Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
RES 1240
RESOLUTION NO.1240 A RESOLUTION approving the Camas traffic impact fee (TIF) update dated May 2012,and adopting from the TIF update the establishment of the North and South TIF Districts,the TIF eligible projects,the calculation of the traffic impact fee,the indexed traffic impact fee rates,and repealing Resolution No.951. WHEREAS,the Council of the City of Camas commissioned DKS Associates to prepare an update to the Camas traffic impact fees;and WHEREAS,DKS Associates has submitted to the Council its “Camas Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)Update”; WHEREAS,the City Council has considered the update and the recommendations set forth therein;and WHEREAS,except as noted herein,Resolution No.976 adopted by the City Council on November 24,2003,is hereby amended, NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMAS AS FOLLOWS: Section I The Council hereby approves and accepts the Camas Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)Update, dated May 2012,as prepared by DKS Associates. Section II The Council hereby adopts,for the purpose of classifying TIF districts in the City of Camas,the North and South TIF Districts,as set forth in Figure 11 of the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)Update. Section III Pursuant to Chapter 3.88 of the Camas Municipal Code,the formula for calculating traffic impact fees as set forth in Camas Municipal Code Section 3.88.060,component “C,”is hereby set at the sum of $4,200.00 for the South TIF District and the sum of $11,033.00 for the North TIF District. Section IV The Council hereby adopts as projects eligible for traffic impact fee monies those projects identified in Table 9 and depicted in Figure 10 of the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)Update. Section V The Council hereby adopts the traffic impact fee rate calculation as set forth in Table 10 of the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)Update. Section VI The Council has determined that the traffic impact fee should be indexed to address inflation.The Council hereby adopts the indexed traffic impact fee rates set forth in Table 10 of the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)Update. Section VII Section III of Resolution No.976,adopted November 24,2003,shall remain in full force and effect. Section VIII Resolution No.951 is hereby repealed. Section EX This Resolution shall have full force and effect as of June 5,2012. ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Council of the Gity of Camas this {.day of fl OM ,2012 .uAt *SIGNED:iMayor ATTEST:LL lClerkAPPROVEDastoform: /A City Attorney DKSAssociatesT R A N S P O R T A T I O NS O L U T I O N STable9:CamasUGATIFImprovementsElementImprovementProjectImprovementTotalConstructionProjectCost(millions)TIFEligibleCost(millions)AGoodwinRoad(LacamasCreektoIngleRoad)Widenfrom2to5lanesbetweenFribergStreetandIngleRoad$4.9$4.5Widenfrom2lanesto3lanesbetweenIngleRoadand232ndAvenueBGoodwinRoad(IngleRoadto232ndAvenue$6.4$4.5Widenfrom2lanesto3lanesbetween232ndAvenueand242ndAvenueCGoodwinRoad(232ndAvenueto242ndAvenue$3.2$0.8ExtendIngleRoadsouthofGoodwin/28*asa3laneroadto232ndAvenueDNewEast-WestCollector(extendIngleRoadto232ndAvenue)$7.4$5.1Improve232ndAvenueImprove232ndAvenueto3laneCollectorfromNE28thStreetto9thStreet.Includes2newroundaboutsatintersectionwithnewEast-WestCollectorandat9thStreetE$7.8$4.7Improve/Extend9*StreetImprove9thStreetto3lanecollectorfrom232ndAvenuetoexistingterminusandextendtonew242ndAvenueExtensionF$3.7$2.9Extend242ndAvenuesouthto9thStreetExtendandwidento3lanesbetween28thto9thStreetG$9.5$4.5New3laneroadwaybetween9thStreetandSR500/EverettStreetHNewEast-WestArterial$11.5$9.0Widenfrom2lanesto3lanesbetween35*AvenueandthenewEast-WestArterialIWidenNEEverettStreet$4.7$3.6192nd-GoodwinConnectorCamasshare(39%)ofpotentialconnectionbetween192ndandGoodwin.Specificprojectandalignmenttobedetermined.(Northproportionatecostonly)S$2.8$0.9NorthRoadwayProjects$61.9$40.5 1iDKSAssociatesT R A N S P O R T A T I O NS O L U T I O N SImprovementProjectTotalConstructionProjectCost(millions)ElementImprovementTIFEligibleCost(millions)New2laneroadwaybetween15thStreetand283rdAvenue.WoodburnDrive$5.3$3.8J(GregReservoirarea)Realign23rdStreeteastof283rdAvenuetointersectwithnewEast-WestCollector23rdStreetRealignment$0.6$0.5K5Widenfrom2lanesto3lanesbetween1stStreetand13*StreetFriberg(1stStreetto13thStreet)$5.0$3.9LsJ$2.9MExtendCamasMeadowsDrive$3.8ExtendCamasMeadowsDrivefromPayneStreettoLakeRoadasathreelanecollector,includessignalmodificationatLake/15t/Parkerl38thAvenueExtension$2.0$2.7NNew3laneroadwaybetween650feeteastofBybeeand500feeteastof192ndII1RealignBybeebetweenNW199*andSE20*iO$1.2$1.0BybeeRealignmentWiden38*Avenue(West)(650feeteastofBybeetoParker)$3.7PWidenfrom2lanesto3lanesbetween650feeteastofBybeeandParkerStreet$4.7Widen38*Avenue(East)(ParkerStreetto800feetwestofDahlia)Q$2.2Widenfront2lanesto3lanesbetweenParkerStreetandAstorStreet$2.9$5.9$4.8RGoodwinRoadWidenfrom2to5lanesbetweenFribergStreetandIngleRoadandLacamasCreek(FribergRoadtoLacamasCreek)192nd-GoodwinConnectorCamasshare(39%)ofpotentialconnectionbetween192ndandGoodwin.Specificprojectandalignmenttobedetermined.(Southproportionatecostonly)$4.0$1.3SSouthRoadwayProjects$36.1$26.1TotalRoadwayProjects(North+South)$98.0$66.6 11DKSAssociatesiT R A N S P O R T A T I O NS O L U T I O N SElementImprovementProjectImprovementTotalConstructionProjectCost(millions)TIFEligibleCost(millions)242ndAvenue/Goodvvin/28thInstallatrafficsignal.AddSBleftturnlane.1SO.5$0.14IngleRoad/28*Street2Installatrafficsignal.$0.25$0.25232ndAvenue/22ndStreet3Installroundabout$0.5$0.27232lldAvenuc/9thStreet4Installroundabout$0.50$0.5SR500/NewRoad(242ndAvenueExtension)Installtrafficsignal$0.255$0.25SR500/Leadbetter$0.056Installmedian,convertingintersectiontoright-in/right-outonlyaccess$0.05NorthIntersectionProjects$2.05$1.45CamasMeadowsDrive/GoodwinRoad9Installtrafficsignal.$0.25$0.25LakeRoad/SierraStreet$0.2510Installtrafficsignal.$0.25IILakeRoad/EverettStreet/SR500Installroundaboutwithtwoapproachlanesonwest,eastandsouthlegs,andoneapproachlaneonnorthlegduetobridgelimitationstonorth.$2.0$2.0H^/Everett/SR50012Installbarrierrestrictingaccesstointersectionfromsouthandwestapproaches.$0.05$0.056thAvenue/NorwoodStreet13Installtrafficsignal$0.25$0.25PayneRoad/PacificRimBoulevard14InstallTrafficSignal$0.25$0.25s!BradyRoad/16*Avenue15InstallTrafficSignal$0.25$0.2516ParkerStreet/PacificRimBoulevardInstallTrafficSignal$0.25$0.25ISouthIntersectionProjects$3.55$3.55TotalCostofIntersectionImprovementProjects$5.0$5.6Right-of-WayCosts$8.0$32.3TotalTIFImprovementCost(Roadway+Intersection)$135.9$79.6 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S TIF Cost Comparison Hie cost of transportation improvements in the current TIF Update is expected to be about $100 million in today’s dollars,not including right-of-way costs.This reflects anticipated growth related needs through 2035.Previous project improvement costs were developed as part of three different proj ects: •Camas TIF Update (2003):about $27 million in 2003 (plus right-of-way costs) •North UGA Transportation Improvement Framework Plan:about $119 million in 2007 (plus right-of-way costs) •Greg Reservoir Improvements :about $3.94million in 2005 (includes only TIF eligible costs,right-of-way costs would be additional) The current TIF Update would reflect a combination of the three as well as any new improvements identified.While construction costs increased since 2003,they have also come down,particularly after 2008.Cost estimates across all time periods listed above would be relatively comparable.While the current TIF update costs appear to be lower than the three plans previously developed,it should be considered that some projects previously identified have already been constructed or are underway (previous cost estimate shown): •1st Street/Lake Road -constructed (~$3.0 million) •Leadbetter Road -constructed (~$3.8 million) •SR 14 -project underway (~1.8 million contribution) Other projects are not included,for a variety of reasons: •18th Street Corridor -192nd to Goodwin:It is recognized that some sort of improvement is necessary to provide additional capacity between 192nd and Goodwin.This area is outside of the Camas UGA and there are multiple options for providing the needed capacity .It could be a new corridor along the 18th Street alignment,widening of 13th Street,or some combination of the two.(~$7.8 million) •6th Avenue restriping/Road Diet:($.71 million) •38th Avenue Extension (Astor to Sierra):($2.5 million) •Extend Camas Meadows Drive:(~$1.8 million) •Widen and realign Camas Meadows Drive to lst/Lake/Parker:(~$4.5 million) •Widen Crown Road:(~$14.2 million) Other projects were modified: •NE 28th Street between 232nd and 242nd (reduced from 5-lane section to 3-Iane section) (~$5.9 million before vs.~$3.7 million for the current project) •38 Avenue Widening (Parker to Astor):($3.1 million)-the scope of this project was reduced to include the area between Parker and approximately 800 feet west of Dahlia Street,reducing the overall cost slightly. DKS Associates Chapter 3:TIF Structure Page 39 May 2012 i «?4 NSPUKfAil (l hi S if Ui M 0 ftj S' DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S CHAPTER 3:TIF STRUCTURE The current traffic impact fee calculation methodology has been utilized since 2003.The basis of the calculation is the assessment of PM peak hour vehicle trips from the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation:An TTE Informational Report and a cost rate applied to each trip-end on a citywide basis .Chapter 5 of the previous TIF study provides background into the basis of the TIF.The following sections summarize die key components of the staffs recommended proposed TIF update: •TIF will be collected based on PM peak hour trip generation rates •Two TIF districts will be formed (see Figure 11)with project costs allocated either to the North district or the South district,with the exception of the 192nd/Goodwin connector project,which would be allocated between the districts proportionate to their use of the connector,based on growth. •TIF will fund curb-to-curb plus storm sewer costs •TIF will fund right-of-way outside the UGA proportionate to the expected Camas share of each project •TIF will fund 20%of right-of-way inside the UGA •TIF costs will be indexed at 3.9%per year,with new rates taking effect the first of each year Table 10 summarizes staffs recommendation and the anticipated TIF fee associated with this recommendation,along with adjustments that would be made based upon a 60%reduction factor (as described previously). Table 10:Staff Recommended TIF Fee TIF Fee Summary SouthNorth Curb-to -Curb+Storm+ROW*$10,619 $4,042 60%reduction Factor -$4,248 -$1,617 2011 Net Rate $6,371 $2,425 2012 Net Rate $6,620 $2,520 2013Net Rate $6,878 $2,618 2014 Net Rate $7,146 $2,720 $7,4252015NetRate $2,826 $2,9362016NetRate$7,715 2017 Net Rate $8,015 $3,051 2018 Net Rate $8,328 $3,170 2019 Net Rate $8,653 $3,294 *Includes ROW outside the UGA +20%of ROW inside UGA DKS Associates Chapter 3:TIF Structure Page 40 May 2012 i li A NS POM All ON S8 L 1II l OSS Report for City of Camas Traffic Impact Fee Update Prepared by May 2012 Prepared for City of Camas SHINv ' Camas TIF Update May 2012 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis ........................... 1 Study Area ................................................................................................................................ 1 Motor Vehicle Facilities ........................................................................................................... 3 Completed TIF Roadway Improvements ......................................................................... 3 Existing Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................... 3 Intersection Operations ............................................................................................................. 5 Intersection Performance Measures ................................................................................. 5 Jurisdictional Mobility Standards ..................................................................................... 5 Existing Operating Conditions ......................................................................................... 6 Signal Warrants ................................................................................................................ 8 2005 Base Link Volumes .......................................................................................................... 8 Future Base Conditions ........................................................................................................... 10 Future Demand and Land Use ........................................................................................ 10 2035 Base Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................ 16 Future Base (2035) Operating Conditions .............................................................................. 18 2035 Base Link Volumes ............................................................................................... 20 Chapter 2: Improvements Alternatives Analysis ................................................24 Major Roadway Improvements............................................................................................... 24 Intersection Improvements...................................................................................................... 30 Roundabouts ................................................................................................................... 31 2035 Improved Operational Analysis ............................................................................. 32 Recommended TIF Improvements ......................................................................................... 34 Cost Estimates ................................................................................................................ 34 TIF Cost Comparison .............................................................................................................. 39 Chapter 3: TIF Structure ......................................................................................40 Recommended TIF Structure Summary ......................................................................... 42 Supporting Policy Recommendations ..................................................................................... 42 Reimbursement Costs ..................................................................................................... 42 Late Comer’s Agreements .............................................................................................. 43 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Camas TIF Update May 2012 Page ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Existing Evening Peak Hour Intersection Operations ..................................................... 6 Table 2: Camas Land Use Summary ............................................................................................ 12 Table 3: Existing and Future Projected Vehicle Trip Generation (PM Peak Hour) ..................... 13 Table 4: Future Base (2035) Evening Peak Hour Intersection Operations ................................... 19 Table 5: Summary of 2035 Link Volume Capacity Analysis ....................................................... 23 Table 6: 2035 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Intersection Level of Service ........................................ 25 Table 7: Future 2035 Signal Warrant Summary at Unsignalized Intersections............................ 30 Table 8: 2035 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Intersection Operations ................................................. 32 Table 9: Camas UGA TIF Improvements ..................................................................................... 35 Table 10: Staff Recommended TIF Fee ........................................................................................ 40 Table 11: TIF Structure Summary ................................................................................................ 42 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Study Area Roadway Characteristics .............................................................................. 2 Figure 2: Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ...................................................................... 4 Figure 3: 2005 Link Volumes (V/C Plot) ...................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: TAZs ............................................................................................................................. 11 Figure 5: Travel Forecasting Model Process ............................................................................... 14 Figure 6: 2035 Base Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................... 17 Figure 7: 2035 Base Link Volumes ............................................................................................. 21 Figure 8: Traffic Volume Growth (2005 – 2035) ........................................................................ 22 Figure 9: 2035 Improved Volume-to-Capacity Plot ..................................................................... 29 Figure 10: TIF Project Locations ................................................................................................. 38 Figure 11: Proposed TIF Districts................................................................................................. 41 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Camas TIF Update May 2012 Page iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS City of Camas: James E. Carothers, Engineering Manager/City Engineer Phil Bourquin, Community Development Director Eric Levison, Public Works Director Agency Coordination Committee: Ken Burgstahler WSDOT (Washington Department of Transportation) David Ripp Port of Camas-Washougal Mark Harrington SWWRTC (Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council) Steve Schulte Clark County Tahanni Essig Clark County Phil Wuest City of Vancouver Rob Charles City of Washougal DKS Associates: Chris Maciejewski, PE, PTOE Julie Sosnovske, PE Kevin Chewuk Danella Whitt DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 1 CHAPTER 1: EXISTING AND FUTURE BASELINE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS This chapter introduces the existing and future motor vehicle conditions that will be used to update the Camas Traffic Impact Fee (TIF). The Camas TIF was last updated in 2003. Over the past eight years, the urban growth areas for Camas and other neighboring Cities have expanded and therefore the needs for roadway and intersection improvements have changed. A key element of the TIF update is to identify the areas impacted by the projected growth and determine the associated transportation facility improvements needed to accommodate it. Existing motor vehicle facility conditions were reviewed to identify deficiencies before the traffic volume growth associated with new development was added to the roadway network in Camas. This ensures that the updated TIF can associate costs with a nexus to development impacts. The existing motor vehicle inventory data also represents the baseline to which future growth in the City will be added, and will be used to help ensure that acceptable operations of roadways and intersections is maintained as new development increases traffic volumes. The following sections provide a summary of the study area, a description of the existing motor vehicle facilities, and an inventory of existing traffic volumes and congestion levels at key intersections in the study area. Study Area The study area is comprised of the Camas urban growth area (or Urban Growth Boundary), which includes the entire Camas City limits, in addition to land just outside or adjacent to the City limits that is planned for future annexation and urbanization. Figure 1 shows the major roadways in Camas, as well as key study area intersections that were reviewed for motor vehicle intersection operations. The study intersections included: 1. 6th Avenue/Norwood Street 2. 6th Avenue/Ivy Street 3. Division Street/6th Avenue 4. Adams Street/6th Avenue 5. Dallas Street/SR-500 (3rd Avenue) 6. SR-14/SR-500 (Union Street) 7. 3rd Avenue/2nd Avenue-4th Street 8. 3rd Avenue/Crown Road 9. 6th Avenue/SR-500 (Garfield Street) 10. 14th Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) 11. 18th Avenue/Division Street 12. 28th Avenue/Sierra Drive 13. 18th Avenue/Cascade Street 14. McIntosh Road/Brady Road 15. 16th Avenue/Brady Road 16. Pacific Rim Boulevard/Payne Road 17. Pacific Rim Boulevard/Parker Street 18. 38th Avenue/Parker Street 19. Lake Road/Sierra Street 20. Lake Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) 21. 43rd Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) 22. Leadbetter Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) 23. Nourse Road-15th Street/283rd Avenue 24. Lake Road/Parker Street 25. Lake Road/218th Avenue 26. 1st Street/Friberg Street-202nd Avenue 27. 13th Street/Friberg Street 28. Goodwin Road/Camas Meadows Drive 29. Goodwin Road/Ingle Road 30. 28th Street/232nd Avenue DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S 512 SPEED 20 205 126 105 NO SCALE STUDY AREA ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS 1Figure LEGEND - Posted Speed - WSDOT Regionally Significant Highway (Non HSS) Functional Classification - WSDOT Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) - Arterial - Collector SPEED 35 - Local Roadway - Study Intersection0 500 500 1414 500 500 LAKE RD L A K E R D ST6TH A VADAMS ST 6TH A V 5TH A V 4TH A V 2ND AV UNION STEPHERDHS RD 6TH ST4TH ST1ST A VDIVISION STBENTON ST19TH AV19TH AV18TH AV 28TH AV 18TH BLVD PACIFIC RIM P A YN E 20TH ST 38TH 1ST ST 43RD AV 15TH ST R D AV BY B E E RD18TH AV 23RD AV AV 16TH AV FO R E S T HOMEF A R G O ST10TH AV 7TH AV 6TH AV 5TH AVIVYST LE W I S & C L A R K H W Y EVE R G R E E N H W Y BRADY McINTOSHRDRD R DSTSTSTASTORSTASTORSIERRASIERRASTSTPARKER192ND202ND AV13TH ST AVRD 6TH A V HWY 14TH AV 43RD AV RD283RD AVEVERETT RD267TH AV218TH AVLEWIS & C L A R K H W Y Columbia Ri v er Lacamas Lake232ND AV7TH ST GARFIELDDALLAS ST 28TH ST I ST 3RD AV STNORWOODST23RD ST LEADBETTER DR 2 3 4 30 1 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 242526 27 28 29 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 35 SPEED 25 SPEED 35 SPEED 35 SPEED 35 SPEED 40 SPEED 40 SPEED 25 SPEED 35 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 35 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 25 SPEED 35 SPEED 35 SPEED 25 SPEED 40 SPEED 40 SPEED 40 SPEED 50 SPEED 35 SPEED 35 SPEED 30 SPEED 30 SPEED 35 SPEED 40 SPEED 35 SPEED 35 SPEED 40 SPEED 40 SPEED 25 SPEED 35 SPEED 50 SPEED 40 SPEED 40 SPEED 35 SPEED 50 SPEED 45 SPEED 50 SPEED 50 SPEED 50 SPEED 25 Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 3 Motor Vehicle Facilities Characteristics of the major roadways in the urban growth area of Camas were documented and are presented in Figure 1. Data collected included functional classification, roadway cross- section, and posted speed limits. State Route (SR) 14 and SR 500 are the state highways in Camas. SR 14 is classified by the state as a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS)1, while SR 500 is classified by the state as a Regionally Significant Highway. SR 14 runs east to west and connects the City of Camas to I- 205, the City of Vancouver, other nearby urban areas to the west, and the Columbia River Gorge to the east. SR 500 generally winds north to south through Camas via the alignments of several roadways, connecting SR 14 at the south to 28th Street at the north. Major roadways under City of Camas jurisdiction include Brady Road, Parker Street, Pacific Rim Boulevard, SE 20th Street/NW 38th Avenue, NW 16th/Hood/18th, 1st Street, Lake Road, Dallas Street (between 3rd and 6th), 3rd Avenue and 6th Avenue. Each of these roadways are classified as arterials2 and generally provide for higher volumes of motor vehicle circulation through the City. Completed TIF Roadway Improvements A few of the improvement projects included in the 2003 Camas TIF have been constructed. These projects mitigated forecasted roadway deficiencies that resulted from new growth in Camas. The completed projects include: Leadbetter Road: Constructing a new two lane roadway from Parker Street to Lake Road. 1st Street/Lake Road: Widening 1st Street and Lake Road to three or five lanes. Existing Traffic Volumes Motor vehicle activity at 30 intersections in the study area was collected during the weekday evening peak hour (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) in the late spring and early summer of 2011. In addition, historical motor vehicle count data from recent years (2007 to 2010) for 10 intersections was obtained3 and utilized to supplement the new count data. The count data was used to analyze existing intersection operations at the study intersections, and is included in the appendix. The existing evening peak hour traffic volumes developed for the study intersections are displayed in Figure 2. 1 Highways of Statewide Significance, WSDOT, http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/planning/HSS/Default.htm 2 City of Camas Transportation Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Designations, December 2007. 3 Historical Count Data obtained from the City of Camas. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S 2005 EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 2Figure NO SCALE - Study Intersection LEGEND - Lane Configuration - Stop Sign - Traffic Signal 00 - Volume Turn Movement RightThruLeft LT TH RTHL Hard Left - PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume000 500 500 14 LAKE RD L A K E R D ST6TH AVADAMS ST 6TH A V 5TH A V 4TH A V 2ND AV UNION ST6TH ST4TH ST1ST A VDIVISION STBENTON ST19TH AV19TH AV18TH AV 28TH AV 18TH BLVD PAYNE20TH ST 38TH 1ST ST 43RD AV 15TH ST RD AV BY B E E RD18TH AV 23RD AV AV 16TH AV FO R E S T HOMEF A R G O ST10TH AV 7TH AV 6TH A V 5TH AVIVYSTLE W I S & C L A R K H W Y EVE R G R E E N H W Y BRAD Y McINTOSHRDRD R DSTSTSTASTORSTASTORSIERRASIERRASTSTPARKER202ND AV13TH ST RD 6TH A V 14TH AV 43RD AV RD283RD AVEVERETT RD267TH AV218TH AVLEWIS & C L A R K H W Y Col umbia Ri v er Lacamas Lake232ND AV7TH ST GARFIELD28TH ST I ST 3RD AV ST 2 3 4 30 1 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 242526 27 28 29 NORWOODST00 RDDR RD DALLA S STRD500 14 500 1.6th Ave./Norwood St.2.6th Ave./Ivy St.3.Division St./6th Ave.4.Adams St./6th Ave.5.Dallas St./SR-500 (3rd Ave.)6.SR-14/SR-500 (Union St.)7.3rd Ave./2nd Ave. (4th St.)8.3rd Ave./Crown Rd. 9.6th Ave./SR-500 (Garfield St.)10.14th Ave./SR-500 (Everett St.)11.18th Ave./Division St.12.28th Ave./Sierra Dr.13.18th Ave./Cascade St.14.McIntosh Rd./Brady Rd.15.16th Ave./Brady Rd.16.Pacific Rim Blvd./Payne Rd. 17.Pacific Rim Blvd./Parker St.18.38th Ave./Parker St.19.Lake Rd./Sierra St.20.Lake Road/SR-500 (Everett St.)21.43rd Ave./SR-500 (Everett St.) 22.Leadbetter Rd./SR-500 (Everett Rd.)23.Nourse Rd.-15th St./283rd Ave.24.Lake Rd./Parker St.25.Lake Rd./218th Ave. (Payne St.)26.1st St./Friberg St.-202nd Ave. 27.13th St./Friberg St.28.Goodwin Rd./Camas Meadows Dr.29.Goodwin Rd./Ingle Rd.30.28th St./232nd Ave.45580THLT50 810 90 RT TH L T 10 495 60LT TH RT RT201010LTTHRT 5 0 1 0THLT45 840 15 RT TH L T 15 525 0LT TH RT RT30510LTTHRT 35 5052570THRTLTRT 125 715 THLT 55 375THLT RT5 160 5LTTH RT 10 145 585 RTTHLT0 5 5 LTTHRT401 3 5 70THLT RT80 230 30LTTHRT 20 365 85 RTTHLT6 5 8 5 3 5 LTTHRT75 755 10901085 555LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 85 1035 20 RT TH LT 151015601070RTTHLTLTTHRT1 5 3 4 5 4 5THLT RT2 5 4 5 0 6 5 LTTHRT65 320 085070 505LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 150 470 5 RT TH LT 5 2 15 2 0THLT RT5 15 5LTTH RT 60 20 20 RTTHLT5 3 0 0 5 0 LTTHRT105105THLT 235 2045275TH RTLTRT 105 25 TH LT 25 110 RT LT 3545THRT 30 80 25352535 52045LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 50 105 15 RT TH LT 5 45 011005 000LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 145 85 0 RT TH LT 2205LT TH 330120RT TH 10 80LT RT 80 75 9520110110 25155160LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 20 105 20 RT TH LT 0 320 151050 135015LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 10 290 215 RT TH LT 10 30 2015517515 3019530LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 215 65 45 RT TH LT 35 85 1052518045 55150215LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 25 170 60 RT TH LT 70100RTLT 315 105 RT TH 225 75 LT TH 180325THLT135 275 RT LT 110180THRT 305155RTTH 30 120LT RT17025LTTH 60275THLT5 55 RT LT 5140THRT 5095THLT15 55 RT LT 565THRT 10 255 4030365200 1601560LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 30 365 200 RT TH LT 1065LTRT 10 530 TH LT 35 410TH RT 8035LTRT 170 490 TH LT 45 350TH RT 65 75 RT LT 34035RT TH22530LTTH10 250 405105 651070LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 0 300 40 RT TH LT 701751 1 0 8 0 THRTLTRT 110295THLT 0 190 10555 50515LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 5 290 60 RT TH LT YIELD RightThruLeft LT TH RT Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 5 Intersection Operations This section covers the existing traffic operating conditions at the study intersections. Included is a description of the intersection performance measures, jurisdictional operational standards, and an existing traffic operational analysis. Intersection Performance Measures Level of service (LOS) and volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios are two commonly used performance measures that provide a gauge of intersection operations. In addition, they are often incorporated into agency mobility standards. Descriptions are given below: Level of service (LOS): A “report card” rating (A through F) based on the average delay experienced by vehicles at the intersection. LOS A, B, and C indicate conditions where traffic moves without significant delays over periods of peak hour travel demand. LOS D and E are progressively worse operating conditions. LOS F represents conditions where average vehicle delay has become excessive and demand has exceeded capacity. This condition is typically evident in long queues and delays. Volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio: A decimal representation (between 0.00 and 1.00) of the proportion of capacity that is being used (i.e., the saturation) at a turn movement, approach leg, or intersection. It is determined by dividing the peak hour traffic volume by the hourly capacity of a given intersection or movement. A lower ratio indicates smooth operations and minimal delays. As the ratio approaches 1.00, congestion increases and performance is reduced. If the ratio is greater than 1.00, the turn movement, approach leg, or intersection is oversaturated and usually results in excessive queues and long delays. Jurisdictional Mobility Standards The mobility standards for the study intersections vary according to the agency of jurisdiction for each roadway. Of the 30 study intersections, seven are under state jurisdiction (including intersections along SR 14 and SR 500), two are under county jurisdiction (Nourse Road-15th Street/283rd Avenue and 28th Street/232nd Avenue), while the remaining intersections are under the jurisdiction of the City of Camas. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) requires a level of service “D” or better for Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) in urban areas4, including SR 14. In addition, WSDOT requires a level of service “E” or better for Regionally Significant State Highways (non-HSS) in urban areas, including SR 500. Clark County requires a level of service “E” or better for unsignalized intersections, unless signal warrants are met, then a level of service “D” would be required.5 The City of Camas operating standards require that a level of service "D" and a volume to capacity ratio of 0.90 or better to be maintained for all intersections.6 4 Level of Service Standards for Washington State Highways, WSDOT, January 1, 2010 . 5 Clark County Code, Section 40.350.020, Transportation Concurrency Management System. 6 City of Camas Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element, Policy TR-20, March 2004. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 6 Existing Operating Conditions The existing motor vehicle operating conditions at the study intersections were determined for the evening peak hour based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology7 for signalized and unsignalized intersections. The conditions include the estimated average delay, level of service (LOS), and volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio of the study intersections and are shown in Table 1.8 Table 1: Existing Evening Peak Hour Intersection Operations Intersection Mobility Standard* LOS V/C Delay Level of Service Volume/ Capacity Signalized Intersections Dallas Street/SR-500 (3rd Avenue) E 9.7 A 0.61 SR-14/SR-500 (Union Street) D 30.2 C 0.92 3rd Avenue/2nd Avenue-4th Street D 0.90 5.5 A 0.31 3rd Avenue/Crown Road D 0.90 9.9 A 0.39 38th Avenue/Parker Street D 0.90 15.1 B 0.41 Lake Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 13.6 B 0.49 43rd Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 9.5 A 0.37 Lake Road/Parker Street D 0.90 13.7 B 0.51 1st Street/Friberg Street-202nd Avenue D 0.90 8.4 A 0.35 13th Street/Friberg Street D 0.90 7.5 A 0.38 All-Way Stop Intersections 28th Avenue/Sierra Drive D 0.90 8.6 A 0.24 16th Avenue/Brady Road D 0.90 13.3 B 0.54 Pacific Rim Boulevard/Parker Street** D 0.90 10.8 B 0.46 Unsignalized Intersections 6th Avenue/Norwood Street D 0.90 53.6 A/F 0.65 6th Avenue/Ivy Street D 0.90 33.6 A/D 0.28 Division Street/6th Avenue D 0.90 19.2 A/C 0.30 Adams Street/6th Avenue** D 0.90 15.4 A/C 0.37 6th Avenue/SR-500 (Garfield Street) E 16.9 A/C 0.26 7 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, 2000. 8 Detailed intersection analysis worksheets are attached in the technical appendix. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 7 Intersection Mobility Standard* LOS V/C Delay Level of Service Volume/ Capacity 14th Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 67.1 A/F 0.75 18th Avenue/Division Street D 0.90 10.1 A/B 0.17 18th Avenue/Cascade Street D 0.90 9.3 A/A 0.13 McIntosh Road/Brady Road D 0.90 16 A/C 0.29 Pacific Rim Boulevard/Payne Road D 0.90 15.6 A/C 0.33 Lake Road/Sierra Street D 0.90 12.5 A/B 0.28 Leadbetter Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 9.7 A/A 0.17 Nourse Road-15th Street/283rd Avenue E 9.3 A/A 0.08 Lake Road/218th Avenue/Payne Street D 0.90 17.8 A/C 0.22 Goodwin Road/Camas Meadows Drive D 0.90 13.7 A/C 0.22 Goodwin Road/Ingle Road D 0.90 17.1 A/C 0.37 28th Street/232nd Avenue E 14.7 A/B 0.17 Note: *Mobility Standard is for City of Camas, except for SR-14, which is WSDOT HSS, SR-500, which is WSDOT Non HSS, and Nourse Road-15th Street/283rd Avenue and 28th Street/232nd Avenue, which is for Clark County. **Intersection configuration not allowed in HCM analysis, therefore intersection configuration was modified in Synchro to allow for capacity analysis Bolded and Shaded indicates mobility standard is not met Signalized or AWS intersections: All Movements Unsignalized intersection: Worst Movement LOS = Level of Service of Intersection LOS = Level of Service of Major Street/Minor Street Delay = Average Delay of Intersection Delay = Approach Delay of Worst Movement V/C = Volume-to-Capacity Ratio of Intersection V/C = Volume-to-Capacity Ratio of Worst Movement (except for AWS where V/C is for worst movement) During the evening peak hour, all study intersections operate within jurisdictional standards, with the exception of the 6th Avenue/Norwood Street and the 14th Avenue/SR 500-Everett Street intersections. The 6th Avenue/Norwood Street intersection operates at level of service of “F” on the minor street approach due to the high traffic volumes on 6th Avenue causing long delays for northbound traffic on Norwood Street waiting to find an acceptable gap to turn left onto 6th Avenue. At the 14th Avenue/SR 500-Everett Street intersection, the eastbound approach operates at level of service of “F” due to high traffic volumes from the uncontrolled southbound movement (SR 500-Everett Street) preventing traffic from 14th Avenue to finding an acceptable gap to turn left onto SR 500-Everett Street. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 8 Signal Warrants A signal warrant analysis was performed for the unsignalized study intersections not meeting mobility standards to determine if side-street volumes are high enough to justify (i.e. warrant) the construction of a traffic signal. The only unsignalized intersections not meeting mobility standards under existing conditions were the 6th Avenue/Norwood Street and 14th Avenue/SR- 500 (Everett Street) intersections. For this analysis, the MUTCD9 Warrant #3 (peak hour) was assessed using 2011 p.m. peak hour traffic volumes. Based on the peak hour warrant, neither of these intersections would meet the signal warrant criteria. The signal warrant analysis worksheets are attached in the appendix. 2005 Base Link Volumes To help understand the traffic flows and corridor conditions throughout the entire study area, the regional travel demand model developed by the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council (SWWRTC) was customized for use in Camas. Roadway link data, including estimated volumes and approximate levels of congestion, can be plotted from the model for sketch-level purposes. Figure 3 shows 2005 model link volumes with links having volume-to-capacity ratios over 0.80 colored to indicate the relative level of congestion. In addition, approximate intersection level of service is indicated as well. This figure does not represent Highway Capacity Manual calculations, but gives a general indication of the performance of the network. Based on Figure 3, the worst congestion occurs along SR 14, 6th Avenue and 1st Street/Lake Road. 9 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2003 Ed., Federal Highway Administration, November 2004. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S NO SCALE2005 PM PEAK HOURLINK VOLUMES & V/CINTERSECTION LOS3FigureVolume000LEGENDStreetsIntersectionsNote: Model Volumes - Not Post-Processed Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 10 Future Base Conditions The need for transportation improvements within Camas depends on the level of future development and the corresponding traffic volumes. The 2003 Camas Traffic Impact Fee was based on a 2023 traffic forecast. This TIF update uses a 2035 land use forecast to assess future traffic growth. A detailed mesoscopic transportation forecast model was developed for the study area from the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council’s (RTC) regional travel demand forecast models (base year 2005 and future year 2035) to assess the growth in traffic. The projected growth in traffic was then added to existing volumes to determine traffic volumes for the forecast year 2035. This chapter provides a general description of the forecast methodology and summarizes future roadway operations resulting from the growth in traffic. More detailed information about the forecasting methodology can be found in the Focus-Area Mesoscopic Forecasting Methodology memorandum, in the appendix.10 Future Demand and Land Use The City of Camas TIF addresses additional facilities that are required to serve future growth. The RTC urban area transportation forecast model was used to determine traffic growth and future volumes in Camas. This forecast model translates land uses into person travel, selects modes, and assigns motor vehicles to the roadway network. These traffic volume projections form the basis for identifying potential roadway deficiencies and for evaluating alternative circulation improvements. This section describes the forecasting process, including key assumptions and the land use scenario developed from the existing Comprehensive Plan designations and allowed densities. Projected Land Uses Land use is a key factor in developing a functional transportation system. The amount of land that is planned to be developed, the type of land uses, and how the land uses are mixed together have a direct relationship to expected demands on the transportation system. Understanding the amount and type of land use is critical to taking actions to maintain or enhance transportation system operation. For transportation forecasting, the land use data are stratified into geographical areas called transportation analysis zones (TAZs), which represent the sources of vehicle trip generation. There are approximately 60 RTC TAZs within the Camas TIF study area. As part of the previous Camas TIF update (2003), a detailed land use inventory was conducted for the Camas Urban Growth Area. Information collected from that effort was used to disaggregate RTC “parent” transportation analysis zones (TAZs) into smaller “child” TAZs (see Figure 4). The 60 RTC TAZs were subdivided into about 140 TAZs. 10 Memorandum from DKS Associates to Mark Harrington, RTC, May 20, 2011. Focus-Area Mesoscopic Forecasting Methodology. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S 14 EC B 14 EB LAK E K14 WB192ND T BLAI R I G 1ST 6TH Y 32NDA O 38TH 34TH SPARKER283RD18TH R M F 23RD EVERETTH4TH3RD232ND267THUBRADY176TH L EVERGREE N LAC A M A S 312THIND E XCROWNPACIFIC RIM SIERRALE A D B E T T E R D X WASHOUGAL RIVERV J ZGOODWIN45TH 27THMCINTOSH 30THBROWN175TH249THMILL PLAIN SHEPHERD 2ND 14TH P 11TH REILLY19TH DAHLIA43RD 293RDJULIA187TH303RD7TH BRUNNER DIVISION10THIONE277THZEEK 319THHATHAWAY 271STJ O Y 15TH 5TH 327TH244THADDY ROB I N S O N COFFEYHOOD22NDPAYNE9TH D A L L A S KROHN272ND28TH 24THQ DEL P8TH 44TH 195TH314THWEAKLEY FOR E S T H O M E O A K201ST42ND WOODBURNW292NDFAR G O IVY322NDKENT20TH BYBEE NASTORVAN VLEET177THCASCADEWESTRIDGE305THLOGANHILL 259THWEIR21ST 16TH 326TH17TH310TH179TH60TH FRANKLINWA L D E N 284TH13TH 35THFRIBERG-STRUNKPOLK25TH 185THJAMES181STALPINE 47TH 196THS U N R I S E EL REY CAM A S M E A D O W S 302ND33R D 37TH DRE S S E R BENTONSTAUFFER HAYES189THLOOKOUT RIDGEBASS UNIONALEXANDRA IRISAMMETER274TH257THOGDEN3 1 8 TH WHITMANNOURS E 31ST 41ST 252NDKNAPP 12TH 304TH202NDBIRCHILWACODOGWOOD36TH186TH DEERFERN273RD300TH328THYALE191STWHITNEYASPEN39TH LECHNER194TH248THTREEIFIC29THCLIFFSIDE178TH242NDMARINA WILL O W SQUIRE282ND26TH 199THGARFIELD307THUTAHZENITHLEWIS A N D C L A R K PERRY193RDN E V A D A182NDBEECH229THINGLEWOODOSTENSON CANYON ELMVINCA180THSINGLETREE GR A N D R I D G E 297THMAPLE184THMARYLAND265THKLICKITAT75THEMILY190THSUMNER261ST245TH238TH295TH313THBARLOW237THNIGHTSHADEC E D A R188TH 270THVALLEYDRAKE77THSTRONG183RD GREELEYCOUCHFORD A D A M S AS HDOUGLAS TROUTOAKRIDGEFRONTPARKJACKSONEL L IO T QUARTZ197TH173RDARTZ296THEAGLELARKSPURBAMBOO VIEW RIDGETIDLANDWATKINS174THNORWOOD178TH183RD26TH 31ST 5TH DRAKEQ 17TH 10TH 191ST32ND 22NDHILL33RD 10THABIRCH28TH 3RD 12THF R A N K L I N TROUT 47TH 2NDLACAMAS182ND31STI P 11TH 5TH 1ST176TH1 0 T H 24TH 3RD15TH14TH 19TH23RD 176TH2ND 35TH 14TH 18TH 38TH 42ND KLICKITAT3RD 22ND5TH L 7TH 7TH 36TH9TH 6TH7TH25TH 20TH 41ST 8TH 33RD 35TH Y181ST 6THJ190TH17TH 4TH 22ND 6TH 15TH 31ST29TH 17TH 11TH 9TH 23RD 6TH I202ND Q 10THP 12TH196TH25TH A 5TH 10TH 6TH 25TH13TH 10TH LEADBETT E R 16TH 30TH11TH 24TH 32ND 14THNORWOOD20TH 277THS H4TH6THVALLEY2ND 16TH 14TH 26TH IVY29TH 3R D 23RD H 35TH 26TH S 2ND 8TH 25TH 1ST23RD 11TH 17TH 9THIONE5TH 13TH 26TH 12TH B 8TH 180TH28TH14TH 8TH9TH 7TH 25TH 4TH202ND 18THR 17TH10TH I 9THJ F177TH23RD 3RD 1 9 9 TH 2ND7TH16TH7TH 30TH VALLEY5TH5TH14 G277THU2NDE X 24TH 9TH 6TH A 23RD 14TH 12TH 7TH 6TH 8TH 252NDBENTONA 16TH 15TH 21ST188TH175THIGARFIELD F 6TH 20TH F9TH25TH 11TH 15TH RHOOD30TH12TH23RD 6TH 15TH 14 18TH 19TH 15TH 7TH 3RD 8TH 3RD18TH11TH 4TH 6TH6TH8TH19TH 12TH1 9 6 TH L T G9TH15TH Q 14 6TH 25TH 25TH J 6TH 319TH9TH 14TH 16TH 27TH304TH1ST21ST 30TH 36TH 37 T H 9TH 32ND 282ND7TH IVY22NDSIERRA43RD F196THV H14TH15TH I 20TH7TH7TH17TH IVY19TH 184TH28TH36TH 6THP 31ST 9TH177TH277TH202ND9TH9TH I 30TH 1STI 12TH18TH D 27TH 14 32ND D 488 393 484 486 632 494 392 483 492 487 429 437 659 416 417 631 427 482 485 394 247 279 400 278 397 424 653425 409 401 414 432 418 426 406 395 420 248 407 408 411 301 302 404 651 264 396 433 412 481 635 422 438 405 421 480 399 489 439 419 652263 415 410 428 398 441 402 630 430 277276 249 629 423 413 403 244 490 261 245 275 431 488 900 484 494 632 486 392 483 492 487 429 659 482 631 437 247 279 278 424 397 441 427 418 432 249 426 248 302 420 395 969 301 977 958 264 394 651 393 433 438 653 489 480 485 901 439 953 419 263 652 481 971 952 915 922 415 423 926 912 428 956 411 959 944 425 416 400 414 935 963 401 398 924 422 965 961 413 421 931 962 921 630 934 430 277 967 629 949 925 903 902 911 276 923 947 916 417 909 978 950 954 412 951 976 955 968 408 244 937 975 946 948 940 406 913 908 964 399 930 929 914 945 941 910 972904 938 957 907 407 974 245 405 933 966 410 939 246 402 261 396 932 928 905 920 490 943 936 917 918 919 434 906 973 403 927 404 970 300 Legend City Limits Camas TAZs RTC TAZs ± Figure 4Transportation Analysis ZonesDKSAssociates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 12 The purpose of the disaggregation is to more accurately load traffic onto the street network. Overall, the land uses assumed are consistent with RTC’s land use assumptions, which were recently reviewed and updated, regionally. The disaggregated land use data was reviewed by City staff and refined to reflect local planning efforts. Table 2 summarizes the land uses for the base year model (2005) and the future scenario (2035) within the Camas study area. While these summaries only outline land use in Camas for the purposes of this study, the travel demand forecasts that have been evaluated reflect the regional land use growth throughout the Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area. Table 2 indicates that significant growth is expected in Camas in the coming decades. Table 2: Camas Land Use Summary Land Use 2005 2035 Increase % Increase Households (HH) 7,021 14,124 7,103 101% Retail Employees (RET) 446 3,447 3,001 673% Other Employees (OTH) 5,755 14,797 9,042 157% The land use growth listed in Table 2 is different than the land use growth used to develop the 2003 Camas TIF. The 2023 land use used in the 2003 TIF indicated that households would increase by 66%, slightly less than the amount identified for 2035. The 2035 forecast identifies a significant increase in retail employment growth when compared to the 2023 forecast (a 673% increase in 2035 versus 32% increase in 2023). Other employment growth assumed for 2035 is generally comparable to what was assumed for 2023 (157% in 2035 versus 144% in 2023). The land use developed for the 2035 forecasts includes areas north and east of Lacamas Lake, which were not planned for in the 2023 employment forecast. At the base year (2005) level of land development, the transportation system generally operates without significant deficiencies in the study area. As land uses are changed in proportion to each other (i.e. there is a significant increase in employment relative to household growth), there will be a shift in the overall operation of the transportation system. Retail land uses generate higher amounts of trips per acre of land than do households and other land uses. The location and design of retail land uses in a community can greatly affect transportation system operation. Additionally, if a community is homogeneous in land use character (i.e. all employment or residential), the transportation system must support significant trips coming to or from the community rather than within the community. Typically, there should be a mix of residential, commercial, and employment type land uses so that some residents may work and shop locally, reducing the need for residents to travel long distances. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 13 RTC Area Transportation Model A determination of future traffic system needs in Camas requires the ability to accurately forecast travel demand resulting from estimates of future population and employment for the City. The objective of the transportation planning process is to provide the information necessary for making decisions on when and where improvements should be made to the transportation system to meet travel demand as developed in an urban area travel demand model as part of the Regional Transportation Plan update process. RTC uses VISUM, a computer based program for transportation planning, to process the large amounts of data for the Clark County area. For the Camas TIF Update, the RTC model was used to forecast 2035 travel with substantially more detail added into the Camas area as described previously. Traffic forecasting can be divided into several distinct but integrated components that represent the logical sequence of travel behavior (Figure 5). These components and their general order in the traffic forecasting process are as follows: Trip Generation Trip Distribution Mode Choice Traffic Assignment Trip Generation The trip generation process translates land use quantities (number of dwelling units, retail, and other employment) into vehicle trip ends (number of vehicles entering or leaving a TAZ or sub- TAZ). The RTC trip generation process is elaborate, entailing detailed trip characteristics for various types of housing, retail employment, non-retail employment, and special activities. Typically, most traffic impact studies rely on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) research for analysis.11 The ITE trip rates are used in implementing TIF fee calculations because they provide a greater link between specific land use and vehicular traffic. The model process is tailored to variations in travel characteristics and activities in the region and is useful for establishing area-wide TIF rates. Table 3 illustrates the estimated growth in vehicle trips generated within the Camas area during the PM peak period between 2010 and 2035. It indicates that vehicle trips in Camas would grow by approximately 137 percent between 2010 and 2035 if the land develops according to the land use forecasts, with the majority of growth occurring in the north part of the city. This growth is significantly higher than the 95% growth identified in the 2003 TIF, which is consistent with the change in land use forecasts. Assuming a 25-year horizon to the 2035 scenario, this represents an annualized growth rate of about 2.9 percent per year. Table 3: Existing and Future Projected Vehicle Trip Generation (PM Peak Hour) Camas UGA 2005 2035 2035-2005 Change Trips 10,313 24,483 14,170 137% 11 Trip Generation: An ITE Informational Report, 8th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2008. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S NO SCALE TRAVEL FORECASTING PROCESS LEGEND 5Figure - Posted Speed - WSDOT Regionally Significant Highway (Non HSS) Functional Classification - WSDOT Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) - Arterial - Collector SPEED 35 - Local Roadway - Study Intersection0 Road Network Data Land Uses Trip Generation Rates BUILD/REVISE NETWORK DISAGGREGATE TAZ's TRIP DISTRIBUTION TRIP GENERATION TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Loaded Road Network INPUTS PROCESS OUTPUTS Traffic Volume Projections Levels of Service Circulation Testing Transportation System Mitigation Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 15 Trip Distribution This step estimates how many trips travel from one zone in the model to any other zone. Distribution is based on land uses, trip purpose, and on factors that relate the likelihood of travel between any two zones to the travel time between zones (including the influences of congestion). In projecting long-range future traffic volumes, it is important to consider potential changes in regional travel patterns. Although the locations and amounts of traffic generation in Camas are essentially a function of future land use in the city, the distribution of trips is influenced by regional growth, particularly in neighboring areas in Clark County, including Vancouver and Washougal. The trip distribution from RTC’s regional model was incorporated into the Camas mesoscopic focus-area model to ensure regional consistency. Mode Choice This is the step where it is determined how many trips will be by various modes (single-occupant vehicle, transit, truck, carpool, pedestrian, bicycle, etc.). The 2005 mode splits are incorporated into the base model and adjustments to that mode split are projected for the future scenario, depending on any expected changes in transit or carpool use. These considerations are built into the forecasts used for 2035, consistent with the RTC regional travel demand model. Traffic Assignment Trip assignment involves the determination of the specific travel routes taken by all of the trips within the transportation network. This step was performed using VISUM modeling software. Model inputs included the transportation network (i.e., road and intersection locations and characteristics, as determined from maps and field inventories) and a trip distribution table (determined using methodology described previously in this memorandum). Iterated equilibrium assignment was then performed using estimated travel times along roadways and delays at intersection movements.12 The path choice for each trip was based on minimal travel times between locations. Model outputs include traffic volumes on roadway segments and at intersections. 12 Roadway travel times were calculated based on distance and travel speed. Intersection movement delays were calculated using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Detailed lane geometry, traffic control, roadway cross-sections, and roadway travel speed information is required for model accuracy. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 16 Model Application to Camas The future base network was developed through coordination with City of Camas staff. The improvements included in the base year model are those projects with secured funding. The base 2035 roadway network included the following projects: SR 14 Camas-Washougal Widening and Interchange Improvements: o Widening of SR 14 from two lanes to four lanes from the end of the West Camas Slough Bridge to Union Street (SR 500) o Construction of a split-diamond interchange at Union Street and 2nd Street Includes four new roundabouts, north and south of SR 14 at Union Street and 2 nd Street SE 20th Street Improvement from SE Armstrong Road to SE 192nd Avenue – widen existing portion to three lanes with bike lanes and sidewalks and extend to SE 192nd Avenue.13 2035 Base Traffic Volumes Intersection turn movements were extracted from the model at key intersections for both the base year 2005 and forecast year 2035 scenarios. These intersection turn movements were not used directly, but the increment of the year 2035 turn movements over the 2005 turn movements was applied (added) to existing (actual 2010) turn movement counts in Camas, since 2010 counts were determined to be comparable to 2005 counts. A post-processing technique following NCHRP 255 methodology was used to refine model travel forecasts to the volume forecasts used for future intersection analysis. The turn movement volumes used for future year intersection analysis can be found in the technical appendix. The traffic volumes developed for the Future 2035 Base are shown in Figure 6. 13 Loan payback remnant may be required in new TIF calculation. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S 2035 BASE PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 6Figure NO SCALE - Study Intersection LEGEND - Lane Configuration - Stop Sign - Traffic Signal 00 - Volume Turn Movement RightThruLeft LT TH RTHL Hard Left - PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume000 500 500 14 LAKE RD L A K E R D ST6TH AVADAMS ST 6TH A V 5TH A V 4TH A V 2ND AV UNION ST6TH ST4TH ST1ST A VDIVISION STBENTON ST19TH AV19TH AV18TH AV 28TH AV 18TH BLVD PAYNE20TH ST 38TH 1ST ST 43RD AV 15TH ST RD AV BY B E E RD18TH AV 23RD AV AV 16TH AV FO R E S T HOMEF A R G O ST10TH AV 7TH AV 6TH A V 5TH AVIVYSTLE W I S & C L A R K H W Y EVE R G R E E N H W Y BRAD Y McINTOSHRDRD R DSTSTSTASTORSTASTORSIERRASIERRASTSTPARKER202ND AV13TH ST RD 6TH A V 14TH AV 43RD AV RD283RD AVEVERETT RD267TH AV218TH AVLEWIS & C L A R K H W Y Col umbia Ri v er Lacamas Lake232ND AV7TH ST GARFIELD28TH ST I ST 3RD AV ST 2 3 4 30 1 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 242526 27 28 29 NORWOODST00 RDDR RD DALLA S STRD500 14 500 Roundabout 1.6th Ave./Norwood St.2.6th Ave./Ivy St.3.Division St./6th Ave.4.Adams St./6th Ave.5.Dallas St./SR-500 (3rd Ave.)6a.SR-14 (North Roundabout)7.3rd Ave./2nd Ave. (4th St.)8.3rd Ave./Crown Rd. 9.6th Ave./SR-500 (Garfield St.)10.14th Ave./SR-500 (Everett St.)11.18th Ave./Division St.12.28th Ave./Sierra Dr.13.18th Ave./Cascade St.14.McIntosh Rd./Brady Rd.15.16th Ave./Brady Rd.16.Pacific Rim Blvd./Payne Rd. 17.Pacific Rim Blvd./Parker St.18.38th Ave./Parker St.19.Lake Rd./Sierra St.20.Lake Road/SR-500 (Everett St.)21.43rd Ave./SR-500 (Everett St.) 22.Leadbetter Rd./SR-500 (Everett Rd.)23.Nourse Rd.-15th St./283rd Ave.24.Lake Rd./Parker St.25.Lake Rd./218th Ave. (Payne St.)26.1st St./Friberg St.-202nd Ave. 27.13th St./Friberg St.28.Goodwin Rd./Camas Meadows Dr.29.Goodwin Rd./Ingle Rd.30.28th St./232nd Ave. New Interchange To Replace Existing Intersection 6b.SR-14 (South Roundabout)9515125THLT100 1160 140 RT TH L T 30 580 155LT TH RT RT251510LTTHRT 5 5 1 0THLT180 1010 30 RT TH L T 30 675 5LT TH RT RT95510LTTHRT 35 63025155THRTLTRT 135 885 THLT 55 485THLT RT5 160 5LTTH RT 10 155 745 RTTHLT0 5 5 5 LTTHRTTHLTRTLTTHRTRTTHLTLTTHRT 40 25 3755 190502545105LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 5 10 25 RT TH LT 4520201451070RTTHLTLTTHRT5 7 1 5 6 5THLT RT2 5 6 9 0 2 1 5 LTTHRT225 525 03255195 51405LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 240 830 20 RT TH LT 5 4 80 2 5THLT RT5 20 5LTTH RT 65 20 20 RTTHLT5 4 8 5 7 0 LTTHRT120130THLT 445 7035465TH RTLTRT 105 25 TH LT 35 130 RT LT 85180THRT 35 110 25453035 57550LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 50 185 20 RT TH LT 25 105 011005 500LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 115 150 5 RT TH LT 35010LT TH 345235RT TH 10 115LT RT 145 75 10550230185 25245125LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 90 210 20 RT TH LT 55 635 451402550 175510LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 70 345 395 RT TH LT 10 100 3033531520 11537540LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 330 65 105 RT TH LT 60 245 155165410170 180265340LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 145 385 135 RT TH LT 95310RTLT 765 230 RT TH 475 230 LT TH 330420THLT530 485 RT LT 380330THRT 640155RTTH 80 210LT RT50560LTTH 240485THLT70 310 RT LT 25255THRT 235390THLT25 225 RT LT 25360THRT 10 525 40452010 34020195LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 50 925 670 RT TH LT 190375LTRT 210 1270 TH LT 110 805TH RT 25590LTRT 330 1365 TH LT 275 840TH RT 14 0 18 0 RT LT 930155RT TH735145LTTH15 880 145151510 15015395LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 10 710 75 RT TH LT 954402 6 0 1 7 0 THRTLTRT 355690THLT 20 545 15251025 501045LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 65 675 130 RT TH LT 601 3 5 45 90 400 30 20 530 85 1 3 5 9 0 3 5 85 0 55 20600155LT TH RT RTTHLT LTTHRT 155 25 10 RT TH LT YIELD RightThruLeft LT TH RT Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 18 Future Base (2035) Operating Conditions The 2035 base motor vehicle operating conditions at the study intersections were d etermined for the evening peak hour based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology14 for signalized and unsignalized intersections. The conditions include the estimated average delay, level of service (LOS), and volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio of the study intersections and are shown in Table 4.15 During the evening peak hour, all signalized study intersections operate within jurisdictional standards, with the exception Lake Road/Parker Street and 13th Street/Friberg Street. The Lake Road/Parker Street intersection, while operating at an acceptable level of service, exceeds the City’s volume-to-capacity mobility standard by 0.02, a small amount. However, the intersection at 13th Street/Friberg Street would operate at level of service F and significantly exceed the City’s volume-to-capacity standard. Two of the three all-way-stop controlled intersections would exceed the City’s mobility standard, although current tools do not allow correct analysis of the intersection at Pacific Rim Boulevard/Parker Street. The level of service shown, E, reflects an analysis that assumes fewer lanes than currently exist at this intersection, due to analysis limitations. It is likely that this intersection would operate slightly better than what is reported. However, the 16th Avenue/Brady Road intersection does operate poorly, level of service F, and improvements should be considered at that location. Ten of the unsignalized study intersections deteriorate to a LOS of E or F due to the growth in motor vehicle volumes. These intersections are located on arterial roadways, including 6th Avenue, SR 500/Everett Street, Lake Road, Pacific Rim Boulevard and Goodwin Road/28th Street. 14 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, 2000. 15 Detailed intersection analysis worksheets are attached in the technical appendix. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 19 Table 4: Future Base (2035) Evening Peak Hour Intersection Operations Intersection Mobility Standard* LOS V/C Delay Level of Service Volume/ Capacity Signalized Intersections Dallas Street/SR-500 (3rd Avenue) E 13.7 B 0.74 3rd Avenue/2nd Avenue-4th Street D 0.90 8.7 A 0.55 3rd Avenue/Crown Road D 0.90 20.8 C 0.69 38th Avenue/Parker Street D 0.90 31.1 C 0.84 Lake Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 67.1 E 1.04 43rd Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 15.0 B 0.66 Lake Road/Parker Street D 0.90 38.7 D 0.92 1st Street/Friberg Street-202nd Avenue D 0.90 15.3 B 0.71 13th Street/Friberg Street D 0.90 96.7 F 1.22 All-Way Stop Intersections 28th Avenue/Sierra Drive D 0.90 9.9 A 0.37 16th Avenue/Brady Road D 0.90 88.4 F 1.24 Pacific Rim Boulevard/Parker Street** D 0.90 41.3 E 1.07 Unsignalized Intersections 6th Avenue/Norwood Street D 0.90 >200.0 C/F >2.0 6th Avenue/Ivy Street D 0.90 182.7 A/F 0.55 Division Street/6th Avenue D 0.90 24.2 A/C 0.51 Adams Street/6th Avenue** D 0.90 21.5 A/C 0.53 6th Avenue/SR-500 (Garfield Street) E 46.4 A/E 0.58 14th Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) E >200.0 A/F >2.0 18th Avenue/Division Street D 0.90 12.7 A/B 0.28 18th Avenue/Cascade Street D 0.90 16.5 A/C 0.14 McIntosh Road/Brady Road D 0.90 24.6 A/C 0.43 Pacific Rim Boulevard/Payne Road D 0.90 128.4 A/F 1.05 Lake Road/Sierra Street D 0.90 93.9 B/F 1.07 Leadbetter Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 88.0 A/F 1.03 Nourse Road-15th Street/283rd Avenue D 0.90 9.3 A/A 0.08 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 20 Intersection Mobility Standard* LOS V/C Delay Level of Service Volume/ Capacity Lake Road/218th Avenue/Payne Street D 0.90 >200.0 B/F >2.0 Goodwin Road/Camas Meadows Drive D 0.90 >200.0 B/F >2.0 Goodwin Road/Ingle Road D 0.90 >200.0 A/F >2.0 28th Street/232nd Avenue D 0.90 132.5 A/F 0.93 Roundabout Intersections Union/”C” Street (north) D 7.9 A 0.45 Union/11th Street (south) D 4.3 A 0.20 *Mobility Standard is for City of Camas, except for SR-14, which is WSDOT HSS and SR-500, which is WSDOT Non HSS **Intersection configuration not allowed in HCM analysis, therefore intersection configuration was modified in Synchro to allow for capacity analysis Bolded and Shaded indicates mobility standard is not met Signalized or All Way Stop intersections: All Movements Unsignalized intersections: Worst Movement LOS = Level of Service of Intersection LOS = Level of Service of Major Street/Minor Street Delay = Average Delay of Intersection Delay = Approach Delay of Worst Movement V/C = Volume-to-Capacity Ratio of Intersection V/C = Volume-to-Capacity Ratio of Worst Movement (except for AWS where V/C is for worst movement) 2035 Base Link Volumes In addition to the intersection operation analysis, corridor performance was examined to determine if the growth in traffic volumes exceeded capacity on major routes (arterial and collectors) or if significant volume was added to local or neighborhood routes. Figure 7 shows model link volumes for the 2035 Base condition. Similar to Figure 3, the volume-to-capacity ratios shown do not reflect Highway Capacity Manual analysis, but give a general idea of areas of concern. It shows that a number of key corridors are significantly impacted by growth between 2010 and 2035. Figure 8 shows traffic volume growth between 2005 and 2035. Table 5 lists a summary of the corridor performance findings. The issues identified in Table 5 could potentially be mitigated with access control, roadway widening, parallel route improvements, or new parallel facilities to relieve congestion. Strategies and alternatives for mitigating these concerns will be addressed in Chapter 2. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S NO SCALE2035 PM PEAK HOURLINK VOLUMES & V/CINTERSECTION LOS7FigureVolume000LEGENDStreetsIntersectionsNote: Model Volumes - Not Post-Processed NO SCALELINK VOLUME GROWTH(2035-2005)8FigureVolume000LEGEND Chapter 1: Existing and Future Baseline Conditions Analysis May 2012 Page 23 Table 5: Summary of 2035 Link Volume Capacity Analysis Roadway Limits Issues SR-14 192nd to 6th Avenue Growth of approximately 2,200 vehicles in the PM peak hour PM peak volumes approaching capacity in eastbound direction Lake Road Parker Street to Everett Street/SR 500 Growth of approximately 1,000 vehicles in the PM peak hour PM peak volumes approach or exceed capacity in eastbound direction 13th Street/ Goodwin Road/ 28th Street 192nd to 242nd Growth of 800 to 1,200 vehicles in the PM peak hour PM peak volumes approach or exceed capacity of the existing roadway SR 500 Everett to 242nd Growth of 900 to 1,200 vehicles in the PM peak hour PM peak volumes exceed capacity of existing roadway SR 500/ Everett Street Lake Road to Leadbetter Road Growth of 800 to 900 vehicles in the PM peak hour PM peak volumes approach capacity of existing roadway 242nd Avenue North of 28th Street Growth of approximately 900 to 1,100 vehicles in the PM peak hour PM peak volumes exceed capacity of existing roadway northbound 1st Street/ Lake Road 192nd Avenue to Parker Street Growth of about 1,500 vehicles in the PM peak hour PM peak volumes approach capacity of existing roadway DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 2: Improvement Alternatives Analysis May 2012 Page 24 CHAPTER 2: IMPROVEMENTS ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Between 2005 and 2035, the traffic volume within Camas’ Urban Growth Area (UGA) is forecast to grow by 137 percent. Future deficiencies were identified using WSDOT’s and the local jurisdiction’s thresholds for mobility standards. Improvements to the Camas street system, including intersection improvements, roadway improvements, or new roadways, were considered and a package of recommended improvements was determined. This chapter discusses the recommended roadway improvements, including benefits, costs and related policies. Major Roadway Improvements Several roadway improvements were identified to address the intersection capacity and roadway capacity issues identified in the Existing and Future Baseline Conditions section, previously. Several of the roadway improvements that were tested and recommended were projects originally recommended in the 2003 TIF Update. Other projects include new facilities to serve the North UGA Expansion area, or other improvements determined to meet the latest future forecast demands. Table 6 lists the recommended major roadway improvements and describes their benefits. Figure 9 shows the volume-to-capacity ratios with the proposed improvements in place. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Table 6: 2035 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Intersection Level of Service Roadway Limits Description Benefits Goodwin Road 192nd Avenue to Friberg Street An improvement is needed to provide additional capacity between Vancouver and Camas. No specific project has been identified, but could include: widening of 13th Street constructing an 18th Street connection or a combination of the two Modeling shows there will be a high travel demand in the future between Vancouver and northern Camas. Either two three-lane corridors or one five- lane corridor will be needed to connect 192nd and Goodwin/28th. Goodwin Road Friberg Street to Ingle Road High travel demand along this corridor will require a five-lane section to provide capacity between Vancouver and northeastern Camas. Capacity improvement for key corridor Safety improvement for key corridor Goodwin Road Ingle Road to 242nd Avenue Traffic forecasts indicate a three-lane section, in combination with the proposed 242nd Extension/East-West Arterial Roadway will provide sufficient capacity in this corridor Lower cost than originally anticipated (3-lane vs. 5-lane section Improved capacity and safety Camas Meadows Drive Payne to Lake Road Extend Camas Meadows Drive from Payne Street to Lake Road along Larkspur alignment as a three-lane collector Improved capacity and safety Improves operation of Lake/Parker intersection Eliminates the need to widen 1st/Lake to accommodate eastbound through traffic Ingle Street Extension (New East-West Connector) Extend Ingle Street south and east between Goodwin/28th and 232nd Street Provides an alternative route into north portion of Camas, eliminating the need for a five-lane section on Goodwin between Ingle and 242nd Avenue Provides additional capacity Provides access to new development area DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Roadway Limits Description Benefits 232nd Street Improvement Widen and improve 232nd Street between 28th Street and 9th Street In conjunction with the Ingle Street Extension, eliminates the need for a five- lane section on Goodwin between Ingle and 242nd Avenue Provides additional capacity Provides access to new development area 9th Street Improvement Widen and improve 9th Street between 232nd Avenue and 242nd Avenue Extension In conjunction with the Ingle Street Extension and the 232nd Street Improvement, eliminates the need for a five-lane section on Goodwin between Ingle and 242nd Avenue Provides additional capacity Provides access to new development area 242nd Avenue Extension 28th Street to 14th Street Construct new high-speed (45 mph) 3- lane roadway Provide a high mobility roadway connection as an alternative to SR 500 (which would otherwise have high demands in the future) Provide access to new development New East-West Arterial 14th Street to SR 500 (Everett Street) Construct new high-speed 3 lane roadway Provide a high-speed, high-capacity roadway connection as an alternative to SR 500 Provide access to new development NE Everett Street 35th Avenue to New East-West Arterial Widen to 3 lanes Provide turn lane capacity for adjacent development and growth in through traffic 23rd Street Extension 43rd Avenue to 283rd Avenue New 2 lane, minimum access roadway Provide access to new development Provide additional connectivity in the area DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Roadway Limits Description Benefits 23rd Street Realignment 283rd Avenue to 23rd Street Construct connection between 23rd Street Extension terminus on 283rd Avenue south of 23rd Street to 23rd Street Provide a direct connection between the new 23rd Street Extension (at 283rd Avenue) and the existing 23rd Street, providing access east toward Washougal Friberg Street 1st Street to 13th Street Widen to 3 lanes Provide turn lane capacity for adjacent development and growth in through traffic 38th Avenue Extension 192nd to Bybee Construct new 3 lane roadway Provide a direct connection to 192nd with adequate capacity rather than a residentially fronted two lane street 38th Avenue (West) Bybee to Parker Widen to 3 lanes Provide turn lane capacity for adjacent development and growth in through traffic 38th Avenue (East) Parker to 650 feet west of Dahlia Widen to 3 lanes Provide turn lanes and increased capacity for development Bybee Realignment 199th Avenue to 20th Street Realign to meet new signalized intersection Current alignment of Bybee would not be access spacing standards between the new signal planned west of 202nd Avenue DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 2: Improvement Alternatives Analysis May 2012 Page 28 Notes: 13th Street/18th Street Corridor: It is recognized that additional capacity (five lanes total) is needed between NE 192nd Avenue (in Vancouver) and NE Goodwin Road (in Camas). The area between these two points is located within Clark County and, while there are multiple alignment options, there are issues related to each. The most desirable option, in terms of vehicular demand and connectivity, would be a new route along the 18th Street alignment. However, there are known environmental issues with this alignment which would make development of a project very difficult. Another alternative would be to widen NE 13th Street between 192nd Avenue and Goodwin Road, however, this alignment goes through a neighborhood, and would require acquisition of residential property to build a five-lane section. A third alternative would provide two three-lane roadways, however, both environmental and neighborhood issues would need to be addressed. This analysis assumes that some sort of connection is provided (to be determined at a later date), that would provide capacity for the equivalent of a five lane roadway. Previous analysis has indicated that a five-lane section would be required along the Goodwin/28th corridor. Current analysis indicates that with the planned improvements in the North UGA area, including a parallel collector route, a three-lane section will work between Ingle and 242nd Avenue. Right-of-way should be reserved for a five -lane section, as ultimately, it may be required. In the 2007 Framework Plan, it was recommended that Camas Meadows Drive be realigned to intersect with 1st Street/Lake Road at Larkspur/Parker Street. A key purpose of this realignment was to consolidate access and the need for additional traffic signals along 1 st Street/Lake Road. Alternatives to this realignment were considered, such as improving the existing Payne Street alignment. However, the Larkspur alignment significantly improves operations at the Lake Road/1st Street/Parker intersection and preserves pedestrian access on all intersection approaches. Pedestrian access may have been at risk on the west approach to the intersection due to the high number of eastbound right turns/northbound left turns that can be reduced by extending Parker north to align with Camas Meadows Drive. Camas Meadows Drive will be improved between Payne Street and Lake Road as a three-lane collector. The previous TIF Update recommended improvements to Crown Road. However, current analysis reflects changing development patterns with an increased traffic shed to the north. Current modeling indicates that the current capacity of Crown Road should be adequate to accommodate future growth in Camas. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S NO SCALE2035 PM IMPROVEDPEAK HOUR LINK VOLUMES& V/C INTERSECTION LOS9FigureVolume000LEGENDStreetsIntersectionsNote: Model Volumes - Not Post-Processed Chapter 2: Improvement Alternatives Analysis May 2012 Page 30 Intersection Improvements Intersection capacity deficiencies not solved with the major roadway projects were addressed by adding turn lanes, providing signalization or a roundabout where warranted. Eight unsignalized intersections met peak hour signal warrants for the forecast year 2035, as listed in Table 7. Volumes used to determine whether signal warrants were met can be found in the appendix. Table 7: Future 2035 Signal Warrant Summary at Unsignalized Intersections Intersection Existing Peak Hour Warrant 2035 Peak Hour Warrant 6th Avenue/Norwood Street No Yes 6th Avenue/Ivy Street No No SR 500/14th Avenue No No Pacific Rim Boulevard/Payne Rd No Yes Lake Road/Sierra Street No Yes Leadbetter/SR 500 (Everett) No Yes Nourse Road – 15th Street/283rd No No 242nd/28th Street No Yes* Lake Road/218th/Payne No No Goodwin Road/Camas Meadows No Yes Goodwin/Ingle No Yes 28th/232nd Avenue No No Brady/16th No Yes Parker/Pacific Rim No Yes * No existing count available, future volume estimated based on model volumes None of these locations met signal warrants under existing conditions. Traffic pattern changes are planned at one of the intersections (Leadbetter/SR 500) that would mitigate the need for a traffic signal at this location. Two additional locations were identified as potential roundabout locations (Everett Street/SR 500/Lake Road and 6th Avenue/Norwood Street), and are addressed below. The recommended TIF signal improvements are at the following nine locations: 6th Avenue/Norwood Street Pacific Rim Boulevard/SE Payne Road Lake Road/Sierra Street Goodwin Road/Camas Meadows Drive Goodwin Road/Ingle Street Brady Road/16th Street Parker Street/Pacific Rim Boulevard 242nd/28th Street DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 2: Improvement Alternatives Analysis May 2012 Page 31 Roundabouts Roundabouts are being considered as alternatives to improvements at Everett Street/SR 500/Lake Road and 6th Avenue/Norwood Street for different reasons. Each is discussed below: Everett Street/SR 500/Lake Road: This intersection is currently signalized and will not meet operational standards in 2035 with its existing configuration. Due to a bridge immediately north of the intersection, the addition of an additional southbound lane (which would address the capacity deficiency) would be extremely costly, potentially more than $5 million. There is some undeveloped land, however, to the east of the intersection that may be suitable for reconfiguration with roundabout control. Coincidentally, the land is owned by the City’s Parks Department. Due to the relatively balanced traffic volumes approaching the intersection, the availability of land nearby and the constraint of the bridge to the north, the potential for a roundabout at this location was evaluated. Based on the projected 2035 volumes, a partial multi-lane roundabout at this location would operate at level of service B, well within the acceptable standards for both the City of Camas and the Washington State Department of Transportation. Since this intersection is located along SR 500, input and cooperation from WSDOT will be essential. Recommendation: A roundabout would function well at this location. Both turn lane and roundabout improvement options should be considered as design options. Include the lower cost of the two options for TIF funding. 6th Avenue/Norwood Street: This intersection is currently unsignalized. The level of service for side street traffic is poor (LOS F) today and is projected to decline even further in the future. While traffic signal warrants would be met at this location in the future, a traffic signal at this location may be disruptive to the large volume of traffic traveling east and west through the intersection. A roundabout would allow continuous flow for these heavy movements, while allowing side street traffic a much improved level of service. An additional benefit of a roundabout at this location is its potential to slow traffic coming off of SR 14 an entering the City of Camas. It could be a natural transition from the high speeds on the state highway to slower speeds in town. This roundabout would incorporate ramps to and from SR 14, so input and cooperation from WSDOT is essential. The cost of a roundabout at this location would be substantial, however, due to grade issues, potentially in the multi-million dollar range. A traffic signal would cost substantially less, so a signal will be recommended at this location as part of this TIF Update. Recommendation: Install a Traffic Signal rather than a Roundabout at this location due to cost. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 2: Improvement Alternatives Analysis May 2012 Page 32 2035 Improved Operational Analysis Intersection capacity analysis was conducted at each of the study intersections, including the recommended major roadway improvements and intersection projects. Table 8 lists the results of the analysis. Each of the study intersections operates at a LOS of D and v/c ratio of 0.90 or better, with the exception of 6th/Ivy, 6th/Garfield, Lake/Payne and 28th/232nd. Each of these intersections operate at a LOS E or F for the minor street left turn. Signal warrants are not met at any of these locations and volume-to-capacity ratios for affected movements are relatively low (less than 0.90), therefore no further improvements are recommended. These locations should be monitored to determine if signalization does become warranted at some time in the future with local development. Table 8: 2035 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Intersection Operations Intersection Mobility Standard* LOS V/C Delay Level of Service Volume/ Capacity Signalized Intersections Dallas Street/SR-500 (3rd Avenue) E 13.9 B 0.74 3rd Avenue/2nd Avenue-4th Street D 0.90 8.7 A 0.54 3rd Avenue/Crown Road D 0.90 20.8 C 0.69 38th Avenue/Parker Street D 0.90 33.8 C 0.85 43rd Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 13.5 B 0.60 Lake Road/Parker Street D 0.90 53.1 D 0.90 1st Street/Friberg Street-202nd Avenue D 0.90 21.3 C 0.77 13th Street/Friberg Street D 0.90 26.4 C 0.84 New Signals 6th Avenue/Norwood Street D 0.90 25.8 C 0.63 16th Avenue/Brady Road D 0.90 15.7 B 0.76 Pacific Rim Boulevard/Parker Street D 0.90 20.1 C 0.48 Pacific Rim Boulevard/Payne Road D 0.90 14.5 B 0.59 Lake Road/Sierra Street D 0.90 25.9 C 0.77 Goodwin Road/Camas Meadows Drive D 0.90 29.6 C 0.90 Goodwin Road/Ingle Road D 0.90 31.7 C 0.73 All-Way Stop Intersections 28th Avenue/Sierra Drive D 0.90 11.4 B 0.43 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 2: Improvement Alternatives Analysis May 2012 Page 33 Intersection Mobility Standard* LOS V/C Delay Level of Service Volume/ Capacity Unsignalized Intersections 6th Avenue/Ivy Street D 0.90 84.1 A/F 0.32 Division Street/6th Avenue D 0.90 28.4 A/D 0.66 Adams Street/6th Avenue** D 0.90 19.3 A/C 0.45 6th Avenue/SR-500 (Garfield Street) E 47.8 A/E 0.58 14th Avenue/SR-500 (Everett Street) E Not an intersection, as proposed 18th Avenue/Division Street D 0.90 14.5 A/B 0.32 18th Avenue/Cascade Street D 0.90 16.4 A/C 0.02 McIntosh Road/Brady Road D 0.90 33.7 A/D 0.53 Leadbetter Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) E Right-in/Right-out only, as proposed Nourse Road-15th Street/283rd Avenue D 0.90 14.5 A/B 0.28 Lake/Payne D 0.90 52.6 B/F 0.81 28th Street/232nd Avenue D 0.90 62.4 A/F 0.56 Roundabout Intersections Lake Road/SR-500 (Everett Street) E 22.0 C 0.92 Union/”C” Street (north) E 16.1 B 0.59 Union/11th Street (south) E 13.0 B 0.16 *Mobility Standard is for City of Camas, except for SR-14, which is WSDOT HSS and SR-500, which is WSDOT Non HSS Bolded and Shaded indicates mobility standard is not met Signalized or All Way Stop intersections: All Movements Unsignalized intersections: Worst Movement LOS = Level of Service of Intersection LOS = Level of Service of Major Street/Minor St Delay = Average Delay of Intersection Delay = Approach Delay of Worst Movement V/C = Volume-to-Capacity Ratio of Intersection V/C = Volume-to-Capacity Ratio of Worst Movement (except for AWS where V/C is for worst movement) Roundabout intersections: Worst Movement DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 2: Improvement Alternatives Analysis May 2012 Page 34 Recommended TIF Improvements The improvements identified to mitigate future growth impacts to the transportation system are listed in Table 9 and shown in Figure 10. Cost estimates were completed for each project, which include all project related costs, with potential right-of-way costs shown separately. The projects are not listed in order of priority. Prioritization should occur in coordination with the CIP process. All TIF improvements include sidewalks for pedestrians, bike lanes for bicyclists, and transit facilities for buses and park-and-riders. This improvement program meets the TIF requirement to establish a nexus between capacity needs and future land use. The updated TIF project listing, while extensive, is not intended to represent the comprehensive listing of all transportation improvement in Camas. Other transportation improvements (turn lanes, street modernization, traffic calming, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements beyond those programmed) may be built as part of fronting development improvements, SEPA required mitigation, or other processes. Cost Estimates Cost estimates were developed for each improvement based upon 2011 dollars. Past construction information in the region was utilized as a basis for updates to the unit costs from the previous TIF Update study (2003). Each roadway project was estimated, including the total project cost of the roadway improvement including engineering, construction, and landscaping. In addition, the TIF eligible portion is listed as well. The TIF eligible portion is described later, but generally consists of curb-to-curb plus storm sewer costs. Where projects go outside of the Camas UGA, TIF eligible project costs include only the expected Camas share, based on growth. Potential right-of-way costs are shown separately. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Table 9: Camas UGA TIF Improvements Element Improvement Project Improvement Total Construction Project Cost (millions) TIF Eligible Cost (millions) A Goodwin Road (Lacamas Creek to Ingle Road) Widen from 2 to5 lanes between Friberg Street and Ingle Road $4.9 $4.5 B Goodwin Road (Ingle Road to 232nd Avenue Widen from 2 lanes to 3 lanes between Ingle Road and 232nd Avenue $6.4 $4.5 C Goodwin Road (232nd Avenue to 242nd Avenue Widen from 2 lanes to 3 lanes between 232nd Avenue and 242nd Avenue $3.2 $0.8 D New East-West Collector (extend Ingle Road to 232nd Avenue) Extend Ingle Road south of Goodwin/28th as a 3 lane road to 232nd Avenue $7.4 $5.1 E Improve 232nd Avenue Improve 232nd Avenue to 3 lane Collector from NE 28th Street to 9th Street. Includes 2 new roundabouts at intersection with new East-West Collector and at 9th Street $7.8 $4.7 F Improve/Extend 9th Street Improve 9th Street to 3 lane collector from 232nd Avenue to existing terminus and extend to new 242nd Avenue Extension $3.7 $2.9 G Extend 242nd Avenue south to 9th Street Extend and widen to 3 lanes between 28th to 9th Street $9.5 $4.5 H New East-West Arterial New 3 lane roadway between 9th Street and SR 500/Everett Street $11.5 $9.0 I Widen NE Everett Street Widen from 2 lanes to 3 lanes between 35th Avenue and the new East- West Arterial $4.7 $3.6 S 192nd-Goodwin Connector Camas share (39%) of potential connection between 192nd and Goodwin. Specific project and alignment to be determined. (North proportionate cost only) $2.8 $0.9 North Roadway Projects $61.9 $40.5 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Element Improvement Project Improvement Total Construction Project Cost (millions) TIF Eligible Cost (millions) J Woodburn Drive (Greg Reservoir area) New 2 lane roadway between 15th Street and 283rd Avenue. $5.3 $3.8 K 23rd Street Realignment Realign 23rd Street east of 283rd Avenue to intersect with new East-West Collector $0.6 $0.5 L Friberg (1st Street to 13th Street) Widen from 2 lanes to 3 lanes between 1st Street and 13th Street $5.0 $3.9 M Extend Camas Meadows Drive Extend Camas Meadows Drive from Payne Street to Lake Road as a three lane collector, includes signal modification at Lake/1st/Parker $3.8 $2.9 N 38th Avenue Extension New 3 lane roadway between 650 feet east of Bybee and 500 feet east of 192nd $2.7 $2.0 O Bybee Realignment Realign Bybee between NW 199th and SE 20th $1.2 $1.0 P Widen 38th Avenue (West) (650 feet east of Bybee to Parker) Widen from 2 lanes to 3 lanes between 650 feet east of Bybee and Parker Street $4.7 $3.7 Q Widen 38th Avenue (East) (Parker Street to 800 feet west of Dahlia) Widen from 2 lanes to 3 lanes between Parker Street and Astor Street $2.9 $2.2 R Goodwin Road (Friberg Road to Lacamas Creek) Widen from 2 to5 lanes between Friberg Street and Ingle Road and Lacamas Creek $5.9 $4.8 S 192nd-Goodwin Connector Camas share (39%) of potential connection between 192nd and Goodwin. Specific project and alignment to be determined. (South proportionate cost only) $4.0 $1.3 South Roadway Projects $36.1 $26.1 Total Roadway Projects (North + South) $98.0 $66.6 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Element Improvement Project Improvement Total Construction Project Cost (millions) TIF Eligible Cost (millions) 1 242nd Avenue/Goodwin/28th Install a traffic signal. Add SB left turn lane. $0.5 $0.14 2 Ingle Road/28th Street Install a traffic signal. $0.25 $0.25 3 232nd Avenue/22nd Street Install roundabout $0.5 $0.27 4 232nd Avenue/9th Street Install roundabout $0.5 $0.50 5 SR 500/New Road (242nd Avenue Extension) Install traffic signal $0.25 $0.25 6 SR 500/Leadbetter Install median, converting intersection to right-in/right-out only access $0.05 $0.05 North Intersection Projects $2.05 $1.45 9 Camas Meadows Drive/Goodwin Road Install traffic signal. $0.25 $0.25 10 Lake Road/Sierra Street Install traffic signal. $0.25 $0.25 11 Lake Road/Everett Street/ SR 500 Install roundabout with two approach lanes on west, east and south legs, and one approach lane on north leg due to bridge limitations to north. $2.0 $2.0 12 14th/Everett/SR 500 Install barrier restricting access to intersection from south and west approaches. $0.05 $0.05 13 6th Avenue/Norwood Street Install traffic signal $0.25 $0.25 14 Payne Road/ Pacific Rim Boulevard Install Traffic Signal $0.25 $0.25 15 Brady Road/16th Avenue Install Traffic Signal $0.25 $0.25 16 Parker Street/ Pacific Rim Boulevard Install Traffic Signal $0.25 $0.25 South Intersection Projects $3.55 $3.55 Total Cost of Intersection Improvement Projects $5.6 $5.0 Right-of-Way Costs $32.3 $8.0 Total TIF Improvement Cost (Roadway + Intersection) $135.9 $79.6 DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S NO SCALE10FigureLEGEND00City of CamasTIF PROJECT LOCATIONSA00- Roadway Projects- Intersection Projects00North District TIF Projects- Roadway Projects- Intersection Projects00South District TIF Projects500145005005001487291410121113141516356NOPQSSRABDCEGFHIJKLMNOPQAPXXSLAKE RDLAKERDST6TH AV ADA M S S T6TH AV5TH AV4TH AV2ND AVUNION STSHEPHERDRD6TH ST4TH ST1ST AVDIVISION STBENTON ST19TH AV19TH AV18THAV28TH AV18THBLVDPACIFIC RIMPAYN E20TH ST38TH1ST ST43RDAV15TH STRDAVRD 18TH AV23RD AVAV16TH AVFORESTHOM EFARGOST 10THAV7THAV6THAV5THAVIVYSTLEWIS & CLARK HWYEVERGREENHWYBRADYMcINTOSHRDRD RDSTSTSTASTORSTASTORSIERRASIERRASTSTPARKER192ND202NDAV13TH STAVRD6TH AVHWY14TH AV43RD AVRD283RDAVEVERETT RD267THAV218TH AVLEWIS & CLARK HWYColumbia RiverLacamasLake232NDAV7TH ST GARFIELD DALL A S S T 28TH STI ST3RD AV ST NORWOODST23RD STX192nd to GoodwinConnector Area Chapter 3: TIF Structure May 2012 Page 39 TIF Cost Comparison The cost of transportation improvements in the current TIF Update is expected to be about $100 million in today’s dollars, not including right-of-way costs. This reflects anticipated growth related needs through 2035. Previous project improvement costs were developed as part of three different projects: Camas TIF Update (2003): about $27 million in 2003 (plus right-of-way costs) North UGA Transportation Improvement Framework Plan: about $119 million in 2007 (plus right-of-way costs) Greg Reservoir Improvements: about $3.94million in 2005 (includes only TIF eligible costs, right-of-way costs would be additional) The current TIF Update would reflect a combination of the three as well as any new improvements identified. While construction costs increased since 2003, they have also come down, particularly after 2008. Cost estimates across all time periods listed above would be relatively comparable. While the current TIF update costs appear to be lower than the three plans previously developed, it should be considered that some projects previously identified have already been constructed or are underway (previous cost estimate shown): 1st Street/Lake Road – constructed (~$3.0 million) Leadbetter Road – constructed (~$3.8 million) SR 14 – project underway (~1.8 million contribution) Other projects are not included, for a variety of reasons: 18th Street Corridor – 192nd to Goodwin: It is recognized that some sort of improvement is necessary to provide additional capacity between 192nd and Goodwin. This area is outside of the Camas UGA and there are multiple options for providing the needed capacity. It could be a new corridor along the 18th Street alignment, widening of 13th Street, or some combination of the two. (~$7.8 million) 6th Avenue restriping/Road Diet: ($.71 million) 38th Avenue Extension (Astor to Sierra): ($2.5 million) Extend Camas Meadows Drive: (~$1.8 million) Widen and realign Camas Meadows Drive to 1st/Lake/Parker: (~$4.5 million) Widen Crown Road: (~$14.2 million) Other projects were modified: NE 28th Street between 232nd and 242nd (reduced from 5-lane section to 3-lane section) (~$5.9 million before vs. ~$3.7 million for the current project) 38th Avenue Widening (Parker to Astor): ($3.1 million) – the scope of this project was reduced to include the area between Parker and approximately 800 feet west of Dahlia Street, reducing the overall cost slightly. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 3: TIF Structure May 2012 Page 40 CHAPTER 3: TIF STRUCTURE The current traffic impact fee calculation methodology has been utilized since 2003. The basis of the calculation is the assessment of PM peak hour vehicle trips from the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation: An ITE Informational Report and a cost rate applied to each trip-end on a citywide basis. Chapter 5 of the previous TIF study provides background into the basis of the TIF. The following sections summarize the key components of the staff’s recommended proposed TIF update: TIF will be collected based on PM peak hour trip generation rates Two TIF districts will be formed (see Figure 11) with project costs allocated either to the North district or the South district, with the exception of the 192nd/Goodwin connector project, which would be allocated between the districts proportionate to their use of the connector, based on growth. TIF will fund curb-to-curb plus storm sewer costs TIF will fund right-of-way outside the UGA proportionate to the expected Camas share of each project TIF will fund 20% of right-of-way inside the UGA TIF costs will be indexed at 3.9% per year, with new rates taking effect the first of each year Table 10 summarizes staff’s recommendation and the anticipated TIF fee associated with this recommendation, along with adjustments that would be made based upon a 60% reduction factor (as described previously). Table 10: Staff Recommended TIF Fee TIF Fee Summary North South Curb-to-Curb+Storm+ROW* $10,619 $4,042 60% reduction Factor -$4,248 -$1,617 2011 Net Rate $6,371 $2,425 2012 Net Rate $6,620 $2,520 2013Net Rate $6,878 $2,618 2014 Net Rate $7,146 $2,720 2015 Net Rate $7,425 $2,826 2016 Net Rate $7,715 $2,936 2017 Net Rate $8,015 $3,051 2018 Net Rate $8,328 $3,170 2019 Net Rate $8,653 $3,294 * Includes ROW outside the UGA + 20% of ROW inside UGA DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S 494 492 488 900 490 441 489 484 632 486 392 493 483 487 429 499 315 659 482 491 631 437 430 247 439 300 301 279 275 278 302 424 397 243 427 418 432 249 426 248 420 395 969 977 958 264 394 651 393 433 263 244 299 438 246 653480 485 298 901 953 440 238 419652 481 273 434 971 952 313 915 922 415 423 926 912 428 956 411 959 944 314 410 425 285 272 416 259 400 414 935 261 963 401 398 274 924 245 262 422 965 961 413 421 931 962 921 630 934 260 277 967 629 949 925 903 902 911 276 923 258 947 916 417 909 978 950 954 412 951 976 955 968 284 408 937 975 939 946 948 435 940 406 913 908 402 964 399 257 323 930 929 914 945 941 910 271 972904 431 938 957 409 396 932 907 407 928 974 905 405 431 920 933 943 936 917918 919 942 966 927 270 906 973 403 404 970 242 297 296 256 14 EC B 14 EB 14 WB 1ST J LAK E192ND T BLA I R I G164TH18TH Q162ND172ND 6THY 32ND34TH A O W EVERGREE N S 292NDPARKER283RDR IN G L E 232NDLM F 23RD EVERETTH4THMILL PLAIN 3RD K267THUBRADY176TH ADDY LA C A M A S IN D E X 38TH 261STCROWNWASHOUGAL RIVERPACIFIC RIM SIERRA160THLE A D B E T T E R STAUFFER D X242ND V 29TH IRELAND ZGOODWIN 27TH252NDMCINTOSH 30THBROWN175TH249TH187TH SHEPHERD155TH 40TH 2ND 44TH 14TH AMMETER11TH REILLY19TH WYLIE46TH DAHLIA43RD 37TH 293RDPJULIA316TH35THFISHER303RD7TH BRUNNER 10THIONE277THZEEK 319THHATHAWAY 271STJ O Y166TH 327TH5TH244TH CAVITT52 N D R O B I N S O N COFFEYHOOD22NDPAYNE9THDALLAS167THKROHN BAYPOINT272ND15TH 28TH 24TH DEL P8TH MCGILLIVRAY 195TH314THWEAKLEY 281STFO R E S T H O M E O A K201ST42ND 36TH VILLAGE WOODBURNGEORGE 48TH FARG O222ND 269THIVY322NDKENT20TH BYBEE ED M U N D S NASTOR320THVAN VLEET177THCASCADE305THLOGANHILL259TH335TH332ND39TH 49TH 21ST STILES16TH 328TH326TH17TH 310TH179TH60TH NOBLE 284TH13TH169TH FRIBERG-STRUNKWOOD P O L K 25TH 185TH154TH238TH286TH246THJAMES181STALPINE196THS U N R I S E EL REY302ND33R D 248THTECH CENTERDRE S S E R BENTONHAYES189TH168THBASS47TH UNION233RDALEXANDRA COOPER274TH257TH171ST318THWHITMANNOURS E 31ST TR U M A N BIRCH 41ST12TH 247TH304TH202NDDO G W O O D 50TH LEBRAUN276TH45TH DEERFERNMATNEY156TH273RD300TH330TH312TH174TH191STLECHNER329TH194THTREEIFIC163RD CLIFFSIDE178TH289TH157THMARINA WILL O W SQUIRE182ND282ND26TH 199TH278TH299TH307THUTAH288TH161STPERRY165TH193RD229TH337TH159THINGLEWOODOSTENSO N C A N Y O N186TH ELM180THMAPLE275TH184TH158TH 265THKLICKITAT75TH190TH331ST245TH295TH313TH170TH237THNIGHTSHADE188TH270THVALLEY77THSTRONG183RD C O U N T R Y FORDADAMSAS H FRONTFERNRIDGEPARKJACKSONEL L IO T QUARTZ173RD297THVIEW RIDGEOREGON180TH15TH9TH177TH V 14TH 21ST 9TH17TH 35TH41ST 31ST 176TH14 332ND3RD Y A 9THU I 12TH LACAMAS 34TH6TH 172ND29TH 3RD11TH 47TH 25TH 43RD 35TH3R D 18TH B 6TH157TH P 13TH 169THHH191ST36TH J 34TH 182ND42ND 39TH 47TH K7TH R 27TH23RD161ST45TH 14TH36TH12TH 25TH 29TH 165TH38TH39TH 8TH 38TH17TH242ND 8TH37TH 3RD 43RD 159THUTAHF L A176TH18TH 12TH 48TH 6TH 187TH14TH 1ST A178TH34TH 4TH 3RD 16TH 38TH184TH9TH 11TH 20TH 41ST29TH156TH 36TH5T H175TH 30TH 10TH 16TH 35TH 36TH V H12TH5TH 20TH15TH F164TH31ST171ST25TH6TH R 27TH Y 15TH 164TH13TH 43RD 15TH X 15TH157TH 15TH 29TH 19TH 9TH6TH 16TH 28TH 7TH 29TH 159TH3RD32ND27TH 162ND35TH J 40TH 18TH31ST 277TH267TH20TH T 16TH 11TH162ND3RD G R 28TH 9TH 165TH5TH 36TH A13TH156THA 5TH 6TH32ND I 25TH 9TH 179TH10TH 31ST155TH12TH S D157TH44TH 40TH 5TH 13TH 42ND 11TH14TH 330THE 44TH 16TH 1ST274TH242NDU304THIVY30TH 9TH 49TH 168TH18TH 14TH16TH H X 6TH 17TH12TH167TH 46TH 8TH 6TH4TH 252ND1ST S 42ND 3RD 22ND 3RD 25TH 155TH12TH 5TH G 23RD 20TH 15TH 38TH 16TH 45TH 9TH 6TH6TH 312TH23RD 35TH 28TH 177TH1ST9TH IVY 38TH 22 N D 11TH 20TH P V 9T H 21ST 10TH 9TH23RD 168TH2ND I 39TH166TH6TH 3RD 45TH 6TH 9TH154TH 22ND33 2 N D 5TH 15TH 12TH12TH 27TH 335THW 31ST 5TH 28TH2ND164TH12TH 5TH U 26TH 34TH 31ST 186TH17TH P 29THP 27TH IVY14 35TH 9TH18TH 38TH 28TH J 9TH 14 M 22ND Y312TH X K 6TH 8TH 319TH307TH3RD 7TH 166TH1ST2ND 14 33RD L 8TH 27TH 34THJ2ND237THI 6TH 32N D 7TH 14TH 14TH C F 31ST 15TH 36TH 10TH 24TH 2ND 15TH 16TH Z 2 7 2ND 24TH182ND11TH 28TH 16TH 6TH 10TH 38TH 23RD 20TH 14TH 34TH T 30TH 27TH 27TH I 39TH 36TH 23RD R 6TH 14 I 6TH 15TH302NDLegend City Limits North District Camas UGA Camas TAZs ± Figure 11Proposed TIF Districts Chapter 3: TIF Structure May 2012 Page 42 Recommended TIF Structure Summary Table 11 summarizes the recommended TIF structure. Table 11: TIF Structure Summary TIF Element Basis Land Use Categories Latest Edition of ITE Trip Generation: An ITE Informational Report Trip Generation Based upon highest one hour trip rate in the 4 PM to 6 PM time period from ITE Trip Generation: An ITE Informational Report Pass-by and Diverted Linked Trip Adjustment Reductions allowed for pass-by and diverted linked trips for land use codes as documented in the Trip Generation Handbook, or with data approved by the City Engineer Trip Length Not Included Area of Coverage 2 Districts (North District and South District) per Figure 11 Point of TIF Collection Building Permit issuance or as otherwise provided by code TIF Project Priorities Set by the City of Camas Adopted CFP, 6-year street plan, and annual budget. Inflation Use Washington State Department of Transportation Construction Cost Indices to index TIF as noted in the TIF Rates Alternatives Analysis Memo (see appendix). Changes in Trip Rates Where a use is not addressed in the ITE Trip Generation: An ITE Report, the applicant may be requested to provide research counts of comparable sites, per ITE recommended practice Credits Only for construction projects listed in the TIF. Credits not issued unless work is completed. Credits will be issued based on the cost estimate of the TIF project, the reduction factor, and the TIF rate multiplier. When projects are partially completed, a prorated credit based on percentage of the TIF cost estimate will be applied. Exemptions Per Camas Municipal Code. Appeals Approved or denied by the Board of Adjustment. Supporting Policy Recommendations Reimbursement Costs Washington state law allows for the collection of some reimbursement costs within the TIF. A bond has been taken out against the TIF to build the previously completed Parker Street and Lake Road projects. The current balance of the bond debt is $3,077,193.67. Since the bond was taken out with the intent of paying it back using TIF funds, this amount is included in the updated TIF. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Chapter 3: TIF Structure May 2012 Page 44 Late Comer’s Agreements Where projects are undertaken and the timing of development does not match with the need for the improvement, the City may undertake the full street improvement and assess late comers agreements with fronting property owners that, at the time, do not participate in funding their share of the fronting improvements costs. At the time this fronting land eventually develops, the City would collect the equivalent balance of roadway improvement costs through the late comer’s agreement. This would assure that the TIF is financially solvent and that the fair cost of the street improvements is allocated appropriately to fronting properties – even though at the time of improvement some of the properties are not ready to develop. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Appendix May 2012 Page 1 APPENDICES Appendix A: Traffic Counts Appendix B: Existing Level of Service Analysis Appendix C: Existing Signal Warrants Appendix D: Focus-Area Mesoscopic Forecasting Methodology Memo Appendix E: Land Use Assumptions (by TAZ) Appendix F: Future (2035) Level of Service Analysis Appendix G: TIF Rate Alternatives Analysis Memo Appendix H: Future (2035) Improved Level of Service Analysis Appendix I: Future (2035) Signal Warrants Appendix J: Cost Estimates DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX B EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX C EXISTING SIGNAL WARR ANTS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX D FOCUS-AREA MESOSCOPIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY MEMO DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX E LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS BY TAZ (TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS ZONE) DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX F FUTURE (2035) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX G FUTURE (2035) SIGNAL WARRANTS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX H TIF RATE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS MEMO DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX I FUTURE (2035) IMPROVED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX J COST ESTIMATES DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Appendix City of Camas Traffic Impact Fee Update Prepared by May 2012 Prepared for City of Camas Report for SHINv ' Appendix May 2012 Page 1 APPENDICES Appendix A: Traffic Counts Appendix B: Existing Level of Service Analysis Appendix C: Existing Signal Warrants Appendix D: Focus-Area Mesoscopic Forecasting Methodology Memo Appendix E: Land Use Assumptions (by TAZ) Appendix F: Future (2035) Level of Service Analysis Appendix G: TIF Rate Alternatives Analysis Memo Appendix H: Future (2035) Improved Level of Service Analysis Appendix I: Future (2035) Signal Warrants Appendix J: Cost Estimates DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Dallas St -- 3rd Ave QC JOB #:10624503 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Dallas St (Northbound) Dallas St (Southbound) 3rd Ave (Eastbound) 3rd Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 5 12 2 0 5 4 2 0 1 29 9 0 2 12 4 0 87 4:05 PM 9 13 4 0 4 5 1 0 1 20 3 0 5 16 5 0 86 4:10 PM 9 9 1 0 2 9 0 0 1 20 7 0 6 18 9 0 91 4:15 PM 8 9 1 0 7 9 2 0 1 28 8 0 4 19 6 0 102 4:20 PM 1 12 6 0 4 8 0 0 1 22 5 0 5 22 4 0 90 4:25 PM 5 10 1 0 4 5 0 0 0 28 8 0 2 25 5 0 93 4:30 PM 5 20 4 0 4 5 2 0 1 25 6 0 3 14 7 0 96 4:35 PM 8 11 6 0 3 6 0 0 1 27 8 0 2 26 7 0 105 4:40 PM 6 14 2 0 3 7 1 0 1 32 3 0 4 26 6 0 105 4:45 PM 3 10 3 0 9 6 1 0 2 27 7 0 3 17 6 0 94 4:50 PM 5 11 5 0 8 8 2 0 2 30 5 0 0 15 6 0 97 4:55 PM 6 7 3 0 3 4 1 0 1 36 8 0 3 10 11 0 93 1139 5:00 PM 5 16 4 0 7 11 4 0 1 36 6 0 5 17 7 0 119 1171 5:05 PM 4 8 3 0 8 11 3 0 2 27 11 0 4 14 8 0 103 1188 5:10 PM 8 15 3 0 4 7 4 0 2 33 6 0 2 19 6 0 109 1206 5:15 PM 9 16 4 0 6 4 4 0 0 30 7 0 2 15 8 0 105 1209 5:20 PM 7 7 3 0 5 3 1 0 1 29 3 0 2 18 3 0 82 1201 5:25 PM 5 15 2 0 2 10 3 0 0 30 9 0 3 16 8 0 103 1211 5:30 PM 6 12 2 0 7 4 2 0 2 33 7 0 1 13 3 0 92 1207 5:35 PM 2 5 3 0 3 6 1 0 4 29 8 0 2 16 6 0 85 1187 5:40 PM 7 12 1 0 5 8 2 0 3 25 3 0 2 13 6 0 87 1169 5:45 PM 3 7 3 0 4 7 4 0 1 24 10 0 3 10 6 0 82 1157 5:50 PM 2 14 4 0 4 7 4 0 2 36 8 0 4 13 6 0 104 1164 5:55 PM 6 11 1 0 3 6 4 0 1 27 12 0 0 14 4 0 89 1160 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 84 156 40 0 72 88 44 0 16 360 96 0 32 192 88 0 1268 Heavy Trucks 8 4 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Pedestrians 16 4 8 12 40 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 67 131 36 628331 19 362 83 29 176 78 234 176 464 283 228 195 460 274 0.98 0.91 0.84 0.86 0.91 4.5 1.5 8.3 0.01.20.0 0.0 1.9 1.2 3.4 0.6 0.0 3.4 0.6 1.7 0.7 0.9 1.5 2.2 1.5 13 1 14 10 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r* W*n r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Union -- SR-14 QC JOB #:10624504 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Union (Northbound) Union (Southbound) SR-14 (Eastbound) SR-14 (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 1 0 0 0 5 2 16 0 5 82 0 0 1 50 9 0 171 4:05 PM 0 1 1 0 7 2 9 0 7 59 4 0 0 60 6 0 156 4:10 PM 1 0 2 0 8 1 3 0 4 92 2 0 0 76 14 0 203 4:15 PM 1 2 1 0 15 0 12 0 4 83 1 0 0 60 7 0 186 4:20 PM 1 0 0 0 7 1 10 0 5 85 1 0 0 63 7 0 180 4:25 PM 1 0 2 0 7 1 6 0 4 94 0 0 0 60 11 0 186 4:30 PM 3 1 0 0 8 0 11 0 8 86 0 0 0 40 13 0 170 4:35 PM 1 0 0 0 6 0 8 0 3 92 0 0 0 60 4 0 174 4:40 PM 1 2 0 0 8 1 13 0 10 82 2 0 1 58 6 0 184 4:45 PM 0 1 0 0 4 2 4 0 7 91 0 0 0 68 3 0 180 4:50 PM 2 0 2 0 6 0 7 0 3 92 0 0 1 72 6 0 191 4:55 PM 0 1 1 0 3 0 8 0 4 101 0 0 0 60 5 0 183 2164 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5 3 14 0 9 85 1 0 0 61 9 0 187 2180 5:05 PM 1 0 0 0 19 0 10 0 9 73 2 0 3 57 7 0 181 2205 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 5 1 8 0 11 96 1 0 0 78 7 0 207 2209 5:15 PM 0 2 0 0 7 1 4 0 7 78 0 0 0 77 7 0 183 2206 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 4 0 11 93 3 0 0 53 3 0 173 2199 5:25 PM 0 0 1 0 6 0 7 0 9 79 3 0 0 61 6 0 172 2185 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 7 0 5 89 0 0 1 59 6 0 173 2188 5:35 PM 1 0 0 0 10 1 8 0 7 87 3 0 1 68 3 0 189 2203 5:40 PM 1 1 0 0 5 1 5 0 4 86 3 0 0 61 6 0 173 2192 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 7 1 5 0 3 75 2 0 0 45 8 0 146 2158 5:50 PM 2 1 1 0 7 0 7 0 6 75 1 0 0 46 6 0 152 2119 5:55 PM 0 0 1 0 3 1 10 0 6 87 1 0 0 43 3 0 155 2091 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 4 8 0 0 124 8 88 0 108 988 12 0 12 848 84 0 2284 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 4 12 36 0 0 28 0 80 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 5 4 4 85887 82 1034 18 6 752 73 13 180 1134 831 159 32 1123 844 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.82 0.94 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.40.05.7 8.5 2.3 0.0 0.0 3.9 1.4 0.0 3.9 2.7 3.6 5.0 0.0 2.3 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r* W*n r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Lake Rd -- Payne St/218th Ave QC JOB #:10624506 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Lake Rd (Northbound) Lake Rd (Southbound) Payne St/218th Ave (Eastbound) Payne St/218th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 28 0 0 63 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 41 0 0 0 25 2 0 71 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 21 6 0 67 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 44 0 0 0 20 3 1 72 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 41 0 0 0 29 5 0 80 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 28 1 0 53 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 30 7 1 81 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 31 0 0 0 31 4 0 69 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 2 40 0 0 0 27 4 0 79 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 0 32 0 0 0 22 2 0 64 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 0 0 43 0 0 0 16 0 0 68 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 37 0 1 0 22 3 0 64 831 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 41 0 0 0 32 4 0 82 850 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 38 0 0 0 42 4 0 88 867 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 41 0 0 0 34 2 0 85 885 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 48 0 1 0 37 2 0 95 908 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 21 5 0 71 899 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 49 0 0 0 32 2 0 90 936 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 34 3 0 89 944 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 1 50 0 0 0 33 4 0 98 973 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 53 0 0 0 28 3 0 87 981 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 44 0 0 0 24 0 1 74 991 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 33 5 0 75 998 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 40 3 0 80 1014 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 64 0 8 0 4 508 0 4 0 452 32 0 1072 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 8 0 24 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 0 0 6108 6 528 0 1 355 32 0 69 534 388 36 0 590 365 1.00 0.80 0.00 0.96 0.92 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 1 0 0 1 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W 1 ^(* 4>W ^r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Garfield St -- NE 6th Ave QC JOB #:10624507 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Garfield St (Northbound) Garfield St (Southbound) NE 6th Ave (Eastbound) NE 6th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 2 17 0 0 2 18 5 0 6 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 56 4:05 PM 2 28 0 0 0 27 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 0 67 4:10 PM 2 22 0 0 1 28 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 58 4:15 PM 1 14 0 0 0 31 3 0 6 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 59 4:20 PM 3 26 0 0 0 19 2 0 8 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 61 4:25 PM 2 19 0 0 0 25 2 0 4 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 56 4:30 PM 0 15 0 0 0 26 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 47 4:35 PM 1 20 1 0 0 23 4 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 4:40 PM 4 18 0 0 1 30 6 0 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 65 4:45 PM 2 28 0 0 2 23 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 58 4:50 PM 3 16 0 0 2 21 4 0 6 3 3 0 1 2 1 0 62 4:55 PM 3 16 0 0 0 20 2 0 3 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 49 696 5:00 PM 0 24 0 0 1 28 2 0 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 63 703 5:05 PM 2 26 1 0 0 25 3 0 3 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 64 700 5:10 PM 0 22 0 0 0 21 3 0 4 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 55 697 5:15 PM 1 23 0 0 0 22 1 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 53 691 5:20 PM 2 20 0 0 0 30 0 0 8 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 65 695 5:25 PM 1 27 0 0 0 16 4 0 6 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 57 696 5:30 PM 3 24 0 0 0 25 3 0 4 4 2 0 0 2 0 0 67 716 5:35 PM 2 12 1 0 0 28 2 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 51 709 5:40 PM 0 19 0 0 1 29 22 0 5 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 79 723 5:45 PM 3 19 0 0 1 34 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 64 729 5:50 PM 2 21 0 0 1 22 2 0 10 2 4 0 0 1 0 0 65 732 5:55 PM 2 18 0 0 3 15 2 0 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 737 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 12 284 4 0 0 272 28 0 44 4 20 0 0 16 4 0 688 Heavy Trucks 0 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 16 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 20 248 2 529946 58 17 17 3 11 3 270 350 92 17 309 319 24 77 1.00 0.85 0.90 1.00 1.06 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.00.76.5 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.4 1.1 0.0 1.3 0.9 0.0 3.9 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^r*<3- 4>Wf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Everett (SR 500) -- 14th Ave QC JOB #:10624508 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Everett (SR 500) (Northbound) Everett (SR 500) (Southbound) 14th Ave (Eastbound) 14th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 4 0 10 2 0 0 0 3 18 0 54 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 21 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 21 0 56 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 29 0 6 0 8 5 0 0 0 1 12 0 61 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 21 0 3 0 6 3 0 0 0 1 21 0 55 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 14 0 5 0 6 2 0 0 0 1 28 0 56 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 22 0 1 0 12 1 0 0 0 0 22 0 58 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 22 0 4 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 51 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 3 19 0 53 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 25 0 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 0 16 0 55 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 22 0 6 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 23 0 61 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 3 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 22 0 52 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 21 0 6 0 11 2 0 0 0 0 10 0 50 662 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 19 0 3 0 6 2 0 0 0 2 24 0 56 664 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 24 0 3 0 9 1 0 0 0 3 21 0 61 669 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 13 6 0 0 0 2 18 0 57 665 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 19 0 3 0 13 1 0 0 0 2 18 0 56 666 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 20 0 4 0 12 3 0 0 0 0 25 0 64 674 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 16 0 5 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 22 0 50 666 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 20 0 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 1 24 0 57 672 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 24 0 2 0 6 2 0 0 0 2 14 0 50 669 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 44 0 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 16 0 69 683 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 33 0 7 0 6 0 0 0 0 2 17 0 65 687 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 5 0 8 3 0 0 0 1 24 0 58 693 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 12 0 6 0 8 9 0 0 0 1 12 0 48 691 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 244 0 24 0 140 32 0 0 0 28 228 0 696 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 12 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 0 0 275043 101 21 0 0 16 231 0 318 122 247 332 0 296 59 0.71 0.96 0.00 1.00 0.99 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.50.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 1.3 0.0 2.4 1.8 0.0 1.4 0.0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^r*<3- 4>Wf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:2nd Ave/4th St -- Evergreen Hwy/3rd Ave/E St QC JOB #:10624512 CITY/STATE:Camas, WA DATE:6/1/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At 2nd Ave/4th St (Northbound) 2nd Ave/4th St (Southbound) Evergreen Hwy/3rd Ave/E St (Eastbound) Evergreen Hwy/3rd Ave/E St (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 9 0 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 29 8 0 7 29 0 0 90 4:05 PM 5 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 3 33 3 0 0 30 1 0 81 4:10 PM 7 0 8 0 0 2 0 0 1 40 8 0 5 29 0 0 100 4:15 PM 10 0 7 0 2 0 0 0 3 33 2 0 2 29 0 0 88 4:20 PM 5 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 1 25 7 0 2 31 0 0 76 4:25 PM 8 0 5 0 1 0 2 0 1 41 4 0 3 35 0 0 100 4:30 PM 5 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 30 9 0 4 29 0 0 84 4:35 PM 6 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 4 36 4 0 4 31 0 0 93 4:40 PM 6 1 8 0 0 0 3 0 2 44 6 0 3 19 1 0 93 4:45 PM 7 1 7 0 1 1 1 0 2 50 5 0 2 32 0 0 109 4:50 PM 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 3 38 5 0 4 29 2 0 90 4:55 PM 5 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 1 49 4 0 3 34 2 0 105 1109 5:00 PM 6 0 12 0 2 2 1 0 3 46 2 0 2 29 1 0 106 1125 5:05 PM 3 2 4 0 0 0 3 0 2 34 5 0 3 37 0 0 93 1137 5:10 PM 4 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 44 5 0 3 26 1 0 89 1126 5:15 PM 4 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 1 54 4 0 7 26 0 0 101 1139 5:20 PM 6 0 5 0 2 1 0 0 4 54 7 0 2 34 3 0 118 1181 5:25 PM 6 0 4 0 2 0 1 0 1 47 3 0 6 32 0 0 102 1183 5:30 PM 7 3 7 0 3 1 3 0 2 44 8 0 5 29 1 0 113 1212 5:35 PM 6 0 4 0 2 0 2 0 2 57 4 0 3 32 1 0 113 1232 5:40 PM 9 0 7 0 1 0 1 0 1 42 7 0 3 26 1 0 98 1237 5:45 PM 2 1 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 37 7 0 3 29 1 0 87 1215 5:50 PM 8 0 3 0 2 2 2 0 3 34 2 0 3 32 3 0 94 1219 5:55 PM 3 1 3 0 1 0 2 0 0 32 5 0 5 13 2 0 67 1181 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 44 12 44 0 0 0 20 0 16 528 56 0 52 356 4 0 1132 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 8 Pedestrians 0 0 0 4 4 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 59 7 66 12715 22 546 61 44 363 13 132 34 629 420 42 112 624 437 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.07 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.00.06.7 0.0 1.8 3.3 0.0 2.8 0.0 1.5 2.9 1.9 2.4 0.0 1.8 1.6 3.0 3 7 1 1 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r* W*n r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:192nd Ave -- Brady Rd QC JOB #:10624509 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At 192nd Ave (Northbound) 192nd Ave (Southbound) Brady Rd (Eastbound) Brady Rd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 58 18 0 3 51 0 0 0 2 2 0 16 0 9 0 159 4:05 PM 2 47 23 0 3 61 0 0 0 0 2 0 16 0 6 0 160 4:10 PM 1 78 26 0 5 54 0 0 0 2 1 0 16 0 4 0 187 4:15 PM 1 69 19 0 5 48 0 0 1 2 0 0 23 0 3 0 171 4:20 PM 2 67 32 0 4 51 0 0 0 0 1 0 22 1 3 0 183 4:25 PM 2 69 35 0 6 65 0 0 0 0 2 0 15 0 1 0 195 4:30 PM 3 67 34 0 6 74 0 0 0 1 2 0 14 0 1 0 202 4:35 PM 0 52 25 0 6 60 0 1 1 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 173 4:40 PM 1 55 29 0 4 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 1 0 156 4:45 PM 1 72 34 0 4 52 0 0 0 1 3 0 21 0 5 0 193 4:50 PM 1 61 33 0 5 50 0 0 0 0 1 0 24 1 1 0 177 4:55 PM 1 67 35 0 4 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 1 0 177 2133 5:00 PM 0 60 26 0 5 69 0 0 1 0 0 0 18 0 1 0 180 2154 5:05 PM 0 67 30 0 4 72 0 1 1 1 5 0 23 0 6 0 210 2204 5:10 PM 1 54 24 0 5 80 0 0 1 0 0 0 32 0 3 0 200 2217 5:15 PM 0 63 31 0 7 66 0 0 1 0 0 0 21 0 5 0 194 2240 5:20 PM 2 74 41 0 4 65 0 0 1 0 2 0 22 0 2 0 213 2270 5:25 PM 0 88 37 0 6 68 0 0 1 0 0 0 26 0 4 0 230 2305 5:30 PM 0 85 43 0 1 57 0 0 0 0 1 0 18 0 5 0 210 2313 5:35 PM 0 84 38 0 3 59 0 0 2 1 2 0 34 0 4 0 227 2367 5:40 PM 1 76 40 0 3 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 3 0 209 2420 5:45 PM 0 83 41 0 1 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 211 2438 5:50 PM 0 69 34 0 2 62 1 0 0 0 1 0 16 0 4 0 189 2450 5:55 PM 0 67 39 0 6 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 2 0 182 2455 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 4 736 340 0 64 872 0 4 12 4 20 0 304 0 56 0 2416 Heavy Trucks 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 6 862 419 497640 8 2 11 281 1 35 1287 813 21 317 906 1056 469 7 0.58 0.88 1.00 0.86 1.01 50.0 1.9 0.2 2.01.20.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.8 100.0 0.0 1.6 1.2 4.8 2.8 1.8 1.6 0.6 57.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 1 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W I J l i l ^f J Wutrtg ^r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Lechner -- 3rd Ave QC JOB #:10624510 CITY/STATE:Camas, WA DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Lechner (Northbound) Lechner (Southbound) 3rd Ave (Eastbound) 3rd Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 10 4 7 0 5 3 3 0 3 25 8 0 9 21 1 0 99 4:05 PM 6 6 10 0 2 4 4 0 5 28 6 0 9 24 2 0 106 4:10 PM 11 2 5 0 2 2 2 0 5 31 13 0 6 20 1 0 100 4:15 PM 6 6 4 0 0 2 2 0 6 30 3 0 2 15 2 0 78 4:20 PM 7 7 10 0 0 1 0 0 5 22 10 0 9 27 1 0 99 4:25 PM 5 4 9 0 1 3 3 0 4 30 6 0 6 21 2 0 94 4:30 PM 6 8 5 0 3 6 4 0 5 36 8 0 5 25 1 0 112 4:35 PM 10 4 11 0 3 1 2 0 3 30 10 0 8 22 0 0 104 4:40 PM 10 9 11 0 2 2 0 0 8 26 9 0 3 15 1 0 96 4:45 PM 13 1 8 0 1 5 2 0 3 21 5 0 4 16 1 0 80 4:50 PM 5 7 8 0 1 2 4 0 6 30 5 0 6 16 5 0 95 4:55 PM 7 0 10 0 6 3 3 0 4 27 6 0 6 25 0 0 97 1160 5:00 PM 13 6 5 0 2 2 3 0 2 32 5 0 3 15 1 0 89 1150 5:05 PM 7 3 7 0 0 0 1 0 5 24 8 0 10 22 1 0 88 1132 5:10 PM 5 1 6 0 5 4 8 0 6 22 8 0 2 24 0 0 91 1123 5:15 PM 4 3 10 0 1 3 4 0 9 28 4 0 4 21 6 0 97 1142 5:20 PM 6 6 2 0 2 4 3 0 3 29 6 0 5 14 0 0 80 1123 5:25 PM 1 3 10 0 1 2 4 0 8 35 8 0 3 16 3 0 94 1123 5:30 PM 5 6 9 0 0 5 3 0 2 19 3 0 4 16 0 0 72 1083 5:35 PM 5 3 5 0 2 1 3 0 5 27 6 0 6 30 1 0 94 1073 5:40 PM 7 5 3 0 0 2 1 0 0 21 4 0 4 18 0 0 65 1042 5:45 PM 6 4 3 0 1 1 2 0 3 28 9 0 6 22 3 0 88 1050 5:50 PM 7 1 2 0 1 2 1 0 3 25 3 0 3 23 0 0 71 1026 5:55 PM 8 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 5 24 4 0 5 15 2 0 68 997 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 64 28 92 0 24 28 52 0 80 296 80 0 64 268 28 0 1104 Heavy Trucks 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 12 Pedestrians 0 12 8 8 28 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 71 47 78 212939 53 322 72 59 239 20 196 89 447 318 120 160 421 349 0.98 0.88 1.00 0.86 0.95 5.6 0.0 2.6 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.9 5.6 1.7 2.9 0.0 3.1 0.0 1.6 2.5 0.0 3.1 1.2 3.2 0 5 6 4 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r* W•t rtf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Whitney St/3rd St -- C St QC JOB #:10624511 CITY/STATE:Camas, WA DATE:6/1/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Whitney St/3rd St (Northbound) Whitney St/3rd St (Southbound) C St (Eastbound) C St (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 10 0 13 7 0 0 0 7 2 0 42 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 0 8 12 0 0 0 4 1 0 34 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 13 10 0 0 0 10 3 0 49 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 13 11 0 0 0 4 1 0 37 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 8 0 6 6 0 0 0 8 0 0 30 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 7 9 0 0 0 2 1 0 24 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 6 14 0 0 0 11 1 0 42 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 11 10 0 0 0 9 1 0 39 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 0 9 14 0 0 0 8 2 0 43 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 0 9 9 0 0 0 6 1 0 32 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 9 12 0 0 0 7 1 0 35 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 13 13 0 0 0 8 1 0 41 448 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 12 7 0 0 0 10 3 0 45 451 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 18 5 0 0 0 10 0 0 41 458 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 9 0 3 13 0 0 0 6 2 0 35 444 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 0 14 16 0 0 0 4 0 0 41 448 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 8 13 0 0 0 2 0 0 34 452 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 6 6 0 0 0 9 1 0 30 458 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 15 0 14 15 0 0 0 7 1 0 54 470 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 0 8 20 0 0 0 9 1 0 47 478 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 6 0 11 11 0 0 0 6 1 0 38 473 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 7 0 9 13 0 0 0 4 0 0 36 477 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 4 5 0 0 0 5 1 0 23 465 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 12 14 0 0 0 6 1 0 41 465 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 28 0 76 0 140 136 0 0 0 80 8 0 468 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 Pedestrians 0 8 0 0 8 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 0 0 22093 125 144 0 0 82 11 0 115 269 93 136 0 166 175 0.97 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.01.1 0.8 2.1 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.5 3.2 0.7 0.0 1.8 2.3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W 1 ^(* 4>W ^r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:192nd Ave -- 13th St QC JOB #:10624513 CITY/STATE:Camas, WA DATE:6/1/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At 192nd Ave (Northbound) 192nd Ave (Southbound) 13th St (Eastbound) 13th St (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 17 13 0 8 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 11 0 84 4:05 PM 0 40 17 0 3 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 7 0 93 4:10 PM 0 24 10 0 14 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 13 0 92 4:15 PM 0 24 10 0 7 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 7 0 80 4:20 PM 0 29 15 0 3 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 6 0 80 4:25 PM 0 45 20 0 7 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 110 4:30 PM 0 40 20 0 8 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 8 0 109 4:35 PM 0 29 15 0 9 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 5 0 91 4:40 PM 0 40 16 0 5 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 10 0 102 4:45 PM 0 40 10 0 13 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 2 0 104 4:50 PM 0 53 13 0 7 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 9 0 116 4:55 PM 0 49 21 0 11 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 0 127 1188 5:00 PM 0 37 19 0 13 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 18 0 121 1225 5:05 PM 0 40 17 0 9 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 16 0 117 1249 5:10 PM 0 37 24 0 14 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 10 0 130 1287 5:15 PM 0 41 24 0 15 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 7 0 128 1335 5:20 PM 0 48 14 0 9 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 10 0 122 1377 5:25 PM 0 48 24 0 13 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 7 0 127 1394 5:30 PM 0 47 25 0 8 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 9 0 127 1412 5:35 PM 0 38 18 0 9 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 11 0 115 1436 5:40 PM 0 36 21 0 10 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 5 0 123 1457 5:45 PM 0 35 13 0 12 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 11 0 107 1460 5:50 PM 0 46 17 0 10 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 0 124 1468 5:55 PM 0 32 18 0 4 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 8 0 97 1438 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 472 260 0 152 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 0 132 0 1500 Heavy Trucks 0 8 8 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 509 233 1303140 0 0 0 151 0 123 742 444 0 274 632 465 363 0 0.00 0.99 1.00 0.90 0.97 0.0 1.2 1.3 1.51.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.2 1.1 0.0 0.7 1.3 0.6 1.4 0.0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts RANSPORTATION OATA COLLECTION SERV 4>W 1 11 ^r*3- 4*wtrig ^(* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:6th St/Lechner -- C St QC JOB #:10624514 CITY/STATE:Washougal, WA DATE:6/1/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At 6th St/Lechner (Northbound) 6th St/Lechner (Southbound) C St (Eastbound) C St (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 7 3 0 5 8 3 0 3 5 1 0 0 1 4 0 40 4:05 PM 0 15 0 0 8 6 1 0 2 8 0 0 0 3 5 0 48 4:10 PM 0 12 0 0 7 4 5 0 7 8 2 0 0 8 5 0 58 4:15 PM 0 17 1 0 7 6 1 0 3 8 1 0 0 2 3 0 49 4:20 PM 0 10 1 0 8 6 3 0 3 5 1 0 1 9 2 0 49 4:25 PM 2 12 1 0 4 4 1 0 6 3 0 0 1 1 9 0 44 4:30 PM 0 13 2 0 12 4 7 0 5 5 1 0 0 2 10 0 61 4:35 PM 2 14 2 0 7 7 6 0 4 10 0 0 1 6 9 0 68 4:40 PM 0 17 0 0 6 3 2 0 9 3 2 0 0 6 9 0 57 4:45 PM 1 7 0 0 10 10 1 0 6 11 1 0 1 5 6 0 59 4:50 PM 2 12 0 0 7 7 4 0 8 3 0 0 0 4 8 0 55 4:55 PM 1 10 1 0 9 8 5 0 4 10 1 0 1 3 12 0 65 653 5:00 PM 2 13 1 0 10 5 2 0 3 4 1 0 0 5 7 0 53 666 5:05 PM 1 10 0 0 8 11 6 0 2 5 2 0 1 2 6 0 54 672 5:10 PM 2 15 3 0 9 4 2 0 3 11 0 0 0 3 4 0 56 670 5:15 PM 1 10 2 0 15 6 3 0 3 12 0 0 1 4 6 0 63 684 5:20 PM 1 16 1 0 9 5 3 0 7 10 1 0 1 1 5 0 60 695 5:25 PM 1 14 4 0 5 1 4 0 2 5 1 0 1 4 2 0 44 695 5:30 PM 2 9 0 0 3 7 4 0 4 10 1 0 1 4 5 0 50 684 5:35 PM 2 10 1 0 12 6 2 0 10 13 1 0 0 3 5 0 65 681 5:40 PM 2 5 2 0 7 7 1 0 4 11 1 0 0 4 4 0 48 672 5:45 PM 1 5 0 0 12 5 0 0 5 8 0 0 0 3 4 0 43 656 5:50 PM 1 11 1 0 8 6 4 0 3 4 0 0 0 3 7 0 48 649 5:55 PM 1 12 3 0 6 5 2 0 0 11 1 0 1 4 0 0 46 630 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 16 140 20 0 128 84 44 0 32 112 8 0 8 36 64 0 692 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 Pedestrians 0 12 0 0 12 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 18 129 15 1067236 55 102 9 6 40 68 162 214 166 114 252 87 223 94 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.84 0.95 5.6 0.8 0.0 3.82.80.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 1.2 2.8 1.2 3.5 2.0 2.3 2.7 1.1 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^r*<3- 4>Wf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Garfield St -- 3rd Ave QC JOB #:10624501 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Garfield St (Northbound) Garfield St (Southbound) 3rd Ave (Eastbound) 3rd Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 23 0 11 0 2 30 0 0 0 19 15 0 100 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 15 0 18 0 8 30 0 0 0 20 17 0 108 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 26 0 8 0 8 20 0 0 0 29 14 0 105 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 29 0 6 0 3 24 0 0 0 20 15 0 97 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 22 0 7 0 10 30 0 0 0 19 16 0 104 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 18 0 4 0 3 23 0 0 0 21 15 0 84 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 27 0 13 0 6 33 0 0 0 24 10 0 113 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 9 0 7 21 0 0 0 32 10 0 96 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 24 0 11 0 4 30 0 0 0 21 18 0 108 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 16 0 12 0 5 32 0 0 0 21 20 0 106 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 19 0 10 0 5 36 0 0 0 17 6 0 93 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 15 0 8 0 8 39 0 0 0 25 15 0 110 1224 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 28 0 7 0 3 35 0 0 0 20 12 0 105 1229 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 19 0 6 0 8 30 0 0 0 21 16 0 100 1221 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 14 0 9 0 3 31 0 0 0 23 17 0 97 1213 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 5 0 8 42 0 0 0 27 17 0 116 1232 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 21 0 10 0 5 28 0 0 0 17 15 0 96 1224 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 10 0 9 20 0 0 0 20 14 0 90 1230 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 17 0 9 0 5 35 0 0 0 16 14 0 96 1213 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 18 0 8 0 5 30 0 0 0 18 10 0 89 1206 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 19 0 8 0 4 27 0 0 0 19 11 0 88 1186 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 21 0 7 0 5 24 0 0 0 17 19 0 93 1173 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 25 0 7 0 7 28 0 0 0 20 19 0 106 1186 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 13 0 5 0 10 29 0 0 0 18 8 0 83 1159 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 200 0 80 0 76 412 0 0 0 284 200 0 1252 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 0 0 4 0 16 Pedestrians 0 0 0 4 4 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 0 0 225097 68 377 0 0 240 166 0 322 445 406 234 0 602 337 0.91 0.84 0.00 1.00 0.94 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.02.1 1.5 2.7 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.8 0.0 0.6 2.5 1.5 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.5 0 1 3 6 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W S J l ^(- 4>W r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Shepherd Rd -- 3rd Ave QC JOB #:10624502 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:5/26/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Shepherd Rd (Northbound) Shepherd Rd (Southbound) 3rd Ave (Eastbound) 3rd Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 10 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 3 0 10 36 1 0 94 4:05 PM 5 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 33 9 0 10 28 0 0 92 4:10 PM 12 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 7 0 11 44 0 0 113 4:15 PM 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 12 0 12 30 0 0 94 4:20 PM 4 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 1 36 8 0 8 35 0 0 103 4:25 PM 8 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 6 0 9 30 0 0 71 4:30 PM 5 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 35 12 0 7 43 0 0 112 4:35 PM 7 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 5 0 9 36 0 0 90 4:40 PM 5 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 23 8 0 15 32 0 0 89 4:45 PM 5 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 12 0 8 33 0 0 87 4:50 PM 5 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 29 12 0 8 53 0 0 114 4:55 PM 8 1 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 24 8 0 10 46 0 0 104 1163 5:00 PM 6 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 32 9 0 8 38 0 0 96 1165 5:05 PM 6 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 7 0 10 35 0 0 94 1167 5:10 PM 10 0 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 38 5 0 13 37 2 0 112 1166 5:15 PM 3 0 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 27 5 0 4 39 0 0 85 1157 5:20 PM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 9 0 12 41 0 0 91 1145 5:25 PM 4 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 26 6 0 9 34 1 0 88 1162 5:30 PM 6 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2 0 7 29 0 0 71 1121 5:35 PM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 14 0 12 28 0 0 90 1121 5:40 PM 5 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 8 0 8 31 0 0 84 1116 5:45 PM 3 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 7 0 13 38 0 0 111 1140 5:50 PM 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 7 0 10 37 1 0 91 1117 5:55 PM 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 3 0 10 32 0 0 76 1089 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 76 0 68 0 4 4 0 0 0 384 68 0 108 444 8 0 1164 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 4 4 0 24 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 62 1 69 132 2 342 92 114 449 3 132 6 436 566 6 209 412 513 0.96 1.00 0.92 0.75 0.98 1.6 0.0 1.4 0.00.00.0 0.0 2.9 4.3 0.9 2.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.2 1.8 0.0 2.4 2.7 1.9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r* W*n r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Sierra St -- 43rd Ave QC JOB #:10624505 CITY/STATE:Camas , OR DATE:6/2/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Sierra St (Northbound) Sierra St (Southbound) 43rd Ave (Eastbound) 43rd Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 9 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 26 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 8 0 2 0 5 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 24 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 2 0 3 4 0 0 0 2 7 0 25 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 12 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 30 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 8 0 9 2 0 0 0 2 3 0 30 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 8 0 2 0 11 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 25 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 5 0 10 2 0 0 0 1 6 0 31 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 5 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 18 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 0 10 1 0 0 0 2 5 0 28 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 10 0 11 0 8 2 0 0 0 6 5 0 42 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 6 0 29 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 11 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 4 0 26 334 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 9 0 12 2 0 0 0 1 4 0 33 341 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 8 0 6 0 10 3 0 0 0 4 1 0 32 349 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 10 0 6 4 0 0 0 1 3 0 31 355 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 10 0 5 0 11 2 0 0 0 5 4 0 37 362 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 4 8 0 0 0 1 9 0 29 361 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 9 0 2 5 0 0 0 1 4 0 24 360 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 10 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 8 0 33 362 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 6 0 7 5 0 0 0 4 5 0 34 378 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 0 10 6 0 0 0 2 1 0 26 376 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 9 0 2 0 12 2 0 0 0 4 6 0 35 369 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 8 0 9 5 0 0 0 6 6 0 41 381 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 10 7 0 0 0 3 4 0 35 390 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 100 0 84 0 108 36 0 0 0 40 32 0 400 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 0 0 71079 90 48 0 0 26 55 0 150 138 81 145 0 119 105 0.96 1.00 0.00 0.82 0.92 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.01.3 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.7 1.4 1.2 0.7 0.0 1.7 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 1 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W 1 ^(* 4>W ^r* NorthHillsSubdivisionTIACamas,WACDt—"To>\CMCDCMK)4-282/49^32/31^•0/0^144/1184^47/70*4°/°>.CMOIDCM07M-COinoCOCMoo><•pNE43rdAvi><3ProjectSite3x:N-M£f'vcCMsUuCO**£lr,.UJkeStfZCOi<it6/13^39/48*^,<o^CMCOCDCOfOCOK>r~ro4^221/126^^14*"121/205*^,r~r^tor~tnM*2?07JCD5°£>T-roro^52/584-316/342n^o/o119/146*^192/571-47/5^[£_3rdAvCMOOOt-r-14FIGURE42010ExistingTrafficVolumesLEGEND100/128AM/PMPeakHourTrafficVolumes<*NOTTOSCALE310002.0rfgofes.Owg FILE:0714flow.dwgPLOTDATE:04/13/07'SC££&c1*4gCN;VsiNOSCALECOK>roOfO-*JCn^fU-32'VkUr“205SE15tbStreetO'CO*1^—^130SE15thStreetco(O*~cor^m<onNsNrIftr8—716-71If-p>roVco-xjfO~*•p-o>38~*J27-iioioOvl^-«fr^CNCAODCHf*v<r*~COrO*L-26^Ui^_17V7-9IkIkpsaaipswajSE23rdSItrSC2S'SSItrCOrOo*£<vrO£vor-*t<£>—mCOOsfr^csj*£JlJlt'fs.00t"itJlOOr^to<—^O-eh<~tO—CMsS5rCOCO=5=££A>.2Ujr*>o>rnr-iO101«-423V~0CM<0CO^iOfc_4733014^0Jlk21kxveftyeHE3rdAvenvc5t^W£3rdAvenueS£^76—71856—>-15~^w31-71205->W't'COiDOO3~*ly.HE3rdLoopHE3rdLoopffgjgaimmPMPEAKHOURAMPEAKHOURFIGURENOTES:CHARBONNEAUENGINEERINGLLC2007EXISTINGTRAFFICTHEHILLSATROUNDLAKE1PROJECT:07-14 i/iiii;;i(Methodfordeterminingpeakhour:TotatEnteringVotumeTypeofpeakhourbeingreported:IntersectionPeakIIQCJOB#:10436608DATE;6/9/2009LOCATION:NE192ndAve-SE1stStCITY/STATE:Vancouver,WA14Peak-Hour:5:00PM-6:00PMPeak15-Min:5:05PM-5:20PM6821.21.3l4441263962.41.11.0U444WifX.113«4272614«95JI0.8712244367446t.2.74»0.91.941.1Ji4145;4-0.70.94iir1694654r0.040.51.444.24*\QualityCounts754743344f—44800.88883TRANSPORTATIONDATACOLLEcriONSERVICES3i!111sI>:ju t r i f!IJ!<3SE1stSt(Westbound)NE192ndAve(Southbound)LeftThruRightUSE1stSt(Eastbound)5-MlnCountPeriodBeginningAtNE192ndAve(Northbound)HouriyTotalTotals3LeftThruRiahtLeftThruRightU404080804060206030205000LeftThruRightU1331651930111911504:00PM4:05PM4:10PM4:15PM4:20PM4:25PM4:30PM4:35PM4:40PM4:45PM4:50PM4:55PM628;1457•i122109914416533013716101417344!210633ii1767916180208970462013811146270244200730138111151660*32012i:3303fe1216813718601132332105fS16611100-11146320433304158712131350731322212j'15210161506164016S3421h181151690838300462081848131561461384003438172if?:renD;!-3S*££1{M3Jmr.\imm!j>iWestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundPeak15-MinFlowrates.LeftThruRightLeftThruRightULeftThruRightU-.76:”*E284/W;S60-0i-LeftThruRight^:^12-.KV3287Uj.y;•PSP176-4;.:72.^.-188:4:4...0Heavy.Truckswm&z7,;sov ii,o:4ii•:0.-::•1••>rBicycles-.;;,.Railroad;;-Stopped'BusesComments:rs_T!•/’*if?.;••»:i:;i-SOURCE:QualityCounts,LLC(http://wvAV.qualitycounts.not)Reportgeneratedon6/19/20093:05PMtM Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/1/2011 3:59 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:2nd St -- SR 14 QC JOB #:10509415 CITY/STATE:Washougal, WA DATE:6/4/2010 5-Min Count Period Beginning At 2nd St (Northbound) 2nd St (Southbound) SR 14 (Eastbound) SR 14 (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 2 1 0 0 4 1 6 0 4 98 3 0 1 67 6 0 193 4:05 PM 3 0 1 0 5 2 3 0 4 85 2 0 0 58 5 0 168 4:10 PM 0 1 3 0 4 2 7 0 8 87 2 0 1 72 5 0 192 4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 7 0 9 0 11 78 2 0 0 43 4 0 155 4:20 PM 1 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 10 101 2 0 1 79 6 0 206 4:25 PM 1 0 1 0 4 1 5 0 13 86 2 0 0 71 2 0 186 4:30 PM 0 5 4 0 4 2 8 0 11 84 2 0 3 61 11 0 195 4:35 PM 4 0 0 0 4 1 2 0 8 99 3 0 2 89 6 0 218 4:40 PM 2 1 3 0 5 0 7 0 17 87 2 0 0 64 10 0 198 4:45 PM 1 1 2 0 7 1 8 0 6 85 3 0 1 71 5 0 191 4:50 PM 1 3 1 0 2 0 4 0 13 99 0 0 2 43 4 0 172 4:55 PM 3 1 1 0 6 1 1 0 6 80 1 0 4 70 6 0 180 2254 5:00 PM 0 2 0 0 2 2 4 0 14 98 2 0 0 75 2 0 201 2262 5:05 PM 2 2 2 0 3 2 4 0 14 92 1 0 1 74 7 0 204 2298 5:10 PM 4 2 0 0 3 1 9 0 3 86 0 0 2 69 5 0 184 2290 5:15 PM 1 1 3 0 7 0 10 0 14 89 0 0 0 62 6 0 193 2328 5:20 PM 5 0 0 0 6 3 6 0 9 84 3 0 0 50 2 0 168 2290 5:25 PM 0 6 1 0 3 2 7 0 7 89 1 0 1 65 5 0 187 2291 5:30 PM 3 2 0 0 6 1 3 0 8 86 4 0 0 53 2 0 168 2264 5:35 PM 3 1 0 0 2 1 8 0 15 84 2 0 1 54 6 0 177 2223 5:40 PM 0 1 2 0 3 0 3 0 14 86 4 0 2 55 5 0 175 2200 5:45 PM 2 0 1 0 4 3 7 0 7 76 0 0 0 44 8 0 152 2161 5:50 PM 1 1 0 0 0 1 10 0 12 98 0 0 1 72 11 0 207 2196 5:55 PM 1 1 1 0 10 0 5 0 13 83 3 0 2 55 6 0 180 2196 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 24 24 28 0 52 12 68 0 144 1080 28 0 20 856 108 0 2444 Heavy Trucks 0 4 4 0 0 0 12 24 0 0 36 4 84 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:PM Only Peak-Hour: 4:20 PM -- 5:20 PM Peak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PM 20 18 17 491166 129 1086 18 16 828 70 55 126 1233 914 217 45 1152 914 0.98 0.92 0.84 0.78 0.95 15.0 5.6 11.8 10.29.14.5 3.9 3.1 5.6 0.0 3.6 4.3 10.9 7.1 3.2 3.6 4.1 4.4 3.6 3.9 0 0 1 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r* W*n r* Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/1/2011 4:01 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:N Shepherd Rd -- NE 3rd Ave QC JOB #:10509419 CITY/STATE:Washougal, WA DATE:6/4/2010 5-Min Count Period Beginning At N Shepherd Rd (Northbound) N Shepherd Rd (Southbound) NE 3rd Ave (Eastbound) NE 3rd Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 5 48 0 0 0 33 6 0 98 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 9 0 4 0 9 37 0 0 0 38 5 0 102 4:10 PM 0 0 1 0 4 0 5 0 5 42 0 0 1 31 1 0 90 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 12 51 0 0 0 17 3 0 88 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 8 35 0 0 0 40 4 0 95 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 0 11 37 0 0 0 48 11 0 116 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 18 46 0 0 0 23 9 0 104 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 9 0 7 0 6 54 0 0 0 44 4 0 124 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 3 0 10 42 0 0 0 35 12 0 109 4:45 PM 0 0 1 0 7 0 12 0 11 40 1 0 1 30 5 0 108 4:50 PM 0 0 1 0 4 0 3 0 12 48 0 0 0 38 6 0 112 4:55 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 8 0 15 58 0 0 0 39 8 0 130 1276 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 1 37 0 0 0 40 9 0 95 1273 5:05 PM 1 1 0 0 4 0 3 0 7 39 2 0 0 34 10 0 101 1272 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 14 46 0 0 0 38 3 0 109 1291 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 6 0 13 46 0 0 0 34 7 0 111 1314 5:20 PM 1 0 0 0 2 0 10 0 8 40 1 0 2 32 5 0 101 1320 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 7 47 0 0 0 29 7 0 96 1300 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 4 0 4 0 13 47 0 0 2 36 8 0 115 1311 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 6 0 11 52 0 0 0 32 5 0 113 1300 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 5 0 14 36 0 0 0 34 8 0 101 1292 5:45 PM 1 0 1 0 9 0 3 0 12 38 0 0 0 38 9 0 111 1295 5:50 PM 0 0 1 0 7 0 8 0 11 52 1 0 0 36 5 0 121 1304 5:55 PM 1 0 0 0 5 0 9 0 9 55 0 0 1 21 13 0 114 1288 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 4 0 8 0 48 0 92 0 152 584 4 0 4 428 76 0 1400 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 12 0 0 0 0 16 Pedestrians 0 4 0 0 4 Bicycles Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:PM Only Peak-Hour: 4:25 PM -- 5:25 PM Peak 15-Min: 4:45 PM -- 5:00 PM 3 1 2 49075 126 533 4 3 435 89 6 124 663 527 216 7 584 513 0.90 0.95 0.67 0.69 0.94 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.00.04.0 1.6 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.1 0.0 3.2 0.9 1.3 1.4 0.0 0.9 1.8 6 4 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r* W*n r* T?;it iIiMethodfordeterminingpeakhour:Total Entering VolumeTypeofpeakhourbeingreported:Intersection Peak QC JOB #:10436608 DATE:6/9/2009LOCATION:NE 192nd Ave -SE 1 st St CiTY/STATE:Vancouver,WAi Peak-Hour:5:00 PM --6:00 PM Peak 15-Min:5:05 PM --5:20 PM 400 Q.85 682 1.21.3444 41 263 96 2.4 1.1 1.0 4 W V 4 V 261 *95 J X 113 4"427 t.2.7 4 0.91.9 «•1.1 J) 0,90 +145 0.7710.87 224 if 0.9 *.MP *0.7 •T 169 4 65436748*>•T 0.0 4 0.51.4 +4.2 Quality Counts75474334 4.0 0.8 0.0 4 t 4 4n?4N.SP0RTATIO^.PATACOILSCTIOH••.SEWIOBS4800.86 883 0.81.0 3 4 V 11 «U 11 ittrifV1 iw*4 SE 1st St (Westbound)SE 1st St (Eastbound)NE 192nd Ave (Southbound)5-Min Count Period Beginning At NE 192nd Ave (Northbound)|j Hourly TotalsTotalLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU1336016519403111901150284:00 PM 4:05 PM 4:10 PM 4:15 PM 4:20 PM 4:25 PM 4:30 PM 4:35 PM 4:40 PM 4:45 PM 4:50 PM 4:55 PM 6 1451200217912440914 4 17 9 20 4 27 3 20 11 32 6 32 13 31 15 16 8 30 8 34 1533 05 0 137100116148304210633|:0 17680187916880462007013814105011244020073013801112166011650123303ii:0 16813128182067021033516601156010111440300 22 1 334!i:0 15871210133057li032215280016101524062105341811305091516308200468 18481567014131300460170382 .60 2lMHi 5 ''52 28 •,wm 31 23 mm,2 37 22 0 38&&1 36 -%*365:>V'34 34.^37^1-0^5 33 33 i|g 26' * itM'7 2006HHHMIsstti;•-.10 12 6 12-i4-25:;‘.-,;V7 q 17 9 27 Bn,0 1460201015 8 0 “9 1o 8 3 0 19 14 11 2 ''^L«*IT-i172 3 BlJHMMI 5:20 PM |6 5:25 PM 5:30 PM . 5:35 PM -sSS’lSl§§lfgM5 5?5.6Wg 5155iEfol, 202315509ms20471920 2043162IgipaSSMSI; m 20481631091r/u .i206060364o911205417511 HI -.1 20778o turn Westbound Left Thru Right UEastboundSouthboundNorthboundPeak15-Min Flowrates TotalLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU2TT6;216:;;i;164;p 176 056m:-;;;0:7^:,;1887628460Q328v.0;AI|:Vei1iqies:; rteayyTfuckS Pedestrians; ‘Bicycles,p 84 ;:612 24;0 4:0:4 o;4 o:oo8 0:400 "y .•.••• Stoijped 'Buses Comments: SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net )Report generated on 6 /19/2009 3:05 PM i:l i Methodfordeterminingpeakhour:TotalEnteringVolumelV'I'M©fp§akhourbeingreported:IntersectionPeak'.QCJOB#:10436610DATE:6/9/2009InfiATlON:SE192ndAve-ChurchDwySTATE:Vancouver,WArPeak-Hour:4:20PM-5:20PMPeak15-Min:5:05PM--5:20PM4350i90641L_U0425101.71.6*0.01.60.04»+W0>0JElo*X.6*440.00.0J.X.0.0+0.000.390:92+«0.00.00*0"Vr3845r0.0*2.20.0*0.0*>QualityCounts0635350.01.72.9JTj*TRAMSPORTATjON'&ATACOLLECTION'SEUVIC2S.4630.836701.51.80*V1oJr5-0A%ChurchDwy(Westbound)ChurchDwy(Eastbound)SE192ndAve(Southbound)5-MinCountPeriodBeginningAtSE192ndAve(Northbound)HourlyTotalsTotalLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU740002000002402902403300004605404505124:00PM4:05PM4:10PM4:15PM^oner4.25PM-4-30PM'4:35'PMf4.40PM4:45,PMfef^-0,4.50PM!0674:55!BlSs|S^^5P5:00^PMH%C)S#I5^5.05PM(.'70.--*'-79**«.1...5.10PM--'!*'/o/-'-61-.:.o‘085001000000000001710000000020702094100000'SP0390•3715.0.'0-4 060'4 92"004 214 9-007.03u0IT-uuO.4,0-100/20100ui8 90*°*;339’--oNH03400004700000‘32100*00000-‘-I.*0-38*i^v.0oTT7j1:"q.-"0V;-.0^v3,-.-VO-'.;,/.1-.0-‘'•0"?0/’•31'^'Q-‘C-'0v:h'00W0''->.0‘''|'^1'0’‘0*000•00000Q:4W®00flllllSto':8 31 0 919 31067..408693TT>.1123:;A-1145--122ISliMiSS0-V*5SMM1144790010000000000001320133032034038025034126045051059055054044049049005:20PM5:25PM5:30PM5:35PM5:40PM5:45PM5:50PM5:55PM881143100000000000200000931136200000000.000000011132900001134930000000001112372001000002087110110000000307710850000000001WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundPeak15-MinFlowratesTotalLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU1252•401:6;0:0•0:,,.0-;-:vq0:388;v.0:.0:y0:832120:;:000.AllVehiclesHeavyTrucksPedestriansBicyclesRailroad;StoppedBuses000^40.o.;;oo.4;o40Comments:SOURCE:QualityCounts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net)Reportgeneratedon6/19/20093:05PM Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Adams St -- 6th Ave QC JOB #:10619901 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Adams St (Northbound) Adams St (Southbound) 6th Ave (Eastbound) 6th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 28 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 44 0 0 16 0 0 95 4:05 PM 39 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 1 11 40 0 0 15 0 0 111 4:10 PM 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 50 0 0 13 0 0 107 4:15 PM 30 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 38 0 0 20 0 0 97 4:20 PM 23 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 41 0 0 21 0 0 103 4:25 PM 40 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 37 0 0 19 0 0 112 4:30 PM 31 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 40 0 0 20 0 0 106 4:35 PM 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13 31 0 0 17 0 0 93 4:40 PM 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 33 0 0 14 0 0 84 4:45 PM 25 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 7 45 0 0 14 0 0 93 4:50 PM 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 55 0 1 15 0 0 110 4:55 PM 33 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13 56 0 0 19 1 0 124 1235 5:00 PM 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 44 0 0 17 0 0 114 1254 5:05 PM 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 52 0 0 14 1 0 117 1260 5:10 PM 32 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 49 0 0 14 0 0 110 1263 5:15 PM 31 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 9 45 0 0 9 0 0 97 1263 5:20 PM 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 57 0 1 11 0 0 115 1275 5:25 PM 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 41 0 0 10 2 0 99 1262 5:30 PM 28 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 13 53 0 1 13 0 0 110 1266 5:35 PM 38 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 5 42 0 0 15 0 0 103 1276 5:40 PM 28 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 41 0 1 11 0 0 92 1284 5:45 PM 23 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 12 53 0 0 8 0 0 99 1290 5:50 PM 25 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 37 0 0 16 0 0 101 1281 5:55 PM 24 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 44 0 0 9 0 0 91 1248 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 408 4 4 0 0 8 0 0 12 124 584 0 0 148 4 0 1296 Heavy Trucks 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12 0 0 0 24 Pedestrians 0 4 0 0 4 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 377 2 4 024 6 143 588 4 156 4 383 6 737 164 12 594 147 537 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.75 1.00 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 2.1 2.2 0.0 0.6 0.0 1.6 0.0 2.2 0.6 0.0 2.2 2.0 1.3 0 13 0 9 1 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 1 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^r*<3- 4>Wf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Division St -- 6th Ave QC JOB #:10619902 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Division St (Northbound) Division St (Southbound) 6th Ave (Eastbound) 6th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 0 15 43 0 0 0 42 2 0 116 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 5 52 0 0 0 54 3 0 122 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 0 8 60 0 0 0 40 5 0 122 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 7 0 11 42 0 0 0 45 6 0 114 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 9 56 0 0 0 44 0 0 116 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 8 52 0 0 0 55 4 0 128 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 8 53 0 0 0 48 3 0 120 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 10 43 0 0 0 47 1 0 109 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 6 42 0 0 0 37 4 0 94 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 0 14 47 0 0 0 39 1 0 110 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 0 10 64 0 0 0 39 2 0 127 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 11 67 0 0 0 52 1 0 139 1417 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 7 58 0 0 0 50 4 0 126 1427 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 9 61 0 0 0 48 5 0 130 1435 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 8 0 15 57 0 0 0 46 0 0 131 1444 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 55 0 0 0 36 4 0 111 1441 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 9 71 0 0 0 38 4 0 127 1452 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 5 0 12 50 0 0 0 38 3 0 114 1438 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 9 67 0 0 0 39 2 0 120 1438 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 13 46 0 0 0 50 5 0 120 1449 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 11 51 0 0 0 37 2 0 104 1459 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 7 65 0 0 0 31 1 0 112 1461 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 0 9 57 0 0 0 40 1 0 117 1451 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 11 56 0 0 0 28 5 0 103 1415 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 28 0 84 0 128 692 0 0 0 520 36 0 1488 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 12 0 0 8 0 24 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE (same pole as Division) Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 0 0 25066 121 712 0 0 504 33 0 91 833 537 154 0 737 570 1.00 0.97 0.00 0.81 0.98 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.00.03.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 3.3 1.8 1.3 0.0 0.0 2.2 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 002 0 0 0 0 2 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^(* 4>W ^r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Norwood St -- 6th Ave QC JOB #:10619903 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Norwood St (Northbound) Norwood St (Southbound) 6th Ave (Eastbound) 6th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 4 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 2 66 10 0 3 40 5 0 139 4:05 PM 2 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 3 50 5 0 6 46 1 0 119 4:10 PM 1 0 6 0 2 0 1 0 8 57 1 0 5 57 0 0 138 4:15 PM 4 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 61 6 0 5 37 2 0 119 4:20 PM 3 1 4 0 1 0 0 0 3 55 7 0 5 39 1 0 119 4:25 PM 1 0 5 0 3 0 1 0 3 54 4 0 7 53 0 0 131 4:30 PM 4 0 5 0 2 0 2 0 5 58 3 0 6 46 0 0 131 4:35 PM 1 0 6 0 2 0 1 0 5 50 8 0 5 55 2 0 135 4:40 PM 3 1 10 0 1 0 3 0 1 71 7 0 8 38 0 0 143 4:45 PM 3 1 9 0 0 0 3 0 6 53 9 0 5 41 2 0 132 4:50 PM 9 0 5 0 1 1 4 0 1 75 8 0 7 31 1 0 143 4:55 PM 3 1 6 0 0 3 1 0 6 76 8 0 5 63 0 0 172 1621 5:00 PM 1 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 2 65 6 0 3 44 1 0 128 1610 5:05 PM 7 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 4 61 5 0 3 52 1 0 142 1633 5:10 PM 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 9 70 8 0 6 44 1 0 142 1637 5:15 PM 2 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 4 72 10 0 7 36 0 0 143 1661 5:20 PM 3 1 7 0 2 0 1 0 1 73 7 0 5 43 1 0 144 1686 5:25 PM 1 0 10 0 0 0 3 0 3 62 7 0 4 34 3 0 127 1682 5:30 PM 3 0 7 0 0 1 1 0 7 66 6 0 2 38 1 0 132 1683 5:35 PM 5 0 9 0 1 1 2 0 5 58 8 0 6 47 0 0 142 1690 5:40 PM 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 62 6 0 4 24 0 0 109 1656 5:45 PM 2 0 9 0 1 1 4 0 2 82 9 0 5 33 1 0 149 1673 5:50 PM 3 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 1 63 7 0 5 34 5 0 124 1654 5:55 PM 1 0 4 0 2 0 2 0 1 65 7 0 1 33 2 0 118 1600 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 44 0 84 0 0 0 8 0 68 812 92 0 64 528 8 0 1708 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 12 0 28 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SW (on off-ramp) Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 42 2 84 6719 47 822 88 57 489 10 128 32 957 556 59 152 912 550 0.98 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.98 2.4 50.0 1.2 0.00.00.0 2.1 1.6 1.1 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.3 0.0 1.6 1.6 3.4 0.7 1.5 1.8 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 1 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^(* 4>Wn ^(- Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Ivy St -- 6th Ave QC JOB #:10619904 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Ivy St (Northbound) Ivy St (Southbound) 6th Ave (Eastbound) 6th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 59 3 0 0 39 0 0 107 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 51 3 0 0 53 0 0 110 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 3 57 0 0 0 52 1 0 118 4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 59 1 0 0 40 1 0 107 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 58 0 0 0 42 2 0 105 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 54 3 0 0 60 2 0 124 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 3 52 1 0 0 49 1 0 110 4:35 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 50 4 0 0 59 0 0 118 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 56 3 0 0 42 0 0 104 4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 53 2 0 0 46 1 0 106 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 76 1 0 0 37 1 0 122 4:55 PM 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 6 68 1 0 0 56 1 0 138 1369 5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 59 1 0 0 57 2 0 124 1386 5:05 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 66 0 0 0 44 2 0 115 1391 5:10 PM 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 68 0 0 0 48 3 0 125 1398 5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 74 0 0 0 36 3 0 120 1411 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 6 70 1 0 0 46 0 0 126 1432 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 0 2 64 1 0 0 34 1 0 109 1417 5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 4 67 2 0 0 38 0 0 120 1427 5:35 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 56 0 0 0 48 0 0 111 1420 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 61 3 0 0 32 0 0 103 1419 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 78 1 0 0 31 2 0 117 1430 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 3 62 2 0 0 38 0 0 111 1419 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 5 55 4 0 0 34 2 0 104 1385 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 12 0 0 0 4 4 12 0 32 832 0 0 0 512 32 0 1440 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 4 0 16 Pedestrians 4 0 0 0 4 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SW Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 6 0 1 8327 45 807 11 0 507 15 7 38 863 522 60 14 816 540 1.00 0.96 0.58 1.00 0.99 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 2.2 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.3 1.7 0.0 1.1 1.3 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 000 1 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^(* 4>W<? ^(* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Division St -- 18th Ave QC JOB #:10619906 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Division St (Northbound) Division St (Southbound) 18th Ave (Eastbound) 18th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 13 9 0 0 0 6 1 0 4 0 13 0 1 0 0 0 47 4:05 PM 12 5 0 0 0 4 1 0 4 0 16 0 1 0 0 0 43 4:10 PM 13 10 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 30 4:15 PM 12 12 0 0 0 7 2 0 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 41 4:20 PM 11 6 0 0 0 5 2 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 32 4:25 PM 15 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 33 4:30 PM 7 6 1 0 0 4 3 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 29 4:35 PM 7 8 0 0 0 2 3 0 2 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 29 4:40 PM 7 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 20 4:45 PM 10 6 0 0 0 4 3 0 3 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 34 4:50 PM 7 3 0 0 0 3 4 0 2 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 34 4:55 PM 9 9 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 35 407 5:00 PM 6 6 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 28 388 5:05 PM 9 12 1 0 0 2 5 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 37 382 5:10 PM 6 12 1 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 35 387 5:15 PM 12 9 0 0 0 4 1 0 2 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 36 382 5:20 PM 9 6 0 0 0 3 1 0 2 0 12 1 0 0 0 0 34 384 5:25 PM 9 9 0 1 0 3 5 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 34 385 5:30 PM 9 7 1 0 0 5 3 0 1 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 36 392 5:35 PM 10 11 1 0 0 5 1 0 1 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 38 401 5:40 PM 8 10 0 0 0 3 6 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 35 416 5:45 PM 10 9 0 0 0 7 3 0 2 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 44 426 5:50 PM 6 6 0 0 0 10 1 0 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 34 426 5:55 PM 11 8 0 0 0 3 1 0 2 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 33 424 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 108 132 8 0 0 40 24 0 24 0 96 0 0 0 0 0 432 Heavy Trucks 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 12 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 105 103 4 04234 24 2 110 1 0 1 212 76 136 2 127 154 6 139 1.00 0.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.7 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^r*<3- 4>Wf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Sierra St -- 28th Ave QC JOB #:10619907 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Sierra St (Northbound) Sierra St (Southbound) 28th Ave (Eastbound) 28th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 1 7 0 1 1 4 0 4 9 0 0 7 8 3 0 45 4:05 PM 1 0 1 0 3 0 6 0 3 7 1 0 2 7 4 0 35 4:10 PM 1 1 2 0 3 1 1 0 2 7 1 0 2 6 4 0 31 4:15 PM 2 1 1 0 2 3 0 0 2 3 1 0 3 9 2 0 29 4:20 PM 1 2 7 0 2 1 3 0 2 6 0 0 1 7 1 0 33 4:25 PM 2 4 3 0 1 1 2 0 3 11 0 0 5 4 0 0 36 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 1 6 1 0 2 4 2 0 23 4:35 PM 0 3 1 0 4 1 6 0 5 9 0 0 0 4 4 0 37 4:40 PM 0 3 1 0 5 1 2 0 3 8 0 0 1 3 3 0 30 4:45 PM 1 2 1 0 4 1 7 0 1 8 0 0 2 7 3 0 37 4:50 PM 0 1 4 0 2 1 2 0 1 8 1 0 2 6 0 0 28 4:55 PM 0 1 5 0 5 2 3 0 4 7 0 0 0 3 3 0 33 397 5:00 PM 0 2 5 0 3 1 1 0 6 12 0 0 2 5 2 0 39 391 5:05 PM 0 3 2 0 1 3 3 0 4 5 1 0 4 6 4 0 36 392 5:10 PM 1 1 5 0 2 0 0 0 6 11 0 1 0 4 3 0 34 395 5:15 PM 0 0 5 0 3 2 6 0 2 14 2 0 2 10 1 0 47 413 5:20 PM 0 1 4 0 4 3 1 0 7 10 2 0 1 11 2 0 46 426 5:25 PM 0 1 3 0 0 4 2 0 5 6 2 0 4 8 8 0 43 433 5:30 PM 0 1 4 0 4 2 4 0 7 8 1 0 0 3 1 0 35 445 5:35 PM 0 1 3 0 2 0 2 0 3 7 3 0 4 8 1 0 34 442 5:40 PM 1 2 1 0 3 6 2 0 0 6 1 0 2 9 1 0 34 446 5:45 PM 0 3 0 0 2 0 5 0 3 10 2 0 4 3 2 0 34 443 5:50 PM 0 3 5 0 2 2 1 0 4 8 0 0 2 1 4 0 32 447 5:55 PM 1 2 4 0 4 2 3 0 3 8 1 0 2 4 6 0 40 454 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 4 16 48 0 24 20 36 0 48 120 12 4 24 80 32 0 468 Heavy Trucks 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 16 Pedestrians 8 16 8 8 40 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:NW Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 2 17 41 312431 49 104 15 25 76 28 60 86 168 129 93 64 176 110 0.91 0.95 0.88 1.00 0.95 0.0 5.9 4.9 6.54.23.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 1.3 3.6 5.0 4.7 0.0 3.1 2.2 4.7 2.3 1.8 9 8 8 3 0 1 0 010 0 2 0 0 0 1 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^r*<3- 4>Wf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Cascade St -- 18th Ave QC JOB #:10619908 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Cascade St (Northbound) Cascade St (Southbound) 18th Ave (Eastbound) 18th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 8 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 25 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 6 2 0 0 0 2 1 0 25 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 10 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 23 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 0 12 6 0 0 0 2 1 0 33 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 5 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 15 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 14 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 27 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 10 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 24 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 11 5 0 0 0 4 0 0 26 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 2 0 0 0 7 0 0 19 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 7 8 0 0 0 3 0 0 29 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 12 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 20 12 0 0 0 5 0 0 44 314 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 9 6 0 0 0 3 0 0 23 312 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 12 9 0 0 0 6 0 0 32 319 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 14 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 34 330 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 15 7 0 0 0 5 0 0 37 334 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 14 7 0 0 0 3 0 0 33 352 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 12 6 0 0 0 3 0 0 31 356 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 11 8 0 0 0 2 0 0 32 364 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 10 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 29 367 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 25 373 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 8 12 0 0 0 3 1 0 39 383 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 16 11 0 0 0 4 0 0 38 397 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 11 9 0 0 0 4 1 0 30 383 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 0 164 84 0 0 0 68 0 0 412 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:NE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 0 0 20107 144 85 0 0 44 1 0 109 229 45 145 0 87 151 0.92 0.66 0.00 1.00 0.93 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.03.7 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.4 2.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 3.3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W 1 ^(* 4>W ^r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Brady Rd -- 16th Ave QC JOB #:10619909 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Brady Rd (Northbound) Brady Rd (Southbound) 16th Ave (Eastbound) 16th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 2 12 8 0 4 4 4 0 0 4 2 0 5 4 3 0 52 4:05 PM 2 7 8 0 5 11 1 0 2 4 1 0 11 5 3 0 60 4:10 PM 0 8 10 0 6 5 0 0 1 4 4 0 4 2 8 0 52 4:15 PM 2 14 7 0 8 13 0 0 1 22 2 0 3 8 3 0 83 4:20 PM 1 13 11 0 3 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 7 6 6 0 61 4:25 PM 0 9 16 0 4 5 1 0 2 6 2 0 5 9 2 0 61 4:30 PM 1 11 8 0 12 10 0 0 0 10 2 0 6 6 9 0 75 4:35 PM 2 10 13 0 8 2 5 0 5 7 0 0 4 11 8 0 75 4:40 PM 4 15 5 0 4 12 5 0 1 9 0 0 9 10 8 0 82 4:45 PM 1 13 9 0 5 8 3 0 2 5 1 0 8 5 7 0 67 4:50 PM 2 10 16 0 5 8 2 0 2 4 0 0 10 6 9 0 74 4:55 PM 6 11 19 0 8 2 3 0 1 5 2 0 6 6 4 0 73 815 5:00 PM 1 17 9 0 10 7 4 0 3 5 2 0 7 4 6 0 75 838 5:05 PM 0 11 18 0 5 12 0 0 1 11 1 0 4 5 8 0 76 854 5:10 PM 0 15 16 0 7 13 0 0 2 13 1 0 12 4 7 0 90 892 5:15 PM 0 12 13 0 15 10 2 0 2 10 1 0 2 6 6 0 79 888 5:20 PM 3 10 11 0 10 8 1 0 2 14 1 0 9 7 4 0 80 907 5:25 PM 0 13 9 0 13 8 1 0 1 4 1 0 11 6 5 0 72 918 5:30 PM 2 14 12 0 8 9 0 0 2 13 3 0 5 5 6 0 79 922 5:35 PM 3 8 9 0 11 13 1 0 0 6 1 0 7 10 5 0 74 921 5:40 PM 4 20 12 0 7 11 3 0 1 9 1 0 8 7 9 0 92 931 5:45 PM 0 13 13 0 9 7 1 0 1 8 2 0 10 9 11 0 84 948 5:50 PM 2 14 15 0 7 5 2 0 1 13 3 0 11 4 7 0 84 958 5:55 PM 1 15 9 0 8 9 2 0 1 12 1 0 6 5 5 0 74 959 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 152 188 0 108 140 8 0 20 136 12 0 72 60 84 0 980 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 16 Pedestrians 8 0 0 4 12 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:NE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 21 154 157 10810818 18 102 16 91 75 80 332 234 136 246 252 215 367 114 0.81 1.00 0.98 0.91 0.97 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.92.85.6 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.2 2.7 2.5 0.6 2.1 0.7 2.4 1.2 2.3 0.8 2.6 14 0 0 3 0 0 0 000 0 1 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^r*<3- 4>Wf r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Parker St -- Pacific Rim Blvd QC JOB #:10619910 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Parker St (Northbound) Parker St (Southbound) Pacific Rim Blvd (Eastbound) Pacific Rim Blvd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 3 10 3 0 0 10 8 0 13 3 2 0 2 3 0 0 57 4:05 PM 0 9 4 0 2 8 11 0 10 4 2 0 4 1 2 0 57 4:10 PM 1 14 2 0 0 10 6 0 11 5 7 0 2 4 1 0 63 4:15 PM 0 13 4 0 1 12 10 0 8 4 3 0 1 3 0 0 59 4:20 PM 0 12 3 0 1 10 8 0 6 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 46 4:25 PM 0 13 2 0 1 10 9 0 11 6 4 0 0 1 0 0 57 4:30 PM 2 18 1 0 1 13 10 0 13 3 6 0 1 2 1 0 71 4:35 PM 2 20 2 0 3 12 7 0 9 7 0 0 1 2 0 0 65 4:40 PM 4 16 4 0 0 20 9 0 13 5 2 0 2 3 1 0 79 4:45 PM 1 15 5 0 0 10 9 0 20 7 2 0 1 5 0 0 75 4:50 PM 4 17 3 0 1 9 9 0 14 1 4 0 2 2 1 0 67 4:55 PM 0 14 3 0 0 10 6 0 10 4 4 0 2 1 0 0 54 750 5:00 PM 1 22 3 0 0 12 10 0 21 1 4 0 2 3 1 0 80 773 5:05 PM 2 21 2 0 2 19 8 0 15 6 2 0 1 2 1 0 81 797 5:10 PM 1 17 2 0 0 12 14 0 12 3 6 0 0 3 0 0 70 804 5:15 PM 2 14 1 0 0 17 10 0 11 7 10 0 1 3 0 0 76 821 5:20 PM 1 15 1 0 2 16 15 0 15 6 7 0 1 2 0 0 81 856 5:25 PM 3 16 2 0 1 14 10 0 22 6 7 0 1 3 0 0 85 884 5:30 PM 0 13 2 0 3 19 5 0 18 8 2 0 2 5 1 0 78 891 5:35 PM 0 16 1 0 3 14 14 0 20 9 5 0 3 2 1 0 88 914 5:40 PM 7 15 2 0 0 17 11 0 19 6 3 0 2 1 2 0 85 920 5:45 PM 6 14 4 0 2 12 10 0 14 5 1 0 2 2 0 0 72 917 5:50 PM 5 15 3 0 4 9 6 0 14 3 3 0 0 2 2 0 66 916 5:55 PM 3 15 5 0 1 15 6 0 14 9 6 0 1 0 1 0 76 938 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 20 208 20 0 8 192 128 0 152 64 72 0 8 32 4 0 908 Heavy Trucks 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 12 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 27 194 26 14171122 191 62 55 19 29 7 247 307 308 55 392 245 102 178 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.01 7.4 1.0 0.0 0.02.30.0 0.0 1.6 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.3 0.6 0.0 0.5 2.0 1.0 1.1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 000 1 3 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W 4 U ^r* J Wm ^r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Parker St -- 38th Ave QC JOB #:10619911 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Parker St (Northbound) Parker St (Southbound) 38th Ave (Eastbound) 38th Ave (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 8 6 18 0 4 12 1 0 4 9 6 0 3 7 2 0 80 4:05 PM 2 7 10 0 3 11 2 0 3 11 4 0 9 6 3 0 71 4:10 PM 6 10 15 0 4 8 0 0 5 7 7 0 5 10 2 0 79 4:15 PM 4 7 11 0 1 8 2 0 3 17 1 0 11 10 3 0 78 4:20 PM 3 6 6 0 2 8 0 0 2 15 6 0 7 10 1 0 66 4:25 PM 0 16 11 0 1 8 2 0 0 14 4 0 12 4 3 0 75 4:30 PM 3 12 14 0 2 15 2 0 0 10 5 0 6 9 1 0 79 4:35 PM 4 13 12 0 0 7 1 0 4 15 2 0 11 10 3 0 82 4:40 PM 6 23 10 0 7 15 1 0 1 18 4 0 8 8 1 0 102 4:45 PM 5 14 15 0 4 11 1 0 1 12 1 0 8 7 4 0 83 4:50 PM 1 13 18 0 3 7 0 0 4 16 4 0 8 7 4 0 85 4:55 PM 3 6 16 0 2 8 1 0 1 13 5 0 9 2 7 0 73 953 5:00 PM 5 17 19 0 4 7 0 0 1 7 1 0 12 5 0 0 78 951 5:05 PM 4 18 18 0 3 22 5 0 1 12 0 0 9 7 3 0 102 982 5:10 PM 5 11 15 0 6 14 0 0 2 20 9 0 11 8 4 0 105 1008 5:15 PM 7 4 19 0 5 17 5 0 0 14 5 0 9 0 0 0 85 1015 5:20 PM 4 14 11 0 4 19 3 0 4 25 11 0 10 14 4 0 123 1072 5:25 PM 2 9 26 0 5 12 2 0 2 15 4 0 8 8 1 0 94 1091 5:30 PM 4 13 15 0 2 14 2 0 2 10 6 0 7 5 2 0 82 1094 5:35 PM 11 18 16 0 3 20 2 0 2 14 6 0 9 7 4 0 112 1124 5:40 PM 4 13 23 0 3 25 2 0 0 10 2 0 4 9 1 0 96 1118 5:45 PM 3 10 16 0 3 12 1 0 2 14 7 0 8 10 5 0 91 1126 5:50 PM 3 7 17 0 5 14 4 0 2 11 4 0 8 12 3 0 90 1131 5:55 PM 6 9 18 0 3 9 1 0 0 10 4 0 9 9 1 0 79 1137 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 64 132 208 0 56 212 40 0 12 184 56 0 116 60 28 0 1168 Heavy Trucks 4 4 4 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 20 Pedestrians 0 4 4 0 8 Bicycles 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 53 146 212 4317723 21 170 60 104 82 35 411 243 251 221 202 341 425 158 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.79 0.96 1.9 0.7 0.9 0.01.10.0 0.0 0.6 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.5 1.2 0.7 0.6 0 3 1 7 0 0 1 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^(* 4>W ^(* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Payne Rd -- Pacific Rim Blvd QC JOB #:10619912 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Payne Rd (Northbound) Payne Rd (Southbound) Pacific Rim Blvd (Eastbound) Pacific Rim Blvd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 18 0 2 27 0 0 74 4:05 PM 10 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 2 11 5 0 0 29 0 0 61 4:10 PM 13 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 23 17 0 0 25 0 0 81 4:15 PM 13 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 18 0 0 16 0 0 58 4:20 PM 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 13 0 0 15 0 0 55 4:25 PM 4 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 19 16 0 0 16 1 0 60 4:30 PM 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 19 0 2 18 0 0 63 4:35 PM 12 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 21 16 0 1 26 0 0 79 4:40 PM 10 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 16 12 0 1 22 0 0 63 4:45 PM 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 15 0 1 23 0 0 77 4:50 PM 13 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 16 11 0 1 21 0 0 65 4:55 PM 15 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 15 12 0 2 18 0 0 64 800 5:00 PM 10 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 18 20 0 0 38 0 0 88 814 5:05 PM 12 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 22 14 0 0 26 0 0 80 833 5:10 PM 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 21 0 0 35 0 0 87 839 5:15 PM 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 24 30 0 2 26 0 0 91 872 5:20 PM 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 16 0 2 22 0 0 83 900 5:25 PM 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 30 14 0 3 29 0 0 92 932 5:30 PM 6 0 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 23 14 0 1 23 0 0 73 942 5:35 PM 10 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 18 0 1 24 0 0 98 961 5:40 PM 14 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 18 20 0 2 25 0 0 82 980 5:45 PM 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 30 21 0 1 33 0 0 97 1000 5:50 PM 9 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 18 14 0 1 19 0 0 65 1000 5:55 PM 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 25 21 0 1 11 0 0 67 1003 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 112 0 12 0 0 4 0 0 16 272 260 0 8 348 0 0 1032 Heavy Trucks 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 12 Pedestrians 8 4 0 0 12 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 133 0 15 026 10 288 211 15 320 0 148 8 509 335 10 228 303 459 0.93 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 1.4 0.9 0.0 2.2 0.0 1.4 0.0 1.2 2.1 0.0 0.9 1.3 2.0 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 4 2 0 5 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^(* 4>Wf ^(* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Sierra St -- Lake Rd QC JOB #:10619913 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Sierra St (Northbound) Sierra St (Southbound) Lake Rd (Eastbound) Lake Rd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 7 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 3 0 7 18 0 0 64 4:05 PM 7 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 5 0 5 18 0 0 64 4:10 PM 5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 12 0 6 12 0 0 68 4:15 PM 10 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 9 0 3 22 0 0 71 4:20 PM 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 13 0 7 14 0 0 61 4:25 PM 5 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 10 0 5 11 0 0 61 4:30 PM 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 7 0 6 13 0 0 66 4:35 PM 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 13 0 3 11 0 0 63 4:40 PM 8 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 12 0 1 20 0 0 65 4:45 PM 7 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 2 0 10 26 0 0 66 4:50 PM 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 7 0 9 14 0 0 75 4:55 PM 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 5 0 4 17 0 0 66 790 5:00 PM 6 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 4 0 4 23 0 0 72 798 5:05 PM 10 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 12 0 4 21 0 0 80 814 5:10 PM 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 8 0 8 21 0 0 80 826 5:15 PM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 9 0 7 20 0 0 77 832 5:20 PM 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 7 0 5 12 0 0 59 830 5:25 PM 3 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 10 0 6 16 0 0 70 839 5:30 PM 9 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 12 0 8 16 0 0 78 851 5:35 PM 6 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 11 0 6 26 0 0 90 878 5:40 PM 11 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 10 0 8 21 0 0 87 900 5:45 PM 6 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 10 0 5 16 0 0 82 916 5:50 PM 2 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 6 0 7 19 0 0 71 912 5:55 PM 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 7 0 6 10 0 0 64 910 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 64 0 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 368 116 0 76 248 0 0 948 Heavy Trucks 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 0 16 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 70 0 98 000 0 346 105 74 223 0 168 0 451 297 0 179 444 293 0.93 0.92 1.00 0.00 0.97 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 2.7 2.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.2 2.7 0.0 1.1 0.2 2.4 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 000 0 8 3 0 4 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W ^(* 4>W1r ^(- Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Friberg St -- Goodwin Rd QC JOB #:10619915 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Friberg St (Northbound) Friberg St (Southbound) Goodwin Rd (Eastbound) Goodwin Rd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 10 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 3 0 2 19 0 0 61 4:05 PM 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 22 2 0 0 24 0 0 55 4:10 PM 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 0 1 24 0 0 57 4:15 PM 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 1 0 6 15 0 0 49 4:20 PM 7 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 30 1 0 2 10 0 0 54 4:25 PM 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 20 2 0 4 14 0 0 51 4:30 PM 3 0 9 0 0 1 0 0 1 22 2 0 2 23 0 0 63 4:35 PM 3 2 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 20 1 0 2 18 0 0 50 4:40 PM 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 1 0 1 21 0 0 47 4:45 PM 2 0 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 20 2 0 5 25 0 1 65 4:50 PM 5 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 23 3 0 1 29 0 0 68 4:55 PM 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2 0 4 29 1 0 62 682 5:00 PM 4 0 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 18 3 0 3 18 2 0 55 676 5:05 PM 10 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 17 2 0 2 17 0 0 54 675 5:10 PM 4 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 3 0 2 16 0 0 62 680 5:15 PM 5 1 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 31 2 0 5 33 1 0 84 715 5:20 PM 7 0 8 0 0 2 0 0 0 19 4 0 3 25 0 0 68 729 5:25 PM 5 2 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 31 2 0 3 21 2 0 76 754 5:30 PM 5 1 5 0 0 1 1 0 0 36 6 0 4 20 0 0 79 770 5:35 PM 4 2 6 0 0 2 0 0 0 25 6 0 4 12 0 0 61 781 5:40 PM 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 4 0 5 20 0 0 69 803 5:45 PM 6 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 3 0 3 16 0 0 49 787 5:50 PM 4 0 6 0 0 1 0 0 2 22 3 0 4 20 0 0 62 781 5:55 PM 3 0 5 0 0 1 1 0 1 27 3 0 1 11 0 0 53 772 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 76 8 68 0 0 4 8 0 0 304 28 0 36 264 4 0 800 Heavy Trucks 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 8 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SW Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 62 8 67 184 0 296 40 39 256 6 137 13 336 301 14 87 364 322 1.00 0.99 0.90 1.00 0.98 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.00.025.0 0.0 1.0 2.5 0.0 2.0 16.7 0.7 7.7 1.2 2.0 7.1 1.1 0.8 2.2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 010 0 1 1 2 4 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W s *^r*<3- W*n r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Parker St -- Lake Rd QC JOB #:10619916 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Parker St (Northbound) Parker St (Southbound) Lake Rd (Eastbound) Lake Rd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 10 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 25 8 1 4 23 1 0 79 4:05 PM 7 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 37 8 0 1 27 0 0 87 4:10 PM 4 2 4 0 0 0 3 0 4 27 10 1 3 21 0 0 79 4:15 PM 12 2 2 0 0 3 4 0 3 27 6 0 1 32 0 0 92 4:20 PM 9 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 5 34 4 0 8 20 1 0 87 4:25 PM 14 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 35 11 0 0 15 1 0 83 4:30 PM 9 3 3 0 0 1 4 0 4 23 15 0 3 20 0 0 85 4:35 PM 8 3 6 0 0 0 4 0 2 30 5 0 1 13 1 0 73 4:40 PM 16 2 9 0 0 0 4 0 6 24 15 1 8 27 0 0 112 4:45 PM 15 2 3 0 0 1 5 0 5 24 10 0 3 32 1 0 101 4:50 PM 11 0 6 0 2 2 1 0 2 33 11 0 1 20 1 0 90 4:55 PM 11 2 4 0 0 1 0 0 2 26 12 0 2 19 0 0 79 1047 5:00 PM 11 3 6 0 0 2 3 0 1 25 11 0 2 26 0 0 90 1058 5:05 PM 21 0 4 0 1 2 2 0 2 29 15 0 4 42 0 0 122 1093 5:10 PM 20 1 6 0 0 1 4 0 2 37 12 0 3 26 1 0 113 1127 5:15 PM 15 0 5 0 0 2 5 0 3 41 21 0 2 23 2 0 119 1154 5:20 PM 14 1 8 0 0 0 2 0 4 33 13 0 4 18 0 0 97 1164 5:25 PM 7 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 40 12 0 2 16 0 0 84 1165 5:30 PM 14 2 6 0 0 0 4 0 1 34 22 0 2 16 1 0 102 1182 5:35 PM 7 2 4 0 1 3 2 0 3 38 23 0 9 26 1 0 119 1228 5:40 PM 12 0 1 0 0 1 4 0 2 38 26 0 6 31 0 0 121 1237 5:45 PM 14 2 5 0 0 0 2 0 3 41 19 0 1 20 0 0 107 1243 5:50 PM 10 2 3 0 0 1 3 0 2 32 16 0 0 18 0 0 87 1240 5:55 PM 11 3 2 0 0 0 6 0 1 28 14 0 0 19 0 0 84 1245 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 224 4 60 0 4 20 44 0 28 428 192 0 36 364 12 0 1416 Heavy Trucks 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 24 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 7 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 157 14 56 51430 28 415 197 38 283 6 227 49 640 327 48 249 476 470 0.99 0.79 0.79 0.72 0.88 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.014.30.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.6 2.1 0.0 0.4 4.1 0.9 2.1 0.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 0 1 0 0 3 1 1 000 0 10 3 0 5 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts *ANSPORTATION DAT A COLLECTION SERVICE! 4>W 1 4 l ^(- 4>Wnig r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Camas Meadows Dr -- Goodwin Rd QC JOB #:10619917 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Camas Meadows Dr (Northbound) Camas Meadows Dr (Southbound) Goodwin Rd (Eastbound) Goodwin Rd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 26 2 0 3 18 0 0 54 4:05 PM 7 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 4 0 2 19 0 0 58 4:10 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 1 0 3 22 0 0 51 4:15 PM 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 20 0 0 49 4:20 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 3 0 1 12 0 0 51 4:25 PM 7 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 5 0 3 15 0 0 60 4:30 PM 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 3 0 3 20 0 0 62 4:35 PM 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 0 3 16 0 0 47 4:40 PM 7 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 0 4 18 0 0 55 4:45 PM 5 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 5 0 1 20 0 0 73 4:50 PM 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 3 0 1 26 0 0 62 4:55 PM 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 3 0 1 28 0 0 63 685 5:00 PM 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 3 0 4 19 0 0 56 687 5:05 PM 9 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 3 0 3 10 0 0 48 677 5:10 PM 7 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 1 0 7 11 0 0 66 692 5:15 PM 11 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 1 0 2 30 0 0 85 728 5:20 PM 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 4 0 2 24 0 0 67 744 5:25 PM 6 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 3 0 2 15 0 0 68 752 5:30 PM 9 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 6 0 1 17 0 0 74 764 5:35 PM 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 1 0 5 14 0 0 60 777 5:40 PM 4 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 2 0 0 17 0 0 68 790 5:45 PM 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2 0 2 20 0 0 50 767 5:50 PM 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 1 0 4 19 0 0 60 765 5:55 PM 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 2 0 3 9 0 0 49 751 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 108 0 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 340 20 0 48 204 0 0 796 Heavy Trucks 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 12 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:SE (down the hill) Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 74 0 64 000 0 336 32 30 231 0 138 0 368 261 0 62 400 305 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.00 0.96 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.00.00.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 6.7 2.6 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.1 3.1 0.0 3.2 1.3 2.0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 000 0 1 0 0 6 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts RANSPORTATION OATA COLLECTION SERV 4>W ^(- 4>W1r ^r* Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume Report generated on 6/16/2011 12:25 PM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) LOCATION:Brady Rd -- McIntosh Rd QC JOB #:10619919 CITY/STATE:Camas, OR DATE:5/19/2011 5-Min Count Period Beginning At Brady Rd (Northbound) Brady Rd (Southbound) McIntosh Rd (Eastbound) McIntosh Rd (Westbound)Total Hourly TotalsLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU 4:00 PM 0 20 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 46 4:05 PM 0 20 12 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 62 4:10 PM 0 18 7 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 52 4:15 PM 0 28 14 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 57 4:20 PM 0 26 9 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 56 4:25 PM 0 26 7 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 45 4:30 PM 0 22 8 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 57 4:35 PM 0 30 9 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 52 4:40 PM 0 25 10 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 60 4:45 PM 0 25 5 0 2 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 49 4:50 PM 0 23 4 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 48 4:55 PM 0 38 10 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 59 643 5:00 PM 0 27 5 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 57 654 5:05 PM 0 32 19 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 76 668 5:10 PM 0 26 5 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 1 0 66 682 5:15 PM 0 29 13 0 1 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 65 690 5:20 PM 0 24 10 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 2 0 64 698 5:25 PM 0 28 15 0 1 19 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 68 721 5:30 PM 0 21 6 0 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 48 712 5:35 PM 0 27 12 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 63 723 5:40 PM 0 30 10 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 3 0 76 739 5:45 PM 0 28 8 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 59 749 5:50 PM 0 28 12 0 1 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 62 763 5:55 PM 0 23 10 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 58 762 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound TotalFlowratesLeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightULeftThruRightU All Vehicles 0 348 148 0 4 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 0 4 0 828 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments:NW Peak-Hour: 4:50 PM -- 5:50 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:05 PM -- 5:20 PM 0 333 117 42120 0 0 0 76 0 7 450 216 0 83 341 288 120 0 0.00 0.94 0.91 0.89 0.90 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.01.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.9 0.0 1.2 0.6 1.7 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4>WJt- “V r ^(-Quality Counts RANSPORTATION OATA COLLECTION SERV 4>W l^pH ^(-t- 4>W} ^r* APPENDIX B EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 1: 6th Avenue & Norwood Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 50 810 90 60 495 10 45 5 80 10 10 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 862 96 64 527 11 48 5 85 11 11 21 Pedestrians 2 2 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 539 957 1434 1683 481 1283 1720 265 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 539 957 1434 1683 481 1283 1720 265 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 7.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.5 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 91 35 89 84 88 86 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 1024 726 74 50 533 86 78 738 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB 4 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 53 574 383 64 263 263 11 48 90 43 Volume Left 53 0 0 64 0 0 0 48 0 11 Volume Right 0 0 96 0 0 0 11 0 85 21 cSH 1024 1700 1700 726 1700 1700 1700 74 339 147 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.34 0.23 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.65 0.27 0.29 Queue Length 95th (ft)4007000732628 Control Delay (s) 8.7 0.0 0.0 10.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 118.1 19.4 39.1 Lane LOS A B F C E Approach Delay (s) 0.5 1.1 53.6 39.1 Approach LOS F E Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t I ft*'I ++i*1*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 2: 6th Avenue & Ivy Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 45 840 15 0 525 15 10 0 5 10 5 30 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 48 903 16 0 565 16 11 0 5 11 5 32 Pedestrians 7 2 6 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 0 1 Right turn flare (veh)3 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 587 921 1311 1597 469 1139 1597 296 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 587 921 1311 1597 469 1139 1597 296 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 100 90 100 99 93 95 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 979 748 104 102 542 149 102 702 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 500 468 282 298 16 48 Volume Left 48 0 0 0 11 11 Volume Right 0 16 0 16 5 32 cSH 979 1700 748 1700 142 399 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.28 0.00 0.18 0.11 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft)4000910 Control Delay (s) 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.6 18.8 Lane LOS A D C Approach Delay (s) 0.7 0.0 33.6 18.8 Approach LOS D C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4 i*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 3: Division Street & 6th Avenue 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 3 Movement SBL SBR NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 25 70 125 715 505 35 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 75 134 769 543 38 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1215 290 581 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1215 290 581 tC, single (s) 6.9 7.0 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 82 89 87 cM capacity (veh/h) 148 703 1003 Direction, Lane # SB 1 NE 1 NE 2 SW 1 SW 2 Volume Total 102 391 513 362 219 Volume Left 27 134 0 0 0 Volume Right 75 0 0 0 38 cSH 354 1003 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.29 0.13 0.30 0.21 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 29 12 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 19.2 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 19.2 1.8 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 J > V 4t t1* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 4: Adams Street & 6th Avenue 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 4 Intersection Sign configuration not allowed in HCM analysis. HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 5: Dallas Street & 3rd Avenue 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 5 Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 65 85 35 70 135 40 20 365 85 30 230 80 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.97 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1799 1760 1808 1865 1581 Flt Permitted 0.83 0.86 0.98 0.91 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1516 1531 1774 1709 1581 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 93 38 77 148 44 22 401 93 33 253 88 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 11 0 0 13 0 0 0 50 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 189 0 0 258 0 0 503 0 0 286 38 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 14 10 10 14 1 13 13 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 4% 2% 8% 0% 2% 1% 3% 1% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 8426 Permitted Phases 84266 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.6 11.6 16.3 16.3 16.3 Effective Green, g (s) 11.6 11.6 16.3 16.3 16.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.43 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 464 469 763 735 680 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 c0.17 c0.28 0.17 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.55 0.66 0.39 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 10.4 11.0 8.6 7.4 6.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.7 1.6 0.1 0.0 Delay (s) 10.6 11.7 10.2 7.5 6.3 Level of Service BBBAA Approach Delay (s) 10.6 11.7 10.2 7.2 Approach LOS BBBA Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 37.9 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group J ^^kt5 4 i*4*4*4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 6: SR-14 & Union Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 85 1035 20 10 755 75 5 5 5 85 10 90 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.95 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1671 1858 1805 3433 1785 1671 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.85 Satd. Flow (perm) 1671 1858 1805 3433 1647 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 90 1101 21 11 803 80 5 5 5 90 11 96 RTOR Reduction (vph)0000500400330 Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 1122 0 11 878 0 0 11 0 0 164 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 8% 2% 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.5 47.7 1.2 40.4 14.1 14.1 Effective Green, g (s) 8.5 47.7 1.2 40.4 14.1 14.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.60 0.02 0.51 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 180 1122 27 1756 294 258 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.60 0.01 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.11 v/c Ratio 0.50 1.00 0.41 0.50 0.04 0.64 Uniform Delay, d1 33.2 15.6 38.5 12.7 26.8 30.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 26.6 9.7 0.5 0.1 5.1 Delay (s) 35.4 42.3 48.3 13.1 26.9 35.1 Level of Service D D D B C D Approach Delay (s) 41.8 13.6 26.9 35.1 Approach LOS D B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*4*4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 7: 3rd Avenue & 2nd Avenue-4th Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 7 Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 25 450 65 45 345 15 60 10 70 15 10 15 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.93 0.95 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1798 3458 1803 3484 1702 1718 Flt Permitted 0.52 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.84 0.87 Satd. Flow (perm) 982 3458 834 3484 1462 1528 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 27 495 71 49 379 16 66 11 77 16 11 16 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 004005400130 Lane Group Flow (vph) 27 551 0 49 391 0 0 100 0 0 30 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 3 3 7 1 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 3% 0% 3% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 6248 Permitted Phases 6248 Actuated Green, G (s) 18.3 18.3 18.3 18.3 6.3 6.3 Effective Green, g (s) 18.3 18.3 18.3 18.3 6.3 6.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 535 1883 454 1898 274 287 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.06 c0.07 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.29 0.11 0.21 0.36 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 3.6 4.1 3.7 3.9 11.9 11.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.2 Delay (s) 3.7 4.3 3.9 4.0 12.7 11.5 Level of Service A A A A B B Approach Delay (s) 4.3 4.0 12.7 11.5 Approach LOS AABB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 33.6 Sum of lost time (s) 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group i ^kf1 t1*t1*4»4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 8: 3rd Avenue & Crown Road 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 470 5 0 320 65 5 0 5 70 0 85 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3535 3456 1805 1615 1787 1599 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.75 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3535 3456 1343 1615 1419 1599 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 165 516 5 0 352 71 5 0 5 77 0 93 RTOR Reduction (vph)00002000040080 Lane Group Flow (vph) 165 521 0 0 403 005107713 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 2% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.9 29.4 16.5 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 Effective Green, g (s) 7.9 29.4 16.5 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.64 0.36 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 4.8 4.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 309 2274 1248 185 223 196 220 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.15 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 c0.05 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.23 0.32 0.03 0.00 0.39 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 17.2 3.4 10.6 17.0 17.0 18.0 17.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.1 Delay (s) 19.0 3.5 10.9 17.1 17.0 19.3 17.2 Level of Service B A B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 7.2 10.9 17.1 18.2 Approach LOS ABBB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 45.7 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*ft*4 i*4 r HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 9: 6th Avenue & Garfield Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 60 20 20 5 15 5 5 300 50 20 215 5 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 64 21 21 5 16 5 5 319 53 21 229 5 Pedestrians 3 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft)812 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 647 636 349 662 660 231 234 375 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 647 636 349 662 660 231 234 375 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.3 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.4 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 82 95 97 98 96 99 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 364 388 684 344 376 813 1345 1191 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SE 1 NW 1 Volume Total 106 27 378 255 Volume Left 64 5 5 21 Volume Right 21 5 53 5 cSH 407 413 1345 1191 Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.06 0.00 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 26 5 0 1 Control Delay (s) 16.9 14.3 0.1 0.8 Lane LOS C B A A Approach Delay (s) 16.9 14.3 0.1 0.8 Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 10: 14th Avenue & Everett Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 10 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 105 25 20 235 275 45 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 113 27 22 253 296 48 Pedestrians 2 1 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 881 619 643 1 1 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 881 619 643 1 1 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.5 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 33 92 93 77 82 cM capacity (veh/h) 168 332 322 1080 1620 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 140 274 344 Volume Left 113 0 296 Volume Right 0 253 48 cSH 186 911 1620 Volume to Capacity 0.75 0.30 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 123 32 17 Control Delay (s) 67.1 10.6 6.8 Lane LOS F B A Approach Delay (s) 67.1 10.6 6.8 Approach LOS F B Intersection Summary Average Delay 19.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 V4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 11: 18th Avenue & Division Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 11 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 25 110 105 105 45 35 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 121 115 115 49 38 Pedestrians 2 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 417 71 90 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 417 71 90 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.3 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.4 2.2 p0 queue free % 95 88 92 cM capacity (veh/h) 550 979 1509 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 148 231 88 Volume Left 27 115 0 Volume Right 121 0 38 cSH 855 1509 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.08 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 6 0 Control Delay (s) 10.1 4.1 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 10.1 4.1 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 V 4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 12: 28th Avenue & Sierra Drive 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 12 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 50 105 15 25 80 30 5 20 45 35 25 35 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly flow rate (vph) 56 118 17 28 90 34 6 22 51 39 28 39 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total (vph) 191 152 79 107 Volume Left (vph) 56 28 6 39 Volume Right (vph) 17 34 51 39 Hadj (s) 0.01 -0.05 -0.29 -0.07 Departure Headway (s) 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.7 Degree Utilization, x 0.24 0.19 0.10 0.14 Capacity (veh/h) 749 749 725 700 Control Delay (s) 9.0 8.6 8.1 8.5 Approach Delay (s) 9.0 8.6 8.1 8.5 Approach LOS AAAA Intersection Summary Delay 8.6 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 13: 18th Avenue & Cascade Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 13 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 145 85 0 0 45 500050110 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 156 91 0 0 48 500050118 Pedestrians 11 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 55 92 574 459 92 455 456 52 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 55 92 574 459 92 455 456 52 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 100 100 100 100 99 100 88 cM capacity (veh/h) 1562 1514 352 451 970 478 452 1009 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 247 54 0 124 Volume Left 156 0 0 5 Volume Right 0 5 0 118 cSH 1562 1514 1700 963 Volume to Capacity 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 0 0 11 Control Delay (s) 5.1 0.0 0.0 9.3 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay (s) 5.1 0.0 0.0 9.3 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 14: McIntosh Road & Brady Road 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 14 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 80 10 330 120 5 220 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 89 11 367 133 6 244 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 689 433 500 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 689 433 500 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 78 98 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 411 627 1075 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 100 500 6 244 Volume Left 89 0 6 0 Volume Right 11 133 0 0 cSH 427 1700 1075 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.23 0.29 0.01 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 22 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.0 0.0 8.4 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 16.0 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 V *i t HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 15: 16th Avenue & Brady Road 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 20 105 20 95 75 80 25 155 160 110 110 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 21 111 21 100 79 84 26 163 168 116 116 21 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total (vph) 153 263 358 253 Volume Left (vph) 21 100 26 116 Volume Right (vph) 21 84 168 21 Hadj (s) -0.04 -0.08 -0.25 0.08 Departure Headway (s) 6.1 5.9 5.4 5.9 Degree Utilization, x 0.26 0.43 0.54 0.41 Capacity (veh/h) 497 556 622 550 Control Delay (s) 11.3 13.2 14.5 13.0 Approach Delay (s) 11.3 13.2 14.5 13.0 Approach LOS BBBB Intersection Summary Delay 13.3 HCM Level of Service B Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 16: Pacific Rim Boulevard & Payne Road 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 16 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 10 290 215 15 320 0 135 0 15 0 5 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 322 239 17 356 0 150 0 17 0 6 11 Pedestrians 45 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 361 565 693 862 285 594 981 183 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 468 468 394 394 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 225 394 200 587 vCu, unblocked vol 361 565 693 862 285 594 981 183 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 98 69 100 98 100 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1204 1013 489 464 716 542 418 831 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 11 215 346 17 237 119 167 17 Volume Left 11 0 0 17 0 0 150 0 Volume Right 0 0 239 0 0 0 17 11 cSH 1204 1700 1700 1013 1700 1700 505 625 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.13 0.20 0.02 0.14 0.07 0.33 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft)100100362 Control Delay (s) 8.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 15.6 10.9 Lane LOS A A C B Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.4 15.6 10.9 Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t I ft*ft*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 17: Pacific Rim Boulevard & Parker Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 17 Intersection has too many lanes per leg. HCM All-Way analysis is limited to two lanes per leg. Channelized right turn lanes are not counted. HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 18: 38th Avenue & Parker Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 18 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 25 170 60 105 85 35 55 150 215 45 180 25 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 3.5 5.0 3.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1801 1798 1805 1804 1760 1881 1572 1803 1881 1568 Flt Permitted 0.68 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.62 1.00 1.00 0.66 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1281 1798 917 1804 1146 1881 1572 1245 1881 1568 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 27 181 64 112 90 37 59 160 229 48 191 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 149 0 0 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 27 235 0 112 117 0 59 160 80 48 191 8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 7 1 1 7 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)11 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 3% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+pt pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 523167 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 19.6 17.4 25.6 20.4 17.4 14.6 19.8 16.6 14.2 16.4 Effective Green, g (s) 19.6 17.4 25.6 20.4 17.4 14.6 19.8 16.6 14.2 16.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.31 0.45 0.36 0.31 0.26 0.35 0.29 0.25 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 3.5 5.0 3.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.5 5.4 0.5 5.4 0.5 5.4 0.5 0.5 5.4 0.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 464 553 496 650 383 485 550 389 472 454 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.13 c0.02 0.06 c0.01 0.09 0.01 0.01 c0.10 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.43 0.23 0.18 0.15 0.33 0.15 0.12 0.40 0.02 Uniform Delay, d1 12.3 15.6 9.2 12.4 14.0 17.0 12.6 14.5 17.7 14.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.3 0.1 1.0 0.0 0.1 1.4 0.0 Delay (s) 12.3 16.9 9.3 12.7 14.1 18.0 12.7 14.6 19.0 14.4 Level of Service B B A B BBBBBB Approach Delay (s) 16.4 11.1 14.7 17.7 Approach LOS BBBB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 56.6 Sum of lost time (s) 20.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t 1 *i t f *i t f HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 19: Lake Road & Sierra Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 19 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 315 105 75 225 70 100 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 Hourly flow rate (vph) 358 119 85 256 80 114 Pedestrians 1 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL None Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 478 845 419 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 419 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 426 vCu, unblocked vol 478 845 419 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 92 84 82 cM capacity (veh/h) 1078 513 638 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 477 85 256 80 114 Volume Left 0 85 0 80 0 Volume Right 119 0 0 0 114 cSH 1700 1078 1700 513 638 Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.08 0.15 0.16 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 6 0 14 16 Control Delay (s) 0.0 8.6 0.0 13.3 11.9 Lane LOS A B B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 2.2 12.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t r HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 20: Lake Road & Everett Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 20 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 135 275 180 325 180 110 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1805 1881 1792 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1615 1805 1881 1792 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 145 296 194 349 194 118 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 241 0 0 25 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 145 55 194 349 287 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 7 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.1 9.1 11.2 31.1 14.9 Effective Green, g (s) 9.1 9.1 11.2 31.1 14.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.23 0.63 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 334 299 411 1189 543 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.11 0.19 c0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.18 0.47 0.29 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 17.8 16.9 16.4 4.1 14.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.4 1.0 0.2 1.5 Delay (s) 18.8 17.3 17.5 4.3 15.7 Level of Service BBBAB Approach Delay (s) 17.8 9.0 15.7 Approach LOS B A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 49.2 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I i*t 1* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 21: 43rd Avenue & Everett Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 21 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 120 30 305 155 25 170 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1881 1615 1805 1881 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1615 1881 1615 1805 1881 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 129 32 328 167 27 183 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 27 0 84 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 129 5 328 84 27 183 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.9 7.9 23.0 23.0 1.1 29.1 Effective Green, g (s) 7.9 7.9 23.0 23.0 1.1 29.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.50 0.50 0.02 0.63 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 310 277 941 808 43 1190 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.17 c0.01 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.02 0.35 0.10 0.63 0.15 Uniform Delay, d1 17.0 15.8 7.0 6.1 22.2 3.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.0 0.4 0.1 26.4 0.1 Delay (s) 18.1 15.9 7.4 6.2 48.6 3.5 Level of Service BBAADA Approach Delay (s) 17.6 7.0 9.3 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.37 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 46.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I *i f t f *i t HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 22: Leadbetter Road & Everett Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 22 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 5 55 60 275 140 5 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 59 65 296 151 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 321 pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 vC, conflicting volume 578 153 156 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 525 153 156 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 93 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 466 898 1436 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 65 65 296 156 Volume Left 5 65 0 0 Volume Right 59 0 0 5 cSH 834 1436 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.04 0.17 0.09 Queue Length 95th (ft)6400 Control Delay (s) 9.7 7.6 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 9.7 1.4 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t I V t 1* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 23: Nourse Road-15th Street & 283rd Avenue 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 23 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 15 55 50 95 65 5 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 59 54 102 70 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 282 73 75 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 282 73 75 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 94 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 687 995 1537 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 75 156 75 Volume Left 16 54 0 Volume Right 59 0 5 cSH 908 1537 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.03 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 3 0 Control Delay (s) 9.3 2.7 0.0 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 9.3 2.7 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 V 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 24: Lake Road & Parker Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 24 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 30 365 200 40 255 10 160 15 60 5 15 30 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.90 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1881 1564 1752 3519 1787 1636 1805 1634 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.70 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1881 1564 1752 3519 1362 1636 1333 1634 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 Adj. Flow (vph) 34 415 227 45 290 11 182 17 68 6 17 34 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 132 02005100250 Lane Group Flow (vph) 34 415 95 45 299 0 182 34 0 6 26 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 13 5 5 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 3% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 14% 0% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 2.6 23.5 23.5 4.2 25.1 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 Effective Green, g (s) 2.6 23.5 23.5 4.2 25.1 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.42 0.42 0.08 0.45 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 84 789 656 131 1577 348 418 340 417 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.22 c0.03 0.08 0.02 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 c0.13 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.53 0.15 0.34 0.19 0.52 0.08 0.02 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 25.9 12.1 10.0 24.6 9.3 17.9 15.9 15.6 15.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.2 0.6 0.1 1.6 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 29.1 12.7 10.1 26.2 9.4 19.5 16.0 15.6 15.8 Level of Service C B B C A B B B B Approach Delay (s) 12.7 11.6 18.4 15.8 Approach LOS BBBB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 56.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I *i t i**i tfc HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 25: Lake Road & 218th Avenue 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 25 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 10 530 410 35 65 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 576 446 38 71 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1058 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 484 774 242 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 484 774 242 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 79 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1090 336 765 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 11 288 288 297 187 82 Volume Left 11 000071 Volume Right 00003811 cSH 1090 1700 1700 1700 1700 363 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft)1000021 Control Delay (s) 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.8 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 17.8 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ¥j +1*V HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 26: 1st Street & Friberg Street-202nd Avenue 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 26 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 170 490 0 0 350 45 0 0 0 35 0 80 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3574 3517 1805 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.76 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3574 3517 1439 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 185 533 0 0 380 49 0 0 0 38 0 87 RTOR Reduction (vph)00001200000075 Lane Group Flow (vph) 185 533 0 0 417 000003812 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.3 28.1 13.8 5.6 5.6 Effective Green, g (s) 10.3 28.1 13.8 5.6 5.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.67 0.33 0.13 0.13 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 441 2408 1164 193 217 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.15 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.22 0.36 0.20 0.05 Uniform Delay, d1 13.2 2.6 10.6 16.1 15.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.1 Delay (s) 14.0 2.7 10.8 16.6 15.8 Level of Service B A B B B Approach Delay (s) 5.6 10.8 0.0 16.1 Approach LOS ABAB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.4 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 41.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*ft*4 i*4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 27: 13th Street & Friberg Street 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 27 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 300 40 40 250 10 65 10 70 5 10 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 4.8 4.8 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.98 1.00 0.93 0.96 Flt Protected 1.00 0.99 0.98 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1845 1837 1702 1689 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.92 0.84 0.90 Satd. Flow (perm) 1845 1696 1470 1536 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 341 45 45 284 11 74 11 80 6 11 6 RTOR Reduction (vph)0500100490050 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 381 0 0 339 0 0 116 0 0 18 0 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)2621 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 2% 0% 2% 17% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 25% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2648 Permitted Phases 2648 Actuated Green, G (s) 22.7 22.7 8.4 8.4 Effective Green, g (s) 22.7 22.7 8.4 8.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 4.8 4.8 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1012 930 298 312 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 c0.08 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.36 0.39 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 5.3 5.3 14.3 13.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.1 Delay (s) 5.6 5.5 15.1 13.4 Level of Service AABB Approach Delay (s) 5.6 5.5 15.1 13.4 Approach LOS AABB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.38 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 41.4 Sum of lost time (s) 10.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t 1 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 28: Goodwin Road & Camas Meadows Drive 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 28 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 340 35 30 225 75 65 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 370 38 33 245 82 71 Pedestrians 2 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 410 681 372 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 410 681 372 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.3 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 80 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 1121 406 673 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 370 38 277 82 71 Volume Left 0 0 33 82 0 Volume Right 0 38 0 0 71 cSH 1700 1700 1121 406 673 Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.02 0.03 0.20 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 2 19 9 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 1.2 16.1 11.0 Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.2 13.7 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t f 4 r HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 29: Goodwin Road & Ingle Road 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 29 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SEL SER Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 110 295 175 70 110 80 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 120 321 190 76 120 87 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 266 788 228 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 266 788 228 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 63 89 cM capacity (veh/h) 1298 327 811 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SE 1 SE 2 Volume Total 440 266 120 87 Volume Left 120 0 120 0 Volume Right 0 76 0 87 cSH 1298 1700 327 811 Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.16 0.37 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 0 41 9 Control Delay (s) 2.9 0.0 22.2 10.0 Lane LOS A C A Approach Delay (s) 2.9 0.0 17.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 *i f4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Camas TIF Update 30: 28th Street & 232nd Avenue 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Camas TIF Update 2011 Existing Conditions (PM Peak) Synchro 7 - Report DKS Associates Page 30 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 5 290 60 10 190 0 50 5 15 5 5 5 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 315 65 11 207 0 54 5 16 5 5 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 207 380 595 587 348 606 620 207 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 207 380 595 587 348 606 620 207 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 99 87 99 98 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1377 1189 406 419 698 394 401 839 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 386 217 76 16 Volume Left 5 11 54 5 Volume Right 65 0 16 5 cSH 1377 1189 447 482 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.17 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 15 3 Control Delay (s) 0.1 0.5 14.7 12.7 Lane LOS AABB Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.5 14.7 12.7 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4*4*4*4* APPENDIX C EXISTING SIGNAL WARR ANTS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Signal Warrant Analysis Scenario: 2015 PM Peak Intersection Peak Hour Major Volume Minor Volume Major Geometry/ Minor Geometry Warrant Met 6th Avenue/Norwood Street PM 1,515 45 2 / 2 No SR 500/14th Avenue PM 320 130 1/1 No Figure 4C -3.Warrant 3 ,Peak Hour LULU CLO MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 4 Note:150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane. APPENDIX D FOCUS-AREA MESOSCOPIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY MEMO DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S 1400 SW Fifth Avenue Suite 500 Portland, OR 97201 (503) 243-3500 ((503) 243-1934 fax www.dksassociates.com MEMORANDUM DATE: May 20, 2011 TO: Mark Harrington, RTC FROM: Chris Maciejewski, P.E., P.T.O.E. Garth Appanaitis SUBJECT: Focus-Area Mesoscopic Forecasting Methodology P11057-000 The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize how a regional focus-area mesoscopic model will be applied to help post process forecasted traffic volumes. The following sections describe the creation of the base focus-area network as well as the steps for subsequent alternative testing. All forecasts will be based on the regional travel demand model (using the focus-area model as an intermediate post-processing tool) and National Highway Cooperative Research Program (NCHRP) 255 methodology. For the purposes of this document, the following definitions apply: Focus-area – a “window” within the regional model selected for inclusion in the mesoscopic model. This is similar to a “sub-area” (with regards to consistency with the regional model at the window edges), but has additional detail related to the mesoscopic modeling Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology – analysis of intersection turn delay based on approach geometry, control, and traffic volumes Mesoscopic model – a model that has additional detail beyond traditional macroscopic travel demand models. For the purposes of this document, the mesoscopic model contains the complete street system (compared to the arterial and collector system present in most macroscopic models) as well as intersection geometry and control. The traffic assignment is performed through and iterative, deterministic process, rather than the stochastic process of many microsimulation models that measure individual driver characteristics. NAVTEQ – the system of digital maps that provides the basis for many navigation technologies DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Mesoscopic Focus-Area Forecasting Methodology May 20, 2011 Page 2 of 5 Regional model – the adopted local travel demand model. In some cases this may be for an individual community, county, or larger regional area, such as Metro Creating the Focus-Area Model The following steps (summarized in the attached flow chart) would be followed to create the mesoscopic focus-area base model. Regional Model The foundation for the base and future year traffic forecasts will be the established regional travel demand model (RTC). The use of the mesoscopic focus-area model will add additional detail to the adopted RTC model (as described in the following sections) to aid post-processing of traffic volume forecasts. Cut Focus-Area A focus-area “window” of the regional model will be selected for refinement and inclusion in the mesoscopic model. All areas outside the focus-area (such as external zones and links) will be maintained in the mesoscopic model through fixed traffic demand at the “cut” locations (i.e., links that become external to the focus-area). Areas inside the focus-area will be further refined with additional detail to better reflect traffic loading and circulation within the model area. The extents of the focus area will be selected based on the potential influence area of the enhancements to be evaluated, layout of street network and geographic barriers (minimizing the number of regional link cuts), and the existing zone system. Add Streets and Intersection Control The focus-area model network will include all local, collector, and arterial streets within the focus-area that are necessary to reflect the level of circulation detail desired for the evaluation. The roadway network may be built off of NAVTEQ files to create a routable network with local street-level facilities, but the NAVTEQ network attributes will not be relied upon (e.g., link speed). Attributes of the regional model and field inventories will be used for configuring the current model, which will include number of travel lanes and speeds. Intersection control will be included for all intersections within the focus-area to allow for intersection control delay calculations following HCM methodology. Planned improvements (roads and/or control changes) with committed funding will be added for the future year model. Load Zones based on Parking Lots, Access Points, and Street Parking The vehicle trips for each of the zones (i.e., the peak hour trip table from the travel demand model) will be added to the network (generally at multiple locations) to reflect parking lots, access points, and street parking. In some cases zone loading may be weighted (such as for parking lots with multiple driveways), while in other cases it will be applied uniformly (such as residential areas with on-street parking). Some zones may be further split or disaggregated from Mesoscopic Focus-Area Forecasting Methodology May 20, 2011 Page 3 of 5 the original size occurring in the adopted model. In such cases, the sum of the total zone trips and the trip distribution will remain consistent with the control total in the regional model. Check Reasonableness of Focus-Area Model Volumes with Regional Model Traffic volumes in the focus-area model will be compared to the regional model at external links and major facilities to ensure reasonable consistency with the regional model. Traffic volumes at external links will match exactly with the regional model (control total), while internal links may vary slightly due to additional network detail and parallel routes. Identify Discrepancies between Counts and Model Volumes Traffic volumes in the focus-area model will be compared to observed traffic counts to ensure that local circulation patterns are being reflected correctly. Turn movement counts will be compared to resulting model turn volumes and will be plotted to measure the quality of the mesoscopic model trip assignment. Both the average relationship between counts and model volumes (ie, average factor of model volume to counted volume, optimally a value of 1) as well as the goodness of fit (ie, coefficient of determination or R2 value, optimally 1) will be reported as an overall measure of the focus-area validation. Check Shortest Routes, Turn Delays, etc Travel times and major routes through the focus-area will be reviewed to verify that traffic routes between OD pairs are reasonable. Routes that are not shortest path or are a discrepancy from counted vehicle volumes will be analyzed to determine if network coding errors exist. Model Edits and Calibration Posted speed limits will be the default speed for streets in the mesoscopic network, but may require modification to better represent local conditions (e.g., parking, heavy pedestrian use, significant grades, etc.). In some cases intersection geometry/control may need to be modified to match local conditions (e.g., wide shoulder used for right turn movements, non-standard HCM stop control, etc.). Modifications to link speeds should be compared to the attributes in the regional travel demand model, where adjustments may have been made for calibration purposes. Post Process Volumes Traffic volumes will be extracted from both the existing and future year focus-area mesoscopic models. While the models may be used to test some network alternatives and display sketch- level network assignment results (e.g., volume-difference plots), raw model volumes will not be used for reported intersection analysis. A post processing technique following NCHRP 255 methodology will be used to refine model travel forecasts to the volume forecasts used for future intersection analysis. Mesoscopic Focus-Area Forecasting Methodology May 20, 2011 Page 4 of 5 Evaluating New Network Scenarios The following steps will be used in the event that the regional model and a full model run are used for regionally significant land use or transportation network changes. Land use modification or transportation network improvements that are limited to local impacts will not require a full regional model run. In some cases the focus-area model without a full model run may be used to test preliminary alternatives for screening or brainstorming purposes. Regional Model (If Needed) Alternative transportation improvements (if any) that are being analyzed will be added to the regional model before running Cut Focus-Area (If Needed) The focus-area (with the same extents as the base model) will be cut from the full regional model as previously described for each of the formal alternative scenarios (if needed). Cutting the focus-area model will provide an updated trip table that is consistent with the latest full regional model run. Import Trip Table to Focus-Area Model (If Needed) The trip table resulting from the new focus-area cut of the full model run will be applied to the focus-area network that was previously developed (including any proposed network modifications). This step retains the effort of calibrating the base focus-area model but incorporates changes to the trip table that may result from the full model run. Trip Table Assignment The assignment of the focus-area alternative will be run by assigning the trip table that resulted from the regional model alternative run. This is a re-assignment of the regional travel demand model trip table onto the detailed focus-area model network. Post Process A post processing technique following NCHRP 255 methodology will be used to refine model travel forecasts to the volume forecasts used for future intersection analysis. Regional Model Regional Focus-Area Mesoscopic Model Application To Help Post Processing Create Focus-Area Model Run New Scenarios Cut Focus-Area Add Streets and Intersection Control Load Zones based on Parking Lots, Access Points, and Street Parking Regional Model Cut Focus-Area Import Trip Table to Focus-Area Model Assignment Post Process Traffic Counts Assignment Check Reasonableness of Focus-Area Model Volumes with Regional Model Identify Discrepancies between Counts and Model Volumes Check Shortest Routes, Turn Delays, etc Model Edits / Calibration Post Process Volumes ±t t t i f ¥s t I t f D/fS Associates APPENDIX E LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS BY TAZ (TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS ZONE) DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Growth TAZ #Households Retail Employment Other Employment Households Retail Employment Other Employment Households Retail Employment Other Employment 392 0 0 0 10 0 2 10 0 1 393 146 0 2 261 0 125 115 0 123 394 63 0 3 93 0 8 30 0 4 395 42 0 2 67 1 149 24 1 147 396 19 0 0 132 0 0 113 0 0 397 158 0 14 361 0 14 204 0 0 398 178 0 8 200 2 6 22 2 -2 399 80 0 0 117 0 0 37 0 0 400 15 0 0 143 0 0 128 0 0 401 0 0 1066 0 0 1051 0 0 -16 402 139 98 17 145 109 23 6 11 7 403 36 0 35 40 0 40 4 0 5 404 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 405 53 0 1 58 0 13 5 0 12 406 1 0 0 36 97 189 35 97 189 407 0 0 0 40 0 0 40 0 0 408 69 0 2 143 0 2 74 0 0 409 61 0 22 63 0 45 3 0 23 411 0 0 281 0 208 432 0 208 151 412 211 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 413 101 0 99 106 0 99 5 0 0 414 222 0 11 242 0 11 20 0 0 415 340 0 29 409 20 47 69 20 18 416 243 0 0 327 0 0 84 0 0 417 100 0 0 133 0 0 33 0 0 419 0 0 0 2 30 185 2 30 185 420 0 0 1065 0 0 1372 0 0 307 421 4 0 4 339 0 4 335 0 -1 422 49 3 165 55 2 164 6 -1 -1 423 265 0 14 308 0 14 43 0 0 424 133 0 17 161 0 18 28 0 1 425 1 0 1 10 0 674 9 0 672 426 2 0 2 334 63 237 332 63 235 480 12 0 1 26 9 121 14 9 120 482 85 0 15 212 1 16 127 1 1 483 28 0 58 512 485 2977 484 485 2919 484 172 0 19 227 0 19 55 0 0 485 38 0 19 231 0 19 193 0 0 487 26 0 7 114 0 10 88 0 3 489 29 0 154 69 144 156 40 144 2 490 55 1 7 662 98 65 607 97 58 629 129 0 0 129 0 0 0 0 0 630 1 23 162 4 23 237 3 0 75 652 23 0 8 56 194 538 33 194 530 653 71 0 0 171 0 0 100 0 0 659 234 0 0 791 0 307 557 0 307 900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 901 190 8 43 213 9 110 23 1 68 902 179 0 0 153 0 0 -26 0 0 903 5 0 0 40 0 0 34 0 0 904 5 0 110 7 0 110 1 0 0 905 16 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 906 2 0 0 25 0 0 22 0 0 907 76 0 2 86 0 2 9 0 0 908 34 0 0 71 0 0 36 0 0 909 34 0 6 93 0 10 59 0 4 910 29 0 6 41 0 9 12 0 3 911 35 0 0 148 0 0 113 0 0 912 201 0 0 364 0 0 163 0 0 913 177 4 36 234 18 53 57 14 17 914 8 0 68 7 0 66 -1 0 -1 915 94 0 0 147 186 0 53 186 0 916 25 23 19 26 24 49 1 1 29 917 21 43 171 22 52 174 1 8 3 20352005 Growth TAZ #Households Retail Employment Other Employment Households Retail Employment Other Employment Households Retail Employment Other Employment 20352005 918 0 142 318 0 137 335 0 -5 17 919 37 0 27 48 0 27 11 0 0 920 25 12 63 32 16 94 7 4 31 921 155 0 3 275 16 6 119 16 3 922 50 25 35 56 27 75 7 2 40 923 132 0 3 148 0 29 16 0 26 924 19 0 1 19 0 15 1 0 14 925 0 0 129 0 0 392 0 0 263 926 0 0 528 0 0 632 0 0 104 927 1 0 0 36 97 47 35 97 47 928 13 0 0 15 0 0 2 0 0 929 55 0 0 75 0 0 20 0 0 930 31 0 0 32 0 0 1 0 0 931 36 0 0 75 0 0 39 0 0 932 80 0 0 105 0 0 26 0 0 933 32 0 21 32 0 21 0 0 0 934 10 0 2 73 0 2 64 0 0 935 53 0 2 125 0 2 71 0 0 936 53 0 0 52 0 0 -1 0 0 937 39 19 0 74 23 13 35 4 13 938 0 0 161 0 0 327 0 0 166 939 135 0 9 140 0 19 5 0 10 940 218 0 0 222 0 0 4 0 0 941 1 0 77 8 0 156 7 0 79 942 37 0 0 43 0 0 6 0 0 943 62 8 11 61 10 23 -1 2 12 944 2 0 0 90 170 346 88 170 346 945 0 0 0 0 86 25 0 86 25 946 66 0 52 66 106 140 0 106 88 947 74 0 12 74 0 14 0 0 3 948 167 0 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 949 43 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 950 52 0 11 97 0 11 44 0 0 951 99 0 0 112 0 0 13 0 0 952 20 0 0 30 0 0 11 0 0 953 3 0 25 370 0 25 367 0 0 954 109 0 0 129 0 0 20 0 0 955 0 0 0 157 0 0 157 0 0 956 18 0 12 177 0 61 160 0 49 957 6 0 0 39 0 0 33 0 0 958 38 0 1 115 2 4 77 2 3 959 3 0 0 457 0 0 454 0 0 961 0 0 0 0 210 4 0 210 4 962 0 3 112 0 2 114 0 -1 2 963 5 0 3 40 467 505 35 467 502 964 24 0 36 57 0 37 33 0 1 965 24 0 26 57 90 375 33 90 349 966 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 967 0 0 0 0 0 505 0 0 505 968 129 35 18 129 189 116 0 154 98 970 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 6 971 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 3 973 4 0 0 40 1 0 36 1 0 975 26 0 7 140 24 40 114 24 33 976 35 0 83 119 0 82 84 0 -1 977 39 0 19 231 0 19 192 0 0 978 1 0 153 3 0 153 2 0 0 APPENDIX F FUTURE (2035) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 1: 6th Avenue & Norwood Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 100 1160 140 155 580 30 95 15 125 10 15 25 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 105 1221 147 163 611 32 100 16 132 11 16 26 Pedestrians 2 2 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 644 1368 2171 2476 686 1901 2518 307 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 644 1368 2171 2476 686 1901 2518 307 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 7.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.5 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 89 68 0 0 66 0 8 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 935 508 4 9 391 0 17 693 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 WB 4 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 105 814 554 163 305 305 32 100 147 53 Volume Left 105 0 0 163 0 0 0 100 0 11 Volume Right 0 0 147 0 0 0 32 0 132 26 cSH 935 1700 1700 508 1700 1700 1700 4 70 0 Volume to Capacity 0.11 0.48 0.33 0.32 0.18 0.18 0.02 27.56 2.09 Err Queue Length 95th (ft) 9 0 0 34 0 0 0 Err 342 Err Control Delay (s) 9.3 0.0 0.0 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Err 632.6 Err Lane LOS A C F F F Approach Delay (s) 0.7 3.1 4419.0 Err Approach LOS F F Intersection Summary Average Delay Err Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< 4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 2: 6th Avenue & Ivy Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 180 1010 30 5 675 30 10 5 5 10 5 95 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 189 1063 32 5 711 32 11 5 5 11 5 100 Pedestrians 7 2 6 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 0 1 Right turn flare (veh)3 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 748 1097 1878 2219 556 1668 2219 377 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 748 1097 1878 2219 556 1668 2219 377 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 78 99 61 84 99 77 84 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 852 643 27 34 476 46 34 623 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 721 563 361 387 21 116 Volume Left 189 0 5 0 11 11 Volume Right 0 32 0 32 5 100 cSH 852 1700 643 1700 38 306 Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.33 0.01 0.23 0.55 0.38 Queue Length 95th (ft) 21 0 1 0 49 43 Control Delay (s) 5.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 182.7 28.9 Lane LOS A A F D Approach Delay (s) 2.9 0.1 182.7 28.9 Approach LOS F D Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< f4fc4fc4»4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 3: Division Street & 6th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement SBL SBR NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 25 155 135 885 630 35 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 26 163 142 932 663 37 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1432 350 700 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1432 350 700 tC, single (s) 6.9 7.0 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 75 75 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 104 643 906 Direction, Lane # SB 1 NE 1 NE 2 SW 1 SW 2 Volume Total 189 453 621 442 258 Volume Left 26 142 0 0 0 Volume Right 163 0 0 0 37 cSH 373 906 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.51 0.16 0.37 0.26 0.15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 69 14 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 24.2 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 24.2 1.8 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 t/ V 4+ HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 4: Adams Street & 6th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement WBL WBR SBL SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 485 10 10 215 165 745 Sign Control Free Stop Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 511 11 11 226 174 784 Pedestrians 9 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1647 525 521 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1647 525 521 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 89 59 83 cM capacity (veh/h) 92 550 1045 Direction, Lane # WB 1 SB 1 NE 1 NE 2 Volume Total 521 237 174 784 Volume Left 0 11 174 0 Volume Right 11 226 0 0 cSH 1700 451 1045 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.31 0.53 0.17 0.46 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 75 15 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 21.5 9.1 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 21.5 1.7 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 V V ;>A V V HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 5: Dallas Street & 3rd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 135 90 35 45 135 60 20 530 85 30 400 90 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.98 0.97 0.98 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1799 1740 1822 1871 1581 Flt Permitted 0.71 0.90 0.98 0.93 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1308 1589 1787 1749 1581 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 147 98 38 49 147 65 22 576 92 33 435 98 RTOR Reduction (vph)08001800800051 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 275 0 0 243 0 0 682 0 0 468 47 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 14 10 10 14 1 13 13 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 4% 2% 8% 0% 2% 1% 3% 1% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 8426 Permitted Phases 84266 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 24.2 24.2 24.2 Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 16.0 24.2 24.2 24.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.48 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 417 506 861 843 762 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm c0.21 0.15 c0.38 0.27 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.48 0.79 0.56 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 13.8 10.9 9.2 6.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.9 0.3 4.7 0.5 0.0 Delay (s) 17.6 14.0 15.6 9.6 7.0 Level of Service BBBAA Approach Delay (s) 17.6 14.0 15.6 9.2 Approach LOS BBBA Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.2 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group \J ^r 5 / r4»4»4»4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 6: SR-14 & Union Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 85 1035 20 10 755 75 5 5 5 85 10 90 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.95 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1671 1858 1805 3433 1785 1671 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.85 Satd. Flow (perm) 1671 1858 1805 3433 1646 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 89 1089 21 11 795 79 5 5 5 89 11 95 RTOR Reduction (vph)0000500400330 Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 1110 0 11 869 0 0 11 0 0 162 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 8% 2% 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.4 47.5 1.2 40.3 14.0 14.0 Effective Green, g (s) 8.4 47.5 1.2 40.3 14.0 14.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.60 0.02 0.51 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 178 1121 28 1758 293 257 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.60 0.01 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.11 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.99 0.39 0.49 0.04 0.63 Uniform Delay, d1 33.2 15.4 38.4 12.5 26.8 30.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 24.3 8.9 0.5 0.1 5.0 Delay (s) 35.4 39.6 47.3 13.0 26.8 34.9 Level of Service D D D B C C Approach Delay (s) 39.3 13.4 26.8 34.9 Approach LOS D B C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.7 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group >V ^t A V I V>< 'S ft*4»4» HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 7: 3rd Avenue & 2nd Avenue-4th Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 25 690 215 65 715 5 145 10 70 20 20 45 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1799 3385 1803 3501 1723 1671 Flt Permitted 0.33 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.76 0.90 Satd. Flow (perm) 630 3385 465 3501 1355 1526 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 27 750 234 71 777 5 158 11 76 22 22 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 40 000002200350 Lane Group Flow (vph) 27 944 0 71 782 0 0 223 0 0 58 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 3 3 7 1 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 3% 0% 3% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 6248 Permitted Phases 6248 Actuated Green, G (s) 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 13.4 13.4 Effective Green, g (s) 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 13.4 13.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 335 1799 247 1860 380 428 v/s Ratio Prot c0.28 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.15 c0.16 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.08 0.52 0.29 0.42 0.59 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 5.5 7.3 6.2 6.8 14.8 12.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.5 1.3 0.3 2.3 0.1 Delay (s) 5.7 7.8 7.4 7.1 17.1 13.0 Level of Service A A A A B B Approach Delay (s) 7.7 7.1 17.1 13.0 Approach LOS AABB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 47.8 Sum of lost time (s) 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group \J ^r 5 / 1 4»4» HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 8: 3rd Avenue & Crown Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 240 830 20 0 525 225 5 140 5 195 5 325 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3528 3390 1897 1615 1794 1599 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.60 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3528 3390 1881 1615 1135 1599 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 261 902 22 0 571 245 5 152 5 212 5 353 RTOR Reduction (vph)010057000300154 Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 923 0 0 759 0 0 157 2 0 217 199 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 2% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.4 48.5 27.1 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 Effective Green, g (s) 16.4 48.5 27.1 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.62 0.34 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 4.8 4.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 372 2171 1166 485 416 292 412 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.26 c0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.00 c0.19 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.43 0.65 0.32 0.00 0.74 0.48 Uniform Delay, d1 28.9 7.9 21.9 23.7 21.7 26.9 24.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.9 0.3 1.7 0.4 0.0 9.8 0.9 Delay (s) 34.8 8.2 23.5 24.1 21.7 36.7 25.7 Level of Service C A C C C D C Approach Delay (s) 14.0 23.5 24.0 29.9 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.8 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group >V ^t A V I V>< *1 +t»'S ft*f f44 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 9: 6th Avenue & Garfield Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 65 20 20 5 20 5 5 485 70 25 480 5 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 68 21 21 5 21 5 5 511 74 26 505 5 Pedestrians 3 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft)812 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1137 1124 550 1150 1158 508 511 587 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1137 1124 550 1150 1158 508 511 587 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.3 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.4 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 57 89 96 97 89 99 100 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 159 200 526 152 191 569 1065 995 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SE 1 NW 1 Volume Total 111 32 589 537 Volume Left 68 5 5 26 Volume Right 21 5 74 5 cSH 192 205 1065 995 Volume to Capacity 0.58 0.15 0.00 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 78 13 0 2 Control Delay (s) 46.4 25.7 0.1 0.7 Lane LOS E D A A Approach Delay (s) 46.4 25.7 0.1 0.7 Approach LOS E D Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 *\\c<" 4»4»4»4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 10: 14th Avenue & Everett Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 105 25 70 445 465 35 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 111 26 74 468 489 37 Pedestrians 2 1 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1505 1000 1019 1 1 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1505 1000 1019 1 1 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.5 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 85 56 57 70 cM capacity (veh/h) 29 171 166 1080 1620 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 137 542 526 Volume Left 111 0 489 Volume Right 0 468 37 cSH 35 618 1620 Volume to Capacity 3.95 0.88 0.30 Queue Length 95th (ft) Err 257 32 Control Delay (s) Err 38.5 7.8 Lane LOS F E A Approach Delay (s) Err 38.5 7.8 Approach LOS F E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1156.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 ><V V v4fc HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 11: 18th Avenue & Division Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 35 130 120 130 180 85 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 38 141 130 141 196 92 Pedestrians 2 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 646 244 290 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 646 244 290 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.3 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.4 2.2 p0 queue free % 90 82 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 394 784 1275 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 179 272 288 Volume Left 38 130 0 Volume Right 141 0 92 cSH 648 1275 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.10 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 9 0 Control Delay (s) 12.7 4.4 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 12.7 4.4 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 >>^t 1 V V 4 fc HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 12: 28th Avenue & Sierra Drive Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 50 185 20 25 110 35 5 75 50 35 30 45 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 54 201 22 27 120 38 5 82 54 38 33 49 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total (vph) 277 185 141 120 Volume Left (vph) 54 27 5 38 Volume Right (vph) 22 38 54 49 Hadj (s) -0.01 -0.05 -0.13 -0.11 Departure Headway (s) 4.8 4.9 5.1 5.2 Degree Utilization, x 0.37 0.25 0.20 0.17 Capacity (veh/h) 701 680 639 626 Control Delay (s) 10.7 9.6 9.4 9.2 Approach Delay (s) 10.7 9.6 9.4 9.2 Approach LOS BAAA Intersection Summary Delay 9.9 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< 4»4»4»4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 13: 18th Avenue & Cascade Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 115 150 5 0 105 25 50050110 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 121 158 5 0 111 26 50050116 Pedestrians 11 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 138 164 643 541 162 527 531 125 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 138 164 643 541 162 527 531 125 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 92 100 98 100 100 99 100 87 cM capacity (veh/h) 1457 1425 318 412 888 434 418 920 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 284 137 5 121 Volume Left 121 0 5 5 Volume Right 5 26 0 116 cSH 1457 1425 318 877 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 0 1 12 Control Delay (s) 3.7 0.0 16.5 9.8 Lane LOS A C A Approach Delay (s) 3.7 0.0 16.5 9.8 Approach LOS C A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< 4»4»4»4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 14: McIntosh Road & Brady Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 115 10 345 235 10 350 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 125 11 375 255 11 380 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 905 503 630 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 905 503 630 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 59 98 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 305 573 962 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 136 630 11 380 Volume Left 125 0 11 0 Volume Right 11 255 0 0 cSH 317 1700 962 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.43 0.37 0.01 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 52 0 1 0 Control Delay (s) 24.6 0.0 8.8 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 24.6 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 <<t A V I v HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 15: 16th Avenue & Brady Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 90 210 20 105 75 145 25 245 125 185 230 50 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 95 221 21 111 79 153 26 258 132 195 242 53 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total (vph) 337 342 416 489 Volume Left (vph) 95 111 26 195 Volume Right (vph) 21 153 132 53 Hadj (s) 0.03 -0.17 -0.16 0.06 Departure Headway (s) 9.2 9.1 8.7 9.1 Degree Utilization, x 0.86 0.86 1.01 1.24 Capacity (veh/h) 377 390 416 406 Control Delay (s) 48.9 47.6 75.8 154.7 Approach Delay (s) 48.9 47.6 75.8 154.7 Approach LOS E E F F Intersection Summary Delay 88.4 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< 4»4»4»4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 16: Pacific Rim Boulevard & Payne Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 70 345 395 45 635 55 175 5 10 50 25 140 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 76 375 429 49 690 60 190 5 11 54 27 152 Pedestrians 45 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 755 808 1355 1599 406 1176 1783 380 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 746 746 823 823 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 609 853 353 961 vCu, unblocked vol 755 808 1355 1599 406 1176 1783 380 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 94 0 98 98 81 87 75 cM capacity (veh/h) 861 823 188 235 598 284 215 621 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 76 250 554 49 460 290 207 234 Volume Left 76 0 0 49 0 0 190 54 Volume Right 0 0 429 0 0 60 11 152 cSH 861 1700 1700 823 1700 1700 197 415 Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.15 0.33 0.06 0.27 0.17 1.05 0.56 Queue Length 95th (ft)70050023684 Control Delay (s) 9.6 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 0.0 128.4 24.2 Lane LOS A A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.8 0.6 128.4 24.2 Approach LOS F C Intersection Summary Average Delay 15.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< 4»4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 17: Pacific Rim Boulevard & Parker Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 330 65 105 30 100 10 115 375 40 20 315 335 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 347 68 111 32 105 11 121 395 42 21 332 353 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total (vph) 347 179 84 63 318 239 187 518 Volume Left (vph) 347 0 32 0 121 0 21 0 Volume Right (vph) 0 111 0 11 0 42 0 353 Hadj (s) 0.50 -0.40 0.19 -0.12 0.25 -0.11 0.09 -0.47 Departure Headway (s) 8.6 7.7 9.1 8.8 8.3 7.9 8.0 7.4 Degree Utilization, x 0.83 0.38 0.21 0.16 0.73 0.53 0.41 1.07 Capacity (veh/h) 414 458 378 389 426 437 441 488 Control Delay (s) 40.0 14.2 13.4 12.3 29.6 18.3 15.3 86.9 Approach Delay (s) 31.2 12.9 24.7 67.9 Approach LOS D B C F Intersection Summary Delay 41.3 HCM Level of Service E Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< 4fc 4fc 4fc HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 18: 38th Avenue & Parker Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 145 385 135 155 245 60 180 265 340 170 410 165 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 3.5 5.0 3.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1803 1799 1805 1834 1770 1881 1569 1804 1881 1563 Flt Permitted 0.41 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 773 1799 248 1834 382 1881 1569 926 1881 1563 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 153 405 142 163 258 63 189 279 358 179 432 174 RTOR Reduction (vph)090070001750080 Lane Group Flow (vph) 153 538 0 163 314 0 189 279 183 179 432 94 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 7 1 1 7 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)11 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 3% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+pt pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 523167 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 38.3 30.3 38.9 30.6 40.5 29.9 38.2 36.5 27.9 35.9 Effective Green, g (s) 38.3 30.3 38.9 30.6 40.5 29.9 38.2 36.5 27.9 35.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 0.32 0.41 0.33 0.43 0.32 0.41 0.39 0.30 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 3.5 5.0 3.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.5 5.4 0.5 5.4 0.5 5.4 0.5 0.5 5.4 0.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 402 579 240 596 321 598 637 439 558 596 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.30 c0.06 0.17 c0.07 0.15 0.03 0.04 c0.23 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.22 0.19 0.09 0.12 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.93 0.68 0.53 0.59 0.47 0.29 0.41 0.77 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 18.5 30.9 21.2 25.9 19.2 25.7 18.8 19.7 30.2 19.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 22.2 5.9 1.8 1.8 1.4 0.1 0.2 8.0 0.0 Delay (s) 18.7 53.1 27.1 27.7 21.0 27.1 18.9 19.9 38.2 19.2 Level of Service B D C C C C B B D B Approach Delay (s) 45.6 27.5 22.1 29.8 Approach LOS DCCC Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 31.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 94.1 Sum of lost time (s) 20.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group >V ^t A V I V>< *\fc t f *1 t f HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 19: Lake Road & Sierra Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 765 230 230 475 95 310 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 832 250 250 516 103 337 Pedestrians 1 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL None Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1083 1974 958 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 958 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1016 vCu, unblocked vol 1083 1974 958 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 61 44 0 cM capacity (veh/h) 640 184 315 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 1082 250 516 103 337 Volume Left 0 250 0 103 0 Volume Right 250 0 0 0 337 cSH 1700 640 1700 184 315 Volume to Capacity 0.64 0.39 0.30 0.56 1.07 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 46 0 74 318 Control Delay (s) 0.0 14.2 0.0 47.2 108.2 Lane LOS B E F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 4.6 93.9 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 19.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 ^A>< \t ^f HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 20: Lake Road & Everett Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 530 485 330 420 330 380 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1805 1881 1755 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1615 1805 1881 1755 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 541 495 337 429 337 388 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 338 0 0 48 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 541 157 337 429 677 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 7 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 27.0 27.0 17.0 49.0 27.0 Effective Green, g (s) 27.0 27.0 17.0 49.0 27.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.20 0.58 0.32 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 573 513 361 1084 557 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 c0.19 0.23 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.94 0.31 0.93 0.40 1.21 Uniform Delay, d1 28.3 21.9 33.4 9.9 29.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 26.1 1.5 31.0 0.4 112.3 Delay (s) 54.3 23.5 64.5 10.3 141.3 Level of Service D C E B F Approach Delay (s) 39.6 34.1 141.3 Approach LOS D C F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 67.1 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 85.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.9% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group >>^t 1 V f t HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 21: 43rd Avenue & Everett Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 210 80 640 155 60 505 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1881 1615 1805 1881 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1615 1881 1615 1805 1881 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 221 84 674 163 63 532 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 67 0 80 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 221 17 674 83 63 532 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.0 15.0 36.7 36.7 6.6 48.3 Effective Green, g (s) 15.0 15.0 36.7 36.7 6.6 48.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.51 0.51 0.09 0.67 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 374 335 955 820 165 1257 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 c0.36 0.03 c0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.05 0.71 0.10 0.38 0.42 Uniform Delay, d1 25.9 23.0 13.7 9.2 30.9 5.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 0.1 2.7 0.1 1.7 0.4 Delay (s) 28.5 23.0 16.4 9.3 32.7 6.0 Level of Service C C B A C A Approach Delay (s) 27.0 15.0 8.8 Approach LOS C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.3 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group <<t A V I \f t f HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 22: Leadbetter Road & Everett Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 70 310 240 485 255 25 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 74 326 253 511 268 26 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 321 pX, platoon unblocked 0.78 vC, conflicting volume 1297 282 295 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1239 282 295 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 39 57 80 cM capacity (veh/h) 122 762 1278 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 400 253 511 295 Volume Left 74 253 0 0 Volume Right 326 0 0 26 cSH 387 1278 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 1.03 0.20 0.30 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 327 18 0 0 Control Delay (s) 88.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS F A Approach Delay (s) 88.0 2.8 0.0 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 25.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 >>^t 1 V V HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 23: Nourse Road-15th Street & 283rd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 15 55 50 95 65 5 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 58 53 100 68 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 276 71 74 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 276 71 74 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 94 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 693 997 1539 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 74 153 74 Volume Left 16 53 0 Volume Right 58 0 5 cSH 911 1539 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.03 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 3 0 Control Delay (s) 9.3 2.7 0.0 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 9.3 2.7 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 >>^t 1 V V 4 fc HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 24: Lake Road & Parker Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 925 670 40 525 10 340 20 195 10 20 45 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.90 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1881 1568 1752 3529 1787 1602 1805 1632 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.48 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1881 1568 1752 3529 1337 1602 917 1632 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 54 1005 728 43 571 11 370 22 212 11 22 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 239 010015200350 Lane Group Flow (vph) 54 1005 489 43 581 0 370 82 0 11 36 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 13 5 5 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 3% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 14% 0% Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.3 56.8 56.8 5.5 55.0 30.1 30.1 30.1 30.1 Effective Green, g (s) 7.3 56.8 56.8 5.5 55.0 30.1 30.1 30.1 30.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.53 0.53 0.05 0.52 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 124 1004 837 91 1824 378 453 259 462 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 c0.53 0.02 0.16 0.05 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 c0.28 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.44 1.00 0.58 0.47 0.32 0.98 0.18 0.04 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 47.6 24.8 16.8 49.0 14.9 37.8 28.8 27.7 28.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.4 28.6 3.0 3.8 0.5 40.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 Delay (s) 50.0 53.4 19.8 52.9 15.3 78.2 29.1 27.8 28.0 Level of Service D D B D B E C C C Approach Delay (s) 39.6 17.9 59.1 28.0 Approach LOS D B E C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 38.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 106.4 Sum of lost time (s) 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group >V ^t A V I V>< *i t f**i tt» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 25: Lake Road & 218th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 210 1270 805 110 375 190 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 221 1337 847 116 395 200 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1058 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 vC, conflicting volume 963 2016 482 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 825 1949 311 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 71 0 69 cM capacity (veh/h) 762 38 647 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 221 668 668 565 398 595 Volume Left 221 0000395 Volume Right 0000116200 cSH 762 1700 1700 1700 1700 56 Volume to Capacity 0.29 0.39 0.39 0.33 0.23 10.58 Queue Length 95th (ft) 30 0000Err Control Delay (s) 11.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Err Lane LOS B F Approach Delay (s) 1.7 0.0 Err Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 1909.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 ><V V *i ft V HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 26: 1st Street & Friberg Street-202nd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 330 1365 0 0 840 275 0 0 0 90 0 255 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3574 3451 1805 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.76 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3574 3451 1439 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 347 1437 0 0 884 289 0 0 0 95 0 268 RTOR Reduction (vph)000033000000228 Lane Group Flow (vph) 347 1437 0 0 1140 000009540 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.5 51.9 31.4 10.6 10.6 Effective Green, g (s) 16.5 51.9 31.4 10.6 10.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.74 0.45 0.15 0.15 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 418 2631 1537 216 243 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.40 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm c0.07 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.55 0.74 0.44 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 25.7 4.1 16.2 27.2 26.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 13.4 0.2 2.0 1.4 0.3 Delay (s) 39.1 4.3 18.2 28.7 26.4 Level of Service D A B C C Approach Delay (s) 11.1 18.2 0.0 27.0 Approach LOS B B A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.5 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group >V ^t A V I V>< *1 +t»'S ft*f4»4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 27: 13th Street & Friberg Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 710 75 145 880 15 150 15 395 10 15 15 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 4.8 4.8 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.90 0.95 Flt Protected 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1851 1847 1660 1616 Flt Permitted 0.99 0.75 0.90 0.87 Satd. Flow (perm) 1825 1390 1507 1424 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 10 724 77 148 898 15 153 15 403 10 15 15 RTOR Reduction (vph)050000010100110 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 806 0 0 1061 0 0 470 0 0 29 0 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)2621 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 2% 0% 2% 17% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 25% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2648 Permitted Phases 2648 Actuated Green, G (s) 49.5 49.5 25.2 25.2 Effective Green, g (s) 49.5 49.5 25.2 25.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 4.8 4.8 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1063 809 447 422 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm 0.44 c0.76 c0.31 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.76 1.31 1.05 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 13.3 17.8 29.9 21.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.2 148.8 56.5 0.1 Delay (s) 16.4 166.5 86.4 21.6 Level of Service B F F C Approach Delay (s) 16.4 166.5 86.4 21.6 Approach LOS B F F C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 96.7 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.22 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 85.0 Sum of lost time (s) 10.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 151.0% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group >V ^t A V I V>< 4»4»4»4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 28: Goodwin Road & Camas Meadows Drive Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 930 155 145 735 180 140 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 979 163 153 774 189 147 Pedestrians 2 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 588 pX, platoon unblocked 0.70 0.70 0.70 vC, conflicting volume 1144 2060 981 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 995 2295 763 tC, single (s) 4.2 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.3 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 68 0 48 cM capacity (veh/h) 475 21 284 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 979 163 926 189 147 Volume Left 0 0 153 189 0 Volume Right 0 163 0 0 147 cSH 1700 1700 475 21 284 Volume to Capacity 0.58 0.10 0.32 9.13 0.52 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 34 Err 69 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.6 Err 30.5 Lane LOS B F D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 10.6 5637.8 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 793.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 115.6% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 ^A>< t f f4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 29: Goodwin Road & Ingle Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SEL SER Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 355 690 440 95 260 170 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 374 726 463 100 274 179 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 563 1987 513 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 563 1987 513 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 63 0 68 cM capacity (veh/h) 1008 42 561 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SE 1 SE 2 Volume Total 1100 563 274 179 Volume Left 374 0 274 0 Volume Right 0 100 0 179 cSH 1008 1700 42 561 Volume to Capacity 0.37 0.33 6.48 0.32 Queue Length 95th (ft) 43 0 Err 34 Control Delay (s) 8.2 0.0 Err 14.4 Lane LOS A F B Approach Delay (s) 8.2 0.0 6051.6 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 1298.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 109.3% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 f4fc HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Base Conditions (PM Peak) 30: 28th Street & 232nd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 9/29/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 65 675 130 15 545 20 50 10 45 25 10 25 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 68 711 137 16 574 21 53 11 47 26 11 26 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 595 847 1563 1542 779 1584 1600 584 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 595 847 1563 1542 779 1584 1600 584 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 98 29 90 88 61 89 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 991 799 74 106 397 67 98 515 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 916 611 111 63 Volume Left 68 16 53 26 Volume Right 137 21 47 26 cSH 991 799 119 115 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.02 0.93 0.55 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 2 148 65 Control Delay (s) 1.8 0.5 132.5 69.1 Lane LOS A A F F Approach Delay (s) 1.8 0.5 132.5 69.1 Approach LOS F F Intersection Summary Average Delay 12.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.1% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 >V ^t A V I V>< 4»4»4»4» APPENDIX G FUTURE (2035) SIGNAL WARRANTS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Signal Warrant Analysis Scenario: 2035 Improved PM Peak Intersection Peak Hour Major Volume Minor Volume Major Geometry/ Minor Geometry Warrant Met 6th Avenue/Norwood Street PM 2,130 285 2 / 2 Yes 6th Avenue/Ivy Street PM 1,920 85 2/1 No SR 500/14th Avenue PM N/A N/A 1/1 N/A Pacific Rim Blvd/Payne Road PM 1,300 270 2/1 Yes Lake Rd/Sierra Street PM 1,545 525 1/2 Yes Nourse Road-15th Street/283rd Ave PM 815 140 1/1 No Lake Road/218th/Payne PM 2,150 20 2/1 No Goodwin Road/Camas Meadows PM 1,775 485 2/2 Yes Goodwin/Ingle PM 1,640 415 2/2 Yes 28th/232nd Avenue PM 1,175 70 1/1 No Brady/16th PM 1,000 310 1/1 Yes Parker/Pacific Rim PM 1,220 355 2/2 Yes Figure 4 C -3.Warrant 3 ,Peak Hour MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES—VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) ‘Note:150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume fcr a minor-street approach with one lane. APPENDIX H TIF RATE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS MEMO DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S MEMORANDUM DATE: March 2, 2012 TO: Curleigh (James) Carothers, City of Camas FROM: Chris Maciejewski, PE, PTOE Julie Sosnovske, PE SUBJECT: Draft TIF Alternatives Analysis P11057-000 The current traffic impact fee calculation methodology has been utilized since 2003. The basis of the calculation is the assessment of PM peak hour vehicle trips from the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation: An ITE Informational Report and a cost rate applied to each trip-end on a citywide basis. Chapter 5 of the previous TIF study provides background into the basis of the TIF. As part of this update, there are several areas of the TIF calculation that have options requiring further review at this time, including the following: Daily vs. PM peak trips: whether to use daily or PM peak hour trip generation for assessing the TIF Citywide vs. district areas vs. overlay areas: whether to alter the TIF rate in different areas of the city Cost basis/Multi-Modal Improvement Costs: whether to include fronting costs and/or right-of- way into the TIF as well as whether modes other than motor vehicle (such as bike lane and sidewalk costs) are included in the TIF calculation Reimbursement costs: whether to include reimbursement costs (i.e. repaying previously constructed projects using TIF funds) in the TIF calculation Right-of-way costs: whether to include right-of-way costs, or some share of right-of-way costs Opportunities for other funding sources: whether to include costs that could potentially be covered through other funding sources (such as grants, etc.) Late comers agreements: how to handle situations where adjacent property owners are not ready to develop at the time TIF projects are being constructed Cost indexing: Addressing increased construction costs over time ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Considerations for each of the TIF options presented above were evaluated and are summarized in the following sections. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Draft Future Alternatives Analysis Memorandum March 2, 2012 Page 2 of 9 DAILY VS. PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS The ratio of average daily to average PM peak hour trip generation rates was prepared for many of the land uses identified in Trip Generation: An Informational Report. Land uses that would generally benefit (i.e. pay a lower rate relative to other uses) from using a daily rate compared to a PM peak hour rate were identified as were land uses that would generally be penalized for changing to a daily rate. General categories of land use and how they are likely to be affected, relative to the existing PM peak hour structure, are summarized below, with more detailed tables in the appendix: Uses likely to generate relatively fewer trips for daily compared to PM peak hour: o Industrial/Manufacturing (Light/Heavy Industrial, Industrial Park, Manufacturing) o Office (Office building, Corporate Headquarters, Office Park, Research & Development Center) Uses likely to be neutral for daily vs. PM peak: o Residential (Single family, apartment, condo) o Schools o Office (Medical/Dental office, Business Park) o Big Box Retail Uses likely to generate more trips for daily compared to PM peak hour: o Warehouse o Retail (Shopping center, Department store, restaurants, fast food, etc.) If the City wants to encourage development of certain types of land use (i.e. industrial/manufacturing and/or office), it may be beneficial to change to a daily rate. Many of the adjacent jurisdictions use average daily traffic (ADT), including Clark County, the City of Vancouver and the City of Washougal. Recommendation: The Camas Economic Incentives Ad Hoc Committee reviewed the data prepared relating the PM peak hour rates to daily rates for various land uses and concluded that the City should continue to use PM peak hour rates. CITYWIDE VERSUS DISTRICT TIF The current Camas TIF currently has the same rate citywide. Many jurisdictions choose to set up separate districts, especially where development conditions are substantially different or there is a significant difference in potential rates between areas of the City. In Camas, the areas north of Lacamas Lake were considered to be substantially different than areas south of the lake. New infrastructure is required north of the lake where no arterial or collector facilities currently exist. This infrastructure has a high cost and benefits relatively few in Camas south of the lake. South of the lake, much of the arterial and collector street network is already in place and improvements are more likely to be traffic signals or roadway widenings, rather than new arterials and collectors. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Draft Future Alternatives Analysis Memorandum March 2, 2012 Page 3 of 9 For each roadway or intersection project, the travel demand model was used to calculate the number of trip-ends using the project from each transportation analysis zone (TAZ) in Camas. For each TAZ, the number of trip-ends with either an origin or a destination in the “North” area was calculated as well as the number of trip-ends originated from or destined to a TAZ in the “South” area. For each TAZ, the difference in trip-ends between the “North” and “South” areas was calculated and plotted to determine which TAZs had more trip-ends to/from the assumed “North” area and which had more trip-ends to/from the assumed “South” area. Figure 1 shows which TAZs would be in the “North” area and which would be in the “South” area. Once the TAZs were allocated to districts, the TIF fee for each district was calculated two ways: P ROPORTIONATE SHARE CALCULATION For each roadway or intersection project, the percentage of trip-ends to/from the North district was calculated relative to the number of trip-ends to/from Camas as a whole. The cost of the roadway or intersection project was then allocated to the North district or the South district using the percentage of trip-ends with origins/destinations in the North and vice versa. These project costs were then aggregated into a total “North” cost and a total “South” cost. ALL-OR-N OTHING CALCULATION Each project was assigned to either the North district or the South district based on it’s geographic location. The entire cost of each project was then allocated to that district. The allocation of fees between “North” and “South” districts is very similar, regardless of the calculation method used (less than a few hundred dollars difference in the TIF rate for each district). However, the decision about which method to use would affect both the accounting of the TIF and the ability to share project funds between the districts. If the “all-or-nothing” method is used, TIF funds collected would go specifically to either the “North District” fund or the “South District” fund. North district funds would need to be used exclusively for North district projects and South district funds would need to be used for South district projects. If the “proportionate share” method is used, a portion of each TIF collected would go to the “North” and the remainder would go to the “South.” This method would give the City more flexibility in utilizing revenues, but it would require maintaining two accounts to manage the system. Recommendation: A district fee structure is recommended due to the unique development conditions in the North of Camas relative to the rest of Camas. The calculation method used depends on how the City wants the funds to be allocated between the North district and the South district. Using the “proportionate share” method requires splitting TIF funds between two separate accounts, but may provide the City additional flexibility in terms of project delivery. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S 494 492 488 900 490 441 489 484 632 486 392 493 483 487 429 499 315 659 482 491 631 437 430 247 439 300 301 279 275 278 302 424 397 243 427 418 432 249 426 248 420 395 969 977 958 264 394 651 393 433 263 244 299 438 246 653480 485 298 901 953 440 238 419652 481 273 434 971 952 313 915 922 415 423 926 912 428 956 411 959 944 314 410 425 285 272 416 259 400 414 935 261 963 401 398 274 924 245 262 422 965 961 413 421 931 962 921 630 934 260 277 967 629 949 925 903 902 911 276 923 258 947 916 417 909 978 950 954 412 951 976 955 968 284 408 937 975 939 946 948 435 940 406 913 908 402 964 399 257 323 930 929 914 945 941 910 271 972904 431 938 957 409 396 932 907 407 928 974 905 405 431 920 933 943 936 917 918 919 942 966 927 270 906 973 403 404 970 242 297 296 256 14 EC B 14 EB 14 WB 1ST J LAK E192ND T BLA I R I G164TH18TH Q162ND172ND 6THY 32ND34TH A O W EVERGREE N S 292NDPARKER283RDR IN G L E 232NDLM F 23RD EVERETTH4THMILL PLAIN 3RD K267THUBRADY176TH ADDY LA C A M A S IN D E X 38TH 261STCROWNWASHOUGAL RIVERPACIFIC RIM SIERRA160THLE A D B E T T E R STAUFFER D X242ND V 29TH IRELAND ZGOODWIN 27TH252NDMCINTOSH 30THBROWN175TH249TH187TH SHEPHERD155TH 40TH 2ND 44TH 14TH AMMETER11TH REILLY19TH WYLIE46TH DAHLIA43RD 37TH 293RDPJULIA316TH35THFISHER303RD7TH BRUNNER 10THIONE277THZEEK 319THHATHAWAY 271STJ O Y166TH 327TH5TH244TH CAVITT52 N D R O B I N S O N COFFEYHOOD22NDPAYNE9THDALLAS167THKROHN BAYPOINT272ND15TH 28TH 24TH DEL P8TH MCGILLIVRAY 195TH314THWEAKLEY 281STFOR E S T H O M E O A K201ST42ND 36TH VILLAGE WOODBURNGEORGE 48TH FARG O222ND 269THIVY322NDKENT20TH BYBEE ED M U N D S NASTOR320THVAN VLEET177THCASCADE305THLOGANHILL259TH335TH332ND39TH 49TH 21ST STILES16TH 328TH326TH17TH 310TH179TH60TH NOBLE 284TH13TH169TH FRIBERG-STRUNKWOOD P O L K 25TH 185TH154TH238TH286TH246THJAMES181STALPINE196THS U N R I S E EL REY302ND33R D 248THTECH CENTERDRE S S E R BENTONHAYES189TH168THBASS47TH UNION233RDALEXANDRA COOPER274TH257TH171ST318THWHITMANNOURS E 31ST TR U M A N BIRCH 41ST12TH 247TH304TH202NDDO G W O O D 50TH LEBRAUN276TH45TH DEERFERNMATNEY156TH273RD300TH330TH312TH174TH191STLECHNER329TH194THTREEIFIC163RD CLIFFSIDE178TH289TH157THMARINA WILL O W SQUIRE182ND282ND26TH 199TH278TH299TH307THUTAH288TH161STPERRY165TH193RD229TH337TH159THINGLEWOODOSTENSO N C A N Y O N186TH ELM180THMAPLE275TH184TH158TH 265THKLICKITAT75TH190TH331ST245TH295TH313TH170TH237THNIGHTSHADE188TH270THVALLEY77THSTRONG183RD C O U N T R Y FORDADAMSAS H FRONTFERNRIDGEPARKJACKSONEL L IO T QUARTZ173RD297THVIEW RIDGEOREGON180TH15TH9TH177TH V 14TH 21ST 9TH17TH 35TH41ST 31ST 176TH14 332ND3RD Y A 9THU I 12TH LACAMAS 34TH6TH 172ND29TH 3RD11TH 47TH 25TH 43RD 35TH3R D 18TH B 6TH157TH P 13TH 169THHH191ST36TH J 34TH 182ND42ND 39TH 47TH K7TH R 27TH23RD161ST45TH 14TH36TH12TH 25TH 29TH 165TH38TH39TH 8TH 38TH17TH242ND 8TH37TH 3RD 43RD 159THUTAHF L A176TH18TH 12TH 48TH 6TH 187TH14TH 1ST A178TH34TH 4TH 3RD 16TH 38TH184TH9TH 11TH 20TH 41ST29TH156TH 36TH5T H175TH 30TH 10TH 16TH 35TH 36TH V H12TH5TH 20TH15TH F164TH31ST171ST25TH6TH R 27TH Y 15TH 164TH13TH 43RD 15TH X 15TH157TH 15TH 29TH 19TH 9TH6TH 16TH 28TH 7TH 29TH 159TH3RD32ND27TH 162ND35TH J 40TH 18TH31ST 277TH267TH20TH T 16TH 11TH162ND3RD G R 28TH 9TH 165TH5TH 36TH A13TH156THA 5TH 6TH32ND I 25TH 9TH 179TH10TH 31ST155TH12TH S D157TH44TH 40TH 5TH 13TH 42ND 11TH14TH 330THE 44TH 16TH 1ST274TH242NDU304THIVY30TH 9TH 49TH 168TH18TH 14TH16TH H X 6TH 17TH12TH167TH 46TH 8TH 6TH4TH 252ND1ST S 42ND 3RD 22ND 3RD 25TH 155TH12TH 5TH G 23RD 20TH 15TH 38TH 16TH 45TH 9TH 6TH6TH 312TH23RD 35TH 28TH 177TH1ST9TH IVY 38TH 22 N D 11TH 20TH P V 9T H 21ST 10TH 9TH23RD 168TH2ND I 39TH166TH6TH 3RD 45TH 6TH 9TH154TH 22ND332 N D 5TH 15TH 12TH12TH 27TH 335THW 31ST 5TH 28TH2ND164TH12TH 5TH U 26TH 34TH 31ST 186TH17TH P 29THP 27TH IVY14 35TH 9TH18TH 38TH 28TH J 9TH 14 M 22ND Y312TH X K 6TH 8TH 319TH307TH3RD 7TH 166TH1ST2ND 14 33RD L 8TH 27TH 34THJ2ND237THI 6TH 32N D 7TH 14TH 14TH C F 31ST 15TH 36TH 10TH 24TH 2ND 15TH 16TH Z 2 7 2ND 24TH182ND11TH 28TH 16TH 6TH 10TH 38TH 23RD 20TH 14TH 34TH T 30TH 27TH 27TH I 39TH 36TH 23RD R 6TH 14 I 6TH 15TH302NDLegend North_District Camas TAZs City Limits ± Figure 1Transportation Analysis Zones COST BASIS/MULTI-MODAL IMPROVEMENT COSTS The proposed TIF will continue to rely on fronting developers to dedicate right-of-way as a condition of the land development. It will also continue to rely on developers to pay for portions of their fronting improvements (not creditable toward the TIF). The previous TIF included funds to pay for improvements from one curb to the other. In other words, any improvements outside of the curb (sidewalk, landscaping, lighting, etc.) were not included. Three options are being considered for this TIF update: Full Improvement Cost (includes everything between the curbs plus sidewalks, landscaping, storm drainage and lighting) Curb-to-curb plus storm drainage Curb-to-curb only Table 1 summarizes the relative differences in overall TIF cost between the two options relative to the full improvement cost. TABLE 1: COST BASIS SUMMARY (FULL IMPROVEMENT COST VS. CURB-TO-CURB OR CURB-TO-CURB + STORM, NO ROW) Proportionate Share North South Full Improvement Cost $15,658 $5,050 Curb-to-Curb + Storm Sewer -$3,331 -$938 Curb-to-Curb Only -$5,313 -$1,471 All-or-Nothing North South Full Improvement Cost $15,411 $5,153 Curb-to-Curb + Storm Sewer -$3,451 -$889 Curb-to-Curb Only -$5,502 -$1,391 Recommendation: No recommendation is made. This decision is up to City decision makers to balance the portion of capital improvement funded through TIF vs. other sources (e.g. frontage improvement, grants, SEPA exactions, or general fund). R EIMBURSEMENT COSTS Washington state law allows for the collection of some reimbursement costs within the TIF. A bond has been taken out against the TIF to build the previously completed Parker Street and Lake Road projects. The current balance of the bond debt is $3,077,193.67. Recommendation: Since the bond was taken out with the intent of paying it back using TIF funds, this amount will be need to be included in the updated TIF. Not including it in the South District would decrease the TIF rate by approximately $350. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Draft Future Alternatives Analysis Memorandum March 2, 2012 Page 6 of 9 R IGHT-OF-WAY COSTS While It was determined that much of the right-of-way would be dedicated by development, substantial right-of-way will be required outside of developable areas, particularly in the north area where large swaths of land will be required to develop basic infrastructure and for intersection projects, such as roundabouts, where right-of-way dedication would be disproportionate to the typical frontage share. An analysis was conducted to determine how much right-of-way would be required for the proposed TIF projects both inside the UGA and outside the UGA by district. Of the approximately $30 million in right- of-way required, about $20 million of it would be outside the UGA. Table 2 summarizes the additional cost that would need to be added to the TIF to include total right-of-way costs and right-of-way costs only for those areas outside the urban growth area (UGA). It also shows the required increase in cost per trip by district. TABLE 2: RIGHT-OF-WAY COST SUMMARY District Include Total ROW Include ROW Outside UGA* Cost (millions) Increase in TIF Rate Cost (millions) Increase in TIF Rate North $17.6 +$4,825 $13.8 +$3,783 South $12.6 +$1,425 $6.5 +$736 Total $30.2 $20.3 * Also includes ROW for Lake Road/SR 500 Roundabout Recommendation: Since dedication would not be available as an option for land outside the UGA, additional funds should be provided as part of the TIF for purchase of right-of-way outside the UGA. OPPORTUNITIES FOR OTHER FUNDING SOURCES Funding sources other than the TIF are frequently available. These sources include grants and other state and federal funding. Roadway projects supporting job growth are typically more likely to gain outside funding than are roadway projects that would not support job growth. Table 3 shows the amount the TIF could be reduced for each of the North and South districts by applying a “reduction factor” that represents the proportion of the proposed TIF projects that would need to be funded by the TIF (i.e. not funded by outside sources or grants). The City of Camas calculated previous roadway project “reduction factors,” or the amount required to be paid by the TIF, for various projects and found that projects in “jobs corridors” generally only required about 55% of TIF funding, while projects not in “jobs corridors” generally required about 85% of TIF funding. These represent the outside limits of a potential overall TIF reduction factor. To identify an average reduction factor for use in the proposed rate calculation, ach proposed TIF project was identified as either being a “jobs corridor” or not and an overall reduction factor was calculated for each of the North and South districts. The reduction factors for each of the districts were similar, with the DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Draft Future Alternatives Analysis Memorandum March 2, 2012 Page 7 of 9 rate for the North District slightly higher than the South District. However, both were in the range of 60- 66%. A reduction rate of 65% is presented as an option below. TABLE 3: REDUCTION FACTORS (PERCENT FUNDED BY TIF) Reduction Factor* North South Proportionate Share Full Improvement Cost $15,658 $5,050 85% -$2,349 -$758 65% -$5,480 -$1,768 55% -$7,046 -$2,273 All-or-Nothing Full Improvement Cost $15,411 $5,153 85% -$2,312 -$773 65% -$5,394 -$1,804 55% -$6,935 -$2,319 * Assumes reduction factor does not apply to right-of-way LATE COMER ’S A GREEMENTS Where projects are undertaken and the timing of development does not match with the need for the improvement, the City may undertake the full street improvement and assess late comers agreements with fronting property owners that, at the time, do not participate in funding their share of the fronting improvements costs. At the time this fronting land eventually develops, the City would collect the equivalent balance of roadway improvement costs plus interest through the late comer’s agreement. This would assure that the TIF is financially solvent and that the fair cost of the street improvements is allocated appropriately to fronting properties – even though at the time of improvement some of the properties are not ready to develop. COST INDEXING There is substantial data on construction cost variation over time provided the Washington State Department of Transportation in their construction cost index. By indexing the costs to address inflation, the value of the TIF to funding projects in the future is not eroded over time. Without indexing the TIF, construction costs would increase the TIF would not and over time there would be greater project commitments than TIF revenue, resulting in the potential that certain projects would not be able to be adequately funded. Table 4 provides the construction cost index table for the Camas TIF for the next seven years. The new TIF rates would take affect the first of each year. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S Draft Future Alternatives Analysis Memorandum March 2, 2012 Page 8 of 9 TABLE 4: COST INDEXING Year TIF Rate Factor 2012 1.000 2013 1.039 2014 1.079 2015 1.121 2016 1.165 2017 1.210 2018 1.257 2019 1.306 * The basis for the index is the Washington State Department of Transportation Construction Cost Indices, using the previous 21 years as a basis for the next seven years – approximately 3.9% per year. R ECOMMENDED TIF STRUCTURE SUMMARY Table 5 summarizes the recommended TIF structure. TABLE 5: TIF STRUCTURE SUMMARY TIF Element Basis Land Use Categories Current Edition of ITE Trip Generation: An ITE Informational Report Trip Generation Based upon highest one hour trip rate in the 4 PM to 6 PM time period from ITE Trip Generation: An ITE Informational Report Pass-by and Diverted Linked Trip Adjustment Reductions allowed for pass-by and diverted linked trips for land use codes as documented in the Trip Generation Handbook, or with data approved by the City Public Works Director Trip Length Not Included Area of Coverage 2 Districts (North District and South District) per Figure 1 Point of TIF Collection Building Permit application TIF Project Priorities Set by the City of Camas Public Works Department annually Inflation Use Washington State Department of Transportation Construction Cost Indices to index TIF as noted in Table 4. Changes in Trip Rates Where a use is not addressed in the ITE Trip Generation: An ITE Report, the applicant may be requested to provide research c ounts of comparable sites, per ITE recommended practice Credits Only for construction projects listed in the TIF. Credits not issued unless work is completed with appropriate documented costs not exceeding those in the TIF. Exemptions 1. Existing space conversion less than or equal to 3,000 gross square feet and is approximately equal to 5 or less PM peak hour trips. Appeals Approved or denied by City Public Works Director. DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S SPEED 20 00% 126 105 NO SCALE 2Figure LEGEND - TIF Roadway Projects - TIF Intersection Projects A 00 City of Camas TIF PROJECT LOCATIONS 500 14 500 500 500 14 87 J 2 9 1 4 10 12 11 13 14 15 16 A B C D 3 E G F H 5 6 I N K L M O P Q LAKE RD L A K E R D ST6TH AVADAMS ST 6TH A V 5TH A V 4TH A V 2ND AV UNION STEPHERDHS RD 6TH ST4TH ST1ST A VDIVISION STBENTON ST19TH AV19TH AV18TH AV 28TH AV 18TH BLVD PACIFIC RIM P A Y N E 20TH ST 38TH 1ST ST 43RD AV 15TH ST R D AVRD 18TH AV 23RD AV AV 16TH AV FO R E S T HOMEF A R G O ST10TH AV 7TH AV 6TH AV 5TH AVIVYST LE W I S & C L A R K H W Y EVE R G R E E N H W Y BRADY McINTOSHRDRD R DSTSTSTASTORSTASTORSIERRASIERRASTSTPARKER192ND202ND AV13TH ST AVRD 6TH A V HWY 14TH AV 43RD AV RD283RD AVEVERETT RD267TH AV218TH AVLEWIS & C L A R K H W Y Colu mbia Riv er Lacamas Lake232ND AV7TH ST GARFIELDDALLAS ST 28TH ST I ST 3RD AV STNORWOODST23RD STX Higher Ratio (Daily to PM Peak) ITE Code Land Use Units Ratio (Daily/PM) 21 Commercial Airport Average Flight/Day 18.2 30 Truck Terminal Acre 12.5 150 Warehousing KSF 11.1 Warehouse 152 High Cube Warehouse KSF 14.4 221 Low-Rise Apartment Occupied DU 11.4 Residential 222 High-Rise Apartment DU 12.0 230 Residential Condo/Townhouse DU 11.2 251 Senior Adult Housing Detached DU 13.7 252 Senior Adult Housing Attached Occupied DU 21.8 253 Congregate Care Facility DU 11.9 254 Assisted Living Beds 12.1 260 Recreation Homes DU 12.2 265 Timeshare Occupied DU 13.4 270 Residential Planned Unit Dev. (PUD)DU 12.1 310 Hotel Room 13.8 311 All Suites Hotel Room 12.3 320 Motel Room 12.0 412 County Park Acre 38.0 415 Beach Park Acre 22.9 417 Regional Park Acre 22.9 420 Marina Berths 15.6 430 Golf Course Acre 16.8 443 Movie Theater w/o Matinee Seat 176.0 444 Movie Theater w/ Matinee Seat 32.0 480 Amusement Park Acre 19.2 491 Racquet/Tennis Club Court 11.6 495 Recreation Community Center (e.g., YMCA)KSF 15.8 530 High School Student 13.2 536 Private School (K-12)Student 14.6 550 University/College Student 11.3 560 Church KSF 16.6 610 Hospital KSF 14.5 730 Government Office Building KSF 57.0 813 Free Standing Discount Super Store KSF 11.5 814 Specialty Retail Center KSF 16.4 Retail 815 Free-Standing Discount Store KSF 11.4 820 Shopping Center KSF 11.5 823 Factory Outlet Center KSF 11.6 841 New Car Sales KSF 12.9 851 Convenience Market (24 hours)KSF 14.1 853 Convenience Market w/ Gasoline pump Fueling Positions 28.5 862 Home Improvement Superstore KSF 12.6 869 Discount Home Furnishing Superstore KSF 12.7 875 Department Store KSF 12.9 876 Apparel Store KSF 17.3 890 Furniture Store KSF 11.2 931 Quality Restaurant KSF 12.0 932 High Turnover Sit-Down Rest.KSF 11.4 933 Fast Food w/o Drive-Thru KSF 27.4 934 Fast Food With Drive-Thru KSF 14.7 937 Cofee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window KSF 19.1 938 Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window and No Indoor SeatingKSF 24.0 944 Gas/serve Station Fueling Positions 12.2 945 Gas/Serv. Station with Conv. Market Fueling Positions 12.2 947 Self-serve Car Wash Wash Stall 19.5 Neutral Ratio (Daily/PM Peak) ITE Code Land Use Units Ratio (Daily/PM) 151 Mini-Warehouse KSF 9.6 210 Single-Family Detached Housing DU 9.5 Residential 220 Apartment DU 10.7 232 High-Rise Res.Condo/Townhouse DU 11.0 255 Cont. Care Retirement Community DU 9.7 432 Golf Driving Range Tee/Driving Position 10.9 437 Bowling Alley Lane 9.4 452 Hourse Racetrack Seat 10.2 492 Health/Fitness Club KSF 9.3 522 Middle/Junior High School Student 10.1 Schools 540 Junior/Community College Student 10.0 591 Lodge/Fraternal Organization Member 9.7 620 Nursing Home Bed 10.8 720 Medical-Dental Office KSF 10.4 Office 731 State Motor Vehicles Department KSF 9.7 732 Post Office KSF 9.7 733 Government Office Complex KSF 9.8 770 Business Park KSF 9.9 812 Building Materials & Lumber KSF 10.1 816 Hardware/Paint Store KSF 10.6 817 Nursery (Garden Center)KSF 9.5 843 Automobile Parts Sales KSF 10.4 849 Tire Superstore KSF 9.6 850 Supermarket KSF 9.7 854 Discount Supermarket KSF 10.9 Big Box 857 Discount Club KSF 9.9 863 Electronic Superstore KSF 10.0 879 Arts and Crafts Store KSF 9.1 880 Phamacy/Drugstore w/o drive-through KSF 10.7 946 Gas/Serv. Sta.w/ Conv. Market, Car Wash Fueling Positions 11.0 Lower Ratio (Daily to PM Peak) ITE Code Land Use Units Ratio (Daily/PM) 22 Gen. Aviation Airport Average Flight/Day 6.6 90 Park & Ride Lot w/ Bus Service Parking Space 7.3 93 LRT Station w/ Parking Parking Space 2.0 110 Gen Light Industrial KSF 7.2 Industrial/Manufacturing 120 Gen Heavy Industrial KSF 2.2 130 Industrial Park KSF 8.1 140 Manufacturing KSF 5.2 240 Mobile Home DU 8.5 488 Soccer Complex Field 3.5 493 Athletic Club KSF 7.2 501 Military Base Employees 4.6 520 Elementary School Student 8.6 565 Day Care KSF 6.4 566 Cemetery Acre 5.6 590 Library KSF 7.7 630 Clinic Employees 6.3 710 General Office Building KSF 7.4 Office 714 Corporate Headquarters Building KSF 5.7 715 Single Tenant Office Building KSF 6.7 750 Office Park KSF 7.7 760 Research & Development Center KSF 7.6 818 Nursery Wholesale KSF 7.5 848 Tire Store KSF 6.0 860 Wholesale Market KSF 7.6 881 Phamacy/Drugstore w/ drive-through KSF 8.5 912 Drive-In Bank KSF 5.7 941 Quick Lubrication Veh. Shop Service Position 7.7 APPENDIX I FUTURE (2035) IMPROVED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 1: 6th Avenue & Norwood Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 95 1150 140 145 570 25 95 15 175 15 15 35 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.86 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3485 1805 3539 1575 1770 1541 1742 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.93 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3485 1805 3539 1575 1326 1541 1630 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 100 1211 147 153 600 26 100 16 184 16 16 37 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 0 14 0 130 0 0 26 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 1343 0 153 600 12 100 70 0 0 43 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 2 2 2 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 1% 0% 2% 0% 2% 50% 1% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.3 24.8 6.0 24.5 24.5 18.0 18.0 18.0 Effective Green, g (s) 6.3 24.8 6.0 24.5 24.5 18.0 18.0 18.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.41 0.10 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 183 1422 178 1426 635 393 456 483 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.39 c0.08 0.17 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.08 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.94 0.86 0.42 0.02 0.25 0.15 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 25.9 17.3 27.0 13.0 10.9 16.3 15.8 15.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.3 12.8 31.4 0.2 0.0 1.6 0.7 0.4 Delay (s) 29.2 30.1 58.4 13.3 10.9 17.8 16.5 15.8 Level of Service C C EBBBB B Approach Delay (s) 30.1 22.0 17.0 15.8 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*'I ++i*'I 1*4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 2: Ivy Street & 6th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 70 1075 35 5 675 25 10 5 5 10 5 25 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 74 1132 37 5 711 26 11 5 5 11 5 26 Pedestrians 7 2 6 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 0 0 Right turn flare (veh)3 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 743 1170 1681 2053 593 1468 2058 374 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 743 1170 1681 2053 593 1468 2058 374 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 99 79 90 99 86 90 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 856 603 51 51 450 75 50 626 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 639 603 361 382 21 42 Volume Left 74 0 5 0 11 11 Volume Right 0 37 0 26 5 26 cSH 856 1700 603 1700 65 179 Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.35 0.01 0.22 0.32 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft)70102922 Control Delay (s) 2.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 84.1 34.8 Lane LOS A A F D Approach Delay (s) 1.1 0.1 84.1 34.8 Approach LOS F D Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4 i*4» HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 3: 6th Avenue & Division Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement SBL SBR NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 25 245 165 860 600 35 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 26 258 174 905 632 37 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1450 334 668 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1450 334 668 tC, single (s) 6.9 7.0 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 73 61 81 cM capacity (veh/h) 97 659 931 Direction, Lane # SB 1 NE 1 NE 2 SW 1 SW 2 Volume Total 284 475 604 421 247 Volume Left 26 174 0 0 0 Volume Right 258 0 0 0 37 cSH 429 931 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.66 0.19 0.36 0.25 0.15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 117 17 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 28.4 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D A Approach Delay (s) 28.4 2.2 0.0 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 J > V 4t t1* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 4: 6th Avenue & Adams Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement WBL WBR SBL SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 475 10 10 180 160 720 Sign Control Free Stop Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 500 11 11 189 168 758 Pedestrians 9 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1600 514 511 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1600 514 511 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 89 66 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 99 558 1055 Direction, Lane # WB 1 SB 1 NE 1 NE 2 Volume Total 511 200 168 758 Volume Left 0 11 168 0 Volume Right 11 189 0 0 cSH 1700 449 1055 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.30 0.45 0.16 0.45 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 56 14 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 19.3 9.1 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 19.3 1.6 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 J > V V 'I f HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 5: 3rd Avenue & Dallas Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 135 110 35 35 135 70 20 515 85 30 425 80 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.98 0.96 0.98 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1729 1821 1872 1581 Flt Permitted 0.72 0.92 0.98 0.94 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1337 1606 1783 1758 1581 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 147 120 38 38 147 76 22 560 92 33 462 87 RTOR Reduction (vph)07002200800046 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 298 0 0 239 0 0 666 0 0 495 41 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 14 10 10 14 1 13 13 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 4% 2% 8% 0% 2% 1% 3% 1% 0% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 8426 Permitted Phases 84266 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.6 16.6 24.0 24.0 24.0 Effective Green, g (s) 16.6 16.6 24.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.47 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 439 527 846 834 750 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 0.15 c0.37 0.28 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.45 0.79 0.59 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 13.4 11.2 9.7 7.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.3 0.2 4.5 0.8 0.0 Delay (s) 17.9 13.6 15.7 10.5 7.2 Level of Service BBBBA Approach Delay (s) 17.9 13.6 15.7 10.0 Approach LOS BBBA Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.6 Sum of lost time (s) 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.7% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group J kt5 4 i*4*4*4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 7: 2nd Avenue-4th Street & 3rd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 25 675 225 55 735 5 145 10 70 20 20 45 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 3378 1803 3502 1723 1671 Flt Permitted 0.32 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.76 0.90 Satd. Flow (perm) 610 3378 468 3502 1353 1526 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 27 734 245 60 799 5 158 11 76 22 22 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 44 000002200350 Lane Group Flow (vph) 27 935 0 60 804 0 0 223 0 0 58 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 3 3 7 1 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 3% 0% 3% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 6248 Permitted Phases 6248 Actuated Green, G (s) 25.3 25.3 25.3 25.3 13.4 13.4 Effective Green, g (s) 25.3 25.3 25.3 25.3 13.4 13.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 324 1792 248 1857 380 429 v/s Ratio Prot c0.28 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.13 c0.17 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.08 0.52 0.24 0.43 0.59 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 5.5 7.3 6.0 6.8 14.8 12.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.5 1.0 0.3 2.3 0.1 Delay (s) 5.7 7.8 7.0 7.1 17.1 13.0 Level of Service A A A A B B Approach Delay (s) 7.7 7.1 17.1 13.0 Approach LOS AABB Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 47.7 Sum of lost time (s) 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group i kf1 ft*t1*4*4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 8: Crown Road & 3rd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 230 775 10 0 540 215 5 120 5 205 5 310 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3533 3397 1896 1615 1794 1599 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.64 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3533 3397 1878 1615 1195 1599 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 250 842 11 0 587 234 5 130 5 223 5 337 RTOR Reduction (vph)010050000400140 Lane Group Flow (vph) 250 852 0 0 771 0 0 135 1 0 228 197 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 2% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.9 48.4 27.5 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 Effective Green, g (s) 15.9 48.4 27.5 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.61 0.35 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 4.8 4.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 361 2173 1187 484 417 308 412 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.24 c0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.00 c0.19 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.39 0.65 0.28 0.00 0.74 0.48 Uniform Delay, d1 29.1 7.7 21.5 23.3 21.7 26.8 24.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.7 0.2 1.6 0.3 0.0 9.2 0.9 Delay (s) 34.8 7.9 23.2 23.7 21.7 36.0 25.6 Level of Service C A C C C D C Approach Delay (s) 14.0 23.2 23.6 29.8 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.7 Sum of lost time (s) 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*ft*4 i*4 r HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 9: Garfield Street & 6th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 65 20 20 5 20 5 5 505 80 30 450 5 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 68 21 21 5 21 5 5 532 84 32 474 5 Pedestrians 3 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft)812 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1142 1129 577 1155 1169 476 479 619 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1142 1129 577 1155 1169 476 479 619 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.3 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.4 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 56 89 96 96 89 99 100 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 157 197 508 150 187 593 1094 969 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SE 1 NW 1 Volume Total 111 32 621 511 Volume Left 68 5 5 32 Volume Right 21 5 84 5 cSH 189 202 1094 969 Volume to Capacity 0.58 0.16 0.00 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 80 14 0 3 Control Delay (s) 47.8 26.1 0.1 0.9 Lane LOS E D A A Approach Delay (s) 47.8 26.1 0.1 0.9 Approach LOS E D Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 11: Division Street & 18th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 35 130 140 150 265 70 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 38 141 152 163 288 76 Pedestrians 2 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 795 328 366 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 795 328 366 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.3 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.4 2.2 p0 queue free % 88 80 87 cM capacity (veh/h) 313 703 1196 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 179 315 364 Volume Left 38 152 0 Volume Right 141 0 76 cSH 556 1196 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.32 0.13 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 35 11 0 Control Delay (s) 14.5 4.7 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 14.5 4.7 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 V 4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 12: Sierra Drive & 28th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 50 225 20 25 105 35 5 75 50 35 30 40 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 54 245 22 27 114 38 5 82 54 38 33 43 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total (vph) 321 179 141 114 Volume Left (vph) 54 27 5 38 Volume Right (vph) 22 38 54 43 Hadj (s) -0.01 -0.05 -0.13 -0.09 Departure Headway (s) 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.3 Degree Utilization, x 0.43 0.25 0.20 0.17 Capacity (veh/h) 705 672 616 607 Control Delay (s) 11.4 9.6 9.5 9.3 Approach Delay (s) 11.4 9.6 9.5 9.3 Approach LOS BAAA Intersection Summary Delay 10.3 HCM Level of Service B Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 13: Cascade Street & 18th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 120 130 5 0 110 20 50050110 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 126 137 5 0 116 21 50050116 Pedestrians 11 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 138 143 635 531 140 519 523 127 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 138 143 635 531 140 519 523 127 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 100 98 100 100 99 100 87 cM capacity (veh/h) 1457 1451 321 417 912 438 421 917 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 268 137 5 121 Volume Left 126 0 5 5 Volume Right 5 21 0 116 cSH 1457 1451 321 875 Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 0 1 12 Control Delay (s) 4.0 0.0 16.4 9.8 Lane LOS A C A Approach Delay (s) 4.0 0.0 16.4 9.8 Approach LOS C A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4*4*4*4* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 14: Brady Road & McIntosh Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 115 10 415 240 10 420 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 125 11 451 261 11 457 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1060 582 712 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1060 582 712 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 49 98 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 246 517 897 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 136 712 11 457 Volume Left 125 0 11 0 Volume Right 11 261 0 0 cSH 257 1700 897 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.53 0.42 0.01 0.27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 71 0 1 0 Control Delay (s) 33.7 0.0 9.1 0.0 Lane LOS D A Approach Delay (s) 33.7 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 V *i t HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 15: Brady Road & 16th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 70 185 20 115 75 120 25 295 125 185 290 60 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.99 0.95 0.96 0.98 Flt Protected 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1840 1722 1806 1787 Flt Permitted 0.84 0.74 0.96 0.74 Satd. Flow (perm) 1562 1289 1742 1340 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 195 21 121 79 126 26 311 132 195 305 63 RTOR Reduction (vph)06004800260090 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 284 0 0 278 0 0 443 0 0 554 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 14 14 3 3 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 2% 3% 2% 0% 1% 1% 1% 3% 6% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 4826 Permitted Phases 4826 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.2 13.2 26.1 26.1 Effective Green, g (s) 13.2 13.2 26.1 26.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.28 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 436 360 961 739 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 c0.22 0.25 c0.41 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.77 0.46 0.75 Uniform Delay, d1 15.0 15.7 6.4 8.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.5 9.8 1.6 6.9 Delay (s) 18.5 25.5 8.0 15.0 Level of Service B C A B Approach Delay (s) 18.5 25.5 8.0 15.0 Approach LOS B C A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 47.3 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t 1 4*4*4*4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 16: Payne Road & Pacific Rim Boulevard Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 35 265 385 10 585 20 250 5 20 10 10 35 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3194 1801 3520 1767 1722 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.70 0.94 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 3194 1801 3520 1297 1632 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 38 288 418 11 636 22 272 5 22 11 11 38 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 286 00500500230 Lane Group Flow (vph) 38 420 0 11 653 0 0 294 0 0 37 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 4 4 5 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 5 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 1% 0% 2% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 1.4 14.3 0.7 13.6 18.4 18.4 Effective Green, g (s) 1.4 14.3 0.7 13.6 18.4 18.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.31 0.02 0.30 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 56 1006 28 1054 526 661 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.13 0.01 c0.19 v/s Ratio Perm c0.23 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.42 0.39 0.62 0.56 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 21.8 12.3 22.1 13.7 10.4 8.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 28.0 0.3 8.9 1.1 4.2 0.2 Delay (s) 49.8 12.5 31.0 14.8 14.6 8.4 Level of Service D B C B B A Approach Delay (s) 14.4 15.0 14.6 8.4 Approach LOS BBBA Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 45.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*ft*4*4* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 17: Parker Street & Pacific Rim Boulevard Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 160 65 120 20 40 10 70 380 80 5 365 265 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1863 1556 1805 3487 1687 3487 1805 1863 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1863 1556 1805 3487 1687 3487 1805 1863 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 168 68 126 21 42 11 74 400 84 5 384 279 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 104 0 10 0 0 21 0 0 0 156 Lane Group Flow (vph) 168 68 22 21 43 0 74 463 0 5 384 123 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 7% 1% 0% 0% 2% 0% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.4 8.6 8.6 0.7 2.9 2.1 23.1 0.7 21.7 21.7 Effective Green, g (s) 6.4 8.6 8.6 0.7 2.9 2.1 23.1 0.7 21.7 21.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.18 0.18 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.47 0.01 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 235 326 273 26 206 72 1641 26 823 714 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.04 0.01 0.01 c0.04 0.13 0.00 c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.21 0.08 0.81 0.21 1.03 0.28 0.19 0.47 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 20.5 17.3 16.9 24.1 22.0 23.5 7.9 23.9 9.6 8.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.9 0.3 0.1 94.5 0.5 114.0 0.4 3.6 1.9 0.5 Delay (s) 30.4 17.7 17.1 118.6 22.5 137.5 8.4 27.5 11.5 8.8 Level of Service C B B F C F A C B A Approach Delay (s) 23.3 49.8 25.5 10.5 Approach LOS C D C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 49.1 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I *i t i**i tfc t1**i t i* HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 18: Parker Street & 38th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 125 425 130 175 250 55 165 200 260 200 385 100 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 3.5 5.0 3.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1802 1807 1805 1840 1767 1881 1570 1803 1881 1563 Flt Permitted 0.45 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 847 1807 237 1840 448 1881 1570 1023 1881 1563 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 132 447 137 184 263 58 174 211 274 211 405 105 RTOR Reduction (vph)080060001600054 Lane Group Flow (vph) 132 576 0 184 315 0 174 211 114 211 405 51 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 7 1 1 7 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)11 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 3% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 523167 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 37.5 30.4 40.9 32.1 36.5 26.5 35.3 36.3 26.4 33.5 Effective Green, g (s) 37.5 30.4 40.9 32.1 36.5 26.5 35.3 36.3 26.4 33.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 0.33 0.44 0.35 0.39 0.29 0.38 0.39 0.29 0.36 Clearance Time (s) 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 3.5 5.0 3.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.5 5.4 0.5 5.4 0.5 5.4 0.5 0.5 5.4 0.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 416 593 254 638 319 538 598 484 536 565 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.32 c0.07 0.17 c0.06 0.11 0.02 0.05 c0.22 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.25 0.16 0.05 0.12 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.97 0.72 0.49 0.55 0.39 0.19 0.44 0.76 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 17.9 30.7 20.5 23.8 20.2 26.6 19.1 19.5 30.2 19.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 30.1 8.4 1.4 1.0 1.1 0.1 0.2 7.4 0.0 Delay (s) 18.1 60.7 28.8 25.3 21.2 27.7 19.2 19.7 37.6 19.5 Level of Service B E C C C C B B D B Approach Delay (s) 52.9 26.6 22.4 29.7 Approach LOS DCCC Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 92.6 Sum of lost time (s) 20.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t 1 *i t f *i t f HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 19: Sierra Street & Lake Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 650 160 120 610 150 395 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1838 1752 1845 1787 1578 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1838 1752 1845 1787 1578 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 707 174 130 663 163 429 RTOR Reduction (vph) 11 0000256 Lane Group Flow (vph) 870 0 130 663 163 173 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 11 2 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 3% 3% 1% 0% Turn Type NA Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 43.5 8.7 56.2 20.2 20.2 Effective Green, g (s) 43.5 8.7 56.2 20.2 20.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.10 0.67 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 947 181 1229 428 378 v/s Ratio Prot c0.47 c0.07 0.36 0.09 v/s Ratio Perm c0.11 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.72 0.54 0.38 0.46 Uniform Delay, d1 18.8 36.7 7.4 26.9 27.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 13.5 12.8 0.5 2.6 3.9 Delay (s) 32.3 49.4 7.8 29.4 31.4 Level of Service C D A C C Approach Delay (s) 32.3 14.6 30.8 Approach LOS C B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 84.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t r HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 20: Everett Street & Lake Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 550 470 385 405 370 410 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1805 1881 1881 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1615 1805 1881 1881 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 561 480 393 413 378 418 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 318 0 0 0 418 Lane Group Flow (vph) 561 162 393 413 378 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% Turn Type NA custom Prot NA NA NA Protected Phases 7 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 27.1 27.1 17.1 44.0 21.9 0.0 Effective Green, g (s) 27.1 27.1 17.1 44.0 21.9 0.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.21 0.55 0.27 0.00 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 611 546 385 1033 514 0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.31 c0.22 0.22 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.30 1.02 0.40 0.74 0.00 Uniform Delay, d1 25.4 19.5 31.5 10.4 26.5 40.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 21.0 1.4 51.3 0.4 6.1 0.0 Delay (s) 46.5 20.9 82.8 10.9 32.6 40.0 Level of Service D C F B C D Approach Delay (s) 34.7 45.9 36.5 Approach LOS C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 38.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.1 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I *i f *i t t f HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 21: Everett Street & 43rd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 235 45 490 160 60 540 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1615 1881 1615 1805 1881 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1615 1881 1615 1805 1881 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 247 47 516 168 63 568 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 35 0 91 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 247 12 516 77 63 568 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% Turn Type NA Perm NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.8 15.8 29.4 29.4 4.7 39.1 Effective Green, g (s) 15.8 15.8 29.4 29.4 4.7 39.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.46 0.46 0.07 0.61 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 446 399 865 743 133 1151 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.27 0.03 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.03 0.60 0.10 0.47 0.49 Uniform Delay, d1 21.0 18.2 12.8 9.8 28.4 6.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 0.0 1.5 0.1 3.1 0.6 Delay (s) 22.6 18.3 14.3 9.9 31.5 7.5 Level of Service C B B A C A Approach Delay (s) 21.9 13.2 9.9 Approach LOS C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 63.9 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I *i f t f *i t HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 23: 283rd Avenue & Nourse Road-15th Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 25 115 125 385 310 20 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 26 121 132 405 326 21 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1005 337 347 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1005 337 347 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 89 83 89 cM capacity (veh/h) 241 710 1223 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 147 537 347 Volume Left 26 132 0 Volume Right 121 0 21 cSH 527 1223 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.11 0.20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 9 0 Control Delay (s) 14.5 2.9 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 14.5 2.9 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 V 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 24: Parker Street & Lake Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 725 500 40 560 60 270 460 90 155 280 45 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1881 1579 1752 3485 1787 1845 1805 1660 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.14 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1881 1579 1752 3485 387 1845 260 1660 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 54 788 543 43 609 65 293 500 98 168 304 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 121 060060050 Lane Group Flow (vph) 54 788 422 43 668 0 293 592 0 168 348 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 13 5 5 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 3% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 14% 0% Turn Type Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 52716 74 38 Permitted Phases 2 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.9 50.1 65.0 6.3 49.5 48.1 36.1 37.2 29.2 Effective Green, g (s) 6.9 50.1 65.0 6.3 49.5 48.1 36.1 37.2 29.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.42 0.55 0.05 0.42 0.41 0.30 0.31 0.25 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 105 795 866 93 1456 333 562 186 409 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 c0.42 0.06 0.02 0.19 c0.11 c0.32 0.06 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.25 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.99 0.49 0.46 0.46 0.88 1.05 0.90 0.85 Uniform Delay, d1 54.2 34.0 16.5 54.5 24.8 27.6 41.2 34.5 42.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.2 29.9 0.4 3.6 1.0 22.2 53.0 39.7 15.6 Delay (s) 58.4 63.8 16.9 58.1 25.9 49.8 94.2 74.2 58.2 Level of Service EEBEC DF EE Approach Delay (s) 45.2 27.8 79.6 63.3 Approach LOS D C E E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 53.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 118.5 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.5% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I *i t i**i tfc HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 25: Lake Road & 218th Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 195 1260 905 5 20 215 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 205 1326 953 5 21 226 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1058 pX, platoon unblocked 0.89 0.89 0.89 vC, conflicting volume 958 2029 479 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 701 1907 162 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 74 48 70 cM capacity (veh/h) 804 41 765 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 205 663 663 635 323 247 Volume Left 205 000021 Volume Right 00005226 cSH 804 1700 1700 1700 1700 305 Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.39 0.39 0.37 0.19 0.81 Queue Length 95th (ft) 25 0000167 Control Delay (s) 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 52.6 Lane LOS B F Approach Delay (s) 1.5 0.0 52.6 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ¥j ft*V HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 26: 1st Street/Lake Road & Friberg Street-202nd Avenue Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 415 1235 0 0 900 165 0 0 0 105 0 195 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3574 3496 1805 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.76 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3574 3496 1439 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 437 1300 0 0 947 174 0 0 0 111 0 205 RTOR Reduction (vph)000016000000172 Lane Group Flow (vph) 437 1300 0 0 1105 0000011133 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.5 50.0 29.5 11.1 11.1 Effective Green, g (s) 16.5 50.0 29.5 11.1 11.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.72 0.43 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 427 2586 1493 231 259 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.36 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.02 v/c Ratio 1.02 0.50 0.74 0.48 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 26.3 4.1 16.6 26.4 24.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 49.6 0.2 2.0 1.6 0.2 Delay (s) 75.9 4.3 18.6 28.0 25.1 Level of Service E A B C C Approach Delay (s) 22.3 18.6 0.0 26.1 Approach LOS C B A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.1 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*ft*4 i*4» HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 27: Friberg Street-202nd Avenue/Friberg Street & 28th Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 15 760 90 90 925 15 200 10 330 10 15 20 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.5 4.8 4.8 4.8 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.94 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1845 1805 3522 1770 1586 1574 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.67 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1845 1805 3522 1356 1586 1062 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 15 776 92 92 944 15 204 10 337 10 15 20 RTOR Reduction (vph)040010019500160 Lane Group Flow (vph) 15 864 0 92 958 0 204 152 0 0 29 0 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)2621 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 2% 0% 2% 17% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 25% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 1.0 53.1 4.0 56.1 17.4 17.4 17.4 Effective Green, g (s) 1.0 53.1 4.0 56.1 17.4 17.4 17.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.01 0.60 0.05 0.63 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.5 4.8 4.8 4.8 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 20 1103 81 2225 266 311 208 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.47 c0.05 c0.27 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm c0.15 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.78 1.14 0.43 0.77 0.49 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 43.8 13.5 42.4 8.3 33.8 31.8 29.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 91.0 5.6 141.4 0.6 12.4 1.2 0.3 Delay (s) 134.8 19.1 183.8 8.9 46.2 33.0 29.8 Level of Service F B F A D C C Approach Delay (s) 21.0 24.2 37.9 29.8 Approach LOS CCDC Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 88.8 Sum of lost time (s) 19.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t I ft*4» HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 28: 28th Street & Camas Meadows Drive Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 255 265 1000 100 105 770 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1543 1881 1573 1687 1845 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1543 1881 1573 1687 1845 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 268 279 1053 105 111 811 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 202 0 31 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 268 77 1053 74 111 811 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 2 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 3 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 1% 0% 7% 3% Turn Type NA Perm NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 2 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 2 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 18.1 18.1 50.2 50.2 7.7 61.9 Effective Green, g (s) 18.1 18.1 50.2 50.2 7.7 61.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.57 0.57 0.09 0.70 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 371 317 1073 897 148 1298 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.56 c0.07 0.44 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.72 0.24 0.98 0.08 0.75 0.62 Uniform Delay, d1 32.6 29.2 18.4 8.5 39.2 6.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 11.6 1.8 22.9 0.0 19.0 0.9 Delay (s) 44.2 31.0 41.4 8.6 58.2 7.9 Level of Service D C D A E A Approach Delay (s) 37.5 38.4 13.9 Approach LOS D D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 88.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group <r *i ?t ?*i t HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 29: 28th Street & Ingle Road Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 145 0 165 165 245 0 360 505 0 0 460 70 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 3469 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 3469 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 153 0 174 174 258 0 379 532 0 0 484 74 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 136 00000000170 Lane Group Flow (vph) 153 38 0 174 258 0 379 532 0 0 541 0 Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 8.7 16.0 9.0 16.3 17.4 36.3 14.9 Effective Green, g (s) 8.7 16.0 9.0 16.3 17.4 36.3 14.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.22 0.12 0.22 0.24 0.50 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 210 346 217 414 420 1753 705 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 0.02 c0.10 c0.14 c0.21 0.15 c0.16 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.73 0.11 0.80 0.62 0.90 0.30 0.77 Uniform Delay, d1 31.2 22.9 31.3 25.7 27.1 11.0 27.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 11.9 0.6 18.8 6.9 22.1 0.1 5.0 Delay (s) 43.1 23.6 50.1 32.6 49.3 11.1 32.6 Level of Service D C D C D B C Approach Delay (s) 32.7 39.7 27.0 32.6 Approach LOS CDCC Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 31.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group i kf1 t1*t1* HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Improved Conditions (PM Peak) 30: 232nd Avenue & 28th Street Camas TIF Update DKS Associates Synchro 7 - Report 12/2/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 65 525 25 5 545 20 50 10 10 30 10 25 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 68 553 26 5 574 21 53 11 11 32 11 26 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 595 579 1329 1308 566 1313 1311 584 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 595 579 1329 1308 566 1313 1311 584 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 99 53 93 98 74 93 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 991 1005 112 149 526 120 149 515 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 647 600 74 68 Volume Left 68 5 53 32 Volume Right 26 21 11 26 cSH 991 1005 132 177 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.01 0.56 0.39 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 0 69 42 Control Delay (s) 1.8 0.1 62.4 37.5 Lane LOS A A F E Approach Delay (s) 1.8 0.1 62.4 37.5 Approach LOS F E Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 t 1 4*4*4*4* APPENDIX J COST ESTIMATES DKS Associates T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S O L U T I O N S North vs. South Project Analysis Roadway Project Direction A Direction B Total Trips Camas Origin Camas Dest Total Camas Camas Trips % Camas Origin %Dest %North Origin North Dest North Trips North %N Orig %N Dest%South %S Orig %S Dest % 0 New 13th/18th Roadway 647 885 1532 772 411 1183 592 39%25%13%349 140 245 41%45%34%59%55%66% A Goodwin betw Friberg & Ingle 660 915 1575 773 522 1295 648 41%25%17%377 214 296 46%49%41%54%51%59% B 28th betw Ingle & 232nd 323 345 668 295 67 362 181 27%22%5%277 50 164 90%94%75%10%6%25% C 28th e/o 232nd 331 269 600 299 72 371 186 31%25%6%294 59 177 95%98%82%5%2%18% D New e/w Collector 356 369 725 421 335 756 378 52%29%23%389 242 316 83%92%72%17%8%28% E 232nd Extension (s/o new coll)321 420 741 442 344 786 393 53%30%23%414 252 333 85%94%73%15%6%27% F 9th Street 346 387 733 466 382 848 424 58%32%26%438 281 360 85%94%74%15%6%26% G 242nd Extension 116 535 651 539 129 668 334 51%41%10%515 121 318 95%96%94%5%4%6% H New e/w Arterial 395 343 738 550 462 1012 506 69%37%31%479 283 381 75%87%61%25%13%39% I Everett St 88 43 131 137 102 239 120 91%52%39%69 70 70 58%50%69%42%50%31% J Griggs Reservoir collector 116 214 330 170 225 395 198 60%26%34%38 22 30 15%22%10%85%78%90% K 15th/283rd realignment 77 126 203 42 32 74 37 18%10%8%17 10 14 36%40%31%64%60%69% L Friberg Rd 350 61 411 258 149 407 204 50%31%18%24 54 39 19%9%36%81%91%64% M Camas Meadows realignment 255 344 599 433 344 777 389 65%36%29%8 14 11 3%2%4%97%98%96% N 20th/38th Extension 231 435 666 185 122 307 154 23%14%9%27 17 22 14%15%14%86%85%86% O Bybee realignment 127 80 207 135 117 252 126 61%33%28%8 4 6 5%6%3%95%94%97% P 38th Street w/o Parker 337 307 644 372 321 693 347 54%29%25%46 33 40 11%12%10%89%88%90% Q 38th Street e/o Parker 433 174 607 307 431 738 369 61%25%36%52 34 43 12%17%8%88%83%92% Intersection Project 1 SR 500/242nd/28th 1429 599 193 792 396 28%21%7%516 141 329 83%86%73%17%14%27% 2 Ingle/Goodwin/28th 1735 906 459 1365 683 39%26%13%665 292 479 70%73%64%30%27%36% 3 232nd/new e/w collector 750 446 349 795 398 53%30%23%417 257 337 85%93%74%15%7%26% 4 232nd/9th Street 829 537 412 949 475 57%32%25%507 309 408 86%94%75%14%6%25% 5 New e/w arterial/Everett 709 558 481 1039 520 73%39%34%407 255 331 64%73%53%36%27%47% 6 Leadbetter/Everett 722 642 525 1167 584 81%44%36%524 300 412 71%82%57%29%18%43% 9 Camas Meadows/Goodwin 1869 964 635 1599 800 43%26%17%377 214 296 37%39%34%63%61%66% 10 Lake/Sierra 1169 593 637 1230 615 53%25%27%154 104 129 21%26%16%79%74%84% 11 Everett/Lake 1317 819 802 1621 811 62%31%30%349 192 271 33%43%24%67%57%76% 12 14th/SR 500 367 155 182 337 169 46%21%25%35 20 28 16%23%11%84%77%89% 13 6th/Norwood 961 389 587 976 488 51%20%31%69 33 51 10%18%6%90%82%94% 14 Payne/Pacific Rim 861 584 384 968 484 56%34%22%2 9 6 1%0%2%99%100%98% 15 16th/Brady 478 353 365 718 359 75%37%38%8 4 6 2%2%1%98%98%99% 16 Parker/Pacific Rim 791 625 511 1136 568 72%40%32%0 20 10 2%0%4%98%100%96% TIF District Options Curb-to-Curb + Storm + ROW* Trip Generation by District (North vs. South of the Lake) District 2005 2035 Growth Growth Since 2005 Net New Growth Change North of Lake 671 5,082 4,411 0 4,411 31% South of Lake 9,642 19,401 9,759 1,042 8,717 69% Total Camas UGA 10,313 24,483 14,170 1,042 13,128 100% Estimated Project Cost by District (Entire Project Assumed to be either North or South of the Lake)60% Reduction Factor District Roadway Project Cost (millions) Intersection Project Cost (millions) ROW* Cost (millions) Total Cost (millions) Exist Balance Reimbursement Total Cost (millions) with ROW without ROW with ROW without ROW North of Lake 40.40$ 1.46$ 4.98$ 46.84$ -$ -$ 46.84$ North Rate = 10,619$ 9,490$ North Rate = 6,371.34$ 5,693.95$ South of Lake 26.14$ 3.55$ 2.97$ 32.66$ (0.51)$ 3.08$ 35.23$ South Rate = 4,042$ 3,701$ South Rate = 2,424.92$ 2,220.49$ Total Camas UGA 66.54$ 5.01$ 7.95$ 79.50$ (0.51)$ 3.08$ 82.07$ 6,251.52$ 5,645.95$ 3,750.91$ 3,387.57$ *ROW = Camas share for projects outside UGA + 20% of ROW inside UGA/City Limits TIF Fee Summary North South Total Curb-to-Curb+ Storm+ROW*10,619$ 4,042$ 6,252$ 60% Reduction Factor (4,248)$ (1,617)$ (2,501)$ 2011 Net Rate 6,371$ 2,425$ 3,751$ 2012 Net Rate 6,620$ 2,520$ 3,897$ 2013 Net Rate 6,878$ 2,618$ 4,049$ 2014 Net Rate 7,146$ 2,720$ 4,207$ 2015 Net Rate 7,425$ 2,826$ 4,372$ 2016 Net Rate 7,715$ 2,936$ 4,542$ 2017 Net Rate 8,015$ 3,051$ 4,719$ 2018 Net Rate 8,328$ 3,170$ 4,903$ 2019 Net Rate 8,653$ 3,294$ 5,094$ Camas UGB Preliminary Cost Estimates (DRAFT) Construction Costs ROW Costs Assumed:$10 /SF C-to-C + S + ROW Costs All or Nothing Assumed Existing ROW (ft) ROW Needed (ft) New ROW Needed (sqft) ROW Cost (x$1,000,000)North South North South #Facility Distance (Ft)From To Type Full Curb-to- Curb C-to-C + Storm S NE 13th/18th 3,700 NE 192nd NE Goodwin 5-lane Arterial $2.61 $1.91 $2.16 none 96 138,528 $1.39 $3.55 41%59%0.9$ 1.3$ A NE Goodwin Rd 1,100 Creek NE Ingle Rd 5-lane Arterial $4.86 $4.33 $4.52 fullx60 96 39,600 $0.40 $4.92 100%0%4.5$ -$ B NE 28th St 5,300 NE Ingle Rd NE 232nd Ave 3-lane Arterial $6.37 $4.09 $4.91 fullx60 72 63,600 $0.64 $5.55 91%0%4.5$ -$ C NE 28th St 2,650 NE 232nd Ave NE 242nd Ave 3-lane Arterial $3.18 $2.05 $2.46 fullx60 72 31,800 $0.32 $2.77 31%0%0.8$ -$ D New East-West Collector 5,250 NE Ingle Rd NE 232nd Avenue 2-lane Collector $7.38 $4.83 $5.75 none 72 378,000 $3.78 $9.53 88%0%5.1$ -$ E NE 232nd 5,400 NE 28th NE 9th Str 3-lane Collector $7.81 $5.20 $6.14 50 x 5400 72 118,800 $1.19 $7.33 77%0%4.7$ -$ F NE 9th + 9th Ext to 242nd Ext 2,600 NE 232nd Ave NE 242nd Ave Ext 3-lane Collector $3.67 $2.41 $2.87 50 X 1250 72 124,700 $1.25 $4.11 100%0%2.9$ -$ G NE 242nd Ave 5,400 NE 9th Street NE 28th St 3-lane Arterial $9.47 $4.92 $6.81 none 72 388,800 $3.89 $10.69 67%0%4.5$ -$ H New E-W Arterial 8,200 NE 242nd Ave SE 23rd St 3-lane Arterial $11.52 $7.55 $8.98 none 72 590,400 $5.90 $14.89 100%0%9.0$ -$ I NE Everett St 4,000 SE 35th Ave NE 3rd St 3-lane Arterial $4.76 $3.04 $3.66 fullx80 72 0 $0.00 $3.66 98%0%3.6$ -$ J New E-W Collector 5,200 SE 283rd Ave SE 15th St 2-lane Collector $5.25 $3.02 $3.82 none 72 374,400 $3.74 $7.57 0%100%-$ 3.8$ K SE 23rd St Realignment 500 SE 283 Ave SE 23rd St 3-lane Collector $0.63 $0.41 $0.49 none 72 36,000 $0.36 $0.85 0%100%-$ 0.5$ L NW Friberg 4,000 1st Street 13th Street 3-lane Collector $5.05 $3.33 $3.95 fullx60 72 48,000 $0.48 $4.43 0%100%-$ 3.9$ M NW Camas Meadows Extension 3,000 NW Payne Street NW Lake Rd 3-lane Collector $3.76 $2.47 $2.94 36*1300 72 169,200 $1.69 $4.63 0%100%-$ 2.9$ N NW 38th Ave - Extension 2,400 500 ft e of SE 192nd Ave650 ft e of SE Bybee Rd 3-lane Collector $2.68 $1.76 $2.09 fullx60 72 28,800 $0.29 $2.38 0%96%-$ 2.0$ O Bybee Realignment 1,000 NW 199th Se 20th 3-lane Collector $1.24 $0.81 $0.96 none 72 72,000 $0.72 $1.68 0%100%-$ 1.0$ P NW 38th Ave - West 2,125 650 ft e of SE Bybee RdNW Parker Street 3-lane Collector $4.69 $3.06 $3.65 none 72 153,000 $1.53 $5.18 0%100%-$ 3.7$ Q NW 38th Ave - East 3,800 NW Parker St 800 Ft west of Dahlia 3-lane Collector $2.87 $1.84 $2.21 fullx60 72 45,600 $0.46 $2.67 0%100%-$ 2.2$ R NE Goodwin Rd 3,300 NE Friberg Creek 5-lane Arterial $5.86 $4.26 $4.83 fullx60 96 118,800 $1.19 $6.02 0%100%-$ 4.8$ Facility Total $93.66 $61.28 $73.21 ROW Total $29.20 $102.41 40.40$ 26.14$ Network Intersection Control Allocation (unknown location) Roundabout Control varies 5 $2.93 94,248 $0.95 $3.87 $1.46 $3.55 Other Improvements varies $0.35 (TIF Eligible) Traffic Signal $250,000 ea 8 $2.25 Control Total $5.53 $3.87 TOTAL (without ROW)$99.19 Total w/ ROW $108.89 $41.85 $29.69 2011 Cost Estimate (x$1,000,000) [I Assumptions Item Cost Unit Assumption Remove Pavement 0.33$ SF multiply width and length of project Clear & Grub 0.25$ SF multiply width and length of project, subtracting out pavement removal area Remove Curb 10.00$ LF length of project * 2 (if for both sides) Remove Sidewalk 1.50$ SF multiply width and length of project *2 (if for both sides) Grading 1.25$ SF same as clear & grub Pavement 8.00$ SF new pavement width * length of project Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 200.00$ SF length * width of bridge/tunnel Sidewalk 4.00$ SF multiply width and length of sidewalk *2 (if for both sides) Curb and gutter 14.00$ LF multiply by length of project * 2 (if for both sides) Landscaping 12.00$ LF length of project * 2 (if for both sides) Wall 120.00$ LF length of project * 2 (if for both sides) Lighting 105.00$ LF length of project (do NOT multiply by 2) Full Drainage 100.00$ LF length of project (do NOT multiply by 2) Drainage Modifications 25.00$ LF length of project (do NOT multiply by 2) Driveway Adjustments 2,000.00$ Driveways number of individual driveways Traffic Signal Modification 50,000.00$ Unit number of traffic signals to be modified Signing 500.00$ EA per sign Striping 1.50$ LF multiply length by number of stripes across (i.e. 2 bike lanes plus 2 CTL for a 3-lane road = 4) (i.e. per lineal foot of stripe, NOT roadway) City of Camas TIF Update Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: New Roadway - 13th/18th Corridor (192nd to Goodwin)3700 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 0 SF 0.33$ -$ -$ Clear & Grub 355200 SF 0.25$ 88,800$ 88,800$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 355200 SF 1.25$ 444,000$ 444,000$ Pavement 266400 SF 8.00$ 2,131,200$ 2,131,200$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 44400 SF 4.00$ 177,600$ Curb and gutter 7400 LF 14.00$ 103,600$ 103,600$ Landscaping 7400 LF 12.00$ 88,800$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 3700 LF 105.00$ 388,500$ Full Drainage 3700 LF 100.00$ 370,000$ 370,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 22200 LF 1.50$ 33,300$ 33,300$ SUBTOTAL 3,825,800$ 3,170,900$ Traffic Control 5%191,290$ 158,545$ Mobiliization 10%382,580$ 317,090$ Design/Administration/Management 15%573,870$ 475,635$ Contingency 40%1,530,320$ 1,268,360$ Project Development 5%191,290$ 158,545$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:6,695,150$ 5,549,075$ Camas Portion:39%2,611,109$ 2,164,139$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes construction of a new roadway between 192nd Avenue and Goodwin Road as a 5-lane arterial. The 96-foot cross-section includes 5x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Update Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Goodwin Road Widening (Friberg to Ingle)1100 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 33000 SF 0.33$ 10,890$ 10,890$ Clear & Grub 72600 SF 0.25$ 18,150$ 18,150$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 72600 SF 1.25$ 90,750$ 90,750$ Pavement 79200 SF 8.00$ 633,600$ 633,600$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 8400 SF 200.00$ 1,680,000$ 1,680,000$ Sidewalk 13200 SF 4.00$ 52,800$ Curb and gutter 2200 LF 14.00$ 30,800$ 30,800$ Landscaping 2200 LF 12.00$ 26,400$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 1100 LF 105.00$ 115,500$ Full Drainage 1100 LF 100.00$ 110,000$ 110,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 6600 LF 1.50$ 9,900$ 9,900$ SUBTOTAL 2,778,790$ 2,584,090$ Traffic Control 5%138,940$ 129,205$ Mobiliization 10%277,879$ 258,409$ Design/Administration/Management 15%416,819$ 387,614$ Contingency 40%1,111,516$ 1,033,636$ Project Development 5%138,940$ 129,205$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:4,862,883$ 4,522,158$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes widening Goodwin Road to a 5-lane arterial between Friberg and Ingle. 100 foot bridge structure is included. The 96-foot cross-section includes 5x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Update Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Goodwin Road Widening (Friberg to Ingle)3300 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 99000 SF 0.33$ 32,670$ 32,670$ Clear & Grub 217800 SF 0.25$ 54,450$ 54,450$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 217800 SF 1.25$ 272,250$ 272,250$ Pavement 237600 SF 8.00$ 1,900,800$ 1,900,800$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 39600 SF 4.00$ 158,400$ Curb and gutter 6600 LF 14.00$ 92,400$ 92,400$ Landscaping 6600 LF 12.00$ 79,200$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 3300 LF 105.00$ 346,500$ Full Drainage 3300 LF 100.00$ 330,000$ 330,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 1 Unit 50,000.00$ 50,000$ 50,000$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 19800 LF 1.50$ 29,700$ 29,700$ SUBTOTAL 3,346,370$ 2,762,270$ Traffic Control 5%167,319$ 138,114$ Mobiliization 10%334,637$ 276,227$ Design/Administration/Management 15%501,956$ 414,341$ Contingency 40%1,338,548$ 1,104,908$ Project Development 5%167,319$ 138,114$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:5,856,148$ 4,833,973$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes widening Goodwin Road to a 5-lane arterial between Friberg and Ingle. The 96-foot cross- section includes 5x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Update Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: 28th Street Widening between Ingle and 232nd 5300 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 127200 SF 0.33$ 41,976$ 41,976$ Clear & Grub 254400 SF 0.25$ 63,600$ 63,600$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 254400 SF 1.25$ 318,000$ 318,000$ Pavement 254400 SF 8.00$ 2,035,200$ 2,035,200$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 63600 SF 4.00$ 254,400$ Curb and gutter 10600 LF 14.00$ 148,400$ 148,400$ Landscaping 10600 LF 12.00$ 127,200$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 5300 LF 105.00$ 556,500$ Full Drainage 5300 LF 100.00$ 530,000$ 530,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 21200 LF 1.50$ 31,800$ 31,800$ SUBTOTAL 4,107,076$ 3,168,976$ Traffic Control 5%205,354$ 158,449$ Mobiliization 10%410,708$ 316,898$ Design/Administration/Management 15%616,061$ 475,346$ Contingency 20%821,415$ 633,795$ Project Development 5%205,354$ 158,449$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:6,365,968$ 4,911,913$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes widening 28th Street to a 3-lane arterial between Ingle and 232nd Avenue. The 72-foot cross- section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Update Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: 28th Street Widening between 232nd and 242nd 2650 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 63600 SF 0.33$ 20,988$ 20,988$ Clear & Grub 127200 SF 0.25$ 31,800$ 31,800$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 127200 SF 1.25$ 159,000$ 159,000$ Pavement 127200 SF 8.00$ 1,017,600$ 1,017,600$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 31800 SF 4.00$ 127,200$ Curb and gutter 5300 LF 14.00$ 74,200$ 74,200$ Landscaping 5300 LF 12.00$ 63,600$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 2650 LF 105.00$ 278,250$ Full Drainage 2650 LF 100.00$ 265,000$ 265,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 10600 LF 1.50$ 15,900$ 15,900$ SUBTOTAL 2,053,538$ 1,584,488$ Traffic Control 5%102,677$ 79,224$ Mobiliization 10%205,354$ 158,449$ Design/Administration/Management 15%308,031$ 237,673$ Contingency 20%410,708$ 316,898$ Project Development 5%102,677$ 79,224$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:3,182,984$ 2,455,956$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes widening 28th Street to a 3-lane arterial between 232nd and 242nd Avenue. The 72-foot cross- section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Widen Friberg and improve from 2-lanes to 3-lane collector 4000 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 96000 SF 0.33$ 31,680$ 31,680$ Clear & Grub 296000 SF 0.25$ 74,000$ 74,000$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 296000 SF 1.25$ 370,000$ 370,000$ Pavement 192000 SF 8.00$ 1,536,000$ 1,536,000$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 48000 SF 4.00$ 192,000$ Curb and gutter 8000 LF 14.00$ 112,000$ 112,000$ Landscaping 8000 LF 12.00$ 96,000$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 4000 LF 105.00$ 420,000$ Full Drainage 4000 LF 100.00$ 400,000$ 400,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 16000 LF 1.50$ 24,000$ 24,000$ SUBTOTAL 3,255,680$ 2,547,680$ Traffic Control 5%162,784$ 127,384$ Mobiliization 10%325,568$ 254,768$ Design/Administration/Management 15%488,352$ 382,152$ Contingency 20%651,136$ 509,536$ Project Development 5%162,784$ 127,384$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:5,046,304$ 3,948,904$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project would construct a new 3-lane collector roadway - 5,250 feet (1st to 13th). Assumed to be a 50 foot cross section (3 lanes + bike lanes) and sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Camas Meadows Drive Extension 3000 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 31200 SF 0.33$ 10,296$ 10,296$ Clear & Grub 183300 SF 0.25$ 45,825$ 45,825$ Remove Curb 250 LF 10.00$ 2,500$ 2,500$ Remove Sidewalk 1500 SF 1.50$ 2,250$ 2,250$ Grading 183300 SF 1.25$ 229,125$ 229,125$ Pavement 144000 SF 8.00$ 1,152,000$ 1,152,000$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 36000 SF 4.00$ 144,000$ Curb and gutter 6000 LF 14.00$ 84,000$ 84,000$ Landscaping 6000 LF 12.00$ 72,000$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 3000 LF 105.00$ 315,000$ Full Drainage 3000 LF 100.00$ 300,000$ 300,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 1 Unit 50,000.00$ 50,000$ 50,000$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 12000 LF 1.50$ 18,000$ 18,000$ SUBTOTAL 2,424,996$ 1,893,996$ Traffic Control 5%121,250$ 94,700$ Mobiliization 10%242,500$ 189,400$ Design/Administration/Management 15%363,749$ 284,099$ Contingency 20%484,999$ 378,799$ Project Development 5%121,250$ 94,700$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:3,758,744$ 2,935,694$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes extending Camas Meadow Drive as a 3-lane arterial inside the UGB from Payne Street to Lake Road. The cost assumes that the existing section from NE 13th Street to NE Payne Road will be used. The 72-foot cross-section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Construct new east-west 3-lane collector in north UGA area 5250 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 0 SF 0.33$ -$ -$ Clear & Grub 378000 SF 0.25$ 94,500$ 94,500$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 378000 SF 1.25$ 472,500$ 472,500$ Pavement 252000 SF 8.00$ 2,016,000$ 2,016,000$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 63000 SF 4.00$ 252,000$ Curb and gutter 10500 LF 14.00$ 147,000$ 147,000$ Landscaping 10500 LF 12.00$ 126,000$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 5250 LF 105.00$ 551,250$ Full Drainage 5250 LF 100.00$ 525,000$ 525,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 21000 LF 1.50$ 31,500$ 31,500$ SUBTOTAL 4,215,750$ 3,286,500$ Traffic Control 5%210,788$ 164,325$ Mobiliization 10%421,575$ 328,650$ Design/Administration/Management 15%632,363$ 492,975$ Contingency 40%1,686,300$ 1,314,600$ Project Development 5%210,788$ 164,325$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:7,377,563$ 5,751,375$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project would construct a new 3-lane collector roadway - 5,250 feet (connecting Goodwin/Ingle to 232nd Avenue). Assumed to be a 50 foot cross section (3 lanes + bike lanes) and sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: 232nd Rebuild and Extension of 9th within UGA 5400 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 129600 SF 0.33$ 42,768$ 42,768$ Clear & Grub 388800 SF 0.25$ 97,200$ 97,200$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 388800 SF 1.25$ 486,000$ 486,000$ Pavement 270000 SF 8.00$ 2,160,000$ 2,160,000$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 64800 SF 4.00$ 259,200$ Curb and gutter 10800 LF 14.00$ 151,200$ 151,200$ Landscaping 10800 LF 12.00$ 129,600$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 5400 LF 105.00$ 567,000$ Full Drainage 5400 LF 100.00$ 540,000$ 540,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Roundabout 0 Unit 500,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 21600 LF 1.50$ 32,400$ 32,400$ SUBTOTAL 4,465,368$ 3,509,568$ Traffic Control 5%223,268$ 175,478$ Mobiliization 10%446,537$ 350,957$ Design/Administration/Management 15%669,805$ 526,435$ Contingency 40%1,786,147$ 1,403,827$ Project Development 5%223,268$ 175,478$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:7,814,394$ 6,141,744$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project would rebuild 232nd Avenue to 3 lanes from 28th to 9th Street - 5,400 feet. Roadway would be a 50 foot cross section with sidewalks on both sides. Includes 2 roundabouts. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: 232nd Rebuild and Extension of 9th within UGA 2700 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 64800 SF 0.33$ 21,384$ 21,384$ Clear & Grub 388800 SF 0.25$ 97,200$ 97,200$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 388800 SF 1.25$ 486,000$ 486,000$ Pavement 135000 SF 8.00$ 1,080,000$ 1,080,000$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 32400 SF 4.00$ 129,600$ Curb and gutter 5400 LF 14.00$ 75,600$ 75,600$ Landscaping 5400 LF 12.00$ 64,800$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 2700 LF 105.00$ 283,500$ Full Drainage 2700 LF 100.00$ 270,000$ 270,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Roundabout 0 Unit 500,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 10800 LF 1.50$ 16,200$ 16,200$ SUBTOTAL 2,524,284$ 2,046,384$ Traffic Control 5%126,214$ 102,319$ Mobiliization 10%252,428$ 204,638$ Design/Administration/Management 15%378,643$ 306,958$ Contingency 40%1,009,714$ 818,554$ Project Development 5%126,214$ 102,319$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:4,417,497$ 3,581,172$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project would rebuild 232nd Avenue to 3 lanes from 28th to 9th Street - 5,400 feet. Roadway would be a 50 foot cross section with sidewalks on both sides. Includes 2 roundabouts. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Rebuild 9th into a 3 lane roadway 2600 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 30000 SF 0.33$ 9,900$ 9,900$ Clear & Grub 187200 SF 0.25$ 46,800$ 46,800$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 187200 SF 1.25$ 234,000$ 234,000$ Pavement 124800 SF 8.00$ 998,400$ 998,400$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 31200 SF 4.00$ 124,800$ Curb and gutter 5200 LF 14.00$ 72,800$ 72,800$ Landscaping 5200 LF 12.00$ 62,400$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 2600 LF 105.00$ 273,000$ Full Drainage 2600 LF 100.00$ 260,000$ 260,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Roundabout 0 Unit 500,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 10400 LF 1.50$ 15,600$ 15,600$ SUBTOTAL 2,097,700$ 1,637,500$ Traffic Control 5%104,885$ 81,875$ Mobiliization 10%209,770$ 163,750$ Design/Administration/Management 15%314,655$ 245,625$ Contingency 40%839,080$ 655,000$ Project Development 5%104,885$ 81,875$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:3,670,975$ 2,865,625$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project would rebuild existing 9th Street between 232nd Avenue and the new 242nd Avenue extension - 2,700 feet, total (rebuild 1,250 ft, 1,350 ft extension). Assumed to be a 50 foot cross section (3 lanes + bike lanes) and sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: 242nd Road extension to 9th Street 5400 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C + Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 26400 SF 0.33$ 8,712$ 8,712$ Clear & Grub 362400 SF 0.25$ 90,600$ 90,600$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 362400 SF 1.25$ 453,000$ 453,000$ Pavement 259200 SF 8.00$ 2,073,600$ 2,073,600$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 64800 SF 4.00$ 259,200$ Curb and gutter 10800 LF 14.00$ 151,200$ 151,200$ Landscaping 10800 LF 12.00$ 129,600$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 10800 LF 105.00$ 1,134,000$ Full Drainage 10800 LF 100.00$ 1,080,000$ 1,080,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 21600 LF 1.50$ 32,400$ 32,400$ SUBTOTAL 5,412,312$ 3,889,512$ Traffic Control 5%270,616$ 194,476$ Mobiliization 10%541,231$ 388,951$ Design/Administration/Management 15%811,847$ 583,427$ Contingency 40%2,164,925$ 1,555,805$ Project Development 5%270,616$ 194,476$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:9,471,546$ 6,806,646$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes extending 242nd Avenue as a 3-lane arterial between 9th Street and 28th Street. The 72-foot cross-section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: New East-West Arterial 8200 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 0 SF 0.33$ -$ -$ Clear & Grub 590400 SF 0.25$ 147,600$ 147,600$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 590400 SF 1.25$ 738,000$ 738,000$ Pavement 393600 SF 8.00$ 3,148,800$ 3,148,800$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 98400 SF 4.00$ 393,600$ Curb and gutter 16400 LF 14.00$ 229,600$ 229,600$ Landscaping 16400 LF 12.00$ 196,800$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 8200 LF 105.00$ 861,000$ Full Drainage 8200 LF 100.00$ 820,000$ 820,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 32800 LF 1.50$ 49,200$ 49,200$ SUBTOTAL 6,584,600$ 5,133,200$ Traffic Control 5%329,230$ 256,660$ Mobiliization 10%658,460$ 513,320$ Design/Administration/Management 15%987,690$ 769,980$ Contingency 40%2,633,840$ 2,053,280$ Project Development 5%329,230$ 256,660$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:11,523,050$ 8,983,100$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes a new 3-lane east-west arterial connecting 242nd Extension to SR 500 (Everett Street). The 72- foot cross-section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Everett Widening 4000 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 120000 SF 0.33$ 39,600$ 39,600$ Clear & Grub 168000 SF 0.25$ 42,000$ 42,000$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 168000 SF 1.25$ 210,000$ 210,000$ Pavement 192000 SF 8.00$ 1,536,000$ 1,536,000$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 48000 SF 4.00$ 192,000$ Curb and gutter 8000 LF 14.00$ 112,000$ 112,000$ Landscaping 8000 LF 12.00$ 96,000$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 4000 LF 105.00$ 420,000$ Full Drainage 4000 LF 100.00$ 400,000$ 400,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 16000 LF 1.50$ 24,000$ 24,000$ SUBTOTAL 3,071,600$ 2,363,600$ Traffic Control 5%153,580$ 118,180$ Mobiliization 10%307,160$ 236,360$ Design/Administration/Management 15%460,740$ 354,540$ Contingency 20%614,320$ 472,720$ Project Development 5%153,580$ 118,180$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:4,760,980$ 3,663,580$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes upgrading Everett Street to a 3-lane arterial between 35th Avenue and 3rd Street. The 72-foot cross-section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Everett Southbound Right Turn Lane at Lake 500 LF Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 15000 SF 0.33$ 4,950$ 4,950$ Clear & Grub 21000 SF 0.25$ 5,250$ 5,250$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 21000 SF 1.25$ 26,250$ 26,250$ Pavement 24000 SF 8.00$ 192,000$ 192,000$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 12000 SF 200.00$ 2,400,000$ 2,400,000$ Sidewalk 6000 SF 4.00$ 24,000$ Curb and gutter 1000 LF 14.00$ 14,000$ 14,000$ Landscaping 1000 LF 12.00$ 12,000$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 500 LF 105.00$ 52,500$ Full Drainage 500 LF 100.00$ 50,000$ 50,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 2500 LF 1.50$ 3,750$ 3,750$ SUBTOTAL 2,784,700$ 2,696,200$ Traffic Control 5%139,235$ 134,810$ Mobiliization 10%278,470$ 269,620$ Design/Administration/Management 15%417,705$ 404,430$ Contingency 40%1,113,880$ 1,078,480$ Project Development 5%139,235$ 134,810$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:4,873,225$ 4,718,350$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes widening Everett Street to include a SB right turn lane at Lake Road. The 72-foot cross- section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. The project requires a bridge due to its proximity to Lacamas Lake. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: Everett/Lake Roundabout 1050 LF 600 LF - Circumference Project Description: UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 44100 SF 0.33$ 14,553$ 14,553$ Clear & Grub 56947 SF 0.25$ 14,237$ 14,237$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 56947 SF 1.25$ 71,184$ 71,184$ Pavement 63247 SF 8.00$ 505,976$ 505,976$ Pavement Elevated/Subgrade 0 SF 200.00$ -$ -$ Sidewalk 16200 SF 4.00$ 64,800$ Curb and gutter 2700 LF 14.00$ 37,800$ 37,800$ Landscaping 2700 LF 12.00$ 32,400$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 1650 LF 105.00$ 173,250$ Full Drainage 1650 LF 100.00$ 165,000$ 165,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal Modification 0 Unit 50,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 0 EA 500.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 14400 LF 1.50$ 21,600$ 21,600$ SUBTOTAL 1,100,799$ 830,349$ Traffic Control 5%55,040$ 41,517$ Mobiliization 10%110,080$ 83,035$ Design/Administration/Management 15%165,120$ 124,552$ Contingency 40%440,320$ 332,140$ Project Development 5%55,040$ 41,517$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:1,926,398$ 1,453,111$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 This project includes upgrading Everett Street to a 3-lane arterial between 35th Avenue and 3rd Street. The 72-foot cross-section includes 3x12' lanes, 2x6' bike lanes and 2x6' sidewalks. City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: East/West Collector (SE 23rd Street Extension)5200 LF Project Description: Roadway construction of a new two-lane roadway (cross-section of 36 feet) from 283rd to 15th. This improvement, approximately 5,200 feet in length, includes sidewalks and bike lanes. Linear Foot Cost Template UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 0 SF 0.33$ -$ -$ Clear & Grub 187200 SF 0.25$ 46,800$ 46,800$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 187200 SF 1.25$ 234,000$ 234,000$ Pavement 187200 SF 8.00$ 1,497,600$ 1,497,600$ Sidewalk 62400 SF 4.00$ 249,600$ -$ Curb and gutter 10400 LF 14.00$ 145,600$ 145,600$ Landscaping 10400 LF 12.00$ 124,800$ -$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 5200 LF 105.00$ 546,000$ Full Drainage 5200 LF 100.00$ 520,000$ 520,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Roundabout 0 Unit 500,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 15600 LF 1.50$ 23,400$ 23,400$ SUBTOTAL 3,387,800$ 2,467,400$ Traffic Control 5%169,390$ 123,370$ Mobiliization 10%338,780$ 246,740$ Design/Administration/Management 15%508,170$ 370,110$ Contingency 20%677,560$ 493,480$ Project Development 5%169,390$ 123,370$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:5,251,090$ 3,824,470$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT: East/West Collector (SE 23rd Street Extension)500 LF Project Description: Roadway construction of a new two-lane roadway (cross-section of 36 feet) from 283rd to 23rd. This improvement, approximately 500 feet in length, includes sidewalks and bike lanes. Linear Foot Cost Template UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 12000 SF 0.33$ 3,960$ 3,960$ ROW 0 SF 15.00$ -$ -$ Clear & Grub 36000 SF 0.25$ 9,000$ 9,000$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ -$ Grading 36000 SF 1.25$ 45,000$ 45,000$ Pavement 24000 SF 8.00$ 192,000$ 192,000$ Sidewalk 6000 SF 4.00$ 24,000$ Curb and gutter 1000 LF 14.00$ 14,000$ 14,000$ Landscaping 1000 LF 12.00$ 12,000$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 500 LF 105.00$ 52,500$ Full Drainage 500 LF 100.00$ 50,000$ 50,000$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Roundabout 0 Unit 500,000.00$ -$ -$ Signing and Striping 2000 LF 1.50$ 3,000$ -$ SUBTOTAL 405,460$ 313,960$ Traffic Control 5%20,273$ 15,698$ Mobiliization 10%40,546$ 31,396$ Design/Administration/Management 15%60,819$ 47,094$ Contingency 20%81,092$ 62,792$ Project Development 5%20,273$ 15,698$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:628,463$ 486,638$ City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT:38th Avenue Improvement (between Parker and 650 ft east of Bybee Road) 3,800 LF Project Description: Widen 38th Avenue from 2 to 3 lanes (50 feet) from end of Parker Street improvement (west of Parker) to 650 ft east of Bybee Road. The length of this improvement is approximately 3,800 feet. The project includes sidewalks and bikelanes on both sides of the road. Linear Foot Cost Template UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 91,200 SF 0.33$ 30,096$ 30,096$ Clear & Grub 273,600 SF 0.25$ 68,400$ 68,400$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ Grading 182,400 SF 1.25$ 228,000$ 228,000$ Pavement 190,000 SF 8.00$ 1,520,000$ 1,520,000$ Sidewalk 45,600 SF 4.00$ 182,400$ Curb & Gutter 7,600 LF 14.00$ 106,400$ 106,400$ Landscaping 7,600 LF 12.00$ 91,200$ Wall - LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 3,800 LF 105.00$ 399,000$ Full Drainage 3,800 LF 100.00$ 380,000$ 380,000$ Drainage Modifications LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments - Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal - Unit 150,000.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 15,200 LF 1.50$ 22,800$ 22,800$ SUBTOTAL 3,028,296$ 2,355,696$ Traffic Control 5%151,415$ 117,785$ Mobiliization 10%302,830$ 235,570$ Design/Administration/Management 15%454,244$ 353,354$ Contingency 20%605,659$ 471,139$ Project Development 5%151,415$ 117,785$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:4,693,859$ 3,651,329$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 City of Camas TIF Rough Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT:Bybee Realignment (NW 199th to SE 20th) 1,000 LF Project Description: Realign Bybee approximately 285 feet to the east to align with new signal on SE 38th The project includes sidewalks and bikelanes on both sides of the road. Linear Foot Cost Template UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 24,000 SF 0.33$ 7,920$ 7,920$ Clear & Grub 72,000 SF 0.25$ 18,000$ 18,000$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ Grading 48,000 SF 1.25$ 60,000$ 60,000$ Pavement 50,000 SF 8.00$ 400,000$ 400,000$ Sidewalk 12,000 SF 4.00$ 48,000$ Curb & Gutter 2,000 LF 14.00$ 28,000$ 28,000$ Landscaping 2,000 LF 12.00$ 24,000$ Wall - LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 1,000 LF 105.00$ 105,000$ Full Drainage 1,000 LF 100.00$ 100,000$ 100,000$ Drainage Modifications LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments - Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal - Unit 150,000.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 4,000 LF 1.50$ 6,000$ 6,000$ SUBTOTAL 796,920$ 619,920$ Traffic Control 5%39,846$ 30,996$ Mobiliization 10%79,692$ 61,992$ Design/Administration/Management 15%119,538$ 92,988$ Contingency 20%159,384$ 123,984$ Project Development 5%39,846$ 30,996$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:1,235,226$ 960,876$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 City of Camas TIF Rough Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT:38th Avenue Improvement (between Parker and 800 feet west of Dahlia) 2,400 Project Description: Widen 38th Avenue from 2 to 3 lanes (50 feet) where needed from Parker Street to 800 ft west of Dahlia . The project includes sidewalks and bikelanes on both sides of the road. Linear Foot Cost Template UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 96,000 SF 0.33$ 31,680$ 31,680$ Clear & Grub 76,800 SF 0.25$ 19,200$ 19,200$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ Grading 76,800 SF 1.25$ 96,000$ 96,000$ Pavement 120,000 SF 8.00$ 960,000$ 960,000$ Sidewalk 28,800 SF 4.00$ 115,200$ Curb & Gutter 4,800 LF 14.00$ 67,200$ 67,200$ Landscaping 4,800 LF 12.00$ 57,600$ Wall - LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 2,400 LF 105.00$ 252,000$ Full Drainage 2,400 LF 100.00$ 240,000$ 240,000$ Drainage Modifications LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments - Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal - Unit 150,000.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 9,600 LF 1.50$ 14,400$ 14,400$ SUBTOTAL 1,853,280$ 1,428,480$ Traffic Control 5%92,664$ 71,424$ Mobiliization 10%185,328$ 142,848$ Design/Administration/Management 15%277,992$ 214,272$ Contingency 20%370,656$ 285,696$ Project Development 5%92,664$ 71,424$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:2,872,584$ 2,214,144$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 City of Camas TIF Cost Estimate Summary PROJECT ELEMENT:38th Avenue extension (from 650 feet east of Bybee to 192nd) 2,125 LF Project Description: Roadway construction of a new access controlled three-lane roadway (cross-section of 50 feet) from approx 650 ft east of Bybee to approx 500 feet east of 192nd. This improvement, approximately 2,125 ft in length, includes sidewalks and bike lanes. Linear Foot Cost Template UNIT ESTIMATED C-to-C+Storm UNITS COSTS COST Cost Remove Pavement 15600 SF 0.33$ 5,148$ 5,148$ Clear & Grub 153,000 SF 0.25$ 38,250$ 38,250$ Remove Curb 0 LF 10.00$ -$ Remove Sidewalk 0 SF 1.50$ -$ Grading 137,400 SF 1.25$ 171,750$ 171,750$ Pavement 106,250 SF 8.00$ 850,000$ 850,000$ Sidewalk 25,500 SF 4.00$ 102,000$ Curb & Gutter 4250 LF 14.00$ 59,500$ 59,500$ Landscaping 4250 LF 12.00$ 51,000$ Wall 0 LF 120.00$ -$ Lighting 2,125 LF 105.00$ 223,125$ Full Drainage 2,125 LF 100.00$ 212,500$ 212,500$ Drainage Modifications 0 LF 25.00$ -$ -$ Driveway Adjustments 0 Driveways 2,000.00$ -$ Traffic Signal 0 Unit 150,000.00$ -$ Signing and Striping 8,500 LF 1.50$ 12,750$ 12,750$ SUBTOTAL 1,726,023$ 1,349,898$ Traffic Control 5%86,301$ 67,495$ Mobiliization 10%172,602$ 134,990$ Design/Administration/Management 15%258,903$ 202,485$ Contingency 20%345,205$ 269,980$ Project Development 5%86,301$ 67,495$ Sales Tax 0.0%-$ -$ PROJECT COST:2,675,336$ 2,092,342$ DKS Associates 5/7/2012 9:35 New Intersection Control All or Nothing All or Nothing (TIF Eligible) Number Intersection Control Cost ROW (SF)ROW Cost Rounded ROW Cost In/Out of UGA North %South%North South In/Out of UGA North %South%North South Traffic Signals 9 Camas Meadows Drive/Goodwin Traffic Signal $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 2 Ingle/Goodwin Traffic Signal $250,000 In 100%0%$250,000 $0 In 100%0%$250,000 $0 1 242nd/28th Traffic Signal $250,000 Out 100%0%$250,000 $0 Out 28%0%$70,000 $0 5 New East-West Arterial/SR 500/Everett Traffic Signal $250,000 In 100%0%$250,000 $0 In 100%0%$250,000 $0 10 Sierra/Lake Traffic Signal $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 14 Payne/Pacific Rim Traffic Signal $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 16 Parker/Pacific Rim Traffic Signal $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 15 Brady/16th Traffic Signal $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 13 6th/Norwood Traffic Signal $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 In 0%100%$0 $250,000 Subtotal $2,250,000 Roundabouts Roundabouts 11 Lake/SR 500/Everett Roundabout $1,926,398 31416 314,160$ $315,000 In 0%100%$0 $2,000,000 In 0%100%$0 $2,000,000 3,4 North Framework Area 2 Roundabouts $1,000,000 $500K ea 62832 628,320$ $630,000 3-Out, 4-In 100%0%$1,000,000 $0 3-Out, 4-In 77%0%$765,000 $0 Subtotal $2,926,398 94248 $945,000 Other Improvements 6 Leadbetter/SR 500/Everett RI/RO only Treatment $50,000 In 100%0%$50,000 $0 In 100%0%$50,000 $0 12 14th/Everett/SR 500 Eliminate 2 Approaches $50,000 In 0%100%$0 $50,000 In 0%100%$0 $50,000 1 242nd/28th SB Left Turn Lane $250,000 Out 100%0%$250,000 $0 Out 28%0%$70,000 $0 Subtotal $350,000 Total Intersection Improvements $5,526,398 $945,000 $2,050,000 $3,550,000 $1,455,000 $3,550,000 $5,600,000 $5,005,000 Camas TIF Update Right-of-Way Outside UGA Project LF w/in UGA LF outside of UGA Total % In % Out Camas Share ROW Cost Outside UGA Cost North Outside UGA South Outside UGA North Inside UGA ROW South Inside UGA ROW North Outside UGA + 20% of Inside UGA South Outside UGA + 20% of Inside UGA North ROW Total South ROW Total S 0 7400 7400 0%100%39%3.55$ 1.39$ 0.57$ 0.82$ -$ -$ 0.57$ 0.82$ A 1100 0 1100 100%0%0.40$ -$ -$ 0.40$ 0.40$ -$ B 9300 1300 10600 88%12%27%0.64$ 0.02$ 0.02$ 0.56$ 0.58$ -$ C 0 5300 5300 0%100%31%0.32$ 0.10$ 0.10$ -$ 0.10$ -$ D 7900 2600 10500 75%25%52%3.78$ 0.49$ 0.49$ 2.84$ 3.33$ -$ E 5400 5400 10800 50%50%53%1.19$ 0.31$ 0.31$ 0.59$ 0.91$ -$ F 5200 0 5200 100%0%1.25$ -$ -$ 1.25$ 1.25$ -$ G 3450 7350 10800 32%68%51%3.89$ 1.35$ 1.35$ 1.24$ 2.59$ -$ H 16400 0 16400 100%0%5.90$ -$ -$ 5.90$ 5.90$ -$ I 0 0 0 0%0%-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ J 10400 0 10400 100%0%3.74$ -$ -$ 3.74$ -$ 3.74$ K 1000 0 1000 100%0%0.36$ -$ -$ 0.36$ -$ 0.36$ L 6000 2000 8000 100%0%50%0.48$ -$ -$ 0.48$ -$ 0.48$ M 6000 0 6000 100%0%1.69$ -$ -$ 1.69$ -$ 1.69$ N 4050 200 4250 95%5%23%0.29$ 0.00$ 0.00$ 0.27$ -$ 0.28$ O 2000 0 2000 100%0%61%0.72$ -$ -$ 0.72$ -$ 0.72$ P 7600 0 7600 100%0%54%1.53$ -$ -$ 1.53$ -$ 1.53$ Q 4800 0 4800 100%0%0.46$ -$ -$ 0.46$ -$ 0.46$ R 1650 1650 3300 100%0%27%1.19$ -$ -$ 1.19$ -$ 1.19$ Roadway Total 31.37$ 3.66$ 2.27$ 0.82$ 12.39$ 10.45$ 4.75$ 2.91$ 15.63$ 11.27$ 1 0%0% 2 0%0% 3 0%100%53%0.32$ 0.17$ 0.17$ -$ 4 100%0%0.32$ -$ -$ 0.32$ 5 0%0% 6 0%0% 9 0%0% 10 0%0% 11 100%0%0.32$ -$ -$ 0.32$ 12 0%0% 13 0%0% 14 0%0% 15 0%0% 16 0%0% Intersection Total 0.95$ 0.17$ 0.17$ -$ 0.32$ 0.32$ 0.23$ 0.06$ Total (Roadways + Intersections)32.32$ 3.83$ 2.44$ 0.82$ 12.70$ 10.76$ 4.98$ 2.97$ 7.95$