TIA
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
heffron
I
; t. ran S 0 r tat lon, , n c.
T,,",p""'UOO I
PI,"O'09 & '09'0""0, .
Consulting Services
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
PRAIRIE PARK
YELM, WA
Prepared for'
'Prairie Park Limited Partnership
FEBRUARY 11 , 2000
I
8
o
o
o
o
G
U
r-\
U
("\
o
C)
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
CJ
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
Roadway Network
Traffic Volumes
Level of Service
Traffic Safety
Transit and Non-Motorized Facilities
PROJECT IMPACTS
Trip Generation,
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Level of Service
Site Access..,
Parking".,..... .
Neighborhood Traffic Impacts..
Safety
Transit and Non-Motorized Facilities
MITIGATION
APPENDIX
FIGURES
0,
U
f\
U
.f\
U
1\
V
Q
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
Figure I Site Plan
Figure 2. Site LocatIOn and Vicimty
Figure 3 Existing (Year 2000) Traffic Volumes - PM Peak Hour
Figure 4 Year 2005 Without-Project Traffic Volumes - PM Peak Hour
Figure 5 Project Trip DistributIOn Pattern for New Trips
Figure 6 Phase 1 PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Assignment - New and Pass-by Trips
FIgure 7 Full Project (Phases 1 & 2) PM Peak Hour Traffic Assignment - New and Pass-by Trips
Figure 8. Year 2000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes - With Phase I
Figure 9 Year 2005 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes - With Full Project (Phase 1 & 2)
Figure 10 Parking Accumulation by Time of Day - Phase 1 and Full Project
TABLES
Table 1 Site Development Program
Table 2. Level of Service Summary - Existing and 2005-Without-Project CondItions
Table 3 Study Area ACCIdent Summary (January 1, 1994 through November 30, 1999)*
Table 4 Trip Generation Summary - Total Driveway Trips
Table 5 Trip Generation Summary - New and Pass-By Trips..
Table 6 Level of Service Summary - Existmg and Year 2000 With-Project (Phase 1) Conditions
Table 7 Level of Service Summary - Year 2005 Without and With-Project (Full Project) Conditions
.3
3
6
6
9
10
11
11
13
19
.21
.22
.23
.24
.24
.25
.2
4
7
8
14
15
16
17
18
.23
I
9
10
12
12
19
.20
CJ
o
o
o
i---."
U
o
f\
U
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
('-,
V
i\
U
/'.
U
~
\._)
o
o
o
o
f\
V
r\
V
CJ
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Prairie Park, Yelm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the transportation impact analysis for the proposed Prairie Park mixed-use development
to be located in the City ofYelm, Washington. The scope of work and study area for this analysis were devel-
oped with assistance from City ofYelm staff. The analysis evaluates the project's impact to off-site roadways
and intersections as well as site access.
Project Description
The proposed project would construct a new mixed-use development on the northern corner of the 103rd Avenue
SENelm Avenue E (SR-507) intersection in Yelm, Washington. The project site is bounded by Yelm Avenue E,
103rd Avenue SE, and West Road SE, and extends to the northwest past Clark Road SE. The proposed mixed-use
development would include a variety of uses in 11 separate buildings. Figure 1 shows the site plan and location of
buildings. Table 1 summarizes the anticipated development plan and anticipated sizes of each use. The program
for Phase 2 may substitute multi-family housing units for office or fitness center uses. Since multi-family housing
would result in lower PM peak hour traffic generation, the following uses were assumed for this impact analysis
to represent worst case conditions.
Table 1 Site Development Program
Buildina/Use (Phase) Size Buildina/Use (Phase) Size
Building A (Phase 1) Building E (Phase 2)
Eight Screen Cinema 26,000 sf (1,250 seats) Retail 5,000 sf
Buildings B (Phase 2) Building F (Phase 2)
Retail 6,000 sf Conference 6.000 sf
Office 12,000 sf Building G (Phase 2)
Restaurant 5,000 sf Hotel Expansion 24 rooms
Health Club/Fitness 20,000 sf Buildings H (Phase 2)
Building C (Phase 2) Hotel 24 rooms
Library 6,000 sf Restaurant 5,000 sf
Building D (Phase 2) Building I (Phase 2)
Retail 2,500 sf Office 7,500 sf
As shown in Table 1 above, the development would occur in two phases. Phase 1 would develop only the cinema
component and would be complete by the end of year 2000 Phase 2 would develop the remaining uses on the site
and is expected to be complete by 2005 The project would have a total of eight access driveways, one on Yelm
Avenue, two on 103rd Street, four on West Road, and one onto 4th Street at Van Trump Avenue. The project is
proposing to provide a total of 581 parking spaces.
heffron
- 1 -
February 11, 2000
transportation. inc.
lOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUU~~
+
N
pARKING NOTES
') --..---""...---....
..-..--..-......--...
..........~-
') --................-.....-.
') ~.::"(311--).._.....-...-
4) ...................-.....---...
-.........-.......-.........-
---......---...-........--""
.......--........-............
pARKING REQUIRED
.!i--~ -~
.~~ 1.250.... 201
RiIIc.I '4,500 sF 58
0fI'Ic* 1t.5OO SF 5&
~ 1Q,ooo Sf 50
f--' 20.000 sF 100
1..tIfWY 6.000 Sf 10
~ ..COO sF ..
......-- 24'-' ..
\'4tWHcMl l' I'QICl(M 30
lO"N..p~REQUlRED ;;;e
...
lOl>t.P"""""'~ ..'
1_..-....-""........)
BUILDING LEGEND
- ::::
m:-:: I 1~ @ I 1~
._co- ..p" ...... .......
\,...._1
III I,~@l \ ,~
_ 7SJp" - ......
=- =: @ \ ,~
""'" ,....... - .....
<61ZgooInO...... ~
.._..~ 0. \'-
ea.-- .....
o \'~
.....- ..-
o \2~
..... ..-
__ ..coo..
G:L \'~
"""" 1$1>"
OI'~~
-
tHII.-srwu.~
-""'M""'->>OJI'IIl.I'Il-
~--
~tO.....,..".
...........
\
~
---
PRAIRIE PARK VILLAGE. MASTER pLAN
----
figure 1
heffron
transportation, inc
211Q/(ll
pRAIRie PARK
ye\m,WA
S\TE PLAN
CJ
Q
o
o
Q
n
u
o
Q
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
,/'\
'--.J
o
Cj
C)
{"\,
"-J
o
o
o
r"\
v
C\
v
o
o
o
o
o
o
8
o
()
()
Prairie Park Yelm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
This section of the report discusses the existing and future conditions that would exist without the proposed
Prairie Park project. The IIDpacts of the project were evaluated agamst these base conditions. Per the City ofYelm
staff, the impacts of Phase 1 were evaluated using existing traffic volumes since the cinema is expected to be
complete and occupied by the end of year 2000 The impacts of the full project (with both Phases 1 and 2) were
evaluated using forecast year 2005 traffic volumes.
Roadway Network
The study area evaluated for each phase was determined based on the proposed project's trip generation and trip
distribution pattern (presented later in this report). From that analysis and from discussions with City ofYelm
staff, it was determined that Phase 1 (the cinema component) would require analysis only at intersections pro-
viding primary access to the site However, Phase 2 would generate 20 or more new peak-direction PM peak
hour trips at several intersections farther from the site. The study area intersections for each project phase are
summarized below
Phase 1 Conditions Analvsis
. Yelm Avenue/l03rd Avenue
. Yelm A venue/Clark Road
. West Road/l03rd Avenue
. West Road/Van Trump Road
. All access driveways
Full Proiect (Phases 1 & 2) Conditions Analvsis
. Morris RoadlBald Hill Road
. Yelm A venue/Bald Hill Road
. Yelm A venue/Plaza Drive
. Yelm Avenue/Vancil Road
. Yelm Avenue/l03rd Avenue
. Yelm A venue/Clark Road
. Yelm A venue/l st Street
. Yelm A venue/Solberg Street
. West Road/103rd Avenue
. West RoadlVan Trump Road
. All access driveways
The roadways included in the study area for this analysis are described in detail below Figure 2 shows the proj-
ect site location and vicinity
SR-507/Yelm Avenue is a two-lane roadway that provides access through the City ofYelm. SR-507 approaches
the City of Yelm from the southwest and makes a 90-degree turn to the southeast at its intersectIOn with SR-51 0
and I st Street. At this locatIOn, It becomes Yelm A venue The SR-507/SR-51O/l st StreetN elm A venue intersec-
tIOn is controlled by a traffic signal and has crosswalks equipped with pedestrIan buttons and crossing signals.
The posted speed limit on SR-507 southwest of SR-51 0 and 1 st Street is 50 mph, the speed limit is reduced to
25mph approaching SR-51O " -
Yelm A venue, just east of the SR-507 /SR-5101l st StreetN elm A venue intersection, is a two-lane roadway with
parking and SIdewalks on both SIdes of the street. The posted speed limit IS 35mph from the SR-507/SR-51O/lst
Street/Yelm Avenue mtersection through the Plaza Drive intersectIOn. East of the Plaza Dnve intersection, the
speed limit is reduced to 30 mph. East of 103rd A venue, there are three lanes (two in each direction and a center
turn lane) as well as a bike lane on the north side ofthe street. The bike lane turns east to 103rd Avenue. There
are bus stops serving Intercity Transit route 94 along Yelm A venue.
I03rd Avenue is two-lane, east-west roadway with bike lanes on both sides of the street from Yelm Avenue to
West Road. 103rd Street creates a "T" intersection with Yelm Avenue where traffic on 103rd Avenue is con-
trolled by a stop sign. At this intersection, 103rd widens to three lanes.
heffron
- 3-
February 11, 2000
transportation, inc.
~)OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOO,
+
N
~rP
..
"
"
..
,y
SE.
j,f
MP29.97
"'/~\~.::r:- ~,,-- -.cH"..... - ~ -'... - - - - - - --1
~I
I
~IS-29
q
S-30
FOX HID. RO. SE.
ITH
AVE.
SE.
"t,,.
PRAIRIE PARK
Yelm,WA
Figure 2
heffron
transportation, inc
SITE LOCATION AND VICINITY
~
2/10/00
n
o
o
o
o
r---."
"'--J
r\
U
C)
o
()
o
o
o
o
C)
o
o
C)
o
o
(\
\j
o
o
o
o
C)
o
(\
u
C)
o
o
r---..,
\--1
o
o
CJ
o
1'\
~)
CJ
o
o
C)
o
o
f"'\
U
J
Prairie Park Yelm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
West Road is a narrow, two-lane roadway that parallels Yelm Avenue and connects 4th Street to 103rd Avenue.
West Road provides access to residential areas and represents the northwest site boundary for the Prairie Park
Project. Its approach to 103rd Avenue is controlled by a stop sign.
Van Trump Avenue NE IS a narrow, two-lane residential street that provides east-west access from 1st Street to
4th Street. Its approaches to 4th Street and 1st Street are controlled by stop signs.
Clark Road is a narrow, two-lane, north-south roadway providmg access between residential areas and Yelm
A venue Its approach to Yelm A venue is controlled by a stop sign.
Vancil Road is a two-lane, north-south roadway providing access between residential areas and Yelm Avenue.
Currently, the Vancil Road!Yelm Avenue intersection is slightly offset from the driveway serving the QFC retail
center on the north side ofYelm Avenue All four legs of the intersection (including the offset QFC driveway) are
controlled by one traffic signal, with crosswalks, pedestrian buttons, and pedestrian signals. The posted speed
limit on Vancil Road is 25 mph.
Plaza Drive is a two-lane, north-south roadway that connects I 03rd A venue and Yelm A venue. Plaza Drive
forms a "T" intersection with Y elm A venue where traffic on Plaza Drive is controlled by a stop sign. Directly
opposite the Plaza Drive approach is a Safeway entrance/exit whIch is also controlled by a stop sign. A center,
two-way, left-turn lane provides storage for vehicles turning into Safeway or onto Plaza Drive. The center lane
also serves as an acceleration lane for vehicles turning left from Safeway and Plaza Drive.
Bald Hill Road is a two-lane roadway that provides access from Yelm Avenue to the southwest. For most of its
length, Bald Hill Road has a two-foot shoulder However, at its intersection with Yelm Avenue, it has curb,
gutter, and sidewalk. Bald Hill Road ends at this intersection and Creek Street continues north beyond the inter-
section. The Bald Hill Road!Yelm A venue/Creek Street intersectIOn is controlled by a traffic signal and has a
crosswalk equipped with pedestrian buttons and signals. Southeast of the intersections with Yelm Avenue, Bald
Hill Road has a posted speed limIt of 50 mph. The speed limit is reduced as it approaches Yelm Avenue.
Morris Road is a two-lane, north-south roadway that provides access from Bald Hill Road to residential areas
and an elementary school. The approach to Bald Hill Road has a speed limit of 10 mph.
1st Street is a two-lane roadway that provides access from the SR-507/SR-510Nelm Avenue intersection to the
northeast. The posted speed limit on I st Street IS 25 mph.
SR-510 is a two-lane highway that provides access from the west to the City ofYelm. As SR-510 approaches
the City ofYelm from the west, the speed limit is reduced from 35 mph to 25 mph.
Solberg Street is a two-lane roadway providing access to residential areas northwest of the project site. Traffic
on Solberg Street is controlled by stop signs at its intersection with SR-51 0 Crosswalks exist on the northeast
and southwest legs of the Solberg StreetlSR-51O intersection.
Two transportation Improvements planned by the City of Yelm would affect the project study area and project
access. The City ofYelm is workmg to realign the Clark. Road and Vancil Road mtersections with Yelm Avenue,
both of which have skewed southern approaches. The realignment projects would create a four-legged, 90-degree
intersection at each location. The Clark Road realignment is planned to be complete concurrently with Phase 1 of
the Prairie Park project. The Vancil Road realignment is expected to be complete before year 2005 Therefore, all
with-project analyses consider traffic conditions with the realigned mtersections.
heffron
transportation, inc.
- 5 -
February 11, 2000
o
o
o
Prairie Park lelm, Washington ~ Traffic Impact Analysis
f\
"-J
()
o
o
o
o
C)
o
o
o
C)
o
0,
u
Q
CJ
o
o
Traffic Volumes
The City ofYelm requires that project impacts be evaluated during weekday PM peak hour conditions. This is
because the PM peak hour is the time when traffic volumes on vicinity streets are highest and congestion is most
noticeable. When the proposed project traffic is added to background conditions, this period represents the worst-
case condition. Existing PM peak hour traffic volumes in the project vicinity were compiled from counts taken in
January 2000 Figure 3 shows the existing PM peak hour traffic volumes in the project study area.
Phase I of the proposed project IS expected to open in year 2000 Therefore, Phase-l traffic analysis was per-
formed using the existing year 2000 traffic volumes collected for thIS project. The full project (Phases 1 and 2)
are expected to be complete by year 2005 To determine the traffic condItions that would exist m the future
without the proposed project, existing traffic volumes were increased using a 2.5% annual growth rate. This
growth rate was prOVIded by City of Yelm Transportation review staff Figure 4 shows year-2005-without-
project traffic volumes.
Level of Service
/-...,
"-.)
o
o
o
o
o
(1
"-J
o
f'1
u
o
r-,
\.-i
(;
"--)
~
"-.J
f"~
\,J
Q
f'\
\ )
i"'l
,,-)
f\
\.-J
o
()
C)
o
f\
U
!^\
\ J
Level of service (LOS) is a qualitatIve measure used to characterize traffic operating conditions, Six letter des-
ignations, "A" through "F," are used to define the level of servIce LOS A is the best and represents good traffic
operations with httle or no delay to motonsts. LOS F is the worst and mdicates poor traffic operations with long
delays. LOS F is acceptable to the City ofYelm and represents intersectIOns and roadways that are above theo-
retical capacity The threshold between LOS E and LOS F is generally considered to be an intersection's capac-
Ity Level of service is defined in terms of delay For signahzed mtersections, delay is dependent on a number of
variables, including the traffic volumes for each turning movement, number of lanes on each approach, and sig-
nal cycle length and phasing. For unsignalized intersections, delay is based on the number of gaps in the major
street traffic in which a vehicle entering or leaving the side street can pass. A complete description oflevel of
servIce cntena for signalized and unslgnahzed mtersections is mcluded in the Appendix.
Level of service for the study area mtersections was determined using procedures in the Highway Capacity
Manual (1997 Edition). Table 2 summanzes the eXisting and 200S-wlthout-project levels of service for all study
area intersections. This table shows that the three signalized intersections along Yelm A venue currently operate
at LOS D or better; however, future traffic growth not related to the proposed project would cause the SR-
507/SR-51OIYelm Avenue/1st Street intersectIOn to operate at LOS E by the year 2005 Turns from two unsig-
nalized intersections along Yelm A venue, at I 03rd A venue and Solberg Street, currently operate at LOS F All
other turn movements at study area mtersections currently operate at LOS 0 or better, and would continue to
operate at acceptable levels of service in 2005 Without the project.
heffron
- 6-
February II 2000
transportation, inc.
) 00000 DO C/)O 000000 () ~J 0 0 00 U u u ~
N
3 t-~
0\ 49
j ~~ ~29
8~ ~ -+ r"
97 ~ . \ ~ 0
O. 0
uJ
if)
@
~
u
~
;7
pttA\lUEPA.Rt(
..- v.JA
r\gure 3
E~IS1ING \ '1E/l.R 2000) 1R/1.fflC "OLUtJIES
pM PEA.\< ,",OUR
heffron a-6oo, ,tiC
'traosport
2jIOI()l)
)OOOOOD~)OUO(JDOOOOOOOOOQUUU~~ -
N
5 t-~
o \ ..--- 55
J ~l. ~35
~O----+ ~,r
~~O'--" . \ 0
O. 0
~
~
5
~
/'
VA
~
<f)
~
~
pRA\lt\EP~RK
.,~_'1JA.
FIgure A
'(EP-R 200S INI"'ftlOU1 .pROJEC1
1RJ>.FFIC \lO\..UMES . I'M pEP-K tlOUR
neffron at\On. ,DC
transport
21\0100
CJ
o
o
C)
o
n
\,~
o
Q
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
n
v
o
8
(\
\-J
C
Prairie Park, Yelm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
Table 2. Level of Service Summary - Existing and 2005-Without-Project Conditions
('--.......\
"-../
o
f\
\J
o
f)
V
o
o
r---."
U
r^)
U
o
Existing (Year 2000) 2005 Without Project
Sjgnalized Intersection LOSl Delay2 v/c3 LOS Delay vie
SR-507/SR-510IYelm Avenue/1st Street D 404 074 E 570 0.85
Yelm AvenuelVancil Road C 244 062 C 24.5 065
Yelm Avenue/Bald Hill Road C 23.8 048 C 25.0 054
Unsignalized Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay
West Road/103rd Avenue
Southbound movements from West Road A 99 B 101
Northbound movements from West Road A 9.5 A 96
Westbound left turn from 103rd Avenue A 74 A 74
Eastbound left turn from 103rd Avenue A 74 A 7.5
Yelm Avenue/Clark Road
Northbound movements from Clark Road C 23.4 C 19.3
Eastbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 93 B 104
Westbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 9.9 A 98
Yelm Avenue (SR-510)/Solberg Street
Northbound movements from Solberg Street F 555 F 1076
Southbound movements from Solberg Street D 346 E 454
Eastbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 85 A 8.8
Westbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 96 B 101
Yelm Avenue/103rd Avenue
Left turn from 103rd Avenue F 73.9 F 126.0
Right turn from 1 03rd Avenue C 154 C 176
Left turn from Yelm Avenue A 99 B 10.5
Yelm Avenue/Plaza Drive
Turns from Plaza Drive C 18.2 C 23.8
Turns from Safeway Driveway C 169 C 20.9
Eastbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 89 A 9.3
Westbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 9.2 A 97
4th StreeWan Trump Avenue
Southbound left turn from Van Trump Avenue A 8.9 A 89
Eastbound left turn from 4th Street A 73 A 7.3
Bald Hill Road/Morris Road
Turns from Morris Road B 145 C 161
Left turn from Bald Hill Road A 8.3 A 8.5
1 Level of service
2. Average seconds of delay per vehicle.
3. Vo/ume-to-capacity ratio.
~
"-..J
!\
U
o
()
o
o
CJ
D
o
o
o
o
o
~J
Traffic Safety
Traffic accident records were obtained from the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for
the Yelm Avenue corridor from Solberg Street to Bald Hill Road. The most recent data available meluded com-
plete accident summanes covering the period from January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1996 and partial records for
the period between January 1, 1997 and November 30, 1999 Table 3 summarizes the traffic aCCIdent data for key
study area intersectIons in the corridor As shown, the largest number of accidents (31) occurred at the SR-
507/SR-51ONelm Avenue/1st Street intersection, nearly half of those accidents were rear-end accidents. ThIS
mtersectlOn of two state routes occurs in the City ofYelm with reduced speed hmits (reduced on SR-510 ap-
proaching from the northwest, and reduced on SR-507 approaching from the southwest). The intersection is
signalIzed and is the first signal for some distance for vehicles approaching Yelm from the west. The combination
heffron
transportation, inc.
- 9-
February 11, 2000
o
o
Q
r'\
U
o
n
'L)
o
C)
n
u
(J
C)
C)
o
o
()
.'\
v
o
,f)
'-J
f\
\._~
~
\j
o
o
o
n
u
1\
V
o
(J
.~
\.J
f)
'-.J
o
1\
"--J
o
C)
()
CJ
CJ
Q
o
o
()
()
o
o
n
Prairie Park, }'elm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
of the reduction in speed limits, the potentially unexpected traffic signal, and wet conditions (8 of 14 rear-end
accidents occurred with a wet roadway surface) may all contribute to die higher rate of rear-end accidents. Addi-
tional advanced signs warning of reduced speed limits and the traffic signal, and/or larger signal heads may help
to reduce the occurrence of rear-end accidents.
Table 3 Study Area Accident Summary (January 1,1994 through November 30,1999)*
Intersection Rear-End Head-On Left- Turn AnQle Side-Swipe Other Total
SR-507/SR-510IYelm Ave/1st St. 15 0 0 3 2 11 31
Yelm Avenue/Bald Hill Rd. 2 0 2 8 0 2 14
Yelm AvenuelVancil Road 4 0 0 2 0 2 8
Yelm Avenue/103rd Street 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
Yelm Avenue/Plaza Drive 1 0 0 0 0 1 2
Yelm Avenue (SR-510)/Solberg St. 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Only partial records are available from the WSDOT for years 1997 through 1999.
Transit and Non-Motorized Facilities
Intercity Transit provides limited bus transit service to the study area along Yelm A venue with stops located
just west of Vancil Road and a bus shelter on the north side ofYelm Avenue. One route (94) provIdes transit
service between Yelm and Lacey and operates weekdays from 6.30 A.M. until 7.30 P.M. on approximately one-
hour headways. There is a queue bypass lane for westbound buses at the Vancil Road intersection. Buses can
use the right-turn lane to directly access the far-side bus pullout Just west of the QFC driveway
As a result of funding cuts precipitated by InitiatIve 695, Intercity Transit will reduce the service provided by
Route 94 on February 27; 2000 At that time, the route will make a total offour trips (two in the mornmg, and
two in the evening) through the Yelm Avenue corridor
Non-motorized facihtles eXIst on some study area roadways. Sidewalks exist along most sections ofYelm Ave-
nue including the areas west of the sIte near the SR-51 O/SR-507 intersectIOn. Bike lanes exist along Yelm A venue
east of 103rd Avenue and along both sides of 103rd Avenue between Yelm Avenue and West Road. There are no
sidewalks or bike lanes along West Road, Van Trump Avenue or Clark Road. However, the realIgnment project
planned for the Clark Road mtersection with Yelm A venue would mclude sidewalks to the project extents.
heffron
transportation, inc.
- 10-
February 11 2000
o
o
o
f\
\...J
o
(\
o
('\1
\J
r'^\
V
o
Prairie Park Yelm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
PROJECT IMPACTS
This section of the report describes the conditions that would exist with the proposed Prairie Park project. First,
the total number of project trips generated by each phase of the project was determined. Project trips were then
added to the without-project traffic volumes. Finally, level of service analysis was performed to determine the
proposed project's impact on traffic operatIons in the study area. The following sections describe the methodol-
ogy used to determine the proposed project's impact.
(\
U
o
o
o
o
,0
('-.,
U
(>
V
o
(\
U
C)
o
o
o
o
o
r\
U
o
Trip Generation
As described previously, the level of service analyses were performed for the average weekday PM peak hour
ThIS section presents estimated PM peak hour project traffic generation. In addition, since the proposed project
includes a cinema (which typically generates the most traffic on Friday and Saturday evenings), the City of
Yelm has also requested estimates of weekend traffic generation. Therefore, the subsequent section presents
estimates of Phase 1 and full project weekend peak hour trip generation.
Weekday PM Peak Hour
The following describes the methodology used to estimate the number of tripS that will be generated by the
project. Overall, these trip generation estimates are consistent with the methodology preferred by the City of
Yelm since they rely on rates provided in the City ofYelm's (Trip Generation Rate Default Values P M Peak
Hour, City ofYelm, Chapter 1540 - Concurrency Management). However, the Trip Generation Rate Default
Values do not provide rates for a cinema in terms of seats, or rates for a conference facility Therefore, other
sources were used to develop rates for these components of the development. All assumptions used and the ra-
tionale for their use are documented below
(\
\.~
0,\
W
()
o
Trip generation for the cinema was estimated using rates developed in Bella Botega Driveway Counts and Trip
Generation, (Heffron Transportation, Inc., October 20, 1997). This memorandum (included in the appendix)
documented trip generation rates for an existing 1,873-seat cinema in Redmond, Washington, which were based
on seven days of actual driveway counts at the existmg cinema. Although the PM peak hour trip generation rate
derived for that cinema (of 0 041-trips-per-seat) is below the average rate presented for cinemas m Trip Gen-
eration (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 6th Edition, 1996), it is within the range ofrates presented in ITE
for similar sIze cinemas. The rate developed from the Bella Botega survey is most appropriate for this project
for two reasons. First, the size (number of seats) and location (m suburban Puget Sound area with nearby su-
permarkets and retail) of the Bella Botega site are very similar to the proposed Prairie Park development. Sec-
ond, the Bella Botega survey included a full week of counts to develop the average weekday rates, and it is un-
known whether Trip Generation included data from all weekdays (trip generation on Fridays is substantially
higher than the trip generation Monday through Thursday). Average weekday conditions should be used to
evaluate the off-site traffic impacts and mitigation requirements for PrairIe Park, since these are the conditions
that would occur on most days of the year
(\
V
Q
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
Trip generation rates for all other components of the development as well as all new trip percentages were ob-
tamed from the City ofYelm's Trip Generation Rate Default values The City ofYelm's default-values table
includes basic trip generation rates as well as the estimated percentage of those trips that would be new to the
Yelm roadway network, The following defines the types of trips that would be generated by the project.
· New (Primary) Trips are single purpose trIpS generated by the mixed-use development. New trips
are generally assumed to begin and end at home, although some new trips could originate at work
or other locations.
· Pass-by Trips are trips that are already on the roadway network on the way to another destination.
For example, a trip to the store made on a trIp home from work would be conSIdered a pass-by trip
heffron
transportation, inc.
- II -
February J J, 2000
o
o
o
f\
U
o
(\
\J
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
i',
\J
o
()
f\
'--..)
o
o
o
(J
o
o
1\
\.J
/\
U
o
Q
Prairie Park, 'relm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
These two trip components make up the total driveway trip generation. The methodology used for this site de-
termined the total driveway trips first. This was done by applymg the rates discussed above to the size of each
component of the development. Then the driveway trips were separated into the two components based on the
percentage of new trips determined by the City ofYelm. Total driveway trips for the proposed mixed-use de-
velopment are summanzed ill Table 4 The proposed project would generate 413 driveway trips (203 inbound,
and 210 outbound) during the PM peak hour
Table 4 Trip Generation Summary - Total Driveway Trips
PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips
Land Use Size Trip Rate In Out Total
Phase 1 a
New Cinema 1,250 seats o 041-trips/seat 30 21 51
Phase 2b
Retail (13-;500~sf) 10 160-trips/1,OOO sf 66 71 137
Restaurant m;OOOsf 7 660-trips/1,000 sf 46 31 77
Library 6,000 sf 4 740-trips/1 ,000 sf 13 15 28
Office 19,500 sf 2.550-trips/1 ,000 sf 9 41 50
Fitness Center 20,000 sf 1 830-trips/1 ,000 sf 23 14 37
Hotel 48-rooms o 690 trips/room 16 17 33
Total Both Phases 203 210 413
1 Trip generation rate from Bella Bolega Driveway Counts and Trip Generation, (Heffron Transportation, Inc., October 20, 1997).
2. Trip rate calculated from Trip Generation Rate Default Values P.M. Peak Hour, City of Ye/m, Chapter 15.40 - Concurrency Management.
It should be noted that no specific PM peak hour driveway trips were attributed to the proposed conference
center component. This was done for several reasons. First, as defined by Trip Generation, hotels (Land Use
Code 310) "are places of lodging that provide sleepmg accommodatIons, restaurants, cocktail lounges, meeting
and banquet rooms or conventIOn facilities, and other retail and service shops." Therefore, these rates would
already include trips from conference facilitIes as part of the hotel estimates. Second, the proposed conference
center is relatively small and is expected to serve as meeting space for the adjacent hotel and/or office uses, or
other local community actIvities. On average, these activities are not expected to generate trIpS dunng the PM
peak hour Finally, no specIfic reductIOns in trips have been assumed for mternal trips that would occur due to
the mixed-used nature of the development. Therefore, the tnp estimates presented above are conservatively high
and represent worst-case conditions for the PM peak hour
r-\
U
f'...
Vi
o
f\
U
o
1\
U
o
o
o
o
C)
f\
V
o
o
f)
\....J
o
8
Table 5 summarizes the fraction of trips that would be new to the roadway network for each component ofthe
development. As shown, the development would result in 307 new trIpS (150 inbound, and 157 outbound).
Table 5 Trip Generation Summary - New and Pass-By Trips
New PM Peak Hour Trips Pass-by PM Peak Hour Trips
Land Use New Trip %* In Out Total In Out Total
Phase 1
New Cinema 85% 26 18 44 4 3 7 .
Phase 2
Retail 55% 36 39 75 30 32 62
Restaurant 80% 37 24 61 9 7 16
Library 75% 10 11 21 3 4 7
Office 90% 8 37 45 1 4 5
Fitness Center 75% 17 11 28 6 3 9
Hotel 100% 16 17 33 0 0 0
Total Both Phases 150 157 307 53 53 106
Note: All new trip percentages obtained from Tnp Generalion Rate Default Values P.M. Peak Hour, City of Ye/m, Chapter 15.40-
Concurrency Management
beffron
transportation, inc.
- 12-
February 11 2000
o
o
o
f\
u
'"
\..~
f\
U
/\
V
o
o
o
o
o
o
(\
u
o
Q
o
o
o
o
I)
"'--
o
o
(',
~./
o
~
U
r"\
"-J
~
U
"^\
"'-J
o
n
u
r---...
V
o
o
I)
"-,,/
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
Prairie Park 'relm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
Weekend Peak Hour
Although, the City ofYelm requires detailed analyses of impacts during the weekday PM peak hour, weekend
traffic generation estimates were also requested. Weekend trip generation estimates for the cinema component
were also determined from the Bella Botega Driveway Counts and Trip Generation. This analysis determined
that the cinema would generate the most trips (approximately 270 with 92 inbound, and 178 outbound) between
9'00 to 10'00 P.M. when the first evening movies typically end.
Saturday trip generation estimates for the full project were estimated using the Bella Botega Driveway Counts
and Trip Generation analysis for the cinema and rates and equations from Trip Generation for the other uses.
With the full project, the Saturday peak hour would occur earlier (between 7'00 and 8'00 P.M.) than for Phase I
alone This is because the combination of trips generated by the cinema, retail, and restaurant uses during earlier
evening hours would be higher than the number of trips generated later by the cinema (when the retail and res-
taurants are closed) The peak weekend driveway trip generation is estimated to be approximately 530 trips (313
inbound, 217 outbound). Of these, approximately 420 trips would be new to the local roadway network, while
the remaining 110 trips would come from traffic already passing the site or destined to other uses at the project
site (internal trIpS).
Trip Distribution and Assignment
An overall trip distribution pattern has been developed and approved for retail developments along Yelm A ve-
nue in the vicinity of the project (Traffic Impact Analysis Safeway Store and Retail Center Yelm, WA, Heffron
Transportation, May 6, 1998). This distributIOn pattern was adopted and modified to reflect the anticipated ac-
cess conditions and use of 103rd Avenue as well as West Road to access and egress the site. Figure 5 shows the
new trip distribution pattern.
The new weekday PM peak hour project trIpS for Phase I and the total project (Phase 1 and Phase 2) were as-
signed to the roadway network based on thIS distribution pattern. The pass-by trips would primarily affect op-
erations at the site driveways and were assigned separately based on traffic patterns adjacent to the sIte. Figure 6
shows the Phase I total project traffic assIgnment (including pass-by trips); Figure 7 shows the total project
traffic assignment for the full project (Phases I and 2). These assignments were used to determine the study area
for the traffic impact analysis. Phase I is not expected to generate 20 or more peak direction PM peak hour trips
through any intersection.
The weekday PM peak hour project traffic was added to the background traffic volumes described prevIously and
shown on Figures 3 and 4 The Phase I traffic was added to the year-2000 traffic volumes to determme the year-
2000-with-project weekday PM peak hour volumes shown on Figure 8. The trIpS generated by the full-project
were added to year-2005-without-project volumes to obtain the with project traffic volumes shown on Figure 9
heffron
transportation, inc.
- 13 -
February 11 2000
~
z
"\
)
)
J
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
fl
~
~ ~
uJ
~
~.
~
3'3 QB 1\';)N'9'^ ~
';f..
l,t')
N
@)
3S Q'I:l )\'I:l'V18
'-
'%>
f:?
is
u
O<!i
.$'1\1.:)7
771)0
!!:
;:
~
(g
~
.Is
.:10711'c
:94'07
~~
'3
o
~
o
C
.-
c
o
.....
~
p~
O~
~C
~tG
C)ti
~
~
S
0..
';Z
ocn
i=-o..
::>~
U') COr-
(\) ~
? ~~
.~ ~ ';Z
u.. Oa:.
0..0
~U-
r-
'0
uJ
-,
~
0..
l
tel
0.4
\Il~
'i.
4~
" a:
0.>
)OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOUU~
N
~
o 3
0::.
o
~
...-- ~ '03 ,,\jt~Ut St
-;-.:;
...-4
3--t'
~8 Olll 44 10,f>.,L
NSV'J lR\P.;>o\oS 2~ \~ 3 Olll 7 ,OIf>.,L
pf>.,SS-6'< \ l' r
30 \t'l 2~ OU' 5'\ ,.o"~\.
p,",f..SE '\
uJ
(fl
~
~
<!.
d
w,
~
5
~
;>
8-1LO HILL........ 3
!TO S€
~
2---..
,o"~\.
neffron rtattOO, ,tiC
t.raOSPO
'IJ\OIOll
p~'R'E p~Rt(
, W'W'l . VJ A.
figure 6
I'\\~SE 1 . I'NlI'E~~O~:OI':~~~~ ~~::'C ~SS\GNNlEN"
)OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOU~~
N
..--8 \()3 ,,\}(~\J( '2o(
......
8~
..--2.'3
8'~
. 8
21\.....
fULL pROJEC1 ~ pHASE 1&2)
30? 101Al
"\06 101Al
uJ
Ul
g
';t.
~
...l
o
4,~
.'4
~
g
~
~
:;::>
8A.LDIiIL ~~5
LRD S
~
~6-..
NEW 1 RIPS ,50 IN '57 0\!1
ppS5-BY 1RIPS 53 IN 53 0\!1
20' IN 2'0 01lT ." 101j>,l
f\9ure 7
fULL PROJEC1 ( PHASES 1 I\.NO 2 )
pNlPEjI.\<. HOUR 1R1\.FFIC I\.ssIGNNlEN1
NEIN I\.NO 1'1\.55-8'1 1RIPs
heffron at\On, \(\c
transport
2J\Q!OO
101M.
pRA\R.\E p~R.t<
___lrv'\.'1JA
)OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOUUU~~-
t\
103 "VENUE SE
\
pRAIRie PARK
ve\m,WA
YEAR 2000 pM PEAK HOUR 1RAFFle VOLUMES
W\TH PHASE 1
Figure B
heffron
transportation, inc
21\0100
)OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOUU~-
N
\5 t. \6
() \ ...-- 55
j ~ \.. ~ J5
\()~ "" ~
\\() .-.. . \ () ()
(). ()
~
@
tS
~
7
pRA\R\E pA.Rt(
..- \NA
figure 9
!( ~OUR iRP-fflC VO\.UtJIES
'1EP-;,~~OiJ~ ~'itoJECi (I'~P-SES 1 p-NO 2 )
heffron rta't\OO, ,"C
'traOsPo
2110/()O
o
r'\
o
o
o
!\
\J
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
r'\
V
f\
V
!\
o
.~
v
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
()
o
o
o
()
Prairie Park Yelm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
Level of Service
Levels of service for all study area intersections were calculated for weekday PM peak hour with-project conditions:
year 2000 for Phase I, and year 2005 for the full project. The following summarizes the results for each phase.
Phase 1 CondlflOns
Table 6 summarizes the results of the analysIs for Phase 1 conditions, levels of service for without-project condi-
tions are shown for comparison. The analysis determined that all movements at study area intersections would
continue to operate at without-project levels wIth Phase I of the proposed project. The left-turn movements from
1 03rd A venue would continue to operate at LOS F and some additional delay is anticipated as a result of Phase I
traffic. It should also be noted that left turns onto Yelm A venue from both Clark Road and the site driveway (to
be located opposite Clark Road) would contmue to be difficult and would likely operate at LOS F Although
SIgnalizatIon of this mtersection would likely mitigate the severe delay conditions, as described in the subsequent
Site Access section, volume warrants for a traffic signal would likely not be met under Phase 1 conditions.
Table 6 Level of Service Summary - Existing and Year 2000 With-Project (Phase 1) Conditions
Existing (Year 2000) Year 2000 With Phase 1
Unsignalized Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay
West Roadl103rd Avenue
Southbound movements from West Road A 9.9 A 100
Northbound movements from West Road A 95 A 9.5
Westbound left turn from 103rd Avenue A 74 A 74
Eastbound left turn from 103rd Avenue A 74 A 74
Yelm Avenue/Clark Road
Northbound movements from Clark Road C 23.4 C 22.0
Southbound Movements from Site Driveway N/A E 48.1
Eastbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 93 A 94
Westbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 9.9 A 9.9
Yelm Avenue/103rd Avenue
Left turn from 103rd Avenue F 739 F 75.4
Right turn from 103rd Avenue C 154 C 15.6
Left turn from Yelm Avenue A 9.9 A 99
4th StreeWan Trump Avenue
Southbound left turn from Van Trump Avenue A 8.9 A 90
Northbound left turn from Site Driveway N/A A 94
Eastbound left turn from 4th Street A 73 A 73
1 Level of service
2. Average seconds of delay per vehicle.
3. Volume-to-capacity ratio.
Full-PrOject Conditions
Table 7 summarizes the results of the analysis for 2005 conditions with the full project; levels of service for
2005-without-proJect conditIOns are shown for comparison. The analysis determined that the signalized inter-
sections as well as all movements at unsignahzed mtersections would continue to operate at without-project
levels with the proposed project. The left-turn movements from I03rd Avenue and Solberg Street would con-
heffron
transportation, incl.
- 19-
February 11, 2000
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Prairie Park, Yelm, Washington ~ Traffic Impact Analysis
tinue to operate at LOS F and some additional delay is anticipated as a result of project traffic. It should also be
noted that left turns onto Yelm A venue from both Clark Road and the site driveway to be located opposite Clark
Road would continue be extremely difficult. The site access driveway approach at this intersection is forecast to
operate at LOS F A potential mitigation for this would be to signalize the intersection concurrent with the
buildout of the second phase of the project. The potential signalization of this intersection is discussed in the
following Site Access section of this report. With signalization, the intersections would operate at LOS C
Table 7 Level of Service Summary - Year 2005 Without and With-Project (Full Project) Conditions
2005 Without Project 2005 With Project
Siqnalized Intersection LOS1 Delay2 V/c3 LOS Delay V/c
SR-507/SR-510IYelm Avenue/1st Street E 570 085 E 65.8 0.89
Yelm Avenue/Vancil Road C 245 065 C 26.0 068
Yelm Avenue/Bald Hill Road C 250 0.54 C 26.1 0.57
Unsiqnalized Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay
West Road/103rd Avenue
Southbound movements from West Road B 101 B 105
Northbound movements from West Road A 96 A 97
Westbound left turn from 103rd Avenue A 74 A 75
Eastbound left turn from 103rd Avenue A 75 A 7.5
Yelm Avenue/Clark Road
Northbound movements from Clark Road C 19.3 C 22.2
Southbound movements from Site Driveway N/A F 152.0
Eastbound left turn from Yelm Avenue B 104 B 107
Westbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 98 A 10.3
Yelm Avenue (SR-510)/Solberg Street
Northbound movements from Solberg Street F 1076 F 128.2
Southbound movements from Solberg Street E 454 E 57.5
Eastbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 8.8 A 8.9
Westbound left turn from Yelm Avenue B 101 B 10.2
Yelm Avenue/103rd Avenue
Left turn from 103rd Avenue F 1260 F 154 0
Right turn from 103rd Avenue C 176 C 19.3
Left turn from Yelm Avenue B 10.5 B 10.8
Yelm Avenue/Plaza Drive
Turns from Plaza Drive C 238 C 26.0
Turns from Safeway Driveway C 209 C 22.5
Eastbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 93 A 9.5
Westbound left turn from Yelm Avenue A 97 A 99
4th StreeWan Trump Avenue
Southbound left turn from Van Trump Avenue A 8.9 A 9.3
Northbound left turn from Site Driveway N/A A 9.5
Eastbound left turn from 4th Street A 73 A 7.3
Bald Hill Road/Morris Road
Turns from Morris Road C 161 C 174
Left turn from Bald Hill Road A 85 A 8.6
1 Level of service
2. Average seconds of delay per vehicle.
3. Vo/ume-to-capacity ratio.
heffron
- 20 -
February II 2000
transportation, inc!
o
o
o
1\
\.J
f\
U
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Prairie Park relm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
Site Access
The proposed project would have a total of eight site-access driveways. The primary access driveway would be
located on Yelm Avenue opposite Clark Road. It has been assumed that the planned Clark Road realignment at
Yelm Avenue would be completed concurrent with Phase 1 of the Prairie Park project. Thus, the new access
driveway would become the north leg of the 90-degree mtersectlon. Two new access driveways would be 10- J\
cated along 103rd Avenue and four site access driveways would be located along West Road. Finally, the site ~,^j
could be accessed directly from 4th Avenue at approximately Van Trump Road. All access driveways are pro- V" \
posed as full access, they would serve right-in, nght-out, as well as left-m and left-out movements. Analyses of
site access conditions were performed to determme operatmg condItIOns and to recommend turn-lane channeli-
Phase 1 Conditions
For Phase I conditions, it is anticipated that most project-generated traffic would utilize the four driveways
closest to the cinema building and parkmg lot. These include the driveway from Yelm A venue at Clark Road,
the driveway from 4th Avenue at Van Trump Road, and the two northwestern-most driveways from West Road.
Operations analyses of the Yelm Avenue/Clark Road and 4th Avenue/Van Trump Road intersections were pre-
sented previously Phase 1 of the proposed project is not expected to degrade operations at either of these inter-
sections. However, the left-turn movements from both Clark Road and the sIte access driveway are expected to
continue to operate atLOS F due to heavy through traffic along Yelm A venue. Turn movements to and from the
three other primary site-access dnveways for Phase 1 are expected to operate at LOS A.
Signal warrants were reviewed to determine if a traffic signal should be installed with Phase 1 of the proposed
project. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devicesfor Streets and Highways (MUTCD) states that traffic
signals should not be installed unless one or more of the eleven "Warrants for Traffic Signal Installation" in the
MUTCD is met. Through traffic on Yelm Avenue IS sufficiently high to meet part of the volume requirements
for Warrants 1,2, and 11 (those often considered by WSDOT) However, for Phase I conditions at this mter-
section, the minor street approaches (Clark Road and the site access driveways) are not expected ri1eet any of
the volume thresholds for these warrants. Therefore, it does not appear likely that a traffic signal would be war-
ranted at thIS locatIOn with Phase 1
f\
'---~
f\
\.J
o
f\
\.J
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
The WSDOT Design Manual guidelmes for turn lanes were used to identify whether left- and/or right-turn lanes
should be provided at any of the site access driveways With Phase I development. The proposed reconfiguration
of the Yelm Avenue/Clark Road mtersectlOn will mclude left-turn lanes from Yelm Avenue. Based on the proJ-
ect traffic assignment, no other auxiliary turn lanes would be recommended at any site access driveway to ac-
commodate Phase-I traffic.
Full PrOject Conditions
With the completIOn of the full project, all eight site driveways are expected to be utilized. However, primary
access is expected to be focused at the Yelm A venue access dnveway opposite Clark Road. The driveways
along 103rd A venue and the access to 4th A venue opposite Van Trump Road would be secondary access points
with moderate traffic volumes. The four driveways along West Road are expected to operate as minor access
points and serve relatively low traffic volumes. As presented preVIOusly m Table 7, with the full project in year
2005, delay for turn movements at the Yelm A venue/Clark Road intersections would be increased. Turn move-
ments at all other site access mtersections would operate at LOS B or better
A potential mitigation option for the Yelm A venue/Clark Road mtersectIon would be to install a traffic signal.
A traffic Signal could provide improved access into and out of the proposed site as well as for traffic using Clark
Road. The MUTCD warrants for traffic signals (discussed m the previous section) were also reviewed for con-
ditions with the full proJect. The thresholds for these warrants are dependent on the through volume along Yelm
heffron
- 21 -
February 11 2000
transportation, incl
o
o
~
"---.J
o
o
~
v
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f\
"---.J
r\
o
1\
"---.J
r\
V
(\
"---/
(\
\J
(\
V
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Prairie Park, }elm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
A venue and the higher volume approach traffic on either Clark Road or the site driveway Based on the forecast
site driveway volumes, it appears that both Warrants 2 and 11 would be met with the full project. If the inter-
section is signalized, it would operate at LOS C with the full project in year 2005 The exact timing of sIgnal
installation could be determined through monitoring of approach volumes and would likely be dependent on the
development schedule.
The need for left- and/or right-turn lanes at any of the site access driveways was evaluated for the full project
development conditions. As described above, it is recommended that the Yelm A venue/Clark Road intersection
be signalized during Phase 2 ofthe project. The WSDOT Design Manual recommends that capacity analysis,
using Highway Capacity Manual methodology, be utilized to determine if left- and/or right-turn lanes are re-
quired for signalized intersections to operate at acceptable levels. Level of service calculated for the Yelm A ve-
nue/Clark Road mtersection indicate that it would operate at LOS C during the PM peak hour; additional auxil-
iary turn lanes are not required to maintain acceptable operatmg condItIOns. The WSDOT Design Manual
guidelines for turn lanes were used to Identify needs at the remainmg unsignalized drIveways. Based on the
project traffic assignment, no other auxiliary turn lanes would be recommended at any site access driveway to
accommodate the full project.
Parking
The proposed project would construct a total of 581 parking spaces on site; the number of the spaces that would
be constructed with Phase I (the cmema component) has not yet been determined.
A parking demand analysis was performed to estImate the peak parking demand for the proposed project. Each
element of the project would have different parking demand profiles over the course ofthe day For example,
the cmema's peak parkmg demand would occur m the evening between 8'00 and 11'00 P.M. while the office
peak parking demand would occur between 10'00 A.M. and noon. Therefore, peak parking demand estImates for
the project considered each element's parking demand and parkmg accumulation separately and then combined
the elements to determine the total peak parkmg.
Peak parking demand rates from Parking Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1987) were used
and combined with accumulation rates from Shared Parking (Urban Land Institute, 1983). A table describing
the specific parking and accumulation rates IS included in the Appendix. Figure 10 shows the accumulated-
parked vehicles for Phase 1 and full-project conditions on a weekday and a Saturday As shown, the peak park-
ing demand for Phase 1 would be 325 spaces and would occur on a Saturday from approximately 8'00 to 11'00
P.M The weekday peak parking demand would occur at approximately the same time but would be somewhat
lower-238 spaces. With the full project, the peak parking demand would increase to 528 vehicles and would
occur at approximately 7'00 P.M on a Saturday The weekday peak parkmg demand of 520 spaces would occur
at approxImately 8'00 r.M Based on these estimates, the peak parkmg demand is not expected to exceed the
proposed parkmg supply of 581 parkmg spaces.
heffron
-22-
February 11, 2000
transportation. inc.
'" '"
- -
0-
:2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2
<( <( <( <( <( <( (L (L (L (L (L (L (L (L (L CL (L (L <(
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 '? '? 0 0 0 '? 0 0 0 0 0 0 '? 0
to r-- CO en 6 ~ N N M '<t LO to ~ cri en 6 ~ N
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Time of Day
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1'\
U
o
o
o
i"\
V
1'\
U
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
600
500
Ul
Q)
E
.J::
~ 400
'0
Qj
.0
E
~ 300
"0
c:
cu
E
Q)
o 200
Cl
c:
:.;<
ro
CL
100
Prairie Park }elm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
Figure 10 Parking Accumulation by Time of Day - Phase 1 and Full Project
- - Full Project - Weekday
-Full Project - Saturday
- - Phase 1 (Cinema only) - Weekday
- Phase 1 (Cinema only) - Saturday
--~----'T-~
,
/'
"
,
---
/'
,
~
- - - - -- - -- - ".
,
Neighborhood Traffic Impacts
The proposed project IS expected to mcrease traffic volumes on some local residential roadways. Due to heavy
volumes, peak hOur delay, and lengthy queues along Yelm Avenue, two routes could experience increases in
traffic as dnvers find alternative routes to the site Drivers approaching the study area from the south on SR-507
might choose to avoid the SR-51 0/SR-507/Y elm A venuell st Street intersection by using Mosman A venue and
4th Street to access Yelm A venue near the site entrance Based on the trip distribution pattern, approxImately 2%
of total new mbound project traffic could choose this route (an mcrease of 4 PM peak hour trips). Similarly, the
location of an access point at 4th Street opposite Van Trump Avenue will likely result in increased Jaffic along
Van Trump Road and other roadways that parallel Yelm Avenue Many of the drivers approaching the site from
the north on 1st Street would choose to turn left at Van Trump Avenue rather than contmuing south to /
51 0/SR-507/Y elm A venue/l st Street intersection. During the weekday PM peak hour, approximatel 31 new trips f Y )
are expected along Van Trump Avenue (approximatel 10% of total new trips generated by the project). s ~.
volume is expected to increase to approximately! 42 tnp during the Saturday peak hour (7'00 to 8'00 P.M.). . ~ . ,
The addItional project related traffic would be noticeable to local residents. Currently, these roadways carry
relatively little traffic and are quite narrow with sidewalks or paved pedestflan paths. The new trips may not ~
affect capacity or operations of intersections or vehicular roadways, but could degrade pedestrian access and
safety through the neIghborhood. The CIty of Yelm could consIder traffic calming measures such as traffic cir- " " ,.If.
cles and/or addItional signage to dIscourage cut-through traffic However, as traffic volumes and congestIOn _ \ )~
continue to grow on Yelm A venue, these routes will remain attractive parallel options for project-related trips. ~~)
If these routes are not dIscouraged as an access to the project, roadway widening (to city ofYelm standards)\\y
andlo, ped"tnan-pathway 0' ,ldewalk impmvemen" may be d"lmble. 2-1 ~4 l V ~ ~ 4
\y~ ~ F,broary /I 2000 #~
heffron
transportation, inc.
- 23-
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f'
U
f\
U
i'.
o
r---...
\J
r---...
U
o
C)
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
Prairie Park, relm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
Safety
The number of accidents may increase with the addition of new driveways and increase in turning movements
generated by the Prairie Park project. The increase in through traffic on Yelm A venue may also contribute to a
proportionate increase in aCCIdent experience
The proposed Prairie Park project could adversely affect traffic operations at the 1 03rd A venue intersection with
Yelm Avenue. Left-turn movements from 103rd Avenue onto Yelm Avenue are forecast to operate at LOS F in
2005 wIth or without the proposed project. With additional traffic volume added to this intersection, vehicle delays
will increase and drivers may accept smaller gaps in the traffic stream to maneuver This could result in increased
potential for accidents. However, If a signal is installed at the Yelm A venue/Clark Road intersection to the west (as
suggested in the previous sectIOn), it would provide a protected left-turn alternative for site traffic destined to the
east on Yelm Avenue. When considered in combination with the existing signal located at Vancil Road, the signals
along Yelm A venue will likely create platoons with larger gaps and may Improve operations and safety at this
mtersectlon. With a signal located at the Yelm A venue/Clark Road intersection, neither Phase 1 nor the full project
proposal is expected to result in significant adverse impacts to traffic safety conditions.
The proposed site plan includes a vanety of mternal site access roadways with pedestrian walkways and corridors. It
includes parallel parking along many of the mternal roadways, which will serve to reduce vehicle speeds and
improve vehicular and pedestrian safety conditions.
Transit and Non-Motorized Facilities
Some addItIOnal pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use increase IS expected as a result of the project. However, the
increases are expected to be small. The project would be required to construct sidewalks along some frontage
where none exist as per CIty of Yelm development requirements. The eXlstmg and required sidewalks would
.d,qu.toly """ th, ;no"." in ped""i.n, b"yd" .nd ",,,,,it .otiv;ty g,n''''',d by th, ;"'~f bJJ; /ic,1 /1-
fjrtuL [}J ~(p1(~ WI Phfn{J L - ~S/5
PhtU/-rc/ ~ U)I~ bcvJG {J,M {~
ifi 7-1
); / '/~~ fY
I (~ '11, . UL
~.tY\ LrI'YJ>'Y U Wn~ Tl
~~ ~1-\ u I 'l /f(-
/ :I> OV~J 1 V ;~
QIMiL ~/~fu io~ ~(OJ~ ~~}fJcV
(Jd;11u me,p fYAPAM)().I:!U ~d -r~ {~,. M'~n,oA~
v r beffron f\l/V'" ~ ,24. broary ~
transportation, inc.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f"'..
V
o
o
o
o
o
Prairie Park }elm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
MITIGATION
The proposed project would not degrade the overall level of service at any off-site intersection. However, the
project would result in LOS F conditions at the proposed new site access driveway onto Yelm A venue opposIte
Clark Road. The installation of a new traffic signal at this intersection would mitigate the delay impacts at thiS
location. However, neither the Phase 1 traffic volumes at the site driveway, nor the approach volumes on Clark
Road are anticipated to be high enough to meet MUTCD signal warrants I, 2, or 11 in the year 2000 With the full
project in 2005, the approach volumes on the site driveway are expected to meet signal warrants 2 and 11 There-
fore, a signal could be installed to mitigate the delay impacts of the full project. Since the signal would also
improve access for traffic turning to and from Clark Road (approximately 7% of total entering traffic), it may be
appropriate to develop a shared-cost agreement with the City ofYelm.
The project will likely induce some cut-through traffic a,long residential streets such as Van Trump Avenue, which
is a narrow street with little or no room for pedestrians. The City ofYelm could explore options to discourage cut-
through traffic such as traffic circles and/or new signage. However, due to increasing volumes along Yelm A venue, J
these routes will likely continue to be attractive alternatives. If Van Trump Avenue is to be maintained as a secon-
dary access route for the project, it may be desirable to Improve the roadway to City of Yelm standards and provide
a pedestrian walkway or SIdewalks. L6V1 ()
No other specific off-site transportation improvements would be required to mitigate the impact of the proposed
project. However, the City ofYelm has established a "'transportation facilities charge' as a condition of develop-
ment approval to pay for public facilities needed to serve new growth and development. "The current adopted
fee is $750 per PM peak hour trip The trip generatIOn section of this report determined that the proposed project
would generate 307 new trips to the site dUrIng the PM peak hour This would relate to a total fee of $230,250
~
V
f\
V
o
f',
V
f"'..
~
o
(\
u
C)
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
The CIty ofYelm has developed a credit system for projects that provide economic benefit to the City ThIS
methodology would consider the B & 0 tax and the City share of state sales tax generated by the project over a six-
year period. The credit would be calculated as the portion of that tax that would be applied to the City road fund
that IS designated as prIvate share for projects on the TFC
heffron
- 25 -
February I I 2000
transportation, inc.
c
o
~
u
o
f\
"--J
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f\
V
f\
U
o
o
o
f\
V
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
Prairie Park Yelm, Washington - Traffic Impact Analysis
MITIGATION
The proposed project would not degrade the overall level of service at any off-site intersection. However, the
project would result in LOS F conditions at the proposed new site access driveway onto Yelm A venue opposite
Clark Road. The installation of a new traffic signal at this intersection would mitigate the delay impacts at this
location. However, neither the Phase 1 traffic volumes at the site driveway, nor the approach volumes on Clark
Road are anticipated to be high enough to meet MUTCD signal warrants I, 2, or 11 in the year 2000 With the full
project in 2005, the approach volumes on the site driveway are expected to meet signal warrants 2 and 11 There-
fore, a sIgnal could be installed to mitigate the delay impacts of the full proJect. Smce the sIgnal would also
improve access for traffic turning to and from Clark Road (approxImately 7% of total entering traffic), it may be
appropriate to develop a shared-cost agreement with the City ofYelm.
The project will likely induce some cut-through traffic along residential streets such as Van Trump Avenue, which
is a narrow street with little or no room for pedestrians. The City ofYelm could explore options to discourage cut-
through traffic such as traffic circles and/or new signage However, due to increasing volumes along Yelm A venue,
these routes will likely continue to be attractive alternatives. If Van Trump Avenue is to be maintained as a secon-
dary access route for the project, it may be deSlfable to improve the roadway to City of Yelm standards and provide
a pedestrian walkway or sidewalks.
No other specific off-site transportation Improvements would be required to mitigate the impact of the proposed
project. However, the City of Yelm has established a "'transportation facilities charge' as a condition of develop-
ment approval to pay for public facilitIes needed to serve new growth and development. "The current adopted
fee is $750 per PM peak hour trip The trip generatIOn section of this report determined that the proposed project
would generate 307 new trips to the site during the PM peak hour This would relate to a total fee of $230,250
The City of Y elm has developed a credit system for projects that proVIde economic benefit to the City This --" ,
methodology would consider the B & 0 tax and the CIty share of state sales tax generated by the project over a six-
year period. The credit would be calculated as the portion of that tax that would be applied to the City road fund
that IS designated as private share for projects on the TFC
heffron
- 25 -
February 11 2000
transportation, inc.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f\
V
o
~
'-J
f\
V
i"',
'--.J
f"\
V
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
heffron
transportation, inc.
APPENDIX
Level of Service Definitions
February 11, 2000
o
/',
u
(\
"'-~
n
\....-I
(----'
U
(\
u
r---...
u
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f\
U
o
(-...,
u
o
(\
U
I'~
U
f\
U
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
(\
\J
Levels of service (LOS) are qualitative descriptions of traffic operating conditions. These levels of service are
designated with letters ranging from LOS A, which IS indIcatIve of good operating conditions with little or no
delay, to LOS F, which is indicative of stop-and-go condItions with frequent and lengthy delays. Levels of
service for this analysis were developed usmg procedures presented in the Highway Capacity Manual.
Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay Delay can be a cause of driver discom-
fort, frustration, mefficient fuel consumption, and lost travel time Specifically, level-of-service criteria are
stated in terms of the average delay per vehIcle in seconds. Delay IS a complex measure and is dependent on a
number of variables including: the quality of progression, cycle length, green ratio, and a volume-to-capacity
ratio for the lane group or approach in question. Table 1 shows the level of service criteria for signalized inter-
sections from the Highway Capacity Manual.
Table A-1 Level of Service for Signalized Intersections
Level of Service
A
B
C
D
Averaae Delav Per Vehicle
Less than 1 0 0 Seconds
1 0 1 to 20 0 seconds
20 1 to 35 0 seconds
35 1 to 55 0 seconds
E
55.1 to 80 0 seconds
F
Greater than 80 0 seconds
Source: Transportation Research Board, Hiahwav Capacity Manual, 1997
General Descriotion
Free flow
Stable flow (slight delays)
Stable flow (acceptable delays)
Approaching unstable flow (tolerable
delay-occassionally wait through
more than one signal cycle befor
proceeding.
Unstable flow (approaching intolerable
delay)
Forced flow (iammed)
For unsignahzed intersections, level of service IS based on the average delay per vehicle for each turning
movement. The level of service for a two-way, stop-controlled intersection IS determined by the computed or
measured control delay and IS defined for each minor movement. Delay is related to the availability of gaps in
the main street's traffic flow, and the abilIty of a driver to enter or pass through those gaps. Table 2 shows the
level of service criteria for unsignahzed intersections from the Highway Capacity Manual.
Table A-2 Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections
Average Delay
Level of Service (seconds oer vehicle)
A Less than 10 0
B 10.1 to 15.0
C 15 1 to 25 0
D 25 1 to 35 0
E 35.1 to 50.0
F Greater than 50 0
Source: Transportation Research Board, Hiahwav Capacitv Manual, 1997
heffron
transportation, inc.
February 11, 2000
o
f\
V
1\
U
'\
V
o
f\
\,j
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1\
V
1\
V
f\
V
o
APPENDIX
Bella Botega Driveway Counts and Trip Generation,
(Heffron Transportation, Inc., October 20, 1997)
r".
V
f\
U
r".
'-J
i\
V
r"".
V
f\
V
f\
V
.f",
U
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
heffron
February 11,2000
transportation, inc.
o
0,
V
o
H ~!~~~~~
r".
V
f'I
V
n
V
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
(\
U
f\
\J
o
o
f\
V
o
MEMORANDUM
Date
October 20, 1997
To
Gary Merlino
CC
Dave Halinen, Halinen Law Offices
Rick Utt, Cornerstone Architectural Group
Rob Cnttenden, City of Redmond
From
Marni C Heffron, P E
Subject:
Bella Bottega
Driveway Traffic Counts and Trip Generation - Revised
f'
V
II
V
()
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Bella Bottega will soon be submItting plans to permit an additional element of its Phase II development which is
located on the east side of 161 st A venue NE. Currently, the only portion of Phase II which has been developed is a
1,873-seat movie theater The City of Redmond has requested information about how the number of trips generated
by the theater compares to the estimate set forth in the last traffic impact analysis done for the site (Bella Bottega
Phase 11 - Proportional-Share Mitigation Update, The Transpo Group, October 31, 1994 ) In order to verify the
actual project trIp generation, this study was commissIOned to perform traffic counts at the site driveways and
compare the actual trip generation to the previously estimated trip generation. This memorandum summarizes the
results of the study
Project Description
Phase II of the Bella Bottega project IS bounded by 161st Avenue NE on the west, Redmond-Woodinville Road
on the east, NE 87th Street on the south, and NE 90th Street on the north. Table I summarizes the development
that was proposed for Phase II m the October 31, 1994 memorandum. It also notes the elements which are
constructed, approved by the City, or soon to be submitted for permit.
Table 1 Bella Bottega Phase II Development Program
Evaluated in Constructed Approved by Current Permit Total Applications
Element 10/31/94 Memo (as of 9/97) City (as of 9/97) Aoolication to Date
Retail 88,000 sf o sf 33,240 sf 33,160 sf 66,400 sf
Restaurant 7,000 sf o sf o sf 6,500 sf 6,500 sf
Office 18,000 sf o sf o sf o sf o sf
Theater 1.740 seats 1,873 seats 508 seats o seats 2,381 seats
4133 Interlake Avenue N · Seattle, WA 98103 · Phone (206) 547-7170 Fax: (206) 547-7744
o
f',
U
f\
\J
f\
\J
f\
\J
("\
\J
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f\
V
o
f\
V
1\
\J
f\
\J
o
(\
v
o
o
o
f\
V
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Bella Bottega
Driveway Traffic Counts and Trip Generation
October 20, 1997
Page 2
H~.~~~~~~
Driveway Traffic Counts
Machine traffic counts were performed at all three ofthe driveways serving Bella Bottega's Phase II site. These
counts were performed for a seven-day period beginning September 18, 1997 Manual check counts were also
performed at each driveway to validate the machine traffic counts. Figure 1 shows the daily traffic volumes by day
of week. This shows a dramatic peak for theater trips on Friday and Saturday
Figure 1 Theater Trips by Day of Week
2500
500
2000
1500.
>-
to
C
~
.,
Cl.
III
Cl.
~
1000
o.
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
The traffic counts were also used to determine the average weekday and PM peak hour traffic volumes gener-
ated by the theater This average includes traffic generated Monday through Friday Figure 2 shows how traffic
volumes fluctuate over the day This shows that the peak hour of the theater occurs between 9'00 and 10'00 p.m.
Dunng the commuter peak penod, the highest hourly volume would occur from 4'00 to 5'00 p.m. when the
theater generates 77 trips (45 inbound and 32 outbound)
o
f'\
U
f\
U
(\
U
(\
"-~
f'\
"--~
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Bella Bottega
Driveway Traffic Counts and Trip Generation
October 20, 1997
Page 3
HI~~~~~~~
Figure 2. Theater Trips by Time of Day
150
/--"',
J ....
I
//............/
,.;../
'.
/.\
/' \
. \
I \
.7 \
/ \
/
/
,\
II
1\
I I
I I
I I
, \
I I
I I
I I
I \
, I
\ I \
-.:,'
J \
\
'j
\ ,.
1--
120
Inbound
- - - Outbound
-Total
:; 90
0
J:
"-
ell
Q.
fI)
.9-
~
60
30
--J
f'\
U
o
0 _.:-0._.:.........__
::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;: ::;:
<( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N ~ N M ... .r; iD ,:... ci:i in 0 :: N ~ N '" :.i .r; <D ,:... ci:i in 0 ::
Time Begin
f'\
U
f\
U
f'.
U
n
V
f'\
U
f\
U
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
()
Trip Generation Comparison
The October 31, 1994 memorandum estimated that a 1 ,740-seat theater would generate 70 PM peak hour trips.
This relates to 0 04 trips per seat. The actual dnveway counts determmed that the 1 ,873-seat theater is gener-
ating 77 PM peak hour trips which is also 0 04 trIpS per seat. This demonstrates that the trIp generatIon estImates
for the theater were reasonable.
The October 31, 1994 analysis also included trip generation estimates for all of the Phase II development. Trip
generation for the shopping center was based on a proportion of the trips generated by all of the retail space at
Bella Bottega (Phase I and Phase II.) Phase 1 of the project included 69,125 sf ofretail space. Therefore, the
total proposed for the entire center IS 157,125 sf To show the number of trips that the current proposal
generates, the proportion was based on the total retail in Phase I plus the current proposal, or 131,625 sf. The
shopping center trip generation was based on equations in the 4th Edition of Trip Generation. Trip generation
for the restaurant in the October 31, 1994 memorandum had been based on rates for a "family, sit-down
restaurant" in the 5th Edition of Trip Generation. The restaurant trip generation has been updated for the revised
proposal which is 500 sf less than previously proposed.
The trip generatIon estImates from the memorandum along with an updated estimate for the current proposal are
summarized m Table 2 The previous proposal was estimated to generate at total of 670 PM peak hour trips at
the sIte dnveway Of these, 341 would be new to the roadway network. The current proposal would generate an
estimated 541 PM peak hour dnveway tnps including 280 new trips to the roadway network. This shows that the
applications to date would not cause the number of PM peak hour trips to exceed the number that was previously
approved by the City of Redmond.
o
(".,
u
o
o
(".,
u
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
(".,
u
o
()
(".,
u
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Bella Bottega
Driveway Traffic Counts and Trip Generation
October 20, 1997
Page 4
H~~~~~~~
Table 2. Trip Generation Comparison
Trip Generation from 10/31/94 Memo Trip Generation for Applications to Date
Element In Out Total In Out Total
Retail 88,000 sf * 62,500 sf *
New Trips (33%) 72 72 144 56 56 112
Pass-by Trips (42%) 92 92 184 71 71 142
Diverted Trips (25%) 55 55 11Q 43 43 86
Total 219 219 438 170 170 340
Restaurant ** 7,000 sf 6,500 sf
New Trips (69%) 43 36 79 39 34 73
Pass-by Trips (20%) 11 11 22 11 10 21
Internal Trips (11%) Z Q 13 ~ -2 J1
Total 61 53 114 57 49 106
Office 18,000 sf o sf
New Trips 8 40 48 0 0 0
Theater 1,740 seats 2,381 seats
New Trips 58 12 70 79 16 95
Total Trip Generation
New Trips 181 160 341 174 106 280
Pass-by Trips 103 103 206 82 81 163
Diverted Trips 55 55 110 43 43 86
Internal Trips -1 ~ ~ -1 ~ -1f
Total Trips 346 324 670 306 235 541
Trip generation based on full size of shopping center including 69,125 sf from Phase I. Trip generation for Phase 1/ is based on the size of Phase
1/ retail in proportion to the total shopping center size.
Trip generation determined using rate for 'High-Turnover (Sit Down) Restaurant'in the 5th Edition ofTrip Generation.
We trust that thIS analysis meets your needs. Please call me at (206) 547-7170 if you have any questions.
Attachments. Traffic Count Data
MCH/mch
o
n
~~.J
C)
o
n
v
(\
U
o
o
o
o
o
()
8
o
I',
\..J
o
~
'J
f\
V
n
o
o
o
o
o
'J
f\
\J
o
('
'J
n
u
()
o
o
~
:)
~
V
o
o
o
o
8
::)
o
o
o
o
APPENDIX
Parking Demand and Accumulation
heffron
transportation, inc.
February 11. 2000
------~~-~-- -~- ~_._--~-------~ --~. --~-~-~-
III IVY HI-LIFT
Scaffolding, Forklifts, Aerial Work Platforms. and Contractor & Industrial Equipment
~~t-
CiflUVltA-- / L 50
f;Wcr L / ?J/5Zx:J
LIYw1 (pCX:o ;p (fro) -
()ffu 19; S- &) /1 (;/!ftJ)
Ff~>5 ~fu W, w I/J (fa -:) ::
1Y.d..- 18 (ms (1/fH?1.~ =- &0 ~
-t UhptySJ
~ &/JJO ~ (ljro) c:
. 0fJIvrd- ! ();6(xJ 1j1 (i/2JJ6) =
~ui6
ff/L55) -
2-05
5+
&5'"
~o
Belmont, CA (415) 593-1100 La Mirada, CA (714) 994-6360 Portland, OR (503) 256-9800
Boise, ID (208) 884"1234 Las Vegas, NV (702) 399-3850 Sacramento, CA (916) 372-2555
Eugene, OR (541 )484-2511 Longview, WA (360) 578-0300 Salem, OR (503) 399-9568
Everett, WA (425) 513-9578 Martinez, CA (510) 228-0332 Salt Lake City, UT (801) 974-5858
Glendale, CA (800) 540-6360 Pasco, WA (509) 547-8565 Tacoma, WA (253) 589-9500
Kent. WA (253) 872-4175 Phoenix, AZ (602) 968-5591 Tucson, AZ (520) 790-8891
ooooooooooooooooooooooooouuv~~
Wee~dav Pea~ Par~inQ saturdav Pea\(. par~iitQ
Land Use Site Rate Demand Demand Rate Demand Demand
Based on Rate from Equation Based on Rate fromEquation
Phase ~
NeW Cinema with Matinee (code 443)1 @se~O ~90 spaces/seat C 238 ] 226 0.260 spaces/seat C- 325 -"] 303
Phase 2
Retail (code 820 - 828)\ n,500-S\ 3.230 spaces/~ ,000 sq. ft. 44 23 3 970 spaces/~ ,000 SQ. ft. 54 ~8
Restaurant ~Code 835)1 ~O,OOO-s\ 9.080 spaces/~ ,000 sq. ft. 9~ ~6 6.960 spaces/~ ,000 SQ. ft. 70 n
Library (Est. City RecreaUon Ctr., Code 496)2 6,000-s\ 4 000 spaces/~ ,000 SQ. ft. 24 4 000 spaces/~ ,000 SQ. ft. 24
Office (Code 7~ ~ - 7~6)3 ~9,500-S\ 2.790 spaces/~ ,000 SQ. ft. 54 55 0.500 spacesf~ ,000 SQ. ft. ~O 0
fitneSS Center (Code 495)4 20,000-s\ 4 .370 spacesf~ ,000 SQ. ft. 87 9~ 4.370 spaces/tOOO sQ. ft. 87 9~
\-Iotel ~Code 3~ ~)\ 48-rooms o 8~0 spaces/room 39 65 ~ 030 spaces/room 49
con\erence" 6,OOO-s\
Table I'J. paII<ing Generali011 summa~ lor Pratoe Pall<' ye\m (feblUllfY 4, 2000)
\ paII<ing demand ,ales !rom Parldng Generation (Inslitule 01 T ,ansportalior1 Engineers, \9B7).
2. pall<ing demand ,ales, are nol available, used \llU Citj Recrealion cenler land uselrOm Park'lI9 GeneratiOn as an eslrmate
3. wee'day par\<ing demand rales Irom paII<ing Generation (Institule 01T ,ansportalion Engineers, \ 9B7), SaluldaY par'ing demand rales trom Shared Parkill9 (ULI, \9B3).
4 ~o Saturday rateS available lor fitneSS cenler, .elMay par\<ing demand rales \rom park'lI9 Generation (Inslilule 01 Transportalron En~neers, \9B7) used lor \rOIh weelrday and Salurdal
5. The par\<ing demand tor the conter- tacilitiUS .as _mud 10 be included ",'h rates tor \llU Holel (convenlion Hotel. Land Use corle 3\ I).
'2:54 pM 21'3100
T,;" np.n.x\s Parking
0000000000000000000 () () 00000000000000000000000 I
Table A4 Parking Accumulation by Project Component and by Time of Day - Yelm, WA
Cinema Retail Restaurant Library
Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday
Time % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand
6:00 AM 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0
7'00 AM 0% 0 0% 0 8% 3 3% 2 2% 2 2% 1 0% 0 0% 0
8:00 AM 0% 0 0% 0 18% 8 10% 5 5% 5 3% 2 0% 0 0% 0
9:00 AM 0% 0 0% 0 42% 18 30% 16 10% 9 6% 4 20% 5 20% 5
10:00 AM 0% 0 0% 0 68% 30 45% 24 20% 18 8% 6 30% 7 30% 7
11'00 AM 0% 0 0% 0 87% 38 73% 39 30% 27 10% 7 40% 10 40% 10
12:00 PM 30% 71 30% 98 97% 42 85% 46 50% 45 30% 21 50% 12 50% 12
1'00 PM 70% 166 70% 228 1% 0 95% 51 70% 64 45% 31 100% 24 100% 24
2:00 PM 70% 166 70% 228 97% 42 100% 54 60% 54 45% 31 100% 24 100% 24
JOO PM 70% 166 70% 228 95% 41 100% 54 60% 54 45% 31 100% 24 100% 24
4'00 PM 70% 166 70% 228 87% 38 90% 48 50% 45 45% 31 100% 24 100% 24
5:00 PM 70% 166 70% 228 79% 34 75% 40 70% 64 60% 42 100% 24 100% 24
6'00 PM 80% 190 80% 260 82% 36 65% 35 90% 82 90% 63 80% 19 80% 19
7'00 PM 90% 214 90% 293 89% 39 60% 32 100% 91 95% 66 20% 5 20% 5
8:00 PM 100% 238 100% 325 87% 38 55% 29 100% 91 100% 70 0% 0 0% 0
9:00 PM 100% 238 100% 325 61% 27 40% 21 100% 91 100% 70 0% 0 0% 0
10'00 PM 100% 238 100% 325 32% 14 38% 20 90% 82 95% 66 0% 0 0% 0
-
11'00PM 80% 190 80% 260 13% 6 13% 7 70% 64 85% 59 0% 0 0% 0
12:00 AM 70% 166 70% 228 0% 0 0% 0 50% 45 70% 49 0% 0 0% 0
Note Parking accumulation rates from Shared Parking (The Urban Land Institute. 1983) except for library and fitness which were both assumed to accummulate similar to a
conference faciltity to represent worst case conditions.
Trip gen.xls Parking
1 :03 PM 2/13/00
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Office Fitness Hotel
Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday Total Demand
Time % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand % of Peak Demand Full Project - Weekday Full Project - Saturday
6:00 AM 3% 2 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 65 90% 44 67 44
7'00 AM 20% 11 20% 2 0% 0 0% 0 85% 55 70% 35 72 40
8:00 AM 63% 35 60% 6 0% 0 0% 0 65% 42 60% 30 89 43
9'00 AM 93% 51 80% 8 50% 46 50% 46 55% 36 50% 25 165 103
10:00 AM 100% 55 80% 8 100% 91 100% 91 45% 29 40% 20 230 155
11 :00 AM 100% 55 100% 10 100% 91 100% 91 35% 23 35% 17 244 174
12:00 PM 90% 50 100% 10 100% 91 100% 91 30% 20 30% 15 331 292
1'00 PM 90% 50 80% 8 100% 91 100% 91 30% 20 30% 15 414 447
2:00 PM 97% 53 60% 6 100% 91 100% 91 35% 23 35% 17 454 451
3:00 PM 93% 51 40% 4 100% 91 100% 91 35% 23 40% 20 451 451
4'00 PM 77% 42 40% 4 100% 91 100% 91 45% 29 50% 25 436 451
5:00 PM 47% 26 20% 2 100% 91 100% 91 60% 39 60% 30 444 456
6:00 PM 23% 13 20% 2 100% 91 100% 91 70% 46 70% 35 476 504
roo PM 7% 4 20% 2 100% 91 100% 91 75% 49 80% 40 492 528
8:00 PM 7% 4 20% 2 100% 91 40% 36 90% 59 90% 44 I 520 507
9'00 PM 3% 2 0% 0 100% 91 20% 18 95% 62 95% 47 509 481
10:00 PM 3% 2 0% 0 50% 46 0% 0 100% 65 100% 49 445 461
11:00 PM 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 65 100% 49 324 376
12:00 AM 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 65 100% 49 277 326
Table A4 (cont.). Parking Accumulation by Project Component and by Time of Day - Yelm, WA
Note Parking accumulation rates from Shared Parking (The Urban Land Institute, 1983) except for library and fitness which were both assumed to accummulate similar to a
conference faciltity to represent worst case conditions.
Trip gen.xls Parking
1 :03 PM 2/13/00