Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA-08-081_Misc 2
Traffic Impact Analysis NEW LIFE CHURCH AT RENTON Prepared for: New Life Church at Renton July 2008 Prepared by: The Transpo Group, Inc. 11730 llSth Avenue NE, Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 Phone: 425.821.3665 Fax: 425.825.8434 www.thetranspogroup.com © 2008 The Transpo Group July 2008 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1 Project Description .................................................................................................................... 1 Study Scope ................................................................................................................................. 1 EXISTING & 2009 WITHOUT-PROJECT CONDITIONS ............................. .4 Roadway Network ..................................................................................................................... 4 Planned Improvements ............................................................................................................. 4 Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................................................... 4 Traffic Operations ..................................................................................................................... 5 Traffic Safety .............................................................................................................................. 8 PROJECT IMPACTS ............................................................................... 9 Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................... 9 Trip Distribution and Assignment ........................................................................................ 10 Traffic Volume Impact ........................................................................................................... 10 Traffic Operation Impact ....................................................................................................... 13 Traffic Safety Impact ............................................................................................................... 13 MITIGATION MEASURES ..................................................................... 14 Traffic Impact Fees ................................................................................................................. 14 Frontage Improvements ......................................................................................................... 14 Access Driveways .................................................................................................................... 14 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................... 15 APPENDIX A: LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS APPENDIX B: Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Fjgures Site Vicinity .............................................................................................................. 2 Proposed Site Plan .................................................................................................. 3 Existing (2008) Sunday and Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ........ 6 2009 Without-Project Sunda\' and Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................................... 7 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ....................................................... 11 2009 With-Project Sunday and Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 12 Tables Existing and 2009 \'\'ithout-Projecr Intersection Operations .......................... 5 Summary of Three-Year Accident Records ........................................................ 8 Trip Generation Summary .................................................................................... 9 Traffic Volume Impacts at Study Intersections ............................................... 10 2009 Without-and With-Project Intersection Operations ............................. 13 The Transpo Croup I NewLifeChurch nc New Life Church at Renton July 2008 I ntrod uction The purpose of this traffic impact analysis (TIA) is to identify potential traffic-related impacts associated with the proposed new development at the existing New Life Church at Renton site. As necessary, mitigation measures are identified that would offset or reduce significant impacts. Project Description Figure 1 illustrates the project site and surrounding vicinity. New Life Church, an existing church located at 15711 l52nd Avenue SE in the City of Renton is proposing to construct a new church building totaling up to 36,000 gross square feet. The new church building would be used for worship services, adult Christian education, and associated ministries. With the completion of the new building, the existing church building will continue to be used for children's ministries on Sundays. Youth ministries will continue to use the facility throughout the week. Offices in the existing church building will continue to be used as offices. It is anticipated that the proposed project would be completed and generating traftic bl' 2009. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed site plan. The two existing driveways off of 152nd Avenue SE located approximatell' 400 feet south of SR 169 will remain as the access to the property. Direct vehicular access is not proposed via SR 169. It is important to note that in addition to New Life Church, Renton Christian School (a private K-9 school) and Sonshinc Learning Center (daycare facility) also operate on-site. Use of the new church building would be limited to New Life Church and would not be used by the school or daycare. Study Scope The scope of the analysis follows requirements set forth in the City of Renton's Policy Guideline for Traffic Impact Analysis jor Sew Development. Intersection operations are evaluated during the Sunday peak hour, the one-hour period in which the proposed project would generate the greatest amount of traffic and have the greatest potential impact on off-site intersections. The Citl"s TIA guidelines require the study area include all intersections that would experience a rIve percent or more increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development. Based on this requirement, the study area includes SR 169/152nd ihenue SE and SR 169/140th Way SE intersections as project traffic at these locations would increase total Sunday peak hour traffic volumes by about five percent or more. Project traffic during the weekday PM peak hour would not increase total intersection volumes bl' five percent or more; however, the SR 169/152nd Avenue SE intersection was evaluated since it would serve all new traffic volumes generated by the proposed proj ect. The TIA describes conditions in the project site vicinity, including the roadway network, planned improvements, existing and future peak hour traffic volumes, traffic operations, and traffic safety. Future with-project conditions are evaluated by adding site-generated traffic to future without-project volumes. Site-generated impacts are identified based on the difference between forecasted with-and without-project conditions. The Transpo Group I 04435.03\NewLifeChurch_Revised TIA,doc Page 1 j S~ l60TH p\... :r::i f-J 0; '<t" i " .-..i "'. '-. _. -' SITE .. N NOTTOSCALE " @i ~~ .",.-2:-" ~~ , LIBERT!- /-IS N4PLEJ.lfXO HEIGHTS P-4RK Reproduced with permission granted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS. This map is copyrighted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS. It is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for personal we or resale, without permission. AJi rights reserved. r Figure 1 Site Vicinity New Life Church at Renton M:104104435 New Life Chruch at Renton\Graphics\newlife graphic01 <A> lindak 11/17f05 11:20 The Tra~ Grrup \ • \ / I Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan New Life Church at Renton [C ___________________________ J._~~ ~~ The Transgo Group M:\04\04435.03 New Life Church Revision\Graphics\new life graphic01 <8> robertm 07101108 09:33 New life Church at Renton July 2008 Existing & 2009 Without-Project Conditions This section of the report describes both existing and 2009 without-project conditions within the identified study area, including the adjacent roadway network, planned improvements, existing and future traHic ,'olumes, traHic operations, and traffic safety. Roadway Network Existing roadway characteristics and intersection channelization are described below, Renton-Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) is a five-lane principal arterial with posted speed limits from 40 to 50 miles pef hour (mph) within the study area, Left-and right- turn lanes exist at the signalized intefsections of 140th Way SE and I 52nd Avenue SE. A jersey-barrier median replaces the two-way left-turn lane to the west of 140th Way SE, and continues until the roadway crosses the Cedar River. 152nd Avenue SE is a two-lane local foad with an unposted speed limit of 25 mph. Traffic at the intersection of SE 156th Street/ 152nd Avenue SE is uncontrolled. Northbound traffic is controlled with a stop sign. The northbound approach at SR 169 includes one left-turn lane and one shared through/ right-turn lane. 154th Place SE is a two-lane minor arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. In the third quarter oi2005, a new bridge connecting 154th Place SE to the SR 169/152nd Avenue SE intersection was opened to replace the Elliott Bridge to the west. The southbound approach at SR 169 includes one left-turn lane, one through lane, and one right-turn lane. 140th Way SE is a five-lane principal arterial with a posted speed limit of 40 mph. The northbound approach at SR 169 includes two left-turn lanes and one right-turn lane, Planned Improvements Within the study area, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and City of Renton are planning to improve the intersection ofSR 169/140th Way SE. SR 169 will be widened to provide a westbound transit bypass lane and an eastbound transit queue-jump lane as well as implementing transit signal priority. This improvement is scheduled to be phased over time between 2008 and 2011, and would not be fully completed prior to the proposed church development. Therefore, evaluation of future without-and with-project intersection operations does not include this improvement, Traffic Volumes Figure 3 illustrates existing Sunday peak hour traffic volumes at SR 169/152nd Avenue SE and SR 169/140th Way SE as well as existing weekday PM peak hour volumes at SR 169/152nd Avenue SE. Traffic volumes were based on data collected on Wednesday, September 7, 2005 and Sunday, Septembet 11,2005. Existing 2008 traffic volumes were estimated by applying an average annual growth rate of 4.1 percent per year to the 2005 The Transpo Croup I 04435.03\NewLifeChurch_Revised TIA.doc Page 4 July 2008 traffic counts. Peak hour traffic volumes were rounded to the nearest five vehicles since traffic volumes fluctuate day-to-da)". This is the same growth rate published in the Elliott Bridge Replacement Project TL4 (INCA Engineers, November 2001) and used to forecast future traffic volumes at SR 169/152nd Avenue SE. Although this annual growth rate is reflective oi weekday PM peak hour tramc, it was assumed that weekday PM peak hour and Sunday peak hour traffic will increase at approximately the same rate in the coming years. This same method was used to estimate Future (2009) without-project traffic. Future without-project Sunday peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 4. This figure also illustrates 2009 without-project weekday PM peak hour volumes at SR 169/152nd Avenue SE. Similar to existing traffic volumes, these volumes were rounded to the nearest five vehicles. Traffic Operations The operational characteristics of an intersection are determined by calculating the intersection's level of service (LOS). The intersection as a whole and its individual turning movements can be described alphabetically with a range of levels of service (A through F), with LOS A indicating t-ree-flow traffic and LOS F indicating extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. LOS is measured in average control delay per vehicle and is typically reported for the intersection as a whole at signalized intersections. Control delay is defined as the combination of initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. Appendix A provides a more detailed explanation of intersection LOS. Existing and 2009 without-project levels of service, delays, and volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios were calculated at study intersections based on methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manllal (Transportation Research Board, 2000). Jjnchro (version 6.0) was used for these calculations. Thc results are illustrated in Table 1. Appendix B contains detailed LOS worksheets for both existing and 2009 without-project peak hour conditions. Table 1. Existing and 2009 Without·Project Intersection Operations Existing (2008) 2009 Without· Project Intersection LOS ' Delayl VIC' lOS Delay VIC Weekda~ PM Peak Hour SR 169/1 52nd Ave 5E C 29.8 0.70 C 31.7 0.73 Sundal!: Peak Hour SR 169/152nd Ave SE C 25.3 0.61 C 25.8 0.62 SR 169/140th Way SE B 18.1 0.62 B 18.8 0.65 I. level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology. 2. A .... erage delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Volume-ta-capacity ratio. The Transpo Croup I 04435.03\NewlifeChurch_Revised TIA.doc Page 5 580- 310, CIXJllSE --565 -670 (205 r- 265 I :J: SE l60TH Pl I-- (20) 65 (520) 160 I 60 (235) -'+'-- (280) 200 ) ~ 50 (105) (1,185)385--515(445) (100) 180, ( 45 (15) --tr-(85) 140 25 (20) 30 (10) SITE .. N NOTTOSCALE LEGEND X SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUME (X) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME r Figure 3 Existing (2008) Sunday and Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Transpo New Life Church at Renton Gruup M:\04\04435.03 New Life Church Revision\Graphics\new life graphic01 <C> robertm 07101/08 10:33 605- 325 -. --590 CIJlJflSE , ! 'i st: 166T11 ;>l -695 (215 r- 275 Figure 4 (20) 65 (540) 165 I 60 (245) .It'- (290) 210 J (50 (110) (1,235) 400 --535 (465) (100) 180 -. (45 (15) --tr-(85) 140 25 (20) 30 (10) SITE .. N NOTTOSCALE ~ X SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUME (X) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME r 2009 Without-Project Sunday and Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Tra~o New Life Church at Renton GroUp M:\04\04435.03 New Life Church Revision\Graphics\new life graphlc01 <0> robertm 07/01108 09:08 New Life Church at Renton _____ ...... _ .. _______ -'-Ju~ILy .=:20~0~8 The City of Renton's LOS standard is based on a city-wide transportation performance indicator and it is not direcdy related to specific intersections. The study intersections are located on SR 169. Based on \'\'SDOT's Intersection Standards, LOS 0 or better is considered an acceptable operation. [\5 illustrated in Table I, SR 169/152nd Avenue SE operates at LOS C today, and will continue to operate at LOS C during both the Sunday and weekday PM peak hour. During the Sunday peak hour, SR 169/140'h Way SE currendy operates at LOS B and will continue to operate at LOS B in 2009. Therefore, both study intersections operate acceptably under existing conditions and will operate acceptably under 2009 without-project conditions. Traffic Safety In 2005, traffic accident records at study intersections were requested from the WSDOT for the three-yeat period between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2004. Accident records at study intersections are summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Summary of Three-Year Accident Records Intersection SR 169/152nd Ave SE SR 169/140th Way SE I. Million entering vehicles. Number of Reported Accidents 2002 o 13 2003 2 7 2004 7 Annual Accidents Average per MEV 1 1.0 0.07 9.0 0.49 A traffic safety hazard may exist at any location experiencing more than one accident per one million entering vehicles (MEV). Based on this threshold and the accident data summarized in Table 2, neither study intersection has a traffic safety hazard. ----c ____ -----.•.•. -.-.. -.------- The Transpo Group I 04435.03\NewLifeChurch_Revised TIA,doc Page 8 New Ufe Church at Renton July 2008 Project Impacts This section of the TIA documents project-generated impacts on the surrounding roadway network and at study intersections. First, Sunday and PM peak hour project traffic volumes are estimated, distributed, and assigned to study intersections. Next, future with-project peak hour traffic "olumes are projected and potential impacts to traffic volumes, intersections operations, and traffic safety are identified. Trip Generation Estimates of existing vehicle trips were calculated based on traffic volumes at site access driveways collected on Tuesday through Thursday, July 12-14, 2005, and Sunday, July 17, 2005. Since existing weekday P.'v[ peak hour trips at site access driveways are associated with New Life Church, Renton Christian School, and Sonshine Learning Center, an on- site trip survey was conducted to establish how many trips were exclusively church- generated. A survey was not conducted on Sunday as it was assumed that all vehicular trips are associated with New Life Church. Based on this approach, it was determined that the church generates an average of approximately 45 trips during the weekday PM peak hour and approximately 375 trips during the Sunday peak hour. The survey results were used to calculate a trip rate per 1,000 square-feet. The existing church is approximately 93,000 square-Ieet and generates approximately 45 trips during the weekday PM peak hour and approximately 375 trips during the Sunday peak hour. Therefore, the church trip rate based on the existing traffic data is approximately 0.46 trips per 1,000 square-feet during the weekday PM peak hour and approximately 4.04 trips per 1,000 square-feet during the Sunday peak hour. The trip generation of the proposed church development was calculated based on the church size of 129,000 square-feet (i.e., the existing 93,000 square-foot church plus the 36,000 square-foot addition), and the calculated trip generation rate based on the existing data. Trip generation for the proposed church development is summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Trip Generation Summary Size Trip Future Existing Net New land Use (1,000 sf) Rate ' Trips (in/out) Trips (in/out)' Trips (in/out) WeekdQ~ PM Peak Hour Church 129 0.46 60 (32/28) 43 (23/20) 17 (9/8) Sundar. Peak Hour Church 129 4.04 522 (258/264) 376 (186/190) 146 (72/74) 1. Average trip rates based on existing church trip generation survey conducted the week af July 12, 2005 and Sunday July 17, 2005. 2. Existing trips based on traffic counts collected the week of July 12. 200S and Sunday. July 17, 2005. As illustrated above, the proposed I 29,1l1l1l-gsf church building would generate approximately 60 trips during the weekday PM peak hour and approximately 522 trips during the Sunday peak hour. However, not all of these trips would be new trips as New Life Church is an existing church and currently generates rraffic during borh peak hours. Therefore, the church's existing trip generation was subtracted from rhe future trip The Transpo Group I 04435.03\NewUfeChurch_Revised TIA.doc Page 9 New life Church at Renton July 2008 generation to estimate the number of net new trips the proposed church development would likely generate. As discussed previously, the church currently generates an average of approximately 45 trips during the weekday PM peak hour and approximately 375 trips during the Sunday peak hour. Subtracting these trips, it is estimated that the new church building would generate approximately 17 net new PM peak hour trips and 146 net new Sunday peak hour trips. Trip Distribution and Assignment As reHected by the existing peak hour traffic volumes at SR 169/152nd Avenue SE and SR 169/140th Way SE, net new vehicle trips were distributed and assigned at study intersections based on general travel patterns at these two locations. Trip distribution percentages and peak hour trip assignments are illustrated in Figure 5. It is estimated that 75 percent of project traffic would be oriented to/ from the west on SR 169, 15 percent to/from the north on 154th Place SI~:, and 10 percent to/from the east on SR 169. Traffic Volume Impact Project-generated Sunday and weekday PM peak hour traffic volumes were added to 2009 without-project volumes at study intersections. The resulting 2009 with-project traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure G. Table 4 summarizes the anticipated increase in total entering traffic as well as the percent of 2009 with-project volumes attributable to the proposed church development. Table 4. Traffic Volume Impacts at Study Intersections Peak Hour Total Entering Volume (TEV) 2009 Without· Project-2009 With· Percent Attributable to Intersection Project Generated Project Project Weekdall PM Peak Hour SR 169/1 52nd Ave SE 3,135 17 3,152 0.5% Sundall Peak Hour SR 169/1 52nd Ave SE 1,905 146 2,051 7.1% SR 169/1 40th Way SE 2,710 110 2,820 3.9% As illustrated above, increases in traffic attributable to the new church building would be approximately 110 Sunday peak hour trips at SR 169/140th Way SE and approach 150 Sunday peak hour trips at SR 169/IS2nd Avenue SE. Project traffic would represent approximately 4 and 7 percent of 2009 with-project traffic volumes at these two locations, respectively. In contrast, during the weekday PM peak hour, church-generated traffic would increase traffic volumes at SR 169/152nd Avenue SE by 17 trips (representing about 0.5 percent of total peak hour traffic volumes). Therefore, the proposed project would have the greatest traffic volume impact at SR 169/152nd Avenue SE during the Sunday peak hour as all net new traffic would travel though this Intersectlon. The Transpo Croup I 0443S.03\NewLifeChurch_Revised TIA.doc Page 10 -, i CCVIIS£ 29--30 (26 r- 25 Figure 5 11 ~ (7)54, (7(2) --tr-(6) 56 7 (2) 11 SITE I Project Trip Distribution and Assignment LEGEND ... N NoTToSCAlE X ' SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUME (X) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME r --------------------------Transpg New Life Church at Renton Group M:104104435.03 New Life Church Revision\Graphics\new Ijfe graphic01 <E> robertm 07101108 09:08 r 634- 325, ---590 ---725 (241 r- 300 Figure 6 "- (20) 76 (540) 165 I 60 (245) -'t'- (290) 210 J 4... 50 (110) (1,235) 400 ----535 (465) (107) 234 , (52 (17) ---tr-(91) 196 32 (22) 41 (10) SITE .. N NOTTOSCALE CE/l4N ~ " , .1 LEGENO X = SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUME (X) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME The 2009 With-Project Sunday and Weekday PM Hour Traffic Volumes New Life Church at Renton Tra~o GroUp M:\04\0443S.03 New Life Church Revision\Graphics\new life graphicOl <F> robertm 07101108 09:07 New Life Church at Renton July 2008 Traffic Operation Impact Future with-project intersection operations were calculated for both study intersections; the results are shown in Table 5. These calculations used the same intetsection variables as were used in evaluating 2009 without-project conditions. Future without-project levels of services, delays, and v / c ratios arc also shown in this table for comparison purposes. LOS worksheets for 2009 with-project conditions are included in Appendix B of this report. Table S. 2009 Without· and With· Project Intersection Operations 2009 Without·Project 2009 With· Project Intersection LOS ' Delayz VIC' LOS Oelay VIC Weekda~ PM Peak Hour SR 169/152nd Ave SE C 31.7 0.73 C 32.0 0.73 Sunda:t Peak Hour SR 169/152nd Ave SE C 25.8 0.62 C 30.1 0.68 SR 169/140th Way SE B 18.8 0.65 B 19.6 0.67 1. Level of service, based on 2000 Highway CapaCIty Manual methodology. 2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Volu me-to-capacity. With or without the proposed church development, SR 169/152nd Avenue SE wowd operate at LOS C during the weekday PM and Sunday peak hours. SR 169/140th Way SE would operate at LOS B during the Sunday peak hour both with and without the proposed project. Given WSDOT's Intersection Standards (LOS D or better), no significant impact ro study intersection operations is expected during the Sunday and weekday PM peak hours. Because of the unique traffic characteristics of the church (that is, the anticipated surge in traffic associated with back-to-back worship services), outbound traffic at both site access driveways would likely experience greater-than. normal delays during the Sunday peak hour. To minimize vehicle delay during this time period, New Life Church could utilize traffic control police officers tn temporarily stop traffic on 152nd Avenue SE. This would allow motorists turning onto 152nd Avenue SE to exit the site safely and minimize delays and on-site queuing. In addition, New Life Church could schedwe more time between Sunday worship services and not schedule services back-to-back. This too would improve traffic operations at both site access driveways. Traffic Safety Impact New church-generated traffic would likely result in a proportionate increase in the probability of traffic accidents. [t is unlikely, however, that this traffic would create a safety hazard or significandy increase the number of reported accidents. This is especially true considering that increases in traffic would primarily be limited to Sundays and not throughout the week. New church-generated traffic would not exacerbate an existing traffic safety hazard. The Transpo Group I 04435.03\NewLifeChurch_Revised TIA.doc Page 13 New Life Church at Renton July 2008 Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures have been idemitied to reduce potential traffic-related impacts generated by the proposed church development. Mitigation is summarized below in the form of traffic impact fees, frontage improvements, and measures to ensure safe and efficient operations at both site access driveways. Traffic Impact Fees Project impacts to the City's road system would be mitigated by required participation in the City's Development Fees. This ,,·stem was developed for the purpose of ensuring that financial commitments are in place so that adequate transportation facilities are available to serve new growth and development. To this end, new development is required to pay $75.00 per each new average daily trip generated by the proposed project as calculated by Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (7'" Edition, 2003). Based on ITE, the 36,000 square-foot addition would generate 328 daily trips; therefore, the estimated transportation development fee is $24,600. These fees are payable prior to issuance of a Building Permit. The City of Renton will ultimately calculate the required transportation fee based on the number of net new average daily trips. Frontage Improvements The City of Renton requires that, if needed, new developments construct improvements to roadways abutting the project sice. T'-pically, frontage improvements include curb, gutter and sidewalk. If required, these improvements would be made on the west side of 152nd Avenue SE and the south side of SR 169 along the property lines. Access Driveways During the Sunday peak hour, outbound traffic at both site access driveways would likely experience greater-than-normal delays due to the anticipated surge in traffic associated with back-to-back worship services. To minimize vehicle delay during this time period, New Life Church could utilize traffic control police officers to temporarily stop north- south traffic on 152nd Avenue Sl~:_ This would allow motorists turning onto 152nd Avenue SE to exit the site safek and minimize delays and on-site queuing. In addition, New Life Church could schedule more time between Sunday worship services and not schedule services back-to-back. This too would improve traffic operations at both site access driveways. The Trans-po Group I 04435.03\NewlifeChurch_Revised TIAdoc Page 14 New life Church at Remon July 2008 Summary and Conclusions • The proposed project would generate approximately 17 net new PM peak hour trips and 146 net new Sunday peak hour trips. • Depending on location, project traffic would represent 4-7 percent of future with-project Sunday peak hour traffic volumes at study intersections. • Both study intersections would operate at LOS C or better during the Sunday peak hour and SR 169/1 52nd ,\ venue SE would operate at LOS C during the weekday Pi'vI peak hour. Therd"ore, no significant impact to study intersection operations is expected. • New tramc generated by New Life Church would likely result in a proportionate increase in the probability of [caffic accidents. It is unlikely, however, that this tramc would create a safety hazard or significantly increase the number of reported accidents. • The church would be required to pay Renton's Development Fees for transportation to off-set potential tramc impacts generated by the number of net new daily trips. • The project may be required to construct frontage improvements along the west side of 152nd Avenue SE and south side ofSR 169. • Outbound traffic at both site access driveways would likely experience greater- than-normal delays during the Sunday peak hour. To improve operations, the church could (1) utilize tratlic control police officers to temporarily stop traffic on 152nd Avenue SE and/ or (2) schedule more time between Sunday worship services and not schedule se,,·ices back-to-back. -----.-.. -~~~~~~~~~-=-__:_c:- The Transpo Group I 04435.03\NewlifeChurch_Revised TIAdoc Page 15 Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Signalized intersection level of service (LOS) is defined in terms of the average total vehicle delay of all movements through an intersection. Vehicle delay is a method of quantifying several intangible factors, including driver discomfort, frustration, and lost travel time. Specifically, LOS criteria are stated in terms of average delay per vehicle during a specified time period (for example, the PM peak hour). Vehicle delay is a complex measure based un many variables, including signal phasing (i.e., progression of movements through thL intL[SLction), signal cycle length, and traffic volumes with respect to intersection capacity. Table t shows LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as described in the Highlvay Capacity Afanual (Transpottatiun Research Board, Special Report 209,2000). Table 1. Level of Service A B c D E F level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Average Control Delay (sec/veh) ~10 >10·20 >20 -35 >35·55 >55 -SO >SO General Description (Signalized Intersections) Free Flow Stable Flow (slight delays) Stable flow (acceptable delays) Approaching unstable flow (tolerable delay, occasionally wait through more than one signal cycle before proceeding) Un5table flow (intolerable delay) Forced flow (jammed) Unsignalized intersection LOS crit~ria can b~ further reduced into two intersection types: all-way stop-controlled and two-way stop-controlled. ,-\Il-way, stop-controlled intersection LOS is expressed in terms of the average vehicle delay ot all ot the movements, much like that of a signalized intersection. Two-way, stop-controlled intersection LOS is defined in terms of the average vehicle delay of an individual movement(s). This is because the performance of a two-way, stop-controlled intersection is more closely reflected in terms of its individual movements. rather than its performance overall. For this reason, LOS for ,t t\VQ-way, stop-controlled intersection is defined in terms of its individual movements. With this in mind, total average vehicle delay (i.e., average delay of all movements) for a twu-way, stop-controlled intersection should be viewed with discretion. Table 2 shows LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections (both all-way and two-way, stop- controlled). Table 2. level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections level of Service Average Control Delay (secjveh) A 0·10 B >10· 15 c >15·25 D >25·35 E >35 . 50 F >50 T im ing s 2 : SR 1 69 & 152nd Ave S E ElU stJng Wee kday PM Peak Con d ilJ ons (2006 ) ~ --+ .. (' .-, "\ t '-. ~ .; 1:iiiOGnlw> Ea .. EaT EaR W8L waT W8R N81 NST S8l SST S8R Lane C onf'9ura lJoos , tt ~ , tt ~ , To , t ~ V0tum8 (vph) 280 1185 100 15 445 l OS 85 10 235 20 520 Tu rn Ty pe Prot p,,,,, Pro t Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Porminoo Phases 4 8 6 Detector Phases 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 6 6 Minimum Ini tial (s j 50 15.0 150 5.0 15,0 15.0 5.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 50 Minimum Split (5) 10 .0 3 1.5 31 .5 10 .0 32.5 32 .5 10 .0 39 .0 10.0 39.0 39,0 Tota l Split (5) 26 ,0 48 5 485 10 .0 32 5 325 160 39.5 22 ,0 45.5 45 ,5 Total S~ (%) 21 .7% 40.4% 40.4% 8.3% 27.1% 27 .1% 13.3% 32.9% 18 .3% 37 .9% 37 .9% Yellow T im e (s ) 40 45 4 5 4.0 45 4 .5 40 All-Red TIme (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 .0 1.0 Lead/Lag l ead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Leao Lead-lag Optimize? ROi;aIl Mode None N"", N"", None N"", None N~ Act Effct Green (s) 20.0 42.4 42.4 6.1 21 .5 21 .5 9 .9 Acl ualed glC Ratio 023 0,48 048 0 06 024 0 24 011 lI /c Ra tio 074 074 0 13 0.t 4 0 56 0 24 045 Con lrol Delay 469 243 67 506 335 78 488 Queue Delay 0 .0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tutdl Delay 469 243 67 50G 3J !.J { 8 488 LOS D C A D C A D J\Pflltl"dl Dd"y 273 2Y 2 Approach LO S C C _Summoov Cycle Length: 120 Actuate d Cycle Le ngth: 88.5 Natural Cycle: 115 Con tro l Type. A c tuated-Uncoordinated Maximum vIc Ratio: 0,74 Inte rsection Signal Dela y: 27 .6 IIller se c ~o n lOS , C Intersection Capacity UliJizatio n 66,6% ICU Lellelof Service C Analy si s Pe rio d (min) 15 ~ a nd Ph ... " 2 , SR 169. 152 nd A" SE .'t 'r Lt.; -, ~·)tii," .s ~116 .7 F .. M :\04\044 35 03 New Li fe C h urc h Revisionl LOS\Synch ro files\exi sti ng P M .sy7 Tna Tran spo Group 4.0 4 .0 4 .0 4 .0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lag Le ad Lag La g Min N one M in Min 13.1 17.3 23.3 23.3 0 .15 020 026 026 0.12 071 004 0 74 19 4 490 28S 14< 0.0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 19.4 490 288 144 B D C B 4 1,0 2~,3 D C Page 1 He M S igna li z ed Inte r s e c tion C apaci t y Ana l y s is 2: SR 169 & 1 52nd Ave SE Existing Weekday PM Peak Con d iti o n s l2008) ~ --+ .. (' .-, "\ t _,., E81 Ea T EaR we .. weT W8R NBl~BT Lane Conf'9urahon s , tt ~ , tt ~ , Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total L os t l ime (Sj 4 .0 4 0 4 .0 4 .0 4 0 4 0 40 Lane Uti!. Factor 1 .00 0 .95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1 .00 1.00 'n 1 00 1 00 0.85 100 1 00 0.85 1 00 Fit Prol ected 0 .95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 0.95 Satd . Fl o w (prot) t 770 3539 1583 171 9 3438 1538 1805 Fit Perm itted 0 .95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 0.95 Sat d. Fl ow !l:!o1l111 1770 3539 t583 171 9 343S 1538 1805 Volume (vph) 280 1185 100 15 445 105 85 Pe ak -hour fa cto r. PHF 095 095 0.9 5 0.95 095 0 .95 0 .95 Adj. Flow (vph) 295 1247 105 16 466 111 89 RT OR Reduction (lIpn ) 0 0 46 0 0 81 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 295 1247 59 16 466 30 89 Hea vl Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% 0% Turn T ype p,,,, p,om p,,,, Poom Prot PrO!ecteo Phases 7 4 3 8 5 Permllled Phases 4 8 Acl ucl te<l Green G (s) 190 408 <10.8 i7 2J.tI 23 ~ { 4 Eff ec tive Green. 9 (s) 20.0 423 423 27 25 0 25 0 84 Acl uatfr(l glC RallO 022 046 046 003 027 027 009 Clearance Ti me (s) 50 55 55 50 5 .5 55 5 0 VehIcle EdenSlOn {SI 30 ·10 4 0 30 40 40 30 Lane G rp Cap (lIph) 382 16 17 723 50 928 415 '" vI s Ratio Prot 00 17 cO 35 0 01 0 .14 0 .0 5 vi s Ratio Perm 0 .04 0 .02 IlIe Ratio 0 77 077 0 08 032 050 0 07 0.54 Uniform Delay, dl 34 .2 21 .1 14 ,2 44 .1 28.6 25.2 40.3 Pro gression Fac l o r 100 1 00 100 1 00 1 00 100 1 00 Incremental Delay, d2 9 .3 2.5 0 .1 3 .7 0 .6 0 .1 3.6 Dela y Is) 43.5 23.6 14 ,3 477 29.2 253 43.9 Lellel of Set"IIice D C B D C C D Approach De lay (5 ) 2 6.6 28.9 Approach lOS C C _Swnmoo , HCM Average Conltol Delay 29.8 HCM Level of SeNk s HCM Volume to Capa ci t y ratio 0 .70 Actuated CyCle l ength (5) 92 _6 Sum o f Iosllime (s) In te rsection Capacity UtilizalJ on 66.6 % ICU L ellel of ServICe Analysis Period (min) 15 , Critica l Lane Gfou p M :\04\04 4 35 0 3 New Life Chu rch Revl sron\LOS\S ynchro files\exi sting PM sy7 T he T ran spo Group " 1900 4 0 1 .00 0 .90 1 .00 17 13 1.00 17 13 10 0.95 11 18 14 0% 2 B4 14,4 016 5.0 J5 266 0 .0 1 0 .05 33.3 1.00 0 1 3J< C 4 1,1 D I' '-. ~ .; N8R S81 SST SaR , t ~ 1900 1900 1900 1900 4 0 40 4 0 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 00 1 00 0 85 0 .95 1 .00 1.00 1787 1881 1599 0.95 1 .00 1.00 118 1 1881 1599 20 235 20 5 20 0 ,9~ 0.9 5 0 .95 0 .95 21 247 21 547 0 0 0 325 0 247 21 222 0 % 1% 1% 1% Prot Po "" 1 G 6 162 222 2"22 17.2 23.2 232 019 0?5 075 5.0 50 50 30 30 JO 332 471 401 cO.14 0,01 cO.14 0 .7 4 0 ,04 o !.J5 35.6 26.3 30.2 1.00 1.00 1 00 8.7 0 .0 1.7 443 26 3 3 1 9 D C C 35 5 D C 8.0 C Page 2 T i m ings 2 : SR 169 & 152nd Ave SE Exisllng Sunday Con altion s (2008) ~ --+ "\ • +--'-~ t '.. ~ .; .Cin8Gn1iJO -EBI. EB T EBR WBl WB T WBR NBl NBT SBI. SBT SBR l ane ConfiguratiOf'lS ~ tt , ~ tt , ~ " ~ t , Volume (yph) 200 385 180 45 515 50 140 30 60 65 160 Turn Type PlOt Pen n Prot Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 6 Detector Phases 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 1 6 6 Minimum Initial (s) 5 .0 15.0 15.0 5.0 15.0 15 .0 50 7.0 50 5.0 50 Minimum Spli l (s) 10 .0 31.5 3 1.5 10.0 32 .5 32 .5 10.0 39.0 10.0 39 .0 39 .0 To lal Spilt (s) 210 40 .5 40 .5 13.0 325 32.5 16.0 42 .5 14 .0 40 .5 405 Total Split (%) 19 .1% 36 .8% 36 .8% 11.8% 29 .5% 29 .5% 14 .5% 38.6% 12 .7% 36.8% 36 .8% Yell ow Ti me (s) 40 4 .5 45 4 .0 45 4 .5 4 .0 4 .0 4 .0 All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 .0 1.0 1 .0 1.0 Le ad/Lag l ead l 4' la, lead lag '" Lead "" Leaa lead-Lag Optimize? Recall M ode None Nono Non e Nono None Non, Non , Min Non, Act Effct Glean (s) 16.7 35 .7 35 .7 8 .2 22.3 22 .3 12 .0 15.4 8 .9 Ac tua ted glC Ratio 022 0 .46 046 010 029 0 29 016 020 011 vic RatIO 068 0.3 1 0 .27 0 .33 065 013 065 0 .19 039 Control Dulay 403 15 1 33 399 275 6 4 4 ::'4 20 1 39 6 Queue D elay 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Total Dela y 403 15.1 33 399 2I'J 6 ,1 4'J4 20 1 39 6 l OS 0 B A 0 C A 0 C 0 Approacll Dela y 18 Y 213 I 38 3 Approach LOS B C 0 -.......... Cycle length: 110 Actuated C ycle Length: 76 .9 Natural Cycle: 105 Con trol Type: Actuated ·Uncoordlna ted Maximum vIc Ra ti o: 0 .68 Interse ction Signal Delay: 24 1 Inter secti on lOS: C In tersecti o n Capacily Utilization 49.7% ICU level of Service A Analysi s Period (min ) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: SR 169 & 152 M Av e SE ~., ! ~t~ • I ~'J Ji:F .. =-I 06 .7 M ·\04\04 435 03 Ne w life Ch u rch Rev iSiooll OSISyochro files\existin g Sunda y sy7 Tile Trans po G roup 4.0 40 1.0 1.0 "9 "9 Min M,o '8 9 .8 01 3 013 036 054 36.3 lOB 0.0 00 363 108 0 B 22.7 C I P;;ago 1 HCM S ignal iz e d Int e rsect ion Capac ity Analysis 2 : SR 169 & 152 nd Ave S E Existing S u nday COoa itionS (2008) ~ --+ "\ • +--'-~ t -EBl EB T EBR WBl WBT WBR NBl NBT lane C onfigu rat ions ~ tt , ~ tt , ~ f, Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total lost time (s) 4 .0 4.0 4 .0 40 4 0 4 0 4 .0 40 Lane Ulil. Factor 1.00 0 .95 1 .00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 1.00 Fn 1.00 1 00 0 .85 1 00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.9 3 Fit Protected 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 0 .95 1 .00 1.00 0 .95 1 .00 SaId. Flow (pro t) 1770 3539 1583 1787 3574 1599 18 05 1769 FIt Pennittad 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 0 .95 1 .00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Sato Flow !~e r ml 1770 3539 1583 1787 3574 1599 1805 1769 Volume (Yph) 200 385 180 45 515 50 140 30 Peak ·hour factOI"'. PHF 076 076 076 076 0.76 076 0.7 6 0.7 6 Adj . Flow (vph) 263 507 237 59 678 66 184 39 RTOR Reduction (v ph ) 0 0 13 1 0 0 46 0 27 Lane Group Flow (vph) 263 507 106 59 678 20 184 45 Heav ~ Vehicles !%l 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% T um Type Pro< Penn Prot P,nn Prot PIOI.:!c teu Phase:; 7 4 3 8 5 2 Permit ted Phases 4 8 AcIU,ilcd Green. G (s) 157 342 342 45 230 230 I1.U 14 4 EUective Green , 9 (s) 167 357 357 55 245 24 5 120 15 4 Actuated glC Ratio 021 o 4~ 04> 001 03 1 031 O.!:J 01. Clearance Tirne (s) 5 0 5 5 55 50 55 55 5 .0 50 Vei llcle EdenSlOn (S) 30 4.0 40 30 40 40 30 35 lane Grp Cap (vph ) 369 1577 706 123 1093 489 270 340 vi s Ratio Prot '" 15 0 .14 003 cO .19 cO.l0 0 .0 3 vI s Ratio Perm 0 .07 0 .01 vI c Ratio 071 032 015 048 0 62 004 0.68 0.13 Uniform Delay, d 1 29.5 14.4 13.2 35 .9 23.8 19.5 32.2 26.8 Progre;;sion Factor 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay , d2 6A 0 .2 0 .1 2.9 1.3 0 .0 6.9 0 .2 Delay (s ) 35 ,9 14 .5 133 389 2 51 19 .6 39 .2 27.0 level of Service 0 8 8 0 C 8 0 C Approac h Dali.l y (s) 198 256 357 Approac h lOS B C 0 HCM Volume to Cilpacity ra tio 06 1 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.1 Sum of lost time (s) In lersection Ca paCi l y Uti liza ti on 49 .7% ICU l evel of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cntical Lane Group M :\04 \044 35 03 New U fo Chu f ch Rovi sion\lOS\Synch ro fi les\exi stj ng Sund ay-.sy7 Tne Tran spo Grou p ~ '.. ~ .; -SBl SB"'-§§!j ~ t , 1900 1900 1900 1900 4 .0 4 0 4 0 1 .00 1.00 1.00 100 1 00 0 85 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 1(105 1900 1615 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 1805 1900 1615 25 60 65 160 076 0 .76 076 076 33 79 86 211 0 0 0 182 0 79 86 29 0 % 0% 0% 0% Prot Penn 6 6 b~ •• •• 75 10 9 109 U.UY 014 0 14 50 50 50 30 30 30 169 259 220 0 .04 ctl 05 0 .02 0.47 033 0 .13 34 .4 31 .3 30.4 1.00 1 00 1 00 2.0 0.8 0 .3 36.4 321 307 0 C C 322 C 16.0 A PilgO 2 T imings 3 : SR 169 & 140th Way SE Exis ting Sunday Cond itions (2008) --+ -. {' +-'" ~ Liri8 GIoue EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR La ne Configurations tt ~ , tt " ~ Volume (vph) 580 310 205 670 565 265 Turn Type Penn Prot Purm Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 Permitted Phases 4 2 Detector Phases 4 4 3 8 2 2 Minimum In it ial (s) 15.0 150 5.0 150 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 24.5 24.5 9.5 20.5 29.3 29.3 Tot al Split (s) 26.6 266 22.7 49 3 30.7 307 Total Split (%) 33.3% 33.3% 28.4 % 61.6% 38.4% 38.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.5 45 3.5 45 4.3 4.3 All-Red Time (5) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 LeadJlag "'g lay lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Modo Min Min Nonc Min None None Act Etfct Green (5) 21.6 21 .6 14.6 40.3 2 1.5 21.5 Actu.lled g lC Rati o 0.3 1 031 0.21 057 031 031 vIc Ratio 0.62 0.49 0.64 0.38 0.62 0.44 Control Delay 25.2 54 35.t 92 240 4 8 Queue Delay 0 .0 00 00 0 .0 0.0 0.0 TOla l Delay 2~.2 " 3::'.1 9.2 24.U 4.8 lOS C A 0 A C A ApfJI03C h Delay 18.3 15 .3 17.9 Approach LOS B B B Inl8IMc:tion SumrnatY Cycle length: 80 Actuated Cycle Lenglh: 70.1 Natural Cycle: 70 Con trol Type: Actuated-UnCOOfdinated Maximum vic; Ratio: 0 .64 Intersection Signal Delay : 17.1 Inte(section lOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.5% leU Level 01 Service A Analysis Period (mm) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: SR 169 & 140th Way SE f,u ~~ ~ &it M .\Q4W4435.03 New l ife Church RevisionlLOSISynchro Jiles \exis ting Sunday .sy7 T he Transpo Group • , :: ~ Page 3 H CM S igna li zed Inter section Capaci t y Analysis 3: SR 169 & 140lh Wa~ SE Existing Su nday Conditions (,2008) --+ -. {' +-'" ~ --EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL ~BR Lane Configurations tt ~ , tt " ~ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 t900 1900 1900 Towl Lost time (s) 4 .0 40 4.0 4.0 40 4 .0 Lana Uti!. FactOI' 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0 .97 1.00 Frt 1.00 085 1 00 1.00 100 0.85 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 SaId Fl ow (prol) 3539 1563 1787 3574 3467 1599 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 0 .95 1.00 SaId. Flow (~e r ml 3539 1563 1787 3574 3467 1599 Volume (vph) 580 310 205 670 565 265 Peak-h o ur fador, PHF 0.86 0.66 066 0.86 0.86 0.86 Adj. Flow (vph) 674 3BO 238 779 657 308 RTOR Reduc ti on (vph ) 0 248 0 0 0 213 Lane Group Flow (vph) 674 112 238 779 657 95 Hcavt V eh ides 1%1 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% Turn Typ& P"m Pro' p,"" Pro tected Phases 4 3 8 2 Permilted Phases 4 2 A ctuated Green, C (s ) 201 20.1 14 1 38.1 20 .2 20 .2 Effectille Green, g (s) 21.6 2 U3 146 40.2 215 215 Ac tuated glC Hatio 0)( 0.3 1 0 21 05(:1 0 .31 o 31 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 4 .5 5.5 5.3 5.3 Vdll!.:le Exlefl5 i(lfI (51 50 50 J 5 50 40 4 0 Lane G rp Cap (vph) 1097 49t 37 4 2061 '069 4 93 vis Ratio Prol cO.19 cO.13 0.22 cO.19 vIs Ratio Perm 0.07 0 .06 vic Ratio 0.61 0.23 0.64 0.38 0.6 1 0 .19 Uniform Delay. dl 20.5 17.9 25.1 6.0 20.6 17.7 Progression Factor '.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 0 .5 3.7 0 .2 12 0 .3 Delay (s) 22.0 18.3 288 62 21 .8 180 Level o f Service C B C A C B Ap p roac h Delay (s) 20.7 130 206 Approach LOS C B C Irit8faec.aon &lmrnarw HeM Ave rage Control Delay 18 .1 HeM Level o f Service HeM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (5) 69.7 Sum of lost time (s) Inte rse ction Capacity Utilization 53.5% leu Level 01 Service Analysis Period (min) 15 , C rit ical Lane Group M :\04\04435.03 New life Chu rch Rtwision\lOS\Synchro files\exis ting Sunday.5y 7 The Transpo Group B 12.0 A Page 4 Timings 2: SR 169 & 152nd Ave SE Baseline Weekday PM Peak Conditions (2009) [iiiOGrou. lane Configurations Volume (vph) Tu rn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Detector Phases Minimum Initial is) Minimum Split (s) To t<:11 Sptit (~J Total Splil (%) Yellow Time (5) AlI·Red Time (5) LeadlLag lead·lag Optimize? Recall Mode Act Effcl Glean ($) Actu<l t()(t glC R,llio viC Ratio COrll rol Delay Queue Delay Tota l Delay LOS App roach Delay ApprO<:1ch lOS InterMCtion SIJnvnary Cycle length: 120 ~ -+ ~ EBL EBT EBR , tt ~ 290 1235 100 Prol Perm 7 4 4 7 4 4 5.0 15.0 15.0 10.0 31.5 31 .5 250 49.0 49 0 20 .8% 40.8% 40 .8% 4 ,0 1.0 Lead None 21 .3 023 0.74 481 00 481 D 4,5 1,0 "g None 44.2 048 0.76 256 0,0 25.6 C 28.5 C 4 ,5 1.0 Lag None 44.2 048 0 .13 72 00 72 A AClualed Cycle lenyth 91.4 Natural Cycle: 115 Control Typ e: Actuated ·UncoOidinaled Maximum vIc Ratio: 0 .78 Intersection Si9nal Delay: 29.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.5% Analysis Peri od (min) 15 #' WBL , 15 Prol 3 +- WBT tt 485 8 '- WBR ~ 110 Penn 8 .., NBL , 85 Pr OI 5 t NBT " 10 2 3 8 8 5 2 5.0 15.0 15 .0 5 .0 5.0 10.0 32 .5 32 .5 10.0 39.0 10.0 340 34 0 13.0 400 8.3% 28 .3% 28.3% 10 .8% 33.3% 4 .0 1.0 Lead Non e 6.1 006 0.15 519 0.0 5 1.9 D 45 10 Lag None 22.2 024 0 .59 345 00 34 5 C 2<) <) C 4,5 1.0 "g None 22.2 0 " 0 .25 76 00 76 A 4 ,0 1.0 Lead None •• 009 0 .53 559 0.0 55.9 E Intersection LOS . C ICU level of SeNice C 40 1.0 Log Min 14 .0 015 0.11 185 00 18.5 B 46.U o '-l ~ SBL S8T SBR , t ~ 245 20 540 Prot Perm 1 6 6 1 6 6 50 7.0 7 .0 10.0 39.0 39 .0 210 48.0 48 0 17 .5% 40.0% 40.0% 4 .0 4.0 4 .0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead Lag Lag None Min Min 17 .5 25.4 25.4 019 0?8 0 ?8 0 .75 0.04 0 .78 537266179 00 0.0 00 53726.61/9 DeB 2!ol U C III&:] --=_. -~I 1tIl •... ~ b ~::::== I M.I 04\o4435.0 3 New Life Church RevisionlLOSISynchro fileslbaseline PM .sy7 Tho Transpo Group Pago 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2 : SR 169 & 152nd Ave SE Baseline Weekday PM Peak Condi tions (2009) ---Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total lost time (s) lane UtiJ. Factor Fn Fit Protected Said . Flow (prot) At Permilled Sa id Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak ·hour fa ctor . PH F Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) lane Group Fl ow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) Tum Type Prolected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green. G lsi Effective Green. g (s) Actuated glC Kalio Clearance Time (s) Veh icle Exl~nsion (s) lane Grp Cap (vph) vis Ratio Prot vIs Ratio Perm viC Ratio Uniform Delay . d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) level of SeNice Approach Delay (s) Approach lOS iiiliiiiCiioI .... _ ~ -+ EBL EST , tt 1900 1900 40 40 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1770 3539 0.95 1.00 1770 3539 290 1235 0.95 0 .95 305 1300 o 0 305 1300 2% 2% Prot 7 4 20.2 42 1 21 2 442 0.22 O.4 ti 5.0 55 30 4 0 393 1638 cO.17 c037 0.78 0.7 9 34.9 21 .8 1.00 1.00 9.3 2 .9 44 .2 24 .7 o C 27.5 C ~ EBR ~ 1900 4 .0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1583 1 00 1583 100 0.95 105 44 61 2% Perm , 421 44 .2 0.46 5.5 40 733 0.04 0.08 14.3 1.00 0 .1 14.4 B #' WBL , 1900 4 .0 1.00 1.00 0 .95 17 19 0.95 17 19 15 0.95 16 o 16 5% Prot 3 17 2.7 0.03 5.0 30 4' 0.01 0.3 3 45.5 1.00 3 .9 49 .4 D +- WBT H 1900 4 .0 0.95 1.00 1 .00 3438 1 .00 3438 465 0 .95 489 o 489 5% 8 242 25.7 on 5.5 40 925 014 o 53 29.7 1 00 0 .7 30.5 C 30.1 C '-.., WBR ~ 1900 4 .0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1538 1.00 1538 11 0 0.95 116 B5 31 5% P.~ • 24 2 257 U27 5.5 4 0 414 0.02 0.08 26.0 1.00 0.1 26.1 C NBL , 1900 4 .0 1.00 1 00 0.95 1805 0.95 1805 as 095 89 o .9 0% Prot 5 63 73 U Oil 5 .0 30 138 0 .05 064 42 .8 100 9 .9 52.7 D t NST " 1900 40 1.00 0.90 1.00 1713 1.00 1713 10 0.95 11 1B 14 0% 2 H I 15 1 U.16 5.0 30 271 0.0 1 0.05 34.1 '.00 0.1 34 .2 C 4 7.8 o ~ NBR 1900 20 095 21 o o 0% HCM Average Control Delay 3 1.7 HCM level of SeNiee C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle length (s) 95 .5 Sum of lost time (s) 8 .0 Inte rsection Ca paCIty Uti liz ation 68 .5% ICU Level 01 SeNice C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cr itica l lane Group M:I04 I04435 .0 3 New Lile Church Revision lLOSI Synchr o fileslbaseline PM sy7 The Transpo Group '. SBL , 1900 4 .0 1.00 1.00 0.95 178 7 0.95 1787 245 0.95 258 o 258 1% Prot 1 165 17.5 0.18 5.0 3.0 327 cO .14 0 .7 9 37.2 1.00 11 .9 49.2 D l SBT t 1900 40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1681 1.00 1681 20 095 21 o 21 1% 6 24 3 253 026 5 .0 30 498 001 ~ SBR ~ 1900 4 .0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1599 1.00 1599 540 0.95 56. 293 275 1% Perm 6 2'1 J 25.3 026 5.0 30 424 cO.17 004 065 26.1 31.2 100 1.00 0 .0 3.4 26 .1 34 .6 C C 38.8 o Page 2 T im ings 2 : SR 169 & 152nd Ave SE Baseline SundilY Conditions (2009) L:iiilGIoo.<, Lane Conligurations Volume (vph) / E8L , 2 10 Prol 7 -... E8T tt 400 4 E8R , 180 Perm (' W8L , 45 Prot 3 +- W8T tt 535 8 '-'" waR , 50 Perm N8L , 140 Prot 5 t N8T to 30 2 \. S8L , 60 Prot 1 ! SST t 65 6 .; saR , 16 5 Pe n n Turn Type Protected Phases Permitled Phases Detector Phases Minim um Initia l (s) M inimum Split (s) Total Split (s) 4 8 6 7443885 2 16 6 5.0 150 150 50 I SO 150 50 70 5.0 50 5.0 10.0 31 .5 31.5 10 .0 32.5 32.5 10.0 39.0 10.0 39.0 39.0 22.0 41.5 41.5 13.0 32.5 325 16.0 41 5 14 .0 395 395 Total Split (%) YellOW T ime lSI AlI·Red Time (s) Lead/Lag 20.0% 37.7% 37.7 % 11.8% 29.5% 29.5% 14 .5% 37.7% 12.7% 35.9% 35.9% 4.0 4.5 4 .5 4.0 4 ,5 4.5 4.0 40 4.0 40 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead·Lag Optimize? Rec all M ode Act Effct Green (5) Actua ted glC Ratio vic Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total DeI<l Y LOS Approach Delay Approach lOS I .......... Cyde length: 110 Lead Non e 17.4 0 ,22 0.70 40.9 0.0 40 , o Actua ted Cycle Length ' 783 Natural Cycle: 105 Log None 37 .0 047 0.31 150 0 .0 150 B 192 B Control Type: Ac tuated -Um':OUfdin ated Maximum vic Ratio: 0.7 0 Inte rsection Signal Delay: 24 ,6 Intersection Capacil y Utilization 50.8% Analysis Period (mn) 15 La g No n e 37.0 0,47 0.27 3.2 0.0 32 A Lead None 8.2 0 10 0,33 40 9 0.0 40 , o Splits and Phases: 2: SR 169 & 15 21"10 Ave SE " Lag "." 22 .8 029 0.67 28 3 0.0 283 C 2(,;" C La, None 22.8 029 0.13 65 0 .0 65 A Lea d N one 12.0 015 0 ,67 47 ° 0.0 470 o Intersec~on LOS, C ICU Level of Service A oS La, Mi n 15 .5 020 0,19 205 0 .0 205 C )'1 ;., o M :I04\04435 .03 New Lile Church RellisionlLOSISynchro lileslbaseline Sunday.sy7 The Transpo Group Lead None B.' 0.1 1 0.40 407 0.0 407 o La , Min " 013 0,36 3" 0.0 372 o no C La g Min g., 013 0,55 110 0.0 11.0 B Page 1 HeM Signali zed Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: SR 169 & 152nd Ave SE Baseline Sunday C ond itions (2009) / -... .-..- Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (5) Lane Util. F actor F" Fit Protected Said. Flow (prol) Fit Permitted Said. Flow (perm) Volume (vph ) Peak-hour faclor . PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR RuduC li o n (vph) Lane G roup Flow (vph) Heavy Ve hi dcs (%) Turn Type Protected Phases Perm ilted P ha ses Actuatec Green. G (5) Ellective G ru en , y (s) Actuated glC Ratio Clearance Time (s) V",hi<.:ie E xtellsion (s) Lane Grp Cap (lIph) vIs Ra tio Prot vis Ratio Penn vic Ratio Uni foon D elay, dl Progre ss ion Factor Incremental Delay, d2 De lay (5) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS EBl EBT , t+ 1900 1900 4 .0 4 .0 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1 00 0.95 1.00 1770 3539 0.95 1.00 1770 3539 2 10 400 0.76 0 .76 276 526 o 0 276 526 2% 2% Prot 7 4 16,4 3:'> 5 17 ,4 370 0.2 1 04;" 5.0 5.5 30 4 0 378 1607 cO .16 O.IS 0.73 0 .33 29.9 14.3 100 100 7.1 0.2 36.9 144 o B 20.1 C HC M Volume 10 Capac it y ra~o Actuated Cycle length (s) Intersection Capacit~ U~ljza li on Analysis Period (min) c Critica l Lane Grou p EBR , 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1583 1.00 1583 180 0.76 237 129 lO B 2% Perm 4 35.5 370 0,45 5.5 40 719 0 .07 0.1 5 13.0 1.00 0.1 13.2 a 0.62 81 .5 5 0.8% 15 (' +- WBl WBT , t+ 1900 1900 4 0 4.0 1.00 0 .95 100 1,00 0 .95 1.00 178 7 3574 0 .95 1.00 17 87 357 4 45 535 0.76 076 59 704 o 0 59 704 1% 1% ,"01 3 8 ·1;" £3,(; 5 5 251 0.07 031 5.0 5.5 30 4 0 12 1 1101 0,03 c0.20 0 49 0 ,64 36.6 24.3 100 1.00 3 .1 1.4 397 25.7 o C 26.2 C '- waR , 1900 4 .0 100 0.85 1 .00 1599 1 .00 1599 50 0 .76 66 46 20 1% Porn, 8 236 251 0 .31 5.5 40 492 0 .01 0.04 19 .8 1.00 0 .0 198 B '" N8L , 1900 40 1.00 1.00 0.95 1805 0.95 1805 140 0.76 184 o 184 0% Prot 5 11 0 12 0 015 5.0 30 ,.. cO,lO 0,69 33.0 1.00 7.5 40.5 o Sum of Iosl time (s) ICU Level of SeN ice t NBT to 1900 4 .0 1.00 0.93 1.00 1769 1 .00 1769 30 0 .76 39 27 45 0% 2 14,;" 15 .5 0.19 5.0 " 336 0.03 0.13 27.4 1.00 0.2 27.6 C 36.9 o M '\04\04435.03 Now Life Church Re"isionlLOSISynchro fiteslba seline Su n day,sy7 T he Transpo Group ~ N8R 1900 25 076 33 o o 0% 16.0 A \. saL , 1900 4 .0 1 .00 1.00 0 .95 1805 0 .95 1805 60 0.76 79 o 79 0% Prot 1 0.:' 7.5 009 5.0 30 168 0.0 4 0.48 35.1 1.00 2.1 373 o ~ saT t 1900 4.0 1.00 1,00 1.00 1900 1.00 1900 65 0 .7 6 86 o 86 0% b 10.0 11 .0 013 5.0 3U 256 cO .05 034 31 .9 100 0 8 327 C 32.9 C .; saR , 1900 4 .0 1.00 0.85 1 .00 1615 1.00 161 5 165 0.76 217 188 29 0% Perm 6 10.0 11.0 013 5.0 30 218 0 .02 0 .13 3 1.1 1.00 0 .3 313 C Page 2 Timings 3: SR 169 & 140th Wa~ SE Baseline Sunoay Conditions (2009) -.. " -" ~ .Ciii8Groo~ EBT'---EBR war--weT--r<BL NBR lane Con figu rations tt , ~ tt ~~ , Volume (vph) 605 325 2 15 695 590 275 Turn Type Perm Pro l Perm Protected Phases 4 3 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 2 Detecto( P hases 4 4 3 6 2 2 Minimum Inilial (s) 15.0 150 5.0 150 50 50 Minimum Spli t (s) 24.5 24 .5 9.5 20.5 29.3 29.3 Tola l Split (s) 27.0 270 23.0 500 300 30.0 Tota l Split (%) 33.8 % 33.8% 28.8 % 62.5% 37.5% 37.5% Ye llow T ime (s) 4.5 45 3.5 45 43 43 All-Red Time (s) 1 .0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 LeadlL a9 "9 "9 Lead lead-lag Optimize? Recall Mode Min Min No n e Min Non, Non, Act Effct Green (s) 21.9 21 .9 15.1 41 .1 22.2 22.2 Actuil led glC Ralio 031 031 021 057 031 031 vIc Ratio 0.65 0.51 0.66 039 0.64 0.45 Con!iol Delay 262 54 362 94 248 '" Queue Delay 0.0 0 .0 0.0 0 .0 0.0 00 To ta l Delay 262 " 362 9' 248 48 LOS C A D A C A Approach De lay 11;..9 157 18.~ Ap proach LOS 8 B B _&.mmatY C yde l e n g th: 80 Actuated Cycle Length 7 1.5 Natural Cycle: 70 Coolrol Type: Actua ted·Un coordi nated Maximum vic Ratio: 0 .66 Intersection Si9nal Delay . 17.7 Intersec tion LOS: B Intersection Capacit y Utilizati on 55.5% ICU level of SeNice B AnalySIS Pe riod (min) 15 Splits an d Phases' 3: SR 169 & 1401h W ay SE rk ~: k .. M:I04104435.03 N ew Lile Church RevisionlLOSISynchro fil es\baseline Sunday.sy7 The T ranspo Group :::! ~ :: ~ Page 3 HCM Signalized In tersection Capacity Analysis 3: SR 169 & 140th Wa~ SE Baseline Sunday Condi tions (2009) .. " -" ~ ---EaT EBR waL WaT NaL NaR L an e Configurations tt , ~ tt ~~ , Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total lost lillie (s) 40 4.0 40 4 .0 4 0 4.0 Lane Uti l. Facto( 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0 .97 1.00 Fel 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 0 .95 1.00 Sa id. Flow (pro t) 3539 1583 1787 3574 3467 1599 FI t Pe rmitted 1.00 1 .00 0.95 1 .00 0 .95 1.00 Sa td . F low leerm) 3539 1583 1787 3574 3 467 1599 Vol ume (vph) 605 325 215 695 590 275 PeaK-hour factor. PHF 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Adj. F low (vph) 703 376 250 606 666 320 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 262 0 0 0 220 Lane Group Flow (vph) 703 11 6 250 606 666 100 Heav ~ V eh ides l%l 2% 2 % 1% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Penn P rot Penn PlOh-,c!cd PII"~;e:; 4 3 8 2 Permitted Phases 4 2 Actuated GI'-''-'Il. G (5j 204 '0 , 14 6 395 209 209 Effective Green, 9 (S) 21.9 219 15.1 41 .0 222 22.2 Actuated gle Ratiu 031 031 021 058 031 031 Clearance T ime (5) 5.5 5 .5 45 5.5 5 .3 53 Vchu.:le Extension (s) 50 50 35 50 40 40 Lane Grp Cap (vph ) 1089 467 379 2056 1061 499 vis Ratio Prot cO.20 cO .14 0.23 cO.20 vis RatiO Perm 0 .07 0.06 vic Ratio 0.6 5 0.24 0.66 0.39 063 0.20 Uniform Delay, d l 21.3 18 .4 25.7 6 .3 2 1.0 18 .0 P rogressio n Factor 1.00 100 l DO 1.00 1 .00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1 .6 0 .5 43 0 .3 1.4 0 .3 Delay (s) 23.1 190 300 85 224 18 .3 level of Service C a c A C 8 Approach D elay (:;) 21 .7 13.6 211 Approach LOS C a c HCM Average Con trol Delay 18.8 HeM level of SeNIce HeM Volume to Ca pacit y ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle length (s) 7 1.2 Sum of losltime (5) In tersection Capacity Utilizal ion 55.5% ICU level of SelVicc Analysis Period (min) 15 , Crilicallane Grou p M ·\04104435.03 New life Church Revl sio nlLOSISynchro fi les\baseline Sunda y .s y7 T h e Tr anspo Group a 12.0 B Page 4 T imings 2 : SR 169 & lS2nd Ave SE With-ProJect Weekday PM Peak Con ditions (2009) / -+ .. • 4-'-"\ t \,. ! .; I.ane Groul! EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBl NBT SBl SBT SBR Lane Configuration s , tt , , tt , , To , t , VOlume (vph) 290 1235 107 17 465 110 91 10 245 20 540 Turn Ty pe Pr ot P erm Pr ot Perm Pro t Pro t P enn Proteaed Phases 7 4 3 6 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 6 Detector Phases 7 4 4 3 6 • 5 2 I 6 6 Minimumlnilial (s) 5.0 150 15.0 5.0 I S.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 70 7.0 Minimum Split (8) 10.0 3 1.5 31.5 10.0 32 .5 32 .5 10 .0 39.0 10 .0 39 .0 39 .0 Total Splil (s) 25.0 49.0 49.0 10 .0 34 .0 34,0 13.0 4 0,0 21 .0 48.0 48.0 To tal Split (%) 20.8% 4 0 .8% 40.8% 8 .3% 28.3% 28.3% 10.8% 33,3% 17.5% 40,0% 40.0% Yellow Time (s) 40 45 4 .5 40 4 .5 45 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Le ad/Lag Lead lag lag Lead log log Lead lead-lag Optimize? RecaU Mode None None Non , None None None Non, Ad. Effct Green (s) 21 .3 44.2 44.2 6.1 22.2 22.2 6.9 Actuated g/C RatiO 023 048 048 006 024 0 " 009 viC Ratio 074 076 014 017 059 025 056 Control Delay 48.3 25 ( 71 523 34 G 76 577 Queue Delay 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 TOial Dl:lay 483 2";, ( II ~2 3 34 Q /6 577 lOS 0 C A 0 C A E I\pplOOlch Delay 285 301 Approach LOS C C -Summaty Cycle Length: 120 Actu;Jtttd Cycle Length, 91.5 Natural Cycle: 11 5 Control Type: Ac tuated·Un coor dinated Maximum vIc Ratio: 0 .78 Intersection Signal Delay : 29,7 Inte r section L OS' C Intersection Capacity U tilization 68.5% ICU Level or Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases 2: SR 169 & 152n d Ave SE r: Il iLlt., ~::~"-_F~ .. M .\04'D4435.03 New Life Church RevisionlLOSISynchro files\fulure PM syY T he Transpo Group 4.0 4 .0 4 .0 4 .0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 lag Lead la9 "9 Min Non. Min M in 14 .1 17.5 25.5 25.5 015 019 028 026 0.12 0 .75 0.04 0 .78 \8 1 539 266 18 I 0.0 0 .0 0.0 0 .0 16 I 539 266 " I B 0 C B 'i1.3 292 0 C 4J Page 1 HeM Signalized In tersecti on Capacity Analysis 2 : SR 169 & 152nd Ave SE With-Project Weekday PM Peak Con dltJo n s (2009) / -+ .. • 4-'-"\ --EBl EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBl Lane Conlig uralions , tt , , tt , , Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 To tallos [ li me (s) 4 .0 4.0 4 0 4 0 40 40 40 Lane Utii. Factor 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 ,,, 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 065 1.00 Fit Prote cted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 SaId Flow (p rot) 177 0 3539 1563 1719 3438 1538 1805 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 Said. Flow (I?:erm) 1770 3539 1583 1719 3438 153!! 1805 Volume (vpll) 290 1235 10 7 17 465 11 0 91 Peak·hour factor. PHF 095 095 0 .95 095 0 .95 0 95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vpll) 305 1 300 11 3 16 469 116 96 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 47 0 0 85 0 Lane Group Flow (vpn) 305 1300 66 " 469 31 96 Heav~ Vehide~ j %) 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% 0% Tum Type Prot p ,,,,, Prot p"", Prot P lOtt:<.:lec Phdst:s / 4 3 , 5 Permilled Phases 4 6 A1..11..;.JIco Grt:{;I1, G (s) 202 427 42 ( 11 242 242 .3 Effective G reen. g (s) 2 1 2 442 44 .2 27 257 257 73 Actuatco g lC R"tio 021 046 046 0 03 027 ou 00' Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.5 5.5 5 .0 5 .5 55 50 Vehicle E .. tunSIO Il (s) 30 40 40 3D " 40 30 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 392 1635 73 1 46 923 413 138 viS Raba Prot c017 c037 0 01 014 005 vis Ratio Perm 0.04 0 .02 vIc Ratio 078 0.80 0.09 0.38 053 0.08 070 Uniform Delay, d1 35.0 2 1 .9 14.5 4 5 .7 29.8 26.1 43.1 ProglessiOil Facior 1 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 100 Incremental Delay, d2 9.4 2 .9 0.1 4 .9 0 .7 0 .1 14 .2 Delay (s) 44.4 24 .8 14 .5 SO .5 306 26.2 573 Level 01 Service 0 C B 0 C C E Approach Delay (s) 27 .6 303 Approach lOS C C HeM V olume to Capacity ra ti o 073 Actuated Cycle Length (5) 95.7 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utlllzallon 685% ICU l evet of Se rvice Analysis Period (min) 15 , Critical Lane Group M \04\04435.03 New Life Church Revision\lOS\Synchro liles\luture PM.sy? The Transpo Group t ~ \,. ! .; NBT NOR SBL SST SBR • , t , 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4 0 4 0 40 4 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 090 1 00 1 00 065 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1.00 1707 1787 188 1 1599 1.00 0 .95 \.00 1.00 1707 1787 1881 1599 10 22 245 20 540 0,95 0.95 0.95 0,% 0,95 11 23 256 21 568 19 0 0 0 289 15 0 256 2 1 279 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% Pro< P"m 2 6 6 143 lG~ 24 !J 24 ~ 153 175 255 255 0,16 0 '" 021 Ou 50 50 50 50 30 3u 30 JU 273 327 SOl 426 0 .01 00 14 001 cO .17 0.05 0.79 004 065 34.1 37.3 26.0 31 .2 1.00 1 00 1.00 1 00 0 .1 11 .9 0 .0 3.6 34 .1 49 3 26 I 34. C 0 C C 512 390 0 0 6.0 C Page 2 , Tnni ngs 2: S R 169 & 152nd Ave SE With-Project Sun day Condilio n s (2009) / --+ • (' +-"-..... t ~ ~ .; ..... GIouo fill. EBT EBR WBl weT WBR NEIl. NST Sill. saT SBR Lane Coofl9uratioos , tt , , tt , , To , + , Volume (vph) 210 .00 234 52 535 50 196 41 60 76 165 Turn T ype Prol Perm Pr o l Perm PrOI Prot P.on Protected Phases 7 • 3 8 5 2 1 6 Pm-m ined Phases 4 8 6 Detector Phases 7 • 4 3 8 8 5 2 1 6 6 Minim um Initial (5) 5 .0 15.0 15 .0 5.0 15.0 15.0 50 7 .0 50 5.0 50 Minimum SP'jt (s) 10.0 31 .5 31 .5 10.0 32.5 32.5 10.0 39.0 10.0 39.0 39.0 Total Split (5) 22.0 41 .5 41 5 13.0 325 325 16 0 41 .5 14 0 39.5 3.5 Total Split (%) 20.0% 37.7% 37 .7 "1~ 11 .8% 29.5% 29.5% 14.5% 37.7% 12.7 % 35.9% 35 .9% Ye llow T ime (5) '.0 4 .5 45 4 .0 45 4 .5 40 40 AU-Red Time (5) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 .0 1.0 1 .0 1.0 1 .0 lead/lag Lead lag lag Lead lag lag Lead lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None None N",. None None None N",. Min Act Effct Green (6) 17 .4 34 .6 34.6 8 .3 22.9 22 .• 12 .1 16.2 Actuated giC RatiO 022 0 44 044 010 029 02. 015 020 vi c Ratio 0 .7 1 0 .34 0 .30 037 068 0.13 093 024 Conlrol Delay '17 166 33 ." 288 66 770 217 Qucua Delay 00 00 0 .0 00 0 0 00 0 .0 00 Total Delay 417 166 33 4" 288 66 770 21 7 lOS 0 B A 0 C A E C Approach Dday 192 28 , 620 Approach lOS B C E IIlIerIIction SWnmaI. Cycle Length: 110 Actualed Cycle length: 79 .1 Nalural CyCle: 105 Con trol Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maxi mum vic Ratio: 0 .93 Intersection Signal Delay: 28.2 Inlersec~on LOS. C Intersection Capacity Utitilation 53.9% IC U level o f Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Sp lits and Phases: 2 : SR 169 & 152nd Ave SE \ Ii " .. M :\04104 435.03 NeW" Life Church Revlsion\LOS\Synch ro fite5\1u lure Sunday.sy7 The Transpo Group 4 0 4 .0 40 1.0 1.0 1.0 lead l " l" N",. Min M in 8. 10.4 10.4 011 0.13 0 13 0 .40 0.40 054 41 2 378 H)~ 0 .0 0 0 00 412 378 105 0 0 B 235 C Page I HeM Signalized Inte rse c tion Capacit y Analys i s 2 : SR 1 69 & 152nd Ave SE W im -Project Sun day Con d l\J ons (2009) / --+ • (' +-"-..... t -..ent fill. EaT faR WBl weT WBR NIII. NaT Lane Configuralions , tt , , tt , , To Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 '.00 1900 TOlal Lost time (5) '0 .0 40 40 40 4 .0 4 .0 4 .0 Lane UtiJ. Factor 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1 .00 0 .95 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Fn 1 00 1 00 0.85 1.00 1 00 0.85 1.00 0.93 Fit Protected 0 .95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 Said . flow (prOI) 1770 3539 1583 1787 3574 159 9 1805 1775 AI Permilled 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 Said . Flow leerm ! 1770 3539 1583 1787 3574 1599 l a05 1775 Volume (vph) 2 10 400 23' 52 535 50 196 41 Peak-hour fac lor, PHF 0.76 076 076 076 076 0 .76 076 0.76 Adj. Flow (vph) 276 526 308 68 704 66 258 54 RTOR Reauc\lon (vp h) 0 0 177 0 0 46 0 31 l ane Group Flow (vph) 27 6 526 13 1 68 704 20 258 65 H eav~ Vehicles j %! 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% Tum Type Pml Peon Pro! Peon Pml Proh.:CIOO P h <lsos 7 4 3 • 5 2 Permiued Phases 4 8 AI:i<.. • .JII..'tl G I ..,l,;n. G (~J 164 331 33 1 60 221 221 11 1 1~ 2 Effecllve Green, 9 (5) 17.4 346 346 70 24 .2 242 121 162 ACIt.dlt:a !jIC R ... IIO 0 21 043 043 009 030 030 o ltl 020 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 " " 50 5.5 " 50 50 VE:llide Exl!:I1~iOIl (s) 30 .0 4 0 30 40 40 30 30 lane Gtp Cap (vph) 379 1506 674 154 1064 476 26. 354 vis Ra tio Prot d) 16 015 004 cO.2 0 cO.14 0.04 vIs Ratio Perm 0 .08 0 .01 vIc Ratio 0.73 035 0 .19 0 44 0.66 0 .04 0 .96 018 Uniform Delay, dl 29.7 15.8 14.6 35.3 25.0 20.3 34.4 27 .1 Progression Faclor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 100 100 1.00 1 00 Incremental Delay, d2 6 .8 0 .2 0 .2 2.0 1.7 0 .0 43.2 0 .3 Dela y (s) 30 .6 15.9 148 373 26.7 203 77.5 273 Level of Service 0 B B 0 C C E C Approach Delay (s) 20.8 27.0 639 Approach LOS C C E HCM Vol um e to Capacity ralio 068 Actuated Cyt:1e length (s) S1.3 Sum of lost time (5) Intersection C apacity UtiliLalJon 539% ICU l o"Vo l of Serv ice Analysis Period (min) 15 , Critica l Lane Group M :I04I044 35 03 Ne w life Chu rcl) Re vi 51011ll0SISynchro fih::slful ure Sunday.sy7 The T ranspo Group ~ ~ ~ .; NOR Sill. SBT SaR , + , 1900 1900 1900 1900 40 '.0 40 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 085 0 .95 1 .00 1.00 1805 1900 1615 0 .95 1 .00 100 1805 1900 16f5 32 60 76 165 076 0.7 6 0.76 0 .76 .2 7' 100 217 0 0 0 186 0 79 100 3 1 0"10 0% 0% 0% P'oI P",m " 6 b, lut) 106 75 11 6 116 OOY 014 01' 50 50 5.0 30 30 30 167 271 230 0 .04 '" 05 0 .02 047 037 0 .13 35.0 3 1.5 30.5 100 1 00 1.00 2.1 0.' 0 .3 37.1 32.4 307 0 C C 32.4 C 16.0 A Page 2 Timings 3: SR 169 & 140th Way SE Wllh-ProJ6ct Sunday Conditions (2009) -. ... (' +-~ ~ LaneGrouo E8T EOR WBl. WBT -NOR lan e ConrlQuratJoos tt , , tt " , Volume (lIph) 634 325 241 725 590 300 Turn Typo p.~ Pro t Perm Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 Perrnillod Phases 4 2 Detector Phases 4 4 3 8 2 2 Minimum Initial (5) 15.0 15 .0 5.0 15.0 '.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 24 .5 24 .5 '.5 20 .5 29.3 29.3 Tota l Split (s) 27.0 27 .0 23.0 50 .0 30.0 30.0 T eta! Split (%) 33 .8% 33 .8% 28 .6% 62 .5% 37.5% 37.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.5 All-Red Tune ($) 1 .0 Lead/Lag "9 lead-lag Optimize? Recall Mode Mi n Act Effct Glean (s) 21 .9 Acl ualed glC Ratio 030 viC Ratio 0.69 Con l rol Delay 276 Queue Delay 0 .0 Tolal Delay 276 l OS C Approach Oday ;!O 1 Approach lOS C Int.IfMC&ion Summary Cycle Length: 80 Actuated CyCle Length 72.7 Natural Cycle: 70 4 .5 1.0 "9 M" 2 1.9 030 051 54 0 .0 54 A Control T )lpe : Actualeo-Unroordinaled Maximum vIc Ratio: 0 .72 In terseclion Signal Delay : lH .4 Inlersection Capacity UtiliZaliOrl57 .7% Ana ly sis Period (min) t 5 3.5 4 .5 1 .0 1.0 Lead None M," 15.9 41 .9 022 OS8 0.72 041 387 96 00 00 381 96 0 A 169 B '.3 4.3 1 .0 1 .0 None None 22 .S 22 .6 031 03 1 06. 047 2~ u "" 00 00 4!50 4. C A '"2 B Intersection lOS B IC U l evel of Service B ~.,;"mo~" J JO ';". ~ ':' 0" " Jci M : : M :\04\04 435 .0J New lile C h urch RevisionllOSISynch ro 'Ileslfuture Sunoay.sy7 The Transpo Group Page 3 HeM Signalized Inter section Capaci ty Analys is 3 : SR 169 & 140th Way SE With-Prolect Sunday Cond llJ ons (2009) -. ... (' +-~ ~ --E8T EOR WBl. WBT NBL NOR lane ConrlQuratlons tt , , tt " , Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total lost time (s) 40 40 4 .0 4 .0 4.0 4 .0 lane Uti!. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 .95 0 .97 1 .00 Frt 1.00 085 1.00 1.00 1 00 0.85 Fit Protected 1 .00 1.00 0 .95 1.00 0 .95 1 .00 Said. Flow (prOI) 3539 1583 1787 3574 3467 1599 Fit Permitted 1 .00 1.00 0 .95 1 .00 0.95 1 .00 Said. Flow !e erm ) 3539 1583 1787 3574 3467 1599 Volume (vph) 634 325 241 725 590 300 Peak-hour fa ctor, PHF 0.86 086 0.86 086 086 086 Adj . Flow (vph) 737 378 280 843 686 349 RTOR Reduclion (vph) 0 264 0 0 0 240 lane Group Flow (vph) 737 114 280 843 686 109 Hea~~ Vehicles !%) 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Pro t p"", Prot<:Cleo P hases 3 6 2 Perrnilled Phaws 4 , Actuated Grt< .. n G (s) 204 204 154 403 2 1 3 213 Effective Green. 9 (s) 219 21. 15' 418 22.6 226 Actualed glC Hstlo 030 0'" 022 058 031 031 C learance Time (s) 55 55 4 .5 55 5.3 53 V.,hide Ext (;fI~iun IS) 50 50 35 50 4 0 40 lane Grp Cap (vph) 1070 47. 392 2063 1082 499 vIs Ralio Prot "'21 cO .16 024 cO.2 0 vIs Ratio Perm 0 .07 0 .07 vIc Ratio 0 69 0 .24 0 .71 0 .41 0 .63 0 .22 Uniform Delay, dl 22.2 19.0 26 .1 8 .5 21 .4 18.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 100 Incremental Dolay , d2 2.4 0 .5 6 .3 0 .3 1.4 0 .3 Delay (s) '46 19 .5 324 87 22.7 18.7 level of Setvice C B C A C B Approach Delay (s) 229 14 .6 21.4 Approach lOS C B C In~Su HeM Average Control Delay 19 .6 HeM level 01 Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 067 Actuated CyCle lenglh (s) 72.4 Sum of lost time (s) In te rsection C<lpiloly U tilIZatiO n 577% IC U le~e l of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 , C ritica l lane Group M:I04I04435 03 New lile C h u l ch Re vi sionll OSISynchro liles\future Su noay sy7 The Transpo Group B 12.0 B P<lye 4 • ~J G I .., E' , Al.·.::,~J eotee Hllcal :ngmeermg " Water Resources Solid and Hazardous Waste ~ Ecological/Biological Sciences ~ Geologic Assessments 0 J ! Associated .. Earth Sciences, Inc. Subsurface Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report RENTON NEW LIFE CHURCH BUILDING AND PARKING LOT ADDITIONS King County, Washington Prepared for Renton New Life Church clo Church Development Consultants, Inc. Project No. KE98433A August 24,2005 J/I L Associated Earth Sciences. Inc. August 24, 2005 Project No. KE98433A Renton New Life Church clo Church Development Consultants, Inc. P.O. Box 1526 Duvall, Washington 98019 Allention: Ms. Kathi Bresler Subject: . Subsurface Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Renton New Life Church Building and Parking Lot Additions 15711 152"" Avenue SE King County, Washington Dear Ms. Bresler: We are pleased to present the enclosed copies of the referenced report. This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration and preliminary geotechnical engineering studies 'and offers recommendations for the preliminary design and development of the proposed project. Our recommendations are preliminary in that project plans are still under development at the time of this report. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that the recommendations presented in this report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, AssociATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington KDMIkI KE9843JA2 Proje:cts\19984J3\KE\WP i(irkland Everett 911 FifthAvenue,Surte 100· K"1ti<:land. WA 98033· ftIone 425 827·7701· t-'ax425 827.5424 291 J '12 He1Mtt Ave., SUIte 2 .• Everett. WA 9t3201 • Phone '125 259-0522 • Fax 425 252':)'lO8 , Remon New L~re Church Building and Parking LOi Additions King County, Washington Subsurface Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engilleering Repon Project and Sire Condilions I. PROJECT AND SJTE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the resulls of our subsurface exploration and preliminary geotechnical engineering study for the proposed building and parking lot additions. Our recommendations are preliminary in that project plans are still under development at the time of this report. Existing and planned improvements within the project area and approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study arc presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure I. When final project plans have been prepared, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified, as necessary. J.I Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the preliminary design of the project. Our study included a review of selected geologic literature, drilling exploration borings, and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and shallow ground water. Geotechnical engineering studies were completed to determine the type of suitable foundation, foundation design recommendations, floor support recommendations, anticipated foundation and floor settlement, and pavement and drainage design considerations. This report surrunarizes our current fieldwork and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. We recommend that we be allowed to review project plans prior to construction to verity that our geotechnical recommendations have been correctly interpreted and incorporated into the design. 1.2 Authorization Our scope of work is outlined in our proposal for this work phase dated June 30, 2005. We were subsequently authorized to proceed by means of a signed copy of OUT proposal. We were requested to complete four additional exploration borings not described in our June 30 proposal, and were verbally authorized to proceed with the additional work. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Renton New Life Church, Church Development Consultants, Inc., and their agents for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, OUT services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. August 24, 2005 ASSOCIATED £ARm SCIENCES. INC. BWGlfti -KE9MJ3A2· Pro/f'ClStJ99843}'KEIWP Page 1 Renton New Life Church Building and Parking L01 AMi1ions King Coumy, Washinglon 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION Subsurface Exploration Il1Ili Preliminary Geo1t!chnical Engineering Report Project wld Site Conditions This report was cOlllpleted with an understanding of the project based on a preliminary site plan that was provided to us by Church Development Consultants, Inc. Th@>proposed project will include construction of a new building, constructing a paved parking lot in the area of the existing gravel parking lot west of the existing building, expanding the existing north parking lot further to the north, and possibly constructing gravel surfacing or paving in the grass field on the northwest part of the site. The proposed building will measure approximately 350 by 225 feet in plan view and will include two levels. The finished floor elevation of the lowest level is planned to be at elevation 110 feet. This finished floor elevation is expected to result in minimal fill placement and excavation below existing gradc of up to approximately 8 feet to reach planned finished floor elevation. The site is located at the existing Renton New Life Church. The existing church includes a building with finished floor elevations ranging from approximately 118 to 130 feet, portable buildings south of the existing building, a gravel parking lot west of the existing building, and a paved parking lot north of the existing building. A grass field is located at the northwest corner of the site, is accessed by a bridge across a creek, and is occasionally used as a car parking area. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field study included advancing 11 exploration borings to gain information about the site. The various types of sediments, as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may represent gradational variations between sediment types in the field. If changes occurred between sample intervals in our exploration borings, they were interpreted. The approximate exploration locations are noted on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure I, attached with this report. It should be noted that the exploration borings completed for this phase of work were numbered in sequence with other exploration borings that have previously been completed on.site by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI). We have previously completed three exploration borings in an area west of the existing building, and one in the area of the existing east addition. The previously completed borings were useful as background information for this study, but were not within the current project area and are not included with this report. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the 11 exploration borings completed for this study. The number, locations, and depths of the explorations were completed within site and budget constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. II should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to the August 24, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARW SCIENCES. INC. BWGIId -KE9843JA2 -Projwsll9984JJ\}(El WP Page 2 Remon New Life Church Building and Parkjng Lor Addifiuns King County, WashingrolJ Subswface Exp/ormion and Preliminary Geotechnical Engjneering Repon Project and Site Condilions random nature of deposition and the aiteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until COnstruction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re- evaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate chang~. 3. I Exploration Borings The exploration borings were complered by advancing a 4 \4-inch, inside-diameter, hollow- stem auger with a truck-mounted drill rig. During the drilling process, samples were obtained at generally 5·foot-depth inrervals_ Thc exploration borings were continuously observed and logged by a geologist from our firm. The exploration logs presented in the Appendix are based on the field logs, drilling action, and inspection of the samples secured_ Disturbed but representative samples werc obtained from the exploration borings by using the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) procedure in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):D-1586. This test and sampling method consists of driving a standard 2-inch, outside-diameter, split-barrel sampler a distance of 18 inches into the soil with a 140- pound harruner free-falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows for each 6-inch interval is recorded and the number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is known as the Standard Penetration Resistance (UN") or blow count. If a 10lal of 50 is recorded within one 6-inch interval, the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the corresponding number of inches of penetration. The resistance, or N-value, provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils; these values are plotted on the attached exploration boring logs. The samples obtained from the split-barrel sampler were classified in the field and representalive portions placed in watertight containers. The samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished for this study and visual reconnaissance of the site. As shown on the field logs, the exploration borings encountered subsurface conditions at the exploration locations that were relatively consistent. The existing paving and topsoil were typically underlain by loose to medium dense, moist silty sand with trace gravel interpreted as alluvium deposits. Alluvium was deposited from flowing water and is typically relatively loose. Alluvial deposits are considered suitable for support of paving and lightly loaded floor slabs with proper remedial preparation. Foundations or other structures with higher loads should not be supported on alluvium unless it is first improved using Geopiers TM, Rammed Aggregate Piers TM, or Rapid Impact Compaction. A ugUSI 24. 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. BWG/Id -KE98433A.2 p'OJetl!IJ9984JJ1KE1WP Page 3 Renton New Life Chu.rch Building and Parking Lot Additions King Cowl/y, Washington Subsurface Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Project and Site Conditions Alluvium typically extended to depths of approximately 10 to 24 feet below the existing ground surface at the time of drilling. Below the alluvium, our exploration borings encountered typically dense 1<1' very dense moist silly sand with gravel. This material was interpreted to be an older Vashon or pre-Vashon age deposit that has been glacially consolidated. At this site, undifferentiated sediments observed in our explorations are considered suitable for support of fOUndations, floor slabs, or paving. Due to the depili at which the undifferentiated deposits were observed, we anticipate that pavements and floor slabs will not be directly supported by outwash sediments. We also anticipate that foundation units will have to be supported on Geopiers ™ iliat derive their support directly from the undifferentiated sediments and alluvium that have been improved with GeopiersTM In the explorations that have been completed to date for the planned building addition, the elevation of the top of ilie undifferentiated sediments ranges from approximately 93 to 101 feet. Our observations and interpretations are generally consistent with published mapping for the site vicinity as represented by United States Geological Survey Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington, Map GQ-405, by D.R. Mullineaux (1965). This map . indicates that the site is underlain by alluvial sediments. Ground water was observed in our exploration borings at depths varying from approximately 10 to 16 feet below the ground surface at ilie time of drilling. Variations in ground water levels are possible due to changes in season, weather, on-and off-site land usage, and other factors. It should be noted that our site explorations are open for only a short time, and that actual ground water levels might be closer to the surface ilian we measured in our explorations. Based on the encountered stratigraphy, it is our opinion that any earthquake damage to the proposed structures when founded on suitable foundation bearing strata in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report would be caused by the intensity and acceleration associated with the event. Design of the project should be consistent with 2003 Inlemationnl Building Code (IBC) guidelines. In accordance with the 2003 lBe, the following values should be used: Site Class "0" (Table 1615.1.1) S5 = 126% (Figure 1516 (I) S, = 42 % (Figure 1516 (2) August 24, 2005 BWGIId -KE98433A2 -Projuu1J9984J3!KEIWP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 4 Remon New Life Church Building and Parking Lut Additions King County. Washi~glOn Subsurface Exploracion and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Preliminary Design RecommelllialiolJS II. I'RELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.0 INTRODUCTION Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical engineering standpoint, the proposed project is feasible provided the recommendations contained herein are properly followed. The upper IO to 24 feet of subsurface materials are loose and will offer support to pavement, floor slabs, and foundations for lightly loaded ancillary structures with proper remedial preparation. Substantial foundation loads should be supported on a conventional shallow foundation system constructed above alluvial sediments improved with Geopiers™, Rammed Aggregate Piers™, or soils improved by Rapid Impact Compaction. Pile support of building foundation loads is another alternative that was considered, however the three alternative support types mentioned above were selected during a project team meeting, and therefore geotechnical engineering recommendations contained in this report arc focused on the project approach that has been selected. We are available to provide design recommendations for a conventional pile foundation support system, if requested. The following report sections provide specific geotechnical site development recommendations. 6.0 SITE PREPARATION Where existing pavement, buried utilities, or other structures are present below the planned building, they should be removed. We recommend that, to the extent possible, the existing paving be used for construction staging. Any excavations below planned finished grade for the purpose of demolition or utility relocations should be backfilled with structural fill as described in this report. Existing topsoil should be removed frolll areas where the new building, paving, or other structures are planned. After topsoil stripping. remaining roots and any other organic debris should be removed from structural areas. All soils disturbed by stripping and grubbing operations should be recompacted as described below for structural fill. After site stripping is complete, existing surficial loose soils should be addressed. In areas where on-grade floor slabs are planned, we recommend excavation as needed to achieve elevations at least 18 inches below planned floor subgrade. The resulting surface should be proof-rolled with suitable equipment under the observation of the geotechnical engineer to identify any soft or yielding areas that require compaction or further excavation to expose suitable soils. The subgrade should then be compacted to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM: D-1557 test procedure for fill more than 4 feet below final grade, and to 95 percent of the same standard for fill less than 4 feet below final grade. Depending on season, site conditions, and weather conditions at the time of August 24, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. 8WG/1d -KE98433A2 -Proi«UIJ99843JIKEIWP Page 5 Renton New Life Church Buildillg GIld Parking Lot Additions Kine County, Washington Subsuiface Explormion and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon PrelimilUlty Design Recommendations construction, the use of a geotextile separation fabric, such as Mirat! 500x, might be warranted over the compacted subgrade prior to restoring the planned subgrade elevation with structural fill. Pavement areas should be prepared in the same manner, however overexcavation only needs to extend I foot below planned paving subgrade elevation. Fill placed-in overexcavation areas below floor slabs and paving should meet Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specification 9-03.9(2) for Shoulder Ballast if wet weather or site conditions are expected. If the earthwork and foundation portions of the project will be under construction during seasonal dry weather, excavated soil can be aerated, dried, and recompacted as structural fill. Reusing excavated soil as structural fill will require significant but unavoidable effort on the part of the contractor to dry site soils during favorable dry weather prior to compaction. The contractor should be aware of this and should either include costs for drying site soils, or for exporting the excavated site soil and replacing it with imported fill material as described above. In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and should be determined during construction. For estimating purposes, however, we anticipate that temporary, unsupported cut slopes in the alluvium can be made at inclinations of 1.5H:IV (Horizontal:Vertical) or flatter. If excavation slopes are expected in structural fil\, they should be planned at angles of 1.0 to 1.5H: I V. Temporary excavations into the undifferentiated deposits are not expected because these materials were observed 10 feet or more below existing grades. The reconunended slope angles assume that ground water seepage is not encountered, and that surface water is not allowed to flow across the temporary slope faces. If ground or surface water is present when the temporary excavation slopes are exposed, flatter slope angles will be required. As is typical with earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times. Most of the on-site soils contain substantial silt, which makes them highly moisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance when weI. The contractor must use care during site preparation and excavation operations so that the underlying soils are not softened. If disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to grade with structural fill. The overexcavation and filling process will be least likely to disturb silty moisture-sensitive soils if excavation is completed with a wide-track bulldozer and fill is placed from an advancing fill pad. Import fill could be used to construct temporary truck routes on the building pad 2 feet or more ahove subgrade soils to facilitate truck traffic. In no case should export or import trucks, wheel loaders, or other wheeled equipment be operated on unprotected subgrade soils. If winter construction is expected, crushed rock fill could be used to provide temporary construction staging areas, if desired. The stripped subgrade should be observed by the geotechnical engineer, and should then be covered with a geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent. Once the fabric is placed, we recommend using a crushed rock fill layer at least 10 inches thick in areas where construction equipment will be used. August 24. 2005 ASSOCIA TED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. BWG!li1· KE984JJA2 -Projecrsll9984131K£1WP Page 6 Renton New l..lje Church Building and Parking Lot AddiEiom ~jng County, Washing/on 7.0 STRUCTURAL FILL Subsurface Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Preliminary Design RecommentiaJions Structural fill will be necessary to establish desired grades. All references to structural fill in this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type, placement, and compactioo of materials as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is specified under another section of this repon, the value given in that section should be used. After stripping, planned excavation, and any required overexcavation have been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer/engineering geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be recompacted to 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. If rhe sllbgrade contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain and should probably not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical, placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of the free-draining layer by silt migration from below. After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free-draining rock course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. In the case of roadway and utility trench filling, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with County codes and standards. The top of the compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the location of the perimeter footings or roadway edge before sloping down at an angle of 2H: 1 V. The contractor should note that any proposed fiJI soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material 72 hours in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than the No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No.4 sieve size) should be considered moisture-sensitive. Use of moisture-sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. The on-site soils typically contained 5 percent silt or more, and are considered moisture-sensitive when excavated and used as fill materials. Construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. August 24, 2005 ASSOCIA TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. BWGIld -KE984J3A2 -ProjeCJSll99843J1KEI WP Page 7 Renton New Life Church Building and Parking Lor Addirions King County, Washington 8.0 BUILDING FOUNDATION SUPPORT 8.1 Geopiers™ Subswface Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Preliminary Design Recommendations , Short aggregate piers (GeopiersTM) may be used to improve the existing alluvial soils. Geopiers ™ are formed by drilling to a pre-determined depth with an auger of a specified diameter. Crushed rock is then compacted into the drilled holes in thin lifts. The result is a column of compacted aggregate and compaction of soils surrounding the Geopiers™ Geopiers'" are designed by the contractor who installs them who determines Geopier™ spacing, depth, and diameter to meet project goals. The exploration logs attached with this report can provide a basis for the design. Conventional shallow foundations are then constructed above the subgrade after Geopiers ™ have been installed. 8.2 Rammed Aggregate Piers ™ We understand that a newer "Rammed Aggregate PierT.... system has also been used successfully by Geopier Foundation Company. The end result of Rammed Aggregate Pier™ construction is similar to a GeopierTM, but instead of drilling an open hole, a hollow mandrel is advanced to allow rock placement and compaction. One advantage is that Rammed Aggregate Pier™ construction does not generate drill cuttings that require disposal, and wet subsurface conditions that might be unfavorable for GeopierTM construction are less of an issue since no open hole is used for Rammed Aggregate Pier™ construction. We have been briefed on this system and agree that Rammed Aggregate Piers™ may be a suitable system for this project. Ultimately, Geopier Foundation Company should select the appropriate foundation system and provide the detailed design of the ground improvement system. 8.3 Rapid Impact Compaction Geopier Foundation Company has suggested the use of Rapid Impact Compaction to densiIY the alluvial sediments prior to construction of conventional foundations. The Rapid Impact Compaction techniques appear similar to Deep Dynamic Compaction, which has been used for many years worldwide to densify loose surficial deposits. The Rapid Impact Compaction equipment consists of a track-mounted excavator filled with a hydraulic ram and tamping foot. The ram repeatedly strikes the ground surface compacting the loose surface sediments. The process is repeated until the entire building pad is compacted. We understand that the process can densiIY soils 10 10 15 feet deep, depending on soil and water conditions. The problematic alluvial deposits on this site would likely be suitable for this application. Since the suggested equipment has been used infrequently in the Poget Sound area, we recommend that a confirmatory exploration program be completed along with the Rapid Impact Compaction. We would recommend that soil borings and SPT sampling be completed in compacted areas to confIrm that the alluvial sediments have been adequately densified. If low densities are August 24, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. IJWGlld -KE9843JA2· Pmj€cull998433IKEIWP Page 8 Renton New Life Church Building and Parking Lol Addition.,; King Counry. WashinglOn Subsurface Exploration arui Preliminnry Geotechnical Engineering Repon Preliminar), Design Recommendations produced, it may be necessary to perform Rapid Impact Compaction again, or switch 10 a Geopier"'-type system. 8.4 General Foundation Recommendations For this project, if GeopiersTM (or Rammed Aggregate Piers™) are used, we recommend completing the excavation and fill placement recommended in the Site Preparation section of this reporl. Geopiers™ can then be installed. When GeopierT" installation is complete, the building pad can be cleared of drill cuttings and fine-graded with structural fill. If Rapid Impact Compaction is used, the impact craters would be filled with structural fill to achieve finish grades. Footings can then be constructed using standard shallow foundation design and construction methods. For planning purposes, we anticipate that shallow foundations above Geopiers ™ or recompacted soils could be designed with an allowable foundation soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). If desired, Geopiers™ could also be used to support the building floor slab without the 2-foot-thick layer of structural fill recommended in the Site Preparation section of this report. 9.0 FLOOR SUPPORT Slab-on-grade floors are expected to support light loads, such as people and furniture. The recommendations in this report are appropriate for light loads such as those described. If vehicles, forklifts, materials storage, or other heavy loads are expected, we should be allowed to offer situation-specific recommendations. Cast-in-place concrete floor slabs may be used over structural fill as recommended in the SiTe PreparaTion section of this report, or above a system of Geopiers™ (or Rammed Aggregate PiersT") that are designed by the Geopier™ contractor or a subgrade that has been properly improved by Rapid Impact Compaction. The floor should be cast atop a minimum of 4 inches of washed pea gravel to act as a capillary break. It should also be protected from dampness by an impervious moisture barrier at least 10 mils thick or otherwise sealed. 10.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERA TlONS All footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing elevation. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set at the bottom of the footing at al/ locations and the drain collectors should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. In adtlition, al/ foundation walls taller than 3 feet should be lined with a minimum, 12-inch-thick, washed gravel blanket provided over the full height of the wall and which ties into the footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline August 24, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARm SCIENCES, INC. BWGlid -KE984J3A2· ProjeC/j\1'JWJ4331KEIWP Page 9 Renton New Life Church Building and Parking Lot Additions King County, Washingtolt SubsUlface Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repan Preliminary Design Recommendalions drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to foundations should be sloped downward aw~y from the structure to achieve surface drainage. These recommendations apply to conventional shallow foundation walls and landscape walls less than about 4 feet tall. 11.0 CAST-IN-PLACE RETAINING WALLS All backfill behind foundation walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally backfilled walls, which are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be designed to resist an active lateral earth pressure represented hy an equivalent fluid of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pet). Fully restrained, horizontally baCkfilled, rigid walls which cannot yield should be designed for an at-rest pressure of 55 pcf. Walls with sloping backfill are not expected, but should be designed with appropriate slope surcharge pressures. We should be allowed to provide specific slope surcharge pressures if walls with sloping backfill are used. If parking areas are adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the wall height in determining lateral design forces. The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform backfill consisting of native soils or imported structural fill compacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended as this will increase the pressure acting on the walls. A lower compaction may result in settlement of the slab-on-grade or other structures supported above the walls. Thus, the compaction level is critical and must be tested by our firm during placement. Surcharges from adjacent footings, heavy construction equipment, or sloping ground must be added to the above values. Perimeter footing drains should be provided for all retaining walls as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop against the walls. For walls less than 3 feet tall, the foundation drain, as recol11lllended in the Drainage Considerations section of this report, is expected to be adequate. For walls more than 3 feet tall, a blanket drain is required. This would involve installation of a minimum, I-foot-wide blanket drain for the full wall height using imported, washed gravel against the walls. The drainage blanket should be continuous with and freely communicate with the foundation drain. Foundation wall footings/keyways surrounded with structural fill or alluvium may be designed for passive resistance against lateral translation using an equivalent fluid equal to 200 pcf. The passive equivalent fluid pressure diagram begins at the top of the footing; however, total lateral resistance should be summed only over the depth of the actual key (truncated triangular diagram). Passive resistance values include a factor of safety equal to 3 in order to reduce the amount of movement necessary to generate passive resistance. August 24. 2005 ASSOCIATED £ARm SCIENCES. INC. BWGIJd· Kf984JJA2 -Projwsl/9984J3\KElWr Page 10 Renton New Life Church Building and Parking Lot Additions King County, Washington Subsurface Exploration and Prelimioory Geotechnical Engineering Report Preliminary Design Recommendntions The friction coefficient for footings cast directly on alluvial soils improved with Geopiers TM, Rammed Aggregate Piers TM, or densified by Rapid Impact Compaction as described in this report may be taken as 0.34. This is an allowable value and includes a safety factor. The soil under the footings must be recompacted to 9S percent of the above-mentigned standard, as recommended in the Site Preparalion section of this report, for this value to apply. 12.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The parking 101 pavement for this project is expected to be supported by structural fill. Pavement for this project is expected to include areas that will be used primarily for car driving and parking. Some areas will also be subjected to heavy traffic, such as garbage tTUcks and delivery tTUcks. We recommend that passenger car driveway and parking areas consist of 2.5 inches of hot mix asphalt, Class \I, inch (liMA \I, inch) (equivalent to Class B asphalt concrete paving [ACP)) above 4 inches of crushed surfacing base course (CSBC) (WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.9[3)). Pavement for truck areas should consist of a minimum section of 4 inches of HMA '/2 inch over 6 inches of CSBe. All depths given are compacted depths. All paving materials, base course materials, and placement procedures should comply with suitable standard specifications, such as the Washington Stale Department of Transpor/alion Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, or other suitable specifications. All structural fill and all native subgrades less than 4 feet below finished grade for a planned paving area should be compacted to 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by ASTM:D-1557. Prior to structural fill placement or to placement of base course materials over native subgrades, the area should be proof-rolled under the observation of AESI with a loaded dump truck or other suitable equipment to identify any soft or yielding areas. Any soft or yielding areas should be repaired prior to continuing work. If desired, asphalt treated base (ATB) can be substituted for most of the CSBC and used to provide a construction-working surface. After the buried utilities are in place, the subgrade is prepared, a 2-inch-thick leveling course of eSBC is placed, and the ATB is laid and compacted. This A TB surface is then used for construction access, and once most of the heavy construction traffic has subsided, any damaged pavement areas are repaired prior to final surfacing with ACP. For this project, 4 inches of eSBC under passenger car areas can be replaced with at least 2 inches of ATB with a 2·inch CSBC leveling course. Six inches of CSBC under heavy traffic areas can be replaced with 3 inches of A TB over 2 inches of CSBe. Surface-wearing layers of lIMA '12 inch should be used above the A TB, as described above. This is an optional substitution that can be used if paved construction staging is desired, but is not required for structural purposes. August 24, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. BWGM -K£984J3A2 -f'rojeCIJI19984J3IKEIWf' Page I I Remon New Life Church Building and Parking Lot Additions King County, Washington SubsuTjace Exploration and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Preliminary Design Recommendations 13.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING At the time of this report, site grading, structural plans, and construction methods have not been finalized, and the recommendations presented herein are preliminary. Vje are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops and possibly changes from that upon which this report is based. We recommend that AESI perfonn a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design. We are also available 10 provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundations for buildings and of new pavement depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of the current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington Bruce W. Guenzler, P.G. Project Geologist A lIachments: Figure 1: Appendix: August 24, ZOO5 BWGlld -KE9lJ4JJA2 -ProjeClSI19984331KE1WP I EXPIIlES 11/20/ do Site and Exploration Plan Kurt D. Merriman, P.E. Principal Engineer Exploration Logs EB-5 through EB-15 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. Page 12 APPENDIX , ! 1 I ./ "/.<'1". 10M' .'$ ;~ , ,'I 'y'. < , , --. I , / . t.~ , ." ...... i" ._ 152NOA\IE.S.E ,.:;OY::;;7'::~~'" ,¥;.,;:'2m ••• ~~J= -c' ."; .~ •. --t' tiP ,.--,,;-'.' J «,"".J 1T -, , il. ~ ",--,.f/-;+ -}iE!lL;O "1;$-141' .·_w,i;J r~.EB .. 5 •. /. 'i'" .EB S.q 1---/ r. ·.··./.:rf l }, :",,~~,:.ii'-.. /:f ~ . I ,. -~ r 'j" / i ' ',-!EB·6 'ii'~'y~:i .. ./""" • "B •. 11:' .... ,.,.. I ./ 1'/ ,." . . . i /' '. -M'W m'~,' I , ! . _: :,~';::I~::~".,:O,~ , /'.Ji!.~;. __ .. iI! • EB~9 "/ i',t Moo.. • • ,_ •• __ MI.~ r~_o.;;f,~ ~," .. -.<~ 1-~ . 6,8 -,. i i h' "/ (--. J. •• ,:,,:'S',!,+. , ' l 1-.. r·'1 -.j I ~-' .• EB·7 14 ! • eS"-12J l!::;P,c~ ~B-13 ,~.=.-l ,>t,..·_ --~r-/ J r ' APPROXIMATE L.OCATION OF eXPLORATION BORINe;; -TYP ;"~'~-t':;i"C'~~.l'~'?c'T _1 __ _ I 7" NOTE; EXPLORATIONS LA8ELED CONSECUTIVELY WITH PREVIOUS WORK ON SITE-BY AESI. E6·1 THRU-€EJ..4 Nor. SHOWN I- , , ' ·!f-"0 .. , :; \;: . ::it : j-l : ': 1-~ .".cL. .. ---.... -,---.~.::'.!'.!'f-. , , ! i I .F"'· 'j\",'/r·· "-,0 • ..",,, \ i~r \f .S."". .1' ~ ""1") -': , \: :,: , , i :':.:., : ;. , I ~ ",.,--". ',I ,j z< '"' ! Reference: Barghausen l============================================================~= ! Aultclatecl hf'tll hlellU" Ille. SITE ANO EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 1 SC'.ALE IN I'EET I ~ Iiiii!iI IJIii\ ~ r~ RENTON NeW UFE CHURCH OAT!! 710S i II:i:3 !!IE 5lSf crJ WIll KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON PROJ. NO KE98433A m ~ iii a a N o Z c o o o c !j m (Y ~ m iii a a N o Z Well-graded gravel and GW gravel wilh sand, (iUJe 10 no fines gravel gravel with sand, to no fines gravel and silly G.'loral,·eilNith sand sand swrl "IOU wit~l gfovel, little sand *-~------------~ I , sandy silt. gravelly sill, with sand or gravel clay or silt of low I plast,cily Tenns Describing Relative Density and Consistency Density ~P1.(2)blowslto~ Very loose 0(0 <1 Coarse-loose 41010 Grained SO;!.$ Medium Dense 10 10 30 T esl Symbols Dense 301050 Very Dense >50 G = Gtain Size M = Moisture ConlEnt 9onsi~ency SPTt'1,lows/fool A "" A1te1berg lilnlls Very Soh 0102 C = Chemical Fine Soli 210-" DO '" Dr)' Dens.l), G.aiof-Jj Sr"ls MEdIum Shl1 4 1;) f. K "" f-'e(me.;;brllly S!~t1 e!o 15 Very ShU 151030 '" Hald >:)0 --~~~-.-------- Qes~~0l~_1 erm BouldE:rs Cobbles Gr,'llel Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel S;,nd Coarse S~Jnd Medium Sand Fine Sand ~)il! and Clay Component Definitions ~ize Range an<!.§ievI!...Num~L Larger ih..n 12" 3~ 10 1 2" 3" 10 No, 4 (4.75 mill) 3"103/4" 3/4~ to No." (4.75 mm) No.4 (4.75mm) 10 No. 200 (O.075mml No.4 (4.75 mm} 10 No. 10 (2.00mm) No_ 10 (2.00 mm} to No. 40 (0.425mmj No. 40 (0.425 mm) to No. 200 (0 075 mm) Smalle( than No 7.00 (0.075 mm) Estimated Percentage Moisture Content Dry· Absence of moislure. dusty, dry 10 the touch Slightly Moist ~ Perceptible moisture Percentage by CO!:'2R°!l_c.r:-~ Weighl <5 51010 151025 Trace Few Lillie v'Jith -Non·primary coarse constituents: ..::. 1t1% Moisl -Damp but no visible waler Very Moisl -Watet visible but not tree draining Sampler Type -fines coolenl between S% and 15% Wet -VIsible hee walel, usually hom lIelow ""'alel table Symbols Blows/6" or portion of 6" I • " • Sampler Type Description (.) Cemenlgoul ~urf .. ce sear Bentonite seal 2.0·00 SJJlil·Spoon Sampler 'J--;",i"'---:-:-:-:-:-c;-;:---i (SPt) Clay of high plasticily. 3.0" 00 Split-Spoon Sampler 3.25" 00 Split-Spoon Ring Sarnpler F~te[ pack wilh :' blank casing :., seclion sandy or gravelly clay. fal clay with sand or gravel Bulk sample ff,~;---I--------------I Grab Sample Organic clay or silt of I me,diu,m 10 high 3,0" 00 Thin-Wall Tube Sampler (including Shelby lube) Portion not fecovered ': $oeened casing '.-01 Hydfolip . with filter pack End cap !4) Depth 01 ground water Percentage by dfyweight r~~-JJ?"~~~ __ ~_~~-J !2"J (SPT) Siandard Penetralion TesL f----'------f,i$:6 (ASTM 0-1586) 2-'~ V) muck and other OJ in General Accordance with .:t 'I. ATD = AI lime of drilling. Slatic waler level (dale) ~ ~ ~ organic soils Slar1dard Praclice lor Description I 0 and Identification of Soils (ASTM 0·2488) ~5' Combined uses symbols used for lines between 5% and 15% Classifications of soits in this report afe based on visual field and/or laboratory observatiofls. which include densityfconsistency. moisture condition. grain size, and ptasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply fletd or ldbo,atory tcstiny unless presenled herein. Visual-manu:::rl andlor laboratory classification ~ methods of ASTM D-2487 and 0-2488 were used as an idenliJicatiorl guide for the Unirled Soit ClassirK;at'ion System_ \? r======================================== ~ Associated Earth Sciences, Inc_ frGURE i~~~~~ Exploration Log Key A-1 " Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Ex(!loration LOg ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Project Number ,. Exploration Number I Sheet KE98433A EB-5 -1 of 2 Project Name RentQn New life Cburch Ground Surface Bevation (ft) --.llL __ location KinQ Count~ WA _._ . -------Datum Bargballseo 6l24~ Driller/Equipment . Eoy[rn!lffi.en\<!!£:![i!lin9 ____ ._ Date SlartiFinish 1l14l05 Zl14l05 Hammer WeighVOrop _.140#/30· _._--_ .. _.-Hole Diameter (in) .B·~. ... -..... _-- .---. is ~Qi w w u-0> ~ ;; Q -0 .~ /0 Blows/Foot Q ~ <i ~.o = • ...J I-"E ~c. '-~ <i S E e~ E2 5> :;; ~ T ~ "'" 8~ m ~ 0 <IJ 15 DESCRIPTION • 10 20 30 40 r ____________ ~~wa~~~ ____________ ' Alluvium rr S-1 Medium dense, very moist, gray, fine SAND, Iiltle sift. (SP) • "'" • • . 5 S-2 loose, very moist. brown, fme SAND, few silt, few fine gravel. (SP) • "" , 3 10 Very loose, wet, gray, fine SAND, few to little sift, few fine gravel. (SP) ~ 2 S·3 , "" , 15 ~--------------------------------Vashon 10 Pre-Vashon Undifferentiated Sediments S-4 Medium dense. wet. brown, fine 10 coarse SAND. with fine to coarse 11 gravel. few sift. (SW) ; :\ 2! -20 S-5 Dense, wet, brown, fine to coarse SAND with nne to coarse gravel, few silt. 2, (SW] ,. 3. " -25 As above. , S-6 " "''' 19 30 S-7 Blow count may be overstated due to cobble. 011 'OIl" 35 a ~ IT ~6 Very dense, wet, gray, fine to coarse gravelly fine 10 coarse SAND, liUle 25 silt_ (SW 10 SM) •• 9 • 4. Bottom of exploration boring at 39 feet Sampler Type (ST): rn 2" 00 Splil Spoon Sampler (SPT) o NoR.covery M -Moisture Logged by: BWG rn 3" 00 spla Spoon Sampler (0 & M) IJ Ring Sample 'l Water level () Approved by: IQI Grab Sample IZl Shelby Tube Sample:'-: Water level at time of drilling (ATD) Associaled Ear1h Sciences, Inc. Exploration Log ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e--P~~~~~~'~~r-T EXp'ora~~_~umber--I-----S-t-~t1---~·-··--- I-c--c-------=---c----cc---Lc=--=-~--------_--L ____ :=.::..-=---__ --L ___ ~_'_:_:_=_-__l Project Name Renton New Life---.Churc~.__ ____ _ __ ._ Ground Surface Elevation (ft) __ lJJi __ _ location J5ing County WA .__________ _______ Datum _Bargha"sen 6/24105 Driller/Equipment __ Environmental DriHiD9_~ __ ._~__ _ __________ ~ Date Start/Finish 7/14/05,.1l14105. ____ _ Hammer Weight/Drop 14Q# 130" . _ _ _____ ~ ___ .. Hole Diameter (in) 8" ~:l-i-Hi ~ T ~ CHI} S-1 5 S-2 10 S-3 15 S-4 20 S-5 25 S"; 30 S-7 35 Loose. 'Ve'Y moist, brown. fme to medium SAND. little sin: to with silt. (SP-SM) Becomes medium dense. Loose. wei. mixed brown and gray. fine to coarse SAND.IiHIe fine gravel. few sill, few organic (peat and fine sticks) (SW) Medium dense, wet, brown. fine to coarse gravelly, fine to coarse SAND. few sin. (SW) Dense, wei. brown, fme to coarse gravelly, fine to coarse SAND. few silt. (SW) As above. Becomes 'tIery dense. ----- Bottom of exploralion boring a133.5 feet , 2 • 6 • 5 6 2 2 "'6 • 7 • " 5 to 26 11 16 20 ,. 0/ Blows/Fool 10 "', 50J • ~.~ __ =-~~~~~~ ___________________________________________________ ~ __ ~~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~L-__ L-~~ 6 Sampler Type-(ST): ~ ill 2" 00 Splil Spoon Sampler (SPT) g rn 3" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) ~ ~ Grab Sample o No Recovery IJ Ring Sample M -Moisture V Water level (l 1ZI Shelby Tube Sample:Y Water le .... el atUme of drilling tATO) Logged by: BWG Approved by: -------~-~--, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Projed Number KE98433A I Exploration Log_ Exploration Number -r----- EB-7 I Sheet 10f2 Project Name location Driller/Equipment Hammer WeighlfOrop .R?l1ton New life Church -:K~;'!Jn,~g-,C",o",u",nl!tlCy"W~A,-=~ _____ ~_~~. __ ._~ _____ ~ G<ound Surtace Elevation (ft) ~'---~_ Datum Barghallseo 6124105 Date SlartlFinish JJ.1A1JJ5.J/14/05 € ~ ,. £ " "-S E ~ ~ 0 T <J) S-1 5 S-2 10 - 5-3 t5 S-4 20 S-5 25 S-6 30 S-7 35 N N " ~ ~ s-a 0-.~ 0 ~D ~[ eJ<J) .. Environmental Drilling 140# 130" DESCRIPTION r _ ~ __ ~ _ ~ -~ ~ -~ -MPhollf';lll!n.g ~ - --- -~ ~ --~ ~ , Alluvium Medium dense, moist, brown, fine SAND, few s[lt. (SP) Grades to loose_ loose, we!, brown, fine SAND, little silt, .race fine gravel. (SP to SM) loose, wet, brown, fine gravelly. fine to coarse SAND, few sift (SW) As above, becomes medium dense. Very dense. wet, bfOwn, ftne GRAVEL with rUle to coarse sand, few siR. (GW) As above. Hole Diameter (in) 8" __ _ c 0 'iiI ~E 0 0 ~~ ~-e ~~ ~ ~ <Do ~m l' • 7 • 2 2 , , , 4 0 , 5 4 • 8 , " " • " ,. 7 35 01 Blows/Foot 10 20 30 40 "" "'5 ... ... "" ~ !!'- ~ £ i5 54 51 50/ " o'r-~==~~=,-~ _____________________ -L~-L~_L--L_~_L--L~L1 ~ Sample, Type (S1): 3: []] 2" OD spm Spoon Sampler (SP1) ~ UJ 3" OD Split Spoon Sampler (O & M) ffi ~ Grab Sample o No Recovery Il Ring Sample M -Moisture Si' Water Level 0 o Shelby Tube Sample:J Water level at lime of drilling (ATO) Logged by: BWG Approved by: -------' Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Exnloration Lon f-::-m-,---,-:c~ ___ ~ __ -;c~c--;--_O--;c,--L,-::~::~PK~rOJE':E;;:8:~~~~;::~~e_':_-__ l..L-_-_~· __ F_,p_i_o'_=a~';;'-~umber "'--T----~h~~'2 ------ Project Name .B~DtQn New Li(~ Church __ _ ___ _ _____ .___ _.___ Ground Surface Elevation (ft) _lLl,:70:'::-:==-~ locat;on King County WA ___ _ _____ .. __ Datum _Barghausen 6124/05 Driller/Equipment Environmental Drilling __ _ _____ u_ ___ Dale Start/Finish -1JjAlO5 7L14L~ Hammer Wei9h',V"~D:ro~p:-:=1=4=OlLL=I::3=O="====._~. ~=~ "__ _ _ _ __-~-_-__ --_--~ ____ -__ ~~ _,H_o_'e_Dri,a_m,e_'e~_r_{i~~_._~~' ' -- BlowslFoot € ~ 0-.-0 ., ~D ~ <i ~E n S E ~ ~ 10 20 30 40 w T ~ ClUJ 0 UJ DESCRIPTION -~----~-~------ 15 I~ ~ S-9 Very dense, wet brown, fine SAND, few fme gravel, few sift (SP) 45 Bahom of exploration borin9 at 44 teet 50 55 60 65 70 75 ~~=~~~~ ______________________________ ~~L-~~-L~~LJ~ ~ Sampler Type (ST): i\ [lJ 2" OD Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) ill 3~ OD Split Spoon Sampler (D & M) ~ Grab Sampre o No Recovery M -Moisture logged by: BWG IJ Ring Sample \( Waler level 0 Approved by: 1ZI Shelby Tube Sample -f Wale, level at time of drillill9 (ATD) ~ _____ . ___________ --1 Associated Earth Sciences. Inc. Exploration Lo~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --.. P~~~~~~~~;~--T Exploration Number EB-8 I Sheet 10f2 Project Name Renton New Life Church "__ . ~ ____ . ____ _ Ground Surface Elevation (ft) ---.l.1~ ___ _ localion King County WA.~ __ ... _.__ _ ________ _ OatlHll Rarghausen...fil24.105-. Date StartJFinish 7/15/05 7/1 5105 Driller/Equipment Environmental Drilling __ _ .~ammer WeighUDrop ~?_#_/_3~~~ ________ ~~--~.~_ :_====:::-_::: .. ====_~H~o:le:..;D:ia~me~,e=r~(:in~)~B~',:' ==-:::_====::;:~ € ~ u-~O " ~D " C. !!§.. 15. S E ., T m ""' 0 VJ 5-1 5 S·2 10 ~ S·3 15 S-4 20 S-5 25 30 5-7 35 5-6 DESCRIPTION , -- - -_. - -~ --l'~IJ~tl.P.ll'lin.9 ________ -___ " Alluvium Loose, very moist, brown, fine SAND, littte silt, little fine gravel. (SP to SM) Grades to gray. loose, wei, brown, fine to coarse SAND. little fine gravel, little sill. (SW) Medium dense. wet, brown. fine GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand, few sill (GW) Blow count may be overstated. Very dense, wet, brown. fine GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand, few silt {GW) As above. Becomes dense. Becomes very dense. ----~---.-~--.--------.--.-~~---j o No Recovery M -Moisture IJ Ring Sample "Sl Wate, level 0 :J Blows/Fool 10 20 30 40 l l ". l 2 • • 2 2 3 1J \4 12 S 7 20 , 9 As I I 501 " 30 Logged by: BWG Approved by: o Shelby Tube Sample Y Waler level at lime of drilling (ATD) Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Exnloration Log ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .---P~1~~~(---r-~o~~~~·· ·i----~~-·--···- project Name Renton New Life Cbur_ch. ____ ._ __________ Ground Surface Elevation (ft) -,1~1c:Q,::' ;:-:-;;:-::-- local;on King County..JIYI'I ... _____ .... _ .. ____ . ____ .. _ Dalum .Bargbau5en..fil2<. 4.lD5... Driller/Equipment Enviwnmental Drilling _____ _ ____ '_ ___ Dale SlarVfinish 7/1.5lD5.;l115105. __ _ Hammer WeighVDrop .. l4lli!.: 130" _____ _ _______ ._.____ Hole Diameter (in) _8.'_' _. . ____ . _ _ . _ .. _--_.-_ .. __ .---_. .._ .... -. is ~ 0- " ··0 ~D ~ 0. ~~ 0. S E " T '" I" (I) 0 (I) DESCRIPTION S-I _ _ _ _. _ G(!;!,S1> a!l~_ T..9ru>QjI~-____ _ Fill .M~ium qe[ts~ ~e~ mQisL dark bIQwf1. flD~S.P-NQ_wi!h..Ji.i.!t. JSl!Al. , ___ ./ Alluvium S-2 loose. very moist, gray, siHy fine SAND. iSM) -_._.--_ .. 5 Bottom of exploration boring Oil 4 feet -10 -15 20 25 30 . 35 ~i~--=_~~~--~~------------------------------« Sampler Type (ST): ~ OJ 2" 00 Spin Spoon Sampler (SPT) [JJ 3'· 00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) o No Recovery M • Moisture IJ Ring Sample 2. Water Level () c 0; 0> 0 ='~ .5 ~ ~~ . ~E2.Q 8~[D , 3 9 ,. , 2 , ~ Grab Sample o Shelby Tube Sample.! Water lever at time of dnlling (ATD) ~ 1;; Blows/Foot " }- ~ L 10 20 30 40 5 19 ., i ; . logged by: BWG ApprOVed by: Assodaled Ear1h Sciences. Inc. I Project Name _ tenton N,,~ I if" localion _ :ino WA DriUer/EQuipment _ _ ~ Hammer WeighUOrop _ ~SJ# I 3(] ~---~-------- g 0 In ID ~ <i a. E ID .. 0 U) DESCRIPTION >n Loa I Sheet 1 of 1 Ground Surface Elevation (ft) ~1,-!1"O'c' C-C~- Datum -Bar:ghausen.6L24.lOfL Dale SlarUFinish Jl15/05,2l1S10S- Hole Diameter (in) .....B:.._ I~ Ii Blows/Fool § !. 10 20 30 40 g S-1 I~ -ll ... '! .!loll . ----~~--; .. ~- loose, very moist. gray, Stlty fine SAND. (SM) 4 l 3 S-2 5 Bottom vf explOl'ation boring at -4 feel -10 15 20 25 30 35 ~':':'"«' I ype (ST): ill T 00 Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) [J) 3-00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) ~ Grab Sample [J No Recovery M -Moisture [] Ring Sample ~ Water level 0 o Shelby Tube Sample-X. Water Lever at lime of drilling (ATD) ", logged by: BWG Approved by: --_ .. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ___ __Explora!ion Log _~ ____ --------- ~~~~~ Project Number --] Exp(oration Number -r Sheet KE98433A ____ ~ ______ ~E~B~-~11~~----L-I~----~1~O~f~1~~--~ Project Name location Driller/Equipment Hammer We~htlOrop S-1 S-2 5 10 15 _Renton New Life Chl[[ch ____ __ _ ___________ __ Ground Surtace Elevation (ft) ~' __ _ King CountY,-W~A,=~___ _____________ Datum _Bargbausen 612410!L Environmental Drilling _____________ ___ DateStartiFinish ~05.7J1!j/oL __ 140#/30" ___ _______ ._ _ Hole Diameter (in) K- DESCRIPTION ,. ____________ IopsoiLa!!d..~!~!?s __________ _ Alluvium Medium dense, very moist. brown, silty fine SAND_ (SM) Becomes loose. ------------------j Bottom of exploration boring al .. reel Blows/Foot 10 20 30 40 2 5 6 ; ""5 , 1&11 --,- -20 ~ 'l' ~. ~ 25 -30 35 ~~~~~~~~~~-----------a Sampler Type (51): :;;:-m 2ft 00 Split Spoon Sample~ (SPT) ill 3" OD Spl~ Spoon Sampler (D & M) ~ Grab Sample o No Recovery M -Moisture Logged by: BWG IJ Ring. Sample V-Water Level 0 Approved by: [2} Shelby Tube Sample Y-Water level al lime of drilling (ATD) ------------------------~ I Exploration LQ!L_ _ ______ --;-_________ _ Exploration Number .-r-. Sheel Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~[jj~ Projecl Number KE98433A EB-12 I 1011 Project Name ReJ}19ll New lif~ ChUICh Ground Surface Elevation (ft) _..1.OJr~_. __ location Kin--!lCounty WA _________________ .__ Datum ...llnknOWD_ . __ _ Driller/Equipmenl EDI MOBil 861/HSA _________________ Dale SlartlFinish ..Bl3lQ5 813lO5.. __ _ Hammer Weight/Drop =1=4:"0#=/'::3~"O= .. ==_======== .~ _______ . _________ -=_ Hole Diameter (in) ~_ ~_=~ __ ---_-_ 'S w " ~ a. <i S E m T m 0 Ul S-t f-5 S-2 to S-3 15 S-. -20 S-5 25 S-6 f-30 35 ·~o ~D g-E ~ ~ "'''' DESCRIPTION Sod Fill Moist, brown, fine sandy SilT (Ml); styrofoam in cuttings. ---------- - ---AUuvium-- ---- - - - - Gravelly (inferred from drilfing action). No graver (inferred 'rom drilling action). Very moist, brown, silty fine SAND (SM). Becomes mottled gray below 13'. -Vashon to Pre-Vashon Undifferentiated Sediments Wet, rusty brown. GRAVEl. little sand, trace sin. (GW). Glades-Io a gray. fme GRAVEL (GP) with interbeds of fine 10 medium SAND (SPl_ Gravel becomes weU graded (GW). (1 112' of heave in auger after drilling to 17 1/2'; driller flushed out prior to sampling) lpoor recoyeJy) Bonom of expJoration boring a' 29 reet -- ~ 2 , , 1 2 3 1 • 15 2 5 14 3 14 16 5 • ,. Blows/Fool 10 20 30 40 ! '" "'51 I "'23 " "'" 5 • !I I ~~_=-L~~~~-------------------------------------------L~LL-L--L-~---L--L-~--L-1 Sampler Type (ST): ill 2" OD Splil Spoon Sampler (SPT) ill 3" OD Spld Spoon Sampler (D & M) fQj Grab Sample D No Recovery M -Moisture IJ Ring Sample 5/.. Water level () o Shelby Tube Sample Y Waler level allime of drilling (ATD) Logged by: T JP Approved by: a ~ASSOCii Earmrth Sci[!jences.~lnc. 11___ r~··_~)(.ploratiorLLOg'I __ ~· ______ · ____ _ .~ Projec.t Nl!rnber Exploration Numbef Sheet KE98433A EB-13 1 of 1 Project Name Re1}ton _~ .. e.wJjJ~Ch4.cc:::h. ______ ::'_~-_-_-~~_---__ -_~~~~-_::::::-. -:='~:'_-~:::'-G-rO-U-n-d-S-U-rl.La-c-eE-le-v-a-lio-n-l-ft:") ':::':'~::'l-;-L-;-l:::' ::::::-.-__ -1 location King CounJy, WA~ __ ._.___ _ __ _ __ .. ______ ~___ Datum ~OOfllWllJn"--_____ _ Driller/Equipmenl ...E.DI MOBIL 861IHSA__ u__ __ __ . __ ~ ___ Dale Slart/Finish .ll131lJ58/3/05 ~H~a:m~m~e~r ~w:e:ig:h~~U~D:ro~p~:,1=4=O=#=/,:.=3=O="_~.: ==-. __________ ---"___ _ __ _ _______ .__ Hole Diameter (in) ~ ~~" S-1 5 S-2 10 S-3 15 S-4 20 S·5 25 S-6 -30 35 DESCRIPTION Moist, dark gray, silty fine SAND, trace gravel (SM). Gravel layer present at 6'. f---------.~ .... ~-.--.. "Alluvium Very moist, brown, silty SAND (SM) Becomes rust brown. Becomes gray with abundant organics jpeat .. !ike). ---. --~~ ---- - ---- - ---Vashon-to Pre=-Vashon UndiHertmtiated ---- - - - Grayellyat 15'. Wet, gray, GRAVEL (GW) inlerbedded with wei, brownish gray, fine to medium SAND, trace silt (SP). Wood present in tip of sampler. Piece of wood present in middle of s2mple 1----------- Bottom of exploration boriflg at 29 feet I=~ ~~ 01>(i ..... ~ 5:E2.2 Blows/Foot 3~al 10 20 30 40 2 2 ., , 1 2 ., , 5 17 20 9 ,. ,6 ,. ~ • 7 78J 1" ~'I-~~~-=~~~ ________________________________________________ ~~-L-L __ -L __ ~ __ i-__ L-__ ~-L~ Sampler Type (ST): OJ 2~ OD Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) rn 3 H 00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) ~ Grab Sample o No Recovery M -Moisture [] Ring Sample .7.. Water level 0 [J Shelby Tube Sample.!. Water level at time of drilling (ATD) logged by: T JP Approved by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~Im~o Project Number KE98433A __ Exploration Log . T Exploration Number I EB-14 Sheet 1 of 1 Project Name Renton New I ire C_hlJ!QL_ .. _ .. _. ____ . ______ _ Ground Surface Elevation (n) --,1-,1-,,0,-' __ _ Location Kiog County, WA ___ . ________ . _________ _ Datum ~Unk.nnw.n........ ____ _ DrillerlEquipment _EQI MOBIL B(ll/HSA . ___ .. __ Dale Start/Finish 814105 814105 Hammer WeighUDrop 140# I 30" Hole Diameter (in) ....8_ .. __ .. In.'~~~========~~.~_~==._ t-... ----,-~~-----------~l §: ~ !!! ~ C. Ii S E G T m 0 VJ S-1 5 5-2 10 S-3 15 20 S-5 25 5-6 30 S-7 35 u-.-0 ~D <>E !",.. to'" DESCRIPTION ______ .. z~· A""sphalt Concrete P3ve._men""'.L-_____ . . .J Alluvium Very moist, dark gray, stlty fine to medium SAND (SM). 1----_. Gravel present at 10'~ ----- -VashontoPre=-Vashon Undifferentiated ---, - Gravelly below 12'. Wet, gray, fine to medium GRAVEL, liHle sand (GP). Very moist, dark gray. SilT, trace fine sand (Ml). Wet, brownish gray, fine to medium SAND, trace sift (SP) interbedded with wet gray, fine to medium GRAVEL (GP). (11/2' of heave present at 27 1/2'; driller flushed out prior to sampling) (1 112' of heave present at 32 1J2'; drmer flushed out prior to sampling) (poor recQVery) Bottom of exploration boling at 34 feel c 0 ==~ O>-i:E 0 u ~" ~le -' 00 . ~ ~.Q ~'! 10 2 .. 3 4 2 2 ", • 7 ~ 10 13 • 20 17 , 19 33 , 10 " 6 ,. " 00 1ii Blows/Foot w t- " ~ ·20 30 40 5 .. 7 52 ~'~ __ ~~~T2~~~ __________________________________________________ -L __ ~L-L-__ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~'~-L~ « Sampler Type (ST): Ii m "' 2" OD Spl~ Spoon Sampler (SPT) gs ,rn 3" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (D & M) o No Recovery M -Moisture (J Ring Sample SZ Waler lever () Logged by: T JP Approved by: ffi ~ Grab Sample o Shelby Tube sample:! Water level at time of drilling (ATD) , ~ ;cj " , iI '" Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. m~~~Ol --'Project Number KE98433A Project Name Location DcilierfEquipment Hammer WeighUDrop Renton New Life Chun;IL __ _ King County WA _ EDI MQElll861/HSA _ 140# I 30" ________ _ Sheet 1 of 1 Ground Smface Elevation (ft) ___ 11Q ___ _ Datum .Unknow~ . ___ ... Dale SlarVFinish. ---B1Aj05,8L4jns..-_~ ___ _ Hole Diameter (in) --fi'_' ____________ _ I----~-,---~--------------------------,-~_r-~--------------- € ~ " L <i 1i S E " T ~ 0 '" S-1 5 S-2 10 5-3 15 S-4 20 S-5 25 S-6 30 35 0--0 £D ~t C')'" DESCRIPTION ~------3" Asphalt Concrete-'~.~'!errwnj __________ ._ ------A:liuviUln Very mOist, dark gray, silty SAND with gr8vel (SM). Very moist, dark gray, SILT. trace fine sand (Ml}. Very moist, dark gray, fine SAND with gr<lvl.:l, few sill (SP). - - - - ---Vash-ori-toPre~Vashon Undifferentiated - Becomes gravelly below 10'. Wet. gray, GRAVEL, few sand (GW). (blow count likely overstated due to gravel content) lillie sand; gravel becomes fine to medium (GP). (difficult drilling) Wet, gray, fine (0 medium SAND, trace sill (SP) interbedded with fine to mediUfTl gravel (GP). Bottom of exploration oofffig a! 29 feel C 0; 0 =~ 0>-s:~ 0 0 I I I I I I , > ' "If' ~ ~ -~ "0 ~~ • 7 • , , 6 ~H 2' " 7 " " 7 '9 " 11 48 01 10 , 9 ~ .. Blows/Foot " l- ;; £ 20 30 40 i5 I .. , I I I I i I , I .3 '0 53 7B1 1" " ~i~-.s~a~m~p~~~r'T~Yp~e~(<<S~T'-):---------------------------________ -'--LLL---'----'--.-L--'-_L-.!--j g rn 2" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) 0 No Recovery M -Moisture ITJ 3" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) IJ Ring Sample '¥ Waler level 0 Logged by: T JP Approved by: ~ Grab Sample 0 Shelby Tube Sample.! Water level allime of drilling (ATD) October 17, 2005 Project No. KE98433A New Life Church Associaced Earth Sciences, Inc. clo Church Development Consultants P.O. Box 1526 Duvall, Washington 98019 Attention: Subject: Ms. Kathi Bresler Supplemental Subsurface Exploration Summary Renton New Life Church Property Maple Valley Highway King County, Washington Dear Ms. Bresler: As requested, this letter summarizes the results of our recently completed additional subsurface explorations at the site. ' Our work was verbally authorized by you, and was completed in general accordance with the terms and conditions of our previously provided proposal dated June 20, 2005. The purpose of the additional subsurface explorations summarized in this letter was to explore general subsurface conditions in the northwest part of the Renton New Life Church property for future reference, and possibly to guide foundation design and support , , , decisions regarding the current church addition that has been planned north of the existing building. This lette, has been prepared in general accordance with local standards of practice in the field of geotechnical engineering at the time it was written. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. We previously prepared a comprehensive geotechnical engineering report for the currently proposed building addition. Our comprehensive report is dated August 24, 2005. For clarity, the exploration borings included with this letter are numbered consecutively with the explorations contained in that report. This letter should be considered an addendum to our August !4, 2005 report, and should be used in conjunction with that report. JUL i 5,' 911 FlhhAvenue, Suite 100· i<:rk:,l,-Ic; ,/-/,1:., ";S~J33· Phone 425 827-7701 • F3X 425 827·5424 Site and Project Descriptions The area explored during this additional scope of work included the grass field west of the stream and south of Maple Valley Highway. The grass field was accessed via a wood bridge' west of the cell phone· tower on the property. At the time of our explorations, the area was covered with tall grass, and included mature trees around the south, east, and north perimeters of the area. Site topography was .relatively flat to gently rolling. At the current time, no structures are planned for the immediate future in this area, and we understand the information contained in this letter will be used for future planning. The area might be used as auxiliary parking space in the near term. Subsurface Conditions We completed five subsurface exploration borings during this phase of the project, designated EB-16 through EB-20. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure I, attached with this letter. Interpretive subsurface exploration logs are also attached. The explorations were completed with a compact, track-mounted drill rig that was able to cross the existing wood bridge to access the area. The bridge was in poor condition, and was not suitable for support of a truck-mounted drill rig. Aside from the compact drill, the drilling and sampling methods used during this phase of the project were the same as described in our previously referenced geotechnical engineering report. Subsurface conditions observed in the additional exploration borings completed for this phase of the project were generally consistent with the. observations made during the completion of exploration borings EB-5 through EB-15 for the currently proposed building addition. Logs of exploration borings EB-5 through EB-15 are included in our previously referenced geotechnical engineering report. In general, the supplementary explorations encountered surficial loose sand interpreted as alluvium underlain by medium dense to very dense sand with gravel interpreted as V.ashon to pre-Vashon undifferentiated deposits. These interpretations are discussed in greater detail in the previously referenced geotechnical engineering report. Ground water levels observed in the additional borings were typically on the order of 8 to 14 feet below the ground surface, which is also typical of our previous explorations to the east. Conclusions and Recommendations The grass field at the northwest corner of the Renton New Life Church property is underlain by subsurface conditions that are consistent with the conditions observed in the area further east where a building addition is currently proposed. Althollgh no structures are planned for this area at the current time, any future structures in this area that have similar structural loads to the existing church or the planned addition will require similar foundation support measures. 2 The currently proposed building addition may be supported on a system of GeopiersTM, which penetrate through the existing loose alluvial soils and have total lengths on the order of 10 to 30 feet below existing grades. Shallow subsurface conditions that will affect paving design are also consistent with our observations in the area of the currently proposed building addition,· and warrant remedial preparation to provide adequate pavement support for a normal design life on the order of 20 years. Paving sub grade recommendations were provided in our previously referenced report. Closure We are pleased to have this opportunity to be of continued service. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington ~ BLp.E.G. Project Geologist Attachments: Figure 1 -Site and Exploration Plan Exploration Logs BWG/ls KE9843JAJ Projects\ 1998433\KE\WP 3 I EXl'tRES 11/20/ e<e Kurt D. Merriman, P.E. Principal Engineer -- ~ __ --...:J!'>, ~ n i APPROXIMAte LOCATION _______ OF eXPLoRJljTlON BORING TYP Reference: ESM Consulting Engineers Associated Earth Sciences, Inc_ ~E~~~ / / / I / I / I I I I I L _________________ _ SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN RENTON NEW LIFE CHURCH RENTON, WASHINGTON itS ~~ n ~ ~ ~§ lij II § ~ ~ I; I N A I Ii ii fEET FIGURE 1 DATE 10105 PROJECT NO. KE98433A gravel and wilh sand. little to .. gravel > .. gravel with sand. y; <> to no fines <> '" ,; z Silty gravel and silty c GM gravel with sand 0 "C " C ~ " Ctayey gravet and a: ... Clayey gravel with sand <> '" c sand and .. 5 sand with gravel. little .. (; 10 no fines ::E " Poorly·graded sand '5 en and sand wilh gravel. "0 little to no fines " c 1! CJ sand and ;, " :. 0 u Terms Describing Relative Density and Consistency Coarse· Grained Soils Density SPT(2)blowslfoot Very loose 0 to 4 loose 410 10 Medium Dense 10 to 30 Dense 30 to 50 Very Dense >50 Test Symbols G = Grain Size Consistency SPT(2'blows/foot M = Moisture Cordent A = Alterberg linilS C = Chemicat Fine- Grained Soils Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Sliff Very Sliff Hard 0102 2104 4108 B 1015 151030 >30 DO = Dry Density K = Permeability Descriptive Term Boulders Component Definitions Size Range and Sieve Number Larger Ihan 12" Cobbles: Gravel Coarse Gravel Fine Graver Sand Coarse Sand Medium Sand Fine Sand Silt and Clay 3'1012" 3'10 NO.4 (4.75 mm) 3'10 3/4' 3/4'10 NO.4 (4.75 mm) No.4 (4.75 mm) 10 No. 200 (0.075 mm) No.4 (4.75 mm) 10 No. 10 (2.00 mm) No. 10 (2.00 mm) 10 No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) 10 No. 200 (0.075 mm) SmaQer Ihan No. 200 (0.075 mm) Estimated Percentage Component ~~-L~~~~ __________ ~ Percentage by Weight Trace <:5 Moisture Content Dry -Absence of moisture. dusty. dry 10 the louch Slightly Moist -Perceptible moisture sandy silt. gravelly sill. I SIIII ", .. n sand or gravel to medium Ipl'lstic;ity; silly. sandy. or gravelly clay. lean clay Organic clay or silt of low plasticity Few 5t010 Lit1le 15 to 2S With -Non-primary coarse constituents: ~ 15% -Fines content between 5% and 15% Moist -Damp but no visible waler Very Moist -Water visibte but not free draining Wei -Visible free water. usually rrom below water lable Symbols Sampler Type 2.0' OEl Split-Spoon _ Sampler BIows/6" '" portion 01 6" I " • • Sampler TyPe Oesafption 3.0' 00 Spot-Spoon Sampler Cement grout sUifacl!: seal BentOlllle (~) seal ~~~~~--~~~~----~(SPD Clay of high plasticity. 3.25" 00 Split-Spoon Ring Sampler -: Filter pack with :' btank casing ::. section CH sandy or gravelly clay. fat cI ay with sand or gravel Bu!ksample 3.0' OD Thin-Wall Tube Sampler ~nctud'l'lg Shelby lube) 1--+---------------j Grab Sample o Portion not recovered Organic clay or silt of OHlml,allJmto high (I' Percenlage by dlYweig/lt ~-l~~~~-------l m (SPD Slandard Penelralion resl (ASTM 0-1586) PT Peat, muck and other organic soils P) [n General Accordance with Standard Practice ror Oescriptial and Identification of SoIls (ASTM 0-2488) : -: Screened casng '.' Of Hydrolip -: with niter pack ". End cap (4) Depth or ground water :t: ATD = AI lime or dr~frng i Slalie water level (date) t5J Combined USCS symbols used for lines between 5% and 15% Classifications of soils in Ihis report are based on v1$Ual field and/or laboratory observatiorls. which i1dJde density/consistency. moisture condition. grain size, and plaslic;ity estimales and shOlJld nol be conslrued (0 imply field Of laboralory testing unless presented herein, Vtsual-manual and/or laboraloty classirlCation 9 methods of ASTM D'44a7 and 0'4488 were used a:s 3n identification 9uide: ror the Unified Soil ClassirtcilliOl1 Sy:slem. ~ r============================================================================================================= 1i-Associated Earth Sciences. Inc. FIGURE f~~~~~ Exploration Log Key A-1 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Exoloration Log ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Project Number 1 Exploration Number I Sheet KE98433A EB-16 1 of 1 Project Name Renton New Life Church Ground Surface Etevation (fi) Location King Counlll WA Datum Nil'. Driller/Equipment Davies Drilling Date Start/Finish 9122105,9122105 Hammer WeighUDrop 14Q# /30" Hole Diameter (in) g " ~= ~ ~ u-0 " .-0 :;;;;i "Ie Blows/Foot " -"'.c ,5 Q. Q.E -''' f-<D-~ :< Q. S E I!", ?:e !!!.9 :;; <D T '" C)Ul ~"' ,5 0 U) 0 DESCRIPTION '-' 10 20 30 40 0 ~ S-1 ____________ yr~s~ <:Lnll "(Q~QlI _______________ 2 .0.6 Alluvium 3 Loose, moist, brown, fine SAND, little silt (SP to 8M)_ 3 I-5 [ Becomes very moist to wet. S-2 6 A 4 3 I-10 [ Loose, very moist to wet, reddish brown, medium SAND, little fine gravel, 3 S-3 few to trace silt (SP). 4 10 f-------Vashon to Pr9=Vashon Dndifferentiated s:!t~~~~ fJ...rcJ-'1.ejJy J)d.-1 6 I-15 Medium dense, wet, brown, fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse 7 S-4 gravel, few silt (SW). 15 "'2 10 -20 Medium dense, wet, gray, fine to coarse SAND with fine gravel, few silt 4 S-5 (SW). 10 '" 8 8 t-25 As above. S~ 16 10 '" B B -30 As above. B S-7 Auaer refu •• 1 on boulder. 10 ~23 13 Bottom of exploration boring at 31.5 feet -35 • E ~ ~ • Sampler Type (ST): CD 2" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) o No Recovery M -Moisture Logged by: BWG CD 3" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) IJ Ring Sample 5l. W.ter Level () Approved by: ~ Grab Sample I2J Shelby Tube Sample .!. Water Level at time of drilling (ATD) ~ N t '" Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Exploration LOQ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Project Number I Exploration Number I Sheet KE98433A EB-17 1 of 1 Project Name BenlQn t'jew Life Church Ground Surface Elevation (tt) Location KiOg CQynty. WA . __ . Datum NIA Driller/Equipment Davies Q[iliio9 Date StartlFinish 9122105 9122105 Hammer Weight/Drop 140# /30" Hole Diameter (in) g c l = !! '" u-0 '" .-0 .,'€ ~ """ =ii ...J '" Blows/Foot ~ % C!. C!.E .,--~ S E ~,.. ;;:~ ., 0 <; ., T " C)cn ~ili 5 Cl (j) 0 DESCRIPTION (J 10 20 30 40 ~ S-1 r-_____ - - - - - -..Qrj!s_~ iLn!t TQMQiI _______ - - - -___ 2 ... Alluvium 3 Loose, moist. brown, fine SAND, little silt (SP). 3 5 IT Becomes very moist to wet and grades to with silt (SM). S-2 2 .. 3 4 10 IT Grades to gray (SM). S-3 3 4 10 • .1' 15 IT Grades to silty (SM). S-4 7 4 9 ~ - - - -Vashonto Pr&:"Vashon UndifferentjatedS~~~~~~ rLraJ!t31lY.IJ~ S i-20 I Medium dense, wet. gray, fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse gravel, S-5 1S .. 6 few sift (SW). 1S 13 25 J l' heave spun out. S-6 1S "3 Becomes dense. 16 20 -30 I S-7 19 --------------------------------32 53 Hard, wet, gray, SILT with multi-directional fractures. , 21 -35 I S-8 As above. 11 23 "4 23 Bottom of exploration boring at 36.5 feet Sampler Type (ST): ill 2" OD Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) 0 No Recovery M -Moisture Loggod by: BWG []] 3" OD Split Spoon Sampler (D & M) Il Ring Sample 'l Water Level 0 Approved by: IQl Grab Sample (] Shelby Tube Sample.!. Water Level at time of drilling (ATO) Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Exploration Log ~ m rm ~ ~ Project Number I Exploration Number I Sheet KE98433A EB-18 1 of 1 Project Name Beomn New Life Church Ground Surface Elevation (ft) location ISing Coun!)l W8 Datum tIIlA Driller/Equipment Qavie~ Drilling Date Start/Finish 9122105,9122105 Hammer WeighUDrop 140#/3Q" Hole Diameter (in) g c 0; !l '" Q-0 > ~ '" .-0 ~~ " .c.c =~ Blows/Foot " £ 0. e-[ ,,--~ l- e. S E s:@" " 0 :;; " T '" <!J'" ~a; .c 0 '" 0 i5 DESCRIPTION u 10 20 30 40 S-l _ ~ ~ _________ Yr~s.§. ewe! T.9ru>ru.I ___________ ~ 4 "'. Alluvium 3 Loose, moist, brown, fine SAND, litt!e silt (SP to 8M). 3 r 5 Becomes very moist to wet. S-2 2 "'5 2 3 lC Moderate graveJ/y DA 10 Medium dense, wet, reddish brown. fine gravelly fine to coarse SAND, few S-3 B "', coarse gravel or cobbles, few silt (SW). B 7 , I--15 - - - - --Vashon to Pre-Vas-hon-Undfffenmtiated-Sedfments - - - --- S-4 Dense, wet. gray, fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse gravel, few silt 15 • 4' (SW). 30 ,. :-20 Medium dense, wet. gray. fine to coarse SAND with fine gravel, few silt. 13 S-5 12 "'23 11 -25 6" heave pounded through. gradation as above. S-6 17 21 40 1. -30 S-7 Becomes very dense. 01 50/ .. g -35 Very dense, wet, mottled gray, fine to coarse SAND, little fine gravel, few 2. N S-8 silt (SW). 3. 501 ~ ~ 01 ' ~ E -Bottom of eXpioration boring at 36.5 feet ~ Sampler Type (ST): rn 2" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (Spn 0 No Recovery M -Moisture Logged by: BWG rn 3" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) Il Ring Sample 'l-Water Level () Approved by: ~ Grab Sample IZ1 Shelby Tube Sample.'f Water Level at time of drilling (ATO) Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Exploration Log ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Project Number I Exploration Number I Sheet KE98433A EB-19 1 of 1 Project Name Renton New Life Church Ground Surface Elevation (ft) Location ~i!)g CQUnt}' WE::, Datum !'oJ/II Driller/Equipment Dgvi~s Drilling -Date Start/Finish 9122105,9122105 Hammer WeighUDrop HO#/JQ" Hole Diameter (in) g c ~ = * '" u-0 .!I .-0 ~~ ",<0 Blows/Foot " "'.0 ...JO; '" "-"-E ~ " t- 15. 5 E ~>o ~E " 0 a; " T '" (!)rn ~iIl 5 0 rn 0 DESCRIPTION (J to 20 30 40 U S-1 r-------------§r~5~ C!IHt 19~QjI _____________ 4 '" Alluvium 4 Loose, moist, brown, fine SAND, little silt (SM). 4 -5 [ Loose, moist, moUled gray, fine to coarse SAND, little fine gravel. few silt S-2 3 "', (SW). 3 2 ~ ______________________ M~~~~~~~~ Vashon to PrQ-Vashon Undifferentiated Sediments '" 10 IT Medium dense, wet. brown, fine gravelly fine to coarse SAND, little silt S-3 10 , 2. (SW). 14 15 15 As above. 12 S-4 1S "'3 20 20 Dense, wet, brown, fine gravelly fine to coarse SAND, few silt (SW). S-5 11 "'31 16 15 -25 Very dense, gray, fine to coarse gravelly fine to coarse SAND, few silt. 40 $-6 29 51 22 S-7 1 22 40 1. 30 As above. 34 S-8 01 ' 50{ " Bottom of exploration boring at 31 feet 35 • E i , Sampler Type (Sn: lTI 2" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) 0 No Recovery M -Moisture Logged by: BWG lTI 3" OD Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) Il Ring Sample ¥ Water Level () Approved by: ~ Grab Sample 0 Shelby Tube Sample ~ Water Level at time of drilling (ATO) • E • ~ • , ~ " N I 0: o m ;;; w ~ Associated Earth Sciences. Inc. Exploration Lo~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ Project Number I Exploration Number I Sheet KE98433A EB-20 1 of 1 Project Name Renton New Life Church Ground Surface Elevation (ft) Location KiOg eQUal>' WA Datum Wtl, Driller/Equipment Davies Drilling Date Start/Finish 9122105 9122105 Hammer WeighUDrop 140# /3Q" Hole Diameter (in) <= ~ ~ ~ g '" u-0 ;;; ~ ._ 0 =--; "Ie Blows/Foot " .c .c ...J ~ I-'J. CL CLE ,,-~ ;0 S E !'!~ ~E ~.9 :;; ~ T .. (!len 5 " en 0 :§:oo DESCRIPTION (J 10 20 30 40 ~ S-l Grass and Topsoil 4 .1.13 --- - - - -- - - - - --- -•. -.--- --- - - -- - - -- -4 Alluvium 9 Medium dense, moist, brown, fine SAND, little silt (SP to SM). -5 [ S-2 Loose, moist. reddish brown, fine SAND, little silt (SP). , .1.5 2 3 - - - --Vashon to pre.Vashon-Undffferentlated-Sedfments - - - ---l' -10 [ Dense, wei, brown, fine to coarse SAND with fine to coarse gravel, few silt 7 S-3 (SW). 17 .I., 19 -15 IT S4 Medium dense, wet, gray, fine to coarse SAND with fine to coarse gravel, 25 few silt (SW). 14 "2 12 20 [ S-5 Dense. wet, gray, fine to coarse GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand, few silt 22 .I. 8 (GW). 24 14 25 J S-6 Becomes very dense. ,. 40 501 • 01 -30 I S-7 As above. 28 32 71 '9 Bottom of exploration boring at 31.5 feet 35 Sampler Type (ST): ITl 2" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (Spn 0 No Recovery M -Moisture Logged by: BWG ITl 3" 00 Split Spoon Sampler (0 & M) IJ Ring Sample !l. Water Level 0 Approved by: ~ Grab Sample [] Shelby Tube Sample.!. Waler Level at time of drilling (ATO)