Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
SDR1991-00020
POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. 1 '• �, , .....,,,.„: G,z f.,(. li,,,,�.11,,,,P -.1a1.;US-! -.G. m S. „t py. ,. . ' a..n, c1,I.' j (',•.. _, .i � „� I .,. - l .,-,. ...,� ..w,. -t:.l, ,,t �.... .-, .-'.:.• it a�afremt;. .:,cµ. 'w� �, ., ,�. � .;'1 "°y" . T q,,. jj��7 �`�f'�I 1, , may �•� } •, �dN' V ,'� ( Fi �i.�, �*�`y ''Ry ', 0.7 .�J �11 ii; i �y.� 9 ., ''''r7(I.I71 •J ! R••, }:/lw 9 47' Fi'i�. SW Oii `-4'� ,� I 5t :'I' ,,, • 1 ,;,. ., 1 .,,,"w?r ' {Wrr.�a.u%ii�.iG64kJFUti»+H{-- � _...... ,....a,.,..,..�. .-.,I., ^ar w..,w..a.w+.4.,.,.r`t.,w,..,,,,r.,;+:-,.,,,wwd.•.»..,A 4a.....w.,....w«,+ ,,.u�.,,., -,..r,,,.. w , ,�, '"VO I �1 n...«.w.... L.,_.,.,,.tea { • ., i.,...,xK .1._.x 1,....� -.,Ma.va.,YSi'W.,-,,.,�.,.t. «,S"I n=a+1,1.V�_1..,.�+MYi,,-........,.�:+w:,h l .s... i w•n r. QQ •. , f I a I I I { 4 • "I , 1' t+A 0• µ n x' ' ` 1 f fi \ ry { \ N , + Mil _ . t 1 1 -d. I. (. 1. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION ,';-- FILE NO: SDR 91-0020 FILE TITLE: WINMAR PACIFIC, INC. APPLICANT: Winmar Pacific, Inc. OWNER: SANE 9585 SW Washington Sq. Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE UEm• zoNE, LOCATION: Applicant requests Site Development .'Y Review approval for a Major modification to expand the Washington " , d : Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet , for the relocation of one of its department store. ZONE: C-G ," - (General Commercial) . LOCATION: 9585 SW Washington Square Road. (WCTM 151 21C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) ite COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial NPO NO: 8 C1 NPO CHAIRPERSON: Cathy Chase PHONE NUMBER: 620-4790 I WA. CHECK ALL WHICH APPLY: u 5�4 . _X STAFF DECISION COMMENTS DUE BACK TO STAFF ON 19911 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: _ TIME:7:30 HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME:7. 00 1 �; CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: • TIME: :3U. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND ATTACHMENTS: m' X VICINITY MAP X LANDSCAPING PLAN , X NARRATIVE X ARCHITECTURAL PLANT X SITE PLAN OTHER: PREPARE FOR PLANNER APPROVAL ' b ,.. ADVERTISEMENT - TIGAFD TIMES _ OREGONIAN�_ NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNERS TO BE MAILED LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATION NOTIC TO DLCD - ATTACHMENTS: .�.`� , STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer CODE SECTION: 18. 120 USE services,STINGS: Civic Use Types: Public agency administrati ve �y - public support facilities among other uses Commercial • Use Types: Professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, � r estate services, bus ines s support services among other uses; Residential Use Types: Single-family residential units, among other uses. Co- rgxq ! Ir� r *� U • • • AO'''. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY' CASE NO. ,, °� OTHER CASE NO'S: 4/if • RECEIPT NO. fit.apieffigo APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: , DATE: OV /17/ • (: 1. GENERAL INFORMATION App1 pation elements "submitted: PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION 9585 SW Washington Square R4 . ✓1. Application' form (1) • • Tigard, OR 97223 (B) Owner's signature/written TAX MAP, AND TAX LOT NO.1S126C- A authorization 0140 t 1Is::. r, 01700 (C) Title transfer instrument (1) • SITE SIZE 53.07 acres Assessor's map (1) 10. 4445 PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER,* Winmar Pacific o Inc. ) Plot plan (pre-app checklist) f�l��I�F�'FtC aJ rC�b�l" ADDRESS 700 Fifth Avenue P}l0NE(206) 223.6294r (F) Applcant's statement CITY Seattle, WA ZIP 98104 (pre-app checklist) APPLICANT* Winmar Pacific, Inc. _ (G. ADDRESS 700 Fifth Avenue PHONE(206) 223-6294 I . CITY Seattle WA ZIP 98104 ) Filing fee a c)..QQO ) ' *When the owner and the applicant are different G•.`"tI) Construction Cost Estimate the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee in possession, with written authorization DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: • from the owner or an agent of the owner With written g 4 • ,' authar,.��;;,ti on. The owner(s) must sign this ed on page ` application In the space provided p � . two or FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: submit a written authorization with this application. . COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNIATION 2. PROPOSAL SUM ARY p p p C .- The owners of of the subject property request site development review approval to N.P.O. Number: allow ox0 ans an of shop ?ng center to accommodate Approval Date: 7 ' the relocation of Nordstrom to the Frederick ac . Nelson pad (see Applicant's Statement' att attached). Final Approval IPlanning Engineering,,. . 0524P/13P ,, Rest'd 5/87 • I I •'t'at t u + 1, '`, n i - ,, 7' ' p �, �. 3`11 _ -'•�""�L ' r .. •. . r r' n. 0 yr. ., . .. r. I ..Y ' "�•r. .. - ` r. r ._,..»»r,r»_r .r,.-.,I•,i..Jr.. .t 1' r.. if i I s..v. A.nr. .» 1,,. .r,n ru- •, " .M r .I...., 1 J, 3. a,ist any variance, conditional use, .sensitive lands, or other land use actions to be considered as part of this application: Abp 4. Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments described in the attached information sheet at the time you submit this application. 5. THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • I A. The '. above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached<tonor subject imposed osed u on the sub property. P � s ` . E. If the. application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. C. All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so , acknowledge . that any permit isEaed, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. !, D. The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including • the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving ► or denying the application. DATED this 21st day of - November 19 r r SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subject property. .� � 'restrfft f_ Treasurer Iw' I i M4 (XSL:pm/0524P) I I 1.' I , • I y tr GXI ......._.,.,...a.a.,,,a<.r,,...«.,,M..,.,«J• 'oaM:..a4.-.1....-....,..;,.+», 1......•....�.. Iw4l.a.. i... «.,,..,,,.r.....4w.,.....,...,...M.<-;..,.4�r«M,.•. ..,..r... n-1..,..w.aw._.,......,a...a..,l..,,._..t.,aru ,,. .. .r..,.....,...m.»........ wu,..e...,.,:.4i..,...z?,:.....,r....w,.._r, a..H. �• ' _ ..A..hn.NI1K1..ww M.. - ..tlna•uwM.,r.-a...' • ■ WINMAR PACIFIC, INC. �I • 700 FIFTI-I AVENUE Telephone:(206)223-4500 2600 GATEWAY TOWER Reply to: P.O.Box 21545 SEATTLE,WA 98104-5026 Seattle,WA 98111-3545 • I l APPLICANT STATEMENT •Y. I r Washington Square Expansion November x.991. • • . Winmar Pacific, Inc: the owner of Washington o n S ua r e Inc.,l is proposing to expand and the ' Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet. The modification would involve reconfiguring the Center from its current size of 11178 million • leasable square feet to approximately 1.245 million leasable square feet,a 5.7 percent increase over the existing area. Included in this expansion is the relocation of Nordstrom into a new store in the vacated Frederick&Nelson location. To accommodate Nordstrom's move,Winmar Pacific will demolish the existing Frederick & Nelson structure and relocate site utilities. Additionally, the vacated Nordstrom building will be renovated into specialty shop space similar to that which currently exists along the mall, The schedule is to commence demolition and site work in the Spring of 1992,construct the Nordstrom store for a Fall 1993. opening and renovate the vacated store for a Summer 1994 opening. !1 I i ' To accommodate this expansion, Winmar Pacific will be constructing additional parking in a north out lot, which is currently occupied by a vacant restaurant and the Wunderland entertainment center, This additional parking will accommodate up to 180 stalls. • • • • I I r d i t p r6: .n....n.a«,.-._.,..-ir..,-.",Wrlo>w�'.::....r...,.,..;n«.:.i..,.^.....a»..Ha..,.._. ...,.»`.t1..:.ar....._.......,..a.,.i:,..,.,..,.:..l:,:l.Y�._xw,.,ln ,,,»...,. ,.,,�,,._M..^,«..-RG'.,N ..l..r....t.:.t«.,.,.rt,.i�.Wi li.�.,_"....ti«.. ..,a;_.,.,......•,..a'_�.:., ..»_.,,.....,...,,uM...,.::..ai—.....�.:r.:l..�.•.....,w....,..�u..�.....:.............la,d,_a:-e ��I c7:4;., . �&a1.G I, r g{ R � y r. C:,.p 0 kv/S i,z mw" PI V . 9 Pa1 j November 20,1 1991 ,4. I. R' Ms. Viola R. Goodwin " ' Permits Facilitator City of Tigard. 13125 S..W. Hall Boulevard Post Office Box 23397 Tigard., OR 97223 Dear. Ms. Goodwin TIF Deferral Request CI , Washington Square ,' Winmar Pacific, Inc., is requesting that the TIP payment for the expansion of Washington Square be deferred until such time as the renovated Nordstrom building(existing)is reopened . to the public in its final retail configuration. According to our current schedule, we will be ; taking possession of the old Nordstrom store in Fall 1993, at which time it will go through a renovation process and be grand opened in late Summer 1994. The net expansion of the Center `' will be approximately 67,000 square feet, but depending on the final configuration of leasable ``� area, it may be as low as 33,000 square feet. ' Until we gain control of the Nordstrom space and determine its final configuration, we are unsure as to what the ultimate leasable square footage will be in this area, Upon completion � l ' of the space, the City can determine the net area which has been added to the Center under the expansion program and assess the proper'TIF fee. r . . Thank you for your consideration in matter. Please call me if you have further questions. ns. x,l ., Sincerely, WINMAR COMP ,'IN.P. L Randy,4 yt9, �d,ent a, Vice P d nrn 4s I , , " �Y ,4, 1' � , , r a �Y11, �♦rY `It ( ,'Yi 1', 1^ •. 1 A • • 1.:.1a......!a .,.,..+.:......:,«....,,,.�.•�.a,.w..`....c,,.14.;,— a.,..a».,,...M.�M,,.e„i.....,,... wr,.a H.. ,.,..,......+... .,...w >.....m.., i , ,i la.•..«,;-.�....a..Y,.,,..:.,..,.✓,.n,.... • • w.I,.,.,.�+....u,,,,,F...rH1...L.A,,,.dAb_.w.., Mw,,. .»A,.,..1.,�,.. ,rc...+.ui....;..n.....•.........,-rGO.I....,u.,..,..•-.�.,:-.4.:�.,.,.�,rt...:.,.-.4•.�,.,ed.-n:......Lw�1a w,..L�.w.,�.'.�,�IL,+—,.«....4n 111 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Washington Square Expansion November 1991 L. ct9te Work and Utilities $ 870,600 '�_,60 n ,000 Nordstxon Shell Construction 1 , Total Construction Cost $22,470,600 I I . �. I I I Filing Fee $2,000 tjr I' II � I I I I r I , Q • • • • • s. rr u...,. r.--.+.•.....- ..._...,a..._....,...y ..G....w..:.+...-.rlr.....r.....M..n...,a-L•:...h+.m..4.....r....+_a. w.•r.a.... n•., a...r.L.....,.,._r4w.•.II,.J:..tr wr.,-.1..._.+»•.•.M.-.M+�uJ.„,..,....-r,.r. ._,r _..,. ... .•.L r•»..J.,.-.. ..,M%.,. .an'.4Mr,+:..,-.1/4.,,+.......•.ii%.:..,{a4r.u{1,r•.wJLr:..uL� ( , CITY OF TIGI PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE E NOTE: DATE: ____,O.C.M.D_ELER--- '' , r . • APPLICANT; M N.)W1 i4 a p � AGENT: t�LAIU. '_,.,.nffv\P 6-1-er?--- \, y Phone Phone: : .1 PROPERTY LOCATION' z *4 ADDRESS: TAX .MA AX P & TAX LOT: r NECESSARY APPLICATION(S)a ,d� :.A/EZ-. P 01,4570 T N --J '" " �- PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 0 000 '", ; ,,,k pay( 't 6Vo.• O IZIA ,t --6-4- de' Fee d"i Gg 4 et 60 .....12)__. i,c.•lino r wv-4. Tv.i , e.k' . ' L 54-.,fir liii, i ii"k &Ve v'a( relzki (M'4 re ViirkiWaVii ,Sp ce5; "act q 5wrra- e peurk+03) . � � COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: � COYvt 1 4 'r ZONING DESIGNATION:iTION - 1r fs. N EIGHBO OOD P lfNING ORGANIZAION 4 CHAIRPERSON:0 00 : PHONE =4..3 4 0 ): , ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIRE NTS I. ef Minimum lot size: sq• ft. f Minimum lot width: ft. 1 Setbacks: front,- p+Tr.�r :-fit. sides ft., rear- ft. garage- __ ft. corner- ft. from both streets. Maximus site coverage: � ,, Minimum landscaped or natural. vegetation area: 4 Maximum building height: t.'b' £t I' ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot �`rontat �,. 25 fees. unless lot �s created through { e nor land .� g .h ��. l:an i partition process. Loth created as part of a partition must have a Minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a miniMum 15 foot wide access easement. Maa,imunt lot dep bh to width ratio of 2.5 to. 1. , . SPECIAL SETBACKS Streets:tB . ft. from ren t 'erline of , pstab Li shed areas,: �,, from f. Lower intensity zone.. 'F' , a ong the site k s boundary ll , Flag lot: 10 ft. Oi . =,ed se back ' ' Acc �sar� stxuctt�est up to 28 ft. in ft se�bac� fro� side and ear lot lined AcCessory structures: • to 1000 sq. ft. (where allowed) - See •a Zero lot line Minimum 10 foot separation between buildings ppithable z e 1� separation gH Multi-family residential building separation: See Code Section 18.96.030 Page • . • S„ _ i' • : SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS I Flag Lots: Maximum height of 1-1/2 stories or 25 ft., whichever is less in most zones; 2-1/2 stories or 35 ft. in 1.7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones if standards of Code Section 18.98.030(B) are met. Building Hei ht Exceptions (Code Section 18.98.020) : Buildings located in ^b• a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet t provided: 1. A minimum FAR (building floor area to site area ratio) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; ,. . . 2. All actual building setbacks will be at lea s t 1/2 • the building's height; and 3. The structure will not abut 'a residential zone district. • RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION Community Development Code Chapter 18.92 specifies that the net residential units allowed a particular site may be calculated by ' dividing the net area o " Ehe�devil apable area by the min" evenumber o square feet required p dwelling rani in the applic. •' zoning district. Net development are is calculated Ay subtrac g the following land �x area,(s) from the gr 'ss site area: 1. All sen itive lands area- - land lin the..-;.;+ year loodplain - slopes exceeding 25% e a - dr sinsg s y w 2. Land dedicated for park pu ►..ses 3. Public right-of-way dedicat on • r• 4. All la a nil provided for priv-Ate streets (includes acceesways through parking areas) , The City of Tigard allows a residential density transfer' of up to 25% of -1 the unite that could otherwise have ben developed on sensitive lands % ° areas listed in (I) above to the dev-lopable portion of the site in accordance with Code Section 18.92.030 It is the responsibility of the applif«anti for a residential development application to provide a detailed cal,ulation for permitted residential density and density transfer. • RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SOLAR. ACCESS B L'AE4 S , Effective may 1991 a l subdivision== and minor P artitione are stbj ect to solar access requirements which stat t that;'80% of all lots developed must' ° be solar-oriented. The characteris 'ice of a solar-oriented lot are high, o wintertime sun etrikin t e eolith walls and ,roofs of the house levels £ wi er r g « ' house orientation maxitizing eouth window area, and a south-sloping roof area. To achieve thie, one May u,ilize„the following: , I. Basic requirement: Design lot with at least 90 feet of north-south lot dimension and an orie.Cation within 30 degrees of ebuth; '- 2. Protected Solar Building ins: The solar building line muet a) he it hand n eg ees of south' b have a minimum of 70 feet oriented the mie of the lot to th within 30 a r. i b) between to the south, it.1) have a minimum ' . . of 45 feet between it d the northernmost buildable boundary of the ,r. lot on which the bui ding line is tocatedy h r 3. Perf ce Option : ' The first option.esi a2cis azad the ha�e house a t e st orman' ion oriented Within 30 deg reed of an w at least i f the ground floor south wall protects from shade, The second 0� o � protected � Page 2 I i , I ' ''., �, .A A ............. J.'....1 '..•,...r..n.z... .«,...,.' ,•,._..t.,...r..r._.,•..,.1:. ,..e....0»,.,.«....,.,...... _n:."',.......4.a-'r,_r,........L.,.rl'.,.-...«.._...,,.....»......,.,. •i„ ,. ,..r " ..v..•.».. .trl�. ,..........:»+.d,u •n ....k.l4 s (,. 5 option requires at least 32% of the glass and 500 square feet of the roof area to face soot nd be protected from 'sha i Total or partial e emption of a si e from the soda. ,access requirement, can f be for the folio ing reasons: ` l' 1. East, wes or north slopes =. eper than 20%. "' 2. Off-site s ade sources . ruc■ures, vege&:at ion, topography). 3. On-site eha so -- (vegetat on) i• '4 Adjustments allowing reduction of the S0% solar lot design requirement can be for the following reasons: 1 1. Reduced density or an increase cost of at least five percent due § ` to: - east, west or north slope gr ater than 10%, - significant natural feature, '. . -- existing road or lotting pat ern, . ' • public easement or right-of- ay', 2. Reduction in important develop ent amenities. 3. Pre-existing shade (vegetatio ) . Maps and text sufficient to show th development complies with the solar design standard, except for lots fo which an exemption or adjustment is required, including all of the fol wing items: 1. The north-south lot d mensio and front lot line orientation of each ., . proposed 'lot. . , 2. Protected solar buildinc7 lines and relevant building site restrictions, if applicable 3. For the purpose of identif' ing trees exempt from Section F, a map showing existing trees at least 30 feet tall and over 6 inches I' diameter at a point 4 f et above grade, including their height 4 , diameter and species s a and stating that they are to be retained and are exempt, 4. Copies of all private re tractions relating to solar access. If an exemption or` adjustmen is requested, maps and text sufficient to ;'1 show that given lots or area ' in the development comply with the standards for such an exemption or ad ustment shall be submitted. RESIDENTIAL AL DENSITY TRANSITION 1 Regardless of the allow d housing density in a zoning district, any property within 100 fee of a designated established area shall not be developed at a density greater than 125 percent of the maximum comprehensive Plan designation (not zoning) of the adjacent parcel. ;, I; PAPX/Nd AND ACCESS f--1- , ,� 1 { ! - Required automobile parking for this type of use: 1,1:x, ".- _ t!" "± J M. ,-' .orsi ■ Secondary use required parking: ) 2- Ire, of d ,0 s y &rte pki I :spsrc Ira✓, , , 25% of re ired s saes may ces3 na ted coo act�on 1 s aces« 0.or; Gd ee' -(tor ' dsvrztt Standard parking space dimensions: 9 ft. X 18 ft. 1' Comp ct parking space dimensions: 8.5 ft. X 15 ft. ! Iy • •.'" H andi,.capped) p arki n 9. kl l �arci n 5 areas pro v.id i n g in exce ss of five r e 3red automoiile parkiriq space e eha�l p ad? ap ro riately loaated and ,* designated handica pp ed drcin g space s Thy nini��o ntmbOsr of handioa pp ed page 3 k � r: ■}. II I` v 4 ryr • r 1 parking spaces to be provided and parking space size are mandated by the Oregon Revised Statutes (see handout). A handicapped parking space .,. symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be provided. 'c. Bicycle racks are required for civic uses, non-residential uses, commercial uses, and industrial uses providing 15 or more automobile parking spaces. Bicycle parking must be provided at a ratio of one ,x bicycle rack space per 15 auto parking spaces. Bicycle racks shall be • located in areas protected from automobile traffic. The Planning Division p can provide specifications for approved bicycle rack types. All parking areas and driveways must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: Maximum access width: • Pedestrian access must be provided between building ent,t•ances and parking areas, outdoor common areas, and public sidewalks and streets. �1 I, For detailed information on design requirements for 'parking areas and accesses, see Community Development Code Chapters 18.106 and 18.108. •. , CLEAR VISION AAA The City requires that clear vision be maintained between three and eight feet above grade at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road • intersections in specified clear vision areas. The size ,of the required clear ivision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. LANDSCAPIN1 Street trees are required for all developments fronting on a pLb1ic or private street or a driveway more than 100 feet in length. Street trees m be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private gust � rx.ght of-way p • property within six feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must • have a minimum caliper of two inches at four feet above grade. Street ;,•,• trees should d b. e spaced ed 20 o depending � � mature site. Further information on regulations affecting street andast of recommended street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. tree tlf A. m e ^ e spaces �must be� planted in and around parking seven • ar��:n p a�nim�.. i r . r g in order to provide a canopy ef:iect. Landscaped screenin of parking areas from views from public rights-of-way must be !1' a 9 g p 1 r provided. 1 o Paged , 7 i i i 4 ' .w:..w.l 1a........_...N,4....................i,:..-,...,,..•...,.a.. _..,....._,..n.+,..W....:iwi..«......... ...u.-.-l.x,a,-�.«::i4«h,:.,.'. ._. .u•as.,............wr....:,s;,.:.,.._i. ..a.,....r......a...»i._....«.,..eax-... ' ,� • BUFFERING AND SCREENING k In order to increase privacy and to reduce or eliminate adverse noise or visual, impacts betvieen adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required ed buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and ' evergreen trees and shrubs. Site obscuring screens or, fences are also . required in some cares, and often are advisable even if not required. Required buffer are may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and sidewalks. p Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in Code Chapter 18.100 and the 'Planning Division bulletin on landscaping and buffering. Required buffer widths 'applicab1 to yo 9r proposal area: ft. along north boun ry . ft. along east boundary h ft. along south boundary _ ft. along west boundary In addition, si. t obscuring 'screen'ng is required along _ _0-•i►.i_ SIGNS I, Permits must be obtained before ereoting any sign in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for n P d �' Big ermits handout is available upon requesi:. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development application. ._,_. ADDITIONAL PLANNING CONCERNS OR COMMENTS ow • , f I u I t r • ry, y r u I Y' • • • • PROCEDURE •� Yc Administrative staff review. Public hearing before the land use hearings officer. Public hearing before',the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. Another public hearing is held by the City Council. • All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member at the Community',Development Department counter at City Mall. Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications submitted after 4:30 P.M. on , Thursday will be batched for processing with the following week's applications for processing. No applications will be accepted after 3:00 • • P.M. on Fridays or 4.30' on, other days. • Maps submitted with an application shall be folded in advance to 8.5 by 11 • inches. One 8.5 inch by 11 inch map of a proposed project should be o submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. The 'Planning, Division and Engineering Division' will do a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 10 days'of submittal, Staff will notify an applicant if adcaeional information or copies'of the submitted materials are needed. The administrative decision/public hearing typically will occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as complete ' K by the Planning Diva.dl..on. Applications involving difficult ' issues or requiring review by other jurisdiction; ' may take additional time to review. Written decisions are issued within 10 days of the hearing. A 10 ?i day appeal period follows 'all de4sions. An appeal on this matter would • be heard by the C.t oh►h i!n.0 C...p 1'n.•i's 5 i+e' o A basic flow diagram illustrating the review process is available from the �'• / Planning Division. • > The pre-application conference and the notes of the conference are i'' intended to inform the prospective applicant of the primary Community • Development Code requirements applicable to development of a particular Site and to allow the Staff and prospective applicant to discuss the 1 t opportunities and donst affecting development of the site; The ra.:Znts� "� p �.. conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should, apply to the development of your site plan. : Failure of the staff to provide any information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that .a prospective applicant either� obtain and read the • Communit Y Development Code or ask questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. 1' r Another re-a iidatian conference is required if an application is to be : P pA � "I sub mitted more ` Cs after this icalo reference, unl ess the Second conference is deemed unnecessary by the �� • Planning Division. )(, PREPARED HY PLAN NlNO DiVa ION PIONS: 639--4171 Page 6 �y� �� ! • y f , ! 31. 6 • • r. / "i r ' . ; - f • 0 .r 1, . try 1. I . . „, .1. . i . I t 1. d.w+4�wn.-�.w...:.I1 4 ... ...r�IJ4m..., rm•r+r..r..-. ,.-m.+-l+.r« ..«..•...4..,,.� . ...;a.�.+/w.�...«..... ', , ,�� .11 .Nxn ..,.. _.A.....,.«.«A'3},.�a...,.... .w r' . . i ..A...4�.w.+ .._. - .._w..l.t. �..xuu{tra, u4,.,..t.,.J wn.•.f'W ww ..n�M .w,-..n,.a a.,+.+..A Yrti.--- •�r� t, . ,. . Amhitetnfre (r-, ,„ i ft 1 l'laruiing e a Urban IDesigA', r�'. Interior.Architecture Graphic Destgn ' �.�'T� • " October 29, 1991 88002 I Ooh +•FORT''; R' ti fr , • 3rollWilshire Rtytticavard CONFERENCE REPORT Suite 10.^ Los Angeles CA 90036 .- � � 213 9 PROJECT:39 i90G � �Washington Square�� •' •' 2I39391199Fax • •' Partners TvIEETJNG HELD: October 24, 1991 Ronald A Altoon FAIR • James FPorterA1A i Hartley R Niskala AIA AT: Tigard City Hall, `Tigard Oregon Car}K Denrpscer ACA Senior Associates �4 . . Willior A S21A dates .E: w23? +�Jquare AIA Site �.., ✓elopment Review w." Kenneth R Long AlA :, y Associates ATTENDEES' Viinnlar C__Iim A ,./4,des,FI Hansen AIA �,,...,____.,..._.,�.• Randolph C Larsen AI/1 R Randy •, .Fiends K}tsurita " MargaretI<Sciioaftx' sh ton"► udre Jack Reardon C. ity of�'i .aid rev. Review Planner 1I, • I �.. Jerry Offer t, x • 34 City c•f,", igaxdi.glans Examiner �m aqua 1, ; C 0.f Tig_j i 0uii jn Offi.cial , f Brad Co Roast I 4 I a � Altoon & Porter Architects Gary Dempster • • DIS TR]14 tJTIO : Attendees B b Taylor, W &f Pacific i ( } Richard,Beason,, Winmar Company t, • ,' 1 • 1 I ,, /_/ ) , , ° ka P • ry y, 1.-A..4.:...:a,.1 r....:A.+J...r.L•.,r,.. ..r.•._ ,...«.._........l,rt.I.:.-I 1'., 1 •...w...,.._.....r.a•.-..._...a....r,....4•.—..r..i,•.I.ti r..r............ ...4,....w ..+. ...w1r. .» .. • .r '..I.-. ...»r«_«...a,..w.r•..,., -..,, .n... t-. ,.. +...taC,.'..::.A..uK... ..........„J.,....:..+!.:u,«iii.:a•a.k0.....o«..w...n_..,.,,......,•..l.:i..,•t, n ,fir .. � I. �•; -Conference Report 'Report �. October 29, 1991 ) a Page Two • 7 ALTopN } .o,RTE'R is .'A A•:R C 1.11 T F C T DISC SSION/CONCLUSIONS: and 1. Randy Kyte introduced the project's history a goals to the city representatives. He described the relocation of Nordstroms, the demolition of Fredrick & Nelson and the additional parking required due to the added s.f. of GLA • 2. Randy showed Site Plan K-5 to those in attendance, explaining that the traffic study and parking counts assume that the existing Nordstrorns store will remain at + 1 a _ 9 ,0000 s.f. of GL.A. Randy explalt•Aed that we expect this number to be r reduced by some 30,000 s.f. by utilizing this space as a collection of shops . ) rather that a single user. Our application will assume the worst case, however, • 3. Jreity Offer pointed out that current Tigard codes only allow 85% site coverage and with the addition of the new paved parking area adjacent to Greenburg Road, we might be approaching that number, APA will investigate this and notify Randy. Jerry indicated that once we have determined the percentage, . there is a procedure for negotiating with the city should we exceed the code. �! Randy pointed out that given the existing coverage of the center, we might exceed the 85% as the building now exists. • 1:�• 4. Gary asked Jerry about the Community Development .:.,apartment Application Checklist, and in light of the small amount of site work, how much information would required. Jerry, stated that only those areas affected b the work need wo be regal rry y affected y to described in detail. Those condition which exist and ax..e not a pa rt of this application need not be described except in general. r r • is + d about securing a demolition • eri�nit for the removal of the �,� Randy asked ur�.rfg ,demo.. . p building. Brad Roast stated that no approvals ` � Nelson brill 'or permits I Frederick & �'e q copy of the previously published ' wero re required, He asked that a c y' asbestos ;, report for the that a demo permit. rep e center be submitted at the time tha, is requested, r ; Brad stated that the demo contractor should pull the permit himself. y of the time r 6. Randy_ asked Jim Jaqua estimate Stzrriate required to plan check the Norstrom s building. Jim estimated 2 3 weeks. . • -:A , ..+u«.....«...r......u.......,.....1., +..»-. r_.....,r,.a«.a.._.....-----J„� 4ux«..a,,.. ,.,.n".r 1,...M..AY-.. .,n..........A.f.,l w.......w,.«_._-,..,.a.w..C,.w.,.«....•,._-Nw_. '.,1' .....«-.«r..•+.t f,.wr.l.r ..,. .n .r,wn-i.,x.n...cl,..rw.i...3.-A:-.0«NJ,.,4u.1.r...M.ax..,.x,....w 1.F dn.ix.i. Conference Report October 29, 1991 Page Three •4 I �I • 'ALTOOI ± PORTI 7. this s the 4' lines must t be a part of tl n oil ego. �1 asked Jerry if a revision to Randy aS � P YI .} application. Jerry responded that the revision could take place at any time. 8. Jerry described the review process as follows: f, I I I I A. Applicant submits materials. FP B. Planning department notifies the appropriate agencies such as fire, • transportation, water and utilities ilities and requests responses within two weeks. The department also notifies the Neighborhood Planning Organization and asks for their comments within four weeks. :: C, A report l is prepared by a planning department mmeinber (Jerry) and is published. D, A ten day appeal period is l established. , q Jerry estimated this process to take 6-8 weeks due the time of our submittal (November), and conflicting holidays. . . f 9. Jerry indicated that given that minimal amount of site work involved, the only issue that might be raised would be traffic. Randy explained that the traffic report indicates t hat traffic is only marginally increased. That fact, we are consolidating two department stores into one, we actually might experience a decrease in traffic.' Jack felt that since Nordstroms is an existing department store, trips to the center would not increase due their relocation and expansion: Randy further suggested that since the renovation of the existing INTordstroms f` Y °r into some other use would not open until fall on 1994, perhaps some of the traffic mitigation measures being discussed in the diamond area transportation study might be in effect: I t Prepared by I I I I I ALTOON & PORTBR ARCHITECTS s) ' II •I II �� r I I I I �� Gary K: Dempster,;AlA I R Partner 4 I I I I { �I. CJX.Dls itch rl 1.025'-wsc:gd I I I I I r , 4 ^ Jr .� n ....�.,m.+ ar.. m•-.N1 ...;n.. r w.s..... ru.,I.n.ua e,iru++n.,.....,i _ i.,. .. ., ..n....vr... '1, �I�� � RECEIVED I:, 1 , To: Vlb` C i,riJ{�IIYf1114f L 1 U V LO IY EP I ( r '.M.1, ',/ PrajeGt Nay' "'/.,d�Q�P. 1t-..... .. [" ee), 00x 55 q proieCt a r yJ 0.ansmithai 6ve101,,, . . .. . .. ... C7 Merrtarandum Vie; , 0,1444.. .P.-4L ..., � :-._ .... .. . „. f,,,,. _____. i , . ------We are sending you Attached CJ Under separate cover ,, the following: rints 0 Originals 0 1 0 Submittal 1 0 Samples 0 . i i For your: information and use 0 Review and comment ., ,As requested ■ Action required: 0 As indicated 0 No action required 0 For signature and return [ . • , . ' I • ''''''''"""C'"lirfril I i ? / „, ,,,Q__ '------1 I I, . t . I/ fi cc: r I If enclosures are not as noted kindly n rft us at'once. . 0 Corporate Headquarters: 0 California Office: The Callisort Partnership ltd, Architecture 1420 Fifth Avenue 9 O Sixth Avenue A Corporation Programming i r t ita 2400 I Suite�OfPlanning il Seattle,Washington I San Diego,California interior Design 5. . 98101 1 92101 Graphics � '. (206)623-4646 (619)232-3235 PAX: 06-623 4625 FAX:619-212-3537 Y Rp�1lYk.t.Titrttb1i Artlll t Qtt a. it f ar f ,. . , . . . . . . ', ., .'',.;,,'.,,.,,‘., ' '•■•.,:.;,'',.■':,'',4.:,,.0 pi,•: 714,11; ,. •„.,y, ,.,0,t.,4-(,,•lAt''+'Ar."1,..i: ' ■+ aph lis=Mir 4 t ''......i ...'*.t,:' ''.'.7,`;"'t' t :::" -.'Or: ' ,•,."..-,.'1,,Y.::',A;;;.1%.4.4.itt',,,,", .. .....*^' ko , t 1 1 . , I' ." .-' ''''"..... ' ' ' ' . ' .'..,' ,tott.rt',1"'-'3.7.477''',.. ''''.■:.4'.',1-P,,,Vtl'ir't..e,,,0-,,,A,,Ic-- ';',•AP•' , . ,•'' :. , ''' ;`,';'''-'.'.,"'•• ''',''''.•;', '.. '• .o.'-,' '•'' ' i v., ' ''., '',,. '.,'•„;.t.,,.%,.'.' TE-17,, , 0, ,,y,..„,I k, , J2 - ,..... ,.., ,..,,,,,,,,, •bL • ... t• , . ..,, . .,1.,....,.., ... r •' „ ' ,,,, ,r.'.,`.:,..,,,,t,,,i',,,,.,,4.0, ,‘,44,,i,...,!,,, .?;;;,, ' %'. '''.,' ' '.'.r.:,'• '''' . '' - ;'::.`31i.h..'db,j'434t'''''71 IV. l'.5 f,') ; '''' ' e , • . .-y, - 0 'Pl. .A.I• %f . 41,?.., Pe, , --- .,..iki, 410 ,-'44•5?:''' '".. Y ''!",,t. -f.1 fiVeit't''.. *4;',-e:",:t'':''::',` ''""""•"""""'"''""'''''' '.. ' ' ' ' .' •''. -:::": , • :',. '''''t'':'i'.',..; :,2,.,';'ti144.141~4i';IS,,'•'141 . '1.':::,-:. 41 ' rI , ' ' , ' '. .., . . ' i ■, 'id iN4rAffe44 ''''''''"'- ' .,i...41:;Fe.: ■,.4i., ..,,,,,-, . , . .• ,. N ' '1 .', . . .. . 0.':',,,,;t' V'',(1.0,`'14-4 -":- . .• ' , 1k.•gt.i.o t:.,,,,,.,...:,,p,,,,,,,:,,.,.> , ,; . . ,.,..', , , :',''...:*•'' • ••,','',,.•''.!''4.'44'q;VI,i' ',1{,71,"."-'',rA.,„.,„,4,...?t:;•• , ' i '• '-. ', ••' ' ',''1,..° .' • '• '''''',`",'''',.:'1114k4171 a ,.1;64''0,•tr,::,4'...:',; ° „1,:_,:t ,„"....il.c.,;'1414„r1 ,41.if..;,,`..f.14,4*-',..7 ' ''''' C ;.4,,'''...'t,,,,.' ' 1, t ,. '449 - ' ' ' ' ''' . ' ..'.' r''•'..' ',..; ' ...j;" '' : '/A.,Itql„.,„.,' .: '.',"%. . '' ' ,401.4,.,.4'.',,,,-,,,,,,, ., . . .. --4,.7.,i,,,,-..,-, ..:,,,,,r,..,:-.----t-:, - - . - . : -.,- - , . .,....„' ,,,,',',.;.,q.,.`-4:,..- ,,,.f-,5„,! ,J,,r' - ,, . . , . , , ...,', -,,; ,;,,,,itt-il.f.,, 0,A,jc,..,•••!•14:•.:1•-,.-• , -,,•••,,,,,4,,,,,,,,,,,•-,,.,,,, • .,• ,,,,,, .• ,,,.. , • •, : . " ',L14!"'LY. ' 0,"ne, ,.,,14400Ai4 ;qicfoiril'!I.' ''''' ,..1414V40,,,,.',,,t,;.,1A4,40, , „.., .•.. .......___J----- . , . .. ,....;,..„9,,t,,,t„,,„,,.kt.k.7-, A,,,,,t....r.• . _ __ ,...•,''': ,:‘, ,,., ;.474k7,-.1',',,4-,it, ,: , -- ,, . T.,,... EXISTING 1—',...EVEL MALL ''.1:',.:::,,'4,l1, .• ' • 511,44 ,,,,v'''';','4:-`,`,..,:,.",.• '1 , et . .., ., ' J P•,,,,iii,"4:14.14.;;,iAriro:;4'•':`;',.. 1 ' • : .:: ■'.4 4 ika41.1'..r,,■ '1',:'1,;,I,i'''':t"" , .. . ' '.1";41'4114'.641;,,Ti 4..";"'''''4.§:Vi:,'-f,1.1'',:E.,,X,ISTING SHOPS (TYP.) • Pv,.., „, ,,ti,i,t,„ ,.. ,,_ . .i,':.'t,...5';..,„;,•ti;,i.."ii4:. .. H 1 1 f • `::::Yitti: ,'' . , . • i z,:i.....t,,L.,' - -1. }ON* . 'P . .. . 1 NEW NOliDSTROM ........,_ ______"77.,............--, ■ .... 1., (-- ., ' , 2 LEVELS . . ..... _ , _ .. ..-.. ...,,,....,..:.,.:,....:„Ig„:.:.........:.:..5:w,ii4g§itex.:.:*:::.:....:.t.ilsgt2g.. ....sinio .. 180,000 SF 6 •:: ...........4,.._. • - .. . - .;,:. I r - , 45$1 , i it .... . . 66.) "---------1 , F--- vtc 1 a • 1 1 411r Or • -fr 4 I //e/ I I I ''./.* i' '9■—•i 1 1 1 7 r 7 — 7- ' - ' .3,, 1 il I i 1 ........... ,.._____I____________. r,,, , ' ....54 ' '54a. 4 1 1 ... s 41) :1•014 i ' . ) I f l'', I I i 4 ... . ,...-•: \.!,..,,..,* ,,,.......:,..........,•::,•?••,,,•••-,,t,t.!A•"*.** ..*•' .%.1o' V 1 .. , ,,, ...................._1.......* . 0 t ) -.), ,, 1 I 0 4 . case ' 1111" it, 1 . Ili , el 4 .1 , Y LtS rgi _ •. kg,. , . .Z., tbC(' IA •' / 4 111.1 fr / I '. 10,1 50. • "1113 % . V:14‘• . 1 • 4 ■...--..—...—. ,tt ,r,...• 1 ) 11.,. ,,,,, \IA...,...)nroTR:PXEIDs 14,,ZKING AI.EA ___,-----7---- ..:, 0. ir t. ,. '- :.0...•.‘,.*.t.....0....... ......,,.,,,,,,.:_;,,,,;,, .........t..,--'' • •I ' 1 ...,,,,,.,:,,,;.„, :.4,',,:.:.,1.,•,,,,, ...4 4.4,• • I I •• .... i 1 1 I ' , ■ ■ ('''. ::.::•:::::7.: s..........„,..........., ....,*,. ...,................., , 1• , ,'','''.4617"E"Ti..3 L.'"""''''..''' ... 4•• ...• ... .."'''''.'.".' .''...."' ".'''.''"' I :0 . :ti.: A R 1r AS TO 131' I AREA - . I R 14,1,44S 1 0 1314, 14,, • , 1 1 1, 'I'Yl'IC',A1,.._ • 1 1 E, , .• ••• ., 47 k. );s r.de.e.•..k*vrAiii.sivx 1 R.t e. „ . . . t. • . . , . . , , . ,. , • . . , t • .±.....................±....F j. . _• 1,_ - - -- _:,:-_, ---_ - - . . 1 i• .1 , _._, .. . F . . i . . ._ _ . • , LIL.- . ia -'..,- 5 . _ , : ._ _ MEIER-& FRANK - - B ] _ _ . _ __ _n _s_ i _: , __ -__ -___ ,, _ ,, .-.. ."1,==.M.IMI:L : - i - --- - - - - - - .- . E _ . XIS77NG 1-LEVEL f J _ __ ___ __ , _ _ •._ __ _ ,, -- EXISTING SHOPS (TYR.) ___- ____ -------\_____J----irri _ •... . . ,__... , . .__ _,:: __. . _.- . . - ---raj\� - - - - - -- - -- - _ .- -� � - -.... .. _..I ...- _ -[:',- _ . : _ • -', ; 7--- - = --=- ----- --- -- - ' r - _-___ . - A- "til.mgv4E.g3::e.!:.•!:.g.:::-:-:--.-0K-4?-1.0,..._ ,, OlIggeggOK; _-_f - 0 f rj..... - . ., '_. -7---- ::£'` C� fi 1 - ,_- . ,,_ ,..: _�P ea „ _ c, _ . .....!, ,_ _ _ IT _ -- -- .- -- - -- ' .L' - - ---.- . _ - - •, _-.- ___ _ ,_, : ____ __ • _ — 4 - - -- - . t `'` s , F' ' 4,1 k- -t 1 jz, - - - - P' - \----1 - - f i ___- -____ i __ 4 . 1 ^-. ---- 4,- -_- 1.- '__-1 ._.4..- - -- l'--- -:4,-- ..: :lc- -..1 _--- - - - -- -- . . _.4,- - 1....ii•-:-,,,;_:: _ _.,_,__ ,_F-,..-: • . i. _ . • .. . . ...,_ _ . _ .,_. _.___..... . _ ... ..____,. .... .•._ . _ .... . ._ __ . _ _ . . • , _. . 1 A0-.:411- II-1 - _,...„; _ _ Le _,_ ) _ 4.. _ - „-_::•,-.._..-_,...__. :.-__._,___„-__:-..,...i,_,-,, ...,.„:_.___ ._._ _ ____,-111%.! 1 i - _..—.. .:3. - : - - 1 - r ek:::-.- - .:-,,:,,:_,:,-,-_;',--;:i-1--,.;---_.:,-.:-.•,,,it_f-,--",_44--4.:;=-"-:-_,._-----,,,,_7.,z,:....),F,,,,.. -_:,-„,:,-„,, -,..,:__,„,,,. --_-_,, -1___. t ___, _r,.y. �Ki r Y i,�qf a _ f♦ e i iRAS17 ARcI- - 4k., --- . - ._-__. . . i liiiiii: - -. - .-.-'-.- i .- -_ . _ . ._ .. , _ «Mi...'..M..,.•.•i.,i::i::J....«....,,,1sn.......u:—.u:,.-:.r1—+.,:...»:.»wlr-«..,ww.....d+t;•-:.::..:xar-+..Lw.....i...t.....,w.... - ,..::.u_i..ti.:.wv') .-..u-..:....«.R.::.........«.4.....+•Wa...wix:u..U:..:,—w.wu...'Y-.,-........,.s,+.._w....-.,.:xGJ+.:.,uw..,•:«..4'Wt4�..::S.rv.{ru.:ra...A«...sra'wok.:-:•wN'a::a�.i•:.tC<a.'ww,.w_.:awu.n«.c•u...u.•w. " ' ' ENTERPRISES ENTERPRISES t ' 11080 SW ALLEN, SUITE 600 .1080 SW ALL4, ° SUITE 600 , h..ww BEAVERTON OR 97005 BEAVERTON OR 97005 1S127DD-000100 1512600-01100 f ' y • T. MICHAEL & ASSOCIATES LTD. WASHINGTON SQUARE PLAZA • 9200 E. MINERAL AVENUE BY THE CAFARO COMPANY ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80112 P 0 BOX 422 FLORHAM PARK NJ 07932 0,. 15126C0-01111 .... .. 1512600-01109 HUDESMAN, DAVID & LINDA CO TRS SQUARE LAND CO 1620 43RD AVE EAST BY JC PENNEY CO STORE 288 SEATTLE WA 98112 FIELD TAX OFFICE FO BOX 4015 BUENA PARK CA 90624 1512600-01108 1S126C0.01200 ' , ' SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO DAYTON HUDSON CORPORATION SEARS TOWER, BSC 41-35 BY TARGET #345 TAX DPT 14-1 • BY TAX DEPT 970W 777 NICOLLET MALI, t' 600 SIERRA MADRE VILLA MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 PASADENA CA 91107 E( 1S12600.01301 .. 1S126C0-01302 .• n . • •• .• • • •. •. ..... FRINGE LAND ORE LTD FRINGE LAND ORE LTD % FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OR PO BOX 21545 BANK TRUST PROPERTY DIV SEATTLE WA 98111 PO BOX 3131 •.;; , PORTLAND OR 97208 1S126C0-01303 1512600-01403 .... •« .» FRINGE LAND ORE LTD MAY DEPARTMENT BY FIRST NATAL BANK OF OREG STORES COMPANY THE ? ' '' BANK TRUST PROPERTY DIV 621 SW 5TH ' PO BOX 3131 1 PORTLAND OR 97204 • • . PORTLAND OR 97208 1S126C0-01805 15126C0-01900 . .. •� . TOYS °"R" US, INC CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ASS' 395 WEST PASSAIC ST CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ROCHELLE PARK No' 07662 00000 Y • 3 f • 1 • gg f,' • 4 [...' • SRSr.• ,.,.: ;. :, ,..,...,,, ,, ., ,.,,, ,.. . . .,. � .. ,. ..... . Y , M. r 0 ' 4+a ..«.1. a „ 44 J.J w.. l Y 4. .n.•A+.At w u A,a,.),Ii.. i , w(i.ti r+N. .L..n.t:l-..K.•-.. 14,-••F .1 ..i-r n J+.+«.64 mW,xew.e,wu,..x_.,..�, x REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • TO.• :1;22....N.Lehlirk,d&O DATE. December 2, 1991 ° FROM: Tigard Planning Department f • O RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0020 WINMAR PACIFIQ•,• INC. (NPO #8) A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately • 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department store. ZONE; C-G (General Commercial) The C-G zoning allows public agency administrative f' services, public support facilities, professional and administrative ' services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, and single-family residential units among other uses. ' LOCATION: 9585 SW Washington S are Road WCTM 1S1 26C, tax lots 1107, 1101, and 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section 18.120 )7" C; Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Dee:. 12, 1991. YOU may �r use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If y9u are unable to respond bar the above dato, please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as Boon as ,. possible. If you .have any question0 regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: ,:.. 639-4171. �{ STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: • We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. r Please contact of our office. 4 Please refer to the enoloBed letter. Written itten Comments: • I Name of PerBon Commenting: Phone Number: akm/SDR91-20.I M ( 0-';" • 4 f ' . • 4• f . . 1. .w :.'.,.....s..._ ...:_.4w.n n.n...:...:Y....lJ1«...+..n..r.r:..✓..r...i-r....d..v_:..nJ....+....„.'>�1J I�� FICATION s S .. .., . , . . tk vie ,.. . , /-- .. '.. _,, LIST FOR ALL FiPPL$OAP., u z F , w, i CPO NO • END NO• (Z) copies _____ � . 2. CITY DEPARTS • '. , _ Building Official/Brad R. Parks & Recreation ', Board • C y Recorder Police' . ••-' ,E gineera.ng/Chria D.. Field Operations ' . ✓' Permits Coordinator/Viola G. , 3. SPECIAL DISTRICTS • �� "Fire District School Dist No. �48 � 5 ••,” (Pick-up box) (Beaverton) • Joy Pahl PO Box 200 Beaverton, OR 97075 ns Tigard Water District School Diet. 23J 8777 SW Burnham St. (Tigard) ' Tigard, OR 97223 13137 SW Pacific Hwy. . Tigard, OR 97223 `Y'ual tin Valley Water District 6501 SW Taylors Ferry Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 , 4. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS • Wash. Co. Land Use & Transp. Boundary Commission 150 N. First Ave'. 320 SW Stark Room 530 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Portland, OR 97204 Brent Curtis • _ Kevin Martin METRO __ oann Rice 4.•.; A',�P. � 2000 SW let ave. ' t.% Scott Icing '',,,;: Portland, OR 97201- Fred Eberle ., 5398 Mi a B©rreson r DLCD (CPA's only) City of Beaverton 1175 Court St. NE f' • i Jim Hendryx Salem, OR 97310-0590 PO .Box 4755 • • . Beaverton, OR 97076 Ve Other i.��w{ n� ► Mr� F ,,.. OD01- :-PI took.9 hi. �� (�tirGi t ►� , State Highway Division /'2- P , . Bob Doran ' PO Box 25412 Portland, OR 97225-0412 :' , - `,1 / 5. SPECIAL AGENCIES ; t y' 'eneral Telephone r Portland Genera 'E Elec. 14655 SW Old oll Russ Wells Brian Moore 12460 SW Main St. ��S'cb s ,.Fry. � • T`r ard, OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97007 Gss io NW Natural ural �� Metro Area Communications ns Scott Palmer Jason. Hewitt 220 NW Second Ave. Twin Oaks Tedhnology Center Portland, OR 97209 1815 NW 169th Place 8-6020 Beaverton, OR 97006-4886 TCI Cablevi pion of Oregon. Mike Haliock US West 3500 SW Bond St, Pete .Nelson Portland; OR 97201 421 SW Oak St, Portland, OR , 9/204 ,_,__ Columbia Cable (Frank Stone) 14200 SW Erigadoon Ct. Beaverton, OR 97008 1 i i r I� ' ,... ,.,�...,, . . ,,,. ,,. , .,_ , ..N,,... ,.. _,1-....,....c..,J..r..r„I,.,,.w., .,._. _ ,,..,.•,+.w.».....w,,,..m., .,,ii. s. .,.,,.,,_.... F »te. �hw _ ... ..a<..,...... .._,w..w,u..w..lar�..w.,-w.ti_..'.:..._,.u.. ' iG 6 STATE AGENCIES Aeronautics Div. (ODOT) DOGAHI Engineer Division of State Lands Board of Health Commerce Dept. - M.E~. Park Fish & Wildlife Parks & Recreation Di IvA.,,s..,l. ,_,.-......W..«..c.....•-.,..,u4,:.4.,u.+.» m«�..., -n».«-i.._..-.......•,«,+:_«......�..�•...w.w.».:t.-,,..r,.l,..l..,..-w.w..�. _ ,1' ..,.,w.,., x ..,,.-n„a..-....::.1.............1...,a..'dM�.i..AU..I�..a.vM..,.:J(,.:..J.ra.....?.r.,:...,r,.w_.:f.,a,u,+wa k.,w,w.,.,.....w,:da r �u..w,'tr.l'1.w.M.,u�«c.wtix..,ti:rry+,ii WwnuwJ Yv+>,w...,...�,In...-,q,uaK..n!_w1.+K,.... 'u:a+.w.'n.+T'...w« lu,.-•all,n,w.�w.+ ...•rr n..ww.v«-'•n•w.•.,++' _ r«w«'w•,.f.W. ,wr"Mr',r.-w1��-.,.w,a.j..•r• .w.�.*.+�yt*••.•r�+;w'..m•r:, .r+.•ry-•,x-,.w.�-w...w,ySaW.w'rY nwxx'Yr!„ .r' y. •. ,I /' ' i, ., ., i to I I ., f f I ' I , l 1• • y "f'y /1 "(, p/ . rAgis ivi 1. W ,`II11,. a'i Cf R, (�AM'+ .3', -t- i`1!t1"4l w fir, "� • ad.I , 4,1 ��Nl .t�i rr. !1 '� ""8H 1'[4M7�. �A ��, k1 (1)p' e l',�,.p j1 '¢�'4k ,ry, �JL 'yl'Mt��� .µ(�t yk Nf" N��` 'YM.7 i•-F x I M x�'SWa'0 Fm+. RH �R ;W,I�.,df.y1,Y lM+e' '/91 r.1 ,RIf Yd)'s Aknl Yf a\11P ,'y, I.l'Yn;f1$,Y,N�' \NA`.. V 1114 "r ,;. t ;(. $ 1 � I £' 014 NI 'li � µ.,W, Y )�f y may, YIyW • • �7'�' yy}}1)('1,t.Wv ML,,''���%%1yy1y�t{r1 'Ipi1 1`1 pµ.MN,r, {�My���1�,yyyyW!.� y�,'Q�'�ytxN�M `r.N N, �,y;bi. ,(. \M{lA' }q5y�,,W �4(,.y14�,�}(I�1ry1�(1r IS'iml S' 1''1M0� P'MW ISA,Px I I ,,..I s1 F I �r P1S��w'�M�TMS4'ahY. lYlf�il A �1�•'7�.M 1'Pn',Y1�J� � Y;R��MAk���,fi P �r�� � 1 'WdC�^4 � S Wi1MN 'k•yMN1N4WM11.i Pn Wrv+wglN xgf•IwWMWW1A1NiNq+W.w'RINUrw,ur^IN,fW+uNW yy,,WW� VtY.+KN AINNM4441.LW-1,∎KbwSNNx,.**MNM11 1464041n/ s4/ 11,4.1 1•,P•ao.NU:.0...Nx*iYrvg141.4lit"'{4,xsI�WIY /NrAM4:+nn4n'+rNMMIn14F'aV,M Si/x.et4nMM1,M"tSN r' A d x°'w • 0 "ate" t-'1.01M fxi'.F 1 .. • � , .,I ail � , I i, t ' ��F t �,' 1t 1 I A 1 I 1 I M' urp• tl { r+' y rn+. «d' w"n w..a , M yy d � 1� ,4 1 1 W{tV J��nn 1 ryj1�,pJ Q�,1 r1 r$[p�� �r�� �` �x �. .t.wxas+�.+M...Mr'wa.l..w w-nh+W.,ruuWn+.Mrs+�wWW-,wWaw:Wq r+u..+..k.w:w.W;,aW+.r»4R4.+,x.an..M•'��t+'.+n,ds..+,.w.w,., ,w.r«.a .,..w .. u.c..,ax u,w..-..wr x....,...,aw ....,. a. •..,...�,•.t.a,r �rl•_...x...w:u,e.L+w,u;W.w.+"w.,nl�w•+:.:4.+e.Nh.rW.u..M.dw."+'..Mnr..w,....W.•,..wm.v.4i.:a.aUq,+pnl"ra,�w.µua+r•x...awnulW '4',W."'IW,,1� • 1 J I I , 1 I , ' I .,r r � 4C I 1 r • i r M e a u . ' .1 • • 'r..-,,.,,,.....a ..,....,_...,.,W.. ._..,.,.._...•. 11.'..I..,.w.. ........... _ ,.. _.... _ . .. _...... ....,.._.,.,....,.»...,.x....-,,. .l_.........,.....,_».......,.,..,., ._....,...,.+,'.J.:.'`, u,.._..1.»....,....,.,.t-..,..; ' a...,_._ rt,.a,.,. l po, of • A"�_ , MEMORA DUM '0 04��I0,1 f��•�� J CITY OF TIGA.RD, OREGON arif F TIGARD TO: Hal Keever/Blake, Lettenmaier W&H Pacific OREGON FROM: Jer. r f far, Development Review Planner DATE: October 14, 1992 SUBJECT: Washing tor,. Square Parking Lot 1 . Tigard Community Development Code (CDC) Chapter 18.120 (Site'' o Development Review) requires the review and approval of development , plans within commercial and industrially zoned properties to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. Washington Square is zoned C-G (General Commerci.tl) W&H Pacific has submitted plans for paving and upgrading of an existing gravel parking lot at Washington Square .for Planning Division review as a Site Development Review minor modification to an existing development. The proposed improvement is clearlyy a minor modification to an existing development (CDC 18.120.080.A) . Minor modifications may be approved or approved subject to conditions as long as the plans , will not violate any CDC provision (CDC 18.120.080.C) . I have -reviewed W&H Pacific's late st plan submittal dated O ct 7, 1992 and have determined that this plan will not violate any CDC provisions, as long as certain signs or pavement markings are provided. The plans are therefore approved as a Site Development Review minor modification subject to the following conditions. First, all compact parking spaces must be designated as such 4 on the pavement (CDC 18.106.020.0.1) . } . Second, all aisieways must be pavem ent markings designated for one-way traffic only, either bby �n, � � . �� or signs. None of the a'S.s lewd s .within the proposed parking. lea t would satisfy the • minimum 24 foot width requirement for two way traffic specified by CDC 18.106.050.0. pavement markings as well as all other proposed The � above noted p�a�r »wed elements of the October 7, 1992 site and landscaping plans for this 1 in place prior to use of the parking lot. . lot, must be �. �h� p �'� � ' The Building Division has do ne a preliminary. review. of the parking . ' lot plans .. submitted Site to. Development Review no ) problems with the plans. However, Jim ja� of the �xl�ing Div i sion notes that no building permit a pplication or payment of � fees has yet ocourred. If you +, ' have guestions,� ple se call Jim at 639.4171: . • SW all Blvd.,1140,8oX 23397►Tlgard,Oregon 97223 003)639-417i 68Li=7ak e i 17. Y • .',+� ^, • ..w.i.:.....,�..-...t,:. ,...,.awe..dL,..�a. .....,....,...-,L».a.H...�..i.,.,..-ti.,.n.�a.L+-4.-,. ,,..........._,....,,iH.,».,... i;,.a.c w...»+,as._:...a...»,..._....'r:..u_;rt,., w�a,�a.....1>,-,-,.v..,,.+..,,«,.it...�.�•a.: -.....,.. �,r.�o-«,,..,, .+::t..,..,.x49:.'.;s�'..';.I,x�.,�..r..4.: • i-4r•.A.�r,:wn.�Lir�imr�N+.,� tF.��:wa�:i�.�, YllW51.;--�IUN��.A�:.3:StJL1, r'LC:+:'N.hy4 M a' ',.-.'‘. :', . I 8405 S.W.Nimbus Avenue , " ' PO,Box 80040 ' ' . , Portland,OR 97280 . September 4 1992 RECEIVED CEIVED PLANNfNG SEP K Mr. Jerry Offer City of Tigard Planning Department 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: WASIIING'TON SQUARE OVERFLOW PARKING � Dear Jerry: . . e 'Per our telephone conversation, I am forwarding three sets of plans of the overflow parking lot at Washington Square. • As we discussed a couple of months ago (and as the plans indicate) Winrnar would like to pave the r' existing graveled ov i low parking lots This parking lot is typically used by employees during the Christmas shopping season and is in excess of any of the required parking. , In addition to paving the existing surface, we have tapped into the storm system to facilitate good surface • drainage. i . Please review the enclosed plans,route to the appropriate staff and call.,me',,should you have ary questions. Sincerely, &H PA IFI , I r• Hal Keever. A,S.LA. Associate Developmcnt, Services Manager i • is, Enclosures . (.1A– —,t dl'A( (4c-s•l,wptAA.e..4,‘,,,..ie ' 0,, J , a A A4 ,(iv e Je at, ., I — -may, k A'0cs, ,„4t,5:4,,,,,,,,,:,4 �I .r ,�+, , ''r»"'.'�. s.+k ",, 1,6 L ''. . -- 0,/ f:..4,,t4,;,,,14,4 ';t4::`. 15 r Ci 1G+ yyet_ Ia ',4„�+k.,�,v,,,,rtz,},L P t,..,,,„ , +..!..L..L ', t I. Ci c //AI-. t-44 kr :;,),,E4e,4 604,8711dt, "'''' 405-cti,l'00) 001 it-5;i„,t,,)19t,,,,,,kto-i,iiii,„„ , , .,. , . .-- thillc-,,,,014/4ils , ,,,,,,, t ti +,, i of '5C8��2�-C45Fats�a�52�w0775 Planning' ��i��e�11� trrey�xb Landscape Architecture Environmental Services W . . Kati ., •S' 1 r 41'4 e 7 . - i • ,i it • CITY OF 'TIGARD r PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ' q DATE. �"�� 1 . APPLICANT: 6 - ...„ _;lQ . , _, AGENT: 'JML.. rC” V r� i.G' f . ' Pr\NJ D � � ' - t 2, P4c » ' ' ' . Phone: 4 ' Phone: CoPen' 1 L ' . J. ° FA S, ,C. -0" 55 �F 5 , • .• . ' ' PROPERTY LOCATION i ' ADDRESS: t �, . 7 � ' r . TAX MAP & 'TAX LOT: ' ti , NECESSARY APPLICATION(S)s � J) E.,• ,,n M ��'L t�� .;�.: � � ��} i�1 eat?& /�' t, l dc' �, _ a� PROPOSAL'DESCRIPTION: I g ='>( t� I iu ._ PAieViti.J6.1 tor 1, ,: 1 ,,, I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 'DESIGNATION: cit ti. ,,1 k''A 1---' "l iVi I '' ' , t. ZONING 'DESIGNATION: "*`'�,.� ' �_ e . NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION # CHAIRPERSON: t `M t•,...°6'r" ' ' ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSION REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size: N ! 2 sq. ft',. , s • C „ Minimum lot width: 450 ft„' Setbacks: front- 0 ft.' side- ' it., rear-2, ft. ' ' garage- ;� ft. ' corner--_,�„•, ft. from both atreeta. Maximum site coverage: c*,* ' 1 i� '{�°tLG 1 Minimum landscaped or natural',vegetation areas ,% ' . • Maximum building height: 45? ft. , 1 H, ' ' '.. . 4 ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ' � J..� ' Minimum'lot frontage: 25 feet unless ,lot is crated through the minor land ' ' ,, i ' „ partition pr° se . L tc 'created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 1 See• �rd 1ta a or have a minimum 15 foot wide access ' , easement. t • ' ( Maximum lot depth t width ratio of 2.,'5 to '1. ' , SPECIAL S;TSACICS it Stye iY wiWNk from centerline CJ " E stab°l hedioateY s+a f t. from Low.er.o ea 4 ' n r°t ,. ..,, ft.,, along the site's', boundary d Flag lot: 10 ft. side yard setback ' , . Access a structxred. u P to 523 s' ft a in sLx e-� f t s etb ack fro m tide ,, , and rear lot lines S eessor. ' struc , up to 10001 tel. ! (w..,, .eo allowed) plc ,� tu_ee. ft. - See Zero lot line°lots. minimum J g foot" i pp ng dietriot aotbacka Multi-family residential building se tion ra See Code; eot: o , it.6 e • Multi. i porn y See >ky, 1®�96«+�1p ;� , 1 ,Page I 1 post-!ttM brand t& ,•'ansm'ittal memo 7671 #of 0,0;et T 'grooms . 4^ 6 f� 1 " H 4 V wh S CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES {: r DATES: Mi G '1 I ___14LAA �Ig APPLICANT: t r d " e .. AGENT: f'f" L. key-f,„1",,,62„,,,_____ . Phone: FA 2.(0. Z PROPERTY LOCATION ,. ADDRES:a: d A o ofi o „„:),OpliEja TAX MAP & TAX LOT: ,/• ti�� Y.FifIW i NECESSARY APPLICATION(S): ELO 1.N1 x` Y i1VH /10 ROrit PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: P4 I r PA-te i\J6,1 LcYr . 111.J .i'°t r�'�' ' "` 1 4 tof COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ` + ' ""'' - 1z':' ", ('.,. ZONING DESIGNATI N^ , , $ NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING.ORGANIZATION #k. 3 ,' CHAIRPERSON T 4- .. ... PHONE: &i O -- 7`d 0 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAT1 REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size: iNeNts0 sq. ft. Minimum lot width: 4 Ift. Setbacks: front- ;) ft. side-Cf,d ft., rear-C.) fto garage- ft. cornet- ft. from both streets. �. Maximum site coverage: o % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area. % Maximum building height: 45 ft ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMEN'T'S Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition pre ss. L is created as part of a partition must have a mininn m of 15t» -rb lt"age or have a minimum 15 foot wii,de access easement. Maximum lot depth� vadth ratio of 2.5 to 14. SPECIAL SETBACKS from centerline of i E st ab31 'heefar-eas~ ft. from Lowe .'ntenaii -s nett*r ., r along the site's boundary • up to 528 S ft ft.b � LL . in i� ze=5 f setback Flag lot: 10 ft. side yard setback ssor � and rear S . aek fsr�aih side ,�.coe y structures: � � lot lines Acoesscory structures: up to /000 sq. ft. (Where allowed:, See applicable zoning district setbaoits • Zero lot line lats: minimum foot se ar atiOn between bu � ngs MuZ t_ famiiy esidentia l building Separation: See Code Section 18.96 .C30 •� page ' . g e i • II 1r • a_ nxn.... r..Rl:i. wMi.li.. _Yi.......rn,......n..N_] ._r.....♦ .., __._ .a .. _.... ......_....•,...... nl...... _. ...M1.r.......m u... rr.1.. .w.i.•..♦vx.... 4.4..e.- _. i. .1,_ .. t .s.. i_. i. _ .J. ♦.1.• • ,1 option requires -a: ' % of the glass and 500 square feet of the roof area to, ce south an. •e protected from shade. Total or'partjAd.'exor.1,ption of a site om the solar access requirement can be for the/flowing reasons: . 1. E t, west or north slopes steepe than 20%. f' 2. Off-site shade sources (structure: vegetation, topograply^ 3. /On-site 'shade sources (vegetation) A4dustments allowing reduction of the 80% solar lot de .gn requirement can 1 for the following reasons: i /i. Reduced density or an increased co:-.t 11' at least five percent due •- east, west or north slope grease k than 10%, - significant natural featu ;, - existing road or loth, cpatter , public' easement oregght-of-w 2. Reduction in impoj nt developme t amenities. • 3. Pre--existing s d(vegetation) Maps and tex.tom,dufficient to show th development complies with the solar a,. design standard, except for lots fok which an 'exempt{;on or adjustment is "-requ-±fed, including all of the fo o' owing items: '. 1. The north-south lot dimenson, and front lot line orientation of each proposed lot.' r • 24 Protected solar building lines and relevant, building site restrictions, if app11 able. 3. For the purpose of ifientifying trees exempt from Section F, a map existing � at least feet over 6 showing ng tees a' le�,� 30 .meet tall'' rand ove inches diameter at a 'point 4 feet above :grade, including their height diameter and spe•ies, and stating that they are to be retained and j( are exempt. s 4. Copies of al private restrictions relating to solar access. . - If an exemption/Or adjustment is requested, maps and text sufficient to y show that giveri� lots or afeas in the development comply with the standards for such an/exemption or adjustment shall be submitted. RESIDENTIAL D gSITY TRANSITION Regarfless of the allowed housing density in a zoning district, any property within 100 feet of a designated established area shall not be p anadesignation�(not zoning) of th Comprehensive Pl. .. 125 phe�acl;�acent parcel. PARKING AND ACCESS ) „- Required automobile parking for this 4pe2oT xx se: ! Secondary use require parking:' ` 25% of required sp a"ces may y y b e designated con act�o n ly spaces. Standard parking spade „ f X 18 ft. Comp act p arkin! space dimensions: 8 5 ft. X 15 ft. • Handicapped parking: All l parking areas providing in excess of fie required automobile parking spaces shall provide appropriately located and designated handa ca pp ed parking spaces. The minimum number of handicapnz d Page 3 • y1 ' T 1 /A► , i .. ' • ..,,.4x iw M.lij»M xG1:.Aiai.l.r+:n4w.141,...-t ul. -...........«. .. .. u..0...rn..w... ,..r _ . i , .. r,.lrr...-..wu. ♦.,.....a.....h.A..... Ha..+.......xx.. rx.-........t.c.,.v.i .. ., . ..«, i r.. a r., ......- wu4trw.,'l . parking spaces to be provided and parking space size are mandated by the g Oregon Revised Statutes (see handout) . A handicapped parking space • symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate' /, sign shall be provided. Bicycle racks are required for civic uses non-residential uses, � i c commercial uses, and l'industrial uses providing 15 or more automobile parking spaces. Bicycle parking must be provided at a ratio of one bicycle rack space per 15 auto parking spaces. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic. The Planning Division can provide specifications for approved bicycle rack types. ~ All parking areas and driveways must be paved, 1 I Drive-in use queuing areas: I I • Minimum number of acce sera • Minimum access width: __ _sti a � /A-7 /1 .--' d �- Maximum access width: I I , r . II Pedestrian access must be provided between building entrances and parking areas, outdoor common areas, and public sidewalks and streets. • For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses, see Community Development Code Chapters •1$.106 and 18.108. I CLEAR VISION AREA The City requires that clear vision be maintained between three and eight feet above grade at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road • intersections I in specified clear vision areas. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional M classification. I I LANDSCAPING Street trees are required for all developments fronting on a public or ' mustatb be placed either within the than ubl0c right-of-way g orStreet on eprivate property within six feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must , have a minimum caliper of two inches at four feet above grade. Street trees should 20 to 40 feet apart d be rs spaced regulations affecting street information on regula f gp reet trees and a list of ..,0 depending on mature tree size. recommended street trees be obtained from t he Planning Division. . I � A minimum of one t ree per seven parking rkin, s' aI ces must be planted in and i around parking a re as in ordei t provide a canopy effect. Landacaped screenin g of p kin g ar ea s from views from publ i,C rights-of-way must be provided. • • ' I I a .e I 9 1 II I U I I I I I I I I I I r I I I I '.:.i.:..w t.._,..... ...,..._,.., w. _...,.: .,.n.,Li.,.,. ._.x:::.»--.._„tw.m......, ,...G.,. .. _ .,..,.., ._,N.,u, ».,.,,,.... .».... ......,......,..,.....a , .... . , • PROCEDURE j"" ' ,d � � r Administrative staff review. Public hearing before the land use hearings officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission, Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission ` making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. Another public hearing is held by the City Council. All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff.'member at the Community Development Department counter at City Hall. Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division I, . acceptance may be returned. Applications submitted after 4:30 P.M. on Thursday will be batched for processing with the following week's applications for processing. No applications will be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other days. ' s submitted with an application shall be folded in advance to 8.5 by 11 inches, One 8.5 inch by 11 inch map of a proposed project should be Y P P p P 7 submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. The Planning Division and Engineering Division will do a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 10 days of submittal. Staff will notify an applicant if additional information or copies of the Submitted materials are needed. The administrativ decision/public hearing typically will occur approximately 4 -64-days after an application ie accepted as complete ' by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult issues or requiting review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written decisions are issued within 10 days of the hearing. A 10 day appeal period follows all decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the A basic flow diagram illustrating the review process is available from the Planning Division. ' The pre--application Conference and the notes of the Conference are intended to inform the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to development of a particular Bite and to allow the staff and prospective applicant to discuss the r„ n opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. r Failure of the staff to provide any information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the L community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting ttin J an application. Another -- rea PP cat ion li conference is required if an application is to be P enc unlesst more than months after the Second confe enc d is dee d unnecessary by conference, the Plannin Planning Division. PREPARED OPV: PLANNING VISION PHONE: Pa 1. 4v d • ,,::-.,.....:..uk.a».nw.'..µ..:..,...+a..-..,„.w.»..,�w:x:'.;..+x,ii,.., .. _..t. ,,,,......,..,...,« .w.i.x ,..w„-r.c .xwa m.,..,.:_.,-...w.-�.,. n.,... ,.....,.,• ..,.,.. ._ r..,u.•..,, ... ..m.. .,.... ,.. ., ,. .._ • • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS TO: DATE: December 2. 1991 ! FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 9/--0020 WTNMARI PACIFIC INC. (NPO #8) A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department store. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) The C-G zoning allows public agency n,dminietrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support • services, and single-family residential units among other uses. LOCATION: 9585 SW Washington Square Road (WCTM 151 26C, tax `,lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section. 18.120 Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your 'review, From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Dec. 12, 1991. You may use the space provided below or, attach a separate letter to return your comments. ' u yo are, unab1e to respond by the above date;. please phone the staff contact. /. noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard fi Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFFN CONTACT: Jerry Jerr Offer PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: proposal and have no objections We have �reviewed the p p to Please con tact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: li 1�.r _ �rrrwrr I � � � I I tame of Person Commenting:' ld Phone NUntier:� ' i JJ r ,1 i 1 1 4 .. .-r r L.u4..rr.n.••. .w.. ...>7.4 a....,Aw.t ..w.ria.a.._.a 1w...,m4 r. r ,w.rw..mut....rnNw....+a..n n•:a.ra s...r°•r wa..r>...i.--_.I.w.. -,.. i � N• Ali ) - REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • r . • , TO: 4 ;i , ,,., f�,. w DATE: December . 1991 '61 .-; OZ4: Tigard Planning Department. w '' . . RE:, s/TR DEVELOPMENT VIEW. sDB 91-0020 WIN 2, PACX JC-, INC (NPs #8) ' t A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately , 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a depaxtMent store. ZONES C-C r (General Commercial) The C-G zoning allows public agency administrative 4: services, public support factlittes, professional and administrative ,. ,k services, financial,•, insurance, real estate, and business support aervicea, and single:family residential, units among other use LOCATION: , 9685 SW Washington Square Road (WCTM 1S1 26C, tax then 1107, 1403., and .• . 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section L 18.120 r 0 � ar• Attached iS the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your revie. . From information supplied by various departments and agencies and,. •rn other N information available to our staff, a report and recommend -- • epared and a decision will be .rendered on the proposal in ;,t hg2d®ar future.' If yo. with to comment on this application, we need your commedits by Doc, 22, 1901. Y. may use the space proved below or attach a separate:Lett to return yourre ents • If .you. Mrs unable to s sx nr the abav �atea please aff contact sY.1/I tM�1 YW� iW�i / rA '�+�"�. Y, rooted below with your comments and confirm your coMments in writing as soon as possible, If you have any a uestiOns regarding thin matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PC Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.r Tigard, OE 97223. PHOuE: t 639-.4171. TAPP CONTACT: r. PLEASE CHECX THE 'PO4OWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: we reviewed the prcpae .l, and have no objections e hab�e a ve eta it Pleatle contact of our office. _ ?lea00 refer to the enclosed 'letter, . .�F Written ,Comments: t t .4bris,,,,At .. CD -,t, 111L-N- -. A. 4 *L."•_____________ N—dt___6;,..,____LIre-A CA-....A. _ ....:TIP 4..-11 _1 r 1d.,r r r r I Name of ors ri Ci uics,rYt irtg: �" :5 P ot ?. Number:1h k:r. w FhAqr-"`'''-''''''...—"''''"•'-'.4 to aJ 1 I :{m ....r.w...-.,:r4..w.+.+'...-.,..w.....w...h..,.,;•1.«4..ir.w-..,»...........r+»W...+:.N...x.....__...,«..,..,,..,,. J.. ..n n .. „1..,.. ...,.1+Y..+.w....-JU«u.1.A:t«..:..1..... n...e.».....w...Jw...--J.✓..-tH..:,,..«s..c,t....F.k .....a,.. 1...».r..F ti-'..]1.Jwsw...a.:w+'.,rv'1.+J1 r.-. mJ+R....7J.::....aM.. ..., ,JJJyyy((ry.44n 011. RECEIVED OE t: 'hid DEPARTMENT OF ;' December' 11, 1991 CoMMUNLV tiEVELOPMEN1 TRANSPORTATION Highway Division �. ., RECEIVED PLANNING Region ' r•. Tigard Planning Department FILE CODE: City of Tigard DEC 1 199' PO Box 23397 I PLA 9-1 Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: SDP, 91-0020 Winmar Pacific, Inc. This proposal has been reviewed by ODOT Region 1 Plan Development (Dave h' Williams), Land Use Planning (Lidwien Rahman) and Transportation Analysis (Tom Schwab), and by Maintenance District 2A (Robert Doran). In light of Winmar's participation in the proposed Tigard Diamond Transportation 'I Study(consistent with the recommendation of the Transportation Impact Analysis for the Washington Square Shopping Center Expansion, prepared by Kittelsou and Associates), ODOT has no objection to this expansion, provided the following condition is attached to any approval: #{ Financial participation by Wismar Company, Inc., in its share of • transportation improvements as determined in the Tigard Diamond Transportation Study. The City of Tigard should require a bond or other type of assurance to ensure compliance with this condition even after design review approval and issuance of building permits. Lidwien Rahman Use/Transportation Land. . . annex.. LR'am2129 I3 ,F1 �t 9002 5E McLoughlin ' Milwaulde,OR,97222 ' 7 (50 3)655-3090 FAX(5 03)3 653-3267 U a>ti..__M...,.r.....n...,ls. .M..aui.Jdk......nL........+.».dH...._k...- -_. .-, „- .. .. .........i.J..✓.«.t...,.n-.w.,.....A. H..w1s.I,.J..w..hi...».K.W. ..,.w....a..a,.:F«.»4..w«., .x ,a.ix .,, ..--. <......,nuu w.r,...x n.rs iaK.s.w...a. x - 223 4S'oo i' h7 STATE OF OREGON INTEROFFICE. MEMO ' ro Lidwien Rahman bATE: D rreittliv ! nPlanner . FROM: •Robert P. Doran DEC 4 1991 Assistant District Manager �D SUBJECT: CITY OE TIG Washington Square Shopping Center Expansion Beaverton-Tigard, Beaverton-Tualatin, Scholls Ferry Highways • Washington County • The transportation impact analysis for the Washington Square expansion proposal recommends that a full transportation study of the area be conducted to determine the long term traffic needs. It also states that intersections which presently serve the Washington Square area currently operate at unacceptable levels, but the proposed project will not put roadways which serve it into the next lower level of service. Even though a lower level of service is not expected, there will be a negative impact; therefore, it will be closer to the next lower level of service. This proposal should not be approved until the recommended full transportation study of the area is completed. If approval is given before the study, there will be no incentive for the study. No development in this area should be approved study is completed. eve roved until a stud iI /' RPD:mbb / cc: Tom Schwab Aortandy Wooley • I ' 61+125-1307 • ',,Y •• I • ,.,:,. ..,.M.IM...tirlJxrusn.u-..,.,M t+..4,..„,4v.w,.F...=., NaxLI..-,,...n w,aa4.•.. .... ..... ..... .._..u.+.J-Niy,x,.y.ww_r..w.,...,ud_..++":3w:...u.GG:..A.e..D,.ti'»1,,..,,,,...:.a.-:1...:w.6.:,.+wr.,.«.«+.u:r,:,a.u.:::.r ks+:t;.+rxwr'.LeC;.t.,..t2.:..Ir..,I ..:A7.*Uv.w.;::'...i.n:i:;.i:.�:.ld:'S rv,+".iL..:.'+tila.:t..u:,aYrawu.wenl.+N.., .., Washington Square Expansion• Tigard, Ore,174. TRIP GENERATION Because the assumed trip generation characteristics represent the basis for the entire traffic P impact analysis that will follow, special care has been taken to ensure the reasonableness of these estimates. In particular,the trip generation rates used within this analysis are based upon the results of empirical observations at numerous similar shopping center developments located throughout the United State,, as detailed within a standard traffic engineering reference manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (Reference 6). JI Table 7 presents a summary of the gross number of vehicle trip ends expected to be generated upon expansion of Washington Square. Estimates of trip generation were made for both the existing center and the proposed expanded center. As shown in Table 7, the *�: existing center generates approximately 38,260 daily trips on an average weekday and 45,970 daily trips on an average Saturday. These estimates were verified by a comparison with entering traffic volume counts provided by the shopping center. Shopping Center expansion would result in an increase of approximately 1,870 daily trips to the center during the weekday and an increase of 1,710 daily trips during a Saturday. • This amounts to a 4 to 5 percent increase in daily trips to the center. The total daily trips to the center would be 40,130 and 47,680 during the weekday and Saturday,respectively with. ' the expansion. An estimated 8.7% of weekday daily trips occur during the p.m. peak hour. This amounts to approximately 3,320 p.m. peak hour trips today and approximately 3,470 p.m. peak hour trips with the proposed expansion. Table 7 sunimar`zes the gross trip f generation characteristics on a daily and p.m. peak hour basis for both the existing and expanded shopping center. The trip generation estimates shown in Table 7 are considered conservative since the primary component of the expansion is increasing the site of the existing Nordstrom store, which will likely not proportionately increase the number of trips t o • Nordstroms, relative to the amount of retail space being added. 7 I , -31- TRAPP11C IMPACT ANALYSIS 1 , ..".` • rµ.a "+ak....A.ua.....+-.t N ,....... .,,.........._«.-.�--.-Udk..F,.f.-.i,t.w.net,a++...,-.-« sa.n».v1w v...,i Wµ rk ....w-�...�r. .r 1.� * w v«- .M.F.r L....1.-44aG+.4. -....w L. «.0++1H F,.rWFwri1I-IwWm .,....»»«n 4.0... 12/01/92 /4'17 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROP, INC ! 001 • 4 , SAFECO PROPERTIES, INC. ' '4NMAR COMPANY, INC. 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 P. +O, Bo 21545 Seattle, WA 98104-5026 Seattle, WA 9811-3545 (206)223-45011 TELECOPY COVER SHEET f \. • /g.._. ./, , , 1 iip Tong COMPANY NAME; '. ti /1 '�' v.Imo mow on. • Tekkcopier Na nbet U.'5.- ..__..2 ''' ......7 FROM: NUMBER. OF PAGES, INCLLIDING THIS PAGE: w...._ ...�.._._._.a.,..d,.a. .� a�XEa a Gt!utact ut246/223- c ` ! !/( if there i any problem with thig transmission, �t A COMMENTS: r I , i • 1 ■ Our unattended telecbpier 206/223-456 ,fir x + o • i..AU4Y.+l«r�:.,-w...a,l 1. ..•r 4u..-.b..i.-«k..n,41.-ia...',{'w.......lw-::.Iw M«.rrl..n..�J.n>.I a.,.4n..r+l+N r 0...n a . 1 •uw n y �,,, fl .. ... ....J«.,..ln. wMd...n.:J4M�.- +w�l.m S.j..:..+}.+bl.�M�l...rrv�.l.l• nY�w.mJ.....•il4.r...-.-.-.U.Am.•�w.•h .r'1 «+.....t uw..n•.aanw.• 11 12/01/92 14:17 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROP, INC My WINMAlt C C m F- A N 'Y' . 6 N C . December 1, 1997 •o r I I ! a. Mr. Jerry Offer { Community Development Department City of Tigard P.Q. Box 23397 Tigard, OR. 97223 • Dear Jerry: As promised, attached is a copy of the landscape installation agreement for the east parking • lot at 'Washington Square. We will use the lot for employee parking during the holiday season • and will commence with the landscape installation January 1, 1993, with completion by January 22, as stipulated in the contract. I hope this clarifies our intent to complete this wor k on a timely basis. We certainly appreciate • • your assistance and flexibility in this matter. Sincerely, WINMAR COMPAN . NC. df • . handy$ '. Vice Precnt • '1 JRK:gym Attachment I I • • • .. „2,L.,:,+.-+rJ,�.i..c..M.M,. l..w�.4aiw...,..,,Ai......,.,..t.u.�... .. ., .u, ,.......,,..............0.,k:«...--.I.wJ..�ir.....+xl.- .mow:. ....,,:r'+I:.,.J....,;.y..,;w._,;t„r,..,..,.n,. «....,.,...I..+J'..L.«..,;..w..,.-„r;,:Y+L._..-:i=.u+-..Ln`•.1iwx;ai.4.T.:...iill::«.aq...^.,.•,'. 12/01192 14:17 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROP. INC Cl003' yy CONTPACTOB_AGI ” EEMEN (oregon Prvje) TO: Seven Dees' contract No 120-12-13-2 s.� • r' • i f en et4Piect P r't end. rJR l ntracror License No.. cap Inc , Tele.phone.50-37777-7 7 Td.c eimilr 0 -2399 • At tent ioxrr ].ars -anvil r r r A. 22' ription of Work. Please perform the t ork described on ZXIIIBIT A argxa1,:h:d hereto ("Work") in connection with the project listed above. • B. ' inee io O is O eg�i ate January 1 1993, and shall Performance. be completed by January 22, 1993. C a Ent Ati41t7�IT Terms►, 17 A yn'i . „� Lump sunti, payment at job completion, of � �9�.�0. CoaYtra�l;o'x a Ivey Persorinea. Alan Nakamura. • • • k paMent111. .e. J- Be11Qmy of '1&F Pacific or J. S. Lint©n of Wininar Company, Inc F. Warranties. See EXHIBIT A attached h retod Anted! November 19, 1992 WINM R COMPANY; 1�rtC kl (CorppAn,Y Nattae) P,0i*Bat 21 5,Scittde,WA 981( -1 O26 Telephone(206) 500/Facsuitlic OM)?..2X41565. t E.•ie o e �• a, s(7 d �esi`r-gn ? Ti "fie �� � } Title Ra 1( c e z� IXS AGREEMENT 1 MADE St,ialeGT 's TilB CoI`9fT•RAl grog AGR,SEzoN 'S AN AI D TERMS AN'C tor4DrrioN ON THE " PAGE NERE0F `PLE'P,,SEI1NDI+CA`'E'Yot/Rf+olt.gg(F. `by SIGNING,DATING .l EIII ING A C`PY '•' ; �S SCI'FOR 11.1 AGitEEtvitt 1re SEVnN I EE.5 LANDSCAPING ay .;,. /('6 Porrris\ecntract.oR a II/11/92 Page • • ., .. .,.,. ,_. ,.,., ....,,. a ..,...• .. . ,. .. r •• 1 • ' . , • I • • i40.04.,...44.2.:0.40 4 0 A 00-0 A-4 4004 00 01 0 0-.10440,4. 44044..4 4 4 0 4 . 12/01/02 14:18 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROF. INC Z1004 c • 1 CONTRACTOR A .CREEMENT SrMs11.2______Tae_M_ARD RMS D CONDITIONS (Oregon Projects) EACH PARTY'S ENTRY INTO THIS AGREEMENT IS EXPRESSLY CONDITIONED ON THE OTHER PARTY'S CONSENT TO ALL OF THE FOLLOWING STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS. , - 1. TIME OF ESSVNCE. The Work io to be commenced, and completed by the , dates indicated under tTine for Performance" in Section B on the first page of this Agreement. T!me Jo of the essence of thie Agreereent. Contractor acknowledge() that the Work is an essential part of an overall project. Any delay in completion of the Work may expose Owner to financial loss, including increased costs, incrrJased ot additional interest, claims from other contractors, or lost sale or rental income. Contractor agrees that, if it fails to perferm the Work in accordance 'with the above-referenced schedule, such finaneiel loss may, upon ten (10) days' written notice, be deducted from sums othervese due to Contractor, but smch deduction shall not be Owner's eole remedy. , , , 2. APPL/CATIONS FOR PAYMENT. FINAL PAYMENT. (a) Monthly paymentd shall bp made within 30 daye after OWner's receipt of Contradtor's application for payment; provided that (i) each applications shall not be made more frequently than once each calendar month; (ii) all Work covered, by the application has been fully performed; (iii) Contractor has provided OWner with satisfactory evidence that all persons ' . and entities, if any, furnishing labor, mateeial or equipMent covered by the . previous application for payment have been paid therefor and have executed satiefactory lien waivers; and (iv) Contractor is not otherwiee in default uhder this AgreeMent. Owner may withhold a sum equal to ten percent (10%) of each application for paymeet as tetainage owner may also withhold from payments any aftwAints sufficient to 'protect Owner from losses or expenses occasioned by Contractor's failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement; provided that if the amoUnt withheld by Owner is in excess of the ten percent (10%) retainage, : it shall notify Contractdr of its reasons for doing so and Shall promptly make payment when the reasons for nonpayment have been removed by Contractor. ' (b) Final payment shall be due Within thirty (30) days after . ' adceptance of the Work by iowner,, as evidended by contractor's and Owner eecUtidn of the form of Certificate of CoMpletion attached hereto as EXHIBIT B. . • Owner's acceptance of the Work shall be conditioned upon (i) Contractor's • satisfactory and timely completion of all Work to be performed hereender; . t (ii) Contractor's correction of deficienciee brought to Contractor's attention by OWner; (iii) Owner's receipt of eatiefactoty evidence that all applicable • taxes have been paid and that all persons and entities furtishing labor, material • or equipment have been paid and have executed satisfactory lien waiver8; , 44 (iv) Contractor has execUted a certificate regarding such in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT C arid has executed a conditional Release and Waiver upon Final • Payment in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT D; 4nd 00') Conttacter is not otherwise in default undet this Agreement. 3. CoXPLIANCE WITH LAWS.; SAFETY. Contractor shall comply with all laws, rules, regulatiens ahd ordinances applicable to the Work and Contractor's performance thetedf. contractor shall take all neceesary precautions fot the safety of petsots ihvolved in the Work end shall also erect and properly maintain, as tequirsd by the condition and progress Of the Work, all safeguards e • necessary for the ptotection of the public. • 1 4. PEReoRMANCE STANDARD. Contractor shall perform the Work in an efficient and economieal meaner donelotene with OWner's needs as pet forth on ' * EXHIBIT A attached heteto and in accordance with the highest professional standards for the type of Work being performed under this Alteemeht. Footle Ceneee.OR.13126/92 4,2 ' . , „ I • '; ,._.,..,.....:.4...-,.,,...r.,:...„_-_.,.,..,,..-.,.,...-.—u,.............:.-,,..F..... «._,.......,i...m-.._...,.....,. .!-.,.-.-a._...-,.,_....,,....i._. .:6,.m w,... ., .«....,a..,...a_,»,,,..„.........«...,.,4w,.....i�w.....,.,.y.....,.._.-....:...,i......»..._..,,..K,..u....,....,_....,_ ,,. .......,w u,...__ ...,..-...., .,,«,,. 12/01/92 14:19 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROP. IINC a 005 ct,„ S. CHANGE ORDERS. Owner may, without invalidating this Agreement, front time to time request changes in the scope of the Work. Contractor shah: submit . • a description of the scope, detail and impact of any reaueeted changes,, including impact on costs and completion date, in a Change order proposal' to Owner within c' five (5) working days after Owner'a rec Best or s. me�tualLy acceptable reasonable, ' , period of time thereafter. Owner,will review Contractor's proposal Within five (5) ,.corking; days after its receipt from Contractor or a mutually acceptable reasonable period of time thereafter, and will promptly respond to Contractor. No such change ehall be binding upon either party hereto until both Contractor and owner have agreed upon and signed a Change Order, which shall con.atitexte an amendment to the Agreement. 6� I_� S NId.F. URA LEORrT CP of W'mEd (a) This Agreement may not be assigned, by operation of law or oche wise, without the prior written consent of Owner. (b) Contractor shall assign the persons designated in Section D on the first. page of this Agreement as its key personnel to perform or direct the pork on behalf of Contractor. Such key personnel shall be replaced,only with the prior consent of owner. In addition, contractor shall not enter into any ' agreement with a eubconttactor which does not expressly bind said sebcontractor to assume all .t►bligations and respone .bilitiee which Contractor, by this Agreement, assu,r;es toward Owner. Contractor shall promptly provide Owner with • a copy of all subcontractor agreements. Nape of ehe Work may be delegated or . subcontracted to an independent contractor `witheu.t the prior written consent of l . opera • 7, IN'DEHNIT'(. TO the £'idlest extent permitted by law, Contractor releases and shall indemnify, defend and hold harm1eesi termer and any other party designated by Owner at.d its and their officers, agents, emp .oyeee, representatives, ce su1tants and contractors, of and from any and all claims, N damages, losses and expenses, including, but net limited to reasonable attorneys' fees which arise out of or result from the performance of the Work' - and/or which are a'tte abut eble to, or are alleged to be attributable to, any breach of this Agreement or any negligent, z ecklese or illegal act or omission of Contractor, any subcontractor engaged by Contractor, anyone directly or. indirectly employed by them of` anyone for whose acts arty of them' may be liable. 8. INSURANCE. Prior to the 'commeecemet t of the Work, Contractor shall • obtain and provide Cvwne>± with r.caritten evidence of the following £n trance coverage, which coverage shall remain in force during the term of thin Agreement: (a) 'oofttz tercial general liability insurance covering personal injury and death and damage to and lose of property arising in 'ctannectioz with the Work with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per person each occUree.nce for, personal injury and death and 1,000,000 per occurrence for property damage and loss'; (b) builders' risk insuraneie with coverage of not less than the :replacement cost of the completed portion of the Work; (c) if licei sed vehicles Will be used in connection with performance of the Work, automobile liability insurance, whether oweed, hired, rented, .bona ied oa:' ottieri+ri;ee, with limits of liability ty of net less than $1,000400 per occurrence c o tined single limit for bodily, injury and death property g . waiver of r'i h g 1 and ai�et Owner; and damage, which u a.hsce in p 1.v 11 applicable�of subrelat�,n� a 'llraa'�ce cordax7o�.with ay Ns g � provides e:�3 8 to oz;'cers compensation rwith respect to all of Co.nttactor'ea employees,e against �� i5 j , • under grdte� law. Each �►o�.l�tcaovo�r �s or insurance � insurers ,. re a s then s a e rance is mandator or merely h , policy �, . 1 ranee shall be in a form and with . satisfactory to Owner, non ing Owner as an additional insured and providing thirty ' (30) days' advance notice to owner of noh.renewa1, material. change or cancellation. U pon request Contractor l pr Cane, with,.,certificate �e evidencing 9 u ch iieuxanc lurisdctians re �irir mandatory r y p er ipatie e" in a m000pb list io state workers* iompeneatiori feed, the insurance certificate for the coverage required for werkets' tempeheation will be • FbrnW Corso cLLOR 24/92 a ' : • • • • ..« ...«. ..•L:- ,.,,.... w...w.tl,._.».•,...n.ti-..,n....4�.4_:»„ta....-. ..,N.t 1,..._....nnw..lr,.a,.1.1«.F._...-w-l.a... . l.a...,«•- 12/01/92 14:19 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROP. INC 0 • w, 0 0 6 satisfied by a Letter from the appropriate state agency confirming participation in accordance with statutory requirements. Limitations on the amount of insurance coverage shall in no way be construed to reduce or limit the liability of Contractor to Garter. 9. cOARECTION OF WODj ga TRACTOR'S DEFAULT. (a) If Contractor observes or otherwise becomes aware of any defect in the Work, it shall give Owner immediate written notice thereof. Contractor shall, at no coat to Owner, correct any Work that Owner determines fails to conform to the require►nenta of Chia Agreement and appears during the ,progress of the Work, and shall' remedy any defects due to faulty materials or woricananehip, as determined by Owner, which appear'within a period of one year from the date of completion and acceptance of the Work by owner. (b) If Contractor (i) fails to prosecute the Rork :`promptly or` " properly,, (ii) fails to correct any defective work promptly or properly or (iii) breaches or fails to perform any obligation under this Agreement, tuner may give Contractor and its surety, if any, seven (7) days' written notice of such matter. • Un1ese (A) o+ieh matter has been corrected within such seven-day ' period or • (B) such shatter is of a nature that it cannot reasonably be corrected Within such period. and Contractor has commenced to correct such batter during such period and in thereafter diligently prosecuting such correction to ''its completion, then • Owner may, without preludice to any other right or remedy it may have, • (x) correct any defective Work and either charge Contractor for all costs and expenses incurred by Owner in correcting such defects or deduct the same from `;) SUMS otherwise due crntractor or' (y) take passeseion of all materials, tools and appliances and finish the Work by such means as it sees fit, and if the unpaid balance of the compensation due Contractor exceeds the cost of finishing the'Work and damages suffered by Owner, ouch excess shall be paid to Contractor following final complet.tort of the Work, but if such exceeds the unpaid balance due Contractor, Contractor aha11 immediately' pay the difference to owner. 10. eTTOR?Ets" FEES. If a lawsuit wises in connection With the A(g)reement, the substantially prevai1ieg pasty therein shall be entitled to recover from the other party the substantially prevailing party's reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expehses 11. DoCUMEN S AND DRAWINGS. CQntraI for agrees that all documents, drawings, reports and other information prepared or obtained by Contractor in !. • connection with the Work, including materials or work in p 'ogress, are the sole, property of owner for use exclusively by Owner or its des Lgneted agents and employees and shall be submitted to Owner within, fire. (5) working days after a written request from Owner, aed, in any event, upon cr.r pietion of the Work under this A.greement, prior to and as a condition of final payment. Contractor shall sot be,liable for any modefications to docutnentst prepared by Contractor Which are " made without Contractor eg adeice a'ftee delivery of such documents to Owner, nor hall projects other liab the fWoroe Use by Owner without Contractor's consent' 12. CONFIDE !IAL/TY. Contractor ,agreea that all documents and reports, and all other data, and information prepared or obtained by Contractor in the � . performance of the Work ate Confidential and shall t be disclosed 2c available to �y individual or entity than �ire r and it s desi ra ed age of e'nployeee except with the prior Plteval of Owne r. 13, '`10..T�� E 5 al] notices provided c for her ein tn m may tE' la c p ed delir�rc� or tailed registteed or certified mail, I. return receipt requested, and, if mailed, �. ,. ( ) I ride Ce a 'lot L o es are .nnectwa,vin with s after 9 The addresses to be used in d three •31 days such co,rre de" osite in reds shall e considered de].ive deposited such mail. s'� n and t io � as set forth on the first''page of this Agreement; or stash other address as A 1 'orm.t Cow t a 92� r:�sat7�,-�I� . u r 13.� d , y,. •\ `. :-. ,,, ,; ,,.Ii111 ,..,,. ,,..,.,, .,.. ,.,.;,,.. .,.,.,..., ,. ,.,. ..,. . .,,,. _.,., .,. w ,.\.r.,. ' Q y .71 �l1 4 df93ifiA.`9•� I JIIrI ,, ■ , 0 . , . 0 , 12/01/92 14:20 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROP, INC _ Z007 \ ■ 41 (' f '\ %, . .. .. 4,.. . , party 'hall from time to time ditect. Notices ur correopondence to Owner obeli . .. be seet to ouch addree0 marked for the attention of the Owner'u Represehtative designated in Section E on the first page of this Agreement, or such other .• representative at Owner may hereafter designate from time to time. 14. GOVERNIArgeeeeteeUggegatTION. The validity, meaning and effect of this Agreement shall be determined iu accordance with the laws cf the State of Oregon • applicable to contracts made and to be performed in that state. The parties , hereby eubMit to the 3uriediction of any Oregon Staee or federal court sitting . in Portland in any action or proceeding arioing out of or relating to this, Agreement and agree that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding atising out of or relating to this agreement shall be heard and determined in . • euch an Oregon State or federal court. Is. SUSUNSIOOrtrageTERMINAZION. Owner May, upon written notice, . direct Contractor to suspend all or a portion of the Work. In the event of such aeopeneion, Contractor ehall be entitled to payment of (a) all fees properly ..m, earned up to the effective date of sespension and (b) all reimbursable expenseo . •. actually and properly incurred up to such date. If the Work io suspended for a . continuous period of more than sixty (0) day , and such suspenoion is not due to the fault of Contractor, then contractor shall also be entitled to payMent ce , its unavoidable out-of-pocket losses, other than loss of profit, actually suffered as a result of such oespension. owner also reserves the right to , . terminate this Agreement for the convenience of owner at any time upon ten (10) . days' prior written notice to Contracter. I Owner so terminates this Agreement, Contractor shall be entitled to payment of: (a) all fees properly earned up to the effective date of termination, (b) all reimbursable expenses actually and . properly incutred up to ouch date and (c) unavoidable omt-of-pocket losses . actually suffered as a reselt of such early termination plus a ratable share of • the anticipated profit on the Work as determihed by Owner ba.sed on the percentage of completion of the Work as of the terrninatiort date. ' 4. 16. AWenenee If the payment to be made by owner to Contractot under this Agreement le based on the expenses incurred by Contractor relating to the Work ' ' ' or it Owner is required to reimberse Coatractor for such expeeses, Contractor shall at all times keep complete records of all eXpenses relating to the Work and allele. make such available to Owner or its authorized representative for inepection, atdit and copying upon request. e , . 17. CLEAN WORK AREA. Contractor shall keep its Work area at the Project free ftoM waste material and rubbish at all times and, at the completien of the Work, shall remove from its Wok area at the Project all teals, eqeipmeht, extra materials, waste material and rubbish and leaVe it broom clean. 1" *Hill 18. MEETINGS. Upon reasonable advance notice by Owner, Centractor's key personnel shall meet with representative(s) of Owhet to discuso matters pertaining to the Work, incleding, but not limitee te, the progress thereof, 19. INDEPENDENT CoNTRACTOR. Contractor is an independent contractor and not sin agent or employee of Owne t. neither party shall have any authority to supervise the eepioyeee, repreeentatives or subconeractors of the other party, e . nor to make any 'catements, representations or commitments of any kind or to take any actions ehioh will be binding Upon the other party except as specifieally provided in this Agreement. 20. ENTIRE AGRXEliENT. Thie Agreement constitutes the fecal and complete agreement between the parties hereto with respect to, the subject matter of thie Agreetent, superveding all prior agreemeete or discussions with tespedt thereto, No additions, deletions or modifications hereof shall become part of this Agreement unless each party hereto epecifically recognizes and coneeote to their 4 indlegion by a signed ieettumeet. . , . A , Forrrw:t conirULOR,-8/26/92-5 • .. . koir ., s - 1 . ' . ' J • ....°..N O...w..�+.,,,.:.a...q.,.,na','.au.x...-w��w'.:.......:..++.�5•,I.:,a:,,r•._+..�.-n...r..».a.,-,,.s.....+..,�......�+.L.,;�wl,,..w,_.,.«.,,.,..+..».,,�,:.:t 4i:.u..+:.�1,.:.;:..:w�-:,dL�,...-,.,..»'.'4.�..k..,��;,,..,.,.u..�..rr....t,nf.:«a'-.:��.....»W..YAI:.,I...:,-1,»...»,M.r.C,....k....�,..:.,,._,.� ....,. ..�..;..:u:....M,.«.�:�....^.:s:.+a!:I..x.e4,x,�u,.c.4._.,.«a..sa�...•;w„_.., ,., 12/01/92 14:21 FAX 206 223 4565 SAFECO PROP. INC (2 008 • • • . PPSCri12.tian cLI o„ • Perform landscaping and irrigation sprinkler services at Washington Square shopping center, located in Tigard, Oregon, 1i in accordance with Plans prepared by W & H Pacific, Sheet L-1, dated October 7, 1992, and Seven Dees La .dscaping' s • proposal dated November 19, 1992, and attached herewith as Exhibit "A-1” , 'i�an One year warrar ty` on all plant material furnished with warranty pe io commencing on date of final payment approval for work described in Paragraph 1. above. ; • � I I • I 1r4rTriS Cbt/t1'40ira ,. .1/ii/g Page Y • . 4 . , • • t • //Diiiillilll1 � o July 29, 1993 CITYOFTIGARD OREGON J. Randy Kyte °. . Winmar Company, Inc. 4 700 Fifth Avenue Suite 2600 Gateway Tower Seattle, WA 98104-5026 Dear Randy: On July 2 8, 1993, you submitted sketch plans for design changes and alterations of the former Nordstrom space ;at Washington Square. I , have reviewed SDR 91-0020 which approved a major modification for 67,048 square feet of additional leasable space. That modification included replacing a building formerly occupied by Frederick and i ' Nelson with .a new Nordstrom store and the remodeling of the old Nordstram 'a building into retail space and a food court. In ,; " December, 1992, Winmar was given approval for a minor modification . which reallocated floor area to allow for the construction of an expansion of the Meier & Frank store as well as a parking k, structure. The minor modification left 52,690 square feet of leasable space for. alteration of the old Nordstrom space. You have proposed approximately 52,500 square feet of leasable space in the old Nordstrom location. Therefore, there is no increase floor area for is no change in the type of commercial construction. lease. There There was an addition of 87 net parking spaces with SDR 91-0020. j. • With the Ju ly 28, 1993 request, there was chan a in accessways or parking where off- s ite traffic w ould be affected. Parking at the shopping center has an excess of spaces. As a result, i t has be n determined that alterations su_ bmitta ed July 28, 1993 arc a minor edif ica ion of previously approved plans ` r and ..existing development. YOu may p roceed by s uhmitti-n�bui building plans and the a pp ro riate permit fees and char g es to the City Building Division. If you have any gmestions, please call me' at 639--4171. Sincerely, -7JZ-L5:e--Q-Z>e)U,c. diehard H. Betivet6d • 'c: David Scott' 1'i 0I 97223 50 9 4171 TDb 503 684-2772 13125 SW Hall�blvd, �ar�, � �� b3 �`' � . .. •.w,c...www....il.�,.�Ab.�w,;,w:w.l,,;:.acu...�i....,„w',WU1».,.....+....i.,..�r»c.:.wF�.16::+1.1...w..«•,,.'.A...:.......c.,l..,,...,4.`.-. ....,.s;u.1.1;.•+.:G;i."..ak,ua..w..a:,d':i,«::.:.-,:a.,G..;.�,+«,.: a... a'+.+ � i •I ' FOOD FOOD 47 SF 475 SF 5 , FOOD nPEt� f 57S SF _ 57 . yr . FOOD . 600 SF 0 0, � FOOD 11 ADMIN goo SF OFFICES I III .. , . , . . .. FOOD .. . , . .; , , . . , . ' , . . . .. . . . .N CI,ISTOME ' SERV 600 SF . • FOOD FOOD 200 •SF- IIII 200 SF ' . . . ,.], 0 . . . . OPtJ. , . . , . . .. '. ; . , , . . , . . . ; . ,. ; . . , ; . . . ; . , , ; .. . , . , . . , . .i ; ... , . . . . . . . . .,k . , . , , , . . . . . .; ; , . . , ; . , .•1 fl RETAIL 1 ' 11=000 SF { : ter., • 1 iii n r r i I � ,, • • , ,.,- A ., l�• • • • • FOOD 75',SF FOOD 579 SF , • `� / FOOD 61- 600 S • FOOD 61, 600 SF FOOD 61 600 SF FOOD 200 SF • • RETAIL 10,200 SF • • fi 4 /i Po J,.a 4 F�'O 4U /a 714 is 5 • • • • ' ....•,, •., ,yq....C..,-,J'.... ....w...,•wNLL;YU.;A.,,,,,,,.......-...._.u•,w..u,.•.».,,. .,,. w.,....,..»,,,,,„....1.,, ...a..,......•.,•I ....•r...•w w....«.,..•1+.. ..i..,a..,.∎..t....,««,..........,..,......ks.,.......I,..J.G...•I...,14/.,.,....a.,.w-,.'.Y.t....._...w d..,......,a.....«,.i,._.r,«ar..-,.x.:..,1:»a,tG...u....4:..,..:.....µ,::,Gu„i..;4tut=.r,.J,Y•'.t.,u,:nc:.' Iti i. ' • .4 - . Csi .1 et • Or ril IP L'' 1 0...1, 7.-4',”0 .p.2,,.5-'.e_49C) t:::) 1 r."" .w� I: t i 52 p ! i.+ ...�. ... ov �,.. },„�,•n/J ; r.,�...,,.Y..J,•f r. rfy f.i .I , {°"' 13 ,.....11.w«•.....1•A••:•,1 •.1 . Z.- I �.,; -y J d9� .mil �r..J i.. I s :,tf.•.. tuu I L i..1.J .J.{:Y.J..J Yff J.Y.,,ll V „ � •r._. r} ,.. A p !• 1 1 ��w, DETAIL I y I RETAIL 1-2,600 SF t {I �+1: ,«y r."1 ...J.............r....rft 11. 11..•.,:.,..f.,.:11.3 • • 1 .{.11....00...4 J....00 `11.5 I . • ... E L.,; •Il ::::!:::::.:,,r n.,::.r.J::::::i • CD LI- 7..:,-,"::::::,`,.. 11f • t,L1 11, rr113 I �.. 11 ..11.,.1,.1...x..,.,• f1•„ i I a. I I I I a. t O I O 1 f 1•••11.1.1••.11 H V+ �,E:...•.X!•J.w..uY.:w;,y .,:,:{..,1J.:.1..f../ r wIW.:11..{111:11.• B12 „•., t t. �.i d4•- _.:r.!!;.....Al., s ,J.{.•,.,....„ ..,—�,, a....,..... + � ',1 , \` �w+��' ,a.rJ...w.r:::»`'�+ { =If_T""r.�{+Itw�r -t, 1 t./ e1.0 *^ N�� tfr'� .•I...Or.......,..1-10x2 y'W�: 1J f .14 jj , !' ' 3f 1 y{ {.«t.1' ..":.E 1 W:1.::,. f4„d �' ; E 1 f1...1•••041, :x} 1111 , 11•... J J 11 r..a . ,.,.:.r•1 .....r Ir ,+,l J 1 • !a` r{1Ij �rrflJJ.uJ. ry { S= t' Jr q t.HM: T � b....„1 r.N•..11.,,:J1.J r .Er11YU.....n.44,1. ,J.i.,.u..u..u.•:.I ♦•n. 1..1 .t.•{.J.,..,J:...:r....u.r ...1. 1 E i I II ..11E tt'.J.“ 11.11 11111.11.r..rr.r...:11rIj..i.u..11,141 0.1001,.i,H.J. Jr, ( lxr.,,{ �. .11111 �ri....:J.r.14,,,,uu...JU.{{..,..Y(r1.: , /' s I ■ e P. r j E �t }»v 7 tF3 ' » N`.1•..1.,.1E i:iu...l.f{9 ..u.»J1.,..f.1u:.li,.rJt'�...u,uJ.n..J:J iJ1•.1�'.l:u:uu., r.uJJ.J..u,.Y.�,y�Jrnf,r..JE �u..,t,..1.,Jijtu.uu..Jl.,..t�•'t,:,.lt:u:d ...:�jr.•t r. If•.■1..r.1.1•.11M..1J 11111.11..•.{.1..44“.11.i.........J„•••Jri r` yIrf .. .1 ' F `n'r.`.r”1." .1'If � �; �.uuurl.:.7:„iur,.JJ{ �"a'Y.-++..."`J{'� t 1"`"`w, A 1 1 W V 'MV . .. •Y'tk.+± ..J....,.,,.J,",..1,:J : J,.rw.r 3 t 1 „arlru•u•J.a,..,...t”,r.r. .11.i !}r:.-"....•::�..•I:u�..•'r..re.Y:..1. n,l u.....1•JJ' N � , , (, o Y.Yr.11. «1111...1.x..1 r • • . r r 'p d 1 � c , . . . • e , ,...• ,.,. . ,, . . . , ,, . , . 1 . . . • • II • r . gtv . .. • .. m ya ■ 1• • i 6' I . I Y , • r ii AIL � � � � � 1� � � � RETAIL � I goo • I I q • C� L/, C Li.. (r)L.- (.1 CI&) Q L+.. ate--• t�[] ,,*• ,`,,, }r Cla Cib C2' � ,3 r� ,� �� 2°1 o l.,,..,,'' i " 11 .1! t' I)f .r.7 ♦r •{{ ,1•.011 ......1 , alr.l.,.r.1..«,., .....1 " C /� r 1 'I .,,a....6 Y It a0. I.u.1w.,.a1'''".a.......111 i ,.111{a.1{4.1 i01,YHral1,`..i 1.11„.11,aj • !,1.,1i.,1,' c,.1 li' Z,4V - 1 E l rru l I` ,..H1.x 1 , ...1)4.10,.1.111.1., ,.,.1r1.,.l.,11 1,1{.,,11 r , �. •_._;�r � n 1 �� �1 M�r � � , ., 11 i,al/Ht 111.M.1 r.a 'a{,.f 110+.. 91NI11•N1N ..I.M V f 1H..... r. .11 .•1 ...,.1.;1,11.......1....,1,11.1..1.....1.,....1.....,1 T t Vic" n-" dvi, 1-1 I1].i.... t..11,.....%,4,,,.,..,.� i, 1 ' .,.. �.....,�a�'. C7 `title; det/ ,. ' I. ScaIex.. .1/3X4e)' bate, 1►...t,i''.°/." I � , i 1r A • ., •. I ' . ' . . .. . .. .• . , . . . . . . • : • . • , 1 , . . . ,. ■ ' , , . . , . I •„ , , , • . . . . . , . • , . • , . , , ' .. , . •,..' ..., ■ , , , ' , ' , . .0 • , .• • , . , ,, . , . :h. . . , . . , , • x ,, ,, ' , [. . . , ,....oamommommonmaml , . ' ' ■ , ■ . ■, . ■ . . ,, . ,, ' I , , . , ,, ,. • . . ' ,■ ,, , . . I ' , ■ . . , ■ • . .. J , "#1k41 • MEMORANDUM i11t , . ,. , . CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON CITY OF 'TIGARD . . . , . , OREGON) TO: Randy Kyte, Winmar Compeny, Inc. , , . . FROM: Jerry Offer, Development Review Planner DATE: December 24, 1992 ----___--- . SDR . . ; • . SUBJECT: Washington Square Expansion • 91-20 H ' . . • • ' , , , . • , . • _ . • - • 'Winmar Co., Inc. has submitted plans for construction of a 34,000 sq. ft. ! , . • expansion of the' Meier & Frank store at Washington Square, a parking structure . , ; north of Meier & Prank, and revisions to the existing surface parking lot ., . including relocation of the transit area. Washington Square is zoned C-G , ., (General Commercial). Tigard Community Development Code (CDC) Chapter 18.120 ,.(Site Development Review) requires the revieW and approval of development plans , , on commercially zoned properties to be reviewed and approved by the Community . ! . Development Department. . •.• • • Willmar previously has submitted a Site Development Review application for a ,. , 67,000 square foot expansion of the former Frederick & Nelson store into a larger , .. . e. store for Nordstroms (SDR 91-20). This propos ' was approved January 8, 1991. • •., The present plans constitute a modification to those plans. , . ,„ Community Development Code Section 18.120.070.8 provides criteria for determining ., . , ., whether a development proposal must be reviewed as a major modification to , - . approved plans( or an existing development. Major modification reviews ' ,•• - • essentially reopen the review of the entire development complex, existing and . . • proposed, and require ' a new site DevelOpment Review appliOatiora,' as was •, ..- . .... originally done with SDR 91-20. I have reviewed the current proposal and have 7 • ,,, determined that the proposed improvementa would not trigger a Major modification . , . review. . Firsts there would not be a net increase in square footage approved for • , , , , comMerdial use (CDC 18.120.070.8.8) Since a portion of the existing NOrdstroms . store would be removed from availability for commercial use as outlined in your , • . letter dated December 16, 3.992. , Due to this offset in square footage,: there . , would be no net increase in antidipated vehicular traffic (CDC,18.120.070..8.7) • or increase in reqUired parking Spades (CDC 18.120.070.8.1). , Because all , , • •; proposed improvements are,internal to the,WaShingtori. Square developMent;site,' the; ,, , • • . • proposed changed, to•, adoeSsWays•!and parking area would, not be .anticipated-i,to affect off-Cite traffic (CDC 1,8.120.070.13.6),7• The prOpoSed site deVeicpMent ,• n •, , ', would balance•the',removal:•of.'ex4,eting,landscaping,with replacement landscaping I :•' ; , such that there',would ,'be no net , reduction in Open:idpade.,,on th6,.site ,(CDC •'.;' ''■ • • • • 18120.070.43.9 & •10)4 ' The propoded net Or •enlarged ,,Strudturee are consistent • , , , '• • with the type of exidting StrUdtUres on the mite (CDC,181.120.010.8.4) And WOUld • . not result in building heights in excess of 120 percent of the maximum ekiSting - , building height (CDC 18.120.070.8.5)4 The other criteria of CDC 18.120.070 are , . inapplidable to this type oi, projecta' , The bottom line of all this is that the ., ,. - ,• current propoSala, despiter,theit,significa.nce,within the development, would not constitute a ,major ' modification -to the . existing, deveLopmest,!and approved,,':„ ,' , ' ',',', • development' plan from ',SDR •91-21 autd therefore the current ,proposal 'doeS:,'not xaquire a new Site DevelopMent• RevieW•a.ppl,ication.., ,,,,.,;,.• ,,,'.;;,,,.i,,,;:',,',,'1.,',.', _'', ,'''.cl."•,,' .:', '',;;',.'.r'.'.' , , . The proposed " changed ' .are.,, 'therefore ,1' a minor ' modification, „to:",,,;an" ,existing;,•=;,':,•••., ,, • , , development and ' ,'approved development ,,•;plan •••; (CDC•,•;:!.;18.120 4080 4 It), ' ,,, .Mitioi:.:, ,,,l'•: ,,, , , : `, mod.ifications may be approved or 'approved,subject' 'to donditiOnd ,ati!••longn.ttig the development plans will not Violate anyCDC'provittion (cii0 184120a080.0 a,' 'it have ,,2 ',.'4■ . , , • . , I ,, ■ , A ,,,, 1 . , ■ T , , , „ , . , 'e • , 1 . . f, , , , • ■ . , . ■ . ., , , , • , . . 1 • . , I■ , [, , I I • , ' ., , , '• • 13125 SW Hall glvd„0,a13-c-*23397,11dard i beeclOn- 97223 , (503)639-4171 , . ' , ' " , •, 1 , -44„. . — • .. . , , . , . , • . . ,,. • . „ .. , , , . , . . . ° ..1,...,.e,.., 4 ,/f...21..—',.'_A.,,..,.:...,..........,la_._....,...0„,,,.,...,,,_ ,..d,..w_ ...... .,..u.,w..,,...;:+...,...,......,,,..,,,,,...x'7,—,L.,..,....U.•_...,,,,14..,.».,1..It,,,,,....o L,,,r,,,",,,..,.».,,.,,...,.it-.....,,.,.......-, ..,-.,.,.:,++,...,.1,..-,'.li,»—.1 ,...•,.,..«.,i.,,.','.r:..'r, e.:A.:,.,++._..,.0.'i,.61Y+1,m a,::',;.,a� V • 4a y Otis r :N lr 1Ir Jrij'11r�`'y'�.1 ,..�rt, ` F ?IjYl+�rc ���ti, lcl• , 1 '',11''''' , , S ,, 1 , .!,,t,..:1I r'P 00,1,,w'r v °,d,r ,F 1' ' . t. `•gyp,;,;0, ++'11;� !', reviewed Winmar's site plan submittal dated December 17, 1992 and have determined d•`''''•:;;;;:s `''` • • that this plan will not violate any CDC provisions, as long as the detailed . parking structure and parking lot plans to be submitted for building permits are. . comply with Code parking standards' such as parking space and aisleway dimensions. • The December 17, 1992 plan is therefore approved as a Site Development Review ' minor modificati. n subject to the following conditions:oaf 1... 44betai..led parking area, parking structure, and landscaping plans „,� �" v shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning Division . ,eL./ t prior to the issuance of a building 3rmit. , • 2. The proposed landscaping replacement uaterials and other proposed , site improvements shall be installs 4 in conformance with the 1 6 approved site plan prior to occupancy of the parking structure. , In addition, we discussed extending the approval period for Site Development , Review SDR 91-20 frog its current expiration date of July 8, 1993 for a one year . period consis •ent with CDC Section 18.120.040.0. Winmar intends on initiating construction on the approved plans within (if not before) the extended approval period. There have been no changes in the applicable Plan policies or Community ' • Development Code standards upon which the 'original decision for SDR 91-20 was , based. Finali,y, although changes have been made in the original approved site •` plan, those changes are within the scope of minor modification review and have been approved by the, Planning Division as consistent with Code requirements. Therefore, the Planning Division finds that W ar's current request for minor . , modification review) indicates consistency with the approval standards for extension of the approval period. The approval period is hereby extended to July 8, 1994. Y If you have questions, please call me at 639-41,71. I j , I I 1 I r , i 9 i O Mr. Jerry Offer December 16, 1992 page two In order to accommodate Meier & Frank's expansion within the existing approval, we are limiting the future renovation of the existing Nordstrom store to 52,690 square feet of leasable area. If, in the future, we choose tc' further increase the leasable area in the existing Nordstrom store, we understand that this may constitute a major modification to our existing approval if the additional leasable area contributes more than 20 additional automobile trips daily off of the site. In addition to the Meier & Frank expansion, this minor, modification also includes the construction of a 510-stall parking deck north of the Meier & Frank store over the existing surface parking lot as shown on the attached site plan. In that we would be adding no additional impervious surface area under this proposal,it is my understanding that this is also a minor modification to our existing approval. „ Please let me know whether you have any questions. I will await your formal response, Sincerely, Aq . WINMAR PACIFIC; INC. By Willmar +Comps.. Inc • J. Viand `t ;,"' -.. � / Vice President, Development Enclosure I r. •r .«:eriw,w,..d...e.w.,, w+la.,. ...:«-Irw.m.r✓n�l .k...l,..,...,ti..lr—.m',+s. '....o ..:M.,...�'.,.,,.,4...�,f.„.:,r...n.i:,,Mt:..v �w:.--n-......kw:.�.u«.V...:.x:.,t..,—lXcl+.:.?.. y r .•.,...1. t ', • w..•-�tw.w:.++,T „i...e..w..+«.,,HS...u...,....J—,w.:...7i:a.:,1..:_.lL...w . _ ''1:5M, .+.L,-.::.t}.�,fL...r_,-,r........,K.u�ur.,. • i , I I .. • q'xkJ N k •!' A u V Y . N' A1 r I I I I December 16, 1992 • Mr. Jerry Offer Development Review Planner Community Development Department City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Post Office Box 23397 .. a Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Jerr Y SDR 91-0020 ashen ton' uare Winmar Pacific,Inc„is requesting a minor modification to the above Site Development Review, a I approval. The requested modification maintains the 67,048 square foot expansion of the shopping center at this time,but will now also incorporate with'in that total expansion area a • Meier & Frank second level expansion of 34,000 square feet. Following is an area analysis of the square footages being deleted and added to.Washington''Squares to total the net leasable ' expansion area of 67,048 square feet: Existing F&N'bu Y ldiY 112 42 i Existing Nordstrom store (90,000) Converted retail space a F&N mall shops� � � � 3 300 I • Nordstrom s renovation (proposed) 52,690 store 180 000 New Nordstrom ,� a' Meier & Frank expansion (second level) 34,000 Net leasable expansion area 67,048 q'. I , ��i*�fo�r ti..,. d:��,' i! 0'1 if r,,a's :r� -r• i xr},, ,, • • ...f„,11{.,.. .....,.....4'srr,-:,,...w' 4„,:' ..,.,n..::,...W'l'.tea:.._ .,u..:,.,....wi..:-,...., tr.,—,,,.„-1,,,,,...,,,,..,..4.,...,,...I,C....■..,......,..,-• ,.n....,•-.:.i+....,-,,,,and14..,-.»L.in-- ...I...■..wuw. a.......u:.-I,I..w...•. .+;L=a.w ,41Mn.,,I.,....,,,.::;....t,,,,, .0.44....«-,,.1..:;.a,,..-„-+...:..., SENT BY:Xerox Te I ecopier 7021 ; 6-12°92 ; 9:17AM 2062234565-0 503 684 7297;# 1 1 SAF CO PROPERTIES WINML�, COMPANY INC. INC. • 700 Fifth Avenue, Suits 2600 Seattle, WA 98104.5026 P. 0. Box 21545 �20b 223�45m0 Seattle, WA 98111-3545 • TEILECOPY COVER SHEET r { DATE: • r j ` r i • NAME; Y l /� y• IL• ecopler Nun ber:, 8, .....br? .......„2. 2...2 • f, , , FROM: ' ` 1' ,po_,,, > 1 ft ' NLIM33ER OF PAGES�l X53 T�1C�,LrIiING TI-IIS PAGE: I I i i I I "e Please contact . „ at 206/22,3- y A if there i s qtly prable,m� with thhis transmisstio�� _..�_;��.., iY ij . I COMMENTS I I I I t , . r I i . Our it natterid `.`, ler� 206 2 ,° ed te�ei:ap � �` ��•�5� • I I re , • , r y , A { 4444• r • •• _ r1.4.44_44+4,44.-d,,.1 t .....4.44.4'V 4.1.•■•4,....,-. .....J:...,. n.«!-.l«, .. .,_.,...:I..:,...a...,d,,......,.444,. ...,.+.. ...!'',.._,+..•. I..I.-.....-.44..4...44;..11..,..., L.4.41 . ,..,.:J.....:,ai...._..I,',..,, u.-,P.,,,L...;w_I.:.,,L., »...,,.a....:—.1.«a*.w:iw.--+.-,-•1...4,....4.4.4444+r.J:,,,..4 ,.i.n,,:4.,.. t' j '! .ens—..I■. \..1 7 , .. . 1 . . .► ■■dd 1�J •. . 1 r 1 . 1, 1 1• 1 ( I. . . , . ,, , i ,1�., � 1 1 I ' '1 , , / 1 � , J ii//�rAA// �. � � � �M I 1 1 1 1 1 . f , • , r " 1 { ' , �, , , r 1 1 I i. 1 I ' , I • r A r ,..{) \\\\\\ 1� 1 � ' 11 • ; • '+Q�1 1 ' , ' 1 �I II J f 1 y �' I .■ 1 1 I I I . 1 1 , rl . / 1 • 1 1 1 • '1 I 1r 1. • • 1 • 1 1 I , r I 1 1 , ., 1. 11 1. I II I I I . . Rt...................................$ • nrOM 1 Y . , 1 1 sIr lr.,, 1.,{rl1•r.Y S r„,14.1 1 r �rI3�� 1' 1 . I i I • `od U I 1 1 1 41 hl.r • • • . ,ori, • . 4-------------ii 1 • 1 .1 11 Y I I .', 1 " .4 !mil 1 r.11.l .i ce I •• .I. • affil It . I (!i.. _____.............._..1\i , 1 imi1 .-wommototattn 17 1 1 a , 1 _ • _ 4444, 1 rYII�'1 rr I 4 ..�,_ 4444 . x44.4., I yy 1 ;70' d 170 0 t ! Lh a �•oc. nr-� t , ,,--11 1l #=G67b8gCJ WbG l d 66 1,°9 L0G I,7aoe(ei col :Ag INS 4444 .. .. , .. � , ,.......�... .. .. ... ........ 4444 �,.. e . , 1 • •ar,n-...rr.NL.,_.r.r.r,-„,;,,,,,,„;' ,',Nt...,S),, ..«n.-..,,.4,....,...,• --,rr.,.N.x,,.,.:.....4 4,,„L.„,,,..............wi...,- ., I ' 'n ' - -M,I..A ti- 1 1FM.r4....,t..�.i..,«r,�Ltiu..rlwrrH•w+Fxwr:.rr,MIA...�a..r•7r-.n+r.uk•x / Y...M...•+i-rrm,N,xSi+�^>`^^t..+�N:.�.�.1.r'v..wA4.w..,....�.�rlL'x,.:wAa/rrri-.yt, . (7-: ,,,,,'",” • • • l; NOTE TO THE `FILE zr et: FROM: i. y!!y _r R,F Ze. .Bite, .l` ,2aii /157;ecl21 S . ,., FILE: d- �rt,�fr: , eL,f)- 6.24. , ''imAt 1�4) c,''G- ' 2,v '' ,�'-ceao / /� ”DATE. l if... ` � „_ � ___Yaeb517.0 f5 .A2L4,219.04 ''' 9470P0 .... ' 7-0 Mi?t,25 , -Me _..:i."■;$1,.._____?;■• ___t.:1‘.--- t. , • ./ . A dreagr • a #. ■ -re, -,,/ iireir y .6- /("' ) '� ,) ) ' , „ .aEj,c/45,t42o__A,?'e) _ , , )„,,,,- , A -1 ---,,,2 2.-2) s/ 4.____"12..../±)1L/221). ./. -7.,022, • . At . 4" . ,•?. -- A ZA .• . "V eY_____,e!23°_zegfdyeea.§. .. .. ,,Z 1 7". 1 . ' .- - '.4eZ,:_,_b_ydz2zz,e-__o_VIVASt_e_ALjs;6! _ELa_ :7Z-:•;,A _� ' .� g..; ,ter r ..? «•1,4,- s //1J Ai. P' ) I r n .•vr .+ II� ■ • kg.:1fr.. 5... ..:4Z ,4‘: :Lt . . .. .*.,,5. )qe0444. i '.2, . .' Z., ,.Z.1 *'t....2'.' ._ .. te4- ......J._.zz...._A. , ,,,, 324'ei: i 1 c ,% '� �'i,. co, G// a�' '�' /_ F •.„ 1 1 , 4 fr oz.,. ..„ i - AK..".. .): -.1.._.- L---w-z r7-4,' .,. /i/o -- ,....,&dezAsz.../e.,,___Lms--H , ,, , ,, 1 1 ,_..........................__________. ....._...,.......,.....................7....... .....*-..... t 4 I' h • i • . , *G t. Ii47\ i TT" A ---cr,77- --r. "."" \ VA l\r 1.' '\' '''' L ' Lt, 6 -/ ( t o , '''• 1) Oko 7,',, v ..f IC ,,. . .' "\ 1 (0 \,,,,, J. 1,,,, r" (.k RECEIVED PLANNING ‘ ,W qt . .)A 1 &.i. s, vL..._..... .....\,..,...6_, .., ,..1,,,,_„... Itr • fgeA . , JAN 0 9 1992 , May Realty,Inc. . . 11 January 7, 1992 1 . i , Mr. Dick Bowersdorff l ' " City of Tigard Plannlng Department - City of Tigard City Hall . 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 . ., . . . . Re: Proposed Washington Square Mall Expansion p i Tigard, Oregon i C,\ , Dear Mr. Bowersdorff: . It is our understanding that Winmar Pacific, Inc. proposes to • , .. expand the Washington Square shopping center by constructing a new 180,000 square foot Nordstrom store on the Frederick and Nelson 4. site, and to convert approximately 70,000 square feet of the t, existing Nordstrom store to accommodate specialty shops and a food 1 , - court. li tr..00 • Winmar's proposed expansion will aggrevate traffic problems within the vicinity of the Washington Square Mall site, as several ' studies have recognized the existing traffic congestion. , Specifically, the Progress Area Property Owners Association Transportation Study prepared by David Evans & Associates and Carl l. H. Birftke, Inc. , prepared September 28, 1983, identifiod problems . , at the Oreenburg Road/S.R. 217 interchange along Greenburg Road and at the Groenburg Road/SW Hall Boulevard/Oleson Road intersection. The traffic prcoblems identified in this Study and the improvements i reCcomended to alleviate the vroblems are relevant to th°,1.s • '1 of proposed expansion. The study clearly identifies the problems , which exist at oritical intersections and roadways in this area and .. 14 $ outlines improvement which would improve intersection and roadway levels of service. At the vy least, this study should be , 4. reviewed arid, if these improvements are found to be warranted, they 1 , shoUld then be included and impletented as part of Winmars ; proposed expansion. h I % The current proposed joint study by the Oregon Department of Transportation, Washington County, City of BeaVerton and major property owners will reoult in unnecessary delay, as it will most likely take at least one year to Complete and adopt, and then " several more years to obtain funding and building of the recommended itprovements. This delay will prolong the existing poor level of serVide vhidh exists at the above-referGnced intersections during peak hours, Ill t May 0 epartilita Slakes Comliany 611 Olive Street,SL Louis,Missouri 63161 Ulelilacoue(314)342-00 cr . . • • .Mw . ,.�.... ,.wn,'......«-w..4. ... _..,.,..,. ......w. w.ie....1+4:41. . s ,.s.....,.» W4.-.{.,..'.;u..:;..,a4......w1.l u�i.uW...r+..l.'.n4(itl;J4.,.,Ni.f.,nI Gs r4ti�F, Hwy ' Mr. Dick Bowersdorff January 7, 1992 Page Two We believe it is essential that you revie w potential traffic impact associated with this � proposed expansion, to ensure that Safe • and convenient access will be provided within the Greenburg corridor and that the expansion of Washington Square Mall does not increase the current congested conditions which exist during peak hours at the intersections along Greenburg Road and the S.R. 217/Greenburg interchange adjacent to the Washington Square Mall site. /jilt 4 III '' ruly ours Harry . o �hler Vice Pres dent f, Site Plan ing/Traffic I iy cc: Ronald Cr. Dolan Larry As S idwel L R. Dean Wolfe onho155 • • ■ ' f r ;t . ro d • t . � . .� � ��+ 1+ Cl d ►: !� 1dJ�Fv�s G��°�lG J" r. V4t NN'/�� /F!�'XA,��'VR/ MI � �� Fi�'°'o►Sri,. l� .it, ' ' e'sle..,(;•).' � ^ � , �rec4-i° Via, ' r , . , , , ' ',6..6. ...)41C•Hi4l4,0 14)-:'„I-8 .. '' h,, , . , 4,,,,,,..,,,ig . , . . , . .4/1.'`1/4.) . ' . . 61r44itte i r "�/�` a./. " • . . , . ,. , 4,, ',1?)//4„,.. ,4,, ', .. , '• : 0 . 4,,y . ., H. .. . „f„..., ,,, .:..,... vde,/ :. -... 0-4d.. .. . .:.. . ,., . . , , . . . . . . , . . .1 ' ''72,.. ,y,-•-' ; ,,, , .. . . , , . . ,. . . , , revi.A,,,i , , , . . . . . . . . , . . „ . . .,, . . . . .. . , 1:, . . by AIL It 01' u . • • • , . . . — 0 4t. 1 ,'y,, t A FEB 5 1992 r?tttc�. Fu:�. CITY QE T'� �,6 � .--7/.,__ .fi I ,i.,...„4,e___. \61,01,,, 15,_ } I -iz. ... `rpr� ii r _I lie 4 ta,13_gi a.CS.- ,---C I 4 O./.:,,,i( 2.,3 3 9*7 . • 7 r (= -) 0 Item (,opies ()ate I)iiscriptitm •, _ I/ 3_______tttl, I I I I ttetjlrtl..S f 'P_ b i j -. iT 1 s Y+L 1----__TaicL.d • R,a. ' r -d 1 ; I , I I it • t •ycr re(j0esccl I,uyu1 tvttl p ietr ,cti1,stcci I , ' I' 1 0 N) ycrtir 01A)1.1litttii01 0 i' r your rrviey 0 ". 8. ,l j I I I r� I, n ,I� P11/1)1 I p i , DA � r VIII Al`�IS AND �.b �l � � INC,1C7e5 N r� r a C NGNL ' . r i SI1S UttV 0 t 11 E1' I5 � Il5 I) , S .ANIJI. LAN 5(;Al CiI17'CC j. r � I.AtI 1S O1HiCES iN otIRGON,VNIA5111NGI'ON AND CALIEOltNiA 82B SAW COltlir:17 Al liN,li; 1,010.LANt),Ottlt.DON 07201.48311 (5O3)2.15'6(63 PAX(i+O)225'2701 cc w r 4 4....W—.a...Y..;,n-1.∎i,...r+rJa..nn--,...aakarw+r....ar.a.r4n ark,/l.. ,...n am-J. k. .I.....«w kk.Mawn....">kJ, JJ,..4..,.....w.,..+� W,.r wn r ark,.-;,1k M r Maala.,a,..wk.k.,....a.ara.J.,r,.4.r......r.x+r. ....i•.n•.r..:,.Al w'..rf,,:.....r.,.....lw.,l•r.k.,.a.a..A:..4h4 iIJluv..,.x.....S ia:IM,-r4M.Ar4a 4.......... w.Alk.,,,a, Q A A //!!!lll.��l 1`. r'` . January 28, 1992 MI ►.4.._.r ., 4 li CITYOFTIGARD , r OREGON r r Harry G. Koehler . Vice President, Site Planning/Traffic '(\,, ti The May Department Stores Company 611 Olive Street , St. Louis, Missouri 63101 Re: Proposed Washington Square Mall Expansion Dear Mr. Koehler: Your January 7th letter to Dick ?ewersdorff referred to a 1983 report titled "Progrems Area Property Owners Association Transportation Study" . We have been unable to locate a copy of . ' this report. In 1983 the Washington Square Area was outside the ' City of Tigard; so, we must rely on the County for planning in, that time period. County staff indicate that they have reviewed County records and do not find the 1983. report. Two •. calls to the authoring consultants have failed to yield any ,: response. So, we have not been able to review the 1983. document as you requested. If you have the report, perhaps you can send me a copy. iI, We did review the proposed Washington Square expansion and its A potential impacts, based on more recent traffic engineering documents . We concluded that the expansion proposed at this time `, would not significantly alter existing traffic Conditions . ! • We agree that traffic problems do exist in the Washington Square • area and that the existing problems need to be addressed. The joint study mentioned in your letter is intended to address these , issues . We feel " that Winmar has already made a commit'tnent to l participate in this effort to resolve traffic problems . The ex p ansion cUrrently proposed require payment of Traffic Impact Fees which c an be used to implement traffic solutions . r � Sincerely, , r I Randall R. Wooley City 'Engineer : rw/mayco • Q 13125 SW Hall Blvd,R,C�,' �t 2339`�,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)b39"417�1�-»„ , 4 , � � � .'r.r.. _.,.',..,n. .J...' .....'ar'.,._. ..x_.:�. ri, �v..,' ..t.r ,. , ,..r .,.r.. ..,...�. .. ... ;... .....r.r i, • a .r.. .,.x n. .. ..n.,1._ + ,x .. . .i...,,, .r. 4 � � n , x _ r• • iii ■ i1..a A„.r.ha........�,.rr«f...«m rv..'A-rr.m. u41n�.y..w .rnt.. ..-.rr�.�nr-.n..r-. .4 rwa�.,a.n_ - ..�_.-. � .... ....ti ...,_• - -..,.Ni...}� .. ...... .. � +, . TELECOPY COVER SHEET ' •. Department The May Dtment Stores Company l Office of Legal Counsel, 611 Olive Street,'Suite 1750 St. Louis, Missouri 63101 . . Phone: (314) 342-6330 . Tele� i r: (314) 342-6384 Please deliver the following pages to ' ' , NAME: Mr. Dick Bowersdorff 4 FIRM: ' City Of Tigard' Planning 'Department ' /::-r-,14 '' , ' ' ' ' Cie T t kaa e�2'� , , . . TELEPHONE:', �503-639-4171' , 4 ' t,",1-44 ,./ier. 571(-47. ' TELECOPIER #: 503-634-729 ' �,� hdi :i-0/' ,, ' -ei . , , . � , H : , , ' : TgA l, C();?#1 'b'44/h.lie.„n r �G r NAME: Cathy N. , o hrnara <i?., FIRM: The May Department Stores Corrm..an ,,� , �4 042-4'370, , TEL } . . , , , , . 'c, ' H \ i'.:,,.,/,' ' ', • f • TIME. 11 ,00 'Number' of Pages to follOvw: , 1 ive'all page al please'call Mari If you do not re�e Pad �, , ae eitooti ae possible . at (314) 342.4663, M The inIornr i ori" _ , . � � � fed end'�ari�i�iei�riir� ��r►oiplorit 6�*Obi/n�►�fie�filet inn at �. Y + a is a r1 � he Intended .._ or anti ai red in� �fa� rt c�5lrti a m� file tndivl�'�� efied a�k�ove, My reader Of Gila rnN a�o ie nit 4 co' h I, n or distribution c;t'thie oommunicsti3On it ttrtotiy prohibited. It yot,helve recelvod thin Whitiaianlc tlotr In ' pie: a sender by telephone 1i�nledieteiy end return the brtpinai r�lsei140e to the d�boVe �ddrei vii tI„Si Posted error ie��e rlodl« th � '� Y A . ..,...,....a ..� ... .....,. .,�, .., .,.. ,,. ,..., . .r.,,... ... i t r i t J �� f r iLt • " May Realty,Inc. January 7, 1992 Mr. Dick Bowersdorff City of Tigard Planning Department City of Tigard city Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Proposed Washington Square Mall Expansion Tigard, Oregon Dear M . Bower8dorff: it is our understanding that Winmar Pacific, Ina. proposes to expand the Washington Square shopping center by conStruoting a new 180,000 square foot Nordstrom store on the Frederic.,:', and Nelson site, and to convert approximately 70,000 square feet of the existing Nordstrom store to accommodate specialty shops and a rood court. Winmarts proposed expansion will aggrevate traffic problems within the vicinity of tba Washington Square Mali site, as several studies have recognized the existing traffic congestion. Specifically, the Progtess Area Property Owners Association Transportation Study prepared by David Evans & Associates and Carl H. Buttke, Inc. , prepared September 28, 1983, identified problem at the Greenburg Road/S.R. 217 interchange along Greenburg Road and at the Greenburg Road/SW Hall Boulevard/Oleson Road intersection. The traffic problems identified in this study and the improvements recommended to alleviate these problems are relevant to this proposed expansion. The study clearly identifies the problems which exist at critical intersections and roadways in this area and outlines improvements which would improve intersection and roadway levels of service. At the very least, this study should be reviewed and, if these improvements are found to be warranted, thv should then be included and implemented as part of WinmarcS proposed expansion, I - The current proposed joint study by the oregon Department of Transportation, Washington County, City of Beaverton and major property owners will result in unnecessary delay, as it will most likely take at least one year to complete and adopt, and then Several more years to obtain funding and building of the recomMended improvements. This delay will prolong the existing poor level of service which exiSts at the above-reterenced intersactions during peak houro The My Department Mores Company 611 Oke Stivel4 1x.i4is,Missend 6,310/ llehepiinne(31e0 J42.6366 „ • • n.x.,,r« ......,...—,.�.,...�� .....u..4...«+,-«.,;.,—...µ,i.«w,,.....i,.,�w,,...,,...•.,...' .,.a._..._«. ,..ye,,.. � �. .. ,..I. ...�.0.,4.sw..—.wo ..,,..�M�..�...,.-,..,..h,ia„a.-�...,•.....«�,. .u.,.,... .,� ..w,.w.,.,.,. ..,-�....z..,�.,+•.t...u..,r.1 i.1..1..ist.:�k«..+,.,,..«.a.:.,lJ....�,.«w..r...ru,.»�u:.a aa.-✓♦a««.:...x . GPI v, r a x, ����� MAY .. '� ��Yt ter,! �•. �Y—r;_'•'�.. r ak..t tY: 1��K t ..".r Mr. Dick Bowersdorff y, January 7, 199 Page Two We believe it is essential that you review potential traffic impact associated with this proposed expansion to ensure that safe it and convenient access will be provided within the Greenburg '$ corridor and that the expansion of Washington Square Mall does not increase the current congested conditions which exist during peak. hours at the intersections along G eenburg Road and the S.R. 217/Greenburg interchange adjacent to the Washington Square Mall site. Imvid ruler ours 410 Tiff Harry ; . o hier �r . Vice Pres dent Site Plan ing/Traff is • r'. cc: Ronald ab Dolan Larry F. Sidwel R. bean Wolfe cnh,.155 p AM P% p rr yy_ M I . .. •\ • • • • • .a....wa.......,.,. .aL.;..., n,.,..M ...wr6.:a.. A.f,« N1 Ww.... .. ..l.t:Jw...ti......�.-+..-N..t:.....wl.....«.....,:�x:.w .«:-•..ti,::.i.I.,.,....{.«'M.:...�.w:MMM^.,-.;w.«-+.li' -'P`ti-M..• J VA.A.- • • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING • STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) se. • City of Tigard ) ]C, r. i�J►tt l W'�C V- , being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say: (Please print) That I a a (l'lk m l7fCl for The City of Tigard, Oregon. That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: • That I served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: t/City" of Tigard Planning Director Commission .� Tigard Planning amm a. Tigard bearings Officer Tigard Cit Council g City A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice of Decision) o f w h i c h is attached ed (Mar ked E>thi,bit "A") was mailed to each named persons at the address, shown on the attached list marked' exhibit "B" on the. 7 W day of C.� ,RL� j �9 �, • • said notice NOTICE OF DECISION, as hereto attached, was posted on an appropriate bulletin board on the '2. jE "' day of Q A � ��. 19 Al( • and deposited in the United States jail on the`„_2_1 day of , aN�� i'' , 19 c1( postage prepaid. AA (WdiAtli,t,f(1---"" Prepared Notice Posted For Decision On1 ° . t {/ °4 y J t Lyy and sworn/affirm to me on the . day of , L,. %T1 Jo o r n , rn& •ll:�ly'G, '' 1`O A.i'tS PUBLI e O ` N� llf + ? i , '� My C�11T1 1].E3slon w . es 2 mow- • P rbon " d deliyered to 1508T OFFICE �,pt� S ,bsppibed, and sworn/affirm to me on the A day of , r° '* I NOTARt PUBLIC of OREGON My Commission Eipirest b m/ FFIDAV.EKM • ff Q� 1 t. :t • (, • . --•....:.r.rn....n...f....r.»_.....-r..a....... •.,...n...J..t n....,».....i.'...n'....»n .:.n...r...-....u:a.,. .._ ..vl-.._..•,rna. . ..,...........'n.«.Jw+.i..'......-L nh.....n...In4'...nH,r-`:r.4,ML.:..w...wHi.rn.w......».r»..w.,«...r.._......W...«...,+....-.-rJ.-.....n»..n..A..»....n.....n...r..».,n..r.FV-.,..N.. r..«...r...,J...:..1:«r.r...t......,.+........x..3ni.lu,....1.•rA.r..--..nnlA4e ( •. CITY OF TIGARD , . NOTICE OF DECISION. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW a SDR 91-0020 WINMAR PACIFIC INC. (WASHINGTON SQUARE) APPLICATION: A request by Winmar Pacific, Inc. for Site Development Review approval to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet, a 5.7 percent increase over the existing, mall area. The proposal includes razing the building formerly occupied by the Frederick and Nelson department store on the west side of the mall; replacing that building with a 180,000 square foot, two- story building to be ; occupied by Nordstrom's department store; and remodeling the existing Nordstrom store on the east side of the mall with a food court and a number of small retail spaces. In addition, a vacant r restaurant and the Wunderland entertainment center will be razed to provide additional surface parking. Zoning designation: C- ;° (General Commercial) . Location: 9585 SW Washington Square Road , L (WCT 'i 1S1 26C, Tax Lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) . DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director'; designee for the City of Tigat ; has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted below: A. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Proposal Description requests Site Development Review W"�.�nar Pacific, Inc. r oes, approval to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center b y approximately 67,000 square feet. The proposal inc ludas razing the 112,942 square foot building formerly occupied by Frederick and Nelson on the west side of the mall; replacing that building with a 180,000 ) V square foot, two-Story building to be occupied by a Nordstrom; and remodelin g the existi ng Nordstrom store , with a fo od court and a number of Small retail spaces. .,, I �, „ Some relocation of existing utilities, parking, and parking lot aisleways adjacent to the Frederick and , Nelson' ore will ll b e nene ssa ry d ue t+ .. .. the h. e la r g3 es r footprint of the building. The application also proposes relocation n of the tr ans it area a pproximately 300 fee t further north within the slopping center's western par kin g lot, lthoe g rRand y Kyte of Winmar Pacific indicat ed to City the future location the , M yN transit area may be elsewhere on the site dependent upon Winmar y s negotiations with h; Tr1-][het a I I I ob • I I ' I v . • d.;A:,...:....., ,u., ...._.,..,..,yt.«....i.....4.,... ..An:. ....u.,:wo-.».I,...,.,ti4 -r......,.....U,,..w., ,,...... ...,..a.:,..1:7,uu,.,-w...,.;r.:. u,w. "'tea,:,.+.,..a.;.....:n...,,:,........,4..:+M _.,H,,,.r........ _,ri..,-,,,-..1'H:..w.w,...Ai-:+;.:;.....lw 6 .«.ati.:..,.,.i.».'`...1C,I .,M..a...»:,u5..1.,..,-._......S,.u.iut - ■ t 1 In addition, a vacant restaurant and the wunderland entertainment center in the northwestern portion of the g Washington Square shopping center will be razed to �' provide additional surface parking area. This new parking area would include 180 additional parking spaces. Completion of this parking area along with the reduction of parking lot area adjacent to the new Nordstrom store would result in a net addition, of 87 parking spaces. Utilities, storm drainage, fencing, and landscaping along . the boundaries of the site are already in place. The tentative schedule for the project includes ', demolition and site preparation in the Winter and Spring of 1992, construction of the new Nordstrom store to open in Fall. 1993/ and renovation of the existing Nordstrom store for a variety of uses for a Summer 1994 opening. 2. Agency Comments The Engineerin g Department provides the following comments regarding the proposal a. STREETS: It has been recognized for some time that rr transportation improvements are needed in the area ' of Washington Square. However, it is not clear what . improvements should be made to address existing • congestion and oo solution,proposed development, erit. ira attempt to finc�a City staff have been 'meeting informally with representatives of the Stake Highway Division, Washington County, the the C.ity � of " Beaverton, major property owners in the area (including w nmar) , and others. It � that these informal meetings will soon lead to initiation of a joint study, to identify the needed transportation r..tation improvements for the area. It will likely ke about a year for study to be comp leted and ado p ted the various j urisd tions Winniar is a party to an agreement dated March 8 199i, relating to the proposed Lincoln VII As part of than agreement/ �Winmar is �� � � � � development. p .. committed participating in the proposed trsoration spy P recent past, p � study,�� In i��� , � 'Winimar traffic ovement s on has shared oost iof � .efic imp� .. d 1r1 the � �� 5 holl s Ferry yRoad.: winmar Hall n and ow willingness to participate in continues to show �. rek p �olu �.on.of the traffic .robe . f a valid area, , � t the eras �. wide solution can be identified. NOTICE F DECISION SDR 91-.0020 WINMAR INC. 2 at%p n 4 . • „ . ,a;'a.., ...........u,.._.4.,,,...». ...�...,._,.J. ..............i,.__ ....'.«,.. ._..,.. ,,. w.,_..,,,.-..,_._..._.,u...,.,.. .,.,..._m«1...».w.-. .:r.._.,w. :.,........... .....__«..4., .....,......._....,...,,....... .,.,ati..,...,...i„-.1a»;:.. ;w,..._..'.,,.,..,',.::.:.,«..Nµ..,m.«,.w......:a. .1 ... The traffic report submitted with the application indicates that the proposed development can be expected to generate some additional traffic on the surrounding street system but that the existing level of congestion will not be significantly increased by the development. All major entrances to Washington Square already have traffic signals and turn lanes. There are no obvious minor street improvements which would significantly ease existing congestion on the surrounding street system. j An area-wide traffic solution is needed. The ti development currently proposed will not significantly change the severity of the existing congestion problems. Winmar is already committed to participate in an area-wide study to find ' traffic solutions. The development currently proposed will - - be required to a Traffic Impact Fees which can be pay • applied toward implementation entation of any identified, Until the stu y is completed, the appropriate solutions are not known. For these reasons, we find it appropriate o allow the proposed rc� used development . to occur without any transportation-related conditions other than Winmar's continued participation in the joint effort to resolve the area's transportation problems. b. SANITARY SEWER: The existing structure is currently connected to the public sanitary sewer system. Therefore no additional requirements should be required at this time. ., . c. STORM SEWER: T he applicant is proposing to connect t tot he on-site storm sewer facility ' Effective December 1, 1991, we are required to comply ' with Environmental Quality Commission of State E G : The ECis ' �1 requiring that all new developments, that add iM a/ additional ad d, �t i ona imper viou s service ery Lc a ai- within n the e Unified Sewerage Agen c y (USA) must inc l ude a water r quality treatment facility. Previously, developments without a su itable site for water quality e ft were allowed to p a y a f ee in l ieu of on-site water quality treatment, with the fee s to be used to construct regional facilities. 9 M» 3 NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 91-0020 W11�� ,INC. ' 1 • w +u,......-._ ..._ . .n....u..,..._ ...,.,«.. rn........_.n..,..«-,...,.,..i+,, .m ..I......................,«u... ...-....,... .....i.--n..._:A...-...rF..._.,i..-i..........,w .t...,,....w4. .....«...,.xr,.1-,+1:...m...-.. .-.,.,...i'...r....,.w ..t-r..-.-.....,.i,m....ti r....»...A..-......,...N..`.1....i..-i....+..... _...-, «:.--t..:...-..+.t-JL;-r..4.:.,- .• 1 . The City of Beaverton has reviewed the proposal and has -. commented that Winmar Inc. should be required to commit to participate in a "Diamond Area"' transportation study as .a' condition `Iof development approval for the proposed expansion. The Oregon Department of Transportation Highway Division " has recommended that financial participation in a "Diamond Area" transportation study by the applicants be , required as a condition of development approval. ODOT recommends that the city require a bond or other type of assurance to ensure that Winmar will participate in the study even after the issuance of building permits for the proposed expansion Tra.-Met has reviewed the current ro osal to relocate the P P transit center to another location on the western side of , the shopping center. Tri--Met would prefer relocation of the transit center to a location on the northern side of the shopping center adjacent to the Penney°Is store. Tri- Met and the applicants is both report that negotiations otiations are continuing that may ultimately result in the transit center being moved to that location rather, than the currently proposed location shown on the site plan, Tri- - requests that the City not approve the proposed relocation of the transit center in the western parking area until an agreement for the ultimate relocation of ' the transit center to the site on the northern side of the shopping center is signed by Tri-Met. The City of Tigard Building Division, the, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District, PG, and GTE have reviewed the proposal and have offered no comments or objections. m BA r ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The criteria for approval of a Site Development Review application are found at C ommunity Development Code Section 18. 120. 180, A development proposal must be found to conform with the standards of the applicable zoning' r district; related Communit y Development Code Chapters; and various criteria connected to the proposed , development's relationship to the surrounding natural and . I physical environment. I a 1 The propo sed expansion of of shopping the center r complies with Community Development Code C-G zoning district re q. iremeni s for minimum' m s et backs... from property boundaries, maximum coverage (85 p ercent maximum coverage al lowed; 84 .0 6 percent coverage of total I L 11 NOTICE Or DECISION SDR 91-0020 WINMAR INC. 4 f I .ry. y .._...._.._._. w_r r^,....,....w..,,_,....�...._._ .w_.a.K,_, .....,.._,.1,.. .,. ...._, ._.............,.,__...._.,,,,. .......,.A,.._...,:. ......,...,:.m._ ._, ,......,,,.. ,v.......__...�..,: _ .�,_.w, ..�......_.._.;.._..w,.w_w.......a::.,W., ' it Washington Square site proposed) and minimum site landscaping (15 percent minimum landscaping required; "' 15.04 percent landscaping 'proposed) The intended usage e,„ of the expanded and renovated areas are consistent with the permitted uses in the C-G zone. Tenant modification a., permits necessary for the existing Nordstrom store will be reviewed to assure that future uses of this area will be consistent' with the permitted uses of the zone. The maximum building height permitted in the C-G zoning e T .,. • district '. �stric�, �.s 45 rem:,� The rep c. sed new Nordstrom building P p 9' i would be 48 feet high xceptions to the maximum building height standard area permitted if certain criteria are satisfied. Section 18 98.020 of the Community Development Code (Building Height Exceptions) allows a building height of up to 75 feet if the following conditions will exists 1) the building's floor ,, area does not exceed 1.5 times the area of the site; 2) the proposed structure does not abut a residential zoning district; and 3) all building setbacks from property lines equal at least one -half the building's height. These criteria are satisfied for Washington Square because 1) the 1,262,266 square foot building (after expansion) is located on a greater than 45 acre site and :° p ) �' thus would have an !FAR of,less than 1.5 to 1; the site of the proposed 48 foot tail Nordstrom building does not abut a residential zoning district; and 3) the proposed building setback would be more than 4 times the proposed building height. Therefore, a building height exception i is granted to allow the proposed building to be 48 feet tall as proposed. The entire shopping center complex complies with, Community Development Code Chapter 18. 100 requirements for provisions for parking area trees and landscaping, street trees, buffering from surrounding uses, and other landscaping requirements. In addition, the'' total ` s . comp lex, with the pro p osed addi tional parking spaces, is. Y Chapter . 106 standards related consistent with Code C p l8 andards d to required parking spaces for the mix of existing and , proposed uses, minimum parking lot aisleway widths d and lighting. It will be necessary for the building,n g P ermi plans for the proposed ex p a nsion to provide information on how Washington Square complies or will comply with the standards of the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) relative to designated handicapped parking spaces, standards are now stricter than either the current Tigard Community Development Code a t s tand�rds handidapped p arking Chapter and the Tashing ton County ICE OF DECISION S NOTICE DR 91-0020 'fiVTINMArR INC, 5 c r 1a • ,«.....,..\•.._.....,--.,.w ................i.....,.....1...,r.n.,,..-.....,.,.,..,x.s.iw...._...._,....:......_.:.._..,....._...x. u a..._........,.n.»............vuu..-:....a.,..r»...a.a._..'.u.r.-...-a,,.........,v.....:.....ur.:.".:..«_r.,....r-.._...1.._..:....1L..a.,._,:......w_.a........1ra.....ul..r...0.".....rM.«,.....»l.-».._. .......r .xG..n4...',.,....:....,,«,r..ar...,..a.?.A......1.,.4 standards that were applied at the time of shopping center construction. Compliance with the ORS standards will be required prior to the issuance of occupancy permits Existing accesses to the site are consistent with the ' access standards of Code Chapter 18. 108 as well as the clear vision at intersection standards of Chapter 18. 102. No additional signs are proposed at this time. Any' additional signage will need to be approved through the sign permit process. No trees are proposed for removal as part of the development proposal other than ornamental landscaping trees. Substantial additional landscaping is proposed to more than replace the trees to be removed. No tree N '!, emoval permit is necessary other than the recognition of E the proposed tree removal and replacement included in , this current review. 4• '" Code Section 18. 120. 180.Ar. 12 states that provisions for r r. transit facilities may be required as a condition of development approval if a proposed development is adjacent to an existing or proposed transit route. • .. Washington Square is served by several Tri--Met bus routes and contains a transit center within the shopping pp g center's western parking lot. The application proposes relocation of the transit center approximately 100 feet to the north but still within the western parking lot. While the Planning Division staff's impression , of the transit center relocation issue is that the site on the north side of the shopping center adjacent to Penney's 1 would appear to be more convenient for transit riders, staff does not find that the Site Development Review I,• approval standards provide the city with the authority to ' require that the 'ideal" location for the transit center be provided for as a condition of approval of this application. The proposed relocation would still appear to serve transit needs as well as the current location. Staff encourages Winxnar to continue to work with Tri-diet . on the transit center location. 1elocation of the ,. J:•. transit center from the west sid e to t he north side of the,shopping center could be accommodated through a minor approved City snd Tri-Net should keep y pp - -ogress the Caat �. r�s�. Progress modification to the a.ppr d development l g the} - .• with regard to s iti,Y t trans it center. I • G Winmar Pacific o Inc has participated in pri�liminary discussions relative to the development of a "biamond Area" transportation study and has already provided A u I j NOTICE OF DECISION am i A 9 1-0 0 2 0 wi NmAf INC. 6 ' 1. e 4 '^:. background analysis for such a study through traffic. .' studies funded by Winmar. Winmar has previously 4' comet"tted to participate in such a study as evidenced by the written agreement between the City of Tigard, Winmar, 4 , ro and Lincoln VIII Partners dated March 8, 1991. This existing ag;.:eement appears, to provide the assurance ,` recommended by ODOT and the City of Beaverton. C. DECISION The Director's designee approves Site Development Review SDR 91-0020 subject to the following conditions: BUILDING PERMITS WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING CONDITION IS SATISFIED. 1. An erosion control plan shall 1�,e provided as part of �' the building permit application. The plan shall } coilform to "Erosion Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook., November 1989. " K 2 . The applicant shall install and maintain a water quality facility meeting the requirements of '' Resolution and Order No. 91-47 as approved and . adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County. The City Engineer may waive this requirement to the extent allowed by the regulations of the Environmental Quality Commission and Unified Sewerage Agency as they exist at the time the plans for the facility are approved or installed. a UNLESS A SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE ASSURANCE IS POSTED, ■ THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO TIME ' . .:'' ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT: 3. The proposed landscaping materials and other ' proposed site improvements shall be installed in ' conformance with the ap pr oved site plan. Appropriate numbers and locations o f designated IL , '.... handicapped parking spaces shall be provided in accordance wi th the. .sta nd ards of the Oregon Revis e� _ �; Statutes. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. i THIS APPROVAL SHALL B � VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (1 8)' BELOW. ' MONTHS O)5' TI��, DATE OL' FINAL DECISION NOTED • N OTICE O T ICI OF DECISION - 3 R 9� 0 020 - WINMAR INC 7 • . ` v 1 1, .1 • _. w,.. .....»........t..._ ........._4..._.l a.............. la_...a..._.u.., ,,.. .-,. . .........__......-...w.w.,•_ ...,.1...... .e.w,......-:i,._ .. ...ir..y...., «.-n ,-..-1.11s.r.... .-.—w3_:4.:.,.»..,.u..«...,J 4.,......t.2.... ..-.a,:..«.iLL..::..:,,:4_:.:.G,-..-4«uu..Ni,.,w.',,•r • gab • D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice: . Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to applicant and owners `4 Owners of record within the required distance The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization _„_Affected government agencies t. , 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED OR SUBSTANTIAL REASONS FOR ISSUING AN AMENDED DECISION ARE FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING DIVISION NO LATER THAN 3:30 P.M. ON 4G t1 r.A , 1 1''' 3. Appeal; Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32 .370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. Appeal fee, schedule and forms are available at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , i Tigard, Oregon. I, , 4. Questions: If you have questions, please call Jerry Offer, City of Tigard Planning Department, City of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon. j,e,4 APPROVED BY: Dick Bewersdo'�f f DATE Senior Planner c f winimiar _ r, • � NOTICE Cr DECISION _ SDI ��-O O 20 TINMr INC,, 8 . . • • • I•• • ,: . ..,., ..� w•...�..0«. -WCa..,-..�✓..w�.l.d.wt-J.F�,,.....a..h...,..,wwl..,....h ....- .. - �-., •.�3._iu.• J.......tr.xu.w J.v....:.�d.�.,.r.n.-L.asx.wWM.4>.v..�-.......-r�H+.:-,r.�.du.aUv::l,}a:in�w..�....,F. ....,,.�...•.,i.nwwFU G7•..F.F-ul,K.www.w»+.•.0.h1.NO.k.�w:-wM:W ShH..�lvlt'.NC'.:hV:A..:.WMw..a1W1n F.w+:.K, h 1 ' 1 +, • A. .-,- ... VI \: Ir , , , i::.':::... � I =1 ile'11 .0 v, lIy r �. . I 44,416.4.. ��A ► : • • NMNNN A P., r /- r. •. ... , 11,":,.. ..' ,/ 00011" 1 �CMil '/1l1, D .r , , , . 111 ,►' t�' .: 111111/: 1 1I� '• Est* ,+�' - 9 , ;. Irm g are 4'� 1 / ■ z . ay y / " : +,C' ' ,'\, ' .. al 611, It° '\' .. . . ., .. . , . ' .4., 61,tt" ' p , ,,,,.,,,.... , , 0 . , , ---. . / JT.j} s A •. . 44.,, �I /r• r. . r1 �•.�i.io ,- ').71 1 Eij , --iLL i : .,, ....... . _1 , $*111 Inril" ' Aral?iikgettio go,/ ' 1 .': \ ,, , ' 1 \\,...,,,k, f '.1 • , . . ,,, /1-3 J t1 , V / t j L . ,' , ' il Nillove, 0104. ' ' •waiii 1111111111Nfflit* ,.. .\ ' , , ' ,, • I. .... _ r P' ' M / Nr r•• . � • • • o • h , ..'\',72.:.j,., ,' ., ' ', '.'''' ',, H. :', ' , ' ,', , ': ,' ' : :' ' , • , . , : . '',''' — : : .'. ''., '''','' .: :,,„,, :: , .:, •' uw. .. i.-.,. t i.M .r4li.na.,,,.ix,.ur.aM.' Vl..t.u.G...x.a,._...............So- .n,,,w«,,w. ..... ,....._..I.n..-.,. .H,.a-,....) •W»..+»�4+"m U.l..n.,.,• . 110964 SWT ALLEN, SUITE 600 °'� 1.1080 ,Sid ALLEN, SUITE :Uv ....,. ' .,, '"BEAVERTON' OR 97'005• ' ' ' BEAVERTON ,.. OR 97005 h�51�f �`� � fit, :: 1S127DD-00100 1S126C0--01100 . T. MICHAEL & ASSOCIATES LTD. ..,.. SQUARE PLAZA ,' • • ' '9200 E. 'MINERAL AVENUE ' ' '. . BY THE CAFARO COMPANY' ' . ENGLEWOOD, 'COLORA9.DO 80112 ' P 9 BOX 422 � ? ' FLORAM PAR NJ07932 ' 18126C0—01111 '1S12600—01109 ' . • HUDESMAN, DAVID & LINDA CO TR$' ' ' ' SQUARE' LAND CO ' ' '''• 1620 43RD AVE EAST � ', I ' BY JC PENNEY CO STORE' 288 SEATTLE WA 98112 � , FIELD,TAX: OFFICE ,w . 'PO BOX 4015 ' ,I ' BUENA PARK CA 90624 I, 1S126CO3-01108 ' , 1512600-•01200 ' • , • SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO I DAYTON HUDSON CORPO ATION `` • ' SEA ''TOWER., BSC 41-.35 : : BY. TARGET #345 TAX 13PT 14--1 • BY TAX DEPT 970W :'777 NICOLLET MALL ' • 600 SIERRA ARE VILLA'! MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 ' . ' • . , ' PASADEENA^ 'y/� ' CA 911.0? 1S126C0-01301 ....!.,.....w....e.!n... S 26C , � 1512�4.0-01302 w•.w.ww.+•w'•Ow,w'•,•..M. FRINGE LAND .ORE LTD FRINGE LAND ORE,LTD! . • S! FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OR '' ' ,PO .BOX '215 45 '� , BANK TRUST PROPERTY DIV . , ' SEATTLE WA 9811/,':: ' , : PO BOO 31.31 • . , PORTLAND OR 97206' ' " ' I ' 1512600-01303 .o.,t......N.. 1S126C0-01403 ': FRINGE LAND ORE LTD , MAY DEPARTMENT ' • BY "IRST'NAT'L BANFF OF OREi ,STORES COMPANY THE: ' . BANK TRUST PROPERTY DIV ' : , : . ' , 621 SW 5TH ' ,• w • PO BOX' 3131 ' ' ' PORTLAND ', OR 97204. : • PORTLAND : OR 97208 1S126C0-01805 do...'...... ..w..o..1.. ' ' ' 1S126C0--01900 ...r L.. ...1'....n.• • TOYS "R" US, INC ! - ' ' CRESCENT GROVE CE PER1 ASS , , . , 395 WEST PASSAIC' ST ' CRESCENT, GROVE CEMETER' ' ROCHELLE 'PARK NJ ' 07662, 00000 ' '.. 'WIASIMAR PACIFIC! TNC. �' 9585 W HIWc oN SCE IE 7 • I TIC, ' OR 97223 ' , ' '' ' CATHY' CHASE I ,, . 8365 SW STEVE T'IGAR,D OR 97223 n ■ r I , ,, , ,, ,,, ,:,,, 1:::, ,,,,'''. : ,' ' , , ',. ' . ' '.. '. . . . . . 40 ' ' ' o , ,. .. . ,, , ,. . .. ., , .. ": . ,.. .. ,. , ' , .. . , , .. . . . . . . . „ , .. , ,• •,, ,.. . , . , , ...,,• . . .. . . , . .,K ,, , .: ,. ,, . : , . , . . , , , , . , . . __..,..__. . ... . . . , , .„ ., , , ... , j '.l COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS INC.,' w,eaiLT r 7129 • P.O.BOX 370' PHONE(503)684.0360 Notice l .• 3E4VERTON OREGON 97075 IT>a,...2, r P.,5f i t\tIE fi15lt 9 ta00,0 WI MAWPACIFIC mac.1 legal Notice Advertising nt T1ic Axrclo lias:approved,subyect kq condltxoni$,'a Srie lbevelopmerit :. 12ev,iew'repwuest to e�tphdd.the Washington Square shdispang cehter by ap. • City of Tigard 3' ❑ Tears Ic pro�trr►'iatel° 67,00 square feet fox the relocatiQi bE a.clepartrnerit story, • C0 yc�o 23397 . zOr t'043, ener4 Cornriteiei )':!The:.0 G xo u 1ginl1dws'ppbiac agen ,�0 © �t7uplicate Al cj!yadmu z t.ratrve'ser�treesf'pub1a,�r�sup port,tdnit1U0 S,„prottssaonat;,aird&d-; Tigard, Or 97223 mir.istrative wervlees;Iinancia1,,insuranc �real es te, d bUsine ss Sup . . portsexyices,`ano,•sr�n'gle-'hhizlyesdxdantiol utrts arnon other uses.;, LOCATION.9$ 5'SX°Washington SgiiiireRoa'n''(WCI'M IS1'2 C tact ';• lots 1.107;1401,And 1700) iCABL RREV,fW CR TitlUA COI:* :'.' m;yunit bevelopm nt Co e a�et tiorrs "I:62,1$1 0,18�1t 6,18,.tQ ,and , 18,'12 • - ,, .. ;»_..,• ' *r 11w.l Y � �r AF=IDAViT OF PUBLICATION . N. • STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )es' ?; Q ,' �, •Judith KoehlerA �� h �� aq• ■ lr - ,t p, 1 .I ° being first duly sworn;depese and say:that I a e'Advertising ..ii.i iiir,-�.' , a i91 "/�""" ;;�� Director,or his principal clerk;of the, es "'•r �++t//� �i." 00,44:", i t —r /�IIIII/� " 1 •a newspaper of general ciroulrjtion s defined in ORS 191,010 EI1,41:44-f i i ','� �',�,n. ,' 1 t:$irI(.t ' and 193.020;published'at Ta t� In the ►e+ "�" 0 aid b!1 t t "Pr. .ic _cc r t'I \ , ,/' . . ' r�,,•p',rrrall a printed copy Which iS hereto 'i'�,►� '� �•k� � pY the to annexed,was published « +�l,i�� ""'' I � �;i�` � [ entire issue of said newspaper for One ._ successive and i�,titi' , ,,.1• ` / -� ' "' -r ' ' '� Mn 404 �'�" :.s> "` "1, '71111►�i�;'p • .� � ''consecutive in the followin�i issues;� � � �,�� � ph" �b'�;V; , � ''.�, • • -. ; °4 &' h�'` y •Ill,YI•11 R.N `, r I �' , . ..'„, /� . December 24, 1991 ' ,1"a►,�,.s;-•, , , ,,• a.� , ' .. It■...el.M� �yI/\ r"' \'i-� J',,,'��,r^7�7''' , 'Mi� '1 �' ,,r,r ,r "� Ivlll+O LAND Pe8 A 1TI�Il+Y ML P 91 UOI 'T " ( PO 4ES'� i if' . . :4 . #/ The Dii c tar liar approved,subje t tp conditiOns,a Ivih.i,,fraud ottitiait. xequ©st lt}dih!idc n arcel Q rapI toxin tely Ur9d floes irttb three parcels with:tivo,°araois of approxi notel,y lO,O O�s hare;ieet aricl ane lntrael o(,"' ',�. Subscribed and sworn to before me this,24th day of December J 9t approxi�ate1y'2O,UUO sq�tara 2e0, Z,ON 4;R.12( ;es,ic1.etttirt1f 12-. • .rte unitslacre)r,The Rri2�xotdnl,allows single,famtl, detached acid,att ached,' ' rdsrdontral trnrts du it,xc ,trtttlti arnli dwe Irr s xe rdetttiai dare I r faellitrd ,:Erin�il,c.Writ par s,gubtlivisldns;pablia stippart sarvices;,'•'• Notary public for Oregon resi'd'ential hreatmetithpmu5;t ariufactuied;lxcxttes,'famaly ay'atlre;home my Corrrmission Exlsires t r ocoupations,temporary use and reside,itial fUe1 lnnkS,'amongpthier ues., 02 �` /q? LOOATI i It 155(55 5,1!.r79ta'A.ve,tiue(,IVC1 M'2S L 1224;i4 14#8900. • •) AFFIDAVIT' , APPLICA81,'RItVIA'l�Ci1T ri,IAr•COmrnnrit veto atrntiCode 1 ' Sectian 1$,.a4< 1'g.88,,'18,96.080,;1g,1.n8:0/0, 1:•ga �rb4.O,and..;,13,12 O5O. I . , •.. '� „4. ": "1 ... 114 :7 fi il�:thlit t ' ry Y 1ry�j+i1 .,...lin 1 z �NrNr '4 ,III ti �ri; 1�, -. --=':--4i$rt",1i' ...' , �� , l 44,44 `♦ .' .o `y�,/ i rr .� � S1•is� � ���,� -� r: -- • VO'Tt r' 5 �* .'}j'��1 r � ».1 , , • 77, i , ,,, t `�t i ', ,MGM 4� L2.' ' •'1 , • TdkSiP+�r A�@fiMMi1t1�9r" �**# � 1 �� '1hdlttdt pttd tindttlg tit'tact>l,.df,cis,1ott,aitd Yatedtctit ati10YmA wns t atY a, obi lnta,troi,rt the?Wining.r c tlrwicltt 'i nrd:divlti :ohtdt,1 12W', '' flail 131V!dr�,1',Or Box 23301, `1195tH,Orel; 9,1223;,7110 dc'rvlsron 114,1 . . 1 Any o po t kiGrb h� t cihiam do al n j q0 A hit art x L 70'� nntlnry" ��2 tty_t? tY a xlre cl + a1 1 s tlislOttla accolda Wit cctiti 18'31,2" ' dr tlio Cbtnthunity btvelopmottt Cadti �r lcll ptovides tltal.a written app` . ' ' ' , i ill,:nifty bo'iiihd within 10 days tittar itdti e"xH ciV and sntr'tliO,dcad ' ' ' 11ti fo llltng tlt'an aijip t.l'is 3t30�"1'::4 dwutu �'b.,' 092,1, ,;c . • f�n}1j• (r {1 t.�y W� ,yy iy r�-t+r M "i•�'I � ,'r ��': .l' 11.11219"I1 tifsll1,1 tia,a'lrihni 4 19 i, 4 • I r 1 r s •i r .�I„'1,`' r n 4 r r , „, . . ,, ,, , . , 0 e ., . , , . . . . `1 • y/ '/ COMMUNITY n AC tl, 'B'"Er M RS, �`d ■ A I ,.' . P,o.BOX 370 PHONE(503)6 Legal TZ' 7129 • ( 6a-0360 z .... Notice g t3EAVERTON,OREGON(97075 SIT)✓'DF 1'A IFI NTH UV!EV515DR�g1-)20 � • Legal Notice Advertising , O#13 [ , • g 'he Director has approved subject to.eanditions,a Sfte.Developnr,ent ReView request to expand the Washington Square,shoppir g oenlcr by ap- City of Tigard 0 ❑ Tearsheet t\ proximately 6'7,000'square feet for the r'eloatron of a department store,•' Box 2Tig7 ZONE;G G(General Conrimcrcral).Thu C°G zoning allows public agen ® • ey administrative'serYiecS,'publie supppq'iaciliti,s,professional d 4d a: ❑ Duplicate Al i Tigard, Or 97223 �nninrstratiVC'services,frnancral,insurance,real a Late,and business sup • ,� port services,and single-family residentiai units among other uses `.,� • I. e ; LOCATION:9585 S.W.Washington ScltiareRoad(WCT1V118126C,tax ,; lots 1107,14.01,and 1'/oO) APPLICABLE REVIEW CR1,TBRIA',Corn, ' . mp'un/i�ty Development Code Sections 81.62,18.1�00,•;18.1O6,18:'108,and • AFFiDAVIT OF PUBLICATION �. �' ,� ��� . STATE OF OREGON, ••'•.... ,r " "pig iss. t.. * .•+ COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, S �, . ; ,' ,Judith Koehler r i�•: �,/'' 14( ,s being first July swain,depose and say that I a "•••"• 9` "II ' p Y e Advertising r �Nti v 11J , Director, _ / /� � r ctcrp,er his principal clerk,of the. �igar�. 'Limes , " l�;r+4 i�'�I_--.,� an‘ , � % � ��=�; •� ,� a newspaper of general circulation as define° in ORS 193,010 "�A A "�in P d .4 . f✓`•— r sa a r. • sand 193.020;published at f pTlg d in the a AVV 'y--+/ryj1. �/T a pr€rated copy cf which is hereto annexed was ublished \ ;".Ogn ,—4 published in the �'` �--1 entire issue of said newspaper for One ,successive and ..,,r�+' �,.*;,.�, , *i...4 '„ } . . ' • consecutive in the following issues: "'�• ::: A,. 0. el �" Isi,/ L irm Me December 24, 1991 \ ", 'r „ 1 ar `�w. f n, t „, era ur, mow'4,-1�+#vR q'�-� °� MTT�Rj RATZTJTIQN p 91.001 LARSON/I (NPO#5) ' . _ / � ,ie j ThoDireater has approved,subject to conditions,a Minor Land,Partition j re uestlo divide a parcel of approximately 0.94 acres into three parcels with tWo parcels'of,approxrmateiy 10,000 square'.feet and one parcel of ; Subscribed,and sworn to before me this 24th day,of December 19! apprd innately 20,000 square feet,ZONE:R-12(ftesitiontlal,'12,,a; . N-'.' ,w units/acre),The R-12 zoning allows single-family detached,and attached . , , 7 residential Units,dupiexcs,muiti4aniily'dwellings,residential care.'� I" ry v ubli for • ' facilities,mobilo horrid parrs subdivisions,pubjic suppbrtisot!vices, .. Notary Public far Oregon d) lesidehtral"treutraant,homes,manufactured homes,family day card,home a, ' . ocenpations,temporary use,and.resfrlential.:'uei tanks among Whet rise's, My Comnnlssaton Expires: r � !�9 LOCATION:15555 S, r "‘ �' W;79th Avenue(�'CT�,251��12CA,tax lct,,3900), " ., AFFIDAVIT APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA;Comnitnu1 -Ieveldpinent"Code , . ' Sections 18,54, 18,88, 18,96,080, 18 108 070, 18,12.040,and ' f 18,162,050, n4O' ,. ;J -N —' ' r y ' 1 * '' —-- . ET T11\. -I: , � Etil hf ^ ,i 'I1J f&J / M g , Min-7 ail,ids :15i f `" , .4:,.,..., 1 IA .,1 . 4-.1'''..., " 2 nr.;.w p+fit..—.1-1 •r 1 ,„ 1171 , . ,,.., '1 AL . , ....._ ., , , . i 1 'Ilt r,j.11.74111"' " • F .,4..., ...,,.,,,, , : ,,. .. oto84,11 , ,,,„.4„ ,.........4.„ I .� The adopted finding of facts,decision,and,statement of conditions cart be ' oblititit d'nom the Planning Deiartinent 'igard Civic Center,'13125 S, V. !•' flail lliv ,,,1.Ox Box 23397;Tigard,Oregon 91223.,,`The decision shall be row,c t limitary 8, 1992,Any party to the decision may tiptyeal this decision in accordance with Section 18,32,290(A)and Section 18,52,3/q Pl ay t! idyeh provides th t a written a d -eam be fle Within 10 as after h tdis g n.and sent,The.dead» lire for filing'df an appeal is 30 P M,,rartilar 11,1992, • TT7129--Publish December 24,1991. „ d . t ..ax.,.r. ...I.._.. ._.f........ . ...,.,I...._.......«._.......... ...... ., rr,._... ..,..._Rdl.l.a._...,ur......,..a .«r..... r.-,.-r nr..:....,ti,..t....,.«....,a -,wm..rr ry+.r navy,._...._Ai.e. ,.yF.a ..kyl.,..d...w.w...-r.,...rw..,-...........-.rw,..nA.M wx..........l.:.i....s..w. .-.x 11 ' e. l TRI-COUNTY 4,,. METROPOLITAN �,. . TRANSPORTATION ' DISTRICT „ OF OREGON ' 41 ; TRAZ b ,0 i am w i• LSjjO j • TRI-MET �� ,y s ; Y. 4012 S,E,17TH AVENUE PORTLAND,OREGON 97202 • December 19, 1991 . i r Jerry Offer City of Tigard - Planning Department P.G. Box 23397 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Offer: Tr-Met and the management of Washington Square have been discussing the Transit Center at the 11/4 ;4 Square over the last 2 months. Both Tn-Met and the Square's management have been concerned that the existing Transit Center location on the site was limiting the ability of transit to serve the ;° area. u. Washington Square is important because it provides an anchor for Tri-Met service in the Progress area. It is a destination for our passengers and the Transit Center at the Square provides an opportunity for those passengers to transfer between the routes that serve the area. Transits ability to serve the square is directly related to the amount of traffic congestion in the area. Given the ' importance of this facility to Tri-Met, Washington County and the City of Tigard, Tri-Met wants to keep working with the Square's management and Winmar to improve Transit operations and facilities : at the Square. Several locations have been discussed for the possible re-location of the Transit Center at the Square. In order to evaluate alternative locations for the Transit Center Trig-Met developed the following criteria: . :' * Pedestrian access should be equal to or better than the existing facility (distance and quality of the pedestrian walkway i.e„, cover, lighting, etc.). O Bus travel time should not be increased: • The impact of holiday season traffic upon bus operations should be minimized. . O While a configuration similar to what we have today would be acceptable, a facility that had x R .'. . eight ht distinct us bays might be pre ferable. . 0 The facilities available for layovers should not be less than existing (this was considered. ` � primarily as tl'e distance from the Transit Center to a restroom which our drivers could use). 6 Transit visibility at the square should be improved (while our 'presence' on the site could be increased by signs, shelters, etc., we were trying to evaluate which areas would be seen by the most people). O Passenger... waiting areas s g waiting g should be improved. I I I I I s • I . ° ` !, 1.-:a.,..,.„,o-».,;.+r4 ,.«....,,.._..,..,..-.w,_,.-a.l .,..w» ,.,,..u_,r.....,a+......,.-, ,..,., .,_„.,-..-_.. _..,.,-,„........,w»• .».,._.,..Y .w •:u n..., s -.,.t...a.:,ut.,.+.,,.....u.:.a,....x:xi-.H t..:.raw...r....:...:....s,,..a.u.t.;wa,u.t.+.ua.,r-_t+..a.w.«ras • • ° Based on the above it is Tri-Mgt's opinion is that the site identified as #2 on the attached map is the best location. The representatives of the Square were notified of this decision on November 19, 1991. Winmar tells me that the proposal to relocate the Transit Center to site #2 is still being developed. • Therefore, Tri-Met requests that the City not approve the proposed re-configuration of the parking lot at Washington Square until a agreement for the relocation of the Transit Center to Site #2 is signed by Tn-Met. Please feel free to call me at 238-4898 if you have any questions or concerns regarding our request. I encourage you to consider me a resource as you pursue Washington Square design changes. 1 i Sine rely, ;q: 4(al*.ew' Jeff Doodling; p Project Development Coordinator P • cc: Jack Reardon Washington Square F, „ Randy Kyte Winmar Joe Walsh Tri-Met Doug Capps Tri et Si Stor” , I r.)) Y,• , i i I, III;i .. • 1. ' li.• i, � 1 ti H • r 1 o ,4 , ' /,.•' • ' ■ " I ' • ' .''',,1411:eler,... . , 0 , la • . . �-=._____�. . .To • , Crescent Grove : ' reeler .c NORTH '� If.,is 0 , 'ote ntial New ' ,r' . 1 r , ` ),, ` " d `�o orl . .1 • • • / . ,,,. ..;,.n.__..,.:.�,..y:,�.,..�,._.,....art.................:...,.,,..,«,�_-,..�,._,.k,.....,._,......<........-,._,,,, ,.,, ,...,,_., �,., . ,. ., ....._..........,�.,....».u,. �_....,»r.._.,,•......5�,,.w.,.all..�...M:,...�,r:,i„_.,._�_._,._.u.ta.,.:.uw_�.._..... ''t . 12/11/91 08;56 x'803 684 7297 CI OF TI GAD �� • ACTI ITY REPORT . RECEPT ION OK . TRANSACT I ON # 15097 CONNECTION TEL 503 239 6469 1 �.• • w CONNECTION ID TRIMET PU8 II'FO ; START TIME 12/11 08:53 ., USAtiE TIME 02' 56 PAGES 2 f ,.y • • • 04 I • y ,. i • C • - • t I • i i • 12/11/91 08:49 'x'503 239 6469 TRIMET PUB INFO 343 CITY OF TIGARD fir,} :__�. OOi •4r w *************y;..w**�r�!t***k************ TRI»COUNTY F A X T R A N S M I T T A L M E M O I METROPOLITAN ? . ,.. n. ,S C272Egi� NO.OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT DEPT; FAX#: ^",n_ PAGES , OF OREGON FROM:• __6220HONE' ' ' .: ,1 ri ot 5 2. ' C0: .� .: FAX#: Poet•!t'Nbrand fax transmittal memo 7671 km#) :: . .1 .TRI-MET H, November 19, 1991 4012 S,E:17TH AVENUE PORTLAND,OREGON 97202 Jack Reardon ' Vice President and General Manager Washington Square and Square Too ; 9585 SW Washington Square Road ' a Tigard, OR 9722 a '' Dear Mr. Reardon: As we discussed at our meeting on October 31st, I have discussed your desire to relocate the Transit Center to a different location at the Mall with the interested individuals here at 'Tri-1 et. The following criteria were developed during our evaluation of alternative locations .•lr the Transit Pr Center: • Pedestrian access should be equal to or better than the existing facility (distance and quality 3 of the pedestrian walkway i.e., cover, lighting, etc,).' ® Bus travel time should not be increased. `' The impact of holiday season traffic upon bus operations should be minimized. ' while a configuration similar to what we have today would'be acceptable, a facility ,fat had eight distinct bus bays might be preferable. 0 The facilities available for'layovers should not be less than existing (this was considers. r primarily as the distance from the Transit Center to a restroorn which our drivers could usa • r. 0 Transit visibility at the square should be improved (while our `presence' on the site could I. • increased,by signs, shelters, etc., we were trying to evaluate which areas would be seen by the most people). 0 Passenger waiting areas should be improved. ' ' We then evaluated the sites which were identified at our meeting on.the 31st against these criteria. It was the consensus of this group that the site identified as #2 on the attached map was the best location. ' location will require changes to the bus Obviously development of a Transit Center at this new � g y p routes, While we are confident that this location would have benefits to our operations, we have not • y any s routing proposals. pe`' proposals developed, we will yet developed any speLific rou ro A�-soon as :��fic ro awls are dive solicit your input on the proposed routes. P_ 9, you have 8 if any questions or concerns regarding our lease feel free to,call.me at 238-4898 { ou to consider me a resource relocation Transit evalaation, I encourage you as you pursue reloc of the '� ° Center, cer l Sin � yq i '�� • u n i i eff+Goad I al Project Development Coordinator I 7 1 12/11x'91. 08:50 1'503 239 6469 TRIMET PUB, INFO 444,CITY OF TIGARD X1002 TL w , e• . \ s -\, , , `r. I , . \ 4' N ' . N r r,. 4 I • ,,.. • � ..,......,..,, ,.. . ' :rr •�r..n� r.. • .. aIto• �'F1! ' •1 4� . 4' ' #'� "e E ' '�ransi , Center ;,p, ' Crescent Grove • end' aeI u ,•. ;. NORTH d �., .. . f .., potfnt!al New ,'• i • w w i • . )r f • I °i I mow, D ,4;,,Vi5:, 1.61'1,704,.�'�, 0 �: 8 1.2 2 ''SG Spruce [ � Metzger, Ore. 97223 .I., 5 �s De .91 Mr. Jerry Offer , .. Tigard Planning Department 2 ' � . PO Box 23397 �' • Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Site Development Review for SDR 91-0020 Winmar Pacific, Inc. I Dear Mr. . Offer. CPO 4-M received the "request for comment" form for SDR 91-0020 in early December, however, the CPO was not able to „ review it for comment until the regular meeting date which was after the cut '-off date of December 12th.. Although this communique • is coming to you at this late date, the CPO comments were�' Y r m s w"e�.e ad.o ptc.d . • and, therefore, are being submitted. f statement We are in receipt o. the site plan and a p p d ppl�.car�t s s��af.�.mE..nt for a major modification to expand the Washington Sep'?titre shopping ', center for the relocation of a department store. As noted in . a PPlicaLJ.' s Kittleson report, the proposed modification will a , consist of approximately 69 ,000 square' feet. , CPO 4-M wishes to endorse the proposed expansion in that CV it is a modification to an existing retail business and that the displaced paeking at the entrance of the proposed new `' Nordstrom site will be relocated to the additional parking site between Access Road ,#1 and Access Road 0 . Converting the old Nordstrom site to specialty shops and eatc. ' facilities will ,,• enhance existing retail facility ammenitin..,. In addition, we [; would like to recommend the following• • 1. Reduce the p ost�.d speed limit of 40 mph down to 30 mph on Greenburg Rd. between the Cemetary and Washington Square 4 • entrence south of Locust. The higher speed is posted on a • hill and is shortly followed by intesection lights requiring ':•' traffic to stop. „ - ,� 2 . There should be better synchronization of in ersection lights on Greenburg Road bwtween Hall Blvd. and North, Dakota. 3. Enhance the mass transportation system at the Square to include a shuttle system within the Washington Square Parking area. • 4 Commuter traffic c 'using ''adjacent residential areas as short-cuts to avoid Hwy 217 and Greenburg traffic congestion to travel .. to the retail and commerical establishments is an existing problem; greater attention to the traffic problems identified in the applicant report ott should be addressed. In addition, many of the commuter traffic problems in the �vacinity would ” , f be, corrected if a direct �- " fr would added p into Washington Square om Hwy 217 wou y ed to f m o �'f3 i y l" � ��facilitate retail shoppers I who are commuting to and from the Square. . zzes t. fu1 t 1 sub•�i�. to d c„,/:::"1 447 Pat Whiting, ,��� -Chair. Ch a. g r' cc: CCI, Wash. Co. TranS. Dept. `6� . t ., d 1 , ...,, e,.,. .. ....� . 7 ,.r..,,................:r..... ......,...-.._.,«.,......_, _ a_..Ya..,..IS......... w i ._...»,.,•...._...._,........, _. ,. _.,_.__,..J__....._...,.I:.......r.i_.N...,...—....a„._.....,. _. ,-a..,.. ,.._.,........»., J„,ir...M...n ..,•....,,...— ,.r.—w.......,a._ aM...,_...MJI,. WASHINGTON R 'IFD PLAN N ' ` gin COI..,., 1:',,4',wa0 I x 27, 1991 �, c '�yy+t` ' AD ' PLANNING . , ‘ Jerry Offer rap O y rt ment i4 Pt 0 Tigard P1ar�nia� Department � � 1 P.O. Box 23397 ��4<' ?Ai.”, Tigard, OR 97223 Re: SDR 91-0020 / WINMAR PACIFIC, INC Washington County has reviewed this development request and submits the following comments and recommended conditions COMMENTS The County has reviewed the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Kittelson and Associates and has Meted our awn traffic analysis for the •., proposed 69,100 square foot expansion of the Washington Square Shopping Center • and have the following findings. 1. Intersections within the impact area were analyzed (I & peak) with the following }l results: a, Turn Lane Signal Intersection LOS Warrant Warrant SPIS Greenburg/Mapleleaf D N/A N/A No Scholls Ferry/South Access F N/A N/A No 1 , Scholls Ferry/North Acmes D N/A N/A No Hall Blvd./West Access B N/A N/A No 2. The Kittelson Report- identifies an existing capacity deficiency on Greenburg Road at the Highway 217 interchange. This capacity deficiency problem � '�' e�an d involve M results in a queue' ro pmt whidh e tends north c Greenburg Road past , the Npleleaf Drive intersection. Correction of this problem would ' improvements - gnalized Highway 217 ramp..teals where they at the. si 0 intersect Greenburg Road. Since these intersections are outside the impact . ar'ea, the County has no recommended improvements at this time. No further #-y related improvements can be made at this in .err. ion which would safe.. w alleviate this existing capacity deficiency. 3. The . ;p j �' tithe Scholls Ferry/Smith ith Wash on K.tttelson Report ro acts �•.t35 F a i • .;, Square access (ingress only) i intersection, southbound left `t-urn, volume . pa queueing is to M from this eft turn is Or �across the signalized intersection with projected revised � �c�Hall projected to � - y .` : . Scholls . rev ® �'e��' load. � includes � guide sib n Blvd. to direct Washington ran S .. .e bo ndluraffic to the Hall Blvd ]�ecr�nmend��d Mitigation Department or Land Use ar1J'Transportation, Land Development Services Dlvlsibn #34'0,13 155 North First Avenue Hillsboro; Oregon 97124 Phone: 503/648-8761 PAX, 1-503/693-4412 • . . ^ • • . yd,J.. vd:N..e Itf 'w r SDR 91-0020 / WINMAR PACIFIC, INC. December 27, 1991 page 2 Ir' entrances instead of the Scholls Ferry entrance. This is expected to raluce the projected left turn demand enough to alleviate the projected deficiency. The Kitteison Report identifies no current accident problem at • this intersection as there have been no reported accidents over the period from 1987 to 1989. 4. The Scholls Ferry/North Washington Square access intersection and Hall�'H1est Washington Square access intersection operate acceptably. No improvements are warranted. TI PRIOR TO F1TtL APPROY71L 7up J Ear TO ODOT REVIEW AND A r,�1 Provide unproved guide signing to direct Washington Square-destined traffic eastbound on Hall Blvd. to the. Hall Blvd. entrances instead of the Scholls Ferry entrance. i . 1 If you have any questions, please contact me at 648-8761. Scott KiY'1C, Senior Planner c: Joe Grillo Drug Norval • • I 4 , t tt e , M S L : L F 7-1 • • ,‘Pi, — " ' n'; • • • , • •• May Realty,Inc. • January 7, 1992 Mr. Dick Bowersdorff , City of Tigard Planning Department City of Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard • Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Proposed Washington Square Mall Expansion • Tigard, Oregon Dear Mr. Bowersdorff: It ist our understanding that Winmar Pacific, Inc. proposes to expand the Washington Square shopping center by constructing a new 180,000 square foot Nordstrom store on the Frederick and Nelson site, and to convert approximately 70,000 square feet of the existing Nordstrom store to accommodate specialty shops and a food ' ' court. Winmaros proposed expansion will aggravate traffic problems • within the vicinity of the Washington Square Mall site, as several otudies have recognized the existing traffic Congestion. Specifically, the Progress Area Property Owners Association Transportation Study prepared by David Evans & Associates and Carl H. Buttke, Inc. , prepared September 28, 1983, identified problems at the Greenburg Road/S.R. 217 interchange along Greenburg Road and at the Greenburg Road/SW Hall Boulevard/Oleson Road intersection. The traffic problems identified in this study and the improVements recommended to alleviate these problems are relevant to this proposed expansion. The study clearly identifies the problems which exist at critical intersections and roadways in this area and outlines improvements which would improve intersection and roadway levels of Service. At the very least, this study should be • reviewed and, if these improvements are found to be warranted, they should then be included and implevented as part of Wintat's proposed expansion. • The current proposed loint study by the Oregon Department of • Transportation, Washington County, City of Beaverton and major property owners will result in unnedessary delay, as it will most likely take at least one year to complete and adopt, and then • several more years to obtain funding and building o the • recommended improvementS, This delay will prolong the eXisting poor level of service which exists at the above-referenced intersections during peak hours. The May Deperthieht Stores Cerhpany 611 Ohve Steei 1. Loth i Missotni 6kO1 Tbiephohe 014)3412.6300 9 • ' 0 • 11 � I.W nl.n...4RwwL.w..dvw.,n ,v KU �+..1.ri+.0�4 .(t. 1y ' ..',.........:iI..MU......u. ' =iFi.n.�{.i-w..-.•.-wtw.,.'!'.11',�.:-w.uA.. .a.._- r� �x.r..-....�„ ..............,...-..}J.�.«A»r..l, ,..,,..•„ ,.- M r-i.....M.14.-.�,r,.l.:..+rv•....:.lA.».1,. M7�-+u,........�-4.n ar��Mn17w..w-. ! 1M1..1'..+..A�.l .. 't'`� 1, 144.1,: I -.[t-.,t,.+J,' �ehr.+„rrv,.JA.{-:r.mi� ) 7a�'.N. � •1 � i ^,6-1,1'{—;.. 11:41:M MA! ;. ,..Jr:,E i.;sL 4 . Mr. Dick Bowersdorff January 7, 1992 Page Two We believe it is essential that you review potential traffic • impact associated with this prt osed expansion to ensure that safe and convenient access will be provided within the Greenburg corridor and that the expansion of Washington Square Mall does not increase the current congested conditions which exist during peak f'I hours at the intersections along Greenburg Road and the S.R. 217/Greenburg interchange adjacent to the Washington square Mall site. ti- :ruly ours • --doordi(SI'11 4. (f, Harry . . o hle ' Vice Pres dent Site Plan ing/Traffic • • cc Ronald ao Dolan Larry E Sidwell R. Dean. Wolfe cnhw15 � r } • .. , „ ., •_, ..... . - .....t.+v .....,, .. .. .,................_..t.,n...,,...•.«_.u,....,...._.,._.......-.....,,a..e..1F:_....u.a»:..ei+,.-....Ii.,,..w.,..,..,....,:N....a..n.._.,p..W-u,-,.....,a..,•,tHY.L"4:-\aa' .. a • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS TO: �6 L" I C� DATE: December 2 1991 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0020 WIN2d4AR PACIFIC„ INCe (NPO #8) + . A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department stores ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) The C-G zoning allows public agency administrative services, public • support facilities, professional and administrative �. services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support • services, and single-family residential units among other uses. LOCATION: 9585 SW Wshington Square Road (WCTM 1S1. 26C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section 18.120 Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and, from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered an the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Dec. 12, 1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to rernd by the above date/. please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, ,contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: Jerk Offer • FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT PLEASE CHECK THE F©LIsOWI ?° APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. PleaSe contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter. P Written Comments: Name of Person e 0011111111r 1)..X19-(/ ;) Phone Number: • • bkm/SDR9i-2b b B1 M • J • • �, . G • u..... ....,.._I-_...,... .. .n..k+-w.4.,—swµ..♦r un_.L..-. ...... _ ,a., ,. _ . .i - I,_.. u rl,ni- r,..w rl:. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS -77 ti TO: l - ` V't1 �C DATE: 2. 1991 December FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0020 WINMAR PACIFIC INC. (NPO *8) A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department store. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) The C--G zoning allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, and single-family residential units among other uses. LOCATION: 9585 SW Washington Square Road (WCTM 181 26C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section 15.120 Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. Front information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish I to comment on this application, we need your comments by Dec. 12, 1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact 1 A. noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard t PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: !., Planning Department, , 6394171. ' STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer PLEA SE CHECK THE FOLLOWING I C EMS THAT APPL Y : � , We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact _ of our office Please refer er to the enclosed letter. I I I s Written Comments: I I ti • „ter. I � 'A \ s .— Name of Person Commenting. . Phone (Number: -t9?-e I I I ty, • bkm/SDR91-20.8KM I I I I I I f • Vi a u; • • , r 1. Ar REQUEST FOR COMMENTS TO: Mal, - DATE: December 2, 1991 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91.0020 WMAR IN PACIFIC, INC. (NPO #8) A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately ! ` 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department store. ZONE: C-G Commercial) The C-G zoning allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance,, real estate, and business support services, and single-family residential units among other uses. LOCATION: 9585 SW Washington Square Road (WCTM 151 26C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Core Section 18.120 Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Dec. 112, 1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your, comments. --4 If you are unable to res aond'by the above dates please phone the staff contact ,,;' J. noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as ' r possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, 01197223. PHONE: 639-4171. P, STAFF CONTACT: Jerr� Offer PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY. We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. i Written itten Go ants: Name of Pers r• Phone Number: bkm/SDR9l-20.8K f • RECEIVED PLANNING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DEC 0 9 1991 • TO: l 9C 6/ DATE: December 2, 1991 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0020. WINHAB PACIFIC INC. (NPO 48) A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to i. expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department store. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) The C"--G zoning allows public agency administrative services, public support iacilitiean professional and administrative • services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, and single-family :residential units among other uses. LOCATION: . 9585 SW Washington Square Road (WCTM 1S1 26C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and i 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section 18.'120 Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be,prepared and a derision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Uec. 120 1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comment's. If you are unable to rea»ond by the above date. please phone the staff contact noted below with your commentr and confirm your comments in writing as soon as %+ possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 972.23. PHONE: STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer PLEASE CHECK, THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: VWe have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of ;our office. 1w c Please refer to the enclosed letter ` Written Comments: • • Name of Person Commenting: ,,+�1' O Phone Number: ..2 4 :._.. bkM/SDR91-20.8Y i a. - r ,» . _ i...... -t- . ..,..».. .. .I ,. ... - _. ._ +....._., ..,s......,....... »_,....,,,,:.... ...IL..:.....r_.n,:.3,..,.,..Lx.,..........r....- , r,....1......... .».u...+..d...,«..r.+..«...w.,..l.a..«.w...,.,1.....=..«.»,...ww•.,.n.l,4y+„ it �1 Vh..•.. 1 1 • MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Jerry Offer Decemb r 19, 1991 FROM:. Chris Davies, Development Review Engineer RR: SDR 91-0020 -- WINMAR PACIFIC, INC • Description• The applicant proposes to add approximately 67 o 0YY square feet to i • r• the Washington Square regional shopping center. modifications would involve reconfiguring the current center which would include relocating the existing Nordstrom store to the Frederick & Nelson location and renovating the existing Nordstrom store to specialty shops and mall area. Findinga,: 1 . STREETS: It has been recognized for some time that transportation improvements are needed in the area of Washington Square. ri However, it is not clear what improvements should be made to 4, address existing congestion and to accommodate proposed development. In an attempt to find a solution, City staff have been meeting informally with representatives of th,.-1, State Highway Division, Washington County, the City of Beaverton, major property owners (including Winmar) „ and others . It appears that these nfo, meetings will soon lead to !' i rma1. m initiation of a joint study to identify the needed transportation improvements for the area. It will likely take ` about a year for such a study to be completed and adopted by the various jurisdictions . Winmar is a party to an agreement dated March 8, 1991, relating to the proposed Lincoln VIII development, As part of that agreement, Winmar is committed to participating in the proposed transportation study. In the recent past, Winmar has shared the cost of traffic improvements on Hall Boulevard and nd Sch oils Ferr y Road . Winmar contin ues t o show a willingness to " p articip ate in resolution of the traffiG problems if a valid de solution can areawide be, identified. I j I Th. e traffic fZ c r e or t submitted with the e application indicates th at the proposed development can be expected to generate some additional tra f fic on the surrounding street system but that ° ENGINEERING GI COMMENTS :a SD �:��n WINMAR R 9 PACIFIC,P Cx I�.,C ; INC. 1 • II I I I I I I it I , • N... 'Vim:✓, the existing level of congestion will not be significantly, increased by the development. Al] major entrances to • Washington Square already have traffic signals and turn lanes . There are no obvious minor street improvements which would significantly ease existing congestion on the surrounding street system. • An areawide traffic solution is needed. The development currently proposed will not significantly change the severity of the existing congestion problems. Winmar is already ' committed to participate in an areawide study to find traffic solutions The development currently proposed will be required to pay Traffic Impact Fees which can be applied toward implementation of any solutions identified. Until the study is completed, the appropriate solutions are not known. For these reasons, we find it appropriate to allow the proposed development to occur without any transportation-related conditions other than Winmar' s continued participation in the joint effort to resolve the area' s transportation problems . 2 . SANITARY SEWER: The existing structure is currently connected to the public sanitary sewer system. Therefore no additional requirements 4 should be required at this time. , • 3 . STORM SEWER The applicant is proposing to connect to the on-site storm sewer facility. Effective. December 1, 1991, we are required to comply with a new requirement of the State Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) . The EQC is requiring that all new developments, that i ,Y impervious i 1 1 i 1 , add additional service area, within the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Must include a water quality treatment ,' facility. Previously, developments without a suitable site for water quality treatment were allowed to pay a fee in lieu of on-site quality . t, with the fees to be used to . ' ` • "to water ual�,ty t�^eatment construct regional facilities. ENGINEERING COMMENTS : SIR 91-20 WINMAR PACIFIC, INC. 2 !' I , , • ' 1 4 1 A W ,.-+. ..._....,.l ... ...i a..,__...... ,,.., ..... ._ .... ,,.. .... .o.. ..,,.....,_..� _.4uA..„-M . «r,..::.i..;...,_«....i.: r.....ai..:.-.:......::,..1.»-.'F4.S.-.1d.w,.t.r.i.d. ... J w c4...;...raL..lsi:.:-:;:,t,s..u... . P Recommendations 1 . The applicant shall install and maintain a water quality facility, meeting the requirements of Resolution and Order No 91-47 as approved and adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County. The City Engineer may waive l this requirement to the extent allowed by the regulations of the Environmental Q ualitY y Commission and Unified Sewerage Agency as they exist at the time the plans for the facility are approved or installed. I � APPROVED: Randall R. Woo1410 City Engineer a CD .sdr51 20 .CD I I , I ENGINEERING COMMENTS : SDR 91 20 WINM .R PACIVIC, INC. I 3 I RECEIVED PLANNING ED c 1 2 1991 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS TO: 101Prrl- ___- - DATE: ADecplalmc111,92I1 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0020 wiNlIABII4gIgIgLIgc. (NPO #8) 4 A request for Site Development Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the Washington Square regional shopping center by approximately 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department store. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) The C-G zoning allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, real estate, and business support services, and single-family residentia7, units among other uses. LOCATION: 9585 SW Washington Square Road (WCTM 1S1 26C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section 18.120 Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various department0 and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recorrriendation will be prepared • and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Dec. 12, 1991. You may use the space'provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. Ifyou are unable p_ pond by the above da please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Departmont, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer , PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: --_--__ 1/4 tCh Name of Peron Commenting: lt) eki Phone Number: (14) 2x,iy • bkm/S1)R91-20,BKM 6, 4 RECEIVED PLANNIN1, DEC 12 1991 REQUEST FOR COMMNTS TO: _,E:7; ct:Q. ( 1 , (it 5/ 1, DATE: December 2. 199 • FROM: Tigard Planning Depdrtment ' RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0020 . WINMAR F<ACI, INC. (NPO #8) A request for Site Development..Review approval for a Major Modification to expand the Washington Square'! regional shopping center by approximate ''.y , . 67,000 square feet for the relocation of a department store. ZONE: C-( (General Commercial) The C-G zoning allows public agency administrative '', services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services financial insurance, real estate, and business support • services, a . services, and single-fancily residential units among other uses. LOCATION: 9585 SW Washington Square Road (WCTM 1S1 26C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and 1700) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Section 18.120 Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Dec.12, 1931. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. b th above date please phone the staff contact e to res nd p , you are unable e. P q. If u Y � r noted below with your comments and confiri your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Ts,,4ard, Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 63'9-41.71. CONTACT: JeXr offer STAFF CONT ___._..y PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objeCtiws to it. I Please contact r of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: .2- e.,,6.,,,,.,e2_,c,),- ,..0 r t-(,),-- 0 13 (..'..f)7:::_:1Z.g.„.. c'41)1,,-- i, Pia.,...,--- .11.v.,S-Le(....,--0A-IS !P"-- _.s=. g tr. ts,.. .1.5 '.., 11' U VN.Zi l'. `+ '',� Utz.: e.-.- Kc,c', -1-; _ Name of Person Commenting: _--/.-- -, 40 ,p�qna-wL-L-M Phone Nunthet: ,_ ' .. .1 c�. { � „ t7,1"-::::.' �i dJN y�. rc } } • W bkm/SDB91,-20:5Ki • 4. h r JAY'" 0 h• , l • T 1 . e i • _. ' r w • • ...-r w..,.. ... F•.v U .,..n...r-..F.._..;r......s::J..w._A w.w,.✓...r -.r....'.F.,, .. •.., -... r 1• ;' vwsrT7V•_•vA_SR.*r'V.M..i I N DEC tiG 'Y i 04 17r M CITY OF BEAVE O • K ■ *r . , REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ,' +,_ �h O: ZL.. 01 : ,' ' 4V\ •4. �"'.."'�—.-.�.�.�_.n�r a rwnr.oa.:�—r�r� ' t FROM: Tigard Planning Department ' RI 3 TL_ DEV1114oPMENT AKVIEW _ _V, .002Q a W C P'ACIPI'C. 'INC. (NPC #8) • I A. rec!ueat for Site :'t t've1opment, teview approval fora Major Modification to expand the Waahin. 41 Square regional shopping center by approximately . '.. 67,000 square feet cor the relocation of a department etore.« ZO15 p C-0 `/ (General CoMmercial) Tha O-G zoning al owe ubiic agency ad nS:gfirat va . services, public support facilities, professional and ac linistrative ,.,,, services, financial, ii strance, real estate, and business support ser'v'ices, and single-family residential units among other u as. LOCATION: 9535 SW Washington Square Road (WCT 4 153, 26C, tax lots 1107, 1401, and J, • • . .. 1700) AP ►L/CABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: ComMu ity Development Code Section ,, 18.120 f Attached ie the s4 a plan and applicant's statement for your re'rLe From , information supplied by various d® - �� 3� � departments and agencies and/.. sal other information available to our staff, a report and ,recomT u O", ,�. .• epared • 'X, and a decision w$.11 be rendered on the proposal in ""/Fear future. if yo, wash to comment on this application, we heed your consents by Jaegar. 12, 1901. may , use the space provided below or a,ttaoh a separate lett r to return oUr E t 7[f_,yon a na�al+e to r® tzc e,fir,_tho above dtata, please cif£ conta t .4.4 ' rated below with your comments and confirm your ur c+aammenth in writing as sbc ri .�s • possible. if y oU have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397,, 13125 5W Hall Blvd., Tigard, OA 57223. PHONE: % 634173,« �� STAPF CONTACT. .2erL-u after _��� ������_� Irr�i wur ..�wYn�•�.L�.M.IP PLEASE CHEM THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPL 4 1 We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections jections to it. ,�...�:�. Please contact of our os i.e . tiwrec Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written'Comments: • ■ rwl...ww—r✓ 7 ` fr- �.y� V .Vf j /. M (" . fin M N w, ed�.�y ��`'Yl r, ^7 f sw' 1. J.", !,a i -...nor r , o-+^''� Name o scn CoMmen ..pY.�� . w ++�.+.�•ne ior!:,�s,ur. ..oir,.,r.ri�.. r•. � ' in Phon rt w r ; . fa ip tP`4rtIn^..,r:.r,..�,Iw.4 1 I i ,v'v , ,. a ..`,... ,. ,. ., 'F r r q . w ♦ rl ..r. . a 1 <. ......,,:.L.—,.-w.._...«, ,....r.............._.,i.:...._.-..,.... ,....«..,,,..,..M,....,.....,,..,.,_....,.....wc;.:...,a. ..:..,.,.;w.._.«_.k..r''"41..�_ .._,......+,...«,..,....... .....,.. _....a.., ..•.., «...,-..,:.., .M.,.. .,_......,..-,....a.i1w.,tk:i.�„,._..,.w...«.;...«ti.w.._.•2::.w..P:.u.>,u......;:',w:..... on II'• : ,,` RECEIVED DEC 1 2 1991 DEPARTMENT OF December 11, 1991 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION I ' Highway Division RECEIVED Region 1 Tigard Planning Department FILE CODE City of Tigard DEC X99 NNING PO Box 239 7 PLA 94 Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: SDR 91-0020 Winmar Pacific, Inc. This proposal has been reviewed. by ODOT Region 1 Plan Development (Dave Williams), Land Use Planning (Lidwien Rahman) and Transportation Analysis (Tom Schwab), and by Maintenance District 2A (Robert Doran). In light of Winmar's participation in the proposed Tigard Diamond Transportation Study(consistent with the recommendation of the Transportation Impact Analysis for the Washington Square Shopping Center Expansion, prepared by Kittelson ° and Associates ODOT has no objection l ' lon to this expansion, provided the following t�ovrl II � J � a p �€, condition is attached to any approval: • Financial partic; ation by Winmar Company, Inc., in its share of transportation improvements as determined in the Tigard Diamond Transportation on Stud y. I I I 6 • The City of Tigard should require a bond or other type of assurance to ensure compliance with this condition even after design review approval and issuance of building permits. I , Lidwien Rahman Land Use/Transportation Planner I . LR arn2129B . I I 9002 SE 1vScLough,1 in ieC�i2 a � 97222 505. 655-5090 PAX(503) 653-3267 N I 734-18510(Rev,3-t)i) f. • I ' z r _ - - / . _-. -__ _ _.._ _ : - 4;s.4'6 — — 50fl c` 5 -I 5Ci- - •-t; _ ,-94 AC.-- - ` L t I_ co_ 380'Mit_ - f�—�, .., G' - . 5 __ - f,55 - _\ . .46 CANCELLED . , _ . __. _ ..... _ ED Y LOTS TAX z - 900-bill aids *` 'c:3 .{ . . \ , , _ _ . tic_ . _ __ _ ._ u,. _ ______ _ ( /4:3, - Pr": 1\ ti � . 37.90 - F t— ---)// -263.40 -- • ? N. 82°20'Lk - - - - _ / :: -- i- tv 1:;‘,,i5.) - tk- -_ 300...,,,... - -. ---_-3,-- ,_ ', - _ - - - V \ 1-- -- _- - •- - - - II - _ -\\- \\- _ � j �t/ / • r . \ . 0 - / . ----7---,4--,,vv''� SEA_ MAP; IS f 26C c� °_ t \ '..20 AC. / .,. 51-82 ' f N 88- 55 w _ 329.78- } r -/1/o ;\2 /- - ,1 __ _ 7532° _ -'!--1-1_- _1-_ -_: ':. 1 \ . A t �n �.S. 8Q82) g \ 1:- _ - • : / h S� S 88°59' E a 7 396 49' '� - IL _ - - - - - TAPER �� T-ie - - ...- - eE Qe - - - _- P� - -1:_ - • C=-15:,t-- _ is- Rei42 8�r-44438 �� _ _Vv.A _. _ _._. _ �,�- - -- 3�79 �� 147.04 ., _ S Lf,t _...... • - _ m..\\._ 6'7 380 494 : - TAPE? i/2 . us - \ .....4 . 1 t - .1._ o R�/42 - 66-44 438 i C20,2 . - -t OA ' I\ I f4?_Q4 t//4 . -)fi 0 \.,.- 200 -, - ,P,-.-to ID i q-4< If \ \ , Vc- �'. �pa� tom`"-- till111111 s's.` 9. S 'tee 1 . . .., __ -/_-: , \ \ p9jcfirs ',IMP' _ _ • - 0 t5 - -__ -, ume) / _ ':0 _i_ 1CP \ - • 0,111 ' _ -_ coif ,-t 40 \-_ _ a a go • _ 1 : . r e S. X£0 X.oeirl. y 1...." - , \ f • - - \ . - - SEE MAP 'a .o - - 4 MAP [S, 1: 34AA 27 FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY Fc .� DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE �.. ., . 34 35 T IG ARD BEAVERTON _ i . • • . . • i , f r i ,r f t I� Rye o r ' a s � '"T,oraff o Impact .. • . ,., •, , . . ,, . . ,,. . . . . . , . , . , . , . . . . ,. . . , , , . . . , . • . , . .. . , . • • . .. . , .. .. . .. „. . . , . 1 • ,. , • • , . • . _ . ,• . . . . .. . . . . . , , ,„: • . .. „, 1 . . . ., . . . . .. . . . . . . .. • , „. .• . , . , . ., .. . ... .. . . . . , . . . .1 .. . . Downs,I . . Progress r -t' ��W s,■ .,,County''''.'` I. fi}} f n ( l " • 1'' • � Carl' �� �3ufi � Ir� ��y • ..1 i I ■ '•pp I I • • ,.......,_.u, ..e,.w .. .�iJ.K s.........a N.... .. . i-.,i.•.. _ V .,.-„�4.... _.._ w...t.... .. ,.•i......... ,, .. ..i .,. .,. „.. .c .v«...,,...-�..«..w,1...nr+Aly.,,..w e1�+i,.�.'..w4w�a.:ta.J'r. .«.r..F"tn"...a,.I..A..JHa«W'� �,...�. CARL H, BUTTKE, INC • . CONSULTING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER • " t P.O. BOX 636 N PORTLAIs'■), OREGON 97207 ill 6.03 / 223-4728 j REPORT ON TRAFFIC IMPACT PROGRESS DOWNS OFFICE 'PROJECT WASHINGTON C GUNTY 1. t , • l I I I I I c II I 1 I I 1 � ' •• I I d I I 1 4 . I To: Beim & James S �• . 5 1, �' • Prepared by: Carl H. Buttke, P.E 1 4 Mai',ch 14, 198 r r� 4 114 • • a I ^ I I s .1r P I I I , I I I I I i I i I I 'Kd • ■ • Q 1� ' - � ,.. ,.,.„a.._-„«..« _,w..... .r.,..+..,M-..,,.:r 4.., ..,.....,,...«i,...::,r. ,,..,,:.r..rw..w,....,,,,.:.w..._ax,,.x,.x-,�.... n E , CONTENTS pie INTRODUCTION1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT F Site Traffic 5 ' Level of Service 6 , L CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9 Surrounding Streets 9 Site Access 20 . L APPENDIX 14 ” IMPACT AREA 14 SURROUNDING STREET SYSTEM 18 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 20 .. t SURROUNDING STREET TRAFFIC 21' i 1985 Traffic 21 �,) • Existing Plus In-Process Traffic 21 SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC 24 ? r DISTRIBUTION OF SITE TRAFFIC 31 ASSIGNMENT OF TRAFFIC 34 ' . LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATIONS 38 i , • , CARL+H.titUtTKEs JO GQNSUI,TING TRANSPORTATION et4004EEPI 1 1,. 31 I I "I ,. L. •I k •i LIST OF TABLES i 1 a Page . I1 Description of. Site Development I. 2 Estimate of Site Generated Traffic 5 3 Summary of Level of Service Calculations 8 4 Vehicle Trip Distribution 32 } LIST OF FIGURES �.w 1 Vicinity Map 2 2 Preliminary Site Map 3 3 Site Driveway Volumes 13 , i 4 Phase Z Impact Area 15 5 Phase II Impact Area 16 I . k,. 6 Phase III Impact Area 17 4 „• I 7 Existing Traffic 22 c 1 8 Existing Plus In-Process Traffic 23 9 Regional Zone e Ma p� 33 10 Assignment of Phase 1 Traffic 35 r ,' 11 Assignment of Phase II Traffic 36 12 Assignment of Phase III Traffic 37 13 Intersection Traffic Volumes 82 14 ,. i . , , / • CARL H.8UTTKE,INC. CO NSUL TING'PRANSPOR1ATION'ENGINSSR, 'i. INTRODUCTION , This report concerning the traffic impact of the proposed Progress Downs Office Project is submitted in accordance with the request of Beim & James to fulfill the requirements of the Washington County Department of Public Works Traffic v Impact and Evaluation Procedures (OR 83-219) .The. purpose of indicate h; .. p p this report �s to i the amount of , i traffic which would be added to the street system as a result of this project, its effect on the operation of the street system and resulting level of service, the site access requirements, and to recommend measures to mitigate any adverse traffic impacts , DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The Progress Downs. Office Project is to be located on a seven acre site on the north side of Hail Boulevard and west Olsoh Road , of , � as a;� shhwn on Figure 1 , The proposed site plan �? is shown on Figure 2 OAF.,R BUTT" E INC, GGNSUI;TING TFIANSPQA'tATtbN ENGINE fl • � �..,a r'w.. "...,.a.v,'+,. .J..,.....,t...-.,�...•.rt �,.t�,„......u,..�•:. �,. .,,A-✓ s- ..,,.. A. ,._..,. .�...� .. , • -- .. ....-_- n�,. � .-r.,a N R"m.s..s.aF.,..k.,...,..x_.,�+.,»..r«...,»»n�us«.Y..v.-......4..A....i.+.ibt,.....n,Ra.t...., ,. � , : a� i . iiii S I`IE o • Washington Square • II La 0 O a1c I i • aR , 0 �.� E GM. e. • , IG7' .L l�Ut' E I • VidINI 'Y MAP CARL H.BU11716E,1NC" i t01,15ULtINQ TRANSR001`f AT10N tNi INE t . __ o-.-. ,-- - SV - ,x. _ . t I - - - -; - i `€ \ `` �" 1 s 1 . - -\ - A _ _, _ , _,_ ___ , _ .r. _,_-_, , —, _ , iil \- :,Y, \ - :„4..',-- ' -- ''' - _ --, . :4- - 1 -- ' . Iti\ - "_ - "''�, ( '� v g r - t N a '` • L - It_ i \ _5\\* :::. \ \ �. ` ,. �� / s _ _ - _ .f�1 - �_ � 7....\\.; .- -_ -. -,.__._ - - er - - — . —... / -- 7- - I --",....,,, \ , - - - • in` SZ ry,y'7 --- - - 'a e'o.. - .,,��- 1- I ' s " °" i y • ±10.PC°."Ir ' _ _ -\ - ' _ . _ r . - )S . _ __ -_, - ....._ --'-- ---- _ -_ . -_-____\,:--: -- „-, - � .. . t - _� .. . .,a' The site is proposed to be developed with three office build- I n ings in, three phases for a total of 170,000 gross square feet of office space. Table 1 summarizes the three phases of development. r_.....,_.........,_........... . I I TABLE 1 DESCRIPTION OF SITE DEVELOPMENT ""` General Office Buildings ' i 1 , 1. Phase I 88,000 G.S.V. 1 i_ Phase II 62,400 G.S.F. 1' ' 4 Phase III 19,600 G.S.F. Total 170,000 G,S,Fu G.S.F.• Gross Square Feet • L • . ' COL H.C3UTThE,INC, ! CONSULTING TRANSOOt TATION SNC+INEEA fl , 111.1111111111111.111111M1.1 • '- i_ r. .. ._, •, - .,.,, .. _ -.., _ .. .. ,-, u.......».u.r......r..r.» .r,-w..,,.w.-ate.r«,xi4,..w .y.n ...+w Mk-{ aak4 4! TRAPPSC IMPACT Site Traffic n It. is estimated that the site will generate approximately 1300 vehicle trips per day ( 650 enter and 650 exit daily) after the first �hase is com letEd ands full occu phase p fully occupied By completion of the second phase, some 1 00 vehicle trips 9 pSae estimated to be generated by the site daily ( 950 enter and 950 exit daily) . Upon completion of the third phase, the site is likely to generate 2100 vehicle trips per day (1050 enter and 1050 exit daily) . Table 2 indicates the estimate , of the, daily, AM and PM peak hour traffic generated by the ,u site by each phase . More detailed information on the esti- mates of site-generated traffic is contained in the Appendix. TABLE 2 1 ESTIMATE OF SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC Driveway Volumes 24-Hour AM Peak Hour r PM Peak Hour Two -Way L . . Volume Exit Enter Exit Phase I 1300 155 25 30 175 Phase II 1900 240 30 55 220 r 1 Phase III 2100 , 265 30 60 2140 CARL,H,BUTIks,INC, CbNSULTIIJt3 TRANSPORTATO N ONGINsstI I 10 • - .,.,,. _ ,. -: ,. ..,. ..... _ ... ,r .. -,.-...-.. - ,...,.L aY•n.0-....+r_...1 A.:».:.tw.-.k-,.,...I,.w✓.w.+[.A.ti-n.A«:.nwl11.F....,i-...-w..s.:.I.r.-( b. :. : „ The site generated traffic was assigned to the surrounding street system on the basis of a trip distribution and . -.,1 assignment process described in detail in the Appendix. . I Also contained in the Appendix is a description of the , '. impact area, the surrounding street system within that area, and description of 1985 and future background traffic . . i Level of Service The level of service of the �.�urrounding street system was •• • calculated for 1985 conditions and for conditions for each phase of site development . A description of the various W` levels of service is contained on the followtng page. The details of the ^alculati,on.s are contained in the Appendix . . The Washington County Traffic Impact and Evaluation Pro cedures (OR 83-219) state that mitigating measures will b e uir re ...... q ed when traffic from a new project causes the level " .• of service to exceed the D level for more than 20 minutes L of the AM or PM peak hour. It is estimated this conditon e a would, occur when the percent saturation exceeds 93 percent a of the capacity.e L-, A summary of the level of service calculation results is . contained in Table 3 . CARL H.OUTThE INo. t;ONSULTI IG TbANS150R'rAtItiN SN;GINESr1 s • • 7• ' '' SERVICE LEVELS FOR ARTERIAL ROADWAYS .. .. •IP 'rye Typical Traffic Flow Conditions P Service Level A Relatively free flow of traf.f is with, some . stops at signalized or stop sign c, t-. trolled. intersections. Average deeds would be at least 30 °miles per hour. The volume to capacity ratio would be ri equal or less than 0.60. Service Level B Stable traffic flow with slight delays at ' ' signalized or stop sign controlled inter= t I sections. Average speed would vary between 25 and 30 miles,per hour. The volume to capacity ratio would be equal or less than 0.70. Service Level C Stable traffic flow but with delays at • signalized or stop sign controlled inter- sections to be greater than at level B but yet acceptable to the motorist. The average speeds would vary between 20 and 25 miles per hour. The volume to capacity ratio would be equal to or less than 0.80. ro Service Level D Traffic flow would approach unstable op,eratin.g conditions. Delays at signalized or stop sign controlled intersections would be tolerable and could include wait- ', p ing through several signal cycles for some motorists. The average speeds would vary between 15 and 20 miles p er hour. The volume to capacity ratio would equal or (. t.. be less than 0,90. r, Service Level B Traffic flow would be unstable with con gestion and intolerable delays •to; motorists, The average speed would be '� appro:°imately 15 miles per hour, The �• volumc to capacity ratio would be l.00. ms, ' Service Level F Traffic flow would be forced and jammed with stop and go operating conditions and intolerable delas, The average g e speed would be, less than 15 'miles per *Capacity at service level E, Note! I The average speeds are approximations observed ''at the various levels a ' service but could differ, depending on Actual conditions, ti cA°a L I-I. 9LitTkE CONSULTING ENOIN @ER A i 1 4 • .I • _ _ t_1�14r _ + ` _ v - : , . •. _ - �' ice, s:� a._= �� - . -----] ,_ ___= , -TABLE 3 _ SUM OF TrF�ATEIr OF SERVICE CALCULATIONS Progress-- Downs Impact Area • - Site Access - -Hail & - W.B. - Hwy.-217--- E.B. -Hwy.217 & Hall Olson & reenburg & Greenburg . AM M •• AM - - PM AM = -• =- PM - Existing = G' g - 4f C - -A/E A B -A - C-- - - A C-- � � . x _ Rxist� ng + In-Process C* A* D** s _. A/D A D A C - - --6 P -- r m • Phase I - : A --- C B - D A - • D A-- - -• -C tr • Phase II - -_ - _ B- - G - B --D • A - - -� D - _ -A - -D- Phase=--III - - _-_ - ---- • R-- - G B D B D A D - L., end.. ignal R eQuired -_--- - - - . • - dd -TAT.--.: - Lane_ - - - - - - _ -- /C = Main Street L.0-.S./Gross- Street L-a.0eS4 - -.S s= Level of'--Service co _..r.._..I.,a w.4.; ...a.-N..-.AN.w.+.wAl4......n.l,,....•41,....n.JU.. ....b,. ;.e .. n•.-. a,.. _....,_l,r.r.r t., r,-,1.;..,r..»..wA.;•.,....r... n .;u«...4-; Mr+...x...w -..+r. ..rr....un..t..w•YM a.a ' I Yb F I 9 . .\' / Currently, nearly all the intersections within the impact area are operating at acceptable levels of service with the exception of the intersection of Hall Boulevard and Scholls Ferry Road, which has already been identified as a capacity deficient intersection. Table 3 indicates that the following intersection modifications will be required to accommodate the existing plus in-process traffic : • Install five-phase signal at Hall Blvd. and Washington , • Square easterly access point when warranted. � Install a westbound lane in n Hall Blvd . through the e intersection with Greenburg Road. w Those intersection modifications are anticipated to accommo- , date the background, and site generated traffic through full build-out of the site. ` ' ■' I a CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ■ Surrounding Streets It is concluded that the additional traffic G e er at ed h y the not exceed the a,cce table •„ Progress bnwns��Ciff�.ce Project will p g It cAl-1h H,BUTT' E,INC. CON�ULTINO MANSROi TA'TION tNoINt80 v.P y 4 } mow.,, I 10 levels of service of street operation if the following road-- • way modifications are made at Phase I of site development. j • Install a five-phase traffic signal on Hall Blvd. at the main site access point anu the Washington Square easterly access road . This signal should be installed where rr d wa ante . left turn lane in Hall Blvd at the � Install an eastbound���.e � main access point . This lane should be 150 feet in length plus bay and approach tapers. Widen westbound Hall Blvd . by one lane approximately 300 Feet east of Olson Road to th e west site property line. i.. Site Access It is recommended that the site be provided w ith at least two 3 access points, one on Hall Blvd. and one on Olson Road. i :. . Figure 2 indicates the proposed site access cess p o in t s of the 1 1, preliminary site plan. Two access points are shown on Hall i� p y Blvd. and one access point on Olson Road. It is recommended that the main site access point be located on Hall Blvd . opposite the Washington Square easterly access road. This access should be constructed 40` feet wide and striped for one in-bound lane and two out-bound lanes. Traffic I T � L INC. CARL H.�U t . CONSU TING TtiANSPofRTATION F«NOINE @b N ' V r • _ ......._... ws x.k.... « .,•,,.,-...n......w.. r r,._.. — a,. .».a . e. .,�.� �� ..�: «-., • I I 11 signal control will be required when the Hall Blvd. traffic difficult to exit increases ��to the point when it becomes �. . the site and when warrants are satisfied. This access point would be approximately 565 feet west of the intersection with Olson Road . The County standard calls for a minimum of 600 feet between intersections. However, since the access point would be aligned opposi 4'•e an existing roadway, it would be a superior operation than if the standard of 600 feet were met, resulting in an offset inter- section. A A second access point .for right turn in and out only is shown approximately 200 feet west of the main access point . • II This access point location does not meet the County standard and therefore would require a variance. It is not expected . that a right turn in and right turn out access at this IIlocation would cause any operational problems on Hall Blvd. . I 4 • II and it would reduce, exiting traffic volumes at the main h► access point . , , • �I • An access point on Olson Road is required to reduce turning volumes at the intersections of Hall Blvd, at Olson Road and at the main ccess point � oint and. thereby maintain higher capacity h •1 at those intersections. The access point on Olson Road is 1. 11 shown at the north property line approximately 150 feet north i of Hall Blvd, This access s point,n t, even with a right ht turn h n I : l�UT IC CARL H� A CONSULTIO TFIANSPOATATION ENCIIN EEk • 12 r 111 `. and right turn out, would be too close to the intersection ' r ° with Hall Blvd. Therefore, it is recommended that the Olson t Road access be shared with the existing office building jr immediately to the north on Olson Road. Figure 3 indicates the site driveway volumes at full develo ment p } p\ ■ I . ^h. 1{I ,• Ix CARL H.BUTtKE,!NC OONSUI,141140 T iANSpOFITATJON ENGINEER 4y`' ,', ' * ` • I.ui.x , , \, .. . , , 13 • ' ' ''' '...11: anti \\..,°‘‘..-� . i . . , . , , . . . . . . . . , .k..t- . . . .. . . . . . . . ... . . . ., . . , . . , , , , . _ . . . . . . , . . . .. .. - 1 .' ., , . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . • , . . . . . ., ...., 1,, . . . . . . . . , . . . . , .. . . . . . . . . . , . , . . , .. . . . , • . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . .. , . . . . .• . . . . • . . , . . , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . , . , . " . . . , . . . , , . . . . . . , , . . . . . , . .. .. . . . .. . . . . .. .. , , , . • Legend: . ., . . . . . . , ,:_ ' 00 = AM Peak Hour ' ( 00) .. = PM Peak Hour • • • - l'' ' , . ; .:, ..,, , :, - , H • ,, :.' ' , . 1 „ „, , . f� sq ' "�'i�i$ �`` O i FIG7PE DRIVEWAY VOL U MLA^b o • l _ (' 1 Phase III • .CARL W �UTTK , t • GbNsU►.7lN TbAf,ISpCi ItM1 N L'►,JGINE p' v� . / A ..... ,._..... ..nu.w.+....._n..n+._...,_...a.. ,«..w........,+ ,- ......,_i.... ,.,_,.,,.... - •... «....ru.................. .. . i ,. ._„ .........«1« ..,...«.......,. .t.. is u.., _.....e..t..-..t:..,..w..nx.,.w rdU:.a.a..daw.-.,...:.a,» ... _ " { • p 1/4 APPENDIX • IMPACT AREA The impact area is defined as an area surrounding a proposed development site which will be analyzed to assess the magnitude of impacts contributed by the development and to assess the availability of an appropriate level of urban may., service. The limits of the impact area shall at least include the closest intersections of a major collector or arterial 4 . street on the street where the project is located. Addy.- tional streets will be included where th e site PM p eak hour traffic is estimated to be equal or greater than ten percent of the current PM peak hour traffic volumes on the street • sections between intersections. Figures 4, 5, and 6 indicate the limits of the impact area for each phase of development.; together with a comparison between site and current PM peak hour traffic staff '1 'The Washington County ,staff indicated that a need already { exists for the improvement of the intersection between Hall Blvd. and Sch oll s Ferry Road and, therefore, waive d the � . requirement for further analysis of this intersection. It was further indicated that the Hwy. 2l y 217 ramps. p ,,ad Greenburg Road should lbe analyzed for this site. CARL H.BUTTI<E INC. CCNSULTINf3 TF'IANSFOHTATION ENGINEER • ih} - d • •• • • • C alit Legend: 00 = Site Traffic . 441/4 ' ( 00) = Existing Traffic (PM Peak Hour) to Intersections Studied 0ti . T ,,,,t ', toil c71 � � • • us� , iir 1%,..., Washington (6)77. Square , • • • • ' Oast tx a ""r, i 1 LI x J RE 7 1 PHASE Y IMPACT AREA � 4 i CARL H,1IJTT tL,INC. I . • � � � '�, � � bONSUI1'INU`7aAN9PC7RThttt1N ENGINett:i r it)..;,' ti / P x .-..ten...... � P .... i � ., a, .. «,....x Ln...K,....,x.......,,.�,r..«A..., .....I«A-,„L«uAA,..•..,,..l.x'.x...,:;ar........r4._.AU..L4._.,xl.»...�i ■ I Legend: • i 00 = Site Traffic ( 00) = Existing Traffic (PM Peak Hour o = Intersections Studies , • • , ,� ��' a �. // @ ® d',► • 1 � SITE : I . • ow • Washington (� 7 S , Square �� • E y Cli I • ' . 4:40 .41,i E Oak, • , y ., I. .0 e, 'PHASE 11 IMPACT AR8A • I GAPL H.bUTTKE N INC, • CONSULTI TpAN;i1,011tA1'InN ENdINE A , " 4`.1./ e ,h ti . .., • , 1 • l7 a -°� Legend:l 1 '� 00 = Site Traffic ( 00) Existing Traffic 1 (PM Peak Hour S6- * = Intersections ' ; . � '1!P,,,.,. Studied , , ° i / SITE 0' Washington ��' ' c Square ' I ,\, z L ' v.° . . • f ■ • , "i. Oak i '' r PSI • ?IGTW .E 6 ,,. I (z' PHASE III TM?AGT AREA CARL H,BUt1I<E,i■c, aC•suLTINQ 7RANS1JcIR'rATI ENail,JEER n , , ■ SURROUNDIIdG STREET SYSTEM Noe Hall Boulevard r ' Classification: Minor. Arterial Right-of-Way: 60 feet Lanes: 3 lanes west of main site access to east of Olson Road, plus eastbound right turn lane at j Grelenburg Road. »" 2 lanes west of main site access to westerly Washington Square access road. 11 4 lanes west of Washin g ton Square westerly access road.; II Posted Speed: 40 mph fjli p p Roadway Standard:. � la lanes r with 90 foot right-of-way , } , Olson Road Classification Minor Arterial . Right-of-Way 90 feet adjacent to site Lanes : 5 lanes at Hall and 2 lanes to north I , cAaL H.IBUrrKE,lNc. CoNSLLTING Ttl4Wsk TATIoN EIa3I14E,EF{ i �a, � �._. u.. Y.,.�. :_.x'. .....a.r+..•J..tl� .•..-.a..a... +r...A.�.,a.Y. .. w.»..a _ �....,a_,r�.... ..�., i � .. ..�. ..,.�... .. � , ., � i a ....a u... Y,..Yalit.,:.tv.'1.+.-1..iawa.41..n4•'.-..+.....iM.4.v-�.di.5'.4NMr+%1,Jh�1..1.�.J..17-.:+.I+aL-.H.:n..la-P.0 ... LL S. 11 t Roadway Standard: 5 lanes within 90 foot right-of-way at Hall Blvd. , 3 lanes north of Hall Greenburg Road: Classification: .'Minor arterial , Lanes : 5 lanes at Hall Blvd. 5 lanes at Hwy. 217 ;, 3 lanes between c Posted Speed: /10 mph r L Roadway Standard: 5 lanes within 90 foot right-of- way , , s' j It CARL H,gUT'h<t,INC, Ca■SULTINCI THAW PONTA1'icW EN?,11'4E R' 1 x I.0 i ' ,, ,. ,.' 4.•...,sl.«v.U,:uaw«,M...a.•;1d;:..ti,J..,»,.r_....,•,;.:......,.>.,..,._ E t . 1 20 r PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TRI-MEN' provides bus service adjacent to the site with two lines . The No. 45 line operates . on Olson Road and Hall Blvd. between Tigard, Washington Square, and downtown Portland. The No. 43 line operates on Hall Blvd. adjacent to the site between Tigard, Washington Square, the Barbur 1 Park-and-Ride Station, and downtown Portland . Six different bus lines meet at Washington Square . 1 . ii 1 1 ' fi R CARL H1 t3UtTI<E,INC, 0101JSULTING TtIAN51,bR1ATIOH ENbINEEh ,d,V • .• . ,, r 1. 1 a 21 SURROUNDING STREET TRAFFIC 1985 �. 8 1 Traffic Measurements of AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes were F made at Greenburg Road and Highway 217 during March, 1985. 0 ' I Additional counts were obtained through Washington County } at the other major intersections within the impact area. I Figure 7 ' summarizes the existing peak hour volumes on, the major streets . A summary of, all the intersection counts f 1 - is contained on 13 j I Figure 3 a;t the back of this report ., . � p �.w. 2xisting Plus In-Process Traffic I The existing plus in-process traffic consists of the total expected background traffic without this project and is l ' summarized on Figure 8 . The existing traffic is the 1984/85 volumes and the in-process traffic consists of the , d combined traffic projections from the developments affectin g 1 • the impact' area: Th'e in-process traffic° volumes were pro- 1 , videdlby Washington County: , " CALL R E3UTTKE,INC, CONSULTING TRANSPORTATION ENOINEEFi • • • 22 Ia. „ Le ; nd: �.° a cr� 00 - �AM Peak Hour ,, �,y ( 00) = PM Peak Hour {. •�+ �.. • is o Q. xo° ‘es �y$ . I, i . V , I.,„, ��� 4.„a 0 4vel it I • Washington l Square .' Itlo • I , N Oa ep 1: , r , , 2' EXISTING TRAFJ IC i,. 9 `I' „ 0AflL H.BUTTRBe iF1 � CONSULTING TRANS1,O ltATION'LNG'INEEN ., i"ri" .Aer d • . , ..M f . _ U ✓I ' • • �.......o„_,,....,c.. ..,,�.. .:..,_,._,. ..... ..._.a..: .M.,eur:.........,.._.�..,uH...:c.�a_w.,.._«,..«:v._;r,.r.:aq_+.•.w-F'-�:.��, a...• • • • A , , ti Legend: .. . . . 00 AM Pea Hour } , . .. • C r--- CU) - PM Peak Haur. , . . ' I •• • • G� ,ie• • ✓ SITE' • � .0 .,, . . ,. . ..,...,- ,42 ..., av , , . . • . ..., ..•.. . . . . . : ,' ' • ,1 gi,Washington [ . . . . .. , . ... . Square • b • • • .Q.1 M' o • a , • y� �.wr' • 1 . • • t • • .' - AA, ' ' 4-PROCESS' 'RAFFIC ' • , CA l H.�U i K' 1 E INC.-, . CONSULTING TRANSEbRtxiibN ENGIMJEER a ,tg •Ir.r . . . . ,i -- .• h. .i.v., u, .:,1 _N..a.dn.,.u.—.._.._t.°...r—.it:_ n...IM--^.a......Ni..wf Mn.,,ff u,- 2!I SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC le I The amount of traffic generated by the proposed progress Downs Office. Project was estimated on the basis of nationally measured trip, rates published by the. Institute of Transpor- c._ l o tation Engineers and adjusted to reflect local 'conditions . These estimates off' office building trips ip�C were reduced by • seven percent to account for future public transportation service in the area. The following pages contain summaries • of the trip generation calculations for each phase of site development . Y n Institute of Transportation Engineers; TElp G en!rations An Informational Report; Third Edition; 1983 , and ,.. le software pater program Trip Generation by Micro, 5: microcomputer �. GAEL H.5UT7KC,INc. 9 CONSULTING TFtANSOOATATION tNGINESH • w • I r • • . PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE I 25 f SUMMARY OF AVERAGE VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION FOR 88 1 000 GR a G4 .FT a OF GENERAL OFFICE r • DRIVEWAY VOLUMES 2/20/1985 1 17 ;M:h***;m;:or:►: :4r**;;»;+;4;:ar:4`r**vor w ; a:o*:4r*:s 4r**"o:w:};s;;4;for:+r:pr a*: **for:4r;a;y*;a"**:+r+*:4r;H*:4r;1r 24 HOUR 7-9 AM PK HOUR 4-6 PM PR': HOUR ,,. TWO—WAY • f VOLUME ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT ;e;**4 ;w*+::F;H ;o-*i+ :a .;4r;t:s+r:w+�; i;ih t w•;a 4r;+ 4i I ; =;� <i: :4:i s;a'";p �c�.....i4r :. , s t;;t;�t 3c s �. �:i<. FVERAGE WEEE<DAY, 1302 156 27 30 177 i ;,i"Y*'Y* *;4��� ***:{i i4i"I;�Y' o'...i•T ; 1 f i. i i I 1 Y Y 1 t i i.. Y 1 f 1 ' , :47;t^;k,•;4;;f;;i;:'��:8: :f';tr;{;Sor;G;;i;:�;;4r:4.;f';4.64;;!;;4;�;;Fr ;1-;I;��;t;*.4r*:¢'•;4:;F;•;4 • • t 24 HOUR PEAK HOUR 1 u TWO—WAY VOLUME ENTER EXIT I I 11 . . { r *: ;4 4.:4r:: ;4 ; +b a w H+ :o; r: ***; + r;t;:4 ;:t` ::4r ♦; ;Y:0 »iM*•h. :' :: * ; ;4= :+:*r q 1'1 SA r URDA`r , 177 0 0 .SUNDAY • I I ":11 i i 11 I:Y• i ,i__``�� 1 l Y i,Y.�/ 1 /i/l l i��111�11 i t 1 i f 1 i 1 1 I!1 1 Y .�__l�l� 1 {�1 Y { i I l i yyI f f l"�Y♦A�L .tA i" f i�1y i A`f + T*44"'!•*'i*;4','*;1ti�;'�i�^iY•.T-:4;Q'** '"4 T;"4"�' *^"{'i"***** ;";'8"'*;'4i'T-;Y;'�" ;'y.';;';'4:*�.`. ;¢i;'}�';4"'�:6 T*'�}''f'�"'T:4 ;'9Y' 1..... TRIP ADJUSTMENT FACTOR IS .93 NOTE; ZERO TRIPS RESULTS PROM NO TRIP RATE. BATA II THE ABOVE IRE CULTS ARE �1`EPRE REPRESENTATIVE of MEASUREMENTS , .. MADE AT SIMILAR LAND USES AS IDENTIFIED IN r TE;CI~' GENERATION, AN INFORMATIONAL . REPO R T' r THI R D„I EDITION, 19O3� INSTITUTE or TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS LOCAL CONDITIONS OR SPECIFIC USES MAY CAUSE DIFFERENT I RESULTS REFER TO 'TRIP GENERATION' ,I I , CARL H kU . TTKE� ��lGx CONSUL-VINO TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER i I I mY i I 1. ' ....,, ...L. .x,.r:...i..a.l..i!A... r«...4.M.r ......a ..........,x..r.rr r._..x u•n...r!...-. I _ .. ...,. n.. _r _... x i,..., r 1 .. _ ..., ,.....a, r,,..fx ud,..n....,.y«.af...a-.....F W....,1.n,l...,,...,..aixt...Frx...ln..l.{w.e:r„1:4'.gJ..i ,.0>Aa..a.ra i F'ROGRES'' DOWNS F'HASE I 26 SUMMARY O TRIP GENERATION RATES . FOR R GENERAL OFFICE • iTRIPS PER GR.SO.FT. 2/20/1985 E; . . r ' I1y.. 1 J- 1 L iJJ1����y�• .LJ .LJ L /1 / 1• 1• 1•L.Y I J_ L Y J 1 T*TTY*:Y* • *****1',." i'TY��•1'O;�*********M*;;M�*`G,'�M*A;****;B;* ;I;�*�I;;O;;*;�;T�I;;I;�l***{: AVG MAX MIN NO. AVG TRIP TRIP TRIP OFI • SIZE • RATE RATE RATE DATA STUD` L 1 1 1 Y 1 J Ly, i L�y1 L,J��1 i y{ .fy y J_IJY_ i Y ,,y_,yi� i• 1 lii�IjJ J . .. : * '�;ii'i 4f:*** ****'•1 **** T**T�;*4;*** �1�**T*TE S �T T***,��*4'191'**�� �4*** ' AVG WKDY 2--WAY VOL I 15.91 28.80 8.80 20 50.2 7-9 AM PK HR ENTER 1 .91 1 .90 1 .28 3 24.3 �:' • 7"-9 AM pl.( HR EXIT 0.33 0.80 0. 15 3 24.3 'x 7-9 AM Pk HR TOTAL. 2.24 3.79 1 .40 15 41 .9 4.6' PM P1< HR ENTER 0.37' 0.70 0.06 3 24.3 4-6 PM F{1: HR EXIT ' 2. 16 2.60 0.741 3 2.4.3 , .,... 4--.6 Pm CPt1< tH-HR TOTAL 2.53 r, 6.39_ 0.80 ' 17 4_5. , AM GE'N Pk HR ENTER, 2. 18 3.31 1 .29 5 4f .0 U AM GEN Pk HR EXIT 0.45 1.04 0. 16 5 47.0 j AM GEN P1< HR TOTAL, 2.63 5.98 1 .44 1, 49.6 PM GEN P1< HR ENTER 0.40 0.70 4. 14 5 47.0 ., p1'''1 GEN Pk HR EXIT 2. 15 3. 19 O.r 4 y 5 47.0 PM OEN Pk HR TOTAL 2.55 6'.39 1 . 12 18 51 .4 .., SATURDAY 2-WAY VOL x. 16 14.70 ' 0.60 10 42.6 •, APR HR EXIT 0.00� f0.00/ 0.(0}0', 0 0.0 P1< HR EXIT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0 _ PK HR TOTAL 0.43 . 0.77 0 2(jay 5 58,4 SUNDAY 2- JAY, VOL , 1 .08 , 7.30 0.20 10 42.6 Pk HR ENTER , p'.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0 e t:,.: Pk HR EXIT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0 Pk HR TOTAL 0.16 0.37 0.06 5 58.4 . JI ff i.i4 1 f i f{{1 I{ i f 1 J JJ♦• J{ 1/J Y{J•11 i i.`1 f/J f 1 Y J. i / 1 f l Li{I i1 {3•if JI Y'f!f J{f Y• i. 1/: 3,Y. / J ;r;;t;4;s +t i1;:d:0.. a:b: ;a::4 4 ;�;c+r;�;+41: ►;;4;b;;1;�%:Ir +�;►;,�';!+;II; :a;�;cr;;4 tip;;4;$ 4 :o;'4*. :r,*;�;;�;;�;►i;�;:►i ►;:�, r1;E; i:e1 1 NOTE , A ZERO RATE INDICATES ES NO RATE DATA AV A T LAt' LE , wn A qU� ' INSTITUTE o TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS • TRIP GENERATION, AN INFORMATIONAL REPORT 1 I THIRD EDITION, 1983 1 , CARL H. E UTTKE, $N t iiNSUiLt NG ittAitIS4'btilATIQN MOINEE0 r .: ..r,:..1 ., ..•.4- .. „.•,..,... ,• ., r.. ' r0 l xu , p 1 tl r . ..,.., M1 1.' • r' " • II ,_.4,..._-....;J,.',«,�.,.., ..a..Iw.......,...,».,......ml.......,..ill...._i....-. ,«....._........a_,._ •. ,., ., - ., ., .. '. „- .'_ .,- .. ,4 ...-.,_„a.._......,.a.u.� .......�.;aY..i:.+.�u..•.a,_,k,...a:�:...,u t.,--•,,...,nu",.I..t..a.,,.n,..•,;.,a.,�Y � ' .. PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE I ' • SUMMARY OF AVERAC E VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION FOR 150.4 1000 Chi M SG!.F T. OF GENERAL OFFICE . . 4. DRIVEWAY VOLUMES 2/20/85 Y A4+: *fw 4 a ;r +*+ hM +4ao44: 6; ; a+ a w***44iy4; a � a4+: t4H; F ++; +44+ • 24 HOUR 7-9 AM F'K HOUR 4-6 PM N HOUR r TWO—WAY VOLUME ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT 1 1 I l l .. A 4',{ Y I L Y I 1/l A i 11 44 4'44'�',J 1•A 1.1 ,1;-A,F;;4;•�{;;Q; P•;i;;1:';i;;i•;F.',i•'•�''::'�+';i;;};:�';i;'',i',•��:;tr;:�:;/ "�,•':�:'•�•;1;**�i��1f"�:;�:•*;d:�:•�:''�'.';�:'.,1❖*;{; :a:.,4•* 'i�::!::fi�•�•��'�,•i't,•;!;* • w, AVERAGE WEEKDAY 1915 239 2 54 218 ., 7 y, ;I,+;t; �I;;1,;4,•';i;;F,•;}��;C;;1;•.(;;Y;','F,''.�'.•ii i4i.},{ ,'F•f•• I l l . 1 I A. i +i •1 l Y { 1. c 1 Y l r ,, t t..,f;4,•;1;•{,. i!':'t;;4;;i;:4:;i;;1;iS :d:i6;;i;4 4 f i*1 d•�f;Wit-;t;�4 ii F:f1;i ;ti:¢',!;-!1:!:'K;;4;' �4 HOUR PEAK HOUR TWO—WAY VOLUME ENTER EXIT J 1111 Y { ♦11 {41 i• 1 11.. 1 1 111.. ,.it li Il `..f♦ 1 I.L;A,;..,/1 1{fA/tl YYI Al. � •. t :�: : {:;a 1:�,':+;•t;:!':s�:i4;H;t,;1;4;a it;�;+;4;i4;s;*4;4;1 �;:a;o;;4; ;4 ;1 4 t:i!;;1;Yc;it;4 :�';;N +;#; 4§;'JC:4;4;4*1;4r*4 d; ' SATURDAY 460 7. 28 ( SUNDAY 326 26 10 1YA 1{ 1;/iC 1 IY tl•A LI iA it YI.1 i1i/1. ii Yi4 1 1 1 L1 AI Al h/Y41• i111{• 1.• ° :4:';4:*?1;4.4 '.4:46 fir,;i�••,d,••:4.44"�Y;h:t 4;4• W'4*.}.•,�;?'4 ;0;"Ya;�;M 4;A;4'►�h 5�1; 1;►;',4�i; 6;F,'4;i1;;1':1;;d ai;',.DI.4;^,1h;d;44'b;;• 4 {'; I TRIP ADJUSTMENT FACTOR IS .93 NOTE: ZERO TRIPS RESULTS FROM NO TRIP RATE DATA "1 µ THE A�IUVE RESULTS ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF MEASUREMENTS , MADE AT SIMILAR LAND USES AS IDENTIFIED IN ' F R I P GENERATION, AN INFORMATIONAL R PORT 7 fiTH I I D EDITION, 1983r INSTITUTE or TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS EF k LOCAL CONDITIONS OR SPECIFIC I° I li �. S S MAY , LOCAL 1 C � h`IA� CAUSE { DIFFERENT RESULTS REFER TO 'TRIP GENERATION" F CF DATA LIMITATIONS • y CARL urrKE, INci . CoNRULTiNG TRAN PORTATiON F.NOiNttR 1 .. IPROGRESS DOWNS PHASE I I 28 SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION RATES FOR GENERAL OFFICE TRIPS PER 1000 GR.SQ.FT. 2/20/85 **********************************************************Y..* , AVG MAX MIN NO. AVG , TRIP TRIP TRIP OF SIZE RATE RATE RATE DATA STUDY • ' u r 3:I4 Y T i 4 1!y`17: T M 4.i�i T 4 4i E .I V•i4 L,;4,:J_****JK**:**Y 4 a*** F N**+1 *:N* F'_ *44•i F +*J_4:1i , AVG WFiDY 2•-WAY VOL 13.69_ 23.60 3. 60 10 127.0 7-9 AM PR H ENTER 1. ,�1 2, 10 1 .64 3 142.0 °• �. 7-9 AM PR HR EXIT 0,21 0»4 i 0. 19 3 142.0 7-9 AM F'K Hk TOTAL 1 .92 2.66 1 .06 8 138.0 1 . 4-6 PM PR HR ENTER 0.38 0.47 0.38 3 142.0 • , 4-6 PM PR HP EXIT 1 .56 2.21 1 . 13 3 142.0 (' •r . 6 PM PR HR TOTAL 1 .94 2.69 0.82 10 138.0 AM kiEN PR HP EN TER 11 ■ ✓ 1 2. 10 1 .64 3 142 ,0 !, . AM GEN PR HR EXIT 0.21 0.25 0015' 3 142.0 ' �... AM UEN PR HP TOTAL 1 .92 2.66 106 8 138.0 ' PM GEM PK HR ENTER 0.38 10.47 0.38 3 142.0 r'' x ' PM CEN PR HR EXIT 1 .58 2.21 1 . 13 3 142.0 I PM GEM PR HR TOTAL 1 .94 2.69 0.82 10 1_3` .0 SATURDAY -WAY VOL 3.29 6.50 1 .50 5 138.0 PR HR ENTER' 0.23 0.00 0,00 1 126.0 . , PR HR EXIT 0.20 0.00 0.00 1 128.0 , .,,. PR HR TOTAL 1 SUNDAY 2-WA 2.33 6.20 4.90 5 138.0 PR HR ENTER 0. 19 0.00 0.00 1 126.0 t, . PK BHP EXIT 0.07 0.00 0.00 i 126.0 PR HR TOTAL 0.26 0.68 7 5 138.0 1••••h M;;*;M 14 l . *L.Y`; PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE III . 29 SUMMARY OF AVERAGE VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION FUR 174 1000 GR.S .FT. OF GENERAL OFFICE R DRIVEWAY VOLUME ; 2/20/# 24 HOUR 7-9 M PK HOUR' 4-6 PM F'K HOUR TWO—WAY I . VOLUME ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT ,, 1 /r N1 1 1 1 ..Il 1 i i l 1 1 1 I l i 1 tl x• i +�a;r iz z;k*::�i�t:w:a*:�::+:i�;* ;f; :+::w N;a �; ti:+::�*:r;+;a¢ ;' :� :+;t;*;d;t;a;*:h:a :�:;e ;c;:�:*:�;:�;o ;a :4;.:r,:+.4; $ AVERAGE WEEKDAY 2109 264 32 59 240 ..1 **=e*******:}:* *****%tom******+:fir*f.**�}'.****,14`***.`�*****;�i ****:fit.`¢',**:{ **:1i' •••r••h••r,••♦••••r•r•••+•♦ • •••• •+•.•••♦•••+r,••••r•••r•••••••••••r,•r•r•••••♦r r•r•n••r�•+•r••h••. •r•r••• •1 .�� 24 HCU 4 PEAK HoUF i TWO—WAY VOLUME ENTER EXIT I, • •t ri ii :/ •ti Ii N:ii YY 1'1/l 11 i• •1.111.1 +t t4• •1 Y1 ii•I lr li •,1.Yi 1•Y...r ;1;;/;,1;:M;{;:1:; i;:4:,i;:t,;1;;i;:t*;l;;};;t;;f••*,b;�1;*,�;!;';C•':t„:t 1 :y*;1 *;h:t t-:{�:t: :;4 �;;d :a'N .t :f:t;;f• ;N*1; ;4:t:*;1;d;;p:r`,1•• i SATURDAY 506 35 30 • SUNDAY 1 i!i•1 46.YA4 16 i.1i.4 4 i l Y,./l i i i 1 i Y 1 11�l.� i t i�t. , 1 3,/./,1�L t i i.iA. i�.�1�1 1 1 1 l i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 �1L•. 1 t 1..�Y.i♦.11:...11,.1y. f„ , ••'�'r'* 4*r4 '.�''�{�*TT4: T*�W;'41;;44**;M**T�'{�*';��*y~'.•**r*�F:! *AMT*;}; /'**;hT�i;�+ ;'��,,Q;444T4 TRIP ADJUSTMENT FACTOR IS .93 M, i NOTE; ZERO TRIPS RESULTS FROM NO TRIP RATE DATA THE ABOVE RESULTS ARE REPRESENTATIVE or MEASUREMENTS MADE AT SIMILAR LAND USES AS IDENTIFIED TN G ' TRIP GENERATION, AN INFORMATIONAL REPORT' THIRD EDITION, 1983, INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS LOCAL CONDITIONS OR SPECIFIC USES MAY CAUSE DIFFERENT RE,,,UL1S 1 t`IP GENERATION FOR DATA LIMITATIONS 4((( REFER !- i V �. t CARL Hi buirhE, INC; cbNi;ULTING tRAN§PoRtAtioN ENGIN'i ER i a1 ,i, + ..4 v• i 1M. . . , .. ,'. . :,', • .: „ -T: . ''' ' i ' ' PROGRES&L,DOWNS PHASE III 30 SUMMARY OF. TRIP GENERATION RATES FOR GENERAL OFFICE TRIPS PER 1000 OR.SQ.FT. 2/2O/85 **;a;:e:. o,*:+:**;a;w;i;;i,:a:H :;M,,,,*;o,*: :+:;a:r,;t;:a;;a;;!;;a:h;;:+:s+:;k*******:+:;'*; ;;i:+;+:*;r';$;o; f;:+:+¢:;►; a , AVG MAX MIN NO. AVG , . TRIP TRIP TRIP OF SIZE, RATE RATE RATE DATA STUDY 1 i•1•1 1 f y/Y 4.{. i.,,Y, ♦1 1• 1 i�y, i1.l Y I.� ♦ 1 {{y Y Iy1 1. 1•,,Y1 / 1�y/• 1 ^" ' 1,' *44:,• TT **T **TT****T��'**T****��X1.1*'i.:J**4.441."**T T T T**ii:** `{y AVG WKDY 2-WAY VOL 13.34 23.60 3 U 60 10 127.0 :::: , /-,9 AM F'K HR ENTER 1 .67 2. 10 1 .64 3 142.0 It 7-9 AM PR FOP EXIT f 0.20 0.25 0.19 3 142.' 7-9 AM PK HR TOTAL 1.57 2.66 ' 1 .06 8 138,',0 �(4 4-6 PM PR HR ENTER 0.3? 0.47 0.38 3"142,0 • 4-6 "m Pk HR EXIT 1 .52 2 2� 1 13 3 142.0 , 1 r,.1.a:. a..a.. . 4-6 PM PR HR TOTAL 1 .89 2.69 0.82 10 138.0 AM GEN PK HR ENTER 1 .67 2. 10 ' 1 .64 3 142..0 AM GEN FED HR EXIT 0.20 0.25 0. 191 3 14.0 ' AM GEN PR HR TOTAL 1 .O'7 2.66 1 .06 1 8 138.0 1, f• PM GEN PR HR ENTER 0.37 0.47 0.3S 3 , 142.0 .i' PM GEE P HR EXIT 1 .52 2ND>1 1 . 13 3 142.0 J PM GF«�N F'K HR TOTAL ,' 1 .8/9 2.6�F9, 0.82 10 138.0 . I:. SATE SATURDAY 2-WAY VOL .. 6.50 1 .50 38 PR HR ENTER 0.22 0.00 0,00 1 126.0 R HR EXIT 0. 19 0.00 0.00 1 126.0 P< HR TOTAL '' ' 0.42 0.00 0.00 $ 138.0 SUDAY 2-WAY VOL 2.27 6.20 4.90 0.1 130.0 PK HR ENTER 0.1 S 0.00 0.00 1 126.0 I • PK HR EXIT 0.07 0.00 0.00 1 124.0 ;, • PR HR TOTAL' 0.25 0.68 0.07 e.t. 138.0 1. iY f•1 r l 1 1 Y��F i l :i 1 11 1 1 1.,)f . .F:Y I I f 1 1 1!I f•1 L 1/1 Y T.r•, {.Y.i 1 1 3 i/;1 1. ,.V i.1,..i:f i s 1.Y f.1..;1 1 i 1.i 1 f: 1 1„ 1 ;4:1: 4 ; ;�:>:;+;;e;��;3:;r; �;;3;;f;;c1*::.N;r;:M ibc:+;�;n;i;.:;r,;>:► ;+;::7;o ,.,:+;4:4 +;+; 1;►;+•+r;a:� 1;�;*:4::i:a k;w *;,a 6c a;;a;�;* Nf E t A ZERO RATE INDICATES DATA , SOURCE; INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS r.... TRIP GENERATION AN INFORMATIONAL REPORT THIRD EL' ITION7 1983 i b k e :d CARL a E i rr KE,a INO. CbNSULT1Nd TRAM iORTA`iON 1Nat! ' , .r 1 xtJ ' a . ' ..1 • ry - 31 - ''!' .: ' „r .r'�,,, r„ J_..r.J -, «,_.G'', ,, r r .•. ... ...... -„ . ,w.�.. ., -�,!e+ua,•d. J..r.»..:�+s.m».:,�}�,:'i..` .,^..r„ _�rM,c....,, t �r DISTRIBUTION OF SITE TRAFFIC � . r The site generated traffic was distributed to the surrounding area on the basis of the regional trip distribution of honj;e based work trips and non home based trips developed for the ' Washington County Transportation Plan by Metro in 1982. The home based work trip distribution was utilized for AM '± peak hour entering and PM peak hour exiting trips. The Inon home based trip distribution was utilized for the AM peak hour exitin g' . p g' and Pm peak hour entering trips. This Idistribution is shown on Table 4 , A corresponding zone map is shown on Figure 9 . C. 1 4 r , i I I ry d • r i OARL R bUTTKE,INo, ^ corilsuL'rlNG rllANSK)ATarioN ENGINE I .r :'•,I..,�•.... },.......,.,r,. '..,•,r.rr,� ,w.M�•. ... ........ ... ....... w, r, r,., .,. , n.+ .. .. ,..,� .., .., J... J •rm •.r. ,.... .�.•rr• ... ..r� r llo U g � t' 32 i TABLE ., • E'RiO(3RES•:3 DOWNS OFFICE PROJECT � VEHICLE TRIE.1 DISTRIBUTION �� FF 11 VARY 25, 1 rG5 C' ' i. ' ' '' ' ' 1 ' '' :'' H ' ' ' ' WASHINGTON COUNTY PLAN DATA I , N.H.B.H qel n t4 a H.B.O. N ATTRACT. PERCENT : ATTRACT. PERCENT : ATTR Ta ' F C E T I ' q 5 275 8. 1 . I • 28 0,6 16 O 11 L; ' 14 0,4 1 1'•�:5 ' ' �p8 0.'7'; .,,6 13 0.4 . '� 1 4 ' j 0 3 20 20 0.6 1 S ' 0.2 r 0Y,2 6,I4 19.9 6 0 0 0 • ' 0 103 !.)a 2 16 5,',4 75 2.2 ' -, F.3 : L:t.� , 1„„a 5 ' 116 3 n J �?'a�1. 0,9 ' M i' 9 ' 45 1 4 1.6 ': 16 0.''5 E, . w T 1 . _4 fir" '' 3 �9m/ 2.8 r1 80 } 5 8 12 0"4 aew �. af' t14j �� . ro a 13 ' I 51 1 " 1 • 37, 1 .2 34 41 J a 1 ,I 14 5 6 1 .8 7 2 2 q / . • 15 hK I 7 a 8 315 10.3 1 4 1 ( q : 1 , GY .1: 96 2.8 1'`" ' 3 6.1 157 '5, 1 , 1 1 ?1,1. 4 3 7 2.2 ' 19 50 1 . 1' 31 1 21 �� ' 0.6 ' 20:: , 54 ,1 S 421 44 , : '" � • 'f ' 211. 61 7 K, 7' o °26 7 G rIr 276 r»1 wl err r �} `z f 11 ;L w� 1 �.,� . 7 � .2 18 0.4 1:2 0.4 . , 123 3.6 , iI 24 ,1 r'1 1 .5 50 1n6' 491 'qi 4 ' 1;J P"p i 1�.. �,y "� ��,,1 67 . t.'� 2 I �t ' ' 1 . "f ] 1 :•'': '''' : ' , '2 : 168 ; a ? 115 ,307 °,� Aw j' 2 G? /�' 1r 4.! • 1 5.3 ' ' 29 009 17 .41 11 .r ' : 357 ' 105 , Y i : ''80' ,96 ' 2. i. ' 28 0.9 ' 84 ' 1 : 1 31 257 1 t 6 5 155 ' 5 t f 6. 11 d 1' �, r'1 1 r A z � r :, . .• , , , NOTE; H.1B.W. 1 TI"IIP; FROM I HOM�EE To S .: ..1' R s ,:s E "T?,.O. -iI T :IP'8 FROM HOME TG CITE FOR SHOPPING AND '' ' OTHER PURPOSES : 1 .H.5. TRIP � TO SITE FROM OTHE ; ,i: w 8 of EMPLOYMENT Y. . . .1 I'..: ' ''' '' : ' ' ' r AND 5HOP1=`I NG' i'„,,' . a n I . w f •r .. I I •,.ilap 1 ,, .• • '1 ' 'I r • x ■ r• . IS , e T Pi �, ..r MAHkyf P ,,.E • a0 4 j..„ _i Halved. I [ \\ , '! ; 6 frl{u .tr w. 7 Q µt15 tt'O., a a 1.•.:,, n UnIGn A r W 1 I�yobr �ULtNaMAtt CO %� �r, �,� KILL NGBWGRT4 S* • ...... ik;'°b 1,,IIttGION Gbl ,� ' c w r. r ti y I '• •� 1 \� ,C`'4 I ,,e " I ._.--•.,- ^»..,-,•., l Z E ^r".._, IIGMN LS+..,N \` ..—.18R°AOWa Y _7 ,�� �- •''• �' NAt 81"1 r I ' ..,- ..,,,,.,,... -pig !i :4 0 ;boo, ti no qp 1114(115111't1Kt11' YAW7404NP YIIVD -+•..�..g ' ' � nt,cs ��� 1 z� � �`orE aci d` n. M1` a ti,> .—._b�v X12+.,,, s,.»i_ n 0 ,k kt . a5 L 1 • .'1 -,.r^'�wr„, pry P 1 t V ''' � iLTh Aa ,. N.,� f r K I,o -. ,"e yertoh , 0 i� _ 1 fk x 'A4 + e. h' . i c) ,,, :1E4, ,-. ,,,,,9.%' r '71r* k nnuH Np W A .‹ '' MtivJaUkie iliji D.ttt .9 y.4'4,/'. 1 ....VI SCiii(;:"°' ,. 7 AINq q0 "-•.•1: ^All'+ `r1.JU4C'i1N1'' . - ' H•'d'.t..... m tin i x � y • 1 il' 41.1 ' '0 , ',,, \\ N,,, • k"J G r .. w y,,, +„, e' ,� . ... .-».- � e / S Cyr „t n j i , t N 0SW e. , . '/' '''''''''SC4tgit,.4 Jikr, WI I$ • 7,4 ,ti!,,,454.1 ,,,,,o., / ' ''' 'pi 1"\,,,..4 _44 t, 1r111711r4r\ 1,° no 1 / w ioit'efLI ,7 , . .. , 1. \ .....„, . „„ , . . . t,, „isohollli W /�� n, i, 9 Vk. y t Sri w �,M Kin ,r.i,,,A�{ —7,r- w,�• _.� ,; "� '4 ` �,3 a ar, r . c(l ,,.,/ o aurh r h [i 1 I Y_ ,s'" i a { I "i .,a I!G )`wr y', �.` .,, "'� Tur&latfn 1 w... , .• 4 e ','+ tf«� gr u hdNCy htl c1`!..', i' 61.v 'NR„ '"'.c„•uW,•„7^ 1 tale „``° i Ia I 0 West p Ltrin . .� , , sh.e woC)4 d E r ''' ,` /. 41•A Qr, a • t,n I AK�i'NGV•x � � � '• .q i), . 1' w. LI,aS N �li U ILIrI REGIONAL ZONE MAP , --- - —1 1 CARL--1-1. ilUTTKE, INc,°� • aoNtuLTtN± 1RANs oRteiloN ENGiNt01 J i t w, A d �.,..... ,...�,,.o�,., ,t�.._.,,.......,.r...,.. ,__.,rr...,.,.+, .-.,-..,,-- -..�..,- . ,......�.., ,,, - .. „-. .._.,.,.,..�. ,,..... ,.w..,_..,._,».h x�,....+. ..»a,,,. .„..,....»I..a,, .�.�.-,+m . ..,..7:c::r..r.�.a....�.. 4 3 ' ', [ ASSIGNMENT OF TRAFFIC 1 , !t The site generated traffic was assigned to the surrounding street system on the basis of the previously described trip I distribution and the fastest route between the site and the trip origins or destinations Assignments were made for the AM and PM peak hour for .:, Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III and are shown on Figures 10, 11, and 12 . These assignments were added to the exist-» � ing plus in-process traffic resulting in total AM and PM I' peak hour assignments for each phase of development . 1 The assignments of total traffic are shown on Figure 13 at the back of this report. t. IL ■ CARL H.E3U1 i`KE,INC. CONSULTING TRANSPORTATION EN'aINEEF1 • ^.ire i • *. Z•• 35 .,10 (/S) Legend: , ( S 00 = AM Peak Hour , ,0,00irooloo000,00 � .• ` (00) = PM Peak Hour 10 i . I SITE �"` • i . ". 4/f k • Washington l • ,�, Square ., (�� . .�o w • i •y • "v. Oak . '�, /y , i • PzGHH 10 . �y AS'��IGI�;���'�' OF PHASE I TRAFFIC I CONSULTING THANERORIATiont ENGINEER' .. I y a i .,�. .., � 5 �,F...Ir.. �„_ � ..�, ._ i�,�� � i � .. - .4' ...i.., �, � � ii ,..�� i _•. �... ..�.r.�..�n...I,Jr...l.-.+.A.. ...-♦.• -rr....r...H.....4 r,,,....�.1..!•W....«_�.�+.w�, .., •. 1 • yp �.. Le end. 00 AM e , r r 30 A Peak Hour '. 5") ( 00) = PM Peak Hour • rat? , • • { (- SITE p F 1 • ill, Washington .'' Square • • 1/4,..i.\ ,,-c, . • . r • N ti mN,r , . • • • Oak 1 . F 1 � N , i' ' .. [ a "0 • • FIGURE I E G w ," ASSIGNMENT OP PHASE II TRAFFIC r CARL H.�U�' kM INC.1 NSOOF1.ATIC>N ENG N Ep • bt1'N5ULTINGTFiA r �, Y • • , X n.. •a r! �a d Legend. ,' .. 00 AM Peak Hour f ( 00) - PM Peak Hour 4.) 6',\.- 4 , � SITE h�� I . Owe • I, ." . Fil,., ,....., Washington • Square do I Ql I " �e , I I , . • FIGURE N a J OF PHASE ZI TRAFFIC n r I E• , C L H,Aft BIJ � INC,i�l� , I TTK t •' I J Cbt 9UL'f N T � � TI G 1G 5bt' tl .,NIA I pAi �A N t � nl • II I y '.. J . 38 . ;, �. I, ; • LEVEL: OF SERVICE CALCL�LATIOI�IS r �x, } '• I /• i , 4.1 , .. '••. I i t. I' � I I . r • .. , CARL H, U TK G INC CaNSUlrING TANS ONI'ATtiON E►,16�NE F1 CARL Hp BUTTF(E, INC. 39 ; ' l:i Ih.1",1-.N•i '1'1",f',I 1H I1 f r'1I`'7 ., , HALL BLVD. ARV,, WEEKDAY ' AM PEAK HOUR 1985 ' , Hi f.t OC h• Ili � TO LANES ' ' . V I..lr 1.1�l:. �,ff.LN....,�•I 1 1• I TRAFFIC LANE 1 ' 'LANE: 2 ' • LANE '3 LANE i •••r'I w•rN rN rN w. wu rr wN••.•nr Nr•u•HM w••MIf wM wN•••...i. w •• •• ••p• H • „u I w.V fu.MI•wu •M••w• •wr M w r•••w rH r•rH MN , H I"T 7!- 0 ti 0 fi.a� Ir w J 0 lr 0 ' �y :'1Uw1,i°i 5 0 0 0 0 0 t1 C 0 0 '`t r �,lr;i 1 • •1` 0 '450 10 : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ' UNSXC�Nr. : LIZE' ! I . " PROM I ' ' LANE: 1 , ' LANE 2 LANE: I3 ' LANE N � I.N•w r-rN rM w _ r .HNH ....w..w____:.:IM i-1 r•r I.11•.M 1 M•iM uM I ', ' NH Kr•/H YI.1•w•r1 1••, Nr.H•.ur i r Hr EAST RESERVE CAPACITY . ,I ' LEVEL OF SERY:CCE� ,:., S 0 U H RES Iii,Ft,iv'F:: C.:AF''�iC1" Y 220� ti . LEVEL OF ` H ,YCcN y r H WEST RESERVE ,CAPACITY 1 1w.EV11.,.I... OF SERVICE i • 4 Ltl,, 1, �'1Hti>� Pl r 1 w1.�)!. ,a f I.EN F.. i � ^n 1 l'.,., . l', r' ' ' ' , , . . 1 • f; III' I ,, , . .\,,,\,. ,', . ,'t■• , , , I AF'tiL H 0 BU 1•l1. INC 1' 'CLI1;,RENT• •rr�.'AF :I�w SA&_HF-'r')G5 F, ,WASHING ON SQ p , 3/13r 85 HALL E?ILVU k FlVG a WE.:EE(DAY PM F'E AiI'4 HOUR 198 ,, TRAFF WIDTHS, 6 MOVEMENTS VOLUMES TRUCKS GAPS PEAK GRAD Rr;HT . ,i.,. ' .. E^ROM LN I ' LE x LN 3 L1'44 L , S R ' BUSES L S R HOUR :CENT TURN , • EAST 12.0 12.0 130 475 1 0 0 5.5 0.0 0 0 0.85 0,00 1 .00 , L ' SOUTH 12.0 12 11 0 70 I 0 160 0 7 0 0.0 5. 0 a 8!'i 0.00 1 .00 L RI v , 4 �, I '' ui1. SI y 12d�w0 1 0 500 60 0 0a0 0.0 0.0 0a85 0.00 1 .00, C ... : c . I I ' ! ' , I. , i II ' . i i I I i t ; • I t. • , I I CARL H.n SV E• {`KE.r INC. I CURRENT TRAFFIC S w'�85 , Whi E..EINCr0 .;El ;/13 8 ; HALL BLVID. 9 f�iG A WEEKDAY PM PEAK K HOU1 1 3.98,''''J i. VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES '' Tlhh;A1F'r,..1 C LANE I, LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 I FROM L S R L r 1 L S R L 8 1'4: r/rr r,rl Mr w r....rr ..-.wM r•1«.."...W M•...«w..ww«.. «u rM ....w.r....ww rM wr«• w.rw«/I rM r.l a.w wa:«I.«.Y r....««rr w.w.wl wM Mr,rM rw w M....M a.w...J....wM....rM rw....rwK.r« . E:..fhiS ' :1,r30 0 . 0 0 47'5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' SOUTH ;:r. tr 160 0 0 0 0 0 �. 1�,L'.M'Er r;, ` r.?''.:t /!..1(-.) 0 0 0 0 4i r' 1.1i't1S:1. :ON ALIZEE:;1 .r I�;(1.=t1:1::C r. 4 ,,, FROM LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE .w LANE 4 i,l, «iM.•M ML 1«r.«.M4 ww«r w...MM d1•�w. MM•...i«I r•.w r .... wr....♦ M rw MM«w.w.«. A'S`kt ER:E; ',EF;h::UF R.i::iE"'t'ic7:'I'Y y4'17 LEVEL OF SERVICE A 1 • I SOUTH RESERVE CC APACr:1:-I y 88 43; LEVEL or :sE::,E7,,V:c,::;E 11. WEST R E r: E RV E +::'. FF"A C;;I''° LEVEL OF SERVICE p 1 A rl +tr . M . EAST/ WEST I { 1 . i • I I ) I • • 1, 'b n " • • .. • • ' CARL H BUT«C :F'7 INC K . E.f•A(»H�GRO(...1N'ND TRAFFIC Sri&1•'1r-lt'IIt) f'{.r`}H'H�•i OT OfN S 3 ,rw. � I AVG. WEEKDAY PEAK •I t 1 VOLUME ALLOCAT:E ON TO LANES i TRAFFIC L LANE 1� t{. LANE, 2 4 LANE �3 LANE 4 SR ' FROM L S P: L S R L S F: IL S R i• • «.c«..�«w.««r..w .•«.«r...•.•w»w wr•...». •.w,w.•.. .•.w.•..« .....r1•.««.•««w...,.•«.•.•. I ., ,_...«.««««.w4....« ..w I«.«« «...•w.•.... ...w w«....«.«» :...w.•«..«wJ.•.••»•• E.t)8 I :'5 0 0 0 62`+ 0 0 10 0 0 0, 0 j {{ rj) �;,, ( r 1ti ,1i•1 4 L T 1•� 0 0 0 0, i"+ 0 0 0 0 0 1 ' . W l;•1 8„w 1' e.' 1.0 10 0 0 0, 0 0 0 1 (f .,') u.1h`!,»I.1:ONr•iL.,IZEE) t .'. . . �••1:1,C)M LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 • �� .."•.»•.w w...w r..•«,.. • «»«..»w w....w« wu.......w«»w.. w.• «.w...•..«w» ...•.ar a.....«a...w.... 1 , . EAST RL..S»••SE:•RR's'E. CAPACITY"f' ,a J.1 1 LEVEL OF ti31w.I"•,it ICl;. + ": f ' SOUTH RESERVE C:(iN''r''AC I"'Y 11,6 ,5 LEVEL OF SERVICE I) A WE 8"r R;Er'::L.1:;:V I; I CA1""AC.::ITC'''i • LEVEL OF SERVICE • MAJOR STREET EAST/ WEST 1 1 I , 1 I I.. I tic • f • • rig '1 !1 CARL H a BUS TTKE 7 INC Y , t , BACKGROUND TRAFFIC SA&HPMV I 4 �t_,HING`! ON Q n 3/•13,' w1 • \ HALL F.?. Vf�K f'AVG?. C4EEF(Dit'AY PM PEAK HOUR 1990 , . 1 VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANE'S TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE '2 LANE 3 LANE 4 H . FROM L SR L S C" L S R L 8 R I. - EAST «w.1_.»_w __r _ _ _ wN. w_ w. M w.•r ...w rM .__ .._ M_________ n_ 1 w_ _1•_N _.• H w1 4 1 ',I `• f 1:60 0 0 0 8 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sc)1.1"I`H 70 6''..30 0 0 0 0 160 0t1 0 0 0 0 0 t1J E_:3.r 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 �'.. („.-'3I t•. 1'RAF:C :EC Y , ' L Iat,0M LlAi,F 1 L:fiNE. 2 LANE. w I»Ptr)L:, 4 ,i wC w .o A� RESERVE CAPACITY 331 'LEVEL C) S RVICE B SOUTH RESERVE CAPACITY Nw1 '! ,..s19 SERVICE FAILURE 1 WE:ST 'RESERVE CAPACITY -. t. . LEVEL or S1 I'YI► i , ('A JC)R ST'F EF.'.' — EAST/ WEST • • I', • • • 4, ' I, • f ,i: ■ 4 , • N { 1 i Y t + J \ ,. -.i... ... .,r4,.. _....«.• .._.«.. .:, ., -.,.. ...A.i. „ a a.... .......,A._.i..........+...... .,,SJL:.:xw..,_.....Aw ln,. ...x,.,<A..S...Ir. ,.W.....,.., '1 CARL H C+U q L E I NC a Li4 BAC KGROUND TIR;i'�FEIC SA&HF'i5 V .. WASHINGTON SO. 1 3/13/8 1•Hi1LL 12.1_V Da €=►'' a p EEKD-i' `I'1. �`i r1I 1itrll�ftti :r�"�' VOLUME i.)1.rLOCi`�T LO N TO LANES TRAFFIC LANE i LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 FROM L SR L S 1•'. L S f; Lr S R h r..r....,.rN .. _ » ... ...N r. ...... ....»r..r_.._ rr ..r..NN .r.rr..N„".NM r•. _.N,1 r....N .,...»rr N...r,Nr» .»»...rN Nr • t' f~i 0 SOUTH H 70 0 0 0 0 16 0 011 0 0 0 0 0 WE E 8� 0 6 8 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEFT TURN P CI-{E C:1-, n • sa a' , .. I~TRA 1�IC LEFT TURN PHASE ,,• F•'1'',0Prl C tPhltCITY, V'0eLUME EE�DEi,L).w , r .r rr. ..r, »it..NIlr..rNr.. NNi..N. — — —rN,r . EAST 348 1 3i 0t ,i' • CYCLE LENGTH r 90 SECONDS I B C RATIO 'Y P.ic. 14,T1•.11 F.';01...I'I'H 0 a 1. , r ! r i N J • I PLANNING • " PHASE' 1 TRAFFIC MOVE CRITICAL PERCENT EFFECTIVE AVERAGE ; '' , R'Ot`. PIE•r,•C' t,�oIiiL'ti1E CAPACITY>' iJSEZ,;� GREEN TIME DELAY • : p • 1 SOUTH ALL 160 :1.1 M 2 13 47 • I. ' r • 3 EAST// WEST ALL 7,40 J. 9 59� , 1.2 I TOTALS ' 1030, 7"42.,i2 8 J i.,.6 LEVEL OF SERVICE C " • ^4 ;f x ' FJ M a. �. • ; C..�Ar4,L H. E�,U1 f Il(E:;�y INC. 145 PROGhr: DOWNS; 3S DOWN I'il.litISE I ,r s.& . i • [ SITE ACCESS WASHINGTON SO. 1. 3/85 ,. , ;1"ALL BLVD.a AV G. WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR 1990, VOLUME ALLI...00to i ION TO LAN TRAF I::*IC LANE 1 LANE:: aN LANE 3 1 LANE 4 7 t R , «N..'.... ....r w.1 NM Mt a«M w«N NN w. nN rN«M.W r wi w1 rYi'w1 w, r« rM i«."'.1 N«r«w rr w Mw....«« • I•.11 L4►E1";T1.1 10 0 0 0 5 10 0 0 0, ( r 1...) 1 EAST 25 0 0 Ci 61'1'5 30 0 0 G' 1 0 0 0 ,r ti:I«►t•�I INI �J (') V (•j 5 , �1 0 V 1 C () 0 L(Iii.X14 f ►) �'� 0 0 c,;10 J.0 0 0 0 0 0 • . •# • LrEf=T TURN C1H!F.�CI< j: T E+."A1"EI IC LEF'"EI "E URN P'F-1k�l �E, 1 1.I:e.r hi ►tAfF'A►�:rTy 4)1..1L.1.rUP'1E NEEDED? , ' rii W.u.«., rl•N/1 rW« «N u«NH NN rY. rN MN u .i1.r1I r.y..«w r Ir MN•.N N,.N«.1, . 1, / NORTH 1,14 10 N E l'-',f.,,,',1' 624 25 ,�I I •,. • rS t3(1 Mil 1'1 101 N ',� WEST 589 9 U • • y ttY►«..Li:F . E E„YN: 1:3.1"1.1 r 90 SE►.,;OI' i",10 G"/.��y. R A T 10 : t4.1."...11:::,1'1..1/'�ti 0 I 0 7 0"sa • EAST/WEST 0$97 , ; . PLANNING I PHASE, TRAE°E:Cis MOVE CRITICAL � R G C � N EFFECTIVE AVERAGE, • F?}') , M ME1\ilµ VOLUME CAPACITY USED , GREEN TIME DELAY i , w u4'MM Ilr/YU iJLµ�.I i..'NW NM N/I W w,r w/i IN• iir Nr NN NFI Awv Iw IIM!�I,1,i•M«r IrN NN«il IW KJ/M W Nr lir�rM«r Mr.Y{M NN NN•«r NH Uw.iN Mw/Ir M4 NN•.,i !11 iMl IN•1#N NM NY wl. ,,.• ' I 1 1,4 01,.. `1'1.IE/S0111 f'H ALL 20 .1. 5 2 87 ,� ,I a .. : EAST/ WEST iN LEFT 25 1. f 1 3 0("Y Ig ....,� WEST ALL 65 4." � 7, 50 ', _ 4 EAST/ WEST ALL ' 655 4 .6 68 15 I . I 7 5 I r: , ' LEVEL or SERVICE I A .,...,,...,. .ry-„t_...., _ .,.w .. ., •, .,,. ._ ....... . ...... i-.. .._ ..r,.,, ...._.+.F. -..a.n.l...f...Iw a. •.n-ra.,...r.a......_.I.r..w.r.,tri.,•r.r4�:nu:.A�a,w.,u..l$•,1.. rwCh:.n(A".y a ' CARL H. BUTTftiE, INC. ., Si'. 46 ►GLEES WA'Sf4Ir)bTOr4 SQ. 5 r 1 ! (.1Vo a ttl :L»I,F)AAY F'M •PErta HOUR 1990 y VOLUME ALLOCATION . TO LANES .. • . 1 TE;:AEF•TC LANE 1 LANE 2 � 3 4 2 LANE 3 LANE � • FROM L r S i�:: L 8 �� R: L M3 F: L S R . 1.. Cij TF1 55 0 0 0 2t: 5(1 ) 0 0 0 0 0 • EAST + 0 0 !t 5 . .• SOU I-I bra 0 0 0 ;;� 1(s.").,'") 0 0 0 0 0 0 WEST 11::',i 0 0 0 680 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 r • LEFT 11II�N CHECK •1•,., ' TRAFFIC LE T TU RN FP H a L E � � • FROM CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDED.,',? �( ..,+ «..u«L«wN.Nl««.•.. «..1•N« ««..w. «..«......««««..««M n«..M«.�' •«.....w«....w L« . '„ • a• t . NORTH 155 .W t:t.+ N . • EAST 380 130 SOUTH 190 • 70 4 4 r CYCLE 1 t 90 • • L 1 �,�� RATIO �' �J �' f;afwl '{'� 1 pi i . � .• � v { a. PHASE TC',,� f N I C MOVE CRITICAL PERCENT EFFECTIVE AtLf.'I h� w i . FFkC , MEEK f VOLUME CAPACITY USED 'GREEN TIME DELAY •• r4 MY M«i.«,iN'1 ..w M«KM l•«iwy 1Lw i.L ii«i1M iLi Y � M«wM M«N« iL.««.1u1 M«NN.M.««W ”,1W 4W N1•Nr wL«1�«N« r i•Y'Ni•!.A iW w«««««i0«3�.•i•«i.«f•N iw Jii MM«L«N MM N«.w rw , .� 1 E�;�' 'I. CJ 1�1 ALL 16 0 11 .6 12 ,2 1 I ' 2 EAST/ WEST LEFT 1.5 .• u EAST ALL L '111 '� � f , 4 EAST/ WEST IIIALL 760 . 1.l 1 �J r w 3 j�j ,,� • R TOTALS 10506,4 80 W i NI ..,_. LEVEL OF SERVICE C r. i '".'it yy P. ,.�„..u.',..•. 1 , 4 y, a � . .aa,lw. 4.r... c o!14.i L H p 1«..U 1' 1 I'tir E yr 11 J .p .'. • PROGRESS DUW1I4E; PI"1i�1C1:« I I 7 rir 1!r fi .�' S (E t—'fGC.♦L1,:.',B 4rtSI"I],t L f 0t.4 S GIa /13f'E3 ' HALL BLVD p I - F1V1«;a WLE1•:Ur'•'tY 1.11`1 F E ( HOUR 1990 1 . VLU(1f A 1 T1+1A1::'1"IC I.«t:',lN.. :1, L 1` E 2 LANE LANE; FROM L S IZ, L S R L ti`s R L 8 R , r; t' t 1 1 n (« 0 . hI";j«( 25 I C) 1 U U "!2 t 45 1 C) 0, 01 0 C1 0 .. ; ,; 81.—..11-1'1"1•1 5 0 0 0 0 t 0 0 0 1 ' 0 0 0 1,1 :ci"(' 140 () 0 ij 610 I 10 0 01 0 0 0 0 H 1,; r 1 LEI«r,I .J«LIF',t\! (-.31..1E(.....`1 y. r T1Y 1C' I C LEFT ~ URh F'`1..11'21,5.'5 1�. i''= i„( 1tk�1='i::1 C « VOLUME NEEDED? • ««r♦♦« «:.«.«N ,...wl««w♦o-w M««..««.«.«.�NY«N««.. r w. rH•• «N w:wM•••/ ' ,o,I» ,;w I f d L 11 S ri ,„1 I f' .....,E1.‘ I+ 41 l':'',,N;T 41 w�Gl.Y 14 rl ,fir Y CYCLE YLE LEN(.3'1"I'H , 90 SECONDS ' . ti ta (,f . r r �+�� ' (1"1 i "i� �Y 0 �I I Et' t:3♦J°r•'WI:'''il. 0.98 I PLANNING ' y 1 .w 1 �' i 1♦')r�« �« 1 I,wfl"IN ,C t"♦ I�IU�,`G f•I, C r,[1,s1.r 1:.1.:.:1.4,:r G«1' J EFFECTIVE 11~tr J C��i_ t' �,�1._1',��(:�G« 'R M m i' "1" (,)► l:,l«I11 L: C:'F s F:' ,t♦�:1;TY USED C `tii T x ME ' DELAY i `• .w♦YM YW N i ♦ I « N ri.w.N.« ««w...w:. NN NY«. N«w Nu: 1 4 W :«♦1....♦u« ....wN• ww wY w.-:«N«l r N««..N"w♦ r NN, w •• M1+N Yw w i' 1 1 OR1'1'11./tip,O1,JI'�,1 ALL ''),17 1 5 I ,. IA F I „�, S .1 ` r�1 EAST/ WEST LEFT 25 1 117 r 3 « u I I I I. :q .. �t EAST/ 1)Jfi+.S y, ALL 670 48 p; 65 ‘4,,? I TOTAALE 8:Yi t 60.4 80 LEVEL or: ' 1�.I�`.'•r�.CCE 'B I iI I I I I I . ' \'' ' . rl _III • .�rt f. +� . J w nµ.I s• . a J.Z4n A w N•1� CARL H. ,UTTKE, INC. Q PROGRESS DOWN.. PHASE SE;r I I 9tti&HF fi T 1 WASHINGTON fb I1L ACCESS SQ tl 3/1 3/85 AVG. WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1990 t I Y. • � �Lw11� E ALLOCATION� N TO LANES rl r TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE FROM L S R L S R 1« 6 R L. 3 R _ w1 b.•« w1 rw Yw r r rr rw r wy.u..«..««wr.•11.... �•w.w. «« «. rr w :Nr,« rr.««w1 n•..r« ...1 w1 iw «W«« ««rr w.ww r w. ', j . 0 '! 0 V 0 .`-1 L'.'; 1.'30 0 0 0 8.f 0 15 0i E ,"" 0 V 0 0 tl • : L H 1} 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 ! l. : WEST 2 5 0 0 0 68 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEE r .I . ,,1 t_IIH1E:CI I.w r I:::ril'l'•I C: L,I 1 r TURN I'1-1(-)SE rn' F14;C.)11 CAF'At"..:I.1 i' YoL1.J(''1E:::. NEEDED'? ' - wri r r«rN NM u. • rr««+.« rM Mr w•««4.rr+.«rr rN r«ww rr wN rM««««r«N«r•1 � � F •Y ' • - L'.!0N`r11 1.74 7 0 N EAST '356 .i.u0 Y 194 70 N 1 H M " SOU I CYCLE LENGIi H ; 90 SECONDS ' c;"f,C': RAT I0 ; N0R«r1.•1/S0UTI'l 0 a 17 EAST/WEST 0.83 ^' r' • I � PLAN N T.NO s.. •r f. Iy IN IC '4 1 1 1 uy R «N ..� . � .1,.r AVERAGE y +�ti PHASE TRAFit I C MOVE CR 11N ICAL P'6w14.,t111 N 1" Er�FEl,1 IVE AVERAGE f f 1 1 N f1 1 NI 1 ' I ',.• y • FI�'GC'i f 1E N YOL1.�t'1L. CAPACITY USED ORE. N TIME L�E.1.:r�'� I .«. rNrr.w«_«.Irr.rr.w M.w NN Yw IM. w.n1 rr rN M.i IIM Iw.Hr i1« Nw Mw«_MI N_.1.•,IIM rN t1r NN•rN N« NM Nr KM hfr yN 1..1 Iw11 MN i11r rN 1•w 11•r NH..n ML K4 NN KN Nr IN.1+11 Yw ` 1 NClR1'1-1/SCa1.1T1I'1 ALL 180 1 . 1 13 ;.? ' 2? EAST/ WEST LEr T, � 1 tl 8 2 117 f I •rr ALL 105 . I tl' j' EAST/ WEST ALL 700 56. r , 14 o '• . I T01"i'-t11...S 1090 79 tl A LEVEL or SERVICE ' I • CARL H a r U T • . q I NC H - _G~ V_ DOWNS f I «C III H t C C J SITE ACCESS WASHINGTON S !. 3/1::c/85 . 'HALL +Iw V D F : 19 � � � VOL«UME' ALLO�:A� ION .1 TO LANES TRI F'F'IC Lrr 'r,E 1 L..h'it4 2 LANE .3 LANE 4 R , «1 1 l n �{•y. L • Sr f. .1 Ft-Rom L �1� L S f«, i, L •..1 f 1 p;•,!.. .... •Iew.rr r«m•r1. ....w..w«•Mr rr rr r«r «..r•. . .... «..«i•.1 r«ml•« • •... r«r r«rr «r.r w« r « « «• «.N•1« w •,,- I,�'' 1~ 0 c' 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 yr' E! 1 -1* a 5 0 u 0 r'....25' 55 0' 0 0 : 0 � 0 0 ,rG,. , C)1...1`1"1-1 R".i d , 0 0 F..i `".! 0 () 0 0 0 0 ' ., I.r. WL1=;I' 150 0 0 0 r!;1,0 1.(; 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 LEFT TURN rH I::C„'I , , , , , , • ... „ �, , , , „ , , ..,.•,; .,... , rF;riF''F'i; , I«E.;r"f»i'��F�:� FiI1r4: F: ' '+ '1 ^ FROM CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDED? ?, p •" .._ NORTH '+i.,,'1 '0 ?t "SOUTH 89 A c.► N l EST M'•1 r"ey 150 . t.,,'T LIwL LrI;,I• o..1rH Y 90 SECONDS 0/C A 7 C 1 x NORTH/SOUTH 0. u r Ef)S.r ..WIC'91. ' ,d':P i1 $4. I F''I,„AN t1!7:NC3 I ' ' 1 PHASE .1.IN,'iti I IC MOVE GI� .CTrI�.:CAL_ F'f.,r CE.NT EFFECTIVE AVERAGE f:AGE ' FROM MENT ,VOLUME , c:APACITIY USED , GREEN hTIME DELAY I ' I i •'• ---.— NN—.w—N«—NN—»«•.l.Nx f•r i.•.Nr NY ....Mr iM N«YY wY Hw«r i, «r Nr Nr Iw L11.NN H,w«.NN Nil NY N«Nw" N«N«NN 4.••YIN NN NN«1 NN A«1 NN Nr NY Nw•w r+l•/Y 1 i CJF °f I41/SN'1«fL,I I ff' ALLN 20 1I. t 2 , 8 1 4 1 „WEST EAST/ WEST ALL 680' 49.5 64 G V� m 1 it 1 ' • .I I I : I • • u TOTALS 850 61 ,9 G LEVEL O11 ,rSEP V I CII 81 t r I I' r I 1 I r 1 JJ ,/ 1 r . r// , ,7; et�i.�.',.'. '/., +. 1 ,gin•• � �.+.. u...., _. -,... _ .. , ..... ,.. .srG.+www�..,.r•+„u.I-�w'w..«M,...,i"�4:i1.1( -ran .w Y+., IA_A!R{LNJ'rr.a�n.. a CARL H. BU 1 TF(E,, INC M PROGRESS 4I;f�wt DOWNS PHASE 50 SITE ACCESS WASHINGTON SO. 3/13/85 ' • HALL E,L'V'(}a WEEKDAY 9`9 , VOL..t.iftl'. : ALLOCATION TO LANES .:. : r, ,TRAFFIC C»ANE° 1 LANE LANE 3 LANE 4 . ` FROM L ' 8 R ' ' L. S ' R 'L• S R L. S R R ' NO! ! 75 t 0 0 33 73 O ' 0 0 0 0 11 EAST 130 0 0 0 70 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 . , ' ' . SOUTH f 0 0 0 0 1:.f 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e LEFT T U R N CHECK TURN S PRorr CAPACITY , I JOLUME, 'NEEDED EA S"1 f' 356�' tt . � w a 70 • _ WE.S"l ,' '.1.'.1', '.1. 25, ' ',.t" ' yy CYCLE LENGT l'•! ` 90 !`COND • , „,:i.' ,./C'; 1.1:11'i-1'3:0 ' Ni•.OI I+1/;301..11'l”!, 0 u �.:' ' E AST/LFEi1 I 0 b 8» I I ' { 1 • l HASE: ,I :sil'71:-I :o MOVE cl,:CT:CCAL PERCENT Ef=f°EC 1 :tVE AVER FROM ' ' ME,N`f' VOLUME CAPACITY USED, GREEN TIME DELAY I. +..:Iia:"Y Ny Ny rµ » tId r�M, MdiMN MM iw N»rrµirr rrd Nd � NM »w{!W"» »y»n_+w NM a.»rµl iMr»»�lr Nµ • 1 UE�. 'E y tl f ALL 185 w 14 ' 48 2 EAST / WEST '!.y! I, , 25 1 ,8 2'{ 117 „y ' 3 EAST ALL 105 - ,,;- a 8 • 60 EAST/ 'WEST, ALL 78e) 56.7 57 14 I ' I I I I TOTALS. 9t:' 79.6 r I ' ;! f ...1:1' T..) SERVICE C . r e rs r kr r tl A r . • ,. ''CARL H. BUTTFE , I NC. . • , OL ;ON ROAD CF;E:ENNBIJRG ROAD ' 3/13/8 1 HALL BLVD. ,`.,1,. , Vu. WEEKDAY , AM PEAF( HOUR' 1985 '. - VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES - ' . . I TRAF F'�i C LANE, ,1 ', 2� l..ANL " ''LANE 3 LANE 4 ' . — .FROM ' Lr S . R ' , L.' S F L . S ' R L S R . 11 .• r,.M♦1 r..r»1...Jr.... w..r.r.a. r.r...+.w. r.l rM r..nN rr wr rr wn.»«w.rN..•.rr •w..n..rr rG. w«.1....1.r.r. .r. M w.Y...JN • W..r.w.r.r.rw rn.rr»«L..r.N.w rr wa• • EAST tia% 0 0 0 ' . 265 ' ' "25 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOUTH- • 30 0 61 , ' 155 .. to ' V 0 0 WE'"T 20 f r, ' r �1�� 4 44.,-d 0"s J »�r41 0 0 0 • LEFT IJRN CHECK s ' » N FROM CAh'Ac:C Y VOLUME: D NEED :, r rb,_�.,«r»•wr , rNN»r,M.• »JM Wi,r rN r , n i 1 1 ,G"•+� 1 r.l , EASTI 29 3�1 , 1 N.lr1 u r .., ,,. 'WEST 594 200' Y • " C'r,l�l.Jl 'LrC:F� GTH 90 SE NDS IG/C F.,i"'t TIC ; NORTH/SOUTH 0,, ',' . Ei •. 1lr/W L!IIT ��'M 67 i i ' —PHASE . . .. TRAFFI C MOVE CRITICAL, PERCENT „ EFFECTIVE Vw A O w : F.1-..,0M ME't)1 'VOLUME »».....a...N 'VOLUM ' '' CAr I 1TY USwD 'C ,CE TIME H ' OFNA' . W NN♦.J{.�.Jr N»»+Nr-.”„MJ Wi iNl «.1 i.»rr NN .i.{NJ N»»J...Nr«J Nr 'i.J.1.J NN...u1N N..M«..i.N..N+.:. .w..r. ..11.:M4 Mr 11»lil.,r---rw .»L JY iL:l ur w.»v.a.N.f ' I 1` 0 Fi.. 1 1'1/. i O,,U T Irl —LEFT '. 3 0 2 '72 ' J.» 3 .EAST/ IJEST LEFT ;u � ''�;''. 4 �.a . 4' t4ES :ALL,. 165 12,0 18 36 ' 1 S f' �4d :CT 'ALL 9 � w 26' f . LEVEL r� c�E ` 1 IC E r LL« , C1 ,a Ftl • i • i 1 Ai n S' 1 ♦ 1 d 1 \ , . . . . . - . - • ... „ . , : . . r r . . . ••r . , : : , . ., : , r r ..,, , • ..4r,. „. . , r • r ■ „ . , ,„ „ . ,, , , , ,., , • : _, , ": , ':,, ,r1, : ,: ,r. . . . . . ' I ' ■ ' . , '.4 '• ' . ' ' ' . , , „ , . .. . . ■ , ,. ., , .. .. ... . . . . , . . , .. ' ' ' ' ' ' ''.'' ' ' ' ' . ' • . . . • ' .„ I CARL BUTTKE INC. . , • : I . 52 ,. ... CURRENT TRAFFIC . . . . . . H&OFM85 H. • '-. , OLSON ROAD GREENBURG ROAD:" .• . ...... :.'•.• -•:. .'• • • •• : • • . " ' • 3/1",.3/86 .1,. . . • 1• -,., HALL BLVD. • ' .. '' H. ., I • . „ .........' .. - ' . . . • . . .. .. , ,• . , .....,... , —.. AVG. WEEKDAY. ...PM ..FEAK. HOUR . 1985 . .. ..: , • 1 :. ' •. I.' . .. ' 1 -1 1 . .' ' . . 1 . ,, 1• . • , ,. , . . . , .'''''''..' 1,•...''.:1' . ' .1:, ' '' I...'' . . , , , . . , . . . .. , •i.... .. , . . ., . . , . . . . . : : .. ' . . 1 ,•..'..., VOLUME. ALLOCATION'. TO 'LANES . - . .. •,.. • H. ." : , . • , , . , . .. . . , . . . , .. ,' ,:, .. . • TRAFFIC• . LANE 1. ..... •..'' . .. 1. LANE H2 I, ' , ,:• -. .,'. • - LANE . 3.• • .• ' . '. ' • • LANE 4 , 1.. . . . ... —I FROM L •,1' . S •• ' R .. •' : IL ,• • S :.. R: . '. • L ' ' '. S -1 : RI ' ' L r: Cl. R 1 . . i'•'• . . _ . . . , . . . ... , - . . , . , i • NORTH. 55 :.. . 0'.. :• 0 'HI . ' . , 10 . 195 .. . 0 • I:. ,. • 0 : , 15 •- 180 ' . 0 .I .0 . . 0 1 • . EAST. .. '',, 65 ' ' .01•. ,' .0 ' , ••.. I• •...• O. 285 ' ,35 ' • -:. 0 „, ' • 0 . ' '0 • ' ' 0 0.1, ''• 0 . .1 . . .. . • H '. 11. SOUTH . 120 .. . . 0 . ' 0 ,• L, . . . ,0... ,320I 10. . - 0 .• •' '0 • I '65 • 0 • n . 0. : ., •. .. . WEST . • 240. 0 -.•:. '0 I • ' ' :: .0. 360 -.0 . . '' .. 0 .: , 0 ..,.... 45 .I 1. : 0 :0::, , : 0 ' . ::. - • ; • „ .. ,. . .. . „ . . ., .. . . , . . . .. 1 • . M■I... . . LErlill TURN' CHECK...: . : • .• . . ' . .' ' '. • •'' '' '' .. .H .:. 'H.,•' : ' ''• ''' . . : • . : 1, •'• • ' . . '1"':'' • . .:,. .. . , . „ . . '' • *, TRAFFIC ' . '. ''. LEFT. TURN H. I: PHASE ' II.- :' ''..H” .•: ••1•' . . . . "I. .-.' . • . ... . : I..... • „ ' : ..:,:,•. FROM ' 'CAP,..iCITY' :... VOLUME.. • NEEDED?.. . . .. • 1 • . . ... ' ' • ..;• .H• .11 . . .. .' •.. .. . ... ' ' .• :1 . .. .. : . : . . . . . , . . , . ,•... ' ' ' ' . . . . . , . . . . „ 1."".. ' ' ' : I•NORTH ..., . .'' ,,175 ' .., '• . :. '55 I .. : i Y '• '' . ' - . " •.' ..' '':' i. • •' ',I, , , ,,, , ... . , : • : ' • EAST '. 1 • ', 395• ' ., '65' ' ) , .., , , . . ,... .. ,. . : • L. . . , • '‘' ... ,80LITH. ',- : ' , 170 ''. „ . 120' . • Y.' . " : u ••.' ' .. : . • . . . . „ . . , . • ' : WEST 1 ' , 480 ', ' 240 ' Y.• ' .1 . . .H. ' ,.... 'I ' '''. • .. ,•,,'. . ' :".. ' ' .'' '• .• 1 . ; i : . . . . . '... '.. H :CYCLE LENGTH 4' '90, SECONDS ' . ,.. . 0/6 . RATI0 1.,,, ORTH4SOUTH 0,46' ' . . ' ' ; ., ' ' '' :, ' ' . ,,, . ' ' ''' ' ' ' '' '' .' ,:: ' .' ' . '-' • 60 0. . , ' I:I •. H •.•: . .' ' . .! 1 1 ,H.•.: ' .. '' ' . : I ' I ' . : ,,, . . • . ,.. - : . • i , i. ' ,' . : .: : . I ' . .. Ii '' .., ',., ....,,' • , •.. .h . . ' .., ' .. '. • , 1 " ' , . .. . . . . „ ,. . . , • , , • . . ,. . . ;. . . , . . 1. . PLANNING,'' . . . . . ., . ,. , . , ..., ,. ,. . . .. . ; ;. ,. .....PHHSE, - , 11virl-,IL . MOVE CITICAI... ', , , HI 'PE10ENT:, ' ', H, ',' 'EFFECTIVE , , AVERAGE • P.Rom . , MENT .., voLumg . . CAPACITY USED ' OREEN:TIME- :. DELAY . ' ... ' • ' . ... ,. : '.. . . . , : . . , . '.: .. :-.:. •.'. ',1. ': : ,• NORTH/SOUTH . LEFT : ' . ' , 55. H'.,' H : ; .. 4,0 ; '; , H .:',:, ' ,4', , ' ' .. - 91 1: .'- • I''' ' 2 ••' '• SOUTH ' ' . ' ' ' ' ALLH, '' ', ,:e',)5. .: '.,'' ' :.' , 4',7... ,, 1 : . :' , , .5 ' ; ' ' ' 74 ' !,, , • ; :l.. . NORTH/S0111H ALL .., .H.'255 ,, . '. ,' ' ,' '185 ''', ''' I."1 . ' ' , 31 : . . . .. .., ,. . ' 4 .'„EAST/, WEST ,,:' LEFT ','' ' - ,:i '65 ". ,' , , ':'''' ' ' -47- ' ' ' '' ' 5 ' ; ., '. - " 74 ;'1 ..,' • . , ... . , . 5 WEST,' . ''''. 14 ' ' ' . '.; HALL .' ., . 175 H. , , '.., ' H'. 12,7 ' 1 ' . - 44 , ,, 46 • I.,. ., i • i, 6 '-','. '.". EAST/ WEST H HALL',,,.', '',, ,,—; 320 ' HI ' - . ,. 2;1.),,,3 ' Hi .„, 26, . . . • ' . 33 ; ,,. . , . . , ,„ . •. „. . . . TOTLS ,' . ;''-' 1 95: , ' '., - HI ' 67.9, .., . ' ' . 75 ' , • : . -,-1.EVEL....OF.,'SERVICEH , . .. „ . . ,. . . . . . . . .. . , . . . , . .. „ . . , . . . „.. , . . . • . , , - .';i',;.' ' - . • : , • . • A • , , . . CARL H. BUT fKE, INC. 53 ,-,BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1 H&OAMJ OLSON ROAD GREENBUR6 ROAD 3/13/$5 ' , . SHALL E LVE:�. , I AVG. WEEKDAY AM 'PEAK HOUR 1990 • VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES TRAFFIC LANE 1 , LANE 2 , LANE 3 LANE �t I E« F�. L: Fw L. �" F H ,•;: «..««««««...«««« r..«..w..r»«« .•«..w••«,:Mw_.w..«..ww ...«..w««..w.•1'«:•w.. •. ' . I TES 50 0 0 � 0 295 0 0 G0 215 0 0 0 , EAST 50 0 0 0 20 0 0 16 35 0 0 0 . ' SOUTH 45 0 0 0 ' 22 ,, 0 ' 0 30 ' 0 0 0 L .,. LEFT TURN CHECK F „ L TRAFFIC ' LEFT 'TURN PHASE FROM CAPACITY VOLUME • NEEDED?ELF' :329 50 y' EAST 441 SOUTH 80' 45 Y ' ' ' • i ' WEST : 371 h „ 270, ,, y, ' ' ' : • '„," '. - ' , ! CYCLE .Eh;O 1.14; r,, 90 SECONDS , ! t3 'C. RATIO ; 11 rR T1H1r'SOLiT .1 0 u 42 ' 4,. Ett 5�w/LEES•T 0.o0 y . � i W 111 �: 'CRITICAL 1 p.•.!� Il � t AVERAGE,,.: PHASE I FirE« ,Cl MOVE:;, 'C,RITItoAL PERCEN1 EFFECTIVE AVERAGE FROM ICIEE��•E vOLlih1k•, , ' c:Af`itiC,: ,TY USED , O '1.F .EN TIME DELAY lwi wH F1H:«Y,«ii N«••••.••Y.w•MM««HH u:HN'•:•:NM :.A.N«:I.r I.N r1+•l..Y«+.HN il:w.Y.N NU ««I.w i:«« .,.:jiN i•H««HM«w!IU Hw wM, I..c t.«Hu W i•««u:i«H«YM.i wu VI«L14I w,.•i«H«MU iw . L.. .,.., C. 1 NORTH/SOUTH : : LEFT „LEFT' , 45 , 3{ .7311 4 : 70 L . 2 NORTH/S OUYH ALL' ' x:95 ' 211,3 ' 25 29 „L'. ' 3 EAST/ WEST,'H LE:i;:-.(' ' ' .5'0'n '' ' 3,6 ' ,1 ' , 5 - ' ' 59 - -, [::,,, , 4 WEST AE«.LL 220 16 N 0 21 Z5 i '5 ,EAST/,,,, WEST ' '''' ALL ' 20 ' � 14,';„8 15' if. TOTALS 1 t 8i3 t5 77 LEVEL OF� SEF" ��� X L"E , : A t� _ • ,� I • .-.., - , ...._,-........... ........... - .. ..,. ., ,. .,__......,.,,.-,,.,...,.....,.,..,.,.,.......,, _i.,,....,._...:mow,.,., ..a.w-::1.»::.M..»...t.s.Y_„»1.t.,u,a:«:_�,.,.x,s:..,.»:.,vr. ' 7nm a...,,, ' ' [ CARL H. E:UTTf E, INC„ 5 'BACKGROUND TRAFF IC H&Ui'Mi OLSCriN ROAD GRFENBURO ROAD 3/13/85 HALL BLVD. 1 AVG. WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1990 r, VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES i TRAF'FIC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANG: 4 :0 FROM L S R L S R L S R 1 L S, R ...Iw•r«w • rr»...«.w«««N««.. rr wl r«u « 1111«•N«nr wrr r«r•r wr 4«»r rN«w ««»r rN r« r«I wr.w««rr««r.r•"«n•• r•r»«........«.ww w•««r«rw nu wN 80. NORTH , .., 0 0 0 283 • EAST 95 0 0 0 420 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOUTH 180 U C 0 485 0 I 0 U 100 0 0 ' WEST 305 0 0 0 460 0 0 0 60 , 0 0 0 LEFT T a R:N CHECK Th;AF'F•IC I.„r;F''I' TURN PHASE: . FROM « H » C 1 f VOLUME tE ED r D? ,. w,•rw./1 r•1»« rw ««M««••wt r.Y Nu N«Y»r 1•LW N«ru{Nir M««..»w r•. i I , , NORTH t »I Wty i tJ EAST 256 95 L 1 ,, S O U T H 8 18 0 �iWES« 296 305 Y , CYCLE L E NG T H r 90 SECONDS l 0/C R A r I O, TNORTH/SOUTH 0 4.' EAST/WEST t ,5 , . . I I I PLANNING ' s.: PHASE ` I TRAFFIC MOVE CRITICAL PERCENT :r r� , v r AVERAGE FROM ME:NT VOLUME: CAPACITY USED GREEN EN TIME DE:LAts° NN+•,r NN i,ir••Ir iir wu N«•IN NN YNrllw W:•1w I,NNH Ww rW,w:ri W«IiN.».,NN'NHi Nw ww«N l,«lr•r Nw rw LN MN••r.I�««Ww ww 1•N ilw MwNw uw N»NN:rN»r rui i,rr Ir,: iNlw r«rr Ir«I,r,In �., 1 NORTH/SOUTH LEFT 801 5. ,µ SOUTH ALL 100 7.3 3 NORTH/SOUTH ALL 38E 28,0 } EAST/ WEST LIE. T 95 6 u9 WEST ALL ' 210 15.3 r ' I /wA5T WEE w 9 TOTALS 1350 98 , • LEVEL u r Su RV:t 8 r` I • • , I I r. 0 , t .. 55 • I✓.Af.:Kt3ROUND TRAFFIC F I C • OLS ON ROAD GREENBURG ROAD ' 1 cr li iHALL P.,LVo a , wvC � WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1990 , VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES • s TRAFFIC LANE i LANE 2 ' LANE 3 LANE 4 FROM L � R L .a � rM wr 1 Ir1 w rw.. r• rr � rr wr H.rw wr Yr, rN rN rw J+♦,MJ rr rY u rw YY r w rw wr rw wr w.+wr w....«.... { , r I :: Nt RTHHH' ' 80 0 0 0 283 ' '0 0 h 18 265 0 0 0 EAST '95 ' 0 0 ' 0 24 0 HO 180 '60 O 0 ` ' 0 SOUTH ; 180 0 ' 0' 0 485 ' ' 0 0 0 100 ' 0 0 ' 0 WEST 305 .0 0 0 '4460 0 ' 0 0 60 0 0 0 t .r LEFT; TURN CHE ,k TRAF'F I C 1 L.r, h I TURN • PHASE 1',0 CAPACITY VOLUME , NEEDED'? ' .wl'w hl wlr r w..rN NJ N.•rll rN hn.wM wr w rN r Nh rh N r r. N• r wY w � wr rr rl YN w i , 1 NORTH 95 80 Y ' SOUTH 115' 180 Y 200 305 CYCLE LENGTH 90, SECONDS • . . 1 0/C RI A{ T10 * NORTH/SOUTH 0 j5' k_ ' EAST/WEST I wt W L . i ' H , , . , , n h PLANNING ' ' ! . , I HA E R „ I MOVE ,' CRITICAL PERCENT, 'EFFECTIVE AVERAGE' 1 1, FRUm MLNT VCl,iJME GA PA'ICITY USEr GREEN TIME DELAY • .+w Nw•ir Y.•1 wY"""MY ra{r+)�r?Mi.Nw.w .w r w rr wr i Nh YJ piN trl liw wl♦�i.w wM hY tir r•.N h.i iN•hr VY r1Mµ41•iY rY ....NY wl Mr ti•.IM M4{ir i.M i+r wY 4r ri..Gd•w 4..!.1r 1 1 NORTH/SOUTH LEFT 80 5 a ' ' i 113 ' , ' . . I s . { OUTH ' ALL ,I.00 7.3 , � 72 ',. a r. NU NTH/SOUTHHI ALL ' 385 2 .0 26 "39' 4 EAST/ WEST LEFT ' ' 6 u 9 : ' 97 1 5 ES" ALL 210, , ' 15 M 3 14 55 I: 1 yY V 1 {b W� i' A �` � 'iL I� ',F 1N � JNi}• i i 'r'� '1 l P . r. 6 EAST/ ', JIB.. � 'ALL '254 � 18,i 2 1�� 4 f. ',LEVEL' Et L L OF SRRVCC W ..,c.,+....., ,.,-,....x,ww+...4, ..«.....w...t..,,,._................A...«_w.,-..-..-L..,..nw..+....-..-J...,.wr..,ii......... `I ',I. -, EARL Ha BUTTKE, INC. p–PROGRESS DOWNS P 56 H iAM ' OLSON ROAD cREENEURO ROAD . 3/13/85 HALL BLVD. . AVG. WEEKDAY AM 'PEAR ' H UR :1 90 !4 ' ' VOL UME M� �LLU�A r�U � TCLr �E� 1 :TRAFFIC LANE 1 ' LANE 2 LANE 8 LANE A ' ' FROM L S..' h; L ' ' $ R , L. s . R L S R. -----...� .�rr �... .«.r«r » »«d ----- INORTH 50 4, 10 0 295 0 0 80 215 0 0 0 , - • . EAST ' 50 0 ' 0 .'205,.':–.1. 0 ' 0 170 3 , 0 0 , 0 r. SOUTH ' ' 80 .' 0 r0 0 240 I 0 ' '' (0'i� ' /0 ' 30 �0 �C4 toy . ..•: ;WEST 270 ) V �i +( � 0/ i! 0 0 0 wa • :«1 ' .t r � I r�... LEFT ' l U R N C H E C i t, ' . . TRAFFIC EFT TURN PHASE ,. FROM CA1"'AC I TY. VOLUME —NEEDED'?.' ti •r.1 nN»«n»r.f«•. r•.W W r»N«r .i w.«» •N«r..w• t«» r ...N•.«» '' NORTH. t9, 8; 50 ' trr EAST 3 0 '�' 1 ' SOUTH Y. " r �•f.» t r 5 C'1 1 1 1 •i 1 ti . •� d tl : 4 –CYCLE: ti 9 0 SECONDS C ON D ' , t { r { '1 y d If di 9 EAST/WEST• 0„ .. • PLANNING ' PHASE TRAFFIC 6V1i CR'C'1":CCAL .PERCENT EFFECTIVE AVERAGE ��RC M MEN ( VOLUME CAPACITY USED GREEN TIME DELAY' ..»...i:.•:...t 4Y ww r...::N:...«»w«rY YY 4u :{r{Y.«J 4Y rY Yr:..:.,Y 4:i—n4 W —w..•"Y"Ylj NY HN nY—.1Y:.1.{...1.4 YY 4Y I.n NY'w'w-n" .» . / : " « r . 2 SOUTH ' ALL '30 2,2 ' ' ' " 3 NOR TfI/SOU 1 H ALL 29„1 .21 ,5 2l6 32 . EASTf WES 1 LLB"1` 30 3.6 4 79 - S WEG(` ' . ALL '220 16 0 20 36 ' ' • EAST/ tl 1.ST ' ALL. ' 1?0 i 14.9 ' 18 3 TOTAL 8$0 „ 61 ,8 75 • w r + LEVEL—OF EhVUE 1 CARL H. BtU ,.TTKE INC. ' �.. PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE I 57 'H&OPMI OLSON ROAD GREENBtUF'G ROAD ' 3/13/85 HALL BLVD. ' 'AVG. WEEKDAY: PM TEAK HOUR 1990 VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES , TRAFFIC LANE`. 1, .'LANE'''2 LANE 3 LANE 4 ' FROM' S t � I S � w R 'I NORTH '60 O 0 0 H29.5 G ' ' 0 30 265 0 0 , 0 • EAST 9 O 0 0 240'. '0 O 1.80 60 ' 0 I 0 O , . SOUTH 190 0 0 o 4$5: o , o 0 100 0 0 0 WEST 1 305 0 ' 0 G 465 G 0 0. x.25 0 0 0 ' ' Ht.' '.. H ::.' LIE T TURN-CHECK, ., T wlF :I LEFT TURN PHASE:: FROM CAPACITY VOLUME, NL°EDED" ': . [.' _•1 r•.r•w.rH wf N» rw »w r»H••r»rr_r».. _•f»»r»rM w.•rf•.n.«.r•.•.yN NORTH ' H.- 95'.... . . i Y '' L EAST 90 95 jr '. ,SOUTH. r U 190 'r ' ' [ WEST . ' H 200 ....'. ,' . , 305 .'. ' : . . Y . . . „ S/C R(1T:G ' ; NORTH/SOUTH ' 0.5 0 ,, M � EA�T,/�WES,•�» •a( H 1•.J'4' " ELANNING ' ' '1.I I '`HAKE 1 RAF IC ' ' MOVE GRIT CAL' PE CENT EFFECTIVE, ' 'AVERA GE E ., ', I FROM MENT ' VOLUME CAPAC1 TY USED GREEN TIME DELAY ' i «»«N i1r f•i• N_N.•rH.•»N_f»f'.-{:r.••+•»:.f1r wL N»N.NN •w•w rM{IN{•r w r»W eM H •r Hr•:H Nr NN•fH NH.»• ' »»e•r 1•••rl1 Hr•_..F!••N»rN,•••f Iw rH.i•i IN4»:.•J.li_' ' 1 NORTH/SOUTH LEA r G0 5',.'G ' 5 1,3 t` 2 SOUTH ALL 110 8.0 7 I 87 ' ' I ' ' I a I NOR TH/SOU H ALL - 375' ..' I, 27.3 25 40 1 4 EAST/. WEST LEFT ' '96 16.9 6 9f7 ), , 6 EAST/ WEST' ' ALL.I 255 ' 1 18,5 ' ' 17 ' 50 I I ,� I ' 1125 ' LEVEI,H OF SERVICE a ., • • , `^4• 1 ..I''''''' ' ' • , . CARL H BUTTKE , INC. , . r Er ROGRESS DOWNS PHASE :[:[ 58H C M' 1 OL.SCJN(}ROAD OREENE'1URG ROAC`! 3/13/85 , HALL BLVD. AVG. WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR 1990 • VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES • TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 L +NE 4 FROM L S R L S R L. S' R L S R NORTH 50 0 0 0 295 0 0 80 215 5 0 0 EAST 50 0 0 0 205 0 0 170 35 0 0 00 SOUTH 100 0 0 0 2501 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 WEST 270 0 0 0 305 0 0 0 50 0 0 ;, LE 1URN t.,HLr..,K - , TRAFFIC I LEFT TURN PHASE 1=1",OIi 1 CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDED I• NORTH 340 ,G T, t f t:p : EAST 385 SO r SOUTH 8 100 Y WEST 330 r)wl , , i C?i LE LENGTH r 90 SECONDS r G/ N RATIO T NORTH/SOUTH 0.45 i ' EAST/WEST 0° •"t+1 PLANNING PHASE TRA Fr C MOVE CRITICAL F w RCEN w ' EFFECTIVE AVERAGE , FROM MENT VOLUME CAPACITY USED GREEN TIME DELAY • NN{N NN NM Nw li..NF NF NF N«NF NM ilr fiJ•l..l NN N.l NM w ....I.N 1N1 HN.NI...i Nw NN' r_fl.i NM IlN NN MN NM/:_.{r'1,..1.1 Mii./.1 NM FN.w NN_r Nr I�I..i.1..l.w _N i1N NM w,nh ir.wN ' NORTH/SOUTH I }MN} ' .. 1 , LEFT .50 3.6., 4 ✓ !1 1 2 SOUTH ALL 30 8.6 4 " 1{�Y ' NC['t r1-'1 SOUTH. ALL 295 21 ,45 26 32 1 4 EAST/ WEST LEFT 50 3.6 4 79 6 WEST ALL 220 16,0 19 38 ' ) 6 EAST/ W E T ALL 205 14,5) 18 39 rr,, TOTALS 870 63.2 75 ' LEVEL or SERVICE 8 , -. x . . CARL H a 'UTT �E r NC. ., [FROORESS DOWNS PHASE I I �9_H&OPmI I OLSON ROAD GREENE,URG ROAD 3/ 13/85 1, HALL BLVD., • A a t.7 a wG::EF\DA S fr if ff C:Ac+ ,HOUR -', 1. i 74!' VOLUME AL»1+rOCAT.l ON TO L» iNE [ ,TRAFF lC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE , LANE, 4 .. d. FROM ' L S; F:, ' L HS I�' L 8 P , L 8 P; . . H NORTH 80 0 0 0 298 i 0 0 :3;3 265 0 0 0 C. EAST 95i 0 0 0 ' 240 ,..„ OH,H , 0 180 60 0 0 0 1.1 . SOUTH 200 ' '0 '0 485 0 0 ' 0 100 ' 0 0 0 WEST , 305 0 0 0 '465 0 0 0 140 ' ' 0' 0 0 n w , .... L�iE 1 `1llirr CHECK: 'TRAFFIC LEFT• TURN 'PHASE , • [,.»•.FROM w.«1 C•A F ACC•.rI N ". T,..•,M«»»VO»L UM»E NEEDED? • a • ' NORTH ' 9 80 �' ' HSOuTH 85 200 y WEST )00 30wa r . L- CYCLE LE�40'ri,lI ; 90 SECONDS ' NORTH/SOUTH a EA �T/WES « 0 a iu • PLANNING , ' 4 PHASE TRAFr IC MOVE CRITICAL, PERCENT EFFECTIVE AVERAGE " ' FROM MENT VOLUME CAPACITY USED GREEN TIME DELAY ,.«., »u..w...:.•»..«uw«N«...._..r ..»»»»..»»M»Nu:.. i 1 .UFR,TH.SO T IHI LEFT l 00 ti G 5 '11'3 E 3 NORTH/SOUTH ALL 4 5 ' '' .:', ' 26, 25 3 4 EAST! WEST LEIS T' 96 6.9 :: ', 6, 97 . 5 WEST ALL 210 15,3 14 . 5 L : ,:EAST! ;WES'1"° ALAI:», 25 18.5 17 50 L. "? 8117 . LEVEL 'OF SERVICE 0 rV „ .. . , . _ . ..r. ..__.• l . . .'� - ...w,.,..:..i..,i' ... '.,.: i.. x:....._.r ...... td .. , . t s. -.. - .._ .._ s,s.....,.s._,,a 4,.R.,~.,,.«s.,....-,w.n...•_-,•.h..L,.S.»..n». n.r,_.ray....,41.1.,,...L. Gl .1.... n CARL H. BUTTKE, INC. 'p•' 1.,,, �I PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE III 6c.1&oAM I I I OLSON ROAD GREE=NBURO ROAD ' I 3/13/85 •. ... • • HALL BLVD. 1 AVG., 'WEEKDAY AM F'E.:AE( 'HOUR '199'0 ' e v OLU,ME ALLOCATION TO LANE'S • TRAFFIC LANE LANE 2 ', LANE 3 ' • , LANE 4 '1 FROM L S R ' '' L S R L ' R : , L ; 8 R . .w_....w w.._..ww_., w.._..wr..t.wr.__..___w_w ww_..w.. ww ...ww__wN ww_r.w.._.. .w_N w._N_.._N .__...w.w .w.�_.n.,._..�w.,.. . NORTH , 50 0 : 0 295 0 0 80 215 0 0 0 x EAST SO 0 0 G X08 0 0 173 35 .; 0 G 0 SOUTH 105 0 0' 0 ' 25 � 0 0 ' 30 0''� 0 0 WEST' , 279 ' 0 �' 0 30 0 ' ' 0 0 ' 50 0 0 0 ' 1...Ea.•i=T TC.IRi•� CHF►:�i- �. TRAFFIC LEFT TURN PHASE ` F r•:;of I ' t:AE°'Ate ' ' , Cr:C'1� l L['JOE::l:� #C�II(,�E Cy" I . NORTH , 47' 0 Y• ' ' ' EAST ,:',i3 ' ' 50 1' SOUTH ''1 H 8 i0 t5 `f ' CYCLE Lr�. 171 H • 90 SECONDS ' . :S/C RAT :O► ; NORTH/SOUTH 0,46 1 ' , .,, E.,AS 1/WEST 0 n t ' PLAN N I NO ' ' ' : ' ' ,, I I 1 PHASE SE TRRR.AF EC, MOVE CRITICAL PERCENT I F FECT IVE AVERASE t E C:t1 'MEW' VOLUME CAPACITY USED ORLEN :TIME DELAY r ' .:.win iiN iNr tNr w_MN NN ww MN NN ii4 rw Nw w.l wN .w Nr wN.w I MN Hw Nw tiY.Nw Ni.Nw.W Nr iiw FM N_NN NN iw wN N4 MN Yiw if4 w_ Yw fir_INr w.i,.ifl w.trl.M_iw Nw w_:.:s«N,M4 Nn r.N it.. ' I. I I ' NORTH/SOUS I•I LEFT ' 50 ' 3',6 4 '%' 2 5 � � 't I NORTH/SOUTH ALL' 1,aa 2 ,fit.. , • 4 "!EAST/,' wr s'1 LEFT 50 3,6 6 4 79 `` ', WEST,, ALL, ' 220 I 6 ' EAT/ WE `1 , ALL 208' :f.15'w;l : 15 9 . TOTALS 8 H 'LEVEL o :SERVICC ' ' , .r . r , I ' r . ..... ,.a u...4. .a._ ...n. _. 1 ..,. 1 ,i .. .. .......... e.A_-._.., r.. -.,i. .,., r, ., _i-.r _ r..r.,r „ .,. . r.., t.._l. _k....A...•.-....h—.I.r..J...n+1 1.wwrn....wM,S•..11+.—•...hi.n.«..Ar..irr.:N.-.iN_r.nn+r.w...A]wu...iA \• n CARL H. E.UTTkE�, I NC . T .... f 61 ,PROGRESS l =S PHASE :{ ! :C H&OPMII I i' 'OLSON ROf E) GREENE•UF t 'ROAD I 3/'13/85 '' • P ' } HALL BLVD. 'r 1 AVG WEEKDAY "M PEAK HOUR '1990 r I � VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES I . 'TRAF'FI'C LANE 1 ' LANE :'' , LANE 3 I I LANE 4 , 1 w»K Mii» w w»w1 «K w » w«u.... rx M•««.... I w..«.Mx «IA «I w««.».«..• w....x wY i « . NORTH 80 0 0 'I 6 300 V QI 35 266 0 0 0 1 •A Y Y li1 !'• 0 Y 0 EAST 95 0 0 {.i 2r40 0 0 150 60 0 0 0 ' SOUTH 1 00 0 ' 0 ' 0 4t 5; O 0 0 1001 0 ' 0 0 . '. , [ , WEST 305 0 ' 6 I 0' ',470H ', 0 O 0 140 0 0 0 ,, TRAFFIC , LEFT TURN PHASE I �'' 0 FROM CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDED'.. I N11 i W »..N " MY.»«»..w i.••.i..«..M...1..wM««w.«M"«»« «•i«««.j•N ., I . � .. it ,NORTH ,' : 95 80 r I . •• , _. E.ASii 80 95 Y I I I .[ SOUTH ' ' 80' 200 y WEST 2�,C1 305 t i:, 'CYCLE LENGTH b } SECONDS' . 1 0/c::, RA ! I O, ,. NORTH/SOUTH 0.50 • - L EAST/WEST L .1,5 4 , 1 PLANNING : 1 's , I • r, 'PHASE' "RA=« It MOVE .CRITICAL, PERCENT EFFECTIVE AVERAGE I ,r . F/r4OPI MENT I VOLUME CAPACITY, USED, GREEN TIME 'DELAY ; Kr 1.4.W«M«« W.KIi,•W 1/»xi•Kx 1.N Kx Kw iLl•NM YiM IMi««NM «•1«N»«•i«K«INi i•r.NIi AIM u:l NM W IIr«•i NK N«IIM 1«i N31 i/K w .1..» wx Hw Mw MN•W NM x«iN. Y N.i Ki1 i+ii/l.{Mr N« .I it r I, _I 1 NUR.T H/SC11»UTH LE,F'T 80 5 5 11'8 0 2 OUTH ALL 120 07 8 H 73 • � 1 4 J Sr � J 97 � f • 5 ' WEST I ' ALL ':: : 21 .5,3 : 4 55, EAST f. 141ESTI ALL 60 1 a 9 17 51 TOTALS, , 1130 02, 1 75 I . � C � r � � C ° I I l I I ' I I h I . I r ' ry • _.,v..- r r._ _ .a,n�i.........4H.._...,,.«_w«.H ..xA r... ....1.... .: -r. ., r . . � er.�......rmr.....11 r...t•R r r:-�I+--..—..r%w.�.....11.•....i•..u..nwn+.H.wly.I x.1TN 4:u..tiw.>.., �J • , CARL ,H.. .BUTTI<E", INC. 62 ' • CURRENT 71wR !'t" •I:0 Cx C: f�;riC�!} •`"� •11tGREENB,t�URG R�� RAMPS'µ1' 3/x 3/85 ' ' ,, _ W.B b ,i(4Y ! 1 7 1 lAi f '•rY � AVG. WEEKDAY AM F'EAK HOUR 1%'85 • •..,— [ • i VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES•• ' ,-. , TRAFFIC LANEi: LANE: 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 ' FROM L S R 'L S R • L L , S R ' 1 . w w I«M w"w.»1. •w M"".I•••••w{{..•N.•....•«. •w ww wi1'..•J.w.wr..w..t.wN iir«. w♦«I w•r w.•... »••w«w•e•.w•Nw•..1...• ......{•r•4 ....N«♦1 nw.r.1 rN..•• rl...• r r. NORTH 0 150 0 0 150 0 0 , 0 105 0 0 0 . ' ..'' , 1 300 0 0 SO11UTH 2:35 0 O• ' t j • 400 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WEST 0 9 0 0 , ci 9 0 0 0 0 0 •r 4^ I w N � " ` T � � « -L �•, TRAFFIC' 'LE Ft T TURL EP'HACtiE 1 . FROM CAPACITY 'VOLUME NEEDED? I rt ..+,»•1••«w««w•N.wl wl •••t •r"w« w1«•✓»WI {.»il •w•w•w.N•1 "»w•w1••••••«•W'M« , Sr\ v f ... SOUTH 375 235 : .11 ' f WEST: 312 0 4 I I I b w..•C YC:LE4 LENGTH v 75 5 E�COND5. 1 •0/C RATIO NORTH/SOUTH 0„5 I ; PLANNING , , PHASE; I TRAFFIC MOVE CRITICAL ' PERCENT � EFFECTIVE AVERAGE FROM MENT VOLUME H HrAPAC7TY, USED OREE•N TIME :DELAY •r r{N ru{w{w «y i..•l+w rw i•M NN•W Nw....N1. •.M N« 11•i.i N»N»IfN 1".N/1 w»«M� w 1W N«f•{{"N N111•N • f 1.: I : : :: LSOU°I H ALL 235 . , • ' 16 • 2 24 I I i M 2 4t H/ llN l" AN . Lai d 16 27 I L : , ',..,: ' ,',7!!;:,,: :' ' .:H 1 . I EAST/ WEST ACL.,:.. 300 2II, „ 1 29 `19, I f 1 . TOTALS 0 • 49.2 i . • . , LEVEL, or SERVICE�� �� I I rl •.-;,•'1? y ..r-�..,.,... .II ...«.._................�.....,.« ,,..._-.,. ..e..,. ., .,. ,, ,.,«.k I -.. .,,,_,. ,. .,_. � . .. -, .,,- � ......,.r.t�. u_«._,,....,....,. .,.wl.,.-..«�d.... n -«•..I:.,.,..,.IJ.uw..1»..ui.,-'...l..rWi a.,,,......_ ,...Iw " '1 C •Y ('11+51.« H. E UT 1 RI I t4C. ' �A w ... • 63 ' LLikRENY1 TkHFEIL G&WRF'M85 GREENS I RG RD 3/13/85 W.B. HWY 217 RAMP . • AVG. WEEKDAY DhAY PM PEAI< HOUR 1985 ' .' I., VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANE TFtir°tF:ir'IC. L LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE w.w.w«wj W«N.w w.r4 W w+r«wN««w4««NN NN L«r«Jw rr NN.x«W «««w.«« «N w w. w.rN..« .w w N«««, W rw wN«« .,+.wl««W W«N MN«N rl...W M«« t NO1F;TH 0 440 440' 0 0 0� 270 0 0 0 r EAST 175 0 0 0 Q 400 0 0 0 0 ' ' , SOUTH !0� 0 0� 1 0 J f om 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I U •y r 7 • I � LEFT TURN to 1"i L: ;L TRAFFIC L .F"Y.L. TURN PHASE 1 1 1 r ,1—'At.rITY VOLUME NEEDED'' 'i- .lr«wY N.«fY«.NII •NNw NW«1 «4w •"1.w1 w• 1_ . � 1;"i`' �` 's+`ir 175�S r 52t« 17 N i' ,.. B(:)1,1 11.1 .r'% 20:3 "• W E w'1" 12 r3 Li N , . CYCLE LENGTH r Y l a SECONDS 1 r f (3/C RATIO NORTH/SOUTH U • I • i A 4 L. .b ,, ' PHASE' Tl oarr" :c MOV E CRITICAlY.. FERCEN r EFFECTIVE AVERAGE • • f • FROM OM tl ►:ni VOLUME Ci�t 't:r r` USED OREE� TIME D N � n I • ««M«iw«N 1iM ..«WI 141 NN 1w 1Y1.4r iW 1 N lw iw NN 4«4r.W YN«rM 7Y«««♦.N W«..Iw YW wJ.NN ffN lilt NJ«N 1„1.w Nr 4«fW NN , NNNr NN III.«r Nr.W YYN YW N« NN Nr.«/N«i1i.IiN Wa ? ' ` 'Y 1 , , ' •—_,,,,, k 1 ALL 440 1 30.9 1. ./. EAS`r� WE�"I ALL 400 2C1 1 3 ' I.• , i aN !a J. I A'�.!uw i i i 1 , I e I Y 1045 A 92 C�Tr�l1«.�' I �1 LEVEL Chi' ,8Y 14�1f :C1 } i i I . 1 • o .V ,. ,lt .,....,..,...... ,........-.«,.,..-...,«tn,.,......,...,.+............. . ,., ... . ,. .. .f• - -,r , ,....,...a:.l..• w... ..a,. - ....,,......w.r.,....dl+..s..+.,... .n.:..Al-,..:...'.4,,,.:...n.....isJH:yba A.?BACKGROUND TRf) E:IC 64 f r it C E EENBIJIRG RD 8/18/85 Irk.L'.. HWY 217 RA('1PS 1 ., AVG. WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR 15:$.90 '' ' I VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES s ' • 1, TRAFFIC ' LANE LANE r} LANE 3 LANE 4 ' ° FROM L_ s i" L C C� L lr R _..w.a»N rw ww,_»r.. rµµf».r«..w»»rr.r,yr w w»_«w!^w« wr.N.w hµf•^^rN_u rr w^» rw." rr ...•,J. ...rw w,r.... HH»..r.f».."«»"w_f^w.•wy rw r.,"..w^^ C , NDf;1"H 0 1'65 0 465' 0 0 0 145 0 0 0 I SOUTH 260 0 0 0 440 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 WEST 0 0 6 0 0 0' 0 0 0 , 0 LEFT TURN C H E E; ' , j i T a F� 7 C LEFT i PHASE 1 FROM ' CAPAC fIf',TY VOLUME NEEDED? 4 , S t. ', r .0 ' CYCLE LENGTH: 100 SECONDS, . s/C RATIO ; . 1NO1°t'("Hd` SOUfi H 0 M, 7 ' PLANNING PHASE , TRAr IC MOVE CRITICAL j._ PERCENT' EFFECTIVE AVERAGE ' •, • PROM ' MEET ' VOLUME CAPACITY USED ' GREEN TIME DELAY 4 M µr f•r'IfwµM rr..µN».,^I«Nw wy Nr.rµr rr»«»r Mr N"HM 1fµ,H 1..r rµr»»µ Hr wM Mw w.l•w hr wf N"M4 r»tµ1 HN M•f Jr»»µif.r,Nh.••t •r•»r rw Ma MµWµr�rN n NJ I ALL ' I 2 NORTH/SOUTH ALL 180 i2'„,,, ,, 21 r . 1., . , , „. "a 5 y 0 1 1 1 1 "r1' ! n I I TOTALS: ' 1 , i» J "�LEVEL or SE RVICE A'''',' I • 1 1 at a 1 .. .,� y�+ I _ H. {p... 1, 1/41C.� , _ � ,.u• .,a ....u...:1 . , ,4 _. .. _„_,, CA L 1 1 O BIJ�•*T�1E.� . B ir.•,1,GG:)RlalUND TRAFFIC C&WR,iw' V , W„B. HWI ' 2:17 RAMPS , ' (,VG. WLL: \DM'r• PM F'Ef$I'; HOUR 19914 . [ : VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES TRAFFIC LANE 1 1 ' 1 La'ANCN 2 ' I LANE 3 LANE 4 i=i�;C�f� L «�«IL ENS L I� �.._L «.«R I Y Wa r{•a Yr"H r•« Mr.a••r•ri r«I rw «{ w« {"..1 r ««r•r,••1.1 aW rN r.r rr w•1 r ♦•W N«Yrw r r N4 N ..«w« wN«• ♦W r.w rrr Nrl•.«wH r•.1 rW w M, ik H NORTH 0 513 0 , 0 ,51 3 0 0 0 315 0 0 0I .k: EAST '180 ' 0 0 0 0 500 ', 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 ' SOUTH 210 ' 0 10 G 590 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' •• WEST 0 0 0I 1 0 1 0 0 0 ' 0 0• , L LE T TURN CI-Ili:CFti 1 ''I' T I•S• i F111'a E':'Nlrl tNYI rLEFT rra TORN'.•«N•1 NN .• w•1 i w«rN I W Frl w1 w;W F:: :r •.� 1 FROM l. tiE'(.1f31•TY OLL.lME: NEEDED'? 1 1 V wM •N r s'5".? w v al 1 . 1 1 SOUTH 65 2:10 'I' 1�,wi:.:,ar I 65 0 N I - C` :L,EN 'LENGTH _• 110 SECONDS . 5/C RA T I 0 M N Ol IR,'1"H/C:,'(31.1'1" 3Ni I•NI 11x1 H a,�,/,.'1'� I ' E:,AA,,FTI� WE,,a f 0 M 1 - : 1 1'; i ',' ' - ' , ' , ' ' , PLANNING ' 'h, ' ' '''' : ' , ' '' . , 1, : , ,, i , ' .• PHASE '1•'i r''AE,FIC ' MOVE C ly;ITICrtiL•.' PERCENT EP"Fiw1. T:CtryEi. rtIVEEP,tAl."3IE HN FII 1/0 M M�::N1' VOLUME CAiFt'4tHI.I.I1{4 f Y USED GRi 4`, :E w TI ME,1.' DELAY , . NN IIU iY/N NY rIN{«•«N r•N I/N Nra rNY,rN r•r1.W«N rr•i NN N.1 Ilir «a H«««Nr NN rrw..3.N4 NN«««w rN NN:W•rir 4N Y/••1/N{W«N..rl iW Ma 4r NN NN NN 4•r Y«.H•.r1r: 1 N•r!•YN 4N Nr Mi MN1 NM Y ' 1 SOUTH OU TH � ALL 2.M 0 '1"T a 7 ' 17 p 64 1 2 ' NOR H/, 1O1U:{t'141.1 ALL 513 36 a 0 43 ' 35 . ' L 3 EAST/ L f ALL 500 „ 42 36 j , 1 1, , I 1 �'. k . TOTALS 1223 15 K lL 102 I . LEVEL h1 C• VT;ti" D ' ' . I s • I ...�.n.r....:.a.....w...;+1�._:w r..--........�..,...mow..:..:,_:_.�r„:.���... .». ....._+.'x 4..,, _, µ� ��WW_ ��ww'' ++ ll f :..:_..r e..:...iw.a:..:.r Y•..f oYe4'.I..�rN r...YJr 4�YJ...w rru.x..1«JAS..�..w.. ..LW.:.r•.irw.r.r.w+�LL.w.I4.Y.+MW w.w..: .. • • i PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE I 66 &WRF' iI LGREENSLIFtG RD 3/13/85 W a t3 r H W Y 217 RAM P AVG. WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR 1990 r VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES ' • TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 . h Rom L S R L S R L S R L S R °......«r M .w. r w:..:.«. x 0 EAST 135 i 0 0 01 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 . ;r t i iTH 260f 0 0 0 450 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WEST 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I LEFT TURN CHECK • a w. TF4Ai°FI IG LEFT TURN PHASE FROM CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDED? . r I _ « rw w4.NN«.. w..r..N.r.r rN« rr wN r« rN rw«N_N rN bN« •Nw NN rN wY i ' , � ' EAST ,r 0 5 135 N I SOUTH 275 26I0 ' ,. W E S T X 3 0 0 .� f CYCLE LENGTH < 110 SECONDS '.. (3/C 1• P'',1*I”10 ; l0(�,'I'I•.1/S0U1"1.4 0,55 EAST/WEST 0'.�4c7' PLANNING PHASE TRAFFIC C t OVE CRITICAL PERCENT 1 EFFECTIVE AVERAGE , FROM 1 1E NN VOLUME CAPACITY USED E L C r EE N N I MN DELAY I , "w MJ«N M..W N.i««NN i.r wi.NN N..ii«rr.r Nr w« r w ....w"Nr..r wJ rN MN Vw r Iw:Nw NJ NM wN wri....M"wM wr�W{Yir i .«Y Nr«N♦irxr NN«r NN w .rr Nr N4 Nr).r NN NN NN • 1 SOUTH ALL 260 18,2 32 36 , i 2 NORTH/SOUTH ALL 190 13,3 23 43 W EAST/ r.5 • , ¢.. - I �, " iii�! � �' '' I �, �'I -., k •I I I I i � ���L 1.J 4.I):"�:I � ,T)7.8 dY 5J' LEVEL OF ,SERVICE: A I I I I I I j �• 9 o x : , P _ _ a..H, a_Is.-an,Jln ..«...,,».i»...Hr✓•w.w,.....».I.n�/xl«..I w»,hlA.l+..n..A,1i..,.,1.ti.w a.1...,..,..+.,■ »neW.1.4 s.r......,a...Vt ate•,■J.a._ „a�.■,i , ■1....■■ .■.e, . - CARL H UTT �E, C �C A 67 E Rli►.ai;rw' ,.: DUt)i4NI i�FHr•iSE I t lid,�r 4'`I r� GREENBfURtO R'CFL11 R yJ 1y«« 3/13/85 ' W M B q 115.1' 217 1",ACii 1•.J '. . A 'C>, WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR .1990 , . , 1 ' ?, TRAFFIC LANE: 1 LANE: ' LANE, 3 LANE 4 . LFROM L `,;,3 R l ': L S 'R L_ 8 R L S R w.".. .. �.�. .._~N_ ."Hw w.._N _ _H H Hw w_w NH w H_w.Nr _w _�_�___ w. H.._!!_ ._._ w. W w N..H. ._ NORTH 533 3 0 U 533 ` f 333 ' U . 5y , L ir.r'�u. 1 180 0 tr 0 U 500 0 0 V. 0 0 C• SOU'1 H '2 10 0 0 U i1 f0 0 U U 0 0 0 I 0 1'WEST 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 , 0 0 '0 0 ' w LEFT ' Tui,N l Hr. , , , TF4,;AF'FtC, LEFT TUR'i~ PHASE . FROM CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDE:D'? ,.,. w.. ""NH.., !. ww HH_.HW_.,".q1 w..H.�_H.u«HH H.._«HH�_ -� i.•1 NIY wl wn H..N ��, EAST ' 545 IRO N ' 1 SOUTH .5, 210 `fir ` . '-' WEST 6 i, ' ' , 0 F I' . • . f CYCLE LENGTH .1 110 SE:CCa1•1I; ;�, (3./C iN;r 'r ID �'l:a 1 1'I'� �::�i"i"I''F� 0.;60 ' . u•1A$wi•i'WES I' 0 n,i40 ,, 4 ,' I r I L A N NI:N C ' PHASE- L kArFTC � MOVE CRITICAL' ', � PERCENT ' ' EFFECTIVE ' AVERAGE ' PROM E , , VOLUME. CAPACITY "&FC,L N T I E : DELAY f Mw MN ww Hu 3•_ Nu••w".•Mw Ww!YY•ww Nw Nw N":«. ..N{.Y._ {1M HH!jM ur 1:••wH�•M wN .r.rr 11M Nu N••+••1 i••:N_ww.•H uM NH•••• ,.H!1u wW ww W w(.•)wu.iH.wi Nw�3lu NH Mu uM NN uL i A I • i 1 ' SOUTH '' , ALL 21. i 14,7 17 1. . ti NORTH/SOUTH 4H H �« L .Y. a r,� 44 . w , 3 EAST/ WEST i ALL 500 H35. 1 41 38 i r �I i d r 2 TOTALS t � p L • ' HJ u 4 iN N 1 • M � LLT VEL or, �EktryIC!ru , . w . it i• . • ... ., ,.,... _. .•.,.w ..,_.,_1....�..,_._.,._,uW.M........,.,... .,.._,,_. ,.... �'r�t r�.� M p. �u� �r��.;., ,-.c,.;,.N .,. . . ;..,.,.,a...,..._....�,,�. ; :�,...�.� :..�.:k._..,..:1.�,..�,:,� ,�.a::,. • . ' [ PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE 1I 68u&WRAP I , :, '. 1...,.GRF'E:1NBURO RD . 3/13.85 U.B. H � ` x 1 � PE •1' .Ater,. WEEKDAY • AM PEAR HOUR 199b 1 t ,. . ' ' VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES . TRAFFIC '. LANE' 1 LANE 2 ' LANE 3 LANE ' ' LANE 4 ' ' FROM L S . R . L S R L S 1 L S • E`i rr N__««»%_ %«« _«rN� r _ «. _ «_««_ .«r%•.ww��w«r.«..___.,_.1_ .r_ ___�N�..N«W .w.�... • NuE"<TH 0 170 0 . 01 170 0 0 0 115 ' 0 0 0 EAST 135 0 0, 0 0 3" ,; 1, • 0 0 0 0 0 0 'S'SOUTH • 2 0 • 0 0i r 1 460 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ., , • ' WEST 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEE%T TURN CHECK f,' TRAFFIC. LEFT " URN PHAE. 4 wi FROM ii••r MOIr M CrM1 MAIr=r�rl«rCN C 1N.«•••11«••I«•«V OE Jel.M«/i NE ED? l', .• , V« � 1 • SOUTH 258 260 1 WLS}% 2h 2 • N : • CYC:LE LENGTH Y 110 'SECONDS . lwh/C , RA•1 I'C 1 ti NORTH/SOUTH ri N`5,tf 1 . 1 ' • ' ' . , 1 '': i ' ' ' ' . . .. , , . PHASE TRAFFIC '. MOVE '.. CRITICAL PERCENT i AVERAGE E:�ROm MEET 1 VOLUME; t�A[:iAOITY USED GREEN TIME DELAY °• ' �..., ««_41»«L'•M«« rrw_M.•N••%a114 Nu N.a 11%YIN i•.1 LLAI .••a%rMa N.1 r V«w w•r««ir%w 'a•••1••.N+•rIN.•«N%r••a MM w_li•i i•%•1N•w _..N_•rii««wr NM/ii•i1M N•1 Nr _W w_«M«r N.r ir.r • ' 1 1 SOU�HIE 1 F'IL_L. 260 15 r 2 1 31 3) I 2 NlOE,TH/sOX11~H ALL 290 14 a 0 4 42 • 3 EAST/ WEST ' ALi ' 3t? i 2 , ' ' ' 47 26 , f t TOTALS O +td 1 '59'..9 102 'LEVEL CJE�" 1 x �;CE i u 1 tyl . 5 .i a P , 69 PROGRE DOWNS PHASE II .. f 1 .L3r,EFY IB(rlF b RD 3/13/85 •', '' W.B+. HWY 217 P iti MPS • ',. • ,AV G. WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1,990 ' VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES` i' TRAFFIC LANE 1 , ' LANE 2 • LANE 3 • LANE 4 ,• ,'' : FROM i h; L I P L L 0 � ., 1 •" t()R.* I 0 ' 545 0 0 545 0 ' 0 1 0 335 0 • 0 ' 0 EAST 180 'v+ Si V 5• 4 0 0 5t1uTH 210 '0 0 0 595 ' , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . WEST 0 ',:•O 0 • 0 0 0 ' ' 0 0. . 1 0 0 0 0 , [ : ,W LEFT , TURN CHECK ..• TR;A FF1IC LEFT TURN PHASE FROM cAI:'A( :[TY i VOLUME: NEEDED? , , ' • ;n� EAST . , 545 ' ' 180 ' , ' 1 ., SOUTH 65 ' 210 , , Y WEST ' 65 0 �' •r .CYiCLE LENGTH . , ::i 1 1p `o 5.;E:C,ONDti:� I i 'a t (j (r �iW ��(1{r' 1 t1 f}i //♦ l� ~ ' t4 J C ,I�A i l I C ♦ N 5 W R T H f r SOU !N H 0 1'�'1.,'-) : '• � E::t)L?,T/WE ST: ' � w 4 F} W i 'CRITICAL PHASE, TRAFFIC' ' MOVE , i PERCENT EFFECTIVE' A V E A f E FROM ' I MENT VOLUME CAPACITY USED 'GREEN TIME DELAY , . , MN wY WY INI r.. rW Mw MW NM W i W W rJ IW w+.iw YW MY+I•X 1:W. ' .�IIY w..Nr MN N.:.+.J'i«. NY.IN{IN MN w.:wN wr rN NN wY Mw NI•ii.. {�..M rw IW W..rM nr wr Wii W1a 3.Y irI Wr Nr N«NW H« , I SOUTH : ' ALL ' 210 J14 i� ' '1l' 64 2 NOR rH-1/$OIJTH ALL 545 38,2 ' • 44 1 • o«+ . ' EAST/ WEST', ALL 510 85 , W 41 • TOTALS ' LEVEL Or SERVICE ' , D ,.a•.,. ..., ...i.. w.. -..,, ...-1•r,y, .,t'1'Y 1Y'tit'1 1'I Y'1.7..1... ,I_.5 q... ..,.. xw...m.. zY _.. .A.lt.: tYMtiN.aMa..ui'u.. 70 t 1:.PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE III G&WRAMII"1 ,GREEENBURG RD 3/13/85 . . W a,I?t. HWY 217 RAMPS . ,, AVG. WEEKDAY All PEAK HOUR ' 1990 VOLUME' ALLOCATION' TO LANES' ' • TRr-`AF F•IC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 FROM R O M L 8 ' IM; L S P Iw G ' R Ir, 8 I" •o'w1 rM w•rN»r••,...rr .w�rw•w nw....wN wN ww w. r rr ww w.rr w•W w.w.•r r•r wM w..w. rr w.,wr w..w rw rN rw w••.......rN rw wn rN Nr wi nw w•n,.wNl, - NORTH 0 170 0 0 170 : ' 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 H . EAST T 135 0 0 � 0 0, 405 ' ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ,. SOUTH 260 0 0 0 ' 460 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 WLtiaT ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 H 0 ' 0 0 0 ,. '-, ' :: ' LEFT T U R N CHECK r TRAFFIC . LEFT TURN PHASC' l • Y. , FROM CAPACITY VOLUME ' ',NEEDED'? . � w,w.w•i wN rN,Nw NN rN NM rw•.r NN r..w11 Nw wN wi «w1 4M r t w wi ww nr nn rr rN rN ww' � � I• I EAST 629 435, • N , WEST 22`t • 0 N . ,,,„ . CYCLE LENGTH : 110 SECOND I, • --0/C • RA1 IC :. NORTH/SOUTH 0.',..58 , II » I'.!I• A n n T n a C 7 : : MOVE CRITICAL.:, H 'PERCENT' : :. EFFECTIVE a V w r w C'PROM ME:,NIT VOLUME:; CAPACITY, USEDH GREEN TIME DELAY , I.N.l.i NN Nn r NN bb,w Nit NN.«,.N.iN Nr N.1.•N -wN'....N« nr b N w•.iN w N. ..•wn b..rN NN MN Nr tir w" rN w lir w.l iiN Mw bN Y.w NN 4:1 wr* ••ii bN rN i•r•,,••i,w rN { , I SOLIT i I ALL 260 18 d.» 71 87 I 2 NOTH SOU H ALL. 200 14 M,0 24 42 • W E1"p1ti iyr' J E',$'4,(' FL«L, 40$ w SN + 48 N .4,t./ , 'I:` , II I t' ' I TOTALS' 6$ 60.6 10 H 'LEVEL OF SERVICE , ' '! , 1 . . ; 1 h l l rt �"'1.1 s" 0 ' , i . , ..:.t.w..+-ref........_ ,m.....na... w..w.. ..,.e.:..-, '... J .. I -- ... .nN. • .v. la"p�r t. t"i'n C lr t t"rat '•, � . � 71 .. PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE III ' G 8,WErg:PMI I I i W.1:.:',.1 ti.�',r HW.� 2.j / RAMPS {y • -.. AVG. WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1990�`0 , ' VOLUME. ALLOCATION. TO LANE TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE ' 2 I LANE 3 LANE 4 FROM L S • R ' ' ' L R L S I�` L S R • . ✓..✓✓L«r....,,..:.r.1 ...r.....r..v«_.✓..✓..✓..✓...r.r«✓.. , r.. W.rr r..✓.._..✓r✓+ .....N..,..✓., .M......W✓ w.f...r.._..✓ ✓.._.. _,w.r........✓✓w._......✓.✓✓ ✓« - • NORTH 0 548 0 0 548 • 0 0 0 335 0 0 0 . •. H : EAST 180 0 0 0 ' 0 . 510 ' 0 0 : 0 0 , 0 0 ,a SO1...I T 210 0 0 0 593 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WEST 0 � 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 : 0 0 0 0 LEFT TURN CHECK I • ' TR'AF'E IC LEFT TURN PHASE FROM CF" PACXTY ' VOLUME NEEDED; ✓N✓..'W.Nn.MM...1 ✓..✓..rJ.W5✓..rr Wt r✓✓✓.n. r✓W..........5.rN .«L«_..w«W.... EAST 545 • • ;150 N, ' 210 SOUTH 65' • , 210 I j I •. L WES T 65 ' , 0 N ' . ' ' , : •: • • ' yC. ., EM. ..,E LENGTH 1.10 SECONDS S ' , ' • 0/C NATIO + NORTH/SOUTH a 6 ,w EAST/WEST H 0.40 PLANNING NO , ' ' nil 91e( "A... PHASE 51 RAE,F II.I , MOVE 1 cR.MTIk.IALM 'PERCENT E1 FEC`rIVEM AVERAGE FROM MELiT VOLUME CAr'AC::IT°f USED GREEN l'IME DELAY ' ..✓J ✓i.r_M lw..r iW L.r.i.t Nil i..1,.._✓_.i✓...5 iHl rr MN rr Mr HN.Mw rr N✓w fd..lM. .W 5.N//r NN Ml.✓.l rii Mil!.✓...1 Nr.r.M✓ Mi.N.•1i...r l.«NM«.1 W,r 1...iW ..N w'i.5.Nn iN5 NL✓N SOUTH ALL 21 L f' 7 , . . L 2 ' NaOR TH/SOUIR 1 ALL 545 :,i� .5� 44 36 i ' ' 3 EAST/ WEST ALL 510 V5.'8 41 8 n . 1 ✓ ALS ,�26 89.0 „ ,. �. , LEVEL ' or SERVICE E ,... . ' . . ...•.,.,N• ..,.,,.,.,.....<,,,,.,..._.,<...4......,..._.............,.,....-a,:..,,.,.,...a,.._:..4i.aim.+''�....,..H.fl.+::,c..,...,,,.a:xw.i:w:rw;i ,, m.... G_ CURRENT TRAFFIC 7 G&ERAMS5 lJl"1G.G IA4UR,f ROAD ' 3/1.3/351 , , E a 2 a RAMPS HWY 217 ' ,AVG. WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR 198 • VOLUME f'�LL C:f'tl":CC i� TO .LANES � ' TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE ' 3 LANE, _7 FROM L S ' R ' L S ,R L S . R 1... S R w.r» If«rr� Iw1 M««M r«frr w••...«»wf»»rN NN ir• ««rLM r.r»w1.wn. w rr rr r.l r»r rr M.rr w1 w 7 U.»fr. r•• rr�•N+ w«•.H w rr««�+1r . NORTH 80 ' C`1 0 65 ' 0 . 0 O ' 2.80 ' 0 0 0. 0 M. : ' .„. [. EAST 0 0 0 .' 0 0 0 0 -O 0 0 0 0 BOOTH 0 t25 0 0 05 0 0 0 a 0 0 WEST 210 O 0 G� '.. '. 0'' '' '1� 3' 0 ' O ' '0 0i 0 0 , ; , (.,, ) , ,, , . , , -TRAF F•IC LEFT T TURN PHASE .• FROM CAPACITY., w. VOLUME' i» 1 . • NORTH 0 .18 300 . Y. —„., .. 1 . - E f a,S T 2�r 0 I • {+�� , 1.' ��I:rST 444 210 ' f`I a ' CYCLE LENGTH b 75 SECOND` , ., `I - .1.(3 r C RATIO Y NO l H/SOUIH O'k'u71 , /.,. . .. . . „ ., . „ , . , ,PLANNING ' 1 F f r I I�"♦�•1 « i TRAFFIC 11 .41 ' AVERAGE:CRITICAL N w R IwN7 EFFECTIVE . FROM ' ' MENT ' VOLUME CAPACITY USED GREEN TIME DELAY b NN••«Yi«NN Iy1. .Y.Y•L..N w1:NN HN•W♦«f Yf•1«N NN, • Iw HN rN rN Nr r r M Irl•M r M«NN{w««NN 1Nf rr MM MN u i«�:«I LU NN NN{r..r rr lr.NN Mr•r. rN WN Nr w.flr 11H'•« ! M1' NOETH ALNL S0 5.6 ... 2 ' NORTH/SOUTH ALL 425 ' 29.18 40 12 ' L. £A WEST AL11» X10 i•4 w NI rl� ' 4 • a i { r l N � N.i+ I t» cr 1"t1"r9L:f� ���, tetra :! �.,. LEVEL{ CAF SERVICE A ''' ,i '' : ' ' . . ' L , , , l o • f . ' • -,..,,......,,...»..c-._....,..,...,,.e..,.,.., t.,.....,,...r._..a., _.,.» ..,-.. ., -. ,- - ..-,- , .. . . ,,.,., ...,.,.. ..F...r_.r..•.,.k. ...-....t_ A.-,.,_..,..,.._..ti,..,.w.....,..1..,..:i•i....r;,y...CS.',...rw,.:...,.:,s,..aw.,.....,..... CARL H. BUT KE, INC. 73 CURRENT TRAFFIC f IC G&FRFtMSE1 GF+;E'ENF:,URG ROAD ' 3/13/ a ' • ' Ent 3 I RAMPS HW Y 21;% AVG. WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1985 . VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 3 LANE 4 I"_I",Ca M L R L S I L w RI 1 L S R • Nw ww n ..« «« ww..Nw_. N ww« ww ww«N«w.» n n.n «« nN«n w nw w wN ».ww««nN w.. «N.. .w«n«« _.. w.•.«,w«ww.w».,n, .;_ nn • • • NORTH 278 '227 0 0 0 550 0 0 0 0 • EAST 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOUTH . 46 0 0 0 :12 ,r 0 0 0 0 0 1,t,„,,,.; WhE (1 310 0 0 0 � 0 301 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEFT TURN 6HL►w,K s TRAFFIC 'LEFT TURN ' PHASE. r-l,0M Cts AC C ( r VOLUME NEEDE : I • w.Y..w..N..NN«.i n.. r.wN w•M.1n .wi nN o,Mw wi•w....ru w:• .. n..ww«••NY•• rNr r 1 f I1 w..Ir 1 1. ' 4 0 N . rf. ' W E�S '1` '44 4 610, N 'LENGTH w { SECONDS I I • . 0/Ci 11,A 1n:C o , wo1:'1"H '.:,I::1U 1H 0 e '1 ',. «1 1 I ' 1 , F F N.L Cti I l • n PHASE TRAFFIC MOVE CRITICAL PERCENT FFFECTIV. AVERAGE FROM , ' ' IILNT VOLUME H CAPACITY USED TIME DELAY . Jn rjI wN wN w w ww{.w Nr li..NM Nn nb N«i.N i.•.w•Y4 N« .p.•Mu w ii..NN Y+u MU i.w .1r•+N HN h«wl•N+NNE i.w.iN YM 1rYw.•+MY wr«..iNi Mn LL..IiN ww1 Yw i...wn YN W ilM i.«NN...•,MN L'' ''' 1 NOF4TH ALL 278 19.5 18 33 tom; x r NORTH/SOU H ALL ' 465 30 ii i EAST/ WEST ALL , 21 I a i. TOTALS 10C:53 7'3.9 68 1 LEVEL or SERVICE C ' . ' l 4 CARL H. B°UTTKEr INC. 74 7&I.'-_-1,.:►1(11 kT)tt?°ACL i3ROU r (+ TRAFFI C ',. 1.7REENP.UI Ca ROAD ' 3/1.3,.,',C.:,:5 1,., E.B. RAMPS I..IWY 217 LJIJLunE ALLOCATION TO LANES , TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE I_. S R L S R L S R L S I",�.. «~.w r..r w. w»r»r» , "«»..rr r.. »_J_r .:.1»r»r »» » J..rN»««»»».»._««..•..,»»_«_..._.» ' ' _»_w NN rN r....rr .•w+w..««.JJ ww r»w»..•.r» r» » rr w+.r....« » M NORTH 88 0 0 72 0 0 0 305 0 0 0 0• 0• EAST 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti3 f:1I1•`I•� 0 470 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 �} ill S T 230 0 0 0 0 215 0 0 0 0 0 0 I LEFT TURN CHECK , ' ', ,." TRAFFIC LEFT TURN PHASE ' , .. µ(yA} FROM CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDED? " (f'} ..»wr wl.Mw H»JN,wJ r»w»w1 w. w"r«w w. i r. ..1 »u..ww w w..".•�....Jr»+i�N w. � � � �, , • t N O i";`r•i`H 2'5 I r I: :N�:N° 4J'8 y , ` EAST 229 1 1 0 — WEST 444 230 N ` CYCLE LENGTH ; 75 SECONDS . . , 0/C RATIO ; NORTH/SOUTH 0.7 EASTr' WE S 1' i 0.29 . ... LANN I�N PHASE TRAFFIC MO, VEr ' C R''I1 XCµAL PERCENT EFFECTIVE AVERAGE FROM MENT VOLUME CAPACITY USED GREEN TIME DELAY •• 4..J Y«J Jw i.N.iJ Mw r...rr r «iN"«Nw MJ Iw»»N»w w4 w4 V«Y»w wJ N»...NJ•N.Mr»r/Nr Mw.r»..NY.r rr ii.y iww:W N.1 w•a»N NN»w»J»w i»'11J 1 W wN i.M NJ .J Nw Nw NN:+..Mw Nr ,. • it 1 NORTH ALL, 88 6,2 39 2 NORTH/SOUTH ALL 1 470 33.0 40 13 1 3 EAST/ WEST ALL 230 16. 1 20 26 I • TOTALS 780 ,.�r 5 h 3 68 LEVEL O 5ER VJ:C, 1 I 1 i , • N . CARL H. BUTTKE.y INC. .r . 75 ,,wBitiCKI3ROUND TRAFFIC G&ERPMV L3REENBURG ROAD 3/13/85 1 :E;',13. RAMPS HWY 217 HOUR ' AYG a WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1990 , VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES • a ' Tt AF FIC LANE 1. LANE 2 LANE LAN FROM L ; S R L 8 R ' L S R L S R - ...y Yr r.l w.rM W wi w.M rw wr»w ww nr wr rr w w.w..r rY w/w. Mr ww.M rr W W rw rw rw wy rw UM,w..w.wr wr wr wr rN M w.wr w w.rw w.w.ww.... 11 r i i r.y'r My rr'rN ryt r.l rY , NORTH 316 0 0 ' 259 0 0 0 630 0 0 0 0 ' EAST : 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOUTH 480 0 0 130 0 0 0 0 0 WEST % HBO 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 ' . LL " TURN CHECK a , TRAFFIC L E F r rU� � PHASE' ' , EROI1 CAPACITY VOLUME NEEDED? , . iNORTH 332 13:16 r w EAST 118 0 N' ' ' ' , _ WEST 43 i 320 ' Lj ' :1-''CYCLE LENGTH ; 80 SECONDS . 0/C RATIOS ,Y NOkTH�,SOUTH 0 n 71 : ' I 1 . EAST WEST ).2 PLANNING PHASE TRAFFIC 'h1OVE CRITICAL PERCENT E FECTIVE AVERAGE FROM ENS 'VOLUME ME CAPACITY USED GREEN TIME DELAY «r wM wr rrY Nn y.Y w w ur wN wN u4 Y..H..iyM w w•M.w.. ..r Yal.M.M wr wr wYµY w...Y..µY w.MµN Jy,y MY Y.r♦.N uY....rY N.. 4..i..y.'µ:...y1 irr rr w.+w:u Yr..Y µY wr'rr'yw ww!N..w. . .' 1 NORTH ALL 316 ry 20 i2 A a�« 20 4 7 0 •' 2 NORTH/SOUTH ALL 4x50 ,; 3 d"7 31 26 ; 3 ' EAS.1 J' WEST ALL 020, 22 r 5 21 3.4 I • 1 . TOTALS 1116 18.4 72 LEVEL or SERVICE C i , .. .....i�__l.i..ex.�,n....A...�.........i,.-.r..J...»i•.w....,.n...r..4—.I.w...wi.Ji.n..•...«w.-K..+Y•.r-.u.Ul-...«w..l.. �CARL H. f3tJ T TKE., INC. { 76 '. PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE aE I G ALE",A( GREENBURG ROAD 3/13/85 • E .B. RAMPS HWY 217 AVG. WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR 1990 . VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES I. TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 '` ` • ( ME. E_NRCJE'i L. S k L S R I_ S R L k • NN r4..r._uN_.._.. ..r.«.._»..r NN.rN rw,...NN N.1.... ._ ..r r«rN NN NN r,.".:I.w_.. NN N•1..,_.. r..«« "..rN rN"..»"....r:1«.. r.l M.rN.M NN_..Mr"..r..r_I.r r.l•w»N ' � • NORTH 91 0 0 . 74 0 0 0 305 0 0 0 tip C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , SOUTH 0 480 0 0 0 225 C) 0 0 WEST 2:74,0 0 0 0 0 215 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 • ` LEFT TURN CHECK C�� ry n TRAFFIC LEFT TURN PHASE: FROM CAPACITY VtOLI..'.11E NEEDED? ,1 ++• N.1 r,1 r.._r NN ..rN rN 1.. nN rl•r. .1 r_r•1 NN N_rN M..H N_ r.l rN i•o..W:4i NORTH rN 91 EAST . WEST 444 2 0 N ,J„ C "� Cl.E N N ; 75 SECONDS i (3 C RATIO T NORTH/SOUTH 0.71 , EAST/WEST' 0.29 PLANNING w PHASE TRAFFIC MOVE CRITICAL PERCENT EFFECTIVE AVERAGE FROM MENT VOLUME CAPACITY u S ED GREEN TIME DELAY ; • _i« 44•i_,IL YIN NN NN MN i1N NN NN:IN 4r NN:w N_.." iii.,N4 iN:(M it NN NU rN i,r NNW 4M 44 NN NN awl uw1 4r rN I.il Iiil i.r/+.,114 i... rN M{,i.,.Nr4 N"IiN Ni,ii..1 iN.Iw iw I,J MN 4•M,4r Nr 44 4 r 1 NORTH ALL 91 6.4 8 40 ; 2 NORTH/SOUTH ALL 480 3 a 7 40 13 ti EAw;"C,/ WEST ALL 230 18„ JI 19 ' i_r J TOTALS 80 1 56.2 W f 1 LEVEL or SERVICE , j a I CARL H. EUTTKE, INC. PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE I ', 6&ERPM�I CREENI3URG ROAD /13/ ' E.I.��. RAMPS HWY 217 HOUR' �I VOLUME ALLOCATION' TO LANES . ,, TRAFFIC, . L A N E 1 , :LANE. 2 � FROM L '. S R H L S R L ' S R L S R«. w EAST 0 0 0 0 0 '' 0 '0. ' 0 0 0 0 0 SOUTH 0 480 • 0-• ' 0 � 0 130 ' 0 ' f ' 0i ,., WEST 320 0 0 ' 0;� f , . 320 0 0 �'� 0 0 '03 ' � ' LEI' T TURN CHECK L 'TRAFFIC NORTH� ti „« Y 0 N ,� I.wST 42 6, 320 N CYCLE' LENGT H '8 0' SECONDS' ' ;, (3/C lf.ATIO r ireORTHr`sOU`1"H " 0-7.2 „ 1 EAST/WEST ° 02.8 , : '' `Lrf . PHASE ' Mi A w r. '' 1 L l' i '. PERCENT . ' C T:["M 1«. A V E F A J ' , FROM ' MENT .—.VOLUME. CAF'AC TY USED : GREEN TIME ' DELAY ':', l '.' '.««N_4«.i:l IW M' • w NN.W.«..r i.N«..MM 4«IW V•4 M.i ««♦L.1..«rr .•M Yi., JW iW 11+{4._1:M.lM iM Y Mii«M M:.«.f WY ✓4_r✓«Iw✓«M«_J iW W.w :.71 M«4«.1..ii«rw w.l 1. . NC"iP f hi ALL 33_.� . 23,, 1 �36 2 NO TH/8oUTH ALL 4 80f 33, 30 25 1 ' .,,., i, EAST/ WEST ' ALL . "�0 22 2 . 37.• TOTALS -1,135, 7 • . . l ,, '; '„..: ,:, - . -:,.,LEVEL tri SERVICE ., ,...:',... ,.:' 8 , . ,,...,' ,, , ,, . .. ' ' , 9 ''): . ,, ,'' .' '' '' ' ' -'. ' ' ' . ' . . . , n _H �, . CARL H. BUTTKE, INC,. 78 . 1 PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE I L�i":`�t'�.0 GR ENBUP G ROAD 3/13/85 E .i?,. RAMPS H W''i` 2 . , . ': 'AtVG,, WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR 1990 VOLUME ALLOCAT ION TG LANEG TRAFFIC LANE 1 LANE LANE 3 LANE 4 . FROM, Lr r�; L :a i"�; L G R L S+..r rr w.wl+..w. w4 Hw ww ww w4 W,.Jr HH wl ww 4.Y rr rH YN;W I •w w • H r .. wt W wY w««....w..rl r 4•ww:4YY .wwY r.w rr wY rwH r♦Y.. 4 . 1::: Ntwok 1 H 91 0 0 74 0 0 0 8110 0 0 0 0 EAST 0 0 ':0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G SOUTH 0 490 i 0 0 ' 0 225 0 0 0 0 0 c i. ■ WEST 230 H, 0 0 ;;),..1, o H . o Cry ( U H . - LEFT:: TORN CHECK TRAFFIC LEFT T UR'N.' PHASE I,.-' r POM "AF AµiTY VOLJME NEEDED' ' - : � Tr,u, . NORTH 2 5 9 ''t` NORTH ew f t a.� - , EAST.;N, . 1 _ :.Awl1 2f : 0 N . WEST 432 : 230 N ;, ,:F CYCLE LENGTH " r73 SECONDS • 0.fC RATIO NORTH/SOUTH ' 0 a r ' `E::AS T/lti::S(` 0 2 r 'LrAii,!N:I:NG k '• ' I PHASE TRAFFIC F$C MOVE CRITICAL I LI:CLN` . Y, ` v t V M,k 1 ' FROM MEN"r VOLUME CAPACITY Y USED 'GREEN TIME DELAY F . wr YwH liH wW 4r f. : 1. ' :NORTH ' AiLi..Y , 91 l' 6, 8 40 i 2 NORTH/SOUTH ALL }r 0 '34 a,4 41 12 1 .., sir , a r; �1N,' � ��t / i �� �, i' e w'. 7a NI r: 1. Ci r'--1,✓ r r t r' 8,11- TOTALS, , 1 i i , i I I ^ . 1 f rr _.. .... ..,s-,., ,..,w sl... ... .,-ti.F,...,... ., 4•_ .i,i ... 3..ii s...,_.i , , - .. i i,., „. . i .. , ... .,.,..._ .v, x.a.,.,,t sr.«H....r.,..wn.n...l,.,a,,.m.4%i.,:1 w..ai.w,r.ihrii...a'w....I_..y,.............14.4.,.,-.,... a.. . CARL H. 8UTTKE, INC. ' C :RF 1 i• C PROGRESS' DOWNS PHASE. I I I 3 f 1 r,,OREENBURG ROAD _ E.B. RAMPS HW I 21 7 Y 1, ' VOLUME ALLOCAT ALLOCATION CN .TO LANES 1 ' .T �F IC LiNL LANE 2 LANC LANE 4 T •FROM L S R L S R L S R L R ' • ,' NORTH. 344 0 0 " 281 0 ' 0 '0 645 0 0 0 0 • EAST 1 , 0 0_5 SOUTH ' .''0 485 0I' 0 0 1 h0 0 ' 0, ' 0 0 0 ' 0 . '..::': . ., wES'('' . . 320.' ' 0 0 ' 0 0 3 '0 ' 0 0 O t 0 LEFT' TURN TRAFFIC: ' L..EFN1 TURN ' PHASE i,• FROM ' CAPACITY, : VOLUME �EEDED''i` (I •..NN ...» »w w ..» N» » »NN» r,rN tH «NN » »»_NN NH I . ' ' NORTH ' ' 339 34,: Y ' ' . ' LAST , 10cs ' 0 N ' r . 1 , ■ P 1,.: CYCLF LENGTH k 80 SECONDS.' . ,• ' . '. i. Cl/Q. Rt T fit NOR TI-1/SOUTH'' a f1 , l +5 4 .r : . LA NxNO 1 r•� � HS(rH TRAFFIC MOVE ",CRITICAL,..' PERCENT E -F EC 1 IViu VE R t a FROM iEN VOLUME 'CAPACITY 'USED. GREEN TIM DELAY H .w,w»N iw iM. N»»M.«t iN.e1N riot rr UN N4.NI HN M4 W ee»M» lr.»»leN NH ew:i.l Nr N« ....NM♦{N U»NM MH♦i«'NH Mli NN UM NU UN iN.l NN.ice:...e.w.....»ew MM..N 1.»NY NN/ti iiM W.wH i 1. NORTH, ALL 1 '344 2' a ail 22 34 2' NORTH/SOIJTI' AL; '} 0 is 2 4.:1, .1N 0« C if�r U�iS : ' ALL x 11 h12 t;,'' ",,O .: » -,. + r . i L ,r A..1! JI.{J1M It''Y,� A. .4. ' 4 , . 1 TOTALS i iX4'9 80,6 72 .m LEVE»11 O SERVICE • ' ' 0 ' ' , . i, : ,, 1 , .. , . .. . • . �, , Y h • _..,." ...,..n,..•..,•_.'..—_.._•....'_..,........ '...,._..,........ .,. , . •_ t,;A h'L H'n �t u1 1 Fc E.Y ').�4..c r.. � ......,., .1......... _—..0...u...r.._v.'.1"...w,_,LN.„.....,,u-...-4..u''{.._'''',-,.—..,, R o � „ • • PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE III %&wki Ci I , , . . GRi»♦w•1N D`1RO ROAD 3/13/85 • E.B. M En RAMPS HWY 217 kYs,W 34 WEEKDAY A M PEAK Frt i s U ;1 1990 , 1 . p. I i , : ,, , ' VOLUME •LLLOC AT ION TO LANES ' TRAFFIC LANE ;I.' LAidE 2 LANE '3' LANE 4 FROM IM;�J lit L 8 R L R L r R i L 0 R ,., Nrl rr•r•r Nw♦♦r♦ rw.Ir Nrl• r,Ir♦rr w•wr rr r♦1 NH w•1»H rw»w rr Nrr rw w+wr r wl♦r•♦Nr w.Nr w♦ «.NN..»If♦•r•r♦..+.•...rw.w w/Jw rvJ NN wr ..r..... w/♦•♦f Nr rw rM»N.Nr....NN ... ( NORTH 91 0 0 ,4 0 0 0 310 0 0 0 0 • - EAST ' 0 0 ' 0 0 0 : 0 0 0 0 0 0t . SSOIJTI•H 0 490 0 I 0 0 22 3 O 0 0 0 0 0 1 - _ . WEST 230 0 0 ' 0 ; I 0 .2.J15 ' ' 0 0 ' 0 ' ' 0 0 0 .:— , ..: 11r ' I . t_ , LEFT TURN CHEC"•1.f, , N 14 S T If4.1it J! �:Cr L.'�f t I.If ♦I.1 F,i E F rr�,..�' E I I i 1 I ,FROM CAPACITY' VOLUME N1:wF„i rD+' rll rM MN rr r i/ur rr rM Nu wJf rN 1•N 1♦♦♦NN♦♦•♦ N rN rN I,N w1 r♦1 •♦ r•♦ ♦wr NW r.µ»H • 1 I NC11z,T ! 24t5 J , 91 f Y ,, Eli 1 2. 121. N _ , i', : „ WEST 1 N X 1 2 M i •Cr'1 Clf L E` L.E:,N(3"11.,1: ; 3t 8 E�C:0 t4,I)F,.r �` (3,r'C Rr'ti1":c(, Y 1,1("..11,:;'1”H/8()I.:i'rid ' ii I , ' E,fp t ♦11/leWlI::N 18" ' 0„28 ' ' ' i i ' . I • w N♦f ♦r M rr•r I r.t. r ' f { 1 1 PLANNING I ,•PHASE; TRAFFIC ' , MOVE ' CRITICAL ' m PERCENT . " : C , r � �L N FROM 'MEN" ' VOLUME' CAPACITY USED 1 OREEN TIME DELAY , NN IJN NN r 1 NN • NN N4 J•!•NN Nr IIN♦w NN iNl wN Nr J•rf JW w ♦♦1 MN rw INi Nw NN iG W Wi 11w r4M N.li Nr'NN rN MM • 1 NC/NTH' ' ALL 91i ' 6 4 8 �t �2, NORTI"I•r O1J,TINI ALL 490 34.,4 41 12 ' '", EAST/ WEST ALL ' 2 16 h 1 - 19 28 1 '; ', i ..1 1'O1 ALS 811 56 '0.V 68 • LEVEL CIF` SC RVIC E 11H H, s, ,, • I I } , I I CARL H. BUT KE, INC ,,,, PROGRESS DOWNS PHASE III I i`1 �1 GRE ENBURG ROAD .3/13/85 „ E,B..I,.. R'AMh'S HWY 217 ', • AVG M WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 1990 , .. i . TRAFFIC . 'LANE 1 LANE 2 ' LANE 3 LANE 4 . FROM L $ R ' L 8 'R L .' S R L 8 R 'O _••- ,.-rw•w ..y M».... w �•__ »N Iw_»__••«•.H M•w..w• _.. _•.•w _....w _w w•r._--•w wy _w r•Y wnr N»!w �• _...r•w•_H ... OT 1 ,. NORTH Z46 0 0 204 0 0 0 645 0 0 0 0 1 • EAST 0 0 '0 0 0 0 ' 0H 0 0 '0 0 0 OU't'H 0 485 ' ' 0 0 0 130 ' 0 ' ' 0 ' ' 0 0 0 • WEST ;a2'0 0 0 0 0 '320 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 .� LEFT TU R N I CHECK 1' '' • 1' y 1 ' - TRAFF:r,C f. NN••..N..YN»N uNN fr " r " UR ; PHASE t .. '.A -ROM .. CAPACITY VOLUME N EDED7- ' ' � � � M ! yw.Y»i•1•w.l_N lii{1_.N.•W rw wµN•1 »r rN_..w..M N.1 r_ NORTH 339' 346 Y I ' 'p... rrY�Ny l'(l I j• r - E A+: { 1 0 6' �' t+� i.. u WEST' 426 32 1 ' N p CYCLE LENGTH U0 SECON)S , 1 r 0,/0 RATIO ' r NORTHI/tiOUTH•1 0.721 ' EAST/WEST " 0u2 3 I I I ',PLANNING. i • r,'IH4(r!S 11'. ; ' , .TRAFFI MOVE CRITICAL PERCENT EFFECTIVE ' AVERAGE '. ' FROM IEN1 VOLUME ' CAPACITY' US ' GREEN TIME DE _ w{Y wli{/N 4{N N» NN wM nwr wM nW IiM 11.n i.../w yi•• N•/N Nw_w NN wN{_4 N»rN r»IIN II. i.»rw N_{{»,,hr GN•M MN NIL Nyf yw.•N wY InM w•wy Mu 1•r,G+I N«•.w h»NN w_wM Nw•.N••M 1{N i.w it 1 .NORTH ALL 346 2 3 22 ' 4 1, ' NoRTH/SOUTH '1 ALL 48`5 ' ' 34.0 0 ' :28,.1 • i. 3 , EAST/. K T/ W E 4 I i L IiN � I W 2 4 .!6'jw"f' C 37 t LEVEL OF SERVICE 0 I 1 • , ,/. , J . • V F I G U RF 13 INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES Legend: 25 = AM PK HR, (25) = PM PK HR SITE. ACCESS Itt HALL ,.. : .`'_....ILv,.L5c111J r.®. t 217 .<tzbEIJT�u2G F-B Wy Z11 I" eEargue.c, ,.. N ' t..35(40 34x(53«� -v I 1 1 �43s(�F7s) ` M 4..Z65(285) 1-, r 4.�.o 4 0 M! miroo.z5(m,,,) +I 4. 14 35(65) 4L !2S(17) 4 K'(1/0) ?..10—t 4 rt. , , (5aa) ` a�a 2c; 4, I1 O ""► k C 4 Q n �, o c ) .4 k, I.oy (,0) to '�P �° `V%) 3p o' o �1 '37°) 195 .^,,No o ' . Existing - c .., I - So (ks) ! .,.� t3$o(s ) o it 1 4n,foz5($70 "�' 370(Vto) g ,". - 3 ,:. • 4' 25 (130) 4..1 4P 41 5o (9s) + + 4 135(160) 4 Li, - _14 (305) 270 4.1 (31n) t3. -16 1 ((013x, 0, 4 ('it49 305,4 b t,. ° — 4 %be) I b r,� 1 '1 (15) Sla , `� y N ` ""� '� ti „� Q, w,, (ago) Z15 ,G; ,,fk • ro ess yy -------/ ,� t t 4°(to� So (.' / t 4/0(655) t y „a 1 iti to . 4625�il7n) w ,^ 4° 4'3/5 ( l°) +" — — o �� bib M� #11 4 25 130) 4 + 1 : (is) 4r1 4 135(18 O 14 • (15) 90 i (305) t70 4 i(3,..) ��o (489 4ile p ' c) 305 r 0 a ° - •- o Q, er (4 s) r, r .(J t5) So �' on `�' (300) 116' :h w ' ,V ` 'LTotal Phase I 1 rt., 0 i• (° (t°) ■... �... `°,, fn's 5° (`.+) `^j .. fo'.M•To(s6Oa) `•.. ` I, M ~ +.6ts(g70 ,� • 4475 6119 — ► iirl 4 6 . ? � 5 455) � 3S leb) '� 44 ifs. Coos, t7n —dt to no ..11" (49°) '6/0 - 0 (' ) 305 g o n . (6b Total o -N, ` "a, (,y.) so use II � t flp, , i ,i,, i p V1 M V ti L r l a �.n 5� 6 5 M �lSo 560) 4-4z5(a7v) t° -.1 8 o(yio) 4- - , i..3 ' - i 41 14 /E 034 41 4 ip, 5. (Is) 4I lip X36 Capp) 4 1,�r . C. ) r6 - 'r (co ) no p . , ,,; 115 p �q 0 (3t�1 � a • P (48t) 4/to .4 �tk, 0 ('fio) 3e?"' �;► 3 - - ' ' t `^ ISM � 5 6 C ...,,N 1,,, t B a,r 1 , u ray' Total "hale III ... �u ' I I � CAFiL l4,BUl"ThE,INC. I I coNSULTI JG TiANSPoRTATloN ENGINtE1a : f . f,! IMPACT A .. . . . . , . ,. . .i, .. . ., . .• . , .., , . ,, . ., . . • , „ . . . . . . . „. . . . . . .. . {{ . . . , . . . . , 1 , : .. . . . . . . . !; . . ., . . .. , , . . . . . % • . . . . . : . . 1;,ri,..: . . .. ,. .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . , . . . . . , .. . . ,., : . . . . . 1, , . .. 1,, . : . . .,. . . . , . ..: , . ,,.. , {3 SHOPPING � ',' g EXPANSION' Tigard, O I . , . . . , , , . „ . . . .,.. .. . , , . , . , , . ... . , ,,,,, . . . . , . . . . „ , . , 1 . . . , , , , , . 1, . . , . , . ., , , . , . . . . , . 1 td. . KI TTELSO 1 & AS So .. , � T � INS, �` November 1991 '' ' 'It . • , .' . '. , , ''' ' il,. irtt: .11 4,. r � I . .,.......w 1,.'.;....,..,.�''.. «. ' ..�........t..;,.......�....,n.w.. , ,,.._.,.F... ..._......,M.. �.......... ........... ,. ,_.....,...... •..�.,-.._, .. � .,.,...,..,..,w...:7. ...,.....,,.�.+.....�.�.,�...:.u,.,..,.,�;,,+.uei�.:_'A,e-,..-.6:,�'„-t a.._r:....w,«'- • • • 1 , ti TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS • for the EXPANSION OF THE WASHINGTON SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER Tigard, Oregon Prepared for Winmar Company, Inc. Gateway Tower 700 5th Avenue Suite 2600 y .� Seattle, Washington 98104-5026 Prepared by Associates, e r Sox ,, ,• , ' Alder 700 61C S.W. Portland, Oregon 97205 (503)228-5230 ICI November 199 , . Project No. 479.00 • ,1 • " w:.a.ti....-0.,,..,..h, ..a_..M,x:a.—.....,».,....._—«1--.......x. .. _.. .,, . . 1l TABLE OF CONTENTS � • )CEdUT J SUMMARY . • r INTRODUCTION , • 4 SCOPE OF THE REPORT ' • PROJECT DESCRIPTION' r r EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS 7 WASHINGTON SQUARE PARKING AND CIRCULATION SYSTEM '' • SURROUNDING J AND USE AND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE TRAFFIC SAFETY CHARACTERISTICS s ' P L A N N E D H I G H W A Y IMPROVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. .. .. . , .• 24 ' I ; . TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR MALL EXPANSION . . •• •4 . 25 i DEVELOPMENT PLANS t'' n ' (BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' .0:4, ,TRIP 1' ( ENERATIO • ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ' , TOTAL 1991 TRAFFIC VOLUMES • • TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF MALL EXPANSION ' x• CONCLUSIONS ANTS RECOMMENDATIONS • •4 i • • • . i i • •4 • . •• i •• i i • . • • 4 •• u i • .4 4 41 t REFERENCES •i • 4 • • . 6 •• i o i Y • 4 r • i 4'i i i i i' i i • Y 4 1 i • i 4 • • • b • 4 4 • ! I' A PEd•'i JV,d.L 7r L,ri: •'i' 4 • 4,4' • • • . • • 4 .4 0 • i 4�4 • i •i'•• ' 4 4 i 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 • • 4 ♦ 4 • i a i 43 } 1,'t 1 1 1 1 4 .• 1 . �I ti �l pr . ,xy , y..' 3 1' ' 44 y • r�:n�...'...:.•.:,.n.::..,....••...;.•.�....,.�..:.a ti, �.." ., ,..'...'....,. _. _, ,_ _,.... ..•i...1.c.,.•.. i.. ., „ _ ....... ... ......r_,_�...-.�——_.,.r•..�,��N..,..1....,..a hw:�l:-...:.:.:«:.....:d,...�Y'.a.tu.i..., LIST OF FIGURES • / Y 1. Washington Square Site Vicinity and Entrance Points . . 5 P�` 2. Monthly Variation of Traffic Volumes Entering Washington Square 10 3. Existing 1990 Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4. Existing 1990 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes , ; . . . . . , . . . . 12 5. Existing 1990 Saturday Midday Peak H o u r T r a ff i c Volumes . . . . . . y . . . . . . . 13 6. Existing Traffic Control and Lane Configurations 15 7. Background 1991 Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . 27 8. Background 1991 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . 28 9. Estimated Peak Hour Trip Distribution 35 10. Site Generated Trips 36 11. Total 1991 P.M. Peak Flour Traffic Volumes With Mall Expansion . . 37 ii Y ' ..� ...., ,, .. .a..,.,,..,.... 31.,,. ,..,,,;..«:z_x�s.a...�w,�•�_, UST OF TABLES 1, Existing A.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results . . . . . . . . . . • • . . , . . . . . . 16 2, Existing P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results 17 3. Existing Saturday Peak Hour Level of Service Results , 20 4. Accident History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 23 5. Background A.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results • • 29 F: Background P.M. Peak Hour L e v e l of SPvvice Results . . . . . . . . . , Y . . . . . . . 30 7. Projected Trip Generation Characteristics . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 32 8. Total 1991 P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 1A. Level of Service Definitions: Signalized Intersections . . . 46 2A. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections . . . . 47 3A. Level of Service Definitions: tTnsignalized Intersections . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 4A. Level of Service Criteria for TJnthgnalized Intersections . . . . . . 49 , r . I ail R '111 . I I 1 1 .4 ' Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ° The existing Washington Square mall has approxdinuately 1,17/8,000 square feet of gross leasable retail area. Expansion of the mall would include the relocating the existing Nordstroms Store and the addition of some specialty and foodcourt shops. In addition to Highway 217, Washington Square is served by three major roadways: Hall Boulevard,Greenburg Road, and Scholls Ferry Road. All three of these roadways have grade separated interchanges with Highway 217 which provide excellent access for shopping opportunities. • traffic analysis considered three periods: The thr lime i • • Average Weekday AMC. Peak Hour • Average Weekday P.M. Peak Hour • Saturday Peak Hour The traffic analysis was conducted in mid-November and represents significantly above average conditions on the adjacent roadway system. Additionally, the,worst case condition, the peak 15 minute flow rate,was used to determine capacity deficiencies in this evaluation. ` average weekday a.m. peak hour, all intersections the(vicinity of Washington During an. average weekda Square are currently operating at acceptable levels of service. N .. During the p.m.peak hour,four intersections in the area are operating at unacceptable levels of service. These intersections are listed below: Hall. Boulevard/Scholl • �' s Ferry Road " Greenbur Road/Highway 217 Northbound ound ramps • Greenburg Road/Highway 217 Southbound rasps Scholls Ferry Road/Washington Square ingress Each of these intersections experiences major capacity es under the existing traffic demand during th e p.m. peak a hour. With the expansion of Washington Square, the deficiencies at each these intersections ons wi ll remain substantially the time as today.a Y The impact of the traffic c g enera tedb y the mall expansion is very relative to the existing traffic volulnes. Y - ISXECUTIVg SUMMARY .,....w.„,.,,. '.......•, .x.., ..,. .•.,u.........n .x... ..i..... ...,,... ...,... ...,,i,.,•.,. .. .... ....... ...r...... . .x., ..,..... .,.. ,... l.u...,in... u. ....... .. rs,,...,.,,. ... .• •,. ...•..i .......A w.... ,, .:v.,1. IL • • .._.,..._ _.. • • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon . The Hall Boulevard/Scholls Ferry Road,intersection is currently over capacity. With the proposed expansion of Washington Square •Lrxe average vehicle delay during the p.m, peak I hour will only increase approximately 2.6 seconds and the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio would increase less than one percent. I I Both intersections on the Greenburg Road/Highway 217 interchange are currently operating at unacceptable levels of service during the pam. peak hour. The Greenburg Road/Highway 217 northbound ramp intersection is currently operating unacceptably(estimated LOS"E-F") primarily due to a high.southbound demand on Greenburg Road.. With the already approved full buildout of Lincoln Center, the level of service will drop below LOS "F With the expansion of Washington square, the level of service will remain the same, the average intersection delay is only expected to increase 2 seconds and the V/C ratio would increase an „ . estimated 4 percent. The Greenburg Road/Highway 217 southbound ramp intersection is currently operating unacceptably. With the proposed expansion of Washington Square the level of service and . delay will remain the same, The Washington Square entrance on Scholls Ferry Road is currently operating at LOS F ; during the p.m: peak hour. This is primarily due to the high northbound traffic volume on Scholls Ferry Road and the proximity of intersections along Scholls Ferry Road. With the proposed expansion of Washington Square the operation at this intersection will remain LOS {, ;' "F"• It is recommended that guidesigning for customers visiting the mall from Hall • 1 Boulevard to the west be revised to read Washington Square Second sight instead of .• "Washington Square Right Lane" as it does now. This would decrease the mall's impact on Scholls Ferry Road at both this entrance as well as at the Hall Boulevard,intersection,while making better use of excess capacity at the Hall driveway. • I I I The problems that are experienced during the Saturday peak hour are similar to those experienced during p peak h • p the p.m eak hour,but not as critical. Therefore,the p.m•peak hour was iced d •n th used as the bellwether upon which projected def•encies were evaluated. . y , the existing roadway system vicinity ofWashingto,,• Square ���� Based.on this analysis, g, syste in the� Washington has some major deficiencies. Additional traffic generated by the expansion of Washington Square can be accommodated by the existing roadway system with virtually insignificant oaxr:rno g t : impacts. • There will be no changes in : v IT n lev any vicinity levels at �init. of • service of intersections in e of se • a an f the a rsec ons the vic� Sgii r e as a result the expansion. • I Washin on of p anon, gt - salt at th .. . ' The traffic problems that currently exst in the vicinit y of Washington Square are a,product of not only Washington Square but of many other developments such as Lincoln Centers I . I 2µ ( EX CU `IVE SUMMARY I I I r • , Washington Square Expansion-,Tigard, Oregon Embassy Suites, Target, Lamonts and other smaller developments. The recommended. r improvements are very costly and will have a significant effect of the circulation of traffic in. the area, and therefore it is recommended that a full transportation study of the area be conducted to determine the long texm traffic needs. This study would also determine appropriate staging of improvements over the next 10 'to 20 year future. Under such a comprehensive study, these improvement costs could be allocated more directly to future developments over the course of the study period. r ! I • I I • . I I I it I I I I I h 1 I I I I Rif' ' V i 1.I A:/SUM:WR 1 Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon • E Y i INTRODUCTION SCOPE OF THE REPORT The The 1,1 h • (l purpose of this report rt 15 to provide rP de an assessment of the expected p e pected on-sate and off-site transportation impacts associated with the proposed expansion of the Washington Square ° Shopping Mall in Tigard,Oregon. Figure 1 shows a site vicinity map for Washington Square. Specific trafl"g related issues discussed in this report include: • • Existing land use and traffic characteristics. • Identification of existing deficiencies in the roadway system. • Other approved developments in the area. 6 Trip estimates for full development e e vel o P ne n t of the site in accordance ance with the proposed site plan. I Traffic impacts of the proposed mall expansion on future peak hour operations at the key intersections within the site vicinity and site driveways.- PROJECT JEC7C DESCRIPTION • I 'I plans for Washin' • Square renovation call for the addition, of Current p the Washington S uare I�iall approximately 69,100 square feet of leasable area. The modifications would involve reconfiguring the current center r fian its current sire of 1.178 zai hon.gross leasable square • feet to approximately 1,247 million gross leasable square feet. This would include relocating the existing Nordstrom department store to the Frederick&Nelson location and renovating mall area. • the existing Nordstrom store to specialty shops and ma. I , I I -4- INTRODUCTION • ti I �I r I I' • I 1. 4, 1 II .. I - r , , •R• 4 rrl.....bnAA'»v,,.tl.,-.xr..,.,....-,+i.IJ:44...+n.M.e4.1..uu., r �.....,. ........A....w.e,t,. n.�.r ,. - _ _,.it . ...... r s., .,. _ -.- ..�..ax...�...n...i.J.r,,.Inr,....rw..mM b.... .w....w...ue-. ' 4 r 1 21 7 NORTH Q A , 4,t-- v V ti 1141p , ¢ . ,tom, ��� EMBASSY 1 `t �'�l✓Q i�5 v) ' SUITES TARGET' t " 'J n ry , LAMGNTS U�S, ,.� BAP1K • ,, , . r4rA . . / .7 / � ,'WASHINGTON /SQUARE MALL r/ .,/ 6 '4■ - - o CEMETARY m 4Irtmai co .. .,., irr ... . ,, ., . WASH Q,. TOO , WASHINGTON SQUARE '' " 1b. +h Mtg t 1 i a , 1 ' l , •• fi I. , WASHING TOI SQUARE ACCESS O N1S .) 113AF SIC SN �LF� , I 1 479r I A ', ' l 11i Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon STUDY AREA DEFINITION Preliminary meetings with Washington County, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT)and City of Tigard staff indicated the roadways and intersections critical for study. F Applying PP p Ying Wasliiugton County's requirement for an access study,this study would be required to consider the traffic impacts on Hall Boulevard, Scholia Ferry Road and Greenburg Road 600 feet beyond the project boundaries(each of these roads are designated as minor arterials in the Washington County Transportation Plan). Accordingly, the study would consider the traffic impacts of the proposed expansion on a road system defined as the triangle bounded by the Hall Boulevard/Scholls Ferry Road intersection to the northeast, the Highway 217 southbound, off-ramp/Hall Boulevard intersection to the northwest, and the Highway 217 southbound rarnps/Greenburg Road intersection to the southwest. However,it is the opinion of this consultant that the Cascade AvenueiGreenburg Road intersection is so closely related to the Highway 217 southbound ramp intersection that it should be included in the analysis, despite the fact that the code does not require its inclusion. Thus, the study area included • in this study is defined as the triangle described above plus the intersection of Cascade Avenue/Greenberg Road. Washington Count y generally employs t he "10% a" in identifying appropriate e study area for which a traffic study should consider impacts. This rule identifies the study area to include those streets and intersections in which the proposed project would contribute at • least a 10 percent increase over existing traffic volumes. Given that the current proposal t under consideration is for a 5.8 percent increase in leasable shopping square footage, it is reasonable to expect that a ten percent increase in traffic volumes would not be,experienced Therefore,under strict interpretation this . -` on any of the adjacent streets in the vicinity. , ,r a strict xn:t��;' retation of thi � • • rule,this traffic study might be expected to consider only the driveways into the center,even recognizing these roadways would not experience a ten zing that the percent increase in traffi due to the proposed expansion. In any case, this traffic analysis considers a far greater impact area than Washington County code requires, and therefore provides a more comprehensive picture of the traffic imp act s of the proposed develo p ment than may be required. It: , i 1 -6- INTRODUCTION , • .... a.., ;J W I• • Washington Square Expansion-Tigard, Oregon EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS WASHINGTON SQUARE PARKING AND CIRCULATION SYSTEM y shin �t'S Square Shopping Center has a total of nine'access points from Hall Boulevard, Wa � q pp �' �? Greenburg Road and Scholls Ferry Road. These accessways connect with an internal circulation roadway that circulates around the perimeter of the main center. These entrances are shown on Figure 1. There are approximately 6130 parking spaces provided for shopping center patrons. • SURROUNDING LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Land uses in the vicinity of the site include primarily commercial retail and office with a • mixture of office and.multi-family residential uses. There are a few scattered single-family houses in the vicinity, although it is likely that these homes may be displaced by redevelopment in the future. Washington Square is served by three freeway interchanges,.providing excellent regional nal . metropolitan area. Highway 217, also • access for shopping opportunities in the Portland xn.etrcrpo g y t known as the Beaverton-Tigard Highway in the Oregon State Highway System,is a four-lane • • freeway with a designated speed limit of 55 mph in the vicinity of Washington Square. The three freeway interchanges serving Washington Square are at Hall Boulevard,Scholls Ferry J Road and Greenburg Road. The Hall ouievar'VHighway 217 interchange serves only southbound Highway 217 on off m while the ` 'terchanges at Highway and o movements, w xn• Scholls Ferry at Greenburg Road serve on a;id off freeway • .•. Road and a both northbound and southbound movements. S.W.Hall Boulevard is designated as an arterial in the Tigard Comprehensive p • �,, � p Transportation Plan. Hall Boulevard is also known. a g Highway Oregon State l3 e. to the eav -'T'u as r�ton . i �. hacra, xn.the .. is as a : no arterial in the Washington Hall Boulevard xs desx aced a o • Highway System.. al designated bo u nty Transportation Plan. This designation xOn accurately.. reflects the regional al c harac ter of f this Hall Boulevard is generally a our a roadway west of the main to •) TargetiLam.orits and becomes general ly a two-lane road with left turn reiit es at intersections between this point and Greenburg Road, AS properties develop, fronta g e pr require widening five-lane .. i ., lre g, .. . 4 �• nxn this �street to a fir lane cr . ' � , n improvements r+e u sti Cross-section,in accordance with the ODOT plans. The designated speed limit is 40 mph. There are six major intersection • o ' M -7-, E r r I • • ,�1.7��1V L'X L.i y�7�� • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon Hall Boulevard that were studied as a part of this investigation. These intersections are at ' the'followin?locations: • Highway 217 southbound ramps/Cascade Avenue • Scholls Ferry Road • Washington Square/Embassy Suites Driveway • Target/Laamonts Shopping Center Entrance W US Bank Driveway • Greenburg Road/Oleson Road }c , S.W. Scholls Ferry Road is an arterial in the Tigard Comprehensive Transportation Plan and a minor arterial in the Washington County Transportation Plan. This four-lane roadway is also known as Scholls Highway(State Route 210)in the state system, and serves southwest- . to-northeast regional travel movements between the Washington County hinterland, Ne Beaverton and Portland. 'The designated speed limit is 35 mph. S.W. Scholls Ferry Road intersects with Hall Boulevard at a four-way signalized intersection. This intersection, has experienced capacity and safety problems liar many years and has recently undergone improveni nts. Although there have been significant improvements in the last couple years, the intersection is still experiencing some capacity problems. These improvements and their effects are described in a later section. • S.W. Greenburg Road is designated as a major collector in the Tigard Comprehensive Transportation Plan and a minor arterial,in the 'Washington County Transportation. Plan. This roadway has a four-lane cross-section with left-turn lanes at major access points. The designated speed limit is 40 mph. To the north of Hall Boulevard,Greenburg is called Oleson Road and has only a single lane in each direction with a left-turn lane at the Hall intersection. There are traffic signals on Greenburg Road at the following intersections: • Cascade Avenue • Highway 217 southbound ramps • Highway 217 northbound ramps • Mapleleaf Road Locust Road(under construction) • Hall Boulevard intersections were analyzed as a part of this stn • z p study. In addition all, Washington These al Square driveways were also considered. -s« , sv.A'O CONDITIONS • n . • • • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon TRA,F'EIC VOLUMES , 4 Manual turning movement counts and roadway link,volume counts were conducted for 17 key intersections and roadways in the study area for all time periods and for an additional two intersections for the most critical time periods (ant.'and p.m. peak hours). Traffic counts • were conducted during the week of the 10th through.the 14th of November. Figure 2 shows the monthly variation of traffic entering Washington,Square Mall. As shown in this figure, the month of November is at the begim ing of a steep increase in shopping activity. • Therefore, by basing this analysis on mid-November conditions, this analysis represents ' , ', significantly above average traffic conditions in the region. • Figures 3 g turning p 4 and 5 show the existin turnip movement patterns at all key intersections in • the study area during the identified weekday a.m. and p.m,. peak hours and the Saturday • mid-day peak hour. In order to assure that worst-case traffic conditions are evaluated, the evaluation of traffic operations on the existing transportation.system focuses on all three time periods. It was found that a typical weekda a.m. peak hour occurs from 7:30 a.m.. to 8:30 a.m. and the p.m. peak hour occurs from 4:30 p.m.to 5:3110 p.m. The Saturday counts showed that the peak hour of traffic on the adjacent street system occurs from 2:15 p.m. to 3:15 p.m.. CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE To assess the traffic conditions at key intersections in the study area,capacity analyses were ' conducted using the Federal Highway A hstration's(FHWA)Highway Capacity Software (HOS)programs. The TiCS programs examine a roadway's arid/or intersection's'operational ;. 1 . characteristics .d then determine the traffic that can be accommodated for each movement. "' r • I T he resulting values are then hew co�p ared to the actual traffic de nand. Based on the capacity analysis, a level of service is derived for facility. , l entire ,r��� � � � each movement well as e Level of service is a concept developed by the transportation profession to quantify the degree , of comfort(including such elements as travel time,number of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impediments by other vehicles)afforded to drivers as they travel through "A", ..� its caused la o ., ough an intersection or roadway segment..LAS is expressed as a letter grade that ranges from • indicating that vehicles ;vehicles will experience little,le,if any delay,to�`T ',indicating significant traffic ice mitt congestion and driver delay,will occur. For unsignr sired intersections,LOS"Jr is considered to be the :.. 'a minimum � signalized d intersections, LOS Il� is . r acceptable LOS grade. be the si�� ak�e urci acc � For considered to rnxnxinum.�acceptable LOS grade, A. detailed explanation of these LOS r , letter grades as well as the criteria use d to es',? i l x s.h them are presented in Appendix A.• procedures All LOS analyses described in this report were performed in.,accordance with the I ; San s desc re rfox�ared r described above. Copies of the analysis forms are contained in project files and are available for review upon re, q ue.st. In order to assure that this analysis is based n.po n worst case , G CONDITIONS n.. A. M • O . , . Monthly E ' . . ,. , • , . . , •. , , i 1, Washington Square Shopping Center .: ..rear KI a y • •. y I. .1 ..• • , . rn d '- 'Mww N6f,ww MOM w�:JwYhw , wwwM\ 17/IIITT . - - _ • O jnb Mar Apr ', ny J Jul p 'Nov ; , o I I ,I I , Ir r i rived .. y k ethic ,data provided ,T'hi trend i derived' from ct�nfidetial m®anth1e Nrc�vd by 1►liesl�it�ytdr� q��re fr©m 1987 18d; L'. ', , I so . ______......_________] ' I I Y ' . I 1 �N TMLY �A�I�T r�� C � T���-�!C VJLU� S E • WASHINGTON SQUARE ' Figuee , r . : Arptc ANALYSIS_ 1'991 4-75wti d i 4� r1�1' • �1 r w r !�Ili h^ w . 5 a t ?- T .jl f - 48 135 1 L I�� 1 4r o °,; s:ci_,. 3o y = Co ism3.0 if. is Ir1 d �` {=¢g �,.x'35° s� s rir 1 ( - t .3)-ir N't'S ri Q \'7.-------- lt..--- '''.---------''' X. ' - A.--.1s_ O o go�Vf 45 I 445 s_t. Y - - _ �`16U i 9i 1• - ,rte - .- (4 7e5 - ----- - - - - - - - \ - _- - - _ - - -- - - - - - N - - - _ -- - -- -7,8 _ 1 - - - -- _ _ - - - 4p "� -- - - J _ - - - __t Z _ -f -O ---- I --- - tom / --- S � - - - _ ) -- _ - _r-w • ,tn / ri ,,,,-/ i / s tip.s'- , apti�Ae s ` CRS r_ _ I '' 1 fiBURc ,�.�.J o CEYETARY - gas..� I 1`Ct1ARE�il�d W M1 h pc, _ r- _`� $34,, ROAD tn_ Yfielfi iTOtd� f- t 21 * . , )-----, , cr> . Ofibiriswi_ ritab... s.....r 1/4 D _ 77 �i 9 NE ..� ) `''S S 44 � r.70,T. - •1 t r CASCADE NE.. �-"IL ti' 1217 ` j..........„: 4 I i ia o � Af:..f. "3..?; (I:0..0 .330 . -. 1.t' ��?� m it a _ EXISTING TRAFFIC - WEEKFigura DA1� ';';:: _ '- (A.M. PEAK HOJ'�i. 7=15-815) WASHINGTON SQUARE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ea � i; -11- November 1991- 3 L • _ . - - �: - - y , ti♦� r._,._..J............r..............ti,., ....u..Y.+.M...... ..-x.+.... 1...,.....� . _ ....r �. ...+.,,...� • - ...........A........,.,..-.n......_4_,- .....r...„.n+,,..r•4.rn.Y..,.....„,_, ....w....,::I...w,,..r,. ....11.21_:',N 'i \ I a j a s a;it oor. , i c� ” V ,`gyp r ( 11.1 .� '.�, + M Off♦ • ..4 ai'' 0) r � °; Z W h- o �”' �^ ef l / �ti 091.A \ �\ ui Q 'X ,fin /�//(� ' 1 `(jb \ 11 oat sT. r' bn 1 "-s LOCUST ST. O �`" p r _ St,. � :1 r Ert�b l , n Ct'mL ST. 1 t atMaa ST. r W �. ti 1 �' �`, 1 o�r.rr j '' ��,or'r� , \1 11 Oft I Is h �" � 1 wry, ,;,,, \ , t. p� L E,MOASSY Q / SUITES 1 IA I r pd r. Rl Q AP INC. De` �.M• tibu or�a/r y/od , ye"\ ° r q � h ti hb r' rof� Li ' DAD a b t 1 r d )4 ....:`,,tp ) ` , ' of,oiz. t r � � d f K ''''' P i .' "xi� 1i r i�^ r hh / I I � r ..-, P , _ /<---: JH . , __ - (------ i - _ . _ __ _ -_- - - __ -- fb' - .2,S �_ t-t�4 --- - /.S_0. - 45%.- _ 23 - Sd0 -- - 1- � -- - -- ---- +ti ? - -if - ;OS - 35 - - - ta!- X305 -- - - ,y4..1�. 7 - - Ai-sr- _ - -- - - - - -hn� •�4. ter'-~• - -_ FaP' I - zap- - ay sssy �4o}1) 5 6 ' J )j 1 1 t, _ _._ ' 'e' a _7 _ _ _ _ - -:=__ -_:,_:: ---_-__ - :4;g_ r 0� r sis b`' +ra. CEhfETPRY I -- -- Sra . _ WASH. SQ. �r - _ -- - TQO/ . 5! _ . l JS/- -- �1?Q ���o� Rqt T- - -WA Tat .MAL - 1 . j A.- - 'i ,t' / / - . - r . z CASC1➢EtAVE J'.'�3 z - t -- '9�hv _ _- _ !% nary _ - _ - - - - - - - - - _ X_.......r-ii, - -if_e_:.- - /7)2c0.-..:"----\\ _, 'Sa� ,eI {ASS �3S� r= _.....k.;Y - --- -EXiSY1N3 TRAFFIC -- SATURDAY r° . - €'EF�K NOi�R}_ , - - - WASHINGTON SQUARE -figure KJ 1 - • Washington Square Expansion• Tigard, Oregon • conditions,the peak 15 minute period flow rate during the evening peak hour was used in the evaluation of all intersection levels of service. Thus, the analysis reflects conditions that are only likely to occur for 15 minutes out of each average weekday. For the remainder of each weekday and throughout the weekends, traffic conditions within the study impact area are likely to be better than that described in this report. The current intersection controls and lane configurations which were assumed in this analysis are shown in Figure 6. Based on these traffic controls and existing volumes, an operational analysis was conducted for the a.m. peak hour, the p.m. peak hour and the Saturday peak hour. A.M. AND P.M. PEAK HOURS Table 1 shows that all intersections in the vicinity are operating at acceptable levels of service during the a.m, peak hour. Table 2 shows that during the p.m» peak hour, four intersections are operating at unacceptable levels of service. These intersections are listed below: • Hall Boulevard/Scholls Ferry Road • Scholls Ferry Road/Washington Square Inbound • Greenburg Road/217 Northbound ramps • Greenburg b ur �,oad/217 Southbound ramps g Hall Boukev r ai!Se poi l� Perry Road Although the Hall Boulevard/Scholls Ferry Road intersection has been improved in the last two years,it is stir,over capacity and operates at an unacceptable level of service during the p.m. peak hour. The capacity problem is primarily due to a lack of lanes and the existing channelitation, One problem is that of the intersection approaches h ave separ ate zight t turn lanes to separate right turning traffic from through movement s. Scholls Ferry Road'/Washington Square inbound The. LOS. analysis conducted for this intersection indicates that southbound left.turning from Scholls Ferry Road entering the shopping center would encounter vehicles ' fr lls Fe , an insufficient number of "acceptable gaps" in northbound through traffic to through foal cc �� . fulfill the a e' table n the no This condition deuaand: persists during both the weekday . peak hour (in which 195 v p�m.' ak �x �. vehicles were observed making this movement) an.d the Saturday peak hour(in which 264 es . observed).`' 'According to the analysis,there would be a deficit of approximately • vehicles were obsery 44- : STING CONDITIONS • . it • 7 �' r 0 I • 14 tmtt -NI 1.414* 0 1.-4 UCH! • ¢t1 n� .4 � c-U y�- ' �Ul z 0 Ikb: 0 Z 0 2 /Th )t fr i' , bAK ST„ , ( I i,'N.\ \NNN, \AI4PLELEAr . „. 1 I "-------......._.............L.ocusr si•1 ,4,„,\g\\ . ---4;'1 . ,\\ t 0. CORAL,sr, t' • C-Iiti)_____ R 6 , - .. ter's— II "N 0 , N ilkla\6..k1X1 I\\SP,S11‘, . k, us, i oats _ - Bfl II( • t 7kRGET i iti • X91, pPp t� EJABASSY 0 o�y p. SUITES s r 0 /71 t, ? tt,.� l''40,,,,1,,,,‘t , , '4'.,,,t,z,,,,,,, t 1. 0 lip '1'14, w +AO , isAZ 1 tiI • • • • ..a .1'..... n 0. . .. _ • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon ,,: TABLE 1 EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE A.M.PEAK HOUR • Signalized Unsignalized Intersection' � ; Delay ,'�'/� EOS Reserve ,. LOS . r Ratio Capacity Hall Blvd/217 South in .83 C , 1 R Hall Blvd/Scholls Fy l!grill .86 I) Hall Blvd/Wash Square 5.0 uar .66 A Hall Blvd/Target Ace 4.7 .48 A i Hall Blvd/Greenburg Rd 1111M .78 Mill 1 ' , ,, A 7- a Hall Boulevard/US Baal , 7R�i E Scholls 1Pr/Wash Square 70 E Scholls .79 B Sch.olls /217 North 8� � 8.4 .5 B Scholls F y/217 south 26.2 4 .99 ' D • Greenburg/217 South'', ; 22.1 .73 Greenburg/217 North 14.0 1 .79 B 1 , 9-reen.burgibilapleleaf IIMI .52 B Greenburg/Wash S Ace 270 4 1 Gree nburg/Wash M Aec 2 25 - C . .A' Greenburg/Wassh N Ace 285 Greenburg Locust 9.1 .57 B' 116 D : % Greenbun g ascad.e 14,4 .83 B } Naths. 1. 'ID" is con + ..; an acceptable LOS for sig vli zed.intersections.tlom$: 2. "E" is considered a.m. acceptable LOS for intersections.or un� gnalzz�d inters 46- EXIS.TT. G CONDITIONS , r II • • Washington Square Expansion• Tigard., Oregon 25 "acceptable gaps" during the p.m. peak hour and 125 during the Saturday peak hour to accommodate southbound left turns. The close spacing of this entrance to the signalized egressing intersection (approximately 200 feet to the north) creates conflicts between northbound queues backing up from the signalized intersection and blocking southbound vehicles making a left turn into Washington Square: Greenburg RoadlHighway 217 Northbound Ramps The Greenburg Road/Highway 217 Northbound ramps intersection is currently operating at level of service "F" during the p.m peak hour. This is primarily due a high southbound demand on the intersection . Southbound queues on Greenburg Road during the p.m peak hour were observed to back approximately 1200 feet from the Greenburg Road/217 North ," ramp intersection. The long queues regularly back up through the Mapleleaf intersection by . 4:30 p.m. and virtually stop all traffic movements at that intersection They queues were observed to dissipate dear the end of the p.m. peak hour (5:30). One primacy cause of the congestion and queuing problems is the allocation of southbound green time from the Greenburg/217 North traffic signal. As a result of the existing signal timing, the • volume/capacity ratio for the southbound through traffic movement is L22. This indicates . that the traffic demand for southbound through vehicles exceeds the capacity by 22 percent during the p.m peak hour, To provide for acceptable operation,ramp, overpass, and traffic signal timing modifications will likely be required. Greenburg Road/HYighway 217 Southbound Ramps The Greenburg Road/217 Southbound ram. , on operates u unacceptable of � he �,�i�td/2�, ramp intersecti at�. Revel ,service due to a high eastbound,right turn demand in combination with a high southbound • demand: During the p.m. peak hour, the eastbound right turn movement experiences very long q � lengths ing eastbound volume/capacity . queue�lengths and high delays,',The exist; ound col ca�pacxt�r ratio is 1;47 during the p.m.. pe hour. To provi d e for acce pt able operation,the ramp will likely re quire widerin g with additional lane widening and traffic signal timing modifications on Greenburg Road. along Greenburg x,os,d a progression analysis Was ,.. anal the anial��'. p intersections xs o£t performed, The existxn traffic signals- the � j at xtiiapleleaf` and the 217 interchange are not currently interconnected. The purpose of y..is was to • cur y co Th the analysis determine whether •, e s w interconnection of 1; ' •�� signals would be beneficial. ' the �s� al The progression of tra �c along aag Greenb r g... analyzed Road was using a standard computerized uterized , simulation and optimization program (PASSER II-87), Passer r. 0-87 xs a macroscopic computer ad��l��hat is desigriod�to�e��uate a��a�variety of signal strategies along an arterial. E.XIST1.Nc CONDITIONS - .............. »+,,.... ..._... «..._.....-.I- ,........ ..,... .,. '.-.. .,...._.'i ,._ r...,.. . ....rshr.31.....,.......,.....,.kn.A.....l.r.w:��.n'.,,,,.r,...-.An..r .1-.w. .. • Washington Square Expansion Tigard, Oregon Although the program is capable of analyzing isolated intersections, its most common application is in evaluating and optimizing signal.progression on an arterial street system. For this analysis, Passer 11-87 was used to evaluate the relative effects, ,from a signal .; progression standpoint, of interconnecting the traffic ¢ignal at Mapleleaf and the 217 interchange signals. The results of the progression ; .nalysis indicate that althoagh good progression is possible, major signal modifications would be required to accorm odate existing traffic. The 4, Mapleleaf/Greenburg Road intersection's optimal cycle length is between 95 and 105 seconds and cannot be lowered significantly due to capacity constraints. In contrast,the optimal cycle length for the interchange is between 75 and 85 seconds anci'. cannot increase because of tl° potential delay and queuing problems. To allow for the Greenburg/Mapleleaf intersection to function at a consistent cycle length with the interchange, major geometric and signal modifications would be required. Based on the progression analysis, interconnection of Mapleleaf with the Highway 217 interchange signals is not considered the sole answer to the problems along Greenburg Road. Although interconnection may not significantly help the traffic problems on Greenburg Road with tine existing roadway system, it should always be considered as this area grows and roadway improvements are made. All of the deficiencies mentioned above today and are a result of the expansive, Al d hove eXllst tod y p lve, commercial, retail, and office development in the area which iiias occurred subsequent to Washington Square development. Although very large developments such as,Lincoln Center, Embassy Suites, Target, Lamonts and others have come into the area,improvements to the surrounding transportation network have not kept pace with the increase in trip generation. SATURDAY PEAK HOUR Table shows the results of the level of service analysis for the Saturday peak hour, During ble3 the Saturday Peak.hour, many of the same occur as during the typical g' yp`cal v�eekday ur axne de�.c�enc.�es oc p peak hour, During hour,five intersections operate at unacceptable .mid ak ng the Saturday peak hu into ' ns op levels of service, as listed below: fall BaulevardiScholls Ferry Road ® Hall Boulevard/US Bank • Scholia Ferry]load/Washington Square inbound • Cxreenburg/Kighwa y p 217 Southbound ramps s Qreenburg/tHighway 217 Northbound ramps -19- 1 75Tfi 'u CONDITIONS -• " • �A1 , ti • v • 1 1Drash& n Square Ex van ncrn z,u, Oregon o TABLE r 1 JXIST G LEVELS OF SERVICE SA' .WAY PEAIC HOUR + . Signalized Unsi.. ized Intersection Delay ' V/C LOS Reserve Ratio Capacity � , ' •, , Hall Blvd/217 youth' '24.2 ' �78 ` I .�'• Hail Blvd/Scholls Fy 57.9 1,0 5 In, ' 11111111 . Hall Blvd/Wash ' • d/V6�'ash Sq,�.ax�e � � � � � , x.2.6 .84 �B vd ar t Ace, Hall BI , '' . a:r• . BlITd/Greenbnrg Rd 15,6 , ., Hai Boulevard/US Bank -70 F ?:, Scholls Fy/Wash Square -125 Scholls Fy/217 North Off 12.9 ' .89 : iniScholls Fy/217 North 21.6 .91 nil,, , Greenburg/217 South 85.9° e88 V* Greenburg/217 North 62.9* .99 1 41 . Greenbur apleleaf 15,8 1.01 0 reenr sh a b a �. �r S Ace 275 Greenbarg/Wash M Ace 215 • • ,��en� �g/ ash N Ace Greenburg ust 7,9 �,�.51 13 , 70 I � One or more n ovements is over 20 percent over capacity.. anl therefore a level of a t s , service cannot be accurately a e� � x For purposes of analysis,an average , i intersection delay was estimated • ..._a • "20' =STING CONDITIONS • • I t + `I Washington Square Expansion- T''gard, Oregon ' I , ' Although the Hall Boulevard/Scholls Perry Road operates better during the Saturday peak hour(LOS "R") than during the p.m. peak hour, it remains unacce p table and over capacity. ♦ II. The Hull I Boulevard/US Rank driveway degrades to an LOS "F" for the outbound • (northbound)left turn movement during the Saturday peak hour. The cause of the degrade . in level of service is the increase in outbound traffic movements at the bank entrance on Saturdays. Although this driveway operates at LOS "k'", it is not recommended that this intersection be signalized for the following reasons: • As noted earlier, the u signalized analysis procedure is a very conservative in " ` that it often predicts a worse level of service than actually occurs. The LOS "F" only occurs for a short period on the weekend. ' • The unacceptable level of se rvice only effects ec4s on-s i to traffic c and does not affect the operation of Hall Boulevard. • The c that does experience long dela• s has alternate routes of egress traf� y ,ess front the bank and shopping mall in which exiting drivers will experience less delay entering onto the adjacent street system. • The traffic signals upstream and downstream on Greenburg Road and the TargetfLa .onus driveway meter cc nctsnn g eastbound and westbound vehicles, which results in increasing the number of acceptable gaps available for this •, I movement. This x ear alts from the platooning effect of the upstream and downstream traffic signals: • I I . I I Although signalization is not recommended at this time, as traffic volumes increase along Hai.Boulevard and commercial development increases,this intersection.should be monitored and considered for future signalization. Sim lar, to the average weekday p.m♦ peak ho ur, the Scholls Ferry Road/Washington Square ' • I inb oun d intersection. opeI rates at LOS � ► during the Satur d ay peak hoar: As discussed ear lier, this intersection is affected b y northbound q ue�in g from the Scholls Perry Road/21.7 I• North on-ramp intersection, , I . Irr,.wr+rr.,rxwrriWwr�winlM+rn��. iw.nww.Wrwiy.w� Wriw ra- . -21- EXISTIN0 CO.r DITICNS a"'° • e �; • • ....,, ........ ._.k ,,,....... .:..,.-' - - 14.x. Washington Square ELwansion r Tigard, Oregon • • At Greenburg Road, as during the p.m. peak hour, both intersections on the Greenburg interchange operate at unacceptable levels of service during the Saturday peak hour. The unacceptable operation is primarily due to the traffic signal timing plan u.ed on the '; interchange. At the Greenburg/217 North intercb.ange, the southbound through movement is currently nperating over capacity. it is likely that a'revised traffic signal timing plan could improve the overall operation of this intersection to acceptable levels. , . Although some intersections in the study area operate at unacceptable levels of service during the Saturday peak hour, the majority of intersectiors operate poorer during the p.m, peak . hour. Therefore,in general,the critical time period for analysis is during the p.m.peak hour. • TRAFFIC r i 11. 6� '� w rS A review was conducted of a recent three-year accident history(1987-19$9 and 1990 where available)for all key intersections within the study area. Table 4 summarizes results of this review, The accident rate for these intersections range from 0,00 to 2.77 accidents per million me weighted average rage accident t gate for the study area is 0,72 , accidents per MEV. Accident rates in the range of 1.5 to 2A) accidents per MEV are typical 'onsin for intersections the Portland urban.area. tersect�. During the 1987-1989 study period,the Scholis Ferry ad/Hall,Boulevard intersection had 1, an accident rate of 2.77 accidents per MEV. This is considerably higher than the average - rate for the study area. In 1989,the Oregon Department of Transportation implemented all , " 0 • • � � improvement project for the Scholls Ferry Road/Hall Bt�udevaird.intersection, Shown below � . the 1987 1989 accident is the rate � s the accident rate fox•the first part of 1990. indicated, decreased substantially from 2.77 to 1024 in 1990. As the accident rate indicates,the Scholls Ferry Road/Hall Boulevard intersection operates improvements. o ra�:t�es m,u safer today after,the��. rovexr�e .., The remaining intersections in t appear provide relatively safe operation. erat' he study area to p �.on. It is expetg,4 that development of this site will not adversely effect the traffic safety ics of the surrounding street system with the improvements recommended in this charm,teristics improvements . report. Wit h the project, some in crea se in the total number of accidents within the st udy , area may occur, but this is likely to be due more to the increased eaa s ed anount of driving time exposure tha n to a change in the degree'of hazard. • A . { -22- =STING CONDITIONS µwk t ' • O} , •' • • • • ■ • OW II r • Washington Square•+ ,anion- Tigard, Oregon TABLE ACCT L" ENS'HISTORY''9874989 • ►SECTION AVG AVG AVG AVG TOTAL ADT 'YEARLY O • FATAL ACCIDENTS ACCD. ACCD ACCD. (11EV) SCHOLLS FERRY/ 26800 5' 2 0 0.545 21.7 SB SCHOLLS 111 ;RRY/ 23580 2 0 0 0.194. • 217 NE OFFRAMP SCROLLS FERNY/ 21090 0 0 0 0.04.6 TASU SQ EN-2 SCHOLLS FERRY/ 27365 11 • 4 0 1.068 217 NB ONRAIVtii 1' HALL/217 28630 5 0 0.478 INTERCHANGE HALL/SCHOLLS 1987-1989 38205 39 12 0 2.773 • (1990 Jan-Aug) 39760 (12) (4) (0) (1.242) • HAL) 20575 6 3 0 0.755 ' EMBASSY SUITES HALL/ 19475 0 0 0 0.000 U.S,, BANK r+ HALL/ 25180 2 1 0 0.218 GREENBURO • GREENBURG/ 13890 1 1 0 0.2 63 I LOCUST • 5 3 I. I •. GREENBURG/ 227 2 0 0.402 1VM,A PLELEAF G,REENBURG/ 22135 1 1 0 0.124 • O X. dREENBURG/217 30675 13 4 0 1,91 , IWrERCHANGE GTtCASCADEENBE UR I.. G/ 15080 1 n 0 0.117 • -23- EXISTING CONDfl%ON►8 •, • r •• ' I I I • I r• r•� • t N, Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon PLANNED ffiGHWAY IMPItOVEMENTS �. dear future. 11 in the area t � Theur are no immediate improvement projects planned an the study ore A major improvement of the Greenburg Roadiffighway 217 interchange is currently on the Oregon Department of Transportation's 6-year plan. Local funding for this project has been approved by Washington County as part of the recently approved MSTIP-2 ballot measure, The project would widen Greenburg Road from Mapleleaf to Cascade to accommodate another southbound through lane. This would widen the Greenburg Iiiaad overpass to six lanes with four southbound lanes and two northbound lanes. r ' o , • ; P,LA1 TNED h';I'C. t' A F t� ll 'Nr7` .1 `^:y�y�l' , • • • • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR MALL EXPANSION I The weekday evening peak hour impacts of traffic generated by the proposed development ' were analyzed as follows: • • The placement and size of the planned Washington Square expansion was confirmed. The total number of future daily and evening peak hour trips, both in and out of the existing and expanded shopping center were estimated. • Trip distribution patterns relative to major feeder roadways were examined to obtain an estimate of trip distribution patterns within the study area. 61 Background 1991 traffic volumes on each key road segment within the study area were forecasted. The 1991 background traffic volumes include 1990 existing traffic volumes plus traffic: expected to be generated by developments in the vicinity that have been approved or are undergoing approval. a Site-generated traffic predicted for the weekday evening peak period were assigned to the highway network and added to 1991 background traffic volumes. I • Traffic demands on each roadway facility were,analyzed to identify any capacity or level of service deficiencies, . ' A detailed discussion of the analysis methodology and results is contained in the remainder , a i • • i • ndex of this section. DEVELOPMENT PLANS '• • Willmar Company, Inc,nG+ is s p r®po sYn g to expand d the Washington gton Square Shopping Center by approximately 69,100 square feet The modifications would involve reconfiguring the current • center • gross square rd' its current size of . '�� leasable s u . the pp �1 ���` er role f�. 1 �aY on ess leasa are feet to�, ��tel . million gross leasable square feet. This would include relocating the existing Nordstrom department store to the Frederick&Nelson location and renovating the existing Nordstrom store to specialty shops and mall area. -25- ,i .� x I I f I' I I • I I • • Washington SQ'iBGW"e Expansion- Tigard, Oregon ;:';'.•' u .. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES , Background 1991 traffic volumes on each key road segment within the study area were forecasted. These background traffic volumes do not include traffic resulting from the proposed new development at Washington Square, The 1991 background traffic volumes include 1990 observed traffic volumes plus traffic expected to be generated by developments in the vicinity that have been approved or are undergoing approval. The only major development that has been approved by the City of Tigard is the expansion of Lincoln Center on the west side of the Mapleleaf/Greenblarg Toad intersection. A retail center on the north side of Hall Boulevard has also been approved for development. However, due to changed plans, the City of Tigard staff irlicated that this development should not be included in the background traffic. The emoting office buildings at Lincoln Center have approximately ' �� y 725,000 square feet of office and two restaurants with approximately 17,000 square feet, The approved expansion p ansion will include a new office building with approximately 140,000 square ' meet. Although City of Tigard staff has indicated that this project has been placed on hold, site-generated traffic volumes for this development were estimated, Traffic estimates for each of the background traffic generators were developed based on: 1. The a .spartation Anal sis for t/he L ncol n Ce ,ter Develo meat, prepared by A. .. . Associated Transportation.Engineering and Phmning(Reference 4). 2. Existing driveway volumes counted by Kittelson and Associates in mid-,January' 1.991:1 N 3. Trip generation rates for similar office developments located throughout the county and summarized. in a standard traffic engineering reference manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (Reference 2) Figures 7 and 8 show the total 1991 Background traffic volumes during the a.m. and p.m: 4 . p eak hours without the�a�kin gton Square expansion, These volumes include the projected • traffic from the approved expulsion of the Lincoln Center Development.' 1. •� � ter Office �e � . ' • • y .. -26- TRAPFIC IMPACT fp • = f 4 a \ �s .pT ! (300 rt..,-- pip- j�,�moo'.".SJ-!-ep - 5}5 - - .,,,P - - z- - i t �� $[ �2dd 7275 S5� 340 _ h t?O. 4 y 0-251 • • - - .zpi+e°'3"n. �S -_'le�y��j4'�'.�,5 _ vs - h 7 0 -75Lif d G _ C -- - i5 125 _ 6 O. I !� � 1.60 _ t - " TO O " ;_()_ - ._ / / / c _ P� -.. �xa'O.Vim°p � % _ 17 - - - - _ - -400-G - - - - - --- ! _� q d Q s - ti.-e.. s s a CEMEARY � _-1.o _ - I)tr i 1 ..- 7-- 1 q . -4.4?- -- _ - __ _ isa�•-�4''3 Rato Yitl # T .',' --1-, _ . - -4 e//,/,, _____.__,,-,/,/, _ . . _ .. .. : - 't,°ar►.......ra ' o JSO `iy '. • ,_ /•rte . CASCADE AVE. TZs� _ _ r rp ba� a-. yr • 217 '411111114, - iO __ - -_ yid yp�----_�_IS r_ _ - - - -- - - .,_ _.fizt----_ - - __-_------_-<-7---77 - _- _ __ . _f _ _ _,,,, -3- _- _ __ __ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _., _ - - - - - - - - - -- - - - J S a- , - add -x-10. - _ 2y _- i�O -j30 4:,,..._ L - l BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES ME -- (A M. PEAK HOUR. 745-8.15) WASHWQTO/I SQUARE F p u r. � _, ' _ - —27— XPANSION November 1991 _ -- -- s- - - - as - - _ --' -- R I Sr may° �oo: jo - _f�° �as� F ss�s - -- sus°''! ►✓t�:: s - 1p �4--SIg �7 -!� SSp`s - Ip�g ��7; y °t i-Il>1-- 5- t,-- _ - cbt *‘e-a) re b " S t'1- J rQ: -) ,a 1- 7 n`• fig. 2s�}I 1a / ...,9„ `\_ N, 7�0 �f l sp 1 -_ _ - - g- - `a s—s Jp j - n'°253 t 'N. / -- 1 :-s -:-. __. / _- - .::,.. : , _ _ - - - _ _ Jtsx--„,. _,..-st\\ 4,1er• ..P.s.py- - __ - -- --__,.,.,.. 7i1;e �'��, R NgL'RC RG 1. —_ - 10°yam-- !y _ (11;a3.."_ '- -- :-- _ ::,- cy w o S a CEMETARY WASFL-SQ. a -- "'*- �3 sp - - TL�O� '� as J� _ ,,,.:- r �. - c 2f181�iK3T � SOUPS UM _. to O ` f � T�3�JC •• 7. yp \ z - k - t ;1--- -- i l p ` 01111.011MINIM - - . •CASCADE a v atop n�4""'.140- , _ 4 ti 3 - S S- S Q'rn y jS. n v - ti..3,- - s i,•F TS\s s j� SI szo •o4 1�5_►k nas•� .111....111... 9SS F p -}_- _ - - - BACKeROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES - (P.,`,M.-PEAK HOUR. 4.30-5.30) - i NASHINGTON SQUATS Figure - , _ -28- ' XPA Sort , - - ,• November 99-1— 1 . r r k Ti. f n ''. o•. I,�r� ...,.0 ...r.-,a ...1..4 ....._..x«...«..:rl..,A�,....-r.-...,........�..+ x. ,.»...x�......r....-�,.,. • .,, ...-4.w�.n......u...r-1......1.x......w..+ x�J.IAI�µ,,,•w+..A n1I�.........�...•u...r.t..�....+.n�.L.. •w«w✓A...._�.u i T dA Washington Square Expansion Ti,gard, Oregon ' i .. � .,. �• .. •. TIMEXvn,4- •-� . nm �...�•..,....n. rte..+.•, s. ..«.rrr!. TI �� BACKGROUND LEVELS OF SERVICE PEAK HOUR Sig7ria ized. Unsignalized . Intersection Delay V/O LOS Reserve LOS Ratio Capacity Hall Blvd/217 South 23.1 .83 C Hall Blvd/Scholls F3, 32.2 .86 Hall Blvd/Wash.Square 5.0 .66 A Hall'Blvd Target Ace 4.7 .48 Hall Blvd/Greenburg Rd 2148 .79 C • Hall Boulevard/CTS Bank ' 75 � Fy ' Schohs, /V1'asla Square r • Scholls 217 North Off 11.1 .79 Scholls 1"y/21F?North 8.4 •' • Greenburg,/217 South 29. .78 C Greenburg/217 North : 18.8 .86 O Greenburg/Mapleleaf 1 . .72 • • Greenburg/WVash S Ace 240 C f.. Greenburg/Wash M Ace 220 C Cxreetibur aah N.Acc, 270 0 Greenburg Locust 10.1 �� 116 • r Greeri'burg/Casca.de . 7 8�, I B f 4n -29- l'.1ZALFFIC IMPACT'ANALYSIS r . _..._..._., .....,.. ,F ... ,.wr.... ._x. . i..-• ..,, m n. ., _ .......`v...F.mt.i.,. .w L.c..n«..1.«rJ.....r.a...N w....1...1_.IA...... '• • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES • Background 1991 traffic volu raes on each key road segment within the study area were forecasted. These background traffic volumes do not include traffic resulting from the . proposed new development at Washington Square. The 1991 background ground trafc volumes include 1990 observes.traffic volumes plus traffic expected to be generated by developments in the vicinity that have been approved or are undergoing approval. The only major development that has been approved by the City of Tigard is the expansion of Lincoln Center on the west side of the MapleleafYGreenburg Road intersection. A retail center on the north side of Hall.Boulevard has also been approved for development. However, dine to changed plans, the City of Tigard staff indicated that this development should not by included in the background traffic. The existing office buildings at Lin.coln Center h=ve approximately , 725,000 square feet of office and two restaurants with approximately 17,000 square feet, The approved expansion will include a new office building with approximately 140,000 square feet. Although City of Tigard staff has indicated that this project has been placed on hold, site-generated traffic volumes for this development were estir a,ated. Traffic estimates for each f . .. of the background traffic generators were developed based on: 1. The 7Cransportatiou Ana� sis for the T,in+�olaiL Centereyelot�ment, prepared by • Associated Transportation Engineering and Planning(Reference 4). 2. Existing driveway volumes counted by Kittelson and Associates in mid-January 1991, 3. Trip generation rates for similar office developments located throughout the y and summarized standard county ai�ized i�. a traffic engineering reference manual tbli ►hed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (Reference 2). Figures 7 and 8 show the total 1991 Background traffic volumes daring the a.m. and p.m. peak hours without the Washington a xg ans�on. These volumes include the projected :. traffic from th® �pprov ede expansion the Yincon Center Office Jeel ap�ent: • PRAPPIC 21 IMPAC ANALYSIS , .ifs'F1 3 Washington Square Expansion•Tigard, Oregon • TABLE • PROJECTED TRIP GENERATION CHARACTRRISTICs for the PROPOSED WASHINGTON SQUARE EXPANSION NSIO • Weekday Saturday Total P.M. Peak Hour(A,B) Mid-Day Peak k Hour A,B • Million (A.M. Peak Hour) Scenario � � Sq. Ft. � Daily (C) *(Sat) Total In. Out Total In Out ut) • •. • BExisting 1.178 38,260 3,320 1,560 1,760 4,245 2,165 2,080 Center *(45,970) (765) (535) (230) Expanded ' 1.353 , 40,130 3,470 ' 1,63 . 1,840 4,400 2,245 2,155 .. �'. Center *(47,680) (795) (555) '. (240) , Expansion ' .069 1,870 150 70 80 80 75 '�; *(1,710) (30) (20) (10) fro -,ins 40 20 20 (D) llew "rips 110 50 60 • 11V.M 1rwYOwm Notes: A. Includes both Inbound and outbound trips. A.M. peak hour trips are shown in parenthesis. B. Assumes that no trips are made via transit. y trips weekday ..Saturday are shown. The Saturday daily trips C. ]��l tri s estY�ates for the weekda and�>�tiulrt�a are marked by(*) and shown in p erenthesis. JD. Although:drop-in trips occur luring the Saturday peat hour,they were not estimated for y, since the Saturday peak hour was determined use�n this study noe th a�tur�ay� . . . the critical . , us y . . ea c a�x rrnane to not be xoa time period foxy,stud -32- TRAFFIC W,11 `.PACD ANAL YS L° I, i' ' '� a ., I ��•. • Washington Square Expansion Tigard, Oregon ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 1. ti . I Analysis of Shopping Trip Types traffic impacts of proposed expansion on the street system, I I ,, In evaluating thc,tr P P Posed e�pans' a surrounding s it is important to realize that for commercial developments, there are different types of vehicle trips, and that each type has'a different effect the street system. Generally,there are three basic types of trips associated with any retai.Ucommercial development: • -- a7 i� the roadways that,provide 1. Drop-in Trips -These retail trips alr�,�dy exist off.t y P primary access to the Washington Square Shopping Mali. and are being made . P t'y PP• g ° for some purpose other than shopping at the Mall(for example,home-to-work). Drop-in trips do not result in any increase in background traffic volumes within the study area. In fact,the only impact of these drop-in trips occurs at the site driveway(s),where they become turning movements into and out of the proposed retail center instead of through movements Therefore;drop-in trips have no additional effect on the road system beyond the development's driveways. In this case many of these drop-in. trips are likely work-to-home from Highway 217. These trips will only impact the roadways adjacent to Washington Square and will,not increase the traffic on Highway 217. • � S q 2. Diverted Trips -- These shopping trips are currently being drawn to other commercial activities that compete wiith. the proposed retail center, but are redirected to the new store when it opens. This redirection usually occurs r. because of an improvement in shopping convenience and proximity for the affected drivers, Diverted trips will result in an. increase in traffic volumes within the immediate vicinity of the site, but will also result in a decrease in traffic volumes at other locations within the area (i.e., in areas where they used to shop). Therefore,this component of the total generated demand causes no change in the total number of vehicle trips within the 04ea,even though it may add to the number of trips within the immediate " ' ' y va.crny.t of the site. . Another side benefit is that by dive rting, these trips often cause, a net j I re- duction in total vehicle� es traveled on the areawide transpo rtation sy stem., This is a co m mon se nse observation, since it is difficult to imagine that many drivers would divert to a new retail center in order to travel a greater distance than they did previously: 3. New Trips -,r These retail trips would not have been made without the ti mall. Therefore, is the only trip ' ea�.sterACe of the this is xp type that r;�esnits in an, Y33. TRAFFIC T A„1y SrS ••■ , • . • • • • ' • ••• • • • • •••■■■••• Washington Square Expansion• Tigard, Oregon I .• I • increase in the total number of vehicle trips made within the area. These are , also the only vehicle trips that represent additional vehicle miles of travel on ( the areawide transportation system. Although traffic engineers have long recognized the existence of these three different types of retail trips, until recently very little research has been conducted to detrmine what proportion of the total retail center-generated traffic demand can be attributed to each of these trip types. Because this issue is critical in determining the likely traffic impacts of the • proposed center,Kittelson &Associates,Inc.has conducted a special analysis t-better define the probable breakdown of sit,e-generated vehicle trips among these three categories. 4, r Based on both the results of this special analysis and an engineering review of the transportation system serving the study site,the existing traffic volumes and the movements of traffic going to the mall,it was assumed for the purposes of tilic raffi.c analysis 25 percent e01 . „ b of all weekday evening peak hour vehicle trips to the propoeed. )31 center can reasonably be assumed to be drop-in trips already passing by the site on Highway 217,Greenburg Road, • Hall,Boulevard and Seholis Ferry Road. Based on the existing volumes,the majority of drop- in trips are from Highway 217,while smaller portions of drop-ins come from Hall Boulevard and Greenburg Road. The distribution of shopping trips to Washington Square are shown in Figure 94 Trip distribution patterns relative to major feeder roadways in the vicinity were examine.d to obtain an estimate of trip distribution patterns within the study area. In addition, the distribution of site-generated trips onto the roadway system within the k tudy iinpact area was estimated. through examination of entering driveway traffic data provided by the , shopping center. It is believed that the assumed vehicle trip distribution pattern represents a best estimate based upon available knowledge of eNisting and future conditions. Figure 10 shows the assignment of site-generated trips to the study area roadway system for a typical weekday p.m, peak hour. TOTAL 1991 TRAFFIC VOLUMES , • • a The 1991 background volumes were thea added to the site-generated traffic volumes, resulting in the total 1091 traffic volurr,es, These forecasted weekday p.m. peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 11. The site-generated traffic volumes were then added to the p.m, peak hour background traffic volumes, The projected total traffic volumes with the expansion of Washington Square are " shown in Figure 114 •• -34, TRAFFIC' MPACD ANALYSIS • , : , • a ». .. , y NORTH 217 • . �., + 1T20°10 W . . • 0 , , , , , . ., , . • . , . , . v , , . , h M t c SUITES Z vSQ •I �,� , . , (5.1))/ ' ' 'TARGET , ' •,,, . lr�O5 U.S.US R . i : ,r, . . , . W ' 1111114.114i y',., / r . SQUARE, . . ,. , . . �. , , . , , . . , , , , , , . . , , dos. Q. , , ca ,/ /2//• L ST. m C EIEA►�Y z r w_ . •Fir' H Sq. LQG.USf ST: • T�t� .l i At� F sr T f t. 1. . r �q i � �y�r 6e�� � �A.A 1�1 AS t� , O 1tf i'e '55- E _. .. .J+ 'deri 47,9F9A • . • . • - ae� } t k • yI (7— _n r >� q_. `' o - s� toy I a-s 7---- -----2,_ ° ,.„, _ CRf 4 f Age c RA / - \\ CEldE3AftY r/AS !f — _ °_► z HDO�Q. s v W "° r r m R0t,4i 'p osmium scum WU f -r a br Cr /7 r ��Js +�r F- , oa ..a CASCADE AVE ` r f_ - -- - - - _ - ° , '1/4.4 / 1..''' : , .__ -i -,, :711 F_ . I::: v, . -. i 0, — SITE TRIPS £° HOUR i -- - • P.M. PEAK HOUR WASHINGTON SQUARE Figure F' }- _- .. EXPANSION -36.- November 1991 q 0 = s . a - f n_S-± X5- 0 ss�fir: n t a - , -.-: . ._ °":- i. i - _ : .P (u° 5 t p _ - �_ C g 4° -i.;,,,,_.-i.;,,,,_.--- ° d°am ,r s = y Q . 1 p # n �'o ao k-s° -- E 7- 2 rfi-- - - - -- \ - )1i.- - _. \ i SS "t (j(f y _._ ....2. _ . . __ _ . - -, .- „- - _ f 2T _ o � _ 7tip �.S- -- -- - . - - - 94 Q SERI 4R (*.j:‘ Y Soli_ f ro.04/: _ sr�t' ...Nil.. RY ROAD NAtL/ te i -,°ice 40;;"4.2 a. 'r is t . fiiir . cascaa v `� � �J as,,,, to ..P.,?.?...-i' ,1 - f _ . _ .:t . - - . R°?s n J3 ry Via? 2j_ Cry .\\t,.-_v q._ _ L___ --Ifs' 4tp�a Jgs �°t00i ! d 9 v. dJO I_ - - - - - i- - - TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES € WITI rAPANSiQiV .). ',-. - - - - !SH1NQTONQUARE - - - i I tmDa.► 1 991 � 1 - _4:•tt t_. F_ 4 • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF MALL EXPANSION The 1991 forecasted tad volun e s wit h the project were then analyzed to determin® the future ,, weekday p.m.peak hour intersection service levels. Table 8 identifies the results of the LOS analysis for each major intersection within the study area, based upon the projected total 1991 peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figure 11. .As this table indicates,traffic conditions , at study area intersections will not worsen appreciably. Ten of the eighteen intersections studied will not experience an y change e in overall level of g service or intersection delay. Of the intersections that are even minimally affected by the proposed expansion, none will experience a change in level of service. The same capacity deficiencies that are experienced during the existing and background p.m. , peak hours at the Hall l3oulevard/Scholls Ferry Road intersection, Scholls Ferry Road/Washington Square inbound intersection and at the Greenburg interchange will also b e experienced with the expansion ansxo n of Washington Square.are Th e levels of service for these , intersections will remain the same and only minor increases in delay will be experienced at a limited number of intersections. Each of these intersections is discussed ire.the rest of this' section. ' The average vehicle delay during the p.m. peak hour will only increase approximately 2.6 seconds at the Hall Boulevard/Scholls Ferry Road intersection with tba proposed expansion , of Washington Square. This is a very small increase (4%) and will not have a significant • effect on the operation of the intersection. It is recommended that guidesigning for customers visiting the mall from Hall Boulevard to the west be revised to read "Washington Square ', Second Right" instead of "Washington Square Right Lane" as it does now. This would decrease the mall's impact on both the Hall/Scholls Ferry intersection as well as the a Washington Square Entrance on.Scholls and make better use of the Hall driveway,which has an abundance of excess capacity. At the Greenburg 'g y northbound intersection the level of service will remain • Greenbur RAadlHa. hwva 217 north?bo the same and the average intersection delay is only expected to increase 2 seconds(3%)with the expansion of Washington Square. The ,+ y 1 p ry T'he Greenburg RAad/1=hghwa 217 se�uthboun�.rant... �.nters+�c;tYian 1 � ' is currently operating at ' an unacceptable e level, With the proposed expansion of Washington Square the level of' and delay will remain=changed Therefore,there will be no noticeable effect on this intersection with the proposed!expansion of Washington Square. The Washington q entrance on Scholls Ferry Road will experience a small drop in res erve capadty(25 vehicl e gaps) as a result of the Washington Square expansion but will con_ tnaue to operate at LOS"Ft. Delays for inbound vehicles into Wasliington.Square will,not be significantly increased. -36 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS • Washington Square Expansion-Tigard, Oregon T.AlBLE 8 " FUTURE LEVELS OF SERVICE WITh (AND WITHOUT)EXPANSION P.M.PEAK HOUR " Signalized(1) Unsigned(1) Intersection Delay V/C LOS Reserve LOS ■ Ratio Capacity , Hall Blvd/217 South 36.5 .9.9 D (36.1) (.99) (D) • Hall Blvd/Scholls Fy 63.3 1.07 F' , . � (60.7) (1.06) (F) Hall Blvd/Wash Square 10.9 .63 B (10.6)` (.61) (B) Hall Blvd/Target Acc 5.6 .66 B (5.6) (.65) (B) Hall BlvdlGreenburg Rd 33.0 .93 D (32.3) (.93) (D) Hall Boulevard/LIS Bank 12 (12) (E) Scholls Fy Rd/217 South 27.6 .99 D (27,4) 9 9 (0) ( • Scholls Fy/217 North Off 11.5 .81 B (11.5) (.81) (B) Scholls Fy/Wash Square F e -25 F Scholls Fy/217 North 20.2 .81 C (18.4) .78 Greenburg/217 South 43.6' .96 Fl (43.6) (.96) (Ed) Greenbug/217 North 69,9* .91 F` (67,91') ( 7) I I and traffic conditions shown in Table enthesXS (�;�#�) represent background . Values in 'Parenthesis re resent back o 6 Re • . ` Boulevard, west of 2. Revised ,� �desitghneri�enter�vxa the � Scholl. Heal Boulevard wo .... y divert', the s Ferry... Road would dYv traffic visiting Scholls access to the access. This diversion would in turn- improve m. rove the operation p " n at the Scholia access to reported levels. • -89- TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS I I , ' � i � .1 � � ` � � � i �, � �..YJi.4.,.y i.�Nl.awNn..r-e.Mrr.X...x,,,••A-.-•J..L„u,-h'-„ir i.V.M.4�+:Wru Washington Square Expansion-Tigard, Oregon TABLE 8 Continued FUTURE LEVELS OF SERVICE WITH(AND WI'TOUT)EXPANSION T t, P.M.PEAK HOB Signalized Unsignalized Intersection Delay V/C LOS Reserve LOS Ratio Capacity Greenburg/Mapleleaf 26.9 89 D (26.9) (.85) (D) Greenburg/Wash S Ace 325 B (325) (B) Greenburg/Wash M Ace 130 D (130) (D) G eenburg/Wash N Ace 175 D (175) (D) Greenburg/Locust 14.1 .62 (14.1) (.62) (B) Greenburg/Cascade 11.9 .77 B (11:9) (.77) (B) 1. Values in Parenthesis (####)represent background traffic conditions shown in Table 6. -40- TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ' r ,..,,.,',�, ...,. .,.",'�.,..n �� ,•,x,,..., „n....,. o-,:.r.,,..�. c,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,„w., .„w.,...,.,..,.,.,,. .,,., ..,.,,.�,,..., ... .,., , ......,.. ;.:.,•. o ,..r�.i.r .e.,,,,., n .n, .,r.w ....., � x....,,o-.,r ... nl' .., .I,i�.�:.,rn .,,�. ,. x �....,.d�.,,...1,.., • • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Washington Square vicinity is one of the most accessible commercial and retail areasin • the Portland metropolitan area. Washington Square and surrounding developments are served by three interchanges and three State Highways which offer excellent shopping and business opportunities. Because of the expansive development, traffic demands in the last tz, decade,since the development of Washington Square, have substantially increased. At the j " same time, improvements to the roadway system have not ntet the demands. The existing roadway system has some major deficiencies. The major locations of deficiencies are listed below: 1. Washington Square Entrance on Scholls Ferry Road. 2. The Greenburg Road interchange. 3. The Hall Boulevard/Scholls Ferry Road intersection. 4. The Scholls Ferry Road/Washington Square Entrance Each of these intersections experiences major capacity deficiencies under the existing traffic demand during the p.m. peak hour. The expansion of Washington. Square will not significantly change the operations of these intersections. The impact of the traffic generated by the mall expansion is very minimal relative to the existing traffic volumes. As discussed earlier in this report, traffic engineers generally consider that an increase of less than ten percent in traffic is relatively insignificant. The proposed project represents an increase of less than ten percent in traffic growth on an roadways and intersections in the study area. This further supports the conclusion that the proposed expansion has a relatively insignificant impact upon the operations of the adjacent.+oadway system. A recommended mitigation for the capacity deficiencies on Scholls Ferry Road would be to provide improved gui desi gning to redirect Washington Square-bound traf�c to the e I3all Boulevard entrances. This would relieve pan, peak traffic problems at both of the identified Sch olls Fer ry problem locations, while better utilizing capacity a t the Hall Boulevard entrance, The traffic problems in the vicinity of Washington Square are a product of the increase in ' .• c associated� h man developments such as Washington Square, Lincoln Center,Kohl l Business Center, Lm bassy Suites, Target, Laimonts and other smaller developments in combination with increases in re ional background, traffic. gY gr a�ic. The improvements required to • bring capacity-deficient intersections to acceptable levels are very costly nature y regional i.n and will have a s� costly, Th n it,is a traffic re ' gx�xfi.can.t effect on the circulation of tr cut the Therefore, recommended . d reprehensive t. stud.; the area be conducted to d that a co transportation y of the area , determine near-term and long-term traffic needs: The study should consider a ten to twenty year future, This study would also determine appropriate staging of f improvements ements over the n ext to 20 ear•• future. trno er such a comprehensive study.,.,these improvement costs could be fstirly allocated more directly to future developments over the course of t h e study period. -41- CONC.�i"I0.SIONS.AND RECC111IENDATION8 �,_ • • CJ{.'I s..��.Y.,..._,�»,....,m�i4.Gh1�.:.n::,L.rw • Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon REFERENCES 1. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual. Special Report Number 209 (1985). 2. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation, Fourth Edition (1987). 4 . 3. Tri-Met. Transportation & Guide Map. September 1989. 4. Associated r ransportat:on Engineering and Planning. Traffic Analysis for Lincoln C'ertter. (September, 1990). I I , -42- R E. iNCE"S • • � r.. _..X..•......a A........�n�...i...n,....♦,..,.n»..-.I.n..♦.,.._xs._ •,..,1....,._ .. .r..t.,....a... ..r..i r i I ,r. .+..u,u:...,,...�+....h,A�•,:41».Itt...:♦4:0.:.u..w.14wH.1...i...h.1•....N.�IUA41%a.l...�..�.r-........-J.+.w....r.r....vv. r Washington Square Ktpan,sion,- Tigard, Oregon • • I a APPENDIX A • r ( I lul .,. r .r,..N. .„ .ir♦�rr ..., .., � .. ... .... .. .. „. ..., x�wruwwrrwK J '1.I -43- il.PPEND.Dr. • • '�a'• _p . n • .'. �„.. ,„.,w, ..........,_,w,a»....., .,............S,Cs,_:µ[..:,.,..tA._.,—..M:'w..u+Ada....4_:,,-.`:�',1n..:,a...�...uxrua.,...:,..x„_. r: t Washington Se dare Expansion- Tigard, Oregon APPENDIX A . DESCRIPTION OF LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA METHODS OF EVALUATION j' Level of Service (LOS) is a concept developed to quantify the degree of comfort (including such elements as travel time,number of stops,total amount of stopped delay,and impediments caused by ' other vehicles)afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or roadway segment. Recent research has determined that average stopped delay per vehicle is the best available measure of the LOS at a signalized intersection. As defined within the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual(Reference 2), six grades are used to denote the various LOS; these six grades are described qualitatively for • signalized intersections in Table 1A. Additionally,Table 2A identifies the relationship betWeen level. of service and average stopped delay per vehicle. Using this definition, a "D” LOS is generally considered to represent the minimum acceptable design standard. i. For signalized intersections, LOS defines the quality of the traffic flow, but does not necessarily gosh � q describe the overall design adequacy of the intersection to accommodate the traffic volumes being analyzed. As an example, a good LOS can be achieved even when the volume/capacity ratio for the . , intersection exceeds 1.0, Similarly, there are conditions under which a poor LOS is achieved even • though the volume/capacity ratio for the intersection is well below 1.0. Therefore, all signalized intersection summary tables contained in this report provide both the calculated. LOS and the . calculated volume/capacity ratio for each intersection. In this way, the reader is provided with a ' complete description of the expected operating conditions for each signalized intersection that is ,, analyzed. The calculation of LOS at an unsignalized intersection requires a different approach: The 195 y , • Highway Capacity Manual includes a methodology for,calculating the LOS at two-way stop-controlled intersections. For these unsignalized intersections, LOS is defined differently than for signalized intersections in that it is based upon the concept of",Deserve Capacity"(i.e., that portion of available hourly capacity that is not used). A qualitative description of the various service levels associated with • an unsignalized intersection is presented in Table 3A. A quantitative definition of LOS for an =signalized intersecti om n is presented in d Table 4A. The reserve capacity eit Y conce P applies plies only to an individual traffic movement or to shared lane movements. Once the capacity of all the individual • movements has been calculated and their LOS and expected delays determined,an overall evaluation of the intersection can be made. Normally,the movement having the worst LOS defines the overall evaluation, but this may be tempered by engineering judgement. Past experience.. with the =signalized d analysis pr indicates that this his methodology ... is very y conservative in that it tends to overestimate the magnitude of a y p o tential problems that might exist. . Therefore,the results of any unsignalized intersection analysis should be reviewed with this thought . in mind. Generally, LOS his considered to be acceptable for an=signalized in tersectaon' al though . it also indicates that the need for signalization should be investigated. • 1 - � APPENDIX A ti ., Washington Square Expansion-Tigard; Oregon Table :LA GENERAL LEVEL OF SERVICE DE'SCRIPTIONS FOR IJNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LOS General Description A - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 0 and 10 seconds - Nearly all drivers find freedom of operation - Very seldom is there more than one vehicle in the oueue - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 10 and 20 seconds Some drivers begin to consider the delay an inconvenience Occasionally there more than one vehicle the queue C - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 20 and 30 seconds Many times there is more than one vehicle in the queue - Most drivers feel restricted, but not objectionably so D - Average delay per vehicle ranges between,30 and 40 seconds - Often there is more than one vehicle in the queue - Drivers feel quite restricted I E - Represents a condition in which the demand is near or equal to the probable maximum number of vehicles that can be accommodated by - the movement - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 40 and 60 seconds d , There is almost always more than one vehicle in the queue Drivers glad the delays to be approaching intolerable levels F Forced,flour Represents an intersection failure condition that is caused by geometric and/or o rah±°coal constraints external to the interseCtaon. * -45. A x , Ia .,u._...........�_,.�...,....,,.»... ,.�...c»j..i...»,...«,r.,.....,,_,�..�u.. w-........,..._._,.....»..,...,-.�.,.�. - ��......... ....,. .. _ ._ •_. �i„_.•,....._....«.....-.... y,M-....,._.»..,,ua.''u....»....�..i 4.t.:..l.J._:_.L;i.w..«�,::`.. ..t�i;�,rsr�........__ ., • Washington Square Enpa~,sion- Tigard, Oregon • Table 2A LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR I7NSIGNALIZED 11NITERSECTIONS Reserve Capacity . Level,of Expected Delay to (peph) Service Minor Street Traffic .. 400 A Little or no delay 300-399 B Short traffic delays 200-299 C Average traffic delays 199-300 D Long traffic delays 0-99 E Very long traffic delays WOK * When demand volume exceeds the capacity of the lane, extreme delays will be encountered with queuing r which may cause severe congestion affecting other traffic movements frt.the intersection. This condition usually warrants improvement to the intersection. -46- APPENTDL7'A i I O. ' ..� ._ ., .,.. e.....,. ._,.. - .. _...., ».w.,.. , nrv. ... ,,,..A..w....--11.`....u.«u...r..rer.............. ...h.,Laa2. .r,.+.........._,r. ,jj 4 Washington Square Expansion- Zgard, Cif cgon • ['Able 3A ' b GENERAL LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS �. • :1Level-of- Service Traffic Flow Characteristics , . ° y A Very low average stopped delay,less than five seconds per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green ? phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. � B° ' Average stop delay is in the range of 5.1 to 15.0 seconds per vehicle. This ` generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of.average delay. C Average stopped delay is in the range of 15.1 to 25.0 seconds per vehicle. These , higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is s gni ca it at this level,although many still pass through the intersection wou stopping. without D Average stopped delays are in the range of 25.1 to 40,0 seconds per vehicle. The V • Influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle length, or high volume/capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not- stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. E Average stopped delays are in the range of 40.1 to 60.0 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally V � indicate poor,progression,long cycle lengths, and high volume�c apacity ratios. , Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences, s ' F Average stop delay is In excess of 60 seconds pe r vehi • cle. This is considered to be t unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with oversaturation.. It may also occur at hi g h u olu me%a acity ratios below 1.00 with many ny individual daal cy cle failures. Poor progression and long c y cle lengths may also be major ., • contributing causes to such high lei ls, Note: .signal cycle failure is considered to occur when one or more vehicles r cbnsi' are forced to wait through more than one ug green signal indication for a particular t . approach., -47. .nTD', • i I L. sip �,. ....,. ..,, .. ... .. ..,..,,. . ., ...,.. .. ....... ..,.,. ,.,, I lh ' ....,..........._.i..,...+aLt_w.....,c...»� .....�...._......,....`_r...,,• .- - ., -,... ..,.,.,....,_..,,. - .�., N.... +.«,�_,m.._.,.....<..,.nl»u::ta,a�,,-,..-A.-Iw -....,.-._�n-.,,daL.w-..p,.r3.,,A..t,....f,.l..,-.� , Washington Square Expansion- Tigard, Oregon S z . able " LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITEIUA FOR „ SIGNALIZED INI'ERSECTIONS ”a Level-of'-Service Stopped Delay per Vehicle (See) • A <= 5.0 B 5.1 to 15.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 Ll 25.1 to 4O.0 r • 40.0 to 60.0 60.0 �,. f Source: Transportation Research Board. "Highway Capacity Man .al". Special • Report 209 (1985) • I I .„ w..n.�.:..:.ri�'�w.,rN.yiy"�w�+.iwwn„� _ •r.�1..:+wi:r�iwr..�..' �. �� 1, -48- APPE.NZ) : ;. �' ��,�...� r- i�. r'.,: .. ,. ,.��. ��.. i.�,i i, �� . .i�., i�.,��� �� �,. �.. .,�, .. , � i .i � �. i� .. 1 n � •. ill � .� ., r ,.