The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit L04-081 - MILLER CHRIS - ACME BOWLING DESIGN REVIEWACME BOWLING 100 ANDOVER PK W L04 -081 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director March 25, 2005 NOTICE OF DECISION TO: Chris Miller, Owner /Applicant Dick Landen, Party of Record King County Assessor, Accounting Division Washington State Department of Ecology Steven M Mullet, Mayor This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on the following project and permit approval. I. PROJECT INFORMATION Project File Number: L04 -081 Design Review Applicant: Chris Miller, Mount Adams Holdings Project Description: BAR approval to remodel a warehouse on the former Fatigue Technology site to construct Acme Bowling, a 40 lane bowling center with associated restaurant and lounge. Also included will be approximately 9,700 square feet of retail and associated revisions to parking and landscaping across the site. Location: 100 Andover Park West Associated Files: D05 -032, D05 -033 Demolition Permits E04 -022 SEPA Review Comprehensive Plan Designation/Zoning District: Tukwila Urban Center II. DECISION SEPA Determination: The City SEPA Responsible Official has determined that the project, as proposed, does not create a probable significant environmental impact and issued a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS). Type 4 Permit Page 1 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 III. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS Decision on Substantive Permit: The City Board of Architectural Review has determined that the application for a 40 lane bowling center, 9,700 square feet of retail and associated site and landscape improvements does comply with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application based on the findings and conclusions contained in the staff report, subject to the following conditions: 1. The DCD Director shall administratively approve minor changes to the landscape plan needed to accommodate Fire Department access requirements. 2. The four red oak street trees proposed south of the southern driveway on Andover Park West should be relocated onto the Acme property, rather than in the strip that is to be dedicated to the City for future road expansion. 3. If the existing street trees along Andover Park West or Baker Boulevard are cut down for any reason they must be replaced on Acme Bowling property within the required front yard landscape strip. The Decision on this Permit Application is a Type 4 decision pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code 18.104.010. Other land use applications related to this project may still be pending. One administrative appeal to the City Council of the Board of Architectural Review Decision is permitted. No administrative appeal of a DNS is permitted. 1. The name of the appealing party. IV. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING In order to appeal the Board of Architectural Review decision on the Permit Application, a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Community Development within 21 days of the issuance of this Decision, that is by April 15, 2005. The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code18.116. All appeal materials shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Appeal materials MUST include: 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. , Type 4 Permit Page 2 W 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision. 4. The Notice of Appeal shall identify (a) the specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; (b) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and (c) the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. V. APPEAL HEARINGS PROCESS The City Council hearing regarding the appeal shall be conducted as a closed record hearing before the based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented at the open record hearing conducted by the Board of Architectural Review. The City Council decision on the appeal is the City's fmal decision. Any party wishing to challenge the City Council decision on this application must file an appeal pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. An appeal challenging a DNS may be included in such an appeal. If no appeal of the City Council decision is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit, the Decision on this permit will be fmal. VI. INSPECTION OF INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila, Washington 98188 from Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Nora Gierloff, who may be contacted at 206 -431- 3670 for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes. Contact the King County Assessor's Office for further information regarding property tax valuation changes. �/G Department of Community] evelopment City of Tukwila Type 4 Permit Page 3 1 ',KW Co 60,0 5i'.riri0 4s 1 • o - j0".° l 5 / LEF15 ( ' TYPE I / 4 LANDSCAPE — — — 7/ ' I r - - - - - x / .. PROPOSED . ( TURE SH 4 PS «' I 1 4,000 S.F I 2 `\ o \ ^:PR 'R 60' J 4 a e6 /79 TRAM RECEPTACLE Beal BKE RACK II 1P ACCESS -" 11 r 4 I T ALS SED 4 31- 1 ' 'O 1 1 .e ■ .r, Adms AS 9 i0 � �L I0Yir'rir► • 4''A 4•a° 5941( Wh,•'n'44ri•'.44Z4444 r4 rh44 01, ft.' S ORED CONC. WA • LO RA S T CO I_ CO 1 0 �1 011, s r 1 It t 1 I r4A 1 -11 1r ▪ t T I I = TAIL SHbPS 10,038 S. 0 w 1 - 0 O CC w 0 J maimirOt IS SCORED CONC. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY --i TRASH RECEPTACLE BENCH EX G IE TREES TO ION. TTP. ri ............................. 00 ri 444444h.r BOWLING 40 LANES 50,901 S.F. TREE IETENQ n, FENCE. TTP. 1 1 -- , WOK EFTS CF WO c)O T cox' corn cA eto i o ti 2, 2005 ilTECTS 30 Erin P'57A3CE LIE - E7CSTE6 TRE. TO RETI AN. TYP TREE RETENTKN FEiCK TTP. POSED E{UTURE 13,200 F TAIL AD ITIONI S.F. LITTS Q Wcac 6' TTSf IL4DSCAPE R MOBS i..AMSGAFE .� FR:A SEEDED LAN WAS NEW PL AN'W MS TO ANDOVER PARK WEST T Ex15T O ENBTW W LN TO 9ET'IA'N SW 3•' 5 TT LAW P -� BT - �Rl. DISTANCE LIE .Y7SP1amil�� _ vn? Inc s�t� c ` q ! 5rihfj�i4Zlah54Z5, Q r h5 ri I k F tie a k os SCORED CONC. WALK PROPOSED RETAIL CENTER 22,000 S.F. LrTrs CF tCiaC .R SEARS e 0 60' 120' CONC KEYSTONE WALL LANDSCAPE PLAN ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington ((''17..AT3E99 h SEEDED LAW U9 W FEATlER 1 SEEDED LA WERE NEW NEW PLANTW BEDS rEET EXST W PL0100a EED5 FEET val EATING LAW TO REPAIN IIEPPA:R b' sa4r DISTANCE LAIN DI°TURBED OT CO NS: ION LAE AI RF,rEIVED MAR 0 2 2005 i.:'uNITY DOI LLOPMENT 30 SAW DISTANCE LEE o3BUILDINC J O.(PLATS A )9 9 C•90070.1 CEO; NS OM WEISMAN DESIGN GROUP LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION 1. HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non- Significance Project Name: 1'r ()Q 1V w ( /Ai Notice of Public Meeting Signature: Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance Person requesting mailing: ju Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other /\J'0 Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this c2-5 da of 4(024, in the year 2046 P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Project Name: 1'r ()Q 1V w ( /Ai Project Number: L- 'og Signature: D Mailer's 4 gk Person requesting mailing: ju Gi Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this c2-5 da of 4(024, in the year 2046 P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM HEARING DATE: STAFF CONTACT: NOTIFICATION: FILE NUMBER: ASSOCIATED FILE: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION/ ZONING DISTRICT: RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: N Ciiy of Tukwila Department of Community Development STAFF REPORT TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Prepared March 14, 2005 March 24, 2005 Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor Notice of Application mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site February 4, 2005 Notice of Public Hearing mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site on March 10, 2005 L04 -081 Design Review E04 -022 Environmental Review Chris Miller, Mount Adams Holdings BAR approval to remodel a warehouse on the former Fatigue Technology site to constnict Acme Bowling, a 40 lane bowling center with associated restaurant and lounge. Also included will be approximately 9,700 square feet of retail and associated revisions to parking and landscaping across the site. 100 Andover Park West Tukwila Urban Center Approval with conditions A. Applicant's Project Description B. Building and Landscape Plans C. Civil Plans D. Lighting Fixture Specifications E. SEPA Threshold Determination Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION FINDINGS Page 2 Staff Report to the BAR 11W L04-081 Acme Bowling Project Description. Mt. Adams Holdings has filed applications to remodel a warehouse to construct Acme Bowling, a 40 lane bowling center with associated restaurant and lounge, to be located at 100 Andover Park West, the former Fatigue Technology site. Also included will be approximately 9,700 square feet of retail and associated revisions to parking and landscaping across the site. The adjacent southern parcel will be redeveloped in a second phase with up to 33,000 square feet of retail space. Existing Development. The office buildings in front of each warehouse will be demolished, see Attachment C. The northern warehouse will be remodeled per this request while the southern building will be remodeled in a second phase and will come back before the Board. However the proposal includes grading, parking lot and landscape installation across the entire site. Surrounding Land Use. The site is on the northeast corner of Andover Park West and Baker Boulevard and Evans Black Drive dead ends against the eastern property line. View from center of site to Evans Black, Lowes Hardware is on the left Across Andover Park West is Westfield Shoppingtown at Southcenter. The proposed remodel will create an internal access street that will connect to Baker Boulevard. I tiOr Staff Report to the BAR There is an existing strip retail development adjacent to the north property line of the site. View to adjacent development from northwest corner of site. Page 3 L04 -081 Acme Bowling View to Mall from center of site, Mervyns is on the right and JC Penney is on the left. View to adjacent development and Lowes from northeast corner of site. Across Baker to the south is the Acura Dealership. Topography. The site is generally flat. Approximately 8,000 cubic yards of fill will be imported to raise the ground level adjacent to the warehouse up to the existing floor level. There is a dropoff to the east along the unused railroad right -of -way. Vegetation. Most of the existing trees, with the exception of the street trees along Andover Park West and Baker Boulevard, will be removed. Most existing parking lot landscaping will be removed and new landscaped islands will be installed. The property owners have Staff Report to the BAR DECISION CRITERIA Page 4 L04 -081 Acme Bowling allowed Tukwila's Parks Department to salvage any plants that are due to be removed for reuse on City property. Access. Access to the site will be from two of the existing five driveways, both on Andover Park West, and a new driveway connection to Evans Black Drive. The property owner directly south of Evans Black has expressed concerns about the access interfering with truck manuvering on his property, however the new driveway will be built in an area that is not currently paved and will require minimal modification to existing paving. This project is subject to BAR design approval under TMC 18.60.030 due to its location in the TUC zone, the size of the buildings and the extent of the remodeling. In the following discussion the Board of Architectural Review criteria are shown below in bold, followed by staff's comments. For the applicant's response to the criteria see Attachment A. 18.60.050 General Review Criteria (1) Relationship of Structure to Site. a. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping and pedestrian movement. b. Parking and service areas should be located, designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas; c. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to the site. This proposal is for the remodel of an existing warehouse building, limiting the site planning options. The office buildings in front of each warehouse will be demolished and that area will be redeveloped for parking, see Demolition Plan at Attachment C. This Staff Report to the BAR 41119 4 4110" L04 -081 Acme Bowling means that the majority of the parking will be located between Andover Park West and the buildings. The front yard landscaping will enhance the site but is not designed to provide screening, see the Landscape Plan in Attachment B. The applicant has proposed to match the existing street tree spacing of 40' rather than the current code requirement of 30', resulting in six fewer trees than required by the Type 1 landscape standards. Scored concrete pedestrian walkways will connect the buildings to each other and the public sidewalks on all three adjacent streets. These will range in width from 5 to 7 feet. They have been located adjacent to landscape islands and buildings to minimize conflicts with automobiles. The 22 to 26 foot height of the existing warehouse building will remain unchanged, however a variety of decorative facade elements up to 40 feet in height will be added to the west elevation. The garbage collection area is located between the two buildings, adjacent to the loading space, and will be screened behind a concrete block wall and metal gate. (2) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. a. Harmony on texture, lines and masses is encouraged; b. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided; c. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character; d. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged; e. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. New street trees will match the Tukwila Street Tree Plan to further the City's goal of a consistent streetscape. Dedication of an additional 4.5 feet of right -of -way along the southern portion of the Andover Park West frontage will be required. Four red oaks proposed south of the southern driveway are shown on the strip that is to be dedicated to the City for future road expansion rather than on the Acme property. The TUC zone does not require landscaping along side or rear property lines. A narrow planting bed with shrubs will be provided along the western 120 feet of the northern property line. Paved parking will abut the neighbor's parking strip for the remainder of that side (see photos on staff report p.3). The area east of the remodeled warehouse, adjacent to the Lowes store, is currently overgrown with blackberries and full of trash. See photo below. Under the proposal this will be cleaned up, the existing trees preserved and additional trees planted. No changes are proposed for the area behind the warehouse to be remodeled in phase 2. Page 5 Staff Report to the BAR g. Page 6 L04 -081 Acme Bowling View of east side of warehouse to be remodeled, adjacent to Lowes. Three of the five existing driveways will be closed under the proposal. A new driveway connection to Evans Black Drive on the east edge of the site will be created. This driveway will not line up with the main site entrance. There are numerous conflicts between the turning movement of Tukwila's ladder truck and landscape island locations. Some of these conflicts would be eliminated if the driveways were aligned. The dashed lines on the Landscape Plan in Attachment B show the path of travel for the fire apparatus. (3) Landscape and Site Treatment. a. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced. b. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance; c. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade; d. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken; e. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encouraged; f. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combination; In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls and pavings of wood, brick, stone or gravel may be used; h. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining landscape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. Staff Report to the BAR L04 -081 Acme Bowling Street trees along the perimeter of the site will be preserved, new trees planted and additional shrubs planted per the Type 1 front yard landscape requirements. Landscape islands will be provided throughout the parking areas to meet parking lot landscape requirements. Flowering cherries will be planted along the pedestrian paths and between the buildings. Flame amur maples will be used in the rest of the landscape islands. The dumpster enclosure will be constructed of concrete block with a metal gate. The Tukwila Police Department has reviewed the lighting plan for sufficient light levels and even lighting to help deter crime. Fixture cut sheets are contained in Attachment D. (4) Building Design. a. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its design and relationship to its surroundings; b Buildings should be appropriate scale and in harmony with permanent neighboring developments. c. Building components such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated life of the structure; d. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent; e. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be screened from view; f Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards, and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with building design; Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of detail, form and siting should be used to provide visual interest. g. This project is a remodel of an existing warehouse, with the second warehouse on the site to be remodeled in a second phase. The existing buildings are constructed of tilt -up concrete with an exposed aggregate finish. There is no modulation, ornamentation or use of color. The warehouse that is the subject of this review is approximately 230 feet wide by 265 feet deep. Page 7 Staff Report to the BAR '` L04 -081 Acme Bowling While the two warehouses are large buildings, the demolition of the office structures will decrease the square footage of buildings on the site. The surrounding buildings vary in size, but are all large, simple commercial or industrial structures. The proposed project will add an arcade, entry structure, intersecting walls, canopies, metal screens, glass storefronts and decorative glass panels to the west elevation to add depth, transparency and detail. These elements will also help to break up the roofline that has only one jog in its 230 foot length. The north elevation will have painted concrete, corrugated metal panels and an entry structure that echoes the main entry, but at a smaller scale. The south elevation will have painted concrete, corrugated metal panels, storefronts and canopies. No changes other than painting are proposed for the east elevation. The concrete will be painted in shades of gray and rust. In contrast the metal components will be silver, white and medium blue. The rough texture of the concrete will form a backdrop to the smooth, precise metal walls, canopies and corrugated panels. Mechanical equipment will be hidden behind the parapet walls. (5) Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture. a. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architectural concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and proportions should be to scale; b. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and buildings. The two wall signs proposed for Acme Bowling are shown on the drawings. The applicant intends to apply for a special permission sign area increase due to the distance that the signs are setback from the property lines (TMC 19.32.140 A. 2). The elevations show the signs at the increased size. Tenant signage for the retail spaces will be placed above the storefronts on the corrugated metal panels. No freestanding sign has been proposed. A bicycle rack, bench and trash can have been provided at each building. CONCLUSIONS 1. Relationship of Structure to Site The site design is constrained by the location of the existing warehouse buildings. The parking areas are all visible from the streets, however this is moderated by the proposed landscaping. The height and scale of the warehouses in relation to the site will not change. Page 8 Staff Report to the BAR L04 -081 Acme Bowling Overall the required square footage of landscaping and number of plants will be exceeded It is appropriate to match the existing street tree spacing even though it results in six fewer trees. Substantially more trees will be planted across the site than required. Pedestrian circulation on the site is provided by a network of concrete sidewalks and works well. Public Works has determined that the existing sidewalk widths along Baker Boulevard and Andover Park West are sufficient and no additional frontage improvements are required. 2. Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area The four red oak street trees proposed south of the southern driveway should be relocated onto the Acme property, rather than in the strip that is to be dedicated to the City for future road expansion. Acme is being given credit for the existing street trees toward the Type 1 front yard landscape requirements. If those trees are lost due to street expansion, utility construction, disease or any other cause Acme should replace them on its own property to remain in compliance with landscape standards. Landscaping along the northern and eastern side yards of the site is not required in the TUC zone. The existing substantial landscape strip along the eastern edge will be preserved. No changes are proposed behind the southern warehouse but the unsightly area behind the northern warehouse will be cleaned up and improved. A small area of landscaping will be provided along the northern property line. The main driveway into the site should be realigned with the Evans Black connection to minimize Fire Department turning movement conflicts with planting islands. Where conflicts cannot be eliminated the applicant and the Fire Department are discussing modifications such as rolled curbing and grasscrete to meet both landscape standards and access requirements. 3. Landscape and Site Treatment The proposed landscape plan provides an attractive streetscape, breaks up the parking lot into smaller sections, and softens the edges of the buildings. The trash enclosure will be screened with a solid wall and metal gate. Lighting levels have been adjusted to meet Police Department recommendations. 4. Building Design The materials chosen, painted metal and glass, are durable and in keeping with the modern style of the new building. The arcade and the canopies will help to bring the walls down to a human scale. The greatest detail will be on the west elevation, but each wall will have projecting elements to provide detail and relief. The design element of a smooth white metal wall intersecting the concrete at a right angle is repeated on all three facades, creating a common motif. 5. Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture The Acme Bowling wall signs are appropriate given the scale of the building and the distance from the streets. Tenant wall signage should be administratively approved. If a Page 9 RECOMMENDATIONS Page 10 Staff Report to the BAR " L04 -081 Acme Bowling freestanding sign is proposed at a later date it should be reviewed along with the second phase of the remodel. Staff recommends approval of the building and site plan with the following conditions: 1. The DCD Director shall administratively approve minor changes to the landscape plan needed to accommodate Fire Department access requirements. 2. The four red oak street trees proposed south of the southern driveway on Andover Park West should be relocated onto the Acme property, rather than in the strip that is to be dedicated to the City for future road expansion. 3. If the existing street trees along Andover Park West or Baker Boulevard are cut down for any reason they must be replaced on Acme Bowling property within the required front yard landscape strip. 4. The main driveway into the site from Andover Park West shall be moved to align with the Evans Black driveway connection. Acme Bowling Project Description The proposed project is located at the N.E. comer of Andover Park and Baker Blvd. Currently there are two Office/Warehouse buildings on the site. Our intended goal is to reconfigure the two existing buildings on the site and potentially add another pad building as outlined in the attached site plan. The focus of this submittal is the modifications to the site plan as well as the partial demolition and subsequent remodel of the remainder of the north building. It's understood that the remodeled south building and the proposed 4,000 s .f. pad building will have to be submitted separately for design review to the Board of Architectural Review. As part of the overall site process the applicant will be submitting, separately, for a lot line boundary adjustment. The parking lot will be reconfigured from 135 to 281 parking stalls. Site lighting though not designed at this point will be restrained and yet provide appropriate light levels to make patrons feel comfortable. Due to the existing loading docks to the north and removal of the office to the west, portions of the site will be regraded to help with the pedestrian transition from the parking lot to both the north and west entries. The owners have looked at the existing trees on site and have attempted to keep as many as is realistically possible. Unfortunately due to existing conditions, specifically due to root structure, it is not realistic to keep many of the existing trees. We have made an honest attempt to meet the City replacement criteria but ask for your consideration in not meeting the letter of the code. Service areas have been located toward the rear of the project and have been screened by landscaping. The applicant feels that the proposed site plan based on reusing the existing buildings provides a positive transition to the street as well as the encouragement of pedestrian circulation within the project itself. The existing north building consists of approximately 19,000 s. f. of office and 62,000 s .f. of warehouse. The warehouse would be completely redesigned to provide for 9,700 s. f. of shell retail shop space as well as a 53,000 s. f. bowling center. The bowling center will consist of 40 lanes for bowling, a restaurant, lounge areas, as well as event and meeting rooms. The redesign of the north elevation will cover the existing loading docks with metal panels and add a new entry. The south portion of the west elevation and the west half of the south elevation will be converted into new retail shop storefronts with metal canopies with a metal sign band above. The East Elevation of the bowling center will be totally redesigned with new materials applied over the existing building with a long pedestrian covered walkway and a glass storefront entry/wall element. The entire building will be repainted. The design intent is to provide a strong new facade that establishes the building as a new dynamic bowling facility that is both fun and inviting. Mechanical units on the roof will be located and or screened such that they don't impact the architectural design of the building. Due to the setback of the existing building from the street and the importance of making the new center visible from the surrounding area the applicant will be applying for a sign variance increase. Attachment A MARCH 2, 2005 FULLER: SEARS ARCHflTECTS DESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTAL ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington RECEIVED MAR 02 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SA( AwcAm_eJ z174/05 Attachment B © a ¢ m 1 1 S 3 i Q o ® a E: O tt>x 2 o Am h1 = 2 2 ox O • e`er 8 8'Tqlr A 511 ZZ N Q rr ehrg OPYPi OTigX lova it-' ig M; i 111111 §!iii ti 9X 8Al 17 1 NSA - ! i "q R;r 8 51 $40 NI 0 c; NI Ir q X g g Job Number 11672 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251 -6222 (425)251 - 8782 FAX CML ENGINEERING. LAND PUNNING. SURVEYING. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 2 N 11 Of D.agr6 _Ai Drown _GL Clmd d Appnwed Dab 1''/6/04 Seal: Nortrraal 1' -30 Vertical N/A 1.).aPJ±ELIa1..a. TUKWIlA PARKWAY 4 4 i in illi9gi 1961 I/ E C V 8 fl V!iqli r r >< AASi i tiy !=tai Y P -< - j;l 580 0 r 1 7R y _ � 6453 � o ffi o . 0 0 a 1 For ACME BOWLING ANDOVER PARK WEST SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 2 3/1/05 600 A AS 00* L AS S LP: pr. Cod. APPr. 1/13/05 Dab 25� 44$ ig 4 g REVISED PER NEW SITE PLAN REVISED PER CITY REVIEW ReN.bn COVER SHEET FOR ACME BOWLING �NN p m 0 1 A .1).2 m c r T n i Ole \110001 \11672 \engineering \11672 0 Dote /Time: 03/01/2005 12:58 Scale: 1.60 myork %refs: 011612- ez11602- 1.:11672 -b.d. MARCH 2, 2005 FULLER SEARS ARCHITECTS . , Irrn it, nria, ht7:1n, ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington MODEL PHOTOGRAPHS F?F.CEIVED MAR 02 2005( CO MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MARCH 2, 2005 FULLER SEARS ARCHITECTS ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington ..; a, ano.4.0 *OF* •.■ Vern. on... • ...... • T. 4.;.....•14 no.: 4,...07 j ■■■■ •- 4 . . • -, . • ...... 3 ' A 3 , IL... 4• 1, 4 0. ■■•■■ ; to*. A •• •••• ora 41.. PARTIAL WEST ELEVATION RECEIVED 'MAR 02 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPT"rNT MARCH 2, 2005 FULLER SEARS ARCHITECTS ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington WEST ELEVATION AT NIGHT RECEIVED 'MAR 02 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MARCH 2, 2005 FULLER SEARS ARCHITECTS FLAT METAL PANELS STUCCO /CONCRETE WALL ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington EXTERIOR MATERIALS EXAMPLES RECE FED MAR 0 2 2005 DEVELOPMENT CORRUGATED METAL PANELS SCREEN MESH PANELS PAINTED STEEL CANOPIES STEEL & GLASS CANOPY ALUMINUM STOREFRONT BUILDING FINISH FLOOR ELEVA110N - 31.89' O NORTH SIDE OF BUILDING, CENTER OF BUILDING, 0 D00RWAY OF SEATTLE PIPELINE RIGHT -OF -WAY PER RECORDED SURVEY 9012319002 AND PLAT A.I.P. N0. 1 100 ANDOVER PARK WEST SEATTLE. WA 98188 BUILDNG FINISH FL00R ELEVATION - 30.60' 0 5018114 SIDE BUILDING. WESTERLY DOORWAY g 30' 0 15 30 60 BUILDWC SETBACK UNE (PIAT A.I.P. N0. 2) N 01'05'06'8. 454.00' (PLAT) ESMT."FOR -O0CES PER AMENDMENTS UNDER REC. NO 5332848, 5500900 & 6138154 PRELIMINAF DEMOLITION /TEMPORARY EROSION SEDIMENTATION COI \ :ROL PLAN ACME BOWLING PROPOSED FUTURE BUILDING PAD SURCHARGE PAD E1.41b ILat 734 SO1'05'06 SURCHARGE RECOMMENDATION NOTES —4 I W 1. SURCHARGE FR/ DEPTH SHALL BE AT LEAST TWO FEET ABOVE FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION. 2. A SETTLEMENT MONITORING PROGRAM STALL BE IN PACE PRIOR TO SURCHARGE OPERATIONS. 3. THE SETRLTIENT MONRORINC PROGRAM SHOULD INCLUDE SETTING SETTLEMENT MONITORS ON THE EXISTING SITE SUOORADE BEFORE ANY Eel S PLACED. MONITORIBNG THEM THROUGH COMPLETION OF FILL PLACEMENT. (SEE 0ES REPORT) 4. AU. SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO STRUCTURAL FILL SPECIFICATIONS. 5. FILL SHOULD 0010910 AT LEAST FIVE FEET FROM 001500E OF FOUNDATION AND SHOULD BE SLOPED AT M4 INCLNATION OF 1:1 OR FATTER 6. FILL SHOULD BE 1[58617 USING FIES.D DONSOMEIER GAGE TO VERIFY ADEQUATE COMPACTION. A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 23 AND PE 1/4 NE 1/4 OF SECTION 20, TOWNSFP 23 NORTH, RANCE 4 EAST WM, KING COMM WASHINGTON SEWN RIM: 27.40 LL 11.31 (43' N) I.E. UNABLE (48' 5) BOTTOM: 1114 0 SD__ EX. ASPHALT NW CCR140 NE1 NO II SECTKW 26 (PIA) JL SD= OT RE1ACNE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT. CONFIRM AND FEED VERIFY LB875 OTRI FIELD ENGINEER SEE SITE PLAN FOR PAVEMENT RESTORA'lON 1811185, 0 SAWNT PAVEMENT N 5N001H. CONTINUOUS LINE (SEE SITE/UTILITY PLAN AND GRADING PLAN FOR EXTENTS OF SAWCUT1140.) 0 REMOVE EXISTING PLANTER, CURBING. AND /OR IRRIGATION PPE IN AREAS OF WORK SEE LAASCAPE/R48104TION PLANS FOR CGORDINA11084. 0 REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE CURB. OS REMOVE DOSING LOT LOTT AND F00TING. ABANDON EXISTING POWER SERVICE. SEE ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN FOR PROPOSED LOT LIGHT LOCATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS. ORIGINAL PLAT BOUNDARY 1 5?t0 ^'4FS�w �- F DEMOUf1ON CALLOUTSI © CATCH BASIN MIST PROTECTION PER DETAIL 0 *840818. DOMING STONY BRAIN STRUCTURES AND PIPE. C> REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE 510EWALK. O MOVE EXSTNO POWER SERVICES. ® CONTRACTOR SHALL FELD LOCATE DOSING CONNECTION TO STORM SSTE.I,COMMUNITY RU N W E IN PLACE ACE 08420410 AND PLANS. NEW ROOF DEvELO ° T 0 INSTALL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PER DETAIL SHEET BEFORE DIGGING DIGGING © INSTALL FILTER FABRIC FENCE PER DETAIL SHEET (800) 424 -5555 ANDOVER PARK WEST --N ( ^U ea CB - -_SD_ _SD_ "SD: - --0 ---- - - _SD_ 10' UTILITY EASEMENT (PLAT) 29 - ESMT. Fiyy,IMJTIES PER RECEIVED 5332 8, 55000900 & 6138154 MAR 02 2005 556481 RIM: 1.20 I.E. 11.20 (48' 0) 715.' / mi L... THESE PLANS ARE APPROVED FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY OF TUKWX.A ENGINEERING DIVISION. APPROVED BY: DATE APPROVED: Z O Z W � N F. DAY7 L �d a7 8 \11000A1 672 \engineering \11672- 01.dwg Dote/Time: 03/01/2005 13:08 Scale: 1•30 rryork Xrete: 211672 -b,a6. 4 Job Number 11672 Shod C5„ 6 e _ Y f Y Pg 1 g . _Iw... Xis PP !b.- g 1 1 fl ,.!: gh dlX ;:r b Is 4 t Q4 j ):41 %Al 01 AR rIR TX 4 b RF-`g IN leiglE gl EP; 464 Am XIM ki N A '; a' 16 Ail: I m ig A IP A PIS m iz 8 z 8 2 0 0 Y • Y' N Ng Pi 11 51 15 9 AX 1; !FTi 8i i %20. R 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251 -6222 (425)251 -8782 FAX CML ENGINEERING, UNO PLANNING. SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES cn a D_ _151- 13rtnrn _9E Scala 1brlmPd N/A Vodka' N/A Mi! > R ! h 1111 1 %: Oni i� �� 3a i g 11 8 01' X Oil% meg 1 I 1 4 /MN 8 1" Ill 11 ®II 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 II II ia IMIGI3: MEMEI0 1; qh ;301 ONI 1; iii; pi; T1; JIP 11 a q i 01J 10 NA j s i zs� isgl 04 84gz 1 ! 1 11 1; L-4 l 1 ' 11! 0� ii g > R !I !lag r'2 PHI 8 8 p 9 For ACME BOWLING ANDOVER PARK WEST SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 A N0. 4 a e NY As a N 3/1/05 IM1) ;' ii! D ill W 1R m di r 1 1 � f 8 c I 2 z f TEMPORARY DEMOL(11ON /EROSION SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS FOR ACME BOWLING AA 3 Job Number 11672 S r . Q Z " n Pr 8 ;a M F 1� FFi- p IT� g �fii 7 kg r; • Ri TS V"4 Y � 01 IX h"11 ;EI A 1 �a glggig t R.4 � �� mm 1. 0e $$i ; 0 21 g lg, _9NRg >�c ail g ! i i r- ' = Prig: Yg 1 g 1 ViTii1141 41 ; i 1 1 P I: F 2 1 % 1 V * ell i; 441 3 ik 1 1 g 11 d:/ 1 ! I; 1 1; li Z m 3 5 i WAgi qg ;" 41 IP" 1 aro+ 1 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KEW, WA 98032 (425)251 -6222 (425)251-8782 FAX CML ENGINEERING LAND PUNNING. SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES in o..ywa Moon del Owckud — AB_ APPme — Ai Dot. 17/7/04 1 h : q ! P 5 IA a 2 i 4 s 0 , wgplif mq P 7. P 9 P 9 ?. g A : g: 0 p 11 ; ROW 4 gli li NI r o g x i A 4 14 G i 4 I - 1 4 4 441 8 1PeggA A If q A ! A 1 1 hi 1 ! 1 ! I M AAlmill !ghl' ii! i 4 S ;i ! 8 l i d 1 g M 1 I 1 d7 51 ;wit 1 1 1 4 lip 1 � 1 111t 1 0! 1)1 11111 1 4>ggl / ; R 4 ;Ix 2 ; " : ' A gg! ; gl 1 T '0U K A �i^ > .1 Wiii!liqi: 'Alg X418140 ; " 8 a °'11F4 .9 M 3- °8 8 a ..- gym€ g - R R A 5 10. p � _o „ 8 —$ a 1 1 S A — _ � gq R 1 ..1 g gm 3 1i did �g ! � _ - , 3 1 A ) g la : qi X Souks Horizontal N/A Vortical N/A A a 1 ; ;; ; l i 1;;; s 1 ; Ili 4 1 ii 1 ! ql h 1; 141! qg 1 P gym ! ! i 11 1 1151 r 1 li ' Pill : ! /iiii; 11 lilt 4 Iiiii h ti lg 0 !II liNi i ki i T i l i 11 i0 i 1 air ! li i!Ill ll d il ad i 1 1 11 ii 1 i! ! 1 1 i 11 i ii Pii y 1 1 1 14 ii m / li 1 1 i li illi! a For ACME BOWLING ANDOVER PARK WEST SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 1 11/13/05 N0. Dab SSW AS a POP AS AP YOY A 2 /1/05 AS REVISED PER NEW WE PUN gi II SR M 0 cn 2 rnD CO * 00 A r cn REVISED PER GW REVIEW R,Nofo, NOTES AND DETAILS FOR ACME BOWLING C6„ 6 Ede: P: \11000, \11672 \engineering \11672 02.dwg Date /Time 03/01/2005 13:08 Seale: 1 myork %refs: 11672 - b,oh. 30' 30' 0 0 V O) co co O (0 0 I pi I > > 14 I v I 0 > 1 CO WI m; 39' -4" •( 100' - " FULLER SEARS ARCHIT - - C.L. F L 60' BUILDING SETBACK LINE (PLAT A.I.P. NO.2) MARCH 2, 2005 250.43' 22 COMPAC 4.TALLS (9'X 16') SCORED CONC. WALK PROPOSE SH(5 y 4,000 S.Fi PROPOSED FUTURE RET IL ADDITION 1,200 S F. 300.00' S01 °05'06 "W N1 0 -- - _ � - 4.5' DEDICATED R.O.W. RS- R 15' LANDSCAPE SETBACK PROPOSED RETAIL CENTER 22,000 S.F. 1, } 10 COMPACT STALLS (8'X16') 1 , \ / \ N 1 N ,20' FIRE � �� 1 � _. \` ACCESS / 1 / 5oL 20' FII3E- 1 1 - AtCESS. I I - 1 1 I JROPOSED1 , =TAIL SHO?S - - 11 1 6,500 S.F. - i - -- L�J o f OUTLINE OF EXIST. BUILDING 60' 120' 4 0 >, 0 m 0 z m 0 C 0 r Iz I m CONC. KEYSTONE WALL 154.00' LOAN G "I1 RAH WI • TRAH ' 1 SITE PLAN 1 ACME EOWLINC' Tukwila, Washington ANDOVER PARK WEST 734.43' 0 tit N I 0 1- 15' LANDSCAPE SETBACK SCORED CONC. _P_E DESIRIALL WALKWAY. 1 1 -1 II it �r n n n = TAIL SHOPS 10,0f38 S. ° PARKING CALCULATIONS: NORTHERN LOT - 277 PARKING STALLS 0 3 SOUTHERN LOT - 186 PARKING STALLS �'-i 9' X 19' - TYPICAL PARKING STALL a ct (UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE) m 24' - TYPICAL DRIVE AISLE EDGE OF EXIST. ASPHALT EVANS BLACK DR. CONNECTION BOWLING 40 LANES 50,901 S.F. 330.00' S01 °02'48 "W 330.00' irk 1 15 COMPACT STALLS (9'X16') - - '- -' - - -° WOW ' 20' F RE /r // ACCESS . - 0 / 1 � rn BUILDING SETBACK LINE o (PLATS A.I.P. NOS. 1 & 2) ?ECE MAR 02 2005 DWELOpM T SCORED CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS - TYPICAL • PROPOSED LIGHT POLES (18) -` - WALL MOUNTED LIGHT (3) O EXIST. TREES TO REMAIN (4) 13 A la� MARCH 2, 2005 • .i u Ak 1! .,:! 9!¢6'r0 00000.q.0:1•0 '4X44''60 •:;--"'• ::.I' ' i 15' TYPE I / „ LANDSCAPE / 1 'f y / PROPOSE o / TURE SH P-S I ' : I r`- 14,000 S.F , • 1 t i • 4+ 0 i LIMITS Crr'DORC i4 Avo•G ►4i0000 eve r00600 t r,r 44 Ilk - 1444 h N 1 .r, 4 • 672 • t � SCORED CONC. WALK w 6 ACCESES ->\ 'RED • \ { \\ 41 /r ' N / / I Ar 1 1 t ■ rztliVejsi f eroa TR � k NIP Ala • I 0 I I� Im v 1 '0 v I m Vow 00".9.swe,fr •r 0; maw: • x.9.2 fOJd r 000,0! 9099, 00994. • Abb. WS R 440. 40:4 • • d • > -r I S ORED CONC. WALK LO TRASH BIKE RAC! 1 r I_T TRASH RECEPTACLE BENCH ar SCORED CONC. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY—. 1: p � • a ' 1 1 EI TAIL SHbPS 10,038 S. I qa 4 St • OF .tea w I- < 0 0 J W W m 0 EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN, TYP. BOWLING 40 LANES 50,901 S.F. TREE RETENTION FENCE, TYP. LIMITS CF WC`RG " 7 • lk - - - - - lf 11' 1 C - C -- rib!!OW 6040' 99409 0Qr 0r 6r ri 06001106004 0 a itr O' T-1 1_ - -CS no n (53 corn / / / ftiverz vetz STATE CF WASFr GTON FCCcSTE FULLER SEARS ARCHITECTS 30' SIGHT DISTANCE LNE .-.•I EXISTS TREES TO R'EMAM,TYP. LLINct-1 ASH RECEPTACLE Nth RETENTION FENCE, TYP. J P RETAIL SHC �Q POSED FUTURE 6,50 — S:F TAIL ADDITION — — — 13,200 S.F. BIKE RACK - 1 L111T5 OF WD"'C 0 N a 15' TYPE I LANDSCAPE PROPOSED RETAIL CENTER 22,000 S.F. EXISTMG LANDSCAPE TO REMA'N LIMITS OF WORK 60' 120' FEATHER IN SEEDED LA'I.N U145 NEW PLANTNs BEDS h> ET EXISTI1 EXISTING LAM TO REMAN. REPAIR 30' SIG —IT LAWN D' -taED EST ' JON. DISTANCE LI! Art. t f r � y� � X41• ?' l WO& _ t+ ANDOVER PARK WEST \\\ \\\ LANDSCAPE PLAN CONC. KEYSTONE WALL ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington t-- FEATI1ER N SEEDED LAM GIIEt PEA NEe ! SEEDED LAIN LR _ N W NEW PLANTING BEDS MEET EXI5711w�s • PLANTIPG ErED5 I'EET EXIST — EXISTNG LAUN TO REM-AN REPAIR 30' SIGHT DISTANCE— LAUN DISTURBED EST CONS TION. LINE RErE1VED MAR o 2 2005\ i7 NlTY DO/ L.LOPMENT 30' 5 GNT DISTANCE LINE rnBUILDING O (PLATS A. M 1 KSDI crw - is 1T . . *DI WEISMAN DESIGN GROUP LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE FOR MUTES PER AMENDMENTS UNML REC. No. 5332648. 5500900. 6138154 LOCUS CF ESNT OF UNEXPECTED WIDTH TO W PACIFIC NW BELL TELE. COMPANY FOR OVERHEAD TELE. FAG. UNDER REC. No. 5317883 f. WIC CO . 714E 1 RIM.272 E.24.7 WEST 10 CONVEYS 'BT WR UNDER j-- FOR UNDER REC. No. 8,5500900,6138154 1HESE PLANS ME APPROVED FOR CONFORMANCE WRN 15IE CRY OF TUKWILA ENGINEERING DIVISION. APPROVED BY: DATE APPROVED: 0 15 30 \ �. R1115.27.9 Y 1 E -25.01 0051M1G SOEVIALK 30' 15' WI UTILITY FAS TO 10' W1 UTILITY EASEM 8 It 4' 80 BUILDING S BACK LIME (AATWP N0. 2) BUILD 0 SETBACK LINE (PUT ALP. No.2) DEWALK AND SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT EASE TO THE CRY OF TUKWEA UNDER REC. No. 9511300537 N Ot'OS'D6'E 454.00' (PUT) 10' WIDE LIIY EASDAENI 501'05'06 \ •\ HEW KEYSTONE RETAINING WALL TOP EL -31.0 SETBACK LANES TOE EL ■26.0* (BUILDING UI,ES) C PRELIMINARY GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN 0 1 - : RIN -2. 8 -26.0 ACME BOWLING A POR11ON OF TFE SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 23 AND PE 1/4 NE 1/4 OF SECTION 20, TOWNSIF 23 NORM{ RANGE 4 EAST WM, MG COMM WASHINGTON COSMO SIDEWJLK 15' WIDE EX CB O NW CORNER NET NEI ORIGINAL PLAT 10' VTUTILITY \/� ��/� EX CR GRANTEE TO UNDISCLOSED 4 B SECTION 26 (PUT, BOUNDARY ANDOVER PARK WEST EASE/VENT (PUT) / 5 11 6 I.E. 11.20 (48' S) _p_________ _ - - - -SD- =SD =_ ;SD = - _JL. =SD_ -e- EL CB - - �- - -- _„ - - its �� - (Oa RIN -26.36 ) WEST 10' 81DE OF PARCEL A6B 1-20.4* O CONVEYED TO THE CITY TUKWI A - - -SD - x - - - - - -- SD 17051190 EDGE OF PAVEMENT NEW KEYSTONE REDRAW WALL TOP Et - 30.0 — TOE EL-26.0 EVANS BACK DR. CONNECTION WIDE OF PARCEL Ad8 TO THE CRY TUKWILA ^.LIJM DEED OF GIFT C. No. 8307110471 COSTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT BY OUT CLAIM DEED OF GIFT UNDER REC. No. 8307110471 RECEIVED "MAR 0 2 2005' DEVELOPMM NT JIM AllIC A:¢ W 29 - i DE AMEND ESMl. FOR UTLRIES PER 5 715.68'(P) EC 1131. 10 RETWN 27.5 -p 044.20 RY - 273 E - 24.50 8M -27.3 (.24.65 MATCH 005TM0 GRADE AT PROPERTY LINE C8 TYPE 1 RBA 273 '•24.8 7 52 52 O tl La N • LL Q N t N W 4 O §g • L.71 N L� 4 s Y • v�i iS .5 N a U Z '01i > O > 6 Z Z r Z Z D o p m F u 73 X �A O 90 '3421 Nal -EZ VON '(IV 0 101/L'1 0 g i Job Number 11672 Shoe SONI2N3B 30 SISV9 M .cz,sz.ee _4 .46'909 06 +9 G r —I_ BAKER BLVD. EX B' S S. � HAUS 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251 -6222 (425)251 -8782 FAX CML ENGINEERING, LAND PIPNNINC, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 00 Oppromel Dab 1T/D6/0. (U'1d).00'L801 ui SI � r (SY3N403 Ilkikk 0 0089 n i _ Ise- ESL r 55.0 0.67% II Sedc larvoncd 1 - 30' V.rtka1 N/A J L _ J Yma r � x r (0 0 l SON 'd'I N SLVid) 3911 939813S 09101018 For ACME BOWUNG ANDOVER PARK WEST SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 ,09 11/13/051135W 1 No. Dab By p o_ r mi I I 4 .-.b I V . 1 21 /1 /05 - - 0 - - -- B3 313 F , o ?, 1 g 1 OAS a � II Z D jj D m pwz oO o !OZ v m j m m 33 r Z REVISED PER CRY REVIEW R.N.Ien rum PRELIMINARY WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PLAN FOR ACME BOWUNG C3,, 6 File: P: \11000s \11672 \engmeenng \11672 WS1Awg Date /Pme: 03/01/2005 13:00 Scale: 1 ■40 myork %rely. 011672 - 03116)2 -11 MARCH 2, 2005 FULLER SEARS A 0 CfHTECTS T METAL- PANELS' CONCRETE COLUMNS CONCRETE COLUMN GLASS PANELS 20' 40' 60' r4 STEEL & GLASS ENTRY CANOPY ALUMINUM STOREFRONT W/ CLEAR GLASS EXTERIOR MATERIALS ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington WEST ELEVATION RECEIVED 'MAR 0 2 2005 COMMUNITY DFVELOPMENT STEEL & GLASS ENTRY CANOPY 18' 22' ri MARCH 2, 2005 ARCH ITECTS FULLER SEARS 0 PROPOSED SIGNAGE 208 SF INDIVIDUAL SELF ILLUMINATED LETTERS - 40' FLAT METAL PANELS CORRUGATED METAL PANELS 20' 40' 60' FLAT METAL PANELS CORRUGATED METAL PANELS 1 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT W/ CLEAR GLASS PAINTED STEEL CANOPIES ALUMINUM STOREFRONT W/ CLEAR GLASS PAINTED STEEL CANOPIES EXISTING CONCRETE PANELS PAINTED ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS OVERHEAD LOADING DOOR EXISTING CONCRETE PANELS PAINTED FLAT METAL PANELS STAINED CONCRETE WALL STEEL/CONCRETE COLUMN B. APPROVED DATE - Z / � INITIALSig-�� CONCRETE BLOCK TRASH ENCLOSURE (SEE SITE PLAN) --- 26' SOUTH ELEVATION 1 40' STEEL & GLASS ENTRY CANOPY NORTH ELEVATION RECE!V50 Mop n9 ')nnq - 18' MARCH 2, 2005 FULLEVSEARS ARCHITECTS MAIN ENTRY 0 30' 60' —41-- ______i_ - FLOOR PLAN ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington LOADING/ 30 LANES N MECH. RM RECEEVFD MAR 02 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MARCH 2, 2005 FULLER SEARS ARCHITECTS LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE (ALL NEU TREES TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS TEE PACEMENT) SYM QTY BOTANICAL NAME 1 COMMON NAME SIZE 1 CONDITION DECIDUOUS CANOPY TREES CUERCUS RJERA / RED OAK 11 C: 4* - 0 211 GROUNDCOYER j � MAHONIA AP EFEN5 / C MANON A IGK R!JBUS CALYC'NOIDES / BRAMBLE COTONEASTER DAMMERJ / BEARBERR' COTONEASTER ACER RJBRUM / RED MAPLE ACER T. G'NNALA = LATE' / FLAME A`TJR MAPLE PRUNUS 5. TIT. FUJI' / MT FUJI FLOJ,ER:NG CHERRY DECIDUOUS ACCENT TREES ACER CIRCINATU1 / VE"E MAFLE AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA / SERYICEBER4r EVERGREEN TREES PNUS SYLVESTR'9 / SCOTCH FEE PSEUDOT5U A MENZIE511 / DOUG FIR THUJA PLICATA 'FA511GIATA' / HOYGAN CEDAR EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN SCREENING 1 PERIMETER SHRUBS MYRICA CALFCRNICA / PACIFC WAX MYRTLE FRUNUS LARCCERASIS 'OTTO LUTKEN' / OTTO LUMEN LAU RL PINES MUGO 11,J60' /11.4:40 PINE MAHONIA AOJIFOLIUM 'COMPACTA' CR 'ORANGE FLAME' / OR EGCN GRAPE PRJNUS LUSITANICA / PORTUGAL LAUREL SEEDED LAWN MULCH TREE RETENTION FENCE SITE FURNITURE 0 60' 120' N 1 ' 2 I/2" CAL. STRONG CENTRAL LEADER. MATCHED, PILL, 5t5 (3) 3/4" CANES, MATCHED, FULL, t345 f b' -8' HT, MATCHED, FULL 1 BUSHY TO BASE, Be 1B ° -21" HT, FULL FOLIAGE, BIB OR CONT. O 388 PARKING LOT 1 ACCENT SHRUBS EUONYMUS ALATA 'COMPACTA' I8 °41" HT. 4 5PR, PILL FOLIAGE, Be OR COOT. MAHONIA AOJIFOLI1.11 'CCMPACTA' OR 'CRAZE FLAME' / OREGON GRAPE GISTUS X HYBRIDUS / WHITE ROCCK.ROSE PIERi5 FOREST FLAME' / LILY.G•TF`- VALLEY SHRUB RHODODENDRON SP. / RHODODENDRON vIBJRNUM DA 1 II / DAVID'S V1151RNJJM SPIRAEA BUMALDA 'ANTHONY WATERER' / SPIRAEA TH1JA OCCIDENTALIS 'EMERALD' / AMERICAN ARBORVITAE 6' HT, FULL < BCSITY TO BASE, 545 OR CONT. 4' POTS a 24" 00, FULL FOLIAGE - (2) B'KE RACKS- TIMBERFOR1 CYCLCOPS- 5 BIKE RACK MODEL /110-5-C, EMBED MOUNT, POLDER- COATED BLACK MANUF. BY COLUMBIA CASCACE.18O0F541.540 (2) BEND-ES UATH ARMRESTS- TCBERFORM RENAISSANCE MODEL '2806 -6, SURFACE MOINT PER MAR.?. SPECS, POLDER- COATED BLACK MANUF. BY COLUMBIA CASCADE. (800,5411940 • (2) LITTER CONTAINER- TMBERFOR i RENAISSANCE MODEL '2511-FT-I' INCLUDING MATCHING 32 GALLON LINER, PEDESTAL MOUNT PER M//'�. SPECS, POWDER- COATED BLACK MANUF. BY COLUMBIA CA5C8DE. (800541J?40 LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS PERIMETER LANDSCAPE ► 1(2.111D STREET TREES: 38 (I TREE / 30 LF) T PROVIDED STREET TREES: 32 I�CJIRED SHRJES: 159 I / 1 LF) PROVIDED %CRIBS: 134 NTEROR PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE REOJI PARKING LOT LA"OSCAPE: 6545 SF (15 5 / STALL) PROVIDED PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE: 14,75 SF PROVIDED NUMBER OF STREET TREES ARE LESS THAN THE T�OJIREO NLTIBER. NEW STREET TREES, ALONG ANDOVER PAR( WEST, NAYS SEEN DESIGNED TO MATCH THE SPACING OF THE EXISTNE TREES AT APPROXIMATELY 40' OC. PLANTING NOTES 1. ALL NEW LANDSCAPE A ARE TO SE WATERED IU'TH AN AUTOMATIC WATER CONSERVING I SYSTEM. 2. ALL NEU) SHRUB AND GROUTJDCCVER AREAS ARE TO SE 111CI -ED UATN A MINIMUM 2' DEPTN CF SPECIFIED MULCH. 1 3. WERE GROUNDCOvER 15 PROVIDED, IT SHALL BE PLANTED AT THE SPECPIED SPACNG TI.'ROUGHOJT THE BED, NCLUDING AREAS UNDERNEATH TREES AND 5h START FIRST ROW 12" FRa-1 EPOE CF BED. 4. TREES SHALL BE PANTED A MNIMUM OF ICJ FEET FROM UNDEREROI'ND WATER SELLER AND STORM DRANAC-E PIPS. LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE & CALCULATIONS ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington RECEIVED MAR 02 2005 COmNIUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEISMAN DESIGN GROUP LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE uJ Lighting Legend OlY TIDE SDPEOL FIVURE TYPE NAIATACTUPER 0-1 . OUTDOOR POLE OCNT - SINGLE P401080 0184 P-2 Ey....0 P 0120 , OR FILE 0141 - DOUBLE 0-3 '0 tXlt SCN PROJECTOR WRY AREA 11611. PACK LIGHT FIXTURE 0-5 17 FRONT FACIA - 501 P100 0011 ENTRY AREA P-6 CE0 FRCNT mu - 8 001080 101 10145 E145RE AREA 5 + CAMPY PENDANT Mit nom( 108001 084181 -o Attachment D L. 1. SCALE 1 20' SITE LIGHTING PLAN ANDOVER PARK WEST s p. s+ s+ v.? 0 + 4- s + I* 17+7 0- ..wtosartmfi.ssor—v mat...ammet.ammommems.rannottA RECEIVED MAR 02 2005' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0-0 100 Andover Parkway West Tukwila, WA rr etVersant etts.t.t roams Noc Nam 1 8881104010 Iheiel Humber NetVersant Washington 3849 1st Ave. South Seattle, 8os404gton 98134 Phone(206) 340-1955 For: (206) 340-1980 Otto Br Ch.. Pt, 94' 84414' ATANtAt I DESIGN SET SAN Agfie Dadng Coulev 03/01/05 MRP MM SITE LIGHTING PLAN 00. 0.1.0101 E1.00 Vd Type: SITE- HEAD Job: ACME BOWL Catalog Number: OPM -400 A - 277 -QV- SR - - DB SERIES DISTRIBUTION VOLTAGE MOUNTING: OPTIONS See Page 2 _i (FACTORY PaSTALLED) 9 S Note: X and Y components of order sequence to be manually entered in part number after Option / RPTA= TENON ADAPTOR Accessory is selected Certain configurations or combinations of options ACCESSORIES (SHIPPED SEPARATELY) and /or accessories may not be compatible. ..... ..—___._._..._ . OVERALL DIMENSIONS For Reference Only Optra Ann Mount s° R(14;,,,1 P 50.5" (128.27cm) www.wide- Iite.com CATALOG KEYWORD: OP 36.0" (91.1acm) Optra Post Top Mount rr. P lio•..,,! r 36.0" (91.44c m) P 13.3" (33.G6an) OPTRA OPTRA AREA LUMINAIRE Bulletin No. OPTRA- 021405 FINISH Approvals: Date: Page 1 of 6 SPECIFICATIONS HOUSING Die -cast aluminum housing construction. All hardware shall be corrosion resistant. The Optram shall consist of a separate ballast housing and optical housing ensuring cooler operation and significantly longer component and unit life. FULL CUTOFF OPTICAL SYSTEM Revolutionary optics design incorporates the advantages of vertical tamping with an innovative inverse conical lens (patent pending) to provide compliance with IES full cutoff definition in addition to unrivaled photometric performance. Optical lens employs collimating lens technology to capture and focus uncontrolled lumens back into the main beam while masking arc tube glare. Multi- faceted segmented reflectors shall be made of high purity, anodized 'Super Sheet aluminum with an inorganic dielectric coating, producing a minimum reflectivity of 95% for optimum efficiency. The optical head is equipped with an electrical disconnect and is fully gasketed to ensure Dust - Tde construction for higher maintained Tight levels. Symmetric pattern provides excellent spacing to mounting height ratios with very low glare. Asymmetric pattern provides directional spill light control, useful for perimeter areas. BALLAST Separate but integral ballast shall be high power factor with reliable starting at temperatures as low as -29 °C ( -20 °F) for Metal Halide, -34 °C ( -30 °F) for Pulse Start Metal Halide, and -40 °C ( -40 °F) for High Pressure Sodium. Crest factor does not exceed 1.8. Ballast has Class H, 180 °C (356 °F) rated insulation system. Ballast module shall be tool -less for ease of installation and service. LAMP ACCESS Top of the fixture hinges open to provide tool -less lamp access and relamping. LENS Precision manufactured fully tempered inverse conical glass lens, in conjunction with the collimating optic lens, exceeds limitations of sag glass lens photometrics, which can provide no better than cutoff performance. MOUNTING Fixture is constructed for one - person installation. Field installed surface arm mount shall be of die -cast aluminum. Mounting arm with integral ballast tray assembly shall be used to bolt fixture to a 4" to 5° OD round or 4' to 6" square pole. Post top mount allows fixture mounting to a 2 -3/8" OD x 4' vertical tenon on a 4" or 5" round or square pole. FINISH Standard finish shall be Satin Aluminum UltraCladTM polyester powder coat, electrostatically applied and oven cured to ensure extreme durablility. Other colors may be specified. LISTINGS UUcUL Listed luminare, UL 1598, suitable for wet locations. Standard unit constructed to IP65. The quality systems of this facility have been registered by UL to the ISO 9000 Series Standards. WARRANTY / TERMS AND CONDITIONS Standard 5 Year Limited Warranty Wide- Lite's current Warranty may be found at www.wide - lite.com (keyword: warranty) as well as Wide - Lite's current Standard Terms and Conditions of Sale (keyword: terms). All sales of items in this catalogue shall be subject to Wide - Lite's Standard Terms and Conditions of Sale current at the time of shipment. If you do not have a copy of Wide - Lite's Warranty and Standard Terms, please contact the factory for same prior to ordering. Fluorescent and HID lamps contain mercury. Dispose of these lamps according to local, state or federal laws. For see further information on local, state or other requirements for disposal of mercury-containing WWJIY nine nmlrxmnmrvrl° PROJ: ACME BOWL MFG: WIDELITE MAR 0 2 20 51 PART # OPM 400 A QV SR DB LAMP / RPTA IT 19,giuNY DT13 i)EVELOPMEN TYPE P -1 / P -2 Wid Type: SITE- HEAD Job: ACME BOWL STANDARD FEATURES OPTRA ARM MOUNT SR mount shown OPTRA POST TOP PTTR mount shown fl www.wide- Iite.com CATALOG KEYWORD: OP SERIES Pulse Start O OPP -1000 O OPP -875 O OPP -750 O OPP -450 O OPP -400 O OPP -350 O OPP -250 DISTRIBUTION O S = Symmetric VOLTAGE O 120 O 208 (1) QV = Quad - Voltage ballast (120/208122401277, no 480V). Not available for 750W PSMH. (2) ST = Five Tap ballast (120208/2401277 /480). Consult factory. MOUNTING a1 SR = Arm Mount to Round Pole O SS = Arm Mount to Square Pole (See Arm Mount Dri ll Template and Post Top Detail on page 5.) 0 240 a 277 Metal Halide O OPM -1000 1 OPM -400 O OPM -250 OPTRA' OPTRA AREA LUMINAIRE Bulletin No. OPTRA- 021405 Page 2of6 « A = Asymmetric O 480 DISTRIBUTION GUIDE AND BALLAST DATA (1 High Pressure Sodium O OPS -1000 O OPS -400 O OPS -250 cf two) O 51' (2) O PTTR = Post Top Tenon Mount to Round Pole w (2 -3/8" OD x 4" vertical tenon O PITS - 4 = Post Top Tenon Mount with Transition for 4° Square Pole w /2-3/8" OD x 4° vertical tenon O PTTS -5 = Post Top Tenon Mount with Transition for 5" Square Pole w/ 2 -3/8' OD x 4" vertical tenon Source Type ( Catalog Lamp Number Envelope R) OPP -1000 BT37 OPP -875 BT37 OPP -750 BT37 PS OPP -450 BT37 OPP -400 BT28 OPP -350 BT28 OPP -250 BT28 OPM -1000 BT37 MH OP M-400 BT28 OPM -250 BT28 OPS -1000 BT37(dual arc) HPS OPS -400 E18 OPS -250 E18 Recommended Cutoff .les Max. Spacing Level File Name ( 5 :1 Full opp10(').ies 5 :1 Full opp87(').ies 5:1 Full opp75(1.1es 5:1 Full opp45(1.ies 5:1 Full opp40( *).les 5:1 Full opp35( *).les 5:1 Full opp25(').ies 5:1 Full opm10(1.ies 5:1 Full opm40(').ies 5:1 Full opm25(').ies 5:1 Full ops10( *).ies 5:1 Full ops40(1.ies 5:1 Full ops25(').ies ANSI Code M141 TBAm M149 M144 M135 /M155 M131 M138/M153 M47 / H36 M59 / H33 M58 / H37 S52 S51 S50 Line Current Line 1201208/240/277 /480 Watts 9.00/5.20/4.50/3.90 /2.40 1080 7.80/4.30/3.90/3.40 /2.00. 945 7.00 / 4.00 / 3.5013.00 / 1.70 820 4.44/2.56/2.22/1.92 /1.10: 514 4.00 / 2.20 / 1.91 11.75 / 1.00 456 3.70 /2.10/1.80/1.60 /0.90 400 2.75/1.45/1.30/1.20/0.60 298 9.20/5.60/4.70/4.10 /2.40 1080 4.40/2.50/2.20/1.90 /1.10 462 2.80 / 1.60 / 1.37/1.20 / 0.70 297 9.50 / 5.50 / 4.80 / 4.20 / 2.50 1100 4.10/2.45/2.10/.1.85 /1.10 467 2.70/1.5511.30/1.20 /0.70 310 Notes: (1) The Optra accommodates a variety of other wattages and lamps. Consult factory. (5) Clear lamps are recommended for optimum photometric performance. (2) The Optra meets IES Full Cutoff specifications In all wattages and lamp sources. (6) Replace (') with Reflector type: S (symmetric) or A (asymmetric). (3) Ballast type: CWA (Constant Wattage Autotransformer). (7) TBA = To Be Assigned. (4) PS = Pulse Start Metal Halide, MH = Metal Halide, HPS = High Pressure Sodium. Wide -Lite a Qc7EM company P.O. Box 606 • San Marcos TX 78667 -0606 „,..• (512) 392 -5821 • Fax(512)753 -1122 1 001 PO' Specifications and dimensions are subject to change without notice. t3 F 1 IVED w „ An n 2 90051 yL _ _ Li4T Job Name: i Product Number. GR0444 Product Reference: 150W Gobo Projector Typical Throw: 30 Feet Lamp Base: G12 Lamp Reference: 150W Metal Halide Weight 18.5 Ibs P -3 .com Fixture Type: I Goboclip 150W Promotional Gobo Projector GOBOCLIP expands gobo projection with indoor /outdoor use. Its fully weatherproofed (IP55) ultra compact body can withstand high and very low temperatures, as well as water. Utilizing the CDM -SA/T 150 watt 9000 -hour metal halide lamp, GOBO- CLIP projects a bright and accurate rendition of any graphic design or logo. A zoom facility combines with two inbuilt projection angle options to provide maximum flexibility with projection distance and image size. GOBOCLIP has easy and quick gobo or dichroic filter change, with the rotating image speed settings, the focus and the zoom selection being similarly straightforward. Now, with GOBOCLIP's outdoor projection possibilities, your advertis- ing message can reach your target audience almost anywhere you choose. FEATURES: • 19° - 30° beam spread • Glass or metal gobos • Variable pattem rotation • IP55 housing • 12,000 hour Tamp life TII 51( Stc PROJ: ACME BOWL MFG: TIME SQUARE PART # GOBOCLIP W/ LAMP TYPE P -3 RFCE V € D MAR 0 2 100 Cldi.,:, DEVELOPMENT Type Catalog No APPLICATIONS • Security, access and perimeter lighting for institutional and commercial applications. CONSTRUCTION • Die -cast heavy -gauge aluminum housing for superior corrosion resistance. • Non - yellowing tempered glass flat Tens with a weather -tight silicone gasket. ELECTRICAL • Tray - mounted ballast with integral heat sink for maximum heat dissipation. • Deluxe glazed porcelain socket pulse rated for 4KV. • 57 watt to 175 watt capacity. OPTICS • Lamp types include Metal Halide, Pulse Start Metal Halide, High Pressure Sodium and Compact Fluorescent. • HID Tamp types are medium base. • Cut -Off optics. • Die - formed specular reflector. MOUNTING • Direct mounts to wall or other vertical surfaces. WARRANTY/LISTINGS • UL1598 listed for damp locations. • Published 5 -year warranty. Ordering Guide Example: 613175MAL- 8 6 1 6 1= Medium 3 3 =Type III 57=57W 70 =70W 100 =100W 150 =150W 175 = 175W Product information is subject to change without notice 1 175 1 600 Series Architectural Wall -Mount Cut -off OPTIONS Colors: - Dark Bronze comes standard. - Consult local agent for available colors. ACCESSORIES 630 Wire Guard P110A External Pencil Photo Control 120v P150F Extemal Photo Control 120v - 277v 600L Field - installed latches for tool -less entry DIMENSIONS MA =Metal Halide (175w) PMA =Pulse Start (70w -150w) LX =High Pressure Sodium (35w -150w) NLX =High Pressure Sodium (35w -150w) HA = Compact Fluoresescent (57w - 70w triple tube) L L=Lamp 11.75" 8 Prefix Lamp Base Distribution Wattage Lamp Source Options Voltage 1 =120 volt 5= 480 volt 6= 120/277 volt 8= 120 -277 volt RECEIVE MAR 022 JOB: Acme Bowl CAT #: 613175MAL -8 LAMP: 175watt MH included TYPE P-4 COMMUNITY D EN/Pt QPM D 305 T • LES ORDERING GUIDE WA2 FLUORESCENT WA2 FLUORESCENT WA2 FLUORESCENT HOUSING — One-piece aturnh xn Csruo ik)fi with athitectura ly styled molded die -cast S rrrinun sides htegraI tweed iens bracket pivots dawn for lens removal and relmp;ng Silicone gasket between the housing and lens provides a long-lasting weathertiert se.at FINISH — Black hand-rubbed verde antiqued over back thermoset powidertoat bronze cr white thermoset pcwderroat REFLECTOR — Farmed loom highly refectireharnrr>er akimini. m and semi lack plates Rector assembly is sewed to the housing with four (4) stainless steel screws. ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS — Moulted directly to the housitg and prewired with leads exterxirg fern the swivel arm All electrical coriponents ULd1 recognized SOCKET — Maned directly onto the reflector asses and are UL recogibed for appropriate Imps, rated for4 km BALLAST — Ba asts (HD) are regubfrg with pa ues - factors better 90% (HIT). Ballasts shag provide +1- S% tamp power regulation with +1- 10% input voltage rtgiation. Ballasts are factory wined and tested MOUNTING — Akr thur%d+eecast t.odcng teeth provide ad by tagriening one {1) stainless steel row screw. 11244" NPSM stainless steel threaded ripple prairies secure mot Airing up to a 60' badtlt Fodures used outdoors must be protected from rah and sprinteers if aimed downward ACCESSORIES — Accessories are avar?.able for this product Please see Flooclyte Accessory Section on page 135. LtcUI. listed PROJ: ACME BOWL MFG: HADCO PART # WA2 2F4OBX H 277 TYPE P -5 Jiffy -• 10 1 r 1 t 74' Eiax 10'C 6300 20000 2G11 30 -3/4' 30-3/4" 30.314" • 10' -+r TAY. G13 55- 80w (2)T12 10'C 6100 20000 313 55 -112' 40w 112 -20'C 3050 20000,. G13 55-1J2` finish (A) Black (B) vYhilc,. Voltage ; Total Pxtur e Catalog (G) Verde ( Total Min Start . LOksi Ltusp =. Housing. Number (H) Bronze Wattage (H) 277V Wattage Lamp - Temp . Output Life (Mrs) S oc k et Length': WA2 (Speedy) CF213 (Sperm+) 26w (2 1301 0'C 1600 10000 GX23 17.314' WA2 (Specif) CF226 (Specify) 52w (2) -20"C 3600 10000 GX24q -3 17 -314` WA2 t;, ;li CF232 t`'+ -SM 64w GL 40°C 4800 10000 GX2 • 3 17 -3/4' WA2 (Specify) F244CW (Specify 80w (2)T12 2 610 0"C 0 20000 13 55.1(2' WA2 (Specify) f32 (Specify 32w T8 10 "C 2950 20000 G13 5542" WA2 (Specify) F232 (specify) 64w (2)T8 10`C 5900 20000 G13 55-1(2" MAR 022C CONIMUN1TY Dtv tLVPMChT 1 N N S " COMPOSITE COMPOSITE CAST BRONZE CAST BRONZE TRIM RING ROCKGUARD TRIM RING ROCK GUARD HOUSING - 5rIee-piere compassion molded. fiberglass reinforced Polyester cernposite txxising TRIM RING - Conpretsion molded polrasteccx die-cast stainless steel, or nattral oast bronze. Ai trim rims are sewed With stainless sted strews ROCK GUARD - Directional for eare control Compression molded polyester or natural cast bronze. LENS - aear convex„ tempered sodae glass for high inpact resistance.1;200-potad ive-load rated. standard wabc--okm: GASKET - SaVe-piece molded Atone Lkhannel. SOCKET - Incandescent and HD:medium base. Fluacent CPQ4q-3 or GX24q-4 base. REFLECTOR - Optional specular alurninurn *tin reflector avaiable for E17 spot (50) or flood (70 beam patterrt Fluorescent available in flood. ELECTRICAL- Standard quad-volt core and cal mounted on key-slotted rernmeable tray with gick connect hamcss. high power factor:dipped in rnoiskare-resistant epoxy coating Ruorescent uses electroric ballasts. AIMING - 15° either sick . of vertical and 358° rotation. KM and fuorescent are not amble. ADA COMPLIANT - Comit when used in concrete and flush mounted with al or CPS3. tLclt Listed A CP3 CPS3 IC.G20 ICG30 ICG36 ICG38 13ICL 1 IS3H FVCC.eincrete I Stainless Steel Irdernal Sniv-on Internal Snap-on Internal Snap-on Internal Snap-on Internal Clear I CastAluminum For Concrete Honeycomb - Hone ; Hcneyterrb Honeycomb (Double) Lens, I Exterior Give Sield Four Kt. Lower: lether Louver: Louver: Finish - Bronze Lamp - PAR2Q ; Lamp - RAID Limp - FAR36 1 Lamp - PKR38 [295mmj 13WithTrirn RMg (SectionYiew) 9-5/8" [2.+Imm] 12 [315 min 13WidiRock Guard (Se*iiVie0 9-5/W [244MM] BottomView FrANtEss STEEL TRIM RING Two CB 3/4*IWS Threaded RECFIVFD PROJ: ACME BOWL MFG: HADCO PART # I3G FL 100H 120/277 TYPE P-6 MAR 02 2005( . uNITY uOIELOPMENT �1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LENS, CLEAR GLASS 8 9 10 LE \CS -33250 DATE 02.05.03 MAW NO. 1 sae Nrs • L33250 Maximus Wattage 42W (TR) For the Triple tube, odd wattage and suffix "TR" to Catalogue No. eg: LE\ CS- 33250— F28IR When ordering. specify desired VOLTAGE eg: LE \CS- 33250— F2GTR -120V • TYPE s PROJECT: ACME LE1CS- 33250- F42TR- VOLT -RAL liTEMENEFEY NOTES: W 1. VOLTAGE TO SPEC EZJ 2. FINISH: PAINT Lr 3. INDOOR \OUTDOOR USE 4. LIPS. BY INNERS NO. THOMASit LIGHTING CAIW C WV• jp2�s� C) ? L O M O W z DESCRIPTOIN W J--UOX (BY OTHERS) ! • BALLAST HDUSlNG, EXTRUDED AW.'A L l -I BALLAST. ELECTRONIC u_ • O j DISC, .081 ALUVINUM 2 cc LENS RE A1NER, CAST A_UMINUII SUPPORT STRUT ASSEMBLY (4) O • M L APHOLDER m RAFFLE. ALUTANtIM w LLI TAMP Q J 0 C a Q- Q. City of Tukwila Department of Community Development / 6300 Southcenter BI, Suite 100 / Tukwila, WA 98188 / (206)431 -3670 File Number: E04 -022 Applied: 12/10/2004 Issue Date: 03/08/2005 Status: ISSUED Applicant: CHRIS MILLER Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township/Range: Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 100 ANDOVER PK W TUKW 0223000020 DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: ACME BOWLING REDEVELOPMENT OF FATIGUE SITE INCLUDING DEMOLITION OF 19,000 SF OFFICE BUILDING, IMPORT OF 8,000 CU YARDS OF FILL, CONVERSION OF WAREHOUSE TO 40 LANE BOWLING ALLEY WITH RESTAURANT AND LOUNGE, 9,700 SF OF RETAIL AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPE CHANGES. The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by / y l Ce`c..L1 aa 7,6 The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Morr-LA 13, 61006 Date Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) Attachment E doc: DNS E04 -022 Printed: 03-07 -2005 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION 1, S 6 roc i ' _ HEREBY DECLARE THAT :. 7 ( Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Do 0 Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other P :GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this JE day of in the year 2005- Project Name: C 010 � 601 trig Project Number: LC L "O 0 ( DOS - o3a Do 0 ' Mailer's Signature: � - ��y��• Person requesting mailing: f\fb\.L Nien617PC P :GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this JE day of in the year 2005- Icee-* eq-Ozz__ ihp r 0 0 RECEIVED !JAN 1 9 2005 COMMUNIT DEV ELOPMENT PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT Proposed Acme Bowling Facility NEC — Baker Boulevard and Andover Park West Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: BGI Group 2365 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 December 9, 2004 Revised January 17, 2005 Our Job No. 11672 ,EXPIRES 10/10/067 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251 -6222 (425) 251 -8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW Figure 1— Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 3.0 OFF -SITE ANALYSIS 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology B. Developed Site Hydrology C. Performance Standards D. Flow Control System E. Water Quality System 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 11672.003.docIJPJ/tepi 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Acme Bowling facility is a ±7.92 -acre site located on the northeast corner of Baker Boulevard and Andover Park West within the City of Tukwila, Washington. More particularly, the site is located within a portion of Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 23, and the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 20, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. Please see the attached Figure 1— Vicinity Map for the exact location of the project site. Currently, the site is developed with a two large buildings, appropriate drive aisles, landscaping, +�► parking lot, and stormwater collection and conveyance. The site has been abandoned and there is currently no occupants in the buildings at this time. The proposal for this development is to demolish almost the entire site and construct new impervious surfaces and new buildings, including parking lots, drive aisles, landscaping, and flow control and water quality facilities, all in accordance with City of Tukwila standards. Under existing conditions, there is approximately 5.34 acres of impervious surface with 2.58 acres of till grass. Under proposed conditions, there will be 6.59 acres of impervious surface with 1.33 acres of till grass. Since this project is adding over 5,000 square feet of new impervious surface, flow control and water quality facilities are required for this site. The proposal is to construct a wet detention vault located in the approximate center of the site discharging�o the same location the slite does unitc er existing conditions. The d�ence m grade across the entire site is approximately 5 feet; therefore, this project site is essentially flat since it is so large. However, the site tends to drain through a catch basin collection and pipe conveyance system toward the west and into the right -of -way of Andover Park West. 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The on -site soils are classified as Urban Land and are characterized by disturbed soil and are not classified within any one hydrologic soils group. 11672.003.doc [JPJ/tep) FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP co 0 z O M+ 1 E r r r r FIGURE 2 DRAINAGE BASINS, SUBBASINS, AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS i m 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY Analysis of the Eight Core Requirements: Core Requirement No. 1: Discharge at Natural Location. Response: This project will discharge to the right -of -way of Andover Park West, which it does under existing conditions. Core Requirement No. 2: Off-Site Analysis. Response: Please see Section 3.0 of this report for the off -site analysis prepared for this project. Core Requirement No. 3: Flow Control. Response: As required by the City of Tukwila, Level 1 Flow Control will be provided for the new impervious surface over and above what currently exists at the site. Please review Section 4.0 of this report for sizing calculations. Core Requirement No. 4: Conveyance System. Response: This project will size its proposed conveyance system based on Manning's equation utilizing the Rational method as allowed by the 1998 King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) with an initial time concentration of 6.3 minutes and a precipitation rate of 3.4 inches consistent for a 25 -year storm in this portion of King County, Washington. The on -site conveyance system will be sized to convey, without overtopping any manholes, the entire 25 -year developed conditions storm event. Core Requirement No. 5: Erosion and Sediment Control. Response: All erosion and sediment control measures for this project will be instituted based on Appendix D of the KCSWDM such that clearing limits will be specified, cover measures will be instituted, perimeter protection will be provided in the form of silt fences, and on -site sediment retention will be provided in the form of a sediment pond trapping sediments before they leave the site. Core Requirement No. 6: Maintenance of Operations. Response: This project will conform to all maintenance and operations requirements of the City of Tukwila for projects of this nature. Core Requirement No. 7: Financial Guarantees and Liability. Response: This project will conform to all financial guarantees and liability requirements of the City of Tukwila for projects of this nature. Core Requirement No. 8: Water Quality. Response: Since this project is adding over 5,000 square feet of new impervious surface subject to vehicular traffic, water quality must be instituted on this project site. The City has indicated that Basic Water Quality will be the required means of treating runoff from the project site. This project is proposing a wet/detention vault with dead storage below the live storage to treat runoff 11672.003.doc LP)/tep] from the Basic Menu for the entire site, including roof runoff, which is a more conservative design than what is actually required for this site. Analysis of the First Special Requirements: Special Requirement No. 1: Other Adopted Area - Specific Requirements. Response: To the best of our knowledge, this project is not part of a critical drainage area, master drainage plan, basin plan, a lake management plan, or a shared facility drainage plan; therefore, this requirement does not apply. 11672.003.doc [IPI /tep] 3.0 OFF -SITE ANALYSIS LEVEL 1 OFF -SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Proposed Acme Bowling Site NEC — Baker Boulevard and Andover Park West Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: BGI Group 2365 Carillon Point Kirkland, Washington 98033 December 9, 2004 Our Job No. 11672 Ion Rcs 10 /10 /d& 1 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251 -6222 (425) 251 -8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS EXHIBIT A Vicinity Map EXHIBIT B Downstream Drainage Map EXHIBIT C Upstream Basin Map TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW EXHIBIT D FEMA Map EXHIBIT E Sensitive Areas Folios EXHIBIT F SCS Soils Map EXHIBIT G Assessor's Map EXHIBIT H Wetland Inventory Map EXHIBIT I Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report TABLE OF CONTENTS TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION EXHIBIT J Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) L 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS 11672.001.doc TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS The proposed Acme Bowling site is approximately 7.92 acres in size, located within a portion of the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 23, and the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 20, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. More specifically, the site is located on the northeast corner of Baker Boulevard and Andover Park West and comprises three parcels. bid Under existing conditions the site is almost totally developed with 5.34 acres of impervious and 2.58 acres of lawn area. The proposal for this development is to demolish almost the entire development on site and reconstruct two large buildings, drive aisles, parking, planters, landscaping, and catch basin collection and pipe conveyance facilities draining to a water quality and detention vault, ultimately discharging at the same point the site does under existing conditions. There is very little topographic r.. relief across the site with grades ranging from elevation 30 feet down to 25.5 feet. The site tends to drain to catch basins on site and sheetflow towards the west out to the right -of -way of Andover Park West. UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Based on our site visit, it appears there is no upstream flow onto the subject property since the area surrounding the site is all developed and the site is bound on two sides by streets, and on the remaining two sides by existing commercial development, both of which have their own catch basin collection and pipe conveyance facilities draining to their own systems. There is no upstream basin contributing runoff to this project site. is 11672.001.doc ii EXHIBIT A Vicinity Map _ � �1 ! a r �rn e a .� �.w L � � . .1 1 at � !} �` r A SS3]]v N • •=1 -&- li ) -- 77VH 6 / Vg" OA : 6 ,.,...,.. 0 , ... .... . „,.. : „.....„.:,....„, ....„,„\:. , .. • Ofila 3111110S ; V' Mad - ZX 1a 1 ',..--.....„....--,■' . ) ' '1111) - 4,11:4 It ti2rfr,s_ 4w \ " us 1 RAW LA f MI ---t . 4 0 1 4 A ' PAROIMI lik SGIMRE P M -, or mown S 16/1111 ST /114/1 - fa. c. 'df IIIIIIII r110 11111: " i' AV /`t 1 t o S AY GUS _ 11300 �'` • S S AY H.L9 ,:g ' 6 61 - h h 3 A _ 1 1 1 N O Z a) co G. 0 z 0 EXHIBIT B Downstream Drainage Map 4'7 1 1 2.2304-9086 (077A0 PPP) Pro an 022300-0050 Po. 1 359700 0246 • 359700 0245 636420 0010 "". ••••■•■•■•—• 359700 0240 (1.87 Ac.) 359700-0257 pax Assessor's Map 'Job No. PO 022310 0075 I Page No. 1 0031 \I` 022310 0085 --- 022300 0040 022300 0045 ..0062 PowNSTEEA11 PitAINA&E cOL1ZSE MAP Y• is EXHIBIT C Upstream Basin Map 359700 0245 359700 359700 0240 359700-0257 022300- 0010 AND r'i po, ▪ 022300-005 636420 0010 (1.87 Ac.) 1 Assessor's Map I Job No. 000320-002 PO 022310 0075 Page No. 1 " 022310 0085 0 0N24-0022 022300 0040 ' ▪ 022300 I 0045 I orrovilt•triN& Am !Nom OPST1LEAM OAS 114 MAP TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW ii j� • Road Drainage Problems: This is not applicable. • TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW • Adopted Basin Plans: The site is part of the Green River Basin. • Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable. • • • • Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: Once again, the site is located in the Green River Basin. Less than one -half mile from the project site, the site discharges to the Green River. _ Critical Drainage Area Maps: According to the City of Tukwila Water Quality Applications Map for this area, the site will require Basic Water Quality and the Flow Control Applications Map requires Level 1 Flow Control for projects in this area. In addition, since the site was previously developed, flow control is based on sizing the existing site as impervious surface and the proposed site with greater impervious surface, creating a need for detention more than what is present under existing conditions. Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: Please see the enclosed Exhibit D — FEMA Map utilized for this analysis. As indicated by this map, the proposed project site does not lie within a floodplain or a floodway of a stream. Other Off-Site Analysis Reports: A review of Exhibit I — Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report and the site investigation were conducted in preparation of this Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis. The United State Department of Agriculture Soils Conservation Service (SCS) map is also provided. See Exhibit F — SCS Soils Map. Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on a review of the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folios, it was found that the subject site does not lie within any sensitive areas; however, the site drains to the Green River, which is less than one -half mile away. • United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey: Based on the Soils Map for this area, the entire site is located within Urban Land type soils, which are characterized by disturbed soils and are not mapped within a particular hydrologic soils group. • Wetland Inventory Map: A Wetland Inventory Map for this area is include herewith. See Exhibit H — Wetland Inventory Map. There are no wetlands located on the project site. • Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable. 11672.001.doc d EXHIBIT D FEMA Map r C f NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 959 OF 1725 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) CONTAINS: COMMUNITY SEATAC, WY OF TUKWIIA. CRY OF NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX 530320 530091 0959 F 0969 F MAP NUMBER 53033C0959 F MAP REVISED: MAY 16,1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency X • M2 97 °07'30", 32 °22'30" Elevation Reference Mark River Mile Horizontal Coordinates Based on North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 271 Projection. NOTES This map is for use in administering the National Flood Insurance Program: R does not necessarily identify all areas subject to flooding, particularly from local drainage sources of small size, or all planimetric features outside Special Flood Hazard Areas. Coastal bests flood elevations apply only landward of 0,0 NGVD. and include the effects of wave action: these elevations may also differ significantly from those developed by the National Weather Service for hurricane evacuetion planning, Areas of Special Flood Hazard (100 -year flood) include Zones A, AE. AH, AO, A99. V, and VE. Certain areas not In Special Flood Hazard Areas may be protected by flood control structures. Boundaries of the floodways were computed at cross sections and Interpolated between cross sections. The floodways were based on hydraulic considerations with regard to requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Floodwey widths in some areas may be too narrow to show to scale. Floodway widths are provided in the Flood Insurance Study Report. This map may incorporate approximate boundaries of Coastal Barrier Resource System Units and /or Otherwise Protected Areas established under the Coastal Barrier , Improvement Act of 1990 (PL 101 -591). Corporate limits shown are current as of the date of this map. The user should contact appropriate community officials to determine if corporate limits have changed subsequent to the issuance of this map. For community map revision history prior to countywide mapping. see Section 6.0 of the Flood Insurance Study Report. For ad)olning map panels and base map source see separately printed Map Index. MAP REPOSITORY Refer to Repository Listing on Map Index EFFECTIVE DATE OF COUNTYWIDE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP: SEPTEMBER 29.1989 EFFECTIVE DATE(S) OF REVISION(S) TO THIS PANEL: Revised May 16.1995 to update map format. To determine if flood insurance is available. contact an insurance agent or call the National Flood Insurance Program at (8001 -6620. APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 500 0 500 SOUTH CENTER ZONE X ZONE AH TEL 23) • Si RANDER BOULEVARD SOUTH 153RD STREET PARKWAY ZONE AH TEL 23) STREET '1 LIMITS 22 TT, 7 CITY OF TUKWILA 530091 STREI ' AREA SHOWN ON THIS PANEL IS LOCATED WITHIN 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, L SOUTH 163RD PLACE CITY OF TUKWILA CITY OF SEATAC FEMA Map 52ND AVENUE SOUTH 2 SIADE WAY SOUTH I52ND STREET 8 SOUTH 1681N STREET Job No. 11 ZONE X 23 c I Page No. 2 I • SOU1H soon.. 51ST PL ACE 2 ZONE AH )EL 23) '2 1 53R BAKER BOULEVARD EXHIBIT E Sensitive Areas Folios NW...4M NietS, ,,„- /Ati _triow delitifttaistACZOkiiiiZga \,.7.- iNfrallftliiMinilliA r .,,,,,, , - 4 ,s itaillikeZINMISMIN TN...MP siethmsanalre.lemorgeal zt,TE 1 1 gm. a) a) 1 Z .a - : Stream & 100 Year Floodplainsl Job No. I Page No. 1 I 'J( itataiitt ell i.�� ,, i lesi : if-, , , , - - w ill INFIA till'Ir 1111)114, AFIRELficitmm, p ) i2 111 •. '*'1"3 k f e ��4 Erosion Hazard' Job No. Page No. 1 1 Aurremlivaactitiiiti Al r iqa fAirlaMil..Z 111�:rit�4 O Z 0 co 0. 0 Z d 0 - 4011ffi■■l i /0m1111 3o # &■ KW* III 1 1 1 d 2 m 0 d 2 2 0 Iwr Coal Mine Hazard Areas Job No. Page No. 2 1 EXHIBIT F SCS Soils Map EXHIBIT G Assessor's Map 35 0246 359700 0245 636420 0010 359700 0240 (1.87 Ac.) 359700-0257 Oil Assessor's Map Job No. i` 022300 0010 } ANDOVER I P No 022310 0075 !Page No. 1 022310 0085 t o PARK 03 z 022300 0040 ' 0.4 90 069 on 022300 i 0045 arl 0223000050 lro 022300 -0060 •17 P 072300 0062 EXHIBIT H Wetland Inventory Map Duwamish River Lower Green River Green River Basin • a • a EXHIBIT I Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report di m m RECONNAISSANCE REPORT NO. 24 LOWER GREEN . RIVER BASIN JUNE 1987 Natural Resources and Parks Division and Surface Water Management Division King County, Washington Department of Public Works Don LaBelle, Director Surface Water Management Division Joseph J. Simmler, Division Manager Jim Kramer, Assistant Division Manager Dave Clark, Manager, River & Water Resource Section Larry Gibbons, Manager, Project Management and Design Section Contributing Staff Doug Chin, Sr. Engineer Randall Parsons, Sr. Engineer Andy Levesque, Sr. Engineer Bruce Barker, Engineer Arny Stonkus, Engineer Ray Steiger, Engineer Pete Ringen, Engineer Consulting Staff Don Spencer, Associate Geologist, Earth Consultants, Inc. John Bethel, Soil Scientist, Earth Consultants, Inc. P:CR King County Executive Tim Hill King County Council Audrey Gruger, District I Cynthia Sullivan, District 2 Bill Reams, District 3 Lois North, District 4 Ron Sims, District 5 Bruce Laing, District 6 Paul Barden, District 7 Bob Grieve, District 8 Gary Grant, District 9 Parks, Planning and Resources Joe Nagel, Director Natural Resources and Parks Division Russ Cahill, Division Manager Bill Jolly, Acting Division Manager Derek Poon, Chief, Resources Planning Section Bill Eckel, Manager, Basin Planning Program Contributing Staff Ray Heller, Project Manager & Team Leader Matthew Clark, Project Manager Robert It Fuerstenberg, Biologist & Team Leader Matthew J. Bruengo, Geologist Lee Benda, Geologist Derek Booth, Geologist Dyanne Sheldon, Wetlands Biologist Cindy Baker, Earth Scientist Di Johnson, Planning Support Technician Robert Radek, Planning Support Technician Randal Bays, Planning Support Technician Fred Bentler, Planning Support Technician Mark Hudson, Planning Support Technician Sharon Clausen, Planning Support Technician David Truax, Planning Support Technician Brian Vanderburg, . Planning Support Technician Carolyn M. Byerly, Technical Writer Susanna Hornig, Technical Writer Virginia Newman, Graphic Artist Marcia McNulty, Typesetter Mildred Miller, Typesetter Jaki Reed, Typesetter Lela Lira, Office Technician Marty Cox, Office Technician TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY 1 II. INTRODUCTION 1 III. FINDINGS IN LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN 2 A. Overview 2 B. Effects of Urbanization 4 C. Specific Problems 4 1. Erosion damage 5 2. Threat of landsliding 5 3. Sedimentation 5 4. Destruction of fish habitat 5 IV. RECOMMENDATIONS 6 A. Prevent accelerated erosion and landsliding 6 B. Improve habitat 7 V. MAP 9 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A: Estimated Costs A -1 APPENDIX B: Capital Improvement Project Ranking B -1 APPENDIX C: Detailed Findings and Recommendations C -1 a I. SUMMARY The Lower Green River Basin is located in southern King County between the cities of Tukwila and Auburn. The study area considered here includes the unincorporated areas of the basin, which can be roughly separated into northern and southern portions that are divided by the Lower Green River. The two portions are distinctly different in their development patterns, with the northern area dominated by the commercial development of South Center shopping mall, two major interstate freeways, and light industrial activities. In the southern portion, single - family residential land uses dominate. Urbanization processes in this basin are expected to continue, with impervious surfaces in some areas expanding as much as five times their present levels. As might be expected in a basin so heavily urbanized, there are numerous environmental problems. The basin contains many sensitive areas, particularly along the steep slopes of tributary valley walls that are susceptible to erosion and landsliding. Stormflows, which have increased as the basin has been developed, have caused gullying, landsliding, and other damage along many steep slopes. These problems have also increased sedimentation downstream. Flooding has occurred in some places as both natural and artificial conveyance systems have become clogged with sediment. Worst -case examples of erosion were found at the Kent Highlands landfill, adjacent to King County's Grand View Park, where storm flows have caused erosion of the landfill material. Sediments and chemicals from decomposing trash have washed into the stream system. Flooding potential was found on Tributary 0068 at two locations. Fish habitat !mess were significant in the northern portion of the basin, with one of the worst examples located on Tributary 0036. Recommended solutions in the Lower Green River Basin include 1) preventing further erosion and landsliding by using both natural and artificial retention/detention (R /D), prohibiting certain harmful development practices (such as routing storm flows over steep slopes), and revegetating streambanks; and 2) improving habitat in the basin by preventing the further deterioration of water quality, protecting riparian corridors, and reestablishing streams and streambanks, where feasible. II. INTRODUCTION: History and Goals of the Program In 1985 the King County Council approved funding for the Planning Division (now called the Natural Resources and Parks Division), in coordination with the Surface Water Management Division, to conduct a reconnaissance of 29 major drainage basins located in King County. The effort began with an initial investigation of three basins —Evans, Soos, and Hylebos Creeks -- in order to determine existing and potential surface water problems and to recommend action to mitigate and prevent these problems. These initial investigations used available data and new field observations to examine geology, hydrology, and habitat conditions in each basin. Findings from these three basins led the King County Council to adopt Resolution 6018 in April 1986, calling for reconnaissance to be completed on the remaining 26 basins. The Basin Reconnaissance Program, which was subsequently established, is now an important element of surface water management. The goals of the program are to provide useful data with regard to 1) critical problems needing immediate solutions, 2) basin characteristics for use in the preparation of detailed basin management plans, and 3) capital costs associated with the early resolution of drainage problems. The reconnaissance reports are intended to provide an evaluation of present drainage .conditions in the County in order to transmit information to policymakers to aid them in developing more detailed regulatory measures and specific capital improvement plans. They P:LGR 1 are not intended to ascribe in any conclusive manner the causes of drainage or erosion problems; instead, they are to be used as initial surveys from which choices for subsequent detailed engineering and other professional environmental analyses may be made. Due to the limited amount of time available for the field work in each basin, the reports must be viewed as descriptive environmental narratives rather than as final engineering conclusions. Recommendations contained in each 'report provide a description of potential mitigative measures for each particular basin; these measures might provide maximum environmental protection through capital project construction or development approval conditions. The appropriate ' extent of such measures will be decided on a case -by -case basis by County officials responsible for reviewing applications for permit approvals and for choosing among competing projects for public construction. Nothing in the reports is intended to substitute for a more thorough environmental and engineering analysis possible on a site - specific basis for any proposal. III. FINDINGS IN LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN The field investigation in the Lower Green River Basin was conducted in February 1987 by Ray Heller, resource planner, Amy Stonkus, engineer, and Lee Benda, geologist. Their findings and recommendations are presented in the following discussion. A. Overview of the Basin Geographic and land use features. The Lower Green River Basin is located in southern King County between the cities of Tukwila on the north and Auburn on the south. Parts of the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Auburn lie within the basin, which is divided into two portions. The southern portion lies east of the Green River between the cities of Kent and Auburn; the northern portion lies west of the Green River between the Kent -Des Moines Road and State Road (SR) 518. The southern portion of the basin, which includes large residential and commercial areas within the city of Auburn, was not included in the study area. The areas that were studied - -the unincorporated parts of this southern portion of the basin -- are primarily contained in the Soos Creek Community Planning Area. Single - family residential land use dominates in this area, although small farms also occupy sizable acreages. The effects of future development may be dramatic, as some subcatchments are projected to expand in impervious surfaces to as much as five times their current levels. This development will be mainly single - family residential, interspersed with some multi - family units. The northern portion of the basin is dominated by the commercial areas of the South Center shopping mall, its surrounding commercial and light - industrial land uses, three major arterials (Interstates 5 [I -5] and 405 [I -405] and Pacific Highway south), and the shopping district north of Seattle- Tacoma (Sea.Tac) International Airport. Single - family residences greatly outnumber multi - family units in this portion of the basin, which is contained in the Highline and Green River Community Planning Areas. Future growth in this northern portion will consist of commercial and multi - family land uses, including the conversion of some areas presently zoned single- family to denser zoning classifications. Dominant geologic and geomorphic features. The composition of the geologic materials in the Lower Green River valley is dominated by glacial sediments. The glacial sediments include an extensive till layer that is located at the top of the valley scarp. Deposits of recessional outwash sand and other glacio - fluvial sands are locally P:LGR 2 Ir. C) interspersed on top of the till deposits and along the edges of the valley. The valley bottom is made up of more recent alluvial sand and silt deposited by the Green and White Rivers before diversion of the White into the Puyallup River in 1906. The wide floodplain through which the Green River used to meander (before it was diked) is composed of deep floodplain, channel, and lacustrine sediments up to 100 feet thick. There are a few outcrops of sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Puget Group in the basin. The morphology of the Lower Green • River basin is dominated by the valley that was formed by the Green and White Rivers prior to the most recent glacial advances. The east and west valley walls were cut by numerous minor tributaries originating in the uplands above the valley escarpment. These tributaries formed steep -sided valleys and alluvial -debris fans at the mouths of the basins. Along the tributaries, landslides and slumps play an active role in maintaining the steep, hummocky valley walls. Historically, the Green and White Rivers meandered through the extensive floodplain located between the valley walls. The White River was diverted south to the Puyallup River, the Green has been straightened, diked, and cleaned of organic and inorganic debris, such as trees and boulders. This essentially isolates the river from its natural floodplain and reduces its present role as a geomorphic agent along the valley floor and walls. The upland areas of the basin have a general morphology indicative of glacial abrasion, deposition, and more recent fluvial erosion caused by minor tributaries. Hydrologic and hydraulic features. The Lower Green River Basin is composed of numerous smaller subbasins which are significantly different from each other in their drainage characteristics. The subbasins are mostly urbanized in the northern and rural in the southern portions of the basin where flows enter the Green River via relatively natural stream channels. Alterations in natural stream corridors occur at or near either the Lower Green River itself or at I -5 culvert crossings. Whereas most subbasins studied exhibited serious effects from urbanization, many were in relatively good condition and /or might be potential sites for stream restoration projects. A number of wetlands in the southern section of the basin and a few small lakes scattered throughout the basin help to mitigate some of the effects of peak flows and excess volumes generated from urbanization. Tributaries flowing from the northern side rr of the basin into the Lower Green River are highly urbanized drainages which are in need of R/D facilities to reduce the present and anticipated runoff associated with expanses of impervious areas. The rural southern drainages are slated for the greatest increases in impervious surface due to proposed developments, and are in need of regional R/D/ facilities. rr Habitat characteristics. The habitat conditions in the streams of the Lower Green River Basin vary considerably. In the northern portion of the basin habitat has been almost completely destroyed;. in the southern portion, there are reaches which have been damaged but might be restored to use by fish and other wildlife. At present, there are no tributaries in this basin which support anadromous fish. Commercial development in the northern portion of the basin has severely altered streams and riparian corridors. The clearing and filling of land, construction of buildings, and roadways and piping and diking of streams have eliminated spawning gravel, and other natural features necessary for fish use. In addition, the extensive acres of impervious surfaces associated with intense commercial development have greatly increased the volumes and rates of storm runoff, thereby eroding and destroying those lai P:LGR few remaining natural reaches downstream in the northern portion. Complicating these conditions even further are the flap gates placed along the main stem of the Green River at most points where tributaries enter, these structures would effectively prevent any fish from entering the streams. The southern portion of the basin experiences many of the same habitat problems as the northern portion, however to a lesser extent. This problems could worsen as residential development expands these next few years. Without specific efforts to protect the environment, habitat will be lost in the southern portion of the Lower Green River Basin, as it has been in the northern portion. B. Effects of Urbanization in the Basin As in many other rapidly growing basins in the County, the Lower Green River Basin suffers from increased rates and volumes of runoff generated by the impervious surfaces of roofs, roads, and parking lots. When this runoff flows into natural channels, it causes erosion, scour, and downstream sedimentation. Sedimentation fills spawning gravels and pools, eliminates fish habitat; limits channel capacity and creates the conditions for bank overtopping and flooding. Surface water originating on pavement incorporates greases, oils and other toxic hydrocarbons associated with urban areas. The stormwater that enters drainage ditches flows at an even faster rate than in natural channels, thereby magnifying the damage it can cause. The damages caused by increased runoff in urban areas such as the Lower Green River Basin might be less severe if wetlands, floodplains, and other natural features had been left intact to attenuate and filter the. flows. These elements for the most part have disappeared with development. While development has been accompanied by the installation of artificial conveyance and R/D systems, these have often been undersized, poorly designed and installed, or otherwise inadequate to handle the cumulative effects of runoff from new development. For example, the lower portions of Tributaries 0061, 0068, and 0069 were found to contain particularly serious damage in the form of erosion, scour, sedimentation and the elimination of vegetation from streambanks and corridors. Flooding in these tributaries seems to have increased, in part, from the use of undersized drainage pipes. This problem is repeated along the lower reaches of Tributaries 0036A, 0036B, 0036C, and 0038, where flows have have been piped on their approach to 1 -5 or the Lower Green River. Several extreme cases of erosion - incised channels, and landslides -- in part resulting from flows diverted from their natural drainage course and passing through King County Grandview Park -- were noted on the Kent Highlands landfill area. The destruction of pre- existing tightlined conveyance systems has caused surface water at this location to flow unchecked over the unconsolidated former gravel pit slopes and natural hilislopes. Erosion in this case will also cause water quality deterioration, as toxicants from deteriorating garbage and sediments eventually enter the . Lower Green River. C. Specific Problems Identified Problems » both existing and anticipated -- in the Lower Green River Valley are clearly development- related. Earlier descriptions of the basin and the effects of urbanization pointed out these problems in a general way. Specific details of the most serious problems identified during reconnaissance are provided below. 1. Erosion is damaging both public and private property in the Fewer Green River Basin. The majority of the erosion problems in the basin are P:LGR 4 li iw. km IV. RECOMMENDATIONS associated with the steep slopes within the small tributary valleys and along the major valley walls. a. Gully erosion is occurring adjacent to King County's Grandview Park, where the routing of concentrated storm flows over the steep hilislopes could cause even more serious mass - wasting. Such intense gullying is also occurring in the glacio - fluvial sand adjacent to the Kent Highlands landfill, a situation requiring immediate solution. b. Channel and bank erosion from high peak. flows is occuring along many tributaries, particularly those with narrow, relatively steep sides. On Tributary 0016 (RM. 10) and Tributary 0069 (RM. 50) there are examples of this type of erosion. 2. Landstiding is both a present and future threat on steep valley walls. The removal of vegetation, as well as the muting of stormwater along steep slopes (see also l.a. above), may result in landslides. Many of the valley walls show evidence of historic landslide activity, such as scarps, tilled blocks, chaotic terrain, and tilted trees. A portion of land along the valley wall in the landslide terrain has been put up for sale at S 312th St. and 104th Ave. SE. This area should be assessed for its stability prior to development and all regulatory safeguards (statutory and other regulations) should be used to prevent landsliding. 3. Sedimentation accompanies the kind of erosion processes discussed above. For instance sediment is filling the stream channel on Tributary 0068 at river miles .30 and .60. This is . reducing channel capacity (increasing the possibility of flooding at these locations), as well as degrading fish habitat and water quality. Severe sedimentation in the lower portion of Tributary 0069, where a sediment fan presents a potential barrier to fish. 4. Fish habitat has been destroyed by urbanization throughout the basin, particularly in the northern portion. a. The elimination of habitat features from streambeds and riparian corridors has made most of the basin's tributaries unusable for fish. As discussed in III.A. above, stream channels have been severely altered in the Lower Green River Basin. As a result, large organic debris, pools, gravels, and other elements of godd instream habitat have disappeared. One of the worst cases was found on Tributary 0036, along the north side of SR 518 near 42nd Avenue S. b. Poor water quality is caused by three separate problems in this basin. First, streams are contaminated by the domestic garbage dumped directly into streambeds and ravines. Second, streams are being adversely affected by the accelerated erosion in the Kent Highlands landfill. Sediment from the landfill is being carried downstream, polluting water and eroding banks along the way. The latter is expected to continue and worsen, if not addressed. Third, greases, oils, and toxic hydro- carbons from highways, parking lots, and commercial areas around South Center are degrading water quality. The solutions proposed for this . basin focus on eliminating damage to the natural drainage system, restoring natural drainage conditions where possible, and preventing further damage P:LGR 5 throughout the basin as the urbanization process continues. In most cases these solutions will require the cooperation of local government and other . interested agencies. At the present time such arrangements already exist among the King County Surface Water Managment Division; the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Auburn; and the Washington State Department of Transportation. The purpose of these arrangements is to identify and propose solutions to hydraulic and habitat problems in the basin and to develop cost- sharing agreements where capital improvements are required. These efforts should continue, and similar joint work should be undertaken among other interested agencies, as appropriate. A. Prevent further accelerated erosion and landsliding in the Lower Green River Basin, where possible. Erosion is the source of many other problems discussed in this and other basins reports. By reducing erosion and landslide problems, sedimentation will also be minimized in the both natural and artificial conveyance systems. When sedimentation is reduced flooding problems will be reduced throughout the basin. The steps toward erosion control are listed below. 1. Preserve wetlands for their RID values, and for the valuable roles they play in enhancing water quality (through filtration) and providing fish and wildlife habitat. Natural R/D facilities, such as wetlands help to attenuate storm flows and prevent accelerated erosion in downstream areas susceptible to erosion damage. The southern portion of the basin contains several wetlands that serve as natural R/D areas. 2. Promote infiltration of excess surface water in upland areas where geologic analysis indicates it will not cause landsliding and other similar problems. Groundwater contaimination should also be considered in this analysis. 3. Preserve vegetation along steep slopes by establishing native growth protection easements, and appropriate building setbacks, and prohibiting vegetation removal. Protected vegetation should include trees as well as shrubs and groundcover. 4. Prohibit the concentration of sormflows over steep slopes. Require that stormflows be attenuated from above with adequate R/D, tightlined or diverted to stable channels. The drainage and erosion problem adjacent to King County's Grandview Park should receive immediate attention to alleviate the severe gully erosion that is presently occurring. S. Prohibit construction along steep slopes identified as landslide hazard areas in the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (SAMF). In addition, strengthen the criteria used by Building and Land Development to review development proposals in landslide hazard areas below valley walls. More restrictive criteria will minimize the potential for property damage for property damage caused by erosion and landsliding in the basin. 6. Prevent instream and bank erosion caused by livestock by limiting their access to stream channels. This will preserve streambank vegetation and eliminate the trampling of banks (a direct source of sedimentation). This is particularly important along the Green River, where livestock are presently causing damage. P:LGR 6 r t~ 0 7. Construct or upgrade R/D facilities to assure adequacy to contain both current and anticipated stormwater flows. a. Tributary channels currently experiencing channel and bank erosion (e.g., 0061 and 0069) should be analyzed immediately for their R/D needs. Future developments should be reviewed using criteria that require RID provisions to maintain stormwater runoff at the level necessary to prevent adverse impacts such as erosion. b. Upgrade the existing earthern berm and R/D pond on Tributary 0036D at collection point 7 (47th Avenue S and S 173rd) and add energy dissipators for outflow from the pond. This will improve the overall function of the facility. 8. Replace undersized conveyance pipes, where necessary. Analyze the adequacy of pipes at key locations in all areas where development has occurred or is planned. Review natural capacities as part of this assessment for stormwater conveyance. B. Improve habitat in the Lower Green River Basin stream system where practicable. 1. Prevent the deterioration of water quality from the toxicants of road and parking lot runoff, from domestic trash (including erosion at the Kent Highlands landfill), and from sedimentation. a. Construct an R/D facility on Tributary 0069 adjacent to Wetland 3226 to provide 3 acre -feet of storage. The facility will intercept drainage from roadside ditches on Southeast 312th Street and cleanse it by means of an oil/water separator. b. Increase enforcement of regulations against the dumping of domestic garbage into ravines and stream channels. Garbage . not only degrades water quality as it deteriorates, but it creates fish blockages in tributaries (e.g., Trib. 0069 at P.M ..65). c. See A.4. above, regarding the attenuation of stormflows near Kent Highlands landfill and Grandview Park. Preventing severe erosion at these locations will also decrease the washing of chemicals and sediments from the landfill (adjacent to the Grandview Park) into the stream system. 2. Protect against further destruction to channels and riparian corridors in order to preserve the essential features of fish habitat. a. See A.2., 3. and 6. above for recommendations related to the protection of these resources. b. Establish stream - corridor guidelines to prohibit clearing, filling and building within riparian corridors. All streams in the basin would benefit from these guidelines. 3. Reestablish stream and streamside habitat in the northern portion of the basin where these elements have already been severely altered. These restoration efforts should occur during development (�r redevelopment) of a site. Opportunities for restoration presently exist on Tributaries 0036A, 00368, 0036D, and 0038. P:LGR 7 L L 210 ST awl / AVE 122 SI LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN (North Section) Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary 0 Collection Point Stream 0038 Tributary Number . •3205 Proposed Project 0 J uly . 19 8 V.p 4:70, EAST GREEN RIVER LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN (South Section) amornowill Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary ( Collection Point •-■.-/ Stream 0061 Tributary Number •3201 Proposed Project July. 1987 1. .265T 5E . STLic La,fl$ TTT' 4J Rata 4-7 IC r r r r NOTE: Indicates project was identified by the Surface Water Management Division prior to reconnaissance. Project Number Collect. Point Project Description 320P 18 Construct R/D facility with 3.0 acre -ft. of storage adjacent to upper end of Wetland 3226. Interceptthe roadside runoff on SE 312th so that it will be retained in the upper wetland. Further biological assessment is needed to assure this project does not decrease habitat values. 3204 15 Construct R/D facility on Trib.0061 at RM 1.25 which would have a capacity of approx. 3.7 acre ft. 3205• Install a control structure and excavate two existing stream channels to provide 2.5 acre -ft. of storage (Trib. 0036B, 0036C). P:LOR.APA A -I Problem Addressed r r APPENDIX A ESTIMATED COSTS: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN Decreases potential downstream flooding and improves water quality. Lessen impact on downstream riparian habi- tat. Provides storage for runoff from future development. Eliminates channel scouring, road erosion and potential downstream flooding r r 5 Estimated Costs and Comments $99,000 (subject to right of way acquisitions). $160,000 (dependent on land acquisitions). $85,000 • (Dependent on right -of- way acquisitions) APPENDIX B CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RANKING LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN A total of three sites had been proposed for Surface Water Management (SWM) projects prior to the field reconnaissance of the Lower Green River Basin. One project remains proposed as iden- tified, one project has been changed to an R/D facility, one R/D facility has been added, and one proposed R/D facility has been eliminated by the consensus of the field team because it is located in the wetland serving as the city of Kent's water supply. The previous SWM project list for the Lower Green. River Basin had an estimated cost of $700,000, compared to a revised figure of S344,000 for the remaining three projects. The revised costs are a result of lower estimates for right -of -way acquisitions. These projects are listed in the table below, which summarizes the scores and costs of the proposed projects in the basin. These projects were rated according to criteria set forth by the SWM Program Citizen Advisory Committee. The first rating question,'. ELEMENT 1: "GO /NO GO," could be answered affirmatively for the projects below. These projects can now be considered for merging into the live" CIP list. Any projects scoring more than 100 points should be considered for incorporation into the six -year CIP plans. Project No. Score Rank No. Cost 3201* 103 1 S 99,000 3205* 73 2 85,000 3204 60 3 160,000 TOTAL $344,000 ' Indicates project was identified by Surface Water Management prior to reconnaissance. P:CLGAPB /mlm B-1 r r r r r r • All items listed here are located on final display maps In the offices of Surface Water Management, Building and Land Development, and Basin Planning. Trib. & Collect. Existing Item' River Mile Point Catejory Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems 1 Section 15 12 Geology & hydrology 2 0001 RM .29 -,30 16 Geology 3 0001 20 Geology RM .31 4 0001 20 Geology RM 30.60 P:LGAPC /mlm U APPENDIX C DETAILED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LOWER GREEN IUVL'R BASIN Runoff from Kent Highlands landfill and sub -basin tributary to King County Grandview Park is causing extensive gullying and steep - walled valleys. Presents a potential hazard. Extensive sedimen- tation is resulting from erosion. Lower portion of channel is experiencing channel and bank erosion. A very large gully (small valley) is developing due to discharging con- centrated flow on steep slopes. Landslide area is posted for sale. C -1 r= r Anticipated Conditions and Problems Continued extensive erosion. Fill material will continue to scour away because of lack of compaction. Considerable volumes of fill (contributing to poor water quality) will still be conveyed. Uncontrolled runoff is the cause. Increasing erosion with in- creasing flows in the basin. Continued erosion; may be a public hazard due to 30' vertical walls. Possible hazards associated with development could occur. r r r r Recommendations Tightline runoff down to valley floor in a safe, nonerosive manner. . Plan and develop adequate regional RID facilities in the basin. Determine whether existing facilities should. be upgraded for greater control of flows and storage. 'I'ightlinc drainage to Green River. Perform critical prcdevelopment review. f Trib. & Collect. Proposed Existing hem River Mile Point Catej ory Project Conditions and Problems S 0001 20 Geology RM 31.00 6 0036A 9 Habitat RM .80 7 0036B 8 0036B 003613 10 003613 4 Hydrology 3205 4 Habitat 4 Hydrology 4 Geology Backwater in channel appeared to be caused by defective riser control. Low- gradient stream chan- nels on Tribs. 003613 and 0036C. Floodplain approxi- mately 25' wide. r Large gully (small valley) formed by development - related drainage. Stream corridor and in- stream habitat both heavi- ly impacted by erosive storm flows, clearing, and sedimentation. Manhole inlet with trash rack next to new extensive roadfill. Damaged inflow pipes into manhole control structure. Channel is experiencing channel and hank erasion. Cause is probably high flows. P:LGAPC /mlm C2 Wash water from Segale truck center flowing under Frager Rd. contains oil film and quantities of algae. r r Anticipated Conditions and Problems Continued erosion. Same. If no upstream R/D exists, then water may back up during storms. Riser replacement may eliminate this problem. Further deterioration of the stream system. Roadfill embankment will continue to erode. Erosion will continue. C r r r [ Recommendations Tightline drainage. Install and maintain a wastewater treatment facility before releasing water to ditch and ultimately the Green River. Excavate and install control struc- ture for an R/D pond. This system needs R/D to lessen impacts on the system from urban runoff. - Locate control at intersection of Tribs. 3613 and 36C. - Reduce existing storm flows. - Restrict future development to release runoff at nonerosive rates. - Require setbacks from tops of ravines. - Repair and replace pipes in manhole . structure. - Stabilize roadfill. Build upstream RP) facility. r r r r r f r Trib. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Pro Conditions and Problems 11 0036D 12 0061 RM .00 -1.40 13 0061 RM .01 -.15 7 Hydrology 14,15 Habitat Geology 14 0061 14 hydrology RM .02 r R/D berm has collapsed. Severe instream erosion above and below the faci- lity. Sedimentation and erosion in lower reach by farm adjacent to the Green River. Middle reaches have nice pools and riffles.. Four waterfalls up to 10' high keep this from being an anadromous stream. Stream ravine is steep and mostly vege- tated. Best trout stream habitat in the basin. Bank erosion and sedimen- tation in channel located on private property at mouth of basin. Erosion is limited to this sec- tion. Cause of this ero- sion is not certain. Scouring, bank erosion, channel erosion, sediment build up in stream. The channel capacity is too small for the flows pre- sently generated. • P:I..GAPC /mlm C -3 r r Anticipated Conditions and Problems Instream erosion will con- tinue. No energy dissipation from Drisco pipe above berm area. Sediment build up from erosion will migrate downstream. Future development could create up to four times the current amount of impervious surface. This could fill pools with sediment and destabilize the large organic debris in stream. Possibly continued erosion with increased development in the basin. Degradation of riparian corridor will continue. Erasion will continue. r r r r Recommendations - Stabilize and upgrade earthen berm. - Provide energy dissip.itors for Drisco pipe outflow. - Establish a stream corridor pro- tecting the stream and adjacent ravine sideslopes from clearing. -Future development should release stormwater at nonerosive rates. - Develop adequate R/D for the basin to prevent erosion. - Reestablish the channel floodplain at the mouth of the basin. Use onsite infiltration to the maxi- mum extent poasihte for new construct ion. r r f r I r r r Trib. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 15 0061 15 Hydrology 3204 RM 1.25 16 0001 14 Hydrology RM 1.50 17 0068 17 RM .25 -.35 18 0068 17 RM .25 19 0068 17 RM .30 P:LGAPC /mlm 1- labitat Hydrology habitat Stream segment meanders with little change in ele- vation. Erosion and down - cutting exist in lower segments of stream. Existing outlet of Wetland 3224. Floods over existing gravel road. This wetland is owned by the city of Kent as a water supply source (approx. 86 acres). Nice- looking stream with few pools. Good stream - side cover and instream stabil -ity. Lots of benthic organisms. No fish observed. Outfall has instream ero- sion taking place. Large fill of combustible and construction debris on left bank. Fill is unstable and sliding downhill toward stream. C -4 r r r r Anticipated Conditions and Problems No change in existing con- ditions. Impact on downstream areas will con- tinue. Increased flows and flood frequency due to develop- ment. Use as a well field for water supply. Further instream instability from future development storm runoff. Probable vegetation clearing in stream corridor from development. Erosion of stream channel/ bank, if flows continue unchecked. health and water quality hazard. r r r r r Recommendations Construct an RID facility with 3.7 ac /ft. of storage to mitigate downstream problems. Develop an interlocal agreement to examine the possibility of using part of the wetland for a regional RID facility. - Establish and enforce stream corri- dor guidelines. -Future development should release stormwaters at non - erosive rates. Subcatchmcnt 17 should use onsite RID and infiltration systems to the maxi- mum extent possible for control of peak flows. -BALD grading and filling section has been contacted. - Stabilize and revegetate slope down to stream. - Prohibit filling in stream ravine. r r r 20 0048 17 RM.60 21 0069 18 RM .00 -.90 22 0069 18 RM .10 -.90 23 0069 18 RM .10 P:LGAPC /mIm ( i r r Trib. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems I lahitat Habitat Geology Geology Stream becomes eroded from road ditch flows above 108th Ave. SE. Fill occurring adjacent to stream in SW corner of SE 219th St. and 108th Ave. SE. Minimal fish habitat potential in this stream. Access to stream is open to Green River, but stream is heavily impacted by runoff. This is causing sedimen- tation of the channel in lower portion, erosion and garbage in mid - section, and ditches by trailer park in upper section. High frequency . of bank erosion, some small streamside landslides associated with bank ero- sion. Sedimentation resulting from channel and bank erosion described above. Sedimentation is occurring over a large area and may threaten private property. C -5 r Anticipated Conditions and Problems More erosion . and possible flooding due to fill in the stream corridor. Suhcatchment projected to quadruple in amount of impervious surface. The suhcatchment is pro- jected to expand in imper- vious surface five times that in 1985. All problems exhibited in 1987 will pro- bably get worse. As development increases in the basins, erosion will increase. Sedimentation will increase with continued development in the basin. [ r r r r Recommendations No obvious regional RID sites, so onsite RID will he critical in this subcatchment. Release rates of stormwater should he at nonerosive levels. Assess the fish - habitat potential of this stream before doing any habitat projects. Reducing existing and future storm runoff will he key to maintenance of a good stream. Releasing stormwatcr runoff at nonerosive rates would help accomplish this goal. Plan and develop adequate RID as population and development increase in the basin. Same as RM .l0 -.90. Also construct sediment detention ponds at the mouth' of the stream. Trih. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Ca tegory Project Conditions and Problems 24 0069 18 RM .10 25 0069 18 RM .65 26 0069 18 RM .90 -1.10 P:1.GAPC /mlm Hydrology Habitat Hydrology 3201 Undersized pipe for existing flows. Evidence of debris from backwater. Garbage pushed over ravine embankment is blocking stream. Presents fish blockage and is visually very unpleasant. Wetland 3226 is bissected by SE 312th St. Flows into the northern wetland are blocked due to non- functional culvert on opposite side of SE 312th. This has caused the asphalt road to begin to fail from saturation and standing water. Wetland 3226 contains a wide variety of trees. C -6 Anticipated Conditions And Problems Increase in flows from development in upper catch- ment. Instream erosion and headwall erosion will result. Possible water quality problem and further fish blockage. Potential road failure of SL' 312th St. Continued impact on northern portion of Wetland 3226 if road- side ditch flow is not curtailed. Introduction of petroleum by- products into wetland system. Recommendations Increase the capacity of the existing pipe system. Consider project to remove garbage to allow fish passage without further destabilization of the streambed. - Construct an R/D facility on the southern portion of Wetland 3226. - Intercept the roadside flows on S13 312th. to southern portion of Wetland 3226. This will incorporate a major flow source of the region into an RID facility and mitigate a major impact on the northern section of wetland. - Perform a detailed wetland study to determine environmental impact. TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION EXHIBIT J Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table Symbol Drain Component . Typ Name and Size ;Drainage Component ' ;Dcseription° >> ; Slope, Distance , : from Site Discharge Existing? Problems. Potential Problems Observations of Fieict Inspector, Resource Reviewer, or ' Resident See Map Type: sheet flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; size, diameter, surface area Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume 96 Pt. Constrictions, under capacity, poeding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion Tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts (Ti 48 -inch SD Flows north in Andover Park West Flat 0'4,210' None noted None noted ® 84 -inch CMP Flows east on the north side of Tukwila Parkway - -- 1,210'-2,000' None noted None noted Q Large vegetated ditch 1:1 side slopes, 12 feet to 15 feet deep, 10 -foot bottom, flows east under 68th Avenue South 2 2,000'-2,415' None noted None noted r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Basin: Green River ©FF -SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Subbasin Name: Subbasin Number: 11672.002.doc TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION There were no problems reported or observed during the resource review, nor did the field reconnaissance find any potential constrictions or lack of capacity in the existing drainage system downstream from the site. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Conveyance system nuisance problems, in general, are defined as any existing or predicted flooding or erosion that does not constitute a severe flooding or erosion problem. Conveyance system nuisance problems are defined as flooding or erosion that results in the overflow of the constructed conveyance system for runoff events less than or equal to a 10 -year event. Examples include inundation of a shoulder or lane of a roadway. Overflows collecting in yards or pastures, shallow flows across driveways, minor flooding in crawlspaces or unheated garages/outbuildings and minor erosion. Based on our site visit, there was no evidence of past conveyance system nuisance problems occurring, as it was raining heavily at the time of the field reconnaissance and there was no lack of capacity in the convey systems on site or downstream from the site. 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems are defined as downstream channels, ravines, or slopes with evidence of or potential for erosionTmcision, sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to downstream conveyance systems or propose a landslide hazard by undercutting adjacent slopes. Severe erosion problems do not include roadway or minor ditch erosion. Based on our site visit, there is no evidence of, or potential for erosion/incision sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to downstream conveyance systems evident anywhere along the downstream drainage course as the vast majority of this downstream drainage course occurred through pipe systems, except for the final 400 feet prior to discharge into the Green River. 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depressions, Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: • Flooding of the finished area of a habitable building for runoff events less than or equal p,., to the 100 -year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial buildings. Flooding in electrical/heating systems and components in the crawlspace or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe building flooding problems." • Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or severely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100 -year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." As mentioned previously, there was no evidence of flooding from the site visit downstream of the immt subject property. The entire downstream drainage course is through developed land and very shortly, within one -half mile of the project site, discharges into the Green River. The vast int 11672.001.doc 011 majority of the downstream drainage course consists of pipe conveyance systems with large diameter pipe. Please review the Exhibit J - Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table for the sizes of the pipes. The field reconnaissance for this off -site analysis drainage report was conducted on December 6, 2004. It was raining during the downstream analysis and the skies were overcast. The high temperature on this day was approximately 40 to 45 degrees. 11672.001.doc 6 TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS Runoff leaves the site by exiting off the western property line of the site along the frontage of Andover Park West and flows through pipes into a large diameter, 48 -inch storm drain, which flows northerly in Andover Park West until crossing underneath Tukwila Parkway. The runoff then enters a catch basin and is discharged through a larger diameter pipe, which is 84 -inch CMP, and courses in an easterly direction for several hundred feet, discharging to a large, deep ditch, which ultimately discharges into the Green River, 400 to 600 feet away from the discharge point of the 84 -inch CMP culvert. Since it was raining heavily the day of the downstream analysis and there were no flooding or other problems occurring at that time, it is assumed that the downstream drainage course is adequate to convey runoff from the project site. 11672.001.doc a a TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING AND POTENTIAL PROBLEMS TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING AND POTENTIAL PROBLEMS The area downstream of this proposed project known as Acme Bowling does not exhibit any potential problems, nor is there evidence of any existing problems in this downstream drainage course. Since the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual has been adopted by the City Tukwila and the City has indicated that Basic Water Quality and Level 1 Flow Control are the required means of treating and detaining runoff, this project assumes that those are adequate for this site. This project will neither aggravate nor create a problem as specified in the problem - specific mitigation requirements set forth in Section 1.2.2.1 of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual as delineated in Task No. 4 of this report. A Level 2 or Level 3 off -site analysis should not be required for this project site as there is no evidence of existing or potential problems identified in this Level 1 analysis. The site does not contribute more than 15 percent of the total peak flow drainage downstream from the site. 11672.001.doe 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology This site is entirely developed under existing conditions; however, we are adding impervious surface under proposed conditions by approximately 1.25 acres of new impervious surface. The site existed as a building known as Fatigue Technologies. The entire site was graded, cleared, and landscaped with appropriate drive aisles, parking, and catch basin pipe conveyance facilities previously designed to the City of Tukwila standards. The proposal for this development is to demolish the entire site and start over with the design of new facilities. B. Developed Site Hydrology Under developed conditions, the detention system has been sized to collect runoff from the entire site and detain/treat it to City of Tukwila standards such that Level 1 Flow Control will be provided for the new impervious surface. The system was modeled as an existing condition with 5.34 acres of impervious surface and 2.58 acres of till grass, with a developed condition of 6.59 acres of impervious surface and 1.33 acres of till grass. Detention is provided such that the 2 and 10 - year pre developed peak runoff rates for this project site are matched under developed conditions. C. Performance Standards Once again, the detention facility on the site is sized to detain runoff based on Level 1 Flow Control. The conveyance system design standard is to convey the entire 25 -year storm within the pipes and catch basins based on the Rational method. The area- specific water quality treatment followed for this project site was the Basic Water Quality Menu, of which we are proposing a wet vault below the live storage in the wet/detention vault. D. Flow Control System Please see the illustrative sketch within this section of the report for the flow control system prepared for this development. E. Water Quality System Please see the illustrative sketch within this section of the report for the wet/detention vault and water quality facility proposed for this project site. 11672.003.doc [JPJhep] DETENTION AND WATER QUALITY SIZING CRITERIA Existing Conditions: Impervious = 5.34 acres Till Grass = 2.58 acres Total = 7.92 acres Proposed Conditions: Impervious = 6.59 acres Till Grass = 1.33 acres Total = 7.92 acres Detention volume required = 3,855 cu. ft. 11672.003.doc [JPJ/tep] SIZE THE BASIC WATER QUALITY WET VAULT V. = [0.9 Al = 0.25 A (0.039) = [(0.9)(6.59) + (0.25x1.33)] (0.039)(43,560) = 10,641 cu. ft. Vb = (3)(VJ = (3)(10,641) = 31,923 cu. ft. 11672.003.doc [JPJ /tep] Impervious Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11672pre.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location : Sea -Tac Computing Series : 11672pre.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series Till Grass 2.58 acres Loading Time Series Impervious 5.34 acres Total Area : 7.92 acres Peak Discharge: 3.07 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:11672pre.tsf Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies 7L Co howl e coif L.1 itA2 1 -- i 7 -OS File :C: \KC_SWDM \KC_DATA \STTG60R.rnf File :C: \KC_SWDM \KC_DATA \STEI60R.rnf Loading Stage /Discharge curve:11672pre.tsf Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:11672pre.pks Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location : Sea -Tac Computing Series : 11672dev.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series File :C: \KC_SWDM \KC_DATA \STTG60R.rnf Till Grass 1.33 acres Loading Time Series File :C: \KC_SWDM \KC_DATA \STEI60R.rnf 6.59 acres 1d ir Total Area : 7.92 acres Peak Discharge: 3.40 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:11672dev.tsf Time Series Computed Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11672dev.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies hm Edit Facility Loading Stage /Discharge curve:11672dev.tsf Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:11672dev.pks Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command Size a Retention /Detention FACILITY Edit Facility Loading Time Series File:11672dev.tsf Time Series Found in Memory:11672dev.tsf Saving Retention /Detention Facility File:11672convey.rdf . Starting Documentation File:C: \kc_swdm \kc_ data \example \kcrts \11672convey.doc Lio Time Series Found in Memory:11672dev.tsf . Edit Complete Retention /Detention Facility Design Saving Retention /Detention Facility File:11672convey.rdf . Starting Documentation File:C: \kc_swdm \kc_ data \example \kcrts \11672convey.doc Time Series Found in Memory:11672dev.tsf Retention /Detention Facility Design Time Series Found in Memory:11672dev.tsf Saving Retention /Detention Facility File:11672convey.rdf . Starting Documentation File:C: \kc_swdm \kc_ data \example \kcrts \11672convey.doc Time Series Found in Memory:11672dev.tsf . Edit Complete Retention /Detention Facility Design • Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11672pre.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 1.53 1.26 1.83 1.38 1.65 1.62 2.01 3.07 Computed Peaks 6 2/09/01 2:00 8 1/05/02 16:00 3 2/27/03 7:00 7 8/26/04 2:00 4 10/28/04 16:00 5 1/18/06 16:00 2 10/26/06 0:00 1 1/09/08 6:00 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) 3.07 2.01 1.83 1.65 1.62 1.53 1.38 1.26 2.72 Period 1 100.00 0.990 2 25.00 0.960 3 10.00 0.900 4 5.00 0.800 5 3.00 0.667 6 2.00 0.500 7 1.30 0.231 8 1.10 0.091 50.00 0.980 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11672dev.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 1.72 6 2/09/01 2:00 1.47 8 1/05/02 16:00 2.07 3 12/08/02 18:00 1.67 7 8/26/04 2:00 1.99 4 10/28/04 16:00 1.83 5 1/18/06 16:00 2.42 2 10/26/06 0:00 3.39 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 3.39 1 100.00 0.990 2.42 2 25.00 0.960 2.07 3 10.00 0.900 1.99 4 5.00 0.800 1.83 5 3.00 0.667 1.72 6 2.00 0.500 1.67 7 1.30 0.231 1.47 8 1.10 0.091 3.07 50.00 0.980 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11672rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 1.51 1.21 1.83 1.32 1.68 1.64 1.87 6 2/09/01 4:00 8 1/05/02 17:00 3 2/27/03 8:00 7 8/26/04 3:00 4 10/28/04 17:00 5 1/18/06 17:00 2 10/26/06 1:00 3.25 1 1/09/08 7:00 Computed Peaks (CFS) 3.25 1.87 1.83 1.68 1.64 1.51 1.32 1.21 2.79 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (ft) 0.91 0.75 0.74 0.71 0.71 0.62 0.48 0.40 0.87 Period 1 100.00 0.990 2 25.00 0.960 3 10.00 0.900 4 5.00 0.800 5 3.00 0.667 6 2.00 0.500 7 1.30 0.231 8 1.10 0.091 50.00 0.980 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 8.40 1.601 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None ihrs Retention /Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Vault Facility Length: 130.00 ft Facility Width: 40.00 ft Facility Area: 5200. sq. ft Effective Storage Depth: 0.70 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 26.00 ft Storage Volume: 3640. cu. ft Riser Head: 0.70 ft Riser Diameter: 18.00 inches Number of orifices: 1 Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 26.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.04 26.04 208. 0.005 0.358 0.00 0.07 26.07 364. 0.008 0.506 0.00 0.11 26.11 572. 0.013 0.620 0.00 0.14 26.14 728. 0.017 0.716 0.00 0.18 26.18 936. 0.021 0.801 0.00 0.21 26.21 1092. 0.025 0.877 0.00 0.24 26.24 1248. 0.029 0.947 0.00 0.28 26.28 1456. 0.033 1.010 0.00 0.32 26.32 1664. 0.038 1.070 0.00 0.35 26.35 1820. 0.042 1.130 0.00 0.39 26.39 2028. 0.047 1.190 0.00 0.42 26.42 2184. 0.050 1.240 0.00 0.46 26.46 2392. 0.055 1.290 0.00 0.49 26.49 2548. 0.058 1.340 0.00 0.52 26.52 2704. 0.062 1.390 0.00 0.56 26.56 2912. 0.067 1.430 0.00 0.60 26.60 3120. 0.072 1.480 0.00 0.63 26.63 3276. 0.075 1.520 0.00 0.67 26.67 3484. 0.080 1.560 0.00 0.70 26.70 3640. 0.084 1.600 0.00 0.80 26.80 4160. 0.096 2.170 0.00 0.90 26.90 4680. 0.107 3.120 0.00 1.00 27.00 5200. 0.119 4.310 0.00 1.10 27.10 5720. 0.131 5.700 0.00 1.20 27.20 6240. 0.143 7.260 0.00 1.30 27.30 6760. 0.155 8.770 0.00 1.40 27.40 7280. 0.167 9.380 0.00 1.50 27.50 7800. 0.179 9.960 0.00 1.60 27.60 8320. 0.191 10.490 0.00 1.70 27.70 8840. 0.203 11.000 0.00 1.80 27.80 9360. 0.215 11.490 0.00 1.90 27.90 9880. 0.227 11.960 0.00 Aro 2.00 2.10 2.20 2.30 2.40 2.50 2.60 2.70 28.00 28.10 28.20 28.30 28.40 28.50 28.60 28.70 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 3.39 * * * * * ** 3.25 0.91 26.91 4737. 0.109 2 2.42 * * * * * ** 1.87 0.75 26.75 3887. 0.089 3 2.07 1.83 1.84 0.74 26.74 3855. 0.088 4 1.99 * * * * * ** 1.68 0.71 26.71 5 1.83 * * * * * ** 1.64 0.71 26.71 6 1.72 1.53 1.51 0.62 26.62 7 1.67 * * * * * ** 1.32 0.48 26.48 8 1.47 * * * * * ** 1.21 0.40 26.40 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:11672dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:11672rdout Inflow /Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: 10400. 10920. 11440. 11960. 12480. 13000. 13520. 14040. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11672rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 1.51 1.21 1.83 1.32 1.68 1.64 1.87 3.25 Computed Peaks 6 2/09/01 4:00 8 1/05/02 17:00 3 2/27/03 8:00 7 8/26/04 3:00 4 10/28/04 17:00 5 1/18/06 17:00 2 10/26/06 1:00 1 1/09/08 7:00 0.239 12.410 0.251 12.840 0.263 13.260 0.275 13.670 0.287 14.060 0.298 14.440 0.310 14.820 0.322 15.180 3715. 3673. 3247. 2498. 2096. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.085 0.084 0.075 0.057 0.048 3.40 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 3.25 CFS at 7:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 0.91 Ft 26.91 Ft 4737. Cu -Ft 0.109 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) Period 3.25 0.91 1 100.00 0.990 1.87 0.75 2 25.00 0.960 1.83 0.74 3 10.00 0.900 1.68 0.71 4 5.00 0.800 1.64 0.71 5 3.00 0.667 1.51 0.62 6 2.00 0.500 1.32 0.48 7 1.30 0.231 1.21 0.40 8 1.10 0.091 2.79 0.87 50.00 0.980 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The conveyance system for this site will be sized with the final Technical Information Report proposed for this development and is not included with this Preliminary Technical Information Report. The conveyance standard followed would be to size all pipes based on the Rational method utilizing a 25 -year precipitation and a Manning's equation "n" value of 0.014 for the on -site pipes. 11672.003.doc [JPI/tep] 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 0 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 11672.003.doc [JPJRep] 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 7.0 OTHER PERMITS Other permits required for this project site include: D Side Sewer Connection Permit • Water Connection Permit • Right -of -Way Use Permit • Clear and Grade Permit > Building Permit 11672.003.doc [JPJ/tep] 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN m 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The erosion and sedimentation control facilities for this project have been sized based on Appendix D of the KCSWDM. Calculations for the sediment pond are included herewith. Sediment retention will be maintained on site such that no sediment -laden rainwater will be allowed to be discharged from the project site during construction due to the institution of the following measures, including perimeter protection by using silt fences, and installation of temporary V- ditches with rock checkdams to route runoff to the sediment facility. At least one rock construction entrance will be installed. Cover measures will be instituted to prevent stockpiled material from leaching into the runoff. Clearing limits will be specified for the project site. 11672.003.doc [WJ/tcp] 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATIONS OF COVENANT 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 11672.003.doc [JPJ/tep] 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL a a r r r a r a la 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 11672.003.doc [JPJ/tep] ‘&01 .02 RECEIVED DEC 10 2vl -0t COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Transpo Group ACME Bowl Tukwila, WA Transportation Impact Analysis December 2004 Transpo rtation Specialists Focused on Mobility [ExPIRES 03 -15- oc j Transportation Impact Analysis ACME BOWL TU KWI LA, WA Prepared for: Mt. Adams Holdings, L.L.C. 1'13-01 December 2004 Prepared by: The Transpo Group, Inc. 11730 118 Avenue NE, Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 Phone: 425.8213665 Fax: 425.825.8434 www.thetranspogroup.com ® 2004 The Transpo Group Pne INTRODUCTION 1 Project Description 1 Study Approach 1 EXISTING AND FUTURE WI T HOOT PROJECT CONDf11ONS 5 Roadway Network 5 Existing Traffic Volumes 5 Planned Improvements 7 Future Traffic Volumes 7 Intersection Operations 8 Arterial Operations 11 Traffic Safety 12 Transit Service 12 Non - Motorized Facilities 13 PROJECT IMPACTS 14 Trip Generation 14 Trip Distribution and Assignment 15 Traffic Volume Impacts 15 Intersection Operations 20 Arterial Operations 22 Site Access Analysis 23 Transit Service 23 Non - Motorized Facilities 23 Parking 24 Traffic Safety Impacts 24 Transportation Impact Fees 24 SUMMARY /CONCLUSIONS 26 APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: APPENDIX D: 0 Table of Contents LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA AND DEFINITIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS REGIONAL BOWLING CENTERS - TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY FITNESS CLUB - TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ..w r W 'rr war Table of Contents (continued) Figures 1. Study Area Intersections 3 2. Site Plan 4 3. Existing (2004) Weekday PM Peak & Saturday Mid -day Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6 4. Baseline (2010) Weekday PM Peak Hour and Saturday Mid -day Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 9 5. Project Trip Distribution 16 6. Project Traffic Assignment 17 7. Future with Project Weekday PM Peak & Saturday Mid -day Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 18 Tables 1. Existing and Future Without- Project Intersection LOS Summary 10 2. Existing and Future without - Project Arterial LOS Summary- PM Peak Hour 11 3. Accident History Summary 12 4. Project Trip Generation: PM Peak Hour and Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour 15 5. Project Traffic Volume Impacts 19 6. Future Without- Project and Future with- Project LOS Summary 21 7. Future with- Project and Future with - Project Arterial LOS Summary - Weekday PM Peak Hour 2 2 8. Driveway LOS Summary 23 9. Peak Parking Demand Summary 2 4 10. Transportation Impact Fees Summary 25 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA The Transpo Groupl 04282 Introduction December 2004 This report summarizes the results of the transportation impact analysis prepared for a proposed recreational/retail development located in Tukwila, Washington. The purpose of this analysis is to identify any potential traffic - related impacts the proposed project would have on the roadway network in the site vicinity and to recommend mitigation measures, as necessary, to mitigate those impacts. Project Description The proposed project is located at the northeast corner of Andover Park W /Baker Boulevard. The location of the site is shown in Figure 1. The site is currently occupied by vacant warehouse buildings which would be retrofitted to accommodate the proposed development. Three driveways currently provide access to the site on Andover Park W, with another minor driveway located on Baker Boulevard. With the proposed development, only two of the three Andover Park W driveways would continue to provide access to the site, while the other two driveways would be closed. The project would retrofit existing buildings on -site to accommodate a 40 lane (52,500 sf) bowling center, a 22,000 sf fitness club, and 16,900 sf of general retail space. Figure 2 includes the site plan used as the basis for this analysis. To be consistent with other studies conducted in the City of Tukwila, and as directed by city staff, a 2010 horizon year was used for this study. The site plan provided in Figure 2 does show the potential location of a possible retail outlot near the southwest corner of the site and area dedicated for a possible expansion of the fitness center building, though they are not proposed at this time and are not considered part of the currently proposed development. The site plan also shows slightly less retail space than was analyzed in this report. As currently shown on the site plan, the site will contain 16,200 sf of retail space, though all analyses and calculations in this report assume 16,900 sf of retail space. As all analyses in this report assume the amount of retail space is less than the actual proposed space, the analyses slightly overestimate the amount of retail traffic to be generated by the proposed project. Removing the 700 sf of retail space from the project trip generation would resuh in one to two less peak hour trips than projected for the site in future conditions. Study Approach In order to meet the study's objectives, the study area and scope were coordinated in advance with review staff from the City of Tukwila. Several study intersections in the Tukwila Urban Core (TUG) were studied during the weekday PM peak hour to satisfy City of Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 9.48- Transportation Concurrency Standards and Impact Fees. In addition, the three signali7fd intersections nearest the site were selected for Saturday Mid -day peak hour analysis, as previous traffic analyses completed in the area found that the Saturday peak hour generally occurs between 1 -3 PM. Study intersections in the TUC included in this analysis are listed below. • 51St Ave S. /SR 518 WB On -Ramp • 51St Ave S✓SR 518 EB Off-Ramp • 53rd Ave S /Klickitat Drive • Klickitat Drive /I -5 SB On -Ramp • 61St Ave S /Southcenter Blvd • 66th Ave S /Southcenter Blvd • 6151 Ave S /Tukwila Parkway • I -405 NB Ramp /Tukwila Pkwy • Andover Park W /Tukwila Parkway* • Andover Park E /Tukwila Parkway • Andover Park W /Baker Blvd* • Southcenter Pkwy /I -5 NB Ramp -Mall • Southcenter Parkway /Klickitat Dr • Southcenter Parkway /I -5 NB Ramp 1 ti ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 • Southcenter Parkway /Strander Blvd • 6151 P1 S- Mall/Strander Blvd • Andover Park W /Strander Blvd* • Andover Park E /Strander Blvd • West Valley Highway / Strander Blvd • Southcenter Parkway /S 168th Street • Southcenter Parkway /Minkler Blvd *Denotes intersections studied during Mid -day Peak Hour. • Andover Park W /Minkler Blvd • Andover Park E /Minkler Blvd • Southcenter Parkway /S 180th Street • Andover Park W/S 180th Street • Andover Park E/S 180th Street • Sperry Drive /S 180th Street • West Valley Highway /S 180th Street both the weekday PM peak hour and Saturday The Transpo Groupl 04282 2 Figure 1 Study Area Intersections ACME Bowl - Tukwila, Washington M:04\04282 ACME Bowl- TukwilalGraphicsIGraphic03 dwg, A, 12/2/2004 9:17:12 AM, lindak STUDY INTERSECTIONS 0 = WEEKDAY PM PEAK N NOT TO SCALE SATURDAY MID-DAY PEAK & WEEKDAY PM PEAK The Transpo Group ANT row ' 4, S, 7.■ 1/4. OP ASP . BOWL NG 40 ONES 1:41.500 S.F. MEL PROP. LE TO BE RELOCATED ..... maim • Figure 2 Site Plan ACME Bowl- Tukwila, Washington %I04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\ Graphics Graphic,01 <A> bra 12/03/04 14:45 NOT TO SCALE The Transpo Group ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 Existing and Future Without - Project Conditions This section of the report documents existing conditions in the vicinity of the proposed project, including the surrounding roadway network, weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour traffic volumes and intersection operations, weekday PM peak hour arterial operations, traffic safety, transit service, and an inventory of adjacent non - motorized facilities. In addition, this section documents 2010 future without - project (baseline) conditions. The analysis of existing and future baseline traffic conditions provides a frame of reference when evaluating potential project impacts. Project impacts are measured by comparing the difference in area operations between the with- and without- project scenarios. Roadway Network Existing roadway and non - motorized characteristics for the immediate area surrounding the site are described below. Andover Park West is a four -lane roadway that runs north -south adjacent to the project site. The roadway is designated as a minor arterial by the City of Tukwila, and major intersections along Andover Park W are signali7rd. Sidewalks exist along both sides of the roadway in the immediate area of the project site. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Tukwila Parkway is designated as a minor arterial by the City of Tukwila and consists of four -five lanes near the site. Sidewalks exist on the south side of the roadway, and intermittently on the north side. To the west of the Tukwila Parkway /61s Avenue S intersection,'Tukwila Parkway curves to the south and becomes Southcenter Parkway. The posted speed is 35 mph. Baker Boulevard is a four -lane roadway located directly to the south of the project site. Baker Boulevard serves as a connection between Southcenter Mall, Andover Park W, and Andover Park E. Sidewalks are located on both sides of the street adjacent to the site. Strander Boulevard is a four -five lane minor arterial that connects Southcenter Parkway with the West Valley Highway. Sidewalks exist on both sides of the roadway, and major intersections are controlled by traffic signals. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Existing Traffic Volumes Existing weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour traffic volumes collected at the study area intersections in 2002 and 2003 were grown by an annual growth rate to arrive at existing 2004 traffic volumes. Based on direction from city staff, and to remain consistent with other studies conducted in the area and the city, a 1.5- percent annual growth rate was applied. The 1.5- percent growth rate was originally developed based on a review of historic counts of daily traffic. In addition, traffic volumes associated with the Bahama Breeze and Olive Garden restaurants (located on the Southcenter Mall site) were also added to the existing traffic volumes, as the traffic counts had been conducted prior to their openings. ITE Trip Gerrratiaz average rates for land use # 832 (Nigh- turnover Sit -down Restaurant) were used to develop trip generation and were assigned to the study intersections, consistent with the traffic volumes used for the Westdd Shioppingtaten S outhcenter ExpansionEmimramntal Inlazct Statenvnt. The resuking 2004 existing weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour traffic volumes, rounded to the nearest five vehicles, are summarized in Figure 3. The Transpo Groupl 04282 5 O SR 518 WB 165 � i 725 1 ON-RAMP 2 SR 518 EB 170 25j 640"1 1 85 OFF -RAMP 1 O KLKC(RAT DR O S5 645 4.780 80 ( -120 2 0 85 SB ON -RAMP 740 � l � 85 61ST OUTHCENTER BLVD 680 . 4.765 1,485 x205 1, 010 75 66TH AVE S O SOUTHCENTER BLVD 605 4.720 95, r ("605 61ST AVENUE S O TUKWILAPARKWAY 710 1.000 J L 475, t - 615 445- -■ 4-175 MALL ENTRANCE/I-405 NB O TUKWILAPARKWAY 280/ 320 620- -4. 4.-610 235, 155 1050 r55 -1 1 ® ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA PARKWAY (385) 480 --► 4.- 550 (425) (350)375, r (' 255(305) (415) 540 250(285) 1 0 TU ( 520-.. * -275 205 r ('225 355 400 ANDOVER BAKER BLVD (510) 460 (110) J ! (95) 70 , .. (4 5) 35 - ( 120) 45 ' (145) 80 140 605 (430) PARK W L (_ 65 4. 45 `- 90 (60) ( (55) (60) 12 SOUTHCENTER PKWY L5 NB OFF- RAMP/NORDSTROM'S 8 1L 140,) `55 60-0. 40, r 240 4 7 SOUTHCENTER PKWY . 7 KLICKRAT DR 685 J ! 200,) 585 9055 1 4 SOUTHCENTER I.5 NB OFF -RAMP 1,180 380 1, PKWY (RIGHT ONLY) I 75 1 5 SOUTHCENTER PKWY STRANDER BLVD 1,035 i L 585 r355 1325 1 C) STRANDER 45 No 140, 415--► 125 1 0 1 45 BLVD 160 4.590 80 0 ANDOVER ER (460) 375 ( ) 1-) (205) 125. (545) 380 - .. (205)105 , (235) 470 (365) BLVD k.- 0) ` 165 (200) 4. 505 (560) r 130 (156) 1 s (13) 1 g ANDOVER PARK E STRANDER BLVD 365 A 100,) �9 5 425 4.435 125 125 , r u5 444499990000 WEST VALLEY 19 STRANDER 1,130 3 J lL 435,) 30 440 "'1 1 1 HIGHWAY BLVD `,10 4.20 20 r r O SOUTHCENTER PKWY O S 168TH ST 168TH S 1,270 Ji 5,) �35 0 ..... 5 , r 15 5 1 0 1,135 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2 1 MINKLER BLVD 1,180 L1D5 x 105 1 55 1,25 ANDOVER 2 2 MINKLER BLVD J + k► 70,) 100-► 35, 2531 PARK W 140 4.90 ( -6° 5 ANDOVER MINKLER BLVD 1 J 60,) 30-.. 95- 0050 PARK E 30 L 55 4.60 (-61) SOUTHCENTER 24 S 180Th ST J 175. 275-. 30- 2 90 PKWY L L4o5 4.490 x145 ANDOVER PARK W 2 5 S 180TH ST 90 Ji L 80,) t ` 200 515-4.- 4.790 5-) (-20 2 1 35 is c ANDOVER PARK E 2 6 S 180TH ST 125 245 125. `150 720- -► 4.840 SPERRY DR 2 7 S 180TH ST J4 75,) 910 5, 1 145 L250 4.885 r 5 WEST VALLEY 2$ S 180TH ST J 110,) 580 565, 4701055 HIGHWAY L k_245 4.570 ` -75 N STUDY INTERSECTIONS O = WEEKDAY PM PEAK =Y SATURDAY MID -DAY PEAK & _ WEEKDAY PM PEAK X = WEEKDAY PM PEAK (X) = SATURDAY MID -DAY PEAK v,: Figure 3 me Existing (2004) Weekday PM Peak & Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Tralispo Gimp ACME Bowl - Tukwila, Washington M:104104282 ACME Bowl- TukwilalGraphics\Graphic03.dwg, 8,12/2/2004 9:17:14 AM, kndak ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 The Transpo Groupl 04282 Planned Improvements The City of Tukwila's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program was reviewed to determine what improvement projects were planned at any of the study area intersections. Three projects were identified that would directly impact operations at study intersections, have funding sources identified, and that have previously been identified by city staff as being likely to be completed by 2010. These improvement projects include: • Andover Park E /Minkler Boulevard Intersection Improvements- This project includes the construction of left -turn lanes for the north and south approaches of Andover Park E, allowing for signal phasing improvements at the intersection. • S 168th Street Roadway Extension - This project includes the construction of S 168th Street so that it connects between its current eastern terminus and Andover Park W. This provides for a full connection between Southcenter Parkway and Andover Park W. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, drainage, illumination, and landscaping improvements would all occur as part this improvement. • TUC Traffic Signal Interconnect This project will involve the installation of hard wire interconnect systems between traffic signals in the TUC, effectively coordinating the operations between adjacent traffic signals (the TUC encompasses much of the project's study area). Other improvement projects in the general area include the construction of the Strander Boulevard extension from West Valley Highway to Oaksdale Avenue SW, a fly -over ramp near Klickitat Drive and Southcenter Parkway, and widening of I -405 planned by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). However, based on previous feedback from City of Tukwila staff, and previous traffic analyses completed in the area, these projects are not anticipated to be complete by the 2010 horizon year, have not had funding sources secured, and/or have not been fully defined. Therefore, the Strander Boulevard extension, Klickitat Drive flyover ramp, and I -405 widening have not been assumed complete in future operating conditions. Future Traffic Volumes To arrive at 2010 future without -project (baseline) traffic volumes, the developed 2004 existing traffic volumes were grown by a 1.5- percent annual growth rate. In addition, city staff indicated that traffic volumes from the planned Westfield Shoppingtown Southcenter expansion ( Southcenter Mall expansion) project, currently undergoing environmental impact review, should be included in the future 2010 traffic volumes. Since the Southcenter Mall expansion has not been approved, the inclusion of this traffic results in a conservative estimate of the future forecast volumes. In addition, traffic associated with the proposed S 154th Street Sound Transit light -rail station was included in future weekday PM peak hour traffic volumes. The combination of the background traffic growth rate and pipeline projects accounts for potential future traffic growth in the study area. While new traffic anticipated to be generated by the Southcenter Mall expansion was included in future traffic volumes, no roadway or intersection improvements associated with this development were assumed in future conditions. The WesOeld Shoppingtozm Sacalamrtter Expansion Enuron'w ttalInitact Statenertt (EIS) identified several options for mitigation improvements at intersections analyzed in this study. However, a specific mitigation program has not been finalized to date. By not assuming any mitigation improvements from the ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA ' December 2004 Southcenter Mall expansion, while still including the new traffic generated by the expansion, one could consider this analysis conservative in nature. In order to account for the shifts in background traffic anticipated due to the before mentioned S 168th Street extension project, adjustments were made to the 2010 baseline traffic volumes based on existing travel patterns in the area and the projected future volumes of turning movements at adjacent intersection that would likely take advantage of the new east -west connection. Traffic forecasts provided in the Saab 168th Stnes Draft EIS (Entranco, June 1987) were also used as a guideline to forecast traffic volume shifts. These shifts are consistent with those developed for the Westfield Shoppingtoun SarthomterExpansion EIS. The resulting 2010 future baseline weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour traffic volumes are summarized in Figure 4. Intersection Operations A level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted for the study area intersections for the weekday PM peak hour and the three adjacent study intersections during the Saturday mid - day peak hour. The signalized intersections were analyzed using Syrdnv 60. This software program is based on methodologies presented in the High w y CagacityManual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board, 2000 Edition). Signal timing information obtained from the City of Tukwila was optimized (splits) under existing conditions to account for the actuated traffic signal adjustments that are likely to occur in response to specific traffic volume demands. Traffic signal timings were again optimized for 2010 baseline conditions, reflecting the actuated nature of the traffic signals and planned city improvements in coordination between traffic signals. LOS values range from LOS A, which indicates good operating conditions with little or no delay, to LOS F, which indicates extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. LOS is measure in terms of total average intersection delay for signalized intersections, and total vehicle delay by lane group for unsignal 7fd intersections. A more detailed explanation of LOS criteria is provided in Appendix A. The delay calculation for a signaliw d intersection becomes increasingly inaccurate beyond a v/c ratio of 1.20. Thus, when the v/c ratio exceeds 1.20 it is more appropriate to measure intersection operations and congestion by the v/c ratio rather than intersection delay because it is difficuh to predict the intersection delay. To reflect the potential inaccuracy of the delay values in this circumstance, the intersection delay has been reported as greater than or equal to 80.0 seconds (the lower LOS F boundar)) indicating the intersection is operating at LOS F. At unsignalized intersections, vehicle delays exceeding 50.0 seconds become increasingly inaccurate. This is due to the sensitivity of the vehicle delay equation and, as a resuh, vehicle delay exponentially increases at a disproportionate rate. Thus, LOS F best represents operations that exceed LOS F, and delay is truncated at greater than 50.0 seconds (the lower LOS F boundary) to indicate this condition. Table 1 summarizes both existing and 2010 future baseline, weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour LOS, for the respective study intersections. The LOS worksheets are included in Appendix B. The Transpo Group! 04282 8 Wi a im Figure 4 The B aseline (2010) Weekday PM Peak & Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour Traffic Volumes TPA1 11 Group ACME Bowl - Tukwila, Washington M:\04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila)Graphics\Graphic03.dwg, C, 12/2/2004 9:17:15 AM, indak 51ST AVE S SR 518 WB ON-RAMP 180 J! -115 0 51ST AVE SR 518 EB ( 1 755 S OFF -RAMP t I 955 53RD AVE S KLK;KITAT DR 760-.. .-905 85" (140 —1 r" 20 110 KLICKITAT DR O L5 SB ON -RAMP 870 IL i 745 1,020 O 61ST AVENUE S S SOUTHCENTER BLVD 805-... ,.655 ("275 ,270 125 O SOUTHCENTERBLVD 750 � --855 105 ( 1 4 280 775 O T'LKWILAPARKWAY 905 1245 J L 6o5J k_ 795 525-... f210 0 TUKWILAPAR 330J 805 275, 175 1'd0 PARKWAY `385 f790 (65 1 65 s" TUKWI (430)545 -► f 625 (490) (575) 535 , r 325(415) (650) 730 0 (370) 0 TUKWILA PARKWAY 620 -..--370 -370 y � 1 r245 390 4 ANDOVER PARK W ` BAKER BLVD (710) 575 (21,) -.)C (208) 168 J A 70 (40) (53) 41 - f 51 (64) (225)124 , r 100 (65) (233) 135 1 r- 735 (605) SOUTHCENTER 12 L5 NB OFF- 160J 113-.. 55 7 PKWY RAMPMORDSTROMS L 1 `144 x308 r- 1 5 SOUTHCENTER KLICKRAT 7 365 J r 235J 685-1 1,085 PKWY DR 5 SOUTHCENTER 4 1-5 NB OFF -RAMP 445, ,, 7 PKWY (RIGHT ONLY) I 35 SOUTHCENTER 5 STRANDER 1,225 PKWY BLVD 1 456 L 1 ` r230 305 C) STRANDER P . S R MALL 52 J I ` 19oJ & 272 345- -■ X490 135'- 4 (85 110 i ,20 55 ANDOVERR (590) 475 ( ) JiL 1 ( (320)190 J (560)420 -► (105)50, 1 (220)165 i 550 (470) PARK W BLVD ) 215(280) ` 490(560) r 290(340) r 160 (265) 1 8 ANDOVER PARK STRANDER 4 140 I 1100 535- 180 305 E BLVD L 165 105 ..-560 (135 200 f 1 7 WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY STRANDER BLVD 1,240 JI ao 485J k10 35-+ X20 5401 r20 3-.6 5 ,�85 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2 0 S 168TH ST 1,210 JI 155 5J k155 0-.. -...--0 5, ( -215 5 5 110 1, 45 21 SOUTHCENTER PKWY MINKLER BLVD 1,20 85 &60 ( � 40 1.75 O ANDOVER PARK W MINKLER BLVD 645 100 160 55J + L 4 220 110+ 55 20-) r65 51� 4 ANDOVER PARK E 3 MINKLER BLVD 12535 65J ` `„6o 35-e. 65 12 (85 130 - 4 SOUTHCENTER PKWY S 180TH ST 345 310 1 445 200j t_445 c. L L445 300-■ ...-535 35, ( 6135 1 0 ANDOVER PARK 2 S S 180TH S7 1 250 85 J J 565-.- 5, 6140 80 W 335 x `225 ..--865 ( 20 2 6 135J 790- ANDOVER PARK E S 180TH ST 135 330 J L L220 f925 SPERRY DR 2 7 S 180TH ST 60 J 80J 1,060-.. 5• 15 150 360 L k _275 (.1,035 r 5 �► 2 8 WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY S 180TH ST 1,055 85 1 375 J L 120 k_320 645-... f635 670, ( 80 1 4 570 1060 9 4, N O "°; X (X) STUDY INTERSECTIONS = WEEKDAY PM PEAK _ SATURDAY MID - DAY PEAK & WEEKDAY PM PEAK = WEEKDAY PM PEAK = SATURDAY MID - DAY PEAK Wi a im Figure 4 The B aseline (2010) Weekday PM Peak & Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour Traffic Volumes TPA1 11 Group ACME Bowl - Tukwila, Washington M:\04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila)Graphics\Graphic03.dwg, C, 12/2/2004 9:17:15 AM, indak km" NNW ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Table 1. Existing and Future Without- Project Intersection LOS Summary 51st Ave S /SR 518 WB On -Ramp 51st Ave S /SR 518 EB Off -Ramp E 35.7 EB Left F >50.0 EB Left 53rd Avenue S /Klickitat Drive B 12.4 0.71 B 15.4 0.78 Klickitat Drive /I -5 SB On -Ramp C 15.1 SB Left C 20.4 SB Left 61m Ave S/Southcenter Blvd F >80M 1.28 F >80.0 1.60 66th Ave S /Southcenter Blvd D 47.0 0,92 D 52.5 1.11 61'' Ave 5/Tukwila Parkway D 39.2 0.95 E 73.4 1.16 1 -405 NB (Mall)/Tukwila Pkwy B 16.2 0.55 B 13.9 0.70 Andover Park W/Tukwila Pkwy C 33.6 0.79 E 59.7 1.04 Andover Park E/Tukwila Pkwy C 24.0 0.56 B 15.8 0.62 Andover Park W /Baker Blvd B 13.0 0.43 B 16.4 0.57 'Southcenter Pkwy /I -5 NB (Mall) C 24.8 0.57 C 30.4 0.80 Southcenter Pkwy /Klickitat Dr C 31.6 0.85 D 35.0 0.98 Southcenter Pkwy/I -5 NB Ramp C 23.6 EB Right E 44.1 EB Right , .Southcenter Pkwy /Strander Blvd D 45.1 0.87 E 64.3 1.03 61" PI S- Mall / Strander Blvd C 22.3 0,60 C 28.5 0.61 Andover Park W/Strander Blvd D 41.6 0.77 E 59.9 0.95 - - Andover Park E /Strander Blvd C. 34.5 0.69 D 43.3 0.73 West Valley Hwy / Strander. Blvd C1 44.7 0.92 E 73.1 1,08 ,Southcenter Pkwy /5 168'h St A 8.7 0 -48 C 24.9 0.76'` Southcenter Pkwy/Minkler Blvd A 9.3 0.48 A ° 7 0 ; ,O 6 Andover Park W /Minkler Blvd C ; 34.5 0.66 D 47.3 0.80, u ;Andover Park E/Minkler Blvd D 48.3 0.82 B 14,7 0.4 'Southcenter Pkwy /S 180'hStreet E 57.0 0.95 ` E :.71.2 Andover'Park E /S, 180'". Street B 14.2 9.63 , Sperry Drive /S 180t ".Street C s 20.5 0.76 . .West Valley Hwy/5 180!° Street ;;` r D ' 41,3 Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour .:`'?: The Transpo Group' 04282 Existing Conditions LOS' LOS :i Delay' B 12.0 NB App. C 16.0 NB App. Delay 33.6 13.2; LB " V/C or WM'i 2010 Baseline` Conditions ., Delay V/C :;; LOS Delay December 2004 fV /CorWM V /C'; rAndover ParkW/Tukwila Pkwy. ',Andover Park W /Baker Blvd , Andover" Park W/Strander Blvd ,; u 1. Level of Service 2. Average vehicle delay in seconds 3. Volume to capacity ratio (v /c) at signalized intersections; worst movement (WM) at unsignalized intersections. NB-Northbound, SB= Southbound, EB= Eastbound, App. - Approach As shown in Table 1, three of the 28 study intersections currently operate at LOS E or F during the weekday PM peak hour, while the three Saturday mid -day study intersections currently operate at LOS D or better. In 2010 baseline conditions, six additional study intersections are projected to operate at LOS E or F during the weekday PM peak hour. In 2010 Saturday mid -day conditions, two of the three study intersections degrade to LOS E or F from existing conditions. 10 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Arterial Operations Tukwila Municipal Code (TM() 9.48 has established an average level of service standard of LOS E or better for the Tukwila Urban Center (Tug, whose borders are defined in the Municipal Code. The Code identifies 17 cordon locations within the TUC Consistent with the Wes9celd Shwingtot n Sa+thrrnter Expansion EIS, these locations were combined to form 12 arterial segments by which arterial LOS and concurrency could be determined. The level of service for the TUC is determined by calculating the average arterial level of service for each segment, then averaging the segments to arrive at an average LOS for the TUC Consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual, arterial level of service is reported in a range from LOS A to LOS F (LOS A indicating free flow and LOS F indicating failing conditions) and is a function of average travel speed (miles per hour) along the arterial and the class of roadway. Travel speed takes into account driving time between intersections, and the through movement delay encountered at all signalized intersections along the segment. Existing arterial traffic conditions and 2010 baseline conditions were evaluated for the 12 arterial segments within the TUC to establish current and future baseline operating conditions in comparison to the city's TUC threshold of LOS E. Table 2 summarizes the results based on weekday PM peak-hour conditions. Table 2. Existing and Future without - Project Arterial LOS Summary- PM Peak Hour . :SouthcenterPkwy S 180'' St- Minkler" Blvd Southcenter.Pkwy Minkler Blvd- StranderBlvd - Southcenter Pkwy • Strander Blvd- Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila Pkwy: "Southcenter Pkwy = Andover Park E a Andover Park W: Tukwila FPkwy S 180'" St'.' ,Andover. Park E: Tukwila Pkwy -S 180th St ?Strander Blvd Southcenter Pkwy West Valley Hwy Minkler Blvd Southcenter Pkwy- Andover Park E `. The Transpo Croupl 04282 Speed "_; St: Southcenter Pkwy- West,Valley Hwy', !6 Ave S: Southcenter Blvd Tukwila Pkwy 66”,' Ave S: Southcenter Bivd Tukwila Pkwy 12.4 Klickitat "�Dr • SR 518 WB on- ramp - Southcenter Pkwy "20 3 TUC AVERAGE : 13.9 1. Per TMC 9.48.050. 2. Average vehicle traveling speed (miles per hour). 3. Corresponding LOS based on traveling speed and roadway class. 2010 Baseline Conditions E " Speed ,,:.' 20.9 - 14.2 10.1 12.8 17.9 11.8 14.6 6.1 December 2004 .2 LOS "= As shown in Table 2, four of the arterial segments currently operate at LOS E or F, while the TUC average equates to an overall operating condition of LOS E. In 2010 baseline conditions, the TUC average speed reduces by three tenths of a mile per hour, remaining at LOS E. One additional arterial segment degrades to LOS E or F in 2010 baseline conditions, while another segment improves due to planned improvements. Based on these results, the TUC average is anticipated to continue operating within the city's LOS standard in 2010 without the proposed project. 11 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 Traffic Safety The purpose of this section is to identify any existing safety concerns within the study area most impacted by the project in order to evaluate the proposed project impacts at these locations. Historical accident records were obtained from the City of Tukwila for the most recent three -year period available (2001 to 2003). Table 3 provides a summary of the accident records at each study intersection. Both the annual average and the accident rate per Million Entering Vehicles (MEV) are summarized. The accident rate, expressed in terms of accidents per MEV, is an important measure since it factors in the observed traffic volumes in the calculations and provides a perspective in relation to the total entering volume (TEV). The average daily traffic (ADT) for the MEV calculation was estimated at each location by multiplying the existing PM peak hour TEV by thirteen, as PM peak hour traffic volumes were found to represent approximately 13- percent of the ADT in the immediate area, consistent with the Westfield Shoppingtarrn Sartlxen erExpvisian EIS. Accident data was collected for six study intersections nearest the site, as they will be impacted most significantly by project trips. Table 3. Accident History Summary b,, , 1 veSJSV,uan # i - r lvd ' Ave /Tukwi a l - 5.1403 NB )44 717 il'a i y 4ndover ark u Fwila„r Pkw . Andover Park W Bale BBlvd laver}aik ; 5Trander B ± 1. Accidents per Million Entering Vehicles Transit Service Number'of Accidents =2001 .2002 2003 Total As is shown in Table 3, the intersections of 61st Avenue S /Southcenter Blvd and Andover Park W /Strander Blvd both average greater than one accident per million vehicles entering the intersection between 2001 and 2003. During this time period both intersections have also averaged greater than ten accidents per year. The remaining intersections have averaged less than ten accidents per year over the last three years and have MEV rates of less than 1.0. Generally, an intersection that has an MEV rate higher than 1.0 is monitored for collision trends and potential improvements. The most common type of accident that occurred at 61st Avenue S /Southcenter Blvd was rear -end collisions, which accounted for 56- percent of all accidents at this location. Rear -end collisions are not uncommon at congested signalized intersections such as this one. At the intersection of Andover Park W /Strander Blvd, collision types were more varied, with 32- percent involving right angle collisions, 23- percent involving rear -end collisions, and 23- percent involving sideswipe collisions. This array of accidents does not suggest a specific traffic safety hazard at this location. King County Metro (Metro) transit provides transit service in the study area, with Tukwila's primary transit zone located near the southwest corner of Andover Park W /Baker Boulevard. Six Metro transit routes serve this transit zone, and provide service between The Transpo Groupl 04282 12 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 Tukwila, downtown Seattle, Burien, Renton, Kent, Auburn, and other regional destinations. Existing transit routes operate with headways ranging from 15 to 60 minutes during morning and afternoon peak travel times, and between 30 to 60 minutes during the weekday non- peak periods and on weekends. Covered shehers and benches are provided for transit riders at this transit zone. Transit improvements to existing Metro routes serving this transit zone are planned by Metro as part of its Six -Year Transportation Derekprrrtt Plan 2002 -2007. These plans call for improvements in service hours and frequency to existing transit routes, some of which are related to the construction of Sound Transit's planned permanent commuter rail station at the Longacres - Boeing site located to the east of West Valley Highway. Non - Motorized Facilities Sidewalks, curb, and gutter are provided along both sides of Andover Park W, adjacent to the project site, as well as along Baker Boulevard to the south of the site. Sidewalks in the area range in width and condition. The sidewalks adjacent to the site on Andover Park W are buffered from the street by a strip of grass and tree landscaping. Each of the signalized study area intersections provides pedestrian crosswalks, push buttons, and signal heads to facilitate pedestrian activity. No designated on -street bicycle lanes currently exist in the immediate area of the site. The city's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program identifies many non - motorized improvements in the study area that will occur in conjunction with roadway improvements. Sidewalks and related infrastructure are planned at several locations to link sections of existing sidewalks that are already in place. Within the TUC, sidewalk improvements are planned along Southcenter Parkway (south of S 180th Street), along S 168th Street (from Southcenter Parkway to Andover Park W), along West Valley Highway (from I -405 to Strander Boulevard), and along Minkler Boulevard (from Southcenter Parkway to Andover Park W). No other planned non - motorized improvements were identified in the area. The Transpo Groupl 04282 13 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 Project Impacts This section documents the potential impacts of the proposed project on the study area roadways and intersections. It includes a summary of project trip generation, distribution, future traffic volumes, and the potential impacts to traffic volumes, operations, transit, traffic safety, and non - motorized facilities. Trip Generation To determine the extent of the anticipated impact for the proposed project, trip generation was projected for the weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour. Trip generation methodologies were coordinated and reviewed in advance by City of Tukwila staff. For the bowling center portion of the site, trip generation rates were developed based on trip generation counts conducted at three bowling centers in the Puget Sound region in order to identify an average trip rate per bowling lane. In coordination with the AQVIE Bowl's future management team, the following three facilities were selected for the trip generation study as they most closely resemble the size and offer similar amenities to the proposed facility: • AMF Sun Villa Lanes, Bellevue (32 lanes) • Sunset Bowl, Seattle (26 Lanes) • Tech City Bowl, Kirkland (32 Lanes) While the selected bowling facilities are smaller than the 40 lane facility planned as part of the proposed development, they were selected based primarily on their amenities rather than purely on the number of bowling lanes provided. Some bowling facilities in the Puget Sound have 40-50+ lanes, but also offer gambling on -site (card rooms, etc), which are not proposed as part of the ACME Bowl development. The trip rates observed at each of the three facilities were averaged to anive at average weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour trip rates per bowling lane. Summaries of the bowling center trip generation counts are provided in Appendix C The developed trip generation rates were then applied to the number of proposed bowling lanes for ACME Bowl (40 lanes) to arrive at the project's trip generation for this portion of the site. To provide a conservative analysis, no pass -by rate was assumed for this element of the project. Trip generation for the fitness club portion of the site was developed based on the average trip rate from ITE Trip Ge,rratian (7th Edition) for land use # 492 (Health/Fitness Club) for the weekday PM peak hour. For the Saturday mid -day peak hour, ITE Trip Genaatian provides only one data point, from which the Saturday average rate is based. Rather, a trip generation study completed at four west -coast fitness clubs on four different Saturdays in June 2003 was used as the basis for the Saturday mid -day peak hour trip generation. A summary of the fitness club trip generation study is provided in Appendix D. The Saturday 1 -3 PM time period that has been identified for analysis was selected from the trip generation study to determine the average trip rate for the Saturday mid -day peak hour and was used to develop trip generation for the fitness club component of the development: To provide a conservative analysis, no pass -by rate was applied to the fitness club trip generation, though it is likely that some percentage of the trips would be pass -by trips. Trip generation for the retail portion of the site was developed based on average trip rates from ITE Trip Gareration (7th Edition) for land use # 820 (Shopping Center) for both study time periods. Pass -by rates provided by the ITE Trip Gereration Hantilxvie for the shopping center land use (# 820) were applied to arrive at new trips for the retail portion of the site. • The Transpo Groupl 04282 14 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Table 4 shows the PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour trip generation for the proposed project. Table 4. Project Trip Generation: PM Peak Hour and Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour; ACME Bowl Retail Space Fitness Club TOTAL Saturday Mid- Day.` Peak Hour: =:. . ACME Bowl Retail Space Fitness Club TOTAL 40 Lanes 16,900 sf' 22,000 sf2 40 Lanes 2.49' 16,900 sf 4.97' 22 000 sfi 1.93 Trip Rate 1.74' 3.75' 4.05' ;Trip Rate Total Trips 221 Total Trips 100 84 42 226 Pass -by Trips A 2 Pass -by Trips Total News? ;Trips Total New 4 New inbound 105= New Inbound `101 1. Number of bowling lanes proposed for ACME Bowl Site. 2. Size in square feet. 3. Based on average trip rates of three bowling centers in the region that are similar to the proposed facility. 4. Based on ITE Trip Generation (T” Edition) Average Trip Rate for Shopping Center (ITE Land Use #820). S. Based on ITE Trip Generation (7 Edition) Average Trip Rate for Health /Fitness Club (ITE Land Use #492). 6. Based on a study of Saturday trip generation conducted at four fitness clubs on the West Coast (between 1 -3 PM on Saturday); ITE has only one data point on Saturday for this land use. 7. Based on ITE Trip Generation Handbook Pass -by Rates for Shopping Center (ITE Land Use #820). As is shown in Table 4, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 201 new trips, and 20 pass -by trips during the weekday PM peak hour. During the Saturday mid- day peak hour, the proposed project is expected to generate 204 new trips, and 22 pass -by trips. No credit for existing land uses has been assumed in this trip generation, as the warehouses that currently occupy the site have been vacant for more than two years. Trip Distribution and Assignment New project traffic was assigned to the surrounding roadway system based partially on retail distributions completed for the Westfield Shoppingtozun Sa alxenterEIS. This distribution was used as the basis for the project distribution; it had originally been developed using the City of Tukwila's travel demand model. However, the Southcenter Mall expansion distribution was adjusted to account for the location of the proposed project, and its access to only one public roadway (as opposed to the multiple access points accounted for in the mall distribution). The resulting project trip distribution is shown in Figure 5, while the assignment of project trips at study intersections is shown in Figure 6. Baseline traffic volumes were then added to the assigned project trips to arrive at future with - project traffic volumes, which are shown in Figure 7. Traffic Volume Impacts The traffic volumes associated with the proposed development were compared to the weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour future with- project traffic forecasts to gauge the traffic volume impacts of the proposed project. The results of the traffic volume comparisons are shown in Table 5. December 2004 New Outbound 96 New Outbound 103: The Transpo Group' 04282 15 Figure 5 Project Trip Distribution ACME Bowl - Tukwila, Washington M1 '19 ACME Bowl- TukwilakGraphks \GraphicO2 <A> brandom 12103/04 15.02 The Transpo Group 51ST AVE S O SR 518 WB ON -RAMP 8 51ST AVE S O SR 518 B OFF -RAMP I O KLK](RAT DR 8 f8 c ;- KLI O 15 B ON-RAMP 9 113 9 O S BLVD 30, r1 r © AVE S BLVD r22 12 61ST AVENUE S O TUKWILA PARKWAY 31 L l_24 13 +12 O TUKWIIA P ARKWAY k_t0 44-.. x-36 TUKWILA PARKWAY ( 43 ) 44 1 r 22 (21) — ,r (51)46 12(13) TUKWILA PARKWAY 12-.. .-22 ANDOVER PARK W BAKER BLVD (38) 37 ! L) 1 ( I 38 (36) 1 - SOUTHCENTER 1-5 NB OFF-RAMP/NORDSTROM'S 12 QJ I 4 PKWY • i 1 SOUTHCENTER PKWY KLICKITAT DR . J 4J 5 1 A SOUTHCENTER PKWY 1-5 NB OFF -RAMP (RIGHT ONLY) 5 5 1 10 1 5 SOUTHCENTER PKWY STRANDER BLVD 10 L 4..._10 r 3 r O 16 61ST PL S - MALL STRANDER BLVD 13--. x-13 r1 1 (1) ANDOVER STRANDER (14) 14 (15) J (13) 14 _i - I 15 (14) PARK W BLVD k_ 9 (9) O ANDOVER PARK E 1 $ STRANDER BLVD 9-► ...-9 O WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY 1 STRANDER BLVD g--� I -.1 O SOUTHCENTER PKWY O S 168TH ST 3 ! 1 3 @ SOUTHCENTER PKWY MINKLER BLVD 2 I 1 2 @ ANDOVER PARK MINKLER BLVD 14 I 1 15 W @ ANDOVER PARK E MINKLER BLVD 0 I 1 0 - ^ SOUTHCENTER PKWY T S 180TH ST 1—..- --1 r `' 2 C ANDOVER PARK W J S 180TH ST 3 10 3_i L k 11 2 C ANDOVER PARK E S 180TH ST 10 f 2 7 SPERRY DR S 180TH ST 10 X11 2 p WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY s 160TH ST 5 1 1 `4 5 . 5, 1 6 5 STUDY INTERSECTIONS N O = WEEKDAY PM PEAK _ SATURDAY MID -DAY PEAK & WEEKDAY PM PEAK X = WEEKDAY PM PEAK (X) = SATURDAY MID -DAY PEAK Figure 6 The Project Traffic Assignment - Weekday PM Peak & Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour Transpo Group ACME Bowl - Tukwila, Washington 51ST AVE SR 518 WB O 55 853 1 S ON -RAMP 1 1! L 51ST AVE S O SR 518 EB OFF -RAMP 185 25J 763 I 3 LICKITAT DR O 768 X913 85, ( -141 70 111 I-5 B CKITAT DR ON -RAMP O 879 /1 1 7 1,029 AVENUE S O S BLVD 805- x-865 1,885, ( 1� 66TH AVE S SOUTHCENTER BLVD 750 ■ -.855 105 r752 � 7 87 , / 61ST U(WILA PARKWAY 905 1,276 J t 605J 819 538-4. f-222 0 TUKWILA PAR 1 WAYY 330J `395 849 ■ f826 275, (-65 175 165 1 ® TUKWILA PARKWAY (430) 545 -► -4.- 625 (490) (618) 579, (- 347 (436) (701) 776 322 (383) ' TU KWI L A PARKWAY 632-■ ...--392 220, ( 39 0 4 e ANDOVER BAKER BLVD (748) 612 (208) 168 (53) 41 - ► (225)124 - 1 (233)1 6 773 (641) PARK W + ` 71 (41) f 51 (64) r 100 (65) 1 45(65) SOUTHCENTER 2 1-5 NB OFF- 9772 169J - 113+ 55 ', 19 PKWY RAMPINORDSTROMS _144 ( 1 SOUTHCENTER KLICKITAT 7 239J 690 1,09 6 DR 5 SOUTHCENTER PKWY E5 NB OFF -RAMP (RIGHT ONLY) 1,370 450 1, 45 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 5 STRANDER BLVD 1 L705 ( 915 6 61ST PL ER 52 192 1 190J 358 - ∎ , 1 0 BLVD 196 ` t_272 ..-503 r r ` ANDOVEE R ( 489 (375) 189 (333)204 J (560) 420 — (105)50 (220) 565 ( PARK W BLVD 1 294 (329) + � 4 224 (289) — 490 (560) 290 (340) i 160 (265) . 8 ANDOVE R 400 140 11oJ 544-■ 180 5 PARK BLVD 1 165 x `105 -0-569 ( -135 9 STRAN VALLEY 1240 360 4855J 35� 54 t 3 185 BLVD 1 40 L L10 x-20 ( 5 2 O SOUTHCENTER PKWY S 168TH ST 1213 5 ! 155 5_i � L155 0-■ -...-0 5 1 ( 5 o r 1,148 e SOUTHCENTER MINKLER BLVD 1,22 � 40 ,,n PKWY 85 /1 � `60 (-115 ANDOVER PARK W 2 2 MINKLER BLVD 6 100 60 / 55J � 110y f55 20', (-65 ,1� 4 ANDOVER PARK 2 3 MINKLER BLVD 125 os_ 35-■ 1 20, 30 E 35 ` (.60 f65 (-85 50 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2 4 S 180TH ST 345 310 4 200J y �445 301-, ■536 35 (-162 20137 10 ANDOVER 2 5 S 180TH ST 1 253 88J 565-... 5 p 14 6o PARK W ` 345 ~ `,236 x-865 (-20 0 ANDOVER PARK E 2 6 S 180TH ST 135 330 ..) C 135J &_220 800■ f936 SPERRY DR 2 7 S 180TH ST 60 1 .0l 80J 1,010 -■ 5-1 1 I 360 L. `275 -1,046 r5 50 WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY 2 8 S 180TH ST 1,060 85 1 379 ../ L. 120J 4324 650-■ f640 675, r B0 576 1 60 9 STUDY INTERSECTIONS O = WEEKDAY PM PEAK % SATURDAY MID -DAY PEAK 8 ' = WEEKDAY PM PEAK X = WEEKDAY PM PEAK (X) = SATURDAY MID -DAY PEAK w, 11 Figure 7 The Future With- Project Weekday PM Peak & Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Transpo ACME Bowl - Tukwila, Washington Group ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Table 5. Project Traffic Volume Impacts 51st Ave S /SR 518 WB On -Ramp 51st Ave 5 /SR 518 EB Off -Ramp 53`° Avenue S /Klickitat Drive Klickitat Drive /I -5 SB On -Ramp 61'' Ave S /Southcenter Blvd 66" Ave S /Southcenter Blvd Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour [Andover Park.W/Tukwila Pkwy Andover Park W /Baker Blvd The Transpo Groupl 04282 Total Entering Vehtcles`(TEV)' 2010 Baseline 1,235 1,920 2,020 2,715 5,195 3,495 61" Ave S/Tukwila Parkway 4,285 1 -405 NB (Mali)/Tukwila Pkwy 3,020 Andover Park W/Tukwila Pkwy 3,070 Andover Park E/Tukwila Pkwy 2,280 Andover Park W /Baker Blvd 2,222 Southcenter Pkwy /I -5 NB (Mall) 2,818 Southcenter Pkwy /Klickitat Dr 3,935 31 Southcenter Pkwy /I -5 NB Ramp 3,545 20 ' Southcenter Pkwy /Strander Blvd 3,875 26 ;61" PI S -Mall /Strander Blvd 2,244 28 Andover Park 1N /Strander Blvd 3,465 75 ;Andover Park E/Strander Blvd: 3,360 vWest Valley Hwy/Strander Blvd . , 4,505 !, Southcenter,Pkwy /S 168" St 3,010 Southcenter Pkwy /Minkler Blvd . 2,795' Andover Park W /Minkler Blvd 1,775 Park E /Minkler Blvd 1,865 Pkwy /S 180" Street , ;2,940 Andover Park W/S 180'"- Street 2,590 'Andover Park E/S 180" Street 2,535 Sperry, Drive /5,180" ; Street 2;950 West Valley Hwy /S 180" Street 5,545 2010 Baseline 2,930-- 2`,539 Andover Park W/Strander Blvd a 4,390 1. Project trips entering the intersection 2. Total number of vehicles entering the intersection 8 16 , 18 31 55 34 80 90 124 34 77 25 Project Trips 2oio With=` Project 1,243 1,936 2,038 2,746 5,250 3,529 4,365 3,110 3,194 2,314 2,299 2,843 3,966 3,565 3,901 2,272 3,540 3,378 4,523 3,016 2,799 1,804 1,865, 2, "946 Percent 0.6% 0.8% 0.9% 1.1% 1.0% 1.0% 1.8% 2.9% 3.9% 1.5% 3.3% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.7% 1.2 % 2,1% 0.5% 0,4% 0.2% 0.1% 1.6% 0.0% 2,617 1.0% - 0.8% >; 2;971 " 0.7% ,5 584 2010 With Project December 2004 Percent Impact As is shown in Table 5, the proposed project would impact the study intersections by between less than one - percent to just under four - percent during the weekday PM peak hour. During the Saturday mid -day peak hour, the project traffic volumes impact the three Saturday study intersections by between less than two-percent to approximately four - percent. The project's greatest impact is anticipated at those intersections adjacent to the site, 19 Alp w+f Mir WHIP wD ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 including Andover Park W /Tukwila Parkway and Andover Park W /Baker Boulevard. As traffic volumes typically fluctuate within a range of five to ten - percent from day to day, the average motorist would not likely notice those traffic volume impacts caused by the proposed project. Intersection Operations Intersection level of service analyses were performed consistent with the methodologies described earlier in this report. Traffic signal timing information assumed in the 2010 baseline analysis was held constant for the 2010 with- project analysis in order to provide a consistent basis from which to determine the proposed project's impacts upon intersection operating conditions. Table 6 highlights the results of the LOS analysis conducted at the study area intersections for future with- project conditions. The results of the 2010 baseline an alysis have been included in the table for comparison purposes. The LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix B. The Transpo Groupl 04282 20 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Table 6. Future Without- Project and Future with - Project LOS Summary Southcenter Pkwy /S 180th Street: Andover Park W/S 180" Street Andover Park E/S 180" Street ;Sperry Drive /S 180 Street ,West Valley Hwy /S 180'" Street Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour , The Transpo Group' 04282 " .2010 Baseline Conditions 51st Ave S /SR 518 WE On -Ramp 51st Ave S /SR 518 EB Off-Ramp 53"° Avenue S /Klickitat Drive Klickitat Drive /1 -5 SB On -Ramp 61" Ave S /Southcenter Blvd 66°" Ave S/Southcenter Blvd 61" Ave S/Tukwila Parkway 1 -405 NB (Mall)/Tukwila Pkwy Andover Park W/Tukwila Pkwy Andover Park E/Tukwila Pkwy Andover Park W /BakerBlvd Southcenter Pkwy /1 -5 NB (Mall) C Southcenter Pkwy/Klickitat Dr D Southcenter Pkwy /I -5 NB Ramp E Southcenter Pkwy /Strander Blvd E 61" PI S- Mall /Strander Blvd C Andover Park W /Strander Blvd " E Andover Park E /Strander Blvd D 'West Valley Hwy /Strander Blvd E 'Southcenter Pkwy /S'168' ".St'' - C Southcenter Pkwy/Minkler Blvd A Andover Park WJMinklerBlvd D Andover Park E /Minkler Blvd B C F B C F D E B E B B E D B LOS Delay= 49.2. Delay V/C or WM' V /C' 2010 With- Project Conditions 16.0 NB App. >50.0 EB Left 15.4 0.78 B 20.4 SB Left C >80.0 1.60 F 52.5 1.11 E 73.4 1.16 E 13.9 0.70 B 59.7 1.04 E 15.8 0.62 B 16.4 0.57 30.4 0.80 35.0 0.98 44.1 EB Right 64.3 1.03 28.5 0.61 59.9 0.95; 43.3 0.73 73.1 1.08 24.9 ` _ 0.70` 7.0 _ ().62 47.3 0.80 14.7 0.49 71.2 1.09 42.2 0.81 16.4 0.75' 18.4 0 79 .92 LOS Delayz %: 16.3 >50.0 15.4 20.9 >80.0 55.6 74.7 14.4 74.6 15.6. belay Andover Park W/Tukwila Pkwy ;Andover Park WJBaker Blvd , 'Andover Park W/Strander Bl id 1. Level of Service 2. Average vehicle delay in seconds 3. Volume to capacity ratio at signalized intersections; Worst movement at unsignalized intersections December 2004 B 17.0 C 31.0 D 36.6 E 46.5 E 66.5 C 28.6 E 63.4 D 43.2 75.1 C '24.9 D 50.0 B 14.7 E 71.3 NB App. EB Right 0.79 SB Left 1.61 1.13 1.17 0.71" .. 1.09 0.63 0.61 0.81 0.98 EB Right -" 0.62 0.96 0.74 1.09 V /C'" As is shown in Table 6, all of the study intersections during the weekday PM peak hour are anticipated to operate under the same LOS in with- project conditions as they do in baseline conditions, with the exception of 66th Avenue S /Southcenter Boulevard, which falls from LOS D to LOS E with the addition of project traffic. However, the average vehicle delay at this intersection increases by just over three seconds per vehicle with the addition of project traffic, indicating that the intersection is already expected to be near the threshold of LOS E in baseline conditions. Despite operating at LOS E in with- project conditions, the 21 WAND Ne WI r ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Southcenter Pkwy: S 180h St- Minkler Blvd '. Southcenter Pkwy: Minkler Blvd- StranderBlvd Southcenter Pkwy: Strander Blvd- Tukwilaykwy :Tukwila Pkwy :" Southcenter Pkwy-Andover Park E Andover Park W: Tukwila Pkwy -S 180th St E: Tukwila Pkwy -S 180th St Strander Blvd: Southcenter Pkwy -West Valley Hwy Minkler Blvd Southcenter Pkwy- Andover Park E S, tAoth St: Southcenter Pkwy West;Valley Hwy 61 S: Southcenter Blvd- Tukwila Pkwy 66 S Southcenter Blvd Tukwila Pkwy The Transpo Group' 04282 intersection still meets the City of Tukwila's LOS E standard. Optimizing signal timing splits at this intersection would bring the intersection's operating condition back to LOS D in with- project conditions in the weekday PM peak hour, which would occur naturally in actual conditions based on the signal timing parameters. In Saturday mid -day conditions, all three intersections continue to operate at the same LOS as in baseline conditions. The Andover Park W /Tukwila Parkway intersection continues to operate at LOS E, while the Andover Park W/Strander Boulevard intersection continues to operate at LOS F. Arterial Operations Arterial segment level of service analysis was performed consistent with the methodologies described earlier in this report. Table 7 shows the results of the LOS analysis conducted for TUC arterial segments for the weekday PM peak hour, and the resulting average TUC arterial segment LOS to determine concurrency status. The results of the future baseline (2010) analysis have been included in the table for comparison purposes. The LOS worksheets are included in Appendix B. Table 7. Future with - Project and Future with- Project Arterial LOS Summary - Weekday PM Peak Hour 2010 Baseline Speed 14.9 20.9 1.4.2 1' 0.1 72.8 1 2:9 11.8 4.6 10.2 6.1 ;9 9 Klickitat Dr: SR 518 WB on- ramp - Southcenter Pkwy ; 19.8 TUC AVERAGE" 1 6 1 . Per TMC 9.48.050 2. Average vehicle traveling speed 3. Corresponding LOS based on traveling speed and roadway class LOS' 2010 With Project Conditions t . Speed 4.8 20.9 97 12:2 17.9 1 1" 8 ., 14 6 T0.2 5.6 1 0.0, :- 19.5 3.5 As is shown in Table 7, all of the arterial segments operate at the same LOS in with- project conditions as in baseline conditions in the weekday PM peak hour. The overall TUC arterial segment average is anticipated to decrease in average speed by one tenth of a mile per hour. Based on these results, the proposed project meets the city's concurrency standard as the TUCs arterial segment average is anticipated to operate at LOSE or better. December 2004 22 � J . ,, AMP AMP ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Site Access Analysis Unsignalized driveway LOS analysis was conducted using Synchro 60, which is based on 2000 HCM unsignalized intersection methodologies. The total project trips (new plus pass -by), were assigned to the proposed two site driveways on Andover Park W for both weekday PM peak hour and Saturday mid -day peak hour conditions. The driveway LOS results are presented in Table 8. The LOS worksheets are included in Appendix B. Table 8. Driveway LOS Summary Site Access Driveways Weekday PM Peak Hour -'. LOS'• Delay= ,! Andover Park W /North Site Access Andover Park W /South Site Access 1. Level of Service 2. Average delay per vehicle in seconds 3. Worst Movement at the intersection (highest amount of delay) WM':: 19.8 WB App. D 20.7 WB App. ,' December 2004 Saturday Mid -Day Peak Hour LOS' Delay' 31.4 34.4 W M3 WB App. WB App. As shown in Table 8, the results of the an alysis indicate that both driveways would likely operate at LOS C in 2010 future with -project conditions during the weekday PM peak hour, and at LOS Din Saturday mid -day peak hour conditions. The planned widening improvement for Andover Park W for which the city is currently collecting transportation impact fees would provide a two-way center left -turn lane on Andover Park W and would improve the operating conditions reported in Table 8 at the site driveways. Such a two-way center left -turn lane would provide a refuge for vehicles making a westbound left turn out of the site and allow for a two-stage gap process to occur without conflict from other turns. However, the analysis results indicate that this improvement is not needed at project opening to maintain acceptable driveway operations. Transit Service One of Tukwila's primary transit zones is located near the southwest corner of the Andover Park W /Baker Boulevard intersection. This transit zone, and the six King County Metro routes that serve it, are accessible to the site by pedestrians whom may cross at the Andover Park W /Baker Boulevard intersection, which provides pedestrian actuated push - buttons. Given the relatively close proximity of the site to the transit zone, and the connections to local and regional destinations that it provides, the site can be considered reasonably well served and accessible by transit. Non - Motorized Facilities Pedestrian facilities currently exist in the area and adjacent to the site which will support the connection of the site to available transit service. These facilities include sidewalks along Andover Park W, Baker Boulevard, and most other roadways in the immediate vicinity of the site. In addition, signalized intersections in the area provide pedestrian crosswalks, push buttons, and signal heads to facilitate pedestrian activity. Given these amenities, the site can be considered adequately served by the existing non - motorized facilities. The Transpo Groupl 04282 23 ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA Parking As currently proposed, the project will provide approximately 490 parking stalls in an on- site, paved surface parking lot. A parking demand analysis was completed to determine the adequacy of the parking supply. Using ITE Parking Gerrraticn (3rd Edition), weekday peak parking generation rates were developed for the site. The average peak parking rate forITE land use # 437 (Bowling Alley was used for the bowling center portion of the site, with the highest provided parking period assumed (Friday 7 -8 PM). For the retail portion of the site, the average peak parking rate for ITE land use # 820 (Shopping Center) was used, also with the highest provided parking period assumed (11 AM -8 PM in December). For the Fitness Club use, the average peak parking rate for ITE land use # 492 (Fitness Club) was used, with the only provided peak parking period used (6-7 PM). The parking demand analysis assumes that the peak parking demand for all three uses occurs at the same time, which is plausible given the peak weekday time periods provided by ITE Parking Gerrrati n. This resource indicates the peak for all three uses could occur simultaneously between 6-7 PM. Table 9 shows the results of the parking demand analysis for the proposed project. Table 9. Peak Parking Demand Summary l ACME Bowl ,; Re ailSpac'e ; 'Fimess?club 5<02' ,1��3 D Ro. x 5f[ P R G5 r x lrl rj,sti December 2004 :Peak Parking;_,` Demand (Parking Stalls) 1. Average Peak Rate; Parking Generation (ITE, 3" Edition) for Bowling Alley- Suburban (LU #437)- highest weekday peak rate assumed (Friday Peak- 7 -8 PM). 2. Average Peak Rate per 1,000 sf; Parking Generation (ITE, 3" Edition), Land Use #820 (Shopping Center)- highest weekday peak assumed (December, Friday Peak- between 11AM -8PM). 3. Average Peak Rate per 1.000 sf: Parking Generation (ITE. 3" Edition), Land Use #492 (Fitness Club) Weekday peak- 6 -7 PM. As is shown in Table 9, the proposed project's parking capacity is anticipated to provide a surplus of 98 parking stalls during the peak weekday period, adequately accommodating the peak parking demand. Traffic Safety Impacts The previous safety analysis included in this report identified no apparent or recognizable traffic safety issue that would be further worsened by the addition of proposed project traffic. A proportional increase in accidents is possible in conjunction with the addition of vehicular traffic. Project impacts account for two-percent or less of the total entering vehicles at the locations with accident rates exceeding 1.0 accidents per million entering vehicles. Transportation Impact Fees The City of Tukwila has established transportation impact fees in TMC 9.48.140. The current transportation impact fee schedule identifies ten improvement projects throughout The Transp0 Group' 04282 24 �bo ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA the city. Developments that generate trips that impact any one of these projects by five or more trips must pay a fee per peak hour trip. Based on the project trip distribution and assignment noted in Figures 5 and 6, six projects were identified in the impact fee schedule that are impacted by five or more project trips. Each of these improvements, the number of project trips, the per trip fee for each improvement, and the corresponding cost per improvement project are all summarized in Table 10. Table 10. Transportation Impact Fees Summary ntit B Southcen �kwy(S 1 i�8'" St Traffic SIgna West V alle ` H)wy/Strander t> °rya k D.ual l B ft?Turri Canes l teru�k d"r) }vehue; Bridge ".Wider ing> Wideninc �o Strand r 'Blvd . Widenin ritt Fee%.,Peak Hour.Trip' Proposed 'reject Trips 1. Per Tukwila Municipal Code 9.48.150 (Transportation Impact Fee Schedule) 2. Protect trips impacting the improvement project during the weekday PM peak hour. December 2004 As is shown in Table 10, the proposed project's total transportation impact fees are estimated to be $222,710. Final calculation of the impact fees would occur at time of permit issuance. The Transpo Group' 04282 25 w ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 Summary /Conclusions The proposed project is located at the northeast corner of Andover Park W /Baker Boulevard in Tukwila, Washington. The site is currently occupied by vacant warehouse buildings which would be retrofitted to accommodate the proposed development. The project would retrofit existing buildings on -site to accommodate a 40 lane (52,500 sf) bowling center, a 22,000 sf fitness club, and 16,900 sf of general retail space. Two driveways on Andover Park W would provide access to the site. No trip credit for existing uses was applied, as the existing building on -site have been vacant for more than two years. The proposed project is expected to generate approximately 221 total trips during the weekday PM peak hour, with approximately 201 considered new to the area, and 20 considered pass -by trips. During the Saturday mid -day peak hour (between 1 -3 PM), the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately226 trips, with approximately 204 new trips, and 22 pass -by trips. The scope of the analysis was coordinated in advance with City of Tukwila Staff. The following summarizes the key points of the analysis. • Future baseline an alyses incorporated general increases in background growth, as well as traffic associated with the proposed S 154th Street Sound Transit light -rail station, and the proposed Southcenter Mall expansion. However, no mitigation improvements associated with the Mall expansion were assumed in the analysis. In 2010 baseline conditions, nine of the 28 study intersections are projected to operate at LOS E or F in the weekday PM peak hour, while during Saturday midi day conditions, two of the three study intersections are expected to operate at LOS E or F. The average arterial segment LOS for the Tukwila Urban Center is anticipated to be LOS E in baseline conditions. • Based on the future baseline traffic volumes and the project trip assignment, the proposed project is expected to increase traffic volumes by between less than 1- percent and approximately 4- percent during the weekday PM peak hour, and between approximately 2- percent and 4- percent in the Saturday mid -day peak hour. • In 2010 future with project conditions, all of the study intersections during the weekday PM peak hour are anticipated to operate under the same LOS in with - project conditions as they do in baseline conditions, with the exception of 66th Avenue S /Southcenter Boulevard, which falls from LOS D to LOS E with the addition of project traffic, but still meets the City of Tukwila's LOS E standard. In Saturday mid -day conditions, all three intersections continue to operate at the same LOS as in baseline conditions. The Andover Park W /Tukwila Parkway intersection continues to operate at LOS E, while the Andover Park W /Strander Boulevard intersection continues to operate at LOS F during the Saturday mid -day peak hour. The average arterial segment LOS for the Tukwila Urban Center in the weekday PM peak hour is anticipated to remain at LOS E in future with- project conditions, meeting City of Tukwila LOS E concurrency standard for the TUG • Analyses of the two site access driveways indicates that they would operate at LOS C during the weekday PM peak hour, and LOS D during the Saturday mid -day peak hour in future with- project conditions. • The safety analysis conducted for this study did not identify any apparent or recognizable traffic safety issue appears to exist that would be further worsened by the addition of proposed project traffic, though a proportional increase in accidents is possible in conjunction with the addition of vehicular traffic. The Transpo Group) 04282 26 r ' Vor �.r ae NAP saw Now NOW 'MEP wor ACME Bowl, Tukwila, WA December 2004 • The proposed project's parking supply of 490 stalls adequately accommodates the peak parking demand projected for the site. • Transportation impact fees towards City of Tukwila improvement projects noted in the Transportation Impact Fee Schedule (TMC 9.48.140) have been estimated to be $222,710. Final calculation of the impact fees should occur at time of permit issuance. • No specific transportation mitigation, above the payment of the Transportation Impact Fees previously noted, has been identified as necessary for this project. The Transpo Group' 04282 27 Appendix A: Level of Service Criteria and Definitions Highta y Capacity Manua4 2000 Signalized intersection level of service (LOS) is defined in terms of the average total vehicle delay of all movements through an intersection. Vehicle delay is a method of quantifying several intangible factors, including driver discomfort, frustration, and lost travel time. Specifically, LOS criteria are stated in terms of average delay per vehicle during a specified time period (for example, the PM peak hour). Vehicle delay is a complex measure based on many variables, including signal phasing (i.e., progression of movements through the intersection), signal cycle length, and traffic volumes with respect to intersection capacity. Table A-1 shows LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as described in the Hz Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209, 2000). Table 1. Level of Service Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Control Delay Per Vehicle (Seconds) General Description (Signalized Intersections) Unsignalized intersection LOS criteria can be further reduced into two intersection types: all-way stop - controlled and two-way stop - controlled. All-way, stop - controlled intersection LOS is expressed in terms of the average vehicle delay of all of the movements, much like that of a signalized intersection. Two-way, stop - controlled intersection LOS is defined in terms of the average vehicle delay of an individual movement(s). This is because the performance of a two-way, stop - controlled intersection is more closely reflected in terms of its individual movements, rather than its performance overall. For this reason, LOS for a two-way, stop - controlled intersection is defined in terms of its individual movements. With this in mind, total average vehicle delay (ie., average delay of all movements) for a two-way, stop - controlled intersection should be viewed with discretion. Table A-2 shows LOS criteria for unsignali7ed intersections (both all-way and two- way, stop - controlled). Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Total Delay (sec /veh) X C) IMMO 3: SR 518 WB On -Ramp & 51st Ave S J 1 \ f Lane Configurations Srgn Coiittol , • ttoP FN.* ` Free . Grade 0% 0% 0% Voiumer(veh)h) -..? 6 0 7 < ; 5., 140. 165 "' Sd Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourtyfi itite h) ` "0 " , 194r " 59 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Mediari'type None Median storage veh) Upstreern slgnat (ft)•a` pX, platoon unblocked vC, contikfingvoIume , 2094; "`'224.. vC1, stage 1 conf vol . vC2 stage COri(;voC" vCu, unblocked vol 2094 224 253 tC sTngle'(s ' 64 "` 8.2 21.1 , tC, 2 stage (s) p0 queue free % 100 100 35 cM'capaClljr (veti)ti) " "» 2i ' 82i z I3i8 Volume Total ,,, '1018 253, Volume Left 853 0 Vok(me'Right, 6 59 � ; cSH 1318 1700 Voiumefo apaolty' Queue Length 95th (ft) 127 0 Lane LOS B APProacl belays) "�� ' 12.0.> 0.0 :: Approach LOS l Average Delay 9.6 Inteniectto 'ri.Capacity'Utlllzatioft' 65 9 %' , " ' ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 M:\04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 4: SR 518 EB Off - Ramp & Klickitat Or. (Segment 21) Volume Total 27 Volume Left Volume Right cSH Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS tn�e�'elCtiert�iymmat'y """. Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) ti 4\ t 4 -, ) ' t7 0"r ' 8 0T ,,air,K" "`"> . "` 7 7 � . Lane Configurations r Sign Control Stop Grade 0% Volume (veh/h) 25 640 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 696 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type ' None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1061 " 514 pX, platoon unblocked 0.63 vC, conflicting volume 1082 185 185 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1129 185 185 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 81 19 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 144 863 1396 Die i ane: . ' 1 7ft lri >, :' , " ,: 27 , 144 0.19 17 35.7 E 24.5 C 696 897 185 0 0 0 696 0 0 863 1700 1700 0.81 0.53 0.11 220 0 0 24.0 0.0 0.0 C 0.0 0.0 9.8 55.2% 15 Free 0% 825 0.92 897 Free 0% 170 0.92 185 0 0.92 0 I ICU Level of Service M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group e Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 B m t • 7: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 17) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) --►: f 4 - 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 687 1500 207 773 1096 v Ratio'' `"172 "1:26 "x`1.29. , 0'53 0.16' Control Delay 176.7 154.1 207.9 23.2 41.5 Queue Delay 0.0 Y :246,47: 7 6.7 - to'" 26.4 Total Delay 176.7 399.5 207.9 23.2 67.9 Queue `Length 50th'(ft) '-619 759 ." 188'r' :''426 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) #846 #907 #335 258 m426 Internal Link i 1st Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 Bas' Cap8atylvvpl , 533; 11 6. 161 1462 14417, Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 389 Splilback °Cap RRedi)ctn n'0 aSs 0 0 0 " c ' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced 129_ tai `:1.29 0:53 1.04 Volume exceedscapacityi queue is theoretically Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. # 95th`perce i)e aiofurils exceeds capachy; queue niay tie longer Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m - V'oTumefOr'961tr b deritttequeuele inatereccby.upstream'signet.' ' M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS\Weekday PM PeaklExisting Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 7: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 17) & 61st Ave. Brie (Segment 19) Lane Configurations 4 Ideal now (vphpl) ` 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Utit. Factor 1.00 Frt 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 Fit Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1676 Volume (vph). 680 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.99 Adj. Flow (vph) 687 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 687 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% HCM Average Control Delay. HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts Period (mmn) c Critical Lane Group .. itmWat'V C V: 4\ /* rr Turn Type Protected Phases PertnitfefPhases" Actuated Green, G (s) 34.0 51.0 Effective Green, g (s) 35.0 52.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.47 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 533 1186 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 c0.60 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.29 1.26 Unifor Delay. dl 37.5 29.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay. d2 143.7 126.0 Delay (s) 181.2 155.0 Levelof Service F F Approach Delay (s) 163.2 Apprcach40S,. F:.. 1900 4.0 0.88 0.85 1.00 2508 1.00 2508 1485 0.99 1500 0 1500 2% Over Prot 2 3 8 2 ++ 1900 1900 ` 1900 ' 1900 4 .0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 ? 0.96 1608 3217 3046 0.95 1.00 0.96 1608 3217 3046 205 765 1010 0.99 0.99 0.99 207 773 ' 1020 0 0 0 207 773 1096 1% 1% 3% 10.0 11.0 0.10 5.0 3.0 181 c0.13 1.29 49.5 1,00 167.2 216.7 F 108.7 1.28 110.0 97.0% 15 49.0 50.0 0.45 5.0 3.0 1462 0.24 0.53 21.5 1.00 0.3 21.9 63.0 51.0 52.0 0.47 5.0 3.0 1440 0.36 0.76 23.9 1.60 2.6 40.8 C D 40.8 D. ., 75 0.99 76 0 0 3% Sum of lost time (a) ICU Level of Service �ro Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 F MA04104282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group - ; Volume.exceedsc pacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles # ` "95iftliiakitlie vafume;ezyeed's, capacfy, queue mey be longer.; Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. Existing PM Peak Hour 9: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) 11/29/04 -► ,e a - 4 I' Lane Group Flow (vph) 824 712 847 300, 782 vro Retfb 1.0V7 t16 0:37` '0.81 Control Delay 89.2 87.8 9.7 39.1 8.0 Queue Delay "0.0`= 00-" '0.0 _ `0.0 ' 0.0 Total Delay 89.2 87.8 9.7 39.1 8.0 Queue Lettgtn:.5l7ttr(if} 351`' -581 ,;';138 177 67:' Queue Length 95th (ft) #432. #739 161 256 226 Internal Linnk Dist (tt)' 1202 " ' "1408 2 12 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 200 Base Capacity (401) 784' 670 48 . 1920' , Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spitiba ktin Reductn 0` 0 ` 0 ;'• " 0 '" Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0_ 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1 5''. 106 - 3 ' 0.61 0..41' • M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Lane Configurations ft. Ideal Flow (vphpl) ' 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane UM. Factor 0.95 Frt 0.98 Flt ProteCtetL 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3336 Fit Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (pens) 3338 Volume (vph) - 805 95 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 Ad). Flow (vph) 712 112 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 824 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 6% 6% Turn Type Protected Phases 2 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 25.3 Effective'Green g'(s) 27.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 Clearance Time (a) '5.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane:GrP Cap(vph)„ 783' v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 v /ssRatio Perm v/c Ratio 1.05 Uniform Delay, dl 44.0 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 46.8 Delay (s) 90.8 Level of Service ' - F. Approach Delay (s) 90.8 Approacht0S P. HCM ° Average; Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle: Length(s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts'Pe`riod.(mtn , c Critical Lane Group 1.06 35.5 1.00 52.6 88.1 F Existing PM Peak Hour 9: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) 11/29/04 -• r 4- \ 'I 44 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 = 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1752 3505 0.95 : 1752 3505 605 720 0.85 0.85 712 847 0 0 712 847 3% 3% Prot 1 5 5 43.0 73.3 44.0 75.0 0.37 9.2 1.00 0.1 9.3 A 45.3 D 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1752 0.95 1752 255 0.85 300 0 300 3% 8 8 32.0 32.0 riF . 1900 4.0 0.88 0.85 1.00 2760 1.00 2760 665 0.85 782 0 782 3% pt +ov 81 79.0 80.0 0.38 0.65 0.28 0.70 5.0 5.7 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 670.,'2286 x.488 1920 c0.41 0.24 c0.17 0.28 0.61 0.41 36.1 7.4 0.92 0.99 5.3 0.1 38.4 7.5 D A 16.0 47.0 HCM Level of Service 0.92 115.0 Sum of lost time (s) 77.4% ICU Level of Service 2.0 D M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group C 13: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) J --► 4 " t L r Lane Group Flow (vph) 511 478 188 661 1075 763 v /6Thitte < <' "1.23'8' 332 `0: 0:85 0 92, Control Delay 161.9 44.9 30.5 8.1 17.1 15.6 Queue'Deelay 27:0'° 0 t) 70 0" ` bI "'5 ,5 138.7 • Total Delay 188.9 44.9 30.5 8.8 70.7 154.3 Queue (it) 229`'""294 "`125 ^ "132 ° ` 7 "105 ' :563'... Queue Length 95th (ft) #336 429 194 `251 m191 m331 (ft) '121 252 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 275 200 Base ^ Capacty Ntih 417' SB# ':>8b1 x 127'L7833' Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 306 252 SpllbaokCap'Reductn iQ """ 0" x ` 044'"'o • Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reducetly /cRatio'" .1,29`; 0,81'x'031 "0:62 1:tt " "1.3i - Volume exceeds capacity;: queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. a1 Y 95ti >pencenfifeTioiurrie eizceeds capacity, queeliiiali be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m' "` Voluiiiiiiiiiie95tfiperciiiitiie queueW metered by upstream :signal. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group r Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 13: Tukwila Pkwy Mtivemefi( Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane UM, Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) FIt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volurpe.(vph) ' Peak -hour factor, PHF Ad): Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green. G (s) 14.0 36.7 Effective Green, g (s) " 15.0 37.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.34 Clearance Time (s) .. 5.0 ` 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lore" Grp Cep'(vph) . `' 417 '569 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.29 v /s'Ratio`Pernt v/c Ratio 1.23 0.84 Unifoi'm Delay, 41;' 47 b 33.4'. Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 incremeritalbelsy, d2`''t21 1 10.8 Delay (s) 168.6 44.1 Levelof Servlce F. Approach Delay (s) 108.4 ApproaCh.LOS ;. F (Segment 9) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) k. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.97 1.00 1.00. 0.88 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1,00 0.95 1.00 1660 1693 2533 3090 1425 0.95 ` 1.00 1.00 '1,00' 3.95: 1':00: 3060 1660 1693 2533 3090 1425 `475 445 175 z 615 1000 710 -; 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 511 478 188 "661':1075 ; 763`' 0 0 0 0 0 0 511 478 188 661 1075 763 3% 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% Prot pt +ov pt +o 3 1 1 12 2 23 36.7 37.7 0.34 5.0 3.0 580 0.11 HCM Average Control Delay 39.2 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.3% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 86.0 44.3 63.3 87.0 45.3 ` 64.3 0.79 0.41 0.58 5.0 3.0 2003 1273 833 0.26 0.35 c0.54 0.32 0.33 0.84 26.7, " „ 3.3 29.2 1.12 2.31 0.51 0.3 0,1 0.7 30.3 7.6 15.6 C `, A ' B 12.6 14.2 0.92 20.4 0.51 . . 1.7 12.2 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) CU Level of Service Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 D 12.0 C M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 4 F 4_ 4_ 14: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 1-405 NB On -Ramp t Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 Lane Group Flow (vph) 298 660 250 59 649 340 165 181 v /c'Rat)o" .#1.64 d31 ::036. d,i1 033' ' O38 ":0;32' 0.53 ", Control Delay 7.3 9.0 9.3 6.1 19.0 21.8 40.2 46.2 Queue Delay 0,0 > 0 3 ;;' 0.0 " ` 0.0 0.7 � 1.6' ' 0.0 , 0.0 Total Delay 7.3 9.4 9.3 6.1 19.8 23.4 40.2 46.2 Queue Lengtli80th' (ft) . 36 "" . ' 93 '13 13 "' 5S , 122 ; Queue Length 95th (ft) m66 m220 m141 m27 268 m307 79 185 lntemafLinkDrst(8)_ d8 " 223 99' Turn Bay Length (ft) 175 125 125 175 " Base Capacity (vph) 643°';" 21'42' , 958 '619 1J88 889 . "774 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 946 369 0 0 Sp7llbaa'Gap'Reductn '' 7 0 0 " o 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduce3 "w /'Ra1k17 `0:46°`` =" 0:26'""`0.10 0.62" ,t 55 " " ";' 0:21 O.aS m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered. by upstream sIgnaL M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Lane Configurations Ideal Plow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane UtiL Factor FR Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 14: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 1 -405 NB On -Ramp f �.. N' 1900.:190 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 " 1.00 1593 3185 0.35 1.00 587 3185 Volume (vph) 280 620 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 AdJ: Flow (vph) _ 298 -660 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane "Group Flak (vph) " 298 ' 660 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% Tum.Type pm*pt Protected Phases 7 Perri hte(Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 83.2 72.0 Effectiv Green 'g,(s) " ='84 2" ' 73.0' Actuated g/C Ratio 0.77 0.66 Clearance Tfine'(s) , 5,0 , 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 HCM Average. Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio ACttiafed C le ength (a) 1 Intersection Capacity Utilization Anafysls.Period (min) ; c Critical Lane Group 4 r ++ r 1900 :190 190 1900' 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 1.00 1.00 ; 0.95 1.00 •: 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 ' 1.00 1.00 0.95 1425 1608 3217 1439 3152 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00 0.95 1425 679 3217 1439 3152 235 55 610 320 ` 155 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 250 59 849 340 165 0 0 0 0 0 250. 59. 649 340' 165 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% Perm pm +pt Perm Prot 3 8 2 72.0 73.2 67.0 67.0 16.8 16.8 73.0 ' 75.2? 68.0 "68.0`.:17.8; 17.8 0.66 0.68 0.62 0.62 0.16 0.16 5.0. °.r 5.0 > X15.0 5.0 ` '44', 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cep (yph)''',.',:561•`; 946 " 525 1989 890 < :510 . " ;265 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.21 0.01 0.20 0.05 v/s.Ratlo'Perm > .c0:35 . 0.18•` 0.07 ',24 . c0:11 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.31 0.26 0.11 0.33 0.38 0.32 0.68 Uniform Delay; ; =4.5 7.8`:: 7.5' 51 " 10.0 10.5. '40.8' 43.4 Progression Factor 1.36 1.00 0.99 1.27 1.58 1.58 1.00 1.00 IncrementalDelay, d2 ' '0.5 0.2 0.4 *' 0.1 , . -0.4 <•1.1 7.1' (s) 6.6 8.1 7.8 7.3 16.2 17.7 41.1 50.5 Level;of Service;; ' j, A A; . ` .,A A B B D 13 Approach Delay (a) 7.7 16.2 46.1 APPtaaph COS ' B D , 11CM Level of_Service' ' 0.55 110.0' ` , '`' gum of lost tirne`(s) 59.7% ICU Level of Service 8.0 B M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 t y r ry, 1 v, .1 1900' 1900 1900 190 1900 4.0 1.00 0.96 1.00 1635 1.00 1635 120 50 0 0 0 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 128. ; 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 181 _ .:.0" 0 0 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Group Flow (vph) 950 283 611 Control Delay 32.2 53.1 7.5 Queue`tje)ay' `7 Tb , 0;0 . 0 0 Total Delay 33.2 53.1 7.5 Queue'tangth 5bth'(ft) `34`'1 '<187 `"; ": 86 Queue Length 95th (ft) # 419 #302 113 Internal Unk'Dist (ft) • 223," 941 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 BaseCapacity(vph)' '^ 126C . 383 .'2144 Starvation Cap Reductn 121 0 0 SpillbackCap Reductn ' lf'' O "° 253 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduceit'v/c`Ratio • "? 0:81" 600 278 0.81 0.82 45 52.5 45.4 52.5 200 ` 180 ' "' 265 #303 `783 225 807 372 0 0 0 . 0 ` ' ' ' 0 0 ON 0.75 , 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity; queue may be longer; Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 15: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) { '- ` f M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 15: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) vein Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpt) Total Lost time (s) Lane 0111.. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prat) Fit Permitted' Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PI-IF AdJ. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green. G (s) 46.5 Effective Green, g (s) 47.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 Clea?ance Time (s) 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 -►� { ---\ TMlintrnvorriq 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0,95 1.00 0.93 1.00 1:00. 0.95 2918 1562 1:00 0:95 2918 1562 480 " 375 255 0.90 0.90 0.90 533 417 283 0 0 0 950 0 283 4% 4% 4% Prot 3 23.0 24.0 0.22 5.0 3.0 Vi 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.95 ? 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 ; 0.95 3124 3060 1.00 0.95 3124 3060 550 '' ' 540 0.90 0.90 611 600 0 0 611 ? 600 4% 3% 8 2 r 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1411 1.00 1411 250 0.90 278 0 278 3% Perm 2 74.5 25.5 25.5 75.5 28.5 26.5 0.69 0.24 0.24 5.0 . 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2144 i ; ;;737 -, 340 Lane; Grp CaP (vph), ' . 1260; < 34 v/s Ratio Prot c0.33 c0.18 0.20 0.20 v/s ltatlo Perm ` ` . 00:20 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.83 0.28 0.81 0.82 Uniform 'Delay dl "x26.3 < .. 41.1 6.7 `;; 39.4 39.5 Progression Factor 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay d2 , 4,1 ` •15.3 0.3 " 6.9 14.1 Delay (s) 30.1 56.3 7.1 46.3 53.6 l Leve'of Service' `� y C E A D'.: 0 Approach Delay (s) 30.1 22.7 48.6 Approach LOS �C; C D `t HCM Average:Control Delay.., . 33.6 ^ HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Acfuatedd 0yole'Cengllt(e) >:s , 110.0 Sum of fost tIme;(s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.9% ICU Level of Service Atialyafs Period (mm) : `.° .. 18 c Critical Lane Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group e I m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is, metered by upstream,signaL Existing PM Peak Hour 16: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/04 1 ♦- 4 f Lane Group Flow (vph) 735 230 281 362 408 0.81' ' Control Delay 20.9 25.9 1.7 46.4 27.8 Queue;l0elay 0.07 0:0776.6 0.0 "' Total Delay 20.9 25.9 1.7 46.4 27.8 Oueuarerlg ' thlltj "` "'102 • iFir77 tr 250 42" Queue Length 95th (ft) 313 m28 m5 318 220 InterriafLtnkthist{? ° 941': 9` '188 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 Base Capacity (vph)' iV6 436 °;:337x 7 '524 7 T45' Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 SpillbecR Cali Reductn ' 0 D b Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Redueird'V/c Ratio `. "0.42770. "03/ • �0 - M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group j 1 16: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) -•ti �4-� r 138Vement - Eg Lane Configurations r't Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane'UtII. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 ` 1.00 Frt 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected " 1 0.95 1.00 0.95' Satd. Flow (prot) 3425 1752 3505 1787 Fit Permitted ' 1.00 0.28 1.00 ' 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3425 521 3505 1787 Volume (vph) 520 200 '! 225 275 355 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj:)Flow "(vph) ' 531 204 230 281 382 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane;roup Flow (vph) =�35 " �' �0' 230 281 362 408" 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% 1% pm +pt pm +ov 3 8 8 76.1 76.1 77.8 77.8 0.68 0.68 5.0 5:7 3.0 Lane Grp (vph)r 1763 509 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 0.06 v/s Ratio Penn c0.25 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.45 Uniform Delay, di 17.2 8:5 Progression Factor 1.00 2.27 I'ncrernantat Delay d2 0J. 0;1 Delay (s) 18.0 19.2 Le3el'of Servke "; • 'B Approach Delay (s) 18.0 Approach LOS: Heavy Vehicles ( %) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 57.5 Effective Green, g (s) 59.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 Clearance Time (s) 5.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 24.0 0.56 115.0 62.9% '15 r 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1599 1.00 1599 400 0.98 408 2 3 2 28.2 41.8 29.2 43.8 0.25 0.38 5.0 ... . 5:0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2371 454 665 0.08 c0.20 c0,08 0.18 0.12 0.80 0.61 8.5' 40.1 28.8 0.22 1.00 1.00 0.0: 9.4 ,..1.7 1.5 49.5 30.4 9.5 39.4 A 0 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost ;time ,(s)> ICU Level of Service E Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 C` 4,0 B M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak,sy7 The Transpo Group 18: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & 53rd Av. S --• { f '\ Lane Group Flow (vph) 788 130 848 114 *Retie 0.8 t�' , D32" x ;0.68' ; 0.38 7 •.1 Control Delay 15.5 4.8 7.4 31.3 Total Delay 15.5 4.8 7.4 31.3 Queuet:engih 5th(ft) ' , 238' 13 _ - ''138 ` `' ` 40' Queue Length 95th (ft) 475 35 317 119 Internal ° LinK 1ZI3C(f ' 100 ` • ..170' 258 Turn Bay Length (ft) . 150 BaseCapaaFy(upKjy . 129T' 47$ .'4'521 ., "486 Starvation Cap Reductn . 0 0 0 0 Sptflb'aekea>a'fiedt n• 0 ; 0 . -R,0 7 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Rea u ce 'vrcRaiio' "''0:B1' 0.21 ' "056"°`'ti:23 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS\Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 18: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & 53rd Av. S 1 Lane Configurations t. M Ideal Flow'(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 `. 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane UtMI. Factor 1.00 Frt 0.99 Fit Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1853 Flt Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1853 Volume (vph) 645 80 120 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. FIow'(vph) 701 87 130 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 788 0 130 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Protected Phases Pe'mItteil Pt ases Actuated Green. G (s) 32.6 43.0 43.0 10.7 Effecttvetreer1 (s) " 44:0 :.''44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.69 0.69 0.18 Clearan 5.0 ` - '5.0 •" 5.0' `5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp'Cap (vph) 977. 333 1299 "'296 v/s Ratio Prot c0.43 0.04 c0.45 c0.07 v /s'RattoPerrn'; ' 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.39 0.65 0.39 Unlfor „dl ;`124 . .' '8.6' '5.5'' 22.8: Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8' " " 1.2' 0.8 Delay (a) 17.3 9.4 6.7 23.7 Level of Servlee B A A C Approach Delay (s) 17.3 7.1 23.7 Approach LOS 8' - ; A C HCM Average ontroI Delay. HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated; Cycle Length (a) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (Min) c Critical Lane Group 1.00 1.00 0.95 1787 0.14 260 pm +pt 3 8 12.4 0.71 63.7 61.8% 15 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.99 1881 1612 1.00 0.99 1881 1612 780 20 0.92 0.92 848 22 0 0 848 114 1% 4% 85 0.92 92 0 0 4% HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 19: 1 -5 SB On -Ramp & Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade 0% 0% 875" 585 65 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Nouilji "flow rate ph) '`'0„ q 0 " '629 70 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) ' Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent • Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstreancsignal,(ftr • 1018 pX, platoon unblocked 0.70 VC; confilctmg "volume 187' B41`% vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2 "slags 2 cotiffyot ". vCu, unblocked vol 2260 941 tC e"tiigT9'(,Y7 .-; 6\4';' 0277 .. tC, 2 stage (s) p0 queue‘free % 100 100 cM C A a a c i t y ( v e t i h) , '2'7 322' Average Delay 0.4 tntersectlan�ap�chy'tjtulza�ib � nad��Y Volume Total 941 829 _ Volume Left 0 0 70 0 Vol'ueie Right . 7;0 "^'"t)29 cSH 1700 1700 426 1700 Votume to Gapacky" 0 65" O g7 ..'i1.18 , ;0 4T` Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 15 0 ControlDelay (s) . . d.11 " 0 (f n" t51 "134' Lane LOS C AOP *C ($) 00`. " i 2 Approach LOS ., nl CU 1 - ..:.TS . _ B . Analysis Period (min) 15 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) -► .- ` t Let1efaro141 .7 la `1N87" li/Brt "NBA$;F1137 S$1.77S 777 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 158 142 68 84 679 42 537 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.53 0.22 0.15 ` 0.32 0.09 029 Control Delay 16.7 19.5 17.8 5.9 10.3 6.9 11.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.7 19.5 17.8 5.9 10.3 6.9 11.9 Queue Length 50th (It) 20 37 16 9 45 4 70 Queue Length 95th (ft) 52 102 52 31 173 18 134 Internal Link Dist (ft) 181 229 829 783 Turn Bay Length (ft) 75 Base Capacity (vph) 990 495 585 665 2282 586 2120 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Splllback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.16 0.29 0.12 0.13 0.30 0.07 0.25 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Lane Configurations IdealFlow ='' " "1900' 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Utii.` Factor ' Frt 0.96 Fit Protected 0.98" Satd. Flow (prot) 3003 Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (pens) 2308 Volume (vph) -70 35 45 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Ad). Flaw (vph) 74 ' , '37' '47 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Laneiroup Flow (vph) : - 0 -7 '158 -7 Y 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perth;;'t' Protected Phases Perraitted"Phases: 4' Actuated Green, G (s) 9.4 Effective' Green, g_(s) 10.6 . Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 Clearance Time (8) "; ? "5:2 Vehicle Extension (s) 39 Lane Grp Cap (vph) <` v/s Ratio Prot v/s Raflo - Perm • t " v/c Ratio LinifdriiiltrefiqsFW. Progression Factor Incrementafpetey •., Delay (s) Levelof,Servlce Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS . HCM AverageCont?ol HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuate "tf:Cycle en "9th (s- `. '7 Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period.(min) . c Critical Lane Group 0.43 1.00 1900 '19 4 1900 190 1 00 " 1900 ".190 1 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 ` '' 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.95 " 1.00 0.95 1.00 1606 1411 1593 3156 1547 3048 0.70 1,00 - 0.40 1:00 0.39 1.00 1163 1411 674 3156 636 3048 90 45 65 80 605 , 40 40 460 50 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ' 95 . . 47 . 68 84 '637 ` 42 42 484 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 142 68 84 679 ` 0 42 ` ` 537' "0 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% Perm., _ Perm pm +M pm +pt 5 2.; 1 9.5 9.5 43.5 37.1 38.3 34.5 10.6 "- 10.6'.'`48 3 :.38.5 %; . 41.1 35.9 0.16 0.16 070 0.58 0.62 0.54 5`1''.,5.1 - 5:4 5.4 ;5.4. 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 :186.• *• 226., `579 1833' ; 466 = ;1650;: c0.02 c0.22 0.01 0.18 t:(f12 " "'p115 ,.0.08. .005. 0.76 0.30 0.15 0.37 0.09 0.33 \"26.7` :33 7.1 4' 4.9 • '8.5' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • 1.00 1.00 ;168 08 `iX1 `, 01° "0.1 0.1 43.5 25.3 3.5 7.6 5.0 8.6 37.6 CM Level,of Service: Sum o'f list tIme'Cs) ; ICU Level of Service Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 t r \* 1 4/ i M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwlla\LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 1� 0 A 21: Nordstrom Entrance /I.5 MRGTOT1377 Lane Group Flow (vph) 206 v/c Ratio 0.73 Control Delay 50.4 Queue Delay 0.0 Total Delay 50.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 154 Queue Length 95th (ft) 222 Internal Link Dist (ft) 54 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio inferseefibr" TSI"i 'misty Existing PM Peak Hour NB Off Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 11/29/04 -• 1 r '' t '► 41 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 160 0.71 51.8 0.5 52.3 126 192 144 0.66 51.1 0.4 51.6 112 175 179 871 0.48 19.7 0.8 20.4 185 267 301 36 0.19 18.9 0.0 18.9 12 43 427 1454 360 346 1805 190 0 0 0 0 573 0 0 39 41 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.48 0.03 0.50 0.47 0.71 0:19 881 0.47 17.0 0.0 17.0 192 318 369 1891 0 0 0 0.47 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 21: Nordstrom Entrance /I -5 NB Off Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 11/29/04 ▪ -► 1 ! t 1 t Lane Configurations Ideal Flow` ( ":' "" 1900' ;1900`= °;1900 " 1900 100 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane titii:'Factor ` . ` , 104 Y 1.00` 0.95' 0: Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Fit Protected , ' ' ''" .09'1 '1.00 '0:95 0:9'1 Satd. Flow (prot) : 1652 1454 1543 1483 Fit Pern itted 0.97 , `''1.00 '= .95 ` 0.97 Satd. Flow (perm) 1652 1454 1543 1483 Volume "(vph).. ' 140' ' '60 : ". 40 = ':240' 0 '.'55 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Ad). Flow( vph) " '14`4 ''� "' 62 41 '247 '"0 57' RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) =0 � 206 .I " '41' , ' . 160' ' 144 ''0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type' Split • .,. Free Split • Phases 4 4 8 P ermitted ',Phases t" �' Free Actuated Green, G (s) 20.0 120.0 17.1 17.1 Eifective°Green, g':(s) ," 5` :it'l 0 20. '17.6. . •'17.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 1.00 0.15 0.15 Clearance'TIme (s) 4 5" . 4.5 4- , Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 LarleG,rpCap'(vph). „ 282, .1454;` : 226 ". . v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 c0.10 0.10 v /s`Ratio Perm ":<'0 03 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.03 0.71 0.66 0.48 Uniform ;Delay d1 ' :'`'47'1 ) 0 "48:8 4k47`.7'/,:',.;''' 14.5'7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.15 Incremental Delay, d2 " 9 3 . 0 0.7 0:7 7.3 , Delay (s) 56.5 0.0 58.5 55.7 Approach Delay (s) 47.1 57.1 Approach t t t t76 YZ D t4CM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated`CycteLength (s")? , Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts Period .(raIn) c Critical Lane Group P 69.4 69.9' 0.58 3.0 1808 �?, .... c0.28 17.5 17.5 s1 24 8 • HCM`Level of, Service • , 0.57 m £2tf 0 Su"of lost;time (5) 57.8% ICU Level of Service ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The • Transpo Group 1 69.4 69.9 0.58 4.5 3.0 263 12.4 15.2 1 iS°TMR 9001900;.1900 ` 1900` 1900``1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 85' " 0.95 " "100 . 0.97 1.00 1.00 '4.00 , :0,85 ' `Aka 3104 1624 3249 "" 1.00`' 0.26 "' 1.00 a ' 3104 452 3249 0 700` 145 35``855; 0 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0 722` ' 149 " ' > 36' '` 881'‘ '` 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 871 0 36 881 0 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% Perm 69.4 69.9 0.58 4:5 3.0 1893 0.27 0.14 0.47 11.4 ° ; ,14.3.. 1.00 1.00 15.1 22: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) f 4 \ t ""'"01177,t7 i 88 1:17 n ro Lane Group Flow (vph) v/c Ratio Control Delay QuedeDetay '`' Total Delay Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base'Capacity (vph) Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio 213 622 963 601 729 420 0.85 " 0.80 1.02 0.30 ` 0.66 0.55 67.0 29.9 52.6 2.6 33.4 10.7 0.0 0.0 167.9 1.4 ' 11 '01 67.0 29.9 220.5 4.0 34.5 11.0 158. 360' --502 40 128 61 #277 547 m #507 m51 317 85 153 95 ' 301 277 0 0 0 0.77 776 0 0 0 0.80 175 942 262 0 0 1.42 300 2024 1103 792 1176 173 83 0 ' 18 0 0 0 0 0.71 0.78 0.59 - Volume exceeds capacity, queue Is theoretically infinite. Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 22: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) Lane Configurations IdearFlow(Vphpl): y=- Total Lost time (s) LaneUtiiY'Fsctor ' Frt Fftlargtec�ed T Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Perri fitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume' (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj: Flow (vph) '' RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane 'Group Flow (vph)• Heavy Vehicles ( %) Turn Type Protected Phases 1 t 1 J '1800 %'1800' 800 `1800 " 1800 1800 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1:00" 1 Otr''b 83 ; 0.95 " %1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 11:95 0T '1° . 1.bd "•:1:oo Actuated Green, G (s) 19.9 65.0 45.1 92.1 43.0 62.9 EffecttVeGreen, g (er 9231 '43:0 62.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.54 0.38 0.77 0.36 0.52 Clearance Time (s) ' "4.07' ` 4:02: . 4.0 "` 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp'Cap (vphrS, ; 250 `776` `:.941 "2023: '1103''''. 768 ' `. v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 c0.30 c0.38 0.23 c0.24 0.09 Vie Ratielmerm : =, 0:16 .:0:21 v/c Ratio 0.85 0.80 1.02 0.30 0.66 0.55 Uniform belay, 01 48.6: 22.3'`::.37:47 4.2 321419.0' Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.74 0.54 0.93 0.49 Incremeilfal CSelay' 0223';3r 78:1,723 . )8 .. '0 t' Delay (s) 71.9 28.2 51.2 2.4 33.0 10.1 Level of`Sence' �' °, . "`° D " A' ' C ., g ; • Approach Delay (s) 39.4 32.5 24.6 ADprcabh LOS . a' .. '‘70.' HCM Average Control Delay 31.6 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Ac(uated:Cycl'e (:e tgth'(s) i 0 0 Sum of losftime (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.5% Analystel erlo( m1nk c Critical Lane Group HCM Level of Service ICU Level of Service Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 1509 1350 2505 2636 3078 1377 0'95 100'"°0.95" ti0C . rd0 ` COO 1509 1350 2505 2636 3078 1377 200 ' 585 "'905 `'565' .685' ' 395 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 213 063 ' 129" 420 ' . "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 213` (f0 729 °:'" 420 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% pm+gv Prot pm+ov 5 3 3 8 4 5 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group C 12.0 D 23: 1 -5 NB Off -Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) iv1 veSTel t 1BL 14e, S 't"' 14 ,, Lane Configurations 4T 41' Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 380 0 1440 1150 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow Fate (vph) 0 400 0 1516 1211 .0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) ., Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type• None Median storage veh) Upstream signer(ft) 129 175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.81 0.81 0.81 vC, conflicting' volume` 1968 605 1211 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1266 282 1028 tC, single (s) 8.8 6.9 4.1 IC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 31 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 132 583 550 Volume -Total Volume Left Volume Right cSH Volume to Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS Approach Delay(s) Approach LOS 400 0 400 583 0.69 133 23.6 C 23.6 C Intersectoon "Summary. `, Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 758 758 605 605 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 0.45 0.45 0.36 0.36 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 68.1% 15 ICU Level of Service 4' M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 7777 77 24: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) t `► 1 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 Lane Group Flow (vph). 403 665 932 369 460 1176 vIC Ratio ;0;92'" 'o ./s `r` 14' 0.88 ' 0.32 0.47 " Control Delay 78.2 20A 110.7 56.7 18.4 3.2 Queue Delay O f 0.0 " 0.0 1.1 ' 1.2 Total Delay 78.2 20.4 719.1 56.7 19.5 4.4 Queue Length 50th (ff) 160 ` 321 =568' . 274 90 ' 64 Queue Length 95th (ft) #245 455 #636 #434 m115 108 Internal Link bist` "'' 1297;. 1035 ' 49= Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 Base Capacity (uph)'' 438 94 - 820 420 1442 :' 2521 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 717 1040 Spifiback Cap Reductn 0 0 519 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Ratio" . 0,92 0.73. - 310' . 0.88 ' 0.63 0.79 - .,Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite, ::::,, Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. # `95thpestantlie'volume exceeds capacity, queue maybe (anger.' Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume'for'9511) queue ls'melered "by "upstream signal: M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak Existing Conditions- PM Peek.sy7 The Transpo Group Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 24: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated. Cycle; Length (s); :;. Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts Period (m n) c Critical Lane Group r 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 3090 1425 0.95 1.00 3090 1425 Volume (vph) 355 585 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 Adj. Flow (vph) 403 665 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 403 665 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% Turn Type pm +ov Protected Phases 8 1 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.5 72.0 Effective Green; g (s) 17.0 73.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.61 Cleatt(ice 71ine(a) " • • x, 4.5 4:5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 438' '914 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 c0.34 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.73 Uniform Delay, dl 50.8 16.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 24.5 2.9 Delay (s) 75.4 19.4 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 40.5 APpch LOS 0 B t r `► 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 '0.83 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 2810 1439 3090 1.00 1.00 0.95 2810 1439 3090 820 325 405 0.88 0.88 0.88 932 369. 460 0 0 0 932 369 460 1% 1% 2% Perm Prot 2 1 2 34.0 34.0 55.5 35.0 ' 35.0 < 56.0 0.29 0.29 0.47 5.0 5.0' 4.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 820 ' 420 1442 c0.33 0.15 0.26 1.14 0.88 0.32 42.5 40.5 20.1 0.87 0.85 0.88 75.3 20.9 : 0.1 112.5 55.4 17.8 F E B 96.3 'F 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3185 1.00 3185 1035 0.88 1176 0 1176 2% 94.0 95.0 0.79 5.0 3.0 2521:' 0.37 0.47 4.1 0.63 0.5 3.1 A 7.3 A >. 45.1 HCM Level of Service 0.87 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 72.1% ICU Level of Service M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS\Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 D. 8.0 C 25: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & 61st PI S /Mall "e' 1 r ~ 4 \ Lane Group Flow (vph) 151 446 134 86 806 108 166 113 199 v/d Ktatid re . , 0d4' 1),35" 1 33 '•?;Q 20 0.73 ' d.31 0249 Control Delay 13.9 20.0 21.0 13.2 28.2 24.2 38.3 24.2 39.0 ',1f0.02 d.6", "o.b od 0.0 Total Delay • 13.9 20.0 21.0 13.2 28.2 24.2 38.3 24.2 39.0 Ouaue "Lengt iltilltiflY '-le 86" 7747 21 191 ? 38 80 40 97' Queue Length 95th (ft) 101 176 120 62 402 108 203 112 243 InteroatLlnitbist(ft' 1297 ° .. 402 ` 85 ' - 163 163 Turn Bay Length (ft) 75 75 100 Base Capacity (vph)' 491 ?`. 1830 ' x '4 9 1581 ; 450 586 :465: " 581 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 3p111tiacicf:ap 3� "educln, 0, 0 0 , 0 6' " 0 0 o' -o Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red "uce vlc Ratio ;', 0,31 v , 0 2d ;018 . "`o.t7 0.53 .' 6:24 "` 0.28 0.24'; 0.34 � l M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 rlifaTAB 25: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & 61st PI S /Mall HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) r . Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period, (min) c Critical Lane Group 22.3 HCM Level of Service 0.60 82.8 Sum of lost time (a) 64.1% ICU Level of Service 15 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 ti t `- 1 4 \ t r` 1 Fro"vemerti 1 WB ° r: l* TrO ° r rr Selt- sIR, Lane Configurations 1 1 l't r 1 4I. rl p rt p Ideal Flow (vphpl) ' 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.89 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1608 3217 ' 1439 1593 3083 1624 1528 1624 1515 Fit Permitted 0.18 1.00 1.00 0.49 ' 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.56 1.00 Satd. Flow (pens) 308 3217 1439 828 3083 858 1528 949 1515 Volume (vph) '• 140 415 125 80 590 160 100 45 110 105 45 140 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj,.'F'l6w'(vph) 151 446 134 ' 86 634 172 108 48 118 113 48 151 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 151 446 134 86 : 806 0 108 166 0 113 199 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm +pt Perm pm +pt Pm +Pt . pm +pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 .. 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 42.0 32.5 32.5 34.7 28.7 25.3 17.7 25.3 17.7 Effective Green, g (s) 43.6 33.3. 33.3 36.6 29.8 26.5 ` 18.3 26.9 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.40 0.40 0.44 0.36 0.32 0.22 0.32 0.22 Clear 4.8 r, '4.8 4.8 . ` 4.8 5.1 4.6 4.6 4.8 4.8 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 324 1294 579 429. 1110 350 338 377 338 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.14 0.02 c0.26 c0.03 0.11 0.03 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm ' . 0.19 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.34 0.23 0.20 0.73 0.31 0.49 0.30 0.59 Uniform =De)ay,01 - ^123 ; 16.3 13.6 23.0 20.6 28.2 20.3 28,7. Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 InarimentaCGetaWd2 ? 1 1 . 0;2 '02; ' 0.2 < <2.4; 0.5 ;'1,1 0.4 2 Delay (s) 13.3 17.3 16.5 13.9 25.4 21.1 29.3 20.8 31.4 .......... Level of Seridbe , ` ; e .. B . B ,_r 8 7 C _ ... , C C Approach Delay (s) 16.4 24.3 26.1 Approach LOS >. . B C C < C 27.5 C 16.0 C M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 26: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/04 f - ► ti r 4 - t \ , Lane Group Flow (vph) 136 413 114 141 728 v/c > tafio =':` 065'' ttt 47`:''029 "0 K 0.84 Control Delay . 54.6 33.6 34.4 53.0 39.2 Queue Belay , . 0.t) 0.0 ' 0 ' 9.0' 0.0 Total Delay 54.6 33.6 34.4 53.0 39.2 Queue'Cerigth 501 2 • ` Queue Length 95th (ft) #180 191 123 174 355 Internal tmk bls( {(t) ?" ` 40r''"' ' "' 990` • Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 100 Base C'apidity'(vp`hr 1 265 '1031 ° 482 "'385 ..1081' Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 5pi Ibacti'Cap Reductn " 0 0 :` " 0 0 10` Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v(p Ratla' 0.51; 0:38` " 0:24 0:49 0.68 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 196 609 239 533 - 0,75' "0.82." 0.78 0.56 50.1 42.5 47.6 36.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0' 50.1 42.5 47.6 36.1 140 ' 225' "170, 184 227 #326 #271 257 25517' 150 155' _ 923 421'?' 1056 0 0 0 0 , 0 ' 0 , . _,_ 21 ,.. 0 0 0 0 0:56 '0.66 .0.57 0.51 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group ttl'`d Tum Type • Protected Phases Pennfted Plisses Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green: g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) ` v/s Ratio Prot v/s RatloPerm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) ApproaCt%LOS 26: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) MOVemen't ° ° , L .t ""t ,ions` rr "" `i Lane Configurations 11 ft r t + v 4f. ■1 4A Ideal Frow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane UN. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 ` 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1577 3154 1411 1608 3098 1593 3108 1547 2985 Fit Permitted 0.95 1,00 ` 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1577 3154 1411 1608 3098 1593 3108 1547 2985 Volume(vph) 125 380 105 130 505 165 180 470 90 220 375 115 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 138 413 114 141 549 179 196 511 98 239 408 125 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Coup Flow (vph) 136 413 114 141 728 0 196 609 0 239 533 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Petlod (min) c Critical Lane Group 41.6 HCM Level of Service 0 0.77 97.4 Sum of lost time (s) . 12.0 73.6% ICU Level of Service D 15 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 4 t P '► 4� Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 4 10.1 26.8 26.8 10.4 27.1 13.3 24.9 19.3 10.1 -' 26.8 26.8 10.4 ' 27.1 13.3 24.9 19.3 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.11 0.28 0.14 0.26 0.20 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 164 868 .388 172: 862 '218. 795 307 0.09 0.13 c0.09 c0.23 c0.12 c0.20 c0.15 0.08 0.83 0.48 0.29 0.82 0.84 0.90 0.77 0.78 42.8. _ 29.4 27.8 42.6 33.2 41.4 33.6 37.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 27.9 0.4 0.4 25.3 7.6 34.5 4.4 11.8 70.7 29.9 28.3 67.8 40.8 75.9 38.0 48.8 E C C E D E D D 38.0 45.2 47.2 34.7 0 0 0 C 30.9 30.9 0.32 4.0 3.0 947 0.18 0.56 27.8 1.00 0.8 28.4 C ` t 4 27: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 1_ t `1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 109 598 136 576 2661 723 163 538 vfc'Ratiiti 0.65 '` 0.53 0. 59 0; 71 0. 70. °0.57 0:81: Control Delay 50.6 37.0 49.3 34.9 42.4 34.1 47.8 38.1 Qrleue elay 0.0 .X0.0 = o o , ; o, o.o p o .'�o,o ° Total Delay 50.6 , 37 0 49 3 34.9 42 4 34 11 47 8 38.1 Ciusueletlgth�SOth-(ft) `60', 169:' '145 201 . `90, '152 5 ,. " Queue Length 95th (ft) 173: 363 206 338 351 420 237 332 Intema1'Link DI`sttf), 990 " 1003 235 426" Tum Bay Length (ft) 100 Base Capadify (vph) ` 432" 1456 ` ` 477 '1533 , " 688' -1656 ': 534 1419 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sp)(16aeti Cap R dricln 0, 0 0 0 0 ..: 0,, 0 " 0 ,., • Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ReCuCed vk Raba 77"`d.'2$ (1 d1.. 73 , .0,. 8 0.31 ‘ 0.421 0 31 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 intelledfOrr a tr)r R , M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Ideal Flow (vphplJ 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Utif. Factor 1.00 FR 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prat) 1752 Fit Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 Volume (vph) 100 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) ' 109 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 109 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% Turn Type . Prot Protected Phases 7 Permi(ted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 9.2 24.0 Effective`Green,g (s) 9.7 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.27 C1earanCe Time:(sy ''4 5 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph). '185 921 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.59 Uniform Delay, d1. 39.2 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2‘' ` 4.7 Delay (s) 43.9 Level of Service D Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length ' (s); Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Perlod'(min)' c Critical Lane Group 0.65 29.8 1.00 1.6 31.2 33.1 Existing PM Peak Hour 27: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Park. E (Segment 11) 11/29/04 ti t k 4 \ ? r \► l Nro r e ;Bt3C" .''firm eft ' ornytiT`; =VrIeR'°° t7BL"mwmwtti .sEit ; `sorrson Lane Configurations ) 1900 4.0 0.95 0.97 1.00 3385 1.00 3385 425 0.92 462 0 598 3% it ft 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 ` 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1752 3411 0.95 1.00 1752 3411 125 435 0.92 0.92 136 473 0 0 136 576 3% 3% Prot 125 0.92 136 0 0 3% 3 10.4 10.9 0.12 4.5 3.0 208 c0.08 25.2 26.2 0.29 5.0' 3.0 972 0.17 0.65 0.59 38.7' 28.3 1.00 1.00 45.9 29.2 D C -. 32.4 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1770 0.95 1770 95 245 0.92 0.92 103 266 0 0 0 266 3% 2% Prot 5 16.0 16.5 0.18 4:5 3.0 318 c0.15 HCM level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 1900 4.0 0.95 0.96 1.00 3392 1.00 3392 480 0.92 522 0 723 2% 27.1 28.1 0.31 5.0 3.0 1037 c0.21 0.84 0.70 36.4 28.1 1.00 1.00 17.1 2.1 53.5 30.2 D .'. C 36.5 D. 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1787 0.95 1787 185 150 0.92 0.92 201 163 0 0 0 163 2% 1% Prot 1 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 11.4 11.9 0.13 4.5 3.0 231 0.09 0.71 38.3 1.00 .9.4 47.7 D tio 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.96 1.00 3434 1.00 3434 365 130 0.92 0.92 397 141 0 0 538 0 1% 1% 22.5 23.5 .` 0.26 3.0 878 -` 0.16 0.61 30.2 1.00 31.5 D 35.2 Existing PM Peak Hour 28: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/04 ti ♦- t 1 Van r uR Eg Lane Group Flow (vph) 251 265 489 44 11 306 1412 39 1256 344 1// RatioT ' 0,49' - ''0.`96 , 0.48 0.14 0.86 0.85 0.45 0,93 - 0.57 Control Delay 35.5 35.9 62.8 75.4 61.1 77.4 35.1 75.2 43.7 32.4 0.0'' 0.0 ` 0.0 Total Delay 35.5 35.9 62.8 75.4 61.1 77.4 35.1 75.2 43.7 32.4 Qu ue :eltith 50th' {ft) ". 1138 ` 180.` 487 ..- . '35 • 9 ` 545` 31 504 '' 213 . Queue Length 95th (ft) 254 269 #607 #83 29 #217 #657 #75 #652 314 tntemal Drst (ft) .. 126 '� - 141 120 430 Tum Bay Length (ft) 200 125 250 150 `92 .1676 ' 86 1408• , f 630 - Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sp916ack'Cap`Fliiductn. ` i ii ~ 4 ` 0 0 $'0 0 0 0 o 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Redaeed`ita tatic tli44 0.46' 0 91 ; 0:48 0 :14T 0.88' 0.84 - •0:45` # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 28: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 1. f 4- 4 \ t t `► ✓ m-o''ve -ffbi " »= 7'"E1' °EBT': -tBf2 +V9t:" 14 /Brr bFrrtiaerzN f;`714B'it7S13' 'Ss'r S8 Lane Configurations 1 4 r 4 r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1649 1663 1553 1817 1583 3400 3503 1687 3374 1509 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1649 1663 1553 1817 1583 3400 3503 1687 3374 1509 Volume (vph) 435 30. 440 20 20 10 275 1265 5 35 1130 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. f=low (vph) 483 ' 33 489 22.. 22 11 306 1408 6 39 1256 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 251 265 489 0 44 11 306 1412 0 39 1258 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 7% 7% Tum Type Split Perm Split Perm Prot Prot Penn Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) .' Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio llnlform Delay, d1 Progression Factor IncrerrientaF Oetay; d2 Delay (s) Level ' ':ofService Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS 38.1 38.6 0.32 4.5 3.0 531 0.15 0.47 32.5 1.00 0.1 33.1 38.1 38.6 0.32 4.5 3.0 538 0.16 0.49 32.7 1.00 0:7 33.5 c 53.3 4 38.1 38.6 0.32 4.5 3.0 500 c0.31 0.98 40:2 1.00 34.2 74.4 E` HCM Average Control Delay . <. HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 44.7 0.92 119'.8 72.8% 15 3.8 4.8 0.04 5.0 3.0 73 c0.02 0.60 56.6 1.00 19.2 69.8 E 67.2 E` 8 3.8 4.8 0.04 5.0 3.0 63 0.01 0.17 55.6 1.00 1.3 56.9 E 11.2 12.2 0.10 5.0 3.0 346 c0.09 Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 0.88 53.1 1.00 22.5 75.6 E HCM Level of Service f 55.1 55.6 0.46 4.5 3.0 1628 0.40 0.87 28.8 1.00 5.2 34.0 C 41.4 0 D. 16.0 C 1 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 3.8 4.8 0.04 5.0 3.0 68 0.02 0.57 56.5 1.00 11.2' 67.7 E 47.7 48.2 0.40 4.5 3.0 1357 c0.37 310 0.90 344 0 344 7% 6 47.7 48.2 0.40 4.5 3.0 607 0.23 0.93 0.57 34.1 ::27.7 1.00 1.00 10.9 .. 1.2 45.0 28.9 D' •C 42.1 D. 29: S.168th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 4 \ t 4 r 'S L .i 3d Lane Group FIovv (vph) 5 5 16 37 5 1218 32 1356 J/e Rao 0.06'' 907"7 . °'0.31. 0.05 "v - Ct43 - 0.2470:4r Control Delay 53.2 53.4 50.8 53.1 54.6 7.3 56.9 5.2 Queue Delay ' :0 0: 0 0' 0.0 ' 'b.0 0.0 010 0 0 . "t.0�, Total Delay 53.2 53.4 50.8 53.1 54.6 7.3 56.9 5.2 QueuelengthSOth(fty ' 4'° 4 - - ,' 12 _'' `28 160 `22 "- 39 . Queue Length 95th (ft) 17 17 34 62 17 345 m43 m504 Intettiel tirik Qist`(ft)„ 55 428 ; " 1420 -- 1035 Tum Bay Length (ft) 50 50 Base Capacity (vph) , 24r ^ 215 -. 155 ' ^ 229 ' 104 ' ; 2822 ' 142 ' 2974 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SpiiibactcCap`Reductn �0' 0 � "� 0 " "'` 0 0" ' 11 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fteduced'v /c Ratio : " '&027 ` 06 7 "0.23 0.46 M Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal. M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 1 $ 29: S.168th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1444 Fit Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow(perm) 1444 Volume (vph) 5 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 5 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 5 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 25% Tum Type Split Protected Phases 4 4 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 1.5 1.5 Effective Green, g (s) 2.5 2.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.02 Clearance nee (s) 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 30 ,' 27 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.00 v/s Ratio Penn v/c Ratio 0.17 0.19 Uniform Delay d1 57.7 57.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 3.3 Delay (s) 60.3 61.1 Level of Servlce- : ' E E Approach Delay (s) 60.7 ApPioaeh.t Qs HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actueted Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 ♦ r 4C " 4 \ t P to 1900' 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1292 1.00 1292 0 5 0.94 0.94 0 5 0 0 5 0 25% 25% 8.7 0.48 120.0 49.4% 15 190 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 190 1 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1703 1524 1787 3569 1770 3537 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1703 1524 1787 3569 1770 3537 15 0 35 5 1135 10 30 1270 5 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 16 0 37 5 1207 11 32 1351 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 37 0 5 1218 0 32 1356 0 6% 6% 6% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% Split Prot Prot 8 8 5 2 1 6 7.2 7.2 1.2 86.0 5.3 90.1 8.2 8.2 2.2 87.0 6.3 91.1 0.07 0.07 0.02 0.72 0.05 0.76 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0, 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 116 104 33 2588 93 2885 0.01 c0.02 0.00 c0.34 0.02 c0.38 0.14 0.36 52.6 53.4 1.00 1.00 0.5 2.1 53.1 55.5 E 54.8 0.15 0.47 0.34 0.51 58.0 6.9 54.9 5.6 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.02 2.1. 0.6 1.8` 0.6 60.1 7.5 58.7 6.3 E. A E A 7.7 7.5 0 A' A HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 12.0 .; A M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 30: Minkler Blvd. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) r t t 4 Lane Group Flow (vph) 112 112 1149 101 1255 v/c Ritter 0:52 058 ` 0 d5 • " "6: 0:44 Control Delay 47.8 48.6 8.4 3.9 4.1 Queue Delay 71 0 :.0.0 0.0 '" ",0.0 • 0.0 Total Delay 47.8 48.6 8.4 3.9 4.1 Que`ue'fength50th(ft) . 79 "' 8a.`:' t69 12 11'3 Queue Length 95th (ft) 131 133 260 29 184 IntemajLink'tfISt(ft) X 78 i420� Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capac ity(vpn) =` 453 '"'..405 "435 zaea'`. Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spiliback CapReductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vic Ratio X 0.25 0.2 hifers Cfoft`Ji0hiti M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 MoVer e Lane Configurations Ideal FIow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane UtiI. Factor Frt Pit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted`" • Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) -` Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow(vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance lree (s) • , ` Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cep (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 :. Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Inte+'sedtfon°S0 unary' 30: Minkler Blvd. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group ` *' 1900 ` 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 0 0 1900 1900 1800 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1,00 0.85 0.95 1.00''' 1787 1599 0.95' 1.00 1787 1599 0 0 0 105 0 105 0 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0 0 0'112. 0 112 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ` 112 0 112 0 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 0% ti t t 4 \ t ti l 0.0 A 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95' 1.00 3582 1770 3539 1.00 0.20 , 1.00 3582 369 3539 1025 55 95 1180 0 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1090 59 101 1255 0 0 0 0 0 0 1149 0 101 `' 1255 ?' 0 0% 0% 2% 2% 2% pm +pt 2 1 6 8 ,- 80.6 92.2 92.2 81.5 93.1 93.1 0.71 0.81 0.81 4.9 4.7 . 4.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 2539 391 2865 c0.32 0.02 c0.35 0.19 0.52 0.58 0.26 47.4 47,8 3.8 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.1 4.4 0.4 49.5 52.2 4.2 D ; 50.8 7.8 D A 9,3 HCM Level of Service 0.48 115.0 51.2% Prot custom 8 8 8 12.8 12.8 13.9 13.9 0.12 0.12 5.1 , 5.1 3.0 3.0 216 193 0.06 c0.07 0.45 7.2 1.00 0.6 7.8 A 0. 44 3.2 1.00 0.5 3.7 A 3.8 A Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 12.0 A M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 31: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) e Lane Group Flow (vph) 179 37 158 147 415 726 v/c Retie' 0:38" 0.14'. "6:57 " "0:69' Control Delay 45.6 43.4 45.6 46.8 39.8 33.0 Queuebelay ; "6.0 Total Delay 45.6 43.4 45.6 46.8 39.8 33.0 Cluiitik a igtfi 50th (0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 249 67 222 213 262 411 InterPi "Link "b)sf (ff }i` . .1713 `= ' "' 102672551' Tum Bay Length (ft) 100 dase`�SapaCrty(�ptl) `551'' 478` ' 544` - 472 '1127'7 1582 . Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spill6ack`t iFFtediiglrt "0'" 0° 0 0 0' ° 0 3 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced;v/cRatty ";' a:3J0.08' X 0 29 O. "' 3' 0.37.." '15. 46 . ' " M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 f 31: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) f Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 19 190 1900 ' 1900 190 1900 1 1900 1900 1900 ' 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane UtII. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.99 0.98 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1807 1568 1791 1553 3155 3268 Fit Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1807 1568 1791 1553 3155 3268 Volume (vph) 70 100 35 60 90 140 25 345 25 40 560 90 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) : `' 74 105 37 63' `. 95 147 " 26 363 .28 42 ` 589 95 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane "Group Flow (vph) 0 ' 179 37" 0 158 "147: 0 415 0 0 720 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 13% 13% 13% 8% 8% 8% Turn Type Split - ` ' Perm , Split , Perm . Spin Split Protected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 1 2 PermIttei'Phases 3 4 Actuated Green. G (s) 11.9 11.9 11.6 11.6 19.2 28.2 Effective Green, g (s), 12.7 ' 12,7 12.4 12.4 20.2 • 29'.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.22 0.32 Clearance Time (s) ' ' :4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane: Grp Cap (vph) _254 220 , '245: 213 704 1054 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.09 c0.13 c0.22 v/s Rath:. Perm . 0.02 c0.09 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.17 0.64 0.69 0.59 0.69 Uniform belay,' di" 37.1 34.2 37.0 37.2 31.4 29.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 tncrermehtalT)elay, d2- , 8.6' ,0.4> 5.7 9.2. ' 13 . . 1.9 Delay (s) 45.7 34.6 42.7 48.5 32.7 28.8 Leveler Service''; a ' C D D' C . 0 Approach Delay (s) 43.8 44.5 32.7 28.6 ApproachCO51 l',.. . .D,. - D C '.0 HCM Average Control Delay 34.5 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length (s) °' 90:5 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.4% ICU Level of Service B Anal s1s;Period (mitt) . 15 c Critical Lane Group M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 32: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) r 4- Lane Group Flow (vph) 65 134 86 124 656 656 v /cRatlo�' �� ` 09i)`� 031 :' "`0.54" 0.89 Control Delay 124.0 35.0 51.6 49.6 42.6 53.7 6ue3e elay Q.B' 0 b " 0 0 ` "0.0 " 0.0 Total Delay 124.0 35.0 51.6 49.6 42.6 53.7 l3ueus� rengtti`5O01 , {lf) 4 75 " ", 56 ° 8`f " 218 231 Queue Length 95th (ft) #137 135 109 143 293 #350 Internal Link Dist (ft)''- �- ' 768._ ,_ .. `472' 394 360 Tum Bay Length (ft) BaseCapacuy(vph) 72 482' '? ' '`263 ' 904 755 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 SpilfbadeOC'ap Reductn `0' 0 , 0 "0 " - "' 0 , Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rediiceri'v eRatto 0.90 =.0 4$ " °; 047 0.73• •x` 5.87 # 95th percentile • volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 32: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 1 tj Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prat) 1770 Flt Permitted ` 0.15 Satd. Flow (perm) 279 Volume (vph) 60 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 Adj. Flo* (vph) 65 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 65 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% Tum Type. Perm: Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green. G (s) Effective •Green'g(s)` Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance ' In e(s)' ' Vehicle Extension (s) Lane GrpCap:(vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Raga Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Increnierltai_Delay ,,d2' Delay (s) Leyel.ofService Approach Delay (s) ApproiOh'LOS -►� rte' t4\ t r ti Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 1 r HCM Average ,Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length.(s) . _' Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis. Period (min) , c Critical Lane Group ttf 4;GVt vtl'1gt7WB/ "°"t BV14tt `g ' "' 7tIS SB'f "`'."S18R t• ' t+ •tt+ +1t+ 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.89 1.00 0.93 0.99 0.97 1.00 ' 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1650 1770 1730 3438 3397 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.99 1.00 1650 1250 1730 3438 3397 30 95 80 60 55 100 465 45 30 465 115 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 32 102 86 65 59 108 500 48 32 500 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 0 86. 124 0 0 656 0 0 656 0 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Perm Spin Split 3 d 1 1 2 2 3 25.7 25.7 26.7 ,'26.7 0.26 0.26 50:,`5.0 3.0 3.0 72 427 0.08 00.23 • 0.90 0.31 36.9 ; 30.8 1.00 1.00 734 .. 0.4 110.0 31.2 F ::.C' 57.0 4 12.6 12.6 13.6 = 13.6 0.13 0.13 5,0> 5.0 3.0 3.0 165 228 00.07 0.07 0.52 0.54 41.7'` 41.8 1.00 1.00 3.0 ; 2.6 44.7 44.5 44.6 D: 48.3 HCM Level of Service. 0.82 103.1 64.6% 15 Sum Of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 23.5 24.5 0.24 5.0 3.0 817 c0.19 0.80 37.0 1.00 5.7 42.8 D 42.8 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 21.3 22.3 0.22 5.0 '. 3.0 735 00.19 0.89 39:2 1.00 13.2 52.4 52.4 4 1r 33: S. 180th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) 4 f t ti 1 4- Lane Group Flow (vph) 194 339 161 544 v /eRatfd'" ( 0.99 `: 0 22 .0.52' 1.01' Control Delay 125.6 26.3 50.0 91.6 Queiie'oe(ay ' , 0.0; ' ':0'.67'0.6 :. o:0, Total Delay 125.6 26.3 50.0 91.6 f]uaue .e igtti'SOth(n) '"'`'I88'' '104 ,' 128 "560 Queue Length 95th (ft) #365 146 214 #847 Intemal'Clnk Dist (ft) ' 341 1256 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 175 150 Base°Gapactty ; 196`.,1'544 - ` 311 ' : 538 1041 208' ' 219 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SPltitieck'Gap t f e d u c t ` n ' "b' 0 - ."` ":0':'''s 0 '0 "...0 z. '. '0' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reducedv)cRatlo"i 0.09 " 0.22" `'o;52 1.01? 0:43' ` I1 0.46 • 018;.` Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th perceritile'volume exceeds capacity queue maybe longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 450 22 100 33 450 650 0.43 0.13 ` ` 0.57 0.22 0.34 0.98 6.8 61.0 69.9 62.8 33.2 74,9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 61.0 69.9 62.8 33.2 74.9 84 20 93 30 166 610 129 49 157 65 210 #907 406 691 200 186. 1317:`663 0 0 0 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS\Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group HCM Average Control Delay 57.0 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 Actuated Cycle Length (s) ,'.. . 146.0 ' Intersection Capacity Utilization 889% Analysts Perlo'd'(min)' - 15 c Critical Lane Group 33: S. 180th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) C 't iQf3C'erNel Etit 91 "TEaFT! :WEL B'3 ;` Ertl° Lane Configurations ) 5� p Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1787 3522 1787 1787 1519 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.55 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3522 1030 1787 1519 Volume (vph) 175 275 30 145 490 405 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 194 306 ` . 33 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 Lane Group plow (vph) 194 ' 339 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Protected Phases 3 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.0 63.0 Effective Green; g (s) 16.0 64.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.44 Clearance The (s) ' 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 196 1544 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.99 0.22 Uniform Delay, d1 64.9 : 25.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay', i12 0:1' Delay (s) 125.6 25.6 Level of$ervlce:';. , F C Approach Delay (s) 62.0 APPreach LOS Ff 1i`e^slrl"�%"7t Vin' 0.90 0.90 161 544 0 0 161° 544 1% 1% Perm pm +ov 4 2 4 98.0 100.0 0.68 5.0 3.0 1040 0.17 0.13 0.43 0.13 10.3 60.4 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.5 .4t3 0.3 .04 43.7 92.1 10.6 60.8 D " . _ F . :.E : 53.6 4 43.0 43.0 44.0. 44.0 0.30 0.30 5.0 . 5.0 3.0 3.0 310 539 c0.30 0.16. 0.52 1.01 42.2 ^ 51.0 450 0 450 1% 13.0 14.0 0.10 • 5.0 3.0 168 0.01 HCM ,Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 4 \ t ` 1 ) If 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1736 1827 1553 3433 1729 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1736 1827 1553 3433 1729 20 90 30 405 305 280 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 22 100 33 450 339 311 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 100 33 450 650 0 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% SpIIt Perm Split 1 1 2 2 13.0 14:0 0.10 5.0 3.0 175 c0.05 0.57 63, 1.00 =f4,5 67.6 'E .`. 65.4 E .,. 1 13.0 14.0 0.10 5.0 3.0 149 16.0 E M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 55.0 56.0 0.38 5.0 3.0 1317 0.13 55.0 56.0 0.38 5.0 3.0 663 c0.38 0.02 0.22 0.34 0.98 51.0`.31.9- 44.5 1.00 1.00 1.00 '0.8. 0.2`x`299 61.7 32.1 74.4 57.1 Ar 34: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) J -► ! '- t Lane Group Flow (vph) v/c Rato Control Delay OueU9 Detey Total Delay Ouaue Length 50th,(ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist`(ft) Tum Bay Length (ft) . • Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spfllbaclk Cep Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reducei£ vic itatio ` 89 578 22 1100 144 689 0.54 ' 0.44 0.09 0.85 0.40 " 0.81 63.6 33.3 43.2 34.3 53.9 42.5 0.0'; 0 0.0 0.0 0.0'; _ 0.0 63.6 33.3 43.2 34.3 53.9 42.5 66 127''' 17 400 56 260' 140 326 38 555 102 383 1256 ' ' 280 231 977 125 . 204'1409 495 ' 613 1100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.44 <. - 0 41'°"'0.04 ' `0:89 , `0.23" `0.63 " ' M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS\Weekday PM PeaklExisting Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 iffstMlitifratiYn"Ti yl) 34: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Lane Configurations �p p 4p 4• Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane UtU. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.96 0.94 Fit Protected ' 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.98 Satd. Flow (prof) 1770 3534 1719 3334 3125 3170 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.98 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3534 1719 3334 3125 3170 Volume (vph) 80 515 5 20 790 200 20 75 35 300 90 230 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) ' 89 572 6 22 878 222 22 83 39 333'. 100 256 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 578 0 22 1100 0 0 144 0 0 689 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% 10% 10% 10% 5% 5% 5% Tum Type Prot Prot Split Split Protected Phases 3 7 8 4 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases„ 7 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.6 39.1 11.3 42.8 11.4 Effectli a Green;'g (s)- 8.t 40.1 . 11.8 -`, 43.8 12.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.37 0.11 0.40 0.11 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 131 1297 186 1336 355 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.16 0.01 c0.33 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.68 0.45 0.12 0.82 0.41 Uniform`Delay, d1 49.3 26.2. 44.0 29.3 45.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Increnfentalbelay, d2 131 ` .' 0.2 0.3 4.2 0.8 Delay (s) 62.5 26.4 ' 44.3 33.5 45.8 Level. of Service : E . C 0 , . C D Approach Delay (s) 31.2 33.7 45.8 Approach LOS C C D D HCM Average'ControlDelay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cyc)e Length (s) " Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min)' c Critical Lane Group 36,5: ,, . HCM Level of Service 0.75 109.3 Sum of lost time (s) 65.9% ICU Level of Service 15 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 4 \ t r `► 1 , D . 16:0 C 28.0 29.0.' 0.27 5.0 ' .. 3.0 841 c0.22 0.82 37,7 1.00 44.0 D ' 44.0 35: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 766 1054 394 v /cT(atio'�; 1.213 >` 0 35 ":'0x71 ""0.55 Control Delay 30.6 5.4 17.1 26.6 Queue Dalai 0:0 0.0\ °':0.0" ' 0:0 Total Delay 30.6 5.4 17.1 26.6 Queuet.ength80th'(ft) 47`s ,55. 171 .,. ". Queue Length 95th (ft) 131 114 336 161 Interr 1 Link Dist (ft) ° 198 210 " i 598 � " "'' Tum Bay Length (ft) 275 Base Capachy(vph)"" 526 2697 2023 11'87 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductrr 0 "'. 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio '• ;; "0.25': 0.28' ''0:52 0:33 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 �arY"§�i`dtip *;mss • M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak\Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group ve 35: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) Lane Configurations ' Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) . 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prat) 1736 Flt Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1736 volume (vph) 125 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 133 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% Tum Type, Prot Protected Phases 7 Permltted.Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 8.4 Effective Green, g (s) 9.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 257 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.52 Uniform Delay, 01 24.9 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 Delay (s) 26.7 Level of Service C Approach Delay (s) Approach L05 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Anatysie Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3471 1.00 3471 720 0.94 766 0 766 4% 40.2 41.2 0.65 5.0 3.0 2256 0.22 0.34 5.0 1.00 0.1 5.1 8.3 A 1900 4.0 0.95 0.98 1.00 3392 1.00 3392 840 0,94 894 0 1054 4% 26.8 27.8 0.44 5.0 3.0 1487 c0.31 0.71 14.5 1.00 1.6 16.1 B 16.1 B. 1900 1900 1900 4.0 0.97 0.95 0.97 3226 0.97 3226 150 245 125 0.94 0.94 0.94 160 261 133 0 0 0 0 394 0 4% 5% 5% 13.7 14.2 0.22 4.5 3.0 723 c0.12 6 0.54 21.7 1.00 0.8 22.6 c 22.6 14.2 HCM Level of Service 0.63 63.4 Sum of lost time `(s) 55.9% ICU Level of Service 15 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 8 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group t_ F 36: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Sperry Dr. eifft r Lane Group Flow (vph) 77 943 5 1170 v/c Ratio';; 0:27;;' 0.50 °; '0.02" ' 0.78 Control Delay 12.4 15.1 13.4 24,7 QUeueQelay tl:0' ' 0.0 '0.1 Total Delay 12.4 15.1 13.4 24.8 � Qu®ue t.engtt5o(h (it) '71'7=: 1' .288 Queue Length 95th (ft) 55 380 8 551 internal Link Dist(ft) "257' ' 526 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity 325` 2213''';336: Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 90 Spillbaak'Cap f�eoiictn 0 tl' 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced vac Rat(o 0.24' ,, 0.43. 0.01 '0.62 t t 1 1 15 0.07 26.7 00 26.7 25.6 6 11 25 40 61 100 342 744 0 0 0 28 23 340 57 0.06 0.05 0.76 0.11 25.6 25.7 33.5 25.7 0.0� >.0.0 0.1 0.0 25.7 33.6 25.7 9 172 .22 35 373 66 352 ' 75 781 0 0 720 678 0 0 17 ..i6 0 0 0 0 0.04 13.04 11.03 .. 0.51 0.07 •, ` M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 36: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Sperry Dr. Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 Lane Configurations A 11 p )+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utii. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.88 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1736 3468 1752 3389 1719 1507 1461 Flt Permitted 0.11 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.35 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 202 3468 474 3389 641 1507 1461 Volume (vph) 75 910 5 5 885 250 15 5 45 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 77 938 5 5 912 258 15 5 46 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow 77 943 0 5 1170 0 15 28 23 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 5% 5% 5% Tum Type pm +pt pm +pt Perm Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 PermkteilPhases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 51.9 46.0 41.2 Effective Green, g (s) 53.6 47.7 43.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.53 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 250 1836 258 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 c0.27 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.51 0.02 Uniform Delay, d1 11.9 13.7 12.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.2 0.0 Delay (s) 12.6 13.9 Level of Service B B Approach Delay (s) 13.8 Approach LOS B C oveme "Etirrnr 'NSL 'fve " to mt ''„ fJ5r» ti15 <ic7 `SBr7st3 1' 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1583 1.00 1583 55 0.97 57 0 57 2% Perm 6 6 6 26.9 26.9 28.5 28.5 0.32 0.32 5.6 . 5.6 3.0 3.0 435 501 c0.25 0.04 0.74 0.78 0.11 19.8 28.0 21.8 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.9 8.9 0.1 12.1 21.5 36.8 21.9 B. C D C 21.5 34,7 C 3e �'�tT�ttn HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 20.5 0.76 90.1 73.2% 15 40.3 42.0 0.47 5.7 3.0 1580 c0.35 Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 2 26.9 28.5 0.32 5.6 3.0 203 0.02 0.07 21.6 1.00 0.2 21.7 HCM Level of SenAce 26.9 28.5 0.32 5.6 3.0 477 0.02 0.06 21.5 1.00 0.1 21.5 C C 21.5 c 2 26.9 28.5 0.32 5.6 3.0 462 0.02 0.05 21.4 1.00 0.0 21.4 C C 16.0 D M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 4 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1770 0.74 1375 330 0.97 340 0 0 2% Perm 0 0.97 0 0 340 2% i2 37: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) t f i - - r . Lane Group Flow v7c Ratio; (vph) 113 0`60 0 dg' : �tY 598 582 77 77 588 253 485 918 "0; 4 O. d' 'x:0.38 G.73 0.84 ° 0 40 309 1061 Control Delay 69.2 44.7 33.8 \ 75.4 51.9 14.9 46.9 39.1 38.8 40.0 Queue eiay `' ' 0 . 0 � 0.0 ` ' = ` " " 1 3 0 0:0 0.0 ° � D� - 0.0': 0 0 ' " ' Total Delay 69 2 44.7 35.1 75.4 Queue Length50th(tt). ` '88 ^ 230 °'3 `232 51.9 " 14.9 47.2 39.1 38.8 40.8 180 `340 10 ' 396 " Queue Length 95th (ft) #175 297 540 #132 #320 141 240 412 150 488 Internal Link bist(ft)' '; 528 " " , 14t5$ `" 300 279` Tum Bay Length (ft) 175 175 175 200 200 300 Base Caipacity (vph) ` 17r 874 " 754 ., 1 5 ° 754 0 693 0 ` 747 0 . 1238 0 825 0 0 - ° 12909 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 55 0 Spili6ackC'ap t ®ductn . 0 `` 0' 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red`uoedVellafio wi 0. 066 6.83 "0.82 078''-0.37 " .0.74 0.37' 0.86 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/04 t ` l Existing PM Peak Hour 37: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/04 r . 0 , e' .. Lane Configurations r Ideal•Flow (vphpl) ` 1900 • 1900.' 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane (itll. Factor 1.00 `0.95` 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 ' 1.00 Satd. Flow (prbt) 1736 3471 1553 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1736 3471 1553 Volume (vph) ' 110 580 565 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 113 598 582 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 113 598 582 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% Tum Type Prot pm +ov Protected Phases 7 4 1 Permitted Phases ' 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.4 26.8 47.6 EffecttveGreen;`g (s) =10.4. 27.6 49.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.25 0.45 Clearance Time (s) . 5.0 _' 5.0" 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 163 863 750 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.17 00.15 v/s Ratio Perm 0,22 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.69 0.78 Uniform Delay, d1 48.8 37.9 26.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.0 2.4 5.1 Delay (s) 60.8 40.3 31.0 Level of Service E 0 C Approach Delay (s) 37.9 Approach LOS D HCM 'Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle; Length (s) ;., ' Intersection Capacity Utilization Anafy`gls Period = ( c Critical Lane Group 41.3 0.81 111.0 77.9% 15 1 1. ++ r sf� 1't+ tt 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 ` 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.95 ` 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1736 3471 1553 3335 3406 3303 3366 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1736 3471 1553 3335 3406 3303 3366 75 570 245 470 835 55 300 950 80 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 77 588 253 485 861 57 309 979 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 588 253 485 918 0 309 1061 0 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% Prot pm +ov Prot Prot 3 8 6 1 5 6 2 8 5.2 22.4 47.1 21.0 34.5 24.7 38.2 6.2 ' 23.4 49.1 " 22.0 35.5 25.7 39.2 0.06 0.21 0.44 0.20 0.32 0.23 0.35 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 97 732 687 661 1089 765 1189 0.04 0.17 0.09 0.15 c0.27 0.09 c0.32 0.08 0.79 0.80 0.37 0.73 0.84 0.40 0.89 51.8 41.8 20.6 41.8 35.2 38.2 33.9 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 34.6 6.4 0.3 4.2 6.1 0.4 8.8 86. 48.0 21.0 46.0 41.2 36.5 42.7 F D C D 0 D D 43.8 42.9 41.3 D D 0 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service D 8.0 0 M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group a 1 15: Tukwila Pkwy & Andover Pk.W. -. { 4-- 4\ /' Lane Group Flow (vph) 790 328 457 446 306 'r57' 0.84 u= Control Delay 32.0 50.8 7.4 37.6 50.8 Queu'e'Delay 0.0'`' . 0.0 :'0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.0 50.8 7.4 37.6 50.8 QueueLength 50 th (ft) 252 -: ' ` 62 -13T - 199 Queue Length 95th (ft) 341 #337 87 186 #323 Internal LIInkOist (ft) 278 -489 783 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 225 Base apacity(v 1} , r119T 439",72179' 7888 410` Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Splfitieel ap Reductn " 0 0`�> 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio" � � 0.88 0 75" "0,21 ' 0.50 0.75 Existing- Saturday Mid -day Peak 11/29/04 # 95th percentile volume exceeds, capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 15: Tukwila Pkwy & Andover Pk.W. .yams Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Uhl. Factor FR Ftt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) The Transpo Group +1. 1900 4.0 0.95 0.93 1.00 2987 1.00 2987 Volume (vph) 385 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 AdJ. Flow (vph) 414 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 790 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% Tum Type Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 43.1 Effective Green, g (s) 44.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1198 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.66 Uniform Delay, d1 <' 26.8 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay: d2 2.9 Delay (s) 29.7 Level of Service C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS, 29.7 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group it6' , 'WE7Vtir"_i1ftvs7N813 1900 1900 1900 1900 ' 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 ' 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1608 3217 3152 1454 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1608 3217 3152 1454 350 305 425: 415 285 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 376 . 328 457 ` 446 306 0 0 0 0 0 0 328 457 446 306 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% Prot Perm 3 8 2 25.4 26.4 0.24 5.0 3.0 386 c0.20 0.85 39.9 1.00 15.9 55.8 E 33.6 0.76 110.0 66.2% 15 2 73.5 26.5 26.5 74.5 27.5 27.5 0.68 0.25 0.25 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2179 788 364 0.14 0.14 c0.21 0.21 0.57 0.84 6.7 36.0 39.2 1 .00 1.00 1.00 0.2' 0.9 15.9 6.9 37.0 55.1 A D E 27.3 44.3 C' :' 0 HCM Level of Service Sum of IOst time (s) ICU Level of Service Existing- Saturday Mid -day Peak 11/29/04 12.0 C M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila1LOS1Saturday Peak \Existing Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- TukwilalLOS \Saturday Peak\Existing Conditions- Saturday Mid-day.sy7 The Transpo Group 1 E 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. -- • •, t ti Lane Group Flow (vph) 282 125 38 158 v/c Ratio "> 053" b 45' "''0.12‘‘‘ Control Delay 20.9 22.3 19.7 6.2 ' 0 :0 Total Delay 20.9 22.3 19.7 6.2 Que1e , 42 °` » 35'' 710 Queue Length 95th (ft) 96 98 36 50 irrtema> chit' (ft) 181. ""' 388`° ° Tum Bay Length (ft) Bas'e'Capacity(vphr:' 954'. " 502 585 821 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 SpIft clitapRedtictn 0'? Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 ReendeitiVe ;:atiO 010 02 : ti1,0B "626 1 532 60 674 0.30 0.11- 0:45 12.3 6.0 15.7 '0.o 1):0 0.0 12.3 6.0 15.7 95 126 22 182 829.., ::. , ,., 783 75 2054 615 1879 0 0 0 0 0 f Existing- Saturday Mid -day Peak 11/29/04 0 0 0 0.26x'0.10` 0:36" M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Saturday Peak \Existing Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group F F' 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W, HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Anatysis Period' (min) c Critical Lane Group Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane U1il. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) 95 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 103 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 0% Turn Type Penn Protected Phases Pem ltted Phases '4 Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green; g '(s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance line: Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 v/c Ratio 0.62 Uniform Delay, d1 22.0 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.5 Delay (s) 24.5 Level 6f Service C Approach Delay (s) 24.5 Approach LOS 1900 r Mr 4 1900 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.97 1650 0.67 1139 120 60 55 0.92 0.92 0.92 130 65 60 0 0 0 0 0 125 0% 1% 1% Perm 8 8 9.8 9.9 11.0 11.0 0.19 0.19 5.2 5,1 3.0 3.0 457 213 dA 1900 4.0 0.95 0.93 '0.98 2970 0.81 2447 45 0.92 49 0 282 0% 0.11 0.59 21.9 1.00 4.1 26.0 C 24.6 C 13.2 HCM Level of Service 0.52 58.9 ; Sum of lost time (s) 57.5% ICU Level of Service 15 Existing- Saturday Mid -day Peak 11/29/04 r 'i 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 1.00 0.98 1,00" 0.95 1.00 1439 1608 3158 1.00 0.31 1.00 1439 517 3158 35 145 430 0.92 0.92 0.92 38 158 467 0 0 0 38 158 532 1% 1% 1% Perm pm +pt 5 2 8 2 9.9 35.8 27.8 11.0. 38.6 29.2 0.19 0.66 0.50 5.1 : 5.4 5.4 3.0 3.0 3.0 269 513 +1568 c0.05 0.17 0.03 0.15 0.14 0.31 0.34 20.0 4.4 9.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.2 0.3 0.1 20.2 4.7 9.1 C A A 8.1 A +t, 16.0 B M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Existing Conditions- Saturday MId- day.sy7 The Transpo Group t P L 1 -' 41368 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 ' 1.00 1593 3100 0.45 1.00 782 3100 60 55 510 110 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 65 60 554 120 0 0 0 0 0 60 674 0 1% 2% 2% 2% pm+pt 6 8 30.4 25.1 33.2 26.5 0.56 0.45 5.4 5.4 3.0 3.0 524 ,1395.• • 0.01 c0.22 0.05 0.11 0.48 5.8 11.4 1.00 1.00 0.1 0.3 5.9 11.7 B 11.2 8 26: Strander Bi vd. & Andover Pk.W. Lane Group Flow (vph) 214 568 214 161 Control Delay 74.7 38.1 39.4 56.4 Oueuetjelay, ``' °" `"0:0 "" 0.0. -'x,00 ''. Total Delay 74.7 38.1 39.4 56.4 Queue l:ertgtti {fE },.'' X183'" . 196"*71B6`. - 17i : Oueue Length 95th (ft) #307 267 223 191 I rile nia5 LnkbistIft}`: 128 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 100 Base Capacity (vph)`' - 258 ' 983 .' 44o :279. Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spiltback `Cap Reductn "b `` b " " 0 ' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c l7atio ``'' 0:89 " b 58 ;'`.0.49 :0;55' ti 791 245 515 250 713 0.91 °0 88 `0.69 0.86' 0:98` 48.7 69.0 44.9 62.5 55.5 .0,0 ° "' 48.7 69.0 44.9 82.5 55.5 - 107 187' `194 ° 187 285 #415 #333 257 #321 #404 990' `1789 829 " Existing- Saturday Mid -day Peak 11/29/04 t 1 • 943" 300 781 325 811 0 0 0 0 0 s °0` 0 0 0 0 0.84 "0.82' x'0:68 0.17 0.88 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity; queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS\Saturday Peak \Existing Conditions- Saturday MId- day.sy7 The Transpo Group 26: Strander Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. Lane Configurations tf Ideal Flow (vphpi) - 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1608 3217 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1608 3217 Volume (vph) 205 545 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 214 868 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 214 568 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Protected Phases 7 4 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 16.9 33.0 Effective.Green,'g (s) 16.9 33.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.29 Clearance Time (s) • 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane ;Grp 'Cap (vph), 242 947 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.18 v /s'Ratfo Perm,' v/c Ratio 0.88 0.60 Uniform 'Delay, d 1 48.6 33.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 InorementalDelay; d2 '29.4 1.0 Delay(s) 76.0 34.9 Level*, Service" E C Approach Delay (s) 43.5 ApProacif LOS D HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis; Period (Infra c Critical Lane Group ti r ` 1 t i'' `► 1 1 r `f +A 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 1439 1608 3090 1.00 0.95 ` 1.00 1439 1608 3090 205 155 560 0.96 0.96 0.96 214 161 583 0 0 0 214 161 791 1% 1% Perm Prot 3 8 4 33.0 33.0' 0.29 4.0 3.0 424 0.15 0.50 32.8 1.00 0.9 33.7 c 51.8 •. 0.87 112.1 86.8% 15 15.6 15.6 0.14 4.0 3.0 224 0.10 0.72 48.2 1.00 10.5 56.7 E 1% 31.7 31,7 0.28 4.0 3.0 874 c0.26 0.91 38.7 1.00 12.7 51.5 0 52.3 D 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1608 0.95 1608 200 235 0.96 0.96 208 245 O 0 O 245 1% 1% Prot 5 19.4 19.4 0.17 4.0 3.0 278 0.15 0.88 45.2 1.00 26.1 71.3 E HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service Existing Saturday Mid - day Peak 11/29/04 1900 4.0 0.95 0.96 1.00 3090 1.00 3090 365 0.96 380 0 515 1% 2 27.2 27.2 0.24 4.0 3.0 750 0.17 0.69 38.6 1.00 2.6 41.2 D 50.9 . 0 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1608 0.95 1608 130 240 0.96 0.96 135 250 O 0 O 250 1% 1% Prot 0.86 44.5 1.00 21.4 65.9 E 20.3 20.3 0.18 4.0 3.0 291 c0.16 12.0 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Existing Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group 4.0 0.95 0.95 1.00 3058 1.00 3058 460 0.96 479 0 713 1% 28.1 28.1 0.25 4.0 3.0 767 c0.23 0.93 41.0 1.00 17.4 58.5 E 60.4 E -.. 225 0.96 234 0 0 1% Arterial Level of Service: NB 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) Cross Street - Southcenter Blvd., (S:: IV Total IV Arterial Level of Service: SB 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) Tukwila Pkwy (SegmerlV Total IV Arterial Level of Service: NB 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) Crosst$trget Class Southcenter Blvd. (S. IV Total IV Arterial Level of Service: WB 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) rage cross, . =�Ctass x :Speed Ti Delay : ^ Time (s) `. Andover Park E (SegmlV 30 18.5. 1.7 20.2 Total IV 18.5 1.7 20.2 Arterial Level of Service: NB Andover Park E (Segment 11) Crgss Street Class; Costco Or. 111 ' Minkler Blvd. I Strander Br d. (Segm 111 -. ` III 66th Avenue Bridge( '111 Total 111 SS'Str+ BakerBlvd (Arterial;; 10 Strander Blvd. (Segm III Mlnkler Btvd.'(Segme Costco Dr. III 18dth: St. , (Segmein Ifl Total III Ime 30 18.5 18.5 Arterial Level of Service: SB Andover Park E (Segment 11) :ta 1siAi#e fens° 35 :. .10.4 17.1 ' •• . 27.5 - 0.06 ; 8.2 10.4 17.1 27.5 .35 35 35 35 22.3 21.6 61,4 30.4 16.4 152.1 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/2004 aR? ielay ` flrile (s) (mi) ; :.Speed. ..1105 41.5 51.9. . 0.06 4.4 F 41.5 51.9 0.06 4.4 F 0.06 M:104104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS\Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 8.2 0.10 6.4 0.10 6.4 i 9.1_ ; 31.4 0.19 21.3 38.1 59.7 0.17 10.2 53.7 115:1 0.51 16.0 5.6 36.0 0.25 25.3 26.6 ° -43.0. .;0.13" 10.8 133.1 285.2 1.25 15.7 F 7 °Ar3ehal '" R1fa1 0.10 18 4 . C 0.10 18.4 C ra e Delay .cTime (s) . ; ';a (mi) ;Speed! _ 'LOS 35 16.4. 5.5 21.9 0.13 21.1 C 35 30.4 42.6 73.0 0.25 12.5 E 35 61.4 34.1 95.5 0.51 " 19.3 C 35 21.6 5.6 27.2 . 0.17 22.3 C ' 35 ' 22.3 46.4 68.7 0.19 9.7 F 152.1 134.2 286.3 1.25 15.7 0 C E D B E Arterial Level of Service: NB Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Arferial ow w unning °; Toss Street , . Class Speed Time Mlnkler Blvd. (Segme 111 Strander Blvd. (Segm 111 Bakertivd. III Tukwila Pkwy (Segmerill Total ` 10 Arterial Level of Service: SB Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) iillif7 'IOW {"ra AtterTal i Delay: Tiree;(s)< m pe LQS 35 20.9 11.9 32.8 0.16 17.9 D 35 22.0 36.1 58.1 0.17 10.7 E 35 59.8 33.0 92.8 0.50 19.3 C 35 49.2 42.5 91.7 0.41 16.1 D 151.9 123.5 275.4 1.24 16.3 D Cross 'Street : ^ Gies Baker Blvd. 111 Strander Blvd. (Segm 111 Minkler Blvd. (Segme 111 S. 180th St. (Segmen 111 Total 111 Arterial Level of Service: EB Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) Cross Street' 53rd Av. S 111 Southcenter Pkwy (Se 111 Total III peed 30 30 35 49.2 35 59.8 35 22.0 35 20.9 151.9 "` "` ' .7To ir,12unhTng. Cioss.Streef .= �las's '' Speed �� Time 53rd Av. S 111 30 49.2 SR 518 WB Ramps (DWn 30 37.9 Total 10 87,1 to nri "fng ''Time 37,9 49.2 87.1 ='S197,iiir7 `ra"vel tRe1 'Arte'r at £ "A Delay •..Time >(s)', (mi) .Speed " 39.8 89.0 0.41 16.6 42.5 102.3 0.50 17.5 10.3 32.3 0.17 19.2 45.4 66.3 0.16 8.9 138.0 289.9 1.24 15.4 Arterial Level of Service: WB Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) Arterial Level of Service: EB Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) relay`:` ,Ti me'(s) 15.5 53.4 67.0 116.2 82.5 169.8 '" r , STg 7.4 56.6 0.0 37.9 7.4 94.5 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/2004 7rrAiiiff :(ml) „ 'Speed LOS 0.30 20.1 C 0.39 12.0 0.69 14.5 0 er(al L'OS D D C F D Drat ""'A+te far Arterial (m l) ..'Speed LOS 0.39 24.6 8 0.30 28.3 8 0.69 26.1 B ross r5tree1 Andover Pk.W. (Segmel Andover Park E (SegmIll Total 111 30 43.1 30 21.5 64.6 ST gnT • Delay: 45.6 35.0 80.6 (ma (s 88.7 56.5 145.2 (Fnt)', 0.34 0.16 0.50 M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 13.8 10.2 12.4 E E E Arterial Level of Service: WB Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) CrosS$treet Andover Pk.W..(Segmtil Southcenter Pkwy (Se III Total' :° fll s Arterial Level of Service: EB S. 180th St. (Segment 14) Cross' Street . Class' Andover Pk.W.. . _:.III Andover Park E (Segmlll W. Valley Highway SS III Total A 111 Dross Street Class:: W. Valley Highway (S• 111 Sperry Dr. III Andevei' per llSegmlll,:, Andover Pk.W. (Segmell SouthcenterPkwy (Se Ill Total 111 • " ross ' $t 17500 Block III S. 180th St. 111 Total III 30 35 21.5 45.6 . a r.' ..;r• b Tlnte.(s) 67.1 0.16 30 43.1 47.8 90.9 0.34 64.6 934 158.0 0.50 Delay " `Pirtle (s)`. 30.4 33.3 63.7 20.2 5.4 25.6 17.2 ` ;`15.1 32.3 15.5 44.7 60.2 83.3 98.5 '' 181.8 Arterial Level of Service: WB S. 180th St. (Segment 14) ! stay 'Time `(By l. 35.9 51.9 87.8 15.5 24.7 40.2 20.2 34.3 54.5 `:'80:4: -' 91.6 122.0 119.2 219.6 338.8 Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) Arterial Level of Service: SB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) la 20.9" .11.7 30.7 74.9 5'1.6 86.6 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- TukwilaULOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/2004 S 8.6 F 13.4 E 11,4 S. 0.30 12.3 E 0.11 10.3 E "0.13* 14.1„ .. '0 0.16 10.4 E '0.25 7.5 ' F 0.96 10.2 E Esc A'a crossstr`eat Clas Speed 11me� y .. Ttme( s) `' (m %' ;Speed 17500 - Block (Arteria J11 : �:•35 30.7 ; .14.0 ,... 44,7 _.•. :0.26 . 20.6 , C Minkler Blvd. (Segme III 35 20.9 8.4 29.3 0.16 20.1 C Total III, y: 51.6 22.4 74.0 0.42 20.4, C 0.16 18,0 0.26 8.7 0.42 10.9 E Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) Cross Street 'Class S.168th St. 111 Strander Blvd. (Segm III Total 111` Arterial Level of Service: SB Cros'S Sties S.168th St. Minkler Blvd. Total Arterial Level of Service: NB brossStreet G' Klickitat Dr. (Segme 111 Nordstrom Entrance/1 III Dummy Int III Total III Cross Street.:. Nordstrom Entrance /1 III Ktickttat Dr. (Segme III Strander Blvd. (Segm III Total III s Arterial Level of Service: SB 35 35 Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) ; iia '."r 13us t711Ti�g - �S TgnaT :T i"3e1'';: Class" .`Speed`' =' =_ Time' • Delay :' Time '(s)` III 35 25.3 5.2 30.5 III 35 34.1 4.1 38.2 III 59.4 9.3 68.7 Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 35 35 35 e 34.1 25.3 59.4 Ttrtr 8.3 10.5 31.3 50.1 Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) " tfi, tng ° Sfgna!'; ' 1'rflive `Speed . t...T(ma., ,Delay Time(s)' 35 31.3 17.0 48.3 35 10.5 33.4 43.9 35 8.3 3.2 11.5 50.1 53.6 103.7 Arterial Level of Service: EB Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) Cross:Street Class 61st PI S /Mall III Andover Pk.W. (Segm4ii Andover Park E (Segrnl!' W. Valley Highway (S III Total III 35 35 35 35 Tlfine' 31.3 12.3 24.3 35.1 103.0 r!at1` elay' Time (s 7.3 41.4 110.7 136.0 118.0 177.4 S fg"het .Delay 20.0 33.6 37.0 35.9 126.5 slay ::.=Time. (s) 2.6 10.9 19.7 30.2 4.8 36.1 27,1 77.2 'Tfayel Irhe 51.3 45.9 61.3 71.0 229.5 Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/2004 0.28 0.21 0.50 (mi) 0.06 0.07 0.26 0.39 0.26 0.07 0.06 0.39 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group ilia)! Peed. 24.7 5.6 10.1 19.0 8.6 26.0 18.2 0.26 18.3 0.09 7.2 0.20 11.9 0.29 14.8 0.85 13.3 rfetTaf LOS B F tSTst ° Ar)edat ARS1Weel (mi)'' , Speed '.'LOS 0.21 24.9 B 0.28 26. B 0.50 26.0 B effal LOS C F B C igitrrWeWl peed LOS. 19.4 C 5.9 F 18.0 C 13.6 E teia1 LOS, c F E D E 4 Total „ _ IV. Arterial Level of Service: WB Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) Arterial Level of Service: EB Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) Arterial Level of Service: WB Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) f M:\04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \Existing Conditions- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Existing PM Peak Hour 11/29/2004 P,r0s $tt68t ,.. glass yea " ... speed cn 7late eiayk. ,ride W: Valleylitgbway (S, I It �.; 35 61 ',"..15„4.<.;' , � 81.5' '. .''0,04; .off : Andover Park E (SegrMll 35 35.1 34.9 70.0 0.29 15.0 D Andover P?k.W: 1Begmhll . , 35 .. 2413 789 63 6'.' .020 ; . 11; it 61st PI S/Mall . .111 35 12.3 28.2 40.5 0.09 8.1 F Souths9nter Pfcw (Se nI _ 35 x 31:3 ' .' T8 2 • 7 '409.5 `- .'•': 0.26 ' Total 111 109.1 255.9 365.0 0.89 8.8 F l'ossStreet. ; :;. - .Glass'- Speed . ° tLlatt{ C38iay rfene,(sk 61st Ave, Bridge (Se IV ' , 65.4 ''.,• 1-405 NB On -Ramp IV 35 17.7 9.0 26.7 0.11 And0Y6fR'' W tSegmeV . ': 8.5 : `'32.2 41 '7 ' 0.06 Andover Park E (SegmIV 35 25.1 20.9 46.0 0.19 Total , . _' 1V " ..';' 72.8 , ,, 107.0 ,479.8 r: ' :: 0.48 6.8 14.5 5:0 15.1 C 9.7 D F C prossStreet Cass 'Speed dime 9etey AndoverPk.W, (Segmey ` ;' 35 ,,' 251. • ,,x'7.5; 32.6 �l 0.19 • 21.4 B 1-405 NB On -Ramp IV 35 9.5 19.0 28.5 0.06 7.2 61st'Ave;r1dge (Se "1V . x.35 ' `177 ' ' 30,5. .',48.2 ~'0.11 8.0 E Dummy Int IV 35 20.5 4.8 25.3 0.12 17.7 C 728 .,'.:618 .:134.6. 0.48•, 12.9 D 3: SR 518 WB On -Ramp & 51st Ave S Lane Configurations Sign Corifrol ` Grade 0% Voiuriie (vehhi) ' 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 I�durlq)foW rate (vpt) a' Pedestrians LaneWty(dth ('itY Walking Speed (ft/s) Percentflookege Right turn flare (veh) Medtan type :N■ne Median storage veh) Upstream'stgna((ft }`' pX, platoon unblocked . vC; conflict�lg:vclume'� ";2495'.; vC1, stage 1 conf vol • vC2; slags 2 oorlf"+7o1 vCu, unblocked vol 2415 tC; "sln9Te(s) 13:4 tC, 2 stage (s) tF(s 71:3` p0 queue free % 100 100 oM cap tiNeehA 0 7.7 8 0 0 ; 0 0.85 Free 0% 845 155 0.85 0.85 "994 '182 34d ," 276 244 276 4.1 ,. Volume Total„ • . 1176:y ,276 .;',. Volume Left 994 0 Volume'RighfS ' 9n 65 : cSH 1292 1700 Volume ti3 �apaofty" "'‘ - 7.0;167.r Queue Length 95th (ft) 205 0 Colltro)roetaY (a) 16:o,µ a a Lane LOS C APproacti'13elay ( s)- 1B.0" ' 0.0 Approach LOS J 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Free 0% 180 55 0.85 0.85 212 85 ' Average Delay 13.0 Mteisect)or Ga'paci*ytjtiliiatian Analysis Period (min) 15 M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 4: SR 518 EB Off - Ramp & Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) ti t t 4/ Lane Configurations r + Free Free 0% 0% 755 0 955 185 0 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 821 0 1038 201 0 Sign Control Stop Grade 0% Volume (veh/h) 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (fVs) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1061 514 pX, platoon unblocked 0.37 vC, conflicting volume 1239 201 201 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu. unblocked vol 1641 201 201 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 35 3 100 cM'capacity(veh/h) 42 845 1377 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right cSH Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (a) Lane LOS Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS intelieWi Suirrn* Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 27 821 27 0 0 821 42 845 1700 1700 0.65 0.97 0.81 0.12 60 402 0 0 191.4 46.4 0.0 0.0 F E 51.1 F 1038 0 0 . 20.8 63.2% 15 201 0 0 0.0 0.0 ICU Level of Service M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 B ere Lane Group Flow (vph) v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue'Delay Total Delay (luaus tetigtti SOth'(ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) InterriarL'inkDTst(ft) Tum Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn SPlllbaeiCCap liertuctn Storage Cap Reductn Raduced v/o F2Mio' Volume exceeds capacity; queue is theoretically,int7nke. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # `95th "pdicen8le "volume e e ei s capacity; queue'may be longer.' Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m VolumeTor 95tnl erce'ntlte gtiiii* s'me'teFed`Sy;upstream'sig* 2010 Baseline Conditions 7: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 17) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) 11/29/2004 813 1874 278 874 1409 1.58;_ 186" ` "1.44 ,'' 0.58 1.03 290.8 325.3 255.7 25.6 49.3 0.0' " 201.6 820.5 0.0 81.0 290.8 526.9 576.2 25.6 130.4 -738;' .-992 2246 28 - 518 #968 0/1142 m 4369 m270 m448 431 "352 250 520 1129 . "193' 1512 1368 0 0 0 0 216 07. 240 64 0 0. , 0 0 0 0 0 1.587 211 2.16 0.58 1.22''" M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Miitefne . Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permfted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted'Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (4' Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp. Cap (vph), v/s Ratio Prot 7: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 17) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1676 1.00 1676 805 0.99 813 0 813 2% Intersection Capacity Utilization AnalysisPerkad (min),; . c Critical Lane Group 1900 4.0 0.88 0.85 1.00 2508 1.00 2508 1855 0.99 1874 0 1874 2% Over 2 1900 4.0 1,00 1.00 0.95 1608 0.95 1608 275 0.99 278 0 278 1% Prot 3 44.0 11,0 45.0 12.0 0.45 0.12 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 1129 193 c0.75 c0.17 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.95 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00. 0.96 3217 3039 1.00. 0.96 3217 3039 865 1270 125 0.99 0.99 0.99 874'. 1283 126 0 0 0 874:'1409 0 1% 3% 30.0 31.0 0.31 5.0 3.0 520 c0.48 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.56 1.66 1.44 0.58 1.03 Uniforni Delay, dt 34.5 , 27.5 44.0 19.3 27.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.24 0.88 Increitiental Delay, d2r; ; 262,8 300.9 221.2 0.5 "" 23.9 Delay (s) 297.3 328.4 265.8 24.4 48.1 Level of Service F' C >' ' D • , Approach Delay (s) 319.0 82.6 48.1 Approach LOS 46.0 47.0 0.47 5.0 3.0 1512 0.27 2 44.0 45.0 0.45 5.0 3.0 1368 0.46 3% HCM:AverageControl,0elay .;;194.4, • HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.60 Actuated'Cycre t ength (s} a 1000,`" Sum of lost 01'66 8> 118.6% ICU Level of Service M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 2010 Baseline Conditions 9: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 18) & 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) 11/29/2004 4 \ r Lane Group Flow (vph) 1006 859 1006 329 912 v /cl etto' .. "1:'11 -" X1.14` Q3971;04' '0.51 Control Delay ,. 107.6 5.2 105.9 8.6 Queue Delay 0.0 =' 0.0 '" "^0.0 0;0' 0.0` Total Delay 77.8 107.6 5.2 105.9 8.6 Oueue Length 50th (ft) -400: 4643 ' ''103 -233 118 Queue Length 95th (ft) m251 #800 120 #375 143 Internet bist (ft) " " 1202"? '.:'267 ` 212 "' Tum Bay Length (ft) 250 200 Base Capacity (vpti)`" .. "903"x` `753"x' ', 315 1794 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spilfba&CapReductn "'.0' " ''.0'''.' 0 ' ''0':' 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reeucedv /C Ratio ,' 1:11 ' 0.39 ' 1.04 0.51' " - Volume exceeds capacity,; queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # '95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m" Vol"umA for 95th' percentife'queu®13 metered.bX upstream signal. ao n: P1 '.. ' M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 9: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 18) & 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) 11/29/2004 Faove t Lane Configurations 4 . Ideal Flow (vphpl) " 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane UtII. Factor 0.95 Frt 0.98 Fft Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3343 Flt Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3343 Volume (vph) 750 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 882 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1006 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 6% Tum Type Protected Phases 2 Permitted' Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 25.3 Effective Green, g (s) 27.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 5.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 903 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 vis Ratfo,Penn . v/c Ratio 1.11 Unlforrn Delay, d1 36.5 Progression Factor 0.63 Incremental Delay, -d2. ; 53.0 Delay (s) 76.0 Level of Service .; E Approach Delay (s) 76.0 Approach LOS E >; 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1752 0.95 1752 105 730 0.85 0.85 124 859 0 0 0 859 6% 3% Prot 1 42.0 43.0 0.43 '5.0 3.0 753 c0.49 1.14 28.5 1.00 78.9 107.4 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3505 1.00 3505 855 0.85 1006 0 1006 3% 5 5 72.3 74.0 0.74 5.7 3.0 2594 0.29 Mr 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1752 2760 0.95 1.00 1752 2760 280 775 0.85 0.85 329 912 0 0 329 912 3% 3% pt +ov 8 8 17.0 64.0 18.0 65.0 0.18 0.65 5.0 3.0 315. 1794 c0.19 0.33 0.39 1.04 0.51 4.7 ' 41.0 9.1 1.00 1.17 0.83 0.1 ? 59.0 0.2 4.8 106.9 7.8 A F A 34.1 yi .. HCM Average Control Delay: HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 52.5 HCM Level of Service 1.11 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 90.0% ICU Level of Service M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group D 12.0 E I t r 13: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) J' _♦ ~ 4 �. J Lane Group Flow (vph) 651 565 226 855 1339 973 v/e Ratio` z ` t S2 1 70 "0.43 0.96 ' `1 Control Delay 278.2 132.4 21.5 3.3 16.8 53.2 Ctueue delay 0.6 `„ 0 6 ' 0.0 0.0 > 156.1' 99.'7 Total Delay 278.2 132.4 21.5 3.3 172.9 152.9 Queue Length 30t1i'(ft) ;300 `'_ - 433` `?` 65 19 350'" ° =708 Queue Length 95th (ft) #411 #639 104 163 m91 m53 Internet Link Dist (ft) 121' ' '487 252: ' Tum Bay Length (ft) 200 275 200 Baia Capacity(vph)' " 898 ''" Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 405 157 SpillbacktapReductn ' 0 "::` 0`;'13 > 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced\! /c Ratio:'` 1.52'" 1 17 0.46" 0 44 1 :1.31 - Volume exceeds ,capacity, queue is theoreticafty infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # - "95th peroentile "volume exceeds eapeclty, queue may be longer, Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. m ' "Vorumefor 95t1 ` percent8e'queue is Metered . b upstream signal 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle'Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 13: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) Lane Configurations yi ♦ T Irr Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane'OtII. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3060 1660 1693 2533 Fit Permitted 0:95 ' 1:00'' 1.00 ° 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3060 1660 1693 2533 Volume (vph) 605 525 210 795 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 651 565 226 855 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 651' , 565 226 855 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% 3% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot pt +ov Protected Phases 3 1 1 1 2 Permitted phases Actuated Green, G (s) 13.0 28.0 28.0 77.0 Effective Green, g (s) 14.0 29.0 29.0 78.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.29 0.29 0.78 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph). .. 428 " 481 491 1976 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 c0.34 0.13 0.34 v/s Ratio Perris' v/c Ratio 1.52 1,17 0.46 Uniform belay ,41; > _ :43.0`; . 35:5' `29.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.63 Incremental Delay, d2:''246.2 98.6.. :0;6 Delay (s) 289.2 134.1 18.9 Level ' of Service;';: F' Approach Delay (s) 217.1 6.1 APpIoaCh LOST" F A 0.43 0.96 3.7 28.7 0.71 0.46 0.1 2.6 2.7 15.0 r 1900 ' 1900 4.0 4.0 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 3090 1425 0.95 1.00 3090 1425 1245 " 905 0.93 0.93 1339 973 0 0 1339 973 2% 2% pt +ov 2 23 44.0 62.0 45.0 63.0 0.45 0.63 5.0 3.0 1391. 898 0.43 c0.68 1.08 18.5 0.49 39.8 48.8 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 A B. D 29.2 C 73.4 ° HCM Level of Service 1.16 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 81.4% ICU Level of Service 15 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group E 8.0 D e 4. m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal. M:\04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila‘LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 14: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 1-405 NB On-Ramp 11/29/2004 , r 4- k • 4 \ Lane Group Flow (vph) 351 856 293 69 840 410 186 207 'We Ratki '‘' 6:41 0.3i 0.48 ' 0.52 - 033 - 7012 Control Delay 12.2 3.5 3.3 6.5 18.5 21.7 36.3 46.3 01:ItitieDiTaY - 0.0.0' '0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.2 3.5 3.3 6.5 19.8 24.3 36.3 46.3 2W 226"'' Queue Length 95th (ft) m27 m81 m46 m20 m295 m300 82 198 Interifal 223 99 Tum Bay Length (ft) 175 125 125 150 175 BeSiCaPaCity (iroh) "^ 56V298 '939\'' 412 1760 '787 662' '341 - Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 656 256 0 0 SpillhiCktifiReduCtri 0' CC' 7. `' 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Riaiiciiiiiilalkatal' 0:76 0:26' 0.6i oterattoorraprorratai7r7,,,..., rr 14: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 1-405 NB On-Ramp r 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 4- k- 4\ t /4 `. 1 1 o ode - Ir`swarwerweArt7Ntorrs't3r7rarTatm Lane Configurations +4 r '1 ft r IdeafFlow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. rector 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 • 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1593 3185 1425 1608 3217 1439 3152 1624 Flt Permitted 0.25 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 422 3185 1425 560 3217 1439 3152 1624 Volume (vph) 330 805 275 65 790 385 175 130 65 0 0 0 Peak-hour factor. PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (Vph)' 351'' 856 293 69 840 410 186 138 69 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)' 351 856 293 69 840 410 186 207 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Tum Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 73.3 63.8 63.8 58.2 53.7 53.7 16.7 16.7 Effective Greer, g (s). 74.3 64.8' 64.8 60,2 54.7 54.7 17.7 17.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.65 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.55 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time(s) ;^' 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0' 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 496 2064 923 395 , 1760 787 558 287 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.27 0.01 0.26 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.42 0.21 0.10 0.28 c0.13 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.41 0.32 0.17 0.48 0.52 0.33 0.72 Unlforie Delay, d1 • 7:1 ‘ 8.5' 7.8 8.3 13.9 14.3 36.0 38.8 Progression Factor 1.22 0.38 0.37 0.96 1.11 1.13 1.00 1.00 Iliceementil Delay, dl 0.4 01 „OA 0.1 0.6 1.7 ^ 0.4 8.6 Delay (s) 9.1 3.3 3.0 8.1 16.0 17.8 36.3 47.4 Loire( &Service A A A 8 B' Approach Delay (s) 4.6 16.2 42.2 Approach LOS A 0 M:\04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 0.0 A HCM Average Control Delay .13.9 HCM Levet of Service . B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Lorigth (s) '109,0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 . ' • Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.8% ICU Level of Service Analysts Period (mln) 15 c Critical Lane Group 4 k J 15: Tukwila Pkwy iSegment 9) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) f 4 \ e Lane Group Flow (vph) 1200 361 694 811 344 v/c Ratio " = c, '`F'- ;tl1• ':05 -0.S3 '¶°06'' ' Control Delay 54.3 103.8 7.5 86.9 80.8 Queueb®taq' " „' ""W0` QA `' 0.1 "`13:4 ' 0.0 Total Delay 54.3 103.8 7.7 100.3 80.8 Queue "Length SOtir(ft) 4423" -257 ? 87 ' -294 ' ' ' 218 Queue Length 95th (ft) #561. #434 116 #412 #397 tnfertial = Chlebist (ft)';. ;'223'; ' 941 '783," Bay Length (ft) 150 225 Base`Ciapaeity( "vph) : "1186` 344" °'2093 765` 353 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spietiack "Cap'R ductn 0'. 0" x489 ` `24 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reducedv /oRatio``? , ,'(.01' ,1:05 ' 0.43 '109' 0.97 PltteFSeFtOYnTi5�4t Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 3l " 95tt1` pei ceri((te voTuma eofzeecls`capacky, 4ueue' be longer: Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \L0S \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 15: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) ko+ieme Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Uhl. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Ftt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1900 4.0 0.95 0.93 1.00 2892 1.00 2892 545 Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 608 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1200 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% Tum Type Protected Phases 4 Pennitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 40.0 Effective Green, g (s) 41.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 Clearance Time (s) . 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) ; 1186 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 v/s RBtfo Perri' x v/c Ratio 1.01 Uniform Delay, d1 29.5 Progression Factor 0.82 Incremental Delay, d2 28.6 Delay (s) 52.8 Level of Service 0 Approach Delay (s) 52.8 Approach LOS D' HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1562 0.95 1562 535 325 0.90 0.90 594 361 0 0 0 361 4% 4% Prot 3 8 2 21.0 22.0 0.22 5.0 3.0 344 c0.23 1.05 39.0 1.10 61.2 104.2 F 59.7 1.04 100.0 89.0% 15 :': 19 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3124 1.00 3124 625 0.90 694 0 694 4% 0.33 7.0 1.00 0.4 7,4 A 40.6 D 1900 4.0 0.97 1.00 0.95 3060 0.95 3060 730 0.90 811 0 811 3% 1.06 37.5 1.00 49.7 87.2 F 84.4 F ' 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1411 1.00 1411 310 0.90 344 0 344 3% Perm 2 66.0 24.0 24.0 67.0. 25.0 25.0 0.67 0.25 0.25 5.0' 5.0 '5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2093;' 785 353 0.22 c0.27 0.24 0.97 37.2 1.00 40.8 77.9 E HCM Level of Service, Sum of lost time(s) ICU Level of Service M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 12.0 41 16: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) -• r 4 Lane Group Flow (vph) 857 250 378 398 444 v /c.Rattd' 0.+897; b61 6.85 0.40 Control Delay 18.2 10.8 3.6 32.6 14.8 Queue etay 0.0� "00 .''0.0`. `b:0 ' OA Total Delay 18.2 10.8 3.6 32.6 14.8 Queue' Length 50th {ft) 208 42' ':' f ' ' 2 }3 ' "162 " Queue Length 95th (ft) m268 m40 m15 275 192 Internaltink"bist(fir 9d1'" 9' "' 168 Tum Bay Length (ft) 250 Base . CaOac(ty(vph)'. "1234'' .410' 2636' ° sot Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn_ 0 0 0 0 0 Reducetivicttatt 0:69' 70:65 ` 0.49 " m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 16: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) -• r' r (9'OVemer" g "° .: a l a `"EB W B'1 ""NBr"Nall Lane Configurations $.p 4? 1 1 r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Uhl. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3434 1752 3505 1787 1599 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3434 343 3505 1787 1599 Volume (vph) 620 220 245 370 390 435 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj, Flow (vph) 633 224 250 378 , 398 444 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane GrOup Flow (vph) 857 0 250 378 ' 398 , 444 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% 1% Tum Type ' pm +pt Protected Phases 4 3 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 34.2 56.9 EtfectIve Green, g (s) 35.9 57.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.58 Clearance Time (s) 5.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1233 452 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.55 Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 ' 25.1 Progression Factor 0.57 0.36 Incremental' Delay, d2 0.8 ' 0.1 Delay (s) 16.3 9.1 LevefofSeMCe B . A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS _ :; HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) = c Critical Lane Group 15.8 0.62 100.0 69.3% 15 . pm +ov 8 2 3 2 56.2 33.1 50.1 57.9 34.1 52.1 0.58 0.34 0.52 5.7 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2029 609 897 0.11 c0.22 0.09 0.19 0.19 0.65 0.49 9.9 27.9 15.5 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.0 :: 2.5, 0.4 3.3 30.5 15.9 A> C 5.6 22.8 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS\Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 B 8.0 C 18: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & 53rd Av. S r 4 \ M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transco Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 918 152 984 142 v/c Ratio ` 0:87 _0 d3 0.76 " 0.49 Control Delay 17.7 6.5 9.1 39.2 Queue elay `` 6,0 Total Delay 17.7 6.5 9.1 39.2 Queue C2ngtti 50th (ft) 549'" 18 = "219 64 Queue Length 95th (ft) 653 44 464 168 Internat 'Link blst(ft)` 100' 172:7257' Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Cap8ctty (vphr ' 1324 ' 389' : 1524 447 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Sp6ltijiat Gap 2ediiotn 0 °.; 0 ` :-'' 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Redtleit V O Baba :, 083 ` 039" 68S "032 18: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & 53rd Av. S -► 1 r '- 1 r Lane Configurations A I + Y Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 .. 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utli- Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.89 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 r,, 0.99 Satd. Flow (prat) 1856 1787 1881 1606 Pt Permitted 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (pens) 1856 183 1881 1606 Volume (vph) 760 85 140 905 20 110 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 828 ' 92 152 984 ` 22 120 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 918 0 152 984 142 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% 1% 4% 4% Tum Type pm +pt Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 43.0 53.6 53.6 12.7 8ffective t3reen g 4). 44.0 ' 54.6: 54.6 13.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.72 0.72 0.18 Clearance Tlrtie(s). s 5.0 5.0' 5.0 ; 5.0 '" Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)' 1070 270 1346 288 v/s Ratio Prot c0.49 0.05 c0.52 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.35 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.56 0.73 0.49 Uniform Delay, d1 13.5 13.2 6.5 28.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.0. ' '" 2.7 2.1 ' 1.5 Delay (s) 20.5 15.9 8.6 29.5 Level of Service > C B A C Approach Delay (s) 20.5 9.5 29.5 Approach LOS C; A C HCM Average Control Delay 15.4 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated; Cycie'Length (s) " 76.3 Sum of lost time (s). Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% ICU Level of Service Analyalp`Perlod.(rmin) ` " 15 c Critical Lane Group M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transco Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 B;. 12.0 C 19:1-5 SB On -Ramp & Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) r < t p `► 1 Lane Configurations SgnCoMiol $tops ' Free Free Grade 0 % 0 % 0% Volume (veh7h)'` 0 b 1020 745 80 .' 870 , • Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourij�'tlowrate vph) 'G 'r '" r0 - ..1097" . , 801 86` °935 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) ' ' Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Bklckage " "'" Right tum flare (veh) Medla'n t .` N lone Median storage veh) llpstreair'slgnat(R) 1018 pX, platoon unblocked 0.58 vC; conflicttr>g volume' ` 2204` 109T `` • vCl, stage 1 conf vol v0�; `stage � cool vol, ;, vCu, unblocked vol 3072 1097 tG� singCB (s) 6'4;`. tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % Volume Total ,, .1097 801. , 86 , ` 935: ;, Volume Left 0 0 86 0 VohTr &Rtghr' ... ' 0 :•, $01,<vh". 0 k ` „ cSH 1700 1700 318 1700 VotUnle 07p pieft 70:65 :0:4T . 7 , 4:27r" t1;'SS Queue Length 95th .(ft) 0 0 27 0 ContitfDelaY . :0;0 ., 7 ;0': 1 0 4 ' 0 0 Lane LOS C 40.6. WRCeliiy10 71.47. ;`:iy Approach LOS 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 3.5 100 100 262 Average Delay 0 6 Intefsectioit Capaclit? t)tlllzatfon' :641895 , ; ' ICL) Levelof Service Analysis Period (min) 15 The Transpo Group 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) t 1 t \► Crri" ou `° il ia`t'r'" )TOR"1413t t∎Terw SBL`' "Taint Lane Group Flow (vph) 351 159 74 142 821 47 745 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.19 0.31 0.54 0.12 0.67 Control Delay 21.2 25.1 18.4 12.3 14.4 9.9 19.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.2 25.1 18.4 12.3 14.4 9.9 19.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 60 52 21 19 72 6 120 Queue Length 95th (ft) 98 108 50 46 212 19 192 Internal Link Dist (ft) 181 229 829 783 Tum Bay Length (ft) BaseCapacity (vph) 750 338 470 464 1578 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/e Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.16 0.31 f 0.52 75 382 0 0 0 0.12 1212 0 0 0 0.61 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOSlWeekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group f off 1 2010 Baseline Conditions 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 f -0 ■, ! 4- k- t 17. 131717Rtir .."!881. ^ 51:7758 Lane Configurations 4t.. 4 r 1 +7, 1 +1. leleatFlqW(iOhP1)7 ''''190Cr. 1900 ''19001'000' T1900 '.1000''''1900 1906 '1900 . 1900 1900 ' 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Linattir:FaCt6ir,' : ' ' ' ' 'f,00'''' 1.00 '1.60 •.t)''.95' 'T . t.00 . - 0:95 2 . Frt 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 nfi %'. ' ''':',••• ' 0'.97 - :l00 , •:','' 0.95 , '`1,00" :•," - - '095 ' 1.06 Satd. Flow (prot) 2962 1607 1411 1593 3158 1547 3007 „ Flt Pineritted' ' ,-• 7 , ':` 0:517 - 1 : 0 0 7 . " . 621 - -.'1.0tr: - ' ' • ' • ' ' . ' 6:24' ' ' 1 . 0 0 . Satd. Flow (perm) 2280 949 1411 454 3158 393 3007 Voinnie 00) ' ' '168"::' 41. ''.'s'124..: 100 , , :• 51' .770 • '135 " ;.735 ;." •: 45 ,'' - 45 ' 575 , 133 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adt. Ptini(ititt)r''''''",177„ " 43 ': '"'"13 t 7;10 ' ';'54'. ' '•• 774 I' 47 47 5,0' ''•? 140 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Liiiiitialif...00v 077$5f7: 7 0 ; '0 •": ; .: 47 ' • 746,':,,7:0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 pieinitteirimeies<t: '74 • :7,77 .•'-'.• ' ,', '.: 8 ' '7" ' ""8" ' .. 2' ''. ' ',, '.. , 6:' , :: .,',,,`••• • ' Actuated Green, G (s) 13.7 13.8 13.8 33.7 24.9 22.4 19.0 Orectiviiditivakeils) ‘. 25:2. ' '204 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.61 0.45 0.43 0.35 liliiitaalTifftaltiY 2 ,7 ‘•:.1:;;":"':;,817:-.7;'''''.5'.4,7747T•7 `:::7 8.4 5.4 '-'":„,:: " • Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 t. ‘ '1432 '''. , • ".: vis Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.26 0.01 c0.25 7'.'7:77: 6o:f7 : , 0.1z : -.'...-: .' -, . 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.60 0.65 0.20 0.29 0.57 0.18 0.70 Unifortel:telai.:4 9:7':. 11:7 ' . ‘ 14.2 ''. 16:2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ii6ri t iri ;entiireelliy?d 2 7 7 7 , r ,:,-- :7 1 777? , 7'.: - .77• < '•At.::''A3.3, --, '0'.3 . '• ' ‘0:6" . ' • ' 0.3 2.2 ' Delay (s) 20.6 25.3 17.2 10.0 12.3 14.5 18.4 LiiiiiirorS09;10C' A. ' " .; la:: ... '1;';' - ',.,. 8 s" •.•;132: Approach Delay (s) 20.6 22.8 11.9 18.1 ktitiroqq "'• '',C7?7,74:• • .,:•: • •,.: a :';;' '•:"; :''..".: ,'•:;15.. HCM Average dontro o Service' HCM Volume to Capacityratio 0.57 • Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.1% ICU Level of Service • c Critical Lane Group MA04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS\Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group • 2010 Baseline Conditions 21: Nordstrom Entrance/I-5 NB Off Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 11/29/2004 Eimmuotr twrrigtryncricirrrvir7strrwr Lane Group Flow (vph) 281 57 246 220 983 129 990 v/c Ratio 0.88 0.04 0.88 0.84 0.63 0.77 0.60 Control Delay 62.8 0.1 64.9 62.4 17.9 54.3 20.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.2 Total Delay 62.8 0.1 64.9 62.4 18.6 54.3 20. Queue Length 50th (ft) 174 0 160 142 247 66 234 Queue Length 95th (ft) #314 0 #301 #270 m253 #182 301 internal Link Dist (ft) 54 179 301 389 Tum Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 332 1454 293 273 1562 187 1643 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 54 0 0 0 0 121 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vic Ratio ' 0.85 0.04 0.84 0.81 0.75 0.77 0.65 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. M:\04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS\Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 21: Nordstrom Entrance /I -5 NB Off Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 11/29/2004 -- ti C < t t ‘* 1 4 . 4 r 4) � '1900�' 1900'.19'00`'1900' 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 100 X100 F 0.95 .; 0.95' 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.90 1881 1454 1543 1437 1661 1454 1543 1437 113 55 308 0 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 7"446 0 0 0 0 0 281= " �' '57-''.246. :220 0% 0% 0% 0% Free = :'Spltt, 4 8 `Free 18.7 100.0 17.7 17.7 192 °''1000'" 18.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 1.00 0.18 0.18 Clearance 11me (s" d'5 d:5 4.5`.` Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 _ 3.0 3.0 Lane "Grp Cap (vph) 319 '��1454 �'' "281`, v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.16 0.15 v/s RatioP'erm 004 i; v/c Ratio 0.88 0.04 0.88 0.84 Uniform belay, d4 398 ` 0 0 .:39 39 5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental 0aIaj °d2, 23 8 ' 4 ' 24:7 ..20 4.' Delay (s) 62.7 0.1 64.5 59.9 Approach Delay (s) 52.2 62.4 Approach')LOS U E Lane Configurations Ideal Fkiiv (vphp0 1900: Total Lost time (s) Larie Litlt't actor , ' Frt Ftt P otected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Pennitted .` Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph)' 160 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 AdJ 1'Inw;(vp}t) .; ` °' w "165 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane roup Flow (vph) "`;0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 0% Tum Type, Split- Protected Phases 4 Permitted Actuated Green, G (s) Effective` Green, g(s) • HCM'Ayerage Control Delay. ; . • HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated;Cycie1blittik(s F°`. Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis'i4erlo4' thth' �, ; c Critical Lane Group B'13 1900:. 1900 1 9 000 , ° 1900 "1900";,199 0 ;' 4900 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 160 - 0.95 3091 1624 3249 1.00 0.20 '1.00 3091 342 3249 144 0 ' 765 188. 125 960 %. 0 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 148" ' "` 0 789'° '194' 129 ` 990 : ': 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " 0 983 ' 0' ; 129 990 0 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% Perm ;,HCM,LevelofServtce 0.80 400 0 Sum of',lost °ttme'(s)' 84.3% ICU Level of Service 15 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 50.1 50:8 0.51 3 . 0 '1564 0.32 0.63 0.87 1`l" 17.2 17.2 50.1 50.1 50.6 50:6 0.51 0.51 4.5 »'4.6 3.0 3.0 173 ..1644 0.30 80.38 \ 0.75 0.60 19.6. 17:5 • 1.00 1.00 , 25.0. 1.6'`ti:: 44.6 19.2 22.1 22: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) put au Lane Group Flow (vph) v/c Ratio ' Control Delay Queue delay Total Delay 79.2 44.4 125.8 4.0 98.0 18.7 QueUeLength 50th ($):._ "158' ^475 22'' 7 -305" 136' Queue Length 95th (ft) #306 #528 m389 m63 m#411 m #201 Internal Link Dtst (ft) 153 Turn Bay Length (ft) 175 Base Capacity (vph) 272 891 1102 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 166 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 179 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.92 1.02 1.23 e t ,13R 250 729 1154 686 830 537 0.92 0.82 1.05 0.35 1.04 0.81 79.2 22.2 47.0 2.9 63.4 18.5 GO "22:2. 78.8 10" 34.6 0.2 95 301 300 1951 800 661 953 0 35 ` 63 0 0 0.69 1.13 6 0 0 0.82 -. Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl. Tukwila \LOS\Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 22: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) ti 4\ 1 1 4' Lane Configurations l•F1ow' (vphpl)� 0" 1 180800 Idea 1800 'F'1800 71860 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 LaneUtil "Factor 0.95 1 00 ` Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protested . 0.95; T 1.00'`" 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1509 1350 2505 2636 3078 1377 Flt Permitted 0.95. t 00 "``0 95 '1.00 :1.00 "�. 1.00 Satd.FIow(perm) 1509 1350 2505 2636 3078 1377 Volume (vph) .> 235: 685 ".-,1085 ' ";645 ; 780" Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Add FIow(vph) ,' .. ' ' : 250 ' " 729 tt54 7,,`686 w' ..M. `537,•".` „ .. .,.: RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Gioup Flow:(vph)' 250' 729°:: "?1154" 'Wes. 537" • Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% • 2% 2% 0% 0% Tum•Type Pm+oV''' Prot . • . ; 4 pm ►ov Protected Phases 5 3 3 8 4 5 Perm'itied'Phases 5 Actuated Green, G (s) 18.0 62.0 44.0 74.0 26.0 44.0 EffectfVe Green, g (s) 18.x" 62.0 '44.0 .74:0 26:0 ° �`�44:0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.62 0.44 0.74 0.26 0.44 Clearance Time (s)'' "' 4.0' 40 " 4:0 4.0 4.0' Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) '• 272 ' 891: 1102'' •1951 800 .- 661 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.36 c0.46 0.26 c0.27 0.15 v /s'Ratio'Renn 0,18 • ` 0,24 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.82 1.05 0.35 1. 0.81 Uniform Delay, d�f7 '" 40 :3 14.7' :28 0 `;�46 7.0 ` 24.4` Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.62 0.62 0.40 Incremental0elay, d2 33:5';' 5.9 .• 2a 1 •^ '" 0.'0 °' 38.2 "' 5.9 '. Delay (s) 73.8 20.6 45.1 2.9 61.1 15.8 Level Approach Delay (s) 34.2 293 43.3 APproach1.05 ^ V:.. L �' a HCM'Average control Delay s,. ', HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated 'Cycle Length (s1, Intersection Capacity Utilization AnalysisPer)od (min) c Critical Lane Group 35.0 • HCM Level of Service' D 0.98 100.0. Sinn offost time (s)'t`° '8.0 86.9% ICU Level of Service E M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 23: 1 - NB Off & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume ( veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type ` Median storage veh) Up streani'signal pX, platoon unblocked 0.85 vC, conflicting volume'" 2350 vC1, stage 1 confvol vC2, stage 2 conf vet vCu, unblocked vol 1535 tC, single (s) 8.8 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right cSH Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS fn°teisdct*eeSOMinin t Stop 0% 0 0.95 0 3.5 100 92 Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) s ti t 445 0.95 468 0.75 718 1437 296 0 0.95 0 0.75 1251 6:9 4.1 3.3 2.2 11 100 529 419 Free 0% 1735 0.95 1826 Free 0% 1365 0 0.95 0.95 1437 0 sect v ` : ""+i v B : 468 913 913 718. 718 0 0 0 0 0 468 0 0 0 0 529 1700 1700 1700 1700 0.89 0.54 0.54 0.42 0.42 250 0 0 0 0 44.1 0.0 ` 0.0 0.0 0.0 E 44.1 0,0 0.0 E 5.5 72.0% 15 ICU Level of Service 1 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 C f 4 t P \► Iva iBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 790 1097 347 517 1392 v /ts'Rat ):82' ` 1 dr ' 0 71 ? `d:44 0.B8 "'0.56: Control Delay 44.0 266.5 12.2 7.5 58.8 9.4 Ckueue'bela ` Y "'Orb' 168.4` '7 2.8 °" O;T` . "1 . 2:8 " Total Delay 44.0 432.9 15.0 7.5 59.5 22.2 Queue'Cerigtli "81 ". = 703' 161 ` 243: Queue Length 95th (ft) 116 #877 69 42 m182 m265 Internal Link Dist (ft) ' 1297` • " " ' 1035 49 Tum Bay Length (ft) 125 Base Capaoity (vph)` •510' - 5'Z - 7'1553'7, 795 587. 2493 7'. Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 8 1100 Splltiridi raplR 0'` 103 ,;`;'332 ` ;'0 .- 0" "0` Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 R`educeit "v/o)7ata,� " 0 5 t ,'`1'88 ": f'�b ,;15,44 0181 " . 100- . Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically,inftnite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles " ptlievolurria b ezceedscapacity 4tTeueinaye 95thercen tenger Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m 'Volumeor perceiiflfe"' yueua "`meTeredbyupstreanr�signaT." '" M:\04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transco Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 24: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 11/29/2004 r < Lane Configurations 1 1 1 ) Ideal Plow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane`Util. Factor 0.97 Frt 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3090 Fit Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3090 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1425 1.00 1425 695 0.88 790 0 790 24: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 1900 4.0 '0.83 1.00 1.00 2810 1.00 2810 965 0.88 1097 0 1097 1% t t " 1900 ` 1 00 tt 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 1439 3090 1.00 0.95 1439 3090 305: 455 0.88 0.88 347 517 0 0 347 517 1% 2% Volume (vph) 230 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.88 Adj. Flow (vph) 261 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% Tum Type pm+ov Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 1 2 1 6 Permktedhhases 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.2 31.7 54.3 54.3 18.5 77.3 EtfecttVet;feen g (s)` '13.7" x '32.7' ' 55.3 "'55.3' 19:0 78.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.33 0.55 0.55 0.19 0.78 Clearanc'e.TItne' - r7 5 ,; 74.4' '.5:0 5.0 r ' 4.5 5.0'; Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) ''`,`,423': 523 1554 796; 587 2494 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.29 c0.39 0.17 0.44 1//a Ratio Perm , , 0.27 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.62 1.51 0.71 0.44 0.88 0.56 Uniform Delay, dl 40.7 -33.7' 16.4 13.2' 39.4 4.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.43 1.15 1.91 Incremental Delay, d2 2.7 239.5 2.1 '1.3'' 10.6 0.6 Delay (s) 43.4 273.2 11.6 7.0 56.1 8.6 Levet ofService D F B A ; ` E A Approach Delay (s) 216.1 10.5 21.5 ApproachLOS ' 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3185 1.00 3185 1225 0.88 1392 0 1392 2% C .. ti 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 HCM Average Control Delay 64.3 `.: HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.03 Actuated; Cycle°Cength'(s)'`, 100.0 • '` " Sum of lost time'(s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.1 ICU Level of Service Arialyets Period (rain)-- ' 15.- c Critical Lane Group M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak 12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 8.0 E 4 25: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & 61st PI S /Mall 4, Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 371 145 91 819 118 188 213 262 vie Ratio - 0.51 `0.21' ':0,19 ''0.20 0.60 .' 0.58 0.73 0,62 0.82 Control Delay 28.6 15.7 16.4 6.3 15.1 43.9 52.1 44.2 51.3 Queue Delay ` ' ' 0.07 0.0 '0.0 0.5 `': 0.0 '. 9.0' 0.0 Total Delay 28.6 15.7 16.4 6.3 15.6 43.9 52.1 44.2 51.3 (3ueue't engtki5dth (11) . ' 63: 7 ° ` 55 ; ` ' 9 81 ,' 68 ` ; 140 ' 131 ' 194 Queue Length 95th (ft) 123 122 109 m13 m268 104 206 181 273 hltertal Tnk�i "sf (tt 1297 , "` 402 85' 183 Turn Bay Length (ft) 75 75 100 Base Capaoity(V,Ii) -' . 397 1746 "` 781 ' " 447 - 1361 ' ' 228 .'355' 365 7415 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 0 0 Spiliback'Cap Redtuctn " ' 0 = 01 0 `' '0 "0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reducedv /e Ratio ' 0.51 0.21 .. 0.19 0.20 0.71 0.52 0.53 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. , >! M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 25: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & 61st PI S /Mall l' C t 4\ t f `► 1 PIOVe iliff- "'"" °° 'Ear ilftr ESt` kW'a t+t 81"Wel' ' iOL'''NB'f' "411#7 -- 13x #1 Lane Configurations l i 44 r ' ft. tf 1. Il A Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 ' 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.88 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1608 3217 1439 1593 3015 1624 1534 1624 1508 Flt Permitted . ` 0.24 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.44 1.00 Satd.Flow(perm) 413 3217 1439 846 3015 404 1534 744 1508 Volume (vph) 190 345 135 85 490 272 110 55 120 198 52 192 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 204 371 145 91 527 292 118 59 129 213 56 206 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 371 145 91 819 0 118 188 0 213 262 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Tum Type pm +pt Penn pm +pt pm +pt pm +pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 Permitted Phases 4. 4 8'. 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 74.3 64.3 64.3 58.2 53.0 26.1 19.4 Effective Green, g (s) 75.1 85.1 65.1 60.1 •. 54.1 27.3 20.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.54 0.54 0.50 0.45 0.23 0.17 Clearance Time (Sr ' 4.8 4.8 . '4.8 4.8 ; 5.1 ' :4,6 4.6 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 428 1745 781 461. 1359 166 256 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.12 0.01 c0.27 0.04 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm '0.23 ' 0.10• 0.09 ` 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.21 0.19 0.20 0.60 0.71 Uniform Delay, ill . 24 4 ....14:2 14.0 182 24.8 • 49.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.46 0.53 1.00 Idcrert entaI'Delay, dx , ',0'.8 0 3';. < 0.5 '' 0.1 1.0 `.' 13.4 Delay (s) 25.3 14.5 14.5 8.5 14.2 63.3 _ Ceverof,$erWCe C ,_ 5 . • ` ... A; ;$ " Approach Delay (s) 17.5 13.6 60.0 Approach LOS ' B , . B 6 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated"Cycle Length (s) °; Intersection Capacity Utilization AnalysIs;Pertod ` c Critical Lane Group 28.5 0.61 120.0 73.4% 15 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time. (s) ICU Level of Service 0.73 47.5 1.00 10.4 57.9 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 C 8.0 D 6 36.1 36.9 0.31 4.8 3.0 323 c0.07 0,13 0.66 40.9 1.00 4.8 45.7 24.8 25.6 0.21 4:8 3.0 322 c0.17 0.81 44.9 1.00 14.5` .,,. 59.4 E 53.3 2010 Baseline Conditions 26: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 Lary Lane Group Flow (vph) 207 457 54 315 *Ratio O: j " "' 0.72'`' 0.19 0,98 Control Delay 106.6 39.4 30.0 84,9 Queue Delay` ' ' "0.0 On' "" 0.0 "0.0 Total Delay 106.6 39.4 30.0 84.9 QueueLength506 (ft) '158 149' ``330' 257 Queue Length 95th (ft) #319 188 m60 m#420 Internal Link Dist (ft) 402 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 100 Base Capacity (vph) 23 631 " 282 322 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillheck a'p Reductn 0 . 0 ` "" .0 ` 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio ' ' % 0 :99 0.72 " 0:19- 0.98 '- 4 t ` orrorrmwn, 767 179 772 310 706 0.94 0.84 '0.91 0.96 0.71 50.7 75.1 70.0 89.2 40.1 50.7 75.1 70.0 89.2 40.1 307 136 312 ` '240, .254 #426 #253 #443 #420 326 990 2551 829 150 818 226 795 322 990 0 0 0 0 0 0 . ; .. 0..,,..,0.. 0 .: 0 0 0 0 0 0.94 079 0.97 0.98 '' 0.71 # ,95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. m Vol "ume fo�95tttpeiae "ntile'que'ueis'nietered 6y upstreem "signal M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group I 2010 Baseline Conditions 26: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 Mat Lane Configurations Ideal Flbw (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util, Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor. PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green; g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) vis Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, di ". Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Levet of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach,LdS • ,•;' ti 4\ t t `► 1 r 7-sc ":S ° 7 R°i+Vgr 'wa "Wen 7NBr"' B7"'"Ni81T Stir7S8171111 ' 4t r /1 4f• ) Tt• ) ft. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 d,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 ' 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0. 1.00 0.96 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1577 3154 1411 1608 3070 1593 3078 1547 296 9 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1577 3154 1411 1608 3070 1593 3078 1547 2969 190 420 50 290 490 215 165 550 160 285 475 175 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 207 457 54 315 533 234 179 598 174 310 516 190 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 457 54 315 767 0 179 772 0 310 708 0 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 4 16.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 32.0 16.0 31.0 25.0 40.0 16.0'x. 24.0 24.0 24.0 ' 32.0. 16.0 31.0 25.0 40.0 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.27 0.13 0.26 0.21 0.33 4.0 4.0 4.0 .4.0; 4.0 4.0 `4.0 4..0 4..0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 210 631 282 322. 819 212 795 322 990 0.13 0.14 c0.20 c0.25 0.11 c0.25 c0.20 0.24 0 0.99 0.72 0.19 0.98 0.94 0.84 0.97 0.96 0.71 51.9 44.9 39.9 47.7 < 43.0 '50.8 . •44.1` 47:0 35,0 0.94 0.72 0.70 0.98 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 55.8 6.7 1.4 ' 36.5 ` 15.2 25.2 24.9 40.0 2.5 104.8 39.1 29.5 83.2 49.6 76.0 68.9 87.0 37.4 F. ,,0 C F' D E E. F 0 57.3 59.4 70.2 52.6 E . E HCM Average Control Delay 59.9 r HCM Level of Servlce • HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 Actuated Cycle Length (s) " 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.8% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group M:104104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group E 12.0 E 2010 Baseline Conditions 27: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 t `► 723 332 788 179 587 0.60 ' 0.86 '' 0.80 0.77 0.85" 35.6 58.0 44.5 66.0 56.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 '0.0 35.6 58.0 44.5 66.0 56.2 254 • 243 288 134 228 323 #374 364 #231 #304 1003 235 " 426 Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 778 147 v /c'R tiO'" ' ` B 73 '0;71 ' . 0.67 Control Delay 59.8 24.2 66.1 Queue'Delay' . ..0.0'; 0:0 '.0.0' Total Delay 59.8 24.2 66.1 Queue Length`50th`(ft)' . 98 250 x ``'110 Queue Length 95th (ft) m113 m294 #194 Internal Link Dist(ft)`' '990 Tum Bay Length (ft) 100 Base Capacity NOT '''219 1206, 428 1046 - 253 720 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SplIlback' dip Redluctn -, ''0' 0 0_ " - 0 0 0 "0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ReAuce u /chafid .`•; 0.68 0.71 8.67 ;'0.60 0.78 0.75 ,0.71 0,82 # 95th peroentile votume exceeds capacity. queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume ^ fOr'95tfi pementire queue "id meteredbyupstream'signal. M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 27: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 10.9 37.7 EffectiveGreen, g (s) . ;' 11.4. 38.7' Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.32 Clearance Time (s),-' 4.5 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp•Cap(vph) .;'`166_ .1087 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.23 v/s . R800 , 1 2 01111 v/c Ratio 0.72 Uniform Delay, 41 52.8 Progression Factor 0.93 Incremental Delay, d2 7.6. Delay (s) 56.8 Level of Service` E Approach Delay (s) Approach I.QS 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1752 0.95 1752 110 0.92 120 0 120 3% Prot 7 HCM Average Conti I Decay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Lengths) Intersection Capacity Utilization Anatysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group I -• ♦ r `" \ t r `► 1 -' 1900 4.0 0.95 0.96 1.00 3372 1.00 3372 535 0.92 582 0 778 3% 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1752 3422 1770 3393 1787 3435 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1752 3422 1770 3393 1787 3435 180 135 560 105 305 525 200 165 400 140 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 196 147 609 114 332 571 217 179 435 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147 723 0 332 788 0 179 587 0 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% Prot Prot Prot 3 8 5 2 1 6 0.72 35.8 0.60 2.1 23.4 C 27.9 14.5 41.3 15.0 `:.42.3 0.12 0.35 4.5 5.0 3.0 3.0 219 • 1206 0.08 c0.21 0.67 0.60 50.1 31.9 1.00 1.00 7.8 2.2 58.0 34.1 E C 38.1 D 43.3 0.73 120.0 , Sum of lost time (s) 73.8% 15 25.6 26.1 0.22 4.5 3.0 385 c0.19 0.86 45.2 1.00 17.7 62.9 E HCM Level of Service ICU Level of Service 33.7 34.7 0.29 5.0 3.0 981 c0.23 0.80 39.5 1.00 4.8 44.3 D 49.8 D . M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS\Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group D 8.0 D 15.1 23.2 15.6 ` 24.2 0.13 0.20 4.5 5.0' 3.0 3.0 232 > .693'.' 0.10 0.17 0.77 0.85 50.5 ''46.1 1.00 1.00 14.6 9.4 65.1 55.5 E E:y. 57.8 I r 28: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 2010 Baseline Co /29/2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 282 296 600 44 11 406 1545 44 1378 400 vfc Rake . ' o :49 0.51 > ' 1,10 0 :51 '0.14 1.13 0.97 'o.54 1.07 0.69 Control Delay 35.5 35.9 108.6 78.2 61.5 136.2 49.6 82.5 82.3 40.1 aueue'QelaY 00 0.0`x` 0 , 0 "'° . 0' ' 0.6" 0.0. - 00; 0.0' 0.0 "' 0.0 Total Delay 35.5 35.9 108.6 78.2 61.5 136.2 49.6 82.5 82.3 40.1 Oueue'Leng1h60th ":(ft) It19 3 200"'?560 � r : 35 3, . 9`" = 198'; 697 "'`` "35'." -657 272 Queue Length 95th (ft) 281 295 #785 #83 29 #302 #837 #88 #796 Internal�link'bjs (R) 126 141 520 939 Tum Bay Length (ft) 200 125 250 150 Base Capacity (vph)' , 577 582 543 87 76 360 1599 81 1291 577 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Qap Reductn " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ;0 0 . 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduceit'WcRatio "t' " 0;49 051" 1 10' 0,61 0.14' i 13 70:97 ' 0.54".1.07 0,69 - - Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. # " 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. k. 4\ t ` 1 1 M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 396 1 I 28: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 2010 Baseline Con29 /2 004 1 4 \ t p 1 J S'1 rEttfrMit SY"'W10271914l"7Nerf71\111T3 ", Vie.1" 9`l R Lane Configurations if 4 F 4 r » 41i 1 ++ r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane'Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 FR 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1649 1663 1553 1817 1583 3400 3503 1687 3374 1509 Fk Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1649 1663 1553 1817 1583 3400 3503 ' 1687 3374 1509 Volume (vph) 485 35 540 20 20 10 365 1385 5 40 1240 360 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 539 39 600 22 22 11 406 1539 6 44 1378 400 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 282 296 600 0 44 11 406 1545 0 44 1378 400 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 7% 7% 7% Tum Type Split Perm Split Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green. G (s) 42.5 42.5 42.5 3.9 3.9 12.0 55.7 3.9 47.6 Effective Green, g (s) 43.0 43.0 43.0 4.9 4.9 . 13.0 56.2 4.9 48.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.45 0.04 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 567 . 572 534 71 62 354 1575 66 1298 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 0.18 c0.02 c0.12 0.44 0.03 c0.41 v/s Ratio Perm c0.39 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.52 1.12 0.62 0.18 1.15 0.98 0.67 0.69 Uniform Delay, d1 32.4 32.7 41.0 59.1 58.1 56.0 33.9 59.2 32.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 IncrementatOelay. d2 .0.7. 0.8 ' 77.6. 15.0 1.4 _94,0 18.2 22.8 3.4 Delay (s) 33.1 33.5 118.6 74.2 59.5 150.0 52.1 81.8 35.6 Level ofSeMce; .,'C: ' C ' F: "° E'. _'E' F O.: F D Approach Delay (s) 76.8 71.2 72.5 Approach LOS ? E E E HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cyiiie'Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) , c Critical Lane Group 73,1 HCM Level of Service 1.08 125.0 81.9% ICU Level of Service 15 . Sum of lost time (a) M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group E 16:0 0 1.06 38.4 1.00 43.1 81.6 F 71.5 E 8 47.6 48.1 0.38 4.5 3.0 581 29: S.168th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) t 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 5 5 229 165 5 1335 165 1292 Control Delay 43.4 43.4 43.1 39.4 45.4 21.2 88.6 13.9 Queue'1Jetay "'O.0 0.0' '0.0 0.0 ` 0.0' "-'.0.0 `0.0 Total Delay 43.4 43.4 43.1 39.4 45.4 21.2 88.6 13.9 Queuetength 30th {ft) 3 3 ="135 94 S'' 288 " 97 " 138 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 15 195 146 15 #601 #231 486 Inte n'a t ink Dist (ft) ` " . ' 55,,x 428 1420 ' 103 5 ' . Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 Basal Ca lac • p ftY (vph)„ ' � 274 - ; 245- ' � `367 ' : '328 ' 107 `` 1932 '177 2361 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spi(Iback`Cap Reductn ..0 ` "0" " `0 " 0 . 0 "0 " 0 " 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 ReducedV /c'itafio 0:02 M 0.02' ` 0162 ` '0.50 0:05' 0.89 0.93 0,55 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 29: S.168th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 1 Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900' Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 Lane Utii. Factor 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1444 1292 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1444 1292 Volume (vph) 5 0 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 5 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 5 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 25% Tum Type Spilt Protected Phases 4 Perrnitted Phases', Actuated Green, G (s) 1.4 1.4 Effective ,Green, g,(s) 224" 2.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.02 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 35 31 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 47.8 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 Delay (s) 49.7 Level of Service D Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS HCM ;Average Control Delay .. 24.9 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cyc)e Length (s) 10010 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.3% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Level of Service t t 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 4 r 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900` 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1703 1524 1787 3527 1770 3537 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1703 1524 1787 3527 1770 3537 5 215 0 155 5 1145 110 155 1210 5 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 5 229 0 165 5 1218 117 165 1287 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 229 165 5 1335 0 165 1292 0 25% 25% 6% 6% 6% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% Split . Perm Prot Prot 8 8 5 2 1 6 8 19.8 19.8 1.0 45.8 13.0 57.8 20.8 20:8 2.0 46.8 14.0 58.8 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.47 0.14 0.59 5.0 . 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 354 317 38 1651 248 2080 c0.13 0.00 c0.38 c0.09 c0.37 0.11 0.16 0.65 0.52 0.14 0.81 0.67 0.62 47.8 36.2 35.2 48.2 22.8 40.8 13.4 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.10 2.4 4.0 1.5 1.8 4.4 5.6 1.2 50.3 40.3 36.7 49.9 27.1 41.5 15.9 0 D D D C D B 50.0 38.8 27.2 18.8 0 D C B M:\04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group C' 12.0 C 1 r 30: Minkler Blvd. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) r t 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow ( vph) 122 64 1293 90 1404 v/c ttada Q 4 0 /r:F 5 81 70:23 Control Delay 22. 21.1 7.1 4.9 5.5 Queirebeiay , .0.0° (10 `:`00 r'O:b 0 :0'" • Total Delay 22.3 21.1 7.1 4.9 5.5 Queue en9th 5tithlftr ' 40 28 "`;w09 „ 8 7103' Queue Length 95th (ft). 77 46 168 23 185 Internal L(nk btst (if)' " ";378 1420 ' Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 Base •Capacity(vph) " ' 536' 2136 " 390' Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillbaok`Cap Reductn`„ 0 0 : " 0 .. '0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced'vlcRatio . 0.20 ; 0.12, _ "0;61: '0.23 • ° 0.53 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- TukwilalLOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 30: Minkler Blvd. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 ti 4 4 - A . \ t r\ 1 ✓ nv �nT Brxe - ar T X61 ivei '" i?iIBE ' °r`I 0°L "�'1rJ�`>�" "1V�) " rT -slim Lane Configurations 1 r TA 1 ft. ideal Flow (vp1101) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane'UtiI Factor 1.00. 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 FR Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0. 185 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1599 .00 3592 1770 0.95 3 00 Flt`Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.00 Satd. Flow (pens) 1787 1599 3592 219 3539 Volume (vph) 0 0 0 115 0 60 0 1175 40 85 1320 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) ,' 0.9 0 0 0 122 ' 0 84 0 1250 43 90 1404 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 122 0 64 0 1293 0 90 1404 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% 2% 2% Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) ERective g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v /s' Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Unifomi Delay, d1: Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 0.0 Approach LOS A I! erNROVSPrt m HCM Average Control Delay 7.0 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Prot t custom pm+pt 8 8 2 1 6 8 6 . . 7.9 7.9 31.9 42.1 42.1 9.0 9.0 32.8 43.0 ' 43.0 0.15 0.15 0.55 0.72 0.72 5.1 ` 5.1 4.9 4.7 4.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 268 240 1964 317 2536 c0.07 0.04 c0.36 0.03 c0.40 0.17 0.46 0.27 0.66 0.28 0.55 23,3: 22.6 9.6 5.5 1.00 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.2 0.6 1.7 0.5 24.5 23.2 6.8 6.0 C C A A 24.0 6.8 C A M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group A 12.0 A 4.0 1.00 0.9 4.9 A 4.9 A' 31: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) t - Volume exceeds capacity,,, queue is theoretically infinite., Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. iii 95 th` percent) le'volume ' excceed"s ' capacity',,g ne ue irtay be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group .: x .. V(Vr.'R7S Lane Group Flow (vph) 174 21 126 232 468 847 vrc Ktatia AS6' :08' 0.37 70.78 Control Delay 38.8 32.2 34.4 47.1 39.3 63.1 Queue;Dtay 6:0�:� 0 0 ° 0 Total Delay 38.8 32.2 34.4 47.1 39.3 63.1 Queue1 mitt SOtf `(tf) ` °: 94 10 - 627 - 125'".'131 7 .2627,`-',` Queue Length 95th (ft) 159 30 120 #245 196 #427 Internoi Ll k'bls �k):' _ '` "171��: 763 1026 "2551 ' . Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 Base Capacty (' pti 376` ` 325'x" 0 ` , :331 685' 857 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Split t epOettuctn." 0 07 ' 0 . ° - 7 :0 w0 <. 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reidedad:v /c 080 , 0;48:';' 0706;"'''''013 -0, 0 068 0;99 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 thtgfatiTon ;5 31: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util: Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) 55 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 Adj. Flow(vph) 58 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% Tum Type Split Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases, Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Titre (s)', Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, dl Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS; HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 4 r 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.98 1.00 1814 1568 0.98 1.00 1814 1568 110 20 0.95 0.95 116 21 0 0 174 - 21 3% 3% Perm 3 13.1 13.1 13.9 " 13.9 0.16 0.16 4.8 '. 4.8 3.0 3.0 292 253 c0.10 0.60 33.6 1.00 3.3 36.8 D 36.2 4 r 4'4 4t• 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ' 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.99 0.98 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1779 1553 3163 3268 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1779 1553 3163 3268 65 55 220 15 405 25 60 645 100 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 68 58 232 16 426 26 63 679 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 . 232 0 468 0 0. -847 0 4% 4% 4% 13% 13% 13% 8% 8% 8% Split Perm SPIft Spin 3 4 4 1 1 2 2 0.01 0.08 30.8 1.00 0.1 30.9 C 15.8 16.6 0.19 4.8 3.0 342 0.07 0.37 30.3 1.00 0.7 31.0 C 40.0 D 4 15.8 16.6 0.19 4.8 3.0 299 c0.15 0.78 33.1 1.00 11.9 45.0 D.. HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 16.1 17.1 0.20 5.0 3.0 627 c0.15 0.75 32.6 1.00 4.8 37.4 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 D 16.0 B 21.7 22.7 0.26 5.0 3.0 860 c0.26 0.98 31.6 1.00 28.8 58.4 E , 58.4 2010 Baseline Conditions 32: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 j Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 167 91 135 140 640 38 725 v/c ctitlo - 0.21 - ,0;15 0 32 ''0.29 "0.29` 0.30 `012,° 0.47 Control Delay 21.5 22.6 22.8 21.7 22.2 10.4 26.7 18.5 Queue Delay Q;l) 0.0 "; 0.0 .. 0.0 ` 0.0 ` 0.0 _'`0.0' .. •0.0`. . Total Delay 21.5 22.6 22.8 21.7 22.2 10.4 26.7 18.5 Queue tenth "50th (ft) 72. 55 29 ''43 4S�' 51 " 13 127 Queue Length 95th (ft) 54 110 69 90 97 143 38 190 Inteniat' Lk* b ist (ft) 768 `x° 472' ' 394 360 Tum Bay Length (ft) BaseCapacity(vph) :,- 409 587 371 595 696. 2193 429'.1611 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback "CapReductri • '':0 . 0 0 . 0 `:0 0 _ 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio D:1 ' 0.29 -'0.25 0.23 0.20 ` 0.29 0.09' 0.45 lhfO ibrTSt7rrT: .. :a M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 32: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) Lane Configurations 1 Ideal Plow (vpF pl) "'1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Utii. Factor 1.00 Frt 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 Fit Permitted" 0.67 Satd. Flow (perm) 1249 Volume (vph) 65 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 70 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% Tum Type Perm Protected Phases 2 Permitted Phases`' 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.7 10.7 Effective Green g (s) :.11.7 „11.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 Clearance Tithe (a) �:, 5.0 : °` 5:0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 244', , 321' v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 v/s Ratio .Penn 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 20.6' 21.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, .d2 ' 0.7 1.5 Delay (s) 21.2 23.2 Level of Service ` C C Approach Delay (s) 22.6 Approach LOS - C 1900 4.0 1.00 0.88 1.00 1647 1.00 1647 35 0.93 38 0 167 2% r 1 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1770 0.60 1116 120 85 0.93 0.93 129 91 0 0 0 91 2% 2% Perm .6 10.7 11.7 0.19 5.0 3.0 218 0.08 0.42 0.40 21.2 21,1 1.00 1.00 1.3: '0.8 22.5 21.9 C: C 22.1 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 0.93 1.00 1728 1.00 1728 65 60 0.93 0.93 70 65 0 0 135 0 2% 2% 10.7 11.7 0.19 5.0 3.0 337 0.08 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1752 0.95 1752 130 0.93 140 0 140 3% Prot 7 10.4 11.4 0.19 5.0 3.0 333 c0.08 0.42 21.4 1.00 0.9 22.3 HCM Average .Control i Delay, 14.7, HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuate 'Cycle Length :(s)`; . 60.0 '. Sum of lost time Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.9% ICU Level of Service Anat sls:Perio :(min) . - 15 c Critical Lane Group 4 \ t P r 1900 4.0 0.95 0.99 1.00 3460 1.00 3460 545 0.93 586 0 640 3% M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group f F € 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1752 0.95 1752 50 35 0.93 0.93 54 38 0 0 0 38 3% 3% Prot 3 j 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.97 1.00 3408 1.00 3408 550 125 0.93 0.93 591 134 0 0 725 0 3% 3% 31.0 3.3 23.9 32.0 4.3 24.9' 0.53 0.07 0.42 5.0 5.0 "5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1845 126. 1414 0.18 0.02 c0.21 0.30 0.51 26.4 " 13.0 1.00 1.00 1.4 0.3 27.8 13.4 14.1 B 33: S. 180th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) 1 ■ k t r 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 222 372 178 594 494 22 122 39 494 727 vlc Ratio. - 1.247'''0728'70:87' - `1:25 :, 0 - '50^ ' 0.11 ' 0.58 "` '0.22 0.37" ' "1.09 Control Delay 191.0 24.8 22.0 139.7 7.8 46.4 54.8 48.3 23.3 92.8 QueueDefay 0:0° 2T0` i`0o (30 0.0•" 0.o 0.0 0:0: 0.0 ' 0.0 Total Delay 191.0 24.8 22.0 139.7 7.8 46.4 54.8 48.3 23.3 92.8 Qi19u81:engtli°50th ft) = "214' `fi00• ` �� 81' 91 149 ° 't5 LL ° ' "28� ' . 122. -644 Queue Length 95th (ft) #372 137 m96 m#654 m174 40 150 61 920 Inlemattlnk0ist"(t 7:' 1258. `406 ' 154 #920 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 175 150 200 BaseCepecYty7vpryf ^ "''179'"`1407 266' " 989:' 280 '233', 1319 (:665 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3pifl6aci Cap Reiluctn ; :'.. 0 . 0 ,, 0 0 0 ;:. 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ReducerkV /c Ratio � ` 1,24.. 0.26 :;'0.67 `1.25 0.50' 0.08 .; 0.45 0.17 0.37 ' 1.09 Volume exceeds capaclty,queue is theoretically, infinite: Queue shown is maximum after two les # 2 95t h pereentil''e` otume'ezeeed§' capiicky, queue ° may be longer, Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m ' "Volume for 95th'percent0e °quelie s metered by upstream signal. M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 33: S. 180th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) e Lane Configurations VI Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1,00 Fn 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 Fit Permitted " 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 Volume (vph) 200 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 222 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 222 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% Tum Type ; Prot Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green. 9 (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.24 Uniform Delay, d1 54.0 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental pelay, d2 146.4 Delay (s) 200.4 Level of. Service F Approach Delay (s) Approach f;.OS' . 11.0 12.0 0.10 5.0 3.0 179 - 1407 c0.12 0.11 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period: (min) c Critical Lane Group 1900 4.0 0.95 0.98 1.00 3518 1.00 3518 300 0.90 333 0 372 1% 7 7 47.0 48.0 0.40 5.0 3.0 0.26 24.2 1.00 0.1 24.3 C 90.1 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1787 0.53 998 35 180 0.90 0.90 39 178 0 0 0 178 1% 1% Perm 71.2 1.09 120.0 95.4% 15 4 31.0 32.0 0.27 5.0 3.0 266 0.18 0.67 39.3 0.42 2.3 18.7 B 4- k 1 t ` 1 d 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1787 1519 1736 1827 1553 3433 1731 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1787 1519 1736 1827 1553 3433 1731 535 445 ' 20 110 35 445 345 310 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 594 494 22 122 39 494 383 344 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 594 494 22 122 39 494 727 0 1% 1% 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% pm +ov Split Perm Split 4 2 1 1 2 2 4 1 31.0 76.1 12.9 12.9 12.9 45.1 45.1 32.0 78.1 13.9 13.9 13.9 48.1 46.1 0.27 0.65 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.38 0.38 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 477 989 201 212 180 1319 865 c0.33 0.19 0.01 c0.07 0.14 c0.42 '0.13 1.25 0.50 0.11 44.0 10.8 47.5 0.45 1.21 1.00 116.9 0.1 0.2 136.8 13.2 47.7 F B 0 72.0 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 0.58 50.3 1.00 3.7 54.0 D. 52.1 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 0.03 0.22 48.1 1.00 0.6 48.7 0` E 16.0 F 0.37 26.6 0.82 0.7 22.6 C 1.09 37.0 0.85 60.8 92.1 F` 64.0 >e:.. I 34: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) t F Lane Group Flow (vph) 94 634 22 1211 155 761 Vic Patio ' 0.30 - . 0.84 Control Delay 78.8 12.4 65.7 44.0 46.3 62.4 Queiiitalay _0.97 00" `0.0 °` 0.0 . 0 ° 0 . 0 • Total Delay • 78.8 12.4. 65.7 44.0 46.3 62.4 Clile6etengtti5Oth(ff). "63:: 63 18 503 " "56 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) • #161 195 m26 #632 90 #423 Intemiaunk t)gst (ft • "'" ,1 8 k" . ttti . • 231 "` 977 Tum Bay Length (ft) 125 Base Gepachy (vpi�) 120 1550 �` X 44 "'12 i 75141 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 S'pilbaekCap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio .. 0 Tg 0 41 "' 0b6 tf 0 0'30 093' # 95th, pen :entile -volume exceeds capacity queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m ' V &Iurilefor 95ti ° p®rcenttliqueue't metered b' i pstream stoat: M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 4 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 34: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) ow_ Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpi) Total Lost time (s) Lane tJtil, Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s), Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.59 0.41 Uniform Delay, d1 52.5 23.1 Progression Factor 0.70 0.48 Incremental Delay, d2 5.6 ' 0.2 Delay (s) 42.3 11.3 Level of Service D Approach Delay (s) 15.3 Approach LOS B HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization A`naysis Period '(min) \' c Critical Lane Group 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1770 0.95 1770 85 0.90 94 0 94 2% Prot 3 7 10.3 51.6 10.8 ' 52.6 0.09 0.44 4.5 5.0 3.0 3.0 159 1549 c0.05 0.18 ti r B. 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3534 1.00 3534 565 5 0.90 0.90 628 6 0 0 634 0 2% 2% 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1719 0.95 1719 20 0.90 22 0 22 5% Prot 8 4 4 3.2 44.5 3.7 45.5 0.03 0.38 4.5'. : 5.0 3.0 3.0 53 1283 0.01 c0.36 0.42 0.96 57.1 36.3 1.23 0.88 3.5 > 12.4 73.7 44.2 E D 44.8 D 4 4 4 t r 1 1 f14 it1. itt. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 ` 0.95 0.95 0.97 0.96 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.98 3332 3120 3172 1.00 0.99 0.98 3332 3120 3172 865 225 20 80 40 335 100 250 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 961 250 22 89 44 372 111 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1211 0 0 155 0 0 761 0 5% 5% 10% 10% 10% 5% 5% 5% Split Split 2 2 6 6 42.2 HCM Level of Service 0.81 120.0 ' , . Sum of lost time (s) 71.0% ICU Level of Service 15 r • 16.1 17.1 0.14 5.0 3.0 .445 c0.05 0.35 46.4 1.00 2.1 • 48.6 D 48.6 D M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 16.0 C 29.6 30.6 0.26 5.0 3.0 809 c0.24 0.94 43.8 1.00 18.7 62.5 62.5 E' 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 35: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 144 840 1218 495 vfd italic 0.71" 0 41 ° ;83 `054 Control Delay 48.6 7.4 20.3 17.0 Queue t5elay, O;f1' 0 0. ' 0 0' ` 0.0' Total Delay • 48.6 7.4 20.3 17.0 Queue Cength`00f ilft i 79' Queue Length 95th (ft) m105 m179 #384 121 Internaltk k t)isf (ft) ` Tum Bay Length (ft) 275 Base Capaelty (vph)` ? 203 2026: . 919 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spilltiacktep Reductn Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduaed'v /cAatio 0.71 0.41 ? " 0.83 "0.54 n # ,'95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queuepay be Longer. • Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m ' Votdre,e for 95ttt pel l entile queue is` petered by upstream ignal.' M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 35: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) Mo eirta 77 8' 'VSIPTWBR "tiC7SFIR " Lane Configurations +T +p Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utit. Factor 1:00 0.95 0.95 FR 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1736 3471 3371 Fit Permitted 0.95 1,00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1738 3471 3371 Volume (vph) • 135' 790 925 220 ; 330 135 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) ' 144 840 984 234 351 144 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 144 840 1218 0 495 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% Turn Type Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 4.8 35.0 25.2 Effective Green; g (s) 5.8 36.0 28.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.60 0.44 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 168 2083 1472 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.24 c0.36 v /s Ratio _Perm `` v/c Ratio 0.86 0.40 0.83 Uniform Delay,' d1 28 7 : 6.3 ; 14.9 Progression Factor 1.16 1.00 1.01 Incremental Delay, d2 27.7 >' 0.1 Delay (s) 58.6 6.4 Level of Service ` E A Approach Delay (s) 14.1 Approach LOS B B HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated :Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 17.7 B 17.7 16.4 0.75 60.0 63.7% 15 1900 1900 1900 4.0 0.97 0.96 0.97 3242 0.97 3242 15.5 18.0 0.27 4.5 3.0 885 c0.15 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS\Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 36: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Sperry Dr. '- o t r 1 I Lane Group Flow (vph) v/c Ratio° Control Delay Queue Delay "" Total Delay Queue Lehgth 5Otti'(ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Diss(fiy Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn 801116idetap"tiedugtn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced ■ic Ratio 82 1098 5 1351 0: 45 1).62'"'0:02` 26.4 19.9 1.8 13.3 0:0 01 00 .. ",o'.1 26.4 20.0 1 13.4 27 27r . 0: ''' ''44 74 317 m0 m67 257 "` '526 150 1 1828 ' 253 ' : 1583 ', 0 . 0 0 9 o 58. ,r a 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0:45 '0.62 0 :02 ' 0.80 ' ......a. 7 . gin .. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal: 15 31 26 371 62 '0,06 003."0.04 0.68' 0.10 25.8 25.1 25.0 39.1 25.5 0,0 0.0. "' 0.0 0.0 25.8 25.1 25.0 39.1 25.5 ` 15 13 247' 31' 24 38 34 372 63 61 ,.. 352 100 75 250 '599 582 '547 630 0 0 0 0 0 0 `' . n 0 > 0 0 0 ,. 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 0.05 , 0.04 0.68 0.10 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 36: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Sperry Dr. trove Lane Configurations Ideal. Flow (vphpi) Total Lost time (s) Lane UN. Factor Fri Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 AdJ. Flow (vph) 82 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 82 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% Tum Type pm +pt Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 60.1 Effective Green, g (a) 6t8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 156 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 23.1 Progression Factor 1.32 Incremental Delay, d2 . 2.9 Delay (s) 33.4 Level, of Service C Approach Delay (s) Apprvapti 40S HCM Averages Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (a) Intersection Capacty Utilization Analysis Period_ (min) c Critical Lane Group t t r" 1 4' tt+ 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1736 3469 0.07 1.00 132 3469 80 1060 0.97 1093 0 1098 4% 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 s°i IM r+1 rBt r8 tit: ,1s 81111 1900 1900. 190 1900 1900 190 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.87 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1752 3394 1719 1503 1461 0.20 1.00 0.35 1.00 1.00 367 3394 626 1503 1461 5 5 . 1035 275 15 5 50 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 5 5 ` 1067 284 15 5 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1351 0 15 31 26 4% 3% 3% 3% 5% 5% 5% pm +pt Perm Perm 3 8 2 8 2 60.1 56.6 55.9 42.2 61.8 57.6 57.6 43.8 0.52 0.48 0.48 0.36 5.7 5.0 . 5.7 5.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1787 204 1629 228 c0.32 0.00 c0.40 0.01 0.61 0.02 0.83 20.6 23.9 27.0 0.88 0.10 0.35 0.6 0.0 1.7 18.8 2.4 11.0 B A B 19.8 11.0 B i 18.4 0.79 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 79.8% ICU Level of Service i5 0.02 0.07 24.8 1.00 0.6 25.3 C HCM Level of Service 42.2 43.8 0.36 5.6 3.0 549 0.02 0.06 24.7 1.00 0.2 24.9 C 25.0 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2 42.2 43.8 0.36 5.6 3.0 533 0.02 0.05 24.6 1.00 0.2 24.8 C B 12.0 D 4 r 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1770 1583 0.74 1.00 1371 1583 360 0 60 0.97 0.97 0.97 371 0 62 0 0 0 0 371 62 2% 2% 2% Perm Perm 6 6 6 42.2 42.2 43.8 _. 43.8 0.36 0.36 5.6 5.6 3.0 3.0 500 578 c0.27 0.04 0.74 0.11 33.2 25.2 1.00 1.00 5.9 0.1 39.1 25.3 0 C 37.1 D:', 1 ti r `1 t \, 4 Lane Group Flow (vph) 124 665 691 82 655 330 588 1021 387 1176 v /c'Ratia '" 0,95 ° " 0.90 _ "0.94 0:87' 014 "" 052" - 0.78 0.54 s 0.93 Control Delay 107.7 47.7 39.6 120.8 80.0 20.4 52.2 37.7 45.0 49.9 Queuebelay �'Otk' d 0 Q `�~ , 0 ' 0.0 B OA: ' < 0r`S 0.0 . 0,0 - 0.0 Total Delay 107.7 47.7 39.6 120.8 80.0 20.4 52.2 37.7 45.0 49.9 Queue Length`50fh (ft) ; 99 ' ° 288`" 3 k "65 26$' "140 - 222 ' - Queue Length 95th (ft) m #216 #364 #749 #169 #394 208 288 447 189 #598 Internal "LinkDist(t) - 520 ' - 149" `300`' '>279 - Tum Bay Length (ft) 175 175 175 200 200 300 Base Capacity (uph)' 130+ -752 ' 732'"' 94 865' 634 750 1306 716 1263 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback`Cap Reductn 0 0 0 " '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reducedw Ratio ; 0;95 + 0.83 " �`0 94 : '0:87" 0.98: 0.52 n 0.78 0:78 -` .0.54 ° 0:93 2010 Baseline Conditions 37: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/2004 a 5 # . 95th peroentile volume exceeds capacity; queue,may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Vol i?re fort35tfipik entice' queue I; metered`byupstream signet.' M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 37: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/2004 -♦� { 4 ■4 t `4 ;f Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Uhl. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prat) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) 120 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 124 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 124 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% Tom Type Prot Protected Phases 7 Permitted' Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) LaneGrp Cap (vph) •_ v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS 1900 1900' 190 4.0 4.0 4.0 10 0:95. 1:00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0:95' .1.00 1.00 1736 3471 1553 0.95 1.00 '1.00 1736 3471 1553 645 670 0.97 0.97 665 691 0 0 665 691 4% 4% pm +ov 4 1 4 8.0 24.5 50.5 9.0 . 25.5 52.5 0.08 0.21 0.44 5.0 5:0:' 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 130 s. 738 731 c0.07 0.19 c0.21 0.23 0.95 0.90 0.95 55,3 46.0 32.4 0.84 0.77 0.63 56.6 11.8 17.9 103.1 47.0 38.3 F D D 47.6 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio ACtiiated:Cyclelength (b), : . Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts Period (rn)n) c Critical Lane Group D r r 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 ' 0:95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1:00 1.00' 1736 3471 1553 0.95 ` 1.00 1.00 1736 3471 1553 80 635 320 0.97 0.97 0.97 82 655 330 0 0 0 82 655 330 4% 4% 4% Prot pm +ov 3 8 6 8 5.5 22.0 47.0 26.0 45.0 6.5: 23.0 49.0 21.0 46.0 0.05 0.19 0.41 0.22 0.38 5.0 . 5.0 5.0 -` 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 94 865' 634 750 1306 0.05 0.19 0.11 0.18 0.30 0.10 0.87 0.98 0.52 0.78 0.78 56.3 48.3 26.7 43.8 32.6 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 53.6 30.9 0.8 5.4 3.1 109.9 79.2 27.4 49.1 35.7 F:. E C D D 65.6 40.6 E.. D 49.2 0.92 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) . '1 87.8% ICU Level of Service HCM Level of Service M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group `111 4A 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.99 0,95' 1.00 3335 3407 0.95 1.00 3335 3407 570 ` 930 0.97 0.97 588 959 0 0 588 1021 5% 5% Prot 1 5 1900 1900 4.0 0.97 1.00 0.95 3303 0.95 3303 60 375 0.97 0.97 62 387 0 0 0 387 6% Prot 6 2 5% 8.0 E 1900 1900 4.0 0,95 0.99 1.00 3367 1.00 3367 1055 85 0.97 0.97 1088 88 0 0 1116 0 6% 6% 25.0 44.0 26.0 45.0 0.22 0.38 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 716. .1263 0.12 c0.35 0.54 41.7 1. 2.9 44.6 D 0.93 36.0 1.00 13.4 49.5 D 48.3 D 15: Tukwila Pkwy. & Andover Pk.W. C ♦- 4 \ o C eou 1 i Lane Group Flow (vph) 1080 446 527 699 398 v/d 13afio`; t 1Tar : °' 07 0.25 0:85 1.05 Control Delay 65.7 100.0 7.3 46.8 98.3 0:0' 0.0 • Total Delay 65.7 100.0 7.3 46.8 98.3 (5ueuetength 50th {ft) ,X73.7 316:7"64 '"'' 18. 27 , Queue Length 95th (ft) #515 #507 87 #312 #463 Internal t nkOl's1(ttj" ' "'32T °.`, ":"''489'='TU Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 225 Base "Capacity'(v"ph)' 1055' 418"''123 , "820 378 ' ""`' ". Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 SpilibackCapfeductn 0 "'0 ' 0 0 .., 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced'v/c Ftafi3 ;. ' 1:03" 1.07" 025 '. °0:85'' "` "1.05 ' - VOlurne exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 9�StA perceiitlle:voTume eX eeds capacky. qu'eue'may tie longer:: Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. dr " 'Oefacto R1ghtLane,.ReCode with1 though lane as a right lane. 2010 Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 11/29/04 15: Tukwila Pkwy. & Andover Pk.W. -► 1 C '' 1 O movemthii "r ` ; "" "EB7 1 ""'1 Lane Configurations 0 '1 f4 VI if Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0,95 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected . 1.00 0.95 1.00-i 0.95 ' 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 2941 1608 3217 3152 1454 FitPermftted - ` '1.00 ;'' ' '0:95' 1.00 095', '1.00 ,' Satd. Flow (perm) 2941 1608 3217 3152 1454 Volume(vph)' ' '430 ': 575'. ' 415 490'C 650, 370 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) . ' '' 462 618 448 527 ' 699 398 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) " 1080 0 446 527 699 398 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 Permitted' Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 35.0 25.0 65.0 25.0 Effective Green, g (s) 36.0 26.0 66.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.26 0.66 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 ' . 5.0 Vehicle Extensbn (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane;Grp Cap (vph) ' 1059 ,: , : 418 :,2123" '820 v/s Ratio Prot c0.37 c0.28 0.16 0.22 4/s'1'ta6o germ °" v/c Ratio 1.17dr 1.07 0.25 0.85 1.05 Uniform belay; di . ,' ; *'320 37.0' . 8.9 =. '35.2" 37.0'''. Progressbn Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,, d2 `:'32 7 "' 63.0 3 `. Z 8.5 ' 80.9 ' , Delay (s) 64.7 100.0 7.2 43.7 97.9 Level of Service. Approach Delay (s) 64.7 49.7 63.4 Approach LOS E D E HCM Average Control Delay 59.6 . HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.9% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) , 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Crlticcl Lane Grow `;, 2010 Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 11/29/04 2 25.0 26.0 0.26 5.0 3.0 378 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday PeaklBaseline Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila ILOS\Saturday Peak\Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group a 4 F 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. Lane Group Flow (vph) 529 141 v/c Ratio' 0.84 0.57 Control Delay 35:6 31.3 Queuel7etay 0.6i „0:0 Total Delay 35.6 31.3 Queue Cengtfi?5 °' 152' ` ' 52 Queue Length 95th (ft) #193 #110 Internal Link Dist (ft) 181 179 Tum Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity(vph) 653 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 Reduced'• "v /c Retie' 0.81' 43 253 729 65 1001 0.11 0.69 0.50 0.15 0.85 20.0 30.9 16.4 9.2 26.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 • 0.0 0.0 20.0 30.9 16.4 9.2 26.3 14 62 140 10 198 36 #154 180 23 #290 829 783 75 256 403 369 1500 421 1221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 015 0.11 . 0.69 # '95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 2010 Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 11/29/04 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid day.sy7 The Transpo Group 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. aYel�i nt , •.�, Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) Lane UtIl. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) 208 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 226 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) ' 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 0% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.1 Effective Green,g (s) : , 1,8.3. Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 Clearance Time (s): 5.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 608 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm c0.23 v/c Ratio 0.87 Uniform,pelay, df 24.7 Progression Factor 1.00 Inure mentatDetey d2W" 12 Sa' Delay (s) 37.6 LevelotSeivice Approach Delay (s) 37.6 ApproaCtl4OS HCM Average control Delay; HCM Volume to Capacity ratio ActuB sd,Cycle Length (a). °''' Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts'Pe 1Od:(min) . c Critical Lane Group ti r k. 4\ t t `. l ` ar s'ieeriTretl'k" WtillL7r 413 iaRTI liar.: °" a'r 17(3a ""'Serrgei `SI C 41+ TA 'f 41. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.93 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 2960 1651 1439 1608 3170 1593 3076 0.77 0.52 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.28 1.00 2325 875 1439 255 3170 471 3078 53 225 65 64 40 233 605 65 60 710 211 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 58 245 71 70 43 253 658 71 65 772 229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 529 ` 0 0 ' 141 _ ' 43 '253 729 0 85 1001 0 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% Perm Perm pm +pt pm +pt 4 8 5 2 8 8 2 17.2 17.2 42.2 29.9 18.3' 18.3.' 43.7 : 31.3 0.26 0.26 0.62 0.45 5.1 5,1 5.4 5.4 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 229 376 424 1417 c0.12 c0.23 0.16 0.03 0.26 0.62 0.11 0.60 0.51 22.8 .19.7: 17.3 "13:9 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4;9 , 0.1>? 23 27.6 19.8 19.6 14.2 2010 Baseline Conditions Saturday Mid - Day 11/29/04 25.8 15.6 C. B -25,0 : HCM .Level.ofService , .::, 0.76 700 :Sum =of lost tirlels)„ 81.1% ICU Level of Service D ^ M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group \ - 4 1 6 6 31.6 24.6 34.4,'" 26.0 0.49 0.37 5.4 5.4 3.0 3.0 386 '1143 0.02 c0.33 0.07 0.18 0.88 14.1 20.5 1.00 1.00 0:2? 1^72 . w 14.3 28.2 . , G mss ;,' 27.4 fi 26: Strander Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. C '- 4 \ t ' 1 1tv8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 333 583 109 354 875 229 766 333 vien886' 1:1 " 0:$i . x'0.34 4..98 :1.07' . 1.14 1.08 1.13 Control Delay 136.5 53.8 42.5 88.8 95.3 153.1 100.7 136.5 Queue ttelay '..: {t.O' OA; . '0 0 0'i0 • 0.0 "' 0,0 ` "' 0.0 '0.0 Total Delay 136.5 53.8 42.5 88.8 95.3 153.1 100.7 136.5 108.1 Queue ength 50th (ft) ' - 299' .` 226 `' 71' 274 - 396' 207 348 -299 -464 Queue Length 95th (ft) #483 295 127 #469 #526 #368 #474 #483 #596 Internal Link Dist (ft) • 467 436 1789 829 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 100 150 Base Capacity (vph) 295 724 324 ' 362 815 201 710 295 885 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spilltiabit ap Reductn 0 0 0" `0 0 0 D 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced' /e'Ra£ef ' ' `' '1.03 ? 0 :81 ''`0.34 0 :98 '' 1.07 1.14 1.08 1.13 1.12 - Volume exceeds capactty, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th;p®tuerdite volume` ezp_seds,cepa queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 2010 Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 11/29/04 990 1.12 108.1 26: Strander Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. Movenl rd. Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor. PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 22.0 Effective' Green, g (s) 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 4,0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 295 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.13 Uniform Delay, di 49.0 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 91.7 Delay (s) 140.7 Level of Service F Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS HCM A'verageControt Delay , ,. HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cyclet ength (s)' . Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis' 'Period (min) c Critical Lane Group r 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 ' 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1608 3217 1439 1608 3056 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1608 3217 1439 1608 3056 320 560 105 340 560 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 333 583 109 354 583 0 0 0 0 0 333 583 109 354 875 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Prot Perm Prot 7 4 3 8 4 27.0 27.0 27.0 32.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 32.0 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.27 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 724 324 382 815 0.18 c0.22 c0.29 0.08 0.81 0.34 0.98 1.07 44.0 39.0 46.2 44.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 9.3 2.8 40.9 53.2 53.3 41.8 87.1 97.2 D D F F 80.5 94.3 F 102.9 .::. 1.06 120.0 104.7% '15 2010 Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 11/29/04 -• r` <4\ t / `► 1 4A 1900. 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1608 3043 0.95 1.00 1608 3043 280 220 470 265 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 292 229 490 276 0 0 0 0 0 229 766 0 1% 1% 1% 1% Prot 5 2 15.0 15.0 0.12 4.0 3.0 201 0 1.14 52.5 1.00 108.0 158.5 F ' HCM Level of Service: , <' Sum of lostt(me (s) ICU Level of Service 28.0 28.0 0.23 4.0 3.0 710 0.25 1.08 1.13 46.0 49.0 1.00 1.00 57.1 91.7 103.1 140.7 F F 115.8 F 8.0 G M:104104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak) Baseline Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 1.00 1608 3034 0.95 1.00 1608 3034 320 590 360 0.96 0.96 0.96 333 615 375 0 0 0 333 990 0 1% 1% 1% Prot 1 6 22.0 35.0 22.0 35.0 0.18 0.29 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 295 885 c0.21 c0.33 1.12 42.5. 1.00 68.4 110.9 F 118.4 F Arterial Level of Service: NB 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) Delay:" time (s =.:`: 49.3 59.7 49.3 59.7 Cross Street `• Southcenter Blvd (Se IV Total IV Arterial Level of Service: SB 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) Coss Street .:= Cl Southcenter Blvd (Se • IV Total IV 9d� . TOO. 30 18.5 18.5 Arterial Level of Service: NB 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) Delay'. 105.9 105.9 Arterial Level of Service: WB 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) e (s) 124.4 124.4 g ita eve Crdss:Street Cfass , Spud , .'Pim a O star :TIme(s) ' Andover Park E (SegmiV 30 18.5 3.6 22.1 Total IV 18.5 3.6 22.1 Arterial Level of Service: NB Andover Park E (Segment 11) 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 .. 0.10 0.10 peed 3.0 3.0 Atfedal a 0.10 16.8 • C 0.10 16.8 C Cross Street` Costco Dr., Minkler Blvd. III StranderrBtvd.'(Segm' Ill III 66th' Avenue Bridge:( "pT Total III ne Delay, Time (s) 35 16.4r 0.8 17.2 0.13 35 30.4 10.4 40.8 0.25 '36 = '61.4 44.5 105.9? 0.51 35 21.6 5 6 27.2 0.17 35 223 .:'.32.6 54.9 0.19 152.1 93.9 246.0 1.25 Arterial Level of Service: SB Andover Park E (Segment 11) F F WON •:LOS 28.9 B 22.3 C 17.4 •: D 22.3 C 12.E 18.3 C Baker Blvd (Arterial . III 35 , 22.3 .9.4 31.7 0.19 21.1 Strander Blvd (Segm 111 35 21.8 56.2 77.8 0.17 7.8 Mhigkit>3}v`"tI Segri, ttt, "35 . ": 185 ' 79.9 .. ; 0.5't 23.1 .. Costco Dr. III 35 30.4 5.5 35.9 0.25 25.4 S. 180th'St. (Segmeh III 35 184. ',170: .' 334: 0.13 ` 13:8 Total III 152.1 106.6 258.7 1.25 17.4 M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Arterial Level of Service: NB Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Cross Street, Minkler Blvd. (Segme III Strander Blvd. (Segm III Baker Blvd,' . III Tukwila Pkwy (Segmerlll Total III Arterial Level of Service: SB Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) oa( '`Trgvel "`70tit,'t F' Afi1s) i1 elay >'. `Time(s) (m1) < 'Speed- t OS 35 20.9 19.2 40.1 0.16 14.7 D 35 22.0 40.1 62.1 0.17 10.0 F 35 59.8 63,1 122.9 0.50 14.8 D 35 49.2 62.4 111.6 0.41 13.2 E 151.9 184.8 336.7 1.24 13.3 E >ss'( Baker Blvd. < III Strander Blvd. (Segm III Minkler Blvd. (Segme III S. 180th St. (Segmen III Total III Arterial Level of Service: EB Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) Cross Class'~ SR 518 WB Ramps ((Mtn 53rd Av. S III Southcenter Pkwy (Se III Total III e gross Street y' .Claes" 53rd Av. S IO SR 518 WB Ramps (DOtn Total III Cross Street as Andover Pk.W. (Segmal Andover Park E (SegmIll Total III `��renat'� °) �Kal w� :"`l�l�nning'Signa'�i` ?ave't°" Class .. = Speedy °; Time -<' Delay' ='Tune (s)' 35 49.2 39.3 88.5 35 59.8 70.0 129.8 35 22.0 14.4 36.4 35 20.9 86.9 107.8 151.9 210.6 362.5 Kiowi2ttttn ng ;� War'`I ravel"" Speed: '_• Ttme s. Delay' Time {s) 0.0 2.0 17.7 55.6 79.2 128.6 96.9 186.2 30 2.0 30 37.9 30 49.4 89.3 Arterial Level of Service: WB Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) unnlltg " Wna"r '" r*i er7 geed Time Delay" 30 49.4 9.1 58.5 30 37.9 0.0 37.9 87.3 9.1 96.4 Arterial Level of Service: EB Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) 30 43.1 30 21.5 64.6 iti 38.8 22.6 61.4 81.9 44.1 126.0 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 "t)r8t Aitai tr "a( (mi). °•''Speed LOS 0.41 16.7 D 0.50 13.8 E 0.17 17.0. D 0.16 5.5 F 1.24 12.3 E t7 at (mi). 0.01 0.30 0.39 0.70 ArteffaT'rfierlal 'Speed `LOS 22.8 C 19.3 C 10.9 E 13.5, 71510 � rted l "� *(eiial • (fir . $peed. `. 0.39 • 24.0 " C 0.30 28.3 B 0.69 . 25.7 B 0.34 0.16 0.50 14.9 13.1 14.3 Arterial Level of Service: WB Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) Cross Street. Andover Pk.W. (Segm411' Southcenter Pkwy (Se III Total "111" Arterial Level of Service: EB S. 180th St. (Segment 14) na,, CrossStreet '`. Class'. `` Speed. , ,':'71 me.. ,. ` "Delay Time . _, (m1) "' Speed` 'f LO Andover Pk,W, III 35 30.4 12.4 42.8 0.25 21.3 C Andover Park E (Segmlll 35 20.2 7.4 27.6 0.16 20.6 C `35 17.2 19.9 37.1 " 013 13.1 E 35 15.5 47.7 63.2 0.11 6.5 F 83.3 ° 87.4 170.7 0.66' 13.9 E W. Valley Highway (S III Total all Arterial Level of Service: WB S. 180th St. (Segment 14) na i ni was Cros ; Street Gl ass y $' , e e d t I e ' .-Delay . TEnta°(s) ; • x, (ml) ,, ;Speed , W, Valley Highway (S 111 35 6.3 80.0 86.3 0.04 1.8 F Sperry Dr. III 35 15.5 13.3 28.8 0.11 14.3 0 Anda4iPark>r(5ecnot . " 35 . 17.2 20,3 ''s 375. 0.13" 12.9 ' ;E 35 20.2 44.0 64.2 0.16 8.9 F 35 ` 30.4 130.7 ' 170.1; `. 0.25 5.4 F 89.6 297.3 386.9 0.70 6.5 F Andover Pk.W. (SegmNl Southcenter Pkwy (Si III . Total III Cross, $ 17500 Block.' S. 180th St. Total The Tramp° Group Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) n CtvsSStre9f Crane Spe ed. .. Tlrrle `:D rime 17500 Block (Arte(Ia °III 35 °30 7 -. .17.6.: ; ,. 48,3 = 0.26 19,1 MEnkler Blvd. (Segme III 35 20.9 7.1 28.0 0.16 21.0 Total Ill. 51.6 24.7 76.3 0.42 19.8 Arterial Level of Service: SB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) e III III t it Peed 30 30 Tf ine, - .'Delay : Time (s) : Spee 21.5 34.4 55.9 0.16 10.3 E 43.1 22.3 65.4 0.34 18.7 C 64.6 56.7 1213 0.50' - 14.8 LS . 20.9 35 30.7 92.8 '5 16, - ... ,100. 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 fine 28.8. 0.16 ' 20.4 C 123.5 0.26 7.5 F 152.9: ; x .0.42,- 9,9 r r f Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Cross Street S.168th St. III Strander Blvd. (Segm 111 Total III e -; ' :Delay' fine (s) 35 34.1 21.2 55.3 35 25.3 12.2 37.5 59.4 33.4 92.8 Arterial Level of Service: SB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) ow"'2u"°"nnTng ,5 ve'; e tfa Ar er11 Peed Ttme, • ' ..Delay Time (e): - ( mi), ..z Speed . °'" LOS 35 25.3 13.9 39.2 0.21 19.4 C 35 34.1 5.5 39.6 0.28 25.8 B 59.4 19.4 78.8 0.50 22.6 C Cross Street .'`' . -Ciass S.168th St. III MEnkler Blvd. III Total 111 Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) Cross`Str Klickitat Dr. (Segme III Nordstrom Entrance /I III Dummy Int III Total III 35 35 35 nnrng Tfnie.. v D 8.3 10.5 31.3 50.1 2.9 17.9 4.8 25.6 Arterial Level of Service: SB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) e' fr ar 7:KA trig rSrg ir7r'raye ,,, C)�f" "Aftia " tle" CrossiStreet : .'Class . '' Speed. , .? Time„ Delay. :' . .Tlmi(s)': ;(miy` ° Speed , ;LOS Nordstrom Entrance /I III 35 31.3 20.0 51.3 0.26 18.3 C Kllckitat Dr. (Segme III 35 10.5 63.4 73.9 0.07 3.5 F Strander Blvd. (Segm III 35 8.3 9.4 17.7 0.06 11.7 E Total III 50.1 92.8 142.9 0.39 9.8 F Arterial Level of Service: EB Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) Me (a 11.2 28.4 38.1 75.7 0.28 0.21 0.50. 0.06 0.07 0.26 0.39 18.5 20.3 19.2 18.5 9.1 26.0 18.6 Cross' Street , Class Speed Time Delay'`: Time 61st PI S /Mall III 35 31.3 15.7 47.0 0.26 20.0 AndoverPk.W. (Segmtll 35 12.3 39.4 51.7 0.09 6.4 Andover Park E(Segmlll 35 24.3 24.2 48.5 0.20 15.0 W. Valley Highway (S III 35 35.1 35.9 71.0 0.29 14.8 Total :j:'' III; . 103.0 115.2 218.2 0.85 s 14.0 M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Baseline PM Peak.sy7 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group C F D D i W,:Valleynighwayu( 1II . • Andover Park E (SegmlII Andove'r:Pk,W (Begm�ii 61st PI S/Mail 111 SouthCenter Piiwy"(Se itl . Total 01 Arterial Level of Service: EB Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) gross S treet .. aCias 61st Ave, Bridge (Se -. IV. 35 1-405 NB On -Ramp IV 35 Andover Pk:W. ; 35 •. Andover Park E (SegmIV 35 Total, - IV Arterial Level of Service: WB Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) Ctoss'St e ApdoveFPk;W,(SegmlV , 1 NB On - Ramp IV 61stA�ie�,Btidge(S"8" N, _' `` Dummy Int IV 35 total. IV.. 2010 Baseline Conditions 11/29/2004 Arterial Level of Service: WB Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) - ross,Street fia8s :: $ , ed_, ..'time„ Oeia 'tirite s 35. .6.1 ' 782 • 84.3 0.04' :.r- , 1.8," , ="= .S F 35 35.1 35.6 70.7 0.29 14.9 D 35 ` - > 75,0 "0.20: 35 12.3 15.1 27.4 0.09 12.0 35 .313 '440',' 733 0.20`" 1 2:5 • " ,E 109.1 223.6 332.7 0.89 9.6 F Tele' 205.- ° :132.4 17.7 3 25.1 18.2 72.8 • : ':208.4 7 52.9:- j; 0.12 `:- 21.2 0.11 638 006 •. -- 43.3 0.19 281.2 .,;, 0.48 me:( ; a 35 , - 251 ;; 7.5 . 32.6 0,19 35 9.5 18.5 28.0 0.06 11.7' 21.5 " 39.2. 0.11 20.5 4.8 25.3 0.12 8 52.3 . %°:125.1 0.48 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Baseline- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 16.1 6.2 C • M 4 i (f • f i * f' 4 3: SR 518 WB On -Ramp & 51st Ave S ti 4\ t 4 d Lane Configurations 4 A 5�gn`Coiitroi ' Stogy" ' Free ' Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume veh/h) , : 0� . 0 e 853 '7155 '180 ' 55 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Haire) owrate (vph) " "0 ` 0' `1004 ' 182 "212' < '65 ,_ ... Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent 'BloCkage';' Right tum flare (veh) tviedi ®ii type None Median storage veh) Upstri (signal (ft): pX, platoon unblocked vC', coiitlicting'voluine ` °2434" 244' "'276' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2: 04:1'2 confvol vCu, unblocked vol . 2434 244 276 tC sing1e (ar tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % 100 100 22 Volume Total 1 ":276 Volume Left 1004 0 Volume' Flight 0` ` 65 • cSH 1292 1700 Voit7irieta Capacity'" " 0.78:" 016. "' Queue Length 95th (ft) 211 0 ContrdtDelay(s) s :18.3: o.o Lane LOS C App/caOl fielay"(s) , 7" = Approach LOS tit Average Delay interse&tlo'n°Capacfty Utilization Analysis Period (min) 13.3 74.9% ' ICIJ Level of Service 15 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 4: SR 518 EB Off-Ramp & Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) 1 o t 4 r Lane Configurations r 4 + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) ' ` 25 763 0 963 185 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 829 0 1047 201 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1081 514 pX, platoon unblocked 0.37 vC, conflicting volume 1248 201 201 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1675 201 201 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 30 2 100 cM capacity ( veh/h) 39 845 1377 tllrect�o"n,°1�+"rie >1•`"" Volume Total 27 829 Volume Left 27 0 Volume Right 0 829 cSH 39 845 Volume to Capacity 0.70 0.98 Queue Length 95th (ft) 63 417 Control Delay (s) 212.8 48.7 Lane LOS F E Approach Delay (s) 53.9 Approach LOS F Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 1047 0 0 1700 0.62 0 0.0 21.9 63.6% 15 201 0 0 1700 0.12 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.92 0 ICU Level of Service 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 B M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS ■Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Protect- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with Project PM Peak,sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group Lane Group Flow (vph) 813 1904 279 874 1433 v/c talio' '1".68','"1:61)7 ;1.45 0 Control Delay 290.8 336.9 257.8 25.6 55.1 Que "ue Delay 0.0" 222,5` 21.7 `'0'.0 "'7 /.9 Total Delay 290.8 559.4 579.5 25.6 133.1 Queue tL ngth50th (ft) - 738" 1015 ' =248 , =`:; = 535` Queue Length 95th (ft) #968 #1165 m #369 m270 m453 Intemat Link Dist`('ft)` : 773" 433: Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 Baseivapaeity(vplij` 520 °:..1129' '0193 1512 1368 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 203 Spillback C p'Red"i dtrt Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced`v /cRtatio 1.56' 2:157'1167 f f f f L f l 2010 Future with Project Conditions 7: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 17) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) 11/29/2004 ♦ r 4 \ - Volume exceeds capacitymueue is_theoreticailyinfinite.; Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95thpercentlle violume exceeds capacity queuemay be' longer Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. m' Volumafor955ipercentile queue Is metered' by Upstream' signal: Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Utli. Factor Frt Ftt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 2508 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1676 2508 Volume (vph) 805 1885 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.99 0.99 Adj. Flow (vph)" 813 ; 1904 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane`Oroup.Fiow`(vph)' ,813 1904 The Transpo Group 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 rr 1900 4.0 0.88 0.85 1.00 327.4 F.. r 2010 Future with Project Conditions 7: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 17) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) 11/29/2004 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1608 0:95 1608 276 0.99 279 0 279 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 1% Turn Type . • ; Over Prot Protected Phases 4 2 3 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v /s. Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Levelof 'Service ; , Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS' ' WaIRMITTet 30.0 44.0 11.0 31.0 4510 12.0 0.31 0.45 0.12 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 520 1129. 193 c0.48 c0.76 c0.17 1.56 1.69 1.45 34.5 27.5 44.0 1.00 1.00 1.01 282.8';.312.8 223.4 297.3 340.3 268.0 ff w 1900 ` 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3217 1.00 3217 865 0.99 874 0 874 1% 8 0.97 0.99 0.96 3039 0.96 3039 1293 0.99 1306 0 1433 3% 2 46.0 44.0 47;0 45.0 0.47 0.45 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 1512 1368 0.27 0.47 0.58 1.05 19.3 ; 27.5 1.24 0.87 0.5 ; 29.9 24.4 53.9 C`. D .. 83.3 53.9 F D 126 0.99 127 0 0 . 3% HCM Average Control Delay. 200:4 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.61 Actuated Cycle Length (s) : 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 119.4% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) • 15 c Critical Lane Group 12.0 H M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with-Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group ! t 1 2010 Future with Project Conditions 9: Southcenter Blvd (Sec ment 18) & 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) 11/29/2004 C 4- 4 \ r Lane Group Flow (vph) 1006 885 1006 329 926 v/cRatio 1,11 0.39, :1.04 0.52 Control Delay 77.8 121.0 5.2 105.8 8.6 Queueb&ay O:b "" 0 0 •' ' 0.0 �" p:0 Total Delay 77.8 121.0 5.2 105.8 8.6 tlueueterigth 5 tlt(ft) -400` ` X678 ' ' 103" - . 234 Queue Length 95th (ft) m250 #834 120 #375 143 'denier Link Dist Tum Bay Length (ft) 250 200 Bas`eCa '903` • 753 '72594' "`315`, 1794." • . Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spflltiack °Gap t3etlyctn o ' 0 ;" 0 "0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Raked 'v!c Ra r s ?' 1 11. '1 18'` "0.39 '. 'f:04 Volume exceeds; capacity,,Queue is theoretically infinite.. , • . +` Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # ".9§th (eCe' i e " um "e ezceeireat�aeky� gceue'»ay ,tie to'figr Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m ' VPRIthe"foi 95th:p d titlfe ueueis:ineterettb} upstrea�ti'sfgnat 2010 Future with Project Conditions 9: Southcenter Blvd (Segment 18) & 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) 11/29/2004 Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Utit. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) The Transpo Group Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 882 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1006 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 6% Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 25.3 Effective Green; g (s) 27:0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 Clearance Tlme`(s) .. " Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp. Cap (vph); 903 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 v/s Radii Perm v/c Ratio 1.11 Uniform Delay, d1 36.5 Progression Factor 0.63 Incremental Delay, d2 53.0 Delay (s) 76.0 Level of Service' ' E Approach Delay (s) 76.0 Approach LOS E +■ 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.98 1.00 3343 1.00 3343 750 105 0.85 124 0 0 6% 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1752 0.95 1752 752 0.85 885 0 885 3% Prot 1 HCM Average DOntrol Delay ; 55.6 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.13 Actuated Cycle Length (s)..: 100.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.3% Analysts'Period (min) . . 15 c Critical Lane Group 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 3505 1752 2760 1.00 0.95 1.00 3505 1752 2760 855 280 787 0.85 0.85 0.85 1006 329 926 0 0 0 1006 329 926 3% 3% 3% pt +ov 5 8 81 5 42.0 72.3 17.0 64.0 43.0 "' 74:0 `, 18.0 ` 65.0 0.43 0.74 0.18 0.65 5.0`: 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 753 2594 315 1794 c0.51 0.29 c0.19 0.34 1.18 0.39 1,04 0.52 28.5 4.7 41.0''9.2 1.00 1.00 1.17 0.82 92.5 0.1 '. 58.9 0.2 121.0 4.8 106.8 7.7 F A ...F A 59.2 33.7 E C C trrir t9BFt HCM Level of Service Sum of iosttime (s) ICU Level of Service • 12.0 F M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group • 2010 Future with Project Conditions 13: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) 11/29/2004 r 8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 651 578 239 881 v /cFtatio'` '1.52 1:20 "'0.49: 0.45 Control Delay 278.2 142.6 22.1 3.7 Queue`Delay ` "0.0 ` 0:0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 278.2 142.6 22.1 3.7 Quei . Length'S0th (ft) > - 300" =450" 60 19 Queue Length 95th (ft) #411 #658 113 177 Internal Link Dist (ft) 121 487 Tum Bay Length (ft) 200 275 200 Base+rapacity (p''h):' 42e 481 " 491 `1976 .1391 898 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 402 162 Sp716ac1t G`ap Reductn °0' 0 `c 0 .' '.It Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced%/ / Rata " 1 :52` .20 : 0 49 ,'0:45 ' 1.39:,x: 1.32' Ramp - ' Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theonmticaltylnfinite Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 9Sth percer>3ile tiolume eiCeeds capacity, queue May tie;tbnger: Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m ' Volume for' 95th "percentftequeues metereebyupstream signal: " 1372 973 _0.99 '1.08 19.5 53.2 165.8 103.6 185.3 156.9 402 -709 m93 m52 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 0 Lane Configurations '111 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Progression Factor J 1900 4.0 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 3060 1660 0.95 1.00 3060 1660 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated, Cycle Length (s) ; Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 13: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) 11/29/2004 Volume (vph) 605 538 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 651' 578 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 651 578 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% 3% Tum Type Prot pt +ov Protected Phases 3 1 1 1 2 Permitted" Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 13.0 28.0 28.0 77.0 Effective Green, g (s)'' 14.0 29.0 29.0 78.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.29 0.29 0.78 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 . 5.0 . 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap '(vph) » 428. 481 491 1976 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 c0.35 0.14 0.35 v/s Ratlo'Perm v/c Ratio 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1693 1.00 1693 222 0.93 239 0 239 1% 1.52 1.20 0.49 UnIform. Delay, `d1 43.0 '. 35.5 .' 29.3 1.00 1.00 0.63 74.7 1.17 100.0 82.6% 15 _ 4 ', BL7 1'SBR rr 1900 4.0 0.88 , 0.85 1.00 2533 1.00 2533 819 0.93 881 0 681' 1% 0.99 27.2 0.47 Incregental'Delay d2:';246.2 "109.3 = 0.7, 0.1 4.7 Delay (s) 289.2 144.8 19.3 3.1 17.4 Leve f o(',Serilce ' ' F F B ` A B Approach Delay (s) 221.3 6.5 30.4 • Appraach LOS' � ... _ r " -A ':.. , • .0 0.45 3.7 0.79 1900 4.0 0.97 1.00 0.95 3090 0.95 3090 1276 0.93 1372 0 1372 2% 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1425 1.00 1425 905 0.93 973 0 973 2% pt +ov 2 23 44.0 62.0 45.0 63.0 0.45 0.63 5.0 .. 3.0 1391 , 898 0.44 c0.68 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 8.0 E M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 14: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 1-405 NB On -Ramp 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) v/c Ratio Control Delay QueueDelay Total Delay Queue >Length 50th'(ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link OIst Tum Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph)' Starvation Cap Reductn Spilt6acT "Cap'Aedt ctn` Storage Cap Reductn Reduced°v /c RaUo 351 903 293 69 879 420 186 207 0:81' 043 V '0.31 01'7 0.51 ‘0154 x0:33 14.2 3.6 3.3 6.8 19.8 22.8 36.3 46.3 '0 0 - (10 " 0.0' .1a1 14.2 3.6 3.3 6.8 21.4 26.0 36.3 46.3 55 85' '43 8 258 240 - "53 ' 124 m35 m85 m44 m20 m300 m298 82 198 487 223 99 125 125 150 175 '549: "395 1739? 778,'662. "341 0 0 0 0 643 254 0 0 "'"6::'"'"0` . 0 , 0 �,0., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0:84 0.40 : :0.31 0.17 "` 0.80" 0,80 0:28 ` 0.61 m , ; Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered, by upstream signal ; M:104104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 14: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & 1-405 NB On -Ramp Lane Configurations r Ideal Flow"(vphpl) 1900 1900" 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 LaneUtil. Factor .. . ` 1.00 '0.95" '1.00 Fn 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1593 3185 1425 Flt Permitted 0.23 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 393 3185 1425 Volume (vph) 330 849 275 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 351 903 293 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 351 903 293 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 2% Tum Type pm +pt Perm pm +pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 Pet'rrikfedPhases y 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 73.3 63.8 63.8 57.5 Effective Green; g (s) `' ` 641 64.8 ' 59.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.65 0.65 0.60 Clearance Time (s) - 5.0 )` '- 5.0 . ' 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 488 2064 923 377 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Penn v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 7.8 Progression Factor 1.22 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 Delay (s) 10.0 Level of Service B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS, c0.12 0.28 0.01 c0.42 0.21 0.10 0.72 0.44 0.32 0.18 8.6 7.8 8.6 0.39 0.37 0.99 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.4 3.0 8.6 A A A 4.8 A .. �� r ' 1900 1900 - 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1608 3217 1439 3152 0.32 1.00 1.00 0.95 534 3217 1439 3152 65 826 395 175 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 69, 879 420 188 0 0 0 0 69 879 420 186 1% 1% 1% 0% Perm Prot 8 2 53.0 54.0 0.54 5.0 3.0 1737 0.27 0.51 14.6 1.14 0.6 17.2 B 17.3 B HCM Average Centro( ,Delay . \ ' x.'14,4 ', <;'I tCM Level of Service., HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71 AFtuatedCycI tength: ' ' 100.0 ' 'Sum `tritest time (s).' Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period ° (min) • . ' " " 15 ; c Critical Lane Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 4 \ t t `► 1 8- 2 53.0 16.7 16.7 54.0. 17.7: 17.7 0.54 0.18 0.18 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 777 558 287 0.06 0.29 c0.13 0.54 0.33 0.72 14.9 , 36.0 38.8 1.15 1.00 1.00 1.7 0.4 8.6 18.9 36.3 47.4 B' D D 42.2 Stertt $11 1900 1900 ' '1900' 1900 1900 4.0 y.00. 0.95 1.00 1624 1.00 1624 130 65 0' 0 0 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 138 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 8; C M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 0.0 4 ti 2010 Future with Project Conditions 15: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 8 862 358 vle13tk? �� i :::667.6,1"1,126'5..07,,,,67,..27, 0d1249 1 6 :0.33 694 '1 13 f.01 �` Control a Delay 109.2 90.4 QueuaD'elay - . . X 26 7 .0' Total Delay 67.4 125.7 7.9 135.9 90.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) ^ 463 . 28y' °� "z" 00 :,;=. 329 -234' " Queue Length 95th (ft) #599 #471 120 #450 #420 IriternitLink Dist` (ft) 223 ;` \ 9 4 1 "`„ 783 , Turn Bay Length (ft) • 150 225 Base Capac`ity'(vph)" .1182;' 3447: 2093' 765' 353'` Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spilltiack "'0" d " ' '`40 ' ' 0 , Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio' 1.05 1.12. 0,45 1.19 . 1.01 -,• ' Volume. exceeds Capacity, queue'is theoretically infinite: Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th' iiiiierai luuerezc!adds opacity giieire may tie longer. Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. dr ° "Defacto'Rtghtlimi Reeailew 't'thtiugli ne as /fright lane. M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS\Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 4 2010 Future with Project Conditions 15: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 Lane Configurations ft, Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Util, 0.95 Frt 0.92 Fit Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 2883 Fit Permitted, • " 1,00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2883 Volume (vph) 545 579 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 606 643 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1249 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted phases Actuated Green, G (s) 40.0 Efecttve Green, g (s) 41:0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 Clearance Time (s)' 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Carle: Grp Cap ?(vph) 1182 v/s Ratio Prot c0.43 vls Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.10dr Uniform Delay, di 29.5 Progression Factor 0.81 Incremental Delay, d2 42:0 Delay (s) 66.0 Level of Service E Approach Delay (s) 66.0 Approach LOS ' ,E" � r 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1562 0.95 1562 347 0.90 386 0 386 4% Prot 3 4 1 P rrRtfil 44 1 1 1900 's 19 190 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 .0.85 1.00 ' 0.95 1.00 3124 3060 1411 1.00 0.95 1.00 3124 3060 1411 625 776 322 0.0 0.90 0.90 694 862 358 0 0 0 694 862 358 4% 3% 3% Perm 8 2 2 66.0 24.0 24.0 67.0' 25.0 ' 25.0 0.67 0.25 0.25 5.0 ' 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 344 2093<: 765 353 c0.25 0.22 c0.28 0.25 1.12 0.33 1.13 1.01 39.0 7,0 37.5 37.5 1.11 1.03 1.00 1.00 85.0 0.4 73.3 51.5 128.3 7.6 110.8 89.0 F A F. F 50.8 104.4 F ... 21.0 22.0 0.22 5.0 3.0 HCM Average Control Delay 74,6 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.09 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.4% AnalyslsPerlodT(min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c , ' GriUcat Lane Group i Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service E 12.0 F M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 16: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 -" ! 1 P' rau Lane Group Flow (vph) 889 250 400 398 444 v/c patio' 0.70 0 81` ^ 0 . 20 065: 0.4g Control Delay 18.2 10.7 3.5 32.6 14.8 • Oueue Delay 0:0 i' 0 0 00 ` "0 0 0.0 Total Delay 18.2 10.7 3.5 32.6 14.8 Queue Length' SOtii (ft) , "210" ',742 "" `.? 15 162: Queue Length 95th (ft) m258 m37 m16 275 192 Inter`nat Link bist tft)`s Tum Bay Length (ft) 250 Base'Gapacffy(vph)" 1234.; 410 ' Soo' Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spilltiack capReductn 0` ° 0 `::. ` ° 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reducedyfc l atlo `'` 0:707OM "020 .'O ;s5 ""''" m Volume for 95th . percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal. M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with Project PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 16: Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 C 4.- 1 / i�1 V@m91 = 11 13. • - 77," Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Utll. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane "Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor +1. 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.96 1.00 3436 1.00 3436 632 220 0.98 0.98 645 224 0 0 869 0 1% 1% 34.2 35.9 0.36 5.7 3.0 1234 c0.25 Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Levetil4 Service, Approach Delay (s) 16.2 Approach LOS ' ''B;. 0.70 27.5 0.58 0.3 16.2 HCM Average. Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated,CyCle• (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 250 3% pm +pt 3 8 56.9 57.9 0.58 5.0 3.0 448 c0.10 0.22 0.56 25.4 0.35 0:1 9.1 15.6' 100.0 69.7% 15 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 ` 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1752 3505 1787 1599 0.18 1.00 0.95 1.00 333 3505 1787 1599 245 392 390 435 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 250 400 398 444 0 0 0 0 400 398 444 3% 1% 1% pm +ov 8 2 3 2 56.2 33.1 50.1 57.9 ` 34.1 52.1 0.58 0.34 0.52 5.7, 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2029 609 897 0.11 c0.22 0.09 0.19 0.20 0.65 0.49 10.0 27.9 15.5 0.32 1.00 1.00 0.0 .. 2.5 0.4 3.2 30.5 15.9 22.8 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service B 8.0 C M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with Project PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group s 18: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & 53rd Av. S r 4 \ Lane Group Flow (vph) 927 153 992 143 vie , 5.87.'5:44 ''0.713 ` : 0.50 Control Delay 17.9 6.7 9.2 39.7 ueuelelay X 00`; - 0.6 - " "0.0 .b;0 Total Delay 17.9 6.7 9.2 39.7 Queue.Length 50th (ft) _ "356 18 `' 224 ' ` 66 ' ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 666 44 472 170 Internal Unk bist (ft) 100 172 257 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity (vph) 1324 381 1522 439 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 SplHback Lap iteductn .�" Os' 0,', 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 • 0 0 0 Reduced v /c Rat -70' D.40 ` 0.85'• 0;33 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 18: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & 53rd Av. S lut8voman{'` t'a'I :•.,V1 BE7Wt i` 'NBC' MR Lane Configurations fi 1 1 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Uhl. Factor` 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1856 1787 1881 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.10 1.00 Satd. Flow (pens) 1856 183 1881 Volume (vph) 768 85 141 913 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 835 92 153 992 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 927 0 153 992 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Protected Phases 4 PermlttedPhases • Actuated Green, G (s) 44.1 Effective Green,g (s) ' 45.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 Clearance lime (s) X5.0 ' : Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane;: Grp Cap (vph) 1081. • v/s Ratio Prot c0.50 v/s Ratio Perm' v/c Ratio 0.86 Uniform Delay, di; 13.5 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 ' 6.9 Delay (s) 20.3 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 20.3 Approach LOB .: C pm+pt 3 8 2 8 54.7 54.7 12.7 55.7 557 13.7 0.72 0.72 0.18 5.0 "';'5,0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 268`,1354',: 284 0.05 c0.53 c0.09 0.38 0.57 0.73 13.5 6.4 1.00 1.00 2.9 2.1 16.4 8.5 B A 9.6 A. C v 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 0.89 0.99 1606 0.99 1606 20 111 0.92 0.92 22 121 0 0 143 0 4% 4% 0.50 28.8 1.00 1.4 30.2 C 30.2 I1CM Average Control Delay ", 15.4 HCM Level of Service . HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Acti ateV r ycie length (s) , ... 77:4 " '( ' Sum °f lost time (s)' Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) °, c Critical Lane Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 8 M:104104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 19: 1 -5 SB On -Ramp & Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) { t t `► 1 Lane Configurations 1' r 1 f SignControt 'Stop Free • Free 0% 0% 0% Volume vehht ) � . �" �, ,0 � 0' `1029 758 80 879 Peak Hour Factor • 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Houiiy`dOW rste(vpti) 0'' " 0' '1106 ' 815 86 945 Pedestrians LaneWIdth (ft) Walking Speed (ftls) Percent' Bockage "' Right tum flare (veh) Median type ' . one Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft)';" pX, platoon unblocked 0.58 vC;corifticttrigJotuine :2224 1922 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2; stage 2 conf v& vCu, unblocked vol 3127 1106 1922 tC; Vitae' (SY tC, 2 stage (s) tF,(s) :. » 3.5 :.3.3� , 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 72 6 M e81:40KY v811Rt)' : 5; 258 312 . 1018 1037 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 VolUmeTotel 1108. 815 X945 Volume Left 0 0 86 0 Volume Right 7"077 815 Q .` 0,'.' cSH 1700 1700 312 1700 Volume'to Capacfy' "."0:65''.. ''..0.56 ' a Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 28 0 ContrrotDelay (s). ' , 0 07Z 0 Q 20 9 ; , :'0:0 Lane LOS C Approactrbelay (s) :. > 0 0 ? "1 7 Approach LOS Average Delay 0.6 • Intersection'apaclt,, •Utllzation. 65'3 %k.. :'ICU Level of Se+v)ce Analysis Period (min) 15 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Lane Group Flow (vph) 351 159 75 142 861 v lcRatio 0.58 0.58 0.20 0.32 0.63 Control Delay 21.3 25.3 18.5 13.3 17.8 Queue Delay 0.0 ` 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.3 25.3 18.5 13.3 17.8 Queue Length 50th (ft)- 60 52 22 19 143 Queue Length 95th (ft) 98 108 51 46 #228 Internal Link DM (8) 181 ' 229 829 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 747 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 tntei`sectoi"`�= uumh5ary� ,.' ° "" 337 0 0 0 0.47 468 0 0 0 0.18 445 0 0 0 0.32 1428 0 0 0 0.60 48 784 0.12 0.70 9.2 19.9 0.0 0.0 9.2 19.9 6 128 19 204 783 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 75 388 0 0 0 0.12 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 1213 0 0 0 0.65 M: 104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwiia\LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 �' -► 1 r '- t / ` 1 J � Configurations fl9 4t• ... •t r 'f tr. ., , .. Lane Con 'f tr. Ideal`Ftow(vphpt)` ; ` ` 1900" 1901) - .11900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900" 1900 ' 1900 �1900 '1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 '0.95 ` 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 ` 1.00 1.00 ' 0.95' 1.00 0.95 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 0 98 0.97 ' 1.00 '0.95" 1.00 ' " 0.95 1.00 • 2962 1607 1411 1593 3159 1547 3011 0.58 X 1.00 `0.25 1.00 X 0,21 1.00 Satd.Flowspenn) 2285 960 1411 423 3159 348 3011 Volume (vph) 168 . , "41: 124 " 100' ' 51 71 135 ' 773 45 46 612 133 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0 95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj'Flow:(vph)'; 1 x ,13'1 x 105 54 " . 75. X 142 <,. 814;.; _47 t 14d RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane& Group Ftoly (vph) 0 351`° , 0 "_0 159 " 75 142' "881 -.: ' 0' �. 48 784 "0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type ' Perm Perm Perm pm +pt pm +pt Protected Phases q 1 Permf'ed 'Phases.' " ' ,4 .8 .. 2 • 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.7 Effecttve $.(s) , • '14.0 Actuated g/C Ratio . 0.26 Clearance Tithe (s) 5.2;' Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap jvph), v/s Ratio Prot v/eRatlo'Perm v/c Ratio UniforM Delay; d1'. "° Progression Factor IncrsmentatDelay,`d2 Delay (s) Level'of Sence Approach Delay (s) Approaclii'tbS Lehi UtiI Factor Fit Fit Proteetect . Satd. Flow (prot) FR: Permitted HCM Average Control Delay, HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cyclelength (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis;l?eriod (iit n) c Critical Lane Group 20.0 8 5 2 13.8 13.8 30.5 22.3 14.9 144 33.3 23.7?' 0.26 0.26 0.58 0.41 5.1 i , 5.1 5.4 5.4 3.0 3.0 3.0 250.; 368 443 1309 c0.05 0.27 c0.17: 0.05 0.13 0.64 0.20 0.32 0.66 18.7. 1615' 10.9 13.5' 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.2 " ' 0'.3`0.4 1.2 16.8 11.3 14.7 C ..8,.. B 8 21.7 14.2 170 ' . HCM. Level of Service 0.61 Sum.of7oat (a) 67.2% ICU Level of Service '15 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 24.5 19.3 27.3 ,, 20.7 . . 0.48 0.36 5.4 5.4 3.0 3.0 304 1090 0.02 c0.26 0.08 0.16 0.72 13.3 15.7' 1.00 1.00 0.2 °;` 13.5 18.0 8 _B. 17.8 4 2010 Future with Project Conditions 21: Nordstrom Entrance /I -5 NB Off Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 11/29 /2004 ~ t �• l ne 290 57 246 220 987 129 1002 0.90 0.04 0.88 0.84 0.63 0.78 0.61 66.3 0.1 64.9 62.4 18.0 56.2 20.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.2 68.3 0. 64.9 62.4 18.7 56.2 20.4 181 0 160 142 248 67 238 #328 0 #301 #270 m253 #183 306 54 179 301 369 Lane Group Flow (vph) v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Tum Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 332 1454 293 273 1559 165 1637 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 256 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 54 0 0 0 0 121 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.87 0.04 0.84 0.81 0.76 0.78 0.66 PriaRENTLIgha # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila1L0S\Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 21: Nordstrom Entrance /I -5 NB Off Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 11/29/2004 t 1 Lane Configurations Ideat rlow (vphp))" Total Lost time (s) LanetWt(I: actor ` Fri Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Perr'riitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1900 t l v 4 4. , , +t♦ 1800 "1906 1900 1900=, 1900.' 1900 1900:' 1900 '1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1:00 "1:00 0:95 0.95 0.95 " ' 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.90 0.97 b.91''' ° `0.95 `0.98 `1.00 - 1660 1454 1543 1437 3091 0.97 1.00' 0.95 0.98 1.00' 1660 1454 1543 1437 3091 338 3249 Volume (vph) :. •; 169= „ 113' 55 308 . • 0 ' 144 0 .769, ' 188 > 125 , 972 ;' 0 Peak -hour factor, 0 PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Mi. .F)ow(vph) . '' ` , 174' ... 116' ..57' - '315 - 0`- '•148' 0 . `793 194 ' 129 "1002 ' 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane:G7oupFIoWi'(vph) • ° '0` 290 °• 57 .. '246 . 220 . "0 . ' 0 ' 987'' "0' ` 129 1002' 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Split Free .' Split Protected Phases 4 4 8 Pemlmed'Phases'T - Free Actuated Green, G (s) 18.9 100.0 17.7 17.7 Effective`Greari g;(sr < 19:4°' 00 0 • `,`18.2 .18:2' " Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 1.00 0.18 0.18 Glearirie*TIeie(IC wA 4 S t '2,4.5 4 :5'. ", Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cep (vph) 322'' =:1454 . 281 262 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.16 0.15 v7sltatto Perm :. _ - 0.04'. v/c Ratio 0.90 0.04 0.88 0.84 0.63 Uniforim'Deiay, di' :' ' 39.4.''" "0 0 . °39:8 39.5 ` 18,1 " Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 Increme'tal,Delay ",'d2 26,7` " " . - 241 - , - . , 20.4 Delay (s) 66.0 0.1 64.5 59.9 Level Cif Service Approach Delay (s) 55.2 62.4 APproa`kLOS:` ' 8 ,: f �'. 49.9 50.4 0.50 3.0 1558', 0.32 17.3 B . . 17.3 HCM Average Co'ntrolQelay :ai `.' • ' 31.G 11CM:Levet Service ' HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 ActSa1ed.Cyc►etenytti (s) >' " '100.0 . Sum of lost' time (s) = :' 12.0` Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysts sPeriod'(tnln) " ' ' ' ° c Critical Lane Group 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1624 3249 0.20 1.00 Perm M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 1 49.9 49.9 50.4 50,4 0.50 0.50 '4.5 " �4.5: 3.0 3.0 170 1637 0.31 0.76 0.61 19.9 17.8' 1.00 1.00 - 26.7 1,7 46.6 19.5 D B 22.6 C 22: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) t 1 Lane at'arp 7% 7 r t 'Itli Lane Group Flow (vph) 254 734 1165 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.82 1.06 Control Delay 82.1 22.6 51.2 Queue Delay 0.0 24.2 " 79.5 Total Delay 82.1 46.8 130.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 161 313 ` -484 Queue Length 95th (ft) #312 #545 m #396 Internal Link Dist (ft) 153 Turn Bay Length (ft) 175 Base Capacity (vph) 272 891 1102 1951 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 165 956 Sptliback Cap Reductn 0 179 0 37 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 1.03 1.24 0.69 NErr SBir"SBR .,' 686 830 550 0.35 1.04 0.83 2.9 63.2 19.9 1.0 • 34.6 0.2 4.0 97.8 20.0 23 -305 142 m62 m #409 m #469 95 301 800 0 63 0 1.13 300 661 4 0 0 0.84 - Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for95th percentile queue. Is metered by upstream signal. M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 2010 Future with Project Conditions 22: Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 11/29/2004 Lane Configurations ' ? '1 ?'1' t'1' r Idea(MOW 0011011'7 1800 1800 "1800 1800'' 1800 1800 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 LaniUt8 Factor ,; = 1:00 1:00 "'`0.83;'0:83 0.95 - 1.00 " Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected O.95 . 7.00" `0.95 = 1:00 1.00 '`1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1509 1350 2505 2636 3078 1 Flt Permitt'Bd i.00 ' 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1509 1350 2505 2636 3078 1377 Volume'(vph) . ; : 239 699';1095 645 ..780 517 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Ad Flow (vph) '234' "� 114'"'$1 '65 ' 686 "830 .0 550 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane 'Grvuj3 Plow (vph) . .254 " 134' 1165 .. ' 686 830 ' 550 ' Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2%, 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% Tum.Type pm+ov' ' Prot pm+ov Protected Phases 5 3 3 8 4 5 Permitted'Pha s' "e 5 �..._ Actuated Green. G (s) 18.0 62.0 44.0 74.0 26.0 44.0 Effect(}ie'Green. g'(s)`' 18.0 820' '44.0 "74 :0' ' 26.0 ` 44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.62 0.44 0.74 0.26 0.44 Cteararice TIM'S ts)" 410:' 4A . '''4.0 "4.0' 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 272 891 ° '1102 1951 800 661 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.36 c0.47 0.26 c0.27 0.15 v/s Ratio Perm 018 ' 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.82 1.06 0.35 1.04 0.83 Unffornn Delay, di = 40.4 14 �8 'x`2810 = "4.6 : 37.0 ". "' 24,7 Factor 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.62 0.62 0.41 Increllientsrfbalay,'d2 `37:17 "` 8.2c`'282 " 0.0 38:1 Delay (s) 77.4 21.0 49.3 2.9 60.9 17.0 Level oi~ Service ''E` " D A ° E 6 Approach Delay (s) 35.5 32.1 43.4 Approach LOS O C"' The Transpo Group HCM °Average Control Delay , 36 .6 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated;Cyote Length (s) ' ` ' 100.0 ` Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.5% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 8.0 E f r 23: 1 -5 NB Off -Ramp & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) 4\ t 1 .' %V e Lane Configurations r 4f ++ Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 450 0 1745 1370 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 474 0 1837 1442 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (f /s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 129 175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.85 0.75 0.75 v0. conflicting volume 2361 721 1442 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 42, stage 2 conf Vol vCu, unblocked vol 1547 299 1258 tC, single (s) 8.8 8.9 4.1 tC. 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 10 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 90 528 417 Volume Total 474 918 918 721 721 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 474 0 0 0 : 0 cSH 526 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.90 0.54 0.54 0.42 ' 0.42 Queue Length 95th (ft) 261 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 48.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS E Approach Delays) 46.5 0.0 LOS E hr"fers Zift i1fh Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 5.9 72.4% 15 0.0 0 0.95 0 ICU Level of Service 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Lane Group Flow (vph) 265 801 1097 vlc Ratio;'. 0:62 '1.53 ° 0.71 Control Delay 44.1 273.5 12.2 Queue delay Ia'185 9 - 2.7 Total Delay 44.1 459.4 15.0 t3u9u "a? englh SOtt'(ft) 82 " 216 ` ;363 Queue Length 95th (ft) 118 #892 68 Interne)LUnktl'st'( )" 1297 1035 Tum Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph)s - 510'. 525 . 1551 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spiiltiack "Gap.l#eductn 0,7 1'12' "'328 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduce`tl vk'ITati ' V: 194" '0,90 if 2010 Future with Project Conditions 24: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 11/29/2004 t f �► 1 L`8r1e^,Grot'rp 350 528 1392 0.44 0:90 7.6 60.6 9.4 0.0' 0.9 " '13.i .. 7.6 61.5 22.5 ` -110 64 243 42m#189 m265 49 125 794 587 2490 0 8 1099 0 0:44 ‘ 1. 00 Volume exceeds queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 795th peroentlfevoiume 'e><ceedscapacity, q ieue'may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m 'Valiiiitiffd(9551.perCentiliquatioili metered by upstream signal. 2010 Future with Project Conditions 24: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 11/29/2004 C k • t P\ 6171slo 11' NE 11§1 x, '. Lane Configurations Vi r T4• r '' f? Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor` 0.97 1.00 '0.83 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 ' 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3090 1425 2810 1439 3090 3185 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3090 1425 2810 1439 3090 3185 Volume (vph) 233 705 965 308 465 1225 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 Adj. Flow(vph) 265 801 1097 350 528 1392 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group, Flow (vph) 265 801 1097 350 528 1392 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% Tum Type pm+ov Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 1 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.3 31.8 54.2 54.2 18.5 77.2 Effective Green, g (s) 13.8 32.8 55.2 55.2 ! 19.0 78.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.33 0.55 0.55 0.19 0.78 ClearanceTime'(s) 4.5 4:5 ' 5.0 5.0; 4.5. 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 426 524 1551 794 587 2491 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.29 c0.39 0.17 0.44 v/s Ratio Perm 0.27 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.62 1.53 0.71 0.44 0.90 0.56 Uniform. Delay, d1 40.6 33.6 16.5 13.3 39.6 4.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.44 1.15 1.90 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 247.4 2.1 1.4 12.4 0.6 Delay (s) 43.5 281.0 11.7 7.1 58.0 8.7 Level of Service . D . F 8 A ' E A Approach Delay (s) 222.0 10.6 22.2 Approach LOS .. F B C Irlta irlrnary " :. HCM Average Control. Delay 66.5 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length (s) -,` 100.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.8% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 8.0 E M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with - Protect PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group A 1 p m Volume for 95th:percentlleemus Is metered byupstream signal. 2010 Future with Project Conditions 25: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & 61st PI S /Mall 11/29/2004 -►1 ! ' - 1 t `► Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 385 145 92 833 118 189 213 262 v/c Ratja' " ''`_" 0:62`° 0:22 '' 019 '_ 021 0:61' ` ` 0.74 0.62 !. 0.82 Control Delay 29.4 15.8 16.4 6.7 15.7 43.9 52.1 44.2 51.3 Quebrati lay ' O:o' 0.0 - 0:0 0.0 0.6' ' 0 0'' 0.10 0.0 ": 0.0'_ Total Delay 29.4 15.8 16.4 6.7 16.3 43.9 52.1 44.2 51.3 QueuetengtW 0th It 83 "".78 55. "`10 ':87 '' ' 66, 7741 ., `131' ''194 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 123 127 109 m13 m279 104 207 181 273 InteYnattInk Dts(ft 1297 402 " „ 85' , '163 Tum Bay Length (ft) 75 75 100 Base Capacitylliph ". ' 39• 11413' 781 440 .1361 226 " " '355 365 ` 415 - Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 0 0 spill6aoli Caip Red'ucln `0`' 0. ''' 0,' ' 0 ' 0 '''"0' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 Reduceily /c Ratio- ,•: U52'f 0.22 b`19. '.0.21. O.62 ''0;53 i'.1.68 l 25: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & 61st PI S /Mall IgoVeltiain Lane Configurations 1 1 ft Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Util.. Factor ' 1.00 Frt 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1608 Fit Permitted 0.24 Satd. Flow (perm) 403 Volume (vph) 190 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 204 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% Tum Type pm +pt Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 74.3 Effective Green, g (s) 75.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 Clearance Time (s) 4.8 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 423 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.48 Unifonvi Delay; dt 25.0 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental; Delay, d2 0.9 (s) 25.8 Level ;of Service ' , ' C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS me HCM Average-Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 3217 1439 1593 1.00 1.00 0.50 3217 1439 830 358 135 86 0.93 0.93 0.93 385 145 92 0 0 0 385 145 92 1% 1% 2% Perm pm +pt 4 3 4 8 64.3 64.3 58.2 65.1 65.1 60.1 0.54 0.54 0.50 4.8 4.8 4.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 1745 781 454 0.12 0.01 0.10 0.09 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.61 14.3 14.0 18.4 25.0 1.00 1.00 0.49 0.55 0.3 0.5 0.1 1.0 14.6 14.5 9.1 14.8 S B A' B 17.7 14.2 g B 28.6 0.62 120.0 73.8% 15 T+ � 1• 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.95 1.00 3018 1624 1534 1.00 0.24 1.00 3018 408 1534 503 272 110 55 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 541 292 118 59 0 0 0 0 833 0 118 189 2% 2% 0% 0% pm +pt 8 5 2 2 53.0 26.2 19.5 54.1 27.4 20.1 0.45 0.23 0.17 5.1 4.6 4.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 1381 167 257 c0.28 0.04 0.12 0.12 0.71 49.8 1.00 12.8 62.6 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 0.74 47.4 1.00 10.4 57.8 E , 59.7 121 0.93 130 0 0 0% 8.0 0 198 0.93 213 0 213 0% pm +pt 6 36.1 36.9 0.31 4.8 3.0 322 c0.07 0.13 0.66 41.0 1.00 5.0 46.0 D M:104104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 1 � T. ti`C7rtt C' `°BBIc "WBr` vvEe " WBR" :tot"' N14 .N9);:'" s-Bt °$ ttfr so 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.95 • 1.00 1624 1508 0.43 1.00 742 1508 52 192 0.93 0.93 56 206 0 0 262 0 0% 0% 6 24.8 25.6 0.21 4.8 3.0 322 c0.17 0.81 44.9 1.00 14.5 59.4 E 53.4 0 4 \ t \* 2010 Future with Project Conditions 26: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 . L Group w (22 45 54 315 :75741 78 20 37 . v ie R atio' Flovph) '1 b.'T2 7 (?. ` di)8 0.95"'' . 0'.9 " 0. ' 0 Control Dela 124.1 39.6 30.3 84.5 52.3 776 74.2 96. 41.4 f2ueo'a`ai`elay >''',.. ' tits' o.o ' ' 0.0 0.0 .0.0 . o.o - ' 0.0 °"0.0 . 0.0 Total Delay, , 39.6 30.3 84.5 52.3 75.1 74.2 96.5 41.4 Queue en 18 &' 146 "` 30 257 313 ,.136' `321`. `249' 268 Queue Lengt:97:,',.,1; #346 190 m61 m#421 #434 #253 #457 #438 345 Intemai linli Oise (tt . ' 40 • ` 990 2 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 1 150 Base ta'pac (vpt 2.16 "631; '262 '. 322 818'" "322` 987 _," Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spt96ackCapRed eem n C a , 0 ,..,. ; : 0 0 ... 0 . _ 0 0' , 0 ,, Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio ' 1.06= 0,72 ';0.19 .'0.98 0 - .93 0.79 ' 0.99': 0.99 `. 0.75 Volume exceeds' capacity; queue is theotstically infinRe. . Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ft' 95th'peroentile'vwturrieexcewis Cepaeky queiemay tie longer Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m , 'Volume for 95th''percehtlfe queuels "metered by upstream signal: M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 26: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 KfaTem Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Utf. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1577 Volume (vph). 204 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 222 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 222 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% Tum Type ; ` Prot Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases ' Actuated Green. G (s) 16.0 Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane. Grp. Cap (vph) 210 v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.06 Uniform Delay, d1 52.0 Progression Factor 0.95 Incremental Delay, d2 76.2 Delay (s) 125.6 Level of Service F Approach Delay (s) ApproaCtt LOS -♦ '- A -� t r 1 d 1.00 1.00 0.95 1577 TT r `f 40 `f To 'i n. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1,00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95. 1.00 0.95 1.00 3154 1411 1608 3066 1593 3080 1547 2965 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 3154 1411 1608 3066 1593 3080 1547 2965 420 50 290' 490 224 165 565 160 294 489 189 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 457 54 315 533 243 179 614 174 320 532 205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 457. 54 315 776 0 179 788 0 320 737 0 3 % 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% Perm Prot Prot Prot 4 3 8 5 2 1 .6 4 24.0 24.0 24.0 32.0 16.0 31.0 25.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 ' 32.0 16.0 31.0 25.0 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.27 0.13 0.26 0.21 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 631 282 322 818 212 796 322 0.14 c0.20 c0.25 0.11 c0.26 c0.21 0.72 44.9 0.73 6.7 39.3 0 64.8 0.04 0.19 39.9 0.71 1.4 29.8 C HCM Average Control Delay. 63.4 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.96 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.0% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 0.98 47.7 0.97 36.4 82.8 F, 0.95 43.2 0.80 16.9 51.4 D 60.5 E 0.84 50.8 1.00 25.2 76.0 E HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 0.99 44.3 1.00 29.0 73.4 E 73.9 E 12.0 E 0.99 47.4 1.00 48.2 95.6 F M:\04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila\LOS\Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 40.0 40.0 0.33 4.0 3.0 988 0.25 0.75 35.5 1.00 3.1 38.6 0 55.9 E.; 5% i4 t '► 4 Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 787 147 732 332 788 179 587 v/o'Ra1io : '',''''.'.';'„'"..:201271)3.72" ":G. 70:61 0.86 0.80 :0.77 . 0:83" Control Delay 59.7 24.0 66.1 35.8 58.0 44.5 66.0 56.2 Total Delay 59.7 24.0 66.1 35.8 58.0 44.5 66.0 56.2 Queue Cengtfi 50thlft) , x'.96" " 250 `''110 ' , 2 5 8 ' 243 Queue Length 95th (ft) m112 m290 #194 327 #374 364 #231 #304 internal Lfnk0is't ff) 990 ' 1003 235"'' ... 426 , •' Tum Bay Length (ft) 100 Base Gapacitty (vAT 01 . 1089 " "219 1207' 428 1046 253 720'" Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5pltl6ack'Cap f eductn 0:" 0 `.`' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 Rediicer:EVIc Ratkt, '• .0.68'= .0 72: "0 ". 6,78 0.75 '0 # ' 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m 'Uoluml8 for95tli'percentiie q iiue is Metered signal. 2010 Future with Project Conditions 27: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 2010 Future with Project Conditions 27: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 -• r t P' `' 4 I ov ._ trr-t e 1'` R G '"fi r °r ;a """""'v i3s°0 { Lane Configurations 1.* ) A ?A Ideal Flow (vphpi)` '' 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor ' 1.00 0.95 ` 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 1752 3374 1752 3423 1770 3393 1787 3435 Flt Permitted > 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 3374 1752 3423 1770 3393 1787 3435 Volume (vph) 110 544 180 135 569 105 305 525 200 165 400 140 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow .(vph) 120 591 196 147 618 114 332 571 217 179 435 152 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 787 0 147: 732 0 332 788 0 179 587 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 10.9 37.7 14.5 41.3 25.6 33.7 15.1 23.2 Effective Green, g (s) 11.4 38.7 15.0 42.3 26.1 34.7 15.6 24.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.32 0.12 0.35 0.22 0.29 0.13 0.20 Clearance Tillie '(s) 4.5 ' 5.0; 4.5; 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.0' Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 166 _:1088 219 , 1207 385 ' 981 232 693 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.23 0.08 c0.21 c0.19 c0.23 0.10 0.17 v/s Ratlo'Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, dl Progression Factor Incremental Delay. d2 Delay (s) LevelrofService • Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS rri s£� SRVm ry HCM Average Control Delay, 43.2 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.0% Analysis Period (Min) , 15 c Critical Lane Group 0.72 0.72 0.67 0.61 0.86 0.80 0.77 0.85 52.8 35.9 50.1 , 32.0 45.2 39:5 50.5 46.1 0.94 0.59 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 7.2':2.0 7.8' 2.3 17.7 4.8 14.6 9.4 56.8 23.2 58.0 34.3 62.9 44.3 65.1 55.5 E.� C E' :.0 E D E 27.6 38.2 49.8 57.8 c o 0 ._ E .. HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 8.0 D M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOSIW eekday PM Peak12010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 28: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 282 296 610 44 vlc Ratio Control Delay 35.5 35.9 114.8 78.2 (queue Delay 0 0`' 0.0 , `0 0 :''00 Total Delay 35.5 35.9 114.8 78.2 Cueiie:(:englh SOth (ft) . ' 189-" '200' '^-77 : "35 Queue Length 95th (ft) 281 295 #803 #83 Internat Link Dtat (ft) :. 126 ` 141 Tum Bay Length (ft) 200 Base CapaCity'(vph) ` • 577 ' ' '543 , .87 - Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spfi , , 0' 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Fted`uced:'v1C lYatio " 'O ' 49',' ,1 12 '`17'61 11 416 1545 44 1378 400 0.14''i16' 0.97 0.54 1.07 0.69 61.5 145.2 49.6 82.5 82.3 40.1 0.0��. 00;x: ��o.b: O.o _ o.o 0.0 61.5 145.2 49.6 82.5 82.3 40.1 "9 z201" 697 " 35" -657 ' '272 29 #311 #837 #88 #796 396 520 , ... > - '939 125 250 150 76`. 360 ' 1599 81;' 1291 _ ' 577 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 =1;16 " ' 0:97' .0`.547 1 07 ° - 069 . Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # ' 95 thp eroentilevOlumeekceeds"capacIty queueinayhelonger. Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles. M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project -'PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 1' 2010 Future with Project Conditions 28: Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/2004 eme nt Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane UM. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (Wh) • e ' RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 Lane "Group Flow (vph) ' 282 ' 296 810 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% Tum Type Split Perm Protected Phases 4 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 42.5 42.5 42.5 Effective Green, g (s) . 43.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4,5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 567 572 534 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 0.18 v/s Ratio Perm c0.39 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.52 1.14 Uniform Delay, dl 32.4 32.7 41.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 lncieinentaIQelay d2'.' 0.7s: :0.8` 84.5' Delay (s) 33.1 33.5 125.5 Level`of Service ' 'C >'C' F Approach Delay (s) 80.7 Approach LOS F Zia m I-(CM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s);; Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group f -► ti r '- 4 4 \ t r `► 4 r f'BC� S'alr'""`t rit WB WBr'WBi2s . Nt; `' Nl3'r'' 38(f7rS'a rtk"'St t ' 4 r 4 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.98 1649 1663 1553 1817 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.98 1649 1663 1553 1817 485 35 549 20 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 539 . 39 610 ' 22 ' . 0 0' 2% Split 8 75.1 1.09 125.0 82.4% 15 r Vi r s. ) tt r 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 ' 1.00 1583 3400 3503 1687 3374 1509 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1583 3400 3503 1687 3374 1509 20 10 374 1385 5 40 1240 360 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 22 11 416 1539 6 44 1378 400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 11 ' 416 1545 0 44 1378 400 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 7% 7% 7% Perm Prot Prot Penn 8 5 2 1 6 8 6 3.9 3.9 12.0 55.7 3.9 47.6 47.6 4.9 4.9 13.0 56.2 4.9 48.1 48.1 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.45 0.04 0.38 0.38 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 71 62 354 1575 66 1298 581 c0.02 c0.12 0.44 0.03 c0.41 0.01 0.27 0.62 0.18 1.18 0.98 0.67 1.06 0.69 59.1 58.1.: 33.9 59.2 38.4 32.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 15.0 1.4 104.5 `18.2 22.6 43.1 . ° 3.4 74.2 59.5 160.5 52.1 81.8 81.6 35.6 E E` F .0 F' F 0 71.2 75.1 71.5 E E E HCM Level of Service Sum of, lost time (s) ICU Level of Service E 16.0 E M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 29: S.168th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) -+ ` 1 t '► j Lane Group Flow (vph) 5 5 229 165 5 1338 165 1295 vie Ratio '0,05 1308" 0.65 "0:52 0.05 ;° 069 - ''093 ' 0:55 _ Control Delay 43.4 43.4 43.1 39.4 45.4 21.3 88.6 14.0 Queue't5elay' ''" ' "0.0 "` 0.0 ' 0.0" 0.0 ' 0.0' "' 0.0 ` 1'0.0 06" Total Delay 43.4 43.4 43.1 39.4 45.4 21.3 88.6 14.0 Queue Length 50th'(ft) 3 3' ' 135 `° ` 94 ' 3 290 97 141 Queue length 95th (ft) 15 15 195 146 15 #603 #231 488 Internal tIll(bist (f Y Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 Base Capacity (vp(i)'` 274'''.' 45. M `367 , '328= 107' " - 1932`77frt ' 2361 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sptlltiac`k "Gap`Reductn - O r' b ,':0.,. 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced 'v /C Retta -'< ` 0.07 440 0:05' .'. 0.69 ° 0.93 0:55 intersett(onZurnma # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.: Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 29: S.168th St. & Southcenter Pkwy Segment 7) Lane Configurations Ideal'Fiow (vphpl)"; Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor' Fn Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (° /,) A Tum, Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green. g (s)' Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 Clearance Time (s) '.5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 35 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 47.8 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2' 1.9 Delay (s) 49.7 Level of Service t1 Approach Delay (s) ApproschLQS HCM Average :Control ;Delay, HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuatad'Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group t irrEMVIKTWOrMOMM 1900' 190 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1444 1292 1703 1524 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1444 1292 1703 1524 5 0 5 215 0 155 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 5 0 5 229 0 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 229 165 25% 25% 25% 6% 6% 6% Split Split Perm 4 4 8 8 5 1.4 19.8 19.8 2.4''. 20.8.'20.8' 0.02 0.21 0.21 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 31 354 317 c0.00 c0.13 0.18 0.65 47.8 36.2 1.00 1.00 2.4 4.0 50.3 40.3 D. D 50.0 38.8 24.9 :. 0.70 100.0 72.4% 15 4 r 1000 1900 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1787 0.95 1787 5 0.94 5 0 5 1% Prot 1.0 2.0 0.02 5.0 3.0 36 0.00 0.11 0.52 0.14 35.X..48.2 1.00 1.00 1.5 ` 1.8 36.7 49.9 l) ' = HCM - Level _ofService' ; Sum Of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 t P +14 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.99 1.00 3527 1.00 3527 1148 110 0.94 0.94 1221 117' 0 0 1338 0 1% 1% 45.8 46.8 0.47 5.0 3.0 1651 c0.38 0.81 22.8 1.00 4.4 27.2 C 27.3 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1770 0.95 1770 0.67 40.8 0.88 5.6 41,6 D 12.0 C M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- TukwilalLOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3537 1.00 3537 155 1213 5 0.94 0.94 0.94 165 1290 5 0 0 0 165 1295 0 2% 2% 2% Prot 1 13.0 57.8 14.0;`'58.8`:. 0.14 0.59 5.0 5,0 3.0 3.0 248 2080 c0.09 c0.37 0.62 13.4 1.10 1.2' 15.9 B . ; 18.8 30: Minkler Blvd. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) ! ` t �► 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 122 64 1295 90 1406 v /cRetlo 0.40 0.24 ";''0.61'''0.23 0.53 Control Delay 22.3 21.1 7.2 4.9 5.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 ` :00 05 o:o 22.3 21.1 7.2 4.9 5.6 40' . 20 111 5 103 77 46 169 23 185 1420 Delay Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Infernal Link D'ist(ft) Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 BaseCapacky (vph) 599`' = 536`' 2130 390 ' 2642 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vic Ratio : 0,20 0.12 0,61 0.23 0.53 t � � 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 30: Minkler Blvd. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 11/29/2004 Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Tum Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Gr Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v /sRatiaPerni v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service' Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS ti • 4 \ t P `► 1 r 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95. 1.00 1787 1599 0.95; 1.00 1787 1599 0 0 0 115 0 60 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0 0 0 122 0 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 0 64 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% HCM Average Control Delay, HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Capacity Utilization Analysis Pe?fod'(m)n) c Critical Lane Group 7.0 0.62 60.0 54.9% 7.9 9.0 0.15 5.1 3.0 268?,. c0.07 Prot ` custom 8 8 8 7.9 9.0 0.15 5.1 3.0 0.04 0.46 0.27 23.3 ` 22.8 1.00 1.00 1.2 i 0.6 24.5 23.2 C<-. C 24.0 c HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 3592 1770 3539 1.00 0.12 1.00 3592 218 3539 0 1177 40 85 1322 0 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0 1252 43 90 1406 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1295 0 90 1406 0 0% 0% 0% 2% 2% 2% pm +pt 2 1 6 6 31.9 42.1 42.1 32.8 43.0 43.0 0.55 0.72 0.72 4.9 4.7 4.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 1964 • 317 2536 c0.36 0.03 c0.40 0.17 0.86 0.28 0.55 9.6 5.5 4.0 0.54 1.00 1.00 1.7 0.5 0.9 6.9 6.0 4.9 A <' A:` A. 6.9 4.9 A A 12.0 A M:\04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 31: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 -► 1 t t Lane Group Flow (vph) 174 21 126 232 484 862 v/c Ratio 0.60 , 0.08 . 0.37 0.78 0.77 . 1.01 Control Delay 38.9 32.2 34.5 47.3 40.2 67.7 Queuel7etay z 0:0 ' ¢ Q ` 0:0 `'0.0 ` 0.0 `` 0.0 Total Delay 38.9 32.2 34.5 47.3 40.2 67.7 Queue�tength50tl (ft) 7s '. ,10 " -62` 925 137 . '-292 Queue Length 95th (ft) 159 30 120 #245 #205 #437 Internal Llnk Olst((t)° .1712, 768' '1025 2551 Tum Bay Length (ft) 100 Base Capacity Zvph)'. 375' 324 379 331 685 855 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Splt(liack`Ca� Rediietn t)`' 0 " 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratto " 0.45` ' Ci:33 ` ""0,70 011 1.01 `. Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capac p rty; queue longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 0 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Protect- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Utli, Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) . 55 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 Adj. Flow'(vph) 58 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) -" 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% Tum Type ' Split Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 13.1 Effective Green, g (s) 13.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 Clearance Time (s) 4.8 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 291 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor (ncrorr enW D ley, d2 ` Decay (s) Level of Servlce Approach Delay (s) 2010 Future with Project Conditions 31: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 1 < 1 t t ► 1 1 OA� 5111" 7 5`81 "ESF2"' V1errW Y -7VO$1711 L N61"* 515r 68rr.SI 1,, 4t• 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.98 1.00 3270 1.00 3270 659 100 0.95 0.95 694 . 105 0 0 882 0 8% 8% 0.60 33.7 1.00 3.3. 37.0 31.0 D C 38.4 Approach LOS D Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated<Cycle;Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min)' c Critical Lane Group c0.15 0.37 0.78 0.76 30.4 33.2 32.7 1.00 1.00 1.00 0:7 12.1" 5.5'. 31.1 45.3 38.2 40.3 38.2 O D` 0.01 0.08 30.9 1.00 1900 1900 • 1900 1900 1900 • 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.97 too 1.00 1814 1568 1779 1553 3164 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1814 1568 1779 1553 3164 110 20 65 55 220 15 420 25 60 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 116 21 68 58 232 16 442 26 63 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 21 0 126 232 0 484 0 0 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 13% 13% 13% 8% Penn Split Perm Split Split 3 4 4 1 1 2 3 4 13.1 15.8 15.8 16.3 13.9 16.6 16.6 ` 17.3 0.16 0.19 0.19 0.20 4.8 4.8 4.8 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 252 341 298 833 0.07 c0.15 50.0 HCM Level of Service 0.81 88.5 ` Sum of lost time :':(s) 61.5% 15 ICU Level of Service D 18.0 B M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 21.7 22.7 0.26 5.0 3.0 858 c0.28 1.00 31.9 1.00 31.9 ::,. 63.8 E 63.8 E f 2010 Future with Project Conditions 32: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 t Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 167 91 135 140 vlcRatio" '0.21; 0,36';`0.32 0.29 0.29 Control Delay 21.5 22.6 22.8 21.7 22.2 Queue elay. , ' 0.0; 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 Total Delay 21.5 22.6 22.8 21.7 22.2 Queue'tength 50th (ft} "`22' .55 > 29' 43 45' Queue Length 95th (ft) 54 110 69 90 97 !Menial Link Disf (5)' ' 768' 472 Tum Bay Length (ft) Base Capacty (vph)' .:' 409, : 56'7" 371 595 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spiliback'Cao klidietn '0' .., 0 ° . 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reducedv /c'Ratio ' 0.1t 0.29','" 0.25 0.23 640 0.30 10.4 0.0 10.4 51 143 394 696 2193 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.20 0.29 38 725 0.12 - 0.47 26.7 18.5 0.0 ' 0.0 18.5 13 .127 38 190 360 429 0 0 0 0;09 1611 0 0 0 0.45 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 32: Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 ♦!~ k 1 t r r MaainenfM" "la ' ItTr. altrWBl- "WSY"":Wait"”Pat''� 7 7N131r St3t " SST : SB t Lane Configurations A 11 A l i 4 1 4A Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1647 1770 1728 1752 3460 1752 3408 Flt Permitted 0.67 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (pens) 1249 1647 1116 1728 1752 3460 1752 3408 Volume (vph) 65 35 120 85 65 60 130 545 50 35 550 125 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 70 38 129 91 . 70 65 140 586 54 38 591 134 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 167 0 91 135 0 140 840 0 38 725 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Tum Type Penn, Penn Prot Prot Protected Phases 2 6 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 2 6 Green. G (s) 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.4 31.0 3.3 23.9 Effective Green, g (s), 11.7 ` :11.7 11.7', 11.7 41.4 32.0 4.3 24.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.53 0.07 0.42 Clearance lime (s) 5.0 - 5.0 5.0 � 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)': 244 " 321 218 4 337 333 1845 126 1414 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.08 c0.08 0.18 0.02 c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.52 0.42 0.40 Uniform Delay, d1 20.6 21.6 21,2' 21.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.5 1.3 f 0.8 Delay (s) 21.2 23.2 22.5 21.9 Level of Service • Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Period (Mtn) c Critical Lane Group C C' C 22.6 C C 14.7 0.49 60.0 65.9% 15. 22.1 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 0.42 0.35 21.4 8.0 1.00 1.00 0.9 0.1 22.3 8.1 C A 10.7 B B 12.0 C M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 0.30 0.51 26.4 13.0 1.00 1.00 1.4 0.3 27.8 13.4 C B 14.1 B 4 33: S. 180th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) Yi Lane Group Flow (vph) 222 373 180 596 494 22 122 41 494 727 v/c Ratio': 1,24`;` 0.27 0.68 1.25 :0.50 ' 0.11 .< 0.58 0:23', 0.37 ` '1.09 Control Delay 191.0 24.8 22.1 141.1 7.6 . 46.4 54.8 48.5 23.3 92.8 Oueuibelay d:0.' '0.0 0.0' 0.0 0.0 , ' 0.0 0.0 ' 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 191.0 24.8 22.1 141.1 7.6 46,4 54.8 48.5 23.3 92.8 Queue tength 50th (ft)~ ' -214 100 '83' =592 147 15 91 29' 122 -644 Queue Length 95th (ft) #372 137 m95 m #646 m167 40 150 63 154 #920 Inteinal Link Disf (ft)' 341'' ' °1258 " ' 406 891 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 175 150 200 BaseCapacity(vph). '179 1407 266 '477 " 989 260 274 . 233'•1319 665 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn `0'° : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 . 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced' Vic Ratio 1.24 0.27 0.68 1:25 0.50 0.08 0.45 '0.18 0.37 1.09 ts- " vnm . Volume'exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m " Volume for 95th percentile queueis'metered`by upstream signal. 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 4 33: S. 180th St. & Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) krolia Brit ,. t3' ;'sE lt3trrW t.Ti Fi 7WB RSC: 3B`t" :t "7S)3r'SH S Lane Configurations I Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 FR 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 Flt Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 Volume (vph) 200 Peak - hour factor. PHF 0. Adj. Flow (vph) 222 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 222 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% Tum Type Prot Protected Phases 3 Pemiltted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 11.0 Effective Green. g (s) 12.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 179 vls Ratio Prot c0.12 v/3 Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.24 Uniform Delay, dl 54.0 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental belay, d2 146.4 (s) 200.4 Level Delay of Service F Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS.. 0.27 24.2 1.00 0.1 24.3 C 90.0 HCM Average Control Delay 71.3 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.09 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.4% Analysis' eriod (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 -► r '- < t P \* 4 4' 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 3518 1787 1787 1519 1736 1827 1553 1.00 0.53 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 3518 997 1787 1519 1736 1827 1553 301 35 162 536 445 20 110 37 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 334 39 180 596 494 22 122 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 373 0 180 596 494 22 122 41 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 4% 4% 4% Perm pm +ov Split Perm 7 4 2 1 1 7 4 4 1 47.0 31.0 31.0 76.1 12.9 12.9 12.9 45.1 48.0 32.0 32.0 78.1 13.9 13.9 13.9 46.1 0.40 0.27 0.27 0.65 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.38 5.0 5.0 5.0 ' 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 '3.0 3.0 3.0 1407 266 477 - 989 201 212 180 1319 0.11 c0.33 0.19 0.01 c0.07 0.14 0.18 0.13 0.68 1.25 0.50 0.11 0.58 39.4 44.0 10.8 47.5 50.3 0.42 0.45 1.18 1.00 1.00 2.3 . 118.4 0.1 0.2 3.7 18.8 138.1 12.9 47.7 54.0 B F B ,',•D D 72.5 52.1 E . HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 0.03 0.23 48.2 1.00 0.8 48.8 D E 16.0 F 1 P1 t+ 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.95 1.00 3433 1731 0.95 1.00 3433 1731 445 345 310 0.90 0.90 0.90 494 383 344 0 0 0 494 727 0 2% 2% 2% Split 2 2 0.37 28.6 0.82 0.7 22.6 C M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04\04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila\LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 45.1 46.1 0.38 5.0 3.0 665 c0.42 1.09 37.0 0.85 60.8 92.1 F 64.0 2010 Future with Project Conditions 34: S. 180th St (Segment 14) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 34: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) 11/29/2004 L.a, Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 634 ° 22 1223 v/4 Ratio 0,8t`° 0.41' = ` : () 21' : 0.96 Control Delay 82.4 12.5 65.4 4 Queue Delay 0.' ; 0.0 0.0 , 0.0 Total Delay 82.4 12.5 65.4 45.3 Qtfeue t e @ii 50th of a \,fit 65 18 509 Queue Length 95th (ft) #171 195 m26 #642 Intemal'G(nktiist"(ft * " ';1256" ' ' 280` Tum Bay Length (ft) 125 Ba's'e "Capacity vph ' 124 1560`'' ''344 "1276 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 8piilbackCapReductn .. "0 ; 0 0 `' °' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reducejv /cRat(o ': 0.81'' 0.4f" "006 '.n'. t 155 775 0.31 ' 0.96 46.6 64.7 0.0 0.0" 46.6 64.7 56 311 90 #435 231.9 498 820 0 0 0 0 0 0 0:31 ' 0.95 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. ; . Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m " Volume for 95th percentile ;queue is'metered by upstream signal. M; \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group B 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1770 0.95 1770 Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (Vphpi) Total Lost time (s) Lane Utii. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) 88 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 98 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% Tum Type Prot Protected Phases 3 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.4 52.0 Effective 'Green, g (s) ` 10.9 53.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.44 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 161 1561 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.18 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.61 0.41 Uniform Delay, 01 52.5 22.8 Progression Factor 0.71 0.49 Incremental Delay, d2 8.1 0.2 Delay (s) 43.2 11.3 Level of Service D 8 Approach Delay (s) 15.5 Approach LOS B r 41• 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3534 1.00 3534 565 0.90 628 0 634 2% 1 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1719 0.95 1719 5 20 0.90 0.90 6 22 0 0 0 22 2% 5% Prot 8 3.2 3.7 0.03 4.5 3.0 53 0.01 0.42 57.1 1.22 3.5 73.4 E 4- 4 4\ t ` +1■ 1900 4.0 0.95 0.97 1.00 3328 1.00 3328 865 0.90 961 0 1223 5% 4 4 44.8 45.8 0.38 5.0 3.0 1270 c0.37 0.96 36.3 0.88 12.9 44.8 D 45,3 D HCM Average Control Delay ;42.9 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated - Cycle Lengths) ' 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.1% Analysts :Period (min). "` . 15 c Critical Lane Group ICU Level of Service 2010 Future with Project Conditions 4A 1900 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.96 0.99 3120 0.99 3120 236 20 80 0.90 0.90 0.90 262 22 89 0 0 0 0 0 155 5% 10% 10% Split 2 2 15.4 16.4 0.14 5.0 3.0 426 c0.05 0.36 47.1 1.00 2.4 49.5 D 49.5 D f 16.0 C M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 4'h 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 0.95 0.95 0.98 3173 0.98 3173 40 345 100 253 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 44 383 111 281 0 0 0 0 0 .0 775 0 10% 5% 5% 5% Split 6 6 29.9 30.9 0.26 5.0 3.0 817 c0.24 0.95 43.8 1.00 19.8 63.6 E 63.6 E 1 i e Cf 2010 Future with Project Conditions 35: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 144 851 1230 495 v/c 1RatTis'` ` i171 t3 42' ` 0.84 0'54 Control Delay 46.5 7.6 20.7 17.0 Queue' 1aY tS 0 0 " 0 0 ,'0.0 , Total Delay 46.5 7.8 20.7 17.0 Queue`Lel�gth 50th (ft) 767 ;124 - "'" '35a 79 Queue Length 95th (ft) m103 m178 #392 121 IntemaI Link blst'(ft)' 198 ,'210 598 Tum Bay Length (ft) 275 Base Gapaclty (vph)> ' 2025' 1472 919 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 $piiltiaok Cap ft ®tlueM 0'` 0 ' b . " 't7 > Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduce /c'laatfo 0:71`" 0.42 "' 0.84" " 0.34 # , 95th; percentlle:volume. exceeds ,capacity,,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m , Votumefor95th' percentilequeueis ;meteredbjupstream`signat. "' 2010 Future with Project Conditions 35: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Andover Park E (Segment 11) Iv�ovetriera , g HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group _. 4 L ti Lane Configurations It Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Ut11. Factor 1.00 " 0.95 0.95 0.97 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.96 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.97 Satd. Flow (prot) 1736 3471 3372 3242 Flt Permitted ' 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.97 Satd. Flow (perm) 1736 3471 3372 3242 Volume (vph) 135. 800 936 220 330 135 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 144 851 996 234 ' 351 144 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 144 851 1230 0 495 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% Tum Type Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 6 Perri itfed Phases Actuated Green. G (s) 4.8 35.0 25.2 Effective Green, g (s) ' 5.8 36.0 26.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.60 0.44 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 188 2083 1472 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.25 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.86 0.41 Uniform Delay, dt 26.7. 6.4 Progression Factor 1.16 1.01 Incremental Delay, d2 27.5 0.1 Delay (s) 58.5 6.6 Level of Service E ' A Approach Delay (s) 14.1 Approach LOS ; B en , . egST6Rl 0.84 15.0 1.02 2.7 18.1 B 18.1 B 16.6 0.75 60.0 64.0% 15 15.5 16.0 0.27 4.5 3.0 865 c0.15 0.57 19.0 0.80 2.7 17.9 B 17.9 B HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 8 12.0 C 1 M:104104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 11/29/2004 36: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Sperry Dr. 1 J 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 82 1108 5 1362 15 31 26 371 62 v/c Ratia' 0 :45 0262 _` 0.02 '" 0 :88 0.08 ' 0.05 ; '0.04 .0.68 ` 0.10 Control Delay 26.2 19.9 1.8 13.6 25.8 25.1 25.0 39.1 25.5 Queue , 06lay '" " ;0 0,1;,'0.0 0:1 0.0 0.0 10 0.0. 0.0 Total Delay 26.2 20.0 1.8 13.7 25.8 25.1 25.0 39.1 25.5 Queue Cert th 50thO ` ft 9 � ,...27 .281. `: -° 0 � =`'4G - :7::,.. . ' 13 .. < 247' ' '31 Queue Length 95th (ft) 75 322 m0 m67 24 38 34 372 63 Internal Link Dist (ft)` i 257 '� 528 ' 61 , 352 _ . � , ' Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 100 75 Base tapaeity (Gph) '''"1826' ' 249 ' 1585 250 599 • 582 547- 630 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 Splliba'c (Cap Redt ctn fr 60 , A 0 0 0 0 . 0 0';` " 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vfc Ratio 0'45 0.63 "°0.02 ;OA" 0.08;' t) 05 70:04' 0.65" Iiltetee tfotrs0rftrfta " x: ' m Volume for 95th °percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal, 36: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & Sperry Dr. Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpi)' Total Lost time (s) Lane Utif. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 82 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane'Group Flow (vph) 82 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% Tum Type pm +pt Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases • • Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated gIC Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perrn v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS. Wititeart ; 4 60.1 61.8 0.52 5.0 3.0 156 0.03 0.24 0.53 23.2 1.32 2.9 33.5 C 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1736 0.07 132 80 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length' (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysts Period (min) c Critical Lane Group - ►ti rte d4\ t1+ ' 11 1900 ' 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 3469 1752 3395 1719 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.35 3469 360 3395 626 1070 5 5' 1046 275 15 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 1103 5 5 1078 284 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1108 0 5 1362 0 ; 15 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 5% pm +pt Perm 4 3 8 8; 2 60.1 56.6 55.9 42.2 61.8 57.6 ' 57.6 - 43.8 0.52 0.48 0.48 0.36 5.7 5.0 5.7 5.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1787 201 1630 228 c0.32 0.00 c0.40 0.01 0.62 0.02 0.84 20.7 24.1 27.1 0.88 0.10 0.35 0.6 0.0 1.8 18.8 2.4 11.2 B A' 8 19.8 11.2 B B 18.5 0.79 120.0 80.1% 15 Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 0.02 0.07 24.8 1.00 0.6 25.3 C HCM Level of Service 0.06 24.7 1.00 0.2 24.9 C 25.0 c t f `. 1 ` W)3r^W BR BL ° >3 14614771%07,181 ,+ r 4 r 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1503 1461 1770 1583 1.00 1.00 0.74 1.00 1503 1461 1371 1583 5 50 360 0 60 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 5 52 371 0 62 0 0 0 0 0 31 26 0 371 62 5% 5% 2% 2% 2% Perm Perm Perm 2 6 2 6' 8 42.2 42.2 42.2 42.2 43.8 43.8 43.8 ' 43.8 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 5.6 5.6 5.6 ' 5.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 549 533 500 ..578 0.02 0.02 0.05 24.6 1.00 0.2 24.8 C 12.0 B D M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transco Group 0.04 0.11 25.2 1.00 0.1 25.3 • C 2010 Future with Project Conditions 37: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/2004 Lane Group Flow (vph) 124 670 696 82 660 334 594 1026 391 1181 Ratio; " ` 0.95 17.91 x 0.95 0. ~e, 0 : 9 9 ' "0:53 � 0:79 "0.79" .. 0,55 "'0.94 Control Delay 107.5 48.1 40.5 122.7 81.8 20.5 52.7 37.9 45.1 50.5 . 0.0 . _ Queue a Delay 00 00 0.0 0:0 0.0 `" 0.0 0.0 6,0:, :: 0.0 ' 0.0 Total Delay 107.5 48.1 40.5 122.7 81.8 20.5 52.7 37.9 45.1 50.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) . "99,. 288 "7 569' ` '65 '271 `x: `142 ' 225 "139 ' 458 Queue Length 95th (R) m #215 #371 #760 #169 #398 211 292 451 190 #602 Internal Link Dist (ft) 526 149 300 279 300 1306 718 1263 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 :79 0.55 0.94 Turn Bay Length (ft) 175 Base Capacity (vph) 130 ' 752 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 Spikback Cap Reductn 0i Storage C ap Reductn 0 Reduced'vlc }patio r:' 0.89' 175 '733 0 0 0 0'95 08$ 175 93 0 200 200 665 634 750 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0.99: ' 0.53 0.79 # 95th; percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. , Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m „ Votume`for 95th`percen6)e queue Is' Metered by :upstream signal: M:\04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with Project Conditions 37: S. 180th St. (Segment 14) & W. Valley Highway (Segment 4) 11/29/2004 1 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (e)` Intersection Capacty Utilization Analysis Reriod (min), •. c Critical Lane Group ti Lane Configurations 1 t ft Ideal Flow (vphpl) ? 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 Lane Util, Factor 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected . '0.95 - 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1736 3471 Fn Permitted 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1736 3471 Volume (vph) 120 650 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 124 670 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 124 670 696 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% Turn Type Prot pm +ov Protected Phases 7 4 1 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.0 24.6 50.6 EffectiveGreen.,g(s) ` 9.0. '25.6., 52.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.21 0.44 Clearahce ni (s) 'S b 5.0; ,.. '5:0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane G Cep (vph) ' �. � 130 '740 732 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.19 c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.91 0.95 Uniform Delay, d1 55.3 46.0 32.5 Progression Factor 0.84 0.76 0.63 Incmmental d2' ; 56.6 12.1 ; ° 18.8 Delay (s) 102.8 47.2 39.2 Level often/Ice F D . D Approach Delay (s) 48.1 Approach LOS ` 0 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1553 1.00 1553 675 0.97 696 49:8 HCM Level of Service 0.96 88.2% r t 4 \ t ti 1 s+ r i't fA VI ft;. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1736 3471 1553 3335 3407 3303 3368 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1736 3471 1553 3335 3407 3303 3368 80 640 324 576 935 60 379 1060 85 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 82 660 334 594 964 62 391 1093 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 660 334 594 1026 0 391 1181 0 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% Prot pm +ov Prot Prot 3 8 6 1 5 6 2 8 5.4 22.0 47.0 26.0 45.0 25.0 44.0 6.4 . 23.0 49.0 27.0 46.0 26.0 " 45.0 0.05 0.19 0.41 0.22 0.38 0.22 0.38 5.0 .S0 5.0 5.0. '5.0 s 5.0 ` . 5.0 " 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 93' 665' 634 750 1306 718 1263 0.05 0.19 0.11 0.18 0.30 0.12 c0.35 0.10 0.88 0.99 0.53 0.79 0.79 0.55 56.4 48.4 26.8 43.9 32.6 41.8 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 56.5 32.8 0.8 5.7 3.2. 3.0 113.0 81.3 27.6 49.6. 35.8 44.7 F' F C D 0 67.0 40.9 E Sum of lost time (s ) ICU Level of Service E M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Project PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group E 0.94 36.1 1.00 13.9 50.0 D 48,7 s l 2010 Future with - Project Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 15: Tukwila Pkwy. & Andover Pk.W, 11/29/04 1 '- 1 I Lane Group Flow (vph) 1127 469 527 754 412 v /o122 {iv" 1.26d�'` 112 '(?25 ;t)97 ; i.09 '" Control Delay 80.0 117.4 7.3 53.9 109.3 Total Delay 80.0 117.4 7.3 53.9 109.3 Clueue' tfngth'$btti "(ft)` =42f`' 347 64 ' "24r . 29`f Queue Length 95th (ft) #550 #542 87 #353 #483 Intemal'L7nk Disf`(f{} "` 327 "` 489` :783 Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 225 Base "Capacty lvph)? - .1055' :'41 . Z123 " "820 378 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 S`pNitiaC "Cap I eduetn 0 °" 0 , r . 0z `, tt " Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 ReducetJ,v /c Ratid`" x:07 1a2 "0,25° °� .i 09`' Volume exceeds Capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. E . PacI # 95t1►'peroentile ' lumeexceeCs capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. dr befacio Right Cane. 7 ecode with Ithough lane as a'right M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid-day.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with - Project Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 15: Tukwila Pkwy. & Andover Pk.W. A 11/29/04 �� ♦ • ,_ 4 / IGi ' nyi Tit .:. ; " ? rrm - wgr ` 8 " # "" se NBR77 n ; Lane Configurations +1. 'I f4 +)I e Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utli.' Factor 0.95 1,00 0.95 ' 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prat) 2932 1608 3717 3152 1454 Fit Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2932 1608 3217 3152 1454 Volume (vph) 430 618 436 490 701 383 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. ")=low (vph) ' 462, 665 469 527 ‘ ` 754 412 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1127' .. 0 460 527 " 754 412 ' Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% Tum Type Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 35.0 25.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g (s) 36.0 26.0 66.0 26.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.26 0.66 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 ! 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1056 418 2123 820 378 v/s Ratio Prot c0.38 c0.29 0.16 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.26dr 1.12 0.25 Uniform Delay, di 32.0 37.0 6.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 . " 47.5 81.6 0.3 Delay (s) 79.5 118.6 7.2 Leverof Service. E F A 1 Approach Delay (s) 79.5 59.6 71.8 APproacti LOS E E E 0.92 36.0 1.00 15.1 51.1 0 c0.28 1.09 37.0 1.00 72.6 109.6 HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 70.8 1.09 100.0 94.4% 15 HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) Level of Service dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Ciitical,LaneGroup E _ 12.0 F M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with - Project Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 20: Baker Blvd. &Andover Pk.W. 11/29/04 Lane Group Flow (vph) 529 141 45 ,,. v c afrts ' '0:114''D S7= , 0 12 Control Delay 36.0 31.4 20.0 Queue Delay " 0:0`" 0.0 ,'` 4.0 ,. Total Delay 36.0 31.4 20.0 Queue Length 50th' (ft) " ` 112 Queue Length 95th (ft) #193 #110 38 tritemai' ,ink Disf (ft) 181 ` 179 Turn Bay Length (ft) Basetapacity(vph);' ;'650`- • 255 '402 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Sptlibacir'Cap 12eductn 7 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Red "ucedv /e Retie'' 0.8' " 0:55' 0.11 T 253 768 66 1042 '0.69' 0.52 .'`016" 08$ 30.8 16.3 9.5 28.3 0.0 `0.0 0.0` 0.0 . ' 30.8 16.3 9.5 28.3 , 60 147'- 10''' 211 #154 191 24 #327 829'x: 783 75 ' 360 1512. '` 400 '1221' 0 0 0 0 . 0 ., . ,, . .. 0 0 0• 0 0;69 0.51 "' 0.17 '- 0.85 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,, queue; may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 20: Baker Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. Lane Configurations Ideal'Fiaw (vphpt)' Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt FIt Protected 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 2960 Fit Permitted 0.77 Satd. Flow (perm) 2324 Volume (vph) 208 53 225 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.92 ' 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 226 58 245 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 529 0 Heavy Vehicles ( %) 0% 0% 0% Tum Type Perm Protected Phases Perittfterf Phases 4, Actuated Green. G (s) 17.1 EffecttveGresn; 9 (s) 18.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 Clearance Ttme (s)' 5.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp 'Cap (vph) 605 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Rafter Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay. d2 Delay (s) Level of. Service Approach Delay (s) ApproachtQS HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Anaiysis'Period (min); c Critical Lane Group The Transpo Group 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1439 1608 3172 1593 3080 1.00 0.14 1.00 0.26 1.00 1439 231 3172 441 3080 41 233 641 65 81 748 211 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 45 253 697 71 66 813 229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 253 768 0 66 1042 0 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% Perm pm +pt pm +pt 5 2 1 6 1900 1900' 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.93 00.23 0.87 24.9 1.00 13.3 38.2 0 38.2 0 2010 Future with Project Conditions Saturday Mid - Day 11/29/04 65 0.92 71 0 0 1% Perm 1.00 0.98 1651, 0.51 871 64 0.92 70 0 141 1% 8 17.2 17.2 42.6 '`18:3 '`:18.3` "44.0 0.26 0.26 0.63 5.1 5.1 6.4 3.0 3.0 3.0 227 375 413 00.12 0.28 0.61 18.0 1.00 2.7 20.6 0.16 0.62 22.9 1.00 5.2 28.1 c 26.2 C. 0.03 0.12 19.9 1.00 0.1 20.0 B 1 26.1 HCM Level of Service 0.78 70.3 ;Sum of lost time (s) 82.3% ICU Level of Service 15 f ti 30.8 32.0 0.46 5.4 3.0 1444 00.24 0.53 13.8 1.00 0.4 14.1 C B 15.8 B C . 8.0 E 31.5 34.3 0.49 5.4 3.0 346 0.02 0.07 0.19 14.8 1.00 0.3 15.1 B 24.9 28.3 0.37 5.4 3.0 1152 00.34 0.90 20.8 1.00 10.1 30.9 C. 29.9 c M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 M:104 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group 4 4 r t 4 _ 2010 Future with-Project Conditions- Saturday Mid-Day 26: Strander Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. 11/29/04 Lane Group -347 583 109 354 884 229 780 343 1020 vie 'Kea: 76.8i - 0.98 - 1,09 1.14 110 1.16' 1.15 ' Control Delay 152.2 53.8 42.5 88.8 99.2 153.1 106.5 147.5 121.0 QueOitlefay 00 `t" 00 00 flO 00 9.0 ' 00 00 00 Total Delay 152.2 53.8 42.5 88.8 99.2 153.1 106.5 147.5 121.0 Iferigth 513thift) 404\ '-" =-360 Queue Length 95th (ft) #510 295 127 #469 #534 #368 #486 #502 #623 InternirtinleDliefftY ' 61 ' 438 ' 7 829' Tum Bay Length (ft) 150 100 150 Base Capacity (vph) 295 724' - 324 '362 814 . 201 711 - '"295 s84 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillbacktap keductti 0 0 0 ' 0 0' ' - 0 ' 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RedUcedVIC ''0:8i".70:34 '0.98 1.09 - 114 ',`"1 tie 1.15 Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. , Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # - 95thpe ' ment� Ithi eXcirkkli be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 2010 Future with-Project Conditions- Saturday Mid-Day 26: Strander Blvd. & Andover Pk.W. 11/29/04 4 \ t / r't Lane Configurations 44 ft. 41. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1608 3046 1608 3032 0.95 1.06 0.95 1.00 1608 3046 1608 3032 289 220 484 265 329 604 375 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 301 229 504 276 343 629 391 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 780 0 343 1020 0 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Prot Prot 5 2 1 6 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane UR 'Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Pft PreteCted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1608 3217 1439 1608 3053 Fit Permitted 0.95' -1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1608 3217 1439 1608 3053 Volume(vph) 333' 560 105 340 560 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 347 583 109 354 583 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Grotib Flow (vph) 347 583 109 354 884 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 22.0 Effective Green, g (s) 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 Clearance lime (s) 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cep (vph) 295 724 324 v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.18 v/s Ratio Perm ' 0.08 v/c Ratio 1.18 0.81 0.34 0.98 1.09 Uniform 'Delay, di 49,0 S' 44.0 39.0 46.2 44.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 InerementalDelay,02,' 109,0 .9.3 • '2.8 40.9 57.5 Delay (s) 158.0 53.3 41.8 87.1 101.5 LeVel:orSetvice' F 0 0 F F Approach Delay (s) 87.0 97.4 Approach LOS, F F ilifirairetB11 ary. ,, ,.7 - .7 1, `17 - HCM Average Control Delay 110.2 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.09 Actuated Cycle Length (s) , 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) , Intersection Capacity Utilization 106.8% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) ; c Critical Lane Group The Transpo Group Perm 4 4 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 0.22 0.22 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 s„. 1% 1% Prot 3 8 27.0 32.0 27.0 32.0 0.22 0.27 4.0 . 4.0 3.0 3.0 362 814 c0.22 c0.29 r f \ 15.0 15.0 0.12 4.0 3.0 201 0.14 2 28.0 0.23 4.0 3.0 711 0.26 1.14 1.10 52.5 46.0 1.00 1.00 106.0 63.4 158.5 109.4 F F 120.5 F 1.16 1.15 49.0 42.5 1.00 1.00 103.9 82.1 152.9 124.6 8.0 G 22.0 22.0 0.18 4.0 3.0 295 c0.21 35.0 35.0 0.29 4.0 3.0 884 c0.34 131.7 M:\04\04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \ Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid-day.sy7 M: \ 04 \ 04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila LOS \ Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid-day.sy7 The Transpo Group Arterial Level of Service: NB 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) nir'�g ' ;. STgna ' 74 T el Cross Street ; Ctass ..`:'j Speed Time ;.:'Delays, "Time (s ) . `.. -= .(nil) .: Southcenter Blvd (Se IV 35 10.4 55.1. 65,5 0.06 Total IV 10.4 55.1 65.5 0.06 Arterial Level of Service: SB 61st Ave. Bridge (Segment 19) w • CrOSS'Street Class:- Tukwila Pkwy (SegmerlV Total IV Cross"Stre Costco Dr. III Minkler Blvd. III Strander sely '(Segm Itt 111 66th'Avenue °Bridge('' Ili . Total III 96 Street Baker Blvd (Arterial > III Strander Blvd. (Segm III MIrikkei"biGd`_(Segr is Ili Costco Dr. III 5.180th "St• (5e016n' Total III e eiey 35 10.4 19.5 10.4 19.5 Arterial Level of Service: NB 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) ed 35 ` 16.4 35 30.4 35 '61.4 35 21.6 35 . 22.3' 152.1 Arterial Level of Service: SB Andover Park E (Segment 11) le 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 itne (s) 29.9 29.9 Arterial Level of Service: WB 66th Avenue Bridge (Segment 20) Cress Street . -. ,:,Class >> „: Speed- 'Time - "Delay, -Time ((s Andover Park E (SegmlV -.-' ' ; 30 18.5 3.5 , 22,0 Total IV 18.5 3.5 22.0 Arterial Level of Service: NB Andover Park E (Segment 11) 0.06 0.06 Ar1e r"?Ari'ei Tit Spee 1. 05 3.5 F 3.5 F peed" LOS 7.6 7.6- E 7.6 E elay Time ($) (rnt) 0.8 17.2 . 0.13 10.4 40.8 0.25 44.5 - 105.9• 0.51 5.6 27.2 0.17 32.6' . 54.9 0.19 93.9 246.0 1.25 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Attarlal ":LOS 0.10 16.9 C 0.10 16.9 C Speed 26.9 22.3 17.4 22.3 12.2 18.3 35- ^ . 22.3 -•9.4 31.7 - 0.19 21,1 35 21.6 56.2 77.8 0.17 7.8 35 a "'6'I4 >�.'' 799 35 30.4 5.5 35.9 0.25 25.4 16.4 "170 : >33.4 ';; ': 13.8 0, 152.1 106.6 258.7 1.25 17.4 B C D c E c Arterial Level of Service: NB Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Artiiiif '"'r" P low °'Runn}ngs Slgnal-` Yra"vel' Cross.Street ' = Time- Delay: '.Time (s) Minkler Blvd. (Segme III 35 49.2 40.2 89.4 Strander Blvd. (Segm III 35 59.8 74.2 134.0 Baker Blvd. III 35 22.0 17.8 39.8 Tukwila Pkwy (Segmerill 35 20.9 109.2 130.1 Total III 151.9 241.4 393.3 Arterial Level of Service: SB Andover Pk.W. (Segment 10) Ss' Street Glass+' Baker Blvd. 111 Strander Blvd. (Segm III Minkler Blvd. (Segme III S. 180th St. (Segmen III Total III Arterial Level of Service: EB Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) Cross. Street CI aSS SR 518 WB Ramps (DUM 53rd Av. S III Southcenter Pkwy (Se III Total III Ras Cross Street . Classes 53rdAv.S III SR 518 WB Ramps (Oft Total III toss;Str Andover Pk.W..(Segmlll Andover Park E (Segmlll Total III irfew 12i g ` "` .01i t r' r;:ls , spTg ' Hrta�ierlla S peed Time. ` Delsy Time (s} •`:. (ini} :Speed LOB 35 20.9 19.9'' 40.8. 0.16 14.4 D 35 41.4 63.4 0.17 9.8 F 35 59 22.0 8 67.7 127.5 0.50 14.1 D 35 49..2 64.7 113.9 0.41 12.9 E 151.9 193.7 345.6 1.24 13,0 E 30 30 30 Arterial Level of Service: WB Klickitat Dr. (Segment 21) flow :Rtmnn'� g °"tgnat Travet"r(�ts'° Speed ,. Time a ?. Delay ' 30 49.4 9.2 58.6 0.39 30 37.9 0.0 37.9 0.30 87.3 9.2 96.5 0.69 Arterial Level of Service: EB Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) 30 43.1 30 21.5 64.6 fat Ade a " ®'6 (a :Time ~ Dela " 'i me (s)' .. '(nil) - . `-Speed' `LOS 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.01 22.8 C 37.9 17.9 55.8 0.30 19.2 C 49.4 82.1 131.5 0.39 10.7 E 89.3 100.0 189.3 0.70 13.3 E slay, < 7In et( 38.9 82.0 22.6 44.1 61.5 126.1 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 bisi Arterial Arterial (mi)- • Speed ' LOS 0.41 16.5 D 0.50 13.4 E 0.17 15.6 D 0.16 4.5 F 1.24 11.4 E 0.34 0.16 0.50 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \ LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group Crterlef S peed ; 23.9 28.3 25.6 14.9 13.1 14.3 tterial LOS C B B 1 1' t " 4 Ai1al% Cross'Street Andover Pk.W. (Segmell Southcenter Pkwy (Se III Total _ _ < ` III Arterial Level of Service: WB Minkler Blvd. (Segment 13) Arterial Level of Service: EB S. 180th St. (Segment 14) :ra Dross Street ' ; ' C l a s s '' ' Speed Time : .Delay Tfine (s)' . W. Valley Highway (S III 35 6.3 81.8 88.1 Sperry Dr. III 35 15.5 13.6 29.1 Andover Park E(Segrnill ° =; 36 '0.2 ' : 20.7' 37.9 Andover Pk.W. (Segmell 35 20.2 45.3 65.5 SoulhcentenP ii\vy (Se ill' " 35 '30.4 ; ' 141.1 171.5 Total III 89.6 302.5 392.1 Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) brass, Street Class. ,.'~,•, S 17500 Block (Arteria III Minkler Blvd. ( Segme III Total; ° :ilt . 35 Arterial Level of Service: SB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 6) 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 TT RuYmTng ve t"ci'c"Aignr7rA ° fal Tome -Delay ",Ti (s)` ,. -. (mi) Speed 'LOS 30 ' 21.5 34.5 56.0 0.16 10.3 E 30 43.1 22.3 65.4 0.34 18.7 C 64.6 . ' 56.8 121.4 0.50 14.8 0 Yta71a Cross Street Class + r Speed ., Time - Delay.:. -Time (s) < Cmi) ..:Speed . 'r CO5 Andover Pk;W. III 35 30.4 12.5 42.9 0.25 21.2 C Andover Park E (Segmlll 35 20.2 7.6 27.8 0.16 20.5 C 1 35` " ,17.2 :%19.9 37.1 0.13` 13.1 " `E W. Valley Highway(S III 35 15.5 48.1 63.6 0.11 6.5 F Total ' III • 83.3 88.1 '';171.4 0.66 13.9 E Arterial Level of Service: WB S. 180th St. (Segment 14) 0.04 1.8 0.11 14.2 0.13 12.8 0.16 8.7 0.25 5.3 0.70 6.5 I tare , „Delay? , TPme (s} (m» . S pe ed 30.7 ; 176 „48.3. '.026 ' 19,1 -;, 20.9 7.2 28.1 0.16 20.9 5 1,6. , 24.8. 76.4 . ' 0.42 19.7 F D E F F F a1 C C 1750 BIOck S. 180th St. Total r"BPrierfe) OS 209 • ; 79\'_ je, 28.8 .':;0.16' 20,4' C 30.7 92.8 123.5 0.26 7.5 F 51.6 100J'; ` 152.3 0.42 1 9.9 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) 7AffiilT fTo °w'" 1 dnning ,. < tignal '"' ra�reT • �s . - e - AU Cross Street : " Class , ; Speed , ,: .Time'':; Dalai'. me (s) ` '• ' (ml) Speed LOS S.168th St. III 35 34.1 21.3 55.4 0.28 18.5 C Strander Blvd. (Segm III 35 25.3 12.2 37.5 0.21 20.3 C Total III 59.4 33.5 92.9 0.50 19.2 C Arterial Level of Service: SB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 7) naa -Ttifliii ,.,. e ' Time (s)= . {tni} ' Speed ...IOS 35. 25.3 . 14.0 39.3 0.21 19.3 • C 35 34.1 5.6 39.7 0.28 25.8 B 59.4 19.6 79.0 0.50 22.6 C rfsli? Cross. Street . S.168th St. III Minkler Blvd. III Total. 111 CrossStreet Klickitat Dr. (Segme 111 Nordstrom Entrance /I III Dummy Int ill Total 111 Arterial Level of Service: NB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) Crpse'Street 61st P1 S /Mall 111 Andover Pk.W. (Segmell Andover Park E (Segmlll W. Valley Highway (S III Total 111 pebd g ' aTime ;m... belay, -e.Time (s) 35 8.3 2.9 11.2 35 10.5 18.0 28.5 35 31.3 4.8 36.1 50.1 25.7 75.8 Arterial Level of Service: SB Southcenter Pkwy (Segment 8) A ii a 9Igr�eP' i TPa' del 115firr i i Cross'Sttreet '`_' , ° Ciasg: 5peed ". 'Time '• Dela . .: fl me (s)A: ; •(mi) . Sneed . Nordstrom Entrance /1 III 35 31.3 20.2 Klickitat Dr. (Segme 111 35 10.5 63.2 Strander Blvd. (Segm Ill 35 8.3 9.4 Total 111 50.1 Arterial Level of Service: EB Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) 0.06 0.07 0.26 0.39 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS\Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with - Protect- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group The Transpo Group 18.5 9.1 26.0 18.5 C F B C 51.5 0.26 18.2 C 73.7 0.07 3.5 F 17.7 0.06 11.7 E 92.8 142.9 0.39 9.8 F ,te slay Time (s 35 31.3 15.8 47.1 0.26 19.9 C 35 12.3 39.6 51.9 0.09 6.3 F 35 24.3 24.0 48.3 0.20 15.1 D 35 35.1 35.9 71.0 0.29 14.8 D 103.0 115.3 218.3 0.85 14.0 E f 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/29/2004 Arterial Level of Service: WB Strander Blvd. (Segment 12) Gross St t Ctess S' et `''rime * Ti,.' e s k mi) , \ •. S ed ' ., 1.09 W Valley Highway (S .14 .,. 35 , .61; . .78.2 84.3 . . 0.04' ,1.8 F Andover Park E (Segmllt 35 35.1 35.8 70.9 0.29 14.9 0 Ande4erhk.W. (Segmtll 35 34.3 52.3 76.6 0.20 9,5 ' F 61st PI S/Mali III 35 12.3 15.7 28.0 0.09 11.7 E SouthCei!iterPkiay ( vSeill .35 7:;-513 .: <�'`441 . ` - '75.4` 0.26 ' 12.5 '` `. E Total III 109.1 226.1 335.2 0.89 9.5 F Arterial Level of Service: EB Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) Cross Streef CI 61stAye. 8tidge (Se,; 1.405 NB On -Ramp IV Andevei• Ftk.W j$e raA Andover Park E (SegmlV Total. ;- IV• ° Arterial Level of Service: WB Tukwila Pkwy (Segment 9) 205 :'>.1426•. ;1631, ',°0,12...x'.2.7' 17.7 3.6 21.3 0.11 18.1 769_" ;0.06 2.7 25.1 18.2 43.3 0.19 16.1 72.8':. .:304.6' 0.48 5.7 F C c Giaas;'Street Class Andover,Pk W .(Segm 1 NB On - Ramp IV 61atAve7gddgb (Se" IV Dummylnt IV Total _ IV 3b > , 25 7 7 32.8 35 9.5 19.8 29.3 35 '' 177 ' 221 : 39.8' 35 20.5 4.8 25.3 ' 72.8 . - '' 54.4 127.2 0.19 0.06 0.11 0.12 0.48 M: \04104282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak12010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 21.2 7.1 9.7 17.7 13.6 B E 0 C c ii 1 4 4 1 f f f f( i i f i 4 (4 4 • 8: North Driveway & Andover Park W r 4 t Lane Configurations V ft. Sign Control" ' ' " " Stop Free Grade 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) "' 19` ' 29 ` 785 ' 19 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 14'044 fo v (vph) . 21 32 :853 21 36 Pedestrians Lane'Wdth (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) ty Median None Median storage veh) Upstream signet (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, "corifRcting voiume : ~ 1210' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vCu, unblocked vol 1210 437 tC single"(s) ". .. 1 6.8' 6:9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF'(s) 7, .. 3.5' "3.3 p0 queue free % 88 94 cM cepez)tY.(JetJtt)`'..:: t70�` '573:° 874 4 :1 2.2 95 Volume Total , 52 . 569 '', 305 219 366 Volume Left 21 0 0 36 0 Voliiiii0tlght ' ' .. : 0 .. " 21 . , 0 0 . cSH 295 1700 1700 768 1700 Volume to Capecltjr " 0.18' 0;33`." 018:'"0.05 '0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 0 0 4 0 Controf Detay (s) "18:3 ":` 00.,'• "00 .' . 2.1 '0.0"`.' Lane LOS C A AljOoach De &aRsr? i9:5' 0 0 ° 0:8 Approach LOS C 44 Free 0% 505 0.92 549 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/30/2004 Average Delay InterseCtioirCapaCity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 1.0 48.8 %, "ICU Level of Service_ 15 11: South Driveway & Andover Park W Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC. conflicting volume 1197 432 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1197 432 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) t �► 1 Mt ement' "7" -- IVIV :Wd117 ∎11W F SOC del ''Str' 77.7 r.7~ +A 4+ Stop Free Free 0% 0% 0% 24 34 770 25 38 486 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 26 37 837 27 41 528 864 864 4.1 3.5 3.3 2.2 85 94 95 172 577 774 2010 Future with Project Conditions 11/30/2004 13 rel78116n gene "VVR \T N9'" n;IS VI'm Sr2 .:."' fi-' ""°"77'" . " Volume Total 83 558 306 217 352 Volume Left 26 0 0 41 0 Volume Right 37 0 27 0 0 cSH 292 1700 1700 774 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.33 0.18 0.05 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 20 0 0 4 0 Control Delay(s) 20.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 ' 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay(s) 20.7 0.0 0.9 Approach LOS C In"1"eiseitto aintila Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% Analysis Period (min) 15 The Transpo Group ICU Level of Service r M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl Tukwila \LOS1Weekday PM Peak \2010 Future with- Project- PM Peak.sy7 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Weekday PM Peak\2010 Future with Project PM Peak.sy7 The Transpo Group 2010 Future with - Project Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day 8: North Driveway & Andover Park W 11/30/2004 t yq gy p r`► p Stop Free Free 0% 0% 0% 20 32 885 18 32 1013 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 22 35' 962 • 20 35 : 1101 Lane Configurations Sign Cohtrol Grade Volume(veh/n) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph)'' Pedestrians Lane Width(R) ' Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' " Right tum flare (veh) Median type' None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC; °confltctfng volume '1592 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2. stage 2 confvol vCu, unbtocked vol 1592 tC, Single ;(s) .. 6.8' ° 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) p0 queue free % 77 cM capacity`(veh/h) 95 529 491 93 982 4.1 Volume Total . ; 57 641 340 402 734 Volume Left 22 0 0 35 0 VOlurne:RTgtir 35" oY ;' 0 ` .:. „ 07 '', cSH 192 1700 1700 699 1700 Volumelo Capashji r7f'70.29 , ,`0:38', 0:20 ?'O:l " 049 .`, Queue Length 95th (ft) 29 0 0 4 0 Co'ntraff'ele isr 31.4° 70'..0770,077. ;'re ".0" ' >, < Lane LOS D A Approadhtelay (s) ''' 3'147' . 0 0 >''" ` 0.5 Approach LOS 0 , Average Delay 1. Inter :eetlon'Capacit,Utli)zation' ' ; '6t2 % ' ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group 4 1 11: South Driveway Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume ( veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage. Right tum flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC. 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) Stop 0% 25 0.92 27 None 3.5 72 96 D ie n, ne l"Illte1"wNEr2 /sir 'St3 -. Volume Total 67 828 340 402 721 Volume Left 27 0 0 41 0 Volume Right 40 0 28 0 0 cSH 188 1700 1700 708 1700 Valurne`to Capacity 0.36 0.37 0.20 ; 0.06' 0.42 Queue Length 95th (ft) 38 0 0 5 0 Control'Oelay (s) °:'34.4 ?` 0.0 ` 0.0 1.8 ` 0.0 Lane LOS D A Approach Delay (s) 34.4 0.0 0.6 Approach LOS D triclel e'aro Su''m`rra Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 2010 Future with- Project Conditions- Saturday Mid -Day & Andover Park W 11/30/2004 Vl i3L ='VVBFt KiEtT`i"' NtR , , ;S8L ""88T:7. . 37 0.92 40 1578 484 1578 484 6.8 6.9 3.3 92 534 1.4 '65.6% 15 Free 0% 866 0.92 941 24 0.92 26 38 0.92 41 967 967 4.1 2.2 94 708 4+ Free 0% 995 0.92 1082 ICU Level of Service I 6 f M: \04 \04282 ACME Bowl- Tukwila \LOS \Saturday Peak \Future with Project Conditions- Saturday Mid- day.sy7 The Transpo Group Appendix C: Regional Bowling Centers - Trip Generation Summary F ATTACHMENT C Bowling Center Trip Generation Study Bawlt Center =`: Sunset Bowl, Bellevue Tech City Bowl, Kirkland Sun Villa Lanes, Seattle #- 'ofLanes. 26 32 32 Total Trips 51 78 26 AVERAGE fihurs . 10/21 : =Trips /Lane 1.96 2.44 0.81 1.74 Sat10/23 Total Trips 101 59 56 Trips/Lane 3.88 1.84 1.75 2.49 ACME BOWL 40 69 1 1.74 1 100 2.49 IACME BOWL .Weekday PM Peak Kouiw- TOTAL, 69 39 OUT 30 Saturday (between 1 =3 _ TOTAL 100 46 OUT 53 The Transpo Group, Inc. 12/3/04 �!! ),)) Pt 1 11 tt, 11 ) )))) ) ) ) 1 LA Fitness Saturday Peak Hour Trip Generation Study Four day Average (6/7/03, 6/14/03, 6/21/ A TURDAY . Diamond Bari! Lake Forrest `. Norco Ventura 1 -3 PM. PEAK HOUR TRIP. AVG Pk • PK Time 129 "2 -3 PM •" 1-2 PM, 56 2.3 PM 63 ' 2-3 PM ;< GENERATION SF (k) Rate 38.0 3.39 41.0'`: 1.59 41.0 `` 1.37 46.3 1.36 AVG Saturday PK- All ; Clubs (1-3 PM) ATTACHMENT D Fitness Club Trip Generation Survey- Saturday Peak Hour Four day Average (6/7/03, 6/14/03, 6/21/03, 6/28/03) Diamond Bar II In (avg)1 Out Total Lake Forrest In(avg)1 Out Total Norco In (avg)1 Out Total Ventura In (avg)1 Out Total 12:00 AM 1 0 1 12:00 AM 0 0 0 12:00 AM 0 0 0 12:00 AM 0 0 0 1:00 AM 2 1 3 1:00 AM 0 0 0 1:00 AM 0 0 0 1:00 AM 0 0 0 2:00 AM 0 2 2 2:00 AM 0 0 0 2:00 AM 0 0 0 2:00 AM 0 0 0 3:00 AM 4:00 0 0 0 3:00 AM 0 0 0 3:00 AM 0 0 0 3:00 AM 0 0 0 AM 0 0 0 4:00 AM 0 0 0 4:00 AM 0 0 0 4:00 AM 0 0 0 5:00 AM . 0 0 0 5:00 AM 0 0 0 5:00 AM 0 0 0 5:00 AM 0 0 0 6:00 AM 7:00 1 0 1 6:00 AM 35 0 35 6:00 AM 0 0 0 6:00 AM 2 0 2 AM 8:00 68 1 69 7:00 AM 47 35 82 7:00 AM 53 0 53 7:00 AM 54 2 56 AM 9:00 113 68 181 8:00 AM 88 47 135 8:00 AM 58 53 111 8:00 AM 79 54 133 AM 10:00 92 113 205 9:00 AM 87 88 175 9:00 AM 55 58 113 9:00 AM 73 79 152 AM 11:00 AM 96 92 188 10:00 AM 69 87 156 10:00 AM 46 55 101 10:00 AM 59 73 132 63 96 159 11 :00 AM 50 69 119 11:00 AM 29 46 75 11:00 AM 35 59 94 12:00 :00 PM 1 : :00 PM 66 57 63 6 129 123 12 00 PM • .. 1 00, PM 34 t ... 84 50 84 34 :: 12:00 PM . :0 ,. M . ., . . 32 29 61 � 12:00 PM , . 23 �" 35 58 2:00 PM : PM 72. e ° ; ... :5 :.. 129 ` 2:00 PM 3 32 ; • : 65 , 31 ; - '... 63 " 1:00 PM ',2:00 PM ,` 20.. °�: 36 _ : F . 32 _20 52 � 56 a 1:00 PM 0 2:00 PM 30 33 ' _ 23 30 : � .. 53 . 63 3:00 65 72 137 3:00 PM 27 32 59 3:00 PM 28 36 64 3 :00 PM 40 33 73 4:00 PM 83 65 148 4:00 PM 25 27 52 4:00 PM 22 28 50 4:00 PM 39 40 79 5:00 PM 92 83 175 5:00 PM 26 25 51 5:00 PM 20 22 42 5:00 PM 32 39 71 6:00 PM 74 92 166 6:00 PM 22 26 48 6:00 PM 21 20 41 6:00 PM 21 32 53 7:00 PM 22 74 96 7:00 PM 8 22 30 7:00 PM 11 21 32 7:00 PM 9 21 30 8:00 PM 1 22 23 8:00 PM 0 8 8 8:00 PM 4 11 15 8:00 PM 1 9 10 9:00 PM 0 1 1 9:00 PM 0 0 0 9:00 PM 1 4 5 9:00 PM 0 1 1 10:00 PM 0 0 0 10:00 PM 0 0 0 10:00 PM 0 1 1 10:00 PM 0 0 0 11:00 PM 0 0 0 11:00 PM 0 0 0 11:00 PM 0 0 0 11:00 PM 0 0 0 LA Fitness Saturday Peak Hour Trip Generation Study Four day Average (6/7/03, 6/14/03, 6/21/ A TURDAY . Diamond Bari! Lake Forrest `. Norco Ventura 1 -3 PM. PEAK HOUR TRIP. AVG Pk • PK Time 129 "2 -3 PM •" 1-2 PM, 56 2.3 PM 63 ' 2-3 PM ;< GENERATION SF (k) Rate 38.0 3.39 41.0'`: 1.59 41.0 `` 1.37 46.3 1.36 AVG Saturday PK- All ; Clubs (1-3 PM) ATTACHMENT D Fitness Club Trip Generation Survey- Saturday Peak Hour Four day Average (6/7/03, 6/14/03, 6/21/03, 6/28/03) Studies required with the applications include: Preliminary Technical Information Report Transportation Impact Analysis CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PROJECT INFORMATION Mt. Adams Holdings has filed applications to remodel a warehouse to construct Acme Bowling, a 40 lane bowling center with associated restaurant and lounge, to be located at 100 Andover Park West, the former Fatigue Technology site. Also included will be approximately 9,700 square feet of retail and associated revisions to parking and landscaping across the site. The adjacent southern parcel will be redeveloped in a second phase with up to 33,000 square feet of retail space. Permits applied for include: L04 Design Review D05 -032, D05 -033 Demolition Permits Other known required permits include: Building Permits Lot Consolidation/BLA Special Permission Sign Area Increase Sign Permits A SEPA Determination of Non - Significance has been made for the project. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. Project Files include: L04 -081 Design Review E04 -022 SEPA Review OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You are invited to comment on the project at a public hearing before the Board of Architectural Review, scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on March 24, 2005 at the Tukwila City Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard. To confirm this date call Nora Gierloff at the Department of Community Development at (206) 431 -3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: 12 /10/04 Notice of Completeness Issued: 1/25/04 Notice of Application Issued: 2/4/05 Q: \ Bowling \ HearNotice.DOC MARCH 2, 2005 • a "PR i R / • LIMITS CF WORK 5' TYPE I / - -- LANDSCAf'E Yry % ad 0' woo v a� �. • 1 PROPOSE TURE SH i 4,000 S.F F-- SCORED CONC. WALK Y p 0 fk E _ ACCESS - >\ rA \ \ 1 BKE RACK— e\ -0 5— \ 1 1 SH 1 ■ ISM* I S ORED ONC. WALK • ., • g�F`O rBI(E RAC4 — — TRASH RECEPTACLE \ I I BENCH LO RAS Q) -w O ` E \ SCORED CONC. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY -H r- r 4 ri .49110,44�i,4. Cpy 0S; . 4444 U4 4! J Y e aa 4 lEe tr __i s- --C no 0)33 mm s; CD, STATE CF KOS 30' SIGHT DISTANCE LNE - EXISTIP.6 TRIES TO REMAK T. TREE RETENTILTI TICE TYP. 15' TYPE I LANDSCAPE 'TRASH RECEPTACLE BENCH PROPOS RE TAIL SH POSED FUTURE 6,5 — S:F TAIL AD ITION 13,200 .F. LI1T5 CF WORK EXISiPG LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN FEATHER M SEEDED LAWN WHERE ANDOVER PARK WEST NEW PLANT A BEDS MEET EXISTING EXISTING LAUN TO REMAIN. REPAIR 30' SIGHT RB I = LAAN OFT. ED BY 110N. DISTANCE 1.1* gi0 40044400/ rr 440 OG.,01iQO,OL, lo • _ a ` y ` n 1,0 / \ I 1 ■ PS ;iguro / \ � PROPOSED RETAIL CENTER 22,000 S.F. LIMTS OF CORK FULLER SEARS Q 0 60' 120' N ! T ARCHITECTS CONC. KEYSTONE WALL \ \\ LANDSCAPE PLAN ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washington - FEATHER N SEEDED LAWN IINE FEATHER IN SEEDED LAIN WHERE NEW NEW PLANTING BEDS rEET EXISTING PLANTRY BEDS FEET EXIST - EXISTING LAN TO REMAIN. REPAIR 30' SIGHT DISTANCE — LA3,1, DISTURBED BY CONS TIOr1 LINE RECEIVED MAR 02 2005\ GC' t,':UMITY Otvc.LOPMENT 30' SIGHT DISTANCE LNE OO BUILD ING q O(PLATS A It KO WEISMAN DESIGN GROUP LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SnaolthRheinhaelamil Dick Landen Rainbow Assoc. 22820 148 Ave. SE Kent, WA 98042 Chris Miller Mt. Adams Holdings 2365 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 Now Amitremags atipr 5Wg® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: A BIT OF HAWA ' 735 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ABERCROMBIE & FITCH 834 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Acura 301 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ALDO 729 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Alvin & Carole Pearl 405 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: AMERICAN EAGLE OUTFITTERS 707 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: APPLE 733 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ATHLETE'S FOOT 610 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Baker Square Retail 415 Baker Blvd Ste 200 Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BANK OF AMERICA 225 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Barrier SC Volvo 131 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BATH & BODY WORKS 650 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BEN BRIDGE 258 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BOBACHINE 896 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BODY SHOP, THE 1036 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366TM Occupant: ERCROMBIE 651 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ACTIVATE 709 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ALASKA SMOKEHOUSE 808 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ALTERATIONS EXPRESS 1076 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Alvin & Carole Pearl 4304 Hunts Point Bellevue, WA 98004 Occupant: ANN TAYLOR LOFT 719 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: AS SEEN ON TV 903 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BAHAMA BREEZE 15700 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BAKERS 969 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Bank of America C/O Burr Wolff-PO Box 2818 Alpharetta, GA 30023 Occupant: BASKIN- ROBBINS 886 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BATTERIES & BANDS 1064 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Beneficial 104 Andover Pak East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BODY JEWELRY PLUS 985 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BOMBAY COMPANY, THE 929 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: BON MACY'S 500 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BUCKLE 846 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CACHE' 711 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CARLTON CARDS 664 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CASUAL CORNER 327 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHAMPS SPORTS 1040 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHILDREN'S PLACE 1062 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 CIGNA Life Ins Company 8 Campus Drive Parsippany, NJ 07054 Occupant: Circuit city 223 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Clearwater Spas 339 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CROWN HAIR DESIGN 890 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Dining interiors 331 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Dualstar 327 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ENDLESS INNOVATIONS 422 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EXPRESS 935 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® Fite Folder Labels Use template for 5366TM Occupant: kOOKSTONE 858 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 CED Inc 551030 3651 Business DR #100 Sacramento, CA 95820 Occupant: CAJUN GRILL 896 -L Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Cascade Development Company 6301 2nd Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 Occupant: CATHY JEAN 739 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHARACTER CORNER 864 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHOCOLATE BAR 1024 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CINNABON 896 -M Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CLAIRE'S ACCESSORIES 876 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER (CRC) 641 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Cullen Bindery 406 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: DIPPIN' DOTS 404 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EDDIE BAUER 941 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EXCALIBUR CUTLERY & GIFTS 642 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EXPRESS MEN 852 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: FAST FIX JEWELA' REPAIR 905 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FOOT LOCKER 1068 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Frank C Buty 1150 Alki Ave SW #4 Seattle, WA 98116 Occupant: FRED MEYER JEWELER 1119 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FYE 1000 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GAMESTOP 1004 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GAP KIDS 1052 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GENERAL NUTRITION CENTERS 911 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GIFTS R US 1111 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GODIVA CHOCOLATIER 309 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GUESS? 321 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HALLMARK 715 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HELZBERG DIAMONDS 814 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HICKORY FARMS 1010 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ICING BY CLAIRE'S 973 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366"A Occupant:.ESTONE 215 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FOREVER 21 826 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FRANKLIN COVEY 626 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FRIEDLANDER'S JEWELERS 676 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GADZOOKS 862 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GAP 1048 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GENE JUAREZ SALON & SPA 1070 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GEORGIO'S SUBS 896 -F Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Glass Doctor 402 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GORDON'S JEWELERS 870 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GYMBOREE 654 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Harrahs Casino and entertainm 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Herman and Blumenthal 401 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HOT TOPIC 1005 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Illustative Arts 401 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: ISIS 759 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: IVAR'S 896 -A Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JCPENNEY 1200 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JUST SPORTS 1103 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KENNELLY KEYS 606 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KEY BANK 275 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KITS CAMERAS 1020 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LEATHER ZONE 965 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LIDS 1014 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LIMITED TOO 947 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Lowe's HIW Inc 101 Andover Park E #200 Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MARINERS TEAM STORE 804 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MERVYN'S 1100 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MOTHERHOOD MATERNITY 1018 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: NATURALIZER 668 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® Fite Folder Labels Use template for 5366' Occupant: LAND INKJET 276 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JAMBA JUICE 680 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JOURNEY'S 880 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KAY BEE TOYS 1006 Southcenter, Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KENNETH BEHM GALLERIES 646 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KING COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEMS 1115 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LANE BRYANT 953 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LENSCRAFTERS 615 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Life Uniforms 313 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LIMITED, THE 315 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MADE IN WASHINGTON 618 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MCDONALDS 896 -E Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Midwest signs and screen Prt 401 Evans Black Drive Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MRS. FIELDS COOKIES 872 Southcenter Mali Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: NEXTEL 301 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: NORDSTROM 100 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: NUVO 989 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ORANGE JULIUS/DAIRY QUEEN 896 -B Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PACIFIC SUNWEAR 803 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PARFUMERIE 262 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pearl Northwest Inc 401 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pearl Vision 70 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PICTURE PEOPLE 688 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PIERCING PAGODA (KIOSK) 1050 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pro Auto Sales 405 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PROSSER PIANO & ORGAN 298 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RADIO SHACK 1003 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RAINFOREST CAFE 290 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RARE ROSE, THE 840 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RAVE GIRL 832 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366TM Occupant: ■RI'S SUSHI & GRILL 896 -D Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: OLIVE GARDEN 310 Strander Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pacific Bay 321 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PANDA EXPRESS 896 -C Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PAYLESS SHOESOURCE 993 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pearl Optical 407 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PETITE SOPHISTICATE 331 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PIERCING PAGODA 1016 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PRETZEL TIME WALL BOUTIQUE 402 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pro Golf Discount 301 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PUZZLED? 907 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Rainbow Associates LTD 22820 148th SE Kent, WA 98042 Occupant: RAINIER ROASTER 896 -G Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RAVE 1007 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Rocklers Woodworking 345 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5366TM Occupant: SARKU JAPAN ``"' 896 -N Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Seafirst Bank LEEDE #6504080 -P0 Box 34029 Seattle, WA 98124 Occupant: SELECT COMFORT 640 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Sleep Air 341 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SOLE OUTDOORS 925 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SOUTHCENTER COBBLERS 716 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SPENCER GIFTS 614 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: STEAK ESCAPE 896 -H Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNCOAST MOTION PICTURE CO. 266 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNGLASS HUT I 923 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SWEET FACTORY 977 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: TALBOTS 242 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Tan Elite 325 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: THAT KITCHEN SHOP 660 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: The Bedroom super store 121 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Occupant: S ARRO'S 896 -J Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SEARS 400 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SHIRTZ TO GO 755 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SMART WIRELESS 913 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Southcenter Automobile PO Box 4999 Bremerton, WA 98312 Occupant: Southcenter Imaging 110 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: STARBUCKS 806 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Sun Signs 309 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNGLASS DESIGNS 333 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNGLASS HUT II 722 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: TACO TIME 896 -K Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: TALLS CAMERA 672 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Teriyaki Time 80 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: The Andover Company 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: The Madison Company 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: THINGS REMEMRED 820 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: T- MOBILE 757 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: U S POST OFFICE 225 Andover Park W Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: US Bank 151 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: VANS 1058 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: VERIZON WIRELESS KIOSK 706 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WALDENBOOKS 270 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WEISFIELD JEWELERS 636 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WET SEAL 957 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WHISTLE WORKWEAR 1107 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WILSONS LEATHER 727 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ZALES 921 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Beta Holdings LTD 18827 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 Use template for 5366TM Occupant: TINDER BOX 751 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Tux Shop 311 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: US Arm Forces Recruiting 349 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 US Bank Corporate Property 2800 E Lake St3.AKE0012 Minneapolis, MN 55406 Occupant: VERIZON WIRELESS 622 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: VICTORIA'S SECRET 303 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WATCH WORLD 1034 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Westfield Corp 11601 Wilshire Blvd #1200 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Occupant: WETZEL'S PRETZEL'S 981 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WHITEHALL JEWELERS 1030 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Winstaffing 319 Tukwil Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ZUMIEZ 1008 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Laser 5366TM Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION /, WaivL6M4---- HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Project Number: L-D Li 'OS 1 0 S 1 °3a DD Determination of Non - Significance Person requesting mailing: 1 \01L& Cl(fithrg75 Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision ^ /Notice V of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this year 25 P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM day ofF 4 , in the Project Name: C rJra 60 t Project Number: L-D Li 'OS 1 0 S 1 °3a DD L 4 Mailer's Signature: Person requesting mailing: 1 \01L& Cl(fithrg75 Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this year 25 P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM day ofF 4 , in the CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION Mt. Adams Holdings has filed applications to remodel a warehouse to construct Acme Bowling, a 40 lane bowling center with associated restaurant and lounge, to be located at 100 Andover Park West, the former Fatigue Technology site. Also included will be approximately 9,700 square feet of retail and associated revisions to parking and landscaping across the site. The adjacent southern parcel will be redeveloped in a second phase with up to 33,000 square feet of retail space. Permits applied for include: L04 Design Review D05 - 032, D05 Demolition Permits Other known required permits include: Building Permits Lot Consolidation/BLA Special Permission Sign Area Increase Sign Permits Studies required with the applications include: Preliminary Technical Information Report Tranportation Impact Analysis A SEPA checklist has been submitted with the studies identified above. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. Project Files include: L04 - 081 Design Review E04 SEPA Review OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD at the address above or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M., February 18, 2005. Opportunity for additional oral and written public comments will be provided at a public hearing before the Board of Architectural Review, tentatively scheduled for March 24, 2005. To confirm this date call the project planner Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431 -3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: 12 /10/04 Notice of Completeness Issued: 1/25/04 Notice of Application Issued: 2/4/05 ¢ o 0 • Q e V 9 4 E 6 a F g V g *a O O e � °P 81 ® 4 tt a s 44 2 11 1 I 0 IIII 'P I Agx g gli Arlig iii NO iix 3 8111 Illaal! 11672 V 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251 -8222 (425)251 -8782 FAX CM Ql648Ei9G, WO PIM#* , 9M.F!1MG. PNQIRaAYEKNM SONIC dos, Ocateilne nv.9i =w9 I £FAXs 6/0/06 I RXWLA PARKWAY ACME BOWLING ANDOVER PARK WEST SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 1 14 g 1111 9. 9. 2. i a I:- 0 M M ,. % N w 9 x ill ligill p _ a A g , i o 'p o pp iiliI / 1 A g 8 8 =� 1 ill q i I Ott I w.I "6*IWI6I A r 2 I REVISED PER anWEER COVER SHEET FOR ACME BOWLING ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT () DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES () OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR () DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. () DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE K () BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD () FIRE DISTRICT #11 () FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION () K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA UBRARY () RENTON UBRARY ( ) KENT UBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE UBRARY ( ) OWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY UGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHUNE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE ( ) POLICE () FINANCE () PLANNING () BUILDING ( ) PARKS & REC. ( ) MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ( ) FISHERIES PROGRAM () WILDLIFE PROGRAM ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL F:W ADMINISTRATIVE WFORMSWCHKLIST.DOC CHECK' 'ST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/SHOREUNE PERMIT MAILINGS a FEDERAL AGENCIES WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. () DEPT OF ECOLOGY. SHORELAND DIV (D3 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DMSION• ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL • SEND CHKUST W/ DETERMINATIONS • SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES MEDIA () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. () NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE () HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE () KC. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ((KC. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY () K C PUBLIC UBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT O OLYMPIC PIPEUNE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 () WATER DISTRICT #125 () CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWER/WATER DISTRICT () RENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEA-TAC () CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* • NOTICE OF AU. SEATTLE RELATED PING PROJ. ( ) DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY (( SOUND TRANSIT ( ) DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION 'SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW So C rc� n A- 1 ?0. a rce_r_arrj Smooth feed SheetsTM Bank of America C/0 Bun Wolff PO Box 2818 Alpharetta, GA 30023 Seafirst Bank LEEDE #6504080 PO Box 34029 Seattle, WA 98124 US Bank Corporate Property 2800 E Lake St LAKE0012 Minneapolis, MN 55406 AVERY® Address Labels Rebecca Davidson John C. Radovich Development Co. 2835 82 Ave. SE, #300 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Christopher D. Miller Bowler's Heaven 2365 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 Use template for 5160® 90tSS `silodeauunN Z I00aIv'I IS Xpadoid alezod1oD Num Sn t'Z186 VM `alll.caS 6Z017£ Xog Od 080b0S9# algal Nucg I STUDS £Z00£ ''D `cllaJ gdld 8I8Z Xog Od 33IoM Ong O/D EouauW JO dreg Laser 5160® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: A BIT OF HAWAII 735 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ABERCROMBIE & FITCH 834 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Acura 301 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ALDO 729 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Alvin & Carole Pearl 405 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: AMERICAN EAGLE OUTFITTERS 707 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: APPLE 733 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ATHLETE'S FOOT 610 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Baker Square Retail 415 Baker Blvd Ste 200 Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BANK OF AMERICA 225 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Barrier SC Volvo 131 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BATH & BODY WORKS 650 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BEN BRIDGE 258 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BOBACHINE 896 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BODY SHOP, THE 1036 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Use template for 5366TM Occupant: ARCROMBIE 651 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ACTIVATE 709 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ALASKA SMOKEHOUSE 808 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ALTERATIONS EXPRESS 1076 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Alvin & Carole Pearl 4304 Hunts Point Bellevue, WA 98004 Occupant: ANN TAYLOR LOFT 719 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: AS SEEN ON TV 903 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BAHAMA BREEZE 15700 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BAKERS 969 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Bank of America C/O Burr Wolff -PO Box 2818 Alpharetta, GA 30023 Occupant: BASKIN - ROBBINS 886 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BATTERIES & BANDS 1064 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Beneficial 104 Andover Pak East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BODY JEWELRY PLUS 985 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BOMBAY COMPANY, THE 929 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY© File Folder Labels Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed Sheets"' Occupant: BON MACY'S 500 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: BUCKLE 846 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CACHE' 711 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CARLTON CARDS 664 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CASUAL CORNER 327 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHAMPS SPORTS 1040 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHILDREN'S PLACE 1062 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 CIGNA Life Ins Company 8 Campus Drive Parsippany, NJ 07054 Occupant: Circuit city 223 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Clearwater Spas 339 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CROWN HAIR DESIGN 890 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Dining interiors 331 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Dualstar 327 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ENDLESS INNOVATIONS 422 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EXPRESS 935 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366TM Occupant: BR OKSTONE 858 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 CED Inc 551030 3651 Business DR #100 Sacramento, CA 95820 Occupant: CAJUN GRILL 896 -L Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Cascade Development Company 6301 2nd Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 Occupant: CATHY JEAN 739 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHARACTER CORNER 864 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CHOCOLATE BAR 1024 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CINNABON 896 -M Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: CLAIRE'S ACCESSORIES 876 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER (CRC) 641 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Cullen Bindery 406 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: DIPPIN' DOTS 404 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EDDIE BAUER 941 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EXCALIBUR CUTLERY & GIFTS 642 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: EXPRESS MEN 852 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 53667m Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: FAST FIX JEWELR PAIR 905 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FOOT LOCKER 1068 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Frank C Buty 1150 Alki Ave SW #4 Seattle, WA 98116 Occupant: FRED MEYER JEWELER 1119 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FYE 1000 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GAMESTOP 1004 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GAP KIDS 1052 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GENERAL NUTRITION CENTERS 911 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GIFTS R US 1111 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GODWA CHOCOLATIER 309 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GUESS? 321 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HALLMARK 715 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HELZBERG DIAMONDS 814 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HICKORY FARMS 1010 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ICING BY CLAIRE'S 973 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366" Occupant: FIISTONE 215 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FOREVER 21 826 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FRANKLIN COVEY 626 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: FRIEDLANDER'S JEWELERS 676 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GADZOOKS 862 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GAP 1048 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GENE JUAREZ SALON & SPA 1070 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GEORGIO'S SUBS 896 -F Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Glass Doctor 402 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GORDON'S JEWELERS 870 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: GYMBOREE 654 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Harrahs Casino and entertainm 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Herman and Blumenthal 401 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: HOT TOPIC 1005 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Illustative Arts 401 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: ISIS 759 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WAR'S 896 -A Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JCPENNEY 1200 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JUST SPORTS 1103 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KENNELLY KEYS 606 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KEY BANK 275 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KITS CAMERAS 1020 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LEATHER ZONE 965 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LIDS 1014 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LIMITED TOO 947 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Lowe's HIW Inc 101 Andover Park E #200 Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MARINERS TEAM STORE 804 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MERVYN'S 1100 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MOTHERHOOD MATERNITY 1018 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: NATURALIZER 668 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366TH" Occupant: ISL1D INKJET 276 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JAMBA JUICE 680 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: JOURNEY'S 880 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KAY BEE TOYS 1006 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KENNETH BEHM GALLERIES 646 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: KING COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEMS 1115 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LANE BRYANT 953 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LENSCRAFTERS 615 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Life Uniforms 313 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: LIMITED, THE 315 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MADE IN WASHINGTON 618 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MCDONALDS 896 -E Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Midwest signs and screen Prt 401 Evans Black Drive Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: MRS. FIELDS COOKIES 872 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: NEXTEL 301 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: NORDSTROM 100 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: NUVO 989 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ORANGE JULIUS/DAIRY QUEEN 896 -B Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PACIFIC SUNWEAR 803 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PARFUMERIE 262 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pearl Northwest Inc 401 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pearl Vision 70 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PICTURE PEOPLE 688 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PIERCING PAGODA (KIOSK) 1050 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pro Auto Sales 405 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PROSSER PIANO & ORGAN 298 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RADIO SHACK 1003 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RAINFOREST CAFE 290 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RARE ROSE, THE 840 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RAVE GIRL 832 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366Th Occupant: NHS SUSHI & GRILL 896 -D Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: OLIVE GARDEN 310 Strander Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pacific Bay 321 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PANDA EXPRESS 896 -C Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PAYLESS SHOESOURCE 993 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pearl Optical 407 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PETITE SOPHISTICATE 331 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PIERCING PAGODA 1016 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PRETZEL TIME WALL BOUTIQUE 402 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Pro Golf Discount 301 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: PUZZLED? 907 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Rainbow Associates LTD 22820 148th SE Kent, WA 98042 Occupant: RAINIER ROASTER 896 -G Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: RAVE 1007 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Rocklers Woodworking 345 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed Sheets"' Use template for 5366' Occupant: SARKU JAPAN 896 -N Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Seafirst Bank LEEDE #6504080-P0 Box 34029 Seattle, WA 98124 Occupant: SELECT COMFORT 640 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Sleep Air 341 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SOLE OUTDOORS 925 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SOUTHCENTER COBBLERS 716 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SPENCER GIFTS 614 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: STEAK ESCAPE 896 -H Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNCOAST MOTION PICTURE CO. 266 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNGLASS HUT I 923 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SWEET FACTORY 977 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: TALBOTS 242 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Tan Elite 325 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: THAT KITCHEN SHOP 660 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: The Bedroom super store 121 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® File Folder Labels Occupant: SB -(RO'S 896 -J Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SEARS 400 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SHIRTZ TO GO 755 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SMART WIRELESS 913 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Southcenter Automobile PO Box 4999 Bremerton, WA 98312 Occupant: Southcenter Imaging 110 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: STARBUCKS 806 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Sun Signs 309 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNGLASS DESIGNS 333 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: SUNGLASS HUT II 722 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: TACO TIME 896 -K Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: TALLS CAMERA 672 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Teriyaki Time 80 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: The Andover Company 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: The Madison Company 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Occupant: THINGS REMEMBED 820 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: T- MOBILE 757 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: U S POST OFFICE 225 Andover Park W Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: US Bank 151 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: VANS 1058 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: VERIZON WIRELESS KIOSK 706 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WALDENBOOKS 270 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WEISFIELD JEWELERS 636 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WET SEAL 957 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WHISTLE WORKWEAR 1107 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WILSONS LEATHER 727 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ZALES 921 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Beta Holdings LTD 18827 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 AVERY® File Folder Labels Use template for 5366TM Occupant: TI1R BOX 751 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Tux Shop 311 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: US Arm Forces Recruiting 349 Tukwila Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 US Bank Corporate Property 2800 E Lake St- LAKE0012 Minneapolis, MN 55406 Occupant: VERIZON WIRELESS 622 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: VICTORIA'S SECRET 303 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WATCH WORLD 1034 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Westfield Corp 11601 Wilshire Blvd #1200 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Occupant: WETZEL'S PRETZEL'S 981 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: WHITEHALL JEWELERS 1030 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: Winstaffing 319 Tukwil Pkwy Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant: ZUMIEZ 1008 Southcenter Mall Tukwila, WA 98188 Laser 5366 f February 17, 2005 Chris Miller Mount Adams Holdings 2365 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 City of Tukwila RE: L04 -081 ACME Bowling E04 -022 SEPA Dear Chris, I wanted to follow up on our meeting on the 11 with some written comments summarizing our discussion. Q:\Bowling\MtgSummary.DOC Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Lighting The Police Department commented on the extremes of light and darkness in the parking lot lighting plan (ratio of average to minimum footcandles of 27.3). I provided you with some standards from the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and recommended that you follow the Enhanced lighting levels. I understand ,that .PW has provided you with street light information. How tall will the parking lot light poles be? The building uplights that you have shown are utilitarian rather than decorative. This may be appropriate for a somewhat hidden location along the top of the arcade (I am assuming that this is what is shown on Sign Option 3). Are you planning on using them in any other lower, more visible locations? Sign Area I provided you with a copy of the diagram that shows how Tukwila calculates sign area. Using this method your proposed wall sign is considerably larger that what is allowed by code. We have discussed the possibility of applying for a special permission sign area increase, however the Director rarely grants more than a single 50% increase. Whatever you present to the Board of Architectural Review should meet code. Freestanding Sign Acme is not currently proposing a freestanding sign, however if you think that the retail tenants may want to use one you should include a design in the design review submittal. Information about size and setback information is available in a handout on our web site. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 North Elevation The proposed north elevation of the Acme building is rather plain, with the only detail adjacent to the side entrance. We discussed some options for enhancing this side of the building. West Elevation We discussed the need for some pedestrian level detail along the arcade. The frosted glass "circles in squares" shown on some of the elevations would help with this. Please provide additional detail about this feature in your resubmittal. Evans Black Connection In lieu of frontage improvements along Evans Black PW is requiring Acme to design and build a driveway connection as you have shown conceptually on your civil plans. The sidewalk along the north side of the street should connect through to the on -site sidewalk adjacent to the building. I have asked you to reconsider my request to align the APW driveway with the Evans Black driveway. If you choose not to include this in your proposal I will likely recommend this to the Board as a condition of approval. Dedication along Andover Park West In order to handle increased traffic volumes and increase safety PW is planning to widen Andover Park West by 4.5 feet. This will require you to dedicate 4.5 feet of additional right -of -way along the west side of the southern parcel and around the corner to Baker Bl. Contrary to what we discussed at the meeting you will not be responsible for designing or constructing these frontage improvements. Your required 15 feet of front yard landscaping (which can include sidewalks on easements) will be measured from this new r -o -w edge. Landscape Tukwila has an adopted Central Business District street tree plan. Please revise your landscape plan to show Marshall Ash (Frasinus pennsylvanica lanceolata) along Andover Park West and Lavalle Hawthorn (Crataegus lavellei) at the intersection of Andover and Baker. The 15 feet of required front yard landscaping is measured from your property line inward. This is in addition to any landscaping in the public r -o -w. It appears that you are short along some portions of the site. Fire Department Don Tomaso has faxed the fire engine turning radius to Steve Sears as promised and will answer any questions that arise. Resubmittal Please resubmit 12 packets of design review materials by March 3 in order to be placed on the March 24th BAR agenda. This should include one final set of elevations, sign designs, color /materials information, lighting plan, parking calculations, site plan, landscape plan and design narrative. You do not need to include civil drawings or floorplans. Please call out the areas included as part of this review and those that will be considered as a later phase. Q:\Bowling\MtgSummary.DOC Q:1Bowling\MtgSummary.DOC Your site plan ignores the internal property lines between the three parcels. As I mentioned early on you should submit a lot consolidation and/or a binding site plan. If you intend to keep two or more lots you will also need cross easements and maintenance agreements. Feel free to call me, Dave McPherson or Don Tomaso with any questions about these comments. Sincere y, Nora Gierloff Planning Supervisor Enclosure cc. Dave McPherson, PW Don Tomaso, Fire Nodes Tukwila Parkway Andover Park East Andover Park West Southcenter Parkway Strander, Baker, Minkler South 180th Street City of Tukwila Southcenter Parkway intersections Andover Park West intersections Andover Park East intersections Pedestrian Links Washington Resolution No. /; 7' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A CBD TREE PLAN. WHEREAS, the CBD sidewalk construction necessitates removing existing trees for a variety of safety and landscaping reasons; and WHEREAS, a coordinated tree plan has been prepared and reviewed; and WHEREAS, a schedule has been prepared and approved by the Transportation Committee for CBD sidewalks and trees as shown on the attached figures; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: That the CBD Tree Plan is adopted and the CBD sidewalk project and development projects will plant trees in accord with the plan as follows: Street Tree Type Flame Ash (Fraxinus oxycarpa) Tulip Tree (Liriodendron tulipifera) Marshall Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica lanceolate) Red Oak (Quercus rubra) Red Maple (Acer rubrum) Flame Ash (Fraxinus oxycarpa) Kobus Magnolia (Nagolia kobus) Lavalle Hawthorn (Crataegus lavallei) Bradford Pear (Pyrus calleryana) Vine Maple (Acer circinatum) PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF Y OF TUI , WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this �� day of , 1993. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: a.,,`e_ g . Ja a E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney Filed with the City Clerk: /Q - 1 Passed by the City Council: / / / 3 Resolution Number /02 Ito Steve Lawrence, Council President February 17, 2005 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development (DCD) 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Nora Gierloff, Project Planner Ref: Proposed Mt. Adams Holdings development at 100 Andover Park West/Tukwila Dear Ms. Gierloff, I represent Rainbow Associates, LLC, who are the part of the eastern adjoining properties to this proposed development (our parcel #022310- 0033). It's in my capacity as the Managing General Partner that I would like to submit some items for discussion that need to be addressed during the review of this proposed project. They are as follows: Proposed Driveway access from Evans Black Dr. 1.) This area in cross section is heavily used by both our tenant and Lowes for truck loading/unloading. A great deal of turning and maneuvering is required to approach the docks. The cul de sac was originally created for trucks loading and unloading from the public railroad dock that was torn out around 1987, when we acquired our property. 2.) If a full driveway were installed, the areas on ours and Lowes parcels would possibly be subjected to overflow or indiscriminate parking by the customers of Acme et al. 3.) There is a storm sewer adjacent to the proposed drive that if the drive were widened to enable a two way access /egress, drainage patterns may be affected because of extensive fill requirements. 4.) If the proposal for the drive has been requested by the Tukwila Firedept, it could be marked and gated for fire dept use only and made a single width. 5.) With open access, at night, the areas around ours and Lowes parking could become hang out areas or a racing strip to the end of EB Drive. 6.) We have not been contacted by anyone for discussion of a permanent easement to our property. It would appear on new parcel (022310 -0020) maps that The City has granted Mt. Adams ownership or a right of way on Evans Black between ours and Lowes truck docks. The effect is to cut us off from our own access via the public roadway, Evans Black Drive, this cannot prevail. See attached sketch. 7.) We cannot look favorably on the driveway concept. It would appear that there are very good traffic circulation routes existing around Andover West and Baker Blvd for the project utilization, which do not need to include the EB Drive route. Page 1 of 2 RECEIVED FEB 1 8 (]fl'i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila, Acme Bowling Project, February 17, 2005 North -South landscaping on Mt. Adams eastern property line. 8.) For years because of the railroad right of way, this area has been in severe disuse. We have maintained the cutbacks on the western areas of our parcel but the eastern edge of the former Fatigue parcel has been neglected. Several dump spots exist and transient camps have had to be removed. 9.) It would appear that a landscape plan has been drawn up but is not detailed in the draft plans, in the review package. It does not presently show how the whole area will be worked out to preserve the drainage and to properly develop the plant growth while retarding the native blackberry and brush growth. 10.) A 3 foot elevation loss (as in drop off) exists from west to east between both our property and the southern bordering property. We have no problem with the use of an "ecoblock" concept and maintaining the elevation differences. It would probably make sense to extend our asphalt to the base of that wall. In summary, we recognize that this area west of The Mall has been undergoing a slow steady change for years, from an industrial base to a retail base. However, it cannot be ignored that even these industrial buildings are investments as well and that their values must be maintained during these transitions. We have been associated with the Tukwila business area for over 25 years and have always been willing to maintain a spirit of cooperation wherever possible. Please relate your questions to me and maintain this address for notice of the appropriate Public Hearings. Ve Truly Yours anden Managing General Partner Rainbow Associates, LLC 22820 148 Ave SE Kent, WA 98042 253/631 -4931 dicklanden @aol.com attach: Evans Black Sketch page 2 of 2 January 25, 2005 Chris Miller Mount Adams Holdings 2365 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 RE: L04 -081 ACME Bowling E04 -022 Dear Mr. Miller, Sincerely Nora Gierloff Planning Supervisor Q:\Bowling \COMPLETE.DOC e Guy of Tukwila NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Your application for SEPA determination and design review to remodel a warehouse located at Andover Park West and Baker Boulevard has been found to be complete on January 25, 2005 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. The project has been tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the Board of Architectural Review on March 24 The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to install the sign with your application packet. If you need another set of those instructions, please call me. Once you have notified me that the notice board has been installed I will post it with a laminated copy of the Notice of Application and the comment period will start. After installing the sign with the laminated notice, you need to return the signed Affidavit of Posting to our office. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. I will be contacting you soon to discuss this project. If you wish to speak to me sooner, feel free to call me at (206) 433 -7141. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Nora Gierloff - King County Participation in Transit Project at Southcenter Page 1 From: "Alexander, Paul- Transit" <Paul.Alexander@METROKC.GOV> To: "Moira Carr Bradshaw (E- mail)" <mbradshaw @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 11/10/04 12:57PM Subject: King County Participation in Transit Project at Southcenter Moira, Metro has considered the proposal for a transit project at the intersection of Andover Park W and W Baker Street; and, we would like to keep the southbound bus stop south of Baker. Extension to the existing bus pullout by 30' is desirable, but driveway access appears to be a constraint. Upgrades are needed at this pullout stop could include the above mentioned extension, construction of two new double unit F12 internally lit shelter footings and increased paving behind the sidewalk along the length of the pullout to account for the areas where riders stand off the sidewalk. Provision of a single unit B11 footing and litter receptacle pad is desirable at the westbound bus stop on Strander Blvd just west of 61st Ave. S. adjacent to the Olive Garden Restaurant. We would also like to return to the old northbound stop north of Baker adjacent to the old "Fatigue Technologies" building. Based on our planning level estimate of the costs, subject to an agreement with the City, are willing to contribute up to (but not to exceed) $75,000 toward the actual construction costs of a new bus pullout, including: the pullout; curb and sidewalk; and, internally lit shelter footings, conduit, handholds and wire pulled to the handhold, should it be desired that Metro install our internally lit passenger shelters at the northbound stop. The City and /or the developer would need to absorb the design, mobilization, demolition, drainage, utility, and other costs, etc. We could work with the City on other variations and the party with ultimate responsibility for completion. Should Metro shelters and internal lights be use, the City will need to absorb the ongoing power costs for these lights. Funding would be subject to our approval of the final design and inspection of the finished work. Prior to formal commitment of the funds, an agreement will need to be executed directly with the City as the sole source for this work and the party with ultimate responsibility for completion. Please review this proposal and let me know if you have any questions. Paul Alexander Transportation Planner King County Metro Transit 201 S Jackson St, KSC -TR -0413 Seattle, WA 98104 Ph: 206 -684 -1599 Fx: 206 -684 -1860 e -mail: paul.alexander @metrokc.gov CC: "Lattemann, Jack" <Jack.Lattemann @METROKC.GOV >, "Johnson, Doug - Planning" < Doug - Planning.Johnson @METROKC.GOV> January 4, 2005 Chris Miller Mount Adams Holdings 2365 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 RE: L04 -081 ACME Bowling E04 -022 Dear Mr. Miller, City of l uk,Y lla Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION Your application for a SEPA determination and design review to remodel a warehouse located at Andover Park West and Baker Boulevard has been found to be incomplete. In order to be a complete application, the following materials must be submitted (numbering is from the application checklist): 15 (g) Fences, rockeries and retaining walls with called out colors and materials. You have proposed a 5 -6 foot retaining wall adjacent to the Evans Black street frontage but no other information is provided about that wall. 15 (h) Street furniture such as benches and bike racks. You are required to provide bicycle parking at a ratio of 1 space per 50 parking stalls with a minimum of 2 spaces. Please provide a location, design and color for your bike racks. 15 (i) Pedestrian connections between the building entrances and the sidewalk/public street. Since you are including all of the site work under the first development phase these connections should be made for all three buildings to the Andover Park West, Baker Boulevard and Evans Black frontages. See attached redlines for suggested locations. These paths should have a special treatment such as changes in material, color, surface level and/or texture to distinguish them from the parking lot. Simply striping them with paint is not sufficient. 16 (b) Note that tree replacement ratios only apply to sensitive areas (wetlands, watercourses, slopes over 15% and their buffers) and there are no sensitive areas on your site. 18 (c) Existing (dashed) and proposed (solid) topography at 2' intervals. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 20. Color and materials board accurately representing the proposed project. Please note that the color and detailing of the corrugated metal panels will be key to giving an appearance of design quality appropriate to the project. 22. Site light levels in footcandles across the entire parking lot. The lighting levels and uniformity of illumination will be of concern to our Police Department when they provide a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) analysis. Upon receipt of these items, the City will re- review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. In addition I understand that you will be applying for a special permission sign area increase for the bowling business. This should be included in your resubmittal in order to be reviewed in concert with your design review. Please see attached redlines for some preliminary comments on the site design. Evans Black Drive is a City street and frontal improvements as well as a driveway and sidewalk connection will be required. We are sensitive to your concern about losing parking spaces and have proposed a solution that will minimize the changes to your proposed site plan. These applications will expire if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.105.070(E). Please be aware that delays in responding to this request will affect your project timeline. If you have any questions with this matter please call me at (206) 433 -7141. " Nora Gierloff Planning Supervisor CC: Bob Giberson, Public Works Don Tomaso, Fire Department STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING EXECUTED at le+ f i CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E-mail: tukolan @ci.tukwila.wa.us (Address) 0i 25) %VI - 7900 Phone AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 100 AvAdogR r Par k t.JeS t for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests for items on the "Complete Application Checklist" within ninety (90) days. 7. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. (city), WA (state), on , )eceWi 6e r. , 20 f Mk, Adams Ho +'Mg5 LLC. (Print Name) 2 CAAllovt l4-. 44J OR 9%633 (Signature) On this day personally appeared before me d `�/ i t el Z4 rs'O r' to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. '/� c SUBSCRIBk�MT SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THI / DAY OF (Jet"rK , 204 � II Z ` O . ';S1 F +A� V� NOTAR PUBLI Ar te a of Washington .. C � 1 y % Residing at cur /TtO �/¢ .•:. v - a%%%% % % % % %% My Commission expires on tt qu tf 0 a Z *if B R Address: 2:3G Ca e. na-r Phone: ( 116 - 8 c'-79S/ Si 100 f}A over par- k tAkS 0223 00 DO2.O I 0 00 2-0 Quarter: 5 C Section: 23 Township: 23 Range: O (This information may be found on your tax statement.) P o: , ► + FAX: Date: 0./1070y CITY OF TUKWILA bipfmt, 10 2004 pr Department of Community Development 0 MENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: q w,, . S0w1 ∎ h) PUBLIC DESIGN REVIEW LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: CL�; M ; f �2r' FOR STAFF USE ONLY Sierra Type P -BAR Planner: File Number: (_. 3c4 — 03 Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: 1 - o Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: LD 4 - t� Address: 2:3G Ca e. na-r Phone: ( 116 - 8 c'-79S/ Si 100 f}A over par- k tAkS 0223 00 DO2.O I 0 00 2-0 Quarter: 5 C Section: 23 Township: 23 Range: O (This information may be found on your tax statement.) P o: , ► + FAX: Date: 0./1070y CITY OF TUKWILA bipfmt, 10 2004 pr Department of Community Development 0 MENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: q w,, . S0w1 ∎ h) PUBLIC DESIGN REVIEW LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: CL�; M ; f �2r' Check items . submitted with application Information Required. May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: V 1/ 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. ✓ 2. Completed Application Form and drawings (5 copies). 3. One set of all plans reduced to 81/2" by 11 ". One complete set of PMTs of the _final drawing set will be required prior to final approval. l/ ✓ _4. Application Fee $1,400. i� 5. SEPA Environmental Checklist if required (see SEPA Application Packet) PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: i.,-*'''' 6. King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 ft. of the subject lot. V 7. Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings —e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks —must be included (see Public Notice Materials section) 8. A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that the application is complete (see Public Notice Materials section). PROPERTY INFORMATION: ✓,� 9. Vicinity Map with site location. / P44 10. Document sewer and water availability if provided by other than the City of Tukwila. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: RE(Ptvrr t COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted at a later date for use at the public hearing (e.g. colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 -431 -3670 (Department of Community Development) and 206 - 433 -0179 (Department of Public Works). DEC' 10 2004 DEVELOPMENT NT A Check items submitted with application Information Required. May waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning / ✓ V 11. A written discussion of project consistency with decision criteria. (See Application) / V 12. Technical Infotrmation Report (TIR) including feasibility analysis per King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). For additional guidance contact Public Works. A//i 13. Provide sensitive ai#ea studies as needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). SURVEY: v ,....-- V 14 (a) The survey must include a graphic scale and north arrow. It shall be drawn with black ink in record of survey format. This shall be stamped by the surveyor. (b) An existing and proposed boundary and topographic survey (2 ft. contours including a minimum 20 ft. beyond the property line) with all structures, easements, encumbrances and right -of -way width. Vertical datum NAVD 1988 and horizontal datum NAD 83/91. Conversion calculations to NGVD 1929, if in a flood zone or flood -prone area. _ ✓ (c) Existing and proposed building footprints. ✓ N,/ (d). Fire access lanes and turn- arounds per Fire Department standards. L°+ e_y_k "' bn n• 4 4,.hu,,a.1 CAL. SITE PLAN: ✓ 4 ,15 (a) The site plan must include a graphic scale, north arrow and project name. M aximum size 24" x 36 ". � ' (b) Existing and proposed building footprints. ✓ (c) Dash in required setback distances from all parcel lot lines. �// (d) Fire access lanes and turn- arounds per Fire Department standards. 1/,/ (e) Parking lots with dimensioned stalls and drive aisles. 1/ (f) Loading and service areas. "tA , o , (g) Fences, rockeries and retaining walls with called out colors and materials. N4 0„ (h) Street furniture such as benches and bike racks. 4........ C,,,- ; ,, p„\ (i) Pedestrian connections between the building entrance(s) and the sidewalk /public street. 1 WA' 1 (j) In MDR and HDR zones provide a development coverage calculation (maximum 50%). LANDSCAPE PLAN: f ,/ 16 (a) Landscape planting plan that meets the standards at TMC 18.52 by a Washington State licensed landscape architect. One set of all plans and analyses shall have an original Washington State registered Landscape Architect stamp and signature. Plans must include the type, quantity, spacing and location of all plantings. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". . / t/ ✓ (b) Show all existing trees to be retained and any tree protection measures required (for example fencing at drip line). RFrPil/Crti cYetac cAwent- c''`4r DEC' 1 0 2004/ DEVELOPMENT Check items submitted with application Information Required. May waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN: n) / 17 (a) Location of all sensitive areas (e.g. streams, wetlands, slopes over 20 %, coal mine areas and important geological and archaeological sites). For stream frontage provide existing and proposed top of stream bank, stream bank toe, stream mean high water mark, and base flood elevation (i.e., 100 yr. flood). Maximum size 24" x 36 ". AM / -,A (b) Location of all required sensitive area buffers, setbacks tracts and protection measures. N4 I, , , (c) Show all trees over 4" caliper, indicating those to be retained. 4/4 AA, (d) Existing and proposed building footprints. CIVIL PLANS: ✓ / V 18 (a) One set of all civil plans and analyses shall be stamped, signed and dated by a licensed professional engineer. Include a graphic scale and north arrow. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". / ✓ (b) Vertical datum NAVD 1988 and horizontal datum NAD 83/91. Conversion calculations to NGVD 1929, if in a flood zone or flood -prone area. V (c) Existing (dashed) and proposed (solid) topography at 2' intervals. V (d) Total expected cut and fill. �/ 1/ . (e) Existing and proposed utility easements and improvements, on site and in street (water, sewer, power, natural gas, telephone, cable). Schematic designs to be provided regardless of purveyor (e.g. site line size, location, and size of public main). No capacity calcs, invert depth, valve locations or the like are needed. / V (f) Storm drainage design at least 90% complete, which meets the TIR and KCSWDM. Include all storm drainage maintenance access and safety features. Call out total existing and proposed impervious surface in square feet. ✓�/ (g) Locate the nearest existing hydrant and all proposed hydrants. (h) Show the 100 yr. flood plain boundary and elevation as shown on FEMA maps. ti---' (i) Plan, profile and cross- section for any right -of -way improvements. (j) Show planned access to buildings, driveways, fire access lanes and turn- arounds. OTHER: /19. ,V Dimensioned and scalable building elevations with keyed colors and materials. Show mechanical equipment and /or any proposed screening. La+ee -- 20. Color and materials board accurately representing the proposed project. L a r _ 21. A rendering is optional. If submitted it must accurately show the project and be from a realistic perspective (5 to 6 feet above the sidewalk). 22. Luminaire plan including location and type of street and site lighting. Include proposed fixture cut sheets, site light levels (foot-candles), and measures to shield adjacent properties from glare. ✓ 23. All existing and proposed signage with sign designs and l i.. ^ _ DEC' 10 1004 ' DEVELOPMENT k' DECEMBER 10, 2004 30' SIGHT DISTANCE LINE EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN, TTP. TREE RETENTION F�NCE, FULLER SEARS Oak ARCHITECTS LIMITS OF WC% IS' TYPE I LANDSCAPE EXISTING LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN LIMITS OF WORK 0 60' 120' N C 1EATI-E 5Eru1=D L ''T11X1ERE NEW PLANTING EEDS MEET EXI5TI4 EXISTING LAIN TO REMAN. REPAIR 30' SIGHT LAIN DIF' :::7. BY • . - ON. DISTANCE LICE 'lift ;' - VIEW ■ = A 4 - ` - . i` _ ~ - � v e�� s c 1�3 �C:i lt_ L� Q ••rE! . , vie '; li,;p ....zsrovii Gt;tri &taiG =�94� eOZ-,'`F, 4 e - --'. itai $ I I t ii,i6la�G Lep IG . fir TYPE I 'OA ea LANDSCAPE q , a o iri 1 p c .:,:; ANDOVER PARK WEST roVit • NM al ist 1 4 5' LIMITS OF WORK PROPOSE 1 TURE SH i 4,000 S.F FIRE . ACCESS 4 2 4 , regi fozli • so LINE BLDG IT EX ST. • kE DEMO 45 J F: 01 RETAIL SHC P S— POSED FUTURE 6,500 .F: ; TAIL ADDITION 13,200 S.F. PROPOSED RETAIL CENTER 22,000 S.F. _ J _ J D000n r•N�. fi y — OOOO TRASH �a �.6i°r4 GP w, & ,.= - �s�' w 41 . • 1•' Ii.•U,U!i,L,rw•ilei, i! e!i,tc!..r,�i,!iiti�i�9210, GG�b,!ikri„ U�i!ic!i �i,�ici�ih•, �i fi!i!i !iG!i Ct. Mw7!i�ig U, !!i i!i {iG�i6!Jtn'C 6 1 r Ir j ILA n4. � , ° Cig o bbl i TZA t ■ 2 1 110 kri 0, IJ t "got 1 �1 .F h �•-�� a,. .a. Via 'i ft�•� `. - achgoal MON .,L L_ 11 1 { TAIL SHbPS 9,7q0 S F m x 0 • (n r . L 1TS OF u>or • n = 1 = i�Q�r. 1 SCI ni'1 II I 11-rt U II O II '1 - 11 - - th � T- I-ll �r 9 l _' 3 �n - INF i '� 'i1 fi� ,I I= � I -: n- ,i 1�n�1 , r ii, . arai �n - ai j ' . 1` ussa- - :- nE iia - ✓ rr7• ':e- rV EXISTM TREES TO REMAIN, TYP. BOWLING 40 LANES 52,500 S.F. iktt RETENTION FENCE, TYP. ?u- L' ?n. 7 (\ LANDSCAP PLAN ACME BOWLING Tukwila, Washinigton N SEEDED au ire - — — - — -FATHER M SEEDED LAIN LLFERE Pew - — NEW PLANTING BEDS MEET EXISTING PLANTING BEDS MEET EXIST EXISTING LAWN TO RE31AN. REPAIR 30' SIGHT DISTANCE LAIN DISTURBED BY C7151. fONL LINE US \!\G^' "�r�1 v Un� 1 1 C JJ DEC1 1 0 20 DBE LDpM 30' 5IGI-IT DISTANCE LINE O , BUILDING o (PLATS A. LINE BLD' DEM STATE CF WASI -NGTON WES M' J KIER ulf bKO E: LIS'NE WEISMAN DESIGN GROUP LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE MiovJeST SIGN 4 SuceE N PRI4T stoulo y Co guILPItJG IAA PA ACE cr. 4-oLZ3tO — 0033 i Cn 6* is drain. S i Nor ft. SCALE: /fi 2o' APPROVED my : DRAWN BY Q L ow/Joe-v-1/P : DATE:M$/ ZisCdY. PRIA/BOAi PrAreGIq -'TE- f L 1- - L 4o I Evows &*!U D,?_ 'ru k.WILA REVISED 1 DRAWING NUMOER Rust colored stucco or concrete stain \ 1 k - := Natural sandblasted concrete ACME EXTERIOR COLORS January 11, 2005 Dark warm gray painted Medium warmarm gray painted Zincalume comrgated metal existing concrete panels existing concrete panels canopy roof and misc. metals Metallic Silver flat metal panels Zincalume metal screen Frosted canopy glass These colors are for reference only, color matching should be done to actual samples which can be obtained from the manufacturer or architect. Refer to the finish schedule for actual material call outs and locations. FULLER SEARS ARCHITECTS Tahoe Blue Corrugated Metal Regal white canopy and screen wall steel Clear anodized alum. mullions 0 12.5 25 50 75 10Qeet 0223000010 831 00033 • • . f ^ 100t MARK LAVIAllsss ( 50 o 5_1 tiwl- ioL (2_4) 2-33 __Deo S 11.0 - .4. 1 2r 4 k% .,pets ysvAi,„ ljMiS A4:11-er - Z 3 s Jf 0/Ir Is.or3 z. 5 $2' -7 kers Pt^ Q2 6 - ycsu t • ( -kiLe...QTEer .414, stQ ^stor sarm-arbasez.• btiv los .172-6,14-492/5/ " 1/1467,4.1 - 231 p (' A r, :s'v9J r 4. � 4 - - ,si12-J e-//i r rj pzi,I,/.v Co 4o lq'S 5(9,6ois sr lno 21 o' 1 I1 /4 a • r 1 ZS ID h r E PLt op•rlo/t/ 4 .4e -,'7 - 5 oti •r G 7-2 1 AMMO ...a ,T-,',7e_ N f.4/ Ac?� 5f) (/%'i ( )<-¢ Z = 049.574114 0 1 • 7 , 4-- 5gops,ie 0,9,400 S e c /loco) _ Z • rn1L SHops s. ( ,SF 5/moo) =*3 • gL�T L ( 776 ; 1 - 00 S s/ ) 17c `4 sF s/i000) = 20 Pr-DV/Deb -¢8! RF'9 ENED CITY OF TUtCWILA 6 w ,E4 3 PERMIT CANTER .4 8 1 C1.7? c7 .eA C CO e--0 - � j 'ui Ly1 � (� r — ft C C�J �✓�C L � v � 1 A-0 E c' 5 1(c a►L r71 91 I/ ' ( "/ I I )1, EVANS BLACK DRIVE EXTENSION Parallel Parking i 4 BACK OF SIDEWALK S ss�l t y k BACK OF SIDEWALK f, 11 �I 3 kity 3 6 1' I'L IL Pct 3 a A- I o Lc„ Dn S EVANS BLACK DRIVE EXTENSION Parallel Parking BACK OF SIDEWALK BACK OF SIDEWALK Existing Section (Typical) • Andover Park East/ Andover Park West 12' 12' S.W. Travel i Travel Travel Travel S.W. 60' R.o.W 12' 12' Page 1 of 1 file: / /Q: \Bowling\Existing Section APW.jpg 11/15/2004 Proposed Section • Andover Park West at Mall 11' Pars Travel Lane Lane 11' 11' Travel Travel Lane Lane 60' • OW) 11' Travel Lane Page 1 of 1 file: / /Q:\Bowling\Proposed Section Andover Park West at Mall jpg 11/15/2004 TINV's.s a2ce 4 0 A 14, yip grki 4 "row/414, anarf /4 c#4 (611r vvAx.g.- vw741 D -0 _ irr- file://QABowlingaecommendation diagram with basejpg ff-C.-17;r:'.4,0'1- ewe. Page 1 of 1 PREOI 11/16/2004 Nora Gierloff - ACME Southcenter Design Review From: "Hiroyuki Sasaki" <hiro @ftburbandesign.com> To: "Lynn Miranda (E- mail)" <Imiranda @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, "Nora Gierloff (E- mail)" <ngierloff @ci.tu kwila.wa. us> Date: 11/12/04 10:19AM Subject: ACME Southcenter Design Review Dear Lynn and Nora, Per our phone conversation on Wednesday November 10th, here is an outline of FTB tasks for the ACME Southcenter design review project (former Fatigue Engineering site). FTB received current plans and elevations as well as photos of existing conditions of the site from the city and had a phone conference with Lynn and Nora to discuss how to handle this project on November 10th. Subsequent FTB tasks will include reviewing plans, elevations and existing condition photos, reviewing draft TUC Subarea Plan regulations on these parcels, preparing FTB's recommendation on site planning and elevation design, producing sketches showing FTB's recommendations, sending recommendations to the City, and having a phone conference with the City. We believe the FTB tasks as outlined above will cost approximately one thousand dollars, and would recommend that work proceed based on a Time and Materials basis. If we find that our cost will exceed one thousand dollars because of additional tasks requested by the city that are not included in the tasks above, we will let you know in advance before providing those services. Please contact me if you have any questions on this proposal. If this proposal meets with your approval, please send us a written approval by e -mail. Regarding the phone conference, we will prepare all necessary materials and send them to you by Tuesday morning. Since I have another meeting on Tuesday morning, either in the afternoon on Tuesday, November 16th or any time on Wednesday, 17th is convenient for me. Please let me know when you would like to have the phone conference. Regards, Hiro Hiro Sasaki, AICP Senior Associate Freedman Tung & Bottomley 74 New Montgomery St., Suite300, San Francisco, CA, 94105 T:415.291.9455 F:415.291.9633 CC: "Michael Freedman (E- mail)" <michael©ftburbandesign.com> Page 1 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT #2 FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES This Amendment is entered into this 12th day of November, 2004, between Freedman Tung & Bottomley ( "Consultant ") and the City of Tukwila ( "City "). Freedman Tung and Bottomley and the City entered into an Agreement, dated April 1 2003 for professional consulting services in connection with the Design Review Services Mall Expansion and J.C.Penny Expansion Proposals ( "Agreement "). The City and the Consultant desire to amend the Agreement to include additional tasks outlined in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows: 1. Compensation. The total of all hourly professional fees for additional services described in Exhibit A to this Amendment shall not exceed $1,000, including expenses. 2. Scope of Work. The Scope of Work is described in Exhibit A to this Amendment. Except as amended above, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. FREEDMAN TUNG & BOTTOMLEY CITY OF TUKWILA CONSULTANT 74 New Montgomery, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94105 ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY Dear Lynn and Nora, Regards, Hiro Sasaki, AICP Senior Associate Freedman Tung & Bottomley 74 New Montgomery St., Suite300, San Francisco, CA, 94105 T:415.291.9455 F:415.291.9633 EXHIBIT A Per our phone conversation on Wednesday November 10th, here is an outline of FTB tasks for the ACME Southcenter design review project (former Fatigue Engineering site). FTB received current plans and elevations as well as photos of existing conditions of the site from the city and had a phone conference with Lynn and Nora to discuss how to handle this project on November 10th. Subsequent FTB tasks will include reviewing plans, elevations and existing condition photos, reviewing draft TUC Subarea Plan regulations on these parcels, preparing FTB's recommendation on site planning and elevation design, producing sketches showing FTB's recommendations, sending recommendations to the City, and having a phone conference with the City. We believe the FTB tasks as outlined above will cost approximately one thousand dollars, and would recommend that work proceed based on a Time and Materials basis. If we find that our cost will exceed one thousand dollars because of additional tasks requested by the city that are not included in the tasks above, we will let you know in advance before providing those services. Please contact me if you have any questions on this proposal. If this proposal meets with your approval, please send us a written approval by e-mail. Regarding the phone conference, we will prepare all necessary materials and send them to you by Tuesday morning. Since I have another meeting on Tuesday morning, either in the afternoon on Tuesday, November 16th or any time on Wednesday, 17th is convenient for me. Please let me know when you would like to have the phone conference.