HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L07-019 - INTERURBAN RETAIL CENTER LP571054 - SPECIAL PERMISSION PARKING VARIANCEINTERURBAN RETAIL
CENTER
Administrative Parking Variance
13038 INTERURBAN AV S
L07 -019
Associated Permits:
Ciz of Tukwila
Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director
Notice of Decision
Administrative Parking Variance
February 26, 2008
File Number: L08 -003, (Administrative Parking Variance)
E04 -004 (SEPA), D04 -412 (Building Permit) and L04-
Review), L04 -044 (Administrative Parking Variance 2/
(Administrative Parking Variance 3 /23/07)
Applicant 13038 Interurban, LLC
Request: Administrative Parking Variance
Location: 13038 Interurban Ave S
Comprehensive Plan
Designation: Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI)
Zoning District: Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI)
SEPA Determination: Determination of Non - Significance issued September 7, 2004
Staff: Brandon J. Miles, Senior Planner
Recommendation: Approval with conditions
Request
In February of 2005, the City issued an administrative parking variance for the Interurban Retail site
at 13038 Interurban Ave S. The requested reduction was for five stalls, which was 7.9 percent of the
required parking stalls.
In 2007, Gramor Development (the owner at the time) revised the usable floor area for the building
on the site and requested to add an additional fast food restaurant. Thus, it was necessary for Gramor
to seek another administrative variance (L07 -019) in order to allow the fast food restaurant to be
located at the site.
L07 -019 provided the following breakdown for uses on the site:
05), L07 -019
Starbucks 1,438 square feet (Fast food) 288 square feet (storage)
Quizno's 1,136 square feet (Fast food 289 square feet (storage)
Vacant 1,106 square feet (Fast food) 221 square feet (storage)
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
Vacant 1,318 square feet (General Retail) 221 square feet (storage)
Under Figure 18 -7 of the TMC fast food is required to have a parking ratio of one stall for every 50
square feet of usable floor area. General retail, located outside of the TUC, is required to have 2.5
for every 1,000 square feet of usable floor area. The total number of parking stalls required for the
proposed project is 61 stalls.
13038 Interurban LLC purchased the property from Gramor Development. The new owners wish to
utilize the suite designated as "general retail" as "office ". "Office" use requires a parking ratio of 3
per 1000 square feet of usable floor area.
The number of parking stalls required on the site will remain unchanged at 61 stalls. However, since
the previous owner indicated that the remaining suite would be utilized by a use that had a lower
parking demand than the proposed use, a new parking variance is needed. The updated parking
variance assumes the following square footages:
Starbucks 1,438 square feet (Fast food) 288 square feet (storage)
Quizno's 1,136 square feet (Fast food 289 square feet (storage)
Vacant 1,106 square feet (Fast food) 221 square feet (storage)
Vacant 1,318 square feet (Office) 221 square feet (storage)
Review Criteria
TMC 18.56.140 (B) states the criteria that will be used to evaluate administrative variance from
parking standards.
A. All shared parking strategies are explored.
The project site is bordered by three commercial businesses, Jack in the Box, Husky
Trucking, and the Gateway Office Complex.
Parking on the Jack in the Box site is limited, additionally parking in the Jack in the Box
parking lot would require patrons of the applicant's building to cross a major drive path.
The Husky Trucking property is an active truck yard and for safety reasons a shared parking
agreement was not explored.
The previous owners' of the site, Gramor Development, did approach the owners' of the
Gateway Office Complex with regards to obtaining a shared parking agreement. In an email
dated, September 9, 2004, Gramor Development noted that the owners' of the Gateway
Office Complex were not interested in sharing excess parking.
The new owners also contacted the adjacent properties and none were willing to allow off -
site parking.
B. On site parking and ride opportunities are fully explored.
Mass transit is available along Interurban Avenue. Customers and not the employees on the
site will generate most of the parking demand for the building. Thus, implementing a park
and ride program for employees on the site would not significantly reduce the total number
of parking stalls needed.
C. The site is in compliance with the City's commute trip reduction ordinance, or if not an
affected employer as defined by the City's ordinance, agrees to become affected.
D. The site is at least 300 feet away from a single - family residential zone
There is no single- family residential zone within 300 -feet of the subject property.
E. A report is submitted providing a basis for less parking and mitigation necessary to offset
any negative effects
Conclusion
Attachments:
The project is not subject to the requirements of the City's CTR program. However,
granting this administrative parking variance will require that the site participate in the
City's CTR program.
As part of this project the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by
The Transpo Group, dated October of 2004. According to the TIA, the peak hour will
require that 42 parking stalls be available. As previously noted the applicant will be
providing a total of 58 parking stalls.
Based upon the information presented to the City, the reduction of parking on the site by 4.9 percent
is warranted. The City has on file (L07 -019) a parking review, which demonstrates that sufficient
parking will be available on the site. The applicant did attempt to obtain a shared parking agreement
with an adjacent property owner and one could not be obtained.
It should be noted that the proposed breakdown of uses would provide a great deal of flexibility to
the owners of the site. Since fast food and office uses require some of the highest parking ratios for
uses under the TMC, the applicant would have the flexibility to change the uses provided any new
uses were at or below the parking requirements of this variance application.
Staff's Recommendation
The administrative parking variance should be granted subject to the following conditions:
1. The site is now subject to the City's CTR program.
2. The suite identified as "Office" cannot not be converted to a restaurant or fast food use.
Minnie Dhaliwal, Acting Planning Supervisor Date:
1. Letter from applicant, dated March 15, 2007
2. Letter and layout of building from applicant, dated February 15, 2007
Brandon Miles - RE: 13038 Interurban - Parking Variance
From: "Bob Jones" <Bob @GramorWa.com>
To: "Brandon Miles" <bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us>
Date: 03/23/2007 6:15 PM
Subject: RE: 13038 Interurban - Parking Variance
Brandon,
No sweat! We came up with our various square footages using Autocad 2005 Measuring Tools. Our approach
was to measure to the inside of each general area, without including the walls shown in the drawings. I suppose
showing the areas lost to walls in our calculations would have made them easier to follow. So here you go:
Starbuck's
1,149.5 sf Restaurant / Retail Sales
287.9 sf Storage
131.3 sf Lost to Restrooms
133.3 sf Lost to Walls
1,702.0sf Gross Area
Restaurant / Retail 5ales
1,149.5 sf
Interurban Retail Center
Starbuck's
Quizno's
847.2 sf Restaurant / Retail Sales
Page 1 of 3
fi1P• / /('• \Tlnnmmc.nte onrl Cn1-1-;nnc \1-4ronr1r. ,_AA \T nnol Ccrtt;rme \ AK /IA 1 elf n2 /1I /Thn1
289.4 sf Storage
121.1 sf Lost to Restrooms
106.3 sf Lost to Walls
1,364.0 sf Gross Area
Restroorns
121.1sf
NIC
S
289.4x. sf •
Restaurant / Retail Sales
8471 sf
Interurban Retail Center
Quiznos
Walls
1Q6.3sf
NIC
What else can I get for you.
Starbuck's
Bob Jones
Gramor Development
From: Brandon Miles [mailto:bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us]
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 4:37 PM
To: Bob Jones
Subject: Re: 13038 Interurban - Parking Variance
Bob,
Page 2 of 3
Nora and I were looking at the variance this afternoon and some question came up. I took a closer look
at the numbers and had some questions.
First, the usable floor area reductions are very large. In the first administrative variance issued it was
assumed that 93.1 percent would be the actual "usable" floor area for the fast food restaurants and 89.9
percent would be the usable floor area for the general retail.
X10•/ /0•\r,„„,,.,,o„fr. ,.,,7 C + +: \D J 1\ a\7 \T \VT7! \I7: \ A LlcA 1 (' C A') /^I nn-7
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Brandon J. Miles
Assistant Planner
Department of Community Development
City of Tukwila
tel (206) 431 -3684
fax (206) 431 -3665
bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us
»> "Bob Jones" <rjones028 @centurytel.net> 03/21/2007 9:28 am »>
Hello Brandon,
Bob Jones
Gramor Development WA, LLC
1505 Westlake Avenue North, Suite 320
Seattle, WA 98109
c - 253 - 370 -6382
f - 206 - 284 -4061
bob @gramorwa.com
Page 3 of 3
Can you update the details for each tenant and show which areas will be "unusable "? The details show
the bathrooms, which would we would not consider us usable. Can you provide an actual number for
each tenant space for the total wall area? Also, the tenant details do not add up to what is included in
the calculations. For example, the table shows that the Starbucks is 1702 square feet, yet the plan detail
when added together only comes up to 1568.65.
It was good talking to you on Friday. Does it still look like the Interurban Retail Center parking variance is
a go for this week?
f; 1. • 110 A 1 1,...,..,,o., + .,., -1 co + +;.,,,-, \ T2 «.,., A ,,., Af\T ,.,.. 1 c,a++:.,,...\• r-.... .....\If nr..... \I/:.. \A4AA1(1C ill /')4 /'1!1!1'7
•
To:
Attn:
From:
Dear Ms. Gierloff,
Sincerely,
Gra
Bo
In
•
Nora Gierloff
Sr. Planner
Bob Jones
ones,
erurban Re
elopment WA, LLC
perry Manager
I Center.
RECEIVED
FEB 1
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
City of Tukwila Date: February 15, 2007
Planning Division
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100
Tukwila, WA 98188
Re: Parking Requirements CC: Cory Shelest
Interurban Retail Center
13038 Interurban Ave. South
Tukwila, WA
Please accept the enclosed information supporting amended Parking Requirements for
Interurban Retail Center.
The attached summary a) corrects previously submitted general building information; b) adds
known Usable Square Footage data for the exiting Quizno's and Starbuck's; and c) projects
parking requirements for additional tenants based on the existing ratios.
Please note, our assumptions predict one of the two remaining spaces to be occupied by a food
vendor. As you may know, last year we leased to "YS Sunny ", a Teriyaki restaurant. At the time,
we were unable to establish that Interurban Retail Center had adequate parking to support this
additional restaurant use. YS Sunny was unable to complete the permitting process and
ultimately, was lost as a tenant.
To prevent this from happening again, we ask the City of Tukwila to review our analysis and
confirm that we would, in fact have adequate parking to support the proposed tenancies, should
we be fortunate enough to attract them. Any help in this regard would be greatly appreciated.
1505 Westlake Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109
Phone (253) 370 -6382 Fax (206) 284 -4061
E -mail: bob @gramorwa.com
4'
Member of
International Council
of Shoppinp Centers
(GRAMCNV
DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, LLC
Pages: 4
Interurban Retail
Amended Parking Summary
w/ Proposed Parking Calculations
Proposed Recalculation
Starbucks
Quiznos
Vacant #120
(Proposed as Food Use)
Vacant #130
(Proposed as General Retail Use)
1702 84.5% 1438 1150
288 storage
1364 83.3% 1136 847
289 storage
1318 84.0% 1106 885
212 storage
1318 84.0% 1106 885
221 storage
20
0.5
20
0.5
20
0.5
2.5
0.5
23.0
0.1
16.9
0.1
17.7
0.1
2.2
0.1
Fast Food
Retail ( #120 & #130)
4384 3680
1318 1106
5702
4787
Required Parking
Stalls provided
= Shortage
- Administrative Variance previously provided (5 stalls or 7.9% - see 'Original')
- Additional Variance /City Consideration
= Adjusted Required Parking
Updates for actual square footage of existing leased units and vacant space.
0.0%
60.4
58.0
2.4
5.0
2 Usable Floor Area - measured from construction files provided by Tenant's respective architects, using AutoCad 2005 measuring tools (see
attached exhibits). Excludes restrooms and areas actually occupied by framed walls (ie: inside dimensions).
3 Methodology: (a) Apply applicable Parking Requirement ratios to known Usable Floor Areas for SBUX and Quizno's. (b) Apply the same
ratio of Usable Floor Area to each of the remaining suites. (c ) Apply applicable Parking Requirement ratios to the two remaining suites based
on thier respective proposed uses.
•
Restrooms
121.14sf
Storage
289.35 sf
Restaurant /Retail Sales
847.21 sf
\J51,
Interurban Retail Center
Quiznos
Interurban Retail Center
Starbuck's
The
ranS1/o
Group
Interurban Retail
Tukwila, WA
Transportation Impact Analysis
;Transportation
Specialists
Focused
October 2004
CR Arkil ff fy
EXPIRES 03/24/ os I
Transportation Impact Analysis
INTERURBAN RETAIL
TU KWI LA, WA
Prepared for:
Gramor Development WA, LLC
October 2004
Prepared by.
The Transpo Group, Inc.
11730 118 Avenue NE, Suite 600
Kirkland, WA 98034-7120
Phone: 425.821.3665
Fax: 425.825.8434
www.thetranspogroup.com
° 2004 The Transpo Group
Table of Contents
List of Tables
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
Project Description 1
Study Approach 1
EXIS11NG AND FUTURE WITHOUT- PROJECT CONDITIONS 4
Roadway Network 4
Existing and Future Traffic Volumes 4
Planned Improvements 7
Intersection Operations 7
Arterial Operations 8
Traffic Safety 9
Transit Service 10
Non - Motorized Facilities 10
PROJECT IMPACTS 1 1
Trip Generation 11
Trip Distribution and Assignment 11
Traffic Volume Impacts 12
Intersection Operations 12
Arterial Operations 16
Site Access Analysis 17
Non - Motorized Facilities 17
Parking 18
Traffic Safety Impacts 18
Transportation Impact Fees 18
SUMMARY /CONCLUSIONS 19
Table 1. Existing and Future Without - Project Intersection LOS Summary -
PM Peak Hour 8
Table 2. Existing and Future without - Project Arterial LOS Summary-
PM Peak Hour 9
Table 3. Accident History Summary 9
Table 4. Project Trip Generation: PM Peak Hour 11
Table 5 Project Traffic Volume Impacts- PM Peak Hour 12
Table 6. Future Without - Project and Future with- Project LOS Summary-
PM Peak Hour 16
Table 7. Future with- Project and Future with - Project Arterial LOS Summary-
PM Peak Hour 16
Table 8. Driveway LOS Summary- PM Peak Hour 17
Table 9. Peak Parking Demand- Weekday Peak Conditions ..19
List of Figures
Figure 1. Site Vicinity 2
Figure 2. Site Plan 3
Figure 3. Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5
Figure 4. Future Baseline PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6
Figure 5. Project Trip Distribution 13
Figure 6. Project Trip Assignment 14
Figure 7. Future with Project PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 15
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA
The Transpo Group 1 04209.00 \04209r1
Introduction
October 2004
This report summarizes the results of the transportation impact analysis prepared for the
proposed retail development located at 13038 Interurban Avenue S 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 mid -block between the intersections of Gateway Drive S
and 48th Avenue S on 1 nterurban Avenue S. A site vicinity map is included as Figure 1. The
site is currently vacant, as a gas station and convenience market formerly located on -site has
been demolished. Access to the site will be consistent with the existing configuration, with
full access to existing private driveways located on both the east and west of the site which
ultim ately access Interurban Avenue S. Full access is currently permitted at the intersections
with Interurban Avenue. The project would consist of a single building, which would include
an approximately 1,700 square foot (sf) Starbucks Coffee shop with drive -thru window, a
1,365 sf fast -food restaurant without drive -thru (identified as a Quiznos), and approximately
2,650 sf of specialty retail space. Figure 2 includes the site plan used as the basis for this
analysis. Full buildout is anticipated by 2005. However, 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.
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. Four signalized intersections near the
project site were selected for analyses during the PM peak hour. In addition, to satisfy City
of Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 9.48- Transportation Concurrency Standards and Impact
Fees, four additional signalized intersections were selected for PM peak analysis south of
Interstate 5 (1 -5) to allow for the analysis of the Interurban Avenue arterial unit. This arterial
unit is defined by the TMC as between I -5 and Interstate 405 (1 -405).
The four nearest intersections were identified due to potential impacts based on overall
distribution of project trips. The selected arterial unit was selected as it will be impacted by
five or more peak hour trips. In addition to intersection and arterial levels of service, the
scope of the analysis includes a review of traffic safety and impact fee calculation.
kkt
; ' •
;
."' •
• r
x 4 _
. . ,
„ •-••
•",
• P
•-•"
. , .
- !
I i .
•
!;r
,
r!!
L
1 ST
•-•
•
1
51 ;
- T
U Ng 1 LA
4
f
515i ST
ST ' • . S OT $T
,•,-• ;.nsisrsi
• . • 1
!
it-ib m-iyi
8t
S 149U1 Sr
te!
. 5,156Th' ST
Figure 1
Site Vicinity
Interurban Retail
w
A .
•• •;;; - 1/
'5 " *Pt:At •
RA'
51
i 5
.4
F
T • • ! • 158TP • • • x■ • .
. ' •--
ar-vA4
ST
•
,5.P!Cifit! 'PAR, ' •
50TH
0- -C9111
.0
CRLSTVIA
PAv: 01621 ST
.,1 1
ST , 1-s•• ••••■-
Reproduced with permission granted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS.
ttr
1.:9714 sr
M intenita!! Retaill*rephics graphicel ef,:24(41
,••
14
ra ,
14zi, '31
PJP.A
a. !Pa
T 4' 0
. .2•
s*"
. I 14.3
5?
x
' S
sy
.S ST
' i t
• a: a-
1st 91
Tukk
SUITHCEN111? f"
X.ALL
—pc .
ST RANDIR4-"! la
1 .
r Pv14
S
A
N
NOT TO SCALE
•
S )15.3RD
71 ;71± . 4 :,. /
. ;
• • 0 j
•
RAY.ER. '
p • ft
c f, -•
eLlio
3:-I<E
, . ..
•.? --..-...-,..........„......, .
,- -
p i ,, i
%,., • i. LA(.; , \
r . ..,. , ...,— ..-... 1:381H
1 ! 1 I r '
. .:',..:,.• .■ . ': _„ ,i .■ _ r\ i
: I ' i 1 ...— r - I rs,. Ni
..., ,..) , i : 497,,,, I 1 ,_,' i 1 . .
._ ..
- . ?- .,..,..„,....-
.: ! :4...• ln
QKWY
9 i EPar.S.ST
I , SUITES
BLACK RIVE
RIPARIAN PC.4
. t
PLtaSTEB ,
• 12-t 1 P
1
• • 54.
-
DE
.„ ENTON
,
• •, •''• .
•
• S.
This map is copyrighted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS. It is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or
any part thereof whether for personal use or resale, without permission. All rights reserved.
The
Transpo
Group
25 roar
' ACCE56
E, IiirtaiRY
2LE 516NA6E
II' SIDEYARD
;APE SUMER
gA
0
0
ou¢NO8
RETAIL_
1.01341 8Q FT_
( 1,28a USF)
Figure 2
Site Plan
Interurban Retail
• •
■ •
L „� ■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■L____ • ■
■■■■ ■■.U•UI■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■t ■■■■■■■
■■■■■ ■■■ ■U■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■ ■oesaa.e�o;�,e ..., ■aw=e..... ■■.■■■ •
■■ _■r ■. :eesoo■
�
.jl� ■■ o 0
1111•1111•••••••111111 . L o L .
4,••••••••••••• c=== .
� Q
S49 24' 00' - 112.00'
0
U — I
10
W04 lr:arurr •:17>> :rani: - nrn f7 ” .'Yr
944 24' 00' - 112.00'
f
C
ELECTRIC TRANBtAIABION UNE n.C.W.
INTERURBAN AVENUE
or,E WAY
C
C
C
C
•
•
1r
■
■
•
rooT Tn SCALE
- 5-0' 'TYPE 11' 51
LANDSCAPE MP
The
Transpo
Group
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA October 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, PM peak hour traffic vohunes, PM
peak hour intersection and arterial operations, traffic safety, transit service, and an inventory
of adjacent non - motorized facilities. The analysis of existing and future without- project
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 study area are
described below.
Interurban Avenue S is a five -lane roadway that runs southeast - northwest in the project
vicinity. Between Interstate 5 and Interstate 405, Interurban Avenue S is designated as a
principal arterial, while to the north of I -5 adjacent to the project site, it is designated as a
minor arterial. Major intersections along Interurban Avenue S are signalized. Sidewalks exist
on the east side of the roadway in the immediate area of the project, and intermittently on
the west side. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
S 133rd Street/Gateway Drive S is designated as a minor arterial to the west of Interurban
Avenue S, and a local roadway to the east. It consists of four lanes to the east of Interurban
Avenue S (Gateway Drive S), and two lanes to the west. Sidewalks exist on the south side of
the roadway, and intermittently on the north side. The posted speed is 30 mph to the west of
Interurban Avenue S, and 25 mph to the east.
48th Avenue S is a local roadway located to the south of the project site. 48dr Avenue S is a
two-lane roadway with sidewalks located on the east side of the street, and intermittently on
the west side. A traffic signal controls its intersection with Interurban Avenue S. The posted
speed limit is 25 mph.
52nd Avenue S /56th Avenue S is a two-lane collector arterial to the south of Interurban
Avenue S (52nd Avenue S), and a local roadway to the north (56th Avenue S). A traffic signal
controls its intersection with Interurban Avenue S. Sidewalks exist on the west side of the
roadway. The posted speed limit is 25 mph.
Existing and Future Traffic Volumes
Existing weekday PM peak hour volumes were collected at the study area intersections in
May and June 2004. The existing PM peak hour traffic volumes are summarized in Figure 3.
Based on direction from City Staff, and to remain consistent with other studies conducted in
the area, a 1.5- percent annual growth rate was applied to the existing volumes. In addition,
City Staff indicated that traffic volumes from the planned 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. The
combination of the background traffic growth rate and this pipeline project account for
future traffic growth in the study area. The resulting future without- project traffic volumes
are summarized in Figure 4.
The Transpo Group 1 04209.00 \04209r1
S 133RD ST
O INTERURBAN AVE S
S 133RD ST- GATEWAY
0 45
39
200 \� "j 220 850
65
L 65
235
'..„ 235 235
240 65
510 � 745
INTERURBAN AVE S f
SR 599 NB OFF -RAMP
�, t04;rt4 (9 Iraerurt an R ta: Gr:,;,hi . •.(? , t , r ru • -
in
w
a
co
u)
INTERURBAN AVE S
48TH AVENUE S
70 95
725
C / 125
�\ 140
600
Figure 3
Existing (2004) PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Interurban Retail
INTERURBAN AVE S
1.5 SB OFF -RAMP
225 15 5
860 �/ 545 1255 _ / 5 5
80 )7 �510
510 5 � 835
60 25
A
N
NOT TO SCALE
INTERURBAN AVE S
56TH AVENUE S
INTERURBAN AVE S
58TH AVE S
10 5
1275 5
65 >N 5
60)7 .510
5 960
60 65
O INTERURBAN AVE S
1.405 SB RAMPS/
FORT DENT
70 40
835 30
100 .....‘` .# 155
75 )7 ∎,..5 245
50 --,. r 685
360 635
O INTERURBAN AVE S
SOUTHCENTER BLVD
280 700
795 — 775
235 . ..."••• f( 260
180 )7 ■ 435
670 ,. - 735
210 135
The
Transpo
Group
O S INTERURBAN AVE S1 INTERURBAN AVE S1 133RD ST-GATEWAY I O SR 599 NB OFF -RAMP O 8TH AVENUE S S
0 50 ; 75 105
430 ' — 220 1 935 800 "
220 , 245 1 ( 140
70 f �` 260 255
70 560
255 260 70
M•'04 hderurl;ar Re7aTGraphics grar•h c "•' _ L'rarda?"
820
Figure 4
Baseline (2010) PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Interurban Retail
155
660
INTERURBAN AVE S
1 -5 SB OFF -RAMP
245 15 N'----` 5
950 /595 135 › � 5
N 85)7 �(10
565 5 920
70 30
O INTERURBAN AVE S
56TH AVENUE S
A
N
NOT TO SCALE
INTERURBAN AVE S
58TH AVE S
10 5
1405 5
70 >"*.
65 )7 N.,5 10
5 1,060
70 75
INTERURBAN AVE S
1 -405 SB RAMPS/
FORT DENT
75 45
935 `, 35
110 \'' 'j 170
805'‘''5'.:::::N., : 2
5 , 770 70
435 695
O INTERURBAN AVE S
SOUTHCENTER BLVD
305 765
890 915
300 - ' : 285
215 )f N.,5 475
800 805
230 150
The
Transpo
Group
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA October 2004
Planned Improvements
The City of Tukwila's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program was reviewed to
determine what if any improvement projects were planned at any of the study area
intersections. No projects were identified that would directlyimpact the operations at study
intersections. However, one project was identified on Interurban Avenue that will improve
general transportation facilities, but not increase roadway capacity. This project would
construct curb, gutter, sidewalk, illumination, and landscaping improvements on Interurban
Avenue between S 143rd Street and Fort Dent Way. The design phase of the project was
scheduled to begin in early 2004, with no completion date identified. No other projects were
identified at study intersections or along the studied arterial unit.
Intersection Operations
A level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted for the study area intersections for the
weekday PM peak hour. The signalized intersections were analyzed using Synhro 5.0. This
software program is based on methodologies presented in the Hig{nruy Capacity Manual
(HCM) (Transportation Research Board, 2000 Edition).
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 unsignali7fd intersections. A more detailed explanation of
LOS criteria is provided in Appendix A.
Table 1 summarizes both existing and future without- project, weekday PM peak hour LOS,
for the eight study area intersections. The LOS worksheets are included in Appendix B. The
signal timing information used for the intersection analysis was based on information
obtained from the City of Tukwila. Signal timing information from existing conditions was
optimized within parameters from the timing information and held constant for all future
operating analyses.
The Transpo Group 04209.00 \04209r1 7
I
/
1
1
1
1
•
•
1
•
1
1
1
1'
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
•
•
•
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA
Table 1. Existing and Future Without- Project Intersection
LOS Summary - PM Peak Hour
Interurban Ave S/
Gateway Dr S
Interurban Ave S/
SR 599 NB Off -Ramp
Interurban Ave S/
48" Ave S
Interurban Ave S/
1 -5 SB Off -Ramp
Interurban Ave S/
52' Ave S
Interurban Ave S/
58' Ave S
Interurban Ave 5/
Fort Dent Wy- 1 -405 SB
Interurban Ave S/
Southcenter Blvd
1. Level of Service
2. Average vehicle delay in seconds
3. Volume to capacity ratio
The Transpo Group 1 04209.00 \04209r1
xistinga.Condltions
� 10 Future ,wit outt Proje
October 2004
C 21.2 0.60 C 23.0 0.65
A 7.2 0.43 A 7.3 0.48
B 15.1 0.58 B 16.0 0.64
C 21.9 0.63 C 26.7 0.70
A 5.6 0.51 A 6.0 0.56
B 10.1 0.66 B 11.3 0.73
D 49.8 0.93 E 71.2 1.06
F 87.6 1.14 F 109.7 1.26
As Table 1 shows, the study intersections adjacent to the project site, including Interurban
Avenue S /SR 599 NB Off -Ramp, Interurban Avenue S /48th Avenue S, and Interurban
Avenue S /I -5 SB Off -Ramp, all currently operate at LOS C or better, and are anticipated to
continue to operate at LOS C or better in 2010. The two intersections on the far southern
end of the Interurban Avenue S arterial segment currently have the highest amount of delay
of the study intersections. The Interurban Avenue S /Fort Dent Way intersection currently
operates at LOS D, but degrades to LOS E in 2010 baseline conditions. The Interurban
Avenue S /Southcenter Boulevard intersection currently operates at LOS F, and is
anticipated to continue to do so in the future, as no improvements are planned for this
intersection by the City.
Arterial Operations
To satisfy TMC 9.48, an arterial LOS arterial analysis was conducted for the Interurban
Avenue S arterial unit. TMC 9.48.070 defines the Interurban Avenue S arterial unit as being
between I - and I -405, and states that LOS E or better shall be maintained for this arterial.
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. Travel speed
takes into account driving time between intersections, and the through movement delay
encountered at all signalized intersections along the segment. Table 2 shows the resulting
LOS for the Interurban Avenue arterial segment. The LOS is based on an arterial
classification of Interurban Avenue S as an arterial Class III facility.
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA
Table. 2.
Arterial Segme
Interurban Avenue:
1 -5 to 1 -405
1. Average of northbound and southbound travel speeds
As shown in Table 2, the Interurban Avenue arterial unit currently operates at LOS C, and is
anticipated to continue to operate at LOS C in future baseline conditions. Based on these
results, the arterial segment is currently operating, and is anticipated to continue operating
within the City's LOS standard by 2010 without the proposed project.
Traffic Safety
The purpose of this section is to identify any existing safety concerns within the defined
study area 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 ten, as PM peak hour traffic volumes
typically represent approximately 10- percent of the ADT.
Accident data was collected for the four study intersections nearest the site, as they will be
impacted most significantly by project trips. The study intersections along Interurban
Avenue S to the south of 1 - were analyzed for purposes of determining the arterial LOS
only.
Table 3. Accident History Summary
Interurban Ave S/
Gateway Dr S
Interurban Ave S/
SR 599 NB Off -Ramp
Existing and Future without - Project Arterial LOS Summary PM Peak Hour
3 < Exlstlr g,,Condit ons .
20.2
Jumberof Accident`s -
c
3 4 8
4 2 3
:interurban Ave S/ 4 8 3
48'" Ave S
Interurban Ave S/ 0 1 0
1 -5 SB Off-Ramp
1. Accidents per Million Entering Vehicles
uture without Project' =+
18.2
October 2004
c
15 5.0 0.57
3.0 0.43
15 • 5.0 . 0:78,
1•
0.33. 0.04
As is shown in Table 2, the intersections of Interurban Avenue S /Gateway Drive S and
Interurban Avenue S /48th Avenue S both have had 15 reported accidents occur between
2001 and 2003. The remaining intersections have had less than ten accidents reported over
the last ten years. The four nearest study intersections all show an MEV rate of less than 1.0,
which suggests that no unusual safety conditions exist.
The Transpo Group l 04209.00 \04209r1 9
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA October 2004
Transit Service
King County Metro transit provides transit service in the study area and near the project site.
Metro Routes 124 and 154 provide service along Interurban Avenue S connecting the
immediate area around the site with Allentown, Southcenter, Seattle, Kent, Auburn and
other regional destinations. Bus stops are located near the intersections of Interurban
Avenue S with 48th Avenue S and Gateway Drive S. Additional Metro routes make
scheduled stops at the Interurban Park and Ride lot located to the south of the site near the
intersection of Interurban Avenue S /52nd Avenue S. Based on existing transit opportunities,
the site should be considered reasonably well served and accessible by transit.
Non - Motorized Facilities
Sidewalks, curb, and gutter are provided along the east side of Interurban Avenue S near the
project site, while pedestrian access is restricted on the west side. Sidewalks are also provided
along Gateway Drive S, the south side of S 133rd Street, and the east side of 48th Avenue S.
Sidewalks exist intermittently elsewhere in the site vicinity. Each of the signalized study area
in tersections provides pedestrian crosswalks, push buttons, and signal heads to facilitate
pedestrian activity. The site is adequately served by the existing non - motorized facilities.
The Transpo Group 1 04209.00 \04209r1 10
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA October 2004
Table 4.
S tarbucks Coffee
with Drive -thru
Specialty Retail
Fast Food without.
Drive: thru
TOTAL
2,650 sf 2.71
26.15
1,365 sf
Project Impacts
This section documents the potential impacts of the proposed project on the study area
roadways and intersections. It includes a summary of the 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. The Starbucks trip generation estimate is
based on a trip generation study previously conducted specifically for Starbucks stores. This
study was conducted by Transportation Engineers Northwest in 2002 at five Puget Sound
area Starbucks locations. ITE Trip Ge ration 7th Editiory was used to determine the total trip
generation for the remaining uses. Trip rates identified for the Specialty Retail (ITE Land
Use # 810), and Fast -Food Restaurant without Drive -Thru (ITE Land Use # 933) land uses
were used. The ITE Tnp Generation Harnd:sock does not provide pass -by rates for the Fast
Food Restaurant without Drive -Thru land use, so a related use: Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive -Thru (ITE Land Use # 934) was utilized. No pass -by rate is provided by ITE for
Specialty Retail. To provide a conservative analysis, no pass -by rate was assumed for this
portion of the site. In addition, no trip credit has been taken for the previous uses of this
site. Table 4 shows the PM peak hour trip generation for the proposed project.
Project Trip Generation: PM Peak Hour
7
1,700 sf 33;89' 58 42'
36 18
16 8 8
7 3 4
18 8 10
1. Total trip rate identified in the Starbucks Trip Generation Study, Transportation Engineers Northwest (2002)
2. Pass -by rate of 73% identified in Starbucks Trip Generation Study, Transportation Engineers Northwest (2002)
3. ITE Trip Generation (2004), Land Use #810 (Specialty Retail)
4. No pass -by trips were assumed for the specialty retail portion of the site
5. ITE Trip Generation (2004), Land Use #933 (Fast Food Restaurant without Drive -Thru)
6. Pass -by rate of 50% used; ITE Trip Generation Handbook (2003), Land Use #934 (Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive -thru)
As is shown in Table 4, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 40 new
PM peak hour trips, and 60 pass -by trips.
Trip Distribution and Assignment
The distribution of project trips to /from the project site was determined based on current
travel patterns in the area and the anticipated market area for the uses identified within the
current development plan. Prior to initiating the LOS analysis, the trip distribution was
reviewed and approved by City Staff. The net -new project trips, for the PM peak hour, were
then assigned to the study intersections based on the City approved trip distribution. The
project trip distribution is shown in Figure 5, while the project trip assignment for the PM
The Transpo Group 104209.00\042090 11
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA
peak hour is shown in Figure 6. The resulting future with- project traffic volumes are
summarized in Figure 7.
Traffic Volume Impacts
The traffic volumes associated with the proposed development were compared to the PM
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.
Table 5. Project Traffic Volume Impacts- PM Peak Hour
tudyInters.ect�o�
Interurban Ave /Gateway Dr S
interurban Ave S /SR 599 NB Off -Ramp
Interurban Ave 5/48'" Ave S
Interurban Ave S /I -5 SB Off -Ramp
Interurban Ave S/ 52"° Ave S
Interurban Ave S/58'" Ave S
Interurban Ave S /Fort Dent Wy- 1 -405 SB
Interurban Ave S /Southcenter Blvd
1. Total new project trips entering the intersection
2. Total number of vehicles entering the intersection
21
22
19
15
13
10
6
6
2,661
2,102
1,954
2,370
2,503
2,795
3,681
6,141
October 2004
0.8%
1.0%
1.0%
0.6%
0.5%
0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
As is shown in Table 5, the proposed project would impact each of the study intersections
by 1- percent or less in 2010. The project's greatest impact is anticipated at those
intersections adjacent to the site. As traffic volumes typically fluctuate within a range of ten -
percent from day to day, the average motorist would not likely notice such impacts.
Intersection Operations
Intersection levels of service analyses were performed consistent with the methodologies
described earlier in this report. Table 6 highlights the results of the LOS analysis conducted
at the study area intersections for future with- project conditions. The results of the future
baseline analysis have been included in the table for comparison purposes. The LOS
worksheets are included in Appendix B.
The Transpo Group 1 04209.00\04209r1 12
LEGEND
0 = STUDY INTERSECTION
X = PM PEAK HOUR TRIP ASSIGNMENT
(NEW TRIPS ONLY)
fi Figure 5
Project Trip Distribution/Assignment
Interurban Retail
M04 !We rurbon Graphsrahc ; ::7;07P4 le
A
N
NOT TO SCALE
The
Transpo
Group
0 INTERURBAN AVE S 1
INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S
S 133RD ST-GATEWAY I SR 599 NB OFF-RAMP 1
1
48TH AVENUE S
1
,
7 2 2
,-..„ ,.._„
4 _ N.... ••' 8
( 2
i N N
.••'
f" 1
...---... "...... 7
2 3
12
1
N 7
7
N
0 INTERURBAN AVE S
1-5 SB OFF-RAMP
N
6
1
1)
INTERURBAN AVE S
56TH AVENUE S
12 14
(.4)1.10) 6 (.4)
J L (-4)
(.10) 16
(-10) -6
Driveway Assignment
15 1
(411)05)
(.5) 9 —1
( -1
S 144TH ST
18 (.11)
-9 (-11)
S 133RD ST
LEGEND
X = TOTAL TRIPS
(X) = PASS-BY TRIPS
SITE
(1)
trdruc:1 - CA
uJ
I—
L()
Figure 6
I Project Trip Assignment - PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
sou
NOT TO SCALE
2 N
2 )
INTERURBAN AVE S
1-405 SB RAMPS!
FORT DENT
3 N
N 5
INTERURBAN AVE S
58TH AVE S
N
N
3
3
0 INTERURBAN AVE S
SOUTHCENTER BLVD
1 1
■AK
1
I
1
The
Transpo
Group
23 42
JL.
31
904
0 50
434 v • 220 i 943
220 �~ r/ 247 1 N
70 7 .5 262 1 255
70 i'. 567
257 263 71
Shared Driveway Volumes'
14
807
Interurban Retail
O INTERURBAN AVE S
S 133RD ST- GATEWAY'
SITE Kz'''
88 25
J L.
86
860
'NOTE: VOLUMES INCLUDE EXISTING TRAFFIC
THAT SHARE THE DRIVEWAYS
41
734
INTERURBAN AVE S
SR 599 NB OFF -RAMP
M ' a4 • •4 ;09 lr,I rur 2n •F • I ,,, ; , , . ' r:: u;
N 832
INTERURBAN AVE S
48TH AVENUE S
77 107
807 •� i
/ 140
■( 155
667
957 N.
Figure 7
Future (2010) With- Project PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
INTERURBAN AVE S
I -5 SB OFF -RAMP
U
595
571
A
N
NOT TO SCALE
-1
rn
INTERURBAN AVE S
56TH AVENUE S
5
U 5
r/5
86 >7 N5 10
5 925
70 30
INTERURBAN AVE S
58TH AVE S
10 5
1,408 t' 5
72 >N r� 5
67 �� . 10
5 ' i'"" 1,063
70 75
7 ) INTERURBAN AVE S
1 -405 SB RAMPS! I
FORT DENT
75 45
938 ' ••— 35
110> r / 170
80 )aV •N 270
55 773
435 695
O INTERURBAN AVE S
SOUTHCENTER BLVD
306 766
891 " "‘-', 915
301 ....***• / 285
216 >,f N...5 475
800 806
230 150
The
Transpo
Group
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA
Table 6. Future Without- Project and Future with- Project LOS Summary -
PM Peak Hour
Interurban Ave S/
Gateway Dr S
Interurban Ave S/
SR 599 NB Off -Ramp
Interurban Ave S/
48'" Ave S
Interurban Ave S/
I -5 SB Off -Ramp
Interurban Ave S/
52m Ave S
Interurban Ave S/
58'h Ave S
Interurban Ave S/
Fort Dent Wy- 1 -405 SB
Interurban Ave 5/
Southcenter Blvd
1. Level of Service
2. Average vehicle delay in seconds
3. Volume to capacity ratio
The Transpo Group 1 04209.00 \04209r1
lOfrifiire,withouc
a v$ =x.
Interurban Avenue:
I -5 to 1 -405 18.2 C
1. Average of northbound and southbound travel speeds
C 23.0 0.65
k FutureiVVlthout�Pro�ectxGoridiCons��
uture with ;Prole.
C 23.1 0.66
A 73 0.48 A 7.3 0.48
B 16.0 0.64 B 16.2 0.64
C 26.7 0.70 C 26.7 0.71
A 6.0 0.56 A 6.0 0.56
B 11.3 0.73 B 11.4 0.73
E 71.2 1.06 E 71.6 1.06
F 109.7 1.26 F 110.0 1.26
As is shown in Table 6, all of the study intersections are anticipated to operate under the
with- project scenario at the same LOS as in baseline conditions. The average vehicle delay at
each intersection increases by less than one second with the addition of project traffic. The
study intersections nearest the site continue to operate at LOS C or better in 2010 future
with- project conditions.
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
the Interurban Avenue arterial segment for future (2010) with- project conditions. 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 -
PM Peak Hour
t,. Future Project__ Condition:
eed r?
October 2004
As is shown in Table 7, the Interurban Avenue S arterial segment would continue to operate
at LOS C with the addition of project traffic, decreasing in average speed by one tenth
(mph). Based on these results, the proposed project meets the City's concurrency standard as
the affected arterial segment is anticipated to operate at LOS E or better.
16
p
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA October 2004
1
1
p
1
1
1
p
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Site Access Analysis
Unsignalized driveway LOS analyses were conducted using Syntdry 5.0, which is based on
2000 HCM unsignali7ed intersection methodologies. Traffic volumes were developed at the
site access locations based on turning movement counts conducted in June 2004 at the two
shared private driveways that connect with Interurban Avenue S. The total project trips (new
plus pass -by), were assigned to the existing driveway volumes generated by the other
neighboring uses that share these driveways. The two-way center left -turn lane on Interurban
Avenue S provides a refuge by which vehicles making a westbound left turn from either
driveway can use in order to complete the turn in two stages depending on the timing of
gaps in traffic on Interurban Avenue S. This two-stage gap process is possible without
conflict from other turns as the driveways do not have an opposing approach to the west.
The two-stage gap use was assumed in the reported driveway LOS analysis.
The driveway LOS results are presented in Table 8. The LOS worksheets are included in
Appendix B.
Table 8.
Driveway LOS Summary- PM Peak Hour
Share °Site Driveway,
Interurban Avenue S/
North Shared Site Driveway
Interurban Avenue S/
South Shared Site Driveway
1. Level of Service
2. Average delay per vehicle in seconds
3. Worst Movement at the intersection (highest amount of delay)
C
C
22.7
22.4
or ° st Mvmt' ;'
Westbound
Left Turn
Westbound
Left Turn
As shown in Table 8, the results of the analysis indicate that both driveways would likely
operate at LOS C in future with- project conditions. This analysis focuses on the PM peak
hour which generally represents the highest outbound volumes for uses adjacent.
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, both existing and future. These facilities
include a sidewalk along the east side of Interurban Avenue S, which connects to other
sidewalks and leads to designated transit stops in the area.
Parking
As currently proposed, the project will provide 58 parking stalls in an on -site, paved surface
parking lot. City of Tukwila Parking Code requires 58 stalls for this site, which is met by the
proposed supply.
A parking demand analysis was also completed to determine the adequacy of the parking
supply. Using Parking Generation (ITE, 2nd Edition), weekday peak parking generation rates
were for the site. For the Starbucks portion of the site, the average peak parking
rate for ITE land use # 836 (Fast Food with Drive -In Window) was used, while ITE land use
# 837 (Fast Food Without Drive -In Window) was used for the Quiznos portion of the site.
The peak parking demand for the balance of the development was determined using ITE
land use # 820 (Shopping Center), as no parking rates are provided for ITE land use # 810
(Specialty Retail). The Shopping Center land use classification is the closest related land -use
to Specialty Retail. Table 9 shows the results of the parking demand analysis.
The Transpo Group l 04209.00 \04209r1 17
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA
Table 9. Peak Parking Demand: Weekday Peak Conditions
Starbucks Coffee with Drive -thru
Specialty Retail (Shopping Center)'
Fast Food without Drive -thru
1,700 sf
2,650 sf
1,365 sf
9.95'
3.23'
11.68
Total Peak Demand
Total Parking Supply
Parking Surplus
October 2004
17
9
16
42
58
+16
1. Average Peak Rate; Parking Generation (ITE, 2' Edition), Land Use #836 (Fast food with Drive -In Window)
2. Average Peak Rate; Parking Generation (ITE, 2" Edition), Land Use #820 (Shopping Center); Note: no Specialty
Retail parking rates are provided by ITE.
3. Average Peak Rate: Parking Generation (ITE, 2' Edition), Land Use #837 (Fast Food without Drive -in Window)
As is shown in Table 9, the proposed project's practical parking capacity would provide a
surplus of ten parking stalls during the peak weekday period, adequately accommodating the
peak parking demand.
Traffic Safety Impacts
Given the minimal level of traffic expected to be generated by the proposed project,
combined with the operational impacts summarized previously for the study area
intersections, this project is not likely to adversely impact the operational safety of the
roadways or intersections within the defined study area. The previous safety analysis
included in this report identified no existing safety deficiencies to which the project would
impact.
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 city. Developments that generate trips that impact any one of these projects by five or
more trips must pay a fee per trip.
Based on the project trip distribution and assignment noted in Figures 5 and 6 and the
anticipated local nature of project trips, only one of the projects currently identified in the
impact fee schedule is impacted by five or more project trips. The Interurban Bridge
widening project will widen the bridge to allow dual left turn lanes. The per trip fee for this
improvement project is $240, equating to a total impact fee for this project of approximately
$1,440.
The Transpo Group I 04209.00\04209r1 18
Interurban Retail, Tukwila, WA October 2004
Summary /Conclusions
The proposed project would consist of a single 5,700 -sf (approximate) retail building to be
located on the east side of Interurban Avenue S between the intersections of Interurban
Avenue S /Gateway Drive S and Interurban Avenue S/481h Avenue S. The retail building will
include approximately 1,700 sf of space for a Starbucks Coffee shop with drive -thru window,
approximately 1,365 sf for a fast food restaurant without drive -thru, and 2,650 sf of specialty
retail space. Access to the site is proposed via two existing shared private driveways located
on the east and west sides of the site. The site is currently vacant, though it formerly was the
site of a gas station and convenience market. No trip credit has been taken, assuring a
conservative analysis and estimate of potential project impacts.
The proposed project is expected to generate approximately 100 total trips during the PM
peak hour, with approximately 40 considered new to the area, and 60 considered pass -by
trips.
The scope of the analysis was coordinated with City of Tukwila Staff. The following
summarizes the key points of the analysis.
• Future baseline analyses incorporated general increases in background growth. The
results of the analysis indicated that the signalized off -site study intersections
adjacent to the site on Interurban Avenue S are expected to operate at LOS C or
better during the PM peak hour, while the intersections on the far southern end of
the arterial segment would operate at LOS E or F. However, the Interurban Avenue
arterial segment is expected to operate at LOS C overall during the PM peak hour.
• Based on the future baseline traffic volumes and the project trip assignment, the
proposed project is expected to increase traffic volumes by 1 percent or less in the
PM peak hour.
• The with- project levels of service indicate that the off -site signalized study
in tersections are expected to operate at the same LOS as in baseline conditions.
Delay at the off -site study intersections are anticipated to either remain the same or
increase by less than one second per average vehicle. The LOS for the Interurban
Avenue S arterial segment is projected to operate at LOS C in the future under with -
project conditions, meeting the City's LOS E standard.
• Analyses of the site access points indicate that the two shared private access
driveways would operate at LOS C in the future under with- project conditions.
• Overall traffic volumes are expected to increase by 1- percent or less during the PM
peak period as a result of the project, thus not significantly increasing traffic
volumes within the area beyond what the future transportation network can
accommodate. This minor increase in traffic volumes is not anticipated to affect
overall safety within the study area.
• The proposed project's parking supply of 58 stalls adequately accommodates the
peak parking demand projected for the site.
• No transportation mitigation, above the payment of the standard Transportation
Impact Fees previously noted, has been identified for this project.
The Transpo Group ► 04209.00 \04209r1 19
Appendix A:
Highzezy Capacity Manual (2000) :
Level of Service Criteria and Definitions
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 Highuuy Capacity M antral (Transportation
Research Board, Special Report 209, 2000).
Table 1.
A
B
C
D
<_10
>10 - 20
>20 - 35
Higlratcy Capacity Marueal 2000
Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
eneralDescripiion
S gnalized'I ntersections
Free Flow
Stable Flow (slight delays)
Stable flow (acceptable delays)
>35 - 55 Approaching unstable flow (tolerable delay, occasionally wait through
more than one signal cycle before proceeding)
E >55 - 80 Unstable flow (intolerable delay)
F > 80 Forced flow (jammed)
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 (i.e., average delay of all movements) for a two-way, stop - controlled intersection should be
viewed with discretion. Table A -2 shows LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections (both all-way and two-
way, stop - controlled).
Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections
L'evel, of S eance
B
C
D
E
F
v6a6e1Tota( Delay {sec /veh)
0-)0
>10 -15
>15 - 25
>25=35
>35 - 50
>58
Appendix B
Level of Service Worksheets
1: Gateway Dr. S & Interurban Avenue S }
Lane Group
Lane Group Flow (vph)
Queue Length 50th (ft)
Queue Length 95th (ft)
Internal Link Dist (ft)
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection Summary
THETRALVL3 -FF51
EBT
142
66
112
798
EBR
258
103
159
250
WBT
511
127
#182
1251
NBL
264
71
#115
175
NBT
818
64
81
184
SBT
429
85
137
1287
SBR
220
86
163
50
31% 32%
48% 53%
86 91
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
M:104104209 Interurban Retail \LOS\Existing - PM Peak Hour.sy6
Page 1
1: Gateway Dr. S & Interurban Avenue S
Movement EBL
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Fit Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph) 65
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 71
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4%
Turn Type Split
Protected Phases 4
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)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection; Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
-- '- & 1 t t ► l
EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL
4 r 41 )
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97
1.00 0.85 0.99 1.00
0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95
1782 1553 3408 3303
0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95
1782 1553 3408 3303
65 235 220 200 45 240
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0 91 0.91
71 258 242 220 49 264
142 258 0 511 0 264
4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 6%
pm +ov Split Prot
4 5 8 8 5
4
9.9 17.9 14.0 8.0
11.6 20.6 15.7 9.0
0.14 0.26 0.20 0.11
5.7 5.0 5.7 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
258 478 669 372
0.08 c0.06 c0.15 c0.08
0.11
0.55 0.54
31.8 25.6
1.00 1.00
2.5 1.2
34.3 26.8
C C
29.5
C
21.2
0.60
80.0
56.1%
0.76
30.4
1.00
5.2
35.6
D
35.6
D
M:104\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
0.71
34.2
0.71
5.9
30.1
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
0.50
12.9
0.34
1.0
5.5
C A
11.5
B
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
?A f P
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0 4.0
0.95 0.95 1.00
0.95 1.00 0.85
1.00 1.00 1.00
3245 3374 1509
1.00 1.00 1.00
3245 3374 1509
510 235 0 390 200
091 0.91 091 091 091
560 258 0 429 220
818 0 0 429 220
6% 6% 7% 7% 7%
Perm
2 6
6
39.5 26.5 26.5
40.7 27.7 27.7
0.51 0.35 0.35
5.2 5.2 5.2
3.0 3.0 3.0
1651 1168 522
c0.25 0.13
0.15
0.37 0.42
19.6 20.0
1.00 1.00
0.9 2.5
20.5 22.5
12.0
A
21.2
C
C C
Page 2
2: SR 599 NB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S
t
Lane Group EBL EBR NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 240 66 760 867
Queue Length 50th (ft) 112 28 22 66
Queue Length 95th (ft) 169 55 38 87
Internal Link Dist (ft) 329 519 184
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time
95th Bay Block Time % 15%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5
intersection Summary ?.
150
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
2: SR 599 NB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
t j r
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations r +t 4T
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 100
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prat) 1641 1468 3505 3539
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1641 1468 3505 3539
Volume (vph) 235 65 0 745 850 0
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98
Adj. Flow (vph) 240 66 0 760 867 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 240 66 0 760 867 0
Heavy Vehicles ) %) 10% 10% 3% 3% 2% 2%
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 15.7 15,7 54.2 54.2
Effective Green, g (s) 16.7 16.7 55.3 55.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.69 0,69
Clearance Time (s) 5,0 5.0 5.1 5.1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 343 306 2423 2446
v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.22 c0.24
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.70 0.22
Uniform Delay, d1 29.3 26.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 6.1 0.4
Delay (s) 35.5 26.6
Level of Service D C
Approach Delay (s) 33.5
Approach LOS C
Intersection Summary
7.2
0.43
80.0
43.9%
0.31
4.9
0.20
0.3
1.3
A
1.3
A
0.35
5.1
0.57
0.4
3.2
A
3.2
A
M:\04104209 Interurban Retail\LOS\Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6 M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Page 3
THETRALVL3 -FF51 THETRALVL3 -FF51
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
8.0
A
Page 4
THETRALVL3 -FF51
3: 48th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S
t `� 1
Lane Group °° WBL. WBR .:NBT SBL SST'
Lane Group Flow (vph) 132 100 779 74 763
Queue Length 50th (ft) 62 47 77 38 76
Queue Length 95th (ft) 109 87 97 #87 100
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1167 120 519
50th Up Block Time ( %) 3%
95th Up Block Time ( %) 5%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50
50th Bay Block Time % 23% 2%
95th Bay Block Time % 47% 39%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 35 51 17
Interseotidn Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Existing PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 5
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
15.1
0.58
80.0
44.5%
3: 48th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S
t `►
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL '''SBT
Lane Configurations 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 Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 1.00 1,00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1656 1482 3439 1736 3471
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1656 1482 3439 1736 3471
Volume (vph) 125 95 600 140 70 725
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph) 132 100 632 147 74 763
Lane Group Flow (vph) 132 100 779 0 74 763
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 9% 9% 2% 2% 4% 4%
Turn Type Perm Prot
Protected Phases 3 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 3
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.6 11.6 31.6 4.8 39.4
Effective Green, g (s) 11.6 11.6 31.6 4.8 40.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.40 0.06 0.50
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3 0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 240 215 1358 104 1753
v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.23 c0.04 0.22
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07
v/c Ratio 0.55 0.47 0.57
Uniform Delay. dl 31 8 31 4 18.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.60
Incremental Delay. d2 2.7 1.6 1.5
Delay (s) 34.5 32.9 12.9
Level of Service C C B
Approach Delay (s) 33.8 12.9
Approach LOS C B
Intersection, Summary-
0.71 0.44
36.9 12.6
0.70 0.63
19.7 0.8
45.6 8.7
D A
11.9
M: \04104209 Interurban Retail\LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
B
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
B
32.0
A
Page 6
r
4: 1 -5 SB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Lane Group ' "' WBI. `WBR ' NBT `i'. SB
Lane Group Flow (vph) 592 245 554 935
Queue Length 50th (ft) 148 117 104 101
Queue Length 95th (ft) #238 #233 162 87
Internal Link Dist (ft) 540 918 120
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
THETRALVL3 -FF51
t
275
4%
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 7
4: 1 -5 SB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Movement WBL
Lane Configurations �1I
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97
Frt 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95
Satd. Flow (prot) 3367
Flt Permitted 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 3367
Volume (vph) 545
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0 92
Adj. Flow (vph) 592
Lane Group Flow (vph) 592
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4%
Turn Type
Protected Phases 4
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8
Effective Green, g (s) 16.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20
Clearance Time (s) 5.2
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 673
v/s Ratio Prot c0.18
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.88
Uniform Delay, dl 31.1
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay. d2 12.6
Delay (s) 43.6
Level of Service D
Approach Delay (s) 43.4
Approach LOS D
Intersection Summary
Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
WBR 'NBT°
tf
1900 1900
4.0 4.0
1.00 0.95
0.85 1.00
1.00 1.00
1553 3539
1.00 1.00
1553 3539
225 510
0.92 0.92
245 554
245 554
4% 2%
Perm
4
14.8
16.0
0.20
5.2
3.0
311
0.16
0.79
30.4
1.00
12.4
42.8
D
2
31.6
31.6
0.40
4.0
3.0
1398
0.16
0.40
17.4
1.00
0.8
18.2
B
18.2
B
21.9
0.63
80.0
49.4%
NBR SBL SBT
1900 1900 1900
4.0
0.95
1.00
1.00
3471
1.00
3471
0 0 860
0.92 0.92 0.92
0 0 935
0 0 935
2% 4% 4%
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
6
39.4
40.4
0.50
5.0
3.0
1753
c0.27
0.53
13.4
0.28
1,1
4.8
A
4.8
A
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
23.6
A
Page 8
5: 56th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Lane Group, " "! EBT ` = =` ..EBR' " NBL NBT SBL SBT
929 16 1340
52 1 88
103 8 174
1512 918
Lane Group Flow (vph) 93 66 15 27
Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 14 3 2
Queue Length 95th (ft) 55 41 15 15
Internal Link Dist (ft) 523 975
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time % 17%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5
Inter8ectio6 Summary
50
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
Existing PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 9
5: 56th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Movement
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)
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 Time (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
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
f
EEL EBT EBR WBL 'WBT
r
1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.85
0.95 1.00
1796 1599
0.73 1.00
1367 1599
80 5 60 5
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
88 5 66 5
0 93 66 0
1% 1% 1% 1%
Perm Perm Perm
4
4
9.6
10.6
0.16
5.0
3.0
224
c0.07
0.42
24.2
1.00
1.2
25.5
C
24.9
C
4 8
9.6
10.6
0.16
5.0
3.0
262
0.04
0.25
23.5
1.00
0.5
24.1
C
5.6
0.51
64.6
56.1%
4 -
1900
4.0
1.00
0.96
0.98
1767
0.91
1630
5
0.91
5
15
1%
8
9.6
10.6
0.16
5.0
3.0
267
0.01
0.06
22.8
1.00
0.1
22.9
C
22.9
C
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
2
44.6
46.0
0.71
5.4
3.0
219
009
0.12
2.9
1.00
0.3
3.2
A
HCM Level of Service
2
44.6
46.0
0.71
5.4
3.0
2467
0.27
0.38
3.7
1.00
0.1
3.8
A
3.7
A
8.0
Existing PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
WBR ''NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
?T+ `t fA
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 1.00 1.00 0.98
0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
1736 3465 1787 3519
0.17 1.00 0.29 1.00
308 3465 542 3519
5 25 835 10 15 1095 125
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
5 27 918 11 16 1203 137
0 27 929 0 16 1340 0
1% 4% 4% 4% 1% 1% 1%
Perm Perm
A
A
6
44.6
46.0
0.71
5.4
3.0
386
0.03
0.04
2.8
1.00
0.0
2.8
A
6
446
46.0
0.71
5.4
3.0
2506
c0.38
0,53
4.
1.00
0.2
4.5
A
4,5
A
Page 10
6: 58th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
7 t- 1 t `- 1
Lane; Group= f :EST EBR WBT -tBL NBT SBL SBT '
Lane Group Flow (vph) 73 67 18 73 1090 11 1506
Queue Length 50th (ft) 24 22 6 26 67 4 206
Queue Length 95th (ft) 55 52 20 #66 194 17 328
Internal Link Dist (ft) 681 222 1266 1354
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Inters Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Existing PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 11
THETRALVL3 -FF51 THETRALVL3 -FF51
Existing- PM Peak Hour
6: 58th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
J - 0, { ` k 4 \ t /' \► ♦ 4/
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 tv 4, 41, 1 41,
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade ( %) -1% 0% 0% 0%
Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 100 0.85 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.95 1 00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1790 1591 1750 1770 3534 1736 3446
Flt Permitted 0.73 1.00 0.90 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1368 1591 1605 1770 3534 1736 3446
Volume (vph) 60 5 60 5 5 5 65 960 10 10 1275 65
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Adj. Flow (vph) 67 6 67 6 6 6 73 1079 11 11 1433 73
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 73 67 0 18 0 73 1090 0 11 1506 0
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4%
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot
Protected Phases 4 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
Uniform Delay, dl
Progression Factor
Incremental Delay, d2
Delay (s)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary?
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
4 4 8
8.9 8.9 8.9 4.7
10.1 10.1 10.1 5.2
0.13 0.13 0.13 0.07
5.2 5.2 5.2 4.5
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
179 208 210 119
c0.04
c0.05 0.04 0.01
0.41 0.32 0.09
30.8 30.4 29.4
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.5 0.9 0.2
32.3 31.3 29.6
C C C
31.8 29.6
C C
10.1
0.66
77.1
66.8 %
M: \04104209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
52.6
53.4
0.69
4.8
3.0
2448
c0.31
0.61 0.45
35.0 5.3
1.00 1.00
9.0 0.1
44.0 5.4
D A
7.8
A
16.0
B
1.1
1.6
0.02
4.5
3.0
36
0.01
0.31
37.2
1.00
4.8
42.0
D
49.0
49.8
0.65
48
30
2226
CO 44
068
8.6
1.00
0.8
9.4
A
9.6
A
Page 12
7: 1 -405 SB Ramps & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Lane Group
Lane Group Flow (vph)
Queue Length 50th (ft)
Queue Length 95th (ft)
Internal Link Dist (ft)
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
THETRALVL3 -FF51
N it
EBT
137
100
162
392
EBR
396
358
#568
33%
WBL WBT
170 77
153 65
#269 119
296
I
NBL` %NBT'' SBL
698
329
m246
250
14%
2%
42
1022
332
m231
363
1%
13%
1%
45
Intersection Sum mary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longe
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
M:\04104209 Interurban Retail \LOS\Existing - PM Peak Hour.sy6
77
68
124
175
1 4'
SBT
918
448
#584
324
18%
31%
42%
49%
261
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
SBR
110
84
143
200
Page 13
7: 1 -405 SB Ramps & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Movement
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util, Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (vph)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
Heavy Vehicles (°/0)
Turn 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, dl
Progression Factor
Incremental Delay, d2
Delay (s)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
EBL '` EBT
4
1900 1900
4.0
1.00
1.00
0.97
1774
0.97
1774
75 50
0.91 0.91
82 55
0 137
4% 4%
Split
6 6
6
35.9
36.9
0.26
5.0
3.0
468
0.08
0.29
41.1
1.00
0.3
41.5
D
75.1
E
EBR ' WBL
1900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1553
1.00
1553
360
0.91
396
396
4%
Perm
6
35.9
36.9
0.26
5.0
3.0
409
c0.26
0.97
51.0
1.00
35.8
86.8
F
49.8
0.93
140.0
72.5%
1900
4.0
1.00
1.00
0.95
1787
0.95
1787
155
0.91
170
170
1%
Split
2
15.3
16.3
0.12
50
3.0
208
c0.10
0.82 0.38
60.4 572
1.00 1.00
21.4 1.2
81.8 58.4
F E
74.5
E
M: \04\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
Existing PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
` t 1 t /' `► 1
WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
VI T I Tt
1900 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 0.91 0.91
0.91 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85
1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1720 3433 3399 1752 3357 1427
1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1720 3433 3399 1752 3357 1427
30 40 635 685 245 70 835 100
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
33 44 698 753 269 77 918 110
77 0 698 1022 0 77 918 110
1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3%
Prot Prot Perm
2 3 8 7 4
2 4
15.3 29.0 58.9 9.9 40.8 40.8
16.3 29.0 59.9 109 41.8 41.8
0.12 0.21 0.43 0.08 0.30 0.30
5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
200 711 1454 136 1002 426
0.04 c0.20 0.30 0.04 c0.27
0.08
0.98 0.70 0.57 0.92 0.26
55 2 32.8 62.3 47 4 37.3
0.76 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00
6.6 0.3 5.3 14.2 1.5
48.5 20.6 67.6 61.7 38.8
D C E E D
32.0 59.8
C E
D
16.0
C
Page 14
Existing- PM Peak Hour
8: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Lane Group EEL
Lane Group Flow (vph) 191
Queue Length 50th (ft) -218
Queue Length 95th (ft) #376
Internal Link Dist (ft)
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150
50th Bay Block Time % 34%
95th Bay Block Time % 63%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 173
THETRALVL3 -FF51
r & 4 \ t `► 1 4/
EBT
713
313
387
606
38%
45%
79
Intersection Summary,
EBR
223
85
127
9%
150 250
3%
35%
77
WBL WET WBR
277 824 745
246 322 -852
#396 393 #1100
375
44%
4% 54%
100
15% 58%
24% 61%
53 244
- 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 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
NBL -NBT SBL ' SET SBR
144 1245 298 846 250
130 -732 149 303 0
#238 #872 m163 m338 m0
527 155
28% 15%
40% 16% 17%
150 100
58% 27% 24%
37% 61% 29% 26%
115 85 143 206
Page 15
Existing- PM Peak Hour
8: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Movement EBL
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 (prof) 1770
Flt Permitted 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 1770
Volume (vph) 180
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94
Adj. Flow (vph) 191
Lane Group Flow (vph) 191
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2%
Turn Type Prot
Protected Phases 7
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.0
Effective Green, g (s) 12.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09
Clearance Time (s) 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 152
v/s Ratio Prot c0.11
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 1.26
Uniform Delay, dl 64.0
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 157.9
Delay (s) 221.9
Level of Service F
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
IntersectionrSummary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
1 1 t\ r
EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
tt r tt r tt
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 40 4.0
0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00
1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85
1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 1752 3309 3367 3471 1553
1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 1752 3309 3367 3471 1553
670 210 260 775 700 135 735 435 280 795 235
0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
713 223 277 824 745 144 782 463 298 846 250
713 223 277 824 745 144 1245 0 298 846 250
2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4%
pm +ov Prot Perm Prot Prot Free
4 5 3 8 5 2 1 6
4 8 Free
38.1 51.5 23.9 51.0 51.0 13.4 42.6 15.4 44.6 140.0
39.1 53.5 24.9 52.0 52.0 14.4 43.6 16.4 45.6 140.0
0.28 0.38 0.18 0.37 0.37 0.10 0.31 0.12 0.33 1.00
5.0 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 3.0
988 605 315 1314 588 180 1031 394 1131 1553
0.20 0.04 0.16 0.23 0.08 c0.38 c0.09 0.24
0.10 c0.47 c0.16
0.72 0.37 0.88 0.63 1.27 0.80 1.21 0.76 0.75 0.16
45.5 31.1 56.1 36.1 44.0 61.4 48.2 59.9 42.1 0.0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.48 1.00
2.6 0.4 23.1 0.9 133.3 21.9 102.6 3.3 1.8 0.1
48.2 31.5 79.2 37.0 177.3 83.3 150.8 59.8 22.0 0.1
DC ED F F F E C A
99.9 143.8 26.2
F F C
74.3
E
87.6
1.14
140.0
103.2%
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
12.0
F
Page 16
V
1: Gateway Dr. S & Interurban Avenue S
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT is NBL NBT ' SBT SBR'`
Lane Group Flow (vph) 154 280 566 286 901 473 242
Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 113 143 77 70 97 97
Queue Length 95th (ft) 119 171 #225 #124 90 153 183
Internal Link Dist (ft) 798 1251 184 1287
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection Summary
THETRALVL3 -FF51
250 175
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
r
M: \04104209 Interurban Retail\LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
1 I
50
35% 37%
51% 56%
104 109
2010 Baseline PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 1
1: Gateway Dr. S & Interurban Avenue S
Movement ` EBL
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prof)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph) 70
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 77
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4%
Turn Type Split
Protected Phases 4
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, dl
Progression Factor
Incremental Delay, d2
Delay (s)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Inter§eetiort Sunimaty•
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
EBT -EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
4 r 4t. 'f't fA ft r
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
1.00 1. 00 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.95 1.00
1.00 0.85 0.99 1.00 0 95 1.00 0.85
0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
1782 1553 3407 3303 3244 3374 1509
0.98 1.00 0 98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
1782 1553 3407 3303 3244 3374 1509
70 255 245 220 50 260 560 260 0 430 220
0.91 0.91 0.91 0,91 0.91 0.91 091 091 0.91 0.91 091
77 280 269 242 55 286 615 286 0 473 242
154 280 0 566 0 286 901 0 0 473 242
4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 6% 6% 6% 7% 7% 7%
pm +ov Split Prot Perm
8 8 5 2 6
11.8
13.5
0.17
5.7
3.0
301
0.09
0.51
30.3
1.00
15
31.7
27.8
4 5
4
19.8
22.5
0.28
5.0
3.0
514
c0.06
0.12
0.54
24.4
1.00
12
25.6
C C
C
23.0
0.65
80.0
60.7%
4 . 4 \
14.3
16.0
0.20
5.7
3.0
681
c0.17
0.83
30.7
1.00
85
39.2
D
39.2
D
HCM Level of Service
M: \04\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
8.0
9.0
0.11
50
3.0
372
c0.09
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
0.77
34.5
0.68
8.9
32.5
C
2010 Baseline PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
37.3
38.5
0.48
5.2
3.0
1561
c0.28
0.58
14.9
0.36
1.5
6.9
A
13.0
B
12.0
B
243
255
0.32
52
3.0
1075
014
0.44
216
1 00
1.3
22.9
C
23.9
C
6
24.3
25.5
032
52
30
481
0.16
0.50
22.1
1 00
3 7
25.8
C
Page 2
2: SR 599 NB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S
- t j
Lane ' " EBL 'EBR ' NBT SBT%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 260 71 837 954
Queue Length 50th (ft) 121 29 31 73
Queue Length 95th (ft) 179 57 42 m111
Internal Link Dist (ft) 329 519 184
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time % 18%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6
Intersection Summary
150
1%
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
p
2: SR 599 NB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S
1 t j r
Movement EBL ' EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations r ff +t
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1641 1468 3505 3539
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1641 1468 3505 3539
Volume (vph) 255 70 0 820 935 0
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98
Adj. Flow (vph) 260 71 0 837 954 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 260 71 0 837 954 0
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 10% 10% 3% 3% 2% 2%
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 16.7 16.7 53.2 53.2
Effective Green, g (s) 17.7 17.7 54.3 54.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.68 0.68
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.1 5.1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 363 325 2379 2402
v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.24 c0.27
v/s Ratio Perm 0.05
v/c Ratio 0.72 0.22 0.35 0.40
Uniform Delay, d1 28.8 25.5 5.4 5.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.55
Incremental Delay, d2 6.6 0.3 0.3 0.4
Delay (s) 35.4 25.8 1.4 3.5
Level of Service D C A A
Approach Delay (s) 33.4 1.4 3.5
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection' Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 7.3 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.
Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.5% ICU Level of Service A
c Critical Lane Group
M:104104209 Interurban Retail\LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6 M'\04\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Page 3
THETRALVL3 -FF51 THETRALVL3 -FF51
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 4
3: 48th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S
t
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL
Lane Group Flow (vph) 147 111 858 79 842
Queue Length 50th (ft) 69 52 84 39 83
Queue Length 95th (ft) 118 94 m102 #93 127
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1167 120 519
50th Up Block Time ( %) 4%
95th Up Block Time ( %) 5%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50
50th Bay Block Time % 29% 10%
95th Bay Block Time % 49% 41%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 43 74 21
tnterVection
# 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:104104209 Interurban Retail\LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3-FF51
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 5
3: 48th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S
Movement
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)
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 Time (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
1900
4.0
1.00
1.00
0.95
1656
0.95
1656
140
0.95
147
147
9%
3
12.2
12.2
0.15
4.0
3.0
253
c0.09
0.58
31,5
1.00
3.4
34.9
C
34.0
C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
WBL WBR NBT 'NBR SBL SBT
r
1900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1482
1.00
1482
105
0.95
111
111
9%
Perm
3
12.2
12.2
0.15
4.0
3.0
226
0.07
0.49
31.1
1.00
1.7
32.7
C
1900
4.0
0.95
0.97
1.00
3438
1.00
3438
660 155 75 800
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
695 163 79 842
858 0 79 842
2% 2% 4% 4%
Prot
2 1 6
31.0
31.0
0.39
4.0
3.0
1332
c0.25
0.64
20.0
0.58
2.0
13.7
B
13.7
B
16.0
0.64
80.0
47.6%
++
1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0
1.00 0.95
1.00 1.00
0.95 1.00
1736 3471
0.95 1.00
1736 3471
4.8
4.8
0.06
4.0
3.0
104
c0.05
0.76
37.0
0.72
25.5
52.3
D
38.8
39.8
0.50
5.0
3.0
1727
0.24
0.49
13.3
0.65
0.9
9.5
A
13.2
8
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M:\04104209 Interurban Retail\LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour sy6
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
B
32.0
A
Page 6
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
4: 1 -5 SB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Lane Group WBL WBR 'NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 647 266 614 1033
Queue Length 50th (ft) 166 129 119 53
Queue Length 95th (ft) #271 #260 184 100
Internal Link Dist (ft) 540 918 120
50th Up Block Time ( %) 1%
95th Up Block Time ( %) 5%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 275
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time % 3%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 25
Intersection; Summary ...:;': '
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
M ;\04\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS12010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
Page 7
4: 1 -5 SB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Movement
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (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 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)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary`:
4
14.8
16.0
0.20
5.2
3.0
673
c0.19
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 - FF51
WBL "WBR NBT NBR` SBL SBT
r ft
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
0.97 1.00 0.95 0.95
1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
3367 1553 3539 3471
0.95 1.00 1.00 1,00
3367 1553 3539 3471
595 245 565 0 0 950
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
647 266 614 0 0 1033
647 266 614 0 0 1033
4% 4% 2% 2% 4% 4%
Perm
4
14.8
16.0
0.20
5.2
3.0
311
2
31.0
31.0
0.39
4.0
3.0
1371
0.17
0.96
31.7
1.00
25.3
57.0
E D B
55.2
E
0.17
0.86 0.45
30.9 18.2
1.00 1.00
19.9 1.1
50.8 19.2
19.2
B
26.7
0.70
80.0
53,7%
6
38.8
39.8
0.50
5.0
3.0
1727
c0.30
0.60
14.4
0.31
1.4
5.9
A
5.9
A
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M:104\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline PM Peak Hour sy6
2010 Baseline PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
24.2
A
Page 8
5: 56th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Lane Group " EBT' EBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 77
Queue Length 50th (ft) 24 18
Queue Length 95th (ft) 58 47
Internal Link Dist (ft) 523
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time (°/0)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time % 19% 7%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 7
Intersection Summary
THETRALVL3 -FF51
50
3
WBT
15
3
15
975
NBL
33
3
19
NBT
1022
61
120
1512
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
SBL SBT
16 1472
1 106
8 209
918
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 9
5: 56th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
THETRALVL3 -FF51
Movement EBL
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) 85
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 93
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1%
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases 4
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, dl
Progression Factor
Incremental Delay, d2
Delay (s)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
EBT EBR WBL WBT
Q r 4+
1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 0.85 0.96
0.95 1.00 0.98
1796 1599 1767
0.73 1.00 0.91
1366 1599 1630
5 70 5 5
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
5 77 5 5
98 77 0 15
1% 1% 1% 1%
Perm Perm
4
9.8
10.8
0.16
5.0
3.0
224
c0.07
0.44
24.8
1.00
1.4
26.2
25.6
C
4 8
9.8
10.8
0.16
5.0
3.0
262
0.05
0.29
24.2
1.00
0.6
24.8
C C
6.0
0.56
65.9
60.3%
t \
8
9.8
10.8
0.16
5.0
3.0
267
0.01
0.06
23.2
1.00
0.1
23.3
C
23.3
C
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS12010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
2
45.7
47.1
0.71
5.4
3.0
182
0.13
0.18
3.1
1.00
0.5
3.6
A
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
f 4 4T+
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 1.00 1.00 0.98
0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
1736 3466 1787 3520
0.14 1.00 0.26 1.00
255 3466 483 3520
5 30 920 10 15 1205 135
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0 91 0.91 0.91
5 33 1011 11 16 1324 148
0 33 1022 0 16 1472 0
1% 4% 4% 4% 1% 1% 1%
Perm Perm
2
45.7
47.1
0.71
5.4
3.0
2477
0.29
0.41
3.8
1.00
0.1
3.9
A
3.9
A
A
8.0
B
6
45.7
47.1
0.71
54
3.0
345
0.03
0.05
2.8
1.00
0.1
2.8
A
6
457
47 1
0.71
54
30
2516
c0.42
0.59
4.6
1.00
0.4
5.0
A
4.9
A
Page 10
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
6: 58th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
4- • t \
Lane Group EBT ' -'EBR W81 NBL NBT' ° SBL' SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 79 79 18 84 1202 11 1658
Queue Length 50th (ft) 26 26 6 30 79 4 250
Queue Length 95th (ft) 59 58 20 #84 226 17 #456
Internal Link Dist (ft) 681 222 1266 1354
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
IntersecttonSiimmary..
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
v/s Ratio Perm c0.06 0.05 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.43 0.37 0.08
Uniform Delay, dl 30.6 30.3 29.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 1.1 0.2
Delay (s) 32.2 31.4 29.3
Level of Service C C C
Approach Delay (s) 31.8 29.3
Approach LOS C C
Intersection ;Summary'
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
11.3
0.73
76.9
71.8%
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6 M: \04\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Page 11
THETRALVL3 -FF51 THETRALVL3 -FF51
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
6: 58th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
J - 1 C~ t 4\ t/ `► 4 r
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 iv 4 1 +is ) +T
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade ( %) -1% 0% 0% 0%
Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.95 1,00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1789 1591 1750 1770 3534 1736 3446
Fit Permitted 0.73 1.00 0.90 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1365 1591 1605 1770 3534 1736 3446
Volume (vph) 65 5 70 5 5 5 75 1060 10 10 1405 70
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Adj. Flow (vph) 73 6 79 6 6 6 84 1191 11 11 1579 79
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 79 79 0 18 0 84 1202 0 11 1658 0
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4%
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 9.1 9.1 9,1 4 8 52.2 1.1 48.5
Effective Green, g (s) 10.3 10.3 10.3 5.3 53.0 1.6 49.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0 07 0.69 0.02 0.64
Clearance Time (s) 5.2 5.2 5.2 4.5 4.8 4.5 4 8
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 0 3.0 3 0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 183 213 215 122 2436 36 2209
v/s Ratio Prot c0 05 c0.34 0,01 c0.48
069 0.49
35.0 5.6
1.00 1.00
15.0 0.2
50.0 5.8
0 A
8.7
A
0.31 0.75
37.1 9.5
1.00 1 00
4.8 1.5
41. 11.0
D B
11.2
B
16.0
C
Page 12
7:1-405 SB Ramps & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
THETRALVL3 -FF51
- ► - 1_
Lane Group EBT "'EBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 148 478
Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 -515
Queue Length 95th (ft) 173 #735
Internal Link Dist (ft) 392
50th Up Block Time ( %) 26%
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection Summary
WBL
187
170
#307
48% 8%
is maximum after two cycles.
4-
WET
87
74
133
296
1
"NBL' NET
764 1143
-404 414
m242 m238
363
10% 6%
250
23%
2%
103
18%
2%
103
- Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite
Queue shown
# 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: \04104209 Interurban Retail\LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
2010 Baseline PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
• 1 4/
SBL SET "SBR "
82 1027 121
73 -556 93
131 #699 157
324
28%
41%
175
48%
55%
398
200
Page 13
7:1 SB Ramps & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Movement
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)
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 Time (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
Intersection;, Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
t
EEL EBT
4
1900 1900
4.0
1.00
1.00
0.97
1774
0.97
1774
80 55
0.91 0.91
88 60
0 148
4% 4%
Split
6 6
6
36.0
37.0
0.26
5.0
3.0
469
0.08
0.32
41.3
1.00
04
41.7
D
124.1
F
EBR WBL WBT'' WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
r ) A 1 1) 4A ) f A r
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
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1,00 0.91 0.91
0.85 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85
1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1553 1787 1722 3433 3401 1752 3357 1427
1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1553 1787 1722 3433 3401 1752 3357 1427
435 170 35 45 695 770 270 75 935 110
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
478 187 38 49 764 846 297 82 1027 121
478 187 87 0 764 1143 0 82 1027 121
4% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3%
Perm Split Prot Prot Perm
2 2 3 8 7 4
6 2
36.0 15.7 15.7 29.0 58.3
37.0 16.7 16.7 29 0 59.3
0.26 0.12 0.12 0.21 0.42
5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
410 213 205 711 1441
c0.10 0.05 c0.22 0.34
c0.31
1.17
51.5
1.00
98.1
149.6
F
71.2
1.06
140.0
79.6%
0.88
60.6
1.00
30.8
91.5
F
0.42
57.2
1.00
1.4
58.6
E
81.0
F
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M104 104209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
t
1.07 0.79
55.5 35.0
0.77 0.65
36.6 0.4
79.1 23.1
E C
45.5
D
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
16.0
C
`►
10.0
11.0
0.08
5.0
3.0
138
0.05
0.59
62.3
1.00
67
69.0
E
4,
4
40.3 40.3
41.3 41.3
0.30 0,30
50 50
3.0 3.0
990 421
c0.31
1.04
49.4
1,00
387
88.1
F D
82.1
F
0.08
0.29
38.0
1,00
1.7
39.7
Page 14
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
8: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
J 4 \ t ` ► l 4/
Lane Group
Lane Group Flow (vph)
Queue Length 50th (ft)
Queue Length 95th (ft)
Internal Link Dist (ft)
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EBL
229
-289
#461
150
51%
70%
257
Intersection Summary
EBT EBR "'WBL WBT WBR NBL ''NBT SBL SET SBR
851 245 303 973 814 160 1361 324 947 319
393 95 274 402 -983 146 -848 162 369 0
#502 140 #451 485 #1234 #274 #988 m155 m333 m0
606 375 527 155
5% 50% 38% 16% 19%
21% 15% 58% 47% 17%
150 250 100 150 100
45% 11% 25% 60% 2% 61% 29% 27%
51% 2% 42% 31% 62% 45% 63% 28% 26%
110 129 84 294 153 99 161 254
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: \04104209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
Page 15
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
8: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Movement EBL
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 (prot) 1770
Flt Permitted 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 1770
Volume (vph) 215
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94
Adj. Flow (vph) 229
Lane Group Flow (vph) 229
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2%
Turn Type Prot
Protected Phases 7
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 11 0
Effective Green, g (s) 12.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09
Clearance Time (s) 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 152
v/s Ratio Prot c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 1.51
Uniform Delay, d1 64.0
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 259.0
Delay (s) 323.0
Level of Service F
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
109.7
1.26
140.0
112.9%
4\ t t ti 1
EBT EBR WBL WBT' WBR
tt r t+ r
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
800 230 285 915 765
0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
851 245 303 973 814
851 245 303 973 814
2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
pm +ov Prot Perm
4 5 3 8
4 8
37.4 51.2 24.6 51.0 51.0
38.4 53.2 25.6 52,0 52.0
0.27 0.38 0.18 0.37 0.37
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
971 602 324 1314 588
0.24 0.04 0.17 0.27
0.11 c0.51
0.88 0.41 0.94 0.74 1.38
48.5 31,8 56.4 38.1 44.0
1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
9.0 0.5 33.3 2.3 183.4
57.5 32.3 89.6 40.4 227.4
E C F D F
98.7 120.4
F F
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
NBL NET NBR SBL SBT SBR
TA �l ft r
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0
1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00
1.00 0,94 1.00 1.00 0.85
0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1752 3310 3367 3471 1553
0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1752 3310 3367 3471 1553
150 805 475 305 890 300
0.94 0 94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
160 856 505 324 947 319
160 1361 0 324 947 319
3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4%
Prot Prot Free
5 2 1 6
Free
13.8 42.2 15.8 44.2 140.0
14,8 43.2 16.8 45.2 140.0
0.11 0.31 0.12 0 32 1.00
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
185 1021 404 1121 1553
0.09 c0.41 c0.10 0.27
c0.21
0.86 1.33 0.80 0.84 0.21
61.6 48,4 60.0 44.1 0,0
1.00 1.00 0.94 0.49 1.00
31,7 156.6 1,1 0.8 0.0
93.4 205.0 57.3 22.4 0.0
F F E C A
193.3 25.0
F C
12.0
G
Page 16
1: Gateway Dr. S & Interurban Avenue S
1 ~ 1 t 1 r
Lane Group - ,.. EBT EBR WBT; NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 154 282 568 289 911 478 242
Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 114 144 78 70 98 97
Queue Length 95th (ft) 119 172 #226 #127 91 155 183
Internal Link Dist (ft) 798 1251 184 1287
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 175 50
50th Bay Block Time % 36% 37%
95th Bay Block Time % 51% 56%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 105 110
ntersecfIOn- Suitt mart' `
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
2010 Future with- Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
1: Gateway Dr. S & Interurban Avenue S
t p v 1 r
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 (+ 4p rtv) �� ++ 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
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 0,95 1,00
Frt 1,00 0.85 0.99 100 0,95 00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1,00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1782 1553 3407 3303 3244 3374 1509
Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0 98 0.95 1.00 00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1782 1553 3407 3303 3244 3374 1509
Volume (vph) 70 70 257 247 220 50 263 567 262 0 435 220
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.91 0 91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0 91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph) 77 77 282 271 242 55 289 623 288 0 478 242
Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 154 282 0 568 0 289 911 0 0 478 242
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 6% 6% 6% 7% 7% 7%
Turn Type Split pm +ov Split Prot Perm
Protected Phases 4 4 5 8 8 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.8 19.8 14.3 8.0 37.3 24.3 24.3
Effective Green. g (s) 13.5 22.5 16.0 9 0 38,5 25.5 25.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 Q.28 0.20 0.11 0.48 0,32 0.32
Clearance Time (s) 5.7 5.0 5.7 5.0 5.2 5.2 5.2
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 301 514 681 372 1561 1075 481
v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.06 c0.17 c0.09 c0.28 0.14
v/s Ratio Perm 0.12
v/c Ratio 0.51 0,55 0,83
Uniform Delay, d1 30.3 24.4 30.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 1.2 8.7
Delay (s) 31.7 25.6 39.4
Level of Service C C D
Approach Delay (s) 27.8 39.4
Approach LOS C D
intersection. Sum man ..
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
23.1
0.66
80.0
61.1%
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
0.78 0.58
34.5 15.0
0.68 0.36
9.4 1.5
33.0 6.9
C A
13.2
B
M: \04\04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6 M: \04104209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour sy6
Page 1
THETRALVL3 -FF51 THETRALVL3 -FF51
12.0
B
016
0.44 0.50
21.6 22.1
1.00 1.00
1.3 3.7
23.0 25.8
C C
23.9
C
Page 2
2: SR 599 NB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S
J 1 1
Lane Prop' `° ESC, .EBR NBT ", ;SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 260 72 849 963
Queue Length 50th (ft) 121 30 32 73
Queue Length 95th (ft) 179 57 43 m112
Internal Link Dist (ft) 329 519 184
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %) 1%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time % 18%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6
Intersectlon`Bummanj
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2010 Future with Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
2: SR 599 NB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S
f 4\ 1 1
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ++ ?t
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1641 1468 3505 3539
Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1641 1468 3505 3539
Volume (vph) 255 71 0 832 944 0
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0 98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98
Adj. Flow (vph) 260 72 0 849 963 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 260 72 0 849 963 0
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 10% 10% 3% 3% 2% 2%
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 16.7 16.7 53.2 53.2
Effective Green, g (s) 17. 17.7 54.3 54 3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.68 0.68
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.1 5.1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 363 325 2379 2402
v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.24 c0.27
v/s Ratio Perm 0,05
v/c Ratio 0.72 0.22
Uniform Delay, dl 28.8 25.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 6.6 0 3
Delay (s) 35.4 25.9
Level of Service D C
Approach Delay (s) 33.3
Approach LOS C
Intersection Summary.
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
7.3
0.48
80.0
47.7%
0.36
5.4
0.20
03
1.4
A
1.4
A
0.40
5.7
0.55
0.4
3.5
A
3.5
A
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M:\04 \04209 Interurban Retail\LOS\2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6 M: \04104209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Page 3
THETRALVL3 -FF51 THETRALVL3 -FF51
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
A
8.0
A
Page 4
3: 48th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S
c ` 1
Larie (�roup '.,' �Y.m'... UUBL WBQ. . NBF
Lane Group Flow (vph) 147 113 865
Queue Length 50th (ft) 69 53 84
Queue Length 95th (ft) 118 95 m103
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1167 120
50th Up Block Time ( %) 4%
95th Up Block Time ( %) 5%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50
50th Bay Block Time % 29% 11%
95th Bay Block Time % 49% 41%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 44 77 22
r
S BL
81
40
#96
18T
851
84
130
519
Intiecttorr'Summe4_ °'
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may longer
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m ` Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
2010 Future with Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 5
3: 48th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S
Movement
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (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 Time (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
THETRALVL3 -FF51
WBL WBR NBT 'NBR SBL 'SBT
ft
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00 0.95 100 0.95
1.00 0.85 0.97 1.00 1.00
0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
1656 1482 3439 1736 3471
0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
1656 1482 3439 1736 3471
140 107 667 155 77 808
095 095 095 0.95 0.95 095
147 113 702 163 81 851
147 113 865 0 81 851
9% 9% 2% 2% 4% 4%
Perm Prot
3 2 1 6
3
12.2 12.2 31.0 4.8 38.8
12.2 12.2 31.0 4.8 39.8
0.15 0.15 0.39 0.06 0.50
4.0 4.0 4 0 4.0 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
253 226 1333 104 1727
c0.09 c0.25 c0.05 0.25
0.58
31.5
1.00
3.4
34.9
C
34.0
C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
0.08
0.50
31.1
1.00
17
32.8
C
0.65
20.0
0.58
2.0
13.7
B
13,7
B
0.78
37.1
0.73
28.5
55.4
E
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
0.49
13.4
0.65
09
9.6
A
13.6
B
16.2
0.64
80.0
47.
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M:104104209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour sy6
B
32.0
A
Page 6
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
4:1-5 SB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
t
Lane Group :'ii , 1NBG
Lane Group Flow (vph) 647
Queue Length 50th (ft) 166
Queue Length 95th (ft) #271
Internal Link Dist (ft) 540
50th Up Block Time (°/0)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
3%
, WBR NBA' SBT
267 621 1041
130 121 _ 53
#261 186 100
918 120
1%
5%
25
Intersect I 00 8t<nmat ..; €r,,
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
Interurban Retail
Page 7
2010 Future with- Project: PM Peak Hour
4: 1 -5 SB Off -Ramp & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
r t `► 1
WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Movement
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (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 Time (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
Intereecttorr Summary
1 1 1 1
1900
4.0
0.97
1.00
0.95
3367
0.95
3367
595
0.92
647
647
4%
4
14.8
16.0
0.20
5.2
3.0
673
c0.19
0.96
31.7
1.00
25.3
57.0
E
55.3
E
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
r
1900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1553
1.00
1553
246
0.92
267
267
4%
Perm
4
14.8
16.0
0.20
5.2
3.0
311
0.17
0.86
30.9
1.00
20.3
51.2
D
++
1900
4.0
0.95
1.00
1.00
3539
1.00
3539
571
0.92
621
621
2%
2
31.0
31.0
0.39
4.0
3.0
1371
0.18
0.45
18.2
1.00
1.1
19.3
B
19.3
B
26.7
0.71
80.0
53.9%
TT
1900 1900 1900
4.0
0.95
1.00
1.00
3471
1.00
3471
0 0 958
0.92 0.92 0 -92
0 0 1041
0 0 1041
2% 4% 4%
6
38.8
39.8
0.50
5.0
3.0
1727
c0.30
0.60
14.4
0.31
1.4
5.9
A
5.9
A
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M 10 410 4 2 0 9 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour sy6
24.2
A
Page 8
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
5: 56th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
1 t `►
Lane Group>' ` . . : j EST': EBR . ' BT = :NBC :NBT.. ;° SBL S81
Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 77 15 33 1027 16 1481
Queue Length 50th (ft) 24 18 3 3 62 1 108
Queue Length 95th (ft) 59 47 15 19 122 8 212
Internal Link Dist (ft) ' 523 975 1512 918
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50
50th Bay Block Time
95th Bay Block Time % 21%
Queuing Penalty (veh) - 8 3
interaection
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail\LOS12010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
7%
Page 9
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
5: 56th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Movement
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (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 Time (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
Intersection . Summary
..
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
f r < t `► 1 4'
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT' WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL `.SBT SBR
4 r 4+ `f ft. `f fA
1900 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
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
1.00 0.85 0.96 1 00 1.00 100 0.98
0.95 1. 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
1796 1599 1767 1736 3466 1787 3520
0.73 1.00 0.91 0.14 1.00 0.25 1.00
1366 1599 1630 251 3466 479 3520
86 5 70 5 5 5 30 925 10 15 1210 137
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0,91 091 091 0.91 091 0.91 0.91 091
95 5 77 5 5 5 33 1016 11 16 1330 151
0 100 77 0 15 0 33 1027 0 16 1481 0
1% 1 %. 1% 1% 1% 1% 4% 4% 4% 1% 1% 1%
Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm
4 8 2 6
4 4 8 2 6
9.9 9.9 9.9 45.7 45.7 45.7 45.7
10.9 10.9 10,9 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.1
0.17 0.17 0.17 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71.
5.0 5.0 5 0 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3 0
226 264 269 179 2473 342 2512
0.30 c0.42
CO 07 0.05 0.01 0 13 0 03
0.44 0.29 0.06 0.18 0.42 0.05 0,59
24.8 24.2 23.2 3.1 3. 2.8 4.
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00
1.4 0. 6 0.1 05 0.1 0.1 04
26.2 24.8 23.3 3.6 4.0 2.9 5.0
C C C A A A A
25.6 233 3.9 5.0
C C A A
6.0
0.56
66.0
60.5%
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
MA04104209 Interurban Retail\LOS12010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
A
8.0
B
Page 10
l
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
6: 58th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Lane Group
Lane Group Flow (vph) 81
Queue Length 50th (ft) 27
Queue Length 95th (ft) 60
Internal Link Dist (ft) 681
50th Up Block Time ( %)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
THETRALVL3 -FF51
�B7 EE3F
t `► 1
79
26
58
100
VBT
18
6
20
222
84 1205
30 80
#83 228
1266
Intersection Summary4 ;> .
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles
1
4
17
1663
251
#461
1354,
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS12010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
Page 11
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
6: 58th Avenue S & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Movement
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Grade (%)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (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 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)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
J -• e 4 \ t t `► 1 4
EBL EBT - EBR'' WBT `_WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
4 i 4+ ) ?■ If TA
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
-1% 0% 0% 0%
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
1.00 0.85 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99
0.96 1.00 0.98 0.95 1, 00 0.95 1.00
1789 1591 1750 1770 3534 1736 3446
0.73 1.00 0.90 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
1364 1591 1605 1770 3534 1736 3446
67 5 70 5 5 5 75 1063 10 10 1408 72
0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
75 6 79 6 6 6 84 1194 11 11 1582 81
0 81 79 0 18 0 84 1205 0 11 1663 0
2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4%
Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot
4 8 5 2 1 6
4 4 8
9.2 9.2 9.2 4.8 52.2 11 48.5
10.4 10.4 10.4 5,3 53.0 1.6 49.3
0.14 0.14 0.14 0.07 0.69 0.02 0.64
5.2 5.2 5.2 4.5 4.8 4.5 4.8
3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 30 30
184 215 217 122 2432 36 2206
CO 05 c0.34 0.01 c0 48
c0.06 0.05 0.01
0.44 0.37 0.08 0 69 0.50 0 31 0.75
30.6 30.3 29.1 35.0 5.7 37.2 9.6
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00
1.7 1.1 0.2 15.0 0.2 4.8 1.5
32.3 31.4 29.3 50.0 5.8 41.9 11.1
C C C D A D B
31.8 29.3 8.7 11 3
C C A B
11.4
0.73
77.0
72.1%
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
M. \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 - FF51
16.0
C
Interurban Retail
Page 12
2010 Future with- Project: PM Peak Hour
7: I -405 SB Ramps & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
THETRALVL3 -FF51
c 4-- t
Lane Group' EBT' EBR WBL i;.WBT NBL = NBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 148 478 187 87 764 1146
Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 -515 170 74 -404 416
Queue Length 95th (ft) 173 #735 #307 133 m242 m240
Internal Link Dist (ft) 392 296 363
50th Up Block Time ( %) 26% 10% 6%
95th Up Block Time ( %) 48% 8%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 250
50th Bay Block Time % 23% 18%
95th Bay Block Time % 2% 2%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 103 105
Intersection Sum ,``
- 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.
`• 1 r
SBL ' SBT 'SBR
82 1031 121
73 -559 93
131 #703 157
324
29%
41%
175
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
48%
55%
403
200
Page 13
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
7: 1 -405 SB Ramps & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Movement EEL EBT
Lane Configurations 4
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4,0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00
Frt 1.00
Flt Protected 0.97
Satd. Flow (prot) 1774
Flt Permitted 0
Satd. Flow (perm) 1774
Volume (vph) 80 55
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 60
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 148
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 4% 4%
Turn Type Split
Protected Phases 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
Uniform Delay, dl
Progression Factor
Incremental Delay, d2
Delay (s)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
tntersectton Summary
THETRALVL3 -FF51
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
6
6
36.0
37.0
0.26
5.0
3.0
469
0.08
0.32
41.3
1.00
0.4
41.7
D
124.1
F
1
EBR .'WBL WBT` WBR -;NBL NBT ' NBR ` SBL 'SBT " SBR
r `f A `t`f t + `f TA r
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
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91
0.85 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85
1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1553 1787 1722 3433 3402 1752 3357 1427
1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
1553 1787 1722 3433 3402 1752 3357 1427
435 170 35 45 695 773 270 75 938 110
0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
478 187 38 49 764 849 297 82 1031 121
478 187 87 0 764 1146 0 82 1031 121
4% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3%
Perm Split Prot Prot Perm
2 2 3 8 7 4
6 2 4
36.0 15.7 15.7 29.0 58.3 10.0 40.3 40.3
37.0 16.7 16.7 29.0 59.3 11.0 41.3 41.3
0.26 0.12 0.12 0.21 0.42 0.08 0.30 0.30
5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
410 213 205 711 1441 138 990 421
c0.10 0.05 c0.22 0.34 0.05 c0.31
c0.31
1.17
515
1.00
98.1
149.6
F
71.6
1.06
140.0
79.7%
0.88
60.6
1.00
30.8
91.5
F
0.42
57.2
1.00
1.4
58.6
E
81.0
F
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
1.07 0.80
55 5 35.1
0.77 0.65
36.6 0.4
79.1 23.1
E C
45.5
D
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
t `. 1 .r
16.0
C
0.59
62.3
1.00
6.7
69.0
E
1.04
494
1.00
40.0
89.3
F
83.1
F
0.08
0.29
38.0
1.00
1.7
39.7
D
Page 14
2010 Future with- Project: PM Peak Hour
8: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
- O ` \ \ t ` - 1 -'
Lane Group EBL . EBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 230 851
Queue Length 50th (ft) -291 393
Queue Length 95th (ft) #463 #502
Internal Link Dist (ft) 606
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time ( %)
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150
50th Bay Block Time % 51% 45%
95th Bay Block Time % 70% 51%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 257 110
intersectiort ummaryaffi 8
- 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.
EBR W.BL WBT `WBR NBL NBT 'SBL ` SBT` '
245 303 973 815 160 1362 326 948 320
95 274 402 -985 146 -848 163 370 0
140 #451 485 #1236 #274 #989 m155 m331 m0
375 527 155
5 50% 38% 16% 19%
21% 15% 58% 47% 17%
150 250 100 150 100
11% 25% 60% 2% 61% 29% 27%
2% 42% 31% 62% 45% 63% 28% 26%
129 84 294 153 99 161 253
M:104 \04209 Interurban Retail'LOS12010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
THETRALVL3 -FF51
Page 15
2010 Future with- Project: PM Peak Hour
8: Southcenter Blvd. (Segment 18) & Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment) Interurban Retail
Movement " EBL EBT
Lane Configurations ++
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
Flt Protected 0.95 1,00
Satd. Flow (prof) 1770 3539
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3539
Volume (vph) 216 800
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94
Adj. Flow (vph) 230 851
Lane Group Flow (vph) 230 851
Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2%
Turn Type Prot
Protected Phases 7
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.0
Effective Green, g (s) 12,0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09
Clearance Time (s) 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 152
v/s Ratio Prot c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 1.51
Uniform Delay. dl 64.0
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 261.7
Delay (s) 325.7
Level of Service F
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersectton Summary ,
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
c Critical Lane Group
THETRALVL3 -FF51
1_
BBR WBL
1900 1900
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
0.85 1.00
1.00 0.95
1583 1770
1.00 0.95
1583 1770
230 285
0.94 0.94
245 303
245 303
2% 2%
pm +ov Prot
4 5 3 8
4
37.4 51.2 24.6 51.0
38.4 53.2 25.6 52.0
0.27 0.38 0.18 0.37
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
971 602 324 1314
0.24 0.04 0.17 0.27
0.11
0.88 0.41 0.94 0.74
48.5 31.8 56.4 38.1
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
9.0 0.5 33.3 2.3
57.5 32.3 89.6 40.4
E C F D
99.4 120.7
F F
k. t `- 1 -'
WBT WBR `'NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
40 4.0 40 40 40 40 40
0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 097 095 1.00
100 0.85 1.00 0.94 100 1.00 0.85
1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0 95 1.00 1.00
3539 1583 1752 3310 3367 3471 1553
1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0 95 1.00 1.00
3539 1583 1752 3310 3367 3471 1553
915 766 150 806 475 306 891 301
0.94 0.94 0.94 0 94 0 94 0.94 0.94 0.94
973 815 160 857 505 326 948 320
973 815 160 1362 0 326 948 320
2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4%
Perm Prot Prot Free
5 2 1 6
8
51.0
52.0
0.37
5.0
3.0
588
c0 51
1.39
440
1.00
184.1
228.1
F
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
13.8
14.8
0.11
50
3.0
185
0.09
0.86
61.6
1.00
31.7
93.4
F
M \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
42.2
43.2
0.31
50
3.0
1021
c0.41
1.33
48.4
1.00
157.0
205.4
F
193.7
F
120
G
15.8
16.8
0.12
50
3.0
404
c0.10
0.81
60,0
0.94
1.1
57.3
E
44.2
45.2
0.32
5.0
3.0
1121 1553
0.27
0.85
44.2
0.49
08
22.3
C
25.0
C
Free
140.0
1400
1.00
00.21
0.21
0.0
1.00
0.0
0.0
A
Page 16
32: North Driveway & Interurban Avenue S
Moventent NWBLK NBRR ` NBT °; SBL i: SBT
Lane Configurations it +14 T?
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 42 23 807 14 31 904
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourly flow rate (veh /h) 46 25 877 15 34 983
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ftls)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type TWLTL
Median storage veh) 1
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 1443 446 892
vC1, stage 1 conf vol 885
vC2, stage 2 conf vol 559
vCu, unblocked vol 1443 446 892
tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8
tF (s) 3.5 3.3
p0 queue free % 82 96
cM capacity (veh /h) 249 565
Direction, Lane #'"
Volume Total
Volume Left
Volume Right
cSH
Volume to Capacity
Queue Length (ft)
Control Delay (s)
Lane LOS
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Inter ectidn "Su nmary
THETRALVL3 -FF51
Average Delay
Intersection Capacity Utilization
t t
V- 1 "WB,2 NB 1 NB "2 S
46 25 585
46 0 0
0 25 0
249 565 1700
0.18 0.04 0.34
16 3 0
22.7 11.7 0.0
C B
18.8
C
0.0
4.1
2.2
96
756
308 34
0 34
15 0
1700 756
0.18 0.04
0 3
0.0 10.0
A
0.3
2010 Future with Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
SB2 SB3
491 491
0 0
0 0
1700 1700
0.29 0.29
0 0
0.0 0.0
0.8
37.2% ICU Level of Service
M: \04104209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
A
Page 1
34: South Driveway & Interurban Avenue S
Movement
Lane Configurations
Sign Control
Grade
Volume (veh /h)
Peak Hour Factor
Hourly flow rate (veh /h)
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (f /s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type TWLTL
Median storage veh) 1
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 1474 421
vC1, stage 1 conf vol 820
vC2, stage 2 conf vol 654
vCu, unblocked vol 1474 421
tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8
tF (s) 3.5 3.3
p0 queue free '7 88 84
cM capacity (veh /h) 234 584
Direction, Lane #
Volume Total
Volume Left
Volume Right
cSH
Volume to Capacity
Queue Length (ft)
Control Delay (s)
Lane LOS
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
THETRALVL3 -FF51
t
WBL? WBR NBT
fA
Stop Free
0% 0%
25 88 734
0.92 0.92 0.92
27 96 798
WB 1
27
27
0
234
0.12
10
22.4
14.6
B
Average Delay
Intersection Capacity Utilization
C B
0.0
1.4
42.0%
l � 1
NBR SBL
41
0.92
45
86
0.92
93
842
842
4.2
2.2
88
783
B
0.9
SBT
++
Free
0%
860
0.92
935
WB2 NB1'NB2 SB1 SB2''SB
96 532 311 93 467 467
0 0 0 93 0 0
96 0 45 0 0 0
584 1700 1700 763 1700 1700
0.16 0.31 0.18 012 0.27 0.27
15 0 0 10 0 0
12.4 0.0 0. 0 10.2 0.0 0.0
ICU Level of Service
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour sy6
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
A
Page 2
Arterial Level of Service: NB Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
Southcenter Blvd. (S III 35 15.5 136.5 152.0 0.1 2.7 F
1-405 SB Off-Ramp-Fo III 35 16.4 20.9 37.3 0.1 12.4 E
58th Avenue S III 35 93.6 5.3 98.9 0.9 33.1 A
56th Avenue S III 35 58.9 4.3 63.2 0.6 32.6 A
1-5 SB Off-Ramp III 35 22.7 18.4 41.1 0.2 16.6 D
Total III 207.1 185.4 392.5 1.9 17.6 D
Arterial Level of Service: SB Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Arterial :•.. Flow Running Signal Travel Dist. Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class- ' Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
56th Avenue S III 35 22.7 5.1 27.8 0.2 24.5 B
58th Avenue S III 35 58.9 11.7 70.6 0.6 29.2 B
1-405 SB Ramps III 35 93.6 56.3 149.9 0.9 21.8 C
Southcenter Blvd. (S III 35 16.4 20.5 36.9 0.1 12.5 E
Total III 191.6 93.6 285.2 1.8 22.7 C
THETRALVL3-FF51
ft
T ( 4
M:104\04209 Interurban Retail\LOS\Existing- PM Peak Hour.sy6
M
L 5 C
Existing- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 1
Arterial Level of Service: NB Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
Southcenter Blvd. (S III 35 15.5 174.0 189.5 0.1 2.2 F
1 -405 SB Off-Ramp-Foil! 35 16.4 23.2 39.6 0.1 11.7 E
58th Avenue S III 35 93.6 5.8 99.4 0.9 32.9 A
56th Avenue S III 35 58.9 4.5 63.4 0.6 32.5 A
1 -5 SB Off -Ramp III 35 22.7 19.3 42.0 0.2 16.2 D
Total III 207.1 226.8 433.9 1.9 15.9 D
Arterial Level of Service: SB Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Arterial Flow Running Signal, - Travel . ;. Dist . Arterial r Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s (mi) Speed LOS
56th Avenue S III 35 22.7 5.5 28.2 0.2 24.1 B
58th Avenue S III 35 58.9 16.5 75.4 0.6 27.4 B
1-405 SB Ramps III 35 93.6 81.7 175.3 0.9 18.7 C
Southcenter Blvd. (S III 35 16.4 22.0 38.4 0.1 12.0 E
Total III 191.6 125.7 317.3 1.8 20.4 C
THETRALVL3 -FF51
C
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour.sy6
2010 Baseline- PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
,AA
Lc.5
Page 1
Arterial Level of Service: NB Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Arterial Flow . Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross, Street Class Speed Time Delay ; Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
Southcenter Blvd. (S III 35 15.5 174.3 189.8 0.1 2.2 F
1 -405 SB Off - Ramp -FoIII 35 16.4 23.2 39.6 0.1 11.7 E
58th Avenue S III 35 93.6 5.8 99.4 0.9 32.9 A
56th Avenue S III 35 58.9 4.5 63.4 0.6 32.5 A
1 -5 SB Off -Ramp III 35 22.7 19.4 42.1 0.2 16.2 D
Total III 207.1 227.2 434.3 1.9 15.9 D
Arterial Level of Service: SB Interurban Avenue S (Arterial Segment)
Arterial Ftow Running : Signal ; Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed . Time Delay °: Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
56th Avenue S III 35 22.7 5.6 28.3 0.2 24.0 B
58th Avenue S III 35 58.9 17.0 75.9 0.6 27.2 B
1-405 SB Ramps III 35 93.6 82.8 176.4 0.9 18.6 C
Southcenter Blvd. (S III 35 16.4 22.0 38.4 0.1 12.0 E
Total III 191.6 127.4 319.0 1.8 20.3 C
THETRALVL3 -FF51
1\ - IS -9
S i 2 a 3
C 10-5 S - i'c4_ c; (;_f, - C
M: \04 \04209 Interurban Retail \LOS \2010 Future with Project- PM Peak Hour.sy6
2010 Future with - Project: PM Peak Hour
Interurban Retail
Page 1
, ��I N „ Ho d '
.+ S IRT C '•. lit
•
•
= AR . --s. wAso .‘,
,,,,
„„ ,,,,,
I S? 1 13 031.76 s ;
.7.1N,P.a. ,, .. s ,„
. ci s...,„,.
P:\Planning Forms \ Applications \SPDirector- 12- 06.doc
CITY OF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E - mail: tukplannci.tukwila.wa.us
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS
PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
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 1 o 3 f I. c.c./ (Da 4..
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. 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. /� r �t
EXECUTED at S ea (city), VIA (state), on fr 1 _ L_ 5 , 20 i.av
Print Name co a
ss
Address t o S v5, e ii / N t 320
v.J /4- ' / s ��
Phone Number 2_454 2 "t
- pro rs'
Signature CSJ1
On this day personally appeared before me ( - l 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. ` +
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS ` � 66- DAY OF I V l,( Q2-
20-
NOTARY P i : I in and forth ' . to of hington
residing at
My Commission expires on 4- 25 - Zet)t o
December 4, 2006
FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -SP 1/Oq "0 I
Planner:
File Number:
Application Complete (Date:
)
Project File Number:
Application Incomplete (Date:
)
Other File Numbers:
LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement).
000300 - 0 11 O- D � —
Name:
Address:
Phone: ( 3/0 - S-3 87_
E -mail: btS 6" 3 r a -O r
Signature:
P:\Planning Forms \Applications \SPDirector- 12- 06.doc
•
CITY OF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E - mail.: tukplan(a,ci.tukwila.wa.us
eo
Date:
•
,1S 2-007
MAR ��
SPECK � 40 1
PERMISSI T
DIRECTOR
APPLICATION
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: NI x,21 -61 12Ti 4-t L CE
LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s),
block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection.
13.0 • 1 uK *.It
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR :
The individual who:
• has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /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.
,c'{ --J 1ND , > ' 2 0 , j `z/! -trlt R v ° 1
FAX: CZ°9 z $c-( — 4 g
December 4, 2006
Check items
submitted
with
application
Information Required. ...A
MA
May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning Z
„ CD
V41
APPLIC TION MATERIALS: 44
1. Application Checklist one (1) copy, indicating items submitted with application.
2. Permit Fee (LDR = $230, Other zones = $350).
/
3. Written description of the project, the deviation being requested and response to the applicable
decision criteria.
ZONING CODE PARKING DEVIATION
4. A complete description of the proposed construction relative to parking areas, and all
supporting agreements.
V
✓
5. Dimensional site plan(s) to demonstrate parking area consistent with Zoning Code
requirements.
/
v " ------
6. Parking studies as needed to demonstrate adequate parking is provided.
LANDSCAPE DEVIATION
7. Landscape plan — two (2) copies showing size and species of existing and proposed plant
materials, required perimeter landscape types, parking areas, buildings, walkways, transit
facilities, property lines, dimensions and area of planting beds and any calculations necessary
to demonstrate compliance with review criteria.
SENSITIVE AREA ORDINANCE DEVIATIONS
8. Site Plan — two (2) copies showing all buildings, parking areas, walkways, property' lines,
planting areas, sensitive areas, their buffers and setbacks.
9. Sensitive area studies and enhancement plans to justify a requested buffer or setback reduction
and demonstrate that the reduction will not result in a direct or indirect short-term or long-
term adverse impact to the sensitive area per TMC 18.45.090 D.
SIGN CODE APPROVAL/DEVIATION
10. Complete "Permanent Sign Permit Application" with all supporting materials and fees
($115).
11. The following information should be given on the plans:
North arrow, title, scale and date;
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. Application review will not begin until it is
determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED.
The initial application materials allow project review to begin and vest the applicant's rights. However, the City may
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).
P\Planning Forms \A pplications \SPDirector- 12- 06.doc
December 4, 2006
2401