Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 2769 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 2769 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AN INTERIM TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE NrE. 3RD/N.E. 4TH TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT ZONE, MAKING THAT INTERIM . PLAN. AN INTERIM SEPA POLICY AND ADOPTING THE CH2M HILL STUDY AS A FACTUAL DOCUMENT. WHEREAS, the N.E . 3rd/N.E . 4th transportation benefit zone has been established for study by the City of Renton, and WHEREAS, the area within the N.E . 3rd/N.E . 4th transportation benefit zone has experienced rapid growth which generates substantial additional traffic, and WHEREAS, the transportation system is inadequate to support the present development and the projected business and residential development within the N.E . . 3rd/N.E . 4th transportation benefit zone, and WHEREAS, the City of Renton commissioned CH2M Hill to analyze the future traffic and transportation needs in the N.E . 3rd/N.E . 4th transportation zone, and WHEREAS, CH2M Hill has produced a study entitled "The East Renton -Transportation Benefit Zone Study, " dated March 1989 which outlined the transportation deficiencies in this area and proposed certain improvements , NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : The above recitals are found to be true and correct in all respects . . SECTION II : Development in the N.E . 3rd/N. E . 4th transportation benefit zone has created a compelling need for RESOLUTION NO. 2769 transportation improvements which must be done to avoid environmental degradation. SECTION III : The East Renton Transportation Benefit Zone Study in its interim draft form dated March 1989 is hereby adopted as a factual document. SECTION IV: The transportation services division of the public works department is directed to continue to review the N.E . 3rd/N.E . 4th transportation benefit zone and to submit to the city council for final approval a report and a proposed traffic mitigation fee structure, such final , report and recommendation to be presented within six months of this resolution. SECTION V: There is hereby adopted an interim SEPA policy of the City of Renton to require new development within the boundaries of the N.E . 3rd/N.E. 4th transportation . benefit zone to contribute up to $288 . 00 per daily trip as traffic mitigation fee, such sum as described in table 5-3, scenario 3, page 5-5 of the East Renton Transportation Benefit Zone Study of CH2M Hill dated March 1989 . Should the final council policy on the N. E . 3rd/N.E . 4th transportation benefit zone have a traffic mitigation fee of a lesser amount, then refunds will be made to anyone paying or promising to pay the traffic mitigation fee established by this resolution, to the extent that payment has actually been received. SECTION VI : The administrative staff is also authorized and directed to apply the interim trip mitigation fee in an equitable manner, to negotiate fees under this policy in a manner RESOLUTION NO. 2769 that utilizes sound engineering and legal principles, and to coordinate and cooperate with developers and property owners to utilize sound planning and engineering practices which reduce daily trips and thereby reduce -the need for transportation mitigation. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 2nd day of October, 1989 . Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 2nd day of October, 1989 . Earl Clymer, nyor Approve s to form: Lawrence J. War n, City Attorney RES . 62-08/17/89-as . I � � DRRfi REPORT � The East Renton � Transportation Benefit. Zone Study 771 1 1 1 1 �I City of Renton gfMHILL MARCH 1989 1 PREFACE ' This volume contains the Draft East Renton Transportation Benefit Zone Study report in full compliance with Task 6 of Phase I as defined in the professional services agreement for the study. The professional services agreement is be- tween CH2M HILL NORTHWEST, INC. and CENTRON Corporation. The scope of work was approved by the City of Renton on February 10, 1989. CENTRON Corporation is proposing to develop a major portion of a vacant parcel in east Renton into a 1 , 400-unit multiple- family residential development. CENTRON is voluntarily pre- paring the study as part of the requirements for compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and other City of Renton permitting processes. The costs ' for the study are to be credited against fees for development of the residential project. 1 The information presented in this draft report is preliminary and has not been officially reviewed and approved by either the City of Renton or the developer. The executive summary and conclusions regarding the impact fee scenario to be ' adopted for the East Renton Transportation Benefit Zone will be included in the final report. se6532/071/1 iii CONTENTS Page ' Preface iii 1 Introduction and Approach 1-1 Study Purpose and Boundary 1-1 Study Approach and Assumptions 1-2 2 Benefit Zone Arterial System 2-1 Existing Arterial System 2-1 Planned Road Improvements 2-3 Other Potential Road Improvements 2-3 ' 3 Benefit Zone Traffic Demands 3-1 Land Use and Trip Generation 3-1 Traffic Model Development 3-2 Existing Traffic Volumes 3-2 Future Traffic Demands 3-4 4 Benefit Zone Arterial System Costs 4-1 Arterial Improvements Needs 4-1 Cost Estimates of Arterial Improvements 4-2 5 Alternative Fee Scenarios 5-1 Transportation Benefit Zone Supported Costs 5-1 ' Public Versus Private Share of Costs 5-2 Distributing the Private Share Among Developers 5-4 i Conclusions 5-7 6 Transportation System Management Strategies 6-1 1' Appendix A. Study Zone Land Use and Trip Generation Appendix B. Model Validation Appendix C. Basic New Roadway Cost Per 1 , 000 Linear Feet i ' 3 I ' k i se6524/021/1 v TABLES Page ' 2-1 Planned Study Area Road Improvements 2-4 3-1 Daily Vehicle Trip Generation 3-1 4-1 Generalized Daily Traffic Capacities 4-1 4-2 Proposed Benefit Zone Road and Signal Improvements 4-4 4-3 Typical Roadway and Signal Costs 4-6 4-4 Cost Estimates for Benefit Zone Road and Signal Improvements 4-7 5-1 Capital and Right-of-Way Costs to be Included in the Benefit Zone Program 5-3 5-2 Public Versus Private Share of Costs 5-4 ' 5-3 Costs per Daily Trip Based Upon Daily Trips 5-5 5-4 Cost per Daily Trip Based Upon P.M. Peak jj Percent 5-5 i' 5-5 Costs per Daily Trip Based Upon P.M. Peak, Excluding Passersby 5-6 I.' 5-6 Cost per Daily Trip Based Upon P.M. Peak, ! Excluding Passersby, and Trip Length 5-7 ('� FIGURES 1-1 Study Area Map 1-3 r 2-1 Existing Arterial System 2-2 ' 3-1 Existing Traffic Volumes 3-3 3-2 Future Traffic Demands 3-5 ' 4-1 Benefit Zone Improvements 4-3 ' 4-2 Future Traffic Volumes With Proposed Improvements 4-5 se6524/.021/2 vii Section 1 INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH In the past, the City of Renton has negotiated voluntary developer fees on a case-by-case basis. Voluntary developer contributions normally were required to comply with City ordinances regarding onsite improvements and to mitigate deficiencies created on adjacent, offsite roadways. With that approach, only those developers with projects generat- ing demand that exceeded existing capacity had to contribute to funding offsite road improvements. Small developments were seldom required to contribute to funding for offsite road improvements because their impacts were claimed to be negligible. Therefore, the City of Renton is conducting Transportation Benefit Zone (TBZ) studies throughout the city limits to more explicitly determine roadway needs and costs in specific areas of potential development and to establish how much money each developer should contribute. The perceived advantages in using this more formal approach are: o Developer fees would be based upon reasonabl def- inite plans based upon projected overall needs. o The fees would reflect the specific costs neces- sary to meet road improvement needs in a particu- lar area. o Costs could then be distributed to all develop- ment, not just to the marginal development that ' triggers the need for the improvements. o The process would provide for intergenerational equity because impacts created by existing land uses in the area could be kept separate from im- pacts from new development in the area. o Horizontal equity would be provided by treating all developments alike, regardless of size. Included in this section is a brief description of the pur- pose, boundaries, approach, and assumptions for the study. i�� STUDY PURPOSE AND BOUNDARY The main purpose of the East Renton Transportation Benefit Zone (TBZ) Study is to determine what major road improve- ments will be needed to support future development of the East Renton area and to consider alternative trip generation fee scenarios to finance the improvements. A secondary pur- pose is to provide the technical documentation necessary for se6522/073/1 1-1 consideration by elected officials, private developers, and city staff to develop policies. The study area is bounded by the Burlington-Northern Rail- road on the west, the Renton City limits on the east, roughly NE 6th and 4th Streets on the north, and the Cedar River on the south (see Figure 1-1) . The study area boundaries were established based upon the estimated limits of a 5 percent contribution by traffic generated by the CENTRON Corporation project to peak-hour ' traffic volumes on the areawide road network. When develop- ing the study boundaries an attempt also was made to include ' the major developable parcels of land and to keep the bound- aries within the city limits. ' STUDY APPROACH AND ASSUMPTIONS The study approach is summarized as follows: ' 1 . Examine the existing arterial street system serving the 1 study area. Identify future committed and other poten- tial road improvements needed p to support future land �.. development. � 2. Estimate future land use and trip generation for the ' "build-out" condition. Develop a traffic model to sim- ulate traffic demands and identify the extent of future arterial street system deficiencies. ' 3. Determine the costs for needed improvements in the ben- efit area arterial system. Establish which costs should be. included in the benefit zone program. 4 . Determine the public versus private share of the bene- fit zone program costs . 5. Develop methods for distributing the private share among developers . Evaluate alternative cost-per-trip adjustments for different land-use types. 6. Consider transportation system management (TSM) strat- egies egies to meet unmitigated traffic demands. Guidelines, criteria, and assumptions provided by City of Renton staff to guide the study effort are listed below. ' o The TBZ study methodology should be consistent with the methodology used on other City of Renton TBZ studies, specifically the Valley Transporta- tion Benefit Assessment District Study. se6522./073/2 1-2 e i �i a Q �i a W cc � a 3S AVONZVI LZ cn \ . . .\ hal `�ti 0 ■ • ::. 3S AV 1-U9C \.".". . . h \■ ■ % S ao v a) 3N AV NOW3S:nVN01Nn: : : :': : : :': 0 ♦ 1�>■■ \:. .'. . .C'.'.�.�. .moi �O ♦s�:�•?i:'':.. `\ . . ..� : : \". cc ....'..."."z «> 1 i w E3' a 3N AV30HNOW \ . . . . 3N AV ONVINHIN : tea` G \ . . . . oz \ W> \: : : w \ . ' � w 3NAVNOlJNiFldVH : : : : _ z ' o� . . 2 !mow. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . \«:: 3N AVSONOW03 + v. . . . .". .'. . .". ...: �. .'.'. .'. .... AV B�NW 8 0 N ly i .MONTERElC 4A, NAV AHOlOVj N AV N308VJ �b b?! S AV NOIN3H ` 6 NAVHHVd rn y S AV NMY 0 N N s 1-3 o The study is to identify only those major and minor arterials needed to support development and mitigate future project deficiencies in the TBZ arterial system. Collector and local streets pro- vide minimal areawide benefit and therefore are to be excluded from consideration in this study. o The basis for the assumed "build-out" land use is mapped and tabular information provided by the City of Renton. Assumed trip generation rates are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (fourth edition, 1987) and special trip generation studies conducted by the City of Renton in the study area. The generation ' rates reflect vehicular traffic in lieu of person- trip activity. o The peak 2-hour capacity at level of service (LOS) D is to be used for roadway system needs analysis. o Regional traffic affecting the study is to be ' estimated based upon the traffic model developed for the North Renton TBZ study. i o TSM measures are to be considered in concept only. Detailed programs and improvements are the subject of subsequent study phases. ' o The emphasis of the traffic analysis is to "scale" roadway facilities rather than performing a detailed traffic operational analysis or related system needs study. Consistent with the "scaling" emphasis, unit roadway costs are appropriate for estimating improvement costs. The application of a 1 . 30 factor to construction costs is considered appropriate and reflects an estimate of engineer- ing, administration, and contingencies costs. i o Costs are for 1988. No escalation factors are to !. be applied for future-year conditions. For esti- mating right-of-way costs, $3 per square foot is assumed. o The cost of the "private share" of the benefit ' area funded road improvements will be calculated and assessed against each land development project at the time of building permit issuance. r ' o Three alternative scenarios are to be developed {t and evaluated for determining the public/private share of the benefit area road improvement pro- gram. Cost-sharing scenarios are to be based upon ' se6522/073/3 1-4 i i proportional traffic use of each improved road link . The City Council and the study area prop- erty owners will need to select and agree upon one of these alternative scenarios . i o The three scenarios for cost sharing of road im- provements should be calculated based on (1) post- 1988 study-area trips divided by total future trips; (2) total study-area trips divided by total ' future trips; or (3) future Renton-only trips di- vided by total future trips. o The post-1988 arterial improvement needs associ- ated with benefit area growth and development are assumed to be directly caused by such post-1988 benefit area development. Hence , the private funding share of the arterial improvement program will be borne totally by post-1988 land devel- opment or redevelopment projects . Existing development, however, will be subject to local improvement district (LID) assessments for local and collector streets and for a direct local benefit share of abutting maior arterials. sl l (1 { �1 II ' se6522/073/4 1-5 Section 2 ' BENEFIT ZONE ARTERIAL SYSTEM This section describes the existing and planned arterial street system in the study area. EXISTING ARTERIAL SYSTEM The arterial street system serving the study area is illus- trated in Figure 2-1, which also shows City of Renton functional classifications, locations of traffic signals , and number of lanes on roadways in the study vicinity. Access between the vicinity arterial street system and I-405 is currently provided at Sunset Boulevard North and at Bronson Way North/Maple Valley Highway. The interchange at Sunset Boulevard North allows only for northbound on- and southbound off-ramps from I-405. The interchange at Bronson Way North and Maple Valley Highway provides southbound on-, northbound off-, and northbound on-ramps . Existing access along the north side of the study area is via NF 3rd/NE 4th Street, which is classified as a principal arterial by the City of Renton. NE 3rd transitions into NE 4th at Jefferson Avenue, and becomes SE 128th Street to the east as it enters the -jurisdiction of King County. It is a four-lane roadway, which is widened to five lanes at the westbound approach to the intersection with Sunset Boule- vard, and from Monroe Avenue to Union Avenue. Signalized intersections along NE 3rd/NE 4th Street exist at Sunset Boulevard, Monterey Drive (just east of I-405) , and Monroe Avenue. Between the I-405 undercrossing and Edmonds Avenue, the roadway winds up a fairly steep grade (8 to 12 percent) . Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169) is a five-lane arte- rial located to the south of the project site. It begins at ' the I-405 interchange to the west, and runs east to Maple Valley and Enumclaw in southeastern King County. Sunset Boulevard is another important arterial serving the west side of the study area. It links the I-405 inter- changes with NE 3rd Street. Although Sunset Boulevard functions as a two-lane secondary arterial between NE Park Drive and I-405, it isa seven-lane major arterial with left-turn and right-turn lanes at its intersection with NE 3rd Street. Edmonds Avenue, Monroe Avenue, and Union Avenue provide access to and from the north. Edmonds Avenue and Union Ave- nue provide continuous access to NE Sunset Boulevard and beyond to Kennewick/NE 27th/SE 94th, both which have se6524/022/1 2-1 3S AV QWVb vJ 1 y Q Z . . . - . . .. . .. ./i J � „1 �,� . . , ♦ `, ANN e7 / N 2)X m ii w Cl) N AviivAno 3S AVH19El \/ i • J I J14 uuuuunuu..... nu unnnim:n�;nuumunnnunnuwanwm unnomnmwumw,nunuur��. J y J 3N AV NOW ` 1 3S AV NOW ;� g ? N 14, ` IQ co N o opo y co 3N AV 308N6W , J::. :::. y �'s��, I .•'. >' Q, 3N AV ON"8>1 N LU •.�:::. rn En 3NAVNOlJNIlWVH 'C'/) N LU ~¢ �>.. ' 3N AV SONOW03 JCY yi _` 04 Z 1Y 3NIY'p Q� L. ........... w •V U .S •O i_.. i ............. o Old �` I.� a � cgwz Ilk w\ \ , •\ IC;�/ TEREYDa CY) �\3.� lA —J ;„` 5 1 �� an P•.•' �' Qy N AV AdOlOVj 0 v nu..... uuonnuunnnnuunu�nuw nuuunnuuw,, �, NAVN30FlV'J qA, :.: SAVN01M � � r.� �� �� 2 6a,:. NAVSItlVd 1 �1 Q ;:jd Z ao 1 1I a nnonu611811 � 1 ZI ti o S AV NIM Oy �d� o H y S 2-2 interchanges with I-405. Edmonds Avenue NE is a residential ' street between NE 3rd Street and NE Sunset Boulevard. Mon- roe Avenue NE leads only as far north as NE Sunset Boule- vard. To the east of the study area is Duvall Avenue NE, which extends further north into the City of Bellevue along the Coal Creek Parkway. There is no current access through the study area. Access north/south around the study area is provided by either Sunset Boulevard North or I-405 on the west, and 156th/ 142nd/154th/149th on the east. To the south of the study area, north/south access is only available from Maple Valley Highway at 140th Avenue SE. ' PLANNED ROAD IMPROVEMENTS The City of Renton' s 1988 through 1993 Transportation Im- provement Program (TIP) was reviewed to identify planned road improvements in the vicinity of the study area. These planned road improvements are summarized in Table 2-1 . ' Among these improvements , the most significant are the widening of NE 3rd Street at I-405 and the extension of Edmonds Avenue NE from NE 3rd to the Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) . The Washington State - Department of Transportation (WSDOT) plans for the addition of two HOV lanes to I-405 through ' Renton and will include widening of the I-405 undercrossing at NE 3rd Street. WSDOT intends to completely rebuild the bridge structure, and the widening will allow for seven lanes plus sidewalks on NE 3rd Street. WSDOT also plans to make improvements to the Maple Valley Highway. Capacity improvements will be made at 140th Avenue SE intersection. Maple Valley Highway will be widened to a five-lane section at the Burlington-Northern grade separation. OTHER POTENTIAL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Other potential road improvements affecting the study area include: o Extension of Monroe Avenue NE to the Maple Valley Highway of Duvall Avenue NE to the Maple Valle o Extensionp y Highway, connecting to 140th Place SE o An east/west connection between Edmonds Avenue NE and Union Avenue NE (south of and parallel to NE 4th Street) ' se652.4/022/2 2-3 I, O r1 I tT z 4 ,xi > O ra z rd m cr m rd x x 10 3 s, .q (a z 3 >, .--q v v ro .a •P 'o C: E-: •rl v +) M tr rd cr . rd tr U I~ O >~ 'O 3 rd 3 (a G •ri ' tT rd •r1 m v -rl - rq a) r. O v r� O O ro x 41 rd 4-) -rl r. •r1 34 34 4-3 rl 'O N Z3 N a) %r-I 0. ' •r{ r i v U0 V m C: •I-) N H S4 E r--I �4 r-I a) s, ZI4v Uvm O +1 -r1 'O v >, rd va4rd >, a) U �4 •I- >4 •C v •r1 ::� rl Z3 41 O z -P O I~ m S4 U) Z m v4-) U +a tr v ro +) .J U) +-) tr 3 4-J v a) -P O 4J v U r. O m •r1 m •rl Z3 U) r-I ' G I , U r- 9 0 , >~ • O tr) m tr m M a 4-) .14 >4 •r1 •I-) I4 .a ro m 3 I-) - 34 O 'O rd •I••) 4-4 r-+ v H v d-) 7 4 f, +) v is v S, 34 E: U v rd •-) r; 3 i 4 m 0 U v A >~ 3 .f2 z 3 M v r{ $ Z • rd v C U 3 'o f4 •r1 O v S, •r1 O v 3 4-) r v •.-I C z 9 O v 'O :5 +) •ri m ::I +J •r+ m C; W m ' O >,ro O toO 3 U - ism co U4 -P U ,q -P r� z s, r<s •,-I r 4 • q rq •r1 v m z I tr ra z3 to rd 'U r-I rtf pa 3 (n rd 4-) m 4-) S I a) -H -H N C, --H N I~ 4J 4-) Cd F- C!1 I r_: (d rd 54 >~ U S, tP tP r- -H rd tr-- •rt m U rd z fu H O % tr I~ v Z v >, ro rd O z r, Z r-i is �4 ' z 3 >4 •11 -H T, •r1 -N (0 ra 44 -I.J •,.I ,I +) v % -r1 +J CO �4 r-1 •r1 tr w -Pvmzs Hro0 3 �4m a) C: �4 zC; zI4 4-3rdm O -P s, > >4CL 'O �4Z vv vvzv vv ,~ v U) r. �4 w ro +) z3 O O O rg rd ::s m 'O rO I~ ro �4 rd ++ 'O I, (0 -N C: tr 3 W > `t) :� r- O 'I4 O O O O v r� •r1 rd •r1 +J 4 M •r{ -P ,C CO O -r1 v �O �C is rd U P4 0 Z 4.4 s 3 rq 3 m U 3 X cr U m s~ •r, a H v r-1 Q r•-1 •rl 4 Cl Q ' (moi O r i RS m +) ow U) > O O a H r-I 41 Q O U: z Cn Q 4-3 O O O 0H O o H < r1 O 4-) 4-) Lr) 41 4-) F- +.) H 4-J v .c +� a rO rd >+ _Q r_: v O I 4-3 v I, 4 ' U) z O E-4 C: H O � M O RS Q r- O w z H OW ro M v P4 sv, w w rn Z z W z rn •r♦ z r, „Q v v � v v a) v •ON U I4 I 7, v > 00M 4-) •i-) W 4J 4 > aC 00 m cn cn z cn cn rs, rn 'O 4 b b rI � O tti O >~ � E > E O rd z z z z w A rz a) rn w r-1 O v' I, Co Co M o 'r, >, '- ' 0 co 0o co rn m m rn rn v rn � rn rn rn rn rn >1 r, ri r, ri � r-I '-, rd .� m 1 Z-4 i i _ ZO/ bZS9as i i 7 t } i 4 I 1 1 •gaodai stuq 3o t uoTg3GS UT paquasazd sT Apngs ' szu4 -Jo s-4ua4uoo aqq uodn paspq Xaom4au pEoz ajngnj aus abuegDaaquz uosuo.IU/4asunS /S06-I auq punoap ssediiq e sp aAaas oq sod -! ' 30 4sva 69T2iS 04 49aJgS pz£ ggnos go uotgoauuoo o T-C I/AZO/�ZS9as .ono-PTTna qvie 6£8'6L Lig£'Z£ qvjlos ' ZL£'L£ 8L£'£T a9cP0/TTP4aa/TPT0aaunu00 80L'S 8£9 ao?330 69L'9£ T££'8T TPTquapTsag P s Tal aangn3 s Tay (886T) 5uT4sTxa ia05a4P0 asn puPZ TPaauaO ' N0IIVH2[Ma9 dldL TIDIHaA XIIVCI I-C aTgps ' •auOZ -4TJauag uoz-4p- IodsuPas uo�uag �sPg ac(� Ion sa�PutT�sa uoT�paauab dTI- auk ' sazTIPUIUMs T-C aTgps, •V xTpuaddV UT papTnoad aIP saTlppunoq Zvi, jo dpui P pup ZVS, goEa Ioj uoT-4udTI-4 pa-4PUIT-4sa PUP P-.Pp asn puPT ;o sbuz'4stT paTTp-4aQ -33Egs e�-4To �q pa-4onp -uoo aaaM saTpn'4s uoT-4paauab dTI-. TpToads 'sasn puPT J�TTWP; ' -aTdT4Tnui pup -aTbuTs .I03 ' (L86T 'uoTqTpa u4Ino;) uoz4 -Paauag dTal MLI) saaautbu3 uoT}P-4aodsupaj, jo aqn-4z4sul au-4 uo paspq aaam adiLq asn puPT uopa Io; sa4P.I uoT-.PIauab dTa,I, •buTTapOui oTJJpl-4 Io; palTnbal saTIP -punoq auoz o-. utaojuoo o-4 �-4TO aqq �q TanaT (ZVy) auoz szsA ' -TPuP OTJ;12-7-4 aq-4 04 pa-4Pbaabbp uatP aaam p-4pp asauy •stspq Taoapd-,�q-Taoapd p uo ;;p4s uO4uag 30 (Kqz0 Aq paTgwassp aaaM paap Apngs 9144 Io; P4Pp asn puPT aan4n; PUP buTgsTxg ' NOIJVdaNSJ cl!UJ, QNV 3SL1 QNVI ' • suoT4Tpuoo OT3;Pa4 aangn; PUP but -gsTxa sagTlosap pup suoTgoaCoad oTJ;PI4 at(4 buTXPut IO; pasn P-4Pp pup �BOTOPOLPaM 9q4 sassaappP UOT40as sTtIy •saoanosaa ' buTpun; agPntad pup OTTgnd uaaMgaq sgsoo 4uaui9n0adurT ppoa 30 gTTds 9Tgp4Tnba up buTSSaSSP Io; -AaPSSaoau o.sTP aap � Aaoba4Po aasn Aq suoT40GCoad 0T3jpl,j, •uIPaboad Zg,L au-4 Ioj s4uautanoaduiT pPoa Jo buTZTS usTTgpgsa pup paau au4 ssassP 04 ' appui aaaM spuPuiap 0T3jpI74 „-4no-PTTnq,, aangn; 30 suOT400Coad ' SGKVW3Q OIaaWds SNOZ SI33NSfi C uOT400S I ' Z-� Z/AZO/6ZS9as •886T uT 99P4s u04uag 90 A4T3 Aq uaNpq ' squnoo oTJgPz4 uodn pasleq azP pa4zodaz sauinTon aqy •Paap Apngs Zgy aq4 uT Wa4SAS 49914s TPtz94zP 9q4 109 sauinTon (yQMV) oTg;Pzq APPX99M abPzanP buT4sTxa sApTdstp I-£ aznbTd ' SaWflIOA OldJVHI JNIZSIX3 •g xTpuaddV UT paquasazd eap ssaoozd uoT4PpTTPn aq4 90 s4Tnsaz aqy -uoT4PpTTPn anaTgoP 04 S9uiT4 0I unz pup pagsnCpp spm Tapoui aqy •buTgS94 uoT4PpTTPn zo9 AoPznoop 30 sTanaT aTgpaTsap spuaunuooaz goTuM ' (Z86T 'pzpog gozpasag uoigPgzodsuPzy) SSZ azo ag uiPz ozd gozpasad AeMq TH anTgpza ooO TPuoT4PN 9q4 UT paquamnoop uoT4PutzoTuT gazPasaz g4TM aouP'Tduioo uT pagonp i' -uoo sum ssaoozd uoT4PpTTPn aqy •xzoM49u APMgbTg ago uT } SIPTzagzP zoCPui zog sauinTon g4TM s4uautubTssP buTzpduzoo (8) Pup !sauTTuaazos oM} ssozop sauinjon g4TM s4uaiuubTSSP ' buTzpduioo (Z) !uopzoo Pazp Apngs . agq ssozop sauinTon oTgjpzq Ten4OP g4TM S4uauiubTSSP 3TggPz4 Tapoui buTZPdwoo (T) Aq Pazp Apngs aqq uT suoT4Tpuoo buT4sTxa z09 pa4epTTPa sum Tapouz aqy ' ' sxuTT 096 PUP ' sapou SI6 'sauoz LL ATagpuiTxozddP sapnTouT Tapoui oTspq aqy • sTsleq buTobuo up uo spazp Apnjs Zgy zog pauTgaz zaggzng buTaq j ' sT Tapoui aqy •uta4sns 40a14s z040aTToo pule ' TPTz94zP 'APM aa - ig aqy. sapnTouT A4To aq4 uTg4TM NJOm4au APMgbTq oTspq aqy ' •Pazp Apngs aqq buTpunozzns PUP uTg4TM suoT4Tpuoo TPn4DP 43aTgaz ATagpanoop azoui 04 Tapoui oTsPq aq4 o4 pappP azaM sXuTT Mau 0£Z ATa4PuiTxozddV -sauoz TE oq sauoz Z uiozg pa-4ebazbbpsTp seM azn4onzqs auoz aqq 'eazP Apn4s Zgy uoquag ' 4sPH aqy. zod •pauTPzb auTJ azou ATgpaapTsuoo ST u04uag 90 A4TO aq4 uTg4TM azngona4s auoz oTspq aqq aTTgm 'sauoz APM -agpb zabzpT o4uT passazdwoo sT uo4uag 90 ALTO age buTpunoz ' -ins azngona4s auoz TPuoTbaz aqy • (OOOSd) s4uauiu19nOq Jo TTounoO punoS gabnd aqy. Aq paTTddns Pgpp gspoazog Tanpaq pup asn puPT TPuoTbaz uodn paseq saTqunoO gsTuiogouS pule 'aozaTd 'buTX buTsspduiooua Tapoui TPuoTbaz P ATTP-l4uas•s9 sT Tapout aqy ' •squauiubTssp S(zomgau pup sdTzq aToTgan ATTPp gspoazo,g o4 padojanap uaaq suq Tapoui aqy •z94ndui000zoTui aTgT4Pduioo-Wqj up uo sunz urPzbozd aqy •pa4pzodzooul 'dnozO uoTgpgzodsupzy ozgaW aqq Aq pasuaoTT uipzbozd XS Ia(IOWI aqq. sT Tapout aq4 unz oq pasn azpM4gos zagndwoo aqy •npngs Zgy uO4uag g4zoN aq4 zo9 uO4uag 90 A4TO aq-4 zo.J padoTanap SPM (aTgpq dTzq PUP xzoM49u AemgbTq TPuoTbaz aqy. ' •a•T) Tapoui ag-4 ;o azngona4s oTspq aqy •Tapoui zagnduioo P jo asn aqq gbnozgq appw aj aM Apngs aqq zog suoT4oaCozd puPuiap oTggPzy ' IN3WdOgaAaG ` aGOW OI3dVdLL � w J ' 3S AV ONZbI $ 4:2.1 V U- - -- - -- - -- - - - - __ _ _ _ _/ U. 1401H 3NAVllannOr. . . . . �� ,\. . . . . .`-�, p 1 • :: e�) z 3S AV HM9 \ \1 •':::>;.: CD F- r _1\. . . . . . . . a� 1cn r. . . OLIN .�............ . . . . . . ,•,.r 1 e...: Ll- LLI \...r o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\ . .. . � . . . . . . . . . . . ;1 1 \. .'.'.'.':':': \ . \1 1 . cv .... . . . . . . .:.; J � 3N AV NOW \ . . . 3S:AV NOINn: : : : : : : : : :r $ � $ C'3 x. . \. .o. F. C� :�. .r 1 c� cts . . . . . . .r, e r v>: a ;i :::::>::>:: CN PU <w 6[b. . : :5�. 3N AV 30HNOW r ►`_<>: .'N v�i °fJ1, 3N AVONVIHdIN � w r z w_ \. . p ' p r N?, r 3N AVNOl°JNIEUVH °' �W+ �:» o w W F- \ LU 3N AV SONOW03 v. . . >. ,::;;: m s. . �. �r:: :: o' ..c,V..: dam: :. .JP .y:. m YgN�• .. Z rn O W c�s I a. P. .ra°Nr�tev 1 LO N qr N Atl A)J lOV3 0P v N AV N3adn �6 6?1 S AV NOIN3H \ b .. , NAVMHVd cc $ rn 6� ' z Z c SAVNIVA ' 3-3 -£ £/6ZO/VZS9as 1' •s�TuiTT ��.TO aqy go apTsgn-o spaaP padOTanapun AT4uaaano go quauidOTanap aangnj ucoaj glnsaa TTTM 4pg4 SaspaaoUT TpuoTgaodoad abapT Mous Pa-Tp Apngs aq4 go apTs 4spa aqq uo sTPT104ap aqy •Aumaaaj I SOS-I aq4 JO A4TUTOTn 9q4 uT aq o4 pagoadxa aap saspaao -uT OT;3Pa4 4au 4sabael aqy •saunTon buT4sTxa aq4 UPg4 ' aagbTq quaoaad OS upgq aaoui aq oq pagoadxa aaP paap Apngs aq4 uT sTPTJ@4ap aoCuLu aqq uo saurnTon oTg3Paq aangng aqy •uMOgS SUOT4O9L -oad aqq UPg4 lagbTq aq pTnoM I (4uauiubTssp „buTu40u-aO-TTP„ up uodn paspq ' •a •T) SUOT4P4TUITT A4Topdpo go 9nT4oadsaaaT 'spupwap OT33Paq MPu •uoTgsabuoo pup AgTopdpO aTgeTTPnp ' go qunouip aq- ,Sq paaoduia-4 sT -4Pg4 TanaT puputap P 4u9saadai aao3aaagq pup quauiubTssp ,pauTpa4saa-A4Topdpo,, P uo paspq aap suoTgoaCoad oTgjpaq asauy • (886T apan) UOT4TpuOO buT -4sTxa aqy. W01; g4Moab OT.93Pa4 -4au aq4 SP TTaM sp M94s4s aq'4 UO spupuiap OTjjs'4 Tp404 pagoaCoad aqq go Aipumns p sapTnoad 1 Z-£ aznbid •peap ,ipngs Zgy aqq gnogbnoagq ggmoab OTJ pz-4 Tel4upgsgns sa4PoTpuT uia4SAS 49aa4s TPTaagap buTgsTxa aqq oq spupuiap oT_;jpa4 „-4no-pTTnq,, aan-.nj aq4 go 4uatuubTssP auy SQNKWaG DIddVULL 32Inynd •pdn 000' 6 aanO gsnC 4p auin -Ton buT4STxa gsagbTq aqq spq anu@AV uoTun 'sTPTaa4ap 9s9g4 ' gp •sauinTon oT3Jpz4 MOT ATanT4pTaa anPq dT4ua.zznO S0�-I go 4sp9 aaP 4Pu4 sTPTl;D-4Jp u-4nos-q-4aou aq-4 '-4apd gsoui aq-. and ' *SOV-I go apTs 4spa aqq uo pdn 000 'LZ sT APMgbTH AaTTPA aTdpW uo auinTOn OT33Pa4 buT4stxa aqy •papn -aTnog 4asuns 4p pdn 000'0£ gnogp oq '4spa aq4 uo pdn 000' OZ aanO gsnC uioa; abupa aopTaaoo gaaa4s qqp/pa£ gN aqq buOTP saurnTOn 3T.T3Paq buTgSTxa aqy •ga914S pa£ dN go ggnoS pdn 00010V 4soutTP pup 4aaags pa£ dN 3o ggaou (pdn) App aad ' saTotgan 000 ' 9Z aano ST papnaTnog gasunS uo auinTOn LQMV aqy ' SOP-I 04 4uaoPCpP papnaTnog 4asunS Jo A4TuTOTn aq4 uT an000 sauinTOn oTJJPaq buTgsTxa gsagbTq aqy. 'aanbTj aqy uT uMogs SV 0 ... Cf)z ' � a w C o 3S AVOND I S2 V .. . .. . . . .Baa+i 1 �' + J Q ` / N� W 3NntllltlnnOas 4. 1 o 1 OC 3S AV HIM 14 . LL- U- y : . .'rl r.'. ".'.'.'... . . . . . . . '.'.'.".".y 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I .'.'.'.'.'.'.'. . . . .'.". .".\ . .. . 1 .J d 3N AVNOINn .'.'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\ o �. . . �. . . . . . . . . . . .r a� • e i �'. b. . .'. .".'. . - - z" R.. , \. cu00..o. . . o...b. ....... ." i::..... 3N AV 308N -t; ;�, y "'far'. ,.>: ` 4 3N AV ONVINdIN i r fA- , T z w \.oz 4 E : : :':':':':':':':':':' ...�. a� cc<w r \ o 3N AV NOIDNIli8 LL r $ r w ; g ...... ... .LAJ Z m i," . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ¢ d Ao 3N AVSONOWO3 , .".':►= :":":": :":":':': :':':': : \,; •::.;; cp: `;::�:� ...' \ ":— t� yds + o .'Q:" w `� a •� .'.b' o r s: Q. S o + N AVI ATIM 0 c NAVN30M 16 b�jSAVNOIN38 ` i2N hV 71FlVd cr to N N z �+ b� t z z SAW NIM 7pdb�gy� o of y s 3-5 T-� T/VLO/ZZS99S r •auPT uang-gjaT aaguao e sapnTouiq •aTTW .zad suotgoas -zaguT pazTTPubis anzJ uPug azoui og spuodsaiaoo abupa aug 90 pua OT auy •alTui -Tad suOtgoas.zaguT pazTTPubiS ' anzJ uetjg ssaT og spuodsaaaoo abuez aqq go pua gbTq aqL ' •suoigoasaagu-r paziTpubzs go Aouanbaaj atjg .zoo sgun000e sanTPn Jo abupa aqs •Q SOZ guasaada.z pup TpnupW AgzopdPO ApmgbTH S861 aqq uo paspq azp aTgpg aqq uT umogs sanTPA aqL, 00019V - 0001V£ 00018£ - 0001 £Z L 0001Z� - 000' 0£ 000' M: 000' 61 q9 000 ' T£ - 000 ' VZ 000'LZ - 000 'LTS OOO ' LZ - 000 ' OZ 000'£Z - 000 ' £1 qV, 000 ' LT - 000' tl 000 'ST - 000 ' 01 q£ 000' £1 - 000 ' 01 000 ' TT - 000' 9 Z sTPTaagly sTeTa@41V .zogoaTTOD saup'I Aemppog ' aTdTOUTad pup sTPTJ94 V aOuzW go zaquinN (suozgoeaTp ggoq go urns--App aad saTOzgan) ' PS3IZIOKdV3 OIddVUI VIIfII GSZI`IVUaN30 T-t aTgps •SuOT4P4T1uTT ngTopdeo goeo.zddp uoZgoaszaguT zog gun000p Pup (S86T 'papog goapasad uoTgPgaodsueaL) 60Z g.zo ag TP-roadS TpnupW gtoe e0 pmu TH S861 atlg uodn paseq aze sanTen ' AgTopdeo aus ' (T-t, aTges) padOTanap spm sazgiopdpo oTggp.zg ATTep pazzTpaauab go aTgpg P 'uosTapduioo sTgq uiaogaad os, ' •sazgTopdeo xuzT TPTa@4'p 1 6uT4sTxa pageuitgsa L14TM spupwap OTgge.zg xutT TezJagzP pagoaC -oad buTaPdIUOO Aq pagonpuoo spm STSATpue AOu9TOi3ap TPTJ ' -a4-TP up 'AOTTod Stag uodn paspg *APP aug go pot.zad anon-Z Xvad goea buTanp aaggaq .zo Q (SOZ) aOznzas 90 TanaT gP I pauzp4uzpiu aq uiags�s gaa.zgs Tez.zagau aqg buoTP suOT4POOT TTP ' gp suoTgPaado gegg sagegOip AOTTod oTggvag uoguag go AgTO SQd3N SIN3WaAOHdWI gVIUHIHV •sguauianojdLuT pasodoid aqq buzgonagsuoo jog sgsoo ageuiTxoadde au-4 go 41pumins P sT papnTOui OsTV •uiagsns 49aa4s TPTaaglP ' aq4 uT satouatoTgap pagoadxa agebTgTui pup guauidOTanap aingnj gaoddns Og papaau sguauiaAOadiuT aug saz.ATPuP uOzgoas szus ! ' SSSOO WaISACS 'I` idaluv dNOZ ZIdamzu v uoigoaS ' Z-� Z/ALO/ZZS9as SXTPMapzS o squaumAozduiT apisppod o butubzs pup buzdTa4s TozquoO OT;;Pa4 pup buT4gblq o butopgzns pup buTApd o abPUTPaP PUP butppz0 0 ' s-4uauigsnCpp AgTjT4n O buzggnzb pup bUTaPaTD o ' :azp sa4puiT4S@ gSOO ago uz S4uautaTa OTspq agy •sAPMpPOz auPT -uanas pup '-xts '-ani; '-zno3 '-aazgq '-omq zo; padOTanap azam s4soD •STspq 4003-TP9uTT-000 'T-zad P uo suoTgoas APMpPOz OTSPq zoo 'I'IIH WZHo AQ padoTanap azam s4soo qTun •sgsoo 4Tun paZTTPzauab uodn paspq pado ' -Tanap spm squauanozduii iupzbozd pasodozd aqq go uoT4onzgsuoo zo; sgsoo �Pm-;o-4gbTa PUP TP4TdpO aqq go szsnTPuP Azoszno K SSNSWHAoddwl rividaildv do SSILVIIii S5 ,LSOD •Q SO'I J0 4TwTT zaddn aq4 4e agpzado Apui goTgM 'g4aON ' nPM uosuOzg/ApmgbTH xaTTPA aTdpw o4 gaazgs paC SN uiozj pzpnaTnou gasuns aq Put uoTgdaoxa ATuO agy •s4u9utanozduii supzbozd Zuy u04uag 4SPH ago ;0 uOT4P4uauiaTdwT g4TM p94Pb -T4Tui aq TTTM s9T3u9TOzJ9p Oz;;Pz4 au4 30 TTP ATzpau 4Pg4 agPOtpuz SquauiuBTSSP oT;;Pzq aqy • Z-� aznbTa uT umogS azp squauzanozduiz pasodozd aq4 q4zm suaiuubtssp OT;;Pz4 pa43aCOzd •-4uauidoTanap Zgy uoquad -.spa g4TM p049TOOSSV aq ATgPuospaz gouupo Aagq 'Pazp Apngs aqq ;o apTs4no pa4poOT azp s4u9uranozduiT aq4 PUP OT;JPz4 Tpuoibaz anzas ATTaPUITad Aagq asnpoaq 'OSTV • s4sO3 gbzq ATTPT4uP4s -qns an q pTnoM pup uoT4PbT4TW OT;;Pz4 TPuzbzPui ATuO pappP squauanozdun 9AT4vua94TP 9sag4 4Pg4 p9uzuia94ap SPM 4T ' s4uaui -ubissP Tapoui oT; ;Pzq uodn paspu •suospaz go zaquinu p zo; �. uipzbozd Zuy u04uag 4SPu aq4 uz uotsnTOui zO3 pa4oaTas 40u azam gpuq s4uaui9nozdtuT anT4PuzagTP azP T-V aznbTj uT uMOgS •Z-� ajgpy UO pa4STT pup T-t aznbTd uz umogs azp satouaToi;ap azn4nj a4PbT4Tui 04 p9409T9s squauianozduii ppog •Pazp STg4 uz AOuaioT;ap age. a4Pb -T4Tul 04 pagpnTpna azam sppoz sspcAq 9ni4Puaa4TP 'azO;azagy ' •paspazoui aq gouupo sppoz asagq go Agzopdpo aqq 'squzpzgs -uoO TP4u9uiuozznua pup asn puPT go asnpoaq 'atuT4 auIPs age 4y •PazP sTg4 gbnozgq paTauunj ST 'OT;;Pz4 gbnozgq pup Pazp ' Apnqs buzpnTouz 'Oz;JPa4 TTP 'Pazp pn4s aqq go ngdpzbodoq aq4 go asnPoag •,�PMaaz; S0�-I ago ;0 A4TuTOTA aqq uT abupgO -za4ut Apmaaz3 pup s4aaz4s aqq aq oq pagpdzoTqup sT Aouaioz; -ap 4LIpDTJiubTS qsouI aqy •aznqn; aq4 uT -4uatOtjap aq pTnom s4aaz4s TPTza4aP PazP Apngs aqq go Aupw 4pgq pa4poipuz xzom -qau buTgszxa aqq oq pupuiap aT;3Pzq azngn; go 4uawubzssu aqy cn z w w `D O 3S AV ONZVI cc CL ' - - - - - - -- --— -I J �L Y %Iui. 14 z 3NAvllvAno ` r"� 1► ••�♦ p 1 ♦'::: N A ;1 3S AVHiM I` ;t N t ♦ ... LL 1,. r: ........... 1 W Y \1 IY YI1z o fir' NI +�W LZ m 1 3N AV NOINfI 3S AV NOINfI \ ti::::s:;::.;::: Rf Cfl O h \: \ W1Cn s ►::i \ 4r �o V d 3N AV 308NOW Yti:: .}•. '' �R »' c 3N AV ONVINw dIN Y�• ' Off ' !r •}; � 111111 � ' { �lO3NNOOSo m zw ti 3N AVNOI.0NIFJUVH Y: :' m v w DSGON 11 N } 4>: a zE1,,III j111111� c c � osaEi m aci E la \ ti •. 4i?: 3N AV SONOW03 •r.r r. a E c cr <: E E o uj a m > SOS \ �;� ^Y 3NIY'p PQ =Cp c c c E US z Q TEREY DP Y C9 c c c c L � Y::i: W m m m ca cv kk 41. •y'y'N•9 ,,. i, an •�/" Q �p1 N AV kUOiDVj ez / N AV N30dVJ �b 61! S AV NOIN3tl NnvHtivdcr ti Q 6� z z H o S AV NNYI o UJ ' Q b ' 4-3 1 ' 1 U] U) U) N U) U) � Ul F ro • ro ro • ro • (d . ro . •r.1 r-1 U) r-1 U) r-1 U) r•1 cb F-4 U) r-I U) r r%1 U) •O •11 .ri •O-1 r-1 O r-1 O 1-•1 O r-1 0 1-1 O r-1 O r-1 r-i O U U U W U ro Q)-H a-r1 a•ri a•ri a•r1 a•1-1 a a•1-1 a a a r t a ' >+) >�) >.0 >�) >.0 >+1 >4-) M (P U)r� u) [ ro tic roro roro ro ro roro (a (o o roro ro a O S.1 U �4 U 1.1U N U S.1 U S-1 U 4.) f4 V >, . >, >,g >,,,_.-1 •r1 .1.)•H F.1•ri y.)•r1 -P•rl +)•ri 11•r1 .4)•r1 ro+) ro ro ro 0. 4) W W W W W W C1 .-i•.-I r-i•.•� ri•ri r-1•r1 r-I•r•I ri•ri �(3)' r-I•4-4 r1 b N -r-1 roro (a ro (0 ro roa to ro co ro c Colo ro ro•r1 ro ' >4 ro go a0 c0 Z0 1~ O a Z O+) o 09 04-) U O O r O F 0 Ei 0 8 0 8 > O F 74 U) s4 N ro F ai �r-1 .1 H 4J r-i .N r-1 jam)r 1 �r-1 r-1 a a a a.1% a z Q •r1 ro •r1 ro •r1 ro •r1 ro •r1 ro •r1 ro U) •r1 ro Z J.4 9 z a I~ O a c lo g. lo g a s 10 9 a c ro rot; ro M ro Co s~ M-H 1 4-) a CS a tr) ro r a tr a 0) a tr G a ty) .-1 ri y W U ro ra ro•r+ (a-,i Ia•r1 ro•r-1 ro-r+ o to•r1 I W 1 I to 1 ro U) co co En NO z � ru �> ^ OOOO O O ' O 0 � � O 0 aro 3a 3a aro 3a 310 w aro o+-) 0 0 o ro �4 W C +) g .V 9 4-1 9: 4-1 9: 4) C 4) Z W ro W W.k W 4-) p, a ro ro ro ra ro ro 4-1 ra m ' ro a ro a a a O aQ) 3 3 0 3 q � az a >~ a ,; as as~ as Cos~ art a a3 a•r1 ro0 ro0 roo roo CO (d0 4-) roc 1 .r1 1 -r-I 1 -11 1 •r1 I •r1 I •r+ g 1 •ri a 1 +) 1 +.1 1 4-1 1 +1 1 W 1 W a 1 +) 4-1•ri W JJ 14 • d-) ro a tTU tPU b'U tTU CTU OAU E OAU U rr U U roro OZ •ri U) •r1 U) -r1 U) •r1 U) •rt U) •r1 U) (s+) .r{ m }4 >, N I4 �4 $4•rl ro 9f4 Z �4 G �4 914 Zf4 C �q .,q Q) 9W 4J 44 +) +1 $4•r1 4) U) 3 as as as as as as r1 In as En-Hco U) 0 V) ,0 U: a+J ro4J a+J ro4-) a+) a+-1 rota a+-) gro Z g.-V g 31T r1 G rl g •r1 Z •r1 C •ri ~ •r1 1~ a W •r•1 Z 00 O O ro a O a•r1 N 3 r� 3 ri Sri 3 r1 3 r1 3 r1 a 0 3•r1 vC-: u C) rZ �4 U g x rvlQ 0 1 Wz a a za c •b0 x>AO Uroa +) � s, w 0H W 0 � � a) t� > +1 +) •W • ••a W < U) a W . r+ >Q A > > a a • a > O • a > $4 '0 $4 • -4Ic O F r+ r I~ > > a a > -4 W > a+) •r1 G X r-1•r N r 1 cc > > o o RC >FC 4J to cn U) o c M to In to U) rC O U) ri X >r 1 FI 4) 1-1 f4 ro a $4 �1 a a r-1 4-1 a a) a s r-1 �1 a s az a s a 0 0 c 0r1 W a)Lr) N O u)4-) O 04-4 W $4 )`4 0 o ro z (h O M N O N 4 a) ro a) r-q 4 W 1~ W W z z E E z g.r.1 •r•1 > v W z oro as roo oro 0 :� Wo row •u00 > CO WU)� �".W Wr] hx z QQ a U)H z w RCr-1Wa' x+) W V) 0 - P4 +) r 1 0 a v n n n n n '� �' u a'1 4 � fo ro 41 a a ro x r a v a M M M V a1-1 O rq a O k k O S4 W W W W W W ro w (0-14tr 10 O O o w z z z z z z w x w 2: z 11 41 a � W tit O � HN M d' U) l0 [� co d1 •rl O r-i N f•1 .'3 ri ri ri N � z ro 4-4 i Cl)... F z ' w w CD uj > 3SAVOWN C, �? O $ v J E a t cr> cla tH 1 ' o Cn 3N nV��vnn0�. ::':.a.,.� 1;.a.,.a� :\+ 0 1 ♦ :: a O \ - ��. . . . . . . . .\ F- O \. .-. ..h. aa� 'aaa�aaaaaaaaaN. ... 1 / (� \.'.'. \1 "' cY cr a. \ ern'. 8 $.taaaaaaa LL LL . . . . . . . . . -j o 3N AV N01 \".". .'. . . . .".". . .'. 3S:AVNOINn: . . . . . . . . $ L \. . . . . . . . . .". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .;� o ♦ i .- . g ;:;:.1> \. .Z. ::: \ \:>i>:: 3N AV 30dNOW 3N AV ONVI>U A �103NNO�a T pZ ; ,;`i`'' E 12 ' 3N AVNOIDNIdHVH = LL c ¢' EGS W : : : . . a. . .3: t':. E Z . 5 .N. ?.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. .\:5::: 3N AV SONOWO3 , ri �. . . . . . . . . \ Y o '.'y+ 0 y� .' : : ::"xY•3NtV'B .'.'Qv •.:j::::::::i;i:%2:%" uZ Q LU MONTEREY G�76 + c� + N AV AlfaOVJ v '...... 0P 0 \ N AV N3ONVO fb 6?f S AV NODBU ' NAVNHVd N o 8 ti c cr Q � N � •�� de - Z Z 1 o S AY NNYI ¢ S ' N N ' 4-5 Contingencies and related supplemental costs to raw con- struction costs (such as engineering and administrationY ' costs) were not included in the basic unit costs . A factor of 1 . 30 was applied to adjust the raw construction costs for ' these items. Costs for traffic signals were estimated sepa- rately. Consideration was given to the high costs antic- ipated for construction of the segment of the Monroe Avenue Connector at the hillside adjacent to Maple Valley Highway. ' Table 4-3 summarizes estimated costs by number of lanes. The basic unit costs and estimated quantities for various roadway widths are shown in Appendix C. (� Table 4-3 TYPICAL ROADWAY AND SIGNAL COSTS (1988 dollars) Item Costa New Two-Lane Roadway $570, 000 per 1, 000 linear feet New Three-Lane Roadway $620 , 000 per 1 ,000 linear feet New Four-Lane Roadway $670, 000 per 1, 000 linear feet New Five-Lane Roadway $720, 000 per 1, 000 linear feet New Six-Lane Roadway $770, 000 per 1, 000 linear feet New Seven-Lane Roadway $820 , 000 per 1 , 000 linear feet Traffic Signals $100, 000 each One-lane Road Widening $250, 000 per 1 ,000 linear feet Signal Modification $50, 000 each g �. aTypical costs include a 1 . 30 factor for contingency and ' supplemental costs. i For estimating purposes, a ROW cost of $3 .per square foot I was used. This cost reflects prior localized city experi- ence. The roadway improvements within the ROW are included ' in the basic unit costs (sidewalks, street lighting, _ street-scape, curb, gutter, and paving) . Developer costs for onsite improvements (onsite circulation, drainage, park- ing lots and walkways , and landscaping) are not included in those costs. The total capital and ROW costs for construction of the ' proposed program improvements are listed in Table 4-4 by individual project. The total cost of these improvements is (q, 238000• - I ' se6522/074/3 4-6 1 . Table 4-4 COST ESTIMATES FOR BENEFIT ZONE ROAD AND SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS Cost Estimates--S1,000sb Improvement a Roadway Signal R/W Number Project Costs Costs Costs Total 1 NE.3rd St.--Sunset Blvd. to Monterey Dr. 475 50 14 539 2 NE 3rd St.--Monterey Dr. to Edmonds Ave. 1,013 50 97 1,160 3 NE 3rd St.--Edmonds Ave. to Jefferson Ave. 813 25 78 916 4 NE 4th St.--Jefferson Ave. to Monroe Ave. 463 50 44 557 5 NE 4th St.--Monroe Ave. to Union Ave. 1,250 50 120 1,420 6 NE 4th St.--Union Ave. to Duvall Ave. 950 50 91 1,091 7 Edmonds Ave.--at*NE 4th St. 200 -- 24 224 1 � 8 Maple Valley Hwy.--Sunset Blvd. to NB I-405 On/Off 438 100 -- 538 9 Edmonds Ave.--NE 3rd St. to Monroe Ave. 2,680 25 956 3,661 10 Monroe Ave.--Edmonds Ave. to l NE 2nd St. 1,474 -- 554 2,028 it Monroe Ave.--At hillside 5,792 -- 290 6,082 12 Monroe Ave.--Maple Valley Hwy. to hillside 670 100 252 1,022 TOTALS 16,218 500 2,520 19,238 aSee Table 4-1 for more detailed project descriptions. bSee Appendix C for summary of basic roadway cost per 1,000 linear feet. Qualifying Statement: The opinions of cost shown and resulting conclusions on project funding requirements have been prepared with information available at the time the opinion was produced. The final costs of the projects and resulting feasibility will depend on actual labor and material I costs, competitive market conditions, actual site conditions, final project scope, implementation schedule, continuity of personnel and engineering, and other variable factors. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the opinions of cost presented herein. Because of these factors, funding needs must be carefully reviewed prior to making specific financial decisions or establishing project budgets to help ensure proper project evaluation and adequate funding. se6522/077/1 4_7 �1 Section 5 ALTERNATIVE FEE SCENARIOS j� This section addresses which costs should be included in the II benefit zone program, discusses different approaches for allocating the public versus private share of the costs, and presents alternative fee scenarios for distributing the pri- vate share among developers. The calculations presented do not account for the ability of specific land uses within the TBZ to generate sufficient t revenue to pay the estimated trip generation fees. The potential developer fees should be evaluated to determine whether the fees will act as a deterrent that inhibits I future growth and/or makes particular land use developments infeasibile within the benefit zone. I TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT ZONE SUPPORTED COSTS A major concern in formulating the TBZ road improvement pro- gram is the determination of which road improvement costs should be considered for distribution to new development. The following conclusions have been made regarding costs for inclusion in the program: o Roadway improvements to be funded through the j areawide TBZ assessment program are the major and minor arterials needed to support areawide devel- opment and to mitigate projected future defi- ciencies in the arterial system. o New internal arterials necessary to provide access to areas currently not served by streets provide areawide benefit as well as direct benefit to local abutting properties. For these arterials, City ordinance requires that new developments pro- vide offsite improvements including dedication of ROW, construction of part of the roadway, and I associated amenities. Therefore, for this study, +' CH2M HILL has assumed that half of the costs of these street improvements should be included in the benefit zone assessment program; the other half should be funded directly by abutting properties on each side of the new arterial through LIDs or direct funding. o Collector and local streets provide minimal area- wide benefit and therefore should be excluded from the areawide TBZ program. These improvements ' serve limited local benefit areas and should be se6522/078/1 5-1 financed through tIDs or by direct subsidy from abutting land owners. o The costs of new ROW needs have been estimated for each TBZ road improvement project and included as part of the fundinq to be collected through the benefit zone assessment program. ROW dedication , by any property owner will be credited against j his/her road assessment obligations. t ' o For those road improvements to be included in the TBZ program, current public or private funding commitments are ignored until after the identifi- cation of public/private cost shares. Such com- mitments will be credited against the overall public or individual private funding shares of the ' East Renton TBZ improvement program. 1 o As stated earlier, the costs for road improvement projects required to mitigate existing deficien- cies are included in the TBZ program. On the basis of the above consideration, the capital and right-of-way costs of road improvements to be included in the program are listed in Table 5-1 . The total cost for inclusion in the program is $16, 139, 000. PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE SHARE OF COSTS The allocation of relative public versus private shares ' depends upon the method of proportioning the impacts for the sources of excess traffic demand. Three alternative scenar- ios were developed for considering the public/private share of the benefit zone road improvement program. Cost-sharing �• scenarios are based upon proportional traffic use of each improved road link. The City Council and the study area property owners will need to select and agree upon one of these alternative scenarios. The three scenarios for cost sharing of road improvements were calculated based on either (1) post-1988 study-zone traffic volumes divided by total ' future traffic volumes , (2) total study-zone traffic volumes divided by total future trips, or (3) future Renton-only traffic volumes divided by total future trips. Scenario 1 has justification based upon the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and provides a reasonable minimum for developer participation in related road improve- ments. It would not require developer participation in road ; improvement needs that may be caused partially by benefit zone development traffic outside the benefit zone. se6522/078/2 5-2 1 I I Table 5-1 CAPITAL AND RIGHT-OF-WAY COSTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE BENEFIT ZONE PROGRAM i Estimated Benefit Capital and Benefit Zone Supported Improvement ROW costs Zone Program Costs ` Number Projects (x $1,000L Support W (x $1,000) 1� 1 NE 3rd St.--Sunset Blvd. ' to Monterey Dr. 539 100 539 I 2 NE 3rd St.--Monterey Dr. to Edmonds Ave. 1,160 100 1,160 1 3 NE 3rd St.--Edmonds Ave. to Jefferson Ave. 916 100 916 4 NE 4th St.--Jefferson Ave. to Monroe Ave. 557 100 557 5 NE 4th St.--Monroe Ave. to Union Ave. 1,420 100 1,420 6 NE 4th St.--Union Ave. I to Duvall Ave. 1,091 100 1,091 7 Edmonds Ave.--at NE 4th St. 224 100 224 8 Maple Valley Hwy.--Sunset Blvd. to NB I-405 On/Off 538 100 538 I 9 Edmonds Ave.--NE 3rd St. to Monroe Ave. 3,661 50 1,831 I� 10 Monroe Ave.--Edmonds Ave, to NE 2nd St. 2,028 50 1,014 ' 11 Monroe Ave.--At hillside 6,082 100 6,082 12 Monroe Ave.--Maple Valley Hwy. ' to hillside 1,022 75 767 TOTALS 19,238 16,139 aSee Table 4-1 for more detailed project descriptions. li SE6522/083/1 5-3 I' Scenario 2 increases developer proportional obliqations for road improvement funding within the benefit zone to a level greater than the prospective SEPA-related obligation. This increased share could be considered a reasonable compen- sation for East Renton TBZ development traffic impacts with- out funding obligations outside the benefit zone. ' Scenario 3 requires East Renton TBZ property owners to fund the TBZ arterial improvements in the proportion that the Renton-related (i.e. , trip ends within the city limits) traffic on every street improvement compares to total traf- fic on that link. It is based upon the premise that devel- opers within the city will pay for development related traffic improvement needs within their respective benefit zones of the city and be absolved of their development im- pacts within the city outside of their respective benefit zones. The assumption is made that the impact the study zone traffic will have on Citv of Renton roadways outside the study zone will be equivalent to the impact that nonstudy-zone, city-generated traffic will have on roadways within the studv zone. The City would assume the obligation to fund the non-city-generated proportional share of traffic on each benefit zone street improvement link,.. ' Table 5-2 indicates the resulting public versus private f share calculations for each scenario. Table 5-2 PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE SHARE OF COSTS Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 % $1,000 % $1,000 % $1,000 941 43.7 7 Public 55.4 8, ,053 15.2 2,453 Private 44.6 7,198 56.3 9,086 84.8 13,686 Total 100.0 16,139 100.0 16,139 100.0 16,139 DISTRIBUTING THE PRIVATE SHARE AMONG DEVELOPERS With the total private share of TBZ program costs estab- lished, these costs must be further distributed among devel- opers. The study' s intent is to establish an equitable method for distributing the costs. Ideally, the costs ' should be distributed in direct proportion to the impacts that created the need for the improvements. From a prac- tical standpoint, the method for distributing the costs should be relatively simple to understand and easy to imple- ment. Variables that should be considered as indicators of _!. se6522/078/3 5-4 Y- relative impact are: daily trip generation; p.m. peak hour percentage; percentage of passer-by trips; and trip length. DAILY TRIP GENERATION Use of daily trip generation would be the simplest method for distributing costs. The private share of costs would be divided by the total new daily vehicle trips for the TBZ . Each development would be assessed an equivalent per-trip cost based upon estimated daily trip generation rates . How- ever, daily trip generation does not necessarily provide an equitable correlation with the need for new road improve- ments , because road improvement needs are generally due to peak period impacts. Table 5-3 shows the results of using only daily trip generation to distribute costs. Table 5-3 COSTS PER DAILY TRIP BASED UPON DAILY TRIPS Percent of Cost Per Daily Trip ($/Trip) Land Use Private Share Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 r Residential 38.8 151 192 288 Offices 10.7 151 192 .288 Comm./Retail/Other 50.5 151 192 288 ADJUSTMENT FOR P.M. PEAK-HOUR PERCENT Adjustments for p.m. peak-hour percent would more closely correlate fees by land-use types to relative impacts on the roadway system. However, use of p.m. peak-hour percent com- plicates the cost distribution process because it varies by land-use type and would need to be evaluated on a case-by- case basis. For the sake of � s analysis, this stud assumes Y p.m. peak-hour percentages of 11 percent for residential, 15 percent for office, and 8 percent for commercial/retail/ other. The corresponding cost per daily trip fees account- j ing for p.m. peak-hour percentages are shown in Table 5-4 . Table 5-4 COST PER DAILY TRIP BASED UPON P.M. PEAK PERCENT Percent of Cost Per Daily Trip (S/Trip) Land Use Private Share Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Residential 43.1 168 212 320 Offices 16.1 229 289 434 Comm./Retail/Other 40.8 122 154 233 se6522/078/4 5-5 ' ADJUSTMENTS FOR PERCENT PASSERBY TRIPS [ A number of ITE studies have shown that for certain land (� uses (such as convenience retail) , up to 80 percent of the total trip generation may be "passerby" trips that merely pass by the land-use site for other primary travel purposes. Accounting for passerby trips will be controversial because ' data do not exist for all land-use types, and because the results of studies vary from case to case. Also, it can be b argued that passerby trips benefit land uses financially, and therefore an adjustment is not warranted. An assumption ' of 25 percent has been used for this study to represent an average passer-by trip percentage for the commercial/retail/ other land-use category. The results are presented in Table 5-5. 4 Table 5-5 COST PER DAILY TRIP BASED UPON P.M. PEAK EXCLUDING PASSERSBY Percent Cost Per Daily Trip ($/Trip) Land Use of Private Share Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Residential 48.0 189 236 363 I Offices 18.0 256 322 486 1 Comm./Retail/Other 34.0 101 129 194 ADJUSTMENTS FOR TRIP LENGTH 1 Another variable that should be considered is relative trip length by land use. Trip lengths are known to vary accord- ing to trip purpose. It may be logical to conclude that longer trips will have a greater impact on the street sys- tem. Very limited data are available on trip length by land-use type. The majority of trips, regardless of pur- pose, will have either an origin or a destination outside the TBZ study area (i.e. , the study area is only 1-1/2 miles by 1 mile in size) and therefore would have similar vehicle- mile impacts on the study area roadways. For this study., trip lengths of 6 miles for residential, 9 miles for office, and 5 miles for commercial/retail have been estimated, based ' upon weighted average calculations of trip lengths by trip purpose. Table 5-6 lists cost per daily trip fees account- ing for p.m. peak-hour percent, exclusion of passerby trips, and trip length: 1 se6522/078/5 5-6 l i ' Table 5-6 COST PER DAILY TRIP BASED UPON P-M. PEAK ' EXCLUDING PASSERSBY, AND TRIP LENGTH s Percent Cost Per Daily Trip ($/Trip) Land Use of Private Share Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Residential 46.4 181 229 345 1 Offices 26.1 371 468 704 ' Comm./Retail/Other 27.5 82 104 157 CONCLUSIONS Conclusions regarding the particular impact fee scenario to be adopted for the East Renton Transportation Benefit Zone will be included in the final report for the study. l 1 s ! � I i i 1 I f se6522/078/6 5-7 i� I Section 6 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES The vehicle trip generation rates used in analyzing the ben- efit zone traffic demands are based on surveys that were generally taken in relatively low-density areas. As such, they exhibit relatively low mode-split characteristics 1 (peak-hour transit mode split of 2 percent or less) and low average car occupancy (peak-hour average car occupancy of 1 . 2 or less) . The characteristics of the study area (mini- mal transit service and abundant free parking) are likely to result in a similar mode split and average car occupancy. The potential exists for reducing vehicle trip generation for land uses in the benefit zone through implementation of TSM measures. This section provides an overview of TSM mea- sures that should be considered by the City and development community to help reduce traffic demands that would other- wise exceed the available capacity of the proposed facilities. TSM refers to measures that can be implemented to improve the overall performance of the transportation system through various low-capital or no-capital management actions. Such actions can be intramodal (e.g. , improved transit scheduling techniques, bikeway or pedestrian facilities, and express bus operations) , intermodal (e.g. , bus priorities on streets, parking restrictions, and relocation of bus stops that impede traffic flow) or extramodal (e.g. , staggered work hours, pricing strategies to discourage long-term parking, and ' employer incentives for ridesharing) . The goal of TSM is to increase the systemwide efficiency of people and goods move- ment without significant new infrastructure investment, ' rather than to simply accommodate increasing vehicle travel. When TSM is used as a measure for reduction of vehicle traf- fic demands from new development, the objective is to miti- gate traffic impacts through travel demand management. In ` general, TSM is used to increase the number of person-trips served in relation to the volume of vehicular traffic. Reduction of single-occupant vehicle usage is the focus of the TSM strategies. y TSM strategies yield the best results in areas with the high ' densities needed to support excellent transit service and a limited parking supply. The Seattle central business dis- trict is an obvious example. However, both mid-density and I ' rapidly developing suburban areas can also profit from TSM measures, particularly ridesharing and high-occupancy- vehicle (HOV) facility measures. Areas that are rapidly developing and are still in the process of constructing the se - 6522/082/1 6 1 6 roadway network are ideal for implementation of HOV facil- ities because these treatments can be more readily included in the original construction. The existence of such facil- ities in turn encourages both ridesharing participation and ' effectiveness and so ultimately enhances transit effective- ness and efficiency. The 2-hour level of service within the study is expected to be reasonably good at full development (year 2000) . How- ever, major roadways that provide access to the study area may experience significant traffic congestion by the year ' 2000. Any strategies that result in a reduction in the num- ber of daily vehicle trips to the study area would have a citywide benefit as well. For aiven parcel development, the two main methods of g P P reducing the vehicle trip generation are to increase the transit mode split and to increase the average car occu- pancy. Because of the land use character of the study area, incentives need to be provided to encourage the shift in travel behavior. [ The types of incentives can be broken into two categories: �( physical improvements (HOV lanes and improved transit ser- vice) and behavioral incentives (transit pass subsidies, preferential carpool and vanpool parking, and information services) . The physical improvements require active support from Metro and WSDOT. WSDOT will be widening I-405 in the Renton area to provide HOV lanes. This will provide travel time savings for HOVs. By the year 2000 these improvements would provide a significant time savings for HOVs. To be significant, time savings should be in the order of 5 min- utes or more for the total trip duration. Additional incentives will be necessary to change individual tbehavioral patterns from single-occupant vehicles to tran- sit, carpools, and vanpools. The City and developers need to work together and with other resources such as Metro Transit to provide those incentives. The following incen- tives should be encouraged to be provided by all employers and developers in the benefit zone: o A minimum of 20 percent of the onsite parking - spaces should be set aside for carpools and van- pools. These spaces should provide for preferen- tial parking and be located close to building entrances and exits. o A 50 percent (approximately $20 per month) tran- sit, vanpool, or carpool subsidy should be pro- vided for employees who choose to use these Imethods to commute to work. 1 se-6522 082/2 6-2 o Ridesharing information and transit scheduleE should be prominently displayed in building 1._L bies and apartment common areas. o A rideshare coordinator should be designated by all employers with over 200 employees. These individuals should coordinate with an individual assigned by the City or Metro to integrate the study area effort into an areawide program. o Consideration could be given to creating a trans- portation management association (TMA) along the lines of the TMA in Bellevue, Washington. The TMA should be formed with membership including the City, employers, and developers. The typical goal of a TMA is to mitigate collective traffic impacts and provide the essential mobilization and follow- through required to assure the success of TSM incentives. The association could also be struc- tured to be eligible for state and federal funding. Available evidence suggests that as much as a 10 percent reduction in total daily vehicle trips is possible reTulting from successful implementation of a TSM-type program. A 10 percent reduction would reduce total trips generated by the benefit zone from 83, 000 to '75, 000. The level of service on streets within the study zone may improve; how- ever, major facilities surrounding the area may not receive significant benefits. It is unlikely that implementation of a TSM program would reduce the vehicle travel demand suffi- ciently to warrant deletion of anticipated projects. Rather, a TSM program may reduce the total trip generation upon which the allocated improvement cost is based. 1 Orski, C. Kenneth. Managing Suburban Traffic Congestion: A Strategy for Suburban Mobility. Transportation ` Quarterly. October 1987. se6522/082/3 6-3 M t i i ' i I I I i i, APPENDIX A f 1' Study Zone Land Use and Trip Generation Appendix A i� STUDY ZONE LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION The traffic analysis zone boundaries and numbers are illus- trated in Figure A-1 . Tables of existing and future land use and trip generation data for each traffic analysis zone in the study zone are also included in this appendix. i se-6522/079/1 A-1 r Ir r s y o c 9 �9r�Or MAIN AVS � D z z CA-{ PARKAVN RENTONAVS GARDEN AVN ;, ACTORY AV N N w a :�: `• � SSB !!G �i 3 9 V v ® ` ;� ? O ' BROW CD 79 > n ' ..... ..... V � 3 � .� ...........................:.. �� .................. : EDMONDS AV NE Li cn ....:.,.::::.:.... _ > c, HARRINGTONAVNE ImIz KIRKLANDAVNE ro c^ SFcn © i MONROE AV NE 03 r y m Co w N m CL `C cn v: `i ♦ n m v: s ♦♦ ': ................ UNION AV SE UNION AV NE m 4 1' .:::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::.:.: ........... ....... co � r .. �♦. 1 I� :jiii\i\viii=V=ice \moi";: ;1 . ♦ , .. I 136TH AV SE I ♦ I O \mac :.. #I /�::....E.... O ♦'. \ -a=y� iii ii: DUVALLAV NE O m 0, Z r m -n (D I :.......:� cn - .-- -- n y 142ND AV SE Z cD n r rc rn 1 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T 0 N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: SUMMARY ; --- Existing --- ; ; ---- Future ---- ZONE: ; Land Use ; ; Land Use Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ------------------------- - ------------------------- -----------------�---- Single Family d.u. 806 7,282 850 7,766 Multiple Family d.u. 1,356 9, 482 4,240 29, 680 Multiple Family acres 2.47 371 2.47 371 Mobile Home d.u. 299 1,196 250 1,000 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 26.099 1 ,893 26.0.99 1,893 Retail Stores emp. 4 100 4 100 ' Retail Stores acres 19.6 3,055 19.6 3, 055 Offices emp. 5 17 5 17 Offices 1000 gsf 53.941 621 213 .941 1, 581 Offices acres 0 0 13 .7 4,110 Industrial 1000 gsf 53.714 288 46.714 267 Industrial emp. 99 264 49 114 Church 1000 gsf 11 165 11 165 ' Medium Density Retail emp. 31 620 0 0 Day Care emp. 10 200 10 200 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0. 0 0 185 .7 7, 558 Gas Station station 6 3,000 6 3 ,000 ' Car Wash stall 2 100 2 100 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 22. 253 445 22 . 253 445 ' High Density Retail emp. 94 1,880 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 16.416 1,231 16.416 1,231 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 150 10,050 Commercial acres 0.00 0 27.62 7,796 Bank 1000 gsf 2 380 2 380 Cemetery acres 42.7 214 44. 9 224 Motel acres 0.0 0 5. 4 1,080 Rec. Center acres 28.4 95 28.4 95 ' Transfer_Stationstation 1 400_ 1 400_ TOTALS 33,298 82,678 IIS A-3 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T 0 N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION TABLE� LandLand 1 --_ Existing -- -II ---- uUse---- ZONE Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 150 0.91 137 0.91 137 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 ' Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 f Offices acres 0 0 f Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 i Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' QualityRestaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 200 0 5.4 1, 080 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 ' TOTALS --===137= ===1,217 A-4 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : 524418 .A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE2 ; --- Existing --- ; ; ---- Future ---- ZONE: 85 ; Land Use ; ; Land Use i Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ Single Family d.u. 11 160 1,760 160 1 ,760 Multiple Family d.u. 7 244 1,708 294 2 ,058 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 4 49 196 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 ' Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 12 16.254 195 16.254 195 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 7 17. 2 120 17 .2 120 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 500 3 1 ,500 3 1,500 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 5,479 5,633 i A-5 ' File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 1� Proj . No. : S24418.A0 t E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION i rn: 8TABLE36 L I --- ExistingLand Use ---II ---- Future ---- I and U Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 ' Multiple Family d.u. 7 98 686 98 686 Multiple Family acres 150 0.88 132 0.88 132 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. _ 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 20 22.253 445 22 .253 445 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Quality Restaurant 1000g sf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 j Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS ===1,263= ===1,263 A-6 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE4 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 87 I Land Use Il Land Use Trip Daily Daily ' ----Land Use TypeUnitsRate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ------------- ----------------------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 ' Multiple Family d.u. 7 264 1,848 264 1,848 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. .0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 15 11 165 11 165 ' Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 cjsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 ' Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 ' Transfer Station station 0 0 --------- --------- TOTALS 2, 013 2, 013 A-7 f ' File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D . S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION I 88 I --- Existing --- II - Future ZONE: LandUse Land Use Dail Trip Daily y t Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- t Single Family d.u. 0 0 ' Multiple "Family d.u. 7 28 196 28 196 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 22 .2 16 355 16 355 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 7 14.514 102 14.514 102 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 Cjsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 300 0 0 2.3 690 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 ' Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS =====653= ===1, 343 � . A-8 1 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418 .A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE6 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 89 I Land Use 11 Land Use Trip Daily Daily ----Land Use TypeUnitsRate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips --------- -------------------------------------------- -- Single Family d.u. 0 0 ' Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 ' Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 5 36.7 184 36.7 184 ' Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 --- --------- --------- TOTALS 184 184 I�1 A-9 f � ' 4 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION ZONE: 970 I LandtUse II Land Future Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- i Single Family d.u. 11 1 11 1 11 Multiple Family d.u. 7 401 2,807 583 4,081 Multiple Family acres 150 0.68 102 0.68 102 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 ' Retail Stores 1000 gsf 100 17.64 1,764 17.64 1,764 Retail Stores emp. 25 2 50 2 50 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 3.3 3 10 3 10 r ' Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 ({ Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 3 13 39 13 - 39 Industrial emp. 0 0 ' Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 qsf 0 0 ' Gas Station station 500 1 500 1 500 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Commercial acres 200 0 4.9 980 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 ' TOTALS 5,283 7, 537 1 ' A-10 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 ' E A S T R E N T 0 N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION I i TAB 91 I --- LandExis --- II ----LanduUse---- ZONEI Trip Daily Daily ----Land-Use-Type-------Units Rate Quantity--- 737Trips -Quantity Trips --- ------o- Single Family d.u. ----------------11 67 737 67 737 Multiple Family d.u. 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 ' Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 3 2 6 2 6 ' Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 qsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station - station 0 0 -------------- TOTALS =====743 -----743 1 ' A-11 f I 1 ' f File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 t E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE9 Existing --- --- Future ---- ZONE: 92 Tri I ----Land Use II Land Use ----Land Use-Type p Daily Daily Units------- Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ----- --------------------------------------------------- 1 Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 ' Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 cjsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 r � Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 5 6 30 8. 15 41 Motel acres 0 0 C Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS________________ 30= 41 = ' A-12 II' File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418 .-AO E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION TABLE93 Tri Landting UDail I � Landu ZONEre Use Trip y Daily LandUseTypeUnits Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---- - - ------- -------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 7 0 0 1400 9,800 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 ' Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 ' Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 j, Quality Restaurant . 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 67 0 0 150 10,050 i Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 ' Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 i, Transfer Station ----- station 0 0 TOTALS 0 19,850 1 ' I A-13 I ' File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 J Proj . No. : 524418.A0 1 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE11 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 94 Land Use ( Land Use----I f- ' Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single Family' d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 ' Offices 1000 gsf 12 9.948 119 9.948 119 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 ' High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 ' Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 ' Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 ' TOTALS________________ =====119 =====119 1 A-14 7 ' File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLEI2 Existing --- Future --- ZONE: 95 I Land Use 11 --- .Land Use ` Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ' Single Family d.u. 11 2 22 2 22 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 j Multiple Family acres 0 0 ' Mobile Home d.u. 4 250 1,000 250 1, 000 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 12 1.68 20 1. 68 20 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp, 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 qsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 ' High Density Retail emp. 0 0 f Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Commercial acres 300 0 0.52 156 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 1, 042 1, 198 ' A-15 t File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : 524418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y ' SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION ZONE: 96 1--- ExisLandtUse --- II ---- LanduUse---- I ' Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------- -------------- Single Family d.u. it 369 4,059 369 4, 059 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 ' Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 � Retail Stores emp. 25 2 50 2 50 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 ' Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 3 34 102 34 102 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 Cjsf 0 0 Gas -Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 ' High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 1 Commercial acres 0 0 1 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 f ICemetery acres 0 0 .Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS ===4,211 ===4,211 A-16 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T 0 N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLEI4 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 97 I Land Use � ) Land Use Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---- - ------- ------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home .d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 .0 ' Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 12 3 . 156 38 3 . 156 38 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 3 .6 26.4 95 26.4 95 rTransfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 133 133 A-17 1 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y ' SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION TABLE98 I --- LandExistUse -- -II ----LanduUre se---- ZONEI � Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 11 6 66 50 550 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 ' Offices 1000 gsf 12 0 80 960 j Offices acres 0 0 ' Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Da Care Y em 0 P 0 Low Density Retail 1000 qsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 i Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 i Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 66 1, 510 A-18 I File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 j Proj . No. : S24418.A0 ' E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION 1 - rn: TABLEI6 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 99 I Land Use I ) Land Use Trip Dail Dail Land Use Type y y ------------- Units Rate Quantity Trips--Quantity Trips Single Family d.u. -------------------------- 0 ---------- Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 ' Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 i Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices Offices 1000pgsf 0 0 Offices acres 300 0 13. 7 4 , 110 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 3 .52 156 2 6 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp, 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000sf g 0 p Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 ! Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 --------------- -----156- --------- TOTALS 4, 116 i A-19 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 tt E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION ' rn: TABLEI7 sn _ ____ ____ re Tri i LandtUse II LandFutuUse ZONE: 100 ' p Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------- ----------------------------- ------------------- Single Family d.u. 11 5 555 55 Multiple Family d.u. 7 199 1,393 199 1, 393 j Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 { Retail Stores 1000 gsf 24 5.385 129 5. 385 129 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Officesp0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Offices acres 0 0 1000 , Industrial gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 75 16.416 1,231 16.416 1,231 ' Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 , 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf p Cemetery acres 0 0 l Motel acres 0 0 ' Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 ' TOTALS -==2,808 ===2,808 A-20 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 I Proj . No. : 524418 .A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rrn: TABLEI8 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 101 I Land Use II Land Use Trip Daily� Daily j Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Single Family d.u. 11 13 143 1.3 143 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 + Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 ' Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 3 2 6 2 6 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 ' Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 --------------- TOTALS =====149 --------- -----149 A-21 ' File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION' rn: isL TABLE119 I --- ExtingFutureZONE: 103 ' and Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------- --------------------- Single Family d.u. 11 39 429 39 429 ' Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 p Retail Stores emp. 0 0 (F Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 ' High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 i Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 --------- _________ TOTALS 429 429 A-22 i File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418 .A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE20 I --- Existing ---1 � ---- LFuture ----I ZONE: 104 Land Use Trip Daily Dail Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips QuantityTrips Sigle Family-----------d.0 �----------------------------o-------- --- -- -o- Multiple Family d.u. 7 0 477 3, 339 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 ! Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 ' Offices. 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 1 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp, 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 300 0 3.4 1, 020 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres p 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station -_ station 0 0 TOTALS 0 4, 359 I i ' A-23 E i � File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION i tR rn: TABLE21 -- Existing --- --- Future ---- ZONE: 105 { Land Use I � Land Use Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Single Family d.u. .0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 7 0 478 3, 346 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 12 17.923 215 17.923 215 F Offices acres 0 0 (I Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 1 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. . 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 1 1 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 ---------------------- --------- _________ TOTALS 215 3 , 561 A-24 1 i File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE22 I --- Existing ---II ---- Future ---- ZONE: 107 Land Use Land Use Trip Daily Daily ----Land-Use Type ------Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ------- ---------------------------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 7 0 124 868 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 i Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 1 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 0 868 i i 1 A-25 1 � File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 1 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION ' TABLE208 LandLand I --- Existing -- -II ---- uUse---- ZONEI Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips Single Family -----------d.0.----------------------------0-----------------o- Multiple Family d.u. 7 93 651 271 1,897 Multiple Family acres 0 0 1 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 3. 3 2 7 2 7 Offices 1000 gsf 12 1.98 24 1.98 24 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 j Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 cjsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 r High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ` Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 ttt ' Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 i Cemetery acres 0 0 L Motel acres 0 0 ' Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 ---------------------- --------- --------- TOTALS 681 1,927 i I I A-26 1 t File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION ■ rn: TABLE24 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 109 I Land Use I ) Land Use Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - Single Family d.u. 0 - 1 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 400 1 400 1 400 TOTALS 400 400 I� A-27 I File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T 0 N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION 1 � rn: TABLE25 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 110 I Land Use II Land Use Trip Daily Daily Land Use-Type------- - UnitsRate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ------------ --------------------------------- --- ---------------- ------ ------- ---------- Single Family d.u. 0 24 168 24 Multiple Family d.u. 7 168 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 750 3.6 2,700 3.6 2, 700 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. p 0 Day Care emp. - 20 10 200 10 200 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 500 1 500 1 500 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 I Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 L_ Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 3, 568 3, 568 A-28 �� File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE26 --- Existing --- -- Future ---- ZONE: 111 I Land Use ` I Land Use Trip Daily Daily ----Land Use Type------ Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips --------- ----------------------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 1 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 3. 3 3 10 3 10 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 vsf 0 0 Gas Station station 500 1 500 1 500 Car Wash stall 50 2 100 2 100 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ji Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 300 0 16.5 4,950 Bank 1000 gsf 190 2 380 2 380 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 ---------------------- ---- TOTALS 990 5,940 I, A-29 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 f Proj . No. : 524418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION { TABLEI2 ExistingI --- Us -- -II ---- u ---- ZONELandLandUseI Trip Daily Daily Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 1 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Q Retail Stores emp. 0 0 tl Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 3 7 21 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 j Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 1 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 r I Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 --------- --------- -------- TOTALS 21 0 k f A-30 i ' File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION ' rn: TABLE28 --- Existing --- ---- Future ---- ZONE: 49 I Land Use Il Land Use ' Trip Daily Daily ----Land Use Type ------Units . Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ---------- ------------------------------------------------ Single Family d.u. 0 0 ' Multiple Family d.u. 5 .5 25 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 { Offices acres 0 0 II Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 i Medium Density Retail emp. 20 31 620 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 qsf 40.7 0 0 75.4 3,069 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 ,. Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 645 3,069 I A-31 I 1 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : S24418.A0 SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION ____ ZONE: 59 Existing 8 ( Land Use I � Land uUse Trip Daily' Daily Land Use Type -----Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 a Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 1 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 f Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 cjsf 40.7 0 0 110.3 4,489 Gas Station station 0 0 1 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 20 94 1,880 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 ! Rec. Center acres 0 0 f Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 1,880 4,489 � l r ' A-32 i File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : 524418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION Tri --- Existing --Il---- ure Use ZONE: 113 LandULand ----� i p Daily Daily i Land Use Type Units Rate Quantity Trips Quantity Trips ------------------------ ------ ---------- Single Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 0 0 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 qsf 0 0 Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 ' Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 Motel acres 0 0 Rec. Center acres 0 0 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS A-33 File Name: TBDSTDY.WK1 Proj . No. : 524418.A0 E A S T R E N T O N T B D S T U D Y. SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION rn: TABLE31 ; --- Existing --- ; ; ---- Future ---- ZONE: 102 ; Land Use ; ; Land Use ' Trip Daily Daily ' - ---Land-Use-TypeUnits----Rate---Quantity---Trips--Quantity---Trips ----_-- -- Single Family d.u. 5.5 144 792 144 792 Multiple Family d.u. 0 0 ' Multiple Family acres 0 0 Mobile Home d.u. 0 0 Retail Stores 1000 gsf 65 3 .074 200 3.074 200 Retail Stores emp. 0 0 Retail Stores acres 0 0 Offices emp. 0 0 Offices 1000 gsf 0 0 Offices acres 0 0 Industrial 1000 gsf 0 0 Industrial emp. 3 11 33 11 33 Church 1000 gsf 0 0 1 Medium Density Retail emp. 0 0 Day Care emp. 0 0 Low Density Retail 1000 gsf 0 0 ' Gas Station station 0 0 Car Wash stall 0 0 Clinic/Dental 1000 gsf 0 0 High Density Retail emp. 0 0 Quality Restaurant 1000 gsf 0 0 Shopping Center 1000 gsf 0 0 Commercial acres 0 0 1 Bank 1000 gsf 0 0 Cemetery acres 0 0 �- Motel acres 0 0 Rec: Venter acres 6 2 12 2 12 Transfer Station station 0 0 TOTALS 1,037 1 ,037 A-34 r r APPENDIX B Model � Validation 1 f � I 1 '1 Appendix R MODEL VALIDATION tThe traffic model used for the study was validated for ex- isting conditions in the study area by: ' 1 . Comparing model traffic assignments with actual traffic volumes across the study area cordon. 2. Comparing assignments with volumes across two screenlines. 3 . Comparing assignments with volumes for major arterials in the highway network. Figure B-1 illustrates the cordon and screenlines used for the comparisons. Table B-1 shows the results of the compar- ison of model assignments with traffic volumes for the study area cordon. The cordon was chosen to avoid the potential ' complications created by including through trips . The goal for percent deviation of assignments versus actual volumes was 5 percent. The cordon assignments were within 2 . 7 per- cent of actual volumes. Table B-1 i' MODEL VALIDATION--CORDON COMPARISONa (' Traffic Volume Model Percent Roadway Count Assignment Deviation Monterey Drive NE 750 700 -6. 7 Union Avenue NF 6 , 400 6 ,000 -6 . 3 j, SE 5th Street and Others 900 1 , 100 +22. 2 Jefferson Avenue NE 500 600 +20. 0 Monroe Avenue NE 900 800 -11 . 1 9, 450 9 , 200 -2. 7 (' aVolume and assignment data are for existing (1988) average weekday. The results of the screenline and roadway comparisons are shown in Table B-2. As shown in the table, the total se652.2/041/1 B_1 I� I sm w ' J c�^ Z' U�+! LLJ 3S AV ONZ4t co ZO Lu to N I roll �I C I I taoTHp` J Z 3N AVIIVAno\ as a \a. O t 9 Z 3SAVH19El1�`.'' CO w O \ / aaj \aaaaaaaa aaaaa, \I I ♦''�: :. ,,' =3 O r i1 Ii r1 / Ll_ C.1 r _J 3N AV NOW ; � 3S AV NOINfI \ x r d RL \a.\ / e t ................. +•i ::: 3N AV 3OUNO—A-11-lof 3NAVONVIAUI / "' c .... C' LUco , ¢a \ •:::: ' 3N AVNOIJNIlIl1VH ui j cc m 3N AVSONOW03 Q �w \ :>. ¢ m v t' �......-. oda y; d JP Lig p c c c c gNz � yo L� 7Y3NIY'� ' m NOf18;as ', 72 2 A TEREYIlk \<: AS :. 4y .d.b•N•g m ::>: �Q• to 4�• Z1PA N 7V A8010Yj \ � ••�' `� p � I N AV N3O8VO 76 b/j :.. 63.. SAY NO.N3H NhYHHYdcc c S Z Z y SAVNfM 7pb6 4b� o a I B-2 1 Table B-2 a MODEL VALIDATION--SCREENLINE AND LINK COMPARISONS Traffic Volume Model Percent Roadway Count Assignment Deviation A. North of NE 4th Street 1 . Edmond Avenue NE 1 ,500 2 , 600 +73 2. Jefferson Avenue NE 2 , 400 790 -67 3 . Monroe Avenue NE 7 ,500 5 , 400 -28 4. Union Avenue NE 5 , 500 6 , 400 +16 5 . Duvall Avenue NE 5 , 200 7 , 800 +50 i Total 22, 100 22 , 990 +4 . 0 B. East of I-405 1 . SR 169 26 , 600 25 , 800 -3 ' 2 . NE 3rd Street 2.9 , 000 28 , 900 -0. 4 3 . NE Sunset Boulevard 9 , 800 5, 600 -43 4 . SR 900 17 , 700 21 , 100 +19 Total 83 , 100 81 , 400 -2 . 1 C. East of Duvall Avenue 1 . SR 169 25 , 000 23, 000 -8 2. NE 4th Street 24 , 300 20, 400 -16 ' 3 . SR 900 9 , 200 10, 200 +11 4. SE 136th Street 200 220 +10 Total 58 , 700 53, 820 -8 . 3 aVolumes and assignment data are for existing (1988) average weekday. f I se6522/042./1 B-3 ' screenline volumes and assignments compare closely. The percent deviations between actual volumes and the model assignments for the screenlines ranged from +4 .0 percent to ' -8 .3 percent . The goal for screenlines was 15 percent. In general, the assignments for major arterial links along the screenlines compare closely with actual volumes. The individual link deviations for major arterials (with 15,000 AWDT or greater) are within 16 percent. The deviations in screenline link volumes can be partially explained as follows : o Centroid connector link assignments are different ' than actual road -volumes. This is because they represent traffic loadings from many collector and local roadways for an entire zone. o The location of connector links relative to screen- lines can be .the cause of assignment deviations. Because of the large zone sizes and the limited ' number of centroid connector links to the major street network, the traffic assignments along a ' major roadway will show more fluctuation than actu- ally occurs. I o The traffic count data that is being compared to the link assignments has limited accuracy. .Traffic counts are generally made on only a few days during the year. Seasonal, monthly, or daily variations have not been accounted for. In some cases, the volumes used for comparison are only estimated volumes . A guide regarding the deviation of model assignments is pro- ! vided in the publication Highway Traffic Data for Urbanized Area Project Planning and Design, National Cooperative High- way Research Program Report 255 (Transportation Research Board, 1982) . A figure from this publication is included for reference (see Figure B-2) . This figure was developed as an aid in determining the acceptability of base year assignments for specific network links. The figure is based upon the assumption that the maximum desirable traffic as- signment deviation should not result in a design deviation of more than one highway travel lane. Therefore, the "acceptable" deviation is higher on low volume roads where a large percentage deviation will not have major design impli- cations. Accordingly, deviation for links with volumes of 15 ,000 ADT or less is 30 percent or less . The converse is true on higher volume facilities. Acceptable deviation for links with 50 ,000 ADT or more, is 20 percent or less. The model assignments for this study comply with these generalized guidelines. I se6522/041/2 B_4 I i' 60 - 50 0 -50 — Base Year Assignment—Base Year Count Z Percent Deviation = o Base Year Count `—a 40 — > w 0 z 30 — 0 Ma rima mp W 20 — esirab/e Deviation L 10 — - 0 ' 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 BASE YEAR COUNT SOURCE: HIGHWAY TRAFFIC DATA FOR URBANIZED AREA PROJECT PLANNING AND DESIGN. Figure B-2 National Cooperative Highway MAXIMUM DESIRABLE ERROR Research Program Report 255, ' Transportation Research Board,1982. FOR LINK VOLUMES I E B-5 I i 1 1 1 1 ' APPENDIX C 1� � Basic New Roadway 'l Cost Per � 1 ,000 � Linear Feet i ' Appendix C BASIC NEW ROADWAY COST PER 1 , 000 LINEAR FEET (Estimated Costs are for 1988) New Two-lane Roadway Assumed Construction Items Unit Quantities Unit Cost Extension ' 1. Mobilization (approximately 7 percent of subtotal) L.S. 1 $30,000 $ 30,000 ' 2. Clear and grub, removal of obstructions L.S. 1 10,000 10,000 ' 3. Utility adjustments lane 2 10,000 20,000 4. Grading and drainage - Roadway excavation cu yd 4,518 7 31,626 - Embankment fill cu yd 4,518 10 45,180 - Embankment compaction cu yd 4,518 1 4,518 - 12-inch gravel base ton 3,519 17 59,823 - 36-inch main storm drain lin ft 1,000 90 90,000 - 12-inch laterals lin ft 80 30 2,400 - Catch basins each 6.7 1,000 6,700 - Manholes each 2.5 2,000 5,000 - Concrete curb and gutter lin ft 2,000 10 20,000 ' 5. Paving and surfacing - 4-inch ACP ton 580 40 23,200 - 4-inch ATB ton 580 35 20,300 - Concrete sidewalk sq yd 1,333.3 19 25,333 ' 6. Lighting, and traffic control - Illumination system lin ft 1,000 40 40,000 - Pavement markings lin ft 1,000 2.00 2,000 - Signing lin.ft 1,000 1.00 1,000 7. Roadside improvements acre 0.6 5,000 3,000 Subtotal $440,080 Engineering/Contingency (300) 132,024 ESTIMATED TOTAL (per 1,000 lf) $572,104 se6522/080/1 C-1