Loading...
Hard File ScannedOFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF YELM AMENDED REPORT AND DECISION CASE NO.: YELM TERRA SUBDIVISION, SUB-03-8353-YL APPEAL OF MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE SUB-03-8353-YL APL-04-0005-YL APPLICANT:YeIm Terra, LLC 4200 6th Avenue SE, Ste. 301 Lacey, WA 98503 AGENT: SCA Consulting Group P.O. Box 3485 Lacey, WA 98509 APPELLANT: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell 15715 - 105th Avenue Yelm, WA 98597 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to subdivide approximately 24.25 acres into 97 single family residential lots. The property is zoned R-4 Low Density Residential, which allows up to four dwelling units per acre. The site currently has an existing residence that will be demolished. SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell appeals the issuance of a Mitigated Determination of Non- significance for a proposed 97 lot subdivision. Specifically, Dr. Campbell takes issued with the mitigation measure which requires the closure of 105th Avenue at Mill Road. SUMMARY OF DECISION: The applicant's request for preliminary plat to subdivide approximately 24.25 acres into 97 single family residential lots is hereby granted subject to conditions. The environmental appeal of Dr. Lee Anne Campbell is hereby denied. PUBLIC HEARING: -1- After reviewing Planning and Community Development Staff Report and examining available information on file with the application, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the request as follows: The hearing was opened on March 1, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. Parties wishing to testify were sworn in by the Examiner. The following exhibits were submitted and made a part of the record as follows: EXHIBIT "1" - Planning and Community Development Staff Report and Attachments re: subdivision EXHIBIT " 2" - Planning and Community Development Staff Report and Attachments re: appeal EXHIBIT " 3" - Memorandum to Tami Merriman from Scott Davis, P.E. dated February 28, 2004 EXHIBIT "4" - Letter to Grant Beck from Thomas T. Longmire dated February 20, 2004 EXHIBIT "5" - Landscaping Plan dated September 29, 2003 EXHIBIT "6" - Letter to Hearing Examiner from Beth Jorgenson TAMI MERRIMAN appeared, presented the Community Development Department Staff Report, and testified that the subdivision includes four parks and that proper notice was given. The subdivision meets all City guidelines and all lots can accommodate homes which will meet setback requirements except possibly lots 31 and 32. The City would like to see building plans for those lots. The code requires that 5% of the plat remain as open space, and storm water ponds do not generally qualify as open space. The applicant must pay a fee in lieu of open space because a park is nearby. Staff has concerns regarding the old growth fir on the site as development may damage the root systems, and the City has requested a plan to show whether or not the trees may remain. If not, the applicant will replant on a 2:1 ratio for those removed. The requirement for an agreement with the Yelm School District was added to the MDNS. The Traffic Impact Analysis will require curb and gutters on the roads to the north and wider lanes for the street. She then discussed the MDNS mitigation which includes the closure of 105th to the west. The driveways and garages will accommodate two cars, and water and sewer will serve the site. They could need a second sewer line for the basin to the east. They will locate the storm water ponds in the center and all homes will have dry wells. The applicant must show acceptable sight distance for driveways from corner lots. -2- GRANT BECK appeared and referred to letters in opposition. Thurston County analyzed the TIA and recommended two conditions of approval which the Examiner need not add as other proposed conditions and MDNS measures address the concerns. Concerning the boundary dispute, the applicant must resolve any such issues by the time of final plat approval. The preliminary plat, therefore, is subject to change. The code prohibits blocks longer than 660 feet and the street does not meet those standards. However, the applicant can add planter strips in the center of the street. CRAIG STEEPY appeared on behalf of the request and testified that the same family owned the property for many years and sold it to the applicant, but will build a home on one of the lots and continue to reside on the site. They studied traffic impacts quite extensively and prepared two TIAs. They have also studied the stormwater and utility issues extensively. He has reviewed the conditions in the staff report and agrees with all but two. Concerning Condition 2, he introduced Exhibit "5". They will perform additional work with lots 31 and 32 to ensure reasonable building lots. They do have sufficient room to adjust the lot sizes. Condition 3 addresses open space, and he believes they meet the open space requirement as they need 52,700 square feet and have provided 53,000 square feet. They also propose recreational amenities and pathways and trails through the development in addition to the sidewalk system. They will have two formal playground areas to include a location at the southeast corner. They will provide a recreational component rather than pay the fee in lieu. They will discharge no stormwater off site. Along 3~d Street they will construct curb, gutter, and sidewalk on one side and will widen the pavement to 24 feet. JEFF SCHRAMM, traffic engineer, appeared and testified that he had prepared the TIA. BETH JORGENSON appeared and expressed concerns regarding 105th Avenue as closure will create a dark area at the western end of the plat. The applicant proposes a well planned development, but it is totally out of character with the area. The subdivision proposes 6,000 square foot lots as opposed to the five acre lots in the area. The new residents will really impact the area. She recognizes the development complies with the zone. Concerning the TIA, she feels the traffic will create a greater impact than shown in the analysis as the report does not identify impacts to pedestrians and bicycles. She recommended the widening of 105'" at the western end to allow two way traffic to Mill Road. She introduced Exhibit "6", her letter. The project proposes a looped road system as opposed to a grid design. The applicant should not recognize the density requested until a public road extends to the west. Her driveway is located 60 feet from the intersection of 105t" and Clark Road. She did not see a notice posted on the site. SHERRY SPIVEY appeared and questioned the date of the traffic counts. No one can go through the intersection in nine seconds. Buses and parents picking up children clog up the Clark/SR-507 intersection and no one can make a left turn except on a red light. They might have taken the traffic counts when school was out. A sight distance problem exists at the intersection of Clark Road and 1051h. The property to the west is in the County and not -3- the City. She questioned whether the applicant will widen Clark Road when they develop the subdivision. Traffic now has to pull out from 105th to see to the north on Clark Road. 105th serves as a private driveway to the west and she recognizes the necessity to close it. However, the City should require the applicant to fix all roads before building homes. BUFFY CLARK appeared and testified that she owns the house on the hill above the road closure area. The area is dark and the last thing the City needs is the closure of a cross street. The City needs no more cul-de-sacs and should open the road as opposed to closing it. People walk along the road now and will continue to do so. She would like to see sidewalks constructed as she has children. 105th is a dangerous road as people race along it. Only one small house is available to watch what is going on. She does not believe the City can enforce the law. MARY LOVETTE appeared and testified that closing 105th will increase the time for emergency vehicle access as these vehicles frequently use the road. It becomes a health, safety, and welfare issue. She leaves her home at 5:00 a.m. and traffic is horrible even then. Adding new homes and traffic will create bigger problems not addressed by the proposal. She agrees that closing the road will create an attractive nuisance. It is notfairto the neighbors to close the road. Most have lived on the south side of the road for many years and the closure will impact their lives. They will also hear substantial noise from children residing in the subdivision, and the applicant needs to consider downsizing the project to 50 homes. Reappearing was MS. JORGENSON who testified that the play area for the plat is located across the street from her home in the corner and it should be in the center of the development. Plat residents will then hear the noise and not her and other property owners. CRAIG STEEPY reappeared and testified that they must widen 105th and will include streetlighting from Clark Road to the dead end. Law enforcement states that a good crime deterrent is a well lit area. Improvements will include a fence across the frontage of the plat which will block all activities occurring on the plat property to the south and east. No balls will enter the street and he has no concerns regarding the safety of the play area. MR. SCHRAMM reappeared and testified that the focus of the TIA started during meetings with City staff and they took special care to address the City's concern. The City told them that 105th to the west is an existing concern and they did not want to add any traffic to the west over the substandard road. They then looked at where the traffic would go, and all traffic mitigation reflected the traffic away from 105th to the west. MR. STEEPY then testified that they analyzed 105th opened and closed. The applicant does not propose the closure, but the City does based upon the TIA. MR. SCHRAMM then testified that fronta~e improvements will include widening and sidewalks and the widening of the Clark/105 h intersection. This will add stacking room for -4- cars and should not impact driveways. The City wanted a two way connection to the north and they have provided two-way traffic via 3rd. More accesses allow greater disbursement and better circulation. He recognizes the area-wide congestion and looked at the impact of 97 lots during the p.m. peak hour between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. They identified the routes traffic would take from the development and performed traffic counts while school was in session with the exception of one intersection. The school peak period occurs before the normal peak period. They focused on the highest traffic along the highway and all mitigation is based on the high traffic period. They will pay approximately $75,000 to help fund area-wide traffic facilities. Concerning time periods, during the peak period it will take nine seconds to make the left turn from 105'" onto Clark. The actual time could vary between one second and 20 seconds. At the intersection of Clark and Yelm Highway they consider the delay for a signalized intersection. Side streets experience a higher level of delay than does the main line. Adding the plat traffic to the intersection will not lower the intersection below City standards. To continue EVA response down 1051h they want to sign the road "Local Traffic Only" and erect an appropriate barricade which would discourage drivers from going west on 105t" versus prohibiting such travel. They identified the need to direct traffic away from 105t" to the north and east. He observed traffic at the Clark/105t" intersection himself at two different periods. He counted between 65 and 70 trips north of 105t" in both directions during the p.m. peak period. They ordinarily do not perform an average daily trip count, but in this case it would amount to 650 to 700 average daily trips. Thirteen cars made a right turn onto 105t" and eight a left turn from 1051h. The intersection will still operate at Level of Service A following completion of the subdivision. MR. BECK reappeared and testified that the City wants 105t" closed as the addition of even one car would create an unacceptable safety hazard. Fixing 105t" would be expensive and is not on the City's six year TIP. The applicant's proposal would discourage, but would not prohibit traffic. The applicant's road system is not a closed loop and factored heavily in the decision to close 1051 . GMA requires the City to ensure that projects meet the target density. The City has placed the parcel in its least dense zone classification. The City requires all traffic improvements completed before final plat approval. The building official posted the property last week. Reappearing was MR. STEEPY who testified that they published notice in the paper and very early on he hosted an informal neighborhood meeting to discuss the project. They tried to address the neighborhood's concerns and made extra efforts to notify residents of the plans and listen to their concerns. MS. MERRIMAN reappeared and stated that sidewalks will extend north up to 3rd Avenue. MS. SPIVEY reappeared and testified that the other side of Clark Road is in the County and she questioned whether the County agreed with the proposed traffic measures. MR. STEEPY reappeared and testified that the County recommended conditions of approval requiring the provision of sight distance at the intersection, but the City had already included these conditions. The County also wanted the undersection lit which they -5- have already agreed to do. The intersection will meet County expectations. JERRY BROWN appeared and expressed concerns regarding the Mill Road/105tH intersection. Drivers will make a right turn on Mill which will heavily impact that road especially since it has no sidewalks. Such will create a safety issue. No sidewalks will be constructed on Clark which is in the County. It takes 20 minutes to drive from his clinic across Yelm Avenue. Too many people try to get through Yelm. He questioned whether the City hired an outside expert to evaluate the TIA. SCOTT DEMICH appeared and testified that Clark Road does not front the development, but the applicant should be responsible for safety on that road. They have no place to ride bikes now and will need a sidewalk or something. MARY LOVETTE reappeared and testified that the traffic engineer took counts between two school times. The elementary school dismisses at 3:30 p.m. and the junior high and high school at 2:15 p.m. At 3:00 p.m. the school generates no traffic. At peak period it takes 30 minutes to get through the intersection. They need an overall study. MS. JORGENSON reappeared and testified that the County said to widen 1051h. They are looking at the widening to the west. BUFFY CLARK reappeared and ascertained that the traffic counts do not include pedestrians. Clark Road measures 10 to 15 feet and is too narrow. Mirrors of buses and trucks are close. She would like the City to count pedestrians on Clark Road in hopes that we will not have an injury before sidewalks. Concerning the intersection of Mosman and 3`d, no sidewalks extend to SR-507. The City should add sidewalks at its earliest opportunity. A left turn light is needed at the Clark/507 intersection. MR. BECK reappeared and testified that he did not ignore the comments of citizens, but the City must determine what it can require an applicant to do. The City must show a nexus between the development and the impacts. Clark Road is under capacity and this subdivision will not affect the capacity. The TIA shows other intersections operating at LOS A and TIAs prepared by other projects agree. City standards allow LOS D for all intersections controlled by traffic lights. The City engineer reviewed the TIA and agreed with its conclusions. No one spoke further in this matter and so the Examiner took the request under advisement and the hearing was concluded at 9:55 a.m. NOTE: A complete record of this hearing is available in the City of Yelm Community Development Department FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION: FINDINGS: -6- The Hearing Examiner has admitted documentary evidence into the record, viewed the property, heard testimony, and taken this matter under advisement. 2. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on December 26, 2003. An appeal of said SEPA Determination was filed with the City on January 14, 2004, by Dr. Lee Anne Campbell. 3. Public Notice of the date and time of the Public Hearing was posted on the project site, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site, and mailed to the recipients of the Notice of Application and SEPA Determination on February 13, 2004, and advertised in the local newspaper on February 20, 2004. 4. The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in a 24.16 acre, roughly rectangular parcel of property abutting the north side of 105th Avenue SE and the south side of the Prairie View single family residential subdivision. The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to allow subdivision of the site into 97 single family residential lots. 5. The parcel abuts 105th Avenue for a distance of 1,993 feet and measures 623 feet in depth. Internal plat roads having two accesses onto 105th Avenue and one access onto 3~d Street SE at the south end of the Prairie View subdivision will provide access to all 97 lots. The central area of the site will support the storm drainage system. Proposed on-site amenities include four rectangular open space areas in the southeast and southwest corners and anorth/south trail extending from 105th Avenue to the sidewalks in 3~d St. SE and north central area, through the central portion of the plat. 6. The parcel was previously used for either agricultural purposes or grazing, and vegetation is limited to grasses and fir trees located mainly in the center of the parcel. Conditions of approval provide for retention of as many trees as possible. Development of the plat will require removal of the former owner's single family residential dwelling, but said owner will construct a new house on one of the plat lots and will continue to reside on the site. 7. Abutting uses include the Prairie View single family residential subdivision and homes on large lots to the north; a duplex development, vacant property, and a shop to the west; single family residential homes on large lots to the south across 105th Avenue; and unincorporated Thurston County to the east. 8. The parcel is located within the Low Density Residential (R4) zone classification of the Yelm Municipal Code (YMC). Parcels abutting the west portion of the north property line, the west portion of the south property line within the City of Yelm are all within the R4 classification. Parcels abutting the east and the eastern portion of the north and south property lines are located in the Rural Residential zone -7- classification of unincorporated Thurston County which authorizes one dwelling unit per five acres. Cochrane Park is located approximately 120 feet to the northwest of the parcel. Section 17.12.020 YMC authorizes single family residential dwellings within the R4 classification at a density not exceeding four dwelling units per gross area. The project is consistent with the density provisions of the R4 classification and the average lot size will measure 6,000 square feet. 9. Residents of the area object to approval of the plat based primarily upon the impacts of plat generated traffic on City streets and intersections. Dr. Lee Ann Campbell appealed the issuance of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued by the City Environmental Official following review in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).which imposed a number of traffic mitigating measures. Dr. Campbell objects primarily to the closure of 105t" Avenue at Mill Road and also believes that the project will generate more traffic than estimated by the applicant's traffic engineer. 10. As previously found, the site will have two accesses onto 105'" Avenue which has adequate pavement width and sight distance from the parcel's west property line to its intersection with Clark Road. Prior to final plat approval the City will require the applicant to close 105t" Avenue SE at Mill Road. The closure will require all plat traffic using 105t" to travel east to Clark Avenue which provides access to the north to SR-507 at a signalized intersection. Plat traffic may also travel north on 3~d St. S. through the Prairie View subdivision and access SR-507 to the north. Traffic may also turn left from 3~d onto Mosman Avenue and access SR-507 southwest of the downtown area. 11. The applicant prepared two traffic impact analyses (TIA), one showing the impacts with 105t" Avenue closed and the other with 105t" Avenue remaining open to Mill Road in its present condition. The TIA accepted by the City estimates that the plat will generate 928 average daily trips, 98 of which will occur during the p.m. peak period. Fifty-four peak period trips will either access or leave the site via the 105t"/Clark Road route (55%). The balance of 44 trips (44%) will enter and exit the site from 3~d Street. The TIA estimates that of the 16 trips existing the site via 3rd Street fourwill continue on 3`d Street to SR-507 and 12 will turn left onto Mosman to access SR-507. 12. The City required the applicant to study eight intersections within the City, three of which are controlled by traffic signals and five of which are unsignalized. The TIA shows that plat traffic will not cause a reduction in level of service at any intersection. The signalized intersection of 1St St. SE/Yelm Avenue will have an increased delay from 42.4 seconds without the project to 47.5 seconds with the project, but the intersection will not fall below Level of Service (LOS) D, the City standard. The northbound movement at the intersection of Yelm Avenue and SW Longmire Street, an unsignalized intersection, will have an increased delay from 52.5 seconds to 55.7 seconds per vehicle. Said movement operates presently at -8- LOS F and will continue to do so upon buildout of the project. In addition to the above intersections, residents also expressed significant concern regarding the ability to access Clark Road from 105t" Avenue. Mitigating measures require the applicant to provide a two lane approach (right turn lane, left turn lane) on 105t" at said intersection. Residents also expressed concern that Clark Road does not meet current City standards. The TIA performed in late 2003 shows a total of 62 trips during the peak period passing through the Clark Road/105t" Avenue intersection. As previously found, the TIA anticipates that 54 plat generated trips will use said intersection which will raise the traffic volume to 116 trips during the peak period, an increase of 87%. However, 116 trips during the peak period calculates to approximately one vehicle every 30 seconds. The intersection will therefore continue operating at its present LOS A. Clark Road is a two lane roadwa~r with 10- 11foot travel lanes and 2-4 foot wide gravel/grass shoulders between 1051 and SR- 507. The City classifies Clark Road as a neighborhood collector which requires two, 10 foot wide, travel lanes and is intended to accommodate between 500 and 6,000 vehicle trips per day. The subdivision will generate approximately 540 new daily trips on Clark Road, well within the neighborhood center standard. The Yelm Transportation Plan described Clark Road as a Class IV bike path which means that bicyclists and motorists share travel lanes. The plan proposes no additional widening of Class IV bike paths. 13. The City of Yelm Environmental Official issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) pursuant to review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and imposed the following mitigating measures: A. Payment of the transportation facility charge of $757.50 per dwelling unit to mitigate overall transportation impacts. B. Improvement of the northern half of 105t" Avenue from Clark Road to the west property line. C. Block 105t" Avenue at Mill Road and allow no through access. D. Improve 3`d Avenue from the north property line to Yelm Avenue East with curbs and gutters, and connect plat sidewalks to the sidewalks in the Prairie View subdivision. E. Improve 3`d Avenue between the proposed subdivision and Mosman Street to a 24 foot wide, asphalt, driving surface with vertical concrete curbs on both sides and "No Parking" signage. F. Improve 3`d Avenue from Mosman Street to Yelm Avenue, and improvement of Mosman Street from 3`d Street to 1St Street to a 24 foot wide driving surface with two foot shoulders. -9- G. Ensure entering and stopping sight distance exists at the intersection of Clark Road and 105t" Avenue in accordance with Yelm Development Guidelines and AASHTO specifications. 14. The above described traffic mitigation measures will ensure that the applicant satisfies its requirements to mitigate the impacts of subvidision traffic on City streets and intersections. The applicant will also construct internal plat roads to City standards, will install curb, gutters, and sidewalks on each side, and will provide a north/south connection between 3~d Avenue and 105t" Avenue. The plat makes appropriate provision for streets, roads, alleys, and other public ways. 15. Chapter 14.12 YMC requires that the applicant dedicate a minimum of 5% of the gross site area as open space or pay a fee in lieu of providing the open space when park facilities exist near the development. The applicant may not include storm water retention and detention areas as open space, and signage areas proposed at the entrances to the plat likewise do not meet open space qualifications. However, the applicant asserts that improved parks within the subdivision will equal more than the minimum required open space and thus no fee in lieu payment is required. Prior to final plat approval the applicant must establish that the open space area meets the requirements of the YMC. Since Cochrane Park is located a short distance from the subdivision and is accessed by sidewalks via Parkview Loop in Prairie View, the applicant may also pay a fee in lieu if the plat parks do not meet the open space requirements. Residents raised concerns regarding the location of one park in the southeast corner of the site. However, the applicant will fence the park and provide tot lot improvements for small children. Older children residing in the plat will likely elect to use Cochrane Park. The applicant will install a six foot high fence adjacent to 105t" Avenue which will mitigate noise generated by children playing in the park. In addition to the open space in the southeast and southwest corners, the applicant proposes anorth/south linear trail through the center of the site and two additional open space areas in the northcentral portion of the site. The plat makes appropriate provision for open spaces, parks and recreation, and playgrounds. 16. Conditions of approval require that the applicant enter into a school mitigation agreement with the Yelm School District to offset the impacts on the district of school aged children residing in the plat. The mitigation agreement required by the MDNS will ensure that the plat makes appropriate provision for schools and school grounds. 17. The City of Yelm will provide domestic water, fire flow, and sanitary sewer service to the site. Fire Station No. 21 located on Mill Road is in reasonable proximity of the site and can provide timely emergency vehicle service. The plat makes appropriate provision for potable water supplies, sanitary waste, and fire protection. 18. The applicant must construct the storm water drainage system to City of Yelm requirements which set forth the criteria for treating and controlling runoff from -10- impervious surfaces. The applicant has submitted a preliminary storm water report that provides a conceptual design for treatment and storage of stormwater. Compliance with City standards will ensure that the plat makes appropriate provision for drainage ways. 19. The applicant must satisfy all requirements of City Codes addressing street lighting and landscaping. 20. Dr. Campbell's environmental appeal asserts that the TIA deflates the number of vehicle trips that the subdivision will generate. However, she did not provide any authority for the assertion, and the TIA estimated the number of vehicle trips using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual Sixth Edition 1997, a recognized authority. Dr. Campbell also asserts that the City has not measured the impact to pedestrians, bicycles, and the neighborhood, especiall~r considering the congestion on Yelm Avenue, Clark Road, Mill Road, and 105 Avenue. As previously found, City plans do not propose widening Clark Road for bicycle lanes, and no impacts will occur on Mill Road following the closure of 105tH Avenue. The applicant acknowledges the congestion at the intersection of Yelm Avenue and Clark Road, but again studies based upon expert publications show that the preliminary plat traffic will not overly impact said existing congestion. While the applicant must mitigate its impacts, it has no responsibility forcorrectingexlsting deficiencies. Speeding problems are addressed by the Police Department. Finally, the applicant did not propose closing 105t" Avenue. Such was a City decision based upon the grossly inadequate road between the parcel's west property line and Mill Road. The City properly determined that no additional traffic could use said route due to safety concerns. The applicant will install a street light at the intersection of the westernmost plat access onto 105th Avenue which should alleviate many of the concerns regarding darkness and illegal activity. Furthermore, the addition of 97 new families and their attendant activities will serve to discourage such illegal activities. Dr. Campbell has not shown that the environmental official erred in issuing the MDNS. CONCLUSIONS: The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented by this request. 2. The applicant has established that the request for preliminary plat approval is consistent with the City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan and satisfies all criteria of the R4 zone classification. 3. The applicant has established that the request for preliminary plat approval satisfies all criteria set forth in Chapter 16.12 YMC and specifically Section 16.12.170 YMC. The applicant has shown that the proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provision for the public health, safety, and general welfare for open spaces, -11- drainage ways, streets, roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary waste, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and safe walking conditions. 4. The applicant has shown that public facilities impacted by the subdivision can adequately serve the subdivision concurrent with its development. 5. In reviewing a determination to issue an MDNS by the Environmental Official, the Examiner is bound by the following: A. RCW 43.21 C.075(3)(d): "If an agency has a procedure for appeals of agency environmental determinations made under this chapter such procedure shall provide that procedural determinations made by the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight. B. WAC 197-11-680(3)(VII): Agencies shall provide that procedural determinations made by the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight. The case of Hayden v. Port Townsend, 93 Wn. 2d 870 (1980) holds that a hearing examiner's standard of review for a MDNS appeal is "clearly erroneous". A finding is "clearly erroneous" when although there is evidence to support it the Examiner is left with the definite and firm conviction that the environmental official made a mistake. The burden is on the appellant to show that the environmental official's decision is clearly erroneous. The Examiner has reviewed the appeal of the issuance of the MDNS and finds that the appellant has not satisfied her burden of proof of establishing that the environmental official's decision to issue an MDNS was clearly erroneous. The recommended conditions of approval will mitigate possible adverse environmental impacts. 6. The proposed preliminary plat will serve the public use and interest by providing an attractive location for a single family residential subdivision convenient to the Yelm downtown area as well as to schools and parks. Therefore, the proposed preliminary plat should be approved subject to the following conditions: Lot Sizes and Setbacks: 1. Corner lots shall place driveways, and direct house fronts as follows: Lot # 1 -Driveway faces north, house fronts north Lot #23 -Driveway faces north, house fronts north Lot #39 -Driveway faces east, house fronts south Lot #40 -Driveway faces west, house fronts south Lot #79 -Driveway faces north, house fronts west Lot #83 -Driveway faces south, house fronts west 2. Applicant shall either reconfigure Lot # 31, and #32, or show construction -12- plans for a residence that can meet the setback requirements. Open Space 3. Applicant shall submit a final improvement plan for the open space. The open space improvements shall demonstrate compliance with Chapter 16.14.050. 4. Applicant shall pay a fee in-lieu-of for the difference between provided qualified open space, and the required open space amount. Transportation 5. Frontage improvements are required for this project. Frontage improvements shall be consistent with the City of Yelm's Development Guidelines. Improvements required shall include the frontage on 105t" Ave. SE, 3rd Street SE, and Mosman Street as described in the MDNS. 6. Internal streets within the subdivision will be constructed per Yelm Development Guidelines for Local Access Residential. Provisions to this detail will be made for the creation of "bulb-outs" where the pedestrian accesses cross the internal streets. 7. The applicant shall mitigate transportation impacts based on the new residential p.m. peak hour trips generated by the project. The Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) shall be based on 1.01 new peak hour trips per residential unit. Credit for the existing dwelling shall be given. The applicant will be responsible for a TFC of $757.50 per unit which is payable at time of building permit issuance, unless previously credited towards traffic related improvements. Water 8. The applicant shall connect to the City's water system. There is an existing water main located on 105t" Ave. SE, that is located along a portion of the frontage of this property. This main shall be extended to run the entire frontage of this site on 105t" Ave. SE. 9. Water connection fees are charged at the current rate of $1,500 per connection, (fee subject to change) payable at building permit issuance. 10. All open space areas and planting strips not located with 75' of a hose spigot, shall have an irrigation system with a separate water meter(s). The applicant shall submit a final landscape and irrigation plan with civil plan submission. 11. The waterline easement that bisects the property shall be preserved by locating open space over the easement area and protected during construction operations. -13- 12. The existing waterline connection to 3`d St. must be relocated to the proposed public roadway within the subdivision. This waterline is currently located within lot 40 and the adjacent open space. Wastewater 13. The applicant shall connect to the City's S.T.E.P. System. 14. Sewer connection fees are charged at the current rate of $5,269.00 per connection (fee subject to change) payable at building permit issuance. All connections require an inspection, with a fee of $145.00 per connection, also payable at building permit issuance. 15. The applicant shall provide proof of sewer basin distribution, to be approved by the City, during civil plan review. stormwater 16. The applicant shall design and construct all storm water facilities in accordance with the DOE Storm Water Manual, as adopted by the City of Yelm. Best Management Practices (BMP's) are required during construction. 17. The applicant shall compile a final storm water report along with construction drawings. 18. All roof drain runoff shall be infiltrated on each lot. Infiltration shall be accomplished utilizing individual dniwells. 19. The applicant shall submit a storm water operation and maintenance plan to the Community Development Department for approval prior to final plat approval. 20. The stormwater system shall be held in common by the Homeowners Association. The Homeowners Agreement shall include provisions for the assessment of fees against individual lots for the maintenance and repair of the stormwater facilities. Fire Protection 21. The applicant shall submit a fire hydrant plan to the Community Development Department for review and approval as part of the civil engineering plans prior to final subdivision approval. 22. The applicant shall submit fire flow calculations for all existing and proposed hydrants. All hydrants must meet minimum City standards. -14- Street Lighting 23. Per the City of Yelm's Development Guidelines, street lighting and interior street lighting will be required. A lighting design plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Plat name and addressing 24. Prior to the submission final plat application, the applicant will provide the Community Development Department an addressing plat map for approval. SEPA 25. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation requirements of the MDNS issued on December 26, 2003. Mitigation includes: The applicant shall mitigate transportation impacts based on the new p.m. peak hour trips generated by the project. The Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) shall be based on 1.01 p.m. peak hour trips per residential unit. The applicant will be responsible for a TFC of $757.50 per unit, which is payable at time of building permit issuance. Prior to final subdivision approval, the applicant shall a. Improve the northern half of 105th Ave. SE from Clark Road to the western property line b. The right-of-use portion of 105th Ave. SE shall be blocked with no through access c. 3rd Street shall be improved from the proposed development to Yelm Avenue East, and; d. Mosman Street shall be improved from 3rd Street to Hwy 507. e. Tree losses shall be mitigated by a 2 to 1 replacement. f. Open Space Fee in-lieu-of payment for difference of qualified open space. g. School District Mitigation Agreement shall be required prior to final plat approval. Landscaping 26. Prior to any land clearing, a site plan including the location of all trees to be retained and removed (exceeding 8 inches in diameter) must be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. Tree losses shall be mitigated by planting at least a 2 to 1 mix of evergreen (70%) and deciduous trees (30%), with a minimum of a 2-inch caliper measured at 4 feet from the ground, around the perimeter of the storm pond areas, and in the -15- qualified open space areas. Trees to remain must be protected during construction pursuant to Chapter 14.16 YMC. 27. The applicant shall submit a final landscaping and irrigation plan to include the perimeter of the project site, planter strips, open space, and stormwater facilities. DECISION: The request for preliminary plat approval of Yelm Terra is hereby granted subject to the conditions contained in the conclusions above. The environmental appeal of Dr. Lee Anne Campbell is hereby denied. ORDERED this 22nd day of March, 2004. STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR. Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED this 22nd day of March, 2004, to the following: APPLICANT:YeIm Terra, LLC 4200 6th Avenue, Suite 301 Lacey, WA 98503 AGENT: SCA Consulting Group P.O. Box 3485 Lacey, WA 98509 APPELLANT: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell 15715 - 105th Avenue Yelm, WA 98597 OTHERS: Roberta B. Longmire P.O. Box 499 Yelm, WA 98597 -16- Beth Jorgenson Sherry A. Spivey R. Houx Mary K. Lovette Rosemary Demich Tom Longmire Judy Scheible Jan Loutzenhiser Jeff Schramm City of Yelm Tami Merriman 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 Yelm, Washington 98597 15939 105t" Way SE 11215 Clark Road 15809 105t" Way, P.O. Box 623 15823 105t" Way SE P.O. Box 577 P.O. Box 1869 10630 Mill Road SE 10339 - 3rd St. SE 16625 Redmond Way #M-323 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Redmond, WA 98052 -17- CASE NO.: YELM TERRA SUBDIVISION, SUB-03-8353-YL - APPEAL OF MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE SUB-03-8353-YL APL-04-0005-YL NOTICE 1. RECONSIDERATION: Any interested party or agency of record, oral or written, that disagrees with the decision of the hearing examiner may make a written request for reconsideration by the hearing examiner. Said request shall set forth specific errors relating to: A. Erroneous procedures; B. Errors of law objected to at the public hearing by the person requesting reconsideration; C. Incomplete record; D. An error in interpreting the comprehensive plan or other relevant material; or E. Newly discovered material evidence which was not available at the time of the hearing. The term "new evidence" shall mean only evidence discovered after the hearing held by the hearing examiner and shall not include evidence which was available or which could reasonably have been available and simply not presented at the hearing forwhatever reason. The request must be filed no later than 4:30 p.m. on April 5, 2004 (10 days from mailing) with the Community Development Department 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm, WA 98597. This request shall set forth the bases for reconsideration as limited by the above. The hearing examiner shall review said request in light of the record and take such further -18- action as he deems proper. The hearing examiner may request further information which shall be provided within 10 days of the request. 2. APPEAL OF EXAMINER'S DECISION: The final decision by the Examiner may be appealed to the city council, by any aggrieved person or agency of record, oral or written that disagrees with the decision of the hearing examiner, except threshold determinations (YMC 15.49.160) in accordance with Section 2.26.150 of the Yelm Municipal Code (YMC). NOTE: In an effort to avoid confusion at the time of filing a request for reconsideration, please attach this page to the request for reconsideration. -19- OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF YELM REPORT AND DECISION CASE NO.: YELM TERRA SUBDIVISION, SUB-03-8353-YL APPEAL OF MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SUB-03-8353-YLRPL-04-0005-YL APPLICANT: Yelm Terra, LLC 4200 6th Avenue SE, Ste. 301 Lacey, WA 98503 AGENT: SCA Consulting Group P.O. Box 3485 Lacey, WA 98509 APPELLANT: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell 15715 - 105th Avenue Yelm, WA 98597 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to subdivide approximately 24.25 acres into 97 single family residential lots. The property is zoned R-4 Low Density Residential, which allows up to four dwelling units per acre. The site currently has an existing residence that will be demolished. SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell appeals the issuance of a Mitigated Determination of Non- significance for a proposed 97 lot subdivision. Specifically, Dr. Campbell takes issued with the mitigation measure which requires the closure of 105th Avenue at Mill Road. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: It is hereby recommended to the Yelm City Council that the preliminary plat of Yelm Terra be approved subject to conditions. It is further recommended that the environmental appeal of Dr. Lee Anne Campbell be -1- denied. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing Planning and Community Development Staff Report and examining available information on file with the application, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the request as follows: The hearing was opened on March 1, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. Parties wishing to testify were sworn in by the Examiner. The following exhibits were submitted and made a part of the record as follows: EXHIBIT "1" - Planning and Community Development Staff Report and Attachments re: subdivision EXHIBIT " 2" - Planning and Community Development Staff Report and Attachments re: appeal EXHIBIT " 3" - Memorandum to Tami Merriman from Scott Davis, P.E. dated February 28, 2004 EXHIBIT "4" - Letter to Grant Beck from Thomas T. Longmire dated February 20, 2004 EXHIBIT "5" - Landscaping Plan dated September 29, 2003 EXHIBIT "6" - Letter to Hearing Examiner from Beth Jorgenson TAMI MERRIMAN appeared, presented the Community Development Department Staff Report, and testified that the subdivision includes four parks and that proper notice was given. The subdivision meets all City guidelines and all lots can accommodate homes which will meet setback requirements except possibly lots 31 and 32. The City would like to see building plans for those lots. The code requires that 5% of the plat remain as open space, and storm water ponds do not generally qualify as open space. The applicant must pay a fee in lieu of open space because a park is nearby. Staff has concerns regarding the old growth fir on the site as development may damage the root systems, and the City has requested a plan to show whether or not the trees may remain. If not, the applicant will replant on a 2:1 ratio for those removed. The requirement for an agreement with the Yelm School District was added to the MDNS. The Traffic Impact Analysis will require curb and gutters on the roads to the north and wider lanes for the street. She then discussed the MDNS mitigation which includes the closure of 105th to the west. The driveways and -2- garages will accommodate two cars, and water and sewer will serve the site. They could need a second sewer line for the basin to the east. They will locate the storm water ponds in the center and all homes will have dry wells. The applicant must show acceptable sight distance for driveways from corner lots. GRANT BECK appeared and referred to letters in opposition. Thurston County analyzed the TIA and recommended two conditions of approval which the Examiner need not add as other proposed conditions and MDNS measures address the concerns. Concerning the boundary dispute, the applicant must resolve any such issues by the time of final plat approval. The preliminary plat, therefore, is subject to change. The code prohibits blocks longer than 660 feet and the street does not meet those standards. However, the applicant can add planter strips in the center of the street. CRAIG STEEPY appeared on behalf of the request and testified that the same family owned the property for many years and sold it to the applicant, but will build a home on one of the lots and continue to reside on the site. They studied traffic impacts quite extensively and prepared two TIAs. They have also studied the stormwater and utility issues extensively. He has reviewed the conditions in the staff report and agrees with all but two. Concerning Condition 2, he introduced Exhibit "5". They will perform additional work with lots 31 and 32 to ensure reasonable building lots. They do have sufficient room to adjust the lot sizes. Condition 3 addresses open space, and he believes they meet the open space requirement as they need 52,700 square feet and have provided 53,000 square feet. They also propose recreational amenities and pathways and trails through the development in addition to the sidewalk system. They will have two formal playground areas to include a location at the southeast corner. They will provide a recreational component rather than pay the fee in lieu. They will discharge no stormwater off site. Along 3~d Street they will construct curb, gutter, and sidewalk on one side and will widen the pavement to 24 feet. JEFF SCHRAMM, traffic engineer, appeared and testified that he had prepared the TIA. BETH JORGENSON appeared and expressed concerns regarding 105th Avenue as closure will create a dark area at the western end of the plat. The applicant proposes a well planned development, but it is totally out of character with the area. The subdivision proposes 6,000 square foot lots as opposed to the five acre lots in the area. The new residents will really impact the area. She recognizes the development complies with the zone. Concerning the TIA, she feels the traffic will create a greater impact than shown in the analysis as the report does not identify impacts to pedestrians and bicycles. She recommended the widening of 105th at the western end to allow two way traffic to Mill Road. She introduced Exhibit "6", her letter. The project proposes a looped road system as opposed to a grid design. The applicant should not recognize the density requested until a public road extends to the west. Her driveway is located 60 feet from the intersection of 105th and Clark Road. She did not see a notice posted on the site. -3- SHERRY SPIVEY appeared and questioned the date of the traffic counts. No one can go through the intersection in nine seconds. Buses and parents picking up children clog up the Clark/SR-507 intersection and no one can make a left turn except on a red light. They might have taken the traffic counts when school was out. A sight distance problem exists at the intersection of Clark Road and 105th. The property to the west is in the County and not the City. She questioned whether the applicant will widen Clark Road when they develop the subdivision. Traffic now has to pull out from 105th to see to the north on Clark Road. 105th serves as a private driveway to the west and she recognizes the necessity to close it. However, the City should require the applicant to fix all roads before building homes. BUFFY CLARK appeared and testified that she owns the house on the hill above the road closure area. The area is dark and the last thing the City needs is the closure of a cross street. The City needs no more cul-de-sacs and should open the road as opposed to closing it. People walk along the road now and will continue to do so. She would like to see sidewalks constructed as she has children. 105th is a dangerous road as people race along it. Only one small house is available to watch what is going on. She does not believe the City can enforce the law. MARY LOVETTE appeared and testified that closing 105th will increase the time for emergency vehicle access as these vehicles frequently use the road. It becomes a health, safety, and welfare issue. She leaves her home at 5:00 a.m. and traffic is horrible even then. Adding new homes and traffic will create bigger problems not addressed by the proposal. She agrees that closing the road will create an attractive nuisance. It is not fair to the neighbors to close the road. Most have lived on the south side of the road for many years and the closure will impact their lives. They will also hear substantial noise from children residing in the subdivision, and the applicant needs to consider downsizing the project to 50 homes. Reappearing was MS. JORGENSON who testified that the play area for the plat is located across the street from her home in the corner and it should be in the center of the development. Plat residents will then hear the noise and not her and other property owners. CRAIG STEEPY reappeared and testified that they must widen 105th and will include streetlighting from Clark Road to the dead end. Law enforcement states that a good crime deterrent is a well lit area. Improvements will include a fence across the frontage of the plat which will block all activities occurring on the plat property to the south and east. No balls will enter the street and he has no concerns regarding the safety of the play area. MR. SCHRAMM reappeared and testified that the focus of the TIA started during meetings with City staff and they took special care to address the City's concern. The City told them -4- that 105th to the west is an existing concern and they did not want to add any traffic to the west over the substandard road. They then looked at where the traffic would go, and all traffic mitigation reflected the traffic away from 105th to the west. MR. STEEPY then testified that they analyzed 105th opened and closed. The applicant does not propose the closure, but the City does based upon the TIA. MR. SCHRAMM then testified that frontage improvements will include widening and sidewalks and the widening of the Clark/105th intersection. This will add stacking room for cars and should not impact driveways. The City wanted a two way connection to the north and they have provided two-way traffic via 3~d. More accesses allow greater disbursement and better circulation. He recognizes the area-wide congestion and looked at the impact of 97 lots during the p.m. peak hour between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. They identified the routes traffic would take from the development and performed traffic counts while school was in session with the exception of one intersection. The school peak period occurs before the normal peak period. They focused on the highest traffic along the highway and all mitigation is based on the high traffic period. They will pay approximately $75,000 to help fund area-wide traffic facilities. Concerning time periods, during the peak period it will take nine seconds to make the left turn from 105th onto Clark. The actual time could vary between one second and 20 seconds. At the intersection of Clark and Yelm Highway they consider the delay for a signalized intersection. Side streets experience a higher level of delay than does the main line. Adding the plat traffic to the intersection will not lower the intersection below City standards. To continue EVA response down 105th they want to sign the road "Local Traffic Only" and erect an appropriate barricade which would discourage drivers from going west on 105th versus prohibiting such travel. They identified the need to direct traffic away from 105th to the north and east. He observed traffic at the Clark/105th intersection himself at two different periods. He counted between 65 and 70 trips north of 105th in both directions during the p.m. peak period. They ordinarily do not perform an average daily trip count, but in this case it would amount to 650 to 700 average daily trips. Thirteen cars made a right turn onto 105th and eight a left turn from 105th. The intersection will still operate at Level of Service A following completion of the subdivision. MR. BECK reappeared and testified that the City wants 105th closed as the addition of even one car would create an unacceptable safety hazard. Fixing 105th would be expensive and is not on the City's six year TIP. The applicant's proposal would discourage, but would not prohibit traffic. The applicant's road system is not a closed loop and factored heavily in the decision to close 105th. GMA requires the City to ensure that projects meet the target density. The City has placed the parcel in its least dense zone classification. The City requires all traffic improvements completed before final plat approval. The building official posted the property last week. Reappearing was MR. STEEPY who testified that they published notice in the paper and very early on he hosted an informal neighborhood meeting to discuss the project. They -5- tried to address the neighborhood's concerns and made extra efforts to notify residents of the plans and listen to their concerns. MS. MERRIMAN reappeared and stated that sidewalks will extend north up to 3`~ Avenue. MS. SPIVEY reappeared and testified that the other side of Clark Road is in the County and she questioned whether the County agreed with the proposed traffic measures. MR. STEEPY reappeared and testified that the County recommended conditions of approval requiring the provision of sight distance at the intersection, but the City had already included these conditions. The County also wanted the undersection lit which they have already agreed to do. The intersection will meet County expectations. JERRY BROWN appeared and expressed concerns regarding the Mill Road/105th intersection. Drivers will make a right turn on Mill which will heavily impact that road especially since it has no sidewalks. Such will create a safety issue. No sidewalks will be constructed on Clark which is in the County. It takes 20 minutes to drive from his clinic across Yelm Avenue. Too many people try to get through Yelm. He questioned whether the City hired an outside expert to evaluate the TIA. SCOTT DEMICH appeared and testified that Clark Road does not front the development, but the applicant should be responsible for safety on that road. They have no place to ride bikes now and will need a sidewalk or something. MARY LOVETTE reappeared and testified that the traffic engineer took counts between two school times. The elementary school dismisses at 3:30 p.m. and the junior high and high school at 2:15 p.m. At 3:00 p.m. the school generates no traffic. At peak period it takes 30 minutes to get through the intersection. They need an overall study. MS. JORGENSON reappeared and testified that the County said to widen 105th. They are looking at the widening to the west. BUFFY CLARK reappeared and ascertained that the traffic counts do not include pedestrians. Clark Road measures 10 to 15 feet and is too narrow. Mirrors of buses and trucks are close. She would like the City to count pedestrians on Clark Road in hopes that we will not have an injury before sidewalks. Concerning the intersection of Mosman and 3~d, no sidewalks extend to SR-507. The City should add sidewalks at its earliest opportunity. A left turn light is needed at the Clark/507 intersection. MR. BECK reappeared and testified that he did not ignore the comments of citizens, but the City must determine what it can require an applicant to do. The City must show a nexus between the development and the impacts. Clark Road is under capacity and this subdivision will not affect the capacity. The TIA shows other intersections operating at LOS -6- A and TIAs prepared by other projects agree. City standards allow LOS D for all intersections controlled by traffic lights. The City engineer reviewed the TIA and agreed with its conclusions. No one spoke further in this matter and so the Examiner took the request under advisement and the hearing was concluded at 9:55 a.m. NOTE: A complete record of this hearing is available in the City of Yelm Community Development Department FINDINGS. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION: FINDINGS: 1. The Hearing Examiner has admitted documentary evidence into the record, viewed the property, heard testimony, and taken this matter under advisement. 2. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on December 26, 2003. An appeal of said SEPA Determination was filed with the City on January 14, 2004, by Dr. Lee Anne Campbell. 3. Public Notice of the date and time of the Public Hearing was posted on the project site, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site, and mailed to the recipients of the Notice of Application and SEPA Determination on February 13, 2004, and advertised in the local newspaper on February 20, 2004. 4. The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in a 24.16 acre, roughly rectangular parcel of property abutting the north side of 105th Avenue SE and the south side of the Prairie View single family residential subdivision. The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to allow subdivision of the site into 97 single family residential lots. 5. The parcel abuts 105th Avenue for a distance of 1,993 feet and measures 623 feet in depth. Internal plat roads having two accesses onto 105th Avenue and one access onto 3~d Street SE at the south end of the Prairie View subdivision will provide access to all 97 lots. The central area of the site will support the storm drainage system. Proposed on-site amenities include four rectangular open space areas in the southeast and southwest corners and anorth/south trail extending from 105th Avenue to the sidewalks in 3`d St. SE and north central area, through the central portion of the plat. 6. The parcel was previously used for either agricultural purposes or grazing, and vegetation is limited to grasses and fir trees located mainly in the center of the -~- parcel. Conditions of approval provide for retention of as many trees as possible. Development of the plat will require removal of the former owner's single family residential dwelling, but said owner will construct a new house on one of the plat lots and will continue to reside on the site. 7. Abutting uses include the Prairie View single family residential subdivision and homes on large lots to the north; a duplex development, vacant property, and a shop to the west; single family residential homes on large lots to the south across 105th Avenue; and unincorporated Thurston County to the east. 8. The parcel is located within the Low Density Residential (R4) zone classification of the Yelm Municipal Code (YMC). Parcels abutting the west portion of the north property line, the west portion of the south property line within the City of Yelm are all within the R4 classification. Parcels abutting the east and the eastern portion of the north and south property lines are located in the Rural Residential zone classification of unincorporated Thurston County which authorizes one dwelling unit per five acres. Cochrane Park is located approximately 120 feet to the northwest of the parcel. Section 17.12.020 YMC authorizes single family residential dwellings within the R4 classification at a density not exceeding four dwelling units per gross area. The project is consistent with the density provisions of the R4 classification and the average lot size will measure 6,000 square feet. 9. Residents of the area object to approval of the plat based primarily upon the impacts of plat generated traffic on City streets and intersections. Dr. Lee Ann Campbell appealed the issuance of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued by the City Environmental Official following review in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).which imposed a number of traffic mitigating measures. Dr. Campbell objects primarily to the closure of 105th Avenue at Mill Road and also believes that the project will generate more traffic than estimated by the applicant's traffic engineer. 10. As previously found, the site will have two accesses onto 105i" Avenue which has adequate pavement width and sight distance from the parcel's west property line to its intersection with Clark Road. Prior to final plat approval the City will require the applicant to close 105th Avenue SE at Mill Road. The closure will require all plat traffic using 105th to travel east to Clark Avenue which provides access to the north to SR-507 at a signalized intersection. Plat traffic may also travel north on 3`~ St. S. through the Prairie View subdivision and access SR-507 to the north. Traffic may also turn left from 3~d onto Mosman Avenue and access SR-507 southwest of the downtown area. 11. The applicant prepared two traffic impact analyses (TIA), one showing the impacts with 105th Avenue closed and the other with 105th Avenue remaining open to Mill -s- Road in its present condition. The TIA accepted by the City estimates that the plat will generate 928 average daily trips, 98 of which will occur during the p.m. peak period. Fifty-four peak period trips will either access or leave the site via the 105th/Clark Road route (55%). The balance of 44 trips (44%) will enter and exit the site from 3rd Street. The TIA estimates that of the 16 trips existing the site via 3rd Street four will continue on 3rd Street to SR-507 and 12 will turn left onto Mosman to access SR-507. 12. The City required the applicant to study eight intersections within the City, three of which are controlled by traffic signals and five of which are unsignalized. The TIA shows that plat traffic will not cause a reduction in level of service at any intersection. The signalized intersection of 1St St. SE/Yelm Avenue will have an increased delay from 42.4 seconds without the project to 47.5 seconds with the project, but the intersection will not fall below Level of Service (LOS) D, the City standard. The northbound movement at the intersection of Yelm Avenue and SW Longmire Street, an unsignalized intersection, will have an increased delay from 52.5 seconds to 55.7 seconds per vehicle. Said movement operates presently at LOS F and will continue to do so upon buildout of the project. In addition to the above intersections, residents also expressed significant concern regarding the ability to access Clark Road from 105th Avenue. Mitigating measures require the applicant to provide a two lane approach (right turn lane, left turn lane) on 105th at said intersection. Residents also expressed concern that Clark Road does not meet current City standards. The TIA performed in late 2003 shows a total of 62 trips during the peak period passing through the Clark Road/105th Avenue intersection. As previously found, the TIA anticipates that 54 plat generated trips will use said intersection which will raise the traffic volume to 116 trips during the peak period, an increase of 87%. However, 116 trips during the peak period calculates to approximately one vehicle every 30 seconds. The intersection will therefore continue operating at its present LOS A. Clark Road is a two lane roadway with 10- 11 foot travel lanes and 2-4 foot wide gravel/grass shoulders between 105"' and SR- 507. The City classifies Clark Road as a neighborhood collector which requires two, 10 foot wide, travel lanes and is intended to accommodate between 500 and 6,000 vehicle trips per day. The subdivision will generate approximately 540 new daily trips on Clark Road, well within the neighborhood center standard. The Yelm Transportation Plan described Clark Road as a Class IV bike path which means that bicyclists and motorists share travel lanes. The plan proposes no additional widening of Class IV bike paths. 13. The City of Yelm Environmental Official issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) pursuant to review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and imposed the following mitigating measures: A. Payment of the transportation facility charge of $757.50 per dwelling unit to -9- mitigate overall transportation impacts. B. Improvement of the northern half of 105th Avenue from Clark Road to the west property line. C. Block 105th Avenue at Mill Road and allow no through access. D. Improve 3~d Avenue from the north property line to Yelm Avenue East with curbs and gutters, and connect plat sidewalks to the sidewalks in the Prairie View subdivision. E. Improve 3`~ Avenue between the proposed subdivision and Mosman Street to a 24 foot wide, asphalt, driving surface with vertical concrete curbs on both sides and "No Parking" signage. F. Improve 3`~ Avenue from Mosman Street to Yelm Avenue, and improvement of Mosman Street from 3`d Street to 1St Street to a 24 foot wide driving surface with two foot shoulders. G. Ensure entering and stopping sight distance exists at the intersection of Clark Road and 105th Avenue in accordance with Yelm Development Guidelines and AASHTO specifications. 14. The above described traffic mitigation measures will ensure that the applicant satisfies its requirements to mitigate the impacts of subvidision traffic on City streets and intersections. The applicant will also construct internal plat roads to City standards, will install curb, gutters, and sidewalks on each side, and will provide a north/south connection between 3~d Avenue and 105th Avenue. The plat makes appropriate provision for streets, roads, alleys, and other public ways. 15. Chapter 14.12 YMC requires that the applicant dedicate a minimum of 5% of the gross site area as open space or pay a fee in lieu of providing the open space when park facilities exist near the development. The applicant may not include storm water retention and detention areas as open space, and signage areas proposed at the entrances to the plat likewise do not meet open space qualifications. However, the applicant asserts that improved parks within the subdivision will equal more than the minimum required open space and thus no fee in lieu payment is required. Prior to final plat approval the applicant must establish that the open space area meets the requirements of the YMC. Since Cochrane Park is located a short distance from the subdivision and is accessed by sidewalks via Parkview Loop in Prairie View, the applicant may also pay a fee in lieu if the plat parks do not meet the open space requirements. Residents raised concerns regarding the location of one park in the southeast corner of the site. However, the applicant will fence the -10- park and provide tot lot improvements for small children. Older children residing in the plat will likely elect to use Cochrane Park. The applicant will install a six foot high fence adjacent to 105' Avenue which will mitigate noise generated by children playing in the park. In addition to the open space in the southeast and southwest corners, the applicant proposes anorth/south linear trail through the center of the site and two additional open space areas in the northcentral portion of the site. The plat makes appropriate provision for open spaces, parks and recreation, and playgrounds. 16. Conditions of approval require that the applicant enter into a school mitigation agreement with the Yelm School District to offset the impacts on the district of school aged children residing in the plat. The mitigation agreement required by the MDNS will ensure that the plat makes appropriate provision for schools and school grounds. 17. The City of Yelm will provide domestic water, fire flow, and sanitary sewer service to the site. Fire Station No. 21 located on Mill Road is in reasonable proximity of the site and can provide timely emergency vehicle service. The plat makes appropriate provision for potable water supplies, sanitary waste, and fire protection. 18. The applicant must construct the storm water drainage system to City of Yelm requirements which set forth the criteria for treating and controlling runoff from impervious surfaces. The applicant has submitted a preliminary storm water report that provides a conceptual design for treatment and storage of stormwater. Compliance with City standards will ensure that the plat makes appropriate provision for drainage ways. 19. The applicant must satisfy all requirements of City Codes addressing street lighting and landscaping. 20. Dr. Campbell's environmental appeal asserts that the TIA deflates the number of vehicle trips that the subdivision will generate. However, she did not provide any authority for the assertion, and the TIA estimated the number of vehicle trips using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual Sixth Edition 1997, a recognized authority. Dr. Campbell also asserts that the City has not measured the impact to pedestrians, bicycles, and the neighborhood, especially considering the congestion on Yelm Avenue, Clark Road, Mill Road, and 105tH Avenue. As previously found, City plans do not propose widening Clark Road for bicycle lanes, and no impacts will occur on Mill Road following the closure of 105th Avenue. The applicant acknowledges the congestion at the intersection of Yelm Avenue and Clark Road, but again studies based upon expert publications show that the preliminary plat traffic will not overly impact said existing congestion. While the applicant must mitigate its impacts, it has no responsibility for correcting existing -li- deficiencies. Speeding problems are addressed by the Police Department. Finally, the applicant did not propose closing 105th Avenue. Such was a City decision based upon the grossly inadequate road between the parcel's west property line and Mill Road. The City properly determined that no additional traffic could use said route due to safety concerns. The applicant will install a street light at the intersection of the westernmost plat access onto 105th Avenue which should alleviate many of the concerns regarding darkness and illegal activity. Furthermore, the addition of 97 new families and their attendant activities will serve to discourage such illegal activities. Dr. Campbell has not shown that the environmental official erred in issuing the MDNS. CONCLUSIONS: The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented by this request. 2. The applicant has established that the request for preliminary plat approval is consistent with the City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan and satisfies all criteria of the R4 zone classification. 3. The applicant has established that the request for preliminary plat approval satisfies all criteria set forth in Chapter 16.12 YMC and specifically Section 16.12.170 YMC. The applicant has shown that the proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provision for the public health, safety, and general welfare for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary waste, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and safe walking conditions. 4. The applicant has shown that public facilities impacted by the subdivision can adequately serve the subdivision concurrent with its development. 5. In reviewing a determination to issue an MDNS by the Environmental Official, the Examiner is bound by the following: A. RCW 43.21 C.075(3)(d): "If an agency has a procedure for appeals of agency environmental determinations made under this chapter such procedure shall provide that procedural determinations made by the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight. B. WAC 197-11-680(3)(VII): Agencies shall provide that procedural determinations made by the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight. -12- The case of Hayden v. Port Townsend, 93 Wn. 2d 870 (1980) holds that a hearing examiner's standard of review for a MDNS appeal is "clearly erroneous". A finding is "clearly erroneous" when although there is evidence to support it the Examiner is left with the definite and firm conviction that the environmental official made a mistake. The burden is on the appellant to show that the environmental official's decision is clearly erroneous. The Examiner has reviewed the appeal of the issuance of the MDNS and finds that the appellant has not satisfied her burden of proof of establishing that the environmental official's decision to issue an MDNS was clearly erroneous. The recommended conditions of approval will mitigate possible adverse environmental impacts. 6. The proposed preliminary plat will serve the public use and interest by providing an attractive location for a single family residential subdivision convenient to the Yelm downtown area as well as to schools and parks. Therefore, the proposed preliminary plat should be approved subject to the following conditions: RECOMMENDATION: It is hereby recommended to the Yelm City Council that the preliminary plat of Yelm Terra be approved subject to the conditions contained in the conclusions above. It is further recommended that the environmental appeal of Dr. Lee Anne Campbell be denied. ORDERED this 19th day of March, 2004. STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR. Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED this 19th day of March, 2004, to the following: APPLICANT: Yelm Terra, LLC 4200 6th Avenue, Suite 301 Lacey, WA 98503 AGENT: SCA Consulting Group P.O. Box 3485 Lacey, WA 98509 -13- APPELLANT: OTHERS: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell 15715 - 105th Avenue Yelm, WA 98597 Roberta B. Longmire Beth Jorgenson Sherry A. Spivey R. Houx Mary K. Lovette Rosemary Demich Tom Longmire Judy Scheible Jan Loutzenhiser Jeff Schramm City of Yelm Tami Merriman 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 Yelm, Washington 98597 P.O. Box 499 15939 105th Way SE 11215 Clark Road 15809 105th Way, P.O. Box 623 15823 105th Way SE P.O. Box 577 P.O. Box 1869 10630 Mill Road SE 10339 - 3~d St. SE 16625 Redmond Way #M-323 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Yelm, WA 98597 Redmond, WA 98052 -14- CASE NO.: YELM TERRA SUBDIVISION, SUB-03-8353-YL - APPEAL OF MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE SUB-03-8353-YL APL-04-0005-YL NOTICE 1. RECONSIDERATION: Any interested party or agency of record, oral or written, that disagrees with the decision of the hearing examiner may make a written request for reconsideration by the hearing examiner. Said request shall set forth specific errors relating to: A. Erroneous procedures; B. Errors of law objected to at the public hearing by the person requesting reconsideration; C. Incomplete record; D. An error in interpreting the comprehensive plan or other relevant material; or E. Newly discovered material evidence which was not available at the time of the hearing. The term "new evidence" shall mean only evidence discovered after the hearing held by the hearing examiner and shall not include evidence which was available or which could reasonably have been available and simply not presented at the hearing for whatever reason. The request must be filed no later than 4:30 p.m. on April 2, 2004 (10 days from mailing) with the Community Development Department 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm, WA 98597. This request shall set forth the bases for reconsideration as limited by the above. -15- The hearing examiner shall review said request in light of the record and take such further action as he deems proper. The hearing examiner may request further information which shall be provided within 10 days of the request. 2. APPEAL OF EXAMINER'S DECISION: The final decision by the Examiner may be appealed to the city council, by any aggrieved person or agency of record, oral or written that disagrees with the decision of the hearing examiner, except threshold determinations (YMC 15.49.160) in accordance with Section 2.26.150 of the Yelm Municipal Code (YMC). NOTE: In an effort to avoid confusion at the time of filing a request for reconsideration, please attach this page to the request for reconsideration. -16- City of Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 947 Yelm, WA 98597 (360) 458-3244 To: Stephen Causseaux, Jr., Hearing Examiner From: Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner Date: February 17, 2004 Subject: Yelm Terra Subdivision, SUB-03-8353-YL List of Exhibits: Exhibit I Site Plan Exhibit II Notice of Application Exhibit III Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance and Comments Exhibit IV Public Hearing Notice Applicant: Yelm Terra LLC 4200 6th Ave. SE Suite 301 Lacey, WA 98503 Agent: SCA Consulting Group P.O. Box 3485 Lacey, WA 98509 Proposal: The applicant is proposing to subdivide approximately 24.25 acres into 97 single-family residential lots. The property is zoned R-4 Low Density Residential, which allows up to 4 dwelling units per acre. The site currently has an existing residence that will be demolished. Location: The property is located on the north side of 105th Ave., SE, between Clark Road and Mill Road. The property is identified by Assessor's Tax Parcel Numbers 22730210500, 22730210600, 22730210700, and 22730210800. Description of Property: The subject property is a rectangular parcel of land approximately 24.25 acres in area. The land has a grove of old fir trees located near the center, and the parcel was mainly pastureland. The City of Yelm has a waterline easement that runs northerly through the center of the property. The applicant is proposing pedestrian pathways along this easement, which protects the waterlines and qualifies as a portion of open space requirements. Notice of Application, SEPA, and Public Hearing: Notice of this application was mailed to state and local agencies, and property owners within 300 feet of the project site on October 22, 2003.. Public Notice of the date and time of the Public Hearing was posted on the project site, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site, and mailed to the recipients of the Notice of Application and SEPA Determination on February 13, 2004 and advertised in the local newspaper on February 20, 2004. The City has performed an environmental review, including review of a transportation analysis, and issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance on December 26, 2003, with a comment deadline of January 9, 2004, and an appeal deadline of January 16, 2004. SEPA Appeal: An Appeal of the SEPA Determination was filed with the City on January 14, 2004. The appeal hearing is scheduled for March 1, 2004. The City of Yelm Staff Report for the appeal is a separate document. Staff Analysis and Recommended Conditions of Approval 1. Lots Size and Setbacks: Finding -The R-4 zoning district does not have a minimum or maximum lot size, although it does require standard yard setbacks of 15 feet from the front property line adjacent to local access road (with a minimum 20 foot driveway approach), 5 feet from side property lines (with a minimum<of 12 feet between the two side yards), and 25 feet from the rear property line. The setback on a flanking yard is 15 feet from the property line. The maximum building coverage allowed is 50% and the maximum development coverage is 75% of the lot. Lot numbers 31 and 32 do not appear to have sufficient room for building setbacks. The applicant should either combine the lots to provide adequate building footprint, or show construction plans for a residence that can meet the setback requirements. For traffic safety, and sight distance, driveway locations on corner lots should have specific locations. Conclusion -The lots within the proposed preliminary subdivision appear to contain sufficient area for subsequent development to meet setback and lot coverage requirements, with the exception of lots 31 and 32. Page 2 of 12 2. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: Finding -The properties directly to the north are residential. The northwest side is developed as a residential subdivision, and the northeast side is in Thurston County, with a Rural Residential 1/5 zoning. The property directly to the west is zoned R-4 Residential, and is developed with a duplex and shop. The property to the east is Thurston County Rural Residential 1/5. The properties to the south are residential, with the southwestern portion zoned City of Yelm R-4, and the southeastern portion Thurston County Rural Residential 1/5. Conclusion: -The plat as conditioned meets City of Yelm development requirements, and is a compatible use with surrounding properties. 3. Open Space: Finding -The Growth Management Act establishes a goal for open space and recreation that states "encourage the retention of open space and development of recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks" [RCW 36.70A.020(9)]. Finding -The Yelm Comprehensive Plan states that adequate recreation and park facilities should be developed and improved to provide a broad range of recreational facilities which meet the needs of the Yelm community [Section VII.C.3.a.ii Yelm Comprehensive Plan]. The plan further establishes a level of service for neighborhood and community park and recreation facilities of five acres of land per 1,000 population. Finding -Chapter 14.12 YMC provides guidelines for the retention and creation of open space within the City. This chapter requires a minimum of five percent of the gross area be dedicated as open space or pay a fee in-lieu-of providing the open space on site. The fee in-lieu-of may be applied when there are park facilities near the development. Chapter 14 YMC also lists attributes for qualification of open space. Stormwater retention and detention areas do not qualify as open space. The signage areas proposed at the entrances of this plat also does not meet open space qualifications. The applicant states that 2.6 acres of open space is being provided, however it appears that the areas that qualify as open is significantly less. The required amount of open space for this development is 52,817 square feet, or 1.21 acres. Finding -Cochrane Park, a City owned park is located near the northwest of this site on Mill Road, with pedestrian access located on Parkview Loop, the development directly north of this site. Conclusion - It appears that the applicant has proposed less than the required 5% of qualified open space. With the City of Yelm Cochrane Park located near Page 3 of 12 this proposal, the amount of open space requirement not met with this proposal shall be met with the fee in-lieu-of. 4. Schools: Finding -New residential units create a demand for additional school services and facilities. The Yelm School District requests that the developer enter into an agreement with the school district for the payment of mitigation fees based on the project's impact. Conclusion -This request for a mitigation agreement between the developer and the school district became a mitigation measure of the Environmental Determination. 5. Transportation and Site Access: Finding -The property fronts on 105th Ave. SE. The existing residence on the site has access from a private road leading from 3~d Street in the City limits through property located outside the City limits. The residence is proposed to be demolished, and the private access closed. The subdivision proposes two access points on 105th Ave. SE, with a street connection to 3~d Street. Finding - Yelm Municipal Code, Chapter 16.16.090 states; "The layout of streets shall provide for continuation of streets existing in adjoining subdivisions. When adjoining property is not subdivided, streets in the proposed plat shall provide access to such unplatted property in accordance with the Yelm Transportation Plan." The plat, as proposed, meets this standard by a road connecting to 3~d Street, through the subdivision to the North. Finding -The Yelm Transportation Plan states; "The City of Yelm recognizes that increasing connections throughout the City not only reduces traffic congestion, but also increases the sense of unity of the community. Therefore, the City will limit the use of cul-de-sacs, dead-end streets, loops, and other designs that form barriers. The City will seek to minimize impacts of through traffic upon residential neighborhoods by employing narrow streets, curves, indirect access routes, and other features." Finding: -Section 16.16.120 YMC states that no street shall extend for a distance greater than 660-feet without including a provision for at least one intersection. Road B on the proposal is slightly longer than 660-feet. To minimize impact of traffic in the residential neighborhood, and to provide for pedestrian safety, "bulb-outs" in the internal streets, connecting the pedestrian pathways through the development will be required. Finding -The completed project will increase traffic and impact the City's transportation system. Chapter 15.40, Concurrency Management, requires all Page 4 of 12 development to mitigate impacts to the City transportation system. A single family home generates 1.01 p.m. peak hour trips per unit. The Transportation Facility Charge per unit is $757.50 and payable at time of building permit issuance. Finding -Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC prepared a traffic impact analysis, which analyzed the traffic impacts of the proposed development. The analysis found that the project would generate 928 vehicles per day of average weekday traffic, with a PM peak of 98 vehicles per hour. Finding -The City of Yelm Development Guidelines require all new developments, including subdivisions, improve street frontages to current standards. 105t" Ave. SE is a neighborhood collector, which requires a 16-foot drive lane, vertical curb, a 7-foot planter strip with street trees 35 feet on center, and a 5-foot sidewalk. Street lighting shall be as required by the City Engineer. Finding -105f" Ave. SE, as it heads west tapers to a one-lane paved private access road, which over time has been used by local residents to access Mill Road. Yelm Development Guidelines Section 4B.070(B) states that private streets are not allowed when the street is connected to two public streets. Conclusion -The conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance mitigates the impacts to traffic safety attributable to the addition of the projects traffic into the City transportation system. 6. Parking: Finding -Chapter 17.72, Off-Street Parking and Loading, requires minimum parking ratio of two spaces per dwelling unit. Conclusion -The lots within the proposed subdivision allows sufficient area for 2 parking spaces while meeting the maximum lot coverage of 75%. 7. Water: Finding -The City's Water Comprehensive Plan identifies a portion of the City area for service. The City is pursuing additional land areas for approval and the extension of facilities. Completion of such activities is dependent on grant and developer funding, as well as planned bonding and existing public funds. The status of such plans and funding sources must be considered in any review of concurrency. Developer extensions and or dedications, latecomer agreements, oversizing agreements, and the creation of local improvement districts may all be considered. In the event of a new funding source, however, concurrency is not found until the funding source is in fact in pace - e.g. award of a grant, a binding letter commitment for third parting funding, or the successful formation of a local improvement district. Any necessary water rights are considered, only after Page 5 of 12 approved for municipal use by the Washington State Department of Ecology, or appropriate appeals board, and the time for appeal or challenge has expired. Finding -There is an existing watermain on 105th Ave. SE. The watermain extends along a portion of the frontage of this property. Finding -There are two existing waterlines that bisect this property within an existing easement. The applicant has proposed walking paths in the area of this easement, which provides protection of the waterline, as well as meets a portion of the open space requirements. One of the lines, at the northern edge of the site, makes a "jog" to 3~d Street. This line, where it meets with the new internal road to the north shall be relocated in the right-of-war area within the new internal road, with a new connection to the line on 3r Street. 8. Wastewater: Finding -The city's Sewer Comprehensive Plan identifies a portion of the City area for service. The City is pursuing additional land areas or approval and the extension of facilities. Completion of such activities is dependent on grant and developer funding, as well as planned bonding and existing public funds. The status of such plans and funding sources must be considered in any review of concurrency. Developer extensions and or dedications, latecomer agreements, oversizing agreements, and the creation of local improvement districts may all be considered. In the event of a new funding source, however, concurrency is not found until the funding source is in fact in pace - e.g. award of a grant, a binding letter commitment for third parting funding, or the successful formation of a local improvement district. Finding -The City's wastewater treatment. facility has capacity for this proposal. The compressive sewer plan has established individual sewer basins within the service area. This project is located within 3 different sewer basins. The applicant is required to show the distribution of sewer into the sewer basins, to provide a result acceptable to the City. Conclusion -City sewer service is available to the site. Sewer basin distribution shall be determined during civil plan review. 9. Drainage/Stormwater: Finding -The completed project will increase impervious surfaces on the site and adjacent streets. Impervious surfaces create storm water runoff. Uncontrolled and untreated storm water runoff can create health and safety hazards. The City of Yelm requires all development to comply with the Stormwater Manual for the control and treatment of stormwater runoff. Page 6 of 12 Finding -The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Stormwater Report that estimates the impervious surface, infiltration rates of the runoff, and a conceptual design for treatment and storage of the stormwater. Following preliminary plat approval the City Stormwater Manual requires the developer to submit a final plan consistent with the final impervious calculations for the site. Finding -Stormwater facilities require continued maintenance to ensure they remain in proper working condition. 10. Fire Protection: Finding -Fire protection is provided by the Thurston County Fire District #2. As development occurs there will be additional demands for fire service. 11. Street Lighting: Finding -Adequate street lighting is necessary to provide safety to pedestrians, vehicles, and homeowners. Street lighting is reviewed to assure adequate lighting. 12. Subdivision Name and Addressing: Finding -The proposed plat name of Yelm Terra has been reserved with Thurston County. Addressing is approved by the Community Development Department. 13. State Environmental Policy Act: Finding -The applicant submitted a completed environmental checklist, including a traffic analysis with preliminary subdivision application. Conclusion -The City performed an environmental review and issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance on December 26, 2003. 14. Landscaping: Finding -Landscaping and screening are necessary to promote safety, to provide screening between compatible land uses, to safeguard privacy and to protect the aesthetic assets of the City. Chapter 17.80, Landscaping, requires the applicant to provide on-site landscaping for all development proposals. Finding -The site is adjacent to properties that are compatibly zoned. Chapter 17.80 requires that the perimeter of the site be landscaped with a Type II landscaping. In residential subdivisions the city allows fencing to meet the landscaping requirement for the perimeter of the site. Landscape requirements shall be installed and approved prior to application for final plat. Page 7 of 12 Finding -Landscaping is required in open space and above ground stormwater facilities. All landscape requirements for right of way areas along collector streets and open space areas require irrigation. All areas of landscaping that are not within 75-feet of a hose bib require irrigation. Finding -Section 14.16.110 YMC provides for the preservation of trees on private property with new development and requires that existing trees not be removed until a final decision is made regarding the feasibility of preserving existing trees. The existing trees on this property are a group of large Douglas Fir. The trees located in the area of proposed stormwater treatment areas are in danger of future tree failure with grading near the base of the trees. Existing trees to remain, that are located in areas of qualified open space, shall be protected during development with protective fencing at the drip line. All machinery shall be kept out of the drip line. Finding -Chapter 17.80 requires that at time of civil plan review and approval the applicant provide the Community Development Department a final landscape and irrigation plan for approval. Conclusion and Staff Recommendation: Section 16.12.170 YMC requires written findings prior to a decision on a preliminary plat. Based on the project as proposed by the applicant, and the proposed conditions of approval as stated below, Community Development staff finds that the subdivision: Adequately provides for the public health, safety and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, schools, and sidewalks; That the public use and interest will be served by the subdivision of the property, if conditioned as proposed; The subdivision, if conditioned as proposed, is in conformance with the Yelm- Thurston County Joint Comprehensive Plan, the City of Yelm Zoning Code, the City of Yelm Subdivision Code, the Shoreline Management Act and the Thurston County Shoreline Master Program, and the City of Yelm Development Guidelines. Conditions of Approval: Lot Sizes and Setbacks: 1. Corner lots shall place driveways, and direct house fronts as follows: Lot # 1 -Driveway faces north, house fronts north Lot #23 -Driveway faces north, house fronts north Lot #39 -Driveway faces east, house fronts south Lot #40 -Driveway faces west, house fronts south Page 8 of 12 Lot #79 -Driveway faces north, house fronts west Lot #83 -Driveway faces south, house fronts west 2. Applicant shalt either reconfigure Lot # 31, and #32, or show construction plans for a residence that can meet the setback requirements. Open Space 3. Applicant shall submit a final improvement plan for the open space. The open space improvements shall demonstrate compliance with Chapter 16.14.050. 4. Applicant shall pay a fee in-lieu-of for the difference between provided qualified open space, and the required open space amount. Transportation 5. Frontage improvements are required for this project. Frontage improvements shall be consistent with the City of Yelm's Development Guidelines. Improvements required shall include the frontage on 105th Ave. SE, 3~d Street SE, and Mosman Street as described in the MDNS. 6. Internal streets within the subdivision will be constructed per Yelm Development Guidelines for Local Access Residential. Provisions to this detail will be made for the creation of "bulb-outs" where the pedestrian accesses cross the internal streets. 7. The applicant shall mitigate transportation impacts based on the new residential p.m. peak hour trips generated by the project. The Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) shall be based on 1.01 new peak hour trips per residential unit. Credit for the existing dwelling shall be given. The applicant will be responsible for a TFC of $757.50 per unit which is payable at time of building permit issuance, unless previously credited towards traffic related improvements. Water 8. The applicant shall connect to the City's water system. There is an existing water main located on 105th Ave. SE, that is located along a portion of the frontage of this property. This main shall be extended to run the entire frontage of this site on 105th Ave. SE. 9. Water connection fees are charged at the current rate of $1,500 per connection, (fee subject to change) payable at building permit issuance. 10.A11 open space areas and planting strips not located with 75' of a hose spigot, shall have an irrigation system with a separate water meter(s). The applicant shall submit a final landscape and irrigation plan with civil plan submission. Page 9 of 12 11.The waterline easement that bisects the property shall be preserved by locating open space over the easement area and protected during construction operations. 12.The existing waterline connection to 3~d St. must be relocated to the proposed public roadway within the subdivision. This waterline is currently located within lot 40 and the adjacent open space. Wastewater 13. The applicant shall connect to the City's S.T.E.P. System. 14. Sewer connection fees are charged at the current rate of $5,269.00 per connection (fee subject to change) payable at building permit issuance. All connections require an inspection, with a fee of $145.00 per connection, also payable at building permit issuance. 15. The applicant shall provide proof of sewer basin distribution, to be approved by the City, during civil plan review. St~rmwater 16. The applicant shall design and construct all storm water facilities in accordance with the DOE Storm Water Manual, as adopted by the City of Yelm. Best Management Practices (BMP's) are required during construction. 17. The applicant shall compile a final storm water report along with construction drawings. 18.A11 roof drain runoff shall be infiltrated on each lot. Infiltration shall be accomplished utilizing individual drywells. 19. The applicant shall submit a storm water operation and maintenance plan to the Community Development Department for approval prior to final plat approval. 20. The stormwater system shall be held in common by the Homeowners Association. The Homeowners Agreement shall include provisions for the assessment of fees against individual lots for the maintenance and repair of the stormwater facilities. Fire Protection 21.The applicant shall submit a fire hydrant plan to the Community Development Department for review and approval as part of the civil engineering plans prior to final subdivision approval. Page 10 of 12 22.The applicant shall submit fire flow calculations for all existing and proposed hydrants. All hydrants must meet minimum City standards. Street Lighting 23. Per the City of Yelm's Development Guidelines, street lighting and interior street lighting will be required. A lighting design plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Plat name and addressing 24. Prior to the submission final plat application, the applicant will provide the Community Development Department an addressing plat map for approval. SEPA 25.The applicant shall comply with the mitigation requirements of the MDNS issued on December 26, 2003. Mitigation includes: The applicant shall mitigate transportation impacts based on the new p.m. peak hour trips generated by the project. The Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) shall be based on 1.01 p.m. peak hour trips per residential unit. The applicant will be responsible for a TFC of $757.50 per unit, which is payable at time of building permit issuance. Prior to final subdivision approval, the applicant shall a. Improve the northern half of 105t" Ave. SE from Clark Road to the western property line b. The right-of-use portion of 1051h Ave. SE shall be blocked with no through access c. 3~d Street shall be improved from the proposed development to Yelm Avenue East, and; d. Mosman Street shall be improved from 3~d Street to Hwy 507. e. Tree losses shall be mitigated by a 2 to 1 replacement. f. Open Space Fee in-lieu-of payment for difference of qualified open space. g. School District Mitigation Agreement shall be required prior to final plat approval. Landscaping 26. Prior to any land clearing, a site plan including the location of all trees to be retained and removed (exceeding 8 inches in diameter) must be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. Tree losses shall be mitigated by planting at least a 2 to 1 mix of evergr-een (70%) and deciduous trees (30%), with a minimum of a 2-inch caliper measured at 4 feet from the ground, around the perimeter of the storm pond areas, and in the Page 11 of 12 qualified open space areas. Trees to remain must be protected during construction pursuant to Chapter 14.16 YMC. 27.The applicant shall submit a final landscaping and irrigation plan to include the perimeter of the project site, planter strips, open space, and stormwater facilities. Based on the Analysis and Findings, and the Conditions of Approval above, staff recommends that the Hearing Examiner approve SUB-03-8353-YL. Page 12 of 12 A U ~ p(J 00•JB'47 F O ~ m N (~1 f~1 C1 O U n ~ ~' D i ,t Z p '.'~. T) pN0 SUN P1~N N ~ J r -OO Q ~~~~ m - "o n ~NO ~] 1~N '~ C) v LO D W N Z O ~ O p ~N ]: v~ ~? O ~1 S O N I I I I W I ; la I I I I N IF I~ i I j l N f I ! V~ i l L j I o 1 I I II i ~ ! r I I ~ I I I I I ~ I b NI I i I Ot ! I Ot 'I ( II ~~ I N ! Y I ....... 1 -.' I _, ( ~~ .. J. I I IIt I 1 N 00:79'02' E 62J.00 ~ N N J OU W I C I °°I O I A Obi Ol m J O~ U A W O O I J ~ IIFI~ I N IT ~!s N ~ n y r r m c~ A z C7 r O ~7 D~ (', a -~ I pl O O I N A I Cn (P O m O G I I I W I z Lp I ~ ~ W '° IU ! ! N l l ~ ! ° N I W ~m N O F I W ~ I ~ ! ~u W w ~ I I A I I a N ~ ~I I I > ~ ~ I N V1 i N I . W ! ~ m I ~ N °~' !- I rn I ! to N I ~ m o 1 rnl I i ~ I . I ,. t-•~ ~ ~ ~. I I V I I W ~m tD V m N ~ 4. tb N 00'SJ'19' E 101.4H I I r A / , y ~ ~l W ~ ~, O: I (P N ! VI Ir N 0x / / f O N /i !'~ ~ I' > I I w m ~ / nNi I m: I ~ I ! I W _ ~ /ai / O~y97,' u' W /' I i ~ 6~ ' I' N 0 bi ~ / i I I I- / ~ / . / / U idd ~ / ^~d~ I / V /ad ~~ /aa ~. -i~.7 ~ 0 I i ~ aoo ' ~ O ' I I I: / ~ li /. ~ i' I / ~ I 1' I: / --. I~'. I . I ,. -' ---- "J I - -- .~ -;_ _.. p~,~~ TI CIN c c.oc> t1 ~~ .U -.'. D v v,~omn s y<,~; D° ~;n= ~~? o 0~~: n no, ~v`~rl app o a~vxU b1 V o p. '"rto= ~oatn~~~ v "3=~f~= vv~ ~, 7. o~a~, ti -t ~~. n~y'O ~ y ~~ o ~o; n j l1'~^Tt ~ :n ] D~ i ~ - m) „` ~ . ~l .. 7r"'- CLARK RD. SE C~ r_^~ V- r ' ~_ i YyY U u II ~® a r~ d ... ~n ® I~°II G v V\J O ~..o-:a~-..~-- cri ~' ~ o ~ ~ O o DURANT - ~ i ~ D....... ~ ti--I m ~ r ~ ~ z ° r `~ fTl ' -I ... ?%~~~ -1 C7 F~ ; yF,p~ ~ ; Z MILL _ o .._ wn _ . a i ~~ C __ - AL - D = \ ~ CLARK ~~ VANCIL ~~j\ . ~ , -.. ~ .-- \ CREE! o .......9J-.. ... a O O DESIGNED BY: CRS ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ T _ oRAxri er: DJO VAL ~ ~' ° Z N a ~ cif O~ ... ~; ~~ _ Y('Y~. ~, 3tr~s9~ ~ 'd ~ ~-~, _ CHECKED BY: niq 'e4'3r ~~~ ~ J ~ z tryR I~ :i in : ~ ~ 5 a ~y~~r._ DATE: O9~~I9~O3 ° . , = 100 ~ g o ~~ 1 SCALE: ; I f•1 II ~I~II V'Y ~~~~~ &s'11~ V ~ W ~ W I61S Y BY: DATE: DIRECTOR OF PUDLIC WORKS YELM WASHINGTON APPROVAL E%PIRES: ~.~ 1~ 1~ ~~~ ~~ 1 t z-^ - ~ s .,_,,.~iYs ~'NA~~.Nlti C;rQN PO Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 360-458-3835 I~O~~CE O~ APPL1CAi'~O~l Mailed on: October 22, 2003 PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION: Yelm Terra Preliminary Plat Approximately 24 Acres on 105th Avenue SE, Between Mill Road and Clark Road LAND USE CASE: SUB-03-8353-YL An application submitted by Yelm Terra LLC, 4200 6th Ave. SE. Suite 301, Lacey, WA 98503, for the above referenced project was received by the City of Yelm on October 10, 2003. The City has determined the application to be complete on October 22, 2003. The application and any related documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Avenue W., Yelm WA. For additional information, please contact the Community Development Department at 360-458-3835. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project proposal is to subdivide 24.25 acres into 97 single-family residential lots. ENVIRONMENTAL and OTHER DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION: An Environmental Checklist, Traffic Impact Analysis, and Preliminary Stormwater Report, was submitted with the application. Additional Information or Project Studies Requested by the City: No additional information is requested at this time. No preliminary determination of consistency with City development regulations has been made. At minimum, this project will be subject to the following plans and regulations: City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Title (17), Critical Areas Ordinance (14.08), Storm Water Drainage Design and Erosion Control Manual (DOE), Uniform Building Code, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Title (14), Road Design Standards, Platting and Subdivision Title (16), and the Shoreline Master Program. The City of Yelm invites your comments early in the review of this proposal. Comments should be directed to Tami Merriman, Community Development Department, P.O. Box 479, Yelm WA 98597, 360- 458-3835. THE 15-DAY PUBLIC COMMENT PER10D ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON NOVEIVtBER 6, 2003 This notice has been provided to appropriate local and state agencies, and property owners within 300 feet of the project site. These recipients, and any others who submit a written request to be placed on the mailing list, will also receive the following items when available or if applicable: Environmental Threshold Determination, Notice of Public Hearing and Notice of Final Decision. If the proposed project requires a City Council decision, it will be mailed to all those who participate in the public hearing and to anyone else requesting the decision in writing. Additionally, there will be a 14-day public comment period if an environmental determination is issued. Opportunities for appeal occur within twenty one (21) days after the date the environmental determination is issued. City Council decision can be appealed through Superior Court. Appeals of site plan review decisions may be filed within 14 days of Notice of Final Decision. ~, _~ a ~a v ~~e n n E,~ a ~ ~ ~u a I~? ;g~ z ~P ~w ~? c '~2=~ ' I CP3Y' i2.O I - I - a ~ 'i . ---~°r- --- -~-r--~~ w ~ Y I o f o f =N = a~ i -- ~ ----- ,~ i~--- ,, ~ , ~! _ i ~ - I I i ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ 1 i 1 I. a c ~~ 1 ~, ~ 1, ~ o f ~ ! ~ \• \\~ 1 yj c ' ~ - ~ I ` ~ u I I / J' ~ I I ~ ~ - e ~ ~~ ~ •". ~ nn I Y..1 W ~ I C ~ ___. ___ _~_'I till ~ u __ _I~ _~ y JJi ~. _- f Al ___ __ ~~ ' , t; j~ _: 1 _ i~~ ~ o -l, ~ ~'i 1 i ei 1 ~ = I I I ~ J i 4 1 a a a I~ m e ~ ~ ~ / a, b ` / I I 9 /i / = N i l; I i 1 - ~ t /r ~ ~In 0o/i /i HH..JJ ~ I ~ i / ~ ~ - ~ ,~, :~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~~ ' i ~• . ,i a / ~ i~ ~ ~ , • i , ~ :. i ,~ ,.i~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ CLARK RD. SE `~~ _ '~_ 3 4= -- f~ r ~ // a ® `~`] ~a _~ g~ ~~ ~ .. -i 1 ~~ I ;_~ ~- _- CnJEA SNrcT '' rYTi 7 . }~ai~ `' ~! ~~ ?1't ~ ( Y~.i.J,i9 1~~~1, -- _ ., ___ t c f ' November 3, 2003 Tami Merriman Communit~~ Development Dept. P. O. Box 479 Yelrn, WA 98597 RE: Yelm Terra Preliminary Plat Dear Ms. Merriman: NOV 0~'r' The comments provided belo~r address the impacts the Yelm Terra subdivision, as proposed, will have on the community. The developer of Yelm Terra subdivision proposes to provide inadequate access to and from the development. All egress traffic is proposed to be onto 105th Way. Even worse, the developer proposes to close 105th Way where it accesses Mill Road. This will direct ail the subdivision traffic as well as traffic generated by the current residents on 105th Way to one point: the intersection of 105th Way and Clark Road. The traffic report provided for this proposal did not adequately address the impact this will have to the residents on ].05th Way, particularly to those with driveways within 350 feet of the stop sign. Traffic from the development has a strong potential of blocking ttivo driveways serving four residences during morning peak hour traffic. The driveway closest to the stop sign is only 60 feet away from this intersection. and, will be the one most affected. Closing 105th Way will. also impact the public who use this road to bypass the stagnant traffic on Yelm Avenue. Peak hour traffic is so bad in the downtown area now that it takes about I S minutes to get from the Yelm Avenue/Clark Road intersection to the high. school. People often. take 105th Way to b}pass this congestion. The City of Yelm must not allow the developer to ignore his responsibilities to provide adequate ingress/egress at the site, and to not harm neighboring properties. To mitigate the traffic impact for this development, the developer must purchase property adjacent to 105th Way near Mill Road to widen the road at this end, and open 3r`' Street to two-way traffic. Yelm City Code Section 16.16.090 states, "The lad-out ofstreets shall provide for• cnntim.ratiorz of streets eristin~~r in adjoining su6divisiofas." Allowing the developer to proceed with the subdivision as proposed will be in violation of this code as well as Code Sections 16.16.110 and 1.6.16.120, which do not allow for dead end streets greater than 600 feet, or extend 660 feet without including a provision for at least one intersection. The City_ 's Comprehensive Plan also demands that 105`}' remain open at both ends and that 3"~ Street be developed for rivo-way traffic as provided in Section B of the Transportation Element, as follows: ll2e objective of the Trat2sportatio;2 Plan is to provide a tort-effective t2ettivork to accott2tnodate travel in at2d around the core area. To ctccort2pli.sh this objective, 1 eln2 will actively p2nsue: 1. A connected-Streets• policy to promote the eff ciet2t flox~ oj'tta~~c K~itl2it2 the cotntnunity. 2. ~~ SerIC'S oj~COYZt2eCted at'te;'IalS 11'lZIC1Z Yvill pern2it traffic to bypass the urban core if it is tnet'ely passing tl2rouglz, to reduce cot2gestion in the central core. The Cite of Yeim must take into consideration the fact that the large-acreage properties to the south of the proposed subdivision are in Yelm's Urban Growth Boundary and dvill be annexed rota the City in a few years. Land costs will increase tremendously and many of these property o«jners will be forced to, or desire to subdivide their o~~~n properties. If the Yelm Terra's preliminary plat is not conditioned to mitigate the traffic impacts it will have on Clark Road and 1051 Way, it will unfairly require a later developer or the taxpayers to mitigate the problems created by the developer of Yelm Terra. The City would be very short sighted if it allowed the developer to minimize his expenses by closing the Mill Road end of 105` Way. This avenue of travel will be increasingly needed by the public as more housing developments are built. It will also help to relieve the traffic backups through downtown Yelm until a nes~~ bypass road is constructed, which may be many years from. now. As this subdivision will be adding a large number of vehicles to 105`h Way, the developer should be required to fix the dangerous condition that exists at the intersection of 105`h Way and Clark Road. A high. embankment on the northwest corner of the intersection blocks drivers' views of southbound traffic on Clark Road. Vehicles entering onto Clark Road from 105`h Way must drive their vehicle almost to the center line of Clark Road before they can see approaching southbound traffic. Vehicles regularly travel. at high rates of speed on Clark Rd and with the extra traffic resulting from the new subdivision, a fatality accident is imminent. , The traffic study provided by Transportation Engineering Northwest, was totally inadequate in showing the significant, negative impacts that will. be imposed on the community if they are allowed to develop without improving both ends of 105`h Way and 3r`' Street. In addition to staying silent about the impacts closing 105"' Way will have to the public and residents who use l05`h Way, the transportation engineering firm collected data for the traffic study during the summer when school ~~~~as not in session. Summer traffic in Yelm flows far smoother than when school. is in session. Much of that is because the high school and middle school are on Yelm Highway/Avenue. During the school year, school buses and parents driving their kids to and from school slow traffic. When buses stop to pick up or drop off children, they hold up traffic in Moth directions for several minutes each time. High school kids driving to school significantly increase the delay time for traffic on Yelm Avenue. Currently, driving from the Clark Rd/Yelm Ave intersection to the high school at 7:00 a.m. during a school day takes 10 minutes due to the stop and cras~,~l traffic. During the off-peak time, it takes 3 three minutes to travel this same distance. You do not have to be traffic engineer to know that that delay time is far higher than 37.6 seconds as indicated in Table 2 of the transportation report. To many of us who travel this route each work day, Yelm AvenLae is already considered to be at a level of service "F". Adding such a large number of homes to this area and taking away access to Mill Road from i 05`I' will result in a very significant negative impact to Yelm Avenue between Clark and 1'` Street. If 105`h Way is open to t~vo lanes where it meets Vlill Road, there will be far less impact to Yelm Avenue. Another impact the proposal will have that was not addressed by the traffic study is the additional time it will take the fire department located on Mill Road, to get to emergencies on 105`'' Way, I would think the City would be doing all they could to reduce the time it takes to reach an emergency rather than increase that time. Accuracy of other areas of the traffic study is also questionable. The traffic report indicated the speed limit on 1'` Street is 35 mph within the city limits. That is incorrect. The correct. speed limit is ?5 mph on this section of road. The traffic engineer also reports the posted speed limits on Clark Rd and 105' Way are 25 mph. This is also incorrect. The posted limits are 35 mph. I do not know if these errors contribute to distorting the analysis of the study but if they do, the study should be thrown out and completed by an impartial transportation engineering fine. One is led to believe that if they aren't willing to take the time to find out the speed limits posted for the roads on which they are reporting, they are also not taking the time to provide a sound analysis of existing conditions and projected impacts to the traffic levels. I hope City staff and the hearing examiner will see that a new traffic study is required by an impartial transportation engineering fine. The new traffic study should take into consideration hozv to mitigate the negative impacts to existing residents on 105' Way, and how to mitigate the delay time created by emergency service vehicles who must travel further distances to residences on 105'h Way when it is closed. The only feasible solutions to mitigate the negative impact to the neighboring property owners and the public who use l OSth Way as a through road is for the City to condemn. property near -Mill Road on lOStt' Way and widen the road to City of Yelm standards. The developer should be required to compensate the ov~~ners of the condemned property. Additionally, the road to the north proposed to be open only for ingress to the subdivision but closed to egress traffic should be widened to allow both ingress and egress traffic. If that is not feasible, another road from the north side of the subdivision should be opened for egress only. One possibility is an extension of 104`'' Ave from Mill Road to the subdivision. Sufficient access from. the subdivision on roads other than 105`" Way would provide some relief from traffic impacts to l05"' Way and Clark Road. There are three other issues that the SEPA Threshold Determination should mitigate. The first is construction noise. The developer should be limited to working no earlier than 7 a.m. and no later than 5 p.m. on tiveekdays. No work should take place on weekends to maintain the peace of residents near the site. A second issue that should be addressed is the impact to privacy that is currently enjoyed b_y the subdivision's neighbors. A six- foot-high fence should be constructed around the development to provide some privacy and hopefully dim some of the noise generated by 97 families. In keeping with the intentions of SEPA, the developer should provide access to Cochrane Park. The subdivision is adjacent to the park and a path or trail should be constructed for use by the public ~vho live nearby, including those outside the subdivision. I hope that the Cits~ and the Hearing Examiner will take these comments into account and see that the developer's proposal will create a negative impact to those residents ~vho live on 105' Way and Clark Road, and will further impact future development by eliminating ar restricting access to roadways when more roadways are needed to permit traffic to bypass congested areas. Please place me on your mailing list to receive the Environmental Threshold Determination, Notice of Public Hearing, and Notice of Final Decision. Sincere y, ~~r.~-~ l~~ Kelly an Elizabeth Jorgenson 15939 105`h Way SE Yelm, WA 98597 ~~~~~`~ ~5~~3 ~~S ~_~~S~-= l~~ ~ l~0 ~ 1~5 ~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~L ~~~~-~~~c~ ~~ . ~ ~. ~~~ ~ . ( ,~ ~. ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ 1~~~ ~~~ ~ J ~~ 9 ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~u /- a V' ~ ! A n f ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ r ~~.. ~~ ~ ~~'~ h~,~ CIA Q. J. Q.~QD~ n ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ U!~ ~ ~ ~~~L , ~~ ~ ~-~~ ~u ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ , ~~~ /~~ ~ ~ ~ `.' I' 11, an ,h , n ~ 1/Yl ~'" ~~ I ~~ ~ ~7"f) SEPA NO: 8353 MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Proponent: Yelm Terra, LLC Description of Proposal: Subdivide 24.25 acres into 97 single-family residential lots. The project includes the construction of stormwater facilities, interior streets, and street improvements to 105th Avenue SE. Location of the Proposal: The project site is located between on 105th Avenue SE, between Clark Road and Mill Road. Section~i'ownship/Range: Section 30, Township 17 North Range 2 East, W.M. Threshold Determination: The City of Yelm as lead agency for this action has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Conditions/Mitigating Measures: SEE ATTACHED Lead agency: Responsible Official: Date of Issue: Co Deadline: ppe e ' Gra Beck, Commui City of Yelm Grant Beck, Community Development Director December 26, 2003 January 9, 2004 at 5:00 P.M. January 16, 2004 at 5:00 P.M. ~- city Development Director This Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance (MDNS) is issued pursuant to Washington Administrative Code 197-11-340 (2). Comments must be submitted to Tami Merriman, Community Development Department, at City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Avenue West, P.O. Box 479, Yelm, WA 98597, by January 9, 2004, at 5:00 P.M. The City of Yelm will not act on this proposal prior January 16, 2004, at 5:00 P.M. You may appeal this determination to the Yelm Hearing Examiner, at above address, by submitting a written appeal no later than January 16, 2004, at 5:00 P.M. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Grant Beck, Community Development Director, to learn more about the procedures for SEPA appeals. This MDNS is not a permit and does not by itself constitute project approval. The applicant must comply with all applicable requirements of the City of Yelm prior to receiving construction permits which may include but are not limited to the City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code (Title 17 YMC), Critical Areas Code (Chapter 14.08 YMC), Storm water Drainage Design and Erosion Control Manual (DOE), Uniform Building Code, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (Title 14 YMC), Road Design Standards, Platting and Subdivision Code (Title 16 YMC), and the Shoreline Master Program. ------------------------------------------------------ DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE Published: Nisqually Valley News, Friday, January 2, 2004 Posted in public areas: Friday, December 26, 2004 Copies to: All agencies/citizens on SEPA mailing list and adjacent property owners Dept. of Ecology w/checklist ATTACHMENT SEPA Case Number 8353 Findings of Fact This Mitigated Determination of Non Significance is based on the project as proposed and the impacts and potential mitigation measures reflected in the following environmental documents: • Environmental Checklist (dated October, 2003, prepared by SCA Consulting Group) • Traffic Impact Analysis (dated September 2003, and updated November 2003, prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest) • Preliminary Storm Drainage and Erosion Control Report (dated October 2003, prepared by SCA Consulting Group) 2. The traffic impact analysis (TIA) submitted as part of the subdivision application indicates that the project will generate 928 vehicle trips per day, with a PM peak of 98 vehicles per hour. The TIA, assuming a baseline annual growth rate of 4%, indicated that: The intersection of 105th Ave, and Clark Road will be at a. Level of Service (LOS) A, with an average delay of 9 seconds. The signalized intersection of Clark Road and Yelm Avenue will be at a LOS A, with an average delay of 9 seconds. The intersection of 3`d Street and Yelm Avenue will be at LOS C, with an average delay of 22 seconds. The intersection of Mosman and 1St Street (507) will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 33 seconds. The signalized intersection of Yelm Avenue and First Street will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 48 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue West (510) and SW Longmire Street will be at LOS F, with an average delay of 56 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue (507) and NE 103`d Street will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 34 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue East (507) and Bald Hills Road will be at LOS C, with an average- delay of 30 seconds. Frontage improvements will be constructed along 105th Avenue SE. The subdivision will provide for a road connection to the existing neighborhood to the north, with a narrowed street, traffic signs, no parking and a raised pedestrian crossing. The subdivision will provide connecting sidewalks from Yelm Terra to the sidewalks in the Prairie View subdivision. 3. The City of Yelm has adopted a concurrency management system as required by the Growth Management Act. Chapter 15.40 YMC (Concurrency Management) is designed to ensure that the improvements required to support development are available at the time of development. A concurrency determination may be issued for a proposal as it relates to transportation issues when: the development provides on-site frontage improvements; the project makes off-site improvements as necessary to provide for the safe movement of traffic; and the project makes a contribution to projects identified the six year transportation improvement program in the form of a Transportation Facilities Charge. The Growth Management Act at Section 36.70.070 (6)(b) RCW states that a finding of concurrency can be issued when required improvements are in place at the time of development or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. Improvements to West Yelm Avenue, including atwo-way center turn lane, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. West Yelm Avenue is a State Highway (SR 510). There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Improvements to the Mosman Street/SR 507 intersection including intersection realignment, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Improvements to Mosman Street to 2"d Street including widening the roadway, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Improvements to Mill Road including road realignment, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Private streets within the City limits shall not be allowed except when approved by the City and when all conditions of Section 46.070, Development Guidelines are met. Section 46.070(6) states that private streets are not allowed when the street is connected to two public streets. Section 4B.150 Yelm Development guidelines states that sight distance at intersections shall be in conformance with the WSDOT Design Manual and the AASHTO Green Book. The City's Comprehensive Transportation Plans connectivity policy recognizes that increasing connections throughout the City not only reduces traffic congestion, but also increases the sense of unity of the community. Section16.16.090 Yelm Municipal Code (YMC) states that the layout of streets shall provide for continuation of streets existing in adjoining subdivisions. 5. Mosman Street from 3`d to SR 507, and 3`d Street from_the Praire View subdivision to SR 507 are currently substandard in that they have travel lanes less than 12 feet in width in areas. 3`d Street in the Prarie View subdivsion does not meet current standards for a neighborhood collector street. There is a berm at the intersection of Clark Road and 105th Avenue which may limit sight distance below acceptable standards with the addition of traffic to 105th Avenue. 6. The public right-of-way at 105th Avenue ends at the western property line of the development and 105th continues as a one lane, curved, right-of-use road to Mill Road and SR 507. This right-of- use road does not meet any public street standards, is a one-way street used for two way traffic, and contains no pull-outs. The development will provide alternate connectivity in the form of a public street from 105`h, through Yelm Terra and Prairie View, along Mosman to SR 507. 7. Section 14.16.110 YMC provides for the preservation of trees on private property with new development and requires that existing trees not be removed until a final decision is made regarding the feasibility of preserving existing trees. The existing trees on this property are a group of large Douglas Fir. The trees located in the area of proposed stormwater treatment areas are in danger of future tree failure with grading near the base of the trees. Existing trees that are located in areas of qualified open space should be protected during development with protective fencing at the drip line. All machinery shall be kept out of the drip line. 8. Chapter14.12 YMC requires the dedication of open space for all residential development. Section 14.12.050 YMC lists four (4) attributes for qualification of open space. Section 14.12.060 allows for a fee in lieu of open space under certain conditions. 9. The Yelm School District has adopted a school mitigation requirement based on the demand that new residential units create for additional school services and facilities. Additional demands on the school system will be mitigated through the requirement that the developer enter into a mitigation agreement with the District. Mitigation Measures The developer shall mitigate transportation impacts based on the new residential P.M. peak hour trips generated by the project. The Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) shall be based on 1.01 new peak hour trips per residential unit. The proponent will be responsible for a TFC of $757.50 per dwelling unit which is payable at time of building permit. Credit should be given for the existing single-family dwelling. Prior to final subdivision approval, the developer shall complete the following transportation improvements: a. The north half of 105th Avenue shall be improved to City Standards for a Neighborhood Collector from Clark Road, to the western most property line of the proposed subdivision. b. The right-of-use portion of 105th Avenue shall be blocked by a barricade meeting Yelm Development Guidelines and Manual of Uniform Trafffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards at Mill Road and signed pursuant to MUTCD as a private road with no though access. c. The developer shall ensure sight distance at the intersection of Clark Road and 105th Avenue meets Yelm Development Guidelines and ASHTO specifications. d. 3`d Street, between the proposed subdivision and Mosman Street, shall be improved to a 24 foot asphalt driving surface with vertical concrete curb on both sides, and signage for no parking. e. 3`d Street, from Mosman to Yelm Avenue East (507) and Mosman from 3`d Street to First Street (507) shall be improved to a 24 feet driving surface with 2-foot shoulders. f. Sidewalks from the proposed development must connect to the sidewalks in the Parkview deve-opment, pursuant to the TIA. Prior to any land clearing, a site plan including the location of all trees to be retained and removed (exceeding 8 inches in diameter) must be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. Tree losses shall be mitigated by planting at least a 2 to 1 mix of evergreen (70%) and deciduous trees (30%), with a minimum of a 2-inch caliper measured at 4 feet from the ground, around the perimeter of the storm pond areas, and in the qualified open space areas. Trees to remain must be protected during construction pursuant to Chapter 14.16 YMC. 4. Pay open space "Fee in Lieu of" for the difference between the qualified (usable) open space, and the required open space. The developer shall enter into an agreement with Yelm Community Schools to mitigate project impacts to the School District. -i1T~: .:~~ /F. ~ ~-~ i ~ `, Jl J1~+s[ ©~ ~yasi-~i~~jl~l~i D~PAR I MAN i O~ ECOLOGI' P.Q. 8oz 1?i7~ a Ofvmpia, '~i'a~h;,-:~ton 98.0-..'-i:75 = (360) 40T-6300 January 9, 2004 Ms. Tami Merriman Community Development Department City of Yelm 105 Yelm Avemie West Yelm, WA 98597 Your address _' _-i is in the ~-~ -- -- =~ -- --- - I watershed Dear Ms. Merriman: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the mitigated determination of nonsignificance for the Yelm Terra (SEPA #8353) located between 105' Avenue Southeast, between Clark Road and Mill Road, as proposed by Yelm Terra LLC. We reviewed the environmental checldist and have the following comments: Water Quality Any discharge of sediment-laden ninoff or other pollutants to waters of the state is in violation of Chapter 90.48, Water Pollution Control, and WAC 173-201A, Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Washington, and is subject to enforcement action. Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. These control measures must be effective to prevent soil from being carried<into surface water by stormwater runoff. Sand, silt, and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered pollutants. Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot enter the old drainage ditch or cause water quality degradation of state waters. Erosion and sediment control is a lcey to preserving habitat and preventing denudation of a developing area. The following practices are recommended: Clearing limits and/or any easements or required buffers should be staked and flagged in the field. All temporary erosion control systems should be designed to contain the runoff ti-om the developed t«~o year. 24-hour design storm without eroding. Provision should be made to minimize the tracking of sediment by construction vehicles onto pared public roads. If sediment is deposited, it should be cleaned every day b}' shoveling or sweeping,. 1~~atcr clearing should only be done after the area has been shoveled out or s«'ept. Pant and «~all tinishin~~ equipment ~~'ash «~attr shoulc] b~ disposed of in a ~t~ay' which ~~ ill not ad~~rr~cl~~~ impact the «~ater qualit}' of-the state. Ms. Tami Merriman January 9, 2004 Page 2 The owner of a construction site which disturbs five acres or more of total land area, and which has or will have a discharge of stormwater to a surface water or to a stone sewer. must apply for coverage under Ecology-s General Permit for Stonmwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities. Owners of sites where less than five acres of total land area will be disturbed must also apply if the construction activity is part of a larger contiguous plan of development or sale in which more than five acres will eventially be disturbed. Discharge of stonmwater from such sites without a permit is a violation of federal and state law and the owner will be subject to enforcement action by the Department of Ecology or tlu-ough third party lawsuits. For construction of subdivisions, the five acre threshold which triggers the NPDES permit requirement applies to land that is disturbed by the land owner, land owner's agent, or by an entity which has obtained a use agreement (e.g., lease, easement) from the land owner. Include acreage which is disturbed (e.g., graded) prior to its sale to independent contractor(s). A stoz-mwater permit application form, referred to as a Notice of Intent, can be obtained by calling Ecology's Stornlwater Request Line (360) 407-7156 or Linda Matlock at (360) 407-6437. Applicants are encouraged to submit completed forms and publish public notices more than 38 days prior to the planned start of construction to avoid delays to the project. Water Resources The proponent is responsible for inspecting the site to determine the location of all existing wells. Any unused wells must be properly decommissioned and decommissioning reports submitted to Ecology as described in Chapter 173-160 WAC entitled "Minimum Standards for the Construction and Maintenance of Wells." This includes resource protection wells and any dewatering wells installed during the construction phase of the project. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these coirunents, please call Roberta Woods (Water Quality) at (360) 407-6296 and/or Deb Hunemuller (Water Resources) at (360) 407-0290. Sincerely, ~~~ ~` ~, ,~ ~.., . ~--' Jeri Benibe Administrative Coordinator JB: smb (03-7970) ee: Roberta Woods, WQ Linda Matlock, WQ Deb Hunemuller, WR elm Terra. LLC (Applicant) ., . .... JAN .~ ~~ 10fl4 January y, X004 P.0. Box 3485 Grant Beck, Community Development Director Lacey, WA 98509-3485 City Of Yelm (360) 493-6002 PO BOX 479 (360) 493-2476 Fax Yelm, WA 98597 sca@scaconsultinggroup.com www.thescagroup.com RE: Yeim Terra -MDNS Comments SCA#03008 Dear Mr. Beck: This letter is to formally comrr:ent on the Mitigation Measures attached *_o the Yelm Terra MDNS dated December 26, 2003. Specifically, we wish to comment on Finding of Fact #5 and Mitigation Measures 2d and 2e relating to off-site roadway improvements. Finding of Fact #5 states in part; "3rd Street in the Prairie View subdivision does not meet current standards for a neighborhood collector street." This is a true statement, however, it should be pointed out that the subject section of street was built to neighborhood collector standards at the time the subdivision was built. The Park View subdivision is not that old and the City required 3rd street to be stubbed to the south. This means that the City anticipated and encouraged more traffic to utilize this section street and asked for the street to be built accordingly. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 2d should not be attached to the Yelm Terra MDNS. 3rd Street within the Park View subdivision was built to the requested street standard in place at the time the plat was developed. A change in the street, standards is not an action caused by the proposed development and it should not be the responsibility of Yelm Terra to update the street section. If existing on-street parking is an issue with traffic safety on 3rd Street, then the City needs to take the responsibility to enforce the no parking requirements to ensure proper traffic safety. Furthermore, the traffic impact analysis addressed conditions on 3rd Street and recommended the placement of no parking signs and a stop sign at Mossman Road. There is no discussion or recommendation in the TIA that such a mitigation measure is necessary. Mitigation Measure 2d is simply not supported by the TIA or by the expanded Finding of Fact outlined above. We ask the City to withdraw or consider other alternatives for Mitigation Measure 2d from the MDNS. We ask for a clarification on Mitigation Measure 2e. 2e requires 3rd Street to be improved to a 24 foot driving surface with 2-foot shoulders, What is the expected surface composition of the shoulders, gravel or asphalt pavement? Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the MDNS for Yelm Terra. We hope the City will be able to respond to our questions a.nd comments within the next couple of days. In the event we do not hear back from you prior to the January 16 appeal deadline, we wish to inform the City we intend to maintain our due process by filing the appropriate appeal documentation. We look forward to your response and if you have any questions, please contact me at 360.493.6002. 4200 Sixth Ave SE, Suite 301 Lacey, WA 98503 SLC Development June 6, 2003 Page 2 cc: (g:\text\pr\003\03GOo\BeckGi0904.doc) a 01/09/2004 14:14 FAX 253 512 2268 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1002 3anuary 9, 2004 Grant Beck Yelm Community Development Director Dear Mr. Beck: I have reviewed the revised traffic report and the MDNS provide~3 for the Ye1m Terra Subdivision. The t7affic report does not accurately reflect the current delay time for traffic turning left onto Clark Road from Yelm Avenue, During peak hows, traffic moving east is typically bumper to bumper, traveling at approximately 20 miles per hour. When turning south onto Clarl: Road from Yelm Avenue, drivers often cannot find a break in this line of traffic until the traffic light has changed to red. As a result, only one car can turn left {illegally} for each light change. Granted, this does ;not happen all the time, but it does occur often enough for one to know that adding 97 new homes on 105° Way SE will result in longer lines of traffic trying to turn left onto Clark. The City is aware that Yelm Avenue i.s at a transportation Level ~~f Service "F" and should zequire Yelm Terra LLC to reduce or eliminate the resulting additional impact:: their proposal will have on traffic flow. The MDNS should be revised, adding a new mitigation measure requiring the applicant to install a left turn signal to allow safe movement of vehicles turning onto Clarlc Road from Yelm Avenue. I would also like to bring up my concern about the impact this project will have on my ability to get out of my driveway during peak bows. As I had specified in my previous letter, my driveway is only about 60 feet from the intersection. Three or more vehicles backed up ~on 105°i Way to tum onto Clark will prevent anyone from leaving my driveway. Despite the traffic report's indication that this road will remain Level of Service "A", I am quite swe drat after the 97 residences in Yelm Terra are occupied, I will be forced to wait for a significant time for cars to let me onto 105`" Way so I can leave for work in the mornings. This makes my existing garage and driveway unusable. I will be forced to park in my pasture west of my house just so I can leave for work at a reasonable time. At the very least, please consider a requirement that the deve1ope~r provide the City with a $10,000 bond, to be held for minimum of one year after all new residences are sold. If the impact that I believe will occw does occw, then the money should be used toward constru~~ting a new driveway and two-car garage for the residents of 15939 105`" Way'. The new driveway and garage will he located west of the house, futther from 105``' Way where traffic stopped to turn onto Clark }Zd. will no longer impact the residents of this property. If the impact to the residents does not materialize, the bond will be released to the developer. Thank you for your serious consideration of these mitigation mes~swes. I look forward to receiving youx final threshold determination. Sincerely, Beth 3orgenson ~ The owner oCthis property will ma7ce up the difYerence in construction coats. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING YELM HEARING EXAMINER DATE: Monday, March 1, 2004, 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Yelm Public Works, 901 Rhoton Road, Yelm WA 1. PURPOSE: Public Hearing to receive comments regarding the proposed Yelm Terra Subdivision of 24.25 acres into 97 single family residential lots. The project site is located on 105t" Ave. SE, Yelm, WA, between Ciark Road and Mill Road. Case No. SUB-03-8353-YL Applicant: Yelm Terra LLC 2. PURPOSE: Public Meeting to hear testimony from parties of record, regarding an appeal of certain conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued for the Yelm Terra Subdivision. Case #APP-04-0005-YL Appellant: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell Applicant: Yelm Terra LLC The City ofi Yelm Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed Yelm Terra Subdivision, and to hear testimony from parties of record, regarding an appeal of certain conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for the Yelm Terra Subdivision. The Hearing Examiner will make a decision on the matter within 10 days after the meeting. ~ .. Parties of Record may testify at the meeting on Monday, March 1, 2004. Any related documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Ave W., Yelm, WA. For additional information, please contact Tami Merriman at (360) 458-3835. The City of Yelm provides reasonable accommodations to persons with disabilities. If you need special accommodations to attend or participate in this hearing, call the City Clerk, Agnes Bennick, at (360) 458-8404, at least 4 days before the meeting. ATTEST: City of Yelm ,~ J , ~' `~~ ~~ ~. ag'nes Bennick, City Clerk DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE Published in the Nisqually Valley News: Friday, February 20, 2004 Mailed to Adjacent Property Owners and Posted in Public Places: February 17, 2004 Staff Report City of Yelm Community Development Department To: Stephen K. Causseaux, Jr., Hearing Examiner From: Grant Beck, Director of Community Developmen Date: February 6, 2004 Subject: Appeal of Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance SUB-03-8353-YL APL-04-0005-YL Appellant: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell 15715 105th Avenue Yelm, WA 98597 Applicant: Yelm Terra, LLC Location: 105th Avenue between Clark Road and Mill Road. Proposal: Appeal Findings of Fact 2 and 6 of the MDNS issued for the proposed Yelm Terra subdivision. I. INTRODUCTION Dr. Lee Anne Campbell appeals the issuance of a Mitigated Determination of Non- significance for a proposed 97 lot subdivision. SpecificallX, Dr. Campbell take issue with the mitigation measure which requires the closure of 1051 Avenue at Mill Road. II. BACKGROUND Yelm Terra, LLC applied for a subdivision of approximately 25 acres into 97 residential lots. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was submitted with the application as part of an expanded environmental checklist. The Community Development Department reviewed the TIA and requested additional information and clarification, which resulted in an updated TIA. Based on the environmental checklist and TIA, the Community Development Department on December 26, 2003, issued a Mitigated Determination of Non- significance pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, it's rules, and Chapter 14.04 YMC. The determination contained the following findings of fact subject to Dr. Campbell's appeal: 2. The traffic impact analysis (TIA) submitted as part of the subdivision application indicates that the project will generate 928 vehicle trips per day, with a PM peak of 98 vehicles per hour. The TIA, assuming a baseline annual growth rate of 4%, indicated that: The intersection of 105tH Ave, and Clark Road will be at a Level of Service (LOS) A, with an average delay of 9 seconds. The signalized intersection of Clark Road and Yelm Avenue will be at a LOS A, with an average delay of 9 seconds. The intersection of 3rd Street and Yelm Avenue will be at LOS C, with an average delay of 22 seconds. The intersection of Mosman and 1St Street (507) will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 33 seconds. The signalized intersection of Yelm Avenue and First Street will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 48 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue West (510) and SW Longmire Street will be at LOS F, with an average delay of 56 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue (507) and NE 103rd Street will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 34 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue East (507) and Bald Hills Road will be at LOS C, with an average delay of 30 seconds. Frontage improvements will be constructed along 105tH Avenue SE. The subdivision will provide for a road connection to the existing neighborhood to the north, with a narrowed street, traffic signs, no parking and a raised pedestrian crossing. The subdivision will provide connecting sidewalks from Yelm Terra to the sidewalks in the Prairie View subdivision. 6. The public right-of-wa~ at 105tH Avenue ends at the western property line of the development and 105 n continues as a one lane, curved, right-of-use road to Mill Road and SR 507. This right-of-use road does not meet any public street standards, is a one-way street used for two way traffic, and contains no pull-outs. The development will provide alternate connectivity in the form of a public street from 105tH, through Yelm Terra and Prairie View, along Mosman to SR 507. Although not included in the appeal, findings 2 and 6 are the facts which support the proposed mitigating condition which requires the closure of 105tH Avenue SE at Mill Road. Specifically, mitigating condition 2.b. states that "the right-of-use portion of 105tH Avenue shall be blocked by a barricade meeting Yelm Development Guidelines and Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices {MUTCD) standards at Mill Road and signed pursuant to MUTCD as a private road with no though access". February 6, 2Q04 Page 2 of 4 III. ISSUES Dr. Campbell is concerned that the closure of 105th Street at Mill Road will be a adverse impact to herself and the neighborhood by impacting privacy by creating an area for public use at the end of the closed road, delaying fire and police protection services for the area. The appeal indicates that the proposed project will create more traffic than stated in the TIA which will impact the use of 105th as a short cut to avoid traffic on Yelm Avenue. It is also noted that the neighborhood is currently impacted by `by-pass' traffic through speeding and congestion. IV. ANALYSIS Trip Generation The trip generation figures used by the developer in the Traffic Impact Analysis are those from the Trip Generation Manual prepared by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. This document is the standard for evaluating traffic generation by most jurisdictions in the State of Washington and is the standard in Yelm for calculating Traffic Facilities Charges and for the preparation and review of TIA's. The traffic distribution from the proposed development was prepared by the City based on a local traffic model. The distribution pattern was developed in two ways -assuming 105th Avenue SE remained connected to Mill Road and assuming it was a dead end road in order to fairly evaluate potential impacts of both scenarios. The appeal did not contain any evidence that the project would generate more traffic than the ITE manual would predict, although it did note that additional evidence would be presented at the hearing. Emergency Services AccesslConnected Streets As noted in finding of fact 6, the development will be creating a new connection between 105th Avenue and downtown Yelm, Yelm Avenue, and State Route 507. The creation of this new connection factored into the requirement that 105th Avenue SE, which is a substandard, one-way street west of the pro~osed development, be closed for safety reasons. The new connection runs from 105 h Avenue SE, through Yelm Terra to 3rd Street from which point access to Yelm Avenue via 3rd or State Route 507 via Mosman is possible. These roads are all two lane City Streets which will be improved further as part of the proposed development. Although Fire Station 21 is located on Mill Road emergency access to the homes on 105 should not be impacted by increased service times as fire apparatus will not February 6, 2004 Page 3 of 4 negotiate the winding, one lane section of 105th Avenue SE, according to Chief Mark King. Access to emergency response from the police will mostly likely be improved after development of Yelm Terra as the police station is located on Mosman Street and the new connection through 3rd Street provides direct access to 105th Avenue. I. CONCLUSION The mitigating conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Non-significance are appropriate and are based on identified potential significant adverse impacts attributable to the development. LIST OF EXHIBITS Appeal Notice and Letter Traffic Impact Analysis MDNS Letters regarding MDNS Map February 6, 2004 Page 4 of 4 Ye1m Terra Play Yelm, Washington Traffic Impact Study November 25, 2003 Prepared for: SCA Consulting Group PO Box 3485 4200 - 6th Ave, Suite 301 Lacey, WA 98509-3485 Prepared by: Transportation Engineering Northwest Transportation Engineering/Operations • Impact Studies • Design Services • Transportation Planning/Forecasting 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PMB 323 • Redmond, WA 98052 • Office/Mobile (206) 396-8286 • Fax (425) 398-5779 Project Manager: ]eff Schramm Schramm@tenw.com Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington Table of Contents Updated Traffic Impact Study FINDINGS 8~ CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. ..2 Project Description .................................................................................................................... ..2 Traffic Study Approach .............................................................................................................. ..2 Primary Data and Information Sources ...................................................................................... ..3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................ ..6 Study Area ................................................................................................................................. ..6 Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................................... ..6 Intersection Level of Service (LOS) ........................................................................................... ..9 Planned Transportation Improvements ...................................................................................... 11 DETERMINATION OF IMPACT ...................................................................................................... 12 Trip Generation .......................................................................................................................... 12 Trip Distribution and Assignment ............................................................................................... 12 Traffic Volume Impact ................................................................................................................ 14 Intersection LOS Impact ............................................................................................................ 14 Non-Motorized Impacts .............................................................................................................. 18 Site Access Analysis ................................................................................................................. 18 MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................................................. 20 Appendix A -Existing Intersection Traffic Volumes Appendix B -Intersection LOS Analysis Results Transportation Eng;neering Northwest i November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Updated Yelm, Washington Traffic Impact Study List of Figures and Tables Figure 1. Project Vicinity ..............................................................................................................................4 Figure 2. Proposed Site Plan ..................................................................................................................... ..5 Figure 3. Existing Channelization ............................................................................................................... ..7 Figure 4. Existing 2003 PM Peak Hour Volumes ....................................................................................... ..8 Figure 5. PM Peak hour Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ............................................................ 13 Figure 6. 2005 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Without the Project .......................................................... 15 Figure 7. 2005 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes With the Project ............................................................... 16 Figure 8. Proposed Access Restriction at West Site Driveway .................................................................. 19 Table 1. LOS Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections...... Table 2. Yelm Terra Plat Existing PM Peak Hour LOS Summary.......... Table 3. Yelm Terra Plat Project Trip Generation for 97 lots ................ Table 4. Yelm Terra Plat 2005 PM Peak Hour LOS Summary .............. .....................................................9 ...................................................10 ....................................................12 ...................................................17 Tra~portation Engineering Northwest ii November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Updated Yelm, Washington Traffic Impact Study F[NDINGS 8t CONCLUSIONS This study is an update to the previous traffic impact analysis conducted for the proposed Yelm Terra Plat development (dated September 16, 2003), and incorporates responses to the City of Yelm's comments in their letter dated November 5, 2003. Project Proposal. The proposed Yelm Terra Plat residential development is a 97- lot residential development located on the north side of 105th Way SE west of Clark Road SE in Yelm, Washington. Access. The primary vehicular access to the site is proposed via two driveways on 105th Way SE and the extension of 3`d Street SE. As part of the project, project-generated trips would be restricted from traveling west on 105th Way SE to access Mill Road. Trip Generation. This proposed 97-lot single-family residential development is anticipated to generate a total of 928 weekday daily vehicle trips, of which 73 would occur during the weekday AM peak hour, and 98 would occur during the weekday PM peak hour. Study Area Operations. The addition of project-generated traffic would not have a significant adverse impact at any of the eight study intersections during weekday PM peak hour conditions. Consideration should be given to potential installation of stop signs at the intersection of 3`d Street SE and Mosman Avenue. Road Connection to North. To meet the City's adopted subdivision requirements, a road connection will be made to the existing neighborhood to the north. To minimize traffic impacts to the existing northern neighborhood, the connecting road will be narrowed, traffic signs installed, no parking allowed, and a raised pedestrian crossing provided to help slow traffic. Non-Motorized Impacts. Sidewalks will be provided on one side of all new roadways within the plat to accommodate pedestrians. Half-street frontage on 105th Way SE would also provide sidewalks for pedestrians. Impact Fees. Mitigation required by the City of Yelm includes payment of a traffic impact fee. The City's current Traffic Facilities Charge (TFC) is $750 per PM peak hour trip. The Yelm Terra Plat would be subject to a $72,7500 traffic charge ($750 per PM peak hour trip X 97 PM peak hour trips), which is based on the 97 new residential lots and credit for the existing house on the property. Transportation Engineering Northwest ~ November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington INTRODUCTION Updated Traffic Impact Study This traffic impact analysis has been prepared for the proposed Yelm Terra Plat development. This study is an update to the previous traffic impact analysis conducted for the development (dated September 16, 2003), and incorporates responses to the City of Yelm's comments in their letter dated November 5, 2003. Project Description The proposed Yelm Terra Plat is a 97-lot residential development located north of lOSa' Way SE west of Clark Road SE in Yelm, Washington (see Figure 1). Full buildout of the proposed development is anticipated to be complete by the year 2005. The existing site includes one single family house. The primary vehicular access to the site is proposed via two driveways on lOSa' Way SE and the extension of 3rd Street SE. As part of the project, project trips would be restricted from traveling west on l O5t" Way SE to access Mill Road The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 2. Traff<c Study Approach The report documents the evaluation of traffic impacts and recommended mitigation measures. To analyze the traffic impacts of the Yelm Terra Plat, the following tasks were undertaken: • Assessed existing conditions and reviewed existing planning documents; • Described and assessed existing transportation conditions in the area; • Documented future without-project traffic forecasts and assumptions; • Documented planned transportation improvements; • Estimated trip generation and documented distribution of project traffic; • Evaluated intersection LOS at eight study intersections for weekday PM peak hour conditions; • Determined City transportation mitigation fees. A project scoping meeting occurred on August 13, 203 with City staff to establish the tasks to be evaluated in this traffic study. Transportation engineering Northwest 2 November 25, 2003 Yeim Terra Plat Yelm, Washington Updated Traffic Impact Study Primary Data and Information Sources • Traffic Scoping Letter to Jim Gibson, City of Yelm -July 31, 2003. • Year 2003 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes; source: Trafficount and Traffic Smithy. • Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board (TRB), Year 2000 Edition. • City of Yelm Development Guidelines -July 19, 2000. • City of Yelm 2004-2009 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program, adopted July 2003. • Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 6`" Edition, 1997. • City of Yelm Municipal Code 15.40 Concurrency Management. Transportation Engineering Northwest 3 November 25, 2003 Not to Scale Transportation Figure 1 Yelm Terra Plat Engineering Vicinity Map Yeim, Washington Northwest, LLC November 25, 2003 3rd Street SE C rbt w s~ Note: Preliminary site plan provided by SCA Consulting Group November 25, 2003. Transportation Fi ure 2 Engineering g Northwest Proposed Site Plan Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington No„ 25, zao3 ~iarK rcoaa 5t Yeim Terra Piat Updated Yelm, Washington Traffic Impact Study EXISTING CONDITCONS Study Area A traffic scoping letter was submitted in July of 2003 to establish the study area of the traffic study and determine the intersections to be evaluated. A scoping meeting on August 13, 2003 established eight (8) study intersections to be evaluated. The eight study intersections are: 1. Yelm Avenue / SW Longmire Street 2. Yelm Avenue / 1St Street SE 3. Yelm Avenue / 3`d Street SE 4. Yelm Avenue /Clark Road SE 5. Yelm Avenue / NE 103`d Street 6. Yelm Avenue /Bald Hill Road SE / NE Creek Street 7. 105th Way SE /Clark Road SE 8. Mosman Avenue SE / 1St Street SE The following paragraphs describe existing roadways that would be used as major routes to/from the site. Roadway characteristics are described in terms of facility type, number of lanes, and posted speed limits. Yelm Avenue is an urban arterial with a posted speed limit of 25 mph to 35 mph within the city limits. The roadway has one travel lanes in each direction. A center turn lane exists on Yelm Avenue east of Clark Road. 1St Street is a major arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 mph within the city limits. The roadway has one travel lane in each direction. Clark Road SE is a neighborhood collector. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. The roadway has one travel lane in each direction. 105"' Way SE is a neighborhood collector. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. The roadway has one travel lane in each direction. Figure 3 is provided to illustrate the existing channelization at the eight study intersections. Traffic Volumes Weekday PM peak hour traffic volume data was collected in 2003. at the eight study intersections. Appendix A provides the detailed traffic volume sheets for each of the study intersections. Figure 4 illustrates the 2003 PM peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections. Transportation Engineering Northwest ( November 25, 2003 LEGEND 5~ ~ 'Stop Sign ~`~~ o`'G ~~ ~ Signal ~~O 'soya s~ ~'o s~q ~`~ Not to Scale s`~ 9~y~ NE 103RD ST • __ .. ..... ` 1 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ `• ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ' ~ 105TH WAY SE Project ~ o Site s ~ ~w ~~ U j ~~ B y~< SO ~O SW Lon'gmire St/Yelm Ave ~, ~~ ,~ ~ Y ~'yo ~~~ NE 103rd StlYelm Ave ~~ ~ 103rd SI SE ~~ e i~ 96s 1st Street SE/Yelm Ave ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ 3rd Street SE/Yelm Ave ~~ 9p ,~a~ ' Clark Road SE/Yelm Ave ~~ ~~ `~ y ~ m U Ye~mq~ ~~ 1st Street Stl`Mos-man Ave ~~ y 0 ~5~ iP3~ 1gl "9a S~ • Bald Hills/Creek StlYelm A ~~ w U ` v _ v m `Y~mgye ~~ Clark Road SE/105th Way 105M Way SE w m x U Transportation FI ure 3 Engineering ~ g ~ , Northwest, i.i.c Existing Channel~zat~on Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington November 25, 2003 _-- SW Lonpmire St/Yelm Ave ~ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~ ~70 ~7 9' Y ~~ ^~ ~~ ei~No g~~. NE 103rd St/Yelm Ave ~ R- 43 1\~$ 103rd S SE 2 -~ ~`~ t 4 ~ 4 ~~~ ~~ e '~9 Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC ~st Street SE/Yelm Ave ~~6^y~ 79 0 2Y~ ~^~ • Bald HilUCreek St/Yelm Av l ~ i~ °' ~ W ~~~ ~ ~ ~ S~0 4~?~~ x`40 28 ~~~ ~ ~ mq~ O ~ ~ N tM0 e16o M 3rd Street SE/Yelm Ave 00 0 ~, j ~ ~ ~S 6 - S~ ,6 ?8 X80 ` 4 ~ ~ ~ ~qVe ~ ~ a c7 E en ~ Clark Road SE/105th Way r ~~ ~osm way sE g~ y •l A~ x o rn U Figure 4 2003 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Clark Road SEIYeIm Ave ~N ,~ 26 683 3S~ ' 0 ~1- y X33 ~ ~ ~ ~q~ x r- W U rn N 1st Street/Mosman Ave ~°~ yp` ~~ti ~ ~~s~y~`~A~s ~~1~ 1 s, ~gt~ ~ (~ Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington Novembar25,2003 i Yelm Terra Plat Yeim, Washington Updated Traffic Impact Study Intersection Level of Service (LOS) A 2003 weekday PM peak hour level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted at the eight study intersections. The existing channelization at the eight study intersections was illustrated in Figure 3. Level of service (LOS) serves as an indicator of the quality of traffic flow and degree of congestion at an intersection or roadway segment. It is a measure of vehicle operating speed, travel time, travel delays, and driving comfort. Level of service is generally described by a letter scale from A to F. LOS A represents free-flow conditions, i.e. motorists experience little or no delays, and LOS F represents forced-flow conditions. Table 1 summarizes the delay range for each level of service at signalized and unsignalized intersections. The methods used to calculate the levels of service are described in the Highway Capacity Manual (Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 2000). The LOS reported for signalized intersections is based on the overall average control delay (sec/veh) at the intersection. The LOS at stop- controlled intersections is based on the average control delay (sec/veh) and is reported for each movement. Intersection LOS were calculated using the methodology and procedures outlined in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board using the Synchro S software program. Table 1. LOS Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections Signalized Intersection Unsi>;nalized Intersection Level of Service Dela Ran a sec Dela Ran a sec A < 10 < 10 B >lOto20 >lOto 15 C >20 to 35 >15 to 25 D >35 to 55 >25 to 35 E >55 to 80 >35 to 50 F >80 >50 Source: "Highway Capacity Manual", Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 2000 Existing weekday PM peak hour LOS analysis results for the eight study intersections are summarized in Table 2. Detailed LOS summary worksheets are provided in Appendix B. Transportation Engineering Northwest 9 November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington Updated Traffic Impact Study Table 2. Yelm Terra Plat Ezisting PM Peak Hour LOS Summ ary Study Intersection LOS` DelayZ V/C3 .~ll1IIa11Zed 4: 2. ls` Street SE / Yehn Avenue D 37.6 0.77 4. Clark Road SE / Yehn Avenue A 8.0 0.61 6. Bald Hills Rd /Creek St I Yelm Avenue C 24.0 0.72 Unsignalized (stow controlled movements): LOS' Delay2 1. SW Longmire St / Yelm Avenue Northbound shared Lt /Thru / Rt D 26.4 Southbound shared Lt /Thru / Rt D 27.3 3. 3`d Street SE ! Yelm Avenue Northbound shared Lt /Thru / Rt C 17.8 Southbound shared Lt /Thru / Rt B 12.6 5. NE 103`d Street / Ye(m Avenue Northbound shared Lt /Thru / Rt D 28.7 Southbound Left D 27.4 Southbound Right C 15.6 7. Clark Road SE / 105' Way SE Eastbound shared Lt J Rt A 8.8 8. 1 S` Street SE / Mosman Avenue Eastbound shared Lt /Thru / Rt C 15.1 Westbound shared Lt /Thru / Rt C 22.7 1. LOS analyses are based on methodologies established in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. 2. Delay =average control delay per vehicle. 3. V/C =Volume to Capacity ratio. 4. Alt signals were assumed to be fully actuated; splits were optimized. As shown in Table 2, all three signalized study intersections, and all of the turn movements at the stop controlled intersections currently operate at LOS D or better during the weekday PM peak hour. It should be noted that the City has indicated the intersection of 1St/Yelm currently operates at LOS F during the PM peak hour. Based on existing traffic volumes, lane channelization, and peak hour factors, this analysis indicates that it currently operates at LOS D during the PM peak hour. Potential explanation for this difference may be lower traffic volume counts conducted in April 2003, use of the existing peak hour factor, and/or signal timing optimization. Transportation Engineering Northwest ip November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Ye(m, Washington upaatea Traffic Impact Study Planned Transportation Improvements There are five planned transportation improvement projects identified in the project vicinity for the six-year period between 2004 and 2009. The planned improvements were identified in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) for the City of Yelm. The projects that would improve intersections and/or roadways within the study area are described next. TIP Project #6: Mosman Street/SR 507 Realignment (1St Street). Improvements include re-aligning roadway, repairing shoulders, paving, drainage, partial walks, and lighting. TIP Project #7: Mosman Street Improvements (SR 507 to 2°d Street). Improvement includes widening roadway to neighborhood collector standards. TIP Project #9: Second Street Improvements (Yelm Ave to Mosman Ave). Improvement includes widening roadway to commercial collector standards. TIP Project #10: Yelm Avenue West Improvements (Solberg St to First St). Improvement includes widening roadway to urban arterial standards. TIP Project #11: Mill Road (SR 507 to 109th Street). Improvements include re-aligning roadway, paving, sidewalks, and lighting. Because all of these projects are planned to be constructed after year 2005, none of them were included in the operational LOS analyses for this traffic study. Transportation Engineering Northwest 11 November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Updated Yelm, Washington Traffic Impact Study DETERMINATION OF IMPACT Trip Generation The project trip generation was calculated based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 6~' edition. ITE Land Use No. 210 (Single-Family Residential) was used for the proposed 97 lots. The weekday daily, AM, and PM peak hour trip generation rates were used to calculate the trip generation, as shown in Table 3 below, per the direction of the City of Yehn. Table 3. Yelm Terra Plat Project Trip Generation for 971ots ITE Trip Project Trip Generation Time Period Rate t Total In Out Average Daily 9.57 trips/dwelling unit 928 464 464 AM Peak Hour 0.75 trips/dwelling unit 73 18 55 PM Peak Hour 1.01 trips/dwelling unit 98 63 35 Trip rates based on TI'E Trio Generation Manual, 6a` Edition, 1997, for LU 210. According to the ITE data, and as shown above, the project is expected to generate 928 weekday daily trips, with 73 occurring during the AM peak hour and 98 occurring during the PM peak hour. Trip Distribution and Assignment The distribution of PM peak hour project-generated traffic was based on information provided by the City's traffic consultant, Parametrix. In general, the following distribution was used in the traffic analyses: • 35 % Northwest on Yelm Avenue (SR-510) • 15% Southwest on 1St Street (SR-507) • 10% Northeast on 1St Street • 15% Southeast on Yelm Avenue (SR-507) • 6% Southeast on Bald Hill Road The remaining percentage (19%) of project-generated traffic have origins/destinations within the Yelm study area. The distribution and assignment of PM peak hour project-generated trips is also shown in Figure 5. Transportation Engineering Northwest 12 November 25, 2003 30% ~9 ~ >> ~y~ ~~ 3% ~~ ~G 6~~ ~ ^~ 2% ~y~ ^ 1~ ~5 ~5 15% ,r/10% ~°s~ ~2 5%''~ ~ -v~s~ ~R~ ~~'- LEGEND XX% Distribution of Project Trips 12 -~ Project Trips o~~y~ ~Fm T ~ ~ 5% ~°~SF Not to scale F 1 ~ % NE 103RD ST N ~ 1-- M ~~ ~~~~~, ./ i 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 F 35 ,~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ 105TH WAY SE ~ ~ 15 19 --> ~, <-10 ° Project N N 5-- ~ Site rc °~ t ~` s ~ ooh ° 6% ~ > ~ a' 2% B 3% y'`sR 0 ~NE 103rd St/Yelm Ave ~ ~ y 1 R NE 103rd S[ 7~ 1st Street SE/Yelm Ave e ~~, ' 79 ~ ~ 6' 2 Y 9ti ry . Bald HitUCreek St/Yelm Av W S y Uri ~~ ~ ~ Y i a a0 ~~qae 3rd Street SEIYeIm Ave 7~ ~~ ~s ~~ ~ , 9 Y lark Road SE/105th Way 35 105th Way SE 19 -~ W tr° . U Figure 5 Transportation pM Peak Hour Pro'ect Tri Engineering 1 l~ Northwest, i.i.c Distribution and Assignment ' Clark Road SEIYeIm Ave ~~ 1 s ~~~ R Yew ~ N 10 I qW U 1st Street /Mosman Ave ti ~~~ ~~~9 Qy~ '~~ ~~e~q°e Ye(m Terra Plat Yelm, Washington November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington updated Traffic Impact Study Traffic Volume Impact Future traffic volumes with and without the proposed project were estimated for PM peak hour conditions in the year 2005. Future traffic volumes at the study intersections were developed based on existing peak hour traffic counts increased to account for background growth. Based on discussions with the City of Yelm, a four percent annual growth rate was used to account for traffic growth in the area. The weekday PM peak hour traffic volumes for year 2005 without the project are shown on Figure 6. Adding the project-generated PM peak hour trips (shown in Figure 5) to the future without-project traffic volumes (Figure 6), results in future with-project traffic volumes, as shown in Figure 7. Intersection LOS Impact Levels of service (LOS) were conducted for weekday PM peak hour conditions with and without the project in year 2005 at the eight study intersections. Future improvements listed in the City's Six Year TIP were not assumed in the 2005 analysis. Therefore, the reported results should be considered conservative at those locations where improvements are planned beyond year 2005. The weekday PM peak hour intersection LOS analysis results for the eight study intersections are summarized in Table 4. The table is set-up to illustrate the LOS results for future conditions without and with the proposed Yelm Terra Plat. The table also separates the LOS results for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Transportation Engineering Northwest 14 November 25, 2003 SW Longmire St/Yelm Ave ~, ~ `~~ so 7 A° Y 5~y ~~ NE 103rd St/Yelm Ave 1`9r's6s ~ 47 ~ ~y ,~-- s 703rd Sl SE 2 -~ ~ ~ s y` e 1st Street SEIYeIm Ave ~.^ ~~ ~ ry ~~ ~ ~ 2y ~~~y ~ ~~ae,~ 4i Y ~~ ^~ ^J ~ ~~~~e l'~ ~~ ~~ ~. -- - • Bald Hill/Creek St/Yelm Av ~~ W ~ S8 @ r i 1B`~ 3 8~-~ ~ ~ S`SZ ~y3 ~ ~ r~~'q~e D m ~ Nf~ON '~ 3rd Street SE/Yelm Ave rn N ~B ~s S~ 8 ~s ~sS ! '~~ y ~ mA~ ~ co I E ti Clark Road SE/105th Way ~ N ~ ~ 105M SE g~ y R 1 ~~ ~ ~ N U Figure 6 Transportation 2005 PM Peak Hour Traffic Engineering Northwest, i.i_c Volumes Without the Project ' Clark Road SE/Yelm Ave rn 1 ~N ~( ~ ~ ~28 X39 39`,~ ~6 ~ X38 ~ mq ~ ~ ` x ~ ~ ~ N U (h 1st Street/Mosman Ave ti~ 1y ti~ ~~ s~, ~ ~ 's ~~~ oy`i. ~ ~Ss i ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington November 25, 2003 ~SW LonQmire St/Yelm Ave ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ! ~ c~~c'S.`'y ~'~ ~ O ~ r ^~ O ~ ~qh 5~y ^O ©NE 103rd StlYelm Ave 1 `9~s6'~ ~ 48 ~~ ~- 9103rd St SE 2 ---~ `~ ~ e~ 9~• 1st Street SEIYeIm Ave ~.^ ~~/~~ ~ A ~y ~ ~?~ 2S e`~ r • Bald Hill/Creek StlYelm Av o ~o_~ W ~~ J U S6? ~8 ~q3 ~ 379y ~ ~ ~ y e~''q~e \ y_ ~ / ~' I NO a ON m ~ 3rd Street SE/Yelm Ave rn ~ ~y ~>> sae ~ S~ 6S ~ ~' m Clark Road SFJ105th Way ~ N W ~ y s losm 44 ~ ~ R I 0~ ~ ° N U Figure 7 Transportation 2005 PM Peak Hour Traffic Engineering Northwest, ~i_c Volumes With the Project ' Clark Road SEIYeIm Ave rn ~N 2 ~, ~ ~ 8 X39 38`~ hsj Y ~a~\ m ~ ~ ~mgk9 Y ~~ ~ U _ ~ 1st Street/Mosman Ave ti'` ~o t/~ti^ti s~, ~ ~ 's a ~ ss ~'`y4' '` ~p /'~ ~''H Yelm Terra Plat Ye(m, Washington Nwen,ber 25, 2003-~ Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington Updated Traffic Impact Study Table 4. Yelm Terra Plat 2005 PM Peak Hour LOS Summary 2005 Without Project 2005 With Project Study Intersection LOS' Delay2 V/C3 LOSt DelayZ V/C3 SIQna11Ze(1 4 2. ls` Street SE / Yehn Avenue D 42.4 0.84 D 47.5 0.90 4. Clark Road SE / Yehn Avenue A 8.9 0.65 A 8.8 0.66 6. Bald Hills Rd /Creek St / Yelm Avenue C 32.4 0.83 C 30.2 0.82 Unsignalized: LOS' Dela LOS' Dela 1. SW Longmire St / Yehn Avenue Northbound shared Lt / Thru / Rt F 52.5 F 55.7 Southbound shared Lt / Thru / Rt E 36.4 E 38.5 3. 3`d Street SE / Yehn Avenue Northbound shared Lt / Thru / Rt C 19.4 C 20.6 Southbound shared Lt / Thru / Rt C 17.0 C 21.7 5. NE 103` Street / Yelm Avenue Northbound shared Lt lThru / Rt C 24.9 D 25.7 Southbound shared Left D 33.3 D 34.0 Southbound Right C 18.6 C 19.1 7. Clark Road SE / 105`s Way SE Eastbound shared Lt / Rt A 8.9 A 9.1 8. 1 S` Street SE / Mosman Avenue Eastbound shared Lt / Thru / Rt C 23.2 C 24.4 Westbound shared Lt / Thru / Rt D 32.2 D 33.5 1. LOS analyses are based on methodologies established in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. 2. Delay =average control delay per vehicle. 3. V/C =Volume to Capacity ratio. 4. All si als were assumed to be full actuated; s lits were o timized under each scenario. Signalized. As shown in Table 4, the three signalized study intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at the same LOS in the future with or without the project. All three intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better during the PM peak hour with or without the proposed project. The addition of project-generated traffic is not anticipated to degrade the operation of the intersections. As noted earlier in the Existing Conditions section of this report, it should be noted that the City has indicated the intersection of lst/Yelm currently operates at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The analysis for this traffic study indicates LOS D during the PM peak hour. Potential explanation for this difference may be lower traffic volume counts conducted in Apri12003, different use of the existing peak hour factor, and/or signal timing optimization. Transportation Engineering Northwest 1'] November 25, 2003 Yelm Terra Plat Updated Yelm, Washington Traffic Impact Study Unsignalized. At the intersection of SW Longmire Street/Yelm Avenue, the northbound movement is expected to operate at LOS F and the southbound movement is expected to operate at LOS E with or without the project. Vehicles making this movement during the PM peak hour on average are expected. to be delayed less than S additional seconds as a result of the additional traffic generated by the proposed development. The remainder of the stop controlled movements at the study intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better during the PM peak hour with or without the proposed project. Detailed LOS analysis worksheets for study intersections are provided in Appendix B. Non-Motorized Impacts Sidewalks are proposed on one side of all new streets within the proposed plat to accommodate pedestrians. The connecting road to the existing northern neighborhood will be narrowed, traffic signs installed, no parking allowed, and a raised pedestrian crossing provided to help slow traffic. Street frontage on lOSt" Way SE will also include new curb and sidewalks to separate pedestrians from motorists. Site Access Analysis Access to the proposed Yelm Terra Plat is proposed via two driveways on 105th Way SE and the extension of 3rd Street SE on the north side of the site. The road connection to the neighborhood on the north side of the site will be narrowed, traffic signs installed, no parking allowed, and a raised pedestrian crossing provided to help slow traffic. The north access would also provide an additional access to the site for emergency vehicles. Based on the anticipated distribution of project-generated traffic, an estimated 45 percent of the project trips would use the northern access via 3rd Street SE. This would generate an estimated 200 additional trips per day, of which 44 would be generated during the PM peak hour. As a result, consideration should be given to installation of stop signs at the 3rd Street/Mosman Ave intersection. As part of the Yelm Terra Plat project, access to Mill Road SE via 105th Way SE is proposed to be restricted. Project-generated trips would not be allowed to travel to the west on lOSd' Way SE west of the site. This would be accomplished by channelization and signage at the western site driveway on 105th Way SE, as shown in Figure 8. A variety of traffic control devices and new signs would help to ensure this restriction. Figure 8 identifies the proposed channelization and potential signs that may be used accomplish this. Street frontage will also be provided along 1O5t1i Way SE to include road pavement widening, curb/gutter, and sidewalk. Transportation Engineering Northwest 1 g November 25, 2003 NEW SIGNS O Stop Sign (~ Lett-Turn Only O3 Local Through Traffic Yield to Oncoming Traffic ® Through Traffic is Local Access Only I .~~n . ~ ., a w . . ` . . r + + + + . a ~I O . I r :, i J~, y, I x [ SI ~\ S~ ~1M0 s~ ' ~` i .... ^ti- ~ r -. S ~. -.v, ~_t ~' . S t ~ '"~ '` , ~ ;~ SIDEWALK a:'..r . TRAFFIC CONTROL__ ~__________ ____________________ ~- --BCE EXISTING EDGE NEW CURB ___-"'"" OF PAVEMENT 105TH WAY SE PROVIDE 10'~ MINIMUM FOR ONE-WAY TRAFFIC LANE --------------------- ROW Transportation Figure 8 Engineering Proposed Access Restr~ct~on Northwest, LLC at West Site Driveway Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington November 25, 2003 ' Yelm Terra Plat Yelm, Washington MITIGATION MEASURES Updated Traffic Impact Study The following measures are identified to mitigate the traffic impacts of the proposed Yelm Terra Plat. • Impact Fee. The City of Yelm requires payment of a traffic impact fee based on the number of PM peak hour trips generated. The City has adopted a Transportation Facilities Charge (TFC) of $750.00 per PM Peak hour trip. .The Yelm Terra Plat would be subject to a $72,750 traffic impact fee ($750 per PM peak hour trip X 97 PM peak hour trips), which is based on the 98 PM peak hour trips generated and credit for the existing house on the property. • Road Connection to the North. To meet the City's adopted subdivision requirements, a road connection will be made to the existing neighborhood to the north. The new road would include a sidewalk connection from the Yelm Terra Plat to the existing sidewalks to the north. To minimize traffic impacts to the existing northern neighborhood, the connecting road will be narrowed, traffic signs installed, no parking allowed, and a raised pedestrian crossing provided to help slow traffic. • 3rd Street/Mosman Ave Intersection. Consideration should be given to installation of stop signs at the 3rd Street/Mosman Ave intersection. • Restriction of Westbound Project Traffic on 1O5t6 Way SE. Project- generated trips would not be allowed to travel to the west on lOSd' Way SE west of the site. This would be accomplished by channelization and signage at the western site driveway on lOSd' Way SE using a variety of traffic control devices and signs. Transportation Engineering Northwest 20 November 25, 2003 Appendix A Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Counts t'ELM, WASHINGTON SW LONGMIRE ST ~fELM AVE i0C# 01 P TENW03226M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 (]rrn me Prin}nri_ PRIMARY File Name : TENW22601P Site Code :00000001 Start Date :08/14/2003 Page No :1 SW LONGMIRE ST YELM AVE SW LONGMIRE ST YELM AVE From North From East From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left Truck App' Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Thru Left Tmck App' Fxctu. InGU. Int. Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:OOPM 2 0 0 1 2 1 158 3 5 162 2 1 1 0 4 1 184 1 8 186 14 354 368 04:15 PM 4 0 2 0 6 0 140 6 5 146 4 0 1 0 5 3 198 3 4 204 9 361 370 04:30 PM 4 0 4 0 8 1 131 2 1 134 4 0 1 0 5 3 168 2 6 173 7 320 327 04:45 PM 0 0 2 0 2 6 147 6 4 159 3 0 3 0 6 4 202 1 7 207 11 374 385 . Total 10 0 8 1 18 8 576 17 15 601 13 1 6 0 20 11 752 7 25 770 41 1409 1450 05:00 PM 3 0 2 0 5 2 156 1 1 159 2 0 1 0 3 2 220 1 2 223 3 390 ~ 393 05:15 PM 2 0 4 0 6 2 143 4 2 149 4 0 1 0 5 2 209 1 3 212 5 372 377 05:30 PM 6 1 1 0 8 3 141 3 3 147 3 0 4 0 7 6 209 2 3 217 6 379 385 05:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1 2 161 2 1 165 0 0 6 0 6 9 200 2 2 211 3 383 386 Total 12 1 7 0 20 9 601 10 7 620 9 0 12 0 21 19 838 6 10 863 17 1524 1541 Grand Total 22 1 15 1 38 17 1177 27 22 1221 22 1 18 0 41 30 1590 13 35 1633 58 2933 2991 . I Apprch % 57.9 2.6 39.5 1.4 96.4 2.2 53.7 2.4 43.9 1.8 97.4 0.8 Total % 0.8 0.0 0.5 1.3 0.6 40.1 0.9 41.6 0.8 0.0 0.6 1.4 1.0 54.2 0.4 55.7 1.9 98.1 SW LONGMIRE ST YELM AVE SW LONGMIRE ST YELM AVE From North From East From South From West StartTime Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru left App. Total Right Thru Left App. Total Int. Total 'eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 05:00 PM Volume 12 1 7 20 9 601 10 620 9 0 12 21 19 838 6 863 1524 Percent 60.0 5.0 35.0 1.5 96.9 1.6 42.9 0.0 57.1 2.2 97.1 0.7 ~ 05:00 Volume 3 0 2 5 2 156 1 159 2 0 1 3 2 220 1 223 390 Peak Factor 0.977 High Int 05:30 PM 05:45 PM 05 :30 PM 05:00 PM Volume 6 1 1 8 2 161 2 165 3 0 4 7 2 220 1 223 Peak Factor 0.625 0.939 0.750 0.967 'eak Haur from 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 By Approach 04:15 PM 05:00 PM 04 :45 PM 05:00 PM Volume li 0 10 21 9 601 10 620 12 0 9 21 19 838 6 863 Percent 52.4 0.0 47.6 1.5 96.9 1.6 57.1 0.0 42.9 2.2 97.1 0.7 High In4 04:30 PM 05:45 PM 05:30 PM 05:00 PM Volume 4 0 4 8 2 161 2 165 3 0 4 7 2 220 1 223 Peak Factor 0.656 0.939 0.750 0.967 YELM, WASHINGTON SW LONGMIRE ST YELM AVE LOC# 01P TENW03226M Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersec0on 05:00 PM Volume 12 1 7 Percent 60.0 5.0 35.0 05:00 Volume 3 0 2 Peak Factor High lirt. 05:30 PM Volume 6 1 1 Peak Factor TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 20 9 601 10 1.5 96.9 1.6 5 2 156 1 620 9 0 12 42.9 0.0 57.1 159 2 0 1 05:30 PM 165 3 0 4 0.939 Fle Name : TENW22601P Site Code :00000001 Start Date :08/14/2003 Page No : 2 ST YELM AVE From West App. Total Right Thru Left 21 19 838 6 2.2 97.1 0.7 3 2 220 1 05:00 PM 7 2 220 1 0.750 _ SW LONGMIRE ST Right T~u Left * T ~ ~°'~ North ~fO~ W < Q ~ -1 ~ ~ ~-~ /14/03 5:00:00 PM ~ D w 114/03 5:45:00 PM ~ } ~ ~ I AR ~~ ~ m I 0 Out In Total 05:45 PM 8 2 161 2 0.625 863 1524 223 390 0.977 223 0.967 c_ TRAFFlCOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 YELM, WASHINGTON LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 Fle Name : TENW12005P SR-507 (N iST AVEj 360-491-8116 Site Code :00000005 SR-510 (YELM AVE) Stag Date :04/30/2003 LOC# 05P TENW03119M Page No : i _ Grou s Printed- PRIMARY l.. N 1ST AVE SR-507 (YELM AVE) SR-507 (N 1ST AVE) SR-510 (YELM AVE) / Ate Ate' ~' ~. ~' ledu. Nt StaKTime Right mti Left Ttuek ' Total Ri®H lAro Left TNek Total Rlpht Thru left Truck ToW Right Thu left Truck Total Total iq~l Total _ Fedor 1.0 LO 1.0 lA 1.0 lA 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 IA 1A 1.0 SA SA 1.0 Da:W PM O1:25PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM ae 30 20 25 LJ 16 13 19 11 14 16 12 O 0 0 2 IL 60 49 S6 • 4 1 6 117 121 122 109 Jl 45 46 47 .a-- 8 7 5 aaV 170 172 182 as 57 64 56 <v 27 25 19 ar 37 40 23 ve- 3 5 4 aw 121 129 98 of 11 8 12 w 122 131 124 a.a 28 22 35 ~ 4 O 9 ..v 161 161 171 _ 1 12 20 w.. 512 511 487 ~~. 527 523 507 TaW 113 TS 53 8 237 18 46T 269 28 654 228 91 13T 12 456 53 500 116 20 669 68 2016 2084 OS:OOPM 28 19 16 0 62 8 121 54 4 183 42 24 42 4 108 10 126 19 2 155 10 508 518' OS:ISPM 21 18 10 1 49 B 121 48 2 175 60 18 3Z 1 110 15 132 29 2 176 6 510 516 05:30 PM 20 15 13 D 48 9 108 44 T 161 56 33 24 2 113 15 128 30 2 173 it 495 506 05:45 PM 27 22 6 1 55 13 100 40 4 153 54 24 40 6 118 15 i31 32 1 178 12 504 516 Total 96 74 44 2 214 36 450 186 17 872 212 99 138 13 449 SS 527 110 7 682 39 2017 2056 Grand7otal 209 145 97 10 451 54 917 355 45 1326 440 190 275 25 805 108 1017 226 27 1351 107 4033 4140 • - Apprth % 46.3 32.2 21.5 4.1 69.2 26.8 48.6 21.0 30.4 1 8.0 75.3 16.7 1 TMaI % 5.2 3.6 2.4 11.2 1.3 22.7 8.8 32.9 ~ 10.9 4.7 6.8 22.d 2.7 25.2 5.6 33.5 2.6 87.4 N 1ST AVE From North SR-507 (YELM AVE) From East SR-507 (N 1 ST AVE) From South SR-510 (YELM AVE) From Wes[ StaRTime Right Thru leh App Tobl Right Thin LeR App. Total Right Thru Leff App.TOtal RI Thu LtR Ap PqK MDef fr0111 g4a111 ra'1 m W:97 rM • read a or a laLers«tion 04:15 PM Valnme 103 6T 57 Portent 45.1 29.5 25.1 04:35Valame 30 16 14 Peak Fedor NiQrIAt OS:OOPM Voume 28 19 15 Peak factor Peak Four From 04:00 PM Io 05:45 PM - Peak l of 1 87MPr~ 04:OOPM Volume 113 71 53 Patent 47.7 30.0 22.4 Mi@I IM. 04:00PM Yolume 38 23 11 Peak fades 227 22 473 192 3.2 68.9 27.9 60 4 121 45 05:00 PM 62 8 121 54 0.915 04:30 PM 237 24 473 195 3S 88.4 28.2 OS.~00 PM 72 8 121 54 0.823 687 2i9 85 142 48.0 20.8 31.1 170 5T 27 37 04:30 PM 183 61 25 40 0.939 04:00 PM 692 228 91 137 50.0 20.0 30.0 04:30 PM 183 64 25 40 0.945 456 41 503 104 6.3 77.6 16.0 121 li 122 28 04:45 PM 129 12 124 35 0.884 05:00 PM 456 55 517 110 8.1 75.8 16.1 05:45 PM 129 15 131 32 0.884 p_Tetal 1nLTOra1 678 ~ 2018 161 i 512' 0.965 171 0.947 . 682 178 0.958 a•d 6GOTi6b09ET ~uno~i~,}e~l dT02ZT EO Sa ~~H YELM, WASHINGTON SR-507 (N iST AVE) SR-510 (YELM AVE) LOC# 05P TENW03119M Peak HauFrom04:00 PM 1005:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Inba15eCt10n 04:15 PM Yolunk 103 67 57 Percent 45.4 29.5 25.1 04:15VOWme 30 16 I4 Peak factor MijhNR OS~OPM Y01ume 28 19 15 Peak Fedor C TRAFFlCOUNT, INC. 4820YELM HWY 8-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 227 22 473 192 3.2 68.9 27.9 60 4 121 45 05:00 PM 62 8 121 54 0.915 687 219 95 142 46.0 20.8 31.1 170 57 27 37 04:30 PM 163 84 25 40 0.939 Fle Name : TENW12005P Sits Code :00000005 Start Date :04/30/2003 Page No : 2 4561 41 503 104 6.3 77.6 16.0 121 11 122 28 04:45 PM 129 12 124 35 0.884 N 1STAVE j ~h` 1 `~- I i i W a~ T -~ ~~ -+ North ~ ~, V J v c--! !3Ql03 4:15:00 PM ~-~ m c ~ !30/03 5:00:00 PM ~ ; i7 ~y ~ ~ 1 i PRIMARY I t r D ql' Jl ~ ~ m ~, T r ~ ~..~ Out In Total 64e 2oia 161 512 0.985 171 0.947 11/21/2003 12:42 4256887784 TRAFFIC SMITHY PAGE 04 INTERSEC'TiON TURN MOVEMENT PEAK HOUR REPORT - T= 0 % P= 0.63 Peak Hour 16:00-17:00 l0 23 Total Enlry Vdurrte 8 0 2 1598 640 t--~ ~ ~i '~- 703 S ~' ~ 15 T= 3.7 % 788 -~ P= 0.96 14 ~ 807 -~ `~ T 4 3 I 74 T=0%=O% •.... 628 T=7% P= 0.97 Fle: DBDG LOCATION: 3RD AVENUE SE AT E YELM AVENUE YELM Date: 11/ZO/04 Day: THU Time: 16:00 - 18:00 Repot P~pareQ fa:• TR4NSPORTATION ENGINEERING NW ~ 60 Surveyed By.' > _ TRAFFIC SM><THX INC ~ 861 ~ 626- 120TH AVENUE NE SUITE 81.02 71 -~~ BELLEWE, WA 98027 T=96 Trucks By Approach 78 ~ PHONE: 425-688-7888 P = PHF By Approach FAX: 42588-7784 P= 0.75 Report Reviewed by: GC EASTAOUND SOUTH60UND NORTHBOUND WESTBOUND TIME PERIOD "'~ ~ ~ <-~ ~, ~ _ ._~ ._ ~ T ~ ~4" ~ T_ ALL ALL VEHICLES 16:00-16:15 3 185 1 2 0 1 1 2 17 16 159 6 393 16:15-16:30 3 202 2 2 0 0 1 0 12 20 154 6 402 16:30-16:45 1 198 1 0 0 1 2 1 23 11 160 2 400 16:45-17:00 7 203 1 4 0 0 0 0 19 13 155 1 403 ~ SINGLE UNIT 2 C S LE G - • -- HT TRU K ( LI AX S - 16:00-16:15 D 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 14 16:15-16:30 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16 0 26 16:30-ib:45 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 19 16:45-17:00 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 9 MED2UM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT i2 AXLES) - - - -- 16:00-16:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:15-16:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:30.16:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS ($EMx-TRACTOR TRAILER) - - --~~ -,- 16:00-16:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 16:15-16:30 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16:30-16:45 p 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16:45-17:00 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •1 0 4 BICYCLES ~ ~ - ~ -- -_ - 16:00-16:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:15-16:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:30-16:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEDESTRIANS .. .. . Crosswalk SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH ALL 16:00-16:15 4 0 2 8 1~ 16:15-16:30 0 0 2 0 2 16:30-16:45 3 0 0 1 4 YELM, WASHINGTON CLARK RD SE YELM AVE LOC# 03P SHG03051M TRAFFlCOUNT, INC. 4820YELM HWY B-195 LACIY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 r...,~~..~ a:..aaw_ oraiaanav Fle Name : SHG05103P Site Code :00000003 Start Date :02/20/2003 Page No :1 CLARK RD SE YELM AVE CLARK RD SE YELM AVE From North From East From South From West SbATime Right Thru l.elt Tnrdt ~ ~' Right Thru taR TnKic ~' Riglrt Thro Lett Truck ~' Right Thru leR Ttudt ~' ~' kagu. ~' Torsi Tobi 7ob1 Total Tool Tgat Tobl Fads 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 LO SA 1.0 1A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:OOPM 2 1 0 0 3 5 154 31 3 170 11 2 3 0 16 3 182 6 10 193 13 382 395 04:SSPM SO 0 S 0 35 1 159 5 3 168 30 0 d 0 14 3 206 6 9 215 32 412 424 04:30 PM 10 3 6 0 19 10 178 6 2 194 7 0 4 0 it 1 174 14 T 189 9 413 422 04:45 PM 11 2 4 0 17 9 176 10 2 1.95 2 0 1 0 3 4 208 7 B 217 ]0 4327F- 44T, ToW 33 6 15 O 54 28 687 32 10 727 30 2 12 0 44 1] 766 35 $s 834 sd 1639 G 1683 05:OOPM 5 1 5 O 11 3 170 t4 4 ]87 10 1 2 0 13 2 196 8 5 206 8 d17 426 OS:iSPM 2 2 4 0 8 6 154 la 6 174 16 0 4 0 20 3 187 3 2 193 8 395 403 05:30PM it 1 5 0 17 3 137 1? 2 352 4 0 6 0 10 2 176 9 1 18T 3 366 369 05:45 PM 9 2 7 0 18 3 135 8 ] 146 S 1 5 0 11 3 171 12 6 186 T 361 366 Total 27 6 21 0 54 15 596 46 13 654 35 2 17 0 54 SO T30 32 14 772 27 1534 1566 GrsMTobl 60 12 36 0 108 43 1263 80 23 1386 f 65 4 29 0 98 21 3496 67 48 1586 71 3178 3249 Apprdi X 55.6 11.1 33.3 I 3.1 91.1 SB 166.3 4.1 29.6 I 13 94.5 4.2 I Tobl % 1.9 0.4 1.1 3.4 1.4 39.7 2.5 43.6 2.0 0.1 0.9 3.1 0.7 47.1 2.1 49.9 2.2 97.8 i t CLARK RD SE YELM AVE CLARK RD SE YELM AVE From North From East From South Frorn West Start Time Right Thru Left App.Tobl _Right Thru teR App.Tobl _ Right _ Thtu leR App.Tobi Right Thru LeR App.Tata1 tntTobl ~ _ _ Peak Hour from 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak ] of 1 Iat4rsec0ion 04:15 PM ~ Yqume 36 6 20 62 26 683 35 744 29 1 11 41 10 782 35 827 1674 Percdtt 58.1 9.7 323 3.5 91.8 4.7 70.7 2.4 2B.8 L2 94.6 4.2 04:45Vdume ]S 2 4 17 9 176 10 195 2 0 I 3 4 206 T 217 432 Peak factor 0.969 High IM. 04:30 PM 04:45 PM Od;15 PM 04:45 PM Volume ]0 3 6 19 9 176 10 395 10 0 4 14 i 4 206 7 217 Peak Factor 0.816 0.954 0.732 0.953 Peak How from 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM • Peak 1 of 1 BTApproach 04:15 PM 04:30 PM OSAOPM 04:15 PM Voume 36 6 TO 62 28 678 44 750 35 2 17 54 SO 782 35 827 Percent 58.1 9.7 32.3 3.7 90.4 5.9 64.6 3.7 3L5 I.Z 94.6 4.2 Hid Irn. 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 05:15 PM 04:45 PM Yolurse 10 3 6 19 9 176 SO 195 16 0 4 20 4 206 7 217 PeakFaetor 0.816 j 0.962 0.675 0.953 1 YELM, WASHINGTON CLARK RD SE YELM AVE LOC# 03P SHG03051M TRAFFlCOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 CLARK RD SE from North YELM AVE Frorn East CLARK RD SE From South YELM AVE from West StaRtime Right firuT ldt App.Tobl Right ~ 7Mu LeR App,TOtal ~ Rie1K i Thni ~ LeR~ App,T0ta1 Right ~ 12Thru ~ leA ~ Ap Peak tionrFrom 0400 PM t005:45 PM • PEak l Ot 1 Intersection 04:15 PM Yalume 36 6 20 Pptxnt 58.1 9.T 323 00:45VWume it 2 4 Peat Factor HIgAI~ 04:30PM Volume 10 3 6 Peak Factor 744 ~ 29 1 11 70.7 2.4 T6.8 195 2 0 1 94:19 PM 195 10 0 4 0.954 Fle Name : SHG05103R Site Code :00000003 Start Date :02/20/2003 Page No : Z 41 10 782 35 1.2 94.6 4.2 3 4 206 7 04:45 PM 14 4 206 7 0.732 CLARK FtD SE Rig''` ~ ° Lr~-- a ~' ~~ ~ H«th ~ < w m a ~--~ ~ 20/03 4:15:00 PM ~ ~ 0/03 5:00:00 VM ~ m w T (~ r r Pi_~I cUry~l ~ i ~~ ~, 1 r a ~ OW In Total 62 26 683 35 3.5 91.8 4.7 17 9 176 30 04:45 PM 19 9 176 10 o.a1s p.iotal ~ IM.7otat I ti27 1874 217 432 0.969 217 0.953 ~-_ ___ _~ .-... 4.... ti IELM, WASHINGTON NE 103RD AVE I'ELM AVE LOC# 03P TENW03226M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 !]rnune Prinfnri_ PR111AARV File Name : TENW22603P Site Code :00000003 Start Date :08/14/2003 Page No :1 NE 103RD ST YELM AVE DRVWY YELM AVE From North From East From South From West StartTime Right Thru left Truck gyp' Rift Thru Left Truck gyp' Right ThN Left Truck APR Right Thtu Left Truck gyp' FxGu. InGu. Int Total Total Total Tofai Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 17 1 3 0 21 6 178 0 4 184 1 0 0 0 1 1 193 14 7 208 11 414 425 04:15 PM 12 0 3 1 15 1 174 1 9 176 4 2 0 0 6 2 220 7 9 229 19 426 445 04:30 PM 13 0 1 0 14 10 189 0 2 199 3 0 1 0 4 0 191 19 4 210 6 427 433 04:45 PM 12 0 3 0 15 4 216 0 9 220 0 0 1 0 1 0 206 14 13 220 22 456 478 Total 54 1 10 1 65 21 757 1 24 779 8 2 2 0 12 3 810 54 33 867 58 1723 1781 05:00 PM 3 0 3 0 6 5 190 3 4 198 1 0 0 0 1 0 220 17 6 237 10 442 452 05:15 PM 13 0 2 0 15 4 174 0 4 178 2 0 0 0 2 0 222 15 4 237 8 432 440 05:30 PM 15 0 0 0 15 4 188 1 4 193 1 0 1 0 2 1 207 14 4 222 8 432 440 05:45 PM 13 0 4 0 17 2 197 0 3 199 1 0 1 0 2 1 210 14 5 225 8 443 451 Total 44 0 9 0 53 15 749 4 15 768 5 0 2 0 7 2 859 60 19 921 34 1749 1783 Grand Total 98 1 19 1 118 36 1506 5 39 1547 13 2 4 0 19 5 1669 114 52 1788 92 3472 3564 Apprch % 83.1 0.8 16.1 2.3 97.3 0.3 68.4 10.5 21.1 0.3 93.3 6.4 I Total% 2.8 0.0 0.5 3.4 1.0 43.4 0.1 44.6 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 48.1 3.3 51.5 2.6 97.4 C NE 103RD ST YELM AVE DRVWY YELM AVE From North From East From South From West StartTime Right Thro Left App.Totai Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thm Left App. Total Right Thru Left App. Total IntTotal 'eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersecdon 04:45 PM Yolume 43 0 8 51 17 768 4 789 4 0 2 6 1 855 60 916 1762 Percent 84.3 0.0 15.7 2.2 97.3 0.5 66.7 0.0 33.3 0.1 93.3 6.6 04:45 Volume 12 0 3 15 4 216 0 220 0 0 1 1 0 206 14 220 456 Peak Factor 0.986 High Int 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 05:15 PM 05:00 PM Volume 12 0 3 15 4 216 0 220 2 0 0 2 0 220 17 237 Peak Factor 0.850 0.897 0.750 0.966 eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 By Approach 04:00 PM 04:30 PM 04:00 PM 05:00 PM Volume 54 1 10 65 23 T69 3 795 8 2 2 12 2 859 60 921 Percerrt 83.1 1.5 15.4 2.9 96.T 0.4 66.7 16.7 16.7 0.2 93.3 6.5 Nigh Int 04:00 PM 04:45 PM 04:15 PM 05:00 PM Volume 17 1 3 21 4 216 0 220 4 2 0 6 0 220 17 237 'Peak Factor 0.774 0.903 0.500 0.972 i t'ELM, WASHINGTON NE 103RD AVE YELM AVE ~OC# 03P TENW03226M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 File Name : TENW22603P Site Code :00000003 Start Date : 08/ 14/2003 Page No : 2 ~ StartTime ~ Right ~ Thro ~ Left ~ App.Total ~ Right ~ Thro ~ left ~ App.TOtai ~ Right ~ mru ~ Lett I App.totar ~ ergot ~ mro I i.ett I app.rotai ~ mt.TOtai ~ Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak i of 1 Intersection 04:45 PM Volume 43 0 8 51 17 768 4 789 4 0 2 6 1 855 60 916 1762 Percent 84.3 0.0 15.7 2.2 97.3 0.5 66.7 0.0 33.3 0.1 93.3 6.6 04:45 Volume 12 0 3 15 4 216 0 220 0 0 1 1 0 206 14 220 456 Peak Factor 0.966 High Int. 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 05:15 PM 05:00 PM Volume 12 0 3 15 4 216 0 220 2 0 0 2 0 220 17 237 Peak Factor 0.850 0.897 0.750 0.966 ~ u~NE 103RD ST I 77I Right Thru Left ~ ~ T ~ ~ ~~ North w -< m r a t- 14/03 4:45:00 PM ~'? ~ w ~ 14!03 5:30:00 PM ~ m ~' ~ T r 0 0 Out In Total >!ELM, WASHINGTON NE CREEKST/BALD HILL RD SE fELM AVE LOC# 04P TENW03226M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 482OYELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 ~rnnns Printarl- PRIMARY Fle Name : TENW226O4P Site Code :00000004 Start Date :08/14/2003 Page No :1 NE CREEK ST YELM AVE BALD HILL RD SE YELM AVE From North From East From South From West StartTime Right Thnr LeR Truck APP- Right Thnr Left Truck APP• Right Thru LeR Truck APP Right Thru LeR Tnrt* gyp' FxGu. Indu. Int Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:OOPM 17 26 12 1 55 10 120 13 3 143 8 12 55 0 75 79 108 16 7 203 it 476 487 04:15 PM 24 25 15 0 64 14 131 8 5 153 12 14 53 1 79 76 146 12 6 234 12 530ff 542 04:30 PM 17 30 22 0 69 10 120 12 0 142 7 19 62 2 88 65 118 29 6 212 8 511 519 04:45 PM 24 16 17 1 57 13 136 9 6 158 17 17 65 3 99 64 110 10 11 184 21 498 519 Total 82 97 66 2 245 47 507 42 14 596 44 62 235 6 341 284 482 67 30 833 52 2015 2067 05:OOPM 21 27 10 0 58 17 123 11 3 151 3 13 50 0 66 80 120 21 4 221 7 496 503 05:15 PM 13 19 18 1 50 13 126 18 7 157 7 7 49 0 63 70 133 17 4 220 12 490 502 05:30 PM 17 21 13 1 51 11 139 10 3 160 8 9 57 1 74 68 136 11 1 215 6 500 506 05:45 PM 17 16 21 4 54 5 137 14 2 156 7 9 58 0 74 74 131 12 3 217 9 501 510 Total 68 83 62 6 213 46 525 53 15 624 25 38 214 1 277 292 520 61 12 873 34 1987 2021 Grand Total 150 180 128 8 458 93 1032 95 29 1220 69 100 449 7 618 576 1002 128 42 1706 86 4002 4088 Apprch % 32.8 39.3 27.9 7.6 84.6 T.8 11.2 16.2 72.7 33.8 58.7 7.5 I ' Total % 3.T 4.5 3.2 11.4 2.3 25.8 2.4 30.5 1.7 2.5 11.2 15.4 14.4 25.0 3.2 42.6 2.1 97.9 NE CREEK ST YELM AVE BALD HILL RD SE YELM AVE ~ StartTime Right ThN Left App. Total Right Thru Left App.Totai Right Thnr Left App. Total Right fim left App.Total IntTotal peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 86 98 64 248 54 510 40 604 39 63 230 332 285 494 72 851 2035 Percent 34.7 39.5 25.8 8.9 84.4 6.6 11.7 19.0 69.3 33.5 58.0 8.5 04:15Volume 24 25 15 64 14 131 8 153 12 14 53 79 76 146 12 234 530 Peak Factor _ 0.960 High Int 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 04:15 PM Volume 17 30 22 69 13 136 9 158 iT 17 65 99 76 146 12 234 Peak Factor 0.899 0.956 0.838 0.909 ?eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 By Approach 04:15 PM 04:45 PM 04:00 PM 05:00 PM Volume 86 98 64 248 54 524 48 626 44 62 235 341 292 520 61 873 Percent 34.7 39.5 25.8 8.6 83.7 7.7 12.9 18.2 68.9 33.4 59.6 7.0 High Int 04:30 PM 05:30 PM 04:45 PM 05:00 PM Volume it 30 22 69 li 139 10 160 17 17 65 99 80 120 21 221 Peak Factor 0.899 0.978 0.861 0.988 From North From East From South From West YELM, WASHINGTON NE CREEK ST/BALD HILL RD SE YELM AVE LOC# 04PTENW03226M Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 10(1 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 86 98 64 Percent 34.7 39.5 25.8 04:15 Volume 24 25 15 Peak Factor Hier Int 04:30 PM Volume 17 30 22 Peak Factor TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 248 54 510 40 8.9 84.4 6.6 64 14 131 8 04:45 PM 69- 13 136 9 0.899 604 39 63 230 11.7 19.0 69.3 153 12 14 53 04:45 PM 158 it 17 65 0.956 lu ~~ m~ J ~-~ North 4:15:00 PM 5:00:00 PM ~,I T r Out © T© File Name : TENW22604P Site Code :00000004 Start Date :08/14/2003 Page No : 2 332 285 494 72 33.5 58.0 8.5 79 76 146 12 04:15 PM 99 76 146 12 0.838 851 2035 234 530 0.960 234 0.909 •r ,~,. m D m i YELM, WASHINGTON CLARK RD SE 105TH WAY SE LOC# 05P TENW03226M TRAFFlCOUNT, INC. 4820 Y!ELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 (:rnnna Printari_ PRIMGRY Fle Name : TENW22605P Site Code :00000005 Start Date :08/14/2003 Page No : 1 CLARK RD SE CLARK RD SE 105TH WAY SE From North F rom East From South From West StartTime Right Thru Left Truck gyp' Right ThN Left Truck gyp' Right ThN Left Truck gyp' Right Thru Left Truck ~' FxGu. Inclu. Int Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 1 0 10 10 04:15 PM 3 6 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 3 0 3 0 17 17 04:30 PM 5 5 0 0 !0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 1 0 1 0 18 ~ 18 04:45 PM 2 4 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 2 0 12 12 Total 10 20 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 20 1 0 6 0 7 0 57 57 05:00 PM 3 7 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 05:15 PM 1 4 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 05:30 PM 1 8 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 05:45 PM 4 5 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 Total 9 24 0 0 33 0 0 0 0 GrandTotai 19 44 0 0 63 0 0 0 0 Apprch % 30.2 69.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total % 16.8 38.9 0.0 55.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 From North StartTime Right Thru Left Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM • Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 13 22 0 Percent 37.1 62.9 0.0 04:30 Volume 5 5 0 Peak Factor High Int 04:30 PM Volume 5 5 0 Peak Factor Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 ey Approach 04:15 PM Volume 13 22 0 Percent 37.1 62.9 0.0 High Int 04:30 PM Volume 5 5 0 Peak Factor 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 15 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 1 0 10 10 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 1 0 15 15 0 0 6 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 1 0 16 16 0 0 18 0 0 18 0 0 5 0 5 0 56 56 0 0 38 0 0 38 1 0 11 0 12 0 113 113 0.0 1 0 0.0 8.3 0.0 91.7 0.0 0.0 33.6 0.0 33.6 0.9 0.0 9.7 10.6 0.0 100.0 CLARK RD SE 105TH WAY SE From East 35 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 0 0 0 3:45:00 PM 10 0 0 0 0.875 04:00 PM 35 0 0 0 10 - - - 0.875 0 I 0 19 0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0 0 7 0 04:30 PM 0 0 7 0 04:00 PM 0 0 20 0 0.0 100.0 0.0 04:30 PM 0 7 0 19 0 0 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 7 0 0 1 04:15 PM 7 0 0 3 0.679 04:15 PM 20 0 0 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 04:15 PM 7 0 0 3 0.714 i. Total ~ Int Total 8 62 1 18 0.861 3 0.667 8 3 0.667 YELM, WASHINGTON CLARK RD SE 105TH WAY SE . LOC# 05P TENW03226M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 Fle Name : TENW22605P Site Code :00000005 Start Date :08/14/2003 Page No : 2 CLARK RD SE From North From East I CLARK RD SE From South 105TH WAY SE From West SfartTime Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru Left App.Tofal Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru Left App.Total IntTotal Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 13 22 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 19 0 0 8 8 62 Percent 37.1 62.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 04:30 Volume 5 5 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 1 1 18 Peak Factor 0.861 High IM. 04:30 PM 3:45:00 PM 04:30 PM 04:15 PM Volume 5 5 0 SO 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 3 3 Peak Factor 0.875 0.679 0.667 CLARK RD SE Right Thru Lgft ~~ T A w ~ North ~ ~ z y ^. o ~ ~- / /14/03 4:15:00 PM ~Z d ~ 14/03 5:00:00 PM ~ o ~ r r ~ .~01-1 IM ~x ~ T r o ~ Out In Total YELM, WASHINGTON S 1ST ST MOSMAN AVE LOC# 06PTENW03226M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 (;rnnns PrintPr•_ PRIMARY File Name : TENW22606P Site Code :00000006 Start Date : 08/ 14/2003 Page No :1 S 1ST ST MOSMAN AVE S 1ST ST MOSMAN AVE From North From East From South From West StartTime Right Thro left Truck gyp' Right Thro Left Truck gyp' Right Thru Left Truck gyp' Right Thro Left Truck ~' Fxdu. Inclu. Int Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 4 49 7 0 60 31 2 6 1 19 1 73 6 2 80 27 7 10 0 44 3 203 206 04:15 PM 3 37 3 3 43 2 1 8 0 I1 8 59 7 3 74 18 6 14 0 38 6 166 172 04:30 PM 6 71 4 2 81 5 3 12 0 20 1 88 2 3 91 27 10 10 0 47 5 239 244 04:45 PM 6 63 0 5 69 7 0 10 2 17 8 76 1 4 85 27 8 17 1 52 12 223 235 Total 19 220 14 !0 253 25 6 36 3 6T 18 296 16 12 330 99 31 51 1 181 26 831 85T 05:00 PM 5 67 2 3 74 3 0 14 0 1T 3 73 2 3 78 32 17 16 0 65 6 234 240 05:15 PM 4 58 5 1 67 1 3 11 0 15 B 71 4 1 81 31 6 9 1 46 3 209 212 05:30 PM 4 66 1 4 71 4 1 16 0 21 10 85 5 0 100 33 6 10 0 49 4 241 iF 245 05:45 PM 2 46 1 0 49 12 1 13 0 26 11 87 2 1 100 26 10 12 0 48 1 223 224 Total 15 237 9 8 261 20 5 54 0 79 30 316 13 5 359 122 39 47 1 208 14 907 921 Grand Total 34 457 23 18 514 45 it 90 3 146 48 612 29 17 689 221 70 98 2 389 40 1738 1778 t Apprch % 6.6 88.9 4.5 30.8 7.5 61.6 7.0 88.8 4.2 56.8 18.0 25.2 •- Total % 2.0 26.3 1.3 29.6 2.6 0.6 5.2 8.4 2.8 35.2 1.7 39.6 12.7 4.0 5.6 22.4 2.2 97.8 S 1ST ST MOSMAN AVE S 1ST ST MOSMAN AVE From North From East From South From West StartTime Right Thro Left App. Total Right ThN Left App. Total Right Thro Left App. Total Right Thro Left App. Total IrrtTotal ?eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:45 PM Yolume 19 254 8 281 15 4 51 70 27 305 12 344 123 37 52 212 907 Percent 6.8 90.4 2.8 21.4 5.7 72.9 7.8 88.7 3.5 58.0 17.5 24.5 05:30 Yolume 4 66 1 71 4 1 16 21 10 85 5 100 33 6 10 49 241 Peak Factor 0.941 High Int 05:00 PM 05:30 PM 05:30 PM 05:00 PM Volume 5 67 2 74 4 1 16 21 10 85 5 100 32 17 16 65 Peak Factor 0.949 0.833 0.860 0.815 Peak Hour From 04:00 PM W 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 By Approach 04:30 PM 05:00 PM 05:00 PM 04:45 PM Volume 21 259 11 291 20 5 54 79 30 316 13 359 123 37 52 212 Percent 7.2 89.0 3.8 25.3 6.3 68.4 8.4 88.0 3.6 58.0 17.5 24.5 High Int 04:30 PM 05:45 PM 05:30 PM 05:00 PM Volume 6 71 4 81 12 1 13 26 10 85 5 100 32 17 16 65 Peak Factor r 0.898 0.760 0.898 0.815 YELM, WASHINGTON S 1ST ST MOSMAN AVE LOC# 06P TENW03226M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B-195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360-491-8116 File Name : TENW22606P Site Code :00000006 Start Date : 08/ 14/2003 Page No : 2 S 1ST ST From North I MOSMAN AVE From East S 1ST ST From South I MOSMAN AVE From West StaRTime Right Thro Left App. Total Right ThN Left App. Total Right ThN LeR App. Total Right Thro Left App. Total IntTotal Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:45 PM Volume 19 254 8 281 15 4 51 70 27 305 12 344 123 37 52 212 90T Percent 8.8 90.4 2.8 21.4 5.7 72.9 7.8 88.7 3.5 58.0 17.5 24.5 05:30 Volume 4 88 1 71 4 1 i6 21 10 85 5 100 33 8 10 49 241 Peak Factor 0.941 Hlgh Int 05:00 PM 05:30 PM 05:30 PM 05:00 PM Volume 5 67 2 T4 4 1 16 21 30 85 5 100 32 17 16 85 Peak Factor 0.949 0.833 0.860 0.815 S 1 ST ST I 6531 1 Right Thru Left ~ ~~ T ~~ ~ > ~ North ~ ~ z ~ ~ F 14/03 4:45:00 PM ~-~ Z ON /14/03 5:30:00 PM y I Out In Total Appendix B Intersection LOS Results 2003 Existing HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Yelm Ave & 1st St SE 9/3/2003 ~ ~ ~ ~-- 1 Moverrgent EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~'I '~ ~ ~ Ideal:Flow {vphpl} 1900 1.900 1900 1.900 1900 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width 12 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 10 12 Total Lost time O 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85. 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 . 1.00 0.90 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Sa#d: Fiow {prof) 1774 1863 1531 1752 1836 1736 1641'. 1728 1584 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1863 1531 1752 1836 1?36 1641 1728 1584 Volume (vph) 112 488 44 180 484 16 148 108 228 56 64 120 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) 112 488 44 180 484 16 148 108 228 56 64 120 Lane Group Flow {vph) i 12 488 44 180 500 0 148 336 0 56 184 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 1 % 1 % 1 °lo Turn Type Prot Perm Prat Prot Prot Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 4.3 21.8 21.8 6.5 24.0 5.0 17.8 2.1 14.9 Effective Green, g (s} 5.3 22:8 22.8 7.5 25.0 6.0 18.8 3.1 15.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.33 0.33 0.11 0.37 0.09 0.28 0.05 0.23 Clearance Time (s} 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 138 623 512 193 673 153 452 79 369 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 0.26 c0.10 c0.27 c0.09 c0.20 0.03 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.78 0.09 0.93 0.74 0.97 0.74 0.71 0.50 Uniform Delay, d1 31.0 20.5 15.6 30.1 18.8 31.0 22.5 32.1 22.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 29.1 6.4 0.1 45.7 4.4 62.3 6.5 25.1 1.1 Delay (s) 60.1 26.9 15.6 75.8 23.2 93.3 29.0 57.2 23.8 Levee of Service E C B E C F C E C Approach Delay (s} 31.9 37.2 48.7 31.6 Approach. LOS C D D C lrtte~csec, ran~Summary HCM Average Control Delay 37.6 HCM Le vel of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated. Cycle Length (s) 68.2 Sum of lost time (s} 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.0% ICU Lev el of Service C c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2003 PM Existing Page 1 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Yelm Ave & Clark Rd SE 9/3/2003 ~ ~ ~ ~ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT VI/BR- NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ '~ ~ '~ ~ 'ta ~ ~ Idea{ Flow {vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ; 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 12 10 10 10 Total Lost time, (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4:0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00.. .0.85 1.00. ...0.87 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1736 1822 1787 1867 1745 1615 1685 .1548 Flt Permitted 0.27 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.75 1.00 Satd Flow (perm) 498 1822 392 1867 1328 1615 1334 1548 Volume (vph) 28 824 16 40 704 36 4 0 8 16 8 44 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) 28 824 16 40 704 36 4 0 8 16 8 44 Lane Group Flow (vph) 28 840 0 40 740 0 4 8 0 16 52 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 4% 4% 4% 1 % 1 % 1 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 Effective Green, g {s) 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 303 1107 238 1135 264 321 265 307 v/s Ratio Prot c0.46 0.40 0.00 c0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.10 0.00 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.76 0.17 0.65 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 3.4 5.9 3.5 5.3 13.3 13.3 13.4 13.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental. Delay, d2 0.1 3.0 0.3 1.4 0.0 OA 0.1 0.3 Delay (s) 3.5 8.9 3.9 6.6 13.3 13.4 13.5 14.0 Level of Service A A A A B B B B Approach Delay (s) 8.8 6.5 13.4 13.9 Approach LOS A A B B In>~~section ~ur~i~ary HCM Average Control.Delay 8.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated. Cycle :Length {s) 41.3 Sum of l ost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.3% ICU Level of Se rvice A c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2003 PM Existing Page 2 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: Yelm Ave & NE Creek St 9/3/2003 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ ~ ~ ~ '(k ~ ~ "~ ~ '~ Ideal Flow {vplipl} 1900 19U0 .'1900. 1900. 1900. .1900 1900 1900 1900 1.900 1900 1900 Lane Width 11 12 15 12 12 12 13 13 12 10 12 12 Total. Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utit. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1 c00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00. 0.85 .1.00 0.93 1.00 0:93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) - 1694 1845. 1725 1770. 1863 1583 1829: 1792 1685 1760 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1894 1845 1725 1770 1863 1583 1829 1792 1685 1760 Volume (vph) 48 584 304 32 524 56 212 56 48 60 100 96 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) 48 584 304 32 524 56 212 56 48 60 100 96 Lane Group Flow (vph} 48 .584 . 304 32 524 56 212 104 0 60 196 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% Tum Type Prot pm+ov Prat Perm Split Split Protected Phases 5 2 4 1 6 4 4 8 8 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 2.0 26.7 38.9 1.3 26.0 26.0 12.2 12.2 9.9 9.9 Effective Green, g (s) 3.0 27.7 40.9 2.3 27.0 27.0 13.2 132 10.9 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.40 0.58 0.03 0.39 0.39 0.19 0.19 0.16 0.16 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) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 72 729 1006 58 718 610 344 337 262 274 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.32 0.06 0.02 c0.28 c0.12 0.06 0.04 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.80 0.30 0.55 0.73 0.09 0.62 0.31 0.23 0.72 Uniform Delay, d1 33.1 18.8 7.4 33.4 18.4 13.7 26.1 24.5 25.9 28.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 20.9 6.3 0.2 10.9 3.7 0.1 3.3 0.5 0.4 8.6 Delay (s) 53.9 25.1 7.6 44.3 22.2 13.8 29.4 25.0 26.4 36.7 Level of Service D C A D C B C C C D Approach Delay (s) 20.9 22.6 28.0 34.3 Approach LOS C C C C Int~sedi~n Sun1 "mart' HCM Average Control Delay 24.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.1 Sum of l ost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.6% ICU Level of Se rvice B c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2003 PM Existing Page 3 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 09/02/2003 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Yelm Ave & SW Longmire St 2003 Existing Pro'ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: SW Lon mire Street Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 e ~i~s~ _. ,t~ ~-~ ' '~s. k. -~ , . Ma"or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 4 880 8 4 624 8 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Houri Flow Rate, HFR 4 880 8 4 624 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1 - - 1 - -- Median T e Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 0 8 8 0 12 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 8 8 0 12 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR T ti-t~ ..°' ar~d t~+ey~1f`~tifPs; ~r`~ce Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 4 4 12 20 C (m)(vph) 956 767 180 181 v/c 0.00 0.01 0.07 0.11 95% queue length 0.01 0.02 0.21 0.37 Control Delay 8.8 9.7 26.4 27.3 LOS A A D D Approach Delay - - 26.4 27.3 Approach LOS - - D D HCS2000rmt Copyright ®2000 Uruversity of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY G~n~al lnfsarm~.tEoa___ _ _ __ Site_lnform~.tiQn _ Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 19/24/2003 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year 3rd St SE & Yelm Ave 2003 Existing Pro'ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: 3rd Street SE Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes `and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 4 812 26 52 620 4 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1.00 4 1.00 812 1.00 26 1.00 52 1.00 620 1.00 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 9 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 0 76 0 0 16 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ~ 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 76 0 0 16 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 Percent Grade (%} 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR Dela ,Queue Len th, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound .Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 4 52 80 16 C (m) (vph) 952 792 360 490 v/c 0.00 0.07 _~ 0.22 0.03 95% queue length 0.01 0.21 0.84 0.10 Control Delay 8.8 9.9 17.8 12.6 LOS A A ~ 8 Approach Delay - - 17.8 12.6 Approach LOS - - C 8 Hc'S?OOOTRt Cop} ria(it ~ ?000 L?uicersitt• of Florida.:Vl Rights Resen-ad Fersiou 4. Ic MMARY NTR L SU TWO WAY STOP CO O !~ y ~IV#~~~~!~ - $1~~ rr g ~ (M ~~~~11 R i Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 09/02/2003 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year NE 103rd St & Yelm Ave 2003 Existing Pro ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/VNest Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: NE 103rd Street Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 TTAJ ~ ~x ,r Ma or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 56 824 0 0 864 16 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 56 824 D 0 864 16 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- - Median T e Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration L TR L TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 0 0 12 0 12 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 0 12 0 12 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 0 1 Configuration LTR L R °`. lt` and ev~I of Service , Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LTR L R v (vph) 56 0 4 12 12 C (m) (vph) 764 802 156 173 353 v/c 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.03 95% queue length 0.24 0.00 0.08 0.22 0.11 Control Delay 10.1 9.5 28.7 27.4 15.6 LOS 8 A D D C Approach Delay - - 28.7 21.5 Approach LOS - - D C HCS2000T~`'t Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, Alt Rights Reserved Version 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY eti ~t`ai ~I~:f4c~. din fife ~nfiot tro Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 09/02/2003 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year 105th Way SE & Clark Rd SE 2003 Existing Pro'ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: 105th Wa SE North/South Street: Clark Road SE Intersection Orientat i on: h-South Nort Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ~ lY `~ y~ 't[y]~ Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 28 0 0 20 20 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 28 0 0 20 20 Percent Heav Vehicles 0 - -- 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 4 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 4 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Y ueue: hand Le ~I q~Se - ~~`K' Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 0 4 C (m) (vph) 1583 954 v/c 0.00 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.01 Control Delay 7.3 8.8 LOS A A Approach Delay - - 8.8 Approach LOS - - A HCS2000TM Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. lc TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ~llr-fo~tnation ~`~` ~. ~ iii n Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 09/02/2003 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Mosman Ave SE & 1st St SE 2003 Existing Pro~ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/Vllest Street: Mosman Avenue SE North/South Street: 1st Street SE Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 5• '=rt.Y ~ ~5 4 _ 5~ J .V} t. ~~~ .,4LS . Ma or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 20 340 40 4 264 16 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 20 340 40 4 264 16 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 - - 5 - -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 64 4 16 40 24 132 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 64 4 16 40 24 132 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 1 1 1 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR ,,. u ue Lin ~ and ~.e~el;~rb# _ ,. r~i~~e ~ ~~ _. _ , 5, ~~., ,,, ~. Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 20 4 84 196 C (m) (vph) 1283 1162 287 551 v/c 0.02 0.00 0.29 0.36 95% queue length 0.05 0.01 1.19 1.60 Control Delay 7.9 8.1 22.7 15.1 LOS A A C C Approach Delay - - 22.7 15.1 Approach LOS - - C C HCS1000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ic 2005 Without-Project HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Yelm Ave & 1st St SE 9/4/2003 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT' NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '~ ~- ~' ~ '~ ~ '!:~ ~ 'G Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4900 1900 Lane Width 12 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 10 12 TotaF Last time.{s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4A Lane Util. Factor 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 0.90 1.00 .:.0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 .1.531 1752 1832 1736 1636: 1728 1596 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm). 1770 4863 1531 1752 1832 4736 1636 1728 1596 Volume (vph) 112 544 44 208 512 24 154 103 237 62 72 111 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94. 0.94 0.88 0.88 0:88 0,92. 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 118 573 46 221 545 26 175 117 269 67 78 121 Lane Group Flow (vph) 118 573 46 221 571 0 175 386 0 67 1.99 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 1 % 1 % 1 Tum Type Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.0 29.3 29.3 11.7 35.0 10.4 22.9 3.0 15.5 Effective Green, g {s) 7.0 30.3 30.3 12.7 36.0 11.4 23.9 4A 16.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.35 0.35 0.15 0.41 0.13 0.28 0.05 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 143 650 534 256 759 228 450 80 303 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.31 c0.13 0.31 c0.10 c0.24 0.04 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.88 0.09 0.86 0.75 0.77 0.86 0.84 0.66 Uniform Delay, d1 39.3 26.6 19.0 36.3 21.7 36.5 29.9 41.1 32.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 30.5 13.3 0.1 24.6 4.2 14.3 14.9 50.1. 5.1 Delay (s) 69.8 39.9 19.1 60.9 25.9 50.8 44.8 91.2 37.6 Level of Service E D B E C D b F D Approach Delay (s) 43.4 35.6 46.6 51.1 Approach LOS D D D D Infersect~ar< Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.4 HCM Level of S ervice D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length {s) 86.9 Sum of L ost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Ut ilization 82.2% ICU Level of Se rvice D c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2005 PM Baseline Page 1 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Yelm Ave & Clark Rd SE 9/4/2003 Movement EBL EBT =EBR WBI. WBT WBR NBL NB'f NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ '~ '~ '~ `~ `~ ~ '~ Ideal flow (vphpl) 1900 190Q 1.900 1.900 4.900 1900. -191)0' 1900.... 1940... 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 12 10 10 10 Totat Lost time (s) 4:0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1 a30 1:00 1.00 0.99. . 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.87 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prof) - 1736 1823 1787 1871 1745. .1621. 1685 1549 Flt Permitted 0.24 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.73 1.00 Satd. Flow {perm) 444 1823 337 1871 1324. 1621 1288 1541 Volume (vph) 38 846 11 38 739 28 12 1 31 22 6 39 Peak-hour. factor, PHF 0:95 ` :0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.68 0.68:. 0.68 0.82 0.82 0.82 Adj. Flow (vph) 40 891 12 40 770 29 18 1 46 27 7 48 Lane Groupflow (vph) 40 903 0 40 799 0 18 47 0 27 55 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 4% 4% 4% 1 % 1 % 1 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 Effective Green, g (s) 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 277 1138 210 1168 253 310 246 295 v/s Ratio Prot c0.50 0.43 0.03 c0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.12 0.01 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.79 0.19 0.68 0.07 0.15 0.11 0.19 Uniform Delay, d1 3.4 6.1 3.5 5.3 14.4 14.6 14.5 14.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.9 0.4 1.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 Delay (s) 3.6 10.0 3.9 7.0 14.5 14.8 14.7 15.0 Level of Service A A A A B B B B Approach Delay (s) 9.7 6.9 14.8 14.9 Approach LOS A A B B Intersection summa HCM Average Control Delay. 8.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle .Length (s) 43.4 Sum of lost. time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.6% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2005 PM Baseline Page 2 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: Yelm Ave & Creek St 9~4~2003 Moverrient -EBL EBT -EBR WBL WBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ '~ Ideal Ftow (vphpl) 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1.900 1900 1900 4900 1900: 1900 .1900 1900 Lane Width 11 12 15 12 12 12 13 13 12 10 12 12 Total Lost time. (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 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. 0.94 1.00 ...0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1694. 1845 1725 ' 1770 1863 1583 1.829 -.1814 1685. 1767 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm} 1694 1845 1725 1770 1863 1583 .1829 1814- 1685 1767 Volume (vph) 78 534 308 43 552 58 249 68 42 69 106 93 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98. 0.98 0.98 0.86 .0.86 0.86 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow {vph) 79 539 311 44 563 59 290 79 49 77 118 103 Lane Group Flow (vph} 79 539 311 44 563 59 290 .128 0 77 221 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot pm+ov Prot Perm Split Split Protected Phases 5 2 4 1 6 4 4 8 8 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 3.0 25.0 39.2 2.2 24.2 24.2 142 14.2 13.0 13.0 Effective Green, g (s) 4.0 .26.0 41.2 3.2 25.2 25.2 15.2 15.2 14.0 14.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.35 0.55 0.04 0.34 0.34 .0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 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) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 91 645 955 76 631 536 374 _371 317 333. v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.29 0.07 0.02 c0.30 c0.16 0.07 0.05 c0.13 vls Ratio Perm 0.11 0.04 vlc Ratio 0.87 0.84 0.33 0.58 0.89 0.11 0.78 0.35 0.24 0.66 Uniform Delay, d1 34.9 22.2 9.0 34.9 23.3 16.9 28.0 25.3 25.7 28.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 53.3 9.2 0.2 10.3 14.9 0.1 9.7 0.6 0.4 4.9 Delay (s) 88.2 31.4 9.2 45.2 38.2 17.0 37.7 25.9 26.1 32.9 Level of Service F C A D D B D C C C Approach Delay (s) 28.8 36.8 34.1 31.2 Approach LOS C D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.4 HCM Level of S ervice C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 74.4 Sum of l ost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Ut ilization 75.9% ICU Lev el of Se rvice C c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2005 PM Baseline Page 3 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 7 ink:' i~'trn: y1~oh `` - ~ . S ,~»fc~ r: Analyst AgencyiCo. Date Pertormed Analysis Time Period TENW 9/2/03 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Yelm Ave & SW Longmire St 2005 Baseline Pro'ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat EastlWest Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: SW Lon mire Street Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 US'l[11E:~1~~5~ `~ r Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 6 906 21 11 650 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 934 21 11 691 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1 - - 1 - -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 13 0 10 8 1 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.63 0.63 0.63 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 17 0 13 12 1 20 Percent Heav Vehicles 0 D 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR De~~. i~~eue ati~> vef' ~fi erv~,., _ - ~- Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 6 11 30 33 C (m) (vph) 901 724 105 147 vlc 0.01 0.02 0.29 0.22 95% queue length 0.02 0.05 1.08 0.82 Control Delay 9.0 10.0+ 52.5 36.4 LOS A B F E Approach Delay - - 52.5 36.4 Approach LOS -- - F E HCS2000T t`"t Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Ic TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Gen~l~al lnforr~aation __ S~te_Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 11/24/2003 PM Peak Intersection 3rd St SE & Yelm Ave Jurisdiction Jr Analysis Year 200 Baseline Pro'ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: 3rd Street SE Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Ad"ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 5 852 15 65 679 16 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 852 15 65 679 16 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- - Median Type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 3 77 ~ 2 0 9 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 3 77 2 0 9 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) Flared Approach Storage RT Channelized Lanes Configuration 0 N 0 0 0 1 D LTR 0 N 0 0 0 1 0 LTR Dela ,Queue Len th, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v {vph) 5 65 84 11 C (m) {vph) 896 772 333 310 v/c 0.01 0.08 0.25 0.04 95% queue length 0.02 0.27 0.98 0.11 Control Delay 9.0 10.1 19.4 17.0 LOS A 8 C C Approach Delay - - 19.4 17.0 Approach LOS - - C C H(~S~pppT~t Cop}~riaht ~~ 2000 Unicersih• of Florida, _~ll Ritrhts Reserved Version 1.1e TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ~` ~~~i - >~ nib` '`r ' Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 9/2/03 PM Peak ~ Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year NE 103rd St & Yelm Ave 2005 Baseline Pro ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/Vllest Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: NE 103rd Street Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 t .may. 1 2 ..:F3_ _, S Jh.~~tl, d-f~ ~ ~ :.,.. Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 65 925 1 4 831 18 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 67 953 1 4 923 20 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- - 3 -- - Median Type Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration L TR L TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 2 0 4 9 0 47 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.77 0.77 0.77 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 8 11 0 61 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 0 1 Confi uration LTR L R ~~~ a ~,er• h ~d ~~~~ ~ '~ _ ,~,~ ~, t~~~~`~ Approach EB WB Northbou nd Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LTR L R v (vph) 67 4 12 11 61 C(m)(vph) 723 716 193 138 325 v/c 0.09 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.19 95% queue length 0.31 0.02 0.20 0.26 0.68 Control Delay 10.5 10.1 24.9 33.3 18.6 LOS 8 8 C D C Approach Delay - - 24.9 20.9 Approach LOS - - C C HCS2000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY }~ ~~ h +~ Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 9/2/03 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year 105th Way SE & Clark Rd SE 2005 Baseline Pro'ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/VNest Street: 105th Wa SE North/South Street: Clark Road SE Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 yS ~'1 _ A~. y l'.:r i _ _ _ ._~ ~'S I>; Ma or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 21 0 0 24 14 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.71 0.71 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.88 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 29 0 0 27 15 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LT TR U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 9 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.67 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 13 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Confi uration LR ~~~ Y ` `TLe "th ~ i~4;l:evei ` :Ice ~ - ~ :'- r 4 °'" '~, ~:~,; Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 0 13 C (m) (vph) 1580 948 v/c 0.00 0.01 95% queue length 0.00 0.04 Control Delay 7.3 8.9 LOS A A Approach Delay - - 8.9 Approach LOS - - A KCS2000~ Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Ic TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ~~i~o~`~o~t gi ~,~- ~~- .~~nr a ,;~ ; Analyst Agency/Co. Date Pertormed Analysis Time Period TENW 9/2/03 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Mosman Ave SE & 1st St SE 2005 Baseline Pro'ect Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Mosman Avenue SE North/South Street: 1st Street SE Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 13 330 29 9 275 21 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 14 366 32 10 305 23 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 55 4 16 56 40 133 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.82 0.82 0.82 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 72 5 21 68 48 162 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 1 1 1 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR _ . ~ ~ 'efi ~8~ tea ` y~~. '~ Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 14 10 98 278 C (m)(vph) 1232 1144 228 469 v/c 0.01 0.01 0.43 0.59 95% queue length 0.03 0.03 2.01 3.77 Control Delay 8.0 8.2 32.2 23.2 LOS A A D C Approach Delay - -- 32.2 23.2 Approach LOS - - D C KCS2000rM Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ic 2005 With-Project HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Yelm Ave & 1st St SE 11/19/2003 MovetTent ` EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '~ ~ ~ '~ '~ '~ '~ ~ '~ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 .1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900. 1.900 1.900 1900 Lane Width 12 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 10 12 Total .Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 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 0.90. . 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1531 1752 1832 1736 1637 1728 1596 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1863 1531 1752 1832 1736 1637 1728 1596 Volume (vph) 112 563 47 210 518 25 161 105 237 68 72 111 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.92. 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 118 593 49 223 551 27 183 119 269 74 78 121 Lane Group Flow (vph) 118 593 49 223 578 0 183 388 0 74 199 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2°l0 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 1 % 1 % 1 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 5.0 25.3 25.3 10.0 30.3 8.0 20.4 3.1 15.5 Effective Green, g (s) 6.0 26.3 26.3 11.0 31.3 9.0 21.4. 4.1 16.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.33 0.33 0.14 0.40 0.11 0.27 0.05 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 135 622 511 245 728 198 445 90 334 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.32 c0.13 0.32 c0.11 c0.24 0.04 0.12 v!s Ratio Perm 0.03 vlc Ratio 0.87 0.95 0.10 0.91 0.79 0.92 0.87 0.82 0.60 Uniform Delay, d1 36.0 25.7 18.1 33.4 20.9 34.6 27.4 37.0 28.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 42.1 24.9 0.1 34.4 6.0 42.9 16.9 42.9 2.8 Delay (s) 78.1 50.5 18.1 67.8 26.9 77.4 44.3 79.9 31.0 Level of Service E D B E C E D E C Approach Delay (s) 52.7 38.3 54.9 44.2 Approach LOS D D D D lntetsection Summary -~ HCM Average Control Delay 47.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.8 Sum of l ost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Ut ilization 83.8% ICU Level of Se rvice D c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2005 PM With Project Page 1 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Yelm Avenue & Clark Rd SE 11/19/2003 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ '~ ~ '~ ~ '~ ~ ~ Ideal Flow (vphpl} 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1:900 1900 1900 Lane Width 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 12 10 10 10 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.87 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1736 1819 1787 1871 1745 1685 1685 1541 Flt Permitted 0.25 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.72 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 454 1819 330 1871 1324 1685. 1272 1.541 Volume (vph) 38 848 27 57 739 28 22 10 31 22 6 39 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95. 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.82 0.82 0.82 Adj. Flow (vph) 40 893 28 59 770 29 32 15 46 27 7 48 Lane Group Flow (vph} 40 921 0 59 799 0 32 61 0 27 55 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 4% 4% 4% 1 % 1 % 1 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 27.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 Effective Green, g (s} 28.5 28.5 28.5 28.5 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 289 1157 210 1190 245 312 236 285 v/s Ratio Prot c0.51 0.43 c0.04 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.18 0.02 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.80 0.28 0.67 0.13 0.20 0.11 0.19 Uniform Delay, d1 3.3 6.0 3.6 5.2 15.2 15.4 15.2 15.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.9 0.7 1.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 Delay (s) 3.5 9.9 4.3 6.7 -15.5 15.7 15.4 15.8 Level of Service A A A A B B B B Approach Delay {s} 9.6 6.5 15.6 15.6 Approach LOS A A B B Intersection Sumria HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 44.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2005 PM With Project Page 1 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: Yelm Avenue & Creek St 9/5/2003 Movement EBL EB_ T EBR -WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT. NBR SBL __ SBT SBR Lane Configurations '~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ `~ '~ ~ '~ Ideal :Flow (vphpl) ' 1900 1900 .1900 1900 .1900. ..1900 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width 11 12 15 12 12 12 13 13 12 10 12 12 Total Lost time (s} 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fit 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1 AO 0.94 1.00 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4694 1845 1725 1770 .1863 1583 1829 1.814. 1685. 1767 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Ffow (perm} 1694 1845 1725 1770 1863 1583 1829 1814.: 1685 1767 Volume (vph) 78 539 311 43 562 58 255 68 42 69 106 93 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.98. 0.86 0.86 0:86. 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 79 544 314 44 573 59 297 79 49 77 118 103 Lane Group Flow (vph) 79 544 314 44 573 59 297 128- 0 77 221 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% Tum Type Prot pm+ov Prot Perm Split Split Protected Phases 5 2 4 1 6 4 4 8 8 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 3.5 28.9 44.5 2.7 28.1 28.1 15.6 15.6 10.5 10.5 Effective Green, g (s) 4.5 29.9 46.5 3.7 29.1 29.1 16.6 16.6 11.5 11.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.38 0.60 0.05 0.37 0.37 0.21 0.21 0.15 0.15 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) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 98 710 1032 84 698 593 391 388 249 262 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.29 0.06 0.02 c0.31 c0.16 0.07 0.05 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.77 0.30 0.52 0.82 0.10 0.76 0.33 0.31 0.84 Uniform Delay, d1 36.2 20.9 7.7 36.1 21.9 15.8 28.7 25.8 29.6 32.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 incremental Delay, d2 36.6 5.0 0.2 5.8 7.7 0.1 8.2 0.5 0.7 21.2 Delay (s) 72.8 25.8 7.8 41.9 29.6 15.9 36.9 26.3 30.3 53.4 Level of Service E C A D C B D C C D Approach Delay (s) 23.7 29.2 33.7 47.4 Approach LOS C C C D tntersec~ian'SOmm~ry HCM Average Control Delay 30.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 77.7 Sum of l ost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.8% ICU Lev el of Se rvice C c Critical Lane Group Yelm Terra Plat Synchro 5 Report 2005 PM With Project Page 3 TRANSPKIRK-ST51 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Oran "#~+~°~n ~~te`lr~~~rtriati i~.~ ~, Analyst Agency/Co. Date Pertormed Analysis Time Period TENW 9/2/03 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Yelm Ave & SW Longmire St 2005 with Project Project Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: SW Lon mire Street Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Ma or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 6 925 21 11 661 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 6 953 21 11 703 10 Percent Heav Vehicles 1 - - 1 - -- Median T pe Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 13 0 10 8 1 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.63 0.63 0.63 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 17 0 13 12 1 20 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR ~~I'°~,` ~ue Len th n~ Lev I of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 6 11 30 33 C (m) (vph) 892 712 100 140 v/c 0.01 0.02 0.30 0.24 95% queue length 0.02 0.05 1.14 0.87 Control Delay 9.1 10.1 55.7 38.5 LOS A 8 F E Approach Delay - - 55.7 38.5 Approach LOS - - F E HCS1000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY _ y _ Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 11/24/2003 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year 3rd St SE & Yelm Ave 2005 With Project Project Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: 3rd Street SE Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ..fr r.,F... ;` _ ~. . Ma or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 5 865 30 65 688 17 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 f.00 1.00 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 5 865 30 65 688 17 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 - -- 3 - - Median Tye Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized 0 D Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 6 3 79 5 0 9 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.OD 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 3 79 5 0 9 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR h $nc~ ~ev~ t~f ~ervlce k'~ Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 5 65 88 14 C (m) (vph) 888 754 318 230 v/c 0.01 0.09 0.28 0.06 95% queue length 0.02 0.28 1.1 i 0.19 Control Delay 9.1 10.2 20.6 21.7 LOS A 8 C C Approach Delay - - 20.6 21.7 Approach LOS - - C C HCS2000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ic TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 09x1/03 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year AvenOerd St & Yelm 2005 witth Project Project Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Yelm Avenue North/South Street: NE 103rd Street Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 +. 7%i Ma or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 66 935 1 4 849 18 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 68 963 1 4 943 20 Percent Hea Vehicles 3 - - 3 - - Median Tye ~ Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 Confi uration L TR L TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 2 0 4 9 0 48 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.77 0.77 0.77 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 8 11 0 62 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 0 1 Confi uration LTR L R ,. Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LTR L R v(vph) 68 4 12 11 62 C (m) (vph) 711 710 186 135 317 v/c 0.10 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.20 95% queue length 0.32 0.02 0.20 0.26 0.71 Control Delay 10.6 10.1 25.7 34.0 19.1 LOS 8 8 D D C Approach Delay - - 25.7 21.3 Approach LOS - - D C HCS2000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY - ~jp~ r =~ ~ ~ Site 1~~ :#~ tior~~ - Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 11/19/03 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year 105th Way SE & Clark Rd SE 2005 with Project Project Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: 105th Wa SE North/South Street: Clark Road SE Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 <~ r. Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Voluble 0 21 0 0 24 49 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.71 0.71 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.88 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 29 0 0 27 55 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 - - 0 -- - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 28 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.67 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 41 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Confi uration LR h ~ e~ce . - Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 0 41 C (m) (vph) 1528 924 v/c 0.00 0.04 95% queue length 0.00 0.14 Control Delay 7.4 9.1 LOS A A Approach Delay - - 9.1 Approach LOS - - A HCS2000~ Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. lc TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY -- >!~~ },i~ h f:` to lrifOrlatiOn Analyst AgencyiCo. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TENW 11/19/03 PM Peak Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Mosman Ave SE & 1st St SE 2005 with Project Project Descri tion Yelm Terra Plat East/West Street: Mosman Ave SE North/South Street: 1st Street SE Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 _ .. __ . ~., .: _ ~ . -.. ..: f, , ..,. Ma or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 13 330 39 12 277 21 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 14 366 43 13 307 23 Percent Hea Vehicles 2 -- - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 58 4 25 56 40 133 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.82 0.82 0.82 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 76 5 32 68 48 162 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 1 1 1 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LTR LTR ~ariil"'t'ev~1~a dice - Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 14 13 113 278 C (m)(vph) 1229 1134 236 457 vlc 0.01 0.01 0,48 0.61 95% queue length 0.03 0.03 2.39 3.96 Control Delay 8.0 8.2 33.5 24.4 LOS A A D C Approach Delay - - 33.5 24.4 Approach LOS - - D C HCS2000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. lc Q~ ~r~' of THE P~t~ ~~~ YELM WASHINGTON CITY OF YELM PO Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 360-458-3244 NOTICE OF APPEAL Fee: Staff Decision - $50.00 Hearing Examiner Decision - $100.00 (In addition, any professional service charges per Resolution #358) A Closed record appeal may follow either an open record hearing or an open record administrative decision on a project permit application when the appeal is on the record, and no or limited new evidence or information is allowed to be submitted. Appeals on Category I & II project decisions are heard by the City Council. Appeals on Category III & IV project decisions as well as Category I & II decisions which have been appealed to the City Council go to Superior Court and follow the judicial review process set forth in RCW 366.70C. A Notice of Appeal must be filed within 14 days of Notice of Final Decision. PROJECT CASE NUMBER BEING APPEALED ~ ~'~ ~ ~ C~ DATE OF NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION ' APPELLANT(S) • C.Q. /9i~ (~!~ L (~ Mailing Address /775 iQS~`n e v City, State and Zip ~x.~-s'Y1 I,~c~ ~7'C'~~`~'7 Telephone ~ fvl~. "~~~. `~i~f :~ SPECIFIC ITEMS OF DECISION BEING APPEALED (attach additional sheet if necessary):- I affirm that all answers, statements and information contained in and submitted with this application are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I also affirm that I am the owner of the subject site or am duly authorized by the owner to act with respect to this application. Further, I grant permission from the owner to any and all employees and representatives of the City of Yelm and other governmental a encies to enter upon and inspect said property as reasonably necessary to process this applicati a to pay all fees of the city which apply to this application. Signed ~~ Date ~~~ OFFICIAL USE ONLY Fee Date Received By File No. PAID JAN 1 4 2004 ci~r~r~y G:\Web Content\community development\AppealApp.doc 9/Ol • • „ ra,~rle ~~:~~~:~~~~~{~ e ~ e~z~ SAN 141004 ,G'ee r~`nne Campbell, ~. ~. cS ~.nuary 13, 2004 grant Beck 'ommunity Development Department ~ity of Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West P. O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Grant: I wish to appeal two counts of the Mitigated Determination ofNon-significance (MDNS) related to the Yelm Terra project. Item one of the appeal is fact number 2: the traffic impact analysis; and item two is fact number 6: an alternative connectivity of 105`h; that is, closure of the 105th and Mill Road access. I will cite and discuss each briefly. The traffic impact analysis (TIA) states the project will generate 928 vehicle trips per day. I ascertain that that number is deflated. There is a greater impact than finding of facts. These numbers address the level of service. Criteria used to address the impact to vehicles does not measure the impact to pedestrians, bicycles, and the neighborhood. Due to the congestion on Yelm Avenue, Clark Road, Mill Road and 105' are all used by both sides of the community as a bypass for work, Mill Pond school activities and other transportation needs. Speeding and congestion presently occur at peak hours and throughout the day creating an unsafe neighborhood. Fact number 6 proposes closing the western end of 105`1i. This will impact the present residents in several ways. Residents on the opposite side of the project have zoning of 1/5. Our privacy will now be gone. Closing off the street could create a haven for 105`}' to be a playground and alley. Fire and police protection will be delayed and more police protection will be warranted. Finally, closure of 105t1i can create breeding of an unwanted element. Yes, the neighborhood's quality of life will be challenged and changed. Representatives of the community will video and monitor traffic on 105th and will present the results of our findings and discuss these issues at the upcoming meeting. 202 First Street South • P.O. Box 1568 • Yelm, WA 98597 • (360) 458-7645 As a business owner and private property owner of Yelm, my concerns embrace all of us. Please give this project more thought. Revenue generated for the city is good but please address the people's concerns and needs. Thank you for assisting in the process. Sincerel , ,.fem. ~ .~~ ~°_ /~L e Anne Camp 1 D.D.S. Cc: Buffy Clark and community at large SEPA N0: 8353 MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Proponent: Description of Proposal: Location of the Proposal Yelm Terra, LLC Subdivide 24.25 acres into 97 single-family residential lots. The project includes the construction of stormwater facilities, interior streets, and street improvements to 105th Avenue SE. The project site is located between on 105th Avenue SE, between Clark Road and Mill Road. Section/Township/Range: Section 30, Township 17 North Range 2 East, W.M. Threshold Determination: The City of Yelm as lead agency for this action has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Conditions/Mitigating Measures: SEE ATTACHED Lead agency: Responsible Official: Date of Issue: Co Deadline: ppe e ' Gra Beck, Commui City of Yelm Grant Beck, Community Development Director December 26, 2003 January 9, 2004 at 5:00 P.M. January 16, 2004 at 5:00 P.M. pity Development Director This Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance (MDNS) is issued pursuant to Washington Administrative Code 197-11-340 (2). Comments must be submitted to Tami Merriman, Community Development Department, at City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Avenue West, P.O. Box 479, Yelm, WA 98597, by January 9, 2004, at 5:00 P.M. The City of Yelm will not act on this proposal prior January 16, 2004, at 5:00 P.M. You may appeal this determination to the Yelm Hearing Examiner, at above address, by submitting a written appeal no later than January 16, 2004, at 5:00 P.M. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Grant Beck, Community Development Director, to learn more about the procedures for SEPA appeals. This MDNS is not a permit and does not by itself constitute project approval. The applicant must comply with all applicable requirements of the City of Yelm prior to receiving construction permits which may include but are not limited to the City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code (Title 17 YMC), Critical Areas Code (Chapter 14.08 YMC), Storm water Drainage Design and Erosion Control Manual (DOE), Uniform Building Code, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (Title 14 YMC), Road Design Standards, Platting and Subdivision Code (Title 16 YMC), and the Shoreline Master Program. ------------------------------------------------------ DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE Published: Nisqually Valley News, Friday, January 2, 2004 Posted in public areas: Friday, December 26, 2004 Copies to: All agencies/citizens on SEPA mailing list and adjacent property owners Dept. of Ecology w/checklist ATTACHMENT SEPA Case Number 8353 Findings of Fact This Mitigated Determination of Non Significance is based on the project as proposed and the impacts and potential mitigation measures reflected in the following environmental documents: • Environmental Checklist (dated October, 2003, prepared by SCA Consulting Group) • Traffic Impact Analysis (dated September 2003, and updated November 2003, prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest) • Preliminary Storm Drainage and Erosion Control Report (dated October 2003, prepared by SCA Consulting Group) 2. The traffic impact analysis (TIA) submitted as part of the subdivision application indicates that the project will generate 928 vehicle trips per day, with a PM peak of 98 vehicles per hour. The TIA, assuming a baseline annual growth rate of 4%, indicated that: The intersection of 105th Ave, and Clark Road will be at a Level of Service (LOS) A, with an average delay of 9 seconds. The signalized intersection of Clark Road and Yelm Avenue will be at a LOS A, with an average delay of 9 seconds. The intersection of 3`d Street and Yelm Avenue will be at LOS C, with an average delay of 22 seconds. The intersection of Mosman and 1St Street (507) will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 33 seconds. The signalized intersection of Yelm Avenue and First Street will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 48 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue West (510) and SW Longmire Street will be at LOS F, with an average delay of 56 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue (507) and NE 103`d Street will be at LOS D, with an average delay of 34 seconds. The intersection of Yelm Avenue East (507) and Bald Hills Road will be at LOS C, with an average delay of 30 seconds. Frontage improvements will be constructed along 105th Avenue SE. The subdivision will provide for a road connection to the existing neighborhood to the north, with a narrowed street, traffic signs, no parking and a raised pedestrian crossing. The subdivision will provide connecting sidewalks from Yelm Terra to the sidewalks in the Prairie View subdivision. The City of Yelm has adopted a concurrency management system as required by the Growth Management Act. Chapter 15.40 YMC (concurrency Management) is designed to ensure that the improvements required to support development are available at the time of development. A concurrency determination may be issued for a proposal as it relates to transportation issues when: the development provides on-site frontage improvements; the project makes off-site improvements as necessary to provide for the safe movement of traffic; and the project makes a contribution to projects identified the six year transportation improvement program in the form of a Transportation Facilities Charge. The Growth Management Act at Section 36.70.070 (6)(b) RCW states that a finding of concurrency can be issued when required improvements are in place at the time of development or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. 4. Improvements to West Yelm Avenue, including atwo-way center turn lane, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. West Yelm Avenue is a State Highway (SR 510). There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Improvements to the Mosman Street/SR 507 intersection including intersection realignment, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Improvements to Mosman Street to 2"d Street including widening the roadway, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Improvements to Mill Road including road realignment, is listed as a project on the 2003 - 2008 Transportation Improvement Program. There is no financial commitment currently in place to complete the improvement. Private streets within the City limits shall not be allowed except when approved by the City and when all conditions of Section 46.070, Development Guidelines are met. Section 46.070(8) states that private streets are not allowed when the street is connected to two public streets. Section 46.150 Yelm Development guidelines states that sight distance at intersections shall be in conformance with the WSDOT Design Manual and the AASHTO Green Book. The City's Comprehensive Transportation Plans connectivity policy recognizes that increasing connections throughout the City not only reduces traffic congestion, but also increases the sense of unity of the community. Section16.16.090 Yelm Municipal Code (YMC) states that the layout of streets shall provide for continuation of streets existing in adjoining subdivisions. 5. Mosman Street from 3`d to SR 507, and 3`d Stree# from the Praire View subdivision to SR 507 are currently substandard in that they have travel lanes less than 12 feet in width in areas. 3`d Street in the Prarie View subdivsion does not meet current standards for a neighborhood collector street. There is a berm at the intersection of Clark Road and 105th Avenue which may limit sight distance below acceptable standards with the addition of traffic to 105th Avenue. 6. The public right-of-way at 105th Avenue ends at the western property line of the development and 105th continues as a one lane, curved, right-of-use road to Mill Road and SR 507. This right-of- use road does not meet any public street standards, is a one-way street used for two way traffic, and contains no pull-outs. The development will provide alternate connectivity in the form of a public street from 105th, through Yelm Terra and Prairie View, along Mosman to SR 507. 7. Section 14.16.110 YMC provides for the preservation of trees on private property with new development and requires that existing trees not be removed until a final decision is made regarding the feasibility of preserving existing trees. The existing trees on this property are a group of large Douglas Fir. The trees located in the area of proposed stormwater treatment areas are in danger of future tree failure with grading near the base of the trees. Existing trees that are located in areas of qualified open space should be protected during development with protective fencing at the drip line. All machinery shall be kept out of the drip line. 8. Chapter14.12 YMC requires the dedication of open space for all residential development. Section 14.12.050 YMC lists four (4) attributes for qualification of open space. Section 14.12.060 allows for a fee in lieu of open space under certain conditions. 9. The Yelm School District has adopted a school mitigation requirement based on the demand that new residential units create for additional school services and facilities. Additional demands on the school system will be mitigated through the requirement that the developer enter into a mitigation agreement with the District. Mitigation Measures 1. The developer shall mitigate transportation impacts based on the new residential P.M. peak hour trips generated by the project. The Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) shall be based on 1.01 new peak hour trips per residential unit. The proponent will be responsible for a TFC of $757.50 per dwelling unit which is payable at time of building permit. Credit should be given for the existing single-family dwelling. Prior to final subdivision approval, the developer shall complete the following transportation improvements: a. The north half of 105th Avenue shall be improved to City Standards for a Neighborhood Collector from Clark Road, to the western most property line of the proposed subdivision. b. The right-of-use portion of 105th Avenue shall be blocked by a barricade meeting Yelm Development Guidelines and Manual of Uniform Trafffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards at Mill Road and signed pursuant to MUTCD as a private road with no though access. c. The developer shall ensure sight distance at the intersection of Clark Road and 105th Avenue meets Yelm Development Guidelines and ASHTO specifications. d. 3`d Street, between the proposed subdivision and Mosman Street, shall be improved to a 24 foot asphalt driving surface with vertical concrete curb on both sides, and signage for no parking. e. 3`d Street, from Mosman to Yelm Avenue East (507) and Mosman from 3`d Street to First Street (507) shall be improved to a 24 feet driving surface with 2-foot shoulders. f. Sidewalks from the proposed development must connect to the sidewalks in the Parkview development, pursuant to the TIA. Prior to any land clearing, a site plan including the location of all trees to be retained and removed (exceeding 8 inches in diameter) must be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. Tree losses shall be mitigated by planting at least a 2 to 1 mix of evergreen (70%) and deciduous trees (30%), with a minimum of a 2-inch caliper measured at 4 feet from the ground, around the perimeter of the storm pond areas, and in the qualified open space areas. Trees to remain must be protected during construction pursuant to Chapter 14.16 YMC. 4. Pay open space "Fee in Lieu of" for the difference between the qualified (usable) open space, and the required open space. The developer shall enter into an agreement with Yelm Community Schools to mitigate project impacts to the School District. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING YELM HEARING EXAMINER DATE: Monday, March 1, 2004, 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Yelm Public Works, 901 Rhoton Road, Yelm WA 1. PURPOSE: Public Hearing to receive comments regarding the proposed Yelm Terra Subdivision of 24.25 acres into 97 single family residential lots. The project site is located on 105th Ave. SE, Yelm, WA, between Clark Road and Mill Road. Case No. SUB-03-8353-YL Applicant: Yelm Terra LLC 2. PURPOSE: Public Meeting to hear testimony from parties of record, regarding an appeal of certain conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued for the Yelm Terra Subdivision. Case #APP-04-0005-YL Appellant: Dr. Lee Anne Campbell Applicant: Yelm Terra LLC The City of Yslm Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed Yelm Terra Subdivision, and to hear testimony from parties of record, regarding an appeal of certain conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for the Yelm Terra Subdivision. The Hearing Examiner will make a decision on the matter within 10 days after the meeting. Parties of Record may testify at the meeting on Monday, March 1, 2004. Any related documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Ave W., Yelm, WA. For additional information, please contact Tami Merriman at (360) 458-3835. The City of Yelm provides reasonable accommodations to persons with disabilities. If you need special accommodations to attend or participate in this hearing, call the City Clerk, Agnes Bennick, at (360) 458-8404, at least 4 days before the meeting. ATTEST: City of Yelm ,, I n _ ~ ~ ~-~ T City Clerk agrees Bennick, DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE Published in the Nisqually Valley News: Friday, February 20, 2004 Mailed to Adjacent Property Owners and Posted in Public Places: February 17, 2004 01/09/2004 14:14 FAX 253 512 2268 COMMi1NITY DEVELOPMENT 1Q 001 I~ TO: Grant Beck DEPT: Comm. Dev. FAX #: 458~14~4 DATE: January 9, 2004 FROM: Beth Jorgenson PAGES (INCLUDING COVER PG): Z RE: Comment Letter for Yelm Terra's MDNS Grant, I decided to fax the attached letter instead of e-mailing it due to "confidential" closing that is included in all our work e-mails. Please take these comments into consideration when finalizing the MDNS. Thank you for your time. 01/09/2004 14:14 FAX 253 512 2268 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1002 January 9, 2004 Grant Beck Yelm Community Development Director Dear Mr. Beck: I have reviewed the revised traffic report and the Mi3NS provide~~ for the Ye1m Terra Subdivision. The traffic report does not accurately reflect the current delay time for traffic turning left onto Clark Road from Yelm Avetxue, During peak hours, traffic moving east is typically bumper to bumper, traaeling at approximately 20 miles per hour. When turning south onto Clarl: Road from Yelm Avenue, drivers often cannot find a break in this line of traffic until the traffic light has changed to red. As a result, only one car can turn left (illegally} for each light change. Granted, this does ;not happen all the time, but it does occur often enough for one to know that adding 97 new homes on 105` Way SE will result in longer lines of traffic trying to turn left onto Clark. The City is aware that Yelm Avenue i,s at a transportation Level ~~f Service "F" and should zequire Yelm Terra LLC to reduce or eliminate the resulting additional impact;: their proposal will have on traffic flow. The MDNS should be revised, adding a new mitigation measure requiring the applicant to install a left turn signal to allow safe movement of vehicles turning onto ClaxJc Road from Yelm Avenue. I would also like to bring up my concern about the impact this project will have on my ability to get out of my driveway during peak hours. As I had specified in my previous letter, my driveway is only about 60 feet from the intersection. Three or more vehicles backed up ~on 1 OS°i Way to turn onto Clark will prevent anyone from leaving my driveway. Despite the traff c report's indication that this road will remain Level of Service "A", I am quite sure that after the 97 residences in Yelm Terra are occupied, I will be forced to wait for a significant time for cars to let me onto 105`" 'I~J'ay so I can leave for work in the mornings. This makes my existing garage and driveway unusable. I will be forced to park in my pasture west of my house just so I can leave for work at a reasonable time. At the very least, please consider a requirement that the developer provide the City with a $10,000 bond, to be held for minimum of one year after all new residences are sold. If the impact that I believe will occur does occur, then the money should be used toward constru~~ting a new driveway and two-car garage for the residents of 15939 105'" Way'. The new driveway and garage will be located west of the house, further from 105°i Way where traffic stopped to turn onto Clark }td. will no longer impact the residents of this property. If the impact to the residents does not materialize, the bond will be released to the developer. Thank you for your serious consideration of these mitigation met°sures. I look forward to receiving your final threshold determination. Sincerely, Beth Jorgenson ° itae owner ofthis property will make up the difference in construction; Costs. November 3, 2003 Tami Merriman Community Development Dept. P. O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 RE: Yelm Terra Preliminary Plat Dear Ms. Merriman: The comments provided below address the impacts the Yelm Terra subdivision, as proposed, will have on the community. The developer of Yelm Terra subdivision proposes to provide inadequate access to and from the development. All egress traffic is proposed to be onto 105th Way. Even worse, the developer proposes to close 105th Way where it accesses Mill Road. This «~ill direct all the subdivision traffic as well as traffic generated by the current residents on 105th Way to one point: the intersection of ].05th Way and Clark Road. The traffic report provided for this proposal did not adequately address the impact this will have to the residents on 105th Way, particularly to those with driveways within 350 feet of the stop sign. Traffic from the development has a strong potential of blocking rivo driveways serving four residences during morning peak hour traffic. The driveway closest to the stop sign is only 60 feet away from this intersection and will be the one most affected. Closing 105th Way will also impact the public who use this road to bypass the stagnant traffic on Yelm Avenue. Peak hour traffic is so bad in the downtown area now that it takes about 15 minutes to get from the Yelm Avenue/Clark Road intersection to the .high. school. People often. take 105th Way to bypass this congestion. The City of Yelm must not allow the developer to ignore his responsibilities to provide adequate ingress/e~ness at the site, and to not harm neighboring properties. To mitigate the traffic impact for this development, the developer must purchase property adjacent to 105th Way near Mill Road to «~iden the road at this end, and open 3r`' Street to two-way traffic. Yelm City Code Section 16.16.090 states, "The lcc}~oi~t ~fsfr•eetc shall pr~ovide.jo~• continiratior~ of strec~s existing in adjoining szrbdivisiotas." Allowing the developer to proceed with the subdivision as proposed will be in violation of this code as well as Code Sections 1 b.16.110 and 1.6.16. i 20, which. do not allow for dead end streets greater than 600 feet, or extend 660 feet without including a provision for at least one intersection. The City's Comprehensive Plan also demands that 105`h remain open at both ends and that 3`d Street be developed for hvo-way traffic as provided in Section B of the Transportation Element, as follows The objective of the Transportation Plan is to prc1vide amost-effective 3zettivork to acco33arr3odate travel in and crrr~arrad floe core area. To accornpli.rh this objective, Yel3n yvill actively pz~3•sz3e: 1. Aconnected-streets policy to promote the efficient floe of t3•c~~c yvitlii3Z floe COr423r23dnit~l. 2. A series of con3aected arterials yt~laiclz rill per•33zit traf is to bypass floe u3•han core if it ia• 3ner•ely passing throzrgh, to reduce congestion i3a floe central core. The City of Yelm must take into consideration the fact that the large-acreage properties to the south of the proposed subdivision are in Yelm's Urban Growth Boundary and will be annexed into the City in a few years. Land costs «r-ill increase tremendously and many of these property owners will be forced to, or desire to subdivide their own properties. If the Yelm Terra's preliminary plat is not conditioned to mitigate the traffic impacts it will have on Clark Road and 1051 Way, it will unfairly require a later developer or the taxpayers to mitigate the problems created by the developer of Yelm Terra. The City would be very short sighted if it allowed the developer to minimize his expenses by closing the :Mill Road end of 105`1 Way. This avenue of travel will be increasingly needed by the public as mare housing developments are built. It will also help to relieve the traffic backups through downtown Yelm until a ne«~ bypass road is constructed, which may be many years from. now. As this subdivision will be adding a large number of vehicles to 105th Way, the developer should be required to fix the dangerous condition that exists at the intersection of 105th Way and Clark Road. A high. embankment on the northwest corner of the intersection blocks drivers' views of southbound traffic on Clark Road. Vehicles entering onto Clark Road from 105th Way must drive their vehicle almost to the center line of Clark Road before they can see approaching southbound traffic. Vehicles regularly travel. at high rates of speed on Clark Rd and with the extra traffic resulting from the new subdivision, a fatality accident is imminent. The traffic study provided by Transportation Engineering Northwest, was totally inadequate in showing the significant, negative impacts that will be imposed on the community if they are allowed to develop without improving both ends of 105`" Way and 3T`~ Street. In addition to staying silent about the impacts closing 105th Way will have to the public and residents who use 105`h Way, the transportation engineering firm collected data for the traffic study during the summer a%hen school v<~as not in session. Summer traffic in Yehn flows far smoother than when school is in session. Much of that is because the high school and middle school are on Yelm I-lighway/Avenue. During the school year, school buses and parents driving their kids to and from school slow traffic. When buses stop to pick up or drop off children, they hold up traffic in both directions for several minutes each time. High school kids driving to school significantly increase the delay time for traffic on Yelm Avenue. Currently, driving from the Clark Rd!Yehn Ave intersection to the high school at 7:00 a.m. during a school day takes 10 minutes due to the stop and crawl traffic. During the off-peak time, it takes 3 three minutes to travel this same distance. You do not have to be traffic engineer to know that t}~at delay time is far higher than 37.6 seconds as indicated in Table 2 of the transportation report. To many of us who travel this route each work day, Yelm Avenue is already considered to be at a level of service "F". Adding such a large number of homes to this area and taking away access to Mill Road from 105`x' will result in a very significant negative impact to Yelm Avenue betvreen Clark and 151 Street. If 105`h Way is open to two lanes i~rhere it meets Mill Road, there will be far less impact to Yelrn Avenue. Another impact the proposal will have that was not addressed by the traffic study is the additional time it will take the fire department located on Mill Road, to get to emergencies on 10j`~' Way. I would think the City i~-ould be doing all they could to reduce the time it takes to reach an emergency rather than increase that time. Accuracy of other areas of the traffic study is also questionable. The traffic report indicated the speed limit on i'` Street is ~5 mph within the city limits. That is incorrect. The correct speed limit is 25 mph on this section of road. The traffic engineer also reports the posted speed limits on Clark Rd and 105' VJay are 25 mph. This is also incorrect. The posted limits are 35 mph. I do not know if these errors contribute to distorting the analysis of the study but if they do, the study should be thrown out and completed by an impartial. transportation engineering firm. One is led to believe that if they aren't willing to take the time to find out the speed limits posted for the roads on which they are reporting, they are also not taking the time to provide a sound analysis of existing conditions and projected impacts to the traffic levels. I hope City staff and the hearing examiner will see that a new traffic study is required b_v an impartial transportation engineering firm. The new traffic study should take into consideration how to mitigate the negative impacts to existing residents on 105' Way, and how to mitigate the delay time created by emergency service vehicles who must travel further distances to residences on 105`h Way when it is closed. The only feasible solutions to mitigate the negative impact to the neighboring property owners and the public who use 105~h Way as a through. road is for the City to condemn property near Nlill Road on 105' Way and widen the road to City of Yeltn standards. The developer should be required to compensate the owners of the condemned property. Additionally, the road to the north proposed to be open only for ingress to the subdivision but closed to egress traffic should be widened to allow both ingress and egress traffic. If that is not feasible, another road from the north side of the subdivision. should be opened for egress only. One possibility is an extension of 104°i Ave from Mill Road to the subdivision. Sufficient access from the subdivision on roads other than 105`h Way would provide some relief from traffic impacts to I OS"' Way and Clark Road. There are three other issues that the SEPA Threshold Determination should mitigate. The first is construction noise. The developer should be limited to working no earlier than 7 a.m. and no later than 5 p.m. on weekdays. No tivork should take place on weekends to maintain the peace of residents near the site. A second issue that should be addressed is the impact to privacy that is currently enjoyed by the subdivision's neighbors. A six- foot-high fence should be constructed around the development to provide some privacy and hopefully dim some of the noise generated by 97 families. In keeping ~~~ith the intentions of SEPA, the developer should provide access to Cochrane Park. The subdivision is adjacent to the park and a path or trail should be constructed for use by the public evho live nearby, including those outside the subdivision. I hope that the City and the Hearing Examiner will take these comments into account and see that the developer's proposal will create a negative impact to those residents who live on 105th Wa~~, and Clark Road, and will further impact future development by eliminating or restricting access to roadways when more roadtivays are needed to permit traffic to bypass congested areas. Please place ane on your mailing list to receive the Environmental Threshold Determination, Notice of Public Hearing, and Notice of Final Decision. Sincere y, _ ~~ ~~- Kelly an Elizabeth Jorgenson 15939 105th ~rVay SE Yelm, WA 98597 ~~ ~L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a~~ 1 Sid 3 r v S~ cJ~ Sf-= ~ 4 ~s ~7 z I~~ w ~. ~J~~. ,~ ~~, ,~it~ ~y1~ ~~. • L~~~~ ~~~' ~9~'~ 0 4 Zp~3 ,~ ! C~. ~ ~ ~~~, ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~u ~~f~~ ~,~,~ f e ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ G~ta~ ~ ~c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~, ~ ~~~ h~,z~, ~ ~. ~~t.11-~ ~~ ~~ ~ _ ~ ~~rn ~~ ~~ ~ ~m~, ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~n ~, C :~ G~~~l/YYj~~~-~'LU. ~~'LGrt-~'Y~ G'~2 r/11,1i0 ~~"'~.~L~"""" ?j r~~~- ~ J,}~~~'L ~~~U ~~ ~ ~ ~. --~, - - '=--~-- -- ®r ' ® - -- -- i~ i/ `~ January 9, 2004 4200 Sixth Ave SE, Suite 301 Lacey, WA 98503 P.O. Box 3485 Grant Beck, Community Development Director Lacey, WA 98509-3485 City Of Yefm (360} 493-6002 PO BOX 479 (360) 493-2476 Fax Yelm, WA 98597 sca@scaconsultinggroup.com www.thescagroup.com RE: Yelm Terra -MDNS Comments SCA#03008 Dear Mr. Beck: ~1`~~~~ This fetter is to formally coma-;ent or. the Mitigator Measures attached to the Yelm Terra MDNS dated December 26, 2003. Specifically, we wish to comment on Finding of Fact #5 and Mitigation Measures 2d and 2e relating. to off-site roadway improvements. Finding of Fact #5 states in part; " 3rd Street in the Prairie View subdivision does not meet current standards for a neighborhood collector street." This is a true statement, however, it should be pointed out that the subject section of street was built to neighborhood collector standards at the time the subdivision was built. The Park View subdivision is not that old and the City required 3rd street to be stubbed to the south. This means that the City anticipated and encouraged more traffic to utilize this section street and asked for the street to be built accordingly. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 2d should not be attached to the Yelm Terra MDNS. 3rd Street within the Park View subdivision was built to the requested street standard in place at the time the plat was developed. A change in the street, standards is not an action caused by the proposed development and it should not be the responsibility of Yelm Terra to update the street section. If existing on-street parking is an issue with traffic safety on 3rd Street, then the City needs to take the responsibility to enforce the no parking requirements to ensure proper traffic safety. Furthermore, the traffic impact analysis addressed conditions on 3rd Street and recommended the placement of no parking signs and a stop sign at Mossman Road. There is no discussion or recommendation in the TIA that such a mitigation measure is necessary. Mitigation Measure 2d is simply not supported by the TIA or by the expanded Finding of Fact outlined above. We ask the City to withdraw or consider other alternatives for Mitigation Measure 2d from the MDNS. We ask for a clarification on Mitigation Measure 2e. 2e requires 3rd Street to be improved to a 24 foot driving surface with 2-foot shoulders. What is the expected surface composition of the shoulders, gravel or asphalt pavement? Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the MDNS for Yelm Terra. We hope the City will be -able to respond to our questions and comments within the next couple of days. In the event we do not hear back from you prior to the January 16 appeal deadline, we wish to inform the City we intend to maintain our due process by filing the appropriate appeal documentation. We look forward to your response and if you have any questions, please contact me at 360.493.6002. DESIGN/BUILD CIVIL AND TRANSPON.TATION ENGINEERING PLANMNG SURVEY]NG SLC Development June 6, 2003 Page 2 cc: (g:\text\pf\2003\03000\Beck0i0904,doc) tiiAT, e ~~_ .,y( ~~ Lkeq ^. SsAT~ O~ WASHl~vGTOv DEPARTMEN I OF ECOLOGY P.O. Box -~ii7.i • Olympia, E~b'ashinbton 9850-7:75 • (3601 -10i-6300 January 9, 2004 Ms. Tami Merriman Community Development Department City of Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Ms. Merriman: -i ~`<`~ - -- _- - - - ~ ~. _ - _ _I -,-- -- - = -- - I Your address is in the ~!vatershed Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the mitigated determination of nonsignificance for the Yelm Terra (SEPA #8353) located between 105`'' Avenue Southeast, between Clark Road and Mill Road, as proposed by Yelm Terra LLC. We reviewed the environmental checldist and have the following comments: Water Quality Any discharge of sediment-laden nmoff or other pollutants to waters of the state is in violation of Chapter 90.48, Water Pollution Control, and WAC 173-201A, Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Washington, and is subject to enforcement action. Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. These control measures must be effective to prevent soil from being carried into surface water by stormwater runoff. Sand, silt, and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered pollutants. Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot enter the old drainage ditch or cause water quality degradation of state waters. Erosion and sediment control is a key to preserving habitat and preventing denudation of a developing area. The following practices are recommended: Clearing limits and%or any easements or required buffers should be staked and flagged in the field. All temporary erosion control systems should be desi~.med to contain the nmoff from the developed two year, 24-hour design stone without eroding. Provision should be made to minimize the trackin~7 of sediment by construction vehicles onto paved public roads. If sediment is deposited, it should be cleaned every day by shoveling or sweeping.;. ~~'ater clearing should only be done after the area has been shoveled out or swept. Pau1t and wall finishing equipment wash water should be disposed of in a way which will nut ad~~crsel~~ impact the water quality of the state. ~~~~~~: Ms. Tami Merriman January 9, 2004 Page 2 The owner of a construction site which disturbs five acres or more of total land area, and which has or will have a discharge of stonnwater to a surface water or to a stone sewer, must apply for coverage under Ecology's General Permit for Stonnwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities. Owners of sites where less than five acres of total land area will be disturbed must also apply if the construction activity is part of a larger contiguous plan of development or sale in which more than five acres will eventually be disturbed. Discharge of stonnwater from such sites without a permit is a violation of federal and state law and the owner will be subject to enforcement action by the Department of Ecology or through third party lawsuits. For construction of subdivisions, the five acre threshold which triggers the NPDES permit requirement applies to land that is disturbed by the land owner, land owner's agent; or by an entity which has obtained a use agreement (e.g., lease, easement) from the land owner. Include acreage which is disturbed (e.g., graded) prior to its sale to independent contractor(s). A stormwater permit application form, referred to as a Notice of Intent, can be obtained by calling Ecology's Stornzwater Request Line (360) 407-7156 or Linda Matlock at (360) 407-6437. Applicants are encouraged to submit completed forms and publish public notices more than 38 days prior to the planned start of construction to avoid delays to the project. Water Resources The proponent is responsible for inspecting the site to determine the location of all existing wells. Any unused wells must be properly decommissioned and decommissioning reports submitted to Ecology as described in Chapter 173-160 WAC entitled "Minimum Standards for the Construction and Maintenance of Wells." This includes resource protection wells and any dewatering wells installed during the conshuction phase of the project. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these continents, please call Roberta Woods (Water Quality) at (360) 407-6296 and/or Deb Hunemuller (Water Resources) at (360) 407-0290. Sincerely, ~4 ; - Py~~``~. Jeri Berube Administrative Coordinator JB: smb (03-7970) cc: Roberta 1~%oods, WQ Linda Matlock, WQ Deb Hunenniller. WR Yelm Terra. LLC (Applicant) - 4~n rf ~ ~'•- .;1jrr," yfpe,_,_ a M~. ~ ~:.. a ~i y~''~~5e +~~ ~~ i W ~ ~ 4,~ If ~ .r ~"''~.- ~ {~ ,.C of ,+ ~]SAI~ 4 +~~i ~"< + ~ $a 2!"r "` 4A '~ - ~ $y'}d`b`~ , ~Y~19 t a~'~~,". :.,v +R ~~,r °' ,~ 9,~~~ ~'~ k ~.k~ F ~.~~'~ 4 ,.~Yy ' ~ ' ~ ' M r ~ `~ +3` rt .~ ~ k . f.~~-t+AP~ } ~ ~ .a 5. may' * t 4 ~ r x (((] ~r ~ ~ r ~ ~y .~ ~ a '~~R '6 N.. ,. ~ `r ~'~~~ ``~' ~ ~~ ~i r ~ are ~ ~,. ,~7~ • ~ ~`'~. ~ i . e~ ~ -. i F a~, {~~ 4' r j -~ i ;,~` , ~\ ~ j : t•~7 e.~, ' r~ r~y '~%seh. ~f ` ,~ i~ < : ~ ` a ~ ~ ~' Fii '"' r ~ fir: 1 's> 'ti ;S ','f 3{ '~~j(////t ; .. _ t" `~ r .~ ~ 4, afi~ 'i+~li ~ { i~u Cl,.-~ ~ k ~ ~. ~.~ I ~ ~ ??fir { 4~'~•L `~~i h• ~ 1 -1 M "~ t' a ti ..rr ~y ^1 ~~~1~ ~~~~ ~~~ '.~8 C ~ ~ t ~i. w_ ~i r.. t~Y ~~1~ ~'"i "~'~ ~ _:b A,~. ~r~,.~ `Il ~ ~ .~. ~~ w~ . { a ~ `D~ ,,py ; p Y ~ ~ ~'r ~ ' LAC ~ .3, r.~y~"'4 ~Y,-~~''~r '~~ ~~' ~ ~ ~. n a '' '~'F` ,I ~. lei po- + d ~ ~ a~',y `i, '~ C {~`„ ~# i~ ~,i t~o 'D~ ~~ 4+b't ~ ~u,r'~ s ~ ^ F ` ~', y tY'. ~~_~ « ` `,ak ~' ~ y "` ~'. ~~T "' y~j4~ ~, v 74 ~ ~ ~. r ~~.; i~~;- .~ t ~~L ~ ~~~. ~ y ~' O ~ . ~ ~ ~ t~ £ ~ h .K~' v~'4 ~ ~ tip ~. -'$ i Tk `~ O ~ ~ ,k~ ~r' ~ ~ a. .4RY~Y,[•f ` ~.a ~ a J~ / ~ ~' •~ t~ ,I Cat ~'~,. t0 ~` ~:° ~p ~~ ,,~' ' x ~~ - L~ F , ~ L r a'vr ~c 4 ~ 1 „,y . ~ i ~ ~ +9p. , ~ a rr h~,.. r k ~V + ~. ~ ~ R~^'~ `P+~''f)r.t `4- ~ ~ ~1r.,rrr ;'"- C ~n ~4 ter 9~L ~ ~~ .~ ~" 'h.*rt+ ~ ~'~ ~ ,~ 4Y,~y ~ y~ ~'~ Z~~ ', {. ~' `V ' • ', ~' 'j~ ~~ „~.; `~~ _~~ ~ ~ ~.,~~~f ll" / +Sr~ :. fit' ~ /r1 r ~ ~ :' ~^ w~t lV r 7 ,Y ~w ` ,. F ~~,~ e f /. r ~~ riT~ ~~~ .! chi ~ ~'_ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~u~ a ~ r ~~/ ~r` v„ 1'41 ~' r ,f ~~' ~.. ~'~ e ~~ . ~: ~ .~ ~ ! ~ ~~~~ ~~` . tk„ 4 1,~ ~,~ G .t~'i (~ -'~ ~ ,c~ 4 ~ fz'~~i +~'~ i ~ i~7yr \ ~!' ?~~~ ;/ ''• ~ rw Raes~~a 1+ { ,L~ ~ ~'` .~'' F t' ~1's r t~4~,dM ~,2:'. <~' / ,,~', ~ ~.,!. ~ ~ j ~ ~~ ~5 r r 1 '` -' _ ' ' " ~ 'A-' c9t f ' ~~A' y,`~`~3~+ . ilk ~'~ } ~ `RY ~r `v, ,N ~r~~` ~,c~i A~ ~. ~t e 9t~ -`. , ...,- r ~! F , , P ~ , ~t, ~~ l ~y~~i ~ f~ i ~•.. ~'~~e ~ ~' 3' ~ ,. '..~ f. 1 ~~ raOl~ ~~5((~ ,:) m ~y~ i ~"'~ ~ r ~q !r ~F'":;^~~ }' f S F ~. ~~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~7-, `Nr 1 r Tom';'' ~ .~ u~ '~. i ~Y' i ~ I ~; ' ~ ~ ~f +.7r~~ ~.,~. ~ yr~ a'^` I. ~ ~~ r;.rT .(~ ~ ~r`,~ ~ ~ O _ ~~{e .rte } }-4 _ ~ ~\ '"~ ti~bs. 1"C.,,~ .N+' ~` „4~,.i ,~i'i~~~\( ,~~ ~ ~~'.~~ ~~. ~< ~`~.~t' ~~ ~V`~'~~ '~1.~~~ j ~ ~~ - - ~ ~- . t i "- ~ ` ~~ C ~. ~~ Y ~Q ~e ~ ~ ` ~~ ~~Ab+c•=r- ~~- 1,{1` ' ~ f.`~~„yY ~{ _4 '`+.`~9" '' ~~` ,Y~.~ 1~ .t ,~.1 r`' ~ ra, -~ ~'F , ' ~ .~ ~ f ~ gym... ~, // t' ~~» y~F"%4 ~ ~ ~ r Ai x'`g'A:v e 7~ ~11~` F ~" '."*`~i~ J ~~iA~'~ ' ~, ~~ r ~#~ .~ ~+..'~ ' i ~r~, ` n „t . ~'~ 4 Jc+l F ~`~. ~~~.~.^. '':'~ 7' ~ / $~y.~d;~~ W ~ r `~ ;~~~i ~h :~ ~ Y ~'/~\ ~j"S 'Uy r ,y+t Pn~ '4 M i n~ ~~ ~ k ~,~~ ~ ~, 4 •j' 1 ~T fr 1C~ ~ Ii _ _ , Y~, t~' - f.'3n;~ - ~r~'7,f~~ ~ ~ S y ~'~..~~t~S'r ~ ':' ~~r, lk'. •. .qqr~. Wi1R ~r ~.t~. }~y'- '1.~,~ ~~ rFN, `~I `'tom' 4 ~ s i_~~,~~ t~~ ~ ~'~'~ ice.'. f r/J ~ ff.' ., )!~ ~ fir'. "rl~n.+~wr .~... ,y'/~ J ~~~~'~ ~ r~ I~ ,,~~g~r.+ Q' ~~~~ inn o ~ ~~ ~~~..~ ~~~~~~~~.~' i` ~' .~~,: ~ ~_~~~. ~r . yr s1 ~} ! _ 4~ 1 ,, ~~4 .~~~; C '- nir l~r r ~ ~~/ 'i~4Fj~ ~~ ~ a~ ~ ` i ,~ t. ~T/^~ ~f rWl ~ ~ ii ~ ,, ~ d a ~ ~ i ~ f~*: lr• ~ ~ r ~ ~~ ~,~ , ~ ~ r r~ it .a {'+ ~~^ 1 s ~~ i N ~ - 1, ~; ,~ J '~ ~ rl } ~~' a {y v~ CAM ~' "° r ~<~ ~ i~, ~ ~ti! _ '~~.~ >Y ~ ~' *~ ~ w' t ry• .~ L~r ;. ~ `Y~~ ~I, ,~ ~ ~ ~~t, ~~. ~~`~~~ yak'>~ N'-f~4r~~y ~. ;~ ,1~,.'~ ~'( ~"t's_~.~ ~ ~~ ~ r, `t~~~~:'a . ,t f '.- bra ,~ G n. ~x;~~r~,,.--'~,~~., ~. ~" ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ b r. p~ ..r~<,.~r~,a ,~ ~ ~~ ~ ~-~ y;*'~~r ~~ ,'' ~ ~ ''~ ~ ~ can ~ fp ~`~' 1~ ~~` ~ ~'~ F ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ °~ c0 _ f t ,~ `taw ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ O~ ~; is ~~~`~ ~~~, ~ ~ ~ ~` .r' ~' "' ©C~ /~y ~ ~~ a ~ ~ " Z ~, ~~~~ ~~~ ~+1~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ O ? 1 fir/ ~ ~i~_ J ~ t~-1 ~y vL ~ y d :Naar v ~„~ y ~,a _~ ,~^~r~ -!x`x~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~~ r ~r~ kE `^`~~ s . t f ~~ ~g~ ~y~4 ~~I ~'4'~'a K'' ~y Yl~f~" ~,i,, ti ~ Y .... ..,~.;' ~ i ' , iL9 A 1S ~>' 'ti $$~~~~(( ° ~ - 2~' ° s 'Af~ ~~ ,. , ~. 'i V C,l r. F~ ~ ,~.5' g~~ o} .~- 5l A ~ .~ i~ ~ ~ L~ ~ . ~`'~Sr_, ' '~,,~r~,4 . b ' ~ ~ , r ~, J~. +1C t ~ i ,v , ~ +s ' R c ter ~ 1 1 r~ ~ ~ a49 y~~~ ~~sk?~ q r~ "t ~1 ~~ r e ~ ~ V~:,+ a '~ sir a~ ''' ~a ',<<tn,~k t , 1 ~' ~ ~i r ~, ~ ~ ~.' t ,~ '~ ~~ • l'~ t. J ~ ~w`e ~ ~ l •N~~aL~ ~ °' r.[~ ~ ftnIT~»'^ ~, 'S5 i J '-F~ ~l'yy: i t l ~ ui ~: ~ ~ r \ € ~ ,L ,:~ ~;1 j ~ ! Y w 1 fix' ~, ~e ~ A, ' 4~~~ . \ . , h. ~~~ ~. r~ ~ c~k y: _ ~_c~ ~ ~ .~ s fe !! ry, ~ ~ ti'kc~-- J L ,~j ,~ ' t `~+ 4. ~j h+ ,tip ~ ~; t~ o ~ ~~~ ~ :.~ ' ° ° A ~ ~ _ ' ~~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ,~~~ "~.. N w, ~. b ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~l „A~~.+i "k1 ~~h ,~'.-~ v-~.jr }r hKY~Y. - P~ CV ) ~.~. ~~.a "7 '. 7. fx' - - h t 4~ - - 0 z ~ u.: c~, T V ' w ¢ .-a n 0 if, ~` T v / ..,.} N 0 a :~ U ,k;, W z ". M 1.~. ~ ti cL L~ Q [-+ -: hi G~ Ft f,: ~ Z _ L "; ,,.~ u ~ C."E .7J ::~ ~ ~ i'-I G:9 cj+ -~, G , fw Q ~ ~` H ~~ .~ E._i FS" t ~~ F'I rw ~~ ~ 1' r.,. ``~ ~ 1 1 r; rr' ` 1; W ~, i=`a t-~ a c: ~. ~ a ~_! w ... ~ E~. ~ O) ao ~~~ ~ ~ i ~~~ C ` .. w wca ;~~ ~a~'~ U ~ w ra E-+ u~ ~ W CC ~; ~iy c-I ~ r r~ ~ w ,~~ t-~ x ~ ~~~ 1~1 4I Fji ~ G-J i~ ~ .,-. A a; ~ ~ w ~~ ; a, ~~ F „ a w o U , , ~~, o ra w ~-~