The URL can be used to link to this page

02/02/2009 - Packet " City of Tigard Ph T l n lZ o Planning Commission — Agenda MEETING DATE: February 2, 2009, 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard—Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:0o p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m. 3.1 ELECTIONS 7:05 p.m. 4. APPROVE MINUTE'S 7:15 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 7:15 p.m. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PD) 2008-00001 - TIGARD RETAIL CENTER— REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval for concurrent review of a Planned Development concept plan and detailed development plan (PDR2008-00001) for development of an 18.16-acre vacant property with a proposed 137,900 square foot Target retail building and two additional 12,000 square foot retail buildings. In addition, there will be surface parking, landscaping, lighting, access and utility infrastructure improvements. The Concept and Detailed Plans will be reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at successive hearings. LOCATION: The property is located south of SW Dartmouth Street,west of SW 72nd Avenue within the Tigard Triangle. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map (WCTM) 1S136CD, Tax Lot 04200, WCTM 2S101BA,Tax Lot 00101, and WCTM 2S101AB Tax Lot 01400. ZONE: C-G (PD) General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA— FEBRUARY 2, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 2 6. PUBLIC HEARING b COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2008-00012/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2008-00006 COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN&MAP CHANGE REQUEST: The applicant is requesting amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps to change the Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Classification for three parcels (approximately .98 acres) from Low Density Residential (R-4.5) to Mixed Use Residential - 1 (MUR-1). The site is located on the east side of Hall Boulevard between Hunziker Street and Knoll Drive, within a small pocket of R-4.5 zoning. Sites on the west side of Hall Blvd. are zoned Central Business District (CBD). All three parcels of the site are within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. LOCATION: 12340 and 12360 SW Hall Boulevard, and 8485 SW Hunziker Street. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 800, 900 and 1000. ZONES: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally; and MUR-1: Mixed Use Residential District. The MUR-1 zoning district is a high density designation applied to predominantly residential areas where mixed-uses are permitted when compatible with the residential use. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Residential to Mixed Use Residential 1. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, 2, 10 and 15 of the updated Comprehensive Plan, and Policy 8 of the previous Comprehensive Plan; Metro Functional Plan, Title 1; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 10 and 12. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 9:15 p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT 92O p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA- FEBRUARY 2, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 of 2 Tigard Planning Commission Agenda Item # Page k of I Date of Hearing 2 - a- C) C\ Case Number(s) - O OOc) Case Name- � rcX ��c C (>_,,V Location SCp-,-k� 3.,., v oLJA ��, U 's S w 2.r.a eve If you would like to speak on this item, please PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (for the proposal): Opponent (against the proposal): Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: 11,„ • " City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Re: Tigard Retail Center Detailed Plan Review (Continuation from February 2, 2009, Planning Commission Hearing to Time Certain) Date: January 16, 2009 At the December 1, 2008 Planning Commission hearing, the Commission unanimously passed a motion for approval of Planned Development Review (PDR) 2008-00001, concept plan review, with the following conditions: Applicant to provide additional feedback on the following items — • Adequate screening for the Hermoso neighborhood. • Further conversation with City Arborist. • Further discussion regarding the parking lot and the plantings within the parking lot, both with the respect to the number and overall canopy, width to the soil vault, and the viability of the trees to produce the canopy. • Further discussion on LID [low impact development] green building practices, LEED practices for both the site and the building. • Address further discussion on police department concerns. • Take a look at the front façade of the Target store to see if there's a way to bring the right side of it down to more pedestrian scale. • Address willingness to put in bus shelter should one be deemed appropriate at some future date. • Meet with the Tree Board(January 28, 2009 meeting date). • Check to see if there are any incentives for energy aspects for the building. After discussion, the applicant chose February 2, 2009 as the date they will return for the public hearing on the detail plan. On December 18, 2008, the applicant requested an extension of the statutory maximum 120- day review period from January 31, 2009 to April 14, 2009 to accommodate additional time expected to adequately respond to the Commission's concerns. At the upcoming February 2, 2009 Commission meeting the applicant will request a continuance to a time certain (possibly March 16,2009) for Commission review of the detailed plan. • , COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS 4 • 6605 SE Lake Road,Portland,OR 87222•PO Bea 370•Beaverton,OR 07015 , Phone:503-884.0300 Fan:503.0203433 Entail: legals @eolmnuwspapers.com T I G n n PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, The following will be considered by the Tigard jjaaning depose and say that I am the Accounting Commission on Monday February 2.2009 at 7:00 Mt at the Tigard Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, Civic Center-Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon. Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this general circulation, published at Beaverton, matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by in the aforesaid county and state, as defined the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that forth in Section 18.390.060.E. The Planning Commission's review is for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City Council City of Tigard on the request. The Council will then.hold a public hearing on the Y 9 request prior to making a decision. Notice of Public Hearing TT 11236 Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard Plannir Division (Staff contact: Cheryl Caines. Associate Planner) a A copy of which is hereto annexed, was 41715 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 or by calling 503-f published in the entire issue of said `4 newspaper for COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT(C ``' 1 week in the following issue: 2008-00012/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2008-0( January 15, 2009 -COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORI` HOUSING PLAN &MAP CHANGF C I ft (41( Ct( C,1 t Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) Subscribed and sworn to before me this January 15, 2009. ,051 OFFICIAL SEAL .. 1 ROBIN A.BURGESS �L 4".• NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC FOR Ore COMMISSION NO.390701 My commission expires MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16,2009 4 Acct#10093001 Attn: Patty Lunsford City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Size: 24.5 Amount Due $204.57* 'Please remit to address above FAH—PCI- Cam , REQUEST: The applicant is requesting amendments to the Com- prehensive Plan and Zoning Maps to change the Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Classification for three parcels (ap- proximately .98 acres) from Low Density Residential (R-4.5) to Mixed Use Residential- 1 (MUR-1). The site is located on the east side of Hall Boulevard between Hunziker Street and Knoll Drive, within a small pocket of R-4.5 zoning. Sites on the west side of Hall Blvd. are zoned Central Business District (CBD). All three parcels of the site are within the Downtown Urban Renewal Dis- trict. LOCATION: 12340 and 12360 SW Hall Boulevard, and 8485 SW Hunziker Street. Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 800, 900 and 1000. ZONES: R-4.5: Low- Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without ac- cessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted condition- ally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted condition- " ally;and MUR-1:Mixed Use Residential District. The MUR-1 zon- ing district is a high density designation applied to predominantly residential areas where mixed-uses are permitted when compatible iP with the residential use. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNA- TION: Low-Density Residential to Mixed Use Residential 1. AP- PLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390;Comprehensive Plan Goals 1,2, 10 and 15 of the updated Comprehensive Plan,and Policy 8 of the previous Comprehensive Plan;Metro Functional Plan,Title 1; and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 10 and 12. t-'� �,� vx.7ein imp ' ccueDtaeRi;so�ueoe.mooc , ;tio, CO.WUMiT PkR 7.7.9$ PJh 6� ... '\` 2�Ty% IMP AMENDMENT f0 G 1" \ t < z>.Nk\ \4. 41 : , ,_,._ Py `` \,,,,,:;\\ \\</:p/),\\/40\ .\4 W4It N f iN \ 01, � Publish January 15,2009, TT11236 ?0,__4 (__) )-J /4 ?) Er, Tigard Planning Commission Agenda Item # Page J of Date of Hearing_2 - 2, - C, Case Number(s) CQfA 2c-do`;-00b CZ_h...e4 ZUO R_no C6/0 Case NameN4 �`,�t�cSr A �vlc�1 �� s� �� Iv�c�� t�Nc� Location 1 z 3`i c °t 1 2-3(DC 50 J\-\c `z %4 3 u•n�i e r `�`� , If you would like to speak on this item, please PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (for the proposal): Opponent (against the proposal): Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Agenda Item: (D Hearing Date:February 2,2009 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE 1111 PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONE MAP AMENDMENT FILE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA) CPA2008-00012 Zone Change (ZON) ZON2008-00006 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps to change the Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Classification for three parcels (approximate) .98 acres from Low Density Residential (R 4.5) to Mixed Use Residential - 1 (M R 1). The site is located on the east side of Hall Boulevard between Hunziker Street and Knoll Drive, within a small pocket of R-4.5 zonin . Sites on the west side of Hall Blvd. are zoned Central-Business District KBD). All three parcels of the site are within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. APPLICANT: Community Partners for APPLICANT'S MGH Associates Affordable Housing REP.: Greta Lavador P.O.Box 23206 104 W.9th St.,Suite 207 Tigard, OR 97281-3206 Vancouver,WA 98660 OWNER: Robert&Patricia Clickener 8485 SW Hunziker Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: 12340 and 12360 SW Hall Boulevard, and 8485 SW Hunziker Street; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S 101BC,Tax Lots 800,900 and 1000. CURRENT ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: R-4.5: Low Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7 500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. PROPOSED ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: MUR 1: Mixed Use Residential District. The MUR 1 zoning district is a high density designation applied to predominantly residential areas where mixed-uses are permitted when compatible with the residential use. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMIISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 1 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380, 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, 2, 10, and 15 of the updated Comprehensive Plan, and Policy 8 of the previous Comprehensive Plan; Metro Functional Plan, Title 1; and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 10 and 12. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change to the City Council. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Proposal Description The applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Designations and Zoning Map Classifications for three parcels totaling�aP,�prmoximate) 43,124 square feet (.98 acres) from Low Density Residential (R-4.5) to Mixed Use Residential (MUR 1). The application package includes a schematic site plan and elevations for an affordable senior housing project,The Knoll at Tigard, but this project is not part of this application. The plans are only provided for informational purposes. Any development on the site must be approved under a separate application. Site and Vicinity Information The subject site is made up of three tax lots and located east of Hall Boulevard between the intersections of Knoll Drive and Hunziker Street. According to the applicant all three tax lots are developed with single-family residences. These homes may have been used as day care facilities in the past based on City records (see Site History. The site is located within a small pocket of single-family homes zoned R-4.5. The three tax lots that make up the site are within the Downtown Urban Renewal Distnct. The district was approved by voters in May 2006 after the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (11)IP) was adopted in September 2005. Maps within the TDIP do not show the three parcels within the downtown, but the inclusion in the Urban Renewal District applies the TDIP to the site. The site is bound by streets on three sides, Knoll Drive to the north, Hunziker Street to the south, and Hall Boulevard to the west. Adjacent properties to the east are zoned R-4.5 like the subject site. Beyond the small pocket of residences 'the .properties are zoned Light Industrial (I-L), Industrial Park II--P), Central Business District CBD and General Commercial C-G . The area has a mix of commercial,and residential(es. F.xcluding this pocket of single-family, residential development in the area is multi-family, apartment buildings. Site History Staff reviewed the zoning history of the subject property utilizing old zoning maps and City records. The 1977 Land Use Map and Existing Comprehensive Plan Map show Tax Lots 800, 900 and 1000 as R 5/7 CUrban Low Residential). All subsequent versions of the City's Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning lassification show the subject lots designated R-4.5 (Low Density Residential). The three parcels were developed with single-family residences. Records show Conditional Use Permits to utilize the residences as day care facilities (Tax Lot 1000 - CU13-67 &CU16-68) (Tax Lot 900 - CU 15-80 &SDR 1-81) (Tax Lot 800 - CU 1-84), but all three structures are currently used as single-family residences according to the applicant's representative. In addition, a two lot Minor Land Partition was approved for tax lot 800 in 1980 (MLP 9-80), but was never completed. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 2 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE Stunmary of Issues: ♦ The site is located within the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan ( DIP),which calls for development of medium to high density residential along Hall Boulevard between Garden Place and Commercial Street. Currently this site is designated as Low Density Residential (R-4.5 zone). The proposed amendment will designate the site as Mixed Use Residential 1 (a high density mixed use zone,MUR 1). This change would bring the zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation of this site in agreement with the TDIP. • The TDIP favors the concept of moderate to higher density mixed use development, with housing availability for a wide range of income levels. The applicant has presented a conceptual plan for affordable,senior housing on the site. This type of development is possible within the MUR 1 zone,but a separate application and approval would be required to ensure it is constructed on the site. ♦ There are 3.17 acres of buildable lands zoned MUR 1 within Tigard compared to 172.4 acres of buildable land zoned R-4.5. Loss of 0.98 acres of R-4.5,Low Density land is insigruhicant. ♦ ODOT commented that the proposed MUR 1 Zone Change/Comprehensive Plan Amendment could result in unacceptable service levels at the Hwy 99/Hall Boulevard intersection. A trip cap has been requested to ensure the proposed amendment will not result in a significant effect upon transportation facilities. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.380: 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in Subsection B be ow. A. The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The Council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Section 18.30. The proposed zone change application to change the zoning on the subject lot from R-4.5 to MUR 1 also involves a comprehensive plan map amendment. Therefore, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to Council on the proposed zone change application and comprehensive plan map amendment. B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 18.380.030. B.1 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES The City has an acknowledged Comprehensive Plan consistent with the statewide planning goals. The applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies are addressed in this section of the staff report. The Comprehensive Plan is currently being updated. All the applicable goals and policies are within the updated Plan with one exception, Transportation (Chapter 8), which is addressed at the end of this section. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 3 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE State and Metro requirements help determine housing capacities on buildable land within the Portland Metropolitan Area - the state Metropolitan Housing Rule and Title 1 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Functional Plan). These requirements are applicable to this application and are addressed under the Housing goal below. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Policy 11.2 The City shall define and publicize an appropriate role for citizens in each phase of the land- and use planning process. Goal 1.2 Ensure all citizens have access to: A. opportunities to communicate directly to the City; and B. information on issues in an understandable form. Policy 1. The City shall ensure pertinent information is readily accessible to the community and presented in such a manner that even technical information is easy to understand. Policy 2. The City shall utilize such communication methods as mailings, posters newsletters, the Internet, and any other available media to promote citizen involvement and' continue to evaluate the effectiveness of methods used. Policy 6. The City shall provide opportunities for citizens to communicate to Council, boards and commissions, and staff regarding issues that concern them. The applicant's representative sent out notices to surrounding property owners and neighborhood representatives, posted a sign on the property and held a neighborhood meeting on November 11, 2008 in accordance with the City of Tigard's neighborhood meeting notification process. According to the minutes of the neighborhood meeting, 12 people attended. Attendee questions were related to the future development of the site, impacts of a multi-story building on neighboring properties, changes to public streets (Hall and Knoll), and public transit. In addition,the City has mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearing to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, interested citizens, and agencies,published notice of the hearing and posted the site pursuant to'11)C 18.390.050 for Type III Procedures. With these public involvement provisions and the applicant's documented participation, this application is consistent with applicable Citizen Involvement policies. LAND USE PLANNING Goal 2.1 Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. Policy 6. The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. Re-zoning the site from Low Density Residential to Mixed Use Residential 1 will increase the economic opportunities on the site. Currently the parcels are developed structures used as single-family residences. Redevelopment of this site with high density residential units may be a catalyst for other development within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 4 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE Policy 8. The City shall require appropriate public facilities are made available, or committed, prior to development approval and are constructed prior to, or concurrently with, development occupancy. Public water and sanitary sewer lines are found in all surrounding streets. Storm water must be collected and treated before released into an approved public system. There is a storm manhole at the corner of Knoll and Hall, but it is unknown if that is adequate to serve any future development. Prior to the approval of any specific development application, regardless of zoning, the applicant must provide information to show how the site would be served. Policy 14. Applicants shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that land use applications are consistent with applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan and,when necessary, those of the state and other agencies. The applicant has shown how the proposed zone change is consistent with the Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. This staff report illustrates how the request is consistent with both the code criteria and Comprehensive Plan policies. Policy 15. In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation; The site abuts three public streets (Hall Boulevard, Hunziker Road, and Knoll Drive). A Traffic Impact Study was repared by the applicant's traffic engineer, Frank Charbonneau of Charbonneau Engineering, LLC. Staff at the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has reviewed the study. Comments received from ODOT note that the study assumes only a 49 unit apartment complex for the worst case traffic scenario under the proposed MUR 1 zoning, but that MUR 1 zoning allows more units than this to be constructed. More units are possible since 50 units per acre is the minimum density, and there is no maximum density within the MUR 1 zone. More units could mean more vehicle trips from the site. ODOT requests that the City condition a trip cap be placed on the approval. Traffic impact is discussed further under the Transportation Goal. Sanitary and water lines are available in the streets. Storm water currently drains to a roadside ditch that parallels SW Hall Boulevard. Comments received from the Public Works department indicate that stormwater is an issue at this location. Prior to future development, the applicant would need to upgrade or connect to current facilities. B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services; A traffic impact study has been prepared by the applicant's engineer, Frank Charbonneau. The study considers development of the site with the maximum estimated density under the current R-4.5 zoning, with the anticipated use of senior adult housing, and with apartment units which is the allowed use that generates the most vehicle trips. The analysis shows the proposed zone change will not have a significant effect on the transportation facilities. ODOT agrees with this analysis, but requests a trip cap be placed on the approval. This issue is discussed further under the Transportation Goal. C. The new land use designation shall fulfill a proven community need such as provision of needed commercial goods and services, employment housing, public and community services, etc. in the particular location,versus other appropriately designated and developable properties; D. Demonstration that there is an inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated, land for the land uses that would be allowed by the new designation; STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 5 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE The Downtown Improvement Plan (1DIP) identifies the need for moderate to high-density, mixed use development with housing for a wide range of income levels. The site is located within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. -The current zoning is low density and the estimated maximum density is six units. Re-designation of the site to MUR 1 would help meet the desire for higher density housing, within the downtown. The applicant expects to develop the site with senior adult housing. Other possible uses could include multi-family housing. Both of these uses present opportunities to provide housing to a wider range of income levels than does single-family homes. This site is served by public transportation making it well-suited for higher density residential. A bus line runs along Hunziker Road . The Tigard Transit Center, with bus and gcommuteryrail service is within 1/4 mile of the site. Proximity to the downtown puts future residents within walking distance of restaurants, shops,commercial uses and the Tigard library. In addition, the applicant states that the City's Buildable Land Map (January 1, 2008) shows a supply of 0.76 acres of MUR 1 compared to 172.4 acres of R-4.5 zoned land, but the map actually shows 3.17-acres of MUR 1 land and 0.76 acres of MUR 2 land. Regardless the reclassification of one acre of low density residential land to Mixed Use Residential will not adversely impact the supply of low density buildable land. E. Demonstration that land uses allowed in the proposed designation could be developed in compliance with all applicable regulations and the purposes of any overlay district would be fulfilled; The applicant has provided conceptual architectural elevations and a site plan that demonstrate how a multi-family, senior housing development could be constructed in compliance with the MUR 1 regulations. There currently is no overlay districts for the site, but this may change in the future as new zoning,is developed for the downtown. Any future development would be reviewed for all applicable regulations prior to construction. F. Land uses permitted by the proposed designation would be compatible, or capable of being made compatible, with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses; and The site is located within a small pocket of single-family homes near a mix of industrial, commercial and multi-family uses. Only the eastern boundary of the site is adjacent to the single-family residences. The site is bound by streets on all other sides. If the site were redesignated to MM-1, then future development must meet the setback and buffering/screening tandards outlined in the Tigard Development Code. Setbacks in the MUR 1 zone are 20 feet when adjacent to residential zoning such as R-4.5. The applicant states that redevelopment of the site under the MUR 1 zoning would provide a buffer between the noise and traffic of SWldall Boulevard and the existing single-family homes. G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. There are no natural areas on or adjacent to the site that would be adversely impacted. If and when the site was redeveloped with higher density homes all stormwater would need to be collected and treated by an approved system. The applicant points out that allowing compact urban development will promote the preservation of open space m other areas of the City. The sites location will enable future residents to walk to services,reduce the dependence upon the automobile,and possibly improve air quality. Policy 16. The City may condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use(s) and per specific design /development requirements. The City Arborist has reviewed the proposal and noted that the conceptual plan appears to not take into consideration several large trees on site. He is suggesting the addition of a Planned Development (PD) overlay to ensure preservation of existing trees. While applying this overlay would allow more discretion by the decision makers for plan approval,the process maybe excessive in relation to the desired outcome. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 6 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNIITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE It is unknown if the applicant is considered existing trees when developing plans for future development. To ensure measures are taken to incorporate existing trees, the Planning Commission may choose to impose a condition for the applicant to design the site and locate buildings to preserve existing trees to the greatest degree possible, to demonstrate alternatives considered, to present information to show why the trees cannot be preserved, and/or to work with staff and consultants to find measures of preservation. ODOT has requested a condition be put on the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment approval. The condition is as follows: A condition of this zone change is that the site is limited to 300 trips per day, with a maximum of 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips. If the applicant or future property owners wish to allow for more trips by removing the condition,the applicant must re-apply for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment showing consistency with the Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660-012-0060 analysis will be required to determine whether the limit can be revised or removed. Policy 23. The City shall require new development, including public infrastructure, to minimize conflicts by addressing the need for compatibility between it and adjacent existing and future land uses. As discussed under other policies, this change from R-4.5 (Low Density) to MUR 1 (Mixed Use Residential 1) will encourage development of the site that is more compatible with the existing and future development in the downtown. Conflicts between the existing single-family homes in the area and future high density development would be mitigated by larger required setbacks and landscape buffering. HOUSING Goal 10.1 Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. Policy 1. The City adopt and maintain land use policies codes and standards that rovide opportunities to develop a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. Policy 2. The City's land use program shall be consistent with applicable state and federal laws. The City of Tigard maintains an up-to-date buildable lands inventory, a permit tracking system for development, as well as complying with Metro's Functional Plan. The City is responsible for monitoring residential development. All of these tools aid the City in monitoring its progress toward the above goals, and in determining if the opportunity remains for current and future residents to have diverse housing choices. State and Metro requirements help determine housing capacities on buildable land within the Portland Metropolitan Area - the state Metropolitan Housing Rule and Title 1 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Functional Plan).Both focus on increasing jurisdictions'housing capacity in order to use land within the UGB efficiently. The Metropolitan Housing Rule (OAR 660-007/Division 7) established regional residential density and mix standards for communities within the Metro UGB to measure compliance with State Goal 10. It set minimum residential density standards for new construction by jurisdiction. Tigard's target capacity is for an overall density opportunity of 10 or more dwelling units per net buildable acre. In addition it requires that jurisdictions designate sufficient buildable land to provide the opportunity for at least 50% of new residential units to be attached housing (either single-family or multiple-family.) STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING OOMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 7 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE The Metropolitan Housing Rule is as follows: OAR 660-007-0035 (3) Multnomah County and the cities gf Portland Grisham Beatertor, Hillsbom Lake Qs -•;• and Tigard nest prozide for an ozerall density cf ten or MOW duelling units per net buildable acre 4e are larger urlunzed jurisdictions with regionally coordinated population preyations of 50,000 or more for their actne planning arras, which encompass or are near major errploynyrrt writers, and which are situated along regional transportation corridors. OAR 660-007-0005 (1) A "Net Buildable Acre"consists of 43,560 square fed iresidentially designated buildable land after exduding present and future rights-of zey, rrstriad hazard areas,public open spaces and restricted resource protation arras. The City is currently in compliance with the Metropolitan Housing Rule as it can provide for an overall density of 10.42 units per net buildable acre (2,979 potential units*-divided by 286 net buildable acres"'). *Based on current zoning regulations for each property found on the buildable lands inventory. **Based on a total of 409.15 acres of residential and mixed-use buildable lands as of January 1, 2008 minus 20% for future rights-of-way and 10%for future parks/open space). Metro implements Goal 10 through Title 1 of the Functional Plan. To meet Title 1, each jurisdiction was required to determine its housing capacity and adopt minimum density requirements. Tigard adopted an 8C)% of minimum density requirement for development in 1998, which means that a development must build 80% of the maximum units allowed by the zoning designation. The City has committed to providing the development opportunity for an additional 6,308 dwelling units between 1998 - 2017. This number shows Tigard's zoned capacity for additional dwelling units. It is an estimate based on the minimum number of dwelling units allowed in each residential zoning district, assuming minimum density requirements. The numbers above are based on current zoning and density rates in Tigard. The City anticipates increased housing capacity with future zone and density changes brought about by the TDIP. Currently, the Central Business Distnct (downtown) zone allows for, but does not require, single-family housing at 12 units/acre and multi-family housing at 32 units/acre. In 2005, only 10% of downtown acreage was used for housing (TDIP2 September 2005). It is likely that the plan will result in greater residential density estimated at 40 unit/acre, on a greater percent of downtown acreage (up to 80%), estimated to yield approximately 1,200 units. Although these changes are not yet assured, they represent a general trend toward increased residential use and density in the downtown. Re-designating the site as MUR 1 increases Tigard's residential capacity, which further meets the state and regional housing goals and residential density goals within the downtown. Policy 3. The City shall support housing affordability, special-needs housing, ownership opportunities, and housing rehabilitation through programs administered by the state, Washington County, nonprofit agencies, and Metro. Policy 4. The City shall adopt and maintain land use regulations that provide opportunities to develop housing for persons with special needs. The scale design, intensity, and operation of these housing types shall be compatible with other land uses and located in proximity to supporting community services and activities. Metro Title 7 calls for voluntary affordable housing production goals to be adopted by local governments. The City has not adopted the goal of 319 affordable housing units units 2027 Report), but does have policies to encourage the development of affordable housing. Tigard provides the opportunity for single- family attached and multi-family housing within high density areas such as Washington Square, Central Business District (downtown Tigard), and the Tigard Triangle. The applicant would like to construct affordable senior housing on the site. A conceptual plan was provided with the application, but a specific development would require separate approval and is therefore not guaranteed. Even if the site were not STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/OOMMUNITY PARTNERS CDMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 8 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE developed with this plan, any multi-family development could possibly be offered as affordable housing. High density provides the developer lower land costs per unit than does low density, but it should be noted that development of this site with affordable housing is a possibility and not a guarantee at this point. Any future development requires approval under separate application. 5. The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in the areas such as town centers (Downtown), regional centers (Washington Square) and- along transit corridors where employment opportunities, commercial services,transit,and other public services necessary to support higher population densities are either present or planned for in the future. The site lies within a small pocket of R-4.5 zoning (Low Density Residential), but is also within the downtown. The current zoning is incompatible with the TDIP which calls for creating more housing of various types within the downtown and to accommodate a wide range of income levels The proposed Mi change to xed Use Residential 1 will allow the site to develop with high density residential in accordance with the downtown plan and Policy 5. The site is located along an existing transit corridor (Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Road), near employment opportunities and commercial services in downtown, and about 1/2 mile from the Tigard Library. Goal 10.2 Maintain a high level of residential livability. Policy 8: The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing or more intense land uses on residential living environments, such as: A. orderly transitions from one residential density to another; B. protection of existing vegetation, natural resources and provision of open space areas;and C. installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening. The applicant states that the proposed MUR-1 zone will provide an orderly transition from the heavily used transit corridors of Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Road to the existing low density residential uses. Standards within the Tigard Development Code such as larger setbacks between the proposed MUR 1 and existing R-4.5 zoning and buffering7screening requirements will also mitigate the impact of a more intense use adjacent to the existing single-family homes. Future development will be reviewed for compliance with these standards prior to plan approval. SPECIAL PLANNING AREAS- DOWNTOWN Goal : 15.1 The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. The applicant states that by approving the zone change to MUR 1, more people will be active in the downtown area. Future residents will walk from their home to work and to recreational amenities within the area. They will be patrons of the downtown retail and restaurants. Development of the site with multi-family residential will spur interest in the area and promote the City's vision of a vibrant urban village. Goal: 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. Policies: 1. New zoning, design standards, and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard, while being flexible enough to encourage development. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 9 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE City staff is currently developing new zoning, design guidelines, and standards for the Downtown. The applicant intends to develop the site with a high quality project that takes steps to incorporate sustainable building practices where possible. The zone change approval does not ensure specific design standards will be met. Any future development will be requu-ed to meet the standards in place at the time of application submittal. As stated above, the new Downtown standards have not been adopted, but the applicant has been working and brainstorming with City staff and design professionals to create a more i detailed plan in accordance with the City's goals. 2. The downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: A. retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; B. medium and high-density residential uses, including rental and ownership housing; C. civic functions government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, etc); D. professional employment and related office uses; and E. natural resource protection, open spaces and public parks. 5. Downtown design, development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety, accessibility, and attractiveness as primary objectives. 6. New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce, and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. The proposed zone change will allow the site to develop with high density residential uses in accordance with this goal. The applicant would like to develop the site with high-density, affordable housing for seniors which will complement existing and future uses within the Downtown. As this- pproposed project has not been approved, there is no guarantee that it will be constructed. Any multi-family housing will be consistent with these policies. Specific design elements such as public safety and accessibility will be reviewed during the development review application. Goa 1 : 15.4 Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles, and transit. Policies: 1. The downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike, and pedestrian facilities. 2. The downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 3. The City, in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 5. Streetscape and public area design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile oriented uses. 6. The City shall require a sufficient, but not excessive, amount of parking to provide for downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. If re-zoned to MUR 1 any future re-development of the site will require the applicant to construct improvements along abutting street frontages for automobiles, pedestrians, and bicycles. These improvements could also include a bus shelter as noted by the applicant. Placement of high density housing on this site will provide more riders with access to public transit choices within the Downtown and decrease the dependency upon the automobile for residents. The following applicable portions of the previous Tigard Comprehensive Plan were in effect at the time of application: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 10 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM The 2001 Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) updates the comprehensive plan and olicies. However, it does not fully replace all elements of the comprehensive plan adopted prior to the 2001 TSP. Goal#4, Policy# 1 of the Tigard TSP correlates to the following comprehensive plan policy: Policy 8.1.4: Set and maintain transportation performance measures that set a minimum intersection level of service standard for the city of Tigard and requires all public facilities to be designed to meet this standard. Comments were received from the Seth Brumley and Doug Baumgartner with Oregon Department of Transportation (Attachment 1). The letter states that the local government must make findings that the Froposed zone change/comprehensive plan amendment complies with the Transportation Planning Rule ) OAR 660-012-0060. There must be substantial evidence in the record to either make the finding of ` no significant effect" on the transportation system, or if there is a significant effect, assurance that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standard of the transportation facility. For zone changes and comprehensive plan amendments: OAR 660-012-0060 1) Where an an-end/runt to a funxtaonal plan an acknozdad con-prehensile pla� n,� or a land use regulation zearld significantly affe t an existing or plarnied trans tion faalit) the local skull put in place neasurres as in sation( )gf this rule to assure that alloua uses are consistent zei�Arl f capacity, and perjarnunce standards(eg lend(f serzic4 zolurre to capacity ration etc)cf the fadlity A plan or lard use regulation at endrrent significantly al ats a trans,• , ion facility of it%could- (c)As treasured d at the end if the planning penad!dent. in the,#•dei transportation system plan (A)Allow land uses or lends gf dezedcpnent that d result in or leds trawl or access that are inconsistent with the Tonal dassification 'an existing or planed transportation' (Bf Reduce the ormzne an existing or planned transportations:facility below the naninum acaptabde performzrxe starxdartd ident' in the TSP or�uze plan or (C) Worsen er fonnxrxe Ian existing or planned transportation facility that is otherzaise prujated to perform below the mi namrmaarp performance standard7dentOcl in the 7SP aor oomprehensiw plan The applicant's traffic engineer prepared a Traffic Impact Study analyzing the traffic impacts from the proposed zone change for a year 20-11 development build-out and a year 2025 planning horizon in order to meet the requirements of OAR 660-012-0060. The study analyzes "reasonable worst case scenarios" for 6 single-family homes for the existing zoning and a 49 unit apartment complex for the proposed zoning, 1 1. Based on the proposed 300 trip generation from the apartment complex of-30a daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27. p.m. peak hour trips, the zone change would not have a significant effect on the transportation facilities. However ODOT staff comments that MUR 1 zoning allows development density greater than a 49 unit apartment complex and could generate more than the 300 vehicle trips estimated in the traffic study. Additional trips could result in a significant effect on the Highway 99W and Hall Boulevard intersection. To ensure that the proposed zone change/comp plan amendment does not significantly affect State facilities, ODOT requests the City conditions a trip cap be placed on this approval The cap would limit the site to 300 vehicle trips per day, with maximums of 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 .m. peak hour trips. To allow more trips,the applicant or future property owners will need a Plan Amendment with TPR OAR 660-012-0060 analysis to determine if the limit can be revised or removed. Policy 8.2.3 The city shall require as a precondition to development approval that: A Development abuts a publicly dedicated street or has adequate access approved by the appropriate approval authority; B. Street right-of-way be dedicated where the street is substandard in width; STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING OOMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS C7OMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 11 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE C. The developer commit to the construction of the streets, curbs and sidewalks to city standards within the development; D. Individual developers participate in the improvement of existing streets, curbs and sidewalks to the extent of the development's impacts; E. Street improvements be made and street signs or signals be provided when the development is found to create or intensify a traffic hazard; F. Transit stops, bus turnout lanes and shelters be provided when the proposed use of a type which generates transit ridership,. G. Parking spaces be set aside and marked for cars operated by disabled persons and that the spaces belocated as close as possible to the entrance designed for disabled persons;and H. Land be dedicated to implement the bicycle/pedestrian corridor in accordance with the adopted plan. The applicant has proposed only a conceptual development plan at this time, but this application is only for a re-designation from R-4.5 to MUR 1. Prior to the construction of any development on-site, the applicant shall obtain separate land use approval and construct required street improvements along all frontages. 18.380.030.B.2 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and- For the purposes of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change, the applicant has satisfactorily addressed the applicable Sections of Chapter 18.380, Zoning Map and Text Amendments, of the Tigard Development Code. Please see the findings under 18.380.030.B.3. The standards of Chapter 18.390.050 for Type III-PC procedures are applicable to this proposal, as identified in 18.380.030. The applicant has submitted an Impact Statement as required under 18.390.050.B.e. Although a conceptual site plan was provided, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change do not include a specific development proposal. Any proposed development will be required to meet all of the current applicable Tigard Development Code standards. An additional impact statement will also be required for the development application. FINDING: The proposal is consistent with the applicable standards of the Tigard Development Code. 18.380.030.B.3 Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. The citizens of Tigard approved an Urban Renewal District in 2007. This site is included within that district and is therefore the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (approved 2005) applies to the site. This plan calls for high density residential along Hall Boulevard between Garden Place to the north of the site and Commercial Street to the south. The site has been zoned low density residential since at least the 1970s, but now the low density zoning is inconsistent with the downtown plan. Re-designating the site to MUR 1 (Mixed Use Residential 1 w� make the zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation consistent with downtown development goals. FINDING: The proposal demonstrates that there is an inconsistency in the comprehensive plan and zoning map as it relates to the subject property. C. Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050. A legislative decision may be approved or denied. FINDING: The land use action requested is quasi-judicial as it is limited to specific parcels and does not apply generally across the City. Therefore,the Planning Commission recommendation to Council-may be for denial, approval,or approval with conditions. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 12 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE SECTION V. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF AND OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS The City Arborist commented that the conceptual development plan appeared to ignore several large trees on the site and asked that a Planned Development overlay be included with the zone change to allow greater discretion over plan approval. The City of Tigard's Public Works Department noted that water service can be provided to the site, but the water meter may need to be upsized. Drainage at the corner of Hall and Hunziker will need to be addressed,as it is a constant issue. The Tigard Police Department reviewed the proposal and had no objection. Oregon Department of Transporation (ODOT) has reviewed the proposal and provided comments. Some comments have been incorporated into this report, but the full comment letter and analysis have been included as Attachment 1. Clean Water Services reviewed the pro osal and recommended that all of the relevant provisions of the IGA between the City and CWS be followed and that a site certification will be required prior to development of the subject parcels. The City's Long Range Planning Division, Engineering Division, Building Division, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, and Metro Land Use and Planning were mailed a copy of the proposal but provided no comment. SECTION VI. STAFF ANALYSIS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION ANALYSIS: The proposal to re-designate the site from R-4.5 (Low Density Residential) to MUR 1 (Mixed Use Residential) would reduce the amount of land zoned for low density development within Tigard but would net more units to meet the City's capacity goal for residential density required under Metro' Title 1 and the City's Housing goals. The current zoning is inconsistent with the downtown conceptual plan which calls for high density residential along Hall Boulevard. In addition, the TDIP identifies downtown housing development as one of eight catalyst projects that will substantively alter the development environment. The TDIP favors moderate to high density housing to serve a wide range of income-levels. Bringing more people into the downtown will support local services, retailers, and mass transit options. ODOT states that re-designating the site to MUR 1 could have a significant effect on transportation facilities because this zoning allows 50 units per acre as a minimum density with no maximum. ODOT has commented that with a trip cap, this issue could satisfactorily be addressed to meet the provisions of the state TPR(OAR 660-012-0060). SECTION VII. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing findings and analysis, staff finds that the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with applicable provisions of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Metro Regional Functional Plan,Statewide Planning Goals,and the Tigard Development code (18.380). STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 13 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE CHANGE SECTION VIII. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change to City Council. January 22,2009 PREPARREEPS BY: Cheryl Caines DATE Associate Planner January 22,2008 APPROVED BY: Di wersdorff DATE Pl.' � g Manager Attachments: 1. 1/13/09 Letter from ODOT 2. Vicinity Map. 3. Current Zoning Map 4. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan(TRIP) Proposed Zoning Map STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2,2009 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2008-00012/COMMUNITY PARTNERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PAGE 14 OF 14 ZON2008-00006/COMMUNITY PARTNERS ZONE C2-IANGE ATTACHMENT 1 IIIregon Oregon Department of Transportation ,ink i "' :z ODOT Region 1 Theodore R.Kulongoski,Governor 123 NW Flanders St Portland,OR 97209-4037 Telephone(503)731-8200 FAX (503)731-8259 File code: PLA9 2A-141 ODOT Case No:3057 1/13/2009 City of Tigard Planning Division RECEIVED 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 JAN 1 3 2009 CITY of TIGARD Attn: Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner r3LANNI , NGINEERIN Re: CPA2008-00012; ZON2008-00006: The Knoll at Tigard ZC/CPA Hall Blvd and SW Knoll Dr Dear Ms. Cheryl Caines, We have reviewed the applicant's proposal to change the zoning on three parcels from R-4.5 (Low Density Residential) to MUR-1 (Mixed Use Residential). The site is adjacent to Hall Blvd and in the vicinity of 99W. ODOT has jurisdiction of these State highway facilities and an interest in assuring that the proposed zone change/comprehensive plan amendment is consistent with the identified function, capacity and performance standards of these facilities. According to the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP), SW Hall Boulevard is classified as a District Highway with a maximum volume to capacity (v/c) ratio of 0.99 and 99W is classified as a Statewide Highway with a maximum v/c ratio of 0.95. For zone changes and comprehensive plan amendments local governments must make findings that the proposed amendment complies with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) OAR 660- 012-0060. There must be substantial evidence in the record to either make the finding of"no significant effect" on the transportation system, or if there is a significant effect assurance that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standard of the transportation facility. In order to determine whether or not there will be a significant effect on the State transportation system the applicant provided a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) dated November 2008 and prepared by Frank Charbonneau of Charbonneau Engineering LLC. ODOT traffic analyst Doug Baumgartner has reviewed the TIS for the proposed Zone Change and compared it with the scope of work provided by ODOT to the applicant on December 1, 2008 (see attached memo). The TIS analyzed the traffic impacts from the proposed zone change in the 2011 build-out year and the 2025 planning horizon. The "reasonable worst case scenarios" were assumed to be 6 single family homes for the existing zoning and a 49-unit apartment complex for the MUR-1 zone. The TIS shows that the Highway 99W and SW Hall Blvd intersection is forecast to operate above the OHP mobility standard at a v/c ratio of 1.40 in the a.m. peak hour and 1.24 in the p.m. peak hour in 2025. In situations where the highway facility is operating above the OHP mobility standard and transportation improvements are not planned within the planning horizon ; CPA2008-00012;ZON2008-01 , The Knoll at Tigard ZC/CPA ODOT RESPONSE 2 to bring performance to standard, the performance standard is to avoid further degradation. With an assumed trip generation of 300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips the proposed zoning of MUR-1 will not increase the volume-to-capacity ratio further and therefore will not have a significant effect. However, the MUR-1 zone allows development density greater than a 49 unit apartment and could generate more trips than the 300 daily trips assumed for the 49-unit apartment complex. The resulting additional site trips generated by the increased density could result in a significant effect on the Highway 99W and SW Hall Blvd intersection. In order to ensure that the zone change will not result in a significant effect upon State facilities, ODOT requests that the City of Tigard condition a trip cap to be placed on the zone change: A condition of this zone change is that the site is limited to 300 trips per day, with a maximum of 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips. If the applicant or future property owners wish to allow for more trips, a Plan Amendment with Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660-012-0060 analysis will be required to determine whether the limit can be revised or removed. It is important that any proposal to allow more trips be addressed in the Plan Amendment process and will trigger a new evaluation of TPR compatibility at that time to determine whether or not the new proposal will have a significant effect on State highway facilities and the limit can be revised or removed. Thank you for providing ODOT the opportunity to participate in this land use review. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (503) 731-8234. Sincerely, Seth Brumley Development Review Planner C: Doug Baumgartner, ODOT Region 1 Traffic ODOT Log No: CPA2008-00012,ZON2008-0L The Knoll at Tigard ZC/CPA ODOT RESPONSE 3 = tes Oregon Oregon Department of Transportation • r,,k.:'z' ODOT Region 1 ' Theodore R.Kulongoski,Governor e 123 NW Flanders St Portland,OR 97209-4037 Telephone(503)731-8200 FAX(503)731-8259 TO: Seth Brumley — Planner Region 1 Planning FROM: Doug Baumgartner, E.I.T. Development Review Traffic Analyst Region 1 Traffic DATE: January 13, 2009 RE: Hall Boulevard Zone Change HWY 141 (Beaverton-Tualatin) Washington County, Oregon Introduction I have reviewed the Transportation Impact Study (TIS) for the proposed Knoll at Tigard Zone Change in Washington County, Oregon. The TIS is dated November of 2008 and was prepared by Frank Charbonneau of Charbonneau Engineering LLC. The scope of work for the TIS was provided by ODOT to the applicant on December 1, 2008. The zone change proposal is for three adjacent parcels on SW Hall Boulevard currently zoned as R-4.5 (Low-Density Residential) and proposed to be rezoned as MUR-1 (Mixed Use Residential). The property currently contains three single family residences and, under the R-4.5 Zoning, could contain up to a maximum of six single family residences. The scope of work for the TIS identified the intersections of SW Hall Blvd with OR 99W, SW Knoll Dr, SW Hunziker Rd / SW Scoffins St, SW Knoll Dr, and SW Burnham St as well as the intersection of SW Hunziker Rd with SW 72nd Ave for analysis. According to the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, SW Hall Boulevard (Highway 141 , MP 5.21) is classified as a District Highway with a maximum volume to capacity ratio of 0.99 and SW Pacific Highway (OR 99W, MP 8.82) is a classified as a Statewide Highway with a maximum volume to capacity ratio of 0.95. The TIS included the analysis of the traffic impacts from the proposed zone change for a year 2011 development build-out and a year 2025 planning horizon in order to meet the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule Section 660-012-060. Build-out scenarios were analyzed for 6 single family homes (ITE Code 210) for the existing zoning, a 48-unit independent living facility for the proposed land use under the zone ODOT Log No ; CPA2008-00012;ZON2008-0( The Knoll at Tigard ZC/CPA ODOT RESPONSE 4 change (Senior Adult Housing —Attached, ITE Code 252), and a 49-unit apartment complex (ITE Code 220) that represents the highest trip generator analyzed for the MUR-1 zone (300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips). The TIS year 2025 planning horizon analysis for the build-out development scenarios under the existing and proposed zoning revealed that the Highway 99W and SW Hall Blvd intersection will operate at a v/c ratio of 1.40 in the a.m. peak hour and 1.24 in the p.m. peak hour. Based on the proposed trip generation of 300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips from the apartment build out development scenario, the zone change would not have a significant effect on the Highway 99W and SW Hall Blvd intersection. The City of Tigard Development Code for the MUR-1 zone could allow development density beyond the 300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips assumed for the 49-unit apartment complex that was analyzed and the resulting additional site trips generated by the increased density could result in a significant effect on the Highway 99W and SW Hall Blvd intersection. In order to ensure that the zone change will not result in a significant effect on State facilities, ODOT requests that the City of Tigard condition a trip cap to be placed on the zone change for 300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips. If based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual a proposed development on the site generates traffic above the trip cap, the applicant shall be required to perform a traffic impact study to demonstrate compliance with Transportation Planning Rule Section 660-012-060. TIS Needs for a Development Proposal The proposed zone change site has frontage along SW Hall Blvd and SW Knoll Dr. ODOT recommends that access to the site be served from SW Knoll Dr since a site access to SW Hall Blvd could not meet the access spacing standards for SW Hall Blvd and the site has frontage along SW Knoll Dr. The TIS did not include an analysis of crash data for study intersections as requested in the scope of work. The queuing analysis that was reported in the TIS identified deficiencies in available storage at a majority of study intersections for the proposed 2011 build-out year. Under the proposed build-out development scenarios, site generated traffic increased queue lengths that were already exceeding the available storage. The TIS did not propose any specific mitigation to address the storage deficiencies or the impact of the development from the zone change. When the applicant submits a development application to the City of Tigard, ODOT requests that the applicant update the TIS in order to analyze the impact of the proposed development on State facilities. The updated TIS should address queuing storage deficiencies and identify mitigation for the impact of the proposed development. The updated TIS should also include a crash analysis for study intersections, and address frontage improvements for SW Hall Blvd including any right of way dedication that may be necessary to meet the TSP cross sections. Frontage improvements, right of way dedication, and proportionate contributions may also be required by the City of ODOT Log No: CPA2008-00012; ZON2008-0C The Knoll at Tigard ZC/CPA ODOT RESPONSE 5 Tigard for any planned improvements for the SW Hunziker Rd / SW Scoffins St and SW Hall Blvd intersection. The Highway 99W and SW Hall Blvd intersection is currently operating beyond the 0.95 mobility standard. A Washington County transportation improvement project is planned for the Highway 99W/ SW Hall Blvd intersection and is anticipated to be completed in the near future. The project will add an additional northbound lane on Highway 99W through the SW Hall Blvd intersection and will provide separate right, thru, and left turn lanes on both Hall Blvd approaches to the intersection. The County project will improve the v/c ratio for the Highway 99W / SW Hall Blvd intersection. The updated TIS for the development application should include these improvements in the analysis of build-out scenarios for which these improvements will be in place. Conclusion The City of Tigard Development Code for the MUR-1 zone could allow development density beyond the 300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips assumed for the 49-unit apartment complex that was analyzed. Based on the proposed trip generation of 300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips from the apartment build out development scenario, the zone change would not have a significant effect on the Highway 99W and SW Hall Blvd intersection. In order to ensure that the zone change will not result in a significant effect upon State facilities, ODOT requests that the City of Tigard condition a trip cap to be placed on the zone change for 300 daily trips with 23 a.m. peak hour trips and 27 p.m. peak hour trips. If based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual a proposed development on the site generates traffic above the trip cap, the applicant shall be required to perform a traffic impact study to demonstrate compliance with Transportation Planning Rule Section 660-012-060. When the applicant submits a development application to the City of Tigard, ODOT requests that the TIS be updated to address the needs listed above. If there are any questions regarding the contents of this memorandum, please contact me at (503) 731-8225. ODOT Log No r �� `V > ��' `� _ VICINITY MAP Z I , .,.--v-- pa� ! r' q'tf. z ��' �` ;$ 9L Y �� Z �.� CPA2008-00012/ZON2008-00006 U Icn z• i,\ �_ 9 e' 1'0o COMMUNITY PARTNERS PLAN F\" i -__ % y 8t MAP AMENDMENT ,�rN 7-I lip V b GF�G MP 5 �O'I ?,- P -PJ�' may' MP 9 -- r�r !•` ` qtr t•,t, aIX ' /e2 Selected Site 4 <. O ..- ',lit Co ...rt c•.rt rata ,, y s:, ...... ,.. k��.� 1 \ems I►.♦ -- c0,�� J�i �4.. Ov P. r #14, 11P , LL,, Information on this map is for general location A, ,� `'�12/ only and should be vices Di with the Development Services Division. yy RST Scale 1:5,500-Tin=456 fl 4 - Map punted at 19-Dec-06 01 41 PM 91..n \ // N'!:` DATA I$f1WARRA FROM PRESEN SOURCES THE CRY E S TO T MAKES NO WARRANTY,REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE CDNTENT,AC IDEO H.HEREIN THE CI OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE \' DATA PROVIDED HEREIN.THE CITY OF S.OR IN SHALL ASSUME NO •.fit�itt•f.•I LtUU t•s•X LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS.OMISSIONS.OR INACCURACIES IN THE MFOR•MTION PROVIOEO REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED. City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd � ► a T 6gRt qPS Tigard,OR 97223 'b. I M 503 639-4171 a.-. {) 4tj${{ 1 www.Ggard-or.gov ,-: ,,, _'•' i . CURRENT ZONING A .4 W Zoning GARDEN PL L 30.000 Sq Ft Min Lot Size QC- 20,000 Sq Ft Min Lot Size 1„I r 10,000 Sq Ft Min Lot Size Q � 75,05000 0 Sq q FFt t MMiin n LLoot t SSiizze e 3,050 Sq Ft Min Lot Size 41 till r- 1,460 Sq Ft Min Lot Size 40 Units Per Acre [ Mixed Used Residential 1 yis. r Mixed Use Residential 2 • s, r > 4 1% • , iCentral Business District• .1.. Community Commercial ,..../' , :.,. . General Commercial 1111 = R-4.5 Neighborhood • ,4 -- Commercial ...l It � --- MI Professional Commercial 4• Q� i' ill Mixed Use Commercial CBD �-� v 1111 Mixed Use Commercial 1 ir - Mixed Use Empoloyment y i ,.- 41 Mixed Use Employment 1 •�� r•� ----7 Mixed Use Employment 2 C �l J I f�! '/ ---- Light Industrial : _0 Industrial Park 4111( �� P `,' r' Heavy Industrial S n?�y r` 4: s T ' I{ Map printed at 22-Jan-09 11'25 AM DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES THE CITY OF TIGARD MAKES NO WARRANTY,REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE CONTENT.ACCURACY.TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR NO ERRORS,OMISSIONS,OR INACCURACIES IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED. I I e QQ City of Tigard - - r1GA'`MgPS 1Td OR 97 B13d nil a 0 301 ft "f 503 639-4171 www.Ugard-or gov TIGARD ATTACHMENT 4 / '.! -• ..- - , , • . ...., , . ,--. , --,•.. k.... _... .7., . \ / _.„- -- --->,./ --..., .. ..., ,- , - ...,. . . • .... ,,,- Ao, - . •1, f; I _ • \ ie. .., , 3 .. /.. . / • ....." , . , "'1:.: 4.e•--t, ',‹-..,:\•,..._ ___ • , ,.,., •-4,2 :, '.v.t, ..,f ' ' ..,‘ 11 if,-;;_lp 1 1.47-livz / . • •. '::, >;'-i.ti--.1 . 4,ei, ..„, . •six,......, -.,,r,___ . r'(... . .• ..- •. •.. ' O't1;,': Sit.- '2. •• - / e , \ , ,.... ,. • . - !.• ... • . , . , . . . ,.::1.-:", • ' ::,.....?••; .4C). •-— . c . • . 1 \. .,...) 0 ' i 0 , . ) ••••) '''''.''''''''.''.7..' . \ i TC- TC- TC- TC- *lc., GREEN MUE-2 C B D MUR-1 MUR-2 MU u gARNR IcDp? K OF7SE r-, PROPOSED -r-tp.Rra csownrrovvr4 IMPROVEMENT PLAN 6.30.06 , ,, ZONING IEZZEZEZI Pacific Realty Associates PD2008-00001 Attn: N. Piven TIGARD RETAIL CENTER 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy., #300 Portland, OR 97224 Brian Dickerson PacLand 6400 SE Lake Road, Suite 300 Portland,OR 97222 Kevin W.Luby 7540 SW Hermoso Way Tigard,OR 97223 C PA2008-00012/Z ON2008-00006 Community Partners for COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORDABLE Affordable Housing HOUSING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND P.O. Box 23206 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Tigard, OR 97281-3206 Robert&Patricia Clickener 8485 SW Hunziker Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 MGH Associates Greta Lavador 104 W. 9th St., Suite 207 Vancouver,WA 98660 URBAN ENGINEERING LAND DEVELOPMENT THE KNOLL PUBLIC WORKS Q4 AT TIGARD DATE: DECEMBER 15, 2008 COMPREHENSIVE { PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PREPARED FOR: COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PO BOX 23206 TIGARD, OR 97281 PREPARED BY MGH Associates, Inc. 104 West 9th Street f , PLANNING 8 ENGINEERING Suite 207 Vancouver, WA 98660 " 4 r In P: (360) 750-0399 PEOPLE MAKING PLACES''' TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY INFORMATION 2 II. PROJECT OVERVIEW 3 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 IV. APPLICABLE CRITERIA 3 V. CONCLUSION 20 IV. APPENDIX A. Signed Land Use Permit Application Form B. Traffic Impact Study C. Utility Memorandum D. Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter E. Neighborhood Meeting Documentation F. Pre-Application Conference Notes G. Conceptual Architectural Elevations and Floor Plans MGH Associates 1 12/15/08 1 I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY INFORMATION Applicant: Community Partners for Affordable Housing PO Box 23206 Tigard, OR 97281-3206 503.293.4038 Preparer for Applicant: MGH Associates 104 West 9th Street, Suite 207 Vancouver, Washington 98660 Property Owners: Robert and Patricia Clickener 8485 SW Hunziker Road Tigard, OR 97223 Request: Approval for a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment for three tax lots from Low Density Residential R-4.5 to Mixed Use Residential MUR-1. Location: 8485 SW Hunziker Road, 12340 SW Hall Boulevard, 12360 SW Hall Boulevard Legal Description: 2S101BC 00800, 00900 and 01000 MGH Associates 2 12/15/08 II. PROJECT OVERVIEW The subject application is for a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment that includes three tax parcels encompassing a total of approximately 0.99 acres. The parcels include tax lot 800 (0.33 acres), tax lot 900 (0.30 acres), and 1000 (acres) all located within the NW 1/4 of Section 01 Township 2 South Range 1 East. The site is presently zoned R-4.5 with a comprehensive plan designation of Residential Low Density by the City of Tigard. The applicant proposes a Comprehensive Plan Designation of Mixed Use Residential and a Zoning Map Designation of MUR-1. Each parcel included in this request currently contains one single family dwelling. The site is relatively flat, with a gentle slope from the northeast corner of the site to the southwest corner. III. EXISTING CONDITIONS This project site is located within the City of Tigard. It is situated east of SW Hall Boulevard and north of SW Hunziker Road. The site slopes up toward the northeast corner of site from a low point of approximately 180 AMSL to a highpoint of approximately 190 AMSL. The site is currently developed with three single family residential dwellings and associated outbuildings. The site is surrounded by existing development on all sides. To the north and east are existing single family residential homes, which are located in the R-4.5 zone. To the south are industrial buildings located in the I-P (Industrial) zone. To the west are multi-family developments located within the CBD (Central Business District) zone. Future development of the site will include frontage improvements on three abutting roads - SW Hall Boulevard, SW Hunziker Road and SW Knoll Drive. Coordination with Tri-Met will also take place as the site is located on two bus routes. IV. APPLICABLE CRITERIA The City of Tigard has determined that the following comprehensive plan policies are applicable to the proposed zone change. MGH Associates 3 12/15/08 Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. RESPONSE: Citizens and affected agencies have been involved in the planning process for this proposal since it began. A pre-application conference was held with the City of Tigard on October 23, 2008. Following the conference, the applicant has been in contact with the City and ODOT to discuss project related questions and issues. A neighborhood meeting, organized per the City of Tigard's process, was held on November 11, 2008. Meeting notices were sent to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, neighborhood representatives, and the City. A sign was also posted on the site to advertise the meeting date and time. Approximately 12 people attended the neighborhood meeting. Discussion included the specifics of the proposed development; how the zone change and the development would impact nearby property values; transportation needs in the area; and hope that the project would be able to work with Tri-Met to improve service to the area. Comprehensive Plan Goal 2.1 Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. Policy 6 The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. RESPONSE: The proposed comprehensive plan designation and zoning map amendment will allow development of a high density residential project that will be a high quality residential development. The development will be a catalyst for downtown redevelopment. This will promote the goals and policies of the Downtown — Special Planning Area that is being incorporated into the City's updated Comprehensive Plan. Policy 7 The City's regulatory land use maps and development codes shall implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses including: A. Residential; B. Commercial and office employment including business parks; C. Mixed use; D. Industrial; E. Overlay districts where natural resource protections or special planning and regulatory tools are warranted, and MGH Associates 4 12/15/08 F. Public services. RESPONSE: The proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment will ensure that needed parcels zoned for high-density residential development are available to facilitate the downtown revitalization that is sought through the Downtown — Special Planning Areas portion of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 14 Applicants shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that land use applications are consistent with applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan and, when necessary, those of the state and other agencies. RESPONSE: The applicant has provided a response to the applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Code, Comprehensive Plan and State Regulations. Policy 15 In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan / Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation; RESPONSE: Transportation Facilities The subject property abuts three public streets — SW Hall Boulevard, SW Hunziker Road and SW Knoll Drive. The applicant will make frontage improvements to SW Hall Boulevard and SW Knoll Drive as part of the development of the site. Storm Water The existing lots drain west to a roadside ditch that parallels SW Hall Boulevard and flows north into an 8" concrete pipe. Water flows north to an existing regional detention facility near Highway 217, and then continues to Fanno Creek. Sanitary Sewer There is an existing 8" sanitary sewer line located in SW Hall Boulevard and an 8" sanitary sewer in both SW Hall and SW Hunziker Street. The sanitary line in Hall is approximately 8 feet deep and, based on the area served and the City's GIS TV and inspection information, does not appear MGH Associates 5 12/15/08 to be over capacity. Sanitary sewer service is therefore readily available to serve the site. Water Waterlines are located within all fronting streets, and existing meters serve the three homes on the site. Service is readily available for the proposed development. B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services; RESPONSE: A detailed traffic impact study has been prepared by Charbonneau Engineering. This study indicates that the proposed zone change will have no negative impact on the existing or planned transportation system. The project engineer has also reviewed the existing utilities in the area and has determined that they have capacity to serve the additional density that will be allowed by this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Change. A memorandum is located in the application appendix describing these facilities. C The new land use designation shall fulfill a proven community need such as provision of needed commercial goods and services, employment, housing, public and community services, etc. in the particular location, versus other appropriately designated and developable properties; RESPONSE: The Downtown Improvement Plan identifies the need for moderate to higher-density mixed use development, with housing availability for a wide range of income levels. Downtown housing development is identified as a "Catalyst Project" in this plan. D. Demonstration that there is an inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated, land for the land uses that would be allowed by the new designation; RESPONSE: The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, published in 2005, indicates that only 2% of the acreage within the downtown area is vacant. None of this land is zoned Mixed-Use Residential (MUR-1). Therefore, an MGH Associates 6 12/15/08 inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated land within the desired downtown area is available for the proposed use. Further, the City's Buildable Land Map, completed January 1, 2008, shows a supply of 0.76 acres of MUR-1 zoned and within the entire City, compared with a 172.4 acre supply of R-4.5 zoned land. The reclassification of one acre of R-4.5 zoned land will not adversely impact the supply of land zoned for single family homes within the City of Tigard. In addition, there is an insufficient supply of land that would allow similar residential densities as MUR-1 within the City. The Buildable Lands Map identified 0 acres of land zoned R-40. The Buildable Lands Map identified four parcels within the City totaling 29.9 acres zoned R-25. Two of these parcels are vacant but under development or proposed for development. The remaining two are not available for sale. None of these parcels are within the Downtown area. E. Demonstration that land uses allowed in the proposed designation could be developed in compliance with all applicable regulations and the purposes of any overlay district would be fulfilled; RESPONSE: Conceptual architectural elevations and floor plans are included in the application appendix, which demonstrate that a land use allowed in the proposed MUR-1 designation — multi-family affordable senior housing - could be developed in compliance with the applicable regulations of the district. F. Land uses permitted by the proposed designation would be compatible, or capable of being made compatible, with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses; and RESPONSE: Affordable senior housing with be a catalyst for the redevelopment of the Downtown Tigard area. The proposed development will act as a buffer between the noise and light of SW Hall Boulevard and the single family residential uses to the east. G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. RESPONSE: Allowing mixed use residential uses near in the downtown area will promote the viability of the City's natural systems. Future residents will MGH Associates 7 12/15/08 be able to walk to nearby services, reducing dependence on the automobile and improving air quality. Allowing compact urban development downtown will also promote the preservation of open space in other areas of the City and County. Policy 16 The City may condition the approval of a Plan / Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use(s) and per specific design/development requirements. RESPONSE: The applicant may be willing to accept conditions assuring development of Senior Housing, and can discuss this at the request of the City. Policy 17 The City may allow concurrent applications to amend the Comprehensive Plan / Zoning Map(s) and for development plan approval of a specific use. RESPONSE: The applicant is not pursing development plan approval at this time. However, conceptual site plans are included in the application to provide insight into the type of development proposed. Policy 24 The City shall establish design standards to promote quality urban development and to enhance the community's value, livability, and attractiveness. RESPONSE: The applicant will meet established design standards as part of the development plan review process. The proposed development will include innovative architectural design, enable residents to walk to public and commercial services, and promote the redevelopment that is envisioned for the downtown area. Comprehensive Plan Goal 6.1 Reduce air pollution and improve air quality in the community and region. RESPONSE: Allowing Mixed Use Residential development in Downtown Tigard will allow residents to walk to urban amenities, such as employment, restaurants and retail locations, and public services. With increased pedestrian activity, dependence on the automobile, and air pollution associated with automobiles, will be reduced. Comprehensive Plan Goal 6.2 Ensure land use activities protect and enhance the community's water quality. MGH Associates 8 12/15/08 RESPONSE: The proposed development will provide stormwater treatment and detention for all impervious surfaces, which will be an improvement to the current situation on the site. Policy 1. The City shall focus a significant portion of future employment growth and high-density housing development in its Metro-designated Town Center (Downtown); Regional Center (Washington Square); High Capacity Transit Corridor(Hwy 99W); and the Tigard Triangle. RESPONSE: The applicant is proposing a high density housing zone — MUR-1 — in the Downtown area, therefore this policy is met. Policy 2. The City shall adopt land use regulations and standards to ensure a well-designed and attractive urban environment that supports/protects public and private sector investments. RESPONSE: There has been significant interest in the past few years to improve Tigard's downtown area. Allowing mixed use residential development on the parcels included in this application will ensure that they are redeveloped with an attractive, urban-scale development that encourages downtown redevelopment and investment. As noted in the Downtown — Special Planning Areas findings of the Comprehensive Plan, the existing R-4.5 zone does not permit mixed use development, which is "crucial for successful downtowns". Policy 3. The City shall commit to improving and maintaining the quality of community life (public safety, education, transportation, community design, housing, parks and recreation, etc.) to promote a vibrant and sustainable economy. RESPONSE: Allowing Mixed Use Residential development downtown will improve the quality of community life. Frontage improvements along SW Hall Boulevard and SW Knoll Drive will be made as part of the development. Residents of the future development will be able to walk to urban amenities in the downtown area. Increased residential density will increase patronage at existing retail shops and restaurants in the downtown area. Comprehensive Plan Goal 10.1 Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. RESPONSE: MGH Associates 9 12/15/08 A 2002 Resolution (Res. No. 02-58, A Resolution Accepting a Staff Report as a Comprehensive Delineation of the City's Affordable Housing Program) adopting the City's Affordable Housing Program states that "the City's efforts in the area of affordable housing are directed to serve the income group with the greatest need, households earning 50% or less of the area median income. All housing units within the proposed project will target households earning 50% or less of the area median income. Affordable Senior Housing, an allowed use in the proposed zone, will add to the types of housing available downtown for current and future City residents. The proposed use of the subject parcels will also assist the City in implementing their Affordable Housing Program. Policy 1. The City shall adopt and maintain land use policies, codes, and standards that provide opportunities to develop a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. RESPONSE: This proposal would help the City achieve residential densities established by the Metropolitan Housing Rule (OAR 660-007 / Division 7). This rule requires Tigard to provide for an overall density of 10 or more dwelling units per net buildable acre, as well as designate sufficient buildable land to provide the opportunity for at least 50% of new residential dwelling units to be attached housing. In addition, the proposal will implement the City's desired increased housing capacity that is demonstrated in the Dowtown Improvement Plan. The Downtown Improvement Plan (prepared in 2005) indicates that only 8% of the downtown area is used for multi-family housing. The plan anticipates "creating more housing of various types in several locations in Downtown", and includes downtown housing development as a "Catalyst Project". The proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment will allow development of the site with affordable multi-family housing for senior citizens. This will create activity in the Downtown area during the day and evening; provide "eyes on the street", which will create a feeling of safety and security; and increase demand for commercial services. Policy 3. The City shall support housing affordability, special-needs housing, ownership opportunities, and housing rehabilitation through programs administered by the state, Washington County, nonprofit agencies and Metro. MGH Associates 10 12/15/08 RESPONSE: The applicant, Community Partners for Affordable Housing, has the following mission statement: "To promote a healthy community through development of permanent affordable housing, sustainable economic growth and community-based partnerships." The applicant is proposing a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment that will allow construction of affordable housing for an underserved sector of Tigard's population. They have a track record of constructing and maintaining quality projects in both Washington County and Multnomah County. Policy 4. The City shall adopt and maintain land use regulations that provide opportunities to develop housing for persons with special needs. The scale, design, intensity, and operation of these housing types shall be compatible with other land uses and located in proximity to supporting community services and activities. RESPONSE: This proposal will create opportunities for persons with special needs — senior citizens with limited to moderate income. The downtown location of these parcels makes them ideal for senior housing, as they are close to community services, recreational areas, and transportation infrastructure. Conceptual building elevations and floor plans are included in the application as appendix items for reference. Given the topography of the site, the building will be able to take up grade and have a reduced height towards the adjacent single family residences to the east. Policy S. The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in the areas such as town centers (Downtown), regional centers (Washington Square) and along transit corridors where employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, and other public services necessary to support higher population densities are either present or planned for in the future. RESPONSE: The proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment will create an opportunity for high density housing in the Downtown area. The parcels are located on existing transit corridors (SW Hall Boulevard and SW Hunziker Road) and near employment opportunities and commercial services in Downtown Tigard. Comprehensive Plan Goal 10.2 Maintain a high level of residential livability. MGH Associates 11 12/15/08 Policy 5. The City shall encourage housing that supports sustainable development patterns by promoting the efficient use of land, conservation of natural resources, easy access to public transit and other efficient modes of transportation, easy access to services and parks, resource efficient design and construction, and the use of renewable energy resources. RESPONSE: Allowing high density residential housing in the downtown core in itself promotes sustainable development patterns. Allowing urban density in close proximity to services lessens demand on the transportation system, provides residents with access to services, and promotes the conservation of land outside the downtown core. Policy 6. The City shall promote innovative and well-designed housing development through application of planned developments and community design standards for multi-family housing. RESPONSE: Conceptual architectural elevations and floor plans have been included in this application to give an idea of the quality of multi-family housing that is proposed. The applicant, Community Partners for Affordable Housing, strives to create "service-enriched, green and sustainable projects". We look forward to continuing the design process with the City of Tigard upon approval of the Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment. Policy 7 The City shall ensure that residential densities are appropriately related to locational characteristics and site conditions such as the presence of natural hazards and natural resources, availability of public facilities and services, and existing land use patterns. RESPONSE: The subject parcels are ideally situated for the MUR-1 zone. The site is located along a busy transportation corridor and within walking distance of urban amenities. Public services are readily available to serve the site, as described previously. Policy 8. The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing or more intense land uses on residential living environments, such as: A. Orderly transitions from one residential density to another; B. Protection of existing vegetation, natural resources and provision of open space areas; and C. Installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening. MGH Associates 12 12/15/08 RESPONSE: The proposed MUR-1 zone will provide an orderly transition from the heavily used transit corridors of SW Hall Boulevard and SW Hunziker Road to the low density residential uses east of the site. The MUR-1 zone contains landscaping and screening requirements, which will be reviewed during the development permitting process. Comprehensive Plan Goal 15.1 The City will promote creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. RESPONSE: Allowing Mixed Use Residential development will increase the number of people who are active in the downtown area at all hours of the day. Future residents will have the opportunity to walk from their home to work and/or recreational amenities. They will be patrons at retail locations and restaurants downtown. The proposed development will act as a catalyst for urban development in the area, promoting the City's vision of a vibrant urban village. Comprehensive Plan Goal 152 Facilitate the development of an urban village. Policy 1. New zoning, design standards, and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard, while being flexible enough to encourage development. RESPONSE: The proposed MUR-1 zone will facilitate the development of an urban village by being a catalyst for future development. As shown on the conceptual architectural elevations, the applicant proposes a high quality project that takes steps to incorporate sustainable building practices where possible. The building will be an attractive feature downtown. Policy 2. The downtowns land use plan shall provide a mix of complementary land uses, such as: A. retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; B. medium and high-density residential uses, including rental and ownership housing; C. civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, etc.) MGH Associates 13 12/15/08 D. professional employment and related office uses; and E natural resource protection, open spaces and public parks. RESPONSE: As noted in the Downtown — Special Planning Areas section of the Comprehensive Plan, mixed-use development is "crucial for successful downtowns. The proposed high-density residential affordable housing development for senior citizens will be complementary with other uses that exist and/or are proposed in the downtown area. Policy 3. The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto- dependent uses; industrial manufacturing; and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. RESPONSE: The applicant is not proposing any of these prohibited uses. Policy 4. Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. RESPONSE: The applicant is not proposing any of the listed prohibited uses. Policy 5. Downtown design, development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety, accessibility and attractiveness as primary objectives. RESPONSE: Conceptual architectural elevations are included in the appendix of this application. The applicant looks forward to presenting the development plan to the City during the land use approval process and demonstrating how these objectives are met and exceeded as part of the proposal. Policy 6. New housing in downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce, and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. RESPONSE: The applicant is proposing affordable senior housing. The applicant, Community Partners for Affordable Housing, has the following mission statement: "To promote a healthy community through development of permanent affordable housing, sustainable economic growth and community-based partnerships." MGH Associates 14 12/15/08 Policy 7. New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Main Street'character. RESPONSE: The proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment is not located on Main Street, therefore this policy does not apply. Comprehensive Plan Goal 15.3 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into downtown. Policy 1. Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into downtown urban design. RESPONSE: The proposal will include treatment and detention of stormwater, landscaping and screening, and creation of open space areas within the site. Sustainable design techniques proposed for the building will call attention to natural resource functions. Policy 2. The Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park, shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. RESPONSE: The treatment and detention of stormwater from the site will improve water quality in Fanno Creek and thereby benefit users of Fanno Creek Park. Policy 3. Development of the downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek. RESPONSE: The treatment and detention of stormwater from the site will improve water quality in Fanno Creek and thereby benefit users of Fanno Creek Park. Comprehensive Plan Goal 15.4 Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles and transit. Policy 1. The downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. RESPONSE: As part of the development of the site, the applicant will make frontage improvements to SW Hall Boulevard and SW Knoll Drive. This will include improvements for automobile users, bicyclists and pedestrians. The applicant is MGH Associates 15 12/15/08 also hoping to work with Tri-Met to develop a bus shelter on the site near the intersection of SW Hall Boulevard and SW Hunziker Road. Policy 2. The downtown shall be Tigards primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. RESPONSE: Increasing urban density downtown, and therefore increasing demand for public transportation, will assist the City with it's goal of making the downtown the primary transit center. Policy 3. The City, in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. RESPONSE: Locating high density residential uses within walking distance of bus service will encourage pedestrian activity by transit users. Policy 4. Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation Systems Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. RESPONSE: A detailed traffic impact study has been prepared by Charbonneau Engineering. This study indicates that the proposed zone change will have no negative impact on the existing or planned transportation system. Policy 5. Streetscape and public area design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile- oriented uses. RESPONSE: As part of the development process, the applicant will make frontage improvements to SW Hall Boulevard and SW Knoll Drive. These will be a significant asset to pedestrians, as there are currently no improvements in this area. Site development and associated transportation improvements will be in conformance with the adopted Tigard Transportation Systems Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and Development Ordinance. A GH Associates 16 12/15/08 Policy 6. The City shall require a sufficient, but not excessive, amount of parking to provide for downtown land uses. Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. RESPONSE: The applicant will work with the City during the development plan review process to ensure that the parking provided is reasonable for the proposed use, but not excessive. The following Community Development Code sections are applicable to the proposal: 18.380.030.B Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 1. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and 3. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. RESPONSE: As demonstrated in this application, the proposal meets all applicable policies and standards. The proposed MUR-1 zoning will be encourage vibrant urban development in Tigard's Downtown in accordance with the City's recently updated Comprehensive plan that encourages mixed use residential development downtown. The City of Tigard has established a City Center Urban Renewal Plan, dated December 5, 2005. The Urban Renewal District, includes the three parcels included in the subject application. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment will bring the proposal into compliance with the Goals and Policies of the City Center Urban Renewal Plan. Specifically, the proposal will further Goal 5 instructs the City to "promote high quality development of retail, office and residential uses that support and are supported by public streetscape, transportation, recreation and open space investments". 18.390.040.B.e Impact Study. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. MGH Associates 17 12/15/08 Transportation Facilities The subject property abuts three public streets — SW Hall Boulevard, SW Hunziker Road and SW Knoll Drive. The applicant will make frontage improvements to SW Hall Boulevard and SW Knoll Drive as part of the development of the site. The site is served by two Tri-Met transit routes. Route number 78 stops adjacent to the site at SW Hunziker Road and SW Hall Boulevard, and takes transit users to either the Lake Oswego Transit Center or the Beaverton Transit Center. Route Number 76 stops at SW Commerical and SW Hall, approximately 0.2 miles southwest of the site, and takes transit users to Beaverton Town Center or Meridian Hospital in Tualatin. It is likely that many residents of the future development will be public transportation users. The applicant is looking forward to working with Tri- Met to establish a bus shelter on the site and also to advocate for additional transit routes. Bicycle lanes will be installed along SW Hall Boulevard. Future residents will be able to utilize existing bicycle lanes in the area. A traffic analysis has been completed for this project and is included in this submittal. This analysis concludes that the project can be constructed without adverse effects on traffic operations or safety in the vicinity of the site. Storm Water The existing lots drain west to a roadside ditch that parallels SW Hall Boulevard and flows north into an 8" concrete pipe. Water flows north to an existing regional detention facility near Highway 217, and then continues to Fanno Creek. Sanitary Sewer There is an existing 8" sanitary sewer line located in SW Hall Boulevard and an 8" sanitary sewer in both SW Hall and SW Hunziker Street. The sanitary line in Hall is approximately 8 feet deep and, based on the area served and the City's GIS TV and inspection information, does not appear to be over capacity. Sanitary sewer service is therefore readily available to serve the site. Water Waterlines are located within all fronting streets, and existing meters serve the three homes on the site. Service is readily available for the proposed development. MGH Associates 18 12/15/08 Power Electrical power will be provided by Portland General Electric out of Wilsonville. Natural Gas Natural Gas will be provided by Northwest Natural Gas. Schools The site is located within the Tigard-Tualatin School District. Schools that would serve any children residing in this Senior Housing development would be Metzger/Durham Elementary School, Fowler Middle School, and Tigard High School. Parks and Recreation The Liberty Park, Potso Dog Park and Fanno Creek Park are each located approximately one half mile from the site. Commercial and Hospital Services The site is located in Downtown Tigard. Many existing commercial services are available within walking distance of the site to serve future residents. Noise Impact Since the project is residential, it is not expected that excessive noise will be generated within it. Adjacent properties will be buffered from incidental noise by landscape buffering. The following Statewide Planning Goals and Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan goals are applicable to this proposal: Statewide Planning Goal 10 — To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. RESPONSE: As demonstrated previously, the City's current lack of available land for high density residential development does not "encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households." The proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment will create additional housing opportunities, which is called for in the City's Comprehensive Plan, as well as Metro's 2040 Plan. MGH Associates 19 12/15/08 Statewide Planning Goal 12 — To provide and encourage a safe and convenient and economic transportation system. RESPONSE: The site is located within the City of Tigard's Downtown Urban Renewal Area. It is immediately adjacent to SW Hall Boulevard, which connects downtown Beaverton and downtown Tigard. The site is also near Highway 217 and Interstate 5. The site is well positioned to utilize existing transportation infrastructure in the region. Development of the site will also provide frontage improvements to SW Hall Boulevard, which will benefit the entire region. In addition to vehicular transportation options, residents will have the opportunity to walk or bicycle to community amenities within downtown Tigard. There are also two bus routes that serve the site. Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan — Title 1 (Requirements for Housing and Employment Accommodation) RESPONSE: The proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment will increase the residential density permitted on the subject parcels. Therefore, the proposal will act as a Measure to Increase Development Capacity, as prescribed in Title 1 of the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. V. CONCLUSION The applicant has met the burden of proof for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment consistent with the applicable criteria described in this application. The subject application meets the City's Comprehensive Plan objective of creating a vibrant downtown and providing affordable housing opportunities. The proposal will act as a catalyst project for future investment in the downtown. MGH Associates 20 12/15/08 33 , PRB-APR HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION ,,r. LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION T' Iv1 Pernrt Center 13125 SW Hail Blu2, Ti OR 97223 • City � Mona 503.63 9.4171 Fax:503.598.1 960 File p • Other Case# Date By Receipt if Fee Date Complete • TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance(I or II) ❑Minor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change(III) 12 Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) ❑Planned Development(III) ❑Zone Change Annexation(IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(1,11 or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑ Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑Site Development Review(II) ❑Home Occupation(H) ❑Subdivision(II or III) •• \ 1.1 • f 11 nss t an^ r '311 BS 14wnz;k-04- 12.3q0 s i 1 hall glva 123 coo SW I- 311 g1id .1- .• ,uLon.'o5. 2 5101 S c- - goo , 0o900 101000 TOTAL SITE SIZE ZONING(IASSIFIG4'►1ON 0 . 0n Ac_res 1-1 • C:otv\(\f\u.n t �j �' nos for A'Corc1a61e Hous► MAILING ADDRESS/C17Y/STATE/ZIP PO .60Y- 232-oCo arc C 1 °I 32"•0 PHONE NO. FAX NO. S03- Z°l 3- 6/°38 S C)3--2-9S-y 03`, Cr PERSON PHONE NO. Greta LaJRd hit 6,14 ASsocIateS -7S0 -0399 PROPERTY OWNEIVI)EEI)HOtDLR(Attach list if tnnre than one) Or. g Mrs. gnu l- L-kener- MAJLING ADDRESS/CITY/S'PA'TE/"LIP 8yE5 SL.J 1-tonzA_er Zd . -17,(larc� c`� 9-0,23 PHONE NO. FAX NO? *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Pleose be specific) • The: aP�l;c.ar�-� ropc- e a Com ID(khel\S;Ve Plan n Des; a+►on arum Z on;rA r f� Anen 4- 4r- -1-�n_ Sttbjec:4 proper-hi . '�.`{'1�,e burr + Corn. - - Je Plan rya+ nur i Laos.] Dens; ■ poses a Co • ¢ hens lan c 41(13-1-10" of M i Xe - e_ • .4-;a - M.U R- 1P1'LICATIONS. \WILL N BE A EPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS )ESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET. is\cwpbn\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc • THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All 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 issued,based on this application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ♦ 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(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. P , . - /- // ; if // • ,./ - 2oog Owner's Signature Date , inn ; / i if/i otg ( Owner's Signature Date gteA Owner's Signature Date • Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant 0. .nt/Representative's Signature Date .a------ Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date . TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORT FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Street CITY OF TIGARD PREPARED BY CHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING Iir NOVEMBER 2008 PROJECT 08-45 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORT FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND ZONE CHANGE Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Street CITY OF TIGARD PREPARED BY Charbonneau Engineering LLC //•2o - o€ 9370 SW Greenburg Rd.,Suite 411,Portland,OR 97223 cn p4 (503)293-1118*FAX(503)293-1119 o I Y �f� 44 0 cc 9301 r liir • ' OREGON -314,4_,`/ 27 t4 } NOVEMBER 2008 CHAWP (RENEWS: Is-.J•oq I PROJECT 08-45 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS CONSIDERATIONS 2 SITE DESCRIPTION, STREETS,AND CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS 2 TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS 4 VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION 6 CAPACITY ANALYSIS 8 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE (TPR) 11 QUEUING ANALYSIS 13 SIGHT DISTANCE 14 TURN LANE WARRANTS 14 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS 14 ACCIDENT HISTORY 15 PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLES, & BUSES 15 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 APPENDIX 17 • Vicinity Map Figure 'a' • Site Plan Figure 'b' • Traffic Flow Diagrams Figures la-lb Raw Volumes With Individual Intersection Peak Data(AM &PM) Figures 2a-2b Raw Volumes With System Peak Hour Data Figures 3a-3b 2008 Unbalanced Base Year 30HV Figures 4a-4b 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV Figures 5a-5b 2011 Background Traffic Figure 6 Trip Distribution(for both analysis scenarios and peak hours) Figures 7a-7b Trip Assignment—Single Family (R-4.5 zoning) Figures 8a-8b Trip Assignment—Senior Housing(Proposed Use) Figures 9a-9b Trip Assignment—Apartments(Alternate Scenario) Figures 10a-10b 2011 Total Traffic—Single Family Figures l l a-l 1 b 2011 Total Traffic—Senior Housing Figures 12a-12b 2011 Total Traffic—Apartments Figures 13a-13b 2025 Future Traffic—Single Family Figures 14a-14b 2025 Future Traffic—Senior Housing Figures 15a-15b 2025 Future Traffic—Apartments • Seasonal Adjustment Calculation • Permanent Recorder Summary Sheets(Recorder#36-004)for 2003-2007 • Traffic Count Data • Peak Hour Signal Warrant • ODOT Right Turn Lane Warrant • Synchro Capacity Analysis Worksheets • Synchro Queuing Analysis Worksheets 1 INTRODUCTION This traffic study has been prepared to document and evaluate the traffic operation and safety conditions that may result from the proposed comprehensive plan map and corresponding zone change on property in Tigard, Oregon. This analysis will include the evaluation of the site considering the proposed land use (senior adult housing) as well as the land use permitted in the Mixed Use Residential (MUR-1) zone that corresponds to the highest level of trip generation, in accordance to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) standards. Changing the site's zoning from R-4.5 to MUR-1 would require a concurrent change to both the comprehensive plan map and to the zoning map. Under its current zoning the site has the potential for a development maximum of six (6) single-family homes. There are currently three single-family homes located on the site. The impacts of three additional single-family homes will be reviewed in this analysis so that the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) may be addressed. After review of the permitted land uses identified in the City of Tigard's Municipal Code (Table 18.520.1) the land use that will correspond to the highest level of trip generation is multi-family housing. For purposes of analysis the impacts of the multi-family housing will be evaluated with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Apartment (1TF.220) trip generation rates; the Senior Adult Housing (ITE 252) trip generation rates will be used to evaluate the proposed use. The study area is defined as the surrounding neighborhood, including Pacific Highway (Highway 99W), Knoll Drive, Hunziker Street, Scoffins Street, Burnham Street, Hall Boulevard and SW 72nd Avenue. The site consists of three separate parcels (Taxlot 1000, 900, and 800) on which a total of three single-family homes (house#8485 on taxlot 1000, house#12360 on taxlot 900, and house#12340 on taxlot 800) are located. The site is highlighted on the vicinity map (Figure `a'). The Oregon Highway Plan (Action 1F.2.) identifies that highway mobility standards should be applied over a 20-year planning horizon in local transportation system plans (TSP) or a planning horizon of 15 years from the proposed date of amendment adoption, whichever is greater. The City of Tigard's TSP was adopted in February 2002 which corresponds to a 2022 planning horizon year; however, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) staff has identified that the year 2025 should be considered in the future year analysis. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 2 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS CONSIDERATIONS In the project scope established with Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) staff and City of Tigard staff, a number of important elements were identified and considered in this study. • Inventory and record pertinent information such as traffic control devices, circulation patterns, lane widths, pedestrian &bicycle facilities, transit zones, parking conditions, and street characteristics. • Record data on typical weekdays during the AM and PM peak traffic hours. • Conduct traffic counts at the intersections of Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard; Knoll Drive and Hall Boulevard, Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard, Scoffins Street and Hall Boulevard, Burnham Street and Hall Boulevard, and SW 72"d Avenue at Hunziker Street during the AM and PM peak hours. City of Tigard staff have agreed that historical data may be used for the AM peak hour period at the Hall Boulevard and Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) intersection and both AM peak hour and PM peak hour periods at the SW 72" Avenue and Hunziker Street intersection with the understanding that one year of growth (using a rate of 2%) will be applied to estimate year 2008 traffic. • Level of service (LOS) analysis of the study intersections to measure the approach delays for comparison to City of Tigard and ODOT standards. • Inclusion of the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) response and a proposal to change both the comprehensive plan map and the zoning map. • Verification of intersection sight distance at the site's proposed access location. • Review of traffic accident data furnished ODOT and determination of the intersection crash rates at the study intersections. • Consideration of traffic circulation. SITE DESCRIPTION, STREETS, AND CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS The Knoll at Tigard site is located on the east side of Hall Boulevard between Knoll Drive and Hunziker Street.. The site would be developed on three parcels (taxlots 1000, 900, and 800) on which three homes are currently located. The current proposal includes a change to the site's current zoning, Low-Density Residential (R-4.5) to Mixed Use Residential (MUR-1) zoning. Changing the site's zoning from R-4.5 to MUR-1 would require a concurrent change to both the comprehensive plan map and to the zoning map. With the senior adult housing scenario and the multi-family (apartment) scenario it is anticipated that access to the site would be provided at a single location on Knoll Drive. A conceptual design of the site with development of senior adult housing is presented in Figure `b'. At this time a site plan for development of the site with multi-family (apartment) units is not available. Currently, the intersections of Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard, Burnham Street and Hall Boulevard, and SW 72"d Avenue and Hunziker Street are signalized. The Hunziker Street and Scoffins Street intersections with Hall Boulevard are also signalized Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 3 and are controlled as a single intersection. The Knoll Drive and Hall Boulevard intersection is unsignalized. The table below summarizes the study area roadways, classification, width, number of lanes, and posted speed. In accordance with the guidelines identified in ODOT's Analysis Procedures Manual (APM) the lane configurations for each study intersection are presented on the traffic volume flow maps. Roadway Classification Width Lanes Speed Bike Lanes Sidewalks (FEET) (#) (MPH) Pacific Highway Statewide Highway' (ODOT) 70-80 4-6 35 Both sides2 Intermittent (Highway 99W) Arterial (Tigard) Knoll Drive Local Street 20-22 1 203 None None Hunziker Street Major Collector 38-44 2 35 None Intermittent Scoffins Street Local Street 21 2 253 None Intermittent Burnham Street Major Collector 50 2 30 None Intermittent Hall Boulevard District Highway(ODOT) 38-40 3 30-35 Both sides Intermittent (Beaverton-Tigard Highway) Arterial (Tigard) SW 72nd Avenue Major Collector 21-38 2-3 30 None Intermittent4 1 NHS Freight Route. 2 East of Hall Boulevard. 3 Speed estimated. 4 South of Dartmouth Street. Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard is a four-legged intersection with protected left turn phasing on the east and west approaches and split phasing on the north and south approaches. On the north approach a left turn lane and shared through-right lane are provided. On the east approach a left turn lane, two through lanes, and a shared through-right lane are provided. On the south approach a shared left-through and right turn lane are provided. On the west approach a left turn lane, through lane, shared through-right lane are provided. Knoll Drive/apartment driveway and Hall Boulevard is a four-legged intersection without stop-control. On the north and south approaches a two-way left turn lane and shared through- right lane are provided. On the west approach a shared left-through-right lane is provided. Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard is a four-legged intersection with protected left turn phasing on the north and south approaches and permitted left turn phasing on the east and west approaches. On the north and south approaches a left turn lane and shared through-right lane are provided. On the east approach a shared left-through lane and a right turn lane are provided. On the west approach a shared left-through-right lane is provided. Scoffins Street and Hall Boulevard is a tee-shaped intersection with protected left turn phasing on the south approach. A shared through-right lane is provided on the north approach. On the south approach a left turn lane and through lane are provided. On the west approach a shared left-right lane is provided. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 4 Burnham Street and Hall Boulevard is a tee-shaped intersection with protected left turn phasing on the south and west approaches and a right turn overlap phase on the west approach. On the north approach a through lane and right turn lane are provided. On the south approach a left turn lane and through lane are provided. On the west approach a left turn lane and right turn lane are provided. SW 72" Avenue and Hunziker Street is a tee-shaped intersection with protected left turn phasing on the south and west approaches. On the north approach a shared through-right lane is provided. On the south approach a left turn lane and through lane are provided. On the west approach a left turn lane and right turn lane are provided. TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS The Oregon Highway Plan (Action 1F.2.) identifies that highway mobility standards should be applied over a 20-year planning horizon in local transportation system plans (TSP) or a planning horizon of 15 years from the proposed date of amendment adoption, whichever is greater. The City of Tigard's TSP was adopted in February 2002 which corresponds to a 2022 planning horizon year; however, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) staff has identified that the year 2025 should be considered in the future year analysis. In order to evaluate traffic flow and delay in the area several intersections were analyzed for level of service (LOS) conditions and safety. The intersections evaluated include: • Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard • Knoll Drive and Hall Boulevard • Hunziker Street/Scoffins Street and Hall Boulevard • Burnham Street and Hall Boulevard • SW 72nd Avenue and Hunziker Street • Site Access and Knoll Drive (total traffic and planning horizon traffic scenarios only) LOS analyses were completed in the AM and PM peak hour periods for the following scenarios: • 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV (30t-hour volume) • 2011 Background Traffic • 2011 Total Traffic • 2025 Planning Horizon Traffic Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 5 In order to perform the LOS analysis at the critical intersections manual traffic counts were conducted during the AM peak (7:00-9:00 AM) and PM peak (4:00-6:00 PM) traffic hours. In accordance with ODOT's APM guidelines the existing intersection volumes will be presented in a series of figures that illustrate the following: • Raw Volumes (during each individual intersection's peak hour) - Figure la and Figure lb • Raw Volumes (during the system peak hour)—Figure 2a and Figure 2b • 2008 Unbalanced Base Year 30HV—Figure 3a and Figure 3b • 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV —Figure 4a and Figure 4b For analysis of the study intersections the system peak hour was taken from the Hall Boulevard and Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) intersection which peaked in the AM peak hour period between 7:25 AM and 8:25 AM and in the PM peak hour period between 4:00 PM and 5:00 PM. Based on ATR (automatic traffic recorder)#36-004 the seasonal adjustment factor for the counts conducted in November was calculated as +1.088; the seasonal adjustment factor for the (historical) counts conducted in March was calculated as +1.080. The November seasonal adjustment factor will be used for all of the traffic counts in the study area. A copy of the ATR data from 2003-2007 and the seasonal adjustment factor calculation are included in the report's appendix. The data presented for the 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV (Figures 4a-4b) is similar to the data presented in the 2008 Unbalanced Base Year 30HV (Figures 3a-3b) with the exception of Figure 4a & Figure 4b also present discrepancies in the traffic volumes between intersections. For the study intersections reviewed two discrepancies were identified in the PM peak hour between the Hall Boulevard intersections with Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Knoll Drive(PM peak hour: 150 northbound vehicles and 105 southbound vehicles) and also between the Hall Boulevard intersections with Scoffins Street and Burnham Street (PM peak hour: 100 northbound vehicles). The discrepancy is the result of traffic utilizing driveways on Hall Boulevard between the roadway segments. No adjustment has been made as a result of this traffic pattern. The historical count data at the Hall Boulevard and Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) intersection [AM peak hour] and the SW 72nd Avenue and Hunziker Street [AM and PM peak hours] intersection was adjusted for traffic growth through the 2008 Base Year using a 2.0% per year growth rate as identified by City of Tigard staff. The City of Tigard's staff identified that there are not currently any in-process projects that will affect the study area intersections. Background growth is comprised of the existing traffic factored with a traffic growth rate. The analysis for this project will apply the growth rate of 2.0% per year over a three-year buildout scenario. This growth rate will also be used to evaluate the growth estimated to occur through the 2025 planning horizon. Year 2011 background traffic volumes, the sum of the 2008 balanced base year 30HV and background growth, are illustrated in Figures 5a-5b. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 6 The 2011 total traffic is the summation of background traffic volumes and site generated traffic. The peak hour volumes with trips generated by the single-family homes are presented in Figures 10a-10b. The peak hour volumes with trips generated by the senior adult housing units are presented in Figures 11a-11b.The peak hour volumes with trips generated by the multi-family (apartment) units are presented in Figures 12a-12b. The 2025 planning horizon traffic is the summation of 2011 total traffic and 14 years of traffic growth (occurring between year 2011 and year 2025). The year 2025 future traffic (planning horizon) peak hour volumes with the single family homes are presented in Figures 13a-13b; the year 2025 future traffic (planning horizon) peak hour volumes with the senior adult housing are presented in Figures 14a-14b; the year 2025 future traffic (planning horizon) peak hour volumes with the multi-family(apartment) units are presented in Figures 15a-15b. VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Trip rates presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (rib) Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition, were utilized to estimate the site's trip generation. Specifically, Senior Adult Housing-Attached (1'I'E 252) and Apartment (ITE 220) trip rates were utilized to estimate the trips generated by the proposed use and the alternate scenario, respectively. Trips generated by the existing three homes on the site will be applied as a credit; the resulting net trip increase will be used to evaluate the development scenarios being considered. Table la presents the trip generation estimate for the site's current zoning development potential which includes a maximum of six (6) single-family homes. Table lb presents the trip generation estimate for the proposed senior adult housing land use. Table lc presents the trip generation estimate for the alternate scenario or apartment land use. Table la. Projected trip generation for the site (Existing R-4.5 Zoning). Units Weekday ITE Land Use (#) ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Single-Family(#210) 6 Generation Rate 1 9.57 0.75 25% 75% 1.01 63% 37% Potential Site Trips 2 57 5 1 4 6 4 2 Single-Family(#210) 3 Generation Rate 1 9.57 0.75 25% 75% 1.01 63% 37% Existing Site Trips(with R-4.5) _ 29 2 1 1 3 2 1 Net Trip Increases 28 _ 3 0 3 3 2 1 Source: Trip Generation,7th Edition, ITE,2003,average rates. 2 Potential(maximum)development with existing land use(single-family)and existing zoning(R-4.5). 3 Net Trip Increase= Potential Trips-Existing Trips. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 7 Table 1 b. Projected trip generation for The Knoll at Tigard (MUR-1 Zoning). Units Weekday ITE Land Use (#) ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Senior Adult Housing-Attached(#252) 48 Generation Rate ' 3.48 0.08 45% 55% 0.11 61% 39% Proposed Site Trips ' 167 4 2 2 5 3 2 Single-Family(#210) 3 Generation Rate ' 9.57 0.75 25% 75% 1.01 63% 37% Existing Site Trips(with R-4.5) 29 2 1 1 3 2 1 Net Trip increases 138 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 Source: Trip Generation,7th Edition,ITE,2003,average rates. a Potential(maximum)development with proposed land use(senior housing attached)and proposed zoning(MUR-1). 5 Net Trip Increase= Proposed Trips-Existing Trips. Table 1c. Projected trip generation for the Alternative Scenario(MUR-1 Zoning). Weekday ITE Land Use Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour (#) ADT Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Apartment(#220) 49 Generation Rate ' 6.72 0.51 20% 80% 0.62 65% 35% Alternative Scenario Site Trips 6 329 25 5 20 30 20 10 Single-Family(#210) 3 Generation Rate 9.57 0.75 25% 75% 1.01 63% 37% Existing Site Trips(with R-4.5) 29 2 1 1 3 2 1 Net Trip increase ' 300 23 4 19 27 18 9 Source: Trip Generation,7th Edition, ITE,2003,average rates. 6 Potential(maximum)development with proposed zoning(MUR-1). Net Trip Increase=Alternative Scenario Trips-Existing Trips. Under the current R-4.5 zoning the site's net trip increase is estimated as 28 daily trips, 3 AM peak hour trips, and 3 PM peak hour trips. With the proposed MUR-1 zoning the senior adult housing net trip increase is estimated as 138 daily trips, 2 AM peak hour trips, and 2 PM peak hour trips. With the alternate scenario, the multi-family (apartment) net trip increase is estimated as 300 daily trips, 23 AM peak hour trips, and 27 PM peak hour trips. Trip distribution is based on existing traffic patterns and engineering judgement. Figure 6 illustrates the AM and PM peak hour trip distribution that will be used for the single family homes, the senior adult housing, and the multi-family (apartment) trip generation during the AM and PM peak hours. Figures 7a-7b illustrate the trip assignments that correspond to the level of development with the single family homes (for the R-4.5 zoning class); Figures 8a-8b illustrate the trip assignment for the senior adult housing (the proposed land use); and Figures 9a-9b illustrate the trip assignments that correspond to multi-family (apartment)units (the alternate scenario in the MUR-1 zone). Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 8 CAPA CITY ANALYSIS Capacity analyses were performed to determine the levels of service for the weekday peak hours. Synchro software (Version 7) was used to determine the level of service for each scenario considered. The program is based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology. Copies of the capacity analysis calculations are included in the appendix. ODOT uses the v/c ratio to measure performance of its highways. In an amendment to Table 7 in the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP)the highway mobility standards have been defined for specifically designated areas within Metro's boundaries. Specifically, Corridors (as 99W is designated)have a maximum v/c ratio of 0.99 for both the first and second hours. ODOT requires mitigation if the project traffic impacts cause the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio to exceed this standard. If the v/c is already exceeding the standard, the project would be required to mitigate its traffic impacts only if the v/c was worsened. Tigard's Transportation System Plan (TSP) identifies `Level of Service E (and demand-to- capacity ratio of 1.0 or less), Highway Capacity Manual, Chapters 15, 16, and 17 (or subsequent updated references)is recommended to balance provision of roadway capacity with level of service and funding.' Table 2a summarizes the 2008 balanced base year 30HV and the 2011 background traffic analysis results. The 2011 total traffic and 2025 future traffic (planning horizon) analysis results are presented in Tables 2b-2d. Specifically, Table 2b presents the results of the Single Family scenario; Table 2c presents the results of the Senior Adult Housing scenario; and Table 2d presents the results of the Apartment scenario. Table 2a. Summary of capacity analysis without development. Traffic Scenario Intersection Type of Control Peak 2008 Existing 2011 Background Hour Mov't LOS Delay v/c Mov't LOS Delay v/c Pacific Highway AM - E 62.2 1.02 - E 76.3 1.08 (Highway 99W) Signal --- and Hall Boulevard PM - E 58.0 0.93 - E 66.3 0.98 Knoll Drive Two-way AM EB B 12.1 0.00 EB B 12.4 0.00 and Hall Boulevard Stop PM SB A 0.3 0.01 SB A 0.3 0.01 Hunziker Street/ AM - D 39.0 0.81 - D 48.2 0.85 Scoffins Street Signal and Hall Boulevard PM - D 37.0 0.77 - D 45.7 0.82 Burnham Street AM - A 7.8 0.59 - A 8.8 0.61 and Hall Boulevard Signal - PM - B 12.0 0.62 - B 12.6 0.65 SW 72nd Avenue AM - C 26.6 0.79 - C 28.7 0.84 and Hunziker Street Signal PM - C 21.7 0.79 - C 24.2 0.83 Notes: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology used in analysis. SB-Southbound, EB-Eastbound,Crit. MoVt-Critical movement or critical approach. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 9 ■ Table 2b. Summary of capacity analysis with Single Family (current R-4.5 zoning). Traffic Scenario Intersection Type of Control Peak 2011 Total 2025 Future Hour Crit. LOS Delay v/c Crit. LOS Delay v/c Mov't Mov't Pacific Highway AM - E 76.5 1.08 - F 166.8 1.40 (Highway 99W) Signal and Hall Boulevard PM - E 66.4 0.98 - F 150.2 1.24 Knoll Drive Two-way AM EB B 12:4 0.00 EB B 14.0 0.01 and Hall Boulevard Stop PM SB A 0.4 0.01 SB A 0.6 0.02 Hunziker Street/ AM - D 48.2 0.85 - F 127.5 1.07 Scoffins Street Signal and Hall Boulevard PM - D 45.9 0.82 - F 117.5 1.05 Burnham Street AM - A 8.8 0.61 - B 11.2 0.75 and Hall Boulevard Signal PM - B 12.6 0.65 - B 17.4 0.75 SW 72nd Avenue AM - C 28.7 0.84 - E 58.8 1.06 and Hunziker Street Signal PM - C 24.2 0.83 - E 63.3 1.05 Site Access Two-way AM NB A 8.4 0.00 NB A 8.4 0.00 and Knoll Drive Stop PM NB A 8.4 0.00 NB A 8.4 0.00 Notes: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology used in analysis. NB-Northbound, SB- Southbound, EB- Eastbound, Crit. Mov't-Critical movement or critical approach. Table 2c. Summary of capacity analysis with Senior Adult Housing (Proposed Use). Traffic Scenario Intersection Type of Control Peak 2011 Total 2025 Future Hour Crit. LOS Delay v/c Crit. LOS Delay v/c Mov't Mov't Pacific Highway AM - E 76.5 1.08 - F 166.9 1.40 (Highway 99W) Signal -and Hall Boulevard PM - E 66.4 0.98 - F 150.2 1.24 Knoll Drive Two-way AM EB B 12.4 0.00 EB B 14.1 0.01 and Hall Boulevard Stop PM SB A 0.4 0.01 SB A 0.6 0.02 Hunziker Street/ AM - D 48.2 0.85 - F 127.5 1.07 Scoffins Street Signal and Hall Boulevard PM - D 45.6 0.82 - F 117.4 1.05 Burnham Street AM - A 8.8 0.61 - B 11.2 0.75 and Hall Boulevard Signal PM - B 12.6 0.65 - B 17.4 0.75 SW 72nd Avenue AM - C 28.7 0.84 - E 58.6 1.06 and Hunziker Street Signal PM - C 24.2 0.83 - E 63.3 1.05 Site Access Two-way AM NB A 8.4 0.00 NB A 8.4 0.00 and Knoll Drive Stop PM NB A 8.4 0.00 NB A 8.4 0.00 Notes: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology used in analysis. NB-Northbound, SB- Southbound, EB- Eastbound, Crit. Mov't-Critical movement or critical approach. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 10 Table 2d. Summary of capacity analysis with Apartments (Alternative Scenario). Traffic Scenario Intersection Type of Control Peak 2011 Total 2025 Future Hour Grit. Crit. Mov't LOS Delay v/c Mov't LOS Delay v/c Pacific Highway AM - E 77.6 1.08 - F 167.9 1.40 (Highway 99W) Signal and Hall Boulevard PM - E 66.7 0.98 - F 150.7 1.24 Knoll Drive Two-way AM EB B 12.4 0.00 EB B 14.2 0.01 and Hall Boulevard Stop PM SB A 0.6 0.02 SB A 0.9 0.03 Hunziker Street/ AM - D 48.6 0.86 - F 128.7 1.07 Scoffins Street Signal and Hall Boulevard PM - D 46.0 0.82 - F 117.5 1.06 Burnham Street AM - A 8.8 0.61 - B 11.2 0.75 and Hall Boulevard Signal PM - B 12.7 0.65 - B 17.4 0.75 SW 72nd Avenue AM - C 29.2 0.84 - E 59.9 1.06 and Hunziker Street Signal - PM - C 24.8 0.84 - E 65.1 1.06 Site Access Two-way AM NB A 8.5 0.02 NB A 8.5 0.02 and Knoll Drive Stop PM NB A 8.4 0.01 NB A 8.5 0.01 Notes: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology used in analysis. NB-Northbound,SB-Southbound,EB- Eastbound,Crit. Mov't-Critical movement or critical approach. In the 2011 background traffic scenario, the buildout year without development, the Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard intersection will operate with a v/c ratio of 1.08 during the AM peak hour and will exceed ODOT's v/c standard of 0.99. During the PM peak hour the Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard intersection will not exceed ODOT's v/c standard. Development of senior adult housing(the proposed use) or the worst-case multi-family (apartment) land use will not worsen the v/c ratios at the Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard intersection and thus mitigation is not necessary. The remaining study intersections will operate with acceptable v/c ratios through the 2011 total traffic scenario with development of the site with senior adult housing (the proposed use). Development of three additional single-family homes results in similar levels of service and v/c ratios as in the Senior Adult Housing scenario with the exception of the delay in the PM peak hour at the Hunziker/Scoffins Streets and Hall Boulevard intersection (2011 total traffic scenario). All of the study intersections will meet or exceed the City of Tigard's intersection level of service standard through the 2011 total traffic scenario. Generally, LOS A , B , C , and `D' are desirable service levels ranging from no vehicle delays to average or longer than average delays in the peak hours. Level `E' represents long delays indicating signalization warrants need to be reviewed and signals considered only if Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 11 warrants are met. Level `F' indicates that intersection improvements, such as widening and signalization, may be required. According to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), the following delay times are associated with the LOS at stop controlled unsignalized and signalized intersections. Level of Service criteria defined in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Level of Service Unsignalized Control Signalized Control (LOS) Stopped Delay (sec/veh) Stopped Delay(sec/veh) A 510 5 10 B > 10 and 5. 15 > 10 and 520 C > 15 and 5__ 25 > 20 and <_ 35 D > 25 and 5__ 35 > 35 and 555 E > 35 and 550 > 55 and 5__ 80 F >50 > 80 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE (TPR) The proposed zone change warrants a response to the State of Oregon's Administrative Rules which require that `the local government shall put in place measures to assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility'. The Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (OAR Section 660-012-0060) are used to determine if a plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility. The Oregon Administrative Rules identify many measures of how a plan or land use "significantly affects" a transportation facility. The measures used and how The Knoll at Tigard site relates to them are addressed below. (1)(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (1)(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or Development of The Knoll at Tigard site does not propose changes to the existing or planned functional classification, nor the functional classification standards. (1)(c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system plan: (1)(A) Allow land uses or levels of development that would result in types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; The Knoll at Tigard site consists of three separate parcels (Taxlot 1000, 900, and 800) which are currently zoned residential (R-4.5). Under the proposed zoning (MUR-1) the site has the potential for development of 48 senior adult housing units which will generate 138 net daily Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 12 trips, 2 net AM peak hour trips, and 2 net PM peak hour trips. Under the MUR-1 zoning the site has the potential for development of up to 49 multi-family (apartment) units which will generate an estimated 300 net daily trips, 23 net AM peak hour trips, and 27 net PM peak hour trips. Regardless of the site's development the Knoll Drive local street sole function (of providing access to adjacent land) will not be adversely affected. Hall Boulevard is classified as a district highway (ODOT) and an arterial (Tigard). Based on the proposed site's access to Knoll Drive, the lower classified street, The Knoll at Tigard site is consistent with the functional classification of the existing and planned transportation facility. (1)(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or The City of Tigard's Transportation System Plan (TSP) identifies level of service "E" as the minimum level of service standard. Table 7 (in Policy 1F) in the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan identifies the maximum volume-to-capacity ratio for Statewide (NHS) Freight Routes within Metro as 0.99. As identified in Table 2b, through the year 2011 total traffic scenario, the study intersections will operate at level of service "E" or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Only the AM peak hour operation of the Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard intersection will exceed ODOT's v/c standard; however, development of the senior adult housing will not worsen the v/c ratio anticipated in the 2011 background traffic scenario. Based on the analysis results the proposed zoning and plan amendment will not reduce the performance of the study intersections below the minimum acceptable performance standards of the City of Tigard's TSP and the State of Oregon's highway plan. (1)(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. The impacts of the site's development with senior adult housing results in similar intersection delays and identical volume-to-capacity ratios when compared to the impacts of the three (3) additional single family homes. Based on these results the proposed senior adult housing will not worsen the performance of the existing transportation facility that is projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard of the City of Tigard's TSP and the Oregon Highway Plan. Based on the information presented in Section (1)(B) or Section (1)(C) development of the site will not have a significant effect on the transportation facility. Approval of the proposed zone change (from R-4.5 to MUR-1) and comprehensive plan amendment (from Low Density Residential to Mixed Use Residential) should be approved. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 13 QUEUING ANALYSIS Queue lengths at the study intersections were taken from the Synchro queuing analysis reports. The storage available and the calculated queue lengths are presented in Table 3. Copies of the reports are included in the appendix. Table 3. Queuing Summary. Storage Queue Length Calculated (feet) Intersection Movement Available 2011 2011 Total 2011 Total 2011 Total (feet) Background -Single Family- -Senior Adult Housing- -Apartments- EB LT 230 285 310 280 270 EB TH 680 715 785 795 760 EB TH/RT 680 715 730 795 765 Pacific Highway WB LT 560 350 345 315 360 (Highway 99W) and WB TH 685 510 515 550 550 Hall Boulevard WB TH/RT 685 530 540 575 580 NB LT/TH 1,070 670 650 675 685 NB RT 185 285 265 280 265 SB LT 320 385 375 375 390 SB TH/RT 1,479 770 765 690 710 Knoll Drive EB LTR 25 <5 10 15 <5 and Hall Boulevard NB LTR 385 275 225 225 195 SB LTR 1,070 105 70 70 100 EB LTR 1,335 150 160 135 145 WB LT/TH 275 540 725 1,150 1,035 Hunziker/Scoffins WB RT 275 330 290 375 325 Streets NB LT 45 50 50 55 70 and Hall Boulevard2 NB TH/RT 1,470 645 640 545 550 SB LT 90 110 120 120 105 SB TH/RT 385 260 165 210 205 EB LT 140 90 95 110 80 E B RT 1,125 145 95 120 115 Burnham Street NB LT 70 110 105 105 105 and Hall Boulevard NB TH 1,435 220 220 220 240 SB TH 1,470 400 " 280 380 345 SB RT 105 120 115 120 125 EB LT 1,525 285 450 455 535 SW 72nd Avenue EB RT 205 195 250 250 220 and Hunziker Street NB LT 150 185 195 200 195 NB TH 185 355 335 340 335 SB TH/RT 520 570 620 615 605 Site Access NB RT 201 ---- 25 15 40 and Knoll Drive 1 Proposed throat length. 2 Realignment of Scoffins Street with Hunziker Street at Hall Boulevard is identified in the City of Tigard's Draft Transportation System Plan(TSP), however the project is not funded. Several of the queue lengths calculated in the 2011 background traffic scenario will exceed the storage currently available. Mitigation for this condition could include widening and redesigning the intersection. Widening and redesigning some of the study intersections are Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 14 discussed in the City of Tigard's Draft Transportation Plan (TSP); however, most of the projects do not have funding and/or do not have a specified start date for construction. SIGHT DISTANCE Sight distance at the proposed site access location was reviewed in the field in accordance with AASHTO standards. Based on a posted speed of 20 miles per hour, AASHTO recommends a minimum sight distance of 195 feet should be available from the access (in both directions). From the proposed site access location the Knoll Drive and Hall Boulevard intersection can be viewed clearly. With development of The Knoll at Tigard site the access to Knoll Drive should be designed such that AASHTO's minimum sight distance recommendation is met or exceeded. TURN LANE WARRANTS ODOT's right turn lane criteria was reviewed for the eastbound and westbound approaches of Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) at Hall Boulevard. For the eastbound approach of Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) at Hall Boulevard the review of the ODOT right turn lane criteria identified that a roadway shoulder is recommended with existing AM peak hour traffic; a right turn lane is recommended with existing PM peak hour traffic. On the westbound approach a right turn lane is recommended with existing AM and PM peak hour traffic. A two-way left turn lane is present at the Knoll Drive and Hall Boulevard intersection. Based on the configuration of Knoll Drive (a one-way street) and the location of the proposed access (on the south side of Knoll Drive) traffic movements at the site access will consist of right turns. Based on these conditions left turn lane warrants were not reviewed at the unsignalized intersections in the study area. TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS The peak hour signal warrant presented in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) was reviewed at the Knoll Drive intersections with Hall Boulevard and the proposed site access. Based on the low peak hour traffic volumes, signalization is not warranted at either intersection regardless of whether the site is developed with senior adult housing or multi-family housing (apartments). A copy of the peak hour signal warrant is included. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 15 ACCIDENT HISTORY Accident data for the study intersections was requested from Oregon Department of Transportation staff,but was not received in time to be included in this analysis. Once the data is received, an addendum that summarizes the accident history at the study intersections will be submitted. PEDESTRIANS,BICYCLES, & BUSES Sidewalks are provided intermittently along both sides of Pacific Highway (Highway 99), Hunziker Street, Scoffins Street, Burnham Street, Hall Boulevard, and SW 72n6 Avenue. With development of the site it is anticipated that sidewalks will be constructed along the frontages to Hall Boulevard and to Knoll Drive. Bicycle lanes are provided intermittently along both sides of Hall Boulevard. Additional bicycle lanes are not proposed. Transit service is provided by Tri-Met. Route#12, Barbur Boulevard, and Route#94, Sherwood/Pacific Highway Express, travel along Barbur Boulevard and Pacific Highway (Highway 99W)between Portland City Center and Sherwood. Route#38, Boones Ferry Road, travels along Boones Ferry Road, Barbur Boulevard, and Kruse Way between Portland City Center and the Tualatin Park and Ride. Route#64, Marquam Hill/Tigard TC, travels along Barbur Boulevard and Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) between Marquam Hill and the Tigard Transit Center. Route#76, Beaverton/Tigard, travels along Hall Boulevard, Greenburg Road, and Lower Boones Ferry Road between the Beaverton Transit Center and Meridian Park Hospital. Route#78, Beaverton/Lake Oswego, travels along Hall Boulevard, Greenburg Road, SW 72"d Avenue, Hampton Street, and Country Club Road between the Beaverton and Lake Oswego Transit Centers. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The traffic study for The Knoll at Tigard site has been prepared to determine the potential impacts of the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and the corresponding zone change (from the site's current Low Density Residential (R-4.5) zoning to the proposed Mixed Use Residential (MUR-1) zoning). Under its current land use designation the site has the potential for a maximum development of six (6) single-family homes which would generate an estimated 28 net daily trips, 3 net AM peak hour trips, and 3 net PM peak hour trips. Under the proposed land use designation the site has the potential for development of up to 48 senior adult housing units which would generate an estimated 138 net daily trips, 2 net AM peak hour trips, and 2 net PM peak hour trips. The multi-family (apartment) units would generate and estimated 300 net daily trips, 23 net AM peak hour trips, and 27 net PM peak hour trips. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 16 Sight distance at the proposed site access location was reviewed in the field in accordance with AASHTO standards. From the proposed site access location the Knoll Drive and Hall Boulevard intersection can be viewed clearly. With development of The Knoll at Tigard site the access to Knoll Drive should be designed such that AASHTO's minimum sight distance recommendation is met or exceeded. Obstruction by landscaping, signing, parking, buildings, or other objects would be unsafe. The peak hour signal warrant was reviewed at the Knoll Drive intersections with Hall Boulevard and the proposed site access. Neither intersection meets the peak hour signal warrant, thus installation of a traffic signal is not recommended. Development of senior adult housing (the proposed use) or the worst-case multi-family (apartments)land use will not worsen the v/c ratios at the Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and Hall Boulevard intersection and thus mitigation is not necessary. The remaining study intersections will operate with acceptable v/c ratios through the 2011 total traffic scenario with development of the site with senior adult housing (the proposed use) or the worst-case multi-family (apartment) land use. All of the study intersections will meet or exceed the City of Tigard's intersection level of service standard through the 2011 total traffic scenario. Based on the analysis results the proposed change in zoning and the associated change to the comprehensive plan map and the zoning map will not reduce the performance of the study intersections below the minimum acceptable performance standards of the City of Tigard's TSP and the State of Oregon's highway plan. Intersection improvements are not necessary. Based on the responses to the Transportation Planning Rule Section (1)(B) and Section (1)(C), the proposed zone change (from R-4.5 to MUR-1) will not have a significant effect on the transportation facility. Based on the information presented in this traffic analysis report approval of the proposed zone change and concurrent change to the comprehensive plan map and the zoning map should be approved. Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 17 APPENDIX • Vicinity Map Figure 'a' • Site Plan Figure 'b' • Traffic Flow Diagrams Figures la-lb Raw Volumes With Individual Intersection Peak Data(AM &PM) Figures 2a-2b _ Raw Volumes With System Peak Hour Data Figures 3a-3b 2008 Unbalanced Base Year 30HV Figures 4a-4b 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV Figures 5a-5b 2011 Background Traffic Figure 6 Trip Distribution(for both analysis scenarios and peak hours) Figures 7a-7b Trip Assignment—Single Family(R-4.5 zoning) Figures 8a-8b Trip Assignment—Senior Housing(Proposed Use) Figures 9a-9b Trip Assignment—Apartments(Alternate Scenario) Figures 10a-10b 2011 Total Traffic—Single Family Figures l la-1 lb 2011 Total Traffic—Senior Housing Figures 12a-12b 2011 Total Traffic—Apartments Figures 13a-13b 2025 Future Traffic—Single Family Figures 14a-14b 2025 Future Traffic—Senior Housing Figures 15a-15b 2025 Future Traffic—Apartments • Seasonal Adjustment Calculation • Permanent Recorder Summary Sheets(Recorder#36-004)for 2003-2007 • Traffic Count Data • Peak Hour Signal Warrant • ODOT Right Turn Lane Warrant • Synchro Capacity Analysis Worksheets • Synchro Queuing Analysis Worksheets Charbonneau The Knoll at Tigard November 20, 2008 Engineering LLC Traffic Analysis Report Knoll Drive, Tigard 4 CHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING LLc Appendix ieCHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING LLc Flow Maps PLOT DATE 11, FILE: 08451low.dvig . . cm .. 0. 655. 4c, ...‘ le V P g el -'r 11"-ttti La W 4TE ri sT ,..;) to) Aux i H ..,„ 4, a I. 0 A -j..; giiz SL_____ CT ii• 1— X CO •..‘-'',..,,,Y 4P & .103• • .4.4r ',.. C.11'-lj a— ,.. 2 1 LI ti-, r"-- ...4:. 4„....,..„0, ... '" c. , ° (...) rC ■I, (...3 '..., S W P AFFLE s"-:' ... i . : ,.._ I : ,s- 4 \ 1 z a G • ; ,.1 s„,., 77-7;"':°- PA1A 8 .4 . *. Xi 151 ,,-- - . _:••••_ Rix ATLANTA ST IP .,,' _§1LATLANTA , `rorr a A k •4 Soc • /, g --, 4- 1 siO, ST 4 SW :'YLV ST -7'• 4/1 lc MOS ,* Sii ; m"' TMIGLIA ST (.). .1:ri a 1 ,ts. p ‘. l's, kW,11, ri■ V - Sbi .,.. Ra 4, -• TANGFLA "" 1.!4•,13 ill\ ' , 11 EADOW NII■ •.. ill" 416e. CT 7., z. ../__ SI `t E ,., -. '-- SW CLIP ! a- "' a- ft a4 <5, 1,, rliERAE 1_, ST 44,c4 CES4:frfie 40, ,i_k cy_ c'' raf n 99W.• LIA R T 2-0 U T 11131 'i t... ST4 ,,,\■*- .4", cft, _. . I r NooDARD—To .sit•'`,‘-. 4' Ssik ...:,,'"' erl .:-•, ,,,Z. ,I, 293 1 ›7',-; 4. ;:—.-------",, 1 c*:-.. •;7 Si' l' o!..'1'.. ,,- . • %.$>, II pt.) ..-4, Sk , 217 &MORS' •" , 5. 4494)00* • 4--.1°- .4', "ITO( t" s ji woos° ..:.-•-.IF A . `tc. .. * ,.., 1,7 WY = ' 4>r e. '1/4\ lb v-- ST ff, • . IN -..4- . .4,. C b•os. 'Y war, a Shf Um/ft ‘.14„. 7,7724,wraL),4 p ,....:,,, __ kit.) = 5 ■ = '2.:' JiIP` jj, c.) col .— 0— .:, Catig\ SW 2 co -c• N. CiOKZ/GA i ! •;!. CAW tt \ ,.... LAMPS!1 . 'ammo r- Z / 7A7CR a 4 6:1 SW HA+Toil 'ST ,... ia L•11 -------7"---. , FS' SITE 1., ---.1- - ''' 1 -",.. '4" 74-6.0s .....1.to a/CM `:- ,-,,, sk- \ 4-el ck: CREST V I EW 4 cl — •.4(Kqe.t F., es: ?■&111174„„ , re. I 1 'll' 'Yr <7.,,* ,0:.- •••4;Vt.; . .4:\ ::-.. maw N■ ■ SW •cc VA/diS % . FANIO CRifirj --,,"r•.-' 61 7: ST • (A--- i t"... •,..„' te • 4 /e CO ..-..t, , It t si'). t''.* - < --'• • io 0-• 4,I,r Si./-___) ,,,_ C7 R. i ), '----C) - --. 4 44.9- e:tsto 06' # (..* 4 • st ` )I-4 a \ \.., . li.;..i. 5• :4 , ( -3)-ls-% v. rcC\I — • , r-! -,1: ,.. L.• ! = '-'. r_ , .„.•:;.. 1 SANDBURG T -(.... c-.,• ° 1-5‘.. Ve• N \ SW CHERRY 0 f 1050 2100 C.,-* • Cr —1 CV *N ,. \ 0 .4)2006 Rand McNally&Company V) f!..Y*,, (r) 469 CHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING LLC 1 NOTES: tr, , : I VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 PRO THE KNOLL AT TIGARD i a JeCT; 08-45 ...._. --- ------- --- Q NO SCALE z - 3W KNOLL ORNE \ (SO'R.OW.) \ ''. -- j■ I 1", Mir fir -LI ------ -----{:---PIT----------'\,,,.,,, I 11„I ir moo . , .._ 1 „........„ ._,e„ look .... !) t .411 g i .. I a I / L... / I ■ I ' WillWill AI y I \ / I71•�=� ;4/ \_0 II I N. mow= &�� I \ 6!:1.11■•� -��"� ,';=/ENEE, \ I m r, , 1 ' 1 to. ir , O' .1�iG. i - /1 ai 1 I 1 441011 r 0, ,,/ / . / / . . ,,,,,j 0 / Iii I I ' 7 ,•i / ` . 2 I iii 16 z %BC's l / /\ . / ,,, /// / LL /I Ir 4 + iY%- �n.... / / '''''''Y ,,,,, ..... 1 -... / , , ` \ `h , / /N ' i /< .r L yJ`: -.( ei16,s • ` r rr 1 / / 8 ai oW CHARBONNEAU NOTES: Conceptual site plan SITE PLAN FIGURE for senior adult housing o ENGINEERING LLC provided by Carleton Hart THE KNOLL AT TIGARD b PROJECT: 08-45 Architecture. LEGEND CHANNELIZATION lj SIGNAL uc T STOP SIGN s 0 0 0 C- CD G 03/15/2007 0 7:25-8:25 AM ° cc g`L 5 O J 'usT,,, ....., ›: C3 0 2—hr Video dj i tea^ 4, \ z 4, v401 4 00 \- 0� OG� * C P 11/07/2008 j to 7:20-8:20 AM 1, 3 CO 4AP Sttee �� O�nO�i ti o 01-2, w F. a -i_ v .S�, 2—hr Video �‘ IT, �s �/� NO SCALE s6. sir- 0,, 4,t, ~ QHv�Ziker Sheet z � Lu-J 11/07/2008 ; r3 11/07/2008 �: 5= 7:25-8:25 AM 7:25-8:25 AM 03/15/2007 ..! N �"") IN o" 7:30-8:30 AM �1 !�W �` NN00 67 i!)N s� �� 1r�1 N4 139—/2 °J 1� Vorns 0� 12�I ,off 0\0 1� o w co 2411 T Street 2—hr Video r �"' No 2—hr Video •-LO 2—hr Video w��h 1 1/0 7/2008 °'?i 7:10-8:10 AM Sfr Pet 1 0)0 in IN � 7 h 57-11it 215 ON ^^ M CO —N 2—hr Video * Two-Way Left Turn Lane Li; o CHARBONNEAU NOTES: RAW VOLUMES WITH INDIVIDUAL FIGURE I- ENGINEERING LLC INTERSECTION AM PEAK DATA a PROJECT: 08-45 THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 1 a LEGEND T CHANNELIZATION El SIGNAL m -u- STOP SIGN -s- 0 ea 0 G CO L / 1/11/2008 °v.4:00-5:00 PM ° '94'' 114 cg'CTI iroI 1 tt7 N 5 1 it 0 2-hr Video " e °G C 11/06/2008 NI gIN Slteei 4:30-5:30 PM 4'in 0 1704 o�� 4 N o °o� 0Tr F� v S', 2-hr Video AL` t. li Ili of �s t�� 41/4 NO SCALE oON IN w Pr Si� z �� Hu ziker Street w 11 06 2008 q -J / / 4 I� 11/06/2008 �: LL 4:40-5:40 PM 3/14/2007 4:25-5:25 PM .� 100 �� CO 4:55-5:55 PM 7 411 y o` Onto R-z3� inO ��, ��► 14—355 J.1, 53-4 " (49 0—A I is �� Vorns iD \ 0� O°"" �51� �T Street a p� O—I ao 294�I „�s 2-hr Video 2—hr Video Nn 2-hr Video e`�� 11/06/2008 o,77 J / 4:45-5:45 PM lof croon NN J11\44 J.1, 64_A 15+ 225—N ter) 0 C'4- N 2—hr Video * Two-Way Left Turn Lane w Q ea CHARBONNEAU NOTES: RAW VOLUMES WITH INDIVIDUAL FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC INTERSECTION PM PEAK DATA a PROJECT: 08-45 THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 1 b LEGEND CHANNELIZATION S SIGNAL • _� ® 111111 *1141111/ T STOP SIGN i 0 ca 0 c CO L 03/15/2007 ° 4 go'l 9`L5 °l ,\„ ...,,,,\.5b, Pe e- ,,,,\, G� N6,15 ��Cj /► `°m 4 �6^ \ i: 00 P° 11/07/2008 4.1‘Stteek vii °� ITS' c Ilf j�t ,-o �a s `! NO SCALE Q `► N�n2iker Sheet z � 11/07/2008 ; ti 11/07/2008 03/15/2007 3.roc �a o� X67 X11 1� ° NN 00 d0n LJ \e, JAL v-°i Nrn ° 1� Varns 12—N �( o� `�T I rO ° t� ONE 238 T Street �ro no) NO) �In eG/?), 1 1/07/2008 S",_ 411 -*t 4 in- 62—2I 1 T 196 N —Lo — N° —co * Two-Way Left Turn Lane ui Q ie CHARBONNEAU NOTES: RAW VOLUMES FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC WITH SYSTEM PEAK (7:25-8:25 AM) PROJECT: oa 45 THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 2a LEGEND T CHANNELIZATION 8 SIGNAL iiiiiiiimmilmo T STOP SIGN iiiiii0111V O co O G CO G 11/11/2008 0 o- 99411 g 6p A rsti ol � j d�o \ � ,, 1,('D c^ VP"4e '`:off 0401 0V o �‘q Q P° 11/06/2008 Sktee` l��(\ o a Ln N f 04/0°4 O 0_11tr' 1 s 0, °�N y z lb -'s �� y NO SCALE sr� T Co r Q �r Hun?i/(er Street z 11/06/2008 ,; r� 11/06/2008 �. " 3J' 03/14/2007 t a� ` �cTon 198 —N i 1 O �� J2RV-325 'na 49-4 �T CbOJ 0� Iv/ �� Vorns -a gyp' OBI °No 225 )T Street d.- N0 .-tO C90,/)h 11/06/2008 o,-1) Pef I� NM �o u� !L 4 7, 66-A )T 223 ,o CO N.C.! O N O N * Two-Way Left Turn Lane di Li ieCHARBONNEAU NOTES: RAW VOLUMES FIGURE ENGINEERING is WITH SYSTEM PEAK (4:00-5:00 PM) a PROJECT: 08-45 THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 2b LEGEND CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL W STOP SIGN illIllkpo/IIIIIIPV -r-0 in 0 c Includes growth (one c. year at 2.0%/year) p and 1.088 seasonal 0- .fl� 111Clk adjustment to get to 99 year 2008 DHV. X01 c� <5goa,c77o 00 4-3 iy Cj� o� \1 .,5 e tea^ o� r�01 4 > o ��9 Q includes 1.088 4111N seasonal adjustment e� to get to Skle year 2008 DMV. °'c o Lo ÷ 411* i / Vr)- �yL °tiF °. L <5_./I N5T r 7 co Sc, Allf <5�I v�v y t 0 oaf. E. �s �j� 4)1. NO SCALE sr„ T 00 a r �l Hunzike� Street z w Includes 1.088 �_ seasonal adjustment t. Includes 1.088 seasonal ad'ustment to get to Includes growth (one year 20008 DtIV. �� year 20081 DI V year of 1.088 seasonol i �� a and adjustment seasonal nN Jc oNo 75 adjustment to_get to J,1, J v N rn <5 year 2008 DtIV 0a J L Ir 75 000 Varns ______) 150...../I o\ <5_/1 15 N.* Street 15—N ,n o r r <5—al vtou�) in to a to 255—7I ' * 265—x1 0� .4 up e4r Includes 1.088 Shp seasonal adjustment to et to S�rPPf 41 year 2008 2008 u) to(NI )4, ,„ 65_11 , 215-4 o0 in to —o * Two-Way Left Turn Lane w I., 4eCHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2008 UNBALANCED BASE YR 30HV FIGURE ENGINEERING LLC AM PEAK HOUR a PROJECT: 08 45 THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 3a LEGEND 4► CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL ammilmummo T STOP SIGN Iiiiiii>l■s 0 0 0 c co c. Includes 1.088 0 seasonal adjustment o- 44> It\ to get to 99 year 2008 DIiV. 4,osi °yy-1 \s b l ) 'fit GI N'191,b .9 x4401 * o ig +� , Includes 1.088 ; ® r seasonal adjustment e� to get to 3 5v year 2008 DHV. tj NON Lon o F ca L <5-11 1T? ym I k.S.' <5—> ANN <5-41 vto y Allfr of .��► t n % t14 41. NO SCALE d` r'-- coo 44 At*Q ~ Hu ziker Street z w Includes 1.088 seasonal adjustment I� Includes 1.088 u. '; seasonal adjustment to get to Includes growth (one year 2008 DHV to get to year at 2.0X/yeor) `� t year 2008 DHV 1 o o �a and u meat seasonal -co �O ��o 215 adjustment to get to y J,0 v a to -<5 year 2008 DHV. 60�t 15+ 0a 355 ma Varns 55�I N,n o <5� T Street sc in <5�I v a. 140 . 250—N 15+' 1M)N —n evi Includes 1.088 �ho� seasonal adjustment S6.P 41 y to get to of ear r 2008 DHV in N It)) .� h An 7o— `5T o 245—N ou) o onto N —u) * Two-Way Left Turn Lane ui a ie CHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2008 UNBALANCED BASE YR 30HV FIGURE o ENGINEERING 'Lc PM PEAK HOUR a PROJECT: 08-45 THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 3b LEGEND + CHANNELIZATION El SIGNAL iiiiiiiimmo '-u- STOP SIGN 1111111114114114141111111\0111/s 0 co 0 0 c i c. 9 Int. X° 9�n s yy t;; ��1:5**\\� j -i,--- a3 ;41 o G�{� M�, N Int. S,teek. #2 I�V4 t" 12 fB- ttn "' <—<5 4C>. Vr7- <5-> 1� ,,°�� fl4 Int 12 EB= �/e. 1Tr Nwti <5�1 VMV 9? 1+' . lb P2, In Int 13 _ o °sir• Int 13 V8=�‘ — iso In ��s <5—> €j�;50-9. ^ i3 NO SCALE o `rr„ Int 13 E8 sr- 7§ W ai r �► ii a y T� 2.,4-%;,4i,;; S T~ nZIker ^' ¢ o l Street ° Z 4� Y [ a'yN� �Int. _� In�14O B= 4 t.117 °r #3 int. !6 i 65-� `n Int. F-a id_ Lon Int14EB' 3J' _to 1`26y • pt6 :'07a� Ir 75 00 1 fB= 7 � 150-�I ' T f �� a <5- 1t Jy a,T� 15� �o o ' <5-4I \R� Varns `y§ ` iO �0 ` J 265�I Q T Street a(0 -up -'77:.'t♦ - V �a 6)4,,. `.y _ 'Int. °/)? co m #5 Pc,„ lO N Int 15 VI=1 t J Fiso h 65._a1 )T 290 Int 15 EB= 5� ,4V.. 215-N °�°n ms V. oi' * Two-Way Left Turn Lane ti; - CHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2008 BALANCED BASE YR 30HV FIGURE o i ENGINEERING u c AM PEAK HOUR a_-' PROJECT: 08-45 THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 4a a_-' LEGEND 4► CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL ay T STOP SIGN 111 \01/1/z 0 ea 0 0 G CO C. 9 Int. a�..°' g`I1l #1 5 '`ID 1....a� 9 AI ,yo )c,.. `0 y 7 C, ,�� \°'`19 dote cow < ,, m �6 Nn4 w 5 I Difference Whom o r,NO� 4 .....y t z F�1i Mmes(1„60 vveh t O0, �vG �v9 ;&�,+ m cn. &a b(105veh.) I QOG\ r� W z * ,press ddrpmrays 217 (N Int. ^", d Hal ONd. 5`jee\ #2 �v♦ Mtoop & tr) nt<5 4° V d O <5—> l� �n0/ J L Int.112 EB= 04, �Q <5—>.' r9-J v,Wo 3 <5"--4I v n v m "'m `iY Irr 0 LC` c `° Int i3 ar o °r- Int t3 VB= 1,‘ �»S57p �s s 5 €l k t. jI1► NO SCALE o `St„ Int 13 CB= T o f_ s . iii f °T . 1�un . nor ' ' y H •zike M Q ...-:,,4 =-41,. .ot 1 Street Y' °f Z 1 m _ " �" #3� LL I#4 I<—1 eo I�`° 9° ,n0 ',Lt. #5621i 0., �� 0o itis—� 3 v�,°ofz215 Int. 5 .0 z Int N EB= ,� F-<5 #6 /nt9p—i J eS �'��, )5�• 355 0) ,6 Elk j#> ml 60—i1 �T J\ti 4.'iiA).. <5—> �T� �� P. 55�I0,n o �c <5�I V�^ Vorns a Nin J �oQ 250�I un0 Street '0N r'S t Difference Ixlreen �^ Int04&Int115NB yr �� Int. �hvr CO m #5 vdu (100 veh.). is attributed to Stp 1 �� uD Presence d driveways ePt ♦ n ua)i r of Hat f Int 15 VB=j h J y 4-265 70—iI 15 T Int 05 B= �� 245�I rn� CO \ O..siJ' 0)u) 0 N VUA * Two-Way Left Turn Lane id CHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2008 BALANCED M PEAK HOUR OUR R 30HV FIGURE OJ PROJECT:_ E08-45 RING LLC THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 4b a LEGEND + CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL ® 1111111111141\0011/ -r STOP SIGN s 0 a3 0 c_ 0< 0 0- g 9 tt) .,40„ .,, Pe OA '6-oT�9h� r Al ,�9��`p'°s Vii`♦ N$ ,h .1 vvi��6 1 G ,fl 0s, 4 . o y;,4. Q yo o _ fii i i 11\-,`N Sk eet Ln + *it'" �OI v -4 f /r-04,e. U o �T� <5 S, �<5I vv 41‘ O Illt 0 LO ,,,s �j 41 I* NO SCALE o `rd 414? T Lii �o'` �1 ~ Ht,nziker S < t meet w � \ 41 LL �, ' �Z "'� J��O vN011�75 uiun 1 160 00 J � � � 80 Na Varns 15-4 0 T o <5 4 T� 270 Street ° <5� vrnn 280�an N � J o -n J .94,,_,", hc,,j7 Sf,eel, 4/1 ID N `� 2 1 25 T •1-0) --4D * Two-Way Left Turn Lane Lii CHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2011 Background 2011 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC FIGURE o Traffic=2008 Balanced Base AM PEAK HOUR o ENGINEERING 11,c Year 30HV+growth (3 years THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 5a a PROJECT: 08-45 at 2% per year). LEGEND 4 CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL i._._. -u- STOP SIGN 11111111111411114111441 )111111/ s 0 03 0 c L 9, 99IA1 R, ,101 $9° r 1��9r 0s�yy�N�cp 'fit c) Y mod^ P ,.0 sti01 \es a) o ��Ca Q o ?OG`��G * b n Street 414 vii 0 I nNo 11f' ��o�� JAL ��F L <5-II I IT <5-41 -v Ifr v <5-41<5 v 3 t 0f� rr NO SCALE n s^ y 0 "V- r Q y Hunziker Street z LL o� aft;; , \ > t1 ^tO X0,0 r)*°o X225 °n y 0oJ )4,St 375 a'r) Vorns 65� �T �� 55�I o,� C) <5� � ' Street 145_,115+ `vn <5-4I vrnccv t v 265 - o0 -N 0 eel, 411 n cD 7, ‘'‘ 255 �1 orn Nlf) co O O N * Two-Way Left Turn Lane tii Q CHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2011 Background 2011 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC Traffic=2008 Balanced Base PM PEAK HOUR p Year per +growth (3 years THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 5b a PROJECT: 08 45 at 2%per year). I K. 41 1 4D4 ijz in ° y Pfoffle Street ��A oir in il Willi T Z 5°* sr 5* a Zti 0 (04 5%�I o G • in m m c 9 c 0 0 9MA)g°I°� Q ti No c el �ti5'I' y Asr co u2 6 Ln N 0 cb- C' NO' �I 4.Po UI cA Shea t r 1Oo9, it NO '20// '1:-r--;/ 0'v� u)� Q h.1. ° THEJ 1 m �'N 3 jKNOLLi S0O J TIGARD 0 'f 859° -J ° �s j„.....i5g Who NO SCALE s IA Cli �^�COl 6�o E'509° yvn2ike� S a `�'� Meet o W N 5%_al7 J Li ,�° %25 , a %�' KI ,0 �o N in J\e, L!)N 00 Varns sR it 20% see) Street j Ln o,27 K' St�P - Pf y 0 di a eaCHARBONNEAU NOTES:Trip distribution TRIP DISTRIBUTION FIGURE ENGINEERING LLC based on existing traffic AM PEAK HOUR & PM PEAK HOUR O patterns and engineering THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 6 ii PROJECT: 08 45 judgement. 1 1 O 1v 0 0 y Pfoffle Street ! 1 T a /O , W K 4 � r °° Ac-0 o 0 0 1 0 0 • c. c 0 C o. 991 ,2, \ > X01 el CV N. 3 y ,r 0 c. e. o, 1 T - 66 o°°. ```4 r N o k O Q 0cW >c'0 0 O ,leek 1 4- °— p `l y c 'THE -1 3 1AT 1 3 I/ lab `Sc+o 1TIGARDI 0 ,r, k_ J ms's - o �N NO SCALE o `sr °& 0 VT,E___ r Q °I I° Hv�?iICE'/ Street Z LW o IL O�I7 A EL o 1.i1 a 1-I ° J 00 Vorns W L 0 ,Z0 Street t o TRIPS: B IN = 0 c,%%O OUT = 3 TOTAL =3 Sre o Pf y 0 co _o N NOTES:Trip generation o CHARBONNEAU based on sin le Famil TRIP ASSIGNMENT FIGURE AM PEAK HOUR-SINGLE FAMILY 1 LC ENGINEERING L Residential(ITE 210)trip ° THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 7a ii PROJECT: OB�5 rates. 1 ► , o , � 4, Pfoffle Street it , T 1 1?1 _y_ �Gr LP O �, r 0 o o� 0 0 • 0 Z o- 9g\1 \2 Q stA -0 N �, lT- c. 0 0 6^ .9 col 0- I0 �0 G\ ?0 ��G W 1�'0 O ��o\�St�ee' T 2 fir 0 0 0 _ I^ F THE o j THE (O Adoit 1KKTOLLI o S�0,, k IL——J to ��s - '`'o o NO SCALE c se` 0 t �� co r' Q0° HUn2ike � Street z jsj, o w -J E o—A 7 J o:_il I B. ono 0 oo J\0 °° (2? Vorns sR10 see. Street t o TRIPS: <94/ IN = 2 �ho� OUT = 1 TOTAL = 3 Si,,,e o er ,l M a NOTES:Trip generation ENGINEERINGULLC based on Single-Family PM PEAK IHOURISINGLE FAMILY FIGURE Q.--1 PROJECT: 08-45 ates.ential(ITE 210)trip THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 7b I 1e 0 N 4, Pfaffle Street ' ,A T , Nil W /G/ lial**IN N?: ..:')'"?' Z �, r ea "`0 o /3 , ea 0 o�I C 0 ,� • C. k" C a. 99411 ,,o si N 3 y �, eb o �T� -,6 9-73 col Q oc CP O. Sklee, 1..._ 04, \ t r o \ O I 1 THE '-7 1 ►ANOLL►v S T1�IGARDo O02 , L % "'0 �o NO SCALE 1 sr o ki ee(- 0 y 0 Q00 HunZiker Street z 124, o w 0_17 4) 0 0�, a ° o� a J\2 0 0 0o Vorns ,I,LIc_0 see' \\ Street T o TRIPS: IN = 1 vp�h OUT = 1 0,,2 TOTAL = 2 Stye o of 4, 0 0 0 N W Q CHARBONNEAU NOTES: Trip generation TRIP ASSIGNMENT FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC based on Senior Housing AM PEAK HOUR-SENIOR HOUSING S?, PROJECT: 08-45 (ITE 252)trip rates. THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 8a 1 1// Pfoffle Street k' \2' T \7' rl ® O`^ °Gr r o r-0 O 1 / t0 O �� 0 0 C A • L O C a g ` Q o� r CV N. a^ 0 O� �T� /3 4401 o r � G ! O Q0G`t� ® !c 0 O� cl ��,sveet Tr 1 /1-� op fO i�� 'vF /°. T L O r---I-1 �THE r j I - 'Poo,.. IAT I TIGARD c .. J-,s Jc"--0 NO SCALE ° Se ~o A Q00 hun2iker Street z .d4, o w J o_+7 J LL O C o 0 40 \9., o0 0p Varns y 0 �p� Street T 0 TRIPS: 9v„ IN = 1 ,)ha� OUT = 1 TOTAL = 2 sf,, o P e,, m [ii a ie CHARBONNEAU NOTES: Trip generation TRIP ASSIGNMENT FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC based on Senior Housing PM PEAK HOUR-SENIOR HOUSING El PROJECT: 08-45 (ITE 252)trip rates. THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 8b 1 1 . IJZ 4, Pfoffle Street V gA T hA IllImicio 0 O O� 0 • C04 o c cx- 9�1 ha Q 9 ,��9r�01 N 3 en Ga co co 0 ,�T� 6^ so 12, IA o o a�°�r o •L/1 QOG\t'G ® I 1�'_1 O� Y 1�eet t 7l r'--1------- 1 �O�, 11 4�1c 0,,, 04 T I / l°) NF o L j THE.../1 -v(O 0 1 KNOLL 1 Allfr v So 1AT 1 3 ow �TIGARDJ o n ,5m T 3 °� NO SCALE 0 toe Q -N Hun2iker Street er z J,I, w O 7 J o` , \) oa 00 Vorns si.Lit_1 sZo Street T o TRIPS: 6 IN = 4 ��h0 OUT = 19 1 TOTAL = 23 `S,,, N I P� W CO O O N W o CHARBONNEAU NOTES: Trip generation TRIP ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 1- ENGINEERING I,L,C based on Apartment AM PEAK HOUR - APARTMENTS a PROJECT: 08-45 (ITE 220)trip rates. THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 9a I ► a Iiz Pfaffle Street ti� T '1.-T tx ® �1 0 r °C- c. o �a �r 1c'1 0 1-411 c0 • m Q) C CI, C - 9940 1T o 1�;�911 C cy 3 � a G cl -73 440 L/ QO 1 G`.{� �, L 4 co 1...71 iteei AN , F cv O r—J � 3 ° j KNOLL Allfr 3 ,5' TIGARD TIGARDI y o r-,,. 121- J v .� '1 NO SCALE T sr-to g Qo- H1nziker Street z ,l, in 1_17 i) E ry 3� 1 a 2-4! a J\2 o(N (bG Varns y L k_.4 �p� Street T 0 TRIPS: 9 IN = 18 �r�ho� OUT = 9 6),,, TOTAL = 27 PPt y N co 111 - Q iie CHARBONNEAU NOTES: Trip generation TRIP ASSIGNMENT FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC based on Apartment PM PEAK HOUR - APARTMENTS El PROJECT: 08 45 (ITE 220)trip rates. THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 9b LEGEND 4 CHANNELIZATION El SIGNAL �� Willill -ii- STOP SIGN z o 0 0 c m c 0 x,0`1 NO tea 4, PI c• �r'10 <5-4< r QOG %.\4ii• svee to * �o`c N �r �l�0 04 ,� �F o �5� iv' �KNOLLt v m i S, <5�I v v ITIIGARDI Q 41 o �s p� NO SCALE ....2 E sr„N � m ,to,r y HunZike, Sheet Q z w LL 4 i `1. 6 311 ..* 41I 40 In Po Lo�t�in�i J\ v corn 4.-<5 n a �4 0c Jl! i4-80 c)d Varns 1so_i �T 15-4 ' ' o: <5� 270--a Street o oo <5-N vtnn 280�i T N drO 00 u')0 —N 490,./, 0 Sf, to �N eel, 1 to N ik -4 T 225 ou') I �in 0 of * Two-Way Left Turn Lane a NOTES:2011 Total Traffic= 2011 TOTAL TRAFFIC FIGURE CHARBONNEAU 2011 Background Traffic+ Single-Family AM Peak Hour AM PEAK HOUR-SINGLE FAMILY 1 Oa a. ENGINEERING LLC THE KNOLL AT TIGARD a PROJECT: 08-45 Trip Assignment. LEGEND CHANNELIZATION ij SIGNAL immummummmitv iliN1111111111\00111I- i- STOP SIGN s 0 ea 0 0 c- m L c col �II� co ap. El- 0 ,6^ 11 000 c ��g l o �/ QoG`k\ * <5-4 E v NJ %IN svee1 411* rTHE 1 F 2- Alb �KNOLL� ��cO AT intnin 41L t� 7 I mss' j� " NO SCALE Sr^ t t` 0 Co Ili m It r z �� HUn2jker Street w �� . LL .'\,■ Z V Mot It CD LO J)°O vaccoo F rt—230<5 °N 65�I 0� i► 375 -rill Varns 55�I 811) �o� <5� T 145_/14, Street ` Nv0 <5-4I vO cv 265�I oo I au) 6`p'2h o,i.) to er '7t� h\ 255-N IT oo 00 CV(0 * Two-Way Left Turn Lane NOTES: 2011 Total Traffic= Q CHARBONNEAU 2011 TOTAL TRAFFIC FIGURE iiie o ENGINEERING LLC 2011 Background Traffic+ PM PEAK HOUR-SINGLE FAMILY p Single Family PM Peak Hour THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 10b a PROJECT: OS 45 Trip Assignment. LEGEND 4 CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL • ® - STOP SIGN arif******Nki)1111111/s 0 ea 0 G mZ. 0 0- 9941 4,0`1 ,,o 1�;�9r \i oars'°` '�y�� cl apk ,�‘9 15- > "7 G\�G <5-4 N QO * v n SLtee Jsl,Li 4 rTHE * KNOLL y � co 3 <5- v T v !TIGARD Ilt � s � � ' � NO SCALE s sr�� `/‘T r At*iii Hu Zin key- Sleet Q z �]]JJ w 4._!LL �J • ��, ,✓ to 3� Z �4t 1 N MBA � \Q,o vNrn X<5 na J 0� J4, 11,-80 I `�� Varns 115-4 o� <5-> T 270_3115+ Street N r <5-1 var-- 280'�I 100 0 S,,,eel, 41 In N CV Z \\ IT 225 am o .-iO N 0 I * Two-Way Left Turn Lane CHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2011 Total Traffic= 2011 TOTAL TRAFFIC FIGURE 2011 Background Traffic+ AM PEAK HOUR—SENIOR HOUSING o ENGINEERING LLC Senior Housing AM Peak 11 a EL-1 PROJECT: 08-45 Hour Trip Assignment. THE KNOLL AT TIGARD LEGEND + CHANNELIZATION El SIGNAL iiiiiimo -'- STOP SIGN 8111%101111//s 0 0 0 c w L O ,�0`1 f��F'�,�90 �► 1a�9" °s`sy``1� �1� cc \�� 4D 2f o��slso �4 p ° yo 10 �► Q a QOG`f`G � <5�I � ...�. ti V ® N N. • S��eet v) , VLnn° It i 0 °iio / <5.- nTr KNOL I -m L P <5 v v 'TIGARD1 y Itt �y tL ,s s�^ �j� �� NO SCALE o Q a....0, Hunziker Street z [� = I �• J LT_ •111 o� ,�� Z 11 �� J��° Vim( <-<50 °n 0c J)W L 375 `r"' Varns 55� IT <5� mtri �45� Street oNL �° <5-4 vm� 265-4 �T NI-ID .--N 6 \ / tinh o,), Sep e 1 Lo of.d sl h\ 255-4 OT can om -- N Un * Two-Way Left Turn Lane a NOTES: 2011 Total Traffic= 2011 TOTAL TRAFFIC FIGURE o CHARBONNEAU 2011 Background Traffic+ PM PEAK HOUR-SENIOR HOUSING o ENGINEERING LLC Senior Housing PM Peak 11 b a PROJECT: 08 45 Hour Trip Assignment. THE KNOLL AT TIGARD LEGEND T CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL _l z STOP SIGN s O 0 0 G (0 G (as 99411 ,�o�l AC\ ,,°o 1��9r ,s �y ,�*3\03�, psfso t'�� c0,,, %) a V Q 0G * N ® N ' .\\ 5<<ee1 Ne 0,0 Lo Jy� rTHE ��z ca <5-> in,,, �KNOLL I ��`O in S` <5� v'- ITIIGARD� °r lb t� )s t�� `I� NO SCALE Ca ir- r Q oat* Hunaiker Street w-a CJ '\ 412 to M NI ' VI IN I,I 4-85 5 d' .-! W OJ lL W y 85 0.1.3. Varns 160-1 I T 0 15�I ,� Off: <5- T" 275-/ Street ` 0 <5� voM 285�I T oo Loo -N e`„,,)h 0 tr S eet �� cO(N J `� 225-1 0 T 0, o -1D 0 N * Two-Way Left Turn Lane NOTES:2011 Total Traffic= FIGURE a ie CHARBONNEAU 2011 TOTAL TRAFFIC 0 2011 Background Traffic+ AM PEAK HOUR - APARTMENTS ENGINEERING LLC Apartment AM Peak Hour 2a a PROJECT: 08-45 Trip Assignment. THE KNOLL AT TIGARD LEGEND 4► CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL _� ® -s- STOP SIGN s 0 0 0 C- (0 G 9.-. 0)ire, la os� \i*\RNr, 1 t3 Y •Lp��`�,ss Cj*l co co e -,6 j .0 4101 000, \AA 101 Q VI'C' a * 20� 0 ® N Vee` ♦� y rTHE 1 F-z 2- KNOLL ��m AT a �, <5-4 T- ,TIT i li 1112f o 0 f NO SCALE o r^ T p 111, a 1/4P ear �* Qr `► Hon2�ker Street z w -J 4 !� LL It0 in �� oJ\pp vacoF<5 vL 65�1,�t 0 I�375 Varns 55-4 oo e p <5- ITo 150 4. Street 265 - ,no dN La -n e4r',h o,,2 Ln Sf,,GJ,I` 1 n LIO ‘Ak 255-4 oo 00 -- N t0 * Two-Way Left Turn Lane di NOTES:2011 Total Traffic= Q CHARBONNEAU 2011 TOTAL TRAFFIC FIGURE 1 ENGINEERING LLC Apartment Background t PM Peak Hour PM PEAK HOUR - APARTMENTS ~o Apartment me Peak Hour THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 1 2 b El PROJECT: 08-45 Trip Assignment. LEGEND 4► CHANNELIZATION , SIGNAL _� ® T STOP SIGN s o 0 0 C- , CO L 9, 9441 r 0,,,\..),a >� 4 0 'L.yO'1L0� d 41, m 0 Y 20 �► Q ��l` <5—4 1 ti QO S��ee` �� \ �� rTHE -1 N�*z 41 ra a IKNOLL1 � m � 1 S <5-4 to 1;TIGARD y Ifr t� tL 3 O>�s sew 4$-7;-•• NO SCALE r Q di 1 y 4 Hunl ker Street z I 41 J LL • 3-i ..• sit 0. vt CO 0oJ 1 , 1 14-105 'IU")' Vorns 200—A I) 20---41 o,n p <5—> T 340 Street <5-4 you-. 355—N T co-4- o"i 0 CO •-CO e``)h 0 ir'e .S el, �l 00 N 3 h` 2851 15 is N.op co o —ao 0 N * Two-Way Left Turn Lane Ili Q CHARBONNEAU NOTES:2025 Future Traffic 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC (Figure 13a)=2011 Total AM PEAK HOUR-SINGLE FAMILY p Traffic(Figure 10a)+growth 1 3 a a PROJECT: 08 45 (14 years at 2%per year). THE KNOLL AT TIGARD LEGEND 4 CHANNELIZATION SIGNAL • ® —+— STOP SIGN 111111041PII s 0 all 0 c. CO Z. 9, 99\t° AI ,,0`1 1 X90 1�‘CP 0 o �6�5 it "41tv e. C .o �o� a� 000• \ \ 15 71 Q V ® N Sktee 411* vii I Nn oS X00 /G., JWy THE�- .z ��co <5 I KNOLL I - 0) AT Sc,Or <5� V0 �ITIGARD� III o .• L a �s s €j� 4!� NO SCALE o r„ Qr �l Hunz;ker Street z Fi w _J 0� Z sit cvao oJ\40 vim-- k.__290 00 W i<67-.75 Vorns late ��\0 <5� T 185 T Street On <5-N vcu 335 T NO CO e4,,?)h o,-,) 0 sf/-P 414 0th Pf J N\ 325- �T in L!)U-) N r, * Two-Way Left Turn Lane di I.= ie CHARBONNEAU NOTES:2025 Future Traffic 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC FIGURE o ENGINEERING LLC (Figure 13b)=2011 Total PM PEAK HOUR-SINGLE FAMILY p Traffic(Figure 10b)+ growth THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 13b a PROJECT: 08-45 (14 years at 2% per year). LEGEND T CHANNELIZATION El SIGNAL immmmmmmmv -u- STOP SIGN iligNeIN*04111/s 0 0 C. AI • ,„c„ 'm C. 9 a 99V1� r \ ,,5 0" 4 o ti�do 4e e. r„,o� 4 �0 Q `{ <5�1 v, 0 9°G * v 217 N 4 1 Sklee` ♦' Lr) 44 J.1,L, rTHE-1 Fez <5 I KNOLL I ��m i s, <5 T v ITIGARD�in VW) c LL ,> €1� �� NO SCALE o `rr.. T ui �0 �� n r a �► Hu ?ikPr Street z _J 4 fl 41 .4 CV•- Si L,�'`� �0 O t°N N F 1 o d t0 IY J 00 A,L ►r 105 r-)L0 Vorns 200— i T 20—N 0,, 0 <5_4 „ 335 Street —� • <5—N VNr- 350—N T (0 d- 0 i Cr)CO rp 0 Sfr6.0f 4l mcODv 7 � ,)T 285—N rno � CO CO o CO 0 N * Two-Way Left Turn Lane Lii NOTES:2025 Future Traffic FIGURE o � CHARBONNEAU (Figure 14a)=2011 Total 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC AM PEAK HOUR-SENIOR HOUSING 14a a PROJECT: 08 45 (14 years at 2% per year). THE KNOLL AT TIGARD LEGEND + CHANNELIZATION I] SIGNAL Nommimmummuip jill11114%11111\0/1110/ , T STOP SIGN i 0 0 0 c io4. O 0- 0) IC\ 1 ego A?; 1��9" <N� s j us c;) y � 1 a° At*I � 6:2 1 b0-5b El-II o .fly VS 01 4 a) oo� �09 15- Poi`{k ---N c * <5 c S<<ee; 4°4‘ opoo L THE l F4- IKNOLL1 ��`O sn <5 o �TIGARD) Ifr 41‘[,41-t-1- O Oft• J °s `/y NO SCALE o s6. �► T co �l Hu �Q � �Iker Street z I LL • • ow `� i 411 ° IO _ " � )s J,., Vin!, (-590 °N SOLI 0° A`l' Ic-"475 in, Vorns 70-I :: <5- 1)tr �y Street 00 e° <54 o 0 <5-AI v-to 335 1"4 J r--to -rn 0 Sfp PPf 44 rn r-I- JW 7 4‘\ 325-4 'T in In N N • * Two-Way Left Turn Lane Ili a CHARBONNEAU NOTES:2025 Future Traffic 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC FIGURE o (Figure 14b)= 2011 Total PM PEAK HOUR-SENIOR HOUSING o ENGINEERING LLC Traffic(Figure 11b)+growth a PROJECT: 08-45 (14 years at 2%per year). THE KNOLL AT TIGARD 14b LEGEND 4 CHANNELIZATION H SIGNAL Nv T STOP SIGN 0 cn 0 c mm 9, , °°yy I \ -1 `��',_s�°° c� ea 0 .1?� r�0� > °o0_ �� 20* Q x 5 O QOG * N N SVee, Off(\ N O 4 `i /�O/ \1 v-rN �� -- 0NF Q rTHE 1 . _ 2- <5-> KNOLL ��1O s, <5 v T IITAjGAR0 �� ti� in■ NO SCALE s6. T Itt o cue �� n r Q Cli 1► yu ziker Sheet z w 4 f 411 LL ....+-------A:b 7111 sal • 0 in Inin �� \e) iAN,— F<55 In0 0oJ r� �► 105 Varns 200_/ )+20�I o <5—> T' 340 1 Street <5� via 355—N CT)CO .—CO 6G,/2h 0 St,S eel, 41 �" �N ,\ T 285--N 8 N10 0 N * Two-Way Left Turn Lane o CHARBONNEAU NOTES: 2025 Future Traffic 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC FIGURE (Figure 15a)=2011 Total AM PEAK HOUR - APARTMENTS o ENGINEERING LLC Traffic(Figure 12a)+growth 15a a PROJECT: 08-45 (14 years at 2% per year). THE KNOLL AT TIGARD LEGEND 4 CHANNELIZATION Fi SIGNAL eo T STOP SIGN I s 0 0 0 G To L 9, 9941 ,9° �' l��Ar 6. tea^ it "4e o-e r�0� > 0 �e9 15 Po��{�G * 20� �+� C NIP v{.0.- mt" i--1--0 cw .Th ®N J,I,L, THE 1 Fez 2 KNOLL 1 ��`O AT S' <5� Loin ITIGARD� � lb � z� v O��SS �� !� NO SCALE o r• T c. r z �� HunZiker Street Lii Lii_J 4 b 41.-i LL o� i 1 � ° U in Jae, vim, F 300 NN SOLI <6° 4,y I4"475 'nr Varns 70-4 ou °�\ <5-A Itr �y Street 190_,I N . r--)0) <5� VNNin 335-N Lo.- o Li-) coin -m 4`p,?h 0 Srr in N e e', + rn n JIN\ 325 �T oil-) ,,,, NI-. * Two-Way Left Turn Lane Q CHARBONNEAU NOTES: = Traffic 2025 FUTURE TRAFFIC FIGURE o (Figure 15b)5b)= 2011 Total PM PEAK HOUR - APARTMENTS o ENGINEERING LLC Traffic(Figure 12b)+growth 15b aJ PROJECT: 08-45 (14 years at 2% per year). THE KNOLL AT TIGARD ieCHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING LLC Traffic Count Data •c:,r,■1n _1. ..r41 1.. ("1-- 3 '\\ ('330'1) (""21:Y k (..;3121A-1.1 ∎ -1. n Nt. l (X a QM-1.- '4-11-- '3) 1 9:901 (H W4 vi) L J90 1 • ' IO I _ vunsa.›14 tia Na SNO /$ , (- "CtNON) 4730'1 - /.9.801 '/QA, 7201 '/,tr)\ /bl, 1q11 (4 �W} 13•�I, 71,), 'l a)1 1: I 1001 7.0)1 `_'9_► 711)1 %‘,3()1 /4()1 71,01 ./3.7,31 (e)111000 11\k,/ f? X107 :, � ypa of em haalr Jbn 2 V.V.07l1'dct4.trrnr l,c. tiO.b.Tr4a'ERNi Va�Trf 7 Y �+Jr,vQ 1{vK 4JeRnt•! Q � 1WTFRSECTION: SW Ha:I RIv:••ParAc H'.vy(OOrh) QC JD8 8: 10740043 WEATHER: DATE:311 ar2001 u 4+ 1 Peak 4ioti 2T AM ••8:20 AM *' ro 89l .r 4 v J • to 832 • 111 , t 87 • •.M1:8 I Pa[■1L Hy):9946? I 6 3 0 18 J 1' II 4M GI ♦8)7 G9' 40 a. • 0U 1742• IS 1 7132 . 21'6 1s .87 � `� r CI w 7G r i--- st . e a 3; A93 f7i� t2` 31 *t 2Se 47A 3 1 4 4 ( T ov gr 8 I I,/ J f ( 3,v Han Blvd i A L ...,....,_..,,f,..,(.: __N s.-4. ____J L , . i. __ f. l t : c.,.:...*... , ? } 4.,,,, r 40,411. I K S __n 1 f t I r---- ..._ _1 I. .__ ._ � f f J *Q,f b�A° . .. s- F° 44, ~ C, -0 .1 rr 7 1---- tSt LPC_h_:. _: 5.MW COUIJT •_.w.....SW Kai Blvd SW lia11 84'vd 'Paccli{c 14 w(99W1 �t'e:Kic Mr'/1#hV1 PERIOD ;Northbound) SSoutRbaund1 (Eastbound! I Westbound)__ I TOTAL TOTALS BE04/1NIINGAT Lsti Thru_R1jYtt U L411 7heu bight U LA Thrp Rent U Lei Ton" 06 t U 700 AM 6 6 9 0 1 b 3 (I 3 137 f 0 16 47 2 0 : 236 7-C6 AM I 1 5 0 9 1' I 0 8 136 3 L 6 58 4 0 t 244 7.10 AM , 9 34 0 a 4 6 0 ' 7 131 1 3 11 12 2 0 271 7:15 AM 3 1 20 0 '6 ''.1 6 u L i 146 0 0 14 65 5 0 292 I — 4 11 29 0 9 6 C 0 8 T37 1 0 5 57 2 0 278 726 AM 3 4 22 3 16 13 6 0 6 140 2 0 11 78 9 0 I 730 Ant 3 8 32 0 15 9 4 0 8 133 1 0 12 06 2 0 793 705 AV 3 5 20 0 Z2 13 4 0 6 140 1 0 5 R4 7 0 311 7;40 AM 3 11 26 0 1_4 12 6 n 10 725 0 0 1 r 72 7 0 _. 1 ' 7:45 AM 1 7 72 0 21 20 1 5 148 2 0 1' 75 8 0 324 7:50 AM 2 10 26 17 14 6 : 15 117 1 0 17 75 2 0 309 7:56 AM_ 2 8 26 0 14 10 5 0 9 942 1 0 1 66 2 0 304 347 11:30 AM 4 8 20 0 70 14 8 • C � i3—� 0 9 62 .8— 0 295 3534 9:35 4M 1 10 22 0 21 7 7 C 9 153 1 0 6 70 8 0 312 3602 6:10 AM 4 1C 30 0 10 9 8 0 '4 113 4 0 16 55 '2 0 268 3419 kt j5 AM 3 6 :5 0 16 12 S_.._G 4 140 0 0 T _ 62 T 0 34:3 31.x" L.4 6:20 AW 9 8 22 0 16 6 s 0 1 74 135 0 ) 11 2 7 C i .:9 365 8:25 AlM 5 8 '4 0 11 8 0 : 6 113 0 :t 4 03 6 0• 746 3054 830 Ant J 13 t8 0 11 7 4 0 7 104 3 0 9 99 4 252 3513 8:35 AM I 7 17 0 15 10 5 0 4 104 1 0 S 72 5 0 263 3495 8 40 AU 3 3 11 0 15 1 10 0 9 1°S 3 0 6 67 4 0 255 3449 8 45 AM 4 4 9 0 •5 5 4 0 12 119 4 0 6 84 3 O : 253 1178 8:50 Art 5 4 15 0 to F 9 0 tR 101 1 0 65 7 0 257 3326 8.65 Al4 0 10 72 0 9 12 4 0 15 7'2 3 0 91 5 0 297 3319 � PEAK 15-MIN _Noribbounet 1 ScuU,tm ura Eastbound Iiilestbour;• _ FLOW RATES Lin 711•u Rlgt+t U Lett Thru Right U LOT Thru R.ht U Lek Thr_u Right U , TOTAL A9 Veh4c7trs 20 103 304 0 208 178 46 :. 125 1826 18 0 172 672 n76 n 1 3148 H *LtiyTrucks 4 4 20 0 0 3 6 60 0 1 8 00 3 180 • P etest;ians 0 4 0 4 8 Bicycles 1 Ralir:*d SiopasJ 54.4as j . CcVnlw COI'-anientd' .tvM't;pna^alr,;cr YJ;n!?U7 5:1,.t105 O,.449 l:o_r.a _:C i^'Jr.."rwWr:Vt.ire iuroc.0411 i1,.it4t 1I%t �i;a�,tiol�mes 5q '‘a 211c7 105 I1)1 6e 0 6A ti:-/ 04 t4r7 IL _ 4s1 ern Y1,Y01 SCAM Same w1e:- Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATION: SW Hall Blvd--OR 99W QC JOB#: 10394105 CITY/STATE: Tigard,OR DATE: 11/11/2008 457 0.86 457 Peak-Hour:4:00 PM --5:00 PM I• * I 4.2 1.5 93 151 213 Peak 15-Min: 4:15 PM --4:30 PM 13.2 a t 8.6 1.4 r • 1821 .171,� 4. 98*1909 • t' 2.3 ♦1.8 1 t 3.1 • 2.4 0.93 1105* 0.97 •1644 0.93 3.4 • OM f 2.4 130* 25 3 t 167*1528 h t P 3.2 ♦ 0.0 1 t 2.4* 2.9 h • P 1_ 84 188 210 Counts Quality Count i 0.0 0.5 1.4 • * 343 0.87 482 • 5.0 0.8 J 9 L -I J • b 1 /'''', t. 16 A 5 . Kce« !� 4 t --141 a. e p —7 14 1---_1 L , . _v.RC+9 `S r . ♦ l �� 4. �o4 —I F _1 H___ 5-Min Count SW Hall Blvd SW Hall Blvd OR 99W OR 99W Period (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) (Westbound) Hourly Total Beginning At Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru M ht Left Thru Right Totals 4:00 PM 4 13 15 18 12 7 14 118 14 127 9 349 4:05 PM 10 19 30 15 12 7 13 88 4 18 131 8 353 4:10 PM 4 9 18 13 5 2 10 101 5 8 151 9 333 --4:15 PM 5 9 18 20 21 5 19 104 1 18 150 3 369 4:20 PM 8 17 12 26 19 7 12 93 0 16 120 13 343 4:25 PM 8 24 21 29 10 1Z 18 98 3 18 123 8 354 4:30 PM 10 11 26 19 9 14 25 67 0 18 121 8 328 4:35 PM 11 13 18 22 12 8 14 93 1 13 147 8 360 4:40 PM 3 16 14 11 15 11 9 106 1 18 151 11 364 4:45 PM 5 18 9 13 8 6 7 89 2 15 143 8 321 4:50 PM 9 17 16 19 18 6 12 72 5 13 151 6 344 4:55 PM 9 22 17 17 10 8 18 80 3 9 129 9 331 4149 5:00 PM 10 24 19 18 15 8 19 75 2 13 117 6 326 4126 5:05 PM 7 19 21 19 11 9 18 80 2 18 112 7 323 4096 5:10 PM 10 16 30 18 12 7 16 87 2 12 133 10 353 4116 5:15 PM 7 19 16 22 10 10 11 97 1 16 135 10 354 4101 5:20 PM 12 16 21 21 13 10 15 89 1 14 144 9 365 4123 5:25 PM 7 17 18 23 20 9 10 103 2 10 130 5 354 4123 5:30 PM 6 17 19 13 20 7 16 94 1 18 129 7 347 4142 5:35 PM 11 26 19 10 15 9 14 94 1 16 123 10 348 4130 5:40 PM 6 12 13 20 11 13 22 82 1 20 125 8 333 4099 5:45 PM 5 11 15 10 13 8 14 85 0 14 137 15 327 4105 5:50 PM 7 19 11 13 10 7 12 94 1 7 139 12 332 4093 5:55 PM 1 8 16 15 10 8 7 72 2 10 162 9 320 4082 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Flowrates Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right ,, Left Thru Right All Vehicles 76 200 196 264 200 96 {fib 1172 16 180 1572 96 4264 Heavy Trucks 0 4 12 8 28 8 8 64 0 4 20 8 164 Pedestrians 4 16 12 4 36 Bicycles Railroad Stopped Buses _ Comments. Report generated on 11/11/2008 5:41 PM SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net) Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method fo, _,6termining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: SW t-tall Blvd--SW Knoll Dr QC JOB 0: 10394101 CITY/STATE: Portland. OR DATE: 11/7/2008 woo 9.1'499 Peak-Hour: 7:20 AM--8:20 AM • L • Peak 15-Min: 7:40 AM•-7:86 AM a • 0 _A8 12 0 56 00 .r • t► _I ✓ 4 I. t�� I *0 j t (t; 7 -_ NCi: J R ':e f+ -- ` 5. 1 .0 1 a.4$1 • 0 1 C.CO ♦ 1 1 4 0* 1i - t • r -_ ..Cu '1 r uu+ —1 -w t e• r_ 1 499 0 4 • Quality Counts ti2 C?9Sao s • J 0 _J ., 4 J______ 4. 'X - • /cam • C —ill • r• r---- ...A L .4 ___J • L 9qe t,,0 f rs1. ca L4 X90 -I F . -1 F 5-10In Count SW Hal Blvd SW Hall Blvd 1 SW Knott pr SW Knoll Dr , Period (Northbound/ (Southbound) J -J,EaStboun� 4--- Westbound) - -� Total Hourly Be. ni -At, 1.011 Thru R , —_ -.ft Tt R0 Id I Left .., R,ht ■, Lett Thru_ RF ht Totals 1 AM r, 23 0 • a 0 0 0 I 0 3 C 3 ^} 7 05 AM i 0 38 0 1 27 0 I 0 0 0 i C. 0 0 50 710 AM 1 0 35 0 0 17 0 i 0 0 0 I 0 3 0 57• 7 15 A64 0 28 0 0 25 0 0 0 C 0 3 0 _ 51 7:20 mi_ 0 45 O 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 69 7:2SAM 0 46 0 1 31 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 78 7:36 AM 0 36 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 130 A M 0 30 0-r 2 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ga .: '. i-' ` p:',��, r ,:r.,, " �\';s'1 00044 Ey�, - i, ,t ,�,y$r ° ' 00 a'. ''i¢,, y r r- ,G R 11IF( ,tS}.,5',. 44 .., . 4 'pm k7F+sivirir t. ..rt .' K F' 7 -x.:.14 r3 "1,i4' f { .:J 7:65 AM 0 40 0 1 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 287+ 8:00AM 0 39 0 1 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 T80 11:00 AM 0 41 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 780 810A1/1 0 33 0 1 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 796 815 Ail . { 0 0 0 0 , At _602_— 8:20 AM 0 39 0 i 0 27 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 88 799 8 25 AM 0 34 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 et 762 8'30 AM 1 34 0 0 18 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 53 772 8.35 Alit 0 28 0 1 24 0 0 0 0 ! 0 0 C 53 785 6 40 AM 1 30 0 3 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 73B 845 AM 0 31 0 0 1r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 716 850 AM 0 41 0 ■ 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 85 • 695 8.55 AM 0 18 0 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 672 Ptak t n Northbound -. Southbound tboun, ^"..and rota/ _ F'brralrs L. Thrtr��lti bt Let r . i Al Lett That -ht Lift T ru RI•M I el11Ges• 2 0 25 2 0 4 4 0 3 I Heavy Trucks 0 8 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 Pedestnins 0 3 0 0 0 Bit des !Stooped Buses (;p,nrtlen7S" Report generated on 1 1/11/2008 5:41 PM SOURC :(]va!rty Courts,LLC( JAaww.quaiitycounlsnet) ,y rlin?k 1 1 /13 o 1 P- 111 1 0 1 1 -- - — Type of peak hour being mooned.Intersection Peak Method for determin,ng peak hour:Tote!Er ttt ng Vorurrle LOCATION: SW HaII Blvd--SW Knoll Dr QC JOG 4: '0394103 CITYISTATE: Portland. OR DATE: 11;612008 i0i21 4 Peak•Hour:4:30 PM-•8:30 PM 3 456 a Peak 18•Min:4:30 PM-- a PM a I a f 0.0 24 :0 0 ♦0 0♦ ....+.! i {...._ J V Fill 0 • I 04f • o[CE 7.0 • ' 1�' • 00 0 •0 al 4' 0* a .1 • t• o0 e 0 1 r 00. 00. f • f 11 Quality Counts 100 1 T 0T-- •5•007 d44 • — 1; r7 J 'dJ _i r 4 4 I x 0 • e J 4r f 11 f Pr l r"--- I I - H !_ 4y, +k+ r P4�9 ♦ ~ 0 p4., I ( 7 ' 1----- 1 , 5.14m ount 8 !i SW Knoll Dr SW wn:Ird Sw apf Bl+d v� Period 04ortnbounal .-.1$0we10ou+wy ___________ eeouwo tdwitbolord) -_-.I Tow Heurty 84'11 nk1J At Litt TMa laR ''■ it is Thrw ,rto _ 1uIlaI 4 00 P 0 � 0 0 0 =5 4 03 MA D 36 3 1 34 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 71 4 10 PM 0 56 0 0 32 U 0 0 0 U 0 0 as 4'15 PM 0 42 7 2 35 0 0 0 U 0 0 61 4.20 PM 0 52 0 f 42 0 0 0 . U 0 0 95 4.25 PM 0 46 0 _ 0 3D_ 0 0 0 �= 0 0 0 78 a.30 b 7 a 45'-- 11 0 ----0-- 0 r.- 0 0 • 0 to 4 36c PRl 0 73 Ct 0 +t0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 t 13 l 4-!O PM 0 5y' -— a 1 34 f Q----_0.... e 0 -Q-- -..0 _fit? _.._-. C 45 P1% r1 54 0 f 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 • 4 50 P1A I 0 42 1 1 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e3 a 55 PM ( 0 64 0 0 29 0 0 0 Cr 0 0 0 03 ' t00.5 5 00 PM 0 42 0 i 0 35 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 78 ! 1055 5.05 PM 0 55 0 1 1 44 0 0 n U 0 0 0 500 j 1006 510 P1`4 1 0 51 2 I 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 93 I $003 5 15 PM 0 35 0 f 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 70 1090 5'2DPM 1 0 55 0 i 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Of, 1 1490 , __-. 2; f_f____.o 31_ _ ._._.0___ ' Q 30----_-._ 0,.____._4_ _--- ._11_ 0 L.__ 0 ____. 00 _i_ ._1107 5 30 PM 0 53 0 1 30 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 `.'2 1083 5 35 PM 0 59 0 u 33 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ui 1079 5 40 PM 0 39 0 u 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 5 1062 5.45 PM 0 44 0 1 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :5 1051 5 50 PM 0 44 0 0 40 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 14 1050 5.55 PM 0 38 0 0 39 0 I 0 0 0 0 •4 1_031 Peak 154111n _-_ Northbound -----_ Southbound Eastbound Total F L Then •r.iii ' R T ! R 1 I Yeti s •. 6 756 4 . 3 J - 5 I - C. 12 * r'eevy Trucks 0 8 0 0 to i - i 0 88 0 0 74. r'e8estrlons 3 20 i 0 20 aleyetes RaWaad { $tappeo sued C:v:nil1entS' Report generated on 1111//2008 5:41 PM SOURCE•QualAy Counts.LLC(htlp:rlwww.quelilyr48ou11ts.her) Slier()11 o G) 1 2. 1 4 ilYi c 1 C c c - -- - 01 am Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for uetermining peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATION: SW Hall Blvd--SW Hunziker St QC JOB#: 10394109 CITY/STATE: Portland, OR DATE: 11/7/2008 291 0.88 494 Peak-Hour: 7:25 AM--8:25 AM 6.5 4.9 I• • Peak 15-Min: 7:40 AM --7:55 AM a a 2 205 84 50.0 4.9 9.5 d • 4 2 r 1 J t 67♦ 138 + 1. 50.0♦0.0 J t 10.4 4.10.9 0.25 0 • 0.87 ♦ 0 0.80 0.0 * ♦ 0.0 2 * 1 1 4- 71 0, 412 . • e• p 0.0 ♦0.07 f ll.3* 5.6 41 • e p 0 426 328 • • Quality Counts J0.0 4.0 4.6 • 277 0.84 754 a 6.5 4.2 L _14, a 4. _ I ,./N t 0 1 . \/ /`l• 1/14 4 ilL__ 1 . -1 411 • e / —1 0 1---- , __,' _I a _I L I 11. I `goyo , �� 4. 0 —I F . —I I 5-Min Count SW Hall Blvd SW Hall Blvd SW Hunziker St SW Hunziker St Period (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) (Westbound) Hourly Beginning At Total 9 9 Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru RI ht Left Thru Right Totals 7:00 AM 0 18 8 4 17 1 0 0 6 2 56 7:05 AM 0 34 9 2 18 0 0 0 0 7 6 76 7:10 AM 0 32 13 1 15 0 0 0 0 7 1 69 7:15 AM 0 23 17 7 21 0 0 0 0 5 2 75 7:20 AM 0 40 21 11 15 0 0 0 0 6 4 97 7:25 AM 0 40 22 8 17 0 0 0 0 8 8 99 7:30 AM 0 34 25 7 28 0 0 0 0 8 1 101 7:35 AM 0 35 37 5 14 1 0 0 0 2 7 101 r7:40 AM 0 44 26 5 12 0 0 0 1 8 11 107 7:45 AM 0 32 38 11 14 1 0 0 0 4 8 108 7:50 AM 0 52 32 16 12 D 1 0 0 9 5 127 _ 7:55 AM 0 31 40 7 8 0 0 0 0 8 6 100 1116 8:00 AM 0 29 23 8 15 0 0 0 0 13 4 92 1152 8:05 AM 0 40 15 6 17 0 0 0 0 4 2 84 1160 8:10 AM 0 31 22 5 26 0 0 0 0 3 3 90 1181 8:15 AM 0 23 26 3 18 0 0 0 0 3 a 78 1184 8:20 AM 0 __35 23 6 28 0 0 0 0 3 _ 8 98 1185 _ 8:25 AM 0 27 16 6 16 0 0 0 0 8 4 77 1163 8:30 AM 0 30 17 3 16 0 0 0 0 3 5 74 1136 8:35 AM 0 24 12 5 23 0 0 0 0 4 5 73 1108 8:40 AM 0 26 15 1 19 0 0 0 0 7 5 73 1074 8:45 AM 0 25 12 5 15 0 0 1 0 10 4 72 1038 8:50 AM 0 34 11 3 20 0 0 0 0 4 8 80 991 8:55 AM 0 8 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 6 9 43 934 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Flowrates Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right All Vehicles 0 5122- -384 Ii- 162 4 4 0 4 84 0 96 ' f368 Heavy Trucks 0 8 12 8 12 4 0 0 0 16 0 4 64 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicydes Railroad Stopped Buses Comments. Report generated on 11/11/2008 5:41 PM SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net) Type of peak hour bang reported:hie Peak Method for determ ring peak hour.Total t-rt'anng Vc.kxne LOCATION: SW Hall Blvd-- SW Hunzlkor St QC JOB S: 103941/1 CITYrSTATE: Portland OR DATE: 1'!&&/2009 - oil'IL, EM. Peak-Hour:4:25 PM--5:25 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:10 PM-- 5:25 PM +il 14 L 0 s-e 6 _J ., ., • t. i •0 J t 2314,fF.r3 00 •0.^ J L 75• 1.7 [71 0 4 F874_1 • 1 [0 641 n- • 401. • 0.0 U 4 3 1 P 355. 1431 h t P 0 0 .0= 'ar t 1.1• f- h t o 4*9 '"2. Quauuty Counts • I t I�0 17 t[!� ? �005 5.4 • 5 72; L _ J _.J .r • 4 l_t. 2 �t (\Cb •.. .._ ___, ..,r -11 ;'. r l 1 .__._ _ .. .._J • L A4i 1,'•G I• „‘„, ... cii;i • Lo- „J �- t 1 C 1 I '5-Min Count :7 SW Hall t3W01 SW Hail Blvd SW Nurursker St SW Ilunriker St I Perked L _ (Northtwund� t5k..thboundl _Mastbound) (Westbound) — Told 1 Hourly = •Mn r At I 1.-- •,Thru _Sr hi 4 Left Thirst R-• Left ► K Left Thru ft Lott-1 Totats '', ..2 3 13 11vr�-- 4.00 PIA C. 33 10 a 34 D 4:05 PM C 73 12 3 29 0 3 0 23 0 13 102 4:10 PM C 33 17 6 26 0 3 0 0 25 0 19 131 4:15 PM 0 :i,:, 5 4 38 - 7 3 16 2 9 108 4:20 PM C 31 9 3 33 G 3 3 30 0 22 '78 425 PIA 0- . 39 - 7 5 36- 0-1— 0 0 0 23 o T1 115 830 PM 0 35 7 6 42 0 I 0 0_ — 0 1 75 0 22 137 4:35P1A 0 48 4 3 30 0 E 0 0 0 33 0 21 } 137 4:43 PM 0 40 6 6 35 0 t 0 0 0 27 0 16 127 4,45 PM 0 36 5 2 27 0 I 0 0 0 39 0 18 130 450 PM 0 28 15 4 36 0 I 0 0 0 34 0 16 133. 4:5S PM 0 41 4 5 23 0 0 G G i 33 3 24 130 1491 5.00 PM 0 21 8 4 20 0 I 0 0 0 35 0 10 115 1.191 5:05 PMW 0 41 13 6 38 0 0 0 0 25 0 10 1 _ 141 1533 Flat P1V • • 0 33 7 8 30. a 0 -•0 ._-• 0 30 1_. 2C 12R 7526 ...I 5115 PEI 0 77 7 8 34 0 C 0 0 E 26 0 26 132 1552. 15.20PA1_.._._0— xi---17 $ - u = --4-- &--0 28 0.__25 t51_ . _.3 T 5 25 PM 0 28 5 / 21 u 0 C 0 32 3 15 1.5 -577 5 30 PM U 27 7 6 31 0 0 0 0 37 0 25 133 1573 5 35 PM 0 43 t2 0 35 0 0 0 0 30 0 17 137 1573 5 40 Pkt 0 25 5 I 35 0 0 0 0 3 1, 0 13 110 1556 545 PM 0 77 10 2 78 0 0 0 0 37 t to 123 1549 5 54 PM 1 24 7 3 34 U 0 0 0 I 27 0 16 112 1528 555 PM 0 31 8 I 33 0 0 0 0 I 29 0 11 113 1,511 Peak 15-68n Northbound - SoWil0ovn4 Eastbound i Wealbaun_d Total • Fklwvatee Left Thru ftkiht L 1,t Thry T Lott Thru_ RIOS - LOT Thar Right AS VeNcies "° 124 et 432 4 4 'S 0 0 0 4 C 8 44 Pcdettrans 0 0 0 C 0 eicycirrs , Raltoed S1r.ppad busts . Cun811 e:C3 Repolt generMed on 11/1.112W9-5 41 PM SCHJRC •Quality Courts LLC Ihtt rv:.w.v r•,ea lycounts r15+ NtAtiftes Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method foi uetermining peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATION: SW Hall Blvd --SW Scoffins St QC JOB#: 10394113 CITY/STATE: Portland, OR DATE: 11/7/2008 278 0.92 754 Peak-Hour: 7:25 AM --8:25 AM 6.8 4.2 I a * Peak 15-Min: 7:40 AM --7:55 AM • • 31 247 0 112.9 6.1 0.0 ., a s. 37 ♦139 J L 0 r 0 i' _ 16.2♦2.9 1 4 0.00 0.0 0.70 0 • 0.90 t 0 0.00 0.0 • • 0.0 151♦ 12 7 r o• 0 ., • 4. a 2.6 .6 0.0 1 • �r 0.0* 0.0 6 615 0 r_ • * Quality Counts 33.3 4.6 0.0 259 0.85 621 i * 5.8 4.8 0 J .1 4 s. L I. 2 it 0 ♦ �` j�t 4 E , \' r F-- Ii _ 1 • /� � : • I___1_I L IF '1 T irr- e -1 F __I • 5-Min Count SW Hall Blvd SW Hall Blvd SW Scoffins St SW Scoffins St Period (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) (Westbound) Hourly Total Beginning At Left Thru Mitt Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Totals 7:00 AM 0 14 _ 22 1 12 0 2 0 0 0 51 7:05 AM 0 38 0 24 1 5 0 1 0 0 0 69 7:10 AM 0 37 0 21 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 67 7:15 AM 0 32 0 24 2 8 0 4 0 0 0 70 7:20 AM 0 53 0 20 1 8 0 2 0 0 0 84 7:25 AM 0 0 23 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 .--- 87 7:30 AM 0 52 0 32 2 7 0 3 0 0 0 96 7:35 AM 0 56 0 14 2 16 0 0 0 0 0 88 7:40 AM 2 60 6^ 18 3 10 0 1 0 O 94 7:45 AM 1 50 0 14 5 20 0 2 0 0 0 92 7:50 AM 0_10 0 17 4 14 0 1_ 0 0 0 106 7:55 AM 0 55 0 13 3 16 0 2 0 0 0 89 993 8:00 AM 0 44 0 26 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 80 1022 8:05 AM 0 47 0 20 1 8 0 1 0 0 0 77 1030 8:10 AM 2 42 0 26 3 11 0 0 0 0 0 84 1047 8:15 AM 0 37 0 16 3 11 0 0 0 0 0 87 1044 8:20 AM 1 48 0__ —_ _28_ 1 10 __g 2 0 0 0 . 90 1060 8:25 AM 1 32 0 22 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 68 1031 8:30 AM 2 41 0 18 1 6 0 2 0 0 0 70 1005 8:35 AM 1 28 0 26 1 8 0 3 0 0 0 67 984 8:40 AM 0 35 0 22 4 6 0 6 0 0 0 73 963 8:45 AM 1 34 0 23 2 3 0 2 0 0 0 65 936 8:50 AM 0 41 0 24 0 4 0 3 0 0 0 72 902 8:55 AM 0 11 0 14 2 7 0 2 0 0 0 36 849 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Flowrates Left Thru RI ht Left Thru RlIght Left Thru Right Left Thru Right All Vehicles 12 726 0 166 d8 1'6 -0 16 0 0 0 y 1168 Heavy Trucks 0 16 0 0 24 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 52 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles Railroad Stopped Buses Comments. Report generated on 11/11/2008 5:41 PM SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net) Type of peak hour being reported:Intersectrvr i Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Ertering Volume LOCATION' SW Hall Blvd-- SW Scotfins St QC JOB#: 10394115 CITY/STATE: Portland. OR DATE: 11/612008 � 1 D9►v' Peak-Hour:4:40 PM••5:40 PM 14 s. it nes G L.__ Peak 15-Min:4:40 PM••4755 PM • f 0G 19 0 r s +r 175 .46 .1 1. O 4. ; 4 G: 4.:0 ,J 4, U: * 0;, '078510 • 0.47 4 0ID"01 :0 G: 0 •53 7 ; u• s h f P -i o► 3 8 7 r 0:• v" 7 '1 • f r...._ 19 463 0 Quality Count 5 n u .4 D 4I f 6s9 023 4t' * $ _J D L I ., 4 1. (_ ..... t it 7 J ,,/.-..,,/,)4. 11 • e i---- 7 , 1----- _.J L —` • L 9, �6 11 1 1 II ;11-7.; r ° o gfo • 4. L• 40 7 1---- , -1 F 1 6hbn Count SW Hall Blvd SW Halt Blvd SW 9coalns St SW Scoffing St Pe10d (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eas tbound)ru i sma!un di-e- Hourly Ba �Q At _L}ft R t Loft Thru i. 4iTh Rntt Lott TAfu i -- Tws Totals o • O G 0 105 406 PM 1 29 0 0 35 13 5 0 0 3 0 0 87 4 10 PM 2 48 0 0 40 11 9 0 5 D 0 D 113 4 15 PM 1 35 0 0 41 '1 3 0 7 5 3 D 101 470 PM 1 33 0 0 51 '2 7 0 5 0 C 0 109 425 PM 0 43 0 1 0 44 9 3 0 2 0 0 0 101 . 430 PM 1 37 0 0 54 13 5 0 3 0 0 0 113 4 35 PM 0 48 0 0 50 13 2 0 6 0 0 0 118 F cis ".j 4 •1. '.5r h •„,";4-1•• •, .' • •.�i L 1 'S 11 h�'a G� s;i}L1A{ # "; T �3 < a ,".s11 trS& ! {: Q Bc*±k4r i s_,. 4511 PM 4 44- 0 0 43 13 1 0 4 0 0 0 111 1385 5:00 PM 0 22 0 0 46 13 1 7 0 3 0 0 0 06 1256 6:06 PM 0 50 9 0 41 15 i 4 0 6 0 0 0 123 1332 610 PM i 36 0 0 50 10 1 4 0 4 0 0 a 106 1324 5:15 PM 0 30 0 0 49 16 4 0 4 0 0 0 100 1323 5210 PM 2 47 0 0 62 10 2 0 4 0 0 0 127 1341 5.'s PM 2 at 0 0 42 iT 3 0 5 0 0 0 100 1340 610 PM 2 32 0 0 61 7 2 0 4 0 0 0 108 1535 5:36 PM. _1 SL___._.R.-.. 0 5fi._ t6 4 0 0._ 0 0 0____ 1V'.... -_. 1343 5 40 PM 2 27 0 0 59 7 3 0 3 0 3 0 101 1335 545 PO 0 32 0 0 52 13 5 0 1 i 0 3 0 103 1377 5:50 PM I 29 0 3 54 7 3 0 4 0 0 0 28 1299 5 55 PM 1 36 0 0 49 13 3 0 5 0 4 0 i C l 1'95 Peak 16-Mkt Northbound Southbound_ Ess40oand Taal f , • h thus R - Lott 7__1 __ L TR r �. _, _ 1 -- --,d -- '..—� 0 3f. - - ., 0 t= I 0 1.•4 limy T irks 0 12 0 0 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Pedestrians 4 0 0 G' 4 moms Railroad Supped Buses , Comm ams: Report genetaled on 1111172008 5.41 PM SOURCE.0:131q Counts, lt.0(http.8wa(r+v.quaRyoount8 net) ()Tit)).Wilk 11 414i — 1 — 51X' t't4. vk - 49 1 , - Type of peak hour being ropo led Intersection Peak Midt.o..1 fnr determining peak reur 10131 Erterin3 Volume LOCATION: SW Hall Blvd--SW Burnham St QC JOE9 0: 1035411 t CR YiS IA 11-.: Rolland. OR DATE: 1117/?X8 2620 541 53. Peak-Hour:7;10 AM--8:10 AM 5 i 4 5 is 203 Peak 15-Min: 7:30 AM -- 7:45 AM 8 • 41 i 4 l 110.1` i I. I lea •97 .f t. 0 f O 5 3 e. 1+:1J • 4. :6 4+ 1 2' L— =1 215 1 C 7♦ O .e I i 3 * aQuattY Counts ,: .�'4 t r 2.1.1•r 1 r ]9 00 • f A 19 r 7 t-- ..7 3 5 _____I •' I J i J....._ J y t. a •1 I , ` I 1 I 1 • r I l iii....01 l____.__. w cPfo l ( HH 5-Min Count SW Hall Blvd 3W Halt Blvd SW Burnham St SW Burnham St Per/o0 (Northbound) (Southbaundl (Eastbound( _ (VSfesilbound► i I+uur►; BeSintttng At- � lieu - Rioht Loll Thry 14% t Left lieu LeR Dim _Ri�t Total lotais —, DD AM 5 21 0 0 20 o 9 0 0 61 :P A,A 11 33 D 0 I! 2 3 0 4 v 7:10 A1,4 ( 10 32 0 D 21 7 3 0 18 _ Q 0 91 7:15 AM I 6 26 0 0 22 3 1 0 21 0 0 0 81 720l.M 9 57 0 0 20 4 4 0 1t1 0 0 0 104 I 725 AM 4 50 0 Cl 13 7 i 4 0 15 0 0 0 94 -7 J —"IT-._-_ 50 0 0 26 5 5 6 25 C 0 0 121 { I 1:35 A,M 13 55 0 0 13 4 3 0 21 0 0 0 111 JMJIM_ 1R , 0 17 _ 5 .. ._Y.__. Q. ¢ : -1 ---` 7:45 AM 1S 46 0 D 5 7 3 0 15 0 0 0 9 7:50 AM 16 71 0 0 10 3 1 a 0 20 0 0 0 128 i 7:55/tit 7 46 0 0 11 6 9 3 16 0 0 0 05 1187 5:00 AIA 0 42 0 0 22 1 4 0 17 0 0 0 95 1221 8:03 AM 11 -.._-. 0. . ` 6 .1 r 2---!.__2_____._ Cl 0 1246 8 10 AM 1 41 0 0 19 2 0 19 0 3 0 52 1237 8 15 AM 6 34 0 0 22 6 I 0 9 0 7 0 i 83 1239 8 20 AM 1 61 D 0 15 4 5 0 1' 0 0 0 I 103 1738 825 AM 4 3-3 0 0 12 3 6 0 10 0 0 0 j fig '71? 830 AM 5 44 0 0 21 7 3 0 IC 0 0 0 50 1181 8 35 AM 2 27 D 0 20 5 5 0 14 0 0 0 73 1143 840AG4 5 41 D 0 26 2 2 0 7 0 0 0 93 1091 6 45 AM 3 31 3 0 23 7 3 C 6 0 0 O 73 1069 6 50 AM 11 72 3 C 15, 5 C I? 0 0 I 9.7 { 1728 A 55 AM 9 22 3 0 ,s 2 4 C 15 0 0 i 67 000 Peat 15-66n _rthbound_ So •. nd Eastbound _W Westbound Total Flanrates Len Mu RF +� . Left _Ttem RiQM - LLif Tbry Risht . -tat_ Thru Riabt -- All Vel-Kies '54 650 0 0 56 68 0 278 D 2 0 '468 Heavy Ttucks 4 32 3 C 5 8 12 0 r0 0 - 0 80 PeOeatnarts 0 9 0 C• Bicycles . Ranatl SW.. Buses' Com,ne:173 Report generated on 11/11/2((38 5.41 r't.A SOURCE Quality C::u111.LLC thlttp(.beer,),4ua1 ycount3.net} 51 em1 12I 6o( — 1 — oc, ti} GL - 196 - - - v 010US Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peok the nod'or determining peak hour:Total Entering Vo lute LOCATION: SW Hall Blvd • SW Burnham Rd OC JOB fr. `0394119 CITY/STATE: Portland OR DATE: 11,6:2008 aot n r- ' Peak-Hour:eak-Hour: 4:45 PM •••5:45 PM _„ 6 5. # Peak 15•Min: 5:05 RM--5:20 •PM ti o ...j 58 I I au ?'J .1 i b 262 •64 4 L 0• 0 - 0o a•6 > r • t. tr 4: (0840 • 0.631 • 01ocr,1 ;o • 111111 • 00 2Se1 er,-li u* 0 * r 2' • 2' 2 C 0::* or. h t P -ti6 4d3 0 QuaLit Counts 0.0 15 00 • 6.+rn_ 5.'r _I , L t. A 1 ; 4-4). sl ..y ii \// 4. r * rr r...._ 1 , 1--- _____J L____ _ ♦ l.___� 1.72--12 g 1 .1 . !if .0 G Qyya a 0 PYd 1 . I `v-!Ire Gourrt I 50 Raft Blvd SW Hall Blvd SW Burnhr.n Rtl SW Burnham Rd P'eri4d Ir lNarthbovndl ISOUthbou M?- tEasebouedt (1WeelboNna} . Hourly Beginning At Lett Thn, Right Left Thru 1t,1�ht-_ Left Thre Right _Lit Thry Right i 'fetal Totals an PM' 11 42 3 —7-1-7-457- 3 3 0 25 D - 0 ti: 4 05 PM 17 34 0 0 43 4 8 U 23 3 C 0 129 4 1.t PMc 14 44 0 3 47 4 0 25 0 0 U 130 I 4.15 PM 11 43 0 0 41 8 2 0 21 3 0 0 123 4 20 PM 16 47 0 0 42 3 6 U 17 3 C 0 131 4 2.5 PM 21 43 0 0 50 5 3 U 13 ! 0 0 0 135 4 30 FM 11 45 0 0 55 7 8 0 28 i 3 C 0 154 4 36 PM 12 55 0 0 45 6 4 0 11 0 C U 136 4 40 PM 'S 37 0 0 38 9 6 0 15 D C 0 121 4 45 PM 1—i7— 47 p' 0 4. .- 7 - 5 0 y7 0 0 0 141 4 50 P141 t2 41 0 0 46 6 5 0 1S 0 0 9 125 4 55 PM I 19 42 0 0 38 5 9 0 13 0 0 0 175 1588 5 00 Rht 15 27 0 0 53 3 7 0 15 C 0 0 171 1580 r 595 PM 2s •44 9 44 z } s ----6— _ o a "" tso lauf 5!10 FM r5 50 0 0 62 4 2 0 30 3 0 3 154 ! 1615} 515 P1.6 14 35 B If 0 52 Cs r_ Q_— • 0 ___..1_____134 1527 1 520 P14 10 35 0 I 0 51 5 3 0 20 0 0 0 1 124 1620 5:25 Prat 20 46 0 I 3 36 2 5 0 26 0 0 0 136 1621 5.00 PM 17 32 0 0 82 9 3 0 15 C a 0 136 1505 525 tail 18 55 0 0 54 5 9 0 10 0 0 0 151 1620 5.40 Mac 20 .3?—_�____-0 so 4 ` ..2__.. 0_ 16 .__-i.___. D ..____ _jm_____ . 1631 545PIA 19 13 0 3 50 _ 3 3 '3 C 0 -21 '51f 5.50 PM 18 .31 0 3 53 5 3 •5 C 0 C '27 ciy 5•55 PM 13 34 0 0 41 6 4 17 0 0 C 716 '4509 Ptah 15Min Narthboun+ Southbound I Eastedund •4000end Total FlawrkMS LA Piro Right ., aj. R:M Left Thru ; • I • R'.!ht + _ .4I Verides 225 520 0 3 597 48 64 • 300 0 0 - r 1752 Heavy Trucks 0 8 0 3 16 0 0 20 0 7 0 44 Pedestrians 0 0 n 0 0 9+cy.aes Reerved ;Stepped Fuzes Report generated on 11/1110:08 5 41 F M Report Sc ,RCE:Clua1tlr Counts LLC(tlttp.1lievo.ry quartyr:4aunts r•e 3li%le`fl Ie_s (i6 172c - 53k w F (4) — 21; — - ...... \ V1)1�1rYs Tye a peak 1wu.beiriu'opened'use•;wino Me cate^nir.ry paa.c tau:149a1 Cr tern'3.c..ima INTI f2SECTION: SW 72^i Ave--SW HiiriziKei Rd QC JOB 0: 10240034 WEATHER: _ DATE;3/1912007 ..__»».�..r E39 +9—" ...._�— Peak-Hour:Jx3S AM--�5 AM -�y - 5.6♦ * uy 5✓I�♦ 4 1 1- -y:3c.illy' I'� r2 �.cL :Itti 4. 101 0 ' t i; 416 0 ( S'..H.okiiiter Rd 1 ••f * 9 J t I).C. .. :0 "a.7e1 4.1117 . a ^o.w u.0 • a « 0+1 £42 .. :.a 1 ( a • a }G .i ' A .►1:.2.1. r co • r.-:, .w t e t r r....— 125 002 U b.0 3 u i +x0.981* 53G 727 + t'..? 7.0 43 I SA'72nd Ave 1 o . % i SW 72nd Ave 1•I 3 L++ _.....A___.-J. .i. ,- 0 4 L V.VAy !I .3 F I r.,:---.4 4--; .......J.1 L__. I L i 1 L........_ *op. f t ,4.4, t -_, Ai=. P*I! 1 �` —1 f ______ 1 •5-M114 COUNT SW 72nd Rye SW 72rtl Ave SW Murikeiser Rd 5W Nuns-244r Rd PERIOD ;Northbound) (Southoound) UinIbaund) I W, tbourtl) . TOTAL T0TRSr t3EGtHNING AT Lett Tt1ru_kfght U Left Thru R1 t_U i Left flirts tight U Lett_ Thru Ri h; ci 1 _ z-__ 7'00 AM s 32 0 0 0 19 15 0 1 10 0 11 0 0 3 0 G 91 111-5 AhM 5 31 n 0 0 33 13 0 I 1 n 17 0 0 0 0 C 92 ' 7:111A1,/ 1 3 43 0 0 0 33 'S 0 15 0 14 C 0 D 0 C '18 7:15AM 3 45 0 0 0 24 5 1' 3 20 C 3 3 0 0 '18 7.20A1.1 12 3i 0 v 0 35 23 7 12 0 21 0 U 3 0 '39 7.7.5 AM 7 43 0 0 if 21 3 22 1 13 0 5 3 0 1 '22 7.30AM 10 `•4 0 0 ___0 27 19 7 15 0 15 G +: :1 u ' •3u 7:35 AM 13 47 U 0 0 4 27 0 14 3 13 0 0 C 0 0 121 -�� 1 7 40 AM 17 57 0 0 0 23 '8 G 18 3 19 n 0 0 0 0 154 I r 45 AM ��11 53 0 ft 3 33 25 0 11 7 5 U 0 0 0 9 122 1 7:`rOAlt 3 4$ 3 0 0 42 14 C 24 0 2y u C 0 9 3 tey 7:55Ab1 10 52 0 0 0 e5 25 0 23 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 172 15141 I 8:033 AMA —. ... ,1 46 0 0 0 38 25 ' 0 26 0 23 3 -C 0 U G 10 J 1 569 8;05 AAA :4 50 0 0 0 27 18 C 15 0 22 3 0 0 0 0 152 1749 &:10 AM 5 55 9 0 0 34 15 0 16 0 12 3 0 3 0 C 137 1798 8:15 APd 10 47 0 0 0 28 13 0 16 0 22 0 0 3 0 9 136 1756 820 ALP 10 (,4 U 3 C 20 23 0 25 0 19 7 0 7 7 0 'ht' 18:5 8:25 ARM 9 44 0 'i 0 34 15 0 6 0 18 0 0 0 3 0 '23 10`.24.--Patt-1 E.V 830 AM__ G 53 0 G n 39 _6 3 10 0 £ 0 D 3 _2_ G •1` mos. a•.r;AM 10 43 0 0 I U 7.4 '4 0 8 0 10 0 0 0 3 0 12? 1797 8 40 AM 11 55 0 3 0 23 '5 3 4 0 12 3 0 3 0 121 • 1704 8 41,AM 9 55 U 0 i 0 211 '3 3 5 3 13 0 7 0 0 3 127 17_19 8 50,414 11 54 0 0 ' 0 34 ..a 0 ' 6 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 12." 1663 5.55 Hf.1 6 62 3 0 , 0 35 12 0 ' 25 0 15 0 0 0 0 3 145 1659 PEAK 15-M1N Northbound 8outhtaou 41 , Eastbound Wastboand TOTAL FLOW RATES Left Thru Right U Left 11sru Right U Left Thru Right U Leh lhru Right U All Vehi4:k= ! '20 592 0 0 �3 507 236 0 240 0 324 0" 0 0 0 3" ��20132 • Heavy•1rur_ks 8 24 0 0 TO 12 0 9 17 ; 0 0 0 92 Pudie-3010 s 1 0 0 0 3 9 Bicy.*Ps Radr0.60 SiElpped Ruses, COUnisr Ctn•im•en&' F.6pOri gatt'u-atS.1 an 5:3t12-007 n...2�._t.•:,.. L.L.vn LLC iniTir,sWe. G•.pi:ycn.•nl5.i.d0 WikL v.l01hS I 21 ()C 3 — xMi 234) 2 li- - Pit - __ OttoWV k/1 — — 319 Z34 il, — I.% - — — 1,14 ra;leak 1•4.4;Name)rnparm&Urab,Llartnari 61c:nt.4 far CC/lowly mu refs!,hot,Tole Elmonn Vr:vvb INTERSECTION: SW 72nd Atria--SW Hunriker Ltd OC JOB A: 1C240035 WEATHER: OA 1 Et 3.-4i2007 97' t.tet, Peak.liour 4:55 PM—5:56 PM ...., .7 4 it .1-- -.,o,• 1 407 L.1i3 t 2 5 — 0 4 1. d 4 14 CIS 44 im J tii 1 • (, , nz oer Rrd ) 2 5 4. f N J 4% t' 01 4. 0.0-. 6 _I I • o :T.E....o 71 i. _ 445 •414 1 r i.) • it .,iii'.iiti,:ltiltz-, '.:r'0' : ; U'JU t e j 7.54 ,..1 7 # #--# . , . . , •a4 ,..1, '1 '• .' ...... •1 4 : e• i______ 2 3 1.7 0 C 4 `44,1, -":1'it..... '-.- sit2 927 1 1.7 t 11 ( SW 72nd Ave J I 9W 72^d Ave 1. --is, .. „ _j L ....,._;... ,.1 ...,. 0 ' ' ' Itiri-'. . - _ ,, . J--- t ' t•- :ji 1 + •dtt • , . --'.› 1 r )1 I .Ri ---- 4 - .% '/OT i 1 1 I I —__../ I.— I it 1 —1 ++ 1 7 .1 •r---- i e p '',.Ea li."_.R_•1:+1.,:r' -........... .... 5-1141N COUNT SVY 72mi-A ve ---Sir 72-rd Ave Stot titinzir 7-- PERIOD (Nati hbriuitili , :suighboui-411 lEastbourKty . _eybecttipurril.. HOMY TOTAL ToT441.5 BILGINNINO AT Left Thru Right U Lott Ttru Rigt,1 U Loft Thru Right U I Lett Ttri Right 1.1 - .. _... - 4:0.3 Plit a 66 C 0 0 34 25 0 ' 5 0 74 0 :' : 0 :: . 133 405 PM 9 62 C 0 3 35 27 0 ' 8 3 W CI 0 3 0 0 151 1 4.10 Prtri 12 43 0303423 014325 OC C. 3 C "55 4,15 pre T 460 0 0523.3016 3 *60 C C 3 C "53 410 P10 9 55 6 0 0 43 39 3 , 11 3 -4 0 C 0 0 0 4:26 Pt" 11 41 Cl C. 0 44 24 3 1 IS 0 '0 3 0 0 3 0 '54 A00 PM 125203 353733i 13325 3 ' 0 0 30 1:16 4 35 PLC 11 55 D 0 3 35 24 0 1 b C 19 0 0 0 0 0 153 4 4D Pkt t1 SS 3 0 0 0 33 32 0 1 13 0 13 0 : 0 0 0 0 162 4.45 PM 9 54 0 0 0 4a 25 0 : '3 0 21 C 1 3 3 0 3 lbd 450 PM a 42 C 0 0 37 40 0 ' '3 0 10 0 I 3 0 0 .0 153 ---4;Trpli 13 Ki 0 U 0 . 30 0 12 U 18 0 0 0 0 0 179- lbti- 5100 PM 17 69 0 0 0 45 43 0 14—5- 24 0 0 0 Cl C 212 231 , t 5;05 PM 10 31 0 3 0 43 Cit 3 16 3 25 0 0 0 0 0 221 20771 1 5:10 flit 21 71 0 3 Cl 51 ao o 14 0 '5 Cl 0 0 9 0 21 21331 5715 IV 15 53 3 0 3 41 41 0 14 --ir Z. CN. 0 0 C 0 335 5:20 PM 17 Cl 3 C 3 01 45 0 12 0 20 C 0 0 C 0 212 2213 ' 5 25 P/.1 5 47 3 C 1 41 42 0 11 0 34 C 0 0 0 0 102 2241 5-30 PM "6 /1 0 0 0 Cs 470002903303 214 2275 5:35 0.1 10 71 0 0 3 32 3-4 0 '5 0 33 0 0 3 0 3 195 23'7 5.40 Pi0,1 18 63 0 3 c 34 33 Cl ., 0 13 3 0 0 0 0 168 2323 I 5;45 PM 16 503304625 030249 CCDC 172 2327 5+:93 PM 13 41 n 3 Q. 36 31 0 22 1 23 3 G 0 3 C 166 5;65 PM 17 65 0 9 1 0 43 27 o1 0 D 8 0 I C 0 3 a L _Ie5.1 ?330 PEAK 15-IWIN .._ ._ 0 _02_1 4 Scliaitib-mind ,, . Eat$abound i olte size un ct _j TOTAL FLOW RATES —Left rm. Right U ( L.r11 Piro Right U Lett,..Stiru Right U i Lett Thru Right LI 1 ' I All Vikkies 192 304 3 0 ,i 0 556 532 0 176 (.. 260 0 3 0 0 CI 2600 1 tcatity Trucits 4 12 3 104 5 400 730 72 Pedestrian.; 0 0 i 4 cii 4 i FIbt,-ti.Ties I . RaiirDadi 1 I ' StDpPed'lausttis: Cri/Vr Ccait,,pr.L, iapqa1vena,AO pitt'.4.L.200.. J-1:," I; .,',:",,,Ar hi :1::;I'llp..4(.5•..V.:1111-1G0L-11t'la') 5■ItlY1 i)ODI. 4) (-)Vc -- — 411- 351 12-1-1 — — — ?Al;"3 C'cilt ____---- _-- idCHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING LLc Signal Timing i I I i I 1 j I I I 1 I , i I ' {! i 11 I ! I ( 1. t I i f. i 1.- 1. . f 1 , f I I { ' 1 i a I I i 1 i , I 1.- ' I I . • t i i 1 I ' i ' I I ! 1 H [ rT1I I- I � i� ' I L r I ' .1 I I . - I I I I f I i ■ I I ! i i i € I ! I 1 I i i I • I I 1 I 1 { ( • r -_.. .. 0'?c - 1.-s 011 } -?a-� o'% =. - -Ps _ 0'0 "'' ' . 0'9 t 0'11 -' J1 . 0'4# 0'1 61 — k-. oZ; its _ 4 k eno-1 I k IN + t.. - c,/ I, i I ; I l of-�-._ T. 4 ..— —! ! - - :.. i— l— _.• I� 1 1 I- l Y r� o a �r 1 ` y� I . 4c,_\s i ; , ,„ _ 1__ I ' ' '-(f)- : ! 2,ct, 9 , sk. _• I ., 1 i - f� ft ! j 0.cl ors " F in J r t ,y II- I i E TI • 'w _ _Hill I { I I —OUP ' > i i ! _.� —,—__._ 1--r- n r I^ ' ' 1_ .- f . ! , 1 { I L_-- , i c ! f 0'04 Oil I T 6 o'0}`a'}; k 1?_ = H11.---21- IA 1)1 -1.7A-YINit-gt- 51..... 1.$CT'i 1.1tS r-j---A /)--IV*\-N.L., .. ----Z,A e),.!--i t,i\AA f M j i j I i i i , 1 t h5 _ I oK TM`, Q 0N,„f1kG ON. G .16U.owS,b; vAIt� . �3"�01. 8 1,, } _ • � 1 Cates' t ,4 69-e64--11 +0.0 .I a: l it0. Gr 15.0 _._ -_ 1 Rev ! 0' .• 0 . ! _ - .a ----- :_ -- -_ _ ._. : _ 1 • � S - �I Mn = �.o _..�x4ls �--,v �� es- Z MPS Sfl- b,5 C 1 i j _ — . Yet tPW'• $0 i 0.149v. . '{.D . : _ .. _. • gel/. 0.0 '0,0 Mix ics = �#,D ,-Pr c----71-70 1�:Q • 3 • i• 1 . • i 1 j = I , i I , i , I 3 . , • . • LL i i - - 1 t . , . _ • . . . . t 1 r ' ! .• ; : . , • . ; • 1, ; I _. .. . . . --- _ , ; 1 1 • 1 , I. . : t ; : • I ! . , . . , . 1 , 1 . 1. • __ I 1 . . I,• . • . . ___... .: . _ • . .: . i • ,. 1 , , 1 i : . , , . . • i . I I : • t 4 I I I • i . • ' I I 1 I f . - • , I • 1 f . ' 4 . t 1-• •- •'. -t- ..:- I - - _1_ • I i . I I • , ' 1 I i I I •, .. . . . .. . , , . . _ __.._ ... . . .. I 1 : • _ i 4 ,,_ • ' ' . 7 , 1 1 .. . . : . I . 1 I . . . 1 I i . - , . i .I 1 r i . . . . . . . . , . I . . , . . • , . 7 - , • . i . . f 1 . . ■ . . • 1 I i I ' . ,• 1 - . • . • I I 1 1 :"- t .., 7- 7 • , I I I . , I: I 4 1 1 I I I 1 4 , '7----• i--- i'-'" -7- -* I---'• 4 I I ..- .....,,,. • : I- 4 4--- ; I 1 , . . . I • . 6 i . . 4 i 4. -4----t -4-- -I r I ' 4 1 1 ,. .1, 1 - .• ' . , I 1 , . . . . ! . ! ! • i ! i I i . • i i . ■ 7 : ' + .1. . i..-- • - '....--: -- :-..,-...--.1.--C, t..-... . -.., ..-. i L _... / , . I . I I I i ,____ ___i . 4 I • • I I - , • ' . • i [ 4 i I i ,...,..._... _ •i i , . __ • II • , 1 I . ; 1 i 4 :f ' 1 ; - . I I ! j • I . , I -„. - .. ._ . I 1 i I 1 . : 1 I I 1 I. • ! . . 1 ! ! • . . • . . • , ' - 1 ; i I 1 , , I 1 I 1 1 1 1 -I:4f,---'-t--r.•.: ---,I:• - I i.i I .! -- : - 9.., -,---M.' ac_h,,I: A ..1 i I IA 4,I vi!i.••'• i 1 t_ 1 1 -Y-ao.•0 :-A. . I- -_ 'r I._,..______t___.e. 4. - — 11- 1111 • 1‘4 ! ,1 I ',. _ •• 1 I I "1 '. ' : 0, Ai , i • f 1 I S Osli ..)\ ,----, ,---- . ,. . : ,. - -- !-----r- 1 : n•(...., -9 • : • _ i ::,-, 9--ds 0,211' . ..." .__, ..... - . _....____,____i ___i___, f,,._ . 1, ___:.__._______i :_r ,........_...:•.4........._.,.._,_.4____L__..-..I.-. . -- -.----7----7A-4-- -- 1 - I !f• , , --c(V) . I; It; , i : ; I ; : •F___, t i 1 f I I I 1 , , , 1. , , • • .._._ ,, . _,—_• i ._....1,. •. , ; i- ; . . 1 1 I i, i ; • il :• , ..11 ., r______, : . .tt .ea, _ ,,,_ 1 i I 'k..... 4 I 1 •e:, !-V I 1 T r I 4 • i ' f . I I L ,.._ I . t • f -1 - I i 4 l' . f , : _ — i i i .1;-,, s I 4 I i 1 f i 1 —41‘—r-t-li , ; 1 'i 1 1 1 1 1 : 7 4 . . 4 14 1 • i• 41-.4 .- 4-44.444 4.4 -7- I I 1 ' . I i ■ 1 11 11 . . . i. I ■ i I / .... . i- .L.--... I i . 1 i . , I i - . .,.... ,.-- I ------- ,----i , • t t i' i 1 , 1SCIF. --51- ".4Vski ,3-liki—rt---40 -1-S-TV-)-a- -AOLk: -‹*,1 _-• :Xii---1•1 ---- 0 ' --- 4 1 .- i 'I• .. -1>C1.4Kk . I I 11 'i i 3 _ .. ' c--k 1 '4NP-- - -! - ' • - r-zc-'4. ,1.- '.,. : ! 0551 .,,_ 1.1_krm ____iat_A.. __...___..-..---i. 1 . - 4 , or---_,,AV e-":1n.1 ,r)" a,C -k-1,9. '. 4 --I 4 , 1 l f , , f . 4 .. :t _I I , [----1 1 i I I, 1 . • 1 1 A ,...,... V* :..- ..I.---7 (.......--.-- t-, : 1.-'‘ -I-T-44- -- -• 7,-__IN---- 4-k-1--- 1 1 k4A-1,\--k I , H ,.. 141,7, , - -__ .-___, . ! I 9ria CA- 1 Ctk.A.‘4 1 n , 1 1 . ' j ► � � � { t --- i--- — , 1 i . { • I ' I q , 1 i I r�o'h-+ :��> 0'0 lac \t'}0L T --__ / • _ hl ZZ : r-� Ohl• z • S - - E il F - - . - !I , , , g deo a' Z - � 4- -, Sl - `- . . ' ) ... .,', ,1 ?,Z 1 ' I i i 21ii 1 . .0 , . i . --I E z a�€ g i , ,.._,, _Li_ i_ .1 ' �'�' ' not o_ ,,-- ,LN--:-N , fliir iv, , , : i- r ,._.__. . 7._____t : „1,i,,wpi_._, i, , 1 177 I , 1. I 1 i , - . t i 1 'r _H—t- --- H s _ i Z '741`4!116 I re-- i i . . , ! L:....- , 1J1IJ - . --r--1--Y-� , - � -_ . i I } ---F---L Location: OR 99W MP 21.6' eleiC HIGHWAY WEST, NO. 1N Recerde NE'W'BERG, 36-004 0.3 rile east c 6vberg Irstalle July, 1952 HISTORICAL TRAFFIC. 7ATA Percent of A.^.T - - everage - 8:`:TOKICAL AACT BY YEAR Daily Max Max 10TH 20:71 30TH 40000 r-- _ __- Year Traffic nay Hour Hoer Four Hoar I 1 1544 `26049 126 10.2 9.0 9.7 9.G 10000 1595 29440 175 10.3 10.0 9.7 9,6 i 1596 31770 121 9.9 9.6 9.5 9.3 1997 31824 122 9.8 9.4 9.2 9.1 20000 1958 32174 122 10.1 9.2 9.: 4.1 1959 32417 ... .... .... .... .... I^_000 L 2000 32292 ... •... .... .... .... ' 1 / 1 22001 321:.9 ... .... .... .... .... 1 200.2 33161. 120 9.4 9 0 6 9 8 n 0 2003 3 1269 121 9.3 9 : e.9 6.8 94 95 96 97 9H 95 00 02 02 03 e 2001 TRXFFICDATA Percent Average Percent Average Percent _-Cieusificatten Preskduvn - _ of ADT Weekday of r'aiIy of Paseenger ears 81.0 Traffic ADT Traffic APT Other 2 axle 4 tire vehicles 13-9 Januney 31445 95 3074e 92 eir,3ic Unit 2 axle 6 tire 1.9 February 37RP0 99 32521 98 Single Veit 3 axle. . 0.6 March 32508 98 31940 96 Single Unit 4 axle or more C.0 April 33395 100 3)120 99 5inele Trailer Track 4 axle or lee0.4 May 33958 102 33693 102 Single Trailer Truck S axle 1.1 Jer 34300 103 34109 102 Lingle Trailer Truck 6 Axle or more... 0.6 IJuly 36301 L 109 ,, 36015 108 D`ol•-?railer Truck S axle Cr less 0.0 Auguet 15730 107 35298 106 dbl-Trailer Track G axle 0,0 September 34154 103 34298 103 Lehi-Trailer Track 7 axle or more, 0.2 October 33897 102 3345e 10: Triple Trailer Trucks 0.0 Novo, e5- }2944 99 3223$ 97 Buses 0.: Derea•-*,er 32700 90 31700 95 Motercyclee 1. eceo;ere 0.2 Location: `J➢. 99W NP 47.15, PA^IFIC HIGHWAY WEST, H;e. 1W kecnrders AMITY, 36-005 2.4 eelee south of Aelty Ie:atalled: September, 1956 H:9T.RICAI eeFFLC DATA Perceec cf ADT __.eee! Average T' l[:0-7ORICAI. AADT BY YEAR Isaily Max Max 10TH 20TH 30TH 6000 • _ -- i Year Traffic bey Hceur Hoer Fleur Hue. 1594 4909 127 12.1 11.3 11.0 11.9 500•: 1 1 I 1 1 I 3495 .4215 132 12.5 11.5 11.1 10.6 4000 1 1586 5110 121 11.6 11.3 11.0 10.0 1937 5267 133 13.2 11.2 10.€ 11.7 30 90 ! 1 1490 5462 129 11.8 11.3 11.1 10.9 2000 2999 5566 ... .... .... .... .... i ] I I I 2000 5451 140 12.2 11.2 31,0 10.9 1000 e i 11 2001 5-425 131 13.1 11.2 30.7 10.5 2002 5483 117 14.1 12-1 11.3 11-1 0 59 70.3 5571 140 13.2 11.5 11.0 11.9 94 9S 16 47 -98 -- 00 01 C2 '- I 1713 TYAF?I C DATA Perrere. Average Percent Average Percent __=:assiletation Preakt,bcn _of ADt Weekday of :ally of faleett.7er Cara 65.6 Traffic APT Traffic APT Ot0er 2 axle 4 tire vehicles 21,1 Jerseary 5140 92 4963 89 ein9le Unit 2 axle 6 :ire..., • 1.2 February 5525 99 51(1 96 Lingle Unit 2 axle... - . 2.1 March 6445 98 5257 Sin9lo :knit 4 axle or mere 1.1 April 570.2 1:2 5560 101 Single Trailer Truck 4 axle or less,., 2.S May 5828 105 5730 103 Eingle Trader Truck 5 axle. 1.6 Jura 5954 1.7 5657 105 single Trailer Truck 6 axle or are7.9 July 6081 109 5715 104 al-Trailer 'Truck 5 axle cr lees. 0.0 August 6009 109 5956 105 Plil-Trader Tr.:ck 6 axle 0.1 September 5056 106 5377 107 Del-Trailer :rack 7 axle :r m..re.....,, 0.7 Oct-Ober 5940 207 5856 105 Tripe Trailer Tru=ke 0.0 Novaeber 1745 3C3 5604 101 buses :.3 December 5176 93 5000 90 meter-cycles 4 etcetera•. . 0.4 283 1.7,rociol. .•;1. 9min to.: 21.4:,. IA=55 1.17:,.wAY 95:71, 1... :w Kecotile4. :74141E147.1, 1m•1.14 i mile rear nf 744.42er,j :nata1led7 )u1/, 1952 e.:Z1..5 1:P.A7r1: DA.1A It .r .4 . . i -!7 _ .. cr .4,..-a7_ _...... . _ -- _ ________ __ . A.-4-ra7m RIST:MiCAL AACT lir YEAR Daily Max ',tax 4C41 .7.;Iii iuli Yea,. Traffic Chly Hour PV.:1 H..US ii<lig • 1:495 ea440 125 10.3 1 O.1 ? ' 4.1 I ,...- 1996 07.710 121 9 3 2.5 1.5 5.3 , 1917 11614 122 ..4.8 5.3 4.2 1.1 _ . .. 19911 321'34 122 10.: 4.:: :999 11417 ... .... .... .... ...a J000 ::2292 .0. "Oil VII.. QM** V..0. 1 :41n1 t.ilicii ... .... .... *Ike. ”Vil, 2592 04E: 12C :1.4 2.: S.L3 1.E I 100.1 :ilirm ,11 1.1 9.3 1.9 4.E. L ' - 95 9C 51 .5e 69 ": ' : s2 .7, 25'74 324E1 :,1., 9 4 3 : A 9 6 6 121,1.4 7RAF:T..7 :ATA 1 Average crt AVeralP PetkrL'. CIAROIL:CIAL1A) Breakd2wn of F. r Weexclay _A. Dul:y ,r iassenger Cara. ... . . . . .. . . . . mi ; Traffic' AL*? 17raffi: A/T C,tner 2 4xle 4 t:..re ventclei Jat;ciasy 21/47mm A: 1,144 1: ..7;59:ri :.1.71 i axle 4 Lire. .. . 14e1;r7...ary 142:9 54 12:054 36 i, gle ,.:b.:-.. S axle • ;- march 1.4:10 ti ri 33111: 14 51.r.g1e 'Jr-ii.: 4 axle -r mr:re . .. . . . . . ,'. APril 34649 101 .19.11 14 :04 Zir.U1C Traile: Truck 4 axle. ..,1* :0..!!...6. . r .4 may 11611 101 14,r49 t. :1 A71:e Trailer Truck 5 axle . June 14316 125__ 3,4443 V , .- :. le '::-.aila: C3s.i-K E 4)31.! , r m.,t, . t. July I 16C6d t-10.9 3 3S460 1:C .hi-Tra:ler tv.:4...k 5 axle 0: :tsa... . Augaat i6914 :01 1571A 1:3 N.-1.Tra.1,..r .,.a.4 b axle 5 C i;Cpterra-....: .141'9i .q4 341JC :: ; 7..t.-Tim.,er .-iu,...1 Axle 7. . ... 1 5 october 14552 :11 415:5 :■..: 7cipla 7railt: Tr.....1,. . .. .. 0 .1.10:-..ver'...3,r 3161) : 0.1 .11(),‘,4 '')) Dugua . . . . . . . ... . . :Icc.7.r:nrr 44141. 1.'74 4)6'l '..1 tr ... 5. 1..c.,...:ei..:.. ,-.o., le& 4 .1 , i..., -..-, 4-:-...1-KA( , "...7, I:, Ix ..e7JJ.:.1,. .14:1 . 2 .4 7 A i.t..., a,0 n .1! A 4,i t, LtISt 41...1.ed! '. .7 ! 7p.2. ,' _____ k•er.-1.tv.:.:-.1' V.:T ---- A:erale Kli"1..P:Chl, MDT 01 IVA Lally M.1). ',." ,,. t-.44 1,1A . 4 ... CC. . • .----..._ _. - --- . ......_ Year Traft1.57 Ca• IL,•r titia: wtcr ,-,;:- I 1115 5215 122 12.5 11.0 ::._ .. , I I 1916 5114 119 11.5 11.1 1: .0 1,:,.: ;7 ' 11111111-11 I I 1917 52,1-.. 1)1 1•.2 11 . 1,1 A -. 1990 54C2 129 11.6 ti i 1.. . t .. 1999 55;4 / I 10:10 5451 143 11.1 11 J c : 1 1. r I :7001 4,425 :31 13 I :1 2 I: 1002 54f3 :37 1-4 1 :2 1 11.1 1: . 1003 5511 14” 14 e 11... j1.: 1:..) q5 96 9: .90 99 CO ::1. 02 ',7 714 :.; 3 t. 4 1 Perrcnt Av9rage Perr!erst Average Percent Claseill,Jailwn Breakdown . of Arc- weekday of Deily elf. rauserger Care 6C 6 Traftic kw Traffi:: kLr :,:her 2 axle 4 tire vehiclel . ... 21 5 ,74nuary 4421 -ri 4419 .1 51 ngle 141t 2 axle 5 tire . .. ... _ 1 .! Fmtruary SS:1 5/ $461 .16, , r1:11e unit 5 axle .. . . .. .. . ... . • ,.. I 1rav:11 59;9 151 C"...1 ,;irgle UnlE 4 axle cr mOre. . . . 3.1 Aptil ta.;1 ic.7 cei7 '...71; i,r,gle r -ail TL-u:4 4 axle -r Itt.!?4 May C111 101 C114 1 • • .7.ingle TJaL1er TtuA 5 EiX.1,.. . . . . '‘.; Airm ti:0 117 1149i 1:5 5:n710 frai1e1 Trock 6 i.1 , ,),, .3. 4 July 6074 1.1.; 3:4E1 1 2 1t1 Trailer TI..: S axle ot •..t,a!!. .. 1. . Alqudt ,174 109 i7:44 1:C fltl-Trailer Truck 6 axle. ) ... Septert,i 5255 109 C122 1: ' 1.1.3 -:railer 7r-Jck 1 axle It 1..ra... . 1 / 1. .c_ter :t1.4 1:7 (7.:11 I:S TrLple Trai:er 4:-.474 cs. . . . Novemt,er 'DWI 1,4 a;:3 11 1.1,e,7eener 5515 ,/ Wiri 52 m;..t1r,:4'cles $ mc-reir-ti ...4 283 1,ccat2.7.,n: • RE59N MP 2) . rAculc 7i:3UWAY W551, NI, lsi RerDrdet' nEwnERG. 14 f2,4 0 3 -111e ea Newberg .. it 1: :U1y1;52 H13i-C1CAl. TRAIFIC IATA ____Percenz_of_ALT,_ _ ,--- --_____ ., Avt_..tage MTSTORICAL AADT 3IY YEAR i Dai.:y Max Max 1,.:13 19TR 31TH ICST 76tit : Day iiDJr Kota' .41.7. 2C 1996 30770 121 9.9 9.i 9.5 5.3 .3caDo • . . 1997 31824 122 9.6 $ 4 9.2 7.1 1990 32174 122 19.; 4 :2 c".1 9.1 1 1949 32417 ... .... .... •n*. •000 " 1110 2000 32292 .... .... .... Ea,' .... 2001 12156 too aaao ooaa oloom a... ':.7 2002. 11161 120 5.4 9..:1 4.; 4.8 2003 11264 121 5.3 9.; P.; il.a 2u04 11461 122 9.3 9.. 8.; 8.6 n ' 96 47 RS 99 CC 11 02 C3 G4 OS 2005 14125 221 5.3 3 9 6.8 4.11 ---- - -- (729;; ;,F-.-FP-1-C'TACrAl Aveiaje 2rcr.7.t fv.-era7.7 P,-:(,nt Classifirazion RreakIl.t'wr, • .._:'J ;..DT Meetiay of Daily Paaaanyar Care. .:af1::: ADT '7Taffir := .-1.!.0-.1 2 ax_e 4 tire vehicles.. . . . . 14,:• ..Lvr.s.a.ly 32995 9 iCifq'R -.,:: F. .'lle Uriiz. 2 axle C tlfe , • .:._ Fyoi.:ary 33974 12. U . 7.,, 21ngle r:TrAt 3 Mir di .14±76 101 7. -1.1 Sn51e 1111t 4 axle Cr -s:Ire.. . . ,. . 0.3 AprIl 9471.0., 112 2421 3 . s_r.31e it-at:pr. Isuc•■:. 4 ax1e or lensC 5 May 1:07,2 101 14562 1,1 5:r171e lra:-..cr Trck 5 axle. . . : 2 04.0e Jriliq 106 35416 1G4 !7:.rljle irai:er rzuck 6 axle OT mni.r0.7 -11-_..- -,..... P641, 107 16016 1::.,1 2r.1-Trniler Truck 9 axle 71- 1ese 0 r-- Lleugust 1 liT'iS8 L 108 1 265C8 17 1b:-Druilcr Treck t aylp. . . . .... 0 : Sepromhs,r 1'7'191 103 34724 122 lb:,Traller 7ruck 1 axle L:1. c.rrbel 24735 112 94.41 1::, ;r:Fle, 7...A:.:er Tru,'.cv riji Nnvee_bar 34252 103 ii.■4 Jt--, RabeS .. O.:. DirLember 34127 12i11 '.i, i.;.:...x,...va. 22.REG-,.W MT 47 ls, rk..:r..:. 191Y '67:ST. N. la Recurder: 2.4 rlIts .77-,0::-. of Ar:ty Ine:all-A: SeTter13 . 1,. 77„Arr:..7 :ATP, .1',...:::+_.A. rf A;A' _ 1 ____ Av,ra-4e HISTCRIZAL AALI BY YE.A.:o. 7.:411y Max Max .1!.r!K 2,::W 1'..-2.11 YC,NL Tit ,.. Lay liGur Ff:.1: ii-7,..f 1L--:: ;2.'20 1996 !UP. 129 12.4 11 11.0 2.2.8 1997 52E7 133 1).2 11.2 19.8 10.7 4230 • ._. 1958 5462 129 :1.4 11.1 11.: 13 5 I I ...• WO*. "04 3:21 • 2000 S4S1 140 12.1 11.2 11.0 11.; I 1 I 2E00 . . 2301 542 111 13.1 11.2 10.9 1:).s I I 1 1011[ 2302 ;489 11/ 14.1 12.1 :1.9 11.1 1.:.:9 i- - • 2301 SS71 140 :3.2 11.5 1: y I --. 2324 Cl): 13. 13 3 11.4 U. :I.': ' . 9F 47 g2 55 CO rrl (17 111 PI 25 ' 2 .‘271 561.2 141 14.2 11 :. 1: 1 i7.-, -. Perc.7.:- A•elaja Pr. -it Avera4c. i-i....i.L'_ C:aatit:.zr. 6re.14J,wn Df 1-::IT Weekday c,f Vai:7 ,...1 73ssenger Cars Traft_c All Traffic MY.- ..ther 2 axle 4 t.:re vehicle,.. . .. . .. . 21 7 Januari 5664 47 52SS .3 Single Unit 2 axle 6 tire 3.2 rcbruary 5520 1::1 go4a 44 Single Unit 7 axle 2.1 March 5942 1;1 5749 98 Single Unit 4 axle Of mOrn G.1 Apt11 5965 1G2 E.79f 93 $4ngle Trailer Truck 4 axle ,,r.- 1AxuG..; May 5561 l'.::: 5959 122 Single Trailei ?nick S axle 3 6 June 5:58 2..9 6'.57 ':2,5 Single 7:,:1 ..f Trick 6 nx:r cr lw.7p! .0.9 July 6366 1G9 E:5, : 0:. ..bl. Tr:-.Y-1 7- ._• ,.. S axle n.r 1.6;7 - 9 0 TuiTtat 6412 111 6275 :57 :)1,1-Tr.a. .-, ---4.....:4 6 axle. . . . . . , .. SepLailei: f30 S 1C9 E17.1 17 It'sl. Trt,_-: 7::... k. 1 AX:0 f2,1- 7,:ro 0.1 9.9 N.:.'wember 5543 1C1 S794 96 Sazea December 5114 il 51.91 13 M:..torcy.:..les i F.,7ote..tti .:.4 70 MP '..t.e Acirr,: capmAy WI-AT, NG. 21 Pec0,2. 1.F.W.r.1.S, 56-904 0.11 (2112 w2.97 C.! Dr.g.ocLer j!A*W. :11,9741112dt 221y19Fd 1.:( Tf2H1CAL TFACF:7 CA:A Vorrw.t nf :1:21 _ -- ______ -- -1 Averdle 1.. AA:: bY Yr,1424 IMd... 10.3.c lail 2t.1'li ..13 41.: Y20r Tr4111:: Day Hour H.711- 1 '.1f Hc.:.t 191 skl4 122 9.9 9.4 9.0 .21.i . V.P.M )21/4 1. 10.1 9,2 19119 3i41.7 .1,1 .... •.1.0. Od.Od 4011.11 eOULI 34,-4'W OD* rk.Odt "Of, .1...• ....• 2001 42150 •22 *0100 4..0 .4,4, 4eas 2002 AIM 121.1 0.4 9.0 0.2 2.4 1111 2004 11.150 121 9.3 9.0 kl. *.4 2:134 4.1461 1:2d 9.1 9.5 0.2 ,-.t) 1111 ] 239F. 14120 121 2.J t.:.9 0.C1 C.2 " 94 52 C9 71 5-2 9A CA CS OA ...x..G )!..)1:12 1.12 4.. ,... 14.171 i..1 - .-- . ......- 1200C 71.0A7 i-- _ Fur:eLt Aloar0.-4-2 }are ': Aver:2012 le:72rit ClA2215:catir... Eres',.dowr. . at A:T Wevkl0y :21 D411? c.: Fand-mr239r Jhr2.. . . ... . . .... . . ... - . 01.4 fl-: ATI Tr4ff)c A.:: f.27mtr 2 .•.7.10 4 i :fa '..et..)clv?' . . .. ... . li.1 11199 55 52159 22 .111:31. 12-.11: 2 1A.:2 C r,*.12. , . . . .. .. . 2.: 020r:.ari 140',4 55 j4C1.9 W. :ir.110 01.1. A 4...:e MArr,. :1f,:17C 99 ii43 .' S7 .1.11r.114, 14 .: 4 nz:2 f.r 1:::;re ,44411 15492 101 ..,.:69. 1 )1 1.1.,rgle Frdsler tv.v2k 4 •r,'..e. ...r :c.-A 3.F. 15205 130 145t7 59 .::1A;.1.2 Tiler 7:72c.P. 3 4A.(0,.... .. 1,2 JI.1.0 1707 IIP 1'11.1; I .1%I.41* Trd:Icr Tr,c1,. 6 .. 2. r-r -nren.', .11..), 117551; 1PS “004 OS Lbi-11-411,: TAWA !, I.A.4 :.”' rtr 1±22111j 3442 I 1D0 1 110c7 1'.■7 Db. Traller. 7p.ek 5 ax1e... ... . . .. .7.: /1,2€r 36,e;) 1911 A114M; 1,J I.41;-7td.let :v.v.* i ar.P. c r5r -..,. . .. . '7. : OCtUt.Or 104 AA122 192 Tr:pis 7r4iler TrIcke.. ., ... .. .. 9.0 November :1..41.3 1UA 14417 :I, Waled... .. .. . . .. ..... .. .. . . . „ . .,.. nezellt.er I e, P..:1 I,i,.-. . '-.:•. ."I. I!:;. ::, . r--- D.tly MI! •J...*.. 1 1.. . :-1 , '-, 1 . stadt Ir- ti.. 1.",w 1 -, r " : -; i: -, •.! . 1997 5257 111 : ,. 11 .. : . ,. '." ' 1999 5152 129 : ; - :I . . :; 1 : ; . 1999 5166 *... .... 41000 46.40 r.r. I I I 2'...7,.) `..4 .1 144 :2.: .;.4 :1 .,, 27,01 '1'2,.. 1!1 ,'.. . 2 ,. . ' I I [ 3,7T-2 -4ffl 11' 1.... 1. . .1.1 I: I 1 1 '27)J ,A11 141 11 . . 1 ' .1.9 14 2 4 1 .. 1.5 . . . , 11_1 1 , ■ 1 I I . _ ---lAw 141 .... .... .... / ' J 5: i.r, s) :' ni 01/ 24 fa 3F '25 19f-,%-.- ,cr..:e Pur,:er.t' 1.A01.D,..1 A.r*cr. .7.1,3-..',.: ...,:--..:7t Ult.-.1.,.<1.:.:-..:. _of. .,- .1 ...... . •ht1-.31',• ".1.ly 7.7! !-34'kenjer -,r1 E5 A lx-Aft.A. Ar'l 'raffi:.- AW. Crner i 1.c.:a 4 , re ..eLicld:-. . .. . . '.' .. 9,. !:4-..) ;2 ...1r.o10 1.. i 1, u r. !ice.. . .. . . 1.2 r71,:Jary 5249 7C..1 fA411 :0 4717-gla ..:,.% .! a.k.m. . . . .. . . . , . . . 2.L Mc1.1. 6055 :;:j 5...62 59 71.7..g12. .n.: 4 41.,...W :r T.-4-c, :/.. Anril A2411 1c5 5044 102 .clir.gir Tre::er Trick 4 +Ala ::-. ;2,,i.: ..1. 1,-.1,1 G:14 1C3 C031 102 .11.:11f2 Tral2er Tr.,ck '. 4.Ale... .. 1.. .' .... ,r.e W. !C7 C20D 104 .317.02 Craillfc :rick 5 1.212 ,Ir ”ol2 3.9 1Li.411 1::,7 5191 1:::4 F0J1-TrA114r :17.c'c : 1.',--.2 7.r .ella... A-TIn. e.Aff2 ::- Cal 1.114 'A:.-7r411er ':17..t.4 f 11.a .. . .... t.:epterbe: 6311 14 C279 1 :6 '..021-Tr4Alaf 1r,.*4 ', d•le -..,..- -:::,.. /./ i:..--•7...,,e, !,110 1:5 E2CC 1.;4 7.4.1e Irtilcr r.ckd. . . . . . .. ;..: 1.1 )0,..0111.1er S ..:1 4a '.:1:.f.r. 2:-. : 1.., :.r" ..'..es Z . .tdrJ . .. . . . 1.4 301 t .• 1.: II.;:li'Vii 4 "., •.•.' .1 •:i ..A • t , •1■,' •,•Is.o- .: •.-t.,c . . . _ -. . . . ■ .11: 1 1.I•1:. ' ;00! .r ..:!1■:' i,.. fl:,“f V:...i' If....'.1: : ", • , ; ' ;•. .;•.•,' L.,' -. 1 :'? .... ..•. a.... el*• •••• 1• t ;:o,0 it.S' 4. % I tiliut: -- • i ..,0C.: . f tf •• :ft..: . • 49 nn nt 02 ri) 14 tfl .1 t 35 :Y • - . . -__-_.-- .1 . rer.-NO; • I.,---:!• 1., .......,.. F t'e Ct lCA.: 1...I I y ..11..■••,1 .-1--.,o- t trl. . . .• . I -. I ,• :, , l'o• I i 1.. i-, (41 I.er .: .a".I..:: ■ ' .."...: '.'":1-.1,-17.1... .. !. .to .1 : .11. 1V,1 F.1 :,•.11.11u 131-.1. / -1, ••• L:r6... .- I 1-:' P..,I al) ,,..irt I,.o 1.3 1.1 3 '1 . .:e - - - 1 •11' I;.. 4 .1,;'.41:. 1.1.: ..7:. 4,,00, lli.i• I - ..u ..-- •,. -,c 1pril V..■F. i.4, ..4(.173 Lf-1 !, 1...1 TraIIVI' 71, - . '.". " .... '1" May 1,1,A 174 ff,!)!IG .('J : .0:J C Tr11,21 I 51 :,:i :;:ii,j1".• 1-:-11 :'• .i.f"• : :if.., .,:- '' :4 z July 4 ;fib 1/H ' "9:1' Iltfl-1 ..../I.-.•: 1:.1:i LAug„isti !1'•-.-I ri):. 1 ,,,,,,, .,, 010 -T,,1i.".. Ir„,-. , •.-., t,epterapol A J-ut'. 1:7,-- NAI-TJ.0.11.61 li •:i; 1, „-.‘ ,.- ter • . :Y:r.c..tter 11111 .0• Ic?....' :01 frip1.5 ll'aila! Alt.:.JilOtc.t : :.: ..4 •...... rt.,n,o... . . . . . . , _ Pncevlber 147:I :13516 %..4 14,1to:<:y,.-.1es of -':','.■ ,-- ., . cl., t.:W,*,:tli' NI •1' I' • ;'r !I.I - :''..•11, : :.;.'I, N:• .,13 Itrr:lt:ler: :..■..r.!1.. ..: .-J.:4) o 1 lid 1...• II _: :.1% :of'41.1:. f "...•. .I , la;.:' ::',41-4..:0•3: •::..;A....•L.1.1, • ."..f, fR'....LOPI.:',A. ■I“.if I,f.' .'',:i, 1 -- _ frlif,rA410 fliitioRICAL AMY. UV ti.J.14 fly i4-1.P. ...O. : 1 ' HI 1,rt 1 C60C r _________. '1:-.:c r:-.1:il(; r_1y if ../t v:J.,: ''. i: .-1-7-tr ..... 1 9".111 • I!,/ 1:)S .' .1 I 11. i I 1111 / - 1 9.../.1 INI.1.--5 *of. ••of. •••• o•.• ow... PO 1: .; : ::.:." 11 i: 10.'... _ 1 i 1 , 1 ,,! 1:si „ I : „.:, In t' !- III 1 4:),.- 1%4'03 131 :( : ':, . .t 11. , 11.: . . 23/A. 53 143 '.,- ..: .. .., II 1:: I 3. 1 57t1 132 . t. , ... . i i : III t,,, k3"); !"11:‘,4 •tt ••••• Al.11.1 •••• •••• i I...ou / I 4'.1jr. -,E,.■0 1 3 i : 1 ... • 1.•:f I i 1 1'' , • ."-. I 1 '3., z,' Dl :i 114 114 05 04; 3; 3c.4'); 'j4'4 :'52 :''. i . i, 4 10.i.• ;lo ', I. . - s'iL123.12 I Eq-'-'7E41: ;•.•.•r.•,...:44e. ••=4-4.41!or. - : .,,:-:',11- -.-.1 :t . Pr e..0.•:‘,.,41 ____ ,.. .:.:.: •'. 14culto.L-o} ;:f :Jai 1y III I-..3,e.ffjcr II ' Triat:.:. h•L/L r1-41 rp: tj 1....{ 2 :0,....q. •: ' .. .' ,JOIllel'Z..,. ..i..: .1.11%1•ry 511. 1 .01., :, ,:ct,::u 1.41:1: A ax;c r . 1:e . . Vet1:1-uttry 90:1 :....'n ..•07.r. .4 t •tql. -4 .o. J a.N117. - • MAIO'. CO7C 157 ,i-ii I .J :I-.(.3I Un:t. 4 arkl t.-.: ....-I . . . . . triltrIl T.!4 1:11 .1-e11 '.,.', .;,t.y.e 7ral:er trIck •. .•..r• or I,7,- . . : . 5tay U.2.:, 1/4 *..99.5 :112 :.1:../:e Trailer fr-Jc1( 5 ../, C ..:,IAC C541 111 6"-PA) 1•17 2.t•ttt:e TraCter Tr.c tt 11 .IA.:0 nr 4-t•i c .. 3. 4 JAly 6(05 1/9 61P. ;Jr, ',. 1-71-411ei; TI.-1.-7 t. nAla cti 101-4 5../ A:gill C6O1 114 $45: :119 ..i-71,1:ler Tt...,7,,.. '. P.It, . .. . ..:r.pi c7sk::,r 11.303 1,:,CP tr./.5.;" ::.;7 ....1 :140.16q.- 1 c.,•:,: -.. I.... .:..1 4,,11,1 1 1 1131‘,I'ci 6Ciin 11.1 1.i.iJ I 14 1 1•:p:fr 11.1.1 1e1 li. . . . . . 5121 111 ,....in. ..,..) L'-_ d .. IC,t-al,.:.e.:. 530C L.1.3 ..'. 3 ;-',,:y7..:(-CIOT 4... 'S,c<,- .2‘ f.. . . . . . . .. . L.': 303 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: = Location: 99W @ m Table Numbers refer to Trafficview&Translink Hall m —1 (c: 1 TABLE 3 TABLE 6 (also see sheet 6) N Clock,EV and Misc. (C+Key) Miscellaneous (D+Code) Phase Rotation Diagram Function fl Function I- Code I Value I Notes �p o=Off 1=On T. E.O.S. Dwg. Nos: Month Q Clock Floating Ped 2E (Ph.7&8 Not permitted) Date © Location C+3 uses Day of Week © Call/Active ID Number 2F 46 Range 0 to 253 (1) Display Hour © Sunday 1 Coordination 3E 1 0=Recall Minute © y Ped Recalls 1-No Recall Second 6 Rest in WALK 0=Off 1/10 Second 8 3F 1=ON Phase Number Advance Warning Extend time for green 11111111111:111113111/11 End of Green 4E after sign turns on (2)(5) 8 •U..1111• • Advance Waming 4F Delay time for sign after Start Yellow 9 ..,,...... Start of Green phase tums yellow (2)(5) EVA Phases gi.�il..,I�... RR Red Clear 5E Length of all red EV8 Phases B .,I..�7..'I.. after RR red flash EVC Phases Du]....1i7.. RR Clear Color 5F 0-Green, 1=Flash EVD Phases D .......n Yellow, 2=Flash Red Handicap Ped ®........ NEMA Inputs 66 Non zero value reassigns Cl inputs. (3) TABLE 3 Bus Delay 6D 25.5 Delay time before preemption (4) Preemption Data (E+Key) Extension of max green for Function ® Parameter Timing Bus Timer N 1 6E phases 2&6 (Free operation) 0 Delay Bus Tirrer 4 3 6F Force off time for Ph 4 5 e (only EVA in Free operation) II Minimum 1 0 = no EVB © Delay JHK Protocol 76 0.1 = yes © Minimum 1 JHK Area No.& 7D Area No.0-7 and 1st digit local Local 001-510 (1) 4 Delay EVC EV minimum timed 0 at start of call El Minimum 1 Start;end of call 7E E 1 =at end of call 6 Delay 0 = Off, 1 = Flash. EV On Indicators 7F EVD 111 Minimum 1 5 = solid indication f5) Overlaps 8 Red Revert 5.0 9 Delay Notes Railroad A Minimum (1) JHK ID no.is formed by Area no.(0 to 7)and 3 digit Local no. Phase Number (001-510). Left most digits entered as x.x in location 70 and 0©©0©fBIO rightmost as xx in location 2F RR Clear Ph B ENINEEMEN (2)See Sheet 6,Location 8+0+E RR Permit QEIMIIIIIMINII• (3)C1 pins 54,63.64,75.76,and 77.See sheet 6.Location B+0+D. RR oL Peroxt D ........ (4)Entering 25.5 in this location is the only way of disabling bus preempt. Nema Hold Ph ©........ (5)Ped yellow outputs,C1-35,36.37,and 38 are used by Rt.Turn 111■■■■■■■■ Overlaps.EV on indicators,TOD/DOW programmable outputs. Fiber Optic sign for RR flash yellow clearance,and Advance Warning sign operation. Hall (r 'ad) rev2c.x;s -T 2 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Location: 99W Hall TABLE 1 Page 0 Phase Functions (D+Key) TABLE 1 Page 0 _ TABLE 2 Page 0 Phase Number• Function Y 1213( Phase Timing (Ph. No. + Key) Miscellaneous (9+Key) -_ 415[5(716 Veh Recall o x x 3 Parameter Y Value Notes Ped Recall 1 `� _ gg L- . _ Red Lock 2 y �^ z "`iii z v°, s co Interval Short Pwr Dn 0 Clock Correction Yellow Lock 3 X hC Speed up 1-9 Permit Phase 4 }(X X X X X Phase Number Long Power Dn 1 Slowdown 11-19 Ped Phases 5 X }( -( _ _ 1 1 2 I 3 1 4 1 5 6 I 7 1 8 EVA 2 Preemption Lead Phases 6 X X X X - Delay Types: Max Green p 21 45 25 19 45 29 c Double Entry 7 o 0 EVB 3 Sequential 6 Max2/ HFDW 1 16 120 25 19 120 29 B. m m EVC 4 Hold 1 Start Green 9 X X d E OLA= A Walk 2 5 5 5 a) 0 I— Latch 2 OLB c Flashing DW 3 12 18 14 a RR 6 Neither 0 OLD= D Max Initial 4 4 20 6 4 20 6 Exclusive E X Ped Inhibit 7 Usually^0^ Min Green 4 10 6 4 10 6 Sim Gap F x X 5 Green 8 TBR 6 8 10 8 8 10 8 OLA -' Yellow 9 TABLE 2 Pa.e 0 TTR 7 3 20 3 3 20 3 Green A Overlap Miscellaneous(C+F+Key) OLB Yellow Observe Gap 8 Function ® Value Yellow B Time Page ID 0 Passage g 2.3 4.8 2.3 2.3 4.8 2.3 Green C should yQ Min Gap A 0.5 2.8 0.5 0.5 2.8 0.5 OLC always be Keys 8 Yellow D specified i©r✓„ through F Add per Act g 1.2 1.2 Green E © �'�� use Yellow C 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 OLD OLA Red a_ Call/Active . Yellow F OLB Red ©_ Display Red Clear D OLC Red 6 Red Revert E 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Keyboard Entries when not in Free Display A Advance D Column Advance OLD Red El Walk 2 F B Back E Enter and Advance Phase Number lill©©a©IZIQa C Clear Display F Free Display RT OLE 12111....... To observe bmmo for an individual phase: Phase Conditions as shown on Free Display RT OLF u..0 ■■.. Enter C.A.F for Ring A(Phase 1-4)or 00 Initial Entry OC Yellow ffeinitialization Red Rest iglimmEmI♦si enter C+B.F for Ring B(Phase 5-8) 02 WALK OD Red Clear D+1+F+1+E Max Recall V•u•u■••• 03 Flashing DW OE Red Revert Use only when in flash) Flash Green Isingimi••m 05 Min Green 11 Gap Out Cn W61414095 1 YQOD®MliI®}^ 08 Rest 12 Force Off Phase Data Coov = Advance WALK 09 Passage 14 Max Out C+x+C+y+0 rn u........ OB Added Initial 15 Red Revert Timed out x From Phase (x cannot be 3 or 81 WI ReS;r�:i a Ph u..■■■■■■ Page I.D. 0 —I y ToPhase(s)-upto3atatime 1 CO • Shown on Call/Active Display • Hall (autoload) rev2c.xls SHEET 3 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: 99W Lo ,n: Hall TABLE 7 1 of 2) Hardwire Dial 1 2 3 Conversion Offset I 1 I 2 1 3 1 I 2 I 3 , 1 ( 2 I 3 r Coordination Timing (B + Plan No. + Key) Parameter Y ' 1 I 2 3 I 4 5 6 I 7 I 8 I 9 Plan Number Cycle Length 0 120 120 140 1 83 53 76 2 20 Forceoffs 3 for Phase 4 41 19 26 indicated by 5 20 53 78 Key number 6 7 8 63 37 57 Offset 9 114 68 116 Permissive A 22 2 2 Max. Dwell B 40 40 47 1 2 3 415161718, 1 213141516 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 C Lead Phases C Lead Phases - C Lead Phases 1 D Coord. Phases A D Coord. Phases 7 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall ea hases 'C Lead Phases }t X X "){ C Lead Phases 2 D Coord. Phases 5 D Coord. Phases X x 8 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall ■ C Lead Phases ){ X X X ' 'C read Phases C'Lead Phases 3 D Coord. Phases X X 6 D Coord. Phases 9 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall TABLE 7 (2 of 2) Coordination Timing (B + D + Key 1 + Key 2) T 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Number Parameter a, . 7 8 9 A B C D E F Key 1 Cycle Length 0 1 2 Forceoffs 3 for Phase 4 indicated by 5 Key number 6 7 8 Offset 9 Permissive A Max. Dwell B 112 3 4 5 6 718, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 718, C Lead Phases C Lead Phases - C Lead Phases 1 3 D Coord Phases 1 6 D Coord. Phases 1 U D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases C Lead Phases C Lead Phases ■ D Coord. Phases D Coord. Phases D Coord. Phases 11 E Perm. 2 Ph. 14 E Perm. 2 Ph. 17 E-Min . 2 Ph. F Min. Recall ' F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C lead Phases C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 12 D Coord. Phases 1 5 D Coord. Phases 18 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall ' F Min. Recall F Min. Recall Hall (autoload) rev2c.xls SHEET 7 TABLE 5 (1 of 2) TABLE 5 (2 of 2) cn Ti me_Cl ock Control (A+Code) Ti me Clock Control (A+Code) Time Clock Control D+8+Code) Time Clo ck Control D+8+Code) T T m o m 6 8 S M T W T F S ti S M T W T F S 6 t S M T W T FS E is SM T W T F S m m E Hour Min. Func i E Hour Min. Func m E - Hour Min. Func m E Hour Min. Func m —I w Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L 1 2 3 4 5 .6 7 W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 wZ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 m CO m_ 80 81 82 83 CO _ Cl C2 C3 80 81 82 83 CO Cl C2 C3 5' 1 IXIXIXIX X 06 00 3 17 XXXXXXX 05 15 131 33 _ I 1 49 I 1 I co 84 85 86 87 04 05 C6 C7 84 85 86 87 C4 C5 C6 C7 0 2 X I X 07 00 2 18 X X X X X X X 22 15 132 34 -1 50 1 - 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 3 X_ 1 - 1 _X 06 59 129 19 35 . 1 I I . 1 51 1 I 8C _ 8D BE 8F CC CD CE CF CC CD CE CF 4 'XIX XIX X 09 30 2 20 I I _ 8C 8D 8E 8F 36 [ 52 ' I I I ci 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 5 I X X I X X X 09 29 129 21 I I 37 1 53 I I I CD 94 95 96 97 D4 D5 D6 D7 94 95 96 97 D4 05 D6 D7_ 6 X X I X I X X 14 59 128 22 38 54 I I I E cp 98 99 9A 9B D8 D9 DA DB 98 99 9A 9B D8 D9 DA DB a 7 XIXXIXX 15 00 5 23 39 55 I 9C 9D 9E 9F DC DD DE DF 9C 9D 9E 9F DC DD DE DF 8 X X X X X 18 30 2 24 40 56 AO Al A2 A3 EO El E2 E3 AO ED El E2 E3 9 IX X X X XI 18 29 129 25 I 41 , 1 Al A2 A3 57 I I A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 10 XIXIX!XIX X=X 22 01 128 26 — - 1 1 1 42 III 58 I I _ L 1 A8 A9 AA AB E8 E9 EA EB AS A9 AA AB E8 E9 EA EB c 1, X XIXIXIX X X 22 00 20 27 j I _ 43 I I 59 _ 1 1 AC AD AE AF EC ED EE EF AC AD AE AF EC ED EE EF 12 I I 28 44 60 I I BO B1 B2 63 FO Fl F2 F3 BO B1 B2 B3 FO Fl F2 F3 13 1 29 45 - 61 1 — c B4 B5 86 B7 F4 F5 F6 F7 B4 B5 B6 B7 F4 F5 F6 F7 14 I I I 30 46 62 I 1 1 B8 B9 BA BB F8 F9 FA FB B8 B9 BA BB F8 F9 FA FB 15 I 1 1 31 - 47 63 _ BC BD BE BF FC FD FE FF BC BD BE BF FC FD FE FF 16 32 48 I - - 64 1 - - Event numbers are for reference only. Local TOD "Free"will override any plan received via an interconnect line. Hall (autoload) rev2c.xls SHEET 8 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: cn Hall at I Location: m C:: 1 Table Numbers refer to Trafficview&Translink Hunziker/Scoff ins M —I TABLE 3 TABLE 6 (also see sheet 6) N - - — -- Clock,EV and Misc. (C+Key) Miscellaneous (D+Code) Phase Rotation Diagram Function I Y Function I Code Value Notes T. E.O. S. Dwg. Nos: Year o 0-Off 1-On Month 1 Clock Floating Ped 2E (Ph.7&8 Not permitted) Date 2 Location C.3 uses Day of Week 3 Call Active ID Number 2F 63 Range 0 to 253 (1) Hour Display our d Sunday-1 Coordination 3E 1 0-Recall Minute 5 Pad Recalls 1-No Recall Second 6 Rest in WALK 3F 0-Off 1/10 Second 7 1-ON Phase Number Advance Warning 4E Extend time for green 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8' End of Green after sign turns on (2)(5) 7777- ?'' .' -..s* ' 7 Advance Warning 4F Delay time for sign after Start Yellow 9 _ Start of Green phase turns yellow (2)(5) EVA Phases A )t X RR Red Clear 5E Length of all red EVB Phases B X after RR red flash EVC Phases C X X 0-Green. 1-Flash RR Clear Color EVO Phases D 5 Yellow. 2.Flash Red Rarxicap Pad E - NEMA Inputs 66 Non zero value reassigns p Cl inputs. (3) TABLE 3 Bus Delay 6D 25.5 Delay time before Preemption Data (E+Key) preemption (4) Bus Tmer >i 1 Extension of mss peen for Function I $1 Parameter 1 Timing 6E phases 2&6 (Free operation) 0 Delay Bus Timer p 3 6F Force on erne for Pr 4 5 6 Io'y EVA ^ Free operation) 1 Minimum 1 2 Delay JHK Protocol 76 0.1 -oes EVB y 3 Minimum 1 JHK Area No.& 7D Area No.0-7 and 1st digit local Local 001-510 n) 4 Delay EVC EV minimum timed 7E 1 0 - at start of call 5 Minimum 1 Start/end of call 1 -at end of call 6 Delay EV On Indicators 7F 0 - Off. 1 . Flash. EVD 5 . solid indication (5) 7 Minimum 1 - Overlaps 8 Red Revert 5.0 g Delay Notes Railroad A Minimum (1) JHK ID no.is formed by Area no.(0 to 7)and 3 digit Local no. Phase Number (001-510). Left most digits entered as x.x in location 70 and 1 121 3 14 151 s 17 19 hghtmost as xx in location 2F RR Clear Ph g - - - (2)See Sheet 6,Location B+O+E RR Permit C (3)Di pins 54.63,64.75.76,and 77.See sheet 6.Location B+0+0. PR DL Pern.t D wV 4 NA (4)Entering 25.5 in this location is the only way of disabling bus preempt. Name Fbld Ph E (5)Ped yellow outputs,C1-35.36,37.and 38 are used by Rt.Turn „_ _ri L T E7- Overlaps,EV on indicators,TOD/DOW programmable outputs. Fiber Optic sign for RR flash yellow clearance,and Advance Warning sign operation. Hall ;7' - nziker, Scoffins rev2d (autoload).xls "''EET 2 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Location: Hall at Hunziker/Scoffins TABLE 1 Page 0 Phase Functions (o+Key) TABLE 1 Page 0 TABLE 2 Page 0 Function Y Phase Number Phase Timing (Ph. No. + Key) Miscellaneous (9+Key) _12131415[61718. T Veh Recall 0 X X m = m `i' Parameter Y Value Notes Ped Recall 1 R = o Rod Lock 2 y a _ = v' rl Interval Short Pwr Dn 0 clock Correction Yellow Lock 3 Speed up 1-s Permit Phase 4 X X X'X X X Phase Number Long Power Dn 1 Slow down 11-19 Ped Phases 5 X X X X _ 1 1 2 I 3 1 4 1 5 I 6 1 7 1 B EVA 2 "Preemption Lead Phases s X X N X Max Green p 17 40 19 15 40 15 = Delay Types: Double Entry 7 o EVB 3 Sequential 8 Max2/HFDW 1 17 50 19 15 50 15 a m a) Hold 1 Start Green 9 X -X - - E N a EVC 4 DLA= A "X X Walk 2 5 5 5 5 0 o F- Latch 2 EVD 5 Both 3 OLB- B OLC- C X X X X Flashing DW 3 20 12 8 12 a RR 6 Neither 0 OLD- D Max Initial 4 4 15 6 4 15 6 Ped Inhibit 7 Usually"o" Sim Gap F X, Min Green 4 10 6 4 10 6 Sim Gap F }( X 5 Green 8 3.5 TBR 6 8 10 8 8 10 8 OLA Yellow 9 4.0 TABLE 2 Page 0 TTR 7 3 20 3 3 20 3 Miscellaneous(C+F+Key) OLB Green A 3.5 Yellow Observe Gap g Function I $I Value Passage 9 2.3 4.5 2.3 2.3 4.5 2.3 Yellow B 4.0 should Page ID 0 Green C 1 _' - Min Gap A 0.5 2.5 0.5 0.5 2.5 0.5 OLC always be Keys 8 - Yellow D 3.5 specified 441AW.„, 2 through F Add per Act B 1.2 1.2 :p714.4:; 3 use Green E OLA Red 4 Call/Active Yellow C 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 OLD Yellow F OLB Red 5 Display Red Clear D OLC Red 6 Red Revert E 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Kevboard Entries when not in Free Display A Advance 0 Column Advance OLD Red 7 Walk 2 F B Back E Enter and Advance Phase Number C Clear Display F Free Display 112131415[61719 RT OLE 8 To observe Cimino for an individual chase: Phase Conditions as shown on Free Display RT OLF 9 Enter C+A+F for Ring A(Phase 1-4)or 00 Initial Entry OC Yellow Aoinitialization Red Rest A enter C+B+F for Ring B(Phase 5-8) 02 WALK OD Red Clear Dv t+F+1 E Max Recall B 03 Flashing DW OE Red Revert (Use only when in flash) Flash Green C 05 Min Green 11 Gap Out 03 itr i 0 - . - 08 Rest t 2 Force Ott Phase Data Coo,/ I Advance WALK E 09 Passage 14 Max Out C+x+C+y+D mRestrictive Ph F Page I.D. 0 OB Added Initial 15 Red Revert Timed out x From Phase (x cannot be 3 or 8) -I y To Phase(s)-up to 3 at a time W • Shown on Call/Active Display Hall at Hunziker, Scoffins rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 3 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Lot a: Hall at Hunziker/Scoffins TABLE 7 1 of 2) Hardwire Dial 1 2 3 Conversion Offset l 1 I 2 I 3 1 r 2 1 3 I 1 i 2 I 3 T Coordination Timing (B+ Plan No. + Key) Parameter Y ai Plan 1 2 3 I 4 I 5 6 I 7 i 8 9 Number Cycle Length 0 1 2 Forceoffs 3 _ for Phase 4 indicated by 5 Key number 6 7 8 Offset 9 Permissive A Max. Dwell B _ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 C Lead Phases - - C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 1 D Coord. Phases 4 D Coord. Phases 7 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Pemr. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall 'F Min. Recall C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 'C Lead Phases 2 D Coord. Phases 5 I D Coord. Phases 8 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Penn. 2 Ph. _ E Penn. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases ' C Lead Phases C Lead Phases ,3 D Coord. Phases 6 D Coord. Phases a D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall TABLE 7 (2 of 2) Coordination Timing (B + D + Key 1 + Key 2) T 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 N Plan Parameter d Y 7 8 9 A B C D E F Key1 Cycle Length o 1 2 Forceoffs 3 for Phase 4 indicated by 5 Key number 6 7 8 Offset 9 Permissive A Max. Dwell B 1 2 3 4 51617 8 1 213141516 7 81 5_s,1 2_a a 7 8 • C Lead Phases l C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 10 D Coord. Phases 13 D Coord. Phases 16 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases _ 'C Lead Phases _ 'C Lead Phases 11 D Coord. Phases 14 D Coord. Phases 1 7 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. ■ ' F Min. Recall ' F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 11 D Coord. Phases 15 D Coord. Phases 18 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall Hall at Hunziker, Scoffins rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 7 TABLE 5 (1 of 2) TABLE 5 (2 of 2) cn i Time Clock Control (A+Code) Time Clock Control (A+Code) Time Clock Control (D+8+Code) Time Clock Control D+8+Code) o m E c S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S - a S M T W T F S m m m E Hour Mir. Func m E Hour Min. Func m E Hour Min. Func m E Hour Min. Func N W Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 W 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 W Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 W 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 m co 80 81 82 83 CO Cl C2 C3 80 81 82 83 CO Cl C2 C3 5 1 1 X-X_X X X 16 00 129 17 33 I 49 CD 84 85 86 87 C4 C5 C6 C7 84 85 86 87 C4 . C5 C6 C7 Pr 2 IX XIXIX X 18 00 128 18 I I 34 50 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 3 I I 19 35 51 8C 8D 8E 8F 8D SE 8F CC CD CE CF 8C CC CD CE CF 4 1 1 I _ 20 36 I I . 52 1 1 1 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 5 I I 21 - - - - 37 ' - - - 53 = s Co CD 94 95 96 97 D4 ' D5 D6 D7 94 95 96 97 D4 D5 D6 D7 6 11 22 38 I 54 0 a 0 98 99 9A 9B D8 D9 DA DB 98 99 9A 9B D8 D9 DA DB n. 7 1 23 39 I 55 - I I 9C 9D 9E 9F DC _ DE DF 9C 9D 9E 9F DC DD DE DF l 8 'I 1 I - - 24 40 - 56 I AO Al A2 A3 E0 E1 E2 E3 AO Al A2 A3 ED El E2 E3 9 1( 1 r [ 25 - - 41 - 1 57 I _ A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 r- 10 I - 26 42 - - 58 n m 11 A8 A9 AA AB 27 E8 E9 EA EB 43 A8 A9 AA AB 59 E8 E9 EA EB o II I 11 AC 'AD AE AF EC ED EE EF AC AD AE AF EC ED EE EF M 12 I 28 I _ I I 44 - 60 -- c c iag BO B1 B2 83 FO Fl F2 F3 BO B1 B2 B3 FO F1 F2 F3 ~ 13 I 1 29 45 I 61 I B4 B5 B6 B7 F4 F5 F6 F7 B4 B5 B6 B7 F4 F5 F6 F7 14 I I 30 - - - - = 46 62 I 1 B8 69 BA BB F8 F9 FA FR B8 B9 BA BB F8 F9 FA FB 0 15 I1 31 I I 47 63 III _ BC BD BE BF FC FD FE FF BC BD BE BF FC FD FE FF 16 32 I - 48 I - I 64 Event numbers are for reference only. Local TOD"Free"will override any plan received via an interconnect line. Hall at Hunziker, Scoffins rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 8 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Hall at I Location: m Table Numbers refer to Trafficview&Translink Burnham m TABLE 3 TABLE 6 (also see sheet 6) N Clock,EV and Misc. (C+Key) Miscellaneous (D+Code) Phase Rotation Diagram Function B Function Code Value Notes T. E.O.S. Dwg. Nos: �0 0-Off 1-On Clock Floating Ped 2E Month 0 (Ph.7&8 Not permitted) Date © Location C-6 3 uses Day of Week © Call!Active 10 Number 2F 193 Range 0 to 253 (t) Hour Display our 4 Sunday Coordination 0-Recall S �© Y_ Ped Recalls 3E 1 1-No Recall Second Q Rest in WALK 3F 0-Ott 1/10 Second 0 1-ON Phase Number Advance Warning Extend time for green Q©©Q©QQO End of Green 4E after sign turns on (2)(5) EUZEME 8 ®®®®®00lui' Advance Warning 4F Delay time for sign after Start Yellow 0..��...��... Start of Green phase turns yellow (2)(5) EVA Phases A .fil..fil... RR Red Clear 5E Length of all red EVE Phases 5 .,,.....'I.. after RR red flash EVC Phases Qm..p�..t..p� RR Clear Color 5F 0.Green, I.Rash EVD Phases D ..U7....(LI Yellow, 2-Flash Red liardicap Ped ©........ Non zero value reassigns NEMA Inputs 66 C1 inputs. (3) TABLE 3 Bus Delay 60 25,5 Delay time before Preemption Data (E+Key) preemption (4) Bus Timer #1 Extension of may preen for Function I $I Parameter I Timing 6E phases 288 (Free operation) 0 Delay Bus Timer p 3 Force off time for Ph 4 a B lonfy EVA 6F in Free operation) 1 Minimum 1 0 - no 2 Delay JHK Protocol 76 0.1 _ yes EVB 3 Minimum JHK Area No.& 7D Area No.0-7 and 1st digit local Local 001 -510 (1 i 4 Delay EVC EV minimum timed 0 - at start of call 5 Minimum I Start/end of call 1 -at end of call 6 Delay EV On Indicators 7F 0 - Oft, 1 - Rash, EVD 5 - solid indication (5) 7 Minimum 1 Overlaps 8 Red Revert 5.0 Railroad 9 Delay Notes A Minimum (1) JHK ID no.is formed by Area no.(0 to 7)and 3 digit Local no. Phase Number (001-510). Left most digits entered as x.x in location 7D and 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1,5 16 17 I E rightmost as xx in location 2F RR Clear Ph B ' (2)See Sheet 6.Location B+O+E RR Permit C (3)Ct pins 54,63,64,75,76,and 77.See sheet 6.Location B+O+D. RR OL Perm? D ". (4)Entering 25.5 in this location is the only way of disabling bus preempt. Nema field Ph E j (5)Ped yellow outputs,C1.35,36,37.and 38 am used by Rt.Turn ; F 1,1 .A` , Overlaps,EV on indicators,TOD/DOW programmable outputs, Fiber Optic sign for RR flash yellow clearance.and Advance Warning sign operation. Hall — rrnham rev2d (autoload).xls `'HEET 2 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Location: Hall at Burnham TABLE 1 Page 0 Phase Functions (O+Key) TABLE 1 Page 0 _ _ _ TABLE 2 Page 0 Function Y Phase Number• Phase Timing (Ph. No. + Key) Miscellaneous (9+Key) 112131415161718 Veh Recall 0 X, X Parameter Y Value Notes Ped Recall 1 x I L T r. m E Red Lock 2 Interval w Z . Z C] Yellow Lock 3 Short Pwr Dn 0 SpeedCoPrractl9n Phase Number Long Power Dn 1 Slowdown 11.19 Permit Phase 4�X X X X 9 Ped Phases 5 X X 1 1 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 1 7 I 8 EVA 2 Preemption Lead Phases 6 'X'X 'X X Max Green (21 15 40 40 18 c Delay Types: Double Entry 7 .0 EVB 3 Sequential 8 Max2/HFDW 1 15 50 50 18 a m a) EVC 4 Hold 1 Start Green 9 X X E �, a OLA-k. A'}( }( Walk 2 5 5 o Latch 2 OLB= B EVD 5 Both 3 oLC= c Flashing DW 3 14 12 a RR 6 Neither 0 OLD= D Max Initial 4 4 15 15 6 Exclusive E - Ped Inhibit 7 Usually"0" Sim Gap F X X' Min Green 5 4 10 10 6 Green 8 TBR 6 8 10 10 8 OLA TABLE 2 Pao e 0 TTR Yellow 9 4.0 7 3 20 20 3 Miscellaneous C+F+Ke ,�,,� Green A Overlap ( y) Observe Gap 8 ,�,.,. I �*M.'. , A OLB Yellow Function E Value Yellow B Time Page ID 0 Passage g 2.3 6.0 6.0 2.3 Green C should .` Q ;w Min Gap A 0.5 4.0 4.0 0.5 OLC always be Keys 8 Yellow D specified 7z^ of"?:?©4814 through F Add per Act g 2.4 2.4 "..,w, `;,."> use Green E © Yellow C 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 OLD OLA Red I_ Call/Active Yellow F OLB Red ©_ Display Red Clear D OLC Red Q_ Red Revert E 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Keyboard Entries when not in Free Display Walk 2 A Advance 0 Column Advance OLD Red � F B Back E Enter and Advance Phase Number C Clear Display F Free Display a©©IO©10611] RT OLE , . .. To observe timina for an individual phase: Phase Conditions as shown on Free Display ( .. 0 .. RT OLF lia........ Enter C.A.F for Ring A(Phase 1-4)or 00 Initial Entry OC Yellow Reinitialization Red Rest ga......u. enter C.B.F for Ring B(Phase 5-8) 02 WALK OD Red Clear D+1+F*1+E Max Recall V�........ 03 Flashing DW OE Red Revert (Use only when in flash) rg■■■■■■■■ 05 Min Green 11 Gap Out Flash Green U 08 Rest 12 Force Off Cn ,14 u • ® ,` ,tt k, Phase Data Copy Advance WALK 1{,3J........ 09 Passage 14 Max Out C+x.C+y+D fmn Restrictive Ph Ilia........ Page I.D. 0 08 Added Initial 15 Red Revert Timed out x From Phase Is cannot be 3 or B) --I y To Phase(s)-up to 3 at a time W • Shown on Call/Active Display Hall at Burnham rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 3 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Lc Al: Hall at Burnham TABLE 7 1 of 2) Hardwire Dial 1 2 3 Conversion Offset 1 1 2 1 3 _ 1 ( 2 3 I 1 _1 2 1 3 r Coordination Timing (B+ Plan No. + Key) Parameter Y ' 1 I 2 3 4 5 6 I 7 8 9 Plan Number Cycle Length 0 1 2 Forceoffs 3 for Phase 4 indicated by 5 Key number 6 7 8 Offset 9 Permissive A Max. Dwell B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8, 1121314 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8, C Lead Phases C Lead Phases - I C Lead Phases 1 D Coord Phases 4 D Coord. Phases 7 Perm.D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Per 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases C Lead Phases C Lead Phases r2 D Coord. Phases 5 D Coord. Phases a D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Penn. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases C Lead Phases C lead Phases D Coord. Phases D Coord. Phases D Coord. Phases 3 E Perm. 2 Ph. 6 E Perm. 2 Ph. 9 E Perm. 2 Ph. ,F Min. Recall F_Min. Recall F Min. Recall _ TABLE 7 (2 of 2) Coordination Timing (B + D + Key 1 + Key 2) - Plan T 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Number Parameter m , Y 7 8 9 A B C D E F Key 1 Cycle Length 0 1 2 Forceoffs 3 for Phase 4 _ indicated by 5 Key number 6 7 8 Offset 9 Permissive A Max. Dwell B 11213 4 5 6 7 8, 1 2 3 41516 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 C Lead Phases • - C Lead Phases • C Lead Phases •n D Coord. Phases 1 3 D Coord. Phases 16 D Coord. Phases E Penn. 2 Ph. E Penn. 2 Ph. _ E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall ' F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases IC Lead Phases IC Lead Phases ii D Coord. Phases 1 4 D Coord. Phases 1 7 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. 'F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases _ C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 1 2 D Coord. Phases 1 5 D Coord. Phases 1 8 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Penn. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall Hall at Burnham rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 7 TABLE 5 (1 of 2) TABLE 5 (2 of 2) cn Time Clock Control (A+Code) Time Clock Control (A+Code) Time Clock Control (D+8+Code) Time Clock Control D+8+Code) o m S M T W T F S S M T W T F S - S M T W T F S . , S M T W T F S m m m E Hour Min. Func i E Hour Min. Func 5°. E Hour Min. Func m E. Hour''Min. Func m w Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 w Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 L 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 u-1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 m 80 81 82 83 _ CO Cl C2 C3 80 81 82 83 CO Cl C2 C3 1 IX XIXIX X_ 06 30 129 17 X X X X XIX X 05 15 131 33I I 49 I CD 84 85 86 87 C4 C5 C6 C7 84 85 86 87 C4 C5 C6 C7 2 LXIXIX X X 09 30 128 18 X X X X X X X 22 15 132 34 I I 50 I I I 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 3 X'XIXIXX 15 30 129 19 35 1 1 I 51 I I I I 8C 8D 8E 8F CC CD CE CF 8C 8D BE 8F CC CD CE CF 4 IXIXIX X X 18 30 128 20 36 1 1 52 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 5 1 21 1 37 53 11 - II (D CD 94 95 96 97 D4 05 D6 D7 94 95 96 97 D4 D5 D6 D7 6 22 38 r 54 I I I o a CD 98 99 9A 9B 08 D9 DA DB 98 99 9A 9B ( I I I I D8 D9 DA DB a [ 23 39 55 I III - 9C 9D 9E 9F DC DD DE DF 9C 9D 9E 9F DC DD DE DF 8 J 1 1 1 24 40 - 56 I 1 AO Al A2 A3 E0 El E2 E3 AO Al A2 A3 EO El E2 E3 9 1 1 1 1 1 25 - 41 I I I 5 7 ' 1 1 1 _A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 r 10 1 1 1 1 1 26 42 I I I - 58 I CO A8 A9 AA AB E8 E9 EA EB A8 A9 AA AB E8 E9 EA EB c 11 I 1 27 43 I 59 I I I I 0 AC AD AE AF EC ED EE EF AC AD AE AF EC ED EE EF I c 12 1 1 1 1 - 28 44 1 1 60 ' I 1 1 1 1 BO 81 B2 B3 FO Fl F2 F3 BO B1 B2 B3 FO Fl F2 F3 a 13 I - - - 29 - 45 61 1 - - _ B4 B5 B6 B7 F4 F5 F6 F7 B4 B5 B6 B7 F4 F5 F6 F7 3 14 I I l I 30 46 1 62 111 1 B8 B9 BA BB F8 F9 FA FB B8 B9 BA BB F8 F9 FA FB 15 1 1 1 31 47 - 63 I BC BD BE BF FC FD FE FF BC BD BE BF FC FD FE FF 16 + I -1 I 32 48 64 _ 1 I I Event numbers are for reference only. Local TOD"Free"will override any plan received via an interconnect line. Hall at Burnham rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 8 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: rn 72nd at Hunziker I Location: rr1 Table Numbers refer to Trafficview&Translink rn TABLE 3 TABLE 6 (also see sheet 6) N Clock,EV and Misc. (C+Key) Miscellaneous (D+Code) Phase Rotation Diagram Function II Function I Code Value Notes Year 0 0=on 1.On T. E.O.S. Dwg. Nos: Month 1 Clock Floating Fed 2E (Ph.7&8 Not permitted) Date 2 Location C+3 uses Day of Week 3 Call/Active ID Number 2F 31 Range 0 to 253 (1) Hour Display our q Sunday-I Coordination 3E 1 0=Recall Minute 5 Ped Recalls 1=No Recall Second 6 Rest in WALK 0..Oft 1/10 Second 7 3F 1=ON Phase Number Advance Warning Extend time for green 112 3 4151617 8 End of Green 4E after sign turns on (2)(5) -T: ti3 ,,,,;e, ;;,,,,. „,„ Advance Warning 4F Delay Time for sign after Start Yellow 9 Start of Green phase turns yellow (2)(5) • EVA Phases A }( RR Red Clear 5E Length of all red EVB Phases B alter RR red flash EVC Phases C }( RR Clear Color 5F 0=Green. 1 -Flash EVD Phases D X X Yellow, 2=Flash Red i+ardcep Ped E NEMA Inputs 66 Non zero value reassigns CI inputs. (3) TABLE 3 Bus Delay 6D 25.5 Delay time before Preemption Data (E+Key) preemption (4) Bus Timer a 1 Extension of wee peen for Function a Parameter Timing 6E phases 2 16 (Free operation) 0 Delay Bus Timer n 3 Force off tie for P5 a 8 (o4 EVA 6F m in Free operation) II Minimum 1 0 = no © Delay JHK Protocol 76 0.1 = yes EVB © Minimum 1 JHK Area No.& 7D Area No.D-7 and Delay 0 1st digit local Local 001-510 (1) EVC © EV minimum timed 7E 0 = at start of call Minimum 1 Start!end of call 1 =at end of call 6 Delay EV On Indicators 7F 0 = Off, 1 = Flash, EVD 5 = solid indication (5) FA Minimum 1 Overlaps 8 Red Revert 5.0 9 Delay Notes Railroad A Minimum (1) JHK ID no.is formed by Area no.(0 to 7)and 3 digit Local no. Phase Number (001-510). Left most digits entered as x.x in location 7D and 1111©F113©1171A11:1 rightmost as xx in location 2F RR Clear Ph g •....... (2)See Sheet 6,Location B+0+E RR Permit 01........ (3)C1 pins 54,63,64,75,76,and 77.See sheet 6,Location B+0+D. RR OL Permt D .111.1.1011;i1;1172 (4)Entering 25.5 in this location is the only way of disabling bus preempt. Sierra Hod Ph ©........ (5)Ped yellow outputs,C1-35,36,37,and 38 am used by Rt.Turn ai ._:1. Ug®t*VAIEnj Overlaps.EV on indicators,TOD/DOW programmable outputs, Fiber Optic sign for RR flash yellow clearance,and Advance Warning sign operation. 72nd ' tlJnziker rev2d (autoload).xls QHEET 2 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Location: 72nd at Hunziker TABLE 1 Page 0 Phase Functions (O+Key) TABLE 1 Page 0 TABLE 2 Page 0 Function Y Phase Number• Phase Timing (Ph. No. + Key) Miscellaneous (9+Key) 1(21314151617(8 `� T Veh Recall 0 X - X 'L' p p Parameter Y Value Notes Ped Recall 1 0 2 Red Lock 2 >. 9 m m Interval Short Pwr Dn 0 4 Clock correction Yellow Lock 3 z speed up 1-9 Permit Phase 4 X X X X Phase Number Long Power Dn 1 4 slowdavn 11-19 Ped Phases 5 X 'X _ 1 1 2 1 3 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 EVA 2 Preemption Lead Phases 6 X X X X Max Green p 17 65 65 20 Delay Types: Double Entry 7 O EVB 3 Sequential 8 Max2/HFDW 1 17 65 65 20 n 0 EVC 4 Hold 1 Start Green 9 X X E m Q OLA- A Walk 2 5 5 2 0 fT — Latch 2 oLB= e EVD 5 Both 3 OLC- c Flashing DW 3 16 13 RR 6 Neither 0 • OLD- 0 Max Initial 4 4 15 15 4 Exclusive E Ped Inhibit 7 Usually"0" Sim Gap _ F X Xa Min Green 5 4 10 10 4 Green 8 TBR 6 8 10 10 8 OLA TABLE 2 Paee 0 TTR 7 3 20 20 3 Yellow 9 Miscellaneous(C+F+Key) Observe Gap ; °Ir" ,, , _ OLB Green A Yellow p Yellow B Function © Value p 8 Time Page ID Q_ Passage g 2.3 4.2 4.2 2.3 Green C should I' ° - Keys 8 Min Gap A 0.5 2.2 2.2 0.5 OLC Yellow D speclwa if be 4..'0. through F Add per Act g 1.2 1.2 Green E © use Yellow C 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 OLD OLA Red a_ Call/Active Yellow F OLB Red ©_ Display Red Clear D 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 OLC Red 0_ Red Revert E 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Keyboard Entries when not in Free Disolav Walk 2 A Advance 0 Column Advance OLD Red � F B Back E Enter and Advance Phase Number O©®CI®LIMEI C Clear Display F Free Display RT OLE Il�ll,7lll 11.11l�lll�lll�lll 1.11. To observe amino for an individual ohase. Phase Conditions as shown on Free Disolav RT OLF Ira........ Enter C+A+F for Ring A(Phase 1-4)or 00 Initial Entry OC Yellow Jieinitializa[iori Red Rest u�e�........ enter C+8+F for Ring B(Phase 5-8) 02 WALK 00 Red Clear D+1*F+1+E Max Recall I�1........ �YY 03 Flashing DW OE Red Revert (Use only when in flash) Flash Green ........ 05 Min Green 11 Gap Out 0 08 Rest 12 Force Off Phase Data Goov Advance WALK 1111........ 09 Passage 14 Max Out C+%+C+y.D mRestrictive 7b I�........ Page I.D. 0 06 Added Initial 15 Red Revert Timed out x From Phase (x cannot be 3 or 8) —I y To Phases)-up to 3 at a time W • Shown on Call/Active Display 72nd at Hunziker rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 3 Date sheet in effect: Date sheet voided: Lo 1; 72nd at Hunziker TABLE 7 (1 of 2) Hardwire 1 Dial 1 2 3 Conversion Offset - 1 ( 2 _ 3 1 ( 2 [ 3 1 ( 2 ( 3 r Coordination Timing (B + Plan No. + Key) Parameter al ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 I 7 8 9 Plan Number Cycle Length 0 100 100 80 1 36 36 14 2 Forceoffs 3 for Phase 4 indicated by 5 Key number 6 14 7 8 22 22 31 Offset 9 74 83 61 Permissive A 2 2 16 Max. Dwell B 30 30 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8, 1 21314 5 6 7 8 1I,INnflfl,in C Lead Phases C Lead Phases C Lead Phases taiiii:ii 1 D Coord. Pharos 4 D Coord. Phases 7 D Coord Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall IiIiXEMMEMINIE.1111. C Lead Phases ea. • ases A_pmpt_: H_la_MMIIIMMIIIIIIIMI 2 D Coord Phases 5 D Coord Phases 8 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases ea. • ases AINK4mom: C Lead Phases .3 0 Coord. Phases 6 D Coord. Phases '' 9 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. _ E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall TABLE 7 (2 of 2) Coordination Timing (B + D + Key 1 + Key 2) T Plan 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Number Parameter c, Y ' 7 8 9 A B C D E F Key 1 Cycle Length 0 1 2 Forceoffs _ 3 for Phase 4 indicated by 5 Key number 6 7 8 Offset 9 Permissive A Max. Dwell B 1121314 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 C Lead Phases - C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 10 D Coord. Phases 13 D Coord. Phases 16 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perrn. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall 'C_Lead Phases 'C Lead Phases C Lead Phases 1 1 D Coord. Phases 14 D Coord. Phases 17 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall F Min. Recall F Min. Recall C Lead Phases IC Lead Phases C Lead Phases 12 D Coord. Phases 15 D Coord. Phases 18 D Coord. Phases E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. E Perm. 2 Ph. F Min. Recall _ F Min. Recall F Min. Recall 72nd at Hunziker rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 7 TABLE 5 (1 of 2) TABLE 5 (2 of 2) Cl) Time Clock Control (A+Code) Time Clock Control (A+Code) Time Clock Control (D+8+Code) Time Clock Control D+8+Code) o m E0SMTWT' FS SMTWTFS SMTWTFS E. 2SMTWTFS 0 m m E Hour Min. Func m E m Hour Min. Func E Hour Min. Func ro E � Hour Mm. Func to W Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 w Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 W Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 W Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 m 80 81 82 83 CO Cl C2 C3 80 81 82 83 CO Cl C2 C3 9. 1 XXIXXX 06 00 5 17 XXXXXXX05 15 131 33 1 a9 84 85 86 87 C4 C5 C6 C7 84 85 86 87 C4 C5 C6 C7 0 2 X_XIX X X 09 30 7 18 X XIX XIXIXIX 22 15 132 34 ' - I -- 50 I i 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 88 89 8A 8B C8 C9 CA CB 3 XX_ XXX 14 30 6 19 35 I I I 51 I 8C 8D 8E 8F CC CD CE CF 8C 8D 8E 8F CC CD CE CF a X x XI X_x 18 30 7 20 I 36 I I 52 - I ,, -- 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 90 91 92 93 DO D1 D2 D3 5 X X X X X 20 00 20 21 I 37 ' I I -_ 53 J 94 95 96 97 D4 D5 D6 D7 94 95 96 97 D4_ D5 D6 D7 < 6 X X 09 00 7 22 38 54 Q m 98 99 9A 9B D8 D9 DA DB 98 99 9A 9B D8 D9 DA DB n 7 XI I I X 18 00 20 23 39 I 55 I I I I 9C 9D 9E 9F DC DD DE DF 9C 9D 9E 9F DC DD DE DF 8 I 24 ' 40 I _ 56 1 I AO Al A2 A3 EO El E2 E3 AO Al A2 A3 EC/ El E2 E3 9 - I - - 25 41 - 57 I I I I I A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 A4 A5 A6 A7 E4 E5 E6 E7 r- 10 26 ' - - 42 58 I o o 1 - m AS A9 AA AB E8 E9 EA EB AS A9 AA AB E8 E9 EA EB e 11 I 27 ' 43 I - - = 59 I AC AD AE AF EC ED EE EF AC AD AE AF EC ED EE N _, EF 12 I l - 28 I I 44 I - I 60 I BO B1 B2 B3 FO Fl F2 F3 BO B1 B2 B3 FO Fl F2 F3 13 I 29 I 45 - I I 61 I I l c` B4 B5 B6 87 F4 F5 F6 F7 B4 B5 B6 B7 F4 F5 F6 F7 N 14 I 30 I 46 62 I I I ro B8 B9 BA BB F8 F9 FA FB B8 B9 BA BB F8 F9 FA FB 15 - - 31 47 63 I BC- - FF FE FD FC BD BE BF BC BD BE BF FC FD FE FF 16 I 32 - - 48 I 64 III Event numbers are for reference only. Local TOD "Free"will override any plan received via an interconnect line. 72nd at Hunziker rev2d (autoload).xls SHEET 8 4 CHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING LLc Warrants F1>urw'!C-3. Watrr nt:1, PP:ik How - j ... . - .. I I ;� I - - ,. ... .. ... "~----...-....-"-s.�.....: i ..f i':1:,,1_ri. . 'f. '_F.. II Pr. - r - . .1 , . Peak hour volume warrant for signalization data. Minor Street Hip tea t°f Mato!Street Slicer Volume Approach signal tr,le•sr:�?wnT^—.—_ 111 Ara'ysis!'Ynlxf -----"r- Speed Volume Lanes Volume lanes Wavanted? 1mphl {vph) •;#r i ph) lit) The Knoll at Tigard lAttached Senior Housing in the Proposed MUR-1 Zoning]. 2011 Total Traffic - AM Peak 917 2 No Hall Boulevard and Knoll Drive 30 1 1 2011 Total Traffic - PM Peak 1224 0 No Site Access and Knell Drive 2011 Total Traffic - AM Peak 20 16 1 1 1 No 2011 Total Traffic - PM Peak 12 No Alternative Scenario(Apartments in the Existing R-4.5 Zoning). Hall Boulevard and Kno!I Drive 2011 Total Traffic - AM Peak :SG 926 1 2 -1 No 2011 Total Traffic - PM Peak 1243 0 No 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak 19 19 No Site Access and Knoll Drive 20 1 1 _ —_ _ 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak 29 __- 9_. .__----No ------ . Source' Mentiaf.>'t Un,•form Traffic Cun!in Devices(U1JTCD) 2003 Editioi eCharhonneau Erlcinorrit l.L( PROJECT #08-45 The Knoll at Tigaro DATE: 11.17 08 Oregon Department of Tf1....sportation - Right Turn Lane Cr .a I. Criterion 1• Vehicular Volume The vehicular volume criterion is intended for app!cation where the volume of the intersection traffic is the principal reason for considering installation of a right turn lane The vehicular volume criteria is deterrr ned using the curve in Figure 1. x ct k . ,tc, + Right Turn Lane Criterion r il .J Y 800 ! elf rare `� 700 - 7, coo : 't i_1 500 300 —� " - 100 '—..-- ------. _ .. __■...,. .. _. L .:.-,-- 0 10 2C 30 40 SC 60 73 60 :10 1CO 110 120 13C Pigh:-Turn Volume\-44 t r r. '2A:i t sa:•.fr rat. , ■ s:::.t.?ise earls t,,f�pr,r-:9a1 —�- _:: .tatarn:hrc a.0 a hug uaa sari:s 0 t.. ..rC.e=z a;..:La:....:$44 I rat Nrn:tva:.:w►l+d. Figure I IRcvarcirig Right TLrns it 5'o rags '-r;ersectiol RAod'. Aims 5 Per iad Speed -Volume Advancing �, tdrinl Lrn l.rile ivt-h t Reg d;:., - 2008 Extg Traffic, AM Peak 1936 16 Shoulder 2008 Extg Traffic, PM Peak 1415 27 Yes 2311 Bkgd Traffic, AM Peak 2043 17 Shoulder 2011 Bkgd Traffic, PM Peak 1493 29 Yes _ Current(R-4.5)Zoning LSingle Farnil t 2011 Total Traffic, Afd1 Peak 2043 17 Shoulder 2011 Total Traffic, PM Peak 1493 33 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, AM Peak 2:576 22 Yes Pacific Highway 2025 Planning Horizon. PM Peak 1590 37 Yes (Highway 99W) --- 35 mph F.B RT Pro sed Senior Adult Housing and Mail (56 kmh) .- - Eioulevara 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak 2043 17 Shoulder 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak 1493 29 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, AM Peak 2576 22 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, PM Peak 1890 37 Yes Alternate Scenario Multi-famtl.x.Iapartrnertsl 7011 Total Traffic, AM Peak 2043 17 . Shoulder 2011 Total Traffic, PM Peak 1494 30 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, AM Peak 2576 22 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, PM Peak ti - 1891 38 Yes lieCharbonneau l'nsnnrrnntt I I { PROJECT #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard DATE: 11 i0 C3 Oregon Department of Transportation - Right Turn Lane Criteria I Criterion 1 Vehicular Volume The vehicular volume criterion is intended for application where the volume of the intersection traffic is the principal reason for considering installation of a right turn lane The vehicular volume criteria is determined using the curve in Figure 1; ) x_.. - Right Turn Lane Criterion Li l —a •X03 44t raft T7 ti .0J - .-._.._..__...- c L 600 -I-- :.:'z - — — 5°0 r 400 300 .--------------- - 200 - � - 100 r---.. ,._ � - i — � . L:. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Rlgtir-Twit V'1rw e :1-;::]) j `.:c-:. _:tcrc::I.)r_ia::un.-ru.r ith_:Is 'mai w'-•Ftr 14.1 .=A,Wri_urr_::At r rat:arra rc'::rc:-sa.t^c rim}.',,::-sti- t T.i6:ul_Lai :xraiad Figure 1 Advarr_ini R i;ht TJ'rs i-1 Intersectvin Mc- I Aralysis PenDu Speed attune Awah:ing bl�rayE Read i;ftj tvnhi Voluni i ph: 1 1 2008 Extg Traffic. AM Peak 1169 102 Yes 2008 Extg Traffic. PM Peak 2078 107 Yes 7011 Bkgd Traffic, AM Peak 1255 108 Yes 2011 Bkgd Traffic, PM Peak 2193 113 Ye.s Current(R-4 5)Zoning (Single Family) 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak 1255 108 Yes 2011 Total Traffic, PM Peak 2194 113 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, AM Peak 1581 126 Yes Pacific Highway 2025 Planning Horizon, PM Peak 2776 143 Yes (Highway 99W) WB R T Proposed Senior Adult Housing 35 6 mph and Hall (56 kmh) - Boulevard 2011 Total Traffic, AM Peak 1256 106 Yes 2011 Total Traffic, PM Peak 2194 113 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, AM Peak 1582 136 Yes 2025 Planning Horizon, PM Peak _ 2776 143 Yes Alternate Scenario Multi-family(apartments) 2011 Total Traffic, AM Peak 1256 108 . Yes 2011 Total Traffic. PM Peak 2197 113 Yes 2025 Planning Honzon, AM Peak 1562 136 Yes 2025 Fannin* Horizon PM Peak 2779 143 Yes lieCharbonneau i'9cif?Ci ring LLC PROJECT $08.45 The Knoll at Tigard DA I E 11 20.08 OgCHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING mac Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18120089:56 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 9:56 am -A -► 1 4- 4\ t e ` 1 1 -) -• p r '- ■ t I' `► 1 I no.,m.at __ .- > MST , 1 fir...t m erl. sta slsa - : - - . .- Lane Configurations vl 14+ v` 't'+I. 4 r 11 1+ Lane Configurations $ 4. 4. Volume(vph) 129 1791 16 149 938 102 42 106 327 227 154 75 Volume(vervh) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 536 0 13 317 0 Ideal Flow lvpnpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb,pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 D 0 1 631 0 15 373 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(Pos) 4.0 Said.Flow(pros) 1770 3465 1703 4788 1775 1553 1787 1806 Percent Blockage 0 Fh Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 3465 1703 4788 1775 1553 1787 1806 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) 2 2 Ad).Flow(vph) 132 1828 16 152 957 104 43 108 334 232 157 77 Upstream signal(0) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 146 0 15 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Lane Group Flow(vph) 132 1844 0 152 1050 0 0 151 188 232 219 0 vC,conflicting volume 1039 1039 376 1038 1039 631 376 631 Confl.Peds.(#/hr) 6 4 1 vC1,stage 1 cunt vol 407 407 633 633 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2,stage 2 coot vol 633 633 405 407 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1019 1019 325 1017 1019 631 325 631 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 IC.single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 tC.2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 11.5 63.0 12.0 63.5 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 tF(st 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 22 Effective Green,g(s) 11.5 63.0 12.0 63.5 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 20 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated gtC Ratio 0.10 0.52 0.10 0.53 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity(vehrh) 400 404 688 408 411 485 1169 962 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 fY1se4ti• - EB 1 Mel 13111 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 volume Total 2 632 388 Lane Grp Cap(von) 170 1819 17D 2534 207 181 208 211 Volume Left 0 1 15 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.53 c0.09 0.22 0.09 c0.13 0.12 Volume Right 1 D 0 v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 cSH 509 1189 962 etc Rah) D.78 1.01 0.89 0.41 0.73 1.04 1.12 1.04 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.02 Uniform Delay,dt 53.0 28.5 53.4 17.0 51.2 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(R) 0 0 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 110 Control Delay(s) 12.1 0.0 0.5 Incremental Delay.d2 19.6 24.5 40.0 0.5 12.1 77.8 96.8 72.2 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 72.6 53.0 93.4 17.5 63.3 130.8 149.8 1252 Approach Delay(s) 12.1 0.0 0.5 Level of Service E D F B E F F F Approach LOS B Approach Delay(s) 54.3 27.0 109.8 137.4 Approach LOS D C F F 011,1011111iflanrt M_MIEIa Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.6% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 622 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.02 Actuated Cycle Length.(51 120.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Ubtizahon 93.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report MEO-Charbenneau Engineering LLC Page 1 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/HunzikerStreet&Hall Boulevard 11/18120089:56 am 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 9:56 am -• 1 e ~ k t P `► 1 41 } 4\ 1 1 1 WIIUgIM 11�_' Mownsol a BR Nat. NOT SBT BR Lane Configurations a ?r i+ r+ Lane Configurations ∎I P wit ? P Volume(vph) 86 66 13 68 34 73 7 378 291 91 198 2 Volume(vph) 67 213 132 659 213 62 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Uhl.Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb,pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Sato.Flow(prof) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prot) 1801 1713 1468 1357 1682 1641 1800 Said Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Permitted D.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Said.Flow(pear) 1801 1713 1468 1357 1682 1641 1800 Adj.Flow(vph) 79 251 155 775 251 73 Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.87 0.97 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.67 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 157 0 0 0 48 Ad).Flow(vph) 99 76 15 78 39 84 8 434 334 105 228 2 Lane Group Flow(vph) 79 94 155 775 251 25 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 74 0 22 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 14% 7% 3% 4% 6% 10% Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 187 0 0 117 10 8 746 0 105 230 0 Turn Type proves Prot Perm Con0.Peds.(#!hr) 1 2 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% 0% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permitted Phases 8 2 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Pmt Actuated Green.G(s) 4.5 15.7 11.2 29.6 14.4 14.4 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Effective Green.g(s) 4.5 15.7 112 29.6 14.4 14.4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated glC Ratio 3.11 0.37 0.27 0.70 0.34 0.34 Actuated Green.G(s) 13.7 11.5 11.5 1.3 43.5 9.4 50.6 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Effective Green,g(s) 13.7 11.5 11.5 1.3 43.5 9.4 50.6 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.47 0.10 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 169 706 466 1285 613 502 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.04 0.09 c0.42 0.14 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Penn 0.03 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 265 212 181 19 786 166 978 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.13 0.33 0.60 0.41 0.05 Ws Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.07 0.01 c0,44 c0.06 0.13 Uniform Delay,dl 17.7 8.7 12.4 3.2 10.6 9.3 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 etc Ratio 0.71 0.55 0.06 0.42 0.95 0.63 024 Incremental Delay,d2 20 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.0 Uniform Delay,d1 37.8 38.4 36.0 45.5 23.7 402 11.1 Delay(s) 19.7 8.8 12.9 4.0 11.0 9.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service B A B A B A Incremental Delay.d2 8.3 3.1 0.1 14.4 20.3 7.6 0.1 Approach Delay(5) 11.4 5.5 10.7 Delay(s) 46.1 41.5 36.1 59.9 44.1 47.8 112 Approach LOS B A B Level of Service D D D E D D B sonsgisiawmisy Approach Delay(s) 46.1 392 44.2 22.7 Approach LOS D D D C HCM Average Control Delay 7.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 1iO 1 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 42.1 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 39.0 HCM Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.4% ICU Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Analysis Period(mm) 15 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 93.1 Suni of lost time(sl 15.0 c Critical Lane Group Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 3014V AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report #05-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 3014V AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light:Report ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/20089:56 am 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/181200810:00am 1 1 1 1 4 • 1 (' ' 4\ t P ` l 1 Iwr...d ex_ - '-" ' - :ME eli7tlateaat ESL 91Ii� leer 1111=11111Mier Pft eR Lane Configurations r 1 tit I+ Lane Configurations ) 'fl. ) 441. 4 f ) To Volume(vph) 254 264 141 665 421 260 Volume(vph) 186 1202 27 182 1789 107 91 205 228 232 164 101 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Ulil.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frpb.ped/b lies 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 D.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0 95 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Said.Flow(prat) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Ftt Permitted 3.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Setd.Flow(pens) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Sat.Flow(prof) 1770 3490 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.89 0.89 0.69 0.89 0.89 0.89 FII Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Ad).Flow(vph) 285 297 158 747 473 292 Setd.Flow(perm) 1770 3490 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 RTOR Reduction(vph; 0 236 D 0 25 0 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0,97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Lane Group Flow(vph) 285 61 158 747 740 0 Adz.Flow(vph) 192 1239 28 188 1844 110 94 211 235 239 169 104 Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3% 10% RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 170 0 16 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Lane Group Flow(vph) 192 1266 0 188 1949 0 0 305 65 239 257 0 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 Conti.Peds.(it/hr) 14 9 5 16 Permitted Phases 8 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% Actuated Green,G(s) 20.5 20.5 11.4 71.5 56.1 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Effective Green,g(s) 20.5 203 11.4 71.5 56.1 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 020 0.11 0.72 0.56 Permitted Phases 9 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Actuated Green,G(s) 17.0 60.4 16.1 59.5 25.5 25.5 21.0 21.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Effective Green,g(s) 17.0 604 16.1 59.5 25.5 25.5 21.0 21.0 Lane Grp Cap Ivph) 343 318 196 1246 957 Actuated g!C Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.12 0.42 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.15 vls Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.09 043 c043 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.D 4.0 v/s Ratlo Perm 0.04 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.D 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.19 0.81 0.60 0.77 Lane Grp Cap(vphi 215 1506 204 2136 338 291 268 248 Uniform Delay.dl 38.1 32.9 43.2 7.1 17.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.36 0.11 c0.39 c0.16 0.13 c0.16 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 Incremental Delay,d2 15.6 0.3 20.9 2.1 5.1 vh Ratio 0.89 0.84 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.22 0.89 1.04 Delay(s) 53.7 332 64.2 9.2 23.1 Uniform Delay.dl 60.6 35.5 61.3 37.8 56.0 48.8 58.4 59.5 Level of Service DC E AC Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Approach Delay(s) 43.2 18.8 23.1 Incremental Delay,d2 33.8 5.8 41.5 7.4 26.0 0.4 28.7 66.7 Approach LOS D B C Delay(s) 94.4 41.3 102.9 45.2 82.0 492 87.1 126.2 IlLi ..--. ....71-: 71 _- s -- Level of Service F D F D F D F F 0 HCM Average Control Delay 26.6 HCM Level of Service C Approach LO S D D F Sy(s) 46.D 50.3 67.7 E F 108. Approach LO HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 YMaardfaa1 ii V Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.9% ICU Level of Service C HCM Average Control Delay 58.0 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93 c Crtical Lane Group Actuated Cycle Length(s) 140.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 942% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Lght: Report 008.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light:Report MEG-Charbcnneau Engineering LLC Page 5 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:00 am 3:Scoff ins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/200810:00 am I -► 1 r ♦- ` 4\ t r `► 1 d - -♦ 1 r ~ k- 4\ t r `• 1 4/ Wilmot all UT ER. iel MST RIR MK NIT .I- .i SOT SIR Ibroaot! EBL EST BR MIL WBT WBR Pal NBT NOR SBL SBT MR Lane Configurations 4. 4. 4. Lane Configurations 4. 4 r '5 k '1 S. Volume(vel'h) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 676 2 8 473 0 Volume(vph) 49 12 53 281 159 215 21 414 t03 58 329 1 Sgn Control Stop Slop Free Free Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Total Lost time is) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.9' 0.91 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 743 2 9 520 0 Frpb,pedibdces 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Frt 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(fOs) 4.0 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Percent Blockage 0 Satd.Flow(prat) 1693 1830 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Right tum tare(yell) Flt Permitted 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Satd,Flow(perm) 1693 1830 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Median storage veh) 2 2 Peak-hour`actor.PHF 0.96 896 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 896 0.96 0.96 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 Adi.Flow(vph) 51 12 55 293 166 224 22 431 107 60 343 1 pX,platoon unblocked 0.78 0.78 0.96 0.78 0.78 0.76 0.96 0.76 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 32 0 0 0 167 0 9 0 0 0 0 vC,conflicting volume 1284 1285 523 1281 1284 744 523 745 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 86 0 0 459 57 22 529 0 60 344 0 vC1,stage 1 cont vol 540 540 744 744 Cont.Peds.(Phi') 1 2 vC2,stage 2 cunt vol 744 745 537 540 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% vCu unblocked vol 1106 1108 482 1102 1106 503 482 504 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot rC single(s) 7.1 6.5 62 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 C.2 stage Is) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Permitted Pnases 4 tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 22 2.2 Actuated Green.G(s) 8.1 20.9 20.9 2.5 31.5 6.7 34.7 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 Effecbve Green,g(s) 8.1 20.9 20.9 2.5 31.5 6.7 34.7 cM capacity(veh/h) 344 343 564 349 348 434 1045 B12 Actuated RIC Ratio 0.10 0.25 025 0.03 0.38 0.08 0.42 rilltikftlAIN i - _ _,f -e7-4-7 _ jr Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Volume Total 0 745 529 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Left 0 0 9 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 167 465 399 55 685 138 786 Volume Right 0 2 0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.25 0.01 c0.30 c0.04 0.18 cSH 1700 1045 812 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.99 0.14 0.40 0.77 0.43 0.44 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 1 Uniform Delay,dl 35.2 30.5 23.7 39.1 222 35.9 16.8 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane LOS A A Incremental Delay.d2 2.7 38.0 0.2 4.7 5.4 2.2 0.4 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.3 Delay(s) 37.9 68.5 23.9 43.8 27.6 38.1 172 Approach LOS A Level of Service D E C D C D B Approach Delay(s) 37.9 53.9 28.3 20.3 YtordlonStwr eg Approach LOS D D C C Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.0% ICU Level of Service A R Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Average Control Delay 37.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 82.2 Sum of lost time(s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 758% CU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 c Cntical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light:Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light:Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:00 am 6'Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/2008 10:00 am ti 4\ t 4/ J 4, t l ./ Miament EBL EBR NBL GBT SBT SBR litivanrrt.- E81. EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations k i` 't 4 ? it Lane Configurations /I l " I I. Volume(vph) 72 243 191 566 583 73 Volume(vph) 139 250 133 719 546 390 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane UIiI.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/btkea 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Frpb,ped/blkes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 120 1.00 0.85 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.94 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prat) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Satd.Flow(prat) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1734 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Satd.Flow(perm) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1734 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Ad.Flow(vph) 77 261 205 609 627 78 Ad.Flow(vph) 142 255 136 734 557 398 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 125 0 0 0 27 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 222 0 0 23 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 77 136 205 609 627 51 Lane Group Flow(vph) 142 33 136 734 932 0 Confl.Pads,(#/hr) 1 5 Confl.Peds.(#/hr) 2 1 1 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm Turn Type Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green.G(s) 6.4 19.5 13.1 45.3 28.2 28.2 Actuated Green,G(s) 13.1 13.1 11.3 78.9 63.6 Effective Green,g(s) 6.4 19.5 13.1 45.3 28.2 28.2 Effective Green,g(s) 13.1 13.1 11.3 78.9 63.6 Actuated gIC Ratio 0.11 0.33 0.22 0.76 0.47 0.47 Actuated glC Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.79 0.64 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 190 619 396 1414 980 742 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 234 203 200 1470 1103 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.05 c0.11 0.33 c0.34 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.08 039 cO54 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ra0o 0.41 0.22 0.52 0.43 0.71 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.16 0.68 0.50 0.84 Uniform Delay,dl 24.9 14.6 20.5 2.6 12.5 8.6 Uniform Delay,d1 41.0 38.6 42.6 3,7 14.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 1.4 02 1.1 02 2.7 0.0 Incremental Delay,d2 4.4 0.4 9.1 1.2 8.0 Delay(s) 26.3 14.6 21.7 2.8 15.3 8.6 Delay(s) 45.4 39.0 51.7 4.9 22.3 Level of Service C B C A B A Level of Service D 0 D A C Approach Delay(s) 17.4 7.5 14.5 Approach Delay(s) 413 12.2 223 Approach LOS B A B Approach LOS D B C HCM Average Control Delay 12.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 59.7 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.6% CU Level of Service B Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group c Critical Lane Group #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light:Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 MEG-Cherbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:04 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:04 am 1 r 4 4N t e `. 4 4' I -• l c 4- t 4\ t o Movement .i .-fir F& MIT '880 Sea Mwsorat i9L BT MR Wet `lb. MBT lIT $8R Lane Configurations I'S +4 1. 4 'I ;. Lane Configurations 4. 4. 4. Volume(vph) 136 1890 17 157 990 108 44 112 345 240 163 79 Volumeiveh/h) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 566 0 14 334 0 Ideal Flow(vpnpl) 1900 1900 1900 190C 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Slop Stop Free Free Total Lost hme(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane U01.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb,pedlblkes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 666 0 16 393 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Fn 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1 00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(Ws) 4.0 Satd.Flow(prof) 1770 3464 1703 4767 1775 1553 1787 1807 Percent Blockage 0 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Said.Flow(peon) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 139 1929 17 160 1010 110 45 114 352 245 165 81 Upstream signal(8) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 143 0 15 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Lane Group Flow(vph) 139 1946 0 160 1109 0 0 159 209 245 232 9 vC.conflicting volume 1097 1097 396 1096 1097 666 396 666 Conn.Peds.(4/hr) 6 4 1 vC1,stage 1 cent vol 429 429 668 668 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2,stage 2 cord vol 668 668 428 429 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu.unblocked vol 1073 1073 331 1072 1073 666 331 666 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 IC.single(s) 7.1 6.5 62 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 11.6 63.0 12.0 63.4 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 tF Is) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 22 1 Effective Green,g(s) 11.6 63,0 12.0 63 4 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 p0 queue free% 130 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated gIC Ratio 0.10 0.52 0.10 0.53 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity(vehlh) 380 386 674 389 395 463 1168 933 Clearance Time(s) 4,0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Direction.Lane I _Hitl NB I se I Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3B Volume Total 2 667 409 Lane Grp Cap(vpn( 171 1819 170 2529 207 181 208 211 Volume Left 0 1 16 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.56 c0.09 0.23 0.09 c0.14 0.13 Volume Right 1 0 0 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 cSH 491 1168 933 v/c Ratio 0.81 1.07 0.94 0.44 0.77 1.15 1.18 1.10 Volume to Capacity 0 00 0.00 0.02 Uniform Delay,dl 53.1 28.5 53.6 17.4 51.4 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 12.4 0.0 0.6 Incremental Delay,d2 24.6 42.5 51.8 0.6 15.6 114.5 118.7 91.1 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 77.8 71.0 105.4 17.9 67.1 187.5 171.7 144.1 Approach Delay(s) 12.4 0.0 0.6 Level of Service E E F 8 E F F F Approach LOS 6 Approach Delay(s) 71.5 28.9 136.2 157.8 Approach LOS E C F F irnmaimilowww Average Delay 0.3 y Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.2% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 76.3 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) t5 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.08 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 120.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.4% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(mm) 15 c Critical Lane Group 008.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report 606-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11(18200810:04 am 5'Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/1812008 10:04 am f -• 1 (. 4 4\ t r ` l d > > 4, t 4 gi MI7lrraset EL ..#11L viliNIIIII-kit .* ilk sec--Win Illpeweata ®L EBB ►BL + ` �. Lane Configurations 41 «t r yf 1. 'S I. Lane Configurations •, + T Volume(vph) 90 69 14 72 35 77 7 399 307 96 209 2 Volume(vph) 71 225 139 695 225 65 Ideal Flow(vpnpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utt.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Ulil.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.65 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prot) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0,95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sam.Flow(prot) 1800 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1800 Satd.Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Permitted 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Satd.Flow(perm) 1800 1711 1466 1357 1682 1641 1800 Adj.Flow(vph) 84 265 164 818 265 76 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 158 0 0 0 51 A .Flow(vph) 103 79 16 83 40 89 8 459 353 110 240 2 Lane Group Flow(vph) 84 107 164 818 265 25 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 78 0 23 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 14% 7% 3% 4% 6% 10% Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 195 0 0 123 11 8 789 0 110 242 0 Turn Type pm+ov Prot Penn Coral.Peds.(1//hr) 1 1 2 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% 0% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permuted Phases 8 2 Turn Type Spit Split Perm Prot Prot Actuated Green,G(s) 6.4 18.1 11.7 30.4 14.7 14.7 . Protected Phases 0 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Effective Green,g(s) 6.4 18.1 11.7 30.4 14.7 14.7 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.40 026 0.68 0.33 0.33 Actuated Green,G(s) 14.0 11.9 11.9 1.3 43.5 9.6 50.8 Clearance Time Is) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Ef ective Green,g(5) 14.0 11.9 11.9 1.3 43.5 9.6 509 Vehde Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated gIC Ratio 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.46 0.10 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 226 744 458 1240 588 482 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 ills Ratio Prot cO.05 0.04 0.09 c0.45 0.15 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vphi 268 217 186 19 778 168 973 vlc Ratio 0.37 0.14 0.36 0.66 0.45 0.05 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.07 0.01 c0.47 c0.07 0.13 Uniform Delay,dl 17.4 8.4 13.5 4.2 11.9 10.3 ills Ratio Perm 0.21 Progression Factor 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 vie Ratio 0.73 0.57 0.06 0.42 1.01 0.65 0.25 Incremental Delay,d2 1.0 0.1 0.5 1.3 0.6 0.0 Uniform Delay,41 38.2 38.6 36.1 46.0 25.2 40.6 11.5 Delay(s) 18.4 8.5 14.0 5.5 12.4 10.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service B A B A B B Incremental Delay,42 9.5 3.4 0.1 14.4 36.0 8.8 0.1 Approach Delay(s) 10.9 6.9 12.0 Delay(s) 47.7 42.0 36.3 60.3 61.2 49.4 11.6 Approach LOS B A B Level of Service D D D E E D B Approach Delay(s) 47.7 39.6 812 23.4 Approach LOS D D C HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio C.61 msnow Actuated Cycle Length(s) 44.8 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 48.2 HCM Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Analysis Period(min) 15 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 94,0 Sum of lost time Is: 15.0 c Critical Lane Group Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 c Cntical Lane Group 008-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report 48-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2C11 Background Traffic AM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report MOO-Charbonneaa Engineenng LLC Page 3 MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/19/200810:04 am 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:16 am 1 1 t l d f - 1 c 4- t 1 t r ' j 1 IltrMaMat Mov.. el EST EBR M. WBT WM Mk ' SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) Lane Configurations '1 +S. yf 4 41. T. Volume(vph) 268 279 149 702 444 274 Volume(vph) 196 1268 29 192 1888 113 96 216 241 245 173 107 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Lost lime(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Ubl,Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 100 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fn 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frpb,pied/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prot) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 F11 Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Said.Flow(perm) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Satd.Flow(prat) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1856 1599 1787 1652 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 FIt Permitted 0.95 1.00 D.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Adj.Flow(vph) 301 313 167 789 499 308 Said.Flow(perm) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1652 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 248 D 0 25 0 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Lane Group Flow(van) 301 65 167 769 782 0 Adi.Flow(vph) 202 1307 30 198 1946 116 99 223 248 253 178 110 Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3% 10% RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 169 0 16 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Lane Group Flow(vph) 202 1336 0 198 2057 0 D 322 79 253 272 0 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 Cont.Peds.(4/hr) 14 9 5 16 Permitted Phases 8 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% Actuated Green,G(5) 20.9 20.9 11.9 71.1 55.2 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Penn Spilt Effective Green,g(s) 20.9 20.9 11.9 71.1 552 Protected Pnases 5 2 1 6 a 8 4 4 Actuated g!C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.12 071 0.55 Permitted Phases 0 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Actuated Green,9(9) 17.1 60.0 15.8 58.7 26.2 26.2 21.0 21.0 Vehicle Extension lrsj 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 _ Effective Green,g(s) 17,1 60.0 15.8 58.7 26.2 262 21.0 21.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 349 325 205 1239 941 Actuated giC Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.11 0.42 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.15 ws Ratio Prot c0.18 c0.10 0.45 c0.46 Clearance lime(s) 4.0 5.9 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Ws Ratio Perm 0.04 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 vic Ratio 0.86 020 0.81 0.64 0.83 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 216 1495 200 2107 348 299 268 248 Uniform Delay,dl 382 32.7 43.0 7.6 185 vls Ratio Prot c0.11 0.38 0.11 c0,41 c0.17 0.14 c0.16 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 Incremental Delay,d2 192 03 21A 2.5 85 v/c Ratio 0.94 0.89 0.99 0.98 0.93 026 0.94 1.10 Delay fs) 57.3 33.0 64.4 10.1 27.0 Uniform Delay.dl 60.9 37.0 62.0 40.0 55.9 48.7 58.9 59.5 Level of Service E C E B C Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Approach Delay(s) 44.9 19,6 27.0 Incremental Delay.d2 43.1 8.6 60.6 14.8 29.7 0.5 39.7 85.3 Approach LOS D B C Delay(s) 104.0 45.6 122.6 54.8 85.6 49.1 98.6 144.8 Level of Service F D F D F D F F Ilmwewiawwww Approach Delay(s) 53.3 60.7 69.7 1232 HCM Average Control Delay 28.7 HCM Level of Service C LOS Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Approach LOS 0 E E F Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost rime(s) 12.0 limmailiamwari Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.2% ICU Level of Service D HCM Average Control Delay 66.3 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 c Cntical Lane Group Actuated Cycle Length(s) 140.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 809-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic AM Peak Hour Synchro 7•Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 M.E.Otto Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:16 am 3:Scottins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/200810:16 am -• 1 e ~ t 1 t , b 1 1 1 1 r ''- t 1 t e ` 1 1 Lane Configurations 4. 4. Lane Configurations ,A t Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 713 2 8 499 0 Volume(vpht 51 13 56 297 168 227 22 438 108 61 347 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free laeal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Lane Ulil.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourty flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 784 2 9 548 0 Frpb,ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Width(ft) 12.9 Frt 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(ft/5i 4.0 Fit Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 9.95 1.00 Percent Blockage 0 Satd.Flow(prat) 1694 1830 1568 1805 1789 1687 1862 Right turn flare(veh) FII Permitted 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1,00 0.95 1.00 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Satd.Flow(perm) 1694 1830 1568 1805 1789 1667 1862 Median storage veh) 2 2 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 Adj.Flow(vph) 53 14 58 309 175 236 23 456 112 64 361 1 pX.platoon unblocked 0.77 0.77 0.94 0.77 0.77 0.74 0.94 0.74 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 31 0 0 0 178 0 8 0 0 0 0 vC,conflicting volume 1354 1355 551 1351 1354 785 551 786 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 94 0 0 484 58 23 560 0 64 362 0 41,stage 1 con(vol 569 569 785 785 Confl.Peels.(Mr) 2 vC2,stage 2 confvol 785 786 566 569 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 4% 1% D% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% vCu,unblocked vol 1134 1136 490 1130 1134 535 490 537 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot tC.single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 tC 2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Permitted Phases 4 tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 22 22 Actuated Green,G(s) 8.4 20.7 20.7 2.6 33.8 7.0 372 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 Effective Green,g(s) 8.4 20.7 20.7 2.6 33.8 7.0 37.2 cM capacity(veh/h) 326 327 546 331 332 407 1015 772 Actuated gfC Ratio 0.10 0.24 0.24 0.03 0.40 0.08 0.44 elder.Lan I E81 NB 1 S01 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Volume Total 0 786 557 Vehicle Fxtens on(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Left 0 0 9 Lane Grp Cap Ivphj 168 446 382 55 712 139 816 Volume Right 0 2 0 vis Rata Prot c0.06 c026 0.01 c0.31 c0.04 0.19 cSH 1700 1015 772 vls Ratio Penn 3.04 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.56 1.09 0.15 0.42 0.79 0.46 0.44 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 1 Uniform Delay,d1 36.5 32.1 252 40.4 22.4 37.1 16.6 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane LOS A A Incremental Delay,d2 4.2 67.5 0.2 5.1 5.7 2.4 0.4 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.3 Delay(s) 40.7 99,6 25.4 45.5 28.1 39.6 17.0 Approach LOS A Level of Service 0 F C D C D B Approach Delay(s) 40.7 75.3 28.8 20.4 Approach LOS 0 E C C Average Delay 0.1 � Inletsecron Capeaty Utilization 41.0% CU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Average Control Delay 45.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 84.9 Sum of lost time(s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 900.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light:Report #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light:Report M.E.Otto Page 2 M.E.Otto Page 3 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:16 am 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/19/2008 10:10 am 1 1 1 t l 1 1 1 1 t i t klopnrnt 21 MIa Na. !ST .811 UR /!dawns ESL Eft -, . , Lane Configurations I/ '' f f s' Lane Configurations it 'p Volume(vph) 76 256 202 597 615 77 Volume(vph) 147 264 140 759 576 411 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Uhl.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Ulil.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb.ped/brkes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.94 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prat) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Satd.Flow(pal) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 RI Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.0C 1.0D 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Sold.Flow(perm) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Satd.Flow(perm) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj.Flow(vph) 82 275 217 642 661 83 Adj.Flow(vph) 150 269 143 774 588 419 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 113 0 0 0 27 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 233 0 0 24 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 82 162 217 642 661 56 Lane Group Flow(vph) 150 38 143 774 983 0 Cone.Peds.(SW) 1 5 Confl.Peds.(#Rtr) 2 1 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Heavy Vehrdes(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% Tum Type pm+ov Prot Perm Tarn Type Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green,G(s) 6.6 20.1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Actuated Green,G(s) 13.4 13.4 11.6 78.6 63.0 Effective Green g(s) 6.6 20,1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Effective Green,g(s) 13.4 13.4 11.6 78.6 63.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.33 0.22 0.76 0.48 0.48 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.79 0.63 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension ts) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 189 614 395 1422 894 753 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 239 207 205 1464 1093 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.06 c0.12 0.34 c0.35 els Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.08 0.42 c0.57 vis Ratio Perm 0.05 0.04 vls Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.26 0.55 0.45 0.74 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.17 0.70 0.53 0.90 Uniform Delay.dl 25.8 15.3 21.4 2.6 12.9 8.7 Uniform Delay,dl 40.9 38.4 42.5 3.9 15.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 1.6 0.2 1.6 0.2 3.2 0.0 Incremental Delay,d2 5.1 0.4 9.9 1.4 11.7 Delay(s) 27.4 15.6 23.0 2.9 16.2 8.7 Delay(s) 46.0 38.8 52.4 5.3 27.5 Level of Service C BC A B A Level of Service O D D AC Approach Delay(s) 18.3 7.9 15.3 Approach Delay(s) 414 12.5 27.5 Approach LOS B A B Approach LOS D B C HCM Average Control Delay 12.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Average Control Delay 242 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 61.7 Sum of lost time(sr 12.0 Actuated Cycle Length(a) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 4 M.E.Otto Page 5 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 12:55 pm 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11120/2008 12:55 pm -• ti r4- 4\ t /' ` 1 1 f -• 1 k- , t l `► 1 1 iwwwww Elk EBT EBR via MT WBR Net NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR *venom Bt. EU MR NIL NOT MR NBL NBT /OR SBL Set 1116 Lane Configurations IN +1. 1 +41. .) { *I 7. Lane Configurations 4. 4-• 4. Volume(vph) 136 1890 17 157 990 108 44 112 346 240 163 79 Volume(venlh) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 567 0 14 334 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 '.900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Ut).Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.55 0.85 0.65 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 667 0 16 393 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 100 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(Ns) 4.0 Satd.Flow(prat) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Percent Blockage 0 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1779 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 139 1929 17 160 1010 110 45 114 353 245 166 81 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 143 0 15 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Lane Group Flow(vph) 139 1946 0 160 1109 0 0 159 210 245 232 0 vC,conflicting volume 1098 1098 396 1097 1098 667 396 667 Confl.Peds.(#/hr) 6 4 1 vC1,stage 1 conf vol 429 429 669 669 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2,stage 2 cant vol 669 669 428 429 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1075 1075 331 1073 1075 667 331 667 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 IC.single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 62 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 IC,2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 11.6 63.0 12.0 63.4 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 22 2.2 Enecuve Green,g(s) 11.6 63.0 12.0 63.4 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 9.52 0.10 0.53 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity(venni) 380 386 674 389 394 462 1168 932 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Irido. Vehicle Extension)s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 �2 � �9 Volume Total 2 668 409 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 171 1819 170 2529 207 181 208 211 Volume Left 0 1 16 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.56 c0.09 0.23 0.09 cO.14 0.13 Volume Right 1 0 0 vls Ratio Perm c0.14 cSH 491 1168 932 v/c Ratio 0.81 1.07 0.94 0.44 0.77 1.16 1.18 1.10 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.02 Uniform Delay,d1 53.1 28.5 53.6 17.4 51.4 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay)s) 12.4 0.0 0.8 Incremental Delay,d2 24.6 42.5 51.8 0.6 15.6 116.4 118.7 91.1 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 77.6 71.0 105.4 17.9 67.1 169.4 171.7 144.1 Approach Delay(s) 12.4 0.0 0.6 Level of Service E E F B E F F F Approach LOS B Approach Delay(s) 71.5 28.9 137,6 157.6 Approach LOS E C F F ItiBillilig Average Delay 0.3 MOSCIONBOOMIry lydersection Capacity Ubt:zatlon 402% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 76.5 HCM Level of Service E Analysts Period tmm) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.08 Actuated Cycle Length(s; 120.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.4% CU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 008-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report 008-05 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-wrth Single Family Synchro 7-Light:Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 12:55 pm 5:Burnham Street& Hall Boulevard 11/20200812:55 pm 1 e 4- k 4\ t o '► 1 d ) 14\ t 1 4 wren `7 1111 IL Ilk . `esr 8 or w msm Wit--is r Lane Configurations •• 4 i" ) I. 1 Lane Configurations 'I r 't 4 Volume(vph) 90 69 14 72 35 78 7 399 307 96 209 2 Volume(vph) 71 225 139 695 225 65 Ideal Flow(vpnpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow lvphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.D 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Ulil.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 100 Said.Flow(prof) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prot) 1800 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1800 Satd Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Permitted 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Sate Flow(perm) 1800 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1800 Adt.Flow(vph) 84 265 164 818 265 76 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0,87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 158 0 0 0 51 Ad1.Flow(vph) 103 79 16 83 40 90 8 459 353 110 240 2 Lane Group Flow(vph) 84 107 164 818 265 25 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 79 0 23 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 14% 7% 3% 4% 6% 10% Lane Group Flow(vphl 0 195 0 0 123 11 8 789 0 110 242 0 Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm Cone.Peels.(dfhr) 1 1 2 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% D% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permitted Phases 8 2 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Actuated Green.G ts) 6.4 18.1 11.7 30.4 14.7 14.7 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Effective Green,g(s) 6.4 18.1 11.7 30.4 14.7 14.7 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.40 0.26 0.68 0,33 0.33 Actuated Green,G(s) 14.0 11.9 11.9 1.3 43.5 9.6 50.8 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Effective Green,g(s) 14.0 11.9 11.9 1.3 43.5 9.6 50.8 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated glC Ratio 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.46 0.10 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 226 744 458 1240 588 482 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 40 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.04 0.09 c0.45 0.15 Vehtde Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Penn 0.03 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 268 217 186 19 778 168 973 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.14 0.36 C.66 0.45 0.05 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.07 0.01 c0.47 c0.07 0.13 Uniform Delay,dl 17.4 8.4 13.5 4.2 11.9 10.3 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.57 0.06 0.42 1.01 0.65 0.25 Incremental Delay,d2 1.0 0.1 0.5 1.3 0.6 0.0 Uniform Delay,dl 38.2 38.6 36.1 46,0 25.2 40.6 11.5 Delay(s) 18.4 8.5 14.0 5.5 12.4 10.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service B A B A B B Incremental Delay,d2 9.5 3.4 0.1 14.4 36.0 8.8 0.1 Approach Delay(s) 10.9 6.9 12.0 Delay(s) 47.7 42.0 36.3 60.3 61.2 49.4 11.6 Approach LOS B A B Level of Service D D D E E D B 1611110__ Approach Delay(s) 47.7 39.6 61.2 23.4 Approach LOS D D E G HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 kiltemilitilumiloy Actuated Cycle Length(s) 44.8 Sum of lost time(5) 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 482 HCM Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Analysis Period(min) 15 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 94.0 Sum of lost time(s) 15.0 c Critical Lane Group Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group x08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2C11 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Roped MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6'Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/20/2008 12:55 pm 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/20/2008 12:55 pm 1 1 t l 41 1 >r ' 1 r _lira! NO - + Ma___ Err WBT ..r,_ .--:_ Lane Configurations * T. Lane Configurations 1. r Volume(vph) 269 280 149 702 444 274 Volume(vehlh) 15 0 0 0 0 3 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Utl.Factor 120 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frt 1.00 0.85 120 1.00 0.95 Hourly flow rate(vph) 17 0 0 0 0 3 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Satd.Flow(prof) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Lane Width(ft) Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed Otis) Said.Flow(perm) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Percent Blockage Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Right turn flare(veh) A .Flow(vph) 302 315 167 789 499 308 Median type None None RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 249 0 0 25 0 Median storage veh) Lane Group Flow(vph) 302 66 167 789 782 0 Upstream signal(ft) Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3% 10% pX,platoon unblocked Turn Type Perm Prot vC.conflicting volume 17 17 17 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 vC1,stage 1 cent vol Permitted Phases B vC2,stage 2 coot vol Actuated Green,G(s) 21.0 21.0 11.9 71.0 55.1 vCu,unblocked vol 17 17 17 Effective Green,g(s) 21.0 21.0 11.9 71.0 55.1 IC,single(6) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Actuated g'C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.12 0.71 0.55 IC,2 stage(s) Clearance Time(s) 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 351 328 205 1238 939 cM capacity(veh/h) 1601 1001 1062 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 c0.10 0.45 c0.46 LNwckm.lfl(Ila R ®1 16:1 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 Volume Total 17 3 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.20 0.81 0.64 0.83 Volume Left 0 0 Uniform Delay.dl 38.1 32.6 43.0 7.7 18.6 Volume Right 0 3 Progression Factor 1.00 120 1.00 1.00 1.00 cSH 1700 1062 Incremental Delay,d2 18.9 0.3 21.4 2.5 8.6 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 Delay(s) 56.9 32.9 64.4 10.2 27.2 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 Level of Service EC E BC Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Approach Delay(s) 44.7 19.7 27.2 Lane LOS A Approach LOS D 8 C Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 1SUlallq - Approach LOS A HCM Average Control Delay 28.7 HCM Level of Service C iimailielbmwm HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Average Delay 1 4 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(mm) 15 Analysis Period(mm) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008108 pm 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 1:08 pm f -• ,r '- k- 4N t P \► 41 -N r 4- k 41 t o `► 1 4' kkwurnt ESL I 1�' k.,,�f 1�t to isT 1 BBL sRT 1 t Ibw� ®I. EST Bt_ MBI. �T t go. ttef pet- spr 1 Lane Configurations IS I T. li +41. 4 /v ) T. Lane Configurations 4• 4+ 4. Volume(vph) 196 1268 29 193 1888 113 96 216 242 245 173 107 Volume(ven/h) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 714 3 9 499 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(5) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Frpb,pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 785 3 10 548 0 Flpb,per/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(fits) 4.0 Satd.Flow(prat) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1652 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1652 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0,97 Median storage veh) 2 2 Ad).Flow(vph) 202 1307 30 199 1946 116 99 223 249 253 178 110 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 170 0 16 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.77 0.77 0.94 0.77 0.77 0.74 0.94 0.74 Lane Group Flow(vph) 202 1336 0 199 2057 0 0 322 79 253 272 0 1/C.conflicting volume 1357 1359 551 1354 1357 786 551 788 Cool.Peds.(#/hr) 14 9 5 16 vC1,stage 1 cont vol 571 571 786 786 Heavy Vehides(%) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% vC2,stage 2 coot vol 786 788 568 571 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1139 1141 490 1135 1139 537 490 539 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 IC.single(s) 7.1 63 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 tC 2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 17.1 60.0 15.8 58.7 26.2 262 21.0 21.0 IF(s) 3.5 4.0 33 3.5 4.0 33 22 2.2 Effective Green,g(s) 17.1 60.0 15.8 58.7 26.2 262 21.0 21.0 p0 queue hee% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.11 0.42 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.15 cM capacity(veh/h) 324 325 546 330 331 406 1015 770 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Drachm. Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 8 ! 0 h88 Volume 558 e Total 0 788 558 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 216 1495 200 2107 348 299 268 248 Volume Left 0 0 10 nis Ratio Prot c0.11 0.38 0.11 c0.41 c0.17 0.14 c0.16 Volume Right 0 3 0 ws Ratio Perm 0.05 cSH 1700 1015 770 etc Ratio 0.94 0.89 1.00 0.98 0.93 026 0.94 1.10 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.01 Undorm Delay.di 60.9 37.0 62.1 40.0 55.9 48.7 58.9 59.5 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.4 Incremental Delay,d2 431 8.6 61.9 14.8 29.7 0.5 39.7 852 Lane LOS A A Delay(5) 104.0 45.6 123.9 54.8 85.6 49.1 98.6 144.8 Level of Service F D F D F D F F Approach O (s) 0.A 0.0 0.4 LOS A Delay L Approach Delay(a) 53.3 60.8 69.7 123.2 Approach LOS Approach LOS D E E F 1111. -Mr Average Delay 0.1 iftreamteummy Intersection Capacity Utikzation 41.1% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 66.4 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 140.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 982% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #0845 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MEO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 1:08 per 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/29,2008.00 on t 1 t f ` 1 d > > 1 t 1 I Ilommot .. EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NIL NET NPR SBL SBT SBR Mouswg ®l EBR NBL NET SBT SMR Lane Configurations rr . '. NI fk Lane Configurations R r w * * )' Volume(vph) 51 13 56 297 168 228 22 438 109 61 347 1 Volume(vph) 76 256 202 598 615 77 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost hone(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost hone(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utt.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,peel/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Fri. 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 E8 Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prot) 1694 1830 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Setif.Flow(prat) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Flt Permitted 0.9B 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(perm) 1694 1830 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj.Flow(vph) 53 14 58 309 175 238 23 456 114 64 361 1 Adl.Flow(vph) 82 275 217 643 661 83 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 31 0 0 0 180 0 8 0 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 113 0 0 0 27 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 94 0 0 484 58 23 562 0 64 362 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 02 162 217 643 681 56 Confl.Peds.(#rttr) 1 2 Confl.Peds.(Whir) 1 5 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Turn Type Split Split Penn Prot Prot Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Protected Phases B 1 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 Permitted Phases B 2 Actuated Green.G(s) 8.5 20.7 20.7 2.6 33.9 7.0 37.3 Actuated Green,G(s) 6.6 20.1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Effective Green,g(s) 8.5 20.7 20.7 2.6 33.9 7.0 37.3 Effective Green,g(s) 6.6 20.1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.24 0.24 0.03 0.40 0.08 0.44 Actuated glC Ratio 0.11 0.33 022 0.76 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time is) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Clearance Time(5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 169 445 381 55 712 139 816 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 189 614 395 1422 894 753 els Ratio Prot c0.06 c026 0.01 c0.31 c0.04 0.19 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.08 c0.12 0.35 c0.35 vrs Ratio Perm 0.04 vls Ratio Perm 0.05 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.56 1.09 0.15 0.42 0.79 0.46 0.44 We Ratio 0.43 0.26 0.55 0.45 0.74 0.07 Uniform Delay.41 36.5 32.2 25.3 40.5 22.5 372 16.7 Uniform Delay,41 25.8 15.3 21.4 2.6 12.9 8.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,42 4.0 68.4 0.2 5.1 5.8 2.4 0.4 Incremental Delay,42 1.6 0.2 1.6 0.2 3.2 0.0 Delay Is) 40.5 100.6 25.5 45.6 28.3 39.7 17.1 Delay(s) 27.4 15.6 23.0 2.9 16.2 8.7 Level of Service D F C D C D B Level of Service C B C A B A Approach Delay(s) 40.5 75.8 28.9 20.4 Approach Delay(s) 18.3 7.9 15.3 Approach LOS 0 E C C Approach LOS B A 8 - bkint lliSIMsy HCM Average Control Delay 45.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Average Control Delay 12.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0,82 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 85.1 Sum of lost time(s) 15.0 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 61.7 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.9% ICU Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/20/2008 1:08 pm 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/20/2008 1:08 pm 1 •N 1 1 1 -. 1 r ~ 1 I' Mows" lilt Bot Warrant - '" t Wit VAT DK IM Lane Configurations } T. Lane Configurations T. r Volume(vph) 147 264 140 759 576 411 Volume(veh/h) 11 2 0 0 0 1 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost lime(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane U6I.Factor 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Flour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Hourly flow rate(vph) 12 2 0 0 0 1 Flpb.ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(Ts) Sam.Flow(prof) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Percent Blockage Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0,95 1.00 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Said.Flow(per,) 1797 1547 1770 1863 1735 Median type None None Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 one 0.98 C.98 one Medan storage veh) Adi.Flow(vph) 150 269 143 774 588 419 Upstream signal(ft) RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 233 0 0 24 0 pX,platoon unblocked Lane Group Flow(vph) 150 36 143 774 983 0 vC.conflicting volume 14 13 13 Conn.Peds.(#!hr) 2 1 vC1,stage 1 cent vol Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% vC2,stage 2 cord vol Turn Type Perm Prot vCu,unblocked vol 14 13 13 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 IC.single(a) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 stage(s) Actuated Green,G(s) 13.4 13.4 11.6 78.6 63.0 IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Effective Green,g(s) 13.4 13,4 11.6 78.6 63.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.79 0.63 cM capacity(vetVh) 1604 1006 1067 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 1 We �1 N 1 Volume Total 14 1 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 239 207 205 1464 1093 Volume Left 0 0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.08 0.42 c0.57 Volume Right 2 1 vis Raho Perm 0.02 cSH 1700 1067 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.17 0.70 0.53 0.90 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 Uniform Delay.dt 40.9 38.4 42.5 3.9 15.8 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Incremental Delay,d2 5.1 0.4 9.9 1.4 11.7 Lane LOS A Delay(s) 46.0 38.8 52.4 5.3 27.5 Approach Delay(a) 0.0 8.4 Level of Service D D D A C Approach LOS A Approach Delay(s) 41.4 12.6 27.5 __ Approach LOS D B C1 ��# Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 24.2 HCM Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length(s) '.00.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Ubl zalron 81.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report 008-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report MEG-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11120/2009116 pm 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/20/20081:16 pm f -• 1 4- k 1 t P f -• c 1 ' t 1 t P \• 1 4/ itra rrit OIL EBT EBR WBL WBT MBR tfBl t$T NM 981. SST SBR lit .ant ®L EST 9R M. TIP WBR NBL NOT NBR 561 UT SIM Lane Configurations 11 {t, '4T* 4 el j• Lane Configurations 4. 4. 4. Volume(vph) 172 2382 22 198 1247 136 56 141 436 302 205 100 Volume(vett/h) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 717 0 18 423 0 Ideal Flow tephp0 1900 1900 1900 1900 190C 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sgn Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb.ped/bikes 1.00 190 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 844 0 21 498 0 Flpb toed/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 190 0.95 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(fl/s) 4.0 Satd.Row(prof) 177D 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Said.Flow(perm) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 098 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) 2 2 Al.Flow(vph) 176 2431 22 202 1272 139 57 144 445 308 209 102 Upstream signal(8) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 135 0 15 0 pX.platoon unblockec 0.65 0.65 0.91 0.65 0.65 0.60 C.91 0.60 Lane Group Flow(vph) 176 2453 0 202 1400 0 0 201 310 308 296 0 vC.conflicting volume 1389 1389 501 1388 1389 844 501 844 Confl.Pads.((Phi 6 4 1 vCt,stage 1 cont vol 543 543 846 846 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2,stage 2 con!vol 846 846 542 543 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu.unblocked vol 1005 1005 398 1003 1005 408 398 408 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 tC.single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases I tC.2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green.G(s) 12.0 63.0 12.0 63.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 Effective Green,g fel 12.0 63.0 12.0 63.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 97 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.52 0.10 0.52 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity lv8Nh) 309 302 593 321 315 389 1060 698 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Medan,taro. a 1 N t 9111 - Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 2 845 519 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 177 1819 170 2513 207 181 208 211 Volume Left 0 1 21 vus Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.71 c0.12 0.29 0.11 c0.17 0.16 Volume Right 1 0 0 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 cSH 400 1060 698 v/c Ratio 0.99 1.35 1.19 0.56 0.97 1.71 1.48 1,40 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.03 Uniform Delay.di 54.0 28.5 54.0 19.1 52.8 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(ft, D 0 2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 14.0 0.0 0.8 Incremental Delay.d2 65.7 '60.5 128.7 0.9 54.0 342.7 240.3 207.2 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 119.6 1899 182.7 20,0 106.8 395.7 293.3 2602 Approach Delay(s) 14.0 0.0 0.B Level of Service F F F C F F F F Approach LOS 8 Approach Delay(s) 184.3 40.4 305.8 276.7 Approach LOS F D F F - _ Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.1% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay - 166.8 HCM Level of Service F Analysis Period(mm) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.40 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 120.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 121.3% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 008-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchm 7-Light Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light:Report M.E.Otto Page 1 M.E.Otto Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/202008 1:16 pm 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 1:16 pm J _, . - ..- 4\ t e `• l 4' J 1 1 t l 4/ ilownsel Nor 1 lter sea mowi net - at ®a IlinallitallirtAIIR Lane Configurations 4. •- if 1 T. 1 H _ane Configurations 'v e1 4' I' Volume(vph) 115 87 18 92 44 98 9 504 389 122 264 3 Volume(vph) 90 285 176 880 285 82 Ideal Flow(vpnpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 '900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Frpb,pea/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Sam.Flow(prot) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 F0 Permitted 0,95 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Said.Flow(prat) 1799 1711 t468 1357 1682 1641 1799 Satd.Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Permitted 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Said.Flow(perm) 1799 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1799 AO.Flow(vph) 106 335 207 1035 335 96 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 189 0 0 0 64 Ary.Fbw(vph) 132 100 21 106 51 113 10 579 447 140 303 3 Lane Group Flow(vph) 106 146 207 1035 335 32 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 98 0 24 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 14% 7% 3% 4% 6% 10% Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 250 0 0 157 15 10 1002 0 140 306 0 Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm Confl.Peds.(#mr) 1 1 2 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% 0% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permitted Phases 8 2 Tarn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Actuated Green,G(s) 7.1 23.0 15.9 37.5 17.6 17.6 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 I 6 Effective Green,g(s) 7.1 23.0 15.9 37.5 17.6 17.6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.44 0.30 0.71 0.33 0.33 Actuated Green,G(s) 15.5 t3.8 13.8 1.4 43.5 13.0 54.1 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Effective Green,g(s) 15.5 13.8 13.8 1.4 43.5 13.0 54.1 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated gtC Ratio 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.43 0.13 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 214 775 530 1303 600 491 Clearance Time(sl 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.06 0.12 c0.57 0.19 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vent 277 234 201 19 726 212 966 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.19 C.39 0.79 0.56 0.07 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.09 0.01 c0.60 c0.09 0.17 Uniform Delay.dl 21.1 9.1 14.5 5.0 14.3 11.9 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.67 0.08 0.53 1.38 0.66 0.32 Incremental Delay,d2 1.8 0.1 0.5 3.4 1.1 0.1 Uniform Delay,di 41.9 41.3 37.9 49.4 28.6 41.8 13.0 Delay(s) 22.9 92 15.0 8.4 15.5 12.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service C A B A B B Incremental Delay,d2 29.B 7.4 0.2 23.9 179.7 7.5 02 Approach Delay(s) 12.5 9.5 14.7 Delay(s) 71.7 48.7 38.1 73.2 208.4 49.3 132 Approach LOS B A 0 _evel of Service E D D E F D B atifailx Approach Delay(s) 71.7 44.3 207.1 24.5 HCM Average Control Delay 11.2 HCM Level of Service B Approach LOS E D F C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 IeYwsdlsYrrtry Actuated Cycle Length(s) 52.6 Sum of lost time(Si 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 127.5 HCM Level at Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.0% ICU Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Analysis Period(mm) 15 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.8 Sum of bst time(s) 15.0 c Critical Lane Group Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 008.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report 008-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 3 M.E.Otto Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 1120/20081:16 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/202008 1:16 pm l 1 1 Z r - • 1 { ~ 1 P Ilorentpl ESL EW1 NBL NOT SST SBR Mewarrr EST BR WBI 8881 I4L NBR Lane Configurations aS r `� • 1. Lane Configurations 1• N Volume(vph) 338 353 188 884 559 345 Volume(vehlh) 19 0 0 0 0 3 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 40 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.DC 1.00 1.90 1.00 1.00 Peak HOW Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 Hourly flow rate(vph) 21 0 0 0 0 3 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Sald.Row(prat) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Lane Width(ft) Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1D0 1.00 Walking Speed(Cs) Saki.Flow(perm) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Percent Blockage Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Right turn flare(veh) Adj.Flow(vph) 380 397 211 393 628 388 Median type None None RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 324 0 0 23 0 Median storage veh) Lane Group Flow(vph) 380 73 211 993 993 0 Upstream signal(fl) Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3% 10% pX,platoon unblocked Turn Type Perm Prot vC.conflicting volume 21 21 21 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 vC 1,stage 1 cant vol Pemntled Phases 8 vC2,stage 2 cost vol Actuated Green,G(s) 18.2 182 10.0 73.6 59.8 vCu,unblocked vol 21 21 21 Effective Green,g(s) 18.2 18.2 10.D 73.8 592 IC.single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 C.10 0.74 0.60 C.2 stage(s) Clearance Tone(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 304 283 172 1286 1020 cm capacity(vett/h) 1595 996 1056 vls Ratio Prot c0.23 c0.12 0.57 c0.58 PPKIOR tile i ®1 Nlit v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 Volume Total 21 3 v/c Ratio 1.25 0.26 123 0.77 0.97 Volume Leff 0 0 Uniform Delay,dl 40.9 35.1 45.0 8.0 19.4 Volume Right 0 3 Progression Factor 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 cSH 1700 1056 Incremental Delay,d2 136.8 0.5 142.6 4.5 22.6 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 Delay(s) 177.7 35.6 187.6 12.5 41.9 Queue Length 95th(tl) 0 0 Level of Service F D F BD Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Approach Delay(s) 105.1 432 41.9 Lane A Approach LOS F D D Approach oaath ch Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 kY1rA0Lit�wy - Approach LOS A HCM Average Control Delay 58.8 HCM Level of Service E illlemeoliabiNtay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Average Delay 1.1 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of tost time(s) 12.0 y � Intersection C2paclty Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.6% CU Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 Aoays s Penal(mm) 15 c Critical Lane Group 408-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 5 M.E.Otto Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1 Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/2012008136 pm 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 1:36 pm f -0 1 c ~ 4 4\ t o ` 1 d I -♦ 1 f ~ k4N t o `► 1 ittallaaraat salt exa oat Ea. EDT Illffilliallin Viit s.i ar. r sla Lane Configurations Ti.. b 4 'G+ Lane Configurations 4, 4, 4. Volume(vph) 248 1605 37 244 2389 143 122 273 306 310 219 135 Volume(vehih) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 903 4 11 632 0 !Peal now(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Frpb,pad/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 992 4 12 695 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 Pedestnans 3 Fn 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(8) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(fl/s) 4.0 Said.Row(prot) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Sald.Flow(perm) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Median storage veh) 2 2 Ai.Flaw(vph) 256 1655 38 252 2463 147 126 281 315 320 226 139 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction Ivph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 154 0 16 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.69 0.69 0.89 0.69 0.69 0.63 0.89 0.63 Lane Group Flow(vph) 256 1692 0 252 2605 0 0 407 161 320 349 0 vC.conflicting volume 1716 1718 698 1713 1716 995 698 997 Confl.Pads.(#/hr) 14 9 5 16 vC1,stage 1 conf vol 722 722 995 995 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% vC2,stage 2 cant vol 995 997 719 722 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Penn Split vCu,unblocked vol 1448 1451 596 1444 1448 700 596 704 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 tC,single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 tC 2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green.G(5) 17.0 60.0 15.0 58.0 27.0 27.0 21.0 21.0 IF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 22 Effective Green,g(s) 17.0 60.0 15.0 58.0 27.0 27.0 21.0 21.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.11 0.41 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.15 cM capacity(vehRr) 225 233 449 233 241 280 1177 571 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 VehicleExtension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volu erT�al R 0 I9 997 707 7 _ Volume Total 0 997 707 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 215 1495 190 2082 358 308 268 248 Volume Left 0 0 12 v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 0.48 c0.14 c0.52 c022 0.18 c0.21 Volume Right 0 4 0 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 cSH 1700 877 571 v/c Ratio 1.19 1.13 1.33 125 1.14 0.52 1.19 1.41 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.32 Uniform Delay.dl 61.5 40.0 62.5 41.0 56.5 50.7 59.5 59.5 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.6 Incremental Delay.d2 122.4 682 178.5 117.3 90.1 1.6 117.9 205.4 Lane LOS A A Delay(s) 183.9 108.2 241.0 158.3 146.6 52.3 177.4 264.9 Level of Service F F F F F D F F Approach Delay(s} 0.0 0.0 0.6 LOS L A Approach Delay(s) 1182 165.5 105.5 224.0 Approach LOS Approach LOS F F F F I isisselieaSurwy' �CIO�_ Average Delay 02 .2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.1% CU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 150.2 HCM Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 124 Actuated Cycle Length Is) 140.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.8% CU Level of Service H Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 408-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7.Light: Report 1100-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoftins/Hunziker Street& Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 1:36 pm 5 Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/20/2008 1:36 pm _ (_ •_ 4\ t P `► 1 1 f 1 1 t 4 d Miami Elk Elf.. BR IMIMMIOMFAIW .411iR SBL 58T S8R llnrrrt EEL EBR 8EL air 421111r 88R. Lane Configurations 4. 4 P ' T. t 4, Lane Configurations 11 ' R 4 4 r Volume(vph) 65 16 71 375 212 288 28 555 137 77 440 1 Volume(vph) 96 324 255 756 778 97 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 190D 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost tirrte(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Uhl.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/btkes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fn 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(pro!) 1693 1829 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Satd.Flow(prof) 1770 1571 1805 1863 1863 1568 Flt Permitted 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(perm) 1693 1829 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Said.Flow(perm) 1770 1571 1805 1863 1863 1568 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 D.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Ad).Flow(vph) 68 17 74 391 221 300 29 578 143 80 458 1 Adj.Flow(vph) 103 348 275 813 837 104 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 30 0 0 0 194 0 7 0 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 69 0 0 0 24 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 129 0 0 612 106 29 714 0 80 459 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 103 279 275 813 837 80 Conti.Peds.(#/hr) 1 2 Col.Peds.(kmr) 1 5 Heavy Vehicles)%) 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Turn Type proves Prot Penn Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green,G(s) 12.0 19.2 19.2 4.5 41.5 8.3 44.3 Actuated Green,G(s) 7.8 22.4 14.6 56.6 38.0 38.0 Effective Green,g(s) 12.0 19.2 19.2 4.5 41.5 B.3 44.3 Effective Green,g is) 7.8 22.4 14.6 56.6 38.0 38.0 Actuated 9/C Ratio 0.12 020 020 0.05 0.43 0.09 0.46 Actuated 9/C Ratio 0.11 0.31 0.20 0.78 052 0.52 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.3 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 212 366 314 85 773 146 859 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 191 573 364 1456 978 823 e/s Raba Prot c0.08 c0.33 0,02 c0.40 c0.05 c0.25 1//s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.10 c0.15 0.44 c0.45 vls Ratio Perm 0.07 v!s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.61 1.67 0.34 0,34 0.92 0.55 0.53 etc Ratio 0.54 0.49 0.76 0.56 0.86 0.10 Uniform Delay,dl 39.8 38.4 32.9 44.3 25.7 42.1 18.5 Uniform Delay.dl 30.6 20.3 27,2 3.1 14,8 8.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 4.9 3142 0.6 2.4 16.5 42 0.6 Incremental Delay,d2 2.9 0.7 8.6 0.5 7.4 0.1 Delay Is) 44.7 352.6 33.6 46.7 42.3 462 19.1 Delay(s) 33.5 21.0 35.9 3.5 22.3 8.7 Level of Service D F CD D D B Level of Service C C D A C A Approach Delay(s) 447 247.7 42.4 23.1 Approach Delay(s) 23.B 11.7 20.8 Approach LOS D F D C Approach LOS C B C HCM Average Control Delay 117.5 HCM Level of Service F HCM Average Control Delay 17.4 HCM Level of Service 8 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 96.0 Sum of lost time(si 19.0 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 72.4 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.1% ICU Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(mm) 15 Analysis Period(mail 15 c Critical Lane Group c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6'Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/20/2008 1:36 ore 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/20/2005 1:36 pm f 1 ,\ t l 1 -• 1 e4- 4N e Monfort .._AMIFINIIIIIIME7116T UT SBR rbwr.at iirTitit WIC` -Willna Lane Configurations 1 P ii ^' t- Lane Configurations 1+ I" Volume(vph) 185 333 177 956 726 518 Volume Ivehlh) 14 2 0 0 0 1 loeal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost brae(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane U1i1.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Hourly low rate(vphl 16 2 0 0 0 1 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestnans Frt 160 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(f0s) Sat.Flow(prop 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Percent Blockage Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Median type None None Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) Adj.Flow(vph) 189 340 181 976 741 529 Upstream signal(5) RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 289 0 0 25 0 pX,platoon unblocked Lane Group Flow(vph) 189 51 181 976 1245 0 vC.con0icting volume 18 17 17 Conft.Peds(#/hr) 2 1 1 vC1,stage 1 conf vol Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% vC2.stage 2 conf vol Turn Type Perm Prot vCu.unblocked vol 16 17 17 Protected Phases B 1 6 2 tC.single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Permitted Phases B IC.2 stage(s) Actuated Green.G(s) 15.0 15.0 12.7 77.0 60.3 tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Effective Green,g(s) 15.0 15.0 12.7 77.0 60.3 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.77 0.60 cM capacity(veh/h) 1599 1001 1062 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.D 4.0 4.0 - - --- - Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 ` �1 Lane Grp Cap h 268 232 225 1435 1046 Volume Left 10 0 � p('�) Volume Left 0 0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 cO.lD 0.52 c0.72 Volume Right 2 1 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 cSH 1700 1062 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.22 0.80 0.68 1.19 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.09 Uniform Delay.dl 40.4 37.4 42.4 5.6 19.8 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Incremental Delay.d2 82 0.5 18.5 2.6 95.1 Lane LOS A Delay(s) 48.6 37.8 60.9 8.2 115.0 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Level of Service D D E A F Approach LOS A Approach Delay(s) 41.7 16.4 115.0 Approach LOS D B F Illosilliihrmy 1 Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13 3% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 63.3 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.1% ICU Level of Service G Analysts Period(min) 15 c Crihcal Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family Synchro 7-Light: Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 5 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1'Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 111e'2000 22 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:22 am 1 1 r ' k 4 t ,' ` 1 4 1 f -• ∎ r t r `► 1 d • Moismat BL 197 BR VAL WVT URI NBL 187 NBR seL SST sea n1r.oaE1 I • Lane Configurations ( 41. R itt. . " h 1. Lane Configurations 40 4. 4. Volume(vph) 136 1890 17 158 990 108 44 112 346 240 163 79 Volume(veloth) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 567 0 15 334 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Losl time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Uhl.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb,pad/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 667 0 18 393 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Fd 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Ft Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(Ts) 4.0 Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Saki.Flow(pens) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PI-IF 0.96 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 139 1929 17 161 1010 110 45 114 353 245 166 81 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 143 0 15 0 pX.platoon unblocked 004 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Lane Group Flow(vph) 139 1946 0 161 1109 0 0 159 210 245 232 0 vC.conflicting volume 1101 1101 396 1099 1101 667 396 667 Col.Peds.(#/hr) 6 4 1 vC1,stage 1 conf vol 431 431 669 669 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2.stage 2 conf vol 669 669 430 431 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perni Split vCu.unblocked vol 1077 1077 331 1076 1077 667 331 667 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 1C,single(s) 7.1 65 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(5) 11.6 63.0 12.0 63.4 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 IF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 22 Effective Green,g(s) 11.6 63.0 12.0 63A 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 052 0.10 0.53 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity(vehrh) 378 385 674 388 393 482 1168 932 Clearance Time(s) 4.D 5.0 4,0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 - . Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 2 668 411 1 Volume Total 2 668 411 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 171 1819 170 2529 207 181 208 211 Volume Leff 0 1 18 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.56 c0.09 023 0.09 c0.14 0.13 Volume Right 1 0 0 v/5 Ratio Perm c0.14 cSH 490 1168 932 v/c Ratio 0.81 1.07 0.95 0.44 0.77 1.16 1.18 1.10 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.02 Uniform Delay,01 53.1 28.5 53.7 17.4 51.4 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(II) 0 0 1 Progresses Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 12.4 0.0 0.6 Incremental Delay,02 24.6 42.5 53.1 0.6 15.6 116.4 118.7 91.1 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 77.8 71.0 106.7 17.9 67.1 169.4 171.7 144.1 A Level of Service E E F B E F F F Approach LOS (sr 124 0.0 0.6 L Approach Delay(s) 71.5 29.1 137.6 157.8 Approach LDS B Approach LOS E C F F lemediallam liy Average Delay 0.3 InInsclatirawm Intersection Capacity Utilization 402% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 76.5 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.08 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 120.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.4% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 111181200810:22am 5:Burnham Street& Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:22 am 1 . f 4 4\ t /' `► 4, 1 11 t 4/ MovearM EBL ET Ell MIL IOU - Ma 1ST MIR * Sr BM Wilmot Elk EBR NBL NBT SBT sea Lane Configurations 4. d' r 1 T. of 1. Lane Configurations ' y4 T T l Volume(vph) 90 69 14 72 35 78 7 399 307 96 209 2 Volume(vph) 71 225 139 695 225 65 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb.ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Setd.Flow(prof) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sald.Flow(prat) 1800 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1800 Sato'Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Permitted 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor,PI-IF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Satd.Flow(perm) 1800 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1800 Adj.Flow(vph) 84 265 164 818 265 76 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.87 0 87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.67 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 158 0 0 0 51 Adj.Flow(vph) 103 79 16 83 40 90 8 459 353 110 240 2 Lane Group Flow(vph) 84 107 164 818 265 25 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 79 0 23 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 14% 7% 3% 4% 6% 10% Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 195 0 0 123 11 8 789 0 110 242 0 Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm Conti.Peds.(#/hr) 1 1 2 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% 0% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permitted Phases 8 2 Tum Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Actuated Green,G(s) 6,4 18.1 11.7 30.4 14.7 14.7 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Effective Green.ois) 6.4 18.1 11.7 30.4 14.7 14.7 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.40 0.26 0.68 0.33 0.33 Actuated Green,G(s) 14.0 11.9 11.9 1.3 43.5 9.6 50.8 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Effective Green,g(s) 14.0 11.9 11.9 1.3 43.5 9.6 50.8 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.46 0.10 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(ugh) 226 744 458 1240 588 482 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.35 0.04 0.09 c0.45 0.15 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ws Ratio Penn 0.03 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 268 217 186 19 778 168 973 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.14 0.36 0.66 0.45 0.05 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.07 0.01 c0.47 c0.07 0.13 Uniform Delay.d1 17.4 8.4 13.5 4.2 11.9 10.3 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.57 0.06 0.42 1.01 0.65 025 Incremental Delay.d2 1.0 0.1 0.5 1.3 0.6 0.0 Uniform Delay,d1 38.2 38.6 36.1 46.0 25.2 40.6 11.5 Delay(s) 18.4 8.5 14.0 5.5 12.4 10.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service B A B A B B Incremental Delay.d2 9.5 3.4 0.1 14.4 36.0 8.8 0.1 Approach Delay Is) 199 6.9 12.0 Delay(s) 47.7 42.0 36.3 60.3 612 49.4 11.6 Approach LOS B A B Level of Service D D D E E D B ilillIeldillamilally Approach Delay(s) 47.7 39.6 61.2 23.4 Approach LOS D D E C HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A _ HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 1811111110 124M114 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 44.8 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 48.2 HCM Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% CU Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Analysis Period(min) 15 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 94.0 Sum of lost time(si 15.0 c Critical Lane Group Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% CU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group • #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report MEG-Charbonneau Engmeenng LLC Page 3 MED-Charbonneau Engmeenng LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/2008 1022 am 7:Knoll Dnve&Site Access 11/18/2008 10:22 am Mss mat liaL EEO tat mit-71111FAIN wM..rr ®r Lane Configurations F a1 t S. Lane Configurations I. Volume(vph) 268 279 1.49 702 444 274 Volume(veh/h) 15 1 0 0 0 1 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frt 1.00 0.135 1.00 1.00 0.95 Hourly flow rate(vph) 17 1 0 0 0 1 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Satd.Flow(prof) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Lane Width(ft) Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(ft/s) Satd.Flow(perm) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Percent Blockage Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Right turn flare(veh) Adi.Flow(vph) 301 313 167 789 499 308 Median type None None RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 248 0 0 25 0 Median storage veh) Lane Group Flow(vph) 301 65 167 789 782 0 Upstream signal(ft) Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3% 10% pX,platoon unblocked Tum Type Perm Prot vC,conflicting volume 18 17 17 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 vC1.sage 1 con(vol Permitted Phases 8 vC2.stage 2 cent vol Actuated Green,G(s) 20.9 20.9 11.9 71.1 55.2 vCu,unblocked vol 18 17 17 Effective Green,g(s) 20.9 20.9 119 71.1 55.2 tc single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 021 021 0.12 0.71 0.55 IC.2 stage(s) Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 tF(s) 22 3.5 3.3 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.D p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 349 325 205 1239 941 cM capacity(vehlh) 1599 1001 1062 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 c0.10 0.45 c0.46 v/s Ratio Penn 0.04 abandon,Lorne f 83 1 8 P6 Volume Total 18 1 v/c Ratio 0.86 020 0.81 0.64 0.83 'Volume Left 0 0 Uniform Delay,dl 382 32.7 43.0 7.6 18.5 Volume Right 1 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 cSH 1700 1062 Incremental Delay,d2 192 0.3 21.4 2.5 8.5 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 Delay(s) 57.3 33.0 54.4 10.1 27.0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 Level of Service EC E BC Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Approach Delay(s) 44.9 19.6 27.0 _ace LOS A Approach LOS D B C Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Approach LOS A HCM Average Control Delay 26.7 HCM Level of Service C YtitU11t HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Average Delay 0.5 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost lime(s) 120 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #06.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 1027 am 2:Apt dlwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/20081027 am I 1 C t 1 t ♦ 1 l c "- t 1 t P \► l 41 Monona En EBT Mink vaTITIIIIII-Illi- .11111rAIIIIMiri5 iMoveme Eni. EBF- • - 4 - - - - ear III Lane Configurations l Aj• ' 1-11* 4 r ii t. Lane Configurations 4. 4. •f. Volume(vph) 196 1268 29 193 1888 113 96 216 242 245 173 107 Volume(vetdh) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 714 2 9 499 0 Ideal Flow(vphpt) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Frpb,pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Hourly lbw rate(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 785 2 10 548 0 Flpb pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Fri 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(f/Is) 4.0 Said.Flow(prop 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1652 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.0C 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Said.Flow(perm) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1767 1652 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 202 1307 30 199 1946 116 99 223 249 253 178 110 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 170 0 16 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.77 0.77 0.94 0.77 0.77 0.74 0.94 0.74 Lane Group Flow(vph) 202 1336 0 199 2057 0 0 322 79 253 272 0 vC.conflicting volume 1357 1358 551 1354 1357 786 551 787 Con0.Peds.(#/hr) 14 9 5 16 vC1,stage 1 contvol 571 571 786 786 Heavy Vehrcles(96) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% vC2,stage 2conlvol 786 787 568 571 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1138 1140 490 1135 1138 537 490 538 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 IC.single(s( 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 62 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 iC,2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green.G(s) 17.1 60.0 15.8 58.7 26.2 262 21.0 21.0 tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 Effective Green,g(s) 17.1 60.0 15.8 58.7 26.2 26.2 21.0 21.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 Actuated g'C Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.11 0.42 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.15 cM capacity(veh/h) 324 326 546 330 331 406 1015 771 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Mad* ¢1 ma!,_t' - - - Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 0 787 558 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 216 1495 200 2107 348 299 268 248 Volume Left 0 0 10 v/s Rata Prot c0.11 0.38 0.11 c0.41 c0.17 0.14 c0.16 Volume Right 0 2 0 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 cSH 1700 1015 771 v/c Rata 0.94 0.89 1.00 0.98 0.93 026 0.94 1.10 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0,01 Uniform Delay.d' 60.9 37.0 62.1 40.0 55.9 48.7 58.9 59.5 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 1 Progression Fatter 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.4 Incremental Delay.d2 43.1 8.6 61.9 14.8 29.7 0.5 39.7 85.3 _ane LOS A A Delay(s) 104.0 45.6 1239 54.8 85.6 49.1 98.6 144.8 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.4 Level of Service F D F D F D F F Approach LOS A Approach Delay(s) 53.3 60.8 69.7 1232 Approach LOS D E EE Ftitnalf Averag only 0.1 lobindlenanorrs Intersecc C tion Capacity Utilization 41.0% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 66.4 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 140.0 Sum of lost time Is i 17.0 Intersecbon Capacity Utilization 982% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street& Hall Boulevard 11/181200810:27am 5:Burnham Street& Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:27 am I ■ ! 4- k '\ t P \► j d 1 4\ t j 1 IIIIIIOtst EA EBT EBR W . Vhf MN IBL NBT NOR SBL 5BT SBR anniumt EBL EBi NBL IBT SBT SBR Lane Configurat ons 4. 4 k T- R '4 Lane Configurations * 1 S ? * 1 Volume(vph) 51 13 56 297 168 228 22 438 108 61 347 1 Volume lope) 76 256 202 597 615 77 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow IvpnpO 190D 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb.ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb.ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ned/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 D.97 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Said.Flow(prot) 1694 1830 1568 1805 1789 1687 1862 Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Fit Permitted 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 FII Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flew(perm) 1694 1830 1568 1805 1789 1687 1862 Said.Flow(perm) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj.Flow(oohl 53 14 58 309 175 238 23 456 112 64 361 1 Ad).Flow(vph) 82 275 217 642 661 83 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 31 0 0 0 180 0 8 0 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 113 0 0 0 27 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 94 0 0 484 58 23 560 D 64 362 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 82 162 217 6d2 661 56 Conf.Peds.(#Rtrl 1 2 Con8.Peds.(it/hr) 1 5 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Tum Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Tum Type pmeov Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green,G(s) 8.4 20.7 20.7 2.6 33.8 7.0 37.2 Actuated Green,G(s) 6.6 20.1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Effective Green.g(s) 8,4 20.7 20.7 2.6 33.8 7.0 37.2 Effective Green.g(s) 6.6 20.1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Actuated glC Ratio 0.10 0.24 024 0.03 0.40 0.08 0.44 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.33 0.22 0.76 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(a) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 168 446 382 55 712 139 816 'Lane Grp Cap(vpn) 189 614 395 1422 894 753 v/s Rata Prot c0.06 c026 0.01 c0.31 0.04 0.19 ws Redo Prot c0.05 0.08 c0.12 0.34 c035 v/u Ratio Perm 0.04 vis Ratio Perm 0.05 0.04 v/c Rata 0.56 1.09 0.15 0.42 0.79 0.46 0.44 v/c Rate 0.43 026 0.55 0.45 0.74 0.07 Uniform Delay,d' 36.5 32.1 25.2 44.4 22.4 37.1 16.6 Uniform Delay,41 25.8 15.3 21.4 2.6 12.9 8.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay.d2 4.2 67.5 0.2 5.1 5.7 2.4 04 Incremental Delay,d2 1.6 0.2 1.6 0.2 3.2 0.0 Delay(s) 40.7 99.6 25.4 45.5 28.1 39.6 17.0 Delay(s) 27.4 15.6 23.0 2.9 16.2 8.7 Level of Service D F C D C D B Level of Service C B C A B A Approach Delay(s) 40.7 75.2 28.8 20.4 Approach Delay(s) 18.3 7.9 15.3 Approach LOS D E C C Approach LOS B A B Mensclosammey kMwtgloR iu mtwr HCM Average Control Delay 45.6 HCM Level of Service 0 HCM Average Control Delay 12.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 HCM Volume to Capacdy ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 84.9 Sum of lost time(s) 15.0 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 61.7 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.9% ICU Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utd/ration 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(mm) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group c Critical Lane Group 008-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report MEO-Charbonneac Engineering LLC Page 3 ME0-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/2008 10 27 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/18/2008 10:27 am 1 '4 t l 4' -. -. r -- 41 P Ilimmont r MR Moat mot EBT EBR WBL WBT SOL NOR are Configurations Lane Configurations I. r Volume(vph) 147 264 140 759 576 411 Volume(veh/h) 11 1 0 0 0 1 Ideal Flow(vphpi( 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Slop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Hourly flow rate(vph) 12 1 0 0 0 1 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.90 0.94 Lane Width(ft) Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(f/s) Sam.Flow(prat) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Percent Blodkage Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Said.Flow(perm) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Medan type None None Peak-hour`actor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) Adj.Flow(vph) 150 269 143 774 588 419 Upstream signal(ft) RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 233 0 0 24 0 pX.Diatoon unblocked lane Group Flow(vph) 150 36 143 774 983 0 vC,conflicting volume 13 13 13 Cont.Pads.(#mr) 2 1 1 vC1 stage 1 conf vol Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% vC2.stage 2 content Turn Type Penn Prot vCu.unblocked vol 13 13 13 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 tC,single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 stage(s) Actuated Green.G(s) 13.4 13.4 11.6 78.6 63.0 IF(s) 22 3.5 3.3 Effective Green,g(s) 13.4 13.4 11.6 78.6 63.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.79 0.63 cM capacity(vehlh) 1605 1007 1069 Clearance Time(s) 4,0 4.0 4,0 4,0 4.0 Vehicle Extension let 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 arecoer Total taro EB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 13 1 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 239 207 205 1464 1093 Volume Left 0 0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.08 0.42 c0.57 Volume Right 1 1 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 cSH 1700 1068 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.17 0.70 0.53 0.90 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 Uniform Delay,dl 40.9 38.4 42.5 3.9 15.8 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Incremental Delay,d2 5.1 0.4 9.9 1.4 11.7 Lane LOS A Delay(s) 46.0 38.8 52.4 5.3 27.5 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Level of Service 0 D D A C Approach LOS A Approach Delay(s) 41.4 12.6 27.5 Approach LOS D B C Mf --r - Average Delay 0.6 likaillnikwary ._ Intersection Capacity Utilization 13 3% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 24.2 HCM Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost hme(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utitzabon 81.6% ICU Level of Service 0 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Repor, #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light:Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:33 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:33 am 1 ♦ r ~ k � ? t ` 1 f -• ♦ r~ 4\ 1 x ` 1 J Mowed BL BIT EBR WBL WBT WBR RBI NET NM Sill SOT SBR ikwo tmt BL EDT BR WBL WET WIIR WI. NBT NBR S8L SOT SBR Lane Configurations '1 }ti:. e ++1. 4 tv ) S. Lane Configurations 4. 4. 4. Volume(vph) 172 2382 22 199 1247 136 56 141 436 302 205 100 Volume(veh/h) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 717 0 19 423 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 '900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost torte(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 844 0 22 498 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestnans 3 Frt 1.0D 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(tic) 4.0 Satd.Flow(prat) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Percent Blockage 0 FII Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(vela) SaId.Flow(perm) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1775 1553 1787 1807 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage vela) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 176 2431 22 203 1272 139 57 144 445 308 209 102 Upstream signal(8) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 135 0 15 0 pX.platoon unblocked 0.65 0.65 0.91 0.65 0.65 0.60 0.91 0.60 Lane Group Flow(vph) 176 2453 0 203 1400 0 0 201 310 308 296 0 vC.conflicting volume 1391 1391 501 1390 1391 844 501 844 Cone.Peds.(#/hr) 6 4 1 vCt,stage 1 conf vol 545 545 846 B46 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2.stage 2 conf vol 846 846 544 545 Tum Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1008 1008 398 1007 1008 408 398 408 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 B 4 4 IC,single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases B IC.2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green.GIs) 12.0 63.0 12.0 63.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.D 3.3 2.2 22 Effective Green,g(s) 12 0 63.0 12.0 63.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 97 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.52 0.10 0.52 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity(yeti/16 308 301 593 321 314 389 1060 698 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 anCIelk.lin• Al let 1111 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 2 845 520 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 177 1819 170 2513 207 181 208 211 Volume Left 0 1 22 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.71 c0.12 029 0.11 c0.17 0.16 Volume Right 1 0 0 v/s Ratio Perm c020 cSH 399 1060 698 v/c Ratio 0.99 1.35 1.19 0.56 0.97 1.71 1.48 1.40 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.03 Uniform Delay,dl 54.0 28.5 54.0 19.1 52.8 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 14.1 0.0 0.9 Incremental Delay.d2 65.7 160.5 130.8 0.9 54.0 342.7 240.3 2072 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 119.6 189.0 184.8 20.0 106.8 395.7 293.3 2602 Level of Service F F F C F F F F Approach Delay(s) 14.1 0.0 0.9 Approach LOS B Approach Delay(s) 184.3 40.8 305.8 276.7 Approach LOS F D F F IinlallbilMINIIM ____ __ ..7. . Average Delay 0.4 kliNgillIlleVIIIIIIV _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.1% CU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 166.9 HCM Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.40 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 125.0 Sum of lost time(sl 17.0 Intersection Capacity Ulik allon 121.3% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senor Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 1 M.E.Otto Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3'Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:33 am 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/200010:33 am I -* •N ( 4- k 1 t e ` 1 4' f 4\ t 1 1 wo4wR ESL at EBR BBL MT BUR MIL- NMEMINIMINV1111 woreart all ers 1!L war SST SOB Lane Configurations 4. 4 r{ ) T. 1 t. Lane Configurations r R 4 f r Volume(vph) 115 87 18 92 44 98 9 504 389 122 264 3 Volume(vph) 90 285 176 880 285 82 Ideal Flow(venal) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost lime(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fn 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prof) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prof) 1799 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1799 Sabi Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Permitted 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor,PHF 3.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Satd.Flow(perm) 1799 1711 1468 1357 1682 1641 1799 Adi.Flow(vph) 106 335 207 1035 335 96 Peak-hour`actor,PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.07 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 189 0 0 0 64 Ad),Flow(vph) 132 100 21 106 51 113 10 579 447 140 303 3 Lane Group Flow(vs) 106 146 207 1035 335 32 i RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 98 0 24 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 1%) 14% 7% 3% 4% fi% 10% Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 250 0 0 157 15 10 1002 0 140 306 0 Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm ConE.Peds.(it/hr) 1 2 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% 0% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permitted Phases 8 2 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Actuated Green,GIs) 7.1 23.0 15.9 37.5 17.6 17.6 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 E6ectrve Green.g(s) 7.1 23.0 15.9 37.5 17.8 17.6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.44 0.30 0.71 0.33 0.33 Actuated Green.G(s) 15.5 13.8 13.8 1.4 43.5 13.0 54.1 Clearance Time(s) 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Effective Green,g(s) 15.5 13.8 13.8 1.4 43.5 13.0 54.1 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.43 0.13 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 214 775 530 1303 600 491 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.06 0.12 c0.57 0.19 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 vis Ratio Penn 0.04 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vphj 277 234 201 19 726 212 966 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.19 0.39 0.79 0.56 0.07 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.09 0.01 c0.60 c0.09 0.17 Uniform Delay,dl 21.1 9.1 14.5 5.0 14.3 11.9 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.67 0.08 0.53 1.38 0.66 0.32 Incremental Delay,d2 1.8 0.1 0.5 3.4 1.1 0.1 Uniform Delay,d1 41.9 41.3 37 9 49.4 28.6 41.0 13.0 Delay(s) 22.9 9.2 15.0 8.4 15.5 12.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service C A B A BB Incremental Delay,d2 29.8 7.4 0.2 23.9 179.7 7.5 0.2 Approach Delay(s) 12.5 9.5 14.7 Delay(s) 71.7 48.7 38.1 73.2 208.4 49.3 132 Approach LOS B A B Level of Service E D D E F D B Approach Delay Is) 71.7 44.3 207.1 24.5 Approach LOS E D F C HCM Average Control Delay 112 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 YI[4nlNdlnikuosy Actuated Cycle Length(s) 52.6 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 127.5 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.0% ICU Level of Service 8 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Analysis Period(min) 15 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.8 Sum of lost time(s) 15.0 c Critical Lane Grouo Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.8% ICU Level of Service E A.nalys:s Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tgard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 3 M.E.Otto Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6 Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/2008 10:33 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/18/2008 10:33 am f N 4\ t 1 -• 1 c •- 4\ , tlowestit EBL EBR NIL 1ST SBT SBR Ilswset EBT EBR WBL WBT 116L NBR Lane Configurations ) { ' t 1. Lane Configurations 1. Volume(vph) 337 352 188 884 559 345 Volume(veNh) 19 1 0 0 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost torte(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 Hourly flow rate(vph) 21 1 0 0 0 1 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Said.Flow(pet) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Lane Width(ft) Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(ftis) Setd.Flow(perm) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Percent Blockage Peak-hour`actor,PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Right turn flare(veh) Ad.Flow(vph) 379 396 211 993 628 388 Median type None None RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 324 0 0 23 0 Median storage veh) Lane Group Flow(vph) 379 72 211 993 993 0 Upstream signal(ft) Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3% 10% pX,platoon unblocked Turn Type Perm Prot vC,conflicting volume 22 22 22 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 vC1.stage 1 conf vol Permitted Phases 8 vC2.stage 2 conf vol Actuated Green,G(s) 18.2 18.2 10.0 73.8 59.8 vCu,unblocked vol 22 22 22 Effective Green,g(s) 18.2 182 10.0 73.8 59.8 IC.single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Actuated giC Ratio 0.18 0.1B 0.10 0.74 0,60 tC.2 stage(s) Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 304 283 172 1286 1020 cM capacity(veh/h) 1593 995 1056 v/s Ratio Pet c0.23 c0.12 0.57 c0.58 firsdke.fast ®I Wit v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 Volume Total 22 1 v/c Ratio 1.25 0.25 123 0.77 0.97 Volume Left 0 0 Uniform Delay,dt 40.9 35.1 45.0 8.0 19.4 Volume Right 1 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 cSH 1700 1056 Incremental Delay.d2 135.5 0.5 142.6 4.5 22.6 Volume to Capacrty 0.01 0.00 Delay(s) 176.4 35.6 187.6 12.5 41.9 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 Level of Service F D F BD Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Approach Delay(s) 104.4 43.2 41.9 Lane LOS A Approach LOS F D D Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Iniociallumuri Approach LOS A HCM Average Control Delay 58.6 HCM Level of Service E iihnocionStawavi HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Average Delay 0.4 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost lane(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Cntical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Lght Report 008-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 5 M.E.Otto Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18/200810:40 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:40 am C ~- k 4\ t e ` 1 41 f -∎ 1 I- k1 t o `► 1 d Mo ISMIl ®R WBL WBT Wir= SBA Porr,ao* 1311. =• - - OUR Lane Confgurabons 447• 4 r" 1 1+ Lane Configurations 4• 4, 4. Volume(vph) 248 1605 37 244 2389 143 122 273 306 310 219 135 Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 903 3 11 632 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% D% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Frpb,pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 992 3 12 695 0 Flpb,oedPoikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedesmans 3 Frt 1.00 110 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Fit Protected 0.95 1.30 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(l/s) 4.0 Said.Flow(prot) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Percent Blockage 0 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 256 1655 38 252 2463 147 126 281 315 320 226 139 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 154 0 16 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.69 0.69 0.89 0.69 0.69 0.63 0.89 0.63 Lane Group Flow(vph) 256 1692 0 252 2605 0 0 407 161 320 349 0 vC,conflicting volume 1716 1717 698 1713 1716 994 698 996 Conn.Peds.(Mr) 14 9 5 16 vC1,stage 1 cool vol 722 722 994 994 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% vC2,stage 2 con(vol 994 996 719 722 Turn Type Prot Prot Sclit Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1447 1450 596 1443 1447 701 596 703 Protected Pnases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 IC.single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases a IC.2 stage Is) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 17.0 60.0 15.0 58.0 27.0 27.0 21.0 21.0 IF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 22 Effective Green,g(s) 17.0 60.0 15.0 58.0 27,0 27.0 21.0 21.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated g'C Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.11 0.41 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.15 cM capacity(vehfh) 226 234 449 233 241 280 877 572 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Mreellion.lane K EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 0 996 707 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 215 1495 190 2062 358 308 268 248 Volume Left 0 0 12 i v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 0.48 c0.14 c0.52 c022 0.18 c0.21 Volume Right 0 3 0 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 cSH 1700 877 572 vlc Ratio 1.19 1.13 1.33 125 1.14 0.52 1.19 141 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 012 Uniform Delay di 61.5 40.0 62.5 41.0 56.5 50.7 59.5 59.5 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(a) 0.0 0.0 0.6 Incremental Delay.d2 122.4 68.2 178.5 117 3 90.1 1.6 117.9 205.4 Lane LOS A A Delay Is) 183.9 1082 241.0 158.3 146.6 52.3 177.4 264.9 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.6 Level of Service F F F F F D F F Approach LOS A Approach Delay(s) 118.2 165.5 105.5 224.0 • Approach LOS 0 F F F ifteNdliiiikilW - - - . Average Delay 02 =' Intersection Capacity Mahon 51.0% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 150.2 HCM Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 124 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 140.0 Sum of lost time Is) 17.D Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.8% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Grouo #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light Report MEG-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 1 MEG-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11110/2008 10 42 a-, 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:40 am f 1 r ~ t 1 1 P ` 4✓ J 1 1 t 1 MaltrMet ESL EST EBR WBL MT ma tro. NBT NBR SBL Sat SBR Morwrt ESL EBR NHL NHT SST SBR Lane Configurations •t• 4 ri 7.4 h Tr Lane Configurations k1 iv NI ? 1' if Volume(vph) 65 16 71 375 212 288 28 554 137 77 440 1 Volume(vph) 96 324 256 755 778 97 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Uhl.Factor 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Uhl.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb.ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 100 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Said.Flow(pat) 1693 1829 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Satd.Flow(prat) 1770 1571 1805 1863 1863 1568 FB Permitted 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(perm) 1693 1829 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Said.Flow(perm) 1770 1571 1805 1863 1863 1568 Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Ads.Flow(vph) 68 17 74 391 221 300 29 577 143 80 458 1 Adj.Flow(vph) 103 348 275 612 837 104 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 30 0 0 0 194 0 8 0 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 69 0 0 0 24 Lane Group Flow(vein 0 129 0 0 612 106 29 712 0 80 459 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 103 279 275 512 637 60 Conn.Peds.(#/hr) 1 2 Conf.Peels.(ft/hr) 1 5 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 4% 1% D% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Turn Type pmvov Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 6 4 4 5 2 1 6 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green,G(s) 12.0 19.2 19.2 4.5 41.5 8.3 44.3 Actuated Green,G(s) 7.8 22.4 14.6 56.6 38.0 38.0 Effective Green,g(s) 12.0 19.2 19.2 4.5 41.5 8.3 44.3 Effective Green,g(s) 7.6 22.4 14.6 56.6 38.0 38.0 Actuated g7C Ratio 0.12 020 020 0.05 0.43 0.09 0.46 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.31 020 0.78 0.52 0.52 Clearance Time(s) 4,0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vphl 212 366 314 85 773 146 859 lane Grp Cap(vph) 191 573 364 1456 978 823 v/s Ratio Prot cO.08 c0.33 0.02 c0.40 c0.05 c025 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.10 c0.15 0.44 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 vie Ratio Perm 0.06 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.61 1.67 0.34 0.34 0.92 0.55 0.53 v/c Ratio 0.54 0.49 0.76 0.56 0.86 0.10 Uniform Delay,dl 39.8 38,4 32.9 44.3 25.7 42.1 18.5 Uniform Delay.d1 30.6 20.3 272 3.1 14,8 8.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 4.9 314.2 0.6 2.4 16.3 42 0.6 Incremental Delay,d2 2.9 0.7 B.6 0.5 7.4 0.1 Delay(s) 44.7 352.6 33.6 46.7 42.0 462 19.1 Delay(s) 33.5 21.0 35.9 3.5 22.3 8.7 Level of Service D F C D D D B Level of Service C C D A C A Approach Delay(s) 44.7 247.7 42.2 23.1 Approach Delay(s) 23.8 11.7 20.8 Approach LOS D F 0 C Approach LDS C B C HCM Average Control Delay 117.4 HCM Level of Service F HCM Average Control Delay 17.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length Is) 96.0 Sum of lost time(s) 19.0 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 72.4 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.1% ICU Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Penod(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group c Cntical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report #00-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6'Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11118/2008 10:40 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/18/2008 10:40 ant I 1 1 t 4 1 -+ • ! '_ 1 f *wed ®l. ®R OIL 1101 lit AMR _ Yra.aa Lane Configurations T. Lane Configurations , Volume(vph) 185 333 177 956 726 518 Volume(veh/h) 14 1 0 0 0 1 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Hourly flow rate(vph) 16 1 0 0 0 1 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Fri 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(Pos) Said.Flow(prof) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Percent Blockage FII Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Said.Flow(perm) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1735 Median type None None Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.96 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.98 Median storage veh) Adl.Flow(vph) 189 340 181 976 741 529 Upstream signal(n) RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 289 0 0 25 0 pX,platoon unblocked Lane Group Flow(vph) 189 51 181 976 1245 0 vC.conflicting volume 17 16 16 Conn.Peds.(#Jhr) 2 1 1 vC1,stage 1 coot vol Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% vC2,stage 2 conf vol Turn Type Perm Prot vCu.unblocked vol 17 16 16 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 IC,single(s) 4.1 6.4 82 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 stage(s) Actuated Green,G(s) 15.0 15.0 12.7 77.0 60.3 tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Effective Green g(s) 15.0 15.0 12.7 77.0 60.3 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 Actuated grC Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.77 0.60 cM capacity(veh/h) 1601 1002 1063 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 AMMON late R $.11 NB 1 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 17 1 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 268 232 225 1435 1046 Volume Left 0 0 vfs Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.10 0.52 6.72 Volume Right 1 1 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 cSH 1700 1063 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.22 0.80 0.68 1.19 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 Uniform Delay,01 40.4 37.4 42.4 5.6 19.8 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Incremental Delay.02 8.2 0.5 18.5 2.6 95.1 Lane LOS A Delay(s) 48.6 37.8 60.9 8.2 115.0 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Level of Service DD E A F Approach LOS A Approach Delay(s) 41.7 16.4 115.0 Approach LOS 0 B F Irimniesamort Average Delay 0.5 Inlerallifammori Intersection Capacity Utilization 13,3% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 63.3 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length.Is; 100.0 Sum of lost bore(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Ublzation 100.1% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Penod(mm) 15 c Critical Lane Gross #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light Report #08.45 The Knoll at Tgard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Synchro 7-Light: Report MEO-Charbonneau Engmeenng LLC Page 5 MEG-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/1812008 10:44 am 2:Apt drwy!Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11118/200810:44 am f -• 1 ! '- t 1 t I' ` 4' f -• 1 C t ■ t r ` 1 -' Ylrwt. Eel EST EBB WBL MT MR M. I T MR SEIL SBT SBR Iftweleint EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR 18L 18T NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '1 +1. ~ a.}p 4 ?+ l 1. Lane Configurations 4. 4. 4. Volume(vph) 136 1890 17 158 990 110 45 115 350 240 165 80 Volume(veh/h) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 573 3 15 334 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb,pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 674 4 18 393 0 Flpb.pedibikes 1.00 1.DC 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Lane Width(R) 12.0 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(Ns) 4.0 Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 3464 1703 4786 1775 1553 1787 1807 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 3464 1703 4786 1775 1553 1787 1807 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor.PI-IF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 139 1929 17 161 1010 112 46 117 357 245 168 82 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 143 0 15 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Lane Group Flow(vph) 139 1946 0 161 1111 0 0 163 214 245 235 0 vC.conlicUng volume 1109 1111 396 1108 1109 676 396 678 Confl.Peds.(#/hr) 6 4 vC1.stage 1 xnisot 431 431 678 678 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2,stage 2 conf vol 678 680 430 431 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1086 1087 328 1084 1086 676 328 678 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 fC.single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitteu Phases 8 IC,2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 11.6 63.0 12.0 63.4 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.D IF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 22 22 Effective Green,g(s) 11.6 63.0 12.0 63.4 14,0 14.0 14.0 14.0 00 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated g7C Ratio 0.10 0.52 0.10 0.53 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity(veh/h) 375 381 675 385 391 457 1168 924 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4,0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3A 3A �IfR�� 2 189 411 Lane G Cap h 171 1819 170 2529 207 181 208 211 Volume Total 2 679 418 Grp (vph) Volume Left 0 1 18 Ws Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.56 c0.09 023 0.09 c0.14 0.13 Volume Right 1 4 0 vis Ratio Perm c0.14 cSH 487 1168 924 vie Ratio 0.81 1.07 0.95 0.44 0.79 1.18 1.18 1.11 Volume to Capacity 9.00 0.00 D.02 Uniform Delay,d1 53.1 28.5 53.7 174 51.6 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 12.4 0.0 0.6 Incremental Delay.d2 24.6 42.5 53.1 0 6 17.7 124.3 118.7 95.8 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 77.8 71.0 106.7 17.9 69.3 177.3 171.7 148.8 Approach Delay(s) 12.4 0.0 0.6 Level of Service E E F B E F F F Apprcach LOS B Approach Delay(s) 71.5 29,1 143.5 160.1 Approach LOS E C F F Ivilmedko Busuroy Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 77.6 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.08 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 120.0 Sum of lost time(5) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utfizatron 98.9% tCU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 1 M.E.Otto Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:44 an 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:44 am f -• > r k 1 t , " 1 J 4\ t 1 Mltitrnrltt IiiriliVAMinerlik.. NOT .c S BBT R Homed BL EBR NBL NOT SST SIR Lane Configurations 4. 4' 14 I. Lane Configurations it R ` a Volume(vph) 90 69 14 74 36 86 7 400 307 96 209 2 Volume(vph) 71 225 139 696 227 65 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 190C 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utd.Factor 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Ulil.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1,00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prat) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Ftt Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sate.Flow(prot) 1800 1711 1468 1357 1683 1641 1800 Satd.Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Flt Permitted 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Satd.Flow(perm) 1800 1711 1468 1357 1683 1641 1800 Adj.Flow(vph) 84 265 164 819 267 76 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 158 0 0 0 51 Adj.Flow(vph) 1D3 79 16 85 41 99 8 460 353 110 240 2 Lane Group Flow(vph) 84 107 164 819 267 25 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 86 0 23 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 14% 7% 3% 4% 6% 10% Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 195 0 0 126 13 8 790 0 110 242 0 rum Type pm4ov Prot Perm Cone.Peds.(#!hr) 1 - 2 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% 0% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permitted Phases 8 2 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Actuated Green,G(s) 6.4 18.2 11.8 30.5 14.7 14.7 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Effective Green,g(5) 6.4 18.2 11.8 30.5 14.7 14.7 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.41 0.26 0.68 0.33 0.33 Actuated Green.G(s) 14.0 12.1 12.1 1.3 43.5 9.6 50.8 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Effectrve Green.g(s) 14.0 12.1 12.1 1.3 43.5 9.6 50.8 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated gip Ratio 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.46 0.10 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 226 746 460 1241 587 481 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.04 0.09 c0.45 0.15 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 26B 220 189 19 777 167 971 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.14 0.36 0.66 0.45 0.05 c/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.07 0.01 c0.47 c0.07 0.13 Uniform Delay,dl 17.4 8.4 13.5 4.2 11.9 10.3 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.57 0.07 0.42 1.02 0.66 025 Incremental Delay,d2 1.0 0.1 0.5 1.3 0.6 0.0 Uniform Delay,dl 38.3 38.6 36.1 46.1 25.4 40.7 11.6 Delay(s) 18.5 8.5 13.9 5.5 12.5 10.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service B A B A BB Incremental Delay,d2 9.5 3.6 0.2 14.4 36.7 9.0 0.1 Approach Delay(s) 10.9 6.9 12.0 Delay(s) 47.8 42.2 362 60.4 62.0 49.8 11.7 Approach LOS B A B Level of Service D DD _ E D B A IrdoeMINLIIimert pproach Delay(s) 47.8 39.6 62.0 23.6 HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A D D E C Approach LOS HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 hlsosalonSumasy _ Actuated Cycle Length(s) 44.9 Sum of lost lime(s) 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 48.6 HCM Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.3% ICU Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Analysis Period(min) 15 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 94.2 Sum of lost lime(s) 15.0 c Cntical Lane Group Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #0845 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 3 M.E.Otto Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/2008 10:44 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/181200810:44 am I ■ 1 ¶ 1 ✓ -, 1 e ~ 1 P • Mastahat al EBR Mt NBT UT SBR laranent EHT El It NM WBT 11C SIR _are Configurations `` '' NI f k Lane Configurations 1. r Volume(vph) 273 283 150 702 444 275 Volume(vehlh) 15 4 0 0 0 19 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Slop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Fri 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 Hourly flow rate(vph) 17 4 0 0 0 21 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Said.Flow(prat) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Lane Width(0) Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(1Vs) Satd.Flow(perm) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Percent Blockage Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Right tum flare(veh) Adi.Flow(vph) 307 318 169 789 499 309 Median type None None RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 250 0 0 25 0 Median storage veh) Lane Group Flew(vph) 307 68 169 789 753 0 Upstream signal(ft) Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3% 10% pX,platoon unblocked Tum Type Perm Prot vC,conflicting volume 21 19 19 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 %C1,stage 1 cont vol Permitted Phases 8 vC2.stage 2 tort vol Actuated Green.G(s) 21.4 21.4 11.7 70.6 54.9 vCu,unblocked vol 21 19 19 Effective Green,g(s) 21.4 21.4 11.7 70.6 54.9 IC,single(sf 4.1 6.4 62 Actuated g'C Ratio 3.21 021 0.12 0,71 0.55 IC.2 stage(s) Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 p0 queue tree% 100 100 98 Lane Grp Cap)vph) 358 332 201 1231 936 cM capacity(vetuth) 1595 999 1059 vls Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.10 0.45 c0.46 einclokblat, a, Iiil v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 Volume Total 21 21 v/c Retro 0.86 0.20 0.84 0.64 0.84 Volume Left 0 0 Uniform Delay,dl 37.8 32.3 43.2 7.9 18.8 volume Right 4 21 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 cSH 1700 1059 Incremental Delay,d2 18.0 0.3 25.9 2.6 8.8 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.02 Delay;s; 55.8 32.6 69.1 10.5 27.6 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 2 Level of Service E C E B C Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.5 Approach Delay(s) 44.0 20.8 27.6 Lane LOS A Approach LOS D C C Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.5 Iiiimicaliewarare --- - - Approach LOS A HCM Average Control Delay 29.2 HCM Level of Service C yy HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Average Delay 4.2 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Uhlizahon 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 5 M.E.Otto Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/182000 10-47 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:47 am 1 { ~ k 4 N t e ` 1 -' --• 4\ t P 1 4/ MOwIMet . f _ �1 SBR Yorr�l - 1181 1ST NBR SOL SST SIR Lane Configurations T'i I. T. 4 To Lane Configurations 40 44 4. Volume(vph) 196 1268 30 196 1888 113 97 216 243 245 174 107 Volume(veM,) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 716 14 14 499 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(a) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Feb,ped/brkes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Hourly Bow rate(vph) 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 787 15 15 548 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(tt/s) 4.0 Satd.Flow(pet) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 098 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 202 1307 31 202 1946 116 100 223 251 253 179 110 Upstream signal(II) 401 1041 RTOR Reouction(vph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 171 It 16 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.77 0.77 0.94 0.77 0.77 0.74 0.94 0.74 Lane Group Flow(vph) 202 1337 0 202 2057 0 0 323 80 253 273 0 vC,conflicting volume 1377 1384 551 1374 1377 795 551 802 Confl,Pads.(#/hr) 14 9 5 16 vCt,stage 1 conf vol 582 582 795 795 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% vC2,stage 2 conf vol 795 802 579 582 Tum Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu unblocked vol 1159 1169 488 1155 1159 547 488 558 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 C.single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 41 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 stage(s) 6.1 55 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 17.1 60.D 15.8 58.7 26.2 262 27.0 21.0 tF(si 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 22 22 Effective Green,g(s) 17.1 60.0 15.8 58.7 26.2 26.2 21.0 21.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.11 0.42 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.15 cM capacity(yell/hi) 315 315 546 324 325 400 1015 758 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Be 1 NS 1 31 1 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 0 802 564 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 216 1495 200 2107 348 299 268 248 Volume Left 0 0 15 Ws Rate)Prot c0.11 0.38 0.11 c0.41 c0.17 0.14 c0.17 Volume Right 0 15 D v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 cSH 1700 1015 758 v/c Ratio 0.94 0.89 1.01 0.98 0.93 027 0.94 1.10 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 092 Uniform Delay,dl 60.9 37.1 62.1 40.0 56.0 48.7 58.9 59.5 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(at 0.0 0.0 0.6 Incremental Delay.d2 43.1 8.6 66.2 14.8 302 0.5 39.7 86.6 Lane LOS A A Delay(0) 104,0 45.7 128.3 54.8 66.1 492 98.6 146.1 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.6 Level of Service F D F 0 F D F F Approach LOS A I Approach Delay(s) 53.3 61.3 70.0 123.9 Approach LOS D E E FSuoimov I S_v Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.9% CU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 66.7 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 140.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.3% CU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Gvouo #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report M.E.Otto Page 1 M.E.Otto Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:47 am 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:47 am -• 1 f 4 &. t o '•, 4 4' f 4\ 1 1 4 �r_ - T WeR Motort errt B - la ter 66T saR T Lane Configurations 4, ` T+ Lane Configurations ) r •E Volume(vph) 52 13 56 297 169 239 22 440 108 61 347 1 Volume(vph) 76 258 202 599 616 77 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Oil,Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.94 1.00 0.65 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 025 Fit Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 At Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prat) 1695 1830 1588 1805 1789 1887 1862 Satd.Row(prat) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Flt Permitted 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Said.Flow(perm) 1695 1830 1568 1805 1789 1687 1862 Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 1572 1805 1863 1863 1570 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 093 0.93 A .Flow(vph) 54 14 58 309 176 249 23 458 112 64 361 1 Adj.Flow(vph) 82 275 217 644 662 83 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 31 0 0 0 188 0 8 0 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 113 0 0 0 27 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 95 0 0 485 61 23 562 0 64 362 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 82 162 217 644 862 56 Confl.Peds.(#/hr) 1 2 Confl.Peds.(#/hr) 1 5 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green.G(s) 8.5 20.7 20.7 2.8 33.9 7.0 373 Actuated Green,G(0) 6.6 20.1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Effective Green,g(s) 8.5 20.7 20.7 2.6 33.9 7.0 37.3 Effective Green,g(s) 6.6 20.1 13.5 47.1 29.6 29.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.24 0.24 0.03 0.40 0.08 0.44 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.33 0.22 0.76 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.D 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(a) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 169 445 381 55 713 139 816 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 189 614 395 1422 894 753 vie Ratio Prot c0.06 c027 0.01 cO31 c0.04 0.19 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.08 c0.12 0.35 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.56 1.09 0.16 0.42 0.79 0.46 0.44 v/c Ratio 0.43 026 0.55 0.45 0.74 0.07 Uniform Delay,dl 36.5 32.2 25.3 40.5 22.5 372 16.7 Uniform Delay,dl 25.8 15.3 21.4 2.6 13.0 8.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 4.3 69.1 02 5.1 5.8 2.4 0.4 Incremental Delay,d2 1.6 0.2 1.6 0.2 3.3 0.0 Delay(s) 40.8 101.3 25.5 45.6 28.2 39.7 17.1 Delay(s) 27.4 15.6 23.0 2.9 16.3 8.7 Level of Service D F C D C D B Level of Service C BC A B A Approach Delay(s) 40.8 75.6 28.9 20.4 Approach Delay(s) 18.3 7.9 15.4 Approach LOS D E C C Approach LOS B A B v HCM Average Control Delay 46.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Average Controi Delay 12.7 HCM Level of Service 8 HCM Volume to Capacity rabo 0.82 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 85.1 Sum of lost time(s) 15.0 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 61.7 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.1% ICU Level of Service D Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report M.E.Otto Page 3 M.E.Otto Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11118/2008 1047 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11118/2008 10:47 am .1' 14N t 4 d -• -1 ,( 4- 4‘ t lro..a.ec Mo me �r Est wec V�R ane Conhgu ations j+ Lane Configurations i+ r Volume(vph) 150 266 144 759 576 416 Volume(velVh) 11 18 0 0 0 9 Ideal Flow(vphp0 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost base(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Hourly flow rate(vph) 12 20 0 0 0 10 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(ft/s) Satd.Flow(prat) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1734 Percent Blockage Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Right tum flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1734 Median type None None Peak-hour`actor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) Act.Flow(vph) 153 271 147 774 588 424 Upstream signal(6) RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 234 0 0 24 0 pX,platoon unblocked Lane Group Flow(vph) 153 37 147 774 988 0 vC.conflicting volume 32 22 22 Confl.Peds.(Mr) 2 1 1 vC1,stage 1 con(vol Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% vC2,stage 2 conf vol Turn Type Perm Prot vCu,unblocked vol 32 22 22 Protected Phases 8 1 8 2 IC.single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 Stage(S) Actuated Green,G(s) 13.5 13.5 11.8 78.5 62.7 IF(s) 22 3.5 3.3 Effective Green,g(s) 13.5 13.5 11.8 78.5 62.7 p0 queue free% 100 100 99 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.78 0.63 cM capacity iveh/h) 1580 994 1055 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.D 4.0 4.0 Pockm.Li it E31 NB 1 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 _ Volume Total 32 10 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 241 209 209 1462 1087 Volume Left 0 0 ' v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.08 0.42 c0.57 Volume Right 20 10 Ws Ratio Perm 0.02 cSH 1700 1055 vlc Ratio 0.63 0.18 0.70 0.53 0.91 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.01 Uniform Delay.d1 40.9 38.3 42.4 4.0 16.2 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 Incremental Delay,d2 5.4 0.4 10.2 1,4 12.6 Lane LOS A Delay(s) 46.3 38.7 52.7 5.3 28.8 Level of Service D D D A C Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.4 LOS A y L Approach Delay(s) 41.5 12.9 28.8 Approach LOS Approach LOS 0 B C & ! Average Delay 2.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Seneca A HCM Average Control Delay 24.8 HCM Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.6 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utitzahon 82.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light:Report M.E.Otto Page 5 M.E.Otto Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:51 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:51 am f -• 1 r ~ 4S � t e ti 1 41 f --• 1 c 4 4\ t ,". l d Mamma - !6L *mat- BL BT '. Lane Configurations Tr ++1, 4 T I j+ Lane Configurations 4. d+ 4* Volume(vph) 172 2382 22 199 1247 136 57 142 440 302 205 100 Volume(veh/h) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 723 3 19 423 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 -5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0,91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 851 4 22 498 0 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians 3 FrI 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Lane Width(ft) 12.0 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(fUs) 4.0 Satd.Flow(pro!) 1770 3464 1703 4787 1774 1553 1787 1807 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right tum flare(veh) Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 3484 1703 4787 1774 1553 1787 1807 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0:98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adj.Flow(vph) 176 2431 22 203 1272 139 58 145 449 308 209 102 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 135 0 15 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.65 0.65 0.91 0.65 0.65 0.60 0.91 0.60 Lane Group Flow(vph) 176 2453 0 203 1400 0 0 203 314 308 296 0 vC,conflicting volume 1400 1402 501 1399 1400 852 501 854 Confl.Pads.(#/hr) 6 4 1 vC1,stage 1 conf vol 545 545 855 855 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 1% 12% 3% 4% 1% 0% 0% vC2,stage 2 conf vol 855 856 544 545 Tum Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu,unblocked vol 1023 1025 398 1021 1023 424 398 427 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 (C,single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 IC,2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green.G(s) 12.0 63.0 12.0 63.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 22 Effective Green,g(s) 12.0 63.0 12.0 63.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 97 Actuated g'C Ratio 0.10 0.52 0.10 0.52 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 cM capacity(veh/h) 303 296 593 316 310 382 1060 688 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Direction Lane At E81 NB 1 SB 1 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Volume Total 2 855 520 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 177 1819 170 2513 207 181 208 211 Volume Left 0 1 22 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.71 c0.12 0.29 0.11 c0.17 0.16 Volume Right 1 4 0 v/s Ratio Perm c020 cSH 395 1060 688 oft Ratio 0.99 1.35 1.19 0.56 0.98 1.73 1.48 1.40 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.03 Uniform Delay,dl 54.0 28.5 54.0 19.1 52.9 53.0 53.0 53.0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 142 0.0 0,9 Incremental Delay,d2 65.7 160.5 130.8 0.9 56.8 352.3 240.3 2072 Lane LOS B A A Delay(s) 119.6 189.0 184.8 20.0 109.6 405.3 293.3 260.2 Approach Delay(s) 142 0.0 0.9 Level of Service F F F C F F F F Approach LOS B Approach Delay(s) 184.3 40.8 313.3 276.7 - Approach LOS F D F F 4 +711 Average Delay 0.4 -,_- Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.6% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 167.9 HCM Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.40 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 120.0 Sum of lost time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 121.5% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Aparbnents Synchro 7-Light Report MEG-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street& Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:51 am 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:51 am -' -• 1 t t 1 t ,. ', 1 J 1 1 t J mmingt E8L EBT EBR Vat. 1ST Wit larlibT 111111111rOr sea ammo Elul EBR BBL. IBT ROT SIR Lane Configurations -+» - ) 2t F are Configurations R r R t t ri Volume(vph) 114 87 18 94 46 106 9 505 389 122 263 3 Volume(vph) 90 285 176 881 287 82 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 one Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb.ped/brkes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 190 Fl 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flpb,oed/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fn 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prat) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Fit Protected 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prat) 1799 1712 1468 1357 1682 1641 1799 Satd.Flow(perm) 1583 1509 1752 1827 1792 1468 Fit Permitted 0.97 0,97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Satd.Flow(perm) 1799 1712 1468 1357 1682 1641 1799 Adj.Flow(vph) 106 335 207 1036 338 96 Peak-hour factor.PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 189 0 0 0 64 Adj.Flow(vph) 131 100 21 108 53 122 10 580 447 140 302 3 Lane Group Flow(vph) 106 146 207 1036 338 32 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 3 0 0 0 105 0 24 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 14% 7% 3% 4% 6% 10% Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 249 0 0 161 17 10 1003 0 140 305 0 Turn Type pm+ov Prot Perm Cool.Peds.(81hr) 1 1 2 Protected Phases B 1 1 6 2 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 0% 0% 11% 0% 10% 33% 5% 4% 10% 5% 50% Permitted Phases 8 2 Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Actuated Green,G(s) 7.1 23.0 15.9 37.6 17.7 17.7 Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Effective Green.g(s) 7.1 23.0 15.9 37.6 17.7 17.7 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 044 0.30 0.71 0.34 0.34 Actuated Green,G(s) 15.5 14.0 14.0 1.4 43.4 13.0 54.0 Clearance Tare(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Effective Green.g(s) 15.5 14.0 14.0 1.4 43.4 13.0 54.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated gIC Ratio 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.43 0.13 0.54 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 213 773 529 1304 602 493 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 42 v/s Ratio Prot cO.07 0.06 0.12 c0.57 0.19 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 276 238 204 19 723 211 963 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.19 0.39 0.79 0.56 0.07 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.09 0.01 c0.60 c0.09 0.17 Uniform Delay,dl 21.1 9.1 14.6 5.0 14.3 11.9 vls Ratio Perm 0.01 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.68 0.08 0.53 1.39 0.66 0.32 Incremental Delay,d2 1.8 0.1 0.5 3.4 1.2 0.1 Uniform Delay,dl 41.9 41.3 37,9 49.4 28.8 41.9 13.1 Delay(s) 23.0 92 15.0 8.4 15.5 11.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Level of Service C A B A B B Incremental Delay,d2 29.8 7 4 0.2 23.9 182.8 7.6 02 Approach Delay(s) 12.5 9.5 14.7 Delay(s) 71.8 48.7 38.0 73.3 211.6 49.5 13.3 Approach LOS B A B Level of Service E D 0 E F D B -Minocifighwirav • Approach Delay(s) 71.8 44.1 210.2 24.7 Approach LOS E C HCM Average Control Delay 112 HCM Level of Service B • HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 52.7 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 HCM Average Control Delay 128.7 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.0% ICU Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.07 Analysis Period(min) 15 Actuated Cycle Length Is) 100.9 Sum of lost time(sl 15.0 c Critical Lane Group Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 c Cnticat Lane Group 808-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report 808-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 3 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/2008 10:51 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/18/2008 10:51 am f 1 1 t l 1 -• 1 i 4- 1 P Mowout Ems Mwames1 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL'IIIIN Lane Configurations Iv Lane Configurations 1 r Volume(vph) 342 356 189 884 559 346 Volume(veldh) 19 4 0 0 0 19 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Stop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% Lane Util.Factor 1.00 t.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 Hourly flow rate(vph) 21 4 0 0 0 21 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Pedestnans Said.Flow(prat) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 lane Width(ft) FR Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(Ws) Said.Flow(perm) 1671 1553 1719 1743 1705 Percent Blockage Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Right turn flare(veh) Ac.Flow(vph) 384 400 212 993 828 389 Median type None None RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 324 0 0 23 0 Median storage veh) Lane Group Flow(vph) 384 76 212 993 994 0 Upstream signal(ft) Heavy Vehicles(%) 8% 4% 5% 9% 3°k 10% pX,platoon unblocked rum Type Perm Pmt vC,conflicting volume 26 23 23 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 vC1,stage 1 cant vol Permitted Phases 8 vC2.stage 2 cent vol Actuated Green,G(s) 182 182 10.0 73.8 59.8 vCu,unblocked vol 26 23 23 Effective Green,g(s) 18.2 18.2 10,0 73.8 59.8 IC,single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.10 0.74 0.60 IC.2 stage(s) Clearance Time(a) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 98 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 304 283 172 1286 1020 • cM capacity(veh/h) 1589 993 1053 v/s Ratio Prot c023 c0.12 0.57 c0.58 IlisokaaVait 7 761 NB 1 vls Ratio Penn 9.05 Volume Total 26 21 v/c Ratio 126 0.27 123 0.77 0.97 Volume Left 0 0 Uniform Delay,dl 40.9 352 45.0 8.0 19.4 Volume Right 4 21 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 cSH 1700 1053 Incremental Delay,d2 142.1 0.5 144.8 4.5 22.8 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.02 Delay(s) 183.0 35.7 189.8 12.5 42.1 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 2 Level of Service F D F BD Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.5 Approach Delay(s) 107.8 43.7 42.1 Lane LOS A Approach LOS F D D Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.5 - - Approach LOS A HCM Average Control Delay 59.9 HCM Level of Service E blenedin gay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Average Delay 3.8 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Cepaclty Utilization 13.3% CU Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.9% CU Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Penod(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report #0845 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report MEG-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:55 am 2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard 11/10/200810:55am f -• l r '- k. 4 N t e `. 1 4' f -. •■ c ~- k- 4.\ t o `. 1 ilttrtutlt Eli.. -BT EBR two. WBT WEIR P . 1ST illit Alit • au MR IkNool EBL HIT EBR Wilk. WWI WBR 11*. NOT NOR _ a9' SON Lane Configurations s{ f . ) fti. 4 Tv 1.. Lane Configurations 4. 4. 4. Volume(vph) 248 1605 38 247 2389 143 123 273 307 310 220 135 Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 905 15 16 632 0 Ideal Flow(venal) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Total Lost time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 40 4.0 Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% one Ulil.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0,91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Frpb,pedlb kes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 995 16 18 695 0 Flpb.ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestnans 3 Fin 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) 120 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0,95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Walking Speed(ft/s) 4.0 Setd.Flow(prat) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Percent Blockage 0 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Sabi.Flow(perm) 1770 3489 1770 5025 1858 1599 1787 1653 Median type TWLTL TWLTL Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Median storage veh) 2 2 Adl.Flow(vph) 256 1655 39 255 2463 147 127 281 316 32D 227 139 Upstream signal(ft) 401 1041 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 154 0 16 0 pX,platoon unblocked 0.69 0.69 0.89 0.69 0.69 0.63 0.89 0.63 Lane Group Flow(vph) 256 1693 0 255 2605 0 0 408 162 320 350 0 vC.conflicting volume 1735 1744 698 1732 1735 1003 698 1011 Cont.Peds.(#mr) 14 9 _ 16 vCt,stage 1 conf vol 733 733 1003 1003 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 3% 0% 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 1% 9% 3% vC2,stage 2 cost rot 1003 1011 730 733 Tum Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split vCu.unblocked vol 1474 1486 596 1469 1474 712 596 725 Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 IC,single(s) 7.1 6,5 62 7.1 6.5 62 4.1 4.1 Permitted Phases 8 IC 2 stage(s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Actuated Green,G(s) 17.0 60.0 15.0 58.0 27.0 27.0 21.0 21.0 IF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 22 22 Effective Green,g(s) 17.0 60.0 15.0 58.0 27.0 27.0 21.0 21.0 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 97 Actuated giC Ratio 0.12 0.43 0.11 0.41 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.15 cM capacity(veh/h) 217 223 449 228 236 275 877 560 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 - Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 � t B� Volume Total 0 1011 712 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 215 1495 190 2082 358 308 268 248 Volume Left 0 0 18 vts Ratio Prot 0.14 0.49 c0.14 c0.52 c0.22 0.18 c021 Volume Right 0 16 0 vls Ratio Perm 0.10 cSH 1700 877 56C v/c Ratio 1.19 1.13 1.34 125 1.14 0.53 1.19 1.41 Volume to Capacity 0 00 0.00 0.03 Uniform Delay,dl 61.5 40.0 62.5 41.0 56.5 50.7 59.5 59.5 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(sl D.0 0.0 0.9 Incremental Delay,d2 122.4 68.5 184.9 117.3 91.1 1.6 117.9 207.1 Lane LOS A A Delay(s) 183.9 108.5 247.4 158.3 147.6 52.4 177.4 266.6 Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.9 Level of Service F F F F F D F F Approach LOS A Approach Delay Is) 118.4 1662 106.1 225.0 Approach LOS F F F F lalleildiallmenrj - ---- Idosixisnikeimirn - - -- - -- Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.9% ICU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 150.7 HCM Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 124 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 140.0 Sum of lust time(s) 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.9% CU Level of Service H Analysis Period(min) 15 c Cntical Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report #08.45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light. Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard 11118/2008 10:55 am 5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard 11/18/2008 10:55 am J -. ti r 4- &. .\ t r ` 1 d 1 t 1 I _.. °k ,#3T lea--,1116L WET WBR NBL IMAIlli111 SBL SBT Sol Yrhseno tk- . - EBL.AMINE NBT SBT SBR - Lane Configurations 4, 4 P` i T+ ) I. Lane Configurations a1 iv /1 t 4 (5 Volume(vph) 66 16 71 376 212 299 28 556 137 77 440 1 Volume(vph) 96 324 256 757 779 97 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,pedlbikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb,ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb,ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fe 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Fe 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prof) 1694 1829 1568 1805 178E 1687 1862 Said.Flow(prot) 1770 1571 1805 1863 1863 1568 Flt Permitted 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(perm) 1694 1829 1568 1805 1788 1687 1862 Said.Flow(perm) 1770 1571 1805 1863 1863 1568 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj.F/ow(vph) 69 17 74 392 221 311 29 579 143 80 458 1 Adj.Flow(vph) 103 348 275 814 838 104 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 30 0 0 0 202 0 7 0 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 69 0 0 0 24 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 130 0 0 613 109 29 715 0 80 459 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 103 279 275 814 838 80 Confl.Peds.(#!hr) 1 2 Confl.Peds.(#/hr) 1 5 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 3% 0% 2% 5% 7% 2% 0% Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% Turn Type Split Split Perm Prot Prot Tum Type pm+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 8 Protected Phases 8 1 1 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 Permitted Phases B 2 Actuated Green,G(s) 12.0 19.2 19.2 4.5 41.5 8.3 44.3 Actuated Green,G(s) 7.8 22.4 14.6 56.6 38.0 38.0 Effective Green,g(s) 12.0 19.2 19.2 4.5 41.5 8.3 44.3 Effective Green,g(s) 7.8 22.4 14.6 56.6 38.0 38.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.20 0.20 0.05 0.43 0.09 0.46 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.31 0.20 0.78 0.52 052 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 212 366 314 85 773 146 859 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 191 573 364 1456 978 823 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.34 0.02 c0.40 c0.05 c025 Ws Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.10 c0.15 0.44 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.61 1.67 0.35 0.34 0.92 0.55 0.53 vlc Ratio 0.54 0.49 0.76 0.56 0.86 0.10 Uniform Delay,dl 39.8 38.4 33.0 44.3 25.8 42.1 18.5 Uniform Delay,dl 30.6 20.3 272 3.1 14.9 8.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 5.2 315,4 0.7 2.4 16.7 4.2 0.6 Incremental Delay,d2 2.9 0.7 8.6 0.5 7.5 0.1 Delay(s) 45.0 353.8 33.7 46.7 42.4 462 19.1 Delay(s) 33,5 21.0 35.9 3.5 22.4 8.7 Level of Service 0 F CD D D B Level of Service C C D A C A Approach Detay(s) 45.0 246.1 42.6 23.1 Approach Delay(s) 23.8 11.7 20.8 Approach LOS D F D C Approach LOS C B C ll _ _ HCM Average Control Delay 117.5 HCM Level of Service F HCM Average Control Delay 17.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 96.0 Sum of lost time(s) 19.0 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 72.4 Sum of lost time(s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.3% ICU Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% CU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group c Cnticat Lane Group #08-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report #0 8-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report MEG-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue 11/18/2008 10:55 am 7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 11/18/2008 10:55 am f 1 1 t ! 4/ -• ■ l ' 1 r 11to mac BM. BR MR. NU .- ORR l_i_ EST ERR ROL WIT tell ill ane Configurations k f '1 + A Lane Configurations i+ r Volume(vph) 188 335 181 956 726 523 Volume(veh/h) 14 18 0 0 0 9 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Sign Control Free Free Slop Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Grade 0°A 0% 0% Lane UUI.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Frpb,ped/brkes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Hourly flow rate(vph) 16 20 0 0 0 10 Flpb.ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.94 Lane Width(ft) Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Walking Speed(Ns) Sold.Flow(prat) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1734 Percent Blockage Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Right turn flare(veh) Satd.Flow(peon) 1787 1547 1770 1863 1734 Median type None None Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Median storage veh) Adj.Flow(Yoh) 192 342 165 976 741 534 Upstream signal(61 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 290 0 0 26 0 pX.platoon unblocked Lane Group Flow(vph) 192 52 185 976 1249 0 vC,conflicting volume 36 26 26 Confl.Pads.(Mr) 2 1 1 vCt,stage 1 conf vol Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% vC2,stage 2 coal vol Turn Type Perm Prot vCu,unblocked vol 36 26 26 Protected Phases 8 1 6 2 C.single(01 4.1 6.4 6.2 Permitted Phases 8 IC.2 stage(si Actuated Green.G(s) 15.0 15.0 12.9 77.0 60.1 IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Effective Green,g(s) 15.0 15.0 12.9 77.0 60.1 p0 queue free% 100 100 99 Actuated gIC Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.77 0.60 cM capacity(venlh) 1575 990 1050 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 f��otal �6 10 w:.. Lane Grp Cap h 268 232 228 1435 1042 Volume Total 36 10 rD p(vP 1 Volume Left 0 0 v/s Rata Prot c0.11 c0.10 0.52 c0.72 Volume Right 20 10 vls Ratio Perm 0.03 cSH 1700 1050 vlc Rabo 0.72 0.22 0.81 0.68 120 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.01 Uniform Delay,dt 40.5 37.4 42.4 5.6 20.0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 Progression Factor 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.5 Incremental Delay,d2 8.8 0.5 19.3 2.6 98.9 Lane LOS A Delay(s) 49.3 37.9 61.6 8.2 118.8 Level of Service D D E A F Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8 LOS A Approach Delay(s) 42.0 16.7 118.8 Approach LOS A Approach LOS D B rr IMINISCIOVI SUWON Average Delay 1.9 IId0101t'1if Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% CU Level of Service A HCM Average Control Delay 65.1 HCM Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.06 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.6 Sum of lost time(01 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.8% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period(mm) 15 c Critical Lane Group 408-45 The Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light Report 408-45 Tne Knoll at Tigard 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments Synchro 7-Light: Report ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 5 MEO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 6 ieCHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING 1 Queuing Analysis The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 9.56 air 111-.812038 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 9:56 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard &ilia 1 1hB _iii ie NB SB as B34 *mod ® ® h6 Ill M. It Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R LTR T Directions Served L R L T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 207 627 634 192 153 178 212 295 202 268 389 25 Maximum Queue(ft) 100 51 93 163 143 86 Average Queue(ft) 149 519 526 120 B9 103 144 154 160 220 288 11 Average Queue(ft) 57 31 56 86 83 32 95th Queue(ft) 277 775 781 230 167 190 234 343 236 369 544 63 95th Queue(ft) 114 61 101 187 157 95 Link Distance(It 613 613 605 605 605 467 569 109 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) B 8 0 6 2 Upstream Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 3 25 2 10 2 13 Storage Blk Time(%) 1 3 5 3 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 25 32 6 15 4 29 Queuing Penalty(veh) 2 23 6 2 0 Intersection:2:Apt divvy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue -- . ..- - fix , ir— . Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L 9 L T TR I Maximum Queue(ft) 6 39 Maximum Queue(It) 325 151 136 262 381 17 Average Queue(ft) 2 10 Average Queue(ft) 169 90 91 133 248 4 95th Queue Oft 16 49 95th Queue(ft) 366 215 155 28B 465 32 Link Distance(ft) 135 423 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream Blk Time(%) Upstream Blk Time(%) 4 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) B 0 4 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 20 0 29 3 Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access • BB BB Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Directions Served Maximum Queue[1t) 135 6 76 50 16 348 94 133 Maximum Queue(Iq Average Queue(ft) 97 1 49 25 5 256 60 62 Average Queue(ft) 95th Queue(h) 142 10 79 63 22 392 104 155 95th Queue(ft) Link Distance(ft) 133 221 2490 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) Upstream Blk Time(%) 7 Upstream Blk Time(%) Queuing Penally(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(8) 275 45 90 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%( 0 38 3 2 Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 1 3 6 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty.209 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV AM Peak Hour SimTratiic Report 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV AM Peak Hour SimTratic Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 1 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10 03 an 11:16'2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) t0:oo am 11/18/2008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:3:Scoffins!Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard WB We WB WB NB NB B4 Be SB Nisiwitaimmi- ES WB WB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L I T TR LT R T L TR Directions Served LTR LT 0 L TR L TR Maximum Queue(It) 227 476 478 245 399 411 442 538 207 361 234 450 Maximum Queue(ft) 86 666 255 44 368 77 214 Average Queue(ftj 161 336 338 173 305 324 351 439 122 201 151 316 Average Queue(ft) 64 396 113 17 227 42 108 95th Queue(ft) 266 505 499 272 446 447 473 695 265 512 306 615 95th Queue(ft) 111 808 306 52 487 92 228 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Link Distance(ft) 103 2490 1312 336 Upstream Blk Time(%) 0 40 13 11 Upstream 811(Time(%) 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 268 90 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Blk Time(%) 7 10 58 0 2 20 Storage Blk Time(%) 24 0 3 39 2 11 Queuing Penalty(veh) 44 19 132 0 6 47 Queuing Penalty(veh) 52 0 13 8 7 6 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard . _ EB NB IS 112 88 S8 Directions Served T Directions Serves L R L T T T R Maximum Queue(ft) 25 Maximum Queue(ft) 62 78 93 217 10 359 111 Average Queue 19) 16 Average Queue(ft) 43 49 73 97 4 219 33 95th Queue(6) 82 95th Queue(ft) 77 87 107 240 24 377 104 _ink Distance(ft) 109 - _nit Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream BIk Time(%) 9 Upstream Blk lime(%) 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage 61k Time(%) 14 2 18 0 Queumg Penalty(veh) Queumg Penalty(veh) 80 4 13 0 Intersection:2 Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue limolk— ..__ _ Ali _ _ (mist- • Ell ES 1! IUD 8B B$ Directions Served LTR LTR Drections Served L R L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 136 10 Maximum Queue(ft) 154 121 161 240 470 150 Average Queue(ft) 56 2 Average Queue(ft) 97 64 104 150 354 49 95th Queue(D) 240 19 95th Queue(ft) 181 129 175 264 573 211 Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream Bpc Time(%) 6 Upstream Blk Time(%) 1 7 Queuing Penalty)veh) 43 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%1 Storage Blk Time(%) 1 3 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 2 23 4 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour SirnTraffic Report 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report MOO-Charbcnneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MOO-Charbonneau Engmeenng LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) t0:0oam 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:04 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Mown* EB EB efiBt=__UB YrB IN: IS NB li:- SI SI Directions Served Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R L TR Maximum Queue(I<) Maximum Queue(ft) 220 641 639 176 159 187 220 221 209 303 340 Average Queue(ft) Average Queue(ft) 125 596 598 129 105 140 166 118 169 229 223 95th Queue(ft) 95th Queue(ft) 242 713 713 240 176 219 251 238 239 340 385 Link Distance(ft) Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 569 Upstream Blk Time(%) Upstream Blk Time(%) 19 18 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Blk Time("Ai Storage Blk Time(%) 1 34 1 8 4 2 Queuing Penalty)veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 6 46 4 13 9 5 Network Summary Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Network wide Queuing Penalty 865 tivisaar".77- •- — -- - - . - Directions Served LTR Maximum Queue(ft( 26 Average Queue(ft) 6 95111 Queue(ft) 39 Link Distance(ft) 423 Upstream 81k Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard doh`' a an !Ye 1N8 NB NO sa SB Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Maximum Queue(ft) 131 16 92 42 16 492 102 105 Average Queue(ft) 90 3 56 20 6 343 56 57 95th Queue(ft) 149 21 111 47 26 644 111 119 Link Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Upstream Blk Time(%) 10 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Blk Time(%) 0 41 4 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) 3 3 8 2 2008 Balanced Base Year 30HV PM Peak Hour SimTralfic Report 2011 Background Traffic AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 3 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:04 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:16 am 11/1812008 Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Directions Served L R L T T R Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R T LTR Maximum Queue(ft) 83 52 72 167 144 39 Maximum Queue(ft) 240 458 478 274 476 481 504 536 212 353 342 636 Average Queue(ft) 49 27 50 90 79 16 Average Queue(ft) 179 362 378 222 354 376 394 463 164 222 234 480 95th Queue 0) 91 57 81 192 151 49 9591 Queue(ft) 284 541 556 405 513 514 526 672 283 530 401 764 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1312 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Upstream Blk lime(%) 0 Upstream 81k lime(%) 0 0 40 13 23 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 283 93 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Blk Time(%) 3 6 3 Storage Blk Time(%) 4 15 59 0 0 48 Queuing Penalty(veh) 18 9 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) 24 30 143 1 1 117 Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue _ Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Directions Served L R L T TR T Directions Served T Maximum Queue(ft) 268 172 167 287 406 62 Maximum Queue(ft) 80 Average Queue(ft) 174 83 120 180 286 24 Average Queue(ft) 39 95th Queue(ft) 283 197 186 357 522 159 95111 Queue(8) 129 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Link Distance(ft) 109 Upstream 8Ik lime(%) 5 4 Upstream Blk lime(%) 13 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%) 4 10 4 Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 10 73 6 Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard rved Directions Served LTR LTR Maximum Queue(ft) Maximum Queue(ft) 272 74 Average Queue(ft) Average Queue(ft) 80 18 95th Queue(ft) 95th Queue(ft) 299 104 Link Distance(ft) Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Upstream Blk lime(%) Upstream 01k lime(%) 5 Queuing Penalty(vet) Queuing Penalty(veh) 37 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(vet) Queuing Penalty(vet) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty:216 2011 Background Traffic AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:16 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1016 an 111812006 Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access +�a NB NB NI $ Se Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Directions Served maximum Queue(ft) 118 9 554 297 52 428 103 216 Maximum Queue(ft) Average Queue(0) 71 2 341 179 21 243 58 120 Average Queue(ft) 95th Queue(ft) 131 17 596 374 57 494 112 234 95th Queue(ft) Link Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) Upstream Blk Time(%) 8 Upstream Bfk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Disl(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Bay Dist(8) Storage Blk Time(%) 22 0 5 40 1 11 Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 49 0 25 9 4 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard Network Summary __ _ ra Si se Network wide Queuing Penalty 979 Directions Served L R L T T T R Maximum Queue(ft) 81 137 93 198 15 354 92 Average Queue(ft) 47 70 71 104 3 198 37 95th Queue(ft) 87 150 108 242 28 382 113 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 1 10 4 19 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 1 59 8 15 1 Intersection:fi.Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue awor g. • !E * a BIB Directions Served L R L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 142 128 157 280 484 206 Average Queue(ft) 87 74 110 160 385 90 95th Queue(ft) 157 156 180 309 587 446 _ink Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream 81k Time(%) 6 8 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time 1%1 0 0 9 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 67 4 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report 2011 Background Traffic PM Peak Hour SimTrafc Report ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 12:55 pm 11/20/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 12:55 pm 11/20/2008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard . T Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R T L TR Directions Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 228 632 636 ' 167 177 204 223 356 201 13 272 358 Maximum Queue(ft) 87 79 85 148 42 187 66 Average Queue(ft) 119 533 563 114 115 135 173 183 165 3 187 224 Average Queue(ft) 43 37 52 73 8 105 26 95th Queue(ft) 243 785 731 186 200 233 259 413 233 23 304 399 95th Queue(16 95 87 97 181 75 216 75 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream BIk Time(%) 14 15 1 Upstream BIk Time(%) 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 5 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 1 30 5 12 2 3 Storage Blk Time(%) 0 0 3 4 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) 9 41 18 18 4 6 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 22 5 4 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L _ R L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 6 11 Maximum Queue(ft) 344 230 166 272 461 77 Average Queue(ft) 1 2 Average Queue(ft) 228 114 130 182 304 16 95th Queue(ft) 10 19 95th Queue(ft) 451 248 196 336 539 114 Link Distance(ft) 135 423 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream 8&lime(%) Upstream BIk Time(%) 10 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage BIk Time(%) Storage elk Time(%) 13 0 11 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 37 0 80 6 Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Directions Served R Maximum Queue(ft) 135 5 123 72 8 505 110 148 Maximum Queue(ft) 22 Average Queue(ft) 96 1 75 32 3 345 71 76 Average Queue(ft) 4 951h Queue(ft) 158 9 134 83 19 639 122 165 95th Queue(ft) 22 Link Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) 237 Upstream BIk Time(%) 8 Upstream BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage BIk Time(%) 0 37 7 4 Storage BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 1 3 15 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty 278 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTratic Report 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraffic Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1:08 pm 11/20(2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1:08 pm 11/2012008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Iiii.... 1111 JIM we we NB NB 84 SB S Yorrrrlt EB WI WO W8 NB Ni. SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R I L TR Directions Semen LTR T LT R L TR L TR Maximum Queue(ft) 253 545 543 281 468 467 500 512 212 269 344 636 Maximum Queue(ft) 118 5 535 222 44 358 80 135 Average Queue(ft) 190 406 415 186 361 372 402 392 122 126 247 429 Average Queue MI 74 1 343 109 16 204 44 75 95th Queue(ft) 310 600 602 347 513 519 538 649 265 411 374 765 9501 Queue(ft) 142 9 724 291 49 392 88 147 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 _irk Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Upstream 91k Time(%) 1 1 25 9 19 Upstream Blk Time(%) 5 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 181 62 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Blk Time(% 7 17 52 2 1 36 Storage Blk Time(%) 20 0 3 39 1 5 Queuing Penalty(veh) 41 34 125 7 3 89 Queuing Penalty(veh) 47 0 14 9 3 3 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard k -T-" .T"!` Nom ` U EB NB NB 812 SB s8 Directions Served T Directions Served L R L T T T P. Maximum Queue(ft) 78 Maximum Queue(ft) 75 85 89 185 38 264 108 Average Queue(Si 34 Average Queue(ft) 43 50 66 87 8 170 38 95th Queue(ft) 117 95th Queue(ft) 85 96 105 221 51 281 116 Link Distance(ft) 109 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 11 Upstream(ilk Time(%) 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 0 9 3 15 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 53 6 11 0 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue lismi BC NIB O. Bloweren ES EB NB NB S8 sa Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L R L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 139 54 Maximum Queue(ft) 186 173 147 280 511 313 Average Queue(ft) 42 12 Average Queue(ft) 102 98 109 160 426 120 95th Queue(ft) 227 73 95th Queue(ft) 220 202 190 325 619 356 Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream 81k Time(%) 3 Upstream Blk Time(%) 3 13 Queuing Penalty(veh) 25 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%i Storage Blk Time(%) 2 8 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 3 58 5 • 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-win Single Family SlmTra9iic Report 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraSic Report ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MEO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 138 pm 11i23!2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 16 am 11:2012008 Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard teNnwe r '^"''1s EB Ee we we `rls s37 NB NB B4 se Directions Served R Directions Served L T TR L T T TR T LT R - Maximum Queue(ft) 12 Maximum Queue(ft) 254 639 628 493 302 234 267 8 391 210 6 344 Average Queue(ft) 3 Average Queue 11) 162 606 601 358 157 169 204 2 217 187 1 334 95th Queue(ft) 18 95th Queue(ft) 302 810 804 562 357 267 298 14 450 243 11 375 Link Distance(ft) 237 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 585 467 423 Upstream BIk Time(%) Upstream 01k Time(%) 30 32 0 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 1' Storage Bay Ost(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage BIk Time(%I Storage Blk Time(%) 17 32 3 6 13 58 Queuing Penalty(vet) Queuing Penalty(vet) 202 55 12 27 26 177 Network Summary Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Network wide Queuing Penalty 77e Directions Served TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 642 124 Average Queue(4) 604 80 95th Queue(ft) 733 175 Link Distance(ft) 569 109 Upstream BIk Time(%) 49 35 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage BIk Time(%) 23 Queuing Penalty(veh) 70 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard tit ES Se Directions Served LTR LTR Maximum Queue(ft) 6 46 Average Queue(ft) 1 13 95th Queue(ft) 11 47 Link Distance(8) 135 423 Upstream BSc Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay 0ist(II) Storage BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTrafhc Report 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraftc Report ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1 16 pm 1/12012008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1:16 pm 1120!2008 Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7.Knoll Drive&Site Access itfii"irt-. _. vs we we A - _AB _ avow I. W*WIT .;a Directions Served LTR 7 LT R ' TR L TR Directions Serves R Maximum Queue(It) 146 50 104 66 12 1250 103 126 Maximum Queue(ft) 23 Average Queue(ft) 112 30 75 34 6 899 68 56 Average Queue(ft) 5 95th Queue(ft) 189 108 126 76 33 1513 118 143 95th Queue(ft) 22 Link Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) 237 Upstream Blk Time(%) 26 6 Upstream Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 56 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(fl) 275 45 90 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bik Time(%) 3 46 8 4 Storage Blk Time I%1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 23 4 22 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard Network Summary _. ,..'�. * . - .� .�.... ._ ,.mss • Network wde Queuing Penalty-.1111 Directions Served L R L T T T R Maximum Queue(ft) 111 BB 93 270 205 180 75 Average Queue(ft) 66 43 68 166 63 103 24 95th Queue(ft) 131 93 111 322 306 197 82 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 9 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 0 0 4 15 8 Queuing Penally(veh) 1 0 36 27 7 Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue Mumma it E 1111- ea sa ei Directions Served L R L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 440 230 174 292 461 98 Average Queue(ft) 298 168 151 218 366 36 95th Queue(ft) 513 300 200 367 579 173 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream Blk Time(%) 1 16 6 Queuing Penalty(veh) 3 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) 27 1 27 5 Queuing Penalty(veh) 96 5 237 10 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraffic Report 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraffic Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1:36 pm 11/20/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 36 pm 11/20(2008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard al t3 WB we en ft-77,1111t Me en en --IN I—let– we AMIN. ea 58 s8 Directions Served L T TR - ITR TT T T Directions Served LTR I Li R L TR L TR Maximum Queue(ft) 236 639 627 563 660 663 648 470 486 331 391 34 Maximum Queue(ft) 148 34 1102 300 47 605 90 195 Average Queue(ft) 224 593 590 332 614 584 578 296 309 156 184 7 Average Queue(ft) 86 7 691 214 20 384 49 105 95th Queue(ft) 291 728 719 605 825 785 755 781 602 584 665 61 95th Queue(ft) 157 38 1286 404 53 732 96 211 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 585 585 2566 2566 169 Link Distance(ft) 103 221 249D 1312 336 Upstream 81k Time(%) 21 19 15 10 9 7 8 Upstream 81k Time(%) 11 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Blk Time(%) 32 24 2 17 Storage Blk Time(%) 51 1 9 46 0 8 Queuing Penalty(vets) 255 59 15 41 Queuing Penalty(veh) 146 7 60 13 0 6 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard IF- 9! Ot_ 58 834 E8 a 11B ie 812 SB SB Directions Served LT R T L TR T Directions Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 532 212 356 344 615 99 Maximum Queue(ft) 115 174 93 267 66 432 70 Average Queue(ft) 455 142 193 260 519 64 Average Queue(ft) 59 85 86 146 16 233 27 9501 Queue(ft) 665 278 515 428 806 163 95th Queue(ft) 121 187 106 297 76 493 83 Link Distance(ft) 467 423 569 109 .ink Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 34 15 36 26 Upstream Blk Time(%) 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) 308 136 0 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 58 2 13 42 Storage 81k Time(%1 2 22 5 18 Queuing Penally(veh) 179 8 45 130 Queuing Penalty(yell) 2 165 12 18 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue IllIrin+ __.. —__._ _ C ibusan p BB is to SB 11x1 II13 1198 8If. Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L R L T TR T T T T Maximum Queue(ft) 201 61 Maximum Queue(It) 278 223 174 282 515 890 279 214 350 Average Queue ft) 70 21 Average Queue(ft) 166 161 146 223 445 770 181 90 129 95th Queue(ft) 279 122 95th Queue(ft) 339 278 204 377 719 1253 448 293 598 Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 277 202 827 Upstream Blk Time(%) 8 Upstream 81k Time(%) 17 32 18 12 9 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 68 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Drsl(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 5 11 26 5 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 16 19 248 10 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraYc Report 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraffc Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1:36 pm 11120/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:22 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Manage EI El ES VIM WI WI WI NI NII.- 841 s8 9I Directions Served Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R T L TR Maxmum Queue(ft) Maximum Queue(ft) 203 628 636 221 191 216 217 347 212 58 307 362 Average Queue(ft) Average Queue(ft) 119 561 560 150 106 135 168 201 168 18 248 280 95th Queue(ft) 95th Queue(ft) 250 795 796 245 197 229 249 453 243 118 358 536 Link Distance(ft) Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Upstream Ilk Time(%) Upstream Blk Time(%) 15 16 6 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 33 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(8) 230 560 187 320 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 3 30 11 10 6 11 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 31 41 37 15 14 27 Network Summary Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Network wide Queuing Penalty 1265 Movois it Directions Served T Maximum Queue(ft) 25 Average Queue(ft) 6 95th Queue(ft) 48 Link Distance(ft) 109 Upstream Blk Time(%) 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard MtYal Ell alk Directions Serven LTR LTR Maximum Queue(ft) 12 20 Average Queue(ft) 2 6 95th Queue(ft) 16 34 Link Distance(ft) 135 423 Upstream Ilk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(vein) 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Single Family SimTraffic Report 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Sim Traffic Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:22 am 1108/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1022 an 11;162008 Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access 1711V-1111M1=11111r9111131111111 -411 Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Directions Served Maximum Queue(ft) 120 14 92 52 26 422 97 95 Maximum Queue(ft) Average Queue(ft) 72 3 54 18 10 300 71 66 Average Queue(ftl 95th Queue(ft) 136 19 106 51 38 547 121 142 9581 Queue(ft) Link Distance(Si 103 221 249C 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) Upstream BBC Time(%) 4 Upstream 91k Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%; 1 37 10 2 Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 4 3 22 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:5:Burnham Street& Hall Boulevard Network Summary amiont EB to 812 BB Network w de Queuing Penalty 386 Directions Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 91 64 88 198 42 180 50 Average Queue(ft) 45 34 54 72 8 113 19 95th Queue(ft) 108 69 101 203 75 225 64 Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 1 Queuing Penally(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 0 4 4 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 31 5 5 Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue twt..e _g a rIe a AI east Directions Served L R L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 339 192 162 281 473 49 Average Queue(ft) 230 106 112 157 309 10 95th Queue(ft) 457 252 191 317 517 55 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream Blk Time(%) 4 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) 16 0 10 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 44 1 68 6 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing Simlrafc Report 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTraffic Report MED-Charbcnneau Ergineenng LLC Page 2 MOO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 3 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:27 am 11)18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:27 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard il- -_. a !6 7 i 7 I. BB ihiWiiiir"- MIL we we NB we se BB .._ Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R T LTR Directions Served LTR LT R L TR L TR Maximum Queue(ft) 239 520 523 246 493 507 513 538 212 294 344 587 Maximum Queue(ft) 98 761 260 39 315 106 169 Average Queue(ftl 189 401 407 160 358 381 401 421 159 105 263 394 Average Queue(ft) 60 470 113 14 201 51 90 95th Queue(ft) 281 626 626 278 537 562 568 668 283 320 387 680 95th Queue(ft) 115 1055 306 44 360 109 183 Link Distance(81 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Link Distance(ft) 103 2490 1312 336 Upstream Blk Time(%) 1 0 24 2 7 Upstream Blk Time(%) 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 169 16 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 580 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(8) 275 45 90 Storage Blk Tine(%) 6 15 51 4 11 24 Storage Blk Time(%) 30 0 4 33 2 6 Queuing Penalty(vet) 40 29 123 11 30 59 Queuing Penalty(veh) 69 0 24 7 6 4 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard MME_ --_ ,.,915 cis. .. NB B12 BB S8 Directions Served T Directions Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 54 Maximum Queue(ft) 80 101 90 132 47 295 109 Average Queue(ft) 16 Average Queue(ft) 42 51 75 79 14 190 32 95th Queue(ft) 77 95th Queue(8) 87 116 105 214 97 317 103 Link Distance(ft) 109 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 3 Upstream Blk Time(%) 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage 81k Time(%) 0 14 3 18 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 85 6 14 0 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue MIoNt_i_.` -- B ® NB NB SO B2B Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L P L T TR I Maximum Queue(ft) 66 34 Maximum Queue(ft) 199 205 174 280 510 279 Average Queue(ft) 13 11 Average Queue(ft) 106 106 116 167 420 117 95th Queue(ft) 120 65 95th Queue(ft) 228 224 198 329 624 364 Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 Upstream B9c Time(%) 0 Upstream Blk Time(%) 6 15 Queuing Penalty(veh) 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 2 2 14 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(vet) 4 3 105 5 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTraffic Report 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTraffic Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 I The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10127 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:33 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Movement EB EB EB WMM WB W8 WB NB NB Be SB S8 Directions Served Directions Served L 1 1 R L T T TR LT R T L TR Maximum Queue(ft) Maximum Queue(ft) 228 643 629 473 197 224 271 430 210 86 344 642 Average Queue(ft) Average Queue(ft) 186 581 577 321 136 163 202 294 187 35 334 579 95th Queue(ft) 95th Queue(ft) 299 864 858 535 232 266 320 543 254 205 375 746 Link Distance(ft) Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Upstream Blk Time(%) Upstream BIk Time(%) 31 32 7 0 43 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 50 1 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage BIk Time(%i Storage BIk Time(%) 20 30 2 27 55 21 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 242 51 11 52 168 62 Network Summary Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Network wide Queuing Penalty.810 834 _________ Directions Served T Maximum Queue(ft) 124 Average Queue(ft) 73 95th Queue(ft) 169 Link Distance(ft) 109 Upstream Bp(Time(%) 34 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(S) Storage BIk Time 1%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Wird- SB Directions Served LTR Maximum Queue(ft) 61 Average Queue(ft) 18 95th Queue(ft) 61 Link Distance(ft) 423 Upstream BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bits Time 1%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTraffic Report 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTraffic Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:33 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:33 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Directions Served R Maximum Queue(ft) 159 34 103 74 16 1069 102 121 Maximum Queue(fl) 12 Average Queue(ft) 107 17 69 36 7 732 60 63 Average Queue(1k 95th Queue(ft) 18C 78 114 81 34 1329 112 149 95th Queue(ft) 16 Jnk Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) 237 Upstream Bic Time(%) 19 3 Upstream Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 32 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%) 3 45 7 5 Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 23 4 18 6 Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard Network Summary se se Network wide Queuing Penalty 1004 Directions Served L R L T T T R Maximum Queue(ft) 99 105 89 247 164 149 75 Average Queue(ft) 56 49 66 139 39 93 24 951h Queue(ft) 112 116 105 281 229 178 82 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(11) 140 69 104 Storage 81k Time l%1 0 0 4 12 a Queuing Penalty(veh) 1 0 37 21 7 Intersection:6 Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue Directions Served L R L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 396 230 171 284 461 67 Average Queue(ft) 253 152 134 214 340 15 95th Queue(ft) 439 276 194 350 541 75 Link Distance(ft) 631 265 440 879 Upstream Blk Time(%) 10 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) 18 3 15 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) 62 11 131 14 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTrafhc Report 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTraffc Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 MOO-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 3 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 1040 am 11118/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10.40 am 11/1812008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard IbirNilnl.IIIIIIIIelIlFgMlgMIWT la Is ti Bp 1x an Bas B33 li ilialr .•‘--,._-r- : NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T TR T T T T T Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Maximum Queue(1q 236 643 634 583 680 664 651 470 491 428 480 34 Maximum Queue(ft) 159 40 1078 300 47 552 86 204 Average Queue(R) 216 593 590 308 616 590 582 309 315 191 221 7 Average Queue(ft) 84 8 695 198 17 347 47 109 95th Queue(ft) 282 729 721 583 825 793 760 784 804 663 745 61 95th Queue(ft) 160 40 1261 391 48 686 94 223 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 585 585 2566 2566 169 ank Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Upstream 81k Time(%) 19 18 14 11 8 7 8 Upstream Blk Time(%) 10 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 236 560 Storage Bay Dist(6) 275 45 90 Storage 01k Time(%) 27 24 2 16 Storage Elk Time(%I 50 1 5 46 1 8 Queuing Penalty(veh) 214 60 15 40 Queuing Penalty(veh) 143 7 36 13 5 6 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard e NI It is is !II __ - s 81 IID NB 812 lie BB Directions Served LT P T L TR T Directions Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 532 212 357 344 648 128 Maximum Queue(ft) 119 182 93 287 123 384 70 Average Queue(ft) 462 146 204 254 546 85 Average Queue(ft) 61 94 86 167 68 220 27 95th Queue(ft) 672 280 528 413 840 178 95th Queue(ft) 125 193 106 330 271 439 83 Link Distance(9) 467 423 569 109 Lirk Distance;ft) 316 231 141C 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 37 16 46 36 Upstream Blk Time(%) 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) 330 142 0 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 59 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 61 2 9 51 Storage Blk Time(%) 3 24 5 20 Queuing Penally(veh) 185 8 33 157 Queuing Penalty(veh) 2 181 14 20 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue Obi_ -- - 1 • S. - - el B NB NB BB eii BO •3I B31 Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L R L T TR T T T T Maximum Queue(ft) 229 56 Maximum Queue(ft) 264 223 174 282 515 890 279 214 397 Average Queue(61 76 20 Average Queue(ft) 163 149 147 234 445 772 204 117 143 95th Queue(ft) 298 121 95th Queue(ft) 330 272 206 370 719 1255 481 327 615 Link Distance(Si 336 423 Lirk Distance;(1) 601 265 440 879 277 202 827 Upstream Elk Tme(%) 8 Upstream Blk Time(%) 22 33 20 17 12 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 72 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(8) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Tune(%) 4 9 27 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 12 17 262 12 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTrafc Report 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SinrTrafic Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:40 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:44 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard :,urL.•.. Yeaammi EB EB EB WB S6 so Directions Served Directions Servea L TP. L T T TR LT R T L TR Maximum Queue(ft) Maximum Queue(ft) 232 614 610 270 240 169 219 254 197 34 317 454 Average Queue(ft) Average Queue(ltl 130 526 537 202 121 111 146 182 161 12 247 303 95th Queue(ft) 95th Queue(ft) 268 762 766 361 272 202 259 453 233 78 392 507 Link Distance(ft) Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Upstream Blk Time(%) Upstream Bik Time(%) 13 14 5 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 27 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 328 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 9 27 5 10 20 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty Inch) 88 37 17 16 48 5 Network Summary Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Network we Queuing Penalty.1984 834 --r. IbM' �� ,_ Directions Served Maximum Queue(ft) 24 Average Queue(ft) 5 95th Queue(ft) 43 Link Distance(ft) 109 Upstream Btk lime(%) 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Mo�wM Directions Served LTR Maximum Queue(ft) 31 Average Queue(ft) 6 95th Queue(ft) 36 Link Distance(ft) 423 Upstream Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage 81k Time 1%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-with Senior Housing SimTraffic Report 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments SimTraffiic Report MED-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 3 MED-Charbonneau Engineenng LLC Page 1 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:44 an 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:44 am 1111812008 Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access r. Directions Served LTR T LT R L TR L TR Directions Served R Maximum Queue(ft) 130 6 103 50 12 494 94 174 Maximum Queue(ft) 34 Average Queue(ft) 86 1 61 26 3 315 60 83 Average Queue(ft) 16 95th Queue(ft) 146 11 115 66 13 548 107 191 95th Queue(ft) 42 Link Distance(ft) 103 221 2490 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) 237 Upstream 81k Time(%) 8 Upstream Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Bey Dist(ft) Storage Blk Time(%) 39 6 4 Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 3 12 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard Network Summary -- j Network wide Queuing Penalty:451 Directions Served L R L T T R Maximum Queue(ft) 63 58 80 153 135 80 Average Queue(ft) 39 37 48 82 95 37 95th Queue(ft) 75 69 81 188 151 100 Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1312 Upstream 81k Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Olst(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 2 5 6 0 Queuing Penally(veh) 12 7 4 0 Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue Directions Served L R T L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 346 172 48 156 285 398 51 Average Queue(ft) 230 89 15 124 174 228 10 95th Queue(ft) 535 220 101 187 334 452 88 Link Distance(ft) 601 429 265 440 879 Ups ream BBc Tlme(%) 4 15 2 Queuing Penalty(veh) 20 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) 16 0 15 3 Queuing Penalty(veh) 45 0 103 4 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments SimTraffic Report 2011 Total Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments SimTraffic Report MEQ-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 MEQ-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:47 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:47 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:3:ScoffinsiHunziker Street&Hall Boulevard as-Allfir11111131111VIIIN ms se e4 se Se temr1111111111111OL 13 1 Se Se Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R T L TR Directions Served LTR LT R L TR L TR Maximum Queue(H) 250 578 574 285 475 485 494 540 212 345 337 554 Maximum Queue(ft) 93 720 247 62 276 60 193 Average Queue(ft) 171 430 445 199 374 380 404 435 128 165 221 439 Average Queue(8) 59 441 124 26 189 31 95 95th Queue(ft) 267 625 618 320 547 555 578 687 266 414 379 709 95th Queue(ft) 107 1033 324 69 308 69 205 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Link Distance(ft) 103 2490 1312 336 Upstream 81k Time(%) 1 2 34 5 15 Upstream Blk Time(%) 2 Queuing Penally(veh) 0 0 246 39 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dial(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Blk Time(%) 7 18 57 0 0 38 Storage Blk Time(%) 23 0 3 34 0 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) 47 35 138 0 0 92 Queuing Penalty(veh) 56 1 17 7 0 4 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard __ -- 1e a re au se- sa Directions Served T Directions Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 63 Maximum Queue(ft) 74 102 93 218 79 334 122 Average Queue(ft) 36 Average Queue(ft) 42 57 66 97 16 103 44 95th Queue(ft) 124 95th Queue(ft) 80 115 107 Z39 130 346 126 Link Distance,ft) 109 'Link Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Be Time(%) 7 Upstream Blk Time(%) 2 Queu!ng Penalty(veh) 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(8) Storage Bay Dist(S) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 0 13 3 19 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 78 5 15 1 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue Mime!_ -1111 . 11k IbwRarL- 131 a is is a of _ Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L R L T TR T T Maximum Queue(ft) 171 75 Maximum Queue(ft) 209 189 152 238 510 293 27 Average Queue(11) 34 19 Average Queue(ft) 114 95 115 146 441 151 5 95th Queue(ft) 193 100 95th Queue(ft) 235 210 196 285 606 587 49 Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Link Distance(ft) 601 265 440 879 277 Upstream Blk Time(%) 1 Upstream 81k Time(%) 4 12 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dtst(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 0 3 7 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 1 4 53 6 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments SimTraffic Report 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments SimTraffic Report MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MED-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:47 am 11/1812008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:51 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard . -- Directions Served R Directions Served L T TR L T T TR LT R T L TR Maximum Queue(ft) 23 Maximum Queue(ft) 237 639 638 337 220 264 292 405 212 114 344 642 Average Queue(ft) 6 Average Queue(ft) 185 630 630 244 147 174 200 268 181 75 321 578 95th Queue(8) 25 95th Queue(ft) 302 645 639 401 248 292 335 570 261 330 392 794 Link Distance(ft) 237 Link Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 467 423 569 Upstream 81k The(%) Upstream 81k Time(%) 30 31 13 6 42 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 97 45 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 187 320 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage BIk Time(%) 15 32 1 27 49 24 Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 173 54 6 54 149 72 Network Summary Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Network wide Queuing Penalty.848 • -u Directions Served T Maximum Queue(ft) 106 Average Queue(ft) 75 95th Queue(ft) 167 Link Distance(ft) 109 Upstream 81k Torre(%) 29 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive&Hall Boulevard Directions Served LTR LTR Maximum Queue(ft) 67 50 Average Queue(ft) 3B 16 95th Queue(ft) 207 73 Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Upstream 81k Time(%) 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 27 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage BIk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 2011 Total Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments SimTra lic Report 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments SimTraffic Report MEO-Cherbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 MEO-Cherbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:51 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:51 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:3 Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Wit_ a !N —'1111' Ail. AlliiAlle " NB 17; Directions Served L TR T LT 0 L TR L TR Directions Served R Maximum Queue(ft) 139 30 138 72 31 972 98 147 Maximum Queue(ft) 30 Average Queue(ft) 115 11 96 32 8 683 65 71 Average Queue;ft) 17 95th Queue(ft) 182 71 162 79 32 1261 120 159 95th Queue(ft) 41 Link Distance(ft) 103 221 2496 1312 336 Link Distance(ft) 237 Upstream Blk Time(%) 20 3 Upstream Blk time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 27 Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(It) 275 45 90 Storage Bay Dist(ft) Storage Bik Time(%) 1 51 8 4 Storage Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) 6 5 22 5 Queuing Penalty(veh) Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard Network Summary _'rte OIY2 - 4:% • --- Network Network vide Queuing Penalty 1240 Directions Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(II) 86 90 85 224 238 200 89 Average Queue(ft) 53 43 55 135 49 118 31 95th Queue 0) 98 95 103 276 335 224 89 _ink Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(11) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(% 0 0 3 9 7 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 28 16 6 0 Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue lkomil t. _ _ * At OIL As .li M 1111. _ .1_ • Direcbons Server) L R T L T TR T Maximum Queue(ft) 497 230 39 174 291 521 191 Average Queue;ft) 322 137 13 162 254 363 56 95th Queue(ft) 644 285 88 196 372 604 193 Link Distance(ft) 601 429 265 440 879 Upstream Blk Tune(%) 5 26 7 Queuing Penalty(veh) 31 0 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) 30 4 33 5 Queuing Penalty(veh) 108 12 289 9 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-wi+h Apartments SimTraffic Report 2025 Future Traffic AM Peak Hour-with Apartments SimTraffic Report MEO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 MEC-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 The Knoll in Tigard The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:55 am 11/18/2008 Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:55 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:3:Scoffins/Hunziker Street&Hall Boulevard - 'W - it . !7i T 696 B36 in 11110i101111=11111r1 WU lib to to- aB as Directions Served L I TR L T 7 TR T T T T LT Drections Served LTR LT R L TR L TR Maximum Queue(ft) 244 628 628 504 676 613 674 494 506 90 105 538 Maximum Queue(ft) 114 1251 298 40 764 103 204 Average Queue(ft) 201 560 564 359 580 503 537 160 196 18 21 484 Average Queue(ftj 78 667 175 16 439 61 130 95th Queue(ft) 299 721 715 623 759 694 744 574 631 99 115 661 95th Queue(ft) 133 1327 374 48 894 113 236 '_ink Distance(ft) 613 613 605 605 605 585 585 2566 2566 467 .ink Distance(ft) 103 2490 1312 336 Upstream B&Time(%) 16 17 11 3 6 1 2 48 Upstream Blk Time(%) 4 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 436 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 230 560 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 275 45 90 Storage Blk Time(%) 18 29 5 9 65 Storage Ole Time(%) 46 0 4 54 3 14 Queuing Penalty(veh) 147 72 38 23 201 Queuing Penalty(veh) 139 1 26 15 14 11 Intersection:1:Pacific Highway(Hwy 99W)&Hall Boulevard Intersection:5:Burnham Street&Hall Boulevard _ m _ , 1111=IIIMINMIIMIF EB P6) 1! ft2 66 .a Directions Served R T L TR T Drections Served L R L T T TR Maximum Queue(ft) 212 445 344 658 129 Maximum Queue(ft) 67 132 93 294 343 374 123 Average Queue(ft) 137 279 304 524 78 Average Queue(ft) 45 72 80 212 124 232 36 95th Queue(ft) 269 603 427 915 175 95th Queue(ft) 75 138 112 385 546 407 121 Link Distance;ft) 423 569 109 -ink Distance(ft) 316 231 1410 1312 Upstream Blk Time(%) 27 38 31 Upstream Blk Time(%) 11 Queu.ng Penalty(veh) 247 0 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 187 320 Storage Bay Dist(ft) 140 69 104 Storage Blk Time(%) 1 18 43 Storage elk Time(%) 1 20 8 23 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 5 66 134 Queuing Penalty(veh) 1 148 20 23 0 Intersection:2:Apt drwy/Knoll Drive& Hall Boulevard Intersection:6:Hunziker Street&SW 72nd Avenue Illomm ll..__ _ ._ . . kar...r a at w6 se y6 bas_ in an oaf 7. Directions Served LTR LTR Directions Served L R L T TR T T T T Maximum Queue(ft) 280 91 Maximum Queue(ft) 173 203 174 292 515 953 330 219 486 Average Queue(ft) 149 19 Average Queue(ft) 99 125 153 247 490 826 186 101 128 95th Queue(ft) 400 89 95th Queue(ft) 201 229 202 342 656 1157 447 313 511 Link Distance(ft) 336 423 Link Distance i)) 601 265 440 879 277 202 827 Upstream 01k Time(%) 10 Upstream 81k Time(%) 19 35 18 13 11 0 Queuing Penalty(veh) 96 Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dot(ft) Storage Bay Dist(ft) 205 150 Storage Blk Time(%) Storage Blk Time(%) 0 6 22 6 III Queuing Penalty(veh) Queuing Penalty(veh) 0 12 207 12 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments SimTraffic Report 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour-Apartments SirnTratfic Report MOO-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 1 MOO-Charhonneau Engineering LLC Page 2 The Knoll in Tigard Queuing Analysis Report(Runs Recorded:5) 10:55 am 11/18/2008 Intersection:7:Knoll Drive&Site Access Mira 11111 Directions Servee R Maximum Queue(ft) 29 Average Queue(ft) 9 95th Queue(ft) 31 Link Distance(ft) 237 Upstream Blk Time(%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Storage Bay Dist(St Storage BIk Time 1%) Queuing Penalty(veh) Network Summary Network woe Queuing Penalty 2094 2025 Future Traffic PM Peak Hour•Apartments SimTraffic Report ME0-Charbonneau Engineering LLC Page 3 PLANNING & ENGINEERING 104 West 9th Street P : 360.750.0399 °U. Suite 207 F : 360.750.0433 t Vancouver, WA 98660 www.mghassociates corn TIGARD KNOLL IMPROVEMENTS UTILITY SUMMARY , .#1 �9 OREG O �h Date November 20, 2008 G 9IPDAL Prepared By: Laura Standridge, P.E. 1>' H 3 ,MGH# CHA012-4 � L A� EXPIRES 6-30— la Project Overview The Tigard Knoll project site is located within the City of Tigard. It is a 0.99 acre parcel situated east of SW Hall Boulevard and north of SW Hunziker Road. The site slopes from east to west from approximately 190 AMSL to approximately 180 AMSL. The site is currently developed with three single family residential dwellings and associated outbuildings. The site is surrounded by existing development on all sides. To the north and east are existing single family residential homes. To the south are industrial buildings and to the west are multi-family developments. Existing soils in the site area are generally classified as Woodburn silt loam, listed as Type B soils. Future development of the site will include frontage improvements on three abutting roads - SW Hall Boulevard, SW Hunziker Road and SW Knoll Street. Existing Utilities Sanitary Sewer There is an existing 8" sanitary sewer line located in SW Hall Boulevard and an 8" sanitary sewer in both SW Hall and SW Hunziker Street. The sanitary line in Hall is approximately 8 feet deep and, based on the area served and City's GIS TV and inspection information, does not appear to be over capacity. Sanitary sewer service is therefore readily available to serve the site. Storm Sewer The existing lots drain west to a roadside ditch that parallels Hall Blvd and flows north into an 8" concrete pipe. It appears that this pipe outfalls to a wetland area to the north of the residences across SW Knoll Street. The wetland flows east to a pond adjacent to Hwy 217. Flow from this pond continues south to Fanno Creek. Additionally, there is a newer manhole located north on Hall Blvd that is part of the storm system that serves the adjacent industrial development. This system also conveys flow to the wetland and pond discussed above. Both of these systems provide storm service options for the proposed development. Water Service Waterlines are located within all fronting streets, and existing meters serve the three homes at the site. Service is readily available for the proposed development. G:\Data1CHA012\4 Planning\Reports and Calculations\2008-11-19-CHA-Utility Narrative 1st Planning.doc Nov. 12. 2008 8: 78AM No, 7464 P. 1 II Glean Water Services o u NOV 0 W S i Pile Number 1 0 2 08 -�\� C1eanWRter Services Q �-0 0 3 511 By _ sitive Area Pre-Screening Site ikssessment 1. Jurisdiction:Tigard 2, Property Information (example-15230801400) 3, Owner Info]mation Tax lot 10(s):2S1018C-00600,00800 &01 000 Name:Mr.r rid Mrs.Robert Clickener Company_ Address: 10 355 SW Pacific Highway Site Address:848 SW urtzlker, 2340&12360 SW Hall City,State,;:lp:Tigard, OR 98223 City,State,Zip:Tigard, OR 97223 Phone/Fax: Nearest Cross Stret SW Knoll Street. E-mail: 4. Development Activity(check all that apply) 5. Applicant I•tforrnatlolt ❑ Addition to Single Family Reeldencw(rooms,deck,garage) Name:Gra'.a Lavadour ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Minor Lend Partition Company: GIGH ASSOGiates, Inc. ID Residential Condominium ❑ Commercial Condominium Address:114 West 9th Street, Suite 207 ❑ Residential Subdivision f] Commercial Subdivision ^r Vancouver,WA 96660 ❑ Single Lot Commercial ❑ Multi Lot Commelt lal City,State, .Ip Other Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Phone/Fax 360.750.0399 360,760,0433 Change a nfr,✓ 1ovr d E-Mail:are a.lavadour@mghessoclatee,com a. Will the project involve any off-site work? ❑Yee El No ❑Unknown Location and description of off-site wed( 7. AdditIonol comments or Information that may be needed to understand yo rr project a v • . . -- This application door)NOT replace Grading and Erosion Control Permits,Connection Permits,Building Permits,Site Davoloument Permits,DEG 1200-C Permit or other permits as laeued by the Department of Environmental Quality,Department of State Lands anchor Department of the Army COE.All required permits and approvals must be obtained end completed under applicable to:el,state,and federal law. By signing this form,the Owner or Owner's authorized agent or representative,acknowledges end ag ees that employees of Clean Water Services have nuthorhy to enter the project she at all reasonable Umea for the purpose of inspecting project site conditions an I gathering wifonnetion related to the project site. I certify that I am tardier with the Information i me ned in this doourneni,end to the hest of my knowledge end relief,this Information t9 true,complete,and accurate. Print/Type Nam +/[ L vabu,r Print/Type 11 tie A e Signature L p ate N FOR DISTRICT USE ONLY Sr nsitive aroma potenleCy exist on site or within 200'of the site, THE APPLI CANT MUST PERFC 2M A SITE ASSESSMENT PRiOR TO ISSUANCE DF A 6ERViCE PROVIDER LETTER. If SensiiveAreas exist on the site or within 200 foot on adjeos it properties,a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required ABased on review of the submitted malerials and best available information Sensitive areas do nr t appear to exist on site or within 200'of the site.This Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Sile Assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate end pi Mtecl water quality sensitive trees If they are subsequently discovered,This document will serve es your Sake Provider letter as required by Resolution 1 nd Order 07-20, Section 3.021. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed under appfc ble local,State,and federal law. ❑.Bated on review of the submitted materiels and best available Information the above referenced•irojectttldi not signlfioar lly impact the existing or potentially sensitive area(s)found near the elte.This SsrtsttiveArea Pre-Screening She Assessment does NOT tllminate the need to evaluate and protect additional water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered.This document wilt serve as your Seri ce Provider letter as required by Resoution and Order 07-20,Section 3.02.1. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed unt sr applicable local,state end federal law. ❑This Service Provider Letter Is not valid unless CWS approved site plan(e)ate attached. ❑The proposed activity does not meet the detnition of development or the lot woo platted after 919195 ORS 92040(2). NO SiTE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDE- . TIER IS RECUIR.e, RevieWed by -.G' —we. Dale • 2550 SW 1-1110 nrn l ghwey • Hrlrshoro,O rand 07123 • pt,n;;;(r,ri.)r nt i tCO •I Fax (503)Ii61-443t1 • wmvsb;arm'n.tersenrirys.gry AFFIDAVIT AVIT OF MAILING/ uSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE 'IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF HE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME _'ROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE, TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION,THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT &COPIES OF ALL NOTICFS AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: 1, Tv1;ckae.1 B;rr\cice-P ,being duly sworn,depose and say that on the 2-8 day of OL}ober 20 08 ,I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list,a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) 2-5 101B(..- 00'8vo, OO'iCO g aa'ol000 ,a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at 134.'" DandeiS „Ajar\r ovve,— \JA with postage prepaid thereon. ignature (In the presence of a .tary Public) POSTING: .4, N ch ae1 r ri dor-e ,do affirm that I am(represent)t}}g party initiating interest in a proposed land use application ---Co ._. re 11enS;u2, Ply �7on;ityy�Mae fArtet.4649nkfiecting the Lind located at(state the approximate ation(s) IF no address(s)and all tax 1ot(9)currently registered)7..S tot 113C. Cot3W r 00900 0 1000 and did on the 2-B day of Oc+c.b e.r ,20 0 personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a Co.v D"t land use application,and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. ` 1 f T h e sign w a s posted at L O f r r 0 4 S� (� l` Ouke.\/of C1 Sw rr,d nZ.i (state location you posted notice on pmpertt) A"'". �r Signature (In the presence of a Notary ublic) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF W R51-11__NI GTot• County of G L(\ - ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed l jj ,j�e on the y _ day of NOvEn�B ,20Oa "%I ►•gip,E.L1 '''.�� cY t1 OT %-0 .4\6 v :J. b8UG = z NOTARY PUBLIC O WAS J( T.s` / 2oos;.•' My Commission Expires: :\»ucren''.r!rrFhlu»tiocxsI ee,,n0\:tkb"°i e!sP;'Q, 'WAgliOCl,, "cenE.cu. ','ISsU11,IsNN,, Page 5 1 Ili r El '' LI. II 104 west 9`"street,suite 207 vancouver,wa 98660 PRELIMINARY LAND USE PROPOSAL FOR v 503.417.8639(OR) TIGARD KNOLL - TIGARD, OREGON 360.750.0399(WA) OFFICIAL NEIGHBOR MEETING f 360.750.0433 NOVEMBER 11, 2008 SIGN-IN SHEET * PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY * NAME ADDRESS HOME PHONE EMAIL ADDRESS _ -�/ / fC/ / / __ _. ✓, - e/i - .A . •-•1 ~row `1! L •�.r ;,_ r l'L 4 - , %/). &s aAt , 4_. .: / ) )5, Sr,3 63''d& R-r-7,421 c --67 ) -/0z, ea,71 rfr,vre h seirler6vC 0Iffeve-- P.X..1, n ie 9uz1, SD3-,3,131- 34't, 2.•ii,e/_,rn-r. C7(6, /0,ei-- g'e.kFS Ai-2_, Lad- aD3-clid Li-Ss76 Pa V t 8 IA/ (sv -1 1 7-3 7S s +-✓ f/(( .g(i)rt 5"03- 2 -s z6__clu j e .?.tc-306 , St e,+ --- <-- e6 Q a te. 2-3 2-o C, i l d z 9 3 y O 1 2, 'J c (o (a.6( v Ht 93 • ZQ(o - 3 ( 75 P;16(/ Gat-i ,1--R L s S Lit( 1-4.._ 1°0 63 a x !a o c. , 4- _a v S o- . . cS- Y „o � \,\A \z 0 sv.3 ■0.14,• z3 a 1 .4117e,7 ::'5,...--1.23.-e.771...3/wk.]0? , k ( PLANNING & ENGINEERIN( I . 104 West 9th Street P : 360.750.0399 5u'te 207 F : 360.750.0433 Q V 111 Vancouver, WA 98660 www.rnghassociates.com SAL _ ° m October 28, 2008 Subject: Tigard Knoll - Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment Dear Neighborhood Resident, MGH Associates represents the developer of three parcels located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Street. The developer is considering proposing a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, we would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Tuesday November 11, 2008 6:30PM s TVF&R Fire Station #51 Community Room 8935 SW Burnham Tigard, OR 97223 Please notice that this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. We look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 360.750.0399 if you have any questions. Sincerely, MGH Associates, Inc. t 562, re a Lavadour Planner PEOPLE MAKING PLACES® r-- /"'` --, t I K-.( � -_ CITY of .AR Li \\ ' GEOGRAPXIL INFOR NATION SY9TEM -- AREaNOT1FIED (500') CI / nroallaa -. m ntnu1t111 GARDEN PL nN„�„“ 11/4 l m 111411 FOR: MGH Assoc. ISIIIIMUISI nlnunll ♦s�o,� ° "'”" n"'�"n' •-57-z- RE: 2S 101 BC; ti�p �- 800/900/1000 V"\ `n1pm= J memo 44444 J Q mlu111 ■ nu1511en1 ,1515/11 i nitllllll ,, . ii010•1 maw/lll manelom nlnl11ul "��\ k�� ,'``\;��',1151 1 Property owner information ►�\•� 151511 J is valid for 3 months from nlnwael `"`� 101 mnultlu > the date printed on this map. iii(oo, a Illell'' 1�11V1�`� III\\\fit 1115111 1 • =MUM ,Elul , MOM niEl11n1 Iswu I % 1wtstsh1 IEllt 1 21111/11151 mu11un n111 iYUA,mul / Ell 11 i40 ' R>' 2111111111711 /4 s T ' I • N • 100 200 300 400 500 Feet nlltlllll • -p 0 1"=352 feel SI IN , \ / / Information/ Information on INS map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division, N _ 13125 SW Hall Blvd / Tigard,OR 87223 • (503)839-4171 I httpJlwww.ei.tlgard.or.us Community Development Plot date: Oct 24,2008;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR 2S102AA-03100 2S102AA-03200 AMERICAN LEGION THE CRAGHEAD GARY t. .DY A TIGARD POST#158 12205 SW HALL BV PO BOX 23487 TIGARD, OR 97223 -'tGARD, OR 97281 J2AA-03801 251018C-01600 ASHER BRIAN W AND SUSAN P DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE 15795 SW SERENA CT 12455 SW 68TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S101BC-01800 2S101BC-00600 BEAUDOIN MICHAEL E& DOUGHERTY ALICIA DONNA R 12260 SW HALL BLVD 12490 SW KNOLL DR PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102AA-00906 2S102AA-00603 BSM REALTY LLC DRL LLC 3176 AMERICAN SADLER DR PO BOX 1006 PARK CITY, UT 84060 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S101BC-00400 2S102AD-00300 CARASOF ALEX S&LILIYA V HARRIS MCMONAGLE ASSOC INC 12330 SW KNOLL DR 12555 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1BC-02300 2S101BC-02201 IS GILLETT INSURANCE INC HUNZIKER ONE LLC 19522 SW NAEVEST 956 WEST POINT RD TIGARD, OR 97224 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 2S101 BC-00800 2S101BC-02200 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A HUNZIKER TWO LLC 8485 SW HUNZIKER BY MICHAEUPAMELA ROACH MGRS TIGARD,OR 97223 956 WEST POINT RD LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 2 1018C-01000 2S102AA-00904 CLI EN ROBERT R&PATRICIA A JASUE LLC& 8485 HUNZIKER NATHAN-JEFFREY LLC T ARD, 97223 BY ALBERTSON'S#65 PO BOX 20 BOISE, ID 83726 2 101BC-00900 2S101C8-00500 CL E ROBERT R&PATRICIA A JEMPAK PARTNERS LLC 848 HUNZIKER 7034 SW 83RD AVE ARD, 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 9S101BC-03000 2S101BC-00201 'TA CLAUDIU& EMILIA JOHANSON TRANSPORTATION SERVICE I SW KNOLL AVE 5583 E OLIVE AVE ,ARD, OR 97223 FRESNO,CA 93727 2S 101 BC-00500 2S101BC-01500 KIM DAE H REED WILLIAM& 12300 SW KNOLL DR LUNDBERG LYDIA TIGARD, OR 97223 PO BOX 12564 PORTLAND,OR 97212 .J10C-02401 2S101BC-00301 KING JAMES F REED WILLIAM C 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD PO BOX 12564 TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97212 2S101BC-00200 2S101BC-01200 KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC REID CHARLES 0 12301 SE HWY 212 8445 SW HUNZIKER RD CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BC-02202 2S101BC-03200 LEACH DOUGLAS W TRUST& REID CHARLES 0 LEACH SUSAN L TRUST 12446 SW 131ST AVE 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S102AA-00500 2S102AA-03301 LEARY DAVID LYLE& REMEDIOS DAVID&MARIA& LEARY KATHLEEN JOAN TAYLOR HANS&JULIE& 10020 SW JOHNSON ST DITTO BRAD/SUSAN& ESMAILI ASG TIGARD, OR 97223 265 N BROOKSHIRE AVE VENTURA,CA 93003 1BC-01700 2S101BC-03300 ITARU DANIEL V& SAUSE MARILYN PETRACHE VIOLETA 12419 SW KNOLL DR 5104 MANORWOOD DR TIGARD,OR 97223 SARASOTA, FL 34235 2S101BC-01801 2S102AA-03000 MILLER LORI M SCOFFINS PROPERTY LLC 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD 12555 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BC-03100 2S102AA-03500 NGUYEN VUONG P SICKLES DANIEL 12387 SW KNOLL DR 12437 SW HALL BLVD#8 TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-01100 25102AA-03300 NITSOS BETTY MAXINE SKOURTES MARIANELLY 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD PO BOX 2327 TIGARD,OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 2S102AA-00901 2S102AD-00201 "LESS DRUG STORES NW INC SNYDER GAIL V V ALBERTSON'S INC 10250 SW HIGHLAND DR APT 70428-CORPORATE TAX TIGARD,OR 97224 PO BOX 20 BOISE, ID 83726 2S102AD-00203 2S101BB-01500 SNYDER OWEN R&GAIL V WA ON CWO A. ,C 8 LLC 15400 SW ALDERBROOK DR BY eP PERTYTAX DEPT 325 TIGARD, OR 97224 PO B 900 TTSD ,AZ 85261 ,2AD-00202 2S101 BB-01600 S DER N R&GAIL V WA ON CW PARK BC 8 LLC 1540 ALDERBROOK DR BY TT OPERTYTAX DEPT 325 ARD, R 97224 PO 4 OTTSDALE,AZ 85261 2S101BC-00700 SUMMERS JOSEPH R BEVERLEY C 12280 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BC-01900 TAPIA OSCAR& ABARCA MANUEL SALVADOR SOLIS 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102AD-03350 THOMPSON LIVING TRUST BY J RONALD/CECILIA 1 THOMPSON TRS 1847 N 150E CENTERVILLE, UT 84014 `2AA-03701 RD MANOR HOLDINGS LLC BY ALLIANCE PROPERTIES 4280 SW 109TH AVE BEAVERTON, OR 97007 2S102AA-03400 TIGARD TOWNHOMES INC BY MERRILL&CHARLOTTE HODGES PO BOX 2907 POULSBO,WA 98370 2S101BB-01000 US BANK NATIONAL ASSN TR BY QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP OF WASHINGTON 2141 5TH AVE SAN DIEGO,CA 92101 2S102AD-00100 WAGGIN'TAIL PROPERTIES LLC BY SUPERIOR SIGNS 12529 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BB-01400 LTON CWOR PARK BC 8 LLC TA/ePROPERTYTAX DEPT 325 BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE,AZ 85261 Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Desigr. pup PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 ^ard OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Susan Beilke 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci Dale D. & Evelyn 0. Beach Y Y 11285 SW 78th Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Diane Baldwin 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Olympia, WA 98501 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 ...,,sander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 —0 4M JUhiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:lcurpin\setupllabels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 6-Aug-07 PUBLIC MEETING ON A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL AFFECTING 2S101BC 00800 2S1O1BC 00900 2S1O1BC 01000 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING MAP CHANGE A MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PRELIMINARY LAND USE PROPOSAL IS SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 11, 2008 6 : 30 PM TVF&R FIRE STATION # 51 COMMUNITY ROOM CONTACT MGH ASSOCIATES 360 . 750 . 0399 PLANNING & ENGINEERING re . L V104 West 9th Street P : 360.750.0399 W q Suite 207 F : 360.750.0433 LA111 Vancouver. WA 98660 www.mphassociates.com M E E T I N G A G E N D A PROJECT NAME: MGH PROJECT#: TIGARD KNOLL CHA012 SUBJECT: NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AGENDA MEETING DATE&TIME: MEETING LOCATION: NOVEMBER 11, 2008 6:30PM TVF&R STATION #51 COMMUNITY ROOM AGENDA 1. Introductions & Sign-In (Greta) Team Members Read mandatory Tigard Neighborhood Meeting Statement Identify Property Location 2. Proposed Zone Change (Greta) Existing Zone and Comprehensive Plan Designation Proposed Zone and Comprehensive Plan Designation How Subject Property Fits into Downtown Plan 3. Proposed Development (Brian) Number and Type of Proposed Dwelling Units Community Amenities Architectural Features ETC. 4. Developer (Sheila) What is CPAH? Mention previous projects in community / region. Who benefits from this project? 5. Questions / Comments From the Audience PAGE1 PEOPLE MAKING PLACES' Tigard Knoll Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment Introductions: Greta / MGH Sheila / Community Partners for Affordable Housing Carleton Hart Architecture Agenda: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation & Zoning Map Amendment Conceptual Site Plan Introduction to the Developer Questions Site & Regional Context: ➢ Three parcels totaling 0.99 Acres ➢ Northeast corner of Intersection of Hall Blvd & Hunziker Road ➢ Currently Zoned R-4.5 Low Density Residential ➢ Part of Tigard City Center Urban Renewal District and Downtown Special Planning Area Bordered by single family homes to the north and east, industrial buildings to the south and multi-family development to the west. Proposed: ➢ Comp Plan Desig Amendment to Mixed Use Residential ➢ Zoning Map Change to MUR-1 ➢ The Mixed Use Residential zone is intended to be compatible with residential uses. ➢ The MUR-1 zone requires 0' minimum front and side 15' minimum street side 120' rear adjacent to existing single family. ➢ Buildings must be minimum two stories in height. ➢ Minimum density of 50 units per acre. ➢ Uses allowed in the zone include residential and commercial. Rezoning the property to MUR-1 meets the goals and policies of the Downtown Special Planning Area, including: • providing a mix of complementary land uses • providing a range of housing types • facilitating the development of an urban village Questions from Attendees Q: What will be in lobby space? A: It will be a common area for the residents. Q: How do structures like the one proposed affect adjoining property values? A: Multi-Family in general increases property values. There have been university studies demonstrating this that we can forward to anyone interested. Downtown Tigard in general has a lot of value to gain, and this project will help this happen. Q: What is the elevation of the building? A: 32' for the lower portion, 50' for the higher portion. Given the topography of the site, the building will have an appearance of less height from the east. Q: Any plans for working with Tri-Met on Hall Boulevard? A: We are proposing a bus stop on Hunziker. We would like to see greater bus access in the area for our residents, and will be advocating for this during the development plan approval process. Q: Will Knoll Drive still be one-way? A: Yes - we will make frontage improvements along Knoll Drive, but it is our understanding that it will still be one-way. 0: What about improvements on Hall Boulevard? There are large sections without sidewalks. A: We will make frontage improvements along Hall Boulevard. This will increase pedestrian safety in the neighborhood. Page 1 of 1 Greta Holmstrom From: Sheila Greenlaw-Fink [sgfink @cpahinc.org] Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 6:00 PM To: betty @strategic-printing.com Subject: Affordable Housing and Property Values: Reports I Promised at Neighborhood Meeting in Tigard Betty: Please let me know if you receive this—it's the information I promised at our neighborhood meeting (sorry for the delay!). The National Association of Realtors has a link to many of the reports that have been done on this topic, so if you're interested in more background, feel free to take a look at some of the other studies at: http://www.realtor.orgilibrary/libraryffg504 Thanks again, for attending the meeting. If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact me. Sheila Greenlaw-Fink,executive director Community Partners for Affordable Housing Mail:PO Box 23206,Tigard,OR 97281-3206 Street: 6380 SW Capitol Hwy.,#151,Portland,97239 Phone: 503/293-4038(Fax:503/293-4039) sgfink(acpahinc.org;www.cpahinc.org Please consider the environment before printing this a-mail. 12/15/2008 FURMAN CENTER 6 _ rs v ► ¢ FOR REAL ESTATE & URBAN POLICY NEW YORK UNIVERSITY Li `1s ,# , $� SL t1„Cl Of LAW• 4lA�vEG. SCHG;� •J, C SECCI:. w" �' • :- '` 7 + it FURMAN CENTER POLICY BRIEF The Irn act of Supportive p Housing on Surrounding Neigtibothoods : Evidence from New York City This policy brief is a summary of the Furman Center's research on the effects supportive housing has on the values of surrounding properties. The full study is available at http://furmancenternyu.edu. What Is Supportive Housing? Supportive housing is a type of affordable housing that provides on-site services to people who may need support to live independently.Residents may include formerly homeless individuals and families, people with HIV/AIDS or physical disabilities, young people aging out of foster care, ex-offenders, people with mental illness or individuals with a history of substance abuse.Residents in supportive housing developments,unlike those in temporary or transitional housing options,sign a lease or make some other long-term agreement. Developments provide a range of services to residents, which can include w case management,job training and mental health or substance abuse counseling. Sup- portive housing developments are run by non-profit organizations that typically provide Z both support services and management. w � Researchers have found supportive housing to be an effective and cost-efficient way to w house disabled and formerly homeless people.'The combination of permanent affordable Z housing and support services is seen as key to providing a stable environment in which Q individuals can address the underlying causes of their homelessness—at far less cost than placing them in a shelter or treating them in a hospital. u_ 1 See,e.g.,Culhane,Dennis,Stephen Metraux and Trevor Hadley.2002.Public Service Reductions Associated with Placement of Homeless Persons with Severe Mental Illness in Supportive Housing.Housing Polity Debate.13(1):107-163;Lipton,Frank R.et al.2000.Tenure in Supportive Housing for Homeless Persons With Severe Mental Illness.Psychiatric Services.51(4):479-486. Supportive Housing Figure A:Supportive Housing Developments in in NYC Our Study by Borough(as of 2003) Supportive housing grew out of attempts in the late 1970s and early 1980s to provide 31 services to mentally-ill individuals who 60 BRONX • were homeless or living in substandard, privately-owned Single Room Occupancy (SRO)buildings.Soon thereafter, nonprofit M A N H AT TA N 3 groups formed to rehabilitate the housing in addition to providing on-site services. 28 nUEENS By 1990, New York City nonprofits were BROOKLYN operating over 2,000 units of supportive housing.The success of these efforts led the STATEN ISLAND state and city to sign a historic joint initia- tive to fund the creation of thousands of new supportive housing units for homeless fairly steady development throughout the persons with mental illness.The New York/ past two decades,with a big building boom New York Agreement,"signed in 1990,was following the 1990 NY/NY agreement. the first of three initiatives that have helped spur the development of over 14,000 units Signed in November of 2005,the New York/ >, in more than 220 supportive housing resi- New York III Agreement"was the largest yet, ro x dences in the city for formerly homeless and committing$1 billion to create 9,000 units o inadequately housed people with a range of of supportive housing (both scattered-site disabilities. As Figure A shows, the over- and single site') for homeless and at risk Z individuals and families with disabilities £ whelming majority of these developments in New York City over ten years. The large OJ were built in Manhattan, Brooklyn and the y y g dBronx. As seen in Figure B, there has been scope of this initiative ensures that there b s W o Figure B:Supportive Housing Developments Completed Annually o f. o 11 .0 In 10 10 10 • 10 >A en • • • 9 • 9 r., 9 a • a • • • • • • ni 0 • • • • • • • 7 • 7 5 • • • • • • • • • • • 41 ap o • • • • • • • S • 5 • • • b er, W 4 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 73 ig CJ 2 • 3 3 • • • • • • • • • • • • • O 41 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O 0 1 • 1 • 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • F• ,n • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CO • 0 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 u A W Note This figure includes all developments examined in this study.all supportive housing opening in New York City before 7004 that resulted from jnew construction or the gut renovation of a vacant building. Si 2 r Our research looks only at the impart of single-site supportive housing(developments in which the supportive housing units all are located Nin a single building with on-site social services),but It is important to note that New York City has an additional 9,000 supportive housing units that are scattered-site(dispersed within non-supportive housing buildings). 1 will continue to be a robust development What D o We Know pipeline of supportive housing to house About Neighborhood homeless New Yorkers living with mental illness and other challenges. PP Impacts of Supportive P As providers of supportive housing begin to H u si n 9? implement the NY/NY III agreement, how- Theoretically, supportive housing develop- ever,they are encountering two related and ments could either depress or raise neigh- significant obstacles: New York City has a borhood property values.If the development serious shortage of land suitable for build- isn't well-maintained or doesn't blend in well ing such developments; and community with the surrounding community, it could opposition to hosting supportive housing have a negative impact on neighborhood further limits the sites on which support- property values.Similarly,if the residents of ive housing can be built. The state and city the new supportive housing engage in offen- require some form of public notification for sive behavior or participate in or are targets all proposed supportive housing develop- for illegal behavior,the housing might cause ments,and opposition by the local commu- prices to drop. On the other hand, if a new nity often makes it difficult or impossible development is attractive and replaces a for developments to secure the necessary community eyesore,such as an abandoned funding and land use approvals. or vacant property,or helps to house people who otherwise would be living on the streets Despite the critical role that supportive nearby,it likely would have a positive impact housing plays in helping to address the prob- on property values. Similarly, if the new w rem of homelessness,communities asked to development is a conscientious and good 10 host the housing often resist, expressing neighbor and provides useful services to the >. fears that the housing will have a negative community,it could raise prices. t, impact on the neighborhood. Neighbors cvoice worries,for example,that the support- While some who oppose supportive hous- ive housing will increase crime, drain the ing may do so regardless of the facts, objec- t,t neighborhoods'services and overburden its tive,credible research about the experiences Winfrastructure,bring people to the commu other neighborhoods have had with support- nity whose personal appearance or behavior ive housing should help to inform discus- will make residents and visitors uncomfort- sions about proposed developments. Some a able, or otherwise decrease the quality of researchers have studied the effects of group o, life in the neighborhood. They also corn- homes, but few have looked specifically at CU monly express a concern that supportive the supportive housing model. Moreover, ab housing will depress the value of housing in previous studies have been limited by data b c the neighborhood, thereby depriving them constraints,including small sample sizes(as aof potential returns on their investment, few as 79 units)and limited time frames,and d4 c and triggering a spiral of deterioration. have studied effects in low-density neighbor- 's c hoods,making it difficult to generalize their 7/ c results to denser urban settings.3 eg ° The Furman Center's research aims to fill ca this gap in the literature with a rigorous, k.0 , large-scale examination of the impacts of G .r RI 0 approximately 7,500 units of supportive a housing created in New York City over the a, past twenty years. Z ~. 3 See,e.g.,Galster,George,Peter Tatian and Kathryn Pettit.2004.Supportive Housing and Neighborhood Property Value Externalities. COLand Economics.8011):35-54;for studies of precursors to supportive housing such as group homes,see,e.g.,Colwell,Peter F,Carolyn A. Dehring and Nicholas A.Lash,2000.The Effects of Group Homes on Neighborhood Property Values.Land Economics.76(4):615-637. About Our Research vacant buildings.' The median size of the 123 developments is 48 units. In order to measure the impacts of support- ive housing on property values, we use a Identifying the impacts of supportive hous large dataset with information on the sales ing on the values of neighboring properties prices of all apartment buildings, condo- is challenging,primarily because it is difficult minium apartments and one to four fam- to disentangle what causes what—to deter- ily homes selling in the city between 1974 mine whether supportive housing affects and 2005, as well as property-level data neighboring property values or whether on the characteristics of the units sold.We neighboring property values affected the link these data to a list of all the supportive decision to build supportive housing in housing developments and their addresses, the neighborhood. Developers of support- which we compiled with assistance from ive housing might, for example, be more the New York City Department of Hous- likely to build the housing on sites in neigh- ing Preservation and Development (HPD), borhoods with very low property values, the New York State Office of Mental Health because more city-owned sites are available (OMH), the Supportive Housing Network in such neighborhoods,because community of New York (SHNNY)—the member asso- opposition may be lower in these neighbor- ciation of nonprofit supportive housing hoods,or because developers can only afford providers in New York State, and the Cor- to build in neighborhoods with the lowest poration for Supportive Housing (CSH)— property values. In fact, a simple compari- a financial and technical assistance interme- son of census tracts in the city reveals that diary to supportive housing providers.This in 1990, before most supportive housing G comprehensive dataset includes 7,500 units was sited, tracts that now have supportive in 123 developments that opened between housing tended to have higher poverty rates 3 1985 and 2003 and either were newly con- and lower homeownership rates than tracts Z structed or the result of gut renovations of that do not(see Table A). E 0 r a 4,ar b W Demographics a Table A:Demo ra (as of t 9 P ( 1990)for Census Tracts with and without Supportive Housing o f Indicator'(as of 1990) All Tracts Tracts that Tracts c in NYC now have without A Supportive Supportive z Housing" Housing s^ a, O g Number of Tracts 2,217 102 2,115 4 a Poverty Rate 19.3% 31.4% 18.4% I, o Homeownership Rate 28.6% 10.9% 30.5% RI CD t+ .N Source.1990 Decennial Census data(NCDB).'All reported numbers represent the mean value across census tracts,weighted by A o population."Tracts with supportive housing are those that are host to the 123 supportive housing developments in our study. opt = s. m O s.al 0 Y 0. V t: .,. 44 O .0 A 14. a v. E Y ,0 4 z I— Because we are interested in the impacts new developments have on a neighborhood,our data on supportive housing developments only include new construction or projects that involved the complete,physical rehabilitation of a formerly vacant building.We did not include 711 instances where an occupied building received cosmetic rehabilitation or was converted Into a supportive housing development without undergoing substantial renovation. ' .ill Figure C:Methodology so uSupportive housing development is represented by the X.We compare prices of properties within 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the development to similar properties in the same census tract but more than 1,000 feet away before and after the supportive housing is built. -It`` Census 1500 feet 1,000 feet I 1 -it` Census 1Supportive 1500 feet 1,000 feet 1 1 .Thad 1 I s.Tract 1 Nausirg 1 I 1 A , '-f-4-'::,ft:' ,F 4`tti_-)l%g I 1 I 4 1 g.41,f I -„,,'i tr °! �. � 1 1 I I 1 xpS �` V, I 1 1 ! !el 1 d rt sue.. :t” .3,'yr* 1 i ,�{•"s� R I 1 I r I 1 1 ; I I ^ 1 }' t 44.' -ice a 1 I t :_ fi 9 = �-, ., fi � n rte '! "-.i7 Pi I _ I I * 1 A --- I 1 1 1 1 .. I I j Price differences between properties inside each ring Price differences between properties inside each ring and those more than 1,000 feet away from the site and those more than 1,000 feet away from the before supportive housing is built. supportive housing after it opens. We address this problem by controlling for also allows us to examine whether impacts w the difference between the prices of proper- vary with distance from the supportive G 1 ties very near to a supportive housing site housing development, because the impact 0 Y and the prices of other properties in the same on a property loser to a development might 3 z neighborhood before the supportive housing very well differ from impacts on properties E is constructed.Specifically,our research corn- still affected but further out in the 1,000 co pares the price differences between proper- foot ring. ti ties within 500 and 1,000 feet of a support- W ive housing development,before and after it Finally, because impacts might be felt as c is built,with a comparable group of proper- soon as people learn that a supportive hous- ties more than 1,000 feet from the site but ing development is going to be built, and .a°0 still within the same census tract.' because construction of any building may •°1 bring noise, truck traffic, and other prob- L F Our strategy is illustrated in Figure C. Our lems, we exclude the construction period a approach controls for differences in prices from our estimate of property value differ- 0 F between properties near to supportive ences between properties within the ring of H housing sites and other properties in the supportive housing and those beyond 1,000 01 0 neighborhood before supportive housing feet,before supportive housing opens. M ,F is built. It also controls for neighborhood W w t, c price appreciation over time. Accordingly, x ca we are able to specifically isolate the impact 81, o of the supportive housing. Our approach F R y tJ N O a. 0 O u • A P CU 5 • a One thousand feet is approximately the length of four North/South streets in Manhattan;across the city,on average,1,000 feet is about the length of two blocks.While previous property value impact studies have looked at larger distances,it is unlikely that the relatively small 1 r, developments we study would have an effect on property values many blocks away in the fairly dense Manhattan,Bronx and Brooklyn �•.i ,J neighborhoods in which they are concentrated. �� What Do We Find? As seen in Figure D, which illustrates the A. N _° impact of a new supportive housing devel- it.T Yt ` Our research finds little evidence to sup- opment of median size(48 units)on proper- port neighbors' fears that supportive hous- ties up to S00 feet away, there is a slight ing developments will reduce the price of increase in the value of nearby properties surrounding properties over time. To the when the development opens (compared contrary,we find that the opening of a sup- with their value before construction began), portive housing development does not have but this difference is not statistically signifi- a statistically significant6 impact on the cant.After the supportive housing opens,we value of the properties within 500 feet of the see a statistically significant rise in the value development. of these nearby properties, relative to prop- erty values in the comparison group. As a We find that two to five years before a sup- result,the four percent discount neighboring portive housing development opens, prop- properties experienced before the supportive erties within 500 feet of the site sell for housing was built steadily narrows over time. almost 4 percent less than properties in the comparison group. This indicates that sup- Moving farther away from the development, portive housing developments are generally we find that properties between S00 and being built in areas that are more distressed 1,000 feet away,unlike those less than 500 than the surrounding neighborhood. feet away,see a statistically significant drop in value when the building is under con- In the five years after completion, we find struction and when the supportive housing that the prices of those nearby properties opens(compared to prices more than 1,000 experience strong and steady growth,appre- feet from the development but within the LI c ciating more than comparable properties in neighborhood).But once again,we find that 3 the same neighborhood but further than prices then show a steady relative gain in the z 1,000 feet from the supportive housing. years after completion. That pattern might E 2 suggest that the positive effects of the sup- N V Co Figure D:Sales Prices of Properties Within Soo Feet of Supportive Housing Relative to W Comparison Group,by Year Relative to Completion(For Median Size Development of 48 Units) oeIn this figure,the dotted line represents what we estimate would have happened to the prices of nearby properties ahad there been no new supportive housing development;the solid purple line represents the results of our analysis, which show steady growth in the value of nearby properties. d r z F T 4% o m 2" p O c , 2% $ m E E e1i c 4 0% w G 8 c b rn l ill ,E b.�. -2% '6 a V 3 v O Os S W -4% w H O • ► s. -6% CO o z § c a i 5 4 -8% m e LI `, -S -4 •3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 S E a E 'OAR at LAME TO COMPLETION(vertical arts represents opening date of supportive housing) U. A — � 0. • u 6The term'statistically significant'refers to the likelihood that the differences between the groups being compared(in this study,the dif- 2 w- terence between the values of the properties near supportive housing and those further away)could have occurred by chance.If statistical methods show that results are statistically significant at the 95 percent level,we can be sure that the probability that the results are due CO o pure chance is five percent or less.Generally,researchers will consider results reliable only if they are statistically significant at the \1J 90(or higher)percent level l[lif portive housing are diluted farther away Does the Size or from the site and initially are outweighed by community uneasiness about the housing, Type of Supportive but as the neighborhood grows comfortable H o u sin g Matter? with the supportive housing, prices show Does the Population steady growth relative to the comparison Density of the Neigh- properties. boyhood Matter? In sum, our research reveals that the prices Because of the diversity of supportive hous of properties closest to supportive hous- ing—which are the properties opponents of ing developments and the neighborhoods in supportive housing claim are most likely to which they are being built,we also wanted be affected by the development--increase to evaluate whether characteristics of either in the years after the supportive housing the development or the neighborhood opens,relative to other properties located in influence any effects the development has. the neighborhood but further from the sup- We were somewhat surprised to find that portive housing. Prices of properties 500 to the effects on neighboring property values 1,000 feet from the supportive housing may do not depend on the size of the develop fall somewhat while the buildings are being ment (number of units) or the develop built and as they open, but then steadily ment's characteristics,such as whether the increase relative to the prices of properties development sets aside a certain number of further away from the supportive housing affordable units for neighborhood residents. but in the same neighborhood. Our results The impact supportive housing has on prop- *. erty values also does not differ between V accordingly suggest that over time, the val- Y ues of homes near supportive housing do lower and higher density neighborhoods. not suffer because of their proximity to the Y z supportive housing. E 0 u E' _ 1 . i _ E. ._, IL 1 • • v.,--.. \ • E zi ri E c . ... __,... ,, , F7 'r'Slt"-:fth/-,'-'-t- ;:' A ' '..11' '. CL MI _.;" ' •.... C1,1 o — � _ _ Vitt oeLwE P o rj9i, IIIIIIIIQ + Ili:. __ .. . lilt, e b (7.----*----—70"a X - I— G LASS FACTORY,a supportive housing development in the East Village,managed by Bl2C. N• z What Do These Findings Mean? Our findings show that the values of properties within 500 feet of supportive housing show steady growth relative to other properties in the neighborhood in the years after supportive housing opens. Properties somewhat further away (between 500 and 1,000 feet) show a decline in value when supportive housing first opens,but prices then increase steadily,perhaps as the market realizes that fears about the supportive housing turned out to be wrong. The city, state, and providers of supportive housing must continue to maximize the positive effects of supportive housing and ensure that supportive housing residences remain good neighbors. But the evidence refutes the frequent asser- tions by opponents of proposed developments that supportive housing has a sustained negative impact on neighboring property values. _ n Ir— '+ ' C �t1 '7 V •, ± �j, E ' ._ �� # k nom, �' t� ., r.; •.,,� f .. . stir,„ 3' w I ( - �1'-` =.. 11,...n • .I.,4• xi I R R O M E C 011 RT,a supportive housing development in the Bronx,managed by Palladia,Inc. rn r, r Z V O, d Q t C b a A a 5 co o THE FURMAN CENTER FOR REAL ESTATE AND URBAN POLICY ; at 4. WEI o is a joint research center of the New York University School of Law and the Robert 73 a, = F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at NYU. Since its founding in 1995, H athe Furman Center has become the leading academic research center in New York M City dedicated to providing objective academic and empirical research on the legal E and public policy issues involving land use, real estate, housing and urban affairs E in the United States,with a particular focus on New York City. More information Zabout the Furman Center can be found at www.furmancenter.nyu.edu. CO Pre-application notes fot (' Community Partners Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendments October 23,2008 STAFF PRESENT: Cheryl Clines,Dick Bewersdorff, Sean Farrelly, Kim McMillan APPLICANT: Sheila Greenlaw-Fink • Community Partners for Affordable Housing PROPERTY LOCATION: 8485 SW Hunziker, 12340 SW Hall Blvd., 12360 SW Hall Blvd. TAX MAP/LOT#'s: 2S101BC-00800/00900/01000 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendments to change the property from R-4.5 to MUR-1 zoning. COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: Current designation is Low Density Residential. Proposed is Mixed Use Residential—1. ZONING: Current zone is R-4.5. Proposed zone is MUR-1. PROCESS The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The Council shall decide the application on the record as provided by Section 18.390, as a Type IV review. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting is required for a legislative zoning and comprehensive plan map amendment. Neighborhood meetings must be held prior to application submittal. NARRATIVE Include a narrative that responds to the applicable review criteria. Provide background and findings of fact as to why the comprehensive plan amendment and zoning map amendment are necessary, or what public benefit is being proposed APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions apply to the proposed zoning map amendment A recommendation to approve, approve with conditions of to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 1. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goal 1.1 Goal 2.1, Policies 6,7, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 24 Goal 6.1 Goal 6.2 Goal 9.3,Policies 1,2,and 3 Goal 10.1,Policies 1, 3, 4, and 5 Goal 10.2,Policies 5,6, 7,and 8 cis ( Duvet fvwt fitcylhrMS/'iorf This list is for guidance only. Please note that the Comprehensive Plan is currently being amended. To ensure use of current policies, please utilize the online version found at http://www.tigard- or.gov/cite hall/departments/ed./does/comp plan volurne2.pdf. 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of the Tigard Community Development Code or other applicable implementing ordinance; (including but not limited to 18.380.020 Zoning Map and Text Amendments, and 18.390.050 & .060 Decision Making Procedures); 3. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. In addition, the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors. The list provided: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197 (Goals 1,2,6, 9, and 10); 2.Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3.Any applicable METRO regulations (e.g.Metro Urban Growth Functional Management Plan); 4.Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Note: The above list of specific goals and standards is intended to provide guidance in preparation of your application, and that additional criteria may be identified dependent upon the nature of the specific application, or as other issues are raised. This is not an exhaustive list of all criteria. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that all applicable standards are met. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; d. Include two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in Section 18.390.050C. e. Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards and to minimize the ■ impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private 2 • property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development; and f. Be accompanied by 18 copies of the narrative. DECISION The decision timeline is generally about 4 months from receipt of a complete application. The 120-day rule is not applicable to legislative changes. APPLICATION FEES: Comprehensive Plan Amendment $8,886.00 Quasi Judicial Zoning Map Amendment (3,200 x 1/2): 1.600.00 Total Fees: $10,486.00 PREPARED BY: Cheryl Gaines Associate Planner • 3 Community Partners Project Hall and Hunziker Site Development Issues 1. Carports are considered structures and must meet the setback requirements of the zone. Side and rear yard setbacks in the MUR-1 zone are 20 feet if abutting a residential zone (R-4.5 in this case). 2. The City's Engineering division states that the access to Hunziker is not permitted. If one access is provided, then section 18.705 limits the number of units to 49 or less. See Table 18.705.2. 3. The site is .99 acres. The maximum density of the MUR-1 zone is 50 units per acre. The City does not round up for partial units and the density is based on net acreage. The proposed development appears to exceed the maximum density allowed on the site. 4. Buffering is required between multi-family and single-family units. Table 18.745.1 indicates a "C" buffer is required. Buffer combinations are shown in Table 18.745.2. The buffer is 6 to 10 feet wide with a mix of trees, shrubs and screening such as a wall, fence, or hedge. 5. Depending on the number of units proposed, the minimum parking standards may not be met. The applicant may request a 20% reduction if the criteria under 18.370.020(C)(7)(a) cab be met. These criteria are: (1) Use of transit,demand management programs,and/or special characteristics of the customer,client employee or resident population will reduce expected vehicle use and parking space demand for this development, as compared to standards Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) vehicle trip generation rates and minimum city parking requirements, and (2) A reduction in parking will not have an adverse impact on adjacent uses. • ' ; 1�,. '�'/n�� / -!■M► T eft }r Y'.. , • �� $b vip s pri. Ir tiS IV. r � ,./ _ / ' r r«f i p- • om •' ' �t . r ! .e. ' > I s P.." may . ~ - ,,• Ali '*01.- • , ,, , - ' V lell.•''/' / 4°4 .. r„ I,. irillk rt. . ., / , / A 4 '1411 .=CO:-1"- to-r iv:__ . : - i-- % • • / ' . t•ilit 4161P 4 /11114y. r to _ i ` ' / 1.' ir-- rl.. ..... •}f„... - 4140-' .• rill li t11#114t . .Art _ • .-s, • • . . ' -44:: � t� • �'� `"a/s. ; s1 i t:tilt i • l'h ' 4 y f/ . / /ft' / ti• :Ail. . dii• ,,,,--, - Ile" -n;\\,"%-- 7 Ik• tr 4 so frfN.• • }� +...II -- rt fir ":41" 1/ •';� ?Jf •�i ��, •1 .A y. f - g* j, r , _ lir p., I „. 4/11fri fir. ,� �� 4.• r, .,,.n ' 0 , . : . J . !- ilia" . '' ' 11411 ,4;4 ‘: It,\./ isles --'f\fsh. _ .141"• i ' w . ii r r.3?0 tAZ a I 1 i: . r r. c • o 411,3' flirlIC-2fil. 1 ... + ' �/ ' r + T t��l, T i• l Jr . •.- ' • ipantiriaLl NiVe.1114% 1 0 latt% ' 0 - '" ' j � i : ' ir 4111, ..de i ' NIIIM2 1111 ; ....' \,,,r445,... ,..,. . ,- ., , .. .r. , , I k. f. \ t. 3 '. , .4 ,-.. 4.- * , v7. % 4P., /N,tt* . ViAll „....4, !lc., „... . , _ • , / 11114 .. ...,„ti‘.. . . .. cif,. • 1 -110i 1\1.1141111k;IN: ,...,:. 4, or „,-, riNeN*7 .. ' 1, ! *dik4r1"11"1 • - 11 "r$V.-. . ' 1 I r r 1'.410r404. ." 14', 4' NO,.;'. / # / pi "'.• - IP ' t)f . . 4' 7 .4. . i- s„ .. vi.—\766---_,'' .... . ,,.. --- .. I 40 t `. in AERIAL MAPS N ED 11.11.2009 COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR THE KNOU. ATTIGARD AFFORDABLE HOUSING TIGARD, OREGON CARLETON HART ARCHITECTURE • • • • 0 1 *.z.f.,;i, _ _.„ • - '`..41-''• ., : - .•"*.x-_.... ,,4-2 ,,,, 1 .r y •- •,.L-...: -...' y1 aAlr- r' y+, .:*'y' 8..14 - :► ` �. _. ,-.. ,..' .e . \ f 20 STANDARD SPACES x • 4t� 3 CARPORTS WITH TRELLIS -t._ r•.. ,_ • 13 COMPACT ■ SPACES . `' 15 COMPACT SPACES }i '1 1 i ..l_ tr.. ~ ! �1 '• c� . ,. : " i� ' T;'. VAN POOL 2 ACCESSIBLE `' " . ; '••! .'� �:�;,;. .� Y, �� s r� l. DROP-OFF SPACES 4. g -L r '> 444 : .. 8 i 4ttliti -' • '.. - . ' ‘• - • Iti''''',, 4,.,„:... .. . ,,,, - Z ...� 1 U 11 j I 1 RESIDENCES LT 411/04-. faa 1104116, , , - '. f RESIDENCES �, � � � t f / 1 "t.. • „ r ;I -1 LOBBY v 4it, 1, R ILI t i .. 4 . 0,Ar4p1H46. '� p"'1 !•^' COMMUNITY SPACE BUS STOP, ri * 1 ..,.n r.M M.... 4. yc. ENTRY COURT WITH _ I '‘' I* - lov !.,04. , - • - - . - .. e it ailli- 4 ' ' ; .....lervi• 31i; 4 . i-- 411°' k 2 t._.____ __ _ _-_._ " TRAIN GARDENS - _ . . _ . _ . / ..1. HALL BLVD N 431 Schematic Site Plan •1 11.2008 COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR THE KNOLL. AT TIGARD AFFORDABLE HOUSING TIGARD, OREGON C ARLETON HART ARCHITECTURE •::.mss_ - r'--- - _ _ , CI [1 E._ el _ .... sillIATV_ H4M11 111M iiimmme . _._ ..,,.. ,,,_ milp 3 i � ........=. ........=.i . '� .. 1."....- mi.:. +� I 1k! F __..... 1 ail Q D czirariviiii .n g ' mr, _ . • .. �w w swim —_ fi . ` _ — _ r t _ _•r - - . ells 1 1611 riri P-1.1-alki.11ait Pkilal .IR- mit II ' III, IF . n•-••••■:3:f::::1.7. • Hall Street - Elevation 1 11 2008 COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR THE KNOLL ATTIGARD AFFORDABLE HOUSING TIGARD, OREGON CARLETON HART ARCHITECTURE CLERESTORY PITCHED METAL ROOF FOR WINDOWS RAINWATER COLLECTION 1' at RESIDENCE '1 RESIDENCE \\ 1. - RETAINING WALL AS r - ii ` LANDSCAPED BUFFER PRIVATE RESIDENCE ' . RESIDENCE i" PORCH _' '- i: r i *7 , • , , i ,t,i': '1 RESIDENCE RESIDENCE r,...._ _ ........::._ t 4: ill 1‘ i . ,.._ __ _.....,_ .....1„/ 1 GREEN ROOF . _. j/ � �� ,_ �. �j/�� t///l-f/•ice I" RESIDENCE I RESIDENCE PRIVATE `�-- " �_ wort _ BALCONY ' ` RESIDENCE 1 1 R1Z11 SIDE III COMMUNITY . ----- _ I ENTRANCE MANAGER'S I RESIDENCE CARPORT WITH RESIDENCE I TRELLIS ` �, - ---- --'- l `� i ' ,* . RESIDENCE - COMMUNITY l f ROOM J- _ , ...�,1,!!t) �: Schematic Site Sections '.11.2008 COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR THE KNOLL AT TIGARD AFFORDABLE HOUSING TIGARD, OREGON CARLETON HART ARCHITECTURE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes February 2, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall,at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Fishel, Hasman, and Walsh Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Muldoon &Vermilyea Staff Present: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Kim McMillan, Engineering Manager; Cheryl Gaines,Associate Planner; Doreen Laughlin, Planning Commission Secretary 3. COMMUNICATIONS None 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES Due to the short interval between meetings, the 1-26-09 meeting minutes were not distributed in adequate time to be reviewed, therefore, the 1-26-09 minutes will be up approval at the next Planning Commission meeting,which will be held February 23rd. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 7.15 p.m. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PD) 2008-00001 - TIGARD RETAIL CENTER— PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Matt Oyen, of Pac Trust, asked for a continuance to May 18,2009, to allow them more time to adequately research and respond to the items that were brought up at the December 1st Planning Commission hearing. President Inman said they would be put first on the agenda for May 18th. 6. PUBLIC HEARING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2008-00012/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2008-00006 COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN& MAP CHANGE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2009—Page 1 of 7 President Inman read from the Quasi Judicial Hearing Guide. There were no abstentions or conflicts of interest from the Commissioners. No ex-parte contacts were reported. No one challenged the jurisdiction of the Commission. There were no site visits reported. STAFF REPORT Cheryl Gaines, Associate Planner, presented the staff report on behalf of the City. She gave the location as being on the east side of Hall Blvd between Knoll Drive and Hunziker Road. She noted that it's 3 parcels (.98 acres) located within a small pocket of what is currently designated as an R4.5 residential zone. She said that staff is recommending that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to City Council to approve with conditions to the comp plan amendment and the zoning map. She noted that was a bit of a change from the staff report which simply says "approve" but the condition is going to be based on an ODOT request. She gave several reasons to approve due to the following changes: • Significant changes in the neighborhood in last few years. • The change would be more in line with Tigard housing goals. • It's included in Urban Renewal District, adopted in 2006, TDIP applies to these 3 parcels. • The TDIP calls for high density residential along Hall Blvd. The proposed change to Mixed Use Residential 1 (MUR-1) is in line with that because MUR-1 is a high density zone. • The TDIP identified 8 catalyst projects that would spur development in the Downtown and one of those projects is Downtown Housing Development. This will bring more people into the Downtown. • The site has been zoned low density residential since at least the 1970's and that no longer fits in with the Plan. This amendment would bring that more in line with what we're looking to do in the Downtown. Gaines went on to explain that another reason for re-zoning the site and amending the Comp Plan is to make it more in line with the current housing goals for the City of Tigard: • Policy 5 under Goal 10.1 calls for higher density housing in the Downtown. • Policies 1, 3 & 4 of the same goal call for affordable and special needs housing in the City of Tigard and this amendment provides opportunity for that type of housing. • Tigard is meeting its housing capacity goals. This change would not affect that—it would just add additional units to that capacity. • There are currently 3.17 acres of buildable land zoned MUR-1; 172.4 acres of buildable land zoned R-4.5—so this loss of just under 1 acre of land to the low density housing zone would not make a significant impact. Gaines addressed some of the issues that were raised during the comment period regarding the zone change and comp plan amendment. The first was brought up by ODOT. She noted PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2009—Page 2 of 7 that Attachment 1 of the staff report outlines their issues with this specific code amendment. They're asking for a trip cap to be put on the site which would be 300 trips a day with a maximum of 23 AM peak hour trips and 27 PM peak hour trips. The reason being that the traffic study provided by the applicant assumed a worst case scenario of a 49 unit multi- family housing project. And that's based on a maximum of 50 units per acre for this site but actually, in the MUR-1 district,it's a minimum of 50 units per acre with no maximum. Another reason they're asking for this is because anything above and beyond the 300 vehicle trips would make the intersection of Hall and 99W operate at an unacceptable level. The other possible condition was brought up by the City Arborist,who had noticed several existing significant trees on the site that had not been incorporated into the site. She said he was asking for plan development overlay —but it may have been overkill. The thought was to apply a condition for having the applicant show different scenarios, taking into consideration existing trees, or putting a condition which would require that they retain certain trees. Gaines said she was not saying she recommends that one way or the other but that she's leaving that up to the Planning Commission. She said that that had been of concern to the City of Tigard arborist [Todd Prager]. Gaines noted that those comments were passed on to the applicant and that she didn't know what changes they may have made to their conceptual plan since they'd received them. QUESTIONS & COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS (Replies in italics) What kind of impact on the neighborhood would changing the zone have? With MUR-1 Zone, there's a required frontyard set-back—the maximum is 10'. The building would be oriented to the frontyard set-back and th y'd be required to have a landscape buffer of maybe 10 feet or so that would require a wall, or a fence, or a hedge— and depending on whether it's a wall,fence or hedge, the landscape buffer changes. The conceptual plan shows the building oriented to the street. Is the MUR-1 the best zone for this site? That's what's outlined in the Downtown Improvement Plan — the proposed Zoning I don't know if it's going to remain that way because the Downtown Plan is just conceptual at this point. But that's what they have pointed out as the proposed Zoning for that area. There were a few other questions by the commissioners and then they moved on to the applicant's presentation. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Greta Lavador of MGH Associates spoke on behalf of the applicant. She said they generally support staff's findings and appreciate staff's help with this process. She said they have one comment regarding trees. Pages 6 & 7 of the staff report talk about the arborist's suggestions for a planned development overlay. She said they feel the development code provides adequate regulation for tree preservation as it is and they do not need additional conditions to protect them. She noted that a lot of the trees are in the right-of-way that will be dedicated for Hall Blvd and Hunziker Street. Some of the trees on the site will be evaluated PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2009—Page 3 of 7 as part of the site development permit and they will be looked at to see if they're healthy and if they can be retained. She said they would like to recommend that an additional condition [regarding trees] is not required as part of this process. QUESTIONS BY COMMISSIONERS (Lavador's replies in italics) The additional condition of the trip cap — is that problematic? It's not. We are proposing that once you take the right-of-way dedications out of the site area we are proposing over the minimum density. And also — senior housing generates fewer trips than the multi family housing that's documented in the reports. We're well under the trip cap. Is your interest in this project strictly around the senior housing? Yes. In other words, if the senior housing project falls through... I represent the applicant who is a senior housing developer. PUBLIC TESTIMONY—IN FAVOR One of the owners of the property, Pat Clickener, spoke in favor. She said, first, she wanted to point out that she loves trees. She said that, unfortunately, the previous owner planted dual trees —together - and they are having issues with the trees. The reality is —with every storm they are having major issues with the trees. She stated that the design accommodates as many of the trees as they can, given the fact that the City has asked for additional footage off of the property. She said she believes there are enough trees. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN OPPOSITION None APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL None QUESTIONS OF STAFF Of the materials presented, it appears that the project wants to be affordable senior housing? I just don't know, since they've mentioned that—can we put conditions that it'll be senior housing? Is the developer dedicated to senior housing? My concern is the idea of- can we force them to do it? Planning Manager, Dick Bewersdorff, answered: The Comp Plan is a picture of what your future is. When we start putting conditions on Comp Plans, I have a real difficult time- because you're going to have a hard time tracking it. You can put conditions on the one change—you can put conditions on development review, but putting conditions on the Comp Plan is something that is extraordinary, very difficult to relate to, and it's hard to track. It's not the function of the Plan to be made site-specific. If the proper y should be toned MUR—Multifamily— then it should stand on its own in the Comp Plan. You can put conditions on the one change—such as what ODOT has asked us to do. I would PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2009—Page 4 of 7 suggest that you put that on the tone change itself and that'll ride with the property just as ifyou were to put the condition on the actual SDK My concern is whether there's a commitment to put affordable housing in that Downtown area. I don't care if it's seniors or whatever. But it's been characterized that this will be an affordable housing project and I just don't know how serious the developers are to have it as affordable housing. I think the applicant can speak to that ifyou allow them to talk about their commitment to this property. They didn't bring that out in their presentation, but I think it's necessary so you'll feel comfortable with the change. Sheila Greenlaw Fink spoke on behalf of the applicant. She said their name is "Community Partner's for Affordable Housing" and that's all they do —affordable housing. She went on to explain that 100% of their projects are designed for folks at 60% median income or below. She said they'd looked at many sites and that it'd been a long road and they were not about to let this one not happen if they can help it. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DELIBERATIONS There was a short period of deliberations including some questions of the Engineering Manager, Kim McMillan, regarding whether Scoffins will ever be connected smoothly into that intersection. She answered, yes, and explained how ODOT has a plan for the intersection that will impact this development— not negatively - because they're going to swing the intersection to the south slightly—but it won't align with Scoffins until basically Scoffins is realigned to match Hunziker - which will require acquiring that property. She noted that down the road that is in the bigger scheme of things. MOTION There was a motion was by Commissioner Doherty, seconded by Commissioner Anderson as follows: I move the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council of the Comp Plan Amendment 2008-00012, and approval of the Zone Change 2008-00006, with the condition of the ODOT trip cap. The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote; the Commission voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Fishel, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, and Commissioner Walsh (7) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: None (0) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2009—Page 5 of 7 ABSENT: Commissioners Muldoon &Vermilyea (2) Planning Manager, Dick Bewersdorff, clarified that the Comp Plan ordinance will be crafted so that it says the condition is a part of the Zone Change — so that's clear— [since that's what had been discussed.] President Inman agreed with Bewersdorff. President Inman then noted this is scheduled to go to City Council on February 24, 2009. 7. OTHER BUSINESS—ELECTIONS President Inman reminded the Commission that, according to the bylaws,in every odd year elections need to be held for the offices of President and the Vice President. There was a short period of discussion, at the end of which, a motion was made. MOTION - FOR PRESIDENT Commissioner Doherty moved to nominate Jodie Inman for another term as President of the Planning Commission.The motion was seconded by Commissioner Anderson. The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote; the Commission voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Fishel, Commissioner Hasman, and Commissioner Walsh (6) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: President Inman (1) ABSENT: Commissioners Muldoon &Vermilyea (2) MOTION - FOR VICE PRESIDENT There was a motion was by Commissioner Inman, seconded by Commissioner Doherty, to nominate Commissioner Walsh for another term as Vice President. The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote, the Commission voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Fishel, Commissioner Hasman, and Commissioner Inman (6) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: Commissioner Walsh (1) ABSENT: Commissioners Muldoon &Vermilyea (2) At this point, President Inman introduced the new Planning Commission alternate,Tim Gaschke, who's been regularly attending the Planning Commission meetings since he was PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2009—Page 6 of 7 appointed. She commended him for so consistently attending. She told Gaschke that he is welcome to sit at the Dais if he'd like to join them. She said he would be welcome to sit with them and enter into the discussion - the only caveat being that he wouldn't be able to actually vote. Gaschke said he'd prefer to sit in the background and watch from there. Inman said the invitation stands and that at some point, if he'd like to join the other commissioners at the Dais, he'd certainly be welcome to. Commissioner Caffall added that, as an alternate, years back - for quite some time he too sat in the back. He encouraged Gaschke to sit up front when he's comfortable with doing so since he believes you get more of a flavor of what goes on, and you also get some interaction with fellow Commissioners. Commissioner Walsh agreed with that and recommended that he sit up front when he feels good with it. He said it helped him when he himself had been an alternate. Doreen Laughlin, Planning Commission Secretary, asked Gaschke to simply let her know ahead of time if he would like to begin sitting with the other Commissioners — so she would have a microphone ready for him. Gaschke nodded. At this point, Dick Bewersdorff,Planning Manager, said he would like to express how much he appreciates this particular group of commissioners. He said this commission is outstanding and that he appreciates their insightful questions. He added that it's refreshing to see them in action —and thanked them again. 8. ADJOURNMENT President Inman adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Doreen Laughlin, Planning Comthilion Secretary vow A'1TEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2009—Page 7 of 7 Tigard r panning Commission - Moll Call Hearing/Workshop Date: 2- "2--(DA Starting Time: v COMMISSIONERS: ✓ Jodie Inman (President) Tom Anderson t/ Rex Caffall r/ Margaret Doherty Karen Fishel Stuart Hasman Matthew Muldoon Jeremy Vermilyea David Walsh STAFF PRESENT: /Dick Bewersdorff Tom Coffee Gary Pagenstecher Ron Bunch V Cheryl Gaines John Floyd Jerree Lewis Duane Roberts V Kim McMillan Sean Farrelly Gus Duenas Darren Wyss Phil Nachbar Marissa Daniels Todd Prager V Doreen Laughlin