HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_TIA-3_191016.pdfWilliam Popp Associates Transportation Engineers/Planners
________________________________________________________________________
(425) 401-1030
(425) 401-2124
e-mail: info@wmpoppassoc.com
14-400 Building Suite 206 14400 Bel-Red Road Bellevue, WA 98007
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
for
Cedar River Apartments
Prepared for:
SRM Renton, LLC
720 6th Street South Ste. 200
Kirkland, WA 98033
Prepared by:
William Popp Associates
14-400 Building, Suite 206
14400 Bel-Red Rd
Bellevue, WA 98007
October 14, 2019
Traffic Impact Analysis Cedar River Apartments
Page i
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................2
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS...................................................................................................................5
1. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES.............................................................................................5
2. ACCIDENT DATA, LAST 3 (AVAILABLE) CALENDAR YEARS.................................................................8
Table 1 Three-plus Year Accident History a .............................................................................................9
Table 2A Accident Type a .........................................................................................................................9
Table 2B Accident Severity History a .....................................................................................................10
3. TRAFFIC VOLUMES ..........................................................................................................................10
Table 3 Existing Peak Hour Volume Summary a ....................................................................................11
4. LEVEL-OF-SERVICE ..........................................................................................................................14
Table 4 Intersection Level-of-Service Criteria........................................................................................14
Table 5 Existing Intersection Level-of-Service (Year 2017) ..................................................................15
5. PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS................................................................................16
B. FUTURE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................................18
1. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES ...................................................................................................18
2. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION .............................................................................................................19
Table 6 Project Trip Generation Estimates a ...........................................................................................21
3. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT...............................................................................22
4. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES .............................................................25
5. LEVEL-OF-SERVICE (FUTURE YEAR PHASED PROJECT CONDITIONS) – SYNCHRO LOS RESULTS ....34
Table 7 Intersection Level-of-Service -- Intersection Results (per Synchro).........................................35
6. SIMTRAFFIC LOS RESULTS – FUTURE WITH AND WITHOUT FULL PROJECT – YEAR 2023................36
Table 8 AM & PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Level-of-Service & Queue -- (per SimTraffic) Project
Horizon Year Full Development – Year 2023........................................................................................38
7. SIMTRAFFIC LOS AND QUEUE RESULTS – FUTURE WITH AND WITHOUT FULL PROJECT – YEAR 202940
Table 9 AM & PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Level-of-Service & Queue -- (per SimTraffic) SR 169
Design Year 2029 with Full Project Development.................................................................................41
8. PARKING ..........................................................................................................................................43
C. CONCLUSIONS..................................................................................................................................43
1. PROJECT DETAILS ............................................................................................................................43
2. ACCIDENTS ......................................................................................................................................44
3. PROJECT VEHICULAR IMPACT ..........................................................................................................44
4. LEVEL OF SERVICE ...........................................................................................................................44
5. SITE ACCESS POINTS ........................................................................................................................45
6. PARKING ..........................................................................................................................................46
D. MITIGATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................46
1. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS .............................................................................................................46
2. PRIMARY SITE ACCESS ....................................................................................................................46
3. SECONDARY SITE ACCESS................................................................................................................47
4. OFF-SITE PROGRAMMED MITIGATION IMPROVEMENTS....................................................................47
5. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE .......................................................................................................................49
APPENDECES A, B, C, and D
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
INTRODUCTION
The following report was prepared to address the traffic related impacts of the proposed Cedar
River Apartments project located in the City of Renton. This study evaluates the project’s
AM and PM peak hour (street peak) traffic impacts at the following intersections per the pre-
application meeting direction:
1. SR 169/Sunset Way/Bronson Way/I-405 Southbound On-Ramp
2. SR 169/I-405 Northbound On-Ramp
3. SR 169/Shari’s Driveway
4. SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr
The study follows the typical City of Renton traffic impact analysis guidelines for project
impacts. These are evaluated for three separate phases, with Phase 3 being the year of
estimated full occupancy.
WSDOT has requested a 2029 design year analysis based on their Design Manual Chapter
1103.02. This six-year horizon year is based on standards for WSDOT-sponsored projects,
which is not applicable to the proposed Cedar River Apartment project. Nevertheless, this
study includes the requested 2029 horizon both with and without the subject project.
Project Identification
The site is located at 1915 Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) in the City of Renton. The parcel
number is 1723059026, and the total area of the site is approximately 12.5 acres. The site is
currently vacant in terms of building structures, however, it is used as a storage area for heavy
construction machinery nd in the recent past operated as an aggregate yard. Presently, there
are two access points to the site including one to Cedar River Park Drive and one to SR 169.
A project vicinity map is shown in Figure 1.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Figure 1: Vicinity Map (north is up)
The project site fronts to SR 169 to the east, the Cedar River to the south, and Cedar River
Park to the west. A parcel map locating the site is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Site Parcel Map (north is up)
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
The proposed Cedar River Apartments site plan consists of three different buildings, to be
constructed in three separate phases. Each building and phase is discussed below:
Phase 1 – Building A will be constructed as Phase 1 and is expected to be fully occupied by
2021. This building will consist of 238 apartment units, on 5 levels; along with 306 parking
stalls in the structure. In addition to the structure parking, there will be some surface parking
on the north side of the building. Building A will be located on the west end of the site and its
proposed access will be via both Cedar River Park Drive and SR 169. The SR 169 access will
replace the existing driveway opening.
Phase 2 –Building B will be constructed as Phase 2. This building will be located at the east
side of the site and will consist of 243 apartment units, on 5 levels, plus 4,852 gsf of
commercial retail on the ground floor for public use. Phase 2 is expected to be fully occupied
by 2022. The retail space use is currently undetermined. There will be 339 parking stalls in
the structure.
Phase 3 – This phase proposes a Medical Office type use on the commercial pad located in the
north corner of the parcel, identified in this report as Building C. Parking is currently
undetermined. Access is presumed to be via the internal roadway on the north of Building B
and the driveway is anticipated to be opposite the garage entry to Building B. No additional
access points to public roadways are proposed with Phase 3.
The site plan is presented in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Site Plan (north is up)
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
1. Existing Transportation Facilities
Key roadways serving the site are discussed below.
SR 169 is a two-way east/west Principal Arterial that extends a distance of 25 miles from I-
405 southeastward through the cities of Maple Valley and Black Diamond to its termination in
Enumclaw where it intersects with state highways 164 and 410. Per WSDOT’s classification
system, SR 169 is a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS). It is also functionally
classified as an Urban-Principal Arterial (U1).
The roadway in the site vicinity is a 7-lane roadway with three-lanes each direction and left
turn pockets or center two-way left turn lane, along with curb, gutter, and sidewalks on both
sides. On-street parking is prohibited. Traffic control includes signals at all major
intersection. The posted speed limit is 35 mph in the vicinity of the site.
Cedar River Park Dr is a two-way local access public/private street that provides project
access and connection to recreational elements including the Cedar River Park, Carco Theatre,
and the Henry Moses Aquatics Center. The roadway is identified as a public road for a
distance of approximately 300 feet southwest from the SR 169 intersection, at which point it
is a private roadway for access and circulation through the park. The public portion of the
road is approximately 40 feet wide with curb, gutter, and sidewalks on both sides. On-street
parking is not permitted. The public portion of the roadway is channelized with a three-lane
section, two lanes northbound towards the signal at SR 169 (left turn and right turn pockets),
one lane southbound (exiting away from SR 169). The speed limit is presumed to be 25 mph.
On the west side of I-405, nearby roadways include Bronson Way, Houser Way, Sunset Way,
the one-way couplet of S 3rd St and S 2nd St, the one-way couplet of N3rd St and N 4th St, and
N 3rd St east of I-405 (becoming N 4th St further east at top of the hill), are all identified as
Principal Arterials.
SR 169 runs in a diagonal northwest to southeast direction in the project vicinity, however, for
the analyses, it is described as in the east-west direction with cross streets in the north and
south directions.
A map identifying the City’s arterial classification is shown in Figure 4.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Figure 4: City of Renton Arterial Classification Map (north is up)
Intersection Geometrics and Signal Operations
SR 169/Sunset Way/Bronson Way/I-405 Southbound On-Ramp is a signalized intersection
with split phasing for all directions plus some overlaps. The intersection channelization is as
follows:
• Southbound approach – a four lane approach including a one left turn lane, a shared
left/thru lane where the thru is restricted to HOV only, a shared thru/right turn lane,
and a right turn lane. The right turn lanes have a large radius turn along with large
raised island with exclusive signal control to Bronson Way. There is no pedestrian
crosswalk across the main approach or the right turn lanes.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
• Eastbound approach – a four-lane approach including dual left turn lanes, a thru lane
and a shared thru/right lane with a large right turn island. There is no pedestrian
crosswalk across this approach.
• Westbound approach – a four-lane approach that includes a left turn pocket, two thru
lanes and a right turn lane. There is no pedestrian crosswalk across this approach.
• The signal operates with three phases. The southbound phase runs with a westbound
right turn overlap. The westbound phase runs exclusive with no overlaps. The
eastbound phase runs with the southbound right turn lane overlap.
• The south leg is the I-405 southbound on-ramp, a two-lane roadway leaving the
intersection. This ramp has one lane with ramp meter control as well as an HOV
bypass lane. The ramp meter is approximately 510 feet south from the intersection
crosswalk.
SR 169/I-405 Northbound On-Ramp is a signalized intersection with special operations. This
intersection is approximately 400 feet east from the SR 169/I-405 Southbound On-Ramp
intersection. The intersection channelization is as follows:
• Northbound approach – a single lane off-ramp from northbound I-405. The lane is
right turn only. There is a pedestrian crosswalk across this approach.
• Eastbound approach – a three-lane approach including one left turn pocket and two
thru lanes. The two thru lanes do not have signal control and thus run free.
• Westbound approach – a four-lane approach that includes three thru lanes and one
right turn lane. There is no pedestrian crosswalk across this approach.
• The north leg exit lane to I-405 is a single lane with ramp meter approximately 775
feet north from the crosswalk at the intersection.
SR 169/Shari’s Driveway is a signalized intersection serving the restaurant plus a Quality Inn.
This intersection is approximately 270 feet east from the SR 169/I-405 Northbound On-Ramp
intersection. The intersection channelization is as follows:
• Southbound approach – a single or possibly dual lane for right or left turns, however
there is no channelization on this leg, as it is a commercial driveway. The pedestrian
crossing of this approach is the sidewalk across the driveway.
• Eastbound approach – a four-lane approach that includes one left turn pocket, and
three thru lanes. There is a pedestrian crosswalk across this approach. U-turns are
signed as prohibited however there is a fair amount of u-turn traffic observed.
• Westbound approach – a four lane approach that includes three thru lanes and one
designated right turn lane that extends through this intersection to the northbound on-
ramp. There is no pedestrian crossing of the east leg.
SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr is a signalized intersection serving the Cedar River Park and
amenities. This intersection is approximately 700 feet east from the SR 169/Shari’s Driveway
intersection. The intersection channelization is as follows:
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
• Eastbound approach – a three-lane approach that includes two thru lanes and one
shared thru/right turn lane. There is no pedestrian crosswalk across this approach.
• Westbound approach – a four-lane approach that includes three thru lanes and one
designated left turn pocket that transitions from a center two-way left turn lane. The
turn pocket is 200 feet in length plus a 150-foot transition opening to the center two-
way left turn lane markings. There is a pedestrian crossing of the east leg.
• Northbound approach – a two lane approach that includes a left turn lane and a right
turn lane that extend back approximately 175 feet to where the proposed Cedar River
Apartments access will be (and where the current gravel yard driveway is now). There
is a pedestrian crossing of this approach.
Pedestrian/bicycle Facilities
Pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the site include sidewalks on the adjacent roadways.
There are no dedicated bicycle lanes on SR 169 or Cedar River Park Drive. Pedestrian access
from the site to the west side of I-405 into downtown Renton is available via the sidewalk
along the south side of SR 169 and under I-405. Alternatively, pedestrians, cyclists, scooter
riders, etc, can traverse a more pleasant route through Cedar River Park near the river and
underneath I-405 to a pedestrian signal and crosswalk across Houser Way N.
Transit Service
Transit service in the region is provided by the King County Department of Transportation
(Metro Transit). There are two routes that run along SR 169 in the vicinity of the site. These
are Routes 143 and 907.
Route 143 runs between Black Diamond and Downtown Seattle. Buses run during the AM
and PM commute hours only with bus headways approximately 20 minutes apart in the peak
direction. Route 907 is DART (dial a ride transit) and provides service between Black
Diamond and the Renton Transit Center. Service is generally provided between 9am and
4pm. The bus stop for both of these routes are on SR 169 just east of the Cedar River Park
Drive intersection, essentially adjacent to the site.
The walking/biking distance to/from the Renton Transit Center is approximately 4,000 feet,
which is based on the route along S 3rd St to Houser Way N and under I-405 and through
Cedar River Park. The Renton Transit Center offers frequent connections for buses serving
Seattle downtown and other major transit destinations in King County. And while 4000 feet
exceeds the transit planning maximum of 1300 foot for walk access, it is well within the range
for cyclists and to a lesser extent, the electric scooter sidewalk mode.
2. Accident Data, last 3 (available) calendar years.
A summary of the three-plus year accident data at the analysis intersections was obtained from
WSDOT Headquarters Olympia. Data for the subject intersection was for the period of
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
January 1, 2014 through May 31, 2017 for the subject intersections. A summary of available
accident data is presented in Table 1.
Table 1
Three-plus Year Accident History a
Number of Accidents by Year Accident
Intersection 2014 2015 2016 2017a Total Rate b
SR 169/Sunset Way/I-405 SB On-Ramp 2 4 4 0 10 0.16
SR 169/I-405 NB On & Off-Ramp 4 5 10 3 22 0.43
SR 169/Shari’s Driveway 8 8 10 2 28 0.71
SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr 8 2 3 1 14 0.36
a Data period is 1/1/14 through 5/31/17.
b Accidents per million entering vehicles (acc/mev). Entering vehicles based on 2017 PM peak hour data * 10.
As shown in Table 1, the accident rate ranges between 0.16 acc/mev and 0.71 acc/mev for the
four analysis intersections for the 3-plus year period. The typical standard threshold is 1.0
accidents per million entering vehicles (acc/mev) at which time further evaluation would be
needed.
The most common type of accidents are rear-end, sideswipe and enter-at-angle type of
accidents. Table 2A identifies the number of occurrences by accident type at each of the four
intersections, as well as the accident severity
.
Table 2A
Accident Type a
Accident Type
Rear Side Left Fixed Intersection
Intersection End Swipe Angle Turn Object Other Related
SR 169/Sunset Way/I-405 SB On-Ramp
# of Accident Type 2 8 0 0 0 0 6
Percent of Total Accidents 20% 80% 0% 0% 0% 0% 60%
SR 169/I-405 NB On & Off-Ramp
# of Accident Type 13 2 1 3 0 3 17
Percent of Total Accidents 59% 9% 5% 14% 0% 14% 77%
SR 169/Shari’s Driveway
# of Accident Type 10 4 5 7 1 1 21
Percent of Total Accidents 36% 14% 18% 25% 4% 4% 75%
SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr
# of Accident Type 9 4 1 0 0 0 5
Percent of Total Accidents 64% 29% 7% 0% 0% 0% 36%
a For the period between 1/1/14 and 5/31/17.
As shown in Table 2A, the rear-end type accident is the most prevalent type of accident at
three of the four intersections. The most prevalent accident type at the SR 169/Sunset Way/I-
405 SB on-ramp intersection is a sideswipe condition, which is most likely due to the large
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
number of vehicles utilizing the dual turn lanes. It should be noted that Table 2 shows all of
the accidents occurring in the vicinity of each intersection, however, as noted in the WSDOT
accident data records, accidents are reported as intersection or non-intersection related. The
number of intersection related accidents at the two ramp terminal intersections and the Shari’s
driveway indicate about 60% to 77% of accidents as intersection related. The number of
intersection related accidents at the Cedar River Park Drive intersection is about 36%.
Overall, cumulative for all four intersections, the rear-end type of accident accounts for 46%
of the total accidents. In general, rear-end accidents are most common at heavily congested
signalized intersections where motorists are not anticipating stop conditions during green
signal indications.
Table 2B identifies the accident severity.
Table 2B
Accident Severity History a
Total Property Injury Total Total Total
Accidents Only Related Fatality Vehicles Pedestrians Bicycles
SR 169/Sunset Way/I-405 SB On-Ramp 10 8 2 0 21 0 0
SR 169/I-405 NB On & Off-Ramp 22 8 14 0 52 0 0
SR 169/Shari’s Driveway 28 17 11 0 58 0 0
SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr 14 6 7 1 31 0 0
Totals at the analysis intersections 74 39 34 1 162 0 0
a For the period between 1/1/14 and 5/31/17.
In terms of accident severity, of the total 74 accidents noted, there were 162 vehicles involved
and no pedestrians or bicycles reported. Of the 74 accidents, 39 were property damage only,
34 resulted in injury (reported as possible or evident), and 1 was a fatal accident. The fatality
occurred at the SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive intersection 12/16/16 at 2:09 PM. The
collision details included two vehicles traveling eastbound with one vehicle traveling at a high
rate of speed (exceeding reasonable safe speed) passing and overtaking another vehicle
changing lanes.
3. Traffic Volumes
Existing AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were collected at the four subject
intersections in mid June of 2017. The AM counts were conducted between 7:00 and 9:00
AM, and the PM counts were conducted between 4:00 and 6:00 PM. Table 3 below identifies
the peak hour volume for each location.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Table 3
Existing Peak Hour Volume Summary a
Total Entering Volume
Intersection AM PK PM PK
SR 169/Sunset Way/Bronson Way/I-405 Southbound On-Ramp 4,347 7:300-8:30 am 5,126 4:00 to 5:00 pm
SR 169/I-405 Northbound On & Off-Ramp 3,267 7:300-8:30 am 4,058 4:15 to 5:15 pm
SR 169/Shari’s Driveway 2,803 (turns only)b 3,157 (turns only)b
SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr 2,717 7:30 to 8:30 am 3,144 4:30 to 5:30 pm
Pk between SB Ramps between NB Ramps between Shari’s Dvwy
Hr Direction and NB Ramps and Shari's Dvwy and Cedar River Park Dr
AM WB 2,220 2,090 2,020
EB 370 680 660
PM WB 1,360 960 950
EB 1,670 2,270 2,120
a Traffic counts conducted in mid June 2017 – 2-hour count periods were 7:00 to 9:00 am and 4:00 to 6:00 pm
b "turns only" means only the turn movements were recorded for this intersection (EB u-turns, EB left, WB right plus thru volume in
curb lane, and SB left and right) and that the thru volumes were obtained from the upstream intersection.
As shown in Table 3, the intersection with the heaviest amount of traffic is the SR 169/Sunset
Way/Bronson Way/I-405 Southbound On-Ramp intersection. The PM entering volume at this
intersection is about 20% greater than the AM entering volume. In general for all four
intersections, the PM peak hour intersection volume is greater than the AM peak hour volume.
The link volume on SR 169 by direction shown in Table 3 is about 2,100 vehicles on average
during the AM peak hour in the westbound direction. This volume reflects a 79% directional
volume in the peak westbound direction. The total two-way volume on average is 2,680
vehicles for the AM peak hour.
For the PM peak hour, the peak directional volume is on average 2,020 vehicles. This volume
reflects a 65% directional volume eastbound. The total volume on average is 3,110 vehicles
for the PM peak hour.
A summary of the existing 2017 AM and PM peak hour volumes at the analysis intersections
are presented in Figure 5 and 6.
SR
1
6
9
S h a ri's D rive w a yI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampSunset WayI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2017 AM Peak Hour Counts (1 hour between 7:00 and 9:00 am)
EXISTING AM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 5
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 33
5
6
4
0
2
0
0
8
755 6
2
3
5
5 261395
104
47
775
578
895853439
631
1
9
8
4
1
2
6
1 2891
7
3
4
8
1
7
0
6
4
1
2495
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
SR
1
6
9
S h a ri's D rive w a yI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampSunset WayI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2017 PM Peak Hour Counts (1 hour between 4:00 and 6:00 pm)
EXISTING PM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 6
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 7716
1
1
6
0
4
7
0
4
2
4
6672
44
1
2
1
1
8
9
3
5
1
331 2
0
8
2
1
5 1145673520
65
334
236
770768638
66389
1
01
2
3
6
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
4. Level-of-Service
Level-of-service (LOS) is a term defined by transportation and traffic engineers as a
qualitative and quantitative measure of operational conditions within a traffic stream and the
perception of these conditions by motorists and/or passengers. LOS, its derivations and
computational methods are described in extensive detail in the Highway Capacity Manual
(Transportation Research Board, 2010). There are several quantitative indices utilized
depending on the type of intersection control present. There are six levels-of-service that are
given letter designations from "A" to "F", with "A" being the best, or minimum delay
conditions, and "F" being the worst, with maximum delay or jammed conditions. LOS "C" or
"D" is generally considered acceptable for planning and design purposes, while LOS "E"
represents operating conditions at or near capacity with freedom to maneuver being extremely
difficult. These levels-of-service are measured in seconds of delay per vehicle.
Level-of-service for the existing condition was calculated using Trafficware’s Synchro
software version 9.0. This software replicates the analytical procedures specified in the
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The level of service criteria are shown in Table 4. Level-
of-service for signalized and non-signalized intersections is quantified in terms of vehicular
delay. Delay, measured in terms of time (seconds), also represents driver discomfort,
frustration, excess fuel consumption and lost travel time.
Table 4
Intersection Level-of-Service Criteria
Level of Stopped Delay Per Vehicle1
Service Definition signalized non-signalized
A Little or no delay Less than 10.0 sec Less than 10.0 sec
B Short traffic delays 10.1 to 20 sec 10.1 to 15 sec
C Average traffic delays 20.1 to 35 sec 15.1 to 25 sec
D Long traffic delays 35.1 to 55 sec 25.1 to 35 sec
E Very long traffic delays 55.1 to 80 sec 35.1 to 50 sec
F Extreme delay Greater than 80 sec Greater than 50 sec
1 Delay; seconds per vehicle
Note that for signalized intersections, the delay presented represents the overall operation of
the intersection, whereas the delay presented for unsignalized intersections represents the
delay for the critical approach or movement. The results for unsignalized are presented in this
manner since the overall intersection delay at an unsignalized intersection is generally quite
good because the major through street maneuvers are not impeded and for the most part carry
the majority of the traffic. Per the WSDOT Developer Services Manual, the LOS threshold
for a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) is LOS D for Urban Areas; SR 169 in the
project vicinity is an Urban-Principal Arterial and an HSS.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
It is also important to note that the level of service results from the HCM Synchro output do
not fully take into consideration the queue spill back from upstream or downstream-signalized
intersections and the additional congestion that may occur.
Accordingly a micro-simulation analysis using SimTraffic software was conducted for AM
and PM peak hour conditions at time of full project buildout (Year 2023) as well as a 6-year
design year (Year 2029) as requested by WSDOT (this is five years after the completion of the
Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes). A queue summary is also included for
these future year analyses.
The existing level of service at the analysis intersections is presented in Table 5.
Table 5
Existing Intersection Level-of-Service (Year 2017)
Individual Intersection Results (per Synchro)
Intersection LOS a Delay a Comments
AM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset Way/Bronson Way/I-405 SB On-Ramp D 47 ramp meter not included
2 SR 169/I-405 NB On & Off-Ramp c C 28 ramp meter not included
3 SR 169/Shari’s Café/Quality Inn Driveway A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr A 6 tee intersection
PM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset Way/Bronson Way/I-405 SB On-Ramp E 56 ramp meter not included
2 SR 169/I-405 NB On & Off-Ramp B 12 ramp meter not included
3 SR 169/Shari’s Café/Quality Inn Driveway A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr A 4 tee intersection
a LOS and Delay are per Synchro v10, HCM 2010 except Int2. Delay values represented in seconds per vehicle, all intersections are
signalized.
b street peak hour: AM 7:00-8:00am, PM 4:45-5:45pm.
c Int2 (SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps) computed using HCM2000 due to fact HCM2010 cannot compute non-NEMA conditions.
As shown in Table 5, as stand-alone intersections, each of these are estimated to operate at
LOS D or better except for the SR 169/Sunset Way intersection (Int1), which is estimated to
operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour.
It is important to note that the operations of these four intersections are all affected directly by
the operations of I-405 and the subsequent ramp metering conditions for Intersections 1 and 2.
Any significant ramp congestion and queuing due to long ramp meter intervals generally
results in spillback congestion through the intersections in this analysis. These conditions
would not be accounted for in the Synchro analysis, but can be modeled in a micro simulation
analysis using SimTraffic.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
5. Planned and Programmed Improvements
According to the city of Renton’s 2019-2024 Transportation Improvement Program, there are
four roadway project improvement projects in the vicinity of the project.
TIP 34 -- Maple Valley Highway Barriers (Traffic Operations and Safety Project).
This project includes two barriers vicinity of western edge of Riverview Park: One is to install
a concrete median barrier between east and westbound travel lanes of the SR 169 S-Curve
between the Riviera Apartments and S. 5th Street including associated roadway widening to
add the barrier. The second barrier improvement will remove the existing concrete barrier end
treatment located eastbound (east of the Riviera Apartments) and replace with 2 new concrete
barriers extending west.
TIP 36-- NE 3rd Street/NE 4th Street Corridor Improvements (Corridor Project)
This project involves a series of improvements in this corridor to improve traffic operations
such as rechannelization and traffic signal modifications, possible transit priority signal
treatments and queue jumps. This project will seek to meet pedestrian, transit and bicycle
needs.
TIP 24-- South 2nd Street Conversion Project (Corridor Project)
The South 2nd Street Conversion Project will be improving multimodal mobility in around
the downtown core by converting an existing 4–lane one-way roadway to a roadway with one
through-lane in each direction between Main Ave South and Rainier Ave South. This project
also includes pedestrian and bicycle facilities, traffic operations improvements, and transit
upgrades that will provide better traffic operation and circulation for all modes of
transportation. The improvements include a westbound bypass transit lane from just west of
Logan Ave S to just east of Lake Avenue. Transit facility upgrades include new Rapid Ride
stops and a transit queue jump at the new traffic signal at the Shattuck intersection.
TIP 41 -- South 3rd Street Conversion Project (Corridor Project)
The project provides pedestrian and bicyclists facilities and enhancements, traffic operation
and circulation improvements in Downtown. The improvements include adding raised
intersections with bulb outs, parklets, pedestrian plaza, lighting, street furniture, streetscape,
bicycle blvd, bike racks, signage, wayfinding and converting S 3rd St to two-way operations.
TIP 28 -- Houser Way S/N Non Motorized Improvements (Non-Motorized Project)
This project would install a separated bike facility on the north side of Houser Way S/N,
between Mill Ave S. and Bronson Way N. Intersection crossings would be improved at Cedar
River Park Drive and Mill Ave S. The project will include planning and pavement overlay,
channelization, and intersection crossing improvements. For feasibility and constructability
issues, the roadway and pedestrian bridge sections would not be part of this project.
Another project not included in the Transportation Element but that is included in the City’s
Rate Study for Impact Fees (8/26/11), is Project #10 which consists of widening SR 169 from
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
the Cedar River Park Entrance to East City Limits – “widen existing 4-lane roadway (7 lanes
exists for a very limited distance) to provide additional lane in each direction; traffic
operations improvements at intersections.” The total project cost was estimated at
$83,693,292 and the amount eligible for impact fees was $59,204,163. This cost is obviously
a substantial portion of the total fee basis of $134,330,224 as used for the denominator in the
calculations of trip fees.
WSDOT Improvements
There are several projects currently in design or long range proposed that would have
significant impact on traffic operations on I-405 in the vicinity of the proposed Cedar River
Apartments project. They are:
I-405/SR 169 Interchange Improvements
There are currently two interchange projects proposed at this location. The first involves a
proposed short-term enhancement with widening of the southbound on-ramp to include two
general purpose metered lanes and one HOV by-pass lane. As part of this, the westbound
approach would be modified (underneath I-405) to include two westbound turn lanes to the
southbound ramp. This would involve rechannelization of the inside through lane to a shared
thru plus left turn lane. In addition, the northbound on-ramp is also planned to be widened to
include an HOV bypass. This concept is expected to be completed in 2019 as its benefits to
current traffic operations are substantial.
The second project is a long-range plan (currently unfunded part of I-405 Master Plan) and
includes a major change of both the SR 169 interchange and adjacent roadways that, at the
conceptual engineering stage, would include new ramps at N 3rd St and a fly-over southbound
to eastbound SR 169. The estimated completion of this concept would be about 15 years out
and will require significant legislative action to fund the remaining portions of the I-405
Master Plan.
I-405 - Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes
The project will add new lanes to create a two-lane express toll lane system between SR 167
in Renton and Northeast 6th Street in Bellevue. In general, the project will add one new tolled
lane in each direction. The existing HOV lane will be combined with this new lane to create a
dual express toll lane system. Since this project adds a lane of capacity each way the
beneficial impacts on mainline and interchange operations should be substantial.
Project highlights
• Dual express toll lane system from SR 167 in Renton to Northeast Sixth Street in
Bellevue
• New southbound auxiliary lane in the I-90 to 112th Avenue Southeast vicinity
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
• Improvements at interchanges, including Northeast Park Drive and Northeast 44th
Street in Renton, and 112th Avenue Southeast and Coal Creek Parkway in Bellevue
• Construction of portions of the Eastside Rail Corridor regional trail, including a 2.5-
mile paved section and a new crossing over I-405 in downtown Bellevue at the site of
the former Wilburton rail bridge (in partnership with King County)
• New direct access ramp and inline transit station at NE 44th Street in Renton to help
support Bus Rapid Transit operations (in partnership with Sound Transit)
The project timeline is:
• Summer 2015: Funded by Connecting Washington for preliminary engineering, right
of way acquisition, and construction
• 2019: Start of construction
• 2024: Open to traffic
The longer term plans for the south end of I-405 Master Plan includes one additional general
purpose lane in each direction in this section of the roadway and other associated
improvements to interchanges, local roadways, noise walls and storm water management
facilities. This longer-term work is not currently funded for design or construction.
I-405 - SR 167 Interchange Direct Connector Project
WSDOT is currently in the final stages of completion of a new flyover ramp connecting the
HOT lanes on SR 167 to the carpool lanes on I-405 in Renton.
This highway-to-highway connection will address weaving issues associated with drivers
exiting the carpool or HOT lanes, merging onto I-405 or SR 167, and merging across traffic
again to the toll lanes. The immediate result should be improved operations for both general-
purpose lanes and carpool or express toll lanes.
B. FUTURE CONDITIONS
1. Background Traffic Volumes
Background traffic volumes were estimated by factoring the existing traffic volumes by a
calculated historical traffic growth rate up to the project's full build out year, plus the six year
addition requested by WSDOT. The project’s estimated horizon years are assumed to be 2021
for Phase 1, 2022 for Phase 2, and 2023 for Phase 3. The horizon year analysis requested by
WSDOT is 2029..
Recent historical traffic counts for SR 169 east of the I-405 interchange were obtained from
WSDOT sources for 2012, 2015, and 2018. Traffic volumes were reviewed for the 3-hour
windows during the AM peak period (6:00 am to 9:00 am) and PM peak period (3:00 pm to
6:00 pm). With seasonal and axle adjustments, the counts for the AM period indicate the
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
recent historical annual growth rate is 1.4%, and for the PM period the annual growth rate is
0.5%.
According to the model based 2025 and 2045 turning movement forecasts from the I-405
Express Toll Lanes Projects Traffic Discipline Report the intersection’s annual growth rate at
the two ramp terminal intersections (I-405/SR 169 SB on-ramp, and I-405/SR 169 NB on-
ramp) are 0.4% per year at each intersection for both peak hour periods.
Given the above ranges of annual growth rates for the two peak periods , a simplified slightly
conservative background growth rate of 1% was used to forecast future volumes for all
movements out to 2023 as well as out to 2029.
No pipeline projects were identified by the City that would have a significant impact on this
analysis.
Background peak hour turning movement volume forecasts for Year 2021, 2022, 2023, and
2029 are all shown in Appendix A.
2. Project Trip Generation
The Cedar River Apartments would consist of 481 apartments in two separate buildings;
Building A and B, with 5 levels each building. The third building is proposed as a medical
office building with a gross floor area of 25,000 gsf approximately, identified as Building C.
The project is proposed to be constructed in three phases. Each phase is discussed below and
the trip generation estimate bases are all per the ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition manual.
Phase 1 will be Building A. This building will consist of 238 apartment units, on 5 levels;
along with 306 structure parking stalls. The best-fit land use is ITE Land Use Code 221,
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise). Mid-rise multi-family housing includes apartments,
townhouses, and condominiums located within the same building with at least three other
dwelling units and that have between three and 10 levels (floors).
Phase 2 will be Building B. This building will consist of 243 apartment units, on 5 levels,
plus 4,852 gsf of commercial retail on the ground floor. There will be 339 structure parking
stalls. For the small space of commercial retail public use, the space(s) are currently
undefined, this analysis assumes a Shopping Center use in accordance with WSDOT
direction: LUC 820, a shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments
that is planned, developed, owned, and managed as a unit. A shopping center’s composition is
related to its market area in terms of size, location, and type of store. A shopping center also
provides on-site parking facilities sufficient to serve its own parking demands. For the
resultant retail trip generation estimate, it was also assumed that 34% of the total trips would
be pass-by related in accordance with the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition, Table
5.4.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Since for Phase 2 there is a mix of land uses, an estimate of internal trip capture was made for
all non-pass-by related trips using NCHRP 684 “Internal Trip Capture Estimation Tool”. The
results are shown in Table 6.
Phase 3 will be the future commercial pad, identified in this report as Building C. It is
intended to be a Medical Office type use. Therefore, trip generation rates are based on ITE
LUC 720, Medical Office. Similar to Phase 2, since there is a mix of land use types, the
internal trip capture tool (NCHRP 684) was used to estimate internal and external trips with
Phase 3.
The site is currently occupied by construction trucks and trailers and other heavy equipment.
However, the trips currently generated at the site are likely incidental and are assumed as
insignificant and thus not identified in this analysis for any trip credit against future project
trips.
The trip generation estimates for the project by phase are presented in Table 6.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Table 6
Project Trip Generation Estimates a
PHASE and, AM Peak PM Peak
ITE Code and Land Use Size AWT Total In Out Total In Out
PHASE 1
LUC 221 b – Multi-Family House Mid-Rise (3 to 10 floors) – 238 units (Building A)
Rate 5.44 0.360 0.260 0.740 0.440 0.610 0.390
Vol 1,295 86 22 64 105 64 41
PHASE 2
LUC 221 b – Multi-Family House Mid-Rise (3 to 10 floors) – 243 units (Building B)
Rate 5.44 0.360 0.260 0.740 0.440 0.610 0.390
Vol 1,322 87 23 64 107 65 42
LUC 820c – Shopping Center Retail Mix – 4,852 gsf commercial/retail
Rate 37.75 0.94 0.62 0.38 3.81 0.48 0.52
Vol 183 5 3 2 18 9 9
Non-Pass By (66%) 121 3 2 1 12 6 6
Phase 2 Subtotal 1,443 90 25 65 119 71 48
PHASE 1 and 2
Total Trips (internal & external) 2,738 176 47 129 224 135 89
Internal Trip Capture Estimate d 55 2 1 1 6 3 3
Total External Trips 2,683 174 46 128 218 132 86
PHASE 3
LUC 720 e – Medical-Dental Office Building – approximately 25,000 gsf (Building C)
Rate 34.8 2.780 0.780 0.220 3.460 0.280 0.720
Vol 870 70 55 15 87 24 63
PHASE 1, 2 and 3
Total Trips (internal & external) 3,608 246 102 144 311 159 152
Internal Trip Capture Estimate d 144 10 5 5 14 7 7
Total External Trips 3,464 236 97 139 297 152 145
a ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition
b Mid-rise multifamily housing includes apartments, townhouses, and condominiums located within the same building with at least three
other dwelling units and that have between three and 10 levels (floors)
c ITE LUC 820 Shopping Center trip rates used for the proposed retail mix on site. The pass-by rate per ITE Trip Generation Handbook
3rd Edition Table 5.4 is 34%, thus the non-pass-by component is 66%.
d Multi-Use Trip Capture per NCHRP 684 Internal Trip Capture Estimation Tool (see Appendix B). Daily capture assumed at 2% for
Phase 1 & 2 and at 4% for Phase 1, 2 & 3.
e A medical-dental office building is a facility that provides diagnoses and outpatient care on a routine basis but is unable to provide
prolonged in-house medical and surgical care. One or more private physicians or dentists generally operate this type of facility.
As shown in Table 6, for Phase 1 the site is estimated to generate 1,295 average weekday
daily trips, 86 AM, and 105 PM peak hour trips.
For Phase 2, including Phase 1, the site is estimated to generate 2,683 average weekday daily
trips, 174 AM, and 218 PM peak hour trips to the surrounding street system. These would be
the total trips to and from the project (total external trips).
For Phase 3, the site is estimated to generate 3,464 average weekday daily trips, 236 AM, and
297 PM peak hour trips to the surrounding street system (which includes Phase 1 and 2).
Again these would be the external vehicle trips to and from the project.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
3. Trip Distribution and Traffic Assignment
The project trip distribution patterns were based in general on traffic volumes for the
surrounding roadways plus knowledge of the surrounding areas with respect to employment
and socio-recreational types of attractions. For all of the land uses including the residential,
retail, and office elements of the project, the analysis assumed the following:
• 25% to I-405 north and 25% to I-405 south,
• 10% to S 2nd St and S 3rd St in downtown Renton,
• 10% to N 3rd St and N 4th St through North Renton and westerly locations,
• 5% to the North Renton via the Houser Way bypass,
• 10% to N 3rd St east to the Renton Highlands via N 3rd-N 4th St,
• 15% to SR 169 east towards Fairwood, Maple Valley, Black Diamond and other
places east.
The AM peak and the PM street peak hour trip distribution and assignment for the project for
all phases is presented in Figure 7a and 7b respectively. For each individual phase, the project
trip assignment turn volumes by movement at each intersection are shown in Appendix A.
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampSunset WayI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- AM Street Peak Hour Project Volumes (all Phases)
AM PEAK PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 7a
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
all Phases (1, 2, and 3)
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030
7
7
1
1
7
2
0451034
14
36
21175
7 225
5
8
4
3
3
2
20x2
0
x
2
0
2
0
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampSunset WayI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- PM Street Peak Hour Project Volumes (all Phases)
PM PEAK PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 7b
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
all Phases (1, 2, and 3)
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030
1
2
7
1
1
6
1
4741532
15
35
41162
5
1
1
3 388
9
8
2
3
4
4
25x2
5
x
1
4
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
4. Background Traffic Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Future year AM and PM peak hour with-project traffic volumes were developed by adding
project trips to the background forecast traffic volumes.
For Phase 1, the AM and PM peak hour volumes include the background traffic growth
estimate from 2017 to 2021 as well as the Project Phase 1 traffic, which would all be
representative for Year 2021. Similarly for Phase 2, the horizon year estimate is Year 2022
and the AM and PM peak hour volumes include an additional year of background growth plus
Phase 2 project traffic. With Phase 2 there will be a small amount of trips that stay on site as
a result of the small retail uses on site (trip capture). And finally, for Phase 3, the project
buildout/full occupancy year estimate is Year 2023 and would include another year of
background growth plus Phase 3 traffic. Like Phase 2, there will be a small amount of trips
that stay on site as a result of the small retail and the medical office mix with the residential.
In accordance with the WSDOT request, a 2029 analysis for both AM and PM peak hour
conditions is also included. This 2029 analysis addresses the difference in operations between
no build condition and the build condition (ie., with project condition) some 5 years beyond
the project horizon year.
All of the volumes by movement at each intersection as well as by Phase and per peak hour
are all shown in Appendix A.
The Year 2023 AM peak hour volumes with and without project volumes are shown in Figure
8a and 8b respectively. The Year 2023 PM peak hour volumes with and without project
volumes are shown in Figure 9a and 9b respectively.
The Year 2029 AM peak hour with and without project volumes are shown in Figure 10a and
10b respectively. The Year 2029 PM peak hour with and without project volumes are shown
in Figure 11a and 11b respectively.
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
CSunset Way131646241046xx -- 2023 AM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 7:00 and 9:00 am)
YEAR 2023 AM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 8a
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
without Project
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 33
7
6
8
0
2
1
3
3
758 6
6
1
5
8 277419
110
50
823
614
951905466
5352
1
0
6
1
3
6
5 3071
8
3
7
0
1
8
1
2
4
3
8525
6
6
8
2
1
1
9
x
xxx
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2023 AM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 7:00 and 9:00 am)Sunset Way134147144149YEAR 2023 AM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 8b
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
with Project (Phase 1, 2, and 3)
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 33
7
7
5
7
2
2
5
0
758 6
8
1
5
8 322419
120
50
857
628
987905466
81522
1
0
6
3
3
1
2
2 3291
8
4
2
5
1
8
9
6
4
7
1525
6
7
0
20c2
1
3
9
x
2
0
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampSunset WayI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C95825729433
xx -- 2023 PM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 4:00 and 6:00 pm)
YEAR 2023 PM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 9a
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
without Project
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 44
4
2
2
5
0
9
9
4
1
433 2
2
1
0
1
6 1216714
552
69
355
251
818791677
70419
6
6
1
3
4
0 8196
5
1
7
0
4
7
4
8
2
6
1713
2
2
8
0
xx9
7
9
x
x
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2023 PM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 4:00 and 6:00 pm)Sunset Way98326432236YEAR 2023 PM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 9b
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
with Project (Phase 1, 2, and 3)
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 44
4
2
3
7
7
1
1
1
0
1
433 2
2
2
4
1
6 1290714
567
69
387
266
853791677
741579
6
6
3
8
1
5
3 8576
5
1
7
9
3
8
3
0
2
9
5713
2
2
8
4
25x1
0
0
4
x
1
4
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2023 AM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 7:00 and 9:00 am)Sunset Way139749143648YEAR 2029 AM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 10a
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
without Project
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 33
9
7
2
2
2
2
6
4
862 7
0
2
6
2 294445
117
53
874
652
1009961495
7372
2
3
6
1
4
6
9 3261
9
3
9
3
1
9
2
4
4
6
5558
7
0
9
2
2
4
9
x
xxx
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2023 AM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 7:00 and 9:00 am)Sunset Way139749143648YEAR 2029 AM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 10a
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
without Project
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 33
9
7
2
2
2
2
6
4
862 7
0
2
6
2 294445
117
53
874
652
1009961495
7372
2
3
6
1
4
6
9 3261
9
3
9
3
1
9
2
4
4
6
5558
7
0
9
2
2
4
9
x
xxx
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
CSunset Way142250046652xx -- 2023 AM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 7:00 and 9:00 am)
YEAR 2029 AM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 10b
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
with full Project (Phase 1, 2 and 3)
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 33
9
7
9
9
2
3
8
1
862 7
2
2
6
2 339445
127
53
908
666
1045961495
91542
2
3
6
3
4
1
2
6 3481
9
4
4
8
2
0
0
7
4
9
8558
7
1
1
2
2
6
9
2
0
20xx
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2029 PM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 4:00 and 6:00pm)Sunset Way101727331235YEAR 2029 PM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 11a
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
without Project
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 54
6
2
3
8
8
1
0
5
5
1
535 2
3
4
6
1
7 1291758
586
73
377
266
868839719
74441
0
2
5
1
4
4
2 8696
9
1
8
0
9
7
9
4
2
7
8757
2
4
2
0
1
0
3
9
x
xxx
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
S
R 1
6
9
S hari's D rivew ayI-405 N B R am psI-405 NB Off-RampI-405 SB On-RampB r o n s o n W a y
I-405 SBI-405 NBSITE
A B
C
xx -- 2029 PM Peak Hour Volumes (1 hour between 4:00 and 6:00pm)Sunset Way104227934238YEAR 2029 PM PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Figure 11b
Int #1
Int #3
Int #4
Int #2
Int #5
with full Project (Phase 1, 2 and 3)
North
WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES
Bellevue, WA 98007
425.401.1030 54
6
2
5
1
5
1
1
7
1
1
535 2
3
6
0
1
7 1365758
601
73
409
281
903839719
781601
0
2
5
3
9
1
5
5 9076
9
1
8
9
8
8
7
6
3
1
2757
2
4
2
4
1
0
6
4
1
4
25xx
Cedar River Apartments
SRM Renton, LLC
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
5. Level-of-Service (Future Year Phased Project Conditions) – Synchro LOS
Results
The following level of service analysis identifies the AM and PM peak hour results based on
Synchro output for all three phases of development and their corresponding horizon years. It
should be noted that the Synchro results essentially assume stand-alone conditions without
upstream or downstream effects. A micro-simulation analysis using SimTraffic software to
address the effects of upstream and downstream traffic is presented later in this report.
Table 7 shows the “without Project” and “with Project” Synchro level of service results for
the full project at the estimated final completion horizon year, as well as the “without project”
and “with Project” for each of the three proposed phases of development. Also shown in
Table 7 are the LOS results for Intersection 1 with the proposed mitigation, ie, the dual
westbound left turn lane on SR 169 at the Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB ramp intersection and the
conversion of Sunset Blvd southbound to two general purpose lanes. Existing LOS results are
given in Table 5 above.
The purpose of showing these LOS results based on HCM/Synchro analysis was to identify
intersection LOS & delay impacts/changes with inclusion of the Project, in full and for each of
the three phases without involving arbitrary assumptions about freeway congestion and meter
rate operations during the several phases of Project buildout.
As shown in Table 7, each of these intersections are estimated to operate at satisfactory levels
of service except for the SR 169/Sunset Way intersection (Int1), which is estimated to operate
at LOS E for both peak hours at Year 2022 (Phase 2) and Year 2023 (full project completion).
It is important to note and that this LOS result is for “with” or “without” project traffic. It is
also important to note the I-405 Express Toll Lane project completion in 2024, one year past
the Cedar Park Apartments project horizon year, is projected to significantly reduce freeway
delay and improve LOS at this SR 169 intersection.
From this analysis, it can be concluded that based on classic HCM methodology the Project
will have little impact on delay at any of the subject intersections (0 to 5 seconds). The major
reason for this is the Project contributes less than 2.5% of all entering traffic at the corridor
critical SR 169/I-405/Sunset Blvd intersection.
By way of comparison, the I-405 Express Toll Lanes Project Transportation Discipline
Report 1 in the 2025 Build scenario gives estimates of LOS C and D for AM and PM peak
hour for SR 169/SB on-ramp terminal intersection and LOS D and B for the SR 169/NB on-
ramp terminal intersection. These estimates are also based on HCM/Synchro methodology,
i.e., without micro-simulation.
1 I-405 Express Toll Lanes Projects, Transportation Discipline Report; Pages E-4 & E-10
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Table 7
Intersection Level-of-Service -- Intersection Results (per Synchro)
Without Project With Project
Intersection LOS a Delay a LOS a Delay a Comments
AT FULL PROJECT COMPLETION (Year 2023)
AM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps E 56 E 60 ramp meter impact not includedc
D 40 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps C 31 D 36 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 9 B 11 tee intersection
PM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps E 71 E 75 ramp meter impact not includedc
E 64 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps B 12 B 13 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 5 A 8 tee intersection
PHASE 1 (Year 2021) (with and without Phase 1)
AM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps D 51 D 52 ramp meter impact not includedc
D 36 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps C 33 C 32 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 6 A 7 tee intersection
PM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps E 65 E 65 ramp meter impact not includedc
E 61 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps B 13 B 13 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 4 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 5 A 5 tee intersection
PHASE 2 (Year 2022) (with and without Phase 2, without includes Phase 1)
AM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps E 57 E 59 ramp meter impact not includedc
D 36 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps C 34 C 34 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 9 A 10 tee intersection
PM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps E 71 E 72 ramp meter impact not includedc
E 63 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps B 12 B 13 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 5 A 6 tee intersection
PHASE 3 (Year 2023) (with and without Phase 3, without includes Phase 1 and 2)
AM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps E 60 E 60 ramp meter impact not includedc
D 40 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps D 36 D 36 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive B 11 A 11 tee intersection
PM PEAK HOUR b
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps E 74 E 75 ramp meter impact not includedc
E 64 same as above with dual WBLT
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps B 12 B 13 ramp meter impact not includedc
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 3 A 3 tee intersection
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 7 A 8 tee intersection
a LOS and Delay are per Synchro v9 and HCM methodology. Delay is represented in seconds per vehicle.
b Street peak hour: AM peak is 1 hour between 7:00 and 9:00am, and PM peak is 1 hour between 4:00 and 6:00 pm.
c Queue spill back through this intersection due to long ramp meter delay can result in additional delay at the subject intersection that
would not be quantified in the Synchro analysis.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
As noted above, the Synchro results assume stand-alone conditions without upstream or
downstream effects. A micro-simulation analysis using SimTraffic was in-turn conducted to
better identify intersection delay at the subject intersections as well as a summary of selected
queue findings.
The Synchro results are all shown in Appendix C.
6. SimTraffic LOS Results – Future with and without full Project – Year 2023
The ensuing analysis computes the level of service at the Project’s four analysis intersections
with ramp meter impacts at the two SR 169 on-ramp intersections to I-405 for both near term
and post I-405 project completion. It also identifies queue results at selected locations.
Currently, the northbound and southbound ramp metering is typically operational from 6 am
to 9 am and from 3 pm to 7 pm. As discussed previously the meter release rates vary
depending on the level of traffic congestion in the freeway lane adjacent to the on-ramp as
well as queue spill back on the ramp. For the simulation analysis, it is not possible to vary the
meter rate based on all of the flux conditions noted above, thus a set meter rate was modeled
based on average meter cycles for existing conditions.
In mid-March of this year the southbound ramp meter cycle was observed to be running at
approximately 8 to 10 seconds per lane both in the AM and PM peak commute peak hour.
The ramp meter cycle of course can fluctuate given speed and volume conditions on I-405.
During times when the meter is in operation the southbound ramp includes two metered lanes
(one lane technically consists of use of the right side shoulder) and one HOV by-pass lane.
The northbound ramp meter cycle was observed to be running at approximately 11 second
intervals during the AM commute peak hour and about 8 seconds during the PM commute
peak hour. The northbound ramp is a single lane on-ramp with no HOV bypass lane.
The simulation of the four subject intersections including the two ramp meters was conducted
for both the AM and PM peak hour cases for the project horizon year of 2023 using the above
observed meter rates with and without Project and with and without near term dual westbound
left turn lane and on-ramp improvements. The simulation was also conducted assuming 4
second meter rates which represent WSDOT’s standard minimum release rate based on the
improved I-405 mainline operations associated with the completion of the ETL project.
WSDOT Improvements (assumed in analysis)
WSDOT has programmed improvements as part of the I-405 Renton to Bellevue Widening
and Express Toll Lanes project and the I-405 - SR 167 Interchange Direct Connector Project
which consist of the following (these are also discussed above in an earlier section):
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
• Widening of the southbound on-ramp to I-405 from SR 169. The widening would include
adding an additional full general purpose lane on the on-ramp for a three lane section from
SR 169 to the meters, in total would include one HOV by-pass lane and two general
purpose metered lanes.
• In turn the westbound approach (on SR 169 to the ramp) would be modified to a left turn
lane and a shared left/through lane (thus two left turn lanes). And for the southbound
approach (Sunset Boulevard), the HOV thru lane designation (shared with general purpose
southbound left turns) would be removed from the shared left/through lane, and two
general-purpose lanes would access the southbound on-ramp.
• Addition of I-405 to SR 167 fly-over ramps connecting HOT lanes on I-405 to carpool
lanes on SR 167.
• Addition of one Express Toll Lane (ETL) each way on I-405 and conversion of existing
HOV lane to an ETL. Project slated for late 2024 completion.
The WSDOT ETL project when fully operational in 2025 should significantly reduce
congestion on I-4052 in this area which is expected to significantly reduce ramp meter
intervals at both SR 169/Sunset Way/I-405 Southbound and Northbound on-ramp
intersections, in particular for AM commute peak period conditions.
In the interim, the westbound dual left turn lane conversion will allow more efficient ramp
operation but that operation remains significantly burdened by the expectation of long meter
rates. However the rates may decrease with the opening of the I-405/SR 167 IC direct HOT
ramps as a result of shift in mainline freeway volumes, so the delay estimates for the SB on-
ramp are likely overstated under that operation.
AM & PM Peak Hour – Year 2023
The results for the 2023 AM and PM peak hour conditions at the four analysis intersections
are shown in Table 8. The table also identifies the queue length for the westbound approach
stemming back from Intersection 4 for the AM peak hour. It should be noted that in the
westbound direction the westbound queue length extends the full length of the link segment at
each of the downstream intersections thus only the queue is reported at Intersection 4 since
this will be where queues vary between analysis scenarios.
For the PM peak hour, the queue was reported for the eastbound direction at only Intersections
3 and 4. The queue reflects the maximum queue per the simulation.
The analysis was conducted for the 2023 without project case for existing geometric/signal
conditions as well as conducted for the case with improvements at Intersection 1 including
southbound ramp widening, dual westbound left turn lane, as well as a I-405 NB on-ramp
HOV bypass (assumes 10% HOV use) downstream of Intersection 2.
2 Ibid; I-405 Operations - 2025 Build AM Period and 2025 Build PM Period, Exhibits 5-9 and 5-10.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
The analysis also conducted LOS for the 2023 with and without project case for conditions
with improvements noted above as well as assumed improvements on I-405 resulting in
shorter ramp meter rates.
Table 8
AM & PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Level-of-Service & Queue -- (per SimTraffic)
Project Horizon Year Full Development – Year 2023
Existing with Int1 Imp’s with Int1 Imp’s &
Conditions a & Ramp Imp’s b Ramp Imp’s and ETL c
without Project without Project without Project with Project
Intersection LOS Delay d LOS Delay d LOS Delay d LOS Delay d
---------------- AM PEAK HOUR ----------------
Intersection LOS and Delay e
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB On-Ramp F 172 F 153 C 33 C 34
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps c E 61 E 59 D 37 D 36
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway D 52 D 38 B 11 A 9
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive D 39 D 47 B 10+ B 10+
Selected Queue Results
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Max Q Westbound (ft) f 4,030 4,140 285 385
---------------- PM PEAK HOUR ----------------
Intersection LOS and Delay e
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB On-Ramp F 184 F 116 D 51 D 50
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps c D 47 C 22 C 22 B 19
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway C 35 A 3 A 3 A 4
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive C 32 A 4 A 4 A 10
Selected Queue Results
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway
Max Q Eastbound (ft) 105 70 55 65
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Max Q Eastbound (ft) 100 140 145 245
a With existing channelization, ramp metering, and I-405 conditions (per 2018 observations).
b Improvements at Intersection 1 including a dual westbound left turn lane and no HOV exclusivity for the southbound thru lanes. The
southbound on-ramp would be modified to allow two general purpose lanes from the intersection when metered, plus one HOV by-
pass. 2018 observed meter rates are assumed. Analysis also assumes a NB on-ramp HOV bypass.
c Ramp meter cycle time assumed at 4 seconds for both the NB and SB ramps due to the I-405 Express Toll Lanes project and projected
reduced freeway congestion. Technically this occurs in late 2024 but for simplicity is folded into the 2023 analyses.
d Average delay measured from simulations. Delay values represented in seconds per vehicle, all intersections are signalized.
e Street peak hour: AM 7:00-8:00am, PM 4:45-5:45pm.
f The maximum queue for the approach (the maximum is based on a 5-run average and averaged for each lane).
In summarizing the results shown in Table 8 above, it is important to keep in mind these are
simulations and conditions throughout the corridor can be affected by small changes upstream
and/or downstream. Each of these simulation results reflect a 5-run, 30-minute simulation
summary, with a 15 minute seed time (also the random seed number was held constant for all
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
cases). Excessive delay and subsequent queue spill back due to conditions downstream once
extended through an upstream intersection will be reported as delay at the upstream
intersection. That being said, the findings are summarized below. Also, the calculations
results are shown in Appendix D.
SR 169/Sunset/ Bronson/I-405 SB On-Ramp
For both peak hour periods, the intersection is estimated to operate at LOS F for the without
the Project case at the project’s full build-out horizon year (and LOS F for with project as well
but not reported in this table). The average intersection delay for the AM is 172 seconds per
vehicle (sec/veh) for the without Project condition and 184 sec/veh for the PM peak hour.
With the proposed WSDOT near term improvements including a rechannelization of the
westbound approach from a single left turn lane, two thru lanes, and a right turn lane, to a left
turn lane, a shared left/thru lane, a thru lane, and a right turn lane, along with elimination of
the southbound thru lane HOV exclusivity, the delay is estimated to improve to 153 sec/veh
for AM conditions and 116 sec/veh for PM conditions, which is a substantial improvement;
however the grade remains LOS F. The analysis assumes no change in meter rates.
With completion of the I-405 ETL project, it is projected that there would be reduced
congestion on the freeway as a result of an added freeway lane each way. Consequently it is
assumed the ramp meter times would decrease to their typical minimum. Assuming a 4
second ramp meter release rate for both the northbound and southbound ramps, the LOS and
delay is estimated to improve to LOS C for AM and LOS D for PM peak hour with an average
delay of 33 sec/veh and 51 sec/veh respectively. This would be for the scenario without
Project. With the Project, the LOS and delay are estimated to be essentially the same for both
peak hours.
SR 169/I-405 NB On/Off Ramps intersection
For the AM peak hour period, the intersection is estimated to operate at LOS E without the
Project at the project’s full build-out horizon year, and LOS D for the PM peak hour without
Project. With the proposed improvements at Intersection 1 and HOV by-pass on the
northbound ramp, the LOS and delay essentially remain unchanged for the AM peak but
improve from LOS D to C with a 25 sec/veh decrease for the PM peak hour.
With completion of the I-405 ETL project, and an assumed 4-second ramp meter release rate
based on the added freeway capacity, the LOS and delay is estimated to be LOS D for the AM
peak hour with or without the project, and borderline LOS B/C for the PM peak hour with or
without the project.
SR 169/Shari’s Driveway intersection
Congestion and delay is primarily a result of the congestion at the interchange. The LOS is
estimated to improve from LOS D to A/B for the AM peak hour with the WSDOT
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Intersection 1 mitigation and the ETL improvements. The PM peak hour is estimated to
improve from LOS D to B for with or without Project scenarios.
SR 169/Cedar Rive Park Drive
For the AM peak hour period the intersection is estimated to be LOS D without Project for
both existing geometric and Intersection 1 and ramp improvements. The level of service is
estimated to improve to LOS B for the AM peak hour with or without the Project, and LOS A
for the PM peak hour with or without the project.
The queue length was also reported at this intersection. During the AM peak hour, the critical
westbound queue at the other three intersections is essentially the segment length to the
upstream intersection. However, the queue from Intersection 4 to the east is open to
quantification asthe modeled link length was approximately 10,000 feet. The maximum
queue length as recorded in the micro-simulation was found to be approximately 4,000 feet
for the first two scenarios (existing conditions and Intersection 1 improvements). The
maximum queue is 285 feet for the without Project case assuming improvements at
Intersection 1, northbound and southbound ramp improvements, and I-405 ETL. With the
project under these same network assumptions, the maximum queue is estimated at 385 feet.
For the PM case, assuming improvements at Intersection 1, northbound and southbound ramp
improvements, and I-405 ETL, the maximum eastbound queue is estimated to be 145 feet
without Project, and 245 feet with Project.
7. SimTraffic LOS and Queue Results – Future with and without full Project –
Year 2029
The ensuing 2029 analysis computes the AM and PM peak hour level of service at the
Project’s four analysis intersections for with and without Project conditions. For network
assumptions, this analysis assumes all of the same improvements as identified in the 2023
analysis, including dual westbound left turn at Intersection 1, northbound and southbound
ramp improvements, and I-405 ETL.
The results are shown in Table 9. The table also identifies the queue length for the westbound
approach stemming back from Intersection 4 for the AM peak hour. It should be noted that in
the westbound direction the westbound queue length extends the full length of the link
segment at each of the downstream intersections thus only the queue is reported at Intersection
4 since there is minimal queue variation for the other downstream locations.
For the PM peak hour, the queue was reported for the eastbound direction at only Intersections
3 and 4. The queue reflects the maximum queue per the simulation.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
The analysis was conducted for year 2029 with and without project case for conditions with
improvements noted above as well as assumed improvements on I-405 resulting in shorter
ramp meter rates.
Table 9
AM & PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Level-of-Service & Queue -- (per SimTraffic)
SR 169 Design Year 2029 with Full Project Development
With Int1 Imp’s & plus
Ramp Imp’s and ETL Int4 Dual NBLT
without Project b with Project c with Project c
Intersection LOS Delay d LOS Delay d LOS Delay d
---------------- AM PEAK HOUR ----------------
Intersection LOS and Delay e
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB On-Ramp D 38 D 41 D 39
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps c D 48 D 51 D 49
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway B 17 B 18 B 16
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 10 B 17 B 18
Selected Queue Results e
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Max Q Westbound (ft) 255 430 400
---------------- PM PEAK HOUR ----------------
Intersection LOS and Delay e
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB On-Ramp D 53 D 53 D 50
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps c C 24 C 28 C 22
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 4 A 4 A 5
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 4 A 10- B 10+
Selected Queue Results e
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway
Max Q Eastbound (ft) 185’ 110’ 117’
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Max Q Eastbound (ft) 170’ 250’ 240’
a With existing channelization, ramp metering and I-405 conditions (per 2018 observations).
b Improvements at Intersection 1 including a dual westbound left turn lane and no HOV exclusivity for the southbound thru lanes. The
southbound on-ramp would be modified to allow two general purpose lanes from the intersection when metered, plus one HOV by-
pass. 2018 observed meter rates are assumed. Analysis also assumes
c Ramp meter cycle reduced to 4 seconds for both the NB and SB ramps due to the I-405 Express Toll Lanes project and projected
reduced freeway congestion. Technically this occurs in late 2024 but for simplicity is folded into the 2023 analyses.
d Average delay measured from simulations. Delay values represented in seconds per vehicle, all intersections are signalized.
e Street peak hour: AM 7:00-8:00am, PM 4:45-5:45pm.
In summarizing the results shown in Table 9 above, it is important to keep in mind, and re-
iterated from above, that these are simulations and conditions throughout the corridor can be
affected by small changes upstream and/or downstream. Each of these simulation results
reflect a 5-run, 30-minute simulation summary, with a 15 minute seed time (also the random
seed number was held constant for all cases). Excessive delay and subsequent queue spill
back due to conditions downstream once extended through an upstream intersection will be
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
reported as delay at the upstream intersection. That being said, the findings are summarized
below. The calculations results can be found in Appendix D.
SR 169/Sunset/ Bronson/I-405 SB On-Ramp
With completion of the I-405 ETL project, it is projected that there would be reduced
congestion on the freeway as a result of an added freeway lane each way. Consequently it is
assumed the ramp meter times would decrease to their typical minimum. Assuming a 4
second ramp meter release rate for both the northbound and southbound ramps, the LOS and
delay is estimated to be LOS D for both the without Project case for the AM and PM peak
hours with an average delay of 38 sec/veh and 53 sec/veh respectively. With the Project, the
LOS and delay are estimated to be essentially the same for both peak hours.
SR 169/I-405 NB On/Off Ramps intersection
For the without Project case, the LOS and delay are estimated to be LOS D for the AM peak
hour with or without the project, and LOS C for the PM peak hour with or without the project.
SR 169/Shari’s Driveway intersection
Congestion and delay is primarily a result of the congestion at the interchange. The LOS and
delay for the without project case is estimated to be LOS B and A respectively for the AM and
PM peak hours. For the with Project case, the LOS and delay is estimated to be essentially the
same.
SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
For the AM peak hour period this intersection is estimated to be LOS A without Project and B
with Project. For the PM peak hour, the intersection is estimated to operate at LOS A for both
with and without project.
The westbound queue length was estimated to be 255 feet without Project and 430 feet with
project. With the added project traffic on Cedar River Park Drive, the green time for this
approach is estimated to increase by 8 seconds thus taking away green time for the westbound
approach, which in turn is the likely reason for the queue distance increase. If the Cedar River
Park Drive was re-channelized from a single left turn lane and right turn lane to a left turn lane
and shared left with right turn lane, it is estimated the green time could shorten for this
approach back to a pre-project condition. The westbound queue length for this mitigated
northbound approach is estimated to decrease. The simulation analysis indicates a reduced
queue from 430 feet to 400 feet.
For the PM case, assuming the same improvements at this intersection, the maximum
eastbound queue is estimated to be 170 feet without Project, 250 feet with Project, and 240
feet with Project with the re-channelization recommendation.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
8. Parking
The project is proposing in total 645 parking stalls in Buildings A and B. There are 41 surface
parking stalls proposed north of Building A, and 14 stalls along the internal access road in
front of Building B. The parking requirement for Buildings A and B is a range between 634
and 700 stalls. Thus the parking proposed complies with City code.
A useful tool in estimating parking demand for residential multi-family development is the
King County Multi-Family Residential Parking Calculator. This program calculates
parking/unit rates for any parcel/area in the county. The model indicates that for the subject
site parcel based on the bedroom count and floor areas as noted in the site plan, and assuming
parking costs are included in rent (not a separate item), the model yields a parking per unit
rate of 1.02 vehicles/unit for Building A and 1.07 vehicles per unit for Building B. The peak
demand is estimated to occur between 10 pm and 5 am.
In total, the parking demand estimate for all of the residential is 503 vehicles for peak demand
conditions. Given the designed parking supply of 645 stalls in the two garages, it is concluded
that the parking supply should be adequate to meet estimated demand.
The parking supply has not yet been identified for Building C, but it is presumed it will meet
or exceed code requirements.
C. CONCLUSIONS
1. Project Details
The site is located at 1915 Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) in the City of Renton. The parcel
number is 1723059026, and the total area of the site is approximately 12.5 acres. The site is
currently vacant in terms of building structures, however, it is used as a storage area for heavy
construction machinery. Presently, there are two access points to the site including one to
Cedar River Park Drive and one two SR 169.
The proposed project consists of three different buildings, to be constructed in three separate
phases. Phase 1 – Building A will consist of 238 apartment units, on 5 levels, along with 306
structure parking stalls and presumed occupied by 2021. In addition to the structure parking,
there will be some surface parking on the north side of the building. Phase 2 –Building B will
consist of 243 apartment units, on 5 levels, along with 339 structure parking stalls, plus 4,852
gsf of commercial retail on the ground floor for public use, and presumed occupied by 2022.
Phase 3 – Building C (as identified in this study) will be a Medical Office type use on the
commercial pad located in the north corner of the parcel. Parking is currently undetermined.
Access is presumed to be to the internal roadway in front of Building B and the driveway is
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
anticipated to be opposite the garage entry to Building B. No additional access points to
public roadways are proposed with Phase 3.
2. Accidents
Based on accident records obtained from WSDOT, none of the four subject intersection have
an accident rate higher than 0.71 for the 3-plus year of data. The accident rates ranged
between 0.16 and 0.71 acc/mev. The typical standard threshold is 1.0 acc/mev. The accident
occurrence and rate suggests no unusual unsafe conditions.
Based on all the data at the four intersections, the rear-end type of accident is the most
common accident type with 45% of the total accidents, next with sideswipe type accidents at
25%. In general, rear-end accidents are most common at heavily congested signalized
intersections where motorists are not anticipating stop conditions during green light situations.
3. Project Vehicular Impact
In total for all phases, the project is estimated to generate 3,464 average weekday daily trips,
236 AM peak hour trips and 297 PM peak hour trips to the surrounding street network.
Phase 1 with 238 units is estimated to generate 1,295 average weekday daily trips, 86 AM,
and 105 PM peak hour trips.
Phase 2 with 243 units plus 4,852 gsf retail is estimated to generate 1,443 average weekday
daily trips, 90 AM, and 119 PM peak hour trips to the surrounding street system.
Phase 3 with 25,000 gsf of medical office space is estimated to generate 870 average weekday
daily trips, 70 AM, and 87 PM peak hour trips to the surrounding street system.
When added all together there is the assumption of some trip capture thus as a mixed use
development at full buildout the project is estimated to generate slightly less trips than if each
phase were a stand alone project.
4. Level of Service
The analysis in this report first presented level of service results at the four subject
intersections based on Synchro/HCM methodology. This classic HCM methodology
demonstrates that the Project has little impact on delay at any intersection. The methodology,
however, does not accommodate inclusion of impacts of downstream congestion as a result of
I-405 congestion and restrictive ramp metering, both of which are considered temporary in the
context of this Project analysis due to the programmed construction of the I-405 Express Toll
Lane project in late 2024 and the implementation latitude offered by the City’s Concurrency
policy.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
The simulation results indicate that the proposed near term dual westbound left turn lane and
removal of the HOV southbound thru lane exclusivity on Sunset Blvd. at the SR 169/
Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB on-ramp intersection, along with programmed on-ramp
improvements, would result in reduced congestion for the intersection as well as the corridor,
but the level of service would remain at F based on the assumption of continued application of
the existing observed ramp meter rates, which are driven by freeway mainline conditions .
In the near future (2024 - 2025), the widening of I-405 for the ETL project along with the
recently completed direct access ramp to-from SR 167 is projected to significantly improve
mainline freeway congestion in the vicinity of SR 169 and which in turn should result in much
lower meter release rates. Accordingly the two ramp terminal intersections at the I-405/SR
169 interchange are estimated to operate at LOS C in the AM and LOS D in the PM peak
hours with completion of the ETL project.
By comparison, the I-405 Express Toll Lanes Project Transportation Discipline Report in the
2025 Build scenario gives estimates of LOS C and D for AM and PM peak hour for SR
169/SB on-ramp terminal intersection and LOS D and B for the SR 169/NB on-ramp terminal
intersection. These WSDOT estimates are based on HCM/Synchro methodology, i.e., without
simulation.
The estimated delay at the SR 169/Shari’s driveway intersection and at the SR 169/Cedar
River Park Dr intersection for the AM peak hour is estimated to improve from LOS D to B for
both intersections with the WSDOT programmed intersection/ramp improvement and with the
ETL project. The LOS remains unchanged with the addition of the Project. The PM peak
level of service at each of these two intersections is estimated to remain at LOS A at each with
the described WSDOT improvements.
At the SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr intersection for the year 2029 evaluation, restriping of the
side street approach to include a dual left with shared right (no widening) is included as a
mitigation recommendation to shift signal green time from the side street to the mainline in
order to improve delay and lessen queue impact on SR 169 with project traffic. For planning
purposes, additional right of way should be set aside for potential widening of the Cedar River
Park Dr approach to include a third approach lane.
5. Site Access Points
The project will have two access points, one to Cedar River Park Drive and one to SR 169.
This analysis assumes that the majority of the project traffic will access Cedar River Park
Drive which currently has signalized access to SR 169. The secondary project site access to
SR 169 which will be approximately 350 feet southeast from the SR 169/Cedar River Park Dr
intersection and is presumed to be right-in, and right-out. No left turn out was assumed for
this driveway due to the expected difficulty in doing so during the peak hour periods, and no
left turn in was assumed based on WSDOT concerns regarding crossing of three lanes of
traffic.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
6. Parking
The project’s peak parking demand for all of the residential in Phase 1 and 2 is estimated to be
503 vehicles. The peak demand would occur for the overnight period. The proposed parking
supply in the two garages in Phase 1 and 2 totals to 645 stalls. Thus, the parking supply as
proposed for the residential will exceed parking demand estimates and no parking spill over is
estimated to occur to surrounding areas, primarily no spill over into the Cedar River Park area.
Parking supply has not yet been identified for Building C, the medical office proposed use.
However, it is assumed that the parking supply will meet or exceed demand. Of course this
will be better identified as the plans develop for that building.
D. MITIGATION and RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the foregoing traffic impact analysis for the Cedar River Apartments project, the
draft mitigation recommendations are suggested:
1. Frontage Improvements
The City requirement along SR 169 per the development standards and the pre-app meeting is
a 6” curb, 8’ planter, 8’ sidewalk and 2’ clear behind sidewalk to new property line. Currently
there is an 8’ sidewalk. The current site plan provides for an additional 8’ for the sidewalk
and landscaping plus 2’ from back of sidewalk to the new property line (and then there is a
15’ setback required that is being provided).
2. Primary Site Access
The project’s primary access will be to/from Cedar River Park Drive. The existing
configuration currently consists of two lanes (left and right) from the site access to SR 169,
and one lane exiting from SR 169. With heavy congestion on I-405, it is estimated that there
would be spill back congestion on SR 169 passing through this intersection, which in turn
may result in congestion when exiting from Cedar River Park Dr to SR 169, primarily left
turns to SR 169.
One consideration to reduce the side street delay as well as shift some signal green time to SR
169 approaches would be re-striping the Cedar River Park Dr curb lane from a right turn lane
to a shared left/right turn lane thereby resulting in increased storage and shorter green time for
this approach. In turn, the delay for the SR 169 mainline approaches would decrease as well
as reduce queue lengths. Additional right of way consideration should be made and potential
further evaluation conducted when Building C as part of Phase 3 is approached. This would
include plans for widening to a three lane approach on Cedar River Park Dr to include dual
left turn lanes and a separate right turn lane.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
All of the WSDOT improvements discussed in Section A.4. should result in decreased
congestion and spill back on SR 169.
3. Secondary Site Access
The project is proposing a direct access to SR 169 as a secondary access in addition to the
access to Cedar River Park Drive. There is an existing driveway opening at the point where
the curb lane begins to taper back from 3 lanes to 2 lanes heading east. This existing driveway
is about 490 feet from the stop bar at the Cedar River Park Dr intersection.
There is a two-way left turn lane on SR 169 that begins approximately 350 feet southeast from
the stop bar at the Cedar River Park Dr intersection. This 350-foot section consists of a 200’
left turn pocket plus a 150-foot transition opening. The proposed driveway is recommended
to be designed with a pork-chop concept to prevent any left turns from entering the site at this
driveway or exiting left from this driveway.
4. Off-Site Programmed Mitigation Improvements
An important near term WSDOT programmed project is widening of the southbound on-ramp
to I-405 from SR 169. The widening would include adding an additional lane on the on-ramp
(from two lanes to three lanes), widening from one general purpose metered lane and one
HOV by-pass lane to two general purpose metered lanes and one HOV by-pass lane(see
Figure 10).
In turn the westbound approach (SR 169) would be modified to a left turn lane and a shared
left/through lane. And at the southbound approach (Sunset Boulevard), the HOV lane
designation would be removed from the shared left/through lane, and two general-purpose
lanes would access the southbound on-ramp. It is estimated that this proposal would improve
intersection level of service from LOS E to D during the morning peak by up to 20 seconds
per vehicle (for all movements), and improve the delay for the PM condition by up to 11
seconds per vehicle (for all movements). During the morning commute period, the westbound
traffic on SR 169 can queue back excessively (sometimes exceeding 4,000 ft) and longer with
a rolling queue. It should be noted that this recommended change would significantly reduce
the overall travel time for HOVs to access southbound 1-405 in light of any difference with
the existing HOV bypass.
The proposed channelization plan from WSDOT is shown in Figure 12. This figure shows
paths for two large trucks side-by-side turning left on to the ramp.
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
Figure 12: SR 169/Sunset Way/I-405 SB On-Ramp Improvements
The level of service results noted in this traffic study are footnoted to indicate these results
reflect stand-alone intersection conditions. Computerized traffic simulation runs indicate
significant spill back however much of that depends on the operations of I-405 and the ramp
metering. It is expected that the proposed improvement shown in Figure 10 would result in
more efficient storage and metering on the ramp than currently exists thereby minimizing the
queue spill back on SR 169.
Furthermore, the I-405 Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes project and the
I-405 - SR 167 Interchange Direct Connector Project should significantly reduce congestion
and decrease travel time on I-405 in this area which in turn and in theory would minimize
excessive ramp meter intervals at the SR 169/Sunset Way/I-405 Southbound On-Ramp
intersection and at the SR 169/I-405 Northbound On/Off-Ramp intersection, in particular for
AM commute period conditions.
It is our understanding that Figure 12 southbound ramp widening and rechannelization of SR
169/Sunset Way/I-405 SB On-Ramp intersection ”has been moved to the head of the line for
construction” by WSDOT and is estimated to be constructed as early as late 2019. The Cedar
River Apartments project would benefit from this project. A lower cost immediate type
option that had been analyzed and advocated by the City before the WSDOT current
construction program had advanced is removal of the HOV bypass lane from the on-ramp.
This would involve restriping the southbound on-ramp to remove the HOV bypass lane and
Traffic Impact Analysis (10/14/19) Cedar River Apartments
William Popp Associates Page
provide two general-purpose metered lanes. In this location, the HOV bypass only provides
travel time savings once the carpool is on the ramp. Also there are no bus routes that use the
on-ramp. However, since WSDOT has advanced their ramp project to a likely late 2019
implementation, this lower cost project becomes unnecessary.
5. Traffic Impact Fee
The City of Renton’s currently adopted traffic impact fees for various land use types are based
on the City’s “Rate Study for Impact Fees for Transportation, Parks, and Fire Protection”,
dated August 26, 2011.
The City’s impact fee rate based on PM peak hour trips generated by new development is
$7,517.08 per PM peak hour Trip (source: Table 7 of the City’s Rate Study 8/26/11). The
estimated PM peak hour total trips generated to the surrounding street system by this
development are 297 PM peak hour trips with completion of all phases of this development3.
That would result in a traffic impact fee of $2,232,573. It is important to note that this project
is a mixed-use development with residential, retail, and medical office uses. Computation of
traffic impact fees based on stand-alone uses in this case would not be applicable due to the
fact it would not take into consideration internal trip capture on site between uses.
The PM peak hour project trip generation estimate by phase and corresponding fee would be
as follows assuming the project is built exactly as identified in Table 1 of this report:
Phase 1: PM Peak Hour Trips = 105 City Impact Fee = $ 789,293
Phase 2: PM Peak Hour Trips = 113 City Impact Fee = $ 849,430
Phase 3: PM Peak Hour Trips = 79 City Impact Fee = $ 593,849
APPENDECES A, B, C, and D
APPENDIX A: AM AND PM PEAK HOUR TURN VOLUME SUMMARIES
APPENDIX B: TRIP GENERATION ADJUSTMENT: INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE
APPENDIX C: SYNCHRO AM AND PM LOS ANALYSES (2021, 2022, and 2023)
APPENDIX D: SIM TRAFFIC ANALYSES (DELAYS AND QUEUES)
APPENDIX A
AM AND PM PEAK HOUR TURN VOLUME SUMMARIES
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 2021 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project w/Project Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
AM PK Growth a Traffic Trips AM PK Growth Trips AM PK Growth Trips AM PK 2023 project project
EBLT 1 199 8 207 0 207 2 0 209 2 0 211 0 224 224
EBLT 2 196 395 8 204 411 0 204 411 2 0 206 415 2 0 208 419 0 221 445 221 445
EBT 104 4 108 2 110 1 3 114 1 5 120 10 117 127
EBRT 47 2 49 0 49 0 0 49 0 0 50 0 53 53
WBLT 775 31 806 16 822 8 16 847 8 2 857 34 874 908
WBT 578 23 601 6 607 6 7 621 6 1 628 14 652 666
WBRT 895 36 931 15 946 9 18 974 10 3 987 36 1009 1045
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBLT 1 187 8 195 5 200 2 6 208 2 13 223 24 211 235
SBLT 2 74 261 3 77 272 6 83 283 1 5 89 296 1 10 100 322 21 84 294 105 339
SBT HOV 358 15 373 0 373 4 0 376 4 0 380 0 403 403
SBT 495 853 20 515 888 0 515 888 5 0 520 897 5 0 525 905 0 558 961 558 961
SBRT 439 18 457 0 457 5 0 461 5 0 466 0 495 495
4347 177 4524 50 4574 46 55 4674 47 34 4755 139 4900 5039
2.0% 1.1% 1.2% 0.7% 2.9%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
1 SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps1SR 169/Sunset/Bronson/I-405 SB Ramps
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 w/Project 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project 2021 Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
PM PK Growth a Traffic Trips PM PK Growth Trips PM PK Growth Trips PM PK 2023 project project
EBLT 1 314 13 327 0 327 3 0 330 3 0 333 0 354 354
EBLT 2 359 673 15 374 700 0 374 700 4 0 377 707 4 0 381 714 0 405 758 405 758
EBT 520 21 541 6 547 5 7 560 6 2 567 15 586 601
EBRT 65 3 68 0 68 1 0 68 1 0 69 0 73 73
WBLT 334 14 348 10 358 4 11 372 4 11 387 32 377 409
WBT 236 10 246 4 250 2 4 256 3 7 266 15 266 281
WBRT 770 31 801 10 811 8 10 829 8 15 853 35 868 903
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBLT 1 718 29 747 16 763 8 18 789 8 6 803 40 810 850
SBLT 2 427 1145 17 444 1191 15 459 1222 5 16 480 1269 5 3 488 1290 34 482 1291 516 1365
SBT HOV 202 8 210 0 210 2 0 212 2 0 214 0 228 228
SBT 543 745 22 565 775 0 565 775 6 0 571 783 6 0 576 791 0 612 839 612 839
SBRT 638 26 664 0 664 7 0 671 7 0 677 0 719 719
5126 208 5334 61 5395 54 66 5515 55 44 5614 171 5778 5949
2.0% 1.1% 1.2% 0.8% 3.0%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 2021 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project w/Project Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
AM PK Growth a Traffic Trips AM PK Growth Trips AM PK Growth Trips AM PK 2023 project project
EBLT 17 1 18 0 18 0 0 18 0 0 18 0 19 19
EBT 348 14 362 13 375 4 14 393 4 28 425 55 393 448
EBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBT 1706 69 1775 37 1812 18 41 1871 19 6 1896 84 1923 2007
WBRT 412 17 429 16 445 4 15 464 5 2 471 33 465 498
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 289 12 301 6 307 3 6 316 3 10 329 22 326 348
SBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 495 20 515 0 515 5 0 520 5 0 525 0 558 558
3267 133 3400 72 3472 35 76 3582 36 46 3664 194 3684 3878
2.0% 2.1% 2.1% 1.3% 5.3%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
2 SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 w/Project 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project 2021 Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
PM PK Growth a Traffic Trips PM PK Growth Trips PM PK Growth Trips PM PK 2023 project project
EBLT 61 2 63 0 63 1 0 64 1 0 65 0 69 69
EBT 1604 65 1669 37 1706 17 41 1764 18 11 1793 89 1809 1898
EBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBT 704 29 733 24 757 8 25 789 8 33 830 82 794 876
WBRT 246 10 256 10 266 3 11 280 3 13 295 34 278 312
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 771 31 802 16 818 8 17 843 8 5 857 38 869 907
SBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 672 27 699 0 699 7 0 706 7 0 713 0 757 757
4058 165 4223 87 4310 43 94 4447 44 62 4554 243 4576 4819
2.0% 2.0% 2.1% 1.4% 5.3%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 2021 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project w/Project Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
AM PK Growth a Traffic Trips AM PK Growth Trips Traffic Growth Trips AM PK 2023 project project
EBUT 55 2 57 0 57 1 0 58 1 0 58 0 62 62
EBLT 35 1 36 0 36 0 0 37 0 0 37 0 39 39
EBT 1 240 10 250 0 250 2 0 252 3 0 255 0 270 270
EBT 2 260 640 11 271 666 13 284 685 3 14 300 712 3 28 331 757 55 293 722 348 799
EBT 3 140 6 146 6 152 2 6 159 2 10 171 22 158 180
EBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBT 1 546 22 569 16 585 6 16 606 6 2 614 34 616 650
WBT 2 541 2008 22 563 2090 6 569 2143 6 7 581 2220 6 1 588 2250 14 610 2264 624 2381
WBT 3 541 22 563 15 578 6 18 602 6 3 611 36 610 646
WBT 4 380 15 395 16 411 4 15 431 4 2 437 33 117 429 462
WBRT 7 0 7 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 8 8
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBLT 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 3
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 55 2 57 0 57 1 0 58 1 0 58 0 62 62
2803 114 2917 72 2989 30 76 3095 31 46 3172 194 3161 3355
2.0% 2.4% 2.5% 1.5% 6.1%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
3 SR 169/Shari's Driveway
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 2021 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project w/Project Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
PM PK Growth a Traffic Trips PM PK Growth Trips Traffic Growth Trips PM PK 2023 project project
EBUT 15 1 16 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 16 0 17 17
EBLT 41 2 43 0 43 0 0 43 0 0 44 0 46 46
EBT 1 990 40 1030 0 1030 10 0 1040 10 0 1051 0 1116 1116
EBT 2 778 2118 32 810 2204 38 848 2258 8 41 897 2339 9 11 917 2377 90 878 2388 968 2515
EBT 3 350 14 364 16 380 4 17 401 4 4 409 37 395 432
EBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBT 1 355 14 369 10 379 4 11 394 4 11 409 32 400 432
WBT 2 158 935 6 165 973 7 172 1007 2 4 177 1053 2 8 187 1110 19 178 1055 197 1171
WBT 3 158 6 165 7 172 2 10 183 2 15 200 32 178 210
WBT 4 264 11 275 10 285 3 11 299 3 12 314 33 116 298 331
WBRT 13 1 14 0 14 0 0 14 0 0 14 0 15 15
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBLT 4 0 4 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 5 5
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 31 1 32 0 32 0 0 33 0 0 33 0 35 35
3157 128 3285 88 3373 34 94 3501 35 61 3597 243 3560 3803
2.0% 2.6% 2.7% 1.7% 6.8%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 2021 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project w/Project Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
AM PK Growth a Traffic Trips AM PK Growth Trips Traffic Growth Trips AM PK 2023 project project
EBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBT 1 272 11 283 0 283 3 0 286 3 0 289 0 306 306
EBT 2 296 623 12 308 648 0 308 648 3 0 311 660 3 0 314 681 0 334 702 334 722
EBT 3 55 2 57 0 57 1 5 63 1 15 78 20 62 82
EBRT 61 2 63 19 82 1 14 97 1 24 122 57 69 126
WBLT 12 0 12 10 22 0 5 28 0 5 33 20 14 34
WBT 1 536 22 558 0 558 6 0 563 6 0 569 0 604 604
WBT 2 783 1984 32 815 2065 0 815 2065 8 0 823 2085 8 0 831 2106 0 882 2236 882 2236
WBT 3 665 27 692 0 692 7 0 699 7 0 706 0 749 749
WBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBLT 31 1 32 54 86 1 54 141 1 9 152 117 37 154
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 6 0 6 0 6 0 1 7 0 1 8 2 7 9
SBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2717 110 2827 83 2910 29 79 3018 30 54 3103 216 3064 3280
2.0% 2.9% 2.6% 1.7% 7.0%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
4 SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 2021 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project w/Project Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
PM PK Growth a Traffic Trips PM PK Growth Trips Traffic Growth Trips PM PK 2023 project project
EBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBT 1 1013 41 1054 0 1054 11 0 1065 11 0 1075 0 1141 1141
EBT 2 989 2082 40 1029 2167 0 1029 2167 10 0 1039 2196 10 0 1050 2224 0 1114 2346 1114 2360
EBT 3 80 3 83 0 83 1 8 92 1 6 99 14 90 104
EBRT 36 1 37 54 91 1 50 142 1 9 153 113 42 155
WBLT 12 0 12 5 17 0 5 23 0 15 38 25 14 39
WBT 1 342 14 356 0 356 4 0 359 4 0 363 0 385 385
WBT 2 229 910 9 238 947 0 238 947 2 0 241 956 2 0 243 966 0 258 1025 258 1025
WBT 3 339 14 353 0 353 4 0 356 4 0 360 0 382 382
WBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBLT 38 2 40 35 75 1 37 112 1 44 157 116 44 160
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 66 3 69 0 69 1 0 69 1 4 74 4 74 78
SBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3144 128 3272 94 3366 34 100 3499 35 78 3612 272 3546 3818
2.8% 2.9% 2.2% 7.5%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
5 SR 169/Cedar River Apts East Driveway
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 2021 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project w/Project Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
AM PK Growth a Traffic Trips AM PK Growth Trips Traffic Growth Trips Growth 2020 project project
EBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBT 629 26 655 0 655 7 0 661 7 2 670 2 709 711
EBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 16 20 20 0 20
WBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBT 1996 81 2077 3 2080 21 4 2105 21 13 2139 20 2249 2269
WBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 0 0 0 10 10 0 8 18 0 2 20 20 0 20
SBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2625 107 2732 13 2745 27 16 2788 28 33 2849 62 2958 3020
2.0% 0.5% 0.6% 1.2% 2.2%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
5 SR 169/Cedar River Apts East Driveway
Existing 2021 2021 Phase 1 w/Project 2022 Phase 2 2022 2023 Phase 3 2023 All Dev 2029 2029
2017 Future Background Project 2021 Future Project w/Project Future Project w/Project by without with
PM PK Growth a Traffic Trips PM PK Growth Trips Traffic Growth Trips Growth 2020 project project
EBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBT 2148 87 2235 0 2235 22 0 2258 23 4 2284 4 0 0
EBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 6 14 14 2420 2424
WBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WBT 922 37 959 10 969 10 10 989 10 5 1004 25 0 0
WBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1039 1064
NBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NBRT 0 0 0 6 6 0 7 13 0 12 25 25 0 0
SBLT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SBRT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3070 125 3195 16 3211 32 25 3268 33 27 3327 68 3460 3489
2.0% 0.5% 0.8% 0.8% 2.0%
a Background growth estimated based on SR 169 count records WSDOT
b Project: 238 apts (Ph1), 243 apts and 4.852 kgsf retail (Ph2), 25 kgsf medical office (Ph3)
APPENDIX B
TRIP GENERATION ADJUSTMENT: INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE
APPENDIX B (page1)
Project Name:Organization:
Project Location:Performed By:
Scenario Description:Date:
Analysis Year:Checked By:
Analysis Period:Date:
ITE LUCs1 Quantity Units Total Entering Exiting
Office 0 - GFA 0 0 0
Retail 815,920 4,852 GFA 5 3 2
Restaurant 930,936 - GFA 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0
Residential 221 481 DU 173 45 128
Hotel 0
All Other Land Uses2 0
178 48 130
Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized
Office
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential
Hotel
All Other Land Uses2
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential
Hotel
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 0 0
Retail 0 0 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0 1 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Total Entering Exiting Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
All Person-Trips 178 48 130 Office N/A N/A
Internal Capture Percentage 1% 2% 1% Retail 33% 0%
Restaurant N/A N/A
External Vehicle-Trips5 176 47 129 Cinema/Entertainment N/A N/A
External Transit-Trips6 0 0 0 Residential 0% 1%
External Non-Motorized Trips6 0 0 0 Hotel N/A N/A
1915 Maple Valley Highway, Renton
AM Street Peak Hour
William Popp Associates
Bill Popp Jr.
At Full Occupancy
23-Sep-19Phase A & B
Estimation Tool Developed by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute - Version 2013.1
Table 5-A: Computations Summary Table 6-A: Internal Trip Capture Percentages by Land Use
2Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator.
5Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-A.
1Land Use Codes (LUCs) from Trip Generation Manual , published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
6Person-Trips
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
3Enter trips assuming no transit or non-motorized trips (as assumed in ITE Trip Generation Manual ).
4Enter vehicle occupancy assumed in Table 1-A vehicle trips. If vehicle occupancy changes for proposed mixed-use project, manual adjustments must be made
to Tables 5-A, 9-A (O and D). Enter transit, non-motorized percentages that will result with proposed mixed-use project complete.
Table 2-A: Mode Split and Vehicle Occupancy Estimates
Table 4-A: Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix*
Destination (To)Origin (From)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
Table 3-A: Average Land Use Interchange Distances (Feet Walking Distance)
NCHRP 684 Internal Trip Capture Estimation Tool
Table 1-A: Base Vehicle-Trip Generation Estimates (Single-Use Site Estimate)
0
0
Cinema/Entertainment
Development Data (For Information Only )
0
0
0
Estimated Vehicle-Trips3
Land Use
Cedar River Apartments
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 2.xlsx, Page 1-A
10/11/2019
APPENDIX B (page 2)
Project Name:
Analysis Period:
Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips* Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips*
Office 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Retail 1.00 3 3 1.00 1.5 2
Restaurant 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Residential 1.00 45 45 1.00 128 128
Hotel 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 0 0
Retail 1 0 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 3 1 26 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 1 0 0 0
Retail 0 0 1 0
Restaurant 0 0 2 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0 1 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 0 0 0 0 0 0
Retail 1 2 3 2 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0 45 45 45 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 0 0 0 0 0 0
Retail 0 2 2 2 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 1 127 128 127 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Land Use Table 7-A (D): Entering Trips
2Person-Trips
Person-Trip Estimates
Cedar River Apartments
AM Street Peak Hour
Table 9-A (D): Internal and External Trips Summary (Entering Trips)
Table 8-A (O): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Origin)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
Table 7-A: Conversion of Vehicle-Trip Ends to Person-Trip Ends
Table 7-A (O): Exiting Trips
0
0
0
Table 8-A (D): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Destination)
Origin (From)
Origin Land Use Person-Trip Estimates External Trips by Mode*
External Trips by Mode*
1Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-A
0
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
0
0
0
0
0
Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
0
3Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator
Destination Land Use
Table 9-A (O): Internal and External Trips Summary (Exiting Trips)
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 2.xlsx, Page 2-A
10/11/2019
APPENDIX B (page 3)
Project Name:Organization:
Project Location:Performed By:
Scenario Description:Date:
Analysis Year:Checked By:
Analysis Period:Date:
ITE LUCs1 Quantity Units Total Entering Exiting
Office 0 - GFA 0 0 0
Retail 815,920 4,852 GFA 12 6 6
Restaurant 930,936 - GFA 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment - - - 0 0 0
Residential 221 481 DU 212 129 83
Hotel - - - 0
All Other Land Uses2 - - - 0
224 135 89
Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized
Office
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential
Hotel
All Other Land Uses2
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 0
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential 0 0
Hotel
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 0 0
Retail 0 0 2 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0 1 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Total Entering Exiting Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
All Person-Trips 224 135 89 Office N/A N/A
Internal Capture Percentage 3% 2% 3% Retail 17% 33%
Restaurant N/A N/A
External Vehicle-Trips5 218 132 86 Cinema/Entertainment N/A N/A
External Transit-Trips6 0 0 0 Residential 2% 1%
External Non-Motorized Trips6 0 0 0 Hotel N/A N/A
1Land Use Codes (LUCs) from Trip Generation Manual , published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
2Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator.
3Enter trips assuming no transit or non-motorized trips (as assumed in ITE Trip Generation Manual ).
5Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-P.
Table 5-P: Computations Summary Table 6-P: Internal Trip Capture Percentages by Land Use
4Enter vehicle occupancy assumed in Table 1-P vehicle trips. If vehicle occupancy changes for proposed mixed-use project, manual adjustments must be
6Person-Trips
0
0
0
0
Table 4-P: Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix*
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
0
Table 3-P: Average Land Use Interchange Distances (Feet Walking Distance)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
NCHRP 684 Internal Trip Capture Estimation Tool
Cedar River Apartments William Popp Associates
1915 Maple Valley Highway, Renton Bill Popp Jr.
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
Estimation Tool Developed by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute - Version 2013.1
Phase A & B 23-Sep-19
At Full Occupancy
PM Street Peak Hour
Table 1-P: Base Vehicle-Trip Generation Estimates (Single-Use Site Estimate)
Land Use Development Data (For Information Only )Estimated Vehicle-Trips3
Table 2-P: Mode Split and Vehicle Occupancy Estimates
Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 2.xlsx, Page 1-P
10/11/2019
APPENDIX B (page 4)
Project Name:
Analysis Period:
Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips* Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips*
Office 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Retail 1.00 6 6 1.00 6 6
Restaurant 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Residential 1.00 129 129 1.00 83 83
Hotel 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 0 0
Retail 0 2 2 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 3 35 17 2
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 5 0
Retail 0 0 59 0
Restaurant 0 3 21 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 5 0
Residential 0 1 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 0 0 0 0 0 0
Retail 1 5 6 5 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 2 127 129 127 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 0 0 0 0 0 0
Retail 2 4 6 4 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 1 82 83 82 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
3Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator
Table 9-P (O): Internal and External Trips Summary (Exiting Trips)
Origin Land Use Person-Trip Estimates External Trips by Mode*
Person-Trip Estimates External Trips by Mode*
0
Table 8-P (D): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Destination)
Origin (From)
2Person-Trips
0
0
Table 9-P (D): Internal and External Trips Summary (Entering Trips)
Destination Land Use
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
Cedar River Apartments
PM Street Peak Hour
Table 7-P: Conversion of Vehicle-Trip Ends to Person-Trip Ends
Land Use Table 7-P (D): Entering Trips Table 7-P (O): Exiting Trips
Table 8-P (O): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Origin)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
Cinema/Entertainment
0
0
1Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-P
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 2.xlsx, NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 2.xlsx
10/11/2019
APPENDIX B (page 5)
Project Name:Organization:
Project Location:Performed By:
Scenario Description:Date:
Analysis Year:Checked By:
Analysis Period:Date:
ITE LUCs1 Quantity Units Total Entering Exiting
Office 720 25,000 GFA 70 55 15
Retail 815,920 4,852 GFA 5 3 2
Restaurant 930,936 - GFA 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0
Residential 221 481 DU 173 45 128
Hotel 0
All Other Land Uses2 0
248 103 145
Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized
Office
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential
Hotel
All Other Land Uses2
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential
Hotel
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 1 0 0 0
Retail 1 0 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 2 1 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Total Entering Exiting Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
All Person-Trips 248 103 145 Office 5% 7%
Internal Capture Percentage 4% 5% 3% Retail 67% 50%
Restaurant N/A N/A
External Vehicle-Trips5 238 98 140 Cinema/Entertainment N/A N/A
External Transit-Trips6 0 0 0 Residential 0% 2%
External Non-Motorized Trips6 0 0 0 Hotel N/A N/A
1915 Maple Valley Highway, Renton
AM Street Peak Hour
William Popp Associates
Bill Popp Jr.
At Full Occupancy
23-Sep-19Phase A & B & C
Estimation Tool Developed by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute - Version 2013.1
Table 5-A: Computations Summary Table 6-A: Internal Trip Capture Percentages by Land Use
2Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator.
5Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-A.
1Land Use Codes (LUCs) from Trip Generation Manual , published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
6Person-Trips
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
3Enter trips assuming no transit or non-motorized trips (as assumed in ITE Trip Generation Manual ).
4Enter vehicle occupancy assumed in Table 1-A vehicle trips. If vehicle occupancy changes for proposed mixed-use project, manual adjustments must be made
to Tables 5-A, 9-A (O and D). Enter transit, non-motorized percentages that will result with proposed mixed-use project complete.
Table 2-A: Mode Split and Vehicle Occupancy Estimates
Table 4-A: Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix*
Destination (To)Origin (From)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
Table 3-A: Average Land Use Interchange Distances (Feet Walking Distance)
NCHRP 684 Internal Trip Capture Estimation Tool
Table 1-A: Base Vehicle-Trip Generation Estimates (Single-Use Site Estimate)
0
0
Cinema/Entertainment
Development Data (For Information Only )
0
0
0
Estimated Vehicle-Trips3
Land Use
Cedar River Apartments
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 3.xlsx, Page 1-A
10/11/2019
APPENDIX B (page 6)
Project Name:
Analysis Period:
Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips* Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips*
Office 1.00 55 55 1.00 15 15
Retail 1.00 3 3 1.00 1.5 2
Restaurant 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Residential 1.00 45 45 1.00 128 128
Hotel 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 4 9 0 0
Retail 1 0 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 3 1 26 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 1 0 0 0
Retail 2 0 1 0
Restaurant 8 0 2 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 2 1 0 0
Hotel 2 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 3 52 55 52 0 0
Retail 2 1 3 1 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0 45 45 45 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 1 14 15 14 0 0
Retail 1 1 2 1 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 3 125 128 125 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Land Use Table 7-A (D): Entering Trips
2Person-Trips
Person-Trip Estimates
Cedar River Apartments
AM Street Peak Hour
Table 9-A (D): Internal and External Trips Summary (Entering Trips)
Table 8-A (O): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Origin)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
Table 7-A: Conversion of Vehicle-Trip Ends to Person-Trip Ends
Table 7-A (O): Exiting Trips
0
0
0
Table 8-A (D): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Destination)
Origin (From)
Origin Land Use Person-Trip Estimates External Trips by Mode*
External Trips by Mode*
1Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-A
0
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
0
0
0
0
0
Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
0
3Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator
Destination Land Use
Table 9-A (O): Internal and External Trips Summary (Exiting Trips)
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 3.xlsx, Page 2-A
10/11/2019
APPENDIX B (page 7)
Project Name:Organization:
Project Location:Performed By:
Scenario Description:Date:
Analysis Year:Checked By:
Analysis Period:Date:
ITE LUCs1 Quantity Units Total Entering Exiting
Office 720 25,000 GFA 87 24 63
Retail 815,920 4,852 GFA 12 6 6
Restaurant 930,936 - GFA 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment - - - 0 0 0
Residential 221 481 DU 212 129 83
Hotel - - - 0
All Other Land Uses2 - - - 0
311 159 152
Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized Veh. Occ.4 % Transit % Non-Motorized
Office
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential
Hotel
All Other Land Uses2
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 0
Retail
Restaurant
Cinema/Entertainment
Residential 0 0
Hotel
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 1 0
Retail 0 0 2 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 3 1 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Total Entering Exiting Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
All Person-Trips 311 159 152 Office 13% 2%
Internal Capture Percentage 5% 4% 5% Retail 17% 33%
Restaurant N/A N/A
External Vehicle-Trips5 297 152 145 Cinema/Entertainment N/A N/A
External Transit-Trips6 0 0 0 Residential 2% 5%
External Non-Motorized Trips6 0 0 0 Hotel N/A N/A
1Land Use Codes (LUCs) from Trip Generation Manual , published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
2Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator.
3Enter trips assuming no transit or non-motorized trips (as assumed in ITE Trip Generation Manual ).
5Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-P.
Table 5-P: Computations Summary Table 6-P: Internal Trip Capture Percentages by Land Use
4Enter vehicle occupancy assumed in Table 1-P vehicle trips. If vehicle occupancy changes for proposed mixed-use project, manual adjustments must be
6Person-Trips
0
0
0
0
Table 4-P: Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix*
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
0
Table 3-P: Average Land Use Interchange Distances (Feet Walking Distance)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
NCHRP 684 Internal Trip Capture Estimation Tool
Cedar River Apartments William Popp Associates
1915 Maple Valley Highway, Renton Bill Popp Jr.
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
Estimation Tool Developed by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute - Version 2013.1
Phase A & B & C 23-Sep-19
At Full Occupancy
PM Street Peak Hour
Table 1-P: Base Vehicle-Trip Generation Estimates (Single-Use Site Estimate)
Land Use Development Data (For Information Only )Estimated Vehicle-Trips3
Table 2-P: Mode Split and Vehicle Occupancy Estimates
Land Use Entering Trips Exiting Trips
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 3.xlsx, Page 1-P
10/11/2019
APPENDIX B (page 8)
Project Name:
Analysis Period:
Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips* Veh. Occ. Vehicle-Trips Person-Trips*
Office 1.00 24 24 1.00 63 63
Retail 1.00 6 6 1.00 6 6
Restaurant 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Residential 1.00 129 129 1.00 83 83
Hotel 1.00 0 0 1.00 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 13 3 1 0
Retail 0 2 2 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 3 35 17 2
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Office Retail Restaurant Residential Hotel
Office 0 0 5 0
Retail 7 0 59 0
Restaurant 7 3 21 0
Cinema/Entertainment 1 0 0 5 0
Residential 14 1 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 3 21 24 21 0 0
Retail 1 5 6 5 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 3 126 129 126 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Internal External Total Vehicles1 Transit2 Non-Motorized2
Office 1 62 63 62 0 0
Retail 2 4 6 4 0 0
Restaurant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 4 79 83 79 0 0
Hotel 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Land Uses3 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
3Total estimate for all other land uses at mixed-use development site is not subject to internal trip capture computations in this estimator
Table 9-P (O): Internal and External Trips Summary (Exiting Trips)
Origin Land Use Person-Trip Estimates External Trips by Mode*
Person-Trip Estimates External Trips by Mode*
0
Table 8-P (D): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Destination)
Origin (From)
2Person-Trips
0
0
Table 9-P (D): Internal and External Trips Summary (Entering Trips)
Destination Land Use
*Indicates computation that has been rounded to the nearest whole number.
Cedar River Apartments
PM Street Peak Hour
Table 7-P: Conversion of Vehicle-Trip Ends to Person-Trip Ends
Land Use Table 7-P (D): Entering Trips Table 7-P (O): Exiting Trips
Table 8-P (O): Internal Person-Trip Origin-Destination Matrix (Computed at Origin)
Origin (From)Destination (To)
Destination (To)
Cinema/Entertainment
Cinema/Entertainment
0
0
1Vehicle-trips computed using the mode split and vehicle occupancy values provided in Table 2-P
NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 3.xlsx, NCHRP Report 684 estimator PHASE 3.xlsx
10/11/2019
APPENDIX C
SYNCHRO AM AND PM LOS ANALYSES (2021, 2022, and 2023)
1. Synchro AM Peak Hour Level of Service Summaries
a. Phase 1 -- Year 2021 with and without Project
b. Phase 2 – Year 2022 with and without Project (includes Phase 1)
c. Phase 3 – Year 2023 with and without Project (includes Phase 1 and 2)
d. Full Build Year 2023 with and without Project. Note that the “without
Project” condition does not include any of the phased development. The
“with Project” condition is the same as 1.c. above.
2. Synchro PM Peak Hour Level of Service Summaries
a. Phase 1 -- Year 2021 with and without Project
b. Phase 2 – Year 2022 with and without Project (includes Phase 1)
c. Phase 3 – Year 2023 with and without Project (includes Phase 1 and 2)
d. Full Build Year 2023 with and without Project. Note that the “without
Project” condition does not include any of the phased development. The
“with Project” condition is the same as 1.c. above.
1. Synchro AM Peak Hour Level of Service Summaries
1.a. Phase 1 -- Year 2021 with and without Project
AM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 background AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 411 108 49 806 601 931 0 0 0 272 888 457
Future Volume (veh/h) 411 108 49 806 601 931 0 0 0 272 888 457
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 457 120 0 896 668 1034 302 987 508
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 756 1509 1189 576 1210 696
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 457 120 0 896 668 1034 302 987 508
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 63.0 10.4 63.0 20.2 35.7 38.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 63.0 10.4 63.0 20.2 35.7 38.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 756 1509 1189 576 1210 696
V/C Ratio(X) 1.15 0.29 0.00 1.18 0.44 0.87 0.52 0.82 0.73
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 756 1509 1189 576 1210 696
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.0 0.0 17.4 10.9 4.3 36.9 42.0 30.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 94.4 0.4 0.0 84.5 0.0 0.7 1.4 2.5 2.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 12.8 2.1 0.0 45.8 4.6 40.0 9.5 17.8 20.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 155.9 56.4 0.0 101.9 10.9 5.0 38.2 44.5 33.1
LnGrp LOS F E F B A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 577 2598 1797
Approach Delay, s/veh 135.2 40.0 40.2
Approach LOS F D D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 52.0 67.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 47.0 62.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 40.4 65.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.5 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 51.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 background AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 375 0 0 1812 445 0 0 307 0 0 515
Future Volume (vph) 18 375 0 0 1812 445 0 0 307 0 0 515
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 417 0 0 2013 494 0 0 341 0 0 572
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 20 417 0 0 2013 348 0 0 341 0 0 562
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 52.0 140.0 78.0 78.0 140.0 52.0
Effective Green, g (s) 53.0 140.0 79.0 79.0 140.0 53.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 1.00 0.56 0.56 1.00 0.38
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 613 3241 2021 818 1476 558
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.13 c0.56 c0.38
v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 0.23
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.13 1.00 0.43 0.23 1.01
Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 0.0 30.3 17.5 0.0 43.5
Progression Factor 1.53 1.00 0.65 0.34 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 16.9 1.3 0.4 39.9
Delay (s) 41.9 0.1 36.8 7.3 0.4 83.4
Level of Service D A D A A F
Approach Delay (s) 2.0 30.9 0.4 83.4
Approach LOS A C A F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.3% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 background AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 57 36 666 2090 7 3 57
Future Volume (veh/h) 57 36 666 2090 7 3 57
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 40 740 2322 8 3 63
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 62 3251 4422 15 4 93
Arrive On Green 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5978 19 68 1420
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 40 740 1579 751 67 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1761 1511 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 0.04 0.94
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 62 3251 3008 1430 99 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.23 0.53 0.53 0.68 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 228 3251 3008 1430 183 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.4 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.5 0.2 0.5 1.0 7.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.0 0.1 0.4 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.4 0.2 0.5 1.0 72.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 780 2330 67
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.0 0.6 72.2
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 126.8 13.2 9.2 117.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 18.0 91.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 8.1 5.2 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 40.3 0.1 0.1 37.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 3.0
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 background AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 648 63 12 2065 32 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 648 63 12 2065 32 6
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 720 70 13 2294 36 7
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2900 281 27 3632 228 204
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.81 0.14 0.14
Sat Flow, veh/h 4332 368 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 467 323 13 2294 36 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1700 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.1 28.1 2.6 0.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.1 28.1 2.6 0.6
Prop In Lane 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1884 1296 27 3632 228 204
V/C Ratio(X) 0.25 0.25 0.49 0.63 0.16 0.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1884 1296 84 3632 228 204
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 5.3 53.4 52.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.5 13.1 0.8 1.5 0.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.2 0.6 11.8 1.3 0.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.3 0.5 81.5 6.2 54.9 52.8
LnGrp LOS A A F A D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 790 2307 43
Approach Delay, s/veh 0.4 6.6 54.6
Approach LOS A A D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.2 110.8 117.0 23.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 101.0 112.0 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 2.0 30.1 4.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 40.7 38.1 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.7
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 AM Peak 2021 Phase 1 Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 411 110 49 822 607 946 0 0 0 283 888 457
Future Volume (veh/h) 411 110 49 822 607 946 0 0 0 283 888 457
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 457 122 0 913 674 1051 314 987 508
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 457 122 0 913 674 1051 314 987 508
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 64.0 10.0 64.0 21.4 36.1 38.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 64.0 10.0 64.0 21.4 36.1 38.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
V/C Ratio(X) 1.15 0.30 0.00 1.19 0.44 0.88 0.56 0.83 0.74
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.1 0.0 16.6 10.2 4.2 38.0 42.9 31.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 94.4 0.4 0.0 86.1 0.0 0.9 1.6 2.9 2.9
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 12.8 2.2 0.0 46.8 4.5 40.7 10.2 18.0 20.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 155.9 56.5 0.0 102.7 10.2 5.1 39.6 45.8 34.1
LnGrp LOS F E F B A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 579 2638 1809
Approach Delay, s/veh 135.0 40.2 41.4
Approach LOS F D D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 51.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 46.0 63.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 40.9 66.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.6 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 51.5
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 05/23/2019
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 AM Peak 2021 Phase 1 with dual wblt Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 411 110 49 822 607 946 0 0 0 283 888 457
Future Volume (veh/h) 411 110 49 822 607 946 0 0 0 283 888 457
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 457 122 0 913 674 1051 314 987 508
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 2 1 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 1585 832 1189 540 1134 664
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.32 0.32 0.32
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 3361 1765 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 457 122 0 913 674 1051 314 987 508
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1765 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 14.8 31.4 66.0 21.8 36.9 39.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 14.8 31.4 66.0 21.8 36.9 39.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 1585 832 1189 540 1134 664
V/C Ratio(X) 1.15 0.30 0.00 0.58 0.81 0.88 0.58 0.87 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 1585 832 1189 540 1134 664
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.1 0.0 9.4 11.2 4.0 39.6 44.7 32.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 94.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 1.8 3.9 3.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 12.8 2.2 0.0 6.5 14.8 40.7 10.4 18.6 20.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 155.9 56.5 0.0 9.5 11.8 4.8 41.5 48.7 36.2
LnGrp LOS F E A B A D D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 579 2638 1809
Approach Delay, s/veh 135.0 8.2 43.9
Approach LOS F A D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 49.0 70.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 44.0 65.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 41.9 68.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.6 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 35.7
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 AM Peak 2021 Phase 1 Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 375 0 0 1812 445 0 0 307 0 0 515
Future Volume (vph) 18 375 0 0 1812 445 0 0 307 0 0 515
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 417 0 0 2013 494 0 0 341 0 0 572
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 20 417 0 0 2013 348 0 0 341 0 0 562
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 52.0 140.0 78.0 78.0 140.0 52.0
Effective Green, g (s) 53.0 140.0 79.0 79.0 140.0 53.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 1.00 0.56 0.56 1.00 0.38
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 613 3241 2021 818 1476 558
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.13 c0.56 c0.38
v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 0.23
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.13 1.00 0.43 0.23 1.01
Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 0.0 30.3 17.5 0.0 43.5
Progression Factor 1.58 1.00 0.65 0.33 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 16.3 1.2 0.4 39.9
Delay (s) 43.3 0.0 36.0 7.0 0.4 83.4
Level of Service D A D A A F
Approach Delay (s) 2.0 30.3 0.4 83.4
Approach LOS A C A F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.3% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 AM Peak 2021 Phase 1 Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 57 36 685 2143 7 3 57
Future Volume (veh/h) 57 36 685 2143 7 3 57
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 40 761 2381 8 3 63
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 62 3251 4424 15 4 93
Arrive On Green 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5978 18 68 1420
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 40 761 1619 770 67 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1761 1511 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 0.04 0.94
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 62 3251 3009 1430 99 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.23 0.54 0.54 0.68 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 132 3251 3009 1430 183 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.71 0.71 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 64.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.4 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.7 0.2 0.5 1.0 7.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.6 0.2 0.5 1.0 72.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 801 2389 67
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.9 0.7 72.2
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 126.8 13.2 9.2 117.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 10.0 99.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 8.1 5.2 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 43.0 0.1 0.0 41.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.9
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 AM Peak 2021 Phase 1 Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 648 82 12 2065 86 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 648 82 12 2065 86 6
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 720 91 13 2294 96 7
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2762 347 27 3568 252 225
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.79 0.15 0.15
Sat Flow, veh/h 4219 464 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 481 330 13 2294 96 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1683 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.1 30.2 7.2 0.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.1 30.2 7.2 0.6
Prop In Lane 0.28 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1849 1260 27 3568 252 225
V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.26 0.49 0.64 0.38 0.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1849 1260 84 3568 252 225
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 6.1 53.6 50.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.5 13.1 0.9 4.3 0.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.2 0.6 12.6 3.7 0.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.3 0.5 81.5 7.0 58.0 51.1
LnGrp LOS A A F A E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 811 2307 103
Approach Delay, s/veh 0.4 7.4 57.5
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.2 108.8 115.0 25.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 99.0 110.0 20.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 2.0 32.2 9.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 41.0 37.8 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 7.3
HCM 2010 LOS A
1.b. Phase 2 – Year 2022 with and without Project (includes Phase 1)
AM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 BACKGROUND AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 415 111 49 831 614 956 0 0 0 286 897 461
Future Volume (veh/h) 415 111 49 831 614 956 0 0 0 286 897 461
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 461 123 0 923 682 1062 318 997 512
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 461 123 0 923 682 1062 318 997 512
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.7 0.0 64.0 15.3 64.0 21.7 36.6 39.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.7 0.0 64.0 15.3 64.0 21.7 36.6 39.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
V/C Ratio(X) 1.16 0.30 0.00 1.20 0.44 0.89 0.56 0.84 0.75
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.1 0.0 27.4 17.9 7.0 38.1 43.1 31.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 98.2 0.4 0.0 91.9 0.0 1.0 1.6 3.1 3.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.0 2.2 0.0 48.9 7.0 41.2 10.3 18.4 20.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 159.7 56.5 0.0 119.4 17.9 7.9 39.7 46.1 34.3
LnGrp LOS F E F B A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 584 2667 1827
Approach Delay, s/veh 138.0 49.0 41.7
Approach LOS F D D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 51.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 46.0 63.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 41.4 66.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 56.6
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 BACKGROUND AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 379 0 0 1830 449 0 0 310 0 0 520
Future Volume (vph) 18 379 0 0 1830 449 0 0 310 0 0 520
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 421 0 0 2033 499 0 0 344 0 0 578
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 20 421 0 0 2033 353 0 0 344 0 0 568
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6 Free 5
Actuated Green, G (s) 52.0 140.0 78.0 78.0 140.0 52.0
Effective Green, g (s) 53.0 140.0 79.0 79.0 140.0 53.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 1.00 0.56 0.56 1.00 0.38
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 613 3241 2021 818 1476 558
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.13 c0.57
v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 0.23 c0.38
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.13 1.01 0.43 0.23 1.02
Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 0.0 30.5 17.6 0.0 43.5
Progression Factor 1.57 1.00 0.61 0.35 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 18.6 1.3 0.4 42.7
Delay (s) 43.0 0.1 37.3 7.4 0.4 86.2
Level of Service D A D A A F
Approach Delay (s) 2.0 31.4 0.4 86.2
Approach LOS A C A F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.0% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 BACKGROUND AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 58 37 692 2164 7 3 58
Future Volume (veh/h) 58 37 692 2164 7 3 58
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 41 769 2404 8 3 64
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 63 3249 4415 15 4 94
Arrive On Green 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5979 18 67 1422
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 41 769 1635 777 68 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1762 1510 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 0.04 0.94
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 63 3249 3003 1427 100 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.24 0.54 0.54 0.68 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 216 3249 3003 1427 183 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.67 0.67 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.4 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.4 0.2 0.5 1.0 7.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.2 0.2 0.5 1.0 72.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 810 2412 68
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.9 0.6 72.2
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 126.7 13.3 9.3 117.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 17.0 92.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 8.2 5.3 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 44.1 0.1 0.1 41.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.9
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 BACKGROUND AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 655 83 13 2065 86 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 655 83 13 2065 86 6
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 728 92 14 2294 96 7
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2601 327 28 3375 324 289
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.75 0.19 0.19
Sat Flow, veh/h 4219 464 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 486 334 14 2294 96 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1683 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 36.4 6.8 0.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 36.4 6.8 0.5
Prop In Lane 0.28 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1741 1186 28 3375 324 289
V/C Ratio(X) 0.28 0.28 0.50 0.68 0.30 0.02
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1741 1186 60 3375 324 289
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 8.9 48.4 45.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.6 13.2 1.1 2.3 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.2 0.6 15.2 3.4 0.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.4 0.6 81.5 10.0 50.7 46.0
LnGrp LOS A A F B D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 820 2308 103
Approach Delay, s/veh 0.5 10.5 50.4
Approach LOS A B D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 102.7 109.0 31.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 95.0 104.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 2.0 38.4 8.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 40.7 35.2 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 9.2
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 2 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 415 114 49 847 621 975 0 0 0 297 897 461
Future Volume (veh/h) 415 114 49 847 621 975 0 0 0 297 897 461
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 461 127 0 941 690 1083 330 997 512
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 461 127 0 941 690 1083 330 997 512
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.8 0.0 64.0 15.5 64.0 22.7 36.6 39.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.8 0.0 64.0 15.5 64.0 22.7 36.6 39.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
V/C Ratio(X) 1.16 0.31 0.00 1.22 0.45 0.91 0.58 0.84 0.75
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.2 0.0 27.4 17.9 7.0 38.4 43.1 31.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 98.2 0.4 0.0 102.3 0.0 1.2 1.8 3.1 3.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.0 2.3 0.0 51.1 7.2 42.1 10.8 18.4 20.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 159.7 56.6 0.0 129.7 18.0 8.1 40.2 46.1 34.3
LnGrp LOS F E F B A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 588 2714 1839
Approach Delay, s/veh 137.4 52.8 41.8
Approach LOS F D D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 51.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 46.0 63.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 41.4 66.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 58.5
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
2022
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 05/23/2019
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 2 AM Peak with dual wblt int1 Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 415 114 49 847 621 975 0 0 0 297 897 461
Future Volume (veh/h) 415 114 49 847 621 975 0 0 0 297 897 461
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 461 127 0 941 690 1083 330 997 512
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 2 1 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 1585 832 1189 540 1134 664
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.32 0.32 0.32
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 3361 1765 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 461 127 0 941 690 1083 330 997 512
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1765 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.8 0.0 15.7 33.6 66.0 23.2 37.4 40.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.8 0.0 15.7 33.6 66.0 23.2 37.4 40.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 1585 832 1189 540 1134 664
V/C Ratio(X) 1.16 0.31 0.00 0.59 0.83 0.91 0.61 0.88 0.77
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 1585 832 1189 540 1134 664
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.2 0.0 9.5 11.4 4.0 40.1 44.9 33.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 98.2 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.7 1.2 2.1 4.2 3.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.0 2.3 0.0 7.0 15.8 42.0 11.0 18.9 20.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 159.7 56.6 0.0 9.6 12.1 5.1 42.2 49.2 36.5
LnGrp LOS F E A B A D D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 588 2714 1839
Approach Delay, s/veh 137.4 8.5 44.4
Approach LOS F A D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 49.0 70.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 44.0 65.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 42.4 68.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.3 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 36.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
2022
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 2 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 394 0 0 1872 465 0 0 316 0 0 520
Future Volume (vph) 18 394 0 0 1872 465 0 0 316 0 0 520
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 438 0 0 2080 517 0 0 351 0 0 578
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 20 438 0 0 2080 369 0 0 351 0 0 568
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6 Free 5
Actuated Green, G (s) 50.0 140.0 80.0 80.0 140.0 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 51.0 140.0 81.0 81.0 140.0 51.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 1.00 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 590 3241 2072 838 1476 537
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.14 c0.58
v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 0.24 c0.38
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.14 1.00 0.44 0.24 1.06
Uniform Delay, d1 28.6 0.0 29.5 16.7 0.0 44.5
Progression Factor 1.57 1.00 0.60 0.35 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 17.7 1.3 0.4 54.9
Delay (s) 44.9 0.0 35.4 7.1 0.4 99.4
Level of Service D A D A A F
Approach Delay (s) 2.0 29.7 0.4 99.4
Approach LOS A C A F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.02
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.8% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
2022
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 2 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 58 37 713 2222 7 3 58
Future Volume (veh/h) 58 37 713 2222 7 3 58
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 41 792 2469 8 3 64
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 63 3249 4416 14 4 94
Arrive On Green 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5979 18 67 1422
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 41 792 1679 798 68 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1762 1510 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 0.04 0.94
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 63 3249 3003 1427 100 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.24 0.56 0.56 0.68 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 216 3249 3003 1427 183 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.65 0.65 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.4 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.4 0.2 0.5 1.0 7.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.2 0.2 0.5 1.0 72.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 833 2477 68
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.8 0.7 72.2
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 126.7 13.3 9.3 117.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 17.0 92.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 8.2 5.3 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 47.2 0.1 0.1 43.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.9
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
2022
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 2 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 660 99 13 2085 142 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 660 99 13 2085 142 6
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 733 110 14 2317 158 7
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2540 379 28 3375 324 289
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.75 0.19 0.19
Sat Flow, veh/h 4133 537 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 501 342 14 2317 158 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1670 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 37.1 11.7 0.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 37.1 11.7 0.5
Prop In Lane 0.32 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1741 1177 28 3375 324 289
V/C Ratio(X) 0.29 0.29 0.50 0.69 0.49 0.02
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1741 1177 60 3375 324 289
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 9.0 50.3 45.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.6 13.2 1.2 5.2 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.2 0.6 15.6 5.9 0.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.4 0.6 81.5 10.2 55.5 46.0
LnGrp LOS A A F B E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 843 2331 165
Approach Delay, s/veh 0.5 10.6 55.1
Approach LOS A B E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 102.7 109.0 31.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 95.0 104.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 2.0 39.1 13.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 42.1 36.0 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 10.2
HCM 2010 LOS B
2022
1.c. Phase 3 – Year 2023 with and without Project (includes Phase 1 and
2)
AM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 419 115 50 855 627 985 0 0 0 300 905 466
Future Volume (veh/h) 419 115 50 855 627 985 0 0 0 300 905 466
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 466 128 0 950 697 1094 333 1006 518
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 466 128 0 950 697 1094 333 1006 518
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.9 0.0 64.0 15.8 64.0 23.0 37.1 40.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.9 0.0 64.0 15.8 64.0 23.0 37.1 40.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
V/C Ratio(X) 1.18 0.31 0.00 1.24 0.45 0.92 0.59 0.85 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.2 0.0 27.4 18.0 7.0 38.5 43.2 31.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 103.0 0.4 0.0 107.5 0.0 1.3 1.8 3.2 3.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.3 2.3 0.0 52.3 7.2 42.6 10.9 18.6 20.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 164.5 56.6 0.0 134.9 18.0 8.3 40.3 46.4 34.6
LnGrp LOS F E F B A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 594 2741 1857
Approach Delay, s/veh 141.3 54.7 42.1
Approach LOS F D D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 51.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 46.0 63.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 42.1 66.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 60.1
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 398 0 0 1891 470 0 0 319 0 0 525
Future Volume (vph) 18 398 0 0 1891 470 0 0 319 0 0 525
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 442 0 0 2101 522 0 0 354 0 0 583
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 20 442 0 0 2101 375 0 0 354 0 0 573
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6 Free 5
Actuated Green, G (s) 50.0 140.0 80.0 80.0 140.0 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 51.0 140.0 81.0 81.0 140.0 51.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 1.00 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 590 3241 2072 838 1476 537
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.14 c0.59
v/s Ratio Perm 0.26 0.24 c0.39
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.14 1.01 0.45 0.24 1.07
Uniform Delay, d1 28.6 0.0 29.5 16.8 0.0 44.5
Progression Factor 1.57 1.00 0.61 0.38 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 20.2 1.3 0.4 57.8
Delay (s) 44.8 0.1 38.2 7.7 0.4 102.3
Level of Service D A D A A F
Approach Delay (s) 2.0 32.1 0.4 102.3
Approach LOS A C A F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 36.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.03
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.5% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 58 37 720 2244 7 3 58
Future Volume (veh/h) 58 37 720 2244 7 3 58
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 41 800 2493 8 3 64
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 63 3249 4416 14 4 94
Arrive On Green 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5979 17 67 1422
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 41 800 1695 806 68 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1762 1510 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 0.04 0.94
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 63 3249 3003 1427 100 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.25 0.56 0.56 0.68 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 204 3249 3003 1427 183 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.64 0.64 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.4 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.4 0.2 0.5 1.0 7.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.2 0.2 0.5 1.0 72.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 841 2501 68
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.8 0.7 72.2
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 126.7 13.3 9.3 117.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 16.0 93.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 8.2 5.3 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 48.4 0.1 0.1 44.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.9
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 666 100 13 2106 144 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 666 100 13 2106 144 6
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 740 111 14 2340 160 7
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2514 375 28 3343 336 300
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.74 0.20 0.20
Sat Flow, veh/h 4133 537 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 506 345 14 2340 160 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1670 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 39.0 11.8 0.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 39.0 11.8 0.5
Prop In Lane 0.32 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1724 1165 28 3343 336 300
V/C Ratio(X) 0.29 0.30 0.50 0.70 0.48 0.02
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1724 1165 72 3343 336 300
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 9.6 49.5 45.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.6 13.2 1.2 4.8 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.2 0.6 16.2 5.9 0.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.4 0.6 81.5 10.9 54.3 45.2
LnGrp LOS A A F B D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 851 2354 167
Approach Delay, s/veh 0.5 11.3 53.9
Approach LOS A B D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 101.7 108.0 32.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 93.0 103.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 2.0 41.0 13.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 42.7 35.8 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 10.7
HCM 2010 LOS B
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 419 120 50 857 628 988 0 0 0 323 905 466
Future Volume (veh/h) 419 120 50 857 628 988 0 0 0 323 905 466
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 466 133 0 952 698 1098 359 1006 518
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 466 133 0 952 698 1098 359 1006 518
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 5.1 0.0 64.0 15.8 64.0 25.3 37.1 40.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 5.1 0.0 64.0 15.8 64.0 25.3 37.1 40.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
V/C Ratio(X) 1.18 0.33 0.00 1.24 0.46 0.92 0.64 0.85 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.3 0.0 27.4 18.0 7.0 39.3 43.2 31.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 103.0 0.5 0.0 108.7 0.0 1.4 2.2 3.2 3.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.3 2.4 0.0 52.5 7.3 42.8 12.0 18.6 20.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 164.5 56.7 0.0 136.1 18.0 8.3 41.5 46.4 34.6
LnGrp LOS F E F B A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 599 2748 1883
Approach Delay, s/veh 140.6 55.1 42.2
Approach LOS F E D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 51.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 46.0 63.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 42.1 66.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 60.2
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
2023
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/30/2018 2021 Phase 3 AM Peak -- with dual WBL Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 419 120 50 857 628 988 0 0 0 323 905 466
Future Volume (veh/h) 419 120 50 857 628 988 0 0 0 323 905 466
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 466 133 0 952 698 1098 359 1006 518
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 2 1 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 1537 807 1189 564 1185 686
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 3361 1765 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 466 133 0 952 698 1098 359 1006 518
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1765 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 5.1 0.0 24.9 45.8 64.0 25.3 37.1 40.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 5.1 0.0 24.9 45.8 64.0 25.3 37.1 40.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 1537 807 1189 564 1185 686
V/C Ratio(X) 1.18 0.33 0.00 0.62 0.87 0.92 0.64 0.85 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 1537 807 1189 564 1185 686
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.3 0.0 19.8 23.9 7.0 39.3 43.2 31.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 103.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 1.0 1.4 2.2 3.2 3.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.3 2.4 0.0 11.5 22.2 42.8 12.0 18.6 20.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 164.5 56.7 0.0 19.9 24.9 8.3 41.5 46.4 34.6
LnGrp LOS F E B C A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 599 2748 1883
Approach Delay, s/veh 140.6 16.5 42.2
Approach LOS F B D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 51.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 46.0 63.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 42.1 66.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 40.0
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
2023
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 426 0 0 1897 472 0 0 329 0 0 525
Future Volume (vph) 18 426 0 0 1897 472 0 0 329 0 0 525
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 473 0 0 2108 524 0 0 366 0 0 583
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 20 473 0 0 2108 377 0 0 366 0 0 573
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6 Free 5
Actuated Green, G (s) 50.0 140.0 80.0 80.0 140.0 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 51.0 140.0 81.0 81.0 140.0 51.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 1.00 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 590 3241 2072 838 1476 537
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.15 c0.59
v/s Ratio Perm 0.26 0.25 c0.39
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.15 1.02 0.45 0.25 1.07
Uniform Delay, d1 28.6 0.0 29.5 16.8 0.0 44.5
Progression Factor 1.61 1.00 0.61 0.38 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 21.2 1.3 0.4 57.8
Delay (s) 46.1 0.0 39.2 7.7 0.4 102.3
Level of Service D A D A A F
Approach Delay (s) 1.9 32.9 0.4 102.3
Approach LOS A C A F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 36.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.7% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
2023
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 58 37 758 2252 7 3 58
Future Volume (veh/h) 58 37 758 2252 7 3 58
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 41 842 2502 8 3 64
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 63 3249 4416 14 4 94
Arrive On Green 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5980 17 67 1422
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 41 842 1701 809 68 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1762 1510 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 0.04 0.94
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 63 3249 3003 1427 100 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.26 0.57 0.57 0.68 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 204 3249 3003 1427 183 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.64 0.64 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.4 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.4 0.2 0.5 1.0 7.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.2 0.2 0.5 1.0 72.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 883 2510 68
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.6 0.7 72.2
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 126.7 13.3 9.3 117.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 16.0 93.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 8.2 5.3 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 50.1 0.1 0.1 46.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.8
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
2023
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 3 AM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 682 123 16 2106 153 7
Future Volume (veh/h) 682 123 16 2106 153 7
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 758 137 18 2340 170 8
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2429 436 33 3343 336 300
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.74 0.20 0.20
Sat Flow, veh/h 4026 628 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 534 361 18 2340 170 8
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1654 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.5 39.0 12.6 0.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.5 39.0 12.6 0.6
Prop In Lane 0.38 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1716 1149 33 3343 336 300
V/C Ratio(X) 0.31 0.31 0.54 0.70 0.51 0.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1716 1149 72 3343 336 300
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.0 9.6 49.8 45.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.7 13.2 1.2 5.4 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.2 0.8 16.2 6.4 0.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.5 0.7 81.2 10.9 55.2 45.2
LnGrp LOS A A F B E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 895 2358 178
Approach Delay, s/veh 0.6 11.4 54.7
Approach LOS A B D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.8 101.2 108.0 32.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 93.0 103.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 2.0 41.0 14.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 43.8 36.5 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 10.8
HCM 2010 LOS B
2023
1.d. Full Build Year 2023 with and without Project. Note that the
“without Project” condition does not include any of the phased
development. The “with Project” condition is the same as 1.c. above.
AM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 AM -- without all of project Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 419 110 50 823 614 951 0 0 0 277 905 466
Future Volume (veh/h) 419 110 50 823 614 951 0 0 0 277 905 466
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 466 122 0 914 682 1057 308 1006 518
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.34 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 1681 3529 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 466 122 0 914 682 1057 308 1006 518
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 64.0 15.3 64.0 20.9 37.1 40.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 4.6 0.0 64.0 15.3 64.0 20.9 37.1 40.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
V/C Ratio(X) 1.18 0.30 0.00 1.19 0.44 0.89 0.55 0.85 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 396 407 0 768 1533 1189 564 1185 686
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 61.5 56.1 0.0 27.4 17.9 7.0 37.8 43.2 31.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 103.0 0.4 0.0 86.9 0.0 1.1 1.5 3.2 3.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.3 2.2 0.0 47.9 7.0 41.1 9.9 18.6 20.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 164.5 56.5 0.0 114.3 17.9 8.0 39.3 46.4 34.6
LnGrp LOS F E F B A D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 588 2653 1832
Approach Delay, s/veh 142.1 47.2 41.9
Approach LOS F D D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 51.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 46.0 63.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 42.1 66.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 56.3
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 AM -- without all of project Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 18 370 0 0 1812 438 0 0 307 0 0 525
Future Volume (vph) 18 370 0 0 1812 438 0 0 307 0 0 525
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 20 411 0 0 2013 487 0 0 341 0 0 583
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 144 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 20 411 0 0 2013 343 0 0 341 0 0 573
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6 Free 5
Actuated Green, G (s) 50.0 140.0 80.0 80.0 140.0 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 51.0 140.0 81.0 81.0 140.0 51.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 1.00 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 590 3241 2072 838 1476 537
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.13 c0.56
v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 0.23 c0.39
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.13 0.97 0.41 0.23 1.07
Uniform Delay, d1 28.6 0.0 28.4 16.3 0.0 44.5
Progression Factor 1.54 1.00 0.59 0.35 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 11.6 1.1 0.4 57.8
Delay (s) 44.0 0.1 28.3 6.9 0.4 102.3
Level of Service D A C A A F
Approach Delay (s) 2.1 24.1 0.4 102.3
Approach LOS A C A F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.9% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 AM -- without all of project Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 58 37 680 2133 7 3 58
Future Volume (veh/h) 58 37 680 2133 7 3 58
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 41 756 2370 8 3 64
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 63 3249 4415 15 4 94
Arrive On Green 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5978 18 67 1422
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 41 756 1612 766 68 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1761 1510 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.01 0.04 0.94
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 63 3249 3003 1427 100 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.23 0.54 0.54 0.68 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 204 3249 3003 1427 183 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.63 0.63 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.4 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.4 0.2 0.4 0.9 7.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.3 0.2 0.4 0.9 72.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 797 2378 68
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.0 0.6 72.2
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 126.7 13.3 9.3 117.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 16.0 93.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 8.2 5.3 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 42.5 0.1 0.1 39.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.9
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 AM -- without all of project Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 661 65 13 2106 35 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 661 65 13 2106 35 6
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 734 72 14 2340 39 7
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2650 259 28 3343 336 300
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.74 0.20 0.20
Sat Flow, veh/h 4328 371 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 476 330 14 2340 39 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1699 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 39.0 2.7 0.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 39.0 2.7 0.5
Prop In Lane 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1724 1186 28 3343 336 300
V/C Ratio(X) 0.28 0.28 0.50 0.70 0.12 0.02
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1724 1186 72 3343 336 300
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 9.6 45.9 45.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.6 13.2 1.2 0.7 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.2 0.6 16.2 1.3 0.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.4 0.6 81.5 10.9 46.6 45.2
LnGrp LOS A A F B D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 806 2354 46
Approach Delay, s/veh 0.5 11.3 46.4
Approach LOS A B D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 101.7 108.0 32.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 93.0 103.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 2.0 41.0 4.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 41.5 35.0 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 9.1
HCM 2010 LOS A
2. Synchro PM Peak Hour Level of Service Summaries
2.a. Phase 1 -- Year 2021 with and without Project
PM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 without Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 700 541 68 348 246 801 0 0 0 1191 775 664
Future Volume (veh/h) 700 541 68 348 246 801 0 0 0 1191 775 664
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 778 601 0 387 273 890 1323 861 738
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 606 623 0 300 599 1093 1849 971 1104
Arrive On Green 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 778 601 0 387 273 890 1323 861 738
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 26.0 24.9 0.0 25.0 11.0 25.0 40.9 60.0 35.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 26.0 24.9 0.0 25.0 11.0 25.0 40.9 60.0 35.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 606 623 0 300 599 1093 1849 971 1104
V/C Ratio(X) 1.28 0.97 0.00 1.29 0.46 0.81 0.72 0.89 0.67
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 606 623 0 300 599 1093 1849 971 1104
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.0 56.6 0.0 65.9 59.3 9.8 23.4 27.7 9.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 140.4 27.5 0.0 143.8 0.3 2.8 1.0 5.2 1.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 23.5 13.9 0.0 23.6 5.1 35.4 19.2 30.6 25.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 197.4 84.0 0.0 209.6 59.6 12.6 24.3 32.9 10.9
LnGrp LOS F F F E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1379 1550 2922
Approach Delay, s/veh 148.0 70.1 23.5
Approach LOS F E C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 30.0 81.0 29.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 76.0 24.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 28.0 62.0 27.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 11.7 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 65.2
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 without Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 63 1669 0 0 733 256 0 0 802 0 0 699
Future Volume (vph) 63 1669 0 0 733 256 0 0 802 0 0 699
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 70 1854 0 0 814 284 0 0 891 0 0 777
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 188 0 0 0 0 0 12
Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 1854 0 0 814 96 0 0 891 0 0 765
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 83.8 140.0 46.2 46.2 140.0 83.8
Effective Green, g (s) 84.8 140.0 47.2 47.2 140.0 84.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 1.00 0.34 0.34 1.00 0.61
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 981 3241 1207 488 1476 894
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.57 c0.23 c0.52
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.60
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.57 0.67 0.20 0.60 0.86
Uniform Delay, d1 11.4 0.0 39.8 32.9 0.0 22.6
Progression Factor 1.31 1.00 0.85 0.39 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 2.9 0.9 1.8 8.1
Delay (s) 14.9 0.1 36.6 13.6 1.8 30.7
Level of Service B A D B A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 30.7 1.8 30.7
Approach LOS A C A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.3% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 without Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2204 973 14 4 32
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2204 973 14 4 32
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 48 2449 1081 16 4 36
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 72 3315 4426 65 7 64
Arrive On Green 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5906 80 148 1336
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 48 2449 745 352 41 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1751 1522 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.05 0.10 0.88
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 72 3315 3051 1441 73 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.74 0.24 0.24 0.56 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 3315 3051 1441 185 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.79 0.79 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.1 1.2 0.2 0.4 6.5 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.9 0.4 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 71.1 1.2 0.2 0.4 72.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2497 1097 41
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.5 0.3 72.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 129.2 10.8 10.0 119.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 11.0 98.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 5.7 5.9 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 63.1 0.1 0.0 58.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.6
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 without Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2167 37 12 947 40 69
Future Volume (veh/h) 2167 37 12 947 40 69
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2408 41 13 1052 44 77
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3197 54 27 3664 216 193
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.81 0.13 0.13
Sat Flow, veh/h 4682 71 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1431 1018 13 1052 44 77
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1752 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.1 7.9 3.3 6.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.1 7.9 3.3 6.6
Prop In Lane 0.04 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1902 1349 27 3664 216 193
V/C Ratio(X) 0.75 0.75 0.49 0.29 0.20 0.40
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1902 1349 48 3664 216 193
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.56 0.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 3.2 54.6 56.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 2.2 13.1 0.2 2.1 6.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.8 0.6 3.3 1.7 3.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1.6 2.2 81.5 3.3 56.7 62.1
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2449 1065 121
Approach Delay, s/veh 1.9 4.3 60.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.2 111.8 118.0 22.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 105.0 113.0 17.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 2.0 9.9 8.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 54.1 54.1 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.5
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/26/2018 2021 with Phase 1 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 700 547 68 358 250 811 0 0 0 1222 775 664
Future Volume (veh/h) 700 547 68 358 250 811 0 0 0 1222 775 664
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 778 608 0 398 278 901 1358 861 738
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 606 623 0 300 599 1093 1849 971 1104
Arrive On Green 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 778 608 0 398 278 901 1358 861 738
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 26.0 25.3 0.0 25.0 10.4 25.0 42.7 60.0 35.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 26.0 25.3 0.0 25.0 10.4 25.0 42.7 60.0 35.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 606 623 0 300 599 1093 1849 971 1104
V/C Ratio(X) 1.28 0.98 0.00 1.33 0.46 0.82 0.73 0.89 0.67
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 606 623 0 300 599 1093 1849 971 1104
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.0 56.7 0.0 57.5 51.5 8.6 23.8 27.7 9.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 140.4 30.1 0.0 159.0 0.3 2.9 1.1 5.2 1.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 23.5 14.3 0.0 24.8 4.9 35.7 20.1 30.6 25.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 197.4 86.8 0.0 216.5 51.8 11.5 24.8 32.9 10.9
LnGrp LOS F F F D B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1386 1577 2957
Approach Delay, s/veh 148.9 70.4 23.7
Approach LOS F E C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 30.0 81.0 29.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 76.0 24.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 28.0 62.0 27.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 11.8 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 65.4
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 05/23/2019
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 1 PM Peak with dual wblt int1 Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 700 547 68 358 250 811 0 0 0 1222 775 664
Future Volume (veh/h) 700 547 68 358 250 811 0 0 0 1222 775 664
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 778 608 0 398 278 901 1358 861 738
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 2 1 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 648 340 1104 1825 958 1082
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.54 0.54 0.54
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 3361 1765 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 778 608 0 398 278 901 1358 861 738
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1765 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 16.2 21.8 27.0 43.4 61.0 37.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 16.2 21.8 27.0 43.4 61.0 37.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 648 340 1104 1825 958 1082
V/C Ratio(X) 1.34 1.02 0.00 0.61 0.82 0.82 0.74 0.90 0.68
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 648 340 1104 1825 958 1082
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 60.5 63.1 9.8 24.5 28.6 10.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 162.7 40.7 0.0 0.9 8.3 2.7 1.1 5.9 1.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 24.4 14.9 0.0 7.6 11.4 35.8 20.3 31.2 26.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 220.2 98.2 0.0 61.4 71.4 12.5 25.7 34.4 12.1
LnGrp LOS F F E E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1386 1577 2957
Approach Delay, s/veh 166.7 35.2 24.8
Approach LOS F D C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 80.0 31.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 75.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 63.0 29.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.3 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 60.8
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2021 Phase 1 PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 63 1706 0 0 757 266 0 0 818 0 0 699
Future Volume (vph) 63 1706 0 0 757 266 0 0 818 0 0 699
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 70 1896 0 0 841 296 0 0 909 0 0 777
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 196 0 0 0 0 0 11
Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 1896 0 0 841 100 0 0 909 0 0 766
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 83.9 140.0 46.1 46.1 140.0 83.9
Effective Green, g (s) 84.9 140.0 47.1 47.1 140.0 84.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 1.00 0.34 0.34 1.00 0.61
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 983 3241 1205 487 1476 895
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.58 c0.23 c0.52
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.62
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.59 0.70 0.20 0.62 0.86
Uniform Delay, d1 11.3 0.0 40.3 33.1 0.0 22.6
Progression Factor 1.31 1.00 0.81 0.28 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 3.3 0.9 1.9 8.1
Delay (s) 14.9 0.1 35.9 10.1 1.9 30.6
Level of Service B A D B A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 29.2 1.9 30.6
Approach LOS A C A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.8% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/26/2018 2021 with Phase 1 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2258 1007 14 4 32
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2258 1007 14 4 32
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 48 2509 1119 16 4 36
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 73 3315 4427 63 7 64
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.89 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5910 77 148 1336
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 48 2509 770 365 41 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1751 1522 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 30.9 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 30.9 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 0.10 0.88
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 73 3315 3049 1441 73 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.66 0.76 0.25 0.25 0.56 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 3315 3049 1441 185 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.33 0.33 0.96 0.96 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 66.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 65.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.4 0.6 0.2 0.4 6.5 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.9 10.2 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 69.3 3.0 0.2 0.4 72.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2557 1135 41
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.2 0.3 72.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 129.2 10.8 10.0 119.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 11.0 98.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 32.9 5.7 5.9 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 55.0 0.1 0.0 61.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 3.8
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/26/2018 2021 with Phase 1 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2167 91 17 947 75 69
Future Volume (veh/h) 2167 91 17 947 75 69
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2408 101 19 1052 83 77
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3118 130 34 3696 204 182
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.82 0.12 0.12
Sat Flow, veh/h 4567 168 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1469 1040 19 1052 83 77
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1735 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.6 7.6 6.4 6.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.6 7.6 6.4 6.7
Prop In Lane 0.10 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1908 1340 34 3696 204 182
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.78 0.55 0.28 0.41 0.42
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1908 1340 48 3696 204 182
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.53 0.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 67.9 2.9 56.8 57.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 2.4 13.1 0.2 5.9 7.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.9 0.9 3.2 3.3 3.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1.6 2.4 81.1 3.1 62.8 64.0
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2509 1071 160
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.0 4.5 63.4
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.9 112.1 119.0 21.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 106.0 114.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.6 2.0 9.6 8.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 57.0 57.1 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.3
HCM 2010 LOS A
2.b. Phase 2 – Year 2022 with and without Project (includes Phase 1)
PM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 without Phase 2 -- PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 707 553 68 361 252 819 0 0 0 1235 783 671
Future Volume (veh/h) 707 553 68 361 252 819 0 0 0 1235 783 671
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 786 614 0 401 280 910 1372 870 746
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 786 614 0 401 280 910 1372 870 746
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.3 26.0 43.4 61.3 37.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.3 26.0 43.4 61.3 37.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
V/C Ratio(X) 1.35 1.03 0.00 1.28 0.45 0.82 0.74 0.90 0.68
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 65.7 58.8 9.6 24.0 28.0 10.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 168.6 43.4 0.0 140.3 0.3 2.8 1.1 5.7 1.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 24.9 15.2 0.0 24.3 5.3 36.2 20.3 31.3 26.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 226.1 100.9 0.0 206.0 59.1 12.4 25.1 33.6 11.7
LnGrp LOS F F F E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1400 1591 2988
Approach Delay, s/veh 171.2 69.4 24.2
Approach LOS F E C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 81.0 30.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 76.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 63.3 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.9 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 70.7
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 without Phase 2 -- PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 64 1723 0 0 764 269 0 0 826 0 0 706
Future Volume (vph) 64 1723 0 0 764 269 0 0 826 0 0 706
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 71 1914 0 0 849 299 0 0 918 0 0 784
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 197 0 0 0 0 0 11
Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 1914 0 0 849 102 0 0 918 0 0 773
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 83.4 140.0 46.6 46.6 140.0 83.4
Effective Green, g (s) 84.4 140.0 47.6 47.6 140.0 84.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 1.00 0.34 0.34 1.00 0.60
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 977 3241 1217 493 1476 889
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.59 c0.24 c0.52
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.62
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.59 0.70 0.21 0.62 0.87
Uniform Delay, d1 11.5 0.0 40.0 32.8 0.0 23.2
Progression Factor 1.31 1.00 0.78 0.21 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 3.2 0.9 2.0 9.1
Delay (s) 15.1 0.1 34.3 7.7 2.0 32.3
Level of Service B A C A A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 27.3 2.0 32.3
Approach LOS A C A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.4% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 without Phase 2 -- PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2281 1017 14 4 33
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2281 1017 14 4 33
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 48 2534 1130 16 4 37
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 72 3313 4426 63 7 66
Arrive On Green 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5910 76 145 1340
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 48 2534 778 368 42 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1751 1521 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 0.10 0.88
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 72 3313 3048 1440 74 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.76 0.26 0.26 0.56 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 3313 3048 1440 185 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.77 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.9 1.3 0.2 0.4 6.5 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.9 0.4 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 70.9 1.3 0.2 0.4 72.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2582 1146 42
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.6 0.3 72.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 129.1 10.9 10.0 119.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 11.0 98.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 5.8 5.9 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 68.2 0.1 0.0 62.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.7
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2022 without Phase 2 -- PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2188 92 18 956 75 69
Future Volume (veh/h) 2188 92 18 956 75 69
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2431 102 20 1062 83 77
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3115 130 36 3696 204 182
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.82 0.12 0.12
Sat Flow, veh/h 4567 168 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1482 1051 20 1062 83 77
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1735 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.7 7.7 6.4 6.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.7 7.7 6.4 6.7
Prop In Lane 0.10 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1906 1339 36 3696 204 182
V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.78 0.56 0.29 0.41 0.42
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1906 1339 48 3696 204 182
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.52 0.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 67.9 2.9 56.8 57.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.7 2.5 13.0 0.2 5.9 7.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.9 0.9 3.2 3.3 3.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1.7 2.5 80.9 3.1 62.8 64.0
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2533 1082 160
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.0 4.6 63.4
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.0 112.0 119.0 21.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 106.0 114.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.7 2.0 9.7 8.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 58.2 58.3 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.3
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2022 with Phase 2 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 707 560 68 372 256 829 0 0 0 1269 783 671
Future Volume (veh/h) 707 560 68 372 256 829 0 0 0 1269 783 671
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 786 622 0 413 284 921 1410 870 746
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 786 622 0 413 284 921 1410 870 746
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.5 26.0 45.5 61.3 37.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.5 26.0 45.5 61.3 37.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
V/C Ratio(X) 1.35 1.04 0.00 1.32 0.46 0.83 0.76 0.90 0.68
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 65.7 58.9 9.6 24.4 28.0 10.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 168.6 47.2 0.0 156.7 0.3 3.0 1.2 5.7 1.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 24.9 15.5 0.0 25.7 5.4 36.7 21.3 31.3 26.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 226.1 104.7 0.0 222.4 59.1 12.6 25.6 33.6 11.7
LnGrp LOS F F F E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1408 1618 3026
Approach Delay, s/veh 172.5 74.3 24.5
Approach LOS F E C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 81.0 30.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 76.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 63.3 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 11.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 72.2
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 05/23/2019
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2022 with Phase 2 Project PM Peak with dual wblt int1 Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 707 560 68 372 256 829 0 0 0 1269 783 671
Future Volume (veh/h) 707 560 68 372 256 829 0 0 0 1269 783 671
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 786 622 0 413 284 921 1410 870 746
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 2 1 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 672 353 1104 1801 945 1071
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.54 0.54 0.54
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 3361 1765 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 786 622 0 413 284 921 1410 870 746
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1765 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 16.7 22.2 28.0 47.0 63.2 39.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 16.7 22.2 28.0 47.0 63.2 39.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 672 353 1104 1801 945 1071
V/C Ratio(X) 1.35 1.04 0.00 0.61 0.80 0.83 0.78 0.92 0.70
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 672 353 1104 1801 945 1071
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 60.1 62.7 10.0 26.0 29.8 11.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 168.6 47.2 0.0 0.9 6.9 3.0 1.4 7.3 1.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 24.9 15.5 0.0 7.9 11.6 36.7 22.1 32.6 27.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 226.1 104.7 0.0 61.0 69.6 13.0 27.4 37.0 12.9
LnGrp LOS F F E E B C D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1408 1618 3026
Approach Delay, s/veh 172.5 35.2 26.6
Approach LOS F D C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 79.0 32.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 74.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 65.2 30.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 7.9 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 62.8
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2022 with Phase 2 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 64 1764 0 0 789 280 0 0 843 0 0 706
Future Volume (vph) 64 1764 0 0 789 280 0 0 843 0 0 706
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 71 1960 0 0 877 311 0 0 937 0 0 784
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 203 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 1960 0 0 877 108 0 0 937 0 0 774
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 83.4 140.0 46.6 46.6 140.0 83.4
Effective Green, g (s) 84.4 140.0 47.6 47.6 140.0 84.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 1.00 0.34 0.34 1.00 0.60
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 977 3241 1217 493 1476 889
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.60 c0.24 c0.52
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.64
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.60 0.72 0.22 0.63 0.87
Uniform Delay, d1 11.5 0.0 40.4 33.0 0.0 23.2
Progression Factor 1.31 1.00 0.78 0.20 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 3.6 1.0 2.1 9.3
Delay (s) 15.2 0.1 35.0 7.6 2.1 32.5
Level of Service B A D A A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 27.8 2.1 32.5
Approach LOS A C A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.9% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2022 with Phase 2 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2339 1053 14 4 33
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 43 2339 1053 14 4 33
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 48 2599 1170 16 4 37
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 72 3313 4428 61 7 66
Arrive On Green 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5913 74 145 1340
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 48 2599 805 381 42 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1752 1521 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 0.10 0.88
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 72 3313 3048 1441 74 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.78 0.26 0.26 0.56 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 3313 3048 1441 185 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.75 0.75 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.7 1.5 0.2 0.4 6.5 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.9 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 70.8 1.5 0.2 0.4 72.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2647 1186 42
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.7 0.3 72.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 129.1 10.9 10.0 119.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 11.0 98.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 5.8 5.9 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 72.1 0.1 0.0 65.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.7
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2022 with Phase 2 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2196 142 23 956 112 69
Future Volume (veh/h) 2196 142 23 956 112 69
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2440 158 26 1062 124 77
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3020 194 44 3696 204 182
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.82 0.12 0.12
Sat Flow, veh/h 4468 253 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1522 1076 26 1062 124 77
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1720 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.1 7.7 9.8 6.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 2.1 7.7 9.8 6.7
Prop In Lane 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1895 1319 44 3696 204 182
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.82 0.60 0.29 0.61 0.42
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1895 1319 48 3696 204 182
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.48 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 67.5 2.9 58.3 57.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.8 2.8 15.7 0.2 12.7 7.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 1.0 1.2 3.2 5.3 3.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1.8 2.8 83.2 3.1 71.1 64.0
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2598 1088 201
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.2 5.0 68.4
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.6 111.4 119.0 21.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 106.0 114.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.1 2.0 9.7 11.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 61.0 61.1 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 6.4
HCM 2010 LOS A
2.c. Phase 3 – Year 2023 with and without Project (includes Phase 1 and
2)
PM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 714 565 69 376 259 838 0 0 0 1281 791 677
Future Volume (veh/h) 714 565 69 376 259 838 0 0 0 1281 791 677
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 793 628 0 418 288 931 1423 879 752
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 793 628 0 418 288 931 1423 879 752
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.6 26.0 46.3 62.5 38.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.6 26.0 46.3 62.5 38.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
V/C Ratio(X) 1.36 1.05 0.00 1.34 0.46 0.84 0.77 0.91 0.69
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 65.7 59.0 9.6 24.6 28.2 10.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 173.8 50.2 0.0 162.8 0.3 3.0 1.3 6.2 1.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 25.3 15.7 0.0 26.2 5.4 37.1 21.7 31.9 26.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 231.3 107.7 0.0 228.5 59.2 12.6 25.9 34.4 11.8
LnGrp LOS F F F E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1421 1637 3054
Approach Delay, s/veh 176.7 76.0 24.8
Approach LOS F E C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 81.0 30.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 76.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 64.5 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 73.8
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 65 1782 0 0 797 282 0 0 852 0 0 713
Future Volume (vph) 65 1782 0 0 797 282 0 0 852 0 0 713
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 72 1980 0 0 886 313 0 0 947 0 0 792
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 203 0 0 0 0 0 10
Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 1980 0 0 886 110 0 0 947 0 0 782
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 82.9 140.0 47.1 47.1 140.0 82.9
Effective Green, g (s) 83.9 140.0 48.1 48.1 140.0 83.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 1.00 0.34 0.34 1.00 0.60
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 971 3241 1230 498 1476 884
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.61 c0.25 c0.53
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.64
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.61 0.72 0.22 0.64 0.88
Uniform Delay, d1 11.8 0.0 40.1 32.6 0.0 23.9
Progression Factor 1.31 1.00 0.74 0.15 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 3.5 1.0 2.2 10.5
Delay (s) 15.4 0.1 33.2 5.8 2.2 34.4
Level of Service B A C A A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 26.0 2.2 34.4
Approach LOS A C A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 44 2362 1064 14 4 33
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 44 2362 1064 14 4 33
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 49 2624 1182 16 4 37
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 73 3313 4425 60 7 66
Arrive On Green 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5914 73 145 1340
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 49 2624 813 385 42 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1752 1521 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 0.10 0.88
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 73 3313 3045 1440 74 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.79 0.27 0.27 0.56 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 3313 3045 1440 185 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.75 0.75 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.6 1.5 0.2 0.4 6.5 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 70.5 1.5 0.2 0.4 72.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2673 1198 42
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.8 0.3 72.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 129.1 10.9 10.1 119.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 11.0 98.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 5.8 6.0 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 73.4 0.1 0.0 66.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.8
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 04/30/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2218 144 23 966 113 70
Future Volume (veh/h) 2218 144 23 966 113 70
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2464 160 26 1073 126 78
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2992 192 44 3664 216 193
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.81 0.13 0.13
Sat Flow, veh/h 4467 253 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1537 1087 26 1073 126 78
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1720 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.1 8.1 9.9 6.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 2.1 8.1 9.9 6.7
Prop In Lane 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1877 1307 44 3664 216 193
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.83 0.60 0.29 0.58 0.40
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1877 1307 48 3664 216 193
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.47 0.47 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 67.5 3.2 57.5 56.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.0 3.1 15.7 0.2 11.0 6.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 1.1 1.2 3.3 5.2 3.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 2.0 3.1 83.2 3.4 68.5 62.3
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2624 1099 204
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.4 5.3 66.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.6 110.4 118.0 22.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 105.0 113.0 17.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.1 2.0 10.1 11.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 62.0 62.0 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 6.5
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2023 with Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 714 567 69 387 265 853 0 0 0 1290 791 677
Future Volume (veh/h) 714 567 69 387 265 853 0 0 0 1290 791 677
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 793 630 0 430 294 948 1433 879 752
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 793 630 0 430 294 948 1433 879 752
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.9 26.0 46.8 62.5 38.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.9 26.0 46.8 62.5 38.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
V/C Ratio(X) 1.36 1.05 0.00 1.38 0.47 0.86 0.78 0.91 0.69
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 65.7 59.1 9.6 24.7 28.2 10.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 173.8 51.3 0.0 179.5 0.3 3.5 1.3 6.2 1.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 25.3 15.8 0.0 27.7 5.5 37.9 22.0 31.9 26.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 231.3 108.8 0.0 245.2 59.3 13.1 26.0 34.4 11.8
LnGrp LOS F F F E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1423 1672 3064
Approach Delay, s/veh 177.1 80.9 24.9
Approach LOS F F C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 81.0 30.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 76.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 64.5 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 75.3
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/30/2018 2023 with Phase 3 Project PM Peak -- dual WBL Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 714 567 69 387 265 853 0 0 0 1290 791 677
Future Volume (veh/h) 714 567 69 387 265 853 0 0 0 1290 791 677
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 793 630 0 430 294 948 1433 879 752
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 2 1 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 624 328 1104 1849 971 1093
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 3361 1765 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 793 630 0 430 294 948 1433 879 752
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1765 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 17.6 23.2 26.0 46.8 62.5 38.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 17.6 23.2 26.0 46.8 62.5 38.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 624 328 1104 1849 971 1093
V/C Ratio(X) 1.36 1.05 0.00 0.69 0.90 0.86 0.78 0.91 0.69
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 624 328 1104 1849 971 1093
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 61.7 64.4 9.6 24.7 28.2 10.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 173.8 51.3 0.0 1.5 14.6 3.5 1.3 6.2 1.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 25.3 15.8 0.0 8.3 12.7 37.9 22.0 31.9 26.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 231.3 108.8 0.0 63.3 79.0 13.1 26.0 34.4 11.8
LnGrp LOS F F E E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1423 1672 3064
Approach Delay, s/veh 177.1 37.6 24.9
Approach LOS F D C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 81.0 30.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 76.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 64.5 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 63.5
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 10/29/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2023 with Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 65 1793 0 0 829 293 0 0 856 0 0 713
Future Volume (vph) 65 1793 0 0 829 293 0 0 856 0 0 713
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 72 1992 0 0 921 326 0 0 951 0 0 792
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 204 0 0 0 0 0 9
Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 1992 0 0 921 122 0 0 951 0 0 783
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 83.0 140.0 47.0 47.0 140.0 83.0
Effective Green, g (s) 84.0 140.0 48.0 48.0 140.0 84.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 1.00 0.34 0.34 1.00 0.60
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 972 3241 1228 497 1476 885
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.61 c0.26 c0.53
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.64
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.61 0.75 0.25 0.64 0.88
Uniform Delay, d1 11.7 0.0 40.7 33.0 0.0 23.9
Progression Factor 1.31 1.00 0.74 0.16 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 4.1 1.1 2.2 10.5
Delay (s) 15.3 0.1 34.3 6.4 2.2 34.4
Level of Service B A C A A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 27.0 2.2 34.4
Approach LOS A C A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.2% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2023 with Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 44 2377 1107 14 4 33
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 44 2377 1107 14 4 33
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 49 2641 1230 16 4 37
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 73 3313 4428 58 7 66
Arrive On Green 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5918 70 145 1340
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 49 2641 846 400 42 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1752 1521 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 0.10 0.88
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 73 3313 3045 1440 74 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.80 0.28 0.28 0.56 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 3313 3045 1440 185 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.74 0.74 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.6 1.6 0.2 0.4 6.5 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 70.5 1.6 0.2 0.4 72.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2690 1246 42
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.8 0.3 72.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 129.1 10.9 10.1 119.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 11.0 98.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 5.8 6.0 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 75.4 0.1 0.0 68.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.8
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 10/30/2018
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2023 with Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2224 153 24 966 157 73
Future Volume (veh/h) 2224 153 24 966 157 73
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2471 170 27 1073 174 81
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2976 202 45 3664 216 193
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.81 0.13 0.13
Sat Flow, veh/h 4451 267 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1547 1094 27 1073 174 81
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1718 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.2 8.1 14.1 7.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 2.2 8.1 14.1 7.0
Prop In Lane 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1875 1304 45 3664 216 193
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.84 0.60 0.29 0.81 0.42
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1875 1304 48 3664 216 193
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.46 0.46 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 67.4 3.2 59.3 56.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.0 3.2 17.2 0.2 26.5 6.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 1.1 1.3 3.3 8.1 3.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 2.0 3.2 84.6 3.4 85.8 62.8
LnGrp LOS A A F A F E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2641 1100 255
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.5 5.4 78.5
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.7 110.3 118.0 22.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 105.0 113.0 17.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 2.0 10.1 16.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 62.8 62.7 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 8.1
HCM 2010 LOS A
2.d. Full Build Year 2023 with and without Project. Note that the
“without Project” condition does not include any of the phased
development. The “with Project” condition is the same as 1.c. above.
PM PK
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT all of Project -- PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 714 552 69 355 251 818 0 0 0 1216 791 677
Future Volume (veh/h) 714 552 69 355 251 818 0 0 0 1216 791 677
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 793 613 0 394 279 909 1351 879 752
Adj No. of Lanes 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.55 0.55 0.55
Sat Flow, veh/h 3261 3441 0 1681 3353 1500 3361 1765 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 793 613 0 394 279 909 1351 879 752
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1676 0 1681 1676 1500 1681 1765 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.2 26.0 42.3 62.5 38.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 25.0 0.0 26.0 11.2 26.0 42.3 62.5 38.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
V/C Ratio(X) 1.36 1.02 0.00 1.26 0.45 0.82 0.73 0.91 0.69
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 582 599 0 312 623 1104 1849 971 1093
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.40 0.40 0.40
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.5 57.5 0.0 65.7 58.8 9.6 23.7 28.2 10.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 173.8 43.0 0.0 131.5 0.3 2.9 1.0 6.2 1.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 25.3 15.1 0.0 23.5 5.3 36.1 19.8 31.9 26.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 231.3 100.5 0.0 197.2 59.1 12.5 24.7 34.4 11.8
LnGrp LOS F F F E B C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1406 1582 2982
Approach Delay, s/veh 174.3 66.7 24.3
Approach LOS F E C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 81.0 30.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 76.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 64.5 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 70.9
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 10/29/2018 2023 with Phase 3 Project PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 65 1704 0 0 748 263 0 0 819 0 0 713
Future Volume (vph) 65 1704 0 0 748 263 0 0 819 0 0 713
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 *0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.86 0.86
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1621 3241 3582 1450 1476 1476
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 72 1893 0 0 831 292 0 0 910 0 0 792
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 191 0 0 0 0 0 13
Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 1893 0 0 831 101 0 0 910 0 0 779
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Free Over
Protected Phases 5 2 6 5
Permitted Phases 6 Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 82.8 140.0 47.2 47.2 140.0 82.8
Effective Green, g (s) 83.8 140.0 48.2 48.2 140.0 83.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 1.00 0.34 0.34 1.00 0.60
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 970 3241 1233 499 1476 883
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.58 c0.23 c0.53
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.62
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.58 0.67 0.20 0.62 0.88
Uniform Delay, d1 11.8 0.0 39.2 32.3 0.0 23.9
Progression Factor 1.31 1.00 0.74 0.15 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 2.8 0.9 1.9 10.3
Delay (s) 15.5 0.1 31.7 5.7 1.9 34.2
Level of Service B A C A A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 24.9 1.9 34.2
Approach LOS A C A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 140.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.5% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Description: SR 169/I-405 NB On-Ramp
c Critical Lane Group
without all of project PM Peak
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT all of Project -- PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 16 44 2250 994 14 4 33
Future Volume (veh/h) 16 44 2250 994 14 4 33
Number 5 2 6 16 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1765 1765 1800 1765 1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 49 2500 1104 16 4 37
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 4 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 0 0
Cap, veh/h 73 3313 4420 64 7 66
Arrive On Green 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.04
Sat Flow, veh/h 1681 4235 5908 78 145 1340
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 49 2500 760 360 42 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1681 1235 1235 1751 1521 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 0.10 0.88
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 73 3313 3045 1439 74 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.75 0.25 0.25 0.56 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 3313 3045 1439 185 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.77 0.96 0.96 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.9 1.3 0.2 0.4 6.5 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 0.4 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 70.8 1.3 0.2 0.4 72.1 0.0
LnGrp LOS E A A A E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2549 1120 42
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.6 0.3 72.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 129.1 10.9 10.1 119.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 114.0 16.0 11.0 98.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 5.8 6.0 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 66.0 0.1 0.0 60.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 2.7
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 05/01/2019
Cedar River Apartments 04/30/2019 2023 WITHOUT all of Project -- PM Peak Synchro 9 Light Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2210 40 13 966 41 70
Future Volume (veh/h) 2210 40 13 966 41 70
Number 2 12 1 6 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1765 1800 1765 1765 1765 1765
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2456 44 14 1073 46 78
Adj No. of Lanes 3 0 1 3 1 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3190 57 28 3664 216 193
Arrive On Green 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.81 0.13 0.13
Sat Flow, veh/h 4677 74 1681 4765 1681 1500
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1461 1039 14 1073 46 78
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1235 1752 1681 1500 1681 1500
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 8.1 3.4 6.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 8.1 3.4 6.7
Prop In Lane 0.04 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1900 1347 28 3664 216 193
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.77 0.50 0.29 0.21 0.40
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1900 1347 48 3664 216 193
HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.53 0.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 68.3 3.2 54.7 56.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.7 2.4 13.2 0.2 2.2 6.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.9 0.6 3.3 1.7 3.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1.7 2.4 81.5 3.4 56.9 62.3
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2500 1087 124
Approach Delay, s/veh 1.9 4.4 60.3
Approach LOS A A E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 111.7 118.0 22.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 105.0 113.0 17.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 2.0 10.1 8.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 56.7 56.7 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.6
HCM 2010 LOS A
APPENDIX D
SIM TRAFFIC ANALYSES (DELAYS AND QUEUES)
1. AM PEAK HOUR
a. Year 2023 without project without any network improvements
b. Year 2023 without project with dual WB lane at Intersection 1 and NB (HOV
by-pass) and SB ramp improvements (two GP continuous plus HOV by-pass)
c. Year 2023 without project with network improvements noted above in (b)
plus I-405 ETL project completion
d. Year 2029 with and without project including network improvements noted
above in (b) plus I-405 ETL project completion.
e. Year 2029 with project with improvements noted above in (e) plus dual NB
left with shared right at Intersection 4.
2. PM PEAK HOUR
a. Year 2023 without project without any network improvements
b. Year 2023 without project with dual WB lane at Intersection 1 and NB (HOV
by-pass) and SB ramp improvements (two GP continuous plus HOV by-pass)
c. Year 2023 without project with network improvements noted above in (b)
plus I-405 ETL project completion
d. Year 2029 with and without project including network improvements noted
above in (b) plus I-405 ETL project completion.
e. Year 2029 with project with improvements noted above in (e) plus dual NB
left with shared right at Intersection 4.
APPENDIX D – AM PEAK HOUR
SIM TRAFFIC ANALYSES (DELAYS AND QUEUES)
1. AM PEAK HOUR
a. Year 2023 without project without any network improvements
b. Year 2023 without project with dual WB lane at Intersection 1 and NB (HOV
by-pass) and SB ramp improvements (two GP continuous plus HOV by-pass)
c. Year 2023 without project with network improvements noted above in (b)
plus I-405 ETL project completion
d. Year 2029 with and without project including network improvements noted
above in (b) plus I-405 ETL project completion.
e. Year 2029 with project with improvements noted above in (e) plus dual NB
left with shared right at Intersection 4.
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 AM -- without project (dual SB metered lanes)10/10/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 44.1 17.6 47.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.5
Total Del/Veh (s) 284.4 57.0 3.0 86.4 23.7 12.5 381.6 430.2 160.0 171.6
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 35.2 2.5 57.6 208.6 2.4 7.0 34.5 60.9
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 59.2 18.3 5.1 61.9 0.7 225.9 170.5 51.7
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 8.9 14.9 127.1 46.6 71.1 2.9 39.0
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.4 0.0 13.2 3.2 10.6
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 62.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 869.0
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- without project (dual SB metered lanes)10/10/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L T T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 736 760 108 89 325 405 194 328 585 1249 1246 1300
Average Queue (ft) 526 591 62 29 324 383 121 204 556 1229 1233 1279
95th Queue (ft) 725 786 113 71 326 404 184 341 731 1242 1245 1292
Link Distance (ft) 1917 1917 1917 1917 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 33 55 0 52 61 95
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 428 3 478 562 876
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 84 0 0 99
Queuing Penalty (veh) 257 4 0 136
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 50 552 264 291 553 383
Average Queue (ft) 7 543 104 207 523 202
95th Queue (ft) 34 550 211 327 638 385
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 47 33
Queuing Penalty (veh) 266 185
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 75 74 163 72 468 180 498 450 161
Average Queue (ft) 51 36 73 16 460 87 291 317 99
95th Queue (ft) 84 74 135 56 468 158 569 560 164
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 48 8 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 344 57 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%) 8 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 43 11
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- without project (dual SB metered lanes)10/10/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 180 227 211 224 694 215 658 69 28
Average Queue (ft) 25 38 18 19 587 26 106 23 2
95th Queue (ft) 103 131 105 111 876 117 373 57 13
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 587
Upstream Blk Time (%) 32
Queuing Penalty (veh) 226
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 69
Queuing Penalty (veh) 9
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB B8 B8 NB
Directions Served T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 279 105 3060 3056 31
Average Queue (ft) 181 7 1089 1034 16
95th Queue (ft) 363 50 2862 2878 41
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 10392 10392 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 63
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 3886
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 AM -- without project 10/10/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.1 27.1 14.3 10.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 83.4 58.3 3.0 157.7 28.5 18.2 293.6 363.9 119.8 152.7
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.7 0.4
Total Del/Veh (s) 27.7 2.9 65.0 104.3 2.4 18.9 70.6 58.8
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 121.9 133.4 1.5 46.5 47.0 54.9 33.9 38.4
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.8 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 4.2 1.3 178.3 59.2 63.6 4.6 47.3
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.0 0.6 16.8 2.9 13.1
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 27.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 792.6
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- without project 10/10/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 303 344 117 102 325 350 342 336 585 1250 1250 1290
Average Queue (ft) 181 240 64 40 318 339 256 225 520 1228 1231 1273
95th Queue (ft) 301 366 107 85 343 365 373 350 810 1248 1247 1318
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 55 3 1 46 57 79
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 425 23 9 430 525 733
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 27 67 0 98
Queuing Penalty (veh) 194 274 1 136
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 21 88 550 347 445 453 678
Average Queue (ft) 5 12 536 165 202 294 394
95th Queue (ft) 24 127 601 322 400 636 795
Link Distance (ft) 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 48 0 14 8
Queuing Penalty (veh) 267 1 79 44
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 175 126 65 40 467 458 425 271 90
Average Queue (ft) 96 16 17 4 439 180 182 149 46
95th Queue (ft) 215 105 56 23 554 500 451 405 90
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 46 6 7 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 330 45 48 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%) 5 7 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 11 36 9
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- without project 10/10/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 102 116 71 190 714 721 646 69 24
Average Queue (ft) 22 36 13 31 575 482 196 35 6
95th Queue (ft) 82 107 65 143 933 901 552 66 26
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 587
Upstream Blk Time (%) 45 13 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 319 92 3
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 65
Queuing Penalty (veh) 8
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB WB B8 B8 NB
Directions Served T T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 267 232 190 3117 3171 31
Average Queue (ft) 170 93 27 1011 1029 15
95th Queue (ft) 354 242 140 3019 3072 40
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 170 5986 5986 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 55 6 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 4040
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 AM -- without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.4 2.7 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 83.4 52.9 4.3 44.3 32.4 25.4 38.5 25.2 10.2 32.8
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 21.0 1.5 36.7 6.1 2.4 44.1 104.9 37.1
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 46.4 42.5 1.6 12.1 1.6 66.0 49.9 11.4
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.2 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 4.1 1.3 30.6 10.6 89.5 4.3 10.2
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.2 0.8 2.0 3.0 1.8
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.9
Total Del/Veh (s) 235.0
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 297 321 109 114 312 337 335 338 260 420 429 324
Average Queue (ft) 176 247 57 40 242 271 238 298 116 295 310 51
95th Queue (ft) 299 345 100 96 346 367 347 380 224 418 419 233
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 6 1 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 46 12 43
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 3 8
Queuing Penalty (veh) 23 32
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 43 535 364 506 133 775
Average Queue (ft) 8 412 135 312 72 557
95th Queue (ft) 32 627 288 551 129 910
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 11 0 1 25
Queuing Penalty (veh) 64 0 4 140
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 112 80 104 39 355 161 200 136 100
Average Queue (ft) 55 6 23 6 194 65 98 58 51
95th Queue (ft) 102 41 75 31 455 177 209 142 120
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 9
Queuing Penalty (veh) 62
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 117 126 77 82 283 230 215 101 29
Average Queue (ft) 27 43 15 16 162 93 80 41 3
95th Queue (ft) 88 110 61 64 546 395 213 132 19
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 587
Upstream Blk Time (%) 5 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 36 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 14 5
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB B8 B8 NB
Directions Served T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 56 34 183 198 40
Average Queue (ft) 26 13 36 32 14
95th Queue (ft) 152 86 278 290 40
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 5986 5986 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 7 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 466
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.1 5.1 8.4 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9
Total Del/Veh (s) 96.7 51.6 3.7 41.9 28.0 28.6 37.9 25.1 10.0 33.8
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 11.6 1.5 37.9 6.3 2.6 36.5 107.8 36.2
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 43.4 43.7 1.3 10.1 3.1 34.3 26.7 9.2
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.7 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 5.4 2.4 50.4 8.7 44.1 6.5 10.1
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.6 1.3 1.0 2.6 1.1
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 12.2
Total Del/Veh (s) 249.0
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 321 393 109 94 303 319 301 344 279 403 440 238
Average Queue (ft) 214 278 56 45 216 242 227 313 136 283 298 45
95th Queue (ft) 359 442 105 87 306 331 333 377 233 387 408 207
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 1 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 6 50
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 9
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 28 528 371 520 163 761
Average Queue (ft) 9 424 155 399 74 547
95th Queue (ft) 30 599 307 595 140 854
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 4 0 6 14
Queuing Penalty (veh) 24 0 38 75
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 129 33 70 41 377 212 283 178 97
Average Queue (ft) 65 4 16 5 177 67 132 67 39
95th Queue (ft) 120 27 61 27 357 184 323 212 81
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 2 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 13 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 10 0
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 99 111 100 72 238 180 384 172 30
Average Queue (ft) 40 61 26 32 119 54 173 95 5
95th Queue (ft) 94 110 76 69 225 155 415 166 24
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 587
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 14
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB B8 NB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 34 52 52 31
Average Queue (ft) 7 10 6 15
95th Queue (ft) 62 89 66 39
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 5986 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 248
SimTraffic Performance Report
2029 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 5.1 4.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 113.2 51.8 4.0 54.2 35.8 26.6 36.1 26.3 11.0 37.9
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 17.5 2.4
Total Del/Veh (s) 18.1 1.5 40.6 6.6 2.5 174.5 47.6
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 47.5 1.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 58.1 41.3 1.7 15.0 5.5 34.8 190.3 16.6
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.6 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.7 1.8 45.2 11.2 39.9 3.5 9.9
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.2 0.0 2.5 1.4 2.2
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 18.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 298.8
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 405 443 104 104 325 346 341 341 293 408 534 237
Average Queue (ft) 243 313 61 44 291 314 260 306 134 294 318 52
95th Queue (ft) 511 615 101 93 357 368 371 392 259 397 488 219
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 9 4 7
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 78 37 56
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 8 23
Queuing Penalty (veh) 59 102
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 39 551 290 478 157 800
Average Queue (ft) 12 497 152 303 78 713
95th Queue (ft) 37 627 281 535 143 949
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 16 2 66
Queuing Penalty (veh) 96 12 366
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 143 60 83 38 432 217 283 197 185
Average Queue (ft) 72 8 23 7 266 91 134 69 107
95th Queue (ft) 134 47 70 32 522 208 293 163 303
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 8 10
Queuing Penalty (veh) 58 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 125 143 65 77 255 218 256 73 30
Average Queue (ft) 28 43 13 16 161 113 75 25 6
95th Queue (ft) 99 119 57 78 546 464 253 71 26
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 587
Upstream Blk Time (%) 6 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 46 4 1
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 13
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB WB B8 B8 NB
Directions Served T T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 52 48 37 356 381 18
Average Queue (ft) 30 12 7 94 101 1
95th Queue (ft) 161 90 62 612 654 11
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 170 5986 5986 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 9 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 917
SimTraffic Performance Report
2029 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.1 5.6 3.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 141.0 55.5 4.6 52.6 36.2 26.9 39.9 27.6 11.0 41.3
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.3 0.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 15.6 1.6 46.7 7.3 2.7 190.7 50.9
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 71.9 1.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 63.2 66.1 1.6 17.2 4.0 38.7 237.7 18.2
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.8 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 6.5 2.3 90.3 17.3 51.9 5.4 17.1
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.8 1.1 3.6 3.8 3.2
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 13.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 374.5
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 466 502 116 117 325 349 342 343 301 447 452 381
Average Queue (ft) 301 367 63 50 303 319 263 304 152 303 324 90
95th Queue (ft) 483 538 110 106 355 367 374 391 273 434 449 317
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 12 6 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 102 50 52
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 9 28
Queuing Penalty (veh) 74 128
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 40 7 549 319 494 162 800
Average Queue (ft) 11 0 530 162 382 85 738
95th Queue (ft) 35 7 589 295 649 151 918
Link Distance (ft) 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 19 7 69
Queuing Penalty (veh) 121 44 385
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 180 66 74 47 461 264 354 165 153
Average Queue (ft) 86 8 20 7 299 99 165 68 106
95th Queue (ft) 170 40 64 35 525 260 359 170 319
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 9 0 13
Queuing Penalty (veh) 73 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 AM -- with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 138 158 113 172 373 293 428 218 30
Average Queue (ft) 57 72 33 54 245 159 192 126 7
95th Queue (ft) 128 147 89 152 617 529 433 215 28
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 587
Upstream Blk Time (%) 10 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 76 8 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 16 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB WB B8 B8 NB
Directions Served T T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 48 44 666 668 35
Average Queue (ft) 42 25 8 254 258 15
95th Queue (ft) 194 129 72 1405 1423 41
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 170 5986 5986 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 13 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1120
SimTraffic Performance Report
2029 AM -- with project- with dual lt Int4 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.3 0.7 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 119.6 53.9 3.7 51.0 34.9 25.5 39.5 29.1 11.5 38.9
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 15.4 2.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 29.0 1.6 46.4 7.0 2.7 174.0 49.2
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 55.0 44.9 1.4 18.4 3.5 50.4 38.6 15.5
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 4.1 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 7.2 2.3 86.3 17.4 66.9 29.1 18.2
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 2.1 1.9 2.9 2.5 2.7
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 8.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 352.2
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 AM -- with project- with dual lt Int4 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 399 426 110 105 324 344 346 340 272 440 557 479
Average Queue (ft) 258 305 60 49 298 318 260 297 141 324 350 111
95th Queue (ft) 436 464 106 100 355 369 389 392 245 448 532 413
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 8 6 7
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 64 47 63
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 8 26
Queuing Penalty (veh) 61 118
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 47 551 342 491 147 794
Average Queue (ft) 11 510 168 372 79 709
95th Queue (ft) 45 622 311 576 140 945
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 15 8 62
Queuing Penalty (veh) 96 47 343
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 146 65 79 53 406 295 261 239 102
Average Queue (ft) 74 9 17 5 296 99 161 91 46
95th Queue (ft) 138 46 62 33 530 268 380 271 95
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 445 445 445 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 11 0 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 88 0 10 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 AM -- with project- with dual lt Int4 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 165 175 117 160 397 346 322 129 163
Average Queue (ft) 66 84 46 58 250 156 159 79 79
95th Queue (ft) 145 172 112 172 641 528 358 156 160
Link Distance (ft) 445 445 445 688 688 688 587
Upstream Blk Time (%) 9 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 68 18
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 20 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 7 1 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB B8 B8 NB
Directions Served T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 48 591 602 31
Average Queue (ft) 34 17 183 186 14
95th Queue (ft) 173 104 1161 1190 39
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 5986 5986 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 10 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1040
APPENDIX D – PM PEAK HOUR
2. PM PEAK HOUR
a. Year 2023 without project without any network improvements
b. Year 2023 without project with dual WB lane at Intersection 1 and NB (HOV
by-pass) and SB ramp improvements (two GP continuous plus HOV by-pass)
c. Year 2023 without project with network improvements noted above in (b)
plus I-405 ETL project completion
d. Year 2029 with and without project including network improvements noted
above in (b) plus I-405 ETL project completion.
e. Year 2029 with project with improvements noted above in (e) plus dual NB
left with shared right at Intersection 4.
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 PM without project without Int1 Imps or ETL 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 264.9 236.7 257.9 62.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 129.3 63.9 36.5 306.5 45.9 22.0 380.7 717.6 254.9 184.3
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 4.2 1.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 13.3 3.4 150.8 5.2 4.7 63.7 46.6
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 19.7 0.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 68.5 59.0 2.9 74.4 4.2 257.6 455.0 35.1
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.6 25.5 0.9
Total Del/Veh (s) 2.5 1.2 213.0 67.3 303.7 27.0 32.3
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.7 10.2 3.3 4.9
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 89.2
Total Del/Veh (s) 1030.6
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM without project without Int1 Imps or ETL 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L T T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 725 780 366 375 325 389 174 342 585 1250 1248 1285
Average Queue (ft) 459 522 248 255 321 360 95 274 515 1229 1229 1269
95th Queue (ft) 768 813 350 352 329 423 155 411 796 1244 1244 1335
Link Distance (ft) 1917 1917 1917 1917 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 40 60 5 67 66 88
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 293 26 557 551 731
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 73 2 8 91
Queuing Penalty (veh) 91 6 77 554
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 40 163 552 84 236 93 780
Average Queue (ft) 11 11 543 43 136 52 517
95th Queue (ft) 35 119 551 88 233 90 851
Link Distance (ft) 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 81 18
Queuing Penalty (veh) 211 124
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 101 99 126 85 465 124 113 101 251
Average Queue (ft) 49 28 59 19 416 24 49 43 118
95th Queue (ft) 98 85 128 66 575 112 113 98 308
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 59 0 5
Queuing Penalty (veh) 200 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM without project without Int1 Imps or ETL 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 96 126 83 224 693 47 126 256 124
Average Queue (ft) 27 36 12 30 429 11 45 102 36
95th Queue (ft) 88 116 58 149 889 41 122 271 105
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 321
Upstream Blk Time (%) 26 9
Queuing Penalty (veh) 86 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 65 16 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 11 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB B6 B7 B7 NB
Directions Served T T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 227 56 238 334 233 30
Average Queue (ft) 71 4 59 47 26 3
95th Queue (ft) 232 41 234 251 185 17
Link Distance (ft) 143 143 197 3131 3131 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 26 0 17
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 3525
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 PM without project with Int1 Imps but no ETL 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.1 46.1 49.7 21.9
Total Del/Veh (s) 121.2 54.8 25.7 134.0 61.2 24.5 148.1 319.4 48.3 116.1
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.6 0.5
Total Del/Veh (s) 13.1 2.8 39.3 4.8 5.1 64.0 22.2
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 71.2 54.9 2.0 2.4 1.9 101.3 14.1 3.3
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.1 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 2.8 0.8 77.8 2.2 66.2 5.6 3.8
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 2.2 0.5 0.3 1.5 1.5
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 43.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 844.7
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM without project with Int1 Imps but no ETL 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 663 705 320 310 324 342 298 342 585 1253 1256 1288
Average Queue (ft) 468 520 229 235 247 265 183 295 581 1139 1121 1055
95th Queue (ft) 743 788 319 316 357 380 310 396 609 1466 1494 1638
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 9 1 6 23 15 23
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 42 5 31 192 125 194
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 5 15 9 62
Queuing Penalty (veh) 14 27 88 375
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 56 171 369 136 290 92 738
Average Queue (ft) 18 11 225 56 155 53 500
95th Queue (ft) 52 125 407 119 275 86 808
Link Distance (ft) 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 12
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 82
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 106 67 91 45 112 48 82 53 57
Average Queue (ft) 51 7 14 5 40 10 26 17 26
95th Queue (ft) 100 42 64 30 95 39 71 51 57
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM without project with Int1 Imps but no ETL 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 121 167 134 47 88 34 136 111 63
Average Queue (ft) 48 74 26 14 23 6 38 45 32
95th Queue (ft) 116 155 97 43 69 25 107 94 54
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 321
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement NB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 12
Average Queue (ft) 1
95th Queue (ft) 11
Link Distance (ft) 378
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1174
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 PM without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2
Total Del/Veh (s) 133.3 56.3 28.2 57.9 54.7 26.2 39.8 38.7 10.4 50.5
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 3.9 0.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 13.2 3.2 34.1 4.8 4.9 75.1 22.0
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 63.3 54.8 2.7 2.0 0.8 77.4 8.3 3.4
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.1 0.4 107.8 1.9 62.7 5.8 3.8
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 2.7 0.3 3.2 2.0
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 1.9
Total Del/Veh (s) 602.9
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 626 648 358 338 273 282 194 342 488 567 659 384
Average Queue (ft) 472 538 243 243 180 190 117 304 333 372 354 82
95th Queue (ft) 700 747 339 333 259 266 184 406 470 537 635 307
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 31
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 0 0
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 57 7 10 379 117 272 96 797
Average Queue (ft) 17 0 1 210 49 159 52 604
95th Queue (ft) 48 7 10 353 103 257 87 918
Link Distance (ft) 328 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 24
Queuing Penalty (veh) 169
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 106 27 78 56 103 39 60 62 62
Average Queue (ft) 46 2 10 5 32 6 16 15 23
95th Queue (ft) 98 18 51 30 92 30 50 50 51
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 142 166 132 47 90 48 129 100 51
Average Queue (ft) 61 82 38 14 23 6 33 39 29
95th Queue (ft) 137 165 111 44 74 32 101 87 50
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 321
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement NB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 30
Average Queue (ft) 3
95th Queue (ft) 18
Link Distance (ft) 378
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 201
SimTraffic Performance Report
2023 PM with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.2 0.3 0.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 120.8 63.0 36.9 59.0 53.3 25.5 40.5 38.7 10.4 49.5
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 2.7 0.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 18.1 3.5 28.7 5.0 5.7 66.0 18.6
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 76.7 67.3 3.3 2.4 2.5 67.6 12.0 4.2
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 3.7 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 7.6 3.1 94.3 4.0 61.1 7.2 9.8
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 5.6 1.5 0.3 3.0 3.9
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 1.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 605.4
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 635 654 392 408 264 264 209 346 527 704 509 372
Average Queue (ft) 446 492 260 269 187 199 129 301 354 396 337 81
95th Queue (ft) 692 714 382 391 258 265 205 398 503 610 493 306
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 8 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 40 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 2
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 78 20 296 118 292 105 727
Average Queue (ft) 31 1 183 49 159 60 471
95th Queue (ft) 71 15 286 98 270 97 789
Link Distance (ft) 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 16
Queuing Penalty (veh) 114
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 111 53 78 63 120 44 74 102 71
Average Queue (ft) 56 6 13 6 36 8 17 27 27
95th Queue (ft) 110 33 56 36 101 35 56 80 62
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2023 PM with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 232 269 231 113 140 58 194 242 162
Average Queue (ft) 124 153 98 51 45 16 68 137 45
95th Queue (ft) 215 247 207 113 108 50 167 229 126
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 321
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 4 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement EB NB
Directions Served T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 52 44
Average Queue (ft) 3 16
95th Queue (ft) 52 44
Link Distance (ft) 683 378
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 160
SimTraffic Performance Report
2029 PM without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.4
Total Del/Veh (s) 141.2 56.0 22.9 69.9 56.7 27.0 40.7 42.9 11.5 53.3
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 56.4 9.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 17.3 3.3 32.5 5.5 5.4 91.4 24.0
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 67.3 60.1 3.2 2.5 1.3 53.4 11.6 4.1
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 4.0 0.8 83.4 2.1 61.5 6.2 4.4
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.5 0.3 2.0 2.5
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 16.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 628.4
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 PM without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 757 754 382 383 234 258 195 343 543 684 711 452
Average Queue (ft) 535 571 241 253 173 182 127 322 369 413 404 125
95th Queue (ft) 792 802 349 356 242 252 201 378 518 620 626 396
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 10 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 51 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 92 3 311 100 306 117 795
Average Queue (ft) 34 0 181 40 169 59 665
95th Queue (ft) 82 3 309 93 299 101 913
Link Distance (ft) 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 35
Queuing Penalty (veh) 243
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 120 156 283 117 109 39 95 90 74
Average Queue (ft) 61 18 33 13 34 6 27 27 25
95th Queue (ft) 111 124 188 96 90 28 80 79 60
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 PM without project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 159 190 152 47 69 47 126 86 59
Average Queue (ft) 69 93 38 14 23 10 33 40 33
95th Queue (ft) 154 194 126 44 67 37 97 86 59
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 321
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement NB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 18
Average Queue (ft) 1
95th Queue (ft) 11
Link Distance (ft) 378
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 297
SimTraffic Performance Report
2029 PM with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 1.2 1.1 0.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 114.5 66.5 43.0 73.4 58.9 28.8 46.2 43.4 11.5 52.9
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 85.6 13.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 17.8 3.8 35.6 5.8 6.2 120.3 28.2
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 63.1 62.4 3.8 2.4 1.2 115.5 15.3 4.4
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 3.8 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 8.2 3.6 73.0 4.1 60.2 7.6 9.6
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 6.6 2.0 0.3 3.0 4.7
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 22.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 669.8
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 PM with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 613 633 406 429 290 284 257 342 571 699 751 452
Average Queue (ft) 441 489 269 284 207 218 143 322 419 474 425 159
95th Queue (ft) 626 650 413 439 276 285 230 371 578 683 670 459
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 13 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 68 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 2 2 8
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 80 8 4 348 145 353 101 817
Average Queue (ft) 36 1 0 212 52 194 63 767
95th Queue (ft) 82 8 4 338 118 343 102 872
Link Distance (ft) 328 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 68
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 479
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 117 104 128 98 119 28 71 88 62
Average Queue (ft) 54 16 21 12 38 6 21 27 28
95th Queue (ft) 109 75 95 62 97 28 65 80 62
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 451 451 451 391
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 PM with project 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 240 273 239 74 132 58 200 243 91
Average Queue (ft) 144 170 125 34 45 15 77 136 37
95th Queue (ft) 231 259 226 77 103 48 175 218 83
Link Distance (ft) 451 451 451 683 683 683 321
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement EB EB NB
Directions Served T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 134 134 36
Average Queue (ft) 9 15 20
95th Queue (ft) 135 163 44
Link Distance (ft) 683 683 378
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 563
SimTraffic Performance Report
2029 PM with project with Int4 dual lt 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 1
1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.0 1.0 0.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 113.7 58.1 27.5 72.6 54.9 25.8 43.9 43.2 10.9 50.3
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 34.8 5.5
Total Del/Veh (s) 18.7 3.8 32.3 5.5 6.8 85.2 22.3
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 67.3 65.8 3.8 2.6 2.0 50.6 13.6 4.6
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 7.6 2.9 85.4 3.3 63.6 43.5 10.1
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 6.0 1.6 0.3 2.7 4.2
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 9.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 599.7
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 PM with project with Int4 dual lt 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 2
Intersection: 1: Bronson Way/SR 169 & Sunset Blvd
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 614 654 354 354 261 272 233 341 563 769 699 551
Average Queue (ft) 444 486 254 259 193 209 145 316 406 453 394 164
95th Queue (ft) 656 676 358 359 261 275 223 378 553 679 606 461
Link Distance (ft) 1916 1916 1916 1916 328 328 328 1218 1218 1218
Upstream Blk Time (%) 8
Queuing Penalty (veh) 45
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 560
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 5
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 82 16 21 363 194 318 101 789
Average Queue (ft) 31 1 1 201 61 174 57 602
95th Queue (ft) 75 12 15 342 171 319 95 918
Link Distance (ft) 328 328 538 538 538 538 692
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 31
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 220
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 144 75 196 80 110 49 100 106 57
Average Queue (ft) 61 11 24 8 37 12 31 34 25
95th Queue (ft) 118 53 145 49 91 39 85 90 57
Link Distance (ft) 538 538 538 446 446 446 391
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 500
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
2029 PM with project with Int4 dual lt 10/09/2019
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
BPJ; William Popp Associates Page 3
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 228 258 227 92 83 62 156 136 248
Average Queue (ft) 133 167 114 39 37 12 60 65 129
95th Queue (ft) 223 278 235 91 85 46 143 120 236
Link Distance (ft) 446 446 446 688 688 688 321 321
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement EB EB NB
Directions Served T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 126 260 53
Average Queue (ft) 8 22 21
95th Queue (ft) 127 204 51
Link Distance (ft) 688 688 378
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 270