Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINALDEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Project Location Map SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC Meeting Date: November 16, 2020 Project File Number: PR19-000304 Project Name: Boeing Apron E Land Use File Number: LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Project Manager: Alex Morganroth, Senior Planner Owner: The Boeing Company, 737 Logan Ave N, Renton, WA 98055 Applicant/Contact: Mark Clement, PO Box 3707, MC 96-01, Seattle, WA 98124 Project Location: 737 Logan Ave N, Renton, WA 98057 Project Summary: The applicant, The Boeing Company, is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a variance in order to convert an existing parking lot (S1 Lot) into an aircraft production area. The subject property (APN 0723059001) is to the east of the Cedar River along Lake Washington. The site is home to the Boeing 737 plant and associated support buildings and is located in the Urban Center (UC) zone. The proposal includes three (3) new outdoor production stalls for aircraft and a new 72,145 sq. ft. (footprint) paint hangar with two bays. The existing fire station west of the proposed building would be retained. A sound wall and landscape screening is proposed along the Logan Ave N and N 6th St right-of-way. A parking lot with approximately 45 stalls would be constructed south of the proposed new building. All work would occur further than 200 feet from the Cedar River OHWM. Site access is proposed via a connection between the existing Apron D area to the west and the proposed work area. The applicant is requesting a variance in order to seek relief from the parking lot landscaping requirements in RMC 4-4-070. The project would result in new and replaced impervious surfaces, tree removal, and vegetation removal. The applicant submitted a Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Impact Analysis, Noise Study, Light Impingement Study, and Parking Analysis with the application. Exist. Bldg. Area SF: N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): 72,145 SF 139,589 SF Site Area: 6,676,701 SF (153.3 acres) Total Building Area GSF: 151,589 SF STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 2 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND The Boeing Apron E project scope has changed multiple times since the initial application was accepted for review on July 16, 2019. Initial changes include minor deviations from the original architectural design of the paint hangar, retaining the existing fire station instead of relocating to a different site, reducing the number of parking stalls provided from 89 to 45, minor utility rerouting, and no longer constructing the smaller utility building. The updated scope was submitted on February 6, 2020 and review of the project commenced on the following day. On March 23, 2020, staff presented a recommendation to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to issue a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance with seven (7) mitigation measures. After reviewing staff recommendation, the ERC determined that additional information related to the traffic and parking issues would be needed before a determination could be issued. ERC members recommended that staff get the Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 19) reviewed by an outside consultant. In addition, ERC requested additional information related to noise impacts from engine run-ups, aesthetics of the sound wall, and siting of the new building. Staff placed the project “on-hold” on April 22, 2020 (Exhibit 17) pending completion of a secondary review of the Traffic Memo and Traffic Impact Analysis. Staff contacted a firm in May and began the process of obtaining a scope and fee estimate. After submitting the scope and fee estimate to Boeing for approval, Boeing requested that staff hold off on a secondary review in order to allow their consultant to prepare a new Traffic Impact Analysis. The new analysis would be based on updated employment numbers and characteristics that reflect the changing realities at Boeing in the past few months including both staff and production decreases. Therefore, the analysis below is based on the updated report and additional information provided by the applicant. The proposed Apron E is located at the current S1 Lot, in the southern portion of Boeing’s Renton campus. The S1 Lot is currently used for vehicle parking and has a total of 976 general parking stalls. The project will convert the parking lot into an airplane apron for the post-manufacture processing. The new apron would connect the existing Apron D located to the west of the S1 Lot. A new paint hangar would be constructed in the southern portion of Apron E. This hangar is anticipated to accommodate two 737 planes and would have dimensions of about 225 feet by 290 feet and a maximum height of about 85 feet. Blast fences, approximately 15 feet in height, will be constructed at the north side of Apron E, and a sound wall, about 25 feet in height, would be construction along the eastern border. Other onsite structures include light-weight crew shelters and tool sheds. New underground utilities include storm, sewer, water, power and communication lines, and stormwater vaults for water quality control. PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M B. Mitigation Measures 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical report prepared by S&EE, dated June 24, 2019, or an updated report submitted at a later date. 2. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found all construction activity shall stop in accordance with RCW 27.53.060 and 27.44.020, and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes’ cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 3 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL 3. The applicant shall submit an Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Plan MIDP to DAHP and any interested Tribes for review prior to the start of any ground disturbing activities. Documentation of the submittal shall be provided to the City of Renton prior to the issuance of building or construction permits. 4. The applicant shall draft an official agreement covering the curfew hours for all engine run-up testing on the Boeing plant site. The agreement should include language limiting the total number of engine run- ups on the Apron E site to four (4) testing cycles per hour. The agreement shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review at the time of Civil Construction Permit application submittal. The agreement shall be executed by both parties (Boeing and the City of Renton) prior to issuance of the Building Permit. 5. The applicant shall not exceed 67 decibels (67 dBA) at Class A EDNA receiving properties as a result of the noise created from 737 engine run-up testing. Should the applicant exceed 67 decibels at any point after project completion, the applicant shall immediately implement intermediate noise barriers between airplane stalls and/or localized noise enclosures installed around the engines to reduce the maximum ambient noise level at the Class A EDNA receiving properties below the 67 dBA threshold. Alternatively, the applicant may submit an updated Noise Study Report with alternative noise reduction measure(s) that achieve the same noise level reductions at or below 67 decibels at Class A EDNA properties. Any updated Noise Study Reports shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to using the three (3) new outdoor production stalls for aircraft engine testing. 6. The applicant shall submit a noise monitoring plan prepared by a professional acoustics engineer for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager at the time of Civil Construction Permit application submittal. The document shall include detailed plans for a minimum of two (2) monitoring stations at the Class A EDNA receiving sites identified in the Noise Study Report prepared by SSA Acoustics (dated May 11, 2020; Exhibit 14). The noise monitoring shall occur continuously for 60 months from issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 7. The applicant shall submit an annual Parking Utilization Report (PUR) for a period of five (5) years. The first report shall be submitted no later than one year after the building permit is issued for the proposed paint hanger. Each annual report shall include the utilization rates at both individual parking lots as well as site-wide. Rates shall be calculated at the current peak demand times (1:00 pm to 1:30 pm and 1:30 pm to 2:00 pm). If the Boeing shift schedules are altered in any way between annual reports, new peak parking demand times shall be calculated to reflect the change. If parking utilization for general purpose stalls is found to exceed 90% site-wide at any time, the applicant shall implement specific measures with six (6) months of the date of the annual report in order to reduce the utilization rate below the 90% threshold. The implementation measures proposed shall be formally submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval. 8. The applicant shall pay a transportation impact fee based on the square footage of the building for the manufacturing use in accordance with the City of Renton fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 4 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL C. Exhibits Exhibit 1: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Report Exhibit 2: Site Plan Exhibit 3: Neighborhood Map Exhibit 4: Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit 5: Arborist Report, prepared by Urban Forestry Services, Inc, dated June 18, 2019 Exhibit 6: Tree Retention and Land Clearing Plan Exhibit 7: Drainage Report, prepared by DOWL, dated December, 2019 Exhibit 8: Conceptual Drainage/Utilities Plan, prepared by DOWL, dated June 21, 2019 Exhibit 9: Geotechnical Report, prepared by S&EE, dated June 24, 2019 Exhibit 10: Architectural Elevations Exhibit 11: Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TranspoGroup, dated September, 2020 Exhibit 12: Lighting Impingement Study, prepared by Casne Engineering, dated June 21, 2019 Exhibit 13: Noise Study Report, prepared by SSA Acoustics, dated June 10, 2019 Exhibit 14: Noise Study Report, prepared by SSA Acoustics, dated May 11, 2020 Exhibit 15: Construction Mitigation Description Exhibit 16: Renton Field Operator Guide for Curfew Hours Exhibit 17: On-hold Letter, dated April 22, 2019 Exhibit 18: Transportation Concurrency Memo, prepared by Development Engineering Manager Brianne Bannwarth, dated November 6, 2020. Exhibit 19: Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TranspoGroup, dated January, 2020 D. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The subject site is located in an area with a known seismic hazard. As such the applicant submitted a Geotechnical Report, prepared by S&EE, dated June 24, 2019 (Exhibit 9). The analysis in the report primarily focused on the area near the proposed footprint of the paint hangar. S&EE relied on the soil characteristics observed in prior geotechnical reports prepared for Boeing, as well as new laboratory testing of nine (9) soil borings collected near the proposed structure. Similar to the results of previous borings across the site, the new borings found fill approximately three to seven feet (3’-7’) in thickness primarily consisting of well-compacted pitrun (mix of sand and gravel). Native alluvial soils with varying degrees of density then extend approximately 100 feet below the fill. Older alluvial soils consisting of medium dense to dense sand, silt and silty clay have been found up to a depth of approximately 170 feet in other areas on the Boeing site. Ground water monitoring wells were installed in seven of the nine borings. Water was found at depths ranging from 7.7 feet to 8.4 feet beneath the surface during analysis between December 2018 and March 2019. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 5 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL The geotechnical report concluded that the project site is located in an area of high liquefaction potential due the close proximity to the Seattle Fault. Due to the high potential for liquefaction near the project area during an earthquake, the report finds the use of a conventional spread concrete footings to be infeasible for the proposed structure. Instead, the report recommends the use of 20-inch diameter Augercast piles drilled to a depth of approximately 75 feet bgs (below ground surface). S&EE recommends that the Augercast piles be installed by an experienced piling contractor due to the various quality control measures necessary and the complexity of the installation process. S&EE estimates that due to the characteristics of the soil and ground water table during testing, approximately four to six inches (4”-6”) of settlement is possible under the proposed floor load. The report recommends preloading the slab area to pre-induce the settlement prior to construction. In addition, the utilizing shallow foundations such as spread footings and mats for the light-weight structures such as the blast fence and sound walls. Due to the specific recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report related to the soil conditions on the site, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant comply with the recommendation in the provided report or an updated report submitted with the building permit. The geotechnical report would be required to be submitted with the building permit application for the construction of the paint hangar building and compliance with the recommendations would be reviewed at that time. The applicant has indicated the project would result in approximately 365,772 square feet of replaced impervious area. The project would not increase the impervious coverage on-site overall. Total earthwork quantities were estimated at 30,800 cubic yards of excavation and 19,200 cubic yards of fill. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical report prepared by S&EE, dated June 24, 2019, or an updated report submitted at a later date. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review, RMC 4-4-060 Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations 2. Air Impacts: It is anticipated that some temporary air quality impacts could be associated with site work and building construction required to complete the proposed project at this site. Project development impacts during construction activities may include dust as a result of concrete cutting and utility work, as well as exhaust from construction vehicles, equipment and/or machinery. These emissions would be temporary and are anticipated to rapidly dissipate. Dust control would be mitigated through the use of temporary erosion control measures, watering or other best management practices as identified in the construction mitigation memo provided by the applicant (see Exhibit 15). Operations within the paint hangar also have the potential to impact air quality on and near the site. Volatile organic compounds and other hazardous air pollutants are present in the paint used on the airplanes and have the potential to be dangerous to both humans and environmental health. The applicant has proposed the mitigation of the potential impacts through the use of Best Available Control Technologies such as filtering particulate matter and other air pollutants from the paint exhaust and limiting the concentrations of certain organic compounds used in the painting process. In addition, operations on the site would be required to meet all applicable control standards designated by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA). The applicant already performs painting on the site and has experience with the challenges and requirements of mitigating impacts to the air. 737 engine run-ups, similar to those already performed on other portions of the Boeing site, are expected to occur a few times per day in the three (3) new outdoor airplane stalls. Although the airplane engine run-ups would release particulate matter into the air from the exhaust, the amount is negligible when compared to the exhaust already released during regular airport operations at the Renton Municipal Airport. Therefore, no further site specific mitigation is recommended for the identified impacts from typical vehicle/construction exhaust and additional engine run-ups. In addition, air quality requirements from City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 6 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL the PSCAA are expected to adequately mitigate for any impacts created by the painting operations on the site. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: N/A 3. Water a. Storm Water Impacts: The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Plan and Technical Information Report (TIR) prepared by DOWL, dated December 2019 (Exhibits 7 and 8). The project contains greater than 2,000 square feet of replaced impervious surface and therefore the development is subject to Full Drainage Review in accordance with the 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual (RSWDM). Based on the City of Renton’s flow control map, the site falls within the Peak Rate Flow Control Standard area matching Existing Site Conditions and is within the Lake Washington and Cedar River Drainage Basin. All nine core requirements and the six special requirements have been discussed in the TIR. The project site is located within the Lake Washington and Cedar River drainage basin. The flowpath from the project site discharge point is less than a half mile to the 100-year floodplain of Lake Washington; therefore, the project qualifies for the direct discharge exemption in accordance with Section 1.2.3.1 of the 2017 RSWDM and must adhere to all requirements thereof. As a commercial site, Special Requirement #4 “Source Controls” per section 1.3.4 in the RSWDM is applicable. In addition, the site is categorized as a “high-use site” per the Definitions section in Chapter 1 of the RSWDM then Special Requirement #5 “Oil Control” per section 1.3.4 in the RSWDM will be applicable. The applicant has elected to provide enhanced water quality treatment prior to discharge via several Linear Modular Wetland systems before entering the outfalls that discharge the stormwater into Lake Washington. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required since grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. All impacts to stormwater are anticipated to be addressed through the requirements of the RSWDW and no additional mitigation measures are recommended. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: N/A 4. Historic and Cultural Preservation Impacts: In the SEPA checklist, the applicant indicated that they completed a search of the Washington State Information System of Architectural and Archaeological Records Data. The Checklist concludes that the system did not identify any properties within the project area as being on the historic property inventory or register. The northern portion of the airport was once under the surface of Lake Washington. In addition the Black River used to run out of the lake, flow south through the airport and then west. Based on the probability of the subject site being along the banks of an old river channel and lake shore there is a higher likelihood of cultural resources discovery, through ground disturbing activity. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that if any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found all construction activity shall stop in accordance with RCW 27.53.060 and 27.44.020, and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes’ cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). The SEPA checklist indicates that if any archaeological resources are encountered a professional Archaeologist would be called to assess the significance of the find. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 7 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL Due to parts of the proposed project that would occur under the existing pervious surface, DAHP has recommended that the applicant hire a professional archeologist to monitor ground disturbing activities. In addition, DAHP recommended the applicant prepare an archaeological monitoring and inadvertent discovery plan (MIDP) to be submitted to DAHP and the interested Tribes for review prior to any ground disturbance. Mitigation Measures: 1. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found all construction activity shall stop in accordance with RCW 27.53.060 and 27.44.020, and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes’ cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation. 2. The applicant shall submit an Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Plan MIDP to DAHP and any interested Tribes for review prior to the start of any ground disturbing activities. Documentation of the submittal shall be provided to the City of Renton prior to the issuance of building or construction permits. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review, RCW 27.53 Archaeological Sites and Resources, and RCW 27.44 Indian Graves and Records. 5. Environmental Health a. Environmental Health Hazards Impacts: Materials planned for storage and use on the project site are primary related to the paint facility and include paints water-based and solvent-based cleaning materials, primers, and other materials typically used in an industrial painting operation. The applicant identifies the potential for the materials to impact the environmental, but anticipates that the risk would be mitigated by storing the materials according requirements from PSCAA, the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE), and the Uniform Fire Code. In addition, all activities during construction would be operated in compliance with a DOE construction stormwater permit with requirements for the protection of local waterways from pollutants generated during construction. Therefore potential short-term and long-term impacts to environmental health would adequately mitigated through compliance with the requirements of various state agencies. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: N/A b. Noise Impacts: The applicant submitted a Noise Study Report for the project prepared by SSA Acoustics and dated June 10, 2019 (Exhibit 13). The applicant also submitted an updated report prepared by SSA Acoustics and dated May 11, 2020 (Exhibit 14). The reports are identical except that the updated report includes measurements and data collected from an additional sound level meter near the Cedar River, as requested by staff after the first Environmental Review Committee meeting on March 23, 2020. The updated report evaluates the noise expected to be generated by testing activities on Apron E and how that noise would impact the receiving properties adjacent to the site. The receiving properties analyzed in the report include the residential properties to the east of the project site, the Renton Memorial Stadium property to the south, and the Cedar River Trail area to the west. The project site is classified as a Class B EDNA (Commercial) source property per Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-60-030. "EDNA" means the environmental designation for noise abatement, being an area or zone (environment) within which maximum permissible noise levels are established. Limits on noise levels at the receiving sites are identified in WAC 173-60-040. The Renton Memorial Stadium property is classified as a Class B EDNA (Commercial) receiver site and has a noise limit of 60 dBA during all hours per the maximum noise levels outlined in WAC 173- 60-040. The Cedar River Trail Park is classified as a Class C EDNA (Industrial) receiver site and has a City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 8 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL noise limit of 65 dBA during all hours. The single-family residential uses to the east are classified as Class A EDNA (Residential) receiver sites and have a noise limit of 57 dBA during daytime hours. During the nighttime, defined as the hours between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am, sound level limits are reduced by 10 dBA where the receiving property lies within a residential district of the city (i.e. the Class A EDNA residential uses to the east of the project site). Per WAC 173-60-040, at any hour of the day or night, noise limitations for Class A, Class B, and Class C EDNAs receiving properties may be exceeded by up to 5 dBA for a total of 15 minutes in any one-hour period, 10 dBA for a total of 5 minutes in any one-hour period, or 15 dBA for a total of 1.5 minutes in any one-hour period. Ambient noise levels were measured by Svantek 971 sound level meters at three (3) test sites near the project site. Ambient noise levels at the east receiving properties (Class A EDNA) were measured during daytime hours and ranged from 57 to 63 dBA depending on time of day. Ambient noise levels at the south receiving property (Class B EDNA) were not specifically measured, but were estimated to be in a similar range as the Class A properties, or between 57 and 63 dBA. Ambient noise levels at the west receiving property (Class C EDNA) were measured during daylight hours and ranged between 50 and 55 dBA. The location of the three receivers used to measure ambient sound levels were identified in the updated Noise Study Report (Exhibit 14). According to the updated report, the decibel level at the three receiving sites would not exceed 10 dBA over the noise limits in WAC 173-60-040. In order to achieve the stated decibel level after during future operations on the site, the applicant has proposed the construction of a 25-foot tall solid steel sound wall along the east side (Logan Ave N) and north side (N 6th St) of the site (Exhibit 10). The report calculated that the sound wall would reduce noise levels at the Class A EDNA receiving properties to the east by approximately 15 dBA and at both the Class B EDNA and Class C EDNA receiving properties to the south and west by 20 dBA compared to the noise levels on a site with no sound wall. After construction of the sound wall, the estimated max sound levels at the Class A EDNA receiving properties is 70 dBA, or approximately 13 dBA over the maximum permissible sustained noise level (57 dBA) and 3 dBA over the maximum permissible intermittent noise level (67 dBA). The estimated maximum sound levels at the Class B EDNA and Class C EDNA receiving properties is 60 dBA, which is under the threshold for the maximum permissible sustained and intermittent noise levels at the site. Per the consultant, the goal of the applicant is to ensure that the future engine run-ups do not increase the ambient noise levels at any of the receiving sites by more than 10 dBA at any time. According to the consultant, limiting the noise levels to less than 10 dBA greater than the maximum permissible levels in consistent with the intermittent noise level regulations in WAC 173-60-040 which allow decibel levels to exceed the maximum levels for short periods of time, and would not result in significant noise impacts to the adjacent properties. Staff concurs with the consultants stated reasons for the identified decibel increase goal and concurs that significant impacts to the receiving properties would not occur if the target limits are not exceeded. Due to the proximity of the site to residential properties, as well as intense nature of the proposed new use on Boeing Apron E, mild to moderate environmental noise level impacts on the residential properties are anticipated. Currently, the nearest aircraft stall where engine testing occurs is approximately 800 feet from the nearest residential uses to the east. If constructed, the future run- ups performed on Apron E would occur at approximately half that distance, or about 400 feet, from the nearest single-family residential property. Based on the data in the report, the noise levels during engine run-ups at 100% power would result in a decibel increase of approximately 13 dBA, or 3 dBA greater than goal indicated by the consultant (no more than 10 dBA over maximum permissible levels). City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 9 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL Measured and Estimated Noise Levels at Adjacent Properties Existing Ambient Noise Level (daytime) Maximum Permissible Noise Level1 Estimate Noise Level at Project Completion Class A Receiving Properties (Single- Family Residential) 63 dBA2 57 dBA 70 dBA Class B Receiving Properties (Renton Memorial Stadium) 60 dBA (estimated) 60 dBA (estimated) 60 dBA Class C Receiving Properties (Cedar River Trail) 60 dBA 70 dBA 60 dBA Footnotes: 1. Intermittent noise levels allowed to exceed maximum noise levels per the following from WAC 173-60-040 5 dBA for a total of 15 minutes in any one-hour period; or (ii) 10 dBA for a total of 5 minutes in any one-hour period; or (iii) 15 dBA for a total of 1.5 minutes in any one-hour period. 2. "dBA" means the sound pressure level in decibels measured using the "A" weighting network on a sound level meter. The sound pressure level, in decibels, of a sound is 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound to a reference pressure of 20 micropascals. In order to reduce the noise levels at receiving properties during engine run-ups even further, the report includes two (2) additional conceptual options as potential noise mitigation measures that could be used in conjunction with the sound wall. The two (2) specific design options include the installation of intermediate noise barriers between individual aircraft stalls and installing localized noise enclosures around the engines during run-ups. In order to ensure that noise levels during engine run-ups do not exceed 10 dBA over the maximum permissible noise levels for all Class A EDNA properties, as well as to decrease the impacts of multiple engine run-ups per hour, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant be required to not exceed 67 decibels (67 dBA) at Class A EDNA receiving properties as a result of the noise levels created from 737 engine run-up testing. If the applicant exceeds 67 decibels at any point after project completion, the applicant should immediately implement intermediate noise barriers between airplane stalls and/or localized noise enclosures installed around the engines to reduce the maximum ambient noise level at the Class A EDNA receiving properties below the 67 dBA threshold. Alternatively, the applicant should submit an updated Noise Study Report with alternative noise reduction measure(s) that achieve the same noise level reductions at or below 67 decibels at Class A EDNA properties. Any updated Noise Study Reports should be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to using the three (3) new outdoor production stalls for aircraft engine testing. All noise impact data provided by the consultant in the report is based on assumptions with respect to the effectiveness of the proposed sound wall and the accuracy of the sound level measurements taken. Unforeseen environmental factors or the use of faulty measuring equipment has the potential to result in inaccurate decibel level estimates for noise once the actual project is completed and engine testing on the site begins. In order to ensure that the maximum noise levels at the Class A EDNA receiving sites do exceed 67 dBA after project completion, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant be required to submit a noise monitoring plan prepared by a professional acoustics engineer for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager at the time of Civil Construction Permit application submittal. The document should City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 10 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL include plans for a minimum of two monitoring stations at the Class A EDNA receiving sits identified in the Noise Study Report prepared by SSA Acoustics and dated May 11, 2020 (Exhibit 14). The monitoring should occur continuously for a period of five (5) years starting from the date of issuance for the Final Certificate of Occupancy. According to the updated noise report, the primary source of noise on the project site is expected to be generated by the engine run-up tests occurring at the three outdoor aircraft production stalls at the north end of the site. Engine run-up testing at the Boeing plant only occurs between hours of 8:00 am and 6:00 pm according to the Renton Field Operator Guide for Curfew Hours document (Exhibit 16). The current run-up test schedule consists of high-power runs allowed between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm and medium-power runs until 6:00 pm. According to the applicant, the typical run-up test lasts between 35 and 40 minutes and testing is limited to one engine at a time (per stall). Therefore, a maximum of four (4) tests per hour on average is possible with the proposed number of outdoor stalls (3). During the tests, the engines are at idle approximately two-thirds of the time and are at full power for approximately one-third of the testing time. In the past, neither Boeing nor the City have been able to produce a copy of an official signed agreement from either party that clearly outlining the times of day that engine run-up are permitted. In order to ensure that engine run-up testing on the future Apron E site are covered under an official agreement and to protect neighboring properties from the noise impacts created by the run-ups, staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that the applicant draft an official agreement covering the curfew hours for all engine run-ups on the Boeing plant site. In addition, the agreement should include language limiting the total number of engine run-ups on the site to four (4) testing cycles per hour. The agreement should be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review at the time of Civil Construction Permit application submittal. The agreement shall be executed by both parties (Boeing and the City of Renton) prior to issuance of the Building Permit. Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall draft an official agreement covering the curfew hours for all engine run-up testing on the Boeing plant site. The agreement should include language limiting the total number of engine run-ups on the Apron E site to four (4) testing cycles per hour. The agreement shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review at the time of Civil Construction Permit application submittal. The agreement shall be executed by both parties (Boeing and the City of Renton) prior to issuance of the Building Permit. 2. The applicant shall not exceed 67 decibels (67 dBA) at Class A EDNA receiving properties as a result of the noise levels created from 737 engine run-up testing. Should the applicant exceed 67 decibels at any point after project completion, the applicant shall immediately implement intermediate noise barriers between airplane stalls and/or localized noise enclosures installed around the engines to reduce the maximum ambient noise level at the Class A EDNA receiving properties below the 67 dBA threshold. Alternatively, the applicant may submit an updated Noise Study Report with alternative noise reduction measure(s) that achieve the same noise level reductions at or below 67 decibels at Class A EDNA properties. Any updated Noise Study Reports shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to using the three (3) new outdoor production stalls for aircraft engine testing. 3. The applicant shall submit a noise monitoring plan prepared by a professional acoustics engineer for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager at the time of Civil Construction Permit application submittal. The document shall include detailed plans for a minimum of two monitoring stations at the Class A EDNA receiving sites identified in the Noise Study Report prepared by SSA Acoustics and dated May 11, 2020 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 11 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL (Exhibit 14). The monitoring shall occur continuously for a period of five (5) years beginning from the date of issuance for the Final Certificate of Occupancy. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review, WAC 173-60-040, RMC 8-7 Noise Level Regulations 6. Aesthetics Impacts: The proposed project represents a large change in the site’s visual presence. Currently the site contains a single one-story building (existing fire station), multiple security/job shacks, and a large surface parking lot. The proposed project involves the construction of a 25 foot tall sound wall and ~70,000 sq. ft. building approximately 95 feet tall. The applicant submitted color renderings and architectural elevations for both the building and sound wall (Exhibit 10). The renderings and architectural indicate an effort by the applicant to add visual interest to both the sound wall and building. Stylized architectural elements designed to mimic the look of an airplane wing has been added to the sound wall and the paint hangar building uses various types of material on the façade. In addition, the applicant has proposed enhanced landscaping between the proposed sound wall and the public ROW in order to provide pedestrian-scale screening to the large building. Lastly, the applicant has proposed 6-foot tall continuous vine panels on the bottom of the sound wall along the entire perimeter. The vine panel would serve as horizontal visual break and provide additional color to the wall itself. Additional design elements related to the scale and visual impact of the structure are expected to be reviewed and added during the site plan review process. Therefore, measures to limit the visual impact of the project can be added through the site plan review process and no mitigation measures related to aesthetics are recommended. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended Nexus: N/A 7. Light and Glare Impacts: The applicant submitted a Light Impingement Study prepared by CASNE Engineering and dated January 28, 2020 (Exhibit 12). The study evaluated the potential light impacts on both the residential uses to the east of the site as well as the Cedar River shoreline to the west of the site. The report also analyzed the existing light levels on the site generated by the parking lot lights in the S1 lot. Data was collected with a handheld visible light meter approximately 36 inches above grade at 30-foot intervals around the site perimeter. In addition, data on light levels was collected along the sidewalk east of Logan Ave N and along the sidewalk east of Burnett Ave N. The consultant tested light levels at the night time and found that existing ambient lights levels in the residential neighborhood were ranged from 0.1 to 1.5 foot-candles. The project proposal includes the installation of six (6) 440W LED fixtures mounted on 36-foot tall poles directly adjacent to the three outdoor stalls on the north side of the site (two lights per stall), two (2) 188W LED fixture mounted on a 20-foot tall poles near the northeast corner of the site, eight (8) 288W LED fixtures mounted on 40-foot tall poles in the associated parking lot, and wall-pack lights ranging from 10W to 300W on each the four (4) paint hangar building façades. The consultant modeled future light levels and compared the results with the existing light conditions in the surrounding area. The results of the modeling found minimal (less than 0.1 foot-candle) in light levels directly outside of the perimeter of the site. Light levels at a both Cedar River shoreline (approximately 550 feet from the site) and residential homes to the east (approximately 400 feet from the site) would not increase according to the study. Therefore, no light impacts on the environment or neighboring properties are anticipated after completion of the project. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: N/A City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 12 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL 8. Transportation Impacts: The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Transpogroup, dated September 2020 (Exhibit 11). The TIA analyzes the parking and traffic impacts of the project while incorporating the new economic realities facing Boeing as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and 737 production challenges. Changes resulting from the various challenges include an approximate 20% reduction in staff and production levels and an increase in permanent telecommuting. The TIA submitted by the applicant primarily focuses on two transportation-related impacts created by the conversion of the S1 parking lot: 1) impacts to the available parking supply and 2) impacts to traffic operations in the immediate area. The S1 parking lot currently has approximately 976 general purpose parking stalls. Parking utilization data was collected as follows: a) 7:00 am and 1:00 pm at 1-hour intervals; b) 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm at 30-minute intervals; and 3:00 pm and 6:00 pm in 1-hour intervals. In order to compare the impact of the Apron E project on overall parking levels for periods where demand was highest, the report uses the site-wide parking utilization rate at times of peak usage (1:00 pm to 1:30 pm and 1:30 pm to 2:00 pm) for analysis. According to the report, the times were chosen as they represent the time of day with the highest parking demand due to the overlapping of the two largest employee shifts (first and second shifts). Due to the current environment facing Boeing, including a reduced work force and a significant reduction in the number of aircraft produced, an updated parking utilization study was not able to be completed this year. In lieu of providing a new parking utilization study, the applicant’s consultant applied a 15% reduction to the parking demand observed at the time the data was initially collected. The consultant estimated that a 15% reduction to parking demand was conservative given the increase in telecommuting and approximately 18% reduction in the total work force that occurred over the past nine (9) months. The original parking utilization analysis estimated a utilization rate of 84% across all Boeing parking lots during the peak times, which was based on a total of 5,565 general purpose stalls if the project is not completed. After applying the 15% reduction to the parking demand data, the consultant calculated the general purpose stall non-project utilization rate to be approximately 72%. If the project is completed, the proposed Apron E improvements would result in the removal of all 976 general purpose parking stalls in the S1 lot which would reduce the total supply to 4,634 general purpose stalls. Based on the previous data, the consultant found that if no new parking stalls are added to the supply to make up for the loss in stalls, conversion of the S1 parking lot would result in a parking utilization exceeding 100% during the PM peak demand period (from 1:00 pm to 2:00pm). The previous finding indicated that the demand for parking would be equal to or greater than the supply and would create significant parking challenges for employees. However, after applying the 15% reduction in parking demand in order to take into account a decrease in production and expected increase in telecommuting, the adjusted parking demand would result in a utilization rate of approximately 85% during the 1:00 pm to 1:30 pm peak time and 86% during the 1:30 pm to 2:00 pm peak time. The consultant concludes that the 85% to 86% parking utilization rate is within the industry standard target for parking lot utilization (typically between 85% and 90%). Although staff concurs with the consultant’s conclusion, with respect to the utilization rate, concern remains about how future demand would be addressed if economic conditions result in a return to previous staffing and production levels. Due the sprawling nature of Boeing’s employee parking system, a low vacancy rate (i.e. 0-10%) exacerbates the issue of excessive cruising for spaces as employees utilize City’s public roads to search for spaces in adjacent lots. This additional driving results in negative impacts such as greater tailpipe emissions, additional traffic congestion on local roads, and an increase in illegal parking on other properties due to drivers who cannot find an open space in timely manner. While economic conditions at Boeing has temporarily reduced the parking demand at the facility, these negative externalities caused by low parking vacancy rates have the potential to resurface if production is increased in the future and more employees are brought back to the plant. The report identifies the potential for this to occur and recommends that the applicant develop a monitoring plan for parking utilization that would City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 13 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL ensure the employee parking network maintains at an efficient vacancy rate if parking demand increases in the future. The report recommends conducting an annual site-wide parking demand study in order to determine the parking utilization rate at the peak periods (between the hours of 1:00 pm to 1:30pm and 1:30 pm to 2:00 pm). The consultant recommends not exceeding a maximum parking utilization rate of 90% across the site at any time. According to the report, if the parking utilization rate exceeded 90%, measures to reduce the overall utilization rate could be implemented by the applicant. The consultant identifies four (4) specific potential measures including restriping lots, developing a commute trip reduction (CTR) plan, leasing additional parking stalls, and converting non-general purpose stalls to general purpose. Therefore, in order to monitor utilization rates in the future, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant be required to submit a Parking Utilization Report (PUR) prepared by a professional traffic engineer annually for a period of five (5) years. Each annual report should include the utilization rates at both individual parking lots as well as site-wide at the peak demand times. If the Boeing shift schedules are altered in any way between annual reports new peak parking demand times should be calculated to reflect the change. If parking utilization is found to exceed 90% site-wide at any time, the applicant would be required to implement specific measures to reduce the utilization rate below the 90% threshold. The second part of the Traffic Impact Analysis analyzes the anticipated project-generated impact on the surrounding roadway network and intersections. The report contains a Level of Service (LOS) analysis for eleven (11) intersections near the project site that includes data on existing conditions, future (2023) conditions without the Apron E project, and future (2023) conditions with the Apron E project. The existing LOS for the eleven intersections ranged from A to E during the peak AM and PM hours. In order to evaluate project impacts on traffic, the study compared future with-project operations to future without-project operation. The future without-project analysis contains data from the expected traffic volumes generated by the Topgolf facility proposed for construction approximately one block northeast of the project site near the intersection of N 8th St and Logan Ave N. According to the report, future without-project conditions would result in a lower LOS for six (6) intersections when compared with existing conditions, including a change from LOS E to LOS F during the PM peak hours at the intersection of Logan Ave N and the S1/E7 Access South. In comparing future with-project conditions to future without-project conditions, the report concluded that the LOS at two intersections is anticipated to decrease by one level within the AM peak hour period (see table below). The project would not result in any intersections decreasing to a LOS F. In addition, one intersection (Logan Ave N and the S1/E7 Access South) would have a LOS D if the project is constructed and a LOS F if the project is not constructed, likely due to the significant reduction in traffic entering and existing the project site after conversion of the S1 lot. Table 7. Future Weekday Peak Hour Intersection LOS Summary 2023 Without-Project 2023 With-Project Intersection LOS Delay WM LOS Delay WM AM Peak Hour 1. Logan Avenue N/N 8th Street B 18 - B 17 - 2. Park Avenue N/N 8th Street B 19 - B 18 - 3. Garden Avenue N/N 8th Street A 6 - A 6 - 4. Lot S6 Access/Internal Road B 12 NBL B 10 SBL 5. Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street C 22 - C 22 - 6. Park Avenue/N 6th Street B 20 - C 21 - 7. Garden Avenue N/N 6th Street A 9 - A 9 - 8. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access North C 15 WB C 16 WB 9. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access South B 12 SBL D 26 WB 10. Park Avenue N/N 5th Street C 20 WBL C 20 WBL 11. Garden Avenue N/N 5th Street B 10 EB B 10 EB City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 14 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL PM Peak Hour 1. Logan Avenue N/N 8th Street C 22 - C 30 - 2. Park Avenue N/N 8th Street C 27 - C 28 - 3. Garden Avenue N/N 8th Street A 8 - A 8 - 4. Lot S6 Access/Internal Road B 11 SBL B 11 SB 5. Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street D 27 - D 47 - 6. Park Avenue/N 6th Street D 34 - D 39 - 7. Garden Avenue N/N 6th Street A 9 - A 9 - 8. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access North C 19 WB C 23 WB 9. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access South F 41 WB D 28 WB 10. Park Avenue N/N 5th Street C 15 EB C 19 EB 11. Garden Avenue N/N 5th Street B 11 EB B 11 EBL LOS = Level of Service (A – F) as defined by the Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2000) Delay = Average delay per vehicle in seconds. WM = Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections. The Public Works Transportation Division reviewed the report and concurs with the findings of the roadway network and intersection analysis; therefore, additional mitigation measures related to impacts on LOS are not recommended. Although not addressed in the second Traffic Impact Analysis, the original Traffic Memo (Exhibit 19) prepared by Transpogroup identifies a total of 80 new employees that would work on the site in three shifts. The Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual identifies two peak hour periods from 6:00 am to 9:00 am (AM Peak Hour) and from 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm (Peak Hour). According to the report, the anticipated shift times for the Boeing site are as follows: 1st Shift – Starts between 5:00 am and 7:00 am, ends between 1:30 pm and 3:30 pm. 2nd Shift – Starts between 1:30 pm and 3:30 pm, ends between 10:00 pm and 12:00 am. 3rd Shift – Starts between 10:00 pm and 12:00 am, ends between 5:00 am and 7:00 am. The report assumes no new trips on the site as a result of the project, as the new report (Exhibit 11) anticipates that employees on the site will not be new, but rather existing employees that already work in other areas on the Boeing plant site. Therefore according to the applicant, the project would not be subject to transportation impact fees. Per recommendations in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual and requirements in City of Renton Municipal Code (RMC), transportation impact fees are only assessed on new PM peak hour trips. Due to the utilization of a 24-hour, multi-shift workforce, a type of commute pattern not identified in the ITE manual, new trips to the Boeing plant frequently fall outside of the typical commuting (peak) hours and projects are frequently not subject to code-required impact fees. However, additional trips occurring outside of the peak hour periods still result in additional vehicles on local roads and exacerbate issues such as traffic congestion and road wear that impact fees are designed to mitigate. In addition, while existing employees shifted to the new Apron E site from other areas on the Boeing plant site may not be immediately generating new trips, the proposed project expands production capacity for Boeing and therefore the potential for new employees and new trips to the plant. If employees transferred to Apron E site from other areas in the facility are replaced or the buildings they worked in altered in a manner that expands production, the City does not have the ability to track or capture the additional trips through the assessment of impact fees. Therefore utilizing the typical metric of new PM peak hour trips to determine traffic impacts does not accurately capture the potential for new trips that occur outside of the PM peak hour range or that occur as a result of increased capacity elsewhere on the site. In order to more accurately mitigate the impacts created by the additional trips resulting the expanded capacity the proposed Apron E will create, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the application be assessed a transportation impact fee based on the square footage of the building for the manufacturing use in accordance with the City of Renton fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Boeing Apron E Staff Report to the Environmental Review Committee LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Report of November 16, 2020 Page 15 of 15 SR_ERC_Staff_Report_Boeing_Apron_E_201116_v2_FINAL The Development Engineering Manager has reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis and determined that the proposed project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D (Exhibit 18). Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall submit an annual Parking Utilization Report (PUR) for a period of five (5) years. The first report shall be submitted no later than one year after the building permit is issued for the proposed paint hanger. Each annual report shall include the utilization rates at both individual parking lots as well as site-wide. Rates shall be calculated at the current peak demand times (1:00 pm to 1:30 pm and 1:30 pm to 2:00 pm). If the Boeing shift schedules are altered in any way between annual reports, new peak parking demand times shall be calculated to reflect the change. If parking utilization for general purpose stalls is found to exceed 90% site-wide at any time, the applicant shall implement specific measures with six (6) months of the date of the annual report in order to reduce the utilization rate below the 90% threshold. The implementation measures proposed shall be formally submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval. 2. The applicant shall pay a transportation impact fee based on the square footage of the building for the manufacturing use in accordance with the City of Renton fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review, RMC 4-1-190 Impact Fees, ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition) E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report.  Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE EXHIBITS Project Name: Boeing Apron E Land Use File Number: LUA19-000145, ECF, SA-H, V-H Date of Meeting November 16, 2020 Staff Contact Alex Morganroth Senior Planner Project Contact/Applicant Mark Clement, PO Box 3707, MC 96-01, Seattle, WA 98124 Project Location 737 Logan Ave N, Renton, WA 98057 The following exhibits are included with the ERC Report: Exhibit 1: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Report Exhibit 2: Site Plan Exhibit 3: Neighborhood Map Exhibit 4: Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit 5: Arborist Report, prepared by Urban Forestry Services, Inc, dated June 18, 2019 Exhibit 6: Tree Retention and Land Clearing Plan Exhibit 7: Drainage Report, prepared by DOWL, dated December, 2019 Exhibit 8: Conceptual Drainage/Utilities Plan, prepared by DOWL, dated June 21, 2019 Exhibit 9: Geotechnical Report, prepared by S&EE, dated June 24, 2019 Exhibit 10: Architectural Elevations Exhibit 11: Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TranspoGroup, dated January, 2020 Exhibit 12: Lighting Impingement Study, prepared by Casne Engineering, dated June 21, 2019 Exhibit 13: Noise Study Report, prepared by SSA Acoustics, dated June 10, 2019 Exhibit 14: Noise Study Report, prepared by SSA Acoustics, dated May 11, 2020 Exhibit 15: Construction Mitigation Description Exhibit 16: Renton Field Operator Guide for Curfew Hours Exhibit 17: On-hold Letter, dated April 22, 2019 Exhibit 18: Transportation Concurrency Memo prepared by Brianne Bannwarth, dated November 6, 2020. Exhibit 19: Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TranspoGroup, dated January, 2020. RENTON SITE SITE PLAN C3 C1 GALVANIZATION NOTE LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION GV FLOW Inlet Outlet RENTON SITE SITE PLAN C4 C2 GALVANIZATION NOTE LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 BOEING 737-MAX10BOEING 737-MAX10LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION RENTON SITE SITE PLAN C5 C3 GALVANIZATION NOTE Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION Apron E – Stalls and Paint Hangar Project North 6th Street Logan Avenue NorthProposed 5-70 Paint Hangar Building Existing 5-28 Fire Station (~94’ Ht) Conceptual Landscape Plan Legend Land-Use Permit/SEPA | 01/28/20 Deciduous - Large Conifer - Large Deciduous - Small Conifer - Medium Conifer - Small Existing Tree to Remain Shrubs and Groundcover 0 20 40 80 blast fence noise wall - 25’ ht fence - 6’ ht existing asphalt trail 20’ wide 15.5’ wide 15’ wide vine panels - 12’ ht, typ Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION Title: Boeing Apron E Expansion Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment Renton, Washington Prepared for: HBB Architects Attn: Mr Aaron Luoma 215 Westlake Ave. North Seattle, Washington 98109-5217 Prepared by: Urban Forestry Service, Inc. Anna Heckman ISA Board Certified Master Arborist® #PN-6153B, ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Date: June 18, 2019 Contents Summary Introduction Findings and Recommendations Method of Assessment Site Map with Trees Located Tree Assessment Matrix Tree Protection Guidelines Critical Root Zone Explanation Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Summary A Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment was conducted on one hundred and three (103) trees in and surrounding the Boeing Apron E Expansion Project in the S1 parking lot in Renton, Washington. 26 trees are street trees and should be managed in conjunction with the city. Seventy (70) of the seventy-seven (77) trees on the property are significant by size and fourteen (14)significant trees are dead, dying, or diseased. This leaves fifty-six (56) significant trees tobe retained or removed and mitigated for as needed. Tree retention calculations show that fivetrees require retention to meet the minimum tree retention standards. These trees should be protected through construction. Note: This document contains the Arborist Report for the Apron E Expansion and also the Lot S2 Firestation project no longer going forward. The Lot S2 assessment includes trees within the current project construction area that will be affected, see report below and the Tree Retention Land Clearing Exhibit. Boeing Apron E Expansion, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. June 18, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Introduction As requested by Aaron Luoma with HBB, I visited the Boeing S1 parking lot south of North 6th St along Logan Ave N. in Renton Washington on May 23rd and 24th, 2019. The purpose of this work was to map and assess the trees impacted by expansion of the airplane construction apron. Trees to be assessed are located in parking lot islands and in long planting strips along the edge of the current parking lot. A public multiuse pedestrian trail on the east side of the parking lot is located between a linear row of onsite retention trees and the City managed street trees along Logan Ave. N. A second linear strip of street trees borders the north property line along North 6th St. Trees were numbered with aluminum tags beginning with #201 on the south west side of the parking lot. Tags are nailed to the north side of the trunk at eye level. Trees are individually identified on the attached Tree Site Plan with photo and data for each tree provided in the attached Tree Assessment Matrix. Tree retention and land clearing regulations for the city of Renton; municipal code 4-4-130 Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations, identify Significant trees as 6 inches diameter and 8 inches for cottonwood or alder unless they are considered “dangerous”. Landmark trees are over 30 inches. Priority tree retention requirements (section H1b.) should be implemented in tree preservation selection on the site. Findings and Recommendations: Photo 1: Dead ‘Crimson King’ maple trees in the foreground on the west side of the parking lot and the columnar ‘Armstrong’ maples in the distance are on the east side of the parking lot. Boeing Apron E Expansion, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. June 18, 2019 Page 3 of 6 The fifty-five (55) trees in the interior parking lot islands have not been well maintained. Soils are very dry and compacted, and no mulch or organic layer remains from the initial planting. Many trees are in very poor condition and some are dead. Trees in larger planter strips or grown in groups were in better condition than the individual planting areas. Trees less tolerant to drought and heat such as the red maples (Acer rubrum) were in much poorer condition than adjacent, more drought tolerant shore pines (Pinus contorta). Multiple specimens have been structurally damaged beyond reasonable recovery. Some trees have major structural defects due to not having the tree stakes and ties removed (Photo 2). Others were not structurally pruned for balanced canopies when they were young. These trees have or will have structural failures that will impact their longevity on the site. The eastern side of the parking lot has many trees in good condition. These trees are the highest value to retain on the site. Fourteen (14) of the twenty-two (22) trees along the eastern edge of the parking lot can be retained as described in the 60% design. These Armstrong maples (Acer X freemanii ‘Armstrong’) have Perimeter Critical Root Zones (PCRZ) identified in the Tree Assessment Matrix. Trees chosen for retention should have the PCRZ drawn to scale on all plans. Information on the PCRZ can be found in the attached Critical Root Zone explanation sheet. Tree #265 has a split leader that will require significant cabling and pruning to retain safely. This tree is recommended for removal for construction at this time. Photo 2: Tree ties were not removed and have girdled the top of these trees. Though there is still living canopy, decay through the trunk impacts their longevity. Boeing Apron E Expansion, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. June 18, 2019 Page 4 of 6 Street trees were measured along Logan Ave and North 6th street. The eleven (11) American ash (Fraxinus americana) along Logan Ave are healthy despite the 4 to 8 inches of soil volume loss below the curb since they were planted. This soil volume loss will impact the long term health and stability of these street trees. These trees look to be an American ash, ‘Autumn Applause’ variety, based on early spring form and leaf structure. Fall color or paper documentation of the cultivar is recommended for confirmation if matching these trees in the new landscape is desired. The fifteen (15) Leprechaun ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 Leprechaun™) along North 6th street are not significant trees. These trees are young and were pruned shortly after planting in 2014 resulting in tall skinny trunks that have poor structure. Many of these trees are in poor health and may not survive construction impacts even with the best protection. The healthier specimens could be successfully transplanted to other areas on the property. This species is a unique and interesting small tree selection. The recommendations provided balance the benefits of retaining trees on site with the reasonable ability for those trees to survive construction and provide benefits to the new site. Retention numbers are expected to change as site plans are altered. Example mitigation numbers were calculated for discussion and planning purposes, final numbers for the project should be calculated using the final retention and removal design. Recommendations: 1. Remove 14 significant and 2 non-significant dead and dying trees on the property. (#’s 201, 221, 230, 231, 235, 237, 238, 240, 241, 243, 245, 246, 249, 257, 261, 262) These trees are either dead, unhealthy beyond recovery given reasonable efforts, or are structurally damaged to a point where tree health has been compromised. Though small, these trees fit the definition of “dangerous” due to physical and structural integrity in the Renton tree code. These trees vary in health and structural deficiencies, but all are identified in the attached map and matrix as having no retention value. The sixteen (16) significant trees can be subtracted from the mitigation total in the mitigation calculation sheet. 2. Remove 41 significant and 5 non-significant trees for construction. (#’s202-208, 212, 219, 220, 222-229, 232-234, 236, 239, 242, 244, 247, 248, 250-256, 258-260, 263-269, 276, 277) These trees are viable and will require replacement if removed for construction. This calculation uses the 60% design for guidance. The number of trees retained or removed for construction is expected to change as designs develop. Trees proposed for removal are Priority 2 significant, non-native trees. 3. Retain and protect 14 of the Armstrong Maples. (#210, 211, 213-218, 270-275) and one red maple (#209). . These trees along the east side of the site should be protected prior to construction following the attached Tree Protection Guidelines. Supplemental irrigation and wood chip mulch should be installed to protect the soil and improve tree resilience prior to construction. Boeing Apron E Expansion, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. June 18, 2019 Page 5 of 6 Tree #271 is a “Priority 1 non-native tree over 18” diameter”, the red maple is part of a grove with tree # 210 and 211, and the remainder trees are “Priority 2 significant, non-native trees”. These trees are in the highest retention categories identified on the site. 4. Retain, protect, and manage the 11 American ash Street trees (#278-288) and the 15 Leprechaun ash trees (#289-303) per direction of the City. These trees are regulated and protected by the City of Renton. Tree health and retention values vary and are identified on the attached map and matrix. These data provide documentation of pre-construction condition in case of incident during or post construction. Trees #287, 300, and 301 are identified for removal in the 60% design. These trees will require City approval and mitigation in addition to the mitigation for the trees on the site per City direction. Conclusion: Most of the trees on the site will be removed for construction. Based on the number of trees on the site and the industrial zoning, only five (5) trees are required to be retained. This number does not change even if no trees were designated as dying or “dangerous”. Protecting the thirteen (13) Armstrong maples on the east side of the property satisfies the tree protection requirements for this area. If plans change and less than 5 trees will be retained on the site, the city will need to approve the mitigation option. This option will require at least 32 trees of 2-inch caliper size to be planted on the site to meet mitigation requirements. The street trees will require coordination with the City of Renton for protection requirements, removal and replanting options. The American ash along Logan Ave. can be retained and protected, the Leprechaun ash along North 6th are recommended to be relocated or replaced. Method of Assessment This Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment was conducted according to the ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) training and methodology (see the attached Tree Risk Assessment Level Descriptions). While no one can predict with absolute certainty which trees will fail and which trees will remain healthy, by methodical process we can predict those most likely to fail by the conditions observed and take appropriate action to reduce or eliminate the potential hazard. The time frame for this Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment considers expected conditions and issues over the next year. Because tree conditions change over time, further assessment may be necessary in the future. Boeing Apron E Expansion, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. June 18, 2019 Page 6 of 6 Tree Risk Assessment Level Descriptions The tree risk assessment process is based on factors present at the time of assessment. Because trees are living, growing things that change in size and condition over time, the tree assessment process must also recognize and anticipate where and when future assessments should be performed. The Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) training and methodology, developed and administered by the International Society of Arboriculture is the best available methodology for tree risk assessment at this time. There are three levels of assessment that may be considered and employed according to the expectations of the owner or manager, conditions of the site and of the trees involved: Level 1 Limited Visual Assessment: Includes a broad overview of an individual tree or group of trees near specified targets, conducted to identify obvious defects or other conditions of concern. A limited visual assessment typically focuses on identifying trees with imminent and/or probable likelihood of failure. Level 1 assessments do not always meet the criteria for a "risk assessment" if they do not include documented analysis and evaluation of individual trees. This level is typically used for large populations of trees as a means to quickly identify trees with imminent and/or probable likelihood of failure, at a specified schedule and/or immediately after storms. Level 1 assessments may be done as walk-by, drive-by or aerial patrols as requested by the tree owner or manager. They may not provide enough information to develop risk mitigation recommendations. They can help identify specific areas and/or trees for further inspection at Level 2 or 3. Trees found to require a Level 2 Basic Assessment are assessed, mapped and documented at the higher level at this time. Trees determined to need a Level 3 Advanced Tree Assessment are documented and recommended for additional testing and analysis. The owner is notified with options discussed. Level 2 Basic Assessment: This is a detailed visual inspection of a tree and its surrounding site, and a synthesis of the information collected. It requires that a tree risk assessor walk completely around the tree, looking at the site, buttress roots, trunk, and branches. This basic assessment may include the use of simple tools to gain additional information about the tree or defects. Our Level 2 Basic Assessment Trees are all typically tagged, mapped and information gathered and retained for each tree. Risk mitigation recommendations may be derived from this level of inspection. Defects found in a Level 2 Basic Tree Assessment may require a Level 3 assessment for further testing and analysis. The owner is notified with options discussed. Level 3 Advanced Assessment: Advanced assessments are performed to provide more highly detailed information about specific tree components, defects, targets or site conditions. An advanced assessment is performed in conjunction with or after a Level 2 Basic Assessment if the assessor determines the need for (requires) additional information. This level is particularly useful where there are concerns about trees that may otherwise be of high value, or to obtain better information on how serious or extensive a particular defect is. The Level 3 Advanced Tree assessment may include but not be limited to a root crown inspection with air spade, Resistograph or Tomograph use to determine sound wood or an aerial crown inspection. The preliminary Level 1 Limited Visual Assessment if requested would help determine where field assessments at Level 2 and Level 3 will be needed. Page 1 of 2 June 18, 2019 Boeing Apron E Expansion, Tree Inventory Renton, Washington URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES, INC. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 PRESERVATION VALUE SYMBOLS SPECIAL, UNIQUE SPECIES, SPECIMEN OR FORM. SAVE. HIGH, GOOD QUALITY, CHARACTER TREE. SAVE IF POSSIBLE. MODERATE, COMMON SPECIES, FAIR CONDI- TION. MAY NEED SPECIAL ATTENTION TO PRESERVE. LOW, POOR SPECIMEN OR SPECIES. HIGH MAINTENANCE OR SOME CAUTION IF RE- TAINED. “DANGEROUS” - HAZARD OR DEAD , DIS- EASED, OR NOT SIGNIFICANT. TREE IS DEAD OR IN VERY POOR CONDITION ND SHOULD BE REMOVED. NON SIGNIFICANT TREE < 6” DIAMETER SIGNIFICANT TREE > 6” DIAMETER #281 #280 #279 #303 #298 #302 #299 #296 #297 #300 #294 #295 #301 #290 #291 #293 #289 #292 #278 #274 #275 #277 #282 #242 #248 #276 #273 #272 #252 #254 #253 #255 #256 #251 #258 #257 #263 #262 #261 #260 #259 #267 #268 #250 #266 #269 #271 #270 #249 #283 #247 #237 #246 #245 #236 #244 #241 #243 #238 #234 #235 #### #### Page 2 of 2 June 18, 2019 Boeing Apron E Expansion, Tree Inventory Renton, Washington URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES, INC. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 PRESERVATION VALUE SYMBOLS SPECIAL, UNIQUE SPECIES, SPECIMEN OR FORM. SAVE. HIGH, GOOD QUALITY, CHARACTER TREE. SAVE IF POSSIBLE. MODERATE, COMMON SPECIES, FAIR CONDI- TION. MAY NEED SPECIAL ATTENTION TO PRESERVE. LOW, POOR SPECIMEN OR SPECIES. HIGH MAINTENANCE OR SOME CAUTION IF RE- TAINED. “DANGEROUS” - HAZARD OR DEAD , DIS- EASED, OR NOT SIGNIFICANT. TREE IS DEAD OR IN VERY POOR CONDITION ND SHOULD BE REMOVED. NON SIGNIFICANT TREE <6” DIAMETER SIGNIFICANT TREE >6” DIEAMETER #208 #203 #206 #207 #204 #202 #201 #205 #215 #211 #213 #210 #209 #222 #218 #217 #225 #216 #214 #212 #221 #220 #219 #230 #226 #224 #223 #228 #229 #231 #227 #232 #286 #284 #285 #263 #264 #### #287 #288 #### #283 #267 #262 #233 #268 #266 #265 #234 #235 #240 #239 Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 201 Poor to Fair Poor to FairShore pine 12.3, (12.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pinus contorta var. contorta CRZ (ft) 12.3 Tree has had unusual historical top loss resulting in unstable growth pattern with decay. Small branches are in decline. Recovery efforts may not be cost effective.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 202 Good Poor to FairShore pine 9.8, (9.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pinus contorta var. contorta CRZ (ft) 9.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 203 Fair to Good Fair to GoodRed maple 10.3, 9.2, 6.6, 6 (16.44) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 16.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 204 Fair to Good FairShore pine 7.8, 6.8 (10.35) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pinus contorta var. contorta CRZ (ft) 10.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 1 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 205 Poor to Fair Poor to FairShore pine 9, (9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pinus contorta var. contorta CRZ (ft) 9.0 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 206 Poor to Fair FairShore pine 7.8, (7.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pinus contorta var. contorta CRZ (ft) 7.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 207 Poor to Fair FairRed maple 11, (11) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 11.0 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 208 Poor to Fair FairRed maple 10.3, (10.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 10.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 2 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 209 Fair FairRed maple 13.6, (13.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 13.6 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 210 Fair to Good FairArmstrong maple 18.3, (18.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 18.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 211 Fair Poor to FairArmstrong maple 9.8, (9.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 9.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Root Prune Recommendations Tree 212 Fair Fair to GoodArmstrong maple 8.5, (8.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 8.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 3 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 213 Fair FairArmstrong maple 6.8, (6.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 6.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 214 Fair FairArmstrong maple 10.5, (10.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 10.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 215 Fair FairArmstrong maple 12.3, (12.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 12.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 216 Fair FairArmstrong maple 13.6, (13.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 13.6 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations 4 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 217 Fair FairArmstrong maple 12.2, (12.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 12.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 218 Fair FairArmstrong maple 15.4, (15.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 15.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 219 Fair FairCrimson King 7.9, (7.9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.9 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 220 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 7.1, (7.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.1 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 5 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 221 Dying/Dead Poor to FairRed maple 7.8, (7.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 7.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 222 Fair FairShore pine 10.4, (10.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pinus contorta var. contorta CRZ (ft) 10.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 223 Fair FairCrimson King 7.2, (7.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 224 Fair Poor to FairCrimson King 9.1, (9.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 9.1 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 6 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 225 Poor Poor to FairRed maple 6, 6, 6, 4, 4, 4, 4, 2 (13.27) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 13.3 tree is a multi stem. Recovery efforts may not be cost effective.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 226 Poor FairRed maple 7.9, (7.9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 7.9 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 227 Fair FairLodgepole pine 15, (15) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pinus contorta var. latifolia CRZ (ft) 15.0 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 228 Poor Poor to FairRed maple 7.3, (7.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 7.3 Tree is in severe decline. Recovery efforts, though possible may not be cost effective and have a low probability of success.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations 7 Date: 6/19/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 229 Poor to Fair Poor to FairRed maple 7.3, 8.6, 8.8, 4, 4 (15.38) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum CRZ (ft) 15.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 230 Fair PoorCrimson King 6.2, (6.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.2 Tree stake ties were not removed. Tree leader was girdled and failed opening the trunk to decay. This tree should be removed despite construction.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 231 Poor to Fair PoorCrimson King 5.5, (5.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 5.5 Tree stake ties were not removed and are girdling the main stem on this tree. Remove tree.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 232 Fair FairCrimson King 5.5, 5, 2 (7.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.7 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 8 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 233 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 8.7, (8.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 8.7 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 234 Poor to Fair Poor to FairCrimson King 7.3, (7.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 235 Dying/Dead Dying/DeadCrimson King 7.7, (7.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.7 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 236 Fair FairCrimson King 5.9, (5.9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 5.9 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 9 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 237 Dying/Dead Dying/DeadCrimson King 7.3, (7.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 238 Dying/Dead Dying/DeadCrimson King 9.1, (9.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 9.1 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 239 Poor to Fair FairFlowering crab 3.1, (3.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Malus species CRZ (ft) 3.1 Not significant.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 240 Poor to Fair PoorLeyland cypress 11.4, (11.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk × Cupressocyparis leylandii CRZ (ft) 11.4 Tree has trunk damage and significant die back.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations 10 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 241 Poor PoorLeyland cypress 9.4, (9.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk × Cupressocyparis leylandii CRZ (ft) 9.4 Tree has lost top and is dying back.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 242 Poor to Fair FairFlowering crab 4.8, (4.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Malus species CRZ (ft) 4.8 Not significant.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 243 Dying/Dead Dying/DeadCrimson King 6.4, (6.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 244 Poor Poor to FairCrimson King 7.3, (7.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.3 Multiple dead branches and top die back will be difficult to recover. Recovery efforts may not be cost effective.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations 11 Date: 6/19/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 245 Dying/Dead Dying/DeadCrimson King 5.3, (5.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 5.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 246 Dying/Dead Dying/DeadCrimson King 6.4, (6.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 247 Fair Poor to FairCrimson King 9.8, (9.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 9.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 248 Poor Poor to FairRed sunset red 3.4, (3.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer rubrum 'Franksred' CRZ (ft) 3.4 Not significantNotes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 12 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 250 Poor to Fair Poor to FairArmstrong maple 6.5, (6.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 6.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 249 Poor to Fair PoorAutumn blaze 7.8, (7.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Jeffersred' CRZ (ft) 7.8 Trunk wound at the base has significant decay.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 251 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 6.4, (6.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 252 Fair FairCrimson King 8.1, (8.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 8.1 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 13 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 253 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 8.3, (8.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 8.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 254 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 6.9, (6.9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.9 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 255 Poor to Fair Poor to FairCrimson King 6.8, (6.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 256 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 6.4, (6.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 14 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 257 Poor Poor to FairCrimson King 6.3, (6.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.3 Top and crown has died back resulting in a very poor structure that may not be cost effective to recover.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 258 Fair Poor to FairCrimson King 7.5, (7.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 259 Fair FairCrimson King 7.3, (7.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 260 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 6.5, (6.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 15 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 261 Poor Poor to FairCrimson King 6, (6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.0 Top die back and 50% crown loss. It may not be cost effective to try to recover.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 262 Poor PoorCrimson King 6.9, (6.9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.9 Top die back. Structural recovery may not be cost effective with this tree.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 263 Poor to Fair FairCrimson King 6.6, (6.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 6.6 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 264 Fair FairCrimson King 7.4, (7.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer platanoides 'Crimson King' CRZ (ft) 7.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 16 Date: 6/14/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 265 Good PoorRed sunset red 16.6, (16.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Medium Acer rubrum 'Franksred' CRZ (ft) 16.6 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Monitor Tree, Risk of Failure Cable/Brace Subordinate Prune Recommendations Tree 266 Fair Poor to FairArmstrong maple 18, (18) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 18.0 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 267 Fair FairArmstrong maple 14.8, (14.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 14.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 268 Poor to Fair Poor to FairArmstrong maple 14.9, (14.9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 14.9 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 17 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 269 Fair FairArmstrong maple 13.8, (13.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 13.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 270 Fair Poor to FairArmstrong maple 13.3, (13.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 13.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 271 Fair FairArmstrong maple 19.2, (19.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 19.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 272 Fair FairArmstrong maple 9.2, (9.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 9.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations 18 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 273 Fair FairArmstrong maple 8.3, (8.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 8.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 274 Fair FairArmstrong maple 8.7, (8.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 8.7 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 275 Fair FairArmstrong maple 6.8, (6.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' CRZ (ft) 6.8 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Tree 276 Poor Poor to FairAutumn blaze 5.5, (5.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Acer x freemanii 'Jeffersred' CRZ (ft) 5.5 Tree is Not Significant and in very poor health.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations 19 Date: 6/19/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 277 Poor PoorRed sunset red 7.3, (7.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Acer rubrum 'Franksred' CRZ (ft) 7.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 278 Fair FairAutumn applause 5.5, (5.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 5.5 Not SignificantNotes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations Tree 279 Fair Poor to FairAutumn applause 6.2, (6.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 6.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Critical Root Zone Treatment Root Prune Clearance Prune Recommendations Tree 280 Fair FairAutumn applause 7, (7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 7.0 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Root Prune Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations 20 Date: 6/14/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 281 Fair FairAutumn applause 6.2, (6.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 6.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations Tree 282 Fair Poor to FairAutumn applause 7, (7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 7.0 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Root Prune Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations Tree 283 Fair FairAutumn applause 6.5, (6.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 6.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations Tree 284 Fair Poor to FairAutumn applause 5.7, (5.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 5.7 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Root Prune Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations 21 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 285 Fair FairAutumn applause 7.1, (7.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 7.1 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations Tree 286 Fair FairAutumn applause 4.5, (4.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 4.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Critical Root Zone Treatment Clearance Prune Recommendations Tree 287 Fair FairAutumn applause 4.4, (4.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 4.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 288 Poor to Fair FairAutumn applause 3.6, (3.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Applause' CRZ (ft) 3.6 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor During Construction Critical Root Zone Treatment Recommendations 22 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 289 Poor Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2, (2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.0 Trees along this ROW are extremely thin for their height and may break under canopy weight. Leaves are smaller than normal for this variety with a high amount of epicormic sprouting. In some cases looking like residual growth regulator spray impacts. Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 290 Fair to Good Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.75, (2.75) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.8 Trunk has a lean, tree stakes were removed too early.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor During Construction Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 291 Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.2, (2.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.2 Canopy pruned very high. .Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor During Construction Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 292 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.2, (2.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.2 Some branch die back in addition to over pruning.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations 23 Date: 6/19/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 293 Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.2, (2.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.2 One of the healthier trees in the row.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor During Construction Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 294 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.2, (2.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.2 Poor root system and pruning. Sun scald on trunk.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 295 Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.3, (2.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.3 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor During Construction Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 296 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.3, (2.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.3 Poor pruning and die back in very small canopy.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations 24 Date: 6/19/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 297 Poor Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.3, (2.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.3 Root crown is buried.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 298 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.2, (2.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Recommendations Tree 299 Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.5, (2.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor During Construction Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 300 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.2, (2.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.2 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations 25 Date: 6/19/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix Boeing S1 Parking Lot Apron E Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 A. Heckman Tree 301 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.2, (2.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.2 Root crown below grade.Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Poor Health Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Tree 302 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.4, (2.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.4 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor During Construction Tree Protection Required, Recommendations Tree 303 Poor to Fair Poor to FairLeprechaun ash 2.5, (2.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Johnson’ PP 9136 CRZ (ft) 2.5 Notes/Defects Noted Tree:Ye s Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor During Construction Tree Protection Required, Recommendations 26 Date: 6/7/2019 6/19/2019 Field Work Completed: General Tree Protection Guidelines By Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 2011-12 Page 1 of 3 General Tree Protection Guidelines With Critical Root Zone Explanation Attachment 1. Responsibilities: These Guidelines pertain to any disturbance, use or activity within the Critical Root Zone of any retained tree on this project. See attached Critical Root Zone Explanation for reference. The owner’s arborist and general contractor shall meet onsite before any site work begins, to review and designate the most appropriate methods to be used to protect the retained trees during construction. These guidelines apply to work provided by all contractors and sub-contractors on the project. The project consulting arborist shall be contacted prior to any work that may need to enter the tree protection fencing. Two days notice shall be provided to the project consulting arborist. A proposed method for work shall be provided to the arborist. This method shall be reviewed by the project consulting arborist and either approval and / or comments provided by the project consulting arborist prior to commencing works within the tree protection area. He or she should be notified within 8 hours should any injury occur to any protected tree or its larger roots (greater than 2-inch diameter) so that appropriate assessment and/or treatment may be made. 2. Soil Disturbance: No soil disturbance shall take place before tree protection fences are installed. All evaluated trees to be retained within these areas are clearly illustrated on the Site Plan. 3. Designated Tree Removals: The owner’s arborist and contractor shall confirm on site which trees are to be removed and those to be retained. Directional felling and removal of trees will be completed with great care to avoid any damage to the trunks, limbs, and critical root zones of the retained trees. 4. The Tree Protection Site Plan shows the recommended location of the Tree Protection Fence (TPF). Immediately after the clearing limits and grading stakes are set in the field, the owner’s arborist, during review and discussion with the contractor, will make a final determination on the tree protection requirements depending on construction limits and impact on major roots and soil condition. The arborist may adjust clearing limits in the field so that, in his/her opinion, tree roots and soils are protected while necessary work can proceed. 5. The Tree Protection Fence (TPF) shall be installed along the clearing limits, with special consideration of the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of trees to be preserved. The CRZ of a tree is generally described as an area equal to 1-foot radius for every 1-inch diameter of tree. For example, a 10-inch diameter tree has a CRZ of 10-foot radius. Work within the CRZ may be limited to hand work or alternate method of construction. The Tree Protection Fence (TPF) shall be constructed with steel posts driven into the ground with 6-ft. chain link fence attached. Upon consultation with the contractor, the arborist shall determine the placement of the fence and the extent and method of clearing that may be done General Tree Protection Guidelines By Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 2011-12 Page 2 of 3 near preserved trees. Additional follow-up determinations may be required as work progresses on the project. See attached Critical Root Zone Explanation. No parking, storage, dumping, or burning of materials is allowed beyond the clearing limits or within the Tree Protection Fence. The TPF shall not be moved without authorization by the owner’s arborist or City arborist. The TPF shall remain in place for the duration of the project. Work within this area shall be reviewed with and approved by the owner’s arborist. Call Urban Forestry Services, Inc. at 360-428-5810 with questions. 6. Silt Fence: If a silt fence is required to be installed within the Critical Root Zone of a retained tree, the bottom of the silt fence shall not be buried in a trench, but instead, folded over and placed flat on the ground. The flat portion of the silt fence shall be covered with gravel or soil for anchorage. 7. CRZ over Hardscape: Where the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) includes an area covered by hardscape, the TPF can be placed along the edge of the hardscape if and until it is removed. After hardscape removal, the available CRZ should be backfilled with topsoil up to 6 inches deep and protected with the TPF. Incorporation of topsoil into the existing sub-grade shall be determined by the consulting arborist. Where applicable a specification for topsoil will be provided or approved by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 8. Tree Protection Signs shall be attached to the fence only and shall be shown as required on the Site Plan. They should read “Protect Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of trees to be retained. No soil disturbance, parking, storage, dumping, or burning of materials is allowed within the Tree Protection Barrier. " Monetary Fines based on the appraised dollar value of the retained trees may also be included on these signs. Telephone contact details for the project consulting arborist should also be included in the sign. 9. Soil Protection within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ): Where vehicular access, temporary work pad or storage pad is required within the CRZ of any preserved tree that is not protected with hardscape, the soil shall be protected with 18” of woodchips and/or plywood or metal sheets to protect from soil compaction and damage to roots of retained trees. A biodegradable coir mat netting is recommended to be placed on the existing grade before woodchip placement to protect the condition and confirm the location of the existing grade. The netting is a valuable benchmark upon removal of the material within the CRZ. 10. Landscape Plans, Irrigation Design and Installation Details: Great care shall be exercised when landscaping within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of any tree. Roots of preserved trees and other vegetation shall not be damaged by planting or installation of irrigation lines The owner’s arborist shall review the Landscape Plan for any potential design and tree preservation conflicts and approve related irrigation and landscape installation activities within the CRZ of retained trees. A proposed method for work shall be provided to and approved by the arborist. 11. Backfill and Grade Changes: The owner’s arborist will determine to what extent backfilling may be allowed within the Critical Root Zone of a preserved tree, and if needed, the specific General Tree Protection Guidelines By Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 2011-12 Page 3 of 3 material which may be used. Grade cuts are usually more detrimental than grade filling within the CRZ and should be reviewed by the arborist well in advance of construction. 12. Tree Maintenance and Pruning: Trees recommended for maintenance and approved by the owner, shall be pruned for deadwood, low hanging limbs, and proper balance, as recommended for safety, clearance or aesthetics. All pruning shall be done by an International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist. ANSI A300 American Standards for Pruning shall be used. Limbs of retained trees within 10 feet or less, of any power line, depending on power line voltage, may only be pruned by a Utility Certified Arborist. This pruning must be coordinated with the local power company, as they may prefer to provide this pruning. 13. Underground Utilities: Utility installation within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of any retained tree shall be reviewed by the Project Consulting Arborist. A less root disturbing route or minimal impact installation method of utility installation may be discussed and recommended i.e. tunneling or trenchless excavation. Trenching through the Interior CRZ of a retained tree is not usually allowed. See CRZ Explanation to differentiate between the Perimeter and Interior CRZ. An Air spade and Vac., Truck may be required when utility installation is mandatory near a retained tree or other methodology such as trenchless excavation. 14. Root Pruning: Required work may result in the cutting of roots of retained trees. Cutting roots 2” or greater should be avoided. Potential root pruning needs should be reviewed in advance with the Project Consulting Arborist to minimize potential root fracturing and other damage. Severed roots of retained trees shall be cut off cleanly with a sharp saw or pruning shears. Applying pruning paint on trunk or root wounds is not recommended. Severed roots shall be covered immediately after final pruning with moist soil or covered with mulch until covered with soil. Excavation equipment operators shall take extreme care not to hook roots and pull them back towards retained trees. In all cases, the excavator shall sit outside of the CRZ. Soil excavation within the CRZ shall be under the direct supervision of the owner’s arborist. 15. Supplemental Tree Irrigation: If clearing is performed during the summer, supplemental watering and/or mulching over the root systems within the Tree Protection Fencing of preserved trees may be required by the owner’s arborist. The arborist should be notified of the proposed schedule for clearing and grading work. Supplemental watering and mulching over the root systems of roots impacted or stressed trees are strongly recommended to compensate for root loss and initiate new root growth. Long periods of slow drip irrigation will be most effective. A large coil of soaker hose starting at least 18" from the trunk and covering the Interior Critical Root Zone area is recommended. Water once per week and check soils for at least 12 inches infiltration. This work shall be under the direct supervision of the owner’s arborist. 16. Additional Measures: Additional tree protection recommendations may be required and may be specified in Urban Forestry Services, Inc. report(s). 17. Final Inspection: The owner’s arborist shall make a final site visit to report on retained tree condition following completed work and shall report to the city to release the bond for the retained trees. Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Rd. Mount Vernon, WA 98273 Title: Critical Root Zone (CRZ) Explanation Source: Urban Forestry Services, Inc Jim Barborinas, ISA Certified Arborist PN-0135 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #356, Tree Risk Assessor Qualified Date: 2018 Not to Scale The Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of a tree is established on the basis of the trunk diameter. The CRZ is a circular area which has a radius of 12 inches for every inch diameter of trunk measured at 4.5 feet above grade. Root systems will vary both in depth and spread depending on size of tree, soils, water table, species and other factors. However, this CRZ description is generally accepted in the tree industry. Protecting this entire root zone area should result in no adverse impact to the tree, except for potentially increased exposure. The above CRZ drawing has been further differentiated into the ’Perimeter’ (PCRZ) and ‘Interior’ (ICRZ) to help define potential impact and required Post Care. Generally, the full PCRZ is considered the optimum amount of root protection for a tree. As one encroaches into the “Perimeter CRZ, but not into the “Interior CRZ” the greater Post Care the tree would require to remain alive and stable. The ‘Interior CRZ is half the radius of the full PCRZ. Disturbance into the ICRZ could destabilize or cause the tree to decline. The ‘Interior’ CRZ should never be disturbed if the tree is to have any chance of survival. This ‘Interior’ CRZ would approximately equal the size of a rootball needed to transplant this tree which in turn would require extensive Post Care and possibly guying. This Post Care Treatment would include but may not be limited to; regular irrigation, misting, root treatment with special root hormones or growth stimulants, mulching, guying and monitoring for several years. Lack of this treatment would be fatal. Tree Trunk Critical Root Zone (CRZ) = 12” Radius for every Tree inch diameter is generally considered optimum protection. Perimeter Critical Root Zone (PCRZ) = the outer half of the CRZ The greater the disturbance allowed in this area, the greater Post Care is required. Interior Critical Root Zone (ICRZ) = the inner half of the CRZ Protecting only this area would cause significant impact to the tree, potentially life threatening, and would require maximum Post Care Treatment to retain the tree. See Post Care Treatment below. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Rd. Mount Vernon, Washington 98273 1. Limitations of this Assessment This Assessment is based on the circumstances and observations as they existed at the time of the site inspection of the Client’s Property and the trees inspected by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. and upon information provided by the Client to Urban Forestry Services, Inc. The opinions in this Assessment are given based on observations made and using generally accepted professional judgment, however, because trees and plants are living organisms and subject to change, damage, and disease, the results, observations, recommendations, and analysis took place and no guarantee, warranty, representation, or opinion is offered or made by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. as to the length of the validity of the results, observations, recommendations, and analysis contained within this Assessment. As a result, the Client shall not rely upon this Assessment, save and except for representing the circumstances and observations, analysis, and recommendations that were made as at the date of such inspections. It is recommended that the trees discussed in this Assessment should be re-assessed periodically. Urban Forestry Services, Inc. shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in our fee schedule and contract of engagement. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. 2. Reaction of Assessment The Assessment carried out was restricted to the Property. No assessment of any other trees or plants has been undertaken by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. Urban Forestry Services, Inc. is not legally liable for any other trees or plants on the Property except those expressly discussed herein. The conclusions of this Assessment do not apply to any areas, trees, plants, or any other property not covered or referenced in this Assessment. 3. Professional Responsibility In carrying out this Assessment, Urban Forestry Services, Inc. and any Assessor appointed for and on behalf of Urban Forestry Services, Inc. to perform and carry out the Assessment has exercised a reasonable standard of care, skill, and diligence as would be customarily and normally provided in carrying out this Assessment. The Assessment has been made using accepted arboricultural techniques. These include a visual examination of each tree for structural defects, scars, external indications of decay such as fungal fruiting bodies, evidence of insect attack, discolored foliage, the condition of any visible root structures, the degree and direction of lean (if any), the general condition of the tree(s) and the surrounding site, and the current or planned proximity of property and people. Except where specifically noted in the Assessment, none of the trees examined on the property were dissected, cored, probed, or climbed and detailed root crown examinations involving excavation were not undertaken. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the trees recommended for retention are healthy, no guarantees are offered, or implied, that these trees, or all parts of them will remain standing. It is professionally impossible to predict with absolute certainty the behavior of any single tree or group of trees, or all their component parts, in all given circumstances. Inevitably, a standing tree will always pose some risk. Most trees have the potential to fall, lean, or otherwise pose a danger to property and persons in the event of adverse weather conditions, and this risk can only be eliminated if the tree is removed. Without limiting the foregoing, no liability is assumed by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. or its directors, officers, employers, contractors, agents, or Assessors for: • any legal description provided with respect to the Property; • issues of title and or ownership respect to the Property; • the accuracy of the Property line locations or boundaries with respect to the Property; and • the accuracy of any other information provided to Urban Forestry Services, Inc. by the Client or third parties; • any consequential loss, injury, or damages suffered by the Client or any third parties, including but not limited to replacement costs, loss of use, earnings, and business interruption; and • the unauthorized distribution of the Assessment. The total monetary amount of all claims or causes of action the Client may have as against Urban Forestry Services, Inc. including but not limited to claims for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract, shall be strictly limited to solely to the total amount of fees paid by the Client to Urban Forestry Services, Inc. pursuant to the Contract for Services as dated for which this Assessment was carried out. Further, under no circumstance may any claims be initiated or commenced by the Client against Urban Forestry Services, Inc. or any of its directors, officers, employees, contractors, agents, or Assessors, in contract or in tort, more than 12 months after the date of this Assessment. 4. Third Party Liability This Assessment was prepared by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. exclusively for the Client. The contents reflect Urban Forestry Services, Inc. best assessment of the trees and plants on the Property in light of the information available to it at the time of preparation of this Assessment. Any use which a third party makes of this Assessment, or any reliance on or decisions made based upon this Assessment, are made at the sole risk of any such third parties. Urban Forestry Services, Inc. accepts no responsibility for any damages or loss suffered by any third party or by the Client as a result of decisions made or actions based upon the use of reliance of this Assessment by any such party. 5. General Any plans and/or illustrations in this Assessment are included only to help the Client visualize the issues in this Assessment and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of Urban Forestry Services, Inc. Our fee is in no way contingent upon any specified value, a result or occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding reported. The Assessment report shall be considered as a whole, no sections are severable, and the Assessment shall be considered incomplete if any pages are missing. The right is reserved to adjust tree valuations, if additional relevant information is made available. This Assessment is for the exclusive use of the Client. Title: Boeing Parking Lot S2 Fire Station Development Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment Renton, Washington Prepared for: HBB Architects Attn: Mr. Aaron Luoma 215 Westlake Ave. North Seattle, Washington 98109-5217 Prepared by: Urban Forestry Service, Inc. Anna Heckman ISA Board Certified Master Arborist® #PN-6153B, ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Reviewed by: Paul Hans Thompson, Consulting Associate Date: August 14, 2019 Contents Summary Introduction Findings and Recommendations Method of Assessment Site Map with Trees Located Tree Assessment Matrix Tree Protection and Soil enhancement Guidelines Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Summary A Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment was conducted on fifty-seven (57) trees in and surrounding the S2 parking lot in Renton, Washington. Seven trees (#’s 601-607) proposed for removal are non-significant by size and therefore do not require permitting. All fourteen (14) trees in the parking lot islands are non-significant, in poor condition, and should be replaced. The forty-three (43) trees along the south and east parking lot perimeter landscape are in good condition but would benefit from landscape maintenance. Twenty-one (21) of these (#’s 551- 572) are within the construction area and will require tree protection prior to construction. No mitigation plantings are required at this time. Boeing Lot 2 Fire station, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. August 14, 2019 Page 2 of 4 Introduction As requested by Aaron Luoma with HBB, I visited the Boeing S2 parking lot north of North 6th St and west of Logan Ave N. in Renton Washington on July 24th, 2019. The purpose of this work was to map and assess the trees that may be impacted by the development of the new fire station. The tree survey and 45% design documents provided by HBB identify trees in eight-foot-wide parking lot islands and along large planting strips on the south and east perimeter of the parking lot. While conducting the risk assessment, trees were identified with numbered aluminum tags beginning with #551 on the south west side of the parking lot. Tags are nailed to the north side of the trunk at eye level. Trees are individually identified on the attached Tree Site Plan with photo and data for each tree provided in the attached Tree Assessment Matrix. Tree retention and land clearing regulations for the city of Renton; municipal code 4-4-130 Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations, identify Significant trees as 6 inches diameter and 8 inches for cottonwood (Populous trichocarpa) or red alder (Alnus rubra) unless they are considered “dangerous”. Landmark trees are over 30 inches. Priority tree retention requirements (section H1b.) should be implemented in tree preservation selection on the site. Findings and Recommendations: Interior Parking Lot Area: The fourteen (14) trees in the interior parking lot islands near the planned fire station are in very poor condition (#594-607,). The soil is compacted and shallow and lacks organic matter. All these trees are non-significant as they are less than six inches diameter. No interior parking lot trees require mitigation for removal. Photo 1: The southern landscape perimeter is one contiguous landscape bed with ample rooting space across the width of the landscape bed onto the ROW edge of North 6th street. Boeing Lot 2 Fire station, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. August 14, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Perimeter Parking Lot Landscape Areas: The twenty-eight 28 (#551- 578, 608) perimeter landscape trees along the south edge of the parking lot between the future fire station and North 6th Street are in very good condition. Eight (8) of these trees are non- significant, six (6) of which are vine maples that are large for their size but do not measure as a significant tree. All of these trees are within the construction impact area and will be damaged if not protected. The fifteen (15) trees along the east perimeter landscape are similar to those along the south landscape in species size health and diversity. There are eleven (11) different species growing along the perimeter landscapes with significant tree diameters ranging from 6.0 – 17.1 inches. No exceptional trees are on this site. Both the south and east perimeter landscape beds have compacted soils with little organic matter and no mulch. All the trees in these planting beds will benefit from a soil renovation treatment using an air spade and compost or biochar with a wood chip mulch top dressing. The following recommendations balance the benefits of retaining trees on site with the reasonable ability for those trees to survive construction and provide benefits to the new site with a reasonable amount of investment. Tree retention numbers and mitigation requirements are expected to change as site plans are altered. Recommendations: 1. Remove 13 of the 14 non-significant trees inside the parking lot islands (#595-607) These trees are dead or in very poor condition. Parking lot islands that will remain through construction should have coarse wood chip mulch placed over the soil to the top of curb to protect curb edges and irrigation. Soils should be renovated, and new healthy trees planted after construction. 2. Protect the twenty eight (28) trees along the south perimeter landscape (#551-578, 608) within the construction area. Most of these trees are healthy and significant and will require replacement if removed or damaged during construction. The whole landscape bed should be fenced off using 6-foot chain link fence placed on the pavement side of the curb. Supplemental irrigation and coarse wood chip mulch should be installed to protect the soil and improve tree resilience prior to construction. Photo 2: Parking lot islands measure eight feet wide with two trees in each island. Red maple trees growing in the parking lot islands have over 50% dieback and are not worth retaining. Boeing Lot 2 Fire station, Tree Risk Assessment Urban Forestry Services, Inc. August 14, 2019 Page 4 of 4 If construction is required within the landscape bed an arborist should be on site to identify the Tree Protection Areas based on the size of the tree. No work should be conducted with the Tree Protection Area without an arborist on site to monitor this work. See the attached mature tree care and tree protection guidelines for further guidance. 3. Monitor the remaining 21 trees along the southeast perimeter landscape that boarder the construction site. The remaining trees along the east side perimeter landscape (#579-594) are likely outside the fenced off construction area and may only require monitoring for pre and post construction condition. These trees should be protected with fencing and soil protection similar to the other perimeter trees if the parking lot in this area is planned for construction staging or any activity associated with construction. 4. Enhance the soil within the existing south and east perimeter landscape beds. Improving the soil conditions will improve tree health and growth in these perimeter landscape beds. See the attached soil enhancement guidelines for further guidance. Conclusion: Based on the provided plans, no significant trees will be removed from this site, and with appropriate protection, the thirty-four (34) significant trees in the south and east perimeter landscape beds should survive standard construction impacts and continue to provide the required landscape buffer for the area. No trees are required to be planted for mitigation purposes at this time. If removal of any significant trees is required for future design changes, the tree retention and removal permit can be filled out and submitted to the city. Method of Assessment This Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment was conducted according to the ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) training and methodology (see the attached Tree Risk Assessment Level Descriptions). While no one can predict with absolute certainty which trees will fail and which trees will remain healthy, by methodical process we can predict those most likely to fail by the conditions observed and take appropriate action to reduce or eliminate the potential hazard. The time frame for this Level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessment considers expected conditions and issues over the next year. Because tree conditions change over time, further assessment may be necessary in the future. Page 1 of 2 August 10, 2019 Boeing Fire station, Tree Inventory Renton, Washington URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES, INC. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 PRESERVATION VALUE SYMBOLS SPECIAL, UNIQUE SPECIES, SPECIMEN OR FORM. SAVE. HIGH, GOOD QUALITY, CHARACTER TREE. SAVE IF POSSIBLE. MODERATE, COMMON SPECIES, FAIR CONDI- TION. MAY NEED SPECIAL ATTENTION TO PRESERVE. LOW, POOR SPECIMEN OR SPECIES. HIGH MAINTENANCE OR SOME CAUTION IF RE- TAINED. “DANGEROUS” - HAZARD OR DEAD , DIS- EASED, OR NOT SIGNIFICANT. TREE IS DEAD OR IN VERY POOR CONDITION ND SHOULD BE REMOVED. NON SIGNIFICANT TREE < 6” DIAMETER SIGNIFICANT TREE > 6” DIAMETER GREEN BOARDER INDICATES CONIFER #### #### Insert 1. Trees within the Proposed Construction area Minimum Tree Protection Fence Placement Recommendation #575 #578 #577 #573 #576 #574 #579 #580 #581 #584 #590 #572 #582 #585 #583 #586 #587 #591 #588 #589 #592 #593 Insert 1, Page 2 of 2 August 10, 2019 Boeing Fire station, Tree Inventory Renton, Washington URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES, INC. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 PRESERVATION VALUE SYMBOLS SPECIAL, UNIQUE SPECIES, SPECIMEN OR FORM. SAVE. HIGH, GOOD QUALITY, CHARACTER TREE. SAVE IF POSSIBLE. MODERATE, COMMON SPECIES, FAIR CONDI- TION. MAY NEED SPECIAL ATTENTION TO PRESERVE. LOW, POOR SPECIMEN OR SPECIES. HIGH MAINTENANCE OR SOME CAUTION IF RE- TAINED. “DANGEROUS” - HAZARD OR DEAD , DIS- EASED, OR NOT SIGNIFICANT. TREE IS DEAD OR IN VERY POOR CONDITION ND SHOULD BE REMOVED. NON SIGNIFICANT TREE <6” DIAMETER SIGNIFICANT TREE >6” DIEAMETER GREEN BOARDER INDICATES CONIFER #### #### #602 #603 #573 #570 #604 #567 #606 #596 #595 #601 #607 #551 #598 #600 #597 #599 #605 #566 #563 #564 #565 #562 #561 #560 #559 #553 #556 #552 #569 #568 #558 #554 #572 #571 #557 #555 Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 551 Poor to Fair FairRed maple 2.8, (2.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer rubrum Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 2.8 Tree 552 Sawtooth oak 6.4, (6.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pres. Cat/Value Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Quercus acutissima Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 6.4 1 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 553 Good FairAtrovirens western 8, 5.3 (9.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens' Excelsea or Hogan variety Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 9.6 Tree 554 Fair FairVine maple 2.2, 2.0, 1.9, 1.7 (3.92) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer circinatum Not Significant. Cherrytree # 608 located behind the fence Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.9 2 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 555 Fair FairVine maple 2.8, 1.5, 1.1 (3.36) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer circinatum Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.4 Tree 556 Poor to Fair Fair to GoodSawtooth oak 7.1, (7.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Quercus acutissima Landscape is low on woodchips.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.1 3 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 557 Good GoodFlame maple 3.7, 2.2, 3.0, 2.3, 3.5, 3.2, 1, 1 Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Acer ginnala 'Flame'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.6 Tree 558 Fair to Good FairFlame maple 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1 (5.29) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer ginnala 'Flame'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 5.3 4 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 559 Good GoodAtrovirens western 7, (7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens' Cedar cultivar. Also could be Excelsea or Hogan variety.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.0 Tree 560 Fair FairAlaska yellow cedar 6, 3.6, 2.5 (7.43) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Callitropsis nootkatensis IPs beetle or similar pinhole bark beetle indicating some stress. Some branch die back but the tree overall is healthy.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.4 5 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 561 Fair to Good FairRiver birch 7.5, (7.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Betula nigra This species is the only birch on site with no current indication of Bronze Birch Borrer.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.5 Tree 562 Good GoodScot's pine 14.5, (14.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Pinus sylvestris Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 14.5 6 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 563 Fair GoodKatsura tree 7.8, (7.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Cercidiphyllum japonicum Shallow roots, both trees have yellowing leaf color. Direct south sun exposure and are a stress to this species. Wood chip mulch is recomended to insulate the roots and retain water.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.8 Tree 564 Fair FairKatsura tree 6, (6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Cercidiphyllum japonicum Tree has a double leader that can be reduced to improve future growth. An unknown orange flag is on the tree.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 6.0 7 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 565 Good GoodAustrian pine 12.8, (12.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Pinus nigra Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 12.8 Tree 566 Fair to Good FairAustrian pine 15.1, (15.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Pinus nigra Remove ivy from the tree. Tree is located behind irrigation boxes. moving irrigation boxes will impact tree roots.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 15.1 8 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 567 Good GoodAtrovirens western 8, 8, 4 (12) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens' Multi stem. Cedar cultivar.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 12.0 Tree 568 Good GoodVine maple 4.5, (4.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer circinatum Diameter taken at 3’ from the ground below the split trunk.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 4.5 9 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 569 Fair to Good FairVine maple 3, 2.5, 2.5, 2.5 (5.27) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer circinatum Hydrant between 569 and 570 Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 5.3 Tree 570 Good Fair to GoodAtrovirens western 8.6, 7 (11.09) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Tree Protection Required, Monitor During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens' Cedar cultivar.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 11.1 10 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 571 Fair FairVine maple 3.1, 2.7 (4.11) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer circinatum Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 4.1 Tree 572 Fair to Good FairVine maple 2.7, 2.6, 2.6 (4.56) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer circinatum Only 2 of 3 vine maples were tagged Third non significant vine maple third is in canopy of tree # 573. with 2.6" diameter trunk. See camera photos after 572 tag Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 4.6 11 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 573 Fair to Good FairAtrovirens western 8, 6, 4 (10.77) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 10.8 Tree 574 Fair Fair to GoodSawtooth oak 8.6, (8.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Structural Prune Recommendations Quercus acutissima Measured low. Some dead branches tree may be pruned to reduce the multiple leaders.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 8.6 12 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 575 Good GoodAtrovirens western 7.8, (7.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens' Both single stem Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.8 Tree 576 Good Fair to GoodAtrovirens western 8.7, 4.5 (9.79) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 9.8 13 Date: 7/24/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 577 Good Fair to GoodRiver birch 11.7, (11.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Betula nigra Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 11.7 Tree 578 Poor to Fair FairRiver birch 15.6, (15.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Crown Clean Prune Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Betula nigra Tree has shallow roots unlike others in the planting bed and the crown is thinner than others. one dead branch. This is the last tree on the south side. Crown is thinner than others Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 15.6 14 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 579 Austrian pine 11.2, 7.2 (13.31) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pres. Cat/Value Recommendations Pinus nigra Tree marks the beginning of the line on the east side of the parking lot.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 13.3 Tree 580 Good GoodAustrian pine 13, (13) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Pinus nigra Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 13.0 15 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 581 Fair Fair to GoodKatsura Cercidiphyllum 6.3, (6.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 6.3 Tree 582 Good GoodAtrovirens western 11.5, 10 (15.24) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 15.2 16 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 583 Poor to Fair Fair to GoodWeeping Alaskan 5.7, 3 (6.44) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Install Ground Protection Critical Root Zone Treatment Recommendations Callitropsis nootkatensis 'Pendula' This tree has some drought stress. Soil rehabilitation should improve the condition.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 6.4 Tree 584 Good Fair to Good7, (7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, Maintenance Recommendations Katsura Cercidiphyllum Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.0 17 Date: 8/13/2019 7/24/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 585 Good GoodAtrovirens western 11, (11) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, Maintenance Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 11.0 Tree 586 Fair Fair to GoodWeeping Alaskan 8, 5, 5, 4 (11.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value low Recommendations Callitropsis nootkatensis 'Pendula'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 11.4 18 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 587 Fair to Good GoodSawtooth oak 17.1, (17.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Quercus acutissima Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 17.1 Tree 588 Good GoodSawtooth oak 13.6, (13.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Quercus acutissima Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 13.6 19 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 589 Good GoodAtrovirens western 8, 8 (11.31) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value High Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Thuja plicata 'Atrovirens'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 11.3 Tree 590 Fair FairGreen Ash 5.3, (5.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Install Ground Protection Critical Root Zone Treatment Recommendations Fraxinus pennsylvanica The landscape bed in this area is compacted and should be rejuvinated Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 5.3 20 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 591 Fair FairGreen Ash 6, (6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Critical Root Zone Treatment Install Ground Protection Monitor Tree, Maintenance Recommendations Fraxinus pennsylvanica Ash Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 6.0 Tree 592 Poor to Fair Poor to FairPaper birch 7.5, (7.5) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Crown Clean Prune Monitor Tree, Maintenance Recommendations Betula papyrifera Tent caterpillars in canopy. Tree should be replaced with a different species. Evidence of Bronze birch borrer damage.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.5 21 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 593 Fair FairPaper birch 7.1, (7.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Monitor Tree, Maintenance Recommendations Betula papyrifera Tree has shallow roots and compacted soil. C Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 7.1 Tree 594 Good Fair to GoodRed maple 4.7, (4.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Acer rubrum One of the few maples in the street islands that is doing well.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 4.7 22 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 595 Poor FairRed sunset red 3, (3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.0 Tree 596 Poor Poor to FairRed sunset red 3, (3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.0 23 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 597 Dying/Dead PoorRed sunset red 3, (3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.0 Tree 598 Poor PoorRed sunset red 3.1, (3.1) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred' 8’ width Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.1 24 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 599 2.9, (2.9) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Pres. Cat/Value Remove Tree Recommendations Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 2.9 Tree 600 Poor Poor to FairRed sunset red 3.3, (3.3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.3 25 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 601 Fair Fair to GoodCleveland select 3.8, (3.8) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Pyrus calleryana 'Cleveland Select' Pear Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.8 Tree 602 Poor Poor to FairRed maple 3.6, (3.6) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Acer rubrum Significant crown loss remove and replace Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.6 26 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 603 Poor FairRed maple 3.2, (3.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Low Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Acer rubrum Remove dead Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.2 Tree 604 Dying/Dead FairRed sunset red 3, (3) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred' The leaves of this maple look like a small fremanii cross.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.0 27 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 605 Dying/Dead FairRed sunset red 3.2, (3.2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.2 Tree 606 Poor to Fair FairRed sunset red 3.7, (3.7) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree, Construction Impact Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 3.7 28 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: Tree Assessment Matrix S2 parking lot fire station Inspector: ISA Certified Arborist ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Road Mount Vernon, WA 98273 (360) 428-5810 Heckman Tree 607 Dying/Dead Dying/DeadRed sunset red 2, (2) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value None Remove Tree Recommendations Acer rubrum 'Franksred'Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 2.0 Tree 608 Good GoodCherry5.4, (5.4) Species DBH (in)Dripline (ft)Vigor Structure Risk Low Pres. Cat/Value Medium Monitor Tree, During Construction Recommendations Prunus species Tree is located in the right of way outside the fence. Further ID can be provided.Notes /DefectsCRZ (ft) 5.4 29 Date: 7/24/2019 8/13/2019 Field Work Completed: SHEET TITLE: TREE PROTECTION FENCE DETAIL PREPARED BY NOT TO SCALE 2017 URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES, INC. 15119 McLEAN ROAD MOUNT VERNON, WA 98273 Sheet 1 of 1 TREE PROTECTION AREA— PROTECTION FENCE Tree protection sign (See “General Tree Protection Guidelines”, item no. 8). Any work within the tree protection fence is to be reviewed and monitored by the arborist. Steel posts anchored into the ground and 6-foot chain link fence. Fence is not to be moved without au-thorization by the arborist. No parking, storage, dumping within the tree protection fence. SEE “GENERAL TREE PROTECTION GUIDELINES” FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS. FENCE FENCE FENCE DRIPLINE DRIPLINE DRIPLINE Apply 18-inches of woodchips or other ground protection measures within the protection area. See “General Tree Pro-tection Guidelines” for additional details (Item no.9 “Soil protection”.) ICRZ ICRZ PCRZ PCRZ 7.5 ft. radius EXAMPLE: 15-inches diameter at 4.5-feet above grade. The CRZ radius equals 15-feet, meas-ured from the center of the trunk. If approved by the UFS, Inc., project arborist, the outer 50% of the PCRZ may be disturbed; in this example this is equal to 3.25-feet (shaded area) of the 15-feet CRZ radius. CRZ 7.5 ft. radius CRZ CRZ CRZ SEE “CRITICAL ROOT ZONE (CRZ) EXPLANATION” FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS. The Critical Root Zone (CRZ) is calculated by converting the trunk diameter in inches to a radial distance in feet; 1-inch diameter equals 1-foot radial distance. NOT TO SCALE ICRZ PCRZ PCRZ ICRZ 7.5 ft. radius 7.5 ft. radius MATURE TREES - POST CONSTRUCTION CARE FOR 2019 THROUGH 2021 1. Irrigation • Water every 2 weeks between May 1 and September 30 when the soil is dry. • Use a trowel or soil probe to check the soil before and after watering. • If there are no sprinklers nearby, set up soaker hoses in loose rings beneath the trees. • Wet soil 12 inches deep to the area within the drip line. • Allow the soil to partially dry out between applications. • Cautions: o Avoid soaking the trunks. o Avoid over watering where turf or new landscape has been placed nearby 2. Mulch • Use coarse organic mulch 4 to 6 inches deep to retain moisture and suppress weeds. • Re-apply when mulch is less than 2-inches deep and/or the soil shows. • Use arborist wood chips, 'Pacific garden mulch', or similar product. Medium or fine bark mulches are not recommended. • Cautions: o Keep mulch off of the lower trunk and trunk flare. o Fertilizer is not recommended at this time. Avoid high fertilization to adjacent turf. Example Do not cover the trunk flare. Mulch can be thicker at the outer edge. Soaker hose can overlap turf. Use as many loops as needed to cover area under drip line. Minimum 1-foot away from the trunk, and about 1-foot or less between loops. General Tree Protection Guidelines By Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 2011-12 Page 1 of 3 General Tree Protection Guidelines With Critical Root Zone Explanation Attachment 1. Responsibilities: These Guidelines pertain to any disturbance, use or activity within the Critical Root Zone of any retained tree on this project. See attached Critical Root Zone Explanation for reference. The owner’s arborist and general contractor shall meet onsite before any site work begins, to review and designate the most appropriate methods to be used to protect the retained trees during construction. These guidelines apply to work provided by all contractors and sub-contractors on the project. The project consulting arborist shall be contacted prior to any work that may need to enter the tree protection fencing. Two days notice shall be provided to the project consulting arborist. A proposed method for work shall be provided to the arborist. This method shall be reviewed by the project consulting arborist and either approval and / or comments provided by the project consulting arborist prior to commencing works within the tree protection area. He or she should be notified within 8 hours should any injury occur to any protected tree or its larger roots (greater than 2-inch diameter) so that appropriate assessment and/or treatment may be made. 2. Soil Disturbance: No soil disturbance shall take place before tree protection fences are installed. All evaluated trees to be retained within these areas are clearly illustrated on the Site Plan. 3. Designated Tree Removals: The owner’s arborist and contractor shall confirm on site which trees are to be removed and those to be retained. Directional felling and removal of trees will be completed with great care to avoid any damage to the trunks, limbs, and critical root zones of the retained trees. 4. The Tree Protection Site Plan shows the recommended location of the Tree Protection Fence (TPF). Immediately after the clearing limits and grading stakes are set in the field, the owner’s arborist, during review and discussion with the contractor, will make a final determination on the tree protection requirements depending on construction limits and impact on major roots and soil condition. The arborist may adjust clearing limits in the field so that, in his/her opinion, tree roots and soils are protected while necessary work can proceed. 5. The Tree Protection Fence (TPF) shall be installed along the clearing limits, with special consideration of the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of trees to be preserved. The CRZ of a tree is generally described as an area equal to 1-foot radius for every 1-inch diameter of tree. For example, a 10-inch diameter tree has a CRZ of 10-foot radius. Work within the CRZ may be limited to hand work or alternate method of construction. The Tree Protection Fence (TPF) shall be constructed with steel posts driven into the ground with 6-ft. chain link fence attached. Upon consultation with the contractor, the arborist shall determine the placement of the fence and the extent and method of clearing that may be done General Tree Protection Guidelines By Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 2011-12 Page 2 of 3 near preserved trees. Additional follow-up determinations may be required as work progresses on the project. See attached Critical Root Zone Explanation. No parking, storage, dumping, or burning of materials is allowed beyond the clearing limits or within the Tree Protection Fence. The TPF shall not be moved without authorization by the owner’s arborist or City arborist. The TPF shall remain in place for the duration of the project. Work within this area shall be reviewed with and approved by the owner’s arborist. Call Urban Forestry Services, Inc. at 360-428-5810 with questions. 6. Silt Fence: If a silt fence is required to be installed within the Critical Root Zone of a retained tree, the bottom of the silt fence shall not be buried in a trench, but instead, folded over and placed flat on the ground. The flat portion of the silt fence shall be covered with gravel or soil for anchorage. 7. CRZ over Hardscape: Where the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) includes an area covered by hardscape, the TPF can be placed along the edge of the hardscape if and until it is removed. After hardscape removal, the available CRZ should be backfilled with topsoil up to 6 inches deep and protected with the TPF. Incorporation of topsoil into the existing sub-grade shall be determined by the consulting arborist. Where applicable a specification for topsoil will be provided or approved by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 8. Tree Protection Signs shall be attached to the fence only and shall be shown as required on the Site Plan. They should read “Protect Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of trees to be retained. No soil disturbance, parking, storage, dumping, or burning of materials is allowed within the Tree Protection Barrier. " Monetary Fines based on the appraised dollar value of the retained trees may also be included on these signs. Telephone contact details for the project consulting arborist should also be included in the sign. 9. Soil Protection within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ): Where vehicular access, temporary work pad or storage pad is required within the CRZ of any preserved tree that is not protected with hardscape, the soil shall be protected with 18” of woodchips and/or plywood or metal sheets to protect from soil compaction and damage to roots of retained trees. A biodegradable coir mat netting is recommended to be placed on the existing grade before woodchip placement to protect the condition and confirm the location of the existing grade. The netting is a valuable benchmark upon removal of the material within the CRZ. 10. Landscape Plans, Irrigation Design and Installation Details: Great care shall be exercised when landscaping within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of any tree. Roots of preserved trees and other vegetation shall not be damaged by planting or installation of irrigation lines The owner’s arborist shall review the Landscape Plan for any potential design and tree preservation conflicts and approve related irrigation and landscape installation activities within the CRZ of retained trees. A proposed method for work shall be provided to and approved by the arborist. 11. Backfill and Grade Changes: The owner’s arborist will determine to what extent backfilling may be allowed within the Critical Root Zone of a preserved tree, and if needed, the specific General Tree Protection Guidelines By Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 2011-12 Page 3 of 3 material which may be used. Grade cuts are usually more detrimental than grade filling within the CRZ and should be reviewed by the arborist well in advance of construction. 12. Tree Maintenance and Pruning: Trees recommended for maintenance and approved by the owner, shall be pruned for deadwood, low hanging limbs, and proper balance, as recommended for safety, clearance or aesthetics. All pruning shall be done by an International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist. ANSI A300 American Standards for Pruning shall be used. Limbs of retained trees within 10 feet or less, of any power line, depending on power line voltage, may only be pruned by a Utility Certified Arborist. This pruning must be coordinated with the local power company, as they may prefer to provide this pruning. 13. Underground Utilities: Utility installation within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) of any retained tree shall be reviewed by the Project Consulting Arborist. A less root disturbing route or minimal impact installation method of utility installation may be discussed and recommended i.e. tunneling or trenchless excavation. Trenching through the Interior CRZ of a retained tree is not usually allowed. See CRZ Explanation to differentiate between the Perimeter and Interior CRZ. An Air spade and Vac., Truck may be required when utility installation is mandatory near a retained tree or other methodology such as trenchless excavation. 14. Root Pruning: Required work may result in the cutting of roots of retained trees. Cutting roots 2” or greater should be avoided. Potential root pruning needs should be reviewed in advance with the Project Consulting Arborist to minimize potential root fracturing and other damage. Severed roots of retained trees shall be cut off cleanly with a sharp saw or pruning shears. Applying pruning paint on trunk or root wounds is not recommended. Severed roots shall be covered immediately after final pruning with moist soil or covered with mulch until covered with soil. Excavation equipment operators shall take extreme care not to hook roots and pull them back towards retained trees. In all cases, the excavator shall sit outside of the CRZ. Soil excavation within the CRZ shall be under the direct supervision of the owner’s arborist. 15. Supplemental Tree Irrigation: If clearing is performed during the summer, supplemental watering and/or mulching over the root systems within the Tree Protection Fencing of preserved trees may be required by the owner’s arborist. The arborist should be notified of the proposed schedule for clearing and grading work. Supplemental watering and mulching over the root systems of roots impacted or stressed trees are strongly recommended to compensate for root loss and initiate new root growth. Long periods of slow drip irrigation will be most effective. A large coil of soaker hose starting at least 18" from the trunk and covering the Interior Critical Root Zone area is recommended. Water once per week and check soils for at least 12 inches infiltration. This work shall be under the direct supervision of the owner’s arborist. 16. Additional Measures: Additional tree protection recommendations may be required and may be specified in Urban Forestry Services, Inc. report(s). 17. Final Inspection: The owner’s arborist shall make a final site visit to report on retained tree condition following completed work and shall report to the city to release the bond for the retained trees. Tree Risk Assessment Level Descriptions The tree risk assessment process is based on factors present at the time of assessment. Because trees are living, growing things that change in size and condition over time, the tree assessment process must also recognize and anticipate where and when future assessments should be performed. The Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) training and methodology, developed and administered by the International Society of Arboriculture is the best available methodology for tree risk assessment at this time. There are three levels of assessment that may be considered and employed according to the expectations of the owner or manager, conditions of the site and of the trees involved: Level 1 Limited Visual Assessment: Includes a broad overview of an individual tree or group of trees near specified targets, conducted to identify obvious defects or other conditions of concern. A limited visual assessment typically focuses on identifying trees with imminent and/or probable likelihood of failure. Level 1 assessments do not always meet the criteria for a "risk assessment" if they do not include documented analysis and evaluation of individual trees. This level is typically used for large populations of trees as a means to quickly identify trees with imminent and/or probable likelihood of failure, at a specified schedule and/or immediately after storms. Level 1 assessments may be done as walk-by, drive-by or aerial patrols as requested by the tree owner or manager. They may not provide enough information to develop risk mitigation recommendations. They can help identify specific areas and/or trees for further inspection at Level 2 or 3. Trees found to require a Level 2 Basic Assessment are assessed, mapped and documented at the higher level at this time. Trees determined to need a Level 3 Advanced Tree Assessment are documented and recommended for additional testing and analysis. The owner is notified with options discussed. Level 2 Basic Assessment: This is a detailed visual inspection of a tree and its surrounding site, and a synthesis of the information collected. It requires that a tree risk assessor walk completely around the tree, looking at the site, buttress roots, trunk, and branches. This basic assessment may include the use of simple tools to gain additional information about the tree or defects. Our Level 2 Basic Assessment Trees are all typically tagged, mapped and information gathered and retained for each tree. Risk mitigation recommendations may be derived from this level of inspection. Defects found in a Level 2 Basic Tree Assessment may require a Level 3 assessment for further testing and analysis. The owner is notified with options discussed. Level 3 Advanced Assessment: Advanced assessments are performed to provide more highly detailed information about specific tree components, defects, targets or site conditions. An advanced assessment is performed in conjunction with or after a Level 2 Basic Assessment if the assessor determines the need for (requires) additional information. This level is particularly useful where there are concerns about trees that may otherwise be of high value, or to obtain better information on how serious or extensive a particular defect is. The Level 3 Advanced Tree assessment may include but not be limited to a root crown inspection with air spade, Resistograph or Tomograph use to determine sound wood or an aerial crown inspection. The preliminary Level 1 Limited Visual Assessment if requested would help determine where field assessments at Level 2 and Level 3 will be needed. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS Urban Forestry Services, Inc. 15119 McLean Rd. Mount Vernon, Washington 98273 1. Limitations of this Assessment This Assessment is based on the circumstances and observations as they existed at the time of the site inspection of the Client’s Property and the trees inspected by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. and upon information provided by the Client to Urban Forestry Services, Inc. The opinions in this Assessment are given based on observations made and using generally accepted professional judgment, however, because trees and plants are living organisms and subject to change, damage, and disease, the results, observations, recommendations, and analysis took place and no guarantee, warranty, representation, or opinion is offered or made by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. as to the length of the validity of the results, observations, recommendations, and analysis contained within this Assessment. As a result, the Client shall not rely upon this Assessment, save and except for representing the circumstances and observations, analysis, and recommendations that were made as at the date of such inspections. It is recommended that the trees discussed in this Assessment should be re-assessed periodically. Urban Forestry Services, Inc. shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in our fee schedule and contract of engagement. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. 2. Reaction of Assessment The Assessment carried out was restricted to the Property. No assessment of any other trees or plants has been undertaken by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. Urban Forestry Services, Inc. is not legally liable for any other trees or plants on the Property except those expressly discussed herein. The conclusions of this Assessment do not apply to any areas, trees, plants, or any other property not covered or referenced in this Assessment. 3. Professional Responsibility In carrying out this Assessment, Urban Forestry Services, Inc. and any Assessor appointed for and on behalf of Urban Forestry Services, Inc. to perform and carry out the Assessment has exercised a reasonable standard of care, skill, and diligence as would be customarily and normally provided in carrying out this Assessment. The Assessment has been made using accepted arboricultural techniques. These include a visual examination of each tree for structural defects, scars, external indications of decay such as fungal fruiting bodies, evidence of insect attack, discolored foliage, the condition of any visible root structures, the degree and direction of lean (if any), the general condition of the tree(s) and the surrounding site, and the current or planned proximity of property and people. Except where specifically noted in the Assessment, none of the trees examined on the property were dissected, cored, probed, or climbed and detailed root crown examinations involving excavation were not undertaken. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the trees recommended for retention are healthy, no guarantees are offered, or implied, that these trees, or all parts of them will remain standing. It is professionally impossible to predict with absolute certainty the behavior of any single tree or group of trees, or all their component parts, in all given circumstances. Inevitably, a standing tree will always pose some risk. Most trees have the potential to fall, lean, or otherwise pose a danger to property and persons in the event of adverse weather conditions, and this risk can only be eliminated if the tree is removed. Without limiting the foregoing, no liability is assumed by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. or its directors, officers, employers, contractors, agents, or Assessors for: • any legal description provided with respect to the Property; • issues of title and or ownership respect to the Property; • the accuracy of the Property line locations or boundaries with respect to the Property; and • the accuracy of any other information provided to Urban Forestry Services, Inc. by the Client or third parties; • any consequential loss, injury, or damages suffered by the Client or any third parties, including but not limited to replacement costs, loss of use, earnings, and business interruption; and • the unauthorized distribution of the Assessment. The total monetary amount of all claims or causes of action the Client may have as against Urban Forestry Services, Inc. including but not limited to claims for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract, shall be strictly limited to solely to the total amount of fees paid by the Client to Urban Forestry Services, Inc. pursuant to the Contract for Services as dated for which this Assessment was carried out. Further, under no circumstance may any claims be initiated or commenced by the Client against Urban Forestry Services, Inc. or any of its directors, officers, employees, contractors, agents, or Assessors, in contract or in tort, more than 12 months after the date of this Assessment. 4. Third Party Liability This Assessment was prepared by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. exclusively for the Client. The contents reflect Urban Forestry Services, Inc. best assessment of the trees and plants on the Property in light of the information available to it at the time of preparation of this Assessment. Any use which a third party makes of this Assessment, or any reliance on or decisions made based upon this Assessment, are made at the sole risk of any such third parties. Urban Forestry Services, Inc. accepts no responsibility for any damages or loss suffered by any third party or by the Client as a result of decisions made or actions based upon the use of reliance of this Assessment by any such party. 5. General Any plans and/or illustrations in this Assessment are included only to help the Client visualize the issues in this Assessment and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of Urban Forestry Services, Inc. Our fee is in no way contingent upon any specified value, a result or occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding reported. The Assessment report shall be considered as a whole, no sections are severable, and the Assessment shall be considered incomplete if any pages are missing. The right is reserved to adjust tree valuations, if additional relevant information is made available. This Assessment is for the exclusive use of the Client. TREE INVENTORY AND TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULETREES NORTH OF N 6TH STRENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONTREE INVENTORY AND TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULELT0LAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION GVGVLEGENDRENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLANE LANETREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLT1LAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION InletOutletInletOutletLEGENDRENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLANE LANELT2TREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGENDLANE LANERENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLT3TREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGENDLANE LANERENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLT4TREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGENDLANE LANERENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLT5TREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGENDLANE LANERENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLT6TREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGENDLANE LANERENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLT7TREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGENDLANE LANERENTON SITESTA T E OFWASHINGTONNO.8.J ULI ETB.VONG57EXPLICENSEDLANDSCAPEARC HITECT 02 / 2 0 2 0 90% DESIGN REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLT8TREE RETENTION & LAND CLEARING EXHIBITLAND USE PERMIT/SEPANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Technical Information Report for Boeing Commercial Airplanes Apron E Stalls and Paint Hangar Prepared for: Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle District P.O. Box 3707, M/S: 1W-10 Seattle, Washington 98124 Prepared by: 8410 154th Avenue NE, Suite 120 Redmond, WA 98052 Tele: (425) 869-2670 FAX: (425) 869-2679 90% Design Submittal December 2019 This report has been prepared by the staff of DOWL under the direction of the undersigned professional engineer whose stamp and signature appears hereon. 13726.16 RENTON SITE DRAINAGE CONTROL PLAN C300 C11 LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION BOEING 737-MAX10BOEING 737-MAX10RENTON SITE DRAINAGE CONTROL PLAN C301 C12 LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 RENTON SITE UTILITIES PLAN (PROPOSED), GENERALIZED C295 C8 LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION RENTON SITE UTILITIES PLAN (PROPOSED), GENERALIZED C296 C9 LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 BOEING 737-MAX10BOEING 737-MAX10RENTON SITE UTILITIES PLAN (PROPOSED), GENERALIZED C297 C10 LAND USE PERMIT/SEPA NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 Job No. 1818 S&EE S&EE REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED APRON E BOEING RENTON PLANT S&EE JOB NO. 1818 JUNE 24, 2019 Boeing Apron E Sound Wall Rendering 01.28.2020 Rev. 1 - 01.28.20 LEVEL 1 0' - 0" G F E C ABD T.O. PARAPET 82' - 6" 1 9 2 1 9 5 555 W-1W-1 W-1 W-1 W-1 W-1 L-4L-4L-4L-4 1 5 L-8 LEVEL 1 0' - 0" ROOF 80' - 0" GFECABD LOWER ROOF 50' - 0" 6 2 10 4 1 2 2 65 2 2 2 6 2 55 5 5 T/O STAIR PENTHOUSE 90' - 9 59/64" SF-8SF-10 SF-11 SF-12 SF-9 SF-8 SF-7 SF-6 SF-5 SF-5 SF-4 W-1 W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1 W-1 2 2 5 5 5 3 8 6' - 0"25' - 2"3' - 6 3/4"17' - 5 1/4"9' - 11 3/4"42' - 2"6' - 0"46' - 2"38' - 2"5 5 5 5 5 5 L-2L-2 L-3 L-3 L-6 L-2 L-12 L-1 L-11 L-3 L-5 L-5 L-5 L-5 SYM REVISION BY APPROVED DATE SYM REVISION BY APPROVED DATE ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT.DATE DRAWN DATE CHECKED ENGINEER CHECKED APPROVED APPROVED SUBTITLE TITLE CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE SHEET JOB NO. DWG NO. COMP NO. DESIGN BY:DATE:12/18/2019 11:29:23 AMORIG APRON E -PAINT HANGAR C199389 RAI EC 12.20.19 Author 12.20.19 Checker 12.20.19 Designer 12.20.19 BUILDING ELEVATIONS APRON E - PAINT HANGAR RENTON, WA BUILDING 5-70 A-D/1-6 C199389 ORIG 12.20.19 A60 A37 5-70-A60 Author:ARCHITECTURAL MASTER RAI 12.20.19 60% DESIGN SUBMITTAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 8'16' 32' 48' 1/16" = 1'-0" LEGEND GENERAL NOTES CONSTRUCTION NOTES CONCRETE PANEL WALL, 6"X7'-2" HIGH.1 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"A60 1NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"A60 2SOUTH ELEVATION PREFINISHED INSULATED METAL PANEL SYSTEM. CENTRIA 'FORMAWALL', 3"THICK. TRANSLUCENT PANEL SYSTEM. KAWALL 2 3/4" THICK, CRYSTAL, CRYSTAL. HM DOOR AND FRAME PER SCHEDULE ON SHEET A350. LOUVER PER MECHANICAL. PREFINISH METAL SIDING ON STRUCTURAL FRAMING. 42" HIGH PIPE RAILING AT BREAK AREA BALCONY. 1 1/2" O.D. PIPE@ 5 1/2" O.C. HORIZ. ALUMINUM STOREFRONT ENTRY. SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A350. SHEET METAL CLAD HANGAR DOORS. SEE STRUCTURAL. SECTORIAL OVERHEAD DOOR PER SCHEDULE ON SHEET A350. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 REV. 1 - 01.28.20 LEVEL 1 0' - 0" ROOF 80' - 0" 8765234 9 LOWER ROOF 50' - 0" 1 2 3 2 1 4 6 2 6 7 T/O STAIR PENTHOUSE 90' - 9 59/64" SF-13 W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1W-1 5 5 5 5 L-10L-10 L-10L-10 LEVEL 1 0' - 0" ROOF 80' - 0" 8 7 6 5 2349 LOWER ROOF 50' - 0" 1 2 3 2 2 6 6 7 8 1 4 T/O STAIR PENTHOUSE 90' - 9 59/64" SF-3 SF-2 SF-1 SF-2 W-1 W-1 W-1 W-1 W-1 W-1 W-1 W-1W-1 5 5 L-8 L-8 SYM REVISION BY APPROVED DATE SYM REVISION BY APPROVED DATE ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT.DATE DRAWN DATE CHECKED ENGINEER CHECKED APPROVED APPROVED SUBTITLE TITLE CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE SHEET JOB NO. DWG NO. COMP NO. DESIGN BY:DATE:12/18/2019 11:29:32 AMORIG APRON E -PAINT HANGAR C199389 RAI EC 12.20.19 Author 12.20.19 Checker 12.20.19 Designer 12.20.19 BUILDING ELEVATIONS APRON E - PAINT HANGAR RENTON, WA BUILDING 5-70 C199389 ORIG 12.20.19 A61 A38 5-70-A61 Author:ARCHITECTURAL MASTER RAI 12.20.19 60% DESIGN SUBMITTAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"A61 1WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"A61 2EAST ELEVATION CONCRETE PANEL WALL, 6"X7'-2" HIGH.1 PREFINISHED INSULATED METAL PANEL SYSTEM. CENTRIA 'FORMAWALL', 3"THICK. TRANSLUCENT PANEL SYSTEM.KAWALL 2 3/4" THICK, CRYSTAL, CRYSTAL. HM DOOR AND FRAME PER SCHEDULE ON SHEET A350. LOUVER PER MECHANICAL. PRE-FINISHED METAL SIDING ON STRUCTURAL FRAMING. 42" HIGH PIPE RAILING AT BREAK AREA BALCONY. 1 1/2" O.D. PIPE@ 5 1/2" O.C. HORIZ. ALUMINUM STOREFRONT ENTRY. SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A350. SHEET METAL CLAD HANGAR DOORS. SEE STRUCTURAL. SECTORIAL OVERHEAD DOOR PER SCHEDULE ON SHEET A350. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CONSTRUCTION NOTES REV. 1 - 01.28.20 RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION Transportation Impact Analysis BOEING RENTON APRON E Prepared for: The Boeing Company September 2020 Prepared by: 12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 203 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 Phone: 425-821-3665 www.transpogroup.com 1.19122.00 © 2020 Transpo Group Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 i Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction............................................................................................................ 1 Project Description ................................................................................................................. 1 Study Scope ........................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Parking Code Analysis ......................................................................................... 6 Chapter 3. Parking Utilization ................................................................................................. 9 Existing Parking Conditions ................................................................................................... 9 Future Parking Conditions ................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 4. Operations and Access ...................................................................................... 13 Existing and Future (2023) Without-Project Conditions....................................................... 13 Project Impacts .................................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 5. Recommendations .............................................................................................. 22 Chapter 6. Summary of Findings .......................................................................................... 23 Appendix Appendix A: Traffic Counts Appendix B: LOS Definitions Appendix C: LOS Worksheets Figures Figure 1. Site Vicinity .......................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Preliminary Site Plan ........................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Study Intersections & Observed Parking Areas .................................................. 5 Figure 4. Code Required Parking Areas ............................................................................. 8 Figure 5. Off-Site Parking ................................................................................................. 10 Figure 6. Existing Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................. 12 Figure 7. Existing Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .................................................. 14 Figure 8. Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............... 15 Figure 9. Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Shifts .................................................................... 18 Figure 10. Future (2023) With-Project Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .................... 19 Tables Table 1. Code Required Parking ....................................................................................... 6 Table 2. Existing Parking Supply Summary ...................................................................... 7 Table 3. Peak Period Observed Parking ........................................................................... 9 Table 4. Peak Period Parking Demand & Utilization Without-Project ............................. 11 Table 5. Peak Period Parking Demand & Utilization With-Project .................................. 11 Table 6. Existing & Future Without-Project Weekday Peak Hour Intersection LOS Summary ........................................................................................................... 16 Table 7. Future Weekday Peak Hour Intersection LOS Summary ................................. 20 Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 1 Chapter 1. Introduction The purpose of this transportation impact analysis (TIA) is to identify potential transportation- related impacts to the surrounding street network associated with the proposed Apron E development on the Boeing Campus in Renton, WA. No new employment levels are anticipated as a result of the proposed project; instead, current employees would shift from other areas to Apron E. As described in the following report, the Apron E project is proposed on an existing parking lot resulting in additional shifts in traffic to other parking lots on campus. Impacts of the proposed project are identified by comparing intersection operations before and after shifts in traffic as a result of the proposed project and an evaluation of the on-campus parking utilization. As necessary mitigation measures were identified that would offset or reduce transportation related impacts. Since the time this study was initiated, reductions in production and staffing levels have been made at the Boeing Renton facility and are projected through completion of the proposed Apron E development. The reductions in employment and production are anticipated to be 15 percent and 40 percent, respectively. These changes further reduce peak parking demand and traffic volumes on the campus. This updated report addresses comments from the City of Renton regarding the assumed parking supply, inclusive of off-site lots; specifically, Lot 10. To address this comment, the following analysis presents a parking analysis without the continued use of Lot 10. It also reflects a reduction in anticipated parking demand as referenced above. Intersection volumes are difficult to differentiate between Boeing and general background traffic; therefore, the traffic volumes estimates were not reduced by 15 percent. Project Description The proposed Apron E project would create three new production stalls and a new paint hangar, located east of the existing Apron D hanger, encompassing the entirety of the S1 parking lot. The S1 parking lot is located on the southwest corner of the Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street intersection and currently includes 976 parking stalls. The site vicinity is shown on Figure 1. This analysis addresses the impacts associated with the changes to lot S1 only as no changes to the to the fire station are included in this proposal. As part of the Apron E project, an additional paint hangar will be constructed. No increase in employment is anticipated as a result of the proposed project, conversely, a decrease in employment and production is anticipated site-wide, employees would be shifted to the paint hanger from other facilities on campus. A preliminary site plan is shown on Figure 2. The proposed Apron E hangar is anticipated to be constructed and occupied by 2023. Study Scope This report documents the potential impacts associated with the development of Apron E, the reduction in the campus wide parking supply, and displacement of peak parking demand within the S1 parking lot to other lots in the area. Peak parking displaced as part of the proposed project would be shifted to other parking lots on the Boeing Campus. Parking spaces on the Boeing campus are organized in a tiered system and includes vanpool/carpool spaces, service vehicle parking, and ADA parking stalls. This parking demand study focuses only on the general-purpose parking lots as that is the only category of parking to be displaced as part of the S1 proposal. The parking utilization survey was conducted during the following intervals: · 7:00 AM – 1: 00 PM in 1-hour intervals Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 2 · 1:00 PM – 3:00 PM in 30-minute intervals · 3:00 PM – 6:00 PM in 1-hour intervals Based on current shift schedules on site, the traffic analysis focuses on the AM (6:00 to 9:00) and PM (4:00 to 6:00) peak commute periods. Considering anticipated localized trip distribution patterns associated with the displaced parking the study area includes the following intersections: 1. Logan Avenue N/N 8th Street 7. Garden Avenue N/N 6th Street 2. Park Avenue N/N 8th Street 8. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 North Access 3. Garden Avenue N/N 8th Street 9. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 South Access 4. Internal Road/N 6th Street 10. Park Avenue N/N 5th Street 5. Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street 11. Garden Avenue N/N 5th Street 6. Park Avenue N/N 6th Street The study area and parking lots included in the demand study are shown on Figure 3. Additionally, the Boeing lease on Lot 10 was terminated in January 2020. As a result, demand observed in the lot was shifted to other lots and the supply was removed from overall calculations in the subsequent sections. The analysis also includes a review of the parking code requirements, parking utilization, and traffic operations and access. Future (2023) with-project conditions were evaluated by shifting traffic associated with Lot S1 to other parking lots on campus and added to future without- project volumes. The with-project conditions are compared to future without-project conditions to identify the potential impacts of the proposed project on the surrounding intersections. Site VicinityBoeing Renton Apron EFIGURE1 Dec 11, 2019 - 8:29am jonathans M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: Site VicinityXStudy IntersectionLEGENDParking AreaProposedApron E(Lot S1) Preliminary Site PlanBoeing Renton Apron EFIGURE2 Dec 18, 2019 - 1:20pm jonathans M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: Site Plan Study Intersections & Observed Parking AreasBoeing Renton Apron EFIGURE3 Dec 13, 2019 - 7:14am Jessical M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: Study Area_S11XStudy IntersectionLEGENDParking AreaLot S1Lot E6Garage10-20Lot E5Lot E4Lot 10Garage10-18Lot E1LotE2Garage10-16Lot E7Lot E3Lot S3Lot S2101167895423 Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 6 Chapter 2. Parking Code Analysis The following sections summarize the code required parking and available parking supply under with-project conditions without inclusion of Lot 10. Code required parking for the Renton Boeing site was calculated based on rates provided in Renton City Code (RCC) 4-4-080-d and the different land uses on-site. Table 1 provides a summary of the with-project code required parking for the Boeing Renton site. Table 1. Code Required Parking Land Use Minimum Code Required Parking Maximum Code Required Parking Total Existing Building Area (sf) Proposed Apron E (sf) Total Building Area (sf) Minimum Code Required Parking Supply Maximum Code Allowed Parking Supply Medical & Airplane Hanger Office 5 stalls/1,000 sf 5 stalls/1,000 sf 10,477 12,653 sf 23,130 115 stalls 115 stalls General Office 2 stalls/1,000 sf 4.5 stalls/1,000 sf 1,428,984 0 sf 1,428,984 2,858 stalls 6,430 stalls Retail 2.5 stalls/1,000 sf 2.5 stalls/1,000 sf 2,168 0 sf 2,168 5 stalls 5 stalls Airplane Hanger 0 stalls 0 stalls 47,176 55,698 sf 102,874 0 stalls 0 stalls Manufacturing Lab/Test 1 stall/1,000 sf 1.5 stall/1,000 sf 2,733,384 40,893 sf 2,774,227 2,774 stalls 4,161 stalls Warehouse & Storage 1 stall/1,500 sf 1 stall/1,500 sf 43,618 0 sf 43,618 30 stalls 30 stalls Total - - 4,265,807 109,244 4,375,001 5,782 stalls 10,741 stalls Notes: sf = square feet As shown in Table 1, the minimum number of code required parking stalls with completion of the proposed Apron E project is approximately 5,782 stalls with a maximum of 10,741 stalls allowed by code. The code required parking areas are shown on Figure 4. As discussed previously, parking spaces on the Boeing campus are organized in a tiered system and also include vanpool/carpool, service vehicle parking, and ADA parking stalls. Table 2 provides a summary of the existing parking between general-purpose and Tier 1 stalls. Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 7 Table 2. Existing Parking Supply Summary Lot General-Purpose Tier 1 Total S1 976 - 976 S2 277 206 483 S3 390 403 793 S5 - 193 193 S6 - 371 371 S7 - 88 88 E1 275 - 275 E2 64 - 64 E3 215 - 215 E4 264 - 264 E5 - - - E6 413 - 413 E7 313 - 313 Garage 10-20 543 - 543 Garage 10-18 1,053 - 1,053 Garage 10-16 782 - 782 Total 5,565 1,261 6,826 Source: Transpo Group. As shown in Table 2, with consideration of general-purpose and Tier 1 parking the site meets minimum code parking requirements. The site would continue to meet minimum code required parking with consideration of the proposed project which would reduce the parking supply by 976 stalls to 5,850 stalls. Code Required Parking AreasBoeing Renton Apron EFIGURE4 Dec 16, 2019 - 7:57am jonathans M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: Code Parking AreasLEGENDGeneral-Purpose ParkingAreaApron ELot E6Garage10-20Lot E5Lot E4Garage10-18Lot E1LotE2Garage10-16Lot E7Lot E3Lot S2Lot S6Lot S5Lot S7Tier 1 Parking AreaLot S3 Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 9 Chapter 3. Parking Utilization This section analyzes the parking on-site by first looking at existing parking conditions, and then how parking would change with the completion of the proposed project. Existing Parking Conditions The following sections review existing parking condition on-site and in the vicinity of the Boeing Renton campus. On-Site Parking Parking supply and demand counts were collected at the 14 parking lots shown on Figure 3. It is the intention of the displaced parking in lot S1 to be accommodated within like type parking in other lots on the Boeing site. The following tables focus on general-purpose only as that is the designation of the S1 parking. As discussed previously, reductions in production and staffing levels are being implemented, increased employees are anticipated to continue telecommuting once office begin to open, and adjustments to when shift changes occur are being made. Reductions in employment and production are anticipated to be 15 percent and 40 percent, respectively. A 15 percent reduction was applied to the existing observed demand to account for the reductions in production and employment levels. Given the increased telecommuting and adjustments to shift changes, the 15 percent should be considered conservative. Based on the parking counts and application of the 15 percent reduction, the peak parking demand of the S1 lot was observed during the 1:00 to 2:00 p.m. with a demand of 769 stalls during the 1:00 to 1:30 p.m. count and 796 stalls during the 1:30 to 2:00 p.m. count. Table 3 provides a summary of the observed parking supply and demand during the 1:00 to 2:00 p.m. time period, utilization, and the number of available stalls. Table 3. Peak Period Observed Parking Lot Existing General- Purpose Supply 1:00 – 1:30 p.m. Count Period 1:30 – 2:00 p.m. Count Period Parking Demand Utilization Available Supply Parking Demand Utilization Available Supply S1 976 769 79% 207 796 82% 180 S2 277 235 85% 42 232 84% 45 S3 390 332 85% 58 295 76% 95 E1 275 65 24% 210 63 23% 212 E2 64 7 11% 57 7 11% 57 E3 215 162 75% 53 160 74% 55 E4 264 220 83% 44 220 83% 44 E5 - - - - - - - E6 413 350 85% 63 350 85% 63 E7 313 106 34% 207 116 37% 197 Lot 10 675 441 65% 234 453 67% 222 Garage 10-20 543 363 67% 180 343 63% 200 Garage 10-18 1053 354 34% 699 353 34% 700 Garage 10-16 782 588 75% 194 568 73% 214 Total 6,240 3,992 64% 2,248 3,956 63% 2,284 Source: Transpo Group. Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 10 As shown in Table 3, there are approximately 6,240 general-purpose parking stalls. After application of the 15 percent reduction, the site is currently operating at an overall utilization of 64 percent during the 1:00 to 1:30 p.m. period and 63 percent during the 1:30 to 2:00 p.m. period. Off-Site Parking Off-site parking is available in the vicinity of the Boeing Renton Campus in the form of on- street and off-street commercial parking at the Landing. A surface parking lot is available for the commercial uses at The Landing. On-street parking is available in the residential neighborhood roughly bound by N 6th Street to the north, Logan Avenue N to the west, N 3rd Street to the south, and Park Avenue N to the east. On- and off-street parking in the area is shown on Figure 5. Figure 5. Off-Site Parking As shown in Figure 5, near the site either parking isn’t allowed on-street or is 2-hour time limited between 8 AM and 6 PM. These time limits prohibit long-term use during the day. Further from the site on-street parking is not restricted. Future Parking Conditions The following sections summarize the future without and with-project parking conditions on campus. Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 11 Without-Project As discussed previously, under future without-project conditions the lease on Lot 10 was terminated resulting in a decrease in the parking supply of approximately 675 stalls. With the termination of the Lot 10 lease, the parking demand would be reallocated to other general- purpose parking lots on campus. Table 4 provides a summary of the peak parking demand and utilization under without-project conditions. Table 4. Peak Period Parking Demand & Utilization Without-Project Time of Day General-Purpose Parking Supply Parking Demand Utilization 1:00 – 1:30 p.m. 5,565 3,992 72% 1:30 – 2:00 p.m. 5,565 3,956 71% Source: Transpo Group. As shown in Table 4, under future without-project conditions, campus wide general-purpose parking utilization is anticipated to be 72 percent during the 1:00 to 1:30 p.m. period and 71 percent during the 1:30 to 2:00 p.m. period. With-Project As discussed previously, the proposed Apron E project would create three new production stalls and a new paint hangar, located east of the existing Apron D hanger, encompassing the entirety of the S1 parking lot. The S1 parking lot currently includes 976 parking stalls. People currently utilizing the S1 lot are anticipated to shift to other lots on campus. As shown in Figure 6 the other lots are well connected with sidewalk/walkway or covered walkways, and marked crosswalk facilities. As noted earlier, no increase in employment is anticipated as a result of the proposed project, actually a decrease in employment and production is anticipated site-wide, employees would be shifted to Apron E from other facilities on campus. The proposed project would provide 45 parking stalls. Table 5 provides a summary of the peak parking demand and utilization under with-project conditions. Table 5. Peak Period Parking Demand & Utilization With-Project Time of Day General-Purpose Parking Supply Apron E Parking Supply Total Parking Supply Parking Demand Utilization 1:00 – 1:30 p.m. 4,589 45 4,634 3,992 86% 1:30 – 2:00 p.m. 4,589 45 4,634 3,956 85% Source: Transpo Group. As shown in Table 5, with completion of the proposed project overall general-purpose utilization is anticipated to be 86 percent during the 1:00 to 1:30 p.m. period and 85 percent during the 1:30 to 2:00 p.m. period. Typically, for a parking lot, industry standard would target 85 to 90 percent parking utilization. A utilization of 85 to 90 percent allows for some open spaces for people searching for parking. At 86 percent utilization, enough parking is available that off-site impacts are unlikely. As such, no parking mitigation is required; however, a plan has been developed to monitor the site-wide general-purpose parking utilization. The monitoring plan is discussed in a subsequent section on Page 22. Existing Pedestrian FacilitiesBoeing Renton Apron EFIGURE6 Aug 18, 2020 - 2:57pm Jessical M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Ex Ped Facilities.dwg Layout: L1Apron ELot E6Garage10-20Lot E5Lot E4Garage10-18Lot E1LotE2Garage10-16Lot E7Lot E3Lot S2Lot S3Apron ESidewalk/WalkwayLEGENDCovered WalkwayMarked CrosswalkSignalizedIntersection Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 13 Chapter 4. Operations and Access This section of the report documents project-generated impacts on the surrounding roadway network and at the study intersections. First, existing and future without-project conditions are described. Next, future with-project volumes are projected and potential impact to traffic volumes and traffic operations are identified. Existing and Future (2023) Without-Project Conditions This section describes both existing and future (2023) without-project conditions within the identified study area. Traffic Volumes The following sections document traffic volumes used in the existing and future (2023) without-project operations analyses. Existing Volumes Weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic counts were collected at the study intersections in April 2019. For purposes of equally redistributing AM and PM peak hour volumes at the S1 driveways through the study area, a consistent system-wide peak hour was utilized at the study intersections. Figure 7 illustrates the existing weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections. The detailed traffic counts are provided in Appendix A. Future Without-Project Volumes Future (2023) without-project traffic volumes were forecasted by applying an average annual growth rate to existing traffic volumes and traffic from previously approved “pipeline” development projects that would contribute traffic to study intersections. An annual growth rate of three percent per year was applied to the existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes along public roadways. A growth rate was not applied to turning movements to/from private driveways along N 6th Street and Logan Avenue N. Growth at private driveways was accounted for in traffic shifts associated with the closure of the S1 parking lot. The three percent growth rate is consistent with previously approved traffic studies. Traffic from one pipeline project in the project vicinity was also included in the future without-project volume forecasts and include: · TopGolf Facility: The proposed project includes 102 golf driving range bays, a 220- room hotel, and a 3,400-square foot (sf) restaurant space. Future (2023) without-project weekday peak hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 8. Existing Weekday Peak Hour Traffic VolumesBoeing Renton Apron EFIGURE7 Aug 18, 2020 - 2:49pm Jessical M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: Existing1234567891011Logan Ave NN 8th St(5) 31(16) 34(15) 16(19) 6740(633)(79) 89(43) 73(18) 4(18) 53(3) 16(549)612(26) 8(10) 56(71) 71(15) 17(12) 21386(377)(143) 65(49) 80(64) 77(14) 59(30) 88(155)261(7) 37Park Ave NN 8th StGarden Ave NN 8th St (232) 210(19) 12(6) 16 (103) 248(152) 39(126) 190 Boeing RdN 6th St(6) 3(20) 31(1) 4(3) 611(14)(4) 17(11) 3(27) 26(67) 11(22) 98(8)3(1) 2Logan Ave NN 6th St(0) 15(12) 35(31) 99(63) 28806(720)(263) 217(21) 110(25) 7(11) 14(9) 8(566)690(16) 9Park Ave NN 6th St(88) 209(86) 104(24) 140(86) 18260(455)(14) 6(8) 16(25) 21(6) 2(16) 6(126)429(55) 28Garden Ave NN 6th St(72) 86(5) 2(42) 22(18) 871(95)(4) 0(0) 0(4) 3(5) 1(0) 0(56)86(9) 28Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (North)(0) 0 (3) 11(0) 01,032(1,039)(10) 0(0) 0 (2) 1(0) 0(607)888(15) 9Park Ave NN 5th St(19) 17(6) 7(10) 14(6) 2(602)(29) 14(3) 42(0) 1(4) 5(3) 3(143)480(2) 15Garden Ave NN 5th St(8) 6 (0) 22(2) 2(134) (14)139(5) 11123456781011       1                                N 8TH STLOGAN AVE NN 6TH STPARK AVE NGARDEN AVE NBURNETT AVE NWILLIAMS AVE NWELLS AVE NPELLY AVE NN 5TH STN 4TH STSOUTHPORT DR NN 10TH STXStudy IntersectionX Weekday PM PeakHour Traffic VolumesLEGEND(X)Weekday AM PeakHour Traffic Volumes24623Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (South)(0) 3(0) 0(1) 51(55) 6(1,046)(3) 0(0) 1(0) 0(0) 1(2) 2(604)894(5) 31,0659     Boeing Renton Apron EFIGURE8 Aug 18, 2020 - 2:51pm Jessical M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: Baseline1234567891011Logan Ave NN 8th St(6) 35(18) 38(17) 18(21) 7888(732)(89) 100(48) 82(20) 5(20) 60(3) 18(630)716(29) 9(11) 63(80) 80(17) 19(14) 24434(424)(161) 73(79) 144(72) 87(16) 66(34) 99(182)312(8) 42Park Ave NN 8th StGarden Ave NN 8th St (261) 236(21) 14(7) 18 (116) 279(171) 44(166) 268 Boeing RdN 6th St(7) 3(23) 35(1) 4(3) 611(14)(4) 17(11) 3(30) 29(75) 12(25) 110(8)3(1) 2Logan Ave NN 6th St(0) 17(14) 39(35) 111(71) 32988(846)(296) 244(24) 124(28) 8(12) 16(10) 9(649)808(18) 10Park Ave NN 6th St(95) 232(101) 120(27) 158(97) 20293(510)(18) 7(9) 22(30) 24(7) 2(18) 7(167)550(60) 32Garden Ave NN 6th St(87) 100(6) 2(47) 25(20) 980(107)(5) 0(0) 0(5) 3(6) 1(0) 0(63)97(12) 36Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (North)(0) 0 (3) 11(0) 01,243(1,205)(10) 0(0) 0 (2) 1(0) 0(695)1,030(15) 9Park Ave NN 5th St(21) 19(7) 8(11) 16(7) 2(678)(33) 16(3) 47(0) 1(5) 6(3) 3(186)611(2) 17Garden Ave NN 5th St(9) 7 (0) 25(2) 2(151) (16)156(6) 12123456781011       1                                N 8TH STLOGAN AVE NN 6TH STPARK AVE NGARDEN AVE NFuture (2023) Without-Project Weekday Peak Hour Traffic VolumesBURNETT AVE NWILLIAMS AVE NWELLS AVE NPELLY AVE NN 5TH STN 4TH STSOUTHPORT DR NN 10TH STXStudy IntersectionX Weekday PM PeakHour Traffic VolumesLEGEND(X)Weekday AM PeakHour Traffic Volumes27726Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (South)(0) 3(0) 0(1) 51(55) 6(1,213)(3) 0(0) 1(0) 0(0) 1(2) 2(692)1,037(5) 31,2809     Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 16 Traffic Operations The operational characteristics of an intersection are determined by calculating the intersection level of service (LOS). At side-street stop-controlled intersections, LOS is measured in average delay per vehicle during the peak hour of traffic and is reported for the worst operating approach of the intersection. At signalized intersections, LOS is measured in average control delay per vehicle and is typically reported using the intersection delay. Traffic operations for an intersection can be described alphabetically with a range of levels of service (LOS A through F), with LOS A indicating free-flowing traffic and LOS F indicating extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. Appendix B contains a detailed explanation of LOS criteria and definitions. Weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic operations for existing and future without-project conditions were evaluated at the study intersections based on the procedures identified in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition and were evaluated using the Synchro 10 software program. Pedestrian and bicycle volumes were taken into account when evaluating intersection operations. The intersection operations are summarized in Table 6. Detailed LOS worksheets for each intersection analysis are included in Appendix C. Table 6. Existing & Future Without-Project Weekday Peak Hour Intersection LOS Summary Existing 2023 Without-Project Intersection LOS1 Delay2 WM3 LOS Delay WM AM Peak Hour 1. Logan Avenue N/N 8th Street B 16 - B 18 - 2. Park Avenue N/N 8th Street B 18 - B 19 - 3. Garden Avenue N/N 8th Street A 6 - A 6 - 4. Lot S6 Access/Internal Road B 12 NBL B 12 NBL 5. Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street B 19 - C 22 - 6. Park Avenue/N 6th Street B 20 - B 20 - 7. Garden Avenue N/N 6th Street A 9 - A 9 - 8. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access North B 14 WB C 15 WB 9. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access South B 11 SBL B 12 SBL 10. Park Avenue N/N 5th Street C 18 WBL C 20 WBL 11. Garden Avenue N/N 5th Street A 10 EBL B 10 EB PM Peak Hour 1. Logan Avenue N/N 8th Street C 22 - C 31 - 2. Park Avenue N/N 8th Street C 27 - C 28 - 3. Garden Avenue N/N 8th Street A 8 - A 8 - 4. Lot S6 Access/Internal Road B 11 SBL B 12 SBL 5. Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street C 27 - D 46 - 6. Park Avenue/N 6th Street C 34 - D 38 - 7. Garden Avenue N/N 6th Street A 9 - A 9 - 8. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access North C 19 WB C 23 WB 9. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access South E 41 WB F 66 WB 10. Park Avenue N/N 5th Street C 15 EB C 19 EB 11. Garden Avenue N/N 5th Street B 11 EB B 11 EBL 1. Level of Service (A – F) as defined by the Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2016) 2. Average delay per vehicle in seconds. 3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections. As shown in Table 6, the study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hour with the exception of the Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 South Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 17 Access driveway. The Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 South Access driveway currently operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour. After accounting for increases in background traffic growth, the study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS D or better under future without-project conditions with the exception of the Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 South Access, which degrades to LOS F with an increase in delay of 25 seconds. Project Impacts This section documents the proposed project’s impacts on the surrounding street system and identifies potential mitigation measures if necessary. As discussed previously, since the time this study was initiated, reductions in production and staffing levels have been made at the Boeing Renton facility and are projected through completion of the proposed Apron E development. Additionally, as a result of the pandemic, more employees are anticipated to continue telecommuting following the reopening of offices and adjustments to when shift changes occur are being made to reduce mass gatherings. These changes further reduce peak parking demand and traffic volumes on the campus. Traffic data collected in April 2019 were not reduced by 15 percent consistent with the parking analysis. Intersection volumes are difficult to differentiate between Boeing and general background traffic; therefore, the following traffic volumes estimates and resulting traffic operations should be considered conservative. Traffic Volume Shifts With the displacement of parking on lot S1, travel volumes at the intersections in the area will change accordingly. Figure 9 summarizes the trip assignment that reflects the peak hour shift in traffic associated with the displacement of traffic from lot S1 to the surrounding lots. Future with-project volumes were estimated by adding shifts associated with the AM and PM peak volumes at the S1 parking lot to the future without project volumes. Future (2023) with- project weekday peak hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 10. Weekday Peak Hour Traffic ShiftsBoeing Renton ApronFIGURE9 Aug 18, 2020 - 2:52pm Jessical M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: Project Trips1234567891011N 8TH STLOGAN AVE NN 6TH STPARK AVE NGARDEN AVE NBURNETT AVE NWILLIAMS AVE NWELLS AVE NPELLY AVE NN 5TH STN 4TH STSOUTHPORT DR NN 10TH STLogan Ave NN 8th St(-3) -5(-11) -6 (3) 5 (-20)-12 (-11) -6 (3) 5 (11) 6 (20)12 Park Ave NN 8th StGarden Ave NN 8th St Boeing RdN 6th St (1) 4(-1) -4(-3) -6-11(-14)(-4) -17(-11) -3(3) 6 (8) 3(-8)-3 Logan Ave NN 6th St (5) 7-17(-11) (31)38(3) 3 (-20)-12 Park Ave NN 6th St(18) 4 (7) 3 2(12) 1029Garden Ave NN 6th St (9) 10 Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (North) (-3) -11 (20) (-5)18(-15) -9Park Ave NN 5th St (10) 10 Garden Ave NN 5th St (10) 18 123456781011                                     2 Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (South)-3 (-1) -51(-55) -6(20)(15) 4(4) 13 3 (-3)10(-5) -3 9    XStudy IntersectionX Weekday PM PeakHour Project TripsLEGEND(X)Weekday AM PeakHour Project Trips Future (2023) With-Project Weekday Peak Hour Traffic VolumesBoeing Renton Apron EFIGURE10 Aug 18, 2020 - 2:54pm Jessical M:\19\1.19122.00 - Boeing Renton Apron E and Fire Station T\Graphics\DWG\Scoping Figures_v2017.dwg Layout: With Project1234567891011Logan Ave NN 8th St(3) 30(7) 32(17) 18(21) 7888(732)(89) 100(48) 82(20) 5(23) 65(3) 18(610)704(29) 9(11) 63(69) 74(17) 19(17) 29434(424)(172) 79(79) 144(72) 87(16) 66(34) 99(202)324(8) 42Park Ave NN 8th StGarden Ave NN 8th St (261) 236(21) 14(7) 18 (116) 279(171) 44(166) 268 Boeing RdN 6th St(7) 3(24) 39 (33) 35(75) 12(33) 113 (1) 2Logan Ave NN 6th St17(19) 46(35) 94(60) 32988(846)(327) 244(24) 162(31) 11(12) 16(10) 9(629)796(18) 10Park Ave NN 6th St(113) 236(101) 120(34) 161(97) 20295(522)(18) 7(9) 22(30) 24(7) 2(18) 7(167)560(60) 61Garden Ave NN 6th St(87) 100(6) 2(47) 25(20) 980(116)(5) (5) 3(6) 1 (63)107(12) 36Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (North) 1,243(1,225)(10) (2) 1 (690)1,048 Park Ave NN 5th St(21) 19(7) 8(11) 16(7) 2(688)(33) 16(3) 471(5) 6(3) 3(186)621(2) 17Garden Ave NN 5th St(9) 7 25(2) 2(161) (16)174(6) 12123456781011       1                                N 8TH STLOGAN AVE NN 6TH STPARK AVE NGARDEN AVE NBURNETT AVE NWILLIAMS AVE NWELLS AVE NPELLY AVE NN 5TH STN 4TH STSOUTHPORT DR NN 10TH STXStudy IntersectionX Weekday PM PeakHour Traffic VolumesLEGEND(X)Weekday AM PeakHour Traffic Volumes27926Logan Ave NS1/E7 DW (South)(1,233)(18) 4(4) 144(2) 2(689)1,0471,2809   Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 20 Future With-Project Traffic Operations An intersection level of service analysis was conducted in the study area to evaluate the future 2023 conditions with the development of the project. Project impacts are determined by comparing future (2023) with-project conditions to without-project conditions. Intersection LOS were calculated at the study intersections using the LOS methodology described previously. Table 7 provides a comparison between the 2023 with and without project conditions. Detailed LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix C. Table 7. Future Weekday Peak Hour Intersection LOS Summary 2023 Without-Project 2023 With-Project Intersection LOS Delay WM LOS Delay WM AM Peak Hour 1. Logan Avenue N/N 8th Street B 18 - B 17 - 2. Park Avenue N/N 8th Street B 19 - B 18 - 3. Garden Avenue N/N 8th Street A 6 - A 6 - 4. Lot S6 Access/Internal Road B 12 NBL B 10 SBL 5. Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street C 22 - C 22 - 6. Park Avenue/N 6th Street B 20 - C 21 - 7. Garden Avenue N/N 6th Street A 9 - A 9 - 8. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access North C 15 WB C 16 WB 9. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access South B 12 SBL D 26 WB 10. Park Avenue N/N 5th Street C 20 WBL C 20 WBL 11. Garden Avenue N/N 5th Street B 10 EB B 10 EB PM Peak Hour 1. Logan Avenue N/N 8th Street C 31 - C 30 - 2. Park Avenue N/N 8th Street C 28 - C 28 - 3. Garden Avenue N/N 8th Street A 8 - A 8 - 4. Lot S6 Access/Internal Road B 12 SBL B 11 SB 5. Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street D 46 - D 47 - 6. Park Avenue/N 6th Street D 38 - D 39 - 7. Garden Avenue N/N 6th Street A 9 - A 9 - 8. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access North C 23 WB C 23 WB 9. Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 Access South F 66 WB D 28 WB 10. Park Avenue N/N 5th Street C 19 EB C 19 EB 11. Garden Avenue N/N 5th Street B 11 EBL B 11 EBL 1. Level of Service (A – F) as defined by the Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2000) 2. Average delay per vehicle in seconds. 3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections. As shown in Table 7, with anticipated shifts associated with the proposed project all study intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better, including the Logan Avenue N/Lot S1/E7 South Access. No traffic impact operations are anticipated with completion of the proposed project. Additionally, with completion of the proposed project, a driveway is proposed along Logan Avenue N at the southern portion of the project site and is anticipated to serve delivery vehicles. Approximately 2 deliveries are anticipated on a daily basis, as such, the site access location with Logan Avenue N is anticipated to operate with minimal delay. Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 21 Traffic Impact Fees As stated in the Rate Study for Impact Fees for Transportation, Parks, and Fire Protection, City of Renton, August 26, 2011: “Impact fees are charges paid by new development to reimburse local governments for the capital cost of public facilities that are needed to serve new development and the people who occupy or use the new development.” Additionally, the City’s impact fees and capital improvement needs are determined based on the PM peak hour. As discussed previously, no increase in employment is anticipated as a result of the proposed project, employees would be shifted to the paint hanger from other facilities on campus; therefore, no net new weekday daily, AM, or PM peak hour trips are anticipated. More realistically, a decrease in employment and production is anticipated site- wide. Additionally, as shown in Table 5 and Table 7 no site-wide parking or intersection operational impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 22 Chapter 5. Recommendations As discussed previously, with completion of the proposed project, general-purpose parking utilization could increase to over 85 percent during the 1:00 to 1:30 p.m. period. Typically, for a parking lot, industry standard would target 85 to 90 percent parking utilization. A utilization of 85 to 90 percent allows for some open spaces for people searching for parking. While a parking utilization of 86 percent during the 1:00 to 1:30 p.m. would not warrant mitigation measures, it is recognized that this utilization rate is dependent on the anticipated reductions in on-site staffing levels. As such, a monitoring plan with contingency measures has been developed to ensure general-purpose parking utilization rates, regardless of the number of employees, remain at or under 90 percent and is described as follows. Under a monitoring plan a yearly parking utilization study would be conducted for the general- purpose parking stalls, outside the secured perimeter of the site. The utilization study should be conducted between 11 AM and 2 PM in 30-minute intervals. This time is consistent with the peak period identified above. A maximum parking utilization of 90 percent should be maintained campus wide for the general-purpose parking stalls. If the site-wide general- purpose parking utilization were to exceed 90 percent contingency measures to reduce the overall general purpose would be identified, presented to the City, and implemented. Those contingency measures could include: · Restriping lots · Develop a commute trip reduction (CTR) plan · Lease additional parking stalls · Conversion of non-general-purpose stalls Ultimately, as the utilization increases beyond the level it will create issues for Boeing employees. This could create parking overflow in The Landing and residential areas surrounding the site. It is likely that the company would be working towards some solutions regardless of the monitoring report. Transportation Impact Analysis Boeing Renton Apron E September 2020 23 Chapter 6. Summary of Findings This transportation impact study summarizes the project traffic impacts of the proposed Boeing Apron E project. General findings and recommendations include: · The proposed Apron E project would create three new production stalls and a new paint hangar, encompassing the entirety of lot S1. Lot S1 is located on the southwest corner of the Logan Avenue N/N 6th Street intersection and currently includes 976 parking stalls. · With the elimination of the Lot S1 parking in the future, the forecast peak hour utilization anticipated to be approximately 86 percent during the 1:00 to 1:30 p.m. period. Typically, for a parking lot, industry standard would target 85 to 90 percent parking utilization. A utilization of 85 to 90 percent allows for some open spaces for people searching for parking. At 86 percent utilization, enough parking is available that off-site impacts are unlikely. · The study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS D or better under future (2023) with-project conditions. No traffic impact operations are anticipated with completion of the proposed project and associated change in travel patterns. · A monitoring plan and possible contingency measures have been identified in the event that future parking utilization rates exceed 90 percent site-wide for the general- purpose parking stalls outside the secure perimeter of the site. Appendix A: Traffic Counts Peak Hour:07:30 AM - 08:30 AM LOGAN AVE LOGAN AVE8TH ST8TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 LOGAN AVE & 8TH ST AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk240621 21 38 14 14 5 606 656 80 90 719628 33 64 N S EW 0 0 576196307008TH ST 8TH STLOGAN AVELOGAN AVE1,438 13 22546N S EW 20322 11 2 640Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 1,209017240513071170269293131421 6:15 AM 1,230067010110101250174275121117 6:30 AM 1,29503401011051730176316321612 6:45 AM 1,3430170790514401107325231821 7:00 AM 1,3820020550515202109314621511 7:15 AM 1,4240050143071710010634034234 7:30 AM 1,438005010100515201142364352011 7:45 AM 1,399014072031540216036455147 8:00 AM 1,3790420123041560014135644224 8:15 AM 0 0 3 0 9 6 0 7 168 0 3 133 35427142 8:30 AM 0 1 2 0 9 2 0 4 153 0 1 122 32585153 8:45 AM 0 2 0 0 9 2 0 8 168 0 0 108 34498255 Count Total 0 35 65 0 107 77 0 70 1,833 0 14 1,347 3,9704750207118 Peak Hour 0 5 14 0 38 21 0 19 630 0 6 576 1,43814217024 HV%PHF 0.83 0.80 0.95 0.90 33.3% 12.5% 6.8% 5.1% 7.0%0.99 EB WB NB SB All 0012 0 8 3 8 0 31 47 10 13 4941 11 0 N S EW 0 0 3004540Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 4 6 1 6 17 6:15 AM 4 9 1 4 18 6:30 AM 3 16 2 3 24 6:45 AM 4 16 3 4 27 7:00 AM 3 6 0 4 13 7:15 AM 5 17 1 2 25 7:30 AM 4 15 3 7 29 7:45 AM 3 8 2 7 20 8:00 AM 4 11 3 10 28 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 37 0 0 4 41 6:15 AM 18 7 0 5 30 6:30 AM 22 6 1 10 39 6:45 AM 13 7 0 9 29 7:00 AM 11 2 0 4 17 7:15 AM 11 4 2 7 24 7:30 AM 14 6 0 5 25 7:45 AM 14 6 0 4 24 8:00 AM 13 9 1 2 25 8:15 AM 0 15 2 7 24 8:30 AM 1 7 3 4 15 8:45 AM 0 25 1 8 34 Count Total 35 151 22 66 274 Peak Hour 11 49 10 31 101 8:15 AM 5 4 1 2 12 8:30 AM 13 10 0 2 25 8:45 AM 5 3 0 1 9 Count Total 176 64 5 55 300 Peak Hour 46 25 2 13 86 Peak Hour:06:45 AM - 07:45 AM PARK AVE N PARK AVE N8TH AVE8TH AVE (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 PARK AVE N & 8TH AVE AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk702214 56 32 13 68 10 178 408 102 269 579194 91 79 N S EW 0 0 1491638417908TH AVE 8TH AVEPARK AVE NPARK AVE N950 12 44150N S EW 431312 12 0 00Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 782072705140234072614814192 6:15 AM 858041405180375033719024232 6:30 AM 917021104180178033320043412 6:45 AM 950051807170595034224424460 7:00 AM 92802110450586044822433530 7:15 AM 9470122081805103073124964431 7:30 AM 90302170131601100082823323376 7:45 AM 8880314013100477065222262350 8:00 AM 9080418015200297184424315280 8:15 AM 0 3 15 0 13 15 0 4 82 0 2 29 205310281 8:30 AM 0 5 11 0 14 11 0 3 97 0 6 26 218213264 8:45 AM 0 4 22 0 10 14 0 8 99 0 7 30 24239342 Count Total 0 42 200 0 111 176 0 43 1,023 1 64 426 2,618356441320 Peak Hour 0 10 68 0 32 56 0 16 384 0 22 149 95013141797 HV%PHF 0.78 0.80 0.96 0.86 17.6% 8.8% 5.4% 7.3% 7.3%0.95 EB WB NB SB All 0010 8 1 6 8 2 13 30 9 12 3119 16 8 N S EW 0 0 1202830Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 5 5 1 0 11 6:15 AM 5 10 2 3 20 6:30 AM 2 4 1 5 12 6:45 AM 5 9 4 3 21 7:00 AM 4 6 1 5 16 7:15 AM 5 11 2 3 21 7:30 AM 2 5 2 2 11 7:45 AM 4 11 2 4 21 8:00 AM 4 10 4 2 20 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 2 6 2 10 6:15 AM 0 5 7 1 13 6:30 AM 0 5 10 0 15 6:45 AM 0 1 11 5 17 7:00 AM 0 6 11 1 18 7:15 AM 0 6 10 3 19 7:30 AM 0 2 12 3 17 7:45 AM 0 3 12 2 17 8:00 AM 0 1 3 0 4 8:15 AM 0 4 3 2 9 8:30 AM 1 8 2 3 14 8:45 AM 3 6 2 5 16 Count Total 40 89 26 37 192 Peak Hour 16 31 9 13 69 8:15 AM 0 1 11 4 16 8:30 AM 0 1 10 1 12 8:45 AM 0 2 7 0 9 Count Total 0 35 110 22 167 Peak Hour 0 15 44 12 71 Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM GARDEN AVE N 8TH AVE8TH AVE (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 GARDEN AVE N & 8TH AVE AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 0 126 152 19 232 0 278 335 109171 251 132 N S EW 0 0 6010308TH AVE 8TH AVEGARDEN AVE N 638 031N S EW 003001 Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 5700049049210401385010 6:15 AM 5730033030320201285026 6:30 AM 6140058043240001443016 6:45 AM 6270061044290001607019 7:00 AM 6270069038150001413016 7:15 AM 6380067045300101695021 7:30 AM 5850061026310201573034 7:45 AM 5670052052270001606023 8:00 AM 5500052029380301525025 8:15 AM 0 0 43 0 19 32 0 6 0 1161015 8:30 AM 0 0 41 0 28 46 0 0 0 1391023 8:45 AM 0 0 53 0 30 25 0 1 0 1438026 Count Total 0 0 639 0 433 350 0 19 0 1,747520254 Peak Hour 0 0 232 0 152 126 0 6 0 638190103 HV%PHF 0.87 0.88 0.76 6.4% 3.2% 11.9% 6.0%0.94 EB WB NB SB All 0 9 0 7 9 0 9 21 137 16 10 N S EW 0 0 10120Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 3 3 0 6 6:15 AM 2 2 1 5 6:30 AM 2 4 1 7 6:45 AM 3 5 3 11 7:00 AM 6 1 0 7 7:15 AM 2 3 2 7 7:30 AM 2 3 4 9 7:45 AM 8 1 0 9 8:00 AM 4 6 3 13 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 6:15 AM 0 0 0 0 6:30 AM 0 1 0 1 6:45 AM 0 1 0 1 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 1 0 1 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 1 2 0 3 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM 0 1 4 5 8:30 AM 5 3 4 12 8:45 AM 6 3 6 15 Count Total 43 35 28 106 Peak Hour 16 13 9 38 8:15 AM 0 1 0 1 8:30 AM 1 1 0 2 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 2 7 0 9 Peak Hour 1 3 0 4 Peak Hour:06:00 AM - 07:00 AM LOT S1 ROAD LOT S2-S3 ROAD6TH AVE6TH AVE (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:6 LOT S1 ROAD & 6TH AVE AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk4038178 17 10 1 19 4 46 198 205 75 3815 24 25 N S EW 0 0 44161806TH AVE 6TH AVELOT S1 ROADLOT S2-S3 ROAD313 0 03324N S EW 001518 0 0 519Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 3130140250220253117154171 6:15 AM 2560150440150606803912 6:30 AM 2340050120130406504900 6:45 AM 2290250360060316303601 7:00 AM 2150230850230916012411 7:15 AM 1840140490030514601810 7:30 AM 1850270270140836012311 7:45 AM 1680270480140524901600 8:00 AM 1560120130130422901020 8:15 AM 0 2 4 0 3 8 0 0 5 0 7 4 4701112 8:30 AM 0 1 11 0 3 8 0 1 1 0 2 3 4301012 8:45 AM 0 0 6 0 1 9 0 0 2 0 5 2 3701002 Count Total 0 15 63 0 36 74 0 10 41 0 83 22 68433002512 Peak Hour 0 4 19 0 10 17 0 4 16 0 38 4 3131178184 HV%PHF 0.86 0.84 0.45 0.40 20.8% 3.4% 26.3% 17.4% 9.6%0.67 EB WB NB SB All 0080 7 0 0 5 0 8 8 7 13 100 5 9 N S EW 0 0 02800Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 1 3 1 2 7 6:15 AM 1 2 2 2 7 6:30 AM 1 3 2 2 8 6:45 AM 2 2 2 2 8 7:00 AM 1 4 1 2 8 7:15 AM 0 2 4 2 8 7:30 AM 0 3 5 2 10 7:45 AM 1 3 4 2 10 8:00 AM 2 2 3 2 9 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 3 16 0 0 19 6:15 AM 11 9 0 0 20 6:30 AM 7 3 0 0 10 6:45 AM 3 5 0 0 8 7:00 AM 12 7 0 0 19 7:15 AM 6 1 0 0 7 7:30 AM 9 5 0 0 14 7:45 AM 9 3 0 0 12 8:00 AM 17 13 0 0 30 8:15 AM 3 2 1 0 6 8:30 AM 1 1 3 1 6 8:45 AM 1 1 2 0 4 Count Total 14 28 30 19 91 Peak Hour 5 10 7 8 30 8:15 AM 10 5 0 0 15 8:30 AM 16 7 0 0 23 8:45 AM 2 2 0 0 4 Count Total 105 76 0 0 181 Peak Hour 24 33 0 0 57 Peak Hour:07:00 AM - 08:00 AM LOGAN AVE N LOGAN AVE N6TH ST6TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:7 LOGAN AVE N & 6TH ST AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk1801212 23 16 35 13 0 562 740 52 311 1,097583 48 125 N S EW 1 0 5328472828506TH ST 6TH STLOGAN AVE NLOGAN AVE N1,759 4 12118N S EW 11129 4 0 08Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 1,48508304120421270360349311508 6:15 AM 1,584040045034156046835290599 6:30 AM 1,663000068038190036839170683 6:45 AM 1,7410040410033159049839342723 7:00 AM 1,75900212303218705121448103793 7:15 AM 1,7370030580151900311943173735 7:30 AM 1,6990050550221940214346973785 7:45 AM 1,65200304701515702149411113555 8:00 AM 1,6350010750111790215542662571 8:15 AM 0 1 4 0 8 1 0 13 178 0 2 130 39372434 8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 11 2 0 16 189 0 7 141 42290424 8:45 AM 0 0 2 0 6 2 0 12 189 0 9 118 394132374 Count Total 0 13 28 1 66 68 0 283 2,095 0 46 1,370 4,8791212171354 Peak Hour 0 0 13 1 16 23 0 84 728 0 12 532 1,759351228518 HV%PHF 0.86 0.81 0.92 0.90 20.8% 7.7% 6.2% 4.4% 6.1%0.94 EB WB NB SB All 3012 0 2 10 0 0 25 46 4 14 6833 10 14 N S EW 0 0 211144130Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 2 6 1 8 17 6:15 AM 4 13 0 5 22 6:30 AM 3 17 2 6 28 6:45 AM 4 18 0 7 29 7:00 AM 3 13 1 5 22 7:15 AM 2 24 1 3 30 7:30 AM 1 18 0 11 30 7:45 AM 4 13 2 6 25 8:00 AM 2 18 1 15 36 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 2 1 3 0 6 6:15 AM 1 1 3 1 6 6:30 AM 2 2 4 1 9 6:45 AM 1 0 2 1 4 7:00 AM 0 2 2 2 6 7:15 AM 1 4 7 0 12 7:30 AM 4 2 2 0 8 7:45 AM 3 3 1 2 9 8:00 AM 2 2 6 3 13 8:15 AM 4 23 1 9 37 8:30 AM 1 20 0 8 29 8:45 AM 1 26 0 9 36 Count Total 31 209 9 92 341 Peak Hour 10 68 4 25 107 8:15 AM 2 1 3 3 9 8:30 AM 2 2 2 0 6 8:45 AM 0 0 3 3 6 Count Total 20 20 38 16 94 Peak Hour 8 11 12 4 35 Peak Hour:06:45 AM - 07:45 AM PARK AVE N PARK AVE N6TH ST6TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:8 PARK AVE N & 6TH ST AM Wednesday, April 24, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk600153 21 5 19 103 89 173 565 29 135 610122 211 201 N S EW 0 0 981204731706TH ST 6TH STPARK AVE NPARK AVE N1,023 15 23123N S EW 1211111 7 8 30Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 8810173500502752041718270414 6:15 AM 9300132401703364011918820222 6:30 AM 1,00201926013024105022423730624 6:45 AM 1,02302427018037126042427441414 7:00 AM 99502026013029114001723140512 7:15 AM 98902028015032120052826070212 7:30 AM 97002522025022113062925842622 7:45 AM 930025190112021110013424671213 8:00 AM 9130181704301111204352256348 8:15 AM 0 38 22 0 0 7 0 17 100 1 2 32 24180212 8:30 AM 0 18 27 0 0 6 0 7 104 0 3 35 2188037 8:45 AM 0 23 21 0 3 2 0 7 117 0 5 29 22910336 Count Total 0 260 294 0 15 66 0 267 1,237 1 37 323 2,789701043166 Peak Hour 0 89 103 0 5 21 0 120 473 0 15 98 1,0231931760 HV%PHF 0.96 0.73 0.91 0.76 4.7% 13.8% 2.3% 9.2% 4.3%0.93 EB WB NB SB All 5011 2 1 0 7 3 16 18 4 8 1411 10 7 N S EW 0 0 1001400Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 2 3 0 1 6 6:15 AM 1 5 0 5 11 6:30 AM 1 2 0 3 6 6:45 AM 3 5 1 4 13 7:00 AM 0 3 1 4 8 7:15 AM 5 4 0 3 12 7:30 AM 2 2 2 5 11 7:45 AM 3 2 0 3 8 8:00 AM 5 8 0 3 16 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 0 3 1 4 6:15 AM 1 4 7 7 19 6:30 AM 1 1 1 6 9 6:45 AM 0 3 1 1 5 7:00 AM 0 4 7 10 21 7:15 AM 0 0 7 1 8 7:30 AM 3 5 8 3 19 7:45 AM 5 5 11 4 25 8:00 AM 3 5 11 4 23 8:15 AM 8 4 2 2 16 8:30 AM 7 4 1 3 15 8:45 AM 4 5 0 2 11 Count Total 41 47 7 38 133 Peak Hour 10 14 4 16 44 8:15 AM 0 3 5 4 12 8:30 AM 0 0 9 6 15 8:45 AM 7 4 5 2 18 Count Total 20 34 75 49 178 Peak Hour 3 12 23 15 53 Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM LOGAN AVE N LOGAN AVE NLOT E7 NORTH ACCESSLOT ST NORTH ACCESS (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:9 LOGAN AVE N & LOT E7 NORTH ACCESS AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk15002 0 0 3 0 0 622 1,041 2 10 1,049610 3 15 N S EW 0 0 60701,039100LOT ST NORTH ACCESS LOT E7 NORTH ACCESSLOGAN AVE NLOGAN AVE N1,676 0 6010N S EW 5100 0 0 37Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 1,3860000000021700863158004 6:15 AM 1,4850000000024400743271107 6:30 AM 1,5740000000029000793750024 6:45 AM 1,6420000000026400993690015 7:00 AM 1,66700000000286001174141028 7:15 AM 1,67600000000276001314162025 7:30 AM 1,65000000000284001524430142 7:45 AM 1,60400000000231001583940014 8:00 AM 1,58200000000248001664231134 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 243 0 0 140 3901024 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 239 0 0 157 3970010 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236 0 0 133 3720003 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,058 0 0 1,492 4,6351431850 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,039 0 0 607 1,676321015 HV%PHF 0.38 0.50 0.91 0.91 0.0% 0.0% 7.0% 7.1% 7.0%0.95 EB WB NB SB All 8000 0 0 0 0 0 44 73 0 0 7336 0 8 N S EW 0 0 3607300Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 6 0 10 16 6:15 AM 0 10 0 8 18 6:30 AM 0 15 0 11 26 6:45 AM 0 17 0 11 28 7:00 AM 0 14 0 9 23 7:15 AM 0 25 0 7 32 7:30 AM 0 17 0 11 28 7:45 AM 0 14 0 11 25 8:00 AM 0 17 0 15 32 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 1 0 1 0 2 6:15 AM 2 0 0 0 2 6:30 AM 5 0 0 0 5 6:45 AM 2 0 0 0 2 7:00 AM 2 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 5 0 3 0 8 7:30 AM 2 0 2 0 4 7:45 AM 2 0 1 0 3 8:00 AM 1 0 0 0 1 8:15 AM 0 21 0 12 33 8:30 AM 0 16 0 7 23 8:45 AM 0 24 0 9 33 Count Total 0 196 0 121 317 Peak Hour 0 73 0 44 117 8:15 AM 1 0 2 0 3 8:30 AM 0 1 2 0 3 8:45 AM 0 0 3 0 3 Count Total 23 1 14 0 38 Peak Hour 10 0 6 0 16 Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM LOGAN AVE N LOGAN AVE NLOT E7 SOUTH ACCESSLOT S1 SOUTH ACCESS (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:10 LOGAN AVE N & LOT E7 SOUTH ACCESS AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk5020 0 0 1 0 0 611 1,046 0 5 1,104605 1 60 N S EW 0 0 604551,04630LOT S1 SOUTH ACCESS LOT E7 SOUTH ACCESSLOGAN AVE NLOGAN AVE N1,716 0 207N S EW 1100 0 0 34Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 1,47002000001821100903296002 6:15 AM 1,55101000002423901823544012 6:30 AM 1,62501000001229200783904102 6:45 AM 1,689010000021274001013970000 7:00 AM 1,687000000113278001174101000 7:15 AM 1,716000000018276001344280000 7:30 AM 1,673000000015289021454540021 7:45 AM 1,62200000009224001603951001 8:00 AM 1,588000000013257001654390013 8:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 230 0 1 140 3851010 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 240 0 1 152 4030020 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 223 0 2 130 3611001 Count Total 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 166 3,033 0 7 1,494 4,745181712 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 1,046 0 2 604 1,7161035 HV%PHF 0.25 0.00 0.90 0.91 0.0% 0.0% 6.4% 5.4% 6.1%0.94 EB WB NB SB All 0000 0 0 0 0 0 33 71 0 0 7133 0 0 N S EW 0 0 3307100Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 1 6 0 8 15 6:15 AM 1 9 0 5 15 6:30 AM 0 16 0 9 25 6:45 AM 0 18 0 8 26 7:00 AM 0 14 0 5 19 7:15 AM 0 25 0 3 28 7:30 AM 0 16 0 8 24 7:45 AM 0 12 0 8 20 8:00 AM 0 18 0 14 32 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 0 1 0 1 6:15 AM 1 0 0 0 1 6:30 AM 5 0 1 0 6 6:45 AM 1 0 0 0 1 7:00 AM 2 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 3 0 1 0 4 7:30 AM 2 0 1 0 3 7:45 AM 2 0 0 0 2 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM 0 21 0 9 30 8:30 AM 0 20 0 7 27 8:45 AM 0 22 0 8 30 Count Total 2 197 0 92 291 Peak Hour 0 71 0 33 104 8:15 AM 1 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 17 0 4 0 21 Peak Hour 7 0 2 0 9 Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM GARDEN AVE N GARDEN AVE N6TH ST6TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:11 GARDEN AVE N & 6TH ST AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk9005 4 0 42 5 72 65 172 9 9 11798 119 31 N S EW 0 0 561895406TH ST 6TH STGARDEN AVE NGARDEN AVE N310 0 1221N S EW 1002 0 0 201Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 2710130001021300135910106 6:15 AM 285015000002220011619002 6:30 AM 3000131001021401126922003 6:45 AM 3070111000072200158220105 7:00 AM 3010115001032400157313001 7:15 AM 310017200204220017768211 7:30 AM 284023100005260012768001 7:45 AM 2710140000062300167611114 8:00 AM 2680182002032400118215223 8:15 AM 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 2 17 0 1 10 506101 8:30 AM 0 11 2 0 0 0 0 5 17 0 2 16 634123 8:45 AM 0 18 3 0 1 2 0 4 15 0 0 20 735122 Count Total 0 173 19 0 1 10 0 45 239 0 4 168 84013110832 Peak Hour 0 72 5 0 0 4 0 18 95 0 0 56 31042549 HV%PHF 0.85 0.56 0.94 0.81 9.2% 55.6% 2.6% 1.5% 6.5%0.95 EB WB NB SB All 0003 2 0 1 4 6 1 12 5 4 32 11 2 N S EW 0 0 10300Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 1 1 2 0 4 6:15 AM 0 2 0 0 2 6:30 AM 1 5 1 0 7 6:45 AM 1 5 0 0 6 7:00 AM 4 2 0 0 6 7:15 AM 3 0 3 0 6 7:30 AM 3 0 0 0 3 7:45 AM 2 0 0 0 2 8:00 AM 3 3 2 1 9 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 3 0 0 1 4 6:15 AM 7 2 0 0 9 6:30 AM 7 0 1 0 8 6:45 AM 8 0 0 0 8 7:00 AM 4 0 0 0 4 7:15 AM 6 2 0 0 8 7:30 AM 3 0 1 0 4 7:45 AM 4 0 0 0 4 8:00 AM 8 0 0 0 8 8:15 AM 3 0 2 2 7 8:30 AM 4 1 1 3 9 8:45 AM 2 3 2 5 12 Count Total 27 22 13 11 73 Peak Hour 11 3 5 1 20 8:15 AM 4 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 2 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 6 0 0 0 6 Count Total 62 4 2 1 69 Peak Hour 21 2 1 0 24 Peak Hour:06:45 AM - 07:45 AM PARK AVE N PARK AVE N5TH ST5TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:12 PARK AVE N & 5TH ST AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk2163 0 3 8 8 20 113 686 6 56 708115 36 6 N S EW 0 0 10446624205TH ST 5TH STPARK AVE NPARK AVE N863 0 231N S EW 2021 0 0 01Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 7240210000010301131282051 6:15 AM 8180420100013103221744160 6:30 AM 8580300100115104261931060 6:45 AM 86303200001180122322910151 7:00 AM 84904200000171032522221140 7:15 AM 82706101000166012521412101 7:30 AM 7910730200314500311984030 7:45 AM 76203200001151014021542110 8:00 AM 7440300000214001472001051 8:15 AM 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 124 0 3 38 1783122 8:30 AM 0 9 0 0 3 1 0 0 111 0 4 31 1693250 8:45 AM 0 4 4 0 1 2 0 3 131 0 1 39 1973270 Count Total 0 51 18 0 9 3 0 12 1,704 1 24 360 2,3172911896 Peak Hour 0 20 8 0 3 0 0 4 662 1 6 104 86383422 HV%PHF 0.64 0.50 0.90 0.91 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% 8.0% 3.1%0.94 EB WB NB SB All 0000 0 0 0 0 0 9 17 0 1 189 0 0 N S EW 0 0 901710Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 2 0 0 2 6:15 AM 0 6 1 3 10 6:30 AM 0 3 0 4 7 6:45 AM 0 4 0 2 6 7:00 AM 0 5 0 2 7 7:15 AM 0 6 0 4 10 7:30 AM 0 3 0 1 4 7:45 AM 1 6 0 3 10 8:00 AM 0 9 0 3 12 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 0 1 0 1 6:15 AM 0 1 1 0 2 6:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 6:45 AM 0 1 1 0 2 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 1 1 0 2 7:30 AM 1 1 0 0 2 7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1 8:00 AM 3 0 2 0 5 8:15 AM 0 0 0 2 2 8:30 AM 0 8 0 2 10 8:45 AM 1 8 0 6 15 Count Total 2 60 1 32 95 Peak Hour 0 18 0 9 27 8:15 AM 2 1 2 0 5 8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 8:45 AM 1 0 1 0 2 Count Total 9 6 9 0 24 Peak Hour 1 3 2 0 6 Peak Hour:06:45 AM - 07:45 AM GARDEN AVE N GARDEN AVE N 5TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:13 GARDEN AVE N & 5TH ST AM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk5002 0 15 17 159 14514 17 6 N S EW 0 121144005TH ST GARDEN AVE NGARDEN AVE N179 0 00N S EW 00 0 0 00Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 6:00 AM 156010062400135003 6:15 AM 166010033100240102 6:30 AM 172030022100230002 6:45 AM 179040004400251001 7:00 AM 175060003200545200 7:15 AM 163010003800446003 7:30 AM 151040013000137001 7:45 AM 151010013900547001 8:00 AM 149020002700433000 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 6 34001 8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1 23 0 0 7 37302 8:45 AM 0 4 0 0 0 21 0 0 12 45602 Count Total 0 28 0 0 14 357 0 0 51 48012018 Peak Hour 0 15 0 0 1 144 0 0 12 179205 HV%PHF 0.53 0.82 0.61 17.6% 4.8% 11.8% 6.7%0.88 EB WB NB SB All 0002 0 1 2 8 74 3 0 N S EW 0 20700Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 1 0 1 6:15 AM 0 3 0 3 6:30 AM 1 4 0 5 6:45 AM 0 5 0 5 7:00 AM 2 2 1 5 7:15 AM 0 0 1 1 7:30 AM 1 0 0 1 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 0 2 0 2 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 6:15 AM 0 0 0 0 6:30 AM 0 0 0 0 6:45 AM 0 0 0 0 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 2 0 0 2 8:00 AM 1 0 0 1 8:15 AM 0 0 1 1 8:30 AM 0 0 3 3 8:45 AM 4 4 4 12 Count Total 8 21 10 39 Peak Hour 3 7 2 12 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 3 0 0 3 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour:04:45 PM - 05:45 PM LOGAN AVE LOGAN AVE8TH ST8TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 LOGAN AVE & 8TH ST PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk60758 5 80 18 19 29 660 892 143 123 909745 66 18 N S EW 0 0 64778059708TH ST 8TH STLOGAN AVELOGAN AVE1,778 18 01132N S EW 00101 4 14 293Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 1,64601115023102176011263981010230 4:15 PM 1,682091001400116707137390316233 4:30 PM 1,73704100221001750315039876182 4:45 PM 1,778010902100520203162460220233 5:00 PM 1,76308501630019603163434411250 5:15 PM 0 5 1 0 21 2 0 1 210 0 1 157 445416252 5:30 PM 0 6 4 0 22 0 0 1 197 0 0 165 439811241 5:45 PM 0 5 2 0 22 0 0 1 206 0 3 166 445216202 Count Total 0 58 56 0 161 7 0 11 1,529 0 21 1,226 3,4094010618113 Peak Hour 0 29 19 0 80 5 0 7 805 0 7 647 1,7781858976 HV%PHF 0.79 0.87 0.96 0.98 10.6% 0.7% 2.6% 3.5% 3.1%0.97 EB WB NB SB All 0000 0 1 1 5 1 23 19 1 10 2425 7 1 N S EW 0 0 2311850Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 5 6 1 3 15 4:15 PM 5 10 0 9 24 4:30 PM 4 6 0 8 18 4:45 PM 3 10 0 7 20 5:00 PM 1 7 0 8 16 5:15 PM 1 4 1 3 9 5:30 PM 2 3 0 5 10 5:45 PM 0 9 0 3 12 Count Total 21 55 2 46 124 Peak Hour 7 24 1 23 55 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 23 7 0 7 37 4:15 PM 11 7 0 4 22 4:30 PM 12 4 0 4 20 4:45 PM 9 2 0 2 13 5:00 PM 10 5 0 9 24 5:15 PM 7 3 0 2 12 5:30 PM 6 1 0 5 12 5:45 PM 11 3 0 3 17 Count Total 89 32 0 36 157 Peak Hour 32 11 0 18 61 Peak Hour:04:00 PM - 05:00 PM PARK AVE N PARK AVE N8TH AVE8TH AVE (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 PARK AVE N & 8TH AVE PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk3307761 89 94 24 75 52 366 506 244 212 472374 151 141 N S EW 0 0 256193936008TH AVE 8TH AVEPARK AVE NPARK AVE N1,233 6 59290N S EW 1148254 1 5 00Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 1,2330141603128048901651293718136 4:15 PM 1,218092202118069301877302611129 4:30 PM 1,22101318019150410202366303711169 4:45 PM 1,22301619023280510902062335421199 5:00 PM 1,16001812017160682027562780161810 5:15 PM 0 15 19 0 29 28 0 8 89 0 30 42 305127134 5:30 PM 0 9 12 0 28 25 0 5 90 0 17 78 3051171211 5:45 PM 0 11 15 0 27 23 0 9 75 0 22 53 27212187 Count Total 0 105 133 0 195 181 0 47 729 0 173 485 2,3932714211165 Peak Hour 0 52 75 0 94 89 0 19 393 0 77 256 1,23324616033 HV%PHF 0.97 0.79 0.89 0.88 16.6% 0.8% 3.6% 4.4% 4.9%0.92 EB WB NB SB All 0021 0 1 5 18 2 16 20 2 20 1720 25 0 N S EW 0 0 1401700Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 6 5 0 2 13 4:15 PM 6 5 0 6 17 4:30 PM 6 4 2 3 15 4:45 PM 7 3 0 5 15 5:00 PM 2 4 0 3 9 5:15 PM 1 4 1 3 9 5:30 PM 1 4 1 4 10 5:45 PM 0 3 0 3 6 Count Total 29 32 4 29 94 Peak Hour 25 17 2 16 60 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 0 9 18 0 27 4:15 PM 0 7 20 3 30 4:30 PM 0 3 13 2 18 4:45 PM 0 10 8 1 19 5:00 PM 0 1 9 3 13 5:15 PM 0 7 15 2 24 5:30 PM 0 2 6 3 11 5:45 PM 0 8 12 0 20 Count Total 0 47 101 14 162 Peak Hour 0 29 59 6 94 Peak Hour:04:00 PM - 05:00 PM GARDEN AVE N 8TH AVE8TH AVE (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 GARDEN AVE N & 8TH AVE PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 0 212 38 13 202 0 250 474 29251 216 233 N S EW 0 1 20027208TH AVE 8TH AVEGARDEN AVE N 758 023N S EW 001121 Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 758004508660802103080 4:15 PM 716104908400501752070 4:30 PM 7350054015380401664051 4:45 PM 707005407680302074071 5:00 PM 648005309440401682056 5:15 PM 0 0 60 0 9 77 0 5 0 1942041 5:30 PM 0 0 37 0 6 62 0 0 0 1382031 5:45 PM 0 0 46 0 8 63 0 6 0 1480025 Count Total 1 0 398 0 70 458 0 35 0 1,406190425 Peak Hour 1 0 202 0 38 212 0 20 0 758130272 HV%PHF 0.93 0.83 0.83 9.3% 4.8% 1.4% 4.7%0.90 EB WB NB SB All 0 2 10 10 10 0 12 14 420 20 2 N S EW 0 0 0040Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 3 1 2 6 4:15 PM 5 2 2 9 4:30 PM 5 0 7 12 4:45 PM 7 1 1 9 5:00 PM 4 4 3 11 5:15 PM 1 0 3 4 5:30 PM 2 1 1 4 5:45 PM 1 1 0 2 Count Total 28 10 19 57 Peak Hour 20 4 12 36 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 1 0 0 1 4:15 PM 1 0 0 1 4:30 PM 1 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 2 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 2 0 0 2 5:30 PM 1 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 6 2 0 8 Peak Hour 3 2 0 5 Peak Hour:04:00 PM - 05:00 PM LOT S1 ROAD LOT S2-S3 ROAD6TH AVE6TH AVE (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:6 LOT S1 ROAD & 6TH AVE PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk2011313 28 2 2 37 2 117 28 43 171 396 41 35 N S EW 0 0 25132106TH AVE 6TH AVELOT S1 ROADLOT S2-S3 ROAD240 0 02033N S EW 00164 0 0 321Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 24000100060050301610360 4:15 PM 21501120080220370741551 4:30 PM 1700160180230261601371 4:45 PM 1330090160130200450230 5:00 PM 1190140140130152362120 5:15 PM 0 0 6 0 0 4 0 1 4 0 10 1 290210 5:30 PM 0 1 3 0 0 7 0 0 1 0 7 0 230211 5:45 PM 0 0 3 0 1 7 0 3 1 0 8 3 310410 Count Total 0 4 53 0 4 50 0 10 22 0 153 8 359422263 Peak Hour 0 2 37 0 2 28 0 5 13 0 113 2 240213212 HV%PHF 0.73 0.83 0.81 0.77 9.8% 11.6% 23.1% 5.1% 10.0%0.81 EB WB NB SB All 0060 5 0 0 4 0 6 7 5 10 90 4 7 N S EW 0 0 02700Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 1 2 0 1 4 4:15 PM 1 3 1 2 7 4:30 PM 1 2 3 2 8 4:45 PM 1 2 1 1 5 5:00 PM 0 2 2 3 7 5:15 PM 1 1 1 1 4 5:30 PM 0 1 1 1 3 5:45 PM 2 1 1 1 5 Count Total 7 14 10 12 43 Peak Hour 4 9 5 6 24 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 10 6 0 0 16 4:15 PM 8 1 0 0 9 4:30 PM 10 10 0 0 20 4:45 PM 5 3 0 0 8 5:00 PM 7 9 0 0 16 5:15 PM 2 1 0 0 3 5:30 PM 2 2 0 0 4 5:45 PM 2 1 0 0 3 Count Total 46 33 0 0 79 Peak Hour 33 20 0 0 53 Peak Hour:04:15 PM - 05:15 PM LOGAN AVE N LOGAN AVE N6TH ST6TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:7 LOGAN AVE N & 6TH ST PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk90814 7 110 99 35 15 707 835 131 260 1,051899 149 44 N S EW 0 0 6902880621706TH ST 6TH STLOGAN AVE NLOGAN AVE N2,038 3 01016N S EW 0091 1 2 142Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 2,000051103100719300161496289483 4:15 PM 2,038079041101017604159498345493 4:30 PM 2,029051202030618501165480273512 4:45 PM 2,017031202820820502184526184582 5:00 PM 1,98100202110424001182534202592 5:15 PM 0 0 4 0 20 1 0 5 219 0 3 174 489124470 5:30 PM 0 3 1 0 13 1 0 4 209 0 2 184 46860414 5:45 PM 0 1 4 0 7 2 0 5 233 0 4 185 49074344 Count Total 0 24 55 0 181 11 0 49 1,660 0 17 1,394 3,9811523138720 Peak Hour 0 15 35 0 110 7 0 28 806 0 8 690 2,03899142179 HV%PHF 0.75 0.70 0.87 0.94 6.7% 2.3% 4.5% 4.1% 4.4%0.95 EB WB NB SB All 2010 0 3 8 0 2 29 26 3 19 4737 10 7 N S EW 0 0 26524180Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 4 10 0 3 17 4:15 PM 3 11 2 7 23 4:30 PM 3 13 0 6 22 4:45 PM 2 10 0 8 20 5:00 PM 2 13 1 8 24 5:15 PM 1 7 0 5 13 5:30 PM 1 6 0 4 11 5:45 PM 2 10 0 4 16 Count Total 18 80 3 45 146 Peak Hour 10 47 3 29 89 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 10 9 1 0 20 4:15 PM 2 3 0 0 5 4:30 PM 5 3 0 0 8 4:45 PM 4 4 0 0 8 5:00 PM 5 0 0 3 8 5:15 PM 5 5 4 2 16 5:30 PM 3 0 2 5 10 5:45 PM 7 3 0 0 10 Count Total 41 27 7 10 85 Peak Hour 16 10 0 3 29 Peak Hour:04:15 PM - 05:15 PM PARK AVE N PARK AVE N6TH ST6TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:8 PARK AVE N & 6TH ST PM Wednesday, April 24, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk28062 21 16 140 104 209 463 471 39 116 284585 453 67 N S EW 0 0 42918260606TH ST 6TH STPARK AVE NPARK AVE N1,239 10 151014N S EW 132010 7 3 410Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 1,2020351418704690410127930006 4:15 PM 1,2390472407304530212531237028 4:30 PM 1,1770482200504700010329937127 4:45 PM 1,1130592703404760393312300112 5:00 PM 1,0450553106906610110831636111 5:15 PM 0 43 18 0 7 5 0 4 58 0 3 87 25020122 5:30 PM 0 31 15 0 2 5 0 6 58 0 1 92 23516117 5:45 PM 0 35 14 0 3 3 0 0 67 0 1 101 24417012 Count Total 0 353 165 1 36 41 0 32 512 0 15 810 2,24722341045 Peak Hour 0 209 104 0 16 21 0 18 260 0 6 429 1,2391402628 HV%PHF 0.93 0.61 0.88 0.86 3.3% 10.3% 2.8% 4.3% 3.8%0.98 EB WB NB SB All 3000 3 1 0 13 2 20 10 4 13 818 15 6 N S EW 0 0 170800Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 1 4 1 4 10 4:15 PM 5 2 0 6 13 4:30 PM 6 3 1 6 16 4:45 PM 1 2 1 4 8 5:00 PM 3 1 2 4 10 5:15 PM 1 2 1 3 7 5:30 PM 1 2 1 4 8 5:45 PM 2 2 0 3 7 Count Total 20 18 7 34 79 Peak Hour 15 8 4 20 47 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 7 1 3 1 12 4:15 PM 5 1 5 2 13 4:30 PM 5 4 2 2 13 4:45 PM 2 2 5 5 14 5:00 PM 2 3 3 1 9 5:15 PM 1 1 0 0 2 5:30 PM 4 0 1 0 5 5:45 PM 0 1 1 0 2 Count Total 26 13 20 11 70 Peak Hour 14 10 15 10 49 Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM LOGAN AVE N LOGAN AVE NLOT E7 NORTH ACCESSLOT ST NORTH ACCESS (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:9 LOGAN AVE N & LOT E7 NORTH ACCESS PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk7001 0 0 9 0 0 869 1,065 1 0 1,064871 9 7 N S EW 0 0 86201,06400LOT ST NORTH ACCESS LOT E7 NORTH ACCESSLOGAN AVE NLOGAN AVE N1,943 0 2012N S EW 0200 0 0 75Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 1,87900000000234002164596003 4:15 PM 1,94100000000229002304642003 4:30 PM 1,94300000000244002064574003 4:45 PM 1,94000000000267002304991001 5:00 PM 1,90900000000292002225214102 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 261 0 0 204 4660001 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 0 202 4541102 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 271 0 0 195 4680200 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,046 0 0 1,705 3,788184015 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,064 0 0 862 1,9439107 HV%PHF 0.56 0.25 0.91 0.94 0.0% 100.0% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6%0.93 EB WB NB SB All 6001 0 0 0 0 0 31 39 1 0 3825 0 6 N S EW 0 0 2503800Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 0 7 0 7 14 4:15 PM 0 10 0 11 21 4:30 PM 0 12 0 8 20 4:45 PM 0 10 0 8 18 5:00 PM 0 11 1 9 21 5:15 PM 0 5 0 6 11 5:30 PM 0 6 0 4 10 5:45 PM 0 10 0 5 15 Count Total 0 71 1 58 130 Peak Hour 0 38 1 31 70 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 8 0 0 0 8 4:15 PM 5 0 1 0 6 4:30 PM 3 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 3 0 0 0 3 5:00 PM 3 0 1 0 4 5:15 PM 3 0 1 0 4 5:30 PM 6 0 2 0 8 5:45 PM 6 0 0 0 6 Count Total 37 0 5 0 42 Peak Hour 12 0 2 0 14 Peak Hour:04:15 PM - 05:15 PM LOGAN AVE N LOGAN AVE NLOT E7 SOUTH ACCESSLOT S1 SOUTH ACCESS (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:10 LOGAN AVE N & LOT E7 SOUTH ACCESS PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk3021 0 1 51 0 3 899 1,069 2 2 1,071946 54 9 N S EW 0 0 89461,06500LOT S1 SOUTH ACCESS LOT E7 SOUTH ACCESSLOGAN AVE NLOGAN AVE N2,026 0 0014N S EW 0000 0 0 86Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 1,964030010122380222048012100 4:15 PM 2,026000000022350022948216000 4:30 PM 2,019000010022490020747918002 4:45 PM 1,995020000012740023352312001 5:00 PM 1,94601000001307022255425100 5:15 PM 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 260 0 0 198 4759000 5:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 244 0 0 204 4552010 5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 276 0 0 191 4745000 Count Total 0 14 0 0 2 0 1 14 2,083 0 4 1,707 3,91079213 Peak Hour 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 6 1,065 0 2 894 2,02651103 HV%PHF 0.75 0.50 0.87 0.96 0.0% 0.0% 4.3% 3.0% 3.6%0.93 EB WB NB SB All 0010 0 0 0 0 0 27 46 0 1 4626 0 0 N S EW 0 0 2604600Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 0 6 0 4 10 4:15 PM 0 11 0 8 19 4:30 PM 0 13 0 5 18 4:45 PM 0 10 0 6 16 5:00 PM 0 12 0 8 20 5:15 PM 0 7 0 6 13 5:30 PM 0 7 0 3 10 5:45 PM 0 11 0 5 16 Count Total 0 77 0 45 122 Peak Hour 0 46 0 27 73 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 6 0 0 0 6 4:15 PM 4 0 0 0 4 4:30 PM 3 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 4 0 0 0 4 5:00 PM 3 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 2 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 3 0 1 0 4 5:45 PM 3 0 0 0 3 Count Total 28 0 1 0 29 Peak Hour 14 0 0 0 14 Peak Hour:04:00 PM - 05:00 PM GARDEN AVE N GARDEN AVE N6TH ST6TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:11 GARDEN AVE N & 6TH ST PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk26011 6 0 18 2 91 122 174 7 3 94113 111 44 N S EW 0 0 951282006TH ST 6TH STGARDEN AVE NGARDEN AVE N334 0 4014N S EW 3100 0 0 212Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 334024100406270122942106 4:15 PM 307019000100190020642003 4:30 PM 292020100103170030867007 4:45 PM 2470280000031900239070010 5:00 PM 197019100102160013676108 5:15 PM 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 2 13 491003 5:30 PM 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 0 0 12 412004 5:45 PM 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 0 12 403004 Count Total 0 145 3 0 0 7 0 16 135 0 3 145 531302045 Peak Hour 0 91 2 0 0 6 0 12 82 0 1 95 334181026 HV%PHF 0.79 0.35 0.71 0.82 9.9% 14.3% 0.0% 10.7% 7.5%0.89 EB WB NB SB All 2010 1 0 4 1 6 13 6 1 2 014 11 3 N S EW 0 0 100000Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 2 0 0 3 5 4:15 PM 3 0 1 2 6 4:30 PM 4 0 0 5 9 4:45 PM 2 0 0 3 5 5:00 PM 3 1 2 4 10 5:15 PM 0 1 0 2 3 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1 Count Total 15 2 3 19 39 Peak Hour 11 0 1 13 25 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 6 0 1 0 7 4:15 PM 4 0 2 0 6 4:30 PM 2 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 2 0 1 0 3 5:00 PM 5 0 0 0 5 5:15 PM 3 0 0 0 3 5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 1 Count Total 23 0 5 0 28 Peak Hour 14 0 4 0 18 Peak Hour:04:00 PM - 05:00 PM PARK AVE N PARK AVE N5TH ST5TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:12 PARK AVE N & 5TH ST PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk17032 3 38 13 5 15 517 262 43 19 259548 33 23 N S EW 0 0 49732451105TH ST 5TH STPARK AVE NPARK AVE N852 0 517N S EW 3201 0 0 52Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 85202001120154001322144044 4:15 PM 84603201100059001332182107 4:30 PM 81508201100059011232194155 4:45 PM 8050210510273021092013021 5:00 PM 77904201500055001152085372 5:15 PM 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 0 70 0 1 98 1873132 5:30 PM 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 1 75 0 1 112 2095115 5:45 PM 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 65 0 0 95 1756013 Count Total 0 27 9 0 64 4 0 4 510 0 5 917 1,6313272329 Peak Hour 0 15 5 0 38 3 0 3 245 0 3 497 8521321117 HV%PHF 0.59 0.83 0.84 0.92 15.2% 0.0% 6.6% 3.5% 4.7%0.97 EB WB NB SB All 1010 0 0 0 5 0 18 9 0 14 1716 5 1 N S EW 0 0 160980Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 0 6 0 3 9 4:15 PM 2 2 0 5 9 4:30 PM 2 6 0 5 13 4:45 PM 1 3 0 5 9 5:00 PM 2 6 0 4 12 5:15 PM 0 4 0 3 7 5:30 PM 1 2 0 4 7 5:45 PM 0 2 0 4 6 Count Total 8 31 0 33 72 Peak Hour 5 17 0 18 40 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 0 1 2 0 3 4:15 PM 2 0 1 0 3 4:30 PM 3 0 1 0 4 4:45 PM 2 0 1 0 3 5:00 PM 1 0 2 0 3 5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:30 PM 0 0 2 0 2 5:45 PM 2 0 0 0 2 Count Total 11 1 9 0 21 Peak Hour 7 1 5 0 13 Peak Hour:04:00 PM - 05:00 PM GARDEN AVE N GARDEN AVE N 5TH ST (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:13 GARDEN AVE N & 5TH ST PM Thursday, April 25, 2019Date and Start Time: All Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Traffic Counts - All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk110017 0 8 169 31 24175 25 12 N S EW 0 158123005TH ST GARDEN AVE NGARDEN AVE N218 0 12N S EW 01 0 0 11Interval Start Time RightLeftThru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn RightLeftThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 218020007003955304 4:15 PM 203010005003848202 4:30 PM 191010016004159604 4:45 PM 159040005004056601 5:00 PM 126000017002040804 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 24 36302 5:30 PM 0 2 0 0 1 5 0 0 15 27202 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 18 23100 Count Total 0 10 0 0 3 46 0 0 235 34431019 Peak Hour 0 8 0 0 1 23 0 0 158 21817011 HV%PHF 0.63 0.86 0.94 56.0% 0.0% 7.7% 12.4%0.92 EB WB NB SB All 00014 0 0 13 0 027 14 0 N S EW 0 130000Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 3 0 1 4 4:15 PM 2 0 4 6 4:30 PM 5 0 7 12 4:45 PM 4 0 1 5 5:00 PM 7 1 5 13 5:15 PM 2 1 0 3 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 23 2 18 43 Peak Hour 14 0 13 27 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWBSB 4:00 PM 1 1 0 2 4:15 PM 1 0 0 1 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 2 0 0 2 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 4 1 0 5 Peak Hour 2 1 0 3 Appendix B: LOS Definitions Highway Capacity Manual 2010/6th Edition Signalized intersection level of service (LOS) is defined in terms of a weighted average control delay for the entire intersection. Control delay quantifies the increase in travel time that a vehicle experiences due to the traffic signal control as well as provides a surrogate measure for driver discomfort and fuel consumption. Signalized intersection LOS is stated in terms of average control delay per vehicle (in seconds) during a specified time period (e.g., weekday PM peak hour). Control delay is a complex measure based on many variables, including signal phasing and coordination (i.e., progression of movements through the intersection and along the corridor), signal cycle length, and traffic volumes with respect to intersection capacity and resulting queues. Table 1 summarizes the LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as described in the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 and 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2010 and 2016, respectively). Table 1. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level of Service Average Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) General Description A £10 Free Flow B >10 – 20 Stable Flow (slight delays) C >20 – 35 Stable flow (acceptable delays) D >35 – 55 Approaching unstable flow (tolerable delay, occasionally wait through more than one signal cycle before proceeding) E >55 – 80 Unstable flow (intolerable delay) F1 >80 Forced flow (congested and queues fail to clear) Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2010 and 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2010 and 2016, respectively. 1. If the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio for a lane group exceeds 1.0 LOS F is assigned to the individual lane group. LOS for overall approach or intersection is determined solely by the control delay. Unsignalized intersection LOS criteria can be further reduced into two intersection types: all-way stop and two-way stop control. All-way stop control intersection LOS is expressed in terms of the weighted average control delay of the overall intersection or by approach. Two-way stop-controlled intersection LOS is defined in terms of the average control delay for each minor-street movement (or shared movement) as well as major-street left-turns. This approach is because major-street through vehicles are assumed to experience zero delay, a weighted average of all movements results in very low overall average delay, and this calculated low delay could mask deficiencies of minor movements. Table 2 shows LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections. Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) A 0 – 10 B >10 – 15 C >15 – 25 D >25 – 35 E >35 – 50 F1 >50 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2010 and 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2010 and 2016, respectively. 1. If the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio exceeds 1.0, LOS F is assigned an individual lane group for all unsignalized intersections, or minor street approach at two-way stop-controlled intersections. Overall intersection LOS is determined solely by control delay. Appendix C: LOS Worksheets HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 1: Logan Ave N & N 8th Ave Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 16 15 43 18 18 19 633 79 3 549 26 Future Volume (veh/h) 5 16 15 43 18 18 19 633 79 3 549 26 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1411 1411 1411 1707 1707 1707 1796 1796 1796 1826 1826 1826 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 5 16 0 44 18 18 19 646 81 3 560 27 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 33 33 33 13 13 13 7 7 7 5 5 5 Cap, veh/h 9 197 55 165 126 34 1052 132 7 1136 55 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.66 0.66 Sat Flow, veh/h 1344 2681 1196 1626 1639 1255 1711 1561 196 1739 1726 83 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 5 16 0 44 18 18 19 0 727 3 0 587 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1344 1340 1196 1626 1622 1272 1711 0 1756 1739 0 1809 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.6 0.0 3.0 1.1 1.4 1.2 0.0 25.3 0.2 0.0 18.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.6 0.0 3.0 1.1 1.4 1.2 0.0 25.3 0.2 0.0 18.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.05 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 9 197 55 163 128 34 0 1184 7 0 1191 V/C Ratio(X) 0.58 0.08 0.80 0.11 0.14 0.55 0.00 0.61 0.43 0.00 0.49 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 197 539 238 326 255 250 0 1184 255 0 1191 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.5 47.5 0.0 52.8 45.0 45.1 53.4 0.0 10.0 54.7 0.0 9.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 48.9 0.2 0.0 23.0 0.3 0.5 13.3 0.0 2.4 37.5 0.0 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 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.2 0.0 1.6 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.0 9.6 0.2 0.0 7.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 103.4 47.7 0.0 75.8 45.3 45.6 66.7 0.0 12.3 92.1 0.0 11.0 LnGrp LOS F D E D D E A B F A B Approach Vol, veh/h 21 A 80 746 590 Approach Delay, s/veh 60.9 62.1 13.7 11.4 Approach LOS E E B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 14.0 8.1 78.3 6.6 17.0 6.3 80.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.0 2.6 3.2 20.1 2.4 3.4 2.2 27.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.1 HCM 6th LOS B Notes * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 2: Park Ave N & N 8th Ave Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 71 15 49 64 14 12 377 143 30 155 7 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 71 15 49 64 14 12 377 143 30 155 7 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.95 0.94 0.96 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1633 1633 1633 1767 1767 1767 1826 1826 1826 1796 1796 1796 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 75 16 52 67 15 13 397 151 32 163 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 18 18 18 9 9 9 5 5 5 7 7 7 Cap, veh/h 176 194 40 192 277 60 26 1608 603 50 2232 95 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.66 0.66 0.03 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow, veh/h 1555 2534 519 1682 2723 585 1739 2453 920 1711 3331 142 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 45 46 52 40 42 13 279 269 32 83 87 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1555 1552 1502 1682 1678 1629 1739 1735 1638 1711 1706 1767 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.2 2.4 0.7 6.6 6.8 1.9 1.7 1.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.2 2.4 0.7 6.6 6.8 1.9 1.7 1.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.35 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.56 1.00 0.08 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 176 119 115 192 171 166 26 1137 1074 50 1143 1184 V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.38 0.40 0.27 0.24 0.25 0.49 0.25 0.25 0.64 0.07 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 311 310 300 296 336 326 174 1137 1074 257 1143 1184 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.7 43.9 44.0 40.5 41.3 41.4 48.9 7.1 7.1 48.0 5.7 5.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 5.1 0.5 0.5 4.9 0.1 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.9 1.0 0.4 2.4 2.3 0.9 0.6 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 41.8 44.6 44.8 40.7 41.6 41.7 54.0 7.6 7.6 52.8 5.8 5.8 LnGrp LOS D D D D D D D A A D A A Approach Vol, veh/h 102 134 561 202 Approach Delay, s/veh 44.4 41.3 8.7 13.3 Approach LOS D D A B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s8.8 12.7 6.5 72.0 6.3 15.2 7.9 70.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s10.0 20.0 10.0 40.0 10.0 20.0 15.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.8 4.9 2.7 3.7 2.6 4.4 3.9 8.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 3.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.6 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 3: Garden Ave N & N 8th St Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 232 19 152 126 6 103 Future Volume (veh/h) 232 19 152 126 6 103 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1811 1811 1856 1856 1722 1722 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 247 20 162 134 6 110 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 6 6 3 3 12 12 Cap, veh/h 1064 86 665 573 200 178 Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.12 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 3315 259 867 1822 1640 1459 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 131 136 177 119 6 110 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1721 1763 1001 1604 1640 1459 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 1.0 2.1 1.0 0.1 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 1.0 3.1 1.0 0.1 1.3 Prop In Lane 0.15 0.92 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 568 582 709 529 200 178 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.23 0.03 0.62 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2452 2513 1956 2286 1708 1520 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.4 4.4 5.4 4.4 7.1 7.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 4.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.9 4.9 5.6 4.7 7.1 12.5 LnGrp LOS A A A A A B Approach Vol, veh/h 267 296 116 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.9 5.3 12.2 Approach LOS A A B Timer - Assigned Phs 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 7.2 11.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.0 19.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.1 3.3 3.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.5 0.4 2.8 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.3 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 4: N 6th St & Boeing Rd Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 20 1 11 27 67 3 14 4 22 8 1 Future Vol, veh/h 6 20 1 11 27 67 3 14 4 22 8 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 24 0 57 33 0 0 57 0 33 0 0 24 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 160 - - 0 - - 100 - - 175 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 Heavy Vehicles, % 21 21 21 3 3 3 26 26 26 17 17 17 Mvmt Flow 8 26 1 14 35 87 4 18 5 29 10 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 146 0 0 84 0 0 269 274 117 218 231 160 Stage 1 - - - - - - 100 100 - 131 131 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 169 174 - 87 100 - Critical Hdwy 4.31 - - 4.13 - - 7.36 6.76 6.46 7.27 6.67 6.37 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.36 5.76 - 6.27 5.67 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.36 5.76 - 6.27 5.67 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.389 - - 2.227 - - 3.734 4.234 3.534 3.653 4.153 3.453 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1328 - - 1506 - - 637 595 874 707 644 847 Stage 1 - - - - - - 851 768 - 838 760 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 780 712 - 885 784 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1298 - - 1424 - - 554 541 801 640 586 783 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 554 541 - 640 586 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 800 722 - 814 735 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 719 689 - 825 737 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.7 0.8 11.4 11 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 554 583 1298 - - 1424 - - 640 603 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 0.04 0.006 - - 0.01 - - 0.045 0.019 HCM Control Delay (s) 11.5 11.4 7.8 - - 7.6 - - 10.9 11.1 HCM Lane LOS B B A - - A - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.1 0 - - 0 - - 0.1 0.1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 5: Logan Ave N & N 6th St Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 12 31 21 25 11 63 720 263 9 566 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 12 31 21 25 11 63 720 263 9 566 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1589 1589 1589 1781 1781 1781 1811 1811 1811 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 13 0 23 27 12 68 774 283 10 609 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 21 21 21 8 8 8 6 6 6 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 1 296 39 453 376 87 1081 911 21 1940 54 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.05 0.60 0.60 0.01 0.56 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 1513 1589 1346 1697 1781 1477 1725 1811 1526 1753 3474 97 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 13 0 23 27 12 68 774 283 10 306 320 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1513 1589 1346 1697 1781 1477 1725 1811 1526 1753 1749 1823 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.5 1.3 0.7 4.3 33.1 10.1 0.6 10.3 10.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.5 1.3 0.7 4.3 33.1 10.1 0.6 10.3 10.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1 296 39 453 376 87 1081 911 21 976 1018 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.04 0.59 0.06 0.03 0.78 0.72 0.31 0.48 0.31 0.31 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 206 376 262 453 376 282 1081 911 239 976 1018 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 36.7 0.0 53.2 31.0 30.8 51.6 15.6 11.0 54.0 13.0 13.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.1 0.0 12.2 0.2 0.1 13.6 4.1 0.9 15.8 0.8 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.8 0.6 0.3 2.2 14.0 3.5 0.4 4.2 4.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 36.8 0.0 65.4 31.3 31.0 65.2 19.7 11.8 69.8 13.8 13.8 LnGrp LOS A D E C C E B B E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 13 A 62 1125 636 Approach Delay, s/veh 36.8 43.9 20.4 14.7 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.5 25.5 10.6 66.4 0.0 33.0 6.3 70.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 26.0 18.0 29.0 15.0 28.0 15.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 2.7 6.3 12.3 0.0 3.3 2.6 35.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 6: Park Ave N & N 6th St Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 88 86 24 8 25 6 86 455 14 16 126 55 Future Volume (veh/h) 88 86 24 8 25 6 86 455 14 16 126 55 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1826 1826 1826 1693 1693 1693 1870 1870 1870 1767 1767 1767 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 93 91 25 8 26 6 91 479 15 17 133 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 5 5 5 14 14 14 2 2 2 9 9 9 Cap, veh/h 118 344 90 16 92 21 117 2083 65 33 1259 522 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.59 0.59 0.02 0.55 0.55 Sat Flow, veh/h 1739 2694 708 1612 1311 303 1781 3516 110 1682 2304 955 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 93 57 59 8 0 32 91 242 252 17 95 96 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1739 1735 1668 1612 0 1613 1781 1777 1849 1682 1678 1580 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.2 2.4 2.6 0.4 0.0 1.5 4.0 5.1 5.1 0.8 2.2 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.2 2.4 2.6 0.4 0.0 1.5 4.0 5.1 5.1 0.8 2.2 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.60 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 118 221 213 16 0 113 117 1053 1096 33 917 864 V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.26 0.28 0.49 0.00 0.28 0.78 0.23 0.23 0.51 0.10 0.11 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 152 477 459 141 0 444 223 1053 1096 168 917 864 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.7 31.5 31.6 39.4 0.0 35.3 36.8 7.7 7.7 38.8 8.7 8.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 17.6 0.2 0.2 8.1 0.0 0.5 4.2 0.5 0.5 4.5 0.2 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.3 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 0.4 0.8 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 54.3 31.7 31.8 47.5 0.0 35.8 41.0 8.2 8.2 43.3 8.9 9.0 LnGrp LOS D C C D A D D A A D A A Approach Vol, veh/h 209 40 585 208 Approach Delay, s/veh 41.8 38.1 13.3 11.8 Approach LOS D D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.4 10.6 10.2 48.7 5.8 15.2 6.6 52.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s7.0 22.0 10.0 21.0 7.0 22.0 8.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s6.2 3.5 6.0 4.3 2.4 4.6 2.8 7.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.7 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.7 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 7: Garden Ave N & N 6th St Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 72 5 42 0 4 5 18 95 4 0 56 9 Future Volume (veh/h) 72 5 42 0 4 5 18 95 4 0 56 9 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1767 1767 1767 0 1070 1070 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 5 44 0 4 5 19 100 4 0 59 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 9 0 56 56 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 498 25 309 0 217 193 43 799 32 242 408 62 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1237 118 1449 0 1070 905 1767 1771 71 1290 1575 240 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 81 0 44 0 4 5 19 0 104 0 0 68 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1355 0 1449 0 1017 905 1767 0 1841 1290 0 1815 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.3 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 Prop In Lane 0.94 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.13 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 523 0 309 0 217 193 43 0 831 242 0 470 V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.44 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.14 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1095 0 924 0 648 577 297 0 1916 817 0 1280 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.8 0.0 9.5 0.0 9.3 9.3 14.3 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 8.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.9 0.0 9.7 0.0 9.3 9.3 21.2 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 8.8 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A C A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 125 9 123 68 Approach Delay, s/veh 9.8 9.3 7.4 8.8 Approach LOS A A A A Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.3 5.7 12.7 11.3 18.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 5.0 21.0 19.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 2.3 2.9 3.5 3.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 1.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.7 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 8: S1 (North)/E7 (North) & Logan Ave N Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1039 10 0 607 15 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1039 10 0 607 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 10 0 10 6 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 10 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 Mvmt Flow 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1094 11 0 639 16 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 348 - - 565 - 0 0 - - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.9 - - 7.1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.3 - - 3.9 - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 654 0 0 405 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 642 - - 400 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.6 14 0 0 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 642 400 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.005 0.005 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 10.6 14 - - HCM Lane LOS - - B B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 9: Logan Ave N & S1 (South)/E7 (South)Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 1 0 0 0 55 1046 3 2 604 5 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 1 0 0 0 55 1046 3 2 604 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 0 7 2 0 2 7 0 2 2 0 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 25 - - 25 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 5 5 5 Mvmt Flow 0 0 1 0 0 0 59 1113 3 2 643 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1339 1893 338 1568 1894 567 655 0 0 1118 0 0 Stage 1 657 657 - 1235 1235 - - - - - - - Stage 2 682 1236 - 333 659 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.22 - - 4.2 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.26 - - 2.25 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 113 71 664 76 71 472 902 - - 603 - - Stage 1 425 465 - 190 251 - - - - - - - Stage 2 411 250 - 660 464 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 106 66 655 71 66 468 896 - - 602 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 106 66 - 71 66 - - - - - - - Stage 1 394 460 - 177 234 - - - - - - - Stage 2 381 233 - 652 459 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.5 0 0.5 0 HCM LOS B A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 896 - - 655 - 602 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.065 - - 0.002 - 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - 10.5 0 11 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - B A B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 10: Park Ave N & N 5th St Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 19 6 10 3 0 4 6 602 29 3 143 2 Future Vol, veh/h 19 6 10 3 0 4 6 602 29 3 143 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 4 5 0 2 4 0 5 2 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 180 - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 20 6 10 3 0 4 6 627 30 3 149 2 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 488 834 85 748 820 336 155 0 0 662 0 0 Stage 1 160 160 - 659 659 - - - - - - - Stage 2 328 674 - 89 161 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.16 - - 4.26 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.23 - - 2.28 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 467 306 963 305 312 666 1415 - - 883 - - Stage 1 832 769 - 424 464 - - - - - - - Stage 2 664 457 - 914 769 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 458 300 955 292 306 662 1410 - - 879 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 458 300 - 292 306 - - - - - - - Stage 1 823 763 - 419 458 - - - - - - - Stage 2 654 452 - 889 763 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 13 13.5 0.1 0.2 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1410 - - 486 292 662 879 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.075 0.011 0.006 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.6 0 - 13 17.5 10.5 9.1 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - B C B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 0 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 11: N 5th St & Garden Ave N Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 8 0 2 134 14 5 Future Vol, veh/h 8 0 2 134 14 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 180 0 50 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 5 5 12 12 Mvmt Flow 9 0 2 154 16 6 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 177 19 22 0 - 0 Stage 1 19 - - - - - Stage 2 158 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.58 6.38 4.15 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.58 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.58 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.662 3.462 2.245 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 777 1015 1574 - - - Stage 1 964 - - - - - Stage 2 833 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 776 1015 1574 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 748 - - - - - Stage 1 963 - - - - - Stage 2 833 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.9 0.1 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1574 - 748 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.012 - - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 - 9.9 0 - - HCM Lane LOS A - A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - - - HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 1: Logan Ave N & N 8th Ave Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 31 34 16 73 4 53 6 740 89 16 612 8 Future Volume (veh/h) 31 34 16 73 4 53 6 740 89 16 612 8 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1737 1737 1737 1885 1885 1885 1856 1856 1856 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 34 37 0 80 4 58 7 813 98 18 673 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 11 11 1 1 1 3 3 3 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 49 231 103 176 142 15 1036 125 34 1176 16 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.64 0.64 0.02 0.65 0.65 Sat Flow, veh/h 1654 3300 1472 1795 1791 1451 1767 1621 195 1753 1812 24 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 34 37 0 80 4 58 7 0 911 18 0 682 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1654 1650 1472 1795 1791 1451 1767 0 1817 1753 0 1836 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.2 1.2 0.0 4.8 0.2 4.1 0.4 0.0 40.0 1.1 0.0 22.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.2 1.2 0.0 4.8 0.2 4.1 0.4 0.0 40.0 1.1 0.0 22.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.01 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 49 231 103 176 142 15 0 1160 34 0 1192 V/C Ratio(X) 0.70 0.16 0.77 0.02 0.41 0.45 0.00 0.79 0.53 0.00 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 242 663 263 360 292 259 0 1160 257 0 1192 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.9 48.1 0.0 51.1 44.8 46.6 54.3 0.0 14.4 53.5 0.0 10.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.6 0.3 0.0 10.5 0.0 1.7 19.3 0.0 5.4 12.5 0.0 2.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 0.5 0.0 2.5 0.1 1.6 0.3 0.0 16.6 0.6 0.0 9.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 69.5 48.4 0.0 61.6 44.9 48.3 73.5 0.0 19.8 65.9 0.0 12.8 LnGrp LOS E D E D D E A B E A B Approach Vol, veh/h 71 A 142 918 700 Approach Delay, s/veh 58.5 55.7 20.2 14.1 Approach LOS E E C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.2 13.6 6.9 77.3 9.1 16.7 8.0 76.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.8 3.2 2.4 24.8 4.2 6.1 3.1 42.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.1 HCM 6th LOS C Notes * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 2: Park Ave N & N 8th Ave Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 56 71 17 80 77 59 21 386 65 88 261 37 Future Volume (veh/h) 56 71 17 80 77 59 21 386 65 88 261 37 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.94 0.91 0.94 0.92 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1648 1648 1648 1885 1885 1885 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 62 78 19 88 85 65 23 424 71 97 287 41 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 17 17 17 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 212 248 57 261 224 150 41 1706 283 123 1893 267 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.19 0.19 0.07 0.62 0.62 Sat Flow, veh/h 1570 2475 572 1795 1983 1325 1753 2986 496 1753 3064 432 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 62 48 49 88 76 74 23 247 248 97 162 166 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1570 1566 1481 1795 1791 1516 1753 1749 1733 1753 1749 1748 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 2.8 3.1 4.3 3.9 4.6 1.3 12.0 12.2 5.4 3.9 4.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.5 2.8 3.1 4.3 3.9 4.6 1.3 12.0 12.2 5.4 3.9 4.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.25 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 212 157 149 261 202 171 41 999 990 123 1081 1080 V/C Ratio(X) 0.29 0.30 0.33 0.34 0.37 0.43 0.56 0.25 0.25 0.79 0.15 0.15 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 298 313 296 337 358 303 175 999 990 263 1081 1080 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 38.0 41.7 41.9 37.3 41.1 41.4 49.1 22.3 22.3 45.8 8.0 8.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.6 4.1 0.6 0.6 4.3 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.4 1.1 1.1 1.9 1.7 1.7 0.6 5.8 5.8 2.5 1.5 1.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 38.3 42.1 42.3 37.6 41.5 42.0 53.2 22.8 22.9 50.0 8.3 8.4 LnGrp LOS D D D D D D D C C D A A Approach Vol, veh/h 159 238 518 425 Approach Delay, s/veh 40.7 40.2 24.2 17.9 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.8 15.0 7.4 66.8 9.5 16.3 12.0 62.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s10.0 20.0 10.0 40.0 10.0 20.0 15.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s6.3 5.1 3.3 6.0 5.5 6.6 7.4 14.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.4 0.1 3.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 27.0 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 3: Garden Ave N & N 8th St Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBU EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 210 12 39 190 16 248 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 210 12 39 190 16 248 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1767 1767 1826 1826 1885 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 244 14 45 221 19 288 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 5 5 1 1 Cap, veh/h 880 50 296 795 480 427 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 3315 184 291 3000 1795 1598 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 132 148 118 19 288 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1678 1733 1630 1578 1795 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.3 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.2 3.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 0.2 3.5 Prop In Lane 0.11 0.30 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 458 472 661 430 480 427 V/C Ratio(X) 0.28 0.28 0.22 0.28 0.04 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1930 1993 1991 1816 1652 1470 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.2 6.2 6.3 6.2 5.9 7.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.7 0.2 0.5 0.0 2.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.9 6.9 6.5 6.7 5.9 9.8 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 258 266 307 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.9 6.6 9.5 Approach LOS A A A Timer - Assigned Phs 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.9 10.8 10.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 20.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 5.5 3.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.1 1.4 2.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.8 HCM 6th LOS A Notes User approved ignoring U-Turning movement. HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 4: N 6th St & Boeing Rd Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 31 4 3 26 11 6 11 17 98 3 2 Future Vol, veh/h 3 31 4 3 26 11 6 11 17 98 3 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 33 0 53 20 0 0 53 0 20 0 0 33 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 160 - - 0 - - 100 - - 175 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 Heavy Vehicles, % 10 10 10 12 12 12 23 23 23 5 5 5 Mvmt Flow 4 42 5 4 36 15 8 15 23 134 4 3 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 84 0 0 100 0 0 214 198 118 177 193 130 Stage 1 - - - - - - 106 106 - 85 85 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 108 92 - 92 108 - Critical Hdwy 4.2 - - 4.22 - - 7.33 6.73 6.43 7.15 6.55 6.25 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.33 5.73 - 6.15 5.55 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.33 5.73 - 6.15 5.55 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.29 - - 2.308 - - 3.707 4.207 3.507 3.545 4.045 3.345 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1464 - - 1432 - - 700 662 880 779 697 912 Stage 1 - - - - - - 851 769 - 916 819 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 849 780 - 908 800 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1418 - - 1360 - - 623 606 820 703 638 839 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 623 606 - 703 638 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 806 728 - 885 791 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 797 753 - 845 758 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0.6 10.4 11.2 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 623 720 1418 - - 1360 - - 703 706 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 0.053 0.003 - - 0.003 - - 0.191 0.01 HCM Control Delay (s) 10.9 10.3 7.5 - - 7.7 - - 11.3 10.1 HCM Lane LOS B B A - - A - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.7 0 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 5: Logan Ave N & N 6th St Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 35 99 110 7 14 28 806 217 8 690 9 Future Volume (veh/h) 15 35 99 110 7 14 28 806 217 8 690 9 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1796 1796 1796 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1826 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 16 37 0 116 7 15 29 848 228 8 726 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 7 7 7 2 2 2 5 5 5 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 30 343 145 476 396 46 979 822 17 1837 23 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.08 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.54 0.54 0.01 0.52 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 1711 1796 1522 1781 1870 1554 1739 1826 1534 1753 3537 44 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 16 37 0 116 7 15 29 848 228 8 359 376 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1711 1796 1522 1781 1870 1554 1739 1826 1534 1753 1749 1832 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 1.9 0.0 7.0 0.3 0.8 1.8 44.2 8.9 0.5 13.7 13.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 1.9 0.0 7.0 0.3 0.8 1.8 44.2 8.9 0.5 13.7 13.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 30 343 145 476 396 46 979 822 17 908 952 V/C Ratio(X) 0.53 0.11 0.80 0.01 0.04 0.62 0.87 0.28 0.46 0.40 0.40 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 233 425 275 476 396 285 979 822 239 908 952 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.6 36.8 0.0 49.7 30.7 30.9 53.0 22.1 13.9 54.2 16.0 16.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.8 0.1 0.0 9.7 0.1 0.2 12.9 10.2 0.8 18.1 1.3 1.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.8 0.0 3.5 0.1 0.3 1.0 20.6 3.2 0.3 5.6 5.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 67.4 36.9 0.0 59.4 30.7 31.0 65.9 32.3 14.7 72.2 17.3 17.2 LnGrp LOS E D E C C E C B E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 53 A 138 1105 743 Approach Delay, s/veh 46.1 54.9 29.5 17.8 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.9 26.0 7.9 62.1 6.9 33.0 6.1 64.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 26.0 18.0 29.0 15.0 28.0 15.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.0 3.9 3.8 15.7 3.0 2.8 2.5 46.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.1 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 27.4 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 6: Park Ave N & N 6th St Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 209 104 140 16 21 2 18 260 6 6 429 28 Future Volume (veh/h) 209 104 140 16 21 2 18 260 6 6 429 28 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1752 1752 1752 1856 1856 1856 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 213 106 143 16 21 2 18 265 6 6 438 29 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 10 10 10 3 3 3 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 230 285 249 30 78 7 35 2159 49 13 2000 132 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1763 1543 1668 1565 149 1767 3524 80 1753 3328 220 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 213 106 143 16 0 23 18 132 139 6 229 238 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1543 1668 0 1714 1767 1763 1841 1753 1749 1799 Q Serve(g_s), s 11.9 5.4 8.6 1.0 0.0 1.3 1.0 3.1 3.2 0.3 11.0 11.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.9 5.4 8.6 1.0 0.0 1.3 1.0 3.1 3.2 0.3 11.0 11.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.12 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 230 285 249 30 0 85 35 1080 1128 13 1051 1081 V/C Ratio(X) 0.93 0.37 0.57 0.53 0.00 0.27 0.52 0.12 0.12 0.45 0.22 0.22 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 230 388 340 217 0 377 177 1080 1128 140 1051 1081 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.0 37.4 38.7 48.7 0.0 45.8 48.5 8.1 8.1 49.7 20.4 20.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 39.1 0.3 0.8 5.4 0.0 0.6 4.4 0.2 0.2 8.3 0.5 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln7.6 2.3 3.3 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.5 1.2 1.3 0.2 5.3 5.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 82.1 37.7 39.5 54.1 0.0 46.4 52.9 8.3 8.3 57.9 20.9 20.9 LnGrp LOS F D D D A D D A A E C C Approach Vol, veh/h 462 39 289 473 Approach Delay, s/veh 58.7 49.6 11.1 21.4 Approach LOS E D B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s18.0 10.0 7.0 65.1 6.8 21.2 5.8 66.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s13.0 22.0 10.0 35.0 13.0 22.0 8.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s13.9 3.3 3.0 13.1 3.0 10.6 2.3 5.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 33.6 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 7: Garden Ave N & N 6th St Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 86 2 22 0 3 1 8 71 0 0 86 28 Future Volume (veh/h) 86 2 22 0 3 1 8 71 0 0 86 28 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1752 1752 1752 0 1693 1693 1900 1900 1900 1737 1737 1737 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 101 2 26 0 4 1 9 84 0 0 101 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Percent Heavy Veh, % 10 10 10 0 14 14 0 0 0 11 11 11 Cap, veh/h 528 8 310 0 547 131 22 816 0 257 297 97 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 1282 37 1455 0 2653 615 1810 1900 0 1220 1243 406 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 103 0 26 0 2 3 9 84 0 0 0 134 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1319 0 1455 0 1608 1575 1810 1900 0 1220 0 1649 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.9 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 Prop In Lane 0.98 1.00 0.00 0.39 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.25 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 536 0 310 0 343 336 22 816 0 257 0 394 V/C Ratio(X) 0.19 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.41 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1149 0 988 0 1092 1069 323 2105 0 882 0 1238 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.4 0.0 8.8 0.0 8.7 8.7 13.7 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.6 0.0 8.9 0.0 8.7 8.7 25.7 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A C A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 129 5 93 134 Approach Delay, s/veh 9.4 8.7 6.9 9.9 Approach LOS A A A A Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 5.3 11.7 11.0 17.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 5.0 21.0 19.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 2.1 3.9 3.9 2.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.5 0.8 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.9 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 8: S1 (North)/E7 (North) & Logan Ave N Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1032 0 0 888 9 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1032 0 0 888 9 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 12 0 12 2 0 2 12 0 2 2 0 12 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 100 100 100 4 4 4 4 4 4 Mvmt Flow 0 0 12 0 0 1 0 1110 0 0 955 10 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 507 - - 559 - 0 0 - - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.9 - - 9.1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.3 - - 4.9 - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 516 0 0 255 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 504 - - 254 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 12.3 19.2 0 0 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 504 254 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.023 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.3 19.2 - - HCM Lane LOS - - B C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 9: Logan Ave N & S1 (South)/E7 (South)Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 51 1 0 1 6 1065 0 2 894 3 Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 51 1 0 1 6 1065 0 2 894 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 14 0 14 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 25 - - 25 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 3 3 3 Mvmt Flow 3 0 55 1 0 1 6 1145 0 2 961 3 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1580 2138 510 1656 2139 587 978 0 0 1145 0 0 Stage 1 981 981 - 1157 1157 - - - - - - - Stage 2 599 1157 - 499 982 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.18 - - 4.16 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.24 - - 2.23 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 75 50 514 66 50 458 689 - - 600 - - Stage 1 271 330 - 212 273 - - - - - - - Stage 2 460 273 - 527 330 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 72 49 500 57 49 452 680 - - 600 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 72 49 - 57 49 - - - - - - - Stage 1 265 325 - 210 271 - - - - - - - Stage 2 449 271 - 461 325 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 16.3 41.4 0.1 0 HCM LOS C E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 680 - - 376 101 600 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 - - 0.154 0.021 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 - - 16.3 41.4 11 - - HCM Lane LOS B - - C E B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.5 0.1 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 10: Park Ave N & N 5th St Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 7 14 42 1 5 2 246 14 3 480 15 Future Vol, veh/h 17 7 14 42 1 5 2 246 14 3 480 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 0 8 6 0 5 8 0 6 5 0 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 180 - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 15 15 15 0 0 0 7 7 7 4 4 4 Mvmt Flow 18 7 14 43 1 5 2 254 14 3 495 15 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 656 795 271 536 795 147 518 0 0 274 0 0 Stage 1 517 517 - 271 271 - - - - - - - Stage 2 139 278 - 265 524 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.8 6.8 7.2 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.24 - - 4.18 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.8 5.8 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.8 5.8 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.65 4.15 3.45 3.5 4 3.3 2.27 - - 2.24 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 326 295 689 432 323 880 1010 - - 1272 - - Stage 1 477 501 - 717 689 - - - - - - - Stage 2 813 648 - 723 533 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 318 289 679 408 317 869 1002 - - 1265 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 318 289 - 408 317 - - - - - - - Stage 1 472 495 - 711 683 - - - - - - - Stage 2 800 643 - 690 527 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 15.3 14.3 0.1 0 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1002 - - 387 408 674 1265 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - - 0.101 0.106 0.009 0.002 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 0 - 15.3 14.9 10.4 7.9 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - C B B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.3 0.4 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 11: N 5th St & Garden Ave N Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 22 2 23 139 11 Future Vol, veh/h 6 22 2 23 139 11 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 3 3 0 0 2 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 180 0 50 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 56 56 0 0 8 8 Mvmt Flow 7 26 2 27 162 13 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 205 175 178 0 - 0 Stage 1 172 - - - - - Stage 2 33 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.96 6.76 4.1 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.96 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.96 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 4.004 3.804 2.2 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 676 746 1410 - - - Stage 1 743 - - - - - Stage 2 867 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 671 742 1406 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 659 - - - - - Stage 1 740 - - - - - Stage 2 864 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.1 0.6 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1406 - 659 742 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - 0.011 0.034 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.6 - 10.5 10 - - HCM Lane LOS A - B B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 0.1 - - HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 1: Logan Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 18 17 48 20 20 21 732 89 3 630 29 Future Volume (veh/h) 6 18 17 48 20 20 21 732 89 3 630 29 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1411 1411 1411 1707 1707 1707 1796 1796 1796 1826 1826 1826 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 18 0 49 20 20 21 747 91 3 643 30 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 33 33 33 13 13 13 7 7 7 5 5 5 Cap, veh/h 10 200 61 171 132 37 1048 128 7 1126 53 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.65 0.65 Sat Flow, veh/h 1344 2681 1196 1626 1638 1263 1711 1566 191 1739 1729 81 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 6 18 0 49 20 20 21 0 838 3 0 673 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1344 1340 1196 1626 1622 1278 1711 0 1757 1739 0 1809 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 0.7 0.0 3.3 1.2 1.6 1.3 0.0 33.2 0.2 0.0 22.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 0.7 0.0 3.3 1.2 1.6 1.3 0.0 33.2 0.2 0.0 22.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.04 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 10 200 61 170 134 37 0 1176 7 0 1179 V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.09 0.80 0.12 0.15 0.57 0.00 0.71 0.43 0.00 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 197 539 238 326 257 250 0 1176 255 0 1179 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.4 47.4 0.0 52.5 44.6 44.8 53.3 0.0 11.5 54.7 0.0 10.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 43.7 0.2 0.0 20.4 0.3 0.5 13.1 0.0 3.7 37.5 0.0 2.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.2 0.0 1.7 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.0 12.8 0.2 0.0 9.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 98.1 47.6 0.0 72.9 44.9 45.3 66.4 0.0 15.2 92.1 0.0 12.6 LnGrp LOS F D E D D E A B F A B Approach Vol, veh/h 24 A 89 859 676 Approach Delay, s/veh 60.2 60.4 16.5 13.0 Approach LOS E E B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 14.1 8.3 77.6 6.7 17.4 6.3 79.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.3 2.7 3.3 24.7 2.5 3.6 2.2 35.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.0 HCM 6th LOS B Notes * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 2: Park Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 11 80 17 79 72 16 14 424 161 34 182 8 Future Volume (veh/h) 11 80 17 79 72 16 14 424 161 34 182 8 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.95 0.94 0.97 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1633 1633 1633 1767 1767 1767 1826 1826 1826 1796 1796 1796 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 12 84 18 83 76 17 15 446 169 36 192 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 18 18 18 9 9 9 5 5 5 7 7 7 Cap, veh/h 181 204 42 226 338 73 30 1545 580 54 2151 89 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.63 0.63 0.03 0.64 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1555 2533 522 1682 2726 587 1739 2452 920 1711 3336 138 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 50 52 83 46 47 15 314 301 36 98 102 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1555 1552 1503 1682 1678 1635 1739 1735 1637 1711 1706 1768 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 3.1 3.3 4.4 2.4 2.6 0.9 8.2 8.3 2.1 2.2 2.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 3.1 3.3 4.4 2.4 2.6 0.9 8.2 8.3 2.1 2.2 2.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.35 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.56 1.00 0.08 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 181 125 121 226 208 203 30 1093 1032 54 1100 1140 V/C Ratio(X) 0.07 0.40 0.43 0.37 0.22 0.23 0.51 0.29 0.29 0.67 0.09 0.09 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 315 310 301 297 336 327 174 1093 1032 257 1100 1140 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.3 43.7 43.8 37.9 39.4 39.5 48.7 8.4 8.4 47.9 6.7 6.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 4.7 0.6 0.7 5.1 0.2 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 1.2 1.2 1.8 1.0 1.1 0.4 3.0 2.9 1.0 0.8 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 41.4 44.5 44.7 38.3 39.6 39.7 53.5 9.0 9.1 53.0 6.9 6.9 LnGrp LOS D D D D D D D A A D A A Approach Vol, veh/h 114 176 630 236 Approach Delay, s/veh 44.2 39.0 10.1 13.9 Approach LOS D D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.8 13.0 6.7 69.5 6.4 17.4 8.2 68.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s10.0 20.0 10.0 40.0 10.0 20.0 15.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s6.4 5.3 2.9 4.2 2.7 4.6 4.1 10.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 4.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.6 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 3: Garden Ave N & N 8th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 261 21 171 166 7 116 Future Volume (veh/h) 261 21 171 166 7 116 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1811 1811 1856 1856 1722 1722 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 278 22 182 177 7 123 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 6 6 3 3 12 12 Cap, veh/h 1240 98 662 671 209 186 Arrive On Green 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 3321 254 852 1833 1640 1459 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 147 153 202 157 7 123 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1721 1764 996 1604 1640 1459 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 1.2 2.6 1.4 0.1 1.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 1.2 3.8 1.4 0.1 1.6 Prop In Lane 0.14 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 660 677 717 616 209 186 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.23 0.28 0.26 0.03 0.66 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2185 2241 1705 2037 1522 1355 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.2 4.3 5.3 4.3 7.8 8.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 5.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.6 4.6 5.6 4.6 7.9 14.1 LnGrp LOS A A A A A B Approach Vol, veh/h 300 359 130 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.6 5.2 13.8 Approach LOS A A B Timer - Assigned Phs 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.9 7.6 12.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.0 19.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.8 3.6 3.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.1 0.5 3.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.4 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 4: N 6th St & Boeing Rd Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 23 1 11 30 75 3 14 4 25 8 1 Future Vol, veh/h 7 23 1 11 30 75 3 14 4 25 8 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 24 0 57 33 0 0 57 0 33 0 0 24 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 160 - - 0 - - 100 - - 175 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 Heavy Vehicles, % 21 21 21 3 3 3 26 26 26 17 17 17 Mvmt Flow 9 30 1 14 39 97 4 18 5 32 10 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 160 0 0 88 0 0 284 294 121 233 246 169 Stage 1 - - - - - - 106 106 - 140 140 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 178 188 - 93 106 - Critical Hdwy 4.31 - - 4.13 - - 7.36 6.76 6.46 7.27 6.67 6.37 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.36 5.76 - 6.27 5.67 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.36 5.76 - 6.27 5.67 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.389 - - 2.227 - - 3.734 4.234 3.534 3.653 4.153 3.453 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1311 - - 1501 - - 623 579 870 691 631 837 Stage 1 - - - - - - 844 763 - 828 753 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 771 702 - 878 779 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1281 - - 1420 - - 541 526 797 625 574 773 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 541 526 - 625 574 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 793 716 - 803 728 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 710 679 - 818 731 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.8 0.7 11.6 11.1 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 541 569 1281 - - 1420 - - 625 591 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 0.041 0.007 - - 0.01 - - 0.052 0.02 HCM Control Delay (s) 11.7 11.6 7.8 - - 7.6 - - 11.1 11.2 HCM Lane LOS B B A - - A - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.1 0 - - 0 - - 0.2 0.1 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 5: Logan Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 14 35 24 28 12 71 846 296 10 649 18 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 14 35 24 28 12 71 846 296 10 649 18 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1589 1589 1589 1781 1781 1781 1811 1811 1811 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 15 0 26 30 13 76 910 318 11 698 19 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 21 21 21 8 8 8 6 6 6 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 1 293 42 453 376 97 1080 909 23 1921 52 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.06 0.60 0.60 0.01 0.55 0.55 Sat Flow, veh/h 1513 1589 1346 1697 1781 1477 1725 1811 1526 1753 3477 95 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 15 0 26 30 13 76 910 318 11 351 366 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1513 1589 1346 1697 1781 1477 1725 1811 1526 1753 1749 1823 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.7 1.4 0.7 4.8 44.9 11.7 0.7 12.4 12.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.7 1.4 0.7 4.8 44.9 11.7 0.7 12.4 12.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1 293 42 453 376 97 1080 909 23 966 1007 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.05 0.62 0.07 0.03 0.78 0.84 0.35 0.48 0.36 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 206 376 262 453 376 282 1080 909 239 966 1007 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 37.0 0.0 53.1 31.1 30.8 51.2 18.0 11.3 53.9 13.8 13.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.1 0.0 12.1 0.2 0.2 12.6 8.0 1.1 15.0 1.1 1.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.9 0.6 0.3 2.4 19.7 4.1 0.4 5.0 5.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 37.0 0.0 65.2 31.3 31.0 63.8 26.1 12.4 69.0 14.8 14.8 LnGrp LOS A D E C C E C B E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 15 A 69 1304 728 Approach Delay, s/veh 37.0 44.0 24.9 15.6 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.7 25.3 11.2 65.8 0.0 33.0 6.4 70.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 26.0 18.0 29.0 15.0 28.0 15.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.7 2.9 6.8 14.4 0.0 3.4 2.7 46.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.4 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 6: Park Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 95 101 27 9 30 7 97 510 18 18 167 60 Future Volume (veh/h) 95 101 27 9 30 7 97 510 18 18 167 60 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1826 1826 1826 1693 1693 1693 1870 1870 1870 1767 1767 1767 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 100 106 28 9 32 7 102 537 19 19 176 63 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 5 5 5 14 14 14 2 2 2 9 9 9 Cap, veh/h 127 367 93 18 98 21 130 2037 72 36 1294 446 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.58 0.58 0.02 0.53 0.53 Sat Flow, veh/h 1739 2719 690 1612 1328 290 1781 3500 124 1682 2439 841 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 100 66 68 9 0 39 102 272 284 19 119 120 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1739 1735 1674 1612 0 1618 1781 1777 1846 1682 1678 1602 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.5 2.7 2.9 0.4 0.0 1.8 4.5 6.1 6.1 0.9 2.9 3.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.5 2.7 2.9 0.4 0.0 1.8 4.5 6.1 6.1 0.9 2.9 3.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.53 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 127 234 226 18 0 119 130 1034 1075 36 890 850 V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.28 0.30 0.49 0.00 0.33 0.78 0.26 0.26 0.52 0.13 0.14 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 152 477 460 141 0 445 223 1034 1075 168 890 850 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.5 31.1 31.2 39.3 0.0 35.2 36.5 8.3 8.3 38.7 9.5 9.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 19.1 0.2 0.3 7.4 0.0 0.6 3.8 0.6 0.6 4.3 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.5 1.1 1.2 0.2 0.0 0.7 2.1 2.2 2.3 0.4 1.0 1.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.6 31.3 31.4 46.7 0.0 35.8 40.3 8.9 8.9 43.0 9.8 9.9 LnGrp LOS E C C D A D D A A D A A Approach Vol, veh/h 234 48 658 258 Approach Delay, s/veh 41.7 37.8 13.7 12.3 Approach LOS D D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.8 10.9 10.8 47.4 5.9 15.8 6.7 51.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s7.0 22.0 10.0 21.0 7.0 22.0 8.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s6.5 3.8 6.5 5.0 2.4 4.9 2.9 8.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.4 0.0 1.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.9 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 7: Garden Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 87 6 47 0 5 6 20 107 5 0 63 12 Future Volume (veh/h) 87 6 47 0 5 6 20 107 5 0 63 12 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1767 1767 1767 0 1070 1070 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 92 6 49 0 5 6 21 113 5 0 66 13 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 9 0 56 56 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 495 25 308 0 216 192 47 797 35 241 389 77 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1230 116 1449 0 1070 905 1767 1762 78 1274 1506 297 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 98 0 49 0 5 6 21 0 118 0 0 79 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1346 0 1449 0 1017 905 1767 0 1840 1274 0 1802 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 Prop In Lane 0.94 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.16 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 520 0 308 0 216 192 47 0 833 241 0 466 V/C Ratio(X) 0.19 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.44 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.17 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1089 0 921 0 647 575 296 0 1910 808 0 1267 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 9.3 9.3 14.3 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 8.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.1 0.0 9.8 0.0 9.3 9.4 20.7 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 9.0 LnGrp LOS B A A A A A C A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 147 11 139 79 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.0 9.4 7.3 9.0 Approach LOS B A A A Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 5.8 12.7 11.4 18.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 5.0 21.0 19.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.3 3.0 3.8 3.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 1.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.8 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 8: S1 (North)/E7 (North) & Logan Ave N Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1205 10 0 695 15 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1205 10 0 695 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 10 0 10 6 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 10 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 Mvmt Flow 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1268 11 0 732 16 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 394 - - 652 - 0 0 - - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.9 - - 7.1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.3 - - 3.9 - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 611 0 0 356 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 599 - - 352 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 11 15.3 0 0 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 599 352 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.005 0.006 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11 15.3 - - HCM Lane LOS - - B C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 9: Logan Ave N & S1 (South)/E7 (South)Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 1 0 0 0 55 1213 3 2 692 5 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 1 0 0 0 55 1213 3 2 692 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 0 7 2 0 2 7 0 2 2 0 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 25 - - 25 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 5 5 5 Mvmt Flow 0 0 1 0 0 0 59 1290 3 2 736 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1520 2163 385 1791 2164 656 748 0 0 1295 0 0 Stage 1 750 750 - 1412 1412 - - - - - - - Stage 2 770 1413 - 379 752 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.22 - - 4.2 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.26 - - 2.25 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 83 48 619 52 48 413 831 - - 515 - - Stage 1 374 422 - 148 206 - - - - - - - Stage 2 364 206 - 620 421 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 77 44 611 49 44 409 825 - - 514 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 77 44 - 49 44 - - - - - - - Stage 1 345 417 - 137 191 - - - - - - - Stage 2 336 191 - 612 416 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.9 0 0.4 0 HCM LOS B A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 825 - - 611 - 514 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.071 - - 0.002 - 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.7 - - 10.9 0 12 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - B A B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 10: Park Ave N & N 5th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 21 7 11 3 0 5 7 678 33 3 186 2 Future Vol, veh/h 21 7 11 3 0 5 7 678 33 3 186 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 4 5 0 2 4 0 5 2 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 180 - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 22 7 11 3 0 5 7 706 34 3 194 2 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 574 964 107 854 948 377 200 0 0 745 0 0 Stage 1 205 205 - 742 742 - - - - - - - Stage 2 369 759 - 112 206 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.16 - - 4.26 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.23 - - 2.28 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 406 257 933 256 263 626 1362 - - 820 - - Stage 1 784 736 - 378 425 - - - - - - - Stage 2 629 418 - 887 735 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 396 251 925 242 257 622 1357 - - 816 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 396 251 - 242 257 - - - - - - - Stage 1 774 730 - 373 419 - - - - - - - Stage 2 617 412 - 860 729 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.5 14.3 0.1 0.1 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1357 - - 420 242 622 816 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.097 0.013 0.008 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 0 - 14.5 20.1 10.8 9.4 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - B C B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.3 0 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 11: N 5th St & Garden Ave N Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0 2 151 16 6 Future Vol, veh/h 9 0 2 151 16 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 180 0 50 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 5 5 12 12 Mvmt Flow 10 0 2 174 18 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 200 22 25 0 - 0 Stage 1 22 - - - - - Stage 2 178 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.58 6.38 4.15 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.58 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.58 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.662 3.462 2.245 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 754 1011 1570 - - - Stage 1 961 - - - - - Stage 2 816 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 753 1011 1570 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 731 - - - - - Stage 1 960 - - - - - Stage 2 816 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10 0.1 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1570 - 731 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.014 - - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 - 10 0 - - HCM Lane LOS A - B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - - - HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 1: Logan Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 35 38 18 82 5 60 7 888 100 18 716 9 Future Volume (veh/h) 35 38 18 82 5 60 7 888 100 18 716 9 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1737 1737 1737 1885 1885 1885 1856 1856 1856 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 38 42 0 90 5 66 8 976 110 20 787 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 11 11 1 1 1 3 3 3 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 52 236 115 187 153 17 1028 116 36 1160 15 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.63 0.63 0.02 0.64 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1654 3300 1472 1795 1791 1460 1767 1635 184 1753 1813 23 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 38 42 0 90 5 66 8 0 1086 20 0 797 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1654 1650 1472 1795 1791 1460 1767 0 1819 1753 0 1836 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.5 1.3 0.0 5.4 0.3 4.7 0.5 0.0 60.5 1.2 0.0 30.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.5 1.3 0.0 5.4 0.3 4.7 0.5 0.0 60.5 1.2 0.0 30.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.01 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 52 236 115 187 153 17 0 1144 36 0 1175 V/C Ratio(X) 0.74 0.18 0.78 0.03 0.43 0.46 0.00 0.95 0.55 0.00 0.68 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 242 663 263 360 293 259 0 1144 257 0 1175 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.8 48.0 0.0 50.7 44.2 46.2 54.2 0.0 18.8 53.3 0.0 12.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 18.2 0.4 0.0 10.4 0.1 1.9 17.7 0.0 16.9 12.2 0.0 3.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 0.6 0.0 2.8 0.1 1.8 0.3 0.0 28.2 0.7 0.0 12.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 71.0 48.4 0.0 61.1 44.3 48.0 71.8 0.0 35.7 65.6 0.0 15.8 LnGrp LOS E D E D D E A D E A B Approach Vol, veh/h 80 A 161 1094 817 Approach Delay, s/veh 59.1 55.3 36.0 17.0 Approach LOS E E D B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 13.8 7.0 76.3 9.3 17.4 8.2 75.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 3.3 2.5 32.4 4.5 6.7 3.2 62.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 31.1 HCM 6th LOS C Notes * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 2: Park Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 63 80 19 144 87 66 24 434 73 99 312 42 Future Volume (veh/h) 63 80 19 144 87 66 24 434 73 99 312 42 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.94 0.92 0.95 0.94 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1648 1648 1648 1885 1885 1885 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 69 88 21 158 96 73 26 477 80 109 343 46 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 17 17 17 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 250 258 58 327 295 199 45 1562 260 136 1779 236 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.08 0.58 0.58 Sat Flow, veh/h 1570 2487 564 1795 1990 1345 1753 2982 497 1753 3090 410 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 69 54 55 158 85 84 26 278 279 109 193 196 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1570 1566 1485 1795 1791 1544 1753 1749 1731 1753 1749 1752 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 3.2 3.5 7.6 4.3 4.9 1.5 13.9 14.1 6.1 5.3 5.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 3.2 3.5 7.6 4.3 4.9 1.5 13.9 14.1 6.1 5.3 5.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.23 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 250 162 154 327 265 229 45 916 906 136 1007 1009 V/C Ratio(X) 0.28 0.33 0.36 0.48 0.32 0.37 0.58 0.30 0.31 0.80 0.19 0.19 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 328 313 297 336 358 309 175 916 906 263 1007 1009 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 37.4 41.6 41.7 34.1 38.1 38.4 49.0 25.4 25.5 45.3 10.1 10.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.4 4.0 0.8 0.8 4.0 0.4 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.5 1.2 1.3 3.3 1.9 1.9 0.7 6.7 6.7 2.8 2.0 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 37.6 42.0 42.2 34.5 38.4 38.7 53.1 26.3 26.3 49.4 10.5 10.6 LnGrp LOS D D D C D D D C C D B B Approach Vol, veh/h 178 327 583 498 Approach Delay, s/veh 40.4 36.6 27.5 19.0 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s14.5 15.4 7.6 62.6 10.0 19.8 12.8 57.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s10.0 20.0 10.0 40.0 10.0 20.0 15.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s9.6 5.5 3.5 7.4 5.9 6.9 8.1 16.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.3 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.5 0.1 3.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 28.2 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 3: Garden Ave N & N 8th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBU EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 236 14 44 268 18 279 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 236 14 44 268 18 279 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1767 1767 1826 1826 1885 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 274 16 51 312 21 324 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 5 5 1 1 Cap, veh/h 900 52 263 829 531 473 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 3311 187 252 3053 1795 1598 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 142 148 198 165 21 324 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1678 1732 1644 1578 1795 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 1.6 0.0 2.0 0.2 4.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 1.6 2.1 2.0 0.2 4.2 Prop In Lane 0.11 0.26 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 469 484 651 441 531 473 V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.31 0.30 0.38 0.04 0.69 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1783 1840 1857 1677 1526 1358 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.7 6.7 6.9 6.8 5.9 7.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.0 2.5 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 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.0 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 7.5 7.4 7.2 7.6 5.9 9.8 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 290 363 345 Approach Delay, s/veh 7.4 7.4 9.6 Approach LOS A A A Timer - Assigned Phs 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.6 12.0 11.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 20.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.1 6.2 3.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.0 1.6 3.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.2 HCM 6th LOS A Notes User approved ignoring U-Turning movement. HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 4: N 6th St & Boeing Rd Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 35 4 3 29 12 6 11 17 110 3 2 Future Vol, veh/h 3 35 4 3 29 12 6 11 17 110 3 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 33 0 53 20 0 0 53 0 20 0 0 33 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 160 - - 0 - - 100 - - 175 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 Heavy Vehicles, % 10 10 10 12 12 12 23 23 23 5 5 5 Mvmt Flow 4 48 5 4 40 16 8 15 23 151 4 3 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 89 0 0 106 0 0 225 209 124 187 203 134 Stage 1 - - - - - - 112 112 - 89 89 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 113 97 - 98 114 - Critical Hdwy 4.2 - - 4.22 - - 7.33 6.73 6.43 7.15 6.55 6.25 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.33 5.73 - 6.15 5.55 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.33 5.73 - 6.15 5.55 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.29 - - 2.308 - - 3.707 4.207 3.507 3.545 4.045 3.345 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1457 - - 1425 - - 688 653 873 767 688 907 Stage 1 - - - - - - 844 764 - 911 815 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 843 776 - 901 795 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1411 - - 1353 - - 612 597 813 691 630 834 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 612 597 - 691 630 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 799 724 - 880 787 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 791 750 - 838 753 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0.5 10.4 11.6 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 612 712 1411 - - 1353 - - 691 698 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 0.054 0.003 - - 0.003 - - 0.218 0.01 HCM Control Delay (s) 11 10.3 7.6 - - 7.7 - - 11.7 10.2 HCM Lane LOS B B A - - A - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.8 0 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 5: Logan Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 17 39 111 124 8 16 32 988 244 9 808 10 Future Volume (veh/h) 17 39 111 124 8 16 32 988 244 9 808 10 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1796 1796 1796 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1826 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 18 41 0 131 8 17 34 1040 257 9 851 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 7 7 7 2 2 2 5 5 5 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 33 330 161 476 396 51 974 818 19 1821 24 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.09 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.53 0.53 0.01 0.52 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 1711 1796 1522 1781 1870 1554 1739 1826 1533 1753 3535 46 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 18 41 0 131 8 17 34 1040 257 9 421 441 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1711 1796 1522 1781 1870 1554 1739 1826 1533 1753 1749 1832 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 2.1 0.0 7.9 0.4 0.9 2.1 58.7 10.3 0.6 16.9 16.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 2.1 0.0 7.9 0.4 0.9 2.1 58.7 10.3 0.6 16.9 16.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 33 330 161 476 396 51 974 818 19 901 944 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.12 0.81 0.02 0.04 0.67 1.07 0.31 0.47 0.47 0.47 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 233 425 275 476 396 285 974 818 239 901 944 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.5 37.5 0.0 49.1 30.7 30.9 52.9 25.7 14.4 54.1 17.0 17.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.4 0.2 0.0 9.4 0.1 0.2 13.9 48.7 1.0 16.8 1.7 1.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.9 0.0 3.9 0.2 0.4 1.1 36.9 3.7 0.3 7.1 7.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 66.9 37.7 0.0 58.5 30.8 31.1 66.7 74.3 15.4 70.9 18.8 18.7 LnGrp LOS E D E C C E F B E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 59 A 156 1331 871 Approach Delay, s/veh 46.6 54.1 62.8 19.3 Approach LOS D D E B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.9 25.2 8.2 61.7 7.1 33.0 6.2 63.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 26.0 18.0 29.0 15.0 28.0 15.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.9 4.1 4.1 18.9 3.1 2.9 2.6 60.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.1 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 46.1 HCM 6th LOS D Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 6: Park Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 232 120 158 22 24 2 20 293 7 7 550 32 Future Volume (veh/h) 232 120 158 22 24 2 20 293 7 7 550 32 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1752 1752 1752 1856 1856 1856 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 237 122 161 22 24 2 20 299 7 7 561 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 10 10 10 3 3 3 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 230 279 245 38 81 7 38 2147 50 15 2004 118 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1763 1543 1668 1586 132 1767 3521 82 1753 3355 197 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 237 122 161 22 0 26 20 149 157 7 292 302 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1543 1668 0 1718 1767 1763 1840 1753 1749 1803 Q Serve(g_s), s 13.0 6.3 9.8 1.3 0.0 1.5 1.1 3.6 3.6 0.4 14.2 14.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.0 6.3 9.8 1.3 0.0 1.5 1.1 3.6 3.6 0.4 14.2 14.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.11 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 230 279 245 38 0 88 38 1075 1122 15 1045 1077 V/C Ratio(X) 1.03 0.44 0.66 0.58 0.00 0.29 0.53 0.14 0.14 0.45 0.28 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 230 388 339 217 0 378 177 1075 1122 140 1045 1077 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.5 38.0 39.5 48.4 0.0 45.7 48.4 8.3 8.3 49.6 21.9 21.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 66.6 0.4 1.1 5.0 0.0 0.7 4.2 0.3 0.3 7.2 0.6 0.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln9.9 2.7 3.8 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.5 1.4 1.4 0.2 6.8 7.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 110.1 38.4 40.6 53.4 0.0 46.4 52.7 8.6 8.6 56.8 22.5 22.5 LnGrp LOS F D D D A D D A A E C C Approach Vol, veh/h 520 48 326 601 Approach Delay, s/veh 71.8 49.6 11.3 22.9 Approach LOS E D B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s18.0 10.1 7.1 64.7 7.3 20.9 5.9 66.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s13.0 22.0 10.0 35.0 13.0 22.0 8.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s15.0 3.5 3.1 16.2 3.3 11.8 2.4 5.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.8 0.0 1.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 38.2 HCM 6th LOS D HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 7: Garden Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 2 25 0 3 1 9 80 0 0 97 36 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 2 25 0 3 1 9 80 0 0 97 36 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1752 1752 1752 0 1693 1693 1900 1900 1900 1737 1737 1737 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 118 2 29 0 4 1 11 94 0 0 114 42 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Percent Heavy Veh, % 10 10 10 0 14 14 0 0 0 11 11 11 Cap, veh/h 518 7 304 0 537 128 26 839 0 252 303 112 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1285 32 1455 0 2653 615 1810 1900 0 1209 1200 442 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 120 0 29 0 2 3 11 94 0 0 0 156 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1317 0 1455 0 1608 1575 1810 1900 0 1209 0 1642 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.2 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 Prop In Lane 0.98 1.00 0.00 0.39 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.27 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 525 0 304 0 336 329 26 839 0 252 0 414 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.42 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1123 0 966 0 1067 1045 316 2058 0 834 0 1205 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.8 0.0 9.1 0.0 9.0 9.0 14.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.1 0.0 9.3 0.0 9.0 9.0 24.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 LnGrp LOS B A A A A A C A A A A B Approach Vol, veh/h 149 5 105 156 Approach Delay, s/veh 9.9 9.0 6.8 10.1 Approach LOS A A A B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 5.4 12.2 11.0 17.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 5.0 21.0 19.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 2.2 4.2 4.3 2.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.6 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.2 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 8: S1 (North)/E7 (North) & Logan Ave N Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1243 0 0 1030 9 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1243 0 0 1030 9 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 12 0 12 2 0 2 12 0 2 2 0 12 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 100 100 100 4 4 4 4 4 4 Mvmt Flow 0 0 12 0 0 1 0 1337 0 0 1108 10 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 583 - - 673 - 0 0 - - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.9 - - 9.1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.3 - - 4.9 - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 461 0 0 205 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 451 - - 204 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 13.2 22.7 0 0 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 451 204 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.026 0.005 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.2 22.7 - - HCM Lane LOS - - B C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 9: Logan Ave N & S1 (South)/E7 (South)Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 51 1 0 1 6 1280 0 2 1037 3 Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 51 1 0 1 6 1280 0 2 1037 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 14 0 14 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 25 - - 25 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 3 3 3 Mvmt Flow 3 0 55 1 0 1 6 1376 0 2 1115 3 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1849 2523 587 1964 2524 702 1132 0 0 1376 0 0 Stage 1 1135 1135 - 1388 1388 - - - - - - - Stage 2 714 1388 - 576 1136 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.18 - - 4.16 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.24 - - 2.23 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 47 28 458 39 28 385 601 - - 489 - - Stage 1 219 280 - 153 212 - - - - - - - Stage 2 393 212 - 475 279 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 45 27 446 33 27 380 593 - - 489 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 45 27 - 33 27 - - - - - - - Stage 1 214 275 - 151 210 - - - - - - - Stage 2 383 210 - 409 274 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 20 66.2 0.1 0 HCM LOS C F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 593 - - 298 61 489 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - 0.195 0.035 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 11.1 - - 20 66.2 12.4 - - HCM Lane LOS B - - C F B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.7 0.1 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 10: Park Ave N & N 5th St Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 19 8 16 47 1 6 2 277 16 3 611 17 Future Vol, veh/h 19 8 16 47 1 6 2 277 16 3 611 17 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 0 8 6 0 5 8 0 6 5 0 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 180 - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 15 15 15 0 0 0 7 7 7 4 4 4 Mvmt Flow 20 8 16 48 1 6 2 286 16 3 630 18 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 808 965 340 637 966 164 656 0 0 308 0 0 Stage 1 653 653 - 304 304 - - - - - - - Stage 2 155 312 - 333 662 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.8 6.8 7.2 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.24 - - 4.18 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.8 5.8 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.8 5.8 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.65 4.15 3.45 3.5 4 3.3 2.27 - - 2.24 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 251 232 619 366 257 858 894 - - 1235 - - Stage 1 393 431 - 686 667 - - - - - - - Stage 2 795 625 - 660 462 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 243 227 610 340 252 847 887 - - 1228 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 243 227 - 340 252 - - - - - - - Stage 1 389 426 - 680 661 - - - - - - - Stage 2 780 619 - 622 456 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 18.6 16.5 0.1 0 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 887 - - 308 340 633 1228 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - - 0.144 0.143 0.011 0.003 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 0 - 18.6 17.3 10.8 7.9 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - C C B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.5 0.5 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 11: N 5th St & Garden Ave N Future (2023) Without-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 25 2 26 156 12 Future Vol, veh/h 7 25 2 26 156 12 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 3 3 0 0 2 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 180 0 50 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 56 56 0 0 8 8 Mvmt Flow 8 29 2 30 181 14 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 227 194 198 0 - 0 Stage 1 191 - - - - - Stage 2 36 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.96 6.76 4.1 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.96 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.96 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 4.004 3.804 2.2 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 656 727 1387 - - - Stage 1 727 - - - - - Stage 2 864 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 651 723 1383 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 644 - - - - - Stage 1 724 - - - - - Stage 2 861 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.3 0.5 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1383 - 644 723 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - 0.013 0.04 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.6 - 10.7 10.2 - - HCM Lane LOS A - B B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 0.1 - - HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 1: Logan Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 7 17 48 20 23 21 732 89 3 610 29 Future Volume (veh/h) 3 7 17 48 20 23 21 732 89 3 610 29 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1411 1411 1411 1707 1707 1707 1796 1796 1796 1826 1826 1826 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3 7 0 49 20 23 21 747 91 3 622 30 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 33 33 33 13 13 13 7 7 7 5 5 5 Cap, veh/h 5 181 61 164 128 37 1059 129 7 1137 55 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.68 0.68 0.00 0.66 0.66 Sat Flow, veh/h 1344 2681 1196 1626 1622 1268 1711 1566 191 1739 1726 83 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 3 7 0 49 20 23 21 0 838 3 0 652 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1344 1340 1196 1626 1622 1268 1711 0 1757 1739 0 1809 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 0.3 0.0 3.3 1.2 1.8 1.3 0.0 32.5 0.2 0.0 21.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 0.3 0.0 3.3 1.2 1.8 1.3 0.0 32.5 0.2 0.0 21.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.05 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 5 181 61 164 128 37 0 1188 7 0 1191 V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.04 0.80 0.12 0.18 0.57 0.00 0.71 0.43 0.00 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 197 539 238 326 255 250 0 1188 255 0 1191 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.7 47.9 0.0 52.5 45.0 45.2 53.3 0.0 11.0 54.7 0.0 10.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 68.8 0.1 0.0 20.4 0.3 0.7 13.1 0.0 3.5 37.5 0.0 1.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.7 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.0 12.4 0.2 0.0 8.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 123.5 48.0 0.0 72.9 45.3 45.9 66.4 0.0 14.6 92.1 0.0 11.8 LnGrp LOS F D E D D E A B F A B Approach Vol, veh/h 10 A 92 859 655 Approach Delay, s/veh 70.7 60.2 15.8 12.2 Approach LOS E E B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 13.3 8.3 78.4 6.3 17.0 6.3 80.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.3 2.3 3.3 23.2 2.2 3.8 2.2 34.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.2 HCM 6th LOS B Notes * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 2: Park Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 11 69 17 79 72 16 17 424 172 34 202 8 Future Volume (veh/h) 11 69 17 79 72 16 17 424 172 34 202 8 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.95 0.94 0.97 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1633 1633 1633 1767 1767 1767 1826 1826 1826 1796 1796 1796 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 12 73 18 83 76 17 18 446 181 36 213 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 18 18 18 9 9 9 5 5 5 7 7 7 Cap, veh/h 177 189 44 226 329 71 34 1520 611 54 2163 81 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.63 0.63 0.03 0.65 0.65 Sat Flow, veh/h 1555 2460 578 1682 2726 587 1739 2399 964 1711 3352 125 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 45 46 83 46 47 18 321 306 36 108 113 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1555 1552 1487 1682 1678 1634 1739 1735 1628 1711 1706 1771 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 2.7 3.0 4.4 2.5 2.6 1.0 8.3 8.5 2.1 2.4 2.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 2.7 3.0 4.4 2.5 2.6 1.0 8.3 8.5 2.1 2.4 2.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.59 1.00 0.07 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 177 119 114 226 203 197 34 1099 1031 54 1101 1143 V/C Ratio(X) 0.07 0.38 0.40 0.37 0.23 0.24 0.53 0.29 0.30 0.67 0.10 0.10 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 311 310 297 297 336 327 174 1099 1031 257 1101 1143 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.6 43.9 44.0 38.2 39.7 39.8 48.6 8.2 8.3 47.9 6.7 6.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 4.4 0.6 0.7 5.1 0.2 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 1.1 1.1 1.8 1.0 1.1 0.5 3.1 2.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 41.7 44.6 44.8 38.6 39.9 40.0 53.0 8.9 9.0 53.0 6.9 6.9 LnGrp LOS D D D D D D D A A D A A Approach Vol, veh/h 103 176 645 257 Approach Delay, s/veh 44.4 39.3 10.2 13.4 Approach LOS D D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.8 12.7 7.0 69.5 6.4 17.1 8.2 68.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s10.0 20.0 10.0 40.0 10.0 20.0 15.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s6.4 5.0 3.0 4.4 2.7 4.6 4.1 10.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 4.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.2 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 3: Garden Ave N & N 8th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 261 21 171 166 7 116 Future Volume (veh/h) 261 21 171 166 7 116 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1811 1811 1856 1856 1722 1722 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 278 22 182 177 7 123 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 6 6 3 3 12 12 Cap, veh/h 1240 98 662 671 209 186 Arrive On Green 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 3321 254 852 1833 1640 1459 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 147 153 202 157 7 123 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1721 1764 996 1604 1640 1459 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 1.2 2.6 1.4 0.1 1.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 1.2 3.8 1.4 0.1 1.6 Prop In Lane 0.14 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 660 677 717 616 209 186 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.23 0.28 0.26 0.03 0.66 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2185 2241 1705 2037 1522 1355 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.2 4.3 5.3 4.3 7.8 8.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 5.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.6 4.6 5.6 4.6 7.9 14.1 LnGrp LOS A A A A A B Approach Vol, veh/h 300 359 130 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.6 5.2 13.8 Approach LOS A A B Timer - Assigned Phs 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.9 7.6 12.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.0 19.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.8 3.6 3.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.1 0.5 3.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.4 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 4: N 6th St & Boeing Rd Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 24 33 75 33 1 Future Vol, veh/h 7 24 33 75 33 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 24 0 0 0 0 24 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 160 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 77 77 77 77 77 77 Heavy Vehicles, % 21 21 3 3 17 17 Mvmt Flow 9 31 43 97 43 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 164 0 - 0 165 140 Stage 1 - - - - 116 - Stage 2 - - - - 49 - Critical Hdwy 4.31 - - - 6.57 6.37 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.57 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.57 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.389 - - - 3.653 3.453 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1307 - - - 792 870 Stage 1 - - - - 873 - Stage 2 - - - - 936 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1277 - - - 751 831 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 751 - Stage 1 - - - - 847 - Stage 2 - - - - 914 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.8 0 10.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1277 - - - 753 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - - - 0.059 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 - - - 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.2 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 5: Logan Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 19 35 24 31 12 60 846 327 10 629 18 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 19 35 24 31 12 60 846 327 10 629 18 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1589 1589 1589 1781 1781 1781 1811 1811 1811 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 20 0 26 33 13 65 910 352 11 676 19 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 21 21 21 8 8 8 6 6 6 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 1 293 42 453 376 84 1080 909 23 1947 55 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.05 0.60 0.60 0.01 0.56 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 1513 1589 1346 1697 1781 1477 1725 1811 1526 1753 3473 98 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 20 0 26 33 13 65 910 352 11 340 355 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1513 1589 1346 1697 1781 1477 1725 1811 1526 1753 1749 1822 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.7 1.5 0.7 4.1 44.9 13.3 0.7 11.7 11.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.7 1.5 0.7 4.1 44.9 13.3 0.7 11.7 11.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1 293 42 453 376 84 1080 909 23 980 1021 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.07 0.62 0.07 0.03 0.78 0.84 0.39 0.48 0.35 0.35 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 206 376 262 453 376 282 1080 909 239 980 1021 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 37.1 0.0 53.1 31.1 30.8 51.7 18.0 11.7 53.9 13.2 13.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.1 0.0 12.1 0.3 0.2 14.2 8.0 1.2 15.0 1.0 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.9 0.7 0.3 2.1 19.7 4.6 0.4 4.7 4.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 37.2 0.0 65.2 31.4 31.0 65.9 26.1 12.9 69.0 14.2 14.1 LnGrp LOS A D E C C E C B E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 20 A 72 1327 706 Approach Delay, s/veh 37.2 43.5 24.5 15.0 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.7 25.3 10.3 66.7 0.0 33.0 6.4 70.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 26.0 18.0 29.0 15.0 28.0 15.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.7 3.1 6.1 13.7 0.0 3.5 2.7 46.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.1 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 6: Park Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 113 101 34 9 30 7 97 522 18 18 167 60 Future Volume (veh/h) 113 101 34 9 30 7 97 522 18 18 167 60 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1826 1826 1826 1693 1693 1693 1870 1870 1870 1767 1767 1767 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 119 106 36 9 32 7 102 549 19 19 176 63 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 5 5 5 14 14 14 2 2 2 9 9 9 Cap, veh/h 149 378 122 18 98 21 130 1994 69 36 1263 435 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.57 0.57 0.02 0.52 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 1739 2556 826 1612 1328 290 1781 3503 121 1682 2439 841 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 119 70 72 9 0 39 102 278 290 19 119 120 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1739 1735 1647 1612 0 1618 1781 1777 1847 1682 1678 1602 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.4 2.9 3.1 0.4 0.0 1.8 4.5 6.4 6.4 0.9 2.9 3.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.4 2.9 3.1 0.4 0.0 1.8 4.5 6.4 6.4 0.9 2.9 3.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.53 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 149 256 243 18 0 119 130 1012 1051 36 869 829 V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.27 0.29 0.49 0.00 0.33 0.78 0.28 0.28 0.52 0.14 0.14 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 152 477 453 141 0 445 223 1012 1051 168 869 829 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.9 30.3 30.4 39.3 0.0 35.2 36.5 8.8 8.8 38.7 10.0 10.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 23.0 0.2 0.2 7.4 0.0 0.6 3.8 0.7 0.7 4.3 0.3 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln3.2 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.0 0.7 2.1 2.4 2.5 0.4 1.1 1.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 58.9 30.5 30.6 46.7 0.0 35.8 40.3 9.5 9.5 43.0 10.3 10.4 LnGrp LOS E C C D A D D A A D B B Approach Vol, veh/h 261 48 670 258 Approach Delay, s/veh 43.5 37.8 14.2 12.8 Approach LOS D D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s11.8 10.9 10.8 46.4 5.9 16.8 6.7 50.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s7.0 22.0 10.0 21.0 7.0 22.0 8.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s7.4 3.8 6.5 5.1 2.4 5.1 2.9 8.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.0 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 7: Garden Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 87 6 47 0 5 6 20 116 5 0 63 12 Future Volume (veh/h) 87 6 47 0 5 6 20 116 5 0 63 12 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1767 1767 1767 0 1070 1070 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 92 6 49 0 5 6 21 122 5 0 66 13 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 9 0 56 56 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 495 25 308 0 216 192 47 800 33 241 389 77 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1230 116 1449 0 1070 905 1767 1769 72 1264 1506 297 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 98 0 49 0 5 6 21 0 127 0 0 79 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1346 0 1449 0 1017 905 1767 0 1841 1264 0 1802 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 1.0 Prop In Lane 0.94 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.16 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 520 0 308 0 216 192 47 0 833 241 0 466 V/C Ratio(X) 0.19 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.44 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.17 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1089 0 921 0 647 575 296 0 1911 803 0 1267 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 9.3 9.3 14.3 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 8.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.1 0.0 9.8 0.0 9.3 9.4 20.7 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 LnGrp LOS B A A A A A C A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 147 11 148 79 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.0 9.4 7.2 9.0 Approach LOS B A A A Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 5.8 12.7 11.4 18.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 5.0 21.0 19.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.3 3.0 3.8 3.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 1.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.7 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 8: E7 (North) & Logan Ave N Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 2 1225 10 0 690 Future Vol, veh/h 0 2 1225 10 0 690 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 6 6 0 6 6 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 7 7 7 7 Mvmt Flow 0 2 1289 11 0 726 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 662 0 0 - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.1 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.9 - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 350 - - 0 - Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 346 - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 15.5 0 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 346 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.006 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.5 - HCM Lane LOS - - C - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 9: Logan Ave N & E7 (South)Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 0 1233 18 2 689 Future Vol, veh/h 4 0 1233 18 2 689 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 2 0 2 2 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - 25 - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 6 6 5 5 Mvmt Flow 4 0 1312 19 2 733 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1697 670 0 0 1333 0 Stage 1 1324 - - - - - Stage 2 373 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.8 6.9 - - 4.2 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.8 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.8 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 - - 2.25 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 85 404 - - 498 - Stage 1 217 - - - - - Stage 2 672 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 84 402 - - 497 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 176 - - - - - Stage 1 217 - - - - - Stage 2 668 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 26 0 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 176 497 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.024 0.004 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 26 12.3 - HCM Lane LOS - - D B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 10: Park Ave N & N 5th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 21 7 11 3 0 5 7 688 33 3 186 2 Future Vol, veh/h 21 7 11 3 0 5 7 688 33 3 186 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 4 5 0 2 4 0 5 2 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 180 - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 22 7 11 3 0 5 7 717 34 3 194 2 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 580 975 107 865 959 383 200 0 0 756 0 0 Stage 1 205 205 - 753 753 - - - - - - - Stage 2 375 770 - 112 206 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.16 - - 4.26 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.23 - - 2.28 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 402 253 933 251 259 621 1362 - - 812 - - Stage 1 784 736 - 372 420 - - - - - - - Stage 2 624 413 - 887 735 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 392 247 925 238 253 617 1357 - - 808 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 392 247 - 238 253 - - - - - - - Stage 1 774 730 - 367 414 - - - - - - - Stage 2 612 407 - 860 729 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.6 14.4 0.1 0.1 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1357 - - 416 238 617 808 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.098 0.013 0.008 0.004 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 0 - 14.6 20.3 10.9 9.5 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - B C B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.3 0 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 11: N 5th St & Garden Ave N Future (2023) With-Project Weekday AM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0 2 161 16 6 Future Vol, veh/h 9 0 2 161 16 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 180 0 50 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 5 5 12 12 Mvmt Flow 10 0 2 185 18 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 211 22 25 0 - 0 Stage 1 22 - - - - - Stage 2 189 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.58 6.38 4.15 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.58 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.58 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.662 3.462 2.245 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 743 1011 1570 - - - Stage 1 961 - - - - - Stage 2 806 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 742 1011 1570 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 722 - - - - - Stage 1 960 - - - - - Stage 2 806 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.1 0.1 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1570 - 722 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.014 - - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 - 10.1 0 - - HCM Lane LOS A - B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - - - HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 1: Logan Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 32 18 82 5 65 7 888 100 18 704 9 Future Volume (veh/h) 30 32 18 82 5 65 7 888 100 18 704 9 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1737 1737 1737 1885 1885 1885 1856 1856 1856 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 35 0 90 5 71 8 976 110 20 774 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 11 11 1 1 1 3 3 3 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 48 229 115 187 153 17 1032 116 36 1164 15 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.63 0.63 0.02 0.64 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1654 3300 1472 1795 1791 1460 1767 1635 184 1753 1813 23 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 33 35 0 90 5 71 8 0 1086 20 0 784 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1654 1650 1472 1795 1791 1460 1767 0 1819 1753 0 1836 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.2 1.1 0.0 5.4 0.3 5.0 0.5 0.0 60.1 1.2 0.0 29.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.2 1.1 0.0 5.4 0.3 5.0 0.5 0.0 60.1 1.2 0.0 29.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.01 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 48 229 115 187 153 17 0 1148 36 0 1179 V/C Ratio(X) 0.69 0.15 0.78 0.03 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.95 0.55 0.00 0.66 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 242 663 263 360 293 259 0 1148 257 0 1179 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.9 48.2 0.0 50.7 44.2 46.4 54.2 0.0 18.6 53.3 0.0 12.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.3 0.3 0.0 10.1 0.1 2.0 17.7 0.0 16.4 12.2 0.0 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 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 0.5 0.0 2.8 0.1 1.9 0.3 0.0 27.8 0.7 0.0 12.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 69.2 48.5 0.0 60.8 44.3 48.4 71.8 0.0 34.9 65.6 0.0 15.3 LnGrp LOS E D E D D E A C E A B Approach Vol, veh/h 68 A 166 1094 804 Approach Delay, s/veh 58.5 55.0 35.2 16.5 Approach LOS E E D B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 13.5 7.0 76.5 9.1 17.4 8.2 75.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 * 5.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 * 16 * 22 * 16 * 32 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 3.1 2.5 31.3 4.2 7.0 3.2 62.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.4 HCM 6th LOS C Notes * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 2: Park Ave N & N 8th Ave Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 63 74 19 144 87 66 29 434 79 99 324 42 Future Volume (veh/h) 63 74 19 144 87 66 29 434 79 99 324 42 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.93 0.91 0.95 0.94 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1648 1648 1648 1885 1885 1885 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 69 81 21 158 96 73 32 477 87 109 356 46 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 17 17 17 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 249 249 61 328 291 197 52 1544 280 136 1782 228 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.08 0.57 0.57 Sat Flow, veh/h 1570 2441 599 1795 1990 1344 1753 2939 532 1753 3105 398 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 69 50 52 158 85 84 32 282 282 109 199 203 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1570 1566 1474 1795 1791 1543 1753 1749 1723 1753 1749 1754 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 3.0 3.3 7.6 4.3 4.9 1.8 14.1 14.3 6.1 5.5 5.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 3.0 3.3 7.6 4.3 4.9 1.8 14.1 14.3 6.1 5.5 5.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.23 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 249 159 150 328 262 226 52 919 905 136 1003 1006 V/C Ratio(X) 0.28 0.32 0.34 0.48 0.33 0.37 0.62 0.31 0.31 0.80 0.20 0.20 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 326 313 295 337 358 309 175 919 905 263 1003 1006 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 37.6 41.7 41.8 34.2 38.3 38.5 49.0 25.4 25.5 45.3 10.3 10.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 4.2 0.8 0.8 4.0 0.4 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.5 1.2 1.2 3.3 1.9 1.9 0.9 6.8 6.8 2.8 2.1 2.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 37.8 42.1 42.3 34.6 38.5 38.9 53.1 26.3 26.4 49.4 10.7 10.7 LnGrp LOS D D D C D D D C C D B B Approach Vol, veh/h 171 327 596 511 Approach Delay, s/veh 40.4 36.7 27.8 19.0 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s14.5 15.2 7.9 62.4 10.0 19.6 12.8 57.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s10.0 20.0 10.0 40.0 10.0 20.0 15.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s9.6 5.3 3.8 7.6 5.9 6.9 8.1 16.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.3 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.5 0.1 3.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 28.1 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 3: Garden Ave N & N 8th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBU EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 236 14 44 268 18 279 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 236 14 44 268 18 279 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1767 1767 1826 1826 1885 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 274 16 51 312 21 324 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 5 5 1 1 Cap, veh/h 900 52 263 829 531 473 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 3311 187 252 3053 1795 1598 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 142 148 198 165 21 324 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1678 1732 1644 1578 1795 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 1.6 0.0 2.0 0.2 4.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 1.6 2.1 2.0 0.2 4.2 Prop In Lane 0.11 0.26 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 469 484 651 441 531 473 V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.31 0.30 0.38 0.04 0.69 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1783 1840 1857 1677 1526 1358 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.7 6.7 6.9 6.8 5.9 7.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.0 2.5 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 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.0 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 7.5 7.4 7.2 7.6 5.9 9.8 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 290 363 345 Approach Delay, s/veh 7.4 7.4 9.6 Approach LOS A A A Timer - Assigned Phs 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.6 12.0 11.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 20.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.1 6.2 3.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.0 1.6 3.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.2 HCM 6th LOS A Notes User approved ignoring U-Turning movement. HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 4: N 6th St & Boeing Rd Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 39 35 12 113 2 Future Vol, veh/h 3 39 35 12 113 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 33 0 0 0 0 33 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 160 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 73 73 73 73 73 73 Heavy Vehicles, % 10 10 12 12 5 5 Mvmt Flow 4 53 48 16 155 3 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 97 0 - 0 150 122 Stage 1 - - - - 89 - Stage 2 - - - - 61 - Critical Hdwy 4.2 - - - 6.45 6.25 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.45 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.45 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.29 - - - 3.545 3.345 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1448 - - - 835 921 Stage 1 - - - - 927 - Stage 2 - - - - 954 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1402 - - - 782 864 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 782 - Stage 1 - - - - 895 - Stage 2 - - - - 924 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0 10.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1402 - - - 783 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 - - - 0.201 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.6 - - - 10.8 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.7 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 5: Logan Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 17 46 94 162 11 16 32 988 244 9 796 10 Future Volume (veh/h) 17 46 94 162 11 16 32 988 244 9 796 10 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1796 1796 1796 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1826 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 18 48 0 171 12 17 34 1040 257 9 838 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 7 7 7 2 2 2 5 5 5 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 33 288 202 476 396 51 974 818 19 1820 24 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.11 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.53 0.53 0.01 0.52 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 1711 1796 1522 1781 1870 1554 1739 1826 1533 1753 3534 46 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 18 48 0 171 12 17 34 1040 257 9 415 434 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1711 1796 1522 1781 1870 1554 1739 1826 1533 1753 1749 1832 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 2.5 0.0 10.4 0.5 0.9 2.1 58.7 10.3 0.6 16.6 16.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 2.5 0.0 10.4 0.5 0.9 2.1 58.7 10.3 0.6 16.6 16.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 33 288 202 476 396 51 974 818 19 901 943 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.17 0.85 0.03 0.04 0.67 1.07 0.31 0.47 0.46 0.46 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 233 425 275 476 396 285 974 818 239 901 943 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.5 39.8 0.0 47.8 30.8 30.9 52.9 25.7 14.4 54.1 17.0 17.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.4 0.3 0.0 15.9 0.1 0.2 13.9 48.7 1.0 16.8 1.7 1.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 1.1 0.0 5.5 0.3 0.4 1.1 36.9 3.7 0.3 6.9 7.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 66.9 40.1 0.0 63.8 30.9 31.1 66.7 74.3 15.4 70.9 18.6 18.6 LnGrp LOS E D E C C E F B E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 66 A 200 1331 858 Approach Delay, s/veh 47.4 59.0 62.8 19.2 Approach LOS D E E B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.5 22.6 8.2 61.7 7.1 33.0 6.2 63.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 26.0 18.0 29.0 15.0 28.0 15.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.4 4.5 4.1 18.6 3.1 2.9 2.6 60.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.2 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 46.8 HCM 6th LOS D Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 6: Park Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 236 120 161 22 24 2 20 295 7 7 560 61 Future Volume (veh/h) 236 120 161 22 24 2 20 295 7 7 560 61 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1752 1752 1752 1856 1856 1856 1841 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 241 122 164 22 24 2 20 301 7 7 571 62 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 10 10 10 3 3 3 4 4 4 Cap, veh/h 230 279 245 38 81 7 38 2147 50 15 1899 206 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1763 1543 1668 1586 132 1767 3521 82 1753 3180 344 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 241 122 164 22 0 26 20 150 158 7 313 320 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1543 1668 0 1718 1767 1763 1840 1753 1749 1776 Q Serve(g_s), s 13.0 6.3 10.0 1.3 0.0 1.5 1.1 3.6 3.7 0.4 15.3 15.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.0 6.3 10.0 1.3 0.0 1.5 1.1 3.6 3.7 0.4 15.3 15.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.19 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 230 279 245 38 0 88 38 1075 1122 15 1045 1061 V/C Ratio(X) 1.05 0.44 0.67 0.58 0.00 0.29 0.53 0.14 0.14 0.45 0.30 0.30 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 230 388 339 217 0 378 177 1075 1122 140 1045 1061 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.96 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.5 38.0 39.6 48.4 0.0 45.7 48.4 8.3 8.3 49.6 22.3 22.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 71.9 0.4 1.2 5.0 0.0 0.7 4.2 0.3 0.3 7.2 0.7 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln10.2 2.7 3.8 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.5 1.4 1.5 0.2 7.3 7.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 115.4 38.4 40.8 53.4 0.0 46.4 52.7 8.6 8.6 56.8 23.0 23.0 LnGrp LOS F D D D A D D A A E C C Approach Vol, veh/h 527 48 328 640 Approach Delay, s/veh 74.4 49.6 11.3 23.4 Approach LOS E D B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s18.0 10.1 7.1 64.7 7.3 20.9 5.9 66.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s13.0 22.0 10.0 35.0 13.0 22.0 8.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s15.0 3.5 3.1 17.4 3.3 12.0 2.4 5.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.8 0.0 1.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 39.0 HCM 6th LOS D HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Boeing Renton Apron E 7: Garden Ave N & N 6th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 2 25 0 3 1 9 80 0 0 107 36 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 2 25 0 3 1 9 80 0 0 107 36 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1752 1752 1752 0 1693 1693 1900 1900 1900 1737 1737 1737 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 118 2 29 0 4 1 11 94 0 0 126 42 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Percent Heavy Veh, % 10 10 10 0 14 14 0 0 0 11 11 11 Cap, veh/h 513 7 302 0 532 127 26 849 0 249 321 107 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1285 32 1454 0 2653 614 1810 1900 0 1209 1237 412 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 120 0 29 0 2 3 11 94 0 0 0 168 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1316 0 1454 0 1608 1575 1810 1900 0 1209 0 1649 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 Prop In Lane 0.98 1.00 0.00 0.39 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.25 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 520 0 302 0 333 326 26 849 0 249 0 428 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.42 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1111 0 956 0 1056 1035 313 2037 0 813 0 1198 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.0 0.0 9.3 0.0 9.1 9.1 14.1 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.2 0.0 9.4 0.0 9.1 9.1 24.2 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 LnGrp LOS B A A A A A C A A A A B Approach Vol, veh/h 149 5 105 168 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.1 9.1 6.8 10.1 Approach LOS B A A B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 5.4 12.5 11.0 17.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 5.0 21.0 19.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 2.2 4.4 4.3 2.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.6 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.3 HCM 6th LOS A HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 8: E7 (North) & Logan Ave N Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 1 1243 0 0 1048 Future Vol, veh/h 0 1 1243 0 0 1048 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 2 0 2 2 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 100 100 4 4 4 4 Mvmt Flow 0 1 1337 0 0 1127 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 673 0 0 - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 9.1 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 4.9 - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 205 - - 0 - Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 204 - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 22.7 0 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 204 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.005 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 22.7 - HCM Lane LOS - - C - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 9: Logan Ave N & E7 (South)Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 4 1280 4 2 1047 Future Vol, veh/h 14 4 1280 4 2 1047 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - 25 - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 4 4 3 3 Mvmt Flow 15 4 1376 4 2 1126 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1945 690 0 0 1380 0 Stage 1 1378 - - - - - Stage 2 567 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.8 6.9 - - 4.16 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.8 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.8 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 - - 2.23 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 58 392 - - 487 - Stage 1 203 - - - - - Stage 2 537 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 58 392 - - 487 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 154 - - - - - Stage 1 203 - - - - - Stage 2 535 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 27.7 0 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 178 487 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.109 0.004 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 27.7 12.4 - HCM Lane LOS - - D B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0 - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 10: Park Ave N & N 5th St Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 19 8 16 47 1 6 2 279 16 3 621 17 Future Vol, veh/h 19 8 16 47 1 6 2 279 16 3 621 17 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 0 8 6 0 5 8 0 6 5 0 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 180 - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 15 15 15 0 0 0 7 7 7 4 4 4 Mvmt Flow 20 8 16 48 1 6 2 288 16 3 640 18 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 819 977 345 644 978 165 666 0 0 310 0 0 Stage 1 663 663 - 306 306 - - - - - - - Stage 2 156 314 - 338 672 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.8 6.8 7.2 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.24 - - 4.18 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.8 5.8 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.8 5.8 - 6.5 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.65 4.15 3.45 3.5 4 3.3 2.27 - - 2.24 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 246 228 615 362 252 857 886 - - 1233 - - Stage 1 387 426 - 684 665 - - - - - - - Stage 2 794 623 - 656 458 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 239 223 606 336 247 846 879 - - 1226 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 239 223 - 336 247 - - - - - - - Stage 1 383 421 - 678 659 - - - - - - - Stage 2 779 617 - 618 453 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 18.9 16.6 0.1 0 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 879 - - 303 336 628 1226 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - - 0.146 0.144 0.011 0.003 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 0 - 18.9 17.5 10.8 7.9 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - C C B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.5 0.5 0 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC Boeing Renton Apron E 11: N 5th St & Garden Ave N Future (2023) With-Project Weekday PM Peak Hour Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 25 2 26 174 12 Future Vol, veh/h 7 25 2 26 174 12 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 3 3 0 0 2 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 180 0 50 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 56 56 0 0 8 8 Mvmt Flow 8 29 2 30 202 14 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 248 215 219 0 - 0 Stage 1 212 - - - - - Stage 2 36 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.96 6.76 4.1 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.96 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.96 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 4.004 3.804 2.2 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 637 707 1362 - - - Stage 1 711 - - - - - Stage 2 864 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 633 703 1358 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 629 - - - - - Stage 1 708 - - - - - Stage 2 861 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.4 0.5 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1358 - 629 703 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - 0.013 0.041 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - 10.8 10.3 - - HCM Lane LOS A - B B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 0.1 - - RENTON, WA Lot S1 Light Impingement Study PROJECT # 35989 January 28, 2020 Prepared by: RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION 222 Etruria Street, Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98109 206.839.0819 ph // 206.839.0824 fx Noise Study Report Boeing Renton Apron E – Phase I Submitted to: Debbie Jung Emily George KPFF 222 Etruria Street, Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98109 206.839.0819 ph // 206.839.0824 fx Noise Study Report Boeing Renton Apron E – Phase I Submitted to: Debbie Jung Emily George KPFF Response to City Comment #3 of 04/22/20 KPFF, 2020-05-13 Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 2 Document Information FILE: Noise Study Report - Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I PROJECT #: 19-7174 PREPARED BY: Alan Burt, P.E. SIGNED: DATE: May 11, 2020 This report has been prepared for the titled project or named part thereof and should not be used in whole or part and relied upon for any other project without the written authorization of SSA Acoustics, LLP. SSA Acoustics, LLP accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of this document if it is used for a purpose other than that for which it was commissioned. Persons wishing to use or rely upon this report for other purposes must seek written authority to do so from the owner of this report and/or SSA Acoustics, LLP and agree to indemnify SSA Acoustics, LLP for any and all resulting loss or damage. SSA Acoustics, LLP accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any other party other than the person by whom it was commissioned. The findings and opinions expressed are relevant to the dates of the works and should not be relied upon to represent conditions at substantially later dates. Opinions included therein are based on information gathered during the study and from our experience. If additional information becomes available which may affect our comments, conclusions or recommendations SSA Acoustics, LLP reserves the right to review the information, reassess any new potential concerns and modify our opinions accordingly. Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 3 I. Introduction The following report documents the results of the evaluation of noise levels from the proposed aircraft stalls to the residential properties east of the proposed site and Renton Memorial Stadium to the south as well as noise levels at the Cedar River trail. The evaluation and analysis are based on noise data, proposed site design, and noise level criteria appropriate for the project. II. DESIGN CRITERIA ZONING & CODE REQUIREMENTS According to the City of Renton, the project site and nearest surrounding properties are currently zoned as follows: Property Zoning Project Site UC East (Residential Properties) R-8 South (Renton Stadium) UC According to Renton Municipal Code, UC properties are within “Commercial” zoning districts, and R-8 properties are within “Residential” zoning districts. City of Renton adopts WAC Sections 173- 60-020, 173-60-040, 173-60-050, and 173-60-090 for maximum environmental noise levels. WAC 173-60 defines commercial use properties as Class B EDNA and residential use properties as Class A EDNA. WAC 173-60 limits noise from a Class B EDNA (Commercial) property as follows: Class B EDNA (Commercial) Receiver: Noise is limited to 60 dBA during daytime hours. Class A EDNA (Residential) Receiver: Noise is limited to 57 dBA during daytime hours. During nighttime, defined as the hours between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., exterior sound level limits are reduced by 10 dBA where the receiving property lies within a residential district of the City. At any hour of the day or night the applicable noise limitations above may be exceeded for any receiving property by no more than: (i) 5 dBA for a total of 15 minutes in any one-hour period; or (ii) 10 dBA for a total of 5 minutes in any one-hour period; or (iii) 15 dBA for a total of 1.5 minutes in any one-hour period. Under WAC 173-60-050, sounds created by aircraft engine testing and maintenance not related to flight operations are exempt between 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM. The current run-up test schedule consists of high-power runs allowed between 8 AM and 5 PM and medium-power runs until 6 PM. Typical run-up tests last for about 35 – 40 minutes. During the tests, the engines are at idle approximately 2/3 of the time (about 25 minutes) with engines at full power for 1/3 of the time (two different runs for 5 minutes or less). One engine is tested at a time. Engine run-up testing conducted at the proposed stalls is therefore exempt from the code limits as the run-up testing will occur only during daytime hours. The following provides an evaluation of the run-up noise levels compared to code limits and existing sound levels and mitigation measures intended to reduce the impact of noise levels to the surrounding properties. Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 4 Run-up testing will vary in duration and extent throughout the day, however as noted the engines run at full power for 5 minutes or less during a test. The engine noise is loudest at full power. In the interest of minimizing impact during testing, it is recommended that noise levels from the run- up testing not exceed ambient levels by more than 10 dBA, which is consistent with the 10 dB short-duration increase allowed for up to 5 minutes above the code limits. The following figure shows a zoning map of the project site and surrounding properties: Figure 1: Proposed Site and Surround Properties (City of Renton GIS) AMBIENT CONDITIONS Existing ambient noise levels were measured at locations representative of the residential properties to the east of the proposed project between 3/13 – 3/16, 2019. Measurements were conducted with Svantek 971 noise monitors. The weather during the measurements was clear and the roads were dry. Hourly average LEQ noise levels during daytime hours (between 7 AM – 10 PM) were between 57 – 63 dBA (average of 60 dBA). Ambient noise levels at the Cedar River Trail park were measured on 5/6/2020. Noise levels were between 50 – 55 dBA. Please see the appendix for more information regarding the measurements. Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 5 IV. PROJECT SITE The following figure presents the project site plan with the proposed stalls. Figure 2: Project Site NOISE BARRIER Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 6 IV. PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS 737 Engine Run-Up Testing Noise Levels: The following are noise levels from measurements of 737 engine run-up, provided in a previous study. Noise levels were measured at 50 feet from the engines. Table 1: 737 Engine Noise Levels – Measured 50 feet from engine1 Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) Engine Power RPM dBA 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 100% 4300 105 112 112 107 102 98 95 92 93 86% 3700 100 102 103 101 97 94 91 90 91 50% 2200 88 81 81 80 81 79 78 84 82 1. Source data obtained from Renton Apron C ground runup stall noise study. Noise data is for 737 Max engines. Predicted Noise Levels Noise levels were calculated based on noise reduction over distance and noise reduction from the barrier or intervening buildings or structures. It is important to note that engine run-up testing is exempt from noise code limits and WAC as the testing is conducted only during daytime hours. East Receiving Properties The proposed aircraft location in the easternmost stall is approximately 400 feet to the nearest residential zoned property to the east. A solid steel sound wall is proposed along the east and north sides of the stalls to block noise to the properties to the east as shown in figure 1. The proposed noise wall will be 25 feet tall. The following are the predicted noise level at the east receiving property: Table 2 - Predicted Noise Levels – East Receiving Properties (Residential) 737 Engine Sound Level Receiver Distance (feet) Distance Reduction1 Barrier Reduction2 Lp,r 100% Power 105 dBA @ 50’ 400 -20 -15 70 dBA 86% Power 100 dBA @ 50’ 400 -20 -15 65 dBA 50% Power 86 dBA @ 50’ 400 -20 -15 51 dBA Table Notes: 1. Distance Factor = 20*log(Dr/Ds) – 10*log(Q) 2. Barrier reduction from proposed noise barrier According to the predicted noise levels, run-up engine noise levels will be between 51 – 70 dBA at the residential receiving properties to the east. Noise levels will be within or slightly above existing noise levels up to 86% power, and about 10 dBA above existing levels at 100% power. This meets the recommended level increase above ambient levels to reduce the noise impact. Note that without the sound wall, noise levels from the testing would be 66 – 85 dBA, which would be significantly above existing levels. Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 7 South Receiving Property (Renton Memorial Stadium) The proposed aircraft locations in the stalls are each approximately 650 feet to the south property. The paint hanger and will act as a noise barrier to the south property. Table 3 - Predicted Noise Levels – South Receiving Property (Commercial) 737 Engine Sound Level Distance (feet) Distance Reduction1 Barrier Reduction2 Lp,r 100% Power 105 dBA @ 50’ 650 -25 -20 60 dBA 86% Power 100 dBA @ 50’ 650 -25 -20 55 dBA 50% Power 86 dBA @ 50’ 650 -25 -20 41 dBA Table Notes: 1. Distance Factor = 20*log(Dr/Ds) – 10*log(Q) 2. Barrier reduction from intervening building According to the predicted noise levels, run-up engine noise will be 41 – 60 dBA, which is within the current background levels. Cedar River Trail The westernmost aircraft stall location is approximately 645 feet to the Cedar River trail to the west. The existing stall walls and intervening buildings will act as a noise barrier to the trail. Table 4 - Predicted Noise Levels – Cedar River Trail 737 Engine Sound Level Distance (feet) Distance Reduction1 Barrier Reduction2 Lp,r 100% Power 105 dBA @ 50’ 645 -25 -20 60 dBA 86% Power 100 dBA @ 50’ 645 -25 -20 55 dBA 50% Power 86 dBA @ 50’ 645 -25 -20 41 dBA Table Notes: 1. Distance Factor = 20*log(Dr/Ds) – 10*log(Q) 2. Barrier reduction from intervening buildings and stalls According to the predicted noise levels, run-up engine noise will be between 41 – 60 dBA which is within the recommended range of noise levels at the trail. Note that the distances between the engines and the sound wall and the receiving properties are such that reflected sound energy from the sound wall will not increase noise levels from the engines. Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 8 V. ADDITIONAL MITIGATION CONSIDERATIONS The currently proposed mitigation measures are designed to reduce noise levels from run-up testing such that they are within the recommended increase above ambient at the residential receiving properties to the east. Noise levels at the other locations will be within the recommended noise level range due to the combination of distance and other intervening elements. Additional mitigation measures may be considered, however, if in practice noise levels are found to be higher than as predicted. Note that extending the proposed noise wall further west or south will not be significantly effective in further reducing noise levels to the residential properties to the east. Due to the geometry of the stalls relative to the barriers and receiving properties, any flanking noise would either be blocked by the barrier, or reduced to equivalent mitigated noise levels due to the distance between the aircraft, barrier edge and receiver location. The following are conceptual options to reduce noise levels, specific design of these or other mitigation measures may be considered should these need to be implemented: • Intermediate noise barriers between stalls • Localized noise enclosures installed around the engines VI. SUMMARY This concludes the noise evaluation for the proposed 737 run-up stalls at the Boeing Renton Apron E project. Please contact us if you have questions or need further information. Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 9 APPENDIX I: DESCRIPTORS A. Descriptors and Terminology A-Weighted Decibel (dBA) Human exposure to noise is typically measured as an A-weighted sound level in units of decibels, symbolized as dBA. The A-weighting is a frequency-specific weighting that corresponds approximately to the sensitivity of human hearing at the various frequencies. Sound levels vary significantly, depending on location and activities. Locations near highways or urban arterials may be 70 dBA, whereas quiet rural areas may be 40 dBA. People normally experience sound levels between about 30 and 90 dBA, depending on their activity. For example, a nearby noisy vehicle, radio or power tool may produce 90 dBA; normal conversation is about 55 to 65 dBA; and a bedroom or quiet office is about 30 to 40 dBA. Loudness is judged by an average listener to double for each 10 dBA increase in sound level. For example, 60 dBA is judged to be twice as loud as 50 dBA and four times as loud as 40 dBA. Leq: When measuring noise that is fluctuating over time it is common practice to use a descriptor called equivalent A-weighted sound level, Leq. The Leq is the constant sound level in dBA, which contains the same amount of sound energy over a given time period as the measured fluctuating noise. Descriptors that are commonly used to describe noise from the environmental noise are the Leq(h), the 24-hour Leq and the Ldn. The Leq(h) is the average sound in dBA over a one hour period during the day or night. The 24-hour Leq is the average sound in dBA over a 24 hour period calculated using the hourly Leqs. Lmax The Lmax is the highest RMS instantaneous sound level for a given sound event or time period. LDN/DNL: The day-night noise level (DNL or Ldn) is a 24-hour average with a 10 decibel penalty added to the hourly leqs between 10 pm and 7 am. These are the most common references in HUD guidelines, and Federal and State regulations. STC/TL: Considering the acoustic performance of a building element such as a wall or floor, the ability of the system to block the transmission of sound waves is important. The sound transmission loss (TL) of a material or building partition is a measure of sound isolation ability. Since TL is very frequency dependent, it is generally reported in the third octave frequency bands between, as a minimum, 125 Hz and 4,000 Hz. As a convenience, a single number rating method has been developed which allows a single value to be given to a transmission loss spectrum. This rating is referred to as the sound transmission class (STC) rating which has been defined in the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard E413. This standard defines a procedure for determining the STC rating for a TL spectrum by fitting a contour to the one-third octave band TL data. Boeing Renton Apron E - Phase I Page 10 APPENDIX II: SITE NOISE MEASUREMENTS Long and short-term ambient noise measurements were conducted March 13- 16, 2019 and May 6, 2020. Noise levels were measured by Svantek 971 integrating sound level meters. The following figure presents the locations of each of the measurements. Figure 3: Noise Measurement Locations Measurement Results Summary: Location Daytime Hourly Leq (dBA) M1 57 – 63 M2 57 – 63 M3 50 – 55 M2 M1 M3 CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Renton, WA Apron E Project Proposed Construction Dates & Times: The proposed construction schedule will begin in Jan 2020 and end in December 2021 Apron E Construction Zones Work Hours: 7:00AM-7:00PM Mon-Sat Crew Mobilize: 6:00AM-7:00AM Construction Work Activities: 7:00AM-7:00PM Construction Mitigation Measures & Best Practices: All activities will begin with the implementation and installation of Best Management Practices (BMP)). These practices include: Proposed Hauling/ Transportation routes Contractors will apply for their own hauling permits related to this project. And will follow a city approved route. Construction. The actual Construction will be accomplished by a Construction contractor. The contractor will call for all required inspections, as well as site pre-construction meeting. The contractor will keep records of any special inspections at the construction site Storm Water Construction will start with the implementation and installation of Best Management Practices (BMP) for Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) under supervision of Boeing Environmental personnel. All storm water drain inlets in and around the proposed construction operations and staging areas will be surrounded by oil absorbent padding to mitigate the potential of any hydraulic/fuel leakages emanating from construction machinery entering the watershed Snow, Ice, dirt and mud removal Contractor shall remove snow and ice to the extent necessary to perform the work. The use of calcium chloride or other chemicals will not be permitted to remove snow or ice. Contractor shall assure that vehicles are constructed, loaded, maintained and covered as necessary to prevent the deposition of dirt, mud or other debris on public roadways. Dirt mud or debris shall be removed on RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION continual basis. Any dirt, mud or debris dropped by vehicles shall be removed immediately. Dust Control Through the entire construction period the Contractor shall take all necessary steps to dust control all working area and unpaved roads. The use of calcium chloride or other chemicals will not be permitted for dust control. The Contractor will accomplish dust control by watering and sprinkling to satisfactorily settle the dust. Contractor shall comply with any requirements imposed by law to prevent fugitive dust emissions. All demolished materials and debris will be stockpiled on site to prevent dust and sedimentation from migrating onto roadways. Contractor vehicles that are transporting materials to and from the site will be required to have tires washed prior to leaving the site. This will prevent dust and sedimentation from entering nearby roadways. Airport Mitigation Contractor will provide advanced notification of any construction activities that could directly affect or pose a risk to airport operations. The Contractor be in communication with airport tower during construction hours. Engine Operation and Safety Precautions – 737 Aircraft Business Process Guide Exhibit I - RENTON FIELD OPERATOR GUIDE FOR CURFEW HOURS WINTER October – April SUMMER May - September Weekdays Engine Runs Permitted 8 AM – 5 PM Low Power Permitted 5 PM – 6 PM All other runs are to be cleared through Senior Manager Weekdays Engine Runs Permitted 8 AM – 11:30 AM 1:30 PM – 5 PM Low Power Permitted 11:30 AM – 1:30 PM 5 PM – 6 PM All other runs are to be cleared through Senior Manager Saturdays All runs permitted 9 AM – 4 PM All other runs are to be cleared through Senior Manager Saturdays All runs permitted 9 AM – 4 PM All other runs are to be cleared through Senior Manager Sundays All runs are to be cleared through Senior Manager and to be limited to 12 PM – 3 PM Only Sundays All runs are to be cleared through Senior Manager and to be limited to 12 PM – 3 PM Only RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION April 22, 2020 Mark Clement The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707 MC 96-01 Seattle, WA 98124 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice #2 Boeing Apron E, LUA19-000145 Dear Mr. Clement: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on July 16, 2019. During our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The City of Renton’s Community Economic Development Department has reviewed the project and would like an independent qualified parking and transportation professional to conduct an Independent Secondary Review of the submitted Boeing Renton Apron E Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Transpo Group (dated June 10, 2019) for the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs. The contract would be executed with a qualified professional from the City of Renton’s small works roster in order to provide a professional opinion regarding the proposed transportation and parking changes. No additional data would collected by the third party beyond what has been provided in the submittedstudy. Upon the conclusion of third party study review, the findings would be provided to the City in a written letter. The Independent Secondary Review would be paid at the applicant’s expense, and the Administrator shall select the third-party review professional. The applicant shall also be responsible for following: 1. Evaluating the potential to provide a greater building setback from the eastern property line along Logan Ave N in order to reduce to visual impact of the proposed structure. 2. Evaluating the potential to modulate the sound wall in order to reduce the visual impact of a 25- foot tall steel wall along a public right-of-way. 3. Submitting an updated noise study that 1) Provides justification for the stated goal of limiting ambient noise increases to 10 dBa or less, 2) Evaluates potential noise impacts to the Cedar River Trail to the west of the project site using ambient noise levels as a base, 3) Identifies the locations of the measuring equipment used to measure ambient noise levels at the adjacent sites, 4) Makes a specific finding with regards to the expected noise levels (measured in dBa) at the adjacent uses, 5) Identifies additional noise mitigation Mark Clement Page 2 of 2 April 22, 2020 measures that the applicant could feasibly incorporate at the site after project completion should actual noise levels occur that are higher than anticipated , 6) Discusses whether or not extending the sound wall further west would reduce noise impacts to any of the adjacent sites. At this time, your project has been placed “on hold” pending receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Alex Morganroth Senior Planner cc: Mr. and Mrs. Oatis /Parties of Record DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: November 6, 2020 TO: Alex Morganroth, Senior Planner FROM: Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager SUBJECT: Traffic Concurrency Test – Boeing Apron E (737 Logan Avenue N); LUA19-000145 The applicant, The Boeing Company, is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a variance in order to convert an existing parking lot (S1 Lot) into an aircraft production area. The subject property (APN 0723059001) is to the east of the Cedar River along Lake Washington. The site is home to the Boeing 737 plant and associated support buildings and is located in the Urban Center (UC) zone. The proposal includes three (3) new outdoor production stalls for aircraft and a new 72,145 sq. ft. (footprint) paint hangar with two bays. The existing fire station west of the proposed building would be retained. A sound wall and landscape screening is proposed along the Logan Ave N and N 6th St right-of-way. A parking lot with approximately 45 stalls would be constructed south of the proposed new building. All work would occur further than 200 feet from the Cedar River OHWM. Site access is proposed via a connection between the existing Apron D area to the west and the proposed work area. The applicant is requesting a variance in order to seek relief from the parking lot landscaping requirements in RMC 4-4-070. The project would result in new and replaced impervious surfaces, tree removal, and vegetation removal. The applicant submitted a Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Impact Analysis, Noise Study, Light Impingement Study, and Parking Analysis with the application. The proposed 72,145 square foot manufacturing building has the potential to generate approximately 284 net new average weekday daily trips per the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition. During the weekday AM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 45 net new trips (34 inbound and 11 outbound). During the weekday PM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 48 net new trips (15 inbound and 33 outbound). The proposed project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D as follows: Transportation Concurrency Test – Boeing Apron E Page 2 of 3 November 6, 2020 Traffic Concurrency Test Criteria Pass Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan Yes Within allowed growth levels Yes Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees Yes Site specific street improvements to be completed by project Yes Traffic Concurrency Test Passes Evaluation of Test Criteria Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan: The City’s investment in completion of the forecast traffic improvements is 130% of the scheduled expenditure through 2020. Within allowed growth levels: The citywide traffic concurrency trip capacity for concurrency with the city adopted model for 2020 is 1,709 trips, which provides sufficient capacity to accommodate approximately 48 additional trips from this project. A resulting 1,661 trips are remaining. Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees: The project will be subject to transportation impact fees at time of building permit for the project. Site specific street improvements to be completed by project: The project will be required to complete any necessary frontage street improvements prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Any additional off-site improvements identified through SEPA or land use approval will also be completed prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Background Information on Traffic Concurrency Test for Renton The City of Renton Traffic Concurrency requirements for proposed development projects are covered under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-6-070. The specific concurrency test requirement is covered in RMC 4-6-070.D, which is listed for reference: D. CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Test Required: A concurrency test shall be conducted by the Department for each nonexempt development activity. The concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adopted Citywide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according to rules and procedures established by the Department. The Department shall issue an initial concurrency test result describing the outcome of the concurrency test. Transportation Concurrency Test – Boeing Apron E Page 3 of 3 November 6, 2020 2. Written Finding Required: Prior to approval of any nonexempt development activity permit application, a written finding of concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development permit approval. The finding of concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development permits required for a development activity. A written finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit. 3. Failure of Test: If no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration a project fails the concurrency test, the project application shall be denied by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit application. The Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element on page XI-65 of the Comprehensive Plan states the following: Based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS-tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation, development will have met City of Renton concurrency requirements. Transportation Impact Analysis BOEING RENTON APRON E Prepared for: The Boeing Company January 2020 Prepared by: 12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 203 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 Phone: 425-821-3665 www.transpogroup.com 1.19122.00 © 2020 Transpo Group RECEIVED 02/06/2020 amorganroth PLANNING DIVISION