East Gateway Traffic Impact AnalysisTraffic Impact Analysis
+� SCSI ALLIANCE
•r
4 CONSULTING SERVICES
Traffic Impact Analysis
Project Information
Project:
Yelm East Gateway
Prepared for: Evergreen Pacific Fund, LLC
Steve Guidinger
2724 Alki Avenue SW, #302
Seattle, WA 98116 -4704
Phone: 206.579.6222
stevenguidinger @msn.com
Reviewing Agency
Jurisdiction: City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
Yelm, WA 98597
Proiect Representative
Prepared by: SCJ Alliance
2102 Carriage St SW, Suite H
Olympia, WA 98502
360.352.1465
scjalliance.com
Contact:
George Smith, Senior Transportation Planner
Project Reference: SCJ #1470.01
Path: N: \Projects \1470 Evergreen Pacific Fund, LLC \1470.01 Yelm
Commercial EIS \Phase 01- Preliminary EIS \Traffic \Report \2014 -1117 Yelm
East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis.docx
SCJ Alliance November 2014
yelm East Gateway
CERTIFICATION
Traffic Impact Analysis
The technical material and data contained in this document were prepared under the supervision and
direction of the undersigned, whose seal, as a professional engineer licensed to practice as such, is
affixed below.
red by George Smith
Transportation Planner
Approv9XPerry A. Shea, PE
Principal
A.
WA
Ike
E«
0
a
a.��
IST
L
SO Alliance November 2014
Yelm East Gateway
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Traffic Impact Analysis
Page
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... ..............................3
1.1 Project Overview ......................................................................................... ..............................3
1.2 Study Context .............................................................................................. ..............................4
1.3 Long Range Planning Context ...................................................................... ..............................5
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................... ..............................7
2.1 Maximum Build -out as a Coordinated Development (Alternative 1) ......... ..............................7
2.2 Moderate Intensity Build -out as a Coordinated Development (Alternative 2) .........................7
2.3 No- Action Alternative (Alternative 3) ......................................................... ..............................7
2.4 Site Access System ....................................................................................... ..............................9
3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ........................................................ .............................12
3.1 Area Land Uses ........................................................................................... .............................12
3.2 Roadway Inventory ..................................................................................... .............................12
3.3 Public Transportation ................................................................................. .............................13
4. PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS ............................................. ............................... 15
4.1 Site - Generated Traffic Volumes ................................................................. .............................15
4.2 Site Traffic Distribution ............................................................................... .............................16
4.3 Traffic Assignment Scenarios ..................................................................... .............................17
5. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ...................................................... ............................... 21
5.1 Roadway Improvements ............................................................................ .............................21
5.2 Future Traffic Volumes ............................................................................... .............................21
6. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ................................................... ............................... 26
6.1 Intersection Level of Service ...................................................................... .............................26
6.2 Volume to Capacity Ratio ........................................................................... .............................27
6.3 Intersection Operations .............................................................................. .............................27
6.4 Stop Sign - Controlled Intersections ............................................................. .............................28
6.5 Signalized Intersections .............................................................................. .............................32
6.6 Site Driveways ............................................................................................ .............................33
7. LONG -RANGE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ............................................. ............................... 38
8. MITIGATION ................................................................................... .............................41
8.1 Developer Funded Off -site Infrastructure Improvements ......................... .............................42
8.2 Site Access and Circulation Improvements ................................................ .............................43
8.3 City of Yelm Traffic Facility Charge ( TFC) .................................................... .............................43
8.4 Phasing of On -Site and Off -Site Traffic Mitigation Improvements ............. .............................44
9. CONCLUSION .................................................................................. .............................46
SO Alliance
Page i
November 2014
Yelm East Gateway
LIST OF TABLES
Traffic Impact Analysis
Page
Table 1. Trip Generation Characteristics — PM Peak Hour .......................................... ............................... 15
Table 2. Project PM Trip Generation Summary .......................................................... ............................... 16
Table 3. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections .................................... ............................... 27
Table 4. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections ................................ ............................... 27
Table 5. Unsignalized Intersections — LOS Summary PM Peak Hour .......................... ............................... 31
Table 6. Signalized Intersections— LOS Summary PM Peak Hour ................................. .............................33
Table 7. Site Driveways — LOS Summary PM Peak Hour ............................................. ............................... 37
Table 8. LOS Summary 2035 PM Peak Hour with Alternative 1 .................................... .............................38
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure1. Site Vicinity Map ............................................................................................ ............................... 6
Figure 2. Parcels and Boundary Area ............................................................................. ..............................8
Figure 3. Uncoordinated Conceptual Access Plan ....................................................... ............................... 10
Figure 4. Coordinated Conceptual Access Plan ............................................................ ............................... 11
Figure 5. Existing PM Peak Hour Volumes ................................................................... ............................... 14
Figure 6. Site - Generated PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes — Alternative 1 ................... ............................... 18
Figure 7. Site - Generated PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes — Alternative 1 (Site Driveways) ....................... 19
Figure 8. 2035 Site - Generated PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes — Alternative 1 .......... ............................... 20
Figure 9. Projected 2020 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes — Alternative 1 ................... ............................... 23
Figure 10. Projected 2020 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes — Alternative 1 (Site Driveways) ..................... 24
Figure 11. Projected 2035 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes — Alternative 1 ................. ............................... 25
Figure 12. Proposed 2020 Alternative 1 Channelization Plan ........................................ .............................34
Figure 13. Proposed 2035 Alternative 1 Channelization Plan ........................................ .............................39
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A
Turning Movement Counts
Appendix B
Alternative 2 and 3 Volume Figures
Appendix C
Traffic Volume Calculations
Appendix D
Capacity Analysis Worksheets
SO Alliance November 2014
Page ii
Yelm East Gateway
1. INTRODUCTION
Traffic Impact Analysis
1.1 Project Overview
The East Gateway commercial area is comprised of approximately 46 acres of undeveloped property
located in the eastern portion of the City of Yelm's commercially -zoned district. The project area
includes seven distinct parcels of land owned by several independent property and business owners.
The potential build -out of the properties will be dependent upon market and economic factors, but it is
likely that these properties could realize their full development potential within the next 10 -15 years.
This report analyzes three build -out alternatives for potential impacts for a near -term (2020) and long -
range (2035) planning horizon.
This analysis is reviewing three potential development scenarios as described below:
1.1.1 Maximum Build -out as a Coordinated Development (Alternative 1)
This alternative is for development of the commercial area as a coordinated development and assumes
a 40% build -out on the site and up to approximately 800,000 square feet of shopping center uses. This
development scenario exceeds the coverage of the neighboring Walmart by approximately 10 %. This
scenario has a PM peak hour traffic volume potential of up to 2,000 new -to- network trip ends.
1.1.2 Moderate Intensity Build -out as a Coordinated Development (Alternative 2)
The moderate intensity alternative assumes a coordinated build -out of the site with approximately 25%
build out on the site and up to approximately 500,000 square feet of shopping center uses. This
development scenario reflects the upper range of development coverage typically seen in the City and
provides a moderate build -out of the properties. This scenario has a PM peak hour traffic volume
potential of up to 1,450 new -to- network trip ends.
1.1.3 No Action Alternative (Alternative 3)
The no- action alternative assumes that development would occur consistent with existing zoning and
would undergo environmental review on a project -by- project basis. Such projects would be subject to
site - specific mitigation and potential SEPA -based appeals, without coverage under the non - project,
Planned Action EIS process. Commercial properties would develop as single parcel sites. The ultimate
build out of the parcels is less predictable. The building area used for the no- action alternative is based
on the non - specific growth forecast used by TRPC and the City of Yelm in preparing the 2035 Regional
Transportation Plan. The employment growth projected for the project site in the current regional
forecast equates to approximately 229,000 -sf of retail building area. This scenario has a PM peak hour
traffic volume potential of up to 850 new -to- network trip ends.
1.1.4 Types of Uses
The project analysis of the alternatives was based on uses typically found in shopping centers and
commercial districts. This includes uses such as:
• Offices
• Banks (including drive through)
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 3
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
• Grocery
• Retail Shops
• Health /Fitness
• Auto Services
• Fast Food Restaurants (including drive through)
• Sit Down Restaurants
Although the land -use "shopping center" category was used to estimate site - generated traffic levels,
other mixes of specific land -uses could potentially yield higher trip generation. Since there is the
potential for both the maximum build -out and the moderate build -out to generate higher trips, in the
context of the traffic operational analysis, the highest vehicle trip threshold will be used to assess the
traffic characteristics and potential impacts to the adjacent and surrounding transportation system.
Using the highest vehicle trip threshold provides flexibility for the mix of uses within the moderate
density scenario without the risk of exceeding the "approved" trip generation potential.
Figure 1 illustrates the site vicinity and the transportation network serving the project area.
1.2 Study Context
This report evaluates the specific transportation impacts of the East Gateway area development
alternatives. This analysis determines the impacts of new development traffic on the existing and future
street network, determines and assesses the appropriate layout and design of the proposed public
street system, determines if the new development can meet acceptable traffic performance measures
and the City's regulatory standards for concurrency under the Growth Management Act, and identifies
appropriate traffic solutions and mitigation measures to accommodate the planned traffic growth and
development impacts. The study was prepared according to City of Yelm Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
guidelines as part of the required environmental review submittal for the proposed project. The
following intersections in the study area were analyzed:
• Creek Street -Bald Hills Road /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Bald Hills Road /Morris Road
• Grove Road/ Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Walmart Boulevard/ Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Walmart Driveway Access /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Creek Street /103rd Avenue
• Grove Road /103rd Avenue
• Walmart Boulevard /103rd Avenue
• Burnett Road /SR 510
• Killion Road /SR 510
• Cullens Road /SR 510
• Longmire Street /SR 510
• Mosman Street /SR 507
• First Street /SR 510
• Clark Road /SR 507
• 103rd Avenue /SR 507
• First Street /Rhoton Road /Railway Road
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 4
Yelm East Gateway
• 103rd Street /West Road
• First Street /Stevens Street
Traffic Impact Analysis
1.3 Long Range Planning Context
This analysis evaluates traffic conditions for two distinct planning horizons; 2020 and 2035. The 2020
analysis provides an evaluation of all of the study intersections to determine if the study intersections
will maintain acceptable operation per the City of Yelm's mobility standards.
The 2035 horizon has also been included to evaluate the ultimate needs of the site frontage and
driveway accesses in the context of the City of Yelm's general long -term vision for the corridor. An
important consideration is the planned completion of the SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop). While the final
Stage 2 completion horizon for the SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) is uncertain, regional and local
planning anticipates its completion well before the 2035 horizon. The initial Stage 1 of the SR 510
Alternate (Yelm Loop) was competed several years ago (SR 510 to Cullens Road) and is already providing
an important link in the City's long -range transportation system. The final Stage 2 will finish the loop
highway by extending the facility from Cullens Road to the SR 507 (Walmart Blvd) intersection. Upon
final completion, SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) will serve as an important part of the arterial system in
and around Yelm and will reduce congestion on Yelm Avenue through the City. Additionally, the City's
vision for Yelm Avenue (SR 507) is that it will remain a two -lane corridor (a single through capacity lane
in each direction —this does not preclude turn lanes as appropriate at intersections).
The 2035 analysis in this report provides a framework for the required lane configurations on Yelm
Avenue (SR 507), Grove Road and Walmart Boulevard to serve local access and regional travel with the
SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) completed.
Per direction from the City of Yelm, the roadway frontage and access requirements for the Yelm
Gateway East properties were determined by the 2035 analysis. The "ultimate" lane configurations and
recommended access plan for the 2035 horizon were then used as the basis of analysis for the 2020
scenario.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 5
Old Pt'
�i
W
u�
e�
2 Muklen Rd Sf
Nisqually Indian Reservation
Fort Lewis Military Reservation SUr,
'drj 5 Roy
Mock City
I
YeOm Hwy 5E
T O N Tod Leuris Mliitary Reservation
North Yelm
51G
Yelm
J
k
r
k.
Lin
gMcKenna
�P 1P
Project
Area
Rainier
507
14Sth Ave SE
+ �
SCJ ALLIANCE
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
Figure 1
Site Vicinity Map
Yelm East Gateway
Yelm, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
4-
Figure 1
Site Vicinity Map
Yelm East Gateway
Yelm, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
Yelm East Gateway
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Traffic Impact Analysis
The East Gateway commercial area consists of approximately 46 acres of undeveloped property in the
eastern portion of the City of Yelm's commercial district. The project area includes seven parcels of land
owned by several independent owners. The properties are situated mostly along the Yelm Avenue (SR
507) corridor, east of Yelm Creek and include areas just east of the Walmart Boulevard intersection.
Figure 2 shows the subject properties, boundary area and surrounding development and parcels.
The properties are located within a commercially- designated land -use area and could develop with a
variety of uses, such as general retail, restaurants, professional office, big -box facilities, and others that
are allowed by the City of Yelm code. The potential build -out of the properties will be dependent upon
market and economic factors but it is likely that these properties could realize their full development
potential within the next 10 -15 years.
2.1 Maximum Build -out as a Coordinated Development (Alternative 1)
This alternative is for development of the commercial area as a coordinated development and assumes
a 40% build -out on the site and up to approximately 800,000 square feet of shopping center uses. This
development scenario exceeds the coverage of the neighboring Walmart by approximately 10 %. While
this option may not be economically feasible, it demonstrates a future trend to provide high density
urban centers.
2.2 Moderate Intensity Build -out as a Coordinated Development (Alternative 2)
The moderate intensity alternative assumes a coordinated build -out of the site with approximately 25%
build out on the site and up to approximately 500,000 square feet of shopping center uses. This
development scenario reflects the upper range of development coverage typically seen in the City and
provides a moderate build -out of the properties.
2.3 No- Action Alternative (Alternative 3)
The no- action alternative assumes that development would occur consistent with existing zoning and
would undergo environmental review on a project -by- project basis. Such projects would be subject to
site - specific mitigation and potential SEPA -based appeals, without coverage under the non - project,
Planned Action EIS process. Commercial properties would develop as single parcel sites. This option
would achieve the lowest potential of build -out and would be restricted by a non - coordinated design of
the commercial properties. This would be considered a "strip" retail type scenario with parcel -by- parcel
development
2.3.1 Types of Uses
The project analysis of the alternatives was based on uses typically found in shopping centers and
commercial districts. This includes uses such as:
• Offices
• Banks (including drive through)
• Grocery
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 7
N
Y
07
7]
V
Y
iA
N
%-R ►A
A
Yelm Ave (SR 507)
Rala"ill, Rd
Yelm East Gateway
Figure 2 Yelm WA
1.18 Project Boundary and Parcels
SCJ ALLIANCE Traffic Impact Analysis
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
• Retail Shops
• Health /Fitness
• Auto Services
• Fast Food Restaurants (including drive through)
• Sit Down Restaurants
2.4 Site Access System
2.4.1 Uncoordinated Access Plan
The Yelm East Gateway project area is composed of multiple parcels with many different owners. If the
properties were to develop independently with no coordination (as described in the No- Action
alternative) each parcel would require access to the public road system. "Piecemeal" development
under the No- Action scenario would require more individual driveways onto Yelm Avenue (SR 507).
Denser driveway spacing could require variance from City of Yelm and WSDOT intersection spacing
criteria. Providing adequate circulation to the parcels would require left -turn access onto and off of
Yelm Avenue (SR 507) at each driveway however, many driveways may only be allowed right -turn
movements. Additionally customer interaction between parcels would require drivers to use the public
street to drive between separate businesses.
Specifically under the No- Action scenario it is anticipated that five full- access driveways onto Yelm
Avenue (SR 507) (in addition to Grove Road and Walmart Boulevard) would be required to serve the
subject properties. The Uncoordinated Conceptual Access Plan is shown on Figure 3.
2.4.2 Coordinated Access Plan
The Maximum Build -Out and Medium Build -Out scenarios each include coordination between parcels.
This will allow a comprehensive access plan to be designed and constructed with internal connections
between adjacent parcels. This will reduce the number of access points onto Yelm Avenue (SR 507) and
will allow for limited access (right- turn -only) at some driveways where internal connections would
provide drivers access to a controlled intersection with left -turn movements.
Under the coordinated development scenarios there are no full- access driveways proposed on Yelm
Avenue (SR 507) except via the northbound approach of the Grove Road intersection. The Coordinated
Conceptual Access Plan that applies to both the Maximum Build -out and Moderate Intensity Build -out
alternatives is shown on Figure 4.
2.4.3 Consistency with WSDOT and Yelm Policy
The WSDOT Olympic region access control manual designates Yelm Avenue (SR 507) to be under access
control Class 4 up to the eastern limits of the City. The project study limits fall within these limits. This
allows for driveway spacing of 250 feet. However, based on City and WSDOT input the driveways would
most likely not be allowed to provide left -turn movements into and out of the properties at this close
spacing.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 9
IE� NO
L _
W}
No Internal
,Roadway Connections
t Right -out only
t ■ .
Yelm East Gateway
��
Figure 3 Yelm, WA
Uncoordinated Conceptual Access Plan Traffic Impact Analysis
SCJ ALLIANCE
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
\I,�/
AV N
4
11
Internal Roadway
Connections
r,r■■■■■■■■■■■
—7)
f■ ■r■■■■■
■
II
A
■
■
IN
■■■■■■■■■■■■
■
■
■
i
■
■
■
■
4
ONE
N■■■■■■■■
IN■■ ■NO■■■ ■1
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Internal Roadway
Connections
■N■■■ ■NONE
i
IN
■■■■■■ ■■R ■R
LEGEND
REM Conceptual Access Network
Full Access
Right -Turn Only Access
i
Right -out
only
I� �$
Al
Yelm East Gateway
�� Figure 4 Yelm, WA
Coordinated Conceptual Access Plan Traffic Impact Analysis
SCJ ALLIANCE
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
1♦
1•
L
■
IN
IN
■
IN IS
■ ■NI■■■■■ ■r
IN
■r�
M
LEGEND
REM Conceptual Access Network
Full Access
Right -Turn Only Access
i
Right -out
only
I� �$
Al
Yelm East Gateway
�� Figure 4 Yelm, WA
Coordinated Conceptual Access Plan Traffic Impact Analysis
SCJ ALLIANCE
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
3.1 Area Land Uses
The project site has two family homes and outbuildings. Most of the property immediately surrounding
the site is undeveloped, with a few single family homes. A Walmart has been constructed adjacent to
the northeast portion of the site and Country Storage is located immediately to the west of Walmart.
3.2 Roadway Inventory
A comprehensive roadway survey was conducted to identify pre- existing conditions of the primary
traffic facilities serving the subject properties.
3.2.1 Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
The City of Yelm classifies Yelm Avenue (SR 507) as an Urban Arterial. SR 507 is a Highway of Regional
Significance (Non -HSS) and its state functional classification is R2, Rural -Minor Arterial. Mile Post (MP)
27.32 through MP 29.90 of SR 507 is located within the incorporated limits of the City. Yelm Avenue (SR
507) consists of a single lane in each direction, with a two -way left -turn lane between Third Street and
Creek Street /SR 507 /Bald Hills Road. Curb, gutter, sidewalks and bike lanes are provided along portions
of the road. The road has a posted speed limit of 35 mph west of Bald Hills Road and 45 mph east of
Bald Hills Road.
3.2.2 Yelm Avenue (SR 510)
SR 510 has a state functional classification of R2, Rural -Minor Arterial. It is a Highway of Regional
Significance (Non Highway of State Significance). The City classifies the roadway as an Urban Arterial.
The road runs from the east City limits to First Street. One lane in each direction is provided, with a two -
way left turn lane west of Longmire Street and between Edwards Street and First Street.
3.2.3 Grove Road SE
Grove Road is classified as an Urban Arterial. In the project vicinity, the roadway has a single lane in each
direction and narrow shoulders. Neither sidewalks nor bike lanes are provided.
3.2.4 Walmart Boulevard
Walmart Boulevard runs in a north -south direction between 103rd Avenue SE and SR 507. A single travel
lane in each direction is provided, with sidewalks and planter strips along the Walmart frontage. This
roadway alignment is part of the partially constructed SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) roadway that will
provide a direct arterial connection from SR 510 (Yelm Highway) at Mud Run Road SE to Yelm Avenue (SR
507) at the current Walmart Boulevard intersection.
3.2.5 Bald Hills Road SE
Bald Hills Road is a two -lane Urban Arterial with paved shoulders. Sidewalks and bike lanes are not
provided. In the study area the roadway has a posted speed limit of 40 mph.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 12
Yelm East Gateway
3.2.6 103rd Avenue NE
Traffic Impact Analysis
In the project vicinity, 103rd Avenue provides a single lane in each direction with narrow paved shoulders
and a posted speed limit of 25 mph. 103rd Avenue NE is classified as a Commercial Collector from Yelm
Avenue (SR 507) to NE Creek Street and as a Local Access Residential Street from NE Creek Street to
Canal Road SE.
3.2.7 Traffic Volume Data
The City of Yelm and Traffic Count Consultants provided evening peak period turning movement counts.
The counts were conducted on January 9, 2014 between 3:00 PM and 6:00 PM for the following
locations:
• Creek Street -Bald Hills Road /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Bald Hills Road /Morris Road
• Grove Road/ Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Walmart Boulevard/ Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Walmart Driveway Access /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
• Creek Street /103rd Avenue
• Grove Road /103rd Avenue
• Walmart Boulevard /103rd Avenue
Additionally, counts for the following locations were conducted between 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on
April 16, 2014:
• Burnett Road /SR 510
• Killion Road /SR 510
• Cullens Road /SR 510
• Longmire Street /SR 510
• Mosman Street /SR 507
• First Street /SR 510
• First Street /Stevens Street
• First Street /Rhoton Road /Railway Street
• Clark Road /SR 507
• 103rd Avenue /SR 507
• 103rd Avenue /West Road
These traffic volumes were used for the base year operations analysis and as the basis for future year
traffic volume projections. Figure 5 shows the existing 2014 traffic volumes for the study intersections.
The turning movement count diagrams are provided in Appendix A.
3.3 Public Transportation
Intercity Transit (IT) Route 94 travels between downtown Olympia and the Yelm Walmart. Buses run
east on SR 507 through the site to the Yelm Walmart, north on Walmart Boulevard, west on 103rd
Avenue, south on Creek Street and west on SR 507. Hourly service is provided on weekdays between
6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. On weekends, hourly service is between 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 13
o N I L-35
.J L+ —395
21
615—
1) Burnett Rd at
Yelm Ave
L 45
r, � �
Ln X480
.J 1 L, r 20
5-J I I-
670— Ln o Ln
f'4
0�
2) Killion Rd at
Yelm Ave
L 15
6J f'4 o X535
l L. r 2
201 `lir
740 �n o nl
5�
3) Cullens St at
Yelm Ave
7Ln 25
rLn 475 200
501 :Ln Yo 500 60�
6) 1st St at
Yelm Ave
67L-20 755
7o
251 'I I r
805 o Ln o
10-1
9) Clark Rd at
Yelm Ave
a
c
3
m
0
4) Longmire St at
Yelm Ave
n t_ 60
Ln o o X125 -1 rn
J 1 L. r25
951
1 r
265
45-1
0 0 0
ci
7) 1st
St at
Stevens
Hwy
t_ 10
o �n
830
r2
601 `I i r
870 -i o Ln
0-1
10) 103rd Ave at
Yelm Ave
V?49 8 16) Bald Hills Rd at 17) Grove Rd at 18) Walmart Blvd at 19) Yelm Ave at
`i4 LP4ss� sx Morris Rd Yelm Ave Yelm Ave Walmart Driveway Access
r 5
IRZ
5) 1st Stat I. A ' l�,�;% �,� -,1 :� -'
Mosman Ave
i
85
L 50
—140
F, -i °
—100
—15
o
Ln -i rn
X520
r 60
f j !
r-2
r 10
„) 1 �.
r 75
200
r
1051
1 r
D2
10~
r
201
1 r
145
-ZT 00
180
o o �n
205
o^
370
o �n o
10-1
�'
�'
280
o 00 �n
12) Creek St at
13) Grove Rd at
14) Walmart Blvd at
15) Bald Hills Rd /Creek St at
103rd Ave
103rd Ave
103rd Ave
Yelm Ave
4.
C
Ln Ln
Ln
rLn
rl
L-70
Ln
rLn
;-685 100
rr-JL-
L130
s
Q�C
Dol
—670
—715
G�
110
5-J
1051
401
15-1
520—
455—
590-
O
I
V?49 8 16) Bald Hills Rd at 17) Grove Rd at 18) Walmart Blvd at 19) Yelm Ave at
`i4 LP4ss� sx Morris Rd Yelm Ave Yelm Ave Walmart Driveway Access
r 5
IRZ
5) 1st Stat I. A ' l�,�;% �,� -,1 :� -'
Mosman Ave
i
O
Ln ;1IV
01 t r
Y
2� _i o o
1� r, o
m
8) 1st St /Rhoton Rd at
Railway Rd
L- 160 Ln r
5 -
55 `� i r
85 � Ln o Ln
10-
11) West Rd at
103rd Ave
r
i.
13 103rd Ave 14 xx— PI
XN
m '
G' a
i 1
t9
04 rA 410. f
i --rr
,:100
17 18 19 `y y
16
ea /ayills Ra
Project
Area
.% r -_
.J
Figure 5 Yelm East Gateway
W Existing 2014 PM Peak Hour Yelm, WA
SC.J ALLIANCE Traffic Volumes Traffic Impact Analysis
CONSULTING SERVICES
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
4. PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
The two project - related characteristics having the most effect on area traffic conditions are peak hour
trip generation and the directional distribution of traffic volumes on the surrounding roadway network.
4.1 Site - Generated Traffic Volumes
Project trip generation for each of the three alternatives was calculated using the trip generation rates
contained in the current edition of the Trip Generation report by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers. The Shopping Center land use (land use code 820) was determined to be applicable. The trip
generation rates used for this analysis are shown in Table 1.
A project such as a commercial center tends to attract a large amount of traffic from people already
driving on the area roadways. These trips are not new trips added to the local roadways (primary trips)
but represent "pass -by" trips according to the following definition:
Pass -by Trips are trips made as an intermediate stop from an origin to a primary destination (i.e.,
stopping to shop on the way home from work) by vehicles passing directly by the project driveway.
The new -to- network trip rate reflects an estimated 34% occurrence of "pass -by" vehicles for the
shopping center.
Table 1. Trip Generation Characteristics — PM Peak Hour
Fitted Curve PM Peak Hour Trip Rates
Land Use (LU) Unit Rate Pass -By % Enter % Exit
Shopping Center (LU 820) 1,000 sf Varies 34% 48% 52%
The total trip generation expected from the development is calculated by applying the square footage of
the shopping center uses in each of the alternatives to the appropriate trip generation rate. The total
project trip generation and new -to- network trip generation for each scenario are shown in Table 2. The
fitted curve equation for a shopping center (ITE land use code 820) was used to calculate the trip
generation of each alternative. Trip generation was reviewed and approved by the City of Yelm during
the traffic scoping process.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 15
Yelm East Gateway
Table 2. Project PM Trip Generation Summary
Traffic Impact Analysis
4.2 Site Traffic Distribution
The vehicle directional trip distribution to and from the site will be based primarily on:
• The area street system characteristics;
• Current travel patterns on the area roadways;
• The proposed access system for the project; and
• Locations of residential areas and shopping /commercial centers.
The Thurston Regional Planning Council (TRPC) model currently maintains a travel demand model that
incorporates all of Thurston County. TRPC created the area -wide transportation model with
cooperation from the local jurisdictions within the County. The model, developed using the Emme /3
software package, has been calibrated to accurately represent the existing vehicle travel patterns
throughout the entire county. The model provides significant detail in the City of Yelm area and has
been used extensively as a traffic forecasting tool for transportation studies in the City of Yelm.
In the transportation model, the county -wide transportation network is divided into "Traffic Analysis
Zones" (TAZ's). A Select Zone Analysis (SZA) was conducted for TAZ 534 to estimate the directional
distribution characteristics of project traffic. This feature of the Emme /3 software package allows all of
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 16
Fitted
New -To- Network
Site Plan
Units Curve
Total Trips
Pass-
Trips
Description Land Use (sf) Rate
In
Out
Total
By
In
Out
Total
No Action Alternative
Shopping
North Side
Center 105,333 5.89
298
322
620
211
196
213
409
Shopping
South Side
Center 123,667 5.59
332
359
691
235
219
237
456
Total
630
681
1311
446
415
450
865
Moderate Intensity Alternative
Shopping
North Side
Center 190,337 4.84
442
479
921
313
292
316
608
Shopping
South Side
Center 307,860 4.13
610
661
1271
432
403
436
839
Total
1052
1140
2192
745
695
752
1447
Highest Intensity Alternative
Shopping
North Side
Center 304,572 4.15
607
657
1264
430
400
434
834
Shopping
South Side
Center 492,576 3.54
837
907
1744
593
552
599
1151
Total
1444
1564
3008
1023
952
1033
1985
4.2 Site Traffic Distribution
The vehicle directional trip distribution to and from the site will be based primarily on:
• The area street system characteristics;
• Current travel patterns on the area roadways;
• The proposed access system for the project; and
• Locations of residential areas and shopping /commercial centers.
The Thurston Regional Planning Council (TRPC) model currently maintains a travel demand model that
incorporates all of Thurston County. TRPC created the area -wide transportation model with
cooperation from the local jurisdictions within the County. The model, developed using the Emme /3
software package, has been calibrated to accurately represent the existing vehicle travel patterns
throughout the entire county. The model provides significant detail in the City of Yelm area and has
been used extensively as a traffic forecasting tool for transportation studies in the City of Yelm.
In the transportation model, the county -wide transportation network is divided into "Traffic Analysis
Zones" (TAZ's). A Select Zone Analysis (SZA) was conducted for TAZ 534 to estimate the directional
distribution characteristics of project traffic. This feature of the Emme /3 software package allows all of
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 16
Yelm East Gateway
Traffic Impact Analysis
the traffic into and out of a particular zone to be isolated and shown separately from the rest of the
traffic on the network. This graphically shows the percentage of vehicles currently using each of the
available routes into and out of the area (Yelm Avenue (SR 507), Bald Hills Road, Grove Road, Walmart
Boulevard, etc.). From this information, regional distribution percentages were calculated for future
traffic from the proposed East Gateway project.
Previous review and analysis of the regional traffic distribution in the vicinity has shown that the model
underestimates the commercial traffic draw to /from the northeast (into Pierce County). Accordingly,
the regional distribution was adjusted for this study to be consistent with previous analysis for the area.
Specifically, the draw to /from west of Yelm (on SR 510, from the Lacey area) was reduced and the draw
to /from northeast of Yelm (via SR 507). The distribution was also "ground - truthed" by comparing to the
existing traffic volumes generated by the Walmart based on recent counts at the Walmart driveways.
4.3 Traffic Assignment Scenarios
The site - generated traffic was assigned to the area roadway network differently for the two analysis
horizon years (2020 and 2035). The differences are described below.
4.3.1 2020 horizon
The development traffic was assigned based on existing travel trends and includes only existing roadway
connections in the area. Specifically SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) and the Bald Hills Road Connector (Y-
2c) are not yet in place for this scenario. The site traffic distribution and assignment for the highest
traffic potential for the 2020 network is shown on Figures 6 and 7.
4.3.2 2035 horizon
Development traffic was assigned to the network assuming SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) and Y -2c (from
Yelm Avenue (SR 507) to Bald Hills Road) to be completed. These improvements are described in
section 5.1. These connections result in more site - generated traffic arriving from the loop roads and not
using Yelm Avenue (SR 507) directly to access the site. The site traffic distribution and assignment of the
highest traffic potential for the 2035 network is shown on Figure 8.
The site traffic distribution and assignment figures for the other two development scenarios are
provided in Appendix B. The traffic distribution and assignments were reviewed and approved by City
of Yelm staff.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 17
1) Burnett Rd at
Yelm Ave
60
r 21
58— �►
rn
2) Killion Rd at
Yelm Ave
3) Cullens St at
Yelm Ave
—91
r 103
87— r
Ln
rn
6) 1st St at
Yelm Ave
—238
r7
222— r
9) Clark Rd at
Yelm Ave
41
Z
ai
c
m
O
L- 10
�►
—81
77—
4) Longmire St at
Yelm Ave
c
O
Y
�J
5) 1st St at
Mosman Ave
7) 1st St at
Stevens Hwy
8) 1st St /Rhoton Rd at
Railway Rd
10) 103rd Ave at
Yelm Ave
11) West Rd at
103rd Ave
Project Trips
I
ry
X31
o m
L35
Pass -By Trips
r 21
Inbound Outbound Total
X23
511 512 1023
28—
r
21—
t
m
26-1
rn rn
New -to- Network Trips
N °
Inbound Outbound Total
953 1033 1986
z
oh
O
4.
vOC�
dr OW ?
os 6
40 .4eS,
` - 4V
287
r 134
267 —I r
N
12) Creek St at 13) Grove Rd at 14) Walmart Blvd at 15) Bald Hills Rd /Creek St at
103rd Ave 103rd Ave 103rd Ave Yelm Ave
• N N L-52 (48) r-- L-53
I 000 m L. X160( -167 X176( -95)
•.) i J ! 4 x89(83) x104(95) —333
481 I (44) 1001 -1 I r► (42) 651 ') i r► 361 -
�p ( -73) 173 o ( -93) 172
(29) 70-1 (39) 60� r
16) Bald Hills Rd at 17) Grove Rd at 18) Walmart Blvd at 19) Yelm Ave at
Morris Rd Yelm Ave Yelm Ave Walmart Driveway Access
�. Afr► ,
-r
Legend
ter. •=- z =. - - - -- .- -
� � Figure 6
qW 2020 PM Peak Hour Site - Generated
SC.J ALLIANCE Traffic Volumes - Alt 1
CONSULTING SERVICES
12 ��
4
Y
GJ
I' �J
k V
m
O
a
13 103rd Ave 14
XXX Site - Generated Project Trips
m (XXX)� Site - Generated Pass -By Trips
G 00 XX% Distribution Percentage
04
G �
JY„
All
•'o
19
N
Project
Area
ed /a yi//S Ra'
Yelm East Gateway
Yelm, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
Note
5% of the distribution was applied
internally between the north and south
side of the site. An additional 5% was
assigned as internal capture.
Legend
XXX Site - Generated Project Trips
(XXX) Site - Generated Pass -By Trips
XX Distribution Percentage
� +
SCJ ALLIANCE
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
Figure 7
PM Peak Hour Site - Generated
Project Trips - Alt 1 (Site Driveways)
;_
m -- m
L18
(27)
(28) 86-1-t
t
0
O M
l
�n
00 -z:r
�m
�I
18 (27)
20—'
t
.
ro�ect
(21) 59-1
ZL
N
Area
M
k i
t
t
00
00 _
N
In 00
c-I ...-
_
-
.�...
L53
Oo v
L52
(48) °—°
•"
o vi
_
X176 ( -95)
M m r, r 160 ( -167) r,
00
L35 (81)
j
r 104 (95)
X421
1
r89 (83)
223(-81)
321--o.
r
(44) 100-J
I r (
r
(42) 65-J
~I t r 325 li y 3
74 N
( -73) 173
(12) 23
Oo o v
( -93) 172
Ln �
(29) 70-1
N V
(39) 60�
� J -
Figure 7
PM Peak Hour Site - Generated
Project Trips - Alt 1 (Site Driveways)
;_
m -- m
L18
(27)
(28) 86-1-t
t
0
cn v
�n
00 -z:r
�m
�I
18 (27)
128► 85-J
35 -0/
e
Project Trips
Pass -By Trips
Inbound Outbound Total
511 512 1023
New -to- Network Trips
Inbound Outbound Total
953 1033 1986
Yelm East Gateway
Ye I m, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
N *� l
.�
y
• r.
a "7_
-13 iO3,# Ave# 14 •
if
aA
......... At.
- .25%►�,
Via, 41 -} - - 4b
c
ell }
3 0
• r�
16
s
�6
Legend
XXX —0- Site - Generated Project Trips
(XXX) --1P- Site - Generated Pass -By Trips
XX Distribution Percentage
-.90M. �
��
SCJ ALLIANCE
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
Yelm Ave ,
n
Project
Area
18%
—31
r 21
29— r
M
12) 103rd Ave at
Creek St
L 12
�o
(►
—11
10 —I•) t
38-1 o
a�
13) 103rd Ave at
Grove Rd
—227
;-52
209— r
a
14) 103rd Ave at 15) Yelm Ave at
Walmart Blvd Bald Hills Rd /Creek St
- 16) Bald Hills Rd at
19 25 Morris Rd
T
Project Trips
Pass -By Trips
Inbound Outbound Total
511 512 1023
New -to- Network Trips
Inbound Outbound Total
953 1033 1986
Figure 8
2035 PM Peak Hour Site - Generated
Traffic Volumes - Alt 1
/ L37 \
O n
—115
.1 j r-71
68: I*' t r
2) 125 oro c
12) 78- N
18) Yelm Ave at
Walmart Blvd
0'
(24')SS
—113(-84)
1 x87(60)
(22) 59--1 t r
30) 125— ,� c
(8) 43�
17) Yelm Ave at
Grove Rd
19) Yelm Ave at I
Walmart Driveway Access
Yelm East Gateway
Yelm, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
Yelm East Gateway
5. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Traffic Impact Analysis
5.1 Roadway Improvements
The City of Yelm's Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) 2013 -2019 includes a number of
projects in the study area:
Y -2c — Bald Hills to SR 507 —This project constructs a new collector street between Bald Hills
Road and the traffic signal at the SR 507 /SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) intersection.
SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) — Construction of this north loop provides a primary alternative for
traffic traveling through and around the City Center.
Bald Hills Road from City limits to 5 Corners —This project reconstructs Bald Hills Road to a
three -lane facility between the Western Chehalis Railroad and its intersection with Yelm Avenue
(SR 507).
5.2 Future Traffic Volumes
The traffic volume forecasts for the study intersections were prepared using the TRPC travel demand
model. The TRPC model reflects the planned household and employment growth predicted by the City
for over the long -term planning horizon.
5.2.1 2020 Horizon
For the 2020 horizon, the "background" area -wide traffic growth rate was determined by the growth
trends calculated from model output. Specifically, for the 2020 horizon a 2.5% annual growth rate was
used for SR 507 and SR 510, and 1% annual growth rate for all other roadways in the study area. The
growth rates were applied to the existing traffic counts collected for the area. The site - generated traffic
volumes for the three development alternatives were added to the background traffic volumes to
calculate the three total traffic assignments for the study.
5.2.2 2035 Horizon
By the 2035 horizon additional roadway connections planned within the City are anticipated to be
completed. These new connections will have a notable effect on traffic flows within the localized study
area. The current TRPC 2035 model scenario was used as the baseline for calculating the traffic shifts in
the area. The 2035 model includes all of the planned improvements in the current Regional
Transportation Plan. Specific improvements within the study area that will affect 2035 travel patterns
are listed below:
• Completion of the entire SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) from Mud Run Road at Yelm Avenue (SR
507) to the Walmart Boulevard intersection at Yelm Avenue (SR 507).
• Y -1 Loop (Thurston Highlands area) from Killion Street at Yelm Avenue to SR 507 south of Yelm.
• Y -2c from Yelm Avenue (SR 507) at Walmart Boulevard to Bald Hills Road.
The spacing between the Grove Road and WalMart Boulevard intersection is approximately 700 -feet
and it is doubtful the Washington State Department of Transportation will allow traffic signal control at
this intersection due to insufficient spacing for vehicle queuing between intersections. Therefore, it is
anticipated intersection control will include a roundabout. Construction of a modern roundabout will
improve the intersection operations by decreasing speeds and reducing collisions and traffic delays.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 21
Yelm East Gateway
Traffic Impact Analysis
To estimate background traffic volume conditions, the TRPC model was used to predict changes in the
traffic patterns associated with the new connections. Specifically the 2035 volume scenarios were
calculated by growing the study intersections by the global growth trends used for the 2020 horizon and
adjusting the traffic flows to account for the localized traffic re- assignment caused by the Y -2c and SR
510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) connections.
The 2020 total traffic assignment for the highest traffic scenario is provided on Figures 9 and 10. The
total traffic assignment for the 2035 horizon is shown on Figure 11. The total traffic assignment for the
other scenarios is provided in Appendix B. Traffic volume calculations for the study intersections are
shown in Appendix C.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 22
o m I L45
-) L+ —505
51
755—
1) Burnett Rd at
Yelm Ave
Ln
L 45
,n Ln -4 610
.j 1 L. r 45
51 'lir
825— Ln o Ln
45-1 `4 -i ^
2) Killion Rd at
Yelm Ave
L 15
o Ln o X 700
«) 1 L. r 5
201
930 L o r
5-1
3) Cullens St at
Yelm Ave
o L25
0 ° ° 640
�) 1 L. r 335
501 'I I r
665 o Ln Ln
65—� �rnm
� m
6) 1st St at
Yelm Ave
L-20
N Ln o° —1105
1 L. r 80
251 `I i r
1150— o Ln Ln
10 1 00
9) Clark Rd at
Yelm Ave
4
Z
c
3
m
O
•�.'y
4) Longmire St at
Yelm Ave
o t-85
0 -i ° X135
J 1 L. r25
1001 -1 t r
280 Ln o o
50-1 mmm
ri
7) 1st St at
Stevens Hwy
r L 10
� o Ln — 1195
JIL. r5
651
1230— o
0-1
10) 103rd Ave at
Yelm Ave
5) 1st St at
Mosman Ave
O
8
4. P�
'°cAS O
J ` OOS 6
4-
. `
410
41f
10
.� ! r90
-a ,R
01 '� 1 r oc
5 � in in o i
5 oN m
8) 1st St /Rhoton Rd at * ,
Railway Rd
0 L 190
n`ni m '45
!� r5 -
60
100 'L o n -
10-
11) West Rd at
103rd Ave
11 12
X180
n o
0°0 °
1125
—130
—15
0 o
° M °
L-55
—885
-•_ _
r85
fj !
r5
r10
„) 1
x215
240—
`1 r
1101
'1 1 r
10—
`1 r
201
`1 1 r
155-1
- 0
210—
o o �n
270-1
° -
695
Ln o Ln
O1
40-1
N
295
N
12) Creek St at
13) Grove Rd at
14) Walmart Blvd at
15) Bald Hills Rd /Creek St at
103rd Ave
103rd Ave
103rd Ave
Yelm Ave
L 175
L 160
�n o
N °
�n o
0 rn
X760
rjS
X870
L140
`J +
.I ! 1.
x170
x200
.� L.
—1155
1651
Dol
1501
`� 1 r
2151
`� 1 r
451
jLn
100-1
rn -1
100-1
X10 0
16) Bald Hills Rd at
17) Grove Rd at
18) Walmart Blvd at
19) Yelm Ave at
Morris Rd
Yelm Ave
Yelm Ave
Walmart Driveway Access
- +�
-,7•' ,.
.. .�: �
� { fir. ,�
•, �•
• -
- r
r� .. r`io•
aw.
I
r �
i� ! • ii 7
-
.��: „M1
LEGEND
11 12
16
13 103rd Ave 14 xx— PI
m '
i 1
f6
04 i --rr
Y3.�• < <i 410. f �7
Of :� 7
17 18 19 `s#j y
- • 4-Y 4
_ � I
0 Bd�a "'ills Ra
Project
Area
J _
�J-0.
s+
Figure 9 Yelm East Gateway
Projected 2020 PM Peak Hour Yelm, WA
SC.J ALLIANCE Traffic Volumes - Alt 1 Traffic Impact Analysis
CONSULTING SERVICES
++
of -
_
Y
16
13 103rd Ave 14 xx— PI
m '
i 1
f6
04 i --rr
Y3.�• < <i 410. f �7
Of :� 7
17 18 19 `s#j y
- • 4-Y 4
_ � I
0 Bd�a "'ills Ra
Project
Area
J _
�J-0.
s+
Figure 9 Yelm East Gateway
Projected 2020 PM Peak Hour Yelm, WA
SC.J ALLIANCE Traffic Volumes - Alt 1 Traffic Impact Analysis
CONSULTING SERVICES
R
:k
--
SCJ ALLIANCE
CONSULTENC, SERVICES
G
Parcel A Parcel C
North Driveway North Driveway
3
_ Parcel C
Pa South Driveway =
South Driveway
Figure 10
Projected 2020 PM Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes - Alt 1 (Site Driveways)
N n
.I.. 1 �► 1-45
T M -
r3
.n
i
.4
Yelm East Gateway
Ye I m, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
.
or
1-115
x925
M m
N N
r
r 215
j
1-175
_ - ,n o
N m N
x760
-- X1205
- ;-170
r
'1tf
o O Ln
mN
Figure 10
Projected 2020 PM Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes - Alt 1 (Site Driveways)
N n
.I.. 1 �► 1-45
T M -
r3
.n
i
.4
Yelm East Gateway
Ye I m, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
0
1-115
x925
r
r 215
j
Im _ :.605
is 100
N W L-n O
���
Figure 10
Projected 2020 PM Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes - Alt 1 (Site Driveways)
N n
.I.. 1 �► 1-45
T M -
r3
.n
i
.4
Yelm East Gateway
Ye I m, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
N
dN E .
P �
�a16 4,
S�
14 _41
LT
14 _41
g [G
k
j
r
4f
- r
Figure 11
1.8 Projected 2035 PM Peak Hour
SCJ ALLIANCE Traffic Volumes - Alt 1
CONSULTMC, SERVICES
L-40
—200 °m m 00 X130
r90 .1 1 r5
245 r 1251 1
175 o N 200 o r
55-� ° N
12) 103rd Ave at 13) 103rd Ave at
Creek St Grove Rd
L5 L60
ui min —15 r�p
—695
,J 1 L. r10 r70
10 � � 1 r 400 `1 r
320 �m� 310 °goo
14) 103rd Ave at 15) Yelm Ave at
Walmart Blvd Bald Hills Rd /Creek St
0 o
0 u
m m
1
2301
15-1
� m
' 16) Bald Hills Rd at 17) Yelm Ave at
19 a.
Morris Rd Grove Rd
n o o L635
m m —660 rVL. L160 r80 —1290
951 V�c 501
485 1130 90-4
18) Yelm Ave at 19) Yelm Ave at
Walmart Blvd Walmart Driveway Access
LEGEND
XX— PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Yelm East Gateway
Yelm, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
6. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
6.1 Intersection Level of Service
The acknowledged source for determining overall capacity for arterial segments and independent
intersections is the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). For signalized and stop sign - controlled
intersections, the HCM 2010 methodology was used. For analysis of "modern roundabout"
intersections, the Sidra analysis methodology was used. Capacity analyses were completed for the base
year and projected 2020 PM peak hour traffic volume scenarios for all intersections. Capacity analyses
were completed for 2035 horizon for the project frontage area intersections only.
Capacity analysis results are described in terms of Level of Service (LOS). LOS is a qualitative term
describing operating conditions a driver will experience while traveling on a particular street or highway
during a specific time interval. It ranges from A (very little delay) to F (long delays and congestion). The
intersections in this study are held to the following LOS standards adopted by the City:
In all residential zones, LOS C
In all commercial and light industrial zones, LOS D
In the urban core, generally between Edwards Street and 4t" Street and Mosman Avenue and
West Road, LOS F is recognized as an acceptable level of service where mitigation to create
traffic diversions, alternate routes and modes of transportation are being planned, funded and
implemented. The LOS standard for the urban core area shall not preclude the City's ability to
require necessary safety improvements of intersections impacted by new development.
6.1.1 Intersection Operations
Level of Service calculations for intersections determine the amount of "control delay" (in seconds) that
drivers will experience while proceeding through an intersection. Control delay includes all deceleration
delay, stopped delay and acceleration delay caused by the traffic control device. The Level of Service is
directly related to the amount of delay experienced. For Concurrency Review, the City uses the total
average delay of the intersection and not individual movements.
For intersections under minor street stop -sign control, the LOS of the most difficult movement (typically
the minor street left -turn) represents the intersection level of service for purposes of assessing potential
impacts. However, the Concurrency Review threshold is applied to the intersection average LOS.
The following tables show the Level of Service criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 26
Yelm East Gateway
Table 3. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Traffic Impact Analysis
Level of Service
Average Control Delay (seconds /vehicle)
A
<_ 10
B
> 10 -20
C
> 20 -35
D
> 35 -55
E
> 55 -80
F
> 80
Table 4. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections
Level of Service
Average Control Delay (seconds /vehicle)
A
<_ 10
B
> 10 -15
C
> 15 -25
D
> 25 -35
E
> 35 -50
F
> 50
6.2 Volume to Capacity Ratio
Another measure of the function of a signalized intersection is the "degree of saturation" which is
typically presented as the "volume to capacity" (v /c) ratio. Many factors affect the volume of traffic an
intersection can accommodate during a specific time interval. These factors include the number of
lanes, lane widths, the type of signal phasing, the number of parking maneuvers on the adjacent street,
etc. Based on these factors, the intersection (or individual lane group) is determined to have a total
vehicle carrying capacity "c" for the analysis period. The analysis period volume "v" is compared to the
calculated carrying capacity and presented as a ratio. If the v/c ratio is below 1.0, the demand volume is
less than the maximum capacity. If the v/c ratio is over 1.0, the demand volume is exceeding the
available capacity.
6.3 Intersection Operations
The analysis was conducted for the following three traffic volume scenarios:
• Existing 2014 traffic volumes
• Projected 2020 traffic volumes with the Yelm East Gateway project (three development
alternatives)
• Projected 2035 traffic volumes (using highest traffic development scenario only)
The capacity analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix D. Following is a description of the level of
service analysis of the study intersections for the scenarios listed above.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 27
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
6.4 Stop Sign - Controlled Intersections
Intersection analysis for stop controlled intersections was performed using the Highway Capacity
Manual output for the Synchro software. Synchro incorporates the methodology of the current
Highway Capacity Manual and is used by the City of Yelm to review operating conditions for unsignalized
intersections. The results identified below represent the average LOS condition for the intersection as a
whole and not by specific traffic movement.
6.4.1 Burnett Road /SR 510
This is a tee intersection with stop sign control for Burnett Road. The concurrency standard for this
location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is projected to remain an LOS A in
all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.2 Cullens Road /Yelm Avenue (SR 510)
This intersection has stop sign control for the north and south approaches on Cullens Road. The
concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is
projected to remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.3 Longmire Street /Yelm Avenue (SR 510)
This intersection has stop sign control for the north and south approaches on Longmire Street. The
concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is
projected to remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.4 1st Street / Mosman Avenue
This intersection is made up of two slightly offset tee intersections, with stop control on the east and
west approaches of Mosman Avenue. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS F. This
intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is projected to remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build
alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.5 First Street /Stevens Street
This intersection has stop control for the east and west approaches on Stevens Street. Both roads
provide a single lane in each direction. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS F. This
intersection currently operates at an LOS D and is projected to operate at an LOS E in the 2020 scenario
for the highest traffic threshold. This intersection has experienced a change in volume patterns now
that it provides an alternative route across 1St Street. The change in volume can be accommodated by
converting this intersection to all -way stop - control. Under all -way stop - control, this intersection is
projected to operate at an LOS C for all of the build alternatives.
6.4.6 1st Street /Rhoton Road /Railway Road
This intersection has stop control for the east and west approaches on Railway Road. The concurrency
standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is projected to
remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 28
Yelm East Gateway
6.4.7 103rd Avenue /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
Traffic Impact Analysis
This intersection has stop control on the north and south approaches of 103rd Avenue. The concurrency
standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is projected to
remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.8 West Road /103rd Avenue
This intersection has stop control on the north and south approaches of West Road. The concurrency
standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS B. It is projected to
operate at an LOS C in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.9 Creek Street /103rd Avenue
This is a tee intersection with stop control for Creek Street. The concurrency standard for this location is
LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is projected to remain an LOS A in all of the
2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.10 Grove Road /103rd Avenue
This is a four -way intersection under all -way stop - control. The concurrency standard for this location is
LOS C. This intersection currently operates at an LOS B and is projected to remain an LOS B for the 2020
Alt 2 and Alt 3 build alternatives. The intersection is projected to operate at an LOS C in the 2020 Alt 1
build alternative. No mitigation is required.
6.4.11 Walmart Boulevard /103rd Avenue
This tee intersection has stop sign control on the south approach of Walmart Boulevard. The
concurrency standard for this location is LOS C. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is
projected to remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.12 Bald Hills Road /Morris Road
This is a tee intersection with stop control on the south approach of Morris Road. The concurrency
standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A and is projected to
remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.4.13 Grove Road /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This is a tee intersection with stop control on the north approach of Grove Road. The concurrency
standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A. For the 2020 build
alternatives, a fourth leg (south approach) of the intersection will be constructed to provide access into
the project area south of Yelm Avenue (SR 507). Leaving the north and south approaches as stop
controlled for the 2020 build alternatives, the intersection is projected to operate at an LOS F condition
during the PM peak traffic period.
This location will serve as one of the primary access points for the proposed development and stop
control will not accommodate the projected traffic volumes for any of the development scenarios.
Construction of a modern roundabout will improve the operations for conditions with the highest traffic
potential to an LOS D. The Alt 2 build alternative is projected to operate at an LOS B, while the Alt 3
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 29
Yelm East Gateway
Traffic Impact Analysis
build alternative is projected to operate at an LOS A. The other type of intersection control to consider
is the installation of a traffic signal control system. This is a traditional method to provide controlled
access while mitigating significant delay impacts to the cross street traffic. However, given the close
proximity of this location to the downstream signal system at the Walmart intersection, this type of
traffic control will not be permitted by WSDOT. A description of the merits and impacts associated with
a modern roundabout versus a signalized system is provided below.
Both a modern roundabout and a traffic signal system could be designed at this location to meet
acceptable level of service standards. However, a traffic signal would require widening Yelm Avenue (SR
507) further west of the intersection to accommodate vehicle storage. At roundabouts vehicles only
turn right to enter the intersection and left -turn lanes are not required. Also vehicles are generally
continuously moving which reduces the need for widening to accommodate queued vehicles.
A modern roundabout would also provide an opportunity for vehicles to enter or exit right- turn -only
(RTO) driveways on Yelm Avenue (SR 507) by performing a U -turn at the roundabout. For example a
vehicle headed westbound on Yelm Avenue (SR 507) wishing to enter a RTO driveway on the south side
of Yelm Avenue (SR 507) could U -turn at Grove Road and enter the driveway.
Modern roundabouts have been shown to experience much lower crash rates than comparable traffic
signals. Data provided by FHWA indicate that an intersection converting from traffic signal to
roundabout experiences, on average, a 48% reduction in total vehicle crashes and a 78% reduction in
injury crashes.
For the reasons described above a modern roundabout is proposed as the preferred intersection control
alternative at this location.
6.4.14 Walmart Driveway Access /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This is a tee intersection with stop control on the north approach, which is the Walmart Driveway
Access. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an
LOS A and is projected to remain an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
Table 5 summarizes the operational results for the stop sign - controlled intersections.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 30
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
Table S. Unsignalized Intersections — LOS Summary PM Peak Hour
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 31
Projected
Projected
Projected
Concurrency
Projected
2020 Alt 1
2020 Alt 2
2020 Alt 3
Standard
Existing 2014
2020 Alt 1
with Imp
with Imp
With Imp
Worst
Worst
Worst
Worst
Worst
Movement
Movement
Movement
Movement
Movement
Intersection
Intersection
Intersection
Intersection
Intersection
Intersection
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Burnett Rd at
D
C(22)
D (33)
D (33)
D (30)
D (29)
Yelm Ave
A (1)
A (1)
A (1)
A (1)
A (1)
Cullens St at
(E 39)
F(76)
F(76)
F(70)
F(64)
Yelm Ave
D
A (1)
A (1)
A (1)
A (1)
A (1)
Longmire St at
D
D (35)
F(108)
F(108)
F(77)
F(53)
Yelm Ave
A (2)
A (3)
A (3)
A (3)
A (2)
1St St at
C(24)
E(43)
E(43)
E(37)
D (33)
Mosman Ave
F
A (5)
A (5)
A (5)
A (5)
A (5)
1St St at
F(50)
F(108)
C (24)1
C (23)1
C (22)1
Stevens Hwy
F
D (25)
E(49)
C (18)1
C (17)1
C (17)1
1St St /Rhoton Rd
B (12)
B (14)
B (14)
B (14)
B (13)
at Railway Rd
D
A (2)
A (3)
A (3)
A (3)
A (3)
103rd Ave at
F(93)
F(300+)
F(300+)
F(300+)
F(253)
Yelm Ave
D
A (1)
A (4)
A (4)
A (4)
A (3)
West Rd at
D
C(24)
D (32)
D (32)
D (30)
D (28)
103rd Ave
B (13)
C (17)
C (17)
C (16)
B (15)
Creek St at
D
B (12)
B (14)
B (14)
B (14)
B (13)
103rd Ave
A (3)
A (4)
A (4)
A (4)
A (3)
Grove Rd at
B (12)
C (21)
C (21)
C (17)
B (15)
103rd Ave
C
B (11)
C (18)
C(18)
B (15)
B (13)
Walmart Blvd at
C
B (11)
B (12)
B (12)
B (11)
B (11)
103rd Ave
A (5)
A (6)
A (6)
A (5)
A (5)
Bald Hills Rd at
C (17)
D (30)
D (30)
D (25)
C(22)
Morris Rd
D
A (3)
A (5)
A (5)
A (4)
A (3)
Grove Rd at
C(24)
F(300+)
F (101)3
C(25 )3
C (17)3
Yelm Ave
D
A (1)
F (Error)'
D (32)3
B (14)3
A (7)3
Walmart Driveway
C(23)
F(60)
F(60)
E(48)
E(38)
Access at
D
A (2)
A (3)
A (3)
A (3)
A (2)
Yelm Ave
1) Convert intersection
to all -way stop control
2) Error given in software as a
result of excessive
delay
3) Includes
implementation of a Modern Roundabout
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 31
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
6.5 Signalized Intersections
6.5.1 Killion Road /Tahoma Boulevard SE /SR 510
This is a four approach intersection under traffic signal control. The concurrency standard for this
location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A. It is projected to operate at an LOS B
in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.5.2 First Street /SR 507 /SR 510
This is a four approach intersection under traffic signal control. The concurrency standard for this
location is LOS F. This intersection currently operates at an LOS C. It is projected to operate at an LOS E
in the 2020 Alt 1 and Alt 2 build alternatives. For the 2020 Alt 3 build alternative, this intersection is
projected to operate at an LOS D. No mitigation is required.
6.5.3 Clark Road /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This is a four approach intersection under traffic signal control. The concurrency standard for this
location is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS A. It is projected to operate at an LOS B
in all of the 2020 build alternatives. No mitigation is required.
6.5.4 Bald Hills Road /Creek Street /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This is a four -leg intersection under signal control. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS D.
This intersection currently operates at an LOS C. It is projected to operate at an LOS D in the 2020 Alt 1
and Alt 2 build alternatives. For the 2020 Alt 3 build alternative, this intersection is projected to remain
at an LOS C. No mitigation is required.
6.5.5 Walmart Boulevard /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This is currently a three -leg intersection under signal control. The concurrency standard for this location
is LOS D. This intersection currently operates at an LOS B. For the 2020 build alternatives, a fourth leg
(south approach) will be constructed. Without further improvements, the 2020 highest traffic potential
scenario is projected to operate at an LOS F condition. Construction of additional eastbound and
westbound through lanes through the project area and a southbound through lane is projected to
improve the level of service of the 2020 highest traffic build alternative to an LOS C. The 2020 Alt 2 build
alternative is also projected to operate at an LOS C with these improvements, while the 2020 Alt 3 build
alternative is projected to operate at an LOS B.
Table 6 summarizes the operational results for the signal - controlled intersections.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 32
Yelm East Gateway Traffic Impact Analysis
Table 6. Signalized Intersections — LOS Summary PM Peak Hour
Projected Projected Projected
Concurrency Projected 2020 Alt 1 2020 Alt 2 2020 Alt 3
Standard Existing 2014 2020 Alt 1 with Imp with Imp With Imp
LOS (Delay) LOS (Delay) LOS (Delay) LOS (Delay) LOS (Delay)
Intersection Intersection Intersection Intersection Intersection
Intersection Average Average Average Average Average
Killion Rd at D A (9) B (12) B (12) B (11) B (10)
Yelm Ave
1St St at F C(28) E(75) E(75) E(63) D (51)
Yelm Ave
Clark Rd at D A (9) B (15) B (15) B (13) B (11)
Yelm Ave
Bald Hills Rd at D C(25) D (54) D (54)4 D (40 )4 C(35 )4
Yelm Ave4
Walmart Blvd at D B (10) F(100) D (41) C(27) B (17)
Yelm Ave
4) HCM 2000 methodology used to accommodate Non -NEMA phasing
6.6 Site Driveways
Analysis for the site driveways was prepared based on a conceptual development plan for the overall
project. The driveway volumes represent equal distribution of site development traffic based on the
proposed access system. Individual developments that locate within the site may have actual trip
generation characteristics higher or lower than the averages represented in this analysis. Turn lane
locations were identified based on these assumptions to provide optimum accessibility to and within the
site while creating the least friction on the public street system (Yelm Avenue (SR 507), Walmart
Boulevard, Grove Road and the future Y -2c connection). The proposed roadway and intersection
geometrics for the site driveways and public intersections adjacent to the site that were assumed for
this analysis are shown on Figure 12.
As individual developments are advanced within the context of the overall plan, the driveway turn lanes
and storage lengths will be defined to the satisfaction of the City of Yelm and WSDOT. The following is a
description of the operating conditions expected with the proposed driveway access locations and
configurations.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 33
r
r?
W �f� Q E y
t.
n
c
6
Legend
Existing Roadway
Existing Channelization
Proposed Roadway
Proposed Channelization
SC:J ALLIANCE
t.ONSULTING SERVICES
�t
Figure 12
Proposed 2020 Alt 1
Channelization Plan
T
i
H
�i
i
fI,
M -'A
Yelm Gateway EIS
Yelm, WA
Traffic Impact Analysis
Yelm East Gateway
6.6.1 Grove Road /North Parcel A Driveway
Traffic Impact Analysis
This will be a tee intersection with stop control on the east approach. The concurrency standard for this
location is LOS D. This intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in all of the 2020 build
alternatives.
6.6.2 Grove Road /South Parcel A Driveway
This will be a four approach intersection with stop control on the east and west approaches. The west
approach serves an existing mini storage facility. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS D.
This intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives.
6.6.3 Parcel D Driveway /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This will be a tee intersection with stop control on the south approach. The concurrency standard for
this location is LOS D. In Alternatives 1 and 2, this intersection is projected to be a "right -in, right -out
(RIRO) driveway. For Alternative 3 this intersection is projected to be full access since there would be no
planned connectivity within the adjacent parcels. This intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in
2020 for Alternatives 1 and 2. For Alternative 3 it is projected to operate at an LOS B.
6.6.4 Parcel B Driveway /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This will be a tee intersection with stop control on the north approach. The concurrency standard for
this location is LOS D. For Alternative 3 this intersection is projected to be full access since there would
be no planned connectivity within the adjacent parcels. In Alternatives 1 and 2, this intersection would
not be constructed, as access is provided along Yelm Avenue (SR 507) in other locations and there is
connectivity through the parcels. This intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in 2020
Alternative 3.
6.6.5 Parcel C Driveway /Parcel F Driveway /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This will be a four approach intersection with stop control on the north and south approaches. The
concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. In Alternatives 1 and 2, this intersection is projected to
be a RIRO for the north and south approaches. For Alternative 3 this intersection is projected to be full
access since there would be no planned connectivity within the adjacent parcels. This intersection is
projected to operate at an LOS A in 2020 for Alternatives 1 and 2. For Alternative 3 it is projected to
operate at an LOS B.
6.6.6 Parcel F North Driveway /Walmart Boulevard
This will be a four approach intersection with stop control on the east and west approaches. The west
approach serves the existing Walmart. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. This
intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives.
6.6.7 Parcel F South Driveway /Walmart Boulevard
This will be a four approach intersection with stop control on the east and west approaches. The west
approach serves the existing Walmart. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. This
intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 35
Yelm East Gateway
6.6.8 Parcel G North Driveway /Y -2c Extension
Traffic Impact Analysis
This will be a four approach intersection with stop control on the east and west approaches. This
intersection will initially be an internal intersection serving the development. It will be constructed to fit
within the planned Y -2c improvement. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. This
intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives.
6.6.9 Parcel G South Driveway /Y -2c Extension
This will be a four approach intersection with stop control on the east and west approaches. This
intersection will initially be an internal intersection serving the development. It will be constructed to fit
within the planned Y -2c improvement. The concurrency standard for this location is LOS D. This
intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives.
6.6.10 Parcel G Driveway /Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
This will be a tee intersection with stop control on the south approach. The concurrency standard for
this location is LOS D. This intersection is planned as a right -out only in all three alternatives. This
intersection is projected to operate at an LOS A in all of the 2020 build alternatives.
Table 7 summarizes the operational results for the site driveway intersections.
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 36
Yelm East Gateway
Table 7. Site Driveways — LOS Summary PM Peak Hour
Traffic Impact Analysis
Intersection
Concurrency
Standard
Projected
2020 Alt 1
with Imp
LOS (Delay)
Worst
Movement
Intersection
Average
Projected
2020 Alt 2
with Imp
LOS (Delay)
Worst
Movement
Intersection
Average
Projected
2020 Alt 3
With Imp
LOS (Delay)
Worst
Movement
Intersection
Average
Grove Rd at
B (14)
B (12)
B (10)
North Parcel A Driveway
D
A (4)
A (3)
A (2)
Grove Rd at
C(23)
C(15)
B (11)
South Parcel A Driveway
D
A (5)
A (3)
A (2)
Parcel D Driveway at
C(20)
C (16)
F(189)
Yelm Ave
D
A (1)
A (1)
B (13)
Parcel B Driveway at
D
N/A
N/A
D (30)
Yelm Ave
A (1)
Parcel C/F Driveways at
C (17)
B (14)
F(143)
Yelm Ave
D
A (2)
A (1)
B (12)
Walmart Blvd at
D (28)
C(22)
B (15)
North Parcel C Driveway
D
A (5)
A (4)
A (2)
Walmart Blvd at
C (21)
C (18)
B (13)
South Parcel C Driveway
D
A (3)
A (3)
A (3)
Y -2c Extension at
C (19)
B (14)
B (10)
North Parcel G Driveway
D
A (5)
A (4)
A (3)
Y -2c Extension at
D
B (12)
B (10)
A (9)
South Parcel G Driveway
A (7)
A (6)
A (6)
Parcel G Driveway at
B (13)
B (12)
B (11)
Yelm Ave
D
A (1)
A (1)
A (1)
SO Alliance November 2014
Page 37
Yelm East Gateway
7. LONG -RANGE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Traffic Impact Analysis
Although not required for concurrency testing as part of the environmental review for this project, this
study has analyzed the intersections and roadways near the project site for conditions expected by the
City's long term 2035 planning horizon. The analysis is based on the 2035 traffic flows predicted for the
area with SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) and Y -2c completed. The analysis also assumes the highest
traffic potential will be realized even though the moderate land -use build -out is the preferred
alternative for the future development scenario. The analysis provides a framework for the street and
highway frontage and access requirements of the Yelm East Gateway development within the context of
the City of Yelm's general overall vision for the area.
The intersection and lane configurations anticipated for this scenario are shown on Figure 13. The
roadway and intersection configurations are the same in 2035 as for 2020 with the exception of
roadway widening on Walmart Boulevard and Yelm Avenue (SR 507) east of Walmart Boulevard
associated with the completion of the SR 510 Alternate (Yelm Loop) and Y -2c connections. The following
is a summary of the predicted operation of the study intersections for the 2035 horizon.
Table 8. LOS Summary 2035 PM Peak Hour with Alternative 1
SCJ Alliance November 2014
Page 38
Projected 2035
Alternative 1
Intersection
LOS (Delay)
Geometric and Intersection Control
Intersection Average
Intersection
Control
Description
Creek Street at
Stop
103rd Avenue
Control
A (4)
Same as 2020
Grove Road at
Stop
103rd Avenue
Control
B (14)
Same as 2020
Install traffic signal and widen
Walmart Blvd at
Traffic
Walmart Boulevard to five lanes
103rd Avenue
Signal
B (20)
south of 103rd Ave as part of Yelm
Lop completion
Bald Hills Rd at
Traffic
Yelm Ave
Signal
D (42)
Same as 2020
Morris Rd at
Stop
A (7)
Same as 2020
Bald Hills Rd
Control
Grove Road at
Yelm Ave
RAB
B (11)
Same as 2020
2nd SB to EB left -turn lane and
Walmart Blvd at
Traffic
conversion of WB through -right lane
D (46)
Yelm Ave
Signal
to right -only as part of SR 510
Alternate (Yelm Loop) completion
Widening of Yelm Avenue (SR 507)
Walmart Driveway
Stop
A (3)
to accommodate completion of SR
Access at SR 507
Control
510 Alternate (Yelm Loop)
SCJ Alliance November 2014
Page 38