The URL can be used to link to this page

07-101624FILE Federal Way August 15, 2007 Harold Christensen Lance Mueller & Associates 130 Lakeside, Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com RE: File #07-101624-00-UP; MODIFICATION TO PROJECT APPROVAL Cedar Park Office at West Campus, 33455 - 61h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Dear Mr. Christensen: On July 20, 2007, the City of Federal Way completed administrative review of the proposal to construct a 50,990 square -foot office building located over a 24,495 square -foot open parking garage at the above - referenced site and issued conditional approval of the proposal. Based on information from the City's traffic division, condition of approval #1 is modified as noted below. The site plan application submitted on March 29, 2007, and revisions submitted on April 18, April 25, April 30, June 5, June 12 and July 10, 2007, remains conditionally approved per the enclosed modified Findings for Project Approval. The remainder of this letter outlines future review processes required, gives a brief summary of the process under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to date, and outlines procedures relating to appeals and approval periods for this decision. Additional requirements will be provided as city departments review the building permit (File #07-1025 1 0-00-CO) and engineering plans (File #07- 102038-00-EN). REVIEW PROCESSES REQUIRED The site is located in an Office Park (OP) zoning district. Office uses are permitted in the zone subject to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-826. These uses are reviewed through the Process III, Project Approval. Project approval does not grant license to begin any type of site work. SEPA PROCESS A Notice of Land Use Application issued on April 29, 2007, included a Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. There were no comments on the application or environmental notice. The responsible official of the City of Federal Way issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on June 14, 2007, pursuant to the SEPA (File #07-101626-00-SE). The fourteen day appeal period for the determination was completed on June 28, 2007, with no corrections to the cty's initial determination. MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Prior to issuance of any construction permits for the proposed development; the applicant shall pay the project pro-rata share contribution in the amount of $65,487.00 to the City in order to mitigate the impacts of the new trips generated by the project and meeting the LOS standards. M'�. iu sen August 15, 2007 Page 2 2. Prior to issuance of the building permit, a statutory warranty deed that dedicates three feet for right-of-way adjacent to 6`h Avenue South must be submitted to the city for review and approval, and recorded by the city at King County at the expense of the applicant. 3. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the area west of the angled parking stalls must be established as landscaping or formal vault access in conformance with FWCC as striping on asphalt is not accepted. 4. Prior to issuance of construction permits, construction plans shall depict specific information about pedestrian pathway materials, patterns and colors. 5. Prior to issuance of any clearing or grading permits, clearing and grading plans shall depict tree retention techniques in conformance with FWCC. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Unless modified or appealed, this project approval is valid for a period of one year from the effective date of the modified decision. If no further action is taken within one year, the decision becomes void. An extension may be granted pursuant to FWCC Section 22-409 through a written request submitted to the Department of Community Development Services (33325 8t' Avenue South, Pa Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718), at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the decision. This decision may be appealed by any person who received a copy of this decision. The appeal must be in the form of a letter delivered to the Department of Community Development Services (address above), and be accompanied by the established fee, within 14 calendar days after the effective date of the modified decision. The effective date of the modified decision is August 18, 2007. The appeal letter must contain a clear reference to the matter being appealed and a statement of the factual findings and conclusions of the Director of Community Development disputed by the person filing the appeal. This decision shall not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. Also, be advised that various performance and maintenance bonds may be required for the project. Any bonds or other agreements as required must be completed prior to issuance of any related construction permits. A cash deposit is also required to cover the city's potential expenses, if necessary, for obtaining and using the proceeds of any bond. The cash deposit shall be posted for up to five percent ($100 minimum) prior to building permit issuance. The cash deposit will be refunded following satisfactory completion of all bond requirements. If you have any questions regarding this revised decision, please call Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253- 835-2642. Sincerely, V W A Kathy McClung, Director Community Development Services enc: Findings for Project Approval Approved Site Plan c: Deb Barker, Senior Planner Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Traffic Engineer Soma Chattopadhyay, Traffic Analyst 07-101624 Doc. 1 D. 41914 FILE CITY OF Federal Way CEDAR PARK OFFICE AT WEST CAMPUS FINDINGS FOR PROJECT APPROVAL - REVISED FILE #07-101624-00-UP The following are findings for recommending approval of a new office building constructed over an open parking garage located at 33455 6`h Avenue South in Federal Way. The applicant proposes the construction of a 50,990 square -foot, two-story office building constructed over a 25,495 square -foot underground parking garage for 58 vehicles, with 127 at -grade parking stalls, and site improvements on an undeveloped 3.01-acre site. 2. Zoning for the subject site is Office Park (OP). Office uses are permitted in the OP zoning district pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-826 subject to Process III, Project Approval. The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) designation for the subject site is Office. The City issued a Notice of Land Use Application and Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance on April 29, 2007, following determination of a complete application. A fourteen day comment period resulted from the notice date. No comments were received on the land use application or environmental threshold notice. 4. The responsible official of the City of Federal Way issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on June 14, 2007, pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The fourteen day appeal period for the determination was completed on June 28, 2007, with no corrections to the city's initial determination. The final staff evaluation for the environmental checklist, Federal Way File #07-101626-00-SE, is hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth in full. 5. A regulated lake that functions as a storm drainage facility is located to the northwest of the project site. A regulated Category II wetland associated with the lake is located on the northwest portion of the subject site. No development activity is proposed to occur within the 100-foot wetland buffer surrounding the wetland, and no development activity is proposed within the 25-foot buffer of the regulated lake. The subject site is located within the ten-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District Wells 10 and 10A, and the site is classified as a "Medium Risk Parcel" for the District's Wellhead Protection Program. These wellheads are located three-quarters of a mile south of the proposed office building. The applicant completed a Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Area and noted that the proposed development will not store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous materials listed in the checklist. No other critical areas were identified on the subject site. 6. Drainage components shall conform to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and City amendments. The applicant has proposed to install an underground a. stormwater vault with nine cartridges in order to meet Resource Stream Protection Area standards of the KCSWDM. The vault will drain into an existing storm drainage system located in an easement on the adjacent property to the north, and will subsequently flow into the Category II wetland associated with Regulated Lake #3, into the lake and discharge through a series of piped storm conveyance systems and lakes, and eventually flow into Hylebos Creek. Access to the vault shall not be encumbered by parking stalls or improvements. Flow control is provided for the siteinLake #1, located approximately %2 mile south of this site. Access to the subject site will be from 6`h Avenue South and from an existing 15-foot-wide private ingress/egress utility easement' located along the southern portion of the site. The existing access does not meet current Federal Way roadway standards. Accordingly, based on a request by the applicant, the Public Works Director in a May 8, 2007 letter, granted modification to required Oh Avenue South right-of-way improvements to permit use of existing pavement and improvements. The applicant will be required to provide streetlights and street trees behind the existing 6 b Avenue South sidewalk, as well as provide for dedication of three feet of land for right-of-way. Further, the Director granted modification to required access easement improvements and provided for a sidewalk to be located on private property in lieu of the easement. Three feet of right-of-way on 6`h Avenue South shall be dedicated to the City via a statutory warranty deed, reviewed and approved by the City and recorded at King County at the expense of the applicant before a construction permit will be issued. 8. The proposed development has been designed to provide optimal placement of parking and building improvements. The 170 minimum required parking stalls for the 50,990 square -foot building is met and exceeded with the 58 below grade parking stalls and the 127 at grade parking stalls located east, west and north of the new building.' Two-way drive aisles are proposed between the new office building and 6"' Avenue South, as well as west of the new building. An internal driveway on the north side of the building will be a one-way only to accommodate angled parking stalls. However, there are no dead end driveways due to existing ingress/egress easements. The area to the west of the angled parking stalls shall be established as landscaping, formal vault access, or parking lot; striping on pavement is not permitted. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the intent of this area must be clarified on construction documents in conformance with FWCC. Under FWCC Section 22-826, Office uses located in the OP zoning district require the following structural setbacks: 50 feet in the front yard when there is parking between the structure and the right-of-way, and 20 feet for both side and rear structural setbacks. The site plan shows that these setback requirements, as well as setbacks from ingress/egress, drainage and utility easements, are met. 10. Landscape plans prepared by Brumbaugh and Associates, revised date June 5, 2007, depict required width of perimeter landscape areas pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1566(h), OP zoning. Specifically, ten feet of Type III landscaping shall be provided along the east, west and south property lines that abut the public right-of-way and/or access easements. Five feet of Type III landscaping will be provided along the north property line. A total of 2,794 square feet of interior parking lot landscaping is required for the 127 at grade parking stalls. The site plan contains 3,305 square feet of Type N interior parking lot landscaping, satisfying code requirement of 22 square feet of parking lot landscaping per stall. Prior to issuance of any construction drawings, landscape plans shall be 1 An additional 12.6 foot -wide ingresslegress easement is located on property east of the subject site. Z At a ratio of one parking stall per each 300 square feet of gross floor area, or 170 stalls for the 50,990 square -foot building is required. Cedar Park Office at West Campus File #07-101624-00-UP/nog. I.D. 41915 Findings for Project Approval — Revised Page 2 revised to add a landscape island at the western end of the diagonal parking stalls as stripping on asphalt is not approved. Prior to issuance of any construction permits, the landscape plan shall be revised to depict street trees that conform to street trees found in Federal Way Development Services Standard Detail #348, and shall be located in addition to and not in conflict with those trees proposed in conformance with perimeter tree requirements. Prior to issuance of construction permits, a final landscape plan shall be submitted to address landscape plan comments dated July 18, 2007. Final landscape plans will be reviewed with construction permits to ensure compliance with the FWCC. 11. A tree survey submitted by the applicant found that the site contains 128 trees that meet the FWCC definition of "significant tree." According to the site plan, the applicant proposes to remove 94, or 73.4%, of the significant trees. Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(1)(a), if more than 75 percent of the significant trees are removed from the subject site, tree replacement in conformance with FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(5) shall be required. Retained trees shall be protected at the drip line during all construction activities. Prior to issuance of any clearing or grading permits, clearing and grading plans shall depict tree retention techniques in conformance with FWCC. 12. Site and architectural design is consistent with FWCC Chapter 22, Article XIX, "Community Design Guidelines," based on provision of the following key design elements: a. The new office building will be oriented to the 6t' Avenue South right-of-way, and features a large two-story glass area and a metal entry canopy to visually articulate the main entry to the building. b. Building walls will be tilt up concrete with cast in place reveals and painted with textured paint. Metal cap flashing, canopy covers and mechanical screen panels will complement the concrete material. The main body of the building will be painted a rich medium brown with darker brown at the center sections of the east and west portions of the building. Recessed areas above the windows will be highlighted with a contrasting green color. Green metal trim color will complement the building trim. c. Horizontally situated banks of insulated anodized aluminum storefront windows line the building facades. d. The eastern fagade, which is longer than 60 feet and visible from the right-of-way, contains code required fagade treatment methods of fagade modulation, a 402 square -foot plaza, which features benches and special landscaping, and a canopied entry. The western fagade, which is longer that 60 feet and visible from the access easement, contains fagade treatment methods of fagade modulation, a 685 square -foot plaza, and landscaping. The southern fagade, which is longer than 60 feet and visible from the access easement, contains building modulation and eight feet of Type II landscaping. e. An internal concrete walkway provides pedestrian route of travel from the main entrance to the 6'' Avenue South right-of-way and to the ingress/egress easement to the south and the parking lot to the north. The pedestrian route of travel on the west side of the building connects the pedestrian plaza to the ingress/egress easement and the building entrance. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide specific information about pedestrian pathway materials, patterns and colors. f. The application demonstrates overall continuity of architectural design while implementing current design standards. 13. The applicant submitted a Concurrency application which has been reviewed by Public Works Traffic staff. The staff report of the Concurrency analysis identifies required mitigation measures for Process III Project Approval, addresses any failures of the City's Level of Service (LOS) standard, Cedar Park Office at West Campus File #07-101624-00-UP/Doc, i n 41915 Findings for Project Approval — Revised Page 3 and provides for the collection of pro-rata share mitigation towards the City's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) projects impacted by the proposed development. Based on the 51,000 square feet of `General Office' building, staff determined project prorated share of $133,513.00 for 103 trips. s However, a previous SEPA application submitted in 2005 for a 19,660 square -foot medical office building on the subject site was reviewed and a DNS was issued for 73 trips. The prorata share from the 2005 SEPA determination was $26,600.00. Prior to issuance of any construction permits for the proposed development, the applicant shall pay the project pro-rata share contribution in the amount of $65,487.00 to the City in order to mitigate the impacts of the 103 new trips generated by the project and meeting the LOS standards. This total is based on the prorata share of $26,600 from the 2005 DNS for 73 trips and the prorata share of $38,887 for 30 additional trips from the 2007 Concurrency Analysis. Impacted Transportation Improvement Plan projects from the 2005 SEPA and the 2007 Concurrency Analysis are listed below: TIP Projects from Concurrency Analysis /,� '4xi r -ir..>+' -.}r �.: ;'�z "`! :a.;�a --{� ..'C.:. �- •�—trc,--' i _ --.c-_��,--y,f•4: 7- _ �,}� — - t�-VIA' 4 i, r s.r ,.;C::'tii,A !•5.. ,, ..i`. R..�e'ti e5�Gf l�}tt�}1 , r•. .t,?u.;•.- ,:a- Design Study, Environmental analysis to improve 150 1 a City Center Access Phase 2 access to City Center $174 150 lb City Center Access Phase 3 Add 2nd SB left-tum lane. 3rd SB right -turn lane $151 Widen S 320th St bridge over I-5, realign loop ramp 150 1 c City Center Access Phase 4 and NB off -ram $1,768 Add HOV lanes, 2nd SB left -turn lane @ 288th, install SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 3: S 284th St - SR raised median, signal @ SR 509 @ Redondo Wy S 141 2 509 with interconnect to 1Ith PI S $5,335 Add HOV )anus, 21ld NB left -turn lanc on SR 99, 138 3 S 348th St: 9th Ave S - SR 99 install raised median, under and utilities $2,055 Add 2nd NB, WB left -turn lanes, WB right -turn lanes, 131 4 S 320th St (a) 1 st Ave S widen 1st Ave S to 5 lanes to S 316th St. $5,364 102 5 SR 99 (u), S 356th St Add WB thru lane, EB, NB left -turn lanes $2,124 - Add HOV lanes, install raised median, underground 143 6 S 320th St: 8th Ave S - SR 99 utilities, illumination Add WB, SB right -turn lanes, 2nd EB, WB left-tum 135 7 S 348th St @ 1 st Ave S lanes $2,323 loth Ave SW / SW 344th St: SW Campus 146 8 Dr - 21st Ave SW Extend 3-lane collectors, sidewalks, street lights $720 148 9 1st Ave S @ S 328th St Install raised median, improve access at 328th $883 139 10 S 320th St @ 20th Ave S Add 2nd left-tum lanes EB, WB $355 2]stAve SW / SW 357th St: SW 356thSt- 137 11 22nd Ave SW Extend 24ane collector, signal modifications $243 SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 4: SR 509 - S 159 12 312th St Add HOV lanes, install raised median $7,304 Add EB, WB right-tum lanes, 3rd WB left -turn lane, 2nd NB right-tum lane, add 3rd lane on SR 161 SB to S 140 13 SR 18 @ SR 161 352nd St $1,395 142 14 SW 312th St @ SR 509 Add EB, WB left -turn lanes $176 157 15 S 356th St: SR 99 - SR 161 Widen to 5 lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks, illumination $1,434 154 16 S 304th St @ 28th Ave S Add NB right -turn lane, signal 3. The final staff evaluation for the Concurrency application, Federal Way File #07-101480-00-CN, is hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth in full. Cedar Park Office at West Campus Findings for Project Approval — Revised File#07-]01624-00-UP/Da t.D 41915 Page 4 151 17 S 352nd St: SR 99 - SR 161 Extend 3 lane principal collector and signal at SR-99 $338 152 18 SW 320th St @ 21 st Ave SW Interconnect to 26th Ave SW with the addition of a 2nd WB left -turn lane $642 131 19 S 320th St: 1st Ave S,- 8th Ave S Add HOV lanes, install raised median $419 166 20 Military Rd S: S Star Lake Rd - S 288th St Widen to 5 lanes. sidewalks, street lights 167 21 SW 320th St , 47th Ave SW Install traffic signal $164 161 22 S 312th St aa, 28th Ave S Add SB right -turn lane 168 23 SW 336th Wy / SW 340th St: 26th PI SW - Hovt Rd Widen to 5 lanes $5,514 Total Mitigation from 2007 Concurrency Analysis (30 trips) f TIP Projects from SEPA: TIP Map TIP Project Name Est. TIP Project Project PM Background Pro-rata Fair -Share #ID Cost Peak Trips p 2007 Volume ° (/o) Contribution 4 S 320'° St @ $5,500,000 15 4,703 0.32% $17,600 I' Ave S 15 S 336' St @ 9" Ave S $100,000 44 2,332 1.89% $1,900 14 SR 18 @ SR 161 $3,000,000 15 6,384 0.235% $7,100 Total SEPA Pro-Rata Contribution for 73 trips $26,600 NOTE: The pro-rata share contribution for each project is calculated based on the following formula: Fair share contribution = Project generated PM peak trips Projected Total PM peak traffic X (TIP project cost— value of right-of-way and frontage improv.) 14. The proposed site plan application and application attachments have been determined to be consistent with the FWCP, with all applicable provisions of the FWCC, and with the public health, safety, and welfare. The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the anticipated demand from the proposal, and the proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration for access. The proposed development is consistent with Process III, Project Approval, decisional criteria required under FWCC Section 22-395(b). The proposed site plan and application attachments have been reviewed for compliance with the FWCP, pertinent zoning regulations, and all other applicable City regulations. Final construction drawings will be reviewed for compliance with specific regulations, conditions of approval, and other applicable City requirements. This decision shall not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. Prepared by: Deb Barker, Senior Planner Cedar Park Office at West Campus Findings for Project Approval — Revised Revised Date: August 15, 2007 File #07-101624-00-UP/Doc LD 41915 Page 5 cu 0 Q E W 0 r U �) zw cc W J W Q m to '3.22.00 C) -7 Ll�lm?k-1 S `TO LvlAbP/'\ .� MA( CONC--'F-Pq� F v� /VtY R i G O T --rC) 5 � � A??--i-7A �— p-c �� o ►� OrjLK IPAJ�.Vlr OF AS R-Eca 1?-- � a v c: c S i RECEIVED AUG 2 2 2007 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY' 13UILDING DEPT. CITY OF �. Federal July 18, 2007 Harold Christensen Lance Mueller & Associates 130 Lakeside, Ste 250 Seattle, WA 98122 L \{FILE CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South y Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com RE: File #07-101624-00-UP; LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS Cedar Park at West Campus, 33455 6cn Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Dear Mr. Christensen: I have had an opportunity to review the revised landscape plan for the above -referenced proposal submitted on June 5, 2007. My comments are based on review of these plans and the Federal Way City Code (FWCC). Prior to the issuance of the building permit for the new office, landscape plans must be revised to reflect the following code requirements: 1. Street trees must be added to the east side of the landscape plan in conformance with FWCC and the right-of-way modification approval. The landscape plan prepared by Brumbaugh and Associates dated June 5, 2007, features Red Oak trees and Western Red Cedar trees along the eastern property line. These trees meet the intent of perimeter trees required under FWCC Section 22-1566(h). Street trees are a separate requirement. These trees must be identified consistent with Public Works Development Standards detail #348, Street Trees, for cross section `R' roadways, and be a minimum of 2-1/2 inch caliper per ANSII standards at the time of planting. Perimeter trees cannot be used for street trees, and street trees cannot be used for perimeter trees. 2. Perimeter landscape areas are required to contain a mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees. The landscape plan depicts evergreen trees only located at the corners of the site, which does not fully provide the mixture of vegetation across the perimeter planting area. Additional evergreen trees must be added along the north and east perimeter planting areas to meet the intent of the perimeter planting requirement. 3. Tree counts for the following trees on the landscape plan do not match the plant schedule symbols: Acer Rubrum, Acer Campestre, Pyrus Calleryana, Fraxinus Pennsylvanica, Psuedotsuga Menziesii, Thuja Plicata and Hinoki Cypress. Please confirm if the symbols or the counts should be followed for all trees as well as all shrubs. Please confirm shrub counts as well and darken connecting identification lines. 4. Some shrubs in key perimeter areas are listed with spread instead of height. Shrubs in perimeter landscape areas must be a minimum of 24 inches in height at the time of planting. Please revise the legend for Viburnum Maresii, Cistus, and Berberis to be 24 inches in height. Mr. Christensen July IS, 2007 Page 2 Native shrubs are proposed to be planted in a row north of and adjacent to the western parking area. This area does not serve as a perimeter planting area; subsequently, these shrubs can be "spread out" and located between the parking lot and the edge of the wetland buffer underneath the retained trees. This planting scheme would serve to augment the retained vegetation and reinforce the wetland buffer area. Any planting within the wetland buffer requires additional land use procedures be met_ If proposed, the wetland buffer must be added to the landscape plan. 6. Add shrubs adjacent to edge related evergreen trees so that the intent of perimeter landscaping is maintained as noted on the red -lined landscape plan. Please submit four (4) copies of the revised landscape plan (L2.0) and revised Plant Schedule (L2.1) with a resubmittal information form. The file number for the building permit application is 07-102510-00-CO. I can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner enc: Red -lined Landscape Plan c: Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Scott Sproul, Acting Assistant Building Official 07-101624 Doc I D 41600 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8`h Avenue South PO Box 9718 CITY OF Federal Way WA 98063-9718 Way RESUBMITTED 253-835-2607;Fax253-835-2609Federa www.cit offederalwa .cant JUN 1 2 2007 CITY OF FEDERAL. WAY HAZARDOUS MATE OX-ITIRVE STATEMENT CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AND WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS I. WHY SHOULD THIS INVENTORY STATEMENT BE FILLED OUT? Critical Aquifer Recharge (CARAs) and Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPAs) are considered "critical areas" pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC), Chapter 18, "Environmental Protection." This inventory statement must be filled out by the applicant or agent for any proposed activity listed in Section II of this handout, and which are located within Wellhead Capture Zones 1, 5, and 10 as shown on the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Areas Maps. Please refer to the handout on Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Areas for a description of the review process. II. ACTIVITIES GOVERNED BY CARA AND W11PA REGULATIONS The inventory statement must be filled out for the following activities: • Construction of any residential structure, including single-family development • Construction of any barn or other agricultural structure • Construction of any office, school, commercial, recreational, service, or storage building • Construction of a parking lot of any size Other minor new construction (see WAC 197-11-800[2]) • Additions or modifications to or replacement of any building or facility (does not include tenant improvements) • Demolition of any structure • Any landfill or excavation • Installation of underground tanks ■ Any division of land, including short plats • Change of use, which involves repair, remodeling, and maintenance activities • Dredging • Reconstruction/maintenance of groins and similar shoreline protection structures • Replacement of utility cables that must be buried under the surface of the bedlands ■ Repair/rebuilding of major dams, dikes, and reservoirs • Installation or construction of any utility, except for on -going operation and maintenance activities of public wells by public water providers • Personal wireless service facilities ► Project Name � u AT' uMors G� ai S Applicant Project Location Tracking No. III. TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Please provide the approximate quantity of the types of hazardous materials or deleterious substances that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of in connection with the proposed activity. If no hazardous materials will be involved, please proceed to Section IV. MATERIAL LIQUID ( allons) SOLID ounds) (1) Acid or basic solutions or solids (2) Antifreeze or coolants 1 j (3) Bleaches, peroxides, detergents, surfactants, disinfectants, bactericides, algaecides (4) Brake, transmission, hydraulic fluids /Z (5) Brine solutions (6) Corrosion or rust prevention solutions (7) Cutting fluids (8) Deicing materials (9) Dry cleaning or cleaning solvents (10) Electroplating or metal finishing solutions (11) Engraving or etching solutions (12) Explosives (13) Fertilizers (14) Food or animal processing wastes (15) Formaldehyde (16) Fuels, additives, oils, greases 6 C' (17) Glues, adhesives, or resins (18) Inks, printing, or photocopying chemicals g (19) Laboratory chemicals, reagents or standards (20) Medical, hospital, pharmaceutical, dental, or veterinary fluids or wastes (21) Metals (hazardous e.g. arsenic, copper, chromium, lead, mercury, silver, etc.) (22) Paints, pigments, dyes, stains, varnish, sealers. _ _ 61 (23) Pesticides, herbicides or poisons (24) Plastic resins, plasticizers, or catalysts (25) Photo development chemicals (26) Radioactive sources (27) Refrigerants, cooling water (contact) (28) Sludges, still bottoms (29) Solvents, thinners, paint removers or strippers 2 (30) Tanning (leather) chemicals (31) Transformer, capacitor oils/fluids, PCB's (32) Waste oil (33) Wood preservatives (34) List OTHER hazardous materials or deleterious substances on a se arate sheet. RESUBMITT J U N 12 2007 ft, Bulletin #056 — November 24, 2004 Page 2 of 3 k:\Handouts\Hazardous Material 7 lJ t'r a�� .ARV I k SU LDiNG DEPT. L4P Project Name ONOC, ,1f 06S C-4NA1..] S Applicant cwz3 Project Location' .J�s (oi h(oi'h �+ts� r7. rt�WA4 Tracking No, IV. FURTHER INFORMATION Provide the approximate quantity of fill and source of fill to be imported to the site. Approximate Quantity of Imported Fill Source of Fill N ^-r - V" -•- -V> G Check box #1 if you do not plan to store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous material or deleterious substance listed in Section III. Check box(s) #2 through #5 (and fill in appropriate blanks) of the below table if they apply to your facility or activity. The proposed development will not store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of #1 [ ] the types and quantities of hazardous materials or deleterious substances listed above. #2 [ ] Above ground storage tanks, having a capacity of gallons will be installed. #3 [ ] Construction vehicles will be refueled on site. Storage within wholesale and retail facilities of hazardous materials, or other deleterious #4 [ ] substances, will be for sale in original containers with a capacity of _ gallons liquid or pounds solid. The presence of chemical substances on this parcel is/will be for "temporary" non -routine F#5 [)(] maintenance or repair of the facility (such as paints and paint thinners) and are in individual containers with a capacity of - gallons liquid or pounds solid. Check any of the following items that currently exist or are proposed in connection with the development of the site. #1 [ ] Stormwater infiltration system (e.g., french drain, dry well, stormwater swale, etc.) #2 ] Hydraulic lifts or elevator, chemical systems, or other machinery that uses hazardous materials #3 [ ] Cathodic protection wells #4 [ ] Water wells, monitoring wells, resource protection wells, piezometers #5 Leak detection devices, training for employees for use of hazardous materials, self-contained machinery, etc. SIGNATURE Signature llate Print Name s If you have any questions about filling out this application form, please call the Department of Community Development Services at 253-835-2607. Please be advised that an application for a developme�i� WITTED lacking the required information will not be accepted. JUN 12 Z007 Bulletin #056 — November 24, 2004 Page 3 of 3 k:\HandoutslHazardous Materials Inven[gr�P6MDERAL. WAY ��.•II BUILDING DEPT. ti CITY OF ti. Federal Way May 22, 2007 Mr. Harold Christensen Lance Mueller & Associates 130 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 "1FILE CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederal wa y. com RE: File #07-101624-00-UP; ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED Cedar Park at West Campus, 33455 6 h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Dear Mr. Christiansen: The City of Federal Way determined that applications for Process III and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the above -referenced office building submitted on March 29, 2007 are complete. The 120-day review clock started as of April 25, 2007. Additional information is requested as noted below to further review of the applications. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED The following comments are based on technical review of the site plan, elevations, landscape plan and civil plans. With this request for additional information, the 120-day maximum review time frame is suspended with 27 of the 120 days used, and it will be restarted within 14 days of the date of your complete response to this request. PLANNING DIVISION, Deb Barker, 253-835-2642 A. Site Plan — Sheet A1.0 1. Building Setback — Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-826,' the side yard setback from a property line or easemenO is twenty feet. The southern side of the property is encumbered by a 15' 6" access easement, and the required twenty -foot building setback must begin outside of this easements As depicted on submitted documents, portions of the southern side of the building intrude into the required twenty -foot setback. In that the proposed office building is `over -parked' by approximately twenty-three parking stalls, it may be possible to eliminate head in parking along the north property line and shift the building north eliminating the setback intrusion. Alternatively, the building footprint could be modified to eliminate the setback intrusion. 2. Sidewalk in Easement — According to comments dated May 8, 2007 from Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineer, the ingress/egress easement on the south side of the site must be widened to include the sidewalk in the easement. As noted above, the structural setback may not include any easement areas. ' FWCC Section 22-826: Office use in OP zoning district. 2 FWCC Section 22-1: Definition of Street. 3 Setback requirements from easements were noted in the preapplication letter as well. Mr. Christensen May 22, 2007 Page 2 3. Retaining Wall Setback— In addition to the building setback intrusion noted above, a four -foot - tall modular block retaining wall is proposed to intrude into the twenty -foot side yard setback area. Retaining walls and rockeries may be located in required yards if they are not being used as a direct structural support for a major improvement and they are reasonably necessary to provide support to a cut or slope.a Provide information to demonstrate how the retaining wall meets these provisions. 4. Garbage Enclosure — Depict the revised layout of the garbage and recycling enclosure on this plan. Enclosure gates must provide a minimum eighteen foot opening. 5. Identify the number of at -grade parking stalls and the number of below -grade parking stalls. 6. Revise the site and building statistics to show no more than forty-eight compact parking stalls, which is twenty-five percent of the 192 parking stalls. 7. There are four site sections at the top of sheet A1.0, and three of them are the same picture. Provide a frame of reference for these details. 8. Civil plans depict an underground vault adjacent to the western plaza. However, the site plan and landscape plans depict a retained significant tree in this location. Revise all plans to be consistent with this sort of relevant information. B. Community Design Guidelines 1. Outdoor Plazas — Outdoor plazas are proposed to provide building favade modulation and screening options required under Design Guidelines FWCC Section 22-1635(b). The plaza at the east side of the building contains seating, special pavement, is bordered by landscaping and is clearly visible and accessible from the adjacent 6a' Avenue South right-of-way. The western. plaza contains special pavement, fixed in place tables and is bordered by landscaping. However, the only pedestrian access to this plaza is from the parking lot or the parking garage. The plaza also sits below grade of the adjacent pedestrian sidewalk and behind a retaining wall. FWCC Section 22-1635(b) (4) states that a pedestrian plaza should be clearly visible and accessible from the adjacent right-of-way. If this plaza is proposed to provide a required treatment method for the west facade, it is recommended that the plaza be connected to the pedestrian sidewalk to ensure accessibility and visibility. 2. It is unclear from building elevations where pedestrian access from the building to the plaza is established. Such a building entrance provides building access for almost half of those parking in the lot and should not be hidden. Provide a sketch that shows the relationship of the plaza, the accompanying building entrance, and the adjacent retaining wall. Staff recommends that the plaza be extended to the west and incorporate at -grade utility manholes, existing vegetation, and other infrastructure through use of retaining walls with built-in seating, a broader pedestrian ramp to the parking lot, etc. 3. Pedestrian Access — Almost 25% of the parking stalls are located at the west end of the site, and pedestrian access from the building to these parking stalls is through the drive aisle. In order to promote pedestrian safety, a dedicated pedestrian connection between the pedestrian sidewalk flanking the south side of the project site and the western parking stalls should be added. 4. As noted in the preapplication letter, a pedestrian connection to the building to the north should be provided. 4 FWCC Section 22-1133(6) 07-101624 Doc I D. 40982 Mr. Christensen May 22, 2007 Page 3 C. Landscape Plan 1. Significant Trees — The tree retention plan notes that 43% of the significant trees are to be retained. Provide a list of the existing significant trees identified on the tree retention plan. Several of the significant trees proposed to be retained are in close proximity to areas proposed for parking lot or retaining construction or utility line work. Tree retention shall include no impacts to retained tree, which may require identification of the root protection zone of a retained tree, and in some cases, may extend protection beyond the drip zone of the tree. If impacts to a significant tree cannot be eliminated, the tree should be removed. Refer to the red - lined plan. 2. Perimeter Landscaping —Under FWCC Section 22-1566(h), ten feet of Type III landscaping is required along those portions of a project fronting a right-of-way.or ingress/egress easement. In the case of Cedar Park, a ten -foot perimeter landscape area must be provided along the east, west and south property lines. Proposed retaining walls intrude into the perimeter landscape requirement along the south side of the site, reducing or eliminating the required landscaping. This may not be an issue when the required side yard setback is provided. However, you may wish to refer to the landscape modification section of FWCC Section 22-1570. In addition, perimeter landscaping is also required in two landscape islands currently proposed as interior parking lot landscaping along the south side of the site. The ten feet of perimeter landscaping must be extended into these islands. Refer to the red -lined plan. 3. Screening of Parked Vehicles — Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1567(e), a landscape perimeter must incorporate a three -foot -tall berm, or thirty-six inch tall plants or a three -foot -tall architectural feature between parked vehicles and the right-of-way. This is required along the east, south and west property lines. Vegetation depicted in these areas does not provide vehicle screening. Refer to the red -lined plan. 4. Show any parking lot lighting on this plan. Lighting shall not replace required interior parking lot landscaping. 5. Additional comments will be provided following review of a revised landscape plan. D. Elevations 1. Rooftop mechanical equipment is required to be screened pursuant to FWCC Section 22-949. Indicate the type of mechanical equipment and the proposed method of screening. 2. Provide information about the building material proposed as window accent. 3. Provide a sample or photograph of the metal siding used on the rooftop. Will this material be incorporated elsewhere on the building? 4. What is the entrance canopy material? 5. What is the width of the reveals? 6. According to building elevations, the front of the office building is approximately 200 feet long, and it rises up four feet above the right-of-way. Visual strength is focused on the center of the building due to both the entrance canopy and dark brown color. However, the balance of the building is pale in color and indistinct. It is recommended that the building base be strengthened through selective use of different materials and/or a change in color. This will harmonize the long fagade to the landscaped ground and integrate with the building center. E. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Following review of the SEPA checklist, the environmental determination can be processed in the next several weeks. An anticipated notice was issued on April 25, 2007, and no comments have been received. 07-101624 Doc I.D. 40982 Mr. Christensen May 22, 2007 Page 4 SUMMARY In summary, applicant responses to identified technical comments for the Process III application are necessary before Process III approval can be granted. With this request for additional information, the 120-day maximum review time frame is suspended with 27 of the 120 days used. It will be restarted within 14 days of the date of your complete response to this request. When resubmitting requested information, please provide four copies of any reports and six copies of any plans, in addition to the green resubmittal form. CANCELLATION Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-34, if an applicant fails to provide additional information to the City within 180 days of being notified that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null and void and the City shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decisions with respect to such an application. If you should have any questions regarding this letter or your development project, please feel free to contact me at 253-835-2642, or deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planper enc: Red -lined site and landscape plans Resubmittal Form c: Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste/Recycling Coordinator 07-101624 Doc. I D 40982 LANCE MUELLER 6 ASSOCIATES A R C H I T E C T 8 A 1 A June 5, 2007 Deb Barker Senior Planner City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98063 RE: Cedar Park at West campus Process III, file #07-101624-00-UP Dear Deb, RESUBMITTED JUN 0 6.2007 CITY WAY BUILFEDEEPDING DEPT. The Cedar Park consultant team has addressed the comments and revisions requested in your letter dated May 22, 2007. In our response letter below, I have indicated the original comment section and comment number for a response from our consultant team. Our response will be in the same order as your comment. A. Site Plan — Sheet A1.0 1. The building has been relocated north so that the building will remain outside the easements along the southern property line. Please see revised sheet A1.0. 2. The building has been relocated north so that the building will remain outside the easements along the southern property line. Please see revised sheet A1.0. 3. Due to the building moving north, we will have the distance to gently slope grade to the building without the use of a retaining wall at the south face of the building. 4. The garbage enclosure has been relocated to allow easy access for the garbage collector. The gates will provide the 18'-0" opening as requested. 5. The number of at grade and below grade stalls has been added to the Site & Building Statistics. 6. Due to the building moving north, the parking layout and count has been revised to reflect the loss of 7 stalls. The compact stalls shown on the site plan have been reduced to 45 stalls or 24% of the 185 total shown. 7. Due to the site changes made as a result of this letter, one site section will remain. The section callout is shown on the enlarged plan for the north exterior stair. 130 Lakeside Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 206) 325-2553 Fax (206) 328-0554 Architecture Planning Space Planning Interiors 8. The western plaza has been relocated farther away from the vault. The location of the trees to remain has been coordinated throughout the plans and is now consistent. B. Community Design Guidelines The western plaza has been redesigned. Access to the plaza has been provided from the new sidewalk along the southern right-of-way. Pedestrian access from the building and parking area has also been centralized utilizing painted pathway within the parking garage and colored concrete entry within the parking area. The plaza will also utilize a modular block wall as a defining element and built in bench. Please see enlarged Outdoor Plaza plan 28/A1.1. 2. Please see comment 1 above. The entrance to the building has been defined through central pedestrian access near the center of the west face of the building. A colored/stamped concrete island has been added along with a walkway through the parking garage to the elevator. Please see sheet A1.0, enlarged Outdoor Plaza plan 28/A1.1 and sheet A2.0. 3. A central pedestrian access point has been added to the west face of the building. Pedestrians will be able to clearly identify where to walk. Once at the walkway, the pathway through the parking garage will be identified by the yellow painted pathway marking on the concrete slab within the garage area. 4. After visiting the site, looking at the adjacent neighbors (Windermere) design drawings and reviewing site photos, a pedestrian connection outside of the existing sidewalk would be hard to provide and redundant. The property to the north has a meandering sidewalk from the building entry to the sidewalk located along the west face of 6th Avenue south. The existing grade between the two sites would not allow a walkway connection without filling a small gulley and removal of existing planting. The existing grades and planting will further discourage anyway from attempting to cut through the gulley that separates the two sites. We believe the sidewalk that fronts 6th Avenue south is the appropriate pedestrian connection for the two sites. C. Landscape Plan 1. The significant trees shown on the previous plans were inadvertently shown in the wrong location on two of the three consultant plan sets. We have corrected the error and show the trees in the proper location. The Landscape architect has determined which trees should remain based on the proposed work in the vicinity. As work begins, we will also monitor the construction activity near trees and make additional assessment at that time. The tree preservation plan (sheet 1-1.0) has been revised to show tree species. The original tree survey only contained fir and Madrona trees. (No Alder, cottonwood or broad leaf Maple were contained in the tree preservation plan.) 2. The landscape plans have been revised to comply with the required Type III landscaping section. 3. The civil and landscape plans have been revised to show a 1 foot high berm with 24" high planting for the screening of parked vehicles. 4. Parking lot light lighting has been added to the landscape plan for referenc fIESUBMITTED 5. Comment noted. JUN 0 5 2007 CITY fOF FEDERAL WAY 130 Lakeside Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 (206) 325-2553 Fax (2p6 13 8 055 EPT. re ('fanning D. Elevations 1. The exact location and type of the rooftop equipment is not known at this time. Sheet A1.2 shows a large screened area for the future rooftop equipment. Depending on the potential tenant layout, the depicted screened area should be ample encapsulate the future tenants needs. 2. The accent area above the windows is concrete. The area has been recessed and will be painted a green color as depicted on the building rendering. 3. The mechanical screen material is a corrugated metal building panel that will likely match the main building color or on of the accent colors. 4. The entrance canopy will consist of a curved 12" metal C channel at the perimeter with corrugated metal decking over the covered area. 5. The reveals measure 2" high from top to bottom. 6. The owner has asked that the building colors have deeper tones than most buildings found in proximity to the proposed cedar park project. We currently show a rich brown color at the building entrance and center points of each face. The remaining areas will have the brown main body color with accent colors above each window. Furthermore the base of the building will be established by new landscaping along each face. Unlike an office building with windows at grade level, we have parking garage openings we are aiming to screen with the use of landscaping. This landscaping also provides a strong base complimenting our three building colors. Attachment: 1. Sheet A2.0, P1 Parking Level for use by planning department review of covered parking area. I would like to offer that we are readily available to meet with you to go over any questions you may have regarding this resubmittal. I can be reached at (206) 325-2553. As I have iterated numerous times, we hope to begin site work this summer and hope we have satisfied your concerns with our project. Thank you, Harold Christensen Architect Lance Mueller & Associates Cc: Michael Hill / Rhapsody partners RESUBMITTED JUN 0 5 2007 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 130 Lakeside Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 206325-2553 Fax Architecture Planning Space Planning Interiors CITY OF � Federal May 4, 2007 Herb Brooks c/o Neil Walter Company P.O. Box 2181 Tacoma WA 98401 COPY CITY HALL Way 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Subject: Garbage/Recycling enclosure location serving 500 SW 336`h St. Dear Mr. Brooks: Your name and company appear on refuse customer data available for the property located at 500 SW 336"' in Federal Way. A parcel directly north of the above -referenced property is undergoing development review by the City of Federal Way, and appears headed for construction in the coming months. An existing enclosure accessed by the above referenced property appears to encroach on the new development's parcel. As such, this enclosure location will likely need to change. Presumably the access road on the north side of this property will remain open into the future. Therefore the NE corner of the property may be a good location for a new enclosure, facing east to allow service access. In general, enclosure dimensions of 10' depth and 20' width, with gates that span the entire width and swing clear of the opening, will accommodate two refuse containers, such as are now used at this property. In order to allow lead time, this letter is being sent in advance of pending changes that may impact this property. A new enclosure may require a building permit or development review by the City. Please contact Deb Barker, Senior Planner in the City's Community Development Department at 253.835.2642 or deb.barker cDcityoffedcralway.colii for information on any permits that may be required if you elect to change the enclosure location. Sincerely, Rob Van Orsow Solid Waste & Recycling Coordinator RV:mo cc: Deb Barker, Senior Planner Day File K:\SWR\p1anning$regs\500 S 336th.doc FEOERAL,WAY - ORALI A SOUND MURK NEWSPAPER Affidavit of Publication Debbie Kaufman, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is the Publisher of The Federal Way Mirror, a semi -weekly newspaper. That said newspaper is published in the English language continually as a semi -weekly newspaper in Federal Way, King County. Washington, and is now and during all of said time has been printed in an office maintained at the aforementioned place of publication of said newspaper. That the annexed is a true copy of a legal advertisement placed by City of Federal Way L-1248 as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplemental form) of said newspaper once each week for a period of one consecutive week(s), commencing on the 28th day of April, 20007 , and ending on the28th day of April, 2007. both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its readers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ 167.28 which amount has been paid in full, or billed at the legal rate according to RCW 65.16.090 Subscribed to and sworn before me this 3rd day of May 2007. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Residing at Federal Way .w •iy PUB! • F O: ,t 1414 S. 324th STREET, SUIT[ 8210, f[DERAL WAY, WA 98003 z 253-925-5565 = f AX: 253-925-5750 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION AND NOTICE OF OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSiGNIFICANCE tDNS) Project. Name Cedar Park at West Cam Us Project Description: Proposed 59,990 square400t office building with 192 parkin stalls and site improvements on an vndeve oped 3.01 -acre site, Applicant: Harold Christensen, Lance Muller & Associates. 130 Lakeside, Seattle, WA 98122 Project Location: 33455 6th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Date Application Received: March 29, 2007 Date Determined Complete: April 25, 2007 Date of Notice of Application: April 28, 2007 Comment Due Date: May 14, 2007 Permits Required by This Application: Pro- cess ill Approval (File #07-101624•UP), En- vironmental Review (File #07.101626.00- SE), Concurrency {File #07.101480-00-CN}, Engineering (07.102638-00-EN) Other Permits Known at this Time and Not in- cluded in This Application; 05-100807-UP, 05.100808-SE Existlna Environmental documents; SEPA Checkllst, Technical lntormatton Repori, uoncurrency Relevant Environmental Documents Are Available at the Address Below: X Yes No Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Review Known at this Time: Federal Way City Cade {FWCC} Chapters 18, 21. and 22 Optional Environmental Determination: Based upon review of a completed environ- mental checklist and other information on life with the Clty, it is likely that the City of Feder- al Way will determine that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. It Is likely that an Envl- ronmental Impact Statement (EIS)) will not be required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The City anticipates that a Determination of Non - significance DNS} will be issued for the pro- posed project. The optional DNS process in WAC 197.11-355 is being used. Tile propo- sal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the review process may incorporate or require mitigation meas- ures regardless of whether an EIS is pre pared. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request- (In addition, the lead agency may choose to maintain a gen- erai mailing list threshold determination dis- Mbution.) Integrated Comment-Perled�-Con- sistent with the provisions of WAC 'f97-11- 355, a single mte�rated comment period will be utilized to obtain comments on the Notice of Land Use Application and Notice of C p- tional Determination of Nonslgnificance. This may he the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. Any person may submit written comments an the iand use application or the environmental impacts of the proposal to the Director of Communit Development Services by 5:00 p,rn, 0rl May 14, 2007. Persons who submit written comments to ,he Director, or specifl- caily request a copy of the declslon, may aD- peal the Process If decision. However. any Interested partyy may appeal the environ- mental threshold determination, Details of appeal pprcceduras for the requested land use do mon will be included with the written decision. Issuance of Final Environmentai Determina- tion: The final Determination of Nonsignlfi. cance may be Issued without a second corn, meet period, unless timely comments identify probable significant adverse impacts that were not considered by the Notice of Op- tional Determination of Nonsignlflcance. A copy of the Determination of Nonslgnlficance may be obtained upon request. Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: Development of the site is sub- ject to all applicable Citycodes_ and regula- tions, Including FWCC Zonin , Environmer- tell rfutecilo �, Landscaping,LDm!Y!'inity ❑P- sign Guidelines, Environmental Protection, and Planning and Development Chapters. The official projeot file is available for public review at the Department of Community De- velopment Services, 33325 8th Avenue South, PO Box 9718. Federal Way, WA 98063-9718, City Staff Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835.2642 FWM#•1248 Date of publication: OV28107 FILE CITY OF L Federal Way April 27, 2007 Harold Christensen Lance Mueller & Associates 130 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com RE: File #07-101624-00-UP; COMPLETE APPLICATION Cedar Park at West Campus, 33455 6`t' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Dear Mr. Christensen: On March 29, 2007, the City of Federal Way's Department of Community Development Services received your Process III Land Use application and environmental checklist to construct a 50,990 square -foot office building. Revisions to the application were received on April 25, 2007. The site is zoned Office Park (OP). According to code regulations, upon receipt of an application the City has 28 days to determine whether all information and documentation required for a complete application pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-33 has been submitted_ NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Please consider this letter as a Letter of Complete Application. Pursuant to the FWCC, the application is deemed complete as of April 25, 2007, based on a review of your submittal relative to those requirements as set out in the Development Requirements checklist. A 120-day time line for reviewing the SEPA and Process III applications has started as of this date. The City has 120 days from the date that an application is deemed complete to take action on the application_ However, the 120-day time line can be stopped at any time that the City requests additional information. You will be informed of the status of the 120-day time line when you are notified in writing that additional information is needed_ Having met the submittal requirements, your application is now ready for processing. Therefore, pursuant to the FWCC, a Notice of Application will be published in the Federal Way Mirror within 14 days and other public notice will be given based on City procedures. The Department of Community Development Services has responsibility to notify other agencies that may have jurisdiction over your development project or an interest in it. Please be advised that technical comments on the application will be available in approximately thirty days. If you should have any questions regarding this letter or your development project, please feel free to call me at 253- 835-2642. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner c: Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Traffic Engineer Rob VanOrsow, Recycling Coordinator Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District Doc I.D. 40646 FILE CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION AND NOTICE OF OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Project Name_ Cedar Park at West Campus Project Description: Proposed 50,990 square -foot office building with 192 parking stalls and site improvements on an undeveloped 3.01-acre site_ Applicant_ Harold Christensen, Lance Muller & Associates, 130 Lakeside, Seattle, WA 98122 Project Location 33455 6t' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Date Application Received.' March 29, 2007 Date Determined Complete: April 25, 2007 Date of Notice of Application.- April 28, 2007 Comment Due Date_ May 14, 2007 Permits Required by This Application: Process III Approval (File #07-101624-UP), Environmental Review (File #07-101626-00-SE), Concurrency (File #07-101480-00-CN), Engineering (07-102638-00-EN) Other Permits Known at this Time and Not Included in This Application: 05-100807-UP, 05-100808-SE Existing Environmental Documents: SEPA Checklist, Technical Information Report, Concurrency Relevant Environmental Documents Are Available at the Address Below: X Yes No Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Review Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapters 18, 21, and 22 Optional Environmental Determination Based upon review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the City, it is likely that the City of Federal Way will determine that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. It is likely that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). The City anticipates that a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) will be issued for the proposed project. The optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355 is being used. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared_ A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request. (In addition; the lead agency may choose to maintain a general mailing list threshold determination distribution.) Doc- 1 D 40648 M Integrated Comment Period: Consistent with the provisions of WAC 197-11-355, a single integrated comment period will be utilized to obtain comments on the Notice 'of Land Use Application and Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal_ Any person may submit written comments on the land use application or the environmental impacts of the proposal to the Director of Community Development Services by 5:00 p.m. on May 14, 2007. Persons who submit written comments to the Director, or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the Process III decision However, any interested party may appeal the environmental threshold determination Details of appeal procedures for the requested land use decision will be included with the written decision. Issuance of Final Environmental Determination_ The final Determination of Nonsignificance may be issued without a second comment period, unless timely comments identify probable significant adverse impacts that were not considered by the Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. A copy of the Determination of Nonsignificance may be obtained upon request. Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: Development of the site is subject to all applicable City codes and regulations, including FWCC Zoning, Environmental Protection, Landscaping, Community Design Guidelines, Environmental Protection, and Planning and Development Chapters. The official project file is available for public review at the Department of Community Development Services, 33325 8`h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718_ City Staff 'Conlact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 Published in the Federal Way Mirror on April 28, 2007. Doc I D 40648 CeG r Park at West Gamms CITY OF �- :"— 33455 6th Avenue South Federal Way Parcel No. 926500-0340 8330 S1 O Pry used Site S,335s, S 337 LN 337 LN 339 CR S 338 ST cp S 338 PL s cn* C,3 File #07-101624-UP Z\ N S 336 S d y y CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityo €€ederalway.c�rr3 DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) LP Notice of Land Use Application & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ;&mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2007. Project Name - CJ - � 1V 12 1-tst `_� fbk st File Numbers). _ 67 - J -b / G D N - U �, _ 6-2-1 b l/,;IG- S t Signature Date K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Uslribution.doc/Last printed 1 /8/2007 4:34:00 PM Map Date: March 26, 2006 City of Federal Way City of 300ft Vicinity from P.0.Bi 97 P.O. Box 9718 e S- Tax Parcel 926500-0340 Federal3325 ayWa. Federal Way Federal Way 00 98063 (206) - 835 - 7000 www.c ityoffed a ralway. co m 172104 9121 132140 172104 9103 926470 0120 92650 0195 926500 0200 926500 0215 926500 0210 926500 0220 926500 0258 ¢Q 33 b 92650C 0755 i s 926470 0040 926500 0250 926500 0240 926504 0010 926500 0350 926500 926500 0160 S 333R[D ST 0170 926500 0173 926500 0180 y'( 926500 Q� 0120 926500 Ib 0190 926500 city 9L cP Hall 926500 0260 �tk �3 159440 c000 1 N ST S 33�YH 926504 926504 0180 0190 92 5504 } 0080 Q 9285M D160 � - TLi]S��M� _l �• 926509 0D6v 6y, 926500 qL 0330 S 926500 0110 172104 I 9138 926501 0120 pry �9 926501 0100 926500 S 335 �H 5T 1 0340 976500 1 0asa 926500 926500 0020 OD40 926500 S, 926500 926500 0385 0030 L 0370 S 336YH ST 926480 0190 1l 926460 0205 S 338TH S 1 926480 926480 0220 6235 926480 F 926480 0210 f 0180 D Legend Subject Site 300' Notification Area CITY OF j King County Tax Lots N Fed aL , YRAL WAY Notify 0 100 200 400 SUILOING Tax Parcels to Noti This map is intended for use as a graphkal represwdMian O�P7'. 'Y Feet The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy H N a� N N d Q 3 � O C E C •C� O G � C -0 U C w C U) E J Z cc O Z L O o o N CD CL N_ X M H ` C �- d Oa t v C Cl) J v 0 0 0 0 0�71 0 r, 0 0 - 0 0 L 00 C� Cl� C� C� oN 0) CN o\ 0 u a a t rA cn rACIO C/) cnC/) z z z z z z z z z O u o O O O o O O 3 q w w w w w w w w w r . ) �n r, �n r. �n .n �n L �n r. �n k �n �n r, v, O O O O O O O O O x x x x x x x x x U U U U U U U U U u w w w w w w w w w O O O O O O O O O 7_ U U U U U U U U U L¢ EE Q Z Q Z¢ ¢ Z¢ z¢ Q Z Q ¢ Q ¢ d ¢ Q Q ¢ Q u ¢ ¢ '- L ¢ Z ¢ z ¢ z ¢ ¢ ¢ z z z ¢ C w w w w w w w w w O O O O O O O O O U U U U U U U U U - o O 0 O 0� O O o o O O 00 O CD O O O O O O O ch O O O O V O O V O O O O O O J Ln n n1�2 n IL *I r N m It Uo CO ti 00 O) I'm 0 CL d d cc J cm C tv 0-1 .-'f FICCEIVED MAR 2 9 2007 -CITY OF FEOEfIAL WAY BUILDING DEPT, 0 a� 0) m IL Ez H d Z O L c m� Co CL N LX M r ) OQ = a N J M O O M N O M O O M O O 00 a\ ¢ O M 00 00 00 00 CT ¢ M 00 CT o00 00 CT d kk 3 M o N o, ozo 00 3 p¢ 00 o 3 z J 3 z Q Q Q 3 z 3 3 a as � Qa -> x x ° "' U w O O w O O O �D �D o o O O W U) cn DO E� cn W d w ¢ wk d W o W C/) W IJ > Li ] Cl) ~ O O M N Cf) N M N O N c�O E O M O N O O M t M M N CV N N P, M O\ i W Q � W 0 0 o x C-1 U o>"O> o>"o>> uo Owo3 U�U�U�U UEU t U a � O U CIO U O O z U zcoo a U Q Q Q z w z u o� O 3 3 d8 W a E" rw LI a a U 0 t O rx c4 r� uo w O> Q 0 z x L y w a 3 a O 0 Cf O 0 M p C7 Q O if)�10 O O O O V7 N v1 vi N O- 0 C4 C.C7 M M wl M W') V'1 M O M Vl 00 M D J 0 CD C- 0 Ca o O C) O O O O CD O o O C. a CD O CD a C7 CD O 0 C v 0 C7 CDO O O O 0 CD O 0 _ 'cr V W" 10 W' %0 wl �O Vl �O N �o ON vi k^ � W" %D � V ] %O V) I'o W) 110 01 \�o C:N CN D+ ON � 011 C % f.1 ONi r N CO V LO CO ti 00 m O r T T N r M r L RECEIVED C1 MAR 2 9 2001 QVTY QF FS�DF WAY BUILDIN© �r-�: CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION AND NOTICE OF OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Project Name. Cedar Park at West Campus Project Description: Proposed 50,990 square -foot office.building with 192 parking stalls and site improvements on an undeveloped 3.01-acre site. Applicant: Harold Christensen, Lance Muller & Associates, 130 Lakeside, Seattle, WA 98122 Project Location: 33455 6'h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Dale Application Received: March 29, 2007 Date Determined Complete: April 25, 2007 Date of Notice of Application: April 28, 2007 Comment Due Dale: May 14, 2007 Permits Required by This Application: Process III Approval (File #07-101624-UP), Environmental Review (File #07-101626-00-SE), Concurrency (File #07-101480-00-CN), Engineering (07-102638-00-EN) Other Permits Known at this Time and Not Included in This Application: 05-100807-UP, 05-100808-SE Existing Environmental Documents: SEPA Checklist, Technical Information Report, Concurrency Relevant Environmental Documents Are Available at the Address Below: X Yes No Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Review Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapters 18, 21, and 22 Optional Environmental Determination: Based upon review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the City, it is likely that the City of:Federal Way will determine that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. It is likely that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). The City anticipates that a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) will be issued for the proposed project. The optional DNS process in WAC 197-1 1-355 is being used_ The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless Of whether an EIS is prepared. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request. (In addition, the lead agency may choose to maintain a general mailing list threshold determination distribution_) Doc. I D 40648 Integrated Comment Period: Consistent with the provisions of WAC 197-11-355, a single integrated comment period will be utilized to obtain comments on the Notice of Land Use Application and Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal_ Any person may submit written comments on the land use application or the environmental impacts of the proposal to the Director of Community Development Services by 5:00 p.m. on May 14, 2007. Persons who submit written comments to the Director, or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the Process III decision. However, any interested party may appeal the environmental threshold determination_ Details of appeal procedures for the requested land use decision will be included with the written decision. Issuance of Final Environmental Determination_ The final Determination of Nonsignificance may be issued without a second comment period, unless timely comments identify probable significant adverse impacts that were not considered by the Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. A copy of the Determination of Nonsignificance may be obtained upon request. Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: Development of the site is subject to all applicable City codes and regulations, including FWCC Zoning, Environmental Protection, Landscaping, Community Design Guidelines, Environmental Protection, and Planning and Development Chapters. The official project file is available for public review at the Department of Community Development Services, 33325 8`h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718_ City Staff Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 Published in the Federal Way Mirror on April 28, 2007. Doc I D 40648 1� ' ... - 'd!!1ar Pk 1t campus CITY OF 33455 6th Avenue South Federal Way Parcel No. 926500-0340 —U0 I 8330SI g� CP w Z Si�te- S 337 LN 337 cn LN 339 GR 5.338 ST Cf S 338 PL Cn File #07-1Q9624-UP Z\ N S336S t 1 CITY OF Federal il'Ilay NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION AND NOTICE OF OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Project Name: Cedar Park at West Campus Project Description: Proposed 50,990 square -foot office building with 192 parking stalls and site improvements on an undeveloped 3.01-acre site. Applicant: Harold Christensen, Lance Muller & Associates, 130 Lakeside, Seattle, WA 98122 Project Location: 33455 6�' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Date Application Received: March 29, 2007 Date Determined Complete: April 25, 2007 Date of Notice of Application: April 28, 2007 Comment Due Date: May 14, 2007 Permits Required by This Application: Process III Approval (File #07-101624-UP), Environmental Review (File #07-101626-00-SE), Concurrency (File #07-101480-00-CN), Engineering (07-102638-00-EN) Other Permits Known at this Time and Not Included in This Application: 05-100807-UP, 05-100808-SE Existing Environmental Documents: SEPA Checklist, Technical Information Report, Concurrency Relevant Environmental Documents Are Available at the Address Below: X Yes — No Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Review Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapters 18, 21, and 22 Optional Environmental Determination: Based upon review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the City, it is likely that the City of Federal Way will determine that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. It is likely that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21C,030(2)(c). The City anticipates that a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) will be issued for the proposed project. The optional DNS process in WAC 197-1 1-355 is being used. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request. (In addition, the lead agency may choose to maintain a general mailing list threshold determination distribution.) Doc. LD 40648 Integrated Comment Period: Consistent with the provisions of WAC 197-11-355, a single integrated comment period will be utilized to obtain comments on the Notice of Land Use Application and Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. Any person may submit written comments on the land use application or the environmental impacts of the proposal to the Director of Community Development Services by 5:00 p.m. on May 14, 2007. Persons who submit written comments to the Director, or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the Process III decision. However, any interested party may appeal the environmental threshold determination. Details of appeal procedures for the requested land use decision will be included with the written decision. Issuance of Final Environmental Determination. The final Determination of Nonsignificance may be issued without a second comment period, unless timely comments identify probable significant adverse impacts that were not considered by the Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. A copy of the Determination of Nonsignificance may be obtained upon request. Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: Development of the site is subject to all applicable City codes and regulations, including FWCC Zoning, Environmental Protection, Landscaping, Community Design Guidelines, Environmental Protection, and Planning and Development Chapters. The official project file is available for public review at the Department of Community Development Services, 33325 8`h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718. City Staff Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 Published in the Federal Way Mirror on April 28, 2007. Doc. [ D. 40648 Ceaar Park at, West Campus CI'" OF 33455 6th Avenue South ,A Federal Way Parcel No. 926500-0340 330 Sl Lpw IZ- Pro used site S 337 LN 337 LN 339 CR UY 338 ST- S 338 PL cn Fill #07-'[01624-UP �a 417 Z\ N a s- UI CL S 336 S CITY OF '�'L"'' "77-7777. Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 81h Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA- 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.c itvo f f ed e ra Iwoy. c o rn DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I 1Ahereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) V. Notice of Land Use Application & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ffi e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on Apl- aZ 2007. Project Name ,t C File Number(s) 072. , . P . Q-?-)b1 Signature Date ` -d &-aa0 K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1 /8/2007 4:34:00 PM CITY OF `=+ Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION AND NOTICE OF OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Project Name: Cedar Park ai West Campus Project Description: Proposed 50,990 square -foot office building with 192 parking stalls and site improvements on an undeveloped 3.01-acre site. Applicant: Harold Christensen, Lance Muller & Associates, 130 Lakeside, Seattle, WA 98122 Project Location: 33455 6"' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Date Application Received: March 29, 2007 Date Determined Complete: April 25, 2007 Date of Notice of Application: April 28, 2007 Comment Due Date: May 14, 2007 Permits Required by This Application: Process III Approval (File #07-101624-UP), Environmental Review (File #07-101626-00-SE), Concurrency (File #07-101480-00-CN), Engineering (07-102638-00-EN) Other Permits Known at this Time and Not Included in This Application: 05-100807-UP, 05-100808-SE Existing Environmental Documents: SEPA Checklist, Technical Information Report, Concurrency Relevant Environmental Documents Are Available at the Address Below: X Yes No Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Review Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapters 18, 21, and 22 Optional Environmental Determination: Based upon review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the City, it is likely that the City of Federal Way will determine that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. It is likely that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The City anticipates that a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) will be issued for the proposed project. The optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355 is being used. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request. (In addition, the lead agency may choose to maintain a general mailing list threshold determination distribution.) Doc f.D- 40648 Integrated Comment Period. Consistent with the provisions of WAC 197-11-355, a single integrated comment period will be utilized to obtain comments on the Notice of Land Use Application and Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. Any person may submit written comments on the land use application or the environmental impacts of the proposal to the Director of Community Development Services by 5:00 p.m. on May 14, 2007. Persons who submit written comments to the Director, or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the Process III decision. However, any interested party may appeal the environmental threshold determination. Details of appeal procedures for the requested land use decision will be included with the written decision. Issuance of Final Environmental Determination: The final Determination of Nonsignificance may be issued without a second comment period, unless timely comments identify probable significant adverse impacts that were not considered by the Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance. A copy of the Determination of Nonsignificance may be obtained upon request. Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: Development of the site is subject to all applicable City codes and regulations, including FWCC Zoning, Environmental Protection, Landscaping, Community Design Guidelines, Environmental Protection, and Planning and Development Chapters. The official project file is available for public review at the Department of Community Development Services, 33325 8`h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718. City Staff Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 Published in the Federal Way Mirror on April 28, 2007. Doc 1 D 40648 Iamarl=ix - Re: Legal Notice From: Teryl Heller <theller@fedwaymirror.com> To: "Tamara Fix"<Tamara. Fix@cityoffederalway.com > Date: 4/26/2007 12:07:24 PM Subject: Re: Legal Notice As per telcon---received and will be in 4/28/07 issue. Thanks, Tamara, Teryl Heller Federal Way Mirror 1414 South 324th Street, Suite B210 Federal Way, WA 98003 (phone) 253-925-5565 (fax) 253-925-5750 On Apr 26, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Tamara Fix wrote: > Please publish the following legal notice (Cedar Park NOA & Opt DNS, > 07-101624) in Saturday's (April 28, 2007) issue. > Please furnish an affidavit of publication. > Thank you, > Tamara Fix > Administrative Assistant > City of Federal Way > PO Box 9718 > Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 > 253-835-2602 41k CITY Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 81h Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I, _ Ach(ltdw �&M hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) LKotice of Land Use Application & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or C�osted to or at each of the attached addresses on • 27 2007. J Project Name File Number(s) 0 0 Signature cJ S Date '-(' Z-7•Zdn7 K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Disiribulion.doc/Last printed 1/2/2007 2:25:00 PM Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall — 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way Regional Library — 34200 ls` Way South Federal Way 3201h Branch Library — 848 South 320t" Street CITY OF Federal Way DATE: April 20, 2007 MEMORANDUM Public Works Department TO: Deb Barker FROM: Kevin Peterson SUBJECT: CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS (fka RHAPSODY) - (07-101624-00-UP) 33455 6TH AVE S Public Works Development Services has reviewed the SEPA Checklist and Land Use Application materials, and find it to be complete, with the following request for additional information: SEPA Issues: Item A.10. — A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit is required to be obtained from the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), as construction will disturb over 1 acre of the site. Land Use (Civil Plans): Show all existing locatable easements, indicating width and purpose of easement. Street improvement and site access requirements will be addressed in the City's response to the applicant's right of way modification request letter. The applicant's request to place the water quality facility in below ground vaults will be addressed in a separate response letter. CITY OF A. Federal April 23, 2007 CI fY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Way Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. corn Mr. Harold Christensen Lance Mueller & Associates 130 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 Re: File #07-101624-00-UP; INCOMPLETE APPLICATION Cedar Park at West Campus, 33455 61h Avenue South, Federal Way Dear Mr_ Christensen: The above referenced application, as filed on March 29, 2007, was reviewed for completeness by the Development Review Committee (DRC) at their meeting on April 19, 2007. The DRC determined the application to be incomplete as identified below. Critical Area Intrusions — The site plan submitted with your application depicts a Category II wetland located northwest of the subject site with the 100 foot wetland buffer extending onto the site.' Proposed is a 1,206 square foot parking lot intrusion into the eastern end of the wetland buffer_ Buffer averaging under Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-1359(b), is proposed to address this wetland intrusion. However, the site plan does not fully depict the extent of the wetland buffer intrusion identified on the Buffer Averaging Plan,' which depicts a manhole and over 100 feet of storm pipe extending through the wetland buffer to the wetland edge. While the pipe may be buried, both the manhole and the pipe are regulated as permanent intrusions into the wetland setback. As such, these intrusions require Process IV review under FWCC Section 22-1359(f), "Modifications." Process IV review includes additional filing fees and a public hearing that is conducted by the Federal Way Hearing Examiner. If this wetland buffer intrusion is proposed, the following information must be submitted before the application will be determined to be complete: • Additional application fees in the amount of $1,423.00, to fund the difference between Process III and Process IV applications. • Formal written responses to decisional criteria in FWCC Section 22-1359(0, prepared by a qualified professional biologist. Two sets of mailing envelopes for notice of application and notice of hearing. As -built plans for the adjacent Windermere property depict the 100 foot wetland buffer ending in a different location than depicted on your site plan. A copy of this plan is enclosed. Please address this discrepancy - Buffer averaging drawing prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers dated March 28, 2007, text author unknown. File H07- 1 0162-1-00-UP Doc 1 D 40580 Mr. Harold Christensen Page 2 April 23, 2007 Any resubmittal shall be accompanied by the City's resubmittal form (enclosed). Within 14 days of a complete response to this request, City staff will notify you of the status of completeness and technical review. Please note that formal technical review will commence following determination of a complete application. Please contact me at 253-835-2645, or deb.barkerfei cit ynffederalwa y.cotii, should you have any questions about this letter. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner Enc: Windermere As -Built Plan Resubmittal Information Form c: Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Barghausen Consulting Engineers, 18215 72"d Avenue South, Kent, WA 98032 File M07-101624-00-UP Doc I D 40580 Sig 317 t 1. 317-16 < TW 317--7_ FENCU SPLIT RAIL ALONG.,"BUFFER LINE TAIL 10-92 FG/ TWt, 1.7. 0 100 LF BIOSWALE u SEE DEFfAIL �1. S q. .1, ,y S Env TW��_ 3 T FG` 312-,0 Dn�IT 0' L :BERM E.W 4 ELEVATION I �W 316.8 V7 ROCK/WALL SEE FG 310.0 70 DETAIL!` (�6"� C:4:-1 TW 316. FIG 310.0 DEBRIS BARRIER SEE\ DETAIL' _". W-4 TW U FG 310.0 P N F- 8� TW .312-0 DO FG 310-0 304.09 IE D5.06 IE 366.66 N 17 LF 8*0 0 12* 1 % ,,22 LF 12190 31 -@. 0.5 %--- CB TYPE 11, WO -,,,'---W/SOUD LOCKING LID 307-63 CONTROL MANHOLE SEE- -DETAIL RIM "312.90 311.87 12" 1E. .62 303.87 30 .50 6'., BERYL j2 -LF'12N CB TYPE it, /ELr 0 6,.�.86 4 OVER BUILD 3 W/8OLIDtOQ -KING LID RIM 568.08 307.93 Ei== Cj 24' I.E. �,=`�03.93 (NE,SW) 'E. 47 I.E.," 505.93`(NE)_ 100 to. Ott bPJ414 AKY blWILM N_ u N INST INTEGRAL 317.6 CURB & SIDEWALK PER DETAIL TYP. 'e. 7.30 2 A DIUMPSTER ENCLOSURE SEE[ DETAILS-4- - 4d :3 8@4 \% 17.7 i . Q �- / 315.0 317.2 FG LOO 11 3114 FF 0.54 36EXIS FIRE 3, DRAINAGE LINE OR FIF RIM 5 316 SINGLE DETECTORi-CHECK FG 5141_5_ 317.0 CMU,WAl! WW-SPJJT RAiL 24" VALVE ASSEMBLY VAULWil 00 FE/NCE SEE DETAILS f 7, 3 D FIG 311,5-` 312.1-90U1 G4 oo F, 0.11 j ELF _7 F-10SITION ALONG, 0o000 /I STALL SPILT RAIL FENCE 6� _-j 1OP OF WALLS OVER 2.5' HIGH I.E.I.E.-3 12 TYPICAL x SEE DETAILS EXISTING ST6Rlif X GXE9 TW 31-X n 3 DRAINAGE SEMI? FG- 311.0 X 1 ♦-VIP �w b NOTE, PROPOSED FOUNDATION FOOTING bRAIN x-5�i. 0 ROCKWALLS OVER 4' REQUIRE SEPARATE BUILDING PE ♦ 83LF 4 0 , J Z11 .24 ♦ SPILT RAIL FENCE 3 moo POND ACCESS ROAD C4 SEE DETAIL ( 3 1D 310.97 309.76 4 0 STORMWATER MANA 2L 3 CARTRIDGE SYSTEM' kt& �nz. Q. &t Ffs 4) LLwA-PER DETAIL Id.65 t GRC RIM = +e:00-A-09,58 Ito SEE DETAILJ!S �1..'ENIIT 8' I.E. 111,14' VADE WOODEN SWING -GATES PTO. MATCH FENCE. MAKE,::,:-: ` r)6, 2 PRbOUCT SUBMITTAL TO OWNER OR APPROVAL 13N)4.69%, (ms,3N) 26TM-i 71 i Z ca� 7V O'LQ2 ay4r, vos -IVAOHddV HOJ Oil ON11001r"ahoslml -Qddl. Mina m() 83WO ol jV.LLjvj8flS lOnOd 33N33 HoLvff_ 03 Z I AdA /.9 0 S,bN ffmc 4flt4)r, = -11 Zl, !23 z 1418 cl, C 3*1 .9 130 33S IIV13613_�� 31OHNVVi 10HIN01 TQ,'jz'x 4*41!z- k arl ONIND01 GPOSIAU, D --j3jjjS'r 11VI30 Ed O.K 'll 3dkL Z#83 3001HIM C .04 V0,1101,111,11 QUIP118ols W13 IN3 9L'60 O.Z 1 JI U 4v X M*M� xq 'I-- os 11VI30 39S 0y0b SS333V (INOd aRo�oa31 60"FO2 op C. 0 0 9"3ON33IN 111dS vo_`Z� Ll _cl;V W /+-Cok 4 r9,00 W j t JIM o; NIV8a DNIiOOJ 11ffi3d ONIGIllng 31VNVd3S 38ino38 v 63Ao slivmKod --kOLLVONnOJ 03SOdOH$oo 0_3 310M9 may, N, O.Ll N30 0'0i£ DJ :P 0 mlfiqo�i lh W30VNIVSG 7 ols ONLLSIX3 v, ,l G 'k33S SINUO 33S 8 S18830 IVOldkL NZ, U 1. dop 0*0 NON 97 83AO STlvm 30 clol L L_* Cb '9 1.2 ml 130 "ONOW 33N33 INS 111dS -nvl 1 000000" x do, x 00 33S -MM /)DOH 0' L Z70 0 vlodj db\lm 9'9L� ?did N081 STV130 33S 9ON33 A AlOK3SSV 3AWA ■ �n 3 001W "831R, 3lytA5ultj IN lFtdS T4 --imnl9vow v ll'� .bj Z]!W�-8019300 310NIS ic 1". J, -3-1 tZ 3HU 01 3NII 39VNIVHO s "Z, u 9LI L2 yu IIVPG 33S /eg 6Z'L L2 00 ONuslx39, 00= ELL 31vmsole J, Go 1, �vl 0 V, ILI &iro��, . NOW 3 fl & __v swi3a,'33s IN,-, 3N ON3 �! U lI z0Mlk ZE"-tu: —L ejffjC i nAk3als v e8no tc L& WHORN ISNI K I u Im 9' 1 r_lLsl d x lIV13%)13d„*0'3 IN II O'l UL &9 -3 .,gq OV *MS) *6 '3 LW_ )G:z -ui7 =� ,� i } — v 9*911 OAd I IdAl 91W ON1. 1 73�1 t 4, Lx LANCE MUELLER 6 AS 1CIATES A R C H I T E C T S A I March 28, 2007 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8T" Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98063 RECEIVED MAR 2 9 2007 CITY OF FEDERAL WP BUILDING nFPT. Re: NARRATIVE SUMMARY CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS, RHAPSODY PARTNERS. (LMA #06-176) We are proposing a new; two-story office building over one level open parking for lease to multiple tenants at West Campus, Lot 34. The site, which is currently undeveloped, is located at 33455 6th Avenue South. The property to the north is the Windermere Real Estate Company, to the west and south is an existing office building, and to the east, across 6th Avenue, is an existing vacant office building. The existing site slopes gently to the west. It has an existing category II wetland in the northwest corner of the site. The surrounding sites are fully developed. The access easement adjoining the property to the south is also improved and will provide additional vehicle access to the rear parking area. Among existing site amenities are 128 trees that are considered significant by the Federal Way Zoning Code. It is our intention to preserve 33% of these trees, as well as any other native plants, by carefully locating outdoor service areas and by adjusting drives and parking layouts. Celebration Park is an excellent amenity, within easy walking distance from the site. The main entry and majority of architectural building features are located close to and facing 6th Avenue, allowing close pedestrian access and visibility. Landscape planters border the entry walks at the front and rear. The front walkway to the street begins at the main entry plaza and slopes gently to 6t' avenue south. This walk and plaza area feature textured patterns in the concrete paving and have colored concrete accents. The front walkway connects the building entry to the access easement to the south. A bicycle rack will be provided in the covered parking garage adjacent to the stairwell and elevator. At the rear (west face) of the building will be a plaza area with benches, table with seating for tenant to enjoy the outdoors. Parking is located around the building and includes one level of parking under the building in an open garage. The parking perimeter will be fully landscaped with new vegetation. The parking garage openings will also be screened with landscaping and the site topography. There are no dead end drives, allowing for smooth traffic flow throughout the site. 130 LAKESIDE • SUITE 250 • SEATTLE. WA • BB1 22 • 120B] 325-2553 • FAX: C20B] 328-0554 ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • SPACE PLANNING • INTERIORS March 28, 2007 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Re: NARRATIVE SUMMARY CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS, RHAPSODY PARTNERS. Page Two The waste enclosure will be constructed primarily of concrete, with a textured paint finish. Colors and reveals will visually connect the enclosure to the design of the main structure. The building will have a security system. The doors for the waste enclosure can be chained and pad -locked. The site will be appropriately illuminated for security and safety, while controlling light glare to neighboring sites. All facades of the building incorporate several tools to accomplish modulation. The building height varies around the building. While the primary material is concrete, we have included horizontal reveals with green tinted glass in clear anodized aluminum frames. Each facade modulates in height and depth. The center section at each face will be painted a rich color and all windows have a recess above, painted a third accent color. Design standards for the City require building facades in this Zoning District longer than 60' to be modulated and screened. Building facades shall include at least two treatments listed in the Code. If more than two treatments are proposed, the City can approve alternate schemes that vary from a prescriptive approach. The proposed office facility has a street on the east side and an access easement on the south side. A large glass area with architectural entrance canopy articulates the main entry. Within the entry there is a portal element of concrete and painted metal. This element will add character and visually identify the main entry from the street below. Landscaping, building surfaces, large glazed area, and a portal frame are also designed not only for visual relief, but to give additional facade modulation. The main entry to the building faces 6th Avenue South. This east face of the building is about 200' long with the middle portion stepping forward twice in increments of five feet. The entire base of the building has at least 8' of base landscaping. The middle portion of the front facade steps incrementally 5' forward while increasing in height as well. This far,ade is also used to create the front portion of the screen wall for the HVAC equipment. In accordance with Code, the design provides a fan shape free standing canopy and over 400 s.f. of pedestrian plaza. The north and south faces are similar in design. Each is about 144' wide and has greater than 8' of landscaping next to them. At these facades the applicant proposed, in order to meet Code, the building face modulates (steps) 2' to 12' and provides multiple colors to break up the face. No face is greater than 60' at the north and south face. March 28, 2007 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Re: NARRATIVE SUMMARY CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS, RHAPSODY PARTNERS. Page Three The west facade of the building faces the rear parking area. This building face has a minimum of 8' landscaping along with modulation of a minimum of 2' at each modulation point. No face is longer than 60'. A building site plaza at the southwest corner serves as a lunch patio and will have benches and tables with seating. The plaza area is 663 s.f. (1.3% of building area) and will be landscaped at the perimeter. Trash receptacles will flank the plaza. Because of the shape of the site, landscape areas are greater than required and will provide excellent screening of parking for both the surface and the covered garage area. We have tried hard to meet all goals and requirements in the Code. If we have not addressed any portion adequately, please feel free to contact me at (206) 325-2553. LAN E MUELLER & ASSOCIATES/ARCHITECTSoot Harold Christensen Architect haroldc@lmueller.com NK-CD-1 RHAPSODY-CEDAR-PK-NAR.doc CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 30, 2007 TO: Will Appleton, Development Services Manager Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District Dave Mataftin, Federal Way Fire Department FROM: Deb Barker FOR DRC MTG. ON: April 19, 2007 - Completeness Review FILE NUMBER(S): 07-101624-00-UP, 07-101626-SE, RELATED FILE NOS.: 07-101480-CN, 07-100921-PC from March 2007 (fka RHAPSODY) PROJECT NAME: Cedar Park Office at West Campus PROJECT ADDRESS: 33455 6th Avenue South ZONING DISTRICT: OP PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed 2-story 50,990 square foot office building with parking below and at grade, 196 parking stalls propsoed and associated site work. Wetland buffer averaging proposed to address small intrusion into regulated wetland buffer. LAND USE PERMITS: PROJECT CONTACT: Process III, SEPA HAROLD CHRISTENSEN LANCE MUELLER & ASSOCIATES 130 LAKESIDE, Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 206-325-2553 MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Site plan, elevations, Civil plans, Wetland buffer averaging plan, and landscape plan. Concurrency permit also submitted. LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 34 OF WEST CAMPUS OFFICE PARK DIVISION 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 97 OF PLATS, PAGES 55 THROUGH 58, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 34 LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 34; THENCE SOUTH 76' 15' 05" WEST 498.54 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 27' 11' 14" WEST 114.64 FEET TO THE TERMINUS OF SAID LINE. (ALSO KNOWN AS LOT B OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 8802019, RECORDED MAY 9, 1988 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8805090973.) PARCEL # 926500-0340-00 VICINITY MAP v • .� -.."-,rn Pi ay.'i7hitrs:- •N �y,5• _ sa3rin s+ r J1 J[tl � 0 b SITEs - f rr;• -�ti� 2s � 9S 7 r' rl rr�FBdefsl " m air .q '� Way N y +Th N 7 crtyy O OEM 4 fED 2007 GfTY OF FEOERAI, WAY BUILDING OPT, 4- 0 W ca co wjeV•}� Co N co ca EW 7 Q L oC: L a Q (a a vi �o 0 CL Y 0 C Q. EY W N O A075 ^, W W Y Y cu N 7 .t cu N N O O 2 Y :3 CO O N c c � c o (Du- N Q. E O O 0 w C L C Y 0 0 U Y N (/j U) N O 'O C >w Q N E CL L 0 H LAKMAVEN MAM NO Im TM AVAILABRAY C,'ERTB+iCTA1E T�HI BB R N E N � fl. a L N O L N N N a o rn Z' N c 0 � o l C f0 d J 44-� E ❑ ❑ n C Y O E y •Z a .0C tOA C N 7 a m U) U O O N El CL ¢ a J 3 _c Z CL Q O O- MO m N C O C a)U L E 20 N a N E C m 0 io cc 7. en L U � O co N L p CL > C co O ca E 2 C a) >. +r .0+ D C O L +` ` O c O y m cp U G- cn U N N pE N Y U1 r Uy 0 3 V-'v u0it v r 3 o E� m N p37 fA Y v�i w +� O a) Co 7 N w C O N A 0 C 7 L O G -0 'C3 N C U N L o i U C > 4N O U i° o U a 3 a� m E N p'N v N c a)C 46 O � cp- cm m aEi (D •a) 2 E � O � C r� L a Q W ° E E U 2 E E o 0 U� V U N N QL �L�- a� `m o a ~ O c0 i a D. "�a p) u) ❑ ❑ ❑ H H H m I9 0 L 0 L cd ❑ �C y6 ii ❑ N cei 0 A li o w � E L cu O 4 2 co E ca cu ^ C L Ll y D O cu a3 8 n CI) O 2 Mn O E co U H D N H N Q � H H .—.. N a D N z N L N fQ C w � � _ N O O Cl rIL N O W ._. ca M cc W Q m a) � E Q Z. N a o 0 � C 0 \Z i O N O c w I� c 6 N 3c�� o o� m!� o oo>a)0)N Q C } a7 Hl j r 41 Q O1 o m E o aa+ C C d a m 3 N E 0 ° E - p►��O�N C Q- •— CD (0 Y ❑ m W � CD a) ' C � E O c a) � Q E _6 m m a) Co O O C 3 m m inE ca CL a) O > m (D c v > a)N U_ E -cc) C C m m 0 , ul Co U O a) 0 C' C � > ca U C O m p p al U m - m -a C- .0 a) '6 -2 m 0 N -(,De m m >NC o °.C_ L�+0°E �m �❑ C ° L�L`�L E O - O )a�— NN m O U Q Q+ y mN T m O �'O E C_m mEn ua) Oco L cu (D c L N aC_ Y3 uu.0 0L�LtLo 2) m EUC U-; ° am O❑❑Ik❑ = Q , r a C U m N m 0 ® a Oi �23m 2-0> Q 0 coU N- (D vAC4) p o m p •s m f mEm�U -p 0 L EQ n v EE ❑ m o�? E c6 din c o aQ� E> a i a�oi co ova) Um0 m 3� mm o � N m o� p m U� � O> U 'U 0 a) m 0 4" wtof Q� fly- �� Qa 72 T� p L �� o� o 2 rQ7 �>mo o c a) 0 a) � O• ` omE o- Q m c m •ca a� o oE z ' U 0 � �-_ a�i °� > Lp �L 3 �rn E L m (0 ao) _ •°cNn oo 0oLN ° _ 0 0ma) a) w _ x e m � o-U'U n `o ` >aoom Oa) n O CaCC v in cp: U a) L •? m a- 8 m - D o) (0 � m 0-6 m 0-6 m 0 .n m L E cm 'C C (n 'O C m CO U Q M > O Q p U H W :❑ )(ElQ a � ce v c O U m \? U L O �_ U t� V O a) rn • I N > ° EV� u � 0-m O U � C U T . 67I`� 1 �2C L }}rr11 T E O E m � E L a' I O U C N O N I In _ ++ L �Z •> m m E a 2 en CU rn o 0 en a) C m Q_ U � U 7p U D cl, = 0 ca O� N E L p 0 a�Ei a) a) yam+ L Z cr- m 0 -6 m0-6 ❑ )�9, ❑ 6 C 01 i N Q e O C. d N IMI 4�3 rQ 0 O N m Lh 0 Of E T m :j m `m 3 4ik CITY 40';:tSP OF Federal Way APPLICATION NO(S) 07-101624-UP, 07-101626-SE MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8`h Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederalway.com Date 3/29/07 Project Name CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS (RHAPSODY PARTNERS OFFICE BUILDING) Property Address/Location 33455 6TH AVENUE SOUTH, FEDERAL WAY, WA Parcel Number(s) 926500-0340-00 Project Description CONSTRUCT (2) STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH 25,495 S.F. PER FLOOR OVER PARKING. PARKING ONSITE FOR 196 CARS. LAar- rm", 1 Type of Permit Required Annexation Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Conference Process I (Director=s Approval) Process II (Site Plan Review) x Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) Process VI SEPA w/Project SEPA Only Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information OP Zoning Designation OP Comprehensive Plan Designation $1, 2 0 0, 0 0 0 Value of Existing Improvements $ 9, 7 0 0, 0 0 0 Value of Proposed Improvements International Building Code (IBC): B/OFFICE, S-2/PARKING Occupancy Type II-B SPRINKLED Construction Type Applicant HAROLD CHRISTENSEN Name: C/O LANCE 14UELLER ARCHITECTS Address: 130 LAKESIDE, SUITE 250 City/State: SEATTLE, WA Zip: 98122 Phone: (206) 325-2553 Fax: (206) 328-0554 Email: haro do@1� gr Signature: �j/ r//f / % Agent (H different than Applicant) Name: Address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: Owner MICHAEL HIL Name: C/O RHAPSODY PARTNERS Address: 3400 CARRILLON POINT City/State: KIRKLAND, WA Zip: 98033 Phone: (425) 50-1050 Fax: (425) 250- 051 Email: m c el. 119 ha � a e�rs�BMc�am _®WW��"�� Signature: SU 0 Bulletin #003 — August 18, 2004 Page 1 of 1 k:1H � S 9 "cation � viLjo Y ED MAR 2 9 2007 CITY OF ary or, r e-DERAL WAY Federal Way BUILDING DEPr. MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF CO%I\ILINITY DE%'ELOPJIENT SER\'ICES 33325 8'" Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-2607,Fax 253-835-2609 avww,citvof cderahvay.coriI o 7 o/6C72-6 -S'�- APPLICATION NOW Date 3/28/07 3 Project Narne CEDAR FAR:: AT WEST CAMPUS (RHAPSODY PARTNERS OFFICE BUILDING) Property Address/Location 33455 6TH AVENUE SOUTH, FEDERAL WAY, WA Parcel Numher(s) 926500-0340-00 Project Description CONSTRUCT (2) STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH 25,495 S.F. PER FLOOR OVER PARKING PARKING ONISTE FOR 196 CARS. 'type of Permit Required _ Annexation _ Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment _ Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Conference Process I (Director—s Approval) Process II (Site Plan Review) X Process III (Project Approval) _ Process IV (Ilearing Examiner's Decision) _ Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) _ Process VI YSEPA w/Project _ SEPA Only _ Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use _ Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information OP Zoning Designation OP (.omprehensive Plan Designation $1, 200, 000 Value of Existing Improvements LAND S9,700,000 Value of Proposed Improvements IMPROVED International Building Code (IBC): a/OFFICE, S-2/PARKING _ Occupancy Type II-B SPRINKLED Construction Type Bulletin 4003 —August 18, 2004 Applicant HAROLD CHRISTENSEN Name: C/O LANCE MUELLER & ASSOCIATES ARCHTITECTS Address: 130 LAKESIDE, SUITE 250 City/State: SEATTLE, WA Zip: 98122 Phone: 206-325-2553 Fax: 206-328-0554 Email: harpidc lmueller.com Signature:OF Agent (ifdifierent than Applicant) Name: Address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: Owner MICHAEL HIL C/O RHAPSODY PARTNERS Name: 3400 CARRILLON POINT Address: Cin�lSmte: KIRKLANTD, WA Zip: 98033 Phone: 425-250-1050 Fax: 425-25 -105 V'otves. Email: mjrrhal. hi :r pe m Signature Page I of I k:\I handouts\Master Land Use Application DEPARTiN1EINT OF CONMNIUNITY DE%'Fi,ovN1F,NT SERVICES 33325 81h Avenue South PO Box 9718 CITY OF Federal Way WA 98063-9718 r� 253yww.c0ty Fax rc1w 5-2609 ��www.cif Gffearalwa .co Feder.a.1d IV IA OF DISTRIBUTION 1, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice V Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other was lCmailed ❑ faxed un L Y . 2007_ Project Name File Number(s) Signature ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on b7-/ol63/,_SE Date 6 -IV!27 K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution_doc/Last printed 1 /8/2007 4:34:00 PM �y 4:CITY OF VMW + Federal Way DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS OFFICE File No. 07-101626-00-SE Related File Numbers: 07-101624-00-UP, 07-101480-00-CN, 07-102510-00-CO, 07-102038-00-EN Description of Proposal: Proposed construction of two-story 50,990 square -foot office building, with 59 parking stalls below the building, 133 at grade parking stalls, storm drainage facilities including an 18 inch diameter storm pipe connection, extension of an eight -inch water main and a six-inch sanitary sewer line; roadway easement improvements and other associated site improvements on a 3.01-acre site. Proponent: Michael Hill, Rhapsody Partners, 3400 Carillon Point, Kirkland, WA 98033 Location: 33455 6`11 Avenue South Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 The Responsible Official of the City of Federal Way hereby makes the following decision based upon impacts identified in the environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist, and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act Rules pursuant to RCW 43.31 C.060. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.032(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period. This decision may be appealed by filing a written appeal within 14 days of issuance. Details of the appeal procedures may be obtained at the Department of Community Development Services. Responsible Official: Kathy McClung Position/Title: Director of Community Development Services Address: 33325 8 h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Date Issued: June 14.2007 Signature: 0 0 Doc 1.D 41185 Jam and Smudge Free Printing www.averyxom AVMRYO) 51600 Use Avery® TEMPLATE 51600 1-800-GO-AVERY OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PO BOX 48343 OLYMPIA WA 98504-8343 LORI KITTREDGE METRO TRANSIT KSC-TR-0413 201 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 JACK HOPKINS SEATTLE PI 101 ELLIOTT AVE W SEATTLE WA 98121 FEDERAL WAY MIRROR 1414 S 324T" STE B-210 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 MONICA ADAMS PIERCE TRANSIT PO BOX 99070 LAKEWOOD WA 98499-0070 DEPT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEC PO BOX 47703 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7703 CHRIS CARREL FRIENDS OF THE HYLEBOS PO BOX 24971 FEDERAL WAY WA 98093 LAURA MURPHY TRIBAL ARCHAEOLOGIST MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE 39015 172ND AVE SE AUBURN WA 98092 SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL PO BOX 130 KENT WA 98035-0130 HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPT PUYALLUP TRIBE 5580 PACIFIC HWY E STE F FIFE WA 98424-2500 JULIE STOFEL WDFW REGION 4 OFFICE 16018 MILL CREEK BLVD MILL CREEK WA 98012 ATTN NEWSROOM TACOMA NEWS TRIBUNE 1950 S STATE ST TACOMA WA 98405 FEDERAL WAY NEWS 14006 1 ST AVE S STE B BURIEN WA 98168 JOHN KIM KOREA POST 28815 PACIFIC HWY S STE 4B FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 AH21AV-09-008-L 0)09L5 iljege6 al zaslmn @09L5 OAU3Ad o IUOY/GaAe-wAm ! apldei 86e4:)as a;a a6eainogllue uolsswdwi FEMA US ARMY CORPS/ENGINEERS JOE HENRY REGION 10 NTH DIV ATTN REGULATORY BRANCH NATURAL RESOURCES CVN SVC 130 228T" ST SW PO BOX 3755 935 POWELL AVE SW BOTHELL WA 98021-9796 SEATTLE WA 98124 RENTON WA 98055 WSDOT EPA ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEC E SEC =ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 1200 6T" AVE MD-126 PO BOX 47331 SEATTLE WA 98101 3 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7331 RAMON PAZOOKI JAMEY TAYLOR WA NATURAL HERITAGE SNO-KING PLANNING MGR DNR SEPA CENTER DNR WSDOT SOUTH KING COUNTY PO BOX 47015 PO BOX 47014 PO BOX 330310 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7015 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7014 SEATTLE WA 98133-9710 �- OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY & WA STATE DEPT WILDLIFE RANDY PEARSON HISTORIC PRESERVATION 600 CAPITOL WAY N WASH STATE PARKS PO BOX 48343 OLYMPIA WA 9004-8343 OLYMPIA WA 98501-1091 PO BOX 42668 OLYMPIA WA 98504-2668 J STOFEL TRAVIS NELSON LARRY FISHER `WDFW WDFW WDFW REGION 4 OFFICE PO BOX 73249 600 CAPITOL WAY N 16018 MILL CREEK BLVD PUYALLUP WA 98373 OLYMPIA WA 98501-1091 ,MILL CREEK WA 98012 US FISH & WILDLIFE SERVCE DOH - DIV OF DRINKING WATER PUGET SOUND AIR 510 DESMOND DR SE #102 ENV DOCUMENTS REVIEWER POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY LACEY WA 98503 PO BOX 47822 110 UNION ST STE 500 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7822 SEATTLE WA 98101-2038 PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF SEATTLE PSRC ENVIRONMENTAL DEPT PO BOX 1209 GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPT PO BOX 1837 SEATTLE WA 98111 1011 WESTERN AVE #500 TACOMA WA 98401-1837 SEATTLE WA 98104-1040 SHIRLEY MARROQUIN GARY KRI EDT PERRY WEINBERG KC WASTEWATER TREATMENT KING COUNTY TRANSIT DIV SOUND TRANSIT MS KSC-NR-0505 ENV PLANNING MS KSC-TR-0431 401 S JACKSON ST 201 S JACKSON ST 201 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-2826 SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 MARK CARY SOUTH KING COUNTY KING COUNTY PARKS LAND US SVC KCDDES REGIONAL WATER ASSOCIATION PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 900 OAKESDALE AVE SW 27224 144T" AVE SE PO BOX 3517 RENTON WA 98055-1219 KENT WA 98042 REDMOND WA 98073-3517 KC BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ROD HANSEN SOLID WASTE DIV SEATTLE/KING COUNTY 810 THIRD AVE STE 608 KING CO DEPT OF NATURAL RES DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH SEATTLE WA 98104-1693 201 S JACKSON ST STE 701 1404 CENTRAL AVE S STE 101 SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 KENT WA 98032�1 �s KING CO ROADS DIVISION COUNTY ROADS ENGINEER 155 MONROE AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 SOUTH KING FIRE & RESCUE 31617 1ST AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 COMCAST CABLE STORE 1414 324T" S FEDERAL WAY WA 98002 PUYALL T E 5580 PAC HW Y E FIFE WA 4-2500 GERI WALKER FWPS 31405 18T" AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PO BOX 3440 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 MUCKLESHOOT INPIAN TRIBE IES DIV�QN ATTN 6MENTAL REVIEWER 39015.._jl7 S AVE E- RN WA 98002 PIERCE CO PLNG & LAND SVCS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STE F 2401 S 35T" ST TACOMA WA 98409-7460 PIERCE COUNTY HEALTH DEPT 3629 S "D" ST TACOMA WA 98408 PLANNING & CD DEPT CITY OF AUBURN 25 W MAIN ST AUBURN WA 98001 KENT CITY HALL PLANNING DEPT 220 4T" AVE S KENT WA 98032 NE TAC NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL C/O JAMES COLBURN TACOMA ECONOMIC DEV 747 MARKET ST RM 900 TACOMA WA 98402-3793 CRAIG GIBSON TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES PO BOX 11007 TACOMA WA 98411 PIERCE COUNTY BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD 2401 S 35T" ST TACOMA WA 98409 CITY CLERK PACIFIC CITY HALL 100 THIRD AVE SE PACIFIC WA 98047 CITY OF TACOMA BLUS LAND USE ADMINISTRATOR 747 MARKET ST STE 345 TACOMA WA 98402-3769 MARION WEED CHAIR NORTHEAST TACOMA NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL 4735 NE 42ND ST TACOMA WA 98422 CITY OF LAKEWOOD 10510 GRAVELLY LK DR SW STE 206 LAKEWOOD WA 98499-5013 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DIST PO BOX 4249 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 FEDERAL WAY DISPOSAL PO BOX 1877 AUBURN WA 98071 PUYALLUP, INTFRTIONAL 3702 MARfM DR, #200 TACOMA 22-2799 PIERCE CO PLNG & LAND SVCS DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER 2401 S 35T" ST TACOMA WA 98409-7460 AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT 915 FOURTH NE AUBURN WA 98002 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ALGONA CITY HALL 402 WARDE ST ALGONA WA 98001-8505 JOE ELTRICH TACOMA WATER DIVISION PO BOX 11007 TACOMA WA 98411 HAYES ALEXANDER PLNG CHAIR NORTHEAST TACOMA NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL 5308 RIDGE DR NE TACOMA WA 98422 CITY OF MILTON 1000 LAUREL ST MILTON WA 98354 CITY OF SEATAC CITY OF DES MOINES CITY OF NORMANDY PARK 4800 S 188T" ST 21630 11T" AVE S 801 SW 174T" ST SEATAC WA 98188 DES MOINES WA 98198 NORMANDY PARK WA 98166 CITY OF BURIEN CITY OF FIFE TERRY LUKENS CITY HALL 5411 23RD ST E BELLEVUE COUNCIL OFFICE 415 SW 150T" ST FIFE WA 98424 PO BOX 90012 BURIEN WA 98166-1957 BELLEVUE WA 98009-9012 WATER DISTRICT #54 HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT MIDWAY SEWER DISTRICT 922 S 219T" ST PO BOX 3867 PO BOX 3487 DES MOINES WA 98198-6392 KENT WA 98032-0367 KENT WA 98032 WATER DISTRICT #111 COVINGTON WATER DISTRICT PAT PROUSE QWEST 27224 144T" AVE SE 18631 SE 300T" PL TH KENT WA 98042-9058 KENT WA 98042-9208 S EAT 7 AVE RM 120E SEATTLE WA 98121 LORI KITTREDGE MARY AUSBURN JILL GASTON REALTY SPEC METRO TRANSIT PSE BPA KSC-TR-0413 6905 S 228T" ST SKC-SVC 914 AVE "D" 201 S JACKSON ST KENT WA 98032 SNOHOMISH WA 98290 SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 WASH ENVIRON COUNCIL CHRIS CARREL TIM PAYNE 615 2ND AVE STE 380 FRIENDS OF THE HYLEBOS PIERCE COUNTY TRANSIT SEATTLE WA 98104-2245 PO BOX 24971 PO BOX 99070 FEDERAL WAY WA 98iJ93 LAKEWOOD WA 98499 SAM PACE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FW COMMUNITY COUNCIL SEA/KING CO ASSOC/REALTORS OF SOUTH KING COUNTY PO BOX 4274 29839 154T" AVE SE PO BOX 66037 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 KENT WA 98042-4557 BURIEN WA 9816E MICHAEL FELDMAN WASH STATE OCD ATTN NEWSROOM AVIATION PLANNING SEATAC 901 COLUMBIA ST SW TACOMA NEWS TRIBUNE PO BOX 68727 OLYMPIA WA 98504-8300 1950 S STATE ST SEATTLE WA 98168-0727 TACOMA WA 98405 JACK HOPKINS LISA PEMBERTON-BUTLER FEDERAL WAY NEWS SEATTLE PI SEATTLE TIMES NORTH ST 101 ELLIOTT AVE W 1200 112T" AVE NE STE C145 STE B 1400E 1400E 1 1 WA AVE E S S SEATTLE WA 98121 BELLEVUE WA 98004-3748 FEDERAL WAY MIRROR SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL JOHN KIM 1414 S 324T" STE B-210 PO BOX 130 KOREA POST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 KENT WA 98035-0130 28815 PACIFIC HWY S STE 4B FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 KING COUNTY ASSESSORS HOLLY WILLIAMSON CITY OF EDGEWOOD 500 4T" AVE RM 700 OLYMPIC PIPELINE CO 2221 MERIDIAN AVE E SEATTLE WA 98104 2319 LIND AVE SW EDGEWOOD WA 98371-1010 RENTON WA 98055 CRESTVIEW SHORECLUB ASSN 4817 SW 310T" FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 NORTH LAKE COMNTY CLUB 33228 38T" AVE S AUBURN WA 98001 STEEL LK RESIDENTS ASSN 2329 S 304T" ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 BELLACARINO WOODS HOA 35204 6T" AVE SW FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 TWIN LAKES HOA 3420 SW 320T" ST # 28 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 KEN SHATOCK GROUSE POINTE HOA 1911 SW CAMPUS DR # 621 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 MHACC C/O WILLIAM HICKS 29219 7T" PL S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 WEST GREEN CONDO ASSN 432 S 321 ST PL FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 BARCLAY PLACE HOA 1034 SW 334T" FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 BELLRIDGE TOWNHOMES HOA 1438 S 308T" LN FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 MAR CHERI COMNTY CLUB PO BOX 25281 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 KINGSGROVE HOA 2613 S 379T" FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 MIRROR LK RESIDENTS ASSN 525 SW 312T" ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 REDONDO COMMUNITY CLUB PO BOX 5118 REDONDO WA 98054 BELMOR PARK HOA 2101 S 324T" ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 CAMPUS GLEN HOA 32806 6T" PL S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 BROOKLAKE COMNTY CENTER 726 S 356T" FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 COMCAST - SE PUGET SOUND ARE CONSTRUCTION/ENG MANAGER 4020 AUBURN WAY N AUBURN WA 98002 PRESERVATION DEFT LAURA MURPHY HISTORIC MASTER BUILDERS ASSOC HISTORIC TRIBE TRIBAL ARCHAEOLOGIST 335 116T" AVE SE PUYALLUP MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE BELLEVUE WA 98004-6407 PACIFIC HWY E STE F, 39015 172ND F[FE AVE SE FIFE WA 9�342=1 2500 AUBURN WA 98092 MONICA AD MMS PIERCE TRANSIT O BOX 99070 KEWOOD WA 08 99-00 0 CHERYLPARAS PSE CMTY SERVICES DEPT 3130 S 38T" ST TACOMA WA 98409 Revised April 10, 2007 K:\Environmental Checklists\Agency Mailing List.doc �Deb,I3arker - IVling Court neighbor notification Page From: Deb Barker To: E Oehler; jodey@norrishomesinc.com; Date: 6/12/2007 5:47:02 PM Subject: Ming Court neighbor notification John Norris; john@norrishomesinc.com All - I'd like to clarify an issue that arose today following approval of the plat modification request. I asked that you notify neighbors whose property touches the Ming Court site, those on are 8th Avenue South across from the plat entrance, and those on 6th along the sewer easement road, and tell them of the start date of clearing and grading actions, the timing of the construction project, hours of activity, and provide them with a contact name and number. The reason that I asked for the neighbor notification was to hopefully alleviate ongoing neighborhood concerns about the preliminary plat project. The City Engineer and I have worked on the plat since it's 2000 submittal, and know that the immediate neighborhood was very upset by the pending activity. You may not be aware, but neighbors did file a SEPA appeal against the preliminary plat application (subsequently denied by the Hearing Examiner) and they attended and spoke at both appeal and preliminary plat hearings. With this background information, we hoped to have the Ming Court construction activity go smoothly for you and have no impacts to the eventual final plat process. There are a number of homes that back up to your project site, and while there is no code requirement to notify them about your construction action, we have found that if there is a neighborhood that is already concerned about a pending development action, they can appreciate being given information about impacts to their neighborhood, knowing what is going to occur, and when; and may be less likely to complain. This is a long winded way of saying that while the neighbor notification is not a required as a condition of preliminary plat approval, it is strongly encouraged for the reasons listed above. Lastly, be advised that formal written notification to Lakehaven Utility. District of pending construction action prior to issuance of any construction permit IS a preliminary plat condition of approval. Please let me know if you have any questions about this e-mail or the issues involved. Regards Deb Barker Senior Planner, City of Federal Way PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-2642 deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com CC: Deb Barker; Kevin Peterson CITY OF Federal flay DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS OFFICE File No. 07-101626-00-SE Related File Numbers: 07-101624-00-UP, 07-101480-00-CN, 07-102510-00-CO, 07-102038-00-EN Description of Proposal: Proposed construction of two-story 50,990 square -foot office building, with 59 parking stalls below the building, 133 at grade parking stalls, storm drainage facilities including an 18- inch diameter storm pipe connection, extension of an eight -inch water main and a six-inch sanitary sewer line; roadway easement improvements and other associated site improvements on a 3.01-acre site. Proponent: Michael Hill, Rhapsody Partners, 3400 Carillon Point, Kirkland, WA 98033 Location: 33455 6`h Avenue South Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 The Responsible Official of the City of Federal Way hereby makes the following decision based upon impacts identified in the environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist, and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act Rules pursuant to RCW 43.31C.060. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.032(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period. This decision may be appealed by filing a written appeal within 14 days of issuance. Details of the appeal procedures may be obtained at the Department of Community Development Services. Responsible Official: Kathy McClung Position/Title: Director of Community Development Services Address: 33325 8'11 Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Date Issued: June 14.2007 Signature: Doc. 1 D 41185 CIT 1�k Federal Way June 14, 2007 Mr. Michael Hill Rhapsody Partners 3400 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 RE: File #07-101626-00-SE; DNS for CEDAR PARK AT WEST CAMPUS 33455 6rh Avenue South, Federal Way, WA Dear Mr. Hill: FILE CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.com This office and other City staff have reviewed the environmental checklist you submitted. We have determined that the proposal will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. As a result, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A copy of the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is enclosed. The 14-day comment period required by the SEPA Rules (WAC 197-11-355) ran concurrently with public comment period associated with the notice of land use action. The comment period began on May 1, 2007, and ended on May 14, 2007. No comment letters were received during that time. The enclosed DNS was issued on Thursday, June 14, 2007. A fmal determination may be appealed within 14 days of the date of issuance. No licenses, permits, or approvals may be issued until completion of the appeal period, which will end on Thursday, June 28, 2007. You may, but are not required to', publish a Notice of Action as set forth in RCW 43.21 C.075. The Notice of Action sets forth a time period after which no legal challenges regarding the proposal's compliance with SEPA can be made. A copy of the Notice of Action form and copies of RCW 43.21 C.080 and WAC 197-11-680 providing instructions for giving this notice are available from the Department of Community Development Services. The City is not responsible for publishing the Notice of Action. However, the City is responsible for giving a notice (to parties of record) stating the date for commencing a judicial appeal (including the SEPA portion of that appeal) if your proposal is one for which the City's action has a specified time period within which any court appeals must be made. If you need further assistance, please contact Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642, or Greg Fewins, CDS Deputy Director, at 253-835-2611. Sincerely, KattMcng,Director Department of Community Development Services enc: DNS Staff Evaluation c: Deb Barker, Senior Planner Harold Christensen, Lance Mueller & Associates, 130 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 250, Seattle, WA 98122 Doc. I.D. 41187 CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FINAL STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST CEDAR PARK OFFICE BUILDING Federal Way File Number: 07-101626-00-SE Related File Numbers: 07-101624-00-UP, 07-401480-CN, 07-102510-CO, 07-102038-EN Note: Technical reports and attachments referenced below may not be attached to all copies of this decision. Copies of exhibits, reports, attachments, or other documents may be reviewed and/or obtained by contacting the Department of Community Development Services, 33325 8t' Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9178. Phone: 253-835-2607. I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION The applicant proposes the construction of a two-story 50.,990 square -foot office building, with 59 parking stalls below the building, 133 at grade parking stalls, storm drainage facilities including an 18- inch diameter storm pipe connection, extension of an eight -inch water main and a six-inch sanitary sewer line, roadway easement improvements and other associated site improvements on a 3.01-acre site (Exhibit A). H. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Name: Cedar Park at West Campus Office Building Applicant: Michael Hill Rhapsody Partners, 425-250-1050 3400 Carillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 Agent: Harold Christensen Lance Mueller & Associates, 206-325-2553 130 Lakeside, Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 Location: 33455 6t' Avenue South (Exhibit B) King County Tax Parcel Number: 926500-0340 Parcel Size: 3.01 acres (131,357 square feet) Zoning: Office Park (OP) Comprehensive Plan Designation: Office Park The following information was submitted as part of the application for development: o SEPA Checklist, dated March 28, 2007, with amendments dated April 18, and June 8, 2007 o Subsurface exploration, geologic hazard and geotechnical engineering report for Dunham project (earlier project at this site) prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., dated Jan 17, 2005 o Talasaea wetland reconnaissance and delineation for West Campus Medical Arts site (City file #05-100807-UP), dated March 18, 2005 o Wetland buffer averaging plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, dated March 28, 2007 o Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, dated March 23, 2007, revised May 31, 2007 o Site plan, Elevations, Tree Preservation Plan and Landscape Plan prepared by LMA, dated March 28, 2007, revised o Civil Plans prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, dated February 15, 2007, revised o Concurrency application submitted March 21, 2007 o Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Area, dated June 11, 2007 M. BACKGROUND The applicant submitted an application for SEPA, Process III project approval on March 29, 2007. Following resubmittal of additional information, the applications were determined complete on April 25, 2007. A Notice of Application and Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on April 29, 2007. IV. REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following lists the elements of the environmental checklist (Exhibit C), and a response to each: 1) whether city staff concurs or does not concur with the applicant's response to the SEPA checklist item, or 2) city staffs additional comments or clarification to each checklist item. A. BACKGROUND 1-5. Concur with the checklist. 6. The City issued a Notice of Optional Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on April 29, 2007. A 14-day comment period ended on May 14, 2007, with no comments submitted. A 14- day appeal period will commence following issuance of the environmental determination. Land use approval would be at the conclusion of the environmental process, and building permits could be issued at the conclusion of the land use process. The applicant has submitted a building permit application (Federal Way File #07-102510-00-CO) and an Engineering application (file #07-102038-00-EN) which are under review by City staff. 7. Concur with the checklist. Staff Evaluation Page 2 Cedar Park at West Campus 07-101626/noa. i.o. 41111 8. The applicant has submitted the following environmental information for the proposed office project: o Subsurface exploration, geologic hazard and geotechnical engineering report for Dunham project (earlier project at this site) prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., dated Jan 17, 2005 o Talasaea wetland reconnaissance and delineation for West Campus Medical Arts site (City file #05-100807-UP), dated March 18, 2005 o Wetland buffer averaging plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, dated March 28, 2007 o Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, dated March 23, 2007, revised May 31, 2007 o Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Area, dated June 11, 2007 9-12. Concur with the checklist. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Earth a. The project site is rolling. b. Approximately 22% slope is at the knoll located adjacent to the wetland. The 1973 King County Soils Survey map lists the soils type as Everett — Alderwood Sandy Loam (EwC) with soils characterized as gravelly sandy loam, with 0 to 6% slopes. d-e. Concur with the checklist. £ Concur with the checklist. A TESC plan will be required for review and approval prior to issuance of any construction permits. No disturbance is proposed within the 100-foot wetland buffer. g. Concur with the checklist. h. No disturbance into the 100-foot wetland buffer is proposed. Additionally, the applicant must submit a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESL) consistent with provisions of the FWCC to prevent and/or minimize erosion impacts during the construction phase of the project. Clearing and grading activities are regulated by FWCC Chapter 22, the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), and City amendments to the manual. Post construction erosion potential will be minimized by applicant's compliance with the KCSWDM in designing the proposed on -sate stormwater detention facility. As the site is within a wellhead protection zone, compliance with code provisions will prevent and/or minimize erosion impacts, thus no mitigation measures are necessary. 2. Air Page 3 Staff Evaluation Cedar Park at West Campus 07-101626/no�. n 41111 a. Short-term effects to air quality will occur during construction and paving operations. Longer term impacts, due to vehicle emissions from company vehicles and future employees and visitors, vary in level according to the amount of traffic generated in the future by the proposal. Construction activities, e.g., site preparation work, will contribute to a short-term increase in local suspended particulate levels.. Construction activity also contributes to carbon monoxide levels through the operation of construction machinery, delivery equipment and materials, and worker access to the site by automobile. These activities also involve emissions of hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, potentially elevating the level of photochemical oxidants, such as ozone, into the ambient air. In addition, vehicles parked in the garage located under the building will produce vehicular emissions. b. Off site sources of emissions are the 6a' Avenue South roadway and the ingress/egress easement south of the subject site. C. Compliance with local, state, and federal air quality standards provides sufficient mitigation of potential impacts. Large wall openings in the below -building parking lot will provide air circulation and help to dissipate vehicular emissions. Enhancement of on -site vegetation and landscaping will provide filtering of suspended particulates. Water a. 1 _ Concur with the checklist. Category H wetlands are regulated with 100-foot buffers under Federal Way City Code (FWCC). 2. There will be clearing and grading activities conducted within 200 feet of the wetland edge, but the applicant has modified the proposal to eliminate any intrusion into the 100-foot buffer of the regulated wetland. 3-6. Concur with the checklist. b. 1-2. Concur with the checklist. There are no proposed groundwater withdrawals or discharges associated with the parking lot improvements. The project site is located within the ten-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District Wells 10 and 10A, and the site is classified as a "Medium Risk Parcel" for the District's Wellhead Protection Program. These wellheads are located three-quarters of a mile south of the proposed office building. The applicant completed a Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Area and noted that the proposed development will not store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous materials listed in the checklist. This will be reviewed in conjunction with construction permits. 1. Stormwater runoff from the site (roof and parking lot runoff) will be connected to an existing storm drainage system located within an easement on the adjacent property to the north. This storm system discharges into the Category 11 wetland associated with Regulated Lake #3, which then discharges through a series of Staff Evaluation Cedar Park at West Campus Page 4 07-101626/Doc.1 D. 41111 piped storm conveyance systems and lakes, and eventually reaches Hylebos Creek approximately 1.5 miles downstream. The 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and city amendments require flow control standards in association with this project to provide detention to the two-year and ten-year rainfall events (predevelopment levels) before runoff leaves the site. However, Lake #1, which is approximately'/2-mile downstream of the site, is sized to provide the detention requirements for this project. Therefore, the on -site detention requirement is waived for this project. A water quality facility is required to be constructed for this project, and shall be designed to meet the Resource Stream Water Quality protection requirements of the KCSWDM. This requirement will be reviewed in conjunction with the construction permits. The City has also waived the requirement to perform a downstream conveyance analysis on the existing storm drainage systems, as City Surface Water Management staff had previously determined that that drainage system has adequate capacity to handle the additional runoff from the project site to Lake #1, thus no mitigation is required. 2. Concur with the checklist. d. Concur with the checklist. The project will be designed to meet the 1998 KCSWDM and city amendments to the manual. In addition, elimination of intrusions in the 100- foot wetland buffer will serve to reduce and control surface water impacts. 4. Plants a. Concur with the checklist. b. The Tree Preservation Plans prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers revised date June 5, 2007, locates 128 significant trees on the subject site, and indicates that 94 of the significant trees will be removed for building and parking lot construction. The plan notes that 34 significant trees (27% of significant trees) that are located within and adjacent to the wetland buffer would be retained with this development. If more than 96 significant trees are removed, tree replacement in conformance with Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-1568(c) (5) shall be required. C. Concur with the checklist. d. Concur with the checklist. Pursuant to FWCC Chapter 22, Article XVII, all required landscaping shall be installed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy (CO) or final inspection. FWCC Section 22-1564(f) requires that at least 25 percent of new landscaping materials (i.e., plants, trees, and groundcover) consist of drought -tolerant species. All developments are encouraged to include native Pacific Northwest and drought -tolerant plant materials. All retained trees are conifers. Animals a-b. The checklist states that there are `eagles in the area.' To clarify, bald eagles fly over the subject site and may perch in the surrounding native vegetation. However, the City's map titled Priority Habitats and Species and Natural Heritage Wildlife Data dated December 2000 shows that Bald Eagle habitats and boundaries are along Puget Sound, well over three miles from the subject site. Staff Evaluation Cedar Park at West Campus Page 5 07-101626/Dac I D 41111 C. The site is adjacent to a wetland, which provides habitat for a variety of birds and mammals. The site is part of the Pacific Flyway Migratory Route. The undisturbed wetland buffer will continue to provide for wildlife habitat, as will retention of up to 25% of the significant trees. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a-c. Concur with the checklist. 7. Environmental Health a. Environmental Health Hazards - The project site is located within the ten-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District Wells 10 and 10A. 1-2. Concur with the checklist. In addition, as the site is within a wellhead protection zone, the applicant shall increase precautions to ensure that activities on the site will not impact the drinking water supply. This will be reviewed in conjunction with construction permits. b. 1. Vehicular traffic on 60'Avenue South and on the existing ingress/egress easement south of the subject site may minimally affect the project. 2-3. Concur with the checklist. Noise will be regulated under F V1iCC Section 22-956, and may not exceed levels established in the Noise Control Act RCW 70.107. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. The site is vacant, with office uses to the north, south, and west. The 6" Avenue South right-of-way is to the east and an ingress/egress easement runs along the south property line. b-g. Concur with the checklist. h. The site is adjacent to a Category II regulated wetland. All proposed activity is at least 100 feet southeast of the wetland edge; no intrusions into the wetland or wetland buffer are proposed. In addition, the project site is located within the ten-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District Wells 10 and 10A. These wells are located three quarters of a mile south of the proposed office building. The applicant completed a Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Area and noted that the proposed development will not store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous materials listed in the checklist. This will be reviewed in conjunction with construction permits. Approximately 200 persons will work in the new office complex. j-1. Concur with the checklist. Staff Evaluation Page 6 Cedar Park at West Campus 07-101626/Doe.I.n 41111 9. Housing a-c. Concur with the checklist. 10. Aesthetics . a. Concur with the checklist. b. The project would change an undeveloped wooded site to a fully developed site with all amenities. No intrusions into the 100-foot wetland buffer are proposed. Compliance with the Federal Way Design Guidelines is mandated. In addition, tree replacement will be required if more than 25 percent of the existing significant trees are removed with project development. 11. Light and Glare a-c. Concur with the checklist. d. In addition, FWCC Section 22-950 prohibits artificial surfaces from producing glare that annoys; injures; endangers the comfort repose, health, or safety of persons; or in any way renders persons insecure in life or in the use of property. 12. Recreation a-c. Concur with the checklist. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a-c. Concur with the checklist. 14. Transportation a-b. Concur with the checklist. C. The proposed office complex would provide 59 parking stalls below the office building and 133 at -grade parking stalls for a total of 192 parking stalls. d. Pursuant to the FWCC, the applicant will be responsible for the design and construction of half street improvements plus tapers along the westerly portion of 6 h Avenue South. That existing street section does not meet city code standards. The Public Works Director, in a May 8, 2007 modification response, noted that 6`" Avenue South is classified as a collector street corresponding to city Roadway Section `R', and requires a 40-foot-wide paved street with vertical curbs, four -foot -wide planter strip, six -foot - wide sidewalk, three-foot utility strip, street lighting, and street trees within a 66-foot right-of-way. There is anexisting 60-foot right-of-way with five-foot sidewalk and three-foot utility strip in addition to paved road, gutter, and curb. The Director determined that as required improvements would not be harmonious with existing street improvements, the improvements would be modified to include only a streetlight and street tree placed behind the sidewalk. The applicant shall provide from the Staff Evaluation Cedar Park at West Campus Page 7 07-101626/noc.I D. 41111 proposed site three feet of right-of-way to be dedicated with a Local No -Improvement District Waiver of Protest Covenant to be recorded before occupancy shall be granted. Based on the modification, the applicant is also required to improve the northern portion of the private access roadway adjacent to the south property line to a paved roadway to a uniform 28-foot pavement width with vertical curb and gutter along the northern margin, and a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk adjacent to the back of the vertical curb. The applicant must grant additional easement width in order to accommodate the required improvements. Installation of the sidewalk on private property not associated with the ingress/egress easement is supported. The modification also approved a request to locate more than one driveway for each 330 feet of lot frontage along 61h Avenue South due to the expected Iow number of turning conflicts at the driveways onto the private access roads. The applicant is required to establisht an adequate site -distance easement near the southeast corner, of the site in order to maintain the driveway at that location Traffic. generated from the proposed development will also impact other roadways and intersections near the site scheduled for improvements. See item g below for specific impacts. e-f. Concur with the checklist. The City's Traffic engineers determined that trip generation results in 103 new PM peak hour trips. These trips generated by the project contribute new trips onto the existing transportation network. g. Concur with the checklist. The applicant submitted a Concurrency application which has been reviewed by Public Works Traffic staff. The Concurrency analysis will provide mitigation measures to be incorporated into conditions of Process III Project Approval, will address any failures of the City's Level of Service (LOS) standard, and will provide for the collection of pro-rata share mitigation towards the City's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) projects impacted by the proposed development. The following are components of the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan supporting the Process III conditions for the development. Staff Evaluation Cedar Park at West Campus TG2 Provide a safe, efficient, convenient, and financially sustainable transportation system with sufficient capacity to move people, goods, and services at an acceptable level of service. The City shall develop and adopt policies for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, and preservation of new and existing facilities. TP6 Give priority to transportation alternatives that improve mobility in term of people and goods moved for the least cost. TP16 The City's LOS standard shall be E. This is defined herein as a volume/capacity ratio less than 1.00 in accordance with Highway Capacity Manual (1994) operational analysis procedures. At signalized intersections, the analysis shall be conducted using a 120-second cycle length and level of service E is defined as less than 60 seconds of Page 8 07-101626/mc. i n. 41111 stopped delay per vehicle. Where transit or HOV facilities are provided, the LOS shall be measured by average delay and volume/capacity ratio per person rather than per vehicle. This standard shall be used to identify concuirency needs and mitigation of development impacts. For long- range transportation planning and concurrency analysis, a volume/ capacity ratio of 0.90 or greater will be used to identify locations for the more detailed operational analysis. TP17 Expand arterial capacity by constructing channelization improvements at intersections when they are an alternative to creating new lanes along a roadway corridor. TP24 Consider safety first in the design of intersection improvements. TP43 Minor capacity projects, placing spot (localized) traffic improvements, will be carried out to extend the capacity of system components. 15. Public Services a-b. Concur with the checklist. 16. Utilities a-b. Concur with the checklist. The applicant will install an 8-inch diameter water line to detector check valve and a 6-inch diameter sewer connection line. As previously noted, the site is within a wellhead protection zone and the applicant will be required to ensure that activities on the site will not impact the drinking water supply. This will be reviewed in conjunction with construction permits. V. CONCLUSION Based on staff analysis of the application, the completed SEPA checklist, and applicable City and county regulations and policies, the proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. The DNS is based upon impacts identified within the environmental checklist, attachments, exhibits, and supplemental reports as listed, and the above Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Application, and is supported by plans, policies, and regulations formally adopted by the City for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. The City reserves the right to review any further revisions or alterations to the site or the proposal in order to determine the environmental significance or nonsignificance of the project at that point in time. VI. EXHIBITS Exhibit A 8'/2 x 11 inch reduced site plan Exhibit B Vicinity Map Exhibit C SEPA Checklist, dated March 29, 2007 with amendments dated April 18 and June 8, 2007 Prepared by: Deb Barker; Senior Planner Date: June 11, 2007 Staff Evaluation Page 9 Cedar Park at West Campus 07-101626/noc. i o. 41111 vrc NOlONIHSYM 'AYM lYN303J xxme v.x •nuv�s �aiswr� ou • a �' " ""' ~� HMOS 3nN31, Y H19 SSYFF I ccsx s ' O S(1dWt/O ISM ltl ��lVd Htla33 90 .... a -- �; - S213N1ifYd .1405dYH21 "--- 133Hs N3n0) 'Nrla 31is Al J �a € x M l��r ]1 •Sti �� 1' i 3'� i Cedar Park At West Campus CITY OF Federal Way 33455 6th Ave S. Parcel No. 926500-0340 t— g 329 PL 5 � 33 5 OST 8330S, a� Sly � * S331P` ,9G site S335SS S 336 SZ _y S 337 LN T ` $ 337 f N LN S 336 gT �. 339 Get - S3,8PL N aQ� �' •��ST co 7G 0) _. Fille I'-T'07-101626--,SE „ 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Feet EXHIBIT � PAGE-JLOF_L Z\ N 44k DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECEIVE] 33325 S`h Avenue South GV G V G PO Box 9718 CITY OF Federal Way WA 98063-9718 Federal Way MAR 2 9 2007 253-835WV.CiLFax253-835-2609 1y.Co W W W.CI[Vili('CLICral W�l .CU311 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 43.21C, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about our proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for Dion -Project Actions. For non -project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. EXHIBIT- C PAGE.L-OFJT' Bulletin #050 — December 22, 2005 Page 1 of 18 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist A. BACKGROUND 1_ Name of proposed project, if applicable: Cedar Park at West Campus. A_K.A. Rhapsody Partners office building. 2. Name of applicant: Rhapsody Partners 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 3400 Carrillon Point Kirkland, WA 98033 Michael Hill (applicant) (425)250-1050 HAROLD CHRISTENSEN (CONTACT PERSON) (206) 325-2553 4. Date checklist prepared: 3/26/07 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Federal Way Planning department 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The owner would like to begin grading the summer or 2007 with building construction starting fall of 2007. 7. . Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Tenant improvements within the building. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Civil engineer will prepare buffer averaging documents for onsite wetland. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Do not know of any. EXHIBIT C PAGE 2� OFF Bulletin #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 2 of 18 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Site process III, Building permit and developer extension package. NPDES permit required by department of Ecology. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Construct (2) story office building with 25,495 s.f. each floor for a total of 5o,990 s.f. office space over one level of open parking. 192 parking stalls will be provided. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located at 33455 6th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98063. The site is located approximately 1000' southeast from the City of Federal Way Department of Community Development. See attached legal description and vicinity map. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The wetland buffer contains a small knoll that will remain. The site has a gentle slope west from 6th avenue south. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, mulch)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Vashon RECESSIONAL OUTWASH consisting of loose, grading to medium dense gravelly sand with variable silt content with areas of Vashon Lodgement TILL. exHiBrr C PAGE 3-OF Iff Bulletin #050 — December 22, 2005 Page 3 of 18 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 4000 cubic yards of class "A" or "B" material will be imported to the site for preparation of building pad and parking/driveway are. Other minor grading activity will occur to install the utilities. Source of fill unknown at this time. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. It is not likely due to the desired construction timing (summer). The contractor will follow all rules for earth disturbance. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately GS percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces, including building and paved parking after the project is constructed. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. Silt fencing, and BMP's for site disturbance in Federal Way. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Exhaust from general construction equipment. No know emission once project is complete. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Do not know of any. PAGE _-OF.. US'. Bulletin #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 4 of 18 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. None known. 3. WATER a. Surface. 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a category II wetland at the northwest portion of the property. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project will not encroach into the 100' buffer. See attached architectural and civil site drawings. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Does not apply. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Does not apply. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. Does not apply. EXHIBIT eo PAGE 49 OF Bulletin #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 5 of 18 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. Does not apply. b. Ground. 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Does not apply. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. Does not apply. c. Water Runoff (including stormwater) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Water from the parking area will filtered on -site before off -site detention. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not likely. On -site filters would hinder oil on parking,surfaces from contaminating ground or surface waters. EXHIBIT C PAGE__k__OF L& Bulletin #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 6 of 18 kAHandouts\Environmental Checklist d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. On -site storm filter vault. See civil drawings. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site. X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs _ grass pasture _ crop or grain X wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other _ water plant: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The parking and building areas will be cleared of vegetation with exception of three existing trees. Approximately 330 of the existing significant trees will remain. Existing vegetation will be removed and replaced with new planting at parking area and building perimeter landscape areas. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None know. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. A city approved landscape plan designed by a Washington State registered Landscape Architect will be implemented showing new landscape areas planted with shrubs, drought tolerant ground cover, trees and grass. exHiB -r ow Bulletin #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 7 of 18 kAHandoutsEnvironmental Checklist 5. ANImALs a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. birds. awk, hero�,eaver, other mammals: deer, ,er fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Eagles in the area. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. Wetland buffer and leaving approximately 33% of existing significant trees on -site. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The project will use gas for heating and electricity of cooling and lighting. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. EXHIBA:T- aw PAGE-0-OF�..,_�. Bulletin #050 — December 22, 2005 Page 8 of 18 k:lHandouts\Environmental Checklist c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. The project will meet or exceed the Washington State energy code. The building will utilize extensive insulation, energy efficient glass and WSEC approved mechanical & electrical systems. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Normal emergency services only. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. Implement safety program during construction. Tenants to provide safe working conditions. b. Noise. 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long - term basis (for example: traffic, construction operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction activities will generate short term noise. After occupancy, the site will generate traffic noise. ExHt T G PAGEOF W Bulletin #050 — December 22, 2005 Page 9 of 18 k:\HandoutsEnvironmental Checklist 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Approved construction operation hours and normal business hours once complete. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. The north property is office use for a real estate company. The east is a vacant office building. South is an office building. The property to the west is an apartment building.` b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. There is a trash enclosure from the office building to the south currently on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The trash enclosure will need to be relocated to the property to the south. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? OP - Office Park f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? OP - Office Park EXHIBIT CO PAGE 1D OF Bulletin #050 —December 22, 2005 Page 10 of 18 k:lHandouts\Environmental Checklist g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an environmentally critical area? If so, specify. The category II wetland. i. - Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Does not apply. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Does not apply. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any - Does not apply. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. Comply with Community design guidelines and ordinances. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Does not apply. EXHIBIT PAGE U OF� Tt- Bulletin #050 — December 22, 2005 Page 11 of 18 k \Handouts\Environmental Checklist b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Does not apply. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. None. 10. AEsT HETICs a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 41'-0" high above the average building elevation (ABE). b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. The site is generally wooded. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. Retain as many existing trees as possible. Perimeter will be landscaped. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Interior lighting will be visible through windows at night. Parking lot lighting will be visible at night. EXHIBIT C PAGE 14' OF�� Bulletin #050 — December 22, 2005 Page 12 of 18 k:\Handouts\Environmentai Checklist b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? CI No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. proposed fixtures are shoebox fixtures with "Nighttime friendly" ratings or approved equal. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Celebration park is within 1/2 mile of site. b. Would the proposed displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. None, c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. Provide passive and active recreation opportunities on -site with seating and pedestrian walkways. EXHIBIT G PAGE -OF= #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 13 of 18 k_\Handouts\Environmental Checklist 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, nation, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. None. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Site access will be provided from 6th avenue south and access driveway shared with office building to the south. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? A bus stop is located within 1,000 feet to the site. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project will have 192 parking stalls. None would be displaced. EXHIBIT C PAGE 4 OF-ir Bulletin #050 — December 22, 2005 Page 14 of 18 k:�Handouts\Environmental Checklist d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The project is expected to generate approximately 107 weekday PM peak hour trips. 7-9 a.m. and 4-6p.m. are expected peak hours. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. Bus service availability and on -site bike rack will be provided. Tenants can offer ride share programs. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Potential increase needed for fire and police protection of building. exH�B _ PAGE OF.,.,�. Bulletin #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 15 of 18 kAHandouts\Environmental Checklist b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Fire sprinkler system and well lit grounds. Site is very close to police station. 16. UTLL=s a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: icily, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer;septic system, other b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Power, gas and telephone will need to be extended into the site. Power and gas - Puget Sound Energy Telephone - GTE Water - Lakehaven Refuse - Waste management C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. SIGNATURE: DATE SUBNC=D: 3/28/07 EXHIB T C � PAGE OF t � Bulletin #050 - December 22, 2005 Page 16 of 18 k.\Handouts\Enviroamental Checklist NO DNIHSVA UM 3V8303J I .... ... R HAGS 3nN3AY R19 95M sndWV3 ISM IV )IUVd ldV(130 SMINVd AOOSdVHN W4 TPl! "i EXHI G LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 34 OF WEST CAMPUS OFFICE PARK DIVISION 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 97 OF PLATS, PAGES 55 THROUGH 58, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 34 LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 34; THENCE SOUTH 76' 15' 05" WEST 498.54 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 27' 11' 14" WEST 114.64 FEET TO THE TERMINUS OF SAID LINE. (ALSO KNOWN AS LOT B OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 8802019, RECORDED MAY 9, 1988 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8805090973.) PARCEL # 926500-0340-00 VICINITY MAP -th St j} to c j t�4t• Celehravon Park �Y. p Sea^?h Pt d `i 2 - 4Ao Ct.r _..5 332�G st SITE, 335tR St ' • 93 - :� N Federal ti � ! m �•_ .�. a4h. • s� {, c' �: _ - ' S 336iA S'r y __ _� - - -C 33gt11 SI N ¢� s Way j- L _ l - JI •�a'r .HSJ. __ •�i..' � 1 _S 3a•:rt151 Pamher ` r P c • S3y1� � •',rr• 'jai __._.. _— Geotechnical Engineering 0 Water Resources Solid and Hazardous Waste Ecological/Biological Sciences Geologic Assessments 6 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report DUNHAM FEDERAL WAY CLINIC Federal Way, Washington Prepared for Architects BCRA Project No.. KE04778A January 17, 2005 r RECEIVED MAR 2 9 2007 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PUILDING [SEAT. LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-7 0 0 N a c� a n 0 L) U Y. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 This log Is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for compplete interpretation. This summary applies only to the locaiion of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this iodation with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Duff and Topsoil Till Loose, moist, gray, silty SAND, with gravel and cobbles and roots to 2.5'. Medium dense at 3'. Dense at 5'. Bottom of exploration pit at depth 7 feet No ground water. No caving. Dunham Federal Way Clinic Federal Way, WA Logged by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Approved by:: 0 E R% Ni U Project No. KE04778A 01 /05/05 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ® 11 rn L1% January 17, 2005 Project No. KE04778A Architects BCRA 2106 Pacific Avenue, Suite 300 Tacoma, Washington 98402 Attention: Mr. Jeff McInnis, P.E. Subject: Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Dunham Federal Way Clinic 61h Avenue South at South 335'h Street Federal Way, Washington Dear Mr. McInnis: We are pleased to present - the enclosed copies ' of the referenced report. This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard,, and geotechnical engineering studies and offers recommendations for the " design and development of the proposed project.. We have enjoyed working with you,on this study and are confident that the recommendations presented in this -report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland," Washington i Kurt D. Merriman, P.E. Principal Engineer KDM/Id KE0477BA2 Projects1200477 ME\ W P 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 • Kirkland, WA 98033 • Phone 425 827-7701 • Fax 425 827-5424 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARD, AND GEOTECHNZCAL ENGINEERING REPORT DUNHAM FEDERAL WAY CLINIC Federal Way, Washington Prepared for: Architects BCRA 2106 Pacific Avenue, Suite 300 Tacoma, Washington 98402 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 5' Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 425-827-7701 Fax: 425-827-5424 January 17, 2005 Project No. KE04778A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal W ,Washington Project and Site Conditions I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazards, and geotechnical engineering study for the proposed new development. The project site location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The proposed site features and approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified, as necessary once project plans and details are finalized. 1.1 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be used in the design of the project. Our study included a review of selected geologic literature, excavating exploration pits, and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and shallow ground water conditions. Geotechnical engineering studies were completed to formulate our recommendations for site preparation, site grading, building construction, drainage, and paving. This report summarizes our current fieldwork and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. We recommend that we be allowed to review project plans prior to construction to verify that our geotechnical engineering recommendations have been correctly interpreted and incorporated into the design. 1.2 Authorization Authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. Jeff McInnis, P.E. of Architects BCRA (BCRA). Our work has been performed in conformance with our scope of work and cost proposal dated December 10, 2004. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of BCRA and their agents for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on a conceptual site plan provided to us by BCRA. The plan does not show site topography. Site grading plans were January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/!d - KE04778A2 - Projects120047781 KEMP Page 1 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Kay, Washington Project and Site Conditions also not available when this report was prepared. The site plan was used as a basis for Figure 2 of this report. The project site includes one roughly rectangular -shaped parcel that is currently undeveloped. The property is moderately densely wooded with third -growth fir, hemlock, and deciduous trees and an understory of blackberry, sword fern, and salal. A topographic hill exists on the western portion of the site with a small lake to the northwest of the hill. The remainder of the property is relatively flat to hummocky. Based on our current understanding of the project, a single -story, medical clinic/office building will be constructed on the eastern half of the property. A second smaller building is shown west of the main clinic. The building will be constructed at or near grade and will utilize conventional, wood -frame, residential -type construction. Paved parking areas and standard utilities will also be constructed with a storm water conveyance system along the northeast property line. We assume that the western parking area will be graded to remove the existing hill. Grade transitions between the parking area and the existing lake/wetland will be completed with a rockery. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field study included the excavation of seven exploration pits to gain subsurface information about the site. We also noted that previous subsurface exploration has been performed by others on this site. However, we were not provided test pit logs or an existing geotechnical report for our review. The various types of sediments, as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may represent gradational variations between sediment types in the field. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the seven exploration pits completed for this study. The number, locations, and depths of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/Id - KE04778A2 - Projects120047781 KEMP Page 2 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Aro'ect and Site Conditions 3.1 Exploration Pits The exploration pits were excavated using a track -mounted excavator. The pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in the exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by a geotechnical engineer from our firm. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as necessary. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of selected geologic literature. The general distribution of geologic units is shown on the field logs. The explorations generally encountered loose sand and gravel interpreted as recessional outwash overlying medium dense grading to very dense silty sand with gravel and cobbles interpreted as lodgement till. The on - site sediments are mapped as till deposits by Booth et al., 2003, Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Washington. 4.1 Stratigraphy Duff/Topsoil A surficial layer of forest duff and organic topsoil was encountered at the location of each of the exploration pits. This organic layer ranged from approximately 6 to 12 inches in thickness. Due to their high organic content, these materials are not considered suitable for foundation, pavement, or slab -on -grade floor support, or for use in a structural fill. Vashon Recessional Outwash Deposits Sediments interpreted to be representative of Vashon recessional outwash were encountered directly below the surficial duff and topsoil at all exploration locations to depths ranging from 3 to 5.5 feet except in EP-7 where recessional outwash was not present. The Vashon recessional outwash sediments generally consisted of loose, grading to medium dense gravelly sand with variable silt content. Recessional outwash was deposited by rivers flowing from the base of northward -retreating continental glaciers near the end of the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation roughly 13,000 years ago. Recessional outwash deposits are typically somewhat loose, but are suitable for support of foundations, floor slabs, and paving with proper preparation. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/td - KE0477842 - Projects120047781 KEMP Page 3 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Project and Site Conditions Vashon Lodgement.Till Many of our exploration pits encountered dense grading to very dense silty sand with gravel, cobbles, and occasional boulders interpreted as lodgement till. The lodgement till observed in our explorations was gray in color and strongly cemented at depth. Lodgement till was deposited at the base of an active continental glacier, and was subsequently compacted by the weight of the overlying glacial ice. Lodgement till typically possesses high strength and low compressibility attributes that are favorable for support of foundations, floor slabs, and paving with proper preparation. Lodgement till is silty and moisture -sensitive. In the presence of moisture contents above the optimum moisture content for compaction purposes, lodgement till can be easily disturbed by vehicles and earthwork equipment. Careful management of moisture -sensitive soils, as recommended in this report, will be needed to reduce the potential for disturbance of wet lodgement till soils and costs associated with repairing disturbed soils. 4.2 Hydrology Ground water was not encountered in any of our exploration pits. However, our exploration pits were excavated at the beginning of the "wet" season and may provide a reasonable assessment of ground water conditions that may be encountered during normal construction activities during the "dry" season. We expect that seasonal seepage will occur throughout the site during normal construction activities that begin towards the end of the "wet" season in April. This seepage is representative of interflow. Interflow commonly occurs in areas underlain by lodgement till and originates as surface water that percolates down through the near -surface, relatively permeable recessional outwash and weathered till soils and becomes trapped or "perched" atop the underlying, relatively impermeable, unweathered lodgement till sediments. Interflow is often a seasonal phenomenon. However, on this site interflow helps sustain the on -site permanent wetlands. It should be noted that the presence and depth of seepage at the site may vary in response to such factors as changes in season, precipitation, and site use. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/Id - KE04778A2 - Projeas120047781 KEMP Page 4 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, slope, and shallow ground water conditions as observed and discussed herein. 5.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. Most of these events are small and are usually not felt by humans. However, large earthquakes do occur as evidenced by the 2001, 6.8-magnitude event; the 1965, 6.5-magnitude event; and the 1949, 7.2-magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this region during recorded history and was centered in the Olympia area. Evaluation of earthquake return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is likely within a given 20-year period. Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: 1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is discussed below. 5.1 Surficial Ground Rupture The nearest known fault trace to the project is the Tacoma Fault located approximately 10 miles to the northeast. No evidence of recent surficial ground rupture has been noted along this fault zone. The recurrence interval for movement along this fault system is still unknown, although it is hypothesized to be in excess of several thousand years. Due to the suspected long recurrence intervals and the distance to this fault zone, the potential for surficial ground rupture is considered to be low during the expected life of the structures and no mitigation efforts beyond complying with the current (1997) Uniform Building Code (UBC) or 2003 International Building Code (IBC) are recommended. 5.2 Seismically Induced Landslides It is our opinion that the risk of damage to the proposed structures by seismically induced landsliding is low due to gentle slope inclinations and the presence of medium dense to very dense soils observed below sloping areas of the site. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/ld - KE04778A2 - Projects120047781 KEIWP Page 5 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal W , Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations 5.3 Liquefaction Liquefaction is a temporary loss in soil shear strength that can occur when loose granular soils below the ground water table are exposed to cyclic accelerations such as those that occur during earthquakes. The observed site soils were generally dense and silty or were not saturated, and are not expected to be prone to liquefaction. A detailed liquefaction analysis was not completed as a part of this study, and none is warranted in our opinion. 5.4 Ground Motion The project site is located within a Zone 3 rating for seismic activity on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest) based on the Seismic Zone Map of the United States, Figure No: 16-2 in the 1997 edition of the UBC. This zonation is based on past earthquake activity in the Puget Sound region. As such, design recommendations in this report accommodate the possible effect of seismic activity in areas with a Zone 3 rating corresponding to a peak ground acceleration of 0.2g (a Richter magnitude 7.5 earthquake occurring directly beneath the site) in accordance with UBC guidelines using soil type Sc. This soil type corresponds to seismic coefficients: Ca = 0.33 and Cv = 0.45. Design of the project should also be consistent with 2003 IBC guidelines. In accordance with the 2003 IBC, the following values should be used: Site Class "C" (Table 1615.1.1) Ss = 125 % (Figure 1516[1]), Fa=1.0 (Table 1615.1.2[1]) Si = 40% (Figure 1516[2]), Fv=1.4 (Table 1615.1.2[2]) 6.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The sediments underlying the site generally contain silt and fine sand and will be sensitive to erosion, especially in the sloping portions of the site. In order to reduce the amount of sediment transport off the site during construction, the following recommendations should be followed. 1. Silt fencing should be placed around the lower perimeter of all cleared area(s). All silt fencing must be keyed into the existing subgrade a minimum of 6 inches. The fencing should be periodically inspected and maintained as necessary to ensure proper function. 2. To the extent possible, earthwork -related construction should proceed during the drier periods of the year and disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. Temporary erosion control measures should be maintained until permanent erosion control measures are established. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGBNd-KE04778A2-Projects 120047781KE1WP Page 6 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Georechnical Engineering Report Federal W , Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations 3. Areas stripped of vegetation during construction should be mulched and hydroseeded, replanted as soon as possible, or otherwise protected. During winter construction, hydroseeded areas should be covered with clear plastic to facilitate grass growth. 4. If excavated soils are to be stockpiled on the site for reuse, measures should be taken to reduce the potential for erosion from the stockpile. These could include, but are not limited to, covering the pile with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas, and the use of straw bales/silt fences around pile perimeters. 5. Interceptor swales with rock check dams should be constructed to divert storm water from construction areas and to route collected storm water to an appropriate discharge location. 6. A rock construction entrance should be provided to reduce the amount of sediment transported off -site on truck tires. 7. All storm water from impermeable surfaces, including driveways and roofs, should be tightlined into approved facilities and not be directed onto or above steeply sloping areas. 7.0 LANDSLIDE HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The project site was characterized by gentle slopes. Topographic survey information was not provided to us on the conceptual site plan. Based on our observations, we did not identify areas that meet City of Federal Way classification criteria for regulation as steep slopes. However, this should be confirmed by topographic survey. In our opinion, the observed slope inclinations do_ not present a significant landslide risk. __ If recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into project design and construction, no detailed landslide hazard analysis is warranted, in .our opinion. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/!d - KE0477842 - Projects12004778 1 KEIWP Page 7 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Design Recommendations III. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 8.0 INTRODUCTION Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the proposed project is feasible provided the recommendations contained herein are properly followed. The bearing stratum is relatively shallow, and conventional shallow foundations and standard pavement sections should perform well with proper subgrade preparation in most areas. 9.0 SITE PREPARATION Site preparation of building and pavement areas should include removal of all trees, brush, debris, and any other deleterious materials. The existing topsoil and root mat should be removed from areas where new buildings, paving, or other structures are planned. These materials will "swell" some 25 to 30 percent upon excavation. The actual observed in -place depth of duff and topsoil at the exploration locations is presented on the exploration logs in the Appendix. After stripping, remaining roots and stumps should be removed from structural areas. All soils disturbed by stripping and grubbing operations should be recompacted as described below for structural fill. Once excavation to subgrade elevation is complete, the resulting surface should be proof -rolled with a loaded dump truck or other suitable equipment. Any soft, loose, or yielding areas should be excavated to expose suitable bearing soils. The subgrade should then be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by the American Society__ for Testing and Materials (ASTM):D-1557 test procedure.- Structural fill can then be placed to achieve desired grades, if needed. 9.1 Tcniporary Cut Slopes In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and should be determined during construction. For estimating purposes, however, temporary unsupported cut slopes can be planned at 1H:1V (Horizontal: Vertical) or flatter in the lodgement till, and 1.5H:1V in the recessional outwash deposits. Permanent cut or fill slopes should not be steeper than 211:1V. These slope angles are for areas where ground water seepage is not encountered, and assume that surface water is not allowed to flow across the temporary slope faces. If ground or surface water is present when the temporary excavation slopes are exposed, flatter slope angles will be required. As is typical with earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/ld - KE04778A2 - Projecis120047781 KEMP Page 8 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Design Recommendations 9.2 Site Disturbance Most of the on -site till soils contain substantial fine-grained material which makes them moisture -sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. 'The contractor must use care during site preparation and excavation operations so that the underlying soils are not softened. If disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to grade with structural fill. 9.3 Winter Construction It may be necessary to dry some of the site soils during favorable dry weather conditions to allow reuse in structural fill applications if moisture. contents are elevated at the time of construction. If construction takes place in winter, drying is not expected to be feasible, and we anticipate that all of the lodgement till soils and potentially some of the outwash soils will be unsuitable for structural fill applications. Even during dry weather, site soils excavated for installation of buried utilities might not be suitable for utility backfill under paving or other structures. We recommend budgeting for backfill of buried utility trenches in structural areas with select, imported structural fill. For summer construction, significant, but unavoidable effort may be needed to scarify, aerate, and dry site soils that are above optimum moisture content to reduce moisture content prior to compaction in structural fill applications. Care should be taken to seal all earthwork areas during mass grading at the end of each workday by grading all surfaces to drain and sealing them with a smooth -drum roller. Stockpiled soils that will be reused in structural fill applications should be covered whenever rain is possible. If winter construction is expected, crushed rock fill could be used to provide construction staging areas, especially where till is exposed in subgrades. The stripped subgrade should be observed by the geotechnical engineer and should then be covered. with a geotextile fabric such as Mir afi 500X or equivalent. Once the fabric is placed, we recommend using a crushed rock fill layer at least 10 inches thick in areas where construction equipment will be used. If desired, planned roadways can be paved with asphalt treated base (ATB) for construction staging as described in the Pavement Recommendations section of this report. 10.0 STRUCTURAL FILL Structural fill may be necessary to establish desired grades. All references to structural fill in this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type, placement, and compaction of materials as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is specified under another section of this report, the value given in that section should be used. After stripping, planned excavation, -and any required overexcavation have been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer/engineering geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be recompacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. If the subgrade January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGBAd - KE04778A2 - Projecis120047781 KEMP page 9 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Woo, L1ashington - Design Recommendations contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain arid- should probably not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical, placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of the free -draining layer by silt migration from below. After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free -draining rock course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non -organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. In the case of roadway and utility trench filling, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with Federal Way codes and standards. The top of the compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the location of the perimeter footings or roadway edges before sloping down at a maximum angle of 211:1V. The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material at least 72 hours in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than the No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered moisture -sensitive. The recessional outwash and lodgement till are estimated to contain more than 5 percent fine-grained material. Use of moisture -sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather and dry subgrade conditions. The on -site recessional outwash deposits contain smaller amounts of silt and are considered suitable for use as fill material under a wider range of site and soil moisture conditions. The on -site lodgement_ till soils contain substantial_ amounts _of silt and are considered highly moisture - sensitive when excavated and used as fill materials. At the time of our exploration program, encountered soils were judged to be at moisture conditions above optimum for structural fill use. We anticipate that most excavated lodgement till soils will require aeration and drying prior to compaction in structural fill applications. However, the outwash materials may be adequate for use as structural fill during summer months without significant aeration. Construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a select import material consisting of a clean, free -draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free -draining fill consists of non -organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction and at least 25 percent retained on the No. 4 sieve. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/Id - KE04778A2 - Projects120047781 KEMP Page 10 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Design Recommendations 11.0 FOUNDATIONS Spread footings may be used for building support when they are founded on approved structural fill placed as described above, or on medium dense to very dense glacial soils that are prepared as recommended in this report. Based on our observations, suitable foundation bearing soils are expected approximately 1 to 3 feet below the existing ground surface. The depth to suitable foundation bearing soils is presented on the exploration logs. Building foundations may be designed for an allowable foundation soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) including both dead and live loads when founded on medium dense native soils or structural fill compacted to 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection. However, all foundations must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum and no foundations should be constructed in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. In addition, all footings must have a minimum width of 14 inches for one-story structures, 16 inches for two-story structures, or 18 inches for three-story structures. Anticipated settlement of footings founded as recommended should be on the order of 3/4 inch or less, with differential settlement of '/2 inch or less. However, disturbed material not removed from footing trenches prior to footing placement could result in increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by AESI prior to placing concrete to verify that the foundation subgrades are undisturbed and construction conforms to the recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may be required by the City of Federal Way. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at 1H:1V from any footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area which has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. In addition, a 1.5H:1V line extending down and away from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in the bearing soils. 12.0 FLOOR SUPPORT If crawl space floors are used, an impervious moisture barrier should be provided above the soil surface within the crawl space. Slab -on -grade floors may be used over medium dense to very dense native soils, or over structural fill placed as recommended in the Site Preparation and Structural Fill sections of this report. Slab -on -grade floors should be cast atop a minimum of 4 inches of pea gravel or washed crushed rock to act as a capillary break. The floors should also be protected from dampness by covering the capillary break layer with an impervious January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/ld - KE0477BA2 - Projects120047781 KEMP Page 11 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal tarry, Washington Design Recommendations moisture barrier at least 10 mils in thickness. Floor slabs that are supported by site soils prepared in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this report or by structural fill should experience 1/2 inch or less of settlement. 13.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS All footing walls, basement walls, rockeries, and retaining walls should be provided with a drain at the footing elevation. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set at the bottom of the footing at all locations and the drain collectors should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the buildings. In addition, all foundation walls taller than 3 feet should be lined with a minimum 12-inch-thick washed gravel blanket provided to within 1 foot of finish grade that ties into the footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to foundations should be sloped downward away from the structures to achieve surface drainage. These recommendations apply to conventional shallow foundation walls and landscape walls less than about 4 feet tall. One should refer to the following section for walls up to 12 feet tall. 14.0 CAST -IN -PLACE RETAINING WALLS AND BASEMENT WALLS All backfill behind foundation walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally backfilled walls, which are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Fully restrained, horizontally backfilled rigid walls that cannot yield should be designed for an equivalent fluid of 50 pcf. Walls with sloping backfill up to a maximum gradient of 2H:1V should be designed using an equivalent fluid of 55 pcf for yielding conditions or 75 pcf for fully restrained conditions. If parking areas are adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the wall height in determining lateral design forces. As required by the 2003 IBC, retaining wall design should include a seismic surcharge pressure in addition to the equivalent fluid pressures presented above. Considering the site soils and the recommended wall backfill materials, we recommend a seismic surcharge pressure of 4H and 8H psf where H is the wall height in feet, for the "active" and "at -rest" loading conditions, respectively. The seismic surcharge should be modeled as a rectangular distribution with the resultant applied at the midpoint of the wall. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/!d - KE04778A2 - Projects00047781 KEMP Page 12 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Design Recommendations The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform backfill consisting of excavated on -site soils, or imported structural fill compacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended as this will increase the pressure acting on the walls. A lower compaction may result in settlement of the slab -on -grade or other structures supported above the walls. Thus, the compaction level is critical and must be tested by our firm during placement. Surcharges from adjacent footings or heavy construction equipment must be added to the above values. Perimeter footing drains should be provided for all retaining walls as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop against the walls. This would involve installation of a minimum 1-foot-wide blanket drain to within 1 foot of finish grade for the full wall height using imported washed 'gravel against the walls. 14.1 Passive Resistance and Friction Factors Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the natural glacial soils or supporting structural fill soils, or by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density to achieve the passive resistance provided below. We recommend the following design parameters: ■ Passive equivalent fluid = 250 pcf • Coefficient of friction = 0.35 The above values are allowable and include a safety factor of at least 1.5. 15.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The pavement for this project is expected to be supported by medium dense, gravelly sand (recessional outwash), dense silty sand (till), or structural fill soils. These soils should be suitable, with proper preparation, to allow the use of standard paving sections. Because some of the site soils were substantially above optimum moisture content at the time of our exploration program, remedial subgrade preparation might be required below the paving, particularly in areas of lodgement till soils. Remedial preparation measures could include removal of some of the existing site soils below the planned pavement section and restoring the planned subgrade elevation with select, imported structural fill, treating the native soil subgrade with Portland cement to stabilize the wet soils, or aeration and drying of existing soils prior to compaction of the pavement subgrades. We recommend that the final determination of how to prepare the pavement subgrades be made at the time of construction when weather and field conditions are known. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/Jd - KE04778A2 - Projecu12004778 1 KEWP Page 13 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Design Recommendations Preparation of pavement subgrade areas should follow the recommendations of the Site Preparation and Structural Fill sections of this report. The proposed subgrade, whether it is cut native soils or compacted structural fill, should have a minimum density of 95 percent based on the ASTM:D-1557 test procedure within the upper foot below the pavement section. Subsequent to compaction or recompaction, the subgrade should be proof -rolled with a loaded dump truck. Any deflecting areas or soft spots detected during proof -rolling should be excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural fill. Upon completion of any recompaction and proof -rolling, a pavement section consisting of 21/2 inches of asphaltic concrete pavement (ACP) underlain by 4 inches of 11/a-inch crushed surfacing base course is recommended for car parking areas. In driveway areas, a heavier section consisting of a minimum of 3 inches of ACP underlain by 6 inches of 1'/a-inch crushed rock base course is recommended. The upper 1 inch of 11/4-inch crushed rock can be replaced with 11/2 inches of 5/s-inch crushed rock as a leveling course, if desired. The crushed rock course must be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum density. Depending on construction staging and desired performance, the crushed base course material may be substituted with ATB beneath the final asphalt surfacing. The substitution of ATB should be as follows: 4 inches of crushed rock can be substituted with 3 inches of ATB, and 6 inches of crushed rock may be substituted with 4 inches of ATB. ATB should be placed over a properly compacted, native or structural fill subgrade compacted to minimum 95 percent relative density, and a 11/2— to 2-inch thickness of crushed rock to act as a working surface. If ATB is used for construction access and staging areas, some rutting and disturbance of the ATB surface should be expected. The general contractor should remove affected areas and replace them with properly compacted ATB prior to final surfacing. 16.0 ROCKERY CONSTRUCTION Rockeries may be used to prevent erosion of cut slopes; however, they are not engineered structures, and we strongly suggest that they not be used in place of retaining walls, especially where important facilities are adjacent to them. Buildings should be set back from rockeries so that a 1H:1V line extending up from the rear base of the rockery does not intersect the footing. Rockery construction is an art that depends largely on the skill of the builder. We would like to point out that although rockeries are commonly used, they occasionally have difficulties and should be considered a long-term maintenance item. Care must be exercised in selecting a rock source since some of the material presently being supplied is soft and disintegrates in a relatively short period of time. Samples of rock can be tested by AESI prior to their use in rockeries. Rockeries 4 feet high or less will usually not require a permit. The following notes present rockery considerations. In addition, the contractor should confirm that his configuration conforms to current King County and City of Federal Way specifications. A rockery detail is presented as Figure 3. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/ld - KE04778A2 - Projects120047781 KEMP Page 14 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Design Recommendations A. The base of the rockery should be started by excavating a trench to a minimum depth of 12 inches below planned rockery subgrade into dense to very dense, undisturbed native till. If loose, soft, or disturbed materials exist at the base of the trench, they should be removed and replaced with free -draining sand and gravel or crushed rock. This backfill material should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. The gradation of the sand and gravel should be such that of the material passing the No. 4 sieve, not more than 5 percent by weight should be finer than the No. 200 sieve. B. The base rock should have a minimum width (perpendicular to the line of the rockery) of 40 percent of the height of the rockery. All rocks should also meet the following weight requirements: Height of Rockery Minimum Weight of Rock Above 5 feet 500/2,200 pounds, graded, top/bottom rocks 5 feet or less 50011,000 pounds, graded, top/bottom rocks C. The rock material should all be as nearly rectangular as possible. No stone should be used which does not extend through the wall. The rock material should be hard, sound, durable, and free from weathered portions, seams, cracks, or other defects. The rock density should be a minimum of 160 pcf. D. Rock selection and placement should be such that there will be minimum voids and, in the exposed face of the wall, no open voids over 8 inches across in any direction. The rocks should be placed in a manner such that the .longitudinal axis of the rock will be at right angles or perpendicular to the rockery face. Each rock should be placed so as to lock into two rocks in the lower tier. After setting each rock course, all voids between the rocks should be chinked on the back with quarry rock to eliminate any void sufficient to pass a 2-inch-square probe. The rockery should be limited to 8 feet in exposed height. E. A drain consisting of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe enclosed in a 12-inch-wide pea gravel trench should be placed behind the lower course of rock to remove water and prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The remainder of the wall backfill should consist of quarry spalls with a maximum size of 4 inches and a minimum size of 2 inches. This material should be placed to a 12- inch minimum thickness between the entire wall and the cut material. The backfill material should be placed in lifts to an elevation approximately 6 inches below the top of each course of rocks as they are placed, until the uppermost course is placed. Any backfill material falling onto the bearing surface of a rock course should be removed before the setting of the next course. January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/ld - KE04778A2 - Projects 120047781KEMP Page 15 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, Dunham Federal Way Clinic and Geotechnical Engineering Report Federal Way, Washington Design Recommendations F. Any asphalt paving should be sloped to drain away from the rockery. In addition, the areas above rockeries should be planted with grass as soon as possible after rockery construction to reduce erosion. 17.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING At the time of this report, site grading, structural plans, and construction methods have not been finalized. We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops and possibly changes from that upon which this report is based. We recommend that AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations• may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundations for buildings and of new pavement depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of the current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project: If you should have any questions, or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. I . Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington Susan G. Beckham, P.E. Project Engineer Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site and Exploration Plan Figure 3: Unreinforced Rockery Detail Appendix: Exploration Logs 4 W nS A x 580 �'�GIS'i�R� 10NAL �4 i s 11l201 Q(1 Kurt D. Merriman, P.E. Principal Engineer January 17, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/ld - KE04778A2 - Projectsl2004778 1 KEI WP Page 16 r $ . i lid f 77 o � sr z na i (A ■ 1 co WL ol \!:l� n' , '-'r � u .•�'�' ,' d: • • y Y,f .�• �.._ .. {�•_�+. � .• � ='tea '��. i�b l-:� ��,,;: � �•� '�' �`3n t1 � •,S ,mot'. .,.. �' ��• � ] _---�?y�, .�' � ,.� cry . y' ��', - "•r_ ,� ;, ram.. ty: lb �f y 1Grya ate' liaTT a�• JP7'/A!U!3!A j r Lo o OD w r � o � (7LLJW O 0 z 0 w a UZ Z O U (9 Z a �j fn V w� J �QLL LL =W Z0 LU Iim LL V 1 9 C u W ki A W 41 "0 10 a) ed v 0 N JJJ iLLYWWgVunp SLL40 EP-1 ■ Approximate location of exploration pit 1 m Reference: BCRA Architects S."*% r A 0 23 80 FEET � HSSUGI�IieU CdIZII .7GlfrflCE:S, If1G. ' """`� ` DATE 01/05 PROJECT NO. KE04778A Min. 16"-- 0 1 00 5 L C7 12" M, Firm undisturbed soil (See Note 2) NOTES: No roadway, parking lots or building footings in this area ' Min. 2 or flatter) 1 Alin. 1' wide layer of 2"-4" quarry spolls adjacent to rockery Stable cut face in natural material (See note 5) 1" (or less) diameter washed gravel min. 6" cover over pipe, 2" gravel under pipe Min. 4" diameter perforated rigid PVC pipe. Min. 1% continuous slope to outlet 1. Rockeries higher than 5' shall be constructed of rocks of graduated sizes from 5—man to 2—man, from bottom to top. Rockeries of 5' or lower shall be constructed of 3—man to 2—man, from bottom to top. 2. Inspection of subgrade, placement of base course and drainage, and finished rockery by engineer is required. 3. Rock shall be sound and have a minimum density. of 160 pounds per cubic foot. 4. The long dimension of all rocks shall be placed perpendicular to the wall. Each rock should bear on two rocks in the tier below. 5. Rockeries are erosion —control structures, not retaining walls. Natural material must be stable and free standing in cut face. Maximum height of 3 feet for rockeries facing fill soils. 6. See text of report for additional recommendations. Rock Lb. Avg. Dimension In. 1-Man 50-200 12 to 18 2-Man 200-700 18 to 28 3-Man 700-2000 28 to 36 4-Man 2000-4000 36 to 48 5-Man 4000-6000 48 to 54 m Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. UNREINFORCED ROCKERY DETAIL FIGURE 3 ® DUNHAM FEDERAL WAY CLINIC ® ® ® FEDERAL WAY, SH NGTON PROJECT NO. KE0 4 8A 0 o �_�_ , "I " o , o , o Well -graded gravel and Terms Describing Relative Density and Consistency C13o' GW gravel with sand, little to u- D Densit SPT"'blows/foot d .0; . no fines Very Loose 0 to 4 `- Coarse- Loose 4 to 10 CD o 0000o Poorly -graded gravel Grained Soils Medium Dense 10 to 30 Test Symbols U in vu 0 0 0 on GP and ravel with sand, g Dense 30 to 50 oa" o a o 0 o little to no fines Very Dense >50 G = Grain Size o N d a z o 0 0 00000 M =Moisture Content )blows/foot 6 c) ° 0 D Cpnsistency A = Atterberg Limits c v ' ' Silt ravel and silt y 9 y Very Soft 0 to 2 C= Chemical O t w GM gravel with sand Fine- Son 2 to 4 DD = Dry Density d m '0 Grained Soils Medium Stiff 4 to 8 K = Permeability co 2 W e Stiff 8 to 15 r Clayey gravel and Very Stiff 15 to 30 = NI GC clayey gravel with sand Hard >30 CComponent Definitions Well -graded sand and Descriptive Term Size Range and Sieve Number w o sW sand with gravel, little Boulders Larger than 12' o to no fines Cobbles 3" to 12' Gravel 3' to No. 4 (4.75 mm) H m > ,`; ' ;:.:' . Poorly -graded sand Coarse Gravel 3' to 3/4' ran tj W '� : SP and sand -with gravel, Fine Gravel 314' to No. 4 (4.75 mm). o .O little to no fines Sand No. 4 (4.75 mm) to No. 200 (0.075 mm) z Coarse Sand No. 4 (4.75 mm) to No. 10 (2.00 mm) J., Silty sand and Medium Sand No. 10 (2.00 mm) to No. 40 (0.425 mm) ` o •. SM Silty sand with Fine Sand No. 40 (0.425 mm) to No. 200 (0.075 mm) ca U y _a- C ::.: . gravel Silt and Clay Smaller than No. 200 (0.075 mm) LL Clayey sand and 0) Estimated Percentage Moisture Content SC clayey sand with gravel Percentage by Dry - Absence of moisture, Component WBiht dusty, dry to the touch Slightly Moist - Perceptible Silt, sandy silt, gravelly silt, Fewe 5 to 10 moisture > MIL silt with sand or gravel Little 15 to 25 Moist - Damp but no visible U5 v, m With - Non -primary coarse water o m t Clay of low to medium constituents: > 15% Very Moist - Water visible but N d v H v plasticity; silty, sandy, or not free drainin -Fines content between g Z ., CL gravelly clay, lean clay 5% and 15% Wet -Visible free water, usually w E from below water table = J _ — Organic clay or silt of low Symbols ti m = oL plasticity -Blows/6' or 0 — Sampler portion of 6" Cement grout Type surface seal Elastic silt, clayey silt, silt Sam ter T e OIttOSDInm MH with micaceous or Description ul Bealtonite S o diatomaceous fine sand or Sampler3.0' OD Split -Spoon Sampler PFilter pack with osilt (SPT)3.25' OD Split -Spoon Ring Sampler N ; := btank casing Clay of high plasticity, - section Bulk sa':Screened ,mac, c r CH sandy or gravelly clay, fat 3.0" OD Thin -Wall Tube Sampler casing 1° E clay with sand or gravel (including Shelby tube) _ with filtert� ack p -' Grab Sa End cap Organic clay or silt of Portion not recovered OH medium to high ttf Percentage by dry weight t°t Depth of ground water plasticity (2) (SPT) Standard Penetration Test 1 ATO = At time of drilling (ASTM D-1586) S Static water level (date) >, Peat, muck and other (3) In General Accordance with y rn co PT highly organic soils Standard Practice for Description tsl Combined USCS symbols used for = O and Identification of Soils (ASTM D-2488) fines between 5%and 15% Classifications of soils in this report are based on visual field and/or laboratory observations, which include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size, and plasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply field or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification methods of ASTM D-2487 and D-2488 were used as an identification guide for the Unified Soil Classification System. rn - Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. FlcuRe tj ®®® Eploratan Lager A_1 9 A - LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-1 This log is par# of the rapart prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. [AESI] for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time, The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Duff and Topsoil 1 Recessional Outwash Loose grading to medium dense, moist, brown, medium SAND with silt, gravel and cobbles. 2 Roots to 2', medium dense at 2'. 3 _. __ rill Dense to very dense, moist, gray silty SAND, with gravel and cobbles. 4 5 Very dense below 5 . 6 71 _ Bottom of exploration pit at depth 7 feet 8 No ground water. Slight caving 0 to 2'. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 - 19 — 1 Ln 0 N N a c� d Logged by: SGB In Approved by: Dunham Federal Way Clinic Federal Way, WA Project No. KE04778A 01 /05/05 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-2 0 N z a m 0 U Y This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AES€) for the named project and should be together that for interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the Z a read with report complete time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location Wth the passage of time. The data presented are p a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Duff and Topsoil 1 Recessional Outwasb Loose, moist, brown, medium to coarse SAND, with silt and gravel and cobbles. 2 3 Roots to 3', medium dense at 3', very moist at contact and slightly mottled. Till 4 Dense, moist, gray, silty SAND, with gravel and cobbles. 5 Very dense at 5'. 6 7 Strongly cemented and very difficult to dig below 7'. 8 9 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 8 feet No ground water. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dunham Federal Way Clinic Federal Way, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE04778A Logged Approvedd by:: 0 EM N a 01105/05 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-3 This log is part of the reportprepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named pproject and should be w read together with that report for complete Interpretation. This summary a plies only to the locafion of this trench at the a time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of tirne. The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5- 6 - 7 - 8- 9- 10 - 11 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - DESCRIPTION ❑uff and Topsoil Recessional Outwash Loose, moist, brown, SAND, with silt, gravel, and cobbles. Few silt and medium dense below 2.5'. Till Dense, moist, gray, silty SAND, with gravel and cobbles. Very dense at 6.5' and strongly cemented. Very difficult to dig below 7'. Bottom of exploration pit at depth 8 feet No ground water. No caving. Dunham Federal Way Clinic Federal Way, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Logged Approvedd by:: 0 9 M M 6 Project No. KE04778A 01105/05 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-4 i w This fog is part pf the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. �AESI} for the named project and should be read together with that report for compplete interpretation. This summary a plies only to the location of this trench at the m time of excavation. Subsurface oondi 'ons may change at this Location with the passage of time. The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Duff and Topsoil 1 Recessional Outwash Loose, moist, brown, SAND, few silt, with gravel and cobbles. 2 Medium dense at 2.5'. 3 f Till 4 Very dense, moist, gray, silty SAND, with gravel and cobbles. 5 - 6 — Bottom of exploration pit at depth 6 feet 7 — No ground water. No caving. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dunham) Federal Way Clinic Federal Way, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc Logged by: SGB Approved by:kQJ Project No. KE04778A 01/05/05 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-5 Z9 a) This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this french at the time of excavation. Subsurface this location the time. data o conditions may change at with passage of The presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Duff and Topsoil 1 Recessional Outwash Loose, moist, brown, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL, with cobbles, few silt. 2 Medium dense at 2.5', roots to 2.5'. 3 4 5 6 Till Dense, very moist, brown, fine to medium SAND, with silt, few gravel. Till Dense, very moist, gray, silty SAND, with gravel and cobbles. 8 T 9 Very dense at 9.5'. 10 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 9.5 feet No ground water. No caving. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dunham Federal Way Clinic Federal Way, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc Logged by: SGB Approved by: Project No. KE04778A 01 /05105 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-6 G This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Barth Sciences, Inc. (ABSI) for the named project and should be together that for complete interpretation. This to the this trench a read with report summary applies only location of at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Duff and Topsoil 1 _! RecessionalOutwash Loose, moist, brown, gravelly SAND, with silt, roots, and cobbles to 3'. 2 3 Medium dense, with few silt below 3'. 4 Till Dense, moist, gray, silty SAND, with gravel and cobbles. 5 6 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 5 feet No ground water. No caving. 7 8 ` 9 Ij 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dunham Federal Way Clinic Federal Way, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE04778A Approvedd by:: 92 Logged il ® mi t)1/05/05 9 0 41 t, - -V P. i pvc _'T RI -I -A�k CITY OF Fe' a ra I Way Public Works Department 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY ANALYSIS Cedar Park at West Campus 07101480-00-CN Prepared by Soma Chattopddhyay City of Federal Way Public Works Traffic Division /2Ja1y 700-�- Cedar Park at West Campus Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 Introduction This analysis studies the transportation capacity impacts for the proposed Cedar Park at West Campus in Federal Way, Washington. The study focuses on evening peak hour traffic operations at all intersections monitored for transportation concurrency impacted by at least one (1) new evening peak hour trip. All other transportation impacts are addressed by other applicable development review processes. The analysis was conducted for 2008, the anticipated year of opening of the development proposal for conditions with and without the project. Purpose and Objectives This study has been performed on behalf of the project applicant by the City of Federal Way, Public Works Department, Traffic Services Division, and is consistent with the City of Federal Way Transportation Concurrency Management code as described in Federal Way City Code Chapter 19, Article IV. The purpose of this code is to implement the transportation concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act, RCW 36A.70.070(6)(e), consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and WAC 365-195-510 and 365-195-835. These requirements apply to all new development and expansions of existing development and specify that the City may not permit development if adequate capacity in the transportation system cannot be provided to the development concurrent with the development. Adequate capacity is deemed to be provided if the City's adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard is met. The City's adopted LOS standard is contained in Comprehensive Plan TP16 and is summarized in the table below: Table I - Level of Service Thresholds Impact Parameter Threshold Minimum Level of Service Signalized Intersection E Unsignalized Intersection None Maximum Volume/Capacity Ratio (Xc) 1.00 Cedar Park at West Campus Page 2 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 Project Location and Description The proposed development is located at 33455 6t' Avenue South. A vicinity map is shown in Figure 1 below. Existing land use on the site is vacant land. The proposed project would consist of General Office. Cedar Park at West Campus Page 3 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 Vicinity Map r � . Site � Parcels Figure 1: Vicinity Map N W- S Cedar Park at West Campus Page 4 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 Background Conditions Traffic forecasts for year 2008 conditions without the project are presented in this section, representing the anticipated year of opening for the project. In addition, all projects shown on the City's currently adopted Transportation Improvement Plan are assumed to be constructed, consistent with the Growth Management Act's definition of "concurrent with development". The 2008 evening peak hour future volume for each study intersection was derived by applying a 2% annual growth rate to the latest available volumes, and adding trips reserved for approved development projects. The Background volumes are illustrated in Figure 2. Cedar Park at West Campus Page 5 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 Figure2-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year without project Project ID 07-101480-CN Fig2.1 Figure2-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year without project 1 1 1 S996 PI - 9 N ly 5 .}•} L�'p4lS r 6 + S3W 51 b 30B 21 SI f rp Q Q v $, 41 e SIN3 2 wr 3rP& ryn SSz2Sl �� '' '�'= S3F2St J� a' 3 7 N _ ys �r `ar � w 4gl � y�J II >ar S 3'�a sw325fil a +r ar ' L VASL Project ID 07-101480-CN Fig2.2 Figure2-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year without project � U S 2 91 '�� rq '�% r S z72 Sl S Ya a ►.0 9p S S< rX0 276 St . � u� ti t T S:r PI �. F Ng T _Q T t34 $$L i�j7 �7� k it rf'1 S266 Stj5. n v, 1`f �T tia �1• 11sr {' R"IM V� �Tll I. l� _ a' 3# I S 296 PI t. r d. a 55i A T T 9ry96 1111 tx 5 r �x S f y -� s < o 53g6 St :� 3d n- o $St j to t y mA V�d'7 ]10 i60.1 !QI 1u 4 vyi Is 30 l� �R S9x d1� Fi m a1a:K a sr. _ J "I S3106I, Project ID 07-101480-CN Fig2.3 Figure2-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year without project YI— ¢D N Cti szr2st N � b] lltl SSty LokO Ad 0 $ Rd �a QN a a� z s r C IS/ 5284" Q � r FFiF N Q S2885t «LI'!� ' ]]r�uHH Sias l� zess� w �� re �n N.y 1. iv 1 � 1 I ft a SMSt tiy0 lilt 9 r a Q $ 7 PI .- asp as r�+ S 683 a 8 St � o <' }o s rl S 300 � F Q a u+ u. S 304 St a Q Y'. S 30a St S.t 'tt i a r ac N Q Q Project ID 07-101480-CN Fig2.4 Figure2-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year without project N J i r rrra' yy�]� T a S 288 St ig `T �i6•, Mal gL L`i io S �+� �� r ~t L� 5 L N N f i ° 5296 Si 2� w yry96 LLLL I .Q? P o c ° s. 7 PI as a st J1 I. i. Il t J a PI S 300 e m ° a .. S 304SI Se rsl % N i 4T C 3916P� +Y 111 ° X 831251 , Y TTrr Y °r0 "• It _ F� Tart 21 ri a' T 7 N yr <' der rMs S317st 4 1 g. s� �14ri IM Was ••• �6 S328SI 1 s 1 ?x`' lurk 8 a 5321 S[ y,, Q _ W / 7f a T S A M �1 Project ID 07-101480-CN Fig2.5 mgur 2kem@«Ae Campus Horizon Year without project Sm , - - � \ • - .,19 7�\t� a»St } , § $ �\ • ..� r„, �� .��m ¥ ; , . J � f | t. _ j A z ■ ; .p _.S*a 2 � . . ,m- . � x ��. Project Do7m1#$CN ng2a mgur 2kem@mWe cros _m .». Project Do7 @igECN ng2 7 . ||. .__ \£ . �. .. - -- Horizon Year without project - � � { f � ' _� — • f � . . � •, J .. ` T -a- § Z � __«_ Figure2-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year without project a r' uSW 925 PI ,395 fix N - 1 }sv$ 390 p f17 33b $< �S S 330 St r,s s w � � s N c n L � & 9 o Sf �35 Qf e N y Y C w t y\ 1 '+< 1 r4 t= SW 336 St yyn/ Cae+s Dr 0' 5A �l�g q v S1 Wn � v t: ar r -R m r ram. t A v4 -!� L ;riy n s 14 i Sw 344 St �i< SW 344 SS on H v � ti� t SW 7St �2M g S34 S[ _ SWMSl }r iS 6W 3499r 9Bg qT a �qy N a' �m u SW 356 St rrp xi S 356 St Y 1•T �` 7 9 s� $f 3 16 i4 r 55 Mr e m _ .t, Project ID 07-101480-CN Fig2.8 Figure2-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year without project •3,�` . 1 �U SW 325 PI z � C S :g. m S SW 336 S[ a i '417 '�i 5W Carpus Dr a 10 { SW 360 r11Y p • y L +7rY R g a A n6-i A7 FO SW 340 `st iti Sw s< R 1 to SW 34i S[ }zl _ SW ZM4 Sl it fx SW 344 Se i v ..off Ir 05 E% 8W$8 � SW 3465t r SW 34951 4r N I ¢' ��z Haan R man ! �1s SW 356 St rO�il f Project ID 07-101480-CN Fig2.9 Site Generated Traffic Evening peak hour trips generated by the proposed project were forecast. The evening peak hour trips were then distributed and assigned to the adjacent roadways and intersection within the study area using the City's latest transportation model. No reduction in vehicle trips was made to account for a potential shift away from the automobile. ITE trip rates are based on observed vehicle trip patterns at each land use and thereby account for a basic amount of non -auto travel. Trip Generation The site is currently vacant. The proposed development consists of General Office. Trips generated by the project were forecast using trip generation rates found in the 7th Edition of Trip Generation (ITE, 2003). Land Use Code 710, General Office was used to calculate the trip generation. Procedures outlined in ITE's Trip Generation Handbook were used to determine when to use rates or regression equations and calculating weighted averages between different independent variables. Equivalencies from the 5th edition of Trip Generation were used to estimate independent variables not available at this planning level of development, such as number of persons and vehicles. These calculations are shown in Appendix A. The project is forecast to generate a total of 103 evening peak hour trips. Table 2 below summarizes the trips generation for the proposed development. Table 2. Evening Peak Hour Trip Generation I Land Use I Size I Entering Trips I Exiting Trips I Total Trips I Existing Uses T-+.i T,;�I 0 I 0 I 0 II Proposed Uses General Office 85 18 103 Net Trips 85 18 103 Notes: *Sources: Trip Generation (ITE, 7- Edition, 2003), land use code "/M Trip Generation (ITE, 5ch Edition, 1991). However, 73 trips are vested. Project is forecast to generate 30 new evening peak hour trips. Cedar Park at West Campus Page 15 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 7/26/2007 Trip Distribution and Assignment The evening peak hour trips generated by the proposed project were distributed and assigned to the roadway system as shown in Figure 3.1 to Figure 3.4. The distribution is based on the City's travel demand model, taking into account surrounding land uses and existing traffic patterns. aq -07 p 6 .ovl 0r 7 7 0 o ❑ a❑ 6 an - 4 q eI0 OD _� 0 � a q e a u 7 nc a q I ^ Q c vo 7 -. n 6 _� O O A Qea Q sled Q , 1 f DO OV `fl O F � `1 a a a a s a r s e ri , t s ro4i e as ! O O b � a tld aP Pp 4� PP ! a C eq i n p Oa � va'' rt tl fru � 2 � I 94 f 7� ❑ 0 0 ;7 l tt^ 0Q�Y1■ n PO en -e OJ U i a i I 0 oitl a o - e 0 q nfa ^ a a o tl n J v v a+ a y +Q 5 a 0 , a Q a— �� 0 6 q o a e iP a n Q ] offer i r I c Figure 3.1 - Evening Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment Cedar Park at West Campus Page 16 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 qv ' cos I Q a L'O+1 I A0Ava a IrrI —A � y ` 1G ]4 ��Y 41e 00 0 r C! P tlIP C y ' qua Ciao O<1 a a_• P6 a�'i� _. u, a a p 6 ea i A 4 9 a 6 n 0 Q pa Q rn! lavl 0 p IFas U b 0 1 1 1 a. a• R p p,p W n tl tl �P9 �! Z 1 a �e PO IJ Ae ^I O O G a m fl .J 7P a _ i 2 • 6 Q a a p ti j s 06 a� '� 7 7 a a G o] 3 7� A �.0 •N R 4 O P jp , p C r ry le Pa av r10 r G;a rya Ip tlafav a a.a a la o D 0 0 a 0 a�a G� I a wO V 1 3 as w N a N p n R ► 6 .. � ,. a -1 n� a a 1 e! 1 ! 5 IL I S I p a a fff% 1 r. s Q,4 1 Figure 3.2 - Evening Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment Cedar Park at West Campus Page 17 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 OI1 M � 9 a N C pI0 � a P 4a 0 tl p a C ❑ 1 9 bN � a ap ce a o op ❑ p a° a � 1 1 ° 6 nvD D � n 7 P 1 a otr P v a vv ° f e olo -n aq Ate: a v ❑ o +m v 0 'a ■ t t ¢ G S � q a va u� a 6 b D � n10 I I p�G OHO w A II p'- v w p ❑ C 1r 1� ! V : a a P alp ° + 7 `T � ❑ O N 0 5 5.7 7 z d e Figure 3.3 - Evening Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment Cedar Park at West Campus Page 18 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 �^� 4 4--im ¢ 0C 7 0 Q 0 f g�p�ap p tea. ee ov 4te v7 - rtl VP � 0a}p D 09n_0 0 f5 p Y M O 8 w I v � Nn van D u 0 0 A h " x � / � � P 0 pvv ❑ I II pgDp n b tl 0 a o Ufa bP�� 5 1 9 p ti a I 0 41 yjp t � ry J Z y� 0 ala ao �v" 4 0 7 1Q ¢$n tl 0-a t O + oo ab Q tl tl V 4 n�v C D tY q �6 aP Cp ❑ A 4 xN oo n ❑ a n + p ❑ T ad 0 0 0 p ❑ p G 0 D ° av �v Figure 3.4 - Evening Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment Cedar Park at West Campus Page 19 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 Horizon Year Traffic Forecast The evening peak hour traffic generated by the proposed project was added to the background forecasts in Figure 2. The Horizon Year volumes are illustrated in Figure 4 below. Cedar Park at West Campus Page 20 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/28/2007 nQur »k«m@«Ae Campus Horizon Year with project � A +® ® t \ \ 4 _ _. , —J:" � k a ! � ` 17 7 _ . : a/w35mm.7 m A / - . a ) � ` ` � • © SW 329 m 2 |�10m r �, \°f� ` \ § Project 2148$CN mgur 2kemR«we cm@a Project Do7m1q$c Horizon Year with project Figure4-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year with project Project ID 07-101480-CN Figure4-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year with project R --04 7 rn Q' 1 'rrrr o � yam �". s1 i9t SL° YC 52EBst jiL r� 28851 v�L S v�tA r1 `r t `t T eat t1 e v S a u w yg°J e� qy+ o w 197 718� g Ry 0 y• n 0 a a N mm V < 1 S1191 St n 0 1 rn m r 1 0 S2B651 Q� yti°'F' 111 d y � P v R 4 rid R S PI R OA o t fi{ 83 PI y S 300 o 0 a� w Q 4 � a e.i IRt g 3 366 S1 s.a� � S 304SI 53 i� 19 ` y U) Q Q Q' S 310 PIr v.Y w 1 ed _ 11y o .1esf r 5312310 e,pr rrrr 44 ra r r C � L3 Q 314 St 77 IN a ak S 3165 e e 1w 5 317 S7 s a W 1� 1� / rip T.': �- " ? s 321T S! I 1s p 11t =ZiT . trof^ SBA: tsi $t F ' S ' 0 'N Sr S 0 N Project ID 07-101480-CN Figure4-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year with project Project ID 07-101480-CN Figure4-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year with project cl '~•�L �f o9 - C11 14 SW St Z� �� '-!5y-s'J21 5- t596 +539 SW �21 r 1 32 lye �t01 jy}- S320 St a Ss- nNrn ��rr � �8 )75" 11 vea a to y ' TIC 71 �riv _II 55P fu or- «I N 3 w a' N �gy SW 325 PI la a St a i m 27 41 1L �w ►yya..� 93pS.%C i-rg S33081 27J nYt y S 9 3 S tiny 3 a' Sjy a Q Ob SW 336 St = rl T m SY� ''5' SW Camus Dr r $ 9 t '� 19 1 i ^!8� 3 � yl ti L a, SW 340 StAL -34 ipi , T? n m � s a_ as SW 344 St LL rta SW 344 StY L Lap rr pt^__ ' pis S �r r +' j 3!�� 4i{ Dwk o d 11 Q NYp • �A+ cN L to SW 7 St tit U SW 348 S1 id S St r Sw3as53 tbT =a ;;; Fo 2 �y -IT H � a a' V ry}N ��iA Bata � i "119 ''74 SW 356 SI �N Ftaa Project ID 07-101480-CN Figure4-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year with project 7Q'S � - *12rtS328A14yryE i69 651r1 5330St U 11j+ I iTiT f T K^PAS + � L -- �y' o } rat S 333 St I r ♦O� a y " d��sj � f fp6y • i Ida +6 S O i nrr � � s1 m S N < S340,4C' t — ry� l t 4 AP wt S 341 PI t �� S ' -• 53u St r� » 1 '!f SR 2to 10 17 r '• R ❑ v.J\t1CA N N 6 ` 4 � q 5 ' ss 1lVJ I-MT L't r SSt ..L �io� S3 St '%f� ruR re>6 JSJ r r IooS" it yk w �h 9 t`v �~ LP37 rii S352 St raa1 r r S � J-44. . S356 FA'�7 y�� 259 14 +9 rN �2 3 �X 3Zs4' 24 24d f i 29e� to M1� S h I i 5 359 N S M S1 u E+w S N -t ID 07-101480-CN Figure4-CederPark at West Campus Horizon Year with project �a w Yam.' S 14'J w�= , 9 US-14 S326 % JU x SS !! !J oS a305114 2f TTrf S 332 S 333 St _ y _ N 221 am pN "f 1n tfi S336St r m rvy4 3 S349 W 0 f 1 b� S 341 PI Y m a 44. Tex t v .t om t1y o �461 g f-1696 q 'L r176 JIJ u �4 r �1iryj'f f069-. Y � S 349 St ear � 44 dn1L rr` rM J 42 toy ;45� ` Q 5{' S 360 Sc o y a$ �9 T S 360 St M� ¢14a S 360 St Project ID 07-101480-CN Figure4-CederPark at West Campus 8 �St 3'e S St � S3tl6SlJ �# rn < J%tt° y's3lost r L i;' J 111 t,i9 •� ,B F:g S "�'� _±b a' '- f-gyr r9�9 MIX- aw vi it ss3ps� 2 —6 S 312 St: a6r i661 V �`° = y M S 314 SI � �7 L m �p 0_ 36 � ,1Q �iiC�' d41 iiy� •1Jy 17766� ¢' sm $3t69t >rg' Yjgs •� N SS17 0 N N y 29 3JJ71 .-1-3 ,JeS �L F4g 4 1-72 .7 L�yi H YPoO w r1996 S 320 St �Co f Q.9 7io +L � C '� r3s9B rIH 46v yyp-1• Tr my ism , S ,,, ni; ' 870-, N mii B0"1 106 — 6 .ids 32-, 1 0 0 X.a 01 log 34 0 'R W .>_,5 i7 r 51 rse sau St BJ a 9f a 5328Sf '° ,S 3305t J1i' 21 3f fT7T - f ; 5332 nd ,dd'M',.'_,LS333St �, LS n S 336 St Jl Project ID 07-101480-CN F2BB 134 E111 304 St M Horizon Year with project Traffic Analysis The quality of traffic flow at the key study intersections is presented in this section of the report. Table 3 shows a summary of the LOS analysis for the study intersections. Where a performance measure does not apply to the entire intersection, the table shows the measure for the worst movement of the intersection. Calculations are shown in Appendix B for Background Conditions and Appendix C for Horizon Year conditions. Table 3 - LOS Summary Worksheet 2009 Intersection Background LOS Conditions Standard ID North -South Street East-West Street LOS J V/C Met? 251 _ ; Pacific Hwy S --_ 451 : Pacific Hwy S --- 750 Pacific Hwy S -- _�--------------- 1050 :._Pacific Hwy S --_ 1051 18 Av S _ -4 1__________________ 1052 ' 20 Av S -J----------------------- 1751 ; Pacific Hwy S___ 2040 ; 1 Av S 2051 ,.Pacific_Hwy S 2140_j 1 Av-S. ____ _- 2240 : 1 Av S S 276 St 16AvS '+S --- PI S 288 St �------------- i 288 St S 288 St 18AvS S_304 St_ S 304 PI - ;- S_308 St 2250 :_PacificHwy S_--__:- -_ ; S 308 St 2350 :Pacific H S_____- S 310 St ------ ----------- --- ------------------- __ 2530 SW Dash Point Rd __ 5W 312 St - --- -- ------------------------------ 2531 ; 14 Av SW _ -_ ___ ; SW 312 St ----------------------- --------1--.-_-I----------------------7- 2533 ; 10 PI SW ; SW -312 St ^------ 25------------------ Av SWJ_------------ ,?.SW-311 2 _St __________ ____35_:-8 2540 ; 1 Ave S ; S 312 St ---------------------------------------------------- 2542 ; 4 Av S i S 312 St --___---•------------------------------4------______ 2545 J 8 Av ; S 312 St -S 2546 8 Av S_ S 312 St - Pacific Hwy S___-_ _ -i _ i S 3 -- St ___ _ -2550 2855 ; 23 Av S -------- - -------------------------Z- : S 317 St _._._----- 3012 ; 47 Av SW _SW 320 St ____J________________ _ __ ___ A 0.39 Y ------ ----- 0.76 Y - - ----y----- C 0.60 Y ----------- ------------- A 0.23 Y ----- -I---- 0.33 Y ------- - ----- -•-;----------- 0.24 Y ------ -- ---------------------- B r 0. .59 ----- Y - ---- -- 0.26Y ----------- 33 ------; ------------- B - 0.54 i Y - - ;----- ----- 0.31 Y _ C - 0.60 --3- - Y----- 0.41 ; Y 0. -32--I------ Y ------ D 0.79 Y ---------- ------------- 0.59 i Y ---------------------------------- A 0.55 Y ----- ;--------------------- - p'- - .0 57- ----- Y----- D 0.81 Y -------------------------- 0.37 Y B--:-----------J----------- 2009 With - Project LOS Conditions Standard LOS V/C Met? A 0.39 Y --------------------- 0.39 Y ------ ;------------- C 0.60 Y A : 0.23 11 Y .---f---.-.---------------- 0.33 Y .. _...----_____-------- --- 0.57--;----- Y----- 0 24 Y - ---------- B 0.59 Y .....:' __0-'- --- ---- 0.33 Y B 0.54 Y -------- -- 0.31 Y C 0.60 Y . '-------------------------- 0.41 Y .__.._..r_._______- -------------- -------- ______________ --------�--0-32-- ----- Y------ D 0.79 Y ............ 0.59 i Y A 0.55 Y ------------------ --- - - -- A - 0.57- ------ Y- D 0.81 Y - ---; -- --------Y------ .3 -- -- ------------------------- D 0.56 Y ___L-. -------- Cedar Park at West Campus Page 30 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/29/2007 3015 42 Av SW ' SW 320 St 0.30 Y 0.30 Y -------- 11______________________________i______-___-____--________ .....__..r-_ _______4__...----.-_.. ---------------------------------- _ 3022 30 Av SW SW 320 St- - -- 0_44- Y -'- --0.45-----Y---- --------------- 3025 26 Av SW : SW 320 St A ; 0.38 Y _A_ ; 0.38 _�____ Y 3028 ; 21 Av SW ; SW 320 St D 0.85 Y D 0.85 ----------i------------- Y --------,--`----------"-------•'-------------^----__'.____-•__�----- 3031 ; 14 Wy SW ; SW 320 St ----i ------"--i-----'------- 0.63 Y _0.63_ Y ___ _________ 3032 13 PI SW SW 320 St 0.48 ------------------ Y ---- __,--__ -0--- _ _ Y -_ __ --------------------------------- 3033 11 P1 SW _•-- --------____-_-------- SW 320 St - ----- 0.00 Y : 0.00 � Y !______________________________J______----..__-..__-____--._ 3034 ; 10 P1 SW ; SW 320 St .__..__. !___________!_____.....__. 0.93 Y _..._.. __�._______-_ ___--_----__ 0.93 «------------ Y -------- _------------------------------- 3036 ; 7 Av SW --_--________..---------- ; SW 320 St .._..._-- ---------- ___-__---.__. 0.56 Y ------------------------------- r----------- 0.57 Y -- --- --------------------------------------- 3037 6 P1 SW ------------------------- SW 320 St 0.48 Y 0 3040 1 Av S S 320 St C 0 74 Y C; 0.75 Y 3043 ; 5 Av S ; S 320 St 0.41 Y ; 0.41 Y _ ,__-----_---- 3050 i_Pacific_ Hwy S ; S_320 St C 0.74 : -- Y -- C 0.74 Y 3052 �_20_Av S -----------------�- S_320 St___.-_____--- �------Y---- -- C -- 0.64 C ------ Y _ ! 21 PI S -________________ S 320 St ------ ------ -- 0.01 �---•-Y----- ... --0-64 -- 0.01 _ -,-------------- Y »___•------------------------------•'-�----_.__".___«_'----'.__ I ......... r-"-------,'-.....----__ •___-- -i- 3055 ; 23 Av S ; S 320 St D ; 0.86 ------------ Y D --------- 0.86 Y ---- --------------------------------�------------------------- 3060 32 Av S S 320 St -------------------- B 0.56 Y B 0.56 Y --------J--`•-----'------"•_-----__---J------------------------- 3061 We,�erhaeuser W,y S S 320 St ...------�----__..._J------------• B 0.66 Y ... --------�...--._-.-1-------'-____• . B ------ ---- -------- ; Y---_ -------------------------------'---,------------------------- 3119 ; 36 Av SW J.SW 320 St ------- ;----------i------------ 33 Y 0--- _ ;_ Y - ;_ 0--- Y 3120 ; SW 323 St _ ; SW 320 St 0.26 - Y _ -_ .26---------- ~ -We�+erhaeuser W +-S-- S_323 St_________ Y -- _--_ - - 0.22_ - Y _3261 3348 ; 11 PIS S 324 St - .0.22 D 0.62 �_ Y D 0.62 ; Y ------------------ - ----- - 3350 ; Pacific Hwy S ;------'4----------_-__- - S 32 St ` .. C - 0.77 ; ---Y -, - C--0.77---------Y r---------- i_____________ ---- . _....._- ...- 3428 ! 21 Av SW ; SW 325 PI A 0.33 - .......�------------------------ Y A --------r--_--•---- 0.33 ------ Y ------ --------------------------------------'+------------------------- 3440 ; 1 Ave S : SW 325 Pl A ; 0.42 -----------I- Y A --- - 0.42 ---------- Y --------J------------------------------ , 3451 ' Av S , ------------------------- 324 St --------1 1------------ 0.31 Y ;--------- 0.31 Y ,_ -- ------------------J- ----------------------- ' --•-----! ------ - ;•----------- -- ---------J------------- Y 3540 ; 1 Av S S 328 St _ A 0.44 Y A ; 0.44 --Y 3550: Pacific Hwy S-------------S-'-'-28 St-------. 0_44 --- - - -. -Y --- --• _ -0.44--,--- -- _ 3637 :p 6 Pi SW , - __. SW 330 St - .... 0.25 Y 0.26 - - -- Y __ -- -- 3638 3 Av SW SW 330 St 0.40 ; Y 3640 ; 1 Av S ; SW 330 St C 0.83 : Y ----------------------------------- Y -- 3650 i Pacific Hw; S 330 St --------�---------------y S --------------1----"------------------- .. B ? 0.49 ; ---------r-- - -------------- -- Y -C- B ------- -___0.84--_------ ; 0.49 i ---------- - Y 3750 ;Pacific Hwy S i S 332 St 0.03 Y -- --- 0 -------------- ------ 3842 : 1 Wy S , S 333 St A 0.46 Y A 0--- Y 3850 Pacific Hwy S S 333 St ! 0.63 Y -- -_--- -----_ -- ..__ ----------------------------?-------------------- - - - ?----- 0- Y 3934 ; 10 Av SW ; SW 334 St 0.33 ; Y ------ ---------- ---- 3942 ; 1 Wy S 334 St S _ : 0 .59 Y 0.59 � Y 3946 9 Av S Av S 0.63 Y _8 _J_ 4028 _21_Av-SW-------------- SW Campus Dr---- -E------0.92__�....--Y----- ---E-- �- ' -0=92----Y_----- Cedar Park at West Campus Page 31 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/29/2007 4029 ; 19 Av SW ; SW Campus Dr____ B 0.59 Y B __; 0.57 Y -------'------------------------------------------- 4043 1 W.y S :1S 336 St ----- D --------,'---.....'-- 0.84 Y D r 0.84 .._.-.__ _.-.-.--_- Y ______________________-____--y---------_-----__-------_ 4046 ; 9 Av S ; S_336 St _ _---,_--------__y._._-__.----- C ; 0.72 Y C ' _ 0.72 ' Y 4049 1-13 PI S~----------------- -S 336 St------- - 0.52--;- ----Y- --- i------Y------ : ..---0.54-- Y 4050 Pacific Hwy S ' S_336 St__..-- D- 0.79 Y -- - , C - _0.80_ - ; --;----------- - --------i- _______-- 4052 ; 20 Av S -;-- -- ; S 336 St C -;-- --- 0.81 c ------------------------- Y C --- 0.81 --------- ; Y ----------------------------------------------------------------- 4124 ; SW 337 St --------- -•----------------- a•---------- . -- 4132 ; SW Cam us ------------------------- ------------ 10 Av S W C: 0.94 -- ----...---- Y --- -- D ------------ 0.94 ----------------- i Y -------------------p----------------------------------------- -- 4218 Hoyt Rd SW ; SW 340 St �_____ __________-_----_--_---____ -- __ - ;- 0.60 �...._...___i__..... Y __ _._ ___ - ..____________ 0--- --_____-- __- 4219 ; 38 P1 SW i SW 340 St ---------------- -- --- 0.34 r --------•------------ Y ,-:r__0.34__ ___•_-Y ......... ---------------------------------------- 4220 i 35 Av SW ------- : SW 340 St C 0.72 i -...-Y--- Y C 0.72 Y 4222: 30 Av SW ' SW 336_WY 0.35_ , ..ti .,.. - --0.35-- ------Y----- _ --- - --- 4223 SW 340 PI - _,-_ ........ SW 336 Wy-------_ ...... .... - 0-00- ---- Y - - - 0.00- ; - ---- '----- Y----- --------;-------------------------------- 7 W} SW -------- - ; SW Campus Dr_--- -_ �__0.74 __� _•- Y ; 0--- Y _4235_ ________________ 4242 ; IN S SW 340 St ? 0.47 ? Y ' 0.48 ____ __ � Y 4250 Pacific Hw}+ S_, S 340 St________---_ ' Y--_ B ------ ------ ----- Y__-_. ----•------- - - -- ___ -- 4328 21 st Ave SW . ----- ----- SW 342 St --B- _0.56_ 0.39 -- Y - - - 0.39 J- ' Y `----------------- -.......... 4341 1 W S J--._..----------....».. S 342 St .----. ------------------------ 0.30 - --- Y--- ----- - •:--------.. ---0.30- --.------" '--___�_'.. --------.1 -- --------------- 4350 ;_ 16th Ave S ------•------- i S 341 PI - 0.33 _ ; Y i 0.33 Y 44364 G Av SW ------'-SW _ Campus Dr___ A 0.64 ----------- - -- Y--- .A__ -- _0.64-_ - ---- -----Y----- -_ --------------------------------------------------- 4441 1 PI S ---•------- 1 W S ; 0.55 Y -------- 0.55 --- - - -- i ------------- Y ----------------- ------------------ 4460 ;Weyerhaeuser Wy S ------�'-----------.---- �_SR18 WB Ramps- ••------- C ----------,--------•- 0.55 ;- Y C 0--- 4----_ ---__» _ Y 4528 i 21 Av SW i SW 344 St A ........ 0.31 •------------r- --------, Y A : .31 --------- - ---___ -----_-.,------------------------------------------------------- 4546 : 9 Av S i S 344 St 0.21 i Y 0.22 Y 4550 : 16 Av S S 344 St C 0.53 Y C 0.53 Y 4560 Weyerhaeuser Wy S 18_EB Ramps _ C 0.73 ----?------------- Y --- C __ , __ 0.73 ' ----- --- ------ Y ----i------------- 21 Av SW _SR ; SW 348th St A 0.41 Y A _ ; 0.41 Y 4840 ; 1 Av S i S 348 St - C i 0.80 i Y C; ---------------- 0.77 i Y --- ------------------------------------•------------------------- 4846 ; 9 Av S i S 348 St ---------------------•------------ C 0.93 '---:: Y C: 0.93 i _----Y---- Y HwyS...--------�-S _ 348 St----------- 0.85 Y---- C -- ' 0.85 ; _4848.�_Pacific 4850 i 16 Av S ; SR 18 --C-- D 0.86 Y D --------r 0.86 ---------,--------------- Y --------------------------------------------------------------- 5050 i Enchanted P) w� S ------- ; S 352 St ------------------------- ---------r----------,------------ C ------- 0.59 ----------.------------ Y C --------r----------,------- 0.59 Y ------ ----------------------------- 5228 ; 21 Av SW i SW 356 St D 0.88 ------------------------- Y D ------------------- ; 0.88 -------------- Y ---------------------------------------y------------------------- 5229 20 Av SW ' SW 356 St 0.34 : �.......... ,.......................-----.._---------------- Y 0.34 ' Y ------------------------------------------------------------ 5231 13 W SW - SW 356 St 0.49 : Y 0.50 Y ' 5240 i Av S 356 St B 0.69 Y B :1.69 Y 5246 ; Pacific Hwy S ; S 356 St D ; 0,86 Y y.__._-_-_-.. D_ .. _0,86__ _ ► __ Y ------__y-----------------------------�_____----------...._-__-- 1 5250 16 Av S ; S 356 St -- ..--.--__-__-..-. , C 0.35 Y D ...-----'�---.....--r-------------- 0.35 1 Y ---..r-------------- ---------------- r---.--------------------- P 52S 1 Enchanted PEcw S 356 St ---------�----------s------------_ C 0.78 Y C 0--- Y -----�-------------------__ _;_S __ -------- -_ -'------------I -------- --------=--------__-------------- Cedar Park at West Campus Page 32 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 6/29/2007 5335 8 Av SW SW 356 St 5345 ; Pacific Hwy S ---- S 359_St - ----------------------- 5450 i 16 Av S ; S 359 St 6340 :1 Pacific Hwy S ' S 373 St A 0.50 Y ----------------------- 0.07 Y ------------------------- 0.50 " Y A 0.50 Y - -------------- 0.38 Y ----•-----,---.. 0.07 ; Y ------------------- 0.50 Y Pro-rata Share Traffic Mitigation The City requires all new development projects impacting projects listed in the City's currently adopted Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) to either construct the impacted projects or provide pro-rata share contributions towards these projects. The pro-rata contribution for each TIP project is calculated as the number of new peak hour trips (103) generated by the development divided by the estimated total peak hour traffic volume at the time that phase of the development is completed. However, 73 trips are vested. Pro-rata share has reduced proportionately for 30 new trips. If a TIP project has been deemed to be fully funded by the Public Works Director, the pro-rata share will be calculated based on the design engineer's current cost estimate subtracting funding from federal and state grants. If frontage improvements are also provided on a TIP project, the cost of the frontage improvements provided by the development would be subtracted from the cost of the TIP project before calculating pro-rata share of mitigation for off -site improvements. If the development's impacts on a TIP project vary within the TIP project, depending on the operational or safety issue the TIP project is intended to resolve, pro-rata shares may be calculated separately for each segment that is impacted differently by dividing the cost of the TIP project on a per -lineal -foot basis. Based on the estimated trip generation and distribution of the project traffic, the project would impact 17 TIP projects by one or more trips during the weekday evening peak hour. In order to mitigate the impacts of the new trips generated by the project and meeting the LOS standards, the applicant shall: 1. Prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, construct the TIP projects identified in Table 4; or 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, voluntarily pay the project's pro-rata share contribution in the amount of $38,887. The pro-rata share calculations are shown in Appendix C. No level of service (LOS) deficiencies were noted outside of locations where programmed improvements would be constructed. Therefore, no supplemental offsite mitigation is necessary Cedar Park at West Campus Page 33 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 7/26/2007 Map CAPITAL PROJECTS iD** Location Description Design Study, Environmental analysis to la I Citv Center Access Phase 2 improve access to City Center Add 2nd SB left -turn lane, 3rd SB right -turn lb City Center Access Phase 3 lane Widen S 320th St bridge over I-5, realign loop lc Citv Center Access Phase 4, ramp and NB off -ram Add HOV lanes, 2nd SB left -turn lane @ 288th, install raised median, signal @ SR 509 SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 3: S @ Redondo Wy S with interconnect to 1 Ith PI 2 284th St - SR 509 S Add HOV lanes, 2nd NB left -turn lane on SR 3 S 348th St: 9th Ave S - SR 99 99, install raised median, underground utilities Add 2nd NB, WB left -turn lanes, WB right - turn lanes, widen 1 st Ave S to 5 lanes to S 4 S 320th St , 1 st Ave S 316th St. 5 SR 99 (a, S 356th St Add WB thru lane, EB, NB left -turn lanes Add WB, SB right -turn lanes, 2nd EB, WB 7 S 348th St , 1st Ave S left -turn lanes IOth Ave SW / SW 344th St: SW Extend 3-lane collectors, sidewalks, street 8 Campus Dr - 21st Ave SW lights 9 1st Ave S @ S 328th St Install raised median, improve access at 328th 10 S 320 1h St @20` Ave S Add 2 nd left -turn lanes EB, WB 21stAve SW / SW 357th St: SW 11 356th St - 22nd Ave SW Extend 2-lane collector, signal modifications SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 4: SR 12 509 - S 312th St Add HOV lanes, install raised median Add EB, WB right -turn lanes, 3rd WB left - turn lane, 2nd NB right -turn lane, add 3rd lane 13 SR 18 SR 161 on SR 161 SB to S 352nd St 14 SW 312th St @ SR 509 Add EB, WB left -turn lanes Widen to 5 lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks, 15 S 356th St: SR 99 - SR 161 illumination Extend 3 lane principal collector and signal at 17 S 352nd St: SR 99 - SR 161 SR-99 Interconnect to 26th Ave SW with the addition 18 SW 320th St @ 21st Ave SW of a 2nd WB left -turn lane S 320th St: 1 st Ave S - 8th Ave 19 S Add HOV lanes, install raised median 21 SW 320th St @ 47th Ave SW Install traffic signal SW 336th Wy / SW 340th St: 23 26th PI SW - Hoyt Rd Widen to 5 lanes Cedar Park at West Campus Soma Chattopadhyay Page 34 Transportation Concurrency Analysis 7/19/2007 Summary and Conclusions ■ The proposed development would replace vacant land and would consist of General Office. ■ Proposed development is forecast to generate 103 evening peak hour trips. 73 trips are vested. Project is forecast to generate 30 new evening peak hour trips. ■ All intersections impacted by one or more evening peak hour trips from the proposed development would meet City of Federal Way LOS standards with programmed improvements, thus the transportation system provides adequate capacity concurrent with the development. ■ The proposed development will either construct all TIP projects impacting by one or more trips or voluntarily contribute $38,887 in pro-rata share contributions. Cedar Park at West Campus Page 35 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 7/26/2007 a Trip Generation Spreadsheet Cedar Park at West Campus Soma Chattopadhyay Appendix A Page 36 Transportation Concurrency Analysis 7/9/2007 Use General Office Period Weekday Evening Street Peak Code 710 Parameter 1000 sq ft Employee Quantity 50.990 168.000 Studies 235 688 Outliers 0 0 Lower Data Range 0.000 0.000 Upper Data Range 2422.000 6750.000 %Entering 17 17 Rate 1.49 0.46 Std Dev 1.37 0.70 Equation Type Lin Lin Coefficient A 1.120 0.370 Constant C 78.81 60.08 R^2 0.82 0.84 Data Close to Rate? Y y Data Close to Equation? Y Y Closest Data Point E E Trips by Rate 75.98 77.28 0.00 0.00 Trips by Equation 135.92 122.24 0.00 0.00 Within Data Range? YES YES NO NO N>2? YES YES NO NO N>19? YES YES NO NO Outliers<5%? YES YES NA NA y-intercept 78.81 60.08 NA NA Near 0? NO NO NA NA Std Dev/Rate>1.10? NO YES NA NA R^2>0.75? YES YES NO NO RECOMMENDATION EQUATION EQUATION STUDY STUDY Trips 135.92 122.24 0.00 0.00 Weight by Rate 1.09 0.66 0.00 0.00 Weight by Equation 0.82 0.84 0.00 1 0.00 RESULTS RATE EQUATION AVERAGE Weighted Average 76.47 129.00 102.73 Entering Trips 13.00 21.93 17.46 Exiting Trips 63.47 107.07 85.27 Pass -By% #REF! #REF! #REF! Total New Trips #REF! #REF! #REF! Entering New Trips #REF! #REF! #REF! Exiting New Trips #REF! #REF! #REF! Cedar Park at West Campus Soma Chattopadhyay Page 37 Transportation Concurrency Analysis 7/9/2007 Appendix B • Background Level of Service Summary Sheets ■ Horizon Level of Service Summary Sheets Cedar Park at West Campus Page 38 Transportation Concurrency Analysis Soma Chattopadhyay 7/9/2007 5/23/2007 Horizon without 251 : S 276 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I 1� 1� Di ttl TTlt+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -2% 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.99 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1712 1541 5092 1752 5034 Flt Permitted 0.76 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1364 1541 5092 1752 5034 Volume (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 60 0 979 41 58 1693 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1 00 ! .00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 60 0 979 41 58 1693 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 30 4 0 0 1018 0 58 1693 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green G (s) 92 9.2 88.5 7.3 101.3 Effective Green, g (s) 8.2 8.2 89.0 7.8 101.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.74 0.06 0.85 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 93 105 3777 114 4271 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.20 0.03 c0.34 v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.04 0.27 0.51 0.40 Uniform Delay, di 53.3 52.2 5.0 54.2 2.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.1 0.2 1.3 0.3 Delay (s) 54.0 52.3 2.6 55.5 2.4 Level of Service D D A E A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 52.8 2.6 4.1 Approach LOS A D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 1050: S 288 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4\ I } '*� 7 --w 1'* Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NSL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 r A Ttl� M TtT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 14% -7% -2% 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri: 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.98 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1698 1757 1585 1787 4881 3399 4970 Fit Permitted 0.98 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1698 1757 1585 1787 4881 3399 4970 Volume (vph) 24 22 16 412 34 183 30 834 299 351 1509 36 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 24 22 16 412 34 183 30 834 299 351 1509 36 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 0 153 0 38 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 49 0 215 231 30 30 1095 0 351 1544 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 6 6 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 0 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.4 19.8 19.8 19.8 5.7 55.7 14.1 64.1 Effective Green, g (s) 9.4 19.8 19.8 19.8 6.2 56.2 14.6 64.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.47 0.12 0.54 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 128 280 290 262 92 2286 414 2676 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.13 c0.13 0.02 c0.22 c0.10 c0.31 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.77 0.80 0.12 0.33 0.48 0.85 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 52.5 47.9 48.2 42.6 54.9 21.9 51.6 18.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.12 1.12 2.48 0.66 0.50 0.95 0.90 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 10.6 13.0 0.1 0.7 0.7 13.9 0.9 Delay (s) 53.2 64.2 66.8 105.7 36.9 11.7 62.9 17.7 Level of Service D E E F D B E B Approach Delay (s) 53.2 77.2 12.4 26.0 Approach LOS D E B C intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 1051: S 288 St & 18 Av S Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT+ fii� 4 *T r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -1 % 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1723 3463 1739 3479 1712 1744 1531 Flt Permitted 0.41 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.85 0.79 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 751 3463 883 3479 1484 1435 1531 Volume (vph) 103 444 26 23 561 66 20 14 17 47 2 58 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 103 444 26 23 561 66 20 14 17 47 2 58 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 16 0 0 0 55 Lane Group Flow (vph) 103 469 0 23 625 0 0 35 0 0 49 3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green G (s) 102.8 102_8 1 n2 s 1 n2 8 8.2 8.2 8.2 Effective Green, g (s) 102.8 102.8 102.8 102.8 7.2 7.2 7.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.06 0.06 0.06 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 643 2967 756 2980 89 86 92 v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.03 0.02 c0.03 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.03 0.21 0.39 0.57 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.5 54.3 54.9 53.1 Progression Factor 0.10 0.03 0.41 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 5.1 0.1 Delay (s) 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.6 55.3 60.0 53.2 Level of Service A A A A E E D Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.6 55.3 56.3 Approach LOS A A E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.23 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2051 : S 304 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* {~ -4-- 4-- t \'*� i 41 ---► I,* Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r +T+ A ttl tfii� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -4% 5% -1 % 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1859 1532 1688 1778 4972 1752 4954 Fit Permitted 0.84 1.00 0.78 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1593 1532 1350 1778 4972 1752 4954 Volume (vph) 26 41 38 168 52 58 42 1060 132 51 1453 57 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 26 41 38 168 52 58 42 1060 132 51 1453 57 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 29 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 67 9 0 269 0 42 1183 0 51 1507 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 6 6 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 28.5 28.5 28.5 9.0 70.7 6.8 68.5 Effective Green, g (s) 27.5 27.5 27.5 9.0 70.7 6.8 68.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.59 0.06 0.57 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 365 351 309 133 2929 99 2828 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.24 0.03 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.01 c0.20 v/c Ratio 0.18 0.02 0.87 0.32 0.40 0.52 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 37.2 35.9 44.5 52.6 13.3 55.0 15.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.49 0.18 1.48 0.26 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 21.3 0.5 0.4 1.7 0.7 Delay (s) 37.3 35.9 63.7 26.4 2.8 83.1 4.9 Level of Service D D E C A F A Approach Delay (s) 36.8 63.7 3.6 7.4 Approach LOS D E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2250: S 308 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 'P r- 1* i Movement EBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ► tO !ii t+T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% 2% 1 % -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.97 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1665 1644 1761 5025 1778 4973 Flt Permitted 0.71 0.86 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1207 1437 1761 5025 1778 4973 Volume (vph) 96 20 65 28 16 64 54 1121 22 33 1537 129 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 t .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 96 20 65 28 16 64 54 1121 22 33 1537 129 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 20 0 0 52 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 161 0 0 56 0 54 1142 0 33 1661 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 8 8 0 2 0 2 0 0 8 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phagac 4 $ Actuated Green, G (s) 17.8 17.8 7.8 82.7 5.5 80.4 Effective Green, g (s) 16.8 16.8 7.8 82.7 5.5 80.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.06 0.69 0.05 0.67 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 169 201 114 3463 81 3332 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.23 0.02 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.28 0.47 0.33 0.41 0.50 Uniform Delay, di 51.2 46.2 54.1 7.5 55.7 9.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.10 0.82 0.87 0.14 Incremental Delay, d2 55.0 0.3 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.5 Delay (s) 106.2 46.4 60.4 6.4 49.5 1.8 Level of Service F D E A D A Approach Delay (s) 106.2 46.4 8.8 2.7 Approach LOS F D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2530: SW 312 St & SW Dash Point Rd _1r C7 Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EDT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations t t r + r I t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -5% 4% -5% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.94 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1716 1829 1512 1782 1909 1557 1734 1811 1452 1783 1894 1522 Flt Permitted 0.69 1.00 1.00 0.71 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1251 1829 1512 1329 1909 1557 415 1811 1452 949 1894 1522 Volume (vph) 29 74 107 236 91 88 116 324 184 70 639 32 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 29 74 107 236 91 88 116 324 184 70 639 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 95 0 0 71 0 0 83 0 0 10 Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 74 12 236 91 17 116 324 101 70 639 22 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2 0 Turn Type D.P+P Perm D.P+P Perm D.P+P Perm D.P+P Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 4 8 6 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 28.7 12.9 12.9 28.7 22.8 22.8 71.3 65.9 65.9 71.3 60.3 60.3 Effective Green, g (s) 28.7 12.9 12.9 28.7 22.8 22.8 71.3 65.9 65.9 71.3 60.3 60.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.19 0.19 0.59 0.55 0.55 0.59 0.50 0.50 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 322 197 163 377 363 296 367 995 797 601 952 765 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.04 c0.08 0.05 0.03 c0.18 0.01 c0.34 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 c0.07 0.01 0.16 0.07 0.06 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.38 0.07 0.63 0.25 0.06 0.32 0.33 0.13 0.12 0.67 0.03 Uniform Delay, di 35.3 49.8 48.2 40.0 41.3 39.8 28.7 14.9 13.1 10.5 22.4 15.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.46 0.42 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.4 0.1 2.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.0 3.8 0.1 Delay (s) 35.4 50.2 48.2 42.4 41.5 39.8 13.3 7.1 3.4 10.5 26.2 15.1 Level of Service D D D D D D B A A B C B Approach Delay (s) 47.2 41.6 7.2 24.2 Approach LOS D D A C info- section Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2540: SW 312 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement ERR EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR '89L SBT SBR Lane Configurations I T r T r t r I tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 1 % 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1796 1876 1561 1761 1839 1530 1755 1863 1496 1755 3421 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1796 1876 1561 1761 1839 1530 1755 1863 1496 1755 3421 Volume (vph) 45 283 103 335 498 148 149 399 265 146 385 79 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 45 283 103 335 498 148 149 399 265 146 385 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 85 0 0 93 0 0 197 0 19 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 283 18 335 498 55 149 399 68 146 445 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permittori PhacacA 2 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 4.3 15.2 15.2 20.5 31.4 31.4 9.2 21.9 21.9 7.4 20.1 Effective Green, g (s) 4.3 15.2 15.2 20.5 31.4 31.4 9.2 21.9 21.9 7.4 20.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.18 0.18 0.24 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.26 0.26 0.09 0.24 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 91 335 279 425 679 565 190 480 385 153 809 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.15 0.19 c0.27 0.08 c0.21 c0.08 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.04 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.84 0.07 0.79 0.73 0.10 0.78 0.83 0.18 0.95 0.55 Uniform Delay, di 39.3 33.8 29.0 30.2 23.2 17.5 36.9 29:8 24.5 38.6 28.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 16.8 0.0 8.7 3.5 0.0 17.5 11.2 0.1 58.3 0.4 Delay (s) 40.8 50.5 29.0 38.9 26.7 17.6 54.4 41.0 24.6 96.9 28.9 Level of Service D D C D C B D D C F C Approach Delay (s) 44.4 29.5 38.1 45.2 Approach LOS D C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 85.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2545:S312St& 8AvS Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL. SE3R Lane Configurations t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 3% -6% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1717 1820 1849 1755 1493 Flt Permitted 0.34 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 612 1820 1849 1755 1493 Volume (vph) 98 580 787 88 61 111 Peak -hour factor, PH 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 98 580 787 88 61 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 3 0 0 102 Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 580 872 0 61 9 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 4 0 2 4 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 28 1 Permitted Phases 4 1 Actuated Green, G (s) 86.1 86.1 100.8 10.2 10.2 Effective Green, g (s) 86.1 86.1 100.8 9.2 9.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.84 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 439 1306 1553 135 114 v/s Ratio Prot 0.32 c0.47 c0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.22 Uniform Delay, d1 5.7 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 Delay (s) 6.9 Level of Service A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS I4ersectioJ6 Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 0.01 0.44 0.56 0.45 0.07 7.0 2.9 53.0 51.4 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.1 0.2 0.9 0.1 8.1 0.4 53.9 51.5 A A D D 7.9 0.4 52.4 A A D 8.6 HCM Level of Service A 0.55 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 70.6% ICU Level of Service C 15 5/23/2007 2546:S312St&8AyS Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ t Y Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.94 Fit Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 Satd. Flow (prot) 1821 1740 1863 1675 Fit Permitted 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.97 Satd. Flow (perm) 1821 745 1863 1675 Volume (vph) 590 23 51 815 60 46 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 590 23 51 815 60 46 RTOR Reduction (vph) 1 0 0 0 26 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 612 0 51 815 80 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 14 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green G (s) 101 3 861 86.1 10.7 Effective Green, g (s) 100.3 86.1 86.1 9.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.84 0.72 0.72 0.08 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1522 535 1337 135 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 c0.44 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.10 0.61 0.59 Uniform Delay, d1 2.4 5.1 8.5 53.3 Progression Factor 0.06 0.33 0.52 1.31 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.3 2.0 3.8 Delay (s) 0.2 2.0 6.4 73.5 Level of Service A A A E Approach Delay (s) 0.2 6.1 73.5 Approach LOS A A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2550: S 312 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NSR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT# '� fly n) W. N ttt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 0% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1747 3372 1741 3417 1741 4965 1755 5058 1517 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1747 3372 1741 3417 1741 4965 1755 5058 1517 Volume (vph) 245 349 99 145 417 75 323 782 98 164 1041 265 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 245 349 99 145 417 75 323 782 98 164 1041 265 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 22 0 0 13 0 0 12 0 0 0 65 Lane Group Flow (vph) 245 426 0 145 479 0 323 868 0 164 1041 200 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages #lhr) 2 2 4 4 4 2 4 2 2 2 4 4 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 19.3 26.2 13.4 20.3 24.9 43.3 19.1 37.5 56.8 Effective Green, g (s) 18.3 25.2 12.4 19.3 24.9 43.3 19.1 37.5 55.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.21 0.10 0.16 0.21 0.36 0.16 0.31 0.46 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 266 708 180 550 361 1792 279 1581 769 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.13 0.08 c0.14 c0.19 0.17 0.09 c0.21 0.04 v/s RatioPerm 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.60 0.81 0.87 0.89 0.48 0.59 0.66 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1l 50.1 42.9 52.6 49.1 46.3 29.7 46.8 35.7- 19,5 Progression Factor 1.02 0.68 1.03 0.80 0.62 0.66 1.05 1.05 0.55 Increm' Ohtal'Delay, d2 33.9 1.0 21.0 13.5 20.7 0.8 1.8 1.9 0A Delay (s) 85.2 30.0 75.0 52.9 49A 20.3 51.1 39.4 10.8 Level of Service F C E D D C D D B Approach Delay (s) 49.5 57.9 28.1 35.6 Approach LOS D E C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 39.3 HCM Level of Service ❑ HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2855: S 317 St & 23 Av S Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBB WBL WBT WBR SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR Lane Configurations 4 1� 0 t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% -3% 0% -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1739 1536 1746 3539 1872 1519 Flt Permitted 0.76 1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1386 1536 897 3539 1872 1519 Volume (vph) 0 0 0 133 0 63 57 595 0 0 447 120 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 133 0 63 57 595 0 0 447 120 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 133 8 0 57 595 0 0 447 96 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green. G (s) 14.5 14.5 96.5 96.5 96.0 96.0 Effective Green, g (s) 14.5 14.5 95.5 95.5 95.5 95.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 167 186 714 2816 1490 1209 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.17 c0.24 v/s Ratio Perm c0.10 0.06 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.80 0.04 0.08 0.21 0.30 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 51.3 46.6 2.7 3.0 3.3 2.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.09 1.05 1.03 1.30 Incremental Delay, d2 21.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 Delay (s) 72.5 46.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 3.6 Level of Service E D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 64.2 3.3 3.7 Approach LOS A E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.37 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3012: SW 320 St & Hoyt Rd SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis , 4, T Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations T I t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -5% -2% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.92 0.97 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1792 1493 1692 1761 1831 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm i 1792 1493 1692 233 1831 Volume (vph) 429 219 157 200 160 112 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 429 219 157 200 160 112 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 94 46 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 429 125 311 0 160 112 Confl. Ped,s. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#!hr) 3 0 0 0 0 3 Turn Type Perm pm+pt Protected Phases 6 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 6 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 77.3 77.3 26.8 47.7 47.7 Effective -Green, g (s) 77.3 77.3 26.8 47.7 47.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.20 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1026 855 336 262 647 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 c0.18 c0.07 0.06 vis Ratio Perm 0.08 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.15 0.93 0.61 OA 7 Uniform Delay, di 16.2 13.5 53.1 34.0 30.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.4 30.2 2.9 0.0 Delay (s) 17.5 13.8 83.3 37.0 301 Level of Service B B F D C Approach Delay (s) 16.2 83.3 34.1 Approach LOS B F C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Deiay 38.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length'�(s),_, ` 135.0 Sum of lost timne (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3025: SW 320 St & 26 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis * Movement EBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT Vi tT+ 1� T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % -1 % -4% 3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.90 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1743 3504 1739 3527 1749 1658 1702 1612 At Permitted 0.26 1.00 0.43 1.00 0.74 1.00 0.75 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 477 3504 795 3527 1364 1658 1349 1612 Volume (vph) 6 570 8 119 1054 12 67 2 5 16 8 17 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 m 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 6 570 8 119 1054 12 67 2 5 16 8 17 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 16 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 6 578 0 119 1066 0 67 2 0 16 9 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 1 1 0 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perrn Perm Protected Phases 2 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 101.7 101.7 101.7 101.7 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 Effective Green, g (s) 101.7 101.7 101.7 101.7 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 404 2970 614 2989 94 115 93 111 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 c0.30 0.00 0.01 v/s Ratio: Perm 0.01 0.15 c0:05 0;01 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.19 0.18 0.36 0.71 0.02 0.17 0.08 Uniform Delay, di 1.4 1 7 1.6' 2.0 54.7 52.1 52.6 52.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.22 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,, d2 0.1 0.1 0, `2 0.1 19.1 0.0 0.3 0.1 Delay (s) 1.5 1.8 0.6 0.5 73.7 52.1 52.9 52.4 Level of Service A A A A E D D D Approach Delay (s) 1.8 0.5 71.7 52.6 Approach LO"S A A E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.38 Actuated Cycle<Length,(s)- 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3028: SW 320 St & 21 Av SW Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis __�f 4___ 4\ t i 4/ _1# --I. Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL 1NBT W 8 R NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 ti. t r ti� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 At Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3386 3412 3433 1748 1863 1530 1749 3280 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.42 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3386 3412 3433 145 1863 1530 766 3280 Volume (vph) 168 396 110 424 739 98 176 400 262 80 694 415 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 168 396 110 424 739 98 176 400 262 80 694 415 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 21 0 0 9 0 0 0 91 0 71 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 168 485 0 424 828 0 176 400 171 80 1038 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 3 3 3 0 3 0 2 2 3 3 Turn Type Prot Prot pm+pt pm+ov pm+pt Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 5 3 8 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.4 25.3 18.3 30.2 61.4 51.1 69.4 51.4 46.1 Effective Green, g (s) 13.4 25.3 18.3 30.2 61.4 51.1 69.4 51.4 46.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.21 0.15 0.25 0.51 0.43 0.58 0.43 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 198 714 520 864 212 793 949 372 1260 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.14 0.12 c0.24 c0.07 0.21 0.03 0.01 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm c0.35 0.08 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.85 0.68 0.82 0.96 0.83 0.50 0.18 0.22 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 52.3 43.6 49.2 44.3 29.0 25.2 11.9 21.0 33.3 Progression Factor 0.97 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.21 0.87 0.47 0.48 0.70 Incremental Delay, d2 26.1 2.0 9.1 20.7 22.2 2.3 0.0 0.1 5.5 Delay (s) 76.7 44.0 58.3 65.0 57.4 24.3 5.7 10.2 28.7 Level of Service E D E E E C A B C Approach Delay (s) 52.2 62.7 25.4 27.4 Approach LOS D E C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/24/2007 Horizon without 3040: SW 320 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -� --v a -- Movement EBL _ EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR _ NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT M tt r tt r tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -1 % -1 % 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3347 3323 3436 3528 1497 3423 3557 1534 3383 3507 1495 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.26 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3347 3323 3436 3528 1497 588 3557 1534 919 3507 1495 Volume (vph) 139 802 151 389 1321 234 337 504 304 196 592 188 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 139 802 151 389 1321 234 337 504 304 196 592 188 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 0 103 0 0 43 0 0 142 Lane Group Flow (vph) 139 941 0 389 1321 131 337 504 261 196 592 46 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 4 2 2 4 0 4 0 4 4 2 4 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm pm+pt pm+ov pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 3 8 5 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.8 47.7 18.8 57.7 57.7 34.5 24.5 43.3 32.5 23.5 23.5 Effective Green, g (s) 8.8 47.7 18.8 57.7 57.7 34.5 24.5 43.3 32.5 23.5 23.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.40 0.16 0.48 0.48 0.29 0.20 0.36 0.27 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 245 1321 538 1696 720 405 726 554 434 687 293 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.28 c0.11 c0.37 c0.07 0.14 0.07 0.03 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 c0.17 0.10 0.09 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.71 0.72 0.78 0.18 0.83 0.69 0.47 0.45 0.86 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 53.8 30.4 48.1 25.9 17.7 35.1 44.3 29.5 34.4 46.7 40.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.76 0.29 0.05 0.89 0.93 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 3.3 2.6 2.4 0.4 12.4 2.2 0.2 0.3 10.5 0.1 Delay (s) 55.6 33.7 39.4 9.8 1.2 43.6 43.4 20.2 34.7 57.1 40.1 Level of Service E C D A A D D C C E D Approach Delay (s) 36.5 14.7 37.3 49.3 Approach LOS D B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3050: S 320 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M W4 M ttt r M ttT+ M ttt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -6% 0% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3522 5120 3433 5045 1536 3358 4830 3426 5136 1522 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3522 5120 3433 5045 1536 3358 4830 3426 5136 1522 Volume (vph) 450 870 80 370 971 291 232 817 231 326 872 315 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 450 870 80 370 971 291 232 817 231 326 872 315 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 8 0 0 0 171 0 44 0 0 0 235 Lane Group Flow (vph) 450 942 0 370 971 120 232 1004 0 326 872 80 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 6 0 0 6 2 6 2 6 6 0 6 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.0 42.9 14.7 37.6 37.6 12.1 27.8 14.6 30.3 30.3 Effective Green, g (s) 20.0 42.9 14.7 37.6 37.6 12.1 27.8 14.6 30.3 30.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.36 0.12 0.31 0.31 0.10 0.23 0.12 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 587 1830 421 1581 481 339 1119 417 1297 384 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.18 c0.11 c0.19 0.07 c0.21 0.10 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.51 0.88 0.61 0.25 0.68 0.90 0.78 0.67 0.21 Uniform Delay, di 47.8 30.4 51.8 35.0 30.7 52.1 44.7 51.2 40.4 35.4 Progression Factor 0.55 0.36 0.75 0.67 0.85 0.66 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.52 Incremental Delay, d2 3.8 0.7 14.6 1.4 1.0 3.0 6.5 6.8 0.9 0.1 Delay (s) 30.2 11.6 53.5 24.7 27.0 37.4 31.6 37.6 21.3 18.4 Level of Service C B D C C D C D C B Approach Delay (s) 17.6 31.6 32.6 24.2 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3052: S 320 St & 20 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---* 4 /0. \0- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WEIR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M +tT M W. 1 T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 2% -1 % -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.90 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3485 5068 3399 4896 1718 1712 1747 1679 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.36 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3485 5068 3399 4896 502 1712 661 1679 Volume (vph) 239 1034 63 49 1385 143 144 83 79 188 87 156 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 239 1034 63 49 1385 143 144 83 79 188 87 156 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 33 0 0 61 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 239 1093 0 49 1520 0 144 129 0 188 182 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 6 0 0 8 0 8 0 6 6 0 8 Turn Type Prot Prot pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 12.0 68.3 5.2 61.5 25.6 14.9 29.4 16.8 Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 68.3 5.2 61.5 24.6 14.4 28.4 16.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.57 0.04 0.51 0.21 0.12 0.24 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 349 2885 147 2509 206 205 266 228 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.22 0.01 c0.31 0.06 0.08 c0.07 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.38 0.33 0.61 0.70 0.63 0.71 0.80 Uniform Delay, d1 52.2 14.2 55.7 20.7 41.8 50.3 39.4 50.2 Progression Factor 0.77 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Incremental Delay, d2 3.4 0.3 0.5 1.1 8.1 4.6 6.2 14.9 Delay (s) 43.8 13.9 56.4 21.8 49.9 54.9 45.5 64.4 Level of Service D B E C D D D E Approach Delay (s) 19.3 22.8 52.5 56.2 Approach LOS B C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3055: S 320 St & 23 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT W.BR NBL NBT NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations M W. )) W. t r T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -5% 1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 100 0.96 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3334 4824 3519 5026 1704 1839 1456 3323 1772 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3334 4824 3519 5026 1704 1839 1456 3323 1772 Volume (vph) 111 1002 33 383 1508 250 112 252 449 492 213 83 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 111 1002 33 383 1508 250 112 252 449 492 213 83 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 3 0 0 17 0 0 0 7 0 12 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 111 1032 0 383 1741 0 112 252 442 492 284 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 16 0 0 8 2 8 2 16 16 0 8 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot pm+ov Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 41.8 19.0 50.8 11.7 20.3 39.3 19.9 28.5 Effective Green, g (s) 10.0 41.8 19.0 50.8 11.2 19.8 38.8 19.4 28.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.35 0.16 0.42 0.09 0.17 0.32 0.16 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 278 1680 557 2128 159 303 531 537 413 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.21 0.11 c0.35 0.07 0.14 c0.13 c0.15 0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.61 0.69 0.82 0.70 0.83 0.83 0.92 0.69 Uniform Delay, d1l 52.2 32.4 47.7 30.5 52.8 48.5 37.6 49.5 42.0 Progression Factor 1.01 1.00 0.82 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.83 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.7 2.0 2.6 11.0 16.7 10.3 19.6 3.7 Delay (s) 53.0 34.2 40.9 15.4 63.8 65.2 47.9 62.6 38.5 Level of Service D C D B E E D E D Approach Delay (s) 36.1 20.0 55.4 53.5 Approach LOS D B E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3060: S 320 St & 32 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --I" --,, --t f *-- 4\ I l,* i 4/ Movoment ESL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT 98R Lane Configurations tt r tT. T+ 4� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -3% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.81 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.92 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3525 1503 1770 3525 1782 1554 1366 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3525 1503 1770 3525 1782 1554 1366 Volume (vph) 4 1527 24 7 1210 0 68 0 11 1 1 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 4 1527 24 7 1210 0 68 0 11 1 1 3 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 4 1527 19 7 1210 0 68 1 0 0 2 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Split Split Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 1.1 89.3 89.3 Effective Green, g (s) 1.1 89.3 89.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.01 0.74 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 5,0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 16 2623 1118 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.25 Uniform Delay, di 59.0 Progression Factor 0.96 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1i Delay (s) 59.2 Level of Service E Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Sumrnary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated -Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 2.0 90.2 8.6 8.6 1.1 2.0 90.2 8.6 8.6 0.1 0.02 0.75 0.07 0.07 0.00 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 30 2650 128 111 1 0.00 c0.34 c0.04 0.00 c0.00 0.01 0.58 0.02 0.23 0.46 0.53 0.01 2.00 6.9 4.0 58.2 5.6 53.8 51.7 - 60.0` ' 1.05 1.68 0.70 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.8 0.0 1.3 0.5 2.1 0.0 1519.0 8.1 6.7 42.1 3.0 56.0 51.7 1578.9 A A D A E D F 8.2 3.2 55.4 1578.9 A A E F 10.1 HCM Level of Service B 0.56 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 62. % ICU Level of Service B 15 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3061: S 320 St & Weyerhaeuser Wy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT N.BL NBR Lane Configurations tt r tT )y r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3525 1507 1770 3525 3337 1386 At Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3525 1507 178 3525 3337 1386 Volume (vph) 1575 94 255 1096 178 163 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 1575 94 255 1096 178 163 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 32 0 0 16 113 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1575 62 255 1096 199 13 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 0 2 2 2 Turn Type Perm pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 75.9 75.9 97.9 97.9 12.1 12.1 Effective Green, g (s) 75.9 75.9 97.9 97.9 12.1 12.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.82 0.82 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2230 953 371 2876 336 140 v/s Ratio Prot 0.45 c0.10 0.31 0,06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.46 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.06 0.69 0.38 0.59 0.09 Uniform Delay, di 14.6 8.4 25.2 10 51.6 49.0 Progression Factor 0.55 -0.57 1.03 0.27 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.1 3.0 0.3 1.9 0.1 Delay (s) 9.8 4.9 29.0 1.1 53.4 49.1 Level of Service A A C A D D Approach Delay (s) 9.5 6.3 51.8 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.7% ICU Level='of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3348: S 324 St & 11 PIS HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement f WSL *-- WBR t NBT /,P. NBR '*� SBL i SBT Lane Configurations r T Vii t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% 1% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1555 1657 1773 1881 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.17 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1555 1657 312 1881 Volume (vph) 275 257 185 290 183 130 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 275 257 185 290 183 130 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 132 47 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 275 125 428 0 183 130 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 2 2 2 0 Turn Type pt+ov pm+pt Protected Phases 3 31 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 22.6 59.7 40.0 81.1 81.1 Effective Green, g (s) 21.6 58.2 39.0 80.6 80.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.49 0.32 0.67 0.67 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 315 754 539 655 1263 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.08 c0.26 c0.09 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.17 0.79 0.28 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 47.9 17.3 36.8 11.6 6.9 Progression Factor 0.69 4.74 1.00 0.93 0.85 Incremental Delay, d2 14.0 0.0 7.4 0.7 0.1 Delay (s) 47.2 82.0 44.2 11.5 6.0 Level of Service D F D B A Approach Delay (s) 64.0 44.2 9.2 Approach LOS E D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 43.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Su.m of lost time (s) 22.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3350: S 324 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations t r T. Di ttl tti� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 1 % 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1778 1812 1500 3361 1786 1755 4932 1713 4943 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1778 1812 1500 3361 1786 1755 4932 1713 4943 Volume (vph) 194 202 205 322 245 48 264 1157 231 181 1111 120 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 194 202 205 322 245 48 264 1157 231 181 1111 120 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 168 0 7 0 0 22 0 0 10 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 194 202 37 322 286 0 264 1366 0 181 1221 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 8 8 8 2 0 2 0 8 8 8 2 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8 22.4 22.4 15.3 22.9 24.0 47.6 15.7 39.3 Effective Green, g (s) 14.3 21.9 21.9 14.8 22.4 24.0 47.6 15.7 39.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.20 0.40 0.13 0.33 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 331 274 415 333 351 1956 224 1619 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.11 0.10 c0.16 0.15 c0.28 0.11 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.61 0.14 0.78 0.86 0.75 0.70 0.81 0.75 Uniform Delay, di 52.2 45.1 41.1 51.0 47.3 45.2 30.2 50.7 36.0 Progression Factor 0.73 0.68 0.63 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.61 0.80 0.46 Incremental Delay, d2 35.6 2.1 0.1 8.1 19.1 7.4 2.0 13.6 2.4 Delay (s) 73.6 33.0 26.0 59.1 66.4 40.2 20.4 54.0 18.9 Level of Service E C C E E D C D B Approach Delay (s) 43.7 62.5 23.6 23.4 Approach LOS D E C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 31.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3440: SW 325 PI & 1 Av S Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ♦ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 411� +TT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -5% 0% 1 % -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.91 0.93 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (Prot) 1662 1649 3485 3519 Fit Permitted 0.87 0.88 0.83 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1466 1474 2890 3347 Volume (vph) 21 0 36 12 2 16 51 991 18 5 1032 31 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 'i .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 21 0 36 12 2 16 51 99.1 18 5 1032 31 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 34 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 23 0 0 15 0 0 1060 0 0 1067 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 4 2 6 Permitteri Phacac 4 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.7 6.7 104.3 104.3 Effective Green, g (s) ' 5.7 5.7 104.8 104.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.05 0.87 0.87 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 70 70 2512 2909 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.01 c0.37 0.32 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.21 0.42 0.37 Uniform Delay, d1 55.3 55.0 1.6 1.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.36 0.49 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0:5 0.5 0.2 Delay (s) 56.3 55.5 1.1 0.9 Level of Service E E A A Approach Delay (s) 56.3 55.5 1.1 0.9 Approach LOS E E A A Intersection Summary HCM Ave rage'Control Deiay 3.2 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length^(s) 120:0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 78:7% ICU Level of Service D AnalysisPeriod'(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3540: S 328 St & 1 Av S Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4" t /-� \0- t Movement WBL WBR NEST NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations I r tlti tt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 2% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 0.99 1.00 1:00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.99 1.00 1.00 At Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1761 1506 3431 1783 3592 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1761 1506 3431 398 3592 Volume (vph) 71 35 1134 116 37 1013 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 35 1134 116 37 1013 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 33 3 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 2 1247 0 37 1013 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.7 7.7 102.3 102.3 102.3 Effective Green, g (s) 7.7 7.7 102.3 102.3 102.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.06 0.85 0.85 0.85 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 113 97 2925 339 3062 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 c0.36 0.28 vls RatioPerm 0.00 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.02 0.43 0.11 0.33 Uniform Delay, d1 54.8 52.6 2.1 1.4 1.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.42 1.30 Incremental Delay, d2 7.6 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.3 Delay (s) 62.4 52.7 2.2 2.7 2.6 Level of Service E D A A A Approach Delay (s) 59.2 2.2 2.6 Approach LOS E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 In'tersectign Capacity Utilization 49.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3640: SW 330 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Vii T. Vi T tT tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -4% 3% 7% -5% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1758 1589 1703 1650 1708 3388 1789 3415 Fit Permitted 0.74 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.28 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1373 1589 1109 1650 272 3388 537 3415 Volume (vph) 250 9 115 6 10 13 445 988 18 26 707 282 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 250 9 115 6 10 13 445 988 18 26 707 282 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 92 0 0 10 0 0 1 0 0 30 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 250 32 0 6 13 0 445 1005 0 26 959 0 Conti. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 6 2 7 4 8 PermitteH Phococ A A Q Actuated Green, G (s) 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 85.9 85.9 52.5 52.5 Effective Green, g (s) 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 85.9 85.9 52.5 52.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.72 0.72 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 276 319 223 331 535 2425 235 1494 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.01 c0.20 0.30 0.28 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 0.01 c0.40 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.91 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.83 0.41 0.11 0.64 Uniform Delay, di 46.8 39.1 38.5 38.6 25.2 6.9 20.0 26.4 Progression Factor 1.13 1.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.51 0.55 Incremental Delay, d2 28.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.5 0.9 2.0 Delay (s) 81.0 77.0 38.5 38.6 35.4 7.4 11.1 16.5 Level of Service F E D D D A B B Approach Delay (s) 79.6 38.6 16.0 16.4 Approach LOS E D B B Intersection Summary m HCM Average Control Delay 24.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3650: S 330 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---t 4---4--I } 4/ --* Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1�, '� 1 A Ttl A TtT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -4% 0% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1737 1629 1689 1574 1752 4952 1787 5067 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1315 1629 1294 1574 1752 4952 1787 5067 Volume (vph) 71 8 37 21 6 52 135 1209 50 198 1512 20 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 8 37 21 6 52 135 1209 50 198 1512 20 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 34 0 0 48 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 11 0 21 10 0 135 1256 0 198 1531 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 6 0 8 8 0 6 0 6 0 0 8 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.9 10.9 10.9 10.9 12.7 65.1 30.0 82.4 Effective Green, g (s) 9.9 9.9 9.9 9.9 12.7 65.1 30.0 82.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.54 0.25 0.69 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 108 134 107 130 185 2686 447 3479 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.01 c0.08 c0.25 0.11 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.05 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.08 0.20 0.08 0.73 0.47 0.44 0.44 Uniform Delay, di 53.4 50.9 51.3 50.8 52.0 16.8 38.0 8.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.02 0.59 0.43 Incremental Delay, d2 10.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 11.5 0.6 0.2 0.3 Delay (s) 63.9 51.0 51.7 50.9 63.3 17.8 22.5 4.0 Level of Service E D D D E B C A Approach Delay (s) 58.9 51.1 22.2 6.1 Approach LOS E D C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3842: 1 Wy S & S 333 St �gHCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement SEL ' 'SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER . 8WL_ SWT SWR Lane Configurations 0 Vi tT 4 +T r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 4% -6% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1796 3551 1701 3403 1656 1719 1506 Flt Permitted 0.19 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.87 0.64 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 358 3551 655 3403 1462 1153 1506 Volume (vph) 90 742 12 4 1226 16 28 0 48 27 0 196 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 90 742 12 4 1226 16 28 0 48 27 0 196 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 183 Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 754 0 4 1242 0 0 31 0 0 27 13 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 4 8 Permittcrl Phaena 6 2 d A R Actuated Green, G (s) 102.3 102.3 92.8 92.8 7.7 7.7 7.7 Effective Green, g (s) 102.3 102.3 92.8 92.8 7.7 7.7 7.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.77 0.77 0.06 0.06 0.06 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 359 3027 507 2632 94 74 97 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.21 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 0.01 0.02 c0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.01 0.47 0.33 0.36 0.13 Uniform Delay, di 2.6 1.7 3.1 4.9 53.7 53.8 53.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.8 1.1 0.2 Delay (s) 2.8 1.9 3.0 4.9 54.4 54.9 53.2 Level of Service A A A A D D D Approach Delay (s) 2.0 4.9 54.4 53.4 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4028: SW 336 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --� --* -*\ t / Movement EBL EBT FBR WBL WBT WBR NSL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tl ti tT tT-� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 1 % 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1754 3407 1753 3359 1724 3357 1772 3438 Flt Permitted 0.09 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.17 1.00 0.16 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 164 3407 393 3359 302 3357 298 3438 Volume (vph) 269 650 124 312 1029 285 237 544 158 279 594 151 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 269 650 124 312 1029 285 237 544 158 279 594 151 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 21 0 0 22 0 0 19 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 269 762 0 312 1293 0 237 680 0 279 726 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 1 2 1 1 4 1 4 1 2 2 1 4 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 59.9 44.9 64.1 47.0 37.0 24.0 39.0 25.0 Effective Green, g (s) 59.9 44.9 64.1 47.0 37.0 24.0 39.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.37 0.53 0.39 0.31 0.20 0.32 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 281 1275 404 1316 247 671 269 716 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.22 0.11 c0.38 0.10 0.20 c0.12 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.36 0.30 0.19 c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.96 0.60 0.77 0.98 0.96 1.01 1.04 1.01 Uniform Delay, d1 36.0 30.3 18.7 36.1 35.5 48.0 34.9 47.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.17 0.86 0.91 0.93 1.07 0.83 Incremental Delay, d2 41.4 2.1 7.4 19.7 44.9 37.8 63.6 36.4 Delay (s) 77.4 32.3 29.2 50.6 77.4 82.3 101.1 75.7 Level of Service E C C D E F F E Approach Delay (s) 44.0 46.5 81.1 82.6 Approach LOS D D F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 60.9 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 105.1% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4029: SW Campus Dr & 19 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---* --p. ---* f- 4--- t t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ti tT+ T I 1� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 2% 0% 3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1777 3465 1749 3444 1727 1559 1712 1579 Flt Permitted 0.19 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.30 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 363 3465 529 3444 1297 1559 545 1579 Volume (vph) 82 754 90 215 1120 77 182 16 214 57 14 53 Peak -hour factor, PHF : 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 82 754 90 215 1120 77 182 16 214 57 14 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 5 0 0 3 0 0 180 0 0 45 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 82 839 0 215 1194 0 182 50 0 57 22 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Dnrm'f4n 4 Dkn _ o 1irmit1VV - V 2 4 nv Actuated Green, G (s) 83.2 77.9 88.4 80.5 20.2 20.2 20.2 20.2 Effective Green, g (s) 83.2 77.9 88.4 80.5 19.2 19.2 19.2 19.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.65 0.74 0.67 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 314 2249 470 2310 208 249 87 253 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.24 c0.03 c0.35 0.03 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 0.31 c0.14 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.37 0.46 0.52 0.88 0.20 0.66 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 6.9 9.7 5.6 10:0 49.2 43.7 47.3 42.9 Progression Factor 1.31 0.91 1.58 0.57 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 30.2 0.1 12.7 0.1 Delay (s) 9.1 9.1 8.9 5.9 79.4 43.9 60.0 43.0 Level of Service A A A A E D E D Approach Delay (s) 9.1 6.4 59.6 50.& Approach LOS A A E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4043: S 336 St & 1 Wy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T 4 rr tl� I fii� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -6% -1 % 3% -5% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.88 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1808 1787 1676 1709 2732 1743 3336 1814 3599 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1808 1787 1676 1709 2732 1743 3336 1814 3599 Volume (vph) 105 100 63 508 53 1370 27 525 169 403 575 22 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 105 100 63 508 53 1370 27 525 169 403 575 22 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 21 0 0 0 221 0 24 0 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 142 0 272 289 1149 27 670 0 403 595 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Turn Type Split Split pm+ov Prot Prot Protected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.9 13.9 22.1 22.1 53.1 4.4 34.0 31.0 60.6 Effective Green, g (s) 12.9 12.9 22.1 22.1 53.1 4.4 34.0 31.0 60.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.18 0.18 0.44 0.04 0.28 0.26 0.51 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 194 192 309 315 1209 64 945 469 1817 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.08 0.16 0.17 c0.25 0.02 c0.20 0.22 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.54 0.74 0.88 0.92 0.95 0.42 0.71 0.86 0.33 Uniform Delay, d1 50.7 51.9 47.7 48.1 32.2 56.6 38.6 42.4 17.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.81 0.81 1.22 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.97 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 12.6 22.1 28.1 14.6 1.6 4.5 13.9 0.5 Delay (s) 52.4 64.6 60.8 67.2 53.9 58.2 43.1 56.0 17.5 Level of Service D E E E D E D E B Approach Delay (s) 59.8 56.9 43.6 33.0 Approach LOS E E D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.4% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4046: S 336 St & 9 Av S Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EDT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT# ti. ►j T+ 1� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% -1 % 2% -4% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1 00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.92 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3431 1760 3449 1752 1702 1787 1716 Flt Permitted 0.17 1.00 0.35 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.25 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 320 3431 646 3449 243 1702 473 1716 Volume (vph) 109 526 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 109 526 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 109 603 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 Turn Type D.P+P Protected Phases 5 2 Permittorl Phncoc F Actuated Green, G (s) 60.9 55.0 Effective Green, g (s) 59.9 54.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.45 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 248 1558 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.39 Uniform Delay, d1 18.5 21.7 Progression Factor 1.50 0.46 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.4 Delay (s) 28.1 10.5 Level of Service C B Approach Delay (s) 13.2 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 86 82 819 1.00 1,00 1.00 86 82 819 0 0 11 0 82 964 10 10 2 2 0 D. P+P 1 6 7 60.9 53.1 59.9 52.6 0.50 0.44 4.5 4.5 2.0 2.0 373 1512 0.01 c0.28 0.10 0.22 0.64 16.2 26.3 0.63 0.69 0.1 1.8 10.3 20.0 B B 19.2 B 156 140 143 1.00 1.00 1.00 156 140 143 0 0 25 0 140 228 10 10 0 0 0 D. P+P 7 4 R 41.1 20.1 40.1 19.6 0.33 0.16 4.5 4.5 2.0 2.0 203 278 0.06 0.13 0.17 0.69 0.82 31.5 48.5 1.04 1.01 7.4 15.8 40.0 64.7 D E 55.9 E 34.1 HCM Level of Service 0.72 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 85.2% ICU Level of Service 15 110 1.00 110 0 0 10 2 351 1.00 351 0 351 10 2 211 1.00 211 33 394 2 216 1.00 216 0 0 10 0 D. P+P 3 8 A 41.1 30.9 40.1 30.4 0.33 0.25 4.5 4.5 2.0 2.0 383 435 c0.16 c0.23 0.15 0.92 0.91 33.9 43.4 1.00 1.00 25.7 21.6 59.6 65.1 E E 62.6 E C 15.0 E 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4050: S 336 St & Pacific Hwv S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } Movemem EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations t Vi tT+ M ttT ttt it Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 1 % 3% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1 00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1718 1853 1502 1717 3287 3368 4871 1796 5120 1556 Flt Permitted 0.18 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm; 325 1853 1502 361 3287 3368 4871 1796 5120 1556 Volume (vph) 256 409 384 188 382 221 265 1068 129 155 1288 257 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 256 409 384 188 382 221 265 1068 129 155 1288 257 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 197 0 75 0 0 11 0 0 0 71 Lane Group Flow (vph) 256 409 187 188 528 0 265 1186 0 155 1288 186 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 6 0 6 6 2 6 2 6 0 0 6 2 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Prot Prot pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 47.2 31.7 31.7 40.0 28.1 12.9 43.5 12.9 43.5 59.0 Effective Green, g (s) 47.2 31.7 31.7 40.0 28.1 12.9 43.5 12.9 43.5 59.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.26 0.26 0.33 0.23 0.11 0.36 0.11 0.36 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 308 490 397 255 770 362 1766 193 1856 765 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.22 0.07 0.16 0.08 0.24 c0.09 c0.25 0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 0.12 0.17 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.83 0.47 0.74 0.69 0.73 0.67 0.80 0.69 0.24 Uniform Delay, d1 28.0 41.7 37.1 31.5 41.9 51.9 32.2 52.3 32.6 17.6 Progression Factor 0.86 0.89 0.81 0.58 0.72 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.95 Incremental Delay, d2 14.8 10.0 0.3 5.0 1.1 6.4 2.1 19.9 2.2 0.1 Delay (s) 38.8 47.1 30.2 23.3 31.2 58.3 34.3 72.4 35.1 16.9 Level of Service D D C C C E C E D B Approach Delay (s) 38.9 29.3 38.6 35.7 Approach LOS D C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 36.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4052: S 336 St & 20 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* --I, f- .4- t i 41 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NST NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations I T r T Vii r Vi r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 3% 0% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1881 1599 1743 1758 1770 1583 1695 1529 Fit Permitted 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 176 1881 1599 609 1758 1770 1583 1695 1529 Volume (vph) 67 639 23 30 814 190 28 0 29 211 0 81 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 67 639 23 30 814 190 28 0 29 211 0 81 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 8 0 6 0 0 0 27 0 0 71 Lane Group Flow (vph) 67 639 15 30 998 0 28 0 2 211 0 10 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 1 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 2 6 6 Actuated Green; G (s) 83.0 776 77 6 786 7 , 4 1 n F 9.3 24.2 15,n Effective Green, g (s) 83.0 77.6 77.6 78.6 75.4 13.5 9.3 24.2 15.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.63 0.11 0.08 0.20 0.12 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 194 1216 1034 429 1105 199 123 342 191 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.34 0.00 c0.57 0.00 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.53 0.01 0.07 0.90 0.14 0.02 0.62 0.05 Uniform Delay, di 19.4 11.3 7.6 8.4 19.2 48.0 51.1 43.7 46.2 Progression Factor 1.44 1.01 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 10.1 0.1 0.3 2.3 0.5 Delay (s) 28.3 11.6 5.1 8.4 29.3 48.1 51.4 46.0 46.8 Level of Service C B A A C D D D D Approach Delay (s} 12.9 28.7 49.8 46.2 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4132: 12 Av SW & SW Campus Dr HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ►j I + r 0 ) +- Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 2% 4% -7% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1704 1844 1527 1734 3392 1832 3648 Fit Permitted 0.76 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1410 1583 1340 1844 1527 1734 3392 1832 3648 Volume (vph) 4 0 16 138 1 522 33 1627 155 278 878 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 4 0 16 138 1 522 33 1627 155 278 878 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 14 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 4 2 0 138 1 517 33 1777 0 278 878 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+ov Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 1 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.3 17.3 16.3 16.3 40.2 4.8 64.8 23.9 83.9 Effective Green, g (s) 16.3 16.3 16.3 16.3 40.2 4.8 64.8 23.9 83.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.34 0.04 0.54 0.20 0.70 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 192 215 182 250 575 69 1832 365 2551 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.00 c0.18 0.02 c0.52 0.15 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.10 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.01 0.76 0.00 0.90 0.48 0.97 0.76 0.34 Uniform Delay, d1 44.9 44.9 50.0 44.8 38.0 56.4 26.7 45.4 7.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.08 1.16 1.20 0.89 0.90 0.62 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 13.8 0.0 15.4 1.6 13.6 7.8 0.4 Delay (s) 45.0 44.9 66.8 48.4 59.6 69.5 37.3 48.8 4.8 Level of Service D D E D E E D D A Approach Delay (s) 44.9 61.0 37.9 15.4 Approach LOS D E D B lntersec:tiori Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.0% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4218: SW 340 St & Hoyt Rd SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations fil tT 1� I t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% 2% 1 % 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1745 3299 1723 3382 1757 1685 1758 1853 1501 Fit Permitted 0.35 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 637 3299 694 3382 486 1685 380 1853 1501 Volume (vph) 62 343 137 209 567 116 273 203 196 110 227 196 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 343 137 209 567 116 273 203 196 110 227 196 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 26 0 0 11 0 0 34 0 0 0 163 Lane Group Flow (vph) 62 454 0 209 672 0 273 365 0 110 227 33 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases d g 2 6 F Actuated Green, G (s) 57.0 51.3 67.0 56.3 43.0 28.8 29.3 20.1 20.1 Effective Green, g (s) 57.0 51.3 67.0 56.3 43.0 28.8 29.3 20.1 20.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.43 0.56 0.47 0.36 0.24 0.24 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5:0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 355 1410 479 1587 364 404 198 310 251 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.14 c0.04 0.20 c0.11 c0.22 0.04 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.20 0.16 0.09 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.32 0.44 0.42 0.75 0.90 0.56 0.73 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 17.3 22.8 14.0 21.1 30.4 44.2 37.3 47.4 42.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.7 7.5 22.5 1.9 7.5 0.1 Delay (s) 17.4 23.4 7.9 13.8 37.9 66.7 39.2 54.9 42.6 Level of Service B C A B D E D D D Approach Delay (s) 22.7 12.4 55.0 47.1 Approach LOS C B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4220: SW 340 St & 35 Av SW Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* f- -*--- 4\ I -0. Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tl tT 41� T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 0% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1766 3534 1710 3440 1708 1733 1820 Flt Permitted 0.13 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.96 0.46 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 244 3534 704 3440 1644 842 1820 Volume (vph) 13 629 22 42 1311 189 24 88 72 188 78 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 13 629 22 42 1311 189 24 88 72 188 78 3 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 23 0 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 650 0 42 1494 0 0 161 0 188 79 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 3 2 4 4 0 3 0 3 2 2 4 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 6 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 86.7 86.7 86.7 86.7 24.3 24.3 24.3 Effective Green, g (s) 86.7 86.7 86.7 86.7 23.3 23.3 23.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 176 2553 509 2485 v/s Ratio Prot 0.18 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 4.9 Progression Factor 1.51 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 Delay (s) 8.1 Level of Service A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 319 163 353 0.04 0.06 0.10 c0.22 0.25 0.08 0.60 0.50 1.15 0.22 5.7 4.9 8.2 43.2 48.4 40.7 1.27 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.00 1.00 0.2 0.3 1.1 0.5 117.7 0.1 7.4 5.2 9.3 45.3 166.1 40.9 A A A D F D 7.4 9.1 45.3 128.4 A A D F 23.3 HCM Level of Service C 0.72 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 76.2% ICU Level of Service D 15 6/27/2007 Horizon without 4250: S 340 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBF SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4� Vi T r tT M tT+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 099 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 100 100 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1834 1770 1452 1770 3491 3460 3552 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1834 1770 1452 680 3491 3460 3552 Volume (vph) 2 12 1 0 10 43 1 560 12 1004 724 1 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1 00 00 1.00 1 00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 2 12 1 0 10 43 1 560 12 1004 724 1 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 14 0 0 10 43 1 571 0 1004 725 0 Confl Peds (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 5 1 1 3 0 Turn Type Split Split Free Perm Prot Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 6 5 2 r1er r n fitted Phases FrPP 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 5.8 3.3 120.0 49.6 49.6 41.3 95.9 Effective Green, g (s) 5.8 3.3 120.0 49.6 49.6 41.3 95.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.03 1.00 0.41 0.41 0.34 0.80 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 89 49 1452 281 1443 1191 2839 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.01 c0.16 c0.29 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.20 0.03 0.00 0.40 0.84 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1 54.8 57.1 0.0 20.7 24.7 36.4 3.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.25 1.00 0.34 0.37 0.46 0.52 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 0.2 Delay (s) 55.1 72.3 0.0 7.1 9.2 20.7 1.7 Level of Service E E A A A C A Approach Delay (s) 55.1 13.7 9.2 12.8 Approach LOS E B A B Intersection Summary+ HCM Average Control Delay _ 12.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4436: SW Campus Dr & 6 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis * Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations fl ti� *T r Vii T. Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 0% -4% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1778 3475 1768 3499 1780 1553 1726 1815 Flt Permitted 0.11 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.71 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 215 3475 454 3499 1357 1553 1284 1815 Volume (vph) 9 906 96 198 1653 62 75 2 82 38 6 1 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 t .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 906 96 198 1653 62 75 2 82 38 6 1 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 75 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 9 998 0 198 1714 0 0 77 7 38 6 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 88.2 87.2 99.5 93.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 Effective Green, g (s) 88.2 87.2 99.5 93.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.73 0.83 0.78 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 171 2525 456 2726 119 136 112 159 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.29 c0.03 c0.49 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.33 c0.06 0.00 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.40 0.43 0.63 0.65 0.05 0.34 0.04 Uniform Delay, di 5.3 6.3 3.2 5.7 53.0 50.2 51.5 50.1 Progression Factor 1.07 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.4 0.2 1.1 8.7 0.1 0.7 0.0 Delay (s) 5.7 6.3 3.4 6.8 61.7 50.3 52.1 50.2 Level of Service A A A A E D D D Approach Delay (s) 6.3 6.5 55.8 51.8 Approach LOS A A E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4460: SR18 WB - Weyerhaeuser Wy Ramp & Weyerha iS"I9edMV e tyAnalysis i Movement WBL2 WBL WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations bi r tt Tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% 0% 1 % -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1647 1509 1770 3525 3507 1460 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1647 1509 448 3525 3507 1460 Volume (vph) 217 0 334 273 404 0 0 942 250 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 217 0 334 273 404 0 0 942 250 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 264 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 217 70 273 404 0 0 942 140 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 19.3 19.3 90.7 90.7 67.4 67.4 Effective Green, g (s) 19.3 19.3 90.7 90.7 67.4 67.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.76 0.76 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 265 243 540 2664 1970 820 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.11 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm 0.43 0.05 c0.30 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.29 0.51 0.15 0.48 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 48.7 44.3 15.8 4.0 15.8 12.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.70 0.83 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.8 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.5 Delay (s) 65.4 44.5 11.2 3.5 16.6 13.2 Level of Service E D B A B B Approach Delay (s) 52.8 6.6 15.9 0.0 Approach LOS D A B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4528: SW 344 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis "' --* 4\ t / 1 4/ --.- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 r tl tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 At Protected 0.97 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1673 1785 1498 1749 3535 1743 3402 At Permitted 0.82 0.75 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.39 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1412 1374 1498 612 3535 706 3402 Volume (vph) 47 1 43 14 14 9 105 700 1 1 704 141 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 47 1 43 14 14 9 105 700 1 1 704 141 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 40 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 51 0 0 28 1 105 701 0 1 840 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 8 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.1 8.1 8.1 102.9 102.9 102.9 102.9 Effective Green, g (s) 7.1 7.1 7.1 102.9 102.9 102.9 102.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 84 81 89 525 3031 605 2917 v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm c0.04 0.02 0.00 0.17 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.35 0.01 0.20 0.23 0.00 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 55.1 54.2 53.1 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.6 Progression Factor 1.10 1.01 1.05 0.44 0.47 0.55 0.57 Incremental Delay, d2 9.0 0.9 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 69.8 55.5 56.0 1.5 0.9 0.7 1.0 Level of Service E E E A A A A Approach Delay (s) 69.8 55.6 1.0 1.0 Approach LOS E E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4550: S 344 St & 16 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --I, f- 4\ t \0. d Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T T. 0 tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -5% 3% -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.93 100 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1720 1644 1780 1734 1729 3432 1756 3548 Flt Permitted 0.45 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.31 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 812 1644 869 1734 453 3432 573 3548 Volume (vph) 10 77 102 168 96 89 53 797 60 105 1027 12 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 10 77 102 168 96 89 53 797 60 105 1027 12 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 51 0 0 35 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 10 128 0 168 150 0 53 854 0 105 1038 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green G (s) 91.1 21 1 91.1 21 1 88.9 RR 9 88.9 88.9 Effective Green, g (s) 21.1 21.1 21.1 21.1 88.9 88.9 88.9 88.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 143 289 153 305 336 2543 424 2628 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 0.09 0.25 c0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.19 0.12 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.07 0.44 1.10 0.49 0.16 0.34 0.25 0.40 Uniform Delay, di 41.3 44.2 49.5 44.6 4.6 5.4 4.9 5.7 Progression Factor 1.05 1.03 1.00 1.00 0.65 0.61 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.4 101.4 0.5 0.7 0.3 1.4 0.4 Delay (s) 43.3 45.9 150.9 45.1 3.7 3.5 6.3 6.1 Level of Service D D F D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 45.7 95.4 3.5 6.2 Approach LOS D F A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4560: SR18 EB - Weverhaeuser Wy Ramp & Weye rhaekd§bAr-Wga&efgF "sEecR 'j!Vcity Analysis _'* __X -"�' 4� t r �* i * */ Movern 'nt EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR Lane Configurations r tt if t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1455 3525 1467 1770 1847 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1455 3525 1467 592 1847 Volume (vph) 158 9 413 0 578 81 473 866 2 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 9 413 0 578 81 473 866 2 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 118 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 167 295 0 578 50 473 868 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 Turn Type Split Perm Perm pm+pt Protected Phases 4 4 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.9 26.9 48.9 48.9 83.1 83.1 Effective Green, g (s) 26.9 26.9 48.9 48.9 83.1 83.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.41 0.41 0.69 0.69 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 397 326 1436 598 697 1279 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 0.16 0.17 c0.47 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 0.03 c0.30 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.91 0.40 0.08 0.68 0.68 Uniform Delay, d1 39.9 45.3 25.2 21.8 9.8 10.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.81 0.41 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 26.6 0.8 0.3 1.9 2.6 Delay (s) 40.1 71.9 26.0 22.1 9.8 7.1 Level of Service D E C C A A Approach Delay (s) 62.8 25.6 8.0 0.0 Approach LOS E C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4828: SW 348 St & 21 Av SW Horizon without HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT VHBFI NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T+ 4 r +TT +TT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 4% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1734 1499 3537 3506 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.74 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1734 1499 3537 2611 Volume (vph) 1 0 0 28 0 84 0 879 24 88 790 8 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 1 0 0 28 0 84 0 879 24 88 790 8 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1 0 0 28 4 0 902 0 0 886 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages #/hr. 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Turn Type Split Split Perm Perm pm+pt Protected Phases 7 7 8 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phascs 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 2.8 6.9 6.9 97.3 97.3 Effective Green, g (s) 1.8 5.9 5.9 97.3 97.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.81 0.81 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 27 85 74 2868 2117 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 c0.02 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.34 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.33 0.06 0.31 0.42 Uniform Delay, d1 58.2 55.1 54.4 2.9 3.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.76 0.97 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.0 Delay (s) 58.5 56.0 54.5 2.4 3.2 Level of Service E E D A A Approach Delay (s) 58.5 54.9 2.4 3.2 Approach LOS E D A A Iritersection Suniinary` HCM Average Control Delay 5.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4840: SW Campus Dr & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBi_ SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 tt r 0 tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% -1 % 7% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3351 3384 3450 3543 1533 1694 3267 1796 3592 1547 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3351 3384 3450 3543 1533 1694 3267 1796 3592 1547 Volume (vph) 167 791 111 282 1384 177 85 224 64 190 480 298 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 167 791 111 282 1384 177 85 224 64 190 480 298 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 8 0 0 0 69 0 23 0 0 0 177 Lane Group Flow (vph) 167 894 0 282 1384 108 85 265 0 190 480 121 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.2 55.8 13.2 59.8 59.8 9.0 13.8 17.2 22.0 22.0 Effective Green, g (s) 9.2 55.8 13.2 59.8 59.8 9.0 13.8 17.2 22.0 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.46 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.12 0.14 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 257 1574 380 1766 764 127 376 257 659 284 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 0.26 c0.08 c0.39 0.05 0.08 c0.11 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.78 0.14 0.67 0.70 0.74 0.73 0.43 Uniform Delay, d1 53.8 23.3 51.8 24.8 16.2 54.1 51.1 49.3 46.2 43.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.66 0.24 0.03 1.01 1.31 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.2 1.5 3.5 1.9 0.2 8.2 4.0 9.2 3.4 0.4 Delay (s) 58.0 24.8 37.9 7.7 0.7 62.6 70.8 58.5 49.6 43.8 Level of Service E C D A A E E E D D Approach Delay (s) 30.0 11.7 68.9 49.5 Approach LOS C B E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4846: S 348 St & 9 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movemeni EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT+ ►� tt r T, I T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% -2% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1720 3463 1787 3575 1514 1755 1659 1744 1548 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.73 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1720 3463 1787 3575 1514 1241 1659 1334 1548 Volume (vph) 90 1005 8 10 1668 231 62 18 28 390 3 111 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 90 1005 8 10 1668 231 62 18 28 390 3 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 81 0 19 0 0 67 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 1013 0 10 1668 150 62 27 0 390 47 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.7 67.4 1.0 60.7 60.7 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 Effective Green, g (s) 7.7 67.4 1.0 60.7 60.7 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.56 0.01 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 110 1945 15 1808 766 379 506 407 472 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.29 0.01 c0.47 0.02 0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.05 c0.29 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.52 0.67 0.92 0.20 0.16 0.05 0.96 0.10 Uniform Delay, di 55.5 16.3 59.3 27.5 16.3 30.5 29.5 40.9 29.9 Progression Factor 1.22 0.54 0.98 0.72 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.70 Incremental Delay, d2 29.3 0.8 42.2 6.2 0.4 0.1 0.0 32.0 0.0 Delay (s) 96.7 9.6 100.2 26.0 15.7 30.6 29.5 68.5 20.9 Level of Service F A F C B C C E C Approach Delay (s) 16.7 25.1 30.1 57.8 Approach LOS B C C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.9% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4848: S 348 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* --► ---t 'r ■--- t /,- �► Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations N ttT )) ttT+ tt r tt F Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% 1 % 2% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1706 4863 3389 4965 3358 3476 1550 1796 3564 1527 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1706 4863 3389 4965 3358 3476 1550 1796 3564 1527 Volume (vph) 197 965 156 430 1638 108 212 418 334 166 603 234 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 197 965 156 430 1638 108 212 418 334 166 603 234 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 5 0 0 0 21 0 0 149 Lane Group Flow (vph) 197 1105 0 430 1741 0 212 418 313 166 603 85 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 4 0 4 4 6 4 6 4 0 0 4 6 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot pm+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.0 44.0 21.0 52.0 9.7 19.7 40.7 15.3 25.3 25.3 Effective Green, g (s) 13.0 44.0 21.0 52.0 9.7 19.7 40.7 15.3 25.3 25.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.37 0.18 0.43 0.08 0.16 0.34 0.13 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 185 1783 593 2152 271 571 590 229 751 322 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.23 0.13 c0.35 0.06 c0.12 0.09 0.09 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 0.06 v/c Ratio 1.06 0.62 0.73 0.81 0.78 0.73 0.53 0.72 0.80 0.26 Uniform Delay, di 53.5 31.1 46.8 29.7 54.1 47.6 31.9 50.3 45.0 39.6 Progression Factor 0.81 0.68 0.68 0.64 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.71 Incremental Delay, d2 77.1 1.3 2.0 1.8 12.7 4.2 0.5 9.0 5.7 0.2 Delay (s) 120.4 22.5 33.9 20.7 66.8 51.8 32.4 55.9 47.3 28.2 Level of Service F C C C E D C E D C Approach Delay (s) 37.2 23.3 48.4 44.3 Approach LOS D C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 34.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4850: S 348 St & 16 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -► "r -*� I * 41 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR. NBL _,'NBT NB.R SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ttt r ))) ttt r M tT r M tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -4% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1 00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1..00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 5034 1522 5083 5159 1572 3372 3235 1426 3467 3458 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 5034 1522 5083 5159 1572 3372 3235 1426 3467 3458 Volume (vph) 72 1062 262 876 1698 481 341 511 584 548 572 124 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 72 1062 262 876 1698 481 341 511 584 548 572 124 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 140 0 0 240 0 18 2 0 16 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 1062 122 876 1698 241 341 626 449 548 680 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 1 1 4 0 4 0 0 0 1 4 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot pt+ov Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 23 1 6 Permitted Phaccc d R Actuated Green, G (s) 8.0 34.5 34.5 21.0 47.5 47.5 12.0 28.0 49.0 16.5 32.5 Effective Green, g (s) 8.0 34.5 34.5 21.0 47.5 47.5 12.0 28.0 49.0 16.5 32.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.18 0.40 0.40 0.10 0.23 0.41 0.14 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 1447 438 890 2042 622 337 755 582 477 937 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.21 c0.17 c0.33 c0.10 c0.19 0.31 c0.16 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.73 0.28 0.98 0.83 0.39 1.01 0.83 0.77 1.15 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 54.5 38.6 33.1 49.3 32.6 25.9 54.0 43.7 30.7 51.8 39.7 Progression Factor 0.76 0.68 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.83 1.47 0.99 1.02 Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 2.6 1.2 26.1 4.1 1.8 49.7 6.5 5.2 87.1 2.2 Delay (s) 46.4 29.0 12.1 75.4 36.8 27.7 96.0 42.8 50.4 138.3 42.8 Level of Service D C B E D C F D D F D Approach Delay (s) 26.7 46.4 57.8 84.9 Approach LOS C D E F intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5050: S 352 St & Enchanted Pkwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Bus Blockages (#/hr) 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 EBL 1900 5.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1754 0.95 1754 88 1.00 88 0 88 10 1 Split 4 EBT T 1900 1% 5.0 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 1760 1.00 1760 20 1.00 20 7 21 0 4 EBR WBL Vi 1900 1900 8 1.00 8 0 0 10 0 5.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1774 0.95 1774 261 1.00 261 0 142 10 0 Split 3 W B'T' 1900 -11% 5.0 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1717 0.96 1717 24 1.00 24 0 143 0 3 10.6 10.6 13.9 13.9 9.6 9.6 12.9 12.9 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.11 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 140 141 191 185 c0.05 0.01 0.08 c0.08 0.63 0.15 53.5 51.4 1.00 1.00 6.2 0.2 59.7 51.6 E D 57.7 E 0.74 0.77 51.9 52.1 1.00 1.00 12.8 16.5 64.7 68.7 E E 52.6 D WBR NBL 1900 1900 5.0 5.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 1581 1769 1.00 0.19 1581 361 237 5 1.00 1.00 237 5 153 0 84 5 10 10 1 0 pt+ov pm+pt 31 5 2 30.2 66.2 30.2 66.2 0.25 0.55 5.0 2.0 398 211 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.21 0.02 35.5 12.4 1.00 1.00 0.1 0.0 35.6 12.4 D B HCM Average Control Delay 20.3 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way NBT fiT 1900 0% 5.0 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 3414 1.00 3414 884 1.00 884 11 1066 C 2 65.2 65.2 0.54 5.0 2.0 1855 0.31 0.57 18.2 1.00 1.3 19.5 B 19.5 B NBR SBL 1 1900 1900 193 1.00 193 0 0 10 0 C 15.0 C 5.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1761 0.17 315 207 1.00 207 0 207 10 0 pm+pt 1 6 82.5 82.5 0.69 5.0 2.0 365 c0.06 c0.33 0.57 11.2 1.59 0.7 18.5 B SBT tt 1900 1% 5.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3522 1.00 3522 1247 1.00 1247 0 1247 C M 76.5 76.5 0.64 5.0 2.0 2245 0.35 0.56 12.2 0.41 0.5 5.6 A 7.1 A SBR r 1900 5.0 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.85 1.00 1517 1.00 1517 87 1.00 87 29 58 10 0 Perm 6 76.5 76.5 0.64 5.0 2.0 967 0.04 0.06 8.2 0.23 0.1 1.9 A 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5228: SW 356 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } --p. 4--I } /0� 1',. i 4/ Movement EBL EBT ErBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NSR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M T tT ) 1, +T r* Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% -1 % 0% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1855 1778 3403 1770 1723 1740 1519 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.70 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1855 1778 3403 540 1723 1281 1519 Volume (vph) 425 508 0 119 809 249 45 32 32 248 32 377 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 425 508 0 119 809 249 45 32 32 248 32 377 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 28 0 0 0 288 Lane Group Flow (vph) 425 508 0 119 1035 0 45 36 0 0 280 89 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted) Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 48.2 10.3 42.5 13.8 13.8 27.7 27.7 Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 48.2 10.3 42.5 13.8 13.8 27.7 27.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.40 0.09 0.35 0.12 0.12 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 458 745 153 1205 62 198 296 351 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.27 0.07 c0.30 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 c0.22 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.68 0.78 0.86 0.73 0.18 0.95 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 51.4 29.6 53.7 36.0 51.3 48.0 45.4 " 371 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.17 0.69 1.00 1.00 0.83 1.65 Incremental Delay, d2 24.6 2.1 18.2 7.3 29.7 0.2 35.6 0.1 Delay (s) 76.1 31.6 81.1 32.2 81.0 48.1 73.4 62.5 Level of Service E C F C F D E E Approach Delay (s} 51.9 37.1 61.7 67.2 Approach LOS D D E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 49.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5240: SW 356 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations t r 0. T r t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -4% 5% 3% 1% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1900 1519 1717 3344 1710 1835 1474 1704 1853 1524 Fit Permitted 0.17 1.00 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.71 1.00 1.00 0.72 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 319 1900 1519 702 3344 1272 1835 1474 1286 1853 1524 Volume (vph) 188 514 26 58 821 168 31 61 44 326 77 528 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 188 514 26 58 821 168 31 61 44 326 77 528 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 12 0 12 0 0 0 30 0 0 191 Lane Group Flow (vph) 188 514 14 58 977 0 31 61 14 326 77 337 Confi. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 73.1 63.7 63.7 60.8 56.4 36.9 36.9 36.9 36.9 36.9 36.9 Effective Green, g (s) 73.1 63.7 63.7 60.8 56.4 36.9 36.9 36.9 36.9 36.9 36.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.53 0.53 0.51 0.47 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 339 1009 806 393 1572 391 564 453 395 570 469 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.27 0.01 c0.29 0.03 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.28 0.01 0.07 0.02 0.01 c0.25 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.51 0.02 0.15 0.62 0.08 0.11 0.03 0.83 0.14 0.72 Uniform Delay, di 14.5 18.1 13.3 15.6 23.8 29.5 29.8 29.0 38.6 30.0 36.9 Progression Factor 1.38 0.77 0.78 0.39 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 0:38 0.31 0.29 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 3.2 Delay (s) 21.1 14.1 10.4 6.1 9.1 29.5 29.8 29.0 24.3 9.2 13.9 Level of Service C B B A A C C C C A B Approach Delay (s) 15.8 9.0 29.5 17.2 Approach LOS B A C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5246: S 356 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M t r Vi ti� M tT tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % -3% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3423 1872 1529 1767 3556 3399 3373 1787 3546 1559 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3423 1872 1529 1767 3556 3399 3373 1787 3546 1559 Volume (vph) 234 424 349 201 447 28 333 586 119 64 988 346 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 234 424 349 201 447 28 333 586 119 64 988 346 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 175 0 5 0 0 13 0 0 0 194 Lane Group Flow (vph) 234 424 174 201 470 0 333 692 0 64 988 152 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 4 0 4 4 0 4 0 4 0 0 4 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phacac d Actuated Green, G (s) 25.5 29.8 29.8 15.9 20.2 14.0 46.2 7.1 39.3 39.3 Effective Green, g (s) 25.5 29.8 29.8 15.9 20.2 15.0 47.2 7.1 39.3 39.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.17 0.12 0.39 0.06 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5:0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 727 465 380 234 599 425 1327 106 1161 511 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.23 c0.11 0.13 c0.10 0.21 0.04 c0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.91 0.46 0.86 0.78 0.78 0.52 0.60 0.85 0.30 Uniform Delay, di 39.9 43.8 38.2 51.0 47.8 50.9 27.8 55.1 37.6 30.1 Progression Factor 0.86 1.05 1.13 1.01 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 19.4 0.3 24.3 6.1 8.5 1.5 6.5 7.9 1.5 Delay (s) 34.3 65.6 43.4 76.0 42.1 59.4 29.2 61.6 45.5 31.5 Level of Service C E D E D E C E D C Approach Delay (s) 50.6 52.2 38.9 42.8 Approach LOS D D D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5250: S 356 St & 16 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4\ t Iv - f- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NHT NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations 0 tt 4 r t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 7% -1 % 3% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.95 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3401 1778 3557 1470 1402 1858 1553 At Permitted 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.77 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3401 474 3557 1310 1402 1429 1553 Volume (vph) 0 515 10 54 258 0 19 0 99 1 22 293 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 515 10 54 258 0 19 0 99 1 22 293 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 171 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 524 0 54 258 0 0 55 63 0 23 122 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type custom custom custom Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 5 58 3 6 Permitted Phases 8 7 7 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 25.7 37.7 44.7 7.5 7.5 47.8 47.8 Effective Green, g (s) 26.7 41.7 46.7 8.5 8.5 49.8 49.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.35 0.39 0.07 0.07 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 757 328 1384 93 99 593 644 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.02 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.04 c0.04 0.02 c0.08 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.16 0.19 0.59 0.64 0.04 0.19 Uniform Delay, di 42.9 36.2 24.1 54.1 54.2 20.9 22.3 Progression Factor 1.15 0.23 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.1 0.0 6.5 9.4 0.1 0.6 Delay (s) 50.7 8.2 5.9 60.6 63.7 21.0 22.9 Level of Service D A A E E C C Approach Delay (s) 50.7 6.3 62.3 22.8 Approach LOS D A E C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5251: S 356 St & Enchanted Pkwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T r 1� ti. tt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 0% -1 % 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1735 1500 1728 1720 3450 3532 1761 3507 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1299 1500 968 1720 3450 3532 1761 3507 Volume (vph) 315 24 298 42 21 14 277 731 24 18 1119 27 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 315 24 298 42 21 14 277 731 24 18 1119 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 232 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 339 66 42 24 0 277 754 0 18 1145 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 a 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 33.2 25.7 24.7 24.7 13.0 61.0 2.8 47.8 Effective Green, g (s) 35.2 26.7 26.7 26.7 15.0 62.0 2.8 49.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.52 0.02 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 7.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 334 215 383 431 1825 41 1455 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.01 c0.08 0.21 0.01 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 0.04 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.64 0.41 0.44 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 39.5 37.9 37.9 36.8 50.0 17.8 57:8 30.5 Progression Factor 0.29 0.37 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.84 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 2.3 0.7 2.7 4.4 Delay (s) 20.7 14.0 38.1 36.8 45.4 15.6 60.5 34.9 Level of Service C B D D D B E C Approach Delay (s) 17.6 37.5 23.6 35.3 Approach LOS B D C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5335: SW 356 St & 8 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } 4---I --,, f- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tl� Vi ti� 4,, 41� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 3% 1 % -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.92 0.95 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1795 3581 1734 3452 1643 1695 Flt Permitted 0.17 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.90 0.83 Satd. Flow (perm) 321 3581 716 3452 1512 1441 Volume (vph) 30 653 10 29 1295 65 9 1 14 43 8 35 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 30 653 10 29 1295 65 9 1 14 43 8 35 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 26 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 663 0 29 1359 0 0 11 0 0 60 0 Conti. Peds. #!hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 94.9 91.8 94.7 91.7 11.2 10.2 Effective Green, g (s) 94.9 91.8 94.7 91.7 10.2 10.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.79 0.76 0.79 0.76 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 292 2739 590 2638 129 122 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 0.19 0.00 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.04 0.01 c0.04 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.24 0.05 0.52 0.09 0.49 Uniform Delay, d1 3.5 4.1 2.7 5.5 50.6 52.4 Progression Factor 0.45 0.47 0.23 0.54 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.1 1.2 Delay (s) 1.6 2.1 0.6 3.5 50.7 53.6 Level of Service A A A A D D Approach Delay (s) 2.0 3.4 50.7 53.6 Approach LOS A A D D intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 451: Pacific Hwy S & 16 AV S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t FA1J I ` l � f-, '� 4\ Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL S13T `913R SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR Lane Configurations A ttt W4 r r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -3% 2% 4% 0% Volume (veh/h) 169 977 9 38 1717 20 0 0 397 0 0 49 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 169 977 9 38 1717 20 0 0 397 0 0 49 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 986 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 vC, con flicting%volUme 74 ; 986 2536 3137 602 2375 3142 340 vC1, stage 1 cont vol "2 vC21 stage Conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1662 986 2504 3146 440 2332 3152 340 tC, sing16 (s.) 4.1 4.1 7.�.5 6.5 &9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4-0 3.3 p0 queue free % 53 95 100 100 24 100 100 92 clVt"capacity (veh/h) 356 696 7 5 520 3 5 650 Direction; Lane # N8 1 N8 2 NB 3 NB. 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 SE 1 NW 1 Volume Total 169 391 391 204 467 858 449 397 49 Volume Left 169 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 9 0 0 20 397 49 cSH 356 1700 1700 1700 696 1700 1700 520 650 Volume to Capacity 0.47 0.23 0.23 0.12 0.05 0.51 0.26 0.76 0.08 Queue Length 951h (ft) 61 0 0 0 4 0 0 168 6 Control Delay (s) 219 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 30.9 11.0 Lane LOS C A D B Approach Delay (s) 35 0.4 30.9 11.0 Approach LOS D B Inferse666 Summary. Average Delay 5.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 750: S 283 PI & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t/P. I* I Movement WBL WBR NST NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations tt'T-, W Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -11 % -3% 3% Volume (veh/h) 0 49 1433 78 0 2010 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 49 1433 78 0 2010 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2162 537 1521 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 2162 537 1521 tC, single (s) ; . 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 90 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 40 481 431 Direction. Lane# WB 1 N81 NB 2 NB 3 SBA SB 2 SS 3 Volume Total 49 573 573 365 670 670 670 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 49 0 0 78 0 0 0 cSH 481 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.10 0.34 0.34 0.21 0.39 0.39 0.39 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 13.3 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Interseetion:'Summary: Average Delay 0.2 Intersection`Capacity Utilizafian 55:3°fo :ICU°LeVellof Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 1052: S 288 St & 20 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --,, 4--- 4-, 4/ Movement ESL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations +'t 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 53 454 619 56 48 70 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 454 619 56 48 70 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 806 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 685 1060 358 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 685 1000 358 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 78 89 cM1cap4c ty (veh/h) 897 222 628 Direction, Lane # Et3 1 EB 2 W B 1 W B 2 SB 1 Volume Total 204 303 413 262 118 Volume Left 53 0 0 0 48 Volume Right 0 0 0 56 70 cSH 897 1700 1700 1700 360 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.18 0.24 0.15 0.33 Queue Length 951h (ft) 5 0 0 0 35 Control Delay (s) 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.8 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) i .1 0.0 19.8 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICLI Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 1751: 18 Av S & Pacific Hwy S Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis { t IHCM t Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y +0 Zi ttt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -10% -4% 3% Volume (veh/h) 75 42 1138 58 23 1753 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 75 42 1138 58 23 1753 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 720 pX, platoon unblocked 0.82 vC, conflicting volume 1817 428 1206 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1177 vC2, stagei2 conf vol 640 vCu, unblocked vol 1549 428 1206 tC, single;O 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tl= (s)' 3:5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 62 93 96 p eapa Iity,(veh/h) 198 566 570 Direction. Lane # W B 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 SB 4 Volume Total 117 455 455 286 Volume Left 75 0 0 0 Volume Right 42 0 0 58 cSH 258 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.45 0.27 0.27 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 55 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D Approach Delay (s) 30.0 0.0 Approach LOS D Intersection Surnmary Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 5.1.10/6 Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 23 584 584 584 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 570 1700 1700 1700 0.04 0.34 0.34 0.34 3 0 0 0 11.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 B 0.2 ICU Level of Service 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2040: S 304 St & 1 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4\ T 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y 4 T Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -2% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 5 27 33 284 385 17 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 27 33 284 385 17 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 764 414 412 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 764 414 412 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 96 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 355 628 1137 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB .1 SB 1 Volume dotal 32 317 402 Volume Left 5 33 0 Volume Right 27 0 17 cSH 561 1137 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.03 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 2 0 Control Delay (s) 11.8 1.1 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 11.8 1.1 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.0 Iilterseclion-Capacty Utilization 56.8% ICU Level of Service B, Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2140: S 304 PI & 1 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 'e- I 1P. i Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR S8L SBT Lane Configurations Y T 4 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -2% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 0 0 316 126 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 316 126 0 0 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 399 399 452 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 399 399 452 tCi single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM .capacity (veh/h) 597 640 1099 Direction, Lanc #. WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 0 442 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 126 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.26 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LQS A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LQS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2240: S 308 St & 1 AV S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movernent EBL EBT EBR WBL '1 gT WBR NBL NBT NBR SSL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T+ 4+ T T Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade -15% 4% 1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 9 8 81 46 5 1 65 432 129 1 447 12 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 8 81 46 5 1 65 432 129 1 447 12 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1319 pX, platoon unblocked 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 vC, conflicting volume 1040 1166 473 1180 1108 516 469 571 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 465 465 636 636 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 576 701 544 471 vCu, unblocked vol 1049 1200 473 1217 1129 418 469 483 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 - 6:5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.b 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 97 97 86 79 98 100 94 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 293 263 583 222 2% 518 1084 889 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 5B 2 Volume Total 98 52 65 561 1 459 Volume Left 9 46 65 0 1 0 Volume Right 81 1 0 129 0 12 cSH 490 228 1084 1700 889 1700 Volume to Capacity 0:20 0.23 0.06 0.33 0.00 0.27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 18 21 5 0 0 0 00frol Delay (s) 14.2 25.4 8.5 0.0 9.1 0.0 Lane LOS B D A A Approach Delay (s) 14.2 25.4 0.9 0.0 Approach LOS B D Intersection Surnmary _. Average Delay 2.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.3% ICU Level of Service 8 Analysis Period (min} 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2350: S 310 St & Pacific Hwy S Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f- t IHCM i Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations ttl� h ttt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 21 51 1074 45 71 1564 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 21 51 1074 45 71 1564 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 660 662 pX, platoon unblocked 0.91 0.88 0.88 vC, conflicting, volume_ 1780 400 1129 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1106 vC2, stage.. cont vol 673 vCu, unblocked vol 1065 49 876 tC, single (sJ; 6.8 6.9 4.1 2 tC, stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) : 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 92 94 89 cM capacity, (veh/h); 262 874 669 Direction. Lane ## WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 SB 4: Volume Total 51 430 430 260 71 521 521 521 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 71 0 0 0 Volume Right 51 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 cSH 874 1700 1700 1700 669 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.25 0.25 0.15 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.31 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 0A 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Err 0.0 0.5 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay Err lntersecton:Capacity:Ufilization' Err% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2531: SW 312 St & 14 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement ESL EBT EBR WBL WBT W13R NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *T+ 4 *T* Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 1 % -1 % 1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 0 437 30 82 555 1 49 2 43 0 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 437 30 82 555 1 49 2 43 0 0 1 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 767 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 566 477 1192 1192 472 1236 1206 576 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 566 477 1192 1192 472 1236 1206 576 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 92 67 99 93 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh1h) 998 1076 149 170 582 129 167 509 Direction, Lane 4 EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 --- Volume Total 467 638 94 1 Volume Left 0 82 49 0 Volume,Right 30 1 43 1 cSH 998 1076 227 509 Volume to Capacity 0:00 0.68 0.41 6.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 6 47 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 2.0 31.6 12.1 Lane LOS A D B Approach0elay (s) 0.0 2.0 31.6 12.1 Approach LOS D B Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.5 Interseption Capacity Utilization 84.0% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way E 5/23/2007 2533:SW312St&10PISW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --,, --v 4--- Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NSL NSR Lane Configurations '+ 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 2% -1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 526 10 6 638 2 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 526 10 6 638 2 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage i 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 546 1201 551 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2•conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 546 1201 551 tC, single (s) 1 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 99 cM:capacity (veh/h) 1015 200 525 Direction. Lang; 41 EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 536 644 5 Volume Left 0 6 2 Volume Right 10 0 3 cSH 1700 1015 318 Volume to Capacity 0.32 0.01 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.2 16.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.2 16.5 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2535: SW 312 St & 8 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement LE3f_. EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 2% -2% 2% 2% Volume (veh/h) 17 407 13 40 618 32 6 2 16 17 6 27 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 17 407 13 40 618 32 6 2 16 17 6 27 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 f2.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 660 430 1212 1198 434 1198 1188 654 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 660 430 1212 1198 434 1198 1188 654 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 96 96 99 97 88 97 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 920 1120 136 173 612 146 175 459 Direction, Lane # 031 W B 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 437 690 24 50 Volume Left 17 40 6 17 Volume Right 13 32 16 27 cSH 920 1120 293 238 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 7 19 Control Delay (s) 0ti6 0.9 18.4 24.1 Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delays) 6.6 0.9 18.4 24.1 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization _ 64.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 2542: S 312 St & 4 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EST ESP WSL WBi NBL NDR Lane Configurations 1� Vi t Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 8% -6% 0% Volume (veh/h) 714 10 28 1005 11 16 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 714 10 28 1005 11 16 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1307 pX, platoon unblocked 0.88 0.88 0.88 vC, conflicting volume 734 1800 739 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 729 VO4 stage2 conf-vol 1071 vCu, unblocked vol 698 1909 703 tC, single°�(s 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF ($) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 94 96 clVf capacity (veh7f) 784 194 378 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WS 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 724 28 1005 27 Volume Left 0 28 0 11 Volume Right 10 0 0 16 cSH 1700 784 1700 273 Volume to Capacity 0.43 0.04 0.59 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 3 0 8 Control Delay (s) 0.0 9.8 0.0 19.6 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.3 19.6 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacify11 ilization 67.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3015: SW 320 St & 42 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 2% 0% Volume (veh/h) 36 367 768 57 35 29 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 36 367 768 57 35 29 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 310 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 835 1072 432 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 806 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 266 vCu, unblocked vol 835 1072 432 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 89 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 788 313 562 Direc#ion, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 W B i W B 2 SB 1 Volume Total 36 184 184 512 313 64 Volume Left 36 0 0 0 0 35 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 57 29 cSH 788 1700 1700 1700 170G 392 Vold meto Capacity 0.05 0.11 0.11 0.30 0.18 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 14 Control Delay (%) 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 Lane LOS A C Appr,.oach Delay �(s) 0:9 0.0 16.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.1 Intersectiorneapacitiy Utilization 45.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3022: SW 320 St & 30 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WST WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations I tt 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -3% -2% Volume (veh/h) 19 563 1131 85 41 15 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 19 563 1131 85 41 15 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1187 pX, platoon unblocked 0,98 0.98 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 1226 1513 628 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2,-stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1211 1504 602 to' ;single (s), 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 61 96 cM,capacity,(veh/h) 556 105 427 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 W B 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 19 282 282 754 462 Volume Left 19 0 0 0 0 V016me=Right 0 0 0 0 85 cSH 556 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.44 0.27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 Control=Delay (s) 11.7 0A 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 56 41 15 131 0:43 47 51.4 F 51.4 F ICU Level of Service A 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3031: SW 320 St & 14 Wy SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --0. 4--- 4" Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations I ft 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 2% Volume (veh/h) 32 974 1594 28 15 24 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 32 974 1594 28 15 24 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1632 2179 831 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1618 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 561 vCu, unblocked vol 1632 2179 831 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 92 87 92 cM capacity (veh/h) 390 '113 307 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 W13 2 SS 1 Volume Total 32 487 487 1063 559 39 Volume Left 32 0 0 0 0 15 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 28 24 cSH 390 1700 1700 1700 1700 185 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.63 0.33 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 0 0 0 0 19 Control Delay (s) 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.5 Lane LOS C D Approacha Delay (s) 0.5 0.0 29.5 Approach LOS D lrtfese#ian Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity�UtM2ation 59.50/0 1OU Level -of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3032: SW 320 St & 13 PI SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -1 % 2% Volume (veh/h) 867 11 93 1643 4 62 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 867 11 93 1643 4 62 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 888 1900 459 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 882 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1018 vCu, unblocked vol 888 1900 459 tC, single :(s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 88 98 89 cM capacity, (veh/h) 752 164 540 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 W B 3 NB 1 Volume Total 578 300 93 822 822 66 Volume Left 0 0 93 0 0 4 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 0 62 cSH 1700 1700 752 1700 1700 474 Volume to Capacity 0.34 0.18 0.12 0.48 0.48 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 11 0 0 12 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.5 0.0 0.0 13.8 Lane LOS B B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.6 13;8 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.1 % ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (rein) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/27/2007 3033: SW 320 St & 11 PI SW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations ti, ft Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -1 % -13% Volume (veh/h) 1 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 11 21 20 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 11 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 10 vCu, unblocked vol 11 21 20 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1593 903 1035 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 1NB 2 WB 3 NB 1 VOlUrne Total 1 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0:00 0.00 000 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s),,,, 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay_;(s) 0.0 0.0 0 0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity=;Wization 20.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3034: SW 320 St & 10 PI SW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis .,# --► *-- k' Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% -1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 39 1379 1564 54 31 196 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 39 1379 1564 54 31 196 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1628 2378 829 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1601 vC2, stage,2 conf vol 778 vCu, unblocked vol 1628 2378 829 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 71 36 cM capacity (veh/h) 392 106 309 Direction, Lane # EB i EB 2 EB 3 W 13 1 W B 2 SB 1 Volume Total 39 690 690 1043 575 227 Volume Left 39 0 0 0 0 31 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 54 196 cSH 392 1700 1700 1700 1700 245 Volume to Capacity 0.10 0.41 0.41 0.61 0.34 0.93 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 0 0 0 0 204 Control Delay (s) 15.2 0.0 0A 0.0 0.0 83.1 Lane LOS C F Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 83.1 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3036: SW 320 St & 7 Av SW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --,, 4-- 4/ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 1 % Volume (veh/h) 5 841 1440 30 13 5 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 841 1440 30 13 5 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1480 1906 755 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1465 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 440 vCu, unblocked vol 1480 1906 755 tC, single (s) 4.1 6:8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 91 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 447 142 345 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SIB 1 Volume Total 5 420 420 960 510 18 Volume Left 5 0 0 0 0 13 Volume,Right 0 0 0 0 30 5 cSH 447 1700 1700 1700 1700 170 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.56 0.30 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 0 0 9 Control Delay (s) 13.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 Lane LOS B D Approach Delay (s) 0A 0.0 28.6 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3037: SW 320 St & 6 PI SW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations +T+ fit Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -2% 2% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 1029 23 98 1645 16 69 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1029 23 98 1645 16 69 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1062 2079 546 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1050 vC2, stage 2•conf vol 1028 vCu, unblocked vol 1062 2079 546 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 85 89 85 CM capacity-(veh/h) 646 143 474 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 W B 1 W B 2 W B 3 NB 1 Volume Total 686 366 98 822 822 85 Volume Left 0 0 98 0 0 16 Volume Flight 0 23 0 0 0 69 cSH 1700 1700 646 1700 1700 584 Volume to Capacity 0.40 0.22 0.15 0.48 0.48 0.1.5 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 13 0 0 13 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 0.0 17.5 Lane LOS B C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.7 17.5 Approach LCS C Intersection Summary Average Delay ❑.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3043: S 320 St & 5 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations f f i� ttt r Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -2% 2% Volume (veh/h) 1524 24 126 2116 10 88 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1524 24 126 2116 10 88 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1157 pX, platoon unblocked 0.66 vC, conflicting volume 1558 2513 540 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1546 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 967 vCu, unblocked vol 1558 2258 540 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 70 91 82 cM capacity (veh/h) 417 114 478 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB 4 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 610 610 329 126 705 705 705 10 88 Volume Left 0 0 0 126 0 0 0 10 0 Volume Right 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 88 cSH 1700 1700 1700 417 1700 1700 1700 114 478 Volume to Capacity 0 3.6 0.36 0.19 0.30 0.41 0.41 0.41 O:Og 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 7 17 Control_Delay, (s) OA 0.0 0.6 17.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.6 14.2 Lane LOS C E B Approach Delay (s) 0..01 1.0 16.8 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary - Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capaeity,Utilizatioh 57.9%o ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3053: S 320 St & 21 PI S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --p. f *-- 4\ t /M. 1 i Movement BBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations aN ttT t"t-t- r F Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 5% 2% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 32 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 32 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 0 0 Upstream signal (ft) 641 567 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 32 32 43 64 11 43 64 11 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 32 32 32 32 vC2, stage 2:,conf vol 11 32 11 32' vCu, unblocked vol 32 32 43 64 11 43 64 11 tC, single. (s), 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tr'(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 pM capacity (veh/h) 1579 1579 661 576 1068 661 576 1068 Direction, Lane # Eg 1 EB 2 EB 3 EB 4 W B 1 W B 2 W B 3 WB 4 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 0 13 13 6 0 13 13 6 0 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 VolumetoCapacity 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0- Approach LOS A A Intersection 5urnmary. Average Delay 0.0 16tetsectidi n Capacity Utilization 7.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3119: SW 320 St & 36 Av SW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -5% 5% -5% Volume-(veh/h) 3 440 853 66 50 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 440 853 66 50 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 929 1132 480 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 896 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 236 vCu, unblocked vol 929 1132 480 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 83 99 cM capacity (veh/li) 726 293 524 Direction, Lane ## ES 1 EB 2. EB 3 W B 1 W B 2 SB 1 Volume Total 3 220 220 569 350 53 Volume Left 3 0 0 0 0 50 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 66 3 cSH 726 1700 1700 1700 1700 300 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.33 0.21 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 16 Controlljelay (s) 10.0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0.0 19.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay. W - 0.1 0.0 19.5 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary - - - Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3120: SW 320 St & SW 323 St HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT ESR WBL WBT NWL NWR Lane Configurations tip Sign Control Free Grade 1 % Volume (veh/h) 459 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 459 Pedestrians 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf Vol vC2, stage 2 conf Vol vCu, unblocked Vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM.capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 Volume Total 306 Volume Left 0 Volume flight 0 cSH 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 Lane LOS Approach Delay (s) 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way Free Stop -4% -4% 13 109 879 13 62 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 13 109 879 13 62 10 10 12.0 12.0 4.0 4.0 1 1 TW LTL 1 482 1143 256 476 668 482 1143 256 4.1 6.8 6.9 5.8 2.2 15 3.3 90 96 92 1068 299 731 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NW 1 166 109 440 440 75 0 109 0 0 13 13 0 0 0 62 1700 1068 1700 1700 584 0.10 0.10 0.26 0.26 '0.13 0 9 0 0 11 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 i 9:1 A B 1.0 12.1 B 1.2 40.3% ICU Level of Service 15 h_1 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3261: S 323 St & Weyerhaeuser Wy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* --t A\ t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations t + if Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -5% 1% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 48 6 369 299 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 48 6 369 299 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1048 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 700 319 312 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 700 319 312 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 93 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 398 710 1238 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 0 48 6 369 299 3 Volume Left 0 0 6 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 48 0 0 0 3 cSH 1700 710 1238 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.22 0.18 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 5 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 10.4 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 10.4 0.1 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3414: SW 326 St & Hot Rd SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement WBL WBR SEL SET NWT NWR Lane Configurations �r Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -2% 0% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 53 19 96 410 388 93 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 19 96 410 388 93 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 1:2.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) 2 Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC; con'flictingvolume 1056 454 491 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1056 454 491 to, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (sX; 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 76 97 91 cM capacity:(veh/h) 223 596 1063 Direction:, Lane # WB 1 SF 1 NW 1 Volume Total 72 506 481 Volume Left 53 96 0 Volume Right 19 0 93 cSH 303 1063 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.09 0.28 Queue Length 95th (ft) 23 7 0 Control Delay (s) 22.2 2.5 0.0 Lane LDS C A Approach Delay (s) 22.2 2.5 0.0 Approach LDS C lrftersectian Summary _ Average Delay 2.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3451: S 324 St & 17 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement FBL EBT EBR WBI_ `WBT WEIR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations t'# +TtT r i Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 2% -1 % -1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 0 505 72 156 529 15 0 0 212 0 0 126 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 505 72 156 529 15 0 0 212 0 0 126 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12:0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 383 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 554 587 1175 1417 308 1333 1446 204 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 554 587 1175 1417 308 1333 1446 204 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6:5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3:5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 84 100 100 69 100 100 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 1004 976 105 112 676 66 108 790 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 337 240 288 264 147 212 126 Volume Left 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 72 0 0 15 212 126 cSH 1700 1700 976 1700 1700 676 790 Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.09 031 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 14 0 0 33 14 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 5:8 0.0 0.0 i2.7 164 Lane LOS A B B Approach Delay (s) 0:0 2.4 .1.2:7 10 4 Approach Los B B Intersection Surnmary Average Delay 3.5 Intersscfioii Capacity Utilization 38.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3550: S 328 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t --* t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations +tt ttT Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 90 0 1660 1880 74 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 90 0 1660 1880 74 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 641 pX, platoon unblocked 0.85 VC, conflicting volume 2490 684 1964 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1927 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 563 vCu, unblocked vol 2403 684 1964 'tC, single (s) 63 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 77 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 84 385 290 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB. 2 SB 3 Volume Total 90 553 553 553 752 752 450 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 90 0 0 0 0 0 74 cSH 385 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.23 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.44 0.26 Queue Length 951h (ft) 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C Approach Delay (s) 17.2 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3637: SW 330 St & 6 PI SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } --P� --t rl "'- 41 T I' ► Movement EBL EST EBR WBI_ WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T., Vi T +T+ Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 13% -2% -1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 27 258 39 17 398 27 3 5 28 21 2 22 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 258 39 17 398 27 3 5 28 21 2 22 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 435 307 806 810 298 808 816 432 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 342 342 456 456 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 465 469 352 361 vCu, unblocked vol 435 307 806 810 298 808 816 432 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 612 7.1 6:5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 99 99 99 96 95 99 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 1115 1243 384 392 730 389 395 614 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB2 NB 1 SB 1 VOILIme Total 27 297 17 425 36 45 Volume Left 27 0 17 0 3 21 Volume Right 0 39 0 27 28 22 cSH 1115 1700 1243 1700 611 474 U916me to Capacity 0.02 0.17 0.0 0.25 0.06 0.09 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 1 0 5 8 Control Delay (s) 8.3 0:0 7.9 0.0 11.3 13.4 Lane LOS A A B B Approach Delay (s) 0.7 0:3 11.3 13.4 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.50x, ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3638: SW 330 St & 3 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis - 4--- t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T+ 1� 4 41� Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -4% -2% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 4 323 5 56 634 41 9 6 40 28 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 4 323 5 56 634 41 9 6 40 28 0 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1031 pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 vC, conflicting=volume 685 338 1102 1140 346 1160 1122 674 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 344 344 776 776 vC2, 'stage.,,2 conf vol 759 797 384 346 vCu, unblocked vol 670 338 1108 1147 346 1168 1129 659 tC, single 4.1 4.1 7.1 t.5 6:2 7.1 6.5 6.2 _(s) tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 95 97 98 94 89 100 99 cM e0acity (veh/h): 870 1211 278 280 686 255 282 435 Direction; Cane , E-B 1 EB 2 W B i W13.2 N B` 1 SS 1 Volume Total 4 328 56 675 55 31 Volume Left 4 0 56 0 9 28 Volume Flight 0 5 0 41 40 3 cSH 870 1700 1211 1700 491 266 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.19 0.05 0.40 0.11 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 4 0 9 10 Control Delay (s) 9.2 0.0 8.1 0.0 13.3 20.3 Lane LOS A A B C Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.6 13.3 20.3 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection C,apaciiy Utilization 60.60/0 ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3750: S 332 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* 4%, t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r ttt ttli, Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 2% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 60 146 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 60 146 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 680 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 166 49 146 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 166 49 146 tC, single (s)' 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM"capacity.(veh/h} 808 1010 1434 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB t NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 0 20 20 20 58 58 29 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 .0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (sy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 G.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity,Utilization 7.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3850: S 333 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis *-- T 110. MoveFnent WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations ttll� Di ttt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -2% 2% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 14 1593 9 0 3237 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 14 1593 9 0 3237 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 890 1 1 10 pX, platoon unblocked 0.82 0.82 0.82 vC, conflicting volume 2696 556 1612 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1608 vC2, stada 2 conf vol 1089 vCu, unblocked vol 2629 13 1304 tC, s,ingle (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) , &5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 98 100 6M,1capacif y (veh/h) 1-07 856 428 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB i NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SIB 2 SB 3 SB 4 Volume Total 14 637 637 328 0 1079 1079 1079 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 14 0 0 9 0 & U 0 cSH 856 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.37 0.37 0.19 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.63 Queue Length 95th (it) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 9.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LQS A Approach Delay (s) 9.3 0.0 0.0 Approach LQS A lnterseciiion Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity -Utilization 77.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3934: SW 334 St & 10 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement FBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y t 1� Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -8% 3% -2% Volume (veh/h) 39 38 53 268 489 78 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 39 38 53 268 489 78 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 922 548 577 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 538 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 384 vCu, unblocked vol 922 548 577 tC, single,(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 90 93 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 407 528 988 01rec#ion, Lane 4 EB 1 NB 1 N82 SB 1 Volume Total 77 53 268 567 Volume Left 39 53 0 0 Volume Right 38 0 0 78 cSH 459 988 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.05 0.16 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 4 0 0 Control Delay (s) 14.4 8.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay`(s) 14.4 1.5 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3942: 1 Wy S & S 334 St Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis }} Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations tT+ tli Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -1 % 0% -8% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1 1062 48 48 1509 0 46 0 33 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 1062 48 48 1509 0 46 0 33 0 0 0 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 0 0 Upstream signal (ft) 358 768 pX, platoon unblocked 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 vC, conflicting volume 1519 1120 1958 2713 575 2191 2737 774 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1098 1098 1615 1615 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 860 1615 576 1122 vCu, unblocked vol 1519 1089 1957 2738 525 2198 2763 774 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 15 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 92 53 100 93 100 100 100 cM capacity,(ve A) 432 610 98 71 473 58 66 335 Direction, Lane 9 SE 1 SE 2 S.E 3 NW 1 NW 2 NW 3 NE i SW 1 Volume Total 1 708 402 48 1006 503 79 0 Volume Left 1 0 0 48 0 0 46 0 Volume Right 0 0 48 0 0 0 33 0 cSH 432 1700 1700 610 1700 1700 147 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.42 0.24 0.08 0.59 0.30 0.54 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 6 0 0 67 0 Control Delay (s) 13.4 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 0.0 55.1 0.0 Lane LCS B B F A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.4 55.1 0.0 Approach LCS F A - Intersection Summary - Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 3946: 9 Av S & 8 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement NBL t NBT 1 SST *j SBR %-* SEL SER Lane Configurations ►j t 1� Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 74 261 305 82 108 258 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 74 261 305 82 108 258 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 654 pX, platoon unblocked vC„conflicting volume 397 775 366 vC1, stage 1 conf Vol 356 vC2, stage 2 conf Vol 419 vCu, unblocked Vol 397 775 366 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 76 61 cM capacity (veh/h) 1152 452 668 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 S8 1 SE 1 Volume Total 74 261 387 366 Volume Left 74 0 0 108 Volume Right 0 0 82 258 cSH 1152 1700 1700 585 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.15 0.23 0.63 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 108 Control Delray (s) 8.3 0.0 0.0 20.8 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (0) 1.8 0.0 20.8 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary - - Average Delay 7.6 lntersectiorr Capacity.Utilization 60.4% ICU Level of Service B. Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4049: S 336 St & 13 PI S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) 19 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 19 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 1078 vC1, stage 1 conf Vol vC2, stage..2 conf Vol vCu, unblocked Vol 1062 tC, single (a) 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 p0 queue free % 97 &M capacity (veh/h) 635 Direction, Lane # EB 1 Volume Total 397 Volume Left 19 Volume Right 0 cS H 635 Volume to Capacity 0.03 Queue Length 951h (ft) 2 Control Delay (s) 0.9 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.3 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR 4t t� Y Free Free Stop 2% -4% 0% 1135 1042 26 37 32 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1135 1042 26 37 32 10 10 10 12.0 12.0 12.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1 1 1 None 815 0.98 0.98 1680 554 1675 529 6.8 6.9 EB2 WB1 W152 757 695 373 0 0 0 0 0 26 1700 1700 1700 0.45 0.41 0.22 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 WE 1.9 60.2% 15 3.5 3.3 54 93 81 478 8131 69 37 32 132 0.52 63 59.2 F 59.2 F ICU Level of Service (:3 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4124: SW 337 St & SW 336 Wy HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movemr;nt SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL 5WT SWR Lane Configurations 4+ 0 1 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade -2% 1 % -2% 3% Volume (veh/h) 26 2 5 2 3 19 6 750 3 21 1288 65 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 26 2 5 2 3 19 6 750 3 21 1288 65 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1790 2148 696 1476 2178 396 1363 763 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1372 1372 774 774 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 418 775 702 1405 vCu, unblocked vol 1790 2148 696 1476 2178 396 1363 763 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6:9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3:3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 78 99 99 99 98 97 99 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 119 140 378 200 135 593 .496 838 Direction, Lane # SE 1 NW 1 NE 1 NE 2 NE 3 $W 1 SW 2 SW 3 Volume Total 33 24 6 500 253 21 859 494 Volume Left 26 2 6 0 0 21 0 0 Volume Right 5 19 0 0 3 0 0 65 cSH 134 373 496 1700 1700 838 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.25 0.06 0.01 0.29 0.15 0.03 0.51 0.29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 23 5 1 0 0 2 0 0 Contr6lI�belay (s) 40.3 16.3 12.3 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS E C B A ApproaehDelay js) 40.3 15.3 0.1 0.1 Approach LOS E C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.9 Interseefion�Capaeity"fJtilization 56.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4219: SW 340 St & 38 PI SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --, 4--- *-, \0. 4/ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t1t. Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -2% 2% 0% Volume (veh/h) 48 580 857 51 12 27 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 48 580 857 51 12 27 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 293 1083 pX, platoon unblocked 0.98 0.96 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 918 1288 474 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 892 vC2, stage, 2 conf vol 396 vCu, unblocked vol 896 1195 442 tC, single,,(s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 96 95 cm-capacity.(veh%h) 732 273 542 Direction, Lane it EB 1 EB.2: EB 3 W B.1 W B 2 SB 1 Volume Total 48 290 290 571 337 39 Volume Left 48 0 0 0 0 12 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 51 27 cSH 732 1700 1700 1700 1700 416 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.34 0.20 0:09 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 8 Control Delay (s) 10.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 Lane LOS B B Approach Delay (s) 0.8 0.0 14.5 Approach LOS B Intersecfivrr Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4222: SW 340 St & 30 Av SW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movemen, EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations +T+ tt Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 5% -2% -8% Volume (veh/h) 728 2 42 1184 4 29 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 728 2 42 1184 4 29 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1275 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 740 1425 385 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 739 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 686 vCu, unblocked vol 740 1425 385 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 98 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 855 252 604 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 W B i W B 2 W 8 3 NB 1 Volume Total 485 245 42 592 592 33 Volume Left 0 0 42 0 0 4 Volume Right 0 2 0 0 0 29 cSH 1700 1700 855 1700 1700 516 Volume to Capacity 029 0.14 0.05 0.35 0.35 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 4 0 0 5 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 12.4 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay'(0 0.0 0.3 12.4 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity U' tifilzlatioh 47.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/27/2007 Horizon without 4223: SW 340 PI & SW 336 Wy HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SVVT Lane Configurations Vr� tT* tkf Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -2% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 t 00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TVVLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 10 20 10 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 10 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 0 vCu, unblocked vol 10 20 10 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 PM cappcity (veh/h) 915 1036 1595 Direction, Lane,# NW1 NB 1 NE 2 SW 1 SW 2 SW 3 Volume Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LQS A Intersection -'summary: Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 10.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4235: SW Campus Dr & 7 Wy SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis __1, 4--- \1, 4/ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t1t, Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 1 % -2% Volume (veh/h) 15 961 1887 91 42 12 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 15 961 1887 91 42 12 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1988 2463 1009 vC1, stage 1 cont vol 1942 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 520 vCu, unblocked vol 1988 2463 1009 tC, single (s) 4.1 &8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 48 95 cM capacity (vWh) 284 80 234 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB I. WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 15 480 480 1258 720 54 Volume Left 15 0 0 0 0 42 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 91 12 cSH 284 1700 1700 1700 1700 94 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.28 0.28 0:74 0.42 0.58 Queue Length- 95th (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 66 Control Delay (s) 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 85.9 Lane LDS C F Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 85.9 Approach LCS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4242: 1 Wv S & S 340 St HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis r ` / Movement NBL NBR SEL SER SW L SW R Lane Configurations I rr r )y Sign Control Free Stop Free Grade 3% -1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 21 648 23 29 1201 93 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 21 648 23 29 1201 93 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) 2 Median type Raised Median storage veh) 0 Upstream signal (ft) 1169 pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 0.92 0.92 vC, conflicting volume 1304 1634 667 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1258 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 376 vCu, unblocked vol 1248 1604 559 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6:9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3:3 p0 queue free % 96 83 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 508 135 430 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SE 1 SW 1 SW 2 Volume Total 21 324 324 52 801 493 Volume Left 21 0 0 23 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 29 0 93 cSH 508 1700 1700 305 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.47 0.29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 0 0 15 0 0 Control Delay (s,) 12.4 0.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B C Approach Delay (s) 0A 24.2 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.8 Inters-ection'Capacity Utilisation 62.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4341: 1 Wy S & S 342 St HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NWL NWR Lane Configurations tT* tt Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 3% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 598 77 87 990 59 63 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 598 77 87 990 59 63 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 0 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 685 1326 358 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 646 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 679 vCu, unblocked vol 685 1326 358 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 70 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 897 196 628 Direction, Lane # EB.1 FB 2 W B 1 W B 2 W B 3. NW 1 NW 2 Volume Total 399 276 87 495 495 59 63 Volume Left 0 0 87 0 0 59 0 Volume Right 0 77 0 0 0 0 63 cSH 1700 1700 897 1700 1700 196 628 Volume to Capacity 0.23 0.16 0A 0 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 8 0 0 30 8 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 31.2 11.4 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0-.0 0.8 20.9 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level�of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/29/2007 4350: S 341 PI & 16 Av S Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f- 4-, t / I Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations *r" +T+ '`fit Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -5% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 118 90 745 78 47 1105 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 118 90 745 78 47 1105 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 805 632 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 vC, conflicting volume 1460 432 833 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 794 vC2, stage 2.,conf vol 656 vCu, unblocked vol 1417 335 761 tC, single,(s), 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3:5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 52 85 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 247 612 791 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 208 497 326 47 552 552 Volume Left 118 0 0 47 0 0 Volume Right 90 0 78 0 0 0 cSH 333 1700 1700 791 1700 1700 Volume -to Capacity 0.63 0.29 0.19 006 0.33 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 100 0 0 5 0 0 Control b6ia' y (s) 32.3 0.0 0.0 R8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D A Approach Delay (s) 32.3 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4441: 1 Wy S & 1 PIS HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis a-- Al \41 4/ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t1t+ Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% -7% Volume (veh/h) 70 649 1398 361 23 44 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 70 649 1398 361 23 44 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1029 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1769 2063 900 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1588 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 474 vCu, unblocked vol 1769 2063 900 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 80 80 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 345 117 278 Direction, Lane 4 EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 70 324 324 932 827 67 Volume Left 70 0 0 0 0 23 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 361 44 cSH 345 1700 1700 1700 1700 189 Volume,to Capacity 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.55 0.49 0.35 Queue Length 95th (ft) 19 0 0 0 0 38 Control Delay`(q 18.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.2 Lane LOS C D Approach Delay�(s) 1.8 0.0 34.2 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.4 Intersection Capacity Utilizaboh 73.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 4546: S 344 St & 9 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4 t /0� Movement WBL WBR N8T NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations "Y" T+ I t Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 2% 4% -2% Volume (veh/h) 38 50 286 21 90 363 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 38 50 286 21 90 363 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 860 316 317 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 306 vC2, stage°2-conf vol 553 vCu, unblocked vol 860 316 317 tC, singles) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 91 93 93 cM capacity (vehlh) 410 712 1233 Direction, Lane # W B 1 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 88 307 90 363 Volume Left 38 0 90 0 Volume Right 50 21 0 0 cSH 540 1700 1233 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.16 0.18 0.07 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 14 0 6 0 Control Delay (s) 13.0 0.0 8.2 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 13.0 0.0 1.6 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.2 lntersedtion'Cepacity. Utilization 41.811/6 ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 5229: SW 356 St & 20 Av SW Horizon without HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tT+ tt Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -2% -1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 733 58 74 1140 35 42 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 733 58 74 1140 35 42 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 330 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 801 1500 416 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 772 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 728 vCu, unblocked vol 801 1500 416 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 85 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 811 230 576 ❑irection, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 489 302 74 570 570 77 Volume Left 0 0 74 0 0 35 Volume Right 0 58 0 0 0 42 cSH 1700 1700 811 1700 1700 342 Volume to Capacity 0.29 0.18 0.09 0.34 0.34 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 B 0 0 21 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 18.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.6 18.5 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.0 intersection Capacity Utilization 47.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5231: SW 356 St & 13 Wy SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---► ---* 4--- *-- t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR_ NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ►j 0 ti� 4� Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -2% 0% 1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 43 710 9 10 1261 53 6 0 3 45 0 22 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 43 710 9 10 1261 53 6 0 3 45 0 22 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1324 729 1493 2154 380 1772 2132 677 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 810 810 1318 1318 vC2, stage,2 conf vol 682 1344 454 815, vCu, unblocked vol 1324 729 1493 2154 380 1772 2132 677 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6:5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 35 4.0 3.3 3.5 4:0 3.3 p0 queue free % 92 99 97 100 100 65 100 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 513 863 179 122 608 127 141 389 Direction. Lane # EB 1 E13 2 EB 3 W B 1 W B 2 W B. 3 NB i SB 1 Volume Total 43 473 246 10 841 473 9 67 Volume Left 43 0 0 10 0 0 6 45 Volume Right 0 0 9 0 0 53 3 22 cSH 513 1700 1700 863 1700 1700 234 163 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.28 0.14 0.01 0.49 0,28 0.,04 0.41 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 0 0 1 0 0 3 45 Control Delay (s) 12.7 0.0 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 21.0 41.7 Lane LOS B A C E Approach Dekay(s) 0.7 0.11 21.0 41.7 Approach LOS C E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5345: S 359 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis T "P. Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y +T4 tt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 2% 3% -3% Volume (veh/h) 5 48 743 8 62 1285 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 48 743 8 62 1285 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 755 pX, platoon unblocked 0.76 vC, conflicting volume 1534 396 761 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 1384 396 761 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 95 92 93 cMcapacity (veh/h) 93 594 840 Direction. Lane # WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 53 495 256 62 642 642 Volume Left 5 0 0 62 0 0 Volume Right 48 0 8 0 0 0 cSH 393 1700 1700 840 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.13 0.29 0.15 OA7 0.38 0.38 Queue Length 95th (ft) 12 0 0 6 0 0 Control Delay (s� 15.6 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 15.6 0.0 6A Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity UtNzat oii 56.89% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 5450: S 359 St & 16 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --► t 0.■ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT W.BR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Right Turn Channelized Volume (veh/h) 13 5 52 0 2 4 32 64 0 10 69 9 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 13 5 52 0 2 4 32 64 0 10 69 9 Approach Volume (veh/h) 70 6 96 88 Crossing Volume (veh/h) 79 169 28 34 High Capacity (veh/h) 1302 1272 1355 1348 HigfY v/c (veh/h) 0.05 0.00 0.07 0:07 Low Capacity (veh/h) 1086 1058 1134 1128 Low v/c (veh/h) 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.08 Intersection Summary Maximum v/c High 0.07 Maximum v/c Low 0.08 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.4% ICU Level of Service A Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 6340: S 373 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f- t /'. \P. Movement W BL VV BR NOT NOR SBL SOT Lane Configurations Y 0 +Tt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 3% -2% 0% Volume (veh/h) 17 12 772 35 19 1275 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 17 12 772 35 19 1275 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1485 424 817 vCi, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1485 424 817 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 85 98 98 cM.capacity (veh/h) 111 569 800 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SS 2 Volume Total 29 515 292 444 850 Volume Left 17 0 0 19 0 Volume Right 12 0 35 0 0 cSH 166 1700 1700 800 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.30 0.17 0.02 0.50 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 0 0 2 0 Control Delay (s) 31.3 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 Lane LOS D A Approach Delay (s) 31.3 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS D intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2% )CU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon without 6457: Milton Rd S & S 375 St HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SEL SET SFR NWL. NWT NWR Lane Configurations *T# 4,- *T+ Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 2% -1 % 2% 2% Volume (veh/h) 8 47 1 3 112 18 28 0 11 1 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 8 47 1 3 112 18 28 0 11 1 0 0 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 140 58 210 211 141 222 220 68 vC1, stage 1 conf vol VC2, stage_ 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 140 58 210 211 141 222 220 68 tC, single (s-)4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2-2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 100 96 100 99 100 100 100 cM capacity.(veh/h) 1431 1533 721 670 892 700 662 979 Direction, Lane # NB 1 SB 1 SE 1 NW 1 Volume Total 56 133 39 1 Volume Left 8 3 28 1 Volume Right 1 18 11 0 cSH 1431 1533 762 700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 4 0 Control Delay (s) 1.1 0.2 10.0 10.2 Lane LOS A A A B Approach Delay (s) 1.1 0.2 10.0 10.2 Approach LOS A B w6rsectian Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 251 : S 276 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1� Vi 1� ti W. ttt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -2% 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1712 1541 5092 1752 5034 Flt Permitted 0.76 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1364 1541 5092 1752 5034 Volume (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 60 0 980 41 58 1693 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 I.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 60 0 980 41 58 1693 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 30 4 0 0 1019 0 58 1693 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Greenn, G (s) 9.2 9.2 88.5 7.3 101.3 Effective Green, g (s) 8.2 8.2 89.0 7.8 101.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.74 0.06 0.85 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 93 105 3777 114 4271 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.20 0.03 c0.34 v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.04 0.27 0.51 0.40 Uniform Delay, di 53.3 52.2 5.0 54.2 2.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.1 0.2 1.3 0.3 Delay (s) 54.0 52.3 2.6 55. 5 2.4 Level of Service D D A E A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 52.8 2.6 4.1 Approach LOS A D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 458: S Star Lake Rd & Military Rd S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations ►fir t Ti Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% -5% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1814 1909 1811 Fit Permitted 0.99 0.17 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 316 1909 1811 Volume (vph) 70 196 64 501 985 121 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 70 196 64 501 985 121 RTQR Reduction (vph) 90 0 0 0 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 176 0 64 501 1103 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.2 93.8 93.8 93.8 Effective Green, g (s) 16.2 93.8 93.8 93.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.78 0.78 0.78 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 218 247 1492 1416 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.26 c0.61 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.26 0.34 0.78 Uniform Delay, d1 50.4 3.6 3.9 7.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 18.3 2.5 0.6 4.3 Delay (s) 68.7 6.1 4.5 11.6 Level of Service E A A B Approach Delay (s) 68.7 4.7 11.6 Approach LDS E A 6 Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuafed'Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.3% ICU Level of Service E Anaiysis;Pehod (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1050: S 288 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis - i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4� Vi 4 r Di tti, M ttl Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 14% -7% -2% 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri: 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.98 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1698 1757 1585 1787 4882 3399 4970 Fit Permitted 0.98 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1698 1757 1585 1787 4882 3399 4970 Volume (vph) 24 22 16 412 34 183 30 836 299 351 1510 36 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 24 22 16 412 34 183 30 836 299 351 1510 36 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 0 154 0 38 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 49 0 215 231 29 30 1097 0 351 1545 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 6 6 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 0 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permittn.d phases R Actuated Green, G (s) 10.4 19.2 19.2 19.2 5.7 56.3 14.1 64.7 Effective Green, g (s) 9.4 19.2 19.2 19.2 6.2 56.8 14.6 65.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.05 0.47 0.12 0.54 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 128 272 281 254 92 2311 414 2700 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.13 c0.13 0.02 c0.22 c0.10 c0.31 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.79 0.82 0.12 0.33 0.47 0.85 0.57 Uniform Delay, di 52.5 48.5 48.7 43.1 54.9 21.5 51.6 18.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.12 1.12 2.48 0.66 0.51 0.96 0.90 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 13.4 16.4 0.1 0.7 0.7 13.9 0.9 Delay (s) 53.2 67.6 70.9 106.9 37.0 11.5 63.4 17.3 Level of Service D E E F D B E B Approach Delay (s) 53.2 80.2 12.2 25.8 Approach LOS D F B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 31.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1051: S 288 St & 18 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I tT. ti� 4� +T F Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -1 % 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1723 3463 1739 3479 1712 1744 1531 Flt Permitted 0.41 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.85 0.79 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 751 3463 882 3479 1484 1435 1531 Volume (vph) 103 445 26 23 561 66 20 14 17 47 2 58 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 103 445 26 23 561 66 20 14 17 47 2 58 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 16 0 0 0 55 Lane Group Flow (vph) 103 470 0 23 625 0 0 35 0 0 49 3 Confl. Peds. (# hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 102.8 102.8 Effective Green, g (s) 102.8 102.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.86 0.86 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 643 2967 v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 1.4 Progression Factor 0.10 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 Delay (s) 0.5 Level of Service A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 8 2 6 8 2 6 6 102.8 102.8 8.2 8.2 8.2 102.8 102.8 7.2 7.2 7.2 0.86 0.86 0.06 0.06 0.06 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 756 2980 89 86 92 c0.18 0.03 0.02 c0.03 0.00 0.16 0.03 0.21 0.39 0.57 0.04 1.4 1.3 1.5 54.3 54.9 53.1 0.03 0.41 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 5.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.6 55.3 60.0 53.2 A A A E E D 0.2 0.6 55.3 56.3 A A E E 6.8 HCM Level of Service A 0.23 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 46.8% ICU Level of Service A 15 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1056: S 288 St & Military Rd S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EEL EBT EBR WBL WBT, WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL :SBR Lane Configurations tl� ti, '� t r Vii t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -5% 8% 3% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1799 3351 1699 3238 1743 1820 1500 1782 1891 1556 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1799 3351 1699 3238 1743 1820 1500 1782 1891 1556 Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Bus Blockages (#/hr) 113 1.00 113 0 113 10 2 240 1.00 240 69 308 2 137 1.00 137 0 0 10 0 268 1.00 268 0 268 10 0 365 1.00 365 30 464 0 129 1.00 129 0 0 10 2 147 1.00 147 0 147 10 0 338 1.00 338 0 338 2 150 1.00 150 87 63 10 2 314 1.00 314 0 314 10 2 635 1.00 635 0 635 0 196 1.00 196 0 196 10 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permit}e�i Phu�e� R 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.1 14.8 21.1 24.8 12.3 39.8 39.8 24.3 51.8 51.8 Effective Green, g (s) 11.1 14.8 21.1 24.8 12.3 39.8 39.8 24.3 51.8 51.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.12 0.18 0.21 0.10 0.33 0.33 0.20 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 166 413 299 669 179 604 498 361 816 672 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 0.09 c0.16 c0.14 0.08 0.19 c0.18 c0.34 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.75 0.90 0.69 0.82 0.56 0.13 0.87 0.78 0.29 Uniform Delay, di 52.7 50.8 48.4 44.1 52.8 32.9 28.0 46.3 29.2 22.2 Progression Factor 1.02 0.79 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.66 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 8.7 6.2 26.6 2.5 22.0 3.3 0.5 18.9 7.2 1.1 Delay (s) 62.4 46.1 75.0 46.6 70.6 25.0 14.2 65.2 36.4 23.3 Level of Service E D E D E C B E D C Approach Delay (s) 49.9 56.6 33.0 42.0 Approach LOS D E C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 1648: S Dash Point Rd & 11 PI S Horizon with HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 T I r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1% 0% 6% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.94 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0:85 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1864 1819 1717 1445 Fit Permitted 0.89 1.00 0.95 1.00 5atd. Flow (perrn) 1658 1819 1717 1445 Volume (vph) 33 354 823 114 109 45 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 33 354 823 114 109 45 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 3 0 0 41 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 387 934 0 109 4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 6 2 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 99.4 99.4 11.6 11.6 Effective Green, g (s) 99.4 99.4 10.6 10.6 Actuated; g/C Ratio 083 0.83 0.09 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1373 1507 152 128 v/s-Ratio'Prot c0.51 c0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.23 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.62 0.72 0.03 Uniform Delay, di 2.3 3.6 53.2 50.0 Progressiac Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 1.9 12.6 0.0 Delay (s) 2.3 5.3 652 50.0 Level of Service A A E D Approachbelay (s) 2.3 5.3 61.2 Approach LOS A A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.4 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity _Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1650: S Dash Point Rd & Redondo Wv S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I 1 t r I 1 T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 1 % -3% 10% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.94 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1751 1808 1761 1853 1460 1796 1557 1681 1460 Flt Permitted 0.41 1.00 0.22 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 758 1808 403 1853 1460 1796 1557 1681 1460 Volume (vph) 10 806 147 38 563 13 23 6 94 4 28 124 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.o0 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 10 806 147 38 563 13 23 6 94 4 28 124 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 84 0 0 115 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 10 949 0 38 563 10 23 16 0 4 37 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 90.6 90.6 9Q.6 90.6 90.6 6.1 13.3 1.1 8.3 Effective Green, g (s) 90.6 90.6 90.6 90.6 90.6 6.1 13.3 1.1 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.05 0.11 0.01 0.07 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 572 1365 304 1399 1102 91 173 15 101 v/s Ratio Prot c0.52 0.30 c0.01 0.01 0.00 c0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.09 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.70 0.12 0.40 0.01 0.25 0.09 0.27 0.36 Uniform Delay, di 3.6 7.6 4.0 5.2 3.6 54.8 47.9 59.0 53.3 Progression Factor 0.89 0.86 0.95 0.98 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 2.9 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.1 3.5 0.8 Delay (s) 3.3 9.5 4.3 5.6 3.7 55.3 48.0 62.5 54.1 Level of Service A A A A A E D E D Approach Delay (s} 9.4 5.5 49.4 54.3 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection SUrnmary HCM Average Control Delay 14.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.1 % ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1651: S Dash Point Rd & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ___* t L* d Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBU SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Zi ttt A ttt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri: 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3419 1493 1770 5072 5070 1556 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3419 1493 1770 5072 5070 1556 Volume (vph) 263 114 214 908 0 1338 898 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 263 114 214 908 0 1338 898 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 85 0 0 0 0 51 Lane Group Flow (vph) 263 29 214 908 0 1338 847 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 6 0 2 0 6 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm pm+ov Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 30.5 30.5 17.5 79.0 56.5 87.0 Effective Green,.g (s) 30.5 30.5 17.5 79.5 57.0 87.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.15 0.66 0.48 0.73 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5:0 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 869 379 258 3360 2408 1199 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.12 0.18 0.26 c0.18 vls Ratio Perm 0.02 0.36 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.08 0.83 0.27 0.56 0.71 Uniform Delay, d1 36.2 34.0 49.8 8.3 22.5 9:1 Progression Factor 0.77 0.62 0.94 0.42 6.83 1.03 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 17.5 0.2 0.8 1.4 Delay (s) 28.1 21.2 64.5 3.7 19.5 10.7 Level of Service C C E A B 'B Approach Delay (s) 26.0 15.3 16.0 Approach LOS C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time,,(s) 10.0 In Capacity Utilization 76.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis ,Period (min) RCritical 15 c Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1935: SW Dash Point Rd & 8 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4__I t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1C 1� +T+ 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 3% -2% -2% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.92 0.94 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1743 1812 1787 1848 1524 1623 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.98 Satd. Flow (perm) 1743 1812 1787 1848 1524 1623 Volume (vph) 24 346 8 16 774 40 6 3 14 27 2 24 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 24 346 8 16 774 40 6 3 14 27 2 24 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 14 0 0 22 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 24 354 0 16 813 0 0 9 0 0 31 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Split Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 4 3 3 Permitter-' Phacec Actuated Green, G (s) 4.1 65.1 3.3 64.3 2.4 5.9 Effective Green, g (s) 6.1 65.1 5.3 64.3 3.4 6.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.61 0.05 0.60 0.03 0.06 Clearance Time (s) 7.0 5.0 7.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 99 1103 89 1112 48 105 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 0.20 0.01 c0.44 c0.01 c0.02 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.24 0.32 0.18 0.73 0.20 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 48.2 10.2 48.7 15.1 50.4 47.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.1 0.4 2.2 0.7 0.6 Delay (s) 48.7 10.2 49.1 17.3 51.2 48.2 Level of Service D B D B D D Approach Delay (s) 12.7 17.9 51.2 48.2 Approach LOS B B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 106.9 Sum of lost time (s) 21.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2051 : S 304 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r 4 Di ttlt+ N W. Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -4% 5% -1 % 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.98 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1859 1532 1688 1778 4972 1752 4954 Fit Permitted 0.84 1.00 0.78 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm': 1593 1532 1350 1778 4972 1752 4954 Volume (vph) 26 41 38 168 52 58 42 1063 132 51 1454 57 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 26 41 38 168 52 58 42 1063 132 51 1454 57 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 29 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 67 9 0 269 0 42 1186 0 51 1508 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 6 6 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 28.5 28.5 28.5 9.0 70.7 6.8 68.5 Effective Green, g (s) 27.5 27.5 27.5 9.0 70.7 6.8 68.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.59 0.06 0.57 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 365 351 309 133 2929 99 2828 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.24 0.03 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.01 c0.20 v/c Ratio 0.18 0.02 0.87 0.32 0.40 0.52 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 37.2 35.9 44.5 52.6 13.3 55.0 15.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.50 0.18 1.48 0.26 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 21.3 0.5 0.4 1.7 0.7 Delay (s) 37.3 35.9 64.1 26.5 2.8 83.0 4.9 Level of Service D D E C A F A Approach Delay (s) 36.8 64.1 3.6 7.4 Approach LOS D E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2057: S 304 St & 28 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations '+ I t I r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 6% -2% 4% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1694 1711 1881 1734 1438 Fit Permitted 1.00 0.65 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1694 1166 1881 1734 1438 Volume (vph) 121 53 521 191 63 402 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 121 53 521 191 63 402 RTOR Reduction (vph) 14 0 0 0 0 284 Lane Group Flow (vph) 160 0 521 191 63 118 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green G (S) 7d Q 7A.Q 7d Q 35 1 14rr,_1 Effective Green, g (s) 74.9 74.9 74.9 35.1 35.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.29 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1057 728 1174 507 421 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 0.10 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm c0.45 c0.08 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.72 0.16 0.12 0.28 Uniform Delay, d1 9.4 15.3 9.4 31.2 32.7 Progression Factor 1.14 0.46 0.50 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.5 1.6 Delay (s) 10.7 9.5 4.7 31.7 34.4 Level of Service B A A C C Approach Delay (s) 10.7 8.2 34.0 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2058: S 304 St & Military Rd S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* 4--- -*\ I } " 'i 4/ --I. '- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I 4 1� Vi t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 4% 5% -4% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1778 1476 1734 1725 1816 1736 1900 1534 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.37 1.00 0.60 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1778 1476 1734 678 1816 1097 1900 1534 Volume (vph) 344 2 371 1 0 0 300 257 0 1 396 483 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 344 2 371 1 0 0 300 257 0 1 396 483 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 Lane Group Flow (vph) 344 83 0 0 1 0 300 257 0 1 396 332 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Split Split pm+pt Perm pm+ov Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.6 26.6 3.2 76.7 76.7 56.3 56.3 82.9 Effective Green, g (s) 26.1 26.1 2.2 76.7 76.7 56.3 56.3 82.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.02 0.64 0.64 0.47 0.47 0.69 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 387 321 32 568 1161 515 891 1117 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.06 c0.00 c0.07 0.14 0.21 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 0.00 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.89 0.26 0.03 0.53 0.22 0.00 0.44 0.30 Uniform Delay, di 45.5 38.9 57.9 11.4 9.1 16.9 21.4 7.4 Progression Factor 1.03 1.37 1.00 1.30 0.70 0.66 0.71 0.73 Incremental Delay, d2 19.9 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 1.1 0.0 Delay (s) 67.0 53.3 58.0 15.1 6.7 11.1 16.1 5.4 Level of Service E D E B A B B A Approach Delay (s) 59.9 58.0 11.2 10.3 Approach LOS E E B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2250: S 308 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis � � � 'r � � 4\ Movement E8L EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR. 'NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ tO !ii ttlt+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% 2% 1 % -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.97 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1665 1644 1761 5025 1778 4974 Flt Permitted 0.71 0.86 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1207 1437 1761 5025 1778 4974 Volume (vph) 96 20 65 28 16 64 54 1124 22 33 1538 129 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 96 20 65 28 16 64 54 1124 22 33 1538 129 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 20 0 0 52 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 161 0 0 56 0 54 1145 0 33 1662 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#Ihr) 2 0 8 8 0 2 0 2 0 0 8 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 PermittAri Phoccc d R v Actuated Green, G (s) 17.8 17.8 7.8 82.7 5.5 80.4 Effective Green, g (s) 16.8 16.8 7.8 82.7 5.5 80.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.06 0.69 0.05 0.67 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 169 201 114 3463 81 3333 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.23 0.02 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.28 0.47 0.33 0.41 0.50 Uniform Delay, di 51.2 46.2 54.1 7.5 55.7 9.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.10 0.82 0.87 0.14 Incremental Delay, d2 55.0 0.3 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.5 Delay (s) 106.2 46.4 60.6 6.4 49.3 1.8 Level of Service F D E A D A Approach Delay (s) 106.2 46.4 8.8 2.7 Approach LOS F D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 2530: SW 312 St & SW Dash Point Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis _3f 10. � ►� - - if 1 "$ /' � P�' ./ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SVVR Lane Configurations t t vi t F t r t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -5% 4% -5% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 097 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.94 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 085 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1 00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1716 1829 1512 1782 1909 1557 1734 1811 1452 1783 1894 1522 Flt Permitted 0.69 1.00 1.00 0.71 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1247 1829 1512 1329 1909 1557 415 1811 1452 949 1894 1522 Volume (vph) 29 74 107 236 92 88 116 324 184 70 639 32 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 29 74 107 236 92 88 116 324 184 70 639 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 95 0 0 71 0 0 83 0 0 10 Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 74 12 236 92 17 116 324 101 70 639 22 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2 0 Turn Type D.P+P Perm D P+P Perm D.P+P Perm D.P+P Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 4 8 6 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 28.7 12.9 12.9 28.7 22.8 22.8 71.3 65.9 65.9 71.3 60.3 60.3 Effective Green, g (s) 28.7 12.9 12.9 28.7 228 22.8 71.3 65.9 65.9 71.3 60.3 60.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.19 0.19 0.59 0.55 0.55 0.59 0.50 0.50 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 321 197 163 377 363 296 367 995 797 601 952 765 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.04 c0.08 0.05 0.03 c0.18 0.01 c0.34 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 c0.07 0.01 0.16 0.07 0.06 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.38 0.07 0.63 0.25 0.06 0.32 0.33 0.13 0.12 0.67 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 35.3 49.8 48.2 40.0 41.4 39.8 28.7 14.9 13.1 10.5 22.4 151 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.46 0.42 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.4 0.1 2.3 01 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.0 3.8 0.1 Delay (s) 35.4 50.2 48.2 42.4 41.5 39.8 13.3 7.1 3.4 10.5 26.2 15.1 Level of Service D D D D D D B A A B C E Approach Delay (s) 47.2 41.6 7.2 24.2 Approach LOS D D A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2540: SW 312 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis MOVCETient FBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations t if Vi t r t r I ti� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 1 % 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1796 1876 1561 1761 1839 1530 1755 1863 1496 1755 3421 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1796 1876 1561 1761 1839 1530 1755 1863 1496 1755 3421 Volume (vph) 45 283 103 335 498 148 151 402 265 146 386 79 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 45 283 103 335 498 148 151 402 265 146 386 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 84 0 0 93 0 0 197 0 19 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 283 19 335 498 55 151 402 68 146 446 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 a Actuated Green, G (s) 4.3 15.3 15.3 20.4 31.4 31.4 9.3 21.9 21.9 7.4 20.0 Effective Green, g (s) 4.3 15.3 15.3 20.4 31.4 31.4 9.3 21.9 21.9 7.4 20.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.18 0.18 0.24 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.26 0.26 0.09 0.24 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 91 338 281 423 679 565 192 480 385 153 805 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.15 0.19 c0.27 0.09 c0.22 c0.08 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.04 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.84 0.07 0.79 0.73 0.10 0.79 0.84 0.18 0.95 0.55 Uniform Delay, di - 39.3 33.6 28.9 30.3 23.2 17.5 36.9 29.9 24.5 38.6 28.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 15.7 0.0 9.1 3.5 0.0 17.5 11.6 0.1 58.3 0.5 Delay (s) 40.8 49.3 29.0 39.5 26.7 17.6 54.4 41.4 24.6 96.9 29.0 Level of Service D D C D C B D D C F C Approach Delay (s) 43.6 29.7 38.4 45.3 Approach LOS D C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 85.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2545: S 312 St & 8 AV S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 'A --IN- ■--41, \0. 4/ Movement EBL EBT W13 T WSR SBL SBR Lane Configurations ►j + T r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 3% -6% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1717 1820 1849 1755 1493 Fit Permitted 0.34 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 612 1820 1849 1755 1493 Volume (vph) 98 581 787 88 61 111 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 98 581 787 88 61 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 3 0 0 104 Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 581 872 0 61 7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#Ihr) 0 2 4 0 2 4 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 28 1 Permitted Phases 4 1 Actuated Green, G (s) 87.8 87.8 102.1 8.9 8.9 Effective Green, g (s) 87.8 87.8 102.1 7.9 7.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.73 0.73 0.85 0.07 0.07 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5,0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, di Progression Factor Incremental -Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary 448 1332 1573 116 98 0.32 c0.47 c0.03 0.16 0.00 0.22 0.44 0.55 0.53 0.07 5,1 6.3 2.5 54.2 52.6 1.00 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.1 1.0 0.2 2.0 0.1 6.3 7.4 0.4 56.2 52.7 A A A E D 7.2 0.4 54.0 A A D HCM Average Control Delay 8.4 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s)` 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2546: S 312 St & 8 Av S Horizon with HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --I,. "-* 4r" , '\ 1* Movement EBT EBR WK WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ t Y Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.94 Fit Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 Satd. Flow (prot) 1821 1740 1863 1675 Fit Permitted 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.97 Satd. Flow (perm) 1821 746 1863 1675 Volume (vph) 591 23 51 815 60 46 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 591 23 51 815 60 46 RTOR Reduction (vph) 1 0 0 0 26 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 613 0 51 815 80 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 1 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 Arti iatart C'raan P (0 1 nl .7 R7,R R7 R 1 n 3 Effective Green, g (s) 100.7 87.8 87.8 9.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.84 0.73 0.73 0.08 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1528 546 1363 130 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 c0.44 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.09 0.60 0.62 Uniform Delay, di 2.3 4.6 7.7 53.6 Progression Factor 0.07 0.29 0.45 1.26 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.3 1.8 4.9 Delay (s) 0.2 1.7 5.3 72.5 Level of Service A A A E Approach Delay (s) 0.2 5.1 72.5 Approach LOS A A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2549: S 312 St & 14 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* .4- -"" t 1w i 'r Movement EBL EBT ErBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NOR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ti.) tT+ -T r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1766 3523 1746 3503 1756 1788 1583 Fit Permitted 0.31 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.97 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 568 3523 745 3503 1756 1788 1583 Volume (vph) 66 633 15 30 737 39 37 10 9 37 7 107 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 66 633 15 30 737 39 37 10 9 37 7 107 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 6 0 0 0 100 Lane Group Flow (vph) 66 647 0 30 774 0 0 50 0 0 44 7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt Perm Split Split Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 5 6 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 88.9 88.9 78.4 78.4 8.7 7.4 7.4 Effective Green, g (s) 88.9 88.9 78.4 78.4 8.7 7.4 7.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.74 0.65 0.65 0.07 0.06 0.06 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 476 2610 487 2289 127 110 98 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.18 c0.22 c0.03 c0.02 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.25 0.06 0.34 0.39 0.40 0.07 Uniform Delay, di 4.9 4.9 7.5 9.3 53.1 54.2 53.0 Progression Factor 1.43 1.57 0.63 0.51 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.1 Delay (s) 7.0 7.9 4.9 5.0 53.8 55.0 53.2 Level of Service A A A A D E D Approach Delay (s) 7.9 5.0 53.8 53.7 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2550: S 312 St & Pacific HwX S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis j- *-- 4.\ I * /I- i Movemen! EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 Vi t1k Zi tO 9 ttt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 0% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1747 3372 1741 3417 1741 4966 1755 5058 1497 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1747 3372 1741 3417 1741 4966 1755 5058 1497 Volume (vph) 245 349 99 145 417 75 323 786 98 164 1042 265 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 245 349 99 145 417 75 323 786 98 164 1042 265 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 22 0 0 13 0 0 12 0 0 0 182 Lane Group Flow (vph) 245 426 0 145 479 0 323 872 0 164 1042 83 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 2 4 4 4 2 4 2 2 2 4 4 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 19.3 26.2 13.4 20.3 25.0 43.4 19.0 37.4 37.4 Effective Green, g (s) 18.3 25.2 12.4 19.3 25.0 43.4 19.0 37.4 37.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.21 0.10 0.16 0.21 0.36 0.16 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5..0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 266 708 180 550 363 1796 278 1576 467 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.13 0.08 c0.14 c0.19 0.18 0.09 c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.60 0.81 0.87 0.89 0.49 0.59 0.66 0.18 Uniform Delay, di 50.1 42.9 52.6 49.1 46.2 29.7 46.9 35.8 30.1 Progression Factor 1.07 0.68 1.03 0.80 0.62 0.65 1.06 1.05 2.59 Incremental Delay, d2 33.9 1.0 21.0 13.5 19.6 0.8 1.8 1.9 0.7 Delay (s) 87.7 30.1 74.9 52.9 48.1 20.1 51.3 39.6 78.8 Level of Service F C E D D C D D E Approach Delay (s) 50.5 58.0 27.6 48.0 Approach LOS D E C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 43.9 HCM Level of Service ❑ HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2552: S 312 St & 20 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -,* .--. 4- t 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR W3L WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT+ *' r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -4% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 3249 1783 3546 1776 1527 1800 Flt Permitted 0.49 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.74 Satd. Flow (perm) 862 3249 826 3546 1297 1527 1360 Volume (vph) 9 385 158 149 423 28 167 44 145 38 51 5 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 385 158 149 423 28 167 44 145 38 51 5 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 22 0 0 2 0 0 0 114 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 9 521 0 149 449 0 0 211 31 0 92 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 6 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 84.1 84.1 84.1 84.1 26.9 26.9 26.9 Effective Green, g (s) 84.1 84.1 84.1 84.1 25.9 25.9 25.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.22 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 604 2277 579 2485 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.01 Uniform Delay, di 5.4 Progression Factor 0.68 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 Delay (s) 3.7 Level of Service A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 280 330 294 c0.18 c0.16 0.02 0.07 0.23 0.26 0.18 0.75 0.09 0.31 6.4 6.6 6.1 44.1 37.7 39.6 0.57 0.71 0.67 0.88 0.84 1.00 0.2 1.0 0.1 8.8 0.0 0.2 3.9 5.6 4.3 47.7 31.8 39.8 A A A D C D 3.9 4.6 41.2 39.8 A A D D 14.6 HCM Level of Service B 0.37 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 55.0% ICU Level of Service A 15 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2554: S 312 St & 23 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --► *4-- 41 /10 Movement I BT EBR WBL 1NBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations t r f r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -8% 8% 0% Total Lost time (s) &0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 035 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1937 1575 1685 1774 1722 1538 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1937 1575 1685 1774 1722 1538 Volume (vph) 427 266 99 463 311 79 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 427 266 99 463 311 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 145 0 0 0 33 Lane Group Flow (vph) 427 121 99 463 311 46 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 2 2 2 0 Turn Type Perm Prot custom Protected Phases 6 5 2 Permitted Phases 6 4 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 54.8 54.8 11.2 70.0 41.0 70.0 Effective Green, g (s) 54.8 54.8 10.2 70.0 40.0 70.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0,46 0.08 0.58 0.33 0.58 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 885 719 143 1035 574 897 v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 c0.06 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 c0.18 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.17 0.69 0.45 0.54 0.05 Uniform Delay, di 22.7 19.2 53.4 14.1 32.5 10.7 Progression Factor 0.89 0.78 1.00 1.00 0.76 3.41 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 0.5 11.1 1.4 3.6 0.1 Delay (s) 22.0 15.5 64.4 15.5 28.3 36.7 Level of Service C B E B C D Approach Delay (s) 19.5 24.1 30.0 Approach LOS B C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Controf Delay 23.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Pd,r'ib&(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2628: 21 Av SW & SW Dash Point Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t f'A ►J `_* I f -1 Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SEL SET SER NW L NWT NW R Lane Configurations T t r +T r +T+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 0% -6% 3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1778 1869 1730 1863 1497 1823 1570 1628 Flt Permitted 0.19 1.00 0.45 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (perm) 363 1869 811 1863 1497 1823 1570 1628 Volume (vph) 50 576 5 8 865 255 105 0 41 4 1 5 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 50 576 5 8 865 255 105 0 41 4 1 5 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 37 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 50 581 0 8 865 222 0 105 4 0 5 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+ov Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 90.0 90.0 80.2 80.2 91.1 10.9 10.9 4.1 Effective Green, g (s) 90.0 90.0 80.2 80.2 91.1 10.9 10.9 4.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.75 0.75 0.67 0.67 0.76 0.09 0.09 0.03 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 329 1402 542 1245 1136 166 143 56 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.31 c0.46 0.02 c0.06 c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 0.01 0.13 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.41 0.01 0.69 0.20 0.63 0.03 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 10.0 5.4 6.7 12.3 4.1 52.6 49.7 56.1 Progression Factor 1.52 1.73 0.57 0.53 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.7 0.0 2.7 0.0 5.7 0.0 0.3 Delay (s) 15.3 10.1 3.9 9.3 2.4 58.3 49.7 56.4 Level of Service B B A A A E D E Approach Delay (s) 10.5 7.7 55.9 56.4 Approach LOS B A E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2652: S 314 St & 20 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* --0- --* f- *-- 4\ t /0. 4 I -*I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SGR Lane Configurations +' r 4- 1� I T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 3% 1 % 4% -5% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.94 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.96 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1772 1467 1700 1696 1669 1782 1839 Flt Permitted 0.60 1.00 0.72 0.54 1.00 0.46 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1104 1467 1262 961 1669 866 1839 Volume (vph) 99 41 84 155 78 85 82 247 169 104 257 55 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 99 41 84 155 78 85 82 247 169 104 257 55 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 60 0 14 0 0 14 0 0 4 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 140 24 0 304 0 82 402 0 104 308 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green G (C) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 6 35.3 34.3 0.29 4.0 2.0 6 35.3 34.3 0.29 4.0 2.0 2 2 35 34.3 0.29 4.0 2.0 4 76.7 75.7 0.63 4.0 2.0 4 76 7 75.7 0.63 4.0 2.0 8 76 7 75.7 0.63 4.0 2.0 8 76.7 75.7 0.63 4.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 316 419 361 606 1053 546 1160 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.02 c0.24 0.09 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.06 0.84 0.14 0.38 0.19 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 35.0 31.1 40.3 8.9 10.8 9.3 9.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.72 0.63 0.83 0.81 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.0 15.5 0.4 1.0 0.8 0.6 Delay (s) 35.4 31.1 52.2 6.9 7.8 8.5 8.5 Level of Service D C D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 33.8 52.2 7.7 8.5 Approach LOS C D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2654: S 314 St & 23 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } --p. ■-- - t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 Vii T I 1� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -6% 6% 7% -7% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.88 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.99 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1608 1666 1673 1774 1786 1867 Flt Permitted 0.96 0.59 0.56 1.00 0.58 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 1006 993 1774 1095 1867 Volume (vph) 22 4 176 7 2 3 101 283 7 3 286 39 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 22 4 176 7 2 3 101 283 7 3 286 39 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 163 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 39 0 0 9 0 101 290 0 3 324 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.1 10.1 101.9 101.9 101.9 101.9 Effective Green, g (s) 9.1 9.1 100.9 100.9 100.9 100.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 118 76 835 1492 921 1570 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.01 0.10 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.12 0.12 0.19 0.00 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 52.6 51.7 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.8 Progression Factor 0.74 1.00 2.18 2.20 1.07 0.90 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.3 Delay (s) 39.7 52.0 4.0 4.3 1.6 1.9 Level of Service ❑ D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 39.7 52.0 4.2 1.9 Approach LOS ❑ D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.22 Actuated Cycle'Length (s) 120.0 S.um of lost time (s) 10-0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2750: S 316 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -"" --,, f- 4--- 4--* 41 I %* Movement FBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SSL SST SBR Lane Configurations 1r T I tO Di tti� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 0% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri: 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1762 1708 1738 1678 1752 4882 1787 5053 Fit Permitted 0.58 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1082 1708 424 1678 1752 4882 1787 5053 Volume (vph) 105 86 97 203 83 110 164 1105 190 105 1266 68 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 Adj. Flow (vph) 105 86 97 203 83 110 164 1105 190 105 1266 68 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 38 0 0 46 0 0 15 0 0 4 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 145 0 203 147 0 164 1280 0 105 1330 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 4 4 0 2 0 2 0 0 4 0 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 23.2 14.8 33.1 20.7 21.0 62.6 10.3 51.9 Effective Green, g (s) 21.2 13.8 32.1 19.7 21.0 62.6 10.3 51.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.12 0.27 0.16 0.18 0.52 0.09 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 233 196 259 275 307 2547 153 2185 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.08 c0.09 0.09 0.09 c0.26 0.06 c0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 c0.12 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.74 0.78 0.53 0.53 0.50 0.69 0.61 Uniform Delay, di 43.3 51.4 37.2 46.0 45.0 18.6 53.3 26.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.82 0.75 0.70 0.42 1.07 0.36 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 11.8 13.1 1.0 0.5 0.4 7.9 1.0 Delay (s) 43.8 63.2 43.5 35.4 31.9 8.3 65.0 10.4 Level of Service D E D D C A E B Approach Delay (s) 56.1 39.6 11.0 14.4 Approach LOS E D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2752: S 316 St & 20 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement ESL EBT EBR WBL WEST WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I T. T 11 'i T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 1 % 4% -6% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1727 1683 1729 1778 1720 1801 1788 1873 Flt Permitted 0.53 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.50 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 959 1683 435 1778 768 1801 946 1873 Volume (vph) 75 144 111 46 115 32 88 380 27 45 470 70 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 75 144 111 46 115 32 88 380 27 45 470 70 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 32 0 0 12 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 75 223 0 46 135 0 88 406 0 45 538 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 6 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 91.7 91.7 91.7 91.7 Effective Green, g (s) 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 90.7 90.7 90.7 90.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 154 271 70 286 580 1361 715 1416 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.08 0.23 c0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.82 0.66 0.47 0.15 0.30 0.06 0.38 Uniform Delay, d1 45.8 48.7 47.2 45.7 4.0 4.6 3.8 5.0 Progression Factor 0.72 0.73 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.10 0.90 0.76 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 14.0 15.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.7 Delay (s) 33.8 49.4 62.9 46.2 3.9 5.5 3.5 4.5 Level of Service C D E D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 45.9 50.2 5.2 4.5 Approach LOS D D A A intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2754: S 316 St & 23 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBR S8L SBR NWL NWR Lane .Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% -7% 4% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5:0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0:97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1721 1539 1831 1718 1552 Fit Permitted 0.63 1.00 0.95 0.44 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1145 1539 1831 790 1552 Volume (vph) 28 195 552 13 200 537 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 28 195 552 13 200 537 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 181 0 0 0 83 Lane Group Flow (vph) 28 14 565 0 200 454 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type custom Perm Protected Phases 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.6 9.6 102.4 102.4 102.4 Effective Green, g (s) 8.6 8.6 101.4 101.4 101.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0:85 0.85 0.85 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 82 110 1547 668 1311 v/s Ratio Prot c0.31 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.01 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.13 0.37 0.30 0.35 Uniform Delay, di 53.0 52.2 2.1 1.9 2.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.26 0.38 0.23 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.2 0.6 1.1 0.7 Delay (s) 7 53.9 52.4 3.3 1.9 1.2 Level of Service D D A A A Approach Delay (s) 52.6 3.3 1.4 Approach LOS D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.36 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 63.2% ICU Level,of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2855: S 317 St & 23 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1� __j, __x l 4-- 1--- �k *N, Movement EBL EBT ESR WBL WEST WBR SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWA Lane Configurations *T+ "fir +T* t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% -3% 0% -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1739 1536 1746 3539 1872 1519 Fit Permitted 0.76 1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1386 1536 897 3539 1872 1519 Volume (vph) 0 0 0 133 0 63 57 595 0 0 447 121 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 133 0 63 57 595 0 0 447 121 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 133 8 0 57 595 0 0 447 96 Confl. Peds. (#Ihr.) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.5 14.5 96.5 96.5 96.0 96.0 Effective Green, g (s) 14.5 14.5 95.5 95.5 95.5 95.5 Acfuated•g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0. 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 167 186 714 2816 1490 1209 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.17 c0.24 v/s Ratio Perm c0.10 0.06 0.06 v/c.Ftat o 0.80 0.04 0.08 0.21 0.30 0.08 Uniform Delay, di 51.3 46.6 2.7 3.0 3.3 2.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1,09 1.05 1.03 1.31 incremental Delay, d2 21.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 ❑Oay� (0) 72.5 46.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 3.6 Level of Service E D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 64.2 3.3 3.7 Approach LOS A E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.9 HCM Level of Service B HCIVI'Volurne to Capacity, ratio 0.37 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.1 % ICU'Leve[of, Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3012: SW 320 St & Hot Rd SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement VVBL WBR NBT PSBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations T Vii t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -5% -2% 1% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.92 0.97 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (Prot) 1792 1493 1692 1761 1831 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1792 1493 1692 233 1831 Volume (vph) 429 221 157 200 160 112 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 429 221 157 200 160 112 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 95 46 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 429 126 311 0 160 112 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 3 0 0 0 0 3 Turn Type Perm pm+pt Protected Phases 6 8 7 4 Permitted Phases fi 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 77.2 77.2 26.8 47.8 47.8 Effective Green, g (s) 77.2 77.2 26.8 47.8 47.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.20 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1025 854 336 264 648 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 c0.18 c0.07 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.15 0.93 0.61 0.17 Uniform Delay, di 16.3 13.5 53.1 34.0 30.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.4 30.2 2.7 0.0 Delay (s) 17.5 13.9 83.3 36.6 30.0 Level of Service B B F D C Approach Delay (s) 16.3 83.3 33.9 Approach LOS B F C intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 38.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 135.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3025: SW 320 St & 26 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movemen? EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT Vi ti T Vii T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % -1 % -4% 3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.90 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1744 3504 1739 3527 1749 1658 1702 1612 Flt Permitted 0.26 1.00 0.43 1.00 0.74 1.00 0.75 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 475 3504 794 3527 1364 1658 1349 1612 Volume (vph) 6 571 8 119 1058 12 67 2 5 16 8 17 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 6 571 8 119 1058 12 67 2 5 16 8 17 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 16 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 6 579 0 119 1070 0 67 2 0 16 9 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 1 1 0 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 101.7 101.7 101.7 101.7 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 Effective Green, g (s) 101.7 101.7 101.7 101.7 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 403 2970 673 2989 94 115 93 111 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.30 0.00 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 1.4 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 Delay (s) 1.5 Level of Service A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 0.15 c0.05 0.01 0.19 0.18 0.36 0.71 0.02 0.17 0.08 1.7 1.6 2.0 54.7 52.1 52.6 52.3 1.00 0.16 0.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.1 0.2 0.1 19.1 0.0 0.3 0.1 1.8 0.5 0.4 73.7 52.1 52.9 52.4 A A A E D D D 1.8 0.4 71.7 52.6 A A E D 4.8 HCM Level of Service A 0.38 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 58.0% ICU Level of Service B 15 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3028: SW 320 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations I fil� Ti t tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3386 3412 3434 1748 1863 1530 1749 3280 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.42 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3386 3412 3434 144 1863 1530 765 3280 Volume (vph) 168 397 110 424 743 98 176 400 262 80 694 415 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 168 397 110 424 743 98 176 400 262 80 694 415 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 20 0 0 8 0 0 0 91 0 72 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 168 487 0 424 833 0 176 400 171 80 1037 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 3 3 3 0 3 0 2 2 3 3 Turn Type Prot Prot pm+pt pm+ov pm+pt Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 5 3 8 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.4 25.a 18.3 3n.3 61.3 51.n 69.3 51.3 d6.0 Effective Green, g (s) 13.4 25.4 18.3 30.3 61.3 51.0 69.3 51.3 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.21 0.15 0.25 0.51 0.42 0.58 0.43 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 198 717 520 867 211 792 947 370 1257 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.14 0.12 c0.24 c0.07 0.21 0.03 0.01 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm c0.35 0.08 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.85 0.68 0.82 0.96 0.83 0.51 0.18 0.22 0.83 Uniform Delay, d1 52.3 43.5 49.2 44.3 29.1 25.3 12.0 21.0 33.4 Progression Factor 0.97 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.22 0.87 0.47 0.48 0.70 Incremental Delay, d2 26.1 2.0 9.1 21.3 22.7 2.3 0.0 0.1 5.6 Delay (s) 76.8 44.0 58.3 65.6 58.1 24.3 5.7 10.3 28.8 Level of Service E D E E E C A B C Approach Delay (s) 52.2 63.1 25.6 27.6 Approach LOS D E C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.4% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3040: SW 320 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis , � � I,- 4\ Movement 1 BL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 tt r tt r tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -1 % -1 % 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3347 3322 3436 3528 1497 3423 3557 1534 3383 3507 1495 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3347 3322 3436 3528 1497 588 3557 1534 901 3507 1495 Volume (vph) 139 802 152 390 1321 234 343 509 305 196 593 188 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 139 802 152 390 1321 234 343 509 305 196 593 188 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 0 103 0 0 43 0 0 142 Lane Group Flow (vph) 139 942 0 390 1321 131 343 509 262 196 593 46 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (##/hr) 0 4 2 2 4 0 4 0 4 4 2 4 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm pm+pt pm+ov pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 3 8 5 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.8 47.7 18.8 57.7 57.7 34.5 24.5 43.3 32.5 23.5 23.5 Effective Green, g (s) 8.8 47.7 18.8 57.7 57.7 34.5 24.5 43.3 32.5 23.5 23.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.40 0.16 0.48 0.48 0.29 0.20 0.36 0.27 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5:0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 245 1320 538 1696 720 405 726 554 430 687 293 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.28 c0.11 c0.37 c0.07 0.14 0.07 0.03 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 c0.17 0.10 0.09 0:03 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.71 0.72 0.78 0.18 0.85 0.70 0.47 0.46 0.86 0.16 Uniform Delay, di 53.8 30.4 48.1 25.9 17.7 35.2 44.3 29:6 34.4 46.7 _ 40.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.76 0.29 0.05 0.88 0.93 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 3.3 2.7 2.4 0.4 13.8 2.4 0.2 0.3 10.6 0.1 Delay (s) 55.6 33.7 39.4 9.7 1.2 44.9 43.5 20.2 34.7 57.2 40.1 Level of Service E C D A A D D C C E D Approach Delay (s) 36.5 14.7 37.8 49.4 Approach LOS D B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control [Delay 31.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3046: S 320 St & 8 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations W. ttT 4.) Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% -4% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.93 0.96 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.97 Satd. Flow (prot) 1720 4948 1805 5076 1656 1715 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 0.79 Satd. Flow (perm) 1720 4948 1805 5076 1594 1397 Volume (vph) 38 1371 12 25 2030 139 10 21 33 117 18 53 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 38 1371 12 25 2030 139 10 21 33 117 18 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 23 0 0 10 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 38 1382 0 25 2163 0 0 41 0 0 178 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 4 0 0 6 2 6 2 4 4 0 6 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phacac 7 Actuated Green, G (s) 5.0 64.4 4.2 62.6 38.4 37.4 Effective Green, g (s) 5.0 63.4 4.2 62.6 37.4 37.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.53 0.04 0.52 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 72 2614 63 2648 497 435 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.28 0.01 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 c0.13 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.40 0.82 0.08 0.41 Uniform Delay, di 56.3 18.5 56.7 23.9 29.2 32.6 Progression Factor 1.21 0.84 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 0.7 1.5 1.9 0.3 0.2 Delay (s) 71.0 16.2 58.2 25.9 29.5 34.7 Level of Service E B E C C C Approach Delay (s) 17.7 26.3 29.5 34.7 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3048: S 320 St & 11 PIS HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis � 4---k. � I }1.t 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I WT Vi Tti� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -1 % 2% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.94 0.92 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 4850 1764 5022 1611 1583 1677 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 4850 1764 5022 1611 1583 1677 Volume (vph) 32 1240 264 87 1433 52 445 5 106 30 59 129 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 32 1240 264 87 1433 52 445 5 106 30 59 129 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 24 0 0 3 0 0 20 0 0 46 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 1480 0 87 1482 0 284 252 0 0 172 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 2 2 8 0 8 0 2 2 2 8 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Split Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 3 4 4 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 3.6 3.6 0.03 5.0 2.0 52.7 52.7 0.44 5.0 2.0 8.9 8.9 0.07 5.0 2.0 58.0 58.0 0.48 5.0 2.0 24.2 23.7 0.20 4.5 2.0 24.2 23.7 0.20 4.5 2.0 15.7 14.7 0.12 4.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 53 2130 131 2427 318 313 205 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.31 c0.05 0.30 c0.18 0.16 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.60 0.70 0.66 0.61 0.89 0.80 0.84 Uniform Delay, di 57.5 27.2 54.1 22.7 46.9 45.9 51.5 Progression Factor 1.01 1.00 1.07 0.95 1.05 1.05 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.6 1.9 7.8 0.9 23.8 12.4 24.6 Delay (s) 70.4 29.0 65.7 22.6 72.9 60.8 76.1 Level of Service E C E C E E E Approach Delay (s) 29.9 25.0 66.9 76.1 Approach LOS C C E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3050: S 320 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL W8T WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M W. M ttt r A) ttT Al ttt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -6% 0% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3522 5120 3433 5045 1536 3358 4831 3426 5136 1522 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3522 5120 3433 5045 1536 3358 4831 3426 5136 1522 Volume (vph) 450 870 80 371 971 291 232 824 231 326 873 315 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0o 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 450 870 80 371 971 291 232 824 231 326 873 315 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 8 0 0 0 172 0 43 0 0 0 234 Lane Group Flow (vph) 450 942 0 371 971 119 232 1012 0 326 873 81 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 6 0 0 6 2 6 2 6 6 0 6 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.1 42.7 14.7 37.3 37.3 12.1 28.0 14.6 30.5 30.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.1 42.7 14.7 37.3 37.3 12.1 28.0 14.6 30.5 30.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.36 0.12 0.31 0.31 0.10 0.23 0.12 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 590 1822 421 1568 477 339 1127 417 1305 387 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.18 c0.11 c0.19 0.07 c0.21 0.10 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.52 0.88 0.62 0.25 0.68 0.90 0.78 0.67 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 47.7 30.5 51.8 35.3 30.9 52.1 44.6 51.2 40.2 35.2 Progression Factor 0.55 0.36 0.75 0.67 0.85 0.66 0.56 0.60 0.50 0.51 Incremental Delay, d2 3.7 0.7 15.1 1.4 1.0 3.0 6.5 6.8 0.8 0.1 Delay (s) 30.1 11.7 54.0 24.9 27.3 37.5 31.5 37.7 21.1 18.2 Level of Service C B D C C D C D C B Approach Delay (s) 17.6 32.0 32.5 24.0 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3052: S 320 St & 20 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* --* -- 4\ I \ i "*1 -0. f- r*. Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SSL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 11) ttT �) W. % r I. Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 2% -1 % -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 097 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1 00 1 00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 100 0.99 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.90 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3485 5068 3399 4896 1718 1712 1747 1679 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.28 1.00 036 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3485 5068 3399 4896 502 1712 661 1679 Volume (vph) 239 1036 63 49 1386 143 144 83 79 188 87 156 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 239 1036 63 49 1386 143 144 83 79 188 87 156 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 33 0 0 61 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 239 1095 0 49 1521 0 144 129 0 188 182 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 6 0 0 8 0 8 0 6 6 0 8 Turn Type Prot Prot pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 12.0 68.3 5.2 61.5 25.6 14.9 29.4 16.8 Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 68.3 5.2 61.5 24.6 14.4 28.4 16.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.57 0.04 0.51 0.21 0.12 0.24 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 349 2885 147 2509 206 205 266 228 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.22 0.01 c0.31 0.06 0.08 c0.07 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.38 0.33 0.61 0.70 0.63 0.71 0.80 Uniform Delay, dl 52.2 14.2 55.7 20.7 41.8 50.3 39.4 50.2 Progression Factor 0.77 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Incremental Delay, d2 3.4 0.3 0.5 1.1 8.1 4.6 6.2 14.9 Delay (s) 43.7 13.9 56.4 21.8 49.9 54.9 45.5 64.4 Level of Service D B E C D D D E Approach Delay (s) 19.3 22.8 52.5 56.2 Approach LOS B C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 2-9 HCM Leve# of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3055: S 320 St & 23 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EB.L EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL 'NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M ttT M ttl t r I. Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -5% 1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 50 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1 00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 085 1.00 0.96 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3334 4824 3519 5026 1704 1839 1456 3323 1772 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3334 4824 3519 5026 1704 1839 1456 3323 1772 Volume (vph) 112 1003 33 384 1508 250 112 252 449 492 213 83 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 112 1003 33 384 1508 250 112 252 449 492 213 83 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 3 0 0 17 0 0 0 7 0 12 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 112 1033 0 384 1741 0 112 252 442 492 284 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 16 0 0 8 2 8 2 16 16 0 8 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot pm+ov Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 9 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 41.8 19.0 50.8 11.7 20.3 39.3 19.9 28.5 Effective Green, g (s) 10.0 41.8 19.0 50.8 11.2 19.8 388 194 28.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.35 0.16 0.42 0.09 0.17 0.32 0.16 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extensiori (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 278 1680 557 2128 159 303 531 537 413 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.21 0.11 c0.35 0.07 0.14 c0.13 c0.15 0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 017 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.62 0.69 0.82 0.70 0.83 0.83 0.92 0.69 Uniform Delay, d1 52.2 32.4 47.7 30.5 52.8 48.5 37.6 49.5 42.0 Progression Factor 1.01 1.00 0.82 0.43 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.83 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.7 2.0 2.6 11.0 16.7 10.3 19.6 3.7 Delay (s) 53.1 34.3 41.2 15.7 63.8 65.2 47.9 62.6 38.5 Level of Service D C D B E E D E D Approach Delay (s) 36.1 20.3 55.4 53.5 Approach LOS D C E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3056: S 320 St & Gateway Blvd S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis - - 4\ I } I* "P. 4/ --* Movement EBL EB'1' EBR WBL WET WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations N W. Zi tti' T Vi T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -1 % 2% -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.86 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 4918 1778 4972 1729 1545 1650 1567 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.42 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 4918 1778 4972 1289 1545 721 1567 Volume (vph) 54 1979 17 97 1995 314 74 13 203 159 4 71 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 54 1979 17 97 1995 314 74 13 203 159 4 71 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 99 0 0 57 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 54 1996 0 97 2295 0 74 117 0 159 18 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 16 0 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.2 69.7 11.1 73.6 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 Effective Green, g (s) 7.2 69.7 11.1 73.6 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.58 0.09 0.61 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 105 2857 164 3049 260 312 145 316 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.41 c0.05 c0.46 0.08 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.70 0.59 0.75 0.28 0.38 1.10 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 54.7 17.7 52.3 16.7 40.6 41.4 47.9 38.7 Progression Factor 0.87 0.48 0.99 0.72 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 1.0 3.1 1.4 0.2 0.3 102.9 0.0 Delay (s) 48.8 9.5 54.7 13.4 40.8 41.6 150.8 38.7 Level of Service D A D B D D F D Approach Delay (s) 10.5 15.1 41.4 114.9 Approach LOS B B D F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.4% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3057: S 320 St & 1-5 SB Ramp HCM Signalized Intersection/Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WN N8L NBR SWL2 SWL SWR Lane Configurations ttt r ) ttt ► W Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 0% 2% 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.95 0.95 0.76 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 100 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 5060 1492 1770 5085 1664 1664 3574 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 5060 1492 1770 5085 1664 1664 3574 Volume (vph) 0 1709 634 144 1498 0 0 0 560 23 919 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1709 634 144 1498 0 0 0 560 23 919 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1709 343 144 1498 0 0 0 292 291 897 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Prot Split custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 4 45 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green. G (s) 59.8 59.8 20.0 668 25,2 25,2 d3.2 Effective Green, g (s) 59.8 59.8 20.0 66.8 25.2 25.2 43.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.17 0.56 0.21 0.21 0.36 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2522 744 295 2831 349 349 1287 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.08 c0.29 c0.18 0.17 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.46 0.49 0.53 0.84 0.83 0.70 Uniform Delay, di 22.8 19.6 45.4 16.7 45.4 45.4 32.8 Progression Factor 0.39 0.43 1.05 1.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 1.5 0.4 0.6 15.2 15.0 1.3 Delay (s) 10.0 9.9 48.1 21.3 60.6 60.4 34.2 Level of Service A A D C E E C Approach Delay (s) 10.0 23.7 0.0 44.4 Approach LOS A C A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3058: S 320 St & 1-5 NEHqMf4pnalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBI_ SBR NEL2 N E L NER Lane Configurations ttl, r tti' Y Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % -1 % 3% 2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.86 0.91 0.95 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri: 1.00 0.85 0.98 1.00 0.95 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 Satd. Flow (prot) 4782 1335 4937 1664 1591 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 Satd. Flow (perm) 4782 1335 4937 1664 1591 Volume (vph) 0 1584 777 0 1134 205 0 0 570 0 110 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1584 777 0 1134 205 0 0 570 0 110 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 11 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1584 777 0 1325 0 0 0 362 307 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Free Split Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G (s) 81.7 120.0 81.7 28.3 28.3 Effective Green, g (s) 81.7 120.0 81.7 28.3 28.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 1.00 0.68 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3256 1335 3361 392 375 v/s Ratio Prot 0.33 0.27 c0.22 0.19 v/s Ratio Perm c0.58 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.58 0.39 0.92 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 9.1 0.0 8.4 44.8 43.4 Progression Factor 0.28 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.3 0.3 26.7 12.4 Delay (s) 2.9 1.3 6.8 71.5 55.9 Level of Service A A A E E Approach Delay (s) 2.4 6.8 0.0 64.2 Approach LOS A A A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 5.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3060: S 320 St & 32 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT Wak 'NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r ►j tT li� 4� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -3% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.81 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.92 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3525 1503 1770 3525 1782 1554 1366 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3525 1503 1770 3525 1782 1554 1366 Volume (vph) 4 1528 24 7 1212 0 68 0 11 1 1 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 !.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 4 1528 24 7 1212 0 68 0 11 1 1 3 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 4 1528 19 7 1212 0 68 1 0 0 2 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Split Split Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 1.1 89.3 89.3 2.0 90.2 8.6 8.6 1.1 Effective Green, g (s) 1.1 89.3 89.3 2.0 90.2 8.6 8.6 0.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.01 0.74 0.74 0.02 0.75 0.07 0.07 0.00 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 16 2623 1118 30 2650 128 111 1 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.43 0.00 c0.34 c0.04 0.00 c0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.58 0.02 0.23 0.46 0.53 0.01 2.00 Uniform Delay, di 59.0 6.9 4.0 58.2 5.6 53.8 51.7 60.0 Progression Factor 0.96 1.06 1.66 0.70 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 0.8 0.0 1.3 0.5 2.1 0.0 1519.0 Delay (s) 59.2 8.2 6.6 42.1 3.0 56.0 51.7 1578.9 Level of Service E A A D A E D F Approach Delay (s) 8.3 3.2 55.4 1578.9 Approach LOS A A E F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3061: S 320 St & Weyerhaeuser Wy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT ESR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt r tt )y r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3525 1507 1770 3525 3336 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3525 1507 178 3525 3336 1386 Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Bus Blockages (#/hr) 1575 1.00 1575 0 1575 2 94 1.00 94 32 62 10 0 255 1.00 255 0 255 10 0 1097 1.00 1097 0 1097 2 179 1.00 179 16 201 10 2 165 1.00 165 114 13 10 2 Turn Type Perm pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 75.9 75.9 97.9 97.9 12.1 12.1 Effective Green, g (s) 75.9 75.9 97.9 97.9 12.1 12.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.82 0.82 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2230 953 371 2876 336 140 v/s Ratio Prot 0.45 c0.10 0.31 c0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.46 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.06 0.69 0.38 0.60 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 14.6 8.4 25.2 3.0 51.6 49.0 Progression Factor 0.51 0.51 1.03 0.26 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.1 3.0 0.3 1.9 0.1 Delay (s) 9.2 4.5 29.0 1.1 53.5 49.1 Level of Service A A C A D D Approach Delay (s) 8.9 6.3 51.9 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3348: S 324 St & 11 PIS Horizon with HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f I Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SET Lane Configurations ►j r 1, I t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% 1 % -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1555 1657 1773 1881 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.17 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1555 1657 310 1881 Volume (vph) 278 257 185 291 183 130 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 278 257 185 291 183 130 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 132 47 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 278 125 429 0 183 130 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 2 2 2 0 Turn Type pt+ov pm+pt Protected Phases 3 31 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 22.8 59.7 40.0 80.9 80.9 Effective Green, g (s) 21.8 58.2 39.0 80.4 80.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.49 0.32 0.67 0.67 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 318 754 539 651 1260 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.08 c0.26 c0.09 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.17 0.80 0.28 0.10 Uniform Delay, di 47.8 17.3 36.9 11.7 7.0 Progression Factor 0.70 4.73 1.00 0.93 0.85 Incremental Delay, d2 14.0 0.0 7.4 0.7 0.1 Delay (s) 47.2 81.9 44.3 11.6 6.1 Level of Service D F D B A Approach Delay (s} 63.9 44.3 9.3 Approach LOS E D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 44.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 22.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 3350: S 324 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations t i T. tO W. Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 1 % 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 097 1.00 1 00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 085 1.00 0.98 1.00 098 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1778 1812 1500 3361 1786 1755 4932 1713 4941 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1778 1812 1500 3361 1786 1755 4932 1713 4941 Volume (vph) 194 203 205 322 245 48 264 1164 232 181 1111 122 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 194 203 205 322 245 48 264 1164 232 181 1111 122 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 168 0 7 0 0 22 0 0 10 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 194 203 37 322 286 0 264 1374 0 181 1223 0 Confl. Peds (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 8 8 8 2 0 2 0 8 8 8 2 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8 22.4 22.4 15.3 229 24.0 47.6 15.7 39.3 Effective Green, g (s) 14.3 21.9 21.9 14.8 224 24.0 47.6 15.7 39.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.20 0.40 0.13 0.33 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 45 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 331 274 415 333 351 1956 224 1618 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.11 0.10 c0.16 0.15 c0.28 0.11 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.61 0.14 0.78 0.86 0.75 0.70 0.81 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 52.2 45.2 41.1 51.0 47.3 45.2 30.3 50.7 36.1 Progression Factor 0.73 0.68 0.63 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.61 0.80 0.46 Incremental Delay, d2 35.6 2.1 0.1 8.1 19.1 7.4 2.0 13.6 2.5 Delay (s) 73.6 33.0 26.2 59.1 66.4 39.9 20.4 54.0 19.0 Level of Service E C C E E D C D B Approach Delay (s) 43.7 62.5 23.5 23.4 Approach LOS D E C C Intersection Surnlra HCM Average Control Delay 31.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3440: SW 325 PI & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T+ 4�, 4M 41k Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -5% 0% 1 % -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.91 0.93 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1662 1649 3486 3519 Flt Permitted 0.87 0.88 0.83 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1466 1474 2892 3347 Volume (vph) 21 0 36 12 2 16 51 1004 18 5 1035 31 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 21 0 36 12 2 16 51 1004 18 5 1035 31 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 34 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 23 0 0 15 0 0 1073 0 0 1070 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 4 6.7 5.7 0.05 4.0 2.0 4 4 2 6.7 5.7 0.05 4.0 2.0 2 104.3 104.3 0.87 5.0 2.0 6 F 104.3 104.3 0.87 5.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 70 70 2514 2909 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.01 c0.37 0.32 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.21 0.43 0.37 Uniform Delay, d1 55.3 55.0 1.6 1.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.38 0.49 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.2 Delay (s) 56.3 55.5 1.1 0.9 Level of Service E E A A Approach Delay (s) 56.3 55.5 1.1 0.9 Approach LOS E E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 3.2 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3540: S 328 St & 1 Av S Horizon with HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis I I' Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations r tT tt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 2% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1761 1506 3432 1783 3592 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1761 1506 3432 391 3592 Volume (vph) 71 35 1148 116 37 1016 Peak -hour factor, PH 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 35 1148 116 37 1016 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 33 3 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 2 1261 0 37 1016 Confl. Peds. (#Inr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.7 7.7 102.3 102.3 102.3 Effective Green, g (s) 7.7 7.7 102.3 102.3 102.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.06 0.85 0.85 0.85 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 113 97 2926 333 3062 v/s Ratio Prot cb:04 c0.37 0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.02 0.43 0.11 0.33 Uniform Delay, d1 54.8 52.6 2.1 1.4 1.8 Progression Factor, 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.38 1.26 Incremental Delay, d2 7.6 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.3 Delay (s) 62.4 52.7 2.2 2.6 2.6 Level of Service E D A A A Approach Delay (s) 59.2 2.2 2.6 Approach LOS E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.8 HCM Level of Service A HGMI Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.4% ICJU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 3640, SW 330 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -• IF-- T 1 Movement EBL :EBT EBR WBL VIBT WBR NBL NOT NBR 88L _' S8T SBR Lane Configurations 1� T tl tl+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% 3% 7% -5% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.86 1.00 092 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1758 1589 1703 1650 1708 3388 1790 3416 Flt Permitted 0.74 1.00 0.61 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.28 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1373 1589 1099 1650 266 3388 529 3416 Volume (vph) 250 9 117 6 10 13 456 1002 18 26 710 282 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 250 9 117 6 10 13 456 1002 18 26 710 282 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 94 0 0 10 0 0 1 0 0 30 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 250 32 0 6 13 0 456 1019 0 26 962 0 Confl. Peds (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 6 2 7 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 R Actuated Green, G (s) 24.9 24.9 24.9 24.9 86.1 86.1 52.0 52.0 Effective Green, g (s) 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 86.1 86.1 52.0 52.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.72 0.72 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 273 316 219 329 541 2431 229 1480 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.01 c0.20 0.30 0.28 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 0.01 c0.40 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.84 0.42 0.11 0.65 Uniform Delay, d1 47.1 39.3 38.7 38.8 26.0 6.8 20.3 26.8 Progression Factor 1.06 1.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.52 0.56 Incremental Delay, d2 30.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 0.5 1.0 2.1 Delay (s) 80.4 71.8 38.7 38.8 37.0 7.4 11.4 17.1 Level of Service F E D D D A B B Approach Delay (s) 77.5 38.8 16.5 16.9 Approach LOS E D B B Intersection Summary�� HCM Average Control Delay 24.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3650: S 330 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4� I i --,* --1''- Movernent EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT W13R NBL NET NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ' '+ Vi T ttT ttT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -4% 0% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1737 1629 1689 1574 1752 4952 1787 5067 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (permi 1315 1629 1294 1574 1752 4952 1787 5067 Volume (vph) 71 8 37 21 6 52 135 1219 50 198 1512 20 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 8 37 21 6 52 135 1219 50 198 1512 20 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 34 0 0 48 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 11 0 21 10 0 135 1266 0 198 1531 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 6 0 8 8 0 6 0 6 0 0 8 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.9 10.9 10.9 10.9 12.7 65.1 30.0 82.4 Effective Green, g (s) 9.9 9.9 9.9 9.9 12.7 65.1 30.0 82.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.54 0.25 0.69 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 108 134 107 130 185 2686 447 3479 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.01 c0.08 c0.26 0.11 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.05 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.08 0.20 0.08 0.73 0.47 0.44 0.44 Uniform Delay, di 53.4 50.9 51.3 50.8 52.0 16.9 38.0 8.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 0.59 0.43 Incremental Delay, d2 10.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 11.5 0.6 0.2 0.3 Delay (s) 63.9 51.0 51.7 50.9 63.4 17.9 22.4 4.0 Level of Service E D D D E B C A Approach Delay (s) 58.9 51.1 22.3 6.1 Approach LOS E D C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 7/12/2007 Horizon with 3842: 1 Wy S & S 333 St HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement SEL SET SER. NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations fly tT 4 4 r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 4% -6% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 0.91 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1796 3551 1701 3403 1656 1719 1506 Flt Permitted 0.18 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.87 0.64 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 347 3551 651 3403 1462 1153 1506 Volume (vph) 90 747 12 4 1251 16 28 0 48 27 0 196 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 90 747 12 4 1251 16 28 0 48 27 0 196 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 183 Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 759 0 4 1267 0 0 31 0 0 27 13 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 R R Actuated Green, G (s) 102.3 102.3 92.8 92.8 7.7 7.7 7.7 Effective Green, g (s) 102.3 102.3 92.8 92.8 7.7 7.7 7.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.77 0.77 0.06 0.06 0.06 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 350 3027 503 2632 94 74 97 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.21 c0.37 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.01 0.02 c0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.25 0.01 0.48 0.33 0.36 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 2.7 1.7 3.1 4.9 53.7 53.8 53.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.8 1.1 0.2 Delay (s) 2.9 1.9 2.9 4.8 54.4 54.9 53.2 Level of Service A A A A D D D Approach Delay (s) 2.0 4.8 54.4 53.4 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.1 % ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4028: SW 336 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis .4- -*\ t /". 1 4/ -# Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 tT 0 1 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 1 % 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1754 3407 1753 3360 1724 3357 1772 3438 Fit Permitted 0.09 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.17 1.00 0.16 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 162 3407 405 3360 302 3357 298 3438 Volume (vph) 269 651 124 313 1035 285 237 544 158 279 594 151 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 269 651 124 313 1035 285 237 544 158 279 594 151 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 21 0 0 22 0 0 19 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 269 763 0 313 1299 0 237 680 0 279 726 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 1 2 1 1 4 1 4 1 2 2 1 4 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 60.6 45.6 63.4 47.0 37.0 24.0 39.0 25.0 Effective Green, g (s) 60.6 45.6 63.4 47.0 37.0 24.0 39.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.38 0.53 0.39 0.31 0.20 0.32 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 281 1295 398 1316 247 671 269 716 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.22 0.11 c0.39 0.10 0.20 c0.12 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.36 0.31 0.19 c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.96 0.59 0.79 0.99 0.96 1.01 1.04 1.01 Uniform Delay, d1 36.2 29.7 18.9 36.2 35.5 48.0 34.9 47.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.21 0.77 0.91 0.92 1.07 0.83 Incremental Delay, d2 41.4 2.0 8.3 20.7 44.9 37.8 63.6 36.4 Delay (s) 77.6 31.7 31.1 48.6 77.4 82.1 101.1 75.7 Level of Service E C C D E F F E Approach Delay (s) 43.5 45.2 80.9 82.6 Approach LOS D D F F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 60.3 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 105.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4029: SW Campus Dr & 19 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* -0. --,* 'r -4- *-- 4\ t 1* \D. i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations fil tT�- 1� T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 2% 0% 3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1777 3465 1749 3445 1727 1559 1712 1579 Flt Permitted 0.19 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.30 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 357 3465 532 3445 1297 1559 545 1579 Volume (vph) 82 755 90 215 1128 77 182 16 214 57 14 53 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 82 755 90 215 1128 77 182 16 214 57 14 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 5 0 0 3 0 0 180 0 0 45 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 82 840 0 215 1202 0 182 50 0 57 22 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 83.6 78.3 88.0 80.5 20.2 20.2 20.2 20.2 Effective Green, g (s) 83.6 78.3 88.0 80.5 19.2 19.2 19.2 19.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.65 0.73 0.67 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time (s} 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle_ Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 311 2261 466 2311 208 249 87 253 _ v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.24 c0.03 c0.35 0.03 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 0.31 c0.14 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.37 0.46 0.52 0.88 0.20 0.66 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 6.8 9.6 5.6 10.0 49.2 43.7 47.3 42.9 Progression Factor 1.36 0.91 1.50 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 30.2 0.1 12.7 0.1 Delay (s) 9.4 9.0 8.5 5.7 79.4 43.9 60.0 43.0 Level of Service A A A A E D E D Approach Delay (s) 9.1 6.1 59.6 50.8 Approach LOS A A E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4043, S 336 St & 1 Wy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT Lane Configurations '� 'i� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 Grade (%) -6% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 50 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1 00 099 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.94 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 Satd Flow (prot) 1808 1787 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1808 1787 Volume (vph) 105 100 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 105 100 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 21 Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 142 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 Turn Type Split Protected Phases 3 3 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 13.9 13.9 Effective Green, g (s) 12.9 12.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 194 192 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.08 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.54 0.74 Uniform Delay, d1 50.7 51.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 12.6 Delay (s) 52.4 64.6 Level of Service D E Approach Delay (s) 59.8 Approach LOS E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way EBR WBL Vi 1900 1900 63 1.00 63 0 0 10 2 48.3 0.84 120.0 93.5% 15 5.0 0.95 1 00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1676 0.95 1676 521 1.00 521 0 278 10 2 Split 4 22.5 225 0.19 5:0 2.0 314 0.17 0.89 47.5 0.82 22.4 61.2 E WBl 190( -1 °/ 5. 0.9 10 1.0 1.0 0.9 170 0.9 170 5 1.0 5 29 WBR NBL 1900 1900 0 50 5 0.88 0 0.98 0 1.00 0 0.85 6 1.00 8 2731 6 1.00 8 2731 3 1372 0 1.00 3 1372 0 219 6 1153 10 0 2 pm+ov 4 1 4 22.5 53.5 22.5 53.5 0.19 0.45 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 320 1218 0.17 c0.24 018 0.93 0.95 47.9 31.9 0.82 1.21 29.4 13.7 68.6 52.3 E D 56.0 E 5.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1743 0.95 1743 27 1.00 27 0 27 10 0 P rot 5 NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ti ti, 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 3% -5% 5 0 5.0 5.0 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1 00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 96 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 3337 1814 3599 1.00 0.95 1.00 3337 1814 3599 528 169 403 575 22 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 528 169 403 575 22 24 0 0 2 0 673 0 403 595 0 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 2 P rot 2 1 6 4.4 33.6 31.0 60.2 4.4 33.6 31.0 60.2 0.04 0.28 0.26 0.50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 64 934 469 1805 0.02 c0.20 0.22 0.17 0.42 0.72 56.6 39.0 1.00 1.00 1.6 4.8 58.2 43.8 E D 44.3 D HCM Level of Service D Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 ICU Level of Service F 0.86 0.33 42.4 17.9 0.99 0.97 13.9 0.5 56.0 17.8 E B 33.2 C 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4046: S 336 St & 9 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } D. Movernent EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 Vi tT+ 1, T, Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% -1 % 2% -4% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.92 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3426 1761 3449 1752 1702 1787 1716 Fit Permitted 0.17 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.25 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 316 3426 604 3449 243 1702 473 1716 Volume (vph) 109 557 96 82 824 156 141 143 110 351 211 216 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 109 557 96 82 824 156 141 143 110 351 211 216 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 10 0 0 11 0 0 25 0 0 33 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 109 643 0 82 969 0 141 228 0 351 394 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 Turn Type D.P+P D.P+P D.P+P D.P+P Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 60.9 54.9 60.9 53.1 41.1 20.1 41.1 30.8 Effective Green, g (s) 59.9 54.4 59.9 52.6 40.1 19.6 40.1 30.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.45 0.50 0.44 0.33 0.16 0.33 0.25 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 246 1553 355 1512 204 278 383 433 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.19 0.01 c0.28 0.06 0.13 c0.16 c0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.19 0.10 0.17 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.41 0.23 0.64 0.69 0.82 0.92 0.91 Uniform Delay, di 18.6 22.1 16.3 26.3 31.5 48.5 33.9 43.5 Progression Factor 1.45 0.49 0.63 0.69 1.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.5 0.1 1.8 7.7 15.8 25.7 22.6 Delay (s) 27.2 11.3 10.3 20.0 40.3 64.5 59.6 66.2 Level of Service C B B B D E E E Approach Delay (s) 13.5 19.2 55.8 63.2 Approach LOS B B E E Intersection Surnmary HCM Average Control Delay 34.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated'Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4050: S 336 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations ] t r tl M W, n ttf r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 1 % 3% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 100 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1718 1853 1502 1717 3287 3368 4871 1796 5120 1556 Flt Permitted 0.17 1.00 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 303 1853 1502 340 3287 3368 4871 1796 5120 1556 Volume (vph) 266 417 396 188 384 221 267 1068 129 155 1288 257 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 266 417 396 188 384 221 267 1068 129 155 1288 257 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 197 0 74 0 0 11 0 0 0 69 Lane Group Flow (vph) 266 417 199 188 531 0 267 1186 0 155 1288 188 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 6 0 6 6 2 6 2 6 0 0 6 2 Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) pm+pt 7 4 47.7 47.7 0.40 5.0 2.0 4 31.6 31.6 0.26 5.0 2.0 Perm 4 31.6 31.6 0.26 5.0 2.0 pm+pt 3 8 39.3 39.3 0.33 5.0 2.0 8 27.4 27.4 0.23 5.0 2.0 Prot 5 12.9 12.9 0.11 5.0 2.0 2 43.6 43.6 0.36 5.0 2.0 Prot 1 12.9 12.9 0.11 5.0 2.0 6 43.6 43.6 0.36 5.0 2.0 pm+ov 7 6 59.7 59.7 0.50 5.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 310 488 396 248 751 362 1770 193 1860 774 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.22 0.08 0.16 0.08 0.24 c0.09 c0.25 0.03 v/s Ratio Perm c0.23 0.13 0.17 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.85 0.50 0.76 0.71 0.74 0.67 0.80 0.69 0.24 Uniform Delay, d1 28.1 42.0 37.5 321 42.6 51.9 32.1 52.3 32.5 17.2 Progression Factor 0.86 0.89 0.82 0.59 0.72 0.95 0.71 1.00 1.01 0.95 Incremental Delay, d2 17.6 11.8 0.3 6.1 1.3 6.6 2.0 19.9 2.1 0.1 Delay (s) 41.7 49.4 31.0 24.9 32.1 55.7 24.8 72.4 35.0 16.5 Level of Service D D C C C E C E C B Approach Delay (s) 40.7 30.4 30.4 35.6 Approach LOS D C C D Intersection Sumniary HCM Average Control Delay 34.4 _ HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4052: S 336 St & 20 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT W8R NBL NBT NBR�' SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I t r 1 r I F Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 3% 0% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1881 1599 1743 1758 1770 1583 1695 1529 Flt Permitted 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 178 1881 1599 602 1758 1770 1583 1695 1529 Volume (vph) 67 647 23 30 816 190 28 0 29 211 0 81 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 67 647 23 30 816 190 28 0 29 211 0 81 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 8 0 6 0 0 0 27 0 0 71 Lane Group Flow (vph) 67 647 15 30 1000 0 28 0 2 211 0 10 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 1 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 83.3 77.9 77.9 78.9 75.7 13.2 9.0 23.9 14.7 Effective Green, g (s) 83.3 77.9 77.9 78.9 75.7 13.2 9.0 23.9 14.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.63 0.11 0.08 0.20 0.12 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 196 1221 1038 426 1109 195 119 338 187 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.34 0.00 c0.57 0.01 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.53 0.01 0.07 0.90 0.14 0.02 0.62 0.05 Uniform Delay, di 19.3 11.3 7.5 8.3 19.0 48.3 51.4 44.0 46.5 Progression Factor 1.48 1.01 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.1 0.3 2.6 0.5 Delay (s) 28.8 11.5 5.0 8.4 28.9 48.4 51.7 46.5 47.0 Level of Service C B A A C D D D D Approach Delay (s) 12.8 28.3 50.1 46.7 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4132: 12 Av SW & SW Campus Dr HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis } Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T 4 r tl tt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 2% 4% -7% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1723 1529 1734 3392 1832 3648 Flt Permitted 0.50 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 936 1583 1295 1529 1734 3392 1832 3648 Volume (vph) 4 0 16 138 1 530 33 1627 156 279 878 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 4 0 16 138 1 530 33 1627 156 279 878 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 14 0 0 0 10 0 6 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 4 2 0 0 139 520 33 1777 0 279 878 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+ov Prot Prot Protected Phases 4 8 1 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.2 16.2 15.2 40.2 4.7 64.8 25.0 85.1 Effective Green, g (s) 15.2 15.2 15.2 40.2 4.7 64.8 25.0 85.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.34 0.04 0.54 0.21 0.71 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 119 201 164 576 68 1832 382 2587 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.19 0.02 c0.52 0.15 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.11 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.03 0.01 0.85 0.90 0.49 0.97 0.73 0.34 Uniform Delay, d1 46.0 45.8 51.3 38.0 56.5 26.7 44.4 6.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.12 1.05 1.15 0.90 1.00 0.91 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 28.4 16.1 1.7 13.6 5.8 0.3 Delay (s) 46.0 45.8 85.8 55.9 66.6 37.5 49.9 6.5 Level of Service D D F E E D D A Approach Delay (s) 45.9 62.1 38.1 16.9 Approach LOS D E D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.6% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4218: SW 340 St & Hot Rd SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBB WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 +T+ T + r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% 2% 1 % 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1746 3300 1723 3382 1757 1685 1758 1853 1501 Flt Permitted 0.34 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 633 3300 693 3382 486 1685 380 1853 1501 Volume (vph) 62 344 137 209 571 116 273 203 196 110 227 196 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 344 137 209 571 116 273 203 196 110 227 196 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 26 0 0 11 0 0 34 0 0 0 163 Lane Group Flow (vph) 62 455 0 209 676 0 273 365 0 110 227 33 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Per i ted Phases 4 R 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 57.0 51.3 67.0 56.3 43.0 28.8 29.3 20.1 20.1 Effective Green, g (s) 57.0 51.3 67.0 56.3 43.0 28.8 29.3 20.1 20.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.43 0.56 0.47 0.36 0.24 0.24 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 354 1411 479 1587 364 404 198 310 251 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.14 c0.04 0.20 c0.11 c0.22 0.04 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.20 0.16 0.09 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.18 0.32 0.44 0.43 0.75 0.90 0.56 0.73 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 17.3 22.8 14.0 21.1 30.4 44.2 37.3 47.4 42.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0:6 0.2 0.7 7.5 22.5 1.9 7.5 0.1 Delay (s) 17.4 23.4 7.9 13.8 37.9 66.7 39.2 54.9 42.6 Level of Service B C A B D E D D D Approach Delay (s) 22.7 12.4 55.0 47.1 Approach LOS C B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4220: SW 340 St & 35 Av SW Horizon with HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 'mot t Movement EBL EBT EB.R WBL WBT WBR NBL N8T NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I tl t1t. 4 1 1� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 0% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.98 1 00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1766 3534 1710 3440 1708 1733 1820 Flt Permitted 0.13 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.96 0.46 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 242 3534 704 3440 1644 842 1820 Volume (vph) 13 630 22 42 1315 190 24 88 72 188 78 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 13 630 22 42 1315 190 24 88 72 188 78 3 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 23 0 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 651 0 42 1499 0 0 161 0 188 79 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#Ihr) 3 2 4 4 0 3 0 3 2 2 4 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 6 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 86.7 86.7 86.7 86.7 24.3 24.3 24.3 Effective Green, g (s) 86.7 86.7 86.7 86.7 23.3 23.3 23.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 175 2553 509 2485 v/s Ratio Prot 0.18 c0.44 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 4.9 Progression Factor 1.52 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 Delay (s) 8.2 Level of Service A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS fntersecfion Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 319 163 353 0.04 0.06 0.10 c0.22 0.25 0.08 0.60 0.50 1.15 0.22 5.7 4.9 8.2 43.2 48.4 40.7 1.28 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.00 1.00 0.2 0.3 1.1 0.5 117.7 0.1 7.4 5.2 9.3 45.3 166.1 40.9 A A A D F D 7.5 9.2 45.3 128.4 A A D F 23.3 HCM Level of Service C 0.72 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 76.4% ICU Level of Service D 15 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4250: S 340 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis � � � � � 4\ t 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *T* 1� r tT til 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1834 1770 1452 1770 3491 3460 3552 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.95 1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 1834 1770 1452 680 3491 3460 3552 Volume (vph) 2 12 1 0 10 45 1 560 12 1016 724 1 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 2 12 1 0 10 45 1 560 12 1016 724 1 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 14 0 0 10 45 1 571 0 1016 725 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 5 1 1 3 0 Turn Type Split Split Free Perm Prot Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 6 5 2 o^'. ,;a�^�' Pti��o� r GI IILLed Phases Free 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 5.8 3.3 120.0 49.6 49.6 41.3 95.9 Effective Green, g (s) 5.8 3.3 120.0 49.6 49.6 41.3 95.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.03 1.00 0.41 0.41 0.34 0.80 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 89 49 1452 281 1443 1191 2839 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.01 c0.16 c0.29 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.20 0.03 0.00 0.40 0.85 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1 54.8 57.1 0.0 20.7 24.7 36`5" 3.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.25 1.00 0.35 0.37 0.47 0.53 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.4 0.2 Delay (s) 55.1 72.2 0.0 7.2 9.2 21.4 1.8 Level of Service E E A A A C A Approach Delay (s) 55.1 13.2 9.2 13.2 Approach LOS E B A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/29/2007 Horizon with 4350: S 341 PI & 16 Av S HIICM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t 10. i Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations 7 t 1� ti, Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -5% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 118 90 747 78 47 1117 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 118 90 747 78 47 1117 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 805 632 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 vC,. conflicting volume 1458 432 835 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 796 vC21 stage 2 conf vol 662 vCu, unblocked vol 1425 335 763 to, -'sing :. 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF,.(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 52 85 94 cult capacity (veh/hy 245 612 790 Direction, Lame.# WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 268 498 327 47 558 558 Volume Left 118 0 0 47 0 0 Volume Right 90 0 78 0 0 0 cSH 331 1700 1700 790 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.63 0.29 0.19 0.06 0.33 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 101 0 0 5 0 0 Control Delay (s) 32.6 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS ❑ A Approach Delay (s) 32.6 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS D intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4436: SW Campus Dr & 6 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EST EBR WBL WEST WBR NBL NBT NBR 5BL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT+ tT -T r T Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % 0% -4% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1778 3475 1768 3499 1780 1553 1726 1815 Flt Permitted 0.11 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.71 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 214 3475 454 3499 1357 1553 1284 1815 Volume (vph) 9 906 96 199 1655 62 75 2 82 38 6 1 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 i .o0 1.0o i .00 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 906 96 199 1655 62 75 2 82 38 6 1 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 75 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 9 998 0 199 1716 0 0 77 7 38 6 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 I'er mitted Phases 6 2 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 88.2 87.2 99.5 93.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 Effective Green, g (s) 88.2 87.2 99.5 93.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.73 0.83 0.78 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 170 2525 456 2726 119 136 112 159 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.29 co.03 c0.49 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.34 co.06 0.00 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.40 0.44 0.63 0.65 0.05 0.34 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 5.3 6.3 3.2 5.7 53.0 50.2 51.5 50.1 Progression Factor 1.14 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.4 0.2 1.1 8.7 0.1 0.7 0.0 Delay (s) 6.0 7.0 3.4 6.9 61.7 50.3 52.1 50.2 Level of Service A A A A E D D D Approach Delay (s) 7.0 6.5 55.8 51.8 Approach LOS A A E D intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4460: SR18 WB - Weyerhaeuser Wy Ramp & Weyerha PAhpgedSROrgeVV&FZMWity Analysis 4- X- t \0- t /'* Movement WBL2 WBL WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations r ' tt tt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% 0% 1 % -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 100 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1647 1509 1770 3525 3507 1460 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1647 1509 448 3525 3507 1460 Volume (vph) 217 0 335 273 404 0 0 942 253 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 217 0 335 273 404 0 0 942 253 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 217 70 273 404 0 0 942 142 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 19.3 19.3 90.7 90.7 67.3 67.3 Effective Green, g (s) 19.3 19.3 90.7 90.7 67.3 67.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.76 0.76 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 265 243 541 2664 1967 819 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.11 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.05 c0.30 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.29 0.50 0.15 0.48 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 48.7 44.3 15.8 4.0 15.8 12.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.68 0.88 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.8 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.5 Delay (s) 65.4 44.5 11.1 3.7 16.7 13.3 Level of Service E D B A B B Approach Delay (s) 52.7 6.7 15.9 0.0 Approach LOS D A B A Intersection SLlmma HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4528: SW 344 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --► f- 4--- t /,P. Movement EBL E=BT EBR INBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 441 f' r I +T tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Fri 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Fit Protected 0.97 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1673 1787 1498 1749 3535 1743 3402 Fit Permitted 0.82 0.76 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.39 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1411 1386 1498 612 3535 706 3402 Volume (vph) 47 1 43 14 15 9 105 700 1 1 704 141 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 47 1 43 14 15 9 105 700 1 1 704 141 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 40 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 51 0 0 29 1 105 701 0 1 840 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases r er mitred Phases 8 Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 8 8.1 7.1 0.06 4.0 2.0 4 4 8.1 7.1 0.06 4.0 2.0 4 8.1 7.1 0.06 4.0 2.0 7 102.9 102.9 0.86 5.0 2.0 2 102.9 102.9 0.86 5.0 2.0 6 102.9 102.9 0.86 5.0 2.0 6 102.9 102.9 0.86 5.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 83 82 89 525 3031 605 2917 v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm c0.04 0.02 0.00 0.17 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.35 0.01 0.20 0.23 0.00 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 55.1 54:2 53.1 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.6 Progression Factor 1.10 1.00 1.03 0.46 0.48 0.55 0.55 Incremental Delay, d2 9.9 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 70.7 55.0 54.9 1.5 0.9 0.7 1.0 Level of Service E E D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 70.7 55.0 1.0 1.0 Approach LOS E E A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4550: S 344 St & 16 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T. Vi T. tl tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -5% 3% -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1720 1644 1780 1734 1730 3432 1756 3548 Flt Permitted 0.45 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.31 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 812 1644 869 1734 447 3432 572 3548 Volume (vph) 10 77 102 168 96 89 53 799 60 105 1039 12 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 10 77 102 168 96 89 53 799 60 105 1039 12 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 51 0 0 35 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 10 128 0 168 150 0 53 856 0 105 1050 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 21.1 21.1 21.1 21.1 88.9 88.9 88.9 88.9 Effective Green, g (s) 21.1 21.1 21.1 21.1 88.9 88.9 88.9 88.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 143 289 153 305 331 2543 424 2628 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 0.09 0.25 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.19 0.12 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.07 0.44 1.10 0.49 0.16 0.34 0.25 0.40 Uniform Delay, di 41.3 44.2 49.5 44.6 4.6 5.4 4.9 5.7 Progression Factor 1.11 1.10 1.00 1.00 0.71 0.67 2.35 2.57 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.4 101.4 0.5 0.7 0.3 1.0 0.3 Delay (s) 45.7 48.9 150.9 45.1 4.0 3.8 12.7 15.1 Level of Service D D F D A A B B Approach Delay (s) 48.7 95.4 3.8 14.8 Approach LOS D F A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4560: SR18 EB - Weyerhaeuser Wy Ramp & WeyerhaeH§b4-e@zESfR4(gEEeginpacity Analysis Movement EBL2 EBL EBR NBL N8T NBR SBL 88T SBR SWL_ SWR Lane Configurations r tt r t Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1 00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri: 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 095 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1455 3525 1467 1770 1847 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1455 3525 1467 588 1847 Volume (vph) 158 9 413 0 578 81 473 867 2 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 9 413 0 578 81 473 867 2 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 118 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 167 295 0 578 50 473 869 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 Turn Type Split Perm Perm pm+pt Protected Phases 4 4 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 269 26.9 48.4 484 83.1 83.1 Effective Green, g (s) 26.9 26.9 48.4 48.4 83.1 83.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.40 0.40 0.69 0.69 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 397 326 1422 592 700 1279 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 0.16 0.17 c0.47 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 0.03 0.30 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.91 0.41 0.08 0.68 0.68 Uniform Delay, d1 39.9 45.3 25.5 22.1 9.9 10.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.74 0.39 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 26.6 0.9 0.3 1.8 2.6 Delay (s) 40.1 71.9 26.4 22.4 9.2 6.8 Level of Service D E C C A A Approach Delay (s) 62.8 25.9 7.7 0.0 Approach LOS E C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4828: SW 348 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4-_ t /p. \p. A/ Movement EBL E13T EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NST NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations + 4 r *TT *M Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 4% -1% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1,.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1734 1499 3537 3506 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.74 Satd. Flow (permf 1770 1734 1499 3537 2611 Volume (vph) 1 0 0 28 0 84 0 879 24 88 790 8 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 1 0 0 28 0 84 0 879 24 88 790 8 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1 0 0 28 4 0 902 0 0 886 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Turn Type Split Split Perm Perm pm+pt Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 7 2.8 1.8 0.02 4.0 2.0 8 8 8 2 6.9 6.9 5.9 5.9 0.05 0.05 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2 97.3 97.3 0.81 5.0 2.0 1 6 6 97.3 97.3 0.81 5.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 27 85 74 2868 2117 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 c0.02 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.34 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.33 0.06 0.31 0.42 Uniform- Delay, di 58.2 55.1 54.4 2.9 3.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 0.95 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.2 0A Delay (s) 58.5 56.0 64.5 2.4 3.1 Level of Service E E D A A Approach Delay (s) 58.5 54.9 2.4 3.1 Approach LOS E D A A Intersection Summary - ti HCM Average Control Delay 5.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum -of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4840: SW Campus Dr & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* --. --t 4- 4\ t I,* \,* 1 -V Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL ' SBT SBR Lane Configurations tT+ tt iff 0 tt rrt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% -1 % 7% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 099 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 098 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1 00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3351 3384 3450 3543 1533 1694 3268 1796 3592 1547 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3351 3384 3450 3543 1533 1694 3268 1796 3592 1547 Volume (vph) 167 791 111 282 1384 177 85 226 64 190 490 301 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 167 791 111 282 1384 177 85 226 64 190 490 301 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 8 0 0 0 69 0 23 0 0 0 177 Lane Group Flow (vph) 167 894 0 282 1384 108 85 267 0 190 490 124 Confl. Peds (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.2 55.7 13.2 59.7 59.7 9.2 13.9 17.2 21.9 21.9 Effective Green, g (s) 9.2 55.7 13.2 597 59.7 9.2 13.9 172 21.9 21.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.46 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.12 0.14 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 50 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 257 1571 380 1763 763 130 379 257 656 282 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 0.26 c0.08 c0.39 0.05 0.08 c0.11 c0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.79 0.14 0.65 0.70 0.74 0.75 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 53.8 23.4 51.8 24.9 16.3 53.9 51.1 49.3 46.4 43.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.66 0.23 0.03 1.01 1.35 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.2 1.5 3.2 1.7 0.2 7.1 3.9 9.2 4.1 0.4 Delay (s) 58.0 24.9 37.2 7.3 0.6 61.6 72.7 58.5 50.5 44.0 Level of Service E C D A A E E E D D Approach Delay (s) 30.1 11.2 70.2 50.0 Approach LOS C B E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 4846: S 348 St & 9 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis s --* '- t 1 41 --p- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations t1* tt r T+ �1 f, Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% -2% -1 % 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 50 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1 00 1 00 1 00 1.00 095 1.00 0.98 1 00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.91 1.00 085 At Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd Flow (prot) 1720 3463 1787 3575 1514 1755 1659 1744 1548 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.73 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1720 3463 1787 3575 1514 1243 1659 1334 1548 Volume (vph) 90 1005 8 10 1668 231 62 18 28 398 3 111 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 90 1005 8 10 1668 231 62 18 28 398 3 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 81 0 19 0 0 66 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 1013 0 10 1668 150 62 27 0 398 48 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#Mr) 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.7 66.8 1.0 60.1 60.1 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.2 Effective Green, g (s) 7.7 66.8 1.0 60.1 60.1 37.2 37.2 372 37.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.56 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 110 1928 15 1790 758 385 514 414 480 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.29 0.01 c0.47 0.02 0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.05 c0.30 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.53 0.67 0.93 0.20 0.16 0.05 0.96 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 55.5 16.7 59.3 28.0 16.6 30.1 29.0 40.7 29.5 Progression Factor 1.20 0.55 0.99 0.73 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.74 Incremental Delay, d2 29.3 0.8 42.7 70 0.4 0.1 0.0 32.6 0.0 Delay (s) 96.1 10.0 101.2 27.4 15.5 30.1 29.0 69.4 21.9 Level of Service F B F C B C C E C Approach Delay (s) 17.0 26.4 29.7 58.9 Approach LOS B C C E Intersection SUrnmary HCM Average Control Delay 28.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4848: S 348 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR S8L SBT SBR Lane Configurations A ttT M ttT+ tt r tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 4% 1 % 2% -3% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1706 4863 3389 4965 3358 3476 1550 1796 3564 1527 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1706 4863 3389 4965 3358 3476 1550 1796 3564 1527 Volume (vph) 197 972 157 430 1638 108 212 418 334 166 603 234 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 197 972 157 430 1638 108 212 418 334 166 603 234 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 5 0 0 0 20 0 0 150 Lane Group.Flow (vph) 197 1113 0 430 1741 0 212 418 314 166 603 84 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 4 0 4 4 6 4 6 4 0 0 4 6 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot pm+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.0 44.6 21.0 52.6 9.7 19.7 40.7 14.7 24.7 24.7 Effective Green, g (s) 13.0 44.6 21.0 52.6 9.7 19.7 40.7 14.7 24.7 24.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.37 0.18 0.44 0.08 0.16 0.34 0.12 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 185 1807 593 2176 271 571 590 220 734 314 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.23 0.13 c0.35 0.06 c0.12 0.09 0.09 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 0.05 v/c Ratio 1.06 0.62 0.73 0.80 0.78 0.73 0.53 0.75 0.82 0.27 Uniform Delay, di 53.5 30.7 46:8 29.2 54.1 47.6 32.0 50.9 45.5 40.0 Progression Factor 0.81 0.68 0.67 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.66 0.63 0.36 Incremental Delay, d2 77.1 1.3 1.9 1.6 12.7 4.2 0.5 12.0 6.9 0.2 Delay (s) 120.4 22.2 33.2 20.4 66.8 51.8 32.4 45.4 35.4 14.4 Level of Service F C C C E D C D D B Approach Delay (s) 36.8 23.0 48.4 32.2 Approach LOS D C D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4850: S 348 St & 16 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 9 ttt r W ttt r 9) 0 r M Tl Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -4% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 0.85 1.00 0.97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 5034 1522 5083 5159 1572 3372 3236 1426 3467 3460 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 5034 1522 5083 5159 1572 3372 3236 1426 3467 3460 Volume (vph) 72 1069 262 876 1698 481 341 512 584 552 580 124 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 72 1069 262 876 1698 481 341 512 584 552 580 124 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 141 0 0 245 0 18 2 0 15 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 1069 121 876 1698 236 341 626 450 552 689 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 1 1 4 0 4 0 0 0 1 4 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot pt+ov Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 23 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.0 33.2 33.2 21.0 46.2 46.2 12.0 27.7 48.7 18.1 33.8 Effective Green, g (s) 8.0 33.2 33.2 21.0 46.2 46.2 12.0 27.7 48.7 18.1 33.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.28 0.28 0.18 0.39 0.39 0.10 0.23 0.41 0.15 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 1393 421 890 1986 605 337 747 579 523 975 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.21 c0.17 c0.33 0.10 c0.19 0.32 c0.16 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.77 0.29 0.98 0.85 0.39 1.01 0.84 0.78 1.06 0.71 Uniform Delay, d1 54.5 39.9 34.1 49.3 33.8 26.7 54.0 44.0 30.9 51'.0 38.7 Progression Factor 0.76 0.69 0.35 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.84 1.47 1.11 1.22 Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 3.2 1.3 26.1 5.0 1.9 49.7 7.1 5.4 52.8 1.7 Delay (s) 46.7 30.9 13.3 75.4 38.8 28.6 96.0 43.9 50.8 109.6 48.8 Level of Service D C B E D C F D D F D Approach Delay (s) 28.4 47.7 58.4 75.5 Approach LOS C D E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle'Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 5050: S 352 St & Enchanted Pkwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T. 4 r fil tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % -11 % 0% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1754 1760 1774 1717 1581 1769 3414 1761 3522 1517 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.17 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1754 1760 1774 1717 1581 357 3414 315 3522 1517 Volume (vph) 88 20 8 261 24 237 5 885 193 207 1254 87 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 88 20 8 261 24 237 5 885 193 207 1254 87 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 7 0 0 0 153 0 11 0 0 0 29 Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 21 0 142 143 84 5 1067 0 207 1254 58 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Split Split pt+ov pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 3 3 31 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phiscs 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.6 10.6 13.9 13.9 30.1 66.3 65.3 82.5 76.5 76.5 Effective Green, g (s) 9.6 9.6 12.9 12.9 30.1 66.3 65.3 82.5 76.5 76.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.25 0.55 0.54 0.69 0.64 0.64 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 140 141 191 185 397 209 1858 364 2245 967 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.01 0.08 c0.08 0.05 0.00 0.31 c0.06 0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.33 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.15 0.74 0.77 0.21 0.02 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 53.5 51.4 51.9 52.1 35.6 12.4 18.1 11.2 12.2 8.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.58 0.41 0.22 Incremental Delay, d2 6.2 0.2 12.8 16.5 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.7 0.6 0.1 Delay (s) 59.7 51.6 64.7 68.7 35.7 12.4 .19.4 18.4 5.6 1.9 Level of Service E D E E D B B B A A Approach Delay (s) 57.7 52.6 19.4 7.1 Approach LOS E D B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 5228: SW 356 St & 21 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NST NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T. Vi ti T. 4 r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% -1 % 0% 1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1,.00 0.96 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1855 1778 3403 1770 1723 1740 1519 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.70 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1855 1778 3403 540 1723 1281 1519 Volume (vph) 425 509 0 119 814 249 45 32 32 248 32 377 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 425 509 0 119 814 249 45 32 32 248 32 377 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 28 0 0 0 288 Lane Group Flow (vph) 425 509 0 119 1040 0 45 36 0 0 280 89 Conti. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 48.2 10.3 42.5 13.8 13.8 27.7 27.7 Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 48.2 10.3 42.5 13.8 13.8 27.7 27.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.40 0.09 0.35 0.12 0.12 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 458 745 153 1205 62 198 296 351 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.27 0.07 c0.31 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 c0.22 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.68 0.78 0.86 0.73 0.18 0.95 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 51.4 29.6 53.7 36.0 51.3 48.0 45.4 37.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.17 0.70 1.00 1.00 0.83 1.67 Incremental Delay, d2 24.6 2.1 18.2 7.5 29.7 0.2 35.6 0.1 Delay (s) 76.1 31.7 80.9 32.8 81.0 48.1 73.5 62.9 Level of Service E C F C F D E E Approach Delay (s) 51.9 37.6 61.7 67.4 Approach LOS D D E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 49.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 5240: SW 356 St & 1 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---1- --t ~ 4N t /'-� '\"� i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBI' Lane Configurations t r tT t r I + r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -4% 5% 3% 1% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 095 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 085 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1900 1519 1718 3344 1710 1835 1474 1704 1853 1524 Flt Permitted 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.71 1.00 1.00 0.72 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 311 1900 1519 698 3344 1271 1835 1474 1286 1853 1524 Volume (vph) 189 514 26 58 821 169 31 61 44 329 78 534 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 189 514 26 58 821 169 31 61 44 329 78 534 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 12 0 12 0 0 0 30 0 0 190 Lane Group Flow (vph) 189 514 14 58 978 0 31 61 14 329 78 344 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 72.4 63.0 63.0 59.9 55.5 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6 376 376 Effective Green, g (s) 72.4 63.0 63.0 59.9 55.5 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.52 0.52 0.50 0.46 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 336 998 797 386 1547 398 575 462 403 581 478 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.27 0.01 c0.29 0.03 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.28 0.01 0.07 0.02 0.01 c0.26 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.52 0.02 0.15 0.63 0.08 0.11 0.03 0.82 0.13 0.72 Uniform Delay, d1 14.9 18.6 13.7 16.0 24.5 29.0 29.3 28.6 38.0 29.5 36.5 Progression Factor 1.33 0.78 0.79 0.39 033 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.38 0.30 0.29 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 3.3 Delay (s) 21.1 14.6 10.8 6.4 9.4 29.0 29.3 28.6 22.9 8.9 13.8 Level of Service C B B A A C C C C A B Approach Delay (s) 16.2 9.3 29.0 16.6 Approach LOS B A C B Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 14.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 5246: S 356 St & Pacific Hwv S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ■-- A, 4\ I Movement EBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SER Lane Configurations t tT. M tTa Vii tt Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -1 % -3% 2% -2% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3423 1872 1529 1767 3556 3399 3373 1787 3546 1559 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm] 3423 1872 1529 1767 3556 3399 3373 1787 3546 1559 Volume (vph) 234 424 352 201 447 28 334 586 119 64 989 346 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 234 424 352 201 447 28 334 586 119 64 989 346 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 176 0 5 0 0 13 0 0 0 193 Lane Group Flow (vph) 234 424 176 201 470 0 334 692 0 64 989 153 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 4 0 4 4 0 4 0 4 0 0 4 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 29.5 29.5 15.9 20.2 14.0 46.5 7.1 39.6 39.6 Effective Green, g (s) 25.2 29.5 29.5 15.9 20.2 15.0 47.5 7.1 39.6 39.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.17 0.12 0.40 0.06 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 719 460 376 234 599 425 1335 106 1170 514 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.23 c0.11 0.13 c0.10 0.21 0.04 c0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.92 0.47 0.86 0.78 0.79 0.52 0.60 0.85 0.30 Uniform Delay, d1 40.2 44.1 38.6 '51.0 47.8 50.9 27.6 55.1 37.4 29.9 Progression Factor 0.86 1.06 1.14 1.02 0.76 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 21.2 0.3 24.3 6.1 8,6 1.4 6.5 7.6 1.5 Delay (s) 34.7 67.8 44.2 76.4 42.6 59.5 29.0 61.6 44.9 31.4 Level of Service C E D E D E C E D C Approach Delay (s) 51.9 52.6 38.8 42.4 Approach LOS D D D D irfferection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 5250: S 356 St & 16 Av S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations tT+ tt +T+ r t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 7% -1 % 3% 0% Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.95 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 1.00 085 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3401 1778 3557 1470 1402 1859 1554 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.77 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3401 442 3557 1309 1402 1439 1554 Volume (vph) 0 515 10 54 258 0 19 0 99 1 23 293 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1 00 1.00 1 00 1 00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 515 10 54 258 0 19 0 99 1 23 293 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 166 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 524 0 54 258 0 0 55 63 0 24 127 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type custom custom custom Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 5 58 3 6 Permitted Phases 8 7 7 6 6 Ac-Liale-' c'�een f- (s ni.tuaLcu vi cc� i, v �� 24.2 35.6 ^2.6 7 5 7 .ri 499 49 9 Effective Green, g (s) 25.2 39.6 44.6 8.5 8.5 51.9 51.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.33 0.37 0.07 0.07 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 714 306 1322 93 99 622 672 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.02 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.04 c0.04 0.02 c0.08 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.18 0.20 0.59 0.64 0.04 0.19 Uniform Delay, d1 44.3 38.1 25.5 54.1 54.2 19.7 21.0 Progression Factor 1.20 0.23 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 0.1 0.0 6.5 9.4 0.1 0.6 Delay (s) 55.0 8.7 6.3 60.6 63.7 19.8 21.7 Level of Service E A A E E B C Approach Delay (s) 55.0 6.7 62.3 21.5 Approach LOS E A E C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/18/2007 Horizon with 5251: S 356 St & Enchanted Pkwy S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis .4- 4__ t /p�\0.i __* ___I, Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NI3T NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +' r T+ tT-1 ) � Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 0% -1 % 1 % Total Lost time (s) 50 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 50 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 100 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1735 1500 1729 1720 3450 3532 1761 3508 Fit Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1299 1500 952 1720 3450 3532 1761 3508 Volume (vph) 315 24 298 42 21 14 277 732 24 18 1125 27 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 315 24 298 42 21 14 277 732 24 18 1125 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 235 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 339 63 42 24 0 277 755 0 18 1151 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 31.7 24.2 23.2 23.2 12.4 62.5 2.8 49.9 Effective Green, g (s) 33.7 25.2 25.2 25.2 14.4 63.5 2.8 51.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.12 0.53 0.02 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 7.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 396 315 200 361 414 1869 41 1517 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.01 c0.08 0.21 0.01 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 0.04 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.20 0.21 0.07 0.67 0.40 0.44 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 40.9 39.1 39.2 38.0 50.5 16.9 57.8 28.8 Progression Factor 0.31 0.37 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.83 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 3.0 0.6 2.7 3.6 Delay (s) 24.8 14.5 39.4 38.0 46.6 14.7 60.5 32.4 Level of Service C B D D D B E C Approach Delay (s) 20.0 38.7 23.2 32.8 Approach LOS B D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 5335: SW 356 St & 8 Av SW HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Vii tl tT 4 4- Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -3% 3% 1 % -1 % Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.92 0.95 At Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1795 3581 1734 3452 1643 1695 Flt Permitted 0.17 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.90 0.83 Satd. Flow (perm) 319 3581 715 3452 1512 1441 Volume (vph) 30 654 10 29 1300 65 9 1 14 43 8 35 Peak -hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 30 654 10 29 1300 65 9 1 14 43 8 35 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 26 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 664 0 29 1364 0 0 11 0 0 60 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8 n +,, ni,i ivatcu ucci i, u 10� on o JT.J 01 g ad 7 qi 7 11 10.2 Effective Green, g (s) 94.9 91.8 94.7 91.7 10.2 10.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.79 0.76 0.79 0.76 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 290 2739 590 2638 129 122 v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 0.19 0.00 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.04 0.01 c0.04 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.24 0.05 0.52 0.09 0.49 Uniform Delay, di 3.5 4.1 2.7 5.5 50.6 52.4 Progression Factor 0.44 0.46 0.20 0.50 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.1 1.2 Delay (s) 1.6 2.0 0.5 3.3 50.7 53.6 Level of Service A A A A D D Approach Delay (s} 2.0 3.2 50.7 53.6 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Surnmary HCM Average Control Delay 5.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 256: S Star Lake Rd & 25 Dr S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Configurations '+ 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 5% -6% -2% Volume (veh/h) 224 112 65 106 52 23 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 224 112 65 106 52 23 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting, volume 346 536 300 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 ccnf vol vCu, unblocked vol 346 536 300 to, s'ingle=:(S) ; 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 89 97 CM capac ty4vehih) 1203 470 727 Direction, Lane.# SE 1 NW 1 NE 1 Volume Total 336 171 75 Volume Left 0 65 52 Volume Right 112 0 23 cSH 1700 1203 528 Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.05 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 4 12 Control Delay (s) 0.0 3.4 13.0 Lane LDS A B Approach Delay (s) O.O 14 13.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.7 Intersection :Capac ty Utllilation 47.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 451: Pacific Hwy S & 16 AV S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t f* 1� Movernent NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR Lane Configurations ttt ttl pr r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -3% 2% 4% 0% Volume (veh/h) 169 979 9 38 1717 20 0 0 397 0 0 49 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 169 979 9 38 1717 20 0 0 397 0 0 49 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 986 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 vC, conflicting volume 1747 988 2536 3139 602 2377 3144 341 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1662 988 2505 3148 440 2335 3154 341 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 53 95 100 100 24 100 100 92 cm capacity (veh/h) 356 695 7 5 520 3 5 650 Direction, Lane 4 NB 1 NB 2 NO 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 SE 1 NW 1 Volume Total 169 392 392 205 467 658 449 397 49 Volume Left 169 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 9 0 0 20 397 49 cSH 356 1700 1700 1700 695 1700 1700 520 650 Volume to Capacity 0.47 0.23 0.23 0.12 0.05 0.51 0.26 0.76 0.08 Queue Length 95th (ft) 61 0 0 0 4 0 0 168 6 Control Delay (s) 23.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 30.9 11.0 Lane LOS C A D B Approach Delay (s) 3.5 0.4 30.9 11.0 Approach LOS D B Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 750: S 283 PI & Pacific Hwy S HICM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 'r I * 1P. 1 i Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations ttl.> tf+ Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -11 % -3% 3% Volume (veh/h) 0 49 1435 78 0 2010 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 49 1435 78 0 2010 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2164 537 1523 vC1, stage 1 conf Vol vC2, stage 2-conf Vol vCu, unblocked Vol 2164 537 1523 tC, single (s) '. 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 90 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 40 481 430 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 49 574 574 365 670 670 670 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 49 0 0 78 0 0 0 cSH 481 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0,10 0.34 0.34 0.21 0.39 0.39 0.39 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 13.3 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Ufilization" 53.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 756: S 284 St & Military Rd S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity: Analysis:, Movemew SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 4 r 1� Vii 1� Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade -8% 9% -4% 5% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 470 1 9 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 470 1 9 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 966 966 26 966 970 20 20 10 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 966 966 26 966 970 20 20 10 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 71 cM capacity (veh/h) 176 177 1033 174 175 1040 1583 1596 Direction, Lane # SE 1 NW 1 NE 1 NE 2 SW 1 SW 2 Volume Total 5 0 0 0 470 10 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 470 0 Volume Right 5 0 0 0 0 9 cSH 1033 1700 1700 1700 1596 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 31 0 Control Delay (s) &5 0.0 0.0 0.0 82 0.0 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay (i 8.5 0.0 6.0 8.0 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 8.0 Intersection Capac%ty'Utilizat-ion 47.2% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way A 6/26/2007 Horizon with 1052: S 288 St & 20 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT \NBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 +T Y, Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 53 454 619 56 48 70 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 454 619 56 48 70 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream -signal (ft) 806 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 685 1000 358 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 685 1000 358 tC, single: (s) -s 4.1 6.B 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 78 89 cM capacity (veh/h) 897 222 628 Diirectio' n, Larre # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 - Volume Total 204 30.3 413 262 118 Volume Left 53 0 0 0 48 Volume Right 0 0 0 56 70 cSH 897 1700 1700 1700 360 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0,18 0.24 0.15 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 0 35 Control Delay (s) 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.8 Lane LDS A C Approach Delay (s) 1.1 0.0 19:8 Approach LOS C Intersection 5umma` Average Delay 2.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 1053: S 288 St & 21 AvS Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movernent --I,. EBT --v EBR WBL 4--- WBT NHI_ NBR Lane Configurations tT+ *tt Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 493 14 19 611 6 9 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 493 14 19 611 6 9 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1045 1268 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 517 864 274 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 517 864 274 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 98 99 cM capacity,(veh7h) 1036 283 712 Direction, Lan, ; t EB i EB 2 W B 1 W 8 2 NB i Volume Total 329 178 223 407 15 Volume Left 0 0 19 0 6 Volume Right 0 14 0 0 9 cSH 1700 1700 1036 1700 444 Volume to Capacity 0.19 0.10 0.02 0.24 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 1 0 3 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.,0 13.4 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.3 1&4 Approach LQS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection;;Capacity Utilization 45A% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 1058: S 288 St & Camelot Dr S Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT ESR WBL WST NBL NBR Lane Configurations t1). 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 2% Volume (veh/h) 698 30 24 775 16 10 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 698 30 24 775 16 10 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1253 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 738 1168 384 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 738 1168 384 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity.(veh/h) Direction. Lane # EB 1 EB 2 2.2 97 857 W8 1 WB 2 3.5 3.3 91 98 178 604 NB 1 Volume Total 465 263 282 517 26 Volume Left 0 0 24 0 16 Volume Right 0 30 0 0 10 cSH 1700 1700 857 1700 244 Volume to Capacity 0.27 0.15 0.03 0.30 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 2 0 9 Control Delay (s); 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 21.5 Lane LOS A C Approach ,Delay (s) 0.0 0.4 21.5 Approach LOS C lritersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way ICU-Levol of Service A 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1059: S 288 St & 30 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --► 4 Movement EBL BBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -5% 5% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 706 765 6 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 706 765 6 5 5 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1317 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 781 1141 406 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 781 1141 406 tC, single (s) 4.1 &8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 97 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 825- 191 585 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 W B 1 W B 2 SB 1 Volume ro?al 235 471 510 261 10 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 5 Volume Right 0 0 0 6 5 cSH 825 1700 1700 1700 288 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.28 0.30 0.15 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 3 Control Delay (s) 4,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.0 Lane LOS C Approach Delay (s) 0:0 0.0 18.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary - - Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1240: SW 292 St & 1 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* - 4- t \P. 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4� 4)- *T+ 4 it Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 5% -10% -7% 5% Volume (veh/h) 3 0 5 45 0 19 4 557 88 36 269 1 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 0 5 45 0 19 4 557 88 36 269 1 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 989 1014 289 975 971 621 280 655 vC1, stage 1 conf vol v62, stage ZconfIvol vcu, unblocked vol 989 1014 289 975 971 621 280 655 tC, singlo. (s)- 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 33 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 99 79 100 96 100 96 cM�capacity �veh/h), 203 224 737 217 239 480 1272 924 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 8 64 649 305 1 Volume Left 3 45 4 36 0 Volume Right 5 19 88 0 1 c5H 371 259 1272 924 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0,25 0.00 0.04 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 24 0 3 0 Control Delay (s) 14.9 23.4 0.1 1.4 0.0 Lane LOS B C A A Approach Delay (s) 14.9 23.4 0A 1.4 Approach LGS B C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection capacity Utiiiz4tion 60.3% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way n 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1248: Redondo Wv S & 13 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement SEL SET NWT NWR SWL SWR Lane Configurations 4 T, Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 9% -6% -11 % Volume (veh/h) 24 62 61 41 21 19 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 24 62 61 41 21 19 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 112 212 102 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 112 212 102 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) T (s) 2.2 :i.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 97 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1465 752 938 Direction, Lane # SE 1 NW 1 SW 1 Volume Totai 86 102 40 Volume Left 24 0 21 Volume Right 0 41 19 cSH 1465 1700 830 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.06 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 4 Control Delay (s) 2.2 OA 9:6 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 2.2 0.0 9:6 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.5 Intersection Capacity_�Uilization 25.8% ICU LevelAof Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1540: S 296 PI & 1 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f, 4-- t /0� 14'. 1 Movement WBL WBR. NBT NBR SBI- SST Lane Configurations Y '* +' Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -14% -4% 4% Volume (veh/h) 6 1 256 21 5 521 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 1 256 21 5 521 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 818 286 287 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2; stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 818 286 287 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 100 100 cM;capkity (veh/h) 341 741 1264 Direction. Lane 9 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 - Volume Total 7 277 526 Volume Left 6 0 5 Volume Right 1 21 0 cSH 369 1700 1264 Vol umexto, Capacity 0.02 0.16 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 14.9 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 14.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 lntersection`Capacity Utilization 45.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 1557: Military Rd S & Camelot Dr S Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis "* \ All *11 l * 1 �-* ►e lr--. Movernent SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations t r T 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 4% -6% 0% 4% Volume (veh/h) 36 989 0 0 514 49 0 0 0 28 0 50 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 36 989 0 0 514 49 0 0 0 28 0 50 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 573 989 1635 1634 999 1620 1610 558 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 573 989 1635 1634 999 1620 1610 558 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 62 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 100 100 100 100 64 100 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 992 699 70 97 293 78 100 520 Direction, Lane 4 SF 1 SE 2 SE 3 NW 1 NW 2 NE -I SW 1 Volume Total 36 989 0 0 563 0 78 Volume Left 36 0 0 0 0 0 28 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 49 0 50 cSH 992 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 172 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0:58 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.45 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 0 53 Control Delay (s) 8.8 0.0 .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.2 Lane LOS A A E Approach Delay (s) 0:3 0.0 0.0 422 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68 60% ICU LeveVof Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1647: S Dash Point Rd & 9 PI S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 1� Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 2% -2% 1 % Volume (veh/h) 36 401 766 75 26 26 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 36 401 766 75 26 26 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane -Width (ft) 12:0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 643 pX, platoon unblocked 0.81 0.81 0.81 vC, conflicting volume 851 1296 824 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 816 1367 782 tC, single (s) . 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 79 92 cM capacity (Veh/h) 651 122 313 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 --- = Volume Total 437 841 52 Volume Left 36 0 26 Volume Right 0 75 26 cSH 651 1700 175 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.49 0.30 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 29 Control Delay (s) 1.6 0.0 34.0 Lane LDS A D Approach Delay (s) 1.6 0.0 34.0 Approach LOS D intersection Summary Average Delay 1-9 Intersection 0,apacity'Utilizati'on : 65-6% ICU Levef'of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1658: S 298 St & Military Rd S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR Lane Configurations *4 4o- 1 4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 2% 0% 3% -3% Volume (veh/h) 17 0 26 2 0 1 8 1011 52 17 563 1 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 17 0 26 2 0 1 8 1011 52 17 563 1 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12:0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1672 1671 1057 1670 1696 584 574 1073 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1672 1671 1057 1670 1696 584 574 1073 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 76 100 90 97 100 100 99 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 72 91 269 65 88 503 991 644 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SE 1 SE 2 NW 1 Volume Total 43 3 8 1063 581 Volume Left 17 2 8 0 17 Volume Right 26 1 0 52 1 cSH 129 92 991 1700 644 Volume to Capacity, 0.33 0.03 0.01 0.63 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 33 3 1 0 2 Control Delay'(s) 46:3 45:5 8.7 0.0 0.7 Lane LOS E E A A Approach Delay 48`3 45.5 0.1 0.7 ,(s) Approach LOS E E Intersection Surnrnary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection CapacitvUtilization 70.9% ICU°Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1751 : 18 Av S & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t 1 Movement WI3L WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y ttT tt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -10% -4% 3% Volume (veh/h) 75 42 1140 58 23 1753 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 75 42 1140 58 23 1753 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 720 pX, platoon unblocked 0.78 vC, conflicting volume 2112 429 1208 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1179 vC2, stage .2 corif vol 932 vCu, unblocked vol 2143 429 1208 tC, single (s) 63 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 50 93 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 151 565 569 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB i NB 2 NB 3 8B31 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 117 456 456 286 23 876 876 Volume Left 75 0 0 0 23 0 0 Volume Right 42 0 0 58 0 0 0 cSH 204 1700 1700 1700 569 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.57 0.27 0.27 0.17 0.04 0.52 0.52 Queue Length 95th (ft) 78 0 0 0 3 0 0 Control Delay (s) 43.8 0:0 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 0.0 Lane LCS E B Approach Delay (s) 43.8 0.0 0.2 Approach LDS E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.79/6 ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 1838: SW Dash Point Rd & 2 PI SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBH SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T+ 4, Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 10 368 1 5 814 9 2 0 3 1 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 10 368 1 5 814 9 2 0 3 1 0 4 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 833 379 1241 1242 388 1240 1238 838 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 833 379 1241 1242 388 1240 1238 838 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 100 99 100 100 99 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 793 1170 144 169 649 145 170 360 Direction, Lane # ES 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 379 828 5 5 Volume Left 10 5 2 1 Volume Right 1 9 3 4 cSH 793 1170 270 278 Volume to Capacity O 01 0.00 0.02 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 1 1 Control Delay (s) 0.4 OJ 18.6 18.2 Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay (p) 0,.4 0:1 18.6 18.2 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 IriteIrsecbonCapacity Utilization 60.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1840: SW 301 St & 1 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations ►yr 4 T Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -4% -2% 3% Volume (veh/h) 56 62 77 700 460 56 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 56 62 77 700 460 56 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1362 508 526 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1362 508 526 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 62 89 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 149 556 1032 Direction. Lane # ES 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 118 777 516 Volume Left 56 77 0 Volume Right 62 0 56 cSH 242 1032 1700 Volumeao Capacity 0.49 0.07 0.30 Queue Length 95th (ft) 62 6 0 Control belay (s) 33.3 1.9 0.0 Lane LOS D A Approach Delay (s) 33.3 1-9 0.0 Approach LOS ❑ tnterse00 Surrrrharyr' Average Delay 3.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.4% ICU level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 1842: S Dash Point Rd & 4 Av S Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4 4--- *-- 4\ t /P. I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WSR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4,- 4 +4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -3% 2% -3% 5% Volume (veh/h) 3 308 12 124 699 19 12 17 85 15 9 10 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 308 12 124 699 19 12 17 85 15 9 10 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 728 330 1311 1306 334 1390 1302 728 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 728 330 1311 1306 334 1390 1302 728 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4,0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 90 89 88 88 82 94 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 868 1219 113 141 696 85 141 416 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume 1 otai 323 842 114 34 Volume Left 3 124 12 15 Volume Right 12 19 85 10 cSH 868 1219 327 129 Volume.to Capacity 0.00 0.10 0.35 026 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 8 38 25 Control Delay ($) 0.1 2.5 21.8 42.7 Lane LOS A A C E Approach Delay (sy 0.1 2.5 2;1.8 42.7 Approach LOS C E Intersection Surnmary Average Delay 4.6 lntersection'Gapacity-Utilization 83.8% I-CU"Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 1846: S 301 St & S Dash Point Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ,- *-- t 1' �► Movement W8L WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations ►fir 'fir 4 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -10% 4% -5% Volume (veh/h) 12 24 413 8 22 744 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 12 24 413 8 22 744 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1225 437 431 vC1, stage 1 conf vol VC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1225 437 431 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 94 96 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 192 610 1119 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 36 421 766 Volume Left 12 0 22 Volume Right 24 8 0 cSH 353 1700 1119 Volume to Capacity 0.10 0.25 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 0 2 Control Delay (s) 16.9 0.0 0.5 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 1-6.3 0.0 0.5 Approach LDS C Iriterseption Summary Average Delay 0.8 IntersectiontapapRy'Utiliztion 71.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 2040: S 304 St & 1 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* --* 4% I i 4/ Movement EBL FBR N8L NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations kT"" 4 1� Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -2% -1% Volume (veh/h) 5 27 33 286 385 17 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 27 33 286 385 17 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 766 414 412 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2; stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 766 414 412 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 33 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 96 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 354 628 1137 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 32 319 402 Volume Left 5 33 0 Volume Right 27 0 17 cSH 560 1137 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.03 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 2 0 Control Qelay (s) 11.8 1.1 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 11.8 1.1 0.0. Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.9% ICU Level of Service 13 Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2054: S 304 St & 23 AV S Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT VVBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations .4 14 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 4% -3% Volume (veh/h) 6 184 310 19 13 19 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 184 310 19 13 19 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 339 536 340 vC1, stage 1 conf Vol vC2, stage 2 conf Vol vCu, unblocked Vol 339 536 340 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 97 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 1210 495 691 Direction, Lane # EB 1 W B 1 5B 1 Volume Totai 190 329 32 Volume Left 6 0 13 Volume Right 0 19 19 cSH 1210 1700 596 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.19 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 4 Control Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 11.4 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 11.4 Approach LOS H Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity,ptilization, 32A%o ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2133: 12 Av SW & SW Dash Point Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f � A( lt-• Movement SEL SET SER NW1_ NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 4 41� 4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade -2% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 9 6 2 19 9 33 4 813 38 51 364 18 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 6 2 19 9 33 4 813 38 51 364 18 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1372 1354 393 1340 1344 852 392 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol 861 vCu, unblocked vol 1372 1354 393 1340 1344 852 392 861 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 91 96 100 83 94 91 100 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 98 137 645 115 139 353 1157 774 Direction, Lane # SE 1 NW 1 NE 1 SW 1 Volume Total 17 61 855 433 Volume Left 9 19 4 51 Volume Right 2 33 38 18 cSH 122 189 1157 774 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.32 0.00 0.07 Queue Length 95th (ft) 12 33 0 5 Control Delay (s) 39.1 33.0 0.1 1.9 Lane LOS E D A A Approach Delay (s) 39.1 33.0 0.1 1.9 Approach LOS E D Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.6 Intersection Cap' ity`l-Rilization 73.9°/° ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2140: S304P1&1 AvS Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movernent WBL *,, WBR T NBT / NBR SBL 4 SBT Lane Configurations Y 1 4 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -2% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 0 0 318 126 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 318 126 0 t Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 402 401 454 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2; stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 402 401 454 tC; single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)", 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM-"capacity (veh/h) 594 638 1097 Direction. Lane 4 W B 1 NB 1 S8 1 Volume Total 0 444 1 Volume Left 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 126 0 cSH 1700 1700 1097 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.26 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.10 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection :Capacity Utilization 39.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2231: SW 308 St & SW Dash Point Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis � t * /* � ►l Movement WBL WBR NET NER SWi_ SWT Lane Configurations Y T +T Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 9 10 393 24 16 866 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 10 393 24 16 866 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1323 425 427 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1323 425 427 tC, single (8) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 95 98 99 cMTcapacity (veh/h) 167 619 1123 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NE 1 SW 1 Volume Total 19 417 882 Volume Left 9 0 16 Volume Right 10 24 0 cS H 271 1700 1123 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.25 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 0 1 Control Delay (s) 19.3 0.0 0.4 Lane LDS C A Approach Delay (s) 19.3 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS C Intersecdon Summary Average Delay 0.5 Infersection Capacity Utilization 72.9% ICU level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 2240: S 308 St & 1 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --v ■--- *-- 4\ t /10, \'D. i --1' f- Movement LBL EBT ESR UUBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL 68T SSR Lane Configurations 4-) 4 % "1 T Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade -15% 4% 1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 9 8 81 46 5 1 65 434 129 1 448 12 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 8 81 46 5 1 65 434 129 1 448 12 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ftls) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1319 pX, platoon unblocked 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 vC, conflicting volume 1044 1169 474 1184 1110 518 470 573 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 466 466 638 638 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 578 703 545 472 vCu, unblocked vol 1053 1204 474 1222 1134 418 470 484 to, single (s) 7.1 &5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 to, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4:0 33 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 97 97 86 79 98 100 94 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 292 26=1 582 221 268 516 1083 885 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NS 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 98 52 65 563 1 460 Volume Left 9 46 65 0 1 0 Volume Right 81 1 0 129 0 12 cSH 488 227 1083 1700 885 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.23 0.06 0.33 0.00 0.27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 19 21 5 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 14.2 25.5 8.5 0.0 9.1 0.0 Lane LOS B D A A Approach Delay (s) 14.2 25.5 U.9 0'0 Approach LOS B D In#ersection .Sumrria - ':��' Average Delay 2.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2350: S 310 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f- t /#� '*� Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations ttll N ttt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 21 51 1077 45 71 1565 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 21 51 1077 45 71 1565 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 660 662 pX, platoon unblocked 0.91 0.88 0.88 vC, conflicting volume 1783 402 1132 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1110 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 674 vCu, unblocked vol 1066 48 878 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF(s) p0 queue free % 92 94 89 cM capacity (veh/h) 261 875 668 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 SBA Volume Total 51 431 431 260 71 522 522 522 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 71 0 0 0 Volume Right 51 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 cSH 875 1700 1700 1700 668 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.25 0.25 0.15 0:11 0.31 0.31 0.31 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 - 0 0 9 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Err 0.0 0.5 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay Err Intersection Capacity Utilization Err% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2430: 16 Av SW & SW Dash Point Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -0 -;� I 's Ae Movement E13L EBR NFL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations Y + 1� Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (vehlh) 9 29 79 348 715 34 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow: rate (vph) 9 29 79 348 715 34 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width:(ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft-) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 vC„conflicting volume 1258 752 759 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 742 vC4 stage 2 conf vol 516 vCu, unblocked vol 1279 752 759 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s,) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 97 93 91 cM, capacity (veh%h). 293 403 845 Direction. Lane # EB 1 NE 1 NE 2 SW 1 Volume Total 38 79 348 749 Volume Left 9 79 0 0 Volume Right 29 0 0 34 cSH 370 845 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0..10 0.09 0.20 0.44 Queue Length 95th (ft) 9 8 0 0 Control Delay (s) 18.8 9.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 15:8 1.8 0.0 Approach LOS C lnlprsecfjor;:Summary. Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2531: SW 312 St & 14 Av SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -1, 'r 4\ I Movement E8L EBT EBR WSL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 + 4 + Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 1 % -1 % 1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 0 437 30 82 556 1 49 2 43 0 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 437 30 82 556 1 49 2 43 0 0 1 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 767 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 567 477 1194 1193 472 1236 1208 576 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 567 477 1194 1193 472 1236 1208 576 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 92 67 99 93 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 997 1076 149 170 582 128 166 508 Direction, Lane # EB' 1 WB 1 NS 1 5.B 1 Volume Total 467 639 94 1 Volume Left 0 82 49 0 Volume Right 30 1 43 1 cSH 997 1076 227 508 Volume to Capacity 0.00 00.08 0.41 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 6 48 0 Control.Delay (s) 0.0 2.0 31.6 12A Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s} 0.0 2.0 31.6 12.1 Approach LOS D B Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.0% Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way ICU Level of Service E 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2533: SW 312 St & 10 PI SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR W BL W BT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 2% -1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 526 10 6 639 2 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 526 10 6 639 2 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Nona Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 546 1202 551 vC1, stage 1 conf Vol vC2, `stage 2 conf Vol vCu, unblocked Vol 546 1202 551 t5, Single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (S) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 99 cNl capacity (veh/h) 1015 199 525 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB i NB 1 Volume Total 536 645 5 Volume Left 0 6 2 Volume Right 10 0 3 cSH 1700 1015 318 Volume to Capacity 0.32 0.01 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.2 16.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.2 16.5 Approach LDS C Intamection. Sum..ma Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2535: SW 312 St & 8 Av SW Movement Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --,, *-- EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR 4 Free Free 2% -2% 17 407 13 40 619 32 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 17 407 13 40 619 32 10 10 12.0 12.0 4.0 4.0 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 661 430 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 661 430 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 920 1120 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 437 691 24 50 Volume Left 17 40 6 17 Volume Right 13 32 16 27 cSH 920 1120 292 238 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 3 7 19 Control Delay (s) 0:6 0:9 18.4 24.1 Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay ,(s�) 0 6 0.9, 18.4 24.1 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.3% Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way t /0' ",,- ♦ 4/ NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 4� 41� Stop Stop 2% 2% 6 2 16 17 6 27 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 2 16 17 6 27 10 10 12.0 12:0 4.0 4.0 1 1 None None 1212 1198 434 1200 1189 655 1.212 1198 434 1200 1189 655 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 31 96 99 97 88 97 94 135 172 612 146 175 458 ICU Level of Service C 5/23/2007 2542: S 312 St & 4 Av S Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WEL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ t Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 8% -6% 0% Volume (veh/h) 715 10 28 1005 11 16 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 715 10 28 1005 11 16 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median -type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1307 pX, platoon unblocked 0.88 0.88 0.88 vC, conflicting volume 735 1801 740 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 730 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1071 vCu, unblocked vol 699 1911 704 tC, single (s 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s)� 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 94 96 cM-capacity (veh,/h) 783 194 378 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 N13 1 Volume Total 725 28 1005 27 Volume Left 0 28 0 11 Volume Right 10 0 0 1.6 cSH 1700 783 1700 273 Volume to Capacity 0.43 004 0.59 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 3 0 8 Control Delay (s) 0.0 9.8 0.0 19.7 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0,3 10 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.4°Io Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way ICU Level of Service C 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2551: S 312 St & 18 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --v 41 t /0 ► Movement ESL, EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T+ tT *T r 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 5% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 39 533 132 19 573 54 72 13 29 32 17 63 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 39 533 132 19 573 54 72 13 29 32 17 63 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 631 659 pX, platoon unblocked 0.98 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 637 675 1093 1362 352 1038 1401 334 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 687 687 648 648 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 406 675 390 753 vCu, unblocked vol 609 563 962 1250 213 903 1292 299 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6:5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (-s)-, 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4:0 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 98 74 95 96 89 93 91 cM capacity-(veh/h) 938 919 272 259 718 303 254 672 Direction, lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 39 355 310 19 382 245 85 29 112 Volume Left 39 0 0 19 0 0 72 0 32 Volume Right 0 0 132 0 0 54 0 29 63 cSH 938 1700 1700 919 1700 1700 270 718 421 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.21 0.18 0.02 0.22 0.14 0.31 0.04 0.27 Queue Length 951h (ft) 3 0 0 2 0 0 33 3 26 Control Delay (s) 9.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 0.0 24.3 10.2 16.6 Lane LOS A A C B C Approach Delay (s) 0.5 0.3 20.7 16.6 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min} 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2612: SW Dash Point Rd & 47 Av SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -5% 6% -2% Volume (veh/h) 104 123 71 157 212 45 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 104 123 71 157 212 45 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 237 484 186 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 237 484 186 tC, single (s)4,, 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF'(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 58 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 1319 504 843 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB t Volume Total 227 228 257 Volume Left 0 71 212 Volume Right 123 0 45 cSH 1700 1319 542 Volume to Capacity 0.13 0:05 0.47 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 4 63 Control Delay (s) 0.0 2 8 17.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 2:8 17.5 Approach LOS C lnteri n.5urnM _ _:. , Average Delay 7.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.99/6 ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 2725: SW Dash Point Rd & 26 PI SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WDL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -6% -6% -15% Volume (veh/h) 151 2 59 237 6 27 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 151 2 59 237 6 27 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1284 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 163 527 172 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 163 527 172 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF`(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 99 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 1404 484 858 Direction, Lane # EB 1 W B 1 NB 1 Volume Total 153 296 33 Volume Left 0 59 6 Volume Right 2 0 27 cSH 1700 1404 752 Volume to Capacity 0.09 &04 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 3 3 Control° -Delay (s) 0.0 1:8 10-0 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.8 10:0 Approach LOS B Intersection Surnmary - Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity"Utilization 44.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 2846: S 317 St & 8 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT E13R WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SSL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 41� Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 12 6 24 19 8 2 14 111 22 3 108 33 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 12 6 24 19 8 2 14 111 22 3 108 33 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width .(ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 803 pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 306 312 144 328 317 142 151 143 vCi , stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 306 312 144 328 317 142 151 143 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6:5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 99 97 97 99 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 614 586 888 581 582 891 1418 1428 Directions, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 42 29 147 144 Volume Left 12 19 14 3 Volume Right 24 2 22 33 cSH 739 596 1418 1428 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0,05 0.01 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 4 1 0 Control Delay (s) 10.2 11.4 0:8 0.2 Lane LDS B B A A Approach Delay (s) 10.2 11-.4 0.8 0.2 Approach LOS B B Intp(s,ectionSummary Average Delay 2.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 3015: SW 320 St & 42 Av SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT W8T WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t1-1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 2% 0% Volume (veh/h) 36 367 770 57 35 29 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 36 367 770 57 35 29 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 31'0 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 837 1074 434 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 808 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 266 vCu, unblocked vol 837 1074 434 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 89 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 786 312 561 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 W$ 2 SB 1 Volume Total 36 184 184 513 314 64 Volume Left 36 0 0 0 0 35 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 57 29 cSH 786 1700 1700 1700 1700 391 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.11 0.11 0.30 0.18 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 14 Control Delay (s) 9.8 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 16:0 Lane LOS A C Approach belay (s) 0.9 0.0 16.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capad -Utilization 45.0% ICU Leve[of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3022: SW 320 St & 30 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t� Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -3% -2% Volume (veh/h) 19 564 1135 85 41 15 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 19 564 1135 85 41 15 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1187 pX, platoon unblocked 0.98 0.98 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 1230 1518 630 vC1, stage 1 conf vol VC2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol 1215 1508 603- tC, sing(e�(s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF'(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 61 96 cM:capacity(veh/h) 554 104 427 Direction,, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 E13 3 W B 1 W8 2 SB 1 Volume Total 19 282 282 757 463 56 Volume Left 19 0 0 0 0 41 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 85 15 cSH 554 1700 1700 1700 1700 130 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.45 0.27 0.43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 47 Control Delay (s) 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 52.0 Lane LOS B F Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 52.0 Approach LOS F tnteri ivii=Sumiria Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3031: SW 320 St & 14 Wy SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WST WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 2% Volume (veh/h) 32 975 1598 28 15 24 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 32 975 1598 28 15 24 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1636 2184 833 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1622 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 562 vCu, unblocked vol 1636 2184 833 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3 3 p0 queue free % 92 87 92 cM capacity (veh/h) 389 143 307 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 32 488 488 1065 561 39 Volume Left 32 0 0 0 0 15 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 28 24 cSH 389 1700 1700 1700 1700 185 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.63 0.33 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 0 0 0 0 19 Contro[Delay (s) 15.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.6 Lane LOS C ❑ Approachh-Delay (s) O:5 0.0 29.6 Approach LOS D Intersection Surnma Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3032: SW 320 St & 13 PI SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --I,. Movement EBT EBR WBL WST NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt. tt Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1% -1% 2% Volume (veh/h) 868 11 93 1648 4 62 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 868 11 93 1648 4 62 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4,0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 889 1904 460 vC1, stage 1 conf Vol 884 vC2, stage 2 cont Vol 1020 vCu, unblocked Vol 889 1904 460 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 1 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 88 98 89 cM capacity (veh/h) 752 164 539 Direction. Lane # EB 1 EB 2 W B 1 W 8 2 W B 3 NB 1 Volume Total 579 300 93 824 824 66 Volume Left 0 0 93 0 0 4 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 0 62 cSH 1700 1700 752 1700 1700 473 Volume to Capacity, 0.34 0.18 0.12 0.48 0.48 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 11 0 0 12 Control061ay-(s) 0.0 0.0 10.5 0.0 0.0 13.8 Lane LOS B B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.6 13.8 Approach LOS B [ntersection Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity`Utilization 61.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3033: SW 320 St & 11 PI SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tT, tt Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -1 % -13% Volume (veh/h) 2 0 0 5 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 0 0 5 0 0 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 12 24 21 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 12 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 12 vCu, unblocked vol 12 24 21 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 33 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1592 900 1034 Direction, Lane # EB.1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 1 1 0 2 2 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.100 0,00 0:00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0:0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary. Average Delay 0.0 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3034: SW 320 St & 10 PI SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt n Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% -1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 39 1380 1569 54 31 196 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 39 1380 1569 54 31 196 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked v,C, conflicting volume 1633 2384 832 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1606 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 778 vCu, unblocked vol 1633 2384 832 tC, single.(s) 4.1 6 8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 71 36 cM; capacity (veh/h) 390 1.06 307 Direction. Lane 4 EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 39 690 690 1046 577 227 Volume Left 39 ❑ 0 0 0 31 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 54 196 cSH 390 1700 1700 1700 1700 244 Volume to Capacity 0.10 0.41 0.41 0.62 0.34 0.93 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 0 0 0 0 206 Control Delay (s) 15,3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 84.3 Lane LDS C F Approach Delay (s) 0:4 0.0 84.3 Approach LOS F n#eseet on -Summary Average Delay 6.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3036: SW 320 St & 7 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement .-A EBL --1' EST 4--- WBT WBR SOL SBR Lane Configurations tt tT+ Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 1% Volume (veh/h) 5 842 1445 30 13 5 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 842 1445 30 13 5 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1485 1911 758 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1470 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 441 vCu, unblocked vol 1485 1911 758 tC, single (s) 4.1 6;8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 8.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 91 99 cm capacity (vehlh) 445 1'42 344 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB. 2 SB 1 Volume Total 5 421 421 963 512 18 Volume Left 5 0 0 0 0 13 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 30 5 cSH 445 1700 1700 1700 1700 169 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.57 0.30 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 0 0 9 Control Delay (s) 13:2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.8 Lane LOS B D Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 28.8 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary._ Average Delay 0.2 Int6r§Ocf on Capacity Utilization 55.4% ICUFLevel of=Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3037: SW 320 St & 6 PI SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --* fe Moverneni EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 0 tt if Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -2% 2% -1% Volume (veh/h) 1030 23 98 1651 16 69 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1030 23 98 1651 16 69 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12:0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1063 2083 546 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1052 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1032 vCu, unblocked vol 1063 2083 546 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 85 89 85 cM capacity (veh/h) 646 143 473 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 687 366 98 826 826 85 Volume Left 0 0 98 0 0 16 Volume Right 0 23 0 0 0 69 cSH 1700 1700 646 1700 1700 583 Volume to Capacity 0.40 0.22 0.15 0.49 0.49 0.15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 13 0 0 13 Control Delay (s) 010 0.0 11.6 0.0 0.0 17.6 Lane LOS B C Approach Dela-y:(s) 0.4 0.6 1,7.6 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.9 Intersection Capacitj Utilization 60.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3043: S 320 St & 5 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations ttT +tt r Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -2% 2% Volume (veh/h) 1525 24 126 2116 10 88 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1525 24 126 2116 10 88 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1157 pX, platoon unblocked 0.66 vC, conflicting volume 1559 2514 540 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1547 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 967 vCu, unblocked vol 1559 2260 540 tC, single (s) 4:1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 70 91 82 cM capacity (veh/h) 417 114 478 Direction, Lane# EB 1 E13 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB 4 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 610 610 329 126 705 705 705 10 88 Volume Left 0 0 0 126 0 0 0 10 0 Volume Right 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 88 cSH 1700 1700 1700 417 1700 1700 1700 114 478 Volume to Capacity 0.36 0.36 0.19 0.30 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.09 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 7 17 Control Delay-(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.7 14.2 Lane LOS C E B Approach belay (5) 0.0 1.0 16�8 Approach LOS C Intersection Surnmary Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3053: S 320 St & 21 PI S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---* 4--- t /&� \*� 1 4/ Movement EEL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NST NBR SSL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +t'+ �) W� r r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 5% 2% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 34 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 34 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 0 0 Upstream signal (ft) 641 567 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 32 34 45 66 11 43 66 11 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 34 34 32 32 vC2, stage 2 corif vol 11 32 11 34 vCu, unblocked vol 32 34 45 66 11 43 66 11 tC, sing Ie:(s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3:5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 6M�capacity (veWfi) 1579 1576 659 575 1066 661 575 1068 Direction, Lane # LB 1 FB 2 EB 3 EB 4 VVB 1 VVB 2 WS 3 WB 4 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 0 14 14 7 0 13 13 6 0 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0:01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ao Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 A ch LnS A A pproa Intersection Summar Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3119: SW 320 St & 36 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---► 4--- Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt +T Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -5% 5% -5% Volume (veh/h) 3 440 855 66 50 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 440 855 66 50 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 931 1134 480 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 898 VC2, stage 2 conf vol 236 vCu, unblocked vol 931 1134 480 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6:9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 33 p0 queue free % 100 83 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 725 292 523 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SS 1 Volume Total 3 220 220 570 351 53 Volume Left 3 0 0 0 0 50 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 66 3 cSH 725 1700 1700 1700 1700 300 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.34 0.21 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 16 Control delay (s) 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.6 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 19.6 Approach LOS C Intersection Sum ma : - Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 3120: SW 320 St & SW 323 St Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT EBR Wi3L WBT NWL NWR Lane Configurations tT, Vi tt Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 1 % -4% -4% Volume (veh/h) 459 13 109 882 13 62 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 459 13 109 882 13 62 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 482 1144 256 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 476 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 669 vCu, unblocked vol 482 1144 256 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 96 92 cM capacity (veh/h) 1068 298 731 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NW 1 Volume Total 306 166 109 441 441 75 Volume Left 0 0 109 0 0 13 Volume Right 0 13 0 0 0 62 cSH 1700 1700 1068 1700 1700 584 Volume to Capacity 0.18 0.10 0.10 0.26 0-26 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 9 0 0 11 Control Delay, (s) 0.0 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 12.1 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay, (s) 0.0 1.0 12.1 A roach LOS B I'll Intersection Summa Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.4% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 0 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3128: S 323 St & 21 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movernent EBL EBT ESR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT Ni3R SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4+ 0 1 tT Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 10 0 18 0 0 0 30 507 1 0 508 18 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 10 0 18 0 0 0 30 507 1 0 508 18 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12:0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1042 814 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 850 1105 283 860 1114 274 536 518 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 527 527 578 578 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 324 578 282 536 vCu, unblocked vol 850 1105 283 860 1114 274 536 518 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7:5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4:0 3.3 2.2 ? p0 queue free % 97 100 97 100 100 100 97 100 cM-capacity (veh/h) 362 319 702 342 311 712 1020 1035 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 28 0 30 338 170 0 339 187 Volume Left 10 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 18 cSH 526 1700 1020 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.20 0.10 0,00 0.20 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 12.2 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A A Approach Delay (s) 12.2 0.0 0.5 0.0 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3213: Hot Rd SW & SW 325 Wy } HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis �l #� X-, 1 --A Movement SBL SBR NWL NWR NEL NER Lane Configurations Y Y Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 499 91 26 346 48 19 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 499 91 26 346 48 19 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 600 962 564 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 600 962 564 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) ' 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 82 96 cM,capacity (veh/h) 969 272 516 Direction,, Lane.•# SB 1 IOW 1 NE 1 - Volume Total 590 372 67 Volume Left 0 26 48 Volume Right 91 0 19 cSH 1700 969 314 Volume to Capacity 0.35 0.03 0:21 Queue Length 951h (ft) 0 2 20 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.9 19.6 Lane LDS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.9 19:6 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capaciky:Ut lizatl0d 76-4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3261: S 323 St & Weyerhaeuser Wy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---* ";il, t d Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations t t if Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -5% 1 % -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 48 6 372 299 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 48 6 372 299 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal'(ft) 1048 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 703 319 312 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 703 319 312 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 93 100 cM capacity ,(veh/h) 396 710 1238 Direction, Lane # EB 1 ES 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 0 48 6 372 299 3 Volume Left 0 0 6 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 48 0 0 0 3 cSH 1700 710 1238 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0:00 0.07 0.00 022 0.18 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 5 0 0 0 0 Controi:Delay (s} 0b 10.4 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A B A Approaeh00ay ls) 10A 0.1 0.0 Approach LOS B lnterseetion Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3414: SW 326 St & Hot Rd SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement WBL WBR SEL SET NWT NWR Lane Configurations I r 4 T Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -2% 0% -1 % Volume (veh/h) 53 19 96 410 388 93 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 19 96 410 388 93 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12:0 12.0 Walking Speed (f /s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) 2 Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1056 454 491 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1056 454 491 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF'(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 76 97 91 cM<capacity;(veh/h) 223 596 1063 Direction. Lane_ # WB 1 SE 1 NW 1 Volume Total 72 506 481 Volume Left 53. 96 0 Volume Right 19 0 93 cSH 303 1063 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.09 0.28 Queue Length 95th (ft) 23 7 0 Control Delay (s) 222 2.5 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 22.2 2.5 0.0 Approach LOS C lnter5ecfion: Summary Average Delay 2.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3451 : S 324 St & 17 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement E8L EBT EBR WBL W6T WEIR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T'+ *TtT r r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 2% -1 % -1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 0 507 72 156 530 15 0 0 212 0 0 126 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 507 72 156 530 15 0 0 212 0 0 126 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 - 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 383 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 555 589 1178 1420 310 1335 1448 204 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 555 589 1178 1420 310 1335 1448 204 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.? 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 84 100 100 69 100 100 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 1003 974 105 112 675 65 108 789 Direction, Lane # ES 1 E8 2 W B 1 W B 2 W B 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 338 Ni 288 265 148 212 126 Volume Left 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 72 0 0 15 212 126 cSH 1700 1700 974 1700 1700 675 789 Volume to Capacity 0.20 6.14 0.16 0`.16 0.09 0.31 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 14 0 0 34 14 Control Delay (s) 010 0. 5:8 0 0 0.0 12.8 10.4 Lane LOS A B B Approach Delay,(s) O.q 2.4 12.8 10.4 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary -' Average Delay 3.5 Intersection Capacity'Utilizatbn 38.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3514: SW 329 Wy & Hoyt Rd SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4N t 1 Movement FBL FBR NBL N81' SET SBR Lane Configurations Y 4 1� Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 8% -2% 1 % Volume (veh/h) 41 29 38 341 438 124 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 41 29 38 341 438 124 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 937 520 572 vC1, stage 1 conf vol v62, stage 2 confwol vCu, unblocked vol 937 520 572 tC, single.(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 85 95 96 OM capacifylveh/h)' 277 545 992 Direction, Lane.# EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 70 379 552 Volume Left 41 38 0 Volume Right 29 0 124 cSH 348 992 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.04 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 19 3 0 Control Delay (s) 17.9 1.3 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 17.9 1.3 0.0 Approach LOS C interseefion Summary _ — --- Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3550: S 328 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4\ T Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations ttt tt� Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 .90 0 1669 1880 74 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 90 0 1669 1880 74 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 641 pX, platoon unblocked 0.85 vC, conflicting volume 2493 684 1964 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1927 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 566 vCu, unblocked vol 2405 684 1964 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 77 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 84 385 290 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 90 556 556 556 752 752 450 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 90 0 0 0 0 0 74 cSH 385 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.23 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.44 0.26 Queue Length 95th (ft) 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.2 0.0 0:0 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 Lane LOS C Approach Delay (s) 17.2 O.Q 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3628: SW 330 St & 21 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4--- .4\ t /0� \ 'i 4/ --p. 'r Movernen, FBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +1 1 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 1 % 3% Volume (veh/h) 29 2 39 36 1 10 71 935 53 13 1056 64 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 29 2 39 36 1 10 71 935 53 13 1056 64 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1131 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1754 2264 580 1718 2270 514 1130 998 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1124 1124 1114 1114 vC2, stage 2 eonf •vol 630 1140 604 1156 vcu, unblocked vol 1754 2264 580 1718 2270 514 1130 998 tC, single (s) 7:5 6:5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 IC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 IF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3:5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 79 98 91 72 99 98 88 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 141 128 450 131 114 497 609 683 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 70 47 71 623 365 13 704 416 Volume Left 29 36 71 0 0 13 0 0 Volume Right 39 10 0 0 53 0 0 64 cSH 228 154 609 1700 1700 683 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.31 0.30 0.12 0.37 0.21 0.02 0.41 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 31 30 10 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 27.7 38.2 11.7 0.0 0.0 10.4 0.0 0.0 Lane LQS D E B B Approach Delay (s) 27.7 38.2 0.8 0.1 Approach LOS D E Intersection Summary Average Delay 2-a Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 3637: SW 330 St & 6 PI SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---► f- 4--- 4.- 4\ I * # 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT S B R Lane Configurations T+ T 41 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 13% -2% -1 % 0% Volume (veh/h) 27 260 39 17 409 27 3 5 28 21 2 22 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 260 39 17 409 27 3 5 28 21 2 22 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL i"WL FL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 446 309 820 824 300 821 830 442 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 344 344 466 466 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 476 480 354 363 vCu, unblocked vol 446 309 820 824 300 821 830 442 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.6 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 99 99 99 96 95 99 96 CM capacity (veh/h) 1105 1241 379 387 728 384 391 605 Direction, lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 27 299 17 436 36 45 Volume Left 27 0 17 0 3 21 Volume Right 0 39 0 27 28 22 cSH 1105 1700 1241 1700 607 468 Volume to;,Capacity 0.02 0.18 0.01 0.26 0.06 6.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 1 0 5 8 Control Delay (s) 8.3 0.0 7.9 0.0 11.3 18.5 Lane LOS A A B B Approach Delay (s) 0.7 0.3 11.3 13.8 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3638: SW 330 St & 3 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NB.T NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T 1� Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -4% -2% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 4 325 5 56 645 41 9 6 40 28 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 4 325 5 56 645 41 9 6 40 28 0 3 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1031 pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 vC, conflicting volume 696 340 1116 1154 348 1174 1136 686 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 346 346 788 788 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 770 808 386 348 vCu, unblocked vol 679 340 1122 1162 348 1183 1143 668 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 15 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 95 97 98 94 89 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 859 1209 273 276 684 251 278 427 Direction, Lane# EB f EB 2 WB 1 WI3 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 4 330 56 686 55 31 Volume Left 4 0 56 0 9 28 Volume Right 0 5 0 41 40 3 cSH 859 1700 1209 1700 486 261 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.19 0.05 0.40 0.11 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 4 0 10 10 Control Delay (s) 9.2 0.0 8.i 0.0 13.4 20:6 Lane LOS A A B C Approach Delay (s) 0A 0;6 13.4 20.6 Approach LOS B C Intersecfion Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity -Utilization 61.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3715: SW 331 PI & Hoyt Rd SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ,- t /,P. "P. MoveMen; WBL WBR NLT NSR SBL SBA Lane Configurations ►fir 1, +' Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -11 % -3% 1 % Volume (veh/h) 0 0 495 2 3 540 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 495 2 3 540 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1062 516 507 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1062 516 507 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 244 551 1049 Direction, Lane 4 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 0 497 543 Volume Left 0 0 3 Volume Right 0 2 0 cSH 1700 1700 1049 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.29 &00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 Lane LDS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 Approach LDS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection CapacitiWtilizatio'n 45.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3744: 8 Av S & S 333 St HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movernent NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT Lane Configurations; Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 103 11 5 77 46 9 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 103 11 5 77 46 9 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 164 64 92 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 164 64 92 tC, single (s) 6.4 &2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 87 99 97 PM capacity (veh/h) 787 984 1490 ❑irection, Lane # NW 1 NE 1 SW 1 Volume Total 114 82 55 Volume Left 103 0 46 Volume Right 11 77 0 cSH 803 1700 1490 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.05 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 12 0 2 Control Delay (s) 10.2 0.0 6.3 Lane LDS B A Approach Delay (s) 10. 0.0 6.3 Approach LOS B Intersection -Summary -=- - - - Average Delay 6.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3750: S 332 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis -.* t Movement ESL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r ti ttt ttT Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 2% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 70 146 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 70 146 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 680 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 169 49 146 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 169 49 146 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 804 1010 1434 Direction. Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 0 23 23 23 58 58 29 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delays) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary - - Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.5% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way A 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3850: S 333 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations r ttIT., Di ttt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -2% 2% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 14 1603 9 0 3237 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 14 1603 9 0 3237 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 890 1110 pX, platoon unblocked 0.82 0.82 0.82 vC, conflicting volume 2706 559 1622 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1618 vC2, stage 2 conf vdl 1089 vCu, unblocked vol 2641 15 1315 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 98 100 cM capacity (yoh/h). 105 853 423 Direction., Lane.# WB 1 Ns'1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 SB 4 Volume Total 14 641 641 330 0 1079 1079 1079 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Flight 14 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 cSH 853 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to.Capacity-- _ 0.02 0.08 0.38 0.19 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.63 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ Control -Delay (s) 9.3 0.0 0:0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach,Delay (s) 9.3 0.0 00 Approach LOS A intersection Sumrsl3 Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.0% ICU: Level,of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3934: SW 334 St & 10 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBR NBL t NBT i SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y t T Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade -8% 3% -2% Volume (veh/h) 39 38 53 270 498 79 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 39 38 53 270 498 79 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12:0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 934 558 587 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 548 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 386 vCu, unblocked vol 934 558 587 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 3:5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 90 93 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 403 521 980 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 77 53 270 577 Volume Left 39 53 0 0 Volume Right 38 0 0 79 cSH 454 980 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.05 0.16 0.34 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 4 0 0 Control Delay (s) 14.5 8.9 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 14.5 1.5 0.0 Approach LOS B -Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.3% ICU'Leve[of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 3942: 1 Wv S & S 334 St HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis # f k *--* Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET `NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 0 tT 4 4,- Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -1 % 0% -8% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1 1062 48 48 1512 0 46 0 33 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 1062 48 48 1512 0 46 0 33 0 0 0 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent'Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 0 0 Upstream signal (ft) 358 768 pX, platoon unblocked 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 vC, conflicting volume 1522 1120 1960 2716 575 2194 2740 776 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1098 1098 1618 1618 v1U, stage 2 conf vol 862 1618 576 1122 vCu, unblocked vol 1522 1089 1959 2741 525 2201 2766 776 tC, single�(s)' 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 &9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s), 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4:0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 92 53 100 93 100 100 100 c1Vl`capacity ('veh/h) 431 610 98 71 473 58 66 334 Direction, Lane.# SE 1. SE 2 SE 3 NW 1 NW 2 NW 3 NE -I SW 1 Volume Total 1 708 402 48 1008 504 79 0 Volume Left 1 0 0 48 0 0 46 0 Volume Right 0 0 48 0 0 0 33 0 cSH 431 1700 1700 610 1700 1700 146 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.42 0.24 0.08 0.59 0.30 0.54 U0 Queue Length 95th (h) 0 0 0 6 0 0 67 0 Control Delay (s) 13.4 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 0.0 55.2 0.0 Lane LOS B B F A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.4 55.2 0.0 Approach LOS F A Intersection Summary - - Average Delay 1.8 Inte[5e6ii6n Capacity Utilization 58.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 3946: 9 Av S & 8 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis t i 1j *--* Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations 'fir Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 74 261 305 85 109 258 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 74 261 305 85 109 258 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 654 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 400 776 368 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 358 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 419 vCu, unblocked vol 400 776 368 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 2.2 & 5 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 76 61 cMcapacity (veh/h) 1149 452 667 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SE 1 Volume Total 74 261 390 367 Volume Left 74 0 0 109 Volume Right 0 0 85 258 cSH 1149 1700 1700 584 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.15 0.23 0.63 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 109 Control Delay (s) 8.3 0,.0 0.0 21.0 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 1.8 0.0 21.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 7.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4049: S 336 St & 13 PI S Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis __a. ■-- 4/ Movement EBL EBT W BT W BR SBL SER Lane Configurations +'T 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 2% -4% 0% Volume (veh/h) 19 1166 1047 26 37 32 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 19 1166 1047 26 37 32 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh)' Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 815 pX, platoon unblocked 0.98 0.98 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 1083 1701 556 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1064 1695 526 IC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6:9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 53 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 632 78 478 Direction. Lane 4 EB 'i E6 2 W B f W B 2 SB 1 Volume Total 408 777 698 375 69 Volume Left 19 0 0 0 37 Volume Right 0 0 0 26 32 cSH 632 1700 1700 1700 128 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.46 0.41 0.22 0.54 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 0 65 Control Delay (s) 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 62.2 Lane LOS A F Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 62.2 A roach LQS F pP Intersection Summa Average Delay 2.0 IntersectiomCapacity Utilization 61.0% tCU,Level of Service B. Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4124: SW 337 St & SW 336 Wy Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis *_* x 1 A'* *11 f P", lt.. Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 4� +T 1 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade -2% 1 % -2% 3% Volume (veh/h) 26 2 5 2 3 19 6 751 3 21 1293 65 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 26 2 5 2 3 19 6 751 3 21 1293 65 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1796 2154 699 1479 2184 397 1368 764 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1378 1378 774 774 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 418 776 704 1410 vCu, unblocked vol 1796 2154 699 1479 2184 397 1368 764 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7:5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 78 99 99 99 98 97 99 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 118 139 376 200 134 592 494 838 Direction. Lane # SE 1 NW 1 NE 1 NE 2 NE 3 SW 1 SW 2 SW 3 Volume Total 33 24 6 501 253 21 862 496 Volume Left 26 2 6 0 0 21 0 0 Volume Right 5 19 0 0 3 0 0 65 cSH 133 372 494 1700 1700 838 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity' 0:25 0.06 0.01 0.29 0.15 0.,03 0.51 0.29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 23 5 1 0 0 2 0 0 Contro.l'Del�y (s) 40.6 15.3 12.4 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS E C B A Approach Qelay W 40.6 15.3 0.1 0.11 Approach LOS E C Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.9 Intersection_Capacity'Ufiiization 56.2% I00- Level of Service 13 Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4219: SW 340 St & 38 PI SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations I tt fl Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -2% 2% 0% Volume (veh/h) 48 581 861 51 12 27 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (yph) 48 581 861 51 12 27 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 293 1083 pX, platoon unblocked 0.98 0.96 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 922 1293 476 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 896 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 396 vCu, unblocked vol 895 1188 438 tC, single,(,) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s' 2.2 3.i5 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 96 95 eM capacity�(veh/h) 729 273 544 Direction, Lane 4 EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 W B 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 48 290 290 574 338 39 Volume Left 48 0 0 0 0 12 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 51 27 cSH 729 1700 1700 1700 1700 417 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.34 0.20 0.09 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 8 Control Delay (s) 10.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 Lane LOS B B Approach Delay (s) 0.8 0.0 14.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary - - Average Delay 0.7 In"ter�action capacity Utilization 47.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/29/2007 Horizon with 4222: SW 340 St & 30 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBT FBR W6L WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations t1l ►� tt Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 5% -2% -8% Volume (veh/h) 729 2 42 1188 4 29 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 729 2 42 1188 4 29 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1275 pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 741 1428 386 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 740 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 688 vCu, unblocked vol 741 1428 386 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 98 95 cM.capacity (veh/h) 854 252� 603 Direction, Lane # EB 1 ErB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 486 245 42 594 594 33 Volume Left 0 0 42 0 0 4 Volume Right . 0 2 0 0 0 29 cSH 1700 1700 854 1700 1700 516 Volume to Capacity 0.29 0.14 0.05 0.35 0.35 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 4 0 0 5 Cont�q[Q6lay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.4 0;0 0.0 12.5 Lane LOS A B Approach, -Delay (s) 0.0 0.3 12.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summa Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity'Utilization 47.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 4223: SW 340 PI & SW 336 Wy HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement NWL NWR NET NER SVVL SVVT Lane Configurations Y tT-1 tt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% -2% -2% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 1 0 0 5 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 1 0 0 5 Pedestrians 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 14 20 11 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 11 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 2 vCu, unblocked vol 14 20 11 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.6 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 913 1035 1593 Direction. Lane # NW 1 NE 1 NE 2 SW 1 SW 2 SW 3 Volume Total 0 1 0 0 2 2 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LDS A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary- - Average Delay 0.0 Intersection�Capacity Utilization 1=7.8% 1C, U,Level of°Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4235: SW Campus Dr & 7 Wy SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement ; BL EBT W BT W BR SBL SBR Lane Configurations I tt TT Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 1 % -2% Volume (veh/h) 15 961 1888 91 42 12 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 15 961 1888 91 42 12 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1989 2464 1010 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1944 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 520 vCu, unblocked vol 1989 2464 1010 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 48 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 283 80 234 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 W B 1 W B 2 SB i Volume Total 15 480 480 1259 720 Volume Left 15 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 91 cSH 283 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.28 0.28 0.74 0.42 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69:6% Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 54 42 12 94 0.58 66 86.1 F 86.1 F ICU Level of Service C 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4242: 1 WX S & S 340 St / HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement NBL NBR SEL SER SWL SWR Lane Configurations rr r )Y Sign Control Free Stop Free Grade 3% -1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 21 651 23 29 1214 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 21 651 23 29 1214 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) 2 Median type Raised Median storage veh) 0 Upstream signal (ft) 1169 pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 0.92 0.92 vC, conflicting volume 1317 1648 674 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1270 vC2, stage 2 conf Vol, 378 vCu, unblocked vol 1261 1619 564 to, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 83 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 501 133 426 93 1.00 93 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SE 1 SW 1 SW 2 Volume Total 21 326 326 52 809 498 Volume Left 21 0 0 23 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 29 0 93 cSH 501 1700 1700 300 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.48 0.29 Queue Length 95th (tt) 3 0 0 15 0 0 Control Delay (s) 12.5 0.0 0.0 24.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LQS B C Approach Delay (s) 0.4 24.5 0.0 Approach LDS C Intersection Summary. Average Delay 0.8 Intern 6 tion Capacity Utilization 62.50/6 ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/29/2007 4328: SW 342 St & 21 Av SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4 I i 41 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y tt ti� Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 2% 0% Volume (veh/h) 15 12 17 901 996 42 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 15 12 17 901 996 42 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 817 pX, platoon unblocked 1.00 VC, conflicting volume 1522 539 1048 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1027 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 494 vCu, unblocked vol 1519 539 1048 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4A tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 93 97 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 222 479 654 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB Z NB 3 SB 1 S8 2 Volume Total 27 17 450 450 664 374 Volume Left 15 17 0 0 0 0 V06 e,Riglit 12 0 0 0 0 42 cSH 291 654 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to.Capacity 009 0.03 0.27 0.27 0.39 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 2 0 0 0 0 Coritrol"Delay,(s) 18.6 10.6 0:0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C B Approach Delay;(s) 181.6 0,2 0.0 Approach LOS C intersection SurnmaFy Average Delay 0.3 Intersecti©6 Capacity Utilization 43.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4341 : 1 Wy S & S 342 St HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EDT EBR W BL W BT NW L N W R Lane Configurations tT+ tt Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 3% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 601 77 87 1003 59 63 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 601 77 87 1003 59 63 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12,.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 0 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 6& 1335 359 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 650 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 686 vCu, unblocked vol 688 1335 359 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 70 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 804 194 627 Direction, Lane 4 EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NW 1 NW 2 Volume Total 401 277 87 502 502 59 63 Volume Left 0 0 87 0 0 59 0 Volume Right 0 77 0 0 0 0 63 cSH 1700 1700 894 1700 1700 194 627 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.16 0.10 0.29 0.29 0.30 0A 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 8 0 0 31 8 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 31.4 11.4 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 D.8 21.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Summa Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 4420: SW 342 St & 35 Av SW Horizon with HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis --,* 4\ t 4-1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y 4 1 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 1 % -1 % 2% Volume (veh/h) 51 37 90 94 46 36 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 51 37 90 94 46 36 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 659 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 358 84 92 VC-1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 358 84 92 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 91 96 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 592 959 1490 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB f Volume Total 88 184 82 Volume Left 51 90 0 Volume Right 37 0 36 cSH 705 1490 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.12 0.06 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 11 5 0 Control Delay (s) 10t8 410 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 10.8 4:0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4441: 1 W S & 1 PIS HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement u EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt 0 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% -7% Volume (veh/h) 70 651 1411 361 23 44 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 70 651 1411 361 23 44 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (eft) 1029 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1782 2077 906 vC1, stage 1 conf Vol 1602 vC2, stage 2 conf Vol:, 476 vCu, unblocked Vol 1782 2077 906 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3:5 3.3 p0 queue free % 79 80 84 cM capacity, (yeh/h) 341 115 275 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 W B 1 W B 2 SB 1 Volume Total 70 326 326 941 831 67 Volume left 70 0 0 0 0 23 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 361 44 cS H 341 1700 1700 1700 1700 186 Volume to Capacity 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.55 0.49 0.36 Queue Length 951h (ft) 19 0 0 0 0 38 Control Delay (s) 18.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.8 Lane LOS C D Approach Delay (s) 1.8 0-0 34.8 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.4 Intersection Capacity Uiilization 73.6% ICU Level of Servic-e Q Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 4546: S 344 St & 9 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f- IL- t /00. 140. i Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations ►fir T+ + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 2% 4% -2% Volume (veh/h) 38 50 287 21 91 371 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 38 50 287 21 91 371 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 870 318 318 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 308 vC2, stage 2 conf, vol 563 vCu, unblocked vol 870 318 318 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 91 93 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 406 711 1232 Direction, Lane 4 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 88 308 91 371 Volume Left 38 0 91 0 Volume Right 50 21 0 0 cSH 537 1700 1232 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.16 0.18 0.07 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 0 6 0 Control Delap(s) _ 13.0 0.0 8.2 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 13.0 0.0 1.6 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.2 Interpection'Capacity'Qplization 41.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 7/12/2007 Horizon with 5229: SW 356 St & 20 Av SW HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis � 4r- *-- 4\ /01 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations +T& ++ Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade -2% -1°% 0°% Volume (veh/h) 734 58 74 1145 35 42 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flout rate (vph) 734 58 74 1145 35 42 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 330 pX, platoon unblocked VC, confl,icting volume 802 1504 416 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 773 vC2, stage 2, conf voF 730 vCu, unblocked vol 802 1504 416 tG, single.`(s,)' 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 85 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 810 230 576 Direction, Lane.# EB t. EB 2 WB 'I WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 489 303 74 572 572 77 Volume Left 0 0 74 0 0 35 Volume Right 0 58 0 ❑ 0 42 cSH 1700 1700 810 1700 1700 342 Volume to Capacity 0.29 0.18 0.09 0.34 0.34 0.23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 8 0 0 21 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.9 0A 0.0 18.6 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.6 18.6 Approach LOS C Intersectton Summary - Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.4°% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 Horizon with 5231: SW 356 St & 13 Wy SW HCM Unsignalizedd Intersection Capacity Analysis Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT 1NSR- N13L NST NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T+ ti� 4 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade -2% 0% 1 % -1 % Volume (veh/h) 43 711 9 10 1267 53 6 0 3 45 0 22 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 43 711 9 10 1267 53 6 0 3 45 0 22 Pedestrians 10 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12-0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4-0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1330 730 1497 2162 380 1778 2140 680 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 812 812 1324 1324 vG2,.stage 2 conf vol 686 1350 454 816 vCu, unblocked vol 1330 730 1497 2162 380 1778 2140 680 tc, single (s) 4A 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 33 p0 queue free % 92 99 97 100 100 64 100 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 511 863 178 121 608 126 141 387 bit etion, Lane # Es 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total' 43 474 246, 46- 845 475 9 67 Volume Left 43 0 0 10 0 R 45 Volume Right 0 0 9 0 0 53 3 22 cSH 511 1700 1700 863 1700 1700 233 162 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.28 0.14 0.01 0.50 0.28 0.04 0,41 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 0 0 1 0 0 3 46 Control Delay (s) 12.7 0.0 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 21.1 42.1 Lane LOS B A C E Approach Relay (s) 0.7 0.1 21.1 42.1 Approach LOS C E Inl'ersectivn,Summa . , Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 6/26/2007 5345: S 359 St & Pacific Hwy S Horizon with HICM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis f- *-- * I Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y f T+ tt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 2% 3% -3% Volume (veh/h) 5 48 744 8 62 1288 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 48 744 8 62 1288 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 755 pX, platoon unblocked 0.76 vC, conflicting volume 1536 396 762 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1388 396 762 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 95 92 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 92 593 839 Direction, Lane # W8 1 Nl3 1 NB 2 SB 1 S8 2 SB 3 Volume Total 53 496 256 62 644 644 Volume Left 5 0 0 62 0 0 Volume Right 48 0 8 0 0 0 cSH 392 1700 1700 839 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.29 0.15 0.07 0.38 0.38 Queue Length 95th (ft) 12 0 0 6 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.6 0.0 0.0 9.6 0,0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 15.6 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary- - . Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 5450: S 359 St & 16 Av S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ---* --,, -,* 4-- t I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR S81- SBT S13R Right Turn Channelized Vdume :(ve'hih) 13 5 52 0 2 4 32 64 0 10 70 9 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow'rate>(Vph) 13 5 52 0 2 4 32 64 0 10 70 9 Approach Volume (veh/h) 70 6 96 89 Crossing Volume (veh/h) 80 109 28 34 High Capacity (veh/h) 1301 1272 1355 1348 High v/c jvefi/h) 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.07 Low Capacity (veh/h) 1085 1058 1134 1128 Low V/c `(0eh/h) 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.08 Intersection Summary Maximum v/c High 0.07 Maximum v/c Low 0.08 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.4% ICU Level of Service A Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way 5/23/2007 Horizon with 6340: S 373 St & Pacific Hwy S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4__ T /,,. Movement WBL WBR NOT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y +T +Tt Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 3% -2% 0% Volume (veh/h) 17 12 773 35 19 1278 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate (vph) 17 12 773 35 19 1278 Pedestrians 10 10 10 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12:0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1488 424 818 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf Vol. vCu, unblocked vol 1488 424 818 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 85 98 98 cM-capacity (veh/h) 110 569 799 Direction, Lane # WB 1 N8 1' NB 2 S81 SB 2 Volume Total 29 515 293 446 852 Volume Left 17 0 0 19 0 Volume Right 12 0 35 0 0 cSH 165 1700 1700 799 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.18 0.30 0.17 0.02 0.50 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 0 0 2 0 Control �Delay.(s) , 31.4 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 Lane LOS D A Approach Delay (s) 31.4 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Cedar Park at West Campus City of Federal Way Appendix C ■ Prorata Share (NJ N N O 10 m V O! 01 A W IN .p 1.10 'DD J Ol 01 P W N IC! Q D1 Vl m (n Cl) (n 0 0 (n (n CCCn ,m A ICA xl WG •m � + m (n W (q 2A (n m c) :� n C O' __ W N C W N W O W 01 .0 + (D < W N 'D (D D W A N ."L1 (p IN A O W W N W N Ot O W N N J A W '� '0) •t0 O G ,� C W O (D 'O W fW0 in .O In 'ID n (D a CD n m m O � ( m-0, s �n Dc, cn N•mm U D 0 ( CD (D co CD Er Er >D << CD m `fD m <y y m N v D o cn y Ol Dt y SCD CD m O CD m CD CD 0 � W ZOI a D < U! A cn W m � D rn A W N w 0 CD cn N J 0) m U) U O O A N N O n 3 � V m C� < (n 0 (n N O 0 m J O Z7 n w < CD n D 5 D �S �m D :� D a D D m D 3 m D D D m D D '�' D D a v .� iG a n y a n a 'y '6 a n a n n a a n g N a a y n (D a a �a •n a a I n a n a n (D ...� '� (n = 2 io ,y a Z J m W a m = a — a �2 = !2 y 0� 0 2 2 CD J > 0 r •O m m O p < •J J 'W �m J, 0 co CC m Ol CC p < N a m y' CP m 'p < m _ a (n o 0 C < O ,W < C, W acn m Ut W n iN :J O G m G m N N J (D a 01 J (n m O1 D 2 m D) d N.T1 J O1 J N O m G < O L iry C J fD y i0 ID C J O J. fD y (D C (D J. (D N .C.. W y p (D W y — (D x m y 3 01 N = IN 0) J. 3 N x C Cn J- J O J fD O >• y J U) m ^ N Cl) E J c/% J (D T. n y S n O ID) J (D 0• is W 3 .� + C W y N O O 01 J y Of J fD O O C 3 D= m N x a Z p a (D (n 0' J. 3 p N N N 'y O y D1 J w In m C y DI N Z C 3 CO Oa CO G (D J (D N N <m< ID J 0 Co CD CD(D � O a fT. �D/� (D m Dl .Y' n .Y' < W 01 N n G .» w fM p- a n N 30 cmc < m < N D1 d a ;P C N y C 3 0 C J CD a D1 N ID (D a ' S 'Dl .J (D � W N (3p a (�'i N N m N I < N m M. N W f! N 57 J m J Jt y N m ? J co J. N f, CID01 vi(D D. a * (p� ^ 0 y N W '_ I m W a O Z C (n m J m N W O O 3 3 C 7 O .d. 3In 3 O 3 co O N J O J •� y C C N J Gt (D D, N co Ol O j (D 3 G CD J CD N_ D N w N O J N N C N y p� d — N 0 n a m y = f a = � o 0 N n v(Di y C <z m m CD y CD J N 65, >: a m O m a 0 n x 3 D m In n 'm n 3 m 3 0 � m 0 J CD (o S vt ? FD a CD m o c A o w A �I •V1 + OI iU •A _ + + •W •W(J 1D j W �I + •W .[J •W .m -v -4 W W •v A O N O O W (D 0 I� 'J 0 iN 'O IN .J W v C •D 01 m A co N A (T (D W N ? W O •J m Dfl W -4 A O A •O m O m O (T O �• O O O•� K W W N A Vt C m O N N n N C.N (D IW G7 (00 O (AO A Opf N N f0 m A C. v CD A m w eCi 7 O N (T •O W � Z 1p O+ 0 7 O + W + + W N .A m a m 3 W D •� o w �rn a 'a m .�' c W fire �� » 'v. u9 •w .vi •ei m to (»(A �» 'w a N 0 W + N •A N (O O A A '0m + " 'CT O W (NJ O N .Oa (O N J --Iy R O bq fA 69 fA (A fA .FA 'fig fA fA fA fA EA iE9 •Vi •Yi •Ffl •fig E9 •69 'fig 169 cl, Co w 69 R C O O C W + N O CJl OD W(n A IN TN + A (O 01 O A 0) m O O 'W 'La i� W O IN A J co t0 v J IN 'O W 3 J 'O N (a -I 0 O W - (0 w y' N O y W W O O N W O 'O 'W O) N VI A W 00 0) 'W '01 •N A IN Ut -4 J G) -I (O �1 y9 EA Hi W fA .EA .W •69 fA (A fA .L9 •E9 'FA 'fH •Vi -CA £H Hn .fig fA .9 fA w fA O O W N a W + + O v + ae J O) OD V A + W A •fD m .A 'N W W 61 A W A + �1 O iW 'tD 'V7 'W •O A :N A W W (T VI W 0) W �1 N O W N W IN A W d) A Vt Ut OI co W J A G '0 7 0 w 0 t w �- V N _ ov a w N 4111- iP G �❑ 3 9 D 0 p •n (l i- is _ iD is N In I;/1 N fP •N N I%1 N 0 m A m N N N D D N n _ N � vl O � T Z :a :A c r{ �` .� N N N D I� :a IN D Im 'S 'D i� Vi N IDNUi •a '� + •� 0iv n �'^ a N E N 'a In = D 'o A y A N N a •� 1 19 r' !0 'N v 'PA a [ N •� In m Im In a In �p G SS 3 2 n 0 ;A 1'_' O � � 9i w � 0 in in a N G w a n N N 'B m �N m m '� m A A N !A .1 2 n N ± � D N * :� D In '� _ Vl a n �l .N < 'n :� •S n _ 0 N +o N - 'N w N_ �A � ;°a Ic 3 Ip j �� v � �� Y m �� m la I9 '3 y •� O m s '� _ p gym•' ET 2 N n _ _ o — O o � 0 r N •� ❑ O i� O N W •P� O 9 P - O � £• O i� m N o 19 Wm Aw 1j % W tli N iP N P C �. S H• N .�. .❑.. � � 1. £ Z p m A G P P .P G W W n S w N a IY1 (q ib� IU W IA �bl •b! �N + O 37 7 IJ l + O O N 6 � � 'n � � � $ Pa u S m it L" w IU" t y •rn > .> D •C I!! N N1 :� N f✓I In N N r N `L �M w 2 - s ov N v : I, la O_ r y Iv in •D 1A iA 0 [D m �n N !D N 9 N S iN - N .� �C � � f •C IG � [1 � = - _ iz � q � In n 'p iv •A �x n � � � T m � n a m o .1 n In I�IA 0 ID m a _ m :EL m Ill iW mo n I'Jl �N N In :� :� - n ii f n IInn 02 = A u :� I� Irn � � fn fn B1 N 'N N tD N '3 m �+ � �.'i •� to'i;n -N < fA 'N g - ' N -_ r�7 92 A n Ir2 N � 'A �� itn � n •D i< � D •A a y � 3 �m IN m o iN r2 N I;n N £ Y 'nm n _ N � al 3 3 - m 3 3 fa t0 :J iP :m A W WP �a m O F. �7 6 iV .V iy •v im iW uro N O r zv IpNj '� m Ii is J p m tN.l IV � iV N @ U UP P IA iP A z I'J y 1 V N + b V :1. N a •w 'm w pp tm .� Iw w to is 'm w f� N v ,yl 'tq �A •P 1V ,W i� i� •m ,W 'FA Iw Im �P Is iU im bl A m I� -P 1$ P