BROADWAY E 12623 VILLAGE APARTMENT COMPLEX - Traffic Study
, ~ • •
, - w~ rayor Engineenng, Inc.
~ .
;
-Civil Design and Land Planning
Principals:
Perry M. Taylor, P.E.
Stanley R. Stirling
Mark A. Aronson, P. E.
, David C. Larsen, P.E.
ASSOCIA7'ES:
' SCOTT M. BUSCH, P.F.
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
; 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS ~
AT
BROADWAY AND VERCLER
1993 Traffic Study
I~
i
i
, W. 106 Mission Ave. • Spokane, WA 99201 0 (509) 328•3371
_ FAX (509) 328-8224
Z~~e~].,YlV . =n'C • .
, Tay~ or- ETi~3 F~=L~ UNYT~
1. 6 O MLT L z'
, a~
~y1AY as~.d VERCLER
. ~3gQA
1993 T~ ~~~X
-AP
~
. cc
~ 24681
AFa1ST~g0
~ -
~
1 V AL
f t' r"ikPIRES 3 • ' '1 ~ -
i
-Tayl o r Er-i <g ineeri.ng ~ 2n.c _
1. 60 MULT I-FAMI LY UN I TS
at
_ BROADWAY and VERCLER
1993 Tx-aLT:E:L= Study
. .
EXECOTIVE SUMMARY o PURPOSE
..The objective ot this traffic analysis is to determine the
impacts of the p-roposed project to operational characteristics at
the i'ntersections of Broadway and Mission Avenues with Pines Road
(State Route 27). Its purpose is to address concerns expresesed
(-by staff of the Washington State Department of Transportation
(W.S.D.O.T.), District 6, and, if deemed warranted based on the
results, "mitigating measures" were to be identified. Standard
transportation engineering and planning methods and proceclures
were used in the analyses.
' o OFF-SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Broadway is a four-1 ane road with a 35 mph speed 1 imi t.
Broadway has no channelization at the int.ersection. Pines Road
;is a five-lane road wzth a 35 mph speed limit. Pines has a
left turn lane in the center. Mission is basically a four-lane
with an additional lane at its intersection with Pines.
; The intersections of Broadway and Mission with Pines are
s.ignalized. The signals are fully actuated. A"peak period
turning movement survey (see below)" was conducted at the
~ intersection of Broadway and Pines in April, 1992, for a previous
traffic study; during the survey, it was observed the signal
phasing and the cycle length varied widely in response to traffic
- volumes.
~
No improvements are scheduled for the intersections within
_ the "planning hori2on" of the proposed project. However, to
enhance safety of operations (W.S.D.O.T.) has recently revi-sed
signal operations at the intersection ot Broadway and Pines to
include "split phasing" for traffic on Broadway (i.e., all
eastbound movements will occur during one phase, anci all
westbound muvements will occur during another). Split phasing
will provide for "protected" left turns on Broadway.
; To supplement estimates of "background" traffic volumes from
two previous studies, "peak period turning movement surveys" were
completed between 3:30 P.M. and 6:30 P.M. on Wednesday, November
; 1*, 1992, at the intersection of Broadway and Vercler and on
' Wednesday, January 27, 1993, at the intersection of Mission and
Pines. Whereas the results of the surveys indicate the project's
. peak hour of trip generation is not coincident with the peak hour
, of traffic on adjacent streets, it was assumed they were
coincident to assure the traffic study addressed "worst case
conditions". - Ta}• 1 or Engineering, Inc. ,
BROADT.AY PROFESSIONAL CENTER
1992 Traffic Analysis Page i
---o PROJECT'S CHARACTERISTICS
The site is located in the northwest corner of the intersec-
'tion of Broadway and Verclei. The-entire site comprises about
' eight acres. The proposed project includes the construction of
160 multi-family units in eight buildings and parking areas with
:-274 spaces. Based on trip rates contained in ITE's TRIP
~i GENERATION / 5th Edition, the project is estimated to generate an additional 1,054 vehicle trips on an average weekday and 99 trips
during the P.M. peak hour of the project on an average weekday.
, The site is provided two driveway connections one with
- Broadway and one with Vercler.
.
._o PROJECT' S IMPACTS to "LEVELS-of-SERVICE
. Capacity analyses were performed usin.g HCS85, computerized
. implementations of procedures and parameters described in the
Transportation Research 8oard's 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL:
SPECIAL REPORT 209. Those analyses indicate there will be no
changes in "levels-of-service" for any of the three intersections.
o FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
, Since no substantial changes in levels-of-service are anti-
cipated due to the proposed project, no "mitigating measures"
appear warranted.
' -
.
Taylc~ Engineering, Inc.
BROAL V,Y PROFESSIONAL CENTER
; 1992 Traffic Analysis Page ii
TABLE of CONTENTS
_ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................i
, STATEMENT of PURPOSE f OVERVIEW
::................1
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................1
II. TRAVEL FORECASTING PROCEDURES and METHODOLOGIES............ 1
"BACKGROUND" CONDITIONS ....................................4
A. ARTERIAL SYSTEM 05
B. "BACKGROUND" TRAFFIC VOLUMES...........................5
C. BACKGROUND LEVELS-of-SERVICE........................... 5
~ IV. TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS with the PROPOSED PROJECT.......... 8
A. TRZP GENERATION............:...........................8
B. TRIP DISTRIBUTION and ASSIGNMENT .......................8
C. LEVELS-of-SERVICE with the EXPANDED SITE ..............13
. EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1:- VICINITY MAP ........................................2
' EXHIBIT 2: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ...............................3
EXHIBIT 3: ESTIMATES of 1993 AWDT's without PROJECT............ 6
EXHIBIT 4: ESTIMATES of 1993 PEAK HOUR without PROJECT......... 7
~ EXHIBIT 5: INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS w/o SITE .............9
'EXHIBIT 6: PROJECT's TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES ................10
EXHIBIT 7: ESTIMATES of 1993 AWDT's-with the PROJECT.......... 11
EXHIBIT 8: ESTIMATES of 1993 PEAK HOUR with the PROJECT....... 12
EXHIBIT 9: INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS with SITE...........13
.-ATTACHHENTS
. ATTACHMENT "TM": Turning Movement Surveys & Projections
ATTACHMENT "CA": -Capacity Analyses
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
BROADWAY PROFESSIONAL CENTER
1992 Traffic Analysis Page iii
i
~
Tayl or Erigirzeqari.rzc
_j , Inc _
1 60 MULT I-FAM I LY UN I TS
, ~ at
BROADWAY an.d VERCLE~2.
1992 T~2Ei= 8tudy
The objective of this traffic analysis is to determine the
impacts of the proposed project to operational characteristics at
the intersections of Broadway and Mission Avenues with Pines Road
(State Route 27). Its purpose is to address concerns expresesed
by staff of the Washington State Department of Transportation
.(W.S..D.O.T.), District 6. The basic analytical approach follows standardized princi-
pals* and procedures described in the Institute of Transportation
, Engineers' (ITE) TRANSPORTATION and LAND DEVELOPMENT (TbLD). It
; was supplemented with procedures and parameters contained in the
Transportation Research 8oard's (TRB) NATIONAL COOPERA TIVE
_ HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM REPORT 187 (NCN.RP 187) and other
' standard references.
' I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Exhibit 1, on the following page, shows the site's location
in relation to its immediate vicinity. The proposed project
includes the construction of 160 multi-family units in eight
buildings and parking areas with 274 spaces. The enti-re site
comprises about eight acres. Exhibit 2, on page 3, is a
preliminary site plan for the pro.posed project.
II. TRAVEL FORECASTING PROCEDURES and METHODOLOGIES
- The primary purpose of this study is to determine the
, proposed project's traffic impacts on oper-ati-ons at the
- intersections of Broadway and Mission with Pines; much of it is
based on a study completed in April, 1992, far another proposed
residential development north of B:oadway and east of Pines and
' another traffic study completed in October, 19012, for the
expansion of a medical office center north of Broadway and just
west of Pines. Since the impacts of the projpct are considered
~ relatively minor, they can be anticipated to be localized.
- The estimation of traffic volumes is comprised of two
, components:
(1) Estimates of "background" traffic (i.e., the
'traffic that would be on the roadway systern without the
' proposed project) were based on the results of the
previous studies and "peak period turning movement
- surveys"; and,
- (2) Site-generated traffic.
- Taylor Engineering, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
1992 Traffic Analysis Page 1
i
EXHIBIT 1: VICINITY MAP
~
. I ~
. ~ I
~ I
1,,MISSION
. r ~ ~
- ~ I
- I ~
I
j I LLJ I
. W
! i
,
ii
°
5 I T E I
W~I~ I
~ ~ I I
cL- ~ i BP,nADWA'f L
.
. ~
- I I RPPROXIMATE SGRLE
; I I 1" - 1000 (LANE NIOTHS NGT TO
,I I SGALE FOR GLRRITY)
I I
, Tayior Engineering, Inc.
~ 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at B3t0ADWAY and VERCLER _
1992 Traffic Analysis Page 2
I
EXHIBIT 2: PRELIHIFiARY SITE PLAN
.
UR3.5
. .
_...1....._~_._ ~ r ~
I . ~ o, ~rre, ~~,•~n e. n,e ~~.u~ae,► c• ,
~ 0000 o ce c
nO
- v .s,..~.,,.a.... - , ~
W/ L S T R N C T O N W A T E R O O 12 IMT3 ~ 12 U N T T S
po~vea sua,srAnoN O o ~ . - - - -
_ I •
O0
V D ~ , - - - - -
~ ~ IIQI
~ ~ 1111 1 I~. U I I 1
; ILLIE
. u vNTrs ~ u vrTrs
~ . . ' ( • ~ - - -
-0#01J , i ;
, ~c.s,~,+oiw•cnNt , .
I , ( ...:a.C aw . • VR.33
. ~"U 09-0 .
.
- I ~ . 1 I~.~ I. I I I 1 I 11 I I i 11 f ~ I I I I_,(_j..~
~ ZO V!~„~1 00. .24 VN,. J
~ ' ~ o _ • ~ ~ a
. ~
' i a . 00 ~
. =e~. oo ~
v,p
~ .
0
• r - - - - ~ • - • - ~ 21 llNfTS ~ ~ :
ac~t ~
I a ~ ~ f I I I I r cF~~a~
c sruuc.vRt ~.I ~_r
tv It uxo
I /u or ?i C. . • • ~ ~ . oi rrrs m rc+ , .
~ ~ ~ ~ae ~us*o.r uua ~ ~ ~ ~ . ' ~s atvtni*~ aw • ~ ~ - - , -
~ BROADII'AY J1VF1dilB ~ f BROADtvA
k
sr
I I '
~
~
uR-:3 ~ cnt-3.5 o I
~ y
. ~ . - - - ~ ~ ~
0
- u
, Taylor Engineerinq, inc. •
160 HULTI-PAMILY t1NIT9 at BROADVA7f and VERCLER ~
' 1992 Traffic Analysis Page 3
To supplement estimates of."background" traffic volumes from the
previous studies, "peak period turning movement surveys" were
completed between 3:30 P.M. and 6:30 P.M. on Wednesday, November
11, 1992, at the.intersection of Broadway and Vercler and on
Wednesday, January 27, 1993, at the intersection of Mission and
' Pines. Traditional travel demand modeling is comprised of the
f ol l owing four steps :
. (1) Tzip Genetatioa Trip generation is the estima-
`tion of the number of trips that begin or end at given
locations (i.e., trip ends). ITE's TRIP GENERATION /
5th Edition was used to estimate traffic generated by
the proposed project. Traffic counts by time of day
-indicate the P.M. peak hour of adjacent street traffic
by the site are hiqher than the A.M. peak hour which is
, coincident for the peak hour of residential develop-
ments. Consequently, the P.M. peak hour was selected
as the "design hour".
,
(2) Trip Distribution Trip distribution is the
estimation of how many trip ends that begin at one
location end at another location (i.e., trips.). The
, estimat.ion of the pr.oposed project'-s trip distri-buti-on
- was based on the results of the peak period turning
- movement surveys.
(3) Mode Choice Mode choice is the estimation of how
many trips are made by different "modes" of travel.
ITE's TRIP GENERATION / 5th Edition estimates vehicle
trips (as opposed to person trips). Since alternat.ive
~ modes would reduce the traffic impacts of the site,
alternative mode choice estimates were not made.
(4) Trip Assignment Trip assignment is the estima-
' tion of how many trips use each segment of the roadway
system. For this study, the trip assignments were
limited to the turninq movements at the three intersec-
~ ~ tions
III. "BACKGROUND" CONDITIONS
- Estimates of "background" traffic volumes were based the
results of the previous studies and the peak period turning
movement surveys. The following provides additional pertinent
' information.
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
_ 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
, 1992 Traffic Analysis Page 4
i
' I A. AR'1'ERIAL SYSTEM
Broadway is a four-lane road with a 35 mph speed
. limit. There is na channelization at the intersection.
mission is baiscally a faus-Iane road with a 35
mph speed limit except for the hospital zone east of
the intersectian which has a30 mph speed limit. There
is westbo-und right tu~~ channelization and three east}
bound lanes at -the int ers ect i an.
,
~j Pines Road is a fiVe-larie road wath a 35 mph speed
limi t . The center lane is a 1 ef tturn lane.
~Bath intersectivns are signalized, and the signals
are ful ly actuated. During the previous surveys r it
was observed the signal phaszng and the cycYe length
~varied widely in response to traffic volumes,
~
W.S.D.O.T. has recently revised the phasing at
--Broadway and Pines to include "split phasing" for
traffic an 8r_o.adway -(.i..e. r all eastbound movements will
occur during one phase, and al 1 westbaund rnovements
_ will accur during another).Split phasing wil1 provide
for "protected" left turns on Sroadway.
. - B. *'BACKGRDUND" TRAFFIC 1fULUMES
; "Backg-around" -traffic volurr~~s were devel oped in
' SeVeYI StepS; AttaChineITt *'TM" proYldes dOCu311eI3tat102'3.
P.M. peak hour traf€ic vo_lumes were obtained from ~P.M.
peak period turning mavement surveys'#. The counts
,were taker~ by liue minute intervals; the hour witY~ the
highest cumulative val ume of traff ic was used as the
estirnate.
;The results were used in canjunction with
historical grawth rates in traffic and est~mafi.es 'from
the Dctober, 1992, traffic study to estimate traffic
volurnes Yn 1993 withaut the proposed groject but with
the other two pragosed prajects. Exhibit 3, on the
'following page, graghically portrays estimates af 1993
AWDT's; Exhi}ait 4, on page 7, portrays estimates of
1993 P.M. peak hour turning movements.
il
C. BACKGR~UND LE{4iELS-of-SER11ICE
- fihe "idea l't capaci ty f atypica 1 roadwa~r i s 1,800
t~ehi cl es per haur per lan~~~3. The wvrst congesti on an
f ir - - - i i f - -
~ I
HiGHWAi~ CAFACITY MANUAL; SPEC'IAL REPO1RT 209, TrSrlSpOrtStlOn
Re5 ear1:'hi BOardr Wd$hiI1gtOP1 r D. C. (AugL15tt 1985)•
, ~ T~Y1 vr Engi-neering, Inc.
_ 160 MTJLTI-F°AMILY UHITS at SRC3ADWAY and VERCLER
1992 Traffic Analysis Fage 5
~
I
. i
' EXHI$IT 3: ESTIMATES 4f 1993 AWDT'$ ulthOUt PROJECT
INTERSECTIONs MisSIan & Pines
NDRTH LEG
Total Approaching 20,453
Left Turns 4,886 5,447
Thrvughs 14ffl320 36,471
Rlght TurriS lr24? 1,518 .
Total Exiting 20r453
WE5T LEG - EAST GEG
. Total Apgroaching 3,331 Total Agproaching 7,240
~ i ~~~t TurI1S 1..247 975 L8ft Z'[Ir375 766 1r 013
Throi~ghS 1i 588 1i ThrD11Jh5 ~ o58$ 11738
R1ght Tur1'i5 496 638 R1 Jht TUr'i!S 4, 886 4g325
, Total Exiting 3,331 Total Exiting 70240
SDUTH LEG
. Total Apgroaching 15, 582
Left Turns 496 35.3
i-Throughs 14,320 12,306
Ri ght Turns 766 518
- Total Exit-ing ' 15,562
TDTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 46,606
- TDTAL EX I fi ING VOLUMES _ 46,606
---w-rrr---:-----t---:~~~~~~~-- 0 -----f r w w-_f---;--;--i r trt--~-----------
INTERSEC'1'IOI+i: Broadway & VerC].er
- NORTH LEG
Total Approachzng 483
Left Turns 282 425
Right Turns 201 313
Total Exiting 483 .
WEST LEG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 5,570 Total Appboaching 5,651
- Left Turns 201 88 Throughs 51369 4., 4 13
Thraughs 5,369 6,325 Right Turns 282 138
' Total Exiting 5,570 Total Exzting 5,651
' T~~~~ APPROACH VOLUMES = 11,704
TOTAL EXI TING VOLi7ME8 = 11,704
--rr k ir! -+P 14 -i a ir -i ~ ----r ---AY ~ ~ ------Y i~ - m f t Y # -------r ir -rl 4+ f -fV Y -4
tNTERSECTION: $roadWay & Pine5
NORTH LEG
- Total PlppraaChxng 15r582
Left Turns 1, 4 34
Throughs 13r143
Right Turns 1,005
Total Exiting 15,582
- WEST LEO EAST LEG
' Total Approaching 5,877 . Total Agproaching 5,522
- Left Tur~s 1,005 Left Turns 652
Thraughs 3,436 Throughs 3,436
Ri ght Turns l,436 Right Turns 1, 434
Total Exiting 5,877 Total Exiting 5,522
! SOUTH LEG
Total Agpro~ching 15,231
-Left Turns 1 f 436
. Ths o ughs 13f 143
' Right Turns 652
Total Exiting 15,231
I TOiAL APPR1.IALL1 VOLV1'1Era ~ 42,212
TOTAL EXIT I NG VDLUMES ~ 42,212
' --R r -----s Wh F --ii i ~ ----M -----iF ~ ~ ~ f t -a -------f -----i4 Y --r i r !F i
,
- ' Taylar Engineering r InC.
160 MUL~~-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
1992 Traf f i c Anal ysis Page 6
EXHIBIT 4: ESTiMATES of 1993 PEAIK HOUR withaut PROJECT
.rt --rtr.--r---E.. --,rrsf fs--------f:--.. -f----.... -rrr---r..---:---r..`.f.f -.a -
INfiERSECTION: Mission & Pines w/ All Dther Projects
NDRTH LEG
Tota 1 Approaching 1, 9 9 2
- - Left Turns 463
, - -Throughs 11400
Right Turns 129
Tota1 Exi ting 1,470
WEST LEG EAST LEG
- Total Approaching 244 Total Approachixtg 566
Left Turns 78 Left Turns 81
_ Thraughs 115 Throughs 139
Right, Tttrns 51 Right Tur-ns 346
Total Exiting 1298 Total Exiting 622
SOUTH LEG
~ T6tal Agpraaching 1,120
tef t, Turns 30
Throughs l, 046
Right Turns _ 44
Total Exiting 1,532
'~O~P~L APPRl7ACH V~LUMES = 3 , 9 22
I ~ TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 3 r 922
- arf - tr- ~ - r r~- - f i - w- - - - - - rrf- - - - - - - - - - - - - rf - arf - - - r- - - - - rMw ~ ~
INTERSECTION: Broadwap & Vercler - wl A1l other Projects
NDRTH LEG
`T,atal Approaching 59
i teft Turns 34
- Ri ght Tubns 25
, T6tal Exiting 18
~ WEST LEG ' EAST LEG
Total Rgproaching I1513 Total Approaching 354
Lef t Turns 7 Throughs 353
, 'I'hro.ughs 506 Right Turns 11
; - Total Exiting I378 Total Exiting 540
TOTAL AFPRDACH VOGUMES = 936
. , TDtAL ]EXI TING VOLUMES = 936
-f -rrr-f t --t+-~rr r~
-a ----ar- ----rw -w ---rrf-----r --r --r ----w -
INTERSECTION; Broadway'& Pines - w/ A3 l Other Projects
NORTH LEG
T6tal Apprc~~ching 1,532
Left Turns- 364
; throughs 1,299
Right Turns 69
_
Tital Exiting 11120
WEST LEG EAST LEG
Total Apgroach.ing ~550 - Total Approaching 378
Left Turns 38 Left Turns 52
Thsaughs 304 Throughs 241
Right Turns 14$ Right Turns 75 `
Total Exiting 399 Total Exi#.ing 513
5OUiTH LEG
1,osi
I Total Apgr~aching 89
. , L~eft Tu n
; - Tlhroughs 947
R~ight Turns 45
Tv'tal Exiting I,509
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 3*5 41
' TOTAL EXITTNG VOLUMES - 3, 541
iI
Taylor I
TaylOr GY1gZneEL 13lgf Ia♦V .
160 MULTI-FAMILY aNI'T;~ ~~OADWAY and VERCLER -
! 1992 Traffic AnaIysis, Page 7
~ '
roadways usually occurs at intersections where
- competing traffic flows (e.g., left turns -vs- opposing
movements, etc.) "share" the roadway's capacity.
' Conqest~.of is defined in terms of "levels-of-
service ~2 .
Detailed capacity analyses were performed using
"1985 Hiqhway Capacity Software" (HCS85), computerized
-implementations of HCM85's procedures. The results are
' portrayed in Exhibit 5; the output of HCS85 is provided
in Attachment "CA". -As shown in Exhibit 5, the back-
ground levels-of-service vary for each intersection.
IV. TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS with the PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project wi11 be comprised of 160 multi-family
, dwelling Linits. There are no roadway improvements scheduled
within t.he planning horizon of the study. The following
- surnmarizes the estimated impacts of the proposed project on
traffic operations.
A. TRIP GENERATION .
ITE's TRIP GENERATION / Sth Edition was used to
_ estimate the additional trips generated by the
expansion of the site. Exhibit 6, on page 10, portrays
; the estimates developed for the proposed project.
~
i B. TRIP DISTRIBIITION and ASSIGNMENT
To assure "worst case conditions " were analyzed,
- it was assumed the peak hour of the proposed proje--t
was coincident with the peak hour of adjacent street
~ traffic. The project's trip distribution was based on
existing travel orientations in the site's vicinity.
The following two "assignments" were made; Attachment
"TM" contains summary documentation:
(1) AWDT's; and,
(2) P.M. peak hour.
~ [2) "The concept of '1evels -of-service' is defined as a qualitative measure
; describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and their
-perception by motorists and / or passengers. A Ievel-of-service (LOS)
definition generally describes these'conditions in terms of such factors
~ as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions,
comfort and convenience, and safety. Six Ievels-of-service are defined.
They are given letter designations, from 'A' to 'F'', with LOS 'A'
representing the best operating conditions and LOS 'F the worst."
; NIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL: SPECIAL REPORT 209 (HCM85), Transportation
Research Board, Washington, D. C. (August, 1985).
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
160 MIILTI-FAMILY IINITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
1992 Traffic Analysis Page 8
i
i _
~ EXHIBIT 5: INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS W/o SITE
Piocs Road
Sb TOTAL I ~ 346
Vb . .
i of tioesl r 139 701A6
561 .
119 1400 463 ~ 81
, .
' i -
~ (Oj( 1 I of 1anec
' .0 ~
ci •
A
, 1 A1S610D `
of Laaes i ~ (DJ Areone . ~ ~
1 (D] (DJ
T ~ A A C~
~ °7a ~o ioA6 44
Bb - ! 1 1 1
~ TOTAL 115 ~ I i of laoes~
~ ?44 >
51 . ~ Bb TOTAL
1,120
' Jercler,°
Sb 70?AL ~ A 15 Sb ?0?At A 11
~
~ 1,532 ~ 59
! - Yb Yb
of lioes 241 TOTAL . 353 TOTAL
1 1 1 ~ ( 318 364
69 1299 164 ~ 61 ?S 34 _ [o] IDI 1 4 ~
(D]~ 1I of Liozs of Lanes
LO ~ ~
, • IoJ •
; A
1 eroadtiay 1 t>(A) 6roadkaT
I of Lanes (D) Areoue ~ of Laoes Arenae
A
~ 98 A E9 9A1 45 7 A
~
Eb ~1 1 1~ eb
TOTAL 304 1 of Laces 707A6 506
)
550 513
14E ~ _
1 Ob TOTAL
~ 1,081
. ;
Taylor Enqineerinq, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNIT3 at BROADWAY and VERCLER
~ 1992 Traffic Analysis Page 9
' .
i
' EXHIBIT 6: PROJECT's TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES
-
~Low-Rise Apartments AVERAGE .
160 units RATE STANDARD ADJUSTMENT DR-WAY
ITE Code 221 per UNIT DEVIATION FACTOR VOLUME
_
'
- AVG WKDY 2-WAY VOL 6.59 2.84 1.00 1,054
7-9 AM PK HR ENTER .09 .00 1.00 15
~ 7-9 AM PK HR EXIT .38 .00 1.00 60
. 7-9 AM PK HR TOTAL .47 .70 1.00 75
4-6 PM PK HR ENTER .38 .00 1.00 61
-4-6 PM PK HR EXIT .20 .00 1.00 32.
4-6 PM PK HR TOTAL .58 .77 1.00 93
I
AM GEN PK HR ENTER .10 .00 1.00 16
AM GE1V PK HR EXIT .41 .00 1.00 65
' AM GEN PK HR TOTAL .51 .73 1.00 82
PM GEN PK HR ENTER .40 .00 1.00 64
PM GEN PK HR EXIT .22 .00 1.00 35
PM GEN PK HR TOTAL .62 .80 1.00 99
-
SATURDAY 2-WAY VOL 7.16 2.96 1.00 1,146
PK HR ENTER .31 .00 1.00 50
PK HR EXIT .27 .00 1.00 43
;-"PK HR TOTAL .58 .77 1.00 93
SUNDAY 2-WAY VOL 6.07 2.71 1.00 971
, PK HR ENTER .30 .00 1.00 47
PK HR EXIT .26 .00 1.00 42
PK HR TOTAL .56 .76 1.00 90
'
' Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers
TRIP GENERATION / 5th Edition (1991)
'
B. TRIP DISTRIBUTION and ASSIGNMENT continued
~ The estimates of the project's traffic were added to
the estimates of "background" traffic for all three
intersections. Exhibit 7, on,the following paqe, prov-
ides summaries of estimated 1993 AWDT's with the
proposed project; Exhibit 8, on page 12, provides
summaries of estimated 1993 P.M. peak hour turning
movements with the proposed project; Attachment "TM"
~ contains 'summary documentation of the procedures used
' to develop the estimates.
Taylor Engineerinq, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY ONITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
, 1992 Traffic Analysis Page 10
i
; EXHIBIT 7: ESTIMATES of 1993 AWDT's with the PROJECT
INTERSECTION: Mission & Pines_ 1993 AWDT's with Project
~ NORTH LEG
Total Approaching 20,640
Left Turns 5,064
- Throughs 14,329
' . Right Turns 1,247 _Total Exitinq 20,640
WEST LEG EAST LEG
- Total Approaching •3,361 ' Total Approaching 7,424
Left Turns 1,247 Left Turns 766
Throughs 1,615 Throughs 1,613
Right Turns 499 Right Turns 5,045
Total Exiting 3,361 Total Exiting 7,445
SOUTH LEG
Total Approaching 15,615
Left Turns 501
Throughs 14,348
~ Right Turns 766
Total Exiting 15,594
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 47,040
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES - . 47,040
INTERSECTION: Broadway & Vercler 1993 AWDT's with Project
NORTH LEG
~ Total Approaching 514
Left Turns 292
Right Turns 222
Total Exiting 500 •
WEST LEG EAST LEG
, Total Approaching 5,620 Total-Approaching 5,703
Left Turns 209 Throughs 5,412
, Throughs 51411 Right Turns 291
Total Exiting 5,634 Total Exiting 5,703
~i TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 11,837
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 11,837
, INTERSECTION: Broadway & Pines 1993 AWDT's with Project
' NORTH LEG .
Total Approaching 15,594
Left Turns 1,446
; Throughs 13,143
. Right Turns 1,005 Total Exiting 15,615
- WEST LEG EAST LEG
; Total Approaching 5,931 Total Approaching 5,748
Left Turns 11005 Left Turns 791
Throughs 3,490 Throughs 3,490
~ Right Turns 1,436 Right Turns 1,467
Total Exiting 5,931 Total Exiting 5,727
SOUTH LEG ,
Total Approaching 15,370
Left Turns 11436
~ Throughs 13,143
Right Turns 791
Total Exiting 15,370
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 42,643
; TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 42,643
.
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
1992 7'raffic Analysis Page 11
'EXHIBIT 8: ESTIMATES of 1993 PEAK HOUR with the PROJECT
INTERSECTION: Mission & Pines 1993 P.M. Peak Hour with Project
NORTH LEG
Total Approaching 2,019
Left Turns 487
Throughs 1,403
Right Turns 129 Total Exitinq 1,481
WEST LEG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 247 Total Approaching 578
Left Turns 78 Left Turns 81
Throughs 118 Throughs 141
Right Turns 51 Right Turns 356
Total Exiting 300 Total Exiting 649
' SOUTH LEG
Total Approaching 1,121
Left Turns 30
Throughs 1,047
Ri'ght Turns 44 Total Exiting 1,535
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 3,965
~ TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 3,965
I ----------r~~
INTERSECTION: 8roadway & Vercler 1993 P.M. Peak Hour with Project
NORTH LEG
Total Approaching 63
Left Turns 35
Right Turns 28
Total Exiting 23
~ WEST LEG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 519 Total Approaching 368
Left Turns 11 Throughs 356
Throughs 508 Right Turns 12
Total Exiting 384 Total E:siting 543
' TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 950
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 950
, INTERSECTION: Broadway & Pines 1993 P.M. Peak Hour with Project
NORTH LEG Total Approaching 1,535
Left Turns 167
' Throughs 1,299
Right Turns 69
Total Exiting 11121
' WEST LEG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 557 Total Approaching 393
Left Turns -98 Left Turns 73
Throughs 311 Throughs 244 ,
' Right Turns 148 Right Turns 76
Total Exiting 402 Total Exiting 538
SOUTH LEG Total Approachirig 1,096
' Left Turns 89
Throughs 947 Right Turns 60
Total Exiting 1,520
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 3,581
' TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 3,581
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
- 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
1992 Traffic Analysis Page 12
C. LEVELS-of-SERVICE with the EXPANDED SITE
-Detailed capacity analyses were performed for 1993
_ with the proposed project using HCS85 consistent with
' the procedures used to determine 1993 levels-of-service
without the project. Exhibit 9 portrays the results;
EXHIBIT 9: INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS with SITE
- - • - - • - - -
' Sb 701AL riocc load A 356
V6
i of 6aoe6 141 10?Ab
, 1 1 1 I ( 578 129 1403 i0I I 81
. . I #
1 i of Lzaes
0
ci
A
1 t> Nission
i of Lanes i ~(Dj Arcnoe
~ . T IDI [D]
, A A L)
, 78 A ~ . 30 1041 44
A
Bb ~ 1 1 1
-707AL 116 , # of Laoes
24] >
51 I Bb ?0?Al
1,121
~ oerelerl
. Sb 70TA6 I 1~ 16 Sb 701AL ~ ' 12
' 1';35 , I lb 63 ' Yb
- # of Lanes 144 ?0?A1 . 356 ?0?Ab
1 1 1~ ( 393 1 ~ ( 368
~
64 1294 161 ' 13 28 35 ` (DI [°1 c~ if oi c~ 1 a oc
,OS I Laoes ( 1 Lanes
- - - - - - - - - - p]
A A
' i of 1 t> eroodray # of 1 t>(Aj Droadxay
Lanes 1 i> A~eooe ' lanea 1 ) Areoae
1 ~
- A
98 A ~ 89 941 60 11 I~
Lb ~ ( l 1 1 TO?AL S06
455~1 311 t of Lanes 519
>
~148 ~ eb Tote6
# 1,096
; Taylor Engineering, Inc.
160 MULTT _FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER ~qc)l r Analvsis Pa4e 13
i ~
I
- the autput of HCS85 is provided in Attachrnent "CA".
,
: i As iandicated by comgaring Exhibits 5 and 9, none
` of the intersecti ons ' overall I eveIs-of -service cIaange,
and the LUB's of all individuarl movements rer~ain the
Sc''. LDS YS COnS1C~ered adeC~Li~~~ fQr 1.,1rb$ri cOI1d1- .
tions. Of the three intersections, Brvadway and Pines is anticipated,tv expesience the warst averal I Ievel-
; a~-~~rv~~ce { L~os wh~~~x ~s cor~sidered acceptabl e far
urban coxtditxons}. Whereas the sntersection has
- sufficient eapacity to absorb the growth in traffic due
tn the propc+sed expansion and a €ew anQre years of _
growth at current rates, it would appear improvements
- (e, g. , eastbvund/ westbound 1 ef t turn channelization)
wi Il be necessary within the near future ta maintain
acceptable operating conditions.
i '
i ,
I
r
~
i I I k _I
I
, I
'I'aylal Er'lgxrieerlllgr IriC.
~I 160 MiJLTI-FAMILY UNITS-at BRDADWAY and VERCLER
~ 1992 Traffic Analysis Page 14
y1
~
W
~
.
.
~ z
Ho
HzH~
zwbH .
WZ gU .
~W ~dW
x> h
UO 0
H a
H~
~z
H
z
a
~
H
I _ . .
RESULT3 of TURNING MOVEMENT SURVEY
Peak period (i.e., between 3:30 P.M. and 5:30 P.M.V turning
muvement surveys were taken on Wednesday, November 11, 1992, at
~the intersection of Broadway and Vercler on Wednesday, January
27, 1993, at the intersection of Mission and Pines. The
followinq provides a summary of the results; also shown are the
estimates of 1992 turning movements at the intersection of Pines
- and Broadway developed for a traffic study completed in October,
1992:
. IN'IERSECTION: Mission b Pines/Results of 1993 P.M. Peak Period Survey NORTH LDG
, . Total Approaching 1,905 Lef t Turns 456
Throughs 11322
Right Turns 127
, Total Exiting 1,267
WES'T LEG EAST IaDG
Total Approaching 238 Total Approaching 554 Lef t Turns 77 Lef t Turns 76
Throughs 113 Throughs 137
; Right Turns 48 Right Turns 341
Total Exiting 288 Total Exiting 604
SOUTH * I.DG
Total Approaching 908
Left Turns 24
Throughs 849
Right Turns 35
, Total Exiting 1,446
INTERSECTION: Broadway & Vercler/Results of 1992 P.M. Peak Period S~.irvey
NORTH LM
Total Approaching 57
Left Turns 33
Right Turns 24
Total F.xiting 18
WEST LaDG EAST I,EG
Total Approaching 465 Total Approachinq 275
Left Turns 7 Throughs 264
- Throughs 458 Right Turns .11
Total Exiting 288 Total Exiting 491
INTERSECI'ION: Broadway & Pines/1992 PM Pk w/o Proposed Project
NORTH LDG
~ Total Approaching 1,478
' Left Z'urns 152
Throughs 1, 261
, R.ight Turns 65
Total Exiting 11049
WEST LEG EAST LDG
Total Approachinq 503 Total Approaching 288
Left Turns 92 ' Left Turns 52
Throughs 271 Throughs 198
R.ight Turns 140 Right Turns 38
Total Exitinq 347 Total Exiting 465
90UTH I,DG
, Total Approaching 1,045
' Left Turns 84
Throughs 919
Right Turns 42
Total Exiting 1,453
~
ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS of TURNING MOVEMENTS
STEP 1: ESTIMATE 1993 P.M. PEAR HOUR w/o ANY PROJECTS
The first step in developing projections of 1993 traffic was
„ to factor the 1992 P.M. peak hour turning movements consistent
with historical qrowth rates in traffic in the site's vicinity
, and to balance approach and exiting volumes; the following is a
~ summary:
.
INT'ERSEGTIQIV MOVIIMENTS 1993 P.M. Peak Hour
INfigiSECI'ION: Mission & Pines . w/o Any Projects
NORTfi LDG
Total Approaching 1,984 Left Turns 463
, T'hzoughs 1,392
Right Turns 129
Total Exiting 1,434
WEST LDG EAST LEG
, Total Approaching 244 Total Approachinq 565
; Lef t Turns 78 Lef t Turns 80
Throughs 115 Z'hroughs 139
Right Turns 51 Right Turns 346
Total Exiting 297 Total Exiting 620
. SOUTH 1,00
Total Approaching 1,081
Left Turns 29
' Throughs 11010
_Right Turns 42
Total Exiting 1,523
INTERSEGTION: Broadway & Vercler 1993 P.M. Peak Hour
NORTH LDG w/o Any Projects
Total Approaching 59
- Lef t Turns 34
Right Turns 25
' Total Exiting 18
WEST LDG EAST LDG
Total Approaching 479 Total Approaching 283
' Left Turns • 7 Throughs 272
-Throughs 472 Right Turns 11
Total Exiting 297 Total Exiting 506
INTERSECTION: Broadway & Pines 1993 P.M. Peak Hour
- NORTH LEG w/o Any Projects
Total Approaching 11523
. Left Turns 157
Throughs 1,299
Right Turns 67
Total Exiting 11081
WEST LDG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 518 Total Approaching 297
" Left Turns 95 . Left Turns 54
_ Throughs 279 'Throughs 204
Right Turns 144 Right Turns 39
Total Exiting 358 Total Exiting 479
SOUTH LDG
Total Approaching 1,077
Lef t Turns 87
. Throughs 947
Right Turns 43
Total Exiting 1,497
,
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
' 16n, HTTT,TT-FAMILY IJNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
At t a,-hmr--T"`rM" page 2
I
STEP 2: ESTIMATE INCREASES 1993 P.M. PK FiR due to OTHER PROJECTS
; The second step was to determine increases in 1993 P.M. peak
.._hour turning movements due to the other two proposed projects
based on the previous traffic studies estimates for the intersec-
tion of Broadway and Pines; the following is a summary of the
estimates for Broadway and Pines:
_ INTFZSEGTION MOVEMENTS 1993 w/o 160 Apt Units
; INTF~SDGTION: Broadway & Pines w/ Other Projects
, NORTH LEG
Total Approachinq 1,532
Lef t Turns 164
Throughs 1,299
Right Turns 69
Total Exiting 1,120
- WEST LEG EA.ST LEG
Total Approaching 550 Total Approaching 378
...Left Turns 98 Left Turns 62
Throughs 304 Throughs 241
- Right Turns 148 Right Turns 75
Total Exiting 399 Total Exiting 513
- SOiJTH LDG
Total Approaching 1,081 Lett Turns 89
Throughs 947
- Right Turns 45
Total Exiting 1,509
,-TOTAL APPROACH VOI,iJMES = 3, 541
TOTAL EXITING VOLiMFS = 3,541
INTERSEGTION: Broadway & Pines Increases Due to Other Projects
NORTH LDG
: Total Approaching 9
Left Turns 7
Throughs 0
Right Turns 2
, Total Exiting 39
F1EST LEG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 32 Total Approaching 81
~ Left Turns 3 Left Turns 8
Throughs 25 Throughs 37
Right Turns 4 Right Turns 36 , Total Exiting 41 Total Exiting 34
SOtJZH LDG
_Total Approaching 4
Left Turns 2
. Throughs 0
; -Right Turns 2
' Total Exiting 12 .
TOTAL APPROA(H VOLr'UM.S = 126
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES ' = 126
Estimates for the intersections of Mission and Pines and
Broadway and Vercler were developed using the proportional
distribution of approach and exiting volumes for the correspond-
ing leg on Broadway (i.e., the north leg of Pines at Broadway
,
Taylor Engineering, Inc..
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
Attachment "TM" Page 3 .
corresponds to the south leg of Mission, and the west leg of
Vercler corresponds to the east leg of Broadway at Pines); the
following is a summary;
-r-------------r-------------------- ------r---
IrrrmstcrioN MavFaMErrrs -
INTEtSEGTI4N: Missian & Fines/Increases Due to Other Projects
NORTH LDG
Total Approaching 8
' Left Turns
Throuqhs 8
Right Turns
Total Exitinq 36
WEST LDG FAST LDG
Total Approaching 0 Total Approachinq 1
Left Turns Left Turns 1
Throughs Throughs
Right Turns 0 Right Turns .
Total Exiting 1 Total Exiting 2
SOUTH LEG
"Total Approaching 39
Left Turns 1
- Throughs 36
Right Turns 2
Total Exiting • 9
TOTAL APPRQACH VOLUMES = 48
TOTAL EXITING VOLIMES = 48
IN'I'FRSEGTION: Broadway & Verclerl*]/Increases Due to Other Projects
, NORTH LDG
Total Approaching 0
Left Tur"s
Right Turns
' Total Exiting 0
WEST LDG EAST LEC;
- Total Approaching 34 Total Approachinq 81
' Left Turns Throughs 81
Throughs 34 Right T~aRns
Total Exiting 81 Total Exiting 34
- TO'I'AL APPROACH VOLUMES = 115
' TdTAL EXITING VOLUMES = -115
- It should be noted the other proposed residential project is
directly south of this project; consequently, all of its
trips are unlikely to use the intersection of Broadway and
Vercler. As a result the estimates at the intersection of
Broadway and Vercler are somew.hat exaggerated.
STEP 3: ESTIMATE 1993 P.M. PEAR HOIIR utJ OTHER PROJECTS
- The third step was to determine increases in 1993 P.M. peak
, hour turning movements with the other two proposed projects by
adding the results of Steps # 1 and 2; the following page
provides a summary:
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
,160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
, Attachment "TM" Page 4
I - - r - - - - - - y F - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
INTgtSEGTION MOVIIMENTS 1993 w/o 160 Apt Units
INTERSECTION: Mission & Pines w/ Other Projects
NORTH LDG
Total ;ipproaching 1,992
Left Turns 463
Throughs 1,400
Right Turns 129
_Total Exiting 1,470
WF.ST LDG FAST LDG
Total Approaching 244 Total Approachi.ng 566
Left Turns 78 Left Turns 81
--Throughs 115 Throughs 139
. Right Turns 51 Right Turns 346
Total Exiting 298 Total Ex.iting 622
SOtFIH LDG
Total Approaching 1,120
Lef t Turns 30
Throughs 1,046
~ Right Turns 44 .
Total Exiting 1,532
TarAL APPROAaH voLUMEs = 3,922
. ' TOTAL E{ITING VOLUMES = 3, 922
INZ'ERSECTION: Broadway & Vercler 1993 w/o 160 Apt Units
_ NORTH LDG w/ Other Projects
Total Approaching 59
' Left Turns 34
Right Tubm 25
_ Total Exiting 18
WEST LEG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 513 Total Approaching 364
Left Turns ? Throughs 353
- Throughs 506 Right Turns 11
Total Exiting 378 Total Exiting 540
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 936 -
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = . 936
" ---------------------------------------------------r---r---...----------
INTERSECTION: Broadway & Pines 1993 w/o 160 Apt Units
- NORTH LEG . w/ Other Projects
• Total Approaching 1,532
; Left Turns 164
; Throughs 1,299
Right Turns 69
Total Exiting 1,120
. WEST LEG . EAST LEG
Total Approaching 550 Total Approaching 378
-Left Turns 98 Left Turns 62
Throughs 304 Throughs 241
- Right Turns 148 Right Turns 75
Total Exiting - 399 Total Exiting 513
- SOi1'IH LDG .
- Total Approaching 11,081
Lef t Turns 89
Throughs 947
- Right Turns 45
. Total Exiting 1,509
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 3, 541
TO':AL EXITING VOLUMES = 3, 541
~
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
, 160 MIILTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
Attachment "TM" Page 5
~ STEP 4: ESTIHATE 1993 AWDT's wf OTHER PROJECTS
~ The fourth step was ta determine increases in 1993 average
weekday traffic uolumes (AWDT's ) with the ❑ther two propased
i pro~ects. The estimates are based an parameters cantaxned in
NCHRP 287 for similar sized urban areas. 7he fall c~wing is a
summary:
; -
I f~iyrfrrrf-ir~~~------w-w--- i------r--if-------i--irif--Y--M-f---:-----
frarn NCHRP 187, Table 34
A~DT -vs- P.M. FFAK HOUR P
~ - PARAMETER MISSION PINE5
- ~ • . ~ -w-s-:-w----:r--rrarrr-f~~----ws-------#wr-r--:r+w-r+rt-,-r----t--wt-r.rrfw--
Raadway GTassification Arterial Arterial
~ orientation af Roadway Cross-Town Radial
Type vf 5ubregim Suburban Suburban
i r-rt-f wwq---rr--~~rrt~~.rrifar.-a-w-rr--r+rr-r----f-f-t- -r--r-rr+rrrfr` rr r ar-
II I ~ ~OIRTH LM 8.5%
' f*= LEG 8f EAST LBG 8.0%
I SOU++4 iJiJti..7 ~ .5~
~~~~----tiF-#i4laata------W--i- w ---M-Ya-----Y---yl-^r----------f---ri#arE-E--
' INTERSEG~ION: Missian & Pines A4M's with Other Prajects
-i i rtF --Eraa-----fiii+ffr.ac-r- m a---! Iwl-l------~~ -l+t T------E---r+r -
NORiii LEG
I ' Total ApproaChxng 20 , 522
~ ; - Le~t Tum.s 4,886
~ Throughs . 14r389
~ Rlght `E`l1tTs 1,247
' T~~~l'E]{1tllYg 20, 522
. . WEST LEG EASI` LEG
Total Approaching 3,331 Total Approaching 7,240
Left Turns 1,247 Lef t Tu,rns 766
Thraughs 1, 588 Throughs 1,588
Right Tums 496 Right Turns 4,886
- Total Exiting 3 r 331 Total Exiting 7, 240
~ SOJTH LEG
Total Appraaching 15,651
Left Turns 496
Throughs 14,389
. Right Turns 766
Total Exi.ti,ng 15, 651
TOTAL APPROACH VDLUPM = 46,744
ToI'AL F.XITING VOLUMES = 46,744
-----:-r-a-s...-------.r--..----rm e---...`------:-:-f------r-wfwr-:.rr-ar..-----
• PARAMETM Bi~AD~~Y VERCLER
---r-----ir f f-; ~~------ir-ffs-w--fra-:-w----rfr -----r-r-w f ---rrr-------r
Raadway C1 assif ication . Arterial Local
Dri entation of Roadway Cross-Towra N/A
' Tyge of Subregion SuIaurban Suburban
~
' 4 ---r------#--f-fwf--- M rr-:---:i.-w-----rwt--
•1ORiii Yiiti/ V i
WEST YYV V*~% EAST #E/ 8.0%
SO= LEC; 8.0%
----i-f---r -rr -YYl-i--rM--------r --4lF-aa ---+111----! -r--Y# i+r-r---rYFaa----
' TaylOr ErlglAeering, InC.
160 MULTI-FAMIGY CJHITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
.
~ Attachrnent "TM`* Page 6
I -
'
INTERSECTION: Broadway & Vercler AWD`r's with Other Projects
; NORTH LEG
~ Total Approaching 483
Left Turns 282 425
Right Turns 201 313
~ Total Exitinq 483
' WESZ' I.DG EAST IEG
Total Approachinq 5,570 Total Appboaching 51651
: Left Turns 201 88 Throughs 5,369 4,413
~Throughs 51369 61325 Riqht Turns 282 138
' Total Exiting 51570 Total Exiting 5,651
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 11,704
TOTAL EXITING VOLiMg'.S = 11,704
PARAMEM BROADWAY P I NES
Roadway Classification Arterial Arterial
Orientation of Roadway Cross-Town Radial
Type of Subregion Suburban Suburban
NORTH LDG 8.5$
WEST LDG 8.0$ FAST LEG 8.0$
SOUTH LEG 8.5%
INTERSECTION: Broadway & Pines AWDT's with Other Projects
NORTH LEG
Total Approaching 15,665
Left Turns 1,434 1,929
Throughs 130212 15,282
Right Turns 1,019 812
Total Exiting 15,665
WEST LEG EAST LEG
- Total Approaching -5, 875 Total Approaching 51493
Left Turns 1,019 1,225 Left Turns 652 775
Throughs 3,407 31800 Throughs 31407 31013
Right Turns 1,449 1,850 Right Turns 1,434 938
Total Exiting 5,875 Total Exiting 5,493
SOUTH LEG
Total Approaching 15,313
Left Turns 1,449 1,047
' Throughs 13,212 11,141 Right Turns 652 529
- Total Exiting 15,313
TO'I'AL APPROACH VOLUMES = 42,346
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 42,346
STEP 5: DETERMINE OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION of PROJECT'S TRAFFIC
i A"cordon line" was drawn around the "external legs" for all
; intersections in the study area to determine "external stations"
' (i.e., the roadway sements used to enter/exit the study area),
and the site's traffic was apportioned accordinq to directional
movements. Estimates were made for the east leg at the intersec-
~ tion of Mission and Vercler based on the approaching/ exiting
volumes for the east leq of Mission and Pines. The following
page contains summaries .for the P.M. peak hour and AWDT's:
~
- Taylor Engineering, Inc.
. 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
Attachment "TM" Page 7
i
P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Outs Ins TOTALS
S ITE GFNERATED TRAFFIC 35 64 99
NORTH LEG / MISSION & PINES
~ Total Approaching 1,992 27
~ Total Exiting 1 470 11
- WEST LEC; / MISSION & PINES FAS+ LEC; / MISSION & VIIRCLER
Total Approachinq 244 3 Total Approachinq 555 8
Total Exiting 298 2 Total Exitinq 596 4
WEST LEC; / BROADWAY b PINES EAST LEG / BROADWAY & VERCLIIt
Total Niting proaching 550 7 Total Approachinq 309 4
Total 399 3 Total Exiting 459 3
~ SOUTH LDG / BROADWAY & PINES
Total Approaching 10081 15
Total Exiting 1,509 11
TOTAL APPROACH VOLiTMES = 4,731 64
TOTAL E{ITING VOLUMES = 41731 34
- - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - -
AWDT 'S OLitS II]S 'I'0'I'ALS
SITE GENERATED TRAF'FIC 527 527 1,054
---w--r------------..---------------r----..--r---------------------
NORTH LEC; f MISSION & PINES
Total Approaching 20,453 187
Total E5u ting 20,453 187
WEST LDG / MISSION & PINES EAST LEG f MISSION b VERCLER
Total Approaching 3,331 30 Total Approaching 7,059 65
~ Total Exiting S3~I3~31~ 30 Total Exiting 7,059 65
WEST LEC; / BROADWAY S PINES EAST LDG / BROADWAY & VIIRCLER
Total Approaching 5,877 54 Total Approaching 5,651 52
I Total Exiting 5,877 54 Total Exiting 5,651 52
' SOUTH LDG / BROADWAY & PINES
Total Approaching 15,231 139
Total Exiting 15,231 139
TO'I'AL APPROACH VOLUMES = 57,602 527
TOTAi, EXITING VOLUMES = 57,602 527
STEP 6: DETERMINE ON-SITE DISTRIBiTTION of PROJECT' S TR.AFFIC
The estimation of the project's on-site traffic distribution
- (i.e., its use of driveways) were based on relative distances
from parking spaces to "external stations"; the following is a
summary:
PROJFX,T' S P. M. PFAK HO(JR
INTE'RSECTI4N: Mission & Pines Project's 1993 P.M. Peak Hour
NORTH LEC;
Total Approaching 27
Left Turns 24
Throughs 3
- Total Exiting 11
; WEST LEG EAST LDG
Total Approaching 3 , Total Approaching 12
Throughs 3 • Throughs 2
Right Turns 0 Right Turns 10
Total Exiting 2 Total Exiting 27
SOtJ'IH LDG
Total Approaching 1
~ Left Turns 0
, Throughs 1
Total Exiting 3
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
, 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
kttachment "TM" Page 8
r
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
--INTERSECTION: Broadway & Vercler Project's 1993 P.M. Peak Hour
NORTH LDG
Total Approaching 4
- Left Turns 1
Right Turns 3
Total Exiting 5
WEST LDG EAST LDG -
- Total Approaching ~o ~ 3ota1 A,pproachinq 4
- Throughs 2 ~ Right Turns 1
Left Turns 4
Total Exiting . 6 Total Exitin 3
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = . 1 ~
TOTAL FXITING VOLUMES = 14
, INTERSECTION: Broadway & Pines Project's 1993 P.M. Peak Hour
NORTH LEG
Total Approaching 3
- , Lef t Turns 3
~ Total Exiting ~ lLEG
- Total Approaching 7 Total Approaching 15
Left Turns Left Turns 11
Throughs 7 Throughs 3
. Riqht Turns ' Right Turns 1
Total Exiting SOUTi3LM Total Exiting 25
- Total Approaching 15
Right Turns 15
. Total Estiting 11
TO'PAL APPROAC,H VOLUMES = 40
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 40
-
;
PR0JDGT' S AWM' S
, INTERSEGTION: Mission & Pines Project's 1993 AWDT's
NORTH LDG
Total Approaching 187
Left Turns 178
Throughs 9
- Total Exiting 187
WTotalApproaching 30 ETo a1~~Approachinq 184
Throughs 27 Throughs 25
Right Turns 3 Right Turns 159
, Total Exiting ~~0~ Total Exiting 205
Total Approaching 33
Left Turns 5
- Throughs 28
; Total Exiting 12
~ TOTAL APPROACFI VOLUMES = 434
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 434
' INTIIRSEGTION MOVEMENTS
INTERSECTION: Broadway S Vercler Project's 1993 AWDT`s
NORTH LEG ,
Total Approaching . 31
- Lef t Turns 10
+ Right Turns 21
Total Exi ting 17
- WEST T to Approaching 50 FTot 1 Ap proaching 52
' i Le f t T urns 8 T h r o u g h s 43
~ Throughs 42 Rig h t T u rn s 9
-Total Exiting 64 Total Exiting 52
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
-160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
; Attachment "TM" Page 9
' INTERSEGTION MOVIIMFNTS
INTERSEGTION: Broadway & Pines Project's 1993 AWDT's
NORTH LEG
: Total Approaching 12
Lef t Turns 12
Total Exiting 33
WEST I.DG EAST I.DG
Total Approaching 54 Total Approaching 226 .
Left Turns Left Z'urns 139
Throughs 54 Throuqhs 54
Right Turns Right Turns 33
, Total Exiting 54 Total Exiting 205
SOUTfi LM
Total Approaching 139
Right Turns 139
Total Exiting 139
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES = 431
TOTAL EXITING VOLUMES = 431
-
STEP 7: DETERMINE 1993 TURNING MOVEHENTS with PROJECT'S TRAFFIC
~ The final estimates of total turning movements in 1993 with
~ the proposed project at the three intersections were derived by
adding the results of step 6 to steps 3 and 4; the following is a
,-summary:
1993 P.M. PFAK HCXTR with PRO7DGT
' INTERSECTION: Mission & Pines 1993 P.M. Peak Hour with Project
NORTH LE)G
-Total Approaching 21019
. Left Turns 487
Throughs 1,403
' Right Turns 129
Total Exiting 1,481
WEST LDG EAST LEG
~Total Approaching 247 Total Approaching 578
Left Turns 78 Left Turns 81
Throughs 118 Throughs 141
, Right Turns 51 Right Turns 356
Total Exiting 300 Total Exiting 649
SOt1'TH LEG
Total Approaching 1,121
Lef t Turns 30
Throughs 1,047
~ Right Turns 44
Total Exiting 1,535
-
INTgtSECTION: Broadway & Vercler 1993 P.M. Peak Hour with Project
- NORTH LDG
Total Approaching 63
Left Turns 35
' Right Turns 28
-Total Fxiting 23
WEST LEG EAST LEG
Total Approaching 519 Total Approaching 368
Left Turns 11 Throughs 356
Throughs 508 Right Turns 12
_ Total Exiting 384 Tatal Exiting 543
Taylor Engineering, Inc. _
- 160 MIILTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
leTMit Pano 1 n
I '
I
I I - - - - - - _s- a_- - _=t- - - - - - - -
r_~~~~,~~~~_~~,~:,Rr~_~~~~f ~ ~
- IN1 ION MOVEMENT..!
. I INR'ERSEGTI4N. Broadway & Pines 1993 P.M. Peak Hour with Prvject
~ i NDRTH LDG
~ Total Approaching 1.535
Lef t 'Iurns 167
; Throughs 1,299
~ - Right T"m 69
Total Exiting 1,121
WEST LEG EAST IM
Total Approaching 557 Total Approaching 393
• Left Turns 98 Lef tTurns 73
Throughs 311 Thrvughs 244
Right Turns 148 Right Turrs 76
Total ~xiting 402 Total Exiting 538
- 54UTH LDG
Total Approaching I1,096
~ Left Turns 89
Throughs 947
- Right Tums 60
Total Exiting 1, 520 -
~--F+--i------w--ariafw--Y}raai--iw--rhr------------w-wy-rsaii--y--------w---
i '
L I ,
- - 1993 AWDI'' s wlth PROJECT
_____________-______r---__.._________ -___t-_
INTERSECTION: Mission & Pines 1993 AWD'I''s with Project
l' ~ NDRTH LEG
Total Approaching 20,640
Left Turns 5,064
Throughs 14,329
Right Turns 11247
~'otal Exiting 20,640
. WE S'T LEG EAS3' LEG
~ Total Approaching 31361 Total Approaching 7f 424
Lef tTurns 1,247 Left Turns 766
Thraughs 1,615 Throughs If 6111)
Rlght Tur71s 499 R1ght `I~1rI7S 5,045
Total Exiting 3r 361 Total Exitrng 7,445
' - ~ SQUTH LEG
Total Approaching 15,615
Left Turris 501
Throughs 14, 348
Ri ght T'urns 766
. Total Exiting 15,594
' . . 1O1AL lLPF~OA4.37 VOLUMES = 47,040
j TOTAIJ r-XI1 INV V O13LJ1'1ES ^ 47,040
---.rr.-«----....----------..-:-------- ----..--..-----r..-E-.r,rr--~~~~------.'----..
INTERSECTIO1V: Broadway & Vercler 1993 PZ-~D'I''s with Project
IVORTH LEG
, Total Approaching 514
Lef t Turns 292,
Right Turns 222 `
Total Exiting So0
. ~ WEST LEC; F.AST LEG
Total Approaching 5,620 Total Approaching 5t703
~ Left Turns 209 Throughs 5,412
Thraughs 5, 411 Right Turns 291
Total F.xiting 5,634 Total Exiting 5,703
F--rE-----------f-rwr--Tart#ta~~~---f---wwrf---Mr----sarrw-r--if-iii#r---~iM!
I ~
I ~
. . Taylvr Engineering, Inc.
150 ML1L~~~FAMILY UNI'TS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
~ Attachment "TNi" Page 11 _
i
- - - - - - - - _t_____- - - - - - _r- - - _ -
r NTERSECI' I ON MOVEME:N'I'S
I ION; 8rvadway & Pines 1993 PIWM's with Project
NORTH LEG
- 'Fatal Appraaching 151,594
, Left Turns 1,446
, Through.s 13,I43
Right T=-Ls 1,005
'
Total Exiting 15,615
.-WES'i' LEG EAST LEG
Tota1 Appraaching 5,931 Total Appraaching 5o748
-
` Left Turrxs 1.005 Left 'I'urns 791
Throughs 3, 490 Throughs 3,490.
Fiight Turns I,436 Right Tums 1,467
~ Total Exiting 5, 931 Total Exiting 5,727
SOU'I'H LEG
- Total Approaching 15,370 - Lef t Tunns 1,436
~ Throughs 13.143
--Right Txrns 791
Tatal Exiting -15,370
TO'I'AL APPROAC'H VOLtTbES = 42,643
'I"OTAL EXITING-VOLUNiES = 42,643
___-___..e_......__.._.._
~i
I
.i
.
.i
Taylar Engineering, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
~ ' Attaohment "TM" Page 12
i i
i I
i I
~
I
1
- A'I'~'~.~Il~i~~'~ t~
. ' ~ C A,PAC I 3'W ,AM2A31j'~ SE:S
;i
~
~
_ M+
II ~
.
i
i
I ~
CAPACITY AIVALYSES
Capacity analyses were performed using standard
methodologies described in the 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL
(Special Report 209), Transportation Research Board: 1985
- (1985 HCM). For signalized intersections, the Federal Highway
Administration's (FHWA) "Signal Operations Analysis Package
(SOAP) and proqrams developed by Daniel F. Beaqan.of the Central
Transportation Planninq Staff were used to estimate signal
phasings which provide acceptable Ievels-of-service for alI
movements (LOS "D" for urban conditions); however, it should be
noted that higher overall levels-of-service can be achieved by
penalizing minor movements. Standard software (HCS85) developed
for FHWA and distributed by McTrans was used for final analyses.
- The remainder of this attachment contains the output of
HCS85 and is subdivided into two sections as follows:
1. 1993 Design Hour Levels of Service without the
Proposed Expansion pp. 1-?; and,
~
2. 1993 Design Hour Levels of Servic-e w-ith the
- Proposed Expansion pp.
' Capacity Analyses without the Proposed Expansion
~ HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W) Broadway Avenue (N-S) Pines Road
~ Analyst: TEI File Name: B&P-1.HC9
~Area Type: Other 1-14-93 P.M. Peak Hour
Comment: 1993 without Proposed Project
Eastbound ; Westbound ; Northbound ; Southbound
; L T R; L T R; L T R; L T R
No. Lanes ; > 2 < ; > 2 < ; 1 2 < ; 1 2 <
Volumes ; 98 304 148; 62 241 75; 89 947 45; 164 1299 69
--Lane Width ; 12.0 ; 12.0 ;12.0 12.0 ;12.0 12.0
RTOR Vols ; 20; 10; 10; 15
-
Signal Operations
Phase combination 1 2 3 4; 5 6 7 8
EB Left * ;NB Left *
Thru Thru *
Right Right *
~ Peds Peds *
WB Left * ; SB Left * *
_ Thru Thru * *
~ Rigrit Right * *
Peds Peds *
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
Attachm-nt "CA" Page 1
Signal Operations
-
NB Right * * ;EB Right * * *
SB Right * * ;WB Right * * *
Green 25A 18A ;Green 14A 6A 42A
Yellow/A-R 3 3 ;Yellow/A-R 3 3 3 Lost Time 3.0 3.0 ;Lost Time 3.0 0.0 3.0
Cycle Length: 120 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #S #6 #7
+
„ Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c q/c - Approach:
Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay L0
' EB LTR 3404 709 0.87 0.21 36.6 D 36.6 D
WB LTR 3439 516 0.83 0.15 38.5 D 38.5 D
NB L 1693 198 0.50 0.12 39.5 D 29.6 D
. TR 3543 1240 0.92 0.35 28.8 D
SB L 1693 324 0.56 0.19 35.0 D 31.7 D
TR 3543 1594 0.99 0.45 31.3 D
~Intersection Delay = 32.5 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D
I ll7C 7~~ 7~~ 7C 777777C 7l ~ 7777~ 7~~ 7C 77c ~ 7C ~ JC ~)G T J7G ~ J~ 7l ~ 77~ 7l II7C 7C l7Jlf ~ A~~!G 7G 7~ 7C ~ 7G 777C
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35
PEAK HOUR FACTOR .85
; AREA POPULATION 300000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... Broadway Avenue
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... Vercler
NAME 0F THE ANALYST TEI
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 1-14-93
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED P.M. Peak Hour
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 without the Proposed Project
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
- MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST
CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
.
EB WB NB SB
LEF: 7 34
THRU 506 353
RIGHT r 25
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
, 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
P.ttachment "CA" Page 2
~ - ,
I ~
~
i I
~ - - - - w- - ;t- s - wr - - - - _ - __.r-r..t- - r- - - - - - - - - - - - - - r- w- - - - - - - - - r f- - .r -
iTLMBEil OF LANJ„1S
~ i
' y.r-r--r-rr---r r -r -ris-sr-t+f ----w-r-f -wr irrartf --------rr --r -rr--------f
I ~
EB tTB NB r3B
• ~ ~ w i ~ F ! ~ P! ~ i ~ 4 R ~ ! ! ~ ~ ~ # - e 4 - f ! - W i W i -
LANi/S 2 2 i _
I 5
~ ADJi]STMEHT FACTDRS - .
~ i ;rw- - .ft,rw~w~w-w~rir-wrrM rM w~~W -0 MPs~4wM~.r- - o- - r- is- f- rf
' - : . . - , . . PERCErt~ TURN cvRB RADIUs (f t ) AcCEi:ERATIaN LAxE ~
GRADE 'ANGLE F'OR RIGHT Tt]RNa FOR RIGHT TORNS
w-w --f---i r r Err-r
I ~
ii ~y /~y V 3f~
}~ASTE~y VUND /y V■0y~y 'V /
Y N
WESTB1JU!•D 0.00 90 30 i•
_ SVUTHBYUNiI 0.00 90 30 N
I~ I
' VEiiICYE COiiPOSITIV31
s -----W ----r ~ ~ ~ --i i ----r -ii ii i -iF i +rt f --i i ~ ~ --r i E -------i k s iF -------E
~~~CK~ ~ C~~~IIqATION
AND RV' S V-EH I CLES ~ M0TDRCYCLES
------W ii --f M r -l4 f E ---E --i E
EASTBOvND N/A r~~~
~ ~~~~~OUND N/A N/A NlA
- ~ SouTxsaux~ ~/A NIA rr/A
CRITIcAL CAPS
--__,...,.-..---f_=-___-_-___-_______--..-__.----f........_^^__-___-,.----------
TABUrr~~ VA~UES ADJUSTE~ ~IGHT DIST. FINAL
~ (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
II -----i --i i f i i i s a ----f w a -a -a
MINOR RTGHTS SB 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20
_ MAJOR LVFTS Ei..f 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10
MINax LEFTS SB 7.30 6, so 0.00 6.80
eAPACITY ArrD LEtrEL-vF-SERvrCE
m
Po~EN- ACTuxL
FUOW- ~IAL MOVEr~ENT Sx~~~~ ~~~~RVE
- RATE CAPAC i TY CAFACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOv~~ENT v(pcph) cp(pcph) cm(pcph) csx(pcph) cR= CsH- v Las
I. . I -fe ---iF - -4 -a i a -t ----r -f 1F i r -i -
MI+•O•w STi4LET
SB LEF'T 44 199 19$ > 198 > 154 > D
' 5 29? > 221 >C
RIGHT 32 933 933,* > 933 > 901 > A
~ i MAJOR STREET
EB L~EFT 9 753 753 753 744 A
--r-f r f -sw---.~. r-rr-r f t-:----:--.. r --r-------,f -rr-----r:a.Fr--- r-ir :--w-,...
~ I
I ~
~
~ Taylor Engineering, rnc.
160 MULTI-FAMI L3C UN i TS at BROADWAY and YERCLER
~ Attachment "CA," Page 3
HCM: SIGNALIZEU INTERSECTION 5UMMARY
Center For Microcornputers In Transportatian
~~~:~~.~~~~~~~~~,~_~s..___•.~~..~~_~,...~_----------=f~.~...~».~_..__...__
~treets : (E-W) Mission Avenue {N-S} Pines Road
Analyst: TEI FiIe Name: M&P-J.HC9
' _.I • Arei# iypei ~~her 1-31-93 P.M. Pe
Comment : 1993 wi thcut Prvgosed Pra ject - -
.1.~
~ ~ - - - - - - - - ; Eas tbvund ; Nestbaund ; Northbau.nd ; 5nuthbound
L T R ; L T R ; L T R ; L R
_ _ ' • ' ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ! Y ~ F ! f f t # ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ! F ~ f f E i ~ ~ ~ ~M ~ f ~ i ~ ~ ! ~ i ~F ! # ~
N0 . 1.+aI1 es ; > 3 < ; > 2 3 ~ 1 2 < ~ 1 2 ~
Volumes ; 78 115 51; 81 139 346; 30 1046 44; 463 1400 12
Lane Width ; 12.0 ; 112.0 12.0112.4 12.0 ; 12.0 12,0
~ R"1'DR Vo15 ; 17 j 1291, 5t 22
~ -
I I ------r i T -i ----ert --R ! -----i -W -i 4r M -f f aa -f -a i aa c r r a..a r -if a.a f -i s ---r
Signal Operations
~ Phase cambinati on 1 2 3 4 ; 5 ~ 7 8
EB L-e,f t * :NB Left *
'I`hru `I'hru ~
Right Right *
Peds Peds *
~ W8 Lef t * ; SS Lef t
Thru ~ ; Thru
. ~ ~ Ri,ght Right * *
, Peds * 4 Peds *
NB Ri+ght * ; EB Right
- SB Right * ; WS "Right
Green 18A ; Green 12A 32A 46A
Yel 1 aw/AYR 3 ; Yel lowJA-R 3 ~ 3
Lost Time 3.0 ; Lvst Time 3.0 3.0 3.0
Cycle Length: 120 secs Phase cambination order: #1 #5 #5 #7
~ I ai -----Y i -#F # -r ------w r -f r w ----------ii ~s VY M r i a~ f T -~4 W rr -N i f +4 t i a~ s i s 1~ # s a
Intersection Performance Summar ~r
~~,ane Group; Ad' 5at vf c gf C ~ Approach:
Mv-rnts Cap FZ ow Ratio Ratia DeI sy LOS Del ay LOS
, EB I,TR 3$7$ 5$2 0.48 0.15 30.6 D 30.6 13
WB LT 2914 437 0.59 0.15 32.0 D 21.2 c
~ R 1515 821 0.29 0.54 9.7 B
NB Ti 1693 169 0.19 0.10 37.7 D 27.9 D
i; TR 3543 1358 0.93 0,38 27.7 D
S8 L 1693 621 0.83 0.37 32.6 D 13,1 B
TR 35L ! 2381 0.74 r+ 0.68 7.4 B
- Intersection Delay = 19.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C
' -------~--______-_---------_--..f-_-------_-_~~~-____^-_--_-_..-___..--..__
Tay1 or Engineering, Inc,
160 MULT I--FAMI LY UNIT5 at B~OADWAY and VERCLER
~ ~ AttaChnleRt "CA" Page 4
~ y
~
Capacity Analyaes with the Propased Expansion
, , - HCM: STGNAL,IZED INTERSECTIOI~ SUMMARY ~
- Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
-
Streets: (EiW) Broadway Avenue (N-S) Pines Road ~ -
- Analyst: TEI Fi3e blame; $&P-2.HC9
Ar+ea Type: Other 1-14-93 P.,M, Peak Hour
Camrnent: 1993 with Progosed Prvject
'
_--_--_-______--_~______=~;~~~t:.~~~~„~~~~~;~~~.,~~..~_~_~~__~~~.w
. . ; Eastbound ~ Westbound Northbound i Southbound
; L T R ~ L T R ;L T R 4 L T R
i ~ ~.rrr- w r-w t-:- ~ w+__ ~~6- ~~#r r arr.r -r w F f-r r~--r- -r-.
~ ~ E
- ' No. Lane8 ; > 2 < ; } 2 < ; 1 2 < r 1 2 <
Volurnes ; 98 311 148; 73 244 76; 89 947 60; 157 1299 60.
' Larxe Wi'dth ; 12.0 ; 12.0 112,0 12.0 112.0 12.0
RTOR Vvls ; 2 0; 10; lo; 15
• Signa1 operations
. ~ Phase cornbination 1 2 3 4 ; 5 ~ 5 -7 8
EB Left * ;NB Left *
Thru Thru *
! Right Right *
~ - ' Peds Peds *
WB Left * FSE Left
7'hru Thru * *
Right Ri ght
Peds Peds *
~ NB Ri ght * * ; ES Ri ght - * * *
; SB Right * * ;WB Right
- Green 25A 19A 3 Green 14A 5A 41A
Yellow/A-R 3 3 ; Yellow f A-R 3 3 3
Lost Time 3.0 3,0 ;Lost Time 3.0 0.0 3.0
' Cycle Length: 120 secs Fhase combinativn arder: 11 #2 #5 #6 #7
--w. -----rt - - ---s s --r + ---.r --i -----T i. r - ----i -.s i .i a
~ Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group; Adj 5at V/C g/c Approach:
, Mvmts Cap F1 ow Ratio Ratio De1 ay L05 DeI ay LOS
-...r--...--
E$ L'~'R 3405 709 C. $8 0.21 37.4 D 37.4 D
WB LTR 3440 545 0.82 0.16 .37.2 D 37.2 r
NS L 1693 198 D.5D 0.12 39.5 D 33.6 D
Tk 3537 1208 0.96 0.34 33.1 D
S$ L 1693 324 0.57 0,19 35.3 D D
TR 3543 1,565 1.01 0.44 35.1 D
Intersection Delay = 35.3 (sec/veh) inte-rsection LOS = D
------.rr--r --s.------:1.--r+++tf ----rw------e--...---e -:..r-t+r-----rf
~
~
1 I
I ~
Tay'. 7r EnglneerlI'lg, IriC .
16Y MULTIiFAHIYY Ui}ITS +/1t Bi%OADWAY M■!d VYRCLEi4
' AttaChmerlt "CA" Fage 5
, I
,
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-!
- *******k************************************************************•~
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
-
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35
` PEAK HOUR FACTOR .85 •
AREA POPULATION 300000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... 8roadway Avenue
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... Vercler
NAME OF THE ANALYST TEI
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 1-14-93
- TIME PERIOD ANALYZED P.M. Peak Hour
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 with Proposed Project
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
~
~ INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST
CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGK
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EB WB NB SB
~
LEFT 11 35
THRU 508 356
' RIGHT 12 28
NUMBER OF LANES
'
EB WB NB SB
LANES 2 2 1
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
~
~ PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS 'FOR RIGHT TURNS
EASTBOUND 0.00 90 30 N
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 30 N
SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 30 N
~ VEHICLE COMPOSITION
-------r ~ ~----------------..1 ----------------r
. ~
% SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION
AND RW'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES
~
EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A
~ WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A
SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A
~
. Taylor Engineering, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
'rA - - pa9P
. i~~~.,..
CRITICAL GAPS
TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL
_ (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
, MINOR RIGHTS SB 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20
; MAJOR LEFTS EB 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10
MINOR LEFTS SB 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.80
' CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE -
'
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
' RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) cp(pcph) cM(pcph) cSH(pcph) cR= cSH- v LOS
MINOR STREET
SB LEFT 45 196 194 > 194 > 149 > D
> 299 > 218 >C
RIGHT 36 931 931 > 931 > 895 > A
MAJOR STREET
EB LEFT 14 749 749 749 735 2
----------r m
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
; Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W)-Mission Avenue (N-S) Pines Road
Analyst: TEI File Name: MSP-2.HC9
Area Type: Other 1-31-93 P.M. Peak Hour
Comment: 1993 w/ Proposed Project
Eastbound ; Westbound ; Northbound ; Southbound
L T R ; L T R ; L T R ; L T R
~ No. Lanes ; > 3 < ; > 2 1; 1 2< ; 1 2<
Volumes ; 78 118 51; 81 141 356; 30 1047 44; 487 1403 12
Lane Width ; 12.0 ; 12.0 12.0;12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
~ RTOR Vols ; 17; 129; 5; 22
~
Signal Operations
~ Phase combination 1 2 3 4; 5 6 7 8
EB Left * ; NB Left *
Thru Thru *
Right Right *
Peds Peds *
WB Left * ; SB Left * *
Thru Thru * *
~ Right Right * *
~ Peds Peds *
-
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
~ Attachment "CA" Page 7
-
i; Signal Operations continued
~
-----------r---r -----r-----rw ------o.----r. ---r
NB Right * ;EB Right * *
SB Right * ;WB Right * *
; Green 18A ;Green 12A 32A 46A
Yellow/A-R 3 ;Yellow/A-R 3 3 3
Lost Time 3.0 ;Lost Time 3.0 3.0 3.0
Cycle Length: 120 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 #7
Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/c Approach:
Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
EB LTR 3871 581 0.49 0.15 30.7 D 30.7 D
; WB LT 2906 436 0.59 0.15 32.1 D 21.1 C
R 1515 821 0.31 0.54 9.8 B
NB L 1693 169 0.19 0.10 37.7 D 28.0 D
TR 3543 1358 0.93 0.38 27.7 D
SB L 1693 621 0.87 0.37 35.9 D 14.2 B
TR 3527 2381 0.74 0.68 7.5 B
Intersection Delay = 20.1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C
i,
.i
I~
~
Taylor Engineering, Inc.
' 160 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS at BROADWAY and VERCLER
_ Attachment "CA" Page 8
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: B92137 Tpu1E OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 1
REVIEWER: C. REICH Tc (ovarland) Tc (gutter) Areas C. A'C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED OATE: 14Sep-94
1 Single (lype A 0 Double (iype B) Ct = 0.15 L2 = 0 0.66 0.90 0.594
Total Area (calc.) (sae H1) 1,57 Z1 = 50 0,91 0.25 0.2275
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see Ht) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 7.2 = 3 0.00 0.00 0
Composite "C (calc.) (see H1) 0,52 N(A) = 0.016 B= 0 0.00 0.00 0
Time of Conc, (min) 5.00 S(A) = 0.02 n= 0.014 0,00 0.00 0
Area (Aaes) 1.57 s= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
C Faclor 0.51 Tc (A) = 0.24 d= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 28659 Total A Comp "C"
Volume Provided 208: 1295 storm: 1735 L1(B) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 1.57 0.52
Outflow (c(s) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) = 0.24
Area' C" Factor 0.82 S(B) = 0 Q=C'1'A= 2.61
Tc(tot.)= 5.00 Q(esl.)= 0.00
#1 92 #3 #4 p5 g6 #7 Tc (B) = 0.0 Intensity = 3.18
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage A= 0.157119
Inc. Inc. WP = 4.0943
(min.) (sec.) (inJhr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. fl,) (cu, fl.) R = 0.0384
(a1-60) (A:c'#3) (ouK.*#2) (as-#s) v= 1.27
Tc (total} = Tc (overland) + Tc (gutter) Tc(gu) = 0.00
5.00 300.00 3.18 2,61 1050 90.00 960 Tc (overland) = Ct'(L1 *wsro.5)110.6) Q(est) = 0.20
Cl = 0.15
5 300 3.18 2,61 1050 90 960 Lt = Lenglh of Overland Flow Hnlding = 0.00
10 600 2.24 1,84 1292 180 1112 N= friction (actor of overland flaw (.4 for average grass cover)
15 900 1.77 1.45 1457 270 1187 S= average slope of overland Ilow
20 1200 1.45 1.19 1551 360 1191 Tc (gutter) = Lenglh (ft.)Nelocity (NJsec.)!60
25 1500 1.21 0.99 1592 450 1142 B= Bflflom width of gutter or ditch
30 1800 1.04 0.85 1625 540 1085 Z1= inverse of cross slope one of ditch
35 2100 0.91 0.75 1646 630 1016 Z2 = inverse of cross slope iwo of ditch
40 2400 0.82 0.67 1685 720 965 d= depth of 11ow in gutter (estimate, check estimate with Flow)
45 2100 0.74 0,61 1703 810 893 Area = d'B+d^2J2'(Z1+Z2)
50 3000 0,68 0.56 1133 900 833 Wetted perimeter= B'd+(1/sin(atn(121))+11sin(atn(1IZ2)))
55 3300 0.64 0.53 1789 990 199 Hydraulic Radius = R= ArealWefled Perimeier
60 3600 0.61 0.50 1855 1080 775 Velocity =1.4861n'R".667's".5
65 3900 0.60 0.49 1913 1170 803 Flow = Velocity'Area
70 4200 0.58 0.48 2050 1260 790 n= 0.016 for asphall
75 4500 0.56 0.46 2117 1350 767 s= longitudircal slope of gutter
80 4800 0.53 0.44 2134 1440 694
85 5100 0.52 0.43 2222 1530 692
90 5400 0,50 0.41 2260 1620 640
95 5700 0.49 0.40 2336 1710 626
100 6000 0.48 0.39 2406 1840 606
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond siorage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 inJ 12 in1R. = 1194 cu. fl.
provided: 1295 cu. ft. OKI
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS -10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 1191 cu, fl.
provided: 1735 cu, fl. OK!
Number and type of Drywelis Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGM PROJECT: 692131 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 2
REVIEWER: C. REICH Tc (overland) Tc (gurier) Areas C. A'C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 14-Sep-94
1 Single (iype A 0 Double (type B) Ct = 0.15 L2 = 0 1.18 0.90 1,062
Total Area (calc.) (see H1) 1.74 Z1 = 50 0.56 0.25 0.14
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H1) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 Z2 = 3 0.00 0.00 0
Composite "C' (calc.) (see H1) 0.69 N(A) = 0.016 B= 0 0.00 0.00 0
Time of Conc. (min) 5.00 S(A) = 0.02 n= 0.014 0.00 0.00 0
Area (Acres) 1.74 s= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
C' Factor 0.69 Tc (A) = 0.24 d= 0.077 0.00 0.00 0
ImpeNious Area (sq. ftl 51438 Total A Comp "C
Volume Provided 208: 2194 sloRn: 2938 L1(B) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 1.74 0.69
Oumow (cfs) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) = 0.24
Area' C" Factor 1,20 S(B) = 0 Q=C'i'A= 3.82 ,
Tc(tot.) = 5.00 Q(esl.) = 0.00
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Tc (B) = 0.0 Intensity = 3.18
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage A= 0.157119
Inc, Inc. WP = 4.0943
(min.) (sec.) (inlhr.) (cfs) (cu. fl.) (cu. fl.) (cu, ft,) R = 0.0384
(#1 -so) (A-c-a3) (outr.-#2) (4546) v= 1.27
Tc (total) = Tc (overland) + Tc (guttet) Tc(gu) = 0.00
5.00 300.00 3.18 3.82 1537 90.00 1441 Tc (overland) = CY(L1'N/S^0.5)^0.6) Q(est) = 0.10
Ct = 0.15
5 300 3.18 3.82 1537 90 1441 L1= Lenglh oi Ove►land Flow Holding = 0.00
10 600 2.24 2,69 1890 180 1710 N= iriction factor of overland Ilow (.4 for average grass cover)
15 900 1.77 2,13 2131 270 1862 S = average slope of overtand flow
20 1200 1.45 1,74 2269 360 1909 Tc (gutter) L Length (ft.)Nelocity (fllsec.)!60
25 1500 121 1.45 2330 450 1880 B= Bottom width of gutter or dilch
30 1800 1.04 115 2378 540 1838 Z1= inverse of cross slope one oi ditch
35 2100 0.91 1.09 2469 630 1779 Z2 = inverse of cross slope Iwo oi ditch
40 2400 0.82 0.99 2466 720 1746 d= depth of Aow in gutler (eslimate, check estimate vuiih Flow)
45 2700 0.74 0.89 2492 810 1682 Area = d'B+d^2/2'(Z1+Z2)
50 3000 0.68 0.82 2535 900 1635 Wetted perimeter = B'd+(1/sin(atn(1lZ1))+tlsin(atn(122)))
55 3300 0.64 0,77 2617 990 1621 Hydraulic Radius = R= ArealWetted Perimeter
fifl 3600 0.61 0,73 2714 1080 1634 Velocity =1.4861n'R".667's",5
65 3940 0.60 0.72 2886 1170 1116 Fiow = Velocity'Area
70 4200 0.58 0.70 2999 1260 1139 n= 0,016 (or asphalt
75 4500 0.55 0,61 3098 1350 1748 s= longitudinal slope of guttet
80 4800 0.53 0.64 3123 1440 1683
85 5100 0.52 0.63 3251 1530 1721
90 5400 0.50 0.60 3307 1620 1687
95 5100 0.49 0.59 3417 1710 1707
100 6000 0.48 0.58 3521 1800 1721
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storege volume
= Impervious Area x.5 inJ 12 inJfi. = 2143 cu. fl.
provided: 2194 cu. fl. OKI
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS -10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Mlaximum storage required by Bowstring ■ 1909 cu. fl.
provided: 2938 cu. fl. OK!
Number and type of Drywells Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 692137 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 3
REVIEWER: C. REICH Tc (overland) Tc (gutter) Areas C. A"C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 14-Sep-94
1 Single (type A 0 Double (type B) Ct = 0.15 L2 ~ 0 0.17 0.90 0.153
Total Area (calc.) (see H1) 0.41 Z1 = 50 024 025 0.06
Time of Conc. (calc.) (ses H1) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 Z2 = 3 0.00 0.00 0
Composite `C' (calc.) (see H1) 0.52 N(A) = 0.016 B= 0 0.00 0.00 0
Time of Conc. (min) 5.00 S(A) = 0.02 n= 0.014 0.00 0.00 0
Area (Acres) 0.41 s= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
C Factor 0.52 Tc (A) ~ 0.24 d= 0.077 0.00 0.00 0
Impervious Area (sq. fl.) 7580 Total A Comp'C
Volume Provided 208: 408 storm: 547 Lt(8) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 0.41 0.52
Outflow (cfs) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) ~ 0.24
Area' C° Factor 0.21 S(B) = 0 Q=C'I'A= 0.68
rc(tot,)= 5.00 a(est.)= 0.00
M1 #2 #3 #4 #5 g6 #7 Tc (B) = 0.0 Intensity = 3.18
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage A= 0.157119
Inc. Inc. Wp = 4,0943
(min,) (sec.) (inJhr.) (eis) (cu. ft,) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) R = 0.0384
1 `60) (A'C'#3) (Outf.'#2) (#5-#b) V = 1.27
Tc (total) ~ Tc (overland) + Tc (gutter) Tc(gu) = 0,00
5.00 300.00 3.18 0.68 172 90.00 182 Tc (overland) = CI'(L1'FUS110.5)"0.6) Q(ast) ~ 0.20
C1= 0.15
5 300 3.18 0.68 172 90 182 l1= Length of Overland Flow Holding ~ 0.00
10 600 224 0.48 335 180 155 N= iriction factor of overland (low (.4 for average grass cover)
15 900 1.77 0.38 378 270 108 S= averege slope of overland flow
10 1200 1.45 0.31 402 360 42 Tc (gutter) = Length (fl.)Nelocity (flJsec.)160
ZS 1500 121 0.26 413 450 -37 B= Bottom widih of gutler or ditch
30 1800 1.04 0.22 421 540 -119 Z1= inverse of cross slope one of ditch
35 2100 0.91 0.19 427 630 •203 Z2 = inverse of cross slope two of ditch
40 2400 0.82 0.17 437 720 -283 d= depth of (low in gutter (estimate, check eslimate with Flow)
45 2700 0.74 0.16 441 810 -368 Area = d'B+d"212'(Z1+Z2)
50 3000 0.68 0.14 449 900 451 Wetted perimeter = B•d+(1/sin(a1n(121))+1/sin(atn(122)))
55 3300 0.64 0.14 464 990 -526 Hydraulic Radius ~ R= ArealWetted Perimeter
60 3600 0.61 0.13 481 1080 •599 Velocily = 1.4861n'R".661's".5
65 3900 0.60 0.13 511 1170 -659 Flow = Velocity'Area
70 4200 0.58 0.12 531 1260 -729 n = 0.016 for asphalt
75 4500 0.56 0.12 549 1350 -801 s= longitudinal slope of gufler
80 4800 0.53 0.11 553 1440 -887
85 5100 0.52 0.11 576 1530 -954
90 5400 0.50 0.11 586 1620 -1034
95 5700 0.49 0.10 606 1710 -1104
100 6000 0.48 0.10 624 1800 -1176
caascssaaaaaaaaacacaaea_ene=n__n_'ne_a'~~ec:a'ec__"_a~e_an___"e'_ _
DRAINAGE RaND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond s1orage volume
= Impervious Area x.S inJ 12 inJH. = 316 cu. ft.
provided: 408 cu. ft. OK!
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS -10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Manimum storage required by Bowstring ■ 182 cu. ft.
provided: 547 cu. ft. OKI
Number and type of Diyvwells Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: B92137 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 4
REVIEWER: C. REICH Tc (overiand) Tc (gurier) Areas C. A'C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 14-Sep-94
1 Single (type A 0 Douhle (type B) Ct = 0.15 L2 = 0 0.20 0.90 0.18
Total Area (calc.) (see H1) 0.51 Z1 = 50 0.31 0.25 0.0775
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H1) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 Z2 = 3 0.00 0.00 0
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H1) 0.50 N(A) = 0.016 B= 0 0.00 0.00 0
Time of Conc. (min) 5.00 S(A) = 0.02 n= 0,014 0.00 0.00 0
Area (Acres) 0.51 s= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
C' Factor 0.50 Tc (A) = 0.24 d= 0.071 0.00 0.00 0
Imperoious Area (sq. ft.) 8173 Total A Comp "C"
Volume Provided 208: 385 storm: 516 L1(B) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 0.51 0.50
Outilow (cis) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) = 024
Area' C Factor 026 S(B) = 0 C=C'I'Aa 0.82
Tc(lot.) = 5.00 Q(est.) = 0.00
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 A6 #7 Tc (B) = 0.0 Intensity = 3.18
Time Time Inlensity Q dev. V in V out Slorage A= 0.157119
Inc. Inc. WP = 4.0943
(min,) (sec.) (in1hr.) (cis) (cu, ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. fl.) R= 0.0384
(a1 •60) (A•c-#3) (oun.*#2) (#s-#s) v= 1.27
Tc (toial) = Tc (overland) + Tc (gutter) Tc(gu) = 0.00
5.00 300.00 3.18 0.82 329 90.00 239 Tc (overland) = Ct"(L1`NIS"0.5)"0.6) Q(est) = 0.20
Ct = 0.15
5 300 3.18 0.81 329 90 239 L1= Length of Overland Flow Holding = 0.00
10 600 2.24 0.58 405 180 225 N=(riction factor of overland flow (.4 for average grass cover)
15 900 1.77 0.46 457 270 187 S= average slope of overland Ilow
20 1200 1.45 0.37 486 360 126 Tc (gutter) = Length (ft.)Nelocity (ftJsec.)!60
25 1500 1.21 0.31 499 450 49 B= Bottom widih of gutter or ditch
30 1800 1.04 0.27 509 540 -31 Zt = inverse of cross slope one o( ditch
35 2100 0,91 0.23 516 630 •114 Z2 = inverse of cross slope fwo of ditch
40 2400 0.82 0,21 528 720 •192 d= depth of Ilow in gutter (estimaie, check estimate wiih Flow)
45 2700 0,74 0.19 534 810 •276 Area = d'B+d"212'(Z1+Z2)
50 3000 0.68 0.18 543 900 •357 Wetted perimeter = B'd+(11sin(atn(121))+11sin(aln(1f12)))
55 3300 0.64 0.16 561 990 -429 hlyrdraulic Radius = R= AreaMletted Perimeler
60 3600 0,61 0.16 581 1080 -499 Velocity =1.4861n'R".667's".5
65 3900 0.60 0.15 618 1170 •552 Flow = Velociiy'Area
la 4200 0,58 0.15 643 1260 -611 n= 0.016 for asphalt
15 4500 0.56 0.14 664 1350 -686 s= longitudinal slope of gutter
80 4800 0.53 0.14 669 1440 •771
85 5100 0.52 0.13 697 1530 -833
90 5400 0,50 0.13 708 1620 •912
95 5700 0.49 0.13 132 1710 •978
100 6000 0.48 0.11 154 1800 •1046
=a~~~....~~~~~~~~~~:.r:.~=========----~~~==========-===========_====
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required gressy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 inJ 12 inJfl. = 366 cu. ft.
provided: 385 cu. R. OK!
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS • 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum starage required by Bawstring = 239 cu. R.
provided: 516 cu. ft. OK!
Number and type of Drywells Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM OESIGN) PROJECT: B92137 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 5
REVIEWER; C. REICH Tc (overland) Tc (gutter) Areas C. A'C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 14Sep-94
1 Single (type A 0 Double (fype B) C1= 0,15 l2 = 0 0,70 0.90 0.63
Tofal Araa (calc.) (see H1) 1.51 Z1 = 50 0.81 0.25 0.2825
Time of Cortc. (calc.) (see H1) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 Z2 = 3 0.00 0.00 0
Composite "C" (calc.) (sae H1) 0.55 N(A) = 0.016 B= 0 0,00 0.00 0
Time of Conc. (min) 5.00 S(A) = 0.02 n= 0.014 0,00 0.00 0
Area (Actes) 1.51 s= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
C Factor 0.55 Tc (A) = 0.24 d= 0,077 0.00 0.00 0
Imperoious Area (sq. ft.) 30402 Total A Comp "C
Volume Provided 208: 1278 stortn: 1713 L1(6) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 1.51 0.55
Outllow (cfs) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) = 0.24
Area " C" Factor 0.83 S(B) = 0 Q=C'I'A= 2.65
Tc(toi.) = 5.00 Q(est.) = 0.00
#t #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Tc (B) = 0.0 Intensity = 3.18
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Sforage A= 0.157119
Inc. Inc. WP = 4.0943
(min.) (sec.) (inJhr.) (cfs) (cu. fl.) (cu, ft.) (cu, fl.) R = 0.0384
(#1'8U) (A`C'#3) (Outf.'#2) (#S-#b) V= 1.27
Tc total - Tc overlan + Tc (9utler) Tc(9u) = 0.00
-
5.00 300.00 3.18 2.65 1064 90.00 974 Tc (overland) = Ct'(L1'N!S"0.5)"0.6) Q(est) = 0.20
Ct = 0.15
5 300 3.18 2.65 1064 90 974 L1 = Lenglh of Overland Flow Holding = 0.00
10 600 2.24 1.86 1309 180 1129 N=(riction faclor of overland flow (.4 for average grass cover)
15 900 1.17 1.47 1476 270 1206 S= average slope of overland Ilow
20 1200 1.45 1.21 1571 360 1212 Tc (gutter) = Length (ft.)Nelocity (flJsec.)160
25 1500 1.21 1,01 1614 450 1164 B= Boftom widlh of gutler or dilch
30 1800 1.04 0.87 1641 540 1107 Z1= inverse o( cross slope one of ditch
35 2100 0.91 0,76 1668 630 1038 Z2 = inverse o( cross slope two of dilch
40 2400 0.81 0.68 1108 720 988 d= depth of Oow in gufter (eslimate, check estimate with Flow)
45 2100 0.74 0.62 1726 810 916 Area = d'B+d"212'(Z1+Z2)
50 3000 0.68 0.57 1756 900 856 Wetted perimeter= B'd+(1/sin(atn(121))+1lsin(atn(122)))
55 3300 0.64 0.53 1813 990 823 Ftydraulic Radius = R= ArealWetted Perimeter
64 3600 0.61 0.51 1880 1080 800 Velocilyr =1.4861n'R".667's".5
65 3900 0.60 0.50 1999 1170 829 Flow = Velociiyr'Area
70 4200 0.58 0.48 2077 1260 817 n= 0.016 for asphafl
75 4500 0.56 0.47 2145 1350 795 s= long'rtudinal slope at gutter
80 4800 0.53 0.44 2163 1440 123
85 5100 0.52 0.43 2252 1530 122
90 5400 0,50 0.42 2290 1620 670
95 5700 0.49 0.41 2361 1710 657
100 6000 0.48 0.40 2438 1800 638
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in112 inlfl. = 1267 cu. fl.
provided: 1218 cu. fl. OK!
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS • 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring ■ 1212 cu, fl.
provided: 1713 cu, fl. OK!
Number and lype of Orywells Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (fEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 692137 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 6
REVIEVIIER: C. REICH Tc (overland) Tc (gutter) Areas "C" A'C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 14-Sep-94
1 Single (rype A 0 Double (type B) Ct = 0.15 1-2 = 0 0.47 0.90 0.423
Total Area (calc.) (see H1) 0,79 Zt = 50 0.32 0.25 0.08
Time ai Conc. (calc.) (ses 1-11) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 Z2 = 3 0.00 0.00 0
Composite "C" (calc.) (see Hi) 0.64 N(A) = 0.016 B= 0 0.69 0.00 0
Time of Conc, (min) 5.00 S(A) = 0.02 n= 0.014 0.00 0.00 0
Area (Acres) 0.79 s= 0,011 0.00 0.04 0
C Factor 0,64 Tc (A) = 0.24 d e 0.017 0.00 0.00 0
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 20503 Total A Comp "C'
Volume Provided 208: 860 stam: 1152 Lt (B) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 0.79 0.64
Outllow (cfs) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) = 0.24
Area' C Factor 0.50 S(B) = 0 Q=C'I'A= 1.60
= Tc(tot.) = 5.00 Q(est.) = 0.00
#1 92 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Tc (B) = 0,0 Intensity = 3,18
Time Time Intensityr Q dev. V in V oul Storage A= 0.157119
Inc. Inc. WP = 4.0943
(min.) (sec.) (inJhr.) (cis) (cu. ft.) (cu. fl.) (cu. fl.) R = 0.0384
(a1-60) (A-c-aa) (ouK.*#2) (#s-#s) v= 1.27
Tc (totao = Tc (overlanc) + Tc (gutter) Tc(gu) = 0.00
5.04 300,00 3.18 1.60 643 90.00 553 Tc (overland) = Ci'(Li'WS"0.5)"0.6) Q(est) = 0.20
C1= 0.15
5 300 3,18 1.60 643 90 553 L1= Length of Overland Flow Holding = 0.00
10 600 2,24 1.13 791 180 611 N= friction factor of overland flow (.4 fa average grass cover)
15 900 1.77 0.89 892 210 622 S = average slope of overland Oow
20 1200 1,45 0.73 950 360 590 Tc (gufter) = Length (fl.)Nelociry (ftJsec.)160
25 1500 1.21 0.61 915 450 525 B= Boflom widih of guller or ditch
30 1800 1.04 0.52 995 540 455 Z1= inverse of cross slope one of ditch
35 2100 0.91 0.46 1008 630 378 Z2 = inverse of cross slope two o( ditch
40 2400 0.82 0.41 1032 120 312 d= depth o( flow in gutter (estimate, check estimate with Flow)
45 2700 0.74 0.37 1043 810 233 Area = d'B+d"2l1'(Z1+Z2) •
50 3000 0.68 0.34 1061 900 161 Wetled perimeter = 8'd+(11sin(atn(121))+11sin(atn(122)))
55 3300 0.64 0.32 1095 990 105 Hydraulic Radius = R= ArealWetted Perimeter
60 3600 0.61 0.31 1136 1080 56 Velocity =1.4861n'R".667's".5
65 3900 0.60 0,30 1208 1110 38 Flow = Velocity'Area
70 4200 0.58 0.29 1255 1260 -5 n= 0.016 for asphalt
75 4540 0.56 0.28 1296 1350 -54 s= longitudinal slape of gutler
80 4840 0.53 0.27 1307 1440 •133
BS 5100 0.52 0.26 1361 1530 -169
90 5400 0.50 0.25 1384 1620 -236
95 5100 0.49 0.25 1430 1710 -280
100 6000 0.48 014 1473 1800 •327
=n~s:ancaccaaaa~~a=====================-============
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond slorage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in112 inJR, = 854 cu. ft.
provided: 860 cu. ft. OK!
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS -10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Manimum sforage required by Bowstring ■ 622 cu. ft.
provided: 1152 cu. ft. OKl
Number and type of Drywslls Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: B92137 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 7
REUIEWER: C. REICH Tc (overland) Tc (gutter) Areas C. A'C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 14-Sep-94
1 Single (type A 0 Double (rype B) Ct ~ 0.15 L2 = 0 0.14 0.90 0.126
Total Area (caIc.) (see H1) 0.35 Z1 ~ 50 0.21 0.25 0.0525
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H1) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 Z2 = 3 0.00 0.00 0
Composile "C" (calc.) (see Hi) 0.51 N(A) = 0.016 B= 0 0,00 0.00 0
Time of Conc. (min) 5.00 S(A) = 0.02 n= 0.014 0.00 0.00 0
Area (Acres) 0.35 s= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
C Factar 0.51 Tc (A) = 0.24 d= 0.077 0.00 0.00 0
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 6247 Total A Comp "C"
Volume Provided 208; 278 siorm: 373 L1(B) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 0.35 0.51
Oumow (cfs) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) = 024
Area' C' Factor 0.18 S(B) = 0 Q=C'I'A= 0.57
Tc(tot.)= 5.00 Q(est.)= 0,00
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Tc (B) = 0.0 Intensity c 3.18
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storege A= 0.157119
Inc. Inc. WP = 4.0943
(min.) (sec.) (n.lhr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. 8.) (cu. 8.) R = 0.0384
(#1"60) (A'C'#3) (Ouli.'#2) (#5-#6) V= 1.27
Tc (totaD = Tc (overland) + Tc (gutter) Tc(gu) = 0,00
5.00 300.00 3.18 0.57 228 90.00 138 Tc (overtand) = Ct'(L1'N!S"0,5)^0,6) Q(esl) = 0.20
Cl = 0.15
5 300 3.18 0.57 228 90 138 L1= Length af Overland Flow Holding = 0,00
10 600 2.24 0.40 281 180 101 N= friction factor of ovedand flow (.4 for average gress cover)
15 900 1.77 0.32 317 270 47 S= average slope oi overiand tlow
20 1200 1.45 0.26 337 360 -23 Tc (gutter) = Length (fl.)Nelocity (ftJsec.)160
25 1500 1.21 0.22 346 450 -104 8= Bflttom widlh o( gutter or ditch
30 1800 1.04 0.19 353 540 -187 Z1= inverse of cross slope one of difch
35 2100 0.91 0.16 358 630 •211 Z2 = inverse of cross slope two of ditch
40 2400 0.82 0,15 366 720 -354 d= depth of flow in gutter (estimate, check estimate wilh Flow)
45 2700 0.74 0.13 370 810 -440 Area = d'B+d"212'(Z1+Z2)
50 3000 0.68 0,12 377 900 -523 Wetied perimeter = B"d+(11sin(atn(1lZ1))+1lsin(atn(122)))
55 3300 0.64 0.11 389 990 -601 Hydraulic Radius = R= ArealWetted Perimeler
60 3600 0.61 0.11 403 1080 -677 Velocity =1.486ln'R".667's".5
65 3900 0.60 0.11 429 1170 -741 Flow = Velocity'Area
70 4200 0.58 0.10 445 1260 -815 n= 0.016 for asphaft
75 4500 0.56 0.10 460 1350 -890 s= longitudinal slope o( gutter
80 4800 0.53 0.09 464 1440 -916
85 5100 0.52 0.09 483 1530 -1047
90 5400 0.50 0.09 491 1620 -1129
95 5700 0.49 0.09 501 1710 -1203
100 6600 0.48 0.09 523 1800 -1177
~__e=e_=aeea'o===caa=ca_a__~smseaarsca=cas~acaaaaaccceacaer:~~eea~c'e~
ORAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x,5 inJ 12 inJfl. = 260 cu. fl.
provided; 278 cu. fl. OKl
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS • 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 138 cu. fl.
provided; 373 cu, ft. OK!
Number and type of Dryvrells Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: B92137 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (minutes)
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 8
REVIEWER: C. REICH Tc (overland) Tc (gutter) Areas C. A'C
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 14-Sep-94
1 Single (type A 0 Double (type B) Ct = 0.15 L2 = 0 0.17 0.90 0.153
Total Area (calc.) (see H1) 0.35 Z1 = 50 0.18 0.25 0.045
Time olConc. (calc.) (see Ht) 5.00 L1(A) = 19 Z2 = 3 0.00 0,00 0
Composite 'C' (calc.) (see H1) 0.57 N(A) = 0.016 8= a 0.00 0.00 0
Time of Conc. (min) 5.00 s(a) = 0.02 n= 0.014 0.00 0.00 0
Area (Acres) 0.35 s= 0.011 0.00 0.00 0
C' Factor 0.57 Tc (A) ~ 0.24 d= 0.077 0.00 0.00 0
Impervious Area (sq, ft.) 7125 Total A Comp "C
Volume Provided 208: 304 storm: 407 L1(B) = 0 Tc (gu) = 0.00 0.35 0,51
Outllow (cfs) 0.3 N(B) = 0 Tc(A+B) = 0.24
Area' C" Factor 0.20 S(B) = 0 Q=C'I'A= 0.63
Tc(tot,) = 5.00 a(esl.) = 0.00
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Tc (8) = 0.0 Intensity = 3.18
Time Time Intensiiy Q dev. U in V out Slorage A= 0,157119
Inc. Inc. WP = 4.0943
(min.) (sec.) (inJhr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. fl.) (cu. ft.) R = 0.0384
(#1'60) (A'C'#3) (Ouff.'#2) (#5-#6) V = 1.27
Tc (lotal) = Tc (overland) + Tc (gutter) Tc(gu) = 0.00
5.00 340.00 3.18 0.63 253 90,00 163 Tc (overland) = CY(L1'WS"0.5) "O.6) Q(esl) = 0.20
a=a.1s
5 300 3.18 0.63 253 90 163 Lt = Length of Ove►land Flow Holding = 0.00
10 600 1.24 0.44 311 180 131 N= friction factor of overfand Aow (,4 far average grass cover)
15 900 1.77 0.35 351 270 81 S= averege slope o( ovsrland (low
20 1200 1.45 0.29 374 360 14 Tc (gutter) = Length (fl.)Nelocity (flJsec.)160
25 1500 1.21 0.24 384 450 -66 B= Bottom widlh of gutter or dftch
30 1800 1.04 0.21 392 540 •148 Z1 = inverse of cross slope one oi dilch
35 2100 0.91 0.18 397 630 •233 Z2 = inverse of cross slape lwo of ditch
40 2400 0.82 0.16 406 720 -314 d= depth of Oow in gutter (estimale, check estimate with Flow)
45 2700 0.74 0.15 411 810 -399 Area = d`B+d"212'(Z1+Z2)
50 3000 0.68 0.13 418 900 -482 Wetted perimeter ~ B'd+(11sin(atn(121))+11sin(atn(122)))
55 3300 0.64 0.13 431 990 •559 Hydraulic Radius ~ R= AreaMfetted Perimeter
60 3640 0.61 0.12 447 1080 -633 Velocity=1,486/n'R".667's".5
65 3900 0.60 0.12 475 1170 -695 Flow = Velocity'Area
TO 4200 0.58 0.11 494 1260 •766 n = 0.016 for asphalt
75 4500 0.56 0.11 510 1350 -840 s= longitudinal slope oi gutter
80 4800 0.53 0.10 514 1440 •926
85 5100 0.52 0.10 536 1530 -994
90 5400 0.50 0.10 545 1620 •1075
95 5700 0.49 0.10 563 1710 -1147
100 6000 0.48 0.10 580 1800 -1220
~ .~n........ n...,........
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impenrious Area x.5 in112 inJfl. = 301 cu. fl.
provided: 304 cu, fl. OK!
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS -10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 163 cu, fl.
provided: 407 cu. fl. OK!
Number and type of Dryvaells Required = 1 Single 0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PRQJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 0
0 Single 1 Double ~-f
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 68133.00
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H 1) 5.00 / • ~ ~
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H 1) 0.52 l _
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 1.56 ~
C Factor 0.52 - - J - Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 28659
Volume Provided 129 ,
Outflow (cfs) ~ 1
Area * C" Factor 0. -
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
Inc. Inc.
(min.) (sec.) (in.lhr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) {cu. ft.)
(#1 *60) (A'`C*#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 2.58 1037 300 737
5 300 3.18 2.58 1037 300 737
10 600 2.24 1.82 1276 600 676
15 900 1.77 1.44 1439 900 539
20 1200 1.45 1.18 1531 1200 331
25 1500 1.21 0.98 1572 1500 72
30 1800 1.04 0.84 1605 1800 -195
35 2100 0.91 0.74 1625 2100 -475
40 2400 0.82 0.67 1664 2400 -736
45 2700 0.74 0.60 1682 2700 -1018
50 3000 0.68 0.55 1711 3000 -1289
55 3300 0.64 0.52 1766 3300 -1534
60 3600 0.61 0.49 1832 3600 -1768
65 3900 0.60 0.49 1948 3900 -1952
70 4200 0.58 0.47 2024 4200 -2176
75 4500 0.56 0.45 2091 4500 -2409
80 4804 0.53 0.43 2108 4800 -2692
85 5100 0.52 0.42 2194 5100 -2906
90 5400 0.50 0.41 2232 5400 -3168
95 5700 0.49 0.40 2306 5700 -3394
100 6000 0.48 0.39 2376 6000 -3624
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 1194 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 1295 cu. ft.
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM ~
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 737 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 0 Single
1 Double
I
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 0
0 Single 1 Double
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 76989.00
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H1) 5.00
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H 1) 0.69
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 1.76
C' Factor 0.69
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 52213
Volume Provided 2194
Outflow (cfs) 1
Area * C" Factor 1.21
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #fi #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
I nc. I nc.
(min.) (sec.) (in./hr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)
(#1'`60) (A*C*#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 3.86 1552 304 1252
5 300 3.18 3.86 1552 300 1252
10 600 2.24 2.72 1910 600 1310
15 900 1.77 2.15 2154 900 1254
20 1200 1.45 1.76 2293 1200 1093
25 1500 1.21 1.47 2354 1500 854
30 1800 1.04 1.26 2402 1800 602
35 2100 0.91 1.11 2433 2100 333
40 2400 0.82 1.00 2492 2400 92
45 2700 0.74 0.90 2518 2700 -182
50 3000 0.68 0.83 2562 3000 -438
55 3300 0.64 0.78 2644 3300 -656
60 3600 0.61 0.74 2742 3600 -858
65 3900 0.60 0.73 2916 3900 -984
70 4200 0.58 0.70 3030 4200 -1170
75 4500 0.56 0.68 3130 4500 -1370
80 4800 0.53 0.64 3155 4800 -1645
85 5100 0.52 0.63 3285 5100 -1815
90 5400 0.50 0.61 3341 5400 -2059
95 5700 0.49 0.60 3453 5700 -2247
100 6000 0.48 0.58 3557 6000 -2443
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 2176 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 2194 cu. ft.
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 1310 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 0 Single
1 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 0
1 Single 0 Double
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 18955.00
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H1) 5.00
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H 1 ) 0.54
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 0.435
C' Factor 0.54
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 8413
Volume Provided 408
Outflow (cfs) 0.3
Area * C" Factor 0.23
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
Inc. Inc.
(min.) (sec.) (in./hr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)
(#1''60) (A*C*#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 0.75 300 90 210
5 300 3.18 0.75 300 90 210
10 600 2.24 0.53 369 180 189
15 900 1.77 0.42 417 270 147
20 1200 1.45 0.34 443 360 83
25 1500 1.21 0.28 455 450 5
30 1800 1.04 0.24 465 540 -75
35 2100 0.91 0.21 471 630 -159
40 2400 0.82 0.19 482 720 -238
45 2700 0.74 0.17 487 810 -323
50 3000 0.68 0.16 495 900 -405
55 3300 0.64 0.15 511 990 -479
60 3600 0.61 0.14 530 1080 -550
65 3900 0.60 0.14 564 1170 -606
70 4200 0.58 0.14 586 1260 -674
75 4500 0.56 0.13 605 1350 -745
80 4800 0.53 0.12 610 1440 -830
85 5100 0.52 0.12 635 1530 -895
90 5400 0.50 0.12 646 1620 -974
95 5700 0.49 0.12 668 1710 -1042
100 6000 0.48 0.11 688 1800 -1112
DRAINAGE PQND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 351 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 408 cu. ft.
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 210 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 1 Single
0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 0
1 Single 0 Double
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 22433.00
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H 1) 5.00
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H 1) 0.50
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 0.515
C' Factor 0.5
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 8773
Volume Provided 385
Outflow (cfs) 0.3
Area * C" Factor 0.26
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
I nc. I nc.
(min.) (sec.) (in./hr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)
(#1 *60) (A*C*#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 0.82 329 90 239
5 300 3.18 0.82 329 90 239
10 600 2.24 0.58 405 180 225
15 900 1.77 0.46 457 270 187
20 1200 1.45 0.37 486 360 126
25 1500 1.21 0.31 499 450 49
30 1800 1.04 0.27 509 540 -31
35 2100 0.91 0.23 516 630 -114
40 2400 0.82 0.21 528 720 -192
45 2700 0.74 0.19 534 810 -276
50 3000 0.68 0.18 543 900 -357
55 3300 0.64 0.16 561 990 -429
60 3600 0.61 0.16 581 1080 -499
65 3900 0.60 0.15 618 1170 -552
70 4200 0.58 0.15 643 1260 -617
75 4500 0.56 0.14 664 1350 -686
80 4800 0.53 0.14 669 1440 -771
85 5100 0.52 0.13 697 1530 -833
90 5400 0.50 0.13 708 1620 -912
95 5700 0.49 0.13 732 1710 -978
100 6000 0.48 0.12 754 1800 -1046
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 366 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 385 cu. ft.
~ DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 239 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 1 Single
0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 0
0 Single 1 Double
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 63854.00
Time of Conc. {calc.} (see H1) 5.00
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H 1) 0.55
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 1.466
C' Factor 0.55
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 29569
Volume Provided 1278
Outflow (cfs) 1
Area * C" Factor 0.81
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
Inc. Inc.
(min.) (sec.) (in.lhr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)
(#1 *60) (A'`C''#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 2.56 1031 300 731
5 300 3.18 2.56 1031 300 731
10 600 2.24 1.81 1268 600 668
15 900 1.77 1.43 1430 900 530
20 1200 1.45 1.17 1522 1200 322
25 1500 1.21 0.98 1563 1500 63
30 1800 1.04 0.84 1595 1800 -205
35 2100 0.91 0.73 1616 2100 -484
40 2400 0.82 0.66 1654 2400 -746
45 2700 0.74 0.60 1672 2700 -1028
50 3000 0.68 0.55 1701 3000 -1299
55 3300 0.64 0.52 1756 3300 -1544
60 3600 0.61 0.49 1821 3600 -1779
65 3900 0.60 0.48 1936 3900 -1964
70 4200 0.58 0.47 2012 4200 -2188
75 4500 0.56 0.45 2078 4500 -2422
80 4800 0.53 0.43 2095 4800 -2705
85 5100 0.52 0.42 2181 5100 -2919
90 5400 0.50 0.40 2218 5400 -3182
95 5700 0.49 0.40 2292 5700 -3408
100 6000 0.48 0.39 2362 6000 -3638
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 1232 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 1278 cu. ft.
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 731 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 0 Single
1 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 0
0 Single 1 Double
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 33616.00
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H1) 5.00
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H1) 0.63
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 0.772
C' Factor 0.63
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 19778
Volume Provided 841
Outflow (cfs) 1
Area * C" Factor 0.49
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
Inc. Inc.
(min.) (sec.) (in.lhr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)
(#1*60) (A*C*#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 1.55 622 300 322
5 300 3.18 1.55 622 300 322
10 600 2.24 1.09 765 600 165
15 900 1.77 0.86 863 900 -37
20 1200 1.45 0.71 918 1200 -282
25 1500 1.21 0.59 943 1500 -557
30 1800 1.04 0.51 962 1800 -838
35 2100 0.91 0.44 975 2100 -1125
40 2400 0.82 0.40 998 2400 -1402
45 2700 0.74 0.36 1008 2700 -1692
50 3000 0.68 0.33 1026 3000 -1974
55 3300 0.64 0.31 1059 3300 -2241
60 3600 0.61 0.30 1098 3600 -2502
65 3900 0.60 0.29 1168 3900 -2732
70 4200 0.58 0.28 1214 4200 -2986
75 4500 0.56 0.27 1253 4500 -3247
80 4800 0.53 0.26 1264 4800 -3536
85 5100 0.52 0.25 1316 5100 -3784
90 5400 0.50 0.24 1338 5400 -4062
95 5700 0.49 0.24 1383 5700 -4317
100 6000 0.48 0.23 1425 6000 -4575
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 824 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 841 cu. ft.
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 322 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 0 Single
1 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPOSED DATE: 0
1 Single 0 Double
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 15236.00
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H 1) 5.00
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H 1) 0.52
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 0.35
C' Factor 0.52
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 6247
Volume Provided 279
Outflow (cfs) 0.3
Area * C" Factor 0.18
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
Inc. Inc.
(min.) (sec.) (in.lhr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)
(#1 *60) (A*C*#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 0.58 233 90 143
5 300 3.18 0.58 233 90 143
10 600 2.24 0.41 286 180 106
15 900 1.77 0.32 323 270 53
20 1200 1.45 0.26 344 360 -16
25 1500 1.21 0.22 353 450 -97
30 1800 1.04 0.19 360 540 -180
35 2100 0.91 0.17 365 630 -265
40 2400 0.82 0.15 373 720 -347
45 2700 0.74 0.13 377 810 -433
50 3000 0.68 0.12 384 900 -51 fi
55 3300 0.64 0.12 396 990 -594
60 3600 0.61 0.11 411 1080 -669
65 3900 0.60 0.11 437 1170 -733
70 4200 0.58 0.11 454 1260 -806
75 4500 0.56 0.10 469 1350 -881
80 4800 0.53 0.10 473 1440 -967
85 5100 0.52 0.09 492 1530 -1038
90 5400 0.50 0.09 501 1620 -1119
95 5700 0.49 0.09 517 1710 -1193
100 6000 0.48 0.09 533 1800 -1267
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 260 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 279 cu. ft.
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 143 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 1 Single
0 Double
BOWSTRING METHOD (TEN YEAR STORM DESIGN) PROJECT: 0
DETENTION BASIN DESIGN BASIN: 0
DESIGNER: 0
NUMBER OF DRYWELLS PROPQSED DATE: 0
1 Single 0 Double
Total Area (calc.) (see H 1) 14969.00
Time of Conc. (calc.) (see H 1) 5.00
Composite "C" (calc.) (see H 1) 0.56
Time of Conc. (min) 5
Area (Acres) 0.226
C' Factor 0.56
Impervious Area (sq. ft.) 7225
Volume Provided 304
Outflow (cfs) 0.3
Area * C" Factor 0.13
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
Time Time Intensity Q dev. V in V out Storage
Inc. Inc.
(min.) (sec.) (in./hr.) (cfs) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.) (cu. ft.)
(#1 ""60) (A'`C*#3) (Outf.*#2) (#5-#6)
5 300 3.18 0.40 162 90 72
5 300 3.18 0.40 162 90 72
10 600 2.24 0.28 199 180 19
15 900 1.77 0.22 224 270 -46
20 1200 1.45 0.18 239 360 -121
25 1500 1.21 0.15 245 450 -205
30 1800 1.04 0.13 250 540 -290
35 2100 0.91 0.12 254 630 -376
40 2400 0.82 0.10 260 720 -460
45 2700 0.74 0.09 262 810 -548
50 3000 0.68 0.09 267 900 -633
55 3300 0.64 0.08 276 990 -714
60 3600 0.61 0.08 286 1080 -794
65 3900 0.60 0.08 304 1170 -866
70 4200 0.58 0.07 316 1260 -944
75 4500 0.56 0.07 326 1350 -1024
80 4800 0.53 0.07 329 1440 -1111
85 5100 0.52 0.07 342 1530 -1188
90 5400 0.50 0.06 348 1620 -1272
95 5700 0.49 0.06 360 1710 -1350
100 6000 0.48 0.06 371 1800 -1429
DRAINAGE POND CALCULATIONS
Required grassy swale pond storage volume
= Impervious Area x.5 in./ 12 in./ft. = 301 cu. ft.
Grassy swale pond volume provided = 304 cu. ft.
DRYWELL REQUIREMENTS - 10 YEAR DESIGN STORM
Maximum storage required by Bowstring = 72 cu. ft.
Number and type of Drywells Required = 1 Single
0 Double
PROJECT b
HEC12 Version: V2.91 Run Date: 08-10-1994
INLET NUMBER cb6 LENGTH 1.7 STATION 130.0
DRAINAGE AREA = 0.220 ACRES C VALUE _.720 CA = 0.158
SUM CA= 0.158 INT= 3.18 CFS= 0.504 C0= 0.420 GUTTER FLOW= 0.924
GUTTER SLOPE = 0.0169 FT/FT PAVEMENT CROSS SLOPE = 0.0400 FT/FT
SPREAD W W/T SW SW/SX Eo a S'W SE
3.93 2.5 0.64 0.0400 1.0 0.93 1.0 0.033 0.071
XXXXXXXXXX SLOTTED DRAIN INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE XXXXXXXXXX
REQUIRED LENGTH (ft) = 10.8 EFFICIENCY= 0.26
CFS INTERCEPTED= 0.24 CFS CARRYOVER= 0.68
Triangular Channel Analysis & Design
Open Channe 1- Un i f orm f 1 ow
Worksheet Name: b92137
Comment: cb 6 with .42 cfs carryover
Solve For Depth
Given Input Data:
Left Side Slope.. 25.00:1 (H:V)
Right Side Slope. 22.73:1 (H:V)
Manning's n...... 0.014
Channel Slope.... 0.0169 ft/ft
Discharge........ 0.92 cfs
Computed Results:
Depth............ 0.13 ft
Velocity......... 2.24 fps
Flow Area........ 0.41 sf
Flow Top Width... 6.26 ft
Wetted Perimeter. 6.26 ft
Critical Depth... 0.16 ft
Critical Slope... 0.0067 ft/ft
Froude Number.... 1.54 (flow is Supercritical)
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.21 (c) 1990
Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708
PROJECT b
HEC12 Version: V2.91 Run Date: 08-09-1994
INLET NUMBER cb7 LENGTH 1.7 STATION 130.0
DRAINAGE AREA = 0.240 ACRES C VALUE _.760 CA = 0.182
SUM CA= 0.182 INT= 3.18 CFS= 0.580 C0= 0.000 GUTTER FLOW= 0.580
GUTTER SLOPE = 0.0130 FT/FT PAVEMENT CROSS SLOPE = 0.0200 FT/FT
SPREAD W W/T SW SW/SX Eo a S'W SE
5.35 2.5 0.47 0.0200 1.0 0.81 1.0 0.033 0.047
XXXXXXXXXX SLOTTED DRAIN INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE XXXXXXXXXX
REQUIRED LENGTH (ft) = 10.5 EFFICIENCY= 0.27
CFS INTERCEPTED= 0.16 CFS CARRYOVER= 0.42
Triangular Channel Analysis & Design
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name: b92137
Comment : V C
Solve For Depth
Given Input Data:
Left Side Slope.. 50.00:1 (H:V)
Right Side Slope. 67.00:1 (H:V)
Manning's n...... 0.014
Channel Slope.... 0.0130 ft/ft
Discharge........ 0.58 cfs
Computed Results:
Depth............ 0.08 ft
Velocity......... 1.45 fps
Flow Area........ 0.40 sf
Flow Top Width... 9.68 ft
Wetted Perimeter. 9.68 ft
Critical Depth... 0.09 ft
Critical Slope... 0.0080 ft/ft
Froude Number.... 1.25 (flow is Supercritical)
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.21 (c) 1990
Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708
INLET NUMBER trench d LENGTH 30.0 STATION 130
DRAINAGE AREA = 0.184 ACRES C VALUE _.830 CA = 0.153
SUM CA= 0.153 INT= 3.18 CFS= 0.486 C0= 1.020 GUTTER FLOW= 1.506
GUTTER SLOPE = 0.0285 FT/FT PAVEMENT CROSS SLOPE = 0.0010 FT/FT
SPREAD W W/T SW SW/SX Eo a S'W SE
43.09 0.5 0.01 0.0010 1.0 0.03 1.0 0.167 0.006
XXXXXXXXXX SLOTTED DRAIN INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE XXXXXXXXXX
REQUIRED LENGTH (ft) = 67.6 EFFICIENCY= 0.65
CFS INTERCEPTED= 0.98 CFS CARRYOVER= 0.52
~
t
PROJECT b
HEC12 Version: V2.91 Run Date: 08-10-1994
~
INLET NUMBER trench d LENGTH 0.5 STATION 130.0
DRAINAGE AREA = 0.184 ACRES C VALUE _.830 CA = 0.153
SUM CA= 0.153 INT= 3.18 CFS= 0.486 C0= 1.020 GUTTER FLOW= 1.506
GUTTER SLOPE = 0.0285 FT/FT PAVEMENT CROSS SLOPE = 0.0010 FT/FT
SPREAD W W/T SW SW/SX Eo a S'W SE
43.09 %30.0 0.70 0.0010 1.0 0.96 1.0 0.003 0.004
XXXXXXXXXX SLOTTED DRAIN INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE XXXXXXXXXX
REQUIRED LENGTH (ft) = 91.9 EFFICIENCY= 0.01
CFS INTERCEPTED= 0.01 CFS CARRYOVER= 1.49
Rectangular Channel Analysis & Design
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name: b92137
Comment: trench drain with 1.02 cfs carry over
Solve For Depth
Given Input Data:
Bottom Width..... 30.00 ft
Manning's n...... 0.014
Channel Slope.... 0.0285 ft/ft
Discharge........ 1.54 cfs
Computed Results:
Depth............ 0.03 ft
Velocity......... 1.72 fps
Flow Area........ 0.89 sf
Flow Top Width... 30.00 ft
Wetted Perimeter. 30.06 ft
Critical Depth... 0.04 ft
Critical Slope... 0.0082 ft/ft
Froude Number.... 1.76 (flow is Supercritical)
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.21 (c) 1990
Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708
PROJECT b
HEC12 Version: V2.91 Run Date: 08-10-1994
INLET NUMBER cb5 LENGTH 1.7 STATION 115.0
DRAINAGE AREA = 0.290 ACRES C VALUE _.620 CA = 0.180
SUM CA= 0.180 INT= 3.18 CFS= 0.572 C0= 0.680 GUTTER FLOW= 1.252
GUTTER SLOPE = 0.0261 FT/FT PAVEMENT CROSS SLOPE = 0.0320 FT/FT
SPREAD W W/T SW SW/SX Eo a S'W SE
4.66 2.5 0.54 0.0320 1.0 0.87 1.0 0.033 0.061
XXXXXXXXXX SLOTTED DRAIN INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE XXXXXXXXXX
REQUIRED LENGTH (ft) = 15.3 EFFICIENCY= 0.19
CFS INTERCEPTED= 0.23 CFS CARRYOVER= 1.02
Triangular Channel Analysis & Design
Open Channel - Uniform flow
Worksheet Name: b92137
Comment: cb5 with .68 cfs carry over
Solve For Depth
Given Input Data:
Left Side Slope.. 31.25:1 (H:V)
Right Side Slope. 31.25:1 (H:V)
Manning's n...... 0.014
Channel Slope.... 0.0261 ft/ft
Discharge........ 1.25 cfs
Computed Results:
Depth............ 0.12 ft
Velocity......... 2.66 fps
Flow Area........ 0.47 sf
Flow Top Width... 7.66 ft
Wetted Perimeter. 7.66 ft
Critical Depth... 0.16 ft
Critical Slope... 0.0067 ft/ft
Froude Number.... 1.90 (flow is Supercritical)
Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.21 (c) 1990
Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708
•i r
REVIEW COMMENTS w~~j~►t~,r ~td~ort,1'.~~
SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER
DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES s~94`/
~
~
PROJECT B92137 REVIEWER: Bob Turner
,
~
PROJECT NAME: Village on Broadway DATE: 31 Mar 94 ~
~
REVIEW 1
COMMENT3
-
GENERAL : ,
A recorded property d, which can be obtained at the County
Auditor's office, is r uired to process the dedication of right-
rcler. The right-of-way dedication must
Ve
of-way for Broadway a
be completed before ermit "release can occur.
A bond for the project cannot be prepared until all the road plans
are completed and appyloved. Al1 road plans must have the owners
s i, nature on it. ~
~
Set-aside for future acquisition,by the County for future right-of- ~
way needs, old and new right-o ,way lines, need to be shown on the
site plan. Required 208 swale areas and landscaping must be outside
~..~a,.
of set-aside area, and rig ~t-of-way. ~{~"-~~~;~,,cn,✓~~,~~-twz.c.wArrerJO-AL~ ~~~ns4~~,u'tr
~ s _r L ti►~s _
Show a typical section of a swale. The-swale must be sodded and
side slopes should not be steeper trrg'n' 2:1 for up to 12" in depth.
For swales with greater depths u 3:1. The top_ of the swale should
be a minimum 2 in. above the ywell lid. °t*iN,E -~NSCus,~ ,
-
w~-t«~ S~-a ~c.n,►~ E,- t~~ IJ ~~'ct,~N ►.~L- G'. La p a R-0 Vtok Fe`N ClN C~ `
Calculations, includirig-a b ckwater analysis, proving the adequate
performance of grates, p' es, inlets, curb cuts, trench drains,
ditches, etc. need to be submitted.
DRA.INAGE REFORT :
My review of basins 2, 3, and 8, r' sed questions about accuracy of
the areas their percentage of per ious and impervious areas._ Please
provide further information,to~clarify these figures. We W-)
R-EVkieh l.~~o-,tS te 5 CLe=11lSeP GA4.l~s
Provide a drYwell -detail/that comP]~' es with Spokane County I~
~
Standards; use a type IV frame and gr e for drywells in swales. A
copy of our standard detail is at ched to your plans. pduta - -n, ~tintr ~
to
Page 1 of 4
1
REVIEW COMMENTS
PROJECT # B92137
REVIEW # 1
31 Mar 94 Proper sizing of drywells is requi d. A Type "A" drywell will
handle 5,000 sf and a Type "B" dry~ll will handle 15,000 sf. Use
multiples of each to provide adequ e drywell structures. Bowstring
calculations to prove that the d ywell type selected is suff icient
will be required if these r ommended values are exceeded. A
separate bowstring will be r uired for each basin. The analysis
o presented in the drainag _report would be valid if the swales
re +inter-connected. .i°c~~~~~5 a,~~MA~~ ~uws~•~..•~.. i~NAl•~~fvi VS~:i~ ~c~
G~''~'W ~r~"c~ r~d ~ _ w~,l, ~ ~_z ' - c- c. - , ~ _ _ - -
PLANS : - - - -
, Sheet L1: abel the old and new right-of-way lines and the set- '
' aside a a. Required 208 swale areas and landscaping must be
outsid of set- side area, and right-of-way. vorAci
Show he dr ?e/la in the westerly swale (correlate with the civil
site and d age plans).-~o►~f:
Trees sha 1 minimum of_10 feet away from drywells in a swale
to avoid a onflict. c.~c~~~,+.~a~~;s~ w~-r►~ ~~~~~n~,~ ~a~sic,,~ I
rywells o the plan have been mislabeled as yard drains. Please
correct. - w ~
Sheet L2: Trees shall e a minimum of 10 feet away from drywells in
a swale to avoid any o flict.
Drywells on_the plan ave been mislabeled as yard drains. Please
correct. b o rjE-rj
Landscaping in the no thwest swale shall be pulled back out of the
swale to avoid encro chment. "i4o.a.o►oA-TOro wV-%A p~~t(441
Label the old and ne right-of-way lines. Required landscaping must
be outside of the r gh -of-way. Dpn1e w~T~
3 eet SP1: More cl arly show how all the drainage for this
pool\recreation are is connected to the civil site and drainaqe
plans. ~Pd~o1. ;D GA=G~ - - ~--~Q.At•NA-to6- DG-f160 ~4A-s ~G-~,N SL~,yis~ a►~ ~ G~-~2~•~ A~1L,~~p
Sheet C1: Please provide the information requested on the plan.
?1,,Sheet C2: Calculations, including a backwater analysis, proving the ~
adequate performance of grates, pipes, inlets, curb cuts, trench
drains, ditches, etc. need to be submitted. Suggest that you use
f ewer curb cuts into swale #12 and use curb inlet detail attached.
~~IIS ~~A•~ STa 4A A G i'~ pc<..~c t+.-r,,2A... A-►J - -
S ~i`6:5 r ~j ~ A~ ~ I (1 h~ ~ #3 43 ~d- ~'"~'j Qj,~t1►'~-1~7 ~l.eC
.......+'ari-..-'~G1,~C:'-+' .tt i1t7~l~'~+;i iS ~ - ~.rh
~ r►4~tV Ct~~l V~ ~ag - 0-1 4~ri
. ~ t .
~
REVIEW COMMENTS
PROJECT # B92137
. REVIEW # 1
31 Mar 94
Detail pipe entrance to swale. Show a concrete splash block to
eliminate erosion. Typical for all pipe outfalls to swales. ~-4v14~U X- Sl.~~-TtV N Ov S~C3G ~~t E?~ QL.IAv(-~ 5P AI.L pPo i1J 1.%,zut Of-'
Detail if there is any sheet flow from the pavement going into
swale #2 or #3. 1r1d)
Bypass for the approach to Vercler is ok due to its minor amount.
Approximately 500 square7 feet is the threshold for allowable runoff
off of the property. ✓
Sheet C3: Calculations, including a backwater analysis, proving the
~adequate performance of grates, pipes, inlets, curb cuts trench -
drains, ditches, etc. need to be submitted. DaVE
f'o2 1;o4GktvA"r~rL 4NAGI1StJ ~~~✓r~~•~r~f✓~ ,4oE6,uq6, tof- .oE.riG•~
The building in the middle of the sheet appears to have no outlet
for the rainwater tight line. ~e~-WEO
Bypass for the approach to Broadway is not allowable. Approximately
500 square feet is the threshold for allowable runoff off of the
property. Suggest you move the trench drain closer to Broadway .l-~;'~o!'/j 7'G-z9
r,~-,r.e,l eciv.fev y,44nl.v6- Te- . s," / r r.►I .uV 1522V g~
Set-aside for future acquisition by the County for future right-of-
way needs, old and new right-of-way lines, need to be shown on the
site plan. po,me f
Detail if there is any sheet flow from the pavement going into
swa l e # 7 . A/o, ? - ~~,~~d~ ~ ~u~~is.,vG ~iu1,~,~f~ s~i~~ ~ fYa~v ~v ..s•r - Q ~Z/p1~V~ G~
is DIR,~5&~40 -73 MAWca AA9l-AJ What portion of basin 8 goes to swale #7?
~r/o f ~,v p ~A Gt,l ~
eet C6: Provide profile calculations as attached to te lan. po.v6-
' cIN G,aLGS. ~d 4t ler~.~-y~
abel your cross section sideslopes at a maximum of 1 1. I)aA✓`- ,
Need complete drainage plans for Vercler. Pc-rz._ I
5 ~ / 3 Tu~.v~,~. yQ ~If ,S~
13-rao rt(eVr*(- ba-p",vA-Ge El19 h)eej Ntr I)e-09 /f .10-41 ',v6lu,9 e-n
~A recorded property deed, which can be obtained at the County
Auditor's off ice, is required to process the dedication of right-
of-way for Broadway and Vercler. The right-of-way dedication must
be completed before permit release can occur.
0. bond for the project cannot be prepared until all the road plans
are completed and approved. All road plans must have the owners ~f
signature on it. '
~
~
Page 3 of 4 . ~
~
~
[ F ~ 1 ~
REVIEW COMMEi;TS
PROJECT # B92I37
REVIEW # 1
31 Mar 94
Once the road plans are approved a mylar of those road plans will
be required.
Correct the misleading label af the 40 foot right-of--way ~on the
plan. 1DPAv~~
;he C7: Provide a drywell detail that cvrnplies with Spokane
unty Standards; use a type IV frame and grate for drywells in
swales. Acopy of our standard detail is attached to yaur plans. ~
~$"r~J~ ~ -r~ ~/'d'~•9~-~' -~,c,~~ ~ ~ e7
~ -CB: SYiow a typical secti~n of a swale. The swale must be Vlrsv dded and zside slopes shoulci nat be steeper than 2:1 far ug to 12" ~
in depth. For swales with greater depths use 3.1. The top of the ,
swale sh~uld he a TRlI'1i7RUm 2 in. above the drywel llid .
~ Ale, e-e~ ~ '
avide a drywel1-- -detai 1 that compli~s with Spokane County
5tandards; use a type IV frame and grate for drywells in swales. A
c py nf our standard detail is attached to yQUr plans.
p ~.V~ d
Please addressthe -elevatian discrepancies marked an the plans,
DO A~Z, ~
sheet C9: Hames and other structures circled on this plan are in
r the same locatian as propased drainage swales. Provide soils
inforrnation verifyirxg that typical Valley Garrison gravels or vther
soil type apg~rave~i b~~r tY~e County Enginee,r are being used in -these
swa les. ~07-6= 7-o
- - ,
1
~
~
. ~
~
I
e~
~
Page 4 of 4
r ~
Y i
S ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T
b_w
QMCE (JF TH~ CoUNTY ENCiN'Er:R + ADMSiQN OF THE I'UBLIC VVORKS DEPARTmEN'T
Ranald C. Harmann, P.E., Caunty Engirteer Dennis M. Scott, P.E., Direetor
Date: 3 - -',!D 1- ~,_A\
sUBJECT: V
~ ( ~ . _b~ ay;~_f
,
Gentlerrien:
A review of the road, drainage, ar s-ite plan for the above-referenced building perrnit has
been accomplished. Areas af eoncern tn us are indicated in red an the attached plan set and
calculations marked °°ORIGINAL,". Please make the corrections and resuhmit them to the
Buzlding Department in order that 'the review process may proceed. When the alans ar~
resubmitted, mark all changes on the revised orint iri colar an.d include the mark-u-0.
Please nate that the plan set and calculations marked °'OI~IGINAL" are official public
documents, and must be retumed with the revised plans and calculations. Review of the
revised plans and calcuXations will not proceed until the "ORIGINAL" set -is returned to the
Caunty.
If you hav~ any quest-ions about -this review, please contact us at 456-3600. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Ronald C Hormann, P. E.
Spakane Cnunty Engineer
, fx
~
Robert Turner, E.I.T.
Plans Review Engineer
W. 202613roadway Ave. s~okane, WA 99260-0170 (509) 456-3600 FAX (509) 456-4715 TDD: (509) 324-3166
~
REVIE4J CDMMENTS
SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER
DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES
PROJ~CT B 92I37 REVIEWER : Bob Turner
PROJECT YiTAME: Village on Brvadway DATE: 31 Mar 94
~~~EW i
COMMENTS
GEITERAL :
A recorded property deed f wh,ich can be obtained at the County
Auditor' s office, is required to process the dedicativn of right-
of-way for Braadway and Vercler. The right-of--way dedication must
be completed befare permit release can occur.
A bond for the project cannot be prepar+ed until all the road plans
are completed and approved. A11 rvad plans znust have tYxe owners
s ~.gnature on it.
Set-aside for future acquisition by the County f or future right-of--
way needs, ald and new right-of-uray li.nes, need to be shown on the
site plan. Required 208 swale areas and landscaping rnust be outside
of seit-aside area, and right-of-way.
Show atypical sectivn of aswale. The swale must be sodded and
side slopes should not be steeper than 2:I for up ta 121' in depth.
For swales with greater depths use 3:1. The top of the swal~ should
be a rninimurn 2 in. above the drywell lid.
Calculations, including a backwater analysis, proving the adequate
perfarrnance of grates, pipes, inlets, curb cuts, trench drains,
ditehes, etc. need to be subxnitted.
DRA~IVAGE REPORT:
My review of basins 2, 3, and 8, raised questions about accuracy vf
the areas their percentage vf pervious and ixttperviaus areas. Please
provide further inf ormation to cTarify these figures.
Provide a drywell detail that campl~~s with Spokane County
Standards; use a type IV frame and grate for dryweIls in swales.A
copy of our standard detail is attached to yvur plans.
Page 1 of 4
REVIEW COMMENT3
PROJECT # 892137
REVIEW # 1
31 Mar 94
Proper sizing of drywells is required. A Type "A" drywell will
handle 5,000 sf and a Type "B" drywell will handle 15,000 sf. Use
multiples of each to provide adequate drywell structures. Bowstring
calculations to prove that the drywell type selected is sufficient
will be required if these recommended values are exceeded. A
separate bowstring will be required for each basin. The analysis
you presented in the drainage report would be valid if the swales
were inter-connected.
PLANS:
Sheet L1: Label the old and new right-of-way lines and the set-
aside area. Required 208 swale areas and landscaping must be
outside of set-aside area, and right-of-way.
Show the drywell in the westerly swale (correlate with the civil
site and drainage plans).
Trees shall be a minimum of 10 feet away from drywells in a swale
to avoid any conflict.
Drywells on the plan have been mislabeled as yard drains. Please
correct.
Sheet L2: Trees shall be a minimum of 10 feet away from drywells in
a swale to avoid any conflict.
Drywells on the plan have been mislabeled as yard drains. Please
correct.
Landscaping in the northwest swale shall be pulled back out of the
swale to avoid encroachment.
Label the old and new right-of-way lines. Required landscaping must
be outside of the right-of-way.
3heet 3P1: More clearly show how all the drainage for this
pool\recreation area is connected to the civil site and drainage
plans.
3heet C1: Please provide the information requested on the plan.
3heet C2: Calculations, including a backwater analysis, proving the
adequate performance of grates, pipes, inlets, curb cuts, trench
drains, ditches, etc. need to be submitted. Suggest that you use
fewer curb cuts into swale #12 and use curb inlet detail attached.
Page 2 of 4
REVIEW COMMENT3
PROJECT # B92137
REVIEW # 1
31 Mar 94
Detail pipe entrance to swale. Show a concrete splash block to
eliminate erosion. Typical for all pipe outfalls to swales.
Detail if there is any sheet flow from the pavement going into
swale #2 or #3.
Bypass for the approach to Vercler is ok due to its minor amount.
Approximately 500 square feet is the threshold for allowable runoff
off of the property.
Sheet C3: Calculations, including a backwater analysis, proving the
adequate performance of grates, pipes, inlets, curb cuts, trench
drains, ditches, etc. need to be submitted.
The building in the middle of the sheet appears to have no outlet
for the rainwater tight line.
Bypass for the approach to Broadway is not allowable. Approximately
500 square feet is the threshold for allowable runoff off of the
property. Suggest you move the trench drain closer to Broadway.
Set-aside for future acquisition by the County for future right-of-
way needs, old and new right-of-way lines, need to be shown on the
site plan.
Detail if there is any sheet flow from the pavement going into
swale P.
What portion of basin 8 goes to swale #7?
Sheet C6: Provide prof ile calculations as attached to the plan.
Label your cross section sideslopes at a maximum of 1 1/2 : 1.
Need complete drainage plans for Vercler.
A recorded property deed, which can be obtained at the County
Auditor's office, is required to process the dedication of right-
of-way for Broadway and Vercler. The right-of-way dedication must
be completed before permit release can occur.
A bond for the project cannot be prepared until all the road plans
are completed and approved. All road plans must have the owners
signature on it.
Page 3 of 4
REVIEW COMMENTS
PROJECT # B92137
REVIEW # 1
31 Mar 94
Once the road plans are approved a mylar of those road plans will
be required.
Correct the misleading label of the 40 foot right-of-way on the
plan.
Sheet C7: Provide a drywell detail that complies with Spokane
County Standards; use a type IV frame and grate for drywells in
swales. A copy of our standard detail is attached to your plans.
Sheet C8: Show a typical section of a swale. The swale must be
sodded and side slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 for up to 12"
in depth. For swales with greater depths use 3:1. The top of the
swale should be a minimum 2 in. above the drywell lid.
Provide a drywell detail that complies with Spokane County
Standards; use a type IV frame and grate for drywells in swales. A
copy of our standard detail is attached to your plans.
Please address the elevation discrepancies marked on the plans.
Sheet C9: Homes and other structures circled on this plan are in
the same location as proposed drainage swales. Provide soils
information verifying that typical Valley Garrison gravels or other
soil type approved by the County Engineer are being used in these
swales.
Page 4 of 4