Loading...
Final Traffic Impact Report.pdf1=0 EDMONDS WAY KEYBANK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS July 22, 2011 JTE . Jake Traffic Engineering, Inc. Mark I Jacobs, PE, PTOE, President 2614 391h Ave SW - Seattle, WA 9811.6 2503 Tel. 206.762.1978 - Cell 206.799.5692 E-mail iaketraffic@comcast.net /''�l .r v..-+'M.+.tY..'W.felv.evMlh �w •.n'acr{ aw��s-e.-� APPROVED BY ENCINEERliVG F y Date: —j-/w'w±— RECEIVED DEC 12 2011 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR. CITY OF EDMONDS JTE. lake Tmffic Enginetriog, Inc . Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CAl_L-ISON 1.420 Fifth Avenue #2400 Seattle, WA 98101-2343 Re: Edmonds Way KeyBank - Edmonds Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Ms. Rowan, Mark j. Iambs, PE, ME President 2614 394 Ave. SW Seattle, WA 98116-2503 Tel. 206.762.1978 - [ell 206,799.5692 E-mail laketraffic@ comcutnet July 22, 2011. I am pleased to submit this Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed 2,740 sf KeyBank with drive up service project located in the southwest corner of the 00th Ave. W./Edmonds Way (SR -104) intersection in Edmonds. The project would replace an existing Shell gasoline/service station. Access to the site is proposed via 2 driveways with one on Edmonds Way and on 100th Avenue West. These 2 driveways would replace 4 existing driveways and be constructed to current standards. The advent of on-line banking, direct payroll deposit, cash machines and the like have drastically changed banking/credit union activities. In fact, so many financial customers conduct transactions ion -line, use cash machines and have direct deposit for payroll checks that the recently published (November 2008) 8th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation removed the bank data collected from prior years. These new realities have resulted in financial institutions generating far less traffic than in the past. The trip generation trend towards less traffic generation has continued. Jake Traffic Engineering, Inc, has collected substantial traffic data for banks that is used in this letter. have reviewed the site and surrounding street system and have prepared this report based on my correspondence with JoAnne Zulauf of Edmonds, the City's TIA guidelines and my extensive Traffic Engineering work experience. The site re -development generates less than 25 net new PM peak hour trips. However due to the site's location the City requested that a limited scope Traffic Impact Analysis be conducted. This analysis is conducted using readily available traffic data. The general format of this report is to describe the proposed project, identify existing traffic conditions (baseline), project future traffic conditions and identify Agency street improvements (future baseline), calculate the traffic that would be generated by the project and then add it to the future baseline traffic volumes. Operational analyses are used to determine the specific project traffic impact and appropriate traffic mitigation measures to reduce the impact- Additionally, Agency traffic impact fees are addressed in this report. The summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page 10 of this report. JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -2- PROJECT INFORMATION Figure 1 is a vicinity map which shows the location of the site and the surrounding street system. Below is an aerial of the site obtained from the Snohomish County SCOP] aerial data. The project site is presently developed with a Shell Gasoline/Service Station with 8 -fueling, positions. This facility is to be removed to make way for the proposed KeyBank project. Figure 2 shows a preliminary site plan prepared by Callison. The plan shows the 2,740 sf KeyBank, 14 parking stalls including 1 handicap, 2 drive up service lanes and internal circulation. Access to the site is proposed via 2 re -constructed driveways with one on Edmonds Way and the other on 100th Avenue West. The western Edmonds Way driveway and the northern 1001h Ave. W. driveways will be closed. 'C' curbing exists on both Edmonds Way and 1001h St. W. that makes both accesses right in/out only. Table 3-4 in the Edmonds Comprehensive Transportation Plan, 2009 identifies the Functional Classifications of City streets- Edmonds Way is classified as a Principal Arterial and 100'-h Ave. W. is a Minor Arterial. Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows the existing PM peak hour traffic volumes at the 100'h Ave. W./Edmonds Way intersection conducted April 23, 2008 as provided to me by the City. The TMC information JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -3- was collected by Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. a firm specializing in the collection of traffic data. The count data sheet is attached in the appendix. The City of Edmonds is a mature City and traffic volumes on Edmonds Way (SR - 104) are less in 2010 than they were in 2007; reference WSDOT AnnualTrafficReport, 2010- A copy is included in the appendix. As noted earlier the delta site traffic generation is less than 25 PM peak hour trips and traffic volumes on Edmonds Way have matured, thus the 2008 traffic data is reasonable for use in this report. Transi We have reviewed the Snohomish County Community Transit website (http://www.cOmmtrans.org/BusServicc/SystemMaps-cfm) for routes that serve the site vicinity. As depicted on Community Transit's system map the site is served by Routes 131 and 416. Woodway S0160, LAM KeyBank 2*th st sw Mthstsw 14 Additional information on these routes can be obtained from the community Transit website. intersection Operations Traffic engineers have developed criteria for intersection operations called level of service (LOS). The LOS's are A to IF with A and B beingvery good and E and F being more congested. LOS C and D correlate to busy traffic conditions with some restrictions to the ability to choose travel speed, change lanes and the general convenience comfort and safety. The procedures in the Transportation Research Board Higbway Capacity Manual 2000 were used to calculate the level of service at the study intersections. The following table depicts JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -4- the LOS and corresponding average delay in seconds at signalized and stop control intersections: Intersection Type Level of Service A g 71. C D E F Signalized <10 >10 and <20 >20 and <35 >35 and <55 >55 and <80 >80 Stop Control <10 >10 and <15 >15 and <25 >25 and <35 >35 and <50 >50 LOS Analysis Criteria The City of Edmonds Ordinance #3767 Amended the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Table 3-9 provides the City's level of service standards as noted below: Table 3-9. Level of Service Standards Facility Standard City Streets Arterials: LOS D or better (except slate routes): Collectors: LOS C or better, State Routes, SR 99 north of SR 104; SR 524; LOS E or better. 1. State rows lot wfw.h a standard isdesgnated ate Hghways d Regiora! Sgnifcance, and are sutrp ;l to Cay wncur envy rnqurenwn►s. State toutes des gnateJ as HiJhKays of Statewide Sitlnircanoe (SR 101: and SR 99 soiti of SR 104) are riot Stbject Ia concunelcy and 11105 nu Csy stjrtaird is darned la live se bones Huvwver, to monbr operatem on Hahwrdys of StdtewMe &gni an;e, the Coy idertf1t!5 eKStitM or fotenW fulure derr..sn::es i! the WSDOT sland3rd of LOS D is exceealeJ The analysis intersection currently operates at LOS `D'. LOS Ana is Software The LOS of the study intersections were calculated using the SYNCHRO intersection analysis program by Traffieware. Accident Data The City of Edmonds provided us with 3 years of accident data history (attached in the appendix) at the adjacent intersection at the W. Edmonds Way/ 1001h Ave. W. intersection and approaches. The data showed indicates 7 accidents at the W. Edmonds Way/1001h Ave. W. intersection. This yields a rate of about 0.2 accidents per million entering vehicles, The accident rate was found using the PM peak hour traffic data and a "k" factor of 10. This factor presumes that about 10% of the daily traffic occurs during the PM peak hour that is typical. No fatalities are noted; the accident data is attached in the Appendix. JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, 11DA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -5- Typically an accident rate of less than one is generally considered to indicate that an intersection is operating satisfactorily, one to two is typical, and over two requires further review. The analysis intersection experiences a rate of less than one thus operates satisfactorily. The City data also indicates that 11 incidents may be associated with the westernmost and northernmost driveways serving the existing Shell Gasoline/service Station. These 2 driveways are to be removed in conjunction with the KeyBank site re -development. HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS "WITHOUT" THE PROJECT Figure 5 shows the projected 2016 PM peak hour through traffic volumes "without" the project. A growth factor of two percent per year was applied to ensure a conservative analysis. Per the Annual Traffic Re ort, 2010 the historical traffic volumes on SR - 104 in the vicinity of 100th Ave. W. remained relatively constant between 2007 and 2010. Therefore the use of a two percent per year growth factor ensures a conservative analysis. STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Per my correspondence with the City and review of City's web site, I am not aware of any City street improvement projects in the immediate vicinity of the subject Keybank re -development project. Review of the WSDOT web site did not reveal any improvements planned on SR - 104, TRIP GENERATION Definitions A vehicle trip is defined as a single direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination inside the study site. Traffic generated by development projects consists of the following: Pass -By Trips: Trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination. Diverted Linked Trips: Trips attracted from the traffic volume on a roadway within the vicinity of the generator but which require a diversion from that roadway to another roadway in order to gain access to the site. Captured Trips: Site trips shared by more than one land use in a multi -use development. 6 R EN 0 1i I JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -6- Primary Trips: Trips made for the specific purpose of using the services of the project. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation provides trip generation rates for a variety of land uses. All site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips are included in the trip generation values. As iterated earlier the trip generation rates contained in the Trip Generation for a financial institution are outdated in that the data does not account for further use of on-line banking, bank machines and direct payroll deposit. We have conducted an independent trip study that includes data from 8 facilities (3 - JTE' Inc. sites and 5 - from Colleagues). The data collected are for three weekdays (Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday). The JTE, Inc. data was collected for KeyBank's in Kent, Covington and Maple Valley, Washington. The Maple Valley KeyBank is inordinately large (11,528 sf) versus the average size of 4,000 sf; thus the analysis uses 4,000 sf that assures a conservative trip generation estimate. Correspondence with colleagues (Geri Reinart, PE and Bill Popp Jr. of Bill Popp & Associates) identified that they also have performed similar studies for banks in Washington. The data is for 5 sites that included drive up service, 2 in Kirkland 3 in Burlington and included Friday data that is outside the typical data analyzed. Traffic data is traditionally collected on a typical weekday; Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. The following table summarizes the germane data points from the collected trip generation data: SUMMARY DRIVEWAY COUNTS PM PEAK HOUR (STREET PEAK) Location/Bank Name PM peak hour TM's size in sf TM's/ksf day of the week Kirkland/Wells Fargo 68 5,130 13.26 _ Tuesday 09.20.2005 mmThursday Kirkland/Frontier Bank Burlington/Horizon M 32 4,192 32 4,000 7.63 8.00 09.15.2005 Wednesday 05.11.2005 62 4,000 15.50 Thursday 05.12.2005 Burlington/Skagit _ 35 _ 3,000 11.67 Wednesday 05.11.2005 24 3,000 8.00 Thursday 05.12.2005 Burlington/Whidbey 98 6,118 16.02 Wednesday 05.1.1.2005 6161118 9.97 Thursday 05.11..2005 Key Bank/Maple Valley (1) 29 _ 4,000 7.25 Thursday 04.09.2009 27 4,000 6.75 Tuesday 04.21.2009 Key Bank/Kent 19 3,420 5.56 Wednesday 06.24.2009 Key Bank/Covington 33 4,174 7.91 Thursday 06.18.2009 Average 43.33 4,262.67 10.17 All Studied (1) -The bank size is 11,528 st that is overly large; the srze used for amirys►s ,.5w,vvv „ me national average size. ,. .. ,...-s ..,,. .,...�.. ....�...'1a�i UF1•tr: F'i C�4.. JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IiDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -7- The collected trip generation data indicates that drive in financial institutions generate 10.17 PM peak hour trips (PMPHT's) per 1,000 sf for banks in the Puget Sound Region. And the data shows that KeyBank's tend to generate even less traffic! Financial institutions also tend to attract a significant amount of pass -by traffic. Table 5.20 contained in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook Second Edition, June 2004 provides pass -by data for financial institutions. The table (copy attached) identifies the average pass -by rate for financial institutions with drive up service at 47 percent. Thus the projected trip generation for the 2,740 sf KeyBank is 28 to 71 PM peak hour trips, Accounting for pass -by traffic the net new is 15 to 88 net new PMPHT's. Per the institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, Eighth Edition for Drive in Bank (ITE Land Use Code 912) 50% of the traffic enters and 50% exits the site during the PM peak hour. The project site is presently developed with a Shell Gasoline/Service Station that is to be removed to make way for the proposed development. The existing site use generates significantly more traffic than the proposed KeyBank. Trip Distribution Figure 6 shows the site generated traffic assigned to the street system. Trips to and from the site were distributed to the surrounding street network based on the characteristics of the network, existing traffic volume patterns and the location of likely trip origins and destinations (residential, business, shopping, social and recreational opportunities). HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS "WITH" THE PROJECT Traffic Volumes Figure 7 shows the 2014 PM peak hour traffic volumes "with" the proposed project at the site access intersection. The site generated PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 6 were added to the projected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 5 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes - Level of Service Table 1 shows the calculated LOS for the horizon year (2016) "with" and "without" project conditions at the W. Edmonds Way/100', Ave. W. intersection. Based on our analysis the analysis intersection would continue to operate at LOS 'D' or better "with" and "without" project conditions. W. Edmonds Way (SR - 104) is exempt from concurrency that is moot since the intersection operates at LOS `D' that meets the City's criterion. Via Traffic Engineering inspection the site accesses would operate satisfactorily. JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -8- Queuing Analysis: JTE, Inc. obtained a queuing template for use in determining queuing. This template was provided by Rick Perez, PE, PTOE. Two items are needed to use the template traffic volume entering the site and the time it takes to conduct a typical transaction. The PM peak hour site traffic is identified to be 26 vehicle trips (based on JTE, Inc, data) with half entering and half exiting the site during the PM peak hour. Using ITE data that I believe to be high the site traffic would be 67 PMPHT's (shown for illustrative purposes) It is noted not all the customer traffic using the site would use the drive up service lanes; some would park and obtain services inside. However for analysis purposes all site customers are presumed to use the drive up service lanes that ensures a conservative queuing study. Banks typically limit the number of transactions allowed to be conducted at the drive up service windows. The presumed average transaction time is conservatively estimated at 3 minutes. Conducting a queuing analysis (see table below) for 14 (JTE, Inc.) and 18 (ITE) entering vehicles with an average delay of 180 seconds using the template provided by my Colleague shows that that the probability of more than two vehicles queued at less 10/0 based on JTF, Inc. data and 2.3% ITE data. And in fact not all customers would use the drive up service lanes. Volume 14 (JTE, Inc.) 18 (ITE) Lanes 14 18 Lanes 2 2 Delay (seconds) 180, 180 Averagequetue using Red 0.0000 0.0000 Average Queue using Delay 0.35001 0.4500 Average Queue 0.3500L 0.4500 Queued Vehicles Cumulative Probabilit. 0 70.46880% 63.7628% 1 95.1329%92.4561% 2 99.4491% 98.9121% 3 99.9527% 99.8805% 4 99.9967% 99.9894% 5 99.99980/6 99.9992% 6 100,0000% 99.9999% 7 100.0000% 100.00000/0 The data and my Traffic Engineering expertise indicate that providing storage for 2 -vehicles (50') behind the customer being served vehicle is more than sufficient. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -9- Site Circulation: The project site has access via right in/out driveways on Edmonds Way (SR -104) and 100" Ave. W. and an internal connection to the adjacent business drive aisle and parking area to the west JTF Inc. trip generation based on local financial institutions projects that 28 would enter and exit the site (71 per ITE) during the PM peak period that correlates into at most a vehicle just over a vehicle a minute. The site circulation as depicted on the site plan works for these rates of projected traffic. AGENCY TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City of Edmonds has a traffic impact fee per Ordinance 3791 April 21, 2010 that Amended Chapter 18.82 of the Edmonds Community Development Cade that was added via Ordinance 3516 September 8, 2004. The pertinent sections (italics) of ECDC follow: 18.82.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. A. Required The cili, shall collect intpacl,fees, based on the rates in ECDC IS. 82.1110. _front any applicant seeking; development approval from the cittatarn- an), development activity within lire cit,) as provided herein. 774s shall include,, but is not limiled la1, the development agfresidential, comnerciaal, retail, office, and industrial land, and inhales the expansion or changer of existing uses that creates a demand, fur additional public facilities. B. Timing and Calculation of lees. Impact fees shall be assessed basad upon the roml irnpacl fee rates in qrfect at the line of'issuance of the building permit, Including but nol limited to change of use permit or remodel permit., ht the event rite development activity does not require a building permit, application of the chirpier shall be al the time of issuance of the buvi ness license. Business license applications shall be filed pursuant to C.`hapler 3.20 ICC 1. For a change in use of ran erisling huilaling or di}-elling unit, including; arrY afteration, e.vpansionn, replacement or nein accessort, building, the impact fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the ITE land use ofthe new use, less an amount equal to the applicable irrtlracl fee for the ITA.. land use of the prior use, established at the time the prior use was permitted. If the previous rase was permitted prior to the adoption of Ordinance 3516 (effective date 091.12104), lire 2004 ECDC 18.82.120 impact fee shall be rased, 18.82.120 Road impact fee rates, The road impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECDC 113.82.130exemptions in l Ol S:1i t Cif t+!:I JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -10- ECDC 1'$.82.040 and credits in ECDC 18.82.050. all new developments in the city will be charged the road impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows: W. Drive-in bank, ITE Land Use Code 912.$7.00 per square foot. AC. Gas station with convenience, ITE Land Use Code 945:$3,347.62 per vehicle fueling position, [Ord. 3 791 § 6, 2010; Ord. 3516 § 1, 2004]. Note: The fee per Edmonds Ordinance 3516, 2004 is $3,535.82 per fueling position (FP) per ITE LUC 844) The Traffic Impact Fee for the proposed KeyBank re -development project is determined as follows: Proposed KeyBank: 2,740 sf x $7/sf = $19,180 Existing Shelf Gasoline/Service Station: 8 FP's x $3,535.82/FP = $28,286.56 Based on my analysis the no TIF is due. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report analyzed the traffic impact of the proposed Edmonds Way KeyBank re- development project in the City of Edmonds. The site is located on the southwest corner of the W. Edmonds Way/1001h Ave. W. intersection. The City of Edmonds Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet indicates that projects generating less than 25 PM peak hour trips (the KeyBank traffic generation is significantly less than the existing Shell Gasoline/Service Station site use). City staff requested that traffic effects be reviewed due to the site's location adjacent to a high traffic intersection. City staff provided existing traffic data at the W. Edmonds Way/100" Ave. W. intersection that is used in the analysis. Future horizon year traffic volumes were derived using a two percent per year growth factor. Level of service analyses Were performed for existing and projected future horizon traffic volumes. The evaluation of the traffic impact of the proposed project included adding project generated traffic to the future traffic volume projections and calculating the level of service. The "with" project traffic operations were then compared to the "without" project operations. The comparison of traffic operations "with' and 'without" the project identified that the project would not cause a significant adverse affect on the operation of the study intersections. Traffic queuing for the drive up service lanes was analyzed using internal JTE, Inc. traffic data and ITE data (that we believe to be high) and based on the results providing queue storage for 2 -vehicles (50') behind the customer being served vehicle is more the adequate. The site circulation depicted on the site plan works for the anticipated traffic loading of the site (reviewed using both JTE, Inc. and ITE data). Based on our analysis we recommend that the KeyBank re -development project be allowed with the following traffic impact mitigation measure. 1. Construct site in accordance with applicable City requirements. JTE, Inc. Cassandra Rowan, IIDA, Director CALLISON July 22, 2011 Page -11- 2. No Traffic Impact Fee payment to the City is required. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. Please contact me at 206.799.5692 or email me at iaketraffic(Rcomeas .net if you have any questions. MJJ. I Ewme 4&2 0 Very truly yours, Mark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE JAKE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. 87.22. 7-0 1( PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE TABLE 1 EDMONDS WAY KEYBANK -- BURLINGTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS INTERSECTION I APPROACH I EXISTING 1 2016 W/O PROJECT 1 2016 WJ PROJECT W. Ave.{ Overall I D (39.4) I D (46.9) D (47.8}* Way /1t3000th Av. W. ( _ * The actual delav would be less: the re -development traffic is less than the existing site traffic but for analysis no credit for existing traffic is taken that ensures a conservative analysis. T =trips, A= per 1.ewU sq. tt. or fi or Tueiing, po51Uons, Axl - Uvf juIG'S 1 fGWL1vc vaiuc A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (existing or entering) inside the study site. The above trip generation values account for all the site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips. VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION TABLE 2 EDMONDS WAY KEYBANK - EDMONDS TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TIME PERIOD TRIP RATE TRIPS ENTERING TRIPS EXITING TOTAL PASS -13Y TRIPS % NET TOTAL A. Drive-in Bank (Land Use Code 912, 2,740 sq. ft.) Average Weekday T = 148.15X 203 (50%) 203(50%) 406 - - AM peak hour T = 12.35X 19 (56%) 15(44%) 34 - PM peak hour (ITE) T = 25.82X 35(50%) 36(50%) 71 47% 38 PM peak hour (JTE) T = 10.17X 14(50%) 14(50%) 0) 28 ry` 47% � 15 B. Gasoline/Service Station (Land Use Code 944, 8 -fueling positions) Average Weekday T = 168.56X 674 (50%) 674 (50%) 1,348 - - AM peak hour T = 12.16X 49(51%) 48(49%) 97 - - PM peak hour T=13.87X 55 (5036) 56(50%) 111 424.6 64 Net Total (A - B) Average Weekday - <471> <471> <942> - - AM peak hour - <30> <33> <63> - - PM peak hour - <20> <20> <40> <28? T =trips, A= per 1.ewU sq. tt. or fi or Tueiing, po51Uons, Axl - Uvf juIG'S 1 fGWL1vc vaiuc A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (existing or entering) inside the study site. The above trip generation values account for all the site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips. Project: Edmonds Way KeyBank - Edmonds Location: SW corner of SR - 104/1001h Ave. W. intersection JTE, Inc. FIGURE 1 EDMUNDS WAY KEYBANK EDMONDS TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS VICINITY MAP Fu Si Y 21t31h St Sw �. zr D Y - Elm Eli �`�r a' C J � g yp � � aS 220M St Sw 1 '� c�i n ri Wad S! SW no A 22ith St SW r W41h 51 SW 226th SI SW 225th St SW Project.sytir s a < 27dir. sw n �* ; __ 1N' $ 'E 23ibh St SAN S 231 st Si Sw • Rabin k 232nd 5t SYr' 232nd Pt SW waziwsatt Rd .� 0 2340; St a SW233ri PS SW I341t, PI SW t a 36th Si SW - s t 401w th St SY FrOale 2381t, St SW _ 2371h ; *Z a 20h St 55W G a 242nd St SW 242nd St Sw is _. 7r14h lk`ivs a t '-7� ""`i izrrtl ......- . ....... • 'Plr1 206th St. .. . , '" �244h ST SW N 235th St iS 20&h-53 - .. JTE, Inc. FIGURE 1 EDMUNDS WAY KEYBANK EDMONDS TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS VICINITY MAP Project: Edmonds Way KeyBank - Edmonds Location: SW corner of SR - 1.04/100th Ave. W. intersection ED1RW) i Why Ml w- 10 0 L -M --MM-M-M M -M -M- IM W- --1' 0 1 M I �, I CM VA , , I , Li L r u i T+rSN a Ey: %L LAV5, -E .-w-1e. f Off FH*W-1 tl�I ',Wl /curt Note: An 8.5 x W copy of the site plan is included with this report No CAR IIJS 4 _ C4) tklSwhr "'SMS 51ijJ,s Ta . � Rtli4v ,fes �1FIET � G19iiVG LktS i E>lsrrr. T'I MAW WR i tff M! -e i SIR. ACCESS f . Eits�Cr 005 r�5n txu�s� JTE, Inc.I EDMONDS WAY KEYBANK - EDMONDS FIGURE 2 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SITE PLAN 91, ig NO w 41001 E ` M t C c o 0 c � o• y e t a z Z W 06 j FN o Qtn Z t9 't W mo h VJ tV C N186 _ p � �' Q Z • r.s., •_ Y 1.68 � N O aG W J M C ��I" Y Z z 9+ Y p Z e[ Q G >- +C W 4 W a w Y :E Qt a W U)IL z a qac z IX N 01- x M Abp • OO L p � W rcy,t;�t •1 �n f. � r p V C W +ice W i9 �M c E �. E O w. 3 c a LV Q w10 F H y n w o = t4 J 0. � N16 N 2 A JI 3htf 166LL ... C .fid LL 2 At Z d' I za I "' � v UJ i CL +ac 3IL a as � I" i Z I o� z Lti N ?C W H O ` Oa soz �►►`# !i it C LAN _ W V+' o c E o "' o v o D v H �. d z Y s -` v • Q w- C ` va 60 a O rp a O w Q E- v1 o H i us y �MMi �. -, O CL O 18 � W co i,�,s•. 3/lt� 66 j/f ? LU t� z z W W be o a � 3LL be ILa 4 a p CL nn nd rriao4 Q w VqO N St S 1 �-� a Svc x.40. a OC ti ■ Lo C la W 42 � E O r � � O O Q IL � N O 4 W Y ,� F- v/ o E N W CL a w 4 O J o N t m U) I� V4 N 14 f U) N 186 O N I > C .e; LL 4 W d Q :E � Y • t- Q, N li C1 4 I o t/t `%Oz a w c� � a M $ + o o r 6 r f= ow W CL I, ;e W AC P •exp sw x V. 1N =m E o v o O _ sa x c t a z c o t� I r' iv O a ti H186 3 N � to t66 IED SC W J g z li W a m >- a LU gL �- : _ a be V a M 3/1�i' H1QOl p epi � a n D gm OC oda III M/4f'i oe C1 h C W CI pl •~-i L6 APPENDIX City of Edmonds Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet - Name of Proposed Project: Owner/Applicant Name Street/Mailing Address City State /Zip Telephone: Applicant Contact Person: Name Street/Mailing Address City State Zip Telephone: Traffic Engineer who prepared the Trak Impact Analysis (if applicable): Firm Name Contact Name 7 - Telephone: 2ta C t Ali G -mail: fTZi+FFI <Q C CC` CAW-.N,z THRESHOLD LEVELS OF ANALYSIS Pro'ect Traffic Levels Sections to complete 1. Less than 25 peak -hour trips generated 1 and 7 only (Worksheet/Checklist) 11. More than 25 peak -hour trips generated All sections 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. Location - Street address: M G' (Attach a viriaity map and site plait.) , 1 b. Specify existing land use: c, Specify proposed type and size of development: 2, '& S1 S �•,- ✓I C t f ._, �"J (# (if residential units and/or square fi-utage of building) �j ,� r n.•.-:�,..t..� f�r•rr, �:t!!'�Q �Fe'a?� r_..r:.. r.�.l f.���"`�'���'• � rrr. t�._.r� re •-£rL.1. 0 2. d, Date construction will begin and be completed: e. Define proposed access locations: y 7- t"t- e_ —J I f. Define proposed sight distance at site egress locations: 7 c-- ­Y9,v TRIG' GENERATION Source shall be the Eighth Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual. For independent fee calculations, the current edition of the ITE manual may be used. ADT = Average Daily Traffic PM Peak -hour trips (AM, noon or school peak may also apply as directed by the City Engineer) a, Existing Site Trip Generation Table: Land Use Daily (ADT) PM Peak -Hour Trips IN OUT 6;4jr. 2- b. Proposed Project Trip Generation Table: Land Use Daily (ADT) PM Peak -Hour Trips IN OUT 2- IL( c. Net New Project Trip Generation Table: Land Use Daily (ADT) PM Peak -Hour Trips IN OUT 2- d. State assumptions and methodology for internal, link -diverted or passby trips: e_ M -S �, I-., k r- W, f ..... .. ;_ , '. n..,. , 11 , . 4, 4 3. TRIP DISTRIBUTION Prepare and attach a graphic showing project trip distribution percentages and assignments. For developments that generate over 75 peak -hour trips, the City Engineer reserves the right to require trip distribution to be detennined through use of the City traffic model.' /0 M 4. SITE ACCESS ROADWAYJDRIVEW.AYS AND SAFETY a. Have sight distance requirements at egress location been met per AASHTO requirements? b. Intersection Level of !+ervice (LOS) Analysis: r 0 © r - r I. `"`' _,j9j e A.),. t lrttetseelions to he evaltiated shall he determined by the City ofE'dntonds Tru�J%4' Isnginecr IC. Existing Conditions LOS 95% Delays Year of Opening '4 ( LOS Delays Five 'Fears Beyond Change of Land Use O Five Years Beyond Change of l JOS Delays Land Use (C U Descri Aannelirati, Grits: 3,e, —Z,f (Attach striping plait.) d. Vehicle Storage/Queuing Analysis (calculate 50% and 95 % quetting le?ngths): e. If appropriate, state traffic control warrants (e.g. stop sign warrants, signal warrants): C Summarize local accident history'' (only required for access to principal and minor arterials): 'Available upon request at City of Edmonds Development Services Department T Available upon request at City of Edmonds Police Department n.as.....$ -- 1. 17.; I. [-R7 'Y....Fr.. I--__. !._._i..,.:.. 11-....7„1,.1.11 f,..-.,.. .? ,J' 4 50% 95% Lxisting Conditions Year of'Opening Five 'Fears Beyond Change of Land Use e. If appropriate, state traffic control warrants (e.g. stop sign warrants, signal warrants): C Summarize local accident history'' (only required for access to principal and minor arterials): 'Available upon request at City of Edmonds Development Services Department T Available upon request at City of Edmonds Police Department n.as.....$ -- 1. 17.; I. [-R7 'Y....Fr.. I--__. !._._i..,.:.. 11-....7„1,.1.11 f,..-.,.. .? ,J' 4 5. TRAFFIC VOLUMES � e e '7-./,9 Provide the following and other planned development traffic within the city.` a. Describe existing ADTand peak -hour counts (less than two years old). including turning movements, on street adjacent to and directly impacted by the project. b. describe the estimated ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, the year the project is fully open (with and without project traffic). c. Describe the estimated ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, five years atier the project has been fully open (with and without project traffic). d. State annual background traffic growth tactor and source: 6. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS a. Summarize Level of Service Analysis below and attach supporting LOS analysis documentation. Provide the following documentation for each arterial street or arterial intersection impacted by ten or more peak -hour trips. Other City -planned developments' most also be factored into the LOS calculations. J e e TIA Los LOS L'xisting Conditions Existing Delays Year of Opening With Project Without Project Five Years Beyond Change of Land Use With Project Without Project b. Note any assumptions/variations to standard analysis default values and justifications: ` A list of planned developments are available at the City upon request for public records 7. MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts. Traffic impact fee shall be calculated from the Edmonds Road Impact Fee Rate Study Table 4 (attached) and as identified in ECDC 18.82.120, except as otherwise provided for independent ice calculations in ECDC 18.82.130. CHANGE IN USE Fee for prior use shall be based on fee established at the time the prior use was permitted. If'the previous use was permitted prior to the adoption of Ordinance 3516 (e&ctivc date: 09/12/04), the 2004 ECDC 18.82.120 impact fee shall be used. Units in ITE I -and Use Category Per Unit square feet, Fee Rate # of dwelling, or , etc. New Use 5V1 Z S - 0.3 X 2:��� � Prior Use �,�,, f'S'.-✓•cc cl New Use Fee: S 1 Ct /O - NEW DEVELOPMENT ITE Land Use Category New Use (.i OTHE11 Fee 26 362, tM14 Jo Prior Use Fee: $�w-a Ej �12 Units in Per Unit square feet, Fee Fee Rate 11 of dwelling, AID. etc. S Ix MITIGAIM FEERE FN N INDEPENDENT FEE CALCULATION: $200.00 + consultant fee S TO'T'AL TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE S Citv of Edmonds, Engineering Division Approval Date 'No impact fees will be due, nor will a credit be given, for an impact fee calculation resulting in a net negative. ...1....'. 1.1 11i VQ7 T- W.. /.,...,.... 1....1...:. !t';..,/., 1. Ir....., C-fC 2009 - Impact Fee Rate Table Edmonds 50001s and Rcxids IMPOct Fee Rofa Stucly TABLE 4 IMPACT FEE RATES (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Trip FTE !TE Land Use Trip % New Length Net New Trips per Mtpact Fee Per Unit ode Cat Rate' Trips' Factor' Unit of Measure $1,049.41 Tr' 110 Light Industrial 0.97 100% 1.47 1.43 1.000 sq It 1.50 per square toot 140 Manufacturing 0.73 100% 1.47 1.07 1.000 sq ft 1.12 per square foot 151 Miro-wanehouso 0.26 10046 1.47 0.38 1,000 sq ft 0.40 per of foot 210 Single family Clouse 1.01 100% 1.13 1.14 dvielling 1,196.33 per dwelling unit 220 Apartment 0.62 100% 1.20 0.74 dwelling 776.56 per dwelling unit 230 rondomirtium 0.52 100% 1.15 0.60 dwelhnr 629.65 per dwelling unit 240 MoVle Home 0.S9 i 0046 1.09 0.64 dwelling 671.62 per dwelling unit 251 Senior Housing 0.16 100% 0.93 0.15 dweting 157.41 per dwelling unit 320 Motel 0.47 100% 1,27 0.60 room 629.65 perroom 420 Marina % 0.97 0.18 berth 188.89 per boat berth 444 Movie Theater % 0.73 2.36 1,000 sci ft 2.48 per square foot 492 Health/FitnesClub % 1.00 2.65 1,000 It 2.78 per uare_foot 530 High Schaal 16 1.00 0.78 1,000 sq ft0 82 per square foot 560 church % k22 1.20 0.66 1,000 sq ft 0.69 per square foot 565 Da Care Center 5% 0.67 6.26 1 000 A 6.57 er are toot 620 Nursing Home % 0.87 0.19 bed 199.39 per bed 710 General Office 095 1.47 1.97 1,000 sq ft 2.07 per square foot 720 Medical Office 5% 1.40 3.63 1,000s ft 3.81 per square foot 814 Specialty Retail 2.71 55% 0.60 0.89 1,000 sq ft 0-93 per square foot 820 Shoaling Center 3.73 65% 0.53 1.28 1,000 sq ft 1.34 per square foot 850 Superrnartet 10,50 65% 0.67 4.57 1.000 5q ft 4.80 per souare foot 85Z Convenience mkt 34.57 40% 0.40 5.53 1,000 sq ft 5.80 per square foot 15-16 hours 912 Drive-in bank 25.82 55% 0,47 6.67 1,000 sq ft 7.00 per square foot 932 Restaurant: s:t- 11.15 55% 0.73 4.48 1,000 %9 ft 4.70 per square foot dawn 933 Fast food, no 0.67 8.76 1,0GO sq ft 26.15 5036 9.19 per square foot drive -up 934 Fast food, w/ 33.84 51 % 0.62 10.70 1,0W sq ft 11.23 per square toot drive -up 936 Coffee/Dorrut 40.75 20% 0.67 5.46 1,000 Sq ft 5.'l3 per square foot Shop. no drive -up 938 Coffee/Donut 75.00 20% 0.67 10.05 1,000 sq ft 10.55 per square foot Shop, drive -up, no indoor stating 945 Gas station 13.38 45% 0.53 3.19 vfp 3,347.62 per vfW w/convedence rr-- '3'fj�r•, :r-_ a 2 ITE trip Gencr4tion (8th Edition): 4-6 PM Peak Hour Ttlp Ends " Excludes pass-t)y trips: see `Trip Generation Hondbook: An ITE, Ploposed Pecommerrded Practice, (1488) 4 r?otio to averago trip Iongfh. 5 vfp: vehicle fusing position Henderson. City of Edmonds, Washington October 29.2W9 YpoC.ompany EFFECTIVE 5!1/20111 Pout-, 21 0--;. 110 -- ,cn,rirtb lc'Q'! T....Tl:.. J..,..,..., d..,.f...i.- A...-.. `a 44 2004 - Implact Fee Rate Table Edmonds Road IMPOct FOO Rate Study TABLE 4 IMPACT FEE RATE'S - - (1) _ (2) (3) (4) 1 (S) (6) Trip ITE ITE Land Use Trip % New Length Net New Trips per impact flee Per Unit @ S Code Cate or Rate' 1 rips' Factor* Unit of Measure 763.66 per Tri 110 LIgM Industrial 0.98 100% 1.59 1.56 1,000 sq it 1.19 per square foot 140 Manufacturing 0.74 100% 1.59 1.18 1,000 sq it 0.90 per square foot 151 Mini -warehouse 0.26 100% 1.59_ 0.41 1,000 so it 0.32_er square foot 210 Single family 1.01 10096 1.09 1.10 dwelling 840.72 per dwelling unit House ?.20 Apartment 0.62 100% 1.15 0.71 dwelling 544.49 per dwelling unit 230 Condominium 0.54 10096 1.15 0.62 dwelling 474.24 per dwelling unit 240 Mobile Home 0.56 100% 1.09 0.61 dwelling 466.14 per dwelling unit 310 Ilotel 0.61 100% 1.25 0.76 room 582.2.9 per mom 320 Motel 0.47 100% 1.25 0.59 room 498.65 per room 420 Marina 0.19 10OWN 0.97 0.16 berth 140.74 per boat berth 430 Golf course 0.30 1009' 1.OU 0.30 acre 229,10 per acre 444 Movie Theater 3.80 100% 0.72. 2.74 1.000 s(i it 1.36 rer square foot 492 P.acquct club 1.83 100% 0.97 1.78 1,000 _.q it 3.58 rer square foot 530 High School 1.02 100% 0.62 0.63 1,000 sq it 0.48 rer square foot 560 Church 0.66 10096 1.15 0.76 1 000 sq it0.58 _ per square foot 610 Hospital 0.92 100% 1.56 1.44 1,000 sq it 1.10 per square foot 620 Nursing borne 0.20 10046 0.87 0.17 bed 132.88 per bed 710 General Office 1.49 100%i 1.59 2.37 1,000 sq It. 1.81 per square font 720 Nc6cal office - 3.66 100% 1.50 5.49 1,000 sq f t 4.19 per square foot 820 Sho3pingCenter 3.74 81% 0.40 1.21 1,000 sq ft 0.93 per square fool 832 Restaurant, sit- 10.86 56910 1.06 GAS 1,000 sq it 4.92 per square foot dom 833 Fast food, no ?.6.15 52% 0.6? 11.43 1,000 sq it 6.44 per square toot drive -up 834 past food, w/ 33.48 51% 0-62 10.59 1,000 sq ft 8.08 per square foot drive -up 844 Gas station 14.56 60W 0.53 4.63 pamp 3.53 r v 845 Gas station 13.38 47% 0.53 3.33 t"np , per vilt5 w/convenie. nce 850 Supermarket 11.51 55% 0.65 4.11 1,000 sq it 3.14 per square foot 851 Convenience 53.73 39% 0.40 8.38 1,000 sq it 6.40 per square foot market -24 hr 912 Drive-in Bank 54.77 i 51% 0.47 13.13 1,000 sq it, 10.03 per square foot ITE Trip Generation (61h Edltlon): 4.6 PN Peak liotrr Trip Ends ' Excludes pass -by trips; see 'Trip Generation Handbook: An IIE Proposed Recommended Practice" (1 x788) 4 Ratio to average trip lengll►. S vtp: vetic:le fuel!ng posillon Henderson, City of 1 drn.,)nds, Washington youCompany EFFECTIVE 9/12/2004 April 15, 18 v....:.....t ..., fi».rfrel VVI 'r --fl - t.......,., a....t..,r. r...,.,. A .,r n Message Page 1 of 1 Mark J. Jacob, PE, PTCIE From: Hauss, Bertrand (hauss@ci.edmonds.wa.us] Sent: Monday, July 11, 20119:26 AM To: JakeTraffic@comcast.net Cc: Zulauf, JoAnne Subject: SR -104 @ 100th Attachments: SR -104 @ 100th Accident History.xls; Edmonds Wy & 100th Ave W Apr08PM.pol Good morning, 1/ 3 -year accident history at SR -104 @ 100th Av. W (1st attachment) 21 PM Intersection Peak hour volume 31 The daily traffic counts at the intersection of SR -104 @ 100th are as follows: 1. 24,500 vehicles: total of both movements along SR -104 near 100'h intersection (ADT) 2. 13,109 vehicles: total of both movements along 91" Av. S (ADT) Thanks and let me know if you need any additional information. Bertrand ----Original Messarge-- Fram: Zutauf, 3oAnne Seat: Tuesday, 3uly 05, 20119:31 AM To: Nauss, Bertrand Subject: FW: 2011.008 - traffic and accident data request Hey Bertrand, I think it would be more helpful to Mark if you repond to this one. Thanks! JoAnne Zulauf --Orifnai Message ----- Fran: Mark 3. Jacobs, PE, PTOE[mailto:JakeTraffic@corncast.net] Sera: Tuesday, July 05, 20119:29 AM To: Zulauf, JoAnne Subject: 2011.008 - traffic and accident data request JoAnne hope you had a nice 4tt,_ Does the City have any current TMC's at the 100th Ave. W/Edmonds Way (SR --104) US? If yes 1 request the information. I am also looking for 3 — years of accident data at the 100th Ave. W./Edmonds Way IIS + 1000' in all directions. Contact me with arty questions. Mark 206.799.5692 7/15/2011 'Ibtal Survey 8 t'rcpared for. 511 ICF Jones 20 & Stokes 861 213 21 231 1204 463 44 8i 96G Traffic Count Consultants. Inc. Peal: flour. 5:00 I'M to 6:00 I'M Mime: (425) 861-8866 FAX (425)861-X877 27 4 1': Mail: TCN"C.41�301.com 467 113 13 124627 246 25 46 57I 130 3067 524 799 tti'Ii1JUBF. 747 3067 MTotal1 p39r, intersection: Edmonds Way WK 100th Ave W 05% 1.3% 3.3% 1.4% nate of Count: Apr 23 2008 Location: Edmonds Checked By: 1001h Ave W i.Mli Time From North on (SB} From South on (NB} From East on (WB) From West on (EB) Interval interval 100th Ave W IOQUTAve W t-dmontks Wa W 1 dmMds WO YW Total Ending at T L 5 R T L S R T 1.. 4 R "I 1. Edmonds WayW S R 2fn► 4:15 P 0 32 42 10 9 51 103 26 2 24 145 40 2 5 50 . 26 556 4:301' 2 38 58 t0 3 49 83 23 4 28 136 74 TO 7 140 40 686 4:45 P 3 34 64 6 4 66 104 25 0 24 146 56 2 11 113 40 689 5:0)U P 2 32 38 5 1 59 102 26 2 31 150 47 5 12 92 47 656 5:15 P 0 61 72 4 0 52 1,11 31 4 29 135 60 2 8 183 40 816 5:301' 0 74 67 4 2 51 169 20 2 27 181 65 li 15 117 2 732 5:45 P 0 41 81 6 1 58 110 29 1 30 143 67 I1 12 149 47 773 G:09 11 1 32 69 13 1 58 107 33 10016 Ave W 38 168 54 1 11 122 41 746 6:15P 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 INT 07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:4511 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 7:001' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 0 0 0 'Ibtal Survey 8 344 511 58 20 439 861 213 21 231 1204 463 44 8i 96G 283 565) Peal: flour. 5:00 I'M to 6:00 I'M 208 289 27 4 219 467 113 13 124627 246 25 46 57I 130 3067 524 799 997 747 3067 MTotal1 p39r, 05% 1.3% 3.3% 1.4% 1001h Ave W ^ N��F Edmonds WayW 2T 2fn► ztitt u t (fled Edmonds WayW - ?q a 14 1� � 3 � 627 9y7 Biker'- n r Y >.- 124 1 1091 Ib20� ' + 0 �___t tike 947 571 0 5:00 PM cn 6"Oo Pr1 I 3 . F'e1i 872 N 5 E w Fled- �0 —_1 219 467 113 32G1 1.0 PHF 11e:ak (lour Volume Pi is array INT 01 t I 1 3 t- --": Bikei._ 1'lIF 9bIIY I f Eft 0.81 3.3% INT 02 03 1 1 � 1__ Chcck will OM 13% INT 1 3 1 �� In: 3067 N11 0.89 0.5% IN7 44 0 1342 Oat: 3067 so 0.90 O2"o INT 05 G 10016 Ave W fritmclion 0.94 IA% INT 06 2 4 1 INT 07 2 2 Bicycles From: N 5 E W INT 08 1 1 2 INT 01 1 1 5necial Atatcs: 1w 09 0 INT 02 0 INT 10 0 INT 03 0 INT 11 0 INT 04 0 INT 12 0 INT 05 0 0 2 6 fl 19 INT 06 ! 1 INT 07 t► INT Be 1 1 ( 2 0 0 3 1 M05 8052 08000520 �� 20080205 132533 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08000911 20080303 112212 ACCIDENT H&R UNAT W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08001966 20080517 160423 ACCIDENT H&R ATT W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 0$Q42168 20080531 194224 ACCIDENT H&R ATT W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08002305 20080610 135433 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08002752 20080707 113449 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08003325 20080811 150046 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 08003352 20080813 174905 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, HWY 104 08003540 20080825 111240 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, HWY 104 08003544 20080825 124736 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 08003622 20080830 185035 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08004313 20081018 180402 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, WAY 08004592 20081106 153546 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, HWY 104 08004655 20081110 182039 ACCIDENT H&R ATT W, EDMONDS 100 AV W Q8004737 20081115 120109 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08004908 20081128 162033 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 08004.991 20081204 53612 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, 1000 08004997 20081204 145616 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, 100 AV W 08005225 20081220 163246 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WA 100 AV W 09000754 20090226 134814 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, HWY 104 09000875 20090306 190121 ACCIDENT H&R ATT EDMONDS WA HWY 104 09000891 20090308 104649 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09061076 20090322 160456 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 09001106 20090325 73426 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09001142 20090327 194934 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 09001203 20090401 123204 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, HWY 104 09001378 20090413 165036 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WA SR 104 09001426 20090418 172045'ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 09001533 20090426 170545 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 09001701 20090508 141835 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09001758 20090512 190504 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09001856 20090520 142647 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WA HWY 104 09001875 20090522 100419 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 09002082 20090606 113502 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09002156 20090611 112436 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09002445 20090702 151552 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, 100 AV W 09002541 20090710 175459 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09002615 20090716 84140 ACCIDENT H&R UNAT EDMONDS WY, SR 104 09003085 20690816 174826 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 09003192 20090824 164855 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100"S 09003194 20090824 170831 ACCIDENT H&R ATT W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09004381 20091116 145906 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 09004678 20091209 171524 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 10000052 20100105 171413 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 10000629 20100218 115252 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY 10000653 20100220 95010 ACCIDENT H&R UNAT W, EDMONDS 100 AV W 10001308 20100411 143731 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, 100 AV W 10001313 20100412 91253 ACCIDENT TRAFFIC EDMONDS WY, EDMONDS WY STREET2 TRAF AREA IMPACT PT PRIM CAUSE INJ CNT FATAL CNT I REPAREA HWY 104 STREET AT T+DUNK 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WY PRIVPROP 150 FT N WN 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY PRIVPROP 200 FT N +DUNKW 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY LOT 156 FT NE UNKWN 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY PRIVPROP 200 FT S N 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 150 FT S S+DOUT 1 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 300 FT W N 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY AT T+NOTD 0 0 E022 f 100 AV W STATEHWY 200 FT W NOTDI 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 515 FT W DOUTS 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 400 FT S +NOTD 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 40 FT E N 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 406 FT E +DUNK 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WY LOT 200 FT N DUNKWN 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 225 FT S +DUNK 0 0 E022 HWY 104 LOT 100 FT E +DUNKW 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WA STATEHWY 0 +DUNKW 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WA PRIVPROP 100 FT NE DR+DUN 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET AT WN 1 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 595 FT E DUNKW 2 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 110 FT W T+DUNK 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WY PRIVPROP 300 FT N G+DUNK 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 100 FT E DIS 0 0 E022 jc EDMONDS WY STREET 300 FT N N 1 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 300 FT W N 2 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY AT 9900 S+DOUT 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY AT T+INTR 0 0 E022-'' 100 AV W STATEHWY 50 FT E T+INTR 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY AT T+DUNK 2 0 E022 .- EDMONDS WY STREET 270 FT S NOTDI 0 0 E022 HWY 104 STREET 30 FT S ER 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY AT +DUNK 0 0 E022 100 AV STATEHWY 500 FT E T 0 0 E022 SR 104 LOT 150 FT SW +DUNKW 2 0 E022 EDMONDS WY LOT 385 FT N T+DUNK 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 40 FT S DIS 0 0 E022 SR104 STREET 15 FT S CLS 1 0 E022 100 AV W LOT 200 FT E 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 60 FT E +NOTD 0 0 E022 j4 HWY 104 LOT 300 FT S T 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 300 FT N TRN 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STATEHWY 200 FT N +DUNK 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 80 FT S DUNKW 0 0 E022 tC 100 AV W STATEHWY 235 FT W DUNKW 1 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 30 FT E T+DUNK 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY LOT 150 FT N DUNKWN 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 40 FT S TOOC 1 0 E022 100 AV W STREET 515 FT W NONE 1 0 E022 f� 10001412 10001542 10001633 10001653 10001768 10001823 10001826 10001838 10001916 10001941. 10001960 10002044 10002054 10003116 10003644 10004027 100034043 10004110 11000254 11000569 11001510 11002068 11002147 11002165 20100419 20100428 20100505 20100506 20100514 20100519 20100519 20100520 20100527 20100528 20100529 20100605 20100605 20100820 20100927 20101025 20101026 20101030 20110122 20110215 20110430 20110608 20110614 20110615 164208 ACCIDENT 174847 ACCIDENT 102043 ACCIDENT 140702 ACCIDENT 160519 ACCIDENT 112958 ACCIDENT 160159 ACCIDENT 174558 ACCIDENT 103239 ACCIDENT 153828 ACCIDENT 113612 ACCIDENT 120100 ACCIDENT 190603 ACCIDENT 154601 ACCIDENT 135312 ACCIDENT 125951 ACCIDENT 182045 ACCIDENT 115515 ACCIDENT 124622 ACCIDENT 183202 ACCIDENT 220606 ACCIDENT 182353 ACCIDENT 174053 ACCIDENT 135340 ACCIDENT tlz TRAFFIC TRAFFIC H&R UNAT TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC H&R UNAT H&R ATT TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC H&R UNAT W,EDMONDS EDMONDS WY, W, EDMONDS EDMONDS WY W,EDMONDS EDMONDS WY, W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS EDMONDS WY, W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS EDMONDS WY, W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS EDMONDS WY, W,EDMONDS W,EDMONDS 100AVW EDMONDS WY 100AVW HWY 104 100 AVE W HWY 104 100AVW 100AVW 100 AV W 100AVW 100 AV W 100AVW HWY 104 100 AV W 100 AV W 100AVW 100 AV W EDMONDS WY 100AVW 100 AV W 100 AV W 100AVW 100 AV W 100 AV W EDMONDS WY STREET 130 FT S AILL+DUNKWN 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 300 FT W UNKWN 1 0 E022 HWY 104 LOT 200 FT N DUNKWN 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 200 FT E IMPTRN+INATT 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 200 FT N K 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 250 FT E N 2 0 E022 HWY 104 PRIVPROP 500 FT N KWN 0 0 E022 HWY 104 PRIVPROP 600 FT N S 0 0 E022 HWY 104 LOT 300 FT S N 0 0 E022 HWY 104 LOT 600 FT N D+DUNK 0 0 E022 HWY 104 STREET 200 FT N DOUTS 1 0 E022 HWY 104 LOT 300 FT N G+DUNK 0 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 1000 FT E N 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 200 FT N YIELD 0 0 E022 HWY 104 STREET 305 FT S +DUNK 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 150 FT S N+TOOL 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 300 FT S GLS 1 0 E022 100 AV W STATEHWY 220 FT E DUNKW 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 80 FT S N+TOOC 0 0 E022 )e' EDMONDS WY STREET 200 FT N DUNKW 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET 225 FT N NOTDI 1 0 E022 EDMONDS WY STREET AT CLS 0 0 E022 HWY 104 STREET 300 FT N N 0 0 E022 EDMONDS WY LOT 300 FT S N+BACK 0 0 E022 f -' r e "ej C,(" J, C', y OD W. Edmonds Way/1 00th Ave, W existing c Cffxcal Lane Group Baseline Synchro 6 Report Jake Traffic Engineering, Inc. Page 1 EOL 'EST .EOR WOR W -ST WBR WK NBT NBR SBL -:1�.04T, 8811 Lane Configurations 0 Ideal Flaw (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 Lane Uhl. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt . 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Sald. Flow (prot) 1770 3441 1770 3390 1770 3436 1770 3494 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3441 1770 3390 1770 3436 1770 3494 Volume (vph) 46 571 130 124 627 246 219 467 113 208 289 27 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 50 621 141 135 682 267 238 508 M 226 314 29 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 36 0 0 17 0 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 50 745 0 135 913 0 238 614 0 226 338 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 5.3 28.5 12.4 35.6 18.5 30.7 17.7 29.9 Effective Green, g (s) 5.3 28.5 12.4 35.6 18.5 30.7 17.7 29.9 Actuated 91C Ratio 0.05 0,27 0.12 0.34 0.18 0.29 0.17 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 89 931 208 1146 311 1002 298 992 v1s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.22 c0.08 c0.27 c0.13 c0.18 0.13 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm We Ratio 056 0.80 0.65 0.80 0.77 0.61 0.76 0.34 Uniform Delay, dl 48.9 35.8 44.4 31.6 41.3 32.2 41,8 29.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 IM 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.9 5.0 6.8 3.9 10.7 2.8 10.5 0.9 Delay (s) 56.7 40.7 51.2 35.5 52.0 35.0 52.3 30.8 Level of Service E D D a D C D C Approach Delay (s) 41.7 37.5 39.6 39.4 Approach LOS D D D D HCM Average Control Delay 39.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 105.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69,9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cffxcal Lane Group Baseline Synchro 6 Report Jake Traffic Engineering, Inc. Page 1 W. Edmonds Way/100th Ave. W 2016 without project Lane Configurations ►i #1� 1 0 > fl� Vi fl� Ideal Flow (vphpi) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1,00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Said. Flow (prot) 1770 3442 1770 3389 1770 3437 1770 3496 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1,00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3442 1770 3389 1770 3437 1770 3496 Volume (vph) 55 670 150 145 735 290 255 545 130 245 340 30 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 60 728 163 158 799 315 277 592 141 266 370 33 RTDR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 34 0 0 17 0 0 5 0 Lane Group Flaw (vph) 60 875 0 158 1080 0 277 716 0 266 398 0 Tum Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 5.3 32.6 13.7 41.0 21.2 30.4 20.4 29.6 Effective Green, g (s) 5.3 32.6 13.7 41.0 21.2 30.4 20.4 29,6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.29 0.12 0.36 0,19 0.27 0.18 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 83 992 214 1229 332 924 319 915 vls Ratio Prot 0.03 0.25 c0.09 c0.32 c0.16 c0.21 0.15 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.72 0.88 0.74 0.88 0.83 0.78 0.83 0.43 Uniform Delay, dl 53.2 38.4 48.0 33.7 44.3 38.2 44.7 34.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 26.5 9.3 12.5 7.4 16.3 6.3 16.8 1.5 Delay (s) 79.7 47.8 60.5 41.1 60.6 44.5 61.5 36.3 Level of Service E D E D E D E D Approach belay (s) 49.8 43.5 48.9 46.3 Approach LDS D D D D rater , Snirtlrrrt�yy, ` . _ _ . HCM Average Control Delay 46.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 113.1 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 6 Report Jake Traffic Engineering, Inc_ ( Page 1 W. Edmonds Way/100th Ave. W 2016 with project -'# -. --v 4 *- k- 4N t 10. 1 ►ya ,1 r ' ; r EBRD Mi1V#3� 215 1227 341 NPR $P1.. : _ r. " SBR Lane Configurations 0.26 c0.09 c0.32 c0.16 c0.21 0.15 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm Tk Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 48.2 4.0 4.0 38.7 4.0 4.0 Progression Factor 4.0 4.0 1.00 Lane Util., Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 24.9 1.00 0.95 7.5 1.00 0.95 18.0 Frt 1.00 0.97 49.1 1.00 0.96 61.4 1.00 0.97 37.0 1.00 0.99 D Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 D 0.95 1.00 Approach Delay (s) 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 50.0 Said. Flow (prot) 1770 3443 1770 3389 D 1770 3438 1770 3496 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Said Flow (perm) 1770 3443 1770 3389 1770 3438 1770 3496 Volume (vph) 55 680 150 145 735 290 265 552 130 252 340 30 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 60 739 163 158 799 315 288 600 141 274 370 33 RTQR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 34 0 0 17 0 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 60 886 0 158 1080 0 288 724 0 274 398 0 Tum Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 5.4 32.8 13.8 41.2 21.9 30.4 20.8 29.3 Effective Green, g (s) 5.4 32.8 13.8 41.2 21.9 30.4 20.8 29.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.29 0.12 0.36 0.19 0.27 0.18 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 84 992 215 1227 341 918 324 900 vts Ratio Prot 0,03 0.26 c0.09 c0.32 c0.16 c0.21 0.15 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm v1c Ratio 0.71 0.89 0.73 0.88 0.84 0.79 0.85 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 53.4 38.8 48.2 34.0 44.3 38.7 44.9 35.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 24.9 10.3 12.2 7.5 17.1 6.8 18.0 1.6 Delay (s) 78.3 49.1 60.5 41.5 61.4 45.6 62.9 37.0 Level of Service E D E D E D E D Approach Delay (s) 51.0 43.8 50.0 47.5 Approach LOS D D D D tnleiriipti-i�ttilrH>ia�]t HCM Average Control Delay 47.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 113.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 6 Report .lake Traffic Engineering, Inc, /.6 Page 1 C� 0 OC. C- C, 4C� 0 C-' CI C' C, 0 -, GI m "I C4 "I tj C, ci vI ,4 1 ft 1 m6j O r- o C, u C, L, C, M ci ILI C3 " C, ID C', o o a CD ID C. C, C', O0 (c O C> �,j cq r) C, 0 m �n C4 11) Ir O O c> c-, C. C3 C, -1 11�1 FI 1 O(D C) C) C> C) 0 n 0 0 {7n O0 0 0 0 (D C)C3 C-) C:) L:� o C, OU L-, C, ct 0 0 0 0 Ow Tr GnI Z) Co Q 0 .-+ H -4 'A kc, H M CD r- Ul m w M Cl f'J CJ CJ C-4 (,I n Ir C) cz, r,• C, 41 1 CI H (D OC, 1:1 o C) v C, c-, L!t O r� , c-, C, 'o C, 2 0 C> 0 0 G0 c C� L, O fa C, C, 0 O0 2 S, C, 0 C) C> C-, C, C? C.:1 C) 2 n C, (,1 0 a, t -i r! r - (N Q m to w C) f,j ('I . . . rq C4 F Fa cr z P+ tai L) ba I firA % Iz W -D �4 0 14 of 14 U) 0 C-- ;_, E-, F- ft. U. — w w W v) f4 f,M u U CA 4 Io I., Z) 0 9.1 1-4 z V) (y, z U S -7c z :- Fr " Hz tr u a 0 W IH V) 12 :7 C) E-- :4 ;e - "A (4 ly " ko 1.1 F. 2 >I >I E4 oz va 0 O N ZaHch w co f- F- En W U > 14 M to Ffi - r' W .1c n E- E- (,I M x M d !� C, ") — r. " C4 F, U., :,. -1 Cu H on E- I- I-- ti.1 - •-•— D, V- :�: lmr. M C3 W, :3V ta (d 14 ::3 0 0 x W 14 Z cn C'4vi 0 H F F • E- Q1 14 C•7 3 () U 1,3 t -j 1 '.) '-,) I j GJr "0 'Ne, e m ". f2 e 4,, 4• Si re j, a:1 0 W 0 14 -I [1 1.1 0 W 1- 2 rE- 8 [-1 1.4 1.1 4. C4 r. (11 W Ell 1.3 E.' t. al (I. G. r4 a 't Cy cn en P, -t: < 'a 4 4 al e. .4 al rn E EI -1 fry M I-) C, a, N m In r1im m 9•r, CIA AT) 0) Pt) rq V? r- M M VI 4 U") sf) E- C- f; Z cf; j n 61 Ch 8 .4 N N Tg C4 44 (-j C4 eq N " m m M rn m m P) 'r N r4 cn C4 H c: C) C-1 n cn d C) cl o (:> CJ C. CD, Co. CZ) 'D v C., C3 0 ♦ En 011 V) 0 0 0 (D Z:4 :4 X, 21 Y. 0 0 () 0 U 0 E-- om C3 C-2 a C3 C) 0 -1 - .--/r, .1.f ,f 04) V. 9 9