HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Transpo_TIA_Cedar_River_Apts_210507.pdf
12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 203, Kirkland, WA 98034 | 425.821.3665 |
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 7, 2021 TG:1.19297.00
To: Matt Herrera, AICP - City of Renton
From: Jon Pascal, PE, PTOE – Transpo Group
Walker Cheng, PE – Transpo Group
cc: Chris Barnes, PE - City of Renton
Subject: Cedar River Apartments Independent Transportation and Mitigation Analysis
This memorandum summarizes the results of an independent transportation analysis of the
proposed Cedar River Apartments proposal. The following provides a summary of the results,
project background, methodology and approach, analysis results, and potential mitigation
measures.
Summary of Results
A summary of the analysis conducted, and the resulting key findings and recommended mitigation
measures are highlighted below.
Overview of the Analysis
The updated transportation analysis was built from the prior TIA and associated data files
prepared by William Popp Associates. The scope of the transportation analysis was developed
based on discussions with City of Renton staff and consisted of the following elements and key
assumptions:
· Focused on concerns raised by members of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC)
o off-site intersection LOS
o site access operations
o vehicle queuing along SR 169
o potential cut-through traffic in the park
· Expanded the study area to capture operations and potential impacts at nearby
intersections that served a high percentage of project related trips.
· Updated the horizon year from 2023 to 2024 to reflect likely completion of the proposed
project.
· Removed the I-405 ETL project from the analysis since it will not be completed until 2025.
· Modified the assumptions at the I-405 interchange based on discussions with Renton
Public Works traffic operations staff.
· Included additional performance criteria such as:
o Intersection LOS and delay by intersection approach to better understand the
specific changes to intersection operations from the proposed project.
o Vehicle hours of delay to understand system performance along the SR 169
corridor.
o Travel time to estimate the potential amount of cut-through project traffic that may
utilize an internal connection through Cedar River Park.
Key Findings
The updated transportation analysis resulted in the following key findings:
2
· All study intersections will operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours,
except for the Bronson Way / Houser Way and Sunset Boulevard / NE 3rd Street
intersections.
o The Bronson Way / Houser Way intersection will operate at LOS F with and
without the project.
o The Sunset Boulevard / NE 3rd Street intersection will drop from an LOS D to
LOS E with the addition of project related traffic during the PM peak hour.
· The added project traffic would result in noticeable increase in delays on the northbound
approach at the SR 169 / Cedar River Park Drive intersection. The delays would be
particularly high during the AM peak hour due to congestion and vehicle queuing on SR
169, thereby limiting available capacity for vehicles to exit the project site.
· The average westbound vehicle queue length on SR 169 at the Cedar River Park Drive
intersection during the AM peak hour is expected to increase by approximately 450 feet
(35 percent) due to the addition of project related traffic and little available remaining
capacity along the corridor.
· The total vehicle hours of delay along SR 169 in the vicinity of the site would increase by
approximately 20 percent with the addition of project traffic.
· There is the possibility that between 15 to 24 project generated vehicles may utilize the
route through Cedar River Park as alternative access due to travel time advantages of
avoiding the I-405 / SR 169 interchange.
Recommended Mitigation
The following mitigation is recommended to address the impacts of the project. The mitigation is
focused on improving performance and reliability of the signal system at the site access
intersection and along the SR 169 corridor in the immediate vicinity of the site. It also addresses
the potential for cut-through traffic in Cedar River Park.
· Implementation of an Adaptive Traffic Control System (ATCS) is recommended to mitigate
the project’s impact to vehicle queuing, intersection operations, and vehicle hours of delay
along SR 169. The City’s ATCS system is referred to as Split Cycle Offset Optimization
Technique (SCOOT) system and has been implemented on the Rainier Avenue corridor.
Installing a similar system along SR 169 would assist in helping mitigate the project
impacts by improving performance of the signal system around the I-405 interchange and
allowing the system to dynamically change to the surrounding traffic conditions.
· Traffic calming measures should be implemented to discourage project related traffic from
utilizing the route through Cedar River Park to bypass congestion around the I-405
interchange. Any potential traffic calming measure should be coordinated with the City’s
Parks Department for feasibility.
Background
The purpose of this effort was to prepare an independent transportation analysis of the potential
impacts of the Cedar River Apartments proposal. A prior Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by
William Popp Associates, dated July 6, 2020, was reviewed by both the City of Renton and
Transpo Group. The TIA noted level of service (LOS) impacts and significant vehicle queuing
along SR 169 during the AM and PM peak hours under future 2023 scenarios where the I-405
Corridor Express Toll Lane (ETL) project was not completed. The City was interested in exploring
and confirming the potential impacts of the project in more detail, including possible mitigation
measures as part of this updated transportation analysis.
Completion of the I-405 ETL improvements by WSDOT are not expected to occur until 2025, a few
years after the original project proposal was to be completed. Since the ETL will not be completed
until 2025, any potential benefits of the ETL project on I-405 mainline capacity or congestion were
3
not included in this updated transportation analysis. WSDOT studies have shown less freeway
congestion during the 2025 conditions after completion of the project, which would likely result in
improved operations at the I-405 / SR 169 interchange and its associated ramps. As a result, the
updated transportation analysis presents a ‘worst-case’ scenario of traffic operations around the
SR 169 interchange for the period between 2024 and 2025.
Analysis Approach
The transportation analysis was built from the prior TIA and associated data files prepared by
William Popp Associates. The project trip generation and distribution were considered reasonable
and were consistent with the prior TIA. The horizon year for purposes of the updated independent
analysis and to help in establishing potential mitigation was updated from 2023 to 2024, and both
AM and PM peak periods were evaluated. Other key assumptions utilized in the independent
transportation analysis are listed as following:
· The primary access for the project is Cedar River Park Drive intersection with SR 169
· The I-405 ramp meters are not included in the traffic operations analysis to provide a
better ‘apples to apples’ comparison between with and without project scenarios, as
agreed upon with Renton Public Works traffic operations staff.
· The existing westbound HOV left-turn lane at the Bronson Way/Sunset Boulevard
intersection was converted to a general-purpose turn lane as part of the traffic operations
analysis, thereby providing dual westbound left-turn lanes that are open to general-
purpose traffic. There were several reasons for this:
o The traffic operations model that was utilized was not sophisticated enough to
adequately model SOV versus HOV traffic.
o Past studies and observations by Renton and WSDOT staff have shown a high
number of HOV lane violations, thereby the lane is serving a high number of
general-purpose vehicles today.
o Renton staff are working with WSDOT to modify the channelization, which could
occur before the ETL project is completed.
o The change is consistent with the plans for the WSDOT ETL project.
· The study area was expanded to capture operations and potential impacts at nearby
intersections that served a high percentage of project related trips.
Network Expansion and Adjustment
The study transportation network was expanded from the original TIA scope to include two
adjacent intersections to the SR 169 / Sunset Boulevard intersection. The two added intersections
were Bronson Way N and Houser Way N, and Sunset Boulevard N and NE 3rd Street. In addition,
the traffic operations model, which utilized the Synchro/SimTraffic software package, was adjusted
to align with a scaled aerial background to account for proper queuing storage space between
intersections. The expanded Synchro/SimTraffic network is shown in Figure 1.
Pre-Covid turning movement counts and signal timing information for the two added intersections
were provided by the City. The turning movement counts were adjusted to reflect the existing
analysis year condition by balancing with volumes at the intersection of SR 169 / Sunset
Boulevard from the original TIA.
4
Figure 1. Expanded Synchro/SimTraffic Transportation Network
Forecast Traffic Volumes
For the purpose of establishing potential mitigation, the horizon year of this study was assumed as
2024 instead of 2023 from the prior TIA to be consistent with the year the project will be fully
completed. A one percent annual growth rate was used to forecast the traffic volumes out to 2024,
consistent with the background traffic volume forecast methodology from the prior TIA. No pipeline
projects were identified by the City that would have a significant impact on this analysis within the
extended horizon year.
As mentioned earlier, the project trip generation and distribution were kept consistent with the prior
TIA. For the horizon year of 2024, the project trip generation covered all development phases.
Future year AM and PM peak hour with-project traffic volumes were then developed by adding the
project trips to the background forecast 2024 traffic volumes.
5
The 2024 AM and PM peak hour volumes for without-project, project generated trips, and with-
project scenarios are shown in Figure 2, 3, and 4.
Performance Measures
The updated transportation analysis did not develop and prepare an entirely new TIA. Instead, the
effort focused on the evaluation of key performance measures to better quantify and understand
the impacts of the project proposal on the transportation system surrounding the I-405 / SR 169
interchange. The analysis focused on key concerns raised by members of the Environmental
Review Committee (ERC), which included off-site intersection LOS, site access operations, vehicle
queuing along SR 169, and potential cut-through traffic in the park.
The types of performance criteria that were more closely reviewed included:
· Intersection Level: The overall intersection LOS was evaluated consistent with the prior
TIA, but the LOS and delay by intersection approach was also summarized to better
understand the specific changes to intersection operations from the proposed project.
· Corridor Level: To understand system performance along the SR 169 corridor, several
corridor level performance measures were evaluated. The first was the AM peak hour
westbound vehicle queuing at the site access intersection of Cedar River Park Drive. An
additional measure of the vehicle hours of delay was also evaluated. Both measures
assist in determining more system level changes along SR 169 with and without the
proposed project.
· Cut-through Traffic: The potential amount of cut-through traffic that may utilize an
internal connection through Cedar River Park was quantitively evaluated based on the
attractiveness to utilize the route. The attractiveness of the route was based upon a high-
level travel time analysis.
Baseline (2024) Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Renton Traffic Study Review
FIGURE
2
Apr 14, 2021 - 12:02pm siqih M:\19\1.19297.00 - Renton Traffic Study Review\Graphics\Graphics.dwg Layout: Vol - Baseline
2 3
4
6
1
5
Houser Way N
Factory Ave N
(65) 190
(15) 20
70
(160)
(520) 1,155
(1,035) 910
(55) 25
(10) 25
(475) 305
(470) 630
(100) 470
(85) 40
495
(720)
(580) 1,010
(810) 970
(290) 215
(165) 175
(80) 205
(755)
1,265
(175) 130
Sunset Blvd N
N 3rd St
Sunset Blvd N
Bronson Way
(425) 720
(110) 560
(50) 70 (830) 360
(620) 255
(960) 825
(280) 1,230
(915)
800
(470) 685
SR 169
I-405 NB Ramps
(20) 65
(375) 1,720
(310) 825
(1,830) 755
(440) 265
(530) 720
SR 169
Shari's Driveway
(35) 45
(685) 2,275 (2,155) 1,005
(5) 15
(5) 5(60) 35
1112
1 2
3
(115) 35
SR 169
Cedar River Park Dr
(670) 2,230
(65) 40
(35) 40 (5) 70
(15) 15
(2,125) 975
4
1 2
3 4
5 6
Study Intersection
(X) Weekday AM Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes
LEGEND
X
X Weekday PM Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes
N 3RD ST
FACTORY AVE NHOUSER WAY NN
3
R
D
S
T
BRO
N
S
O
N
W
A
Y SUNSET BLVD NSHA
RI'
S
D
RI
V
E
W
A
Y
PAR
K
D
R
CED
A
R
RIVER
N 4TH ST
FACTORY P
I
NMAP
L
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
HW
YI-405 NB RAMPSI-405 SB RAMPS
2024 Weekday Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Renton Traffic Study Review
FIGURE
3
Apr 14, 2021 - 12:02pm siqih M:\19\1.19297.00 - Renton Traffic Study Review\Graphics\Graphics.dwg Layout: Vol - Project Trip
2 3
4
6
1
5
Houser Way N
Factory Ave N
(10) 15
(14) 15
(9) 15
(15) 14
7
(7)
(14) 14
(9) 15
(27)
44
Sunset Blvd N
N 3rd St
Sunset Blvd N
Bronson Way
(10) 15
(34) 32
(14) 15
(36) 35
(45) 74
SR 169
I-405 NB Ramps
(55) 89
(22) 38
(84) 82
(33) 34
SR 169
Shari's Driveway
(77) 127 (117) 116
1112
1 2
3
SR 169
Cedar River Park Dr
(20) 14
(57) 113
(117) 116 (2) 4
(20) 25
4
1 2
3 4
5 6
Study Intersection
(X) Weekday AM Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes
LEGEND
X
X Weekday PM Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes
N 3RD ST
FACTORY AVE NHOUSER WAY NN
3
R
D
S
T
BRO
N
S
O
N
W
A
Y SUNSET BLVD NSHA
RI'
S
D
RI
V
E
W
A
Y
PAR
K
D
R
CED
A
R
RIVER
N 4TH ST
FACTORY P
I
NMAP
L
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
HW
YI-405 NB RAMPSI-405 SB RAMPS
With-Project (2024) Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Renton Traffic Study Review
FIGURE
4
Apr 14, 2021 - 12:03pm siqih M:\19\1.19297.00 - Renton Traffic Study Review\Graphics\Graphics.dwg Layout: Vol - With-Project
2 3
4
6
1
5
Houser Way N
Factory Ave N
(65) 190
(15) 20
70
(160)
(530) 1,170
(1,049) 925
(55) 25
(10) 25
(475) 305
(470) 630
(109) 485
(100) 54
502
(727)
(594) 1,024
(819) 985
(290) 215
(165) 175
(80) 205
(782)
1,309
(175) 130
Sunset Blvd N
N 3rd St
Sunset Blvd N
Bronson Way
(425) 720
(120) 575
(50) 70 (864) 392
(634) 270
(996) 860
(325) 1,304
(915)
800
(470) 685
SR 169
I-405 NB Ramps
(20) 65
(430) 1,809
(332) 863
(1,914) 837
(473) 299
(530) 720
SR 169
Shari's Driveway
(35) 45
(762) 2,402 (2,272) 1,121
(5) 15
(5) 5(60) 35
1112
1 2
3
(115) 35
SR 169
Cedar River Park Dr
(690) 2,244
(122) 153
(152) 156 (7) 74
(35) 40
(2,125) 975
4
1 2
3 4
5 6
Study Intersection
(X) Weekday AM Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes
LEGEND
X
X Weekday PM Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes
N 3RD ST
FACTORY AVE NHOUSER WAY NN
3
R
D
S
T
BRO
N
S
O
N
W
A
Y SUNSET BLVD NSHA
RI'
S
D
RI
V
E
W
A
Y
PAR
K
D
R
CED
A
R
RIVER
N 4TH ST
FACTORY P
I
NMAP
L
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
HW
YI-405 NB RAMPSI-405 SB RAMPS
9
Transportation Analysis Results
The following summarizes the results of the updated independent transportation analysis of the
project for the study intersections and the SR 169 corridor. The analysis also included an
evaluation of the potential cut-through traffic within Cedar River Park. Weekday AM and PM peak
hour traffic operations were evaluated using SimTraffic 10, consistent with the prior TIA.
Intersection Level of Service and Delay
At signalized intersections, LOS is measured in average control delay per vehicle (in seconds)
during a specified time period (e.g., weekday PM peak hour). Control delay from SimTraffic 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.
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. SimTraffic does not assign a LOS letter grade to describe
intersection operations; however, the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 6th Edition parameters
were used to provide the LOS. Table 1 summarizes the LOS and delay at the overall intersection
level for all study intersections for with and without project conditions. Detailed LOS and SimTraffic
worksheets are provided in Appendix A16.
Table 1. 2024 With vs. Without Cedar River Apartment Project – Intersection LOS and Delay
2024 Without Project 2024 With Project
Intersection LOS1 Delay2 LOS Delay
Weekday AM Peak Hour
1. Sunset Blvd/NE 3rd St D 38 D 39
2. Bronson Way/Houser Way C 23 C 23
3. SR 169/Sunset/I-405 SB On-Ramp D 36 D 38
4. SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps C 27 C 30
5. SR 169/Shari's Driveway C 33 D 36
6. SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive B 15 D 35
Weekday PM Peak Hour
1. Sunset Blvd/NE 3rd St D 45 E 55
2. Bronson Way/Houser Way F 174 F 168
3. SR 169/Sunset/I-405 SB On-Ramp D 44 D 44
4. SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps C 20 C 21
5. SR 169/Shari's Driveway A 5 A 5
6. SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive A 4 A 9
1. Level of service, based on Highway Capacity Manual 6th methodology.
2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
3. BOLD: An intersection operating below LOS D
Table 2 compares the LOS and delay changes at both the intersection and approach levels. It
highlights both the overall intersection LOS and the individual approach LOS and delay to better
emphasize the changes between the scenarios. Additionally, the information focuses on locations
where delay has changed by greater than +/- 5 seconds or where an intersection or approach
changed from one letter grade to another.
10
Table 2. 2024 With vs. Without Cedar River Apartment Project – Changes in LOS and Delay
Overall Intersection Approach
Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Intersection LOS1 Delay2 LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay
Weekday AM Peak Hour
1. Sunset Blvd/NE 3rd St
2. Bronson Way/Houser Way A->B + 3
3. SR 169/Sunset/I-405 SB On-Ramp C->D + 3
4. SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps E->F + 24
5. SR 169/Shari's Driveway C->D + 3 + 6
6. SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive B->D + 20 B->C + 14 D->F + 153
Weekday PM Peak Hour
1. Sunset Blvd/NE 3rd St D->E + 10 + 11 E->E + 22
2. Bronson Way/Houser Way F->F - 6 F->F - 3 F->F - 11
3. SR 169/Sunset/I-405 SB On-Ramp
4. SR 169/I-405 NB Ramps
5. SR 169/Shari's Driveway B->C + 10
6. SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive C->D + 21
1. Changes in level of service, based on Highway Capacity Manual 6th methodology. Changes are shown as LOS changes from the
without project condition to the with project condition, or both are anticipated to operate at LOS E or F.
2. Changes in average delay in seconds per vehicle. Only included locations where delay changed by greater than +/- 5 seconds or where
a location changed from one letter grade to another.
3. BOLD: Locations and approaches where there was a noticeable difference in results associated with the project proposal.
As shown in Table 1 and Table 2, a few intersections would result in increased delay on one or
more approaches, such as the SR 169 / I-405 NB Ramps intersection in the AM peak hour.
However, while one or more approaches may be impacted, it can still result in minimal impact to
the overall intersection delay. This is due to the limited amount of traffic on those impacted
approaches, compared to the overall level of traffic traveling through the intersection. The results
of the updated intersection operations analysis indicates that a majority of intersections will
operate at LOS D or better, with the exception of the following two intersections:
· Sunset Boulevard / NE 3rd Street (2024 PM peak hour, LOS E)
The southbound approach at this intersection would be forecasted to operate at LOS E
under without project condition. With the additional 44 vehicle per hour project trips going
southbound at this location during the PM peak hour, southbound delay would increase by
22 seconds. Along with the westbound approach delay increase of 11 seconds, the overall
intersection delay would be increased to just above the LOS E criteria (55.4 seconds, 0.4
seconds above the LOS E criteria of 55 seconds).
· Bronson Way / Houser Way (2024 PM peak hour, LOS F)
This intersection would be anticipated to operate at LOS F in 2024 PM peak hour without
the project generated trips. The congestion delay at this intersection would mainly be due
to northbound right turn traffic turning left at the close by downstream SR 169 and Sunset
Boulevard intersection. With the project trips assigned on the northbound right turn but
going straight to the east at the next intersection, the project added trips would use the
under-utilized right most lane on the northbound approach, resulting in a slightly reduction
of the overall intersection delay.
Beside the two intersections discussed above, the primary project access intersection of SR 169
and Cedar River Park Drive is anticipated to experience noticeable impacts during both the AM
and PM peak hours in 2024. Though the intersection would operate at LOS D overall under both
11
peak hours, the northbound approach would go from a LOS D to an LOS F in the AM peak hour.
The poor operations are due to the limited capacity for left turning traffic to find enough gaps in the
westbound SR 169 queue. Figure 5 provides two screen shots captured from the SimTraffic model
to illustrate this situation where the outbound vehicles from Cedar River Park Drive must wait
during the signal green time until queuing from the desired downstream lane along SR 169 clears
out to allow for additional vehicles to proceed through the intersection. The queuing along SR 169
reduces the overall capacity of the northbound left-turn at Cedar River Park Drive.
Figure 5. Outbound Traffic from Cedar River Park Dr Entering Blocked Intersection
Corridor Level - Vehicle Queuing on SR 169
Consistent with the prior TIA, westbound vehicle queuing along SR 169 beginning from the Cedar
River Park Drive intersection was measured to compare the queuing impact from the project. The
longest queue length within each 2-minute interval from the SimTraffic model was recorded and
then summarized to provide estimated average and maximum vehicle queue lengths.
The summary of westbound vehicle queue lengths along SR 169 are summarized in Table 3
below. Detailed queuing worksheets from SimTraffic are provided in Appendix A.
Table 3. Westbound Queuing on SR 169 from Cedar River Park Drive
Without Project With Project Change
Weekday AM Peak Hour
6. SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Average Q1 Westbound Thru (ft) 1,475 1,925 + 450
Max Q2 Westbound Thru (ft) 2,350 3,250 + 900
Weekday PM Peak Hour
6. SR 169/Cedar River Park Drive
Average Q Westbound Thru (ft) 25 50 25
Max Q Westbound Thru (ft) 100 125 25
Note: sf = square-feet
1. Average queue length, measured as the average of longest queue length within each 2-minute interval during the 1-hour simulation.
2. Maximum queue length, measured as the maximum longest queue length within the 1-hour simulation.
Before signal turns green
for Cedar River Park Drive
After signal turns green for
Cedar River Park Drive
Few available
spaces for left-
turning vehicles
Long queues, and
limited space for
entering vehicles
12
As shown in Table 3, the added project trips in the AM peak hour would increase the westbound
queue length by approximately 450 feet, with minimal impact during the PM peak hour. The
maximum queue was measured as the longest vehicle queue length recorded during the study
hour, and the average vehicle queue was measured as the average of the longest vehicle queue
length within each 2-minute interval during the hour. As such, the average vehicle queue length is
considered more representative of a typical peak hour condition and was utilized in understanding
the potential impacts of the project.
The average vehicle queue lengths for with and without project conditions have also been
illustrated in Figure 6 for the 2024 AM peak hour. The figure provides an improved visual
reference of how the project is anticipated to impact the vehicle queue length during the morning
commute. The 2024 PM peak hour condition is not illustrated since minimal westbound congestion
and queuing would be anticipated during that time period.
Figure 6. SR 169 Westbound Average Queue, 2024 AM Peak Hour
The increase in the westbound SR 169 vehicle queue is primarily due to the cumulative
congestion and delays around the I-405 interchange caused by closely spaced intersections and a
high level of peak hour traffic. The bottleneck results from the limited queuing space between the
I-405 NB and SB ramp intersections and not enough signal green time to process the demand in
westbound traffic during the morning commute. The project-generated traffic that enters the SR
169 corridor at Cedar River Park Drive consumes any remaining capacity or queue storage space
along the corridor, thereby increasing the occurrence of vehicle queue spillbacks along this
segment of SR 169, resulting in additional queuing along westbound SR 169 by an average of
approximately 450 feet.
Corridor Level – Vehicle Hours of Delay
The corridor level project impact on SR 169 was measured in total vehicle hours of delay (VHD)
within the AM and PM peak hours for the corridor segments between Sunset Boulevard and Cedar
River Park Drive. VHD was calculated by multiplying delay for each movement with the
corresponding traffic volumes to account for all congestion delays. This is a high-level
measurement to compare congestion levels and delay between scenarios.
Table 4 compares the VHD between the with and without project conditions for 2024 AM and PM
peak hours. As shown, the project would generally increase the VHD along SR 169 by
13
approximately 20 percent during the AM and PM peak hour, with more impact to the peak direction
of travel.
Table 4. Vehicle Hours of Delay (VHD) along the SR 169 Corridor1 (Number of Hours)
Without Project With Project Change Change in %
Weekday AM Peak Hour
Eastbound 7.4 7.6 + 0.2 + 2%
Westbound 73.9 92.0 + 18.1 + 25%
Total 81.3 99.6 + 18.3 + 22%
Weekday PM Peak Hour
Eastbound 8.2 10.8 + 2.6 + 32%
Westbound 25.3 29.7 + 4.4 + 17%
Total 33.4 40.4 + 7.0 + 21%
1. Delay measured on SR 169 between Sunset Blvd and Cedar River Park Drive.
The increase of vehicle hours of delay is due to the additional intersection operational delay from
the with-project condition. Since VHD measures the cumulative delay in the number of hours that
each vehicle experiences, it is a good system level metric to understand how additional traffic from
the project is anticipated to impact the overall system delay for the segment of SR 169 between
Cedar River Park Drive and Sunset Boulevard. In other words, the 6 to 8 percent increase in traffic
volumes from the project, results in a corresponding increase in delay of approximately three times
greater, or roughly 20 percent. The difference in relative percentages between the actual number
of new vehicles from the project and the increase in system delay is due to the congestion around
the interchange and little remaining available capacity.
Cut-Through Traffic on Cedar River Park Drive
Cedar River Park is a community park featuring multi-use athletic fields, an aquatic center and a
300-seat theater. Cedar River Park Drive is an internal roadway for the park, providing access
to/from Houser Way South and SR 169. Connecting between SR 169 and Howser Way requires a
circuitous route through the parking area, but does allow vehicles to avoid the I-405 / SR 169
interchange. With the primary access to the project site via Cedar River Park Drive, there is the
potential for some projects trips to utilize the route through Cedar River Park. As a result, the
magnitude of cut-through traffic was evaluated to determine potential impacts and methods for
discouraging such activity.
Houser Way is a one-way street traveling northbound at the west end of Cedar River Park Way.
As such, the origin-destination travel pattern that could potentially benefit from the cut-through
route is limited to between Houser Way/Bronson Way and the project site. The two possible cut-
through patterns are illustrated in Figure 7, one for each direction of travel to the project site.
14
Figure 7. Potential Cedar River Park Cut-Through Routes, from/to Project Site
Based on the trip distribution assumptions, approximately 24 to 30 trips have the potential to divert
through the park. The potential amount of cut-through traffic was evaluated based on the
attractiveness to utilize the route, which was measured as the travel time along each route.
The travel time was estimated assuming free-flow travel time plus the intersection signal delay
from the traffic operations model for each movement along the route. Error! Reference source
not found. summarizes the magnitude of project trips that could potentially use the cut-through
route and compares the travel time measured in minutes between arterial assigned route and
route through the park.
Table 5. Potential Cedar River Park Drive Cut-Through Traffic Evaluation, 2024
Assigned Route in TIA Cut-Through Route via
Cedar River Park Drive
Maximum Number
of Potential Project
Trips Travel Time1 Travel Time2
Change in
Travel Time
(veh/h) (min) (min) (min)
Weekday AM Peak Hour
Inbound 10 3 2 - 1
Outbound 14 6 4 - 2
Weekday PM Peak Hour
Inbound 15 8 5 - 4
Outbound 15 4 8 No Time Saving
Note:
1. Travel time measured as free-flow travel time based on posted speed limit plus the movement delays from the traffic operations model at
each intersection along the route.
2. The travel time along Cedar River Park Drive was based on an estimated average speed of 12.5 mph, considering the narrow roadway
width, interaction with parking vehicles, and frequent stop signs along the route.
As shown in Table 5, there is the potential that 3 out of 4 evaluated routes may utilize the park
connection based on travel time savings between 1 and 4 minutes, depending on time of day and
direction of travel. The travel time savings account for the forecast travel delays in 2024 as traffic
navigates through the I-405 / SR 169 interchange. The additional cut-through traffic could mean 15
to 24 vehicles per hour from the proposed project are using the park as a short cut to bypass
congestion around the I-405 / SR 169 interchange.
15
Mitigation Measures
To mitigate the transportation impacts from the Cedar River Apartment project, several mitigation
options were previously explored to improve roadway capacities, including adding turn lanes at
key intersections and widening SR 169 with an additional travel lane. However, given the proximity
to the I-405 / SR 169 interchange and the closely spaced intersections along SR 169, none of the
capacity improvements were identified as providing meaningful improvement to system
performance. In addition, widening of the highway would present many feasibility concerns that
would be difficult to overcome due to the surrounding right of way, topographic, and geometric
constraints.
Mitigation should be focused on improving system performance and reliability given the congestion
around the I-405 / SR 169 interchange and the project’s impact to vehicle queuing, intersection
operations, and vehicle hours of delay. Implementation of an Adaptive Traffic Control System
(ATCS) was identified as a mitigation option, such as the Split Cycle Offset Optimization
Technique (SCOOT) system. ATCS allows the signal control system to dynamically respond to
changes in traffic detected in real time, helping to mitigate congestion during peak shoulder
periods, providing equitable distribution of signal green time, and offering proactive response to
changing traffic conditions, such as impacts from congestion along I-405.
Studies have shown that such a system would benefit the roadway network by improving travel
time reliability and reducing vehicle queuing between 10 to 30 percent. Transpo Group assisted
the Seattle Department of Transportation in evaluating the performance of the SCOOT system
installed along the Mercer Street corridor in South Lake Union. The results of the analysis indicate
that travel time reliability was improved by 38 percent along the corridor after SCOOT was
implemented1. While we are not suggesting that SR 169 would see similar levels of improvement,
the example along Mercer Street is provided to demonstrate advanced signal systems do provide
tangible benefits, especially along constrained corridors where additional widening or other
capacity improvements are not feasible.
Installing a similar SCOOT system along SR 169, as has already been installed along Rainier
Avenue, would assist in helping mitigate the project impacts by improving performance of the
signal system around the I-405 interchange and allowing the system to dynamically change to the
surrounding traffic conditions.
Finally, to discourage project related traffic from utilizing the route through Cedar River Park to
bypass congestion around the I-405 interchange, traffic calming measures should be implemented
to further discourage this behavior. Any potential traffic calming measure should be coordinated
with the City’s Parks Department for feasibility.
1 https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/technology-program/mercer-scoot
16
Appendix A: SimTraffic Delay and Queuing Worksheets
SimTraffic Performance Report
Baseline 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.8 0.1 0.0 3.0 2.1 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5
Total Del/Veh (s) 93.1 49.2 1.1 44.0 39.0 23.9 22.8 29.1 10.6 35.8
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 7.3 1.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 19.3 7.3 27.7 5.7 7.1 28.7 72.3 27.6
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 84.1 77.8 12.1 36.1 47.2 84.2 46.5 32.5
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.3 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 4.3 1.8 50.5 17.5 58.6 4.6 15.1
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.1 6.1 5.0
7: I-405 NB On-Ramp Performance by movement
Movement NBT SER All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 40.1 21.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.4 19.4 11.1
11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 52.8 12.2 11.7 59.4 60.9 28.3 8.7 23.1
SimTraffic Performance Report
Baseline 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 2
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 2.7 0.2 2.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 45.9 44.5 1.4 47.7 58.0 3.1 62.7 40.0 5.5 66.8 44.7 2.8
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 37.5
13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.9 0.3 0.3 0.4
34: NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 6.9 2.9 2.4 5.2
Total Network Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 4.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 109.4
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 3
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 227 217 118 222 316 326 343 347 197 427 495 304
Average Queue (ft) 176 186 35 68 213 252 262 289 94 231 246 99
95th Queue (ft) 235 224 84 146 350 357 370 390 170 351 376 266
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 170 170 304 304 304 304 820 820 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 31 46 0 0 13 12 8 8 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 45 67 0 0 74 72 47 49 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)560
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L T T T T T R R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 59 50 52 270 277 279 163 36 506
Average Queue (ft) 10 11 11 171 215 252 77 16 395
95th Queue (ft) 42 95 99 294 307 296 135 135 584
Link Distance (ft) 304 304 237 237 237 237 367 503
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 1 12 14 33 0 2 15
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 1 69 83 190 0 0 79
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 187 242 248 236 594 621 646 150 132
Average Queue (ft) 131 78 78 39 226 319 509 129 52
95th Queue (ft) 186 226 223 174 511 624 798 204 105
Link Distance (ft) 237 237 237 610 610 610 345
Upstream Blk Time (%) 4 4 3 1 1 17
Queuing Penalty (veh) 10 10 7 5 9 120
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 175 125
Storage Blk Time (%) 3 8 40 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6 12 218 9
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 4
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 174 186 124 72 385 434 473 106 31
Average Queue (ft) 26 40 13 14 112 188 281 36 4
95th Queue (ft) 94 114 61 48 362 488 599 82 21
Link Distance (ft) 610 610 610 460 460 460 387
Upstream Blk Time (%)0 2 16
Queuing Penalty (veh)3 17 115
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%)0
Queuing Penalty (veh)0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB WB B8 B8
Directions Served T T T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 92 151 212 1687 1727
Average Queue (ft) 11 58 98 822 845
95th Queue (ft) 76 182 283 2967 3014
Link Distance (ft) 158 158 158 6584 6584
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 1 21
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: I-405 NB On-Ramp
Movement SE
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 263
Average Queue (ft) 95
95th Queue (ft) 322
Link Distance (ft) 323
Upstream Blk Time (%) 16
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 5
Intersection: 11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB
Directions Served T T T T TR LT R R R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 88 67 50 167 316 330 207 201 78 34
Average Queue (ft) 25 16 9 92 177 148 87 89 12 7
95th Queue (ft) 71 53 33 154 325 287 201 203 49 27
Link Distance (ft) 753 753 753 170 170 944 944 944 316
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 7
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 36
Storage Bay Dist (ft)700
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB B35 NB NB NB
Directions Served L LT T R L L LT R T L T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 218 226 212 62 360 391 447 348 39 173 235 255
Average Queue (ft) 199 202 175 6 230 256 299 63 2 76 144 176
95th Queue (ft) 221 221 221 35 329 366 427 268 26 146 212 239
Link Distance (ft) 197 197 197 197 393 393 2401 820 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 26 22 3 0 0 2 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 68 58 9 0 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)400 350 150
Storage Blk Time (%)0 0 4 0 1 6
Queuing Penalty (veh)0 0 7 0 2 5
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement NB SB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T L T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 256 311 381 348 283 27
Average Queue (ft) 188 81 246 220 157 0
95th Queue (ft) 245 205 348 310 258 0
Link Distance (ft) 820 875 875 875
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 275
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 3 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 6
Intersection: 13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr
Movement WB NB
Directions Served R TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 30 5
Average Queue (ft) 7 0
95th Queue (ft) 27 5
Link Distance (ft) 364 385
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 34: NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB WB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 223 208 153 8
Average Queue (ft) 95 94 18 0
95th Queue (ft) 198 194 94 9
Link Distance (ft) 403 403 403 197
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 35: Bend
Movement SE
Directions Served T
Maximum Queue (ft) 35
Average Queue (ft) 2
95th Queue (ft) 48
Link Distance (ft) 393
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1507
SimTraffic Performance Report
Baseline 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 75.1 53.4 6.5 65.0 56.5 23.6 44.4 44.2 13.9 42.9
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 13.0 2.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 17.6 3.2 32.7 4.6 5.4 20.6 59.9 19.1
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 66.0 69.6 3.5 4.5 2.1 84.5 16.0 5.3
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.9 1.1 77.5 1.7 63.5 5.2 4.3
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 2.0 0.2 1.5
7: I-405 NB On-Ramp Performance by movement
Movement NBT SER All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 25.6 17.5
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.1 22.5 15.7
11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.1 7.9 7.7 13.6 0.2 6.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 570.9 10.1 8.8 96.7 103.7 238.5 9.8 163.3
SimTraffic Performance Report
Baseline 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 2
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied Del/Veh (s) 1.2 2.5 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.3 0.3 1.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 49.6 74.9 18.4 62.8 59.1 3.0 79.0 33.8 6.9 101.1 62.5 7.0
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 47.3
13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 6.5 114.0 153.3 112.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 311.1 172.2 247.9 175.8
34: NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 24.7 2.4 2.6 20.0
Total Network Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 21.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 143.2
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 3
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 234 226 230 235 261 277 246 320 555 812 855 734
Average Queue (ft) 167 209 156 173 179 197 135 288 433 490 478 207
95th Queue (ft) 256 219 231 246 247 265 221 365 538 697 737 558
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 170 170 303 303 303 820 820 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 30 74 14 19 0 0 0 9 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 100 250 46 64 0 1 0 43 2 4 1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)300 560
Storage Blk Time (%)0 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh)0 1 0 1
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served L T T T T T R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 80 26 23 249 155 249 112 520
Average Queue (ft) 29 1 1 193 56 156 54 460
95th Queue (ft) 67 18 18 280 116 256 89 612
Link Distance (ft) 303 303 237 237 237 237 501
Upstream Blk Time (%) 6 0 2 18
Queuing Penalty (veh) 15 0 6 127
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 130 193 208 119 182 64 118 109 79
Average Queue (ft) 67 14 25 9 59 14 35 28 30
95th Queue (ft) 121 88 116 71 137 48 89 80 65
Link Distance (ft) 237 237 237 610 610 610 345
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 1 1
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 175 125
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 4
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 149 169 82 60 104 50 118 100 62
Average Queue (ft) 43 66 8 17 25 4 33 40 30
95th Queue (ft) 111 139 44 48 74 25 90 84 53
Link Distance (ft) 610 610 610 460 460 460 387
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: I-405 NB On-Ramp
Movement SE
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 362
Average Queue (ft) 181
95th Queue (ft) 432
Link Distance (ft) 323
Upstream Blk Time (%) 25
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 5
Intersection: 11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB
Directions Served T T T T TR LT R R R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 885 900 821 123 235 725 1007 997 1005 54
Average Queue (ft) 397 529 209 42 64 261 894 913 874 12
95th Queue (ft) 883 921 688 109 161 758 1173 1115 1210 39
Link Distance (ft) 1726 1726 1726 170 170 944 944 944 316
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 1 48 47 31
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 201 194 130
Storage Bay Dist (ft)700
Storage Blk Time (%)0 37
Queuing Penalty (veh)2 33
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB B35 B35 NB NB
Directions Served L LT T R L L LT R T T L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 211 237 234 212 389 446 439 345 112 118 88 122
Average Queue (ft) 180 205 205 168 314 316 309 62 14 13 32 45
95th Queue (ft) 233 222 222 255 414 455 444 280 100 96 71 104
Link Distance (ft) 197 197 197 197 393 393 2401 2401 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 13 54 54 13 2 3 4 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 46 190 190 46 0 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)400 350 150
Storage Blk Time (%)2 3 6 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh)6 11 11 0 0
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement NB NB SB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T L T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 165 174 325 735 695 599 300
Average Queue (ft) 96 115 273 447 396 323 48
95th Queue (ft) 146 159 403 712 671 568 227
Link Distance (ft) 820 820 1882 1882 1882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 275
Storage Blk Time (%) 3 30 9 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 11 61 11 0
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 6
Intersection: 13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr
Movement WB NB NB
Directions Served R T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 175 1439 1441
Average Queue (ft) 61 865 890
95th Queue (ft) 192 1875 1891
Link Distance (ft) 364 1397 1397
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 30 41
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 34: NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB EB
Directions Served T T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 318 374 353 281
Average Queue (ft) 95 199 188 63
95th Queue (ft) 290 381 366 204
Link Distance (ft) 1790 1790 1790 1790
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 35: Bend
Movement SE SE SE
Directions Served T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 392 380 143
Average Queue (ft) 86 76 8
95th Queue (ft) 337 312 100
Link Distance (ft) 393 393 393
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1812
SimTraffic Performance Report
With Project 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7 0.1 0.2 3.2 2.4 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 94.8 49.5 1.1 50.4 41.0 24.7 23.1 29.9 10.6 37.5
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 16.3 2.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 14.6 2.4 29.5 6.6 3.1 43.5 96.6 30.2
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 80.7 76.0 10.2 42.0 54.0 74.8 48.8 35.6
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 98.4 90.7 5.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 8.6 3.7 67.2 31.1 211.2 74.6 35.3
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.4 1.1 10.6 3.1 8.5
7: I-405 NB On-Ramp Performance by movement
Movement NBT SER All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 90.7 47.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.5 41.7 22.1
11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 54.8 12.0 11.2 70.1 59.8 27.4 11.8 22.6
SimTraffic Performance Report
With Project 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 2
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 2.7 0.2 2.6
Total Del/Veh (s) 45.2 44.1 1.7 51.0 61.3 3.3 59.9 40.3 5.4 66.3 47.3 2.9
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3
Total Del/Veh (s) 38.6
13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.3 0.3 0.3 0.4
34: NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 6.9 2.6 2.5 5.2
Total Network Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 10.4
Total Del/Veh (s) 132.4
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 3
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 227 222 96 192 315 333 342 346 230 492 575 288
Average Queue (ft) 179 188 34 71 242 270 280 292 102 242 259 98
95th Queue (ft) 234 226 77 143 374 372 378 399 185 369 415 255
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 170 170 304 304 304 304 820 820 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 34 49 0 17 19 10 10 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 51 72 0 106 117 60 59 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)560
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L T T T T T R R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 50 57 66 267 274 278 198 41 518
Average Queue (ft) 10 4 4 191 225 256 90 3 443
95th Queue (ft) 34 33 40 306 304 276 161 41 606
Link Distance (ft) 304 304 237 237 237 237 367 503
Upstream Blk Time (%) 13 16 33 0 28
Queuing Penalty (veh) 80 100 204 0 150
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 191 250 251 256 610 644 649 150 129
Average Queue (ft) 138 93 89 49 247 335 612 134 52
95th Queue (ft) 189 243 234 187 542 650 711 201 107
Link Distance (ft) 237 237 237 610 610 610 345
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 2 1 0 2 25
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 6 2 1 14 193
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 175 125
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 6 46 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 8 262 12
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 4
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 232 254 183 102 476 506 496 388 206
Average Queue (ft) 52 75 34 34 225 341 446 263 26
95th Queue (ft) 151 176 114 78 482 566 570 461 136
Link Distance (ft) 610 610 610 460 460 460 387
Upstream Blk Time (%)1 3 30 27
Queuing Penalty (veh)4 25 218 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%)0 48 0
Queuing Penalty (veh)0 3 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement WB WB WB B8 B8 NB
Directions Served T T T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 165 188 247 2591 2621 29
Average Queue (ft) 14 105 191 1237 1284 12
95th Queue (ft) 87 224 320 3584 3618 33
Link Distance (ft) 158 158 158 6584 6584 213
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 1 37
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: I-405 NB On-Ramp
Movement SE
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 316
Average Queue (ft) 178
95th Queue (ft) 442
Link Distance (ft) 323
Upstream Blk Time (%) 38
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 5
Intersection: 11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB
Directions Served T T T T TR LT R R R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 89 71 48 170 312 341 218 238 73 48
Average Queue (ft) 24 17 10 95 173 142 85 89 10 8
95th Queue (ft) 69 52 35 156 317 294 192 206 42 31
Link Distance (ft) 753 753 753 170 170 944 944 944 316
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 32
Storage Bay Dist (ft)700
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB B35 B35 NB NB
Directions Served L LT T R L L LT R T T L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 219 226 214 95 378 409 464 346 16 86 172 254
Average Queue (ft) 200 202 178 9 241 263 306 65 1 6 88 142
95th Queue (ft) 219 221 219 48 346 380 446 276 19 45 166 217
Link Distance (ft) 197 197 197 197 393 393 2401 2401 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 25 22 4 0 0 0 3 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 67 57 9 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)400 350 150
Storage Blk Time (%)0 0 5 0 2 7
Queuing Penalty (veh)0 1 9 0 5 7
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement NB NB SB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T L T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 255 247 286 411 373 294 54
Average Queue (ft) 171 184 82 262 237 171 2
95th Queue (ft) 233 234 194 361 333 276 41
Link Distance (ft) 820 820 875 875 875
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 275
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 4 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 3 0
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 AM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 6
Intersection: 13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr
Movement WB NB
Directions Served R TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 30 2
Average Queue (ft) 7 0
95th Queue (ft) 27 2
Link Distance (ft) 364 385
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 34: NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB
Directions Served T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 224 231 179
Average Queue (ft) 93 96 21
95th Queue (ft) 195 203 105
Link Distance (ft) 403 403 403
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 35: Bend
Movement SE SE
Directions Served T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 61 63
Average Queue (ft) 2 5
95th Queue (ft) 46 75
Link Distance (ft) 393 393
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1952
SimTraffic Performance Report
With Project 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 1
1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 73.0 58.7 8.8 64.9 59.3 26.6 45.3 44.8 13.7 44.3
2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR NBR SBT SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 18.7 3.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 18.2 3.7 34.0 4.8 6.2 33.1 75.1 21.5
3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway Performance by movement
Movement EBU EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 67.5 67.9 3.8 5.3 2.8 74.6 19.6 5.8
4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 3.8 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 7.1 2.6 88.7 3.1 67.7 7.0 9.3
5: Site East Access & SR 169 Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 3.9 1.0 0.3 20.0 2.9
7: I-405 NB On-Ramp Performance by movement
Movement NBT SER All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 85.7 56.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 1.2 41.3 27.4
11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 9.5 5.9 12.5 0.1 5.8
Total Del/Veh (s) 640.6 11.2 9.6 84.9 94.5 230.5 9.5 168.2
SimTraffic Performance Report
With Project 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 2
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied Del/Veh (s) 3.1 3.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.3 0.3 1.2
Total Del/Veh (s) 52.3 74.4 22.4 76.5 68.5 5.0 78.5 33.6 6.9 122.7 80.1 11.2
12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 55.4
13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 62.9 58.7 61.7
Total Del/Veh (s) 249.5 143.5 155.2 145.8
34: NE 3rd St Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBT WBR All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total Del/Veh (s) 30.3 3.0 2.5 24.3
Total Network Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s) 19.4
Total Del/Veh (s) 152.3
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 3
Intersection: 1: I-405 SB On-Ramp/Sunset Blvd & Bronson Way/SR 169
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L L T TR L LT T R L LT TR R
Maximum Queue (ft) 219 229 233 242 278 285 269 323 568 821 858 721
Average Queue (ft) 167 208 176 190 197 215 146 301 450 513 492 195
95th Queue (ft) 247 221 240 252 264 282 235 350 541 725 739 506
Link Distance (ft) 170 170 170 170 303 303 303 820 820 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 28 75 17 32 0 0 0 13 0 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 95 254 59 108 0 1 0 66 3 5 1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)300 560
Storage Blk Time (%)0 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh)0 1 2 2
Intersection: 2: I-405 NB Off-Ramp/I-405 NB On-Ramp & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L T T T T T R R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 90 75 48 249 157 249 126 35 520
Average Queue (ft) 30 5 3 201 58 173 58 4 491
95th Queue (ft) 72 51 49 281 121 264 97 64 583
Link Distance (ft) 303 303 237 237 237 237 367 501
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 8 0 4 0 30
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 23 0 11 0 219
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 3: SR 169 & Shari's Driveway
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB SB
Directions Served UL T T T T T T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 146 189 229 196 206 86 156 130 91
Average Queue (ft) 69 21 34 17 66 15 39 33 30
95th Queue (ft) 125 114 138 107 161 53 112 93 66
Link Distance (ft) 237 237 237 610 610 610 345
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 4 4
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 175 125
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 1 3 0
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 4
Intersection: 4: Cedar River Park Dr & SR 169
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T TR L T T T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 306 302 192 121 114 62 163 265 162
Average Queue (ft) 96 119 39 47 44 9 61 137 40
95th Queue (ft) 211 225 123 104 97 38 132 231 106
Link Distance (ft) 610 610 610 460 460 460 387
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200
Storage Blk Time (%)3 0
Queuing Penalty (veh)2 0
Intersection: 5: Site East Access & SR 169
Movement EB EB NB
Directions Served T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 40 56 60
Average Queue (ft) 3 3 18
95th Queue (ft) 59 65 46
Link Distance (ft) 460 460 213
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: I-405 NB On-Ramp
Movement SE
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 369
Average Queue (ft) 285
95th Queue (ft) 483
Link Distance (ft) 323
Upstream Blk Time (%) 54
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 5
Intersection: 8: Bend
Movement EB
Directions Served T
Maximum Queue (ft) 8
Average Queue (ft) 0
95th Queue (ft) 9
Link Distance (ft) 158
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Houser Way N/Factory Ave N & Bronson Way
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB
Directions Served T T T T TR LT R R R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 880 884 818 117 306 725 1002 1002 1009 57
Average Queue (ft) 405 544 295 74 118 262 857 881 849 14
95th Queue (ft) 902 947 793 133 245 766 1192 1136 1179 42
Link Distance (ft) 1726 1726 1726 170 170 944 944 944 316
Upstream Blk Time (%)2 40 38 28
Queuing Penalty (veh)9 169 158 117
Storage Bay Dist (ft)700
Storage Blk Time (%)0 33
Queuing Penalty (veh)2 30
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 6
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB B35 B35 NB NB
Directions Served L LT T R L L LT R T T L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 215 234 238 213 392 474 471 375 293 267 102 112
Average Queue (ft) 182 205 205 184 343 363 347 106 75 68 38 45
95th Queue (ft) 236 220 223 248 432 515 505 375 320 301 84 101
Link Distance (ft) 197 197 197 197 393 393 2401 2401 820
Upstream Blk Time (%) 16 51 52 19 6 13 12 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 56 182 183 68 0 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)400 350 150
Storage Blk Time (%)6 13 15 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh)19 43 26 0 0 0
Intersection: 12: Sunset Blvd & NE 3rd St
Movement NB NB SB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T L T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 162 165 325 884 959 799 300
Average Queue (ft) 100 114 290 559 522 424 84
95th Queue (ft) 148 155 402 897 893 761 305
Link Distance (ft) 820 820 1882 1882 1882
Upstream Blk Time (%)0
Queuing Penalty (veh)0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300 275
Storage Blk Time (%) 4 45 16 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 17 92 20 0
Intersection: 13: Houser Way N & Cedar River Park Dr
Movement WB NB NB
Directions Served R T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 161 1423 1434
Average Queue (ft) 53 758 785
95th Queue (ft) 172 1787 1812
Link Distance (ft) 364 1397 1397
Upstream Blk Time (%) 21 30
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
With Project 2024 PM Peak Hour 05/12/2021
Cedar River Apartments SimTraffic Report
Transpo Page 7
Intersection: 34: NE 3rd St
Movement EB EB EB EB
Directions Served T T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 312 356 366 380
Average Queue (ft) 126 205 194 108
95th Queue (ft) 394 454 437 321
Link Distance (ft) 1790 1790 1790 1790
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 35: Bend
Movement SE SE SE
Directions Served T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 394 391 184
Average Queue (ft) 71 65 10
95th Queue (ft) 306 291 113
Link Distance (ft) 393 393 393
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 2062