2021, 06-29 Study SessionAGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
STUDY SESSION FORMAT
Tuesday, June 29, 2021 6:00 p.m.
Remotely via ZOOM Meeting
10210 E Sprague Avenue
Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting
NOTE: In response to Governor Inslee's March 24, 2020 Proclamation concerning the COVID-19
Emergency, which waives and suspends the requirement to hold in -person meetings and provides options
for the public to attend remotely, physical public attendance at Spokane Valley Council meetings are
suspended until the Governor's order has been rescinded or amended. Therefore, until further notice, a live
feed of the meeting will be available on our website and on Comcast channel 14. Public comments will
only be accepted for those items noted on the agenda as "public comment opportunity," will be
accepted via the following links, and must be received by 4:00 pm the day of the meeting.
• Sign up to Provide Oral Public Comment at the Meeting via Calling -In
• Submit Written Public Comment Prior to the Meeting
• Join the Zoom WEB Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ACTION ITEM:
1. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Local Access Streets Project — Bill Helbig
[public comment opportunity]
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
DISCUSSION LEADER
SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL
2. Bill Helbig, Jerremy Clark Traffic Impact Fee Studies, Mirabeau Discussion/Information
And N. Pines Subareas
3. Gloria Mantz
4. John Hohman, Cary Driskell,
Erik Lamb
5. John Bottelli
6. Mayor Wick
Capital Improvement Program Discussion/Information
Code Enforcement Discussion/Information
Orchard Avenue Park Discussion/Information
Advance Agenda Discussion/Information
7. Information Only (will not be reported or discussed):
(a) Police Department Monthly Report; (b) Finance Monthly Report
8. Mayor Wick Council Comments Discussion/Information
9. Mark Calhoun City Manager Comments Discussion/Information
ADJOURN
Council Agenda June 29, 2021 Page 1 of 1
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: June 29, 2021 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Bid Award — 2021 Local Access Streets: South
Park Road
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 3.35.10 — Contract Authority
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
• May 21, 2019: Administrative Report on the 2020-2021 Six Year Transportation
Improvement Plan, which included this project.
• June 4, 2019: Council passed Resolution 19-008, adopting the 2020-2021 Six Year
Transportation Improvement Plan, which included this project.
• May 5, 2020: Administrative Report on the 2021-2026 Six Year Transportation
Improvement Plan, which included this project.
• May 26, 2020: Council passed Resolution 20-009, adopting the 2021-2026 Six Year
Transportation Improvement Plan, which included this project.
• March 16, 2021: Administrative Report on the 2021 Construction Projects
BACKGROUND:
The road preservation project provides street repairs and preservation efforts to local access
streets west of South Park Road between Appleway Avenue and 6th Avenue. The project includes
installation of ADA curb ramps, pavement repairs, and storm water improvements to reduce
puddling in the area.
The funds for this project originated in Fund 106, the Solid Waste Fund, as the "Solid Waste Road
Wear Fee," and was subsequently transferred as part of the 2021 Budget to Fund 311, the
Pavement Preservation Fund. The current estimated project budget and cost are shown below:
Project Costs
Preliminary Engineering
Construction
Total Estimated Costs
$ 45,000
$ 1,340,595
$ 1,389,000
Project Budget
City Fund 311
City Fund 402
Total Budget
$ 1,200,000
$ 189,000
$ 1,389,000
The project was designed in-house and advertised on June 11, 2021. Bids will be opened on
June 25, 2021, and as such, inclusion of the Bid Tabulation and recommendation for award is not
available at time of Council Agenda publication. This information and a formal recommendation
will be made at the Council Meeting, the timing of which is necessary to assure timely project
completion.
OPTIONS: Move to award the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, or take other
appropriate action
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to award 2021 Local Access Streets Project CIP
#325 to in the amount of $ and authorize the City Manager to finalize
and execute the construction contract.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Budget impacts will be discussed with Council at the meeting.
STAFF CONTACT: William Helbig, PE, City Engineer
ATTACHMENTS: The Bid Tabulation and award recommendation will be provided at the meeting.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: June 29, 2021 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Mirabeau and North Pines Subareas Transportation Impact Fee Rate
Study
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b); RCW 43.21 C; RCW 82.02.050-.110;
WAC 197-11; WAC 365-196-850; SVMC 17.110-010; SVMC 22.100.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: December 15, 2020: Council approved Ordinance No.
20-026 to establish Transportation Impact Fees as part of CTA-2020-0005; January 1, 2021
Master Fee Schedule updated to include Schedule G: S. Barker Corridor Transportation Impact
Fees
BACKGROUND: Staff have identified the Mirabeau Subarea and the North Pines Road/SR-27
Corridor as an area experiencing a significant amount of new development. This has and will
lead to continued degradation of levels of service for traffic movement on Pines Road/SR-27 and
adjacent arterials.
Further, staff have identified challenges with collecting a proportional fee to offset the impacts of
the new development occurring around the corridor. Currently, the two primary mechanisms for
the City to impose mitigation requirements on new development in this area are through
concurrency and SEPA. However, there are challenges with each, as both are limited to larger
projects and impacts. Thus, while all new development, including relatively "smaller" residential
short plats, will contribute to the impacts within the corridor, the City does not currently have the
tools to require such development to address its impacts to the system.
In 2015, staff contracted with a transportation engineering and planning firm, Fehr & Peers, to
complete a comprehensive traffic study for the Mirabeau Subarea. Through this study, the City
identified various improvements needed to accommodate new development and the anticipated
proportional, fair -share costs per trip for new development. The study was finalized in June, 2016.
In 2019, the Mirabeau Subarea Study was updated to include expanded area for development
west of the Mirabeau Subarea and south of 1-90. Instead of changing the boundaries of the
previously established Mirabeau Subarea, a second Subarea was established as the North Pines
Road Subarea.
Transportation impact fees are allowed pursuant to RCW 82.02.050-82.02.110 and SVMC
22.100. These are fees specifically allowed to address impacts from new development and they
may be imposed on all development within a designated area, such as the Mirabeau Subarea or
North Pines Road Subarea. Generally, they are collected when a building permit application is
submitted, though there are some allowed deferrals for smaller developments. Further, impact
fees provide a known fee so developers may plan for mitigation costs with certainty.
In June 2021, Fehr & Peers developed a transportation impact fee rate study derived from the
Mirabeau Subarea Study Update (the rate study is designated as the "Mirabeau & North Pines
Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study" or "Rate Study" herein). The Rate Study
evaluated the previously determined infrastructure improvements and their associated costs, and
how those costs can be fairly and proportionately distributed to new development that contributes
traffic that affects the transportation network in a manner that complies with the requirements of
RCW 82.02.050 - .110 and SVMC 22.100. The Rate Study calculates a "per trip" impact fee of
$716 per PM peak -hour vehicle trip generated in the Mirabeau Subarea and $2,816 per PM peak -
hour vehicle trip generated in the North Pines Road Subarea.
The following list highlights prominent new development types and their associated impact fee.
Costs shown are based on the "per trip" rate of each Subarea. The Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10t" Edition quantifies various "generation rates"
associated with a multitude of different land uses and applies an appropriate multiplier to the "per
trip" rate.
Land Use Description
1. Single Family Home/Duplex
2. Multi -Family
3. Hotel (3 or more levels)
4. Elementary School
5. Medical Clinic
6. General Office
7. Shopping Center
Mirabeau Subarea
$709 per dwelling unit
$401 per dwelling unit
$709 per dwelling unit
$0.98 per sq. ft.
$2.35 per sq. ft.
$0.82 per sq. ft.
$1.80 per sq. ft.
N. Pines Rd. Subarea
$2,788 per dwelling unit
$1,577 per dwelling unit
$2,788 per dwelling unit
$3.86 per sq. ft.
$9.24 per sq. ft.
$3.24 per sq. ft.
$7.08 per sq. ft.
Chapter 22.100 SVMC was adopted in December, 2020 and imposes impact fees in all areas
identified pursuant to adopted rate studies in such amounts as adopted pursuant to the rate
studies and Master Fee Schedule. Staff are recommending adoption of the Mirabeau and North
Pines Rate Study to allow assessment and collection of impact fees. After adoption of the Rate
Study, staff will come forward with an amendment to the Master Fee Schedule for the Mirabeau
and North Pines impact fees.
This administrative report will discuss the Transportation Impact Fee rate study and proposed
changes to the impact fee schedule to be applied towards new development in the designated
Mirabeau Subarea and North Pines Road Subarea.
As part of the process to adopt the Rate Study, there will be a public hearing on July 13, 2021.
OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed with first reading at a future council meeting; or take other
action deemed appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to proceed with first reading of an
ordinance to adopt the rate study at a future council meeting.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There is no additional cost to the City if the proposed Rate
Study and associated Transportation Impact Fees are adopted. Proposed impact fees are
anticipated to generate up to $3.98 million of new revenue to be applied to transportation system
improvements identified in the Mirabeau & North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee
Rate Study.
STAFF CONTACT: Bill Helbig, City Engineer; Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney; Jerremy Clark,
Traffic Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
1. PowerPoint Presentation
2. Mirabeau & North Pines Road Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study (2021)
3. Mirabeau Subarea Study (2016)
4. Mirabeau Subarea Study Update (2019)
June 29, 2021
Bill Helbig, City Engineer
Jerremy Clark, Traffic Engineer
Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney
Topics
Transportation Impact Fee Discussion
Mirabeau Subarea Study (2016)
Mirabeau Subarea Study Update (2019)
Mirabeau & North Pines Road Subarea
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
Proposed Rates
2
3
Transportation Impact Fees
What are they?
Statutorily authorized mechanism to have development pay
for its proportionate impact on services and infrastructure
May be limited in application to an identified geographical
area rather than City -Wide
History in the City of Spokane Valley
December 15, 2020 —Council adopted Ordinance 20-026
creating SVMC 22.100: Transportation Impact Fees
Fee amounts established by rate studies and amended
to the Master Fee Schedule
January 1, 2021 —Master Fee Schedule updated including
Schedule G — South Barker Corridor Transportation Impact
Fee Schedule
Spokane
.Valley
Mirabeau Subarea Study (2016) & Update (2019)
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
• Purpose
• Study Intersections
Existing Level of Service
• Future Level Of Service
• Recommendations
• Fair Share Analysis &
Potential Funding
4
531
6
437
532
116 Mirabeau Subarea
E ( J N Pines Road Subarea
• Projects Identified in Previous Study
• Intersections Analyzed In Update
439
4 3A
259
294.
301
3.02
290
295
333
rr
309
30rs
E Mnntgari sry nr
251
KnoxA;
2uEi
304
292
297
534
284
293
39:,
31.3`
4 E Trens Ave
E
1
296
DM..? A •e
ri.
32:i
I�•,w,n Pncl
:i21
39-1
Kaiser'Xcarl
316
E !roans
322
E.Nc , aP
329
305
310
311
306
396
May Av.
�Ik ...
312 E Main e 335
397
330
3L
565
350 351
E Sprague Ps..8
347 Apos,Na'!
348
352
353
349
•
Ahalciohes7 RR
356
EtithAte
E
331
Spokane
Valley
••
373
336
E EuCI1
332
315
A
•
350
36 7
354
370 __
271
376
3
Mirabeau Subarea Studies
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Purpose
Area in central part of City experiencing
significant development
Pines Corridor Level of Service degrading;
adjacent corridors impacted
Identify and evaluate impacted
intersections on adjacent arterials
Document Existing Conditions
Identify Future (2040) Conditions
• Develop Mitigation Recommendations
• Identify Fair Share Costs
5
Mirabeau Subarea Studies
Study Intersections
Pines Road/Indiana Avenue
Pines Road/I-90 EB Ramps
Pines Road/Mission Avenue
Pines Road/Broadway Avenue
Pines Road/Sprague Avenue
Mirabeau Parkway/Mansfield Avenue
Evergreen Road/Sprague Avenue
Sullivan Road/Mission Avenue
Argonne Road/Trent Avenue
0
6
• 1
7
Mirabeau Subarea Studies
Intersection Level of Service Results (PM Peak Hour)
Intersection
Existing
Conditions
2040
Conditions
Pines Rd/Indiana Ave
D
E
Pines Rd/I-90 EB Ramps
E
F
Pines Rd/Mission Ave
E
F
Pines Rd/Broadway Ave
E
D
Pines Rd/Sprague Ave
E
E
Mirabeau Pkwy/Mansfield Ave
B
F
Evergreen Rd/Sprague Ave
D
D
Sullivan Rd/Mission Ave
E
F
Argonne Rd/Trent Ave
F1
F
(Improved with signal timing improvements)
1 Argonne/Mullan Corridor Memorandum (2018)
Spokane
.Valley
Mirabeau Subarea Studies
Recommended Improvements
Pines Road / Indiana Avenue
Add second dedicated westbound left turn lane
Pines Road / I-90 EB Ramps
Add eastbound left turn lane & northbound
right turn lane
Pines Road / Mission Avenue
Reconfigure Mission Ave. approaches to eliminate split
phase signal timing, add southbound right turn lane,
upgrade traffic signal
Pines Road / Sprague Avenue
Add southbound right turn lane and second eastbound
left turn lane
Mirabeau Parkway / Mansfield Avenue
Add traffic signal or roundabout (estimated as signal)
Mirabeau Subarea Studies
Recommended Improvements
Sullivan Road / Mission Avenue
Reconfigure eastbound approach
for left -only and
shared through/right turn lane
Argonne Road / Trent Avenue
Add second westbound left turn
lane
9
cis
0
ce
c
a)
0
L
0)
L
a)
>
W
Sprague Avenue
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
Fair Share Cost Analysis
Project
Estimated
Cost
Eligible
Cost
Mirabeau
Subarea
% Cost
North Pines
Subarea
% Cost
Pines Rd / Indiana Ave
$1,545,000
$1,545,000
18% $278,100
42% $648,900
Pines Rd / I-90 EB Ramps
$1,152,000
$1,152,000
18% $207,360
48% $552,960
Pines Rd / Mission Ave
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
16% $320,000
53% $1,060,000
Mirabeau Pkwy / Mansfield Ave
$1,252,000
$1,252,000
38% $475,760
5% $62,600
Sullivan Rd / Mission Ave
$97,000
$97,000
4% $3,880
9% $8,730
Pines Rd / Sprague Ave
$843,000
$759,000
6% $45,540
19% $144,210
Argonne Rd / Trent Ave
$776,000
$540,000
10% $54,000
7% $37,800
Total:
$ 7,665,000
$ 5,615,000
$ 1,384,640
$ 2,515,200
10
Other
Funding
Sources
45%
North Pines
Road Subarea
Impact Fees
33%
( !TV OF
pokane
.Valley
Existing
Deficiencies
4%
1",%.
Mirabeau
Subarea
Impact Fees
18%
Impact Fees: Proposed Rates
• Proposed Mirabeau Rate
■ $716 Per PM Peak Trip
• Proposed N. Pines Road Rate
$2,816 Per PM Peak Trip
• Adopted S. Barker Rate
110
$1,272 Per PM Peak Trip
• Northeast Industrial Area
11 • $2,831 per PM Peak Trip
ITE Code
City of Spokane Valley Mirabeau Transportation Impact Fee Rate Schedule
Adjusted Trips
PM Peak Vehicle Passby
ITE Land Use Category z per Unit of
Trip Rate' Measure3
Impact Fee Per Unit4 @
$716 per PM Peak Vehicle Trip
210
Single Family & Duplex
0.99
0%
0.99
$709 per dwelling unit
220
Multi -Family
0.56
0%
0.56
$401
per dwelling unit
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
0.70
0%
0.70
$501
per room
520
Elementary School
0.00137
0%
0.00137
$0.98
per sq ft
630
Medical Clinic
0.00328
0%
0.00328
$2.35
per sq ft
710
General Office
0.00115
0%
0.00115
$0.82
per sq ft
820
Sho..in. Center
0.00381
34%
0.00251
$1.80
.er s. ft
1 ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition): 4-6 PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Generation Rates for the Adjacent Street Traffic (weekday 4-
6PM); This worksheet represents only the generalized land uses in the SRTC regional travel demand model and is NOT all-inclusive; see
Table 10 for a wider variety of uses; Projects with land uses not in Table 8 or 10 shall prepare a trip generation and distribution letter and
will be responsible for a fee based on $716 per PM peak hour trip.
ITE Code
City of Spokane Valley North Pines Road Transportation Impact Fee Rate Schedule
Adjusted Trips Impact Fee Per Unit4 @
PM Peak Vehicle Passby
ITE Land Use Category a per Unit of
o
Trip Rate Measure3 $2,816 per PM Peak Vehicle Trip
210
Single Family & Duplex 0.99
0%
0.99
$2,788 per dwelling unit
220
Multi -Family
0.56
0%
0.56
$1,577 per dwelling unit
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
0.70
0%
0.70
$1,971 per room
520
Elementary School
0.00137
0%
0.00137
$3.86 per sq ft
630
Medical Clinic
0.00328
0%
0.00328
$9.24 per sq ft
710
General Office
0.00115
0%
0.00115
$3.24 per sq ft
820
Sho..in. Center
0.00381
34%
0.00251
$7.08 .er s. ft
1 ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition): 4-6 PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Generation Rates for the Adjacent Street Traffic (weekday 4-
6PM); This worksheet represents only the generalized land uses in the SRTC regional travel demand model and is NOT all-inclusive; see
Table 11 for a wider variety of uses; Projects with land uses not in Table 9 or 11 shall prepare a trip generation and distribution letter and
will be responsible for a fee based on $2,816 per PM peak hour trip.
2 New trips will exclude "pass -by" trips: see "ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition" (2017).
3 PM peak trip rate excluding passby trips
4 sq ft = square feet, room = available hotel/motel room
Pursuant to chapter 22.100 SVMC, transportation impact fees for uses not listed in the rate table shall be based
on (1) the most similar land use category identified in the table, or (2) the base rate and the most similar land use category identified in ITE Trip
Generation Manual, as documented by a trip generation and distribution letter in accordance with Section 3.2 of the Spokane Valley Street Standards.
Discussion
• Questions?
• Consensus to move the
Impact Fee Rate Study
adoption forward
Take other action
deemed appropriate
12
531
2
Mirabeau Subarea
1 Pines Road Subarea
• Projects Identified in Previous Study
• Intersections Analyzed In Update
r.}
..
293
397
.. n -7' Ahail] tinned RR
335
2z1
Spc'k3...
Valley
nraguc as
•
316
Mirabeau & North
Pines Road Subarea
Transportation
Impact Fee Rate Study
Prepared for:
City of Spokane Valley, Washington
June, 2021
SE21-0679
FEHRPEERS
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Study Area 1
Methodology 4
Project List 5
Travel Growth 5
Cost Allocation 8
Existing Transportation Deficiencies 9
Fair -Share Cost 10
Committed External Funding 12
Cost per PM Peak Hour Trip 13
Impact Fee Schedule 14
Trip Generation 14
Pass -By Trip Adjustment 14
Schedule of Rates 14
Appendices
Appendix A — Expanded Impact Fee Schedule
Appendix B — Mirabeau Traffic Study Update (2019)
List of Figures
Figure 1. Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Traffic Study Area 3
Figure 2. Impact Fee Methodology 4
Figure 3. Impact Fee Cost Allocation 9
List of Tables
Table 1. Mirabeau Traffic Study Project List and Cost Estimates 5
Table 2. Growth in Mirabeau TIF Area PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips (2015-2040) 7
Table 3. Growth in North Pines Road TIF Area PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips (2015-2040) 8
Table 4. Percent of 2040 Traffic Attributable to each Project Location 11
Table 5. Mirabeau TIF Area Eligible Cost Calculations 11
Table 6. North Pines Road TIF Area Eligible Cost Calculations 12
Table 7. Cost Per PM Peak Hour Trip Calculations 13
Table 8. Mirabeau Impact Fee Schedule 15
Table 9. North Pines Road Impact Fee Schedule 15
Table 10. Expanded Mirabeau Impact Fee Schedule 16
Table 11. Expanded North Pines Road Impact Fee Schedule 17
This page intentionally left blank.
Introduction
This report documents the methods, assumptions, and findings of a transportation impact fee (TIF) rate
study for the Mirabeau and North Pines Road subareas in Spokane Valley. The need for a TIF is identified
in the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update (Dec 2019), which documented land use growth in the
Mirabeau and North Pines Road subareas. That study projected how resulting traffic growth will degrade
traffic operations at numerous intersections in and near the two subareas and identified several
transportation capacity projects to support growth and ensure adequate level of service through the year
2040. That study identified the needed future transportation capacity improvements in the area,
completed project cost estimates, and included a fair share cost analysis to separate project costs
between growth in both subareas and growth from other parts of the region. This TIF rate study builds on
the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study and identifies a Growth Management Act (GMA) compliant impact fee
rate schedule per development unit in both the Mirabeau Subarea and the North Pines Road Subarea.
Using this rate schedule, developers in the TIF area can quickly identify their fair share contribution toward
new transportation projects, facilitating development and reducing the cost and complexity of traffic
studies associated with project permitting and transportation concurrency requirements.
Except as otherwise identified herein, the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update provides the basis for all
TIF rates calculated in this rate study. As part of adoption of any TIF rates, both the Mirabeau Subarea
Traffic Study Update and this TIF rate study will be adopted as supporting documents.
Study Area
The Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update defined the impact fee area for the Mirabeau and North Pines
Road Subarea as shown in Figure 1. Along with the two subareas, that Study identified seven
intersections, as mapped in Figure 1, where forecast development in the two subareas would contribute
to a degradation of transportation level of service (LOS) by the year 2040. The areas were defined in that
study using a select zone analysis from the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) regional
travel demand model to quantify the impact of the transportation analysis zones (TAZs) to the seven
intersections.
• Mirabeau TIF Area - Figure 1 shows the Mirabeau subarea which covers most of the area
between Pines Road and Sullivan Road and 1-90 and the Spokane River in north central Spokane
Valley. This includes the following transportation analysis zones (TAZs) from the SRTC regional
travel demand model: 320, 321, and 322. This area will be referred to in this report as the
Mirabeau TIF area.
• North Pines Road TIF Area - Figure 1 also shows the North Pines Road subarea, which is around
North Pines Road covering most of the area between University Road and Adams Road and East
Valleyway Avenue and Trent Avenue excluding the Mirabeau Subarea. The North Pines Road
subarea includes the following TAZs: 293, 297, 298, 305, 306, 329, 330, 331, 395, 396, and 397.
This area will be referred to in this report as the North Pines Road TIF area.
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
June 2021
Based on the analysis provided in the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update, future development in the
two subareas is expected to contribute between 13% and 66% of future traffic to the seven intersections
identified - depending on the intersection.
439
530\
- 531
—7
E Upr Ir Dr
u_
( J Mirabeau Subarea
( N Pines Road Subarea
— 436
®_._.lp Project Locations
74
---289
z
301
308
E Sinto Ave
E Ca aldo
568
350
532
E Montgomery Dr
E Knox Ave
I534
(
E Rich Ave
313
Mirabeau Prkwy
E Mansfield Ave Mansfield / 321
Union Pacific
ific RR L
•- 90 E Nora,ve_ 322
A
E Mission Ave
297 r
y 298
EBoone Ave
-3 I
E Alki Ave
oadway Ave
`Sprague AV
349 I Abandoned RR 366
E 4th Ave
J 370 nH
354 r
394
Kaiser Works
315
Montana Rail Link RR
_r_
E Euclid Ave
371
376
Figure 1
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Traffic Study Area
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
June 2021
Methodology
The impact fee for the Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subareas was developed to establish the fair share
of transportation improvement costs that may be charged to new development in the area. Revised Code
of Washington Section 82.02.050 authorizes cities planning under the
GMA to impose impact fees for system improvements that are
reasonably required to support and mitigate the impacts of new
development. Fees may not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of
improvements and cannot be used to fund existing deficiencies.
The following key points summarize the process for developing the
impact fee structure (refer to Figure 2):
• The Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update identified a list of
future projects and estimated costs that will be needed to
support future growth through the year 2040.
• The Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update also accounted for
any existing deficiency (intersections/roadway segments that do
not meet current level of service standards) by deducting the
costs of those deficiencies from the total project cost.
• The Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update next identified the
share of traffic growth that is attributed to each of the two TIF
areas.
• The forecast growth in PM peak hour vehicle trips in the
Mirabeau and North Pines Road TIF area was estimated by
converting the forecast land use growth in the SRTC regional
travel demand model (and modified based on estimates
provided by developers) using the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition.
• A cost per PM peak hour trip was calculated by dividing the fair
share cost of each project by the growth in vehicle trips in each
subarea.
• Lastly, a land use -based fee schedule was developed using the
cost per PM peak vehicle trip. Trip rates for multiple land use
categories were estimated using vehicle trip generation rates from the ITE Trip Generation
Manual, 10th Edition. Using the ITE Trip Generation Manual will provide consistency between a
project trip generation letter or traffic impact study and the impact fee rate.
Figure 2. Impact Fee
Methodology
Projects and costs
identified (Mirabeau
Subarea Traffic Study)
1
Eligible project costs
identified (Mirabeau
Subarea Traffic Study)
Fair share of each project
to TIF areas identified
(Mirabeau Subarea Traffic
Study)
Forecast growth in PM
peak hour vehicle trips in
TIF areas
Growth cost allocation
(cost per PM peak hour
vehicle trip)
Impact Fee Schedule
The following sections describe in detail these elements that that are integral to the final impact fee
schedule.
Pines Rd/ Mission
Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/
Mission Ave
Pines Rd/
Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/
Trent Ave
Project List
The Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study, originally completed in 2016 and updated in December 2019,
included an analysis of traffic demand through the year 2040 to identify potential traffic improvement
projects at major intersections in and near the subareas. That study identified a total of seven projects
that will be needed by 2040 to accommodate future growth and maintain level of service standards. Those
projects, and costs in 2021 dollars, are shown in Table 1. The seven projects total approximately $7.66
million in 2021 dollars (note: these costs have been updated from the cost estimates in the Mirabeau
Subarea Traffic Study Update to account for construction cost inflation or more detailed estimates by the
City of Spokane Valley - COSV).
Table 1. Mirabeau Traffic Study Project List and Cost Estimates
Project Description Program
Cost Estimate
(2021 dollars)
Pines Rd/ Indiana
Ave
Add westbound left -turn lane; retime traffic signal
N/A
Pines Rd/ I-90 EB Add eastbound left -turn lane and northbound right -turn
Ramps pocket (extending back to Nora Ave); retime traffic N/A
signal
Reconfigure lane assignments on Mission Ave to include
eastbound dual -left and a through -right lane and
westbound left, through, and right turn lane; retime and
upgrade traffic signal; add southbound right -turn lane
(extending back to the 1-90 off -ramp)
Add traffic signal, add new 180 foot southbound 2022-2027 TIP
through -right lane (#41)
Reconfigure eastbound to include a left and through -
right lane; retime signal
Add a southbound right -turn -only lane; convert the
existing southbound through -right lane to a through -
only lane; add a second eastbound left -turn -only lane.
2022-2027 TIP
(#13)
N/A
N/A
Add a second westbound left -turn lane. N/A
TOTAL
$1, 545,000
$1,152, 000
$2,000,000
$1,252,000
$97,000
$843,000
$776,000
$7,665,000
Source: Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update (December 2019). Costs were updated based on California Construction Cost Index,
which showed a 3.0% inflation rate from December 2019 to March 2021. The exception being the Pines Road/Mission Avenue
project, for which cost estimates were more recently updated by COSV.
Note: TIP = City of Spokane Valley Transportation Improvement Plan.
Travel Growth
Determining the growth in travel demand caused by new development is a key requirement for a TIF
program. In nearly every TIF program across Washington and the country, the total eligible costs of
building new transportation capacity is divided by the total growth in trips to determine a cost per trip. All
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
June 2021
developments pay the same cost per trip, but larger developments that generate more trips pay a higher
total fee than smaller developments. In this way, the cost to provide the new transportation infrastructure
is fairly apportioned to new development. Moreover, in setting the boundary for the TIF, a select zone
analysis was performed to validate that all the areas within the two TIF areas contribute a meaningful
amount of total traffic to the combined project sites relative to the amount of growth expected. The
amount of traffic varies somewhat based on which project location is evaluated and which TAZ the project
resides in, but in all cases each of the 11 identified TAZs within the two TIF areas contribute a similar
proportion of the total TIF area traffic to the project sites relative to the amount of growth expected in the
respective TAZ.
For the Mirabeau TIF area, the future growth in PM peak hour vehicle trips was estimated using the
change in land use in the study area from 2015 and 2040 based on the data provided in the original
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study (2016) as well as trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th
Edition. Forecast land use growth was attained from a combination of sources, including conversations
with major developers, a land use audit of development in the pipeline, and the SRTC regional travel
demand model.
For the North Pines Road TIF area, which was incorporated by the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
in 2019, the future growth in PM peak hour vehicle trips was estimated using the change in land use in
the study area from the 2015 and 2040 SRTC regional travel demand model as well as trip rates from the
ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. The SRTC travel demand model includes 11 land use categories:
two residential and nine non-residential categories. For each land use in the SRTC model, an associated
ITE trip rate was identified.
Table 2 summarizes the calculation for the Mirabeau TIF area and Table 3 summarizes the calculation for
the North Pines Road TIF area.
It should be noted that COSV directs developers to apply the trip calculation methodology based on the
process detailed in Section 4.4 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition when estimating trip
generation for developments. In some situations the best -fit curve would be used instead of average trip
rates. That methodology is applicable at the development scale where developments of various sizes can
impact trip rates. However, in this situation given growth forecast in the model will occur among
developments of various sizes over a 25-year period, using average trip rates is more appropriate and was
applied to forecast growth in trips in the TIF area.
Table 2. Growth in Mirabeau TIF Area PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips (2015-2040)
Land Use (LU)
2015-2040 Unit of
LU Growth Measure
ITE Code ITE Description
ITE Average
Trip Rate 1
(PM peak hr.)
Growth in
Trips (LU
growth x
trip rate)
Single Family
Residential
Multi -Family
Residential
65 Dwelling
Units
979 Dwelling
Units
Hotel/Motel 150 Rooms
Thousand
Retail Trade 63.89
Square Feet
Office 2,561 Employees
210 Single -Family Detached
Housing
220 Multifamily Housing
(Low -Rise)
310 Hotel
820 Shopping Center 3.81 244
710 General Office Building 0.40 1,025
0.99
65
0.56 549
0.60 90
Total Growth in PM Peak Hour Trips 1,973
1. ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10t" Edition; average trip rate of adjacent street traffic 4-6 PM was used for all land uses given growth
will occur among developments of various sizes.
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
June 2021
Table 3. Growth in North Pines Road TIF Area PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips (2015-2040)
SRTC Land Use (L
Single Family
Residential
Multi -Family
Residential
Hotel/Motel
Agriculture, Forestry,
Mining, Industrial,
Manufacturing,
Wholesale
2015-2040 Unit of
LU Growth Measure
78
157
Dwelling
Units
Dwelling
Units
ITE Code ITE Description
210 Single -Family Detached
Housing
220 Multifamily Housing
(Low -Rise)
0 Rooms N/A N/A
ITE Average
Trip Rate 1
(PM peak hr.)
0.99
Growth in
Trips (LU
growth x
trip rate)
78
0.56 88
N/A 0
79 Employees 110 General Light Industrial 0.49 39
Retail Trade (Non -
Central Business 155 Employees 820 Shopping Center 1.62 252
District)
Services and Offices 248 Employees 710 General Office Building 0.40 100
Finance, Insurance,
and Real Estate 11 Employees 710 General Office Building 0.40 7
Services (FIRES)
Medical 371 Employees 630 Clinic 0.85 316
Retail Trade (CBD) 0 Employees N/A N/A N/A 0
Education Employees 18 Employees 520 Elementary School 1.78 33
University Employees 0 Employees N/A N/A 0.40 0
Total Growth in PM Peak Hour Trips 9112
1. ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10`" Edition; average trip rate of adjacent street traffic 4-6 PM was used for all land uses given growth
will occur among developments of various sizes.
2. Estimated growth in trips is slightly higher than the findings in the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update (2019) because the retail
trip generation is based on employees instead of square foot and the trip generation from the school land use was updated.
Using this methodology, it is forecast that the Mirabeau TIF area would generate 1,973 new PM peak hour
vehicle trips by 2040, and the North Pines TIF area would generate 911 new PM peak hour trips by 2040.
The total PM peak hour vehicle trip growth for these two areas will be used in the calculation of the TIF
rate.
Cost Allocation
Three steps were used to allocate costs per PM peak hour trip, see Figure 3. First, the TIF methodology
must separate the share of project costs that address existing deficiencies from the share of project costs
that add transportation capacity and serve new growth. Second, resulting growth -related improvement
costs are then further separated to identify the share of growth related to land development in Mirabeau
and North Pines Road TIF areas. It should be noted that dedicated funding from external sources
(state/regional grants, other mitigation payments, etc.) is considered in the impact fee eligible costs, if the
dedicated funding exceeds the share of costs caused by growth outside of the TIF areas. This is currently
not the case, thus non -City funding sources were not excluded from the total eligible project cost.
Figure 3. Impact Fee Cost Allocation
STEPS
Project List
$7.6 M
Future Growth
$7.3 M
Inside Mirabeau
TIF Area
$1.4 M
lir +2% Admin
Eligible Mirabeau
Impact Fee
$1.4 M
Existing Deficiency
$320 K
Inside N Pines Rd
TIF Area
$2.5 M
4,,r +2% Admin
Eligible N Pines Rd
Impact Fee
$2.6 M
Existing Transportation Deficiencies
1
Outside TIF Areas
$3.4M
4fr
Other Funds Needed
$3.8 M
An existing conditions analysis was conducted for the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update, which
identified existing level of service (LOS) deficiencies at two of the seven project locations: Pines Road &
Sprague Avenue and Argonne Road & Trent Avenue. A deficiency at an intersection is defined in the
Comprehensive Plan as a LOS rating of E or lower at a signalized intersection or LOS F at an unsignalized
intersection. The full cost of projects at these two locations cannot be included in the impact fee and a
portion must be deducted to account for the existing deficiency. The methodology for accounting for the
existing deficiency is explained in Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update and provided below.
Pines Road & Sprague Avenue
The full cost of improvements at the Pines Road & Sprague Avenue intersection cannot be applied to the
impact fee because there is a LOS deficiency at this intersection under existing conditions. To account for
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
June 2021
this, the portion of traffic that if removed from the system today would effectively reduce the LOS at this
intersection from an "E" to a "D" was estimated in Synchro. The result was 10% of existing traffic. This
means that if traffic volumes were 10% lower at this intersection under existing conditions, the
intersection would meet the LOS D threshold. Therefore, to account for the existing deficiency, 10% of the
total cost of the improvement project at Pines Road & Sprague Avenue was deducted from the total cost
to arrive at the applicable cost as shown in Table 5 and Table 6.
Argonne Road & Trent Avenue
Similarly, the full cost of improvements at the Argonne Road & Trent Avenue intersection cannot be
applied to the impact fee because there is an existing LOS deficiency at this intersection. To account for
this, the cost of a restriping and signal modification project which would bring the intersection to a LOS D
under existing conditions was estimated. The project was recommended as part of the North Argonne
Road/North Mullan Road Corridor Retiming Project.' The estimated cost of this project ($229,200 in 2019
dollars; updated to $236,000 in 2021 dollars) was deducted from cost of the longer term project to arrive
at the applicable cost as shown in Table 5 and Table 6.
In total, between the two projects, $320,000 was deducted from the $7.66 million total cost of all seven
projects associated with the TIF areas to account for existing deficiencies.
Fair -Share Cost
With deficiencies accounted for, the remaining project costs are related to supporting new growth in trips
that will be funded by COSV. However, not all the growth comes from development in the Mirabeau and
North Pines Road TIF area — there is a portion of growth that comes from other parts of Spokane Valley
and surrounding jurisdictions. To ensure that the costs assessed to development as part of the TIF are fair
and proportional to the impact, a fair share percentage was used. The Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
Update identified the percentage of traffic growth through each project intersection that are expected to
be attributable to development in the Mirabeau TIF area and North Pines Road TIF area. This was done
using a select zone analysis in the 2040 SRTC travel demand model. The percentages range from 4% to
53% depending on the TIF and the project location as shown in Table 4.
1 Fehr & Peers. Technical Memorandum. N Argonne Road/N Muiian Road Corridor Retiming. July 25, 2019. Project #
SE18-0621.
r"
10
Table 4. Percent of 2040 Traffic Attributable to each Project Location
Intersection
Mirabeau Subarea
Portion of Future Traffic
North Pines Road
Subarea Portion of
Future Traffic
Combined Portion of
Future Traffic from
two Subareas
Pines Rd/ Indiana Ave
Pines Rd/ I-90 EB Ramps
Pines Rd/ Mission Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/ Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/ Mission Ave
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/ Trent Ave
Source: Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update (Dec 2019)
18%
18%
4%
38%
4%
6%
10%
42%
48%
53%
5%
9%
19%
7%
60%
66%
57%
43%
13%
25%
17%
The fair share percentages were multiplied by the eligible cost of each project in the corridor to get the
cost of growth -related transportation improvements at the seven project locations that is expected to be
attributable to development in the two TIF areas. For the Mirabeau TIF area, this equates to $1,384,640. A
two percent administrative fee was added to each Subarea cost to cover the cost of administering the
program, including future updates to the TIF rate study. When factored in, the eligible project cost for the
Mirabeau TIF area equates to $1,412,330 shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Mirabeau TIF Area Eligible Cost Calculations
Project Location Project Cost
Cost to Address
Existing
Deficiencies
Eligible Project
Cost
TIF Area Fair Cost
Share Attributable to
Percent Study Area
Pines Rd/ Indiana Ave
Pines Rd/ I-90 EB Ramps
Pines Rd/ Mission Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/ Mission Ave
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/ Trent Ave
$1, 545,000
$1,152,000
$2,000,000
$1,252,000
$97,000
$843,000
$776,000
$0
$0
$0
$1, 545,000
$1,152,000
$2,000,000
$0 $1,252,000
$0
$84,000
$236,000
$97,000
$759,000
$540,000
$278,100
$207,360
$320,000
38% $475,760
4%
6%
10%
$3,880
$45,540
$54,000
SUBTOTAL
$320,000 $7,345,000
Varies $1,384,640
Administrative Cost (2%)
$27,690
TOTAL $1,412,330
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
June 2021
For the North Pines Road TIF area, the fair share total equates to $2,515,200. When the two percent
administrative fee factored in, the eligible project cost for the North Pines Road TIF equates to $2,565,200
as shown in Table 6.
Table 6. North Pines Road TIF Area Eligible Cost Calculations
Project Location
Project Cost
Cost to Address
Existing
Deficiencies
Eligible Project TIF Area Fair Cost
Cost Share Percent Attributable to
Study Area
Pines Rd/ Indiana Ave
Pines Rd/ 1-90 EB Ramps
Pines Rd/ Mission Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/ Mission Ave
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/ Trent Ave
$1,545,000
$1,152,000
$2,000,000
$1,252,000
$97,000
$843,000
$776,000
$0
$0
$0
$1,545,000
$1,152,000
$2,000,000
42%
48%
53%
$0 $1,252,000 5%
$0
$84,000
$236,000
$97,000
$759,000
$540,000
9%
19%
7%
$648,900
$552,960
$1,060,000
$62,600
$8,730
$144,210
$37,800
SUBTOTAL j $7,665,000 $320,000 $7,345,000 Varies $2,515,200
Committed External Funding
Administrative Cost (2%)
$50,300
TOTAL $2,565,500
As identified in Table 5 and Table 6, the two TIF areas are eligible to fund $3.90 million of the $7.66
million total project costs. The City of Spokane Valley is responsible to fund the balance through any non-
TIF area funding source. One of the more common sources of funding to pay for this external growth
share are grants. To this end, the City has secured a Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality grant of $1.73
million to fund capacity projects in the area and has chosen to advance implementation of the Pines Road
and Mission Avenue intersection. Since this grant is less than the total amount the City is liable to cover to
fund the share of growth outside of the TIF areas ($3.76 million), there is no change in cost attributable to
either of the TIF areas.
Additionally, there are existing "vested" trips from the prior "Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement"
that was established by Spokane County. While the transportation improvement projects identified as part
of the Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement have largely been constructed, Spokane Valley will count
the vested trips as a credit against impact fee documented in this rate study. These trips have a value of
$303.36 per PM peak hour trip. Developers can apply the value of their unused vested PM peak hour trips
in their current quantity as a credit to the Mirabeau TIF until they have no vested trips remaining.
Cost per PM Peak Hour Trip
Lastly, the cost per PM peak hour trip for each of the two TIF areas was calculated by dividing the total
eligible fee for each TIF by the respective growth in PM peak hour trips in each TIF area. This equates to a
fee of $716 per PM peak hour trip in the Mirabeau TIF area and $2,816 per PM peak hour trip in the North
Pines Road TIF area as shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Cost Per PM Peak Hour Trip Calculations
TIF Area
Fair Share Eligible 2015-2040
Project Costs Growth in PM
Peak Hour Trips
Cost per PM
Peak Hour Trip
Mirabeau TIF
North Pines Road TIF
$1,412,330
$2,565,500
1,973
911
$716
$2,816
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
June 2021
Impact Fee Schedule
The impact fee schedule was developed by adjusting the cost per PM peak hour vehicle trip to reflect
differences in trip -making characteristics for the general land use types forecast in the SRTC regional
travel demand model within Spokane Valley. The fee schedule is a table where fees are represented as
dollars per unit for each land use category which makes it easier for developers to calculate their impact
fee rates. Table 8 and Table 9 shows the various components of the fee schedule.
Trip Generation
Trip generation rates for each land use type in the PM peak hour were derived from average trip rates for
selected land uses of the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition to ensure consistent and repeatable
calculations across all land uses.
Pass -By Trip Adjustment
The ITE trip generation rates represent total vehicles entering and leaving a development. For certain land
uses (e.g., retail, convenience stores, etc.), a substantial amount of the motorized travel is already passing
by the property and merely turns into and out of the driveway. These pass -by trips do not add trips to the
surrounding street system and therefore are subtracted out prior to calculating the impact fee. The
resulting trips are considered "new" trips and are therefore subject to the impact fee calculation. The pass -
by trip percentages are taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition (2017).
Schedule of Rates
The proposed impact fee rates for the Mirabeau TIF are shown in Table 8 and the proposed impact fee
rates for the North Pines Road TIF are shown in Table 9. An expanded table of land uses is provided in
Table 10 and Table 11 in Appendix A. In the fee schedule, fees are shown as dollars per unit of
development for various land use categories. The impact fee program is flexible in that if a use does not
fit into one of the ITE land use categories listed, an impact fee can be calculated based on the
development's projected PM peak hour person trip generation and multiplied by the cost per PM peak
hour trip which is $716 for the Mirabeau TIF area as shown in Table 8 and $2,816 in the North Pines Road
TIF area as shown in Table 9. Projects with land uses not in Table 8 - Table 11 shall prepare a trip
generation and distribution letter and will be responsible for a fee based on $716 per PM peak hour trip
for the Mirabeau TIF are and $2,816 per PM peak hour trip for the North Pines Road TIF area.
Table 8. Mirabeau Impact Fee Schedule
ITE Code
City of Spokane Valley Mirabeau Transportation Impact Fee Rate Schedule
PM Peak Vehicle Passby Adjusted Trips Impact Fee Per Unit 4 @
ITE Land Use Category a per Unit of
Trip Rate Measure 3 $716 per PM Peak Vehicle Trip
210
Single Family & Duplex 0.99
0%
0.99
$709 per dwelling unit
220
Multi -Family
0.56
0%
0.56
$401 per dwelling unit
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
0.70
0%
0.70
$501 per room
520
Elementary School
0.00137
0%
0.00137
$0.98 per sq ft
630
Medical Clinic
0.00328
0%
0.00328
$2.35 per sq ft
710
General Office
0.00115
0%
0.00115
$0.82 per sq ft
820
Sho..in. Center
0.00381
34%
0.00251
$1.80 per sq ft
1 ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition): 4-6 PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Generation Rates for the Adjacent Street Traffic (weekday 4-
6PM); This worksheet represents only the generalized land uses in the SRTC regional travel demand model and is NOT all-inclusive; see
Table 10 for a wider variety of uses; Projects with land uses not in Table 8 or 10 shall prepare a trip generation and distribution letter and
will be responsible for a fee based on $716 per PM peak hour trip.
2 New trips will exclude "pass -by" trips: see "ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition" (2017).
3 PM peak trip rate excluding passby trips
° sq ft = square feet, room = available hotel/motel room
Table 9. North Pines Road Impact Fee Schedule
ITE Code
City of Spokane Valley North Pines Road Transportation Impact Fee Rate Schedule
Adjusted Trips Impact Fee Per Unit 4 @
PM Peak Vehicle Passby
ITE Land Use Category a per Unit of
Trip Rate Measure 3 $2,816 per PM Peak Vehicle Trip
210
Single Family & Duplex 0.99
0%
0.99
$2,788 per dwelling unit
220
Multi -Family
0.56
0%
0.56
$1,577 per dwelling unit
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
0.70
0%
0.70
$1,971 per room
520
Elementary School
0.00137
0%
0.00137
$3.86 per sq ft
630
Medical Clinic
0.00328
0%
0.00328
$9.24 per sq ft
710
General Office
0.00115
0%
0.00115
$3.24 per sq ft
820
Sho..in. Center
0.00381
34%
0.00251
$7.08 .er sq ft
1 ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition): 4-6 PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Generation Rates for the Adjacent Street Traffic (weekday 4-
6PM); This worksheet represents only the generalized land uses in the SRTC regional travel demand model and is NOT all-inclusive; see
Table 11 for a wider variety of uses; Projects with land uses not in Table 9 or 11 shall prepare a trip generation and distribution letter and
will be responsible for a fee based on $2,816 per PM peak hour trip.
2 New trips will exclude "pass -by" trips: see "ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition" (2017).
3 PM peak trip rate excluding passby trips
° sq ft = square feet, room = available hotel/motel room
15
Appendix A - Expanded Impact Fee
Schedule
Table 10. Expanded Mirabeau Impact Fee Schedule
ITE Code
Ir° City of Spokane Valley Mirabeau Transportation
ITE Land Use Category
PM Peak
Vehicle
Trip
Rate'
Impact Fee Rate
passby %2
Schedule
Adjusted Trips
per Unit of
Measure3
Impact Fee Per Unit 4 @
$716 per PM Peak Vehicle Trip
Land Use Group
210
Single Family & Duplex
0.99
0%
0.99
$709 per dwelling unit
Residential
220
Multi-Famil
0.56
0%
0.56
$401
.erdwellin. unit
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
0.70
0%
0.70
$501
per room
Services
492
Health Club
0.00345
0%
0.00345
$2.47
persq ft
912
Bank
0.02045
34%
0.01350
$9.66
.ers. ft
520
Elementary School
0.00137
0%
0.00137
$0.98
persq ft
Institution
522
Middle School
0.00119
0%
0.00119
$0.85
persq ft
530
Hi.h School
0.00097
0%
0.00097
$0.69
.ers. ft
925
Drinking Establishment
0.01136
43%
0.00648
$4.64
persq ft
Restaurant
934
Fast Food Restaurant (with drive-thru)
0.03267
50%
0.01634
$11.69
persq ft
937
Coffee Sho. with Drive-Thru
0.04338
89%
0.00477
$3.42
.ers. ft
820
Shopping Center
0.00381
34%
0.00251
$1.80
persq ft
Retail
841
Automobile Sales - Used/New
0.00375
0%
0.00375
$2.68
persq ft
853
Convenience Market with Gasoline Pum.
23.04
66%
7.83
$5,608
.er .um.
110
Light Industry/High Technology
0.00063
0%
0.00063
$0.45
persq ft
Industrial
140
Manufacturing
0.00067
0%
0.00067
$0.48
persq ft
151
Mini-Stora.e
0.00017
0%
0.00017
$0.12
.ers. ft
710
General Office
0.00115
0%
0.00115
$0.82
persq ft
Office
720
Medical Office/Clinic
0.00346
0%
0.00346
$2.48
persq ft
750
Office Park
0.00107
0%
0.00107
$0.77
.ers.ft
'ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition): 4-6 PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Generation Rates for the Adjacent Street Traffic (weekday 4-6PM); This worksheet
represents only the most common uses in southeast Spokane Valley and is NOT all-inclusive; Projects with land uses not in Table 8 or 10 shall prepare a trip
generation and distribution letter and will be responsible for a fee based on $716 per PM peak hour trip.
2 New trips will exclude "pass -by" trips: see "ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition" (2017).
3 PM peak trip rate excluding passby trips
4 sq ft = square feet, pump = vehicle servicing position/gas pump, room = available hotel room
FEHR'' PEERS
Table 11. Expanded North Pines Road Impact Fee Schedule
Land Use Group
City
of Spokane Valley North Pines Road
ITE Land Use Category
Transportation
PM Peak
Vehicle
Trip
Rate'
Impact
Passby % 1
Fee Rate Schedule
Adjusted Trips Impact Fee Per Unit 4 @
per Unit of
Measure 3 $2,816 per PM Peak Vehicle Trip
ITE Code
Residential
210
220
Single Family & Duplex
Multi-Famil
0.99
0.56
0%
0%
0.99 $2,788
0.56 $1,577
per dwelling unit
.erdwellin. unit
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
0.70
0%
0.70 $1,971
per room
Services
492
Health Club
0.00345
0%
0.00345 $9.72
persq ft
912
Bank
0.02045
34%
0.01350 $38.01
.ers. ft
520
Elementary School
0.00137
0%
0.00137 $3.86
persq ft
Institution
522
Middle School
0.00119
0%
0.00119 $3.35
persq ft
530
Hi.h School
0.00097
0%
0.00097 $2.73
.ers. ft
925
Drinking Establishment
0.01136
43%
0.00648 $18.24
persq ft
Restaurant
934
Fast Food Restaurant (with drive-thru)
0.03267
50%
0.01634 $46.00
persq ft
937
Coffee Sho. with Drive-Thru
0.04338
89%
0.00477 $13.44
.ers. ft
820
Shopping Center
0.00381
34%
0.00251 $7.08
persq ft
Retail
841
Automobile Sales - Used/New
0.00375
0%
0.00375 $10.56
persq ft
853
Convenience Market with Gasoline Pum.
23.04
66%
7.83 $22,060
.er .um.
110
Light Industry/High Technology
0.00063
0%
0.00063 $1.77
persq ft
Industrial
140
Manufacturing
0.00067
0%
0.00067 $1.89
persq ft
151
Mini-Stora.e
0.00017
0%
0.00017 $0.48
.ers. ft
710
General Office
0.00115
0%
0.00115 $3.24
persq ft
Office
720
Medical Office/Clinic
0.00346
0%
0.00346 $9.74
persq ft
750
Office Park
0.00107
0%
0.00107 $3.01
.ers.ft
'ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition): 4-6 PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Generation Rates for the Adjacent Street Traffic (weekday 4-6PM); This worksheet
represents only the most common uses in southeast Spokane Valley and is NOT all-inclusive; Projects with land uses not in Table 9 or 11 shall prepare a trip
generation and distribution letter and will be responsible for a fee based on $2,816 per PM peak hour trip.
2 New trips will exclude "pass -by" trips: see "ITE Trip Generation Handbook 3rd Edition" (2017).
3 PM peak trip rate excluding passby trips
4 sq ft = square feet, pump = vehicle servicing position/gas pump, room = available hotel room
FEHR i PEERS
Appendix B - Mirabeau Traffic Study
Update (2019)
FEHR'' PEERS
Mirabeau Subarea
Traffic Study Update
Prepared for:
City of Spokane Valley, Washington
December 2019
DN19-0631
FEHRt PEERS
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Previous Study Findings 1
Update to Expand Subarea 1
Traffic Analysis 4
Level of Service Standards 4
Methodology 5
Existing Traffic Level of Service 7
Year 2040 Traffic Level of Service 8
Project Cost Estimates 10
Updated Project Unit Costs 10
Project Cost Estimates 11
Fair Share & Cost Per Trip Analysis 13
Fair Share Analysis 13
Cost Per Trip 15
Conclusions 17
Appendices
Appendix A - Existing Conditions Synchro Reports
Appendix B - Existing Conditions Optimized Synchro Reports
Appendix C - Future Conditions Synchro Reports
Appendix D - Future Conditions with Mitigations Synchro Reports
Appendix E — Project Cost Estimate Spreadsheets
List of Figures
Figure 1: Study Area 2
Figure 2: Existing and Future Lane Configurations Traffic Controls, and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6
List of Tables
Table 1: Projects identified in 2016 Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study 3
Table 2: Level of service description and delay thresholds at intersections 5
Table 3: Existing (2019) PM peak hour level of service 7
Table 4: Existing (2019) PM peak hour LOS with signal timing adjustments 8
Table 5: 2040 PM peak hour LOS with signal timing optimized 8
Table 6: Potential project to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS 9
Table 7: Potential project at Argonne Rd./ Trent Ave. to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS 9
Table 8: Unit costs 10
Table 9: Cost estimate of potential projects to improve future LOS 11
Table 10: Subarea share of future PM peak hour traffic at deficient intersections 13
Table 11: Subareas' share of total improvement costs 14
Table 12: PM peak hour trip generation calculation 15
Table 13: Voluntary Traffic Mitigation Fees for Developers to Meet SEPA Obligation 17
This page intentionally left blank.
Introduction
The City of Spokane Valley commissioned the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study in 2016 that identified
existing transportation level of service (LOS) deficiencies and future transportation improvements to
support existing and planned growth in the Subarea. Based on the traffic forecasts, future traffic impacts
and potential mitigation projects, a fair share analysis was used to estimate a cost per PM peak hour
vehicle trip that developers in the Subarea would pay to meet their obligation under SEPA. The City will
use these fees to offset the cost of transportation improvement projects directly impacted by
development in the Subarea. The Mirabeau Subarea is mapped in Figure 1 and covers most of the area
between Pines Road and Sullivan Road and 1-90 and the Spokane River in north central Spokane Valley.
Previous Study Findings
The 2016 Mirabeau Traffic Study identified five intersections in or around the Mirabeau Subarea that are
forecast to have LOS deficiencies by 2040. These intersections are shown in Table 1, including the 2015
and 2040 PM peak hour LOS and delay. For each intersection, a project was identified to address the
future LOS deficiency, including a cost estimate for each project. A fair share percent was also estimated
that represents the portion of future traffic that would pass through the location generated by the
Mirabeau Subarea. This proportion is based on a select link analysis using the Spokane Regional
Transportation Council (SRTC) regional travel demand model. Based on the estimated project costs, fair
share analysis, and future traffic generated by development in the Subarea, a cost per PM peak hour
vehicle trip of $323.75 was calculated and assessed to developments in the area to pay for the future
transportation improvement projects identified in the Study.
Update to Expand Subarea
In 2019, the City commissioned an update to the Mirabeau Traffic Study. This report provides a summary
of the update, including an updated cost analysis and findings. The main purpose of this Study is to
update the fair share cost per PM peak hour vehicle trip from the original traffic study as well as expand
the geographic area by which transportation impact fees will be collected to account for new
developments planned for the area south of 1-90. Instead of changing the boundaries of the previously
established Mirabeau Subarea to accommodate the expanded area, a second Subarea was established
directly adjacent to the Mirabeau Subarea. The second Subarea is referred to as the North Pines Road
Subarea and is mapped in Figure 1. The North Pines Road Subarea is around Pines Road roughly between
Sprague Avenue and Trent Avenue and University Road and Adams Road excluding the Mirabeau
Subarea.
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
531
IE 1
•
34 6
w
437-
301
- 302-
L
E Upriver Dr
532
Mirabeau Subarea
N Pines Road Subarea
Projects Identified in Previous Study
Intersections Analyzed in Update
- 308-
309
a)
x
z
296—
I
304
t_
_z
II I
534
'284
6u`t� gtpe
Radtoary 4 ve
395.,,
E Rich Ave
313E
rtaFe°
oxel
Mirabeau Prkwy
90 E.Nora.A
329
Lr\
E Trent Ave
I�
394-
Kaiser Work
321
297
298
-E Boone Ave
3Q5
0
CO
z
E Valleyway Ave
310
311
396
0
T
306 Broadway Ave o
0
E Alki Ave
397
�31-2— E Main Ave
346
568
E Sprague Ave
347—C4pplee-
348
o- �1111111
351
350,
b 35
1
d RR
•� SpragueAv
349
z
335
330
366
E 4th Ave
E
2
z
316
Spokane
Valley
•
E Cataldo Ave
331
celD ce
0
u>
z
315
Montana Rail LinkRR
Industrial) Park A St
Industrial Park B St
E Euclid
Industrial Pa
.1317
k C St
Ave
i
Indiana.A
323
0
0
E
0
0
0
z
332
324
=388
333
336
17337
—353 .I
354T
370
II
36j7'—
368
376 (:
3
Figure 1
Study Area
Table 1: Projects identified in 2016 Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
Project
(Intersection)
2015 2040 2040 LOS Description of Cost
LOS LOS with Improvement Estimate
I m prov.
Mirabeau
Subarea Mirabeau
Proportion Subarea Fair
of Future Share Cost
Traffic
Pines Rd/
Indiana Ave
Pines Rd/ I-90
EB Ramps
E
E F D
Add westbound left -turn
lane; retime traffic signal
Add eastbound left -turn
lane and northbound
right -turn pocket
(extending
back to Nora Ave); retime
traffic signal
Add southbound right -
turn lane
(extending back to the I-
90 off -ramp);
reconfigure lane
Pines Rd/ assignments on Mission
Mission Ave Ave to include eastbound
dual -left and a
through -right lane and
westbound left,
through, and right turn
lane; retime traffic signal
Mirabeau Add traffic signal, add
Pkwy/ B F C new 180 foot southbound $874,000 38% $332,000
Mansfield Ave through -right lane
Reconfigure eastbound to
Sullivan Rd/ include a left and
Mission Ave through -right lane; retime
signal
$896,000
18% $161,000
$753,000 18% $135,000
E F D
D E B
Source: Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study (June 2016).
$457,000 16% $73,000
$61,000 4% $2,500
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update 3
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Traffic Analysis
In the previous study, traffic analysis was performed for 21 intersections in and around the Mirabeau
Subarea, with five of those locations identified as having traffic level of service (LOS) deficiencies by Year
2040. No updates to that analysis were performed as part of this study and the COSV still plans to
implement those five projects (listed in Table 1) over time as fees are collected. However, as part of
expanding the traffic analysis to include the North Pines Road Subarea as part of this study, three
additional signalized intersections were identified to evaluate existing (2019) and future (2040) traffic LOS.
These include:
1. Pines Road/Broadway
2. Pines Road/Sprague Avenue
3. Evergreen Road/Sprague Avenue
Level of Service Standards
City of Spokane Valley Level of Service Standards
The City of Spokane Valley uses level of service (LOS) to describe and evaluate traffic operations along
major arterial corridors and intersections within the City. Levels range from LOS A to LOS F, which
encompass a range of congestion types from uninterrupted traffic (LOS A) to highly -congested conditions
(LOS F). The description and intersection delay thresholds of each LOS category are described in Table 2.
These are based on the Highway Capacity Manual, which is the methodology used by Spokane Valley. The
LOS for signalized intersections is measured by the average delay per vehicle entering the intersection
from all approaches, while the LOS for unsignalized intersections is measured by the average delay per
vehicle on the approach with the highest average delay. Spokane Valley also applies Corridor LOS to
evaluate major arterial corridors in the City. Average daily traffic (ADT) volume thresholds are used to
measure average LOS conditions along the length of the entire corridor. Corridor LOS acknowledges that
some intersections may experience greater congestion than the corridor as a whole. Sprague Avenue and
Pines Road are both major arterials where corridor -level LOS can be applied.
The LOS standards used by Spokane Valley are defined in the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
• LOS D at the corridor level for major arterial corridors:
o Argonne/Mullan between the town of Millwood and Appleway Boulevard
o Pines Road between Trent Avenue and 8th Avenue
o Evergreen Road between Indiana Avenue and 8th Avenue
o Sullivan Road between Wellesley Avenue and 8th Avenue
o Sprague Avenue/Appleway Boulevard between Fancher Road and Sullivan Road
• LOS D for signalized intersections not on major arterial corridors
• LOS E for unsignalized intersections (LOS F acceptable if peak hour traffic signal warrant is
unmet)
Table 2: Level of service description and delay thresholds at intersections
Level of
Service
Description
Signalized Unsignalized
Intersection Delay Intersection Delay
(seconds) (seconds)
A Free -flowing conditions.
B Stable operating conditions.
C Stable operating conditions, but individual motorists are
affected by the interaction with other motorists.
D High density of motorists, but stable flow.
0-10
10-20
20-35
35-55
E Near -capacity operations, with speeds reduced to a low but 55-80
uniform speed.
F Over -capacity conditions with long delays. > 80 >50
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2016, Transportation Research Board
0-10
10-15
15-25
25-35
WSDOT LOS Standards
35-50
WSDOT also uses LOS thresholds for State Highways. The LOS standard for State Highways in Urban Areas
(including the Study Area) is LOS D for signalized intersections and LOS E for unsignalized intersections.
Within the Study Area WSDOT's LOS standards are also considered for intersections along Pines Road,
which is State Route 27.
Methodology
Traffic Analysis
Synchro software (version 9) was used to evaluate PM peak hour LOS at the three signalized intersections
included in this Update. Synchro settings were set consistent with WSDOT Synchro & SimTraffic Protocol
(Aug 2018) and City of Spokane Valley standards. LOS was measured using the Highway Capacity Manual
(HCM) 2010 methodology within Synchro.
Existing (2019) Traffic Volumes
Existing intersection turn movement counts were collected between 4 PM and 6 PM on Thursday,
September 19th, 2019. The existing (and future) PM peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 2.
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update 5
N Vercler Rd
m
$
1
E Boone Ave
i
N ni� ityIRdl
H
....
I f
1cDonald Ri
t E
z
z
il
z
widish Rd
Z
E Cataldo
Ave
E Broadway
Ave
.
z
EAIkiAve
I',Eco
z
—
N ProgressARc
—
„
z
Z
z
JI_
E Valleyway Ave
Main ANe
Spokane
Valley
E
410
-
SpragueAv •
Ill
ESprag
—
Abandoned RR
I i
E 4th Ave
E 5th AveII_
1. Pines/Broadway
2. Pines Sprague
3. S Evergreen Rd/Sprague
a,os
o--
��rn
- o co
I 1 I I y
e,oadwa
76(85)
275 (280)
123 (130)
„a.
,noo
CO OD
N m m
I
d♦ 1 I Iy
4S 173(195)
837 (1,005)
% 140 (160)
�noC
O 2
oCOLO "
CO OD
I1 L
o,a4 e 4-IL
4S_215(240)
873 (980)
% 127 (145)
187 (205)
315 (320) _►
101 (110)
III*
0 rn 0
MCOv
CO 0
216 (240) --.1►
801 (960) —►
93(120)�'
Its
0 o rn
��r•
CO V
166 (185) �►
830 (1,005) —►
95(110)�'
Its
o f
7,r�
v- V O
Existing PM (2040 PM) Volumes
Existing and 2040 Lane Configurations
Traffic Controls, and PM Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
Future Year (2040) Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes at each of the study intersections were forecast using the current version of the SRTC 2015
and 2040 regional travel demand models, which was last updated in December 2017. After review of the
land use forecasts in the model with City staff, no adjustments were made to the existing or future land
use assumptions or transportation network in the model. Instead of using the traffic forecasts directly
from the 2040 travel demand model, 2040 volumes were estimated using an industry standard approach
known as the difference method. Under the difference method, the difference in traffic volumes between
the 2015 and 2040 models were added to observed counts at each of the study area intersections to
arrive at a 2040 forecast traffic. This method reduces model error by relying as much as possible on
observed data rather than model output data. Note: the difference in traffic volumes between the 2015
and 2040 model were multiplied by 0.84 to account for growth in traffic that occurred between 2015 and
2018 (21 years/ 25 years = 0.84). Post processing to account for model anomalies was also applied to
arrive at the final 2040 traffic forecasts. Forecast traffic volumes in Year 2040 are also shown in Figure 2.
Existing Traffic Level of Service
Table 3 shows the existing PM peak hour LOS using the methodology described above for the three
intersections analyzed. Under existing conditions, both the Pines Road/Broadway and Pines Road/Sprague
Avenue intersections operate at LOS E, exceeding the COSV and WSDOT intersection LOS D threshold. It
should be noted that the Pines Road/Sprague Avenue intersection is just on the cusp of LOS D and LOS E
during the PM peak hour. Additionally, both Pines Road and Sprague Avenue are major arterials through
these intersections and it should be noted that for these corridors the 2016 Comprehensive Plan directs
the LOS threshold to be measured by using corridor -wide LOS. While the Comprehensive Plan
acknowledges that individual intersections may exceed the LOS D threshold using this method (as long as
the corridor -wide average is at or below LOS D), the corridor -level LOS was not a primary consideration in
this case and was not analyzed as part of this study.
Table 3: Existing (2019) PM peak hour level of service
Intersection
Control Delay (sec) LO5
Pines Rd/ Broadway
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Evergreen Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Signal
Signal
Signal
Improving Existing Level of Service
62
56
51
E
E
The most cost-effective way to improve the existing LOS at the Pines Road/ Broadway intersection would
be to make signal timing adjustments. Table 4 shows what the existing PM peak hour LOS would be if the
signal timing splits were optimized and cycle length maintained in order to preserve coordination
between signals along the corridor. Right -turn -on -red movements were factored into the analysis.
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Optimizing the signal splits would improve the Pines Road/Broadway intersection to LOS D, but would
have little to no effect at the other two intersections.
Table 4: Existing (2019) PM peak hour LOS with signal timing adjustments
Intersection Control Delay (sec) LOS
Pines Rd/ Broadway
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Evergreen Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Signal
Signal
Signal
Year 204o Traffic Level of Service
48
56
48
D
E
Table 5 shows the estimated PM peak hour LOS in 2040 for the three intersections analyzed, based on
traffic growth from the SRTC regional travel demand model. The 2040 delay and LOS presented in Table 5
assumes the same cycle length for the signals, but assumes the signal splits would be optimized over time
to account for changing traffic patterns. The results show that in 2040 the Pines Road/ Sprague
intersection would continue to operate at LOS E, but would degrade by an average of 8 seconds per
vehicle from existing conditions, and would exceed WSDOT and COSV intersection LOS threshold. Again,
it should be noted that City of Spokane Valley uses corridor -level LOS methodology to measure LOS for
both the Pines Road and Sprague Avenue corridors. Corridor -level LOS was not measured in 2040 as part
of this analysis, but in consultation with City staff it was determined that addressing congestion at Pines
Road and Sprague Avenue in the future was desired to reduce delay, improve corridor -wide LOS for both
Sprague Avenue and Pines Road, and to mitigate potential congestion related safety issues.
Table 5: 2040 PM peak hour LOS with signal timing optimized
Intersection Control Delay (sec) LOS
Pines Rd/ Broadway
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Evergreen Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Signal
Signal
Signal
Improving 2040 Level of Service
49
64
52
D
E
D
Using an iterative approach and accounting for land use constraints, a project was identified to improve
the delay at the Pines Road/ Sprague Avenue intersection in 2040. A description of the project and the
improvements to LOS and delay is shown in Table 6. This project would reduce the 2040 delay by about 9
seconds and bring the LOS from an E to a D (just on the cusp of a D/E). It should be noted that while this
intersection is not specifically required to meet LOS D threshold per Spokane Valley standards (instead the
Pines Road and Sprague Avenue corridors are required to meet corridor -wide average LOS D threshold),
improving the average vehicle delay at this intersection will ensure that WSDOT LOS standards are met
and would contribute toward ensuring the Pines and Sprague corridors do not exceed LOS D corridor -
wide in 2040.
Table 6: Potential project to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS
Intersection Description of Improvement
Delay (sec) with LOS with
Improvement Improvement
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Argonne Road & Trent Avenue Intersection
• Add a southbound right -turn -only lane;
• Convert the existing southbound through -right
lane to a through -only lane;
• Add a second eastbound left -turn -only lane.
54.6
The intersection of Argonne Road & Trent Avenue is near the North Pines Road Subarea, and while traffic
analysis at that intersection was not performed as part of this study, this intersection was identified in the
2016 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan as a location that would exceed COSV and WSDOT LOS
thresholds. As part of the Comprehensive Plan, a project was identified to address the poor LOS in the
future, as described in Table 7. Given that development in both the Mirabeau and North Pines Road
Subareas would increase traffic at this intersection, this project was also included as part of the fair -share
cost analysis for both Subareas. Note that while the improvement at Argonne Road & Trent Avenue would
improve the LOS compared to a "do nothing" alternative, this intersection would not meet either WSDOT
or COSV LOS thresholds. Land use constraints related to the BNSF railroad overpass and the narrow street
cross section in Millwood limit options related to adding roadway capacity to Argonne Road. Because this
improvement would add capacity and reduce delay, the cost can be factored into impact fees per the
Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), despite not reducing LOS to within the City or State
thresholds.
Table 7: Potential project at Argonne Rd./ Trent Ave. to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS
Intersection Description of Improvement Delay w/o LOS w/o Delay with LOS with
Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement
Argonne Rd/ • Add a second westbound
Trent Ave
left -turn lane.
Source: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (Dec 2016), Appendix A.
109
F
96
F
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Project Cost Estimates
This section includes updated cost estimates, including methodology, for the five projects identified in
previous plans as well as the cost estimates for two projects identified in this study at both the Pines Road
& Sprague Avenue and Argonne Road & Trent Avenue intersections.
Updated Project Unit Costs
Unit costs for roadway construction were identified in the 2016 traffic study. In collaboration with City
staff, these costs were updated based on construction costs from recently completed transportation
projects in Spokane Valley. Where recent costs were not available, unit costs were updated based on
inflation from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) National Highway Cost Index.' Costs to
account for drainage and traffic control were also added. Table 8 summarizes the unit costs that were
used to develop project cost estimates.
Table 8: Unit costs
Element
Description
Hard Costs
Roadway Demolition Demolition and removal of old roadway
Curb Demolition Demolition and removal of old curb/gutter
Sidewalk Demolition Demolition and removal of old sidewalk
Signal Demolition Demo and removal of old traffic signal eqpt.
Excavation Excavation, grading, fill, earthwork
Road Section Construction of new roadway surface
Curb Construction of new curb/gutter
Sidewalk Construction of new sidewalks
Curb Ramps Construction of new curb ramps
Traffic Signal Construction of new traffic signal
Other Costs
Right-of-way Cost of acquiring right-of-way
Mobilization Cost to get a construction crew engaged
Drainage Cost to provide proper stormwater drainage
Traffic Control Cost to manage traffic during construction
Contingency Cost contingency for unexpected drainage/ utility/
earthwork conflicts; WSDOT coordination
Engineering Cost to design and permit the project
Source: City of Spokane Valley, Fehr & Peers, FHWA National Highway Cost Index.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pol icy/otps/n hcci/ptl .cfm
Unit Quantity Unit Cost (2019 $)
Square Yard
Linear foot
Square Yard
Each mast arm
Cubic Yard
Square Yard
Linear foot
Square Yard
Each
Each new system
$15
$16
$20
$6,000
$35
$60
$45
$80
$4,000
$480,000
Square Foot
10% of "hard" costs above
20% of applicable "hard" costs above
15% of "hard" costs above
30% of "hard" costs above
20% of "hard" costs above
$12
10
Project Cost Estimates
Table 9 shows the cost estimates for seven potential projects in the study area where LOS would degrade
to unacceptable levels in the future. This includes updated costs for the five projects identified in the
previous (2016) Mirabeau Traffic Study to account for construction cost inflation, plus the additional
projects at Pines Road & Sprague Avenue intersection identified in this Update and the potential project
at Argonne Road & Trent Avenue identified in the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (2016). Details for
how these costs were estimated is provided in Appendix E. All cost estimates are in 2019 dollars.
Table 9: Cost estimate of potential projects to improve future LOS
Project
escription
Non -
Cost Estimate Applicable
Costs
Applicable
Costs (2016 dollars)
2016 Cost
Estimates
Pines Rd/
Indiana Ave
Pines Rd/ I-90
EB Ramps
Pines Rd/
Mission Ave
Phase 1
Pines Rd/
Mission Ave
Phase 2
Mirabeau
Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/
Mission Ave
Pines Rd/
Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/
Trent Ave
Add westbound left -turn lane;
retime traffic signal
Add eastbound left -turn lane and
northbound right -turn pocket
(extending back to Nora Ave);
retime traffic signal
Reconfigure lane assignments on
Mission Ave to include eastbound
dual -left and a through -right lane
and westbound left, through, and
right turn lane; retime and
upgrade traffic signal
Add southbound right -turn lane
(extending back to the 1-90 off -
ramp);
Add traffic signal, add new 180
foot southbound through -right
lane
Reconfigure eastbound to include
a left and through -right lane;
retime signal
Add a southbound right -turn -only
lane; convert the existing
southbound through -right lane to
a through -only lane; add a second
eastbound left -turn -only lane.
Add a second westbound left -turn
lane.
Source: Fehr & Peers, City of Spokane Valley.
$1,500,000
$1,119,000
$0 $1,500,000 $896,000
$0 $1,119,000 $753,000
$588,000 $508,620 $79,380
$ 812,000
$1,215,000
$94,000
$457,000
$0 $ 812,000
$0 $1,215,000 $874,000
$0 $94,000 $61,000
$818,000 $82,000 $737,000 NEW
$753,600 $229,200 $524,400 NEW
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
It should be noted that the improvements at Pines Road & Mission Avenue have been split into two
phases as the City is planning to implement a portion of this project (Phase 1) in 2020. Additionally, about
86% of funding for this project is from non -City funds (that portion is funded by a Surface Transportation
Block Grant) and thus cannot be included as part of the fair -share cost analysis. All other projects are
assumed to be funded entirely by City general funds (which include mitigation fee payments from
development).
Secondly, the full cost of improvements at the Pines Road & Sprague Avenue intersection cannot be
applied to the impact fee because there is a LOS deficiency at this intersection under existing conditions.
To account for this, the portion of traffic that if removed from the system today would effectively reduce
the LOS at this intersection from an "E" to a "D" was estimated in Synchro. The result was about 10% of
existing traffic. This means that if traffic volumes were 10% lower at this intersection under existing
conditions, the intersection would meet the LOS D threshold. Therefore, 10% of the total cost of the
potential improvement project at Pines Road & Sprague Avenue was deducted from the total cost to
arrive at the applicable cost as shown in Table 9.
Similarly, the full cost of improvements at the Argonne Road & Trent Avenue intersection cannot be
applied to the impact fee because there is an existing LOS deficiency at this intersection. To account for
this, the cost of a restriping and signal modification project which would bring the intersection to a LOS D
under existing conditions was estimated. The project was recommended as part of the North Argonne
Road/North Mullan Road Corridor Retiming project.' The estimated cost of this project ($229,000) was
deducted from cost of the longer term project to arrive at the applicable cost as shown in Table 9.
2 Fehr & Peers. Technical Memorandum. N Argonne Road/N Muiian Road Corridor Retiming. July 25, 2019. Project #
SE18-0621.
r"
12
Fair Share & Cost Per Trip Analysis
Fair Share Analysis
A common way for a development project to mitigate its traffic impact is through a fair -share financial
contribution toward a transportation system project that would improve LOS to meet City standards. The
Subarea's fair -share financial contribution is determined by how much traffic the Subarea is expected to
contribute to each of the deficient intersections under future conditions (see Table 9). In other words,
what percentage of 2040 traffic through a deficient intersection is caused by new development within the
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea?
The SRTC regional travel model was used to determine the percentage of traffic generated by future
development within the two Subareas. The travel model has a tool called a "select zone analysis" that can
track the traffic generated by different areas throughout the city. The select zone analysis was set to
identify the traffic generated by Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea development separate from any
other traffic generated by development in the region. The results of the select zone analysis were
analyzed for each of the seven deficient intersections identified in Table 9. Table 10 shows the results of
the select zone analysis. This reflects the same portion of traffic from the Mirabeau Subarea through the
five deficient intersections identified from the previous (2016) study.
Table 10: Subarea share of future PM peak hour traffic at deficient intersections
Intersection
Mirabeau Subarea
Portion of Future Traffic
North Pines Road Subarea Combined Portion
Portion of Future Traffic of Future Traffic
from two Subareas
Pines Rd/ Indiana Ave 18%
Pines Rd/ 1-90 EB Ramps 18%
Pines Rd/ Mission Ave 4%
Mirabeau Pkwy/ Mansfield Ave 38%
Sullivan Rd/ Mission Ave 4%
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave 6%
Argonne Rd/ Trent Ave 10%
Source: Fehr & Peers, SRTC Regional Travel Demand Model (last updated December, 2017).
42%
48%
53%
5%
9%
19%
7%
60%
66%
57%
43%
13%
25%
17%
The results in Table 10 show that at some intersections, the majority of future traffic is generated by the
two Subareas combined, while at other locations, the majority of future traffic is generated by locations
outside the two Subareas. For example, at the Pines Road & I-90 Eastbound Ramps, 18% of future traffic
will be generated by land uses in the Mirabeau Subarea and 48% will be generated by land uses in the
North Pines Road Subarea. Combined, the two Subareas will generate about 66% of the future traffic
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
passing through the intersection during the PM peak hour. In contrast, about 10% of future traffic at
Argonne Road & Trent Avenue intersection will be generated by land uses in the Mirabeau Subarea and
7% will be generated by land uses in the North Pines Road Subarea. Combined the two Subareas will
generate about 17% of the future traffic passing through the intersection during the PM peak hour, while
land uses outside the Subarea will generate about 83% of future traffic passing through the intersection.
The results in Table 10 were used to determine the two Subareas' financial share of the total project
improvements by multiplying the total improvement cost by the proportion of traffic generated by new
development in the two Subareas. The result of this calculation is the fair -share cost of each project to the
Subarea and is shown in Table 11. This shows that the total fair -share cost of all seven projects adds up to
$1,079,000 for the Mirabeau Subarea and $1,708,000 for the North Pines Road Subarea. A two percent
administrative fee was added to each Subarea cost to cover the cost of administering the program,
including future updates to this study. Thus, the total fair share cost of improvements, including the
administrative fee, equals $1,101,000 for the Mirabeau Subarea and $1,742,000 for the North Pines Road
Subarea.
Table 11: Subareas' share of total improvement costs
Intersection
Mirabeau
Applicable Mirabeau Subarea North Pines Road North Pines
Portion of Total Subarea Portion UPDATED Fair- Subarea Portion Road Subarea
Project Cost of Future Traffic Share Cost of Future Traffic Fair -Share Cost
Pines Rd/ Indiana
Ave
Pines Rd/ 1-90 EB
Ramps
Pines Rd/ Mission
Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/
Mission Ave
Pines Rd/
Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/
Trent Ave
Total Fair -Share
Cost
Total Fair -Share
Cost with 2%
Administrative
Fee
$1,500,000
$1,119,000
$891,000
$1,215,000
$94,000
$737,000
$524,000
18% $270,000
18% $201,000
4% $143,000
38% $462,000
4% $3,700
6% $48,000
10% $51,000
N/A N/A $1,079,000
N/A N/A $1,101,000
42% $628,000
48% $532,000
53% $476,000
5% $64,000
9% $8,200
19% $137,000
7% $38,000
N/A $1,708,000
N/A $1,742,000
Cost Per Trip
Given both Subareas' share of the total project costs as identified in Table 11, the cost per PM peak hour
trip could be updated for the Mirabeau Subarea and calculated for the North Pines Road Subarea by
applying the same methodology as the previous study. The same amount of future land use growth in
Mirabeau through Year 2040 assumed in the previous study was applied (but with updated project costs
and updated trip rates) as shown in Table 12. This calculation might seem counterintuitive because there
has been growth in the Mirabeau Subarea between 2016 and today. However, since this study did not re-
calculate the proportion of traffic growth associated with the remaining development potential in the
Mirabeau Subarea, the original total increase in trip generation was assumed. This is a common
assumption used when updating impact/mitigation fees and helps to keep the fees relatively stable and
predictable over time.
For the North Pines Road Subarea, the difference between the land use assumed in the 2040 SRTC
Regional Travel Demand Model and the 2015 model was used. PM peak hour trip generation was
estimated with standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates. Table 12
summarizes the land use growth and resulting trip generation rates for both Subareas. This is the same
trip generation approach used in the original Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study, except with updated rates
based on the current (2017) ITE Trip Generation Manual.
Table 12: PM peak hour trip generation calculation
Land Use
PM Peak Hour
Trip Rate
Mirabeau Mirabeau North Pines Road
Subarea Units of Subarea PM Subarea Units of
Development Peak Hour Trips Development
North Pines Road
Subarea PM Peak
Hour Trips
Single -Family
Residential
Multi -Family
Residential
Retail
Office
Hotel
Medical
School
Industrial
Total Fair -Share
Cost
0.99 65 dwelling units
0.56 979 dwelling units
3.81
0.40
0.60
0.85
0.17
0.49
N/A
63,890 square feet
2,561 employees
150 rooms
0 employees
0 employees
0 employees
N/A
65 78 dwelling units
549 157 dwelling units
244 69,750 square feet
1,025 259 employees
90 0 rooms
0 371 employees
0 18 employees
0 79 employees
1,973
78
88
266
104
0
316
4
39
N/A 895
Source: Trip generation: ITE (2017); Mirabeau Subarea land use growth: Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study (2016); North Pines Subarea
land use growth: SRTC Regional Travel Demand Model (last updated December, 2017).
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Based on the results from Table 11 and Table 12 the cost per PM peak hour for each Subarea are as
follows:
Mirabeau Subarea (UPDATED):
$1,101,000 (Subarea's share of total project costs) / 1,973 (Subarea PM peak hour trip generation from
growth) = $ 558 per PM peak hour trip.
This compares to $323.75 per PM peak hour trip from the 2016 study. The cost per trip went up because
of higher construction costs, the two additional improvement projects (at Pines Road & Sprague Avenue
and Argonne Road & Trent Avenue), and slightly lower assumed trip rates based on the updated trip
generation manual (which reduced forecast new trips generated by development from 2,176 in the
previous study to 1,973).
North Pines Road Subarea:
$1,742,000 (Subarea's share of total project costs) / 895 (Subarea PM peak hour trip generation from
growth) = $ 1,946 per PM peak hour trip
Vested Trips
There are still existing "vested" trips from the prior "Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement" that was
established by Spokane County. While the transportation improvement projects identified as part of the
Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement have largely been constructed, Spokane Valley is open to
counting the vested trips as a credit against this new transportation improvement program. Based on data
supplied by the City of Spokane Valley in October 2019, there were 816 PM peak hour vested trips
outstanding amongst the land owners in the Subarea. These trips have a value of $303.36 per trip, which
works out to a total value of $247,542. Developers can apply the value of their unused vested PM peak
hour trips as a credit to the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Mitigation Program until they have no vested trips
remaining.
Conclusions
This report provided an update to the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study previously performed in 2016. The
main purpose of this study was to update the projects costs, based primarily on inflation, and to expand
the geographic area paying the traffic LOS impact mitigation fee as planned new developments will add a
substantial amount of new traffic to the area. Instead of expanding the Mirabeau Subarea, a new Subarea
called the North Pines Road Subarea was defined. As part of this analysis, the existing and future traffic
LOS conditions at three new intersections in and around the two Subareas was performed. As shown in
the previous study and this update, in the future, traffic LOS is expected to degrade within the study area
as the Mirabeau Subarea, North Pines Road Subarea, and the rest of Spokane Valley and the region
continue to grow. This report identified the necessary traffic mitigation measures to improve congestion
and meet Spokane Valley's LOS standards. Most of the congestion relief projects are on the Pines Road
corridor with a separate improvement at Argonne Road & Trent Avenue and a minor improvement at the
Sullivan Road & Mission Avenue intersection.
A fair -share calculation was developed to identify the Mirabeau Subarea and North Pines Road Subarea
landowner's share of future traffic impacts and mitigation costs. If landowners agree to implement future
traffic congestion improvement projects through a mitigation contribution up to the amount shown in
Table 13, then they will meet their SEPA obligations to mitigate traffic congestion impacts. After making
this mitigation payment (which is subject to a credit from the existing Pines -Mansfield Development
Agreement), the developer will not have to conduct another traffic study, outside of a site access and
circulation study, which may be required by Spokane Valley to ensure safe access for all modes into and
within the development site.
Table 13: Voluntary Traffic Mitigation Fees for Developers to Meet SEPA Obligation
Subarea Cost per PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip
Mirabeau Subarea
North Pines Road Subarea
$ 558
$1,946
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update 17
Appendix A - Existing Conditions
Synchro Reports
FEHR'' PEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2052: Pines & Broadway
10/08/2019
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 11 j II f "j 4'
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Future Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 195 328 93 128 286 68 55 839 50 91 1115 167
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 255 350 99 197 348 83 204 1356 81 112 1080 161
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.27 0.27 0.07 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.43 0.43 0.07 0.38 0.38
Sat Flow, veh/h 1650 1292 366 1634 1339 318 1634 3125 186 1650 2866 428
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 195 0 421 128 0 354 55 438 451 91 639 643
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 0 1659 1634 0 1658 1634 1630 1681 1650 1646 1648
Q Serve(g_s), s 11.0 0.0 32.2 7.4 0.0 26.1 4.0 27.0 27.0 7.1 49.0 49.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.0 0.0 32.2 7.4 0.0 26.1 4.0 27.0 27.0 7.1 49.0 49.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.26
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 255 0 450 197 0 430 204 707 730 112 620 621
V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.00 0.94 0.65 0.00 0.82 0.27 0.62 0.62 0.81 1.03 1.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 255 0 472 241 0 497 204 707 730 203 620 621
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.00 0.91 0.62 0.62 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.7 0.0 46.3 35.5 0.0 45.3 51.5 28.5 28.5 59.7 40.5 40.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.8 0.0 25.8 4.0 0.0 8.7 0.4 2.5 2.5 12.8 44.0 45.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 6.1 0.0 18.0 3.5 0.0 13.0 1.8 12.7 13.0 3.6 29.8 30.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.5 0.0 72.1 39.5 0.0 54.0 51.9 31.0 30.9 72.6 84.5 85.9
LnGrp LOS D E D D D C C E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 616 482 944 1373
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.6 50.2 32.2 84.4
Approach LOS E D C F
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.3 54.0 16.0 38.7 13.8 61.4 14.5 40.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 49.0 11.0 39.0 16.0 44.0 13.0 37.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.0 51.0 13.0 28.1 9.1 29.0 9.4 34.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.1 3.6 0.1 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 61.6
HCM 2010 LOS E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/08/2019
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
EBL EBT
11
t4
216 801
216 801
3 8
0 0
1.00
1.00 1.00
1733 1733
225 834
1 3
0.96 0.96
1 1
241 1190
0.15 0.27
1650 4381
225 599
1650 1577
17.5 22.2
17.5 22.2
1.00
241 857
0.93 0.70
241 857
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.91
54.9 42.6
37.5 2.3
0.0 0.0
10.5 9.9
92.4 44.9
F D
1141
54.9
D
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
1
1
28.2
5.0
17.0
12.1
1.2
2
2
43.0
5.0
44.0
35.5
2.6
EBR WBL
93 140
93 140
18 7
0 0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1750 1733
82 146
0 1
0.96 0.96
1 1
116 171
0.27 0.10
429 1650
317 146
1656 1650
22.4 11.3
22.4 11.3
0.26 1.00
450 171
0.70 0.85
450 241
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.55
42.6 57.3
4.5 11.1
0.0 0.0
10.8 5.7
47.1 68.4
D E
3
3
24.0
5.0
19.0
19.5
0.0
4
4
34.8
5.0
30.0
29.5
0.3
1-
WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
f f
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
872 147 141 439 64 292 625 231
3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
933 156 292 797 116 317 686 253
0.23 0.23 0.18 0.28 0.28 0.19 0.29 0.29
4074 683 1634 2856 414 1650 2345 866
674 345 141 249 254 292 438 418
1577 1604 1634 1630 1640 1650 1646 1565
27.2 27.5 10.1 16.9 17.1 22.6 33.4 33.5
27.2 27.5 10.1 16.9 17.1 22.6 33.4 33.5
0.43 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.55
722 367 292 455 458 317 481 458
0.93 0.94 0.48 0.55 0.55 0.92 0.91 0.91
728 370 292 455 458 355 557 530
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27 0.27 0.27
49.1 49.2 48.0 39.9 40.0 51.6 44.4 44.4
12.1 21.1 1.2 4.7 4.8 10.2 8.6 9.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
13.1 14.3 4.6 8.2 8.4 11.2 16.4 15.7
61.3 70.4 49.2 44.6 44.7 61.8 52.9 53.4
E E D D D E D D
1165 644 1148
64.9 45.7 55.4
E D E
5
5
30.0
5.0
28.0
24.6
0.4
6
6
41.3
5.0
33.0
19.1
2.2
7
7
18.5
5.0
19.0
13.3
0.2
8
8
40.3
5.0
30.0
24.4
2.6
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
56.4
E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3028: S Evergreen Rd & Sprague 10/08/2019
1-
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "j Ili 4'f f
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Future Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 173 865 82 132 909 173 118 439 82 182 675 168
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 196 1761 166 157 1506 285 141 661 123 203 721 179
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.40 0.40 0.10 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.24 0.24 0.12 0.28 0.28
SatFlow,veh/h 1650 4393 415 1650 3993 757 1650 2771 514 1650 2612 650
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 173 620 327 132 717 365 118 260 261 182 425 418
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 1577 1654 1650 1577 1596 1650 1646 1639 1650 1646 1616
Q Serve(g_s), s 13.4 19.1 19.2 10.2 23.8 24.0 9.2 18.5 18.8 14.1 32.8 32.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.4 19.1 19.2 10.2 23.8 24.0 9.2 18.5 18.8 14.1 32.8 32.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.40
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 196 1264 663 157 1189 602 141 393 391 203 454 446
V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.49 0.49 0.84 0.60 0.61 0.84 0.66 0.67 0.90 0.94 0.94
AvailCap(c_a),veh/h 203 1264 663 203 1189 602 203 462 460 203 462 454
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 56.4 29.0 29.1 57.9 32.6 32.7 58.5 44.7 44.8 56.2 45.9 46.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 20.1 0.7 1.4 20.9 2.2 4.4 17.8 2.7 2.9 36.1 26.4 26.9
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.2 8.4 9.0 5.6 10.7 11.3 4.9 8.7 8.8 8.5 18.2 18.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 76.5 29.7 30.4 78.7 34.9 37.1 76.4 47.5 47.8 92.3 72.3 72.9
LnGrp LOS E C C E C D E D D F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1120 1214 639 1025
Approach Delay, s/veh 37.2 40.3 52.9 76.1
Approach LOS D D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.4 54.0 15.1 41.4 16.4 57.1 20.0 36.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 43.0 16.0 36.5 16.0 43.0 16.0 36.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.4 26.0 11.2 34.8 12.2 21.2 16.1 20.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 12.1 0.1 1.0 0.1 14.4 0.0 5.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 50.6
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Appendix B - Existing Conditions
Optimized Synchro Reports
FEHRPEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2052: Pines & Broadway
10/08/2019
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 11 j II f "j 4'
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Future Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 195 328 93 128 286 69 55 839 50 91 1115 164
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 244 350 99 178 310 75 98 1393 83 112 1305 191
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.06 0.45 0.45 0.07 0.45 0.45
Sat Flow, veh/h 1650 1292 366 1634 1335 322 1634 3125 186 1650 2875 422
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 195 0 421 128 0 355 55 438 451 91 637 642
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 0 1659 1634 0 1657 1634 1630 1681 1650 1646 1651
Q Serve(g_s), s 11.4 0.0 32.2 7.8 0.0 27.2 4.3 26.4 26.5 7.1 44.8 45.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.4 0.0 32.2 7.8 0.0 27.2 4.3 26.4 26.5 7.1 44.8 45.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.26
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 244 0 450 178 0 385 98 726 749 112 747 749
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.00 0.94 0.72 0.00 0.92 0.56 0.60 0.60 0.81 0.85 0.86
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 244 0 472 178 0 408 98 726 749 178 747 749
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.00 0.91 0.63 0.63 0.63 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.1 0.0 46.3 38.4 0.0 48.7 59.5 27.3 27.3 59.8 31.6 31.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.7 0.0 25.8 11.9 0.0 23.7 4.6 2.3 2.3 14.0 11.8 12.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 6.3 0.0 18.0 4.1 0.0 15.0 2.0 12.4 12.8 3.7 22.8 23.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 51.9 0.0 72.1 50.3 0.0 72.4 64.1 29.6 29.6 73.8 43.5 43.8
LnGrp LOS D E D E E C C E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 616 483 944 1370
Approach Delay, s/veh 65.7 66.5 31.6 45.6
Approach LOS E E C D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 64.0 18.0 35.2 13.8 62.9 13.0 40.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 59.0 13.0 32.0 14.0 51.0 8.0 37.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 47.2 13.4 29.2 9.1 28.5 9.8 34.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 1.0 0.1 4.0 0.0 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 48.3
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/08/2019
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
EBL EBT
11
t4
216 801
216 801
3 8
0 0
1.00
1.00 1.00
1733 1733
225 834
1 3
0.96 0.96
1 1
248 1249
0.15 0.28
1650 4387
225 599
1650 1577
17.4 21.8
17.4 21.8
1.00
248 898
0.91 0.67
254 898
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.91
54.4 41.0
30.8 1.7
0.0 0.0
10.1 9.7
85.2 42.8
F D
1140
51.6
D
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
1
1
26.4
5.0
12.0
12.3
0.0
2
2
43.2
5.0
45.0
35.4
2.7
EBR WBL
93 140
93 140
18 7
0 0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1750 1733
81 146
0 1
0.96 0.96
1 1
121 170
0.28 0.10
424 1650
316 146
1657 1650
21.9 11.3
21.9 11.3
0.26 1.00
472 170
0.67 0.86
472 228
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.55
41.1 57.3
3.3 12.6
0.0 0.0
10.5 5.7
44.4 70.0
D E
3
3
24.5
5.0
20.0
19.4
0.1
4
4
35.9
5.0
33.0
29.2
1.8
1-
WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
f f
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
872 147 141 439 63 292 625 231
3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
970 163 269 766 109 315 688 254
0.24 0.24 0.16 0.27 0.27 0.19 0.29 0.29
4074 683 1634 2862 408 1650 2345 866
674 345 141 249 253 292 438 418
1577 1604 1634 1630 1641 1650 1646 1565
26.9 27.2 10.3 17.2 17.4 22.6 33.4 33.4
26.9 27.2 10.3 17.2 17.4 22.6 33.4 33.4
0.43 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.55
751 382 269 436 439 315 483 459
0.90 0.90 0.52 0.57 0.58 0.93 0.91 0.91
800 407 269 436 439 330 570 542
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 0.45 0.45
48.0 48.1 49.6 41.2 41.2 51.7 44.2 44.3
7.5 14.0 1.9 5.3 5.4 17.6 12.6 13.3
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
12.5 13.5 4.8 8.4 8.5 11.8 16.8 16.1
55.5 62.1 51.5 46.5 46.7 69.3 56.8 57.5
E E D D D E E E
1165 643 1148
59.3 47.7 60.3
E D E
5
5
29.8
5.0
26.0
24.6
0.2
6
6
39.8
5.0
31.0
19.4
2.1
7
7
18.4
5.0
18.0
13.3
0.2
8
8
42.0
5.0
35.0
23.9
4.0
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
55.6
E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3028: S Evergreen Rd & Sprague 10/08/2019
1-
~
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "j Ili 4'1 f Vi
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Future Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 173 865 83 132 909 176 118 439 82 182 675 166
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 197 1696 162 158 1443 278 140 695 129 206 761 187
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.39 0.39 0.10 0.36 0.36 0.09 0.25 0.25 0.12 0.29 0.29
SatFlow,veh/h 1650 4387 419 1650 3980 767 1650 2771 514 1650 2619 644
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 173 621 327 132 719 366 118 260 261 182 424 417
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 1577 1653 1650 1577 1594 1650 1646 1639 1650 1646 1617
Q Serve(g_s), s 13.4 19.5 19.7 10.2 24.5 24.7 9.2 18.2 18.5 14.1 32.0 32.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.4 19.5 19.7 10.2 24.5 24.7 9.2 18.2 18.5 14.1 32.0 32.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.40
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 197 1219 639 158 1143 578 140 413 411 206 478 470
V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.51 0.51 0.84 0.63 0.63 0.84 0.63 0.64 0.88 0.89 0.89
AvailCap(c_a),veh/h 228 1219 639 241 1143 578 165 456 454 241 532 522
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 56.3 30.5 30.5 57.8 34.2 34.3 58.6 43.3 43.4 55.9 44.1 44.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.3 0.8 1.5 14.0 2.6 5.1 27.1 2.4 2.5 26.8 15.4 15.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.0 8.7 9.3 5.3 11.1 11.7 5.3 8.6 8.6 8.0 16.5 16.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 72.6 31.3 32.0 71.8 36.8 39.4 85.7 45.7 46.0 82.7 59.5 59.9
LnGrp LOS E C C E D D F D D F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1121 1217 639 1023
Approach Delay, s/veh 37.9 41.4 53.2 63.8
Approach LOS D D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.5 52.1 15.1 43.3 16.4 55.2 20.2 38.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 38.5 13.0 42.0 19.0 37.5 19.0 36.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.4 26.7 11.2 34.1 12.2 21.7 16.1 20.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 9.1 0.1 3.7 0.2 11.4 0.2 5.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 48.0
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Appendix C - Future Conditions
Synchro Reports
FEHR'' PEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2052: Pines & Broadway
10/08/2019
at \g- iy
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 11 j II f 4'
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 205 320 110 130 280 85 55 895 55 90 1190 190
Future Volume (veh/h) 205 320 110 130 280 85 55 895 55 90 1190 190
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 205 320 97 130 280 73 55 895 50 90 1190 174
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 239 347 105 171 298 78 68 1417 79 111 1373 200
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.27 0.27 0.05 0.23 0.23 0.04 0.45 0.45 0.07 0.48 0.48
Sat Flow, veh/h 1650 1270 385 1634 1311 342 1634 3138 175 1650 2879 419
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 205 0 417 130 0 353 55 465 480 90 678 686
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 0 1655 1634 0 1653 1634 1630 1683 1650 1646 1652
Q Serve(g_s), s 12.1 0.0 31.8 7.0 0.0 27.3 4.3 28.4 28.4 7.0 47.7 48.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.1 0.0 31.8 7.0 0.0 27.3 4.3 28.4 28.4 7.0 47.7 48.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.25
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 239 0 453 171 0 376 68 736 760 111 785 788
V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.00 0.92 0.76 0.00 0.94 0.81 0.63 0.63 0.81 0.86 0.87
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 239 0 458 171 0 382 68 736 760 165 785 788
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.00 0.91 0.55 0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.8 0.0 45.9 42.2 0.0 49.3 61.8 27.3 27.3 59.8 30.2 30.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.5 0.0 23.8 16.3 0.0 28.8 30.8 2.3 2.2 16.9 12.1 12.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.2 0.0 17.5 2.3 0.0 15.5 2.5 13.2 13.7 3.7 24.1 24.7
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 61.3 0.0 69.7 58.5 0.0 78.1 92.5 29.6 29.5 76.8 42.4 43.0
LnGrp LOS E E E E F C C E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 622 483 1000 1454
Approach Delay, s/veh 66.9 72.8 33.0 44.8
Approach LOS E E C D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.4 67.0 18.0 34.6 13.7 63.7 12.0 40.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 62.0 13.0 30.0 13.0 54.0 7.0 36.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 50.3 14.1 29.3 9.0 30.4 9.0 33.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 4.4 0.0 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 49.2
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/08/2019
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 12.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 109.2
LnGrp LOS F
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
1
1
23.1
5.0
13.0
13.7
0.0
EBL EBT EBR WBL
11
t4
240 960
240 960
3 8
0 0
1.00
1.00 1.00
1733 1733
240 960
1 3
1.00 1.00
1 1
241 1219
0.15 0.28
1650 4335
240 698
1650 1577
18.9 26.5
18.9 26.5
1.00
241 887
1.00 0.79
241 887
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.91
55.5 43.1
53.8 4.3
0.0 0.0
12.1
47.5
D
1304
59.9
E
2
2
45.9
5.0
46.0
38.2
2.7
120
120
18
0
1.00
1.00
1750
104
0
1.00
1
132
0.28
468
366
1649
26.7
26.7
0.28
464
0.79
464
1.00
0.91
43.2
8.1
0.0
13.2
51.3
D
3
3
24.0
5.0
19.0
20.9
0.0
160
160
7
0
1.00
1.00
1733
160
1
1.00
1
183
0.11
1650
160
1650
12.4
12.4
1.00
183
0.87
203
1.00
0.55
56.9
18.7
0.0
6.6
75.5
E
4
4
37.0
5.0
32.0
34.0
0.0
1-
WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
f f
1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
1005 166 155 470 74 310 670 257
3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
1006 166 228 760 119 305 729 280
0.25 0.25 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.18 0.31 0.31
4086 673 1634 2823 442 1650 2318 889
775 396 155 270 274 310 476 451
1577 1606 1634 1630 1635 1650 1646 1562
31.9 32.0 11.7 18.9 19.1 24.0 36.2 36.2
31.9 32.0 11.7 18.9 19.1 24.0 36.2 36.2
0.42 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.57
776 395 228 439 440 305 518 491
1.00 1.00 0.68 0.62 0.62 1.02 0.92 0.92
776 395 228 439 440 305 582 553
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 0.34 0.34
49.0 49.0 53.2 41.6 41.7 53.0 43.0 43.0
23.6 33.9 8.0 6.3 6.5 34.7 10.5 11.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0
16.4 17.9 5.8 9.3 9.4 13.9 18.0 17.2
72.6 82.9 61.2 48.0 48.2 87.8 53.5 54.0
E F E D D F D D
1331 699 1237
76.0 51.0 62.3
E D E
5
5
29.0
5.0
24.0
26.0
0.0
6
6
40.0
5.0
35.0
21.1
2.4
7
7
19.4
5.0
16.0
14.4
0.1
8
8
41.6
5.0
35.0
28.7
3.2
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
63.9
E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3028: S Evergreen Rd & Sprague 10/08/2019
1-
~
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "j Ili 4'1 f Vi
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 185 1005 110 145 980 240 130 470 115 195 720 215
Future Volume (veh/h) 185 1005 110 145 980 240 130 470 115 195 720 215
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 185 1005 95 145 980 192 130 470 92 195 720 185
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 209 1569 148 169 1323 259 152 731 142 218 792 204
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.36 0.36 0.10 0.33 0.33 0.09 0.27 0.27 0.13 0.31 0.31
SatFlow,veh/h 1650 4393 414 1650 3970 776 1650 2747 534 1650 2593 666
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 185 721 379 145 778 394 130 280 282 195 457 448
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 1577 1654 1650 1577 1592 1650 1646 1636 1650 1646 1613
Q Serve(g_s), s 14.3 24.8 24.9 11.2 28.4 28.5 10.1 19.6 19.8 15.1 34.7 34.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.3 24.8 24.9 11.2 28.4 28.5 10.1 19.6 19.8 15.1 34.7 34.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.49 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.41
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 209 1126 591 169 1051 531 152 438 435 218 503 493
V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.64 0.64 0.86 0.74 0.74 0.85 0.64 0.65 0.89 0.91 0.91
AvailCap(c_a),veh/h 228 1126 591 198 1051 531 165 470 467 228 533 522
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 55.9 34.8 34.9 57.4 38.4 38.4 58.1 42.2 42.3 55.5 43.4 43.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 18.3 1.5 2.8 25.8 4.6 8.9 31.0 2.7 2.8 32.2 18.9 19.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.6 11.0 11.8 6.3 13.0 13.8 5.9 9.2 9.3 8.8 18.4 18.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.1 36.3 37.7 83.2 43.0 47.3 89.2 44.9 45.1 87.8 62.3 62.7
LnGrp LOS E D D F D D F D D F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1285 1317 692 1100
Approach Delay, s/veh 42.2 48.7 53.3 67.0
Approach LOS D D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.4 48.3 16.0 45.2 17.3 51.4 21.2 40.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 38.4 13.0 42.1 15.6 40.8 18.0 37.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.3 30.5 12.1 36.7 13.2 26.9 17.1 21.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.8 0.0 3.0 0.1 11.1 0.1 5.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 52.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Appendix D - Future Conditions with
Mitigations Synchro Reports
FEHRPEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/22/2019
1-
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 1+ Vi 114 Vi ft r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 240 960 120 160 1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
Future Volume (veh/h) 240 960 120 160 1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1733
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 240 960 104 160 1005 166 155 470 74 310 670 257
Adj No. of Lanes 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 292 1120 121 184 1140 188 398 772 121 334 765 336
Arrive On Green 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.11 0.28 0.28 0.24 0.27 0.27 0.20 0.23 0.23
SatFlow,veh/h 3201 4334 468 1650 4087 674 1634 2823 442 1650 3292 1446
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 240 698 366 160 775 396 155 270 274 310 670 257
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1601 1577 1649 1650 1577 1607 1634 1630 1635 1650 1646 1446
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.6 27.4 27.5 12.4 30.5 30.7 10.3 18.8 19.0 24.0 25.5 21.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.6 27.4 27.5 12.4 30.5 30.7 10.3 18.8 19.0 24.0 25.5 21.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 292 815 426 184 880 448 398 446 447 334 765 336
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.86 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.39 0.61 0.61 0.93 0.88 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 296 849 444 228 995 507 398 446 447 368 886 389
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.55 0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 0.34 0.34
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 58.0 45.9 45.9 56.8 44.8 44.8 41.1 41.1 41.2 50.9 48.1 46.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.3 7.7 13.9 15.0 5.0 9.4 0.6 6.0 6.1 12.8 5.2 5.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.9 12.8 14.2 6.4 14.0 14.8 4.7 9.2 9.4 12.1 12.2 9.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 73.3 53.6 59.8 71.8 49.8 54.2 41.7 47.2 47.4 63.7 53.3 52.3
LnGrp LOS E D E E D D D D D E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1304 1331 699 1237
Approach Delay, s/veh 59.0 53.8 46.0 55.7
Approach LOS E D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 36.7 35.2 16.9 41.3 31.3 40.5 19.5 38.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.0 35.0 12.0 41.0 29.0 28.0 18.0 35.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.3 27.5 11.6 32.7 26.0 21.0 14.4 29.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.1 2.7 0.3 3.6 0.4 1.7 0.2 2.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
54.6
Notes
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
Appendix E - Project Cost Estimate
Spreadsheets
FEHR'' PEERS
Pines Road & Indiana Ave - 600' EB Lane Addition,
Partial SW Corner Island Removal, Full Island
Relocation
Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
Roadway Demo
Curb Demo
Sidewalk Demo
Signal Demo
Excavation
Road Section
Curb
Sidewalk
Curb Ramps
Traffic Signal
ROW
Subtotal
400
900
333
2
400
800
900
700
6
1
11,000
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 6,000
$ 14,400
$ 6,660
$ 12,000
$ 14,000
$ 48,000
$ 40,500
$ 56,000
$ 24,000
$ 480,000
$ 132,000
Pines Road & I-90 EB Ramps - EB 450' Lane Addition
and NB 75' Lane Addition
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
0
75
42
1
233
1,059
75
42
0
1
1,200
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
1,200
840
6,000
8,155
63,540
3,375
3,360
480,000
14,400
$ 701,560
Subtotal
$ 566,470
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 70,156
$ 140,312
$ 105,234
$ 210,468
$ 140,312
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 56,647
$ 113,294
$ 84,971
$ 169,941
$ 113,294
Total $ 1,500,042 Total $ 1,119,017
11000 Sq Ft ROW
* About half of the ROW is WSDOT, using standard "over
the fence" price for land
Assumes new signal pole and longer mast arm with 1-90
off ramp island relocation south. Relocate signal
controller. New pole at Pines/Indiana. Reconstruct both
right turn islands. Assumes ROW cost for additional lane
on south side of road.
1200 Sq Ft ROW
Assumes reallignment of intersection to south. Move
SE corner ped head. Assumes all ROW for NBR lane
would need to be purchased, but no cost to aquire off -
ramp widening space. ADA ramps look new. No
replacement assumed.
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
Item
Roadway Demo
Curb Demo
Sidewalk Demo
Signal Demo
Excavation
Road Section
Curb
Sidewalk
Curb Ramps
Traffic Signal
ROW
Mirabeau Pkwy and Mansfield Ave -Signalize and Sullivan Road and Mission Ave -Restripe and partially
SB 175' Lane Addition
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
remove curb
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
0
175
97
0
0
233
300
250
4
1.25
2,700
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
$ 2,800
$ 1,940
$ 13,980
$ 13,500
$ 20,000
$ 16,000
$ 600,000
$ 32,400
20
40
0
0
0
20
80
200
2
0.05
0
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
$ 300
$ 640
$ 1,200
$ 3,600
$ 16,000
$ 8,000
$ 24,000
Subtotal
$ 668,220
Subtotal
$ 53,740
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 66,822
$ 13,644
$ 100,233
$ 200,466
$ 133,644
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 5,374
$ 8,061
$ 16,122
$ 10,748
Total
2700 Sq Ft ROW
$ 1,215,429
Assumes all new ramps to meet current ADA.
Assumes new fiber to be installed back to Pines.
Total
$ 94,045
3 ramps will need to be made ADA compliant. Risk:
Might need to relocate pole and mast arm on NE
corner to meet ADA clearance. This is not assumed in
the cost.
Item
Roadway Demo
Curb Demo
Sidewalk Demo
Signal Demo
Excavation
Road Section
Curb
Sidewalk
Curb Ramps
Traffic Signal
ROW
Pines and Sprague - Add 250' SBR and 325' EBL Argonne & Trent - 300' WBL turn add
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
460
1,215
433
2
200
566
1,215
520
2
0.5
5,175
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
$ 6,900
$ 19,440
$ 8,667
$ 12,000
$ 6,983
$ 33,933
$ 54,675
$ 41,600
$ 8,000
$ 240,000
$ 62,100
0
850
100
2
208
933
850
67
3
0.5
0
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
15
16
20
6,000
35
60
45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$480,000
$ 12
13,600
2,000
12,000
7,296
56,000
38,250
5,333
12,000
240,000
Subtotal
$ 432,198
Subtotal
$ 386,479
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 43,220
$ -
$ 64,830
$ 129,659
$ 86,440
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 38,648
$ 77,296
$ 57,972
$ 115,944
$ 77,296
Total $ 818,446
6200 Sq Ft ROW
Assumes northwest curb along Sprague would
be moved 4 feet north along with restriping to
narrow outside lanes for second EBR. Assumes
northwest curb along Pines would be moved
west 12 feet to accommodate SBR. Two new
signals on northwest and southeast corners.
Total $ 753,634
Assumes south curb along Trent Avenue would
be moved 12' south for 300' plus 150' taper on
both sides of Argonne to accommodate a
second WBL. Both signal poles on the south
side would be replaced along with the right turn
island on the SW corner.
Pines & Mission Phase 2 - Southbound Right Turn Lane Addition
Engineers Estimate
Project CIP No. TBD
Prepared by - Adam Jackson
Date
3/5/2018
Ilk 4.V'r�,.�„
,. �C tcy
Item No.
Bid Item
Qty
Unit
Unit Price
Est. Cost
Use
100
MOBILIZATION @ 10%
1
L.S.
$ 45,042
$ 45,042
101
CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING
1
L.S.
$ 15,000
$ 15,000
102
SPCC PLAN
1
L.S.
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
103
PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL
1
L.S.
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
104
PUBLIC LIAISION REPRESENTATIVE
1
L.S.
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
105
EROSION CONTROL
1
L.S.
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
106
PORTABLE CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN
1344
HR.
$ 4
$ 5,376
107
REMOVE CEMENT CONCRETE CURB
350
L.F.
$ 15
$ 5,250
108
SAWCUT ASPHALT PAVEMENT
750
L.F.-in
$ 5
$ 3,750
109
ROADWAY EXCAV. INCL. HAUL (assumes 16" depth)
400
C.Y.
$ 30
$ 12,000
110
CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE, 8 IN. DEPTH
778
S.Y.
$ 25
$ 19,444
111
JOINT/CRACK SEALANT ATHMAJOINTS
500
L.F.
$ 3
$ 1,500
112
HMA CL 1/2" PG 70-28 0.50 FT. DEPTH
130
C.Y.
$ 50
$ 6,481
113
CEMENT CONCRETE TRAFFIC CURB, TYPE B
350
L.F.
$ 45
$ 15,750
114
CONRETE RETAINING WALL AT BACK OF SIDEWALK
1089
SF
$ 50
$ 54,450
115
CEMENT CONCRETE CURB RAMP PERPENDICULAR TYPE A
1
EACH
$ 2,500
$ 2,500
116
CEMENT CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN CURB
20
L.F.
$ 30
$ 600
117
TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS
0
L.S.
$ 250,000
$ -
118
REMOVE EXISTING STRIPING
0
L.F.
$ 3.00
$ -
119
PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE
390
S.F.
$ 18
$ 7,020
120
PLASTIC LINE
300
L.F.
$ 4
$ 1,200
121
PLASTIC WIDE LINE
300
L.F.
$ 12
$ 3,600
122
PLASTIC TRAFFIC ARROW
3
EACH
$ 300
$ 900
123
PLASTIC STOP LINE
20
L.F.
$ 30
$ 600
124
LANDSCAPE RESTORATION
1
L.S.
$ 30,000
$ 30,000
125
STORMWATER SWALE AND ROW IN LIMITED ACCESS AREA
1
L.S.
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
126
UTILITY RELCOATION (POLES AND BOXES)
1
LS
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
ITEMS: Total
Contingency 15%
Inflation Adjustment Factor @ 2 years 3%
$ 495,464
$ 74,320
$ 30,174
Construction Subtotal
PE Engineering 20%
CN Engineering 10%
ROW (excl. WSDOT) 1 L.S. $ 32,000.00
Estimated Project Cost
$ 599,958
$ 119,992
$ 59,996
$ 32,000
$ 811,945
I $ 812,000
E Trent Road/N Argonne
Road Proposed Layout Improvements to Address Existing LOS Deficiency
Cost Estimate
Unit
Unit Cost
Qty
Cost
1
Install of Ground Sign
EA
$ 270.00
4
$ 1,080
2
Remove Striping (Grind)
LF
$ 0.50
800
$ 400
3
Thermoplastic Arrow
EA
$ 475.00
7
$ 3,325
4
Thermoplastic Lane Line
LF
$ 3.50
1100
$ 3,850
5
Thermoplastic Stop Bar
LF
$ 20.00
80
$ 1,600
6
Thermoplastic Traffic Letter
EA
$ 175.00
4
$ 700
7
Traffic Signal Modification
EA
$480,000.00
0.25
$ 120,000
Construction Subtotal
$ 130,955
Design (20%)
$ 26,190
Traffic Control (15%)
$ 19,640
Mobilization (10%)
$ 13,100
Contingency (30%)
$ 39,290
Total
$ 229,200
S°pokane
j Valley
Mirabeau Subarea
Traffic Study
Prepared for:
City of Spokane Valley
June 2016
DN15-0515
FEHRk PEERS
S iokan e
�•'�\'alley
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
Table of Contents
BACKGROUND 1
EXISTING CONDITIONS TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE 2
IMPROVING EXISTING CONDITIONS TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE 6
FUTURE CONDITIONS (2040) TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 8
IMPROVING FUTURE CONDITIONS TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE 15
ESTIMATING THE COST OF THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 16
ESTIMATING THE SUBAREA'S FAIR -SHARE CONTRIBUTION AND COST PER TRIP 18
CONCLUSIONS 21
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
List of Figures
Figure 1A. Study Intersections — Existing Lane Configurations, Traffic Controls and PM Peak Hour Traffic
Volumes (West) 3
Figure 1 B. Study Intersections — Existing Lane Configurations, Traffic Controls and PM Peak Hour Traffic
Volumes (East) 4
Figure 2. SRTC Traffic Analysis Zones in the Study Area 9
Figure 3A. Study Intersections — 2040 Lane Configurations, Traffic Controls and PM Peak Hour Traffic
Volumes (West) 11
Figure 3B. Study Intersections — 2040 Lane Configurations, Traffic Controls and PM Peak Hour Traffic
Volumes (East) 12
List of Tables
Table 1. LOS for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections 2
Table 2: Intersection Vehicle Delay and LOS for Existing Conditions (2015) 5
Table 3: Approach to Identify Most Cost -Effective Intersection Improvements 6
Table 4: Potential Projects to Improve LOS at Selected Intersections 7
Table 5: Study Area and Surrounding Area Households 9
Table 6: Study Area and Surrounding Area Employment 9
Table 7: Intersection Vehicle Delay and LOS for Future Conditions (2040) 13
Table 8: Potential Projects to Improve Future Conditions LOS at Selected Intersections 15
Table 9: Project Unit Costs 16
Table 10: Potential Projects to Improve Future Conditions LOS at Selected Intersections 17
Table 11: Subarea Share of Traffic at the Deficient Intersections 18
Table 12: Subarea's Share of Total Improvement Costs 19
Table 13: Trip Generation Calculation 20
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
BACKGROUND
This report summarizes the methods, assumptions, and results behind the Mirabeau Subarea traffic study.
The purpose of this analysis is to identify existing transportation level of service (LOS) deficiencies and future
transportation improvements to support existing and planned growth in the subarea. In addition, this
analysis uses the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel model to evaluate the proportion
of future traffic growth contributed by development in the Mira beau Subarea. Identifying the subarea traffic
growth allows for the determination of the subarea's fair -share financial contribution towards transportation
improvements that provide good access and traffic LOS in the future. As developer's pay their fair -share
toward long-term traffic congestion relief projects, they are meeting their obligation under SEPA and no
further traffic studies are needed (other than site access and circulation analysis).
Page 1
Spokane
.000 Valley
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
EXISTING CONDITIONS TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE
This section describes the methodology and results of the traffic LOS analysis for existing conditions. The
purpose of this analysis is to understand which subarea intersections are currently failing the City's adopted
LOS standards of: LOS D for signalized and LOS E for unsignalized intersections. Traffic volume data was
provided by the City of Spokane Valley and a data vendor, National Data & Surveying Services. The traffic
data provided by The City of Spokane Valley is from one week (3/18-3/24) in March of 2015. The traffic data
provided by National Data & Surveying Services was collected on November 18, 2015.
Since we had traffic counts from two different time periods, we intentionally "double counted" the
intersection of Pines Road / Indiana Avenue to determine if there were any trends between the spring and
fall of 2015 that we should be accounting for. The comparison indicated that the traffic was comparable for
both time periods and no adjustments were necessary.
Using the counts as input data, the traffic LOS analysis was conducted using industry -standard
methodologies from the Transportation Research Board's 2070 Highway Capacity Manual. The Highway
Capacity Manual LOS categories are defined in Table 1. Analysis was conducted using Synchro, which is the
software used by Spokane Valley and most transportation consulting firms for intersection LOS analysis.
Input data including lane geometries, traffic signal timing, and traffic signal phasing was provided by
Spokane Valley and WSDOT and confirmed by Fehr & Peers using aerial photos.
Table 2 shows the results of the existing conditions LOS analysis. Figures 1A and 1 B show the location of
the study intersections, lane configurations, traffic controls, and PM peak hour traffic volumes. Appendix A
contains the detailed LOS calculation sheets from Synchro.
TABLE a. LOS FOR SIGNALIZED AND UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Average Delay Average Delay
Level of (seconds/vehicle) for (seconds/vehicle) for
Service Signalized Intersections Unsignalized Intersections* Description
A Less than 10 Less than 10 Free flow, very light traffic
B 10-20 10-15 Slight delays, light traffic
C 20-35 15-25 Moderate delays, moderate traffic
D 35-55 25-35 Moderate delays, may take more
than one traffic signal cycle to clear
E 55-80 35-50 High delays, congestion
F More than 80 More than 50 Very high delays, long queues,
congestion
Source: 2070 Highway Capacity Manual
* For side -street stop -controlled intersections, delay is measured for the approach with the longest wait to cross/enter the main street.
Page2
Q
1. Cement RoadlPines Rd/Trent (SR 290)
2. Pines Rd/Pinecroft Way
3. Pines Rd/Mirabeau Pkwy
4. Pinecroft Way/Mirabeau Pkwy
a
o
K
0
cn inra N E
�yI v
Trent SR 290
,_ 20
310
a
2
o_
Lc)
o clolIo
41L
®
40
Pinecroft Way
a
Ln o o_
'n LoII.-
4/L
165
10
00
Pkw
CO
o
o c
Lo N o
Mirabeau au Pkwy
5
115
5_r
905 i
265-
a
ce
a
lr
"'r`°4'
"
5
0�'+
5
0
v)Tt
oc`r'oo
r
0
Obi►
5
rMiirabeau
�If
�or�
m
5�
225
5. Pines Rd/Grace Ln
6. Pines Rd/Mansfield Ave
7. 1-90 WB off-ramp/Indiana Ave
8. Pines Rd/Montgomery Dr/Indiana Ave
a
C"
a
NLoo
0 CO
Ip.
Grace Ln 4•
20
4-5
40
a
0
O oo O
COCO0
41 L
Mansfield Ave
50
�145
170
Indiana Ave
..,4— 290
a
a
NCO
Il Il I
Mont ome �DP y
245
47-70
400
Ave
20
5�►
30
0
if
00�
O�v
65
70�
380
a
m
r},,
�If
oLoo
Nam
--��
260�t
m
o
rn
�vir
Loo
c'
??Indiana
vi�IIr
oLoo
o
9. Pines Rd/I 90 EB Ramps
10. Pines Rd/Mission Ave
11. Mirabeau Pkwy/Indiana Ave
12. Mirabeau Pkwy/Mansfield Ave
D
co ��
♦1L
1-90 EB off -ram.
1-90 EB on -ram.
D
�o�
N,- N
41LL
�350
�130
90
Mission Ave
a
�0 m
cOM-220
)LL
Indiana Ave
-235
�O
NNO
4L
0
�0
�0
0
Mansfield Ave
370 �►
_
650
a
LY
a
I f
LLox,�►
co
265
165 •
'It�
LoOo
v rn CI240
50�
20
g'
220 �' i
® a
5
vi1r
moo
C C
13. S Evergreen Rd/E Indiana Ave
14. S Evergreen Rd/1-90 WB Ramps
4— 315
435
E Indiana Ave E Indiana Ave
345
370 —4
M M
17. Sullivan Rd/E Indiana Ave
a
LO
▪ LO
)11
1-90 WB on -ram
R_ 155
'-0-1
260
1-90 WB off -ram
11II
oCO
18. Sullivan Rd/WB on -ramp
15. S Evergreen Rd/I-90 EB Ramps
16. Mission Connector/E Mission Ave
4.
a
W
o°oo w
11L
1-90 EB off -ram.
1-90 EB on -ram
500 IIIIr
5-4 Ln
M-41
500 � O CNI
19. Sullivan Rd/I-90 EB Ramps
4— 250
30
E Mission Ave
210
190
0
0
20. Sullivan Rd/E Mission Ave
o
N
(�
411L
E Indiana Ave
Sullivan Rd
v.--195
260
0-125
130 —4
105
330
'nttr
000
M Cho r
a
4-150
M 200
WB on -ram .41
TIT
rn
a
W Lo
c N V)
N
LILL
1-90 EB off -ram. 1-90 EB on -ram
290 —
1-4- ' 0Ncoo
790 — N
ttr
a
Lt
m
o
0�0 in 65
V-10
411L 30
E Mission Ave
'l
105 II�
5-4 0000
125
21. I-90 WB off-ramp/E Indiana Ave
4— 330
210
E Indiana Ave
235
E
LOCO
N
Spokane
_.Valley
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
TABLE 2: INTERSECTION VEHICLE DELAY AND LOS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (2o15)
Intersection Details
Name
1. Pines Road / Trent Ave
2. Pines Road / Pinecro ft Way
3. Pines Road / Mirabeau Parkway
4. Mirabeau Parkway / Pinecroft Way
5. Pines Road / Grace Lane
6. Pines Road / Mansfield Avenue
7. Indiana Avenue / 1-90 WB off -ramp
8. Pines Road / Indiana Avenue
9. Pines Road / 1-90 EB ramps
10. Pines Road / Mission Avenue
11. Indiana Avenue / Mirabeau Parkway
12. Mirabeau Parkway / Mansfield Avenue
13. Evergreen Road / Indiana Avenue
14. Evergreen Road / 1-90 WB on and off -ramps
15. Evergreen Road / 1-90 EB on and off -ramps
16. Mission Connector & Mission Avenue
17. Indiana Avenue / Sullivan Road
18. Sullivan Road / 1-90 WB on -ramp
19. Sullivan Road / 1-90 EB on -ramp
20. Sullivan Road / Mission Avenue
21. Indiana Avenue /1-90 WB off -ramp
Existing (2015)
Control Delay* LOS
Signal 63 E
Side -Street Stop 13 (EB) C
Side -Street Stop 52 (WB) F
Side -Street Stop 11 (SB) B
Side -Street Stop 52 (WB) F
Signal 24 C
Signal 26 C
Signal 36 D
Signal 69 E
Signal 76 E
Signal 13 B
Side -Street Stop 12 (EB) B
Signal 22 C
Signal 13 B
Signal 16 B
Side -Street Stop 13 (NB) B
Signal 38 D
Signal 9 A
Signal 20 C
Signal 40 D
Signal 11 B
* Intersection delay is averaged for all movements. Some movements (e.g. left turns) may have LOS E or F conditions to ensure that
the intersection as a whole operates optimally. Spokane Valley staff continually monitors LOS E and F movements and makes
intersection timing adjustments as necessary.
The results in Table 2 show that five intersections are not currently meeting the City's LOS standards. All the
intersections with substandard LOS are along the Pines Road corridor.
• Pines Road / Trent Avenue
• Pines Road / Mirabeau Parkway
• Pines Road / Grace Lane
• Pines Road / 1-90 EB ramps
• Pines Road / Mission Avenue
Page 5
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
IMPROVING EXISTING CONDITIONS TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE
The previous section identified several intersections along the Pines Road corridor that are not meeting the
City's LOS standard. Based on this finding, Fehr & Peers developed potential improvements that Spokane
Valley could implement to improve LOS and maintain acceptable traffic operations. These improvements
would ensure that the City meets the Growth Management Act's transportation concurrency requirement.
We undertook an iterative approach to developing the most cost-effective traffic improvement measures
for each of the deficient intersections. In general, we applied the logic listed in Table 3 which begin with
the least costly option and step up to more complex and costly options to improve traffic flow. If a low-cost
solution is identified that meets the LOS standard, then we stop and move onto the next location.
TABLE 3: APPROACH TO IDENTIFY MOST COST-EFFECTIVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection
Modify traffic signal timings Modify lane assignments
Modify lane assignments (e.g., make a through
lane into a turn lane)
Install a traffic signal (note, that a traffic signal cannot
be installed at a location unless it meets or is expected
to meet a traffic signal warrant)
Add turn pockets Add turn pockets or two-way left turn lane
Add through lanes Add through lanes
As shown in Table 3, we start with improving the traffic organization within the existing intersection by
modifying lane assignments or traffic signal timings. If that approach is insufficient, then we look to add
turn pockets or turn lanes. These lanes extend back a limited distance and are less costly than the final
option —adding through lanes, which must be extended to a logical start or end point to ensure they are
safe and effective. In many cases, we use a combination of these approaches for the different "legs" of an
intersection. For example, it may be sufficient to add a turn lane on only one of the legs and retime the
traffic signal to achieve an adequate LOS.
Table 4 summarizes the potential improvements for the intersections that do not meet the LOS standard.
As shown in the table, all the existing LOS deficiencies can be addressed through the addition/modification
of traffic signals or by adding turn lanes. Appendix B contains the detailed LOS calculation sheets from
Synchro.
Page 6
Spokane
�•'�Ualley
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
TABLE 4: POTENTIAL PROJECTS TO IMPROVE LOS AT SELECTED INTERSECTIONS
Intersection
Pines Road / Trent Ave
Pines Road / Mirabeau
Parkway
Pines Road / Grace Lane
Pines Road / 1-90 EB
ramps
Pines Road / Mission
Avenue
Description of Improvement
Add 260 foot northbound right turn
pocket; modify northbound lane
assignments, retime traffic signal
Install traffic signal (currently in design,
expected completion in 2016)
Install two-way left turn lane (expected
completion in 2017)
Retime traffic signal
Retime traffic signal
Delay with LO5 with
Improvement
38
18
22
53
52
Improvement
D
B
C
D
D
Page 7
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
FUTURE CONDITIONS (2040) TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
This section summarizes the methods and assumptions to estimate future (2040) traffic volumes in the study
area. Future traffic volumes were analyzed using the same methods and software described in the existing
conditions LOS analysis section.
The primary component of future year traffic analysis is the forecasted traffic volumes at the study
intersections. Future year traffic volumes are estimated using the SRTC travel model. The travel model has
inputs that include: population, employment, roads, and transit. Based on these inputs, future traffic
volumes can be predicted. To ensure the future traffic forecasts are reasonable, SRTC uses the same model
with existing conditions input data to model existing travel patterns. The model is fine-tuned to ensure that
it can replicate existing traffic conditions in a process known as model calibration and validation.
Prior to running the future conditions travel model, City staff reached out to the major developers in the
study area to determine what they could reasonably expect to develop on their properties over the long-
term. This information was used to update and refine the SRTC land use forecasts for the subarea. This is a
critical step because SRTC only has the resources to focus on large-scale regional growth and cannot verify
the development potential at the subarea scale.
In addition to updating the land use in the subarea, Spokane Valley and Fehr & Peers staff did an audit of
the surrounding land use growth assumptions and the assumed changes to the roadway and transit
network. Within the vicinity of the subarea, additional land use growth was assumed in the area around
Indiana/Sullivan/Flora and the Sullivan/Broadway/Flora areas. This additional development reflects projects
that are already in the development pipeline and recent trends toward more growth in those areas. On the
roadway network side, we assumed that the Bridging the Valley project at Pines Road/Trent Ave would be
completed by 2040, along with additional traffic capacity at the Barker Road interchange. Figure 2 shows
the SRTC model's traffic analysis zones in the study area and Tables 5 and 6 summarize the land use growth
assumed in the SRTC travel model, including the updates described above.
Page 8
Spokane
�s Valiey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
Figure 2. SRTC Traffic Analysis Zones in the Study Area
TABLE 5: STUDY AREA AND SURROUNDING AREA HOUSEHOLDS
TAZ
2010 Existing
SRTC Model
2040 Future
SRTC Model
2010-2040 Absolute 2010-2040 Percent
Change
Change
320 1,000 1,184 184 18%
321 0 860 860 N/A
322 0 0 0 0%
Surrounding
2,771 4,320 1,549 56%
Area
TABLE 6: STUDY AREA AND SURROUNDING AREA EMPLOYMENT
2010 Existing
SRTC Model
2040 Future
SRTC Model
2010-2040 Absolute 2010-2040 Percent
Change Change
320 805 1,188 383 46%
321 312 2,767 2,455 787%
322 351 351 0 0%
Surrounding
7,035 9,304 2,269 32%
Area
Page 9
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
With the SRTC travel model land use inputs updated to reflect a more realistic level of growth in the subarea,
we ran the model and used the output to develop 2040 PM peak hour traffic volume forecasts at each of
the study intersections. To reduce the potential for model error, the future volume forecasts were developed
using an industry -standard approach known as the difference method. The difference method takes the
growth in traffic forecasted by the SRTC travel model and adds this traffic growth to the observed traffic
counts at each of the intersections. This reduces model error by relying as much as possible on observed
data rather than model output.
In addition to applying the difference method, Fehr & Peers reviewed several traffic studies in the area to
ensure consistency between studies. One study for the Bella Tess Apartments near Indiana Avenue/Flora
Road indicated that the updated SRTC model run may be understating north -south traffic volumes on
Sullivan Road through the study area. Based on these findings, we post -processed the SRTC travel model
volumes to include approximately 200 additional north and southbound vehicles during the PM peak hour
on Sullivan Road through all four study intersections. We also increased the eastbound -westbound traffic
on Indiana Avenue east of Sullivan Road by about 100 vehicles per hour in each direction based on the Bella
Tess traffic study.
Following the difference method forecasting and post -processing, future conditions traffic LOS was
evaluated using Synchro and the Highway Capacity Manual methodologies. The results are shown in Table
7. Figures 3A and 3B show the 2040 lane configurations, traffic controls, and PM peak hour turning
movement forecasts. Note that all the improvements to address existing conditions LOS deficiencies are
assumed in the 2040 analysis, as is the Bridging the Valley railroad grade separation and intersection
improvement project at the Pines Road / Trent Avenue intersection. Appendix C contains the detailed LOS
calculation sheets from Synchro.
Page 10
1. Cement Road/Pines Rd/Trent (SR 290)
2. Pines Rd/Pinecroft Way
3. Pines Rd/Mirabeau Pkwy
4. Pinecroft Way/Mirabeau Pkwy
a
0
o �n �n E
� r� cj
4 it
Trent SR 290 I
�— 20
— 690
s 420
a
0_
0 ,r
41L
� 95
Pinecroft Way
a
o_
� � rn
Il
4/
405
4� 0
265
Mirabeau Pkw
0
0 0 a,
v co a
Mirabeau Pkwy
25
475
10�
1,125�
350
a
ct
a
rr
Yi r
L0o�
,I-,0
5
0�+'
5
0
�It
000
05
0
O�r
�If
Lood
m N
40�
515
5. Pines Rd/Grace Ln
6. Pines Rd/Mansfield Ave
7. I-90 WB off-ramp/Indiana Ave
8. Pines Rd/Montgomery Dr/Indiana Ave
a
2
a
oMmM
Grace Ln 41L
�55
50
a
"' o
�co O
41L
Mansfield Ave
55
�170
180
Indiana Ave
4-530
a
0
M
o m o
���
)11L
Mont.ome Dr
260
310
0--455
Indiana Ave
25
5�►
40
0
r},,
vIf
m-v
95
125�
470
r},,
vIf
ooLnNI
Nroo
—�,,
490�
0
0
��r
a,o
a-
11
»??r
ooLC)
COom
9. Pines Rd/I 90 EB Ramps
10. Pines Rd/Mission Ave
11. Mirabeau Pkwy/Indiana Ave
12. Mirabeau Pkwy/Mansfield Ave
D
o a
�N
11L
1-90 EB off -ram.
1-90 EB on -ram.
D
a
LO
�JJ0IM215
`ilirir
90
Mission Ave
ii
Mc°io
�iirir
Indiana Ave
�225
Mom
_J L
`i
�105
235
Mansfield Ave
4405 �►
705 —4
°
I
v c
315
�►
275
°
)1-
000
n - CO
160—
335
25
'
230 o_
m
),9tr
unoo
3A
2040
Q
13. S Evergreen RdfE Indiana Ave
14. S Evergreen Rd/1-90 WB Ramps
15. S Evergreen Rd/I-90 EB Ramps
16. Mission Connector/E Mission Ave
4-415
455
E Indiana Ave
565
600 —. `m
a
17. Sullivan Rd/E Indiana Ave
)11
1-90 WB on -ram
-o
315
'?5
c 350
1-90 WB off -ram
rn�
18. Sullivan Rd/WB on -ramp
•
-o
a)
rnLO
I-- M j
11�
1-90 EB off -ram.
1-90 EB on -ram
550 ttttr
5 ��► o v
605
19. Sullivan Rd/I-90 EB Ramps
4— 305
14— 70
E Mission Ave
265
250 —4 0
U
0
00
20. Sullivan Rd/E Mission Ave
Y- N CD
Y- N
411E
E Indiana Ave
Sullivan Rd
355
395
0— 190
140 ,,
535 —►
340 —4
'nttr
oX)(0
M co CV
Sullivan Rd
WB on -ram
4— 365
0— 250
11"
1-90 EB off -ram
1-90 EB on -ram
430 —
0 �► "
945 —4 tn,
IIp
o
N f r)
411E
E Mission Ave
Sullivan Rd
85
15
35
180 ‘1 °
10-4. LC) CD
140
21. I-90 WB off-ramp/E Indiana Ave
4— 650
425
E Indiana Ave
1005 Y
00
co N
N
2040
Spokane
_.Valley
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
TABLE 7: INTERSECTION VEHICLE DELAY AND LOS FOR FUTURE CONDITIONS (2o4o)
Intersection Details
Name
1. Pines Road / Trent Ave
2. Pines Road / Pinecroft Way
3. Pines Road / Mirabeau Parkway
4. Mirabeau Parkway / Pinecroft Way
5. Pines Road / Grace Lane
6. Pines Road / Mansfield Avenue
7. Indiana Avenue / 1-90 WB off -ramp
8. Pines Road / Indiana Avenue
9. Pines Road / 1-90 EB ramps
10. Pines Road / Mission Avenue
11. Indiana Avenue / Mirabeau Parkway
12. Mirabeau Parkway / Mansfield Avenue
13. Evergreen Road / Indiana Avenue
14. Evergreen Road / 1-90 WB on and off -ramps
15. Evergreen Road /1-90 EB on and off -ramps
16. Mission Connector & Mission Avenue
17. Indiana Avenue / Sullivan Road
18. Sullivan Road /1-90 WB on -ramp
19. Sullivan Road /1-90 EB on -ramp
20. Sullivan Road / Mission Avenue
21. Indiana Avenue/1-90 WB off -ramp
Control
Existing (2015)
Delay* LOS
Signal 53
Side -Street Stop 16 (EB)
Signal 38
Side -Street Stop 17 (SB)
Side -Street Stop 28 (WB)
Signal 33
Signal 21
Signal 58
Signal 116
Signal 81
Signal 17
Side -Street Stop >120 (EB)
Signal 25
Signal 22
Signal 15
Side -Street Stop 15 (NB)
Signal 55
Signal 12
Signal 33
Signal 75
Signal 36
* Intersection delay is averaged for all movements. Some movements (e.g. left turns) may have LOS E or F conditions to ensure that
the intersection as a whole operates optimally. Spokane Valley staff continually monitors LOS E and F movements and makes
intersection timing adjustments as necessary.
Page 13
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
The results in Table 7 indicate that most subarea intersections are expected to operate acceptably under
2040 conditions and meet Spokane Valley's LOS standards, with the exception of the following locations:
• Pines Road / Indiana Avenue
• Pines Road / 1-90 EB ramps
• Pines Road / Mission Avenue
• Mirabeau Parkway / Mansfield Avenue
• Sullivan Road / Mission Avenue
Three of the locations are along the Pines Road corridor, which will continue to see traffic growth into the
future as Spokane Valley and the region continue to grow. It is important to note that the poor 2040 LOS
conditions on Pines Road takes into account the traffic signal retiming improvements described earlier. In
other words, even with optimized traffic signal timings, the LOS on the Pines Road corridor is expected to
degrade at some point in the future.
Traffic congestion at the Mirabeau Parkway / Mansfield Avenue intersection is also expected to degrade to
substandard conditions by 2040. This degradation in LOS is largely due to growth in the Mirabeau subarea
that will add to the background traffic growth through the area.
Traffic volumes are also expected to increase substantially along the Sullivan Road corridor by 2040.
However, this analysis only identifies the Mission Avenue intersection along Sullivan Road as having a
substandard LOS. The intersection of Sullivan Road / Indiana Avenue is approaching LOS E, but at this time,
it is premature to identify an improvement at this location since this intersection is still forecast to operate
at LOS D.
Page 14
Spokane
.000 Valley
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
IMPROVING FUTURE CONDITIONS TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE
Similar to existing conditions, Fehr & Peers used an iterative approach to identify the most cost-effective
means to meet Spokane Valley's LOS standards under 2040 conditions. Table 8 shows the proposed
improvements at the five intersections with substandard LOS. Appendix D contains the detailed LOS
calculation sheets from Synchro.
TABLE 8: POTENTIAL PROJECTS TO IMPROVE FUTURE CONDITIONS LOS AT SELECTED
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection
Delay with L05 with
Description of Improvement Improvement Improvement
Pines Road/Indiana Added westbound left -turn lane; retimed
Ave traffic signal
Pines Road / 1-90 EB
ramps
Pines Road / Mission
Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
42 D
Added eastbound left -turn lane and
northbound right -turn pocket (extending 35 D
back to Nora Ave); retime traffic signal
Added southbound right -turn lane
(extending back to the 1-90 off -ramp);
reconfigure lane assignments on Mission
Ave to include eastbound dual -left and a 53 D
through -right lane and westbound left,
through, and right turn lane; retime traffic
signal
Added traffic signal, added new 180 foot
southbound through -right lane
Sullivan Road/Mission Reconfigure eastbound to include a left
Ave and through -right lane; retime signal
28 C
17 B
The improvements identified in Table 8 address all the LOS issues within the study area under 2040
conditions.
Page 1 5
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
ESTIMATING THE COST OF THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
To estimate the cost of the projects identified in Table 8, Fehr & Peers collaborated with Spokane Valley
staff to identify construction costs from recently completed transportation projects in Spokane Valley. Table
9 shows the unit costs and a description of the project cost elements. Table 10 summarizes the project
costs.
TABLE 9: PROJECT UNIT COSTS
Element Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost (in
2016 dollars)
Roadway Demolition Demolition and removal of old Square Yard $12
roadway
Curb Demolition Demolition and removal of old Linear foot $13
curb/gutter
Sidewalk Demolition Demolition and removal of old Square Yard $16
sidewalk
Signal Demolition Demolition and removal of old traffic Each mast arm $5,000
signal equipment
Excavation Excavation, grading, fill, earthwork Cubic Yard $30
Road Section Construction of new roadway surface Square Yard $50
Curb Construction of new curb/gutter Linear foot $35
Sidewalk Construction of new sidewalks Square Yard $45
Curb Ramps Construction of new curb ramps Each $2,200
Traffic Signal Each new
Construction of new traffic signal $400,000
signal system
Right-of-way Cost of acquiring right-of-way Square Foot $10
Mobilization Cost to get a construction crew 10% of "hard" costs above
engaged
Page 16
Spokane
�s Valiey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
Contingency
Cost contingency for potential for
unexpected drainage/utility/
earthwork conflicts; WSDOT
coordination
30% of "hard" costs above
Engineering Cost to design and permit the project 20% of "hard" costs above
TABLE so: POTENTIAL PROJECTS TO IMPROVE FUTURE CONDITIONS LOS AT SELECTED
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection Cost Estimate
Pines Road / Indiana Ave $ 896,000
Pines Road / 1-90 EB ramps $ 753,000
Pines Road / Mission Ave $ 457,000
Mirabeau Pkwy/Mansfield Ave $ 874,000
Sullivan Road / Mission Ave $ 61,000
Page 1 7
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
ESTIMATING THE SUBAREA'S FAIR -SHARE CONTRIBUTION AND
COST PER TRIP
The previous sections identified future year LOS deficiencies at five intersections within the study area. A
common way for a development project to mitigate its traffic impact is through a fair -share financial
contribution toward a transportation system project that would improve LOS to meet City standards. This
section describes how we calculate the subarea's fair -share contribution toward the improvements
identified in Table 8.
The subarea's fair -share financial contribution is determined by how much traffic the subarea is expected
to contribute to each of the deficient intersections under future conditions. In other words, what percentage
of 2040 traffic through a deficient intersection is caused by new development within the Mirabeau Subarea?
To determine the percentage of traffic generated by Mirabeau Subarea development, we use the SRTC
travel model. The travel model has a tool that can track the traffic generated by different areas throughout
the city. This tool is called a "select zone analysis." The select zone analysis was set to identify the traffic
generated by Mirabeau Subarea development separate from any other traffic generated by development
in the region. The results of the select zone analysis were analyzed for each of the five deficient intersections
identified in Table 8. Table 11 shows the results of the select zone analysis,
TABLE 11: SUBAREA SHARE OF TRAFFIC AT THE DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS
Intersection Mirabeau Subarea Proportion of Future Year Traffic
Pines Road / Indiana Ave 18%
Pines Road / 1-90 EB ramps 18%
Pines Road / Mission Ave 16%
Mirabeau Pkwy/Mansfield Ave 38%
Sullivan Road / Mission Ave 4%
The results in Table 11 indicate that the majority of traffic through the deficient intersections is generated
by land uses outside of the subarea. For example, 18 percent of the traffic through the intersection of Pines
Road / Indiana Avenue is generated by land uses within the Mirabeau Subarea. The highest proportion of
subarea traffic is generated at the Mirabeau Parkway / Mansfield Avenue intersection —a result that is
reasonable since this intersection is within the subarea.
Page 18
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
The results in Table 11 are used to determine the subarea's share of the total project improvements by
multiplying the total improvement project cost by the proportion of traffic generated by new development
in the subarea. The result of this calculation is shown in Table 12.
TABLE 12: SUBAREA'S SHARE OF TOTAL IMPROVEMENT COSTS
Intersection
Pines Road / Indiana
Ave
Pines Road / 1-90 EB
ramps
Pines Road / Mission
Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Road /
Mission Ave
Mirabeau Subarea
Proportion of Future Year
Traffic
Total Project Cost
18% $ 896,000
18% $ 753,000
16% $ 457,000
38% $ 874,000
4% $ 61,000
Mirabeau Subarea
Fair -Share Cost
$ 161,000
$ 135,000
$ 73,000
$ 332,000
$ 2,500
With the subarea's share of the total project costs identified in Table 12, we can identify the cost per PM
peak hour trip, similar to how the existing developer agreements are established. Based on the land use
growth estimates provided by the area developers (summarized in Tables 5 and 6), PM peak hour trip
generation is estimated with standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates. Table
13 summarizes the trip generation results.
Pagel 9
Spokane
. Valley
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
TABLE 13: TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION
Land Use
Single -Family Residential
Multi -Family Residential
Retail
Office
Hotel
Total
* Includes 8, space.
Total Units of Development
PM Peak Hour
Trip Rate
Total Trips
65 dwelling units 1.00 65
979 dwelling units 0.62 607
63,890 square feet 3.71 236
2,561 employees 0.46 1,178
150 rooms 0.60 90
NA NA
Using the results in Tables 12 and 13, the cost per PM peak hour trip is:
2,176
$704,000 (subarea's share of total project costs) - 2,176 (subarea new PM peak hour trip generation) =
$323.75 per PM peak hour trip.
Mitigation Credits
There are still existing "vested" trips from the prior "Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement" that was
established by Spokane County. While the transportation improvement projects identified as part of the
Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement have largely been constructed, Spokane Valley is open to
counting the vested trips as a credit against this new transportation improvement program. Based on data
supplied by the City of Spokane Valley in December 2015, there were 904 PM peak hour vested trips
outstanding amongst the land owners in the subarea. These trips have a value of $303.36 per trip, which
works out to a total value of $274,237. Developers can apply the value of their unused vested PM peak hour
trips as a credit to the new Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Mitigation Program until they have no vested trips
remaining.
Page2 0
Spokane
1s Val1ey
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
June 2016
CONCLUSIONS
This report documented the existing and future traffic LOS conditions within and around the Mirabeau
Subarea. As described, there are existing LOS deficiencies within the subarea that Spokane Valley is actively
addressing through a mix of capital projects and traffic signal retiming. In the future, traffic LOS is expected
to degrade within the study area as the Mirabeau subarea, Spokane Valley, and the rest of the region
continues to grow. This report identified the necessary traffic mitigation measures to improve congestion
and meet Spokane Valley's LOS standards. Most if the congestion relief projects are on the Pines Road
corridor with a minor improvement at the Sullivan Road/Mission Avenue intersection.
A fair -share calculation was developed to identify the Mirabeau Subarea landowner's share of future traffic
impacts and mitigation costs. If landowners agree to help implement future traffic congestion improvement
projects through a mitigation contribution of $323.75 per PM peak hour trip, then they will meet their SEPA
obligations to mitigate traffic congestion impacts. After making this mitigation payment (which is subject
to a credit from the existing Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement), the developer will not have to
conduct another traffic study, outside of a site access and circulation study, which may be required by
Spokane Valley to ensure safe access for all modes into and within the development site.
Page 21
Appendix A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Pines/Cement Road & Trent (SR 290) 6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 11' r ) 14 4 r 4,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 905 265 310 505 20 315 35 465 25 35 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 5 905 265 310 505 20 315 35 465 25 35 5
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 7 4 14 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1491 1578 1609 1593 1557 1625 1625 1609 1593 1625 1577 1625
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 5 953 0 326 532 21 332 37 215 26 37 5
Adj No. of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 3 1 2 4 4 1 1 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 9 1016 464 342 1620 64 326 36 318 33 46 6
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.34 0.00 0.23 0.56 0.56 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.06 0.06 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1420 2998 1368 1517 2901 114 1385 154 1352 584 831 112
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 5 953 0 326 271 282 369 0 215 68 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1420 1499 1368 1517 1479 1537 1540 0 1352 1528 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 45.9 0.0 31.5 14.7 14.8 35.0 0.0 21.5 6.5 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 45.9 0.0 31.5 14.7 14.8 35.0 0.0 21.5 6.5 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.90 1.00 0.38 0.07
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 9 1016 464 342 826 858 362 0 318 85 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.94 0.00 0.95 0.33 0.33 1.02 0.00 0.68 0.80 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 324 1087 496 346 826 858 362 0 318 364 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 73.8 47.7 0.0 56.9 17.8 17.8 56.9 0.0 51.8 69.4 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 45.4 14.3 0.0 35.7 0.2 0.2 52.4 0.0 5.6 15.3 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.3 20.9 0.0 16.6 6.1 6.3 20.0 0.0 8.6 3.1 0.0 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 119.2 62.0 0.0 92.5 18.0 18.0 109.3 0.0 57.4 84.7 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS F E F B B F E F
Approach Vol, veh/h 958 879 584 68
Approach Delay, s/veh 62.3 45.6 90.2 84.7
Approach LOS E D F F
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.9 89.1 40.0 39.6 56.5 12.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.0 54.0 35.0 34.0 54.0 35.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.5 16.8 37.0 33.5 47.9 8.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 11.5 0.0 0.1 2.6 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 63.6
HCM 2010 LOS E
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Pines & Pinecroft Way
6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4+ r ) 0 "1 14
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 40 0 765 5 0 615 0
Future Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 40 0 765 5 0 615 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0 200 300 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 0 5 0 0 44 0 841 5 0 676 0
Major/Minor
Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1097 1522 340 - - 424 676 0 0 846 0 0
Stage 1 676 676 - - - -
Stage 2 421 846 - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 - - 6.94 4.14 4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 - - 3.32 2.22 2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *397 183 656 0 0 *790 911 1138
Stage 1 *409 451 - 0 0 -
Stage 2 *744 624 - 0 0 -
Platoon blocked, % 1 1 1 1
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *374 183 655 - - *789 910 1137
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *374 183 - - - -
Stage 1 *409 451 - - - -
Stage 2 *702 624 - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.7 9.8 0 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 910 - - 476 789 1137
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.023 0.056 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 12.7 9.8 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.2 0
Notes
—: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 4
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Pines & Mirabeau Parkway 6/17/2016
4 4\ / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4, 4 r 'i 14 'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 5 100 0 165 5 605 35 110 505 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 5 100 0 165 5 605 35 110 505 5
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1625 1593 1625 1625 1593 1593 1593 1593 1625 1593 1593 1625
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 0 5 110 0 181 5 665 38 121 555 5
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 0 0 9 232 0 207 556 1734 99 501 1966 18
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.01 0.60 0.60 0.05 0.64 0.64
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 0 1346 1517 0 1354 1517 2911 166 1517 3074 28
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 0 5 110 0 181 5 346 357 121 273 287
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 0 1346 1517 0 1354 1517 1513 1564 1517 1513 1588
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.4 6.4 0.0 12.7 0.1 11.6 11.6 2.8 7.7 7.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.4 6.4 0.0 12.7 0.1 11.6 11.6 2.8 7.7 7.7
Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 0 9 232 0 207 556 901 931 501 968 1016
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.47 0.00 0.87 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.24 0.28 0.28
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 0 139 250 0 223 642 901 931 599 968 1016
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 48.1 37.5 0.0 40.2 7.8 10.3 10.3 7.0 7.7 7.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 47.6 1.5 0.0 28.2 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.8 0.0 6.4 0.1 5.1 5.3 1.2 3.4 3.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 0.0 95.6 39.0 0.0 68.4 7.8 11.5 11.5 7.3 8.4 8.4
LnGrp LOS F D E A B B A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 5 291 708 681
Approach Delay, s/veh 95.6 57.3 11.5 8.2
Approach LOS F E B A
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 62.8 5.6 4.5 67.0 19.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 41.0 10.0 6.0 46.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 13.6 2.4 2.1 9.7 14.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 8.6 0.0 0.0 9.3 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.3
HCM 2010 LOS B
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Mirabeau Parkway & Pinecroft Way 6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations ) fF I+ ¥
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 225 115 5 20 5
Future Vol, veh/h 5 225 115 5 20 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 2 1 1
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None None
Storage Length 100 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 0
Grade, % - 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 6 278 142 6 25 6
Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 150 0 - 0 438 148
Stage 1 - - - 147
Stage 2 - - - 291
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - 5.42
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - 5.42
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1431 - - 576 899
Stage 1 - - - 880
Stage 2 - - - 759
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1430 - - 572 897
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - 627
Stage 1 - - - 879
Stage 2 - - - 755
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0 10.7
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1430 - - - 667
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - - 0.046
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 - - - 10.7
HCM Lane LOS A - - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.1
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 8
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Pines & Grace Ln
6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4+ 4, 4i, 4T
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 5 30 40 5 20 60 600 45 30 550 25
Future Vol, veh/h 20 5 30 40 5 20 60 600 45 30 550 25
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Mvmt Flow 22 5 32 43 5 22 65 645 48 32 591 27
Major/Minor
Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1123 1492 309 1161 1481 347 618 0 0 694 0 0
Stage 1 669 669 - 798 798 -
Stage 2 454 823 - 363 683 -
Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.12 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.21 2.21
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *163 125 *890 *153 127 *845 1240 1235
Stage 1 *692 637 - *643 596 -
Stage 2 *797 577 - *839 627 -
Platoon blocked, % 1 1 1 1
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *139 110 *890 *129 111 *845 1240 1235
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *139 110 - *129 111 -
Stage1 *632 612 - *588 545 -
Stage 2 *703 528 - *769 602 -
Approach
EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
24.1 39.6 0.9 0.5
C E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1240 - - 247 172 1235 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.052 - - 0.239 0.406 0.026
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 0.3 - 24.1 39.6 8 0.1
HCM Lane LOS A A - C E A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.9 1.8 0.1
Notes
-: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
6: PINES & Mansfield
6/17/2016
4 4\ I / * 4'
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4' r ) 1. 'i 14 'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 65 70 380 170 145 50 210 725 180 50 650 30
Future Volume (veh/h) 65 70 380 170 145 50 210 725 180 50 650 30
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1667 1667 1667 1667 1667 1700 1667 1667 1700 1667 1667 1700
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 70 75 54 183 156 54 226 780 181 54 699 32
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 175 171 145 305 184 64 535 1611 374 395 1804 83
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.16 0.15 0.08 0.63 0.62 0.03 0.59 0.58
Sat Flow, veh/h 1587 1667 1408 1587 1181 409 1587 2547 591 1587 3084 141
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 70 75 54 183 0 210 226 485 476 54 359 372
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1587 1667 1408 1587 0 1590 1587 1583 1555 1587 1583 1641
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.1 5.5 4.7 13.1 0.0 16.7 6.9 21.1 21.2 1.7 15.8 15.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.1 5.5 4.7 13.1 0.0 16.7 6.9 21.1 21.2 1.7 15.8 15.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.09
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 175 171 145 305 0 248 535 1001 984 395 926 960
V/C Ratio(X) 0.40 0.44 0.37 0.60 0.00 0.85 0.42 0.48 0.48 0.14 0.39 0.39
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 260 333 282 305 0 318 723 1001 984 536 926 960
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.56 0.56 0.56 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.7 54.8 54.4 44.3 0.0 53.4 9.4 12.7 12.8 10.7 14.5 14.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.5 1.8 1.6 3.2 0.0 15.4 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.2 1.2 1.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.3 2.6 1.9 6.0 0.0 8.4 3.0 9.4 9.3 0.8 7.2 7.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 50.2 56.6 56.0 47.5 0.0 68.8 9.7 13.6 13.7 10.9 15.7 15.7
LnGrp LOS D E E D E A B B B B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 199 393 1187 785
Approach Delay, s/veh 54.2 58.9 12.9 15.4
Approach LOS D E B B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.6 80.1 11.1 24.3 8.4 86.2 18.0 17.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 47.0 13.5 25.5 15.0 57.0 13.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.9 17.8 7.1 18.7 3.7 23.2 15.1 7.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 8.7 0.1 0.8 0.1 8.9 0.0 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 23.9
HCM 2010 LOS C
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
7: 1-90 WB off -ramp & INDIANA 6/17/2016
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations 11' 11' '11'i r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 260 0 0 290 425 10
Future Volume (veh/h) 260 0 0 290 425 10
Number 8 18 7 4 1 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1634 0 0 1634 1587 1587
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 271 0 0 302 443 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 0 2 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 0 0 1 4 4
Cap, veh/h 2339 0 0 2339 542 239
Arrive On Green 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.18 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3267 0 0 3267 2931 1349
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 271 0 0 302 443 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1552 0 0 1552 1466 1349
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.1 0.0 0.0 3.5 18.9 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.1 0.0 0.0 3.5 18.9 0.0
Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2339 0 0 2339 542 239
V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.82 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2339 0 0 2339 1263 571
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.96 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.3 0.0 0.0 4.4 50.9 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.5 7.9 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.4 0.0 0.0 4.5 54.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS A A D
Approach Vol, veh/h 271 302 443
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.4 4.5 54.0
Approach LOS A A D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 102.0 28.0 102.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 65.0 55.0 65.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.5 20.9 5.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.7 2.2 2.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 26.0
HCM 2010 LOS C
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 14
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: PINES & INDIANA
6/17/2016
4 4\ I / * 4'
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations .1 4T 'i'i 11' r ) 11' r
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 0 400 70 245 550 875 160 100 865 235
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 0 400 70 245 550 875 160 100 865 235
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 5.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1265 2399 2710 2794 1250 1397 2794 1250
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1265 2399 2710 2794 1250 1397 2794 1250
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Growth Factor (vph) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 412 72 253 567 902 165 103 892 242
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 178 0 0 0 96 0 0 141
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 255 304 0 567 902 69 103 892 101
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 4
Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Turn Type Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 6 5 15 2
Permitted Phases 4 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 32.8 32.8 31.7 53.2 53.2 22.5 49.5 49.5
Effective Green, g (s) 33.8 33.8 33.2 54.7 54.7 24.5 51.0 49.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.42 0.42 0.19 0.39 0.38
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 328 623 692 1175 525 263 1096 475
v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.32 0.07 c0.32
v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 0.13 0.06 0.08
v/c Ratio 0.78 0.49 0.82 0.77 0.13 0.39 0.81 0.21
Uniform Delay, d1 44.6 40.8 45.6 32.2 23.1 46.2 35.3 27.1
Progression Factor 1.11 1.41 1.03 0.65 0.37 0.93 0.84 0.36
Incremental Delay, d2 11.4 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.0 1.1 5.7 0.9
Delay (s) 60.9 58.2 47.9 21.3 8.5 43.9 35.4 10.7
Level of Service E E D C A D D B
Approach Delay (s) 0.0 59.2 29.2 31.3
Approach LOS A E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 36.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.3% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
9: Pines & EB Ramps
6/17/2016
4 4 / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 i'i' 11 'i 4t
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 370 5 650 0 0 0 0 1215 365 230 1035 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 370 5 650 0 0 0 0 1215 365 230 1035 0
Number 3 8 18 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1650 1618 1618 0 1618 1650 1618 1618 0
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 381 5 637 0 1253 352 237 1067 0
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0
Cap, veh/h 447 6 705 0 1077 297 243 1981 0
Arrive On Green 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.60 0.59 0.16 0.64 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1522 20 2399 0 2463 656 1541 3154 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 386 0 637 0 799 806 237 1067 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1542 0 1200 0 1537 1502 1541 1537 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 30.7 0.0 33.2 0.0 58.8 58.8 19.9 24.6 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.7 0.0 33.2 0.0 58.8 58.8 19.9 24.6 0.0
Prop In Lane 0.99 1.00 0.00 0.44 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 453 0 705 0 695 679 243 1981 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.00 0.90 0.00 1.15 1.19 0.98 0.54 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 480 0 748 0 695 679 243 1981 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.2 0.0 44.1 0.0 25.9 26.2 54.5 12.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.2 0.0 13.9 0.0 74.9 90.2 50.7 1.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 14.7 0.0 12.3 0.0 39.0 41.0 11.9 10.7 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.4 0.0 58.0 0.0 100.8 116.4 105.2 13.6 0.0
LnGrp LOS E E F F F B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1023 1605 1304
Approach Delay, s/veh 57.4 108.6 30.3
Approach LOS E F C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 88.3 25.0 63.3 41.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 57.5 19.5 55.5 39.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 26.6 21.9 60.8 35.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.0 0.0 0.0 2.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 69.3
HCM 2010 LOS E
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 18
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Pines & Mission
6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4tEa 4+ r ) 14 'i'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 265 155 65 90 130 350 45 970 30 275 1150 270
Future Volume (veh/h) 265 155 65 90 130 350 45 970 30 275 1150 270
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1650 1618 1650 1650 1618 1618 1618 1618 1650 1618 1618 1650
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 279 163 68 95 137 88 47 1021 32 289 1211 268
Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 273 192 80 128 202 146 250 1413 44 384 1080 237
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.46 0.46 0.13 0.43 0.42
Sat Flow, veh/h 1541 1084 452 1201 1893 1363 1541 3042 95 2989 2507 549
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 279 0 231 123 109 88 47 516 537 289 738 741
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1541 0 1537 1558 1537 1363 1541 1537 1601 1494 1537 1519
Q Serve(g_s), s 23.0 0.0 18.9 10.0 8.8 8.0 3.4 35.2 35.2 12.1 56.0 56.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 23.0 0.0 18.9 10.0 8.8 8.0 3.4 35.2 35.2 12.1 56.0 56.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 0.77 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.36
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 273 0 272 167 164 146 250 714 744 384 662 654
V/C Ratio(X) 1.02 0.00 0.85 0.74 0.66 0.60 0.19 0.72 0.72 0.75 1.11 1.13
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 273 0 272 228 225 199 250 714 744 506 662 654
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.64 0.64 0.64
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.5 0.0 52.0 56.3 55.8 55.4 47.0 28.0 28.1 54.7 37.0 37.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 60.7 0.0 21.6 8.1 4.5 4.0 0.4 6.2 6.0 7.0 64.8 72.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 14.4 0.0 9.7 4.7 4.0 3.2 1.5 16.1 16.8 5.4 35.6 36.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 114.3 0.0 73.6 64.4 60.3 59.4 47.4 34.3 34.1 61.6 101.8 109.3
LnGrp LOS F E E E E D C C E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 510 320 1100 1768
Approach Delay, s/veh 95.9 61.6 34.8 98.4
Approach LOS F E C F
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.1 60.0 17.9 20.7 64.4 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.0 55.0 18.0 21.0 49.0 22.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.4 58.0 12.0 14.1 37.2 25.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.5 0.0 0.6 1.6 4.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 75.9
HCM 2010 LOS E
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 20
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
11: INDIANA & Mirabeau Parkway 6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 11' 11, r 'Pm r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 50 240 220 235 360 65
Future Volume (veh/h) 50 240 220 235 360 65
Number 1 6 2 12 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1434 1434 1434 1434 1434 1434
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 53 255 234 0 383 30
Adj No. of Lanes 1 2 2 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 53 1106 640 567 609 327
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.41 0.24 0.00 0.23 0.23
Sat Flow, veh/h 1366 2796 2796 1219 2649 1219
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 53 255 234 0 383 30
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1366 1362 1362 1219 1325 1219
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 1.9 2.2 0.0 3.9 0.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 1.9 2.2 0.0 3.9 0.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 53 1106 640 567 609 327
V/C Ratio(X) 1.00 0.23 0.37 0.00 0.63 0.09
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 949 1758 1758 1067 1710 834
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.5 5.9 9.7 0.0 10.5 8.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 58.7 0.1 0.3 0.0 1.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.3 0.7 0.8 0.0 1.5 0.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 73.3 6.0 10.0 0.0 11.5 8.4
LnGrp LOS F A B B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 308 234 413
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.6 10.0 11.3
Approach LOS B B B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.2 12.6 17.8 12.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.5 5.5 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.0 19.5 19.5 19.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 4.2 3.9 5.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.7 2.7 1.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 13.0
HCM 2010 LOS B
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 22
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Mirabeau Parkway & Mansfield 6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ) 1, 'i 1+ ) 1 r 'i 1,
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 0 220 0 0 0 195 90 0 0 210 25
Future Vol, veh/h 20 0 220 0 0 0 195 90 0 0 210 25
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - 175 0 175 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 21 0 227 0 0 0 201 93 0 0 216 26
Major/Minor
Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2
Conflicting Flow All 724 724 229 838 737 93 242 0 0 93 0 0
Stage 1 229 229 - 495 495 - - -
Stage 2 495 495 - 343 242 - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 341 352 810 286 346 964 1324 1501 - -
Stage 1 774 715 - 556 546 - - -
Stage 2 556 546 - 672 705 - - -
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 301 299 810 182 293 964 1324 1501
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 301 299 - 182 293 - - -
Stage 1 656 715 - 472 463 - - -
Stage 2 472 463 - 484 705 - - -
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
EB
11.8
B
WB
0
A
NB
5.6
SB
0
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1324 - - 301 810 - - 1501
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.152 - - 0.069 0.28 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 - - 17.8 11.2 0 0 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - C B A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.2 1.1 - 0
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 24
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
13: S Evergreen Rd & E Indiana Ave 6/17/2016
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations 11' r .1 4+ 'i'f r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 345 370 435 315 310 355
Future Volume (veh/h) 345 370 435 315 310 355
Number 6 16 5 2 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1863 1863 1863 1863 1863 1863
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 363 81 458 332 381 192
Adj No. of Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 579 259 828 435 1485 662
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.16 0.23 0.23 0.42 0.42
Sat Flow, veh/h 3632 1583 3548 1863 3548 1583
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 363 81 458 332 381 192
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1770 1583 1774 1863 1774 1583
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.2 2.9 7.4 10.8 4.5 5.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.2 2.9 7.4 10.8 4.5 5.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 579 259 828 435 1485 662
V/C Ratio(X) 0.63 0.31 0.55 0.76 0.26 0.29
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1143 512 873 459 1485 662
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.3 24.0 21.9 23.2 12.3 12.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.2 0.9 7.7 0.4 1.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 3.1 1.3 3.7 6.5 2.3 2.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.7 24.2 22.8 31.0 12.7 13.6
LnGrp LOS CCCC B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 444 790 573
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.4 26.3 13.0
Approach LOS C C B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.2 31.2 14.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.5 15.0 19.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.8 7.2 8.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 1.1 0.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 21.9
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 26
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
14: S Evergreen Rd & North Ramps 6/17/2016
4 4\ / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations .1 4 r 'Pm 11, 11, r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 260 1 155 300 835 0 0 560 245
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 260 1 155 300 835 0 0 560 245
Number 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1937 1937 1863 1863 1863 0 0 1863 1863
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 281 0 0 323 898 0 0 602 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 1 2 2 0 0 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 483 0 207 1631 2668 0 0 772 346
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.95 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3690 0 1583 3442 3632 0 0 3632 1583
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 281 0 0 323 898 0 0 602 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1845 0 1583 1721 1770 0 0 1770 1583
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 483 0 207 1631 2668 0 0 772 346
V/C Ratio(X) 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1107 0 475 1631 2668 0 0 871 390
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.6 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.9 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 7.6 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.7 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 31.6 0.0
LnGrp LOS C A A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 281 1221 602
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.7 0.5 31.6
Approach LOS C A C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 34.8 18.2 12.0 53.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 15.0 18.5 37.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 12.4 6.7 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.3 0.8 0.9 6.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 13.0
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 28
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
15: S Evergreen Rd & South Ramps 6/17/2016
4 4 / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4 i'i' 1111 r 'i ti,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 500 5 500 0 0 0 0 635 230 190 630 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 500 5 500 0 0 0 0 635 230 190 630 0
Number 3 8 18 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1863 1937 1937 0 1863 1937 1863 1863 0
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 536 0 265 0 676 0 202 670 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 2 0 4 1 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0
Cap, veh/h 911 0 845 0 1134 266 691 2222 0
Arrive On Green 0.26 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.78 1.00 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3548 0 3293 0 6669 1647 1774 3632 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 536 0 265 0 676 0 202 670 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1774 0 1647 0 1602 1647 1774 1770 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 8.6 0.0 4.2 0.0 6.3 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.6 0.0 4.2 0.0 6.3 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 911 0 845 0 1134 266 691 2222 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.29 0.30 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1228 0 1140 0 1774 431 691 2222 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.93 0.93 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.2 0.0 19.5 0.0 24.6 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.3 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.4 0.0 20.0 0.0 26.7 0.0 5.1 0.3 0.0
LnGrp LOS C B C A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 801 676 872
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.6 26.7 1.4
Approach LOS C C A
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 44.8 29.3 15.5 20.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.0 12.0 17.0 21.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 4.1 8.3 10.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.3 3.0 2.2 5.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 15.6
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 30
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
16: Mission Connector & E Mission Ave 6/17/2016
4
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 210 190 30 250 95 65
Future Volume (Veh/h) 210 190 30 250 95 65
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Hourly flow rate (vph) 231 209 33 275 104 71
Pedestrians 1 1
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 231 573 232
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 231 573 232
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
p0 queue free % 98 78 91
cM capacity (veh/h) 1337 469 806
Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2
Volume Total 231 209 33 275 104 71
Volume Left 0 0 33 0 104 0
Volume Right 0 209 0 0 0 71
cSH 1700 1700 1337 1700 469 806
Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.12 0.02 0.16 0.22 0.09
Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 2 0 21 7
Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 7.8 0.0 14.9 9.9
Lane LOS A B A
Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.8 12.8
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 31
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
17: Sullivan & E Indiana Ave 6/17/2016
4 4\ / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i'i 14 r 'i 4i. r 'i'i 11, r 'i t
Traffic Volume (vph) 130 105 330 125 260 195 320 600 70 55 1020 125
Future Volume (vph) 130 105 330 125 260 195 320 600 70 55 1020 125
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1625 1625 1625 1900 1625 1900 1625 1900 1900 1900 1900 1625
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.91
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.91 0.85 1.00 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 2936 2628 1228 1787 2812 1354 2965 3438 1572 1736 4952
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd.Flow(perm) 2936 2628 1228 1787 2812 1354 2965 3438 1572 1736 4952
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Adj. Flow (vph) 146 118 371 140 292 219 360 674 79 62 1146 140
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 163 162 0 14 129 0 0 41 0 11 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 146 141 23 140 342 26 360 674 38 62 1275 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 2 2 1 1
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 1 5
Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 1 % 1 % 1 % 7% 1 % 5% 1 % 4% 3% 2%
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 4 8 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 11.8 16.3 16.3 15.4 20.9 20.9 19.0 63.2 63.2 15.1 59.3
Effective Green, g (s) 11.8 16.3 16.3 16.4 20.9 21.9 19.0 64.2 63.2 16.1 60.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.16 0.17 0.15 0.49 0.49 0.12 0.46
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap(vph) 266 329 153 225 452 228 433 1697 764 214 2296
v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 0.05 c0.08 c0.12 c0.12 0.20 0.04 c0.26
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.02 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.55 0.43 0.15 0.62 0.76 0.11 0.83 0.40 0.05 0.29 0.56
Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 52.6 50.7 53.9 52.1 45.8 53.9 20.7 17.6 51.8 25.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.42 6.26 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.3 0.9 0.5 5.3 7.1 0.2 12.3 0.7 0.1 0.8 1.0
Delay (s) 58.9 53.5 51.1 59.1 59.2 46.1 52.8 9.4 110.3 52.5 26.1
Level of Service E D D E E D D A F D C
Approach Delay (s) 54.0 56.0 30.6 27.4
Approach LOS D E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 37.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 19.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.9% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 33
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
18: Sullivan & WB on -ramp
6/17/2016
4 4\ I / * 4'
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "1 4' ill' 114 r
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 0 200 150 0 0 990 0 0 1105 375
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 0 200 150 0 0 990 0 0 1105 375
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.91
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1900 5036 3401 1386
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1900 5036 3401 1386
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88
Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 227 170 0 0 1125 0 0 1256 426
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 227 170 0 0 1125 0 0 1298 383
Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 1 % 6%
Turn Type Split NA NA NA Free
Protected Phases 18! 18! 1 2 6 2 4 5 19!
Permitted Phases Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 36.7 36.7 83.3 80.6 130.0
Effective Green, g (s) 37.7 37.7 84.3 81.6 130.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.65 0.63 1.00
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 523 551 3265 2134 1386
v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.09 c0.22 c0.38
v/s Ratio Perm 0.28
v/c Ratio 0.43 0.31 0.34 0.61 0.28
Uniform Delay, d1 37.5 36.0 10.3 14.6 0.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.36 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.4
Delay (s) 38.1 36.3 5.7 5.7 0.4
Level of Service D D A A A
Approach Delay (s) 0.0 37.3 5.7 4.5
Approach LOS A D A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 9.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
! Phase conflict between lane groups.
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 35
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
19: Sullivan & 1-90 EB on
6/17/2016
4 4 / * 4/
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4 i'i' 11, r 'Pm 11,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 290 1 790 0 0 0 0 1120 260 225 1080 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 290 1 790 0 0 0 0 1120 260 225 1080 0
Number 3 8 18 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1759 1760 1900 0 1881 1900 1881 1881 0
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 303 0 670 0 1167 155 234 1125 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 2 0 2 1 2 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 8 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0
Cap, veh/h 839 0 809 0 2015 910 325 2460 0
Arrive On Green 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.09 0.69 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3351 0 3230 0 3668 1614 3476 3668 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 303 0 670 0 1167 155 234 1125 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1675 0 1615 0 1787 1614 1738 1787 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.7 0.0 25.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 18.6 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.7 0.0 25.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 18.6 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 839 0 809 0 2015 910 325 2460 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.36 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.58 0.17 0.72 0.46 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1057 0 1019 0 2015 910 561 2460 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.2 0.0 46.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.3 9.2 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 4.7 0.0 1.2 0.4 3.0 0.6 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.5 0.0 11.9 0.0 0.3 0.1 4.2 9.3 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 40.4 0.0 50.8 0.0 1.2 0.4 60.3 9.8 0.0
LnGrp LOS D D A A E A
Approach Vol, veh/h 973 1322 1359
Approach Delay, s/veh 47.6 1.1 18.5
Approach LOS D A B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 93.5 16.2 77.3 36.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 80.0 20.0 55.0 40.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.6 10.5 2.0 27.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 22.0 0.7 21.3 4.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 19.9
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 38
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
20: Sullivan & E Mission Ave 6/17/2016
4 4\ t / \* d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 r 4 r 'i 44l. 'i 44l.
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 105 5 125 30 10 65 80 1210 20 50 1710 110
Future Volume (veh/h) 105 5 125 30 10 65 80 1210 20 50 1710 110
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1882 1881 1900 1900 1900 1900 1881 1900 1900 1881 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 107 5 16 31 10 8 82 1235 20 51 1745 112
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98
Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1
Cap,veh/h 54 1 387 49 9 390 483 3254 53 66 1910 122
Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.62 0.62 0.07 0.77 0.76
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 6 1597 0 39 1611 1810 5207 84 1810 4933 316
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 112 0 16 41 0 8 82 812 443 51 1210 647
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 6 0 1597 39 0 1611 1810 1712 1867 1810 1712 1825
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 4.5 15.2 15.2 3.6 35.4 35.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 31.5 0.0 1.0 31.5 0.0 0.5 4.5 15.2 15.2 3.6 35.4 35.8
Prop In Lane 0.96 1.00 0.76 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.17
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 56 0 387 58 0 390 483 2140 1166 66 1325 707
V/C Ratio(X) 2.02 0.00 0.04 0.71 0.00 0.02 0.17 0.38 0.38 0.77 0.91 0.92
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 56 0 387 58 0 390 483 2140 1166 306 1791 955
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.72 0.72
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 64.2 0.0 37.7 57.8 0.0 37.5 36.6 12.0 12.0 59.7 13.0 13.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 515.2 0.0 0.0 28.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.9 5.0 8.4 14.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 9.9 0.0 0.4 1.9 0.0 0.2 2.3 7.3 8.1 1.9 17.3 20.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 579.5 0.0 37.7 86.0 0.0 37.5 36.8 12.5 12.9 64.7 21.4 27.5
LnGrp LOS F D F D D B B E C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 128 49 1337 1908
Approach Delay, s/veh 511.8 78.1 14.1 24.6
Approach LOS F E B C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 85.2 36.0 39.7 54.3 36.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.5 5.0 * 5 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.0 63.0 30.5 18.0 * 67 30.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 17.2 33.5 6.5 37.8 33.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 7.3 0.0 4.9 11.5 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 39.5
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
* HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 40
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: 1-90 WB off & E Indiana Ave 6/17/2016
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR NEL NER
Lane Configurations 11' 'i 4t 'f
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 235 0 210 330 245 18 0 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 235 0 210 330 245 18 0 0
Number 4 14 3 8 1 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1881 0 1625 1900 1865 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 273 0 244 384 285 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 1 2 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 0 0 0 0 0
Cap, veh/h 821 0 305 2012 483 0
Arrive On Green 0.23 0.00 0.20 0.56 0.27 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3762 0 1548 3705 1771 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 273 0 244 384 286 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1787 0 1548 1805 1777 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.4 0.0 5.8 2.0 5.3 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.4 0.0 5.8 2.0 5.3 0.0
Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 821 0 305 2012 484 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.33 0.00 0.80 0.19 0.59 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2475 0 607 2500 1950 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.3 0.0 14.6 4.2 12.1 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 4.8 0.0 1.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.2 0.0 2.8 1.0 2.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.5 0.0 19.5 4.2 13.2 0.0
LnGrp LOS B B A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 273 628 286
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.5 10.2 13.2
Approach LOS B B B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.5 12.3 13.4 24.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.0 25.0 40.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.8 4.4 7.3 4.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 2.9 1.1 2.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 11.4
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 4:00 pm 2/7/2013 PM Peak Hour
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 42
Appendix B
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Pines/Cement Road & Trent (SR 290) 6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 11' r ) 14 ) 4 r 4,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 905 265 310 505 20 315 35 465 25 35 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 5 905 265 310 505 20 315 35 465 25 35 5
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 7 4 14 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1491 1578 1609 1593 1557 1625 1609 1609 1593 1625 1577 1625
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 5 953 0 326 532 21 358 0 215 26 37 5
Adj No. of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 3 1 2 4 4 1 1 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 9 1112 507 350 1726 68 464 0 517 33 47 6
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.37 0.00 0.23 0.59 0.59 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1420 2998 1368 1517 2901 114 3065 0 1351 584 831 112
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 5 953 0 326 271 282 358 0 215 68 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1420 1499 1368 1517 1479 1537 1532 0 1351 1528 0 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 33.0 0.0 23.7 10.2 10.3 12.6 0.0 13.2 4.9 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 33.0 0.0 23.7 10.2 10.3 12.6 0.0 13.2 4.9 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00 0.38 0.07
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 9 1112 507 350 880 914 464 0 517 86 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.86 0.00 0.93 0.31 0.31 0.77 0.00 0.42 0.79 0.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 76 1252 571 377 907 942 790 0 660 333 0 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 55.8 32.7 0.0 42.4 11.3 11.3 45.9 0.0 25.6 52.5 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 42.7 5.6 0.0 28.7 0.2 0.2 2.8 0.0 0.5 14.8 0.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.3 14.5 0.0 12.7 4.2 4.4 5.5 0.0 4.9 2.5 0.0 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 98.4 38.2 0.0 71.2 11.5 11.5 48.6 0.0 26.1 67.3 0.0 0.0
LnGrp LOS F D E B B D C E
Approach Vol, veh/h 958 879 573 68
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.6 33.6 40.2 67.3
Approach LOS D C D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.7 73.0 22.0 31.9 47.7 10.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 69.0 29.0 28.0 47.0 24.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 12.3 15.2 25.7 35.0 6.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 12.4 1.8 0.2 6.7 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 38.0
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area Existing Optimized Improved 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Pines & Mirabeau Parkway 6/17/2016
4 4\ / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4, 4 r 'i 14 'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 5 100 0 165 5 605 35 110 505 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 5 100 0 165 5 605 35 110 505 5
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1625 1593 1625 1625 1593 1593 1593 1593 1625 1593 1593 1625
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 0 5 110 0 181 5 665 38 121 555 5
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 0 0 9 232 0 207 556 1734 99 501 1966 18
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.01 0.60 0.60 0.05 0.64 0.64
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 0 1346 1517 0 1354 1517 2911 166 1517 3074 28
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 0 5 110 0 181 5 346 357 121 273 287
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 0 1346 1517 0 1354 1517 1513 1564 1517 1513 1588
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.4 6.4 0.0 12.7 0.1 11.6 11.6 2.8 7.7 7.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.4 6.4 0.0 12.7 0.1 11.6 11.6 2.8 7.7 7.7
Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 0 9 232 0 207 556 901 931 501 968 1016
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.47 0.00 0.87 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.24 0.28 0.28
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 0 139 250 0 223 642 901 931 599 968 1016
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 48.1 37.5 0.0 40.2 7.8 10.3 10.3 7.0 7.7 7.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 47.6 1.5 0.0 28.2 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.8 0.0 6.4 0.1 5.1 5.3 1.2 3.4 3.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 0.0 95.6 39.0 0.0 68.4 7.8 11.5 11.5 7.3 8.4 8.4
LnGrp LOS F D E A B B A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 5 291 708 681
Approach Delay, s/veh 95.6 57.3 11.5 8.2
Approach LOS F E B A
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 62.8 5.6 4.5 67.0 19.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 41.0 10.0 6.0 46.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 13.6 2.4 2.1 9.7 14.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 8.6 0.0 0.0 9.3 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.3
HCM 2010 LOS B
Mirabeau sub -area Existing Optimized Improved 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 7
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Pines & Grace Ln
6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4+ 4, 4i, 4T
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 5 30 40 5 20 60 600 45 30 550 25
Future Vol, veh/h 20 5 30 40 5 20 60 600 45 30 550 25
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Mvmt Flow 22 5 32 43 5 22 65 645 48 32 591 27
Major/Minor
Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1123 1492 309 1161 1481 347 618 0 0 694 0 0
Stage 1 669 669 - 798 798 -
Stage 2 454 823 - 363 683 -
Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.12 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 - 6.5 5.5 -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.21 2.21
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *163 125 *890 *153 127 *845 1240 1235
Stage 1 *692 637 - *643 596 -
Stage 2 *797 577 - *839 627 -
Platoon blocked, % 1 1 1 1
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *139 110 *890 *129 111 *845 1240 1235
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *139 110 - *129 111 -
Stage1 *632 612 - *588 545 -
Stage 2 *703 528 - *769 602 -
Approach
EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
24.1 39.6 0.9 0.5
C E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1240 - - 247 172 1235 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.052 - - 0.239 0.406 0.026
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 0.3 - 24.1 39.6 8 0.1
HCM Lane LOS A A - C E A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.9 1.8 0.1
Notes
-: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
Mirabeau sub -area Existing Optimized Improved 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 11
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
9: Pines & EB Ramps
6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 i'i' 11 'i 4t
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 370 5 650 0 0 0 0 1215 365 230 1035 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 370 5 650 0 0 0 0 1215 365 230 1035 0
Number 3 8 18 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1650 1618 1618 0 1618 1650 1618 1618 0
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 381 5 637 0 1253 352 237 1067 0
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0
Cap, veh/h 357 5 562 0 1230 339 236 2163 0
Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.15 0.70 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1522 20 2394 0 2463 656 1541 3154 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 386 0 637 0 799 806 237 1067 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1542 0 1197 0 1537 1502 1541 1537 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 30.5 0.0 30.5 0.0 0.0 67.1 19.9 20.5 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.5 0.0 30.5 0.0 0.0 67.1 19.9 20.5 0.0
Prop In Lane 0.99 1.00 0.00 0.44 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 362 0 562 0 793 775 236 2163 0
V/C Ratio(X) 1.07 0.00 1.13 0.00 1.01 1.04 1.00 0.49 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 362 0 562 0 793 775 236 2163 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.8 0.0 49.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.0 8.7 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 66.3 0.0 80.6 0.0 23.0 32.3 59.9 0.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 19.6 0.0 16.4 0.0 5.1 7.0 12.4 8.8 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 116.1 0.0 130.3 0.0 23.0 32.3 114.9 9.5 0.0
LnGrp LOS F F F F F A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1023 1605 1304
Approach Delay, s/veh 125.0 27.7 28.7
Approach LOS F C C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 96.0 24.4 71.6 34.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 67.5 18.9 66.1 29.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 22.5 21.9 69.1 32.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 53.3
HCM 2010 LOS D
Mirabeau sub -area Existing Optimized Improved 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 19
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Pines & Mission
6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4tEa 4+ r ) 14 'i'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 265 155 65 90 130 350 45 970 30 275 1150 270
Future Volume (veh/h) 265 155 65 90 130 350 45 970 30 275 1150 270
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1650 1618 1650 1650 1618 1618 1618 1618 1650 1618 1618 1650
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 279 163 68 95 137 88 47 1021 32 289 1211 268
Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 273 192 80 129 203 146 202 1446 45 350 1157 253
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.48 0.47 0.23 0.92 0.91
Sat Flow, veh/h 1541 1084 452 1201 1893 1363 1541 3042 95 2989 2507 549
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 279 0 231 123 109 88 47 516 537 289 738 741
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1541 0 1537 1558 1537 1363 1541 1537 1601 1494 1537 1519
Q Serve(g_s), s 23.0 0.0 18.9 10.0 8.8 8.0 3.6 34.4 34.5 11.9 60.0 60.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 23.0 0.0 18.9 10.0 8.8 8.0 3.6 34.4 34.5 11.9 60.0 60.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 0.77 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.36
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 273 0 272 167 165 146 202 731 761 350 709 701
V/C Ratio(X) 1.02 0.00 0.85 0.74 0.66 0.60 0.23 0.71 0.71 0.83 1.04 1.06
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 273 0 272 240 236 210 202 731 761 368 709 701
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.66 0.66 0.66
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.5 0.0 52.0 56.2 55.7 55.4 50.6 26.9 26.9 48.5 5.0 5.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 60.7 0.0 21.6 6.8 4.4 3.9 0.6 5.7 5.5 12.6 38.4 44.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 14.4 0.0 9.7 4.6 3.9 3.2 1.5 15.8 16.4 5.5 28.0 29.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 114.3 0.0 73.6 63.0 60.2 59.3 51.2 32.6 32.4 61.1 43.4 49.4
LnGrp LOS F E E E E D C C E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 510 320 1100 1768
Approach Delay, s/veh 95.9 61.0 33.3 48.8
Approach LOS F E C D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 64.0 18.0 19.2 65.8 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 59.0 19.0 15.0 54.0 22.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 62.0 12.0 13.9 36.5 25.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.1 0.0 0.7 0.3 4.7 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 51.7
HCM 2010 LOS D
Mirabeau sub -area Existing Optimized Improved 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 21
Appendix C
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Pines/Cement Road & Trent (SR 290) 6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 11, r 'VI 14 'VI 4' r 'i 1,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 1125 350 420 690 20 455 80 575 35 75 10
Future Volume (veh/h) 10 1125 350 420 690 20 455 80 575 35 75 10
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1491 1578 1609 1593 1558 1625 1609 1609 1593 1548 1596 1625
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 1223 380 457 750 22 495 87 457 38 82 11
Adj No. of Lanes 1 2 1 2 2 0 2 1 1 1 1 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 3 1 2 4 4 1 1 2 5 1 1
Cap,veh/h 18 1204 788 506 1646 48 522 328 508 45 81 11
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.40 0.40 0.17 0.56 0.56 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.06 0.06
Sat Flow, veh/h 1420 2998 1365 2944 2937 86 2973 1609 1352 1474 1378 185
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 1223 380 457 378 394 495 87 457 38 0 93
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1420 1499 1365 1472 1480 1543 1486 1609 1352 1474 0 1563
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 48.0 19.5 18.2 18.0 18.0 19.7 5.4 24.4 3.1 0.0 7.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 48.0 19.5 18.2 18.0 18.0 19.7 5.4 24.4 3.1 0.0 7.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.12
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 18 1204 788 506 830 865 522 328 508 45 0 92
V/C Ratio(X) 0.61 1.02 0.48 0.90 0.46 0.46 0.95 0.27 0.90 0.85 0.00 1.02
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 59 1204 788 542 830 865 522 328 508 62 0 92
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 58.7 35.8 14.8 48.5 15.5 15.5 48.7 40.0 35.2 57.7 0.0 56.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 28.3 30.0 0.5 17.9 0.4 0.4 26.8 0.4 18.8 51.2 0.0 98.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.5 24.7 7.4 8.7 7.4 7.8 10.1 2.5 16.8 1.9 0.0 5.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 87.0 65.8 15.3 66.4 15.9 15.9 75.6 40.5 54.0 108.9 0.0 154.9
LnGrp LOS F F B E B B E D D F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 1614 1229 1039 131
Approach Delay, s/veh 54.0 34.7 63.1 141.5
Approach LOS D C E F
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 29.4 26.5 54.0 27.0 12.0 7.5 73.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 5.0 6.0 *6 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 23.0 22.0 * 48 21.0 7.0 5.0 64.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.1 26.4 20.2 50.0 21.7 9.0 2.9 20.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 53.3
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
* HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Improvements 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Pines & Pinecroft Way
6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4+ r ) 0 "1 14
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 95 0 1005 10 0 845 0
Future Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 95 0 1005 10 0 845 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0 200 300 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 0 5 0 0 103 0 1092 11 0 918 0
Major/Minor
Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1465 2021 461 - - 553 918 0 0 1103 0 0
Stage 1 918 918 - - - -
Stage 2 547 1103 - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 - - 6.94 4.14 4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 - - 3.32 2.22 2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *277 *84 547 0 0 *666 739 *997
Stage 1 *292 *349 - 0 0 -
Stage 2 *628 *551 - 0 0 -
Platoon blocked, % 1 1 1 1
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *234 *84 546 - - *666 738 *996
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *234 *84 - - - -
Stage 1 *292 *349 - - - -
Stage 2 *530 *551 - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 16.4 11.4 0 0
HCM LOS C B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 738 - - 328 666 * 996
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.033 0.155 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 16.4 11.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - C B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.5 0
Notes
—: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Pines & Mirabeau Parkway 6/17/2016
4 4\ / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4, 4 r 'i 14 'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 5 265 0 405 5 610 215 290 555 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 5 265 0 405 5 610 215 290 555 5
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1625 1593 1625 1625 1593 1593 1593 1593 1625 1593 1593 1625
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 0 5 288 0 351 5 663 159 315 603 5
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 0 0 9 379 0 339 440 1116 267 420 1785 15
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.12 0.58 0.58
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 0 1344 1517 0 1354 1517 2424 581 1517 3077 26
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 0 5 288 0 351 5 414 408 315 297 311
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 0 1344 1517 0 1354 1517 1513 1491 1517 1513 1589
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.4 21.1 0.0 30.0 0.2 24.4 24.4 12.5 12.3 12.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.4 21.1 0.0 30.0 0.2 24.4 24.4 12.5 12.3 12.3
Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 0 9 379 0 339 440 697 686 420 878 922
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.76 0.00 1.04 0.01 0.59 0.59 0.75 0.34 0.34
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 0 112 379 0 339 483 697 686 483 878 922
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 59.5 41.7 0.0 45.0 17.2 24.0 24.1 17.5 13.2 13.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 49.7 8.6 0.0 58.8 0.0 3.7 3.8 5.6 1.0 1.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 0.0 0.3 9.7 0.0 16.7 0.1 10.8 10.7 5.8 5.4 5.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 0.0 109.2 50.3 0.0 103.8 17.2 27.7 27.8 23.1 14.2 14.1
LnGrp LOS F D F BCCC B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 5 639 827 923
Approach Delay, s/veh 109.2 79.7 27.7 17.2
Approach LOS F E C B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.0 60.2 5.8 4.6 74.6 35.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 41.0 10.0 4.0 57.0 30.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.5 26.4 2.4 2.2 14.3 32.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 7.5 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 37.7
HCM 2010 LOS D
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 7
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Mirabeau Parkway & Pinecroft Way 6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations ) fF I+ ¥
Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 515 475 25 60 40
Future Vol, veh/h 40 515 475 25 60 40
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 2 1 1
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None None
Storage Length 100 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 0
Grade, % - 0 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 43 560 516 27 65 43
Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 545 0 - 0 1180 533
Stage 1 - - - 532
Stage 2 - - - 648
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - 5.42
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - 5.42
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1024 - - 210 547
Stage 1 - - - 589
Stage 2 - - - 521
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1023 - - 201 546
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - 337
Stage 1 - - - 588
Stage 2 - - - 498
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 17.4
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1023 - - - 398
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - - - 0.273
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - - 17.4
HCM Lane LOS A - - - C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 1.1
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 9
SimTraffic Performance Report
6/20/2016
5: Pines & Grace Ln Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied Delay (hr) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.0
Total Del/Veh (s) 25.2 23.9 9.6 26.0 28.4 13.8 9.3 4.8 5.4 8.5 2.2 2.0
Stop Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Stop Del/Veh (s) 23.1 20.8 8.8 23.6 24.8 13.0 4.3 0.1 0.1 5.4 0.1 0.1
5: Pines & Grace Ln Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied Delay (hr)
Denied DelNeh (s)
Total Delay (hr)
Total Del/Veh (s)
Stop Delay (hr)
Stop DelNeh (s)
0.0
0.0
2.6
5.0
0.9
1.7
Mirabeau sub -area Existing Optimized Improved
AM
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
6: PINES & Mansfield
6/17/2016
4 4\ I / * 4'
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4' r ) 1. 'i 14 'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 95 125 470 180 170 55 220 870 205 60 885 45
Future Volume (veh/h) 95 125 470 180 170 55 220 870 205 60 885 45
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1667 1667 1667 1667 1667 1700 1667 1667 1700 1667 1667 1700
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 103 136 293 196 185 60 239 946 209 65 962 49
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 273 392 332 328 296 96 350 1381 305 251 1457 74
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.25 0.24 0.10 0.54 0.53 0.04 0.48 0.47
Sat Flow, veh/h 1587 1667 1413 1587 1204 391 1587 2574 568 1587 3066 156
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 103 136 293 196 0 245 239 581 574 65 497 514
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1587 1667 1413 1587 0 1595 1587 1583 1558 1587 1583 1639
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.4 8.8 26.0 8.7 0.0 17.8 9.4 35.0 35.2 2.7 31.2 31.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.4 8.8 26.0 8.7 0.0 17.8 9.4 35.0 35.2 2.7 31.2 31.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.10
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 273 392 332 328 0 392 350 850 836 251 753 779
V/C Ratio(X) 0.38 0.35 0.88 0.60 0.00 0.63 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.26 0.66 0.66
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 273 474 402 328 0 471 436 850 836 251 753 779
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.1 41.4 48.0 39.3 0.0 43.7 20.0 22.1 22.3 19.3 26.1 26.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.9 0.5 17.5 2.9 0.0 1.9 1.0 1.4 1.4 0.5 4.5 4.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.9 4.1 11.7 2.8 0.0 8.0 4.2 15.5 15.3 1.2 14.6 15.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.9 41.9 65.5 42.2 0.0 45.6 21.0 23.5 23.7 19.8 30.6 30.5
LnGrp LOS D D E D DCCC B C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 532 441 1394 1076
Approach Delay, s/veh 54.0 44.1 23.1 29.9
Approach LOS D D C C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.0 65.8 11.3 35.9 9.0 73.8 12.7 34.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 47.3 6.8 37.9 4.0 62.3 8.2 36.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.4 33.2 8.4 19.8 4.7 37.2 10.7 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 8.5 0.0 2.8 0.0 11.7 0.0 2.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 32.7
HCM 2010 LOS C
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 13
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
7: 1-90 WB off -ramp & INDIANA 6/17/2016
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations 11' 11' '11'i r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 490 0 0 530 495 10
Future Volume (veh/h) 490 0 0 530 495 10
Number 8 18 7 4 1 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1634 0 0 1634 1587 1587
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 533 0 0 576 538 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 0 2 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 0 0 1 4 4
Cap, veh/h 2232 0 0 2232 643 286
Arrive On Green 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.22 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3267 0 0 3267 2931 1349
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 533 0 0 576 538 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1552 0 0 1552 1466 1349
Q Serve(g_s), s 7.6 0.0 0.0 8.3 22.8 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.6 0.0 0.0 8.3 22.8 0.0
Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2232 0 0 2232 643 286
V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.84 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2232 0 0 2232 1353 612
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.91 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.2 0.0 0.0 6.3 48.5 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 3.2 0.0 0.0 3.6 9.5 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.4 0.0 0.0 6.6 51.5 0.0
LnGrp LOS A A D
Approach Vol, veh/h 533 576 538
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.4 6.6 51.5
Approach LOS A A D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 97.5 32.5 97.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 61.0 59.0 61.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.3 24.8 9.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.9 2.7 5.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 21.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: PINES & INDIANA
6/17/2016
4 4\ I / * 4'
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations .1 4T 'i'i 11' r ) 11' r
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 0 455 310 260 560 1040 325 165 1130 240
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 0 455 310 260 560 1040 325 165 1130 240
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 5.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1265 2483 2710 2794 1250 1397 2794 1250
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1265 2483 2710 2794 1250 1397 2794 1250
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Growth Factor (vph) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 495 337 283 609 1130 353 179 1228 261
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 64 0 0 0 195 0 0 79
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 376 675 0 609 1130 158 179 1228 182
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 4
Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Turn Type Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 6 5 15 2
Permitted Phases 4 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 34.0 34.0 26.5 56.8 56.8 17.7 53.5 53.5
Effective Green, g (s) 35.0 35.0 28.0 58.3 58.3 19.7 55.0 53.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.22 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.42 0.41
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 340 668 583 1253 560 211 1182 514
v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.40 0.13 c0.44
v/s Ratio Perm c0.30 0.27 0.13 0.15
v/c Ratio 1.11 1.01 1.04 0.90 0.28 0.85 1.04 0.35
Uniform Delay, d1 47.5 47.5 51.0 33.2 22.6 53.7 37.5 26.3
Progression Factor 0.85 0.83 1.00 0.73 0.98 0.87 0.84 0.92
Incremental Delay, d2 79.4 36.9 25.2 1.0 0.0 18.2 31.5 1.2
Delay (s) 119.9 76.4 76.3 25.3 22.3 65.1 63.0 25.4
Level of Service F E E C C E E C
Approach Delay (s) 0.0 91.1 39.6 57.3
Approach LOS A F D E
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 57.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service E
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.11
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.2% ICU Level of Service F
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 16
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
9: Pines & EB Ramps
6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 i'i' 11 'i 4t
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 440 5 705 0 0 0 0 1485 385 275 1310 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 440 5 705 0 0 0 0 1485 385 275 1310 0
Number 3 8 18 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1650 1618 1618 0 1618 1650 1618 1618 0
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 478 5 728 0 1614 400 299 1424 0
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0
Cap, veh/h 381 4 599 0 1242 295 231 2116 0
Arrive On Green 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.00 1.00 0.99 0.15 0.69 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1525 16 2396 0 2545 586 1541 3154 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 483 0 728 0 981 1033 299 1424 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1541 0 1198 0 1537 1514 1541 1537 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 32.5 0.0 32.5 0.0 0.0 65.5 19.5 35.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 32.5 0.0 32.5 0.0 0.0 65.5 19.5 35.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 0.99 1.00 0.00 0.39 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 385 0 599 0 774 763 231 2116 0
V/C Ratio(X) 1.25 0.00 1.22 0.00 1.27 1.35 1.29 0.67 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 385 0 599 0 774 763 231 2116 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.8 0.0 48.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 55.3 11.8 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 133.7 0.0 111.7 0.0 121.2 160.0 160.5 1.7 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 28.1 0.0 20.1 0.0 26.1 34.0 18.6 15.1 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 182.5 0.0 160.4 0.0 121.2 160.2 215.7 13.5 0.0
LnGrp LOS F F F F F B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1211 2014 1723
Approach Delay, s/veh 169.2 141.2 48.6
Approach LOS F F D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 94.0 24.0 70.0 36.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 65.5 18.5 64.5 31.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 37.0 21.5 67.5 34.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 8.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 115.8
HCM 2010 LOS F
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 19
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Pines & Mission
6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4tEa 4+ r ) 14 'i'i 14
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 315 205 75 90 215 410 50 1150 30 395 1295 330
Future Volume (veh/h) 315 205 75 90 215 410 50 1150 30 395 1295 330
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1650 1618 1650 1650 1618 1618 1618 1618 1650 1618 1618 1650
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 342 223 73 98 234 238 54 1250 33 429 1408 343
Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 273 207 68 128 327 390 71 1271 34 414 1251 297
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.42 0.41 0.28 1.00 1.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1541 1167 382 875 2235 1367 1541 3059 81 2989 2465 585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 342 0 296 176 156 238 54 628 655 429 864 887
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1541 0 1549 1574 1537 1367 1541 1537 1603 1494 1537 1513
Q Serve(g_s), s 23.0 0.0 23.0 14.0 12.5 19.0 4.5 52.5 52.5 18.0 66.0 66.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 23.0 0.0 23.0 14.0 12.5 19.0 4.5 52.5 52.5 18.0 66.0 66.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 0.56 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.39
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 273 0 274 230 225 390 71 638 666 414 780 768
V/C Ratio(X) 1.25 0.00 1.08 0.77 0.69 0.61 0.76 0.98 0.98 1.04 1.11 1.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 273 0 274 230 225 390 71 638 666 414 780 768
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.42 0.42 0.42
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.5 0.0 53.6 53.4 52.7 40.3 61.3 37.6 37.6 47.0 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 141.1 0.0 77.2 14.3 8.9 2.8 37.1 31.7 31.2 38.6 56.7 76.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 20.4 0.0 15.7 7.0 5.9 7.7 2.7 27.8 28.9 9.6 12.3 16.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 194.6 0.0 130.8 67.6 61.6 43.0 98.4 69.3 68.8 85.6 56.7 76.4
LnGrp LOS F F E E D F E E F F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 638 570 1337 2180
Approach Delay, s/veh 165.0 55.7 70.2 70.4
Approach LOS F E E E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 70.0 23.0 22.0 58.0 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 65.0 18.0 17.0 53.0 22.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.5 68.0 21.0 20.0 54.5 25.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 81.4
HCM 2010 LOS F
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 21
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
11: INDIANA & Mirabeau Parkway 6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 11' 11, r 'Pm r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 160 335 225 585 690 305
Future Volume (veh/h) 160 335 225 585 690 305
Number 1 6 2 12 3 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1434 1434 1434 1434 1434 1434
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 174 364 245 0 750 292
Adj No. of Lanes 1 2 2 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 213 1152 497 642 913 610
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.42 0.18 0.00 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 1366 2796 2796 1219 2649 1219
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 174 364 245 0 750 292
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1366 1362 1362 1219 1325 1219
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.8 4.2 3.8 0.0 12.2 7.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.8 4.2 3.8 0.0 12.2 7.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 213 1152 497 642 913 610
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.32 0.49 0.00 0.82 0.48
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 606 1152 1123 922 1092 692
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.3 9.1 17.4 0.0 14.2 7.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.6 0.2 0.8 0.0 4.4 0.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.6 1.6 1.5 0.0 4.9 2.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.9 9.2 18.1 0.0 18.6 8.4
LnGrp LOS C A B B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 538 245 1042
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.0 18.1 15.7
Approach LOS B B B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 14.1 25.5 21.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.5 5.5 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.0 19.5 19.5 19.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.8 5.8 6.2 14.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 2.5 3.2 2.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 15.8
HCM 2010 LOS B
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 23
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Mirabeau Parkway & Mansfield 6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 583.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ) 1, 'i 1+ ) 1 r 'i 1,
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 55 230 235 10 155 205 300 240 5 530 35
Future Vol, veh/h 25 55 230 235 10 155 205 300 240 5 530 35
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - 175 0 175 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 27 60 250 255 11 168 223 326 261 5 576 38
Major/Minor Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1467 1378 595 1533 1397 326 614 0 0 326 0 0
Stage 1 606 606 - 772 772 -
Stage 2 861 772 - 761 625 - -
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 106 145 504 - 95 141 715 965 1234
Stage 1 484 487 - 392 409 -
Stage 2 350 409 - 398 477 -
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 61 111 504 - 23 108 715 965 1234
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 61 111 - - 23 108 -
Stage1 372 485 - 301 314 -
Stage 2 199 314 - - 175 475 -
Approach EB
HCM Control Delay, s 100.8
HCM LOS F
WB
NB SB
$ 2870.4
F
2.7 0.1
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 965 - - 61 299 23 533 1234
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.231 - - 0.445 1.03611.106 0.336 0.004
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.8 - - 104.8 100.E 4875.1 15.1 7.9
HCM Lane LOS A - -F F F C A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 - - 1.7 11.5 32 1.5 0
Notes
-: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 25
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
13: S Evergreen Rd & E Indiana Ave 6/17/2016
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations 11' r .1 4+ 'i'f r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 565 600 455 415 535 415
Future Volume (veh/h) 565 600 455 415 535 415
Number 6 16 5 2 7 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1863 1863 1863 1863 1863 1863
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 614 224 528 405 582 221
Adj No. of Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 841 376 873 459 1176 525
Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33
Sat Flow, veh/h 3632 1583 3548 1863 3548 1583
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 614 224 528 405 582 221
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1770 1583 1774 1863 1774 1583
Q Serve(g_s), s 10.4 8.2 8.6 13.6 8.5 7.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.4 8.2 8.6 13.6 8.5 7.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 841 376 873 459 1176 525
V/C Ratio(X) 0.73 0.60 0.60 0.88 0.49 0.42
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1143 512 873 459 1176 525
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.71 0.71 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.8 22.0 21.7 23.6 17.4 16.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.4 1.4 18.4 1.5 2.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 5.1 3.6 4.4 9.3 4.4 3.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.4 22.4 23.1 42.0 18.9 19.4
LnGrp LOS CCCD B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 838 933 803
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.2 31.3 19.0
Approach LOS C C B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.0 25.5 19.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.5 15.0 19.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.6 10.5 12.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 1.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 24.8
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 27
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
14: S Evergreen Rd & North Ramps 6/17/2016
4 4\ / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations .1 4 r 'Pm 11, 11, r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 350 5 315 390 960 0 0 800 255
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 350 5 315 390 960 0 0 800 255
Number 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1937 1937 1863 1863 1863 0 0 1863 1863
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 384 0 0 424 1043 0 0 870 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 1 2 2 0 0 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 598 0 256 1428 2558 0 0 871 390
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.83 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3690 0 1583 3442 3632 0 0 3632 1583
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 384 0 0 424 1043 0 0 870 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1845 0 1583 1721 1770 0 0 1770 1583
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.3 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.3 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 598 0 256 1428 2558 0 0 871 390
V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.41 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1107 0 475 1428 2558 0 0 871 390
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.84 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.5 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.5 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 30.2 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.6 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 54.7 0.0
LnGrp LOS C A A D
Approach Vol, veh/h 384 1467 870
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.6 1.3 54.7
Approach LOS C A D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 31.0 20.0 14.0 51.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 15.0 18.5 37.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 18.0 8.3 2.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.1 0.0 1.2 8.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 21.9
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 29
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
15: S Evergreen Rd & South Ramps 6/17/2016
4 4 / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4 i'i' 1111 r 'i ti,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 550 5 605 0 0 0 0 800 460 355 795 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 550 5 605 0 0 0 0 800 460 355 795 0
Number 3 8 18 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1863 1937 1937 0 1863 1937 1863 1863 0
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 602 0 501 0 870 0 386 864 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 2 0 4 1 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0
Cap, veh/h 1025 0 951 0 1337 318 578 2109 0
Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.65 1.00 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3548 0 3293 0 6669 1647 1774 3632 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 602 0 501 0 870 0 386 864 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1774 0 1647 0 1602 1647 1774 1770 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.4 0.0 8.3 0.0 8.1 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.4 0.0 8.3 0.0 8.1 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1025 0 951 0 1337 318 578 2109 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.67 0.41 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1228 0 1140 0 1774 431 578 2109 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.8 0.0 19.4 0.0 23.5 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 2.9 0.4 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 3.7 0.0 4.4 0.1 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.9 0.0 20.4 0.0 24.7 0.0 12.0 0.4 0.0
LnGrp LOS C C C B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1103 870 1250
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.7 24.7 4.0
Approach LOS C C A
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.7 25.2 17.6 22.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.0 12.0 17.0 21.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 10.7 10.1 11.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 9.1 0.9 2.5 6.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 15.3
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 31
HCM 2010 TWSC
16: Mission Connector & E Mission Ave 6/17/2016
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations 'F it "1 + 11 r
Traffic Vol, veh/h 265 250 70 305 110 140
Future Vol, veh/h 265 250 70 305 110 140
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 1 1
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - Free - None Stop
Storage Length - 292 410 - 0 0
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 288 272 76 332 120 152
Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl
Conflicting Flow All 0 - 288 0 773 289
Stage 1 - - - - 288
Stage 2 - - - - 485
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 1274 - 367 750
Stage 1 - 0 - - 761
Stage 2 - 0 - - 619
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1273 - 345 749
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 345
Stage 1 - - - - 761
Stage 2 - - - - 582
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
EB
0
WB
1.5
NB
15.4
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 345 749 - 1273
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.347 0.203 - 0.06
HCM Control Delay (s) 20.9 11 - 8
HCM Lane LOS C B - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.5 0.8 - 0.2
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 33
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
18: Sullivan & WB on -ramp
6/17/2016
4 4\ I / * 4'
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "1 4' ill' 114 r
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 0 250 365 0 0 1235 0 0 1370 385
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 0 250 365 0 0 1235 0 0 1370 385
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.91
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1900 5036 3405 1386
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 1900 5036 3405 1386
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 272 397 0 0 1342 0 0 1489 418
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 272 397 0 0 1342 0 0 1530 376
Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 1 % 6%
Turn Type Split NA NA NA Free
Protected Phases 18! 18! 1 2 6 2 4 5 19!
Permitted Phases Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 54.4 54.4 65.6 82.1 130.0
Effective Green, g (s) 55.4 55.4 66.6 83.1 130.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.51 0.64 1.00
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 769 809 2579 2176 1386
v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 c0.21 c0.27 c0.45
v/s Ratio Perm 0.27
v/c Ratio 0.35 0.49 0.52 0.70 0.27
Uniform Delay, d1 25.2 27.1 21.1 15.4 0.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.58 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.2
Delay (s) 25.5 27.5 11.7 9.5 0.2
Level of Service C C B A A
Approach Delay (s) 0.0 26.7 11.7 7.6
Approach LOS A C B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.8% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
! Phase conflict between lane groups.
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 36
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
19: Sullivan & 1-90 EB on 6/17/2016
4 4\ / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4 i'i' 11, r 'Pm 11,
Traffic Volume (vph) 430 0 945 0 0 0 0 1335 320 235 1385 0
Future Volume (vph) 430 0 945 0 0 0 0 1335 320 235 1385 0
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1588 1588 2842 3574 1593 3467 3574
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1588 1588 2842 3574 1593 3467 3574
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 467 0 1027 0 0 0 0 1451 348 255 1505 0
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 139 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 233 234 990 0 0 0 0 1451 209 255 1505 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1
Heavy Vehicles (%) 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0%
Turn Type Split NA Perm NA Perm Prot NA
Protected Phases 8 8 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 46.5 46.5 46.5 58.1 58.1 10.4 73.5
Effective Green, g (s) 47.5 47.5 47.5 59.1 59.1 11.4 74.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.45 0.45 0.09 0.57
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 580 580 1038 1624 724 304 2048
v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 0.15 c0.41 c0.07 0.42
v/s Ratio Perm c0.35 0.13
v/c Ratio 0.40 0.40 0.95 0.89 0.29 0.84 0.73
Uniform Delay, d1 30.7 30.7 40.2 32.6 22.3 58.4 20.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.81 0.42 1.08 1.20
Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 17.7 7.2 0.9 14.2 1.8
Delay (s) 31.1 31.2 57.9 33.6 10.2 77.2 26.3
Level of Service C C E C B E C
Approach Delay (s) 49.5 0.0 29.1 33.7
Approach LOS D A C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 36.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.0% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 38
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
19: Sullivan & 1-90 EB on
6/17/2016
4 4 / * 4/
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4 i'i' 11, r 'Pm 11,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 430 0 945 0 0 0 0 1335 320 235 1385 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 430 0 945 0 0 0 0 1335 320 235 1385 0
Number 3 8 18 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1759 1759 1900 0 1881 1900 1881 1881 0
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 467 0 990 0 1451 209 255 1505 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 2 0 2 1 2 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 8 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0
Cap,veh/h 1158 0 1116 0 1707 771 294 2119 0
Arrive On Green 0.35 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.08 0.59 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3351 0 3230 0 3668 1614 3476 3668 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 467 0 990 0 1451 209 255 1505 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1675 0 1615 0 1787 1614 1738 1787 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 13.8 0.0 37.6 0.0 12.6 1.0 9.4 38.5 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.8 0.0 37.6 0.0 12.6 1.0 9.4 38.5 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1158 0 1116 0 1707 771 294 2119 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.40 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.85 0.27 0.87 0.71 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1237 0 1193 0 1707 771 294 2119 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.4 0.0 40.1 0.0 1.8 1.5 58.8 18.6 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 8.0 0.0 4.9 0.8 22.9 2.0 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 6.4 0.0 18.0 0.0 5.6 0.5 5.5 19.4 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.6 0.0 48.2 0.0 6.7 2.3 81.6 20.7 0.0
LnGrp LOS C D A A F C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1457 1660 1760
Approach Delay, s/veh 43.2 6.2 29.5
Approach LOS D A C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 81.1 15.0 66.1 48.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 73.0 10.0 58.0 47.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 40.5 11.4 14.6 39.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 23.9 0.0 29.3 4.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 25.6
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 39
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
20: Sullivan & E Mission Ave 6/17/2016
4 4\ t / \* d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 r 4 r 'i 44l. 'i 44l.
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 180 10 140 35 15 85 105 1390 40 75 2135 120
Future Volume (veh/h) 180 10 140 35 15 85 105 1390 40 75 2135 120
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1882 1881 1900 1900 1900 1900 1882 1900 1900 1881 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 196 11 29 38 16 18 114 1511 43 82 2321 130
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1
Cap,veh/h 54 0 387 47 12 390 359 3105 88 103 2268 126
Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.20 0.60 0.60 0.11 0.91 0.90
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 0 1597 0 51 1611 1810 5134 146 1810 4980 277
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 207 0 29 54 0 18 114 1008 546 82 1590 861
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 0 1597 51 0 1611 1810 1712 1856 1810 1712 1832
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 1.1 7.0 21.4 21.5 5.7 59.2 59.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 31.5 0.0 1.8 31.5 0.0 1.1 7.0 21.4 21.5 5.7 59.2 59.2
Prop In Lane 0.95 1.00 0.70 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.15
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 54 0 387 59 0 390 359 2071 1122 103 1560 835
V/C Ratio(X) 3.84 0.00 0.07 0.91 0.00 0.05 0.32 0.49 0.49 0.80 1.02 1.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 54 0 387 59 0 390 359 2071 1122 167 1923 1029
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.46 0.46 0.46
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 65.0 0.0 38.0 57.9 0.0 37.7 44.6 14.4 14.4 56.9 5.8 5.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1321.4 0.0 0.0 82.7 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.8 1.5 2.5 20.5 29.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 21.7 0.0 0.8 3.3 0.0 0.5 3.6 10.3 11.4 2.9 27.8 32.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1386.4 0.0 38.0 140.6 0.0 37.8 45.1 15.2 15.9 59.4 26.3 35.7
LnGrp LOS F D F D D B B E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 236 72 1668 2533
Approach Delay, s/veh 1220.7 114.9 17.5 30.6
Approach LOS F F B C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 82.6 36.0 25.1 68.9 36.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.5 5.0 * 5 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 73.0 30.5 13.0 * 72 30.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.7 23.5 33.5 9.0 61.2 33.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.5 0.0 1.0 8.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 89.4
HCM 2010 LOS F
Notes
* HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 41
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: 1-90 WB off & E Indiana Ave 6/17/2016
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR NEL NER
Lane Configurations 11' 'i 4t 'f
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1005 0 425 650 280 20 0 0
Future Volume (veh/h) 1005 0 425 650 280 20 0 0
Number 4 14 3 8 1 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1881 0 1625 1900 1865 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1092 0 462 707 304 0
Adj No. of Lanes 2 0 1 2 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 0 0 0 0 0
Cap, veh/h 1186 0 490 2551 385 0
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.00 0.32 0.71 0.22 0.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 3762 0 1548 3705 1771 0
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1092 0 462 707 305 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1787 0 1548 1805 1777 0
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.2 0.0 25.0 6.1 13.9 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.2 0.0 25.0 6.1 13.9 0.0
Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1186 0 490 2551 387 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.92 0.00 0.94 0.28 0.79 0.00
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1186 0 505 2586 559 0
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.6 0.0 28.6 4.6 31.7 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.6 0.0 26.2 0.1 4.8 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 14.3 0.0 14.2 3.1 7.3 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 39.2 0.0 54.8 4.7 36.5 0.0
LnGrp LOS D D A D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1092 1169 305
Approach Delay, s/veh 39.2 24.5 36.5
Approach LOS D C D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 32.2 32.0 21.7 64.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.0 27.0 25.0 60.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.0 27.2 15.9 8.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.0 0.8 12.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 32.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Base 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 43
Appendix D
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: PINES & INDIANA
6/17/2016
4 4\ I / * 4'
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i'i 4io 'i'i 11' r 'i 11' r
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 0 455 310 260 560 1040 325 165 1130 240
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 0 455 310 260 560 1040 325 165 1130 240
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 5.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 2688 2580 2710 2794 1250 1397 2794 1250
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 2688 2580 2710 2794 1250 1397 2794 1250
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Growth Factor (vph) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 495 337 283 609 1130 353 179 1228 261
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 116 0 0 0 184 0 0 60
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 495 504 0 609 1130 169 179 1228 201
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 4
Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Turn Type Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 1 6 5 15 2
Permitted Phases 4 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 25.7 25.7 29.6 60.6 60.6 22.2 58.7 58.7
Effective Green, g (s) 26.7 26.7 31.1 62.1 62.1 24.2 60.2 58.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.24 0.48 0.48 0.19 0.46 0.45
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 552 529 648 1334 597 260 1293 564
v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 c0.22 0.40 0.13 c0.44
v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 0.13 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.90 0.95 0.94 0.85 0.28 0.69 0.95 0.36
Uniform Delay, d1 50.3 51.0 48.5 29.8 20.5 49.4 33.4 23.3
Progression Factor 1.01 1.01 1.04 0.62 0.97 0.83 0.82 0.94
Incremental Delay, d2 16.9 27.0 7.8 1.4 0.1 5.1 11.0 1.1
Delay (s) 67.8 78.4 58.3 20.0 20.0 46.3 38.4 23.0
Level of Service E E ECCD D C
Approach Delay (s) 0.0 73.7 31.2 36.8
Approach LOS A E C D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 42.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.2% ICU Level of Service F
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Improvements 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 16
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Pines & EB Ramps
6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 4 i'i' 11, r 'i 11,
Traffic Volume (vph) 440 5 705 0 0 0 0 1485 385 275 1310 0
Future Volume (vph) 440 5 705 0 0 0 0 1485 385 275 1310 0
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650 1650
Total Lost time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1460 1465 2420 3074 1375 1537 3074
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1460 1465 2420 3074 1375 1537 3074
Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Growth Factor (vph) 100% 100% 100% 105% 105% 105% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Adj. Flow (vph) 478 5 766 0 0 0 0 1614 418 299 1424 0
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 239 244 720 0 0 0 0 1614 363 299 1424 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5
Turn Type Split NA custom NA Perm Prot NA
Protected Phases 8 8 8 1 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 21.5 21.5 48.6 67.7 67.7 25.3 71.4
Effective Green, g (s) 22.5 22.5 49.6 68.7 67.7 26.3 72.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.38 0.53 0.52 0.20 0.56
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 252 253 923 1624 716 310 1711
v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 c0.17 0.30 c0.53 c0.19 0.46
v/s Ratio Perm 0.26
v/c Ratio 0.95 0.96 0.78 0.99 0.51 0.96 0.83
Uniform Delay, d1 53.2 53.4 35.4 30.4 20.3 51.4 23.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.86 0.49 0.46
Incremental Delay, d2 42.2 46.3 4.3 11.2 0.8 22.2 1.9
Delay (s) 95.3 99.7 39.7 56.9 38.5 47.2 12.8
Level of Service F F D E D D B
Approach Delay (s) 62.1 0.0 53.1 18.8
Approach LOS E A D B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 43.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.8% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Improvements 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 18
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Pines & Mission
6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations '11'i To 'i 4' r ) 14 'i'i 11' r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 315 205 75 90 215 410 50 1150 30 395 1295 330
Future Volume (veh/h) 315 205 75 90 215 410 50 1150 30 395 1295 330
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1618 1618 1650 1618 1618 1618 1618 1618 1650 1618 1618 1618
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 342 223 73 98 234 238 54 1250 33 429 1408 343
Adj No. of Lanes 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 2 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 418 265 87 130 278 415 155 1329 35 391 1429 808
Arrive On Green 0.14 0.23 0.22 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.10 0.43 0.43 0.26 0.93 0.91
Sat Flow, veh/h 2989 1167 382 1541 1618 1368 1541 3059 81 2989 3074 1370
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 342 0 296 98 234 238 54 628 655 429 1408 343
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1494 0 1550 1541 1618 1368 1541 1537 1603 1494 1537 1370
Q Serve(g_s), s 14.4 0.0 23.7 8.1 18.2 19.1 4.2 50.8 50.9 17.0 50.1 2.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.4 0.0 23.7 8.1 18.2 19.1 4.2 50.8 50.9 17.0 50.1 2.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 418 0 352 130 278 415 155 667 696 391 1429 808
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.00 0.84 0.75 0.84 0.57 0.35 0.94 0.94 1.10 0.99 0.42
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 529 0 352 273 286 422 155 667 696 391 1466 825
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.47 0.47 0.47
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.3 0.0 48.1 58.2 52.1 38.3 54.5 35.2 35.2 48.0 4.2 0.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.9 0.0 16.4 8.4 19.3 1.8 1.3 22.9 22.4 61.3 13.3 0.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 6.4 0.0 11.8 3.8 9.6 7.4 1.9 25.7 26.7 10.3 19.4 0.8
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 62.2 0.0 64.5 66.6 71.4 40.1 55.9 58.1 57.6 109.3 17.5 1.4
LnGrp LOS E E E E D E E E F B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 638 570 1337 2180
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.2 57.5 57.8 33.0
Approach LOS E E E C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.8 63.6 22.2 26.3 21.0 60.5 15.0 33.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 61.0 22.0 22.0 16.0 50.0 22.0 22.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.2 52.1 16.4 21.1 19.0 52.9 10.1 25.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.8 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 47.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Improvements 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 21
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
12: Mirabeau Parkway & Mansfield 6/17/2016
4 4 / d
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 4 r ) 1, ) 4' r ) 14,
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 25 55 230 235 10 155 205 300 240 5 530 35
Future Volume (veh/h) 25 55 230 235 10 155 205 300 240 5 530 35
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1625 1593 1593 1593 1593 1625 1593 1593 1593 1593 1593 1625
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 27 60 250 255 11 168 223 326 261 5 576 38
Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 37 82 309 325 18 275 231 637 541 8 729 48
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.15 0.40 0.40 0.01 0.25 0.25
Sat Flow, veh/h 487 1082 1354 1517 84 1283 1517 1593 1354 1517 2883 190
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 87 0 250 255 0 179 223 326 261 5 302 312
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1569 0 1354 1517 0 1367 1517 1593 1354 1517 1513 1560
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 0.0 4.0 8.3 0.0 6.2 7.7 8.1 7.5 0.2 9.8 9.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 0.0 4.0 8.3 0.0 6.2 7.7 8.1 7.5 0.2 9.8 9.8
Prop In Lane 0.31 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.12
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 119 0 309 325 0 293 231 637 541 8 383 394
V/C Ratio(X) 0.73 0.00 0.81 0.78 0.00 0.61 0.97 0.51 0.48 0.62 0.79 0.79
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 119 0 309 462 0 416 231 637 541 115 461 475
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.7 0.0 19.2 19.5 0.0 18.7 22.1 11.9 11.7 26.1 18.3 18.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 20.0 0.0 14.7 5.6 0.0 2.1 49.3 0.7 0.7 57.4 7.5 7.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.9 0.0 4.6 4.0 0.0 2.5 6.3 3.7 2.9 0.2 4.8 5.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.7 0.0 33.9 25.1 0.0 20.7 71.5 12.6 12.4 83.5 25.8 25.8
LnGrp LOS D C C C E B B F C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 337 434 810 619
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.4 23.3 28.7 26.3
Approach LOS D C C C
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.3 25.0 8.0 12.0 17.3 15.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 20.0 4.0 8.0 16.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 10.1 6.0 9.7 11.8 10.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 28.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Improvements 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 25
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
20: Sullivan & E Mission Ave 6/17/2016
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'i 1, 4 r 'i 44 'i 44
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 180 10 140 35 15 85 105 1680 40 75 2280 130
Future Volume (veh/h) 180 10 140 35 15 85 105 1680 40 75 2280 130
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1881 1882 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1882 1900 1900 1881 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 196 11 29 38 16 18 114 1826 43 82 2478 141
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1
Cap,veh/h 290 85 224 244 95 298 380 3418 80 103 2493 140
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.21 0.66 0.65 0.11 1.00 0.99
Sat Flow, veh/h 1612 458 1208 1064 515 1610 1810 5163 122 1810 4976 280
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 196 0 40 54 0 18 114 1211 658 82 1696 923
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1612 0 1667 1579 0 1610 1810 1712 1860 1810 1712 1832
Q Serve(g_s), s 15.4 0.0 2.6 2.6 0.0 1.2 6.9 24.0 24.1 5.7 0.0 65.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 20.6 0.0 2.6 5.2 0.0 1.2 6.9 24.0 24.1 5.7 0.0 65.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.73 0.70 1.00 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.15
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 290 0 308 339 0 298 380 2267 1232 103 1715 918
V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.00 0.13 0.16 0.00 0.06 0.30 0.53 0.53 0.80 0.99 1.01
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 382 0 404 436 0 390 380 2267 1232 167 1923 1029
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.37 0.37 0.37
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.1 0.0 44.2 45.6 0.0 43.7 43.3 11.5 11.5 56.9 0.0 0.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.9 1.7 2.0 11.0 19.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.0 0.0 1.2 1.7 0.0 0.5 3.5 11.6 12.8 2.9 2.6 5.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.4 0.0 44.3 45.7 0.0 43.7 43.7 12.4 13.2 58.9 11.0 19.7
LnGrp LOS E D D D D B B E B F
Approach Vol, veh/h 236 72 1983 2701
Approach Delay, s/veh 53.5 45.2 14.4 15.4
Approach LOS D D B B
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 90.1 28.6 28.7 72.8 28.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.5 5.0 *5 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 73.0 30.5 13.0 * 72 30.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.7 26.1 22.6 8.9 67.1 7.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 14.2 0.4 0.2 4.3 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 17.3
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
* HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Mirabeau sub -area 2040 Improvements 4:00 pm 2/7/2013
PM
Synchro 8 Report
Page 41
Mirabeau Subarea
Traffic Study Update
Prepared for:
City of Spokane Valley, Washington
December 2019
DN19-0631
FEHRt PEERS
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Previous Study Findings 1
Update to Expand Subarea 1
Traffic Analysis 4
Level of Service Standards 4
Methodology 5
Existing Traffic Level of Service 7
Year 2040 Traffic Level of Service 8
Project Cost Estimates 10
Updated Project Unit Costs 10
Project Cost Estimates 11
Fair Share & Cost Per Trip Analysis 13
Fair Share Analysis 13
Cost Per Trip 15
Conclusions 17
Appendices
Appendix A - Existing Conditions Synchro Reports
Appendix B - Existing Conditions Optimized Synchro Reports
Appendix C - Future Conditions Synchro Reports
Appendix D - Future Conditions with Mitigations Synchro Reports
Appendix E — Project Cost Estimate Spreadsheets
List of Figures
Figure 1: Study Area 2
Figure 2: Existing and Future Lane Configurations Traffic Controls, and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6
List of Tables
Table 1: Projects identified in 2016 Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study 3
Table 2: Level of service description and delay thresholds at intersections 5
Table 3: Existing (2019) PM peak hour level of service 7
Table 4: Existing (2019) PM peak hour LOS with signal timing adjustments 8
Table 5: 2040 PM peak hour LOS with signal timing optimized 8
Table 6: Potential project to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS 9
Table 7: Potential project at Argonne Rd./ Trent Ave. to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS 9
Table 8: Unit costs 10
Table 9: Cost estimate of potential projects to improve future LOS 11
Table 10: Subarea share of future PM peak hour traffic at deficient intersections 13
Table 11: Subareas' share of total improvement costs 14
Table 12: PM peak hour trip generation calculation 15
Table 13: Voluntary Traffic Mitigation Fees for Developers to Meet SEPA Obligation 17
This page intentionally left blank.
Introduction
The City of Spokane Valley commissioned the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study in 2016 that identified
existing transportation level of service (LOS) deficiencies and future transportation improvements to
support existing and planned growth in the Subarea. Based on the traffic forecasts, future traffic impacts
and potential mitigation projects, a fair share analysis was used to estimate a cost per PM peak hour
vehicle trip that developers in the Subarea would pay to meet their obligation under SEPA. The City will
use these fees to offset the cost of transportation improvement projects directly impacted by
development in the Subarea. The Mirabeau Subarea is mapped in Figure 1 and covers most of the area
between Pines Road and Sullivan Road and 1-90 and the Spokane River in north central Spokane Valley.
Previous Study Findings
The 2016 Mirabeau Traffic Study identified five intersections in or around the Mirabeau Subarea that are
forecast to have LOS deficiencies by 2040. These intersections are shown in Table 1, including the 2015
and 2040 PM peak hour LOS and delay. For each intersection, a project was identified to address the
future LOS deficiency, including a cost estimate for each project. A fair share percent was also estimated
that represents the portion of future traffic that would pass through the location generated by the
Mirabeau Subarea. This proportion is based on a select link analysis using the Spokane Regional
Transportation Council (SRTC) regional travel demand model. Based on the estimated project costs, fair
share analysis, and future traffic generated by development in the Subarea, a cost per PM peak hour
vehicle trip of $323.75 was calculated and assessed to developments in the area to pay for the future
transportation improvement projects identified in the Study.
Update to Expand Subarea
In 2019, the City commissioned an update to the Mirabeau Traffic Study. This report provides a summary
of the update, including an updated cost analysis and findings. The main purpose of this Study is to
update the fair share cost per PM peak hour vehicle trip from the original traffic study as well as expand
the geographic area by which transportation impact fees will be collected to account for new
developments planned for the area south of 1-90. Instead of changing the boundaries of the previously
established Mirabeau Subarea to accommodate the expanded area, a second Subarea was established
directly adjacent to the Mirabeau Subarea. The second Subarea is referred to as the North Pines Road
Subarea and is mapped in Figure 1. The North Pines Road Subarea is around Pines Road roughly between
Sprague Avenue and Trent Avenue and University Road and Adams Road excluding the Mirabeau
Subarea.
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
531
IE 1
•
34 6
w
437-
301
- 302-
L
E Upriver Dr
532
Mirabeau Subarea
N Pines Road Subarea
Projects Identified in Previous Study
Intersections Analyzed in Update
- 308-
309
a)
x
z
296—
I
304
t_
_z
II I
534
'284
6u`t� gtpe
Radtoary 4 ve
395.,,
E Rich Ave
313E
rtaFe°
oxel
Mirabeau Prkwy
90 E.Nora.A
329
Lr\
E Trent Ave
I�
394-
Kaiser Work
321
297
298
-E Boone Ave
3Q5
0
CO
z
E Valleyway Ave
310
311
396
0
T
306 Broadway Ave o
0
E Alki Ave
397
�31-2— E Main Ave
346
568
E Sprague Ave
347—C4pplee-
348
o- �1111111
351
350,
b 35
1
d RR
•� SpragueAv
349
z
335
330
366
E 4th Ave
E
2
z
316
Spokane
Valley
•
E Cataldo Ave
331
celD ce
0
u>
z
315
Montana Rail LinkRR
Industrial) Park A St
Industrial Park B St
E Euclid
Industrial Pa
.1317
k C St
Ave
i
Indiana.A
323
0
0
E
0
0
0
z
332
324
=388
333
336
17337
—353 .I
354T
370
II
36j7'—
368
376 (:
3
Figure 1
Study Area
Table 1: Projects identified in 2016 Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study
Project
(Intersection)
2015 2040 2040 LOS Description of Cost
LOS LOS with Improvement Estimate
I m prov.
Mirabeau
Subarea Mirabeau
Proportion Subarea Fair
of Future Share Cost
Traffic
Pines Rd/
Indiana Ave
Pines Rd/ I-90
EB Ramps
E
E F D
Add westbound left -turn
lane; retime traffic signal
Add eastbound left -turn
lane and northbound
right -turn pocket
(extending
back to Nora Ave); retime
traffic signal
Add southbound right -
turn lane
(extending back to the I-
90 off -ramp);
reconfigure lane
Pines Rd/ assignments on Mission
Mission Ave Ave to include eastbound
dual -left and a
through -right lane and
westbound left,
through, and right turn
lane; retime traffic signal
Mirabeau Add traffic signal, add
Pkwy/ B F C new 180 foot southbound $874,000 38% $332,000
Mansfield Ave through -right lane
Reconfigure eastbound to
Sullivan Rd/ include a left and
Mission Ave through -right lane; retime
signal
$896,000
18% $161,000
$753,000 18% $135,000
E F D
D E B
Source: Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study (June 2016).
$457,000 16% $73,000
$61,000 4% $2,500
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update 3
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Traffic Analysis
In the previous study, traffic analysis was performed for 21 intersections in and around the Mirabeau
Subarea, with five of those locations identified as having traffic level of service (LOS) deficiencies by Year
2040. No updates to that analysis were performed as part of this study and the COSV still plans to
implement those five projects (listed in Table 1) over time as fees are collected. However, as part of
expanding the traffic analysis to include the North Pines Road Subarea as part of this study, three
additional signalized intersections were identified to evaluate existing (2019) and future (2040) traffic LOS.
These include:
1. Pines Road/Broadway
2. Pines Road/Sprague Avenue
3. Evergreen Road/Sprague Avenue
Level of Service Standards
City of Spokane Valley Level of Service Standards
The City of Spokane Valley uses level of service (LOS) to describe and evaluate traffic operations along
major arterial corridors and intersections within the City. Levels range from LOS A to LOS F, which
encompass a range of congestion types from uninterrupted traffic (LOS A) to highly -congested conditions
(LOS F). The description and intersection delay thresholds of each LOS category are described in Table 2.
These are based on the Highway Capacity Manual, which is the methodology used by Spokane Valley. The
LOS for signalized intersections is measured by the average delay per vehicle entering the intersection
from all approaches, while the LOS for unsignalized intersections is measured by the average delay per
vehicle on the approach with the highest average delay. Spokane Valley also applies Corridor LOS to
evaluate major arterial corridors in the City. Average daily traffic (ADT) volume thresholds are used to
measure average LOS conditions along the length of the entire corridor. Corridor LOS acknowledges that
some intersections may experience greater congestion than the corridor as a whole. Sprague Avenue and
Pines Road are both major arterials where corridor -level LOS can be applied.
The LOS standards used by Spokane Valley are defined in the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
• LOS D at the corridor level for major arterial corridors:
o Argonne/Mullan between the town of Millwood and Appleway Boulevard
o Pines Road between Trent Avenue and 8th Avenue
o Evergreen Road between Indiana Avenue and 8th Avenue
o Sullivan Road between Wellesley Avenue and 8th Avenue
o Sprague Avenue/Appleway Boulevard between Fancher Road and Sullivan Road
• LOS D for signalized intersections not on major arterial corridors
• LOS E for unsignalized intersections (LOS F acceptable if peak hour traffic signal warrant is
unmet)
Table 2: Level of service description and delay thresholds at intersections
Level of
Service
Description
Signalized Unsignalized
Intersection Delay Intersection Delay
(seconds) (seconds)
A Free -flowing conditions.
B Stable operating conditions.
C Stable operating conditions, but individual motorists are
affected by the interaction with other motorists.
D High density of motorists, but stable flow.
0-10
10-20
20-35
35-55
E Near -capacity operations, with speeds reduced to a low but 55-80
uniform speed.
F Over -capacity conditions with long delays. > 80 >50
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2016, Transportation Research Board
0-10
10-15
15-25
25-35
WSDOT LOS Standards
35-50
WSDOT also uses LOS thresholds for State Highways. The LOS standard for State Highways in Urban Areas
(including the Study Area) is LOS D for signalized intersections and LOS E for unsignalized intersections.
Within the Study Area WSDOT's LOS standards are also considered for intersections along Pines Road,
which is State Route 27.
Methodology
Traffic Analysis
Synchro software (version 9) was used to evaluate PM peak hour LOS at the three signalized intersections
included in this Update. Synchro settings were set consistent with WSDOT Synchro & SimTraffic Protocol
(Aug 2018) and City of Spokane Valley standards. LOS was measured using the Highway Capacity Manual
(HCM) 2010 methodology within Synchro.
Existing (2019) Traffic Volumes
Existing intersection turn movement counts were collected between 4 PM and 6 PM on Thursday,
September 19th, 2019. The existing (and future) PM peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 2.
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update 5
N Vercler Rd
m
$
1
E Boone Ave
i
N ni� ityIRdl
H
....
I f
1cDonald Ri
t E
z
z
il
z
widish Rd
Z
E Cataldo
Ave
E Broadway
Ave
.
z
EAIkiAve
I',Eco
z
—
N ProgressARc
—
„
z
Z
z
JI_
E Valleyway Ave
Main ANe
Spokane
Valley
E
410
-
SpragueAv •
Ill
ESprag
—
Abandoned RR
I i
E 4th Ave
E 5th AveII_
1. Pines/Broadway
2. Pines Sprague
3. S Evergreen Rd/Sprague
a,os
o--
��rn
- o co
I 1 I I y
e,oadwa
76(85)
275 (280)
123 (130)
„a.
,noo
CO OD
N m m
I
d♦ 1 I Iy
4S 173(195)
837 (1,005)
% 140 (160)
�noC
O 2
oCOLO "
CO OD
I1 L
o,a4 e 4-IL
4S_215(240)
873 (980)
% 127 (145)
187 (205)
315 (320) _►
101 (110)
III*
0 rn 0
MCOv
CO 0
216 (240) --.1►
801 (960) —►
93(120)�'
Its
0 o rn
��r•
CO V
166 (185) �►
830 (1,005) —►
95(110)�'
Its
o f
7,r�
v- V O
Existing PM (2040 PM) Volumes
Existing and 2040 Lane Configurations
Traffic Controls, and PM Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
Future Year (2040) Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes at each of the study intersections were forecast using the current version of the SRTC 2015
and 2040 regional travel demand models, which was last updated in December 2017. After review of the
land use forecasts in the model with City staff, no adjustments were made to the existing or future land
use assumptions or transportation network in the model. Instead of using the traffic forecasts directly
from the 2040 travel demand model, 2040 volumes were estimated using an industry standard approach
known as the difference method. Under the difference method, the difference in traffic volumes between
the 2015 and 2040 models were added to observed counts at each of the study area intersections to
arrive at a 2040 forecast traffic. This method reduces model error by relying as much as possible on
observed data rather than model output data. Note: the difference in traffic volumes between the 2015
and 2040 model were multiplied by 0.84 to account for growth in traffic that occurred between 2015 and
2018 (21 years/ 25 years = 0.84). Post processing to account for model anomalies was also applied to
arrive at the final 2040 traffic forecasts. Forecast traffic volumes in Year 2040 are also shown in Figure 2.
Existing Traffic Level of Service
Table 3 shows the existing PM peak hour LOS using the methodology described above for the three
intersections analyzed. Under existing conditions, both the Pines Road/Broadway and Pines Road/Sprague
Avenue intersections operate at LOS E, exceeding the COSV and WSDOT intersection LOS D threshold. It
should be noted that the Pines Road/Sprague Avenue intersection is just on the cusp of LOS D and LOS E
during the PM peak hour. Additionally, both Pines Road and Sprague Avenue are major arterials through
these intersections and it should be noted that for these corridors the 2016 Comprehensive Plan directs
the LOS threshold to be measured by using corridor -wide LOS. While the Comprehensive Plan
acknowledges that individual intersections may exceed the LOS D threshold using this method (as long as
the corridor -wide average is at or below LOS D), the corridor -level LOS was not a primary consideration in
this case and was not analyzed as part of this study.
Table 3: Existing (2019) PM peak hour level of service
Intersection
Control Delay (sec) LO5
Pines Rd/ Broadway
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Evergreen Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Signal
Signal
Signal
Improving Existing Level of Service
62
56
51
E
E
The most cost-effective way to improve the existing LOS at the Pines Road/ Broadway intersection would
be to make signal timing adjustments. Table 4 shows what the existing PM peak hour LOS would be if the
signal timing splits were optimized and cycle length maintained in order to preserve coordination
between signals along the corridor. Right -turn -on -red movements were factored into the analysis.
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Optimizing the signal splits would improve the Pines Road/Broadway intersection to LOS D, but would
have little to no effect at the other two intersections.
Table 4: Existing (2019) PM peak hour LOS with signal timing adjustments
Intersection Control Delay (sec) LOS
Pines Rd/ Broadway
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Evergreen Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Signal
Signal
Signal
Year 204o Traffic Level of Service
48
56
48
D
E
Table 5 shows the estimated PM peak hour LOS in 2040 for the three intersections analyzed, based on
traffic growth from the SRTC regional travel demand model. The 2040 delay and LOS presented in Table 5
assumes the same cycle length for the signals, but assumes the signal splits would be optimized over time
to account for changing traffic patterns. The results show that in 2040 the Pines Road/ Sprague
intersection would continue to operate at LOS E, but would degrade by an average of 8 seconds per
vehicle from existing conditions, and would exceed WSDOT and COSV intersection LOS threshold. Again,
it should be noted that City of Spokane Valley uses corridor -level LOS methodology to measure LOS for
both the Pines Road and Sprague Avenue corridors. Corridor -level LOS was not measured in 2040 as part
of this analysis, but in consultation with City staff it was determined that addressing congestion at Pines
Road and Sprague Avenue in the future was desired to reduce delay, improve corridor -wide LOS for both
Sprague Avenue and Pines Road, and to mitigate potential congestion related safety issues.
Table 5: 2040 PM peak hour LOS with signal timing optimized
Intersection Control Delay (sec) LOS
Pines Rd/ Broadway
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Evergreen Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Signal
Signal
Signal
Improving 2040 Level of Service
49
64
52
D
E
D
Using an iterative approach and accounting for land use constraints, a project was identified to improve
the delay at the Pines Road/ Sprague Avenue intersection in 2040. A description of the project and the
improvements to LOS and delay is shown in Table 6. This project would reduce the 2040 delay by about 9
seconds and bring the LOS from an E to a D (just on the cusp of a D/E). It should be noted that while this
intersection is not specifically required to meet LOS D threshold per Spokane Valley standards (instead the
Pines Road and Sprague Avenue corridors are required to meet corridor -wide average LOS D threshold),
improving the average vehicle delay at this intersection will ensure that WSDOT LOS standards are met
and would contribute toward ensuring the Pines and Sprague corridors do not exceed LOS D corridor -
wide in 2040.
Table 6: Potential project to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS
Intersection Description of Improvement
Delay (sec) with LOS with
Improvement Improvement
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave
Source: Fehr & Peers
Argonne Road & Trent Avenue Intersection
• Add a southbound right -turn -only lane;
• Convert the existing southbound through -right
lane to a through -only lane;
• Add a second eastbound left -turn -only lane.
54.6
The intersection of Argonne Road & Trent Avenue is near the North Pines Road Subarea, and while traffic
analysis at that intersection was not performed as part of this study, this intersection was identified in the
2016 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan as a location that would exceed COSV and WSDOT LOS
thresholds. As part of the Comprehensive Plan, a project was identified to address the poor LOS in the
future, as described in Table 7. Given that development in both the Mirabeau and North Pines Road
Subareas would increase traffic at this intersection, this project was also included as part of the fair -share
cost analysis for both Subareas. Note that while the improvement at Argonne Road & Trent Avenue would
improve the LOS compared to a "do nothing" alternative, this intersection would not meet either WSDOT
or COSV LOS thresholds. Land use constraints related to the BNSF railroad overpass and the narrow street
cross section in Millwood limit options related to adding roadway capacity to Argonne Road. Because this
improvement would add capacity and reduce delay, the cost can be factored into impact fees per the
Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), despite not reducing LOS to within the City or State
thresholds.
Table 7: Potential project at Argonne Rd./ Trent Ave. to improve 2040 PM peak hour LOS
Intersection Description of Improvement Delay w/o LOS w/o Delay with LOS with
Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement
Argonne Rd/ • Add a second westbound
Trent Ave
left -turn lane.
Source: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (Dec 2016), Appendix A.
109
F
96
F
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Project Cost Estimates
This section includes updated cost estimates, including methodology, for the five projects identified in
previous plans as well as the cost estimates for two projects identified in this study at both the Pines Road
& Sprague Avenue and Argonne Road & Trent Avenue intersections.
Updated Project Unit Costs
Unit costs for roadway construction were identified in the 2016 traffic study. In collaboration with City
staff, these costs were updated based on construction costs from recently completed transportation
projects in Spokane Valley. Where recent costs were not available, unit costs were updated based on
inflation from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) National Highway Cost Index.' Costs to
account for drainage and traffic control were also added. Table 8 summarizes the unit costs that were
used to develop project cost estimates.
Table 8: Unit costs
Element
Description
Hard Costs
Roadway Demolition Demolition and removal of old roadway
Curb Demolition Demolition and removal of old curb/gutter
Sidewalk Demolition Demolition and removal of old sidewalk
Signal Demolition Demo and removal of old traffic signal eqpt.
Excavation Excavation, grading, fill, earthwork
Road Section Construction of new roadway surface
Curb Construction of new curb/gutter
Sidewalk Construction of new sidewalks
Curb Ramps Construction of new curb ramps
Traffic Signal Construction of new traffic signal
Other Costs
Right-of-way Cost of acquiring right-of-way
Mobilization Cost to get a construction crew engaged
Drainage Cost to provide proper stormwater drainage
Traffic Control Cost to manage traffic during construction
Contingency Cost contingency for unexpected drainage/ utility/
earthwork conflicts; WSDOT coordination
Engineering Cost to design and permit the project
Source: City of Spokane Valley, Fehr & Peers, FHWA National Highway Cost Index.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pol icy/otps/n hcci/ptl .cfm
Unit Quantity Unit Cost (2019 $)
Square Yard
Linear foot
Square Yard
Each mast arm
Cubic Yard
Square Yard
Linear foot
Square Yard
Each
Each new system
$15
$16
$20
$6,000
$35
$60
$45
$80
$4,000
$480,000
Square Foot
10% of "hard" costs above
20% of applicable "hard" costs above
15% of "hard" costs above
30% of "hard" costs above
20% of "hard" costs above
$12
10
Project Cost Estimates
Table 9 shows the cost estimates for seven potential projects in the study area where LOS would degrade
to unacceptable levels in the future. This includes updated costs for the five projects identified in the
previous (2016) Mirabeau Traffic Study to account for construction cost inflation, plus the additional
projects at Pines Road & Sprague Avenue intersection identified in this Update and the potential project
at Argonne Road & Trent Avenue identified in the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (2016). Details for
how these costs were estimated is provided in Appendix E. All cost estimates are in 2019 dollars.
Table 9: Cost estimate of potential projects to improve future LOS
Project
escription
Non -
Cost Estimate Applicable
Costs
Applicable
Costs (2016 dollars)
2016 Cost
Estimates
Pines Rd/
Indiana Ave
Pines Rd/ I-90
EB Ramps
Pines Rd/
Mission Ave
Phase 1
Pines Rd/
Mission Ave
Phase 2
Mirabeau
Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/
Mission Ave
Pines Rd/
Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/
Trent Ave
Add westbound left -turn lane;
retime traffic signal
Add eastbound left -turn lane and
northbound right -turn pocket
(extending back to Nora Ave);
retime traffic signal
Reconfigure lane assignments on
Mission Ave to include eastbound
dual -left and a through -right lane
and westbound left, through, and
right turn lane; retime and
upgrade traffic signal
Add southbound right -turn lane
(extending back to the 1-90 off -
ramp);
Add traffic signal, add new 180
foot southbound through -right
lane
Reconfigure eastbound to include
a left and through -right lane;
retime signal
Add a southbound right -turn -only
lane; convert the existing
southbound through -right lane to
a through -only lane; add a second
eastbound left -turn -only lane.
Add a second westbound left -turn
lane.
Source: Fehr & Peers, City of Spokane Valley.
$1,500,000
$1,119,000
$0 $1,500,000 $896,000
$0 $1,119,000 $753,000
$588,000 $508,620 $79,380
$ 812,000
$1,215,000
$94,000
$457,000
$0 $ 812,000
$0 $1,215,000 $874,000
$0 $94,000 $61,000
$818,000 $82,000 $737,000 NEW
$753,600 $229,200 $524,400 NEW
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
It should be noted that the improvements at Pines Road & Mission Avenue have been split into two
phases as the City is planning to implement a portion of this project (Phase 1) in 2020. Additionally, about
86% of funding for this project is from non -City funds (that portion is funded by a Surface Transportation
Block Grant) and thus cannot be included as part of the fair -share cost analysis. All other projects are
assumed to be funded entirely by City general funds (which include mitigation fee payments from
development).
Secondly, the full cost of improvements at the Pines Road & Sprague Avenue intersection cannot be
applied to the impact fee because there is a LOS deficiency at this intersection under existing conditions.
To account for this, the portion of traffic that if removed from the system today would effectively reduce
the LOS at this intersection from an "E" to a "D" was estimated in Synchro. The result was about 10% of
existing traffic. This means that if traffic volumes were 10% lower at this intersection under existing
conditions, the intersection would meet the LOS D threshold. Therefore, 10% of the total cost of the
potential improvement project at Pines Road & Sprague Avenue was deducted from the total cost to
arrive at the applicable cost as shown in Table 9.
Similarly, the full cost of improvements at the Argonne Road & Trent Avenue intersection cannot be
applied to the impact fee because there is an existing LOS deficiency at this intersection. To account for
this, the cost of a restriping and signal modification project which would bring the intersection to a LOS D
under existing conditions was estimated. The project was recommended as part of the North Argonne
Road/North Mullan Road Corridor Retiming project.' The estimated cost of this project ($229,000) was
deducted from cost of the longer term project to arrive at the applicable cost as shown in Table 9.
2 Fehr & Peers. Technical Memorandum. N Argonne Road/N Muiian Road Corridor Retiming. July 25, 2019. Project #
SE18-0621.
r"
12
Fair Share & Cost Per Trip Analysis
Fair Share Analysis
A common way for a development project to mitigate its traffic impact is through a fair -share financial
contribution toward a transportation system project that would improve LOS to meet City standards. The
Subarea's fair -share financial contribution is determined by how much traffic the Subarea is expected to
contribute to each of the deficient intersections under future conditions (see Table 9). In other words,
what percentage of 2040 traffic through a deficient intersection is caused by new development within the
Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea?
The SRTC regional travel model was used to determine the percentage of traffic generated by future
development within the two Subareas. The travel model has a tool called a "select zone analysis" that can
track the traffic generated by different areas throughout the city. The select zone analysis was set to
identify the traffic generated by Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea development separate from any
other traffic generated by development in the region. The results of the select zone analysis were
analyzed for each of the seven deficient intersections identified in Table 9. Table 10 shows the results of
the select zone analysis. This reflects the same portion of traffic from the Mirabeau Subarea through the
five deficient intersections identified from the previous (2016) study.
Table 10: Subarea share of future PM peak hour traffic at deficient intersections
Intersection
Mirabeau Subarea
Portion of Future Traffic
North Pines Road Subarea Combined Portion
Portion of Future Traffic of Future Traffic
from two Subareas
Pines Rd/ Indiana Ave 18%
Pines Rd/ 1-90 EB Ramps 18%
Pines Rd/ Mission Ave 4%
Mirabeau Pkwy/ Mansfield Ave 38%
Sullivan Rd/ Mission Ave 4%
Pines Rd/ Sprague Ave 6%
Argonne Rd/ Trent Ave 10%
Source: Fehr & Peers, SRTC Regional Travel Demand Model (last updated December, 2017).
42%
48%
53%
5%
9%
19%
7%
60%
66%
57%
43%
13%
25%
17%
The results in Table 10 show that at some intersections, the majority of future traffic is generated by the
two Subareas combined, while at other locations, the majority of future traffic is generated by locations
outside the two Subareas. For example, at the Pines Road & I-90 Eastbound Ramps, 18% of future traffic
will be generated by land uses in the Mirabeau Subarea and 48% will be generated by land uses in the
North Pines Road Subarea. Combined, the two Subareas will generate about 66% of the future traffic
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
passing through the intersection during the PM peak hour. In contrast, about 10% of future traffic at
Argonne Road & Trent Avenue intersection will be generated by land uses in the Mirabeau Subarea and
7% will be generated by land uses in the North Pines Road Subarea. Combined the two Subareas will
generate about 17% of the future traffic passing through the intersection during the PM peak hour, while
land uses outside the Subarea will generate about 83% of future traffic passing through the intersection.
The results in Table 10 were used to determine the two Subareas' financial share of the total project
improvements by multiplying the total improvement cost by the proportion of traffic generated by new
development in the two Subareas. The result of this calculation is the fair -share cost of each project to the
Subarea and is shown in Table 11. This shows that the total fair -share cost of all seven projects adds up to
$1,079,000 for the Mirabeau Subarea and $1,708,000 for the North Pines Road Subarea. A two percent
administrative fee was added to each Subarea cost to cover the cost of administering the program,
including future updates to this study. Thus, the total fair share cost of improvements, including the
administrative fee, equals $1,101,000 for the Mirabeau Subarea and $1,742,000 for the North Pines Road
Subarea.
Table 11: Subareas' share of total improvement costs
Intersection
Mirabeau
Applicable Mirabeau Subarea North Pines Road North Pines
Portion of Total Subarea Portion UPDATED Fair- Subarea Portion Road Subarea
Project Cost of Future Traffic Share Cost of Future Traffic Fair -Share Cost
Pines Rd/ Indiana
Ave
Pines Rd/ 1-90 EB
Ramps
Pines Rd/ Mission
Ave
Mirabeau Pkwy/
Mansfield Ave
Sullivan Rd/
Mission Ave
Pines Rd/
Sprague Ave
Argonne Rd/
Trent Ave
Total Fair -Share
Cost
Total Fair -Share
Cost with 2%
Administrative
Fee
$1,500,000
$1,119,000
$891,000
$1,215,000
$94,000
$737,000
$524,000
18% $270,000
18% $201,000
4% $143,000
38% $462,000
4% $3,700
6% $48,000
10% $51,000
N/A N/A $1,079,000
N/A N/A $1,101,000
42% $628,000
48% $532,000
53% $476,000
5% $64,000
9% $8,200
19% $137,000
7% $38,000
N/A $1,708,000
N/A $1,742,000
Cost Per Trip
Given both Subareas' share of the total project costs as identified in Table 11, the cost per PM peak hour
trip could be updated for the Mirabeau Subarea and calculated for the North Pines Road Subarea by
applying the same methodology as the previous study. The same amount of future land use growth in
Mirabeau through Year 2040 assumed in the previous study was applied (but with updated project costs
and updated trip rates) as shown in Table 12. This calculation might seem counterintuitive because there
has been growth in the Mirabeau Subarea between 2016 and today. However, since this study did not re-
calculate the proportion of traffic growth associated with the remaining development potential in the
Mirabeau Subarea, the original total increase in trip generation was assumed. This is a common
assumption used when updating impact/mitigation fees and helps to keep the fees relatively stable and
predictable over time.
For the North Pines Road Subarea, the difference between the land use assumed in the 2040 SRTC
Regional Travel Demand Model and the 2015 model was used. PM peak hour trip generation was
estimated with standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates. Table 12
summarizes the land use growth and resulting trip generation rates for both Subareas. This is the same
trip generation approach used in the original Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study, except with updated rates
based on the current (2017) ITE Trip Generation Manual.
Table 12: PM peak hour trip generation calculation
Land Use
PM Peak Hour
Trip Rate
Mirabeau Mirabeau North Pines Road
Subarea Units of Subarea PM Subarea Units of
Development Peak Hour Trips Development
North Pines Road
Subarea PM Peak
Hour Trips
Single -Family
Residential
Multi -Family
Residential
Retail
Office
Hotel
Medical
School
Industrial
Total Fair -Share
Cost
0.99 65 dwelling units
0.56 979 dwelling units
3.81
0.40
0.60
0.85
0.17
0.49
N/A
63,890 square feet
2,561 employees
150 rooms
0 employees
0 employees
0 employees
N/A
65 78 dwelling units
549 157 dwelling units
244 69,750 square feet
1,025 259 employees
90 0 rooms
0 371 employees
0 18 employees
0 79 employees
1,973
78
88
266
104
0
316
4
39
N/A 895
Source: Trip generation: ITE (2017); Mirabeau Subarea land use growth: Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study (2016); North Pines Subarea
land use growth: SRTC Regional Travel Demand Model (last updated December, 2017).
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update
December, 2019
Based on the results from Table 11 and Table 12 the cost per PM peak hour for each Subarea are as
follows:
Mirabeau Subarea (UPDATED):
$1,101,000 (Subarea's share of total project costs) / 1,973 (Subarea PM peak hour trip generation from
growth) = $ 558 per PM peak hour trip.
This compares to $323.75 per PM peak hour trip from the 2016 study. The cost per trip went up because
of higher construction costs, the two additional improvement projects (at Pines Road & Sprague Avenue
and Argonne Road & Trent Avenue), and slightly lower assumed trip rates based on the updated trip
generation manual (which reduced forecast new trips generated by development from 2,176 in the
previous study to 1,973).
North Pines Road Subarea:
$1,742,000 (Subarea's share of total project costs) / 895 (Subarea PM peak hour trip generation from
growth) = $ 1,946 per PM peak hour trip
Vested Trips
There are still existing "vested" trips from the prior "Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement" that was
established by Spokane County. While the transportation improvement projects identified as part of the
Pines -Mansfield Development Agreement have largely been constructed, Spokane Valley is open to
counting the vested trips as a credit against this new transportation improvement program. Based on data
supplied by the City of Spokane Valley in October 2019, there were 816 PM peak hour vested trips
outstanding amongst the land owners in the Subarea. These trips have a value of $303.36 per trip, which
works out to a total value of $247,542. Developers can apply the value of their unused vested PM peak
hour trips as a credit to the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Mitigation Program until they have no vested trips
remaining.
Conclusions
This report provided an update to the Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study previously performed in 2016. The
main purpose of this study was to update the projects costs, based primarily on inflation, and to expand
the geographic area paying the traffic LOS impact mitigation fee as planned new developments will add a
substantial amount of new traffic to the area. Instead of expanding the Mirabeau Subarea, a new Subarea
called the North Pines Road Subarea was defined. As part of this analysis, the existing and future traffic
LOS conditions at three new intersections in and around the two Subareas was performed. As shown in
the previous study and this update, in the future, traffic LOS is expected to degrade within the study area
as the Mirabeau Subarea, North Pines Road Subarea, and the rest of Spokane Valley and the region
continue to grow. This report identified the necessary traffic mitigation measures to improve congestion
and meet Spokane Valley's LOS standards. Most of the congestion relief projects are on the Pines Road
corridor with a separate improvement at Argonne Road & Trent Avenue and a minor improvement at the
Sullivan Road & Mission Avenue intersection.
A fair -share calculation was developed to identify the Mirabeau Subarea and North Pines Road Subarea
landowner's share of future traffic impacts and mitigation costs. If landowners agree to implement future
traffic congestion improvement projects through a mitigation contribution up to the amount shown in
Table 13, then they will meet their SEPA obligations to mitigate traffic congestion impacts. After making
this mitigation payment (which is subject to a credit from the existing Pines -Mansfield Development
Agreement), the developer will not have to conduct another traffic study, outside of a site access and
circulation study, which may be required by Spokane Valley to ensure safe access for all modes into and
within the development site.
Table 13: Voluntary Traffic Mitigation Fees for Developers to Meet SEPA Obligation
Subarea Cost per PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip
Mirabeau Subarea
North Pines Road Subarea
$ 558
$1,946
Mirabeau Subarea Traffic Study Update 17
Appendix A - Existing Conditions
Synchro Reports
FEHR'' PEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2052: Pines & Broadway
10/08/2019
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 11 j II f "j 4'
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Future Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 195 328 93 128 286 68 55 839 50 91 1115 167
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 255 350 99 197 348 83 204 1356 81 112 1080 161
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.27 0.27 0.07 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.43 0.43 0.07 0.38 0.38
Sat Flow, veh/h 1650 1292 366 1634 1339 318 1634 3125 186 1650 2866 428
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 195 0 421 128 0 354 55 438 451 91 639 643
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 0 1659 1634 0 1658 1634 1630 1681 1650 1646 1648
Q Serve(g_s), s 11.0 0.0 32.2 7.4 0.0 26.1 4.0 27.0 27.0 7.1 49.0 49.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.0 0.0 32.2 7.4 0.0 26.1 4.0 27.0 27.0 7.1 49.0 49.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.26
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 255 0 450 197 0 430 204 707 730 112 620 621
V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.00 0.94 0.65 0.00 0.82 0.27 0.62 0.62 0.81 1.03 1.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 255 0 472 241 0 497 204 707 730 203 620 621
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.00 0.91 0.62 0.62 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.7 0.0 46.3 35.5 0.0 45.3 51.5 28.5 28.5 59.7 40.5 40.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.8 0.0 25.8 4.0 0.0 8.7 0.4 2.5 2.5 12.8 44.0 45.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 6.1 0.0 18.0 3.5 0.0 13.0 1.8 12.7 13.0 3.6 29.8 30.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.5 0.0 72.1 39.5 0.0 54.0 51.9 31.0 30.9 72.6 84.5 85.9
LnGrp LOS D E D D D C C E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 616 482 944 1373
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.6 50.2 32.2 84.4
Approach LOS E D C F
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.3 54.0 16.0 38.7 13.8 61.4 14.5 40.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 49.0 11.0 39.0 16.0 44.0 13.0 37.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.0 51.0 13.0 28.1 9.1 29.0 9.4 34.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.1 3.6 0.1 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 61.6
HCM 2010 LOS E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/08/2019
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
EBL EBT
11
t4
216 801
216 801
3 8
0 0
1.00
1.00 1.00
1733 1733
225 834
1 3
0.96 0.96
1 1
241 1190
0.15 0.27
1650 4381
225 599
1650 1577
17.5 22.2
17.5 22.2
1.00
241 857
0.93 0.70
241 857
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.91
54.9 42.6
37.5 2.3
0.0 0.0
10.5 9.9
92.4 44.9
F D
1141
54.9
D
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
1
1
28.2
5.0
17.0
12.1
1.2
2
2
43.0
5.0
44.0
35.5
2.6
EBR WBL
93 140
93 140
18 7
0 0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1750 1733
82 146
0 1
0.96 0.96
1 1
116 171
0.27 0.10
429 1650
317 146
1656 1650
22.4 11.3
22.4 11.3
0.26 1.00
450 171
0.70 0.85
450 241
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.55
42.6 57.3
4.5 11.1
0.0 0.0
10.8 5.7
47.1 68.4
D E
3
3
24.0
5.0
19.0
19.5
0.0
4
4
34.8
5.0
30.0
29.5
0.3
1-
WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
f f
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
872 147 141 439 64 292 625 231
3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
933 156 292 797 116 317 686 253
0.23 0.23 0.18 0.28 0.28 0.19 0.29 0.29
4074 683 1634 2856 414 1650 2345 866
674 345 141 249 254 292 438 418
1577 1604 1634 1630 1640 1650 1646 1565
27.2 27.5 10.1 16.9 17.1 22.6 33.4 33.5
27.2 27.5 10.1 16.9 17.1 22.6 33.4 33.5
0.43 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.55
722 367 292 455 458 317 481 458
0.93 0.94 0.48 0.55 0.55 0.92 0.91 0.91
728 370 292 455 458 355 557 530
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27 0.27 0.27
49.1 49.2 48.0 39.9 40.0 51.6 44.4 44.4
12.1 21.1 1.2 4.7 4.8 10.2 8.6 9.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
13.1 14.3 4.6 8.2 8.4 11.2 16.4 15.7
61.3 70.4 49.2 44.6 44.7 61.8 52.9 53.4
E E D D D E D D
1165 644 1148
64.9 45.7 55.4
E D E
5
5
30.0
5.0
28.0
24.6
0.4
6
6
41.3
5.0
33.0
19.1
2.2
7
7
18.5
5.0
19.0
13.3
0.2
8
8
40.3
5.0
30.0
24.4
2.6
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
56.4
E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3028: S Evergreen Rd & Sprague 10/08/2019
1-
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "j Ili 4'f f
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Future Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 173 865 82 132 909 173 118 439 82 182 675 168
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 196 1761 166 157 1506 285 141 661 123 203 721 179
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.40 0.40 0.10 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.24 0.24 0.12 0.28 0.28
SatFlow,veh/h 1650 4393 415 1650 3993 757 1650 2771 514 1650 2612 650
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 173 620 327 132 717 365 118 260 261 182 425 418
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 1577 1654 1650 1577 1596 1650 1646 1639 1650 1646 1616
Q Serve(g_s), s 13.4 19.1 19.2 10.2 23.8 24.0 9.2 18.5 18.8 14.1 32.8 32.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.4 19.1 19.2 10.2 23.8 24.0 9.2 18.5 18.8 14.1 32.8 32.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.40
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 196 1264 663 157 1189 602 141 393 391 203 454 446
V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.49 0.49 0.84 0.60 0.61 0.84 0.66 0.67 0.90 0.94 0.94
AvailCap(c_a),veh/h 203 1264 663 203 1189 602 203 462 460 203 462 454
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 56.4 29.0 29.1 57.9 32.6 32.7 58.5 44.7 44.8 56.2 45.9 46.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 20.1 0.7 1.4 20.9 2.2 4.4 17.8 2.7 2.9 36.1 26.4 26.9
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.2 8.4 9.0 5.6 10.7 11.3 4.9 8.7 8.8 8.5 18.2 18.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 76.5 29.7 30.4 78.7 34.9 37.1 76.4 47.5 47.8 92.3 72.3 72.9
LnGrp LOS E C C E C D E D D F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1120 1214 639 1025
Approach Delay, s/veh 37.2 40.3 52.9 76.1
Approach LOS D D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.4 54.0 15.1 41.4 16.4 57.1 20.0 36.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 43.0 16.0 36.5 16.0 43.0 16.0 36.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.4 26.0 11.2 34.8 12.2 21.2 16.1 20.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 12.1 0.1 1.0 0.1 14.4 0.0 5.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 50.6
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Appendix B - Existing Conditions
Optimized Synchro Reports
FEHRPEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2052: Pines & Broadway
10/08/2019
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 11 j II f "j 4'
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Future Volume (veh/h) 187 315 101 123 275 76 53 805 54 87 1070 177
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 195 328 93 128 286 69 55 839 50 91 1115 164
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 244 350 99 178 310 75 98 1393 83 112 1305 191
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.06 0.45 0.45 0.07 0.45 0.45
Sat Flow, veh/h 1650 1292 366 1634 1335 322 1634 3125 186 1650 2875 422
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 195 0 421 128 0 355 55 438 451 91 637 642
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 0 1659 1634 0 1657 1634 1630 1681 1650 1646 1651
Q Serve(g_s), s 11.4 0.0 32.2 7.8 0.0 27.2 4.3 26.4 26.5 7.1 44.8 45.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.4 0.0 32.2 7.8 0.0 27.2 4.3 26.4 26.5 7.1 44.8 45.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.26
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 244 0 450 178 0 385 98 726 749 112 747 749
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.00 0.94 0.72 0.00 0.92 0.56 0.60 0.60 0.81 0.85 0.86
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 244 0 472 178 0 408 98 726 749 178 747 749
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.00 0.91 0.63 0.63 0.63 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.1 0.0 46.3 38.4 0.0 48.7 59.5 27.3 27.3 59.8 31.6 31.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.7 0.0 25.8 11.9 0.0 23.7 4.6 2.3 2.3 14.0 11.8 12.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 6.3 0.0 18.0 4.1 0.0 15.0 2.0 12.4 12.8 3.7 22.8 23.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 51.9 0.0 72.1 50.3 0.0 72.4 64.1 29.6 29.6 73.8 43.5 43.8
LnGrp LOS D E D E E C C E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 616 483 944 1370
Approach Delay, s/veh 65.7 66.5 31.6 45.6
Approach LOS E E C D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 64.0 18.0 35.2 13.8 62.9 13.0 40.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 59.0 13.0 32.0 14.0 51.0 8.0 37.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 47.2 13.4 29.2 9.1 28.5 9.8 34.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 1.0 0.1 4.0 0.0 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 48.3
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/08/2019
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
EBL EBT
11
t4
216 801
216 801
3 8
0 0
1.00
1.00 1.00
1733 1733
225 834
1 3
0.96 0.96
1 1
248 1249
0.15 0.28
1650 4387
225 599
1650 1577
17.4 21.8
17.4 21.8
1.00
248 898
0.91 0.67
254 898
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.91
54.4 41.0
30.8 1.7
0.0 0.0
10.1 9.7
85.2 42.8
F D
1140
51.6
D
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
1
1
26.4
5.0
12.0
12.3
0.0
2
2
43.2
5.0
45.0
35.4
2.7
EBR WBL
93 140
93 140
18 7
0 0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1750 1733
81 146
0 1
0.96 0.96
1 1
121 170
0.28 0.10
424 1650
316 146
1657 1650
21.9 11.3
21.9 11.3
0.26 1.00
472 170
0.67 0.86
472 228
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.55
41.1 57.3
3.3 12.6
0.0 0.0
10.5 5.7
44.4 70.0
D E
3
3
24.5
5.0
20.0
19.4
0.1
4
4
35.9
5.0
33.0
29.2
1.8
1-
WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
f f
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
837 173 135 421 77 280 600 291
4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
872 147 141 439 63 292 625 231
3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
970 163 269 766 109 315 688 254
0.24 0.24 0.16 0.27 0.27 0.19 0.29 0.29
4074 683 1634 2862 408 1650 2345 866
674 345 141 249 253 292 438 418
1577 1604 1634 1630 1641 1650 1646 1565
26.9 27.2 10.3 17.2 17.4 22.6 33.4 33.4
26.9 27.2 10.3 17.2 17.4 22.6 33.4 33.4
0.43 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.55
751 382 269 436 439 315 483 459
0.90 0.90 0.52 0.57 0.58 0.93 0.91 0.91
800 407 269 436 439 330 570 542
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 0.45 0.45
48.0 48.1 49.6 41.2 41.2 51.7 44.2 44.3
7.5 14.0 1.9 5.3 5.4 17.6 12.6 13.3
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
12.5 13.5 4.8 8.4 8.5 11.8 16.8 16.1
55.5 62.1 51.5 46.5 46.7 69.3 56.8 57.5
E E D D D E E E
1165 643 1148
59.3 47.7 60.3
E D E
5
5
29.8
5.0
26.0
24.6
0.2
6
6
39.8
5.0
31.0
19.4
2.1
7
7
18.4
5.0
18.0
13.3
0.2
8
8
42.0
5.0
35.0
23.9
4.0
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
55.6
E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3028: S Evergreen Rd & Sprague 10/08/2019
1-
~
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "j Ili 4'1 f Vi
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Future Volume (veh/h) 166 830 95 127 873 215 113 421 101 175 648 190
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 173 865 83 132 909 176 118 439 82 182 675 166
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 197 1696 162 158 1443 278 140 695 129 206 761 187
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.39 0.39 0.10 0.36 0.36 0.09 0.25 0.25 0.12 0.29 0.29
SatFlow,veh/h 1650 4387 419 1650 3980 767 1650 2771 514 1650 2619 644
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 173 621 327 132 719 366 118 260 261 182 424 417
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 1577 1653 1650 1577 1594 1650 1646 1639 1650 1646 1617
Q Serve(g_s), s 13.4 19.5 19.7 10.2 24.5 24.7 9.2 18.2 18.5 14.1 32.0 32.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.4 19.5 19.7 10.2 24.5 24.7 9.2 18.2 18.5 14.1 32.0 32.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.40
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 197 1219 639 158 1143 578 140 413 411 206 478 470
V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.51 0.51 0.84 0.63 0.63 0.84 0.63 0.64 0.88 0.89 0.89
AvailCap(c_a),veh/h 228 1219 639 241 1143 578 165 456 454 241 532 522
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 56.3 30.5 30.5 57.8 34.2 34.3 58.6 43.3 43.4 55.9 44.1 44.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.3 0.8 1.5 14.0 2.6 5.1 27.1 2.4 2.5 26.8 15.4 15.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.0 8.7 9.3 5.3 11.1 11.7 5.3 8.6 8.6 8.0 16.5 16.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 72.6 31.3 32.0 71.8 36.8 39.4 85.7 45.7 46.0 82.7 59.5 59.9
LnGrp LOS E C C E D D F D D F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1121 1217 639 1023
Approach Delay, s/veh 37.9 41.4 53.2 63.8
Approach LOS D D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.5 52.1 15.1 43.3 16.4 55.2 20.2 38.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 38.5 13.0 42.0 19.0 37.5 19.0 36.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.4 26.7 11.2 34.1 12.2 21.7 16.1 20.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 9.1 0.1 3.7 0.2 11.4 0.2 5.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 48.0
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Appendix C - Future Conditions
Synchro Reports
FEHR'' PEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2052: Pines & Broadway
10/08/2019
at \g- iy
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 11 j II f 4'
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 205 320 110 130 280 85 55 895 55 90 1190 190
Future Volume (veh/h) 205 320 110 130 280 85 55 895 55 90 1190 190
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 205 320 97 130 280 73 55 895 50 90 1190 174
Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 239 347 105 171 298 78 68 1417 79 111 1373 200
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.27 0.27 0.05 0.23 0.23 0.04 0.45 0.45 0.07 0.48 0.48
Sat Flow, veh/h 1650 1270 385 1634 1311 342 1634 3138 175 1650 2879 419
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 205 0 417 130 0 353 55 465 480 90 678 686
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 0 1655 1634 0 1653 1634 1630 1683 1650 1646 1652
Q Serve(g_s), s 12.1 0.0 31.8 7.0 0.0 27.3 4.3 28.4 28.4 7.0 47.7 48.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.1 0.0 31.8 7.0 0.0 27.3 4.3 28.4 28.4 7.0 47.7 48.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.25
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 239 0 453 171 0 376 68 736 760 111 785 788
V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.00 0.92 0.76 0.00 0.94 0.81 0.63 0.63 0.81 0.86 0.87
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 239 0 458 171 0 382 68 736 760 165 785 788
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.00 0.91 0.55 0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.8 0.0 45.9 42.2 0.0 49.3 61.8 27.3 27.3 59.8 30.2 30.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.5 0.0 23.8 16.3 0.0 28.8 30.8 2.3 2.2 16.9 12.1 12.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.2 0.0 17.5 2.3 0.0 15.5 2.5 13.2 13.7 3.7 24.1 24.7
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 61.3 0.0 69.7 58.5 0.0 78.1 92.5 29.6 29.5 76.8 42.4 43.0
LnGrp LOS E E E E F C C E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 622 483 1000 1454
Approach Delay, s/veh 66.9 72.8 33.0 44.8
Approach LOS E E C D
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.4 67.0 18.0 34.6 13.7 63.7 12.0 40.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 62.0 13.0 30.0 13.0 54.0 7.0 36.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 50.3 14.1 29.3 9.0 30.4 9.0 33.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 4.4 0.0 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 49.2
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/08/2019
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 12.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 109.2
LnGrp LOS F
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
1
1
23.1
5.0
13.0
13.7
0.0
EBL EBT EBR WBL
11
t4
240 960
240 960
3 8
0 0
1.00
1.00 1.00
1733 1733
240 960
1 3
1.00 1.00
1 1
241 1219
0.15 0.28
1650 4335
240 698
1650 1577
18.9 26.5
18.9 26.5
1.00
241 887
1.00 0.79
241 887
1.00 1.00
0.91 0.91
55.5 43.1
53.8 4.3
0.0 0.0
12.1
47.5
D
1304
59.9
E
2
2
45.9
5.0
46.0
38.2
2.7
120
120
18
0
1.00
1.00
1750
104
0
1.00
1
132
0.28
468
366
1649
26.7
26.7
0.28
464
0.79
464
1.00
0.91
43.2
8.1
0.0
13.2
51.3
D
3
3
24.0
5.0
19.0
20.9
0.0
160
160
7
0
1.00
1.00
1733
160
1
1.00
1
183
0.11
1650
160
1650
12.4
12.4
1.00
183
0.87
203
1.00
0.55
56.9
18.7
0.0
6.6
75.5
E
4
4
37.0
5.0
32.0
34.0
0.0
1-
WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
f f
1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1750
1005 166 155 470 74 310 670 257
3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
1006 166 228 760 119 305 729 280
0.25 0.25 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.18 0.31 0.31
4086 673 1634 2823 442 1650 2318 889
775 396 155 270 274 310 476 451
1577 1606 1634 1630 1635 1650 1646 1562
31.9 32.0 11.7 18.9 19.1 24.0 36.2 36.2
31.9 32.0 11.7 18.9 19.1 24.0 36.2 36.2
0.42 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.57
776 395 228 439 440 305 518 491
1.00 1.00 0.68 0.62 0.62 1.02 0.92 0.92
776 395 228 439 440 305 582 553
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 0.34 0.34
49.0 49.0 53.2 41.6 41.7 53.0 43.0 43.0
23.6 33.9 8.0 6.3 6.5 34.7 10.5 11.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0
16.4 17.9 5.8 9.3 9.4 13.9 18.0 17.2
72.6 82.9 61.2 48.0 48.2 87.8 53.5 54.0
E F E D D F D D
1331 699 1237
76.0 51.0 62.3
E D E
5
5
29.0
5.0
24.0
26.0
0.0
6
6
40.0
5.0
35.0
21.1
2.4
7
7
19.4
5.0
16.0
14.4
0.1
8
8
41.6
5.0
35.0
28.7
3.2
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
63.9
E
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3028: S Evergreen Rd & Sprague 10/08/2019
1-
~
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "j Ili 4'1 f Vi
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 185 1005 110 145 980 240 130 470 115 195 720 215
Future Volume (veh/h) 185 1005 110 145 980 240 130 470 115 195 720 215
Number 1 6 16 5 2 12 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 185 1005 95 145 980 192 130 470 92 195 720 185
Adj No. of Lanes 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 209 1569 148 169 1323 259 152 731 142 218 792 204
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.36 0.36 0.10 0.33 0.33 0.09 0.27 0.27 0.13 0.31 0.31
SatFlow,veh/h 1650 4393 414 1650 3970 776 1650 2747 534 1650 2593 666
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 185 721 379 145 778 394 130 280 282 195 457 448
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1650 1577 1654 1650 1577 1592 1650 1646 1636 1650 1646 1613
Q Serve(g_s), s 14.3 24.8 24.9 11.2 28.4 28.5 10.1 19.6 19.8 15.1 34.7 34.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.3 24.8 24.9 11.2 28.4 28.5 10.1 19.6 19.8 15.1 34.7 34.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.49 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.41
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 209 1126 591 169 1051 531 152 438 435 218 503 493
V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.64 0.64 0.86 0.74 0.74 0.85 0.64 0.65 0.89 0.91 0.91
AvailCap(c_a),veh/h 228 1126 591 198 1051 531 165 470 467 228 533 522
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 55.9 34.8 34.9 57.4 38.4 38.4 58.1 42.2 42.3 55.5 43.4 43.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 18.3 1.5 2.8 25.8 4.6 8.9 31.0 2.7 2.8 32.2 18.9 19.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 7.6 11.0 11.8 6.3 13.0 13.8 5.9 9.2 9.3 8.8 18.4 18.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.1 36.3 37.7 83.2 43.0 47.3 89.2 44.9 45.1 87.8 62.3 62.7
LnGrp LOS E D D F D D F D D F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1285 1317 692 1100
Approach Delay, s/veh 42.2 48.7 53.3 67.0
Approach LOS D D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.4 48.3 16.0 45.2 17.3 51.4 21.2 40.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 38.4 13.0 42.1 15.6 40.8 18.0 37.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.3 30.5 12.1 36.7 13.2 26.9 17.1 21.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.8 0.0 3.0 0.1 11.1 0.1 5.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 52.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Appendix D - Future Conditions with
Mitigations Synchro Reports
FEHRPEERS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
2053: Pines & Sprague
10/22/2019
1-
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 1+ Vi 114 Vi ft r
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 240 960 120 160 1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
Future Volume (veh/h) 240 960 120 160 1005 195 155 470 90 310 670 325
Number 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1733 1733 1750 1733 1733 1750 1716 1716 1750 1733 1733 1733
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 240 960 104 160 1005 166 155 470 74 310 670 257
Adj No. of Lanes 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cap,veh/h 292 1120 121 184 1140 188 398 772 121 334 765 336
Arrive On Green 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.11 0.28 0.28 0.24 0.27 0.27 0.20 0.23 0.23
SatFlow,veh/h 3201 4334 468 1650 4087 674 1634 2823 442 1650 3292 1446
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 240 698 366 160 775 396 155 270 274 310 670 257
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1601 1577 1649 1650 1577 1607 1634 1630 1635 1650 1646 1446
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.6 27.4 27.5 12.4 30.5 30.7 10.3 18.8 19.0 24.0 25.5 21.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.6 27.4 27.5 12.4 30.5 30.7 10.3 18.8 19.0 24.0 25.5 21.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 292 815 426 184 880 448 398 446 447 334 765 336
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.86 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.39 0.61 0.61 0.93 0.88 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 296 849 444 228 995 507 398 446 447 368 886 389
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.55 0.55 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 0.34 0.34
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 58.0 45.9 45.9 56.8 44.8 44.8 41.1 41.1 41.2 50.9 48.1 46.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.3 7.7 13.9 15.0 5.0 9.4 0.6 6.0 6.1 12.8 5.2 5.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.9 12.8 14.2 6.4 14.0 14.8 4.7 9.2 9.4 12.1 12.2 9.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 73.3 53.6 59.8 71.8 49.8 54.2 41.7 47.2 47.4 63.7 53.3 52.3
LnGrp LOS E D E E D D D D D E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1304 1331 699 1237
Approach Delay, s/veh 59.0 53.8 46.0 55.7
Approach LOS E D D E
Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 36.7 35.2 16.9 41.3 31.3 40.5 19.5 38.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.0 35.0 12.0 41.0 29.0 28.0 18.0 35.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.3 27.5 11.6 32.7 26.0 21.0 14.4 29.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.1 2.7 0.3 3.6 0.4 1.7 0.2 2.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
54.6
Notes
COSV Network 5:00 pm 06/20/2019 Baseline
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
Appendix E - Project Cost Estimate
Spreadsheets
FEHR'' PEERS
Pines Road & Indiana Ave - 600' EB Lane Addition,
Partial SW Corner Island Removal, Full Island
Relocation
Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
Roadway Demo
Curb Demo
Sidewalk Demo
Signal Demo
Excavation
Road Section
Curb
Sidewalk
Curb Ramps
Traffic Signal
ROW
Subtotal
400
900
333
2
400
800
900
700
6
1
11,000
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 6,000
$ 14,400
$ 6,660
$ 12,000
$ 14,000
$ 48,000
$ 40,500
$ 56,000
$ 24,000
$ 480,000
$ 132,000
Pines Road & I-90 EB Ramps - EB 450' Lane Addition
and NB 75' Lane Addition
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
0
75
42
1
233
1,059
75
42
0
1
1,200
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
1,200
840
6,000
8,155
63,540
3,375
3,360
480,000
14,400
$ 701,560
Subtotal
$ 566,470
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 70,156
$ 140,312
$ 105,234
$ 210,468
$ 140,312
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 56,647
$ 113,294
$ 84,971
$ 169,941
$ 113,294
Total $ 1,500,042 Total $ 1,119,017
11000 Sq Ft ROW
* About half of the ROW is WSDOT, using standard "over
the fence" price for land
Assumes new signal pole and longer mast arm with 1-90
off ramp island relocation south. Relocate signal
controller. New pole at Pines/Indiana. Reconstruct both
right turn islands. Assumes ROW cost for additional lane
on south side of road.
1200 Sq Ft ROW
Assumes reallignment of intersection to south. Move
SE corner ped head. Assumes all ROW for NBR lane
would need to be purchased, but no cost to aquire off -
ramp widening space. ADA ramps look new. No
replacement assumed.
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
Item
Roadway Demo
Curb Demo
Sidewalk Demo
Signal Demo
Excavation
Road Section
Curb
Sidewalk
Curb Ramps
Traffic Signal
ROW
Mirabeau Pkwy and Mansfield Ave -Signalize and Sullivan Road and Mission Ave -Restripe and partially
SB 175' Lane Addition
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
remove curb
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
0
175
97
0
0
233
300
250
4
1.25
2,700
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
$ 2,800
$ 1,940
$ 13,980
$ 13,500
$ 20,000
$ 16,000
$ 600,000
$ 32,400
20
40
0
0
0
20
80
200
2
0.05
0
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
$ 300
$ 640
$ 1,200
$ 3,600
$ 16,000
$ 8,000
$ 24,000
Subtotal
$ 668,220
Subtotal
$ 53,740
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 66,822
$ 13,644
$ 100,233
$ 200,466
$ 133,644
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 5,374
$ 8,061
$ 16,122
$ 10,748
Total
2700 Sq Ft ROW
$ 1,215,429
Assumes all new ramps to meet current ADA.
Assumes new fiber to be installed back to Pines.
Total
$ 94,045
3 ramps will need to be made ADA compliant. Risk:
Might need to relocate pole and mast arm on NE
corner to meet ADA clearance. This is not assumed in
the cost.
Item
Roadway Demo
Curb Demo
Sidewalk Demo
Signal Demo
Excavation
Road Section
Curb
Sidewalk
Curb Ramps
Traffic Signal
ROW
Pines and Sprague - Add 250' SBR and 325' EBL Argonne & Trent - 300' WBL turn add
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
460
1,215
433
2
200
566
1,215
520
2
0.5
5,175
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
$ 15
$ 16
$ 20
$ 6,000
$ 35
$ 60
$ 45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$ 480,000
$ 12
$ 6,900
$ 19,440
$ 8,667
$ 12,000
$ 6,983
$ 33,933
$ 54,675
$ 41,600
$ 8,000
$ 240,000
$ 62,100
0
850
100
2
208
933
850
67
3
0.5
0
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Cubic Yard
Sq Yard
LF
Sq Yard
Each
Each
Sq Foot
15
16
20
6,000
35
60
45
$ 80
$ 4,000
$480,000
$ 12
13,600
2,000
12,000
7,296
56,000
38,250
5,333
12,000
240,000
Subtotal
$ 432,198
Subtotal
$ 386,479
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 43,220
$ -
$ 64,830
$ 129,659
$ 86,440
10% Mobilization
20% Drainage
15% Traffic Control
30% Contingency
20% Engineering
$ 38,648
$ 77,296
$ 57,972
$ 115,944
$ 77,296
Total $ 818,446
6200 Sq Ft ROW
Assumes northwest curb along Sprague would
be moved 4 feet north along with restriping to
narrow outside lanes for second EBR. Assumes
northwest curb along Pines would be moved
west 12 feet to accommodate SBR. Two new
signals on northwest and southeast corners.
Total $ 753,634
Assumes south curb along Trent Avenue would
be moved 12' south for 300' plus 150' taper on
both sides of Argonne to accommodate a
second WBL. Both signal poles on the south
side would be replaced along with the right turn
island on the SW corner.
Pines & Mission Phase 2 - Southbound Right Turn Lane Addition
Engineers Estimate
Project CIP No. TBD
Prepared by - Adam Jackson
Date
3/5/2018
Ilk 4.V'r�,.�„
,. �C tcy
Item No.
Bid Item
Qty
Unit
Unit Price
Est. Cost
Use
100
MOBILIZATION @ 10%
1
L.S.
$ 45,042
$ 45,042
101
CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING
1
L.S.
$ 15,000
$ 15,000
102
SPCC PLAN
1
L.S.
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
103
PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL
1
L.S.
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
104
PUBLIC LIAISION REPRESENTATIVE
1
L.S.
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
105
EROSION CONTROL
1
L.S.
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
106
PORTABLE CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN
1344
HR.
$ 4
$ 5,376
107
REMOVE CEMENT CONCRETE CURB
350
L.F.
$ 15
$ 5,250
108
SAWCUT ASPHALT PAVEMENT
750
L.F.-in
$ 5
$ 3,750
109
ROADWAY EXCAV. INCL. HAUL (assumes 16" depth)
400
C.Y.
$ 30
$ 12,000
110
CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE, 8 IN. DEPTH
778
S.Y.
$ 25
$ 19,444
111
JOINT/CRACK SEALANT ATHMAJOINTS
500
L.F.
$ 3
$ 1,500
112
HMA CL 1/2" PG 70-28 0.50 FT. DEPTH
130
C.Y.
$ 50
$ 6,481
113
CEMENT CONCRETE TRAFFIC CURB, TYPE B
350
L.F.
$ 45
$ 15,750
114
CONRETE RETAINING WALL AT BACK OF SIDEWALK
1089
SF
$ 50
$ 54,450
115
CEMENT CONCRETE CURB RAMP PERPENDICULAR TYPE A
1
EACH
$ 2,500
$ 2,500
116
CEMENT CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN CURB
20
L.F.
$ 30
$ 600
117
TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS
0
L.S.
$ 250,000
$ -
118
REMOVE EXISTING STRIPING
0
L.F.
$ 3.00
$ -
119
PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE
390
S.F.
$ 18
$ 7,020
120
PLASTIC LINE
300
L.F.
$ 4
$ 1,200
121
PLASTIC WIDE LINE
300
L.F.
$ 12
$ 3,600
122
PLASTIC TRAFFIC ARROW
3
EACH
$ 300
$ 900
123
PLASTIC STOP LINE
20
L.F.
$ 30
$ 600
124
LANDSCAPE RESTORATION
1
L.S.
$ 30,000
$ 30,000
125
STORMWATER SWALE AND ROW IN LIMITED ACCESS AREA
1
L.S.
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
126
UTILITY RELCOATION (POLES AND BOXES)
1
LS
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
ITEMS: Total
Contingency 15%
Inflation Adjustment Factor @ 2 years 3%
$ 495,464
$ 74,320
$ 30,174
Construction Subtotal
PE Engineering 20%
CN Engineering 10%
ROW (excl. WSDOT) 1 L.S. $ 32,000.00
Estimated Project Cost
$ 599,958
$ 119,992
$ 59,996
$ 32,000
$ 811,945
I $ 812,000
E Trent Road/N Argonne
Road Proposed Layout Improvements to Address Existing LOS Deficiency
Cost Estimate
Unit
Unit Cost
Qty
Cost
1
Install of Ground Sign
EA
$ 270.00
4
$ 1,080
2
Remove Striping (Grind)
LF
$ 0.50
800
$ 400
3
Thermoplastic Arrow
EA
$ 475.00
7
$ 3,325
4
Thermoplastic Lane Line
LF
$ 3.50
1100
$ 3,850
5
Thermoplastic Stop Bar
LF
$ 20.00
80
$ 1,600
6
Thermoplastic Traffic Letter
EA
$ 175.00
4
$ 700
7
Traffic Signal Modification
EA
$480,000.00
0.25
$ 120,000
Construction Subtotal
$ 130,955
Design (20%)
$ 26,190
Traffic Control (15%)
$ 19,640
Mobilization (10%)
$ 13,100
Contingency (30%)
$ 39,290
Total
$ 229,200
Meeting Date:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
June 29, 2021 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Capital Project Process and Progression
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: None
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: February 11, 2020: Admin report discussing Capital
Improvement Program process
BACKGROUND:
Staff will discuss the required steps to deliver the different phases of capital projects.
OPTIONS: Discussion Only
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion Only
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Discussion Only
STAFF CONTACT: Gloria Mantz, Engineering Manager
Bill Helbig, City Engineer
ATTACHMENTS: Presentation
STIP Schedule
Federal Consultant Selection Process
Siii5kane
Valley
June 29, 2021
Gloria Mantz, PE, Engineering Manager
Bill Helbig, PE, City Engineer
Outline
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
Consultant Selection
Preliminary Engineering (PE) Phase
Right of Way (ROW) Phase
Construction (CN) Phase
PE Phase
TIP Process
2
ROW Phase
CN Phase
Spokane
Valley
3
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
■ TO Obligate Federal Funds, a Phase Must be in the State TIP (STIP)
■ Each Phase Must Be Fully Funded & Have Secured Federal Funds
■ Up to 10 STIP Amendment Opportunities:
■ 11+ Weeks to Process
■ Mid Feb to Mid Nov (First & Last FHWA* STIP Approval)
■ Up To 10 Admin Modifications
■ 5+ Weeks to Process
To Use REET Funds, a Phase Must be in the TIP
More Flexible
8 Week Process
*Federal Highway Administration
Amendment Request Date
SRTC Staff Review
Public Comment Period
TTC Recommendation
SRTC Board Approval
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due
FHWA/FTA STIP approval
Sep 3
Sep 6-10
Sep 15-24
Sep 22
Oct 14
Oct 15
—Nov 19
Consultant Selection (City or state Funded)
• Use MRSC Roster for Contracts Under $100,000
• 1 to 3 Weeks for Selection & Contracting
• Review Qualifications of at Least 3 Consultants
• Negotiate Scope & Fee
• Issue a Request for Qualification (RFQ) for Contracts Over $100,000
• 6 to 12 Weeks for Selection and Contracting
• Publicly Advertise RFQ at Least 2 Weeks
• Interview Prospective Consultants
• Negotiate Scope & Fee
• Council Approval (if Over City Manager Authority)
4 MRSC = Municipal Research and Servies Center
Spokane
'Valley
Preliminary Engineering (PE) Phase
• PE Phase Must be Listed in the STIP
■ 11+ Weeks to Process
Green Text Identifies Federal
Process Requirements
• Local Agency Agreement & Prospectus
• 3 to 5 Weeks to Obligate PE Funds
• Request an Underutilized Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (UDBE) Goal
• 2 to 4 Weeks Before Selecting a Consultant
• Select Consultant (Previously Outlined)
• Develop 60% Design Documents In -House or Consultant
Projects up to $3M Typically Designed In -House (Workload Dependent)
• Consultant Design Requires Staff Management and Coordination
5
Spokane
'Valley
6
Preliminary Engineering Phase
• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Approval
• About 6 Weeks for Non -Complicated Projects
• 6 to 12+ Months for Complicated Projects
Develop Right -of -Way Map
• 2 to 4 Weeks for Non -Complicated Projects
• 8 to 12+ Weeks for Complicated Projects
Internal Review of 60 Percent Documents
• Develop & Submit Public Interest Finding (3 to 6 Weeks)
Determine if Proprietary Items are Required
• City Will Supply Long Lead Items (i.e. Traffic Signal Poles) •1•°°'\
Spokane
• Use Local Crews
jUalley
7
Preliminary Engineering Phase
■ ROW Phase Must be in STIP
■ Any Changes Take 5 to 11+ Weeks
■ Request a UDBE Goal for ROW Consultant
■ 2 to 4 Weeks to Process
■ Select ROW consultant
■ 2 to 12 Weeks for Selection & Contracting
■ Develop Project Funding Estimate & Relocation Plan
■ 6 to 12 Weeks to Develop & Finalize Project Funding Estimate
■ 4 Weeks to Develop & Finalize Relocation Plan
■ Obligate ROW Funds
■ 3 to 5 Weeks to Process
8
Right of Way (ROW) Phase
• Develop Legal Exhibits & Property Descriptions
11 Establish Fair Market Value Before Negotiations Begin
• Administrative Offer (1 Month to Process)
• Appraisal & Appraisal Review (3 to 5 Months to Process)
• Local Programs Must Review Offer Letters
• Property Acquisition Negotiations
• Property Relocations
• Right -of -Way Certification (2 Weeks)
• Required to Advertise a Federally -Funded Project
• City -Funded Project can be Advertised while ROW is Negotiated —Cannot Begin
Construction until ALL Property Rights Acquired
Preliminary Engineering Phase
90 Percent Design Documents Internal Review and Engineering Estimate
Plans, Specifications & Estimate (PS&E)
WSDO1 Review (2 Weeks)
• Obligate Construction Funds (3 to 5 Weeks)
• Request UDBE Goal for Consultants (2 to 3 Weeks)
Select Materials Testing Consultant & Others as Needed & Execute
Contract (2 to 12 Weeks)
Construction Advertisement
2 Weeks Minimum — City or State Funded
3 Weeks Minimum —Federally Funded
Issue Addendums as Needed
9
Spokanc
..00Valley
Preliminary Engineering Phase
Public Bid Opening &Award
Bids are Reviewed & Tabulated to Determine Lowest Responsive, Responsible Bidder
■ Grant Agency Must Approve Bid
■ Send to Grant Agency for Review & Approval (1 Week Typically)
■ Verify Condition of Award for UDBEs
Council Award of Bid
Execute Construction Contract
10
Spokanc
�,,� Valley
11
Construction (CN) Phase
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
• Before Construction Begins:
Execute Contract
Issue Notice to Proceed
Document Project Site with Pictures/Videos
Pre -Construction Meeting
Develop Record of Material (ROM)
• For Each Bid Item, Identify All Material that will be Incorporated into Project
• Develop Documentation Needed for Material Acceptance
Spokane
Valley
12
Construction Phase
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Construction Administration
In 2021, 13 Projects in Construction (Administered In -House)
Inspection By:
• 4 Maintenance/Construction Inspectors
• 2 Engineering Techs — Delays Production
• Contract Inspectors — Consultant Provided
• For State or City Funded Projects Only
• Not Always Able to Meet City Variable Project Timelines
• Need Training
• Requires Intensive Staff Oversight
• Costly (2 to 3 Times Greater than In -House Inspection Costs)
■ Barker/BNSF GSP — WSDOT Administered
• Staff still spends considerable time in project
• Project Manager - 30 to 50% workload
• Engineering Manager - 10 to 15% workload
Spokane
Valley
Construction Phase
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
• Maintain Payroll Documentation (On -Going Task)
• Statement of Intent to Pay Prevailing Wages
• Affidavit of Wages Paid
• Certified Payrolls
• Approved Subcontractor & Lower Tier Subcontracts
• Requests to Sublet Work
• Contracts
• Federal Aid Certification Form
13
Spokane
Valley
Construction Phase
Review Material Submittals
Maintain Record of Materials
• Verify Prompt Pay — New Requirement as of 2019
• Compliance with Buy American Act
Two Full-time Engineers Assigned
to These Tasks
Spokane
.o•OValley
15
Spokane
�. 11eyT
LME-Lag Manual Exception
CMO=Certificate of Materials Origin required
Print Date: January fi, 2020
RECORD OF MATERIALS
APPLEWAY TRAIL PROJECT - EVERGREEN ROAD TO SULLIVAN ROAD
Indicates Title or No Submittal To Date
Indicates "Approved"
ndicates "Conditionally Approved", Need Further Material Sampling
Indicates "Missing Items", Need Additional Paperwork
Indicates "Resubmit"
Indicates "Not Used"
Fed. Aid NO. CM-1223[00S)
Contract N0. 19 125
e_I CIF NO. 026E
F rim=_ Contractor 'NM Winkler
Er
Bid Item
vr
Item City.
1F
Unit
Material
Product
Manufacturer
Acceptance
Specification Section
RAM No.
RAM/QPL
Approval
Code
Mfg. Cert.
of
Compile nce
Cert. of
Material
Onieln
Mill Test
Reports
No. Samples
Req.
Req. Met?
Wes'
Current Status or Remarks
111
3
EACH
CATCH BASIN TYPE 1
CATCH BASIN TYPE 1
Inland Northwest Precast, Newman Lake WA
LME = QPL or Catalog Cut. V Anal Acceptance per CM 9•1.4G and
Cert. of Compliance per 1.05.3 and CMO
7-05
2.2
1
Received
Received
1I1.01
\
FAAME& GRATE
Grater 1-4432-01
Frame: 1-4432-R2
D&L Supply Company
LME= Ott or Catalog Cut. Visual Acceptance per CM 9-1.4G and Cert.
of Compliance per 1-05.3 and CMO
9-05.15
2.2
4
Received
Received
111.02
ADJUSTMENT (for oil)
Adjustment Rings
Inland Northwest Precast, Newman Lake WA
LME= OP/ or Catalog Cut. Visual Acceptance per CM 9-1.4G and Cert.
of Compliance per 1-06.3 and [MO
7-05.3(1)
2.2
4
Received
Received
1I1.03\
GROUT or MORTAR
Jet Set
Jet Set Cement Corp, Tukwila WA
4P1 and/or Cotolog Cut Per Const. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Canal'. Man. 9-1.4C
7-05.2&9-20.3
2
1
111.04
CONCRETE RI0CK or BRICK Of used)
Concrete Block
White Block, Spokane Valley WA
()Pt and/or Catalog Cut Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Omsk Man. 9-1.4C
9-12.1, 9-I2.2
2
2
111.05
SAND COLLAR
Catalog Cut or Manufacturer's Certificate per 5rd. Plan; Visual
Acceptance
7-05
112
190
L.F.
SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 10 IN. DIA.
Solid Wall PVC Sewer Pipe
Northern Pipe Products, Fargo ND
QPL and/or Catalog Cut Per Coast, Man. 9.1A6 and Visual
Acceptor nce Per Const. Man. 9-1.4C
9.05.12
1
1
112.01
\
OETEC718LE MARKING TAPE
4in min w/label
Pro -Line Safety Products
LME OP/ or Catalog Cut. Visual Acceptance per CM 9-1.4G
SPECIAL 7-08.3(5), 9-15.18
4
1
122.02
PIPE BEDDING
Recycled Concrete Pipe Bedding
Pro Recycle, Spokane Valley WA
Submit Gradation. Visual Acceptance per Coast. Alamo( 9-1.4C
9-03.12(3)
18
7
Need Field tcsis far Grading and Sand
Equivalency
114
1Rb0
S.Y.
CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COU RSE, 2 IN. DEPTH
Recycled Concrete Crushed
Surfacing Top Course
Pro Recycle, Spokane Valley WA
1 Acceptance Sample per 2000 Tons and per CM 9-4.5
9-03.9(3)
12
1)313L)
Need Field tests for Grading and Sand
Equivalency
115
7360
S.Y.
CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COU RSE, 415. DEPTH
Recycled Concrete Crushed
Surfacing Tap Course
Pro 500309¢, Spokane Valley WA
1ACceptance Sample 33 2000 Tons and per CM 9-4.5
9-03.9(3)
12
1[QPL)
Need Field tests for Grading and Sand
53u108l¢n00
116
670
S.Y.
CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE, BIN. DEPTH
Recycled Concrete Crushed
Surfacing Top Course
Pro Recycle, Spokane Valley WA
1Ac¢eptanre Sample per 2000 Tans and per CM 9-4.5
9-03.9(3)
12
1[ QPL)
Need Field tests for Grading and Sand
Equivalency
117
1
LS.
RESTROOM SEWER SERVICE
7-17
///�/'/
1I70I
PIPEBEDDING
Recycled Concrete Pipe Bedding
Pro Recycle, Spokane Valley WA
Submit Gradation Visual Acceptance per Coast. Manual 9-1_4C
9-03.12(3)
18
7
Need Field tests for Grading and Sand
Equivalency
117.02
PVC SEWER PIPE
Solid WON PVC Sewer Pipe
Northern Pipe Products, Fargo ND
2PE and/or Catalog Cut Per [oast. Man. 9-1.4C and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C
9-05.]2, PLAN SHEET U]
1
117.93\
PVC SEWER PIPEFITTINGS FOR CONNECTION
Sewer Fittings
GPK Products, Fargo ND
9PL and/or Catalog Cut Per Can5t. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C
9-05.12, PLAN SHEET LID
1
1(OPL)
117.04
8" DIA. SOP SLIP RIGID PVC 060419 COUPLING
Sewer Fittings
GPK Products, Fargo NO
OPL and/ar Catalog Cut Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Can St. Man. 4-1.4C
9-05.12, PLAN SHEET LID
I
I(OPL)
117.05
\
18"K 8"DIA. PVC NIPPLE
Sewer Fittings
GPK Products, Fargo NO
QPL and/ar Catalog Cut Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C
9-05.12, PLAN SHEET LID
1
1(CIPL)
117.06
PVC PIPE FOR CLEANOUT
Solid Wall PVC Sewer Pipe
Northern Pipe Products, Forgo NO
CIA and/or Catalog Cut Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C
SPOKANE COIUNTY5TO. PLAN U-15
1
1
117.07
PVC FITTINGS FOR CLEAIVOUT
Sewer Fittings
GPK Products, Fargo ND
WI_ and/or Catalog Cut Per Coast. Mon. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Const. Man. 9-1.4C
SPOKANE COUNTYSTD. PLAN U-15
1
1(571)
117.08
CAST RING & COVER FOR CLEANOUT
11-8020-04 Sewer CVR & H-0020-
R1 Ring (Locking)
Olympic Foundry
Da and/or Catalog Cut Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C. CMO
SPOKANE COUNTY STD. PLAN U-15
4.1
1
Received
117.09
FIBRE IOINT PACKING FOR CLFA0OUT
q01 and/or thtnlog cut Per COnS0. Man_ 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C
SPOKANE COUNTY STD. PLAN U-15
l I7.10
GRIPPER PLUG FOR CCEANOUT
QPI. and/or Catalog ran Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C
SPOKANE COUNTY STD. PLAN U-15
117.11
COMMERCIAL CONCRETE FOR CLEANDUT
Commercial Concrete, 4000ps!,
Mix ID #321145
Central Pre -Mix
Sullivan Plant #1 or Crestline Plant #4
Acceptance per Std. Spec. 6-02.3(5)
6-02.3(2)B, 6-02.3(5)B
15 (Rev)
1
1I7.12
\
DETECTIBLE MARKING TAPE
4in min w/label
Pro -Line Safety Products
LME= OPL or Catalog Cut. Visual Acceptance per CM 9-1.4G
SPECIAL 7-09.3(5), 9-15.18
4
I
118
1
EACH
SERVICE CONNECTION 2 IN DIA3
9-30
118.9I
DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY_BACKFLOW
PRE/ENTER
Double Check Valve
Assembly/Rackflaw Preventer
Worts, North Andover MA
97/ or Catalan Cut Visual Acceptance per CM 9-1-4G and CMO
9-15.1I
1
8
Need CMO
118.02
\
POLYETHYLENE PIPE
Polyethylene Pipe
Interstate Plastic, Inc, Post FaD& 1D
QPL and/or Catalog Cut Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G and Visual
Acceptance Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4C
9-30.6(3)8
I
1
118.03
PIPE BEDDING
Recycled Concrete Pipe Bedding
Pro Recycle, Spokane Valley WA
Submit Gradation. Visual Acceptance per Coast. Manual 9-1.4C
9-03.12(3)
18
7
Need Field rests for Grading and Sand
Equivalency
1I8.04
PIPE FITTINGS
Lead -Free Bross Pipe Fittings
Merit Brass, Cleveland OH
Catalog Cut Per Coast. Man. 9-1.4G
9-39.6(4)
19
1
16
Buy American Act
■ Applies to Iron & Steel Used or Permanently Incorporated in the Project
■ Obtain Certificates of Material Origin
■ Track the Dollar Value of Foreign Steel or Iron
■ Must be Less Than $2,500 or 0.1% of Total Contract Cost, Whichever is Greater
■ Time Consuming Task
Spokane
Valley
Prompt Pay Database
Mark Unconfirmed Sub Entries as Confirmed
Extend Reporting Deadline By Two Weeks From Today
Prime Contractor - August 2018
prime Contractor
Power City Electric, Inc [Info)
Linda Hahn
P 509-S3S-8500 fxt, 1044
F 509.535-4665
LHahrrkSp6wl7CilyeIccana corn
pert
Inc'_ in Goal For
Period
No
Prime's Share total to
this Period Prime's Share. Thos Period 'total to August 20111 August 2018
$170,955.92 5135,375.13 5170,955.92 L135.375.13
Contracted Percent
4 5.? :Na
Actual Percent
79.1
Click prime name to view payment history for this contract. Click cantata person's name to send them a message.
Subcontractors - August 2018
Subcontractor
® GreoGreo 9000n ]f!L
of
greggbaconconcrete,00m
P 509-924-3900
Int.r$tate concrete at Asphalt Company El,,(,-:;
fik WNW
heather. walkergi ntrrstate • i ca.cam
P 509-789-1073
1 piarnand Asphalt Pavinn. lnr„ Unto.]
Kim Long
kiml@diamondacc.com
P 509-939-3932
®fli2d10111211C. [daf,3)
cotoin mpf
P 360-835-8035. F 360-205-3273
0. PIFe L Constmaciirt. Inc. [12($]
;fill Contreras
jiil iipinandkonstrucoon_met
P 509-474-0427
r] AAA Sweeuirie. LLC [Info]
t-t2 lodge Sargent
iodietaaas veepina.con
P 509-922-1363, F 509-926-4319
wl Able Clean. Up Technolpgie. inc. [info]
L-I Maxine Sliver
able deanu oeca M ecI ea nuo.co m
P 569-460-5255
Sookarie Concrete Cutting Inc [Infol
rh R. Costello
spake etoriefetteadinkehotmail.ctm
P 509-489-0901, F 509-489.0959
Spokane Traffic Control Inc« Ill ro)
TAMMY A BEGGS
'rarnmYdPsookenrxrathn ontoll corn
P 509.993-5286, F S09-325.7341
stn. Rit. [InM.
iYe.�ndahFr(
.D P.t*r r9331
1 P 253-S63.2987,.E 253.863.3120
Click subcontractor name to view payment history Fsr this raontrae5. Click contact person` s name to send them a message.
Cent
i4
N9
No
Ty fie
Sub
Manufactater
Sub
Sub
Sub
Sub
Sub
Sub
100%
Sub
100%
Sub
Inc. in Gdal for Period
Ho
n0
ri 6
Na
SSBE
No
SSBE
No
S56E
No
DBE
Na
This Period
view E�:C
Prompt; Yes
Confirmed By Sub
confirmed
Prompt: Yes
Not Included in audit
&ita audit
52,139.00 Confirmed
EA gdft
Prompt: Yes Prompt: Yes
Partial
$0.00 Confirmed
View Egt €t!d
Prompt: Yes
$9,989.74 Confirmed
View Edit ViewESIt
Prompt: Yes Prompt N/A
$1,1110.75 COnfrnred
dewEck %hewOA
Prompt: No Prompt: rvlu
Total Retained Payments to
August 2010
54.576,50
51,947,50
52,139.00
scL0 7
S3,256.50
$1480.75
Contracted PercentAd
Per
0.515% 1.1
3,100% 1.2
7.584% 0.0
2.231% 1.9
6.312% 0.6
$1,552.49 Confirmed $4,552.49 0.507% 2.6
Prompt: No Prompt: Yes
$1,550.00 Confirmed $1,550.00 0.925% 0.9
'<54. va+a Le
Prompt: Yes Prompt: Yea
$14,078,00 Confirmed 918,076.00 8.4148% 9.4
View CAI Ottd. gilt
Prompt: Yes Prompt.: Yes
$0.00 Confirmed s0.00 4.275 % 0.0
0
Prunpt: Yes
No
Inform Prime
Yes
Is $0 "Payment"
Correct?
Prime's Payment
Correct?
4,Yes
Use Prime's Date
For Prompt Pay
Is "Payment" $0?
Yes
Yes
No
Monthly Audit
Review
Confirmed
Payments By Subs?
Does Sub. Agree
with Payment?
Yes
No
No
Construction Phase
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
• Inspect Project
• Construction Diaries
Field Notes
• Conduct Required Contractor Personnel Interviews
• Wage Rates
• UDBE Utilization and Vehicle/Equipment Verification
• Weekly Meetings
• Process Pay Applications
19
Spokane
.o•OValley
Construction Phase
• Conduct Internal Audit at About Mid -construction
11 Substantial Completion
Physical Completion
Continue to Gather Required Payroll & Material Documentation
• Conduct Final Internal Audit
• Project Management Review
• Project Closure
Takes Several Months or Even Years After Physical Completion
20
Spokane
Valley
21
Training
■ Multiple Changes to Guidelines & Implementation
■ Local Agency Guidelines
■ Right of Way Manual
■ Construction Manual
■ Staff Required to Attend Multiple Training Sessions Throughout Year
Spokane
.o•OValley
22
Project Example Delivery Timeline
Project Element
Federal or Local
Programs Administered
(Estimeline)
Non Federal
(Actual Timeline)
Council Approved Expediting Barker Road Widening Project / Limit Changes
NEPA Approval (8 Weeks)
Final ROW Plans
Obligate ROW Funds (3 to 5 Weeks)
Negotiate & Acquire ROW (3 Months)
ROW Certification (2 Weeks) & PS& E Approval
Obligate CN Funds (3 to 5 Weeks)
Request UDBE Goal (1 to 2 Weeks)
Advertise Project (3 Weeks) — Open Bids
Bid Award
Execute Construction Contract
Begin Construction (80 Working Days)
Physical Completion
1/29/2019
3/22/2019
2/6/2019
4/12/2019
7/12/2019
1/29/2019
N/A
2/6/2019
N/A
5/16/2019
7/26/2019 N/A*
8/16/2019
N/A
8/23/2019 N/A
9/13/2019
4/12/2019
9/17/2019 4/18/2019
10/4/2019
5/23/2019
10/7/2019 5/28/2019
Postpone CN to 2020
* Cannot Begin Construction Until All Rights Property Rights are Acquired.
10/8/19
Questions
Before Federal Aid Projects
23
After One Federal Aid Project
Sikerie
_*Valley
2021-2024 Transportation
January Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
Improvem
December 4
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
December 7 -11
Public Comment Period (10 day)
December 16 - 25
TTC Recommendation
December 16
SRTC Board Approval
January 14
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
January 15
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—February 19
February Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
January 1
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
January 4 - 8
Public Comment Period (10 day)
January 20 - 29
TTC Recommendation
January 27
SRTC Board Approval
February 11
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
February 19
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
March 19
March Amendment
February 5
Amendment Request Due Date
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
February 8 -12
Public Comment Period (10 day)
February 17 - 26
TTC Recommendation
February 24
SRTC Board Approval
March 11
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
March 19
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—ApriI16
April Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
March 5
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
March 8 - 12
Public Comment Period (10 day)
March 17 - 26
TTC Recommendation
March 24
SRTC Board Approval
April 8
WSDOT STIPAmendmentDue Date
April 16
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—May 21
May Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
April 2
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
April 5 - 9
Public Comment Period (10 day)
April 21 - 30
TTC Recommendation
April 28
SRTC Board Approval
May 13
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
May 21
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
June 18
June Amendment a
Amendment Request Due Date
May 7
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
May 10 -14
Public Comment Period (10 day)
May 19 - 28
TTC Recommendation
May 26
SRTC Board Approval
June 10
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
June 18
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—July 16
nt
Program (TIP) Amendment Schedule
July Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
June 4
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
June 7 -11
Public Comment Period (10 day)
June 16 - 25
TTC Recommendation
June 23
SRTC Board Approval
July 8
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
July 16
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—August 20
August Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
July 2
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
July 5— 9
Public Comment Period (10 day)
July 21 - 30
TTC Recommendation
July 28
SRTC Board Approval
August 12
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
August 20
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—September17
September Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
August 6
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
August 9 -13
Public Comment Period (10 day)
August 18 - 27
TTC Recommendation
August 25
SRTC Board Approval
September 9
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
September 17
FHWA/FTASTIP Approval
October 15
October Amendment
Amendment Request Due Date
September 3
SRTC Staff Review & Air Quality
September 6 -10
Public Comment Period (10 day)
September 15 - 24
TTC Recommendation
September 22
SRTC Board Approval*
October 14
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
October 15
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—November 19
*The SRTC Board will also be approving 2021-2024 TIP atthis
meeting.
No amendments will be processed by WSDOT in November
or December; the amendment process for the 2021 TIP is
closed after the October cycle.
DRAFT 2021 TIP Policies and Procedures Guidebook I Spokane Regional Transportation Council
2021-2024 Transportation mprovement Program (TIP) Administrative Modifications Schedule
January Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
January 8
SRTC Staff Review
January 11-14
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
January 15
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—February 19
February Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
February 12
SRTC Staff Review
February 15-18
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
February 19
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—March 19
March Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
March 12
SRTC Staff Review
March 15-18
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
March 19
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—April 16
April Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
April 9
SRTC Staff Review
April 12-15
WSDOT STIPAmendmentDue Date
April 16
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—May21
May Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
May 14
SRTC Staff Review
May 10-13
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
May 21
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—June 18
June Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
June 11
SRTC Staff Review
June 14-17
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
June 18
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—July 16
14
July Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
July 9
SRTC Staff Review
July 12-15
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
July 16
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—August20
August Administrative Modificati ,
Admin Mod Request Due Date
August 13
SRTC Staff Review
August 16-19
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
August 20
FHWA/FTA STIP Approval
—September 17
September Administrative Modifications
Admin Mod Request Due Date
September 10
SRTC Staff Review
September 13-16
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
September 17
FHWA/FTASTIP Approval
—October 15
October Administrative Modification
Admin Mod Request Due Date
October 8
SRTC Staff Review
October 11-14
WSDOT STIP Amendment Due Date
October 15
FHWA/FTASTIP Approval
—November 19
No administrative modifications will be processed by WSDOT in
November or December; the amendment and administrative
modifications process for the 2021 STIP is closed after the October
cycle.
DRAFT 2021 TIP Policies and Procedures Guidebook I Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Spokane
Valley
Consultant
work is less
titan S10,000
Select l Consultant from
Rosters.z,+
CONSULTANT SELECTION
ON FEDERAL AID PROJECT
(TABLE A)
A&E
(Qualifications Only)
Determine Type of
Agreement
Negotiate scope
and fees
WSDOT or Ciry form can be
used
City :Managers
executes Agreement
Submit draft scope &
cost estimate to local
programs for DBE
evaluation (follow LAG
Manual Ch. 31)
Consultant
work is $10,000
to 520,000
Select (min) Consultants
from RosterW
Document discussions with 3
(inin) Consultants'
Negotiate scope
and fees
WSDOT Agreement form
required
City Managers
executes Agreement
1) Verify Consultant(s) have not already been selected off of Roster and currently.
under another federal -aid contract.
2) Verify Consultant status with System for Award Management (SAM)
3) If Highest ranked Consultant is not selected, document reasons why.
4) Document selection process.
5) Document Consultant negotiations of scope and Fee (LAG Appendix 31.95)
Professional Services
(Fees may be
Considered)
Consultant
work is 520.001
to S99,909
Develop draft scope of work,
including cost estimate
Develop selection criteria
Issue Request For Additional
Information (RFAI) via email
to 50% of qualified
Consultants on Roster or all if
less than 6 Consultants arc on
roster (Include Title VI
Ianguagcl. '
Review and Score Consultant
Responses
Select highest ranked
Consultant '{
•
Negotiate scope
and fee'
T
WSDOT Agreement farm
required
•
Consultant Agreements over
$100,000 most be selected
using an Request for
Qualification (RFQ)! Statement
of Qualification (SOQI process
per City Policy
Follow LAG Manual, Chapter
31.1 and 31.2 for project
specific advertisement and
Consultant selection for
Consultant Agreements
estimated over $100.000
City Managers
executes Agreement
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: June 29, 2021 Department Director Approval: El
Check all that apply: ❑ consent
❑ information
❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report — code enforcement amendments — policy discussion on
Council preferences.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 7.48 RCW; chapter 7.05 SVMC; chapter 17.100 SVMC.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of chapter 7.05 SVMC relating to nuisances in
2003; amended in 2005, 2006, 2008, 2012, 2017; and 2018. Chapter 17.100 relating to enforcement was
recodified in its entirety in 2016. SVMC 7.05.045 was added as a new section in 2019 to address chronic
criminal nuisance properties. Chapter 17.105 SVMC relating to unfit structures was added in 2018 to
provide an alternative approach to addressing properties that have seriously degraded structures.
BACKGROUND: Shortly after the City's incorporation in 2003, the Council adopted its first code
provisions to begin addressing a long-term problem of nuisance conditions existing on many properties in
what recently had become the City, a problem that was decades in the making. The provisions identifying
what constitutes a prohibited nuisance are found in chapter 7.05 SVMC. The process for enforcing chapter
7.05 SVMC, as well as for enforcing violations of building and land use code provisions in chapter 17-24,
is in chapter 17.100 SVMC.
Since 2003, Council has considered and adopted revisions to the nuisance provisions in an effort to respond
to changing conditions, or to address situations where our existing solutions were not getting the result that
Council and the public expected. Additionally, some amendments became necessary or advisable based on
changes in the law by the Washington State Legislature or the various appellate courts having jurisdiction
over the City.
An example of adapting to changing conditions and finding more effective approaches involved the
adoption in January 2019 of the chronic criminal nuisance provisions, which allows the City to address
properties that are public nuisances due to either numerous qualifying criminal events, or for a combination
of qualifying criminal events and standard nuisance conditions such as junk vehicles or accumulations of
trash not in an approved container.
Another example is the adoption in 2018 of chapter 17.105 SVMC, which allows the City to now have an
alternative process for declaring a structure unfit. The primary benefit is that this process is authorized
pursuant to chapter 35.80 RCW, and allows the City to recover all costs related to abating a qualifying unfit
structure. These provisions can be used either separately or in tandem, depending upon the circumstances,
allowing staff to address deficient conditions more effectively and completely. An example of when they
could be used in tandem is if a property has significant junk or accumulations of old machinery or
appliances, and also has on it a structure that would be unsafe to enter. Chapter 7.05 SVMC will be used
for the trash and junk, and chapter 17.105 SVMC for the unfit structure, where chapter 7.05 SVMC by itself
has proven less effective for the structural issues because of less certainty on removing unfit structures
compared with chapter 17.105 SVMC.
With this background, staff believes that the provisions in chapter 17.100 SVMC regarding how violations
will be enforced, and chapter 17.105 SVMC regarding unfit dwellings, buildings, and structures, are
appropriate tools as adopted to allow the City to enforce the policy choices of the Council as to what
constitutes a nuisance. At this point in time, the pertinent question is whether Council wants, from a policy
Page 1 of 3
standpoint, to amend chapter 7.05 SVMC to identify additional conduct or use of private property that
qualifies as a prohibited nuisance.
Based upon Council comments, changing conditions relating to homelessness, and staffs experiences in
dealing with nuisance conditions since the last amendments to chapter 7.05 SVMC in early 2018, Council
requested that staff bring forward a discussion about potential changes to that chapter. The following are
potential topics for discussion, and staff is seeking specific direction from Council on whether to bring back
additional information and conversation about each one. Further, if Council would like to add topic areas
to this list, Council should identify those with specificity. Some of the issues listed below have been raised
in the past for inclusion or amendment:
- Modifications to the current policy of voluntary compliance.
- Camping on private property not in an approved structure, i.e. in a tent for more than a couple days.
- Living in an RV/camper on private property. Current limit is 30 days, difficult to enforce because
of how hard it is to document, and to prove someone is residing in the RV and not just using it
periodically during the day for extra living space like an office or for playing games.
- Discuss the state definition of a junk vehicle and discuss the number of junk vehicles allowed on
residential property (two sight -screened in rear or side yard); duration of exception for working on a
car in the front yard (up to 120 days).
- Number of RV/campers on a residential lot. Currently no limit, which leads to commercial storage
issues, as well as illegal mini -RV parks where a handful of campers set up on residential property
long-term, usually adjacent to an existing residential structure.
- Number of non -junk vehicles on a residential property; there currently is no limit. Further, there
are no restrictions about where vehicles may park on a residential property (e.g., paved/gravel
driveway vs. grass or dirt yard, or front, side or rear yard).
- Consequences of towing/removal of RV or other vehicle claimed to be the owner's residence due
to Homestead Act (the Long v. Seattle case currently pending at the state Supreme Court).
- Weeds or grass exceeding "X" inches in height for aesthetic and fire danger purposes.
- Whether to require mandatory trash pickup for all residential and commercial properties since trash
continues to be the most pervasive nuisance issue the City deals with.
- Potential adoption of the entire International Property Maintenance Code provisions, including
requirements relating to requirements for upkeep of structure's paint, roofing, cracked window, etc.
to avoid properties looking rundown.
- Potential adoption of approach to put severely distressed, chronic nuisance, or abandoned properties
into receivership, which would require new SVMC provisions similar to City of Spokane's, which
would apparently be work intensive for staff according to Spokane staff.
Some of these topics can be grouped together for discussion purposes, and several may be appropriate to
include in the update on parking regulations that staff is currently working on (consultant is currently
working on geo-locating all City traffic control signs). Once we have received direction from Council on
which of these you want more information on, staff will prepare a more detailed follow up administrative
report on those items. As noted earlier, staff is interested to hear if there are additional topic areas to bring
forward.
Page 2 of 3
OPTIONS: Not applicable, discussion only.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus on a list of topic areas for further discussion at
future meetings.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None anticipated.
STAFF CONTACTS: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; John Hohman, Deputy City Manager; Erik Lamb,
Deputy City Attorney.
ATTACHMENTS: n/a
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: June 29, 2021 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Orchard Avenue Park
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND: During the May 18, 2021 Council meeting advance agenda discussion, Mayor
Wick suggested placing this item on our advance agenda pending list; Mayor Wick asked about
the ownership of the Orchard Avenue Park and said he would like to get more information about
the park. There were no objections from Council to include that topic on a pending agenda.
Orchard Avenue Park is owned by the Felts Field Airport, and has been leased to Spokane
County Parks through a series of lease agreements. The site borders the east side of the airport
next to established older single-family residential neighborhoods in the City of Spokane Valley
and near the Town of Millwood.
The land for the park was originally leased to Spokane County in 1960 and was supported by
the Orchard Avenue Community Club. A ball diamond was built and the sponsoring group
provided the backstop and fencing, and a playground added on the 3.8 acres of parkland. The
park has 25 available parking spaces, play equipment, and a ball field.
Spokane County's current lease for the park expires in August, 2022.
OPTIONS: Council discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council discussion
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: John Bottelli, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation
ORCHARD AVENUE PARK
Administrative Report to the Spokane Valley City Council
John Bottelli, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director
01 I ORCHARD AVENUE PARK
Spokane
Park Rd
- Pool
Edgecliff
Park
02 I ORCHARD AVENUE PARK
Valley
Mission
Park
r
Balfour
Park
Castle
Park
Mirabeau
-P� int Park ii
Appleway
Trail
Browns
Park
Terrace
View Park
Sullivan
Park
Greenacres
■ Park
Liberty
Lake
* Orchard Ave Park
Spokane Valley Park
Centennial Trail
Spokane Valley
V LJ u Miles
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
okan e
0 Valley
NI14
nends Para
IIkst
Fells Fleednrea
Pad:
Fet^S Fled
leurcipa3
E tilersr,eid aEa
Spokane
aseE
023jt
E Glass Ave
Spokane
,Malley
F Fa In er,,
E Huck,. eve
_urlid eve E Emlid UP
Pasadena Park
�aee
rFVFvne River
Millwood
E G-.ttc A.t
ELerEErn.
Spokane County
mPve Paper
E EurkeYe L
SO' S Cp Ui
5ptham C074 �
raon<gomury qEe E Faoncgomcry r.v
Spokane County Information Technology Department Spokane County Assessors Office Esri, NASA, NG..,
Orchard Ave Park
3501 N Park Rd
Spokane, WA 99212
03 I ORCHARD AVENUE PARK
• Approximately 3.8
Acres
• Operated by Spokane
County since 1960
under a series of
lease agreements
• Land owned by the
Airport Board
• Located within
Spokane city limits
• Serves City of
Spokane Valley and
Millwood communities
Spokane
0 Valley
Park Featur
Informatinm Tetinckaa Department 5.. ka ne Coun Assessors Of iiee 5. okane count..
1. Softball Field
04 I ORCHARD AVENUE PARK
2. Restroom
3. Playground
4. Parking
okane
0 Valley
Felts Field Land Lease
• Current Term expires August 31, 2022
• Current Rent is $1,907 per year
• Use of Premises for baseball / softball
diamond, playground and restrooms
• Alcohol is not permitted
05 I ORCHARD AVENUE PARK
Spokane
0 Valley
Neighborhood Overview
in armation TeChnol r { Ee■ aliment S alcaRe G+a i AssdsOrs Office 5'
06 I ORCHARD AVENUE PARK
Spokane e
0 Valley
Questions?
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
as of June 24, 2021; 9:00 a.m.
Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative
To: Council & Staff
From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager
Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings
July 6, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
Proclamation: July is Parks & Recreation Month
1. Potential Grant Opportunity, Transportation Improvement Board - Adam Jackson
2. Homeless Housing & Assistance Act (HHAA) Funds — Erik Lamb, Arielle Anderson
3. Update on City Sculptures — John Bottelli
4. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
[due Tue June 29]
(10 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 40 mins]
July 13, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 6]
1. Public Hearing Traffic Impact Fee Studies: Mirabeau, & N. Pines Subareas — Bill Helbig (10 minutes)
2. First Reading Ordinance 21-008, Adopting Traffic Fees Studies: Mirabeau & N. Pines Subareas — Bill Helbig, Jerremy Clark (5 min)
3. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes)
4. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opportunity, Transportation Improvement Board — A.Jackson (5 min)
5. Admin Report: Batch Text Amendments — Marty Palaniuk
6. Admin Report: American Rescue Plan Act — Chelsie Taylor, Erik Lamb
7. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
(10 minutes)
(20 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 60 mins]
July 20, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 13]
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Second Reading Ord. 21-008, Adopting Traffic Fees Studies: Mirabeau & N. Pines Subareas — Bill Helbig, Jerremy Clark (5 min)
2. Fee Resolution 21-004, Amending Master Fee Schedule - Chelsie Taylor (5 minutes)
NON -ACTION ITEMS;
3. Council Goals & Priorities for Use of Lodging Tax — Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes)
4. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: mins]
Spokane Valley State of the City: July 21, 2021
July 27, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. First Reading Ordinance 21-009, Batch Text Amendments
3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
— Marty Palaniuk
[due Tue July 20]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: mins]
August 3, 2021: National Night Out (Aug 3, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. cancelled)
Aug 10, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Second Reading Ordinance 21-009, Batch Text Amendments — Marty Palaniuk
3. Motion Consideration: Council Goals & Priorities for Use of Lodging Tax — Chelsie Taylor
4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Aug 17, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Council 2022 Budget Goals — Chelsie Taylor
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Aug 24, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: 2022 Budget -Estimated Revenues & Expenditures — Chelsie Taylor
[due Tue Aug 3]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Aug 10]
(15 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Aug 17]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 6/24/2021 2:55:50 PM Page 1 of 2
3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick (5 minutes)
4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
Aug 31, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Sept 7, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
Proclamation: Alcohol & Drug Recovery Month
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Sept 14, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
Proclamation: Constitution Week- Sept 17-23
1. PUBLIC HEARING #1: 2022 Budget Revenues, Property Taxes — Chelsie Taylor
2. Motion Consideration: Set Budget Hearing for October 12, 2021 — Chelsie Taylor
3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Sept 21, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Proposed draft ordinance adopting 2022 property taxes — Chelsie Taylor
2. Outside Agencies Presentations — Chelsie Taylor
3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Sept 28, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
3. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
Oct 5, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. City Manager Presentation of 2022 Preliminary Budget — Mark Calhoun
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Oct 12, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. PUBLIC HEARING #2: 2022 Budget — Chelsie Taylor
2. First Reading Ordinance 21- , Property Tax
3. Admin Report: 2021 Budget Amendment — Chelsie Taylor
4. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Oct 19, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Oct 26, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2021 Budget Amendment — Chelsie Taylor
2. First Reading Ordinance 21- , Amending 2021 Budget
3. First Reading Ordinance 21- , Property Tax
4. First Reading Ordinance 21- , Adopting 2022 Budget — Chelsie Taylor
5. Motion Consideration: Outside Agency Grant Awards — Chelsie Taylor
6. Admin Report: 2021 Budget Amendment — Chelsie Taylor
7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
*time for public or Council comments not included
OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
Appleway Trail Amenities
Artwork & Metal Boxes
Consolidated Homeless Grant
Core Beliefs Resolution
Mirabeau Park Forestry Mgmt.
No Parking Zones
Park Lighting
PFD Presentation
Prosecutor Services
Residency
Ridgemont Area Traffic
St. Illumination (owners, cost, location)
St. O&M Pavement Preservation
SVPD Precinct Needs Assessment
[*estimated meeting: mins]
[due Tue Aug 24]
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Aug 31]
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Sept 7]
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Sept 14]
(10 minutes)
(-60 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Sept 21]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Sept 28]
(30 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Oct 5]
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Oct 12]
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Oct 19]
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
SVPD Vehicle Replacement
TPA
Vehicle Wgt Infrastructure Impact
Water Districts & Green Space
Way Finding Signs
Draft Advance Agenda 6/24/2021 2:55:50 PM Page 2 of 2
Dave Ellis
Chief of Police
Spokane Valley Police Department
Accredited Since 2011
Services provided in partnership with
the Spokane County Sheriff's Office and the Community,
Dedicated to Your Safety.
Ozzie Knezovich
Sheriff
TO: Mark Calhoun, City Manager
FROM: Dave Ellis, Chief of Police
DATE: June 21, 2021
RE: Monthly Report May 2021
ADMINISTRATIVE:
Chief Ellis filled in for Sheriff Knezovich in early May by welcoming the attendees and giving the
opening statement at the Washington State Police Canine Association Conference at the Davenport
Grand Hotel.
The 7th Annual Candlelight Ceremony for the Law Enforcement Memorial Project was held at the
Public Safety Building in early May. Chief Ellis attended this event along with other command staff
members from the Sheriffs Office and other local law enforcement leaders. The following day in the
cul-de-sac of the Public Safety Building, the 33rd Annual Law Enforcement Memorial Ceremony was
held and attended by local law enforcement.
Chief Ellis attended a webinar sponsored by the Washington Association of Sheriffs and. Police Chiefs
(WASPC) in early May, which discussed chief policy considerations that include the major new
bills/laws related to law enforcement and highlighted areas that require policy, legal, and other
decisions/considerations. Also discussed was providing options/ideas and input from some of the
state's chiefs and sheriffs about working with policy changes, morale, communications, and providing
direction for agencies. This webinar provided a good opportunity to discuss ideas and learn from each
other as we maneuver through the current environment in our communities. Chief Ellis also attended
a Risk Pool Podcast where the recent Blake Decision was discussed.
As of May 10th, the Spokane Regional Emergency Communications began taking Crime Check reports
online at SREC911.org/online-reporting. Right now, Crime Check Online Reporting is only available for
unincorporated Spokane County, but other jurisdictions (including the City of Spokane Valley, the City of
Spokane and the City of Liberty Lake) will soon also be available.
Page 1
To file a Crime Check Report online:
1. Go to: SREC911.org
2. Click on Crime Check and then Online Reporting when it pops up.
3. Scroll down and click on the Spokane County Sheriff's Office badge.
4. You will then be able to select the type of incident you are reporting.
5. Fill out all of the information when prompted.
6. Once completed, you will be given a temporary report case number until your report has been
approved.
This service will not be monitored 24/7 and we ask citizens who are reporting incidents that are
currently in progress to contact 9-1-1 or Crime Check at (509) 456-2233 depending on the situation.
In mid -May, the Spokane Valley Rotary Club presented Chief Ellis and Assistant Chief Richey with
a new flag to fly at the Valley Precinct. We are very appreciative that this organization has continued
over the years to provide the American flag that flies at our facility.
Chief Ellis attended the monthly Spokane Regional Law and Justice Committee meeting, held virtually
in mid -May.
Chief Ellis participated in meetings held in mid -May at the Sheriff's Training Center to discuss
specifics in designing the new Sheriff's Training Center in Airway Heights.
The Spokane Regional Emergency Communications Regular Board Meeting was held in late May,
which Chief Ellis attended.
The month of May ended with Chief Ellis attending Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police
Chiefs' Semi -Annual Conference, held in the Tri-Cities area.
SHERIFF'S COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING EFFORT (SCOPE):
In the month of May, S.C.O.P.E. participated in:
• S.C.O.P.E. Basic Training (brought in two fingerprints, to known felons on vehicle
new volunteers). prowls).
• Radar Speed trailers being located • Valleyfest Cycle Celebration Meeting
throughout Spokane Valley on a regular • S.C.O.P.E. Volunteers deliver PPE
basis by our volunteers. Citizens are really supplies weekly to Medical, Fire Stations,
appreciative of S.C.O.P.E. and SV Police Senior Care Facilities and others.
Department for providing this service. • S.C.O.P.E. Volunteers patrolling
• Latent Print Volunteer Training neighborhoods and businesses.
(S.C.O.P.E. Volunteers attempting to find
May 2021 Volunteers Hours per Station
*Includes estimated volunteer service hours that are provided in the City of Spokane Valley. These two locations cover
both Spokane Valley and the unincorporated portion of the county.
Location
# Volunteers
Admin Hours
L.E. Hours
Total Hours
Central Valley
4
26.5
6
32.5
East Valley*
20
132.5
278
410.5
Edgecliff
5
18.5
21.5
40
Page 2
Trentwood
3
51
30
81
University
13
212
50
262
West Valley*
16
317
51.5
368.5
TOTALS
61
757.5
437
1,194.5
Volunteer Value ($31.72 per hour) $37,889.54 for May 2021
The SCOPE Latent Fingerprint Team was given 28 cases for the month of May for latent prints; 14
of those cases were for incidents in Spokane Valley. Of the 14 cases in Spokane Valley, 8 vehicles
were processed and printed where prints were found on 1 of those vehicles. The Latent Fingerprint
Team currently has limited staff and is only open three days a week (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday
by appointment).
SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT
City of Spokane Valley
# of
Vol.
# of Hrs.
# of
Disabled
Infractions
Issued
# of
Warnings
Issued
# of Non -
Disabled
Infractions Issued
January
0
0
0
0
0
February
0
0
0
0
0
March
0
0
0
0
0
April
0
0
0
0
0
May
0
0
0
0
0
YTD Total
0
0
0
0
0
Spokane County
# of
Vol.
# of Hrs.
# of
Disabled
Infractions
Issued
# of
Warnings
Issued
# of Non -
Disabled
Infractions Issued
January
0
0
0
0
0
February
0
0
0
0
0
March
3
6.5
0
9
0
April
0
0
0
0
0
May
0
0
0
0
0
YTl) Total
3
6.5
0
9
0
S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 35 on -scene hours (including
travel time) in May; 20 of those hours were for incidents in Spokane Valley, responding to crime
scenes, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control. There were two special events in May,
one in the county and one in Spokane Valley (East Valley High School Fun Run). Total volunteer
hours contributed by SIRT, including training, stand-by, response and special events is 1,091 for May;
total for 2021 is 4,355.
Page 3
Abandoned Vehicles
March 2021
April 2021
May 2021
Tagged for Impounding
59
46
83
Cited/Towed
18
0
0
Hulks Processed
11
14
27
Total Vehicles Processed
149
146
200
Yearly Total of Vehicles Processed
358
504
704
OPERATIONS:
Driver of Stolen Vehicle Crashes into Box Truck - Spokane Valley Deputies and Traffic Unit
Investigators were at the scene of a traffic crash on S. Dishman Mica between Sth Avenue and
16th Avenue. Dishman Mica was closed in both directions for the investigation. In early May, at
approximately 10:15 am., Spokane Valley Deputies responded to a two -vehicle injury crash on S.
Dishman Mica Road, between 8th and 16th Avenue. Due to the seriousness of the injuries and potential
felony crimes, the north and south lanes of S. Dishman Mica Road were closed between 8th and 16th
Avenue. One of the vehicles involved, a confirmed stolen vehicle, was reportedly traveling at high
speeds and recklessly before it crashed into the second vehicle, a box truck. The two occupants of the
stolen vehicle were transported to the hospital with serious injuries, but believed to be non -life -
threatening. The driver of the box truck, the victim of this crash, appeared to have minor injuries and
was not transported to a hospital. Initial information indicates reckless driving, speed, and impairment
are believed to be factors in the crash. The 31-year-old male driver of the stolen vehicle was identified
and found to be a wanted convicted felon. Once released from the hospital, he was booked on charges
of Vehicular Assault, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle, and
Fugitive from Justice stemming from a valid felony Kootenai County warrant. The passenger of the
stolen vehicle was a 16-year-old male, also a convicted felon. At this time, he is not facing criminal
charges. Upon further investigation, the suspect who was booked on numerous charges relating to this
incident was identified as the suspect in this past February's shooting/robbery in Spokane Valley.
Continuing to work the robbery and shooting of a victim in the parking lot of the Black Angus
Restaurant in February 2021, Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives developed probable cause to
charge this same 31-year-old male with Assault ls` Degree, Robbery 1st Degree, Unlawful Possession
of a Firearm, and Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle. The suspect is a five -time convicted felon for
two counts of Theft of a Motor Vehicle, two counts of Possession of a Controlled Substance without
a Prescription, and Residential Burglary. With these convictions, the suspect is prohibited from
possessing firearms. In late February, at approximately 8:20 pm., an adult victim was confronted by
an unknown suspect who stole the victim's car from the parking lot of the Black Angus in Spokane
Valley. The victim attempted to stop the suspect, but was shot in the chest with a 9mm pistol during
the struggle. Deputies pursued the stolen vehicle, but lost sight of it due to the suspect's extremely
reckless driving behavior. On the first of May, the stolen car was recovered in a parking lot of a
business in the 24700 block of E. Wellesley in Otis Orchards. Major Crimes Detectives seized the
vehicle, obtained a search warrant, and had the car searched for evidence. At that time, DNA samples
were taken and submitted to the Washington State Patrol Crime Lab for processing. Until May 11 th,
the suspect had remained unidentified until detectives received DNA results, which showed the
suspect from the Dishman-Mica incident matched one of the samples from the shooting/robbery
case. Major Crimes Detective Mike Drapeau took this information and found the suspect was a
convicted felon and in custody at the Spokane County Jail. The suspect also had an outstanding Idaho
felony warrant for violating probation. Following the crash, the male suspect was found to have a
Page 4
loaded Sig Saur 9mm pistol in the pocket of his shorts. The pistol was seized for evidence, and the
serial number was checked, which revealed it was reported stolen. In addition to being booked for
charges of Vehicular Assault, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, and Possession of a Stolen Motor
Vehicle, a new charge of Possession of a Stolen Firearm stemming from this incident was
added. Detective Drapeau checked the ammunition in the pistol seized after the crash and learned it
matched the same brand of ammunition used when the victim was shot in February. In mid -May,
Detective Drapeau found he had probable cause to charge the suspect with additional charges of
Assault 1st Degree, Robbery 1st Degree, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, and Attempting to Elude a
Police Vehicle in the shooting/robbery incident. The male suspect remains incarcerated on a $50,000
bond as well as a detainer from Kootenai County for charges there. On the night of the shooting, the
victim of the shooting/robbery was rushed to the hospital with a life -threatening gunshot wound and
listed in critical condition. He has since been released and is now home, still recovering from the
severe injuries he suffered.
Suspect Arrested Less Than Four Hours After Being Released from Jail — In mid -May at
approximately 1:45 am., Spokane Valley Deputies arrested an 18-year-old male suspect after
witnessing him attempting to enter vehicles at a car lot on E. Sprague. The suspect had just been
released from jail the previous evening, at approximately 10 pm. (four hours earlier) stemming
from an arrest one week prior. At that time, he was held on an Assault 4th (DV) charge, but
released on his own recognizance for his other charges consisting of Possession of a Stolen Motor
Vehicle, Resisting Arrest, Obstructing, Refusing to Cooperate/Give Information, and No Valid
Operator's License. The car he was driving when he was stopped was stolen from the same auto
dealership on E. Sprague, where he was arrested during this incident. On May 3rd, at
approximately 4:35 am., Deputy Horton observed a Ford Focus driving south on Division near
Cascade Way. She noted the car was traveling about 15 mph under the posted speed limit with its
hazard lights activated and no visible license plates displayed. Deputy Horton stopped the vehicle,
and the 18-year-old male driver exited the car and began walking back toward the patrol car. Telling
him to sit back down inside the vehicle, Deputy Horton noticed a 19-year-old female sit up in the
backseat. When asked, the male suspect said he didn't have an ID and didn't need to provide Deputy
Horton with his name. Deputy Horton explained as a driver, he was required by state law to identify
himself, but the suspect looked away and didn't answer. Deputy Horton had the male suspect exit the
vehicle and placed him in handcuffs while waiting for another patrol unit to arrive and assist. She
again asked the suspect to identify himself, and he refused. She informed him that he was under arrest,
but instead of remaining calm, the suspect began yelling and swearing, stating he wasn't under arrest
and wasn't going to jail. The male suspect finally identified himself before deciding to walk away
while still in handcuffs from Deputy Horton and Deputy Miller, who had arrived at the scene. They
grabbed onto the male's arms and told him to sit back down, but he refused. With his continued erratic
and uncooperative demeanor, he was placed on the ground to maintain control and then placed in the
back of a patrol car, where he continued to be uncooperative. After the male suspect was secured,
Deputy Miller and Deputy Ball contacted the female. She handed them several sets of car keys, saying
she believed the keys and the car the suspect was driving were possibly stolen. At one point, the
female began to walk away from the deputies. Deputy Ball told her to stop, or she would be placed in
Page 5
handcuffs. The female suspect then turned around and charged toward Deputy Ball. With Deputy
Horton assisting, Deputy Ball attempted to place handcuffs on the female suspect. She began to
struggle and resist, striking Deputy Horton in the nose with her elbow. The female suspect was taken
to the ground, placed in handcuffs, and told she was being arrested for Assault 3`d Degree and
obstructing. Both suspects were booked into the Spokane County Jail. On May 10, 2021, at
approximately 10 pm., the male suspect was released from jail after serving time for an Assault 4th
Degree (DV) charge and being released on his own recognizance for several felony and misdemeanor
charges. On May 11, 2021, at approximately 1:45 am., Spokane Valley Deputies responded to CarHop
of Spokane, located at 5033 E. Sprague, for an alarm. When Deputy Cinkovich arrived, he observed
an eastside door of the business ajar with a dumpster pushed against it and a red sedan backed into the
dumpster. Continuing to watch, Deputy Cinkovich noticed a male walking around the back and sides
of the lot. The same 18-year-old male, later identified from court paperwork found in his pocket after
his arrest, approached one of the vehicles belonging to the business and appeared to be attempting to
open the door. After getting a good look at the male suspect, Deputy Cinkovich identified himself and
told the male to show his hands, but he turned and ran away, ignoring commands to stop. Not knowing
if additional suspects were inside the business or hiding between the parked cars, Deputy Cinkovich
held his position and provided the fleeing suspect's description via his radio as additional patrol units
responded and set up a perimeter. With the help of arriving deputies, the business was cleared, and
no additional suspects were located. Moments later, Deputy E. Jones advised he could see a male
walking away from Walmart toward Custer. He attempted to contact this male and attempted to detain
him, but the male suspect ran. After running approximately 100 yards, the male suspect slowed and
surrendered. Deputy Cinkovich confu-med this male was the same male he observed at the
business. After further investigation, deputies developed probable cause to charge the male suspect
with Burglary 2nd Degree, Malicious Mischief 2nd Degree, four counts of Theft of a Motor Vehicle
(Attempted), and two counts of Obstructing. He was transported back to jail, where he was booked
again for these new charges.
Suspect, Armed with Knife, Fails to Surrender or Follow Commands / Less -Lethal Bean Bags
Aid in Arrest without Serious Injury - Spokane Valley Deputies used less -lethal bean bags to
gain some compliance of a robbery suspect armed with a knife. The suspect, stopped from
entering a busy store, continued to resist arrest as deputies struggled to place him in
handcuffs. He was charged and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Robbery 1st Degree,
Harassment with a Weapon, and Resisting Arrest. In late May, just before 2:00 pm., Spokane
Valley Deputies responded to Rite Aid, located at 12222 E. Sprague, for the report of a male armed
with a knife who was threatening a store employee. The caller stated the 46-year-old male suspect
threatened the store manager with a knife before fleeing on foot. Deputy Ortiz arrived in the store
parking lot and observed two females pointing at a male (the suspect) crossing Sprague, yelling,
"That's him!" This male was the only person seen in the general area the witnesses were
pointing. Deputy Ortiz advised other responding deputies that the male suspect was heading toward
Value Village, which was open and busy. Deputy Walton and Deputy Vicini arrived and contacted
the suspect in front of Value Village. Since the store was open with unsuspecting customers entering
and leaving, the deputies confronted the male suspect, identified themselves, and told him to
stop. Deputy Woolard and Deputy Ortiz arrived seconds later to assist. The male suspect, with a
Page 6
large knife clearly visible on his right hip and an unknown object in his hand, made the choice to
ignore commands saying, "No! I didn't do anything." Attempts to de-escalate the tense situation were
ineffective as the suspect continued to be defiant, choosing to ignore commands. Deputy Ortiz
retrieved his less -lethal shotgun and loaded it with bean bag rounds as the other deputies at the scene
provided lethal cover. With the knowledge that the male suspect just committed an armed robbery,
threatened employees of the store with a knife in his hand, and having grave concern for the safety of
the public/employees if the male was allowed to enter the busy store, deputies knew the suspect must
be taken into custody. The male suspect was informed he was under arrest. After several more
commands were ignored, Deputy Ortiz fired one bean bag round, hitting the male in the lower
leg. Unfortunately, it had little to no effect or change in behavior. The male suspect continued to
refuse to follow commands and keep his hand away from the knife. A second bean bag round was
fired and hit the suspect's right leg. He refused to surrender or comply with commands as he staggered
toward the front entrance of the store. Two additional bean bag rounds were used, striking his leg,
causing him to fall to the ground. The deputies moved to secure the suspect's hands and ensure he
wouldn't be able to use the knife or any weapon, but he fought and resisted. During the struggle, a
couple of distractionary strikes were used, allowing deputies to overpower the suspect and secure him
in handcuffs. The male suspect was provided medical attention until Spokane Valley Fire personnel
arrived to assume care. He was transported to the hospital for additional evaluations and care before
being booked into the Spokane County Jail. Employees of Rite Aid confirmed the suspect used a fixed
blade knife, which was out and used to destroy property of Rite Aid in the commission of a theft. They
also stated they feared for their lives as the suspect brandished the knife while making statements
about "snitches." The male suspect was charged with Robbery 1st Degree, Harassment with a Weapon,
both felonies, and Resisting Arrest, a misdemeanor. Thankfully, no uninvolved citizens or deputies
were injured during this incident.
Your Help Requested as Detectives Work to Identify Assault Suspects - Spokane Valley Major
Crimes Detectives are asking for the community's help as they work to identify the felony assault
suspects who violently assaulted a female victim inside her home. The victim sustained serious
injuries and was transported to a hospital for additional treatment. From the known initial
investigative information, this attack does not appear to be a random incident. Detectives would
like everyone who may have home surveillance video on May 24, 2021, between the hours of 8:00
am. and 4:00 pm. that captures vehicle/pedestrian traffic on E. 16th Avenue (between the 14500
block and the 15100 block) or the north/south side roads (within a block or two) of this area of
E. 16th Avenue, to call Detective Julian Covella at 509-477-3238, reference #10065647. ** (A
more exact location will not be provided to help protect the privacy of the victim) ** Detective
Covella would also like to speak with anyone who noticed any suspicious activity or may have
information that could be helpful during this investigation. In late May, at approximately 4:15
pm., Spokane Valley Deputies responded to the report of an assault at a residence on 16th Avenue in
Spokane Valley. Deputies contacted the victim, who explained she was restrained and violently
assaulted by two men. She did not know how the men gained entry into her secured residence, and
she was unable to identify the males as she lost consciousness during part of the attack. The victim
sustained serious injuries to her head and torso from being beaten and cut during the assault. Deputies
checked the home and the surrounding area and did not locate any suspects. Major Crimes Detectives
and Spokane County Forensic Unit personnel were called to the scene to collect evidence and
document the scene. With the initial information learned, detectives do not believe this was a random
incident, and the victim was the target of the attack. Detectives continue to investigate this violent
assault and would like the help of the public. Anyone with video or information regarding this
incident is urged to call Detective Covella at 509-477-3238.
Page 7
Suspect Arrested for Child. Molestation Charges / Detectives Seek Additional Persons with
Information — Sheriff's Sexual Assault Unit (SAU) Detectives arrested a suspect for sexually
molesting a juvenile male at an apartment complex in Spokane Valley, booking him into jail for
three felony charges. Investigators believe there could be additional persons who live at the
complex or frequent the location that may have information regarding the suspect's interactions
with juveniles or have information that could be helpful to this investigation. In late May, at
approximately 3:20 pm., Spokane Valley Deputies responded to the Eagle Point Apartments located
at 2718 N. Bowdish for the report of a young juvenile male who had been molested. The mother of
the boy provided information that a 23-year-old male suspect went with her son from the apartment
complex's playground into a vacant apartment where he molested the young child. This all occurred
(within approximately 30 minutes) while the child played a short distance from their
apartment. Sexual Assault Unit Detectives and Forensic Unit Technicians were called to the scene to
continue the investigation. With the information learned at the scene, a search warrant to collect
evidence from the vacant apartment, along with samples of DNA from the male suspect, was
obtained. SAU Detective Tom Keys contacted the male suspect and advised him of his rights and the
search warrant authorizing the collection of DNA samples. He declined to answer questions, and
DNA samples were collected for evidentiary testing. The following day at approximately 2:30 pm.,
SAU Detectives and deputies returned to the apartments and arrested the male suspect on three felony
charges. He was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Rape of a Child 1st Degree,
Child Molestation 1st Degree, and Kidnapping 1st Degree. SAU Detective Keys would like to talk
to anyone who lives at the complex or frequents the location, that may have information
regarding the male suspect's interactions with juveniles, or have information that could be
helpful to this investigation. If you have information, you are asked to call SAU Detective Keys
at 509.477-3474, reference #10066151.
Barricaded Suspect Safely Arrested After Hours -Long Negotiations - With the assistance of the
Warrant Service Group, Spokane Valley Deputies successfully arrested a suspect who
barricaded the doors of his residence and would not surrender after he threw a mason jar of
rocks at his roommate's head and locked her out of the house. The victim ducked and was not
injured during this incident. At the end of May, at approximately 5:40 pm., Spokane Valley
Deputies responded to a residence near the intersection of Moen and Sprague for the report of a male
throwing things, yelling, and denying access to his roommate/victim. The victim explained she lived
in the bottom portion of the residence, and the 36-year-old male suspect lived in the upstairs part. The
victim said the male suspect has been throwing things around the house and would not let her
inside. She said she believed he was having a breakdown and that he has become increasingly erratic
since being informed last week she was moving out. She has tried to stay away from home as her fear
of the male's irrational and intrusive behavior increased. Today, she stayed away most of the day, but
came home shortly before calling 911. She was outside in the front yard, and for some unknown
reason, the male suspect opened the front door, began yelling obscenities, and threw a mason jar,
partially full of rocks, at her. She said she ducked to avoid being hit in the head, which she believes
was his intended target. The victim tried to allow the deputies inside the home to contact the suspect,
but the doorknob seemed to be disabled, and the door appeared to be barricaded closed. A check of
the rear slider found it to be intentionally blocked with large pieces of furniture. A check of the
suspect's name revealed that he is a convicted felon and has a history of resisting, obstructing,
malicious mischief, disorderly conduct, and assault. Deputies attempted over a dozen phone calls, and
Page 8
multiple loudspeaker announcements went ignored by the male suspect for over an hour. Deputies
could hear loud thumping noises coming from inside the home, which they believed was the suspect
fortifying the blockages of the doors. They applied for and were granted a search warrant for the
residence. Just after 7:00 pm., deputies were able to get the front door of the residence open. They
yelled inside, telling the male suspect to exit the home, to which the male replied, "F*** You!" The
deputies could see numerous items intentionally constructed to block the route to the suspect's room,
including wood pieces fastened to the wall by screws. The male suspect continued yelling vulgarities,
saying he hated law enforcement and wanted cops to kill him as he refused to comply. The deputies
requested the assistance of the Warrant Service Group. At the same time, they continued to try and
de-escalate the situation and convince the suspect to surrender, including unanswered phone calls by
Hostage Negotiation Team members. At approximately 8:15 pm. with all attempts to get the suspect
to surrender exhausted and the Warrant Service Group deployed inside the home, several warnings
that chemical irritants would be used if he did not surrender were given. With all those warnings
ignored, irritants were deployed. The male suspect continued to resist saying he would never be taken
alive, continuing to ignore ongoing commands to give up. Eventually, the irritants had the desired
effect, and he decided to surrender; he was safely taken into custody and provided medical attention.
The actual owner of the residence was contacted and informed of the incident. He advised he wanted
to pursue charges for the damage caused by the suspect. The male suspect was later transported and
booked into the Spokane County Jail for Assault 4th Degree (DV), Malicious Mischief, Resisting, and
Obstructing.
Join us for Nation Night Out 2021
It's back! National Night Out is on Tuesday, August 3rd this year! If you are interested in having a
block party and don't know where to start, or you need some party ideas, click on the link below to
find the National Night Out (N.N.O.) registration form, which covers the unincorporated areas of
Spokane County, Spokane Valley, Deer Park, Medical Lake, and Liberty Lake.
If you would like to have first responders, government officials, S.C.O.P.E., or other visitors stop by
your party, you will need to fill out the registration form. Please make sure your form is turned in no
later than July 16th.
Also, enter to win a $50.00 gift certificate to the restaurant, store, or movie theater of your choice for
the Dress it -up contest. See the rules and registration form by clicking on the link below!
https://conta.cc/3c 1 v6my
LOCK
ITEMS IN
YOUR TRUNK
OBSERVE
AND REPORT
CARS SHOULD KEEP GARAGE
NEVER RUN DOORS CLOSED
UNATTENDED
We encourage residents who have operational surveillance cameras outside their home to go to
the Sheriff's website and register their home and video cameras. Thank you.
Page 9
https://www.spokanecounty.org/1080/Sheriff
VIP
Video
Identification
Program
Wu]UUIarl1y 1r,
the "YIP program
Page 10
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
IBR Count by District
Time Period: May 2021
Spokane Valley Districts
Unincorporated Districts
IBR Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DP
FF
LAH
ML
MW
RF
SPA
WAV OTHER
TOTAL
09A Murder/NonNegligent
4, O ID 6 6 00 V I—, W O O D I—' I—' 4 4
W O O O O 01 W I1 0 0 I—O 4, ID O
A O O 0 0 T J I—' N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N O O 0 0 .p 00 N I— H O O H O I—` 0 0
NJ O ID O O N W 0 0 0 4 I—, I—, 4 4 4
W O O 0 0 4 'k ( nil 0 0 0 0 0 0 ID 0
Manslaughter
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
09B Negligent Manslaughter
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100 Kidnapping/Abduction
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
9
11A Rape - Forcible
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
6
11B Sodomy - Forcible
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
11C Sex Assault With Object
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11D Fondling- Forcible
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
120 Robbery
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
13A Aggravated Assault
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
19
136 Simple Assault
6
6
4
4
3
1
10
7
0
2
0
1
10
1
0
0
0
13
121
13C intimidation
2
2
0
2
0
0
2
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
48
36A Incest
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36B Rape - Statutory
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
64A Human Trafficking - Commercial
Sex Acts
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
64B Human Trafficking - Involuntary
Servitude
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
500 Violation of Protection Orders
1
0
3
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
31
Total Crimes Against Persons
25
31
20
19
15
21
11
9
8
7
4
2
14
10
0
7
0
1
10
1
1
0
0
31
247
200 Arson
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
210 Extortion/Blackmail
0
0
0
3
0
3
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
2
10
220 Burglary/Breaking & Entering
10
16
3
6
3
10
2
4
0
1
0
3
6
5
0
3
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
12
86
23A Theft- Pocket -Picking
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
233 Theft - Purse Snatching
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23C Theft - Shoplifting
34
2
8
17
1
6
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
77
236 Theft From Building
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
0
0
3
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
6
41
23E Theft From Coin Operated
Machine
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23F Theft From Motor Vehicle
9
26
12
13
5
6
5
12
3
6
6
6
19
5
0
2
0
0
8
2
0
0
0
18
163
23G Theft of Motor Vehicle
Parts/Accessories
5
5
0
1
1
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
26
23H Theft - All Other
11
11
4
11
5
7
6
10
3
2
3
6
6
5
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2D
114
240 Motor Vehicle Theft
9
5
1
8
1
3
5
3
1
3
2
0
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
53
250 Counterfeiting/Forgery
3
4
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
14
26A Fraud - False Pretense/Swindling
10
8
3
9
2
3
9
1
2
4
2
1
4
3
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
6
69
26B Fraud - Credit Card/ATM
4
4
2
4
2
5
0
4
2
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
34
26C Fraud - Impersonation
1
0
1
0
1
2
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
13
260 Welfare Fraud
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26F Identity Theft
1
5
3
3
3
2
2
1
1
4
0
2
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
36
26G Hacking/Computer Invasion
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
IBR Count by District
Time Period: May 2021
Spokane Valley Districts
Unincorporated Districts
IBR Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DP
FF
LAH
ML
MW
RF
SPA
WAV OTHER
TOTAL
270 Embezzlement
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
280 Stolen Property Offense
(Receiving, etc.)
2
1
3
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
16
290 Destruction/Vandalism
27
33
17
18
11
19
16
9
7
9
3
15
24
13
0
9
0
0
4
1
1
0
0
25
261
Total Crimes Against Property
131
124
61
101
40
76
53
45
20
34
22
35
76
42
0
19
0
1
16
15
2
0
0
108
1021
35A Drugs/Narcotics Violation
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
5
35B Drug Equipment Violation
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
370 Pornography/Obscene Material
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
39A Setting/Wagering
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39B Gambling -Operating Promoting
Assisting
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39C Gambling Equipment Violation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40A Prostitution
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
408 Prostiution -Assisting/Promoting
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40C Purchasing Prostitution
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
510 Bribery
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
520 Weapon Law Violation
1
2
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
13
720 Animal Cruelty
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
Total Crimes Against Society
1
2
3
2
1
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
24
09C Justifiable Homicide
0
2
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
90A Bad Checks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9013 Curfew/Loitering
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90C Disorderly Conduct
0
2
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
90D Driving Under Influence
3
6
2
2
2
5
1
3
3
1
0
3
3
3
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
9
49
90F Family Offense- NanVio[ent
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
90G Liquor Law Violation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
90H Peeping Tom
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
903 Trespass of Real Property
3
1
3
0
1
2
2
4
0
0
3
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
90Z All Other Offenses
7
14
6
2
3
8
2
1
4
1
1
3
4
9
0
7
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
21
95
Total Group 8 Offenses
13
25
13
5
8
17
5
8
7
2
4
6
9
14
0
8
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
31
181
NR Not Reportable
10
9
5
0
1
3
3
0
1
3
1
2
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
10
55
Total All Offenses
180
191
102
127
65
124
72
62
36
46
31
45
103
68
0
36
0
2
29
21
3
0
0
185
1528
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Burglary - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
55
51
33
40
53
February
52
26
20
56
45
March
42
33
37
53
43
April
49
36
35
70
40
May
47
34
57
69
48
June
58
29
38
69
-
July
51
44
48
63
August
56
51
57
58
-
September
77
38
50
67
-
October
37
48
46
68
-
November
32
49
41
57
-
December
34
47
40
63
-
Grand Total
590
486
502
733
229
IBR offense: Burglary/Breaking & Entering 220
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Rape - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
9
15
2
2
2
February
2
4
3
2
1
March
2
8
4
2
5
April
7
7
4
-
4
May
7
9
2
3
5
June
2
6
5
4
-
July
6
5
3
1
-
August
4
3
5
2
-
September
2
3
9
4
-
October
7
1
4
-
-
November
1
7
2
3
-
December
2
7
' 3
5
-
GrandTotal
51
75
46
28
17
*IBR Offense: Rape - Forcible 11A, Sodomy - Forcible 11B, Sexual
Assault with Object 11C
Produced:06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Assault - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
96
83
71
93
71
February
94
64
61
96
50
March
77
101
74
80
65
April
89
88
68
95
67
May
93
80
87
85
65
June
94
101
79
103
-
July
94
113
104
88
-
August
74
83
95
99
-
September
92
82
72
79
-
October
89
84
68
80
-
November
85
78
85
73
-
December
84
91
78
63
-
Grand Total
1,061
1,048
942
1,034
318
* IBR Offense: Aggravated Assault 13A & Simple Assault 138
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional intelligence Group 9
Robbery - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
3
6
3
8
7
February
6
2
8
12
7
March
7
5
4
6
5
April
3
6
4
8
9
May
2
9
6
3
7
June
1
3
2
8
-
July
4
7
8
5
-
August
1
6
11
6
-
September
4
6
8
8
-
October
4
5
7
6
-
November
3
3
12
3
-
December
1
4
10
5
-
Grand Total
39
62
83
78
35
* IBR Offense: Robbery 120
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOT<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Motor Vehicle Theft - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
47
36
35
32
29
February
37
27
22
32
25
March
47
27
20
31
25
April
42
26
30
29
23
May
27
25
34
29
27
June
28
24
25
33
-
July
43
40
32
25
-
August
36
20
30
27
-
September
43
27
37
27
-
October
39
32
25
31
-
Novernber
33
45
36
29
-
December
29
32
34
29
-
Grand Total
451
361
360
354
129
IBR Offense: Motor Vehicle Theft 240
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional intelligence Group 9
Theft From Motor Vehicle (Vehicle Prowl) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017
--0— 2018
--2019
— - 2020
- 4K-2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
99
75
51
66
87
February
104
33
44
98
106
March
94
77
73
58
75
April
130
62
122
75
86
May
79
71
140
85
71
June
107,
67
84
80
-
July
97
107
114
77
-
August
691
88
99
148
-
September
118
85
80
130
-
October
70,
105
97
116
-
November
52
112
96
90
-
December
69
71
112
97
-
Grand 'rota!
1,088
953
1,112
1,120
425
* IBR Offense: Theft From Motor Vehicle 23F
Produced:06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Damage/Destruction/Vandalism (MALMS) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
200
180
160 I
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
aJ
a
d
0
CU
E
aJ
0
2
v
E
aJ
u
aJ
—0-2017
2018
-- 2019
2020
2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
158
146
125
113
132
February
148
95
67
142
121
March
137
120
122
105
104
April
173
127
143
157
129
May
139
143
161
116
125
June
144
141
133
154
-
July
178
142
156
146
-
August
154
131
144
172
-
September
159
156
142
190
October
119
166
165
174
-
November
131
155
141
151
-
December
108
126
175
144
-
Grand Total
1,748
1,648
1,674
1,764
611
IBR Offense: Destruction/Darnage/Vandalism 290
Produced:06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Homicide - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
-
-
-
-
-
February
-
-
-
1
1
March
-
-
-
1
April
-
-
-
-
1
May
-
-
-
1
June
-
1
-
-
-
July
1
-
-
-
-
August
-
-
-
-
September
-
-
-
-
October
-
-
-
-
-
November
1
-
-
-
-
December
-
-
1
1
-
Grand Total
2
1
1
3
3
*IBR Offense: Murder/Non-Negligent Manslaughter 09A
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Identity Theft - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
1
u =. ul -CU L L L.
C•i
2
al 07 Q
—A-2017
—El— 2018
—A-2019
2020
-R-2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
9
19
17
17
12
February
24
16
10
17
18
March
22
13
13
12
20
April
16
22
20
17
23
May
31
21
13
442
17
June
19
17
5
47
-
July
23
14
12
26
-
August
12
15
8
28
-
September
17
13
15
16
-
October
15
21
17
18
-
November
18
23
12
15
-
December
24
16
7
17
-
Grand Total
230
210
149
672
90
*IBR Offense: Identity Theft 26F
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
DUI - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
OD
a
L
aJ
c
8
v
E
(0
QJ
v
0
V
0
2017
- -.. 2018
— A-2019
2020
-2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
22
19
32
26
21
February
25
18
22
28
24
March
32
39
22
8
15
April
19
14
27
17
18
May
19
32
18
15
20
June
28
23
24
27
-
July
26
17
25
25
-
August
24
28
24
22
September
20
37
37
22
-
October
24
32
27
27
-
November
18
28
31
21
-
December
20
23
19
22
-
Grand Total
277
310
308
260
98
IBR Offense: DUI 90D
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Drugs - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
4011,11tv
-5
ro ro i
7, = ro
ro
LL
Mc
)x
M
bA
September f
)K xt
December
—s—' 2017
—II— 2018
—AL— 2019
—rr 2020
---2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
23
39
51
45
31
February
28
38
40
62
36
March
28
58
57
51
4
April
38
55
63
36
2
May
23
39
39
64
5
June
21
54
29
51
-
July
17
55
46
38
-
August
25
38
55
35
-
September
25
33
49
39
October
21
50
47
37
-
November
32
38
54
41
-
December
27
47
44
30
-
Grand Total
308
544
574
529
78
k IBR Offense: Drugs/Narcotics Violations 35A and Drug Equipment
Violations 35B
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Fraud - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
120
100
80
60
40
20
ra
c
rES
a)
bll
D
7
4.1
z
C
0
U
+ 2017
- 2018
--ie 2019
2020
— 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
26
69
63
69
65
February
36
46
32
58
57
March
37
59
63
49
96
April
43
55
58
62
96
May
53
67
55
85
61
June
57
64
50
73
-
July
61
64
65
66
-
August
54
64
65
70
-
September
65
49
55
67
-
October
65
60
75
76
-
November
53
56
68
62
-
December
42
60
49
61
-
Grand Total
592
713
698
798
375
* IBR Offense: Pretenses/Swindling/Con Games 26A, Fraud - Credit Card/ATM 26B,
and Fraud - False & Fraud - Impersonation 26C
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Forgery - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
9
18
20
23
13
February
11
10
13
12
8
March
20
24
17
14
10
April
19
21
14
14
10
May
26
21
10
10
10
June
15
15
14
7
-
July
21
15
10
9
-
August
15
17
13
10
-
September
20
14
12
3
-
October
18
11
14
7
-
November
9
21
21
9
-
December
9
13
15
15
-
Grand Total
192
200
173
133
51
*IBR Offense: Counterfeiting/Forgery 250
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Theft - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
207
237
237
239
198
February
200
166
188
199
185
March
217
209
213
197
193
April
201
201
206
181
184
May
235
230
230
152
156
June
252
224
232
217
-
July
236
238
236
195
-
August
223
211
256
168
-
September
212
194
233
218
-
October
236
235
240
204
-
November
218
198
205
219
December
199
251
231
230
-
Grand Total
2,636
2,594
2,707
2,419
916
* IBR Offense: Theft - Pocket -Picking 23A, Theft - Purse -Snatching 23B, Theft- Shoplifting 23C, Theft
From Building 23D, Theft From Coin -Operated Machine 23E, Theft of Motor Vehicle Parts/Accessories
23G, and Theft -All Other 23H
Produced: 06/07/2021
Spokane County Sheriffs Office
Response Times by Priority
May 2021
Spokane Valley
SCSO Unincorporated
SCSO All
Priority Create To Dispatch Dispatch To Arrive Create To Arrive Create To Dispatch Dispatch To Arrive. Create To Arrive Create To Dispatch Dispatch To Arrive
1
00:02:27
00:03:14
00:05:41
2
00:10:27
00:07:31
00:17:58
3
00:31:20
00:09:36
00:40:56
4
01:07:52
00:07:35
01:15:27
Totals
0:23:01
0:08:39
0:31:40
00:02:22
00:08:19
00:10:41
00:13:24
00:11:40
00:25:04
00:34:27
00:14:11
00:48:38
00:22:59
00:07:38
00:30:37
0;25:19
0:12:59
0:38:18
Create To Arrive
00:02:25
00:05:47
00:08:11
00:11:45
00:09:20
00:21:05
00:32:44
00:11:40
00:44:23
00:47:45
00:07:36
00:55:21
0:24:02
0:10:35
0:34:37
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
1:40:48
1:26:24
1:12:00
0:57:36
0:43:12
0:28:48
0:14:24
0:00:00
Priority 1
Priority 2
--•—Priority 3
--Priority 4
Spokane Valley - Create to Dispatch
by hour grouping
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59
12:00 -
15:59
16:00 - 20:00 -
19:59 23:59
0:00:00 0:00:00 0:D1:46 0:00:00 0:02:13 0:03:17
0:12:05 0:08:55 0:09:51 0:11:36 0:13:33 0:06:47
0:24:17 0:26:09 0:27:24 0:42:04 0:38:13 0:15:58
0:00:00 0:0D:00 1:30:24 0:51:47 1:26:34 0:46:35
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
00:12:58
00:11:31
00:10:05
D0:08:38
00:07:12
00:05:46
00:04:19
00:02:53
00:01:26
00:00:00
—0— Priority 1
^—Priority 2
—Priority 3
—41•-Priority 4
Spokane Valley - Dispatch to Arrival
by hour grouping
00:00 -
04:00 -
03:59 07:59
00:00:00
00:05:26
D0:07:43
00:00:00
08:00 -
11:59
12:00 -
16:00 -
15:59 19:59
00:00:00 00:04:36 00:00:00 00:01:42
00:05:30 00:08:46 00:09:26 00:07:40
00:07:39 00:09:42 00:10:15 00:10:46
00:00:00 00:05:49 00:07:36 00:08:32
20:00 -
23:59
00:02:38
00:06:16
00:08:34
00:11:05
Spokane County Sheriff's Office
Response Times by Priority
May 2021
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
0:50:24
0:43:12
0:36:00
0:28:48
0:21:36
0:14:24
0:07:12
0:00:00
—•—Prioirty 1
-- Priority 2
--a—Priority 3
..Priority 4
SCSO Unincorporated- Create to Dispatch
by hour grouping
00:0▪ 0 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
0:00:00 0:00:00 0:03:20 0:01:43 0:02:43 0:01:19
0:06:50 0:08:53 0:10:08 0:15:00 0:21:16 0:12:02
0:17:23 0:29:26 0:31:19 0:38:05 0:46:36 0:22:55
0:05:24 0:00:00 0:17:00 0:33:08 0:38:34 0:11:08
a
1:26:24
1:12:00
0:57;36
0:43:12
0:28:48
0:14:24
0:00:00
—Priority 1
-Priority 2
..Priority 3
..Prioirty 4
SCSO All - Create to Dispatch
by hour grouping
00:00 - 04:00 -
03:59 07:59
0:00:00
0:09:53
0:21:59
0:05:24
08:a0 -
11:59
•
12:00 -
15:59
•
16:00 -
19:59
•
20:00 -
23:59
0:00:00 0:02:17 0:01:43 0:02:33 0:02:37
0:08:54 0:09:59 0:13:22 0:16:39 0:09:01
0:27:47 0:29:17 0:40:24 0:42:11 0:19:06
0:00:00 1:10:23 0:42:54 1:10:34 0:26:53
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
00:20:10
00:17:17
00:14:24
00:11:31
00:08:38
00:05:46
00:02:53
00:00:00
—Priority 1
Priority 2
--a—Priority 3
—4—Priority 4
SCSO Unincorporated- Dispatch to Arrival
by hour grouping
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
00:00:00 00:00:00 00:10:23 00:01:38 00:13:54 00:01:48
00:11:39 00:09:25 00:13:42 00:12:46 00:12:00 00:09:08
00:12:19 00:14:01 00:13:54 00:13:46 00:17:15 00:11:11
00:13:03 00:00:00 00:14:45 00:07:03 00:11:14 00:05:10
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
00:17:17
00:14:24
00:11:31
00:08:38
00:05:45
00:02:53
00:00:00
--�—Priority 1
Prioirty 2
— Prioirty 3
+ Prioirty 4
SCSO All - Dispatch to Arrival
by hour grouping
•
00:00 -
03:59
00:00:00
00:08:02
00:09:15
00:13:03
04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
00:00:00 00:06:32 00:01:38 00:09:50 00:02:21
00:07:18 00:10:45 00:11:10 00:09:24 00:07:29
00:10:48 00:11:43 00:11:44 00:13:50 00:09:45
00:00:00 00:08:15 00:07:20 00:09:26 00:07:48
SPOT<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Call Activity Heat Maps - Spokane Valley
May 2021
Citizen Calls by Day of Week and Hour
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
10
17
11
8
10
7
11
15
18
18
22
19
33
37
43
40
32
44
61
36
34
26
34
12
13
20
9
12
11
11
9
25
31
43
34
40
54
43
44
28
53
56
44
44
34
28
25
18
11
11
7
10
6
7
11
23
23
39
32
40
35
26
31
43
41
42
32
25
25
20
26
14
11
8
11
5
7
4
10
24
25
27
35
34
43
37
30
34
41
43
47
39
22
27
20
16
20
10
9
10
6
11
11
12
27
30
28
32
28
32
35
42
38
35
35
30
27
25
24
16
Friday Saturday Total
20
12
11
6
8
2
20
17
26
25
38
32
33
27
35
46
39
41
43
28
37
34
29
30
15
21.
13
10
11
6
16
13
16
36
42
34
42
35
35
37
31
49
37
38
46
36
43
34
100
99
71
61
59
48
88
129
166
218
231
231
268
237
253
270
275
310
299
240
225
196
201
140
Total 598
729
580
600
573
639
696 4415
Total Deputy Involved Incidents by Day of Week and Hour
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Total
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
21
15
9
9
8
7
8
11
15
18
19
16
23
31
19
17
20
23
29
22
17
28
27
17
14
13
11
9
9
7
8
22
36
38
37
37
41
32
38
26
34
35
28
32
26
40
24
15
23
11
5
8
9
9
12
33
17
25
27
21
28
17
22
31
25
19
18
24
23
11
24
18
22
14
10
5
11
8
9
30
29
30
36
37
33
29
31
28
29
26
31
37
20
30
19
24
17
15
11
10
4
11
14
23
25
42
26
32
32
22
34
30
20
17
25
20
26
23
29
24
24
11
6
6
7
3
16
11
19
24
22
21
25
20
24
23
23
27
26
15
26
27
20
26
15
19
11
10
6
6
14
17
15
32
27
27
30
24
25
24
18
35
23
31
37
19
39
41
136
98
63
57
54
51
81
147
156
209
194
191
212
175
193
179
169
182
180
181
175
178
182
165
Total 429 612 460 578 532 452 545 3608
Produced:06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regionai Intelligence Group 9
Citizen Cali For Service (CFS) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
3,088
3,405
3,351
3,521
3,680
February
2,942
2,862
3,170
3,638
3,342
March
3,546
3,597
3,711
3,504
4,052
April
3,416
3,460
3,839
3,405
4,078
May
3,987
4,331
4,516
3,941
4,415
June
3,955
4,006
4,349
4,153
July
4,459
4,467
4,976
4,570
August
4,204
4,286
4,680
4,319
September
3,799
4,048
4,318
4,259
October
3,718
3,927
4,072
3,909
November
3,353
3,582
3,646
3,392
December
3,406
3,530
3,668
3,678
Grand Total
43,873
45,501
48,296
46,289
19,567
*excludes calls handled by Crime Check only
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Citizen CFS With Deputy Response - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
2
▪ 6- 3
LL
L F-
tU ! GJ U7
E D O D
4
a) U QI V
O- 0 UJ
m 2 0
V)
+ 2017
2018
-lir- 2019
2020
-)x-2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
1,941
2,208
2,189
2,319
2,295
February
1,787
1,865
2,011
2,364
2,072
March
2,224
2,375
2,386
2,321
2,398
April
2,119
2,230
2,418
2,416
2,475
May
2,478
2,731
2,851
2,650
2,605
June
2,416
2,516
2,654
2,677
July
2,609
2,685
2,983
2,660
August
2,589
2,639
2,852
2,708
September
2,336
2,555
2,725
2,524
October
2,292
2,510
2,547
2,462
November
2,131
2,350
2,416
2,170
December
2,157
2,314
2,402
2,301
Grand Total
27,079
28,978
30,434
29,572
11,845
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Citizen CFS Without Deputy Response - Spokane Valley
Tirne Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
1,147
1,197
1,162
1,202
1,385
February
1,155
997
1,159
1,274
1,270
March
1,322
1,222
1,325
1,183
1,654
April
1,297
1,230
1,421
989
1,603
May
1,509
1,600
1,665
1,291
1,810
June
1,539
1,490
1,695
1,476
July
1,850
1,782
1,993
1,910
August
1,615
1,647
1,828
1,611
September
1,463
1,493
1,593
1,735
October
1,426
1,417
1,525
1,447
November
1,222
1,232
1,230
1,222
December
1,249
1,216
1,266
1,377
Grand Total
16,794
16,523
17,862
16,717
7,722
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Deputy Initiated Incidents - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
-11- 2017
-M- 2018
-�2019
- 2020
-x- 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
1,446
1,694
2,024
1,601
1,114
February
1,328
1,481
1,608
1,518
983
March
1,870
2,063
1,614
1,166
1,000
April
1,425
1,683
1,650
1,172
997
May
1,553
1,789
1,157
1,567
1,003
June
1,503
1,699
1,724
1,070
July
1,504
1,793
1,600
1,036
August
1,737
1,637
1,565
1,130
September
1,671
1,773
1,779
1,285
October
1,560
1,595
1,472
1,239
November
1,732
1,841
1,487
1,164
December
1,574
1,661
1,436
1,208
Grand Total
18,903
20,709
19,116
15,156
5,097
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Total Deputy Involved Incidents - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
dorm ailow
4 0 0,
{, L L '-
v. cii
iu 1 cu < > L)
LL 0 N
cu cil Z d
-4-2017
-a- 2018
2019
y-ar- 2020
-w- 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
3,387
3,902
4,213
3,920
3,409
February
3,115
3,346
3,619
3,882
3,055
March
4,094
4,438
4,000
3,487
3,398
April
3,544
3,913
4,068
3,588
3,472
May
4,031
4,520
4,008
4,217
3,608
June
3,919
4,215
4,378
3,747
July
4,113
4,478
4,583
3,696
August
4,326
4,276
4,417
3,838
September
4,007
4,328
4,504
3,809
October
3,852
4,105
4,019
3,701
November
3,863
4,191
3,903
3,334
December
3,731
3,975
3,838
3,509
Grand Total
45,982
49,687
49,550
44,728
16,942
Produced:06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Crime Check Call For Service (CFS) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
612
662
631
627
622
February
608
488
504
689
659
March
647
659
651
690
760
April
667
602
703
684
739
May
699
697
763
1,113
767
June
698
703
630
793
July
712
727
717
782
August
690
673
731
837
September
667
626
655
812
October
667
713
747
735
November
571
661
615
643
December
635
609
683
668
Grand Total
7,873
7,820
8,030
9,073
3,547
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Ticket Counts
Date Range: May 2021
Ticket Type
Criminal Non Traffic
Criminal Traffic
Infraction Non Traffic
Infraction Traffic
Parking
Spokane Valley Districts
Ticket Count Charges Count
54 62
29 32
3 1
157 219
0 0
Unincorporated Districts
Ticket Count Charges Count
85 100
66 76
0 0
196 272
0 0
All Districts
Ticket Count Charges Count
139 162
95 108
3 1
353 491
0 0
Totals:
Ticket Type
Criminal Non Traffic
Criminal Traffic
infraction Non Traffic
Infraction Traffic
Parking
243 314 347 448 590 762
Deer Park
Ticket Count Charges Count
0 0
1 1
0 0
4 4
0 0
Medical Lake
Ticket Count Charges Count
1 1
1 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
Millwood
Ticket Count Charges Count
0 0
1 3
0
3
0
0
5
0
Totals: 5 5 2 2 4 8
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Ticket Charge Details - Spokane Valley
Date Range: May 2021
Charge
Count
(blank)
05.04.032.14: DANGEROUS DOG VIOLATIONS
26.50.110.1: ORDER, PROTECT VIO DV
46.16A.030.2: OPER VEH W/O CRNT/PRPR REG & PLATE
46.16A.030.4: FAIL TO INITIALLY REGISTER VEHICLE
46.16A.030.51: FL RENEW EXPIRED REG <= 2 MTHS
46.16A.030.5.0: FL RENEW EXPIRED REG>2 MTHS
46.16A.305: IMPROPER DISPLAY TEMPORARY PERMIT
46.16A.320,3A: TRIP PERMIT VIOLATION -USAGE
46.20.005: DRIVING WITHOUT A LICENSE
46,20.015: NO VALID OPERATORS LICENSE-2D
46.20.017: LICENSE NOT IN POSSESSION
46.20.342.1A: DWLS 1ST DEGREE
46.20.342.1B: DWLS 2ND DEGREE
46.20.500: CYCLE(OPERATE W/O ENDORSEMENT)
46.20.740: MV IGNITION INTERLOCK DRIVE VEH WO
46.30.020: LIABILITY INSURANCE VIOLATION
46.32.020: VIOLATION OF MOTOR CARRIER RULES (EQUIP/LOGBOOK/MED CERT)
46.37.020: LAMPS, OPERATE VEH WO HEADLGHT WHEN REQ
46.37.050: DEFECTIVE LIGHTS
46.37.200: LAMPS, DEFECT TURN SIGNALS -STOP LAMPS
46.37.420: TIRES, ILLEGAL USE STUDDED OR NON -PNEUMATIC TIRES
46.52.020: OLD CODE:VEH(HIT/RUN PERSON AT
46.61.050: DISREGARD TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIGN
46,61,055: FAIL TO OBEY TRAFFIC CONTROL LEGEND
46.61.140: IMPROPER LANE USAGE
46.61.145,1: FOLLOW VEHICLE TOO CLOSELY
46.61,180.1: FAIL TO YIELD TO VEHICLE APPROACHING INTERSECTION
46.61.185.1: FAIL YIELD LEFT TURN MOTOR VEHICLE
46.61.190.2: FAIL STOP AT STOP SIGN/INTERSECTION
46.61.190,3: FAIL YIELD AT YIELD SIGN/INTERSECTION
46,61.195: FAIL TO STOP YIELD ENTER ARTERIAL
46.61.205.1: FAIL YIELD PRIVATE RD MOTOR VEHICLE
46.61.212,1: FAIL TO YIELD STATIONARY EMERG VEH
46.61.235.1: FAIL TO YIELD PED IN CROSSWALK
46.61.290: TURN, PROHIBIT -IMPROPER
46.61.305: FAIL TO SIGNAL STOP -TURN UNSAFE LANE
46.61.370: PASS STOPPED SCHOOL BUS
46.61.400.05U: SPEED 5 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.08U: SPEED 8 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.10U; SPEED 10 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.11 U:
46.61.400.12 U :
46.61.400.13U:
46.61.400.14U:
46.61.400.15U:
46.61.400.16U:
46.61.400.17U:
46.61.400.18U:
SPEED 11 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
SPEED 12 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
SPEED 13 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
SPEED 14 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
SPEED 15 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
SPEED 16 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
SPEED 17 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
SPEED 18 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400,19U: SPEED 19 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61,400.20: SPEED 20 OVER (OVER 40)
46.61.400.20U: SPEED 20 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
Produced: 6/7/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Ticket Charge Details - Spokane Valley
Date Range: May 2021
Charge
Count
46.61.400.22: SPEED 22 OVER (OVER 40)
46.61.400.24U: SPEED 24 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61,400,25U: SPEED 25 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.29U: SPEED 29 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.45: SPEED 45 OVER (OVER 40)
46.61.500: RECKLESS DRIVING
46.61,502: OLD CODE:VEH(DWUIL/DRUG)NEW
46.61.504: OLD CODE:VEH(PHY/UNIL/DRUG)NEW
46.61.672.1: PER ELECTRONIC DEVICE WHILE DRIVING
46.61,687: FAILTO USE CHILD RESTRAINTS
46.61.688: FAILTO WEAR SAFETY BELT
9A.36,041 GM: ASSAULT-4D
9A.36.041.2: ASSAULT4TH DEGREE
9A.46.020.1: HARASSMENT
9A,48,090,1A: MALICIOUS MISCHIEF-3D
9A.48.090: MALICIOUS MISCHIEF-3
9A.52.070.1: CRIMINAL TRESPASS FIRST DEGREE
9A.52.070: TRESPASS 1
9A.52.080: TRESPASS 2
9A.52.100.1.A: VEHICLE PROWLING 2 ATTEMPT
9A.56.050 [26A] GM: THEFT 3D (DINE & DASH)
9A.56.050: OLD CODE: THEFT-3D
9A.56,330.1: UNLAW POSSESS OF OTHERS ID
9A.76.020: OBSTRUCT LE OFF
9A,76.040: OBSTRUCT GOVT-RESISTING ARREST
9A.76.175: OBSTRUCT GOVT-MAKING FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENT TO PUBLIC SERVANT
9A.84.030: DISORDERLY CONDUCT
C-05.04.030(2): DOG AND CAT LICENSE VIOLATIONS
1
1
1
1
1
2
13
1
9
2
4
2
11
1
1
7
1
1
3
1
1
12
1
4
4
4
1
1
Grand Total 319
Produced: 6/7/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Criminal Ticket Counts - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
152
176
207
173
124
February
140
130
174
185
128
March
165
195
172
140
117
April
103
149
171
153
116
May
116
175
132
154
83
June
149
179
186
171
July
165
184
172
130
August
147
147
168
153
September
125
169
174
162
October
164
178
176
175
November
163
157
169
130
December
148
188
168
133
Grand Total
1,737
2,027
2,069
1,859
568
*Ticket type of Criminal Non Traffic & Criminal Traffic
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Non - Criminal Ticket Counts - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
+ 2017
-2018
2020
-- 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
398
367
357
198
195
February
238
338
261
268
173
March
422
472
226
133
166
April
110
219
299
111
193
May
241
385
130
164
160
June
380
489
421
127
July
295
499
359
217
August
357
257
297
204
September
461
480
306
205
October
365
387
272
140
November
330
366
253
195
December
274
254
253
239
Grand Total
3,871
4,513
3,434
2,201
887
*Ticket Type of infraction Non Traffic & Infraction Traffic
Produced: 06/07/2021
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
All Ticket Counts - Spokane Valley
Time Period: May 2021
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
January
550
543
564
371
319
February
378
468
435
453
301
March
587
667
398
273
283
April
213
368
470
264
309
May
357
560
262
318
243
June
529
668
607
298
July
460
683
_ 531
347
August
504
404
465
357
September
586
649
480
367
October
529
565
448
315
November
493
523
422
325
December
422
442
421
372
Grand Total
5,608
6,540
5,503
4,060
1,455
*AII ticket types except parking
Produced: 06/07/2021
Sp kane
Valley
Memorandum
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director
10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206
Phone: (509) 720-5000 • Fax: (509) 720-5075 •
www.spokanevalley.org
To: Mark Calhoun, City Manager
From: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director
Date: June 24, 2021
Re: Finance Department Activity Report — May 2021
Following is information pertaining to Finance Department activities through the end of May 2021
and included herein is an updated 2021 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and
Expenditures through the end of May.
2020 Year-end Process
The 2020 books were closed in April and the annual financial report was completed and filed in
May. We hope to have the State Auditor's Office on site by early July to begin the audit of 2020.
2021 Budget Amendment
As we have progressed through 2021 the need for a number of budget amendments has arisen.
Council review will take place at the following meetings:
• May 4 Admin Report
• May 18 Public Hearing
• May 18 First reading on proposed ordinance amending the 2021 Budget
• May 25 Second reading on proposed ordinance amending the 2021 Budget
2022 Budget Development
The 2022 Budget development process began in the Finance Department in early March, and
on April 6th we sent detailed budget requests to all departments to complete by mid -May. By the
time the budget is scheduled to be adopted on November 9th, the Council will have had an
opportunity to discuss the budget on seven occasions including three public hearings.
• June 15 Council budget workshop
• August 17 Admin report on 2022 revenues and expenditures
• September 14 Public hearing #1 on the 2022 revenues and expenditures
• September 21 City Manager's presentation of preliminary 2022 Budget
• October 12 Public hearing #2 on 2022 Budget
• October 26 First reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2022 Budget
• November 9 Public hearing #3 on the 2022 Budget
• November 9 Second reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2022 Budget
P:1FinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1202112021 05 31.docx Page 1
Budget to Actual Comparison Report
A report reflecting 2021 Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for those funds for which
a 2021 Budget was adopted is located on pages 5 through 18. Because we attempt to provide
this information in a timely manner, this report is prepared from records that are not formally
closed by the Finance Department at month end or reconciled to bank records. Although it is
realistic to expect the figures will change over subsequent weeks, I believe the report is materially
accurate.
We've included the following information in the report:
• Revenues by source for all funds, and expenditures by department in the General Fund and
by type in all other funds.
• A breakdown between recurring and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures in the General
Fund, Street O&M Fund and Stormwater Fund.
• The change in fund balance including beginning and ending figures. The beginning fund
balance figures are those that are reflected in our 2020 Annual Financial Report.
• Columns of information include:
o The 2021 Budget as adopted
o May 2021 activity
o Cumulative 2021 activity through May 2021
o Budget remaining in terms of dollars
o The percent of budgeted revenue collected or budgeted expenditures disbursed
A few points related to the General Fund #001 (page 5):
Recurring revenues collections are currently at 40.89% of the amount budgeted with 41.67% of
the year elapsed.
• Property taxes are paid to Spokane County in two installments each year on April 30 and
October 31 and are then remitted to the City primarily in May and November with lesser
amounts typically remitted in June and December. Property taxes received thus far in 2021
are $4,771,427 or 37.50% of the amount budgeted.
• Sales tax collections represent only 4-months of collections thus far because taxes collected
in May are not remitted to the City by the State until the latter part of June. Collections are
currently at $10,147,963 or 40.27% of the amount budgeted.
• Gambling taxes are at $179,097 or 46.64% of the amount budgeted. Gambling taxes are
paid quarterly with second quarter payments due by July 31s1
• Franchise Fee and Business Registration revenues are typically received in the month
following a calendar year quarter. So far in 2021 we have received $361,367 or 29.74% of the
amount budgeted.
• State shared revenues are composed of State of Washington distributions that include items
such as liquor board profits, liquor excise tax, streamlined sales tax mitigation and criminal
justice monies. Most of these revenues are paid by the State in the month following a
calendar quarter. Through May we've received remittances totaling $611,752 or 34.76% of
the amount budgeted.
• Fines and forfeitures revenues are composed of monthly remittances from Spokane County
with payments made in the month following the actual assessment of a fine and false alarm
fees. Through May we've received remittances through the month of April with receipts of
$165,094 or 16.34% of the amount budgeted. This amount is lower than average this year
because of a change in accounting rules that requires the City to account for the passed
through District Court revenues in a separate custodial fund. There will be a future budget
amendment moving those passed through revenues to the new fund.
P:1FinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1202112021 05 31.docx Page 2
• Community and Public Works service revenues are largely composed of building permit and
plan review fees as well as right of way permits. Revenues are currently at $2,372,971 or
124.32% of the amount budgeted.
• Recreation program revenues are composed of revenues generated by the variety of parks
and recreation programs including classes, swimming pools (in -season), and CenterPlace.
Currently, revenues total $50,662 or 7.87% of the amount budgeted.
Recurring expenditures are currently at $15,884,891 or 34.95% of the amount budgeted with
41.67% of the year elapsed.
Investments (page 19)
Investments at May 31 total $81,264,635 and are composed of $76,185,976 in the Washington
State Local Government Investment Pool and $5,078,659 in bank CDs.
Total Sales Tax Receipts (page 20)
Total sales tax receipts reflect State remittances through May and total $11,321,226 including
general, criminal justice, and public safety taxes. This figure is $3,001,557 or 36.08% greater than
the same four -month period in 2020.
Economic Indicators (pages 21 — 23)
The following economic indicators provide information pertaining to three different sources of tax
revenue that provide a good gauge of the health and direction of the overall economy.
1. Sales taxes (page 21) provide a sense of how much individuals and businesses are spending
on the purchase of goods.
2. Hotel / Motel taxes (page 22) provide us with a sense of overnight stays and visits to our area
by tourists or business travelers.
3. Real Estate Excise taxes (page 23) provide us with a sense of real estate sales.
Page 21 provides a 10-year history of general sales tax receipts (not including public safety or
criminal justice) with monthly detail beginning January 2012.
• Compared with calendar year 2020, 2021 collections have increased by $2,802,262 or
38.15%.
• Tax receipts reached an all-time high in 2020 of $25,238,481, besting the previous record
year of 2019 when $24,204,762 was collected.
Page 22 provides a 10-year history of hotel/motel tax receipts with monthly detail beginning
January 2012.
• Compared with calendar year 2020, 2021 collections have increased by $2,467 or 1.90%.
• Collections reached an all-time high in 2019 of $743,851, and subsequently decreased to
$443,243 in 2020.
• The decrease from prior year reflects the effects of COVID-19 on the economy.
Page 23 provides a 10-year history of real estate excise tax receipts with monthly detail
beginning January 2012.
• Compared with calendar year 2020, 2021 collections have increased by $672,605 or 78.47%.
• Collections reached an all-time high in 2018 of $3,800,432, and subsequently decreased to a
range of approximately $3,334,000 to $3,658,000 in the years 2019 through 2020.
P:1FinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1202112021 05 31.docx Page 3
Debt Capacity and Bonds Outstandinq (page 24)
This page provides information on the City's debt capacity, or the dollar amount of General
Obligation (G.O.) Bonds the City may issue, as well as an amortization schedule of the bonds the
City currently has outstanding.
• The maximum amount of G.O. bonds the City may issue is determined by the assessed value
for property taxes which for 2021 is $11,553,065,482. Following the December 1, 2020 debt
service payments, the City has $11,120,000 of nonvoted G.O. bonds outstanding which
represents 6.42% of our nonvoted bond capacity, and 1.28% of our total debt capacity for all
types of bonds. Of this amount:
o $4,100,000 remains on bonds issued for the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds
are repaid with a portion of the 1/10 of 1 % sales tax that is collected by the Spokane Public
Facilities District.
o $450,000 remains on bonds issued for road and street improvements around CenterPlace.
The bonds are repaid with a portion of the real estate excise tax collected by the City.
o $6,570,000 remains on bonds issued for construction of the new City Hall. The bonds are
to be repaid with General Fund revenues.
Street Fund Revenue Sources (pages 25 and 26)
The last two charts reflect a history for the two primary sources of revenue in Street Fund #101.
These include:
Page 25 provides a 10-year history of Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax collections with monthly detail
beginning January 2012.
• Compared with calendar year 2020, 2021 collections have decreased by $6,694 or 1.20%.
• Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at just approximately $2.1 million, and subsequently decreased
to a range of approximately $1,847,000 to $1,745,000 in the years 2012 through 2020.
• The decrease from prior year reflects the effects of COVID-19 on the economy.
Page 26 provides a 10-year history of Telephone Utility Tax collections with monthly detail
beginning January 2012.
• Compared with 2020, 2021 collections have decreased by $139,813 or 28.72%. Unlike tax
revenues collected by the State and remitted monthly, these taxes are paid to the City directly
by the service provider. Consequently there is not a "clean cutoff' in terms of when a vendor
pays the tax.
• Tax receipts peaked in 2009 at $3,054,473 and have decreased each year since, due to what
we suspect is the reduction in land lines by individual households.
• The 2021 budget was adopted with a revenue estimate of $1,431,000. We will watch actual
receipts closely as the year progresses.
P:1FinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1202112021 05 31.docx Page 4
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
#001 - GENERAL FUND
RECURRING ACTIVITY
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
Revenues
Property Tax 12,724,200 3,961,913 4,771,427 (7,952,773) 37.50%
Sales Tax 25,200,000 3,029,090 10,147,963 (15,052,037) 40.27%
Sales Tax - Public Safety 1,160,000 121,668 423,339 (736,661) 36.49%
Sales Tax - Criminal Justice 2,040,000 218,765 749,924 (1,290,077) 36.76%
Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 384,000 3,955 179,097 (204,903) 46.64%
Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,215,000 16,249 361,367 (853,633) 29.74%
State Shared Revenues 1,760,000 0 611,752 (1,148,248) 34.76%
Fines, Forfeitures and Penalties 1,010,200 39,497 165,094 (845,106) 16.34%
Community and Public Works 1,908,719 287,371 2,372,971 464,252 124.32%
Recreation Program Revenues 643,600 21,568 50,662 (592,938) 7.87%
Miscellaneous Department Revenue 21,000 34 20,588 (412) 98.04%
Miscellaneous & Investment Interest 592,500 16,529 53,554 (538,946) 9.04%
Transfers in - #105 (h/m tax-CP advertising) 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00%
Total Recurring Revenues 48,689,219 7,716,638 19,907,739 (28,781,480) 40.89%
Expenditures
City Council 638,672 35,349 246,715 391,957 38.63%
City Manager 1,163,839 85,597 407,705 756,134 35.03%
City Attorney 718,593 60,518 281,276 437,317 39.14%
Public Safety 28,383,761 2,245,186 10,868,861 17,514,900 38.29%
Deputy City Manager 284,844 20,431 103,301 181,543 36.27%
Finance / IT 1,500,659 106,106 543,491 957,168 36.22%
Human Resources 318,540 24,136 126,816 191,724 39.81%
City Hall Operations and Maintenance 373,601 18,896 139,644 233,957 37.38%
Community & Public Works - Engineering 2,098,642 157,853 687,195 1,411,447 32.74%
Community & Public Works - Econ Dev 1,097,061 58,534 319,867 777,194 29.16%
Community & Public Works - Bldg & Plan 2,414,558 193,380 982,907 1,431,651 40.71%
Parks & Rec - Administration 355,427 22,387 134,910 220,517 37.96%
Parks & Rec - Maintenance 940,003 71,416 341,534 598,469 36.33%
Parks & Rec - Recreation 328,534 11,673 58,307 270,227 17.75%
Parks & Rec - Aquatics 510,053 4,563 12,328 497,725 2.42%
Parks & Rec - Senior Center 35,403 2,030 11,982 23,421 33.85%
Parks & Rec - CenterPlace 972,214 54,185 273,487 698,727 28.13%
General Government 1,297,380 98,996 344,565 952,815 26.56%
Transfers out - #204 ('16 LTGO bond debt service) 401,500 0 0 401,500 0.00%
Transfers out - #309 (park capital projects) 160,000 0 0 160,000 0.00%
Transfers out - #311 (pavement preservation) 991,843 0 0 991,843 0.00%
Transfers out - #501 (CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 36,600 0 0 36,600 0.00%
Transfers out - #502 (insurance premium) 425,000 0 0 425,000 0.00%
Total Recurring Expenditures 45,446,727 3,271,234 15,884,891 29,561,836 34.95%
Recurring Revenues Over (Under)
Recurring Expenditures 3,242,492 4,445,404 4,022,848 780,356
Page 5
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021 \2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
#001 - GENERAL FUND - continued
NONRECURRING ACTIVITY
Revenues
Grant Proceeds
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
49,000 0 15,735 (33,265) 32.11%
Total Nonrecurring Revenues 49,000 0 15,735 (33,265) 32.11%
Expenditures
City Manager (office furniture for Housing Sery empl 5,000 0 0 5,000 0.00%
Public Safety (replace HVAC units at Precinct) 62,000 0 0 62,000 0.00%
Public Safety (replace handguns) 37,500 0 0 37,500 0.00%
Public Safety (radar trailer) 11,400 0 0 11,400 0.00%
Public Safety (Precinct access control gate) 20,000 0 0 20,000 0.00%
Public Safety (Precinct fire panel replacement) 10,000 0 0 10,000 0.00%
Public Safety (Equipment for bike patrols) 0 4,570 4,570 (4,570) 0.00%
Public Safety (DEMS/Tasers/BodyCams) 109,608 0 0 109,608 0.00%
City Hall Chambers (east wall repairs) 0 74,449 165,279 (165,279) 0.00%
Community & Public Works (Ecology SMP Update) 25,000 850 10,585 14,415 42.34%
Community & Public Works (Housing Action Plan) 0 0 52,039 (52,039) 0.00%
Windstorm 2021 Cleanup Costs 32,000 0 0 32,000 0.00%
General Government - IT capital replacements 212,800 0 0 212,800 0.00%
General Government (Covid-19 Related Costs) 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Transfers out - #101 (Street Fund operations) 2,552,600 0 0 2,552,600 0.00%
Transfers out - #122 (replenish reserve) 364,440 0 0 364,440 0.00%
Transfers out - #309 (CenterPlace west lawn) 14,876 0 0 14,876 0.00%
Transfers out - #309 (CenterPlace roof repairs) 12,227 0 0 12,227 0.00%
Transfers out - #312 ('19 fund bal >50%) 11,126,343 0 0 11,126,343 0.00%
Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 14,595,794 79,869 232,473 14,363,321 1.59%
Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under)
Nonrecurring Expenditures (14,546,794) (79,869) (216,738) 14,330,056
Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues
Over (Under) Total Expenditures (11,304,302) 4,365,535 3,806,110 15,110,412
Beginning fund balance 42,516,032 42,516,032
Ending fund balance 31,211,730 46,322,142
Page 6
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
#101 - STREET FUND
RECURRING ACTIVITY
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
Revenues
Telephone Utility Tax 1,000,000 83,108 347,029 (652,971) 34.70%
Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax 1,800,000 140,487 550,999 (1,249,001) 30.61%
Multimodal Transportation 130,600 0 32,710 (97,890) 25.05%
Right -of -Way Maintenance Fee 70,000 741 4,590 (65,410) 6.56%
Investment Interest 4,000 8 113 (3,887) 2.83%
Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 50,000 50,324 40,324 503.24%
Total Recurring Revenues 3,014,600 274,344 985,765 (2,028,835) 32.70%
Expenditures
Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 1,127,920 78,126 463,186 664,734 41.07%
Supplies 156,050 8,179 65,271 90,779 41.83%
Services & Charges 2,525,828 381,150 649,919 1,875,909 25.73%
Snow Operations 751,652 57,516 369,563 382,089 49.17%
Intergovernmental Payments 935,000 48,590 137,617 797,383 14.72%
Transfers out - #501 (non -plow vehicle rental) 10,250 0 0 10,250 0.00%
Transfers out - #501 (plow replace) 60,500 0 0 60,500 0.00%
Total Recurring Expenditures 5,567,200 573,561 1,685,557 3,881,643 30.28%
Recurring Revenues Over (Under)
Recurring Expenditures (2,552,600) (299,217) (699,792) 1,852,808
NONRECURRING ACTIVITY
Revenues
Insurance Proceeds (traffic signal cabinet) 0 0 16,601 16,601 0.00%
Utilities Tax Recovery 0 0 50,472 50,472 0.00%
Transfers in - #001 2,552,600 0 0 (2,552,600) 0.00%
Total Nonrecurring Revenues 2,552,600 0 67,073 (2,485,527) 2.63%
Expenditures
Emergency Traffic Control Repairs 0 532 12,032 (12,032) 0.00%
Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 0 532 12,032 (12,032) 0.00%
Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under)
Nonrecurring Expenditures 2,552,600 (532) 55,041 (2,497,559)
Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues
Over (Under) Total Expenditures 0 (299,749) (644,751) (644,751)
Beginning fund balance 759,299 759,299
Ending fund balance 759,299 114,548
#103 - PATHS & TRAILS
Revenues
Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax
Investment Interest
8,700 593 2,324 (6,376) 26.71%
200 1 7 (193) 3.27%
Total revenues 8,900 594 2,330 (6,570) 26.19%
Expenditures
Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 8,900
Beginning fund balance 21,516
Ending fund balance 30,416
594
2,330
21,516
23,846
(6,570)
Page 7
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#104 - TOURISM FACILITIES HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND
Revenues
Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel Tax 213,000 28,865 85,707 (127,293) 40.24%
Investment Interest 24,000 160 865 (23,135) 3.61%
Transfers in - #105 453,840 0 0 (453,840) 0.00%
Total revenues
Expenditures
Capital Outlay
Total expenditures
690,840 29,025 86,572 (604,268) 12.53%
0
0 0 0 0.00%
0
0 0 0 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 690,840 29,025 86,572 (604,268)
Beginning fund balance 2,986,573 2,986,573
Ending fund balance 3,677,413 3,073,145
#106 - HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND
Revenues
Hotel/Motel Tax 346,000 44,476 132,058 (213,942) 38.17%
Investment Interest 6,000 48 249 (5,751) 4.16%
Total revenues
352,000 44,524 132,307 (219,693) 37.59%
Expenditures
Transfers out - #001 30,000 0 0 30,000 0.00%
Transfers out - #104 453,840 0 0 453,840 0.00%
Tourism Promotion 224,400 5,371 5,371 219,029 2.39%
Total expenditures 708,240 5,371 5,371 702,869 0.76%
Revenues over (under) expenditures (356,240) 39,153 126,936
Beginning fund balance 798,716 798,716
Ending fund balance 442,476 925,652
(922,562)
#106 - SOLID WASTE
Revenues
Solid Waste Administrative Fees 225,000 308,258 644,246 (419,246) 286.33%
Solid Waste Road Wear Fee 1,500,000 0 0 1,500,000 0.00%
Investment Interest 12,000 71 424 11,576 3.53%
Total revenues 1,737,000 308,329 644,670 1,092,330 37.11%
Expenditures
Transfers out - #311 1,500,000 0 0 1,500,000 0.00%
Education & Contract Administration 237,000 4,824 19,523 217,477 8.24%
Total expenditures 1,737,000 4,824 19,523 1,717,477 1.12%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 303,505 625,147 (625,147)
Beginning fund balance 726,788 726,788
Ending fund balance 726,788 1,351,935
#107 - PEG FUND
Revenues
Comcast PEG Contribution
Investment Interest
79,000 0 18,435 60,565 23.34%
0 10 53 (53) 0.00%
Total revenues 79,000 10 18,488 60,512 23.40%
Expenditures
PEG Reimbursement - CMTV 39,500 0 0 39,500 0.00%
Capital Outlay 33,500 849 887 32,613 2.65%
Total expenditures 73,000 849 887 72,113 1.22%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 6,000 (839) 17,601 (11,601)
Beginning fund balance 181,773 181,773
Ending fund balance 187,773 199,374
Page 8
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#108 -AFFORDABLE & SUPPORTIVE HOUSING TAX FUND
Revenues
Affordable & Supportive Housing Tax 193,000 0 54,437 138,563 28.21%
Investment Interest 0 11 55 (55) 0.00%
Total revenues
193,000 11 54,493 138,507 28.23%
Expenditures
Affordable & Supportive Housing Program 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 193,000 11 54,493 138,507
Beginning fund balance 152,033 152,033
Ending fund balance 345,033 206,526
#120 - CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND
Revenues
Investment Interest
Transfers in
0
0
0 0 0 0.00%
0 0 0 0.00%
Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Expenditures
Operations
Total expenditures
0
0 0 0 0.00%
0
0 0 0 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 0 0 0
Beginning fund balance 300,000 300,000
Ending fund balance 300,000 300,000
#121 - SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND
Revenues
Investment Interest
Transfers in
0
0
0 0 0 0.00%
0 0 0 0.00%
Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Expenditures
Operations
Total expenditures
0
0 0 0 0.00%
0
0 0 0 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 0 0 0
Beginning fund balance 5,500,000 5,500,000
Ending fund balance 5,500,000 5,500,000
#122 - WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND
Revenues
Investment Interest 1,900 8 34 (1,866) 1.82%
Transfers in - #001 364,440 0 0 (364,440) 0.00%
Subtotal revenues
366,340 8 34 (366,306) 0.01%
Expenditures
Snow removal expenses 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00%
Transfers out - #101 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total expenditures 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures (133,660) 8 34 (866,306)
Beginning fund balance 160,043 160,043
Ending fund balance 26,383 160,078
Page 9
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#204 - DEBT SERVICE FUND
Revenues
Spokane Public Facilities District 480,800 80,400 80,400 (400,400) 16.72%
Transfers in -#001 401,500 0 0 (401,500) 0.00%
Transfers in - #301 80,775 0 0 (80,775) 0.00%
Transfers in - #302 80,775 0 0 (80,775) 0.00%
Total revenues
1,043,850 80,400 80,400 (963,450) 7.70%
Expenditures
Debt Service Payments - CenterPlace 480,800 80,400 80,400 400,400 16.72%
Debt Service Payments - Roads 161,550 8,275 8,275 153,275 5.12%
Debt Service Payments -'16 LTGO Bond 401,500 115,750 115,750 285,750 28.83%
Total expenditures 1,043,850 204,425 204,425 839,425 19.58%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 (124,025) (124,025) (1,802,875)
Beginning fund balance 0 0
Ending fund balance 0 (124,025)
Page 10
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021 \2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
#301 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Revenues
REET 1 - Taxes
Investment Interest
Total revenues
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
1,000,000 235,409 764,873 (235,127) 76.49%
25,000 146 823 (24,177) 3.29%
1,025,000 235,555 765,696 (259,304) 74.70%
Expenditures
Transfers out - #204 80,775 0 0 80,775 0.00%
Transfers out - #303 316,620 0 3,969 312,651 1.25%
Transfers out - #311 (pavement preservation) 827,278 0 0 827,278 0.00%
Total expenditures 1,224,673 0 3,969 1,220,704 0.32%
Revenues over (under) expenditures (199,673) 235,555 761,728 (1,480,008)
Beginning fund balance 2,048,068 2,048,068
Ending fund balance 1,848,395 2,809,796
#302 - SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Revenues
REET 2 - Taxes 1,000,000 235,409 764,873 (235,127) 76.49%
Investment Interest 25,000 308 1,648 (23,352) 6.59%
Total revenues
1,025,000 235,716 766,521 (258,479) 74.78%
Expenditures
Transfers out - #204 80,775 0 0 80,775 0.00%
Transfers out - #303 1,662,684 0 24,735 1,637,949 1.49%
Transfers out - #311 (pavement preservation) 827,279 0 0 827,279 0.00%
Transfers out-#314 1,127,387 0 0 1,127,387 0.00%
Total expenditures 3,698,125 0 24,735 3,673,390 0.67%
Revenues over (under) expenditures (2,673,125) 235,716 741,786 (3,931,869)
Beginning fund balance 5,165,924 5,165,924
Ending fund balance 2,492,799 5,907,710
Page 11
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#303 STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Revenues
Developer Contribution 53,703 0 0 (53,703) 0.00%
Grant Proceeds 6,843,308 161,498 613,655 (6,229,653) 8.97%
Transfers in - #301 316,620 0 3,969 (312,651) 1.25%
Transfers in -#302 1,662,684 0 24,735 (1,637,949) 1.49%
Transfers in - #312 0 0 249 249 0.00%
Investment Interest 0 15 183 183 0.00%
Total revenues
8,876,315
161,513 642,791
(8,233,524) 7.24%
Expenditures
205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement 329,453 3,778 8,806 320,647 2.67%
249 Sullivan & Wellesley Intersection 1,020,522 6,592 67,313 953,209 6.60%
259 North Sullivan ITS Project 0 80 1,265 (1,265) 0.00%
267 Mission SW - Bowdish to Union 11,310 0 0 11,310 0.00%
275 Barker Rd Widening - River to Euclid 1,132,320 731,947 1,087,357 44,963 96.03%
285 Indiana Ave Pres - Evergreen to Sullivan 7,210 0 0 7,210 0.00%
292 Mullen Preservation: Broadway -Mission 0 27,390 27,390 (27,390) 0.00%
293 2018 CSS Citywide Reflective Signal BP 74,250 147 7,234 67,016 9.74%
294 Citywide Reflective Post Panels 17,875 1,162 2,927 14,948 16.38%
299 Argonne Rd Concrete Pvmt Indiana to Mont 2,392,450 12,959 75,718 2,316,732 3.16%
300 Pines & Mission Intersection Improvements 498,000 1,225 13,188 484,812 2.65%
301 Park & Mission Intersection Improvements 693,000 2,527 10,596 682,404 1.53%
303 S. Conklin Road Sidewalk 0 0 162 (162) 0.00%
310 Sullivan Rd Overcrossing UP RR Deck Rep. 317,625 1,778 7,153 310,472 2.25%
313 Barker Road/Union Pacific Crossing 1,312,500 675 20,637 1,291,863 1.57%
318 Wilbur Sidewalk: Boone to Mission 50,000 2,957 14,637 35,363 29.27%
320 Sullivan Preservation: Sprague-8th 19,800 0 1,600 18,200 8.08%
321 Argonne Corridor Impry - North of Knox 0 756 756 (756) 0.00%
Contingency 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0.00%
Total expenditures 8,876,315 793,972 1,346,737 7,529,578
Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 (632,459) (703,946) (15,763,102)
Beginning fund balance 67,402 67,402
Ending fund balance 67,402 (636,544)
Note: Work performed in the Street Capital Projects Fund for preservation projects is for items such as sidewalk upgrades that were bid
with the pavement preservation work.
15.17%
Page 12
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#309 - PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Revenues
Grant Proceeds 525,260 0 27,909 (497,351) 5.31%
Transfers in - #001 187,103 0 0 (187,103) 0.00%
Transfers in - #312 718,008 0 2,033 (715,975) 0.28%
Investment Interest 0 0 20 20 0.00%
Total revenues 1,430,371 0 29,962 (1,400,409) 2.09%
Expenditures
268 Appleway Trail - Evergreen to Sullivan 0 0 2,033 (2,033) 0.00%
304 CenterPlace West Lawn Phase 2 14,876 865 3,491 11,385 23.47%
305 CenterPlace Roof Repair 12,227 760 14,618 (2,391) 119.55%
314 Balfour Park Frontage Improvements 565,150 1,144 13,292 551,858 2.35%
315 Brown's Park 2020 Improvements 704,731 123,904 159,446 545,285 22.63%
316 Balfour Park Improvements - Phase 1 0 955 3,509 (3,509) 0.00%
Install stage fill speakers Great Room 6,346 0 0 6,346 0.00%
Repair failed pixels Great Room 6,505 0 0 6,505 0.00%
Reprogram Great Room AN system 12,499 0 0 12,499 0.00%
Repair/replace siding at Mirabeau restroom 30,000 0 0 30,000 0.00%
Sullivan Park water line 152,858 0 0 152,858 0.00%
Total expenditures 1,505,192 127,628 196,388 1,308,804 13.05%
Revenues over (under) expenditures (74,821) (127,628) (166,426) (2,709,212)
Beginning fund balance 75,577 75,577
Ending fund balance 756 (90,849)
#310 - CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Revenues
Investment Interest
3,100 44 242 (2,858) 7.81%
Total revenues 3,100 44 242 (2,858) 7.81%
Expenditures
Transfers out - #312 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 3,100 44 242 (2,858)
Beginning fund balance 842,964 842,964
Ending fund balance 846,064 843,206
Note: The fund balance includes $839, 285.10 paid by the Library District for 2.82 acres at the Balfour Park site. If the District does not succeed
in getting a voted bond approved by October 2017 then the City may repurchase this land at the original sale price of $839,285.10.
Page 13
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#311 - PAVEMENT PRESERVATION FUND
Revenues
Transfers in -#001 991,843 0 0 (991,843) 0.00%
Transfers in -#106 1,500,000 0 0 (1,500,000) 0.00%
Transfers in - #301 827,278 0 0 (827,278) 0.00%
Transfers in - #302 827,279 0 0 (827,279) 0.00%
Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Investment Interest 0 298 1,392 1,392 0.00%
Total revenues
4,146,400 298 1,392 (4,145,008) 0.03%
Expenditures
Pre -Project GeoTech Services 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00%
Pavement Preservation 4,676,350 0 0 4,676,350 0.00%
285 Indiana Ave Pres - Evergreen to Sullivan 0 0 8,129 (8,129) 0.00%
286 Broadway Preservation: Havana to Fancher 0 0 281 (281) 0.00%
292 Mullen Preservation: Broadway -Mission 0 8,841 12,562 (12,562) 0.00%
309 Local Access Streets: Barker Homes 0 0 (2,389) 2,389 0.00%
314 Balfour Park Frontage Improvements 0 2,215 2,215 (2,215) 0.00%
320 Sullivan Preservation: Sprague-8th 0 0 130 (130) 0.00%
323 Evergreen Road Preservation Project 0 5,431 27,120 (27,120) 0.00%
325 2021 Local Access Streets: South Park Rd 0 8,482 36,850 (36,850) 0.00%
Total expenditures 4,726,350 24,970 84,898 4,641,452 1.80%
Revenues over (under) expenditures (579,950) (24,672) (83,507) (8,786,460)
Beginning fund balance 5,792,145 5,792,145
Ending fund balance 5,212,195 5,708,639
#312 - CAPITAL RESERVE FUND
Revenues
Transfers in -#001 11,126,343 0 0 (11,126,343) 0.00%
Transfers in - #310 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Investment Interest 100,000 448 2,492 (97,508) 2.49%
Proceeds from Sale of Land 0 0 109,403 109,403 0.00%
Total revenues 11,226,343 448 111,895 (11,114,448) 1.00%
Expenditures
Transfers out - #303 0 0 249 (249) 0.00%
Transfers out - #309 718,008 0 2,033 715,975 0.28%
Transfers out - #314 725,774 0 22 725,752 0.00%
Land Acquisition 2,659,600 3,500 3,500 2,656,100 0.13%
Total expenditures 4,103,382 3,500 5,805 4,097,577 0.14%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 7,122,961 (3,052) 106,090 (15,212,025)
Beginning fund balance 8,503,764 8,503,764
Ending fund balance 15,626,725 8,609,855
Page 14
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#314 - RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECTS FUND
Revenues
Grant Proceeds
Investment Interest
Leasehold Excise Tax
Transfers in - #302
Transfers in - #312
Miscellaneous Revenues
11,508,819 0 310 (11,508,509) 0.00%
0 38 254 254 0.00%
0 171 941 941 0.00%
1,127,387 0 0 (1,127,387) 0.00%
725,774 0 22 (725,752) 0.00%
0 1,329 7,866 7,866 0.00%
Total revenues 13,361,980 1,538
Expenditures
143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 9,396,870 132,616
223 Pines Rd Underpass 4,149,450 49,464
311 Sullivan Rd./SR 290 Interchange Project 250,000 42,289
9,394 (13,352,586) 0.07%
(188,690) 9,585,560 -2.01%
195,007 3,954,443 4.70%
67,253 182,747 26.90%
Total expenditures 13,796,320 224,369 73,570
Revenues over (under) expenditures (434,340) (222,831) (64,176)
Beginning fund balance 793,526 793,526
Ending fund balance 359,186 729,351
#316 - TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
Revenues
Transportation Impact Fees
Investment Interest
0
0
13, 722, 750
(27,075,337)
0.53%
5,064 107,034 107,034 0.00%
6 22 22 0.00%
Total revenues 0 5,070 107,056 107,056 0.00%
Expenditures
Transfers out 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 5,070 107,056 107,056
Beginning fund balance 0 0
Ending fund balance 0 107,056
Page 15
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
#402 - STORMWATER FUND
RECURRING ACTIVITY
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
Revenues
Stormwater Management Fees 1,900,000 541,097 685,074 (1,214,926) 36.06%
Investment Interest 40,000 139 676 (39,324) 1.69%
Miscellaneous Revenues 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Total Recurring Revenues 1,940,000 541,236 685,750 (1,254,250) 35.35%
Expenditures
Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 552,694 25,624 132,916 419,778 24.05%
Supplies 14,750 2,468 4,322 10,428 29.30%
Services & Charges 1,320,643 125,933 265,296 1,055,347 20.09%
Intergovernmental Payments 45,000 0 0 45,000 0.00%
Vehicle Rentals - #501 6,750 0 0 6,750 0.00%
Total Recurring Expenditures 1,939,837 154,026 402,535 1,537,302 20.75%
Recurring Revenues Over (Under)
Recurring Expenditures 163 387,210 283,216 283,053
NONRECURRING ACTIVITY
Revenues
Grant Proceeds
100,000 0 0 (100,000) 0.00%
Total Nonrecurring Revenues 100,000 0 0 (100,000) 0.00%
Expenditures
Capital - various projects 500,000 0 3,122 496,878 0.62%
300 Pines & Mission Intersection Improvement 0 0 468 (468) 0.00%
309 Local Access Streets: Barker Homes 0 552 1,373 (1,373) 0.00%
314 Balfour Park Frontage Improvements 0 200 200 (200) 0.00%
Watershed Studies 100,000 0 0 100,000 0.00%
Stormwater Comprehensive Plan 100,000 0 0 100,000 0.00%
Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 700,000 752 5,163 694,837 0.74%
Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under)
Nonrecurring Expenditures (600,000) (752) (5,163) 594,837
Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues
Over (Under) Total Expenditures (599,837) 386,458 278,052 877,889
Beginning working capital 2,159,796 2,159,796
Ending working capital 1,559,959 2,437,849
Note: Work performed in the Stormwater Fund for preservation projects is for stormwater improvements that were bid
with the pavement preservation work.
#403 -AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA
Revenues
Spokane County 460,000 0 0 (460,000) 0.00%
Grant Proceeds 2,122,045 0 1,438 (2,120,607) 0.07%
Investment Interest 15,000 101 573 (14,427) 3.82%
Total revenues
Expenditures
Capital - various projects
Total expenditures
Revenues over (under) expenditures
Beginning working capital
Ending working capital
2,597,045 101 2,011 (2,595,034) 0.08%
2,378,109 24,670 201,468 2,176,641 8.47%
2,378,109
218,936
2,120,365
24,670
(24,569)
201,468
(199,457)
2,120,365
2,339,301 1,920,908
2,176,641
(4,771,675)
8.47%
Page 16
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
#601 - ER&R FUND
Revenues
Interfund vehicle lease -#001 31,300 0 0 (31,300) 0.00%
Interfund vehicle lease - #101 10,250 0 0 (10,250) 0.00%
Interfund vehicle lease - #101 (plow replace) 60,500 0 0 (60,500) 0.00%
Interfund vehicle lease - #402 6,750 0 0 (6,750) 0.00%
Transfers in - #001 (CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 36,600 0 0 (36,600) 0.00%
Investment Interest 10,000 72 392 (9,608) 3.92%
Total revenues
155,400 72 392 (155,008) 0.25%
Expenditures
Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 0 85 2,021 (2,021) 0.00%
Small tools & minor equipment 10,000 0 0 10,000 0.00%
Vehicle purchase 130,000 0 0 130,000 0.00%
Total expenditures 140,000 85 2,021 137,979 1.44%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 15,400 (12) (1,629) (292,987)
Beginning working capital 1,387,962 1,387,962
Ending working capital 1,403,362 1,386,332
#602 - RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
Revenues
Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Transfers in - #001 425,000 0 0 (425,000) 0.00%
Total revenues
Expenditures
Auto & Property Insurance
Unemployment Claims
Total expenditures
425,000 0 0 (425,000) 0.00%
425,000 0 365,384 59,616 85.97%
0 5,613 7,398 (7,398) 0.00%
425,000 5,613 372,782 52,218 87.71%
Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 (5,613) (372,782) (477,218)
Beginning working capital 340,484 340,484
Ending working capital 340,484 (32,298)
Page 17
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
FIDUCIARY FUNDS
#632 - PASSTHROUGH FEES & TAXES
Revenues
Passthrough Fees & Taxes
Total revenues
Expenditures
Passthrough Fees & Taxes
Total expenditures
Revenues over (under) expenditures
Beginning working capital
Ending working capital
Budget Year
Elapsed =
2021
41.67%
2021
Budget
Actual Actual through Budget
May May 31 Remaining
% of
Budget
0
38,027 143,986 143,986 0.00%
0
38,027 143,986 143,986 0.00%
0 36,205 143,057 (143,057) 0.00%
0 36,205 143,057 (143,057) 0.00%
0
313
313
1,822
930 287,043
313
1,243
SUMMARY FOR ALL FUNDS
Total of Revenues for all Funds
Per Revenue Status Report
Difference
105,088,303
105,088,303
9,673,501
9,673,501
25,262,695
25,262,695
Total of Expenditures for all Funds 113,185,114 5,536,456 20,908,286
Per Expenditure Status Report 113,185,114 5,536,456 20,908,286
Difference -
Total Capital expenditures (included in
total expenditures) 34,839,586 1,200,511 1,912,412
Page 18
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Investment Report
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
Beginning
Deposits
Withdrawls
Interest
Ending
001 General Fund
101 Street Fund
103 Trails & Paths
104 Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel
105 Hotel/Motel
106 Solid Waste Fund
107 PEG Fund
108 Affordable & Supportive Housing
120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve
121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve
122 Winter Weather Reserve
301 Capital Projects
302 Special Capital Projects
303 Street Capital Projects Fund
309 Parks Capital Project
310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects
311 Pavement Preservation
312 Capital Reserve Fund
313 City Hall Construction Fund
314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects
315 Transportation Impact Fees
402 Stormwater Management
403 Aquifer Protection Fund
501 Equipment Rental & Replacement
502 Risk Management
632 Passthrough Fees & Taxes
"Local Government Investment Pool
6/22/2021
LGI P"
NW Bank
CD #2068
Banner
CD #9161
Total
Investments
$ 72,578,992.09 $ 3,078,658.52 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 77,657,650.61
3,602,249.50 0.00 0.00 3,602,249.50
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4,734.99 0.00 0.00 4,734.99
$ 76,185,976.58 $ 3,078,658.52 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 81,264,635.10
matures: 7/23/2021 12/9/2021
rate: 0.40%
0.40%
Balance
Earnings
Current Period
Year to date
Budget
$ 44,668,875.71 $ 2,802.36
123, 342.05 7.67
19, 983.40 1.24
2, 575, 354.58 160.06
775,714.29 48.21
1,135,605.65 70.58
167, 079.62 10.38
173, 072.81 10.76
0.00 0.00
5, 500, 000.00 0.00
134,148.17 8.34
2, 354, 662.85 146.34
4,950,774.14 307.69
246, 263.87 15.31
0.00 0.00
706,623.17 43.92
4,797,075.26 298.14
7,215,223.12 448.43
0.00 0.00
617,978.52 38.41
89,714.65 5.58
2,234,297.66 138.86
1, 617, 037.49 100.50
1,161, 808.09 72.21
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
14,398.46 $ 500,000.00
113.08 4,000.00
6.53 200.00
865.20 24, 000.00
249.30 6,000.00
423.56 12, 000.00
52.78 0.00
55.25 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
34.49 1,900.00
823.19 25, 000.00
1,647.84 25, 000.00
183.28 0.00
19.66 0.00
241.97 3,100.00
1,391.57 0.00
2,491.59 100,000.00
0.00 0.00
253.83 0.00
21.60 0.00
675.86 40, 000.00
573.01 15, 000.00
392.03 10, 000.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
$ 81,264,635.10 $ 4,734.99 $ 24,914.08 $ 766,200.00
Page 19
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2021\2021 05 31
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Sales Tax Receipts
For the Five -Month Period Ended May 31, 2021
Month
Received
2020
2021
6/22/2021
Difference
February 2,559,296.59 2,934,890.06 375,593.47 14.68%
March 2,015,206.15 2,445,374.71 430,168.56 21.35%
April 1,897,614.47 2,571,438.34 673,823.87 35.51%
May 1,847,551.89 3,369,522.86 1,521,970.97 82.38%
8, 319, 669.10
June 1,875,335.44
July 2,570,769.98
August 2,677,467.88
September 2,682,700.17
October 2,540,248.50
November 2, 731, 249.99
December 2,602,181.93
January 2,451,245.65
11,321,225.97
28, 450, 868.64 11, 321, 225.97
3,001,556.87 36.08%
Sales tax receipts reported here reflect remittances for general sales tax, criminal justice
sales tax and public safety tax.
The sales tax rate for retail sales transacted within the boundaries of the City of Spokane
Valley is 8.9%. The tax that is paid by a purchaser at the point of sale is remitted by the
vendor to the Washington State Department of Revenue who then remits the taxes back to
the various agencies that have imposed the tax. The allocation of the total 8.9% tax rate to
the agencies is as follows:
- State of Washington 6.50%
- City of Spokane Valley 0.85%
- Spokane County 0.15%
- Spokane Public Facilities District 0.10% *
- Criminal Justice 0.10%
- Public Safety 0.10% * 2.40% local tax
- Juvenile Jail 0.10% *
- Mental Health 0.10% *
- Law Enforcement Communications 0.10% *
- Spokane Transit Authority 0.80% *
8.90%
Indicates voter approved sales taxes
In addition to the .85% reported above that the City receives, we also receive a portion of
the Criminal Justice and Public Safety sales taxes. The distribution of those taxes is
computed as follows:
Criminal Justice: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the
State distributes 10% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder
allocated on a per capita basis to the County and the cities within the County.
Public Safety: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the
State distributes 60% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder
allocated on a per capita basis to the cities within the County.
Page 20
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Sales Tax\2021\sales tax collections 2021
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Sales Tax Collections -
For the years 2012 through 2021
January
February
March
April
Collected to date
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
1,589,887 1,671,269
1,009, 389 1,133, 347
1,067, 733 1,148, 486
1,277,621 1,358,834
1,677,887 1,732,299 1,863,225 1,992,273 2,078,412 2,240,908 2,253,852
1,170, 640 1,197, 323 1,316, 682 1,369,740 1,536, 252 1,648, 657 1,776, 898
1,201,991 1,235,252 1,378,300 1,389,644 1,564,282 1,549,275 1,687,355
1,448,539 1,462,096 1,640,913 1,737,933 1,926,551 1,955,470 1,627,596
2,615,326
2,185, 876
2,317, 671
3,029,090
6/17/2021
2020 to 2021
Difference
361,474
408,978
630,316
1,401,494
ok
16.04%
23.02%
37.36%
86.11%
4,944,630 5,311,936 5,499,057 5,626,970 6,199,120 6,489,590 7,105,497 7,394,310 7,345,701 10,147,963 2,802,262 38.15%
May 1,174,962 1,320,449 1,400,956 1,373,710 1,566,178 1,564,119 1,762,119 1,946,112 1,651,937 0
June 1,290,976 1,389,802 1,462,558 1,693,461 1,641,642 1,751,936 1,871,077 2,067,987 2,291,842 0
July 1,302,706 1,424,243 1,545,052 1,718,428 1,776,653 1,935,028 2,053,961 2,232,342 2,368,495 0
August 1,299,678 1,465,563 1,575,371 1,684,700 1,746,371 1,877,899 1,980,940 2,121,051 2,393,597 0
September 1,383,123 1,466,148 1,552,736 1,563,950 1,816,923 1,946,689 2,019,198 2,223,576 2,258,489 0
October 1,358,533 1,439,321 1,594,503 1,618,821 1,822,998 1,898,067 2,005,836 2,134,985 2,431,920 0
November 1,349,580 1,362,021 1,426,254 1,487,624 1,652,181 1,768,817 1,925,817 2,064,504 2,317,685 0
December 1,323,189 1,408,134 1,383,596 1,441,904 1,664,983 1,856,989 1,918,411 2,019,895 2,178,815 0
Total Collections 15,427,377 16,587,617 17,440,083 18,209,568 19,887,049 21,089,134 22,642,856 24,204,762 25,238,481 10,147,963
Budget Estimate 14,210,000 15,250,000 16,990,000 17,628,400 18,480,500 19,852,100 20,881,900 22,917,000 21,784,000 25,200,000
Actual over (under) budg 1,217,377 1,337,617 450,083 581,168 1,406,549 1,237,034 1,760,956 1,287,762 3,454,481 (15,052,037)
Total actual collections
as a % of total budget 108.57% 108.77% 102.65% 103.30% 107.61 % 106.23% 108.43% 105.62% 115.86% n/a
% change in annual
total collected 3.89% 7.52% 5.14% 4.41% 9.21% 6.04% 7.37% 6.90% 4.27% n/a
% of budget collected
through April 34.80% 34.83% 32.37% 31.92% 33.54% 32.69% 34.03% 32.27% 33.72% 40.27%
% of actual total collected
through April 32.05% 32.02% 31.53% 30.90% 31.17% 30.77% 31.38% 30.55% 29.11% n/a
Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of April
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
1
April
1
i
April
March
.0 February
January
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
2019
2020 2021
Page 21
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Lodging Tax \2021 \105 hotel motel tax 2021
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Hotel/Motel Tax Receipts through - April
Actual for the years 2012 through 2021
January
February
March
April
Total Collections
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
6/17/2021
2020 to 2021
Difference
21,442 24,185 25,425 27,092 31,887 27,210 28,752 31,865 36,203 26,006 (10,197) (28.17%)
21,549 25,975 26,014 27,111 27,773 26,795 28,878 32,821 31,035 31,041 6 0.02%
25,655 27,739 29,384 32,998 34,330 31,601 31,906 40,076 37,395 30,536 (6,859) (18.34%)
52,130 40,979 48,246 50,455 52,551 52,242 57,664 59,117 24,959 44,476 19,517 78.20%
120,776 118,878 129,069 137,656 146,541 137,848 147,200 163,879 129,592 132,059 2,467 1.90%
May 37,478 40,560 41,123 44,283 50,230 50,112 51,777 53,596 16,906 0
June 43,971 47,850 52,618 56,975 55,060 60,637 62,048 73,721 28,910 0
July 52,819 56,157 61,514 61,809 65,007 69,337 71,865 84,628 41,836 0
August 57,229 63,816 70,384 72,697 73,700 76,972 79,368 91,637 49,772 0
September 64,299 70,794 76,100 74,051 70,305 80,173 79,661 97,531 59,116 0
October 43,699 43,836 45,604 49,880 55,660 56,631 61,826 77,932 50,844 0
November 39,301 42,542 39,600 42,376 46,393 47,090 52,868 59,252 39,694 0
December 30,432 34,238 33,256 41,510 33,478 37,180 40,363 41,675 26,573 0
Total Collections 490,004 518,672 549,267 581,237 596,374 615,980 646,976 743,851 443,243 132,059
Budget Estimate 430,000 490,000 530,000 550,000 580,000 580,000 580,000 600,000 346,000 346,000
Actual over (under) budg 60,004 28,672 19,267 31,237 16,374 35,980 66,976 143,851 97,243 (213,941)
Total actual collections
as a % of total budget 113.95% 105.85% 103.64% 105.68% 102.82% 106.20% 111.55% 123.98% 128.10% n/a
% change in annual
total collected 7.08% 5.85% 5.90% 5.82% 2.60% 3.29% 5.03% 14.97% (40.41%) n/a
% of budget collected
through April
28.09% 24.26% 24.35% 25.03% 25.27% 23.77% 25.38% 27.31% 37.45% 38.17%
% of actual total collected
through April
24.65% 22.92% 23.50% 23.68% 24.57% 22.38% 22.75% 22.03% 29.24% n/a
Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of April
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2012
2013
2014 2015
April
• I
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
■ April
• March
• February
■ January
Page 22
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\REET\2021\301 and 302 REET for 2021
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
1st and 2nd 1/4% REET Collections through April
Actual for the years 2012 through 2021
January
February
March
April
Collected to date
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Total distributed by Spokane County
Budget estimate
Actual over (under) budget
Total actual collections
as a % of total budget
% change in annual
total collected
% of budget collected
through April
% of actual total collected
through April
2012
2013 I 2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
46,359
56,115
71,730
86,537
56,898
155,226
72,172
90,377
61,192
67,049
81,724
105,448
96,141
103,508
165,868
236,521
104,446
83,583
220,637
205,654
153,661
124,514
282,724
169,060
239,437
146,892
310,562
218,842
120,809
199,209
193,913
347,528
212,512
242,927
203,774
197,928
277,311
283,644
497,974
470,817
260,740 374,673
315,412 602,038
614,321 729,959
915,733 861,459
857,141 1,529,746
111,627
124,976
101,049
106,517
63,517
238,095
104,886
74,300
116,165
139,112
128,921
117,150
174,070
117,806
78,324
75,429
198,870
106,676
208,199
172,536
152,323
123,505
172,227
117,682
165,748
347,421
217,375
202,525
179,849
128,833
129,870
157,919
192,806
284,897
248,899
231,200
178,046
253,038
186,434
164,180
202,734
248,768
449,654
472,420
187,348
207,895
229,800
278,995
646,397
277,424
302,941
261,626
259,492
584,792
263,115
288,912
263,171
465,044
327,636
300,312
335,824
225,216
319,161
235,726
258,784
329,801
234,040
365,838
381,224
381,163
370,449
479,586
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,185,707
875,000
310,707
1,321,650
975,000
346,650
1,567,429
1,100,000
467,429
2,131,578
1,400,000
731,578
2,353,822
2,000,000
353,822
3,007,573
2,000,000
1,007,573
3,800,432
3,000,000
800,432
3,333,549
2,800,000
533,549
3,658,026
2,000,000
1,658,026
1,529,746
2,000,000
(470,254)
135.51% 135.55% 142.49% 152.26% 117.69% 150.38% 126.68% 119.06% 182.90% n/a
23.22%
11.47%
18.60%
35.99%
10.43%
27.77%
26.36% (12.28%)
9.73% n/a
29.80%
38.43%
28.67%
43.00%
30.72%
36.50%
30.52%
30.77%
42.86%
76.49%
21.99%
28.35%
20.12%
28.24%
26.10%
24.27%
24.10%
25.84%
23.43% n/a
Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of
April
6/17/2021
2020 to 2021
Difference
64,799
40,717
294,200
272,889
30.49%
16.76%
144.38%
137.87%
672,605 78.47%
April
■ April
1,800,000
I"' March
1,600,000
• February
1,400,000
•January
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
2012
2013
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Pa
ge 23
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Debt Capacity\2021\debt capacity 2021
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Debt Capacity
3/22/2021
2020 Assessed Value for 2021 Property Taxes 11,553,065,482
Voted (UTGO)
Nonvoted (LTGO)
Voted park
Voted utility
1.00% of assessed value
1.50% of assessed value
2.50% of assessed value
2.50% of assessed value
Maximum
Outstanding
Remaining
Debt
as of
Debt
ok
Capacity
12/31/2020
Capacity
Utilized
115,530,655
173,295,982
288,826,637
288,826,637
866,479,911
0 115,530,655
11,120,000 162,175,982
0 288,826,637
0 288,826,637
11,120,000 855,359,911
0.00%
6.42%
0.00%
0.00%
1.28%
2014 LTGO Bonds
Road &
LTGO Bonds
Period
Street
2016 LTGO
Grand
Ending
CenterPlace
Improvements
Total
Bonds
Total
12/1/2014
Bonds 12/1/2015
Repaid 12/1/2016
12/1/2017
12/1/2018
12/1/2019
12/1/2020
225,000
175,000
185,000
190,000
230,000
255,000
290,000
135,000
125,000
130,000
130,000
135,000
140,000
140,000
360,00
300,00
315,000
320,000
365,000
395,000
430,000
0
0
75,000
150,000
155,000
160,000
165,000
360,000
300,000
390,000
470,000
520,000
555,000
595,000
1,550,000 935,000
2,485,000 705,000 3,190,000
12/1/2021 320,000 145,000 465,000 170,000
12/1/2022 350,000 150,000 500,000 175,000
12/1/2023 390,000 155,000 545,000 180,000
12/1/2024 430,000 0 430,000 185,000
12/1/2025 465,000 0 465,000 195,000
12/1/2026 505,000 0 505,000 900,000
12/1/2027 395,000 0 395,000 '05,000
12/1/2028 300,000 0 300,000 15,000
12/1/2029 245,000 0 245,000 2'0,000
12/1/2030 225,000 0 225,000 2. ,000
Bonds 12/1/2031 180,000 0 180,000 23.,000
Remaining 12/1/2032 130,000 0 130,000 246,000
12/1/2033 165,000 0 165,000 250,000
12/1/2034 0 0 0 260, 1 00
12/1/2035 0 0 0 270,000
12/1/2036 0 0 0 280,0 0
12/1/2037 0 0 0 290,0 0
12/1/2038 0 0 0 305,00
12/1/2039 0 0 0 315,00
12/1/2040 0 0 0 330,000
12/1/2041 0 0 0 340,000
12/1/2042 0 0 0 355,000
12/1/2043 0 0 0 365,000
12/1/2044 0 0 0 375,000
12/1/2045 0 0 0 390,000
635,000
675,000
725,000
615,000
660,000
705,000
600,000
515,000
465,000
450,000
415,000
370,000
415,000
260,000
270,000
280,000
290,000
305,000
315,000
330,000
340,000
355,000
365,000
375,000
390,000
4,100, 000
450,000 4,550,000 6,570,000 11,120,000
5,650,000 1,385,000 7,035,000 7,275,000 14, 310, 000
Page 24
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\MVFT\2021\motor vehicle fuel tax collections 2021
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax Collections -
For the years 2012 through 2021
January
February
March
April
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
159,607
135,208
144,297
153,546
146,145
145,998
135,695
156,529
152,906
148,118
131,247
156,269
152,598
145,455
140,999
157,994
163,918
163,037
145,537
167,304
150,654
164,807
138,205
168,000
162,359
175,936
139,826
168,796
148,530
181,823
131,009
144,080
152,686
170,461
146,280
90,589
143,576
150,882
117,784
141,080
6/17/2021
2020 to 2021
Difference
ok
(9,110) (5.97%)
(19,579) (11.49%)
(28,496) (19.48%)
50,491 55.74%
Collected to date 592,658 584,367 588,540 597,046 639,796 621,666 646,917 605,442 560,016 553,322 (6,694) (1.20%)
May 144,670 151,595 156,850 156,259 171,829 174,211 193,986 185,669 130,168 0
June 159,827 167,479 161,965 164,872 157,737 174,838 144,308 175,985 128,359 0
July 160,565 155,348 157,805 168,205 177,427 177,019 194,267 169,733 138,932 0
August 164,050 173,983 172,308 186,277 177,567 195,780 205,438 195,107 136,633 0
September 171,651 195,397 173,299 174,505 194,640 184,342 180,874 180,605 195,550 0
October 153,022 133,441 160,539 161,520 166,369 163,780 158,062 162,187 160,272 0
November 162,324 164,303 165,871 181,771 176,178 194,814 199,282 196,240 175,980 0
December 138,223 142,140 141,298 153,338 152,787 154,298 148,960 155,728 119,282 0
Total Collections 1,846,990 1,868,053 1,878,475 1,943,793 2,014,330 2,040,748 2,072,094 2,026,696 1,745,192 553,322
Budget Estimate 1,905,800 1,868,900 1,866,400 1,867,700 2,013,400 2,048,900 2,061,100 2,039,500 1,715,000 1,808,700
Actual over (under) budg (58,810) (847) 12,075 76,093 930 (8,152) 10,994 (12,804) 30,192 (1,255,378)
Total actual collections
as a % of total budget 96.91 % 99.95% 100.65% 104.07% 100.05% 99.60% 100.53% 99.37% 101.76% n/a
% change in annual
total collected (0.58%) 1.14% 0.56% 3.48% 3.63% 1.31% 1.54% (2.19%) (13.89%) n/a
% of budget collected
through April 31.10% 31.27% 31.53% 31.97% 31.78% 30.34% 31.39% 29.69% 32.65% 30.59%
% of actual total collected
through April 32.09% 31.28% 31.33% 30.72% 31.76% 30.46% 31.22% 29.87% 32.09% n/a
Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of April
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
1
i
April
April
March
February
iiiiJanuary
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
2018 2019
2020
2021
Page 25
P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Telephone Tax\2021\telephone utility tax collections 2021
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA
Telephone Utility Tax Collections - April
For the years 2012 through 2021
January
February
March
April
Collected to date
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
193,818
261,074
234,113
229,565
217,478
216,552
223,884
214,618
210,777
205,953
208,206
206,038
177,948
212,845
174,738
214,431
182,167
173,971
177,209
171,770
162,734
163,300
162,536
157,285
130,196
164,060
158,416
146,519
136,615
132,538
138,727
126,455
123,292
121,596
121,938
120,016
7,399
155,911
100,611
83,108
6/23/2021
2020 to 2021
Difference
ok
(115,893) (94.00%)
34,315 28.22%
(21,327) (17.49%)
(36,908) (30.75%)
918,570 872,532 830,974 779,962 705,117 645,855 599,191 534,335 486,842 347,029 (139,813) (28.72%)
May 227,469 129,270 210,010 187,856 174,512 161,506 149,434 135,704 118,018 0
June 234,542 293,668 210,289 187,412 170,450 156,023 150,780 129,602 117,905 0
July 226,118 213,078 205,651 190,984 174,405 157,502 147,281 130,723 120,922 0
August 228,789 211,929 205,645 185,172 171,909 150,644 148,158 127,303 112,351 0
September 227,042 210,602 199,193 183,351 170,476 155,977 141,290 128,018 91,866 0
October 225,735 205,559 183,767 183,739 166,784 153,075 142,925 127,214 90,272 0
November 225,319 212,947 213,454 175,235 166,823 151,208 139,209 125,027 88,212 0
December 221,883 213,097 202,077 183,472 168,832 161,115 140,102 126,226 92,242 0
Total Collections 2,735,467 2,562,682 2,461,060 2,257,183 2,069,308 1,892,905 1,758,370 1,564,152 1,318,630 347,029
Budget Estimate 3,000,000 2,900,000 2,750,000 2,565,100 2,340,000 2,000,000 1,900,000 1,600,000 1,521,000 1,431,000
Actual over (under) budg (264,533) (337,318) (288,940) (307,917) (270,692) (107,095) (141,630) (35,848) (202,370) (1,083,971)
Total actual collections
as a % of total budget 91.18% 88.37% 89.49% 88.00% 88.43% 94.65% 92.55% 97.76% 86.69% n/a
% change in annual
total collected (8.24%) (6.32%) (3.97%) (8.28%) (8.32%) (8.52%) (7.11 %) (11.05%) (15.70%) n/a
% of budget collected
through April
% of actual total collected
through April
30.62% 30.09% 30.22% 30.41% 30.13% 32.29% 31.54% 33.40% 32.01% 24.25%
33.58% 34.05% 33.76% 34.55% 34.08% 34.12% 34.08% 34.16% 36.92% n/a
Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of April
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
2012 2013
1
April
1
1
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
April
March
February
January
Page 26