Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM VIII-B-1 EXHIBIT A BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN In the Matter of the Application of ) ) ) LAKELAND IDLLS ESTATES, LLC ) ) ) ) For Approval of a Preliminary Plat ) NO. PLT05-0004 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDA nON LAKELAND HILLS ESTATES SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION The Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn recommends to the Auburn City Council that the Lakeland Hills Estates preliminary plat be APPROVED, subject to conditions. SUMMARY OF RECORD Request: Lakeland Hills Estates, LLC requests approval of a preliminary plat application to subdivide four parcels of land, 22.97 acres in total area, into 70 lots for single-family residential development, a storm drainage tract and a wetland tract. The subject property is located in Auburn, Washington on the west side of Kersey Way SE. Hearing: Date: The Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn held an open record hearing on the request on November 7,2006. Testimony: The following individuals presented testimony under oath at the open record hearing: Steve Pilcher Dan Repp Joe Welsh Lou Larsen Scott Finch, for the Applicant Mark Hancock, for Segale Properties Exhibits: The following exhibits were admitted into the record: 1. Staff Report 2. Vicinity Map 3. Completed Preliminary Plat Application Form 4. Preliminary Plat Map, Pacific Engineering, dated September 28,2006 Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page I of25 5. Lakeland Hills Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., received October 9, 2006 6. Notice of Application 7. Notice of Public Hearing 8. Affidavit of Posting 9. Affidavit of Mailing 10. Confirmation of Publication of Legal Notice 11. SEP A Determination, SEP05-0039 12. Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist SEP05-0039, dated August 17, 2006 13. Environmental Checklist for Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Subdivision, dated November 30, 2005 14. Slope Stability and Setback Recommendations report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated November 10, 2005 15. Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Drainage Report, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, dated November 11, 2005 16. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis, TSI, Inc., dated November 2005 17. Finch - Lakeland Hills Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept Mitigation, B-12 Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated November 10,2005 18. Letter from Stephenie Kramer, Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation to David Osaki, Interim Director, City of Auburn, dated September 5, 2006 19. Letter to Stephenie Kramer from Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, dated September 12, 2006 20. Letter from Amber Santiago, Puyallup Tribe of Indians, to David Osaki, Interim Director, City of Auburn, dated September 8, 2006 21. Letter to Amber Santiago from Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, September 19, 2006 22. E-mail from Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, dated September 5, 2006, with attached E-mail response from Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn 23. Letter from Mark Hancock, Segale Properties, to City of Auburn, dated August 30, 2006 24. Letter from Scott Finch, Lakeland Hill Estates, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: sewer issues, dated October 2,2006 25. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacitlc Engineering Design, LLC, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: revised civil plans (dated 9/28/06), TSI addendum memorandum (dated 6/28/06), and Concept Mitigation plan (dated 10/02/06), dated October 3, 2006 26. Letter from Aaron Will, Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., to Scott Finch, Dreamworks Construction, re: Lakeland Hills Concept Mitigation, dated October 3)~ . 27. Letter from Richard Hutchinson, TSI, Inc., to Joe Welsh, City of Auburn, re: Lakeland Hills Estates Traffic Impact Analysis Supplement, dated June 28, 2006 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 2 of25 28. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: request for modification to intersection spacing betWeen Kersey III and interior plat Road A, dated August 8, 2006 29. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: request to reduce lot widths, dated June 28, 2006 30. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: request for modification for two horizontal curves to interior plat roads, dated June 28, 2006 31. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: request for modification for interior plat road grades, dated October 30, 2006 32. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: request for modification to City of Auburn plat standards, for singular access to the upper portion of the proposed Lakeland Bills Estates subdivision, dated November 2, 2006 33. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: request for modification to City of Auburn plat standards, for a boulevard entrance to the lower portion of the proposed subdivision from Kersey Way, dated November 2,2006 34. Letter from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, to Steve Pilcher, City of Auburn, re: proposed storm ponds around the proposed sewer lift station, with attached proposed sewer location exhibit, dated November 2, 2006 35. Revised Proposed Conditions of Approval for Lakeland Hills Estates, dated November 7, 2006 36. Aerial photograph of the proposed subdivision site, labeled with proposed plat location and nearby gravel mine location The Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions based upon the testimony and exhibits admitted at the open record hearing: FINDINGS 1. Lakeland Hills Estates, LLC (the Applicant) requested approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels ofland, 22.97 total acres (1,000,696 square feet), into 70 single-family residential lots, a storm drainage tract (62,954 square feet.), and a wetland/open space tract (131,997 square feet).l The parcels are located on the west side of Kersey Way SE in Auburn, Washington, in King County. Exhibit 3; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 16. 2. The City of Auburn (City) deemed the application for subdivision and plat modification approval complete on August 15, 2006. Exhibit 6. . I The parcels are identified by the following King County Parcel Numbers: 3221059009 (parcel A), 3221059059 (parcel B), 3221059043 (parcel C), 3221059020 (parcel D). Exhibit 3. The legal descriptions of Parcels A, B, C, and D may be found on the Lakeland Hills Estates preliminary plat map, dated September 28, 2006. Exhibit 4. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 3 of25 3. The City gave notice of the preliminary plat application and plat modification requests on August 14, 2006. The City published notice of the November 7, 2006 public hearing on the application and the requests on October 27,2006, by posting notice of the hearing at the proposed subdivision site, by publishing notice in the King County Journal, and by mailing notice of the hearing to owners of property within 300 feet of the proposed subdivision site. Auburn City Code (ACC) 17.06.030 requires the City give notice of a public hearing on a complete application, and publish notice not less than 10 days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation within the county where the real property proposed for subdivision is located. ACC 17.06.030; Exhibit 6; Exhibit 7; Exhibit 8; Exhibit 9; Exhibit 10. 4. The City of Auburn analyzed the environmental impacts of the subdivision proposal, as required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A). The City determined that the proposal would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and issued a Determination of Non significance (DNS) on October 10, 2006. No DNS appeals were filed by the close of the appeal period, October 24, 2006. Exhibit 11. 5. . The Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (Department) reported that a recorded archaeological site, the Williams Farmstead Site (45KI549), is located on or adjacent to the proposed subdivision site. The Department requested performance of a professional archaeological survey of the proposed subdivision site, prior to ground disturbing activities on the site. The City of Auburn noted that a December 8, 2004 Archaeological Resources. and Traditional Cultural Places Assessment prepared by Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services Limited (LAAS) concluded the Williams Farmstead Site was "probably not significant".2 Given the results of the Assessment, City staff recommended that a condition of preliminary plat application approval for the Lakeland Hills Estates Subdivision be monitoring of site disturbing activities on the proposed subdivision site to determine the presence, if any, of archaeological resources on the proposed subdivision site. At the public hearing on the subdivision application, Mr. Scott Finch, representing the Applicant, requested that subdivision approval be conditioned on this monitoring. Exhibit 18; Testimony of Mr. Finch. 2 The City noted that the contractor prepared the Assessment as part of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation for the Kersey III development, located directly south of the proposed Lakeland Hills Estates subdivision. The City of Auburn issued the final EIS (FEIS) in February 2005. LAAS also concluded that most of the Kersey III development area had "low probability for significant hunter-fisher- gatherer, ethnographic period, and historic Indian archaeological resources because of the project's steep gradient and a lack of a constant water source..." The FEIS for the Kersey III project concluded that site disturbing activities should be monitored to determine the presence of archaeological resources. City staff noted that similar to the Kersey III development, the proposed Lakeland Hills estates subdivision site has a steep gradient and no constant water source. Exhibit 19. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 4 of25 6. The proposed subdivision site is located on the west side of Kersey Way SE, a Minor Arterial street, at 49th Street SE. The proposed subdivision would extend south along the west side of Kersey Way SE, to a proposed road, Evergreen Way SE.3 Evergreen Way would extend to the east of the proposed subdivision, extending through the Kersey III Division 1 development, currently under construction. The Kersey III Division 1 development would border the proposed Lakeland Hills Estates subdivision, sharing a common boundary on the eastern edge of the proposed subdivision. Exhibit I, Staff Report, page 3; Exhibit 2; Exhibit 4. 7. The proposed subdivision site is located within the City's Rl Single Family Residential zoning district. The Rl district provides for the development of single- family detached dwellings, not more than one such dwelling on each lot, and for such accessory uses as are related, incidental and not detrimental to the residential environment. ACC 18.12.010. Two single-family residences currently exist on a portion of the proposed subdivision site. Both residences would be removed from the site as part of proposed subdivision construction. The remainder of the proposed subdivision site is currently vacant, forested land. Exhibit I, Staff Report, pages I, 2, and 3. 8. The minimum lot size in the Rl zoning district is 8000 sq. ft., and the minimum lot width is 75 ft. ACC 18. 12. 040(A), ACC 18.12.040(B). But a maximum of20 percent of the lots within a plat of 50 lots or more may reduce the lot width to 60 feet. ACC 18. 12. 040(B)(1). This reduction shall only be approved simultaneously with a preliminary plat. This provision may only be used when it is necessary to accommodate a proper lot or street layout due to physical constraints of the subdivision. ACC 18. 12.040(B)(I). City staff interprets this provision to allow any lot width between 60 and 80 feet. The Applicant's proposed subdivision includes 7 of70 lots with reduced lot widths: three lots at 60 feet wide, and four lots at approximately 64 feet wide. The Applicant requested a modification from City standards to allow for the 7 lots with reduced lot widths. Aside from the planned detention tract and wetland/open space tract, 805,745 sq. ft. would be available within the proposed subdivision site for lot and subdivision internal road development. The Applicant proposed a development density of3.1 dwelling units per acre. ACC 18. 12. 040(A); ACC 18. 12. 040(B); Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 7; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 29. 9. The proposed subdivision site is designated Single Family Residential by the City's Comprehensive Plan. City staff noted that Comprehensive Plan Policy LU -25 is relevant to the proposed subdivision. Policy LU-25 of the Comprehensive Plan calls for the careful planning of areas abutting major arterials, so that 'potential conflict between arterial development and single family uses can be avoided. Policy LU-25 notes that single family uses in such areas should be platted in a manner which orients 3 Evergreen Way SE will be constructed as a Collector Arterial. Exhibit J, Staff Report, page 3. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 5 of25 the units away from the arterial, though "non-motorized access between the residential area and the arterial should be provided." Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 2 and 7; City Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element, page 3-16 (last revised December 2005). 10. The general goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan are: to manage growth to enhance community quality and values by actively coordinating land use type and intensity with City facility and service provision and development; to provide predictability in land use regulation but flexibility for development through perform~ce standards to protect and enhance natural resources and critical lands; to promote coordinated regional growth; and to maintain and enhance Auburn's character as a family community while providing needed services and opportunities for a wide array of housing types and sizes. City Comprehensive Plan, General Goals 1-4 (last revised December 2005). 11. Area surrounding the proposed subdivision site, in all directions, is part of the City's Rl Single Family Residential zoning district, and is designated Single Family Residential under the City's Comprehensive Plan. Land to thenorth and west of the proposed subdivision site is currently vacant, forested land. Land to the south of the site is vacant land that is part of the Kersey III development project, currently under development. Land to the east of the site, across Kersey Way SE, is the site of an operating 664-acre gravel mine. Asphalt and concrete manufacturing facilities are also located on the mine site. The mine will likely operate for the next 25 years. Exhibit 1, StajJReport, page 2; Exhibit 23. 12. The proposed subdivision site consists of land that slopes steeply uphill, from the north to the south, overlooking the gravel mine site to the northeast and east across Kersey Way SE. The proposed subdivision site also consists of land that slopes uphill, from the west and northwest, to the east and southeast. The point lowest in elevation is located in the northwest corner of the site, at approximately 230 feet of elevation. The proposed subdivision site's slopes are generally at a 15-20 percent grade, though the steepest slope in the northwest section of the site approaches a 35- 40 percent grade. No slopes over 40 percent are found on the proposed subdivision site. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 3 and 8; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 15; Exhibit 23. 13. A wetland/stream complex is located in the western and southwestern portion of the proposed subdivision site. The Applicant's wetland consultant delineated one stream, Stream A, and two wetlands, Wetland A and Wetland B, on the proposed subdivision site, as of November 10, 2005. The consultant determined that Stream A is a Class 3 stream, pursuant to ACC Section 16.10.080 (D). The stream is approxiffiately two to four feet wide, 0.5 to 10 inches deep. The stream flows from the western portion of the proposed subdivision site, angling to the northwest. Wetland A IS a slope wetland with scrub-shrub vegetation located along portions of Stream A near the western site boundary. Wetland B is a slope wetland with scrub-shrub vegetation located in the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 60f25 southwest corner of the site. The consultant determined that both Wetland A and Wetland B qualify as a Category 4 wetland, pursuant to ACC Section 16.1 0.080. Exhibit 4; Exhibit 17. 14. City critical areas ordinances generally require a minimum 25 foot wide buffer around Category 4 wetlands, and a minimum 25 foot wide buffer around Class 3 streams. ACC 16. 10. 090(E)(I); ACC 16. 10. 090(E)(2). 15. Following the consultant determination, Karen Walters, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader, raised a concern regarding the impacts of proposed subdivision construction on the on-site stream. An October 3, 2006 letter to Scott Finch, Dreamworks Construction, from Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., mentioned Walters's concern and noted the classification of the on-site stream was unclear, in contrast to the consultant delineation. The letter noted that the proposed subdivision application was modified to comply with the 75- foot buffer associated with a Class 2 stream. The modification is reflected in the Applicant's October 2006 Conceptual Mitigation Plan Map. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 9; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 22; Exhibit 26. 16. The Applicant would fill a portion of Wetland B, approximately 3,154 sq. ft., and would mitigate for the wetland loss as required by ACC Chapter 16.10. The fill would result from alignment of an access road for the Kersey III development to the south of the proposed subdivision. The alignment is proposed as part of the Lakeland Hills Estates subdivision application. The Applicantwould impact 2,745 sq. ft. of stream buffer to ensure proposed subdivision Lots 53-56 meet the 8,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size requirement for the Rl zoning district. The Applicant would also impact 11,181 sq. ft. of stream buffer to allow for construction of the subdivision's stormwater detention facility. The Applicant would mitigate the wetland impact through enhancement of 8,016 sq. ft. of Wetland A. Planned enhancement would occur through native tree and shrub plantings. The Applicant would mitigate the buffer impact through enhancement of8,396 sq. ft. of buffer, including removal of non-native material and planting with native tree and shrub species. A split-rail fence would be placed on the western border of Lots 53-56 to separate the lots from the stream buffer. The City's Environmental Protection manager reviewed the conceptual mitigation plan presented by the Applicant, and determined the plan was acceptable. A proposed condition of preliminary plat application approval would require the Applicant to submit a final mitigation plan and monitoring schedule that complies with the City's Critical Areas Ordinance prior to the start of construction. Exhibit I, Staff Report, pages 3 and 12; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 17. 17. Pursuant to ACC Section 16.10.120 and 16.10.110, Category 4 scrub/shrub wetland enhancement must occur in a 2.5:1 ratio, for 2.5 acres of wetland enhanced for every one acre of wetland impacted. ACC 16.10.120, ACC 16.10.110. The Applicant would enhance 8,016 sq. ft. of Wetland A for 3,154 sq. ft of impact to Wetland B, a Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 70f25 ratio of2.54: 1. Stream buffer widths may be reduced by the City on a case-by-case basis by up to 35 percent if an applicant demonstrates that a reduction will not result in any adverse impact to the stream. Further, if an existing buffer is vegetatt:d, a buffer enhancement plan may be required to demonstrate how the function and values of the buffer and stream will be improved. ACC 16. 10. 090(2)(e). 18. Aside from impacted areas, the Applicant would protect the wetland/stream complex within a 131,997 sq. ft. open space tract, located in the western portion of the proposed subdivision site. The tract would be set off from adjoining proposed subdivision lots by sensitive area signs and split-rail fencing. Exhibit 1, StaJf Report, page 3; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 5. 19. The owner of the gravel mine neighboring the proposed subdivision, Segale Properties, raised a concern about stormwater draining from the proposed subdivision site. Construction of the proposed subdivision would result in increased stormwater runoff from the proposed subdivision site, and decreased quality of the stornlwater leaving the site, as on-site grading occurs. Stormwater would be collected on-site through roof drains and sanitary sewers, and directed to a stormwater detention pond, to be constructed in the northwest corner of the proposed subdivision site. The pond would be contained within a 62,954 sq. ft. detention tract. The detention tra.ct would be adjacent to the proposed open space tract containing the wetland/stream complex. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 5; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 23. 20. Segale Properties also raised a concern that future owners of property within the proposed subdivision be notified of the proximity of their property to an active mining operation, and of the stricture ofRCW Section 36.70A.060, which ensures, among other things, that the use of land adjacent to mineral resource lands shall not interfere with the continued, customary use of the land for mineral extraction. Segale Properties proposed a condition of preliminary plat application approval that the deed for each individual lot within the proposed subdivision. In addition, RCW S,ection 36.70A.060 requires that the final subdivision plat and building permits within 500 feet of mineral resources lands contain notice to subdivision home buyers of nearby mining operations. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6; Exhibit 23; Testimony of Mr. Hancock; Testimony of Mr. Welsh. 21. Vehicles may access the gravel mine site via Kersey Way SE. Kersey Way SE would also provide access to the proposed subdivision. The street has one lane in each direction for its entire length, with a posted speed limit of 35 MPH, gravel shoulders, curbs, gutters and sidewalks. The Applicant's traffic consultant observed s}X:eds considerably higher than 35 MPH on the street. City staff characterized Kersey Way SE as a high speed arterial. The City would require dedicated lanes for turns and merging and advance warning signs on Kersey Way SE, to prevent rear end collisions and to provide sufficient merging opportunities. The City would also require Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lake/and Hi/ls &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page80f25 vegetation removal to maintain sight distance along the street. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 3 and 4; Exhibit 36; Testimony of Mr. Welsh. 22. The proposed subdivision will add right-turn entering traffic and left-turn entering and exiting traffic to Kersey Way SE. The Applicant's traffic consultant estimated that the proposed subdivision would generate 641 net new traffic trips in and out of the subdivision, including 50 net new weekday AM peak hour trips, and 68 net new weekday PM peak hour trips. 45% of those net new trips will travel outbound from the proposed subdivision on Kersey Way SE, and 54% of those net new trips will travel inbound to the subdivision on Kersey Way SE. The Applicant's traffic consultant reported that all available sight distances would exceed the minimum standards for design speed of 50 MPH, including the stopping sight distances for northbound traffic on Kersey Way NE approaching the proposed subdivision access point. The Applicant proposed placement of the access point so that this sight distance would be 555 feet, which exceeds the 510 feet estimated by the Applicant's traffic consultant. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 16; Exhibit 27. 23. The Applicant would improve Kersey Way SE to provide safe access into and exiting the proposed subdivision, and would widen the roadway consistent with City road standards established for the site. The improvements would include: a right-.of-way dedication from the proposed subdivision site; construction of a 1 O-foot widl~ sidewalk/trail along the west side of Kersey Way SE; landscaping along the west side of Kersey Way SE; curb and gutter; installation ofa northbound left turn lane for entry into the proposed subdivision, and construction of a southbound decelc;:ration and right-turn lane, into the proposed subdivision. The sidewalk/trail would provide pedestrian access to the proposed subdivision. Similar non-motorized improvements are planned for the Kersey III Division 1 development to the south of the proposed subdivision. Proposed conditions of preliminary plat application approval would require the construction of Kersey Way SE and subdivision internal roads in compliance with City standards. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 4, 10, 12; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 16. 24. Following improvements to Kersey Way SE, the R Street SE/Kersey Way SE arterial corridor and the Evergreen Way SE (Lakeland Hills Way SE to Kersey Way SE) corridor would provide a level ofservice4 above the City's minimum level of service threshold, in both directions, through 2008. The Growth -Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW, requires that all jurisdictions within the state ensure that transportation facilities have enough capacity to meet current and future traffic demand, or "'traffic concurrency". The City measures concurrency in terms of arterial level of service. Exhibit 16. ' 4 Level of Service (LOS) is a TOad intersection criteria ranging from LOS A (little/no delay:S 10 seconds) to LOS D (very long delays:S 50 seconds for un-signaled intersections and:S 80 seconds for signaled intersections) with LOS F signifying jammed conditions on all approached with excessively long delays and vehicles unable to move at times. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 90f25 25. The Applicant proposed development of the proposed subdivision in two sections, due to steep slopes on the proposed subdivision site and the difficulty of constructing a north-south road grade in compliance with City regulations. Lots 1-19 in the southern, upper portion of the proposed subdivision would be developed separately from Lots 20-70 in the northern, lower portion of the proposed subdivision. Lots 1- 19 abut the Kersey III development, which lies to the east of the lots. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 31. 26. The southern portion of the proposed subdivision would be accessed from two public streets within the Kersey III Division 1 preliminary plat, previously approved by the City. These two public streets would be parallel to the proposed Evergreen Way, located directly to the south of proposed subdivision Lots 1-5. Lots 1-19 cannot be directly accessed from the proposed Evergreen Way due to the on-site slopes, which create an elevation difference between the lots and the proposed Evergreen Way. According to the Hearing Examiner's decision approving the Kersey III Division 1 preliminary plat, Evergreen Way would be extended east to meet Kersey Way SE.5 A proposed condition of preliminary plat application approval would require extension of proposed subdivision internal streets to meet Kersey III Division 1 internal streets, in the southern portion of the proposed subdivision. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 3 and 10; Exhibit 4. 27. The northern portion of the proposed subdivision lots would be accessed from Kersey Way SE by a public road, Road E, from which a north-south road through the subdivision would branch, Road A. Road E extends southwest past the intersection with Road A, where it becomes Road F. Road F will terminate in a temporary cul-de- sac where the proposed subdivision site abuts the property to the south. Because the property to the south is under the same ownership as the proposed subdivision site, Road F will eventually extend south, through the southern property, to the proposed Evergreen Way, providing another point of access to the proposed subdivision. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4; Exhibit 4. 28. Developing the proposed subdivision in two sections would require the installation of a tall retaining wall between the two areas, located along the lot lines of Lots 16-19, 20-22, and 38. The retaining wall would support the grade differential between the two portions of the proposed subdivision site, but the wall would- prevent vehicle and pedestrian passage between the two portions of the site. The Applicant has proposed a 10-foot retaining wall maintenance easement along the lot lines of Lots 16-19,20- 22, and 38. A retaining wall would also lie along the margin of Lots 23, 24, 29, and 30. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4; Exhibit 4. s See Finding 16 of Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation, Hearings Examiner for the City of Auburn, Kersey III Rezone/PUD/Preliminary Plat, No. PL T05-000 I, PL T05-0002, issued September 2005. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page /0 of25 29. The Applicant also requested approval of four modifications of standards set by Chapter 17.12 ACC, Subdivision Improvements. The Applicant made the following requests: a. Reduction in the required intersection spacing between Kersey Way SE and plat Road A (Modification A); b. Reduction in lot width for proposed Lots 48,54,55,56,60, and 61 (Modification B); c. Reduction in the horizontal centerline radius for Road F near Lot 59 and Road A near Lot 68 (Modification C); d. Allowance to exceed the standard maximum road grade of 6% to allow grades up to 7.5% for Roads A, B, C, F, and cul-de-sacs A and B (Modification D); e. Approval of the boulevard design of the site entrance (Modification E); f. Approval to allow Lots 1 through 19 without a secondary emergency access when 25 residential units are exceeded and are being served by the single road connection (Modification F). The City's Transportation Planner, Joe Welsh, testified that all modifications would be necessary, and thus, would have to be approved by the City Council, to permit connection between lots via an internal road network. Mr. Lou Larsen, Applicant's engineer, testified that the preliminary plat layout depended on approval of all modification requests. Mr. Welsh testified that the requested modifications are acceptable to the City Engineering Department, and necessary to accomplish appropriate road engineering within the proposed subdivision. Exhibit 28; Exhibit 29; Exhibit 30; Exhibit 31; Exhibit 32; Exhibit 33; Testimony of Mr. Welsh; Testimony of Mr. Larsen. 30. The Applicant requested Modification A after the City determined that the Applicant's initial proposal to connect Kersey Way SE with the Kersey III development's road infrastructure, via a road through the proposed subdivision, would call for an unacceptable road grade. Following the City's determination, the Applicant redesigned the proposed subdivision road layout to remove the connection through the proposed subdivision, and provide entry to the 55 lots in the northern section of the proposed subdivision via Public Road E and Public Road A. The Applicant stated a landscaped boulevard connection would be required to provide dual access to Kersey Way for the 55 lots. The Applicant proposed a reduced intersection spacing of 185 ft between Road E/Road A and Kersey Way SE, to allow for a road layout in which all lots could access Road A directly. The Applicant reported that lots are not allowed to access directly onto a boulevard, and that denial of the modification would result in access tracts being used to access lots between Road A and Kersey Way SE, reducing the number of possible lots. Exhibit 28. 31. The Applicant requested Modification B to provide for width modifications on lots 48,54,55,56.60, and 61. The Applicant noted the lesser widths were necessary to Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page II of25 accommodate the road connection points with the Kersey III development and the wetland and stream buffer on the property. The Applicant stated that denial of the modification would result in the loss of at least three lots, and the Kersey III development to the east of the proposed subdivision would have lots smaller than any lot in the proposed subdivision. Exhibit 29. 32. The Applicant requested Modification C to accommodate the road connection points with the Kersey III development and Kersey Way SE. The Applicant stated the width of the proposed subdivision would not be great enough to accommodate a 375-foot road curve radius, without eliminating many lots from the proposed subdivision. The two curves proposed by the Applicant would have 100-foot and 150-foot radii. The Applicant proposed a four-way intersection near the two curves controlled by two- way stop signs. The Applicant noted that the Kersey III development and the Lakeland Hills development north of the proposed subdivision would have horizontal curves below a 375-foot radius. Exhibit 30. 33. The Applicant proposed Modification D to minimize the height of the vertical cut that would be made to cut the plat in two sections, cutting off vehicle and pedestrian access. The Applicant noted that nearby Kersey III and Terrace View Apartments developments employ 12% maximum road grades. The Applicant proposed a 7.5% maximum road grade for the proposed subdivision. Exhibit 31. 34. The Applicant proposed Modification E to permit the splitting of the proposed subdivision site into two portions, the northern and the southern portion, necessitated by the City's road grade limits. The splitting of the site would permit only singular access to the proposed subdivision's northern 51 lots. The Applicant reported that denial of the request could mean the proposed subdivision's southern 19 lots would remain undeveloped. Exhibit 32. 35. The Applicant requested Modification F to permit a split "boulevard-style" entry from Kersey Way SE into the proposed subdivision, at Road E. The Applicant reported the boulevard entry would be developed instead of a second access point for the proposed subdivision's northern 51 lots, since the split of the site to accommodate grading requirements would only allow for singular access to the lots. The Applicant would satisfy secondary emergency access requirements through boulevard construction. Exhibit 33. 36. No transit service is provided adjacent to the proposed subdivision. The nearest transit service available is King County METRO Route 151, which provides service along Mill Pond Drive SE, approximately 1.9 miles to the west of the proposed subdivision. Exhibit 4; Exhibit 16. 37. The Applicant does not propose to create parks or recreational areas within the proposed subdivision. The Applicant would pay the City a park impact fee in-lieu-of Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 12 0/25 park or recreational area creation.6 Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 7; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. 38. The proposed subdivision site is located within the Auburn School District. The City collects a school impact fee for subdivision development's impact on District infrastructure. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6. 39. Dan Repp, City Public Works, testified that water and sewer service is available for the proposed subdivision. Testimony of Mr. Repp. 40. Mr. Repp explained that the method used to make the water service available to the subdivision is currently in question. If the Kersey III development is fully developed (Divisions 1 and 2), water lines would be installed to the northern portion of the proposed subdivision site. The lines would then be extended north to serve the rest of the site. If the Kersey III development is not built, the Applicant would need to explore other options, construction of one or more of which would then become a condition of approval. The other options include the following improvements required by the City's 2001 Water Comprehensive Plan, either (a) and (b) or (c) and (d) of which must be completed prior to final plat approval: a. BP-112: a booster pump facility located along Kersey Way between Oravetz Road and Stuck River Road; b. DS-213-1211, 1411: a 16-inchpipeline within Kersey Way, from 37th Way SE through BP-112, to and through the site into the Zone Four pressure zone; c. BP-lll: a booster pump facility located along East Valley Highway near 8th Street E; d. DS-208-1408, 1508: a 16-inch pipeline within East Valley Highway extending from Oravetz to 8th Street E and DS-649-1509, 1510: a 12-inch pipeline within Elizabeth Avenue SE extending from the existing stub in Elizabeth Loop SE to Lakeland Hills Loop SE. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 5; Testimony of Mr. Repp. 41. Mr. Pilcher, City Planner, testified that though the City has not yet approved the Applicant's proposal for delivering sanitary sewer service to the proposed subdivision, the details of sanitary sewer service provision can be worked out prior to 6 The City did not pass a park impact fee ordinance until after the Applicant filed his application, but the ordinance had been passed by the City at the time of the public hearing on the pr9ject. Had the ordinance not been passed, the Applicant would have been called to adhere to his earlier agreement to pay $152, 716.15 to the City Parks Department for City parks projects. By the earlier ordinance, ACC 17.12.260, an applicant for a preliminary plat of greater than 50 lots would usually be required to provide on-site recreational facilities. In this case, the Parks Department would have been willing to accept a fee-in-lieu, due to the steep slopes on site. Exhibit I, Staff Report, pages 6 and 7; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page /3 of25 final plat approval. Options for providing sanitary sewer service to the proposed subdivision include: a) a gravity sewer system, in step with the 2001 City Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan, routed south along Kersey Way SE down the White River to the Lakeland Hills (King County) Pump Station; b) a single sewer pump station to serve the proposed subdivision, until a permanent gravity sewer system is constructed. Mr. Pilcher added that the City is currently evaluating the pump station option to determine its feasibility. Regardless, the City would require the Applicant to extend a gravity sewer line along the proposed subdivision's frontage along Kersey Way SE. Tract D would be a sewer easement in the northwest corner of the proposed subdivision. Exhibit 1 Staff Report, pages 4 - 6; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. 42. In a letter to the City, Scott Finch, on behalf of Lakeland Hills Estates LLC, expressed a commitment to participate in the cost of constructing either the sanitary sewer lift station or the gravity system that would be located along Kersey Way SE. Exhibit 24. 43. Scott Finch, on behalf of the Applicant, testified that the Applicant supports all proposed revised conditions listed in the Revised Proposed Conditions of Approval for Lakeland Hills Estates, dated November 7, 2006. Testimony of Mr. Finch. CONCLUSIONS Jurisdiction Pursuant to Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 18.66, Section 14.03.040(A) and Section 17.06.050, the Hearings Examiner is granted jurisdiction to conduct a public hearing on a preliminary plat application, and to make a recommendation to the City Council for application approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval. Pursuant to ACC Section 17.18.010, the Hearing Examiner is granted jurisdiction to make a recommendation on the Applicant's request for a modification of any standard or specification established or referenced by Chapter 17.12 ACC. The Hearing Examiner must make the findings of fact listed in ACC Section 17.18.030 to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the modification. ACC 17.18.010(A); ACC 17.18.040. The Hearing Examiner shall make a recommendation on the Applicant's request for modification simultaneously with a preliminary plat application recommendation. ACC 17.18.010(B). Criteria for Review Pursuant to ACC 17.06.070, preliminary plats shall only be approved if findings offact are drawn to support the following: A. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds; Findings, Conclusions. and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page /4 of25 B. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the comprehensive plan; . C. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of any other applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the city council; D. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of this title, as enumerated in ACC 17.02.030;7 E. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the Auburn zoning ordinance and any other applicable planning or engineering standards and specifications as adopted by the city, or as modified and approved as part of a PUD pursuant to Chapter 18.69 ACC; F. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision are mitigated such that the preliminary plat will not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the quality of the environment; G. Adequate provisions are made so the preliminary plat will prevent or abate public nuisances. Pursuant to ACC 17.18.030, the hearing examiner may recommend approval of a request for modification of any Chapter 17.12 ACC standard or specification, upon making the following findings of fact: A. Such modification is necessary because of special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide the owner with development rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; B. That, because of such special circumstances, the development of the property in strict conformity with the provisions of this title will not allow a reasonable and harmonious use of the property; C. That the modification, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties in which the property is located; 7 ACC 17.02.030 establishes that the purpose of this title is to regulate the division ofland lying within the corporate limits of the city, and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare and prevent or abate public nuisances in accordance with standards established by the state and the city, and to: (A) prevent the overcrowding of land; (B) lessen congestion and promote safe and convenient travel by the public on streets and highways; (C) promote the effective use ofland; (D) provide for adequate light and air; (E) facilitate adequate provision for water, sewerage, drainage, parks and recreational areas, sites for schools and school grounds, and other public requirements; provide for proper ingress and egress; provide for the expeditious review and approval of proposed land divisions which comply with this title, the Auburn zoning ordinance, other city plans, policies, and land use controls, and Chapter 58.17 RCW; (H) adequately provide for the housing and commercial needs of the citizens of the state and city; (I) require uniform monumenting of land divisions and conveyance by accurate legal description; (J) implement the goals, objectives and policies of the Auburn comprehensive plan; (K) prevent or abate public nuisances. F~ndings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 15 of25 D. Such modification will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city; E. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district; F. The approval of the modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title; G. The modification cannot lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance.8 Conclusions Based on Findings I. Preliminary Plat Application A. With conditions, adequate provisions will be made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, and sites for schools and school grounds. The City provided adequate notice of the public hearing associated with the application and opportunity for public comment. The proposed subdivision's internal street system will be public and will provide adequate vehicular and pedestrian transportation routes for subdivision residents. The Applicant will pay a fee in-lieu-of providing park space within the proposed subdivision. Stormwater will be collected on-site and routed to a stormwater detention facility for treatment and dispersal. The Applicant will construct improvements to Kersey Way SE, to ensure motorist safety and to construct a pedestrian path along the street. The Applicant will mitigate the impact of the proposed subdivision on Auburn School District schools by payment of a school impact fee. Water and sewer service will be available to the proposed subdivision. Retaining walls will be built within the proposed subdivision to protect steeper slopes. Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure that a means of providing sewer and water service to the proposed subdivision is constructed. Conditions of approval are also necessary to ensure that internal subdivision streets connect to streets of a neighboring development, to provide drop-off and pick-up opportunities for school bus access along internal subdivision roads, and to provide for construction of adequate public storm drainage facilities. Findings 1,2,3,6, 12, 19, 21 - 28,37 - 43. 8 Any such modification must be processed as a variance pursuant to ACC Section 18.70.010. ACC 17.18. 030(G). Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 16of25 B. With conditions, the proposed project conforms to the general purposes of the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan, Title 17.02 (Subdivisions), and to the general purposes of any other applicable policies or plan which have been adopted by the City Council. The proposed subdivision would provide single-family residential housing and would be consistent with the purposes and regulations of the subdivision title, consistent with the general purposes and policies ofthe City Comprehensive Plan, and would be consistent with the City's 2001 City Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan. Should the Kersey III Division 1 development not be completed, the subdivision's water service provision will be required to conform to the City's 2001 Water Comprehensive Plan. Proposed subdivision lots would be oriented away from Kersey Way SE, a minor arterial, in step with Policy LU- 25 of the City Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision's development will be coordinated with the construction of water and sewer service provision facilities in the area of the proposed subdivision. Subdivision development would provide for the enhancement of critical lands, including wetlands, streams, and wetland/stream buffer areas, through a City-approved conceptual mitigation plan. The Applicant will construct improvements to Kersey Way SE, to ensure motorist safety and to construct a pedestrian path along the street. The improvements will not diminish level of service along the R Street SE/Kersey Way SE and Evergreen Way SE arterial corridors. The Applicant will provide for open space within the proposed subdivision via a wetland/open space tract. The request to reduce 7 lot widths within the proposed subdivision will promote the effective use of land, by allowing space for development of internal subdivision roads and wetland and stream buffers. The proposed subdivision's internal street system will be public and will provide adequate vehicular and pedestrian transportation routes for subdivision residents. The Applicant will pay a fee in-lieu-ofproviding park space within the proposed subdivision. Stormwater will be collected on-site and routed to a stormwater detention facility for treatment and dispersal. The Applicant will mitigate the impact ofthe proposed subdivision on Auburn School District schools by payment of a school impact fee. Water and sewer service will be available to the proposed subdivision. Retaining walls will be built within the proposed subdivision to protect steeper slopes. Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure that future subdivision home buyers have notice of neighboring gravel mine operations prior to purchasing a subdivision home, and to ensure that a means of providing sewer and water service to the proposed subdivision is constructed. Conditions of approval are also necessary to ensure that internal subdivision streets Connect to streets of a neighboring development, to provide drop-off and pick-up opportunities for school bus access along internal subdivision roads, to provide for construction of adequate public storm drainage facilities, and to ensure wetland mitigation Findings. Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 17 of25 and monitoring complies with the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. Findings 1,6,9,10-28,37-43. C. The plat conforms to the City of Auburn's zoning ordinance, Title 18, and any other applicable planning or engineering standard and specifications. The proposed subdivision will contain single-family residential housing at a development density of 3.1 dwelling units per acre. No lot will be less than 8,000 sq. ft. in area, in compliance with the Rl zoning district minimum lot size requirement. Seven of the 70 proposed lots, or 10% of the proposed lots, will have widths less than 75 feet to accommodate the subdivision's internal road system and wetland/stream buffer areas. This lot width reduction complies with ACC Section 18.12.040(B)(I) requirements for lot width reduction. Findings 1 and 8. D. With conditions, potential environmental impacts of the proposal have been mitigated such that the proposal will not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the quality of the environment. The City determined that the proposed subdivision would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and issued a Determination of Non significance . (DNS). Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure that site disturbing activities on the proposed subdivision site are monitored to determine the presence, if any, of archaeological resources on the proposed subdivision site. Conditions of approval are also necessary to ensure that on-site wetlands, stream, and buffer areas are protected in compliance with City Critical Areas Ordinances. Findings 4, 5, 13 - 18.. E. With conditions, adequate provisions have been made so that the preliminary plat will prevent or abate public nuisances. Public Nuisances are addressed generally throughout the ACC and are addressed directly in Chapter 8.12 ACC. A public nuisance affects public health and property values by creating visual blight, harboring rodents and/or beasts, or creating unsafe pedestrian and traffic situations. Potentially unsafe pedestrian and traffic situations will be alleviated by the construction of Kersey Way SE street and pedestrian improvements, and by the constructi'on of the subdivision internal road system. Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure that connections to public sewer and water will limit potential negative impacts to public health, to ensure that street improvements are constructed in compliance with City standards, and to ensure that proposed subdivision home buyers have notice of neighboring mine operations prior to purchasing subdivision homes. Findings 1, 20 - 23, 26, 27, 39 - 43. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 18 of25 II. Modification Requests9 A. Special circumstances make modification necessary in this case, and because of such special circumstances, development of the proposed subdivision site in strict conformity with Title 17, Auburn City Code will not allow reasonable and harmonious use ofthe property. The steep slopes present on site and the site's proximity to a minor arterial make all the modifications requested necessary in this case. Development of the proposed subdivision in strict conformity with Title 17 would mean: development of an internal road system with inappropriate road engineering and grades inconsistent with City standards; inappropriate vehicular entry from and onto Kersey Way SE, a minor arterial; loss of area dedicated to wetland/stream buffer areas in step with the City Critical Areas Ordinance; and elimination of some subdivision lots for single family residential development similar to development in neighboring subdivisions. Findings 1, 6, 7, 8, 11 -18,21 - 23, 25 - 27, 29 - 35. B. Modification approval will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties. Approval of al requested modifications will result in the development of a single-family residential subdivision, consistent with the single-family residential subdivisions that surround the proposed subdivision. Approval of all modifications will be beneficial to the neighboring Kersey III Division 1 subdivision development, because the requested modifications will provide for connecting proposed subdivision internal roads with Kersey III Division 1 development internal roads. Findings 1, 6 - 9, 11, 21 - 23, 25 - 27, 29 - 35. C. Modification approval will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of city policies, objectives, and plans. Modification approval will be consistent with City Comprehensive plan goals and policies. Approval of all the modifications will permit orienting proposed subdivision dwelling units away from Kersey Way SE, a minor arterial, and provide for a proposed subdivision internal road system with pedestrian access from the residential area to Kersey Way SE. Modification approval will allow for coordination of single- family residential development with nearby transportation infraStructure, promote coordinated regional growth by constructing street connections between the proposed subdivision and the Kersey III Division 1 development, and to ensure critical wetland/stream buffer areas are protected. Findings 1, 8 -10, 12 -18,21 _ 23, 25 - 27, 29 - 35. 9 The Hearing Examiner will make a single recommendation regarding the Applicant's modification requests, since aU the modifications would be necessary, and thus, would have to be approved by the City Council, to permit connection between lots via an internal road network. Finding 28. Findings, Conclusions. and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 19 of25 D. Literal interpretation of Title 17, Auburn City Code, would deprive the Applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the Rl zoning district. The Applicant requests modifications consistent with development parameters in subdivisions surrounding the proposed subdivision. Modification denial would result in elimination of subdivision lots that would otherwise be pennitted within the Rl zoning district, according to Rl zoning district minimum lot size and minimum lot width requirements. Findings 1, 6 - 8, 11, 12, 21- 23, 25 -27,29-35. E. Modification approval will be consistent with the purpose of Title 17, Auburn City Code and will not lessen the requirements of the Auburn zoning ordinance. Approval of all the modifications will result in subdivision lots that meet the minimum lot size and minimum lot width requirements of the Rl zoning district. Modification approval will allow the Applicant to coordinate proposed subdivision internal road system development with improvements to Kersey Way SE. The improvements will ensure motorist safety and provide a pedestrian path along streets. The improvements will not diminish level of service along the R Street SE/Kersey Way SE and Evergreen Way SE arterial corridors. The request to reduce 7 lot widths within the proposed subdivision will promote the effective use of land, by allowing space for development of internal subdivision roads, wetland/stream buffer areas, and single-family residential lots. The proposed subdivision's internal street system will be public and will provide adequate vehicular and pedestrian transportation routes for subdivision residents. Modification approval would also be consistent with the goals and policies of the City Comprehensive Plan (see Conclusion II (C), above). Findings 1,6 -10,12, 13 -18, 21 - 27, 29 - 35. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn recommends to the Auburn City Council that the request for approval of a preliminary plat application to subdivide four parcels of land, 22.97 total acres, into 70 single-family residential lots, a storm drainage tract and a wetland tract, and the related requests for modifications be APPROVED, with preliminary plat approval subject to the following conditions: 10 I. Prior to final plat approval, the construction of a gravity sewer system is required to serve the property per the 2001 Comprehensive Sewer Plan along Kersey Way and along the White River to the Lakeland hills (King County Metro) Pump Station; OR IA. An alternative, a single sewer pump station, if feasible, may be constructed to temporarily serve the proposed development until such time as the pennanent gravity sewer is in place. Some of the feasibility issues to consider involve the 10 Conditions include both legal requirements applicable to all developments and conditions to mitigate the specific impacts of this development. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 20 of25 ability to bypass pump the system, providing safe working pressures within the pumping system, and available downstream capacity of the existing gravity system. The pump station shall be designed and constructed to serve the sewer basin determined by the City. In addition, the interim pump station shall be located such that it provides adequate space to meet the design requirements for the interim pump station, access to the pump station and access to the storm drainage ponds. Meeting this requirement may impact the configuration and total number of lots proposed, particularly lots 65 through 69. 2. Prior to final plat, the development is required to construct the following offsite improvements as identified in the 200 1 Water Comp Plan to bring water from the valley system to the zone four pressure zone to serve the site. a. BP-112; a booster pump facility located along Kersey Way between Oravetz Road and Stuck River Road b. OS - 213-1211, 1411; A 16-inch pipeline within Kersey Way, from 37th Way SE through BP-112, to and through the site frontage (approximately 4000 linear feet). 3. An alternative to the completion of the Kersey Way booster pump station and Kersey Way waterline improvements would require completion of the following as identified in the 2001 Water Comprehensive Plan: a. BP-ll1; A booster pump facility located along East Valley Highway (EVH) near 8th StE. b. OS-208-1408, 1508; A 16-inch pipeline within EVH extending from the existing 12- inch line south of Lakeland Hills Way to 8th St E (approximately 3000 linear feet). c. OS-649-1509, 1510; A 12-inch pipeline within Elizabeth Ave SE extending from the existing stub in Elizabeth Ave SE (north of 58th PI SE) to the northern entrance to Elizabeth Loop SE (approximately 800 linear feet). 4. Construction activities within the southern portion of the plat (lots 1-19) shall not commence until the connecting streets within Kersey III ~ivision 1 have been constructed and dedicated as public streets. 5. Internal plat streets and utilities shall be extended to the adjoining property as depicted on the preliminary plat. Easements shall be granted to the City for the temporary cul-de-sac turnarounds where plat roads terminate at adjacent properties. These easements shall allow for the City and/or its authorized agents to remove the cul-de-sacs at the time the roads are extended to serve the adjoining property. Building setback requirements shall be measured from the permanent lot boundary, not the easement edge. 6. In order to avoid negatively impacting Lot 1, the temporary cul-de-sac on Road B shall be centered on the street alignment and equally intrude onto both Lots 1 and 9. Alternatively, Lot 1 shall be designated as "unbuildable" until such time the temporary cul-de-sac is removed. 7. A dedicated southbound right turn lane on Kersey Way SE to proposed Road E shall be constructed as directed by the City Engineer, prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall dedicate sufficient right-of-way to accommodate the turn lane. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 21 of25 8. A dedicated northbound left turn lane on Kersey Way SE to proposed Road E shall be constructed as directed by the City Engineer, prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall dedicate sufficient right-of-way to accommodate the turn lane. 9. Prior to final plat approval, appropriate advance warning devices shall be placed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer along Kersey Way approaching the site intersection warning drivers of an intersection ahead. 10. Prior to final plat approval, vegetation shall be removed along both the easterly and westerly edges of Kersey Way SE, approximately 500 feet north and south of the site entrance, to provide and preserve site distance. 11. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall submit a haul route plan explaining: roads to be traveled on, type of material to be hauled,. total quantity of material to be hauled, total number of expected days of the haul, expected daily start and end time of the haul, total number of trips, total number of expected trips per day estimated start and completion date. A traffic control plan shall be submitted showing intended methods and placement of traffic control and clearly showing the site entrance used for hauling. Based on the haul route plan, the City Engineer may condition hauling operations to mitigate impacts to streets. Such measures may include road repair or reconstruction, limitations to days and times of the haul, and installation of traffic control measures. 12. Applicant shall construct the street frontage improvements along Kersey Way to include a 10 foot wide paved trail separated from the road travel way by a 5 foot wide landscape strip and a vertical curb. 13. Applicant shall provide adequate facilities within the plat to allow drop off and pick up opportunities for school bus access along roads with grades less than 6% to the satisfaction of the Auburn School District and the City Engineer. 14. The boulevard median shall be designed to accommodate sight distance and maintenance requirements and shall include street trees in tree pits with grates and a solid decorative surface fmish for the remainder of the median as approved by the City Engineer. 15. A park fee of $152,716.15 shall be paid to the City prior to final plat approval unless the City adopts a park impact fee prior to that time. In that event, park impact fees shall be required in lieu of the aforementioned fee at the time of building permit issue. 16. Prior to issuance of clearing or grading permits, a plan for grading and eIearing necessary for both the construction of infrastructure (roads and utilities) and lot grading shall be approved by the City Engineer. The objective of the plan should be to accomplish the desired amount of grading during one construction period, while limiting the extent of exposed ground, and to limit or avoid the need for subsequent grading and disturbance, including grading of individual lots during home construction. The geotechnical engineer shall develop specific recommendations to mitigate grading activities, with particular attention to developing a plan to minimize the extent and time soils are exposed and also to address grading and related activities during wet weather periods (the period of greatest concern is October 1 through March 31). Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 22 of25 17. Upon completion of rough grading and excavation, the applicant shall have a geotechnical engineer re-analyze the site and determine if new or additional mitigation measures are necessary. A revised geo-technical report shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer. Recommendations for areas where subsurface water is known or discovered shall be given particular attention by the geotechnical engineer and coordinated with the project engineer responsible for the storm drainage system design 18. Prior to commencing site clearing or grading activities, the applicant shall submit a proposed dust control plan for review and approval. This plan shall show methods of preventing dust from impacting adjacent properties, natural and public storm drainage systems, and right-of- ways. Control measures shall be implemented prior to the beginning and in conjunction with on-site clearing, filling, grading or other construction activities. 19. Storm drainage facilities shall incorporate high standards of design to enhance the appearance of the site and serve as an amenity. The design of above ground storage and conveyance facilities shall incorporate landscaping utilizing native vegetation, minimal side slopes, safety, maintenance needs, and function. Prior to final plan approval, a landscaping plan with applicable cross-sections shall be provided to demonstrate that storm drainage pond aesthetic requirements consistent with City standards can be accommodated on-site. 20. To enhance the water quality of the discharge leaving the site, appropriately designed aeration shall be provided within the storm pond. 21. The applicant or a future Homeowners Association shall maintain those portions of the stormwater tract, including landscaping and walls, located outside the fenced pond boundary at the 10-year storm water surface elevation, as determined by the City Engineer. 22. The design of the storm drainage conveyance lines shall consider upstream bypass surface flows, and route them appropriately through the project site, as approved by the City Engineer. 23. Maintenance access shall be provided to all structures proposed to be in public ownership and to the proposed storm ponds. The remaining portions (as applicable) of this system shall be placed within a tract dedicated to the Homeowners Association for maintenance and operation. 24. Public storm drainage facilities shall be constructed to adequately manage ,the storm water quantity and quality impacts from the proposed public street improvements associated with the project including Kersey Way. Storm drainage from the public street improvements shall not be allowed to drain into any private storm drainage facilities. 25. In order to alert potential lot purchasers of the presence of adjacent surface mining operations, the following note shall be placed on the final plat and within the deed for each home offered for sale: ''NOTICE: This property is near designated mineral resource lands on which a variety of commercial activities occur that may not be compatible with residential development, including, but not limited to, mining, extraction, washing, crushing, Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 23 of25 stockpiling, transporting, concrete and asphalt production, recycling of materials, and their related and supporting activities." 26. Residential streets that are 28 feet in width, face of curb to face of curb, shall allow parking on one side of the street only. "No Parking this Side" signs, in accordance with City of Auburn standard details, shall be installed on the same side of the street where fire hydrants are located, prior final plat approval. Failure to provide the ''No Parking" signs will result in the street being declared a Fire Lane and additional signage and painting will be required by the Fire Marshal in order to meet Auburn City Code 10.36.075, Fire Lanes Marking. 27. No direct lot access shall be allowed to 49th St SE, Kersey Way SE or Evergreen Way SE. Access to the storm drainage pond may be provided from 49th St. SE, upon approval by the City Engineer. 28. The applicant shall install a solid wood fence constructed five (5) feet from the rear property lines of proposed Lots 35-37 and 68-70. Evergreen shrubs that will attain the same height shall be planted between the fence and the edge of the right-of-way. This requirement shall be completed consistent with city design and construction standards. 29. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall submit the proposed retaining wall design and its aesthetic treatment for the wall to be located between the upper and lower portions of the plat. The intent of the design shall be to mitigate the visual impact of this wall for those lots located on the downhill (northern) side of the wall. 30. The final plat drawing shall contain the address of all lots as assigned by the City of Auburn. 31. A fmal mitigation plan, monitoring schedule, and contingency plan for the wetland/stream corridor shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director prior to the commencement of any construction activities. The mitigation plan shall include measures to prevent human activities within the buffer area. The mitigation plan shall be prepared consistent with the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. 32. The Applicant shall design the public facilities, including but not limited to the location of structures and appurtenances, to facilitate their future maintenance and operations such that the impact of the steeper road grades are reduced, as approved by the City Engineer. 33. Where retaining walls are used adjacent to public roads or within a public facility, the applicant shall provide either mechanically stabilized earth or cement concrete retaining walls, as approved by the City Engineer. 34. Permanent gravity sanitary sewer service for the development is to be provided through a connection to the future Kersey Way gravity line by routing flows down Road E (from the manhole at the intersection of Road A and Road F) to Kersey Way. Permanent gravity service to the Road A cul-de-sac may be routed through Tract D and then to the future Kersey Way gravity line. Should the interim lift station be acceptable, the developer will need to provide a temporary gravity line from the Kersey Way line to the proposed lift station. Findings, Conclusions. and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 24 of25 35. Site disturbing activities should be monitored by the Applicant to determine the presence, if any, of archaeological resources within the proposed subdivision site boundaries. Evidence of the presence of archaeological resources shall be promptly reported to the City of Auburn. <;~ Dated this '2 ( day of November, 2006. ~~~~~Q~ THEODORE PAUL HUNTER Hearing Examiner Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Lake/and Hills &tates Preliminary Plat PLT05-0004 Page 25 of25 EXHIBIT "B" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR LAKELAND HILL ESTATES PARCEL A: LOT 1, AUBURN CORRECTION SHORT PLAT NUMBER SP-8-78, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8003110673, BEING A REVISION OF SHORT PLAT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7805230335 AND 7806200355, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES AS DELINEATED ON THE FACE OF SAID SHORT PLAT. PARCEL B: LOT 4, AUBURN CORRECTION SHORT PLAT NUMBER SP-8-78, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8003110673, BEING A REVISION OF SHORT PLAT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7805230335 AND 7806200355, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY; WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF LOT 2, CITY OF AUBURN SHORT PLAT NUMBER SP-22-77 REVISION, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7905301012 IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 21, NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2 WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF KERSEY WAY SOUTHEAST (ORAVETZ ROAD); THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF ORAVETZ ROAD A DISTANCE OF 99.70 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 39°19'58" WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF ORAVETZ ROAD 513.39 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2, WITH THE SAID ORAVETZ ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 01°21'03" WEST A DISTANCE OF 579 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2; THENCE SOUTH 58°28'57" EAST 235 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01°21'03" EAST 86.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°22'31" EAST TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL D: LOT 2, CITY OF AUBURN SHORT PLAT NUMBER SP-22-77 REVISION, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7905301012 IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 21, NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXHIBIT "B" EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2 WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF KERSEY WAY SOUTHEAST (ORAVETZ ROAD); THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF ORAVETZ ROAD A DISTANCE OF 99.70 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 39°19'58" WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF ORAVETZ ROAD A DISTANCE OF 513.39 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2 WITH SAID ORAVETZ ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 01°21'03" WEST A DISTANCE OF 579 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2; THENCE SOUTH 58°38'57" EAST 235 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01°21'03" EAST 86.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°22'31" EAST TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXHIBIT \ AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM .f Agenda Subject: Resolution No. 4116 "Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Plat: Application No. PL T05-0004 Department: Planning, Building, I Attachments: Resolution 4116; please and Community refer to Exhibit List Administrative Recommendation: City Council may either approve the plat, remand the plat to the Hearing Examiner, or schedule a closed record hearing at a date to be determined. Background Summary: Date: November 29, 2006 Budget Impact: N/A On Nov~mber 7,2006 the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on a proposed 70 lot preliminary plat called "Lakeland Hill Estates". The 22.97 acre site is located on the west side of Kersey Way SE, south of 491h St. SE.. . On November 22,2006, the Hearing Examiner issued a decision recommending the City Council approve the preliminary plat request subject to thirty-five (35) conditions. In accordance with ACC 18.66.170, the City Council upon its review of the record, may: 1. Affirm the Hearing Examiner recommendation; 2. Remand the recommendation to the Hearing Examiner; or 3. Schedule a closed record public hearing before the City Council. List of Exhibits: See next page L 1204-3 03.5 PL T05-0004 Reviewed by Council & Committees: o Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: o Airport 0 Finance 181 Hearing Examiner 0 Municipal Servo o Human Services 0 Planning & CD o Park Board oPublic Works o Planning Comm. 0 Other Reviewed by Departments & Divisions: 181 Building 0 M&O o Cemetery 0 Mayor o Finance 181 Parks 181 Fire 181 Planning o Legal 0 Police 181 Public Works 0 Human Resources Action: Committee Approval: Council Approval: Referred to Tabled DYes oNo DYes oNo Call for Public Hearing __L~_ Until--.!_'_ Until ---1---1_ Council member: Norman Meeting Date: December 4, 2006 I Staff: Davolio I hem Number: VIII.B.1 AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU lMAGINED Agenda Subject: Resolution No. 4116 Date: November 29,2006 "Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Plat," Application No. PL T05-0004 List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 **Exhibit 6 "''''Exhibit 7 **Exhibit 8 **Exhibit 9 "''''Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Exhibit 19 Exhibit 20 Exhibit 21 Exhibit 22 Exhibit 23 Exhibit 24 Exhibit 25 Exhibit 26 Exhibit 27 Exhibit 28 Exhibit 29 Exhibit 30 Exhibit 31 Exhibit 32 Exhibit 33 Exhibit 34 Exhibit 35 Exhibit 36 Hearing Examiner decision dated November 22, 2006 Staff Report Vicinity Map Completed Preliminary Plat Application Form Preliminary Plat map, Pacific Engineering, dated 9/28/06 Lakeland Hills Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., received 10/9/06 Notice of Application Notice of Public Hearing Affidavit of Posting Affidavit of Mailing Confirmation of Publication of Legal Notice SEPA Determination, SEP05-0039 Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist SEP05-0039 dated 8/17/06 Environmental Checklist for Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Subdivision dated 11/30/05 Slope Stability and Setback Recommendations report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated 11/10/05 Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Drainage Report, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, dated 11/11/05 Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis, TSI, Inc., dated Nov. 2005 Finch - Lakeland Hills Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept Mitigation, 8-12 Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated 11/10/05 Letter of 9/5/06 from Stephenie Kramer, Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Letter of 9/12/06 to Stephenie Kramer from Steve Pilcher Letter of 9/8/06 from Amber Santiago, Puyallup Tribe of Indians Letter of 9/19/06 to Amber Santiago from Steve Pilcher 9/5/06 E-mail from Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division with response from Steve Pilcher Letter of 8/30/06 from Mark Hancock, Segale Properties Letter of 10/2/06 from Scott Finch, Lakeland Hill Estates re: sewer issues Letter of 10/3106 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Letter of 10/3106 from Aaron Will, Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. re: Lakeland Hills Concept Mitigation Letter of 6/28/06 from Richard Hutchinson, TSI, Inc. re: Lakeland Hills Estates Traffic Impact Analysis Supplement Letter of 8/8/06 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC re: request for modification to intersection spacing between Kersey III and interior plat Road A Letter of 6/28/06 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC re: request to reduce lot widths Letter of 6/28/06 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC re: request for modification for two horizontal curves to interior plat roads Letter of 10/30/06 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC re: request for modification for interior plat road grades Letter of 11/2/06 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC re: request for modification to allow a singular access to the upper portion of the plat Letter of 11/2/06 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC re: request for modification to allow a boulevard entrance to the lower portion of the plat Letter of 11/2/06 from Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineer Design, LLC re: proposed storm pond/sewer lift station, with attached proposed sewer location exhibit Revised proposed conditions of approval for Lakeland Hill Estates, dated 11/7/06 Aerial photo of site, labeled with plat location and nearby gravel mine "'* = Exhibit is not included in the packet, but is available for review upon request. Page 2 of 2 ~2 + l Q I Ex h" b', I--J .~ lEGAl. DESCRPTION P~CElA: lOT 1, ~ ~ SHOOT PLAT NlIM3ER SP-8-78, RECmm> tHlER RECORDING Nl.UlER 8003110673, BEING A REVISIOO a= SHORT PLAT RECCRlEDlNlER RECamlNG N.MER ~ AND 7l1062OO355. BEING A POOTIOO OF TIE EAST HAlF a: lHESOOTHWEsr QUARTER a: SECTION 32 1lJNNSHIp 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WI.I.AIErrE t.ERDIAN, IN KING COlMY. WASHNGTON; TOGrnER WIlti AN EASEfoENT Fm t4GRESS, EGRESS AND UTl.JTES AS DEl.HATED ON TtE FACE. OF SW SHORT PlAT. PARCEl B: lOT 4, Al.IBmNCORRECTICW ~T PLAT tUI3ER SP-8-78, RECaU:D lJI)ER REOORDlNG NUf.I3ER 8003110673, BEING A REVISION a: SHORT PlAT RECOROO> UfCER REOOmwG NUr.IJER ~ Nf) 78063>>355, 8e1NG A POOTIOO OF M EAST HALF a: TlE sOvrHwesT Clt.WUER OF SECTION 32 1'O\W8tIP 21 NORTH, RANGe 5 EAST, WllAYmE r.ERIlIAN, IN KWG COlMY, WASHWGTON. PARCEl C: THAT PORTION a= WI' 2, CITY a: AUBURN StKlRT PLAT M.lf.I3ER SP-22.:rT REVISION. RECmtm lIaR RECOODING M.lf.I3ER ~012 IN Kf(G COONTY, WASHINGTON. BEm A POOTICW a: TIE EAST tW.f a= TlE SOOTHWEsr QUARTER OF SECTION 32. T<M'NSHP 21, NORTH, RNGi 5 EAST, W.M., IN KtIG COlim', WASHINGTON. CXlf.tI.ENCH3 AT . TIE INTERSECTIoN a: 1HE EAST LIE a= SoU> lOT 2 wrrn TlE SOOTHWEsrERl. Y IMGIN a: I<ERSEY WAY SCXffiEAST (OOAVETZ RCW>); nENCE NORT1iWESJERI..y ALa<<31HE SOl1TJ.ERLy BCllKWff a: OOAIJETZ ~ A DlSTNa a= 99.70 FEET TO TIE TRUE POINT a= BEGNfING; TtENCE NORTH 39"19'58" WESTERly ALONG 1HE SOUTH BOlNWrf OF OOAVETZ ~513.39 FEET, MCH 00 LESS, TO A POWT a: IN'TERSEC'TJC>> OF 1lI: WEST BCll.t<<MRY LIE Of LOT 2, WITH 1HE SU) ORAYaz RG\D; nENCE SOUTH O1~'03"WEST A DlSTMCE'CF 519 FEETTOA POM ON 1lI: SAD WEST BOlJtt)AAy LINE OF LOT 2; TtENCE SOUTH 58"28"51" EAST 235 FEET; TtENCE NOOTH 01~'O3" EAST 8&.18 FEET; , TIENCe NOOrn 45"22'31~ EAST TO M TRUE POM a= BEGN4ING. . ,.pARCa f):-"'h ... -. '. h_.. _0..___ ~_______.._.._, _0__ _.__. lOT 2, CITY a= AlJBlI:W SHCRf PlAT tuileR SP-22.:rT Rf\'ISl(W, RECatta> lNlER RECOODlNG NJf.fI:R ~1012 IN Kf.IG COUNtY,. WASHtmOO, ~ A PClRTI(Jf a: TtE EAST fWF OF TIE SOOlliWEsr QlWm;R a: SECTION 32. TCMNSHp 21, Namf, RNG: 5 EAST, W.M., IN KWG COC,HJy, WAStftm>>I; EXCEPT THAT PamON 1lEREa= ~ AT TtE IN'I'mSEC11OH a: 1lI: EAST LIE a: SAIl lOT 2 WItH THE SOOT'HWESTERlY JMRGIN OF I<ERSEY WAY SOU1lt:AST (ORAVETZ~); TI-ENCE NOR1'HWEST'm.Y ALONG TIE SOU1lI:Rl.Y ~ a: ORAVETZ RQfD A DISTANCE OF 99.70 FEET TO nE TRUE POINT a= SEGNmG; TtENCE NOOTH 39"19'58" WESTERLy AI..ONG 1li: SOUTH 0CUI:Wn' a: ~VE1Z R(W) A DISTANCE OF 513.39 FEET, MOOE 00 LESS, TOA POIHTa: ~ a:1HE WEST ElCllNWff LN: a: LOT 2 WlTH SAI) ORAVETZ R(W); TtENCE SOUTH 01~'03" WEST A DISTANCE a= 579 FEET TO A POINT 00 ~ SAID WEST 9OOtt>ARY lINE a: LOT 2; TtENCE SOUTH ~57" EAST 235 FEET; THENCE NamI 01"21'03" EAST 8&.00 FEET; TtENCE NOOTH 45"22'31' EAST TO 1lI: TRUE POINT OF BEGINNtfG. EXHIBIT 3 - PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION .....................-........................................................-......................-....................................-..........-........... 4K'.fCLA;j)jJ !flue; bsflrrbS PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME fJ LTlJ ~_~ APPLICATION M Sec. Twp. Rng. Zone Existing Area Code Scheduled Hearing Date Received Staff Project Coordinator: .....-...........................................-............-...-.........--.-...-.........-..-.-..........-...-.............-..................... DO NOT WRITE ABOVE THIS LINE APPLICANT: COMPLETE THIS FORM WITH ALL ENTRIES BEING TYPED (except signatures) OR NEATLY PRINTED IN INK. FADDED SPACE IS NEEDED, AlTACH THE ADDmONAL REQUIRED PAGES TO THIS APPlICATION. NAME OF SUBDMSION: LI=\~Jf) t-hus t'5T""'.TES Total area of subdivision: Acres: 2:2. &f1 Sq: Ft: ',DOc':), 108'l. Total number of lots: "11 Total number of dwelling units: '11, Proposed zoning: 12. - I Existing zoning: e. - I Proposed Jand use; ~TateoCSfJ+e. ~\Vf Minimum size of lot as shown on plat 8,oc>o sq. fl Minimum lot Width as shown On plat "1-5 ' feet --,---'----------MinimUmlot-depth-as showrton-plat-IOO-~-u--m---____h_____n.__ _____un. ....- .... .......----teer_------. Proposed source of domestic water supply: C~1oF ~ - coJJe:r 1:0 Cfl/C1 (A>~ ~PoiIJs ntfu ~ ~. Proposed sewage disposal system:C'~ ate ~ - C(9tqfiT( 10 ftJroee. '55 fub-iP ~TISJ RECEIVED DEe 0" 2005 PlANNING DEPARTMENT Preliminary Plat Revised 11612D05 Page 4 of6 . . , All PROPERTY OWNERS INCLUDED IN THIS APPLICATION MUST BE LISTED BELOW ' OPPOSITE A "PARCEL NUMBER" WHICH IS AlSO SHOWN ON TIiE LEGAl DESCRIPTION AND INDICATES THE PROPERTY OWNED BY EACH APPLICANT. YOUR SIGNATURE AlSO INDICATES YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THE CONTENTS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ITS ATTACHMENTS~ PARCEL NUMBER NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NUMBER (Please Print) PU. r~ C)&..)Jeo' ~ ~ L~LM.bfuU5 ~/~ G,4S1 ~~. Bulo.:9f... alfW'~J ~~, 4805"<0 , !\>fufe.: A~ - 254- <tfll . ~Z210~ ~'22 tC\S1OS1 1ll2..los=:t043 ~U.'0S4620 DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON: 1..00 ~ j'PflGIfIG Olj, 4lBO uLh kVe. sw -u-----~~-w~-,-9~. 425- ZS\-8f)\( .~ ~ Name: Address: , , City: Phone: Preliminary Plat Revised 1.1i12l105 Page 5 of6 I 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Of PROPERTY ~ ~TI~ FEE PAYMENT: T.R. #: DATE RECEIVED: CASHIER'S INITIALS: $1,038.00 and $53.00 per lot plus $727.00 for Environmental Checklist PreliminaJy Piat ReIIised 1.6r2005 Page6of6 't LEGAl.. DESCRPTION PARCEl A: lOT " Al.lEImN ~ SHCm PLAT NUP.IlER SP~78, REcmoeo lNJER RECORI::lWG NlJ&R 8003110673, BEING A REVISION OF SHORT PLAT RECOODED lNlER RECOODING NNlER ~ AND 18063lO355.1lEH3 A pamc.., OF 1lE EAST HAlF OF nE SOO1lfWEST ClUARTER OF SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH. RANGE 5 EAST. WI.LMETTE MERDIAN. t4 KING COlMY. WASHt4GTON; TCIGETlt:R WfT'H AN EASa.ENT FOO INGRESS, EGRESS NfJ U11JTES AS DEl.N:ATED ON 1lE FACE OF SAD SHORT PlAT. PARCEl B: lOT 4, Al.JBlR4CORRECT1l:W SHCRT PLAT tUI3ER SP~78. RECOOIED lNJER RECOODING NlI&R 8003110673. BEING A REVISION OF SHORT PLAT RECORDED UN:lER REC<RlING NNlER ~ N<<> 7806310355. BeING A POOTION OF 1lE EAST HAlF OF nE SOVrHwesr ClUARTER OF SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGe 5 EAST. WlLAIETTE MERDlAN.IN KING COlJ4TY. WASffi3TON. PARCEl c: THAT PORTJC:>>I OF lOT 2. CITY OF ~ SHORT PlAT tUeER SP-22:n REVISION, REC<RlEO lNJER RECORDING tUteER 7905:m012 t4 I<JfG COUNTY. WASHt<<nat BEfiG A POOTIC.W OF 1lE EAST HAlF OF THE SOOTHWEST ClUARTER a= SECTION 32. TCMNSHP 21, HOOlH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.K, IN KING COlJITY. WASHINGT~ cot.t.EHCING AT . TtE tITERSECTlON OF llE EAST LIE OF SAIl lOT 2 Wffif llE SOOTHWEs'rERL V MW3If OF I<ERSEY WAY SOOllt:AST (OOAVETZ RCWJ); nENCE HOR1'HWESTERI..v ALONG llE SOO1lERI..v BaKWff OF OOAVElZ R(W) A DISTANCE OF 99.70 FEET TO TtE TRI.I: POINT OF BEGIftNG; 1lENCE NaUH 39"19'58" VESTERlv AlONG TtE SOUTH ElCII.H:\t.RY OF ooAVETZ R<W>513.39 FEET, MaE 00 LEss. TO A POIIT OF MERSECTION OF 1lE WEST BCUI:Wr( LIE OF LOT 2, WITH TtE SAIl ORAvaz R<W>; TtENCE SOOTH O1~'03"WESr A DlSTAHCE'OF 519 FEETTO A POINT ON TtE SAD WEST BOlNlARY LINE OF lOT 2; nENCE SOOTH 58"28'5r EAST 235 FEET; nENCE Namt 01~'03" EAsT 86.08 FEET; TtEHCE Namt oW22'3,.. EAST TO TtE TRI.I: POIIT OF EIEGNfi3. .. -PARCaD:->u. .. --. ._u_....____ '._h___.._.._. ___._'. lOT 2. OOY OF AlJBlM SHan' PlAT tUiER SP-22:n REVISION. RECCRED lNlER REOOU4G MJf.eER 7005301012 IN KING COUNtY, WASltNGTON, BEING A PORTION OF TlE EAST HAlF OF llE SOO1lMEST CllWm;R OF SEC'TJON 32. RMNSHP 21, NCm'H. RANGE 5 EAST, W.K, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PCm10N 1lEREOF ca.t.ENCI<<3 AT nE INTERSECTION OF 1lE EAST LIE OF SAI) lOT 2 WITlf THE SOOlHWESTERlV WGIN OF KERSEY WAY SOUTJEAsT (OOAlJETZ ROAD) TtEHCE HOR1'HWESTERI..v Al(WG 1lE SOO1lERI.. Y ~ OF OOAYETZ R(W) A DISTANCE OF 99.70 FEET 10 TtE 1RUEPOlNTOF~ 1tEHCE NORTH 39"19'58" VESTERlY AlONG nt: SOUTH ~ OF QRAVETZ ROO) A DISTANCE OF 513.39 FEET. MORE 00 LESS. TOA POIITOF ~ OFllE WEST ElCltIf)ARy LINE OF lOT 2 wrJH SAIl ORAVETZ R(W); TtENCE SOUTH 01~'03" WEST A DISTANCE OF 579 FEET TO A POINT ON 1lE SAI) WEST 800N>ARv lIE OF lOT 2; llENCE SOUTH sa-38'5T EAST 235 FEET; nENCE NORTH 01"21'03" EAST 86.08 FEET; l'tENCC NORTH oW22'31. EAST TO nE TRUE POINT Of BEGINNING. . * * . ~Ci;~..F~.IJ..,.tl'K. i n~:,u. IU~ "" __".,,,,':'(."'<: ,_,-:<f-t:f;.i ,'~",{(,/J" WASHINGTON Peter B. Lewis, Mayor 25 West Main Street * Auburn WA 9800 1-4998 * www.auburnwa.gov * 253-931-3000 FINAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP05-0039 EXHIBIT JL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Plat: a subdivision of an approx. 23 acre site into 70 single family residential lots, together with tracts for storm drainage and a stream/wetland system. The project will also include the dedication of public streets within the plat and street frontage improvements to Kersey Way SE. PROPONENT: Lakeland Hill Estates, LLC LOCATION: The site is located on the west side of Kersey III, extending from 49th Street SE south to the northern edge of the Kersey III Divisions 1 & 2 subdivisions. LEAD AGENCY: City of Auburn The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available on the public on request. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: POSITIONITITLE: Michael Davolio Director of Planning, Building and Community 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 (253) 931-3090 ADDRESS: DATE ISSUED: October 10.2006 Note: This determination does not constitute approval 0 the proposal. Approval of the proposal can only be made by the legislative or administrative body vested with that authority. The proposal is required to meet all applicable regulations. Any person aggrieved of this final determination may file an appeal with the Auburn City Clerk within 14 days of the date of issuance of this notice. All appeals of the above determination must be filed by 5:00 P.M. on October 24.2006 with reauired fee. AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED EXHIBIT , 1- - FINAL STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST SEP05-0039 Date: August 17,2006 Project: Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Plat Applicant: Lakeland Hill Estates, LLC 6457 Lake Washington Blvd. SE Newcastle, WA 98056 Location: West side of Kersey Way SE, extending from 49th St. SE to the northern boundary of the approved plats of Kersey III Divisions 1 & 2. S-T-R: Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 5 East, W.M. Parcel Size: Approximately 23 acres. Parcel Numbers: 3221059009, -059, 043, -020 Proposal: Subdivision of a 23 acre parcel into 70 single family residential lots. Existing Zoning: R1 Single Family Residential Existing Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ~. Background: 6. A public hearing on the preliminary plat is tentatively scheduled for September 19, 2006. 8. Environmental Information: In addition to the environmental checklist, the applicant submitted the following information: 1. "Slope Stability and Setback Recommendations," letter of November 1 0, 2005 prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc. 2. "Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Drainage Report," Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, November 11, 2005. 3. "Finch-Lakeland Hills Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept Mitigation," B- 12 Wetland Consulting, November 10,2005. 4. "Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis," Transportation Solutions, Inc. (TSI), November 2005. 5. "Lakeland Hill Estates Traffic Impact Analysis Supplement," TSI, June 28,2006. 9. Other applications: Kersey III Divisions 1 & 2 plats are currently under construction. 10. Other Government Approvals: The project requires preliminary plat approval, final plat approval, and facility extension approval from the City of Auburn. Other State permits are also required: Forest Practices, NPDES permit. Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist SEP05-0039 - Page 2 B. Environmental Elements: 1. Earth: The Geotech Consultant's report (11/10/05) specifically studied the slope along the western side of the property. The consultant recommends that conventional footings for future homes be located no closer than 25 feet to the crest of the slope and also that no filling should occur within 10 feet of the slope's crest. The report also recommends that an impervious liner be used in the detention pond for any portion within 50 feet of the crest of the slope and that no portion of the pond be located within 25 feet of the slope. 2. Air: Concur with checklist. 3. Water: Concur with checklist; the wetland and stream analysis report prepared by B-12 Associates adequately addresses the wetland and intermittent stream found on the western portion of the site and their protection through buffers. The wetland and stream area, together with uplands located to the west of these features, will comprise approx. 3 acres of the overall site. 4. Plants: Existing vegetation within the wetland/open space tract will be retained except for the area where buffer enhancement is noted in the B-12 report. 5. Animals: Concur with checklist. 6. Energy and Natural Resources: Concur with checklist. 7~ . Environmental Health: The proposed plat is located in the vicinity of an existing surface mining operation, which could have some noise impacts to future residents. State law requires that a notice be placed on the face of the plat to alert potential lot purchasers of this possibility. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: Concur with checklist. 9. Housing: Concur with checklist. 10. Aesthetics: The proposal will alter the view of the hillside for travelers along Kersey Way SE. The landscaping plan for the project should identify significant trees that could be retained through the plat development process. 11. Light and Glare: Concur with checklist. 12. Recreation: The nearest recreational facilities are found at local schools located to the west of the project site. 13..' Historic and Cultural Preservation: Concur with checklist. 14. Transportation: The plat design has been modified from the original submittal and will require the approval of several plat modification requests related to road geometry, specifically: .a) slopes on Roads A, B, C, F and cul-de-sacs A and B exceeding; b) horizontal centerline radius not meeting city standards is required for Road F near Lot 59 and Road A near lot 36 and lot 63. c) intersection spacing between Kersey Way and Road A. Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist SEP05-0039 - Page 3 15. Public Services: Park facilities will be available with the adjacent Kersey III plats. The applicant has negotiated to pay a park impact fee to the City Parks Department in lieu of providing any facilities on-site. 16. Utilities: Concur with checklist. C. Conclusion: The proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, provided the following mitigation measures are imposed: 1. Final plat design shall incorporate the recommendations of the geotech report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated November 10, 2005, relating to footing locations, filling, and storm pond location and construction. 2. A final wetland/stream buffer mitigation plan shall be prepared consistent with the conceptual plan contained within the November 10,20058-12 Wetland Consulting report and receive approval prior to commencement of site clearing and/or grading activities. 3. A southbound right turn deceleration lane on Kersey Way SE shall be provided to accommodate vehicles turning into the plat. The City reserves the right to review any future revisions or alterations to the site or to the proposal in order to determine the environmental significance or non-significance of the project at that point in time. Prepared by: Steve Pilcher, Development Services Coordinator : EXHIBIT 13 5~ff)~-Oo.39 PLTCJ~ ~CJtJ~ ~V Environmental LhecKllst ~ Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Subdivision City of Auburn, Washington Our Job No. 05056 Submitted to: City of Auburn, Washington Submitted by: Lakeland Hills Estates, LLC November 30, 2005 Prepared by Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 4180 Lind Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055 (425) 251-8811 (phone) (425) 251-8880 (fax) .. . " , A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Lakeland Hills Estates Residential Subdivision 2. Name of applicant: Lakeland Hills Estates, LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: ADDlicant Lake/and Hills Estates, LLC 6457 Lake Washington Blvd SE Newcastle, WA 98056 (425) 254-9891 Attn: Scott Finch 4. Date checklist prepared: November 30, 2005 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Auburn, Washington 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Contact Person Lou Larsen Pacific Engineering Design LLC 4180 Und Avenue SW (425) 251-8811 lIarsen@paceng.com Preliminary plat approval is expected during the first quarter 2006. Construction of site infrastructure improvements is expected to begin during the fall of 2006 and to be completed during the spring of 2007. Home construction is expected in the summer of 2007. . 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity. related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No further additions, expansion, or further activity is anticipated for this proposal. 8. Ust any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The following environmental documents have been prepared related to this proposal: · Preliminary Drainage Report to be prepared by PacifIC Engineering Design, LLC dated November 11, 2005 · TraffIC Impact Analysis prepared by Transportation Solutions, Inc. (TSI) dated November 2005. · Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept Mitigation Report prepared by B- 12 Wetland Consulting Inc. dated November 10, 2005. · Geotechnical Report (Slope stability and Setback Recommendations) prepared by Geotech Consultants dated November 10, 2005. ENV-CHECKLIST-LAKELAND HillS ESTATES.docPage 1 of 15 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Kersey 3 Preliminary Plat - our plat ties into this plat's road infrastructure. Evergreen Way Construction Permit - our plat ties into this proposed collector through Kersey 3. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. · Issuance of a SEPA Threshold Determination by the City of Auburn Environmental Review Committee · City of Auburn Preliminary Plat approval · City of Auburn approval of construction plans for site infrastructure improvements (streets, storm drainage system, sanitary sewer system and water system and site grading) · Washington State Department of Ecology NPDES Permit · City of Auburn Final Plat approval · Issuance of Building permits for single-family residences by the City of Auburn 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. The proposed project contemplates subdivision of approximately 22.97 acres of land into (a) 71 residential lots for single-family detached homes, (b) public residential access streets, and (c) a tract for drainage facilities.. The project will include site grading to establish (1) building pads on each of the proposed lots, (2) the public streets, (3) an open pond-type stormwater detention-water quality facility (and associated maintenance access road). 12. location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located on the south side of Kersey Way SE at the intersection of Kersey Way and SE 4f1' Street in Auburn, WA. The site is located in the southwest quarter of Section '32, Township 21 North, Range 5 East in the City of Auburn. Please see the attached Vicinity Map and project maps for location. The site is comprised of King County Assessor's Parcel Nos. 3221059009, 3221059020, 3221059043 and 3221059059 legally described as follows: PARCEL A: LOT 1, AUBURN CORRECTION SHORT PLAT NUMBER SP-8-78, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8003110673, BEING A REVISION OF SHORT PLA T RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7805230335 AND 7806200355, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W1LLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; ENV-CHECKLlST-LAKElAND HILLS ESTATES.docPage 2 of 15 TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES AS DELlNEA TED ON THE FACE OF SAID SHORT PLA T. PARCEL B: LOT 4, AUBURN CORRECTION SHORT PLA T NUMBER SP-8-78, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8003110673, BEING A REVISION OF SHORT PLAT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7805230335 AND 7806200355, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WlLLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF LOT 2, CITY OF AUBURN SHORT PLAT NUMBER SP-22-77 REVISION, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7905301012 IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 21, NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WM., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2 WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF -KERSEY WA Y SOUTHEAST (ORA VETZ ROAD); THENCE NORTHWESTERL Y ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF ORA VETZ ROAD A DISTANCE OF 99. 70 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 3go19'58" WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF ORA VETZ ROAD 513.39 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2, WITH THE SAID ORA VETZ ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 01"21'03" WEST A DISTANCE OF 579 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2; THENCE SOUTH 51J028'57" EAST 235 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01"21'03" EAST 86.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45"22'31" EAST TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL D: LOT 2, CITY OF AUBURN SHORT PLA T NUMBER SP-22-77 REVISION, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7905301012 IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 21, NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WM., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2 WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF KERSEY WA Y SOUTHEAST (ORA VETZ ROAD); THENCE NORTHWESTERL Y'ALONG THE SOUTHERL Y BOUNDARY OF ORA VETZ ' ROAD A DISTANCE OF 99. 70 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 3go19'58" WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF ORAVETZ ROAD A DISTANCE OF 513.39 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2 WITH SAID ORA VETZ ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 01021'03" WEST A DISTANCE OF 579 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2; THENCE SOUTH 5f3038'57" EAST 235 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01"21'03" EAST 86.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45022'31" EAST TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ENV-CHECKLlST-LAKELAND HillS ESTATES.docPage 3 of 15 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: Hilly. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The site is generally sloped 15-2()ofi, with some flat areas at existing residences near Kersey Way. The steepest slope which is located in the NW section of the site approaches a 35-4()ofi, slope. No steep slopes (over 40%) are indicated. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classifICation of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime fannland. AccorrJing to the 1973 King County Soils Survey, the site soils are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC). For more specific infonnation refer to the Soils Report prepared by Geotech Consultants dated November 10, 2005. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The site will require grading to establish flat pad lots, the proposed public street, and the proposed stonnwater detention-water quality facility. Approximately 79,340 cubic yards of cut and approximately 71,507 cubic yards of fill are anticipated. Generally, cut material from the site will be utilized as filL Fill material from offsite sources, if required, will be approved structural fill. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion could occur due to land clearing activities during construction. Erosion controls will be implemented prior to clearing in conformance with an engineered Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan to be submitted to the City of Auburn for review and' approval along with project site infrastructure construction drawings. Erosion control measures are expected to include Best Management Practices such as construction of drainage ditches, installation of silt fencing, construction of a sedimentation control pond, and construction access pads at the site entry and other measures as appropriate. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for e~ample, asphalt or buildings)? ENV-CHECKlIST-LAKELAND HILLS ESTATES.docPage 4 of 15 The maximum allowable lot coverage is 35% impervious. - With additions of the roads and sidewalks the project will be approximately 50% impervious. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: An Erosion Control Plan will be implemented including the use of silt fencing and sediment traps during construction and the placing of mulch and hydroseeding after construction. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Emissions and dust parliculates generated primarily by construction equipment will be produced during the construction phase of this project. The amount of such transitory emissions to the air is expected to be minimal. Once the project is completed, emissions will be those typically associated with a residential development (such as emissions from fumaces and fireplaces). b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. The applicant is not aware of off-site sources of emissions or odors that will affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: During the site work construction phase of the project, watering dusty portions of the site to help control dust. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is an unnamed stream located in a ravine on the western edge of the property. Buffer locations and setbacks are shown on the preliminary plat plans. The stream flows under Kersey Way S.E. and connects into Bowman Creek approximately ~ mile NW of the site. Bowman Creek then flows into W11ite River approximately one mile from the site. For more infotmation, refer to the Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept Mitigation dated November 10, 2005. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet of) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. A portion of the plat and the detention water quality pond will be constructed within 200 feet of the unnamed stream along the western edge of the property. ENV-CHECKlIST-LAKELAND HillS ESTATES.docPage 5 of 15 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill or dredge material will be placed in or removed from the surface waters discussed above. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. This proposal will not require any water withdraws or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No discharges of waste materials are proposed to surface waters. The on-site stormwater facility will treat project-generated stormwater for water quality and flow control prior to release to the stream near the southwest comer of the site. b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn. or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose. and approximate quantities if known. No groundwater withdrawals or discharges are proposed as part of this project. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The proposed project will discharge domestic sewer into a new public sanitary sewer system. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. c. Water Runoff (including stann water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm. water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. Project-generated stormwater will be collected in a pipe and catch basin system and routed to the proposed stormwater facility to be located in Tract A. The stormwater facility will be designed to the parameters of the City of Auburn's design standards. The facility is planned to discharge to the unnamed stream along the western boundary of the site. 2) Could waste material enter, ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. ENV-CHECKLlST-LAKELAND HILLS ESTATES.docPage 6 of 15 No. Stonnwater runoff from paved surfaces may include'residiJe from petroleum- based products associated with vehicular travel. These pollutants will be treated in the proposed stormwater facility to be located in Tract A. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Installation of the proposed stormwater collection system, stonnwater detention and water quality pond facility. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: -1L deciduous tree: alder, maDIe, aspen, other -1L evergreen tree: fir, cedar, Pine, other X shrubs X grass _ pasture _ crop or grain - wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other _ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other _ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Approximately 23 acres will be cleared for road, utility and house construction. c. list threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Streets and lots will be landscaped according to City of Auburn standards. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, sonabirds, other: crows Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. list any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no known threatened Or endangered animal species on or near the subject property. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Yes, the site is part of the 'Pacific Flyway. ENV-CHECKUST-LAKELAND HIllS ESTATES.docPage 7 of 15 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The project is expected to use electric and natural gas energy sources for heating, lighting, small appliances, and other uses as applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? list other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The future residences will be designed and constructed in conformance with the Washington state Energy Code. No other. energy conservation features are proposed. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None known. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Typical emergency services for single-family residential uses will be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None proposed. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise from Kersey Way S.E. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-tenn or a long-tenn basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. During site construction, the noise of trucks and heavy equipment will create noise. Construction-related noise will also be created by home construction ENV-CHECKLlST-LAKELAND HILLS ESTATES.docPage 8 of 15 activities on the site. Because these activities will be shorl term, the associated noise will be short term. Over the long term, traffic noise and other noise commonly associated with single-family residential developments will uNimately be created by the Proposed development. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Limitation of construction activities in accordance with the City of Auburn's permitted work hours. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The cUfTent use of the site and adjacent properties are all large lot single family residential. b. Has the site been used for agricutture? If so, describe. The applicant is not aware of any prior agricultural use of the subject property. c. Describe any structures on the site. Currently there are four abandoned single family residences and outbuildings on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? All existing structures will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning classifICation of the site is R1. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The cUfTent comprehensive plan designation of the site is single family residential. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? This item does not apply. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. There is an unnamed stream on the western portion of the site. For more information, refer to the Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept Mitigation prepared by ~ Twelve. i. Approximately how many ~ople would reside or work in the completed project? ENV-CHECKlIST-LAKELAND HILLS ESTATES.docPage 9 ot 15 Approximately 213 people would reside in the completed"prOject (assuming an average of 3 residents per single-family residence). j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None proposed. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: This project has been carefully designed to provide desirable housing and intill development in conformance with the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. All 71 of the proposed lots are (a) located within the portion of the site zoned R-1 and (b) designed to be consistent with the site's R-1 zone regulations. 9. HOUSING a. ApprOXimately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Seventy-one new single-famHy detached homes would ultimately be provided, one for each of the single-family residential lots that are proposed. The homes are expected to be in the middle-income housing bracket. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Four abandoned low income, single family houses and outbuildings will be removed. - c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Street trees and landscaping will be added in accordance with the City of Auburn's standards. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. The tallest site structures will be single-family residential structures in accordance with the City of Auburn maximum building height regulations for the R-1 zone. Those regulations buildings to -2 stories and 30 ft. in height". The principal exterior building material(s) of the homes ultimately to be constructed are not yet known. b.What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? From Kersey Way S. E. the view of the site will be altered in that existing trees will be removed from the site during construction. As the site is on the side of a hill, no existing views will be obstructed. ENV-CHECKLlST-LAKELAND HIllS ESTATES.docPage 10 of 15 C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Trees and landscaping will be added to the project in accordance with City of Auburn standards. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. V\lhat type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Minor amounts of light or glare may occur from vehicles entering and exiting the proposed subdivision as well as from intemal streetlights along the proposed residential access streets and from the ultimately-constrvcted homes. These light sources are expected to occur during evening and nighttime hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of fight or gfare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Lake Tapps in located approXimately 1 ~ miles from the site. Lakeland Hills Park is located approximately M of a mile from the site. Auburn Game Farm and Mill Pond Park are located within 1 mile of the site. Roegner Park is approximately 1.2 miles from the site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: City of Auburn park impact fees will be paid in conjunction with the development of the project. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or propose9 for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If 56, generally describe. None known. ENV-CHECKUST-lAKELAND HillS ESTATES.docPage 11 of15 b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. No known landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance are known to be on or next to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None proposed. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site will be accessed by from Kersey Way SE. Secondary access will be to the proposed Evergreen Way (not yet constructed) through Kersey Three Subdivision (not yet constructed). b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Metro transit route 151 serves the following locations near the site: Mill Pond Dr and 51st St Se, 0.88 mles from the site; Mill Pond Dr and 47'1' St SE, 0.95 miles from the site; Mill Pond Drive and 5~ St SE, 0.95 miles from the site; Lakeland Hills Way and W St SE, 1.03 miles from the site; and Lakeland Hills Way & 47'1' St SE, 1.05 miles from the site. (See appendix for the King County Metro Transit Closest Stops to 5011 Kersey Way S.E.) c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? At least two off-street parking spaces will be provided on each of the proposed lots when homes are developed on the lots. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? Yes, new public residential access streets are proposed within the plat. These streets will connect directly to Kersey Way S.E. and' Evergreen (not yet constructed) through Kersey //I (not yet constructed). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. As noted in the Lakeland Hills Estates Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TSI dated November 2005 approximately 641 new vehicular trips per day will be generated by the proposed project, with 50 new AM peak hour trips and 72 new PM peak hour trips. ENV-CHECKLlST-LAKELAND HILLS ESTATES.docPage 12 of15 g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: City of Auburn traffIC impact fees will be paid in conjunction with the development. 15. PUBUC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. An incremental increased need for public services, including fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, and other services are expected to be needed for the project. These needs will be typical for single-family residential development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or contrQI direct impacts on public services, if any. As required by the City of Auburn, Auburn Fire Department impact fees will be paid in connection with the development. Other services will be paid for by property taxes assessed against each of the proposed lots. 16. UTlUTlES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity. refuse service, teleDhone, and seotic svstem. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The utilities proposed to be extended as part of this application include electricity, telephone, water, sewer, natural gas and cable. c. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the and complete. It is understood th non-significance that it might iss willful misrepresentation or will Agent for Proponent: Name Printed: t of my knowtedge the above information is true e lead agency may withdraw any declaration of reliance upon this checklist should there be any of full dis ure on my part. Date: November 3D, 2005 ENV-CHECKLlST-LAKELAND HILLS ESTATES.docPage 13 of 15 ..-" ... Appendix Lakeland Hills Estates Residential Subdivision Pacific Engineering Design Job No. 05056 . Vicinity Map · King County Metro Transit Trip Planner -Closest Stops to 5011 Kersey Way S.E. · Geotechnical Report (Slope Stability and Setback Recommendations) prepared by Geotechnical Consultants dated November 10,2005. · Preliminary Storm Drainage Calculations report prepared by Pacific Engineering Design, LLC. dated November 11, 2005 · Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept Mitigation prepared by B-12 Wetland Consulting, Inc. dated November 10, 2005 · Traffic Impact Analysis report prepared by TSI dated November 2005 -- ------- _~_,..u Page 1 of 1 King County Metro Transit Trip Planner Closest Stops to 5011 KERSEY WAY SE Send Feedback About These Results Revise OriGinal Entries Location Distance Area --_._'~------~"-~""-~'---_'_"'"_____"__R'~__,_____.__..._...._____________~_....___________..______.__..____ Mill Pond Dr & 51 sf Sf SE Mill Pond Dr & 47th Sf SE Mill Pond Dr & 53rd Sf SE Lakeland Hills Way & 53rd Sf SE Lakeland Hills Way & 47th Sf SE 0.88 mile 0.95 mile 0.95 mile 1.03 mile 1.05 mile AUBURN AUBURN AUBURN AUBURN Rou It ,NITISf IVlr ISf << III r (5"" I /1/tl I~I AUBURN /1 I j .i S- / ---, .-.-.----------.-..---..----.----.....--....--.--------------...--.-.------- .-..- - - . -----..-..--.-.~-_.... ~--.-.---..~. --.... -".---.-- ~._---..-._._ _.._________n___ Back fo Find Closest Stops Page Metro Online Home I Site Map I Kino County DOT I Kino County Home http://tripplanner.metrokc.gov/cgi-bin/estops.pl 11/1012005 GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. EXHIBIT Ji 13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 lakeland Hills Estates, lLC 6457 lake Washington Boulevard Southeast Newcastle, Washington 98056 November 10,2005 IN 05393 Attention: Scott Finch Subject: Slope Stability and Setback Recommendations Proposed lakeland Hills Estates 5022 Kersey Way Southeast Auburn, Washington Dear Mr. Finch: via facsimile (425) 254-9892 On September 28. 2005, the undersigned principal engineer met with you at the project site. The purposes of this visit were to observe the existing site conditions, discuss the planned development, and monitor the excavation of test pits along the slope on the western side of the property. This letter presents a summary of our findings related to stability of the western slope. Our services were provided in general accordance with the scope that you authorized in olir Contract for Professional Services. We understand that that the entire property will be developed with numerous residential lots. Of these, approximately eight lots and the detention tract will adjoin the slope that declines to a shallow ravine running along the western edge of the site. During our visit to the site, we measured the inclination of this slope using a hand-held inclinometer, which is accurate to within approximately 2 percent. Based on our measurements, this western slope has an average inclination of 30 to 35 percent, and a height of 20 to 30 feet. The slope was covered with brush and there were several mature trees growing on it. We observed no indications 'of recent instability on this slope. The remainder of the property generally appears to be inclined at less than 30 percent. - We observed the excavation of three test pits spaced at relatively even intervals alolig' ttTe western slope. These explorations were located within 15 feet of the slope's crest.. All three test pits encountered generally similar conditions consisting of loose, slightly silty sand. that became medium-dense to dense below a depth of approximately 3 feet. These soils were exposed to the maximum 10-foot depth of the explorations, and no groundwater or wet soils were observed. We observed similar sand soils in soil exposures at various locations around the property. . Based on our observations and the soil conditions encountered in the test pits, the potential for future instability on the western slope is low. This slope is not steep, and is comprised of sand soils . without a high groundwater table. If soil movement does occur on the slope, it would be confined to the near-surface looser sand and should not affect the denser sand beneath. As a result, the planned development should no~ adversely affect the slope's stability, provided the slope is not' improperly disturbed, and runoff from the development is not discharged onto the slope. Fill and clearing debris must not be placed on th~ slope, unless it is retained by an e'ngineered retention system.. We recommend that conventional footings for the residences be located no closer than 25 Lake/and Hills Estates, LLC November 10, 2005 IN 05393 Page 2 feet to the slope's crest. This is a more than sufficient building setback to protect the house foundations. in the event of shallow slope movement. No filling should occur within 10 feet of the slope's crest. -Due to the permeability of the sand soils, we recommend that an impervious liner be used for the entire detention pond if any part of it extends to within 50 feet of the slope's crest. This prevents infiltration of the detained water into the soil close to the slope. The pond should not be closer than 25 feet to the slope. L1MITA TIONS The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our site visit. If the subsurface conditions encountered during CQnstruction are significantly different from those anticipated, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites. Such unexpected' conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly constructed project. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Lakeland Hills Estates, LLC, and its representatives, for specific application to this project and site. Our recommenda,tions and conclusions are based on the site materials observed and on previous experience with sites that have similar observed conditions. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived. in accordance with current' standards of practice within the limited scope of our services. No warranty is expressed or impJied. We trust that this report meets your immediate needs for the proposed development. Please contact us if we can be of further service. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Marc R. McGinnis, P.E. Principal MRM: esn GEO~CH CONSULTANTS, ,INC. EXHIBIT I ~ - LAKE LAND IDLL ESTATES Kersey Way and SE 49th Street City of Auburn, Washington Preliminary Drainage Report Prepared/or: Lakeland Hills Estates, LLC 6457 Lake Washington Blvd SE Newcastle, W A 98056 (425) 254-9891 Attn: Scott Finch Prepared By: Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 4180 Lind Avenue SW Renton, W A 98055 Phone: (425)251-8811 Fax: (425) 251-8880 Joseph M. Hopper, P.E. November 11, 2005 PED Job No. 05056 Preliminary Drainage Report for lolceland Hills Estates lJI1l12005 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROmCT OVERVIEW. .......... ....... .................... ....... ................... ...... ............. ...........;.. .......1 II. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS ....... ................... ....... .................. ............ ....... ........ ......3 III. FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ............................4 IV. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN .....................................................7 V. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN .........................................................8 APPENDIX · WaterWorks Computer Printouts · DOE Manual: Table ill-2.1 NRCS Hydrologic Soil Groups · DOE Manual: Table 111-2.2 NRCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers · King County Soils Map · 2, 10, 25 and 100 - Year Isopluvials Pacific Engineering Design, UC 05056 Preliminary Drainage Report.doc Page i Preliminary Drainage Report for lalce/and Hills &tates 1 III 112005 I. PROJECT OVERVIEW Site Location and Project Proposal The project is located on the south side of Kersey Way SE at the intersection of Kersey Way and SE 49th Street in Auburn, W A. The site is located in the southwest quarter of Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 5 East in the City of Auburn. Please see the attached Vicinity Map for location. The proposed project contemplates subdivision of approximately 22.97 acres ofland into (a) 71 residential lots for single-family detached homes, (b) public residential access streets, and (c) a tract for drainage facilities. The project will include site grading to establish (1) building pads on each of the proposed lots, (2) the public streets, and (3) an open pond-type stormwater detention-water quality facility (and associated maintenance access road). Existing Site Conditions The current use of the site and adjacent properties are all large lot single family residential. Currently there are two single family residences and some outbuildings on the project site. The site is mostly forested with cleared areas around the single family residences, which could be classified as lawns although some of the cleared areas are not maintained and could be considered pasture. The site is generally sloped 15-20% with some flat areas at'existing residences near Kersey Way. The steepest slope which is located in the NW section of the site approaches a 35-40% slope. No steep slopes (over 40%) are indicated. According to the 1973 King County Soils Survey, the site soils are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC). There is an unclassified stream located in a ravine on the western edge of the property. The stream flows under Kersey Way S.E. and connects into Bowman Creek NW of the site. Bowman Creek then ultimately flows into the White River. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 05056 Preliminary Drainage Report.doc Page 1 Preliminary Drainage Report for Lake/and Hills Estates 11/11/2005 VICINITY MAP ~H \6~-~ II ;/ - j ~ l\i. ~ I /.~ ~. ~ r ~~ r~<l; ~7 'J:;:) S',,, ~ .I -Tj ~ -7 '~i!:: lei A. ~ '\\~ ta /1- ~ ,--J~ ~ t=j-J I ~~ . I I PKWYT. If . '1 ~n nJ n I---' ~ ' ......... - ....... X\^~ i~'J~ ~III. ~~, }. .... ~J_ ., ~~ . ~ ,./;". .-;c, ..].:.,f: ~ ~l (STUCk' ~~~'" n j}ii.:.;...:...';.;.Seattie ':'\""~.':. \Bel.....ue ...--,.... ~ ~;..::.~:;~:..;..P.:.t:;I. .-' -. · ~ ~h~ n,... ~ ':tt;;' "...ri. '.',--,) '" ! ~rt ~ \ I I .fuc::~;~. '.~ ~~ :~=J. : -- r-~":,: ,;$t: j-;i.o')'-=-e RftllOD ~' . (.11/ , .., ',', , Sea-Tu) _ J i ~ --~ \~- ------ --,- :=,"::,;~~:/~KeDI ~ --4..~~,. ... ,,:r;;!" ,~ e Covlnltton I,f) ! ~\\ /c;::)~.;.i~~~ : ~~U RN ~ ~~l ~~ L~I~~US\ :~~',~.:. ~ In 'I ~'I ~.I J~~ I I I ~ l...W ......".:..1 .... IT. ..,.,.. ~ ~~ .. 3 D ~ ~~ "'-\ . "\ s. ~ I- - _I...- j T // ./ I '1 - t=J ~~ I ,- .r- Regional Map & Project Vicinity Map Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 05056 Preliminary Drainage Reportdoc Page 2 Preliminary Drainage Report for Lake/and Hi/ls &taJes ///11/2005 II. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Upstream Tributary Area An upstream tributary are lies to the south of the project site. The direction of flow is almost due north, sheet flowing across the south property line. There don't appear to be any concentrated flows such as creeks or ravines contributing directly to the site at this point. The areas to the east, west and south of this project are proposed to be developed, and is currently under review at the city. This neighboring project is currently known as the Kersey III development. For this project and the drainage calculations contained herein, it is assumed that the Kersey III development will be completed and all drainage from that site will be diverted to the on-site storm detention/retention system associated with that project. There will be no off-site drainage contributing to this site upon completion of the Kersey III development. In the event that the Kersey ill development is not completed, a more detailed analysis of the upstream basin will be performed for this project, as necessary, during the course of the design reVIews. Downstream Analysis There is an unclassified stream located in a ravine on the western edge of the property. The stream flows under Kersey Way S.E. and connects into Bowman Creek NW of the site. Bowman Creek then ultimately flows into the White River. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 05056 Preliminary Drainage Report.doc Page 3 Preliminary Drainage Report for Lakeland Hills &tates 11111/2005 III. FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PART A - EXISTING SITE HYDROLOGY . The current use of the site and adjacent properties are all large lot single family residential. Currently there are two single family residences and some outbuildings on the project site. The site is mostly forested with cleared areas around the single family residences, which could be classified as lawns although some of the cleared areas are not maintained and could be considered pasture. The site is generally sloped 15-20% with some flat areas at existing residences near Kersey Way. The steepest slope which is located in the NW section of the site approaches a 35-40% slope. No steep slopes (over 400-10) are indicated. According to the 1973 King COlmty Soils Survey, the site soils are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC). There is an unclassified stream located in a ravine on the western edge of the property. The stream flows under Kersey Way S.E. and connects into Bowman Creek NW of the site. Bowman Creek then ultimately flows into the White River. The total site area is 22.97 acres, but the existing wetland will not be included in the drainage calculations because it will ultimately be downstream of, and thus will not contribute to, the detention facility. The wetland area is approximately 3.03 acres. The remaining are that will be analyzed on the site measures approximately 19;94 acres. The hydrological soil group is "C" according to the above described soil type identified on site. Two-thirds of the site is covered by trees, eN = 74. The remaining one-third of the site is covered by lawns, buildings and driveways, a conservative approach is to consider all of this area as lawn, CN = 70. Combining the two site conditions results in a composite pervious surface, CN = 71. Please refer to the Appendix for the SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers, Table 111-1.3. According to WSDOE Isopluvial Maps (please see appendix), the estimated precipitation values are: Year Precipitation (inches) 2 2.0 10 3.0 25 3.5 100 4.0 Pacific Engineering Design, UC 05056 Pn:liminary Drainage Report.doc Page 4 Preliminary Drainage Report for Lakeland Hills Estates //////2005 PART B - DEVELOPED SITE HYDROLOGY The proposed project contemplates subdivision of approximately 22.97 acres of land into (a) 71 residential lots for single-family detached homes, (b) public residential access streets, and (c) a tract for drainage facilities. The project will include site grading to establish (1) building pads on each of the proposed lots, (2) the public streets, and (3) an open pond-type stormwater detention-water quality facility (and associated maintenance access road). Project generated stormwater will be collected in a pipe and catch basin system and routed to the proposed stormwater facility to be located in Tract A. The stormwater facility will be designed to the parameters of the City of Auburn's design standards as described below. The facility is planned to discharge from the pond into unclassified stream described above, then under Kersey Way SE into Bowman Creek and continuing ultimately to the White River. The site area analyzed for the developed condition is the same as the pre-developed condition, 19.94 acres. The hydrological soil group is "C" according to the above described soil type identified on site. The site has approximately 9.66 acres of impervious surface, consisting of roads, sidewalks, driveways, roofs, and pond water surface, CN = 98. The remaining pervious surface is approximately 10.28 acres of lawns, CN = 86. Please refer to the Appendix for the SCS Western Washington RunofICurve Numbers, Table 111-1.3. PART C - HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS The drainage analysis uses Engenious Systems, Inc's WaterWorks software, utilizing the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) methodology. In accordance with City of Auburn drainage standards the discharge rates from storm drainage detention system shall be based upon the peak discharged rates. The peaks shall be equal to or less than the following criteria: · The 2-year 24-hour developed discharge shall match 50% of the existing 2-year 24-hour peak storm event; · The 10-year 24-hour developed discharge shall match to the ~xisting 10-year 24-hour peak storm event; · The 25-year 24-hour developed discharge shall match to the existing 25-year 24-hour peak storm event; , · The lOO-year 24-hour developed discharge shall match to the existing 100-year 24- hour peak storm event; Pacific Engineering Design. LLC 05056 Preliminary Drainage Report.doc Page 5 Preliminary Drainage Report for Lakeland Hills &tates 11/11/2005 PART D - RETENTION/DETENTION SYSTEM An open pond-type stormwater detention-water quality facility is proposed to serve this site. Existing Condition: Total Area = 19.94 Ac o Pervious Area = 19.94 Ac @ CN = 71 (composite as described above) Time of Concentration = 37.20 min. o Reach 1: 300' Sheet Flow @ 10.33%; ns = 0.40 o Reach 2: 300' Shallow Channel Flow @ 12.33%, ks = 11.00 o Reach 3: 300' Channel Flow @ 9.33%, lee = 17.00 o Reach 4: 130' Channel Flow @ 1.54%, lee = 17.00 ExistinK Condition Hyd h Summaries Precip. Peak Flow Volume Time of Peak Storm finl. fcfsl rAc-ftl r min.l 2- Year 2.0 0.40 0.44 960 10- Year 3.0 1.26 1.26 540 25- Year 3.5 2.08 1.77 490 l00-Year 4.0 3.37 1.37 480 · See Appendix for 2,10,25, and l00-Year Isopluvials. Developed Condition: Total Area = 19.94 Ac o Pervious Area = 10.28 Ac @ CN = 86 o Impervious Area = 9.66 Ac @ CN = 98 Time of Concentration = 5.00 min. (assumed minimum) Storm 2- Year 10- Year 25- Year Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 05056 Prdiminary Drainage Report.doc Page 6 Preliminary Drainage Report for Lake/and Hills &tates 11/11/2005 Level Pool Routing The following level pool table summary represents the results of routing the developed 2-, 10-,25-, and l00-year hydrograph through a theoretical, detention pond. Please note that in all cases the discharge rates are less than or equal to the allowable release rates. Description Match [cfs] Inflow Storage Discharge Peak Stage Volume Outflow rcfsl ID ID fftl fcfl r cfs 1 1/2 2Y TO DEV2 0.20 5.40 P3 COMB I 106.03 82,462 0.20 EXIO TO DlO 1.26 9.30 P3 COMB I 107.34 105,294 1.26 EX 25Y TO D25Y 2.08 11.32 P3 COMB I 107.85 114,573 1.95 EX100 TO DlOO 3.10 13.36 P3 COMB 1 107.99 117,175 2.80 Each storm event outflow is equal to or below the required matching pre-developed peak storm event. The pond as designed will be 136-feet long, 80-feet wide, and 8-feet deep, containing 117,419 cubic feet of storage capacity. A tee type control structure with two orifices and a notch at the top of the riser pipe will be constructed to meet the release rate standards. These calculations have been included. PART E - WATER QUALITY TREATMENT Water quality treatment has been calculated in accordance with the requirements set forth in the City of Auburn's Design and Construction Standards Manual. The rainfall amount has been calculated by taking 72-percent of the 2-year 24-hour isopluvial, which results in 1.44- inches of precipitation. Engenious Systems, Inc's WaterWorks computer software was used to size the water quality facility. The storage will be provided in a pre-settling type pond prior to outletting to the detention pond. The required storage volume needed for water quality treatment is 59,718 cubic feet Given the restrictions of the site, a bio-filtration swale or bio-filtration filter are not practicable options due to slopes in the site. The best option is a wetpond or pre-sett1~g pond for this site. IV. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The conveyance analysis will be included in the :final Technical Information Report at construction document submittal. The system will be designed to convey the 25-year peak flows and a backwater analysis will be performed to check for flooding conditions at the 100- year event per the King County Surface Water Design Manual. , Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 05056 Prdiminary Drainage Report.doc Page 7 Preliminary Drainage Report for Lake/and Hi/Is Estates J 1/1//2005 v. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN Erosion and sedimentation control will be provided by utilizing BMPs selected from the City of Auburn Design and Construction Standards. These BMPs will likely include, but are not necessarily limited to, sediment pond(s) and/or trap(s), silt fencing, construction safety fencing, interceptor v-ditches, rock check dams, plastic sheeting of stockpiles, straw mulch, hydro-seeding, catch basin protection, and rocked construction entrance, etc. A Temporary Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan will be submitted as part of the construction documents detailing the means by which sediment and erosion control will be handled during construction. Filter fabric fence will be used as perimeter protection, which will reduce sediment transport from the site. A gravel construction entrance will reduce the amount of sediment transported by construction vehicles and reduce the areas disturbed by vehicular traffic. Clearing limits will be delineated on the construction plans for the purpose of preventing disturbance of those areas of the project that are not designated for clearing and or grading. A construction sequence will be provided to aid the contractor in applying the erosion control measures at the appropriate stages during construction Pacific Engineering DeSign, LLC 05056 Preliminary Drainage RepoI1.doc Page 8 APPENDIX 10/25/05 3:46:47 pm PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN Pacific Engineering Design Inc 05056-KERSEY WAY page 1 ===================================================================== BASIN ID: DEV-I00Y SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.. .....: RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: BASIN SUMMARY NAME: BASIN DEVELOPED CONDo 100YR S 19.94 Acres TYPElA 4.00 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0~20 PEAK RATE: 13.36 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: DEV-I0Y SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION.... : TIME INTERVAL....: BASEFLOWS: AREA. . : CN....: TC....: 0.00 cfs PERV 10.28 Acres 86.00 15.00 min 5.21 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min IMP 9.66 Acres 98.00 5.00 min NAME: BASIN DEVELOPED COND. 10YR ST 19.94 Acres TYPElA 3.00 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 9.30 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: DEV-25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: BASEFLOWS: AREA. . : CN....: TC....: 0.00 cfs PERV 10.28 Acres 86.00 15.00 min 3.65 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min IMP 9.66 Acres 98.00 5.00 min NAME: BASIN DEVELOPED COND. 2SYR ST 19.94 Acres TYPElA 3.50 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 11.32 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: DEV-2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: BASEFLOWS: AREA. . : CN....: TC....: 0.00 cfs PERV 10.28 Acres 86.00 15.00 min 4.43 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min NAME: BASIN DEVELOPED COND. 2YR ST 19.94 Acres TYPE1A 2.00 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 5.40 cfs VOL: BASEFLOWS: AREA. . : CN. . . ..: TC....: 0.00 cfs PERV 10.28 Acres 86.00 .15.00 min 2.16 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min IMP 9.66 Acres 98.00 5.00 min IMP 9.66 Acres 98.00 5.00 min 10/25/05 3:46:47 pm PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN Pacific Engineering Design Inc 05056-KERSEY WAY page 2 =================================:=================================== BASIN ID: DEV-6MO SBOO METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: BASIN SUMMARY NAME: BASIN DEVELOPED COND.6MO ST 19.94 Acres TYPE1A 1.44 inches 10 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 3.37 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: EX1-100Y SBOO METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach - Sheet TcReach - Shallow TcReach - Channel TcReach - Channel PEAK RATE: 3.10 BASIN ID: EX1-10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA... ....: RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach - Sheet TcReach - Shallow TcReach - Channel TcReach - Channel PEAK RATE: 1.26 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 10.28 Acres 86.00 15.00 min AREA. . : CN....:' TC....: 1.37 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min NAME: BASIN 1-EXIST. CONDo 100YR ST 19.94 Acres TYPE1A 4.00 inches 10.00 min 0.20 L: 300.00 L: 300.00 L: 300.00 L: 130.00 cfs VOL: BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 19.94 Acres 71.00 37.20 min AREA. . : CN....: TC. . .' . : ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 ks:11.00 s:0.1233 kc:17.00 s:0.0933 kc:17.00 s:0.0154 2.32 Ac-ft TIME: s:0.1033 490 min NAME: BASIN 1-EXIST. CONDo 10YR ST 19.94 Acres TYPE1A 3.00 inches 10.00 min 0.20 L: 300.00 L: 300.00 L: 300.00 L: 130.00 cfs VOL: BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 19.94 Acres 71.00 37.20 min AREA. . : CN....: TC....: ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 ks:11.00 s:0.1233 kc:17.00 s:0.0933 kc:17.00 s:0.0154 1.26 Ac-ft TIME: s:0.1033 540 min IMP 9.66 Acres 98.00 5.00 min IMP 0.00 Acres 0.00 0.00 min IMP 0.00 Acres 0.00 0.00 min 10/25/05 3:46:47 pm PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN Pacific Engineering Design Inc 05056-KERSEY WAY page 3 ===================================================================== BASIN ID: EXl-25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. ......: RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: BASIN SUMMARY NAME: BASIN I-EXIST. CONDo 25YR ST 19.94 Acres TYPE1A 3.50 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 TcReach - Sheet L: 300.00 TcReach - Shallow L: 300.00 TcReach - Channel L: 300.00 TcReach - Channel L: 130.00 PEAK RATE: 2.08 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: EXl-2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach - Sheet TcReach - Shallow TcReach - Channel TcReach - Channel PEAK RATE: 0.40 BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 19.94 Acres 71.00 37.20 min AREA. . : CN....: TC....: ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 ks:11.00's:0.1233 kc:17.00 s:0.0933 kc:17.00 s:0.0154 1.77 Ac-ft TIME: s:0.1033 490 min NAME: BASIN I-EXIST. CONDo 2YR ST 19.94 Acres TYPE1A 2.00 inches 10.00 min 0.20 L: 300.00 L: 300.00 L: 300.00 L: 130.00 cfs VOL: BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 19.94 Acres 71.00 37.20 min AREA. . : CN....: Te....: ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 ks:l1.00 s:0.1233 kc:17.00 s:0.0933 kc:17.00 s:0.0154 0.44 Ac-ft TIME: s:0.1033 960 min IMP 0.00 Acres.. 0.00 0.00 min IMP 0.00 Acres 0.00 0.00 min 10/25/05 4: 20: 13 pm PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN Pacific Engineering Design Inc 05056-KERSEY WAY page 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- TRAPEZOIDAL BASIN Description: POND Length: 80.00 ft. Side Slope 1: 2 Side Slope 2: 2 Infiltration Rate: STAGE STORAGE TABLE ID No. P3 Width: 136.00 Side Slope 3: Side Slope 4: 0.00 min/inch ft. 2 2 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGB----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- ======================================================================================================== 100.00 100.10 100.20 100.30 100.40 100.50 100.60 100.70 100.80 100.90 101.00 101.10 101.20 101.30 101.40 101.50 101. 60 101. 70 101.80 101.90 102.00 102.10 102.20 102.30 102.40 102.50 0.0000 0.0000 102.60 1092 0.0251 102.70 2193 0.0504 102.80 3303 0.0758 102.90 4421 0.1015 103.00 5549 0.1274 103.10 6685 0.1535 103.20 7830 0.1797 103.30 8983 0.2062 103.40 10146 0.2329 103.50 11317 0.2598 103.60 12498 0.2869 103.70 13687 0.3142 103.80 14886 0.3417 103.90 16093 0.3695 104.00 17310 0.3974 104.10 18536 0.4255 104.20 19771 0.4539 104.30 21015 0.4824 22268 0.5112 23531 0.5402 24803 0.5694 26084 0.5988 27374 0.6284 28674 0.6583 29983 0.6883 104.40 104.50 104.60 104.70 104.80 104.90 105.00 105.10 31302 0.7186 105.20 32630 0.7491 105.30 33968 0.7798 105.40 35315 0.8107 105.50 36672 0.8419 105.60 38038 0.8732 105.70 39414 0.9048 105.80 40800 0.9366 105.90 42196 0.9687 106.00 43601 1.0009 106.10 45016 1.0334 106.20 46440 1.0661 106.30 47875 1.0991 106.40 49319 1.1322 106.50 50773 1.1656 106.60 52237 1.1992 106.70 53712 1.2330 106.80 55196 1.2671 106.90 56690 '1.3014 107.00 58194 1.3360 107.10 59708 1.3707 107.20 61233 1.4057 107.30 62767 1.4409 107.40 64312 1. 4764 65867 1.5121 67432 1. 5480 107.50 69007 1.5842 107.80 113678 2.6097 70593 1.6206 107.90 115543 2.6525 72189 1.6572 108.00 117419 2.6956 73795 1.6941 108.10 119306 2.7389 75412 1.7312 108.20 121204 2.7825 77039 1.7686 108.30 123114 2.8263 78677 1.8062 108.40 125035 2.8704 80325 1.8440 108.50 126967 2.9148 81984 1.8821 108.60 128911 2.9594 83653 1.9204 108.70 130866 3.0043 85333 1.9590' 108.80 132833 3.0494 87024 1.9978 108.90 134811 3.0948 88725 2.0368 109.00 136800 3.1405 90437 2.0761 109.10 138801 3:1864 92159 2.1157 109.20 140813 3.2326 93893 2.1555 109.30 142838 3.2791 95637 2.1955 109.40 144873 3.3258 97392 2.2358 109.50 146921 3.3728 99157 2.2763 100934 2.3171 102722 2.3582 104520 2.3994 106330 2.4410 109.60 148980 3.4201 109.70 151050 3.4676 109.80 153133 3.5154 109.90 155227 3.5635 110.00 157333 3.6119 108150,2.4828 110.00 157333 3.6119 107.60 109982 2.5248 107.70 111824 2.5671 10/25/05 4: 20: 13 pm Pacific Engineering Design Inc 05056-KERSEY WAY page 5 PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE MULTIPLE ORIFICE Description: ORIFICE OR2 Outlet Elev: 100.00 Elev: 98.00 ft Elev: 106.20 ft ID No. OR2 Orifice Diameter: Orifice 2 Diameter: 1.7200 in. 6.0000 in. STAGB <--DISCHARGB---> STAGB <--DISCHARGB---> STAGE <--DISCHARGB---> STAGB <--DISCHARGB---> (ft) ---Cf8-- ------- (ft) ---Cf8-- ------- (ft) ---Cf8-- ------- (ft) ---Cf8-- ------- ======================================================================================================== 100.00 0.0000 102.10 0.1163 104.20 0.1645 106.30 0.5104 100.10 0.0254 102.20 0.1191 104.30 0.1665 106.40 0.6400 100.20 0.0359 102.30 0.1218 104.40 0.1684 106.50 0.7398 100.30 0.0440 102.40 0.1244 104.50 0.1703 106.60 O. B:Z41 100.40 0.0508 102.50 0.1269 104.60 0.1722 106.70 0.8986 100.50 0.0568 102.60 0.1295 104.70 0.1740 106.80 0.9661 100.60 0.0622 102.70 O. 1319 104.80 0.1759 106.90 1. 0282 100.70 0.0672 102.80 o . 1343 104.90 0.1777 107.00 1. 0862 100.80 0.0718 102.90 0.1367 105.00 0.1795 107.10 1.1407 100.90 0.0762 103.00 0.1391 105.10 0.1813 107.20 1.1924 101.00 0.0803 103.10 0.loll4 105.20 0.1831 107.30 1.2415 101.10 0.0842 103.20 0.1436 105.30 0.1848 107.40 1.2886 101.20 0.0879 103.30 0.1458 105.40 0.1866 107.50 1.3337 101.30 0.0915 103.40 0.1480 105.50 0.1883 107.60 1. 3 772 101.40 0.0950 103.50 0.1502 105.60 0.1900 107.70 1.4193 101.50 0.0983 103.60 0.1523 105.70 0.1917 107.80 1.4599 101.60 0.1015 103.70 0.1544 105.80 0.1933 107.90 1.4994 101.70 0.1047 103.80 0.1565 105.90 0.1950 108.00 1. 5378 101.80 0.1077 103.90 0.1585 106.00 0.1967 101. 90 0.1107 104.00 0.1606 106.10 0.1983 102.00 0.1135 104.10 0.1626 106.20 0.1999 10/25/05 4:20:13 pm Pacific Engineering Design Inc OSOS6-KERSEY WAY PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN page 4 ===================================================================:= NOTCH WEIR Oescription: Weir Length: Elevation STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE ID No. N01 N01 2.3000 ft. 107.70 ft. Weir height (p): 0.3000 ft. Weir Increm: 0.10 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGB---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) -ncfs-- u___u (ft) u-cfs-- ------- (ft), ---cfs-- n_u__ (ft) n-cfs-- ___un 107.70 0.0000 ======================================================================================================== 107.70 0.0000 107.70 0.0000 107.70 0.0000 10/25/05 4:20:13 pm Pacific Engineering Design Inc 05056-KERSEY WAY page 3 PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. Description: COMBINATION ORI AND Structure: OR2 Structure: Structure: NOI Structure: Structure: COMB I RI STAGE <--DISCHARGB---> STAGE <--DISCHARG8---> STAGE <--DISCHARGB---> STAGE <--DISCHARGB---> (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) _ncfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- ===========================================================================3============================ 100.00 0.0000 102.10 0.1163 104.20 0.1645 106.30 0.5104 100.10 0.0254 102.20 0.1191 104.30 0.1665 106.40 0.6400 100.20 0.0359 102.30 0.1218 104.40 0.1684 106.50 0.739B 100.30 0.0440 102.40 0.1244 104.50 0.1703 106.60 0.8241 100.40 0.0508 102.50 0.1269 104.60 0.1722 106.70 0.8986 100.50 0.0568 102.60 0.1295 104.70 0.1740 106.80 0.9661 100.60 0.0622 102.70 0.1319 104.80 0.1759 106.90 1. 0282 100.70 0.0672 102.80 o .1343 104.90 0.1777 107.00 1.0862 100.80 0.0718 102.90 0.1367 105.00 0.1795 107.10 1.1407 100.90 0.0762 103.00 0.1391 105.10 0.1813 107.20 1.1924 101. 00 0.0803 103.10 0.1414 105.20 0.1831 107.30 1.2415 101.10 0.0842 103.20 0.1436 105.30 0.1848 107.40 1.2886 101.20 0.0879 103.30 0.1458 105.40 0.lB66 107.50 1.3337 101.30 0.0915 103.40 0.1480 105.50 0.1883 107.60 1.3772 101.40 0.0950 103.50 0.1502 105.60 0.1900 107.70 1.4193 101.50 0.0983 103.60 0.1523 105.70 0.1917 107.80 1.7053 101.60 0.1015 103.70 0.1544 105.80 0.1933 107.90 2.2143 101.70 0.1047 103.80 0.1565 105.90 0.1950 108.00 2.8886 101.80 0.1077 103.90 0.1585 106.00 0.1967 101.90 0.1107 104.00 0.1606 106.10 0.1983 102.00 0.1135 104.10 0.1626 106.20 0.1999 10/25/05 4 : 20 : 14 pm Pacific Engineering Design Inc OSOS6-KERSEY WAY page 6 PRELIMINARY POND DESIGN --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY <--------DESCRIPTIOH---------> MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PBAK-> (efs) (efs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id OllTFIDW STORAGE (efs) VOL (ef) ===================================================================================== ROUTE 1/2 2Y TO DBV2 ......... ROUTE EX10 TO DI0 ...... ...... 0.20 5.40 1.26 9.30 P3 COMB1 106.03 9 0.20 82462.40 ef P3 COMBl 107.34 10 1.26 ROUTE BX25Y TO D25Y ROUTE EX100 TO D100 2.08 3.10 11.32 13.36 P3 COMBl P3 COMB1 107.85 11 107.99 12 1.95 2.80 2 ac-ft 3 ae-ft 3 ae-ft Curve Number 2.3.2 Runoff Parameters All storm event hydrograph methods require input of parameters that describe physical drainage basin characteristics. These parameters provide the basis from which the runoffhydrograph is developed. This section describes only the key parameter of curve number that is used to estimate the' runoff from the water quality design storm. . The NRCS (formerly SCS) has, for many years, conducted studies of the runoff characteristics for various land types. After gathering and analyzing extensive data, NRCS has developed relationships between land use, soil type, vegetation cover, interception, infiltration, surface storage, and runoff. The relationships have been characterized by a single runoff coefficient called a "curve number." The National Engineering Handbook - Section 4: Hydrology (NEH-4, SCS, August 1972) contains a detailed description of the development and use of the curve number method. NRCS has developed "curve number" (CN) values based on soil type and land use. They can be found in "Urban Hydrology for SmaIl Watersheds", Technical Release 55 (lR-55), June 1986, published by the NRCS. The combination of these two factors is called the "soil-cover complex." The soil-cover complexes have been assigned to one of four hydrologic soil groups, according to their runoff characteristics. NRCS has classified over 4,000 soil types into these four soil groups. Table 2.2 shows the hydrologic soil group of most soils in the state of Washington and provides a brief description of the four groups. For details on other soil types refer to the NRCS publication mentioned above (TR-55, 1986). Table 2.1 SoilT Agnew Ahl Aits Alderwood Arents, Alderwood Arents, Everett Ashoe Baldhill Bamcston Baumgard Beausite Belfast Bellingham Bellingham variant Boistfort Bow Briscot Buckley Bunker Cagey Carlsborg Hoko Hoodsport Hoogdal Hoypus Huel Indianola Jonas Jumpe KaIaloch Kapowsin Katula Kilchis Kitsap Klaus Klone Lates Lebam Lummi Lynnwood Lystair Mal Manl February 2005 2-11 Volume 1/1- Hydrologic Analysis and Flow Control BMPs Soil Cassobuy Cathcart Centralia Chehalis Chesaw Cinebar Clallam Clayton Coastal beaches Colter Custer Custer, Drained Dabob Delphi Dick Dimal Dupont Earlmont Edgewick Eld Elwell Esquatzel Everett Everson Galvin Getchell Giles Godfrey Greenwater Grove Harstine Hartnit Hoh Puget Puyallup Queets Quilcene Ragnar Rainier Raught Reed Reed, Drained or Protected Renton Republic Riverwash Rober Sala1 Salkmn Sammarnish San Juan Scamman Schneider Seattle Sekiu Semiahmoo Shalcar Shano Shelton Si Mashel Maytown McKenna McMurray Melbourne Menzel Mixed Alluvial Molson Mukilteo Naif Nargar National Neilton Newberg Nisqually Nooksack Nonna Ogarty OIete OlomOlmt Olympic Orcas Oridia Orting Oso Ovall Pastik Pheeney Phelan Pilchuck Potchub Poulsbo Prather Solldes Spana' Spanaway Springdale Sulsavar Sultan Sultan variant Smnas Swantown Tacoma Tanwax Tanwax. Drained Tealwhit Tenino Tisch Tokul Townsend Triton TukwiJa Tukey Urbana VaiIton Verlot Wapato Warden Whid Soil Grou B C D D B B variable B CID B A B A B B C C/O C C C B D D D C C C C D C C C C C D AIB B B C B C D D D C D C D C C D D C C B C D B C 2-12 February 2005 Volume /11- Hydrologic Analysis and Flow Control BMPs Soil Sinclair Skipopa Skykomish Snahopish Snohomish Solduc Notes: Hydrologic Soil Group ClassifICations, as Defined by the Soil Conservation Service: A = (Low runoff potenJiaJ) Soils having low runoff potential and high infiltration rates, even when thoroughfy wetted. They consist chiefly of deep, well to excessively drained sands or gravels and have a high rate of water transmission (greater than 0.30 in/hr.). B = (Moderately low runoff potential). Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures, These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission (0. J 5-0.3 inlhr.). C = (Moderately high runoff potential). Soils having low infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of soils with a layer that impedes downward movement of water and soils with moderately fine to fine textures. These soils have a low rate of water transmission (0.05-0.15 inlhr.). D = (High runoff potential). Soils having high runoff potential. They have very low infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potenJiaJ, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a hardpan or clay layer at or near the swface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very low rate of water transmission (0-0.05 inlhr.). · = From SCs, TR-55, Second Edition. June 1986, Exhibit A- J. Revisions made from SCS, Soil Interpretation Record, Form #5, September 1988 and various county soil Slll'Veys. Table 2.3 shows the CNs, by land use description, for the four hydrologic soil groups. These numbers are for a 24-hour duration storm and typical antecedent soil moisture condition preceding 24-hour stoons. The following are important criteria/considerations for selection of CN values: Many factors may affect the CN value for a given land use. For example, the movement of heavy equipment over bare ground may compact the soil so that it has a lesser infiltration rate and greater runoff potential than would be indicated by strict application of the CN value to developed site conditions. ' CN values can be area weighted when they apply to pervious areas of similar CNs (within 20 CN points). However, high CN areas should not be combined with low CN areas. In this case, se~te estimates of S (potential maximum natural detention) and Qd (runoff depth) should be generated and summed to obtain the cumulative runoff volume unless the low CN areas are less than 15 percent of the subbasin. Separate CN values must be selected for the pervious and impervious areas of an urban basin or subbasin. For residential districts the percent impervious area given in Table 2.3 must be used to compute the respective February 2005 Volume 11/- Hydrologic Analysis and Flow COntrol BMPs 2-13 Cover and h drolo 'c condition. 0 Curve Numbers for Pre-Develo mnt Conditions Pasture, grassland, or range-eontinuous forage for grazing: Fair condition (ground cover 50% to 75% and not heavily grazed). 49 69 79 84 Good condition d cover >75% and Ii tI or onl occasionall 39 61 74 80 Woods: Fair (Woods are grazed but not burned, and some forest litter covers the soil). 36 60 73 79 Good Woods are rotected from and litter and brush ad uate cover the soil. 30 55 70 77 Curve Numbers for POIt-Develo mnt Conditions Open space (lawns, parks, golf counes, ce.....ies, landscaping, etc.) Fair condition (grass cover on 500A, - 75% of the area). 77 85 90 92 Good condition cover on >75% of the area 68 80 86 90 Imperviolls areas: Open water bodies: lakes, wetlail<ls, ponds etc. ] 00 ] 00 100 ] 00 Paved . lots, roofs2, drivewa s, etc. excludin ri -of-wa 98 98 98 98 Permeable Pave..ent (See Appendix C to decide which condition below to use) Landscaped area 77 85 90 92 50% landscaped areal500A, impervious 87 9] 94 96 ] 00% im 'ous area 98 98 98 98 Paved 98 98 98 98 Gravel includi ri t-of-wa 76 85 89 9] Dirt inc]udi ri t-of-wa 72 82 87 89 .....re, g........d, or ....ge-co.U.._ ronte fer grazilll: Poor condition (ground cover <50% or heavily grazed with no mulch). 68 79 86 89 Fair condition (ground cover 50% to 75% and not heavily graed). 49 69 79 84 Good condition cover >75% and r tI or occasional 39 61 74 80 Woods: Poor (Forest litter, small trees, and brush are destroyed by heavy grazing or regular burning). 45 66 77 83 Fair (Woods are grazed but not burned, and some forest litter covers the soil). 36 60 73 79 Good oods are tected from and litter and brush ad uate cover the soil . 30 55 70 77 Single family residentia : Should only be used for Average Percent DweIlin Unit/Gross Acre subdivisions> 50 acres im 'ous area3.4 1.0 DUIGA 15 1.5 DUIGA 20 2.0 DUIGA 25 2.5 DUIGA 30 3.0 DUlGA 34 3.5 DUIGA 38 4.0 DUIGA ~ 4.5 DUIGA 46 5.0 DUIGA 48 , 5.5 DUIGA 50 6.0 DUIGA 52 6.5 DUIGA 54 7.0 DUIGA 56 7.5 DUIGA 58 PUD's, condos, apartments, commercial "'.impervious Separate curve numbers shall businesses, industrial areas & must be be selected for pervious and & subdivisions < 50 acres co ted im' ous . ons of the site For a more detailed and complete description orland use curve numbers refer to chapter two (2) orthe Soil Conservation Service's Technical ReIeISe No. 55. 210-VI-TR-55. Sccood Ed. June 1986). Composite CN's may be compuCcd for other combiutions of open SJllICC cover type. 2WheR, roof runoff and driveway runoff are iDfiItrated or di;pcrsed according to the requirements in Chapter 3, the average percent impervious area may be adjusted in IICCOrdancc with the procedure described under "Plow Credit for Roof Downspout Infiltration" (Section 3.1.1), and "Flow Credit fur Roof Downspout Dispersion" (Section 3.1.2). ] Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into slreetlstorm system. 4AlI the remaining pervious area (lawn) are considered to be in good condition fur these curve numbers. February 2005 Volume 111- Hydrologic Analysis and Flow Control BMPs 2-15 ~ 1 I r I I I I I kf4 I E.~ ~.~. ~, . _ I . II ,J .r.I....r U., '-::\- ~ :'~_:.~~ _.;~. .{..:~~~:~~~T~/~~ ~~r:' i I r{;~ rr-~ ~,' "'r /in y...~~Ni..-~, '" ," -J~ - /4JI~. ..~ i" r ~) ..I!F!li~nal~64 "ur "'~" (Jq.t .,t'l~i~,;~"'- .....~or~:~~ N:')''''~~~~~ (# : f: ,'"-" ,. ;;;;; ~ ~ ...,. ,~"". ,.\ tv, '. . '>.L -' .v IJ\ ,p, ~ ' ',' .J :. .. on . ~. I. I!!. " ;" l' ......... ' ~~ ~~' 1/ h ~ ..-,. l E It r .. ... .. ,. '1-1 I I:!' 1._ G' ~ '(. IY , t~. .........". .",~.' /I<Ng · .... " /. ]f~~ &::::-:I!. u II _,::15 ~ :'._ ::;'..~ I I.. II : ........... - Pu. J"lli ",' ~ -/ V ~.. .or, .: ~_" ... { ..... _, I (> I AkF W -;/':-A P" "~ J · I - t:.:,---:I'T= ! : :1: . .l.,..,' 1" .' ~ - . o' I .....J I; " ~ " / 1 ' - . -~ :. . . ill J :1:, 1 . :,.\. Pk . fiJ .( I EvB r . . E .,=-. _J ...-1 u.' ,. _ I. I '.. "'I E.O "i & .' I ...._ _I J I' ~{d A~b.urn O'P' ~ 'l~. ~ ~ . .p:;].... . . '- I', ..,," ,/ (- 2 \.~ . .... l,...< ,..' ./.. ~~~~~ t-Il."? 1.: ~' ,.~~:= ~ p u. : ,.,. ':7 ~~.'" ---.',:....-- J Y ;:;. IE'~ "'" '" ~I~ _ ',,;, -JL. T.~" - . ~, -5;{ 11'-'9' ."':.:... - ~-li.' "'" " + t', .. IL" -:T . _~ ,.-;' II.. ~;tl/~" 'J.:II 4 ~h.J. ' ~Stucl<' . ~ _.. I r "l) r::=::.~ 't="= J I!.JI . I '.., . .~. . ~ N. I _.j: II" '. ~.:. .:.'~ n-:, ).,....... ,(, J T1 ~ l.."'~EVB ': :'1.., . "'of . I~ J ~.. "ie ~ ~ I'ill['" . I....... .."" ':/ ~ -:;--.;~. ' ". . ! 'e" ,,,,,,.' " l\ir, ," ., . , '" " -/~ ~ " ,~ ,,;.i .....;=: I .... 1 P1" . . - . . .. . .P - . pJj, _I' ...: . ... . -- .. Eo. "'-4-/- ,-' .. ~.~ ~ . _ lNg l= ,- ....: T'U'~ \ _ oy/-' M. . ~~-................~::;.;.-" ~EVC .' 30 L' ~ A" - ,.. ~ . Os I U,. I ~ ~". . '\. 1(/ . '". .. '. ::..: I d. · . j l.. . 0, w~ : ' ~~f'~"" '1/ ...._,....,....~._=-J..:.__..- ~ "," ",:'" :'i: t."" oli..J. """'~ ~I ~ .... ,,~...## '.\." -====~=="'--~ ~ .'.' , r- : . $~ ," -.. -,' R ~I i~' ~._. M. - - ....- ..r....' -' ,< "" ~ 0.' .---.- . - '. <~ ~ 0"# ~_. A" . .. _ _ 0" ~'" __ . , . C ,..' ' ~___ _~. / , M. '" I ,.. ~ ,'" .' ..' _, L 1_ \ AgO '~. I l' \ ~ > . E"" I" ,...;' " .....::,..: " .' T-- .., J " · ' .' -." , ' : . ----. . ....-' -'" ' .;/ ~ /' ' . ~ ___" >, '. N ~ ;. · ' ... ' M" ' ---- ." " oC " ' ., ~ Q ~~..' G" : I · , E.c : "" ,,' ' 1:' 1 . ~ It E I~' ~ .~ ,.' I . I c' : .c' "0' . + '''''''-: -:--li'.~ .llo..., \ . ,n.. q I ,,-,' ,.... A" p. ~ "'.. . i~' .::..~,('/ I if,' :'" o. ~. 0 .. I AgB' \ ' t./' ." '-' ~ 1L AgC \ V \ -'. .1~' E.. J u. " ,-1/1 J u, .:;, 311: -=- n) .- : ISm .. ,,_'.! "\ E.O ' .~: I ~, I , ' ..., ,. ,.7 ' -. // , I .~*~ ..... ./ . AgO I . \,', ,>5' I' 1 \: \ ~ \! \, f ' ~ - ,.. I.: ,"c ,33 /// , ..l'\ \ AgO', I ~v ,.... II I ~ t\, # . , (/ -. "*" - ,/ 1,1 I'. AgB Or // . Ag( \ui..___..J! \'1,. I \ 1\ liE. V JI ii, "'. /j II.:.; d: // . r~~..L_-: JlI I~ :l \. . ' ~ .. KIN 'II, \ ~\\ ','. I ____G QO ','Ili. . .' I ."" : 'f' f\ : '. .. I PIERCE ro~-'> \, · I / AgB >-..._ -<._ t' \\' Ii --- ~- ,- c,~/ Agel" , 'i67' ,,+9 6 'ol. I I' " - - - / AgO E "'" ''- " .: :, /- - - . . ., .... ~ I :,. " /" - '- /'t ",' ..:' . / .klf'" ~ I d" ,,' .' , J _ h . I ..' :' h' ';' '.1 "It R,5 E 'I : I fi,'" " .~/.... · ." . ' , ' . . -'. . ,,' SUMNER 4 ~ J' , :. .: : " // ' , . 4 . - :1 _ M'. .' " · I: 01 ~ 12'30" .,"" · : /; " .. ' I "' / ; , " , , / 1t:---..:. . ~... I "- ~ i' ~~L- ,I "-. ,I I Nk 10" . Western Washington IsopluviaI2-year, 24 hour ,46 124 123 49 4 ISOPl.lMALs 2-YR 24-HR PREClPlTA TENTHS OF 124 123 122 121 A-2 Volume 111- Hydrologic Analysis and Flow Control BMPs February 2005 Western Washington IsopluviaI to-year, 24 hour 46 124 123 49 4 10-YEAR 24= OUR PRECIPITATION --J4-ISOPlUYI S OF to-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION IN TENTHS Of AN INCH UAt 124 1'23 122 121 __....1""- ___n............ February 2005 Volume 111- Hydrologic Analysis and Flow Control BMPs A-3 ~ j ~ 1 ~ i ~ ! I I I " ,.pt.1:,~.' ,. . _. .~" _.5 2 I' \'Mal ,- "" '- ,lJ:'1/" ~,\U~.... .~ :;~'.'~1~.i3~'~.'\. aQ.~ft."li- :",:-;~\: /1:."" \ \, f/~ '~..,' ..'. ~(lS.~C IJr ~plCF4~' ~~1flR ,,", '::\~, \ v,li.. < , .~ '\l},..l ~-~_0~-.i ,;~~~}\)~I''J. \';,1 Lr<:" ',~ · ;' """: , \\ ,0(:-, ,,"""''''' '. " . ~~ ~~ ~ ,,'1\ i, ..1--.) '-~'< " ,.; .~ \~.J, .'J.~ .... '),7"-;:; _\ ~'5s..l.1(;;~ f::l:.\,~.. 11......;;... / ~.," ", .,'.,,1 " \1..... .. 'ff Fl. ..' J:l] . ,'.' "~.'~' ..' 1(1 ,-:,:',,_"J7~ r, ",.;~ )" ~I~ }l': " :'~:~ l\;~" ',' " /'} i) 'Q" l.)!', I,S /> "C," c;.;' .Y/.k:i . ;.:::: .'" ':: "OJ' 11 ',X\ "'lS 30' . · O\~,E,-,<:< ~..";~I t.::-.' ).,~.. "u' ';>>I'~>V \i..I/t! ~ \ .,~..: -.. '7 -+~r.lp;'1 ''-~. -i/lr.~.. ..' .." '.'" 7&.:. '''' ':i~'-'~' ,:. ' '~; ,.~. ~ "'"'...!J, '~l ,.t1- ~1::I.j: 1 {/', r .. i l \1 i, "'~. "\..I' ,....."S\'l. ' I . "",,,~F,\I'Il€" . " 1 ~I. I' 'I . "'!!'::;..""(F'li 15~ >,/:,'f.b;,i&~1~;V I ill t,SUTt'liO;;;;: .: 51."- ." 5" \" '/!'IJjii}('\", I' _: 7 - 'I 1,35'1~ ~ill:';, > . ~ ./ 15 ___ ~ 515V .. I, 'If ( . 11'E tl t .. \.,- . ":p..~. . 6$;' . &J 4.' 10 I :/ i tl, k'.\ ,,(I ,,>~ 3~, r.~: ',: ~-. .. a'.. .,'.'" '-:.1~~!"JI': CI 1 ----- "Iii - r. "C" ' " ~ .' . .~. ~, . e -=- -,_ . a 'A r !M"','. .l . ~.. - "ill . .~ ( ,. _ ~, " I !ill '" '. . ' . . ,.~ t., ---tv:- ~, \~~\ttf~";i ~i 1.'51llFi2' >]1;: ')I5~lm 3l\~;~'-~~)'-' .... :'~'~'6 .~~~ lrc I 'r'~t>~~~~ . ..:,.Ltj, ~~~f~"&. #' l ! ~.. Ii " .",," .~!!F . l~' v; fK I, 4. ,::"':':"> ~,~~~~ :~" A$ ',' ".~ _ . ~ -=-: ......~.l ,~>" '~. ,,~' '.... \~~ : 146,l.~---,,-_. ~ ;.Z' l'~)" '. .'~ , . . --10 . ' .. ~ .' I i';I-'-'~ 4$ .!>tlll ,lAW .-= r~\' 5.." . . . . '. ~__'_'-.,-;-__ . ,,"'[(.::lCf',..1iJ... .~: t~,., . ')'~~'.' 10 1 . ...G., AI.',cA I' -.'-' .~ --- lfi 0:::::>:7;( ..."j,' '1' r.-'.r:."" 1'10.' .' "':"'~' '" ~ ! ~''''-i~ .:l.. ..,:).! 1'<' .L'. \'~' ,.., I I. I l~ ~~ ~:::;f'n~" f~\{V~H I' 'J.. .~.,::{..~..'IJ...~.:<<d. <~'.":.M,:!HP;~.1 :..~.; j ~:'.fli',., Frgure28 I I I.", J~S~~~ . .~ ";:Jr.. i :~'-8FF~R 24-HR PRECIPIT~TION~':':';:'~~;O . ~'--~J1: I 46 Western Washington IsopluviallOO-year, 24 hour 49 124 123 4 4 100- YEAR 2~ OUR PRECiPiTATION ;-34-ISOPlUVI S OF 100 .YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPlTA nON IN TENTHS Of AN INCH NNUAL 124 123 122 121 ~-~-",-~ A-4 February 2005 Volume 1//- Hydrologic Analysis and Flow Control BMPs '~ 151 Transportation Solutions, Inc. :~, 1 1% i l' 11_ EXHtBlT /0 Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis November 2005 Prepared for: Lakeland Hill Estates, LLC and the City of Auburn Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis November 2005 . ~ i Prepared for: ~'.,... .t-~ Lakeland Hill Estates, LLC and the City of Auburn ".....,~"lf;..,. Prepared by: I Transportation Solutions, Inc. 8250 -165th Avenue NE, Suite 100 Redmond, Washington 98052 (425) 883-4134 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 IN'lRODUCTION.. .... ............ .... ..... ......... .......~.~~!'.. ........... ........ ............... ..........1 1.1 PROJECT locATION...........................:............................. .............................................. 1. 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................. ............................... ..... 1 1.3 STUDY PRocESS, ORGANIZATION, AND ScOPE................................................................ 1 EX.ISTING COND ITIONS .............................. ... ........... .............. .... ....... .... ..........4 .,."'!''' .. 1.4 STREET NElWORK .. ........................ ....... .......... ................... .......................................... 4 1.5 TRAFFIc CONlROL........................................................................................................ 5 1.6 EXISTING TRAFFIc VOLUMES ........................ .......... ............... ..................... ..... ........ ...... 5 1.7 EXISTING lEvEL OF SERVICE .... ........ ............. ........... ......... .................. .......................... 8 1.8 EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE...... .. .......... ........ . ................. ... .... ............... ......... .... .......... 10 1.9 EXISTING NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION..... ;.......... .... .... ........ ...... ........................ 10 2 FORECASTED BACKGROUND CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT....ll 2.1 PI...ANNED STREET NElWORK IMPROVEMENTS................................................................ 11 2.2 BACKGROUND 1'RAFFIc VOLUMES ................................................ ............... ........... ...... 11 2.3 BACKGROUND lEvEL OF SERVICE ................................................................................ 12 3 FORECASTED CONDITIONS WITH THE PROJECT .....................................14 3.1 PROJECT GENERATED 1'RAFFIc VOLUMES............................................................. .... . ... 14 3.1.1 Trip Generation .... .............. ..... ............ ..... ................... ............... ......... .............. 14 3.1.2 Mode Split.................. ...... ................................................................................. 15 3.1.3 Trip Distribution and Travel Assignment.. ................................. ......................... 16 3.2 FUTURE lEvEL OF SERVICE ... ..... ....... ........ ............................ .................... .............. .... 16 3.3 SITE ACCESS ........................ ...................................................................................... 20 3.4 SIGHT DISTANCE........................................................................................................ 20 3.5 FORECASTED TRANSIT SERVICE Willi lliE PROJECT .......................................................21 3.6 FORECASTED NON-MOTORIZED TRANsPORTATION Willi lliE PROJECT........................... 21 3.7 INTERNAL ROADWAY SYSTEM ......... ...................... .... ........... .............. .......................... 22 3.8 PARKING .. .... ........... ........... ........... ........... .... ....... .... ............. ....... .... .... ..... .... .......... .... 22 3.9 POSSIBlE MITIGATION......... ......... ......... ........... ........ ................ ..... ............... ............... 22 3.9.1 Site Access to Kersey Way SE............................................................................ 22 3.9.2 Other Mitigation............... ....... ..... .......... .............. ..... ....... ................. ................. 23 3.9.3 On-Site Roadway Design.. ....... .... .......... ............................... ............ ................. 23 3.9.4 Traffic Impact Fee .... ........... ..... .......... ...................... ............. ............................. 24 November 2005 Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis UST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP .... ............ ................................................................................... ...... 2 FIGURE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN .................................. ......... .................................................. 3 FIGURE 3: 2005 EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFAc VOLUMES.....................................;............ 7 FIGURE 4: 2008 BACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................ 13 FIGURE 5: PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND AssIGNMENT ............................. 18 FIGURE 6: 2008 WITH PRoJECT PM PEAK HOUR TRAFAc VOLUMES........................................ 19 --,'& UST OF TABLES TABLE 1. INTERSECTION lEvEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA .............................................................. 8 TABLE 2. EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR INTERsECTION l..EVEL OF SERVICE ..................................... 9 TABLE 3. ARTERIAL lEvEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA......................... ..... ............................ ........... 9 TABLE 4. EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL lEvEL OF SERVICE ........................................... 10 TABLE 5. BACKGROUND lEvEL OF SERVICE SUMMARy............................................................ 12 TABLE 6. BACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL lEvEL OF SERVICE.................................... 14 TABLE 7. GROSS T'RIP GENERATION INFORMATION ................................................................. 15 TABLE 8. fuTURE lEvEL OF SERVICE SUMMARy.... ................................................................. 16 TABLE 9. ARTERIAL lEvEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY.. ................ ................. ......................... ... .... 17 TABLE 10. SIGHT DISTANCE AT PROPOSED KERSEY WAY SE ACCESS ......................................21 "h_' ;l:!"l- ~"". APPENDIX A: AVERAGE DAILY 'lRAFFIC VOLUMES APPENDIX B: PM PEAK HOUR 'lRAFFIC VOLUMES APPENDIX D: LEva OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS APPENDIX E: PRELIMINARY SIGHT DISTANCE EXHIBIT Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis ii November 2005 .-t r 1 Introduction .' This analysis documents the traffic conditions associated with the construction and occupation of the proposed Lakeland Hill Estates residential development. Its purpose is to identify traffic related impacts generated by the proposed PI:Qject and, .where appropriate, outline programmatic and/or physical improvements to minimize or eliminate potential adverse effects of these impacts. 1.1 Project Location The project site is located in the City of Auburn, Washington. More specifically, this project would be located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Kersey Way SE at 49th Street SE. The general location of the site is shown on the vicinity map in Figure 1. 1.2 Project Description Lakeland Hill Estates, u.c, is proposing to develop a 71-unit single-family detached residential development. The site would be served by an internal public road network with access directly onto Kersey Way SE and indirect access onto Evergreen Way SE through adjacent development connectivity. The site is currently occupied by four single-family homes, all of which would be removed as part of this development. On-site construction is expected to begin in 2006 and the horizon year for this project has been assumed to be 2008. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed site plan. 1.3 Study Process, Organization, and.Scope This study follows the guidelines set forth by the City of Auburn Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines. The study will first look at the existing conditions to determine the state of the current street network and traffic characteristics within the study area. The study will then . anfllyze the future background conditions that represent forecasted traffic conditions in the . area assuming the proposed project is not constructed. Next, the study will analyze the forecasted conditions with the project and compare the results to the future background conditions to determine the direct impacts associated with the proposed project as well as cumulative traffic conditions. Finally, mitigation measures, if necessary, will be proposed to counter the impacts as predicted. l~ Ii Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 1 November 2005 - ~ r,- Figure 1 Vicinity Map Lakeland Hill- Estates Residential Development . City of Auburn 4 ~ ~ ~ it fimo 0 !nll ~ l 'i;I~>kLarr.,.. r,';' I I Q ~ III ~ ~ III Q ~ . ~ !! ~ ~ lJI J1I J ~ I ~ i .~.. .~~ I _:;:'T-;-f7-i'--~ -:r:-:1 l ~ -- ,---'. _..J IJ--/ .( - -,. - -$-- . tt~~i::l~;;~t-~j -~-] p~. ific _....,,-..w.~ IfllPnooring ~-- ign. LLC="ao (~,. ... ChoI~_ ~ 1IotIIqj~ Figure 2 SITE PLAN Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Development City of Auburn The scope of this analysis was determined with the assistance of City of Auburn staff. Through this scoping process, the following two arterial corridors were identified as potentially impacted during the PM peak hour: . R Street/Kersey Way corridor from Auburn Way S / 17th Street SE to the southern City limits. . Evergreen Way corridor from Lakeland Hills Way to Kersey Way. r:.. _ The affected intersections within these corridors include the following locations: ,-" Intersections within the Study Area: 1. 17th Street SE at Auburn Way S 2. Howard Road at R Street SE 3. 29th Street SE at R Street SE 4. Oravetz Road at Kersey Way SE 5. 53rd Street SE at Kersey Way SE 6. 18200 Avenue E at 9th Street E 7. l..akeland Hills Way SE at _ Evergreen Way SE Proposed Site Access Locations Analyzed for LOS: 8. North Access at Kersey Way SE Existing Conditions This section of the report describes existing transportation conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development and includes a description of the street system, traffic control, traffic volumes, levels of service, and transit service. It is intended to serve as a basis for subsequent analysis of forecasted transportation conditions with the project. 1.4 Street Network The street network is suburban or rural in character in the vicinity of the site. A more detailed description of the street network studied, specifically the affected arterials, is presented below. R Street SE / Kersey Way SE Corridor connects Auburn Way SI17th Street SE to the north with the King County / Pierce County boundary line to the south. Between 17th Street SE and Oravetz Road, this corridor is designated R Street SE. This street has one lane in each direction for its entire length. This corridor has a posted speed limit of 35 MPH, although observed speeds are considerably higher. This corridor has a combination of gravel shoulders and curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Dedicated left- and right-turn lanes are provided at selected intersections. Kersey Way SE bounds the site to the east and is one of the major streets serving the site vicinity. November 2005 Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 4 f' !' ' Lakeland Hills Way SE connects East Valley Highway East to the northwest with Lake Tapps Parkway East to the southeast. The posted speed limit is 30 MPH along the entire length of the street Lakeland Hills Way SE serves one lane of traffic in each direction with dedicated left- and right-turn lanes as well as a central two-way left-turn lane at selected locations. There are curbs, gutters, and sidewalks lining both sides of the street. I. Oravetz Road links Lakeland Hills Way SE to the southwest and R Street SE / Kersey Way SE to the northeast To the southwest, Oravetz Road serves one lane of traffic in each direction with a center two-way left turn lane. The posted speed limit is 30 MPH and curbs, gutters, and sidewalks line both sides of the street. To the northeast, there is no center two- way left-turn lane, the speed limit increases to 35 MPH, and there are gravel shoulders on both sides of the street. Dedicated left- and right-turn lanes are provided at selected intersections along the entire length of the street. 1 ' I.. Evergreen Way SE currently runs from the west at Lakeland Hills Way to just east of Quincy Avenue SE / Evergreen Loop SE, where the roadway terminates. Evergreen Way SE serves one lane of traffic in each direction with a posted speed limit or 30 MPH. Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks line both sides of the street The planned extension of Evergreen Way SE would provide an east/west corridor between Lakeland Hills Way SE and Kersey Way SEe J'i -,,- 1.5 Traffic Control Currently, two of the analysis intersections are signalized. These are the intersections of R . Street SE at 29th Street SE, and 18200 Avenue E at 9th Street E. The intersection of Kersey Way SE at Oravetz Road is now undergoing signalization and will therefore be considered a signalized intersection for this report. All other analysis intersections are currently unsignalized. 1.6 Existing Traffic Volumes f ;; For the purpose of this traffic analysis, the PM peak hour time period was used as the primary basis for evaluating traffic impacts. The traditional PM peak hour occurs between the hours of 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. This two-hour period is then broken down into 15- minute intervals. The peak hour within this two-hour period is identified as the 60-minute interval associated with the greatest four consecutive I5-minute traffic volumes. The PM peak hour was selected as the analysis hour because it represents the time period when the combination of background and project-generated traffic volumes are anticipated to reach the greatest levels, thus resulting the highest potential traffic impact Existing 2005 PM peak hour volumes were obtained from the City's traffic model and checked for relative accuracy by obtaining a PM peak hour turning movement count at the intersection of Kersey Way SE at 53rd Street SE. This turning movement count was Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 5 November 2005 f , f !" conducted on Wednesday, October 13, 2004. These volumes were also compared to the 2005 average daily traffic volumes along these corridors provided by Mirai Transportation Planning and Engineering to confirm consistency. Resultant traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. , . l' f . . i: !:"'" r ~ ; , i: it; ~... Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 6 November 2005 f " !'- ~ 17TH ST SE '"11 s: en -l en ;tJ en -l en m en -l m en m ' ' f<""'" 1,,- Figure 3 Existing Traffic \blumes Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Development City of Auburn 1.7 Existing Level of Service t .,' ~ TSI examined the level of service for the existing conditions at the intersections and arterial corridOls identified as potentially impacted during the PM peak hour. Level of service (LOS) is a measure of the ability of a given transportation facility to serve traffic using the street netwOlK. The Transportation Research Board developed the LOS methodology used in making this evaluation and it is summarized in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 2000. r;-" Intersection LOS is defined in tenns of seconds of average vehicle control-delay. Control- delay includes all of the time a driver is delayed at an intersection. At signalized intersections, the majority of control-delay is generally associated with waiting during a red light. At unsignalized intersections, the majority of control-delay is generally associated with moving through the queue at a stop sign controlled approach. Control-delay at both types of intersection also includes the time to decelerate while approaching an intersection and accelerate after leaving an intersection. Seconds of control-delay are divided into several categories ranging from LOS-A, which is very good, to LOS-F, which reflects a breakdown in traffic flow. Although these letter designations provide a simple basis for comparison, seconds of average vehicle delay should be used as the exact measure of comparison. The LOS category breakdown by control- delay is summarized below in Table 1. Table 1. Intersection Level of Service Criteria LOS Unsignalized LOS Category Delay Range (sec.) A ::;;10 B > 10 and ::;; 15 C > 15 and ::;; 25 D >25 and::;; 35 E > 35 and::;; 50 F >50 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Signalized LOS Delay Range (sec.) ::;; 10 > 10 and ::;;20 >20 and::;; 35 >35and::;;55 >55 and::;; 80 >80 The results of the existing intersection LOS calculations are presented in Table 2 below. For signalized intersections, the LOS represents the average LOS for an entire intersection. For unsignalized intersections, the LOS for the worst movement only is presented. All LOS worksheets associated with this document can be found in the appendices. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 8 November 2005 . r' '!' f .". "" Table 2. Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Intersection 1. 17th St. SE and Auburn Way S. 2. Howard Rd. and R St. SE 3. 29th St. SE and R St. SE 4. Oravetz Rd. and Kersey Way SE 5. 53rd St. SE and Kersey Way SE 6. 9th St. E and 182nd Avenue E 7. Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE NOTES: a Intersection Control: S - Signalized; U - Unsignalized. b Level of service and delay represents intersection average for signalized intersections and worst movement for unsignalized intersections. C Control delay expressed in average seconds per vehicle. r, . ~,- Ctrl. · U U S S U S U Existing Delay h.c LOS 36.7 E 82.0 F 26.0 C 8.5 A 10.7 B 36.3 D 85.9 F In addition to intersection LOS, arterial corridor LOS was evaluated. Arterial LOS is defined in tenns of average travel speed along a street corridor and is measured separately for each direction of travel. Typically, most if not all of the delay along a corridor occurs at intersections. The average travel speed is divided into several categories ranging from LOS- A, which is very good" to LOS-F, which reflects a breakdown in traffic flow. Although these letter designations provide a simple basis for comparison, the actual average travel speed is . a more meaningful basis for comparison. In addition to average travel speed, arterial LOS also depends on the arterial classification. Arterial classification is divided into four categories ranging from Category I (a high-speed principal arterial with strict access control) to Category N (a low-speed urban arterial with minimal access control). The LOS category breakdown defined in the HCM-2000 for arterial LOS is summarized below in Table 3. Table 3. Arterial Level of Service Criteria LOS Category Average Travel Speed (MPH) Arterial Arterial Class I Class II A ~42 ~35 B ~ 34~ 28 C ~27 ~22 o ~ 21 ~ 17 E ~ 16 ~ 13 F < 16 < 13 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Arterial Class III ~30 ~24 ~ 18 ~14 ~ 10 < 10 Arterial Class IV ~25 ~ 19 ~ 13 ~9 ~7 <7 Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 9 November 2005 . f.>'. ! 'l' The results of the existing arterial LOS calculations are presented in Table 4 below. ~; Table 4. Existing PM Peak Hour Arteriall..evel of Service , . tT f ]lII 17th St. SE I R St. SE / Kersey Way SE (Auburn Way S. to 53rd St. SE) Evergreen Way SE (Lakeland Hills Way SE / Kersey Way SE) NOTES: a Direction of travel. II NB SB EB WB Existing Speed LOS (mph) 34.9 A 34.5 A n/a n/a n/a nla a., Arterial Corridor Class Dir. · r; ~, III r..'l The Growth Management Act requires that all jurisdictions within the state ensure that transportation facilities have adequate capacity to rneet current and future traffic demand. Consequently, before any future development is approved by a jurisdiction, it must be shown that adequate capacity exists or capacity improvements will be in place to serve traffic generated by the development prior its construction and occupation. If a transportation facility is operating over capacity under existing conditions, future development cannot cause the facility to deteriorate any further. These tests are tenned traffic concurrency and can be measured a number of ways, including intersection LOS and arterial LOS. The City of Auburn measures concurrency in terms of arterial LOS. 1.8 Existing Transit Service t 'f' There is no transit service provided adjacent the project site. The nearest transit service available is via King County Metro Route 151, which provides limited service along Mill Pond Drive. Consequently, it was assumed that all trips entering and exiting the site would be via private vehicle, which creates a more conservative analysis. 1.9 Existing Non-Motorized Transportation In the vicinity of the site, non-motorized transportation facilities are limited for pedestrian and bicycle use. There are no bicycle lanes or sidewalks in the near vicinity of the site. Therefore, pedestrian and bicycle transportation are not anticipated to playa major role in the movement of people between the site and the surrounding communities. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 10 November 2005 . . ~, i' f ~ r.... 2 Forecasted Background Conditions without the Project . [e' This section of the report outlines the assumptions and steps taken to forecast future traffic volumes without the proposed project. It discusses the potential impacts of additional automobile traffic in the site vicinity generated by the growth in the area and the impacts associated with other transportation issues. 2.1 Planned Street Network Improvements [.'" Based on the City of Auburn Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for 2005 through 2010, multiple facility improvements are planned in the vicinity of the proposed project. These planned improvements include the following projects: i . " - f..... . Kersey Way SE at Oravetz Road Intersection Signalization . Kersey Way Trail - Non-motorized trail running parallel Kersey Way . Bicycle Lanes - Along Kersey Way, 53rd Street SE to 9th Street E . Extension of Evergreen Way SE to Kersey Way SE. The signalization at the intersection of Kersey Way SE at Oravetz Road and the extension of Evergreen Way SE are both expected to increase vehicular capacity within the vicinity of the site. With the extension of Evergreen Way, the intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Kersey Way SE is expected to be signalized. In addition, intersection improvements at the intersection of Evergreen Way and Lakeland Hills Way SE, to include either signalization or conversion of the intersection to a roundabout, are proposed. , . At this time the adjacent development known as Kersey III is on hold, however for the purpose of analysis, it has been assumed that the Evergreen Way extension will be in place in 2008. In the event the connection through Kersey III is not fully constructed before partial occupancy of this proposed development, provisions for a secondary access point may be required or City development standardsIllay limit the number of t,lnits that can be occupied with a single site access. 2.2 Background Traffic Volumes For the purpose of this analysis, the year 2008 was selected as the design year for this project. In 2008 this development is expected to be fully constructed and occupied, thus the corresponding travel patterns would be established. This section of the report describes year 2008 background traffic conditions as a basis for evaluating cumulative traffic impacts and isolating project specific impacts. The background traffic conditions are the future traffic patterns on the road network forecasted without the construction and occupation of the proposed development. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 11 November 2005 r'. . f . For this report, the background traffic volumes were forecast by adding the pipeline traffic volumes from the proPosed Kersey III development and an additional 3. 7 percent annual background growth rate (based on City staff recommendation) to the existing volumes. The resulting background traffic volume forecasts are presented in Figure 4. 2.3 Background Level of Service A level of service analysis was conducted for year 2008 background traffic conditions without the project, as summarized in Table 5. The level of service worksheets for the 2008 afternoon peak hour background conditions can be found in the appendices. Table 5. Background Level of Service Summary ,., . 2005 2008 Without Intersection Ctrl. · Existing Project Delay",c LOS" Delay"'c LOS" 1. 17thSt. SEandAuburn WayS. U 36.7 E 46.2 E 2. Howard Rd. and R St. SE U 82.0 F 124.2 F 3. 29th St. SE and R St. SE S 26.0 C 35.6 D 4. Oravetz Rd. and Kersey Way SE S 8.5 A 9.5 A 5. 53rd St. SE and Kersey Way SE UIS 10.7 B 10.2 B 6. 9th St. E and 182nd Avenue E S 32.1 C 34.9 C 7. Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE UIS 85.9 F 14.7 B NOTES: a Intersection Control: S - Signalized; U - Unsignalized; U/S - Unsignalized under existing conditions, signalized under future conditions. b Level of service and delay represents intersection average for signalized intersections and worst movement for unsignalized intersections. C Control delay expressed in average seconds per vehicle. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 12 November 2005 r.. 17TH ST SE r "!' 21ST ST SE s: en ;tJ -l en en -l m en m r ,f '"11 (JJ -l en m r .~ r r .110 ! f .. r "" ! Figure 4 2008 Future Background Volumes Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Development City of Auburn t , .. . r. f! Table 6. Background PM Peak Hour Arterial Level of Service .f. ?' [. . R St. SE I Kersey Way SE (Auburn Way S. to 9th Street E) Evergreen Way SE (Lakeland Hills Way SE to Kersey Way SE) NOTES: a Direction of travel. II NB SB EB WB Existin 2008 g Background Speed LOS speed LOS (mph) (mph) 35.1 A 32.5 B 27.2 C 24.1 C n/a n/a 27.1 B n/a n/a 31.2 A 1; Arterial Corridor Class Dir. · Ii. ill r-r: As can be seen in the table above, the two corridors analyzed for this report are expected to continue to exceed the City's LOS minimum threshold in 2Q08. f,7 3 Forecasted Conditions with the Project r '!' This section of the report analyzes the forecasted traffic volumes associated with the proposed project and discusses the potential impacts associated with project generated vehicular traffic near the site. Other transportation issues, including site access and parking that relate to the daily operation of the project, are also addressed. The forecasted conditions with the project will be compared with the background traffic conditions to determine any associated impacts with the addition of the proposed project. 3.1 Project Generated Traffic Volumes TSI uses a generally accepted transportation planning approach that includes the following steps for forecasting travel demand: 1. ~ . Trip Generation: Trips produced by the occupancy.ofthe project. . Mode Split: Proportion of trips by travel mode (automobile, transit, other). . Trip Distribution: Originsldestinations and routes of trips. . Travel Assignment: Net number of new trips using the street network by route. 3.1.1 Trip Generation t Trip generation is an estimate of the number of vehicles that enter and leave a site for a particular land use. For traditional developments, such as the proposed project, standard manuals, such as the ITE Trip Generation Manual, are used as a basis for this forecasting process. For this analysis, the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, was used to forecast the gross trip generation associated with the proposed project as prescribed in the City's Traffic Impact Analysis guideliries. The project is categorized as Land Use Code (LUC) 210, Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 14 November 2005 . i . " f..' . f. l' "Single-Family Detached Housing." The number of dwelling units was used as the independent variable. The resulting weekday daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour net new trip generation' estimates are summarized in Table 7 below. :'; ! . Table 7. Gross Trip Generation lnfonnation r Existing Proposed Net New 4 71 67 9.57 9.57 50% 50% 19 19 50% 50% 340 340 50% 50% 321 321 Condition r . i' { !lO ~ Weekday AM Peak Hour Existing Proposed . Net New 4 71 67 0.75 0.75 3 25% 75% 1 53 25% 75% 13 50 25% 75% 12 2 40 38 L f "' Weekday PM Peak Hour Existing Proposed Net New NOTES: Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition a ITE Average Trip Rates used as prescribed in the City's TIA guidelines. 4 71 67 1.01 1.01 4 72 68 64% 36% 64% 36% 64% 36% 3 46 43 1 26 25 r ~ " . As shown in Table 7, the time period generating the greatest hourly volume is anticipated to be the PM peak hour. In this time period, 68 net new trips are forecasted to be generated by the proposed project with 43 trips directed inbound and 25 directed outbound. Therefore, only the PM peak hour will be analyzed as indicated in Section 1.6, "Existing Traffic Volumes." The gross trip generation estimates have been reduced by the number of trips forecasted to be generated by the existing land uses on the site to yield net new trip generation estimates. 3.1.2 Mode Split As described in Section 1.8, "Existing Transit Service," no transit service is provided in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site. Although a non-motorized trail is planned parallel to Kersey Way within the vicinity of the site and bicycle lanes are planned along Kersey Way SE south of the site, all of the trips arriving to and departing from the site were assumed to be via private vehicle. This assumption maintains a conservative analysis. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 15 November 2005 3.1.3 Trip Distribution and Travel Assignment t ~. Using engineering judgment and practice, the forecast trip distribution for this proposed development has been developed through a combination of the distribution formulated by City's traffic model for the proposed Kersey III development site, which is adjacent to this development site,and the current traffic flow trends of the surrounding road netwOlK. The resultant traffic distribution pattern is shown in Figure 5. ~~"i i-': , . 1('-. r. The trip distribution and trip generation were combined to develop a traffic assignment at the analysis intersections. The travel assignment traffic volumes are also shown in Figure 5. The resulting project trips were then added to the background traffic volumes. Figure 6 illustrates the combination of the background and forecasted project generated traffic to show the total forecasted intersection volumes in the immediate vicinity of the site with the addition of the proposed project. 8.2 Future Level of Service A level of service analysis was performed for each of the analysis intersections for future conditions both without and with the proposed development. Table 8 shows the results for conditions without and with the project. Table 8. Future Level of Service Summary 2008 Existing Without Ctrl. · Project Delay LOS b Delay LOS b Delay LOS b b,C: b,C: b,C: Intersection 2008 With Project 1. 17th St. SE and Auburn Way S. 2.' Howard Rd. and R St. SE 3. 29th St. SE and R St. SE 4. Oravetz Rd. and Kersey Way SE 5. 53rd St. SE and Kersey Way SE 6. 9th St. E and 182nd Avenue E 7. Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE 8. Site AcC€SS at Kersey Way SE NOTES: a Intersection Control: S - Signalized; V - Vnsignalized; VIS - Vnsignalized under existing conditions, signalized under future conditions. b Level of setvice and delay represents intersection average for signalized intersections and worst movement for unsignalized intersections. C Control delay expressed in average seconds per vehicle. V V S S VIS S VIS V 26.0 82.0 26.0 8.5 10.7 32.1 85.9 D F C A B C 39.9 124.2 35.6 9.5 10.2 34.9 14.7 E F D A B C B 40.7 133.2 38.~ 9.8 10.4 35.6 29.3 21.7 E F D A B D C C Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis F Non-existent Non-existent 16 November 2005 J J f, ~ ~ I ' Table 8 shows all signalized intersections analyzed would operate at LOS-D or better during the PM peak hour with the project. The eastbound approach at the intersection of Howard Road and R Street SE is forecast to operate at LOS-F. However, this approach operates at LOS-F even under existing conditions. Furthennore, the delay associated with this project at this approach is forecasted to be only negligibly greater than that forecasted for future background conditions without the project. The westbound approach at the intersection of 17th Street SE and Auburn Way S is forecast to operate at LOS-E. However, this approach operates at LOS-E even under existing conditions. As with the eastbound approach of Howard Road, the delay associated with this project at this approach is forecasted to be only negligibly greater than that forecasted for future background conditions without the project. ~ ( I r '., i' r " r \ r 1'. Table 9. Arterial Level of Service Summary rc-" Existing 2008 2008 With Class Dir. · Background Project Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS II NB 35.1 A 32.5 B 32.4 B SB 27.2 C 24.1 C 23.5 C EB n/a n/a 27.1 B 27.1 B III WB n/a n/a 31.2 A 31.0 A Arterial Corridor r ~ i 1 ' R St. SE I Kersey Way SE (Auburn Way S. to 53rd St. SE) Evergreen Way SE (Lakeland Hills Way SE to Ke~ Way SE) NOTES: a Direction of travel. r ~ As can be seen above in Table 9, both corridors are expected to continue to operate above the City's minimum LOS threshold in both directions with this proposed development in place. Level of service is not expected to change in 2008 with the additional trips generated by this development. , < Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 17 November 2005 . . f f ,. 17TH ST SE 21ST ST SE . ,. t.:. '"11 en -l en m s: ~ en m ;tJ en -l en m If; 37TH ST SE r, 16TH 8T E INBOUND - 100% OUTBOUND - (100%) Figure 5 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Development . City of Auburn f.. I" I . 17TH ST SE 21ST ST SE ! . '"11 en s: -I en ;tJ en -I en m en -l f,'" m en 29TH m r-~ to 37TH ST SE ! ' r . 1; L...- f.". Figure 6 2008 Future Volumes With Project Lakeland Hill Estates Residential Development . City of Auburn tl, f f ~ S.S Site Access . ~. As presented Section 1.2, "Project Description," the site would potentially be served by two accesses. One of these access locations would provide direct access onto Kersey Way SE. The other access, through various connections with the adjacent development, would be via the Evergreen Way SE extension. f ' I: Based on the level of service calculations prepared for the intersection of the site access at Kersey Way SE, the eastbound minor approach from the site is forecasted to operate at LOS-C with an average delay of approximately 20 seconds per vehicle. The overall intersection LOS would be LOS-A. ~ ,. The applicant proposes on-site roadway grading and clearing to allow for the proposed auxiliary lanes at the access location along Kersey Way SE. The applicant proposes the addition of a southbound right-turn lane into the site as well as a northbound left-turn lane into the site. r }" S.4 Sight Distance f ... Entering and stopping sight distances were estimated on Kersey Way SE at the proposed location of the primary access, reflecting preliminary construction drawings prepared by Pacific Engineering. These estimates were measured consistent with the City of Auburn Design and Construction Standards, Reference Tables RG-2 and RG-5. The estimated available values, along with the recommended minimum standards are presented below in Table 10. ~' , '2 , The posted speed limit along Kersey Way SE at this location is 35 MPH. Customary engineering practice is to use a design speed 5 to 10 MPH higher than the posted speed limit. However, because multiple speed studies indicate that this corridor is frequently traveled at speeds significantly higher than the posted speed limit, the available sight distances at this location have been compared against the minimum standards for both a design speed of 50 MPH and a design speed of 45 MPH. fi .. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 20 November 2005 I . if r Table 10. Sight Distance at Proposed 'Kersey Way SE Access of ~ Sight 50 MPH Design Speed 45 MPH Design Speed Estimated Distance Direction Value (ft.) Minimum Is Minimum Is Type Standard Standard Standard Standard (ft.). Met? (ft.). Met? Entering South of 410 325 Yes 250 Yes Access ,. Entering North of 500+ 325 Yes 250 Yes f,,", Access Stopping Northbound 400 470 No 395 Yes Stopping Southbound 480 350 Yes 295 Yes Notes: All estimated values should be considered approximate. j i *Assumes 9% upgrade southbound toward access and 9% downgrade northbound toward access along Kersey Way SE. J. Sight lines south of the proposed access location appear to be limited due to a vertical crest curve along Kersey Way SE. Sight lines north of the proposed access location appear to be limited due to the horizontal curvature north of the access. Traffic traveling at excessive speed on northbound Kersey Way approaching the proposed site access may not have sufficient stopping sight distance because of vertical curvature and the additional stopping distance required due to the road's downgrade. Stopping sight distance is that distance necessary to comfortably stop to avoid an object 0.5 feet high. Note that this deficiency is an existing condition and the presence of small objects such as debris in the roadway is not expected to increase with the project. i t Nonetheless, the City of Auburn Police Department may desire to conduct additional speed enforcement to deter the speeding behavior observed. Note that traffic traveling the speed limit or even 10 mph over the speed limit has adequate stopping sight distance to comfortably come to a stop. 3.5 Forecasted Transit Service with the Project Transit service is expected to remain as presented in Section 2.5, "Existing Transit Service," and is not anticipated to playa major role in transportation to and from this proposed development 3.6 Forecasted Non-Motorized Transportation with the Project . ~ Non-motorized transportation is anticipated in the vicinity of the site is expected to change with the implementation of the planned non-motorized trail, which will run parallel Kersey Way SE near the site and the addition of bicycle lanes along Kersey Way SE south of the . Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 21 November 2005 f ,~ f . ~ site. However, pedestrian and bicycle transportation are not anticipated to playa major role in the movement of people between the site and the surrounding destinations. 8.7 Internal Roadway System " Lakeland Hill Estates would be served by an internal street system that would provide access to the surrounding City street network. Cut-thru traffic using the internal roadway of this development is expected to be minimal due to the alternative opportunity provided for access and egress into the traffic flow along Kersey Way at the proposed signalized intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Kersey Way SE. This gravitation of traffic to the signalized intersection and the minimal amount of project generated traffic within the site suggests that the main roadWay through the site would most likely be classified as a non- arterial. ! . L >-~ Due to the topography of the site, the applicant may need to secure a deviation from City standards regarding the slope of the internal roadway. ! . 8.8 Parking Each individual lot would include off-street parking. In addition, on-street parking would be available within the site where not restricted by law. r' 8.9 Possible Mitigation There are several conditions that could warrant the development of mitigation measures in response to the construction and occupancy of a proposed development. Examples of these conditions include existing geometric deficiencies on the street network surrounding the proposed development, improvements along the' developments frontage, impacts to offsite street network facilities, and the traffic impact fee payable to the City of Auburn. 3.9.1 Site Access to Kersey Way SE It is possible that even with improvements to Kersey Way associated with the project, northbound traffic exceeding the speed limit by 15 mph may not be provided the recommended minimum stopping sight distance. Construction of auxiliary turn lanes will facilitate stopping or avoidance maneuvers should they ever be necessary because of a fixed object or stalled vehicle in the roadway; and illumination at the intersection will also assist . drivers in identifying a hazard. Other mitigation to optimize sight lines should include removal of vegetation along both the easterly and westerly edges of Kersey Way SE within the public right of way and on the applicant's properties, from the site access to approximately 500 feet north and south of the access. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 22 November 2005 !' i ~ The planned installation of traffic signals on Kersey Way SE at the intersections of Oravetz Road and Evergreen Way SE will contribute to a change in roadway character, which may create a higher level of driver awareness and in turn lower travel speeds. ! .'" , I,;' . The City of Auburn Police Department may want to conduct additional speed enforcement along this corridor, given the significant disparity between observed speeds and the posted speed limit. If the traveled speeds along this section of Kersey Way are not reduced with the change in character along the corridor, the City may want to consider installation of traffic signage along Kersey Way approaching the intersection, warning approaching drivers that an intersection is ahead. One approach would be to install 36-inch by 36-inch yellow warning signs in the style of sign type W2-2; side road sign, as shown in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Alternative signage could include text that would read "HIDDEN INfERSECTlON'~. The signs should be placed approximately 425 feet in advance of the access,. as measured along the centerline of Kersey Way SE, and at least 6 feet from the edge of shoulder or pavement. 3.9.2 Other Mitigation Auxiliary right-turn and left-turn lanes along Kersey Way SE into the site are proposed to help mitigate any potential safety issues associated with the proposed site access location. This development is not expected to have a significant impact on the adjacent corridors or the intersections analyzed for this report, and therefore no off-site transportation related mitigation is warranted. 3.9.3 On-Site Roadway Design The applicant may need to seek a deviation to the City of Auburn's Design Standards for maximum slope allowed along roadways due to the topography of the site. Installation of traffic calming measures such as chicanes or other devices may be placed along the main on-site roadway where feasible. The Institute of Transportation Engineers describes chicanes as: · a series of narrowings or curb extensions that alternate from one side of the street to the other forming S-shaped curves · also called deviations, serpentines, reversing curves, twists, and staggerings. Other traffic calming measures such as intersection bulbouts may be appropriate. However, devices which induce a vertical deflection such as speed humps are not appropriate on the primary north/south road due to its relatively steep slope. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 23 November 2005 r- f ~ In the event the connection through Kersey III is not hilly constructed before partial occupancy of Lakeland Hill Estates, all site traffic would potentially travel through the intersection of Kersey Way and the primary site access. If this were to be the case, levels of service for site traffic at this intersection would only deteriorate slightly. If the Evergreen Way Extension is not expected to be completed by the time full occupancy of this development is expected to occur, the applicant may need to seek alternative means of gaining secondary site access. J,', J,'" 3.9.4 Traffic ImpactFee L1' The City of Auburn collects traffic impact fees for residential developments based on the number of new dwelling units per development. The current fee rate is $677.71 per single- family residential dwelling unit. This development would consist of 67 net new dwelling units and would be required to pay traffic impact fees in the amount of $45,406.57. Proposed mitigation to the site access intersection and payment of the required traffic impact fee is expected to mitigate the transportation impacts of this proposed project. No significant adverse transportation impacts are expected. , . l~__ Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis 24 November 2005 f! .' r ' f 1': L' , r ,~._ H ( r . ~ ~ ~:-" f,'" Appendix A: Average Daily Traffic Volumes and Speeds Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis November 2005 Dnta File, 005 067 3 f Printed: 7(6105 Palle: r- --5iit8 File: : -ilos 067 31 Printed: 716J()S PAAe : 2 . f ~ f.' Traffic Count Consultants WoodinviUe WA. f" Title I : KERSEYWAYSE Site: 31 Title2 : ~ 491H ST SE. Date: 06130105 Title3 : AUBURN. Direction: NB Berdn TllIal 1-14 15-19 2~24 25~29'" 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 SO-S4 SS-S9 60-64 /i~9 70-9,9 Ava" Timo MPH MPH MJ'H MPH MPH MPH NPH MPH NPH MPH MPH Ml'H MPH 12:AM-- "16-""'0- 0 0 "(J 0 0 , 4) .. 0 0 0 1 49 01:00 17 0 0 0 0 1 3 .. (j J () 0 0 0 44 1 . 02:00 36 0 0 0 0 0 2 IS 14 4 0 1 0 0 4' 03;00 145 0 0 0 0 f) Ii 67 'I 18 3 0 0 0 4' ...; 04:00 613 0 1 0 0 0 9 1" 327 98 II :1 0 0 46 05:00 893 0 0 0 0 Ii 20 m 489 144 7 0 0 0 46 ,~ l> , 06:00 (168 I 0 0 0 7 40 139 298 73 10 0 0 0 4S 07;00 354 0 0 0 0 0 IS 146 146 36 10 0 0 , 4' 08;00 173 0 ::I 5 8 16 41 101 8(J 16 .. 0 0 0 42 09:00 22' 0 1 , 31 69 44 52 20 2 1 0 0 I 36 10:00 221 0 0 0 I 1 11 7S 96 2S 10 I 0 0 46 11:00 202 0 0 0 5 18 39 72 49 12 2 2 2 I 42 12:PM 1.94 1 II 0 0 9 31 84 44 18 6 1 0 0 43 01:00 242 0 0 1 1 I 9 96 88 35 10 0 0 1 46 02:00 2()1 0 1 0 1 2 9 60 74 40 13 1 0 0 46 " 03;00 216 1 0 0 3 2 10 65 Il3 42 3 4 0 3 46 04:00 2S1 0 0 4 0 2 9 84 94 46 S I 1 5 46 In:OO 322 0 0 I II 2 17 117 142 30 10 0 0 3 46 06:00 216 0 0 0 0 0 12 78 lIS 32 8 I II 0 46 07:00 179 I) 0 0 0 I IS 68 63 26 3 3 0 0 45 08:00 141 0 0 0 0 1 16 45 61 16 I 0 0 I 4' 09:00 91 0 I 0 1 3 , 42 24 I 6 0 I 0 44 10:00 43 0 0 0 0 2 9 13 8 10 1 () 0 0 44 11:00 28 0 0 0 0 0 2 12 922 I 0 0 46 Dailv ----s:7jijf-~ 6 16 51 143 375 1.932 2.3;'7' .- """740---rn--' 18 4 17 ..'.W Totals Percenl 0.1 0,1 0,) 0,9 2,5 Ii,' 33,4 40.7 12.8 2.2 0,3 0,1 0,) of'l'otAl ----.------ ...--------....... l'erceatile Speeds lQ% J~ ~ ~ ~ 39.8 40.7 45.8 SO.3 52.2 10 MPU Pace Soeed : 40- SO Nwnber in pace 4.289 %inpllCe 74.1 SDCed EXccodod ~ 55..MfII 6S.MfIi ('ercentaJle 56.4 2.9 0.4 Tota]5 3.262 !li5 21 ~ - Data Yile : H05 067 :I! Printed: 7/6105 .---. PlUlc : ,r-- . . 1 c - Dftta Fi~AOS06~- Printed; 7/6105 - ..-"i;;I~;;:'--f- \)ala Fae ; BOS 067 ,11 Prinlod ; 7/610S - Pa~e;-2--'-.- Traff'1e Count Cqnsultano Woodinville W A. L" ; TitleJ : KERSEYWAYSE Site: 31 Title2 : .~ 491H ST SE- Date: 06130105 Tille3 : AUBURN. Direction: sa ~in TolaI 'j-14 IS-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 7(J.!J9 -.......--- Ava Tim" MI'H MPII MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MI'H MPH MPIJ .12:A~ 37 0 0 0 0 2 S 17 10 3 0 0 0 "0"'. ----.. '4~ 01:00 17 CI 0 0 0 0 5 9 :I I 0 0 0 0 42 fe" 02:00 17 0 0 0 (I 1 4 9 2 0 I 0 0 0 42 113:00 U 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 . J 1 0 0 0 44 .. 114:00 21 0 0 0 0 I 3 9 7 1 I 0 0 0 44 05:00 68 0 0 0 0 2 13 33 16 4 0 0 0 0 43 if"" . 06:00 lI'l 0 0 I 1 17 20 30 12 S I 0 0 0 40 07:00 Jl9 0 0 I 2 24 27 45 14 5 0 0 0 I 40 08:00 152 II 10 10 II 18 36 43 13 4 I 0 0 I 35 09:00 113 lJ 22 19 17 29 24 34 8 6 0 0 0 I 31 10:00 l!>ll 2 2 I 7 14 32 80 SO 9 I . I 0 0 41 ~ 11:00 233 I 7 5 LI 33 57 85 27 6 1 0 {) 0 38 ,. ~ J2:PM 268 1 1 2 IS 44 63 101 3. .. 2 1 0 0 39 01:00 427 0 0 4 13 23 99 196 65 23 3 I 0 0 41 02:00 632 5 9 IS 6 33 144 295 102 19 2 I 1 0 40 r't' 03:00 821 0 0 0 J 49 189 417 136 20 2 0 :2 3 42 i 04:00 797 0 0 0 6 12 221 398 87 10 2 1 0 0 40 OS:OO 589 0 0 J 2 32 "I 287 91 17 3 2 0 .3 42 06:00 333 0 0 0 0 14 95 154 52 10 6 0 <I 2 42 07:00 261 0 0 0 1 7 61 118 56 11 :\ ) 0 1 43 08:00 229 0 0 {) 0 22 63 108 26 6 .3 I 0 0 41 09:00 J44 {) 1 I 1 10 23 65 34 6 I 2 0 0 42 10:00 1M 0 0 0 0 .. 15 54 20 .. 7 0 0 0 43 11:00 73 0 0 0 0 2 14 38 12 3 4 0 0 {) 43 f " DailY - 5.B17 JO 52 60 93 453 l.i6'-- , 2..631 880 178 45 13 .3 "-~"--41 Tot.r. Percent O.S 0.9 1.0 1.6 7.11 23.5 45.2 15.1 3.1 0.8 0.2 01 0,2 of Total ......-....----.-- Pet'Centik Speeds 1D% ~ ~ 8.5% 2m1I 33.8 35.7 41.6 46.5 48.1 10 MPH l'ace Speed: 35 - 45 Number illllftcc 3.99K %inp8Cc (.!t.7 , J Speed Exeeedod .45..MJ!lI s.'i.Ml1I ~ l'ercclltaRe 19.4 1.3 0.3 Totals 1.131 73 IS ~ Data File: BOS 067 31 Printed: 7/6/05 POlle: .-Y"...'.' I, ' I ' i' 1: L' i{ f ~ r 1" lIt Dav Total. OIIv Splits M16 49.2 ~ t Peak Hour 10:30 Volume 205 Factor 0,83 --il8iaFii;:-- 80506731 16 PM " 75 64 74 81 82 96 119 131 1.l3 152 177 111<) 179 227 208 2U Ig() 216 161 146 1:14 100 107 82 68 53 68 66 64 58 65 77 64 SO 42 39 29 30 40 34 l8 23 14 19 16 13 5 4.:\62 70.7 25 13 24 61 03:30 834 0.92 233 138 288 AM 5 4 , 6 .. , 3 :I 7 13 7 14 II 31 49 63 131 132 183 167 231 271 261 197 212 186 127 169 110 119 85 81 71 'I 73 60 67 57 58 45 38 46 70 42 56 60 42 60 3.788 78,2 ,378 593 803 776 487 271 253 89 53 05:00 960 0,89 Traft...c Couat Consultant. Woodinva1le WA. ND PM 20 " 43 4S 5J 15 53 66 54 37 41 51 63 46 43 1$.4 '5 54 40 Sot 613 64 49 SO 47 960 61 54 57 SO 694 39 46 47 27 395 35 47 34 22 255 30 36 36 26 227 26 19 20 14 196 7 11 12 6 218 6 3 4 4 1,805 29.3 5,593 50,8 12:45 224 0.85 1S9 138 128 36 17 200 CombiRCd AM PM 12 -s;- 133 4llR 13 JIll 15 112 IS 125 9 :II 134 588 II 148 5 150 6 l56 13 66 182 7'J6 21 196 15 198 17 220 13 167 2-14 1,006 35 233 53 267 66 262 135 637 277 9g() 136 235 189 266 177 208 244 J.021 207 709 286 188 281 157 210 157 244 799 121 430 218 114 148 100 189 95 136 . 512 101 391 139 Jll 120 92 117 87 98 375 107 361 82 100 108 g() 87 68 91 383 65' 217 102 48 99 SO 91 54 85 379 41 125 95 29 114 35 85 20 112 417 25 70 122 19 7ll J7 105 9 4.842 6.J67 Title 1 : KF.RSEY WAY BE Title2 : iii! 49TH ST Sit Till1l3 : AUBURN. Inkf1l11 -~ sa Bellin AM - 12:00 -----.,',.. 'j".. 12:15 9 12:30 10 12:45 9 01:00 5 Ol:JS 6 01:30 2 01:45 3 02:/JO 6 02: 15 8 02:30 8 02:45 3 03:00 2 03:15 4 03:30 4 03:45 3 04:00 .. 04:15 4 04:30 6 04:45 10 0$:00 13 0$;1S IS 05;30 20 05:45 13 06:00 32 105 06: 15 32 06:30 21 06:45 20 07:00 26 117 07:15 20 07:30 35 07:45 36 08:00 27 120 08: IS 31 08:30 35 08:45 27 09:00 24 156 09: 15 4.5 09:30 41 09:45 46 10:00 47 183 10:15 49 10:30 44 10:45 43 11:00 56 199 11:15 62 11:30 36 11:45 45 Totals 1.054 Split~ 21.8 210 203 203 210 222 79 II ,009 05:00 1,021 0,89 03:30 1.041 0,94 Prinled: 7/6/05 Site: 31 Dalo: 06128105 DIy: Tuetdllv Pal!e: I f f ,I, ' f 1- 1 " , [, . L"" 1,'" , ' I' ComblnN Spill "/0 0.0 AM Peak IJr V oIu'llr .. . I!M Pf'AkBr VoluUle .. .. . l: ~ , Dallll'ilc : 005 067 31 . The 28 8B NB 19 11 16 15 2S 41 13 154 24 613 GI 96& 105 694 117 395 120, 235 1S6 227 183 196 199 218 288 200 3711 110 593 203 803 203 n6 210 487 222 271 159 253 138 233 128 138 79 89 36 5:l 17 -0-"'.5.400 '5:'84- . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .. o o 10.984 ,0 49.2 SO,8 49.7 . 11:00 199 05:00 960 . . 0]:00 803 05:00 222 TrafTac Count Consultants Woodinville W A. Wed 29 SB NR 40 11 26 21 16 40 R 143 24 659 72 938 88 674 116 396 116 282 170 222 190 :us 253 212 2U 204 405 206 641 19S 847 224 843 273 490 269 346 204 283 112 232 140 140 70 7S 49 53 16 S.759 5.835 11.$94 SO,] SO. 1 11:00 253 05:00 938 Title I : KERSEY WAY SE Titfe2 : rm 49TIl ST SE, Tille3 : AUBURN. Interval Mon 27 B~in flR NO 12:AM "----.-"" .. 01:00 .. · 02:00 .. .. 03:00 .. .. 04:00 · .. 05:00 · .. 06:00 * .. 07:00 .. . 011:00 · .. 09:00 · .. 10:00 .. 11:00 12:PM 01:00 02:00 0;1:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 Tutllfa 03:00 847 04:00 273 Thu 30 S8 NB 37 16 17 17 17 36 IS 145 22 613 68 893 87 668 119 354 152 273 17:l 226 199 211 233 202 268 194 427 242 632 201 821 216 797 2'1 S89 322 333 216 261 179 229 141 144 91 104 43 73 28 5.817 '.788 11.605 49,9 11:00 233 05:00 893 03:00 821 05:00 322 0,0 Fri 1 S8 o .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. * o .0 . . NIJ . . . .. .. . . .. . . '. . . . . . . . . o 0.0 .. .. . .. 8al2 sa .. .. . " " .. " .. .. . .. .. .. . * .. .. . .. .. . .. o o ,0 Prinled: 7/6105 NB .. " . " . . " .. .. Sun 3 sa .. .. " . . .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . -0 o 0.0 .. .. . .. Site: Dattl: .. .. 31 06/27/05 --Weekday AVR. NB S8 32 19 19 12 23 67 93 117 129 166 190 228 280 403 622 823 80S 522 316 265 231 140 89 ~9 5.650 NB "'"12' 17 39 147 628 930 678 381 270 225 210 210 199 219 199 214 244 271 193 163 136 80 42 20 u us: 727 . " .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. , . .. o o 11.317 ,0 49.1 50.3 .. 11:00 228 05:00 9.10 .. .. 03;1}(1 823 05:00 271 . - Pn~:T'---' , , , T' Traft'ic Count COrt.1taats WoodInvtlle W A Title I : KBRSEY WAY SE Site: 31 .~. . litlc2 : till 49TH ST SE- Date: 06129/05 Title3 : AUBURN. Intetval -.....- -,.,.... NB ~- - Combiacd - --.... Oar. .,~_.- SB WocInosdav Bellin AM PM AM PM AM PM -" 12:00. 11 40 S4 285 ''''2 II '9 204 13 51 I1J 489 "'-'---.--- [ , , ~ 12:15 11 71 3 62 14 133 ji 12:30 9 83 5 47 14 130 12:45 9 77 J 36 10 113 01:00 7 26 88 40S 1 21 64 206 14 47 152 611 " 01:1S a 88 4 49 12 137 01:30 6 III S 39 11 ISO l ~ 01:45 .s 118 5 54 10 172 02:00 7 16 138 641 4 40 44 195 II 56 182 836 r . 02:15 0 146 13 50 13 196 cn:JO 6 164 13 47 .9 211 02:45 3 193 10 54 IJ 247 03:00 2 11 203 847 2(l 143 <43 224 22 ISI 246 1.071 03:15 3 234 28 66 31 300 !~ 03:30 2 213 44 65 46 278 03:45 1 197 51 SO 52 247 I 04:00 4 24 2IS 843 148 659 68 273 1S2 683 28..~ 1.116 04:15 6 230 163 73 169 303 P 04:30 7 214 In j9 184 213 04:45 1 184 171 7:l 178 257 0':00 12 72 142 490 221 938 74 269 233 1.0Ul 216 759 OS:" 17 126 241 72 251 198 05:30 24 132 264 45 288 177 OS:4S 19 90 212 78 231 168 06:00 20 88 92 346 196 674 54 204 216 762 146 550 06:15 19 96 202 47 221 143 06:31} 22 67 163 58 185 125 r -,:, 06:4' 27 91 113 45 140 1J6 07:00 33 116 79 283 911 3% 44 172 131 512 123 455 07:15 29 68 119 44 J48 112 07:.31} 27 74 108 36 135 liD 07:45 27 62 71 48 98 110 f T 08;00 25 116 79 232 61 2lI2 45 140 86 398 124 372 08:15 28 60 78 35 106 95 08:30 38 44 71 32 IOO 76 08:45 25 49 72 28 97 77 f '" 09:00 40 170 41 140 70 222 19 70 110 392 60 210 09: IS 34 3~ 48 21 82 59 09:30 S6 37 SO 19 106 '6 09:45 40 24 54 II 94 35 10:011 41 190 22 75 so 215 12 49 91 405 34 124 c . 10:15 45 17 48 23 93 40' 10:30 48 18 68 8 116 26 10:45 56 IS 49 G ID5 24 11:00 61 253 19 53 48 212 4 16 109 465 23 69 II:IS 64 16 48 6 112 22 11:30 57 14 71 5 128 19 11:45 71 4 45 1 116 5 'i'olniiL .., . ".:09--..'." 4.640 3.R13 2.022 4.932 .'''6.662 .................,.~-----~- Splil% 22,7 69,6 77.3 30A Oav TOllls 5,159 5,835 11.594 Dnv Splits 49,7 50.3 Peak Hour 11:00 03: IS (15;00 04:15 05:00 04:00 Volume 253 859 938 279 1.010 1,116 Factor 0,89 0,92 0,89 0,94 0,88 0.92 r :-:: 'Dniil'i'liC:" 80S 067 31 ...----.--.-. "'---.-- Prinled: 716105 Plllle:"2'-' Trame Count Consultants WoocIiawilJo W A. Titlcl : KERSEYWAYSE Silo; 31 Titlo2 : rtlI 49T11 ST SF:, Dele: U6l30/05 Titlc..l : At/BURN. IntllrVal --.....-.- '-;~:.:-::,., NB-' CoIIIIIiDlld Day: ~.__... .._~~.....- -- ,'..'-"-,, sa ThUBdav BoRio AM PM AM PM AM PM ~;r 'co -12:00----.0-' 37 66 268 '~. 16 :u I,.. f4 53 100 -462 . , 12:15 6 61 .. 56 10 123 J2:30 12 57 7 so 19 107 :, .:. 12:45 9 78 I 54 10 132 01:00 1/ 17 87 427 5 17 63 242 16 34 ISO 669 OJ;15 3 a7 4 66 7 U3 01:30 0 lilt 3 57 3 175 01:45 3 I3S 5 56 8 191 02:00 2 17 142 632 a 36 " 201 10 53 197 833 . , 02:15 B 157 7 48 15 205 02,30 1 m 8 57 9 212 02;45 6 178 13 41 19 2/9 03:00 3 I~ 198 821 19 145 61 216 n 160 259 1.007 03:15 4 195 32 7J 36 266 ........! 03:30 3 199 36 37 39 236 03:45 5 229 58 47 63 276 04 :00 2 22 223 797 115 613 69 251 117 635 292 1.048 04:15 3 191 161 63 164 254 04:30 1/ 217 170 56 181 273 04:45 6 166 167 63 173 229 05:00 II 61 170 589 226 893 83 322 237 96. 2,;J 911 OS:15 17 172 248 79 265 251 0':30 17 140 242 102 259 242 05:45 23 107 177 58 200 165 06:00 21 87 105 333 1116 668 4J 216 207 755 146 549 (J(j: JS 24 &0 186 63 210 143 06:30 19 71 178 62 197 133 ! '"' 06;45 23 77 118 SO J41 127 07:00 23 119 110 261 III 354 43 179 104 473 123 440 07;15 25 52 113 ';9 /3l! III 07:30 27 59 97 43 J24 102 07:45 44 70 63 34 107 104 08:00 48 152 67 229 73 273 49 141 J21 425 116 370 08:15 35 49 69 33 104 82 011:30 35 58 n 34 113 92 08:45 34 S5 53 2.' 87 80 09;00 33 173 38 144 66 226 27 91 99 399 65 235 09:15 35 38 64 30 99 68 09:30 38 36 60 17 98 53 09:45 67 32 36 17 103 49 10;00 42 199 20 104 54 221 14 43 96 420 l4 147 10: IS 48 31 58 J2 106 43 10:30 46 25 59 8 105 33 10;45 63 28 50 9 113 37 11:00 '5 233 25 73 47 202 14 28 102 435 39 101 1 J:15 58 14 53 4 JlI 18 11:30 57 20 57 5 114 25 1\ :45 63 14 45 5 108 19 Totals JJ39-" 4.618 3.664 2.124 4.803 6.802 .._--_.._-~~------- Split% 23.7 6!l.8 76,3 31.2 Dav Totals 5,817 5.788 a,60S Day Splil8 50,/ 49,9 Peak Hour 10;45 03:45 05:00 04:45 05;00 03:45 VOl'lIlIe 2.H 1160 893 327 961 1.095 Pactor 0,92 0,94 0,90 0.80 0.91 0.94 Oat.. 1'ilO: DOS 067 ," )'rinled; 7/6105--- --. /'lllte :':i"--'-'- ! ~ r . 1," .:' f ~ Appendix B: PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ,. r" f' , " Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis November 2005 O~~ 16 O~ OS:56a Tl"af'Ficaun~ 1380~S1107S p.~ r ~ I. ' AUBURN, WASHINGTON KERSEYWAYSE 53RDSI'SE lOCI 01PTSl04285M TRAFACOUNT, INC. PMB 1954820 YEl.M HWY SE STE B lACEY, WA 98503 360-491-8116 fie Name :18128701P Site Code : ?0ooooo1 Start Date : 10/13/2004 Page No : 1 '-'....., Iii' L' '-I 1IIIaI~ . 'r-. 0 4 m 271 ,. 0 5 :11M - 0 3 317 3211 0 4 31S IS1 ,. .. It 1& i19I wa G5rAllI.... 0 211 · · """ · · · ill .. 0 'j . . 0 0 -u 4 311 au OIl:15J1l11 Cl 2U 31124111401115142 0 1 G . . 0 0 2 3lJ7 - _PM . 117 .223323 D.. 23 OSS 0 . 515 . 0 0 0 2 au 313 ~. 05:4111I . 2Q ~L-.L.~~,---.!.-_L-...L-,. 2t 0 _'. II 0 -! . _....L-!, 0 0 2 3e 351 JlIIII 0 - .. . 177 71 . 2 1 *'1 1 22lI 0 I 221 0 0 D 0 to am' ' i2iii" .....T_ 0 1_ 211 M 11111 ISl 0 , 1401 3 413 0 11 1:1 0 . a 0 ~l 28 2414 2liIII .,.... 0.0 .... 14Jl ! ... 0.0 ... U tU 0.0 G.O U 1.0 .,.." 0.0 -., .. 71.5 5.3 0.0 0.4 5.7i IU su 0.0 a.a D.lI .. l.D ...0 1. ' . I I' ! --~. __J7.~-:J." ~~r~:-:L-.~,:-;-,-!~~;~I"", I~Y'" wr~..' '~-~' 1'.TtIIIII ....,- ,... ..,. --.... ... ., ..~,I, ..-,..!!'!tL- I ....!!!1--_~,lfII.t_=-,p, ..L~.L. _~ .....1Iew........fIlIlD JIM.."U411 ....... _III 131 131 11 0 2 10 1 2lIlI 0 221 0 a 0 I 06;45= ~ :: ~ : Wi ~ ~ 28 ~ "t: 0: . a: ~ a: : I : ,..,.... II.!IJS = ll5:4S:" 213 41 2&4 05>ts;'. u 05:45:' . 0 a 3:t5:IlO.. I I'llIIlFldlt 0.H2 I.. UI2. r , . . PelkHaw'-t4.-OO"".4liPII' ......Uft _...- 1Me30111 CI&OOJIM lIlI:OOPIII 04:0D JIM I -- . Illlll IN III 'IB 0 2 10 1 22D 0 m D 0 0 OJ "- D.lI 87.5 12.5 .7.5 ID 2.5 D.S JI.5 11.0 :1 .* 01:41I'" 0Ii:45 PM G5lUJIM ....... 0 224 31 255 26 0 28 0 . 0 . .......,.,., G.l14 0.719 I.IOl , ' o~e 16 04 09:56a Traf't'icCJune 13604911079 p.5 . I > f !I AUBURN, WASHINGTON KERSEYWAYSE 53RDSJ'SE LOCI 01P1SI04285M , TRAFACOUNT, INC. PM8195 4820 YElM HWYSE SI'E B lACEY, WA 98503 360-491-8116 ' File Name : 15128701P Site Code : ?0ooooo1 Start Date : 10/13/2004 PageNo :2 f. '" ;. ~ '-~::v~y -..,," !'.' ,.. -~==..., 1:" ~s::y'..,_., .".".., I ........ . ...1. ",1._...1, --" ....'1 Lit" ... -.' I ....1' ~r'__ ..-..:....1 L--, . ..;.!lI!L .:.L-_ ,!..!...= _L..!f!. --=..L.. ~. . . __ . ,I~ "~MGI"'''GSoq N-..... UII ......... -... __ D 131 131 ,... 0.0 .. 14.l 115:0I5_ It 213 41 ...,.., ...,.. 0lblII.. ...... a 213 ......... . , :1 s7~ I. Ga4$PII 2M a o.tlI2 .. o 0.0 o 2 U I .1 ~ _I 0 . ClM5P11 at 0 0._1 220 ... . o 0.0 o 2211 0 _I a: .3eII" u:1 -.-.--.-- ..- FronI Welt ! ~ I a.!L-YIII!L:.~1lIlii'1 o I J21I D I UJ5 M I o D DJt D.D D 0 I . 41 o 1 " o ~ ~ Out' lit ~. TDIII ~.,r~ ~2i!J L Ol ~L 1511 T......Left 4. ! 4 I _._,_.--J ._,-.-- In i @~ t ....5- .n[~ NGrtt .a :;r I l ~3IM~":l 4-l, Qsi ; 31M 5:411:00 PM IPR~ .._ ~ J, ~i .. # ..-. ..... .-.- '-"-" . .-.- ..- I ~ t ,. j I.dl ThAI ~ '1~,~ ,~I.J 11 ,'841] ~k1J r-io&2I Out In TCIIIIt '! ~ I r . f ~ L 1 f' r ' , , ll' Appendix C:Level of Service Worksheets f--" r . 1< 1 *" Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis November 2005 f - ~ ~. . URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#l Page 1 of 1 ~ t . ,. URBAN STREET WORKSHEET #1 General Information ~ite Information Analyst rjh Urban Street R StrHt/Kersey Way AgencylCo. T81 Direction of Travel SoiJlh-bound oate Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction City of Auburn ~ime Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2005 ~roiect DescriDtion: U/E nDut Parameters Malysis Period(h) T = 0.25 Seaments . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cycle length. C (s) 95.0 95.0 94.4 82.8 Eft. areen to cvcle ratio. alC 0.526 0.526 0.799 0.533 , "Ie ratio for lane arouo, X 0.961 0.869 0.751 0.233 CaD of lane orooo, c (veh/h) . 979 979 1495 982 PCtVeh on Gm., PVG IVrlvaJtvP8, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension. UE (see) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 anoth of seament. L (mO 0.20 0.60 0.75 1.91 nitial Queue, Qb (veh) 0 0 0 0 lJrban street class. se 2 2 2 2 Free-flow sneed, FSS (mi!h) 40 40 40 40 unnino Time, TR (s) 23.0 55.4 68.6 171.9 ther delav. (8) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 lelav Comoutation nifarm delay, d1 (6) 21.6 19.6 4.8 5.4 10.3 5.4 5.4 5.4 Incremental delay adj, k 0.47 0.40 0.31 0.35 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 LJDstream filterino adj factor, I 1.000 0.182 0.375 0.483 ncremental delay, d2 (s) 20.0 1.7 0.8 1.7 0.1 4.3 3.4 3.4 Initial queue delay, d3 (8) 0 0 0 0 Progression adj factor. PF 1. ()()(J 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 . 0.256 0.256 0.256 L;ontrol delav. d (s) 82.0 21.4 26.0 1004 Seament LOS Determination trravel time, 5T (s) 105.0 76.8 94.6 182.3 trravel sneed. SA (mi!h) 6.9 28.1 28.5 37.7 l8eament LOS F B B A Urban Street LOS Determination Total travel time (s) 458.7 "'otal length {mij 3.46 "'otal travel speed, SA (mi/h) 27.2 otal urban street LOS C HCS2fl()(jll.l Copyright e 2003 University of Florida. All Right:; Re.~erved VCIlOjoo4.ld , ' C' ,~. '$ Ai , 1<; Lr i; file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\a2k23B.tmp 11/21/2005 , URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#l Page 1 of 1 f" f,.1' URBAN STREET WORKSHEET 11 General Information :;ite Information Analyst rjh Jrban Street R Streef/Kersey Way Agency/Co. TS/ )jrectlon of Travel North-bound Date Performed 11/2005 lurfsdiction City of Auburn . Time Period PM Peak AnalYsis Year 2()()5 i=lrolect DescriDtion: LHE nPut Parameters Analysis Period(h) T =0.25 Seoments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cycle length, C (8) 94.4 95.0 70.0 Eff. areen to cvcle ratio, aIC 0.799 0.526 0.700 Ie ratio for lane arOUD, X 0.326 0.502 0.600 CaD of lane croup, c tveh/h) 1441 985 600 Pet Veh on Gm., PVG !\rrival woe. AT 3 3 2 nit extension, UE (sec) 3.0 3.0 0.0 enoth of seament, L (mO 1.90 0.75 0.94 nitlal Queue, Qb (veh) 0 0 0 rban street class. se 2 2 2 ree-fIow speed, FSS (mi!h) 40 40 40 unnina TIme, TR (5) 171.0 68.6 84.9 ther delay. (S) 0.0 0.0 0.0 )elav Computation niform delay, d1 (8) 2.6 14.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental delayadj, k 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Uostream filterina adi factor, I 1.000 0.955 0.857 ncremental delay, d2 (8) 0.1 0.4 3.8 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 nitial queue delay, d3 (8) 0 0 0 :Jrogression adj factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.653 0256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 Antrol delay, d ts) 2.7 14.9 26.0 eament LOS Determination. ravel time, ST (s) 173.7 83.5 110.9 Travel speed, SA (miJh) 39.4 32.3 30.5 ISeament LOS A B B !Urban Street LOS Determination trotal travel time (s) 368.2 rr ota/length (mi) 3.59 h"ota/ travel speed, SA (mVh) 35.1 rrotal urban street LOS A Copyright e 2003 University of Florida. All Righl5 Re.o;erved Vemioo4. td r'" ..I' t: . I' r . r l' ~ 1'.- , IICS2()(JOTM file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSNAcal Settings\ Temp\a2k253.tmp 11/21/2005 URBAN STREET WORKSHEID'#l Page 1 of 1 Ii URBAN STREET WORKSHEET 11 Generallnfonnation :Ule Information ~alyst rjh Jrban Street R Street/Kersey Way ~ency/Co. TSI )Irection of Travel North-bound Date Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction City of Auburn TIme Period PM Peak ~nalysis Year 2008 BackfJfound Proiect Description: LHE nout Parameters Analysis Period(h) T = 0.25 SE Jments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a Cycle length, C (e) 85.3 94.4 95.0 70.0 Eft. arean to cycle rat/o, alC 0.720 0.799 0.526 0.500 vIe ratio for lane croup, X 0.000 0.377 0.581 0.600 leaD of lane grOOD. c (veh!h) 1332 1441 985 600 Pet Veh on Gm., PVG Arrival type. AT 3 3 3 4 Unit Extension, UE (see) 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 enQth of segment, L (mil 0.80 1.10 0.75 0.97 nitlal Queue, Qb (veh) 0 0 0 0 Jrban street class. SC 2 2 2 2 ree-flow soeed, FSS (mi/h) 40 40 40 40 unnina Time, TR (s) 73.0 99.0 68.6 87.5 ther delav. (5) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 elav ComDUtation niform delav, d1 (5) 3.3. 2.7 15.3 12.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental delay adj, k 0.11 0.17 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Upstream filter/no adi factor I 1.000 1.000 0.933 0.788 . neremental delay, d2 (s) 0.2 0.8 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 Initial queue delay, d3 (8) 0 0 0 0 Progression adj factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.767 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 :antral delav, d (s) 4.4 2.9 26.0 39.9 ieament LOS Determination ravel time, ST (5) 77.4 101.9 94.6 127.4 ravel sbeed, SA (mi/h) - 37.2 38.9 28.5 27.4 lSeament LOS A A B C rban Street LOS Determination otal travel time (5) 401.3 otallength (mij 3.62 trotal travel speed, SA (miJh) 32.5 tr otal urban street LOS B Copyright e 20113 University of Florida. All Righlll ReIltrved VCNlion 4,ld ,I' L' 1 "" ~ : ,~ f f' ;, ! . t, ...' file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\a2k271.tmp 11/21/2005 URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#l Page 1 of 1 , . URBAN STREET WORKSHEET 11 General Information Site Information Analyst tjh Urban Street R Street/Kersey Way Agency/Co. TSI Direction of Travel South-bound Date Perlormed 11/2005 jurisdiction City of Aubum TIme Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Background Proiect Description: LHE nDUt Parameters ~nalysis Period(h) T = 0.25 SE ~ments 1 2 3 .. 5 6 7 8 lCycle length, C (s) 95.0 95.0 94.4 94.4 82.8 Eft. CJreen to cycle ratio, ale 0.526 0.526 0.799 0.800 0.533 ~/c ratio for lane grouD. X 0.961 0.961 0.806 0.810 0.233 Cao of fane aroup, c (vetl/h) 979 979 1495 1495 982 )ct Veh on Grn., PVG "rival type. AT 3 3 8 8 8 Jnit Extension, UE (see) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 Length of seamen!. L (mil 0.20 0.60 0.75 1.10 0.80 nltlal Queue Qb (vetl) 0 0 0 0 0 LJrban street class SC 2 2 2 2 2 ree-f1ow speed, FSS (mi/h) 40 40 40 40 40 Aunnina Time. TR (s) 23.0 55.4 68.6 99.0 73.0 k>ther delav, (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 lelay Computation Jniform delay, d1 (8) 21.6 21.6 5.4 5.4 10.8 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental delayadj, k 0.47 0.47 0.35 0.35 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 Upstream filtering ad; factor, I 1.000 0.182 0.182 0.489 0.483 ncrementaJ delay, d2 (s) 20.0 5.8 0.6 1.7 0.1 4.3 3.4 3.4 nitial queue delay, d3 (s) 0 0 0 0 0 . Progression adj factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.256 0.256 0.256 Control delay, d (s) 124.0 27.4 26.0 8.7 10.4 Seament LOS Detennination Travel time, ST (s) 147.0 82.8 94.6 107.7 83.3 . -,,,- '......... "'.~- Travel speed. SA (mi/h) 4.9 26.1 28.5 36.8 34.6 l$eament LOS F C B A B Urban Street LOS Determination Total travel time (s) 515.5 Total length (mO 8.45 Total travel speed, SA (mVh) 24.1 otaf urban street LOS C HCS20d0™ Copyright" 2003 University of Florida. All Rigllls Reserved VeTSion 4,ld ~ , " 'i , f' ,. 1,J: j' r:- I' f' L 7' t file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\a2k23B.tmp l 11/21/2005 URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#l Page 1 of 1 .f ,1 ~ :'. URBAN STREET WORKSHEET 11 General Information Site Information Analyst rjh Urban Street R Street/Kersey Way Agency/Co. TSI Direction of Travel North-bound Date Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction City of Aubum " Time Period PMPsak is Year 2(JOB With Project . Proiect Description: UlE nput Parameters I\nalysis Period(h) T = 0.25 SE ~ments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 GycJe length, e (s) 85.3 94.4 95.0 70.0 =ft. areen to CYCle ratio, a/C 0.719 0.799 0.526 0.500 w/c ratio for lane QfOUP, X 0.310 0.377 0.591 0.600 leao of lane Qroup, c (veh/h) 1333 1441 985 600 :)ct Veh on Grn., PVG &.nival tvoe. AT 3 3 3 4 Jnit Extension, UE(sec) 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 eneth of seament, L (mil 0.80 1.10 0.75 0.97 nmal Queue, Qb (veh) 0 0 0 0 Urban street class. se 2 2 2 2 ree-f1ow soeed FSS (mi/h} 40 40 40 40 unnina Time, TR (s) 73.0 99.0 68.6 87.5 ifher delav. (s} 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 lelav ComDutatlon niform delay, d1 (s) 4.3 2.7 15.5 12.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 Incremental delay adj, k 0.11 0.11 0.18 0.50 0.50 0.50 ' 0.50 0.50 IUpstream filterina adi factor, I 1.000 0.961 0.933 '0.778 ncremental delav, d2 (5) , 0.1 0.2 0.9 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 Initial queue delay, d3 (5) 0 0 0 0 Progression adj factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.767 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 ",",antral delav, d (s\ 4.5 2.9 26.0 40.7 Seament LOS Determination Travel time. ST (s) 77.5 101.9 94;6 128.2 ......,.j, "~ r.." .~ Travel sDeed:-M (mi/hl ., 37.2 88.9 28.5 27.2 Seament LOS A A B C Urban Street LOS Determination Total travel time (s) 402.2 Total length (mi) 3.62 Total travel speed, SA (mi/h) 32.4 Total urban street LOS B c. !, . 1 r r 1" L1: . r .~ HCS2(JOOTM Copyright e 2003 University of Florida. All Rights R$CrVed Version 4. td file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Loca1 Settings\Temp\a2k253.tmp 11/21/2005 'URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#l Page 1 of 1 ( r . f '" URBAN STREET WORKSHEET 111 General Information IStt. Information Analyst rjh ~rban Street R Street/KerseyWay ~encyJCo. TSI Dlrectfon of Travel South-bound pate Performed 11/2005 ~risdicIion City ofAubum Ime Period PM Peak ~alysls Year 2008 With Pro/ect tJrolect Descriotion: LHE ',. nput Parameters Malysls Period (h) T :: 0.25 SE ~ments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a Cycle length, C (8) 95.0 95.0 94.4 85.3 82.8 r=ff. green to cycle ratio. aIC 0.526 0.526 0.799 0.719 0.533 4c ratio for lane arOUD. X 0.961 0.980 0.806 0.780 0.242 ~ap of lane grouD, c (veh!h) 979 979 1495 1330 984 ::let Veh on Gm. PVG vrival tvoe. AT 3 3 3 3 3 Jnit Extension, UE (see) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 ength of segment, L (mil 0.20 0.60 0.75 1.10 0.80 nitia! Queue, Qb lveh) 0 0 0 0 0 Urban street.class, SC 2 2 2 2 2 ree-flow soeed, FSa Cmi/h) 40 40 40 40 40 Runnina Time, TR tsl 23.0 55.4 68.6 99.0 73.0 Dther delay. (8) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Oelav CompUtation Jniform delay, d1 (s) 21.8 22.0 5.4 7.7 10.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental delay adj, k 0.47 0.48 0.35 0.33 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 Jostream filterino adi factor I 1.000 0.182 0.139 0.489 0.532 ncremental delay, d2 (s) 20.0 8.2 0.5 1.5 0.1 4.3 3.4 3.4 Initial queue delay, d3 (s) 0 0 0 0 0 Progression adj factor. PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.258 0.256 0.256 ontrol delav. d Cs) 133.2 30.2 26.0 8.7 10.4 egment LOS Determination ravel time, ST (s) 156.2 85.6 94.6 107.7 83.4 ~;, . ," !Travel sDeed,"'SA1mT/h) '4.6 25.2 28.5 36.8 34.5 Seament LOS F C B A 8 Urban Street LOS Determination Irotal travel time (s) 527.8 T otallength (mi) 3.45 Total travel speed, SA (mi/h) 23.5 Ir otal urban street LOS C .IICS20fH}TM Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4, Jd tr i: f' ~. . t f i' , ,. I f .. f 11'- ;i ~ I . iT file:I/C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\ Temp\a2k24F.tmp 11/21/2005 'URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#1 Page 1 of 1 ~ l' ~? URBAN STREET WORKSHEET '1 General Information Site Information Analyst RJH Urban Street Evergreen Way BE Agency!Co. TSI Direction of Travel East-bound oate Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction City of Auburn nme Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2008 Backtlfound Proiect Description: Lake/and Hill Estates nput Parameters . ~alysls Perlod(h) T = 0.25 SE aments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 !cycle length, C (s) 85.3 Eft. arean to cycle ratio, aJC 0.100 Ie ratio for lane group, X 0.190 .laD of fane aroup, c (veh!h) 156 ~ct Veh on Gm., PVG vrlval type, AT 3 nit Extension UE (sec) 3.0 enoth of seament, L {mil 1.20 Initial Queue, Qb (veh) 0 lJrban street class. se 3 ree-flow sPeed, FSS (mi/hl 35 unnlna TIme, TR (s) 123.4 Dther delav. (s) 0.0 lelay Co lion Jniform delay, d1 (8) 35.2 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental dalayadj, k 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 am filtering adi factor, I 1.000 ncremental delay, d2 (s) 0.6 4.3 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 nltfal queue delay, d3 (s) 0 Progression ad! factor, PF 1.000 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 Control delay, d (8) 35.9 Seament LOS DeterminatIon Travel time, ST (e) 159.3 ?~'_. T:'''-' ravel speed, SA (mVh) 27.1 Seament LOS 8 Urban Street LOS Determination Total travel time (8) 159.3 Total length (mi) 1.20 Total travel speed, SA (mi/h) 27.1 otal urban street LOS B /lCS2(J{)()TM Copyright 4) 20113 University of Rorida. All Rights RCllCI'Ved Version 4.1 d ' I. . If .. w f .~ l " $ ~. } ~ I file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\ Temp\a2k276.tmp 11/21/2005 , . URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#1 Page 1 of 1 f'''' { URBAN STREET WORKSHEET #1 General Information Site Information Analyst RJH Urban Street Evergreen Way BE Agency/Co. TSI DIrection of Travel West-bound Date Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction City of Auburn ime Period PM Peak Hour AnalysIs Year 2008 Background :)roiect DescriDtion: Lake/and Hill Estates nput Parameters Analysis Perlod(h) T = 0.25 8E ~menls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a lCycle length, e (8) 60.0 Eft. areen to cycle ratio, glC 0.333 Ie ratio for lane grouD, X 0.274 ICao of lane orOUD. c (veh/hl 478 )ct Veh on Gm.. PVG '\rrival we, AT 3 . nit extension, UE (see) 3.0 Lenath of seament. L (mil 1.20 Initial Queue. Qb (vehl 0 Urban street class, se 3 ree-flow speed. FSS (milh) 35 Aunninll Time, TR (8) 123.4 Other delay. (8) 0.0 Delay Computation U!1ifonn delay. d1 (8) 14.7 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental delay adj, k 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Ucstream filterinct adi factor, I 1.000 ncremental delay. d2 (5) 0.3 4.3 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 nitlal queue delay, d3 (5) 0 Progression adj factor, PF 1.000 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 ontrol delay, d (8) 15.0 !Seament LOS Determination ITraveltime, ST (s) 138.4 rrravel speed. SA (mi/h) 312 lSeament LOS A Urban Street LOS Determination Total travel time (s) 138.4 Total length (mij 1.20 Total travel speed, SA (mi/h) 31.2 otal urban street LOS A Hcs200lifM Copyright 0 2003 Univen;jty of Florida. All Righls Rc&erved Versioll4.1d fIle:I/C:\Docurnents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\a2k276.tmp 11/21/2005 " .~ URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#! Page 1 of 1 . f,,' ~. ~ URBAN STREET WORKSHEET 11 General Information ISlte Information I\nalyst RJH Urban Street Evergreen Way SE ~encyJCo. TSI Direction of Travel East-bound Date Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction City of Auburn lime Period PM Peak Hour is Year 2008Wdh Project Proiect Description: Lakeland HiD Estst8S nput Parameters I\nalysis Period(h) T = 0.25 Seaments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Cycle length, e (s) 85.3 lEft. arean to cycle ratio, oJC 0.098 Ie ratio for lane group, X 0.186 ~p of lane group, c lveh/hl 156 'ctVehon Grn. PVG '"'ivai type, AT 3 Jnit Extension. UE (see) 3.0 .encrth of seament, L (mi) 1.20 nmaIQueue,Qbweh) 0 Urban street class se 3 Free-flow 5oeed, FSS (mi/h) 35 Runnina Time, TR (s) 123.4 Other delav, (s) 0.0 Defav ComDutation Uniform delay, d1 (6) 35.3 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental delay adj, k 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Upstream filtering adi factor, I 1.000 ncremental delay, d2 (8) 0.6 4.3 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 Initial queue delay, d3 (s) 0 Progression adj factor, PF 1.000 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 Control delav, d (s) 35.9 lSeament LOS Determination rrravel time. ST (s) 159.3 rrravel sooed, SA (mi/h) 27.1 ISeament LOS B Urban Street LOS Determination Irotal travel time (s) 159.3 II" otallength {mil 1.20 Total travel speed, SA (mi/h) 27.1 !Total urban street LOS B .....-;:- ~ .~ ~ ~, -~ f "t , . . ; HCS2(J()(jI'M Copyright e 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Ven;ion 4,ld file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\LocaI Settings\Temp\a2k276.tmp 11/21/2005 URBAN STREET WORKSHEET#l Page 1 of 1 ! ': ~ f .~ URBAN STREET WORKSHEET #1 . General Information Site InformaUon /.\naJyst RJH lJrban Street Evergreen Way BE ~encylCo. TSI :>irectlon of Travel West-bound . Date Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction City of Auburn 'ime Period PM Peak Hour . Year 2008 Wdh Project Proiect Oescriotion; Lalcefand HI71 Estates nDut Parameters /.\nalysis Period (h) T ,= 0.25 Se ]ments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cycle length, C (s) 60.0 lEft. arean to cYCle ratio alC 0.333 4c ratio for lane arOUD, X 0.412 Gap of lane grouD, c (veh/h) 461 ~ Veh on Gm., PVG ~ival type, AT 3 Jnit Extension, UE (see) 3.0 .enath of seelment, L (ml) 1.20 nltlal Queue, Qb (vehl 0 Jrban street class, SC 3 ree-flow soeed, FSS (ml!h) 35 unnina TIme, TR (8) 123.4 )ther delav, (s) 0.0 elav Comoutation nlform delay, d1 (s) 15.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 ncremental delay adj, k 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Jostream filterlna adi factor, I 1.000 ncremental delay, d2 (8) 0.6 4.0 3.4 3.4 ' 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 nitial Queue delay, d3 (8) 0 'regression adj factor, PF 1.000 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 0.256 ontrol delay, d (51 16.1 eament LOS Determination ravel time, ST (s) 139.5 Travel soeed, SA (mVhl 31:0 ;lSeament LOS A Urban Street LOS Determination Irotal travel time (5) 139.5 h"otallength (mi) 1.20 [fotal travel speed, SA (mVh) 31.0 [rotal urban street LOS A HCS2000TM Copyright @ 2003 University of Florida. All Riglll~ Reserved Version 4.Jd 1,1'. J , ~ file:IJC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\a2k276.tmp 11/21/2005 , Two-Way Stop Control Page lof2 1.,' r - ~~WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY Clenerallnfonnation Site Information Analyst rjh Intersection 17TH S1 SE & AUBURN WY S AgencylCo. 18/ Jurisdiction Auburn Date Performed l1i05 Mafysis Year 2005 Existing Analvsls Time Period PM Peak Project Description LHE lEast/West Street: " lNorthlSouth Street Intersection OrIentation: North-80uth .lStudv Period (hrs): 0.25 'ehicle Volumes and Adlustments lalor Street Northbound Southbound 'ovement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R volume 0 1212 6 0 2556 1 ceak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 -1ourly Flow Rate. HFR 0 1289 6 0 ~690 1 Cereent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- - 2 - - ~edian Type Undivided n Channelized 0 0 anes 0 2 1 0 2 0 onfJguration T R T TR Ipstream Signal 0 1 ~nor Street Westbound Eastbound ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R l T R Volume 0 0 224 0 0 213 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.63 0.63 0.63 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 251 0 0 338 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 I=lared Approach N N ~torage 0 0 AT Channelized 0 0 anes 0"'- .,,- 0 ..,. 1 0 0 1 onflqurmion R R lelav. Queue Lenath. and Level of Service . , ~ pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound lMovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 p..ane Configuration R R v (vph) 251 338 C (m) (vph) 416 485 vIe 0.60 0.78 95% queue length 3.85 6.72 Control Delay 26.0 36.7 OS D IE Approach Delay -- -- 26.0 36.7 Approach LOS - -- D E Rights Reserved t ! ~ L i .:. Copyrighr 4) 2003 Univemily of Florida. All Rights Reserved Verl'ion 4.ld file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k30A.tmp 11/22/2005 'Two-Way Stop Control Page 2of2 HC$200dIM VenlioD 4.1d L f; ~ f,'" """..-~ , , file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k30Atmp 11/22/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 , ~. , - , TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY .lGenerallnformation lSite Information Analyst RJH Intersection HOWARD RD & R ST SE AgencylCo. IJurisdiction Date Performed 11/1412005 ~alysis Year 2005 Existing Arialvsls Time Period 5:00 om Proiect Descrlotion EastfNest Street: Street: Intersection Orientation: North-South ~ Period lhrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adlustments . IUalor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R , iiOlume 20 185 0 0 32 1 Deak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.86 ourly Flow Rate, HFR 21 201 0 0 48 1 :Jercent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- - 0 -- - iiedian Type Undivided T Channelized 0 0 anas 0 1 0 0 1 0 onfiauration LT TR :>stream Sianal 0 0 inor Street Westbound Eastbound ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 'olume 0 0 0 60 0 976 )eak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.92 :rourly Flow Rate. HFR 0 0 0 65 0 1060 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 2 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 lAared Approach N y Istorage 0 4 RT Channelized 0 0 anas 0 .0 D' .... 0 .. 0 0 0 onfiauration LR Queue Lenoth. and Level of Service pproach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 21 1125 C (m) (vph) 1558 1014 vie' . 0.01 1.11 5% queue length 0.04 28.62 Control Delay 7.3 82.0 OS A F ~proach Delay -- -- 82.0 ~pproach LOS -- -- F Rights Reserved , ., , - Copyright 0 2003 Univenily of Florida. All Rights Reserved Vel1\ioq 4.ld file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k16F.tmp 11121/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2of2 (., HCS20001ltt VCIllion4.Jd f " I' ! "1 m ~ , r,', f '" L': i if '. , ~ fiJe://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Loca1 Settings\Temp\u2k16F.tmp 11/21/2005 , Detailed Report Page 1 of2 HCS~-DET~LEDREPORT General Information Site Informal/on Analyst rjh Intersection 29TH ST BE & R ST BE Agency or Co. TS/ Area Type All other areas Date Performed 11/05 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2005 Project 10 Lakeland Hill Estates Volume and Tlmlno InDUt EB we NB SB LT TH RT LT TH AT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 28 77 357 12 53 55 70 439 17 84 726 60 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A. A A A Start-up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Altering/metering I I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pad I Bike I RTCR volumes 0 0 163 0 0 37 0 0 1 0 0 3 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 .. 'J"- h 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EWPerm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 G= 2.3 G- 19.9 G= G= G= 3.8 G = 49.0 G- G= Timing V= 5 V= 5 Y= Y= V= 5 y= 5 y= y= Duration of Analvsis, T = 0.25 CYCle Lel'l(lth, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH AT LT TH AT LT TH AT LT TH AT Adjusted flow rate, v 30 288 14 86 76 494 91 851 Lane group capacity, C 352 369 189 402 184 985 444 979 v/c ratio. X 0.09 0.78 0.07 0.21 0.41 0.50 0.20 0.87 Total green ratio, g/C 0.30 0.22 0.30 0.22 0.62 0.53 0.62 0.53 Uniform delay, d1 24.0 34.9 24.7 30.3 16.9 14.5 9.0 19.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fe' i' '";-. ) t'1: 'i-' 1 -. .;: file:IIC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Loca1 Settings\Temp\s2k316.tmp 11/22/2005 , Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.33 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.40 Incremental delay, d2 0.1 10.3 0.2 0.3 1.5 0.4 0.2 8.5 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 24.1 452 24.9 30.6 18.4 14.9 9.2 28.1 Lane group LOS C D C C B B A C Approach delay 43.2 29.8 15.4 26.3 Approach LOS D C B C Intersection delay 26.0 Xo = 0.84 Intersectlon LOS C " 'HCS]OOOTM Copyright" 2000 Universil} of Florida. AU Rights RIllIeIVed Version 4.1d b" ./., T~ fu" ,file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k316.tmp 11/22/2005 Detailed Report Page loi2 ! " HCS2000- DETAILED REPORT Genera/Information ' SIte information Analyst rjh Intersection ORAVETZ RD & R ST BE Agency or Co. TSI Area Type All other BTeB$ Date Performed 11105 Jurisdlctlon Auburn TIme Period PMPea/c Analysis Year 2005 Project 10 Lake/and Hi' Estates Volume and TImIntllnDut , EB WB NB SB ; LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH AT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 . Lane group L TR LT R L TR L T R r Yolume. V (vph) 8IJ 1 3 6 3 11 2 396 3 7 987 70 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 1 1 3 S 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 , -. Peak~hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.88 0.88 0.88 - Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start~up lost tIme, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , Ped I Bike I RTOA volumes 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 18 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N ~4 N N -1 N N 0 N N 1 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stoppIng, NB 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 MIn. tIme for pedestrians, G 3.2 '3.2 '. 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 11.0 G= G= G= G = 75.4 G= G= G:::: Timing y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 V::: V::: V:::: Duration of Analysis, T ::: 0.25 Cvcle Length, C ::: 94.4 0.; Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS DetermlnaUon !: EB WB NB SB ., LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 100 4 22 17 2 470 8 1122 59 ,~ lane group capacity, c 166 198 184 184 256 1441 712 1495 1271 v/c ratIo, X 0.60 0.02 0.12 0.09 0.01 0.33 0.01 0.75 0.05 ! Totalgreeo ratio, g/C 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 ~ iJ Uniform delay. d, 139.6 36.9 37.4 37.2 1.9 2.6 1.9 4.8 2.0 " 1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\ Temp\s2k321.tmp 11122/2005 f- 'to Detailed Report Page 2of2 Delay caHbration, k 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.31 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 6.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 2.2 0.0 Initial queue delay, d3 . Control delay 45.7 37.0 37.7 37.5 1.9 2.7 1.9 6.9 2.0 Lane group LOS D D D D A A A A A Approach delay 45.3 37.6 2.7 6.7 Approach LOS D D A A Intersection delay 8.5 Xc = 0.73 Intersection LOS A HC.s2000™ Copyright " ~ UniVc:lllity of Florida, All Rip's RaIerved Vcrsioo 4.1d :(" f, - I file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\s2k321.tmp 11122/2005 Detailed Report Page 10f2 " ~ ~' , I. ~ HCS2000- DETAILED REPORT General Information SIte information Analyst rjh Intersection 9THSTE& 182NDAVEE Agency or Co. TSI Area Type All other areas , Date Performecl11/21/2005 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 8sseDne Project 10 LHE Volume and TiminJJ InDut EB we NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes. N1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L T R L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 12 276 0 82 143 206 0 115 82 630 225 9 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time. 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ,,2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering. I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand. Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped I Bike I RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 192 0 0 29 0 0 1 Lane width 12.0 16.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 0 N N -1 N N -1 N N 1 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping. NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,Min. time for pedestrians. G 3.2 3.2 >. 3.2 , 3.2 Phasing EB Only WB Onlv 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 G = 15.0 G = 11.7 G= G= G = 26.4 G = 13.7 G= G= Timing y= 4 y= 4 y= y= Y=4 y= 4 y= y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cvcle Lenath, C = 82.8 ' Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 13 300 89 155 15 0 183 685 254 Lane group capacity, e 321 382 251 265 225 186 295 703 982 vIe ratio, X 0.04 0.79 0.35 0.58 0.07 0.00 0.62 0.97 0.26 Total green ratio, glC 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.17 0.17 0.53 0.53 Unifonn delay, d1 28.0 32.4 32.1 33.3 30.8 28.8 32.1 16.1 10.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. GOO 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fr1"-. > i} ~. " , \ file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\s2kl96.tmp 11/21/2005 ' ,Detailed Report Page 2of2 , ... . f - Delay calibration.k 0.11 0.33 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.48 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.1 10.4 0.9 3.3 0.1 0.0 4.0 27.6 0.1 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 28.0 42.7 33.0 36.6 30.9 ~.8 36.1 43.7 10.8 lane group LOS C D C D C C D D B Approach delay 42.1 35.0 36.1 84.7 Approach LOS D D D C Intersection delay 36.3 Xc = 0.85 Intersection LOS D '4' ~; !. " " l j . ~,r HCS2lXlO™ Copyril" e 2000 Uolvetliity of FIocida. All Rights Re&et'Ved Version4.1d ;r T , " - . , . ~i s y:: file:/lC;\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\s2kl96.tmp 11/21/2005 , Two-Way Stop Control Page lof2 1"- r ..", TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Generallnfonnatlon Site Infonnatlon l\nalyst RJH ntersection EVERGREeN WY BE & 182ND AVEE ~ency/Co. TSI Jurisdiction Auburn bate Performed 11/18/05 Analysis Year 2005 Analysis Tune Period PM Peak Proiect Descriotion LHE EastIWest Street 53rd North/South Street: Kersev Wav ntersection Orientation: North-$outh IStudv Period lhrs\: 0.25 'ehlcle Volumes and Adfustments 1810r Street Northbound Southbound ovamant 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 220 1 138 839 0 Peak.Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 1.00 I Hourlv Flow Rate, HFR 0 . 239 1 149 911 0 =>>ercent Heaw Vehicles 0 - -- 2 - ~- . Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Confiauration TR L T lUostream Skinal 0 0 IMlnor Street Westbound Eastbound , Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T A lolume 2 0 78 0 0 0 , :3eak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1. ()() ~ourly Row Rate, HFR 2 0 84 0 0 0 :3ercent Heaw Vehicles 2 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Chanflelized 0 .. 0 i!' ! 0 0 0 0 0 0 anas , ..;onfiouration LR k>elav. Queue Lenath. and Level of Service fApproach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 B 9 10 11 12 " !Lane Configuration L LR ~ (vph) 149 86 , t: (m} (vph) 1327 712 1. I//c . 0.11 0.12 5% queue length 0.38 0.41 Control Delay 8.1 . 10.7 OS A 8 I\pproach Delay -- -- 10.7 ~proach LOS - -. 8 Rights Reserved i; ~ " file://C:\Documents and Settings\RicbardH.TSI\LocaI Settings\Temp\u2k19E.tmp 11/21/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2of2 . r _," \. HCS2()(J()lM version 4.1 d CopyrightC 2003 UDiYmity of Florida, All Riplll Reserved VerIlloo Ud '.;"": c. LJ' , - " 1.. f" ". I. file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\ Temp\u2k1 9E.tmp 1112112005 \," ' Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 r ~ f ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst rjh ntersection EVERGREEN WY BE & LAKELAND HIL ~~ncy/Co. TSI ~urisdictlon Auburn Date Performed 11/05 Analysis Year 2005 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Proiect DescriDtion LHE , - astJ'vVest Street: ~orth/South Street: ntersectlon Orientation: North-South tudv Period (hrs): 0.25 ehiele Volumes and AdJustments IaJor Street Northbound Southbound ovement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R lolume 0 259 81 71 469 240 ;)eak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.88 0.92 0.88 0.92 0.92 0.92 -lourly Row Rate, HFR 0 281 89 77 509 260 ;)ercent Heavy Vehicles 2 - - 2 - -. V1edian Type UndMded :n Channelized 0 0 .anes 1 1 0 1 1 0 Jonfiauration L TR L TR .1IDStream Slanal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 80 19 40 112 19 0 Peak-Hour Faetor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.84 0.92 0.87 0.87 Hourlv Aow Rate, HFR 90 21 47 121 28 0 PercentHeaVYVeh~es 1 1 1 1 1 1 !Percent Grade (%) .2 1 f=lared Approach y N Storage 1 0 RT Channelized 0 ,.. 0 anes 0 1 0 1 1 0 onflguration LTR L TR . elav. Queue Lenath. and Level of Service ~pproach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound ~ovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LTR L m w (vph) 0 77 158 121 28 C (m) (vph) 845 1209 214 143 188 , 'lIe 0.00 0.06 0.74 0.85 0.15 ; ~5% queue length 0.00 0.20 4.98 5.50 0.51 Control Delay 9.3 8.2 58.1 99.4 27.5 p.-OS A A F F D Approach Delay -- -- 58.1 85.9 Approach LOS - -- F F Rights Reserved tt,1! !" l' ;r ~~ f ! ~-= I f T. ~ ,. - ~ ;, -; file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k324.tmp 11/22/2005 Two- Way Stop Control 4;' HCS2(}(xi"" Copyright e 2003 l1nivenilJ' 01 Florida, All Ripts Reserved V ersioo4. t d r .... ~~ i; ./ " "l': '- 'J, , f. > ",. l ! '~ file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\LocaJ Settings\ Temp\u2k324.tmp Page 2of2 Ven;ion 4.1d -;;::;.-~ 11/22/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page lof2 !t :-. TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Generallnformatfon Site Information Analyst RJH ntersection 17TH ST SE & AUBURN WY S ~ency/Co. TSI Jurisdiction Auburn Date Performed 11/05 "I is Year 2008 Background . . is Time Period PM Peak :Jrolect DescriDtlon LHE ast/Nest Street: tlorth/South Street ntersection Orientation: North-8outh ISbJdv Period (hrs):O.25 'ehlcle Volumes and Adjustments alor Street Northbound Southbound ovament 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T A L T R Volume O. 1348 7 0 2869 1 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 HourlY Row Rate, HFR 0 1484 7 0 3020 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- - 2 -- -- Median Type Undivided T Channelized 0 0 snes 0 2 1 0 2 0 onfiguration T R T m DStream Signal 0 1 Inor Street Westbound Eastbound ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 'olume 0 0 259 0 0 235 :leak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.91 0.63 0.63 0.63 ourly Aow Rate, HFR 0 0 284 0 0 373 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N !Storage 0 0 fiT Channelized 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 - ., 1 ~anes 'co' Configuration R R r\AI..... Queue Lenath. and Level of Service Approach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ane Configuration R R " (vph) 284 373 C (m) (vph) 372 435 "Ie 0.76 0.88 5% queue length 6.19 8.57 Control Delay 39.9 46.2 II-OS E E ~pproaeh Delay -- -- 39.9 48.2 IApproach LOS -- -- E E Rights Reserved \ . LL ! '-" 1\ l_j Copyright e 2003 University of Florida. All RighL' Reserved Version 4,ld file://C:\Documents and Seltings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k175.bnp 11/21/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2of2 f. , .' IICS2tJ()(jl'M Ver5ion 4.Id f . f ., ~r , . ~ ~., l . r r.. t \ ~.~ y~ .V'~ file:/ /C:\Documents and SeUings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k17S. tmp 11/21/2005 , . Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 'e- " , 1'. TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RJH ntersection HOWARD RD & R ST SE ~ency/Co. T81. lJurisdiction Auburn Date Perlormed 11/14/2005 .....,..is Year 2008 Background . I\nalvsis Time Period PM Peak Proiect OescriDtion /akeland hill estates EastlWest Street INorth/South Street ntersectlon Orientation: North-SOuth IStudv Period lhrs\: 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adlustments !Maior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R JoIume 23 216 0 0 38 1 ::leak-Hour Factor, PHF 0;92 0.92 1.00 1. DO 0.66 0.86 ~ourtv Flow Rate, HFR 24 234 0 0 57 1 ::lercent Heavv Vehicles 2 - -- 0 -- -- \.o1edian Type Uncftvided qT Channelized 0 0 ...anes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ..ionfiguration LT TR IUDStream. SianaJ 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 66 0 1112 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.98 ~ourlv Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 71 0 1134 ::lercent Heavv Vehicles 0 0 0 2 0 2 ::Iercent Grade (%) 0 0 l=Jared Approach N y Storage 0 4 RT Channelized 0 0 .' Lanes .,.... ..;;;.- 0 0 0 0 0 0 ;onfiQuration LR leIa" "'.....e Lenath. and Level of Service pproach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 a 9 10 11 12 ~ane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 24 1205 C (m) (vph) 1546 989 file 0.D2 1.22 95% queue length 0.05 38.68 Control Delay 7.4 124.2 .....OS, A F Approach Delay - -- 124.2 pproach LOS - -- F Rights Reserved ~ r_ 1,_ f ~ r1' if -:: Copyright 0 2003 Univcnrity of Florida, All Ri~hls Reserved VmiOll 4.1d file:IIC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k16F.lmp 11/21/2005 r ~ . , Two~ Way Stop Control Page 20f2 f.~ HCS2OfxjJ1d Vcrsi0ll4.ld t .,. f .~,. ~~7 i: f l! ~ \ f .~ . f, }I r ... r ! ' I 7 {i;' It' , , ~ file://C:\Doeuments and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k16F.tmp 11/21/2005 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 -r.;> r .., . HCS~-DET~LEDREPORT Generallnformatlon SIte Information Analyst rjh Intersection 29TH ST SE & R ST SE Agency or Co. TS/ Area Type AJI othe1r areas Date Performed 11/05 Jurisdiction Auburn TIme Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Background Project 10 Lskel8nd Hill Estates Volume and Timing Inout EB WB NB sa LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 . . , Lane group L m L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 30 85 403 12 59 61 75 510 18 90 839 65 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 Pretlmed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped I Bike I RTOR volumes 0 0 163 0 0 37 0 0 1 0 0 3 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, .G<., 3.2 32 3.2 3.2 "1'~ Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 G= 2.3 G = 19.9 G= G= G= 3.8 G = 49.0 G= G= Timing y= 5 y= 5 y= y= y= 5 y= 5 y= y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 . Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS DetermlnaUqn EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 32 340 14 100 82 572 9B 941 i Lane group capacity, e 344 368 148 400 169 985 384 979 ; vIe ratio, X 0.09 0.92 0.09 0.25 0.49 0.58 0.26 0.96 . Total green ratio, g/e 0.30 0.22 0.30 0.22 0.62 0.53 0.62 0.53 Uniform delay, d1 24.0 36.3 25.3 30.6 20.7 15.3 9.9 21.6 Progression factor. PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 . ~ ?' ~\ ,If " i ': !. . file://C:\Documents and Settings\RicbardH. TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k32F .tmp 11/22/2005 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.44 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.11 0.47 Incremental delay, d2 0.1, ~.5 0.3 0.3 2.2 0.9 0.4 20.0 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 24.1 84.8 25.5 30.9 22.9 16.2 10.3 41.5 Lane group LOS C IE C C C B B D Approach delay 81.3 30.3 17.1 38.6 Approach LOS E C B 0 Intersection delay 35.6 Xc = 0.93 Intersection LOS D Detailed Report !" ' f~ ". t,. ~~ r ,. " HCS2000™ i !, l' f ~ ! . i r. \ 1 Page 2 of 2 Copyrlghl e 2000 UDiverslly of Florida. All Rlpts Jtescrved VcrsiDll4.1d ,t', file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\LocaI ~ettings\ Temp\s2k32F.tmp 11/22/2005 Detailed Report Page 10f2 ! . HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT Genera/Information SIte Information Analyst rjh Intersection ORAVETZ RD & R ST BE Agency or Co. TSI Area Type All other areas Date Performed 11/05 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Background Project 10 Lake/an(;/ HIli Estates Volume and TimllJD InDut EB we NB SS LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT IT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 Lane group L TR LT R L TR L T R Volume, V (vph) 87 1 4 7 3 12 1 480 3 8 1133 71 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peak.hourfactor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.85 0.89 0.85 0.88 0.94 0.88 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 't 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1. ()()() 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pad J Bike I RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 18 Lane wIdth 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N -4 N N -1 N N 0 N N 1 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, Na 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G .' 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasina EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 11.0 G:: G= G:: G::;: 75.4 G= G= G= Timing y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y::;: y= Duration of Ana/vsis, T = 0.25 Cvcle LenlJth. C ::;: 94.4 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB we NB SB LT TH RT IT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 99 6 24 20 1 543 9 1205 60 Lane group capacity, c 166 196 181 184 202 1441 652 1495 1271 vIe ratio, X 0.60 0.03 0.13 0.11 0.00 0.38 0.01 0.81 0.05 Total green ratio, 9/C 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Uniform delay, d, 39.6 37.0 37.4 37.3 1.9 2.7 1.9 5.4 2.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 l " ~ .,. p r '" file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k33A.tmp 11/22/2005 Detailed Report Page 2of2 f ~ Delay calibration, k 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.". 0.11 0.35 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 5.8 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 3.4 0.0 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 45.3 37.0 37.8. 37.6 1.9 2.9 1.9 8.7 2.0 lane group LOS D 0 D D A A A A A Approach delay 44.9 37.7 2.9 8.4 Approach LOS D 0 A A Intersection delay 9.5 Xc =0.78 Intersection LOS A Copyright C 2000 Univel'!lily of Florida, All RighlA Reserved VendOR 4.1d f' HCS200dfM t-...: ~ }< ~; . ,j, -~ s: ~...; fi)e://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\s2k33A.tmp 11/22/2005 Detailed Report Page lof2 f ::" ~ ". . HCS2000- DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst rjh Intersection 9THSTE& 182NDAVEE Agency or Co. TSI Area Type AN other areas Date Performed 11/21/2005 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2005 Project to LHE VolumB and TlmlntllnDUt EB WB NB 58 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L T R L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 11 249 0 74 129 186 0 104 74 568 203 8 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped I Bike I RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 192 0 0 29 0 0 1 Lane width 12.0 16.0 12.0 12.0. 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 0 N N -1 N N -1 N N 1 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Ontv WB Only 03 04 SB Ontv NS Perm 07 08 G:: 15.0 G = 11.7 G= G= G = 26.4 G:: 13.7 G= G= Timing Y=4 y= 4 Y= Y= y= 4 y= 4 y= y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cvcle Lenath, C = 82.8 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH AT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 12 271 80 140 0 0 162 617 229 Lane group capacity, c 321 382 251 265 225 191 296 720 982 vIe ratio, X 0.71 . 0.32 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.86 0.23 0.04 Total green ratio. gJC 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.17 0.17 0.53 0.53 Uniform delay, d1 ~7.9 31.9 32.0 33.0 30.5 28.8 31.7 14.5 10.3 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 \. l' ~ ~ if ~ file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k196.tmp 11/21/2005 '., " Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 C'". ~ : Delay calibration, k . 0.11 0.27 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.15 0.39 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.0 8.0 0.7 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 10.1 0.1 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 128.0 ~7.9 32.7 35.0 30.5 28.8 33.8 24.6 10.4 , Lane group LOS C D C C C C C C B Approach delay 37.4 34.2 33.8 20.7 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection delay 27.2 Xc = 0.76 Intersection LOS C Copyright e 2000 University of Florida, All Rigbls ReRerved Vmion 4.ld or, '" F Ii:; [, 'i> f, ~ .; " "1. f; . HCS2()(J(P"M r p i: 1: ! ' 1 r " 1..... I. ~ , '. a ~; ~ file://C:\Docwnents and Settings\RicbardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k196.tmp 11/21/2005 Detailed Report Page lof2 !:, .~ HC$2O(JO- DETAILED REPORT Genera/Information Site Information EVERGREEN WY SE & Analyst rjh Intersection LAKELAND HILL2008 Agency or Co. TSI Background Date Performed 11105 Area Type All other areas Time Period PM Peak Jurisdiction Auburn Analysis Year 2008 Background Proiect 10 LHE Volume and Tfmina IlJDut EB WB NB S8 LT TH AT LT TH AT LT TH RT IT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR LT R L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 120 30 0 129 30 89 0 289 120 162 486 260 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak.hour factor, PHF 0.67 10.67 0.67 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.92 0.92 0.92 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A Start.up Jost time. '1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike I ATOA volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 31 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12~0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 1 N N .2 N N 0 N N 2 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 ,- 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 PhasinQ EWPerm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 20.0 G= G= G= G = 32.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 4 y= y= y= V=4 V= y= y= Duration of Analysis, T :: 0.25 Cvcle Lenath, C = 60.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delsy. and LOS Determination EB WB NB 58 LT TH AT LT TH RT LT TH AT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 179 45 190 106 0 416 176 777 Lane group capacity, C 320 618 461 533 170 962 440 936 vie ratio. X 0.56 0.07 0041 0.20 0.00 0.43 0.40 0.83 Total green ratio, g/C 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 Uniform delay, d1 16.4 13.7 15.5 14.3 6.5 8.5 8.3 11.7 ! . j '( l ;; ~: . , t .. ~, flIe:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\LocaI Settings\Temp\s2klBO.tmp 11/21/2005 , _f: ? "'., . Detailed Report Page 2of2 f ~ ,t- Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.37 Incremental delay, d2 2.2 0.1 0.6 02 0.0 0.3 0.6 6.4 Initial queue delay, ds Control delay 18.6 13.7 16.1 14.5 6.5 8.8 8.9 18.1 Lane group LOS 8 B B B A A A 8 Approach delay 17.6 15.5 8.8 16.4 Approach LOS B B A 8 Intersection delay 14.7 Xc = 0.73 Intersection LOS B , . , HCSlOOOTM Copyright 4,') 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.1d ,: J'. ., '., 1: r -: f. " I. r ". f '!i' i ~. ~ J !: I C r- file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\LocaI Settings\ Temp\s2klBO. tmp 11121/200S , Detailed Report Page lof2 t .~ HCS~-DETNlEDREPORT Genera/Information -:- Site information Analyst rjh Intersection EVERGREEN WY 5E & Kersey Way Agency or Co. TSI Area Type AD other areas Date Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Background . ProlOOtlD UlE Volume and Tun/ntJ /nDUt EB WB NB sa LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Nt 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 lane group L m LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 46 0 49 6 0 90 61 350 12 160 914 100 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, " 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand. Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike I RTOA volumes 0 0 22 0 0 60 0 0 1 0 0 59 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians. G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 . Phasing EWPerm 02 03 04 Excl. left NSPerm 07 08 G= 8.4 G= G= G= G= 3.6 G = 61.3 G= G= Timing y= 4 Y= y= y= y= 4 Y= 4 y= y= Duration of AnalYSis, T = 0.25 CvcIe Length. C = 85.3 Lane Group CaIJacIty, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB 58 LT TH AT LT TH RT LT TH AT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 50 29 40 66 392 174 1038 Lane group capacity, c 136 156 155 282 1332 754 1330 vIe ratio. X 0.37 0.19 0.26 0.23 0.29 0.23 0.78 Total green ratio. glC 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.81 0.72 0.81 0.72 Uniform delay, d1 36.0 35.3 35.6 8.8 4.3 2.1 7.7 1.000 1. (}()O 1.000 1.000 1. (}()() 1.000 1.000 'J: <- fiJe:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\ Temp\s2kl DD.tmp 11/21/2005 'f' '''. . Detailed Report Page 2of2 ~r ~ ~ . _ Progression factor, PF OSlay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.33 Incremental delay, d2 1.7 0.6 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.2 3.1 Initial queue delay, ds Control delay 37.6 1as.9 36.5 9.2 4.4 2.2 10.8 Lane group LOS D D D A A A B Approach delay 37.0 36.5 5.1 9.5 ,Approach LOS D D A A Intersection delay 102 Xc = 0.74 Intersection LOS B HCS2fJO(jrM Copyright 0 200() University of Florida. All R.Ighls Reaerved Vmion 4.1d r . t r . {. f . f <' , '~ -........ ..... ~ ,,:", f ;-~ r '" flle:IIC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\LocaJ Settings\Temp\s2klDD.tmp 11/21/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page lof2 . r ~ it TWo..WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY . General Information Site Information /\nalyst RJH ntersectlon 17TH ST SE & AUBURN WY S , Agency/Co. TSI urlsdictlon Auburn Date Performed 11/05 ~alysis Year 2008 With Project /\natvsls TIme Period PM Peak Pro/ect Description LHE ~astNtIest Street folorthJSouth Street: Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period fhrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adlustments lMaior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T A 'olume 0 1348 7 0 2B69 1 'eak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 ~ourly Flow Aate, HFR 0 1434 7 0 3020 1 )ercent HeavY Vehicles 2 - -- 2 - -- ~edjan Tvpe Undivided AT Channelized 0 0 anes 0 2 1 0 2 0 :::onflguration T R T TR rreamSional 0 1 Inor Street Westbound Eastbound ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T A L T R \lolume 0 0 262 0 0 235 Peak~Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.91 0.63 0.63 0.63 I-Jourlv Flow Aate, HFA 0 0 287 0 0 373 PeroentHeavyVehic~ 2 2 2 2 2 .2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N ~torage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 anas 0 0 --f ,'~ '.,,;- 0 ... 0 1 onflguration R R lelsv. Queue Lenath. and Level of ServIce Approach , NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Loane Configuration R R v (vph) 287 373 C (m) (vph) 372 435 vlc 0.77 0.86 95% queue length 6.34 8.57 Control Delay 40.7 46.2 LOS. E E i\pproach Delay -- - 40.7 46.2 Approach LOS -- - E E ! '#' '~ . { . f--" , . ~. '" ! c Rights Reserved Copyright e 2llO3 University of Florida, All Righ15 Re.'lClVed Vcrsion 4.1 d file:IIC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\u2k175.tmp 11/2112005 Two- Way Stop Control Page 2 of2 'f ~ HCS1OOO™ Versioo4.ld f "1\ f ~ >--" " " l" ..., i. !, ... r ; ~" ~ ii * file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k175.tmp 1112112005 Two-Way Stop Control Page 10f2 r l' ~ r- TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY lGenerallnformatlon Site Information Analyst RJH ntersection HOWARDRD & R ST SE AgencylCo. TSI Jurisdiction Auburn Date Performed 11/14/2005 Analysis Year 2008 WIth Project AnalYsis Tme Period PM Peak 5rOlect Descriotion lakeland hill estates .' astNJest Street: uth Street ntersectlon Orientation: . North-South IStu~ Period lhrsT: 0.25 lehlele Volumes and Adjustments IiiaiOr Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 27 220 0 0 38 1 oeak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.66 0.86 curly Flow Rata, HFR 29 239 0 0 57 1 oercent Heavv Vehicles 2 - -- 0 - - lAedfan Tvoe Undivided T Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Gonfiauration LT TR ~tream Siona! 0 0 inor Street Westbound Eastbound . ovamant 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 66 0 1129 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.98 Hourlv Row Rate, HFR 0 0 0 71 0 1152 Percent Heaw Vehicles 0 0 0 2 0 2 lPercentGrade (%) 0 0 II=lared Approach N y torage 0 4 =tT Channelized 0 0 anes 0 0 0 0 0 0 onfiauration LR elav. Queue Lenath. and Level of Service Approach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR II (vph) 29 1223 C (m) (vph) 1546 986 "Ie 0.02 1.24 195% queue length 0.06 40.85 Control Delay 7.4 133.2 ,-OS A F ~pproach Delay -- - 133.2 ~pproach LOS -- - F !; . ! . f;. ? ! . r -.,. f'" \ Rights Reserved Copy,ighl 0 2OlJ3 University of Florida, All Righl5 Re5Crved Versioll4.1d file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k16F.tmp 11/21/2005 . . r !". Two-Way Stop Control HCS20f)(jl'M f ' , -? it ~ ! " f III ~.~ ! ' ~ ~ Version 4.1d Page 2of2 ~ ~~'-:7 file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k16F.tmp 11/21/2005 , , , ' Detailed Report Page lof2 f !! HCS2000- DETAILED REPORT Genera/Information Site Infonnation Analyst rjh Intersection 29TH ST SE & R ST SE Agency or Co. TSI Area Type AU other areas Date Perfonned 11/05 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak AnalysIs Year 2008 With Project Project 10 Lakeland HUI Estates Volume and Tlmlna lnout EB we NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH AT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 30 85 409 12 59 61 78 517 19 90 856 65 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time,I1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand. Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped I Bike I RTOA volumes 0 0 163 0 0 37 0 0 1 0 0 3 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3:2' 3:2 Phasing Exd. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 G= 2.3 G = 19.9 G= G= G= 3.8 G = 49.0 G= G= Timing y= 5 y= 5 y- y= y= 5 Y=5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 32 346 14 100 85 582 98 959 lane group capacity, c 344 368 143 400 169 985 376 979 vIe ratio, X 0.09 0.94 0.10 0.25 0.50 0.59 0.26 0.98 Total green ratio, g/C 0.30 0.22 0.30 0.22 0.62 0.53 0.62 0.53 Uniform delay, d1 24.0 36.4 25.3 30.6 21.0 15.5 10.1 22.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 f , 1 .~ l- ! " file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k20B.tmp 11121/2005 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.45 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.48 Incremental delay, d2 0.1 31.9 0.3 0.3 2.4 0.9 0.4 23.8 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay ~4.1 68.3 25.6 30.9 23.4 16.4 10.4 45.8 . Lane group LOS C E C C C B B 0 Approach delay 64.6 30.3 17.3 42.5 Approach LOS E C B 0 Intersection delay 38.1 Xc = 0.95 Intersection LOS D , Detailed Report ." . , . I : p ,. HCSZOOO1"N f--l: r c f < i ,- Page 20f2 Copyright g 2000 University of Florida, AU Rigbls Reserved Verskm 4.1ct "'F ..." file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k20B.tmp 11/21/2005 Detailed Report Page 10f2 If . !r ,.. H~-DET~LEDREPORT Generallnfofmslion SIIe information Analyst rjh Intersection ORAVETZ RD & R ST SE Agency or Co. TS/ Area Type A/J other areas Date Performed 11/05 Jurlsdlction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 WIth Project Project 10 Lake/and HiD Estates Volume and Tlmlna InDUt EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH AT Number of lanes. N1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 Lane group L TR LT R L TR L T R Volume, V (vph) 87 1 4 7 3 12 1 491 3 8 1156 71 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.85 0.89 0.85 0.88 0.94 0.88 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start~up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension. UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike I ATOA volumes 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 18 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N -4 N N -1 N N 0 N N 1 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, Na 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 . Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 " 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 11.0 G= G= G= G:; 75.4 G= G= G= Timing y= 4 y= y= y= y= 4 Y= y= y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 94.4 Lane Group Capacity. Control Delay. and LOS Determination EB WB NB SS LT TH AT LT TH AT LT TH AT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate. v 99 6 24 20 1 556 9 1230 60 . Lane group capacity, c 166 196 181 184 185 1441 641 1495 1271 : vie ratio, X 0.60 0.03 0.13 0.11 0.01 0.39 0.01 0.82 0.05 Total green ratio, g/C 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Uniform delay, d, 39.6 37.0 37.4 37.3 1.9 2.8 1.9 5.6 2.0 Progression factor, PF 1. 000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 j:.)' f' file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\s2k345.tmp 11/22/2005 Detailed Report Page 2of2 1.. Delay calibration, k 0.19- 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.36 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 5.8 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 3.9 0.0 Initial queue delay, d3 - Control delay 45.3 37.0 3Z8 37.6 1.9 2.9 1.9 9.4 2.0 Lane group LOS D D D D A A A A A Approach delay 44.9 37.7 2.9 9.0 Approach LOS D D A A Intersection delay 9.8 Xc = 0.79 Intersection LOS A Copyright 0 2000 UDiversily of Florida, All RIJbIS Reserved Vllrsi0ll4.ld f..', r -' HCS2fJOlirM h' file://C:\Documents and SeUings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\Temp\S2k345.tmp 11/22/2005 'Detailed Report Page lof2 T " L HCS~~DET~LEDREPORT > Generatlnformation SIte Informatlon Analyst rjh Intersection EVERGREEN WY SE & Kersey Way Agency or Co. TSI Area Type All other aress . . Date Performed 11/2005 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 With Project Proiect 10 LHE , Volume and Tlmina tnDut E8 we NB S8 IT TH AT IT TH AT IT TH AT IT TH AT . Number of lanes, N 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 lane group L TR LTR L TR L m Volume, V (vph) 52 0 52 6 0 90 66 367 12 160 918 100 . % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 . Pretimed (P) or actUated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 , Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.()()() Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pad I Bike I ATOA volumes 0 0 22 0 0 60 0 0 1 0 0 59 lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 , Parking I Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N , Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 - . ~ a.,., .. ~ o .~ ~ Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 Excl. left NSPerm '07 08 G= 8.4 G= G= G= G= 3.6 G = 61.3 G= G= Timing Y=4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= 4 Y= y= , Duration of AnalYsis, T = 0.25 Cvole lenrlth, C = 85.3 " Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination <; EB we NB SB > IT TH AT IT TH AT LT TH RT LT TH AT Adjusted flow rate, v 57 33 40 72 411 174 1043 ,I Lane group capacity, c 136 156 155 279 1333 737 1330 vIe ratio, X 0.42, 0.21 0.26 0.26 0.31 0.24 0.78 .ii:. Total green ratio, g/C 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.81 0.72 0.81 0.72 Uniform delay, d1 36.2 35.4 35.6 9.0 4.3 2.1 7.7 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ji l. Ii ~.,... file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2klDD.bnp 11/21/2005 , Detailed Report Page 2of2 Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.83 Incremental delay, d2 2.1 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.2 3.2 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 38.2 36.1 36.5 9.5 4.5 2.3 10.9 Lane group LOS D D D A A A 8 Approach delay 37.4 36.5 5.2 9.7 Approach LOS D D A A Intersection delay 10.4 Xc = 0.75 Intersection LOS B HCS1OOO™ Copyright 0 2000 Univmlty of Florida, AU Rights Reserved Version 4.ld ,"," ! r, " .,.. file://C;\Documents and Setlings\RichardH.TSI\LocaI Setlings\Temp\s2klDD.tmp 11/21/2005 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 f' L ~ HC~.DET~LEDREPORT General Information SIte Information Analyst 1jh Intersection 9THSTE& 182NDAVEE Agency or Co. TSI Area Type All other areas Date Performed 11/21/2005 Jurisdiction Auburn Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 WIth Project ProjectlD LHE Volume and 71mlno InDUt EB we NB sa LT TH AT LT TH RT LT TH AT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 . 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L T R L m L TR Volume, V (vph) 10 299 0 83 137 217 0 128 83 601 220 6 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension. UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pad I Bike I RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 192 0 0 29 0 0 1 Lane width 12.0 16.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade I Parking N 0 N N -1 N N -1 N N 1 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for,pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 --70: _.~ , Phaslno EB OnlY WB Onlv 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 G: 15.0 G = 11.7 G= G", G =: 26.4 G = 13.7 G: G= Timing y= 4 y= 4 y= y", y= 4 y= 4 y= y= Duration of AnalYsis, T = 0.25 Cvcle Length, C = 82.8 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB S8 LT TH AT LT TH AT LT TH AT LT TH AT Adjusted flow rate, v 11 325 90 149 27 0 198 653 244 Lane group capacity, C 321 382 251 265 225 188 296 691 984 v/c ratio, X 0.03 0.85 0.36 0.56 0.12 0.00 0.67 0.95 0.25 Total green ratio, glC 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.17 0.17 0.53 0.53 Unifonn delay, d1 127.9 ~.8 32.2 33.2 31.1 28.8 32.4 16.3 10.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 f, . t< ,~ '!' + , , " . fiJe:/IC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\LocaI Settings\ Temp\s2klF5.tmp 11/21/2005 Detail.ed Report Page 20f2 f, :;1_ , Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.38 0.11 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.46 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.0 16.5 0.9 2.7 0.2 0.0 5.7 21.8 0.1 Initial queue delay, ds Control delay 2$.0 49.4 33.0 35.9 31.3 28.8 38.1 38.1 10.6 Lane group LOS C D C D C C 0 D- B Approach delay , 48.7 34.5 38.1 30.6 Approach LOS 0 C D C Intersection delay 35.6 Xc = 0.82 Intersection LOS D CopyriJht 4) 2000 tJniversily or Florida, All Rights RCllUVed Vmioo 4.1d .. Hcszo!xifM t. f.. . file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSl\Local Settings\Temp\s2klF5.tmp 11/21/2005 , , " Detailed Report Page lof2 - r ' r ' HCS2000- DETAILED REPORT GenerallnfOl'ITUItIon Site Information EVERGREEN WY BE & Analyst rjh Intersection LAKELAND HILL2008 With Agency or Co. TS/ Project 'Date Performed 11/05 Area Type All other areas , TIme Period PM Peak Jurisdiction Auburn Analysis Year 2008 With-Project ProiEict 10 LHE Volume and Timina InDUt , EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH AT Number of lanes, N 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 lane group L TR LT R L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 120 32 0 132 31 93 0 289 125 168 486 260 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.92 0.92 0.92 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped I Bike I RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 31 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 1 N N -2 N N 0 N N 2 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stoppIng, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasina EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Penn 06 07 08 G = 20.0 G= G= G= G = 32.0 G= G= G= Timing Y=4 y= y= y= y= 4 y= y= y= Duration of Analvsis, T = 0.25 CYcle Lenaltl, C = 60.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Del8y, and LOS Defenninatlon EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT IT TH RT LT TH AT Adjusted flow rate, v 179 48 194 111 0 421 183 777 Lane group capacity, C 317 618 460 533 170 961 436 936 vIe ratio, X 0.56 0.08 0.42 0.21 0.00 0.44 0.42 0.83 Total green ratio, g/C 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 Unfform delay, d1 16.4 13.7 15.5 14.3 6.5 8.5 8.4 11.7 ~; t " ., fe' .. If, '" .' ij . 'fr." ,. '!' , . file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\s2k350.tmp 11/22/2005 Detailed Report Page 2of2 l..; ~-. . Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.37 Incrementa' delay, d2 2.3 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.7 6.4 Initial queue delay, da Control delay 18.8 13.7 16.1 14.5 6.5 8.8 9.1 18.1 Lane group LOS B B B B A A A B Approach cIeIay 17.7 15.6 8.8 16.4 Approach LOS B B A B Intersection delay 14.7 Xc = 0.73 Intersection LOS B Copyright 0 2IlOO University of Florida, All Rights Ileserved Vel5ioo 4.1c1 J- " ,- -;t'e . , HCS2fJ()(JTM i; L' ~. . i: J' ,. '-' .. , , t:;' ! file:/lC:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSI\Local Settings\Temp\s2k350.tmp 11/22/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page 10f2 ~~WAVSTOPCONTROLSUMMARV General Information Site Information Analyst RJH nter8ectIon Site Access and Kersey Agency!Co. TSI jurisdiction Auburn Date Performed 11/14/2005 1A....I..eis Year 2008 With project -I Analvsis Time Period . PM Peak p;;orect Descriotion lake/and hill estates ast/West Street outh Street; ntersection Orientation: North-South . ~ Period lhrs}: 0.25 'ehlcle Volumes and Adiusbnents iafor Street Northbound Southbound bement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R . ilOlume 2 493 0 0 1175 25 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.66 ::tourlV Row Rate, HFA 2 5$ 0 0 1198 37 :larcent Heavy Vehicles 2 - -- 0 - - lifedian Tvpe Raised curb =IT Channelized 0 0 anes 1 1 0 0 1 1 :onfiauration L T T R lostream Siena! 0 0 (nor Street Westbound Eastbound ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T A L T R volume 0 0 0 5 0 4 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.92 -iourly FloW Rate, HFR 0 0 0 5 0 4 Percent Heavv Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 :tercent Grade (%) 0 0 lared Approach N y Storage 0 4 RT Channelized 0 0 aoos 0 . 0 ... 0 1 0 1 onflauration L R '_1_.. Queue Lenath. and Level of Service ,pproach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R ./ (vph) 2 5 4 C (m) (vph) 564 214 228 1c 0.00 . 0.02 0.02 95% queue length 0.01 0.07 0.05 ) Control Delay 11.4 22.2 21.1 OS 8, C C ~proach Delay -- -- 21.7 ~pproach LOS -- -- C !.. ' ~ '" ~< ". ,. " , Rights Reserved Copyriaht 0 2003 University of Florida, AD Righta Reserved Version 4, td ; file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TS1\Loca1 Settings\Temp\u2k2C8.tmp 11/22/2005 . r-'r , , Two-Way Stop Control Page 2of2 HCS2fJO()l1A Versioo4.1d tl' f7 ',; '. . if," I' j t' 1;.' ~ . -~ . .. ~- ~: .~ ~~- ;.~- t~' , 4" ;,;. file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSI\Local Settings\Temp\u2k2C8.bnp 11122/2005 Two-Way Stop Control Page lof2 f ' '? .,.. TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY , General Information ~te Information Analyst RJH ntersection Site Access and Kersey Agency/Co. TSI Jurisdiction Auburn Date Performed 11/14/2005 ~alysis Year 2008 With Project (All Gen) \naiVsis Time Period PM Peak )roiect DescrlDtion /akeland hUt estates asWlest Street ~orthJSouth Street ntersection Orientation: North-8outh IStudy Period fhrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adiustments aiGr Street Northbound Southbound ovement 1 2 3 4 5 6 l T R l T R Volume 15 486 0 0 1175 28 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.66 Hourlv Flow Rate, HFR 16 528 0 0 1198 42 PeroentHeavvVeh~~ 2 - - 0 -- - Median Tvoe RaiSed curb AT Channelized 0 0 anes 1 1 0 0 1 1 onflguratlon L T T R =eam Sienal 0 0 'nor Street Westbound Eastbound ovament 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 13 0 13 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.92 HQurlv Flow Rats, HFR 0 0 0 14 0 14 Percent Heavv Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ercent Grade (%) 0 0 Ir=lared Approach N Y !Storage 0 4 RT Channelized 0 0 .anes 0 0 0 1 0 1 uration L R tallv. Queue I ..-+10. and Level of Service pproach NB S8 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R II (vph) 16 14 14 C (m) (vph) 562 210 228 II/e 0.03 0.07 0.06 5% queue length 0.09 0.21 0.19 Control Delay 11.6 23.4 21.8 LoOS B C C i\pproach Delay -- -- 22.6 i\pproach LOS - - C f ,. .,~, l, o Rights Reserved Copyrighl4.) 2003 University ot Florida, All Righls Re.'Ie1'Ved Ve1llion 4.ld file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH. TSl\Local Settings\ Temp\u2k355.tmp 11/2212005 TWo-Way Stop Control Page 2of2 . J ~ HCS2(}(101V VCflIion 4.1d , " t " I, . J' f .". f.;---Jl r . r ... ) a:. ~ file://C:\Documents and Settings\RichardH.TSl\Local Settings\Temp\u2k355.tmp 11/22/2005 , . f. If. f '" r ' e " >:. , t Appendix D: Preliminary Sight Distance Exhibit. Lakeland Hill Estates Transportation Impact Analysis November 2005 IJ ~Jlo!IMw no:roNaoV.. pol iut-JIIDB (!AD i _'=1::= . · _.:Ii!::n'I -:9. __.I:>AJIO I - VNo ~8UPOOU!SUtl ' J 'No'S '5\V CN"loa. OY!OUd ( r l' , ,. j J,,>;i f. < l'-.,.l' I' I ~ \ \ \\ -- \ \. -r-- \ \ \ \ I \ ' \ I 1 \ ' \ ' : \ \ \ , 1 \ \ \ \ \ ' I \ \ \ \ " \ ' I \ \ \ I I \ \ \ \ \ \ , \ .,,\ \ ~\ \ \ \ \ \ \ i I I \ \ \ \ I \ \ \ 1 -- ,--- \ -p:oi \ \ \ I \ \ \ \ \ , I 'g\ ~\ ...., \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 IL .---. .'. --- '*~-- ------ . ---.- z g ~ ~ g 8 i ~ ~ r W 10 ~ r Z ~ ~ ~ ~ () tH of -;:::- ~ (1) w F= ~ i / I ~ .. i " I -~ ..o.....=~ :Trt&WJU.,....CJNlif"SftP"I - s:u. V J.S3 'T1lH ONv-e:>lV"1 ,i ,i i! II I fl fill I! II il~ i'll' I i 1& I~ , I i i 85 < . . iJiJJ~ . i. ~ ! li-Jit ! !1 u i. I! J'ml..;. )IU& I' ,', - -r, ling ',~ Ii" "J. m !I II in H'I U, , ill, Ii I . , I e tit) H d! nIt I I . illl ~hf hi . .:I! I ~~lh~d "T ' Itil, hi Illi ,I~ Bd'. W - ~ - f..J, ~ nj'II,5 ~IHJi:1 .!.iul. iJlUhi M~ ~ . ~I! ~..i !~ ; ElEYA110N ; j" ..tEL M ,,,,, ~, ,.u_ ~ ij~ ::~~. ~ ~j "" 8 ~.~ l,I'.G~ l! ~ t ; J. !' , i(il: . !! I i! i. 1 ;' " 1 O~ ,r .'"" : 'I ';i :q!.~',::~.. " i] n,z: I llteil211(U U:04;n eHu,ao,-,o;-lISi11 -lEU- 'r hr." (..r,......tt_ H.II.' .' ./1 ~ ,II ~ ~ I, Iii ~ d n JI ~- II t~ : i!! . . ~[I~;) ~ I' i I I ~ .IIi ;~ :J I~ - ~ ,I Ii II I ~ Iii ~"i'l" n~ ! ".~.. Ii! i:' ;1 ..Y1~_. I, . _j~L ,mli ~ .. . .~.~t l'~€:.___ j ; I ,.OlJtt 8 ;t i! _ ,,_~.ZJi.._. ; j! 1 ,._L'!!t._ Ui IflioZ: ! i a 0;, i "";1-, NOli VA313 I, I$E~ hi .c'5!7. 8-12 Wetland Consultin , Inc. FINCH - LAKE LAND HILLS ~\'O~ j1 WETLAND AND STREAM ANALYSIS REPORT AND CONCEPT MITIGATION CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON Prepared For: Scott Finch 6457 Lake Washington Blvd SE Newcastle, W A 98056 J ! 1 . B-12 Wetland Consulting, Inc. 1103 W. Meeker Street Kent, W A 98032 November 10, 2005 Job #A5-214 Phone: 253-859-0515 Fax; 253-852-4732 8-12 Wetland Consultin , Inc. 1103W. MeekerSl. (v)253-859-0515 Kent, WA00032.Q751 (t)253-8524732 FINCH - LAKE LAND HILLS WETLAND AND STREAM ANALYSIS REPORT CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Location This report describes the regulated wetlands and streams on or within 150- feet of the Lakeland Hills project. The site is located to the southeast of Kersey Way SE and includes 4 properties (parcels 3221059009, 3221059043, 3221059020, and 3221059059). Thomas Guide Vicini 1.1 Existing Conditions The northern two properties are currently single family residences as the southern two properties are vacant. A Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc, Company Re: Finch-Lakeland Hills B-12 Job#A5-214 November 10, 2005 Page 2 of8 2.0 METHODOLOGY B-12 Wetland Consulting, Inc. visited the site on May 12,2005, and on August 24,2005, to inspect the site for wetlands and streams. A combination of field indicators, including vegetation, soils, and hydrology was used to determine the presence of wetlands, The methodology used to identify any jurisdictional wetlands on the site is described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (W ADOE, March 1997). This is the methodology currently recognized by the City of Auburn, and the State of Washington for wetland determinations and delineations. The wetland areas identified would also be considered wetlands using the methodology described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), as required by the US Army Corps of Engineers, The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual and the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual both require the use of the three-parameter approach in identifying and delineating wetlands. A wetland should support a predominance ofhydrophytic vegetation, have hydric soils and display wetland hydrology. To be considered hydrophytic vegetation, over 50% ofthe dominant species in an area must have an indicator status of facultative (F AC), facultative wetland (FACW), or obligate wetland (OBL), according to the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9) (Reed, 1988). A hydric soil is "a soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part". Anaerobic conditions are indicated in the field by soils with low chromas (2 or less), as determined by using the Munsell Soil Color Charts; iron oxide mottles; hydrogen sulfide odor and other indicators, Generally, wetland hydrology is defined by inundation or saturation to the surface for a consecutive Re: Finch-Lakeland Hills B~12 Job #A5-214 November 10,2005 Page 3 of8 period of 12.5% or greater of the growing season. Areas that contain indicators of wetland hydrology between 5%-12.5% of the growing season mayor may not be wetlands depending upon other indicators. Field indicators include visual observation of soil inundation, saturation, oxidized rhizospheres, water marks on trees or other fixed objects, drift lines, etc. Under normal circumstances, indicators of all three parameters will be present in wetland areas, Streams were identified by the presence of a defined channel that contains flowing surface water at some time of the year. Streams were delineated by the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). The definition of the OHWM as defined by the Washington State Department of Ecology as a part of the Shoreline Management Act is, "the mark on all lakes, streams, and tidal water that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the sod a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on June 1. 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or the department: PROVIDED, That in any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoiningfresh water shall be the line of mean. high water". . The Wetlands were flagged with pink "Wetland Delineation" flagging and labeled consecutively. The Stream was flagged with white and blue-dot flagging and labeled consecutively. Data points were flagged with orange with black stripe flagging labeled DP#_, Flags were subsequently surveyed by)" I - ) 1.:" /"y"4./lSe."\ Svrt.> ~y . 3.0 OBSERVATIONS 3.1 Existing Site Documentation Prior to visiting the site, a review of several natural resource inventory maps was conducted. Resources reviewed included the King County Soil Survey, King County Sensitive Areas Folio: Streams, A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, and the National Wetland Inventory. 3.1.1 King County Soil Survey According to the King County Soil Survey, the site contains Alderwood gravelly, sandy loam (AgC), which typically occurs on slopes of 6-15 percent; Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgD), which typically occurs on slopes of 15-30 percent; and lndianola loamy fine sand (InC), which typically occurs on slopes of 4-15 percent. Alderwood gravelly, sandy loam soils are moderately well drained soils that formed under conifers, in glacial deposits. Indianola soils are made up of somewhat excessively drained soils that formed under conifers in sandy, recessional, stratified glacial drift. According to the publication, Re: Finch-Lakeland Hills 8-12 Job#A5-214 November 10, 2005 Page 4 of 8 "Hydric Soils of the United States" Alderwood and lndianola soils are not considered hyric or wetland soils. 3.1.2 King County Sensitive Areas Folio: Wetlands According to the King County Sensitive Areas Folio: Wetlands, there are no wetlands located on or with 300' of the site. 3.1.2 King County Sensitive Areas Folio: Streams According to the King County Sensitive Areas Folio: Streams, there are two unclassified streams located on/near the western boundary of the site. There is also an unclassified stream located greater than 300' to the east of the site. Re: Finch-Lakeland Hills B-12 Job#A5-214 November 10, 2005 Page 5 of 8 3.1.3 A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmonid Utilization According to the Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmonid Utilization, there is an un-named stream located along the western boundary ofthe site. The inventory shows a non-fish passable cascade located down stream ofthe site. ---../ I 1/2 -=.::.-=:.- seAL E ~) Ii a: '" al G: U; :> o z. ,i, '" I (~Z' 3.1.4 National Wetland Inventory According to the National Wetland Inventory, there is a small stream classified as R3UBH (riverine, upper perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded) wetland located along the western boundary of the site. %, t Re: Finch-Lakeland Hills B-12 Job#A5-214 November 10, 2005 Page 6 of8 3.2 Topography The site slopes generally to the northwest with varying slope grades. A drainage area is located along the western property boundary and contains a stream. 3.1 Uplands The uplands on the site have been historically disturbed and are generally in non-pristine condition. Dominant vegetation include Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), big leaf maple (Acre macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), vine maple (Acer circinatum), oceans spray (Holodiscus discolor), evergreen blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), salal (Gaultheria shallon), Soil pits excavated within the upland revealed an 8" gravelly, sandy loam A-horizon with a color of IOYR 3/2; an underlying gravelly, sandy loam B-horizon revealed a color of IOYR 3/3. Soils within the upland were dry during the time of our site visit. 3.2 Wetland A Wetland A was flagged with pink "Wetland Delineation" flagging labeled A-I through A-32. The western portion of the wetland was partially flagged and labeled AA-I through AA-I1. Tp.e remainder of the west side of the wetland was not completed due to the fact that no proposed activity will be located on the western side of Wetland A. Wetland A is located along portions of Stream A near the western boundary of the site. Re: Finch-Lakeland Hills B-12 Job #A5-214 November 10, 2005 Page 7 of8 Wetland A is a slope wetland with scrub-shrub vegetation. Although there are some trees located within the wetland there are not enough to comprise a forested wetland class. Dominant vegetation includes, salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), lady fern (Athyrium Filix-femina), skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). Soil pits excavated within Wetland A revealed areas with a 16-inch layer of muck with a color of lOYR 2/1, as well as areas with gravelly sandy loam B-horizon with a color of 10YR 3/2 with few, medium, distinct redoximorphic features. Soils within the wetland were saturated within 12-inches of the soil surface during the time of our site visit. According to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) wetland classification method (Cowardin et a1. 1979), Wetland A has areas that would be considered palustrine, scrub-shrub, broad-leaved deciduous, saturated (PSS 1B). According to the City of Auburn Critical Areas Ordinance No. 5894, 916.10.080, Wetland A would be considered a Category 4 wetland due to its score of 26 on the adopted Department of Ecology Wetlands Rating Form for Western Washington (Dept. of Ecology, 2004, Publication # 04-06-025). Category 4 Wetlands within the City of Auburn typically have a 25-foot buffer measured from the wetland edge (916.1O.090(E)). 3.3 Wetland B Wetland B was flagged with pink "Wetland Delineation" flagging labeled B-1 through B- 9. Wetland B is located in the southwest property comer to the east of Wetland A. Wetland B is a slope wetland with scrub-shrub vegetation. Dominant vegetation includes red alder saplings, salmonberry, skunk cabbage, and lady fern. Soil pits excavated within the wetland revealed a 16-inch layer of muck with a color of lOYR 2/1. Soils within the wetland were saturated within 12-inches ofthe soil surface during the time of our site visit. According the USFWS wetland classification method (Cowardin et a1. 1979), Wetland B would be considered a palustrine, scrub-shfub, broad-leaved deciduous, saturated (PSS1B). According to the City of Auburn Critical Areas Ordinance No. 5894, 916.10.080; Wetland A would be considered a Category 4 wetland due to its score of 26 on the adopted Department of Ecology Wetlands Rating Form for Western Washington (Dept. of Ecology, 2004, Publication # 04-06-025). Category 4 Wetlands within the City of Auburn typically have a 25-foot buffer measured from the wetland edge (916.1O.090(E)). 3.4 Stream A Ntw"lS:Y( The centerline of Stream A was located by the u.. L surveyors due to its narrow stream width. During the time of our site visit Stream A did not have any flow. Stream A progresses from a drainage swale within Wetland A to a defined channel that Re: Finch-Lakeland Hills 8-12 Job#A5-214 November 10, 2005 Page 8 of8 drains Wetland A. Wetland A appears to be Stream A's predominant source of hydrology. Stream A is an intermittent stream approximately l' to 2 'wide with a depth of 6" to 10" inches. One section of the stream near the center portion of the property has been blocked to create a small ponded area. This blockage appears to be man made. Offsite to the northwest Stream A flows through a culvert underneath an elevated gravel road. This culvert appears to be a non-fish passable blockage as indicated by the Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmonid Utilization. According to the City of Auburn Critical Areas Ordinance 916.10.080 (D), Stream A would be considered a 'Class 3 stream due. to the ordinary high water mark width near the 2' threshold, its intermittent flow, and lack offish use. Typically, Class 3 streams have a 25' buffer measured from its ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Due to Stream A's narrow width it was not practical to flag the OHWM, therefore an offset of2' from the centerline of the stream will be taken to compensate for the OHWM. The 25' stream buffer will then be measured from the 2' stream offset. Due to the location of Wetland A being outside ofthe OWHM ofthe stream, Stream A's buffer would not extend beyond Wetland A's buffer no matter what the width of Stream A. 4.0 Proposed Project and Concept Mitigation The proposed project is the development of72 single family residences. Part of the project includes.a through access road for a subdivision to the south ofthe property. Due to the road alignment for this through-road the project proposes fill of Wetland Bas pursuant to 916.10.100. As mitigation for this impact, enhancement of a portion of Wetland A is proposed. To compensate for impacts to 3,154sf of wetland, 8,000sf of Wetland A will be enhanced with native tree and shrub p1antings, this results in a 2.5:1 (enhanced to filled) mitigation ratio as pursuant to 916.10.120, and 916.10.110. Following approval ofthis conceptual mitigation plan, a detailed Final Mitigation Plan will be submitted to the City for review and approval. If you have any questions or need any additional information please contact our office at 253.859.0515 or bye-mail ataaron@b12assoc.com . Sincerely, B-12 Wetland Consulting, Inc. /~ ?v::e?" J. Aaron Will Wetland Scientist File:aw/A5-214 Finch WA.doc . i D RAFT WETLAND RATING FORM - WESTERN WASHINGTON I Name of wetland (if known): W~+lh'-:J A+ 15 - f,'V1Ch Location: SEe: TWNSHP: RNGE: _ (attach map with outline of wetland to rating form) Person(s) Rating Wetland: A-e,/il""'1 w' /I Affiliation: f) -/ ~ Date of site visit: t!"t -2 t.J -0 S" DRAFT SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland 1_ 11_ 111__ IV_ Category I = Score >70 Category II = Score 51-69 Category III = Score 30-50 Category IV = Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions 3 Score for Hydrologic Functions b Score for Habitat Functions I 6 TOTAL score for functions Z. ) Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Wetlaiid'T e Estuarine Natural Herita e Wetland Bo Mature Forest Old Growth Forest Coastal La oon Interdunal None of the above W.ctland Class Depressional Riverine Lake-frin2e Slope )( Flats Freshwater Tidal Wetland RatingFonn - western Washington 1 i\ugust2004 Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. ~jJ]D'\'fd:)\',\f:"~\:I"\I' ,,~~; i:n:", : ':'0'" :,', "~t/~ .~;, j!,~,!,' ,~'."'S:,: "~', nf,'~: "l: .,"';"; ,,"', '!'I' ~ ~.'> .:',l'.~\,' "';'J'\'q'r~",' ,",I ~":':i":\:1,: I:.,: ';~\"~"1t~t:,~?' \':':i~~ )~:~4\,~," i;' ,;ti;;;~t~':it;lt''''h 'iitCV:\'~~~~r1i~11tl((j\~ - j (jJl?f\l:;'~[(iYi.{Gl~f@1(t'(LJ~~~t '1~)itrU{q,:Y;J,;)~(o'f01kS~\l'N3L".~. "l'f.:':;.'>~'l!.t~ 1... ~>, .';~i(Q. ~j(,' ',",\'J "~~'" ,.vi' ;"", '., .. . ".'" ',"," I'" [ , '>"",', ,'r, "," I.'..' .... ."'k,'" ,t' ::""',' 'I' , '\(\ ,'"", ,'. _,~ \" '1';I'.\C,.(.c:I'/:~"<h~f,?~tl 't,".j'/';'l'1:.h,,~~~.~\,~ '.....,~/~\lt',,~I-:..(~.\~~d;! ;t,\,\,,~. :t' ,'~. ;..{j'J\I~.:;"I:I( 1,i:!\;ot.1{ ,I;,<~~ 11/ r,.l,j~.~li\'~; '~)J~~)"'r)?,l"~ ':,'"",',.1,1,"';"'. . 'I, 'I' \lL!1r:l~","\J[nll!'\;'3~;.jjlj\rd;,.~"W::'j"JfhO\:'11 !\I~\~,IR\ In'IOlo1 ,.' \"";"1';"',1. ',,:", ',;",,.,' .;11,1,.", :", ~'~""'J.:.:...f:;J' ..'.'d.J~.~:L,." "::i, ~;, -...\.:l ,; .~l ~10.\.:"" ~',l r ....J "\;.Ik~h' )~ "^'t.~ \ ,- "\".'O:r. t ~\_ \~~~ tt." ,~],-<:-f.;"b\' \ "',I\" !"''''''f", ~ )0...." ~j>'''''''.. l \ i.......Jt'"*J.........\......:;4.",tl..:..'J~__""~~<.:.;,;. SPt. Has the wetland been documented as a habitatfor any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system. "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. . SP2. Has the wetland been documented as habitatfor any State listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. SP3. Does the wetland contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? . ~/ 1 . K SP4. Does the wetland have a local significance in addition to itsfunctions? For example. the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program. the Critical Areas Ordinance. or in a local management plan as having special significance. x .. To comTJlete the next vart of the data sheet vou will need to determine the Hvdrof!eomorTJhic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways, This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 2 August 2004 Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington Wetland Name: Date: 1. Are the water l.evels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~ go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. Ifit is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the tenn "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 2. Is the topography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. ~ go to 3 YES - The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the fonn for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores ofa body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where atleast 20 acres (8 ha) are permanently inundated (ponded or flooded); _At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m)? ~ go to 4 YES - The wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria? -2C...The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradua/), -k::The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. K The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks( depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than J foot deep). NO - go to 5 @::t The wetland class is Slope 5. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to answer "yes." The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine Wetland Rating Form- western Washington 3 August 2004 6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to? YES - The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no stream or river running through it and providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO - go to 8 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of . flooding along its sides. Sometimes we find characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes presentwithin your. wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10% classify the wetland using the first class. . r~'''t~~j; '" 0~~"~'\ ,.\1 1. j :., J!i'i ";l~ ,:', 'J! 'l.<l (~4l;.' ~t.'l~\<!~<l ~~ '~..~?: ; \>l ," ,""~ ~/~"d 'W' 'I\i ~ A~" I'," I "', ~;' M \ ~~,;: .J.... ( I '."" \ ~ ;\(~'l ".jf~~ ' ':C~E<<:: 'c" l-'~' ~rll';:~.3 ,\/t~{'r;fA~~.(\t\l.~,?r~~~\)IJ~" j j~~'l:;I,~1(l/}~, ,1f><,{'8{ 'If:;,,,liih(t-"(e,!/@f'[ 1~1 ~'~~J~~'1jlift~~~ 'I/;~(. '1'~~jrjN"i;'.~ I .' I ,~, .; r l h q ~ /I,~,\\\ ~t>~ /flt::l,{;;'>j!;t~" :Yl1fli),Q'_?lrt!. ""1r' ~ { ",\" ,,~J i~"_A'..,.;....~,I.,'".':i .f~,.. ;;....".~M~l' >4:;} .;/\.)..-,,,,.\.,>) __"''Wf'"....M''~'''~~,.,' ,,,,>bl..-:t.~~."'tl\ ~",:~",,,.,,,,...;.t';J, "j~:l:;,l~" f~~L" .,.~t"{,,> ,r,~ ..'>.1 ;.c..!i<tM:...,1,} ~'~"'-U~",,,,,,,"..Il~bI.>\.:t,...&.'!;.,... Slo e + Riverine Slo e + De ressional Slo e + Lake-frin e De ressional + Riverine alon stream within bounda De ressional + Lake-frin e Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Riverine De ressional Lake-frin e De ressional De ressiona1 Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 4 August 2004 s s S 1. Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p. 64) S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of wetland: Slope is 1 % or less (a 1 % slope has a 1 foot vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft horizontal distance) ..................................... points = 3 Slope is 1 % - 2% points = 2 Slope is 2% - 5% points = 1 Slope is greater than 5% p,~in,~~ (~ , " ," S 12 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay, organic, or smells anoxic (hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). C-'~-~" YES = 3 oints NO ....:'" ~ S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the vegetation in the wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface. Dense, ungrazed" herbaceous vegetation> 90% of the wetland area points = 6 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation> 1/2 of area points =e:::P Dense, woody, vegetation > ~ of area points = 2 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation> 1/4 of area points = 1 Does not meet an of the criteria above for ve etation oints = 0 Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above S 2. Does the wetland have theopportunitv to improve water quality? (seep. 67) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants, - Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft - Untreated stonnwater discharges to wetland -'- Tilled fields, logging, or orchards within 150 feet of wetland - Residential, urban areas, or golf courses are within 150 ft upslope of wetland - Other YES multiplier is 2 ~ multiplier is 1 TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from SI by S2 Add score to table on . 1 s s s s s Comments Wetland Rating F onn - western Washington 11 August 2004 ,) -.~:') "2 ,.--' 3 multiplier / j " s S 3. Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? see . 68 S 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms. Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fit conditions in the wetland. Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covers > 90% of the area of the wetland. (stems of plants should be thick enough (usually> 1/8in), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows) points = 6 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/2 area of wetland points =Q:::) Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/4 area points = 1 More than 1/4 of area is grazed, mowed, tilled or vegetation is not ri id oints = 0 S 3.2 Characteristics of slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood flows: The slope wetland has small surface depressions that can retain water over at least 10% of its area. YES points = 2 ~ oints"E~ Add the points in the boxes above S 4. Does the wetland have the oDDor.pmi~ to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 70) Is the wetland in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows? Note which of the following conditions apply. L Wetland has surface runoff that drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems - Other (Answer NO if the major source of water is controlled by a reservoir (e.g. wetland is a seep that is on the nstream side of a dam) YES multi Ii IS' NO multi lier is 1 TOTAL - Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S 3 by S 4 Add score to table on p. 1 r b ? ~ s o s s J: multiplier 2.. s Comments Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 12 August 2004 ~'.... , f" H 1. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see p. 72) Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) if the class covers more than 10% of the area of the wetland or ~ acre. _Aquatic' bed _Emergent plants ~Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) _Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) _Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: 4 types or more 3 types 2 types 1 t e H 1.2. Hvdroperiods (seep. 73) Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than ,] 0% of the wetland or ~ acre to count. (see text for descriptions ofhydroperiods) _Pennaneiltly flooded or inundated ~Seasonal1y flooded or inundated _Occasionally flooded or inundated ~Saturated only _ Pennanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland x: Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland _ Lake-fringe wetland = 2 points _Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2, (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species, Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle 4 or more types present 3 types present 2 types present If you counted: Listspecies below if you want to: > 19 species 5 - 19 species < 5 species Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 13 points = 4 points = 2 points = 1 , JA) omts ~ c:;, points = 3 points ::::-p point = 1 -.....". ~ points = 2 points =t::P points = 0 I August 2004 H 104. Interspersion of habitats (see p. 76) Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation (described in H 1.1)t or vegetation types and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is hight mediumt lowt or none. None = o points Low~ Moderate = 2 points t(;;ryr;~:\~?'i:'?>i: , ..I'/t'l,,\;.,;.:.;. '-!lrr\ "."'\ !"';:'. (J,',: <. "" .... '..'j "X,.',/: ., ,." 1.:'R~<'" ',1 'd"I" ~~~t1,: \~:~~;!i~l :;j:';,\,ii,f;~;:)i. [':.I.:J: ':'~h~l ~l,.... '1,.. (;'l';,(r' ".. '., "',' I"':-},~, '>Hi:'ill .. i,,'':}l{/Ux i"I"\" i"'\"""''''vk . \~,8til1:}~JJO: >' / [riparian braided channels] / l c:; Comments Wetland RatingForm - western Washington 14 August 2004 H 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (seep. 80) Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed. /I L: 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference, No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing) Points = 5 - 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 - 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 - 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference, . Points = 3 - 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet 'any of the three criteria above - No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - No pavea areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference, Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 - Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 - Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields,paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = O. - Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 ~ 'J H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed co~r~~ question above? YES' 0 to H 2.3) NO = H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetlan : within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? C - YES = 1 oint NO = 0 oints Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 15 August 2004 H 2.3 Near or adiacent to other priori tv habitats listed bv WDFW (see p. 82) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) ofthe wetland? (see text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats) -LRiparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. _Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). _Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. ' _Old-growth forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. _Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 - 200 years old west of the Cascade crest. _Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and/or forbs form the natural climax plant community. _Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, andlor sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. _Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages _Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25%. _Urban Natural Open. Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; andlor the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. _EstuarylEstuary-like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi-enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally ~iluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean-derived salts measure less than 0.5% during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. _Marine/Estuarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function (e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control). If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 oints I If wetland has 1 riorit habitat 1 No habitats = 0 oints Wetland Rating F onn - western Washington 16 August 2004 H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (se.e p. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within ~ mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be. bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development. points = 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetlands within ~ mile points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within ~ mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed. points =d':3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetland within ~ mile points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within ~ mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands. within ~ mile. points = 0 .5' , H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat II Add the scores in the column above Total Score for Habitat Functions - add the points for HI, H 2 and record the resuI~~~ / 6 Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 17 August 2004 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (see p. 86) Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? - The dominant water regime is tidal, - Vegetated, and - With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO SC 1.1 Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserye, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Cate 0 I NO 0 to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/II). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in detennining the size threshold of 1 acre. - At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. - The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Cat. I Cat. I Cat. II Dual rating I/II ;;::~",.;';;t\f),~.t;.. ~, ,.~~~,C.~.$) ~.{~'~:~7%';-5:,'h-';1~!.t\.{?,r.~ Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 18 August 2004 SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as.either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/TownshiplRange that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR) SrUR information from Appendix D _ or accessed from WNHPIDNR web site _ Cat. I YES_ - contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 3.2 NO_ SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I . NO _ SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland (or part of the wetland) meet both the criteria for soils ahd vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. 1. Does the wetland have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - go to Q. 3 No - go to Q. 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 No - Is not a bog for purpose of rating . 3. Does the wetland have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes - Is a bog for purpose of rating No - go to Q. 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5,0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 3. Is the wetland forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover) ? 4. YES = Category I No_ Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat.!. Wetland Rating F Om1- western Washington 19 August 2004 ~:':'';.:~!1:t~::J,.~::::Z~~-;~i~1t~..:r1.l;hll6~lW~~~:Jt;~~1;U:~~q~:,.~,~~'_~:~:'z..~'~'ii,&)~_ JF :..f;~!~7:'-::r~,,_ . .".:.~~ SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department ofFish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. -:- Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least two tree species, fonning a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DPW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter, - Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 - 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria ofa wetland in a coastal lagoon? - The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks - The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at le:ast a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) YES = Go to SC 5.1 NO_ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon Cat. I SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets all of the following three conditions? - The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). - At least 3,4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. - The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square feet) YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. I Cat. II Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 20 August 2004 SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO _ not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: · Long Beach Peninsula- lands west of SR 103 · Grayland- Westport- lands west of SR 105 · Ocean Shores-Copalis- lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II . NO - go to SC 6,2 Cat. II SC 6,2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0,1 and I acre? YES = Category III Cat. III Wetland Rating Form - western Washington 21 August 2004 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERM~NATION DATA FORM (Washington State Wetlands Identification & Delineation Manual, 1997) B-12 WETLAND CONSULTING, ING. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 (253) 859-0515 Proiect Name/#:Finch - Lakeland Hills Date: 8-24-05 Investil1ator: Aaron Will Data Point: Dpt-I Jurisdiction: City of Auburn State: WA Atypical Analvsis: no Problem Area: no VEGETATION Dominant plant species Stratum Indicator Coverage % L 1--) "7,'(1.:/..'/"",- tiW1..!'.....'C'i "'''''';'' !-I- (:7131..- 2.1#..-'$0",1",...-.., F,r/,Ile -~",,^l~ #- F ke, +- 3. , v~vs $ ul.....bJ /,'-5 j/5 FA-t..--I- , 4. , 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 6 Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met: @ No Marginal % of species OBL, F ACW and/or F AC: /t7o/u Conunents: SOILS Mapped Soil Series: Alderwood and lndianola On Hydric Soils List?:~Drainage Class: Mod. well drained, and somewhat excessively well drained. Depth(O in) Matrix color Redox concentration color Texture I.Jz.. in. lOrt- Z/I ~ _tn. - m. - m. Organic soil-, Histic epipedon _' Hydrogen sulfide _, gleyed _, redox concentrations _, redox depletions _, pore linings _, iron concretions _, manganese concretions _, organic matter in surface horizon (sandy soil) _, organic streaking (sandy soils)_, organ ic pan (sandy soil)_. !t9W ~h. r,!:,~ Hydric soil criteria met:@No Basis: ,', Cotrunents: . HYDROLOGY Recorded data _, inundation , saturation Y" ,watermarks _' drift lines _, sediment deposits~, drainage . patterns Wetland hydrology criteria met:~o Basis: ~~ Comments: L SUMMARY OF CRITERIA Soil Temp. at 19.7" depth: Growing Season?:flla:i Hydrophytic vegetation:6'1N Hydric soils~Wetland hydrology:&tl Data point meets the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland?: ~ No ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM (Washington State Wetlands Identification & Delineation Manual, 1997) B-12 WETLAND CONSULTING, INC. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 (253) 859-0515 Proiect Name/#:Finch - Lakeland Hills Date: 8-24-05 Investigator: Aaron Will Data Point: D~ Z- Jurisdiction: City of Auburn State: WA Atypical Analysis: no Problem Area: no VEGETATION Dominant plant species Stratum Indicator Coverage % 1. ').. """ \, \I'~-V> r "\.c.e.. ~&.:- 5/, F ~c. II\, 2. A--r~,./' C ~. ( (.:, "'""..J \J V'^.... 5/5 ~k 3.1t)/~K.'ckv"'" """"',.., .,tv,^". t-f F A-L \A 4t../lr.v.......... r/. tI- ~~Z~ 5 " ........, Iv: or. \.,,' e-r",r,'54,,1"'vV1..b '15 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. % of species OBL, F ACW and/or F AC: D :;0 Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met: Yes l'@)Marginal Conunents: SOILS Mapped Soil Series: Alderwood and Indianola On Hydric Soils List?:~Drainage Class: Mod. well drained, and somewhat excessively well drained. Depth(O in) Matrix color Redox concentration color Texture ~in. IPfl. ?fJ ! ~...v -e.--II.., ~.-( {fJ /0'" ~ /Lin. loytL ('^~Jtff S~ /~"""'......... _Ill. - Ill. Organic soil_, Histic epipedon--, Hydrogen sulfide_, gleyed_, redox concentrations_, redox depletions_, pore linings_, iron concretions_, manganese concretions_, organic matter in surface horizon (sandy soil)--, organic streaking (sandy soils)_, organ ic pan (sandy soil)_. 1-1. 'et... c. h..r-c--.....- Hydric soil criteria met: Yes tni) Basis: Conunents: HYDROLOGY Recorded data _, inundation , saturation ,watermarks _, drift lines _, sediment deposits _, drainage patterns . Dd- Wetland hydrology criteria met: Yes @) Basis: Comments: . SUMMARY OF CRITERIA Soil Temp. at 19.7" depth: Growing Season?:~ Hydrophytic vegetation:~ Hydric SOils:~et1and~IOgy: Y!lf) Data point meets the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland?: Yes .' 1 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM (Washington State Wetlands Identification & Delineation Manual, 1997) B-12 WETLAND CONSULTING, ING. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 (253) 859-0515 Proiect Name/#:Finch - Lakeland Hills Date: 8-24-05 Investigator: Aaron Will Data Point: DI.Jj3 Jurisdiction: City of Auburn State: WA Atypical Analysis: no Problem Area: no VEGETATION Dominant plant species Stratum Indicator Coverage % 1. til: ~, \,,~ ,'Iv", AwvrZ~" II...... 1/ Ot3L 2. .'it'd"""''''''''' F,!/;y- .;1).'.........._ ~ f~Cj. 3. lvi:)~ 5/k-d",b.!/.'3 f/~ FA-c,1- 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. % of species OBL, F ACW and/or F AC: It? '(:1~ Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met~ No Marginal Corrnnents: SOILS Mapped Soil Series: Alderwood and lndianola On Hydric Soils List?:~Drainage Class: Mod. well drained. and somewhat excessively well drained. Depth(O in) Matrix color Redox concentration color Texture II, in.' , ! tJ tl.. ?/~ t.., ~--, ""-eJ.t - , ) .'rJ,,~;'. s/ If; Je>~,^" .I' - In. - m. m. Organic soil-, Histic epipedon-, Hydrogen sulfide_, gleyed_, redox concentrations)(, redox depletions-, pore linings_, iron concretions _, manganese concretions _, organic matter in surface horizon (sandy soil) _, organic streaking (sandy soils)_, organic pan (sandy sOil)_. Hydric soil criteria met: teDNo Basis: Corrnnents: HYDROLOGY Recorded data_, inundation , saturation )0 ,watermarks _, drift lines _, sediment deposits _, drainage patterns . Wetland hydrology criteria met: ~o Basis: Corrnnents: SUMMARY OF CRITERIA Soil Temp. at 19.7" depth. .Growing Season?:~ Hydrophytic vegetation:~ Hydric soils<7/NWetland hydrology:~ Data point meets the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland?: ~ No i ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM (Washington State Wetlands Identification & Delineation Manual, 1997) B-12 WETLAND CONSULTING, ING. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 (253) 859-0515 Proiect Name/#:Finch - Lakeland Hills Date: 8-24-05 Investigator: Aaron Will Data Point: DI-=#r Jurisdiction: City of Auburn State: WA Atypical Analysis: no Problem Area: no VEGETATION Dominant plant species ~ Stratum ,J:dicator Coverage % 1. 6~r'11""Y",\"" CI.'!f) \ #'''''''''3 1;:.$ ';"I-c..~ 2.ltlIJt:.J,....C'/,,>lYV\ ,i4>1 '1~/I\,j..vv.;... (,L F ,A.t,. '" 3 .J.r~V" t ,I r t : '" ",.4 \JI^"'- f/? FA-!-- 4.l-r,' N; """'" "I- #, f.A-.(., II\. 5. , I'> """" h..x, v~ "-"'r;.I(;, ;M.C$., V~ 'f'A-<- "" 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. % of species OBL, F ACW and/or F AC: o9c> Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met: Yes~Marginal Connnents: SOILS Mapped Soil Series: Alderwood and Indianola On Hydric Soils List?:~Drainage Class: Mod. well drained. and somewhat excessively well drained. Depth(O in) Matrix color Redox concentration color Texture 6 in. [0 f t2- 2./2.. 5/;~ /6, '^'\ Ib in. 10 f- 'i /'1 L' I- I 0 ~ VV1 - m. - m. Organic soil_, Histic epipedon_, Hydrogen suljide--! gleyed_, redox concentrations--! redox depletions_, pore linings-, iron concretions _, manganese concretions _' organic matter in surface horizon (sandy soil) --! organic streaking (sandy soils)_, organic pan (sandy soil)_. /I :J~- dw-e~ Hydric soil criteria met: Yes (j) Basis: COl1lll1ents: HYDROLOGY Recorded data _, inundation , saturation ,watermarks _' drift lines _, sediment deposits , drainage patterns D/(J Wetland hydrology criteria met: Yes ~ Basis: COl1lll1ents: SUMMARY OF CRITERIA Soil Temp. at 19.7" depth: Growing Season?:& Hydrophytic vegetation:~ Hydric soils:..YLJ9Netland hydrology: Y..!1SP Data point meets the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland?: Y es ~ T 1: ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM (Washington State Wetlands Identification & Delineation Manual, 1997) B-12 WETLAND CONSULTING, ING. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 (253) 859-0515 Proiect Name/#:Finch - Lakeland Hills Date: 8-24-05 Investigator: Aaron Will Data Poind) p:t1:- 6--1 Jurisdiction: City of Auburn State: WA Atypical Analysis: no Problem Area: no VEGETATION Dominant plant species Stratum Indicator Coverage % 1. ~,A"s 5(HcJ..b/ks f/5 Fk+- 244Ayr" v...... r,'hv-I!"'IM }""-'- ;I- Fkr- 3. La ? ,Irk .'rllI"'" '\ "'-'eof'l'-l;....n""'" I-J- b {;~L 4. . 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. t,; Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met: ~ No Marginal % of species OBL, F ACW and/or F AC: / "t:> .,f, Comments: SOILS Mapped Soil Series: Alderwood andlndianola On Hydric Soils List?:~Drainage Class: Mod. well drained. and somewhat excessively well drained. Depth(O in) Matrix color Redox concentration color Texture (bin. f Ot'rL VI i1'1 (j cPr ~ . - m. - m. - m. Organic soil-, Histic epipedon _, Hydrogen sulfide _, gleyed _, redox concentrations -' redox depletions -' pore linings _, iron concretions _, manganese concretions _, organic matter in surface horizon (sandy soil) -' organic streaking (sandy soils)_, organic pan (sandy soil) . c,~,-,,~ Hydric soil criteria met:&2 No Basis: l (7 f...,/ Comments: HYDROLOGY Recorded data - . inundation ,saturation X ,watermarks -' drift lines ------.! sediment deposits , drainage patterns . Wetland hydrology criteria met: ~ No Basis: Comments: SUMMARY OF CRITERIA Soil Temp. at 19.7" depth: Growing Season?:~ Hydrophytic vegetation:~ Hydric soils&:Wetland hydrologyr1lli Data point meets the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland?: @No EXHIBIT 18 - STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 . Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 · Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 · Fax Number (360) 586-3067 · Website: www.dahp.wagov September 5, 2006 RECEIVED SEP 7 - 2006 PlANNING DEPARTMENT Mr. David Osaki, Interim Director City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 Log: 090506-21-KI Property: Lakeland Hills Estates SEPA MONS SEP05-0039 Auburn Re: Archaeology - Survey Requested Dear Mr. Osaki: We have reviewed the materials forwarded to our office for the proposed project referenced above. There is a recorded archaeological site (45KI549) either on or adjacent to the project area. Because the scale of the proposed ground disturbing actions would destroy any archaeological resources that may be present, a professional archaeological survey of the project area should be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities. Identification during construction is not a recommended detection method because inadvertent discoveries often result in costly construction delays and damage to the resource. We also recommend consultation with the concerned tribes cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. If any federal funds or permits are involved Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, and its implementing regulations, 36CFR800, must be followed. This is a separate process from SEPA and requires formal govemment-to-government consultation with the affected Tribes and this agency. We would appreciate receiving any correspondence or comments from concerned tribes or other parties concerning cultural resource issues that you receive. . These comments are based on the' information available at the time of this review and on behalf of the State Historic Preservation Officer. Should additional information become available, our assessment may be revised. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project and we look forward to receiving the survey report. Please note that OAHP has recently revised our cultural resource reporting guidelines. The guidelines are available on our website at . http://www.oahp.wa.gov/pageslDocumentsldocumentslCRStandards_004.pdf. Should you have any qu stions, please feel ree to contact me at (360) 586-3083 or Steohenie.Kramer@daho.wa.Qov. ~ cc: Laura Murphy Judy Wright PARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION Proteet the Fost. Shape the Future *... ~EItN ~;;~I~GTON .,... Peter B. Lewis, Mayor 25 West Main Street * Auburn WA 9800J -4998 * www.aubumwa.gov * 253-93 J-3000 EXHIBIT l~ - September 12, 2006 ::\ Stephenie Kramer Asst. State Archeologist P.O. Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Re: Lakeland Hill Estates, SEP05-0039. Ms. Kramer: Thank you for responding to the preliminary MONS issued for this proposed subdivision located along Kersey Way SE, south of 4~t:J St. SE. .The prOject site is located directly north of the Kersey 11/ development, for which an Environmental Impact Statement was prepared in July 2004, with the Final EIS being issued in February 2005. As part of the EIS process, an "Archaeological Resources and Traditional Cultural Places Assessment" was prepared by Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services Limited, dated December 8, 2004. The report identified the Williams Farmstead Site (45KI549), a historiG period site it- concluded was "probably not significant." The report did not identify any traditional cultural places through tribal consultation. LAAS also concluded that most of the Kersey 11/ project area had "low probability for significant hunter-fisher-gatherer, ethnographic period, and historic Indian archaeological resources because of the project's steep gradient and a lack of a constant water source... . · The Lakeland Hill Estates site, located to the north, has a similar steep gradient and also has no constant water,source. Given the results of the prior study, we do not find it appropriate to require this applicant to prepare a similar report. The FEIS for the Kersey 11/ project concluded that site disturbing activities should be monitored to determine the presence (if any) of archaeological resources. It is our intention to a similar mitigation measur~ as part of the Final MONS to be issued for this project. A copy of the MONS will be sent to your offices when issued. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. J€incer , if~ ve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator 253-804-3111/spilcher@auburnwa.gov AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED .' EXHIBIT Zo PUY ALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS mSTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT 3009 East Portland Avenue - Tacoma,W A 98404 September 8, 2006 City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, W A 98001 Attn: David Osaki, Interim Director ~CEIVED SEP 1 8 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE: Log: 090506-21-10 Property: Lakeland Bills Estates SEP A MDNS SEP05-0039Auburn Dear Mr. Booth, We received a copy of the letter sent to you by Stephanie Kramer from the Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation regarding the above mentioned project dated ' September 5,2006. We would like a copy of this project material along with the project location address sent to us for review as we have received no information from you regarding this project that is located within the PuyaIlup Tribes U&A. Thank you for your prompt response concerning this urgent matter. Sincerely, ~, " ' C~LT,"'Y',_""',O~,,F :~'::B~.~,_:)1f~ItN~"-;~"'::~'#~ .;- . . ... "",,,>;I', ; . ." c-. --. "'_ ,-' ," ,'<~' .',..... ":"',",!d;~ WASHINGTON Peter B. Lewis. Mayor 25 West Main Street * Aubum WA 98001-4998 * www.aubumwa.gov * 253-93 J-3OOO September 19, 2006 EXHIBIT ~ Amber Santiago Puyallup Tribe of Indians 3009 East Portland Avenue Tacoma, WA 98404 Re: Lakeland Hill Estates Proposed MDNS Our File No. SEP05-0039 Dear Ms. Santiago: Thank,you for your comments regarding the proposed Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for this proposed 70 lot single family residential subdivision at 49'" St. SE and Kersey Way SE in south Auburn. Per your request, we have enclosed a copy of the plat map for your use. I am also enclosing a copy of a ietter of response sent to Ms. Kramer at the State DAHP. At this time, it appears a public hearing on this proposal will be held on October 17, 2006. Could you please clarify what is meant by "the Puyallup Tribe's U&A?" We are not familiar with that term. By the way, the Muckleshoot Tribe was provided with a copy of the proposed MDNS and has commented on the proposal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at either 253-804-3111 or spilcher@auburnwa.Qov. ~i Iy, "~ ' ve~~ Development Services Coordinator Cc: David Osaki, Interim Director AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT 22- Steven Pilcher From: Steven Pilcher Sent: Tuesday, September 05,2006 9:31 AM To: 'Karen Walter' Cc: David Osaki; Carolyn Brown Subject: RE: lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat SEP05-0039 proposed Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance (MONS) Ms. Walter: We will send you a copy of the current plat layout and wetland/stream analysis report. Please tet me know if you have any questions after you've had a chance to review those materials. steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Tuesday, September 05,20069:26 AM To: Steven Pilcher Cc: David Osaki Subject: Lakeland Hills Estates Preliminary Plat SEPOS-D039 proposed Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance (MONS) Steve, The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the threshold determination (proposed MONS) and environmental checklist for the above referenced project. We did not receive the preliminary plat plans nor the Wetland and Stream Analysis Report and Concept mitigation dated November 10,2005; therefore, we were unable to review these documents. Based on the documents that we have reviewed, we have some questions aboutthis proposal as noted below: 1. How many houses will be built by the unnamed stream on site? How close will these houses be built? 2. How close will the detention water quality pond be built to the unnamed stream? 3. What is the level of detention that will be used for the stormwater pond? 4. What method of water quality treatment will be used for stormwater? 5. What impacts will occur to the stream and its buffer and how will these impacts be mitigated? We appreciate your prompt response to these questions to help us determine potential impacts associated with this project and the proposed mitigation. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and land Use Team leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 253-876-3116 9/7/2006 (~) ?,~ ~~A~'~ TRt~9, PERT I E S C Xh'/ kJ,t- ') '} (~~ INDUSTRIAL' COMMERCIAL. AGRICULTURAL' NATURAL RESOURCES August 30, 2006 Auburn Permit Center City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, W A 98001 RE: Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Plat, File PL T05 -0004 To Whom It May Concern: In reference to the plat application for Lakeland Hill Estates Preliminary Plat (File PLT05-0004), while we have not yet reviewed the application material or staff report we do have two initial comments based on our experience in the area: 1) We are concerned about stormwater. The site overlooks our property, which is easterly across Kersey Way. Water will run off the proposed project site and into Bowman Creek which runs through our property. Weare concerned about the volume and concentration ofthe water that will flow to us, as well as water quality. The project sho uld be held to the strictest of standards. Furthermore, no work of any kind should be required on our property of the developer, the City or of us, as a result ofthis project, now or anytime in the future. 2) We must bring to your attention the existing operation on our neighboring gravel mine property. For reasons explained below, we hereby request that notice provisions be inserted into the plat, building permits and individual deeds as conditions of approval for the plat. We own the gravel mining property directly across Kersey Way east and north of Lakeland Hill Estates. It is a major regional facility, and is one of the primary gra vel sources serving the Puget Sound area. In addition, the site also contains major asphalt and concrete manufactu ring facilities. On occasion these facilities operate at night, typically for public projects. The mine is 664 acres in size, has been in operation in excess of 35 years, and will probably operate for another 25 years before the supply is exhausted. Up until now the mine has been fairly isolat ed, but the construction of these homes will encroach upon the mine and give rise to potential problems with uninformed homeowner complaints about such things as air, noise, light and traffic. Mineral resource lands are recognized in the State Growth Management Act as an important element to be protected. The City of Auburn has designated our property as a gravel mine site. In RCW 36.70A.060, it states "[s]uch regulations shall assure that the use oflands adjacent to agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands shall not interfere with the continued use, in the accustomed manner and in accordance with best management practices, of these designated lands for the production of food, agricultural products, or timber, or for the extraction of minerals." We are concerned about interference from the new Lakeland Hill Estates neighbors, and so we PO BOX 88028 . TUKWILA, WA 98138 .5811 SEGALE PARK DRIVE C . TUKWILA, WA 98188 P 206.575.2000 . F 206.575.1837 . www.segaleproperties.com Lakeland Hill Estates, 8/30106, page 2 believe that home buyers in Lakeland Hill Estates need to know of the mine's presence and the potential inconveniences to them, prior to purchase of their homes. When plats are located within 500' of mineral resource lands, they are required by RCW 36.70A.060 to contain a notice that "the subject property is within or near design ated . .. mineral resource lands on which a variety of commercial activities may occur that are not compatible with residential development for certain periods of limited duration. The notice for mineral resource lands shall also inform that an application might be made for mining-related activities, including mining, extraction, washing, crushing, stockpiling, blasting, transporting and recycling of minerals." Since our mine is already in operation where these operations do occur (not just "may" occur), we would propose that slightly different language be used and request that you require the insertion of this notice into the plat of Lake land Hill Estates: NOTICE: This property is near designated mineral resource lands on which a variety of commercial acti vities occur that may not be compatible with residential development, including, but not limited to, mining, extraction, washing, crushing, stockpiling, transporting, concrete and asphalt production, recycling of materials, and their related and supporting activities. The same RCW also requires the notice to be placed on building permits within 500' of mineral resource lands. While this will pick up some of the new homes at Lakeland Hill Estates' northeast end, other new homes are beyond that distance but elevated above the gravel mine as outlined below. We ask that the notice be required on all building permits within Lakeland Hill Estates, just as the notice is required on the entire plat as noted above. Lakeland Hill Estates' physical characteristics argue for this expanded condition, and more. The RCW's anticipate a flat site condition when requiring a notice within 500'. That is not the case with Lakeland Hill Estates. The Lakeland Hill Estates project overlooks our gravel mine property, and is sloped above it rising upward from Kersey Way. All of the potential problems that might affect a neighboring property at a flat elevation could be at issue across the entire Lakeland Hill Estates property due to its elevated condition. Even with these plat and building permit conditions, it is unlikely that the new home buyers will see any of these notices prior to purchasing their homes. They will not see the building permit, and the plat map will probably be reduced to 8 -1/2 X 11 in their title report. The seller disclosure "Form 17" also cannot be relied upon for notice to home buyers. Required by the State (it is outlined in RCW 64.06.020), it requires a response to question IF: "Is there any study, survey project, or notice that would adversely affect the property?" Will the seller check off that box, and will the entire language of the mineral lands notice be attached? Worse yet, it is common for buyers of new homes to waive their right to see Form 17, without knowing what they are waIvmg. We respectfully request that, as a condition of approval of the plat, the plat require the deed for each residential lot to contain the same mineral lands notice. We believe that it is in the interest of the public good to increase the exposure of this notice to potential home buyers, as well as helpful to the sellers and the City to get this information out up front. This mine is big enough, Lakeland Hill Estates is close enough, and the situation is serious enough to warrant this additional condition. ~ ,. Lakeland Hill Estates, 8/30/06, page 3 Thank you very much for your consideration of our requests. Very truly yours, SEGALE PROPERTIES ~9J~~ Mark Hancock EXHIBIT l:f October 2, 2006 Steve Piltcher City of Auburn Planner RE: Lakeland Hills Estates Steve, Lakeland Hills Estates LLC is commited to participate in the cost of constmcting either the sanitary sewer lift station or the gravity system that would be built in kersey way that ends in Orevits by the high school that serves the Kersey 3, LLE, Gillette property's. In addition to being committed to the construction of either one of the systems it is are intensions to continue working with Kersey 3 to complete the cost sharing agreement for the sewer system if required by the city. 4 RECEIVED OCT 0 2 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT : PACIFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC: I CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS EXHIBIT Z,S - October 3,2006 Mr. Steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn 25 W. Main Street Auburn, W A 98001-4998 RECEIVED OCT 0 3 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE: Lakeland Hills Estates, LLC File Nos. SEP05-0039/PL T05-0004 PED Job No.: 05056 Dear Steve: We have revised the engineering plans for the project referenced above in accordance with your comment letter dated September 22, 2006. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval: · 10 sets of revised civil plans dated September 28, 2006 · 10 copies ofTSI addendum memo dated June 28, 2006 · 10 copies of the Concept Mitigation plan dated October 2, 2006 The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a . narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Environmental You are aware of the stream categorization issue raised by the,Muckleshoot Tribe. At this time your consultant has yet to contact Aaron Nix, the City's Environmental Protection Manager, to discuss this more fully. Please have him do so at his earliest convenience. Response: Our Wetland / Stream consultant has discussed the situation with Aaron Nix; they met on-site Friday, September 29, 2006 to walk the stream c()rridor. A concept mitigation plan has been prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. based on this site meeting and is included with this resubmittaL This mitigation will affect lots 53-57 which have been reduced in size to create a zone for this work between the wetland buffer and the developed lots. These revisions are reflected on the revised plans. Sanitary Sewer The 2001 Sewer Comp Plan identifies this basin as being served by gravity sewer on Kersey Way the White River to the Metro pump station. Your plans do not reflect this and rely upon a pump station that has yet to be determined a feasible option to serve your development. (The City is currently evaluation the Kersey 3 Lift Station Technical Memorandum for feasibility of serving I 15445 53RO AVENUE SOUTH. SUITE 1 00. SEATILE, WA 981 B8 FAX 206 388-1648 PHONE 425 251-8811 206 431.7870 www.paceng.com I Mr. Steve Pilcher City of Auburn October 3,2006 PED# 05056 Lakeland Hills Estates this area with an interim pump station, which may impact the force main alignment shown on your plans or service to your development. Your development will be financially responsible for participating in the construction of a gravity line if an interim pump station is constructed). Your development should be discharging into a gravity line in Kersey Way through the development entrance Road E, regardless if it is to be served by a pump station. Response: It is understood that the pump station is only an interim solution and still needs to be approved in concept by the city. A connection to Kersey Way via Road E would be . very impractical due to the elevation difference between the intersection of Road ElF and the cul':"de sac at the end of Road A (24-feet vertical difference). We are showing a connection to Kersey Way through 49th and a gravity extension along Kersey Way. This shows the applicant's intent to provide both a gravity line extension in Kersey Way and an eventual site discharge to that gravity line. SPecific details beyond that can be worked out during the construction document phase of the project. A letter was submitted to the city by the applicant on Monday, October 2, 2006 ahead of this resubmittal that addresses this issue. Traffic 1. Horizontal stationing is missing on the plans, so staff is unable to determine how vertical . data relates to the horizontal data. Response: Stationing now shown on all plan sheets. 2. Temporary cul-de-sacs are requiredfor Roads B & c: but are not shown on the plans. Response: Temporary cul-de-sacs added at the ends of Roads Band C. 3. On page 7 of the plan set, the standard detail shown for a local road is the old city standard Except for the boulevard approach, all roads within the plat shall be designed to the current local residential road standard The detail cross section shown should not include pavement or sub roadbed information. Response: The detail has been revised. We note that this update potentially changes sidewalk locations on our plat. We had worked out with staff that the sidewalks would be shown with a planter strip on one side and sidewalks flush with ba~k of sidewalk on the other. The new detail shows planter strips on both sides. Due to timing constraints, we were not able to confirm with the city as to whether we needed to comply with a planter strip on both sides or not. In order to resubmit in a timely fashion, we have adjusted all sidewalks within the plat to match the new detail and provide planter strips on both sides. If it is determined that this was not necessary, we would like to discuss it at the preliminary plat hearing and provide a condition with the option of returning the sidewalks to the previous design. 4. On page 9, vertical sight distance exhibit for Kersey Way seems to imply that vertical sight distance is not being met. Please clarifY. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC P:IProject Filesl05056 Kersey Plat 31ResponsesIResponse to the City of Auburn 2006-IO-03.doc Page 2 of4 Mr. Steve Pilcher City of Auburn October 3, 2006 PED# 05056 Lakeland Hills Estates Response: This issue has been discussed in several meetings with the city. Transportation Solutions, Inc. prepared a June 28, 2006 addendum memo that evaluates stopping sight distance for northbound traffic towards the site entrance onto Kersey Way and shows that the intersection sight distance meets all safety requirements. Beyond that, we have also proposed a northbound acceleration lane of approximately 200 feet in length which will provide additional safety for left turning traffic coming out of the site. Additional copies of the June 28th TSI memo are included with this resubmittal. 5. On page 11, Section A-A for Kersey Way contains reference to "potential concrete curb and gutter, " etc. Please clarify if this project is constructing this or if it will occur by some other party by more clearly referring to is as "future... by other, "for example. Response: Additional notes have been added" to help clarify what work is under this application and what work is future - by others. 6. The Road A enlarged view is unclear as to location. Response: The addition of intersection locations to the prof"I1es per Item 7 below clarifies the location. 7. 'Vertical profiles need to indicate location of intersections. Response: Intersection locations added. The following new information is provided for your information, but does not require a response at this time: Dust Control The proposed project's on-site construction and off-site hauling activities will result in exposure of existing soils, resulting in potential airborne air quality degradation. Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit, a dust control plan is required This plan shall show methods of preventing dust from impacting adjacent properties, right of ways, and natural and public storm drainage systems. The measures shall be implemented prior to beginning on-site filling, grading or construction activities. Response: Noted. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC P:lProject Filesl05056 Kersey Plat 3\ResponseslResponse to the City of Auburn 2006-1O-03.doc Page 3 of4 Mr. Steve Pilcher City of Auburn October 3,2006 PED# 05056 Lakeland Hills Estates We believe that the above responses, together with the enclosed revised plans address all of your comments. Please review and approve this project at your earliest convenience. If you have questions, comments, or need additional information, please contact me at your convenience. Enclosures: As noted above cc: Scott Finch, Dreamworks Construction Pacific Engineering Design, LLC P:\Project Files\05056 Kersey Plat 3\ResponseslResponse to the City of Auburn 2006-/0-03. doc Page 4 of4 EXHIBIT Lfo - Sewall Wetland Consultin , Inc. 1103W. ~St. PI'me:~15 Kel1, WA 90032-5151 FalC 253-852-4732 October 3, 2006 . RECEIVED OCT 03 2006 PLANNING DEPART~NT Scott Finch Dreamworks Construction 6457 Lake Washington Blvd SE Newcastle, W A 98056 Re: Lakeland Hills Concept Mitigation Cover Letter Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. (SWC) Job #A5-214 Dear Mr. Finch, Per your request we have addressed the additional concerns proposed by Karen Walters (Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader - Mucldeshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division) and the City of Auburn in reference to the stream classification of the on-site stream. After conversations with the City of Au.burn, including people from the Planning Department and Environmental review department it is highly unlikely that the culvert under Kersey Way will ever become fish passable. Additionally, SWC also closely inspected the area off-site to the northwest of the property for any natui:al fish barriers. This area is thought to contain a natural ca.scade fish blockage that is shown on the Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmonid Utilization. Upon close inspection of the presumed natural blockage, it appears, to have Dl8Il made influences asa poorly constrocted barrel and tile system was observed. Upstream of this feature the stream appears to flow through a portion of an, off-site wetland, through a couple of small meandering braided channels and sheet flow, (still off-site to the northwest) which may or may not be passable by fish. Due to the time constraints for this project, the project has been modified to comply with the 7$-foot buffer associated with a Class 2 stream. However, in the event of a determination of non-fish habitat provided by the Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife the project/project client would like the ability to modify the 75-foot buffer to the Class 3 25.foot buffer for those portions ofthestreafi1 above any SUch deemed point. As it is. the proposed project has beenniodifted to reduce impacts to theassooiated 75- foot buffer and has prepared a conceptual mitigation plan to off-set the remaining impacts. For impact to 2, 745square feet (sf) ofb\1ifer adjacent to residential development (minimum buffer width .55-feet) tbc= project proposes buffer enhancement ata 1:1 ratio, Although the buffer enhancement area does contain areas with forested canopy there isa fairly significant amount of garbage andnon-nativeplanm within the buffer area, predominantly Himalayan blackberry. For impacts associated with the proposedstonn . ~"I FCll'll1eIiy known ~,B-1~Wetland Consulting, loe Re; 1..akeland Hills SWC Job #A5-214 October 3, 2006 Page 2 ofl pond facility the project proposes re-establishing the vegetative community after the grading for the facility is complete. All areas of temporary impact for the storm pond grading will be restored with native tree and shrub species. In addition to the restoration of the buffer area, the remaining 25-foot undisturbed buffer will be enhanced adjacent to the stonn pond at a .5: 1 (enhanced to impacted) ratio to off-set the temporary lost function of the impacted buffer area. See attached Concept Mitigation Plan, Sheet W -1. Upon acceptance ofthe conceptual mitigation plans a ftnal mitigation plan will be submitted for City review andconnnents.1he final mitigation plan will outline all plantst species, locations, monitoring gUidelines and financial security 8I110Ullts. If you have any questions or need any ad4itionaI information please contact our office at 253.859.05150 or bye-mail atawill(@.sewallwc.com . Sincerelys Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. /~ tMff J. Aaron Will 'Wetland Scientist FIle: awl AS-214 Finch response Ietter.doc "I TSI TransportatioR ,89tutions, tnc. EXHIBIT Z-r - 8250 . 165th Avenue NE Suite 100 Redmond, WA 98052-6628 T 425-883-4134 F 425-867.0898 www.tsinw.com Mr. Joe Welsh Transportation Planner City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, Washington 98001-4998 June 28, 2006 RECEIVED OCT 03 l006 PlANNtNG DEPARTMENT Subject: Lakeland Hill Estates Traffic Impact Analysis Supplement Dear Mr. Welsh: This letter report serves as a supplement to the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for the Lakeland Hills residential development by Transportation Solutions, Inc., dated November 2005. This addendum further examines the available stopping sight distance at the proposed main site access along Kersey Way SE. PROPOSED CONDmON Lakeland Hill Estates, LLC, proposes to develop a 71-unit single-family residential development. The site would be served by an internal public road network with access directly onto Kersey Way SE and indirect access onto Evergreen Way SE through adjacent development connectivity. The direct access location would intersect the west edge of Kersey Way SE, south of 49th Street SE. SIGHT DISTANCE EVALUATION Entering and stopping sight disiances were estimated on Kersey Way SE at the proposed location of the primary access, reflecting preliminary construction drawings prepared by Pacific Engineering. A site visit confirmed that no other visual obstructions omitted from the drawings were present. These estimates were measured consistent with the City of Auburn Design and Construction Standards. The estimated available values, along with the recommended minimum standards were presented in Table 10 of the transportation impact analysis. The posted speed limit along Kersey Way SE at this location is 35 mph. Common engineering practice is to use a design speed 5 to 10 mph higher than the posted speed limit. However, because multiple speed studies indicate that this corridor is frequently traveled at speeds significantly higher than the posted speed limit, the TSI Transp8rtatio~:Solutjons. Inc. Mr. Joe Welsh June 28, 2006 Page 2 of 3 available sight distances at this location have been compared' against the minimum standards for both a design speed of 50 mph and a design speed of 45 mph. As shown in Table 10 of this project's earlier submitted traffic impact analysis, all available sight distances at this location are expected to exceed the minimum standards for a design speed of 45 mph. All available sight distances were also reported to exceed the minimum standards for a design speed of 50 mph, except for the stopping sight distance for northbound traffic on Kersey Way SE approaching the site access. The estimated available northbound stopping sight distance was originally estimated, assuming a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 0.5 feet, to be 400 feet. Using a 50 mph design speed and accounting for the significant downgrade northbound approaching the site access, the minimum standard stopping sight distance is 470 feet. This sight distance has been reevaluated using the latest generally accepted methodology in the traffic engineering profession for measuring stopping sight distance and as suggested by City staff, which assumes an object height of 2.0 feet rather than the previously assumed 0.5 foot object height. This reevaluation shows that the expected available northbound stopping sight distance will be approximately 510 feet. The available stopping sight distance is now exPected to exceed the very conservative minimum standard of 470 feet set for a 50 mph design speed, while also accounting for the downgrade approaching the site access. This would allow northbound traffic to safely and comfortably decelerate or stop if necessary for a pedestrian or stalled vehicle in the roadway near the proposed site access. SUMMARY All available sight distances measured for this access location are now expected to exceed the minimum standards set for a 50 mph design speed. We believe the 50 mph design speed standard used for this analysis to be conservative considering the posted speed limit is 35 mph. Furthermore, as this area is further developed and with the planned instaIlation of signalization control along Kersey Way SE to the north and south of this proposed access location, driver behavior may change and travel speeds through this corridor may decrease. I trust this additional analysis has provided you with what you need to move fOlward in your review regarding the transportation aspect of this development. TSI TransportatioJfolutions, Inc. Mr. Joe Welsh June 28, 2006 Page 3 of 3 If you have any questions concerning the changes in analysis methodology outlined in this supplement or their implications, please contact either of us at your convenience. ~..--.-- . J. 'chard J. Hutchinson Transportation Engineer Sincerely, Transportation Solutions, Inc. Bruce R. Newman, P.E., PTOE Transportation Engineer Attachmenis cc: Mr. Lou Larson, P.E., Pacific Engineering Design, U.c : PADRe ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC: CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS August 8, 2006 ~i1 EXHIBIT lL c&v~" 4ur; U PLANNING 8 2000 DfP~lftA '.-lftv, Mr. Steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001-4998 RE: Lakeland Hills Estates, (File Nos. SEP05-0039 / PL T05-0004) Project No.: 05056 Dear Steve: As a function of designing the preliminary plat for Lakeland Hills Estates, it will be necessary to request a modification to city of Auburn Plat standards. The specific modification is for reduced intersection spacing between Kersey Way and Road A. Per Auburn City Code 17.18.030, a number of criteria must be met in order to grant a plat modification. The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Such modification is necessary because of special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide the owner with development rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Response: The initial proposal for this project was to provide a connection through the project between Kersey Way and Kersey Ill's road infrastructure. Following a final determination by the city in July concerning road grades, we have jointly worked out a redesign of the plat to remove this connection and drop the elevation of the lower portion of the project, essentially creating an upper and lower plat area with no through connection. As a function of this redesign, it will be necessary to employ a boulevard connection to Kersey Way in order to provide the dual access required for the now isolated 55 lots in the lower plat area left without a connection to Kersey 3's road infrastructure. Since lots are not allowed to access directly onto a boulevard, it is necessary to further revise the road layout so that all lots in the vicinity of the boulevard can access Road A directly. This pushes Road A closer to Kersey Way and reduces the intersection spacing between Road A and Kersey Way to 185 feet (centerline to centerline). www.paceng.com I I 15445 53RD AVENUE SOlJTl-l, SEATTlE, WA 881 sa FAX 206388-1 648 PHONE 425 251-8811 206 431-7870 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates August 8, 2006 PED #05056 That, because of such special circumstances, the development of the property in strict conformity with the provisions of this title will not allow a reasonable and harmonious use of the property; Response: The general property shape and local topography does not allow for a second connection to Kersey Way which forces the use of the boulevard access to the lower 55 lots. Lot access within the plat in the vicinity of the boulevard must be to Road A which further restricts how the lots may be laid out and shortens the distance between Kersey Way and Road A. Denial of the shortened spacing would require that access tracts be used to access several lots between Road A and Kersey Way and further redesign of lots which would cost several lots. C. That the modification, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties in which the property is located; Response: This modification will greatly enhance the site entrance from the simple access road previously proposed. The center island will allow for planting of trees that will divide roadway surface into two separate roads. Even with the reduced intersection spacing, the boulevard dimensions allow for approximately 130 feet of stacking for left-turn I right-turn exiting movements onto Kersey Way without interfering with the function of the intersection with Road A. D. Such modification will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city; Response: A plat modification to allow the reduced intersection distance for this boulevard access will not be detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city. It will be designed as a public street in all other aspects which will provide for utility corridors and circulation for the proposed plat. E. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district; Response: Denial of this plat modification request could result in the loss of several lots that the applicant is allowed under the current zoning code. F. The approval of the modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title; Response: The plat modification being requested (reduced intersection spacing) is only necessary due to the need for the plat to manage larger constraints dealing with road grades and access requirements. G. The modification cannot lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Any such modification must be processed as a variance pursuant to ACC 18.70.010. Pacific Engineering Design, LLe P:\Project Filesl05056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (intersection spacingt) letter. doc Page 2 of3 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates August 8,2006 PED #05056 Response: We are not aware of any underlying zoning ordinance that would make this a false statement. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 431-7970 or VIa email at llarsen@paceng.com. Sincerely, GINEERING DESIGN, LLC. ou . Larsen Project Manager cc: Scott Finch Pacific Engineering Design, LLe P: \Project Files 105056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (intersection spacingt) letter. doc Page 3 of3 :=---: PADRe ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC: I CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS EXHIBIT J!L June 28, 2006 RECEIVED JUN 2 9 2006 PlANNiNG OEPARMNT Mr. Steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, W A 98001-4998 RE: Lakeland Hills Estates, (File Nos. SEP05-0039 / PLT05-0004) Project No.: 05056 Dear Steve: As a function of designing the preliminary plat for Lakeland Hills Estates, it will be necessary to request a modification to city of Auburn Plat standards. The specific modification is to request that 6 lots be designed with widths less than 75 feet. Per Auburn City Code 17.18.030, a nwuber of criteria must be met in order to grant a plat modification. The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Such modification is necessary because of special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide the owner with development rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Response: This project proposes to meet two pre-determined road connection points proposed by Kersey III, one connection to the Gillette parcel at a pre- determined easement connection point, and a connection to Kersey Way. These numerous connections and the narrow nature of the property require that the road system be designed in a reverse "J" type configuration. There is also a wetland and stream buffer on the property that further constrains lot layout. As a function of these constraints, we are proposing to reduce the widths on siX lots (48, 54, 55, 56, 60 and 61) below the required 75-foot lot width. Lots 48, 54, 55 and 56 are proposed to be 60 feet wide. Lots 60 and 61 are proposed to be 65 feet wide. All these lots are in areas where there is extra lot length available due to road-to-r~ad or road-to- wetland-buffer distances. All the proposed narrow lots are between 9,395 and 13,101 SF in size which are well above the minimum 8,000 SF required. That, because of such special circumstances, the development of the property in strict conformity with the provisions of this title will not allow a reasonable and harmonious use of the property; www.paceng.com I I 15445 53RD AVENUE SOUTH. SEATTlE. WA 98188 FAX2OB388-164B PHONE42p251-8811 206431-7870 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates 2 June 28, 2006 PED #05056 Response: With the constraints mentioned above, the only option available to using narrow lots at these specific locations is to make all the proposed lots 75-feet wide. This would result in the loss of at least three lots from the total lot count and would create even larger lots (would add up to 2,000 SF to lot areas mentioned above) with the 75 foot width as the site constraints would force lis to maintain lot length already shown for these narrow lots. The loss of three lots is unreasonable given that the applicant is allowed the lots by zoning, and the city has a means to allow the narrow lots by use of the specific narrow lot allowance for plats above 50-lots in size. C. That the modification, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties in which the property is located; Response: This development will be directly connected to Kersey III which is being designed through a PUD process and will result in many smaller lots than what is proposed for this development. Our proposed narrow lots will actually be some of our larger lots (in square footage) and will not be detrimental in any way to the surrounding plats planned for this area. D. Such modification will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city; Response: A plat modification to allow these six lots to be designed with narrow widths will not be detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city. All these lots front onto proposed public streets and will have direct access to utilities the same as the 75-foot wide lots. E. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district; Response: Denial of this plat modification request will result in the loss of at least three lots that the applicant is allowed under the current zoning code. Neighboring Kersey III will have many lots that are smaller than anything proposed in this development. F. The approval of the modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title; Response: The goal should be to provide a mix of lots that add some variety to a proposed neighborhood. The allowance of using 60-foot wide lots in certain instances helps to generate this variety. These lots are much longer than the typical 75-foot lots located throughout the plat. They are bigger in area, and in five out of the six cases, will have backdrops onto the undisturbed wetland tract. They may even have a unique house design due to the narrower lot configuration. P:\Project Filesl05056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (narrow lots) letter.doc Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates 3 June 28, 2006 PED #05056 G. The modification cannot lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Any such modification must be processed as a variance pursuant to ACC 18. 70.010. Response: This modification does not lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance. The lot count currently proposed, including these narrow lots, is aUowed under the current zoning code. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 431-7970 or VIa email at llarsen@paceng.com. Sincerely, INEERING DESIGN, LLC. cc: Scott Finch P:\Project Files 105056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (narrow lots) letter. doc : PADRe ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC: CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS EXHIBIT ~ RECEIVED JUN 2 9 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT June 28, 2006 Mr. Steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001-4998 RE: Lakeland Hills Estates, (File Nos. SEP05-0039 / PLT05-0004) Project No.: 05056 Dear Steve: As a function of designing the preliminary plat for Lakeland Hills Estates, it will be necessary to request a modification to city of Auburn Plat standards. The specific modification is to request that 2 horizontal curves for the interior plat roads be designed at less than the 375-foot minimum radius. One will be a 100-foot radius; the other will be ISO-foot radius. Per Auburn City Code 17.18.030, a number of criteria must be met in order to grant a plat modification. The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Such modification is necessary because of special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide the owner with development rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Response: This modification is necessary due to the narrow width of the subject property being platted. We do not have enough property width to make the 375-foot radius work and meet all required road connection points without significant loss of lots. Kersey III will have numerous horizontal curvatures below this minimum as do many roads in Lakeland Hills above this development. That, because of such special circumstances, the development of the property in strict conformity with the provisions of this title will not allow a reasonable and harmonious use of the property; Response: This project proposes to meet two pre-determined road connection points proposed by Kersey llI, one connection to the Gillette parcel at a pre- determined easement connection point, and a connection to Kersey Way. These numerous connections and the narrow nature of the property require that the Road system be designed in a reverse "J" type configuration. We do not physically have a www.paceng.com I I 15445 53RD AVENUE SOUTH. SEA"TIlE. WA 881 BB FAX 2OS3BB-1 S4B PHONE 425251-8811 20S 431-7870 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates 2 June 26, 2006 PED #05056 wide enough piece of property to make this configuration work with 375-foot radii without significant loss of lots. C. That the modification, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties in which the property is located; Response: We have modified the layout of the plat so that there are now only 2 horizontal curves. These two curves at loo-foot and ISO-foot radii are short in curvature (86 feet and 106 feet respectively) and will not be detrimental to the surrounding properties. D. Such modification will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city; Response: A plat modification to allow these two curves to be below the 375-foot minimum radius will not be detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city. We are currently proposing that a four-way intersection near these two curves be controlled with two-way stop signs. This could be modified further to a four-way stop to slow traffic at the curves even further. The radii will not have any significant impact to proposed utilities through the plat. E. Literal interpr~tation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district; Response: The physical boundaries of this property are the only constraints necessitating that we request this modification. If the property were wider we could likely meet the 375-foot minimum radius requirement. As noted earlier, Kersey III will be constructing roads that have several instances of horizontal curves below the 375-foot minimum. / F. The approval of the modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title; Response: We believe that this modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title. Many properties throughout Auburn do not have the physical size to develop to the allowed zoning potential and meet the 375-foot minimum road radius requirement. Many of these have been granted permission to put in horizontal curves of this geometry with safe and efficient results. G. The' modification cannot lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Any such modification must be processed as a variance pursuant to ACe 18.70.010. Response: We are not aware of any underlying zoning ordinance that would make this a false statement. P:\Project Files\05056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (road radius) letter. doc Page 2 of3 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates 3 June 26, 2006 PED #05056 If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 431-7970 or VIa email at llarsen@paceng.com. Sincerely, EERING DESIGN, LLC. cc: Scott Finch P: \Project Files\05056 Kersey Plat 31p/at modification (road radius) letter. doc Page 3 of3 EXHIBIT .2L October 30, 2006 Mr. Steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, W A 98001-4998 RE: Lakeland Hills Estates (File Nos. SEP05-0039 / PL T05-0004) PED Project No.: 05056 Dear Steve: As a function of designing the preliminary plat for Lakeland Hills Estates, it will be necessary to request a modification to city of Auburn Plat standards. The specific modification is to request that the road system be designed using maximum 7.5% grades. Per Auburn City eode 17.18.030, a number of criteria must be met in order to grant a plat modification. The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Such modification is necessary because of special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide the owner with development rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Response: The proposed plat is located on the hillside just south of Kersey Way. The majority of this site is sloped at 12% to 14% or greater. Due to the steepness of the existing terrain, it is not possible to connect Kersey Way to Evergreen Way through the plat without using 12% road grades. City Staff have indicated that they cannot support this accommodation. Without this thru-connection, it is necessary to cut the plat into two sections, separated by a vertical 'cut of up to 30 feet that will be inaccessible to car or foot traffic. The lower section of the plat will be accessed via a boulevard entrance from Kersey Way and the upper section will be accessed via two residential road stubs off of Evergreen Way through a portion of the Kersey nl development. We request this plat modification of 7.5% grades throughout the project in order to minimize the height of this cut and other cuts that will be required throughout the project as a function of using these lower design grades. That, because of such special circumstances, the development of the property in strict conformity with the provisions of this title will not allow a reasonable and harmonious use of the property; Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates 2 October 30, 2006 PED #05056 Response: With the existing grade of the site at 12% to 14%, it is unreasonable to impose a 6% maximum grade for interior roads. Even with the requested 7.5% road grades, extreme hardships will be placed upon the developer by way of cuts and retaining walls that will now be required to separate the two sections of the development. C. That the modification, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties in which the property is located; Response: This development is one of several proposed plats currently in process with the city of Auburn along the south side of Kersey Way. The area is currently rural and largely undeveloped with the exception of a handful of single-family homes on large (5 acre+) lots. These new developments by their very nature will alter the character of the area regardless of whether they employ 6%, 7.5% or 12% road grades. The upper portion of this development will be directly connected to the Kersey III road network. That plat will be employing 12% grades on their roads in various locations as well where. existing grades dictate a steeper road. In granting Lakeland Hills Estates the requested 7.5% modification, the development will be nearer to meeting the city standards while at the same time limiting visible cuts and retaining walls required to meet the 7.5% grades to a minimum. D. Such modification will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city; Response: A plat modification to allow interior plat roads to be designed at 7.5% will not be detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city. Many previous developments (including Kersey III and Terrace View Apartments) utilize 12% maximum road grades as do many roads going into Lakeland without any adverse impacts. E. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district; Response: This plat is located on a hillside between the valley floor (Kersey Way) and the Lakeland plateau. Neighboring Kersey III is on the same hillside and will have many instances of 12% roads (including portions of Evergreen Way). Major roads accessing the plateau (Lake Tapps Parkway) employ 12% grades as does the recently constructed Terrace View Apartments. This is typical and necessary for hillside development. C:IDocuments and Settings Ispilche ILocal Settings I Temporary Internet FileslOLK3Dlplat modification (road grades 7 5) letter. doc Page 2 of 3 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates 3 October 30, 2006 PED #05056 F. The approval of the modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title; Response: The city of Auburn consists of a variety of lands from near-flat to near- mountainous. This mix of topography makes Auburn a desirable living destination. For example, Lakeland Hills was developed with road slopes from 2% to 15% and is a very successful neighborhood. This project would be consistent with neighborhoods such as those found in Lakeland Hills, which are safe, accessible and fit in with the overall design of neighborhoods and communities throughout the greater Auburn area. G. The modification cannot lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Any such modification must be processed as a variance pursuant to ACC 18.70.010. Response: This project appears to be consistent with all requirements of the underlying zoning ordinance. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 431-7970 or VIa email at llarsen@paceng.com. Sincerely, PACIFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC. Lou E. Larsen Project Manager cc: Scott Finch C: \Documents and Settings Ispilche ILocal SettingslTemporary Internet FileslOLK3Dlplat modification (road grades 7 5) letter. doc Page 3 of 3 ....,;. 'f : PACIFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC: CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS November 2, 2006 EXHIBIT 32- --. Mr. Steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001-4998 RE: Lakeland Hills Estates, (File Nos. SEP05-0039 / PLT05-0004) Project No.: 05056 Dear Steve: As a function of designing the preliminary plat for Lakeland Hills Estates, it is necessary to request a modification to city of Auburn Plat standards. The specific modification is for singular access to the upper portion of the development. Per Auburn eity Code 17.18.030, a number of criteria must be met in order to grant a plat modification. The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Such modification is necessary because of special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide the owner with development rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Response: The initial proposal for this project was to provide a connection through the project between Kersey Way and Kersey Ill's road infrastructure. This allowed the plat to be designed with a connection to Kersey Way and a connection to Evergreen Way via Kersey Ill's road infrastructure. Following a final determination by the city in July that determined maximum road grades for the development, we have jointly worked out a redesign of the plat to remove this connection and drop the elevation of the lower portion of the project, essentially creating an upper and lower plat area with no through connection. As a function of this redesign, the upper section of the plat will have approx. 19 lots with single access to Evergreen Way via Kersey Ill's road infrastructure. Added together with the 32 lots in Kersey III already served by this same access, a total of 51 lots would be served via singular access. www.paceng.com I I 15445 53RO AVENUE SOUTH. SEATTLE, WA 98188 FAX 206388-1648 PHONE 425 251-8811 206431-7970 .... Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates November 2, 2006 PED #05056 That, because of such special circumstances, the development of the property in strict conformity with the provisions of this title will not allow a reasonable and harmonious use of the property; Response: These lots meet all other development requirements set forth by the city of Auburn. Prior designs proposing 12% road grades allowed these lots to be served via two access points. They are restricted now due to splitting the site into separated sections to meet a maximum road grade throughout the development of 7.5%. With Kersey III proposing 32 lots served by the Evergreen Way access, denial of this request could result in the loss of all 19 lots proposed on the upper portion of the site, which would not constitute reasonable use of the property. C. That the modification, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties in which the property is located; Response: This modification is simply an allowance for additional lots to be served via single access beyond code. It will not alter the character of the neighborhood nor be detrimental to surrounding properties. D. Such modification will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city; Response: This plat modification will not be detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city. These lots meet all other development requirements set forth by the city of Auburn with the exception of secondary emergency access. E. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district; Response: Denial of this plat modification request would likely result in the loss of all 19 lots proposed in the upper portion of the development that the applicant is allowed under the current zoning code. This would be in stark contrast to development currently underway next door in Kersey III. F The approval of the modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title; Response: The plat modification being requested is to allow 19 lots to be developed via a single access that meet all other development requirements set forth by the city of Auburn. Approval of such a modification is consistent with the purpose of this title. Pacific Engineering Design. LLC P:IProject Filesl05056 Kersey Plat 3\plat modification (upper lots single access) letter. doc Page 2 of3 .f Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates November 2, 2006 PED #05056 G. The modification cannot lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Any such modification must be processed as a variance pursuant to ACC 18.70.010. Response: This project appears to be consistent with all requirements of the underlying zoning ordinance. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 431-7970 or Via email at llarsen@paceng.com. Sincerely, ::tJ::J2...GTNEERTNG DESIGN, LLC. QJ1: Project Manager cc: Scott Finch Pacific Engineering Design, LLC P:IProject Files \05056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (upper lots single access) letter. doc Page 3 of3 1/ ~ : PACIRC ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC: CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS November 2,2006 EXHIBIT ~3 - Mr. Steve Pilcher Development Services Coordinator City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001-4998 RE: Lakeland Hills Estates, (File Nos. SEP05-0039 / PLT05-0004) Project No.: 05056 Dear Steve: As a function of designing the preliminary plat for Lakeland Hills Estates, it will be necessary to request a modification to city of Auburn Plat standards. The specific modification is for a boulevard entrance to the lower portion of the plat from Kersey Way. Per Auburn City Code 17.18.030, a number of criteria must be met in order to grant a plat modification. The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Such modification is necessary because of special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide the owner with development rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Response: The initial proposal for this project was to provide a connection through the project between Kersey Way and Kersey Ill's road infrastructure. Following a final determination by the city in July concerning road grades, we have jointly worked out a redesign of the plat to remove this connection and drop the elevation of the lower portion of the project, essentially creating an upper and lower plat area with no through connection. As a function of this redesign, the lower section of the plat will have approx. 51 lots with single access to Kersey Way. The site frontage along Kersey Way is too short to provide a second connection; therefore we are proposing to use a split "boulevard-style" entry road that will satisfy secondary emergency access requirements. www.paceng.com I I 15445 53RO AVENUE SOUTH, SEATTLE, WA88188 FAX208388-1848 PHONE425251-8811 208431-7870 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates November 2, 2006 PED #05056 That, because of such special circumstances, the development of the property in strict conformity with the provisions of this title will not allow a reasonable and harmonious use of the property; Response: The geometry of the property and local topography restricts the site to a single access to Kersey Way. With the plat separated vertically into two separate sections due to road grade requirements, a boulevard entrance is the only way we can satisfy secondary access requirements for the approx. 51 lots in the lower portion of the site. C. That the modification, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood, or be detrimental to surrounding properties in which the property is located; Response: This modification will enhance the site entrance to the lower portion of the site from the simple access road previously proposed. The center island will allow for planting of trees that will divide roadway surface into two separate roads. D. Such modification will not be materially detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city; Response: A plat modification to allow this bonlevard access will not be detrimental to the implementation of the policies and objectives of the comprehensive land use, circulation and utility plans of the city. It will be designed as a public street in all aspects which will provide for utility corridors and circulation for the proposed plat. E. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district; Response: Denial of this plat modification request would result in the loss of approx. 26 lots in the lower portion of the development that the applicant is allowed under the current zoning code. F. The approval of the modification will be consistent with the purpose of this title; Response: The plat modification being requested is to allow a slightly different style of entry road that will satisfy the requirement for secondary emergency access to the lower 51 lots. Approval of such a modification is consistent with the purpose of this title. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC P:IProject Files\05056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (boulevard entrance) letter. doc Page 2 of3 Mr. Steve Pilcher Lakeland Hills Estates November 2, 2006 PED #05056 G. The modification cannot lessen the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Any such modification must be processed as a variance pursuant to ACC 18.70.010. Response: This project appears to be consistent with all requirements of the underlying zoning ordinance. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 431-7970 or via email at llarsen@paceng.com. Sincerely, GlNEERING DESIGN, LLC. cc: Scott Finch Pacific Engineering Design, LLe P:IProject Filesl05056 Kersey Plat 3lplat modification (boulevard entrance) letter. doc Page 3 of3 ~ J : PACIFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC: CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS November 2, 2006 Mr. Steve Pilcher 25 W. Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 EXHIBIT ~, RE: Lakeland Hills Estates PED Job No.: 05056 Dear Steve: Per your request, we have reviewed the following request presented in your em ail of November 1, 2006: Applicant needs to address access concerns to the proposed storm ponds around the proposed sewer lift station. Is the existing right-of Way for 41h Street wide enough to accommodate both uses in this area? The Right of Way for 49th is currently 50-feet wide. The city has indicated that direct access to 49th from Kersey Way will be closed and access to the interim sanitary sewer lift station- Lakeland Hills Estates storm ponds will be via a 15-foot wide paved access road beginning at the cul-de-sac at the end of Road A, traversing along the top edge of pond cell 1 through Tract D and then accessing onto the right-of-way proper where a 12-foot wide gravel access road will be constructed. This is shown on Sheet PI2 of the preliminary plat plans dated 09- 28-06. Using the Terrace View Pump Station as a guide, the interim pump station pad is anticipated to be approximately 35 feet wide by 45 feet long. At these dimensions, it will likely need to be placed partway onto the Lakeland Hills site in order to accommodate access and grading issues. The applicant for Lakeland Hills Estates has stated in the past that if necessary, an agreement could be worked out for such a solution. I have attached a sketch of one possible scenario of how the station might be located this way; If you have questions, comments, or need additional information, please contact me at 206- 431-7970. Thank you. Sincerely, Enclosure: Proposed Sewer Location Exhibit (11 "x 17") cc: Scott Finch www.paceng.com ~5445 53RD AVENUE SOUTH, SEATTLE, WA 9B1BB FAX2D63BB-164B PHONE425251-BB11 206431-797~ ~ 1-, '! / I, I:' i EX t\~1\~ I ',:/ 1 i ' 1 : \ \ I I ' ' 1 ' '- '\- 1\ PAD fL= +- . \-----~&-- " , \ . " 65 , " 7' - ~75- I 1 < 1i""", '" -- .~~,~-- ~';;- -c::---.tji ~ - - ~:---- I I ~r~ 1 1 -t I ~---- /'l-U :/ ........ ----- 24;~ " " -2JZ~ ./ ~ ',- ___ -:Jo......... _""-\.... ~ --~ '--... ---- N OO'?R'07" .. / ./ ./ --- Ek#~ REVISED CONDITIONS LAKELAND HILL ESTATES 11/7/06 At this time, City staff can not support the plat modification request to address access concerns to the proposed storm pond and the location and layout of the proposed interim sanitary sewer lift station. Instead, staff proposes the following modification to the proposed conditions as follows: Conditions #1 & 2 to be revised as follows: 1. Prior to final plat approval, the construction of a gravity sewer system is required to serve the property per the 2001 Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Sewer Plan, to the north along Kersey Way and west along the White River to the Lakeland Hills (King County Metro) Pump Station. 1.A. As an alternative, a single sewer pump station, if feasible, may be constructed to temporarily serve the proposed development until such time as the permanent gravity sewer is in place. Some of the feasibility issues to consider involve the ability to bypass pump the system, providing safe working pressures within the pumping system, and available downstream capacity of the existing gravity system. The pump station shall be designed and constructed to serve the sewer basin determined by the City. In addition. the interim pump station shall be located such that it provides adequate space to meet the desiQn requirements for the interim pump station. access to the pump station and access to the storm drainaqe ponds. Meetinq this requirement may impact the confiquration and total number of lots proposed. particularly lots 65 throuqh 69. 1.8. In the event the City Engineer accepts an interim pump station to serve this development and the sewer basin, the applicant shall be financially responsible for his proportional share of the construction of the gravity system identified in the 2001 Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan. Prior to final plat approval, execution of a Non-remonstrance Agreement between the City and the applicant shall be required to meet this financial obligation. [Former Condition #2] Revision to Condition #24 24. Maintenance access shall be provided to all structures proposed to be in public ownership and to the proposed storm ponds. The remaining portions (as Applicable) of this system shall be placed within a tract dedicated to the Homeowners Association for maintenance and operation. New Condition #35 35. Permanent qravity sanitary sewer service for the development is to be provided throuqh a connection to the future Kersey Way qravity line by routinq flows down Road E (from the manhole at the intersection of Road A and Road F) to Kersey Way. Permanent qravity service to the Road A cul-de-sac may be routed throuah Tract D and then to the future Kersey Way aravity line. Should the interim lift station be acceptable. the developer will need to provide a temporary gravity line from the Kersey Way line to the proposed lift station.