Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.11.12 HE Meeting PacketAGENDA HEARING EXAMINER SPECIAL MEETING City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue Council Chambers WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2025 6:00 PM This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter Cable and streamed at www.pasco-wa.com/psctvlive. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact staff for assistance. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PUBLIC HEARINGS • PP 2025-003 Columbia Waters Subdivision Applicant has submitted an application for the subdivision of one lot into two hundred thirteen lots. The project will be constructed in three phases and will consist of approximately 145 single-family homes and 34 duplexes. • Z2025-009 Rocky Hills Management LP “Wilson Estates” R-T to R-1 A public hearing to consider a rezone application submitted by Big Sky North, LLC on behalf of Rocky Hills Management LP. The request proposes to rezone Parcel No. 115180030, approximately 156 acres in size, from R-T (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). III. ADJOURNMENT REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers WEDNESDAY, November 12, 2025 6:00 PM 1 MASTER FILE #: PP 2025-003 APPLICANT: Big Sky North, LLC 5810 Midland Ln, Unit 65 Pasco, WA 99301 REQUEST: Preliminary Plat: Columbia Waters Estates subdivision of parcel 115010042 into 213 residential lots. Timeline: June 16, 2025 Preliminary Plat Application-PP2025-003 and SEPA Environmental Checklist- SEPA2025-024, submitted June 20, 2025 Preliminary Plat Application Deemed Complete July 14, 2025 SEPA Checklist Deemed Complete October 17, 2025 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issued October 21, 2025 Notice of Public Hearing for PP2025-003 Mailed to Properties Within 300 Feet of Proposed Subdivision October 26, 2025 Notice for Public Hearing for PP2025-003 Published in Tri-City Herald November 5, 2025 Public Hearing Staff Report Published BACKGROUND 1) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: THAT PARCEL OF LAND BEING LOT 4 OF THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED UNDER BOOK 4 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 181, AUDITOR’S FILE NUMBER 1943869, RECORDS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AND 2 OF THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED UNDER BOOK 4 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 643, AUDITOR’S FILE NUMBER 1998115 RECORDS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LOCATED IN A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 9 NORTH, RANGE 29 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 01°06’35” EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER, 671.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; 2 THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 01°06’35” EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 1007.80 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE NORTH 89°28’55” EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 4 AND PARCEL 2, 1103.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°31’05” EAST, 330.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°28’55” EAST, 9.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°31’05” EAST, 160.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°28’55” EAST, 1126.53 FEET; THENCE NORTH 15°00’50” WEST, 35.38 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74°59’10” EAST, 171.98 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ROAD 68 NORTH; THENCE SOUTH 15°00’38” EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 619.73 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE SOUTH 89°36’01” WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 AND LOT 4, 2580.22 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO SHOWN AS ADJUSTED PARCEL 115-170-079 ON SURVEY RECORDED JUNE 5, 2025 UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 1999739. General Location: The property is situated west of Road 68, north of Burns Road, east of future Road 84, and south of Deseret Drive, adjoining the Desert Sage subdivision to the south. Property Size: 42.66 acres 2) ACCESS: The property will have access from Road 68, Ember Lane, and Road 84. 3) UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer are available adjacent to Road 84 and Ember Lane and will be required to be extended to and through. 4) LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is split-zoned, with the northern portion (approximately 360 feet in depth) designated R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and the southern portion (approximately 650 feet in depth) designated R-1 (Low Density Residential). The site is currently undeveloped and utilized for agricultural purposes. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North: R-3 & R-T (Residential Transition) – Undeveloped / Agricultural East: R-3, C-1 (Retail Business), R-1, R-S-40 (Suburban–County), & R-R-1 (Rural Residential) – Undeveloped / Agricultural / Single-Family Homes South: R-3 & R-1 – Single-Family Attached and Detached Homes West: R-1 – Site Improvements / Undeveloped / Agricultural 5) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates the northern portion of the site as Medium Density Residential and the southern portion as Low Density Residential, consistent with the respective depths described above. The Medium Density Residential designation supports a variety of housing types at densities ranging from 6 to 20 dwelling units per acre and may correspond to the R-2 (Medium Density Residential), R-3, R-4 (High Density Residential), or R-P (Residential Park) zoning districts. The Low Density Residential designation supports a range of housing types at densities of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre and may correspond to the R-S-20 (Suburban), R-S-12 (Suburban), R-S-1 (Suburban), R-1, R-1-A (Low Density Residential Alternate), or R-1-A2 (Low Density Residential Alternate) zoning districts. 6) ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the 3 SEPA checklist (SEPA2025-024), the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) was issued on October 17, 2025, for this project under WAC 197-11-355. ANALYSIS Request The applicant proposes to subdivide Parcel No. 115010042, totaling approximately 42.66 acres, into 213 residential lots. Of these, 145 lots are proposed for single-family detached housing (within the Low Density Residential portion), and 68 lots are proposed for single-family attached housing (within the Medium Density Residential portion). The subdivision is planned to be developed in three phases. Proposed improvements include mass grading, construction of public streets, and installation of water, sewer, Franklin County irrigation, communication, and power infrastructure. The project also involves the extension of existing City of Pasco public streets, including Road 84 and Ember Lane. In addition, three public pedestrian pathways are proposed to enhance connectivity and walkability within the residential blocks, providing convenient pedestrian access from Road 84 into the subdivision. History The subject property was annexed into the City of Pasco in 2022 by Ordinance No. 4591 and concurrently assigned R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and R-1 (Low Density Residential) zoning classifications pursuant to Ordinance No. 4637. Historical aerial imagery and property records indicate the site has been in agricultural use since approximately 2005. Lot & Right-of-Way Layout The proposed preliminary plat would create a total of 213 lots designated for single-family residential development. The subdivision includes the dedication of public right-of-way and construction of new internal roadways, including the planned extension of Road 84—classified as a collector street—and Ember Lane, classified as a local access road. Road 84 runs in a north–south direction and has been extended incrementally through the Seven Sisters and Desert Sage subdivisions. Ember Lane was anticipated to connect northward since the development of the Sage Flats Subdivision in 2019. In addition to these, four internal local access roads (running east–west and north–south, including Ember Lane) are proposed to provide circulation within the plat. The longest proposed roadway within Columbia Waters Estates, currently labeled “Road A,” extends approximately 1,770 feet from “Road E” to Ember Lane, traveling east–west. While this exceeds the City’s maximum block length standard of 660 feet, the extended length results from the configuration of existing subdivisions to the south (Desert Sage and Sage Flats), which limit available connection points. The plat also proposes three east–west public pedestrian access easements along the western portion of the site to provide pedestrian connectivity between Road 84 and Road E, enhancing walkability within the subdivision. Within the Low Density Residential (R-1) area, the proposed lots have an average area of approximately 6,884 square feet, ranging from 6,064 square feet (smallest) to 12,259 square feet (largest). Within the Medium Density Residential (R-3) area, the proposed lots average 3,880 square feet, with individual lot sizes ranging 4 from 3,690 to 4,546 square feet. All lots within the proposed plat will have direct access to public right-of-way and will be served by public utilities in accordance with City standards. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT 1) The subject property has a Comprehensive Plan designation of Medium Density Residential and Low Density Residential. The Medium Density Residential designation allows for residential development at densities ranging from 6 to 20 dwelling units per acre, while the Low Density Residential designation allows for residential development at densities ranging from 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre. 2) The proposed number of units within the Medium Density Residential designation equates to 7.4 dwelling units per acre. 3) The proposed number of units within the Low Density Residential designation equates to 4.3 dwelling units per acre. 4) The project will involve the construction of new roadways to provide access to the new lots. 5) Provisions for a direct path for bikes and pedestrians, safe routes to school, and neighborhood traffic management measures are required as the proposed site is within one-half mile of a public school. 6) Water and Sewer will be extended to and through the right-of-way to provide all lots with access to utilities. 7) Water rights shall be either deeded to the City or an in-lieu of fee paid prior to recording of any final plat. 8) Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) identified the potential presence of shrub steppe habitat and a high likelihood of Burrowing Owl activity within the area. 9) A Tier 2 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) dated September 19, 2025, and accepted October 16, 2025 determined that the proposed development will not necessitate off-site transportation improvements beyond the collection of applicable traffic impact fees. 10) Traffic, Park, and School impact fees will be collected for each lot prior to building permits being issued for new residences. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON FINDINGS OF FACT As per Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 21.25.060, Upon conclusion of the open record hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall make and enter findings from the record and conclusions thereof as to whether or not: (1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds, transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking conditions for students, and other public needs; The proposed subdivision will be served by City emergency services and is located approximately one mile from Vintage Park. The developer will be required to construct right-of-way improvements in accordance with the PMC and the City’s Design and Construction Standards. Municipal water and sewer utilities must be extended to and through the right-of-way to ensure service access to all lots within the subdivision. Traffic and park impact fees will be collected at the time of building permit issuance for each new dwelling to mitigate impacts on the transportation network and to support park development, improvements, and ongoing maintenance. (2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land use patterns in the area; The proposed development will include both single-family detached and attached residential dwellings, consistent with the established residential pattern of the surrounding area. The developer will be required to construct full right-of-way improvements—including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lighting—to ensure 5 safe pedestrian circulation and promote public welfare. The extension of Road 84 will serve as a key infrastructure component, establishing an important north–south corridor that connects the development to Sandifur Parkway. This alignment, extending over three-quarters of a mile, will enhance local traffic circulation and help distribute traffic more evenly between Road 84 and Road 68. (3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; • Housing Policy H-1-A: Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc. The R-3 and R-1 zoning designations allow for a variety of dwelling types. This proposal includes both attached and detached single-family dwellings consistent with the development pattern in the immediate vicinity. • Land Use Policy LU-2-B: Facilitate planned growth within the City limits and UGA, and promote infill developments in the City limits through periodic review of growth patterns and market demand within each of the City’s land use designations. The proposal involves residential development within the City limits, located in an area that has historically met the Comprehensive Plan’s average density targets for Low- and Medium-Density Residential land uses. The project is consistent with the surrounding development pattern and land use designations identified in the Comprehensive Plan and will contribute to the City’s overall housing availability. • Utilities Policy UT-1-A: Ensure that public water and sewer services are available concurrently with development in the urban growth area. Public water and sewer services are available in the vicinity of the site. Coordination with the Seven Sisters Phase 4 subdivision, located west of the site across Road 84, may be beneficial to facilitate the extension of required utilities as part of this development. The proposed project would extend these utilities to and through the property, providing service connections to each lot and establishing a closer connection point for future development of adjacent lands within the Urban Growth Area (UGA). (4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City Council; The City Council has adopted the Pasco Comprehensive Plan which contains various goals and policies of which the proposal conforms to, see example policies under (3) of this section. Further, the proposal conforms with some Council’s 2022-2023 goals such as: • Economic Vitality: Implementation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan through related actions including zoning code changes, phased sign code update, and development regulations and standards. In November of 2023 the City Council passed Ordinance 4700 relating to residential design standards. These standards provide various housing types, lot sizes, frontage widths etc. which the proposed plat will conform to and use. (5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of this title; Title 21, Pasco Urban Area Subdivision Regulations, establishes the requirements and procedures for various subdivision types, including standards for streets, lots, blocks, and application materials. The proposed subdivision generally conforms to the intent and purpose of Title 21, with the exception of exceeding the maximum block length specified in PMC 21.20.010(3). This deviation results from the configuration of existing subdivisions to the south. Conditions of approval will address standard issues and allow the preliminary plat to move forward in the review process. (6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed subdivision. The proposed plat, if approved, will be developed in accordance with all City codes and standards designed to 6 ensure the health, safety and general welfare of the community are met. The Comprehensive Plan will be implemented through the development of this plat. These factors will ensure the public use and interest are served. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The Columbia Waters Estates subdivision shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted Plat. The subdivision shall contain 213 residential lots. 2) All frontage improvements associated with this project are to be made in accordance with City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards and Specifications for Public Works Improvements and Municipal Codes. 3) The face of the final plat shall include this statement: “As a condition of approval of this final plat the owner has waived the right to protest the formation of a Local Improvement District for right-of-way and utility improvements to the full extent as permitted by RCW 35.43.182.” 4) All stormwater is required to be maintained and treated on site in accordance with Washington State Department of Ecology and City of Pasco Standards. 5) Civil plans submitted for City approval must be designed and stamped by a Washington State Licensed Civil Engineer. 6) PMC 21.35.100 Underground Utilities: (1) All utility lines serving the subdivision, including but not limited to power, telephone and television cables, shall be installed underground. Adequate easements shall be provided for all such utility lines, which will not be located within the right-of-way. 7) All utilities shall comply with PMC 12.36.050(2), as applicable. 8) The face of the final plat shall include this statement: “The individual or company making improvements on a lot or lots of this plat is responsible for providing and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary junction boxes, and backfill for the PUD’s primary and secondary distribution system in accordance with PUD specifications; said individual or company will make full advance payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary utility easements prior to PUD construction and/or connection of any electrical service to or within the plat.” 9) Any existing water rights associated with the subject property shall be transferred to the City as a condition of approval. If no water rights are available, the property owner, in accordance with PMC 21.05.120, shall pay to the City, in lieu thereof, a water rights acquisition fee as established in the City Fee Summary Ordinance as identified in PMC 3.35. 10) Only City of Pasco and other authorized utilities with franchise agreements are allowed in the public right- of-way. 11) It shall be the responsibility of the property owner/developer to contact all utility owners to determine their system improvement requirements. Prior to subdivision construction plan submittal and/or review, the property owner/developer shall provide the City of Pasco written support/approval of the proposed development from all outside utilities, public and private. 12) All fee payments for bonding of Right-Of-Way improvements and Water Rights must be paid at or before the time of final plat being submitted for signatures. 13) Street lighting will be required per City standards. 14) The pedestrian access easements shown shall be dedicated as public right-of-way in accordance with PMC 21.15.100 and improved with a hard-surfaced, ADA-compliant path that is adequately illuminated. 15) In accordance with PMC 21.15.100, each pedestrian and bicycle accessway that intersects a local access 7 street shall include a complete mid-block pedestrian crossing. 16) Pursuant to PMC 21.35.090 the face of the final plat shall include this statement: “The developer shall install a common “Estate” type fence/wall six feet in height along Road 68 and as part of the infrastructure improvements associated with the plat. The fence/wall must be constructed of masonry block. Fence design and material must be approved by the Community and Economic Development Director. An approved vision triangle at the intersection of streets will be required. Following construction of the masonry fence/wall, the City may make repairs or replace the fencing as needed. Property owners adjoining said fence shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with maintenance and upkeep of the fence/wall.” 17) The developer or builder shall pay a "common area fee" to the City in accordance with PMC 25.180.060(6) and PMC 3.100 at the time building permits are issued for homes. These funds shall be deposited into a dedicated account as outlined in PMC 3.100 and used to support the maintenance of arterial boulevard strips. The City will not assume responsibility for maintaining the landscaping adjacent to these streets until all applicable fees for each adjoining phase have been collected. 18) Lots fronting Road 84 shall obtain future access through shared driveways in order to meet the minimum 150-foot driveway spacing requirement for Collector streets, as specified in PMC 21.20.010. Driveway spacing shall be measured from the edge of adjacent driveway approaches. 19) Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that Lots 4 and 5, and Lots 39 and 40, comply with the lot depth-to-width ratio requirements of PMC 21.20.040(1)(a). The maximum allowable ratio is 2.5:1. 20) The final plat shall include a comment stating: “Existing regulations regarding sight distance, fence height, and setbacks may affect the placement of fences and driveways on any corner lots.” RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Columbia Waters Estates Preliminary Plat located at Parcel 115010042, Pasco, WA with conditions per above. 144 84 85 898788 90 56 55626160595857 82 114 113 112119118117116115 142137 77 129 72 134 74 135 75 136 76 140 80 138 78 139 79 141 81 69 68 67 66 65 647170 73 127 126 125 124 123 122 121128 133 24168 196 204 212 393123157 197 205 213 383022146 198 3721 5 199 3620 200 3519 201 3418 159 191 183 166158 190 182 165157 189 181 164156 188 180 163155 187 167162154 186 161 193 185 160 192 184 111 106110109108107 92 94 95 96 54 9386 120 63 143 83 169168 179 178 173 177 172 176 171 175 170 174 40 42 101 102 105 103 41 43 97 444847 98 46 99 45 100 53 52 51 50 49 91 104 151 150 130 149 131 148 132 TRACT C TRACT B 147 153 152 3 TRACT A 4 1 2 206 2913 207 2812 208 2711 146 209 2610 194 202 210 3325179 195 203 211 32 145 CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TAT E O F W ASHI N G T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y SCALE: 1"=120' VICINITY MAP COVER SHEET CO V E R S H E E T 1 ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” SITE LOCATION SHORT PLAT 93-18 (EXISTING) 115170076 COLUMBIA WATERS FARM, LLC 115170077 COLUMBIA WATERS FARM, LLC 11 5 1 7 1 1 6 7 7H A P A S C O , L L C 115170067 LEE EICKMEYER SAGE FLATS SUBDIVISION (EXISTING)DESERT SAGE SUBDIVISION (EXISTING) SE V E N S I S T E R P H . 1 SU B D I V I S I O N ( E X I S T I N G ) ASHEN DR RO A D 8 4 BUDSAGE DR EM B E R L N R O A D 6 8 ROAD A ROAD A ROAD B ROAD B ROAD D RO A D E RO A D F R O A D I RO A D E RO A D F RO A D G 115170080 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC 115170082 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC 115170081 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC DUSTY MAIDEN DR KAU TRAIL SANDRIFT DR SI L V E R M O U N D D R SA N D D U N E L N Sheet Number Sheet Title ROAD C P H A S E 1 P H A S E 2 PHASE 2 PHASE 1 EM B E R L N PHASE 2 PHASE 1 PHASE 3 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 2 CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TATE O F W A SHI NG T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y PARCEL TABLES PA R C E L T A B L E S 2 151 4,251 SF 150 4,197 SF 130 8,495 SF 149 4,143 SF 131 6,654 SF 148 4,090 SF 132 6,537 SF TRACT C 1,398 SF TRACT B 1,515 SF 147 4,017 SF 153 4,358 SF 152 4,305 SF 206 3,690 SF 207 4,546 SF 208 4,546 SF 146 3,964 SF 209 3,690 SF194 4,546 SF 202 3,690 SF 210 3,690 SF195 3,690 SF 203 3,690 SF 211 3,690 SF196 3,690 SF 204 3,690 SF197 3,690 SF 205 3,690 SF198 3,690 SF 199 3,690 SF 200 3,690 SF 201 3,690 SF 159 3,690 SF 191 3,690 SF 183 3,690 SF 166 3,690 SF158 3,690 SF 190 3,690 SF 182 3,690 SF 165 3,690 SF157 3,690 SF 189 3,690 SF 181 3,690 SF 164 3,690 SF156 3,690 SF 188 3,690 SF 180 4,546 SF 163 3,690 SF155 3,690 SF 187 3,690 SF 167 4,546 SF 162 3,690 SF154 4,546 SF 186 3,690 SF 161 3,690 SF 193 4,546 SF 185 3,690 SF 160 3,690 SF 192 3,690 SF 184 3,690 SF 120 7,266 SF 143 6,400 SF 169 3,690 SF 168 4,546 SF 179 4,546 SF 178 3,690 SF 177 3,690 SF 176 3,690 SF 171 3,690 SF 170 3,690 SF 119 6,400 SF 142 7,266 SF137 6,400 SF 129 7,266 SF 134 6,400 SF 135 6,400 SF 136 6,400 SF 140 6,400 SF 138 6,400 SF 139 6,400 SF 141 7,266 SF 127 6,400 SF 126 6,400 SF 125 6,400 SF 124 6,400 SF 123 6,400 SF 122 6,400 SF 121 7,266 SF128 6,400 SF 133 7,266 SF CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TATE O F W A SHI NG T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y RO A D 8 4 ROAD B ROAD C ROAD D RO A D E RO A D F 11 5 1 7 1 1 6 7 7H A P A S C O , L L C 11 5 1 7 0 0 6 7 LE E E I C K M E Y E R SCALE: 1"=40'115170076 COLUMBIA WATERS FARM, LLC RO A D 8 4 RO A D E RO A D F PARCEL LAYOUT - NW PA R C E L L A Y O U T - N W 3MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET FOR CONTINUATION 4 M A T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T F O R C O N T I N U A T I O N 5 3 7,133 SF TRACT A 1,602 SF 4 9,871 SF 1 8,873 SF 2 7,185 SF 13 6,322 SF 12 6,314 SF 11 6,305 SF 10 6,297 SF 17 6,355 SF9 6,289 SF 16 6,347 SF8 6,281 SF 15 6,338 SF7 6,272 SF 14 6,330 SF6 6,064 SF5 9,653 SF 18 6,363 SF 63 7,266 SF 83 6,400 SF 84 6,400 SF 62 6,400 SF 61 6,400 SF 82 7,266 SF77 6,400 SF 72 7,266 SF 74 6,400 SF 75 6,400 SF 76 6,400 SF 80 6,400 SF 78 6,400 SF 79 6,400 SF 81 7,266 SF 69 6,400 SF 68 6,400 SF 67 6,400 SF 66 6,400 SF 65 6,400 SF 64 7,266 SF71 6,400 SF 70 6,400 SF 73 7,266 SF CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TATE O F W A SHI NG T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y ASHEN DR RO A D 8 4 ROAD A ROAD B RO A D E RO A D G 11 5 1 7 1 1 6 7 7H A P A S C O , L L C DESERT SAGE SUBDIVISION (EXISTING) SE V E N S I S T E R P H . 1 SU B D I V I S I O N ( E X I S T I N G ) SCALE: 1"=40' PARCEL LAYOUT - SW PA R C E L L A Y O U T - S W 4 MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET FOR CONTINUATION 3 M A T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T F O R C O N T I N U A T I O N 6 145 6,400 SF 105 8,266 SF 211 3,690 SF 212 3,690 SF 213 3,690 SF 111 7,647 SF 106 7,647 SF 110 6,400 SF 109 6,400 SF 108 6,400 SF 107 6,400 SF 173 3,690 SF 3,690 SF 172 3,690 SF 176 3,690 SF 171 3,690 SF 175 3,690 SF 3,690 SF 174 3,690 SF 144 6,400 SF 114 6,400 SF 113 6,400 SF 112 7,266 SF118 6,400 SF 117 6,400 SF 116 6,400 SF 115 6,400 SF CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TATE O F W A SHI NG T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y RO A D G ROAD B 115170077 COLUMBIA WATERS FARM, LLC SCALE: 1"=40' PARCEL LAYOUT - N PA R C E L L A Y O U T - N 5 115170080 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC 115170082 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC 115170081 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC ROAD B ROAD C ROAD D EM B E R L N MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET FOR CONTINUATION 6 MA T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T FO R C O N T I N U A T I O N 3 MA T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T FO R C O N T I N U A T I O N 7 97 7,899 SF 48 7,266 SF53 6,400 SF 52 6,400 SF 51 6,400 SF 50 6,400 SF 49 7,647 SF 91 7,647 SF 29 6,454 SF 28 6,446 SF 27 6,438 SF 26 6,429 SF 33 7,388 SF25 6,421 SF 32 7,481 SF24 6,413 SF 31 6,471 SF23 6,405 SF 30 6,463 SF22 6,396 SF 21 6,388 SF 20 6,380 SF 19 6,372 SF 18 6,363 SF 92 6,400 SF 94 6,400 SF 95 6,400 SF 96 7,647 SF 54 7,647 SF 93 6,400 SF86 6,400 SF 84 6,400 SF 85 6,400 SF 89 6,400 SF 87 6,400 SF 88 6,400 SF 90 7,266 SF 56 6,400 SF 55 7,266 SF61 6,400 SF 60 6,400 SF 59 6,400 SF 58 6,400 SF 57 6,400 SF CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TATE O F W A SHI NG T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y BUDSAGE DR SA N D D U N E L N EM B E R L N ROAD A ROAD B RO A D G ROAD A ROAD B MA T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T FO R C O N T I N U A T I O N 4 DESERT SAGE SUBDIVISION (EXISTING) SCALE: 1"=40' PARCEL LAYOUT - S PA R C E L L A Y O U T - S 6 EM B E R L N MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET FOR CONTINUATION 5 MA T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T FO R C O N T I N U A T I O N 7 40 10,434 SF 42 6,528 SF 101 8,131 SF 102 6,528 SF 103 11,745 SF 41 7,631 SF 43 8,171 SF 44 7,667 SF 47 6,400 SF 98 7,400 SF 46 6,400 SF 99 7,400 SF 45 6,400 SF 100 9,014 SF 104 7,400 SF 39 12,259 SF 38 7,017 SF 37 6,531 SF 36 6,523 SF 35 6,514 SF 34 6,506 SF CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TATE O F W A SHI NG T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y R O A D 6 8 KAU TRAIL R O A D I SCALE: 1"=40' PARCEL LAYOUT - E PA R C E L L A Y O U T - E 7 ROAD A DESERT SAGE SUBDIVISION (EXISTING) ROAD B 115170080 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC 115170082 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC MA T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T FO R C O N T I N U A T I O N 6 MA T C H L I N E - S E E S H E E T FO R C O N T I N U A T I O N 5 144 84 85 898788 90 56 55626160595857 82 114 113 112119118117116115 142137 77 129 72 134 74 135 75 136 76 140 80 138 78 139 79 141 81 69 68 67 66 65 647170 73 127 126 125 124 123 122 121128 133 24168 196 204 212 393123157 197 205 213 383022146 198 3721 5 199 3620 200 3519 201 3418 159 191 183 166158 190 182 165157 189 181 164156 188 180 163155 187 167162154 186 161 193 185 160 192 184 111 106110109108107 92 94 95 96 54 9386 120 63 143 83 169168 179 178 173 177 172 176 171 175 170 174 40 42 101 102 105 103 41 43 97 444847 98 46 99 45 100 53 52 51 50 49 91 104 151 150 130 149 131 148 132 TRACT C TRACT B 147 153 152 3 TRACT A 4 1 2 206 2913 207 2812 208 2711 146 209 2610 194 202 210 3325179 195 203 211 32 145 W W W W W W W W W W I R I R I R I R I R I R I R IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR I R I R I R I R IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR CO L U M B I A W A T E R S E S T A T E S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA S C O , W A BI G S K Y N O R T H , L L C 12 4 0 6 E A G L E R E A C H C T PA S C O , W A 9 9 3 0 1 23 7 3 8 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF "COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES" A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 04, TWN. 09 N, RGE. 29 E, W.M. FOR FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON D E R E K J A MES FO R Z A P R O F ESSIONA L E N G I N EERREGISTERED S TATE O F W A SHI NG T O N 21018730 PR E L I M I N A R Y SCALE: 1"=100' PRELIM UTILITY LAYOUT PR E L I M U T I L I T Y L A Y O U T 8 SHORT PLAT 93-18 (EXISTING) 115170076 COLUMBIA WATERS FARM, LLC 115170077 COLUMBIA WATERS FARM, LLC 11 5 1 7 1 1 6 7 7H A P A S C O , L L C SAGE FLATS SUBDIVISION (EXISTING)DESERT SAGE SUBDIVISION (EXISTING) SE V E N S I S T E R P H . 1 SU B D I V I S I O N ( E X I S T I N G ) ASHEN DR RO A D 8 4 BUDSAGE DR EM B E R L N R O A D 6 8 ROAD A ROAD A ROAD B ROAD B ROAD C ROAD D RO A D F R O A D I RO A D E RO A D F RO A D G 115170080 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC 115170082 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC 115170081 BIG SKY NORTH, LLC DUSTY MAIDEN DR KAU TRAIL SANDRIFT DR SA N D D U N E L N SILVER MOUND DR Community & Economic Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 Updated May 2021 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF PASCO PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION PURPOSE: The purpose of a preliminary plat is to provide the owner(s) of property wishing to divide their property into two or more lots and the City an opportunity to review the overall concept prior to initial development. The intent of the preliminary plat process is to promote orderly and efficient community growth within the requirements of RCW 58.17.035. 1. Prior to the filing of an application for approval of a preliminary plat, it is suggested that the subdivider, or his/her agent, contact the Planning Department to discuss the requirement for the preliminary plat. REQUIREMENTS: 1. Title report current within thirty (30) days 2. Application fee (see below) 3. Electronic copy of plat and adjacent properties, as defined below, in AutoCAD format for importation into the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) 4. A completed SEPA checklist 5. An accepted traffic impact analysis (TIA) may be required per the Pasco Design and Construction Standards. 6. Four (4) hard copies of a professionally drawn Preliminary Plat map in ANSi D size (22x34 inches) Clearly showing: a. General information. The following general information shall appear on each sheet of a preliminary plat: i. Proposed name of the subdivision along with the words “Preliminary Plat.” Names shall not be deceptively similar to names of existing subdivisions; ii. Name and address of the applicant/ developer and owner; iii. Name and address of the professional engineer or surveyor who prepared the preliminary plat; iv. Numeric scale, graphic scale, true north point and date of preparation; v. Location of boundary lines in relation to section, quarter-section or quarter- quarter section lines and any adjacent corporate boundaries; vi. A vicinity map sufficient to define the location and boundaries of the proposed subdivision with respect to surrounding property, streets and other major man-made and natural features shall appear on the preliminary plat. b. Existing conditions. Information on existing conditions shall appear on preliminary plats as follows: Docusign Envelope ID: 33D99590-7721-43E9-B717-29688EC04CF6 Page 2 of 6 i. Right-of Way and Parcel lines of completed and current preliminary adjacent subdivisions and/or properties within ½ mile; ii. Existing Topographic features, including all utilities and contours at 5 foot intervals; iii. Location, width and name of each existing or platted street or other right-of- way, parks and other public open spaces, and permanent buildings, within the proposed subdivision; iv. The location, widths and purposes of any existing easements lying within or adjacent to the proposed subdivision as described in item ‘I’ above; v. The location of any well within the proposed subdivision or within one hundred (100) feet of the boundaries of the proposed subdivision. c. Proposed Development. Preliminary plats shall contain the following information about proposed developments: i. Location and width of proposed streets, alleys, pedestrian ways and easements; ii. Indication of any portion or portions of the preliminary plat for which separate or successive final plats will be filed; iii. Layout, numbers and approximate dimensions of lots and numbers of blocks; iv. Location and size of all proposed parks, playgrounds, church sites, or other special uses of land considered for dedication, or reservation by deed of covenant for special use or for use of all property owners in the subdivision and any conditions of such dedication or reservation; v. Indication of proposed land use; vi. Proposed contours, as necessary, to clearly depict future improvements; vii. Two copies of proposed street grades may be required by the City Engineer where conditions warrant their being furnished. viii. For proposed subdivisions involving residential land uses, a Table shall be provided on the preliminary plat containing the following information: 1. Total area of proposed plat in acres; 2. Number of lots and square footage of each lot; 3. Minimum lot size; 4. Maximum lot size; 5. Average lot size; 6. Number of lots per phase; and 7. Total area of proposed rights-of-way per phase. ix. Preliminary layout of water, storm drainage and sanitary sewer systems. PUBLIC HEARING: Upon receipt of a fully completed, and accepted, application for preliminary plat approval, a date shall be set for an open record hearing before the Hearing Examiner. Upon conclusion of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall approve the preliminary plat with or without conditions or deny the preliminary plat. The Hearing Examiner shall make and enter into findings from the record and conclusions thereof as to whether or not: Docusign Envelope ID: 33D99590-7721-43E9-B717-29688EC04CF6 Page 3 of 6 1. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds, transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking conditions for students and other public needs; 2. The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land use patterns in the area; 3. The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; 4. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City Council; 5. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of this Title; 6. The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed subdivision. NOTICE OF DECISION: Following adoption of a resolution approving or denying a preliminary plat, the applicant shall be notified of the Hearing Examiner’s action. The notice shall inform the applicant of applicable time limitations for final plat submittal if the preliminary plat was approved. The approved preliminary plat does not constitute an acceptance of the subdivision, but is deemed to be an authorization to proceed with preparation of the final plat. ADJUSTMENTS: 1. Minor Adjustments. Minor adjustments may be made and approved by the City Planner. Minor adjustments are those which may affect the precise dimensions of the plat but which do not affect the basic character or arrangement of the lots and streets. The adjustments cannot be inconsistent with the requirements of the preliminary plat approval. The adjustments cannot cause the subdivision to be in violation of this title, the zoning ordinance, any other applicable City land use controls, Chapter 58.17 RCW, or any other applicable state law or regulation. 2. Major Adjustments. Major adjustments are those, when determined by the City Planner, that substantially change the basic design, layout, open space or other requirements of the plat. When the City Planner determines a change constitutes a major adjustment, a new application for a preliminary plat is required and shall be processed as a new and separate application. 3. Time Limitations. A preliminary plat shall be valid for a five-year period following Hearing Examiner approval of the preliminary plat. LARGE DEVELOPMENTS: In order to discourage premature subdivision and unfeasible improvements of streets, the following procedure is provided for: 1. When a developer or group of developers have in their control an area of land which they wish to plat, but of such a large size that the sale of a majority of the lots in the area would take more than a year, they may cause to be prepared a preliminary plat for the entire area of development; 2. On such preliminary plat, development divisions may be designated; 3. Upon approval of the preliminary plat, the developer may cause to be prepared a final plat for one or more development divisions, provided the order of development allows for the Docusign Envelope ID: 33D99590-7721-43E9-B717-29688EC04CF6 Page 4 of 6 provision of utilities and streets with proper alignment with existing and future utilities and streets; 4. Each development division shall be considered as a final plat and provisions of these regulations shall be complied with for such development division. Additional Considerations: Due to the potential changes resulting from the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA), plans depicting civil improvements within the plat shall not be submitted for review until the TIA, for the entire preliminary plat, is completed and accepted by the City Engineer. Docusign Envelope ID: 33D99590-7721-43E9-B717-29688EC04CF6 Community & Economic Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 Updated May 2021 Page 5 of 6 CITY OF PASCO PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION Master File # ______________ Date Submitted: ______________ Applicant Info Owner Info (if different than applicant) Name: Name: Address: Address: Phone: Phone: Email: Email: Project Address: ____________________________________ Project Parcel Number: ______________________________ Current Zoning: ____________________________________ Gross square footage of property: _____________________ Number of lots proposed: ____________________________ Source of domestic water: ____________________________ Method of sewage disposal: __________________________ Development variations (density increase, planned density development, planned unit development, etc.): __________________________________________________________________________________ Description of proposal: ______________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 115010042 1,858,269.6 sf Proposal to subdivide 42.66 acres into 213 residential lots. None. City of Pasco City of Pasco 213 North half of the site is zoned R-3, south half is zoned R-1. NKA. North of Burns Road, East of Road 84, and West of Road 68. ccolre@aol.com (509) 521-4834 5810 Midland Ln. Unit 65 Pasco, WA 99301 Big Sky North Docusign Envelope ID: 33D99590-7721-43E9-B717-29688EC04CF6 Page 6 of 6 Access to proposed plat (existing or proposed): ____________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ NOTE: Provide a variance report giving a list and mailing address of owners of all property within 300 feet of the applicant’s property, as shown by a local title company OR payment of $50.00 which shall be utilized by the City to obtain a current list of property owners of all properties within 300 feet of the applicant’s property. Application fee - $ 700.00 Per Lot Fee - $ 30.00 per lot ($950.00 max) Environmental Checklist - $ 75.00 Radius Notification - $ 50.00 TOTAL $  Preliminary Plat (physical & electronic)  SEPA checklist  Fee  Title Report ______________________________________________ _______________ Applicant Signature Date ______________________________________________ _______________ Owner Signature Date The site will be serviced by three public road entrances from Road 68 to the east, and Road 84 to the west, along with the planned construction of Road B, which will allow access to the site from the east and the west. Docusign Envelope ID: 33D99590-7721-43E9-B717-29688EC04CF6 6/13/2025 6/13/2025 Revised Plat Certificate Page 1 REVISED PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE A Office File Number CBF19892 Ref. No.: Effective Date June 11, 2025 at 8:00 a.m. Premium $350.00 THE ASSURED REFERRED TO ON THE FACE PAGE ARE: BIG SKY NORTH, LLC THAT ACCORDING TO THE COMPANY'S PROPERTY RECORDS RELATIVE TO THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY (BUT WITHOUT EXAMINATION OF THOSE COMPANY RECORDS MAINTAINED AND INDEXED BY NAME): SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" A.THE LAST RECORDED INSTRUMENT PURPORTING TO TRANSFER TITLE TO SAID REAL PROPERTY INDICATES THAT TITLE WAS CONVEYED TO: BIG SKY NORTH, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY B.THERE ARE NO MORTGAGES OR DEEDS OF TRUST WHICH PURPORT TO AFFECT SAID PROPERTY, OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN BELOW UNDER EXCEPTIONS. NO GUARANTEE IS MADE REGARDING (A) MATTERS AFFECTING THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST OF ANY MORTGAGE OR DEED OF TRUST WHICH MAY BE SHOWN HEREIN AS AN EXCEPTION, OR (B) OTHER MATTERS WHICH MAY AFFECT ANY SUCH MORTGAGE OR DEED OF TRUST. NO GUARANTEE IS MADE REGARDING ANY LIENS, CLAIMS OF LIEN, DEFECTS OR ENCUMBRANCES OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED FOR ABOVE, AND, IF INFORMATION WAS REQUESTED BY REFERENCE TO A STREET ADDRESS, NO GUARANTEE IS MADE THAT SAID REAL PROPERTY IS THE SAME AS SAID ADDRESS. EXCEPTIONS: 1.LIABILITY TO FUTURE ASSESSMENT BY FRANKLIN COUNTY IRRIGATION DISTRICT 2.EXCEPTIONS AND RESERVATIONS CONTAINED IN DEED; FROM:GLACIER PARK COMPANY RECORDED:MAY 14, 1991 RECORDING NO.:479039 AS FOLLOWS: ALL GEOTHERMAL HEAT AND ALL ORES AND MINERAL OF ANY NATURE WHATSOEVER THE PRESENT OWNERSHIP OR ENCUMBRANCES UPON THE ESTATE OR INTEREST REFERRED TO IN THIS EXCEPTION ARE NOT INCLUDED HEREIN AND NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN MADE THERETO 3.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS AS CONTAINED IN THAT STATE OF WASHINGTON CERTIFICATE OF WATER RIGHT: RECORDED:DECEMBER 26, 2012 RECORDING NO:1793226 CONTINUED 4.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS AS CONTAINED IN THAT ORDER OF INCLUSION: RECORDED:JUNE 12, 2013 RECORDING NO:1801570 5.MATTERS AS DISCLOSED IN THAT SURVEY: RECORDED:JULY 02, 2021 RECORDING NO:1942293 6.MATTERS AS DISCLOSED IN THAT SURVEY: RECORDED:JULY 27, 2021 RECORDING NO:1943869 7.DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR:BIG SKY NORTH LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TRUSTEE:CASCADE TITLE COMPANY OF BENTON-FRANKLIN COUNTIES BENEFICIARY:WHEATLAND BANK, DIVISION OF GLACIER BANK AMOUNT:$4,875,000.00 DATED:December 26, 2024 RECORDED:December 31, 2024 AUDITOR'S FILE NO.:1994294 8.MATTERS AS DISCLOSED IN THE SURVEY RECORDED JUNE 5, 2025, UNDER RECORDING NO. 1999739. END OF SCHEDULE A EXCEPTIONS. NOTES: a.THE ADDRESS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS: VACANT LAND PASCO, WA 99301 b.ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE CURRENT VALUE OF SAID PREMISES IS AS FOLLOWS: TAX ACCOUNT NO.:115-010-042 LAND:$0.00 IMPROVEMENTS:$0.00 TOTAL:$0.00 c. THE FOLLOWING ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS PROVIDED AS A COURTESY TO ENABLE THE DOCUMENT PREPARER TO CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF RCW 65.04.045, PERTAINING TO STANDARDIZATION OF RECORDED DOCUMENTS. ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PTN. SW 1/4 OF 4-9-29 d.GENERAL TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2025, WHICH HAVE BEEN PAID; AMOUNT:$23,612.80 FORMER TAX ACCOUNT NO.:115-170-078 AFFECTS:PORTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY e.IRRIGATION ASSESSMENT BY FRANKLIN COUNTY IRRIGATION DISTRICT, FOR THE YEAR 2025, WHICH HAS BEEN PAID; AMOUNT:$2,784.00 FORMER TAX ACCOUNT NO.:115-170-078 AFFECTS:PORTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY f.GENERAL TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2025, WHICH HAVE BEEN PAID; AMOUNT:$18,311.10 FORMER TAX ACCOUNT NO.:115-170-079 AFFECTS:REMAINDER OF SUBJECT PROPERTY g.IRRIGATION ASSESSMENT BY FRANKLIN COUNTY IRRIGATION DISTRICT, FOR THE YEAR 2025, WHICH HAS BEEN PAID; AMOUNT:$2,651.00 FORMER TAX ACCOUNT NO.:115-170-079 AFFECTS:REMAINDER OF SUBJECT PROPERTY h.INFORMATIONAL NOTE: ALL OF PARCEL NUMBER 115-170-079 AND A PORTION OF 115-170-078, COMPRISE NOW PARCEL NUMBER 115-010-042. EXHIBIT "A" THAT PARCEL OF LAND BEING LOT 4 OF THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED UNDER BOOK 4 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 181, AUDITOR’S FILE NUMBER 1943869, RECORDS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AND 2 OF THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED UNDER BOOK 4 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 643, AUDITOR’S FILE NUMBER 1998115 RECORDS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LOCATED IN A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 9 NORTH, RANGE 29 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 01°06’35” EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER, 671.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 01°06’35” EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 1007.80 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE NORTH 89°28’55” EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 4 AND PARCEL 2, 1103.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°31’05” EAST, 330.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°28’55” EAST, 9.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°31’05” EAST, 160.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°28’55” EAST, 1126.53 FEET; THENCE NORTH 15°00’50” WEST, 35.38 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74°59’10” EAST, 171.98 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ROAD 68 NORTH; THENCE SOUTH 15°00’38” EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 619.73 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE SOUTH 89°36’01” WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 AND LOT 4, 2580.22 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO SHOWN AS ADJUSTED PARCEL 115-170-079 ON SURVEY RECORDED JUNE 5, 2025 UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 1999739. Cascade Title Company of Benton-Franklin Counties Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through its affiliates, from sharing nonpublic personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Cascade Title Company of Benton-Franklin Counties We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: Information we receive from you such as on applications or other forms. Information about your transactions we secure from our files, or from [our affiliates or] others. Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customers to our affiliates as permitted by law. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. ORT 287-C 5/07/01 THANK YOU for your legal submission! Your legal has been submitted for publication. Below is a confirmation of your legal placement. You will also receive an email confirmation. ORDER DETAILS Order Number: IPL0284463  Order Status: Submitted  Classification: Legals & Public Notices  Package: TRI - Legal Ads  Site: tricity  Final Cost: $450.69  Referral Code: NOPH  Payment Type: Account Billed   User ID: IPL0018633  ACCOUNT INFORMATION Debra Barham 525 North Third Ave. Pasco, WA 99301 509-544-3096  cityclerk@pasco-wa.gov City of Pasco TRANSACTION REPORT Date October 22, 2025 2:31:08 PM EDT  Amount: $450.69   SCHEDULE FOR AD NUMBER IPL02844630 October 26, 2025 Tri-City Herald Print Publication PREVIEW FOR AD NUMBER IPL02844630 3.22inches x 7.41inches 10/22/25, 11:31 AM Adportal Self Service Advertising Confirmation https://placelegal.mcclatchy.com/legals/tricity/home/confirmation.html?id=266346&returnto=1/2 << Click here to print a printer friendly version >> 10/22/25, 11:31 AM Adportal Self Service Advertising Confirmation https://placelegal.mcclatchy.com/legals/tricity/home/confirmation.html?id=266346&returnto=2/2 Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 CITY OF PASCO NOTICE OF APPLICATION/SEPA DETERMINATION (Optional DNS Process) Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita más información, por favor llame al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Económico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509-545-3441. SEPA Comment Period Deadlines: August 06, 2025 Proposal: Big Sky North submitted a SEPA checklist on June 16, 2025, for the subdivision of one lot into two hundred thirteen lots. The project will be constructed in three phases and will consist of approximately 145 single-family homes and 34 duplexes. Features of the development include Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication, utility easements, and a roadway connection between Road 84 and Road 68. Project contains zoning of Low-Density Residential (R-1) and Medium-Density Residential (R-3), along with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use designations of Low -Density Residential and Medium-Density Residential. The proposal is located at parcel 115010042 in Pasco, WA 99301. The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code. Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m. on August 06, 2025. Only comments received by the referenced date will be included in the SEPA record. If you have questions on the proposal, contact the Planning Division at (509) 905-2604 or via e-mail to: gundersona@pasco-wa.gov. Open Record Hearing: No public hearing is required for the SEPA. The SEPA determination will be established administratively by the Pasco SEPA Administrator. An open record hearing with the Hearing Examiner for the plat will be conducted at a later undetermined date. Determination of Completeness: The application has been declared complete for the purpose of processing. Environmental Documents and/or Studies Applicable to this Application: Environmental Determination No. SEPA2025-024 has been assigned to this proposal. The SEPA comment period will end August 06, 2025. It is probable that a Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance will be issued for this proposal (WAC 197.11.355 optional DNS process). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of this proposal or to appeal any State Environmental Policy Act related decisions. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination and any other information concerning this action may be obtained by contacting the City of Pasco Planning Department. Required Permits: A building permit and right-of-way permit will be required before any ground disturbing activities begin. Preliminary Determination of Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: To evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, the following may be used for mitigation, consistency, and the development of findings and conclusions: Title 12 (Streets and Sidewalks), Title 16 (Buildings and Construction), Title 21 (Subdivision), Title 25 (Zoning), regulations of the Pasco Municipal Code, and the land use policies contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan; Regulations of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Natural Resources; Other required agency evaluations, approvals, permits, and mitigations as necessary. Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 Estimated Date of the Decision: A DNS or MDNS will be issued following the close of the comment period on August 06, 2025. To Receive Notification of the Environmental Determination: Contact the Pasco Planning Division at the address or telephone number below. Appeals: You may appeal the subsequent threshold determination by submitting an appeal to the address below within 10 days of issuance. The appeal must be in written form, contain a concise statement of the matter being appealed and the basic rationale for the app eal. A fee is required per the City's Fee Resolution. Please note that failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all rights to an administrative appeal under City code. All comments or appeals are to be directed to the City of Pasco Planning Department, PO Box 293, Pasco, WA, 99301, Attn: Haylie Miller. Prepared July 23, 2025 by: Aaron Gunderson, Planner II, PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 (509) 545-3441 Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 NOTICE OF APPLICATION/SEPA DETERMINATION (Optional DNS Process) Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita más información, por favor llame al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Económico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509-545-3441. SEPA Comment Period Deadlines: August 06, 2025 Proposal: Big Sky North submitted a SEPA checklist on June 16, 2025, for the subdivision of one lot into two hundred thirteen lots. The project will be constructed in three phases and will consist of approximately 145 single-family homes and 34 duplexes. Features of the development include Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication, utility easements, and a roadway connection between Road 84 and Road 68. Project contains zoning of Low-Density Residential (R-1) and Medium-Density Residential (R-3), along with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use designations of Low -Density Residential and Medium-Density Residential. The proposal is located at parcel 115010042 in Pasco, WA 99301. The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code. Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m. on August 06, 2025. Only comments received by the referenced date will be included in the SEPA record. If you have questions on the proposal, contact the Planning Division at (509) 905-2604 or via e-mail to: gundersona@pasco-wa.gov. Open Record Hearing: No public hearing is required for the SEPA. The SEPA determination will be established administratively by the Pasco SEPA Administrator. An open record hearing with the Hearing Examiner for the plat will be conducted at a later undetermined date. Determination of Completeness: The application has been declared complete for the purpose of processing. Environmental Documents and/or Studies Applicable to this Application: Environmental Determination No. SEPA2025-024 has been assigned to this proposal. The SEPA comment period will end August 06, 2025. It is probable that a Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance will be issued for this proposal (WAC 197.11.355 optional DNS process). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of this proposal or to appeal any State Environmental Policy Act related decisions. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination and any other information concerning this action may be obtained by contacting the City of Pasco Planning Department. Required Permits: A building permit and right-of-way permit will be required before any ground disturbing activities begin. Preliminary Determination of Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: To evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, the following may be used for mitigation, consistency, and the development of findings and conclusions: Title 12 (Streets and Sidewalks), Title 16 (Buildings and Construction), Title 21 (Subdivision), Title 25 (Zoning), regulations of the Pasco Municipal Code, and the land use policies contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan; Regulations of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Natural Resources; Other required agency evaluations, approvals, permits, and mitigations as necessary. Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 Estimated Date of the Decision: A DNS or MDNS will be issued following the close of the comment period on August 06, 2025. To Receive Notification of the Environmental Determination: Contact the Pasco Planning Division at the address or telephone number below. Appeals: You may appeal the subsequent threshold determination by submitting an appeal to the address below within 10 days of issuance. The appeal must be in written form, contain a concise statement of the matter being appealed and the basic rationale for the app eal. A fee is required per the City's Fee Resolution. Please note that failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all rights to an administrative appeal under City code. All comments or appeals are to be directed to the City of Pasco Planning Department, PO Box 293, Pasco, WA, 99301, Attn: Haylie Miller. Prepared July 23, 2025 by: Aaron Gunderson, Planner II, PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 (509) 545-3441 Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 NOTICE OF APPLICATION/SEPA DETERMINATION (Optional DNS Process) Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita más información, por favor llame al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Económico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509-545-3441. SEPA Comment Period Deadlines: August 06, 2025 Proposal: Big Sky North submitted a SEPA checklist on June 16, 2025, for the subdivision of one lot into two hundred thirteen lots. The project will be constructed in three phases and will consist of approximately 145 single-family homes and 34 duplexes. Features of the development include Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication, utility easements, and a roadway connection between Road 84 and Road 68. Project contains zoning of Low-Density Residential (R-1) and Medium-Density Residential (R-3), along with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use designations of Low -Density Residential and Medium-Density Residential. The proposal is located at parcel 115010042 in Pasco, WA 99301. The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code. Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m. on August 06, 2025. Only comments received by the referenced date will be included in the SEPA record. If you have questions on the proposal, contact the Planning Division at (509) 905-2604 or via e-mail to: gundersona@pasco-wa.gov. Open Record Hearing: No public hearing is required for the SEPA. The SEPA determination will be established administratively by the Pasco SEPA Administrator. An open record hearing with the Hearing Examiner for the plat will be conducted at a later undetermined date. Determination of Completeness: The application has been declared complete for the purpose of processing. Environmental Documents and/or Studies Applicable to this Application: Environmental Determination No. SEPA2025-024 has been assigned to this proposal. The SEPA comment period will end August 06, 2025. It is probable that a Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance will be issued for this proposal (WAC 197.11.355 optional DNS process). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of this proposal or to appeal any State Environmental Policy Act related decisions. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination and any other information concerning this action may be obtained by contacting the City of Pasco Planning Department. Required Permits: A building permit and right-of-way permit will be required before any ground disturbing activities begin. Preliminary Determination of Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: To evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, the following may be used for mitigation, consistency, and the development of findings and conclusions: Title 12 (Streets and Sidewalks), Title 16 (Buildings and Construction), Title 21 (Subdivision), Title 25 (Zoning), regulations of the Pasco Municipal Code, and the land use policies contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan; Regulations of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Natural Resources; Other required agency evaluations, approvals, permits, and mitigations as necessary. Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 Estimated Date of the Decision: A DNS or MDNS will be issued following the close of the comment period on August 06, 2025. To Receive Notification of the Environmental Determination: Contact the Pasco Planning Division at the address or telephone number below. Appeals: You may appeal the subsequent threshold determination by submitting an appeal to the address below within 10 days of issuance. The appeal must be in written form, contain a concise statement of the matter being appealed and the basic rationale for the app eal. A fee is required per the City's Fee Resolution. Please note that failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all rights to an administrative appeal under City code. All comments or appeals are to be directed to the City of Pasco Planning Department, PO Box 293, Pasco, WA, 99301, Attn: Haylie Miller. Prepared July 23, 2025 by: Aaron Gunderson, Planner II, PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 (509) 545-3441 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 1 of 23 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization, or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for lead agencies Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B, plus the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in “Part B: Environmental Elements” that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 2 of 23 A. Background Find help answering background questions 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Columbia Waters Estates 2. Name of applicant: Big Sky North 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Big Sky North c/o Dave Greeno 5810 Midland Ln, Unit 65 Pasco, WA 99301 ccolre@aol.com (509) 521-4834 Contact Person: Harpster Land Development c/o Peter Harpster 5804 Rd 90, Suite C Pasco, WA 99301 peter@harpsterld.com (509) 212-9596 4. Date checklist prepared: 06/11/2025 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Pasco 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Once permitted. The project will be constructed in three phases. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 3 of 23 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.  Storm drainage report to be developed which will outline the designed system that will be used to handle any stormwater runoff from the site.  A Geotechnical Report and Study will be completed. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.  Preliminary plat approval  Final Plat Approval  Construction permit approval SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 4 of 23 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The proposal is to subdivide 42.66 acres currently zoned R-3 and R-1, into 68 attached and 145 detached single-family residential lots for a total of 213 dwelling units. Typical street and utility improvements will be installed to support the subdivision. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. NKA. The site is located on parcel #115010042, North of Burns Road, East of Road 84, and West of Road 68. The parcels are located in a portion of the southwest corner of Section 4, Township 9, North, Range 29 East, W.M. within the City of Pasco, Franklin County, WA. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 5 of 23 B. Environmental Elements 1. Earth Find help answering earth questions a. General description of the site: The site slopes downward from the southeast corner toward the northwest, with the steepest section occurring near the eastern property boundary along Road 68. The northern and western portions of the site, particularly near Budsage Drive, are relatively flat, with slopes less than 2%. Overall, the site’s topography gently directs surface flow to the northwest. Circle or highlight one: Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope on the site is approximately 1%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them, and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. 61.2% of the site consists of Winchester loamy coarse sand, and 38.8% Quincy loamy fine sand, per NRCS soils data. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No history or indication of unstable soil exists. Similar soils and slopes nearby contain existing developments. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading quantities have not been determined at this time. It is likely that the site will be graded to balance the onsite material. f. Could erosion occur because of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, during the construction phase of the project soil erosion from stormwater runoff and fugitive dust emissions could occur. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Impervious surfaces will cover approximately 32% of the overall site for right-of-way after construction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 6 of 23  Adherence to geotechnical recommendations for slope stability and compaction.  Adherence to the Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) implemented by the Contractor will provide measures to mitigate for any erosion caused by onsite stormwater runoff during construction of the project.  Compliance with Franklin County’s Clear Air and dust control ordinances during construction.  The subdivision drainage system will be designed to capture and dispose of stormwater runoff onsite. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 7 of 23 2. Air Find help answering air questions a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. General exhaust will be caused by construction vehicles when in use. Once the project is completed, there will be emissions consistent with residential subdivisions that could occur, such as vehicle exhaust from homeowners. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are none known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. Any vehicles not in use during the development of the project will be kept off to reduce emissions. Adequate dust control measures will be implemented during project construction. 3. Water Find help answering water questions a. Surface Water: Find help answering surface water questions 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. None. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give a general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 8 of 23 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The project site is located within Zone C of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panel 5300440690B, which does not lie within the 100-year floodplain. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground Water: Find help answering ground water questions 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give a general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals…; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. There will not be any waste material that is discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources. The site will contain infrastructure for sanitary sewer disposal that will connect to the City of Pasco municipal system. c. Water Runoff (including stormwater): a) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Any on site runoff will be mainly generated from new impervious surfaces which will be captured and infiltrated on site. b) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Vehicles and rooftops produce a potential for waste materials to be discharged for the site due to their status as point sources for pollution. In order to minimize the potential for a release, any runoff generated from the site will comply with the SWMMEW and City of Pasco standards. Stormwater runoff coming in contact with contamination sources could cause waste material to enter the ground. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 9 of 23 c) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. Drain patterns in the vicinity of the site will not be altered. d) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any. Measures to reduce and control surface runoff will be met following SWMMEW and City of Pasco standards. Engineered stormwater design calculations will be submitted to the City for review. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 10 of 23 4. Plants Find help answering plants questions a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: ☐ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ☐ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ☐ shrubs ☒ grass ☐ pasture ☒ crop or grain ☐ orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops. ☐ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ☐ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ☐ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Existing vegetation on the site will be cleared for development purposes. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. WDFW PHS map indicates “Shrub Steppe” over a portion of the southwest, and southeast corner of the property. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Typical residential vegetation. Lots will be landscaped in compliance with PMC 25.180 Landscaping and Screening. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None are known. 5. Animals Find help answering animal questions a. List any birds and other animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include:  Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:  Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:  Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. Ferruginous Hawk. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 11 of 23 c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes, the entire Columbia Basin is part of a migration route. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. None. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None. 6. Energy and Natural Resources Find help answering energy and natural resource questions 1. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical utilities will be utilized to meet the proposed development’s energy needs. 2. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The proposed development will not impact the potential uses of solar energy by adjacent properties. 3. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. The proposed development will meet applicable state and local energy codes. 7. Environmental Health Find help with answering environmental health questions a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur because of this proposal? If so, describe. No, the proposed development will not pose any environmental health hazards. Any waste that is generated will be disposed of consistent with city, county, and state regulations. 1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. No known contamination is present at the proposed development site. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 12 of 23 2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. There are no known hazardous chemicals/conditions or gas transmission pipelines that might affect project development. 3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Aside from equipment fueling during the construction phase, there are no other known toxic or hazardous chemicals that will be stored onsite during the life of the project 4. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. Compliance with State standards. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 13 of 23 b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Typical farm equipment, traffic, and residential use noises exist near the site. These noises will not affect the proposal. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site)? Short-term noise will be generated during the construction phase of the proposed development. Long-term noise will be typical of residential use. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Noise impacts produced during the construction phase will be limited in duration. To minimize noise impact, construction equipment will utilize mufflers and quieting devices. Compliance with the City of Pasco Municipal Code 9.130 with regards to noise will be followed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use Find help answering land and shoreline use questions a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The site is presently used for agricultural farming. There is residential development directly to the south. Current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties will not be affected. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses because of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? The site is presently a working farmland. The site is in Pasco’s Urban Growth Area and will be converted to residential use. This project does not convert any agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance. 1. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how? No impacts due to farming are known or anticipated. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 14 of 23 c. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning classification of the site is R-1 and R-3. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current comprehensive plan designation of the site is Medium Density Residential, and Low Density Residential. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 213 Dwellings x 3.32 persons per dwelling = 707 people. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. None. l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. Project proposal is compatible with existing and future land uses and plans including providing several hundred housing opportunities for families m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any. None. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 15 of 23 9. Housing Find help answering housing questions a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. 213 Dwelling Units provided for low-income to middle-income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. None. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 16 of 23 10. Aesthetics Find help answering aesthetics questions a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Structure height has not yet been determined but will not exceed the maximum height allowed, according to zoning code requirements established by the City of Pasco. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. The proposed development will improve the aesthetics of the area by providing new streets and landscaping within the development site. The site will conform to the City of Pasco’s Residential Design Standards as detailed in PMC 25.165.100. 11. Light and Glare Find help answering light and glare questions a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Exterior building lighting will be generated by the completed project and occur during the evening and night hours, typical with other residential developments. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Unlikely, typical residential lighting is expected. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No off-site sources of light or glare will affect this proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. None. The site will comply with PMC 12.32 Outdoor Lighting. 12. Recreation Find help answering recreation questions a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Vintage Park is approximately half a mile south of the site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. None. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 17 of 23 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Find help answering historic and cultural preservation questions a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically describe. None. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. None. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. WISAARD (Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data) identifies the majority of the City of Pasco to be High Risk or Very High Risk. The site is mainly labeled High Risk. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Contractor shall have an inadvertent discovery protocol in place prior to ground disturbing activities. 14. Transportation Find help with answering transportation questions a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site will be serviced by three public road entrances from Road 68 to the east, and Road 84 to the west, along with the planned construction of Road B, which will allow access to the site from the east and the west. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No, this site is not served by public transit. The nearest transit stop is situated along Sandifur Parkway, approximately 1 mile South of the project. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 18 of 23 c. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No existing parking spaces will be eliminated as part off this proposal. d. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No, the proposed development is over five miles from the Pasco Airport and the development will not obstruct air traffic. e. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? ITE Manual, Trip Generation 11th Edition was used to estimate vehicle trips per day: • Category 210 – Single-Family Detached Housing: Average weekday rate: 9.43 trips/unit. o 9.43 trips/unit * 145 units = 1,367 vehicle trips per day. • Category 215 – Single-Family Attached Housing: Average weekday rate: 7.20 trips/unit o 7.20 trips/unit * 68 units = 489 vehicle trips per day. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 19 of 23 f. Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. Traffic impact fees (if applicable) will be paid at time of building permit. A Traffic Impact Analysis has been submitted to the City of Pasco. 15. Public Services Find help answering public service questions a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, a project of this size will increase the need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The project will be constructed in accordance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, as well as Engineering and Planning standards. 16. Utilities Find help answering utilities questions a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water and Sewer: City of Pasco Irrigation: City of Pasco Electricity: Franklin PUD Garbage Service: Basin Disposal Inc. Communication: Charter SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 20 of 23 C. Signature Find help about who should sign The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Type name of signee: Peter Harpster Position and agency/organization: Owner-Project Manager, Harpster Land Development Date submitted: 6/13/2025 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 21 of 23 Community & Economic Development Department This application was reviewed by the Planning Division of the Community & Economic Development Department. Any comments or changes made by the Department are entered in the body of the checklist and contain initials of the reviewer. Signature: ______________________________________________________ Name of signee: __________________________________________________ Position: ___________________________________ Date Reviewed: _____________ SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 22 of 23 D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions Find help for the nonproject actions worksheet IT IS NOT REQUIRED to use this section for project actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?  Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?  Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?  Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 23 of 23  Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?  Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities?  Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 13 25 SE TECH CEN TER DR SUI TE 1 40 VAN COUVER, WA 98 660 36 0.695.3 488 MAIN 86 6.727.0 140 FAX APE XCOS .COM Columbia Waters Estates Traffic Impact Analysis Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Prepared for: Big Sky Developers, LLC 12406 Eagle Reach Court, Box #D-113 Pasco, Washington 99301 September 19, 2025 Apex Project 25007188 Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC i September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... iii 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Scope of Study ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Existing Site Conditions ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Existing Infrastructure .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.3.1 Land Uses ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3.2 Existing Roadways ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3.3 Major Intersections and Traffic Control ............................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.4.1 Existing Traffic Volumes.............................................................................................................................................. 4 1.4.2 Background Growth ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.4.3 In-Process Projects ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.4.4 Transportation Improvement Projects .................................................................................................................. 5 1.4.5 Future Volumes .............................................................................................................................................................. 5 2 PROPOSED CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Project Description .................................................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Access and Circulation ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Trip Generation and Distribution ........................................................................................................................................ 6 2.3.1 Proposed Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.3.2 Proposed Trip Distribution ........................................................................................................................................ 7 2.3.3 Future Volumes with Project .................................................................................................................................... 7 3 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS AND ROADWAY CAPACITY ANALYSES .................................................... 8 3.1 Operations Description ........................................................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Operation Standards ................................................................................................................................................................ 8 3.3 Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................................................................................. 8 3.4 Level of Service Analyses ........................................................................................................................................................ 9 3.4.1 2025 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................................ 9 3.4.2 2028 Future Conditions Without Project ............................................................................................................. 9 3.4.3 2028 Future Conditions With Project .................................................................................................................. 10 4 SAFETY ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................................................11 4.1 Left-Turn Storage Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 11 4.2 Collision Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11 4.3 Transit, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Facilities........................................................................................................................ 12 4.4 Sight Distance at Site Access Locations .......................................................................................................................... 12 5 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES.............................................................................................................13 5.1 Transportation Impact Fees per Pasco Municipal Code Section 3.35.230 Amended ................................... 13 6 STUDY FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................................14 6.1 Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 14 6.2 Intersection Performance ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 6.3 Collision Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................................... 14 6.4 Transit, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Facilities........................................................................................................................ 14 Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC ii September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 6.5 Driveway Sight Distance ....................................................................................................................................................... 14 6.6 Transportation Impact Fees ................................................................................................................................................. 14 7 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................15 7.1 Accessibility ................................................................................................................................................................................ 15 7.2 Driveway Sight Lines............................................................................................................................................................... 15 8 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................................16 Supporting Data TABLES Table 1. Land Uses Around the Site Table 2. Existing Roadway Information Table 3. Major Intersections: Existing Lanes and Traffic Controls Table 4. New Trip Generation for Columbia Waters Estates Table 5. Estimated 2025 Level of Service for Existing Conditions for Study Area Intersections Table 6. Estimated 2028 Level of Service Without Project for Study Area Intersections Table 7. Estimated 2028 Level of Service With Project for Study Area Intersections Table 8. Collision History Table 9. Project Transportation Impact Fees FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Plan Figure 3. Existing Lane Configuration Figure 4. Future Lane Configuration Figure 5. Existing 2025 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 6. In-process Projects Trip Assignment Figure 7. PM Peak Hour Trip Assignment & Distribution Figure 8. Future 2028 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes APPENDICES Appendix A: Traffic Counts Appendix B: Trip Generation Calculations Appendix C: Level of Service Calculations Appendix D: Collision Rate Calculations and Data Appendix E: Left-Turn Lane Analysis & SIM Traffic Report Appendix F: Transportation Impact Fees ©2025 Apex Companies, LLC Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC iii September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 Executive Summary Purpose and Scope The applicant proposes to develop 145 detached single-family homes and 34 duplexes (totaling 68 attached single-family dwelling units) in Pasco, Washington. This will be a three-phase project, but this study only considers the 2028 final design. The following intersections were identified for this traffic impact analysis (TIA): 1. Road 84/Burns Road 2. Road 84/Sandifur Parkway 3. Road 68/Burns Road 4. Road 68/Sandifur Parkway 5. Road 68/Wrigley Drive Findings The findings of this TIA are listed below. The Columbia Waters Estates development is anticipated to generate 1,888 vehicle trips during a typical weekday, including 178 during the PM peak hour. All studied intersections will maintain an acceptable LOS and v/c ratio, both without and with the project trips through the 2028 year of opening. All study intersections have a collision rate per MEV of less than 1. No trends were noticed; therefore, no additional study is needed. Multimodal transportation options are readily available for pedestrians. Based upon the access intersection’s aerial view, it is unlikely there will be any barriers or challenges with sight obstruction. Recommendations This TIA supports the following recommendations. Assure all driveways, sidewalks, and curb ramps constructed with the subdivision project comply with the current ADA guidelines. Extension of the sidewalk at Road 68 to be connected with access intersections is beneficial. Design the proposed access points intersections in accordance with AASHTO design intersection sight distance Tables 9-7 and 9-9 guidelines for ISD. Install no objects within the sight distance triangles that would block exiting drivers’ view of approaching traffic. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 1 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of the traffic generated by the Columbia Waters Estates Project (CWE) on the surrounding roadway infrastructure. The Project site is shown on the vicinity map (Figure 1). This study will determine if mitigation is required to keep the roadways operating safely and at capacity levels acceptable under the current level of service (LOS) standards. This report documents the findings and conclusions of a traffic impact analysis (TIA) conducted for the proposed site plan (Figure 2) application for property located in Pasco, Washington. 1.1 Scope of Study This study documents the existing and proposed conditions, traffic data, safety analysis, and intersection operations in accordance with the requirements of the City of Pasco (City) Design and Construction Standards (see References). The following intersections were identified for analysis: 1. Road 84 / Burns Road 2. Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway 3. Road 68 / Burns Road 4. Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway 5. Road 68 / Wrigley Drive This TIA includes analysis of future background conditions growth based on an assumed 2.0% annual growth rate and the addition of traffic from in-process projects. This TIA is prepared for submission to the City. The traffic-related issues addressed in this report include: • Existing traffic conditions • Proposed site-generated traffic volumes and their distribution • Build-out year (2028) conditions without and with the project • Capacity analysis of the existing and future conditions for the weekday PM peak hour • Safety analysis of the existing and future conditions • Access locations, vehicle circulation, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities and connections • Recommendations for mitigation of traffic impacts and conclusions • Address agency staff comments following the TIA’s submittal 1.2 Existing Site Conditions The existing site spans along N Burns Road between Road 68 on the east and Road 84 on the west. The site location is currently undeveloped and vacant, it is zoned as “R-3 Medium Density Residential” 1.3 Existing Infrastructure The existing infrastructure and operational traffic conditions in the study area were documented. Roadway conditions were studied to confirm that the roadway is currently operating in a safe and efficient manner. 1.3.1 Land Uses The land uses surrounding the site are documented to help identify the site location and provide reference for any discussion of conditions that might impact the adjacent properties. The land uses surrounding the site are shown in Table 1. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 2 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 Table 1. Land Uses Around the Site North of Site Zoning C-1, R-1, R-T Description Retail Business District, Low- Density Residential District, Residential Transition District Existing Use Vacant West of Site S I T E East of Site Zoning R-1 Zoning C-1 Description Low-Density Residential District Description Retail Business District Existing Use Vacant Existing Use Vacant South of Site Zoning R-1, R-3 Description Low-Density Residential District, Medium-Density Residential District Existing Use Residential 1.3.2 Existing Roadways The two existing arterial roadways providing access to the site are Broadmoor Boulevard and Road 68. Data was gathered on this and other roadways in the study area to inform operations analysis of the existing roadway system. The pertinent information regarding the study area roadways is tabulated in Table 2. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 3 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 Table 2. Existing Roadway Information Roadway Name Classification Speed Limit Lane Configuration Lanes Sidewalks Bike Lanes Burns Road Major Arterial 35 4/2a Yes Yes Budsage Drive Local Residential Street 25 2 Yes No Dusty-Maiden Drive Local Residential Street 25 2 Yes No Road 68 Major Arterial 35 2/4b No No Road 84 Local Residential Street 25 2 Yes No Sandifur Parkway Major Arterial / Major Collector 35 2/4c Yes No Wrigley Drive Neighborhood Collector / Minor Collector 30 2 Partial No a Burns Road is four lanes west of Road 68 and two lanes east of it. b Road 68 is two lanes north of Burns Road and four lanes south of it. c Sandifur Parkway becomes four lanes approximately 500 feet east and west of Road 68 and then returns to two lanes. 1.3.3 Major Intersections and Traffic Control The information shown in Table 3 was gathered and is relevant to the intersection operations analysis noted above. Table 3 presents the existing geometrics and traffic control at the study intersections. Table 3. Major Intersections: Existing Lanes and Traffic Controls Intersection Road 84 / Burns Road Leg NB SB WB EB Control Stop Stop Unc. Unc. Number of Lanes 1 2 2 2 Intersection Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway Leg NB SB WB EB Control NA Stop Unc. Unc. Number of Lanes NA 1 1 2 Intersection Road 68 / Burns Road Leg NB SB WB EB Control Unc. Unc. NA Stop Number of Lanes 2 1 NA 1 Intersection Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway Leg NB SB WB EB Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 4 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 Control Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Number of Lanes 3 3 3 3 Intersection Road 68 / Wrigley Drive Leg NB SB WB EB Control Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Number of Lanes 3 3 2 2 EB = eastbound NB = northbound SB = southbound Sig. = signalized controlled leg of intersection Stop = stop-controlled leg of intersection Unc. = uncontrolled leg approaching intersection; does not stop or yield WB = westbound The project area is defined as the vicinity of the site encompassed by the study intersections. The operation of the intersections can be controlled by signing, roundabouts, or signalization. Table 3 refers to the type of control and number of approach lanes for each leg of each intersection. The existing lane configurations and traffic controls for all intersections are shown in Figure 3. 1.4 Traffic Volumes 1.4.1 Existing Traffic Volumes Traffic volume data was gathered from various sources for the site vicinity for the weekday PM peak hour (4:00 to 6:00 PM). Apex retained All Traffic Data (ATD) to gather the counts. ATD collected the data on May 6, 2025, which had a typical school schedule. Copies of the count data used are provided in Appendix A. Following data collection, a system peak hour calculation was performed to identify the hour within the PM peak time frames that had the highest total entering volume. Traffic volume data was collected in 15-minute intervals over the PM peak time frames. To calculate the system peak hour, the total traffic volume from each intersection during a single 15-minute interval was summed into hourly totals. The resulting existing system peak hour volumes for the studied intersections are shown in Figure 4. These volumes were input to the intersection operations analyses addressed later in this TIA. 1.4.2 Background Growth Background growth is a generic increase in traffic volumes that either is not attributable to specific developments or is attributable to influences outside the study area. As a conservative estimate, a background growth rate of 2% per year was applied to all 2025 existing peak hour movement volumes between public roadways at the studied intersections. The background growth volumes are included in Figure 6 for growth between 2025 and 2028. 1.4.3 In-Process Projects In-process trips from approved projects were requested from the City. The in-process projects noted by the City are the following: • The Columbia Basin Health Association (CBHA) Pasco Clinic: A two-story medical office building totaling 36,840 square feet (based on a TIA by Apex engineers dated February 13, 2024). Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 5 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 • Three Rivers Ranch (Burns Road Housing Development): A proposed residential single-family, detached housing development containing 140 lots (based on a traffic analysis report by Fehr & Peers dated January 2025). • Hogback Caddis – Davita: The development is proposed to consist of one 11,500-square-foot structure for a kidney center use and one 6,200-square-foot structure of mixed retail/office use (based on a transportation impact study by Kimely Horn and Associates, Inc. dated December 2023). • Madison Park North: 460 single-family homes (based on a traffic impact study by Transpogroup dated April 2024). • Glacier Park Development Phase 1: 197 units of single-family homes (based on a traffic impact study by Apex dated August 2022). • Pasco High School #3: A proposed development of the Pasco High School #3 project (based on a traffic impact study by DKS dated August 2023). • Raven Place Development: 758 single-family detached homes (based on a traffic impact study by DKS dated September 2022). All the in-process projects are understood to add some trips at one or more study area intersection. For each project, the City identified the current extent of occupied development so that the in-process trips accounted for only the unoccupied portions of the in-process projects’ total trip volumes. Figure 6 includes the sum of all in-process trips included in this analysis. Copies of the in-process projects’ trip information are provided in Appendix B. 1.4.4 Transportation Improvement Projects The City’s 2025–2030 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) outlines plan for the following roadway and intersection improvement projects relating to impacting studied intersections or access intersections of the project: 1. Burns Road Extension: This project will extend Burns Road from Road 68 to Rio Grande Lane and provide intersection improvements (traffic signal/roundabout) at the intersection of Road 68 and Burns Road. 2. Sandifur Parkway/Road 84 Intersection Improvements: This project will install a traffic signal at the intersection of Sandifur Parkway and Road 84 and include any necessary Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements. 1.4.5 Future Volumes The baseline volumes for 2025 intersection operations analysis, termed the 2028 Without Project volumes, represent the sum of existing traffic, in-process projects’ trips, and background growth. Figure 7 presents the 2025 Without Project volumes for the weekday PM peak hour. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 6 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 2 PROPOSED CONDITIONS The proposed development will add traffic to the roadway system. Where the project is located, the size of the project, and when it will be completed are all important elements that need to be considered to determine the impacts of this development on safety and capacity. It is also important to examine how the project will operate with the existing transportation system, estimate how much new traffic it will generate, and predict where traffic generated by the site will be distributed. Furthermore, this section will address any funded infrastructure changes planned by other agencies or developers. All of these elements are important in assessing the traffic impacts of this project. 2.1 Project Description This Project will construct 145 detached single-family homes and 34 duplexes, totaling 68 attached single- family homes. The new development will include 3 access points. The anticipated build-out date of this project is 2028. 2.2 Access and Circulation The Project has no existing access points (driveways) and will have three after it is built, as shown in Figure 2. Three accesses are currently proposed into and out of the site development. One driveway is proposed on Road 68. The second access point is located on Ember Lane and serves as the main entrance. The third access is located on Road 84 and connects to Dusty Maiden Drive. 2.3 Trip Generation and Distribution The following sections rely on data provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (see References section). Detailed trip generation calculations are provided in Appendix B. 2.3.1 Proposed Trip Generation The weekday trip generation values are based on the ITE weighted average rates, and the independent variable is the number units for both detached and attached single-family homes. Table 4. New Trip Generation for Columbia Waters Estates Land Use (ITE Code) Single-Family Detached Housing (210) Single-Family Attached Housing (215) Total Independent Variable Dwelling Units Dwelling Units - Size 145 68 - Average Weekday Trips (ADT) 1,420 468 1,888 Peak Hour Trips PM In 89 22 111 Out 52 15 67 Total Trips 141 37 178 Findings: The Columbia Waters Estates development is anticipated to generate 1,888 vehicle trips during a typical weekday, including 178 during the PM peak hour. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 7 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 2.3.2 Proposed Trip Distribution The proposed distribution of new (primary) trips is based on a review of the land uses within the study area, on the distribution of existing traffic patterns, and on engineering judgment. The proposed distribution pattern is as follows: • 40% to and from Broadmoor/Interstate 182 (I-182) interchange • 40% to and from Road 68/I-182 interchange via Road 68 • 10% to and from west of Burns Road • 5% to and from east of Burns Road • 5% to and from north of Road 68 The distribution pattern above represents an external distribution of CWE development trips entering and exiting the study area. The distribution and assignment of the new trips to the Columbia CWE are shown in Figure 7. 2.3.3 Future Volumes with Project Figure 8 presents the 2028 With Project volumes, or the sum of Without Project volumes and the net site- generated trips, for the weekday PM peak hour. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 8 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 3 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS AND ROADWAY CAPACITY ANALYSES 3.1 Operations Description Traffic operations are assessed in terms of LOS, a concept developed by transportation engineers to qualify the level of operation of intersections and roadways (Highway Capacity Manual, see References). LOS measures are classified in grades “A” through “F,” indicating a range of operation, with LOS “A” signifying the best level of operation and LOS “F” representing the worst level. LOS at unsignalized intersections is quantified in terms of average delay per vehicle. LOS “A” reflects full freedom of operation for a driver, while LOS “F” represents operational failure. The criteria are based on the theory of gap acceptance for stop-controlled approaches. The volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio quantifies the portion of the theoretical capacity consumed by traffic demand volume. A v/c ratio of 0.00 reflects none of the capacity is consumed and all the capacity is fully available. A v/c ratio of 1.00 reflects all the capacity is consumed and represents operational failure. The v/c ratio can be calculated for an intersection approach lane or for a signalized intersection as a whole, with the latter calculation aggregating the v/c ratios of the critical movements. 3.2 Operation Standards Per the City’s Comprehensive Plan (see References), Table T-9, the minimum LOS standard for local streets is LOS C and for arterials and LOS D for collectors. This standard applies to all studied intersections as well as to the proposed access intersections. 3.3 Analysis Methodology Traffic impacts were estimated to determine the extent of change in traffic conditions caused by the development of this project. In order to make this determination, the following assumptions were employed: • As noted previously, the system peak hour conditions were applied and analyzed. Analysis of the 2025 Existing Conditions volumes are analyzed. • The analysis assumes that the Burns Road/Road 68 intersection TIP project will be done by the 2028 opening year. • The analysis considers a roundabout alternative for the Burns Road/Road 68 intersection and shows the outcomes for the 2028 With Project conditions. • The peak hour factor (PHF) for the overall intersection, as calculated from the count data, was applied for each analysis scenario. No adjustments were made for future year scenarios. • The heavy vehicle percentage (HV%) for each movement, as calculated from the count data, was applied for all analysis scenarios. A minimum value of 2% was assumed for each movement in the 2028 conditions. • Baseline traffic volumes on the surrounding street system have been determined prior to adding the traffic impacts of the proposed project. This was done to establish a baseline for measuring the project impacts at the time of its development. Baseline tra ffic volume estimates were prepared for a two-year design horizon (the 2028 Without Project volumes). • As noted previously, trip generation estimates for the project were prepared for the weekday PM peak hour on the surrounding street system. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 9 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 • Cumulative traffic impacts of the proposed project were determined by superimposing the project-generated traffic onto the background weekday AM and PM peak traffic at all studied intersections. These are termed the 2028 With Project conditions. • The LOS for all signalized and stop-controlled intersections was calculated with Trafficware’s Synchro software, Version 11, based on Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th edition methodologies. LOS calculation reports for the study area intersections are provided in Appendix C. The key analysis findings are listed in the following tables. 3.4 Level of Service Analyses 3.4.1 2025 Existing Conditions Table 5. Estimated 2025 Level of Service for Existing Conditions for Study Area Intersections INTERSECTION PM Peak Hour LOS Delay (sec/veh) v/c (MVMT) Road 84 / Burns Road C 15 0.18 (NBLTR) Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway C 18 0.17 (SBLR) Road 68 / Burns Road C 19 0.53 (EBLR) Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway C 22 0.77 (EBT) Road 68 / Wrigley Drive B 18 0.68 (NBR) Road 68 / Road B (Proposed) - - - MVMT: movement sec/veh: seconds per vehicle NBLTR: northbound left/through/right SBLR: southbound left/right EBLR: eastbound left/right EBT: eastbound through NBR: northbound right As shown in Table 5, all studied intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS during the weekday PM peak hour. 3.4.2 2028 Future Conditions Without Project Table 6. Estimated 2028 Level of Service Without Project for Study Area Intersections INTERSECTION PM Peak Hour LOS Delay (sec/veh) v/c (MVMT) Road 84 / Burns Road C 16 0.20 (NBLTR) Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 10 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 INTERSECTION PM Peak Hour LOS Delay (sec/veh) v/c (MVMT) Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway C 19 0.19 (SBLR) Road 68 / Burns Road B 10 0.76 (EBR) Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway D 37 0.94 (EBT) Road 68 / Wrigley Drive C 21 0.75 (NBR) Road 68 / Road B (Proposed) - - - MVMT: movement sec/veh: seconds per vehicle As shown in Table 6, all studied intersections will operate at an acceptable LOS in the 2028 year of opening Without Project conditions during the weekday PM peak hours. 3.4.3 2028 Future Conditions With Project Table 7. Estimated 2028 Level of Service With Project for Study Area Intersections INTERSECTION PM Peak Hour LOS Delay (sec/veh) v/c (MVMT) Road 84 / Burns Road C 23 0.31 (NBLTR) Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway C 19 0.20 (SBLR) Road 68 / Burns Road B 11 0.78 (EBR) Road 68 / Burns Road RAB Alternative A 4 0.60 (NBLTR) Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway D 39 0.96 (EBT) Road 68 / Wrigley Drive C 22 0.77 (NBTR) Road 68 / Road B (Proposed) B 12 0.06 MVMT: Movement sec/veh: seconds per vehicle RAB: Roundabout Alternative for Burns Road / Road 68, see Appendix C As shown in Table 7, all studied intersections will operate at an acceptable LOS in the 2028 year of opening With Project conditions during the weekday PM peak hours. Findings: All studied intersections will maintain an acceptable LOS and v/c ratio, both without and with the project trips, through the 2028 year of opening. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 11 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 4 SAFETY ANALYSIS 4.1 Left-Turn Storage Analysis The criteria for the analysis of left-turn lanes at uncontrolled intersection legs are based on the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Design Manual, Exhibit 1310-9, Left-Turn Storage Guidelines: Two-Lane, Unsignalized. The exhibit provides guideline curves for posted speeds of 40, 50, and 60 miles per hours (mph). The speeds of all uncontrolled roadways at study area intersections are 35 mph and below. With all study roadway speed limits set below the 40-mph threshold noted in the WSDOT Design Manual Left-Turn Lane Guidelines, no left-turn lane analyses are recommended for this project. See Appendix E. Although a further study is recommended for the proposed access intersection Road 68 / Road B, the 2028 with project LOS is determined to be B with a 12-minutes delay, and the queuing length for the north bound left-turn entering vehicles was about 75 feet. See Appendix E for SIM Traffic Queuing report. 4.2 Collision Analysis Collision data from the study area was obtained from WSDOT for the five-year period spanning from January 2020 through December 2024. This analysis assumes that a collision rate of less than 1 per million entering vehicles (MEV) is acceptable and generally does not warrant further examination, provided there are no collision patterns present. To calculate the collision rate, the PM peak hour total entering volumes from the existing turning movement counts were multiplied by 10 to provide an approximation of the ADT. The detailed calculations of the critical rate and collision rate are in Appendix D, and the collision data is available upon request. Table 8 provides a summary of the crash history for each study intersection. Table 8. Collision History Intersection Crash Type Total Crashes Collision Rate Per MEV Same Direction Opposite Directions Angle Fixed Object / Animal Road 84 / Burns Road 0 0 2 0 2 0.18 Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway 3 1 2 0 6 0.23 Road 68 / Burns Road 3 1 0 0 4 0.19 Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway 15 7 3 1 26 0.51 Road 68 / Wrigley Drive 21 4 11 0 36 0.86 Findings: All study intersections have a collision rate of less than 1 per MEV. No trends were noticed; therefore, no additional study is needed. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 12 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 4.3 Transit, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Facilities Road 68 includes sidewalks on the western side for approximately 1,100 feet south of the Road 68/Burns Road intersection, and sidewalks on the western side for approximately 375 feet north of the Road 68/Sandifur Parkway intersection. There is an unfinished partial sidewalk on the western side of Road 68 at the Budsage Drive intersection. Road 84 has sidewalks on both sides between the access intersection at Dusty Maiden Drive and the Sandifur Parkway intersection. North of Dusty Maiden Drive, Road 84 ends and no sidewalks are available beyond that point. Ember Lane and Budsage Drive have sidewalks on both sides of their access intersection. The sidewalks on Budsage Drive extend all the way to the Road 68 intersection. Non-adjacent roads such as Wrigley Drive, Road 76, Road 60, and Convention Drive will not be inventoried. No bicycle facilities exist in the study area. Nearby transit service is provided by Ben Franklin Transit Routes 67 and 225. Routes 67 and 225 have nearby bus stops on Sandifur Parkway 950 feet west of the Road 68/Sandifur Parkway intersection. Route 67 also has nearby bus stops 200 feet south of the Road 68/Sandifur Parkway intersection, at the southwest ern corner of the Road 68/Wrigley Drive intersection, and 500 feet south of the Road 68/Wrigley Drive intersection. Findings: Multimodal transportation options are readily available for pedestrians. Recommendations: Assure all driveways, sidewalks, and curb ramps constructed with the subdivision project comply with the current ADA guidelines. Extension of the sidewalk at Road 68 to be connected with access intersections is beneficial. 4.4 Sight Distance at Site Access Locations The existing accesses for the Project site require at least 240 feet of sight distance to the right and approximately 280 feet to the left, from the perspective of the exiting driver, to meet AASHTO intersection sight distance (ISD) recommendations based on the posted speed of 25 mph at Budsa ge Drive and Dusty Maiden Drive (see References). In contrast, the access intersections along Road 68, which has a posted speed of 35 mph, require at least 335 feet of sight distance to the right and approximately 390 f eet to the left to meet AASHTO ISD recommendations. The following diagram illustrates how the ISD is measured. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 13 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 Findings: Based upon the access intersection’s aerial view, it is unlikely there will be any barriers or challenges with sight obstruction. Recommendations: Design the proposed access intersections in accordance with ASSHTO Table 9-7 and 9-9 guidelines for intersection sight distance. Install no objects within the sight distance triangles that would block exiting drivers’ view of approaching traffic. 5 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES 5.1 Transportation Impact Fees per Pasco Municipal Code Section 3.35.230 Amended The Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) is a per PM peak hour trip cost determined by the City based on the area in which a project is located. For the purposes of TIF determination, the Project is located in the north district. The City’s TIF schedule in north district is included in Appendix F. The 2025 TIF for north district is $2215.84 per new PM peak hour trip. The number of net new PM peak hour trips from the Project is 178 for the residential units. Table 10 presents a breakdown of TIF costs for CWE by district. Table 9. Project Transportation Impact Fees Land Use PM Net New Peak Hour Trips Cost Per Trip ($) TIF Cost ($) Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 178 2,215.84 394,419.52 Findings: The total TIF is $394,419.52 for residential development in the north district of Pasco. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 14 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 6 STUDY FINDINGS The findings of this TIA are listed below. 6.1 Trip Generation The CWE development is anticipated to generate 1,888 vehicle trips during a typical weekday, including 178 during the PM peak hour. 6.2 Intersection Performance All studied intersections will maintain an acceptable LOS and v/c ratio, both without and with the project trips through the 2028 year of opening. Further analysis at the proposed Road 68 / Road B intersection is recommended to assess whether left-turn storage is needed for northbound traffic. 6.3 Collision Analysis All study intersections have a collision rate per MEV of less than 1. No trends were noticed; therefore, no additional study is needed. 6.4 Transit, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Facilities Multimodal transportation options are readily available for pedestrians. 6.5 Driveway Sight Distance Based upon the access intersection’s aerial view, it is unlikely there will be any barriers or challenges with sight obstruction. 6.6 Transportation Impact Fees Based upon the City’s TIF schedule, the total TIF is $394,419.52 for residential development in the north district of Pasco. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 15 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 7 RECOMMENDATIONS The traffic impact analysis supports the following recommendations. 7.1 Accessibility Assure all driveways, sidewalks, and curb ramps constructed with the subdivision project comply with the current ADA guidelines. Extension of the sidewalk at Road 68 to be connected with access intersections is beneficial. 7.2 Driveway Sight Lines Design the proposed access points intersections in accordance with AASHTO design intersection sight distance Tables 9-7 and 9-9 guidelines for ISD. Install no objects within the sight distance triangles that would block exiting drivers’ view of approaching traffic. Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington Apex Companies, LLC 16 September 2025 Apex Project 25007188 8 REFERENCES AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials). (2018). A Policy on the Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 7th Edition. ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers). (2021). Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council. (2010). Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 6th Edition. City of Pasco. (Adopted June 7, 2021). City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan, 2018 to 2038. City of Pasco. (March 2022). Design and Construction Standards and Specifications for Public Works Improvements: Chapter 8 – Street Improvements. City of Pasco. (2024, June 24). Resolution No. 4464: Adopting the 2025–2030 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program. Pasco, WA. City of Pasco, Washington (City). (2018). Pasco Municipal Code. Figures 1 Vicinity Map Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington RD 6 0 D R SITE BURNS RD SANDIFUR PKWY WRIGLEY DR INT E R S T A T E 1 8 2 IN T E R S T A T E 1 8 2 BR O A D M O O R B L V D R D 6 8 RD 8 4 CO N V E N T I O N D R HAR R I S R D September 2025 APEX Project 25007188 2 Site Plan Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington APEX Project 25007188 September 2025 3 Existing Lane Configuration Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington RD 6 0 D R SITE BURNS RD SANDIFUR PKWY WRIGLEY DR INT E R S T A T E 1 8 2 IN T E R S T A T E 1 8 2 BR O A D M O O R B L V D R D 6 8 RD 8 4 CO N V E N T I O N D R HAR R I S R D APEX Project 25007188 2 Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway 4 Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway 1 Road 84 / Burns Rd 3 Road 68 / Burns Rd 5 Road 68 / Wrigley Dr LEGEND INTERSECTION TRAFFIC SIGNAL STOP SIGN 1 2 3 4 5 September 2025 4 Future Lane Configuration Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington RD 6 0 D R SITE BURNS RD SANDIFUR PKWY WRIGLEY DR INT E R S T A T E 1 8 2 IN T E R S T A T E 1 8 2 BR O A D M O O R B L V D R D 6 8 RD 8 4 CO N V E N T I O N D R HAR R I S R D APEX Project 25007188 2 Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway 4 Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway 1 Road 84 / Burns Rd 3a Road 68 / Burns Rd* 5 Road 68 / Wrigley Dr 1 2 3 4 5 3b Road 68 / Burns Rd* LEGEND INTERSECTION TRAFFIC SIGNAL STOP SIGN YIELD ROUNDABOUT September 2025 *3a & 3b ACCOUNTING FOR ALTERNATIVE FOR THE BURNS ROAD/ROAD 68 INTERSECTION AND SHOWS THE OUTCOMES FOR THE 2028 WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS 5 Existing 2025 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington RD 6 0 D R SITE BURNS RD SANDIFUR PKWY WRIGLEY DR INT E R S T A T E 1 8 2 IN T E R S T A T E 1 8 2 BR O A D M O O R B L V D R D 6 8 RD 8 4 CO N V E N T I O N D R HAR R I S R D APEX Project 25007188 Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway Road 84 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Wrigley Dr 1 2 3 4 5 6 416 184 12 17 225 26 39 9 1642 1 00 2825 552 56 00 703 45 00 00 0000 2 375 0030 2 1 2 2 17 250 327 2170 3 527 27161 255 197 156 309 72 128 431 133252 4 695 12962 60 126 108 79 193 73 652 5060 5 XXX PM PEAK HOUR LEGEND INTERSECTION September 2025 6 In-process Projects Trip Assignment Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington RD 6 0 D R SITE BURNS RD SANDIFUR PKWY WRIGLEY DR INT E R S T A T E 1 8 2 IN T E R S T A T E 1 8 2 BR O A D M O O R B L V D R D 6 8 RD 8 4 CO N V E N T I O N D R HAR R I S R D APEX Project 25007188 Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway Road 84 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Wrigley Dr 1 2 3 4 5 00 0000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0000 1 00 0000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0000 2 37 87 32 6 25 39 12 3 71 167 3 527 27161 64 26 71 100 23 00 62 13300 4 67 167 00 7 00 00 3 00 140 0000 5 XXX PM PEAK HOUR LEGEND INTERSECTION September 2025 7 PM Peak Hour Trip Assignment & Distribution Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington RD 6 0 D R SITE BURNS RD SANDIFUR PKWY WRIGLEY DR INT E R S T A T E 1 8 2 IN T E R S T A T E 1 8 2 BR O A D M O O R B L V D R D 6 8 RD 8 4 CO N V E N T I O N D R HAR R I S R D APEX Project 25007188 1 2 3 4 5 Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway Road 84 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Wrigley Dr 231 49 6 1 3 6 2 27 3 6 44 3 27 44 4 27 44 5 5% 5% 5 % 5% 4 0 % 40 % XXX PM PEAK HOUR LEGEND INTERSECTION September 2025 8 Future 2028 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Columbia Waters Estates FIGURE Traffic Impact Analysis Big Sky Developers, LLC Parcels 115170078 and 115170079 Pasco, Washington RD 6 0 D R SITE BURNS RD SANDIFUR PKWY WRIGLEY DR INT E R S T A T E 1 8 2 IN T E R S T A T E 1 8 2 BR O A D M O O R B L V D R D 6 8 RD 8 4 CO N V E N T I O N D R HAR R I S R D APEX Project 25007188 1 2 3 4 5 Road 84 / Sandifur Parkway Road 68 / Sandifur Parkway Road 84 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Burns Rd Road 68 / Wrigley Dr 8 448 195 13 18 239 77 41 16 1745 1 00 3030 586 59 00 746 54 00 00 0000 2 462 1139 34 13 27 41 30 268 462 18187 3 650 33886 335 235 237 428 99 136 563 274267 4 832 15373 64 141 115 84 208 77 876 5364 5 Road 68 / Wrigley Dr 427 006 00 00 00 00 3 27 369 0044 7 7 XXX PM PEAK HOUR LEGEND INTERSECTION September 2025 Appendix A Traffic Counts (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 RD 84 & BURNS RD PM Tuesday, May 6, 2025Date: RD 84 RD 84BURNS RDBURNS RD Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Motorized Vehicles PedestriansHeavy Vehicles Peak Hour Peak Hour:04:10 PM - 05:10 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:30 PM - 04:45 PM 26 47 213 245 6762 290 242 0.87 N S EW 0.54 0.88 0.70 0.78 (98)(55) (380) (441) (391) (502) (100)(107) 16 04 12 184 17 39 225 26 0 0 6 42 9 160 BURNS RD BURNS RD RD 84 RD 84 2 0 4 0 N S EW 0 0 31 1 1 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 00 Interval Start Time RightLeft Thru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 5930 4 12 0 3 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 444 4 4 2 4:05 PM 5840 2 16 0 1 11 0 1 0 0 1 0 433 3 2 3 4:10 PM 5960 4 8 0 2 15 0 8 0 0 2 1 462 1 2 1 4:15 PM 5850 3 7 0 2 21 0 3 1 0 0 0 443 2 2 0 4:20 PM 5870 6 11 0 0 15 0 3 2 0 0 0 432 2 0 2 4:25 PM 5800 0 17 0 1 19 0 5 0 0 1 2 559 0 1 0 4:30 PM 5610 0 30 0 0 16 0 5 2 0 0 1 592 0 2 1 4:35 PM 5380 0 16 0 2 23 0 6 1 0 0 0 531 1 2 1 4:40 PM 5220 1 32 0 2 11 0 4 0 0 0 0 597 0 1 1 4:45 PM 4930 5 23 0 3 14 0 2 0 0 0 0 575 0 2 3 4:50 PM 4700 2 20 0 2 14 0 2 1 0 0 0 482 2 0 3 4:55 PM 4530 2 17 0 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 2 422 2 2 0 5:00 PM 4440 1 14 0 1 10 0 3 0 0 1 0 352 0 1 2 5:05 PM 0 2 30 0 1 12 0 1 2 0 0 0 552 2 1 2 5:10 PM 0 1 18 0 0 11 0 2 0 0 0 0 351 2 0 0 5:15 PM 0 4 16 0 0 17 0 2 0 0 1 1 460 3 1 1 5:20 PM 0 0 18 0 4 7 0 0 1 0 1 1 360 3 0 1 5:25 PM 0 1 15 0 1 11 0 1 0 0 1 1 361 3 0 1 5:30 PM 0 1 15 0 4 9 0 3 1 0 0 0 360 1 2 0 5:35 PM 0 0 19 0 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 372 1 1 1 5:40 PM 0 1 13 0 1 8 0 1 3 0 0 0 302 1 0 0 5:45 PM 0 4 9 0 2 10 0 1 0 0 1 2 341 0 3 1 5:50 PM 0 1 11 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 3 0 313 2 1 2 5:55 PM 0 2 9 0 2 10 0 0 0 0 2 0 333 2 1 2 Count Total 0 47 396 0 37 306 0 55 14 0 14 11 1,03759 37 31 30 Peak Hour 0 26 225 0 17 184 0 42 9 0 4 6 59639 12 16 16 HV% PHF 0.78 0.88 0.70 0.54 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.87 EB WB NB SB All Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles on RoadwayInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 1 1 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 1 0 0 1 2 Peak Hour 1 0 0 0 1 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 2 0 0 2 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 2 0 0 2 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 2 0 0 2 4:35 PM 0 0 0 1 1 4:40 PM 0 1 0 1 2 4:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:25 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 2 1 0 3 5:45 PM 0 0 0 2 2 5:50 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:55 PM 0 3 0 0 3 Count Total 0 17 1 4 22 Peak Hour 0 6 0 2 8 (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 RD 84 & SANDIFUR PKWY PM Tuesday, May 6, 2025Date: RD 84SANDIFUR PKWYSANDIFUR PKWY Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Motorized Vehicles PedestriansHeavy Vehicles Peak Hour Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:15 PM - 05:30 PM 53 101 608 731748 577 0.93 N S EW 0.79 0.880.87 (175)(123) (1,169) (1,401) (1,122) (1,406) 25 028 56 552 0 0 703 45 0 0 0SANDIFUR PKWY SANDIFUR PKWY RD 84 4 60 N S EW 1 5 1 3 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 00 1 N S EW 0 0 0 Interval Start Time RightLeft Thru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 1,3050 5 41 0 0 43 0 5 0 1020 5 3 4:05 PM 1,3220 2 59 0 0 43 0 3 0 1090 1 1 4:10 PM 1,3560 2 53 0 0 43 0 3 0 1090 3 5 4:15 PM 1,3610 3 59 0 0 40 0 3 0 1080 1 2 4:20 PM 1,3700 0 49 0 0 45 0 3 0 1070 6 4 4:25 PM 1,3980 2 50 0 0 39 0 4 0 1140 13 6 4:30 PM 1,4090 5 41 0 0 41 0 2 0 990 6 4 4:35 PM 1,4010 8 46 0 0 48 0 1 0 1100 6 1 4:40 PM 1,4010 4 56 0 0 41 0 5 0 1220 8 8 4:45 PM 1,3900 5 62 0 0 41 0 5 0 1180 3 2 4:50 PM 1,3800 4 60 0 0 45 0 3 0 1140 1 1 4:55 PM 1,3870 1 44 0 0 44 0 1 0 930 2 1 5:00 PM 1,3930 2 70 0 0 35 0 2 0 1190 7 3 5:05 PM 0 2 77 0 0 56 0 1 0 1430 6 1 5:10 PM 0 6 61 0 0 43 0 1 0 1140 2 1 5:15 PM 0 4 60 0 0 45 0 0 0 1170 7 1 5:20 PM 0 4 62 0 0 61 0 3 0 1350 4 1 5:25 PM 0 0 64 0 0 52 0 4 0 1250 4 1 5:30 PM 0 2 51 0 0 33 0 2 0 910 2 1 5:35 PM 0 4 56 0 0 41 0 4 0 1100 4 1 5:40 PM 0 4 46 0 0 54 0 3 0 1110 3 1 5:45 PM 0 2 65 0 0 34 0 3 0 1080 0 4 5:50 PM 0 2 51 0 0 57 0 5 0 1210 5 1 5:55 PM 0 1 49 0 0 44 0 3 0 990 2 0 Count Total 0 74 1,332 0 0 1,068 0 69 0 2,6980 101 54 Peak Hour 0 45 703 0 0 552 0 28 0 1,4090 56 25 HV% PHF 0.87 0.88 0.79 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.93 EB WB NB SB All Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 1 0 1 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 1 0 1 Peak Hour 0 1 0 1 Bicycles on RoadwayInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 1 0 0 1 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 1 0 1 Count Total 1 1 0 2 Peak Hour 1 0 0 1 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 2 0 2 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 1 1 2 4:35 PM 0 2 2 4 4:40 PM 0 2 0 2 4:45 PM 0 3 0 3 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 1 1 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 1 1 2 5:20 PM 0 0 1 1 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 1 1 2 5:40 PM 0 2 0 2 5:45 PM 0 2 0 2 5:50 PM 0 1 0 1 5:55 PM 0 2 0 2 Count Total 0 19 7 26 Peak Hour 0 9 6 15 (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 RD 68 & BURNS RD PM Tuesday, May 6, 2025Date: RD 68 RD 68BURNS RDBURNS RD Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Motorized Vehicles PedestriansHeavy Vehicles Peak Hour Peak Hour:04:25 PM - 05:25 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:30 PM - 04:45 PM 405 345 5 4 499627 269 202 0.89 N S EW 0.86 0.45 0.90 0.75 (651)(721) (16) (5) (390) (435) (945)(1,071) 30 00 1 2 2 250 2 17 0 0 37 5 17 0 32 7 20 BURNS RD BURNS RD RD 68 RD 68 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 54 0 0 N S EW 0 0 4 0 5 00 Interval Start Time RightLeft Thru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 1,1420 3 0 0 1 1 0 17 30 0 0 23 827 0 0 0 4:05 PM 1,1550 2 0 0 0 0 0 9 28 0 0 26 9324 0 0 4 4:10 PM 1,1510 1 0 0 0 1 0 19 23 0 0 28 849 0 0 3 4:15 PM 1,1490 2 0 0 0 2 0 17 16 0 0 28 768 0 0 3 4:20 PM 1,1640 2 0 0 1 0 0 18 27 0 0 18 768 1 0 1 4:25 PM 1,1780 1 0 0 0 0 0 19 23 0 0 34 9212 0 1 2 4:30 PM 1,1600 1 0 0 0 0 0 13 33 0 0 28 11134 0 0 2 4:35 PM 1,1250 2 0 0 1 0 0 24 29 0 0 40 11716 0 1 4 4:40 PM 1,1000 2 1 0 0 0 0 8 33 0 0 21 10334 0 0 4 4:45 PM 1,0630 1 0 0 0 0 0 12 24 0 0 24 9528 0 0 6 4:50 PM 1,0450 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 34 0 0 37 10113 0 0 4 4:55 PM 1,0180 2 0 0 0 1 0 15 26 0 0 43 11223 0 0 2 5:00 PM 9750 2 0 0 0 0 0 10 38 0 0 31 9513 0 0 1 5:05 PM 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 15 18 0 0 26 8926 1 0 0 5:10 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 24 0 0 29 8215 0 0 2 5:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 18 20 0 0 40 9111 0 0 1 5:20 PM 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 12 25 0 0 22 9025 0 0 2 5:25 PM 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 12 28 0 0 20 749 0 0 3 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 16 0 0 27 7620 0 0 1 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 12 25 0 0 31 9221 0 0 1 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 25 0 0 19 6611 0 0 2 5:45 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 10 24 0 0 25 7714 0 0 2 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 30 0 1 21 7411 0 0 2 5:55 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 12 19 0 0 23 6910 0 0 4 Count Total 0 31 2 0 5 9 0 325 618 0 1 664 2,117402 2 2 56 Peak Hour 0 17 2 0 2 2 0 170 327 0 0 375 1,178250 1 2 30 HV% PHF 0.75 0.45 0.90 0.86 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.0% 0.8% 0.89 EB WB NB SB All Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 2 2 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 1 0 1 2 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 1 0 1 2 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 2 0 1 3 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 1 0 1 2 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 2 0 0 2 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:35 PM 0 0 0 1 1 5:40 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 9 0 7 16 Peak Hour 0 5 0 4 9 Bicycles on RoadwayInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 2 0 2 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 2 0 2 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 1 0 0 0 1 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:4 RD 68 & SANDIFUR PKWY PM Tuesday, May 6, 2025Date: RD 68 RD 68SANDIFUR PKWYSANDIFUR PKWY Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Motorized Vehicles PedestriansHeavy Vehicles Peak Hour Peak Hour:04:25 PM - 05:25 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:50 PM - 05:05 PM 859 700 608 713 816811 509 568 0.97 N S EW 0.93 0.94 0.91 0.77 (1,381)(1,581) (1,180) (1,330) (1,123) (1,001) (1,625)(1,553) 61 0 27 1 197 255 156 128 309 72 0 0 52 7 25 2 43 1 13 3 0 SANDIFUR PKWY SANDIFUR PKWY RD 68 RD 68 1 1 0 2 N S EW 0 1 00 1 0 2 0 1 00 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 7 1 0 74 0 1 N S EW 0 0 3 0 7 00 Interval Start Time RightLeft Thru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 2,7640 11 30 0 15 25 0 18 34 0 25 43 24512 18 10 4 4:05 PM 2,7690 7 19 0 13 19 0 17 48 0 16 49 24017 15 13 7 4:10 PM 2,7400 8 27 0 20 20 0 19 35 0 18 42 23113 12 14 3 4:15 PM 2,7580 7 27 0 13 21 0 18 29 0 13 34 21014 19 11 4 4:20 PM 2,7790 7 19 0 10 21 0 26 41 0 15 31 2179 20 10 8 4:25 PM 2,7920 2 30 0 15 20 0 22 34 0 18 39 2198 20 7 4 4:30 PM 2,7690 4 22 0 13 20 0 16 41 0 24 54 2467 24 15 6 4:35 PM 2,7280 4 21 0 10 18 0 14 55 0 14 54 2317 17 13 4 4:40 PM 2,7340 5 15 0 19 23 0 23 37 0 25 47 23112 16 6 3 4:45 PM 2,7270 9 19 0 12 27 0 13 27 0 33 38 22716 14 9 10 4:50 PM 2,6920 9 25 0 15 24 0 25 36 0 25 40 2324 16 10 3 4:55 PM 2,6690 6 28 0 14 9 0 17 36 0 20 55 23510 17 15 8 5:00 PM 2,6230 9 33 0 9 26 0 17 39 0 24 47 25014 20 6 6 5:05 PM 0 3 32 0 16 28 0 27 25 0 19 26 21120 7 5 3 5:10 PM 0 9 35 0 13 19 0 20 32 0 21 51 24914 18 15 2 5:15 PM 0 9 27 0 8 23 0 26 37 0 22 36 2318 13 17 5 5:20 PM 0 3 22 0 12 18 0 32 32 0 26 40 2308 15 15 7 5:25 PM 0 2 20 0 11 25 0 25 34 0 16 28 19610 13 8 4 5:30 PM 0 7 20 0 16 17 0 13 36 0 21 43 2057 11 9 5 5:35 PM 0 5 27 0 7 22 0 30 39 0 19 48 23710 13 12 5 5:40 PM 0 5 23 0 12 21 0 19 37 0 20 40 22414 14 14 5 5:45 PM 0 4 24 0 13 15 0 19 39 0 16 36 19211 6 5 4 5:50 PM 0 7 24 0 10 27 0 23 43 0 13 27 20912 11 6 6 5:55 PM 0 2 23 0 17 20 0 15 32 0 22 27 1898 10 8 5 Count Total 0 144 592 0 313 508 0 494 878 0 485 975 5,387265 359 253 121 Peak Hour 0 72 309 0 156 255 0 252 431 0 271 527 2,792128 197 133 61 HV% PHF 0.77 0.94 0.91 0.93 0.0% 0.2% 0.9% 0.5% 0.4% 0.97 EB WB NB SB All Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 2 2 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 1 0 0 1 4:30 PM 0 0 0 1 1 4:35 PM 0 1 0 1 2 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 1 1 0 2 4:55 PM 0 1 0 1 2 5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 1 1 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 2 0 0 2 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 1 0 1 2 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 9 1 7 17 Peak Hour 0 7 1 4 12 Bicycles on RoadwayInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 1 1 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 1 0 0 1 2 Peak Hour 1 0 0 0 1 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 3 0 0 0 3 4:10 PM 0 0 0 1 1 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 1 1 4:25 PM 0 0 1 0 1 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 1 1 5:20 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 6 0 1 3 10 Peak Hour 2 0 1 1 4 (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:5 RD 68 & WRIGLEY DR PM Tuesday, May 6, 2025Date: RD 68 RD 68WRIGLEY DRWRIGLEY DR Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Motorized Vehicles PedestriansHeavy Vehicles Peak Hour Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:05 PM - 05:20 PM 886 971 294 258 762876 345 182 0.94 N S EW 0.87 0.85 0.90 0.88 (1,947)(1,739) (541) (463) (366) (645) (1,578)(1,727) 62 0 12 9 126 60 108 73 79 193 0 0 69 5 60 65 2 500 WRIGLEY DR WRIGLEY DR RD 68 RD 68 1 1 2 2 N S EW 0 1 02 0 1 1 1 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 0 0 64 0 0 N S EW 0 0 4 0 6 00 Interval Start Time RightLeft Thru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 2,2800 9 8 0 4 3 0 5 62 0 8 84 2088 5 4 8 4:05 PM 2,2550 10 8 0 6 5 0 7 54 0 9 50 1787 12 4 6 4:10 PM 2,2750 14 8 0 7 6 0 7 63 0 13 78 22110 5 2 8 4:15 PM 2,2670 17 11 0 7 6 0 5 54 0 8 63 1909 6 3 1 4:20 PM 2,2760 11 9 0 6 5 0 5 72 0 7 41 1887 14 3 8 4:25 PM 2,2640 12 3 0 7 3 0 6 50 0 5 52 1566 6 0 6 4:30 PM 2,2870 19 3 0 3 1 0 4 77 0 13 65 2073 11 4 4 4:35 PM 2,2690 22 4 0 10 7 0 3 58 0 11 59 1933 9 1 6 4:40 PM 2,2520 7 9 0 6 4 0 6 51 0 13 71 20010 13 2 8 4:45 PM 2,2390 16 6 0 1 5 0 5 56 0 11 57 1786 3 5 7 4:50 PM 2,2690 12 9 0 6 3 0 6 59 0 7 56 1815 12 6 0 4:55 PM 2,2460 12 9 0 15 8 0 3 43 0 5 62 1806 10 1 6 5:00 PM 2,2230 20 8 0 9 10 0 5 35 0 6 57 18310 11 4 8 5:05 PM 0 16 3 0 10 6 0 7 52 0 12 67 1986 10 5 4 5:10 PM 0 16 8 0 8 7 0 8 43 0 18 60 21311 20 6 8 5:15 PM 0 19 5 0 16 5 0 3 58 0 17 46 1997 11 8 4 5:20 PM 0 22 7 0 14 2 0 3 65 0 7 40 1762 5 4 5 5:25 PM 0 12 8 0 10 2 0 7 55 0 9 55 1794 11 4 2 5:30 PM 0 13 4 0 14 3 0 6 57 0 11 55 1894 10 6 6 5:35 PM 0 13 4 0 9 5 0 4 62 0 6 51 1767 7 4 4 5:40 PM 0 13 4 0 9 3 0 5 55 0 9 59 1875 13 4 8 5:45 PM 0 15 9 0 7 2 0 3 82 0 7 61 2083 12 1 6 5:50 PM 0 13 5 0 8 5 0 5 52 0 4 48 1582 7 2 7 5:55 PM 0 10 5 0 8 2 0 4 56 0 5 45 1574 10 2 6 Count Total 0 343 157 0 200 108 0 122 1,371 0 221 1,382 4,503145 233 85 136 Peak Hour 0 193 79 0 108 60 0 60 652 0 129 695 2,28773 126 50 62 HV% PHF 0.88 0.85 0.90 0.87 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.5% 0.4% 0.94 EB WB NB SB All Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 2 2 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 1 0 0 1 4:30 PM 0 1 0 1 2 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 1 1 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 2 0 0 2 4:55 PM 0 0 0 2 2 5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 2 0 0 2 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 1 0 1 2 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 9 0 7 16 Peak Hour 0 6 0 4 10 Bicycles on RoadwayInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 1 1 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 1 0 0 1 2 Peak Hour 1 0 0 1 2 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 1 1 2 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 1 1 0 0 2 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 1 0 0 0 1 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 1 0 0 1 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 2 3 1 1 7 Peak Hour 2 2 1 1 6 (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:6 N RD 68 & KAU TRAIL PM Tuesday, May 6, 2025Date: N RD 68 N RD 68KAU TRAIL Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Motorized Vehicles PedestriansHeavy Vehicles Peak Hour Peak Hour:04:25 PM - 05:25 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:50 PM - 05:05 PM 375 328 35 28 348402 0.86 N S EW 0.85 0.80 0.88 (609)(685) (54) (58) (649)(721) 0 05 3 0 32 0 37 0 0 32 5 230 KAU TRAIL N RD 68 N RD 68 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 54 N S EW 0 4 0 5 00 Interval Start Time RightLeft Thru Total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-Turn Rolling HourRightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn RightLeft ThruU-Turn 4:00 PM 7410 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 26 550 2 0 4:05 PM 7550 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 26 590 2 0 4:10 PM 7480 5 0 0 0 25 0 0 25 570 2 0 4:15 PM 7450 0 0 0 0 16 0 1 33 510 1 0 4:20 PM 7570 0 0 0 0 27 0 1 18 460 0 0 4:25 PM 7580 2 0 0 0 19 0 2 35 610 3 0 4:30 PM 7490 2 0 0 0 33 0 0 26 631 1 0 4:35 PM 7330 4 0 0 0 31 0 0 41 790 3 0 4:40 PM 7200 3 0 0 0 33 0 1 19 591 2 0 4:45 PM 7070 2 0 0 0 29 0 0 28 600 1 0 4:50 PM 6970 1 0 0 0 32 0 0 43 770 1 0 4:55 PM 6720 3 0 0 0 30 0 0 39 740 2 0 5:00 PM 6470 3 0 0 0 33 0 0 28 690 5 0 5:05 PM 0 2 0 0 0 20 0 2 27 520 1 0 5:10 PM 0 5 0 0 0 24 0 0 24 540 1 0 5:15 PM 0 2 0 0 0 18 0 0 40 630 3 0 5:20 PM 0 3 0 0 0 23 0 0 20 471 0 0 5:25 PM 0 1 0 0 0 28 0 1 21 520 1 0 5:30 PM 0 4 0 0 0 14 0 1 26 470 2 0 5:35 PM 0 1 0 0 0 19 0 0 41 661 4 0 5:40 PM 0 1 0 0 0 22 0 2 19 460 2 0 5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 22 0 0 22 501 4 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 23 521 1 0 5:55 PM 0 2 0 0 0 19 0 0 24 491 3 0 Count Total 0 47 0 0 0 602 0 11 674 1,3887 47 0 Peak Hour 0 32 0 0 0 325 0 5 370 7583 23 0 HV% PHF 0.80 0.88 0.85 0.0% 1.4% 1.1% 1.2% 0.86 EB WB NB SB All Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Heavy VehiclesInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 2 2 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 1 1 4:30 PM 1 0 0 1 4:35 PM 1 0 1 2 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 2 0 1 3 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 1 0 1 2 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 2 0 0 2 5:30 PM 1 0 0 1 5:35 PM 0 0 1 1 5:40 PM 1 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 9 0 7 16 Peak Hour 5 0 4 9 Bicycles on RoadwayInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians/Bicycles on CrosswalkInterval Start Time EB NB TotalWB SB 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 4:05 PM 0 0 0 0 4:10 PM 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4:20 PM 0 0 0 0 4:25 PM 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 4:35 PM 0 0 0 0 4:40 PM 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4:50 PM 0 0 0 0 4:55 PM 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 5:05 PM 0 0 0 0 5:10 PM 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 5:20 PM 0 0 0 0 5:25 PM 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 1 0 0 1 5:35 PM 0 0 0 0 5:40 PM 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 5:50 PM 0 0 0 0 5:55 PM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 1 0 0 1 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 Appendix B Trip Generation Calculations Appendix C Level of Service Calculations HCM 6th TWSC 1: Road 84 & Burns Rd 05/27/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2025 Existing Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 26 225 39 17 184 12 42 9 16 4 6 16 Future Vol, veh/h 26 225 39 17 184 12 42 9 16 4 6 16 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 4 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 0 - - 0 - - - - - 0 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 30 259 45 20 211 14 48 10 18 5 7 18 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 227 0 0 308 0 0 617 613 286 616 628 220 Stage 1 - - - - - - 346 346 - 260 260 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 271 267 - 356 368 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 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 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1341 - - 1253 - - 402 408 753 403 400 820 Stage 1 - - - - - - 670 635 - 745 693 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 735 688 - 661 621 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1338 - - 1248 - - 375 390 750 373 383 818 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 375 390 - 373 383 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 653 618 - 727 681 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 700 676 - 620 605 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0.6 15.2 11.6 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 428 1338 - - 1248 - - 373 625 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.18 0.022 - - 0.016 - - 0.012 0.04 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.2 7.8 - - 7.9 - - 14.8 11 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 0.1 - - 0 - - 0 0.1 HCM 6th TWSC 2: Sandifur Pkwy & Road 84 05/27/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2025 Existing Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 703 552 56 28 25 Future Vol, veh/h 45 703 552 56 28 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 4 0 0 0 6 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 48 756 594 60 30 27 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 658 0 - 0 1486 628 Stage 1 - - - - 628 - Stage 2 - - - - 858 - 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 930 - - - 137 483 Stage 1 - - - - 532 - Stage 2 - - - - 415 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 926 - - - 129 481 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 265 - Stage 1 - - - - 502 - Stage 2 - - - - 413 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0 17.9 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 926 - - - 336 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.052 - - - 0.17 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 - - - 17.9 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.6 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Road 68 & Burns Rd 05/27/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2025 Existing Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 250 170 327 375 30 Future Vol, veh/h 17 250 170 327 375 30 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - 100 - - - 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 18 272 185 355 408 33 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1150 425 441 0 - 0 Stage 1 425 - - - - - Stage 2 725 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 219 629 1119 - - - Stage 1 659 - - - - - Stage 2 479 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 183 629 1119 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 183 - - - - - Stage 1 550 - - - - - Stage 2 479 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 18.9 3 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1119 - 545 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.165 - 0.533 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - 18.9 - - HCM Lane LOS A - C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - 3.1 - - HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Road 68 & Sandifur Pkwy 05/27/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2025 Existing Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 72 309 128 156 255 197 252 431 133 271 527 61 Future Volume (veh/h) 72 309 128 156 255 197 252 431 133 271 527 61 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 319 132 161 263 203 260 444 137 279 543 63 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 362 415 351 348 456 385 447 677 207 462 856 99 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.22 0.22 0.10 0.24 0.24 0.14 0.25 0.25 0.15 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1583 1781 1870 1582 1781 2678 819 1781 3208 371 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 319 132 161 263 203 260 293 288 279 300 306 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1583 1781 1870 1582 1781 1777 1721 1781 1777 1802 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.9 10.5 4.6 4.4 8.1 7.3 6.7 9.7 9.8 7.3 9.8 9.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.9 10.5 4.6 4.4 8.1 7.3 6.7 9.7 9.8 7.3 9.8 9.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.21 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 362 415 351 348 456 385 447 449 435 462 474 481 V/C Ratio(X) 0.20 0.77 0.38 0.46 0.58 0.53 0.58 0.65 0.66 0.60 0.63 0.64 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 764 699 592 711 699 591 748 949 919 739 949 962 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 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.2 23.9 21.7 17.5 21.8 21.5 14.8 21.9 22.0 15.0 21.2 21.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 3.0 0.7 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.4 0.6 0.6 1.3 2.0 2.0 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/ln 0.8 4.7 1.7 1.8 3.5 2.7 2.5 3.8 3.8 2.8 4.0 4.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.5 27.0 22.3 18.9 23.0 22.6 15.2 22.5 22.6 16.2 23.2 23.2 LnGrp LOS B C C B C C B C C B C C Approach Vol, veh/h 525 627 841 885 Approach Delay, s/veh 24.3 21.8 20.3 21.0 Approach LOS C C C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.4 22.5 9.2 20.5 14.3 21.6 10.6 19.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 35.0 20.0 24.5 20.0 35.0 20.0 24.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.7 11.8 3.9 10.1 9.3 11.8 6.4 12.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 5.4 0.1 1.9 0.6 2.4 0.5 1.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.6 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Road 68 & Wrigley Dr 05/27/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2025 Existing Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 193 79 73 108 60 126 60 652 50 129 695 62 Future Volume (veh/h) 193 79 73 108 60 126 60 652 50 129 695 62 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 205 84 78 115 64 134 64 694 53 137 739 66 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 436 135 125 482 96 201 324 1027 78 363 1090 97 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.31 0.31 0.08 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 891 827 1781 538 1126 1781 3345 255 1781 3299 294 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 205 0 162 115 0 198 64 368 379 137 398 407 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1718 1781 0 1663 1781 1777 1823 1781 1777 1816 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 6.1 1.3 10.0 10.0 2.8 10.7 10.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 6.1 1.3 10.0 10.0 2.8 10.7 10.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.68 1.00 0.14 1.00 0.16 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 436 0 260 482 0 297 324 545 560 363 587 600 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.00 0.62 0.24 0.00 0.67 0.20 0.68 0.68 0.38 0.68 0.68 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 693 0 870 561 0 872 706 1125 1154 703 1125 1150 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 15.5 0.0 22.0 18.6 0.0 21.2 11.9 16.8 16.8 12.4 16.0 16.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 0.0 2.4 0.3 0.0 2.6 0.3 1.5 1.4 0.7 1.4 1.4 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/ln1.9 0.0 2.0 1.2 0.0 2.4 0.5 3.8 3.9 1.0 4.0 4.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.3 0.0 24.4 18.9 0.0 23.8 12.2 18.2 18.2 13.0 17.3 17.3 LnGrp LOS B A C B A C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 367 313 811 942 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.9 22.0 17.7 16.7 Approach LOS B C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.1 23.3 11.0 13.9 8.4 22.0 12.5 12.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 35.0 15.0 29.0 15.0 35.0 11.0 28.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.3 12.7 7.0 8.1 4.8 12.0 2.0 6.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.3 0.3 1.1 0.2 4.9 0.2 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.2 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th TWSC 1: Road 84 & Burns Rd 06/02/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 Without Project Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 28 239 41 18 195 13 45 10 17 4 6 17 Future Vol, veh/h 28 239 41 18 195 13 45 10 17 4 6 17 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 4 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 0 - - 0 - - - - - 0 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 32 275 47 21 224 15 52 11 20 5 7 20 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 241 0 0 326 0 0 654 650 303 654 666 234 Stage 1 - - - - - - 367 367 - 276 276 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 287 283 - 378 390 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 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 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1326 - - 1234 - - 380 388 737 380 380 805 Stage 1 - - - - - - 653 622 - 730 682 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 720 677 - 644 608 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1323 - - 1229 - - 353 370 734 349 363 803 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 353 370 - 349 363 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 635 605 - 711 669 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 683 664 - 600 591 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0.6 16.2 11.8 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 405 1323 - - 1229 - - 349 610 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.204 0.024 - - 0.017 - - 0.013 0.043 HCM Control Delay (s) 16.2 7.8 - - 8 - - 15.5 11.2 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - C B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 0.1 - - 0.1 - - 0 0.1 HCM 6th TWSC 2: Sandifur Pkwy & Road 84 06/02/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 Without Project Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 48 746 586 59 30 27 Future Vol, veh/h 48 746 586 59 30 27 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 4 0 0 0 6 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 52 802 630 63 32 29 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 697 0 - 0 1578 666 Stage 1 - - - - 666 - Stage 2 - - - - 912 - 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 899 - - - 120 459 Stage 1 - - - - 511 - Stage 2 - - - - 392 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 896 - - - 112 457 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 247 - Stage 1 - - - - 479 - Stage 2 - - - - 390 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 19.1 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 896 - - - 316 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.058 - - - 0.194 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - - 19.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.7 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Road 68 & Burns Rd 06/02/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 Without Project Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 41 268 27 34 7 187 418 18 8 435 39 Future Volume (veh/h) 30 41 268 27 34 7 187 418 18 8 435 39 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 45 291 29 37 8 203 454 20 9 473 42 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 518 59 381 258 405 88 459 909 40 490 866 77 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 Sat Flow, veh/h 1361 217 1401 1044 1490 322 886 1778 78 920 1693 150 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 33 0 336 29 0 45 203 0 474 9 0 515 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1361 0 1618 1044 0 1812 886 0 1856 920 0 1843 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 0.0 7.9 1.1 0.0 0.8 8.4 0.0 7.0 0.3 0.0 7.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 0.0 7.9 9.0 0.0 0.8 16.2 0.0 7.0 7.2 0.0 7.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.08 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 518 0 440 258 0 492 459 0 949 490 0 943 V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.00 0.76 0.11 0.00 0.09 0.44 0.00 0.50 0.02 0.00 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 742 0 706 430 0 791 602 0 1248 638 0 1240 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.9 0.0 13.9 18.0 0.0 11.3 12.4 0.0 6.6 9.0 0.0 6.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 2.8 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.5 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/ln 0.2 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.0 0.3 1.4 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.9 0.0 16.7 18.2 0.0 11.4 13.0 0.0 7.1 9.0 0.0 7.4 LnGrp LOS B A B B A B B A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 369 74 677 524 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.3 14.0 8.9 7.4 Approach LOS B B A A Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.7 15.8 25.7 15.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.9 18.1 27.9 18.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.2 9.9 9.9 11.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.0 1.4 3.2 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.3 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Road 68 & Sandifur Pkwy 06/02/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 Without Project Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 99 428 136 237 335 235 267 519 274 338 623 86 Future Volume (veh/h) 99 428 136 237 335 235 267 519 274 338 623 86 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 102 441 140 244 345 242 275 535 282 348 642 89 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 321 470 398 316 580 491 395 621 326 395 978 135 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.31 0.31 0.13 0.28 0.28 0.16 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1583 1781 1870 1582 1781 2249 1183 1781 3134 434 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 102 441 140 244 345 242 275 422 395 348 364 367 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1870 1583 1781 1870 1582 1781 1777 1654 1781 1777 1791 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.7 22.5 7.1 9.6 15.2 12.1 10.0 22.0 22.1 13.3 17.3 17.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.7 22.5 7.1 9.6 15.2 12.1 10.0 22.0 22.1 13.3 17.3 17.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.24 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 321 470 398 316 580 491 395 491 457 395 555 559 V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.94 0.35 0.77 0.59 0.49 0.70 0.86 0.86 0.88 0.66 0.66 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 567 470 398 456 580 491 537 638 594 472 638 642 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 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.4 35.8 30.0 24.9 28.5 27.4 20.7 33.5 33.6 22.6 29.0 29.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 26.9 0.5 6.5 1.6 0.8 1.1 7.7 8.4 15.3 2.5 2.5 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/ln1.6 13.6 2.7 4.5 6.9 4.6 4.1 10.3 9.7 7.0 7.6 7.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.0 62.7 30.5 31.4 30.1 28.2 21.8 41.2 42.0 38.0 31.5 31.5 LnGrp LOS C E C C C C C D D D C C Approach Vol, veh/h 683 831 1092 1079 Approach Delay, s/veh 50.0 29.9 36.6 33.6 Approach LOS D C D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s16.8 35.5 10.6 34.8 20.3 31.9 16.3 29.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 35.0 20.0 24.5 20.0 35.0 20.0 24.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s12.0 19.3 5.7 17.2 15.3 24.1 11.6 24.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 5.6 0.2 1.8 0.5 2.8 0.7 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.7 HCM 6th LOS D HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Road 68 & Wrigley Dr 06/02/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 Without Project Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 208 84 77 115 64 141 64 832 53 153 805 73 Future Volume (veh/h) 208 84 77 115 64 141 64 832 53 153 805 73 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 221 89 82 122 68 150 68 885 56 163 856 78 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 406 132 122 464 94 207 301 1180 75 332 1253 114 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.05 0.35 0.35 0.09 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 894 824 1781 518 1142 1781 3393 215 1781 3292 300 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 221 0 171 122 0 218 68 463 478 163 462 472 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1718 1781 0 1660 1781 1777 1831 1781 1777 1815 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.5 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 8.3 1.5 15.4 15.4 3.8 14.6 14.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.5 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 8.3 1.5 15.4 15.4 3.8 14.6 14.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.17 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 406 0 254 464 0 301 301 618 637 332 676 691 V/C Ratio(X) 0.54 0.00 0.67 0.26 0.00 0.72 0.23 0.75 0.75 0.49 0.68 0.68 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 574 0 719 466 0 720 605 929 958 577 929 950 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 18.7 0.0 27.0 22.4 0.0 25.8 12.9 19.3 19.3 14.2 17.3 17.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.0 3.1 0.3 0.0 3.3 0.4 1.9 1.8 1.1 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/ln2.6 0.0 2.7 1.6 0.0 3.4 0.6 6.1 6.3 1.5 5.6 5.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.9 0.0 30.1 22.7 0.0 29.1 13.3 21.1 21.1 15.3 18.6 18.5 LnGrp LOS B A C C A C B C C B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 392 340 1009 1097 Approach Delay, s/veh 24.3 26.8 20.6 18.1 Approach LOS C C C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.6 30.5 12.7 16.1 9.8 28.3 15.0 13.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 35.0 15.0 29.0 15.0 35.0 11.0 28.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.5 16.6 8.5 10.3 5.8 17.4 2.0 8.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.0 0.3 1.2 0.3 5.9 0.2 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.9 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th TWSC 1: Road 84 & Burns Rd 06/12/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 77 239 41 18 195 13 45 16 17 4 8 48 Future Vol, veh/h 77 239 41 18 195 13 45 16 17 4 8 48 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 4 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 0 - - 0 - - - - - 0 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 89 275 47 21 224 15 52 18 20 5 9 55 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 241 0 0 326 0 0 787 764 303 772 780 234 Stage 1 - - - - - - 481 481 - 276 276 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 306 283 - 496 504 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 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 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1326 - - 1234 - - 309 334 737 317 327 805 Stage 1 - - - - - - 566 554 - 730 682 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 704 677 - 556 541 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1323 - - 1229 - - 262 305 734 275 298 803 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 262 305 - 275 298 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 526 515 - 680 669 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 636 664 - 487 503 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.7 0.6 20.9 11.7 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 315 1323 - - 1229 - - 275 646 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.285 0.067 - - 0.017 - - 0.017 0.1 HCM Control Delay (s) 20.9 7.9 - - 8 - - 18.3 11.2 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - C B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.1 0.2 - - 0.1 - - 0.1 0.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2: Sandifur Pkwy & Road 84 06/12/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 54 746 586 59 30 30 Future Vol, veh/h 54 746 586 59 30 30 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 4 0 0 0 6 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 58 802 630 63 32 32 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 697 0 - 0 1590 666 Stage 1 - - - - 666 - Stage 2 - - - - 924 - 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 899 - - - 118 459 Stage 1 - - - - 511 - Stage 2 - - - - 387 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 896 - - - 110 457 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 244 - Stage 1 - - - - 476 - Stage 2 - - - - 385 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 19.2 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 896 - - - 318 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.065 - - - 0.203 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - - 19.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.7 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Road 68 & Burns Rd 06/12/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 41 268 27 34 13 187 462 18 11 462 39 Future Volume (veh/h) 30 41 268 27 34 13 187 462 18 11 462 39 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 45 291 29 37 14 203 502 20 12 502 42 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 492 58 373 239 344 130 451 950 38 469 906 76 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 Sat Flow, veh/h 1354 217 1401 1044 1293 489 862 1786 71 880 1702 142 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 33 0 336 29 0 51 203 0 522 12 0 544 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1354 0 1618 1044 0 1782 862 0 1858 880 0 1845 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 0.0 8.6 1.2 0.0 1.0 9.1 0.0 8.2 0.4 0.0 8.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 0.0 8.6 9.8 0.0 1.0 17.8 0.0 8.2 8.6 0.0 8.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.08 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 492 0 431 239 0 474 451 0 988 469 0 982 V/C Ratio(X) 0.07 0.00 0.78 0.12 0.00 0.11 0.45 0.00 0.53 0.03 0.00 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 681 0 657 384 0 723 629 0 1370 650 0 1361 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.0 0.0 15.2 19.7 0.0 12.4 12.8 0.0 6.8 9.6 0.0 6.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 3.4 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.5 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/ln 0.2 0.0 3.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 1.5 0.0 2.2 0.1 0.0 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.1 0.0 18.5 19.9 0.0 12.5 13.5 0.0 7.2 9.6 0.0 7.4 LnGrp LOS B A B B A B B A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 369 80 725 556 Approach Delay, s/veh 18.0 15.2 9.0 7.5 Approach LOS B B A A Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 28.2 16.4 28.2 16.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 32.9 18.1 32.9 18.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.8 10.6 10.7 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.9 1.3 3.8 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.7 HCM 6th LOS B HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Road 68 & Sandifur Pkwy 06/12/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 99 428 136 237 335 235 267 563 274 338 650 86 Future Volume (veh/h) 99 428 136 237 335 235 267 563 274 338 650 86 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 102 441 140 244 345 242 275 580 282 348 670 89 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 315 461 390 309 574 485 391 664 322 387 1015 135 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.31 0.31 0.12 0.29 0.29 0.16 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1583 1781 1870 1582 1781 2317 1125 1781 3152 418 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 102 441 140 244 345 242 275 445 417 348 377 382 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1583 1781 1870 1582 1781 1777 1665 1781 1777 1794 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 23.1 7.3 9.9 15.6 12.4 10.1 23.7 23.7 13.4 18.2 18.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 23.1 7.3 9.9 15.6 12.4 10.1 23.7 23.7 13.4 18.2 18.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.68 1.00 0.23 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 315 461 390 309 574 485 391 509 477 387 572 578 V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.96 0.36 0.79 0.60 0.50 0.70 0.87 0.88 0.90 0.66 0.66 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 555 461 390 443 574 485 529 626 586 462 626 632 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 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.1 36.9 30.9 25.6 29.3 28.2 20.8 33.7 33.8 22.8 29.0 29.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 30.9 0.6 7.6 1.8 0.8 1.3 9.8 10.5 18.1 2.7 2.7 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/ln 1.6 14.3 2.8 4.7 7.2 4.7 4.2 11.4 10.8 7.3 8.0 8.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.7 67.9 31.5 33.2 31.0 29.0 22.0 43.5 44.2 40.9 31.7 31.7 LnGrp LOS C E C C C C C D D D C C Approach Vol, veh/h 683 831 1137 1107 Approach Delay, s/veh 53.7 31.1 38.6 34.6 Approach LOS D C D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.8 37.0 10.6 35.0 20.4 33.5 16.6 29.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 35.0 20.0 24.5 20.0 35.0 20.0 24.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.1 20.2 5.8 17.6 15.4 25.7 11.9 25.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 5.7 0.2 1.7 0.5 2.7 0.7 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 38.5 HCM 6th LOS D HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Road 68 & Wrigley Dr 06/12/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 208 84 77 115 64 141 64 876 53 153 832 73 Future Volume (veh/h) 208 84 77 115 64 141 64 876 53 153 832 73 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 221 89 82 122 68 150 68 932 56 163 885 78 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 401 131 121 458 93 206 296 1220 73 323 1290 114 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.05 0.36 0.36 0.09 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 894 824 1781 518 1142 1781 3405 205 1781 3303 291 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 221 0 171 122 0 218 68 486 502 163 476 487 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1718 1781 0 1660 1781 1777 1833 1781 1777 1817 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.7 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 8.5 1.5 16.6 16.6 3.9 15.4 15.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.7 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 8.5 1.5 16.6 16.6 3.9 15.4 15.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.16 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 401 0 252 458 0 299 296 636 656 323 694 710 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.00 0.68 0.27 0.00 0.73 0.23 0.76 0.76 0.51 0.69 0.69 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 558 0 699 458 0 700 590 904 932 559 904 924 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 19.4 0.0 27.8 23.2 0.0 26.6 13.0 19.5 19.5 14.6 17.5 17.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 0.0 3.2 0.3 0.0 3.4 0.4 2.5 2.4 1.2 1.5 1.4 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/ln 2.7 0.0 2.8 1.6 0.0 3.5 0.6 6.7 6.9 1.5 6.0 6.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.6 0.0 31.0 23.5 0.0 30.0 13.4 22.0 21.9 15.8 18.9 18.9 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C B C C B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 392 340 1056 1126 Approach Delay, s/veh 25.1 27.7 21.4 18.4 Approach LOS C C C B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.6 31.9 12.9 16.4 9.9 29.7 15.2 14.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.0 35.0 15.0 29.0 15.0 35.0 11.0 28.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 17.4 8.7 10.5 5.9 18.6 2.0 8.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.1 0.3 1.2 0.3 6.0 0.2 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.5 HCM 6th LOS C HCM 6th TWSC 7: Road 68 & Road B 09/10/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 27 44 369 427 6 Future Vol, veh/h 3 27 44 369 427 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 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 3 29 48 401 464 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 965 468 471 0 - 0 Stage 1 468 - - - - - Stage 2 497 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 283 595 1091 - - - Stage 1 630 - - - - - Stage 2 611 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 267 595 1091 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 267 - - - - - Stage 1 594 - - - - - Stage 2 611 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 12.2 0.9 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1091 - 530 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.044 - 0.062 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 0 12.2 - - HCM Lane LOS A A B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.2 - - SITE LAYOUT Site: 1 [Burns Rd / Road 68 -PM (Site Folder: Single-Lane)] Burns Rd / Rd 68 -PM Site Category: (None) Roundabout Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.1 | Copyright © 2000-2023 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PBS ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Friday, June 13, 2025 1:22:39 PM Project: L:\Projects\_DVP\B\BIG012\25007188\Traffic\Documents\LOS\SIDRA\Pasco-25007188-Burns Rd&Rd 68.sip9 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 1 [Burns Rd / Road 68 -PM (Site Folder: Single-Lane)] Output produced by SIDRA INTERSECTION Version: 9.1.5.224 Burns Rd / Rd 68 -PM Site Category: (None) Roundabout Vehicle Movement Performance Demand Flows Arrival Flows 95% Back Of QueueMov ID Turn Mov Class Deg. Satn Aver. Delay Level of Service Prop. Que Eff. Stop Rate Aver. No. of Cycles Aver. Speed[ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh.Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %v/c sec veh ft mph South: Road 68 3u U All MCs 1 0.0 1 0.0 0.592 12.6 LOS B 5.4 137.2 0.45 0.30 0.45 28.0 3 L2 All MCs 208 2.0 208 2.0 0.592 6.2 LOS A 5.4 137.2 0.45 0.30 0.45 26.9 8 T1 All MCs 513 2.0 513 2.0 0.592 1.1 LOS A 5.4 137.2 0.45 0.30 0.45 24.0 18 R2 All MCs 20 2.0 20 2.0 0.592 2.1 LOS A 5.4 137.2 0.45 0.30 0.45 27.2 Approach 742 2.0 742 2.0 0.592 2.6 LOS A 5.4 137.2 0.45 0.30 0.45 24.8 East: Burns Rd 1u U All MCs 1 0.0 1 0.0 0.116 15.9 LOS B 0.7 17.1 0.71 0.70 0.71 31.3 1 L2 All MCs 30 2.0 30 2.0 0.116 12.6 LOS B 0.7 17.1 0.71 0.70 0.71 26.0 6 T1 All MCs 38 2.0 38 2.0 0.116 7.0 LOS A 0.7 17.1 0.71 0.70 0.71 30.4 16 R2 All MCs 16 2.0 16 2.0 0.116 7.4 LOS A 0.7 17.1 0.71 0.70 0.71 26.2 Approach 84 2.0 84 2.0 0.116 9.2 LOS A 0.7 17.1 0.71 0.70 0.71 27.9 North: Road 68 7u U All MCs 1 0.0 1 0.0 0.519 13.7 LOS B 3.6 91.8 0.58 0.37 0.58 28.1 7 L2 All MCs 13 2.0 13 2.0 0.519 7.3 LOS A 3.6 91.8 0.58 0.37 0.58 27.0 4 T1 All MCs 513 2.0 513 2.0 0.519 2.2 LOS A 3.6 91.8 0.58 0.37 0.58 24.0 14 R2 All MCs 43 2.0 43 2.0 0.519 3.2 LOS A 3.6 91.8 0.58 0.37 0.58 27.2 Approach 571 2.0 571 2.0 0.519 2.4 LOS A 3.6 91.8 0.58 0.37 0.58 24.3 West: Burns Rd 5u U All MCs 1 0.0 1 0.0 0.440 15.4 LOS B 3.0 77.1 0.75 0.69 0.77 32.0 5 L2 All MCs 33 2.0 33 2.0 0.440 12.1 LOS B 3.0 77.1 0.75 0.69 0.77 26.5 2 T1 All MCs 46 2.0 46 2.0 0.440 6.5 LOS A 3.0 77.1 0.75 0.69 0.77 31.1 12 R2 All MCs 298 2.0 298 2.0 0.440 6.8 LOS A 3.0 77.1 0.75 0.69 0.77 26.6 Approach 378 2.0 378 2.0 0.440 7.3 LOS A 3.0 77.1 0.75 0.69 0.77 27.1 All Vehicles 1775 2.0 1775 2.0 0.592 3.8 LOS A 5.4 137.2 0.57 0.42 0.57 25.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specif ied in the Parameter Settings dialog (Options tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA HCM. Delay Model: SIDRA Standard (Control Delay: Geometric Delay is included). Queue Model: SIDRA queue estimation methods are used for Back of Queue and Queue at Start of Gap. Gap-Acceptance Capacity Formula: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. Arrival Flows used in performance calculations are adjusted to include any Initial Queued Demand and Upstream Capacity Constraint effects. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.1 | Copyright © 2000-2023 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PBS ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, June 13,2025 1:22:37 PM Project: L:\Projects\_DVP\B\BIG012\25007188\Traffic\Documents\LOS\SIDRA\Pasco-25007188-Burns Rd&Rd 68.sip9 LANE SUMMARY Site: 1 [Burns Rd / Road 68 -PM (Site Folder: Single-Lane)] Output produced by SIDRA INTERSECTION Version: 9.1.5.224 Burns Rd / Rd 68 -PM Site Category: (None) Roundabout Lane Use and Performance Demand Flows Arrival Flows 95% Back Of QueueCap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block.[ Total HV ][ Total HV ][ Veh Dist ] veh/h %veh/h %veh/h v/c %sec ft ft %% South: Road 68 Lane 1d 742 2.0 742 2.0 1254 0.592 100 2.6 LOS A 5.4 137.2 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 742 2.0 742 2.0 0.592 2.6 LOS A 5.4 137.2 East: Burns Rd Lane 1d 84 2.0 84 2.0 731 0.116 100 9.2 LOS A 0.7 17.1 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 84 2.0 84 2.0 0.116 9.2 LOS A 0.7 17.1 North: Road 68 Lane 1d 571 2.0 571 2.0 1099 0.519 100 2.4 LOS A 3.6 91.8 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 571 2.0 571 2.0 0.519 2.4 LOS A 3.6 91.8 West: Burns Rd Lane 1d 378 2.0 378 2.0 858 0.440 100 7.3 LOS A 3.0 77.1 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 378 2.0 378 2.0 0.440 7.3 LOS A 3.0 77.1 All Vehicles 1775 2.0 1775 2.0 0.592 3.8 LOS A 5.4 137.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specif ied in the Parameter Settings dialog (Options tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA HCM. Delay Model: SIDRA Standard (Control Delay: Geometric Delay is included). Queue Model: SIDRA queue estimation methods are used for Back of Queue and Queue at Start of Gap. Gap-Acceptance Capacity Formula: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. Arrival Flows used in performance calculations are adjusted to include any Initial Queued Demand and Upstream Capacity Constraint effects. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Road 68 Mov.U L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit:S W N E Lane 1 1 208 513 20 742 2.0 1254 0.592 100 NA NA Approach 1 208 513 20 742 2.0 0.592 East: Burns Rd Mov.U L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit:E S W N Lane 1 1 30 38 16 84 2.0 731 0.116 100 NA NA Approach 1 30 38 16 84 2.0 0.116 North: Road 68 Mov.U L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit:N E S W Lane 1 1 13 513 43 571 2.0 1099 0.519 100 NA NA Approach 1 13 513 43 571 2.0 0.519 West: Burns Rd Mov.U L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit:W N E S Lane 1 1 33 46 298 378 2.0 858 0.440 100 NA NA Approach 1 33 46 298 378 2.0 0.440 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) All Vehicles 1775 2.0 0.592 Arrival Flows used in performance calculations are adjusted to include any Initial Queued Demand and Upstream Capacity Constraint effects. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec There are no Exit Short Lanes for Merge Analysis at this Site. Variable Demand Analysis Initial Queued Demand Residual Queued Demand Time for Residual Demand to Clear Duration of Oversatn veh veh sec sec South: Road 68 Lane 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 East: Burns Rd Lane 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 North: Road 68 Lane 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 West: Burns Rd Lane 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.1 | Copyright © 2000-2023 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PBS ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL INC.| Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Friday, June 13,2025 1:22:37 PM Project: L:\Projects\_DVP\B\BIG012\25007188\Traffic\Documents\LOS\SIDRA\Pasco-25007188-Burns Rd&Rd 68.sip9 Appendix D Collision Rate Calculations and Data Intersection:Date 6/5/2025 Average Daily cars passing Through intersection PM Peak Hour NB 670 Movement Counts SB 260 EB 2900 WB 2130 ADT 5960 Millions of Entering Vehicles for a five year period =10.877 Collision Rate Number of Collisions =2 Number of years = 5 Collision Rate =0.18 Collision Rate Goal: Less than 1.0 per MEV ADT = 2024 PM Count X 10 PM Peak Hour= Approx. 10% ADT MEV = Million Entering Vehicles Road 84 and Burns Rd Intersection:Date 6/5/2025 Average Daily cars passing Through intersection PM Peak Hour NB 0 Movement Counts SB 530 EB 7480 WB 6080 ADT 14090 Millions of Entering Vehicles for a five year period =25.71425 Collision Rate Number of Collisions =6 Number of years = 5 Collision Rate =0.23 Collision Rate Goal: Less than 1.0 per MEV ADT = 2024 PM Count X 10 PM Peak Hour= Approx. 10% ADT MEV = Million Entering Vehicles Road 84 and Sandifur Pkwy Intersection:Date 6/5/2025 Average Daily cars passing Through intersection PM Peak Hour NB 4970 Movement Counts SB 4050 EB 2690 WB 50 ADT 11760 Millions of Entering Vehicles for a five year period =21.462 Collision Rate Number of Collisions =4 Number of years = 5 Collision Rate =0.19 Collision Rate Goal: Less than 1.0 per MEV ADT = 2024 PM Count X 10 PM Peak Hour= Approx. 10% ADT MEV = Million Entering Vehicles Road 68 and Burns Rd Intersection:Date 6/5/2025 Average Daily cars passing Through intersection PM Peak Hour NB 8160 Movement Counts SB 8590 EB 5090 WB 6080 ADT 27920 Millions of Entering Vehicles for a five year period =50.954 Collision Rate Number of Collisions =26 Number of years = 5 Collision Rate =0.51 Collision Rate Goal: Less than 1.0 per MEV ADT = 2024 PM Count X 10 PM Peak Hour= Approx. 10% ADT MEV = Million Entering Vehicles Road 68 and Sandifur Pkwy Intersection:Date 6/5/2025 Average Daily cars passing Through intersection PM Peak Hour NB 7620 Movement Counts SB 8860 EB 3450 WB 2940 ADT 22870 Millions of Entering Vehicles for a five year period =41.73775 Collision Rate Number of Collisions =36 Number of years = 5 Collision Rate =0.86 Collision Rate Goal: Less than 1.0 per MEV ADT = 2024 PM Count X 10 PM Peak Hour= Approx. 10% ADT MEV = Million Entering Vehicles Road 68 and Wrigley Dr Appendix E Left-Turn Lane Analysis Chapter 1310 Intersections WSDOT Design Manua M 22-01.22 Page 1310-17 October 2023 Exhibit 1310-9 Left-Turn Storage Guidelines: Two-Lane, Unsignalized Queuing and Blocking Report Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project 09/10/2025 25007188 Columbia Waters Estates SimTraffic Report by Apex Weekday PM Peak Hour - 2028 With Project Page 1 Intersection: 7: Road 68 & Road B Movement EB NB Directions Served LR LT Maximum Queue (ft) 49 101 Average Queue (ft) 20 18 95th Queue (ft) 44 64 Link Distance (ft) 135 990 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Appendix F Transportation Impact Fees Per Pasco Municipal Code Section 3.35.230 Ordinance – Amending PMC Related to TIF - 2 FG: 103761221.1 and 3.40 of the Pasco Municipal Code (“PMC”) at the time that an applicable development permit is available for issuance; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco is in the process of adopting a periodic update of its Comprehensive Plan in order to comply with GMA mandates in RCW 36.70A.130; and WHEREAS, the City has updated its capital facilities planning and identified transportation capital facilities that are needed to serve projected new growth and development; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has not updated its transportation impact fee since 2009; and WHEREAS, using a carefully crafted regional transportation model other engineering review, the City has analyzed the extent to which new development in different areas of the City require, and would benefit from, the transportation capital projects identified as needed to serve projected new growth and development; and WHEREAS, the results of the City’s analysis are set forth in the April, 2025 Pasco Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Rate Study prepared by Fehr & Peers; and WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council desires to amend applicable provisions of the PMC in order to update the City’s transportation impact fee and fee schedule, in order to ensure that new growth and development pays a proportionate share of, the cost of new transportation facilities needed to serve that new growth and development; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. PMC Section 3.35.230 Amended. Pasco Municipal Code Section 3.35.230 is hereby amended as follows: 3.35.230 Transportation impact fees. Fee/Charge Reference Residential developments $709.00 3.40.060 Multifamily units $435.00 3.40.060 Commercial $43.00 per daily vehicle trip 3.40.060 Fee/PM Peak Hour Trip North TIF District* $2,215.84 West TIF District $1,395.77 Ordinance – Amending PMC Related to TIF - 3 FG: 103761221.1 South TIF District $3,862.46 Central TIF District $2,694.78 East TIF District $812.06 See Figure 1 for TIF Districts map. Beginning January 1, 2027, and annually thereafter, the transportation impact fees for all zones charged during the preceding calendar year shall be increased by the year-over-year annual, positive percentage change shown in the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for the Seattle, Washington, area as reported for the preceding July. Such adjusted transportation impact fees shall be set forth in the City’s fee schedule, to be effective January 1 of each year. FIGURE 1 – TIF DISTRICTS MAP Ord. 3905, 2009; Ord. 3719, 2005; Code 1970 § 3.07.220.] Section 2. Chapter 3.40 PMC Amended. Chapter 3.40 of the Pasco Municipal Code is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit B attached to and incorporated by this reference. Chapter 3.40 IMPACT FEES Sections: 3.40.010 Findings and purpose. 3.40.020 Applicability. 3.40.030 Geographic scope and service area. Ordinance – Amending PMC Related to TIF - 4 FG: 103761221.1 3.40.040 Definitions. 3.40.050 Imposition of transportation impact fees. 3.40.060 Fee schedule. 3.40.070 Time of payment of impact fee. 3.40.080 Credits. 3.40.090 Permitted adjustments. 3.40.100 I-182 corridor traffic impact fund Transportation impact fee fund. 3.40.110 Refunds. 3.40.120 Appeals. 3.40.130 Enforcement. 3.40.140 Relationship to SEPA 3.40.150 Relationship to concurrency. 3.40.160 Project list. 3.40.170 Calculation of impact fees. 3.40.180 Independent fee calculation. 3.40.010 Findings and purpose. Pursuant to RCW 82.02.050 through 82.02.100, the city adopts impact fees for transportation. The City Council finds and determines that new growth and development activities within the City will create additional demand for the construction, improvement and utilization of public streets, roadways, and right-of- way improvements by bringing additional residents, visitors, businesses and customers into the City; and further finds that new growth and development activities should pay a proportionate share of the costs of such necessary transportation and circulation facilities needed to serve this new growth and development activity. It is therefore necessary to regulate property development to improve public transportation facilities in order to through mitigating mitigate the direct impacts of the development, and to by the assessment of transportation impact fees to insure ensure that system improvements to these transportation facilities are adequately funded and available to serve the increased demand resulting from this growth and development and that new growth and development pays a predictable, proportionate share of the infrastructure costs attributable to new growth. It is the intent that the provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out the purposes of the Council in establishing this transportation impact fee. [Ord. 4688 § 1, 2023; Ord. 3719 § 1, 2005; Code 1970 3.132.010.] 3.40.020 Applicability. The City shall collect transportation impact fees as provided in this Chapter as provided in PMC 3.35.230 from any applicant seeking a development approval from the City for any development activity within that portion of the City identified in PMC 3.40.030 3.40.040, where such development activity requires the issuance of a building or occupancy permit. This shall include, but not be limited to, the development of residential, commercial, retail, office, and industrial land, and 12131 113th Avenue N.E., Suite 203, Kirkland, WA 98034 | 425.821.3665 | TG: 1.23220.00 Task 26 September 2, 2025 Kurtis Schliebe City of Pasco 525 N. 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 SUBJECT: COLUMBIA WATERS ESTATES TIA REVIEW COMMENTS Dear Mr. Schliebe: On behalf of the City of Pasco, we have completed our independent review of the Columbia Waters Estates Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) dated June 2025. We recommend that the City require the Applicant to respond to the following comments summarized below and update the TIA accordingly. Comment 1, Site Access: In addition to the off-site intersections, the site access intersection of Road 68/Road B is required to be analyzed. Provide an analysis of LOS/delay and turn lane queuing for the site access in addition to the already presented sight distance analysis. Comment 2, Trip Distribution: Update the trip distribution. Per the scoping comments dated March 20, 2025, the trip distribution is based on the Pasco traffic model and is required to be the following: o 40% to/from Broadmoor/I-182 interchange  5% via Road 84 to Sandifur to Broadmoor  15% via Burns Road to Road 90 to Sandifur to Broadmoor  20% via Burns Road to Broadmoor Boulevard o 35% to/from Road 68/I-182 interchange via Road 68 o 5% west on Burns Road o 5% east on Burns Road o 5% north on Road 68 Thank you for the opportunity to assist. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 425.821.3665 or jon.pascal@transpogroup.com should you have any questions about our comments. Sincerely, Transpo Group USA, Inc. Jon Pascal, PE Managing Principal STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Eastern Region Office 4601 North Monroe St., Spokane, WA 99205-1295 • 509-329-3400 August 5, 2025 Aaron Gunderson City of Pasco, Community Development Department 525 N 3rd Ave, PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301-0293 Re: Columbia Waters File# PP2025-003 (SEPA2025-024), Ecology SEPA# 202503033 Dear Aaron Gunderson: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Notice of Application for the Columbia Waters proposal. Based on review of the checklist associated with this project, the Department of Ecology (Ecology) has the following comments: Water Quality Program Chad Sauve, (509) 934-6202, chad.sauve@ecy.wa.gov Operators of construction sites that disturb one acre or more total area and has, or will have a discharge of stormwater to a surface water or to a storm sewer, must apply for coverage under Department of Ecology’s Construction Stormwater General Permit. If soil or ground water contamination is known at the site, additional information will be required. The applicant will be required to submit additional studies and reports including, but not limited to, temporary erosion and sediment control plans, a stormwater pollution prevention plan, a site map depicting sample locations, a list of known contaminants with concentrations and depths found and other information about the contaminants. Application should be made at least 60 days prior to commencement of construction activities. A permit application and related documents are available online. Diana Washington, (509) 329-3519, diana.washington@ecy.wa.gov Please verify that the wastewater collection infrastructure is adequately sized to add the increased flow. Aaron Gunderson August 5, 2025 Page 2 Water Resources Program Herm Spangle, (509) 329-3610, herm.spangle@ecy.wa.gov The water purveyor is responsible for ensuring that the proposed use(s) are within the limitations of its water rights. If the proposal’s actions are different than the existing water right (source, purpose, the place of use, or period of use), then it is subject to approval from the Department of Ecology pursuant to Sections 90.03.380 RCW and 90.44.100 RCW. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments, please contact the appropriate program staff listed above. If you have questions about SEPA, please reach out to sepahelp@ecy.wa.gov. Sincerely, Katy Moos Office Assistant Eastern Region Office State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2620 North Commercial Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 Phone: (509) 312-8117, E-mail: Troy.Maikis@dfw.wa.gov August 6, 2025 Aaron Gunderson Planner II City of Pasco 525 N 3rd Ave Pasco WA Re: WDFW Comments on Columbia Waters Preliminary Plat The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has reviewed relevant maps and SEPA checklist for the proposed Columbia Waters Preliminary Plat, PP2025-003. As correctly noted in the SEPA checklist, there is mapped WDFW Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) shrubsteppe habitat located in the Southwest and Southwest corners of the proposed plat. PHS mapped shrubsteppe is meant as a flagging tool and it is recommended that where it is mapped, to follow up with a site visit to determine if shrubsteppe habitat exists on the property. A site visit to the area was conducted on July 30, 2025 and the western corner of the crop area was found to be highly disturbed. However, there is approximately 2.5 acres of shrubsteppe habitat on the far southeastern corner of the crop area. Additionally, both corners of the existing crop field (both shrubsteppe and non-shrubsteppe) contain high potential for Burrowing Owl presence. WDFW recommends a site visit where The City, the applicant, and WDFW can discuss the habitat, site characteristics, and potential mitigation strategies that could be considered in a habitat management plan WDFW recommends to the city that the applicant prepares a mitigation plan to offset the impacts of the development on the shrubsteppe habitat to achieve no net loss of habitat functions and values. WDFW can advise the city and the applicant on recommended steps to achieve that goal. Sincerely, Troy Maikis Area Habitat Biologist; Benton and Franklin Counties Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife 2620 Commercial Ave Pasco, WA 99301 (509) 312-8117 Troy.Maikis@dfw.wa.gov cc: Cody Gillin, WDFW Assistant Habitat Program Manager, Region 3, Ellensburg Scott Downes, Fish & Wildlife Habitat Regional Land Use Lead, Region 3, Yakima Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (Optional DNS Process) Issuance Date: October 17, 2025 Project Name: Columbia Waters Preliminary Plat Project Number: SEPA2025-024 Proponent: Big Sky North 5810 Midland Ln. Unit 65 Pasco, WA 99301 Applicant: Big Sky North 5810 Midland Ln. Unit 65 Pasco, WA 99301 Description of Proposal: This proposal seeks to subdivide one lot into two hundred thirteen (213) lots. The project will be constructed in three phases and will consist of approximately 145 single -family homes and 34 duplexes. Features of the development include Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication, utility easements, and a roadway connection between Road 84 and Road 68. Project contains zoning of Low- Density Residential (R-1) and Medium-Density Residential (R-3), along with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use designations of Low-Density Residential and Medium-Density Residential. The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code. Location of Proposal: Parcel #115010042 (currently no address), including any future subdivision or consolidation thereof, located in Pasco, WA. Findings: 1. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has identified the potential presence of shrub-steppe habitat and a high likelihood of Burrowing Owl activity within the area. The applicant must ensure compliance with Title 28 of the Pasco Municipal Code. Lead Agency: City of Pasco The City of Pasco, acting as lead agency for this proposal, has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. Appeals must be filed within 14 days of this determination. Responsible Official: ________________________________________________ Haylie Miller, Community & Economic Development Director Address: PO Box 293, Pasco, WA 99301-0293 Phone: (509) 545-3441 Appeals: You may appeal this mitigated determination of non-significance by submitting an appeal to the address below no later than October 31, 2025 (14 days from issuance). The appeal must be in written form, contain a concise statement of the matter being appealed and the basic rationale for the appeal. A fee is required per the City's Fee Resolution. Please note that failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all rights to an administrative appeal under City code. All comments or appeals are to be directed to the City of Pasco Planning Department, PO Box 293, Pasco, WA, 99301, Attn: Haylie Miller. REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers November 12, 2025, 6:00 PM 1 MASTER FILE #: Z2025-009/Rezone R-T to R-1 APPLICANTS: Big Sky North, LLC 12406 Eagle Reach Court Pasco, WA 99301 REQUEST: Rezone: Recommendation to rezone R-T (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). TIMELINE September 26, 2025 Application Submitted. October 9, 2025 Application Deemed Complete. October 22, 2025 Application Noticed for Public Hearing to Property Owners within 300 feet. October 26, 2025 Application Noticed for Public Hearing to the Tri-City Herald. November 5, 2025 Public Hearing Staff Report Published BACKGROUND 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Parcel No.: 115180030 Legal: SHORT PLAT 2009-16 LOT 2 Property Size: Approximately 156 acres (6,793,599.06 square feet) General Location: The site is generally located north of Burns Road, west of Broadmoor Boulevard, south of future Dent Road, and east of future Dent/Fraser Road. 2. ACCESS: The site will have access from Dent/Fraser Road, Dent Road and future Road 108. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal water is available in Dent/Fraser Road. Municipal water and sewer are available in Road 108 southeast of the site. 2 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-T, and the applicant is requesting a rezone to R-1. The majority of the property is undeveloped and currently used for agricultural purposes. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North: R-T Residential Transition/Agricultural East: RR-5 Franklin County- (Rural Residential)/Single Family Homes South: RS-20/R-1 Franklin County- (Suburban)/Single Family Homes/Low Density Residential/Agricultural/Irrigation Pond West: RS-40 Franklin County- (RS-40)/Single Family Homes 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City’s Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential, which supports a variety of housing types at a density range of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, as outlined in Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Table 25.215.015. Permitted zoning designations within this land use category include R-S- 20 (Suburban), R-S-12 (Suburban), R-S-1 (Suburban), R-1, R-1-A (Low Density Residential Alternate), and R-1-A2 (Low Density Residential Alternate). 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City has determined this proposal to be exempt under Washington Administrative Code 197-11-800 (6) Land use decisions. (c) Where an exempt project requires a rezone, the rezone is exempt only if: (i) The project is in an urban growth area in a city or county planning under RCW 36.70A.040; (ii) The proposed rezone is consistent with and does not require an amendment to the comprehensive plan; and (iii) The applicable comprehensive plan was previously subjected to environmental review and analysis through an EIS under the requirements of this chapter prior to adoption; and the EIS adequately addressed the environmental impacts of the rezone. No further Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review is required for this proposal. Analysis Big Sky North, LLC, on behalf of Rocky Hills Management LP (with the property owner’s signed authorization), is requesting to rezone Parcel No. 115180030 from R-T to R-1. The subject site comprises approximately 156 acres. The existing R-T zoning is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Approval of the requested rezone would bring the property into conformance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan land use designation. This rezone request does not include a project-specific development proposal; therefore, no specific project action is under consideration at this time. However, a Preliminary Plat, SEPA checklist, and Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) were submitted concurrently with this application. The Preliminary Plat will be scheduled for a future Hearing Examiner meeting, once SEPA review and related requirements are complete. History 3 In September 2020, a Non-Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was completed for the City’s Comprehensive Plan. As part of this EIS, the City expanded its Urban Growth Area (UGA) using “Alternative 3: Recommended Growth Target High Density, Preferred Alternative.” Alternative 3 proposed higher-density land uses through a combination of UGA expansion on the northern city borders (smaller in area than Alternative 2) and increased infill and redevelopment at higher densities within the City. The subject site was outside of the UGA prior to the adoption of Alternative 3. Following its adoption, the site was annexed into the City on May 23, 2022, through Ordinance No. 4591, and was subsequently assigned R-T zoning under Ordinance No. 4637 on February 6, 2023. The property has been used for agricultural purposes since at least December 1985, according to available Google Earth imagery. Rezone Criteria The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.210.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The site received its current zoning designation on February 6, 2023, following annexation through Ordinance No. 4591 and the subsequent zoning assignment under Ordinance No. 4637. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: Over the years, numerous changes have occurred in the surrounding area, as evidenced by available satellite imagery and development activity within unincorporated County properties adjacent to the site. To better align with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and support feasible future development, the applicant is requesting a rezone from the current R-T designation. The existing R-T zone is intended as a transitional district and does not allow development consistent with the land use standards and density objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The existing R-T zoning does not align with the adopted Comprehensive Plan land use designation, limiting the property’s ability to develop in a manner that promotes public health, safety, and general welfare. Originally applied as an interim classification following annexation, R-T zoning was not intended to reflect the long-term land use vision of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed R-1 zoning would bring the property into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, facilitating orderly, efficient residential development that is compatible with surrounding uses. The rezone would support an appropriate residential density and allow for the logical extension of City infrastructure and services. Additionally, the proposal is consistent with City Council–approved Comprehensive Plan amendments, which have been determined to be in the 4 public interest and supportive of the City’s objectives for housing diversity, coordinated growth, and effective provision of public facilities. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: The proposed Low Density Residential (R-1) zoning is compatible with surrounding properties and is expected to support and enhance the value, character, and residential integrity of the area. By aligning with the Comprehensive Plan’s Low Density Residential designation, the rezone promotes orderly and compatible growth while maintaining the neighborhood’s intended character. Any future development actions, including subdivision or residential construction, will be subject to review under the SEPA to ensure that potential impacts on the natural and built environment, as well as on adjacent property values, are properly identified and mitigated. The proposed zoning change is not anticipated to have a materially detrimental impact on the surrounding area. The R-1 designation supports residential development that is compatible with neighboring properties, both within the City limits and in unincorporated areas of Franklin County. Future development will be required to comply with all applicable City development standards, including setbacks, landscaping, buffering, and traffic mitigation, to minimize potential impacts on adjacent properties. It is worth noting that the applicant has submitted a concurrent preliminary plat application proposing approximately 873 single-family detached residential lots. This proposal is anticipated to be reviewed by the Hearing Examiner at a later date, following completion of SEPA review and all related procedural requirements. The proposed rezone will facilitate development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is expected to maintain the intended low-density residential character of the area while supporting the City’s broader objectives for housing, coordinated growth, and public infrastructure extension. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: If the rezone request is not granted, the subject site would be limited to development under the existing R-T zoning, which allows one dwelling unit per five acres, with the potential for one accessory dwelling unit. Under these standards, the site would be significantly underutilized, and the application of R-T setbacks to any portion of the property would substantially constrain development potential. As a result, the property owner would be unable to realize the full residential development potential of the site, which could negatively affect property value and limit the orderly, efficient use of the land. In addition, development under R-T zoning would not meet the Comprehensive Plan’s minimum density requirement of three dwelling units per acre, further highlighting the inconsistency with the City’s adopted land use policies. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential. 7. Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires: The rezone application is consistent with and supports the intent of the Comprehensive Plan as well as the City Council’s goals. Staff directs the reader to the applicant’s submitted materials 5 for additional perspective on how the proposal addresses the criteria discussed above, specifically criteria 2 through 5. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT 1) Pursuant to PMC 25.210.040, Public notice for this hearing was mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the boundaries of the proposal on October 22, 2025, in compliance with this requirement. 2) Pursuant to PMC 25.210.040, Public notice for this hearing was published in the Tri- City Herald on October 26, 2025, in compliance with this requirement. 3) Pursuant to PMC 25.210.060(2), the Hearing Examiner’s rezone recommendation based on its findings and conclusions must be forwarded to the City Council. 4) The requested R-1 zoning designation request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and aligns with the designated land use for the subject site. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON FINDINGS OF FACT Following the conclusion of an open record hearing on a property rezone petition, the Hearing Examiner shall issue findings and conclusions based on the record, determining whether: (a) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential. The proposed R-1 rezone is consistent with the Land Use Map designation and advances the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, it supports Land Use Policy LU-2-A, which emphasizes maintaining sufficient land for residential uses proximate to appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure. By aligning the zoning with the Comprehensive Plan designation, the rezone helps ensure orderly, compatible, and efficient development in the area. (b) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will be materially detrimental; The proposed zoning change is not anticipated to create materially detrimental impacts to the immediate vicinity. The requested R-1 designation is compatible with adjacent residential uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Low Density Residential land use designation. Any future development will be required to comply with all applicable City standards, including setbacks, landscaping, buffering, and traffic mitigation, ensuring that potential impacts on neighboring properties are minimized and appropriately managed. (c) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole; There is merit and value in the proposed rezone in that it aligns with the guidance of the Comprehensive Plan for the subject site. The Plan identifies the site for Residential use, and applying the R-1 zoning designation is consistent with that guidance. The rezone will create opportunities for additional housing, helping to meet the community’s evolving residential needs. Additionally, the proposal promotes planned and orderly growth, facilitates the efficient 6 extension of City infrastructure, and supports the long-term goals of the community, including enhancing livability, connectivity, and service delivery for existing and future residents. (d) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal; No conditions are necessary as part of this rezone request. The application, as well as any future development, will be subject to the applicable provisions of the PMC and the City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards. Subsequent project actions, including Preliminary Plat review, SEPA, and TIA evaluation, will assess potential significant adverse impacts. Accordingly, the imposition of conditions at this stage is not warranted. (e) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and, if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is not necessary for this proposal. The requested rezoning complies with all applicable City standards and requirements, and no additional terms or conditions beyond those already established in the PMC and adopted development regulations are warranted. Accordingly, no further commitments or agreements are required. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council assign R-1 (Low Density Residential) zoning to Parcel No. 115180030, owned by Rocky Hills Management LP, consisting of approximately 156 acres. THANK YOU for your legal submission! Your legal has been submitted for publication. Below is a confirmation of your legal placement. You will also receive an email confirmation. ORDER DETAILS Order Number: IPL0284463  Order Status: Submitted  Classification: Legals & Public Notices  Package: TRI - Legal Ads  Site: tricity  Final Cost: $450.69  Referral Code: NOPH  Payment Type: Account Billed   User ID: IPL0018633  ACCOUNT INFORMATION Debra Barham 525 North Third Ave. Pasco, WA 99301 509-544-3096  cityclerk@pasco-wa.gov City of Pasco TRANSACTION REPORT Date October 22, 2025 2:31:08 PM EDT  Amount: $450.69   SCHEDULE FOR AD NUMBER IPL02844630 October 26, 2025 Tri-City Herald Print Publication PREVIEW FOR AD NUMBER IPL02844630 3.22inches x 7.41inches 10/22/25, 11:31 AM Adportal Self Service Advertising Confirmation https://placelegal.mcclatchy.com/legals/tricity/home/confirmation.html?id=266346&returnto=1/2 << Click here to print a printer friendly version >> 10/22/25, 11:31 AM Adportal Self Service Advertising Confirmation https://placelegal.mcclatchy.com/legals/tricity/home/confirmation.html?id=266346&returnto=2/2 Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF PASCO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita más información, por favor llame al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Económico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509-545-3441. A public hearing with the Hearing Examiner will be held on November 12, 2025, at 6:00 pm. Place: Council Chambers in Pasco City Hall at 525 N 3rd Avenue in Pasco, Washington. Z2025-009 Rocky Hills Management LP “Wilson Estates” R-T to R-1: Notice is hereby given that the City of Pasco Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing to consider a rezone application submitted by Big Sky North, LLC on behalf of Rocky Hills Management LP. The request proposes to rezone Parcel No. 115180030, approximately 156 acres in size, from R-T (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). The subject property is located in Pasco, WA 99301, generally north of Burns Road, west of Broadmoor Boulevard, south of future Dent Road, and east of future Dent/Fraser Road. The proposal is subject to the provisions of the Pasco Municipal Code. A concurrent subdivision application, which will be subject to a separate public hearing at a later date, proposes the development of approximately 873 single-family detached homes and includes a SEPA submittal for environmental review. This rezone is categorically exempt from SEPA review pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6)(c)(i)-(iii). Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m. on November 12, 2025, to be included in the Hearing Examiner’s packet. If you have questions or wish to provide written comments on the proposal, please contact the Planning Division at (509) 544-4146, by email at barragani@pasco-wa.gov, by mail at P.O. Box 293, Pasco, WA 99301, or in person at 525 N. 3rd Avenue, 1st Floor (CED), Pasco, WA 99301. Please note that only written comments submitted prior to the meeting will be accepted and included in the official record. Oral testimony provided during the meeting will also be accepted and entered into the record at that time. General Location: The subject property is located in Pasco, WA 99301, generally north of Burns Road, west of Broadmoor Boulevard, south of future Dent Road, and east of future Dent/Fraser Road. If you wish to participate in the hearing virtually, please register at least 2 hours prior to the meeting at the following registration link: www.pasco-wa.gov/publiccomment After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Estimated Date of the Decision: It is estimated that the Hearing Examiner will make a recommendation to City Council on the rezone within ten (10) working days of the public hearing. Page 2 of 2 Prepared October 22, 2025 by: Ivan Barragan, Planner III, PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301-(509) 544-4146 The City of Pasco welcomes full participation in public meetings by all citizens. No qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded or denied the benefit of participating in such meetings. If you wish to use auxiliary aids or require assistance to comment at this public meeting, please contact the Community Development Department at (509) 545-3441 or TDD (509) 585-4425 at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting to make arrangements for special needs. 1 Ivan Barragan From:Brad Backus <brad@franklincountyirrigation.com> Sent:Friday, October 10, 2025 10:18 AM To:Ivan Barragan Subject:RE: Notice of Application-PP2025-004/SEPA2025-030 Wilson Estates Subdivision & Z2025-009 - City of Pasco [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Can you please continue to give me further information on this subdivision please Brad Backus Operations manager Franklin County Irriagtion Distict P.O. box 3907 Pasco Wa 99302 (509)547-3831 (509)545-1160 (fax) Brad@franklincountyirrigation.com From: Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov> Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2025 4:43 PM To: Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov> Subject: Notice of Application-PP2025-004/SEPA2025-030 Wilson Estates Subdivision & Z2025-009 - City of Pasco All, Please see the attached Preliminary Plat (PP2025-004), SEPA Checklist (SEPA2025-030), and Rezone Application (Z2025-009) submitted on September 26, 2025, for the subdivision of 873 single-family residential lots within the proposed R-1 (Low-Density Residential) zoning district. The property, currently zoned R-T (Residential Transition) under Ordinance No. 4637, encompasses approximately 156 acres. While the Rezone Application (Z2025-009) is exempt from SEPA, it is being reviewed concurrently with the Preliminary Plat and this SEPA review. The proposed development consists of single-family detached homes to be constructed in ten phases. Subdivision improvements will include mass grading, construction of public roads, and installation of water, sewer, irrigation, communication, and power infrastructure. The project also includes multiple public pedestrian pathways to enhance walkability within the residential blocks and a two-acre park proposed to be maintained by the Homeowners Association (HOA). 2 The site is located on Parcel No. 115180030 in Pasco, WA 99301, generally north of Burns Road, west of Broadmoor Boulevard, south of future Dent Road, and east of future Dent/Fraser Road. The proposal is subject to the applicable regulations of the Pasco Municipal Code. To reiterate, the Rezone Application (Z2025-009) is exempt from the SEPA process; however, it requires a Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner and is ultimately a City Council decision. All pertinent submitted materials can also be found in the SEPA Register. Please submit comments for the proposed plat and SEPA submittal by 5:00 p.m. on October 29, 2025. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. Thank you, Ivan Barragan Planner III To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. O: 509-544-4146 barragani@pasco-wa.gov | www.pasco-wa.gov City Hall, 525 N. 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 This e-mail and any response to this e-mail may be a public record under Washington State Law and subject to inspection and copying by the public upon request. Accordingly, there can be no expectation of privacy. 1 Ivan Barragan From:David Barber <dkba72@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 22, 2025 12:10 PM To:Ivan Barragan Subject:Re: Z2025-009 Notice of Public Hearing - Rocky Hills Management LP "Wilson Estates" R-T to R-1 [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Ivan, When I first saw this I thought it was a joke. I have never seen such concentrated housing. I have also never seen a lot size that is 4000 ft.². It appears that this would be the smallest single housing lots in all of Pasco hugged right up against 0.5 acre and 1 acre lots. Is this essentially a rubber stamp project that will be pushed through no matter what? Or, is there any chance that city council decides to do .25 or .5 acre lots as it was originally zoned for? Thank you, David On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 11:56 AM Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov> wrote: Please find attached the Notice of Public Hearing, scheduled for November 12, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. This notice will also be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site today and published in the Tri-City Herald on October 26, 2025, in accordance with Pasco Municipal Code 25.210.040. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. I will also be preparing the staff report, which is due one week prior to the hearing. Thank you, You don't often get email from dkba72@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 2 Ivan Barragan Planner III To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. O: 509-544-4146 barragani@pasco-wa.gov | www.pasco-wa.gov City Hall, 525 N. 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 To help protect your privacy, Micro soft Office To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office To help protect your privacy, Micro soft Office To help protect your privacy, Micro soft Office This e-mail and any response to this e-mail may be a public record under Washington State Law and subject to inspection and copying by the public upon request. Accordingly, there can be no expectation of privacy. SEPA comment for SEPA2025-030 Wilson Estates Subdivision • Subject: SEPA comments for Wilson Estates Subdivision (SEPA2025-030, PP2025- 004, Z2025-009) • To: City of Pasco Community & Economic Development Department attn. Ivan Barragan • From: Aaron Fabre, owner of 11413 Easton Dr, Pasco, WA 99301 o Aaroboy21@hotmail.com o (725) 777-8021 • Date: October 28th 2025 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on and voice my concerns on the SEPA determination for the Wilson Estates Subdivision. The city of Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan is to reflect the community’s vision of the future, and the city of Pasco’s Planning Department vision is to help create a sustainable, functional, and aesthetically pleasing community through thoughtful planning. I do not believe the proposed subdivision reflects the vision of the city of Pasco and I oppose the current plans. The proposed Wilson Estates Subdivision brings numerous concerns and questions regarding the environmental impact, maintaining the current identity of the surrounding neighborhoods, and short and long-term safety and livability of the planned project and surrounding neighborhoods. This project could negatively affect the quality of life for residents in the neighboring single-family homes, impacting their property values, privacy, and ability to enjoy their outdoor spaces. Proposed Mitigation/Action Requesting a Full Environmental Impact statement prior to approval. Proposed zoning reconsidered from R1 Low Density Residential to RS1, RS12, or RS20 suburban to maintain the surrounding neighborhoods in lot sizes and continue with residential development with large lots and expansive yards. Specific Concerns EARTH Concerns of erosion issues and flooding during clearing, construction, and completed proposed plan. Are there proposed measures to prevent erosion during all stages of development? This proposed project will add impervious surfaces such as asphalt, concrete, and buildings. This will add significant wastewater runoff, and the added urban heat effect will raise surrounding temperatures. With less land, grass, crops, and native plants it will disrupt the current carbon footprint. There are already low spots on the south end of the proposed projects where flooding occurs during rain and snow. What measures will be taken to prevent this from being escalated during the land clearing? AIR Concerns of emissions from construction equipment and dust air pollution. With 900 houses, come 900+ cars. What will be done to help with the pollution? What measures will be in effect to control emissions or impacts on air quality? WATER Concerns about the Irrigation water demand – The current irrigation company Big Sky Irrigation has had a hard time maintaining water supply with the current summer water demand. In the past two years there have been shutdowns/issues on 4/9, 4/15, and 4/17 in 2025. 4/2, 4/22, and 5/11 in 2024. And two major mid-summer shutdowns in previous July of 2022 and 2023. What is the proposed Storm Water runoff method of collection? Will the southern sloped plans direct waterflow into Archer estates northern properties septic drainage areas? Will storm drains be installed to prevent this flooding? This plan alters current drainage patterns of the site reducing ground water absorption. There is already significant flooding prior to the added runoff from paved streets and structures. Concerns of groundwater runoff for the properties with well water zoned RR5 to the east of the proposed project. PLANTS Current permanent crops – Corn, Potatoes, varieties of Field Grass What is the proposed plan to preserve or enhance the vegetation and maintain the positive carbon impact? ANIMALS Birds – Canadian Geese and Snow Geese annually use this field as a winter and spring migration route stop. Numerous species of Hawks, Quail, Sparrow, Starling, Hummingbirds, Finches, Killdeer, Doves, Robins, Heron, Woodpeckers, Owls, Crows, Seagulls, Pelicans all have been observed on this land. Mammals – Deer, Coyotes, Racoon, Skunk, Porcupine Other animals - Snakes, Lizards, Opossums, Squirrels Concern of the added road traffic and loss of habitat. In the month of October there were deer, racoon, and skunk hit by vehicles on Burns and Dent. What are the proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife? Concerns that invasive species including moles/voles and mice will relocate into our large grass lots when they lose their habitat. ENVIROMENTAL Numerous years of agricultural use of chemicals/fertilizers in the ground will get kicked up as dust or wastewater runoff. Noise – A proposed 10 years construction plan will create ongoing noise in the surrounding communities from construction equipment and construction traffic. What are the planned hours of noise disruption that will come from the proposed plan? Are there proposed measures to reduce noise impacts? HOUSING The current plan has 873 homes on 1/10 of an acre lots as small as 4,000 sq ft (avg. size 5,118sq ft.). Surrounding neighborhoods on all developed sides are all county zoned RS-20, RS40, RR5 and RC1 which range from half acre lots, acre lots, and larger. (21,000+ sq ft lots). To the north long term Agricultural Land. The proposed planned lot sizes are significantly smaller than the surrounding neighborhoods. To maintain with the surrounding neighborhoods attributes, lot sizes should be more comparable in size and continue with residential development with large lots and expansive yards. AESTHETICS Views of the expansive land and hills to the north will be obstructed. What is the proposed plan and who will maintain the “alleyway/easements” between the proposed development and the already established northern properties of Archer estates? LIGHT/GLARE Concerns of light pollution with so many houses, and proposed streetlights. Many of the surrounding neighborhoods are without streetlights or have limited street lighting. RECREATION A 2-acre park is not adequate for the size of the proposed housing project. Proximity example of Kohler Estates 2 – it has a 7-acre park for 52 housing lots. Possibility of incorporating a much larger area designated for community parks, dog parks, walking trails, or other recreational activities. TRANSPORTATION Currently, there is no public transportation or bus routes for the proposed plan. Dent Rd is not designed for pedestrian walkability or bicycling. There are no sidewalks, the road shoulders are slanted and difficult to walk on, and there is no lighting. Adding so many homes and added traffic puts pedestrians in danger, especially any school children that would be using the roadways to walk home. The added traffic to the area creates increased risk to the hilled intersection of Burns and Dent, especially during winter conditions. There is a need for added traffic signals and crosswalks. Also, a need for a winter road plan especially for this dangerous intersection in icy conditions. How many added vehicular trips will be generated during the completed project? What will be the peak volume times? What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Current easement between proposed development and current houses in Archer estates is used for movement of agricultural products and as a community walking/biking trail. This easement should not be used for construction traffic. PUBLIC SERVICES Added Police and Fire protection needed, adding public transportation. Current local schools are already at capacity for elementary, middle, and High school. What are the proposed measures to address the impacts on public services? UTILITIES Will this development have any effect on current septic systems in surrounding developments? What are the proposed services for electricity, natural gas, water, irrigation, refuse services, telephone, sanitary sewer, and surrounding septic systems? The city of Pasco continues to grow and build a strong community. The proposed Wilson Estates Subdivision does not appear to have taken into consideration all the environmental impacts or current communities that surround the land. Squeezing in as many houses on small lots as city codes will allow instead of maintaining the distinct character of the community seemingly goes against the City of Pasco’s Planning Department values. I strongly oppose this current proposal. Thank you for taking time to review and address my concerns. Aaron Fabre 11413 Easton Drive Pasco, WA 999301 Aaroboy21@hotmail.com 725-777-8021 OpposiƟon LeƩer to New Development SEPA COMMENT SUBMISSION COVER SHEET Name: John and Kathy Mancinelli Address: 11201 Mathews Rd., Pasco, WA 99301 Project Title: Wilson Estates Subdivision File Numbers: PP2025-004 / SEPA2025-030 / Z2025-009 Submission Type: Formal OpposiƟon LeƩer Summary of OpposiƟon: I strongly oppose the proposed Wilson Estates Subdivision located north of Burns Road and west of Broadmoor Boulevard. This development is incompaƟble with the exisƟng neighborhood and will cause significant and lasƟng impacts including: • Severe traffic congesƟon and safety hazards on Easton Drive, Burns Road, and Broadmoor Boulevard. • Increased flooding and drainage risks to exisƟng homes located downhill from the development. • Irreversible loss of neighborhood character and property value due to excessive housing density. • Prolonged construcƟon noise, dust, and disrupƟon over a 10-year period. • Inadequate park space and environmental miƟgaƟon measures. I respecƞully urge the City of Pasco to issue a DeterminaƟon of Significance (DS) and require a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before allowing this project to proceed in any form. SubmiƩed by: Dr. John Mancinelli and Kathy Mancinelli Date: October 29, 2025 This cover sheet accompanies a full SEPA opposiƟon leƩer submiƩed for the public record. Dr. John Mancinelli Date: October 29, 2025 To: City of Pasco Community & Economic Development Department AƩn: Ivan Barragan, Planner III 525 N. 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 Email: barragani@pasco-wa.gov Subject: Strong OpposiƟon – Wilson Estates Subdivision (PP2025-004 / SEPA2025-030 / Z2025-009) Dear Mr. Barragan, I am wriƟng as a new Pasco resident and property owner at 11201 Mathews Rd., which borders the southern edge of the proposed Wilson Estates Subdivision. I am submiƫng this leƩer to express my strong opposiƟon to this development proposal and to urge the City to deny or substanƟally revise the project before allowing it to move forward. We purchased our house just months ago with the appreciaƟon of the rural and quiet nature. The home has a very high assessed tax rate ($110,000 above purchase price). We were willing to pay the high tax rate due to the beauty and serene nature of the property. This proposal — encompassing 873 homes on 156 acres — would dramaƟcally alter the character, safety, and livability of our established community. The scale, density, and environmental footprint of the project are incompaƟble with surrounding neighborhoods and represent a significant threat to the quality of life for current residents. 1. Overwhelming Traffic and Road Safety Risks The traffic impact of adding nearly 900 homes in this area will be severe and unsustainable. Easton Drive, Burns Road, and Broadmoor Boulevard are already burdened with growing conges  on. This project will add thousands of daily vehicle trips with no corresponding roadway infrastructure to handle them. The City should not approve a development of this magnitude without first guaranteeing: • Major capacity improvements and traffic signals on Burns, Easton, and Broadmoor. • Safe pedestrian crossings and school zone protectons. • Enforced phasing condiƟons tying each construcƟon phase to completed traffic miƟgaƟons. Without these measures, this subdivision would place an unacceptable strain on local roads and endanger residents, children, and bicyclists. 2. Drainage and Flooding Threats to Adjacent Homes As a homeowner whose property sits directly downhill of the proposed subdivision, I am gravely concerned that stormwater runoff from paved streets, roofs, and compacted soils will divert water toward exisƟng lots on Mathews Rd and Eaton Dr., causing erosion and flooding. Unless the City can ensure—through independent hydrological studies—that runoff will be fully contained on-site and maintained indefinitely, this proposal should not move forward. 3. Irreversible Harm to Neighborhood Character Easton Drive and Mathews Rd. are composed of half-acre and one-acre residenƟal lots that reflect the low-density rural transiƟon zoning under which we purchased our homes. Allowing a high-density subdivision of 873 Ɵghtly packed lots would erase the established neighborhood idenƟty, reduce privacy, and undermine the investments that exisƟng residents have made in maintaining a peaceful community. No amount of fencing or landscaping can adequately mitgate the stark difference between this project’s density and the exisƟng neighborhood form. 4. Years of ConstrucƟon DisrupƟon Ten planned construcƟon phases mean a decade or more of constant noise, dust, heavy machinery, and truck traffic. Residents along Easton Drive and Mathews Rd. will bear the brunt of these disrupƟons, enduring environmental and quality-of-life impacts for years without any benefit. ConstrucƟon traffic should be strictly prohibited from using Easton Drive or connecƟng neighborhood streets — and if that cannot be guaranteed, the proposal should be rejected outright. 5. Environmental and Livability Concerns The project site currently funcƟons as valuable open space and wildlife habitat. Replacing it enƟrely with dense housing and asphalt will increase the urban heat effect, reduce groundwater absorpƟon, and diminish local biodiversity. The token two-acre park proposed is grossly inadequate for a development of nearly 900 homes and does not serve as a meaningful environmental miƟgaƟon or community amenity. 6. IncompaƟbility with Pasco’s Long-Term Vision This project reflects an outdated “mass subdivision” approach rather than the though ƞul, sustainable growth Pasco residents expect. The community deserves beƩer than an overbuilt, high-density subdivision that strains public infrastructure, erodes open space, and sacrifices the rural-suburban balance that makes north Pasco desirable. Untl the City can demonstrate that adequate infrastructure, environmental protec Ɵon, and community compaƟbiliƟes are guaranteed, the Wilson Estates Subdivision should be denied. Conclusion As a directly affected homeowner, I strongly oppose the approval of SEPA2025-030 and urge the City of Pasco to issue a DeterminaƟon of Significance (DS) rather than a DeterminaƟon of Non- Significance (DNS). The environmental, traffic, and community impacts of this proposal are substanƟal and unavoidable and warrant a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). I request to be kept informed of all future acƟons, hearings, and determinaƟons regarding this proposal. Thank you for taking these concerns seriously and for standing with exisƟng residents to protect the safety, livability, and integrity of our community. Sincerely, Dr. John Mancinelli and Kathy Mancinelli 11201 Mathews Rd. Pasco, WA 99301 CC: Pasco City Council – council@pasco-wa.gov Pasco Planning Commission – planning@pasco-wa.gov 1 Ivan Barragan From:David Barber <dkba72@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 22, 2025 12:10 PM To:Ivan Barragan Subject:Re: Z2025-009 Notice of Public Hearing - Rocky Hills Management LP "Wilson Estates" R-T to R-1 [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Ivan, When I first saw this I thought it was a joke. I have never seen such concentrated housing. I have also never seen a lot size that is 4000 ft.². It appears that this would be the smallest single housing lots in all of Pasco hugged right up against 0.5 acre and 1 acre lots. Is this essentially a rubber stamp project that will be pushed through no matter what? Or, is there any chance that city council decides to do .25 or .5 acre lots as it was originally zoned for? Thank you, David On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 11:56 AM Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov> wrote: Please find attached the Notice of Public Hearing, scheduled for November 12, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. This notice will also be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site today and published in the Tri-City Herald on October 26, 2025, in accordance with Pasco Municipal Code 25.210.040. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. I will also be preparing the staff report, which is due one week prior to the hearing. Thank you, You don't often get email from dkba72@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 2 Ivan Barragan Planner III To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. O: 509-544-4146 barragani@pasco-wa.gov | www.pasco-wa.gov City Hall, 525 N. 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 To help protect your privacy, Micro soft Office To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office To help protect your privacy, Micro soft Office To help protect your privacy, Micro soft Office This e-mail and any response to this e-mail may be a public record under Washington State Law and subject to inspection and copying by the public upon request. Accordingly, there can be no expectation of privacy. 1 Ivan Barragan From:Jackie Ansotegui <jackieans@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 29, 2025 4:28 PM To:Ivan Barragan Subject:Opposition to Wilson Estates Subdivision (PP2025-004 / SEPA2025-030 / Z2025-009) [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Opposition to Wilson Estates Subdivision (PP2025-004 / SEPA2025-030 / Z2025-009) City of Pasco Community & Economic Development Department Attn: Ivan Barragan, Planner III 525 N. 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 Email: barragani@pasco-wa.gov Dear Mr. Barragan, We are writing as a longtime Pasco residents and homeowners on Whetstone Drive, near the area where the Wilson Estates Subdivision is being proposed. We strongly oppose this project in its current form and want to share why so many of us in this neighborhood are deeply concerned. You don't often get email from jackieans@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 2 Traffic, Traffic, and More Traffic The biggest issue is traffic — plain and simple. We’re already dealing with major congestion from the 400+ apartments that have been built (and more still going up). Adding nearly 900 more homes will make things unbearable. Burns Road, Broadmoor, and Dent Rd can’t handle what we have now, let alone thousands of new cars every day. It’s already tough to turn onto Burns safely, especially during peak hours. Kids ride bikes, families walk dogs, and people are out jogging — this kind of added traffic puts everyone at risk. Before any new development of this size is approved, the city needs to make real improvements: - Additional traffic lights and turn lanes on Burns and Dent. The work already done on Broadmoor is not sufficient to handle the added traffic. - Safe crosswalks and speed control for pedestrians and school zones. - Phased construction tied to completed road upgrades, not promises for “later.” Without those, this project will overwhelm our streets and make daily driving downright dangerous. Developer’s Responsibility 3 and Zoning The developer purchased this property knowing exactly what the existing zoning was — low-density residential. Now they’re trying to push through a massive rezone purely for profit, with no regard for the people who already live here. Those of us who chose this area did so because of its quiet, open, low-density feel. We value space, safety, and a slower pace of life. It feels unfair that someone can come in, ignore that, and try to cash in by cramming in as many houses as possible without considering the strain it puts on the rest of us or the infrastructure that simply isn’t built for it. Drainage and Flooding Concerns Those of us downhill from this property have real worries about where all that stormwater will go once the land is covered with roads and rooftops. We’ve already seen drainage issues in heavy rain. The city should require a full, independent study before approving anything. Neighborhood Character This area was designed as a low-density, family-friendly neighborhood. Jamming in 873 small lots changes everything — the look, the feel, and the peace and quiet that drew us here in the first place. No amount of landscaping will make that density blend in. Many Years of Construction Chaos Ten phases of construction means a decade of noise, dust, and truck traffic. Those of us living here shouldn’t have to deal with that kind of disruption for years on end. At the very least, construction traffic should be kept off Easton Drive and other existing residential 4 roads. A Two-Acre Park Isn’t Enough For nearly 900 homes, a two-acre park is barely a token gesture. Families here know how much open space matters — we need realistic green areas that actually support the number of people moving in. Final Thoughts We are not against growth, but this project is way out of scale for what the area can handle right now. It’s going to choke our roads, change the character of our neighborhood, and make an already busy area nearly impossible to navigate. We respectfully ask the City to issue a Determination of Significance (DS) and require a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before letting this move forward. We also ask city leaders and the planning commission to prioritize the voices of the people who already live here — the families who deal with this traffic every day — and protect the character and safety of our existing neighborhoods. Thank you for your time and attention to these concerns. 5 Sincerely, Darwin and Jackie Ansotegui 6517 Whetstone Dr Please confirm receipt of this email. OpposiƟon LeƩer to New Development SEPA COMMENT SUBMISSION COVER SHEET Name: John and Kathy Mancinelli Address: 11201 Mathews Rd., Pasco, WA 99301 Project Title: Wilson Estates Subdivision File Numbers: PP2025-004 / SEPA2025-030 / Z2025-009 Submission Type: Formal OpposiƟon LeƩer Summary of OpposiƟon: I strongly oppose the proposed Wilson Estates Subdivision located north of Burns Road and west of Broadmoor Boulevard. This development is incompaƟble with the exisƟng neighborhood and will cause significant and lasƟng impacts including: • Severe traffic congesƟon and safety hazards on Easton Drive, Burns Road, and Broadmoor Boulevard. • Increased flooding and drainage risks to exisƟng homes located downhill from the development. • Irreversible loss of neighborhood character and property value due to excessive housing density. • Prolonged construcƟon noise, dust, and disrupƟon over a 10-year period. • Inadequate park space and environmental miƟgaƟon measures. I respecƞully urge the City of Pasco to issue a DeterminaƟon of Significance (DS) and require a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before allowing this project to proceed in any form. SubmiƩed by: Dr. John Mancinelli and Kathy Mancinelli Date: October 29, 2025 This cover sheet accompanies a full SEPA opposiƟon leƩer submiƩed for the public record. Dr. John Mancinelli Date: October 29, 2025 To: City of Pasco Community & Economic Development Department AƩn: Ivan Barragan, Planner III 525 N. 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 Email: barragani@pasco-wa.gov Subject: Strong OpposiƟon – Wilson Estates Subdivision (PP2025-004 / SEPA2025-030 / Z2025-009) Dear Mr. Barragan, I am wriƟng as a new Pasco resident and property owner at 11201 Mathews Rd., which borders the southern edge of the proposed Wilson Estates Subdivision. I am submiƫng this leƩer to express my strong opposiƟon to this development proposal and to urge the City to deny or substanƟally revise the project before allowing it to move forward. We purchased our house just months ago with the appreciaƟon of the rural and quiet nature. The home has a very high assessed tax rate ($110,000 above purchase price). We were willing to pay the high tax rate due to the beauty and serene nature of the property. This proposal — encompassing 873 homes on 156 acres — would dramaƟcally alter the character, safety, and livability of our established community. The scale, density, and environmental footprint of the project are incompaƟble with surrounding neighborhoods and represent a significant threat to the quality of life for current residents. 1. Overwhelming Traffic and Road Safety Risks The traffic impact of adding nearly 900 homes in this area will be severe and unsustainable. Easton Drive, Burns Road, and Broadmoor Boulevard are already burdened with growing conges  on. This project will add thousands of daily vehicle trips with no corresponding roadway infrastructure to handle them. The City should not approve a development of this magnitude without first guaranteeing: • Major capacity improvements and traffic signals on Burns, Easton, and Broadmoor. • Safe pedestrian crossings and school zone protectons. • Enforced phasing condiƟons tying each construcƟon phase to completed traffic miƟgaƟons. Without these measures, this subdivision would place an unacceptable strain on local roads and endanger residents, children, and bicyclists. 2. Drainage and Flooding Threats to Adjacent Homes As a homeowner whose property sits directly downhill of the proposed subdivision, I am gravely concerned that stormwater runoff from paved streets, roofs, and compacted soils will divert water toward exisƟng lots on Mathews Rd and Eaton Dr., causing erosion and flooding. Unless the City can ensure—through independent hydrological studies—that runoff will be fully contained on-site and maintained indefinitely, this proposal should not move forward. 3. Irreversible Harm to Neighborhood Character Easton Drive and Mathews Rd. are composed of half-acre and one-acre residenƟal lots that reflect the low-density rural transiƟon zoning under which we purchased our homes. Allowing a high-density subdivision of 873 Ɵghtly packed lots would erase the established neighborhood idenƟty, reduce privacy, and undermine the investments that exisƟng residents have made in maintaining a peaceful community. No amount of fencing or landscaping can adequately mitgate the stark difference between this project’s density and the exisƟng neighborhood form. 4. Years of ConstrucƟon DisrupƟon Ten planned construcƟon phases mean a decade or more of constant noise, dust, heavy machinery, and truck traffic. Residents along Easton Drive and Mathews Rd. will bear the brunt of these disrupƟons, enduring environmental and quality-of-life impacts for years without any benefit. ConstrucƟon traffic should be strictly prohibited from using Easton Drive or connecƟng neighborhood streets — and if that cannot be guaranteed, the proposal should be rejected outright. 5. Environmental and Livability Concerns The project site currently funcƟons as valuable open space and wildlife habitat. Replacing it enƟrely with dense housing and asphalt will increase the urban heat effect, reduce groundwater absorpƟon, and diminish local biodiversity. The token two-acre park proposed is grossly inadequate for a development of nearly 900 homes and does not serve as a meaningful environmental miƟgaƟon or community amenity. 6. IncompaƟbility with Pasco’s Long-Term Vision This project reflects an outdated “mass subdivision” approach rather than the though ƞul, sustainable growth Pasco residents expect. The community deserves beƩer than an overbuilt, high-density subdivision that strains public infrastructure, erodes open space, and sacrifices the rural-suburban balance that makes north Pasco desirable. Untl the City can demonstrate that adequate infrastructure, environmental protec Ɵon, and community compaƟbiliƟes are guaranteed, the Wilson Estates Subdivision should be denied. Conclusion As a directly affected homeowner, I strongly oppose the approval of SEPA2025-030 and urge the City of Pasco to issue a DeterminaƟon of Significance (DS) rather than a DeterminaƟon of Non- Significance (DNS). The environmental, traffic, and community impacts of this proposal are substanƟal and unavoidable and warrant a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). I request to be kept informed of all future acƟons, hearings, and determinaƟons regarding this proposal. Thank you for taking these concerns seriously and for standing with exisƟng residents to protect the safety, livability, and integrity of our community. Sincerely, Dr. John Mancinelli and Kathy Mancinelli 11201 Mathews Rd. Pasco, WA 99301 CC: Pasco City Council – council@pasco-wa.gov Pasco Planning Commission – planning@pasco-wa.gov 1 Ivan Barragan From:Omar Garza <olg007@outlook.com> Sent:Monday, November 3, 2025 7:14 PM To:Ivan Barragan Subject:Re: Z2025-009 Rocky Hills zone concern [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Subject: Opposition to Rezoning Request Z2025-009 – Wilson Estates Dear City of Pasco Hearing Examiner, I am a nearby homeowner and wish to express my opposition to the proposed rezoning of the Wilson Estates property (Z2025-009) from R-T to R-1. This change would allow much higher housing density—around 873 new homes—which would overwhelm local roads and increase traffic in an area not designed to handle that volume. It would also change the character of our neighborhood, where homes currently sit on half-acre or larger lots and average over 2,500 square feet. Allowing smaller, high-density lots next to our community would likely devalue existing homes and reduce the quiet, spacious atmosphere that residents have invested in. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that the City deny this rezoning request and preserve the current R-T zoning. Thank you for considering my comments. Omar Garza olg007@outlook.com Sent from my iPhone On Nov 3, 2025, at 7:10 PM, Omar Garza <olg007@outlook.com> wrote: Omar Garza olg007@outlook.com You don't often get email from olg007@outlook.com. Learn why this is important