Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L97-0068 - FAMILY FUN CENTER - CONDITIONAL USE APPEALL97 -0068 FAMILY FUN CENTER 15034 Grady Way So. Nora Gierloff Department of Community Development 6300 South center Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 /3O0 FUN CENTER WAY TUKWILA, WA 98188 (425) 225 -7300 FAX (425) 225 -7400 www,fun- centencom PEB d ' 2005 oEvF opM cNr February, 4 2005 Dear Nora, Over the past few years I have noticed that the city has installed street light banners. I love the concept and I think they look great were they have been installed. Since the Grady way intersection is the actual gateway to the city, I would like to request that the banners be extended West to and through the Grady way intersection and or along Fun Center Way. If this is a possibility keep me in the loop. When the original Family Fun Center conditional use permit (file # L -97 -0068) was approved in 1997, we had listed as one of our attractions a swing ride that stood 100 feet tall. This attraction was not installed during our first five years of operations, but as we continue to reinvest in the park, we have decided it is now time to install this attraction. The ride concept is exactly the same, (a big swing ride) however; the size and location slightly change. The size is reduced to from 100 to 65 feet tall and the footprint is only 21 X 60 feet. The new location will move an additional 200 feet away from the river to the South go kart pit area. The existing shade structure will be removed and the new attraction will sit in the existing South go kart pit. All building plans will be submitted to the building department. If any further documentation is necessary, will you please contact me. My direct office number is (425) 917 -7502. fClier a an naHone $ Dealing Wholesome Ente E inrl n ent 5a for.G Uet0 P Go fStn rJ rovement and. Grow h GueSt Service to Sur a y5 at ion5 . .�. SIDE VIEW 30' AIR LAUNCHED SCREAMIN' SWING 4 SEAT SWING: 120 TI:1 160 PPH • FOOTPRINT • J Win' - 6 HAGGARD LAW OFFICE ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR•AT -LAW SUITE 1200, IBM BUILDING 1200 FIFTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 682-5635 FAX: (206) 623 -LAND RECEIVED JUL 311998 CIl Y OF TUKWILA CITY CLERK JOEL E. HAGGARD OUR FILE NO S- 20770.5 July 23, 1998 Clerk of City Council City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Family Fun Center /Appeal Withdrawal Dear Clerk, The Family Fun Center (Scott Huish) has agreed to reduce the GLA of the Main Entertainment Building in their proposal by 13.5% (4,850 sq. ft.). They have also agreed not to construct or operate any high- impact amusement (or "thrill ") rides (i.e., rides classified as other than "kiddy rides "). Appropriate modifications to their proposal and permits are to be made to implement these revisions. Based upon commitments of the Family Fun Center, the pending appeal of their CUP to the City Council is hereby withdrawn. This withdrawal is done on behalf of Park East Building, Inc. (Jeff and Leanne Stock), as our clients. This withdrawal is also done on behalf of Blackriver J.V., L.L.C. (Jeff Roush as Agent) as a result of specific authorization to me. Sincerel yours, cc: Mr. Jeff Stock Mr. Jeff Roush Mr. Glenn Amster Mr. Steve Lancaster JH /sm c: \... \s- 20 \2077011r.723 . oel Haggard City of Tukwila .NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE ..IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL. WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON MONDAY, JULY 20, 1998, BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT TUKWILA CITY HALL, 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD., TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE FAMILY FUN CENTER AMUSEMENT PARK TO BE LOCATED AT THE NE CORNER OF INTERURBAN AVENUE AND SW GRADY WAY. (APPELLANTS: TEFF & LEANNE STOCK, OMNI PROPERTIES, 31919 1ST AVE. S., FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003; ROBERT TRIMBLE, BLACKRIVER T.V., L.L.C., 4640 95TH AVE. NE, BELLEVUE, WA 98004) THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS; HOWEVER, TESTIMONY WILL BE LIMITED TO THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL. THE CITY OF TUKWILA STRIVES TO ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON ON MONDAY IF WE CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE (206- 433 -1800 OR TDD 1- 800 -833- 6388). DATED THIS g DAY OF 1998. ' CITY OF TUKWILA eXt E. CANTU, CITY CLERK DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEATTLE TIMES, FRIDAY, JULY 10, 1998 4 A F F I D A V I T O F 1 1, aiVAu n Notice of Public Hearing 0 Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet []Board of Appeals Agenda Packet planning Commission Agenda Packet Short Subdivision Agenda Packet D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: -0 Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit was mailed to each of the following addresses on ( ©4076 Determination of Non - significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance ODetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice ONotice of Action 0 Official Notice 0 Other 0 Other Name of Project ?t r f l e,rc%'r Signatur eA `J File Number Z. ?7 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director July 6, 1998 RE: Appeal of the Family Fun Center Conditional Use Permit L97 -0068 for an amusement park to be sited at the northeast corner of Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way The Family Fun Center, owner of the parcels at the northeast corner of Interurban Avenue and Grady Way (old Neilson farm site), has applied to the City of Tukwila to develop an amusement park, 153 room hotel, and a restaurant. They received design review approval and a conditional use permit at a public hearing before the Planning Commission/Board of Architectural Review on April 23, 1998. An appeal of the conditional use permit for the amusement park was filed with the City by Jeff Stock, a property owner in Tukwila, and Robert Trimble, a representative of the Blackriver Corporation that owns property in Renton. This appeal will be heard by the Tukwila City Council on July 20 at 7:00 PM in the Tukwila City Council Chambers. While all interested parties may attend the hearing, it is a closed record hearing so only the parties to the appeal will be permitted to testify. The hearing has been rescheduled from the originally scheduled July 6 date. The project files are available for review at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the permit counter of the Tukwila Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100. If you have any additional questions or comments please call me at the City of Tukwila Planning Division, (206) 431 -3670. Sincerely, Nora Gierloff Associate Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 . �. Lg 6 U, UO :CO CV • WW: MLL. W O' g u. co moo; z I- .D ;o I -. - W W F uiz U _i. O ~' A F F I D A V I T Cv Notice of Public Hearing 0 Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet 0 Board of Appeals Agenda Packet 0 Planning Commission Agenda Packet O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet O Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit 1JDetermination of Non - significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance 0 Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice 0 Notice of Action Official Notice Other 0 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on f7 Name of Project f File Number L9 1-00 toR' ,.�• City of Tukwila NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON MONDAY, JULY 6, 1998, BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT TUKWILA CITY HALL, 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD., TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE FAMILY FUN CENTER AMUSEMENT PARK TO BE LOCATED AT THE NE CORNER OF INTERURBAN AVENUE AND SW GRADY WAY. (APPELLANTS: - JEFF & LEANNE STOCK, OMNI PROPERTIES, 31919 1ST AVE. S., FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003; ROBERT TRIMBLE, BLACKRIVER T.V., L.L.C., 4640 95TH AVE. NE, BELLEVUE, WA 98004) THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES; HOWEVER, TESTIMONY WILL BE LIMITED TO THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL. THE CITY OF TUKWILA STRIVES TO ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON ON MONDAY IF WE CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE (206- 433 -1800 OR TDD 1- 800 - 833 - 6388). � DATED THIS A a N DAY OF ,1998. CITY OF TUKWILA DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEATTLE TIMES, FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 1998 Seiit by: HAGGARD LAW OFFICE 2066235263; rnx 06/17/98 #312;Page 2/5 T v . Mod 1 ('Z 5 3 3 3 -6.3? ) DRAFT i��-`' (Provided to Applicant you y7 hiu /5.4 (7-. t - �f�- S2 iP) Linder ER -408] //lew r y 11"' L/ic cc reF %F $ c.�� e l / !'y S7GC (/ r tot1r1?2 �� &a% � /-t, r/r MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: File Joel Haggard June 17, 1998 Family Fun Centers Traffic Analysis RECEIVED CiTY OF T UKWILA JUN 1 8 1998 S-20770 PERMIT CENTER Perspective Basic predicate is data base for existing conditions. Current counts needed, along with growth rates to allow projection to horizon year. Counts needed for all intersections when specified number (i.e., 10 or 1) peak hour /direction trips occur. However, need CO consider also roadway segments. Operational characterization required. Another predicate is distribution pattern for proposal traffic. Due to unique nature of proposal, need to establish basis for distribution and routing since not an employment, shipping or residential base. Pass-by review to verity appropriate since proposal is destination. Another predicate is proposal generation (both volume and hourly distribution). Proper verification of what is a comparable facility (location, size:, etc.) is essential to providing analysis basis. Need to utilize worst -case conditions (hour, day, season, vehicle type, etc). Analysis of impacts then provides for differential impact of proposal relative to off -site existing conditions. At this point, examinations of off - site impacts and mitigation measures required. Feed back for reanalysis of reduced scope of proposal follows. Preiiminaiy Review of Family Fun Center; Reanaivtij 1. Data Base: All current intersections (and roadway segments relevant) to be reviewed need to be identified. These include all with 10+ ( ?) peak hour, peak direction trips. Since nip distribution (Q. assignment) affects this listing, iterate to identify on a conservative (i.e., more inclusive list) basis the intersections of interest. : +.� z • W: 00, • to o: ' CO la • W= J F- N u_ WI o' 2 it gi =a • _. z� t-o z E- o • •0 co to iu' • = V. •u' o.. • Z ui U 2` z Sewt by: HAGGARD LAW OFFICE 2066235263; 06/17/98 3:14PM;Jet #312;Page 3/5 MEMO DRAFT June 17, 1998 [Provided to Applicant Page 2 Under ER -408] Current counts needed for all legs of relevant intersections. Counts need to be representative of existing conditions. Since likely peak season for proposal is Summer, count collection in June may be appropriate. Can analytically adjust if other Summer periods likely to differ. Opening appears predicated for 1999. Thus, adjustment of current counts need to retlect start -up condition. One question is whether cumulative impacts worsen over time and so review needed of conditions over proposal lifetime (use Rule of Reason). Also, identification of known proposals pending and historic growth rates to make existing condition representative of cumulative, "current" condition. Local conditions suggest probability of roadway segment capacity issues. May be reflected in stacking volumes at intersections [Grady /Interurban, on /off ramps (1405 and 1 -5), and turning movements before intersections], or operational moves between intersections. Review and characterize as relevant. Roadway and intersection improvements need to be characterised. Particularly relevant as to Grady /Interurban /Monster and on /off ramps. Accident (history, frequency and cause) data needed (State, Tukwila, and Renton). Planned ( ?) and committed improvements in area of interest to be identified. Probable completion date to be specified. What else is reasonable required? 2. Distribution Pattern: Verification of assumptions /model used for trip assignment needed. Distribution (route assignment) needs to reflect specifics for proposal. This proposal includes a destination recreational facility. Thus, origin /destination not likely represented by conventional Puget Sound model typically used. Similarly as to motel due to Tukwila /Sea- Tac•business (use motel market study for its distribution). This proposal is located at an intersection (Grady /Interurban) for which site access is not actually available from one (or Iwo) legs. Also site access may require direction reversals in order CO get properly positioned. This will affect both distribution and operational site access volumes. This may be worsened by. bus traffic. Finally, distribution differences for the two uses, i.e., motel and recreational park, should be reflected in analysis. While maybe not appropriate at this point, verification of external and internal by -pass (or cross use) trip reduction needs to be reviewed and verified. Absent actual data for comparable facilities, need to minimize to assure worst case. 3. LOS and V/C For Existing Condition LOS and V/C analysis should be provided for all relevant intersections under appropriate signaled or unsignaled conditions and methodology. However, calculations should be adjusted for Tukwila and /or vicinity conditions at variance from standard ' ,.� s1- F. w. tr 2 6 —J C.) 00: J= w 0. J LL Q =a I— w. Z� 1— 0` Z Lu 0co. 0 1—! ww I0 z: UN 1 Sent by: HAGGARD LAW OFFICE 2066235263; 06/17/98 3:15PMt;Je{ #312;Page 4/5 MEMO DRAFT June 17, 1998 [Provided to Applicant Page 3 Under ER -10$] assumptions. Methodology should be described and affirmed as reasonable for this area. (Q. Individual leg versus intersections as a whole dispute for unsignalecl intersections). LOS and V/C analysis for current conditions should reflect both a) current, actual conditions, and b) future existing conditions with scheduled improvements (tied to a ctu al, proj ected availability). 4. Trip Generation: Due to dissimilar uses: separate analysis needed for each use in order to determine proposal generation (Q. restaurant pad). RE: Motel - Probably standard ITE approach. Primary variable could be percent of occupancy if do not use number of rooms. Employees and service /delivery trips (number, day and time) should be accounted for. [Will adequate on -site parking be available for number of employees - assume one person per vehicle.] Due to local traffic problems (I -405, etc), will motel peak hours be more or less than off -site peak using 1TE splits? Anything atypical about this operation (general restaurant, etc)? RE: Recreational Park - Utilization of actual data from comparable facilities appears warranted. Key question is comparability of other Family Fun Centers data. Factors for evaluation of comparability include a) market demographics, b) location, c) access routes and ease of use, d) seasonal and weather variations, e) site size, f) type and quantity of rides, g) amenities, h) open versus closed area sizes, etc. Preliminary indications are that this proposal is on a larger scale than other Family Fun Centers. Applicant has stated up to 3 times larger crowds in July and August with August being the heaviest month. Applicant has said it will provide a larger game room and more (Q. different) rides than at other Family Fun Centers. Methodology for predicting vehicle count [NOTE: do not forget number of buses] is critical. Need to establish and verify, whether use vehicle count or customer count, etc, that projections are conservative, worst -case. Data averaging is nor acceptable for worst - case conditions; but, could be used for an average. analysis (if want to do). All data needs to be hourly segmented (in and out) for worst-case day. RE: J2tearaurant Path - Probably use 1TE for this. But, what is horizon year? 5. LOS, V/C and Accident Probability For Proposal: Same comments as in Paragraph 3 above for existing conditions plus proposal (as to total sire, accounting for any difference in horizon year for components). But, beyond LOS and V/C should be accident analysis differences, particularly due to multi - directional site access restrictions, driver response to route selection restrictions. and congestion/ operational conditions. ;. .. . z iZ re w. 65 00 W 1-- W0 w J � =d z z Off, w U O N 0 H w LU I U; z` iu • , O ~: z SEnt by: HAGGARD LAW OFFICE 2066235263; 06/17/ga, 3:15PM;Jet #312;Page 5/5 j MEMO DRAFT June 17, 1998 [Provided to Applicant Page 4 Under ER-408] 6. Proposal Impact Evaluation: One. focus is localized operational and safety matters. Driveway spacing on Monster Road in light of stacking and multiple point entries and the effect on Grady and Interurban for turns would be reviewed. Alternative for single site driveway would be evaluated. Off -site improvements (i.e., turn lane extension, signage, etc) to be considered for access points to Monster Road. Exit routes, since right-in/right-out only, to be evaluated for off -site travel direction changes (i.e., u- turns, entrance to Ft. Dent, etc) in order to go in desired travel direction. What else? First focus is to off- -site impacts. Two evaluative factors are involved. Using LOS, one level drop or decrease below established standard would require specific impact evaluation and mitigation for any intersection. (NOTE: Consider c-curb to inhibit mid -block u- turns.] Using V/C, 0.1 ( ?) increase for similar analysis. Accident avoidance measures to be identified for probable situations. Consider turn or holding lane extensions to avoid interference with through traffic [NOTE: general traffic impact fees are separate item.]. Establish conditions for applicant construction (if payment, limit time or amount of operation until work completed). Second focus is proposal reduction or phasing to mitigate off-site impacts [NOTE: need to be based upon cumulative, worst-case analysis]. Evaluation should be provided as to change in LOS, V,/C, or accident probability for all intersections as a result of a) delete restaurant pad, b) reduce motel size by 121/2% and by 25 %, c) reduce enclosed play areas by 121h% and by 25 %, and /or d) reduce number of type of rides. This will allow a parameterization of alternatives for impact avoidance. NOTE: • This is a preliminary draft. Recommend discussion with traffic consultant to iron -out scoping issues. Also, recommend review of draft report to allow mid- course correction and avoid delay later. These comments are in addition to those already provided to City of Tukwila. cc: Mr. Jeff Stock JH /sm e: i,. io-20 \2077Otttcttt,6I? CONDITIONAL USE APPEAL City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 June 12, 1998 John T. Backus, President Home Electric Company P.O. Box 9 Bellevue, WA 98009 RE: Family Fun Center/ CUP Appeal Dear Mr. Backus, John W Rants, Mayor RECEIVED JUN 12 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Thank you for your letter to the City Council dated June 3, 1998, requesting to join in the Stock and Blackriver appeals relating to the above - referenced matter. Unfortunately, your request to join the appeals is untimely. Tukwila Municipal Code 18.116.010(A) states that appeals of type four decisions (including conditional use permits) must be brought within fourteen (14) days from the date that the decision, which is the subject of the appeal, is issued. The fourteen day appeal period has expired. cc. =Nora Gierloff, DCD Jane Cantu, City Clerk Very truly yours, OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 7 Robert F. Noe City Attorney Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax: (206) 433 -1833 ' z a• z H': I-z • U Oi ono; • u) w,• ,w w o. ig • La. U1 zF`:. z w.W:. M o O co` • ;w W! H V:: Z: UN. ;0• z 6/3/98 HOMQ ELECTRIC COIF PANY Receive'° Jug - "s9a GVt CI OF CL B TY City Council City of Tukwilla 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwilla, Wa. 98188 Attn: Clerk of Council Re: Family Fun Center/ CUP Dear City Council Persons, Home Electric Company owns the building at 120 Andover Park East. Our location is about 1/2 mile from the proposed Family Fun Center site. A large percentage of our employees and customers reach our building from the east via the Grady/Interurban intersection. Upon review of the Family Fun Center proposal we are concerned that the traffic volumes will increase to such an extent that both employees and customers will find our site unattractive thus reducing the desirability and marketability of our property. This will effect both of our bottom lines. We would like to go on record as joining the May 13th, 1998 appeal filed by Joel Haggard as attorney for Jeff and Leanne Stock (and the_ Blood Center) and Blackriver J. V., LLC. Jo,hn . Backus Pr' sident cc: Joel Haggard Jeff and Leanne Stock Blackriver J. V., LLC. slock698.wps/he98 P. O. BOX 9 BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98009 (425) 455 1341 - ; z D_ W' J O •U 0; • = N LL w0 u..Q • z� 1-0 :z ;o 'w . of u. ~O z; _' :.z t Blackriver J.V., L.L.C. May 15, 1998 HAND DELIVERED City Council City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 ATTN: Clerk of Council RE: Family Fun Center /CUP ,i1 u ra G i `ef /a /-',� RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA MAY 1 5 1998 PERMIT CENTER Dear City Councilpersons, Blackriver J.V., L.L.C., a Washington Limited Corporation, owns the Blackriver Corporate Park, Phase III and V. The Manager of the LLC is Robert Trimble. Our business address is 4640 - 95th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98004 (phone 206 -682- 3300). I am authorized to sign and file this appeal on behalf of the LLC. We currently lease about 120,000 sq. ft. of office space in the Blackriver Corporate Park, Phases III and V. It is located about 1/2 mile east of the Family Fun Center site. A primary access is from Oakesdale off of Grady Way. A large percentage of our tenants and their employees reach the property from the west using the Grady/Interurban intersection. We have reviewed the Family Fun Center proposal recently. We are forced by the market and tenants to file this appeal of the Family Fun Center. Based upon the present and projected volume and operational concerns, the Family Fun Center traffic when added to existing conditions will tend to increase employee travel times and tend to reduce the attractiveness and marketability of our property and the tenant acceptance. This harms or is anticipated to harm our property. We specifically incorporate here the entirety of the May 13, 1998 appeal filed in this case by Joel Haggard as attorney for Jeff and Leanne Stock (and the Blood Center). . May 15, 1998 Page 2 We file this appeal and join as a party appellant to the May 13, 1998 appeal against the Family Fun Center proposal. incerely cc: Clerk of Council, City of Tukwila Mr. Mark Hood, Attorney for Applicant Mr. Scott Huish, Family Fun Centers, Applicant Ms. Nora Gierloff, Tukwila CDC Mr. Steve Lancaster, Tukwila SEPA RO Mr. Gary, L. VanDusen Mr. Jeff Stock Mr. Joel Haggard eff Roush for Robert Trimble RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA MAY 1 5 1998 PERMIT CENTER w LU Qom, U U.O W = LIP ,`n.a: I- W z D o_ oN' I- w Lu of tlx • z: U 67 It o :z. HAGGARD LAW OFFICE ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR•AT -LAW SUITE 1200, IBM BUILDING 1200 FIFTH AVENUE SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 682.5635 FAX: (206) 623 -LAND JOEL E. HAGGARD May 13, 1998 HAND DELIVERED City Council City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 COpy OUR FILE NO: S -20770 RECEIVED MAY 1 3 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ATTN: Clerk of Council RE: Family Fun Center /CUP, et al 'Appeal Dear City Councilmembers, Sherlock Holmes was asked by Dr. Watson in one story how he knew something was wrong. He answered that the dog was not barking. We have a similar situation. The Planning Commission was not provided with studies and has an inadequate record basis for its decision. This, in part, is the basis for this appeal. The City received about 5 inches of documents from the applicant. This material related to traffic and the geo- tecb/hazardous waste condition of the site. This material was withheld from the Planning Commission. See Attachment 1. Certainly, Staff may not wish to overburden the Commission with information; however, all of these studies are material and relevant to the decision the Commission has to make under the criteria for a Conditional Use Permit (See TMC §18.64.050). Why is it that there is not a complete record for or full disclosure to the Commission? This is legal error indicating the Council should remand the matter back to the Commission for full disclosure and consideration. The decision was clearly erroneous and the record insufficient to support critical findings. See Overlake Fund v. SHE, 949 P.2d 418 (Wn. App. Div. 1, 1998). The decision can not be defended on the basis of withholding critical, material and relevant documents from the record. Staff opinion is not sufficient to overcome the record incompleteness. City Council May 13, 1998 Page 2 We had the undisclosed documents reviewed. We summarized our concerns in a letter sent to Staff and the SEPA Responsible Official (See Attachment 2). This was provided to the Commission during the hearing. Staff provided untimely and unresponsive comments which we received during the Commission hearing (See Attachment 3). Numerous, unresolved issues or misleading responses were provided. As discussed below, this raises additional issues for this appeal. Consider first the traffic issues - of paramount importance to the public health and safety and to our clients. The proposed use " 'will not' be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity..." [TMC §18.64.050(1)] and " 'shall' be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic..." [TMC §18.64.050(3)]. This code language is not discretionary since the words "will" and "shall" are used. But, the Commission was not even provided with the applicant's traffic report so it could establish the truth or falsity of criteria compliance. Please explore with us briefly some of the ignored, but fundamental issues. 1. We questioned whether internal access off of Monster Road (perhaps prematurely renamed) complies with City standards. No response was provided in the record. See, for example, Figure RS -9 of Street Standard Plans. The issue is broader though since the operational problems of this access were not adequately disclosed in the applicant's traffic study. For example, no traffic accident data or analysis was conducted. We understood Staff to tell the Commission this was not needed because there are really no accidents on Monster Road. This argumentative response belies the remnant road nature of Monster Road and its immediate interfaces with Grady Way and Interurban Avenue needed for access to the proposed site. A traffic study and operational analysis is needed, but not provided. It may well be that there should only be one access to the applicant's property, a basic question that must be resolved under the CUP criteria and applicable road standards. 2. The Commission record provides no data nor basis for the Staffs conclusionary comments at the hearing on traffic. For example, Staff indicated repeatedly that only about 10% of the proposal's traffic approaches the proposal's site from the north on Interurban. If the Commission had applicant's traffic report, on information and belief, the Commission could have verified it indicates 21% or more. This factor alone suggests the need for a remand with full - disclosure to the Commission. City Council May 13, 1998 Page 3 3. The applicant's traffic study was predicated upon a survey of applicant's experience at Wilsonville, Oregon. Interestingly, the traffic report, if disclosed to the Commission, would affirm that "Friday is typically the highest trip generation weekday for a Family Fun Center." Despite this admission by the applicant, the record is that Staff said there is no problem with weekday traffic impacts because most of proponent's traffic will be on the weekend. The Commission was not provided the data to establish this. If the traffic study had been made available to the Commission it would have understood that "The Summer months are when the Family Fun Centers experience their peak business." Instead, Staff simply ignored this and the common experience that kids do not go to school in the Summer (i.e., weekdays and weekends) and said the applicant's peak traffic will only be on weekends so as to not be a problem. Additionally, the applicant's trip generation was based upon an average of Thursday/Friday (not weekend) trips at Wilsonville. This raises fundamental questions not disclosed to the Commission that a) peak traffic days are not on the weekends, b) the averaging of Thursday/Friday Wilsonville experience substantially underestimates actual peak trip generation rates, and c) Wilsonville is not representative of peak traffic due to lack of similar access and higher figures from applicant's 4 or 5 other California sites. Overall, the trip generation used by Staff, but not disclosed to the Commission, substantially and materially under - represented trips, impacts and occurrence. • The Staff findings adopted by the Commission in Nos. 3, 4, and 5 at p. 5 of the Staff Report and (2)(e), 4 (b) at pp. 9 -10 of the Staff Report are clearly erroneous, unsupported by the record, and/or contrary to known available information not put in the record by Staff. Supplementary to the CUP criteria and lack of disclosure is the SEPA issue. The City issued a DNS - so no administrative appeal is available. When the Staff/ SEPA RO received our comments, Staff (but not the RO) prepared an unresponsive comment (See Attachment 3). This Staff response and our letter was provided to the Commission - but, the documents upon which the DNS was premised were not provided to the Commission. SEPA entails full disclosure so that decision - makers can be fully informed. The Commission was not fully informed. Thus, the Commission was handicapped and could not determine, as a matter of this record, the truth or falsity of the assertions by anyone. A notice of intent to pursue judicial review of the SEPA process in conjunction with an appeal (if needed) of the underlying governmental action (i.e., CUP affirmance by Council if decided) is provided in Attachment 4. City Council May 13, 1998 Page 4 Other issues, similarly treated, exist as to the hazardous wastes on -site. Staff appears to say the City has nothing to do with this because that is the State Department of Ecology's responsibility. We suppose Staffs position is the same as to the Hydraulic Permit from the Department of Fish & Wildlife and the individual permit from the Corp of Engineers. Even supposing this is true, SEPA requires the Commission to consider - not ignore or defer - consideration of fully disclosed impacts. Yet, none of this information nor studies were provided to the Commission. Thus, the Commission did not have an adequate record basis to decide that applicant's size 10 foot could be inappropriate for this size 6 footprint. One Commissioner questioned having all compact size parking stalls in front of the motel. The architect basically responded that there was not enough area to do better. The shoreline regulations appear to restrict the invasive, cramped use of this site. These observations reflect that this appeal is brought, in part, because the Planning Commission did not have the record information required. This presents the constitutional issue of substantive due process violation. This case is unlike one where there is no dispute over what should have been in the record, but rather the findings are reviewed to see if supported by the record. See Sunderland Family Treatment services v. Pasco, 127 Wri.2d 782 (1995). Without critical documents, the Commission can not determine the truth or falsity of Staff findings used for the decision therefore violating fundamental fairness and due process. Would it have made a difference decision if all information had been fully disclosed? We will never know unless the matter is remanded to them by the City Council. We understand this appeal is to include the name, address, and phone number of the appellant(s). This appeal is also to describe the harm suffered or anticipated. This information is provided in Attachment 5. We understand this appeal is to state specific errors of fact or law in the decision. The decision appealed is that copied in Attachment 6 (See also Attachment 1 although one condition not material to this appeal was changed). We have tried to be as specific on factual errors as possible given the record. The applicant has the burden of proof - and has not sustained that based upon questions raised and unanswered. Staff has not provided an adequate or fully disclosed records to the Commission. The record is inadequate as a matter of law. Questions are unanswered or misrepresented. The decision is clearly erroneous, contrary to law, and arbitrary and capricious. Any facts alleged here which are not in the record are made as an offer of proof. Segmented and restrictive document review simply negates the ability of the Commission to have all aspects and impacts of the proposal fairly and fully disclosed to it. City Council May 13, 1998 Page 5 The dog didn't bark for Sherlock Holmes. Does the tail wag the dog - or is there a remand for full disclosure and response to the issues. This is up to you - the City Council - and the reason this appeal is brought. enc. cc: Clerk of Council, City of Tukwila Mr. Mark Hood, Attorney for Applicant Mr. Scott Huish, Family Fun Centers, Applicant Ms. Nora Gierloff, Tukwila CDC Mr. Steve Lancaster, Tukwila SEPA RO Mr. Gary L. VanDusen Mr. Jeff Stock JH/sm Respectfu, Submitted, J -1 Haggard (WSBrA #203) Attorney for Appellants c: \... \s•20 \20770app.513 • !.. 6 J U�: UO; • cn w; • w= • J H w0 • J.. • w.; . z F-'• •z►-; Ucy• O Ni • 'w w. z • ',a. Pi • o • • ui.z` U N�. 'z ATTACHMENT 1 • !.; Staff Report to the Planning Commission/BAR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION/ ZONING DISTRICT: SEPA DETERMINATION: RECOMMENDATION: c9'l 6 VIA 1:r° 1, {p4 ojodo 10i (l ATTACI-24EN"TS: •J Family Fun Center site ' Commercial/Light Industrial Determination of Non - Significance issued April 6, 1998 Approval with the following conditions: 1. All internal information signs must be scaled and located to be viewed by the pedestrian on site and therefore not have off -site visual impacts. Designs for the sips shall be submitted to the Director and administratively approved at the time of building permit. 2. The'landscape islands between compact parking stalls at the Family Fun Center shall be replaced with four 8' by 38' islands containing two trees per island. 3. The design of the Family Fun Center attractions shall be administratively approved by the DCD Director so long as they are harmonious and compatible with the overall site and building design. 4. The east elevation of the guest wing of the La Quinta shall be redesigned to include a prominent entry feature. The new design shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director. 5. The Family Fun Center and La Quinta lighting plans shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director to ensure that they do not cause off-site glare or excessive lighting of the river environment. A. SEPA Threshold Determination B. Application for Conditional Use Permit C. Parking Demand Study for Family Fun Center D. La Quinta'a Response to Design Review Criteria E. Photographs dottier La Quinta Hotels F. Plans for La Quinta G. Rendering of La Quinta H. Drawing of the Sky Max attraction L Family Fun Center Booklet J. Family Fun Center Materials Board (to be presented at hearing) K. La Quinta Materials Board (to be presented at hearing) Page 2 Md /rj^R u- -M.,n_ Wde2 :0 PC, '70 nNw Staff Report to the Family Fun Center She Planning Commission/BAR ENDINGS VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION Project Deseripticm. Family Fun Centers has' applied to develop an approximately 14 acre site by demolishing existing starctures and regrading the site. To accommodate requited flood storage capacity a combiaatibn of off chanae1 pond and riverbank cutback with restoration and habitat enhancement will be built adjacent to the Green River. Proposed buildings include a 9,000 square foot pad building,.a 153 room 4 story hotel, a 36,300 square foot restaurant and arcade building and 7 acres of outdoor attractions including miniature golf, bumper boats, batting cages and a go cart track. A City trail will be constructed along the perimeter of the site and will connect to a new pedestrian bridge crossing the River. The applicant is requesting Board of Architectural Review approval of the site Family Fun Center arcade building and La Quinta hotel. The pad site will come back to the BAR for approval when a tenant has been secured. Fxistin velon,�m_e_nt The site is currently vacant. The historic barn on the property burned down last summer and the abandoned houses have been demolished. The barn was docummrted by photograph and report prior to the arson fire. autte=jingjaniliet, The site is at the northeast comer of Interurban Avenue and Grady Way. The Fort Dent office buildings, Homewood Suites hotel and the Kwan Dental Clinic are across the River to the North. The project is separated from Renton on the east by railroad trades. Grady Way and Interstate 405 are to the south and the Interurban Avenue/I405 interchange is to the west. TopogY. The site is generally flat except the slope down to the River. Vegetatign. The majority of the existing pasture, shrubs and trees will be removed and replaced by buildings, parking lots, attractions and site landscaping. The majority of a significant stand of willows along the eastern portion of the riverbank will be retained for wildlife habitat as requested by the Muckleshoot Tribe Fisheries Department New landscaping will be installed according to Shoreline regulations, Zoning Code standards and the Board of Architectural Review's approved landscape plan. Non -native plants such as Himalayan blackberry will be removed and replaced with native plants of higher habitat value. The riverbank above the ordinary high water mark will be stabilized by landscaping. Page 3 Mrl ,rl ^,n u -1-M∎!(1 ' : NO Gti . ttit, Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site • Planning CommIssion/BAR Access to the site is from Monster Road, which may be renamed Fun Center Way. Turns are Limited to right- in/right -out from Grady Way and Interurban Avenue. REPORT ORGANIZATION The staff report has been divided into four sections. The first section covers the conditional use permit, the second covers the paridng requirement determination, the third covers the special permission sign requests, and the fourth section covers the design review decisions for the Family Fun Center site and the La Quinta hotel. Staff s conclusions and recommendations will follow each section. SECTION ONE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT S'd • - ;�... _:.�. DECISION CRITERIA - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The Family Fun Center requires a conditional use permit to establish an amusement park use in the Commercial/Light Industrial zone. For the applicant's response to the criteria see Attachment B. The criteria for the decision and staff's response follows. 18.64,050 Criteria The following criteria shall apply In granting a conditional use permit: L The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the poperty or bnproyemena pt the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district hi which the subject property Is shinned; The Family Fun Center site is separated from neighboring properties by the Green River on the north, railroad trades on the east, Interstate 405 on the south and the Interurban Avenue/405 interchange on the west. The Commercial/Light Industrial zoning district is intended to allow such large scale uses as truck terminals, heavy equipment repair, and salvage and wrecking operations. 2. The proposed um sMati meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in the district It will occupy; The amusement park use will not generate significant airborne pollution, noise, water pollution or hazardous materials. The project also meets or is capable of meeting all development standards including setbacks, landscaping and height of the Commercial/Light Industrial Zone and other Zoning Code requirements. Page 4 Md /a 1r F 1ZMNf WdoE : Po e6, b@ .0:JW z ~ w: 00: wI J H N L ui0 ga • w z i-- o. •Z !— UJ • U t]• ww U N: • O I— z Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR 0 3. The proposed development shell bt compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of raffle and pedestrian circulation, building and site design; Circulation and tip generarica issues were examined in the Traffic Impact Study completed by Entranco Engineers and reviewed by the Tukwila Public Works Department. The study concludes that the project will not lower the Level of Service at affected intersections below B. The City is currently planning to widen the Interurban Avenue Bridge to ease traffic congestion for vehicles entering 1405, T..e Washington State Department of Transportation did not have any concerns about the proximity of the amusement attractions to I405. A new pedestrian bridge across the Oren River will connect with the new trail segment along the perimeter of the Family Fun Center site by early 1999. I, The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of eke Comprehensive Land Use Policy Ban; • The project will increase public use and access to the shoreline through the new pedestrian bridge and the section of river trail around the site per Goal 5.6 and Policy 5.6.6. The amusement park will add a new recreation opportunity available to residents of Tukwila and the surrounding area per Policy 5.6.4. The riverbank will be enhanced with landscaping, tree snags and an off channel pond per Goal 5.9. The project will redevelop an underu:eed site with multiple uses while enhancing flood control and the habitat value of the riverbank per Goal 5.3. The project includes buildings with distinctive rooflines and pedestrian friendly features per Policies 1.8.7 and 8.1.12. Interior parking lot landscaping has been provided per Policy 8.1.4. Pedestrian paths between sidewalks and buildings have been provided per Policy 8.1.2. Screening of mechanical equipment and screening of trash and recycling collection areas has been provided per Policy 8.1.5. S All mourn have been taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts winch the prapased use truly have on the area In which !t Is located A Determination of Non-significance was issued for the project (see Attachment A). The project is providing extensive riverbank landscaping and habitat features such as log snags along the bank and within the off- channel pond (see details in Attachment 1). This higher quality habitat will mitigate for disturbance to the site during construction and the more intensive use of the site after completion. Lighting will be shielded to control off - site illumination. CONCLUSIONS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Off-site impacts such as noise and glare have been minimized through site design by locating more intensive uses away from the shoreline. Traffic generated by the amusement park will be spread throughout the day, with higher levels after 10:00 AM and on the weekends, so it will not add significantly to peak hour congestion in the Page 5 Md /a c Wdo_:PO e6, b© ,,bu +,° Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR vicinity. The amusement park use will be less intense than many of the uses that are allowed outright in the CfLI zone such as truck terminals. The riverbank will be recontoured and revcgetated to provide required flood storage and improved fish and wildlife habitat. RECOMMENDATION • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit to establish an amusement park on the site. SECTION TWO - PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION DECISION CRITERIA - PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION Per TMC 18.56.100 the parking requirements for any use not specifically mentioned in the Zoning Code are to be determined by the Director. This project requires review by the Planning Commission so the decision has been elevated to that body as required by TMC 18.104.030. The applicant has submitted a parking study performed by Entranco Engineers that documents the expected parking demand for the site based on parking provided at five existing Family Fun Centers and parking use at the Oregon site (see Attachment C). The conclusion of the report is that 303 parking stalls will be adequate to handle the expected parking demand both at opening and after any future additions or remodeling. The current site plan shows approximately 320 parking stalls proposed for the amusement center. CONCLUSIONS - PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION The amount of parking recommended in Entraaco's report seems reasonable in. light of the parking demand experienced at other Family Fun sites. They are providing a little more parking, approximately 320 spaces, to provide for iliture growth. RECONLI ENDATIONS - PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION Staff recommends that the parking requirement for the Family Fun Center be set at 303 parking spaces. SECTION THREE - SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS 2. 'd DECISION CRITERIA - SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS jncrease in Sign Area Family Fun Center has asked for special permission sign area increases for its two "Family Fun Center" wail signs based on TMC 19.32.140 A 2. which allows wall sign Page 6 Md.'a is d'1_M:a(1_ Wd :E:b@ 35, ho ,ldW % z Z', mQ 2. • W � 00 0 W 111 1 N u IL. 4C =• v H= z F; �o Z t-. D 10 N' 0I- U :M ' o: ui z` =!. o�. 'Z ;,,,,,;;:,1 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site ' Planning Commission/BAR areas to be increased up to 50% for each doubling of the required minimum setback distance, not to exceed 6% of the wall area or 500 square feet, whichever is smaller. This is a Type 2 decision generally made by the Director that has been elevated to the Planning z Commission as part of the overall project review. _ F— z re w. The proposed sign on the southeast elevation would be 260 square feet, less than the 387 6 D square feet that would be allowed under the 6% limitation. The proposed sign on the -J O west elevation would be 207 square feet, equal to the maximum allowed under the 6% , (n n limitation. Both signs are set back at !east five tines the required yard setbacks. w = J w Unique Sim, N p 2 Family Fun Center has asked for approval of a unique sign per TMC 19 28.010 5. The g Q' definition of unique sign is: N v w; 19.08.260 Unique Sign z "Unique Sign" means a building or other structure of unique design and exterior decor, where the z O 0. entire structure may be considered an advertising device, tncludbsg but not limited to shapes w w bnitating hats, boots, lira, statues, parts of anatomy, or manuftsetured items such as airplanes, 2 D` cars, bode, carriages, or symbols which may or may not contain lettwin;. v O This is a Type 4 decision made by the Planning Commission. The criteria are that "the w uj effect of the proposed sign would not contribute to a cluttered, confssing or unsafe condition." The unique sign would be a non - illuminated three - dimensional mural of the u_ p Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon characters on the south building elevation. The sign ti z i would be on a different wall plane than either of the "Family Fun Center" wall signs and the area of the south wall has not been used in calculating the allowable size of those z ~ • signs. Tnterr 1 Tn aformation Sigma Family Fun Center has also asked for approval of a variety of internal information signs under TMC 19.22.010. The additional signs are needed to direct customers throughout the eight acre site and label the various attractions. They have shown some examples of these signs in the booklet, Attachment I, such as "Go Karts" and "Restaurant." As the designs for the attractions have not been finalized they request tl,.at the Director be authorized to approve the sign permits at the time of' building permit CONCLUSIONS • SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS Increase h Sign Area The proposed Family Fun Center wall signs, though large, are scaled to the size of the building and do not overwhelm the architecture. The signs meet the criteria for the sign area increase. Page 7 red= u ; -M. ±n. wd'_ : ?0 e5: P3 ;,dw • �;¢ StaffReport to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR Unioue �it?n The unique sign is not illuminated, would not move, and would not obstruct views in the z vicinity, therefore it is unlikely to create a confusing or unsafe condition. The building 11- has been designed to accommodate the sign locations so they are widely spaced and do re W not create a cluttered appearance. D 00 Lntg=al Info none Emma { Co 0 w= The sign code allowance for four internal information signs not to exceed six square feet . N F-; for wall signs and four square feet for freestanding signs is not adequate for a site of this w 0 size and complexity, A majority of the Family Fun Center business is conducted outside 2 and is therefore subject to the sign code, unlike most businesses that have unlimited E Q' interior signage to direct customers within their buildings. to a �w h RECOMMENDATIONS - SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS z =- I-0. Staff recommends that the special permission sign area increases for the two Family Fun w W Center wall signs be approved and that the wall mural be approved as a unique sign. D 0 Staff recommends that Family Fun Center's internal information signs be approved with ;Q �'' the following condition: 1. All internal information signs must be scaled and located to be viewed by the 1-- �,. pedestrian on site and therefore not have off-site visual impacts. Designs for the signs 0 shall be submitted to the Director and administratively approved at the time of v building permit, 1=1; 0 z SECTION FOUR - DESIGN REVIEW 7'J DECISION CRITERIA... DESIGN REVIEW This project is subject to BAR design approval under TMC 18.60.030 due to its location in the CILI zone and size. In the following discussion the Board of Architectural Review criteria are shown below in bold, followed by staff s comments. For Family Fun Center's response to the criteria see Attachment I, for La Quinta's response see Attachment D. 18.60,050 General Review Criteria (1) Relationship of Structure to Site: a. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with essencape and to provide for adequate landscaping and pedestrian movensent: b. Parking and service areal should be located, designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved area's; c The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation :o the spa Page 8 Hd: a a 917mAn Wdst': t O ?b: t'0 null �. 3 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR The project will provide landscaping around the perimeter of the site, in the parking lots, throughout the attractions and adjacent to the buildings. Pedestrian pathways from the sidewalks through the parking lots to the buildings have been provided. The parking lots have been wrapped around the buildings to minimize their impact. The noisiest attractions, go carts and bumper boats, have been located away from the River. The arcade building and the hotel are both large buildings built to the maximum height allowed in the C/LI zone, but the site is quite large and they are set back nom the edges of the property. The pad site in the west corner will come back to the BAR once a tenant has been secured. It is likely that the Layout of the pad site will change from what is currently shown on the drawings. (7) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. a. Harmony an tannin, lines and mantes !s encouraged; b. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided; c Public buildings and ttruetarej should be conaistenl with the established neighborhood character; d Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian a-aikidos p.ttenu and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged; e. Compatibility of ow site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged The City is building a new pedestrian bridge across the Green River that will connect with the new trail segment along the perimeter of the Family Fun Center site. This will provide a bicycle and pedestrian link for the Interurban Trail. Frontal improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, street widening, storm drainage and street lighting will be required along both sides of Monster Road. Driveway location and width for all driveways has been coordinated with Public Works during the review and revision process. Some slight realignment of the driveways may be necessary based on the final grades of the site. Access from Grady Way and Interurban Avenue will be limited to right in/right out. (3) Landscape and Site Treatment a. Where eafttixg topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced b Grader of walks, psxthbng spaces, terraces and other paved at should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance; a landscape iragAmsnt should enhance architectural features, vrengthex vistas and important axis, and provide shade; d In locations where plants will be susceptible to Injury by pedestrian or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken; e Where building sites limit planting, the placement of gees or shrubs in paved areas is encouraged; f Serunittg of servieeyards, and other place, which tend to be unsightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combination; Page 9 ) M.J yr r ,- H`.,r_ lidos : tr© Se, bO ,,eu • Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site ' Planning Commission/BAR g. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials each as fences, walls and paving: of wood, brick, stone or gravel may be used; h. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining landscape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible wait the building and adjacent aree. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colon should be avoided Perimeter, parking lot and building landscaping will be added throughout the site to define the layout and provide screening. An outdoor eating area, plaza and lawn area are provided on the Family Fun Center site. Trash and recycling dumpsters will be screened by fencing and where possible landscaping. A 500 fort long riverbank cut -back above the ordinary high water mark and an of- channel pond will be constructed to provide flood storage compensation for filling on the rest of the site. They will also provide refuge areas for fish and enhance arimAl habitat through revegetation with native plant species and the placement of large wood snags. The bank work has been designed with input from the City of Tukwila, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Department. Z F- w tQr 2 J U 00 t. NO, w =. J 1-- w gQ z w zi-:. Pole fixtures are provided around the building and parking lot for safety lighting. No off- D o premise glare or light in excess of 2 foot - candles will be permitted. o En- tut' w, (4) Building Design. a. Archltectt+rai style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be bated on quaity of its - O design end relationship to it' surroundings; Z ui U__ O ~° z b Buildisge should be appropriate scale and in harmony with permanent neighboring developments. c. Building components such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapet, should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building component' and ancillary pane shall be consistent with antic:pated life of the structure; d Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colon used only for accent; e: Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shorid be screened front view; • f Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept Fixtures, standards, and all exposed accessories should be hamwntous with building design; g. Monotony gfdesign in single or nurlttple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of demo, Jinn and siting should be rsed to provide visual interest The architectural concept of the Family Fun Center building is that of a large, fairly simple building form decorated with a variety of colors and materials. The entryways are emphasized with oversized, playfll elements. The wall materials are smooth and ribbed gray metal panels and dark purple stucco. Accents are provided by ribbed yellow pylons, decorative metal elements, neon tubing, tinted glass and signage. The design theme of the arcade building is repeated in the maintenance building and throughout the site. The mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened with the same metal siding used on the building. Page 10 Md:'c a wdgS : ba 86, t'© AdW Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Ccmmlision/PAR The La Quinta hotel has a southwestern appearance which relates to its name and the theme of the La Quanta chain. There are two sections to the building, the lower lobby area and the four story guest wing (see Attachment F). The roof line of the guest wing z will be broken up with three dormers over the balcony areas. The east elevation (narrow i 1' end of the guest wing) does not have the entry porch shown cn another La Quints in the re 6 first color photograph of Attachment E. 6 D JU The base of the building will be a rosy beige and the upper stories will be tan (see .o o Attachment E). The accent color is a reedit= teal green. The roof will be dark red - ` u) w orange metal formed to look like clay tile. Mechanical equipment will be concealed -I �: within the building. N u_ w0 (5) Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture. g a a. rldlsceilaneoss structures and street furniture should be designed 0 be part alike architectural co n concept of design and landscape. Mat.rlals should be compatible with buildings, scale should H W be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroxndbugs, and proportions z H. should be to scale; I— 0 zi- b. Lighting Is cote eetlon with miscellaneous structures and street Affiliate should meet the w w guidelines epplkable to site, landscape and building ? D The Family Fun Center will have attractions such as a Sky Max ride (see Attachment H), U two miniature golf courses, batting cages, bumper boats and go carts. The La Quinta w w hotel will have an outdoor pool and Lawn area. 1 u.. to o Bicycle racks have been provided throughout the site. Light standards will be installed to iii z provide safe lighting levels around the building and duoughout the parlang lots. oI- z CONCLUSIONS - DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES 1. Relationship of Structure to Site Traffle flow, pedestrian access and circulation on the site work well. The site is pedestrian friendly with paths from the sidewalks and the Interurban Trail to the buildings. The site plan takes advantage of the river amenity and buffers the river from the noisiest uses. The pad site will came back to the BAR for consideration after a tenant has been secured. 2. Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area The site will be linked with the Interurban Trail through the new pedestrian bridge the City is building. Monster Road and the perimeter landscaping will be improved creating an attractive `wont door" for the development 3, Landscape and Site Treatment The proposed landscape plan provides an attractive streetscape, breaks up the parking lot into smaller sections and softens the edges of the buildings. The landscape islands between sets of compact parking stalls in the Family Fun Center parking lot will not be Page 11 S'd Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR very functional because they axes only 6 feet wide and cars tend to pull forward agairst the curb, leaving only about 2 feet in the center for planting. A better solution would be to replace eight parking spaces with 8'x38' islands that would allow enough room for two trees and some shrubs. This would repeat the pattern set by islands at the ends of the parking aisles. Attractive and functional outdoor spaces have been created on. the Family Fun Center and La Quinta sites. The riverbank will be reconstructed above the high water mark to provide flood storage and improved habitat fcr fish and wildlife. The lighting plan should enhance the safety of the site and design of the building without creating unnecessary brightness off -site, 4. Building Design The Family Fun Center arcade building is colorful and playful which is appropriate to its function. It provides distinctive entryways, a prominent roofline, and glass in the facade. The design theme established with this building shall be carried through the other structures on the site. The La Quinta hotel carries out its southwestern theme through color, detailing and the simulated roof tile. It has a smaller scale lobby building with a covered entranceway and a larger guest wing that is broken into sections by the roof dormers over the balconies. It meets the Multi-Family Design Standards that are also applied to hotels and motels. The small balcony over the entrance on the east elevation of the guest wing should be replaced with a more substantial entry feature similar to that shown on another La Quinta in Attachment E. 5. Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture The design detailing of the Family Fun Center attractions should be consistent with the colors and forms of the arcade building. The design of the attractions has not been finalized, and they will likely be remodeled and replaced over time. Administrative review of the attractions will ensure that they remain integrated with the overall design concept, The proposed light fixtures will enhance the safety of the site. RECOMMENDATIONS - DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES Staff recommends approval of the site, Family Fun Center arcade building and La Quinta hotel with the following conditions: 2. The landscape islands between compact parking stalls at the Family Fun Center shall be replaced with four 8' by 38' islands containing two trees per island. z 1—•z w; Qom: JU O 0 to CI ww; W I. J �• w o' g5 u_ a: I— w. r z� t— o z 1-- uj 0 o (12 L- W o U co 0 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site , Planning Commission/BAR 3. The design of the Family Fun Center attractions shall be administratively reviewed by the DCD Director and approved so long as they are harmonious and compatible with the overall site and building design. 4. The east elevation of the guest wing of the La Quinta shall be redesigned to include a prominent entry feature. The new design shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director. . The Family Fun Center and La Quinta lighting plans shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director to ensure that they do not cause off-site glare or excessive lighting of the river environment. "d Page 13 1d: Qtr. Wd2S : bO GS, b0 :.UW 1 ATTACHMENT 2 . �. JOEL E. HAGGARD HAGGARD LAW OFFICE ATTORNEY :ham :^,UNSEL: F•AT•I AW SUITE 1200.18M au1LDING 1200 =:-14 AVENUE SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 662-5635 FAX: (206) 623-LAND April 20, 1998 TRANSMI'rrED BY FAX & HAND DELIVERED Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: SEPA DNS Comments (File No. E97-0024 - Family Fun Centers) Dear Steve and Nora, We have had a review done as to the proposed Family Fun Center. The review has been limited to the following available documents, i.e., a) City DNS dated April 6, 1998, b) Memo to Lancaster from Gierloff dated April 6, 1998, and c) all documents listed in the April 6, 1998 Gierloff memo except the 7/7/94 Addendum for Document #2 which was not provided to us. Our preliminary comments are thus limited to the data sources at this time. RE: Traffic Impact Study: We appreciate the effort Entranco has made in its original and revised reports. We have concerns essential to that analysis. Assuming the correctness of the comments, a further revision is required to fully disclose, pursuant to the SEPA duty, the probable, worst case significant adverse impacts [see WAC 197 -11 -335, - 340(2)(f)]. We do not believe that the cost of having an adequate study available is exorbitant. 1. Does the site plan (Figure 2) reflect current plans? Are access points in compliance with City standards, particularly as to entry radius and location? Due to distance from Interurban and Grady, would not one access point be required or appropriate? z •i z re JU; U O.. UU: w =! ; w O' g -J Q a. .z H Oa z I; Do o ,0 H' uj` wz. z. Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD April 20, 1998 Page 2 z z 2. Traffic counts were obtained over the time period of 1989 through 1997 w (see p. 4). The data does not appear to reflect current conditions nor 6 project background levels to the proposal's horizon year. Use of outdated g. data not reflective of current conditions does not result in full disclosure to w of worst case intersection and roadway service levels nor of operational -I I- issues for site ingress/eg,ress. ` j w 3. Vehicle count data were averaged from Thursday and Friday data (see g wa p. 8). A brief review of Attachment B indicates this averaging technique a results in as much as a 12% to 30% underestimate of actual, worst case r_ i or peak volumes. Revision is needed to bound the probable, worst case z condition and provide full disclosure. z o uj 4. We are intrigued by the logic used to discuss internal trip reductions set out at p. 11. The study uses a 15% reduction for internal trips. Yet, at ;o �' the top of p. 11, the analysis states that "... most internal trips will w w probably become pedestrian trips rather that vehicle trips." Accordingly, there should be no or little internal trip reduction used. — z w c. 5. Apparently, the City has requested that "right turn only" signs be o �! provided at both Monster Road intersections and Interurban and Grady. z Since the City has only "requested" this, it should be a condition of a MDNS due to significant adverse impacts on street/intersection operation and vehicular accident probabilities. Accident data should be provided to allow full evaluation. We also question, maybe due to our misunderstanding, whether the trip distribution and LOS calculations reflect this turn movement requirement. If not, the analysis should be revised. RE: Toxic Waste and Water Quality: Extensive reports have been prepared on preexisting site conditions. These reports are as important for what they say as for what they do not say. For example, the 11/17/97 Geo- Engineer Report clearly affirms the site is "dirty" and is subject to state regulated clean up (see pp. 1 -2). But, methane is not addressed since the consultant could not obtain information (p. 2), an inadequate limitation on disclosure due to experienced and possible sources. 1 Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD April 20, 1998 Page 3 The site is listed by DOE (see 7/16/96 letter included in 8/17 Geo- Engineer Report). Perhaps PLPs have not been identified. Nonetheless, there reasonably appears that hazardous substances are present on the site as a result of prior industrial activities. If so, then conversion of this site to the proposed non - industrial uses appears precluded by state law until DOE provides approval [see RCW §70.105D.030(2)(e)]. Thus, any action by the City prior to DOE approval appears to suggest authorization contrary to law. The technical reports provide sufficient basis for establishing that there are on- site hazardous wastes. More critical is the location of known concerns relative to riverbank excavation and filling. Due to the known concerns of on -site pollutants there is no record information evaluating these probable impacts. Thus, the DNS is predicated upon ignoring, rather than fully disclosing, the probable significant adverse impacts of the proposal. Perhaps DOE will address this in a clean -up plan or a 401 Certification, or perhaps Fish & Wildlife will address this in the HPA. But, this has not been done. The City's DNS attempts to avoid such analysis and disclosure. We suggest this absence of information and analysis is essentially contrary to SEPA, particularly as related to water equality, fishery resource and public health. impacts. The issues have been signaled (i.e., 11/17/97 Geo - Engineers Report, pp. 1 -2, 6 -7, 9 -10; 8/12/97 Geo - Engineers Report, Executive Summary pp. 2 -6, 9 -10, 12 -13, 15 -17; 6/30/97 Geo - Engineers Report, pp. 6 -12; 1/24/97 Geotech Consultants Report, pp. 1 -3, 6 -12), but no such reasonable analysis has been provided as to such probable, significant adverse impacts, particularly as to water quality, fisheries and human health, for the proposed actions on this site. Of additional importance to the DNS inadequacy is the failure to establish by an MDNS as conditions all of the recommendations made by the consultants. The 3/19/98 Riverbank Restoration Report and the 1/26/98 Geo - Engineers Report only serve to reinforce the inadequacies of record information and issue review inherent in the DNS. RE: SEPA: We understand the City provides for no administrative appeal of a DNS [see TCC §21.04280(a)]. If we are incorrect, please promptly advise us so that an appeal can be timely pursued. Alternatively, the City may desire to avoid future issues by requesting of the applicant adequate information on the subjects discussed above so as to allow either a DS or a NIDNS to be issued. The 4/6/98 Staff memo appears conclusionary and contrary to the information record. If not done, please recognize that an appropriate appeal is likely when the first City action is taken on the proposal. This would be unfortunate since it is always better to have full disclosure Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD April 20, 1998 Page 4 under SEPA to allow an informed decision -maker (which various state and federal agencies). Please promptly provide a copy of all applications to jurisdictions. • Sincerely yours el Haggard besides the City includes county, state and federal :�. ; %: MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Lancaster, SEPA Responsible Official FROM: Nora Gierloff kssociate Planner RE: Comment letter on SEPA Threshold Determination for E98 -0024 DATE: April22, 1998 The attached comment letter from attorney Joel Haggard was received on 4/20/98, the last day of the SEPA comment period. It raises questions about the adequacy of the background analysis on which our determination of non - significance for the Family Fun Center project was based. The comments fall into two categories, I have responded.to the questions raised below. Traffic Impact Study 1. The site plan has evolved since the date of the study, however the traffic generating uses are unchanged., The access points have been approved by the City Engineer. 2.-4. The issues raised regarding the procedures used in the traffic study may.have some impact on the LOS calculations at nearby intersections, however the purpose of LOS calculations would be to determine whether the development would be liable for off -site traffic improvements. The applicant has already agreed to pay traffic mitigation fees per Tukwila's Concurrency Ordinance The City is already planning on constructing capital projects to improve or maintain current levels of service in the area, the cost of which would be shared by new development such as Family Fun Center per the Concurrency Ordinance Traffic mitigation fees will be assessed at the time . of application for building permit. 5. The right in/right out turns from Grady Way and Interurban Avenue will be controlled by the existing c -curb medians. The City does not anticipate difficulty in having the "right turn only" signs installed. Toxic Waste and Water Quality The cleanup of the Family Fun Center site is regulated by the Department of Ecology under the Model Toxics Control Act. The City has received notification from DOE that the site has been placed on Ecology's Confirmed and Suspected Contaminated Sites List and that the applicant is working with DOE on a cleanup plan under the Voluntary "'• Cleanup Program. DOE will provide technical assistance prior to and during the cleanup to assure that the cleanup is in compliance with the MTCA and that the site is no longer a threat to human health and the environment at the completion of the cleanup. Then DOE will review the final cleanup report to determine if a No Further Action status can be given to the site, at which time the site will be removed from the CSCSL List. Any land altering permits issued by the City will have to be in conformance with the cleanup plan approved by DOE. DOE has also stated in reference to the Family Fun Center Project that 'they encourage "the cleanup and beneficial reuse of contaminated properties." ... NOTICE OF INTENT TO PURSUE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CITY'S SEPA DNS The appellants do intend to pursue judicial review of the City of Tukwila's DNS for the Family Fun Center application (including, but not limited to Files L97 -0024, L97 -0048, L97 -0068, L97 -0069, L97 -0071, and L97- 0092). State Law requires this appeal to be brought in conjunction with an appeal of the underlying governmental action. The City of Tukwila provides no administrative (quasi - judicial) internal appeal of the DNS. The City does provide for an administrative appeal of the Planning Commission's action on the CUP, et al. Thus, the SEPA appeal will be joined with an appeal (if needed) of the City Council's action on the CUP, et al appeal. The SEPA appeal will be premised upon the following, i.e., a) There was neither full disclosure to nor an adequate record basis for support of the DNS; b) The City did not comply with WAC 197 -11 -080 or WAC 197- 11- 340(2)(f) nor is there any record basis reflecting the SEPA RO's compliance with WAC 197 -11- 340(2)0; c) The City's DNS was not final at the time the Planning Commission took action on the proposal; d) The City's DNS did not reflect the worst -case condition nor evaluate and disclose to the decision - makers the direct and indirect, secondary and cumulative impacts of the proposal (See WAC 197 -11 -060); and e) The City's DNS was clearly erroneous. c: \... \ a-20 \207 70n tc.5o7 . �. ��.. .�,.. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I, Jeff Stock, do swear and affirm as follows: 1. Park East Building, Inc., a Washington Corporation, of which my wife, Leanne Stock, and myself are the sole shareholders, owns the property upon which the Puget Sound Blood Center and Program is located. The property address is 130 Andover Parkway East (See Exhibit 1). 2. Applicant's proposal would cause or is anticipated to harm our property and the use to which is put as a result of the proposal, particularly as to the applicant's understated or not examined traffic impacts. See also attached letter from the Puget Sound Blood Center and Program (Exhibit 2). City's failure to comply with SEPA is a procedural injury in fact contrary to my rights as a citizen of the State and property owner in Tukwila. 3..The Grady Way/Interurban intersection traffic conditions directly impact traffic to and from the Blood Center. Applicant's traffic study used outdated traffic counts from 1990 for the Andover Parkway East/Tukwila Parkway intersection which the Blood Center traffic uses. On information and belief, background traffic has increased here and at all other relevant intersection since the outdated traffic counts relied upon by applicant were collected. This underestimates the traffic impact of adding applicant's attached traffic to the existing conditions. 4. Applicant's proposal was described by Staff at the hearing as peaking on weekends. This is contradictory to the applicant's traffic report withheld from the decision - maker. Applicant experiences a noticeable increase in patronage following the 1 z • Z: �U 0 O. N0: W = J H: w O' gQ. =a � _ z� 1- 0 Z n • o off': 0 I- W w. � p P-- o. Z. U co O ~: z close of school. The Summer months are when applicant's facility experiences their peak business. The applicant's traffic study averaged Thursday and Friday trips from a non-representative location in Oregon and underestimated peak generated traffic by 20% to 30% or so. The traffic study did not identify the level or service or operational problems impacted or caused by applicant's proposal at all relevant intersections. While Staff represented only about 10% of applicant's traffic will use Interurban, it reasonably appears in the applicant's traffic report that this underestimates the traffic by 50% or more. Thus, the impact on the Blood Center's traffic needs are substantially underestimated and/or ignored. This can cause direct/indirect, secondary and cumulative impacts on our property's effective utilization for the Blood Center, its donors, emergency deliveries and public health. 5. I am the owner of Enchanted Parks, located about 10 miles south of our Tukwila property. This appeal, however, is brought because of the harm to be experienced or anticipated by the applicant's proposal to our Tukwila property and our tenant, the Puget Sound Blood Center and Program. • 6. I have read and do affirm the appeal doc • ent to ich this is attached. 2 S-/3 -9 z ~z mow; 2, o O'. LU LU J1- U) wo 0 a- z F- o: z1-- w D ,O N, 0 1-, = w' HU ui ;Z . o OH z STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ss. • On this day personally appeared before me JEFF STOCK, an individual, who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned and on oath stated that he executed said instrument. Given under my hand and official seal this /._ Day of May, 1998. 3 N • 'Y PUBLIC FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, residing at Sea--71-/---/e Commission Expires: 7./ 9/e)/ , . WES1 yAM. y 'J - _aL LAY N19►: .I zv° 1;f H 0):22,: Y' ~• .T U]OD , . , S .41 AY � KM 'ar^ u. ` NI $ g ~ -MCI S I I �'' a ....1= ..% s ,,+' utt• �S�AY 1 ` NI ONZP �: �� S AY ` �� s...,l 1 ,oatri .y G NCI -� GI ^! s Ar kat _ 5 - Sni. ,., M '•fn Sld •19C cost Y GNZC a4 7 • AY orti S ;IAY 5 Meld is 1Slf h 33t▪ 1 — .. S AY ISIS aI a S AY N10E ": �. " _ 's ...La- f , avNO 1VNN wu .. w -!i.Tuu� ..u+ =IS , . May 6, 1998 Mr. Jeff Stock Omni Properties 31919 1" Ave. So. Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Mr. Stock: Puget Sound Blood Center and Program 921 Terry Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 -1256 206 - 292 -6500 • Fax 292 -8030 http: / /www.psbc.org As you know, we have a Blood Donor Center building lease from you at 130 Andover Parkway East, Tukwila. It has come to our attention that a proposed concept called the Family Fun Center has been acted upon and preliminarily approved by the City of Tukwila. This project raises concerns for the Puget Sound Blood Center. The Blood Center collects blood from volunteers at our various Blood Centers and Mobile locations throughout Western Washington. The Blood is transported to and from other various locations to be tested, processed and distributed to the many health and hospital facilities that require our services. The receipt and delivery of this critical medical product are solely dependent on ground transportation systems 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Southcenter Donor Center located in Tukwila and our new, to be opened in June, testing laboratories in Renton are dependent upon traffic movement through the Grady Way, Interurban intersection. The Blood Center couriers and shuttle service will probably be using this intersection every hour early in the day and every two hours later in the day and early evenings. These essential trips, probably between 8 to 10 AM and 4 to 8 PM, to and from Renton testing facility will also impact other delivery schedules to all our Western Washington health facilities. This intersection will also impact the ease of travel for our blood donor volunteers so essential for our blood supply at the 130 Andover Parkway Donor Center. Essentially, if the blood donors cannot travel easily to a donor site they will not voluntarily contribute their blood. We have only briefly reviewed the traffic study for the Family Fun Center. It appears to incorrectly reflect the peak traffic impact and operational problems that can also severely impact our essential regional health services. Serving donors and patients for over 50 years Famtuncraf f, dac05 /07/98 We insist that you as the property owner take all such reasonable steps to assure that our operation and delivery of services will be unimpeded and not be adversely . impacted by this development. Please advise me of your intentions for addressing The Puget Sound Blood Center concerns. Sincerely, Gary L. VanDusen Facilities Manager Famfuntraf f.doc05 /07/98 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development To: Scott Huish, Applicant Chandler Stever, Mulvanny Partnership Doug Sexton, Todd and Associates Erick Thompson, Muckkshoot Indian tribe Philip Schneider, State Department of Fish and Wildlife Gail Colburn, State Department of Ecology Jack Kennedy, US Army Corps of Engineers Puget Sound Energy Andy Levesque, King County Department of Natural Resources, WALD Rebecca Davidson, John C. Radovich Development Company Joel Haggard Sandra Breslich Steve Delay Cheryl Wheeler Chris Brown Doug Grimes William Fouty King County Assessor, Accounting Division State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division NOTICE OF DECISION John W Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director n yes a notice o c r and issued n . following • ' S letter S..P...., ..7tivv 0. decision. ....d ♦o is$'a....► pursuant to i�i /i�. 13.104.170 vn the project and permit approvals. PROJECT BACKGROUND NOTIFICATION: FILE NUMBERS: Notice of Application mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site November 26, 1997 Notice of Public Hearing mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site on April 8, 1998 L97 -0068 Conditional Use Permit - Amusement Park L97 -0071 Special Permission Parking Determination L97 -0072 Special Permission Sign L97 -0069 Design Review 6300 Southcenter Boulevard. Suite 4+100 • Tukwila. Washington 98188 • 12061 431-3670 • Fax- (2061 431-3665 ... , -. , z re w 6 • J U UO • • W= co • w� :CO D' z0. o o N. 0 H° wW L o wz U � z c. Notice of Decision ASSOCIATED FILES: APPLICANT: REQUESTS: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION/ ZONING DISTRICT: SEPA DETERMINATION: • Page 2 E97 -0024 Environmental Review L97 -0048 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Scott Huish, Family Fun Centers A conditional use permit is required to establish an amusement park in the CommercialLight Industrial zone. A special permission parking determination is required to set a parking requirement for the unique amusement center use. Special permission is requested for increases in sign area for two wall sirs, approval of a unique sign and administrative approval of an increased number of internal information signs. Design review approval is required for this proposal for development of an amusement park and hotel. 15034 Grady Way South Commercial Light Industrial Determination of Non - Significance issued April 6, 1998 This notice is to confirm the decisions reached by the Planning Commission/Board of Architectural Review at the April 23rd public hearing. The Commission voted to approve the conditional use permit, set the parking requirement for the Family Fun Center at 303' cars, approve the special permission signs and approve the design of the site and proposed buildings based on the findings and con^lusions in the staff report dated April 14, 1998. Following are the conditions of approval: 1. All internal information signs must be scaled and located to be viewed by the pedestrian on site and therefore not have off-site visual impacts. Designs for the signs shall be submitted to the Director and administratively approved at the time of building permit. 2. The landscape islands between compact parking stalls at the Family Fun Center shall be replaced with four 8' by 38' islands containing two trees per island. `, ,', z �z oo t coC3. w =' JH. . N U-; w o. _° Z I- o. Z to W ur 0 w .. z' U= O~ z.... 1 a .. y Notice of Decision Page 3 3. The design of the Family Fun Center attractions shall be administratively approved by the DCD Director so long as they are harmonious and compatible with the overall site and building design. 4. The Family Fun Center and La Quinta lighting plans shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director to ensure that they do not cause off-site glare or excessive lighting of the river environment. Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development; 6300 Southcenter Boulevard; Suite 100; Tukwila, WA; from Monday through Friday, between 8:30 AM and 5:00 PM. The project planner is Nora Gierloffwho may be contacted at (206) 431 - 3670 for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. The time period for appeals is 21 days starting from the date of this Notice of Decision, April 24, 1998. The SEPA Threshold Determination is appealable only to Superior Court. The Planning Commission decisions are appealable to the Tukwila City Council. Appeal materials shall contain: 1. The name of the appealing party, 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party, and if the appealing party is a corporation, association, or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf, and 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in that decision. The Notice of Appeal shall state specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed, the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be Iimited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. The public notice sign must be removed from the site by the applicant after the appeal period has expired, unless an appeal is filed with the City. i � + AFFIDAVIT ONotice of Public Hearing EJ Notice of Public Meeting 0 Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet OBoard of Appeals Agenda Packet OPlanning Commission Agenda Packet O Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0Shoreline Management Permit ra) OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare that: 0 Determination of Non- significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance ODetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice 0 Notice of Action 0Official Notice er bt(CL 5---be4416"y\ fl Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on • Name of Project rA II. • File Number 1—cr7-(.)0C:75 C,Z)-1 I Lci*?- LM1 Signature ,,*. __ City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF DECISION To: Scott Huish, Applicant Chandler Stever, Mulvanny Partnership Doug Sexton, Todd and Associates Erick Thompson, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Philip Schneider, State Department of Fish and Wildlife Gail Colburn, State Department of Ecology Jack Kennedy, US Army Corps of Engineers Puget Sound Energy Andy Levesque, King County Department of Natural Resources, WALD Rebecca Davidson, John C. Radovich Development Company Joel Haggard Sandra Breslich Steve Delay Cheryl Wheeler Chris Brown Doug Grimes William Fouty King County Assessor, Accounting Division State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division This letter serves a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on the following project and permit approvals. PROJECT BACKGROUND NOTIFICATION: Notice of Application mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site November 26, 1997 Notice of Public Hearing mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site on April 8, 1998 FILE NUMBERS: L97 -0068 Conditional Use Permit - Amusement Park L97 -0071 Special Permission Parking Determination L97 -0072 Special Permission Sign L97 -0069 Design Review 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 .-'.: ¢ >• z Wiz, w. QQ :J V' U0 • .u) w, w =. w o IL Q' . �d w' z F., • .- O •w ~` 2 • O•N. w w, • Cu to: to: Ft, •z z �w JU 0 0, U 0' w= J H CO LL: w�'. ga =1' u_ SP_a =w z� z uJ o • • o CO' w w. H U; • 0 wz U -. O z • Notice of Decision Page 3 3. The design of the Family Fun Center attractions shall be administratively approved by the DCD Director so long as they are harmonious and compatible with the overall site and building design. z The Family Fun Center and La Quinta lighting plans shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director to ensure that they do not cause off -site glare or w; excessive lighting of the river environment. 6 Ia. m J U' 0O:. co w= J H . V) w: w 01 . gas: w ¢. z a I- _; z� I- z i-.. The time period for appeals is 21 days starting from the date of this Notice of Decision, April 24, 2 o` 1998. The SEPA Threshold Determination is appealable only to Superior Court. The Planning .0 N: Commission decisions are appealable to the Tukwila City Council. Appeal materials shall :o contain: = v; -O wz =' O Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development; 6300 Southcenter Boulevard; Suite 100; Tukwila, WA; from Monday through Friday, between 8:30 AM and 5:00 PM. The project planner is Nora Gierloff who may be contacted at (206) 431 - 3670 for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. 1. The name of the appealing party, 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party, and if the appealing party is a corporation, association, or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf, and 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in that decision. The Notice of Appeal shall state specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed, the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. The public notice sign must be removed from the site by the applicant after the appeal period has expired, unless an appeal is filed with the City. z MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission/Board of Architectural Review FROM: Nora Gierloff, Associate Planner RE: Comments on the Family Fun Center Project DATE: April 23, 1998 I have received two telephone calls from citizens who wished to give comments on the Family Fun Center development. Doug Grimes 14473 57th Avenue South Called in support of the project. William Fouty 6423 South 143rd Place Called to express the following concerns: Tukwila is already overcommercialized and does not need an amusement park Traffic is already a problem in the area and this development would make it worse 0o cOO;. W,='. .J H o. =a H =: z I-i D U 0: N1 :0 w W. = 1 U IL Z: tii F—; Z.: Cleanup Program. DOE will provide technical assistance prior to and during the cleanup to assure that the cleanup is in compliance with the MTCA and that the site is no longer a threat to human health and the environment at the completion of the cleanup. Then DOE will review the final cleanup report to determine if a No Further Action status can be given to the site, at which time the site will be removed from the CSCSL List. Any land altering permits issued by the City will have to be in conformance with the cleanup plan approved by DOE. DOE has also stated in reference to the Family Fun Center Project that they encourage "the cleanup and beneficial reuse of contaminated properties." •z w` m; • U O '. : coo cn w;• w z; • w }; gJ; IL Q. co d. • •Hw. •z r: • 'pj. O _ w W: ;1— U: w O{ 111 z: • N; Jr_ zr. O • • ;6-0871995 3: 55PM FROM C RADOV I CH DEVE 206 453 971 -J. April 22, 1998 Mr. Steve Lancaster Director of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Public Hearing Comments/Board of Architectural Review Family Fun Center Dear Mr. Lancaster:. As neighbors to the proposed Family Fun Center", we would like to take this opportunity to endorse the proposed use and design of the project. Having taken the time to visit the applicant's existing site in Wilsonville,' Oregon, we had the chance to see firsthand that the Family Fun Center is a clean and well organized development, giving the community a. healthy environment for family entertainment. However, as stated in our earlier comments to the City of Tukwila dated November 18, 1997, our primary concern for the project continues to be traffic impact. Having hired a traffic consultant to review the Family Fun Center's traffic study, we found it to be gravelly inadequate and cause for serious concern. Not only did the study not address the traffic impact of several adjacent intersections, but in some cases the traffic counts relied upon were from 19941 Attached you will find a memorandum outlining our concerns. Our intent with these comments is not to oppose the specific use or design of this development. It is to state, once again, that traffic impact and mitigation has been grossly underestimated. The result will have serious consequences, not only for adjacent property owners, but the Family Fun Center itself. Sincerely, JOHN C. RADOV1CH DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Rebecca Davidson JoIii.C.RaiovicIi Development Company 2000 - 124th Ave. N.E. B -103 Bellevue, WA 96005 (425) 454.6060 ' P. 2 6 -08 -1995 3:56PM FROM'HN C RADOVICH DEVE 206 453 99 PPR 22 '98 e7 =35 $RGWN&H'b�•UCU TES P, 4 To: From: Date: Re: MEMORANDUM Ms. Rebecca Davidson C. V. Brown, P.E. April 21, 1998 Family Fun Center DNS Traffic Circulation Elements Per your request I have reviewed the Traff Inuact Study (TIS) for the proposed Family Fun Center in Tukwila, located off Monster Road near Interurban Avenue 5. (SR 181) and S.W. GradY Way. The TIS was produced by Entranco and dated January, 1998. The fundamental parameters of interest include the following. 1. Family Fun Center occupying 7.96 acres on the southeast sector of the total site and having a building of primary 60,500 gsf building with parking on the east and South aides. ▪ The inclusion of a Lee Ouinta Hotel on 2.87 acres. The hotel will be a 4 -story structure with 153 rooms. • A proposed high turnover restaurant of 11,900 gsf on 2.09 acres on the western side of the site next to Interurban Avenue: and bounded on the north by the Green River and the south by Monster Road. As noted in the TIS it may be a Red Robin, Tony Roma's or similar type but to date there is no defined tenant. There is one minor access drive linking the southern parking lot of, the gamily Fun Center to Monster Road about calf a block .north of the S.W. Grady way intersection. The major site access is about midway on Monster Road and includes a single inbound lane with a small median that eeparatea the right turn out and left turn out lanes. Traffic count data used in the TIS covers the span 1989 through 1997. The only recent traffic count data is at S. 180th Street and Andover Park E. This is dated June, 1997. Count data on Interurban Avenue at 1 -405 is dated much earlier (12194) as is the data for the West Valley Highway at I -405. Christopher Drown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A -201 Denton, WA 98055 -1380 (206) 772 -1188 P. 3 z HZ JU O 0: coo. • W i. JI. (0 w0: . u-Q: a. z I- 0. z�-. w ;m o U :O •== w w z: U z 6 -08 71995 3.56PM FROM JcatziN1 C RADOVICH DEVE 206 453 974n PPR 22 '9S 07;36 BROWN &ASSOCIATES P.5 MEMORANDUM To: Ms. Rebecca Davidson From: C. V. Brown, P.E. Date:. April 21, 1998 Page: 2 I am not sure if this is an issue you may wish to raise but you Might note.the reported traffic data are too old to have any validity. Even data three years old may be suspect let alone that which has now been modified by recent major freeway interchange reconstruction - which is the rule for this part of the highway network. The trip generation data appear to be adequate including the use of pass -by trips and internally generated traffic. For your files you may note the following. P.M. Peak Hour of the Street System Net Trips In Out Total Fatuity Fun Center . 41 56 97 veh.hour Hotel 45 36 81 veh. /hour Restaurant 56 44 100 veh. /hour Gross Site P.M. Peak 194 134 378 veh. /hour Net Site P.M. Peak 142 136 278 veh. /hour Gross Avg. Daily Traffic 2,469 2,470 4,939 veh. /day Net New Daily Traffic 1,926 1,925 3,851 veh. /day Level of Service (LOS) analyses was limited to only Monster Road at both Interurban Avenue and at S.W. Grady Way - No LOS analysis was published for any of the major intersections along Interurban Avenue such as at Fort Dent, the 1 -405 ramps, Strander Boulevard, etc. The absence.oe an LOS analysis at Grady Way /Interurban and at Fort Dent Way /Interurban, with any Christopher Brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A -20I Penton. WA 980554380 (206) 772 -1188 6 -08 71995 3:S7PM FROM''OHN C RADOVICH DEVE 206 453 97 . PPR 22 ' 98 07: 2,6 BROWrk"•ASS'CIATE5 P.6 MEMORANDUM To: Ms. Rebecca Davidson From: C. V. Brown, P.E. Date: April 21, 1996 Page: 3 estimated queuing, is an oversight of major concern in my judgement. For example, how will a motorist exit Monster Road at'Interurban Avenue in the p.m. peak hour or, better yet, is it even possible in the peak hour? In my estimation, :the entire access issue at the main arterial highway - Interurban Avenue S. - has not been examined in sufficient detail. With only the two LOS data available in the TIS, no assessment of peak hour traffic conditions is possible. As a consequence, it is not practicable to tell how access to your site via Fort Dent Way and Interurban Avenue S. will function in the future after project implementation. I realize this may be a provincial outlook but, for your buildings, how will your future access be restrained (or constrained if that is a better word) by this project and can anything be done to ensure your current LOS, that you now enjoy at Fort Dent /Interurban, will continue in the future? In addition, I did not see any horizon year forecasts (such as the year 2000), both with or without the project, and so no . determination is possible with respect to your site's access under horizon year conditions for the build and no -build conditions. Traffic mitigation fees are described for impacted intersections (seven all told as shown on Table 4 of the TIS). The aggregated total is $155,560. In summary, and apart from the above, from your perspective there are three items that should be of concern to you. These are as follows. 1. To what extent will new or unfamiliar drivers fail to make the site's access via Monster Road and end up on Fort Dent Way and, after that, then have to make a 'U' turn, exit back onto Interurban Avenue S. and, as a consequence, thus compete for scare "green time" at the Christopher Brown es Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A -201 Penton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772 -U88 ! P. 5 , 6 -08 -1995 3:57PM FROM --'711\1 C RADOVICH DEVE 206 453 97 APR 22 '98 07:37 EROWMASEQCIATES To: Ms. Rebecca Davidson From: C. V. Brown, P.E. Date: April 21, 1998 Page: 4 P.7 MEMORANDUM. signal on Fort Dent Way. This will impact your tenants who alroady endure long delay times at the siUnn1 . Will more traffic be added to your access system by this project? What will those impacts be? How will they be managed and inhibited? To what extent will familiar drivers, wanting to avoid the awkward circulation system of Monster Road, park on Fort Dent Way or its abutting properties (such as yours) and then use the new pedestrian bridge to walk to the restaurant. In essence, does the new pedestrian bridge and the close proximity of the restaurant lead to the restaurants future tenants parking on your site(s)? How will this be controlled? Who will bear the responsibility for ensuring this remote parking concept does not impact your current properties parking needs? As noted earlier, there is no discussion of the traffic impacts on the main arterial serving your site(s). Just how will Interurban Avenue S. function in the "after" condition at the major intersections of Fort Dent Way, S.W. Grady Way, the I -905 southerly ramps, and Strander Boulevard? No analysis of these has been found. Chriatophcr Brown et Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A -201 Renton. WA 98055 -1380 (206) 772-1188 P. 6 �; �: z w. .c` J0 0O wW1 ti. w 0 g J' L< d H =,. ? z f- 11J al U 0— = Luc; O z 0 1- z JOEL E. HAGGARD HAGGARD LAW OFFICE ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR-AT-LAW SUITE 1200, IBM BUILDING 1200 FIFTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 682.5635 FAX: (206) 623 -LAND April 20, 1998 TRANSMITMD BY FAX & HAND DELIVERED Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RECEIVED APR 2 0 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RE: SEPA DNS Comments (File No. E97 -0024 - Family Fun Centers) Dear Steve and Nora, OUR FILE NO: We have had a review done as to the proposed Family Fun Center. The review has been limited . to the following available documents, i.e., a) City DNS dated April 6, 1998, b) Memo to Lancaster from Gierloff dated April 6, 1998, and c) all documents listed in the April 6, 1998 Gierloff memo except the 7/7/94 Addendum for Document #2 •which was not provided to us. Our preliminary comments are thus limited to the data sources at this time. RE: Traffic Impact Study: We appreciate the effort Entranco has made in its original and revised reports. We have concerns essential to that analysis. Assuming the correctness of the comments, a further revision is required to fully disclose, pursuant to the SEPA duty, the probable, worst case significant adverse impacts [see WAC 197 -11 -335, - 340(2)(f)]. We do not believe that the cost of having an adequate study available is exorbitant. 1. Does the site plan (Figure 2) reflect current plans? Are access points in compliance with City standards, particularly as to entry radius and location? Due to distance from Interurban and Grady, would not one access point be required or appropriate? �� z J U U O! W I J 1.— U IL,i w O}}-. J: w z Zo uj 0 W w`. O co ..z 0 1 Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD April 20, 1998 Page 2 2. Traffic counts were obtained over the time period of 1989 through 1997 (see p. 4). The data does not appear to reflect current conditions nor project background levels to the proposal's horizon year. Use of outdated data not reflective of current conditions does not result in full disclosure of worst case intersection and roadway service levels nor of operational issues for site ingress/egress. 3. Vehicle count data were averaged from Thursday and Friday data (see p. 8). A brief review of Attachment B indicates this averaging technique results in as much as a 12% to 30% underestimate of actual, worst case or peak volumes. Revision is needed to bound the probable, worst case condition and provide full disclosure. 4. We are intrigued by the logic used to discuss internal trip reductions set out at p. 11. The study uses a 15% reduction for internal trips. Yet, at the top of p. 11, the analysis states that "... most internal trips will probably become pedestrian trips rather that vehicle trips." Accordingly, there should be no or little internal trip reduction used. 5. Apparently, the City has requested that "right turn only" signs be ' provided at both Monster Road intersections and Interurban and Grady. Since the City has only "requested" this, it should be a condition of a MDNS due to significant adverse impacts on street/ intersection operation and vehicular accident probabilities. Accident data should be provided to allow full evaluation. We also question, maybe due to our misunderstanding, whether the trip distribution and LOS calculations reflect this turn movement requirement. If not, the analysis should be revised. RE: Toxic Waste and Water Quality: Extensive reports have been prepared on preexisting site conditions. These reports are as important for what they say as for what they do not say. For example, the 11/17/97 Geo- Engineer Report clearly affirms the site is "dirty" and is subject to state regulated clean up (see pp. 1 -2). But, methane is not addressed since the consultant could not obtain information (p. 2), an inadequate limitation on disclosure due to experienced and possible sources. z • w J U' C.) O. 'cow 0 I• Jam. CO LI- w O. �Q =W z►-• tu Mo, 0 I—. • wW - • —O Z I" z Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD April 20, 1998 Page 3 The site is listed by DOE (see 7/16/96 letter included in 8/12/97 Geo- Engineer Report). Perhaps PLPs have not been identified. Nonetheless, there reasonably appears that hazardous substances are present on the site as a result of prior industrial activities. If so, then conversion of this site to the proposed non - industrial uses appears precluded by state law until DOE provides approval [see RCW §70.105D.030(2)(e)]. Thus, any action by the City prior to DOE approval appears to suggest authorization contrary to law. The technical reports provide sufficient basis for establishing that there are on- site hazardous wastes. More critical is the location of known concerns relative to riverbank excavation and filling. Due to the known concerns of on -site pollutants there is no record information evaluating these probable impacts. Thus, the DNS is predicated upon ignoring, rather than fully disclosing, the probable significant adverse impacts of the proposal. Perhaps DOE will address this in a clean -up plan or a 401 Certification, or perhaps Fish & Wildlife will address this in the HPA. But, this has not been done. The City's DNS attempts to avoid such analysis and disclosure. We suggest this absence of information and analysis is essentially contrary to SEPA, particularly as related to water quality, fishery resource and public health impacts. The issues have been signaled (i.e., 11117/97 Geo - Engineers Report, pp. 1 -2, 6 -7, 9 -10; 8/12,/97 Geo - Engineers Report, Executive Summary pp. 2 -6, 9 -10, 12 -13, 15 -17; 6/30/97 Geo- Engineers Report, pp. 6 -12; 1/24/97 Geotech Consultants Report, pp. 1 -3, 6 -12), but no such reasonable analysis has been provided as to such probable, significant adverse impacts, particularly as to water quality, fisheries and human health, for the proposed actions on this site. Of additional importance to the DNS inadequacy is the failure to establish by an MDNS as conditions all of the recommendations made by the consultants. The 3/19/98 Riverbank Restoration Report and the 1/26/98 Geo - Engineers Report only serve to reinforce the inadequacies of record information and issue review inherent in the DNS. RE: SEPA: We understand the City provides for no administrative appeal of a DNS [see TCC §21.04.280(a)]. If we are incorrect, please promptly advise us so that an appeal can be timely pursued. Alternatively, the City may desire to avoid future issues by requesting of the applicant adequate information on the subjects discussed above so as to allow either a DS or a MDNS to be issued. The 4/6/98 Staff memo appears conclusionary and contrary to the information record. If not done, please recognize that an appropriate appeal is likely when the first City action is taken on the proposal. This would be unfortunate since it is always better to have full disclosure z w. 00 c° W =. J 1- w� LL? d =w z11_ o'. z I-- c.) to, = V'. 1-- � LL 0 w Z. 0� z Mr. Steve Lancaster, SEPA RO Ms. Nora Gierloff, DCD April 20, 1998 Page 4 (-) under SEPA to allow an informed decision-maker (which besides the City includes various state and federal agencies). Please promptly provide a copy of all applications to county, state and federal jurisdictions Sincerely yours City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director HEARING DATE: STAFF CONTACT: NOTIFICATION: FILE NUMBERS: ASSOCIATED FILES: APPLICANT: REQUESTS: LOCATION: ' STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Prepared April 14, 1998 April 23, 1998 Nora Gierloff, Associate Planner Notice of Application mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site November 26, 1997 Notice of Public Hearing mailed to surrounding properties and posted on site on April 8, 1998 L97 -0068 Conditional Use Permit - Amusement Park L97 -0071 Special Permission Parking Determination L97 -0072 Special Permission Sign L97 -0069 Design Review E97 -0024 Environmental Review L97 -0048 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Scott Huish, Family Fun Centers A conditional use permit is required to establish an amusement park in the Commercial/Light Industrial zone. A special permission parking determination is required to set a parking requirement for the unique amusement center use. Special permission is requested for increases in sign area for two wall signs, approval of a unique sign and administrative approval of an increased number of internal information signs. Design review approval is required for this proposal for development of an amusement park and hotel. 15034 Grady Way South 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission /BAR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION/ ZONING DISTRICT: Commercial /Light Industrial SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non - Significance issued April 6, 1998 RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions: 1. All internal information signs must be scaled and located to be viewed by the pedestrian on site and therefore not have off -site visual impacts. Designs for the signs shall be submitted to the Director and administratively approved at the time of building permit. 2. The landscape islands between compact parking stalls at the Family Fun Center shall be replaced with four 8' by 38' islands containing two trees per island. 3. The design of the Family Fun Center attractions shall be administratively approved by the DCD Director so long as they are harmonious and compatible with the overall site and building design. 4. The east elevation of the guest wing of the La Quinta shall be redesigned to include a prominent entry feature. The new design shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director. 5. The Family Fun Center and La Quinta lighting plans shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director to ensure that they do not cause off -site glare or excessive lighting of the river environment. ATTACHMENTS: A. SEPA Threshold Determination B. Application for Conditional Use Permit C. Parking Demand Study for Family Fun Center D. La Quinta's Response to Design Review Criteria E. Photographs of other La Quinta Hotels F. Plans for La Quinta G. Rendering of La Quinta H. Drawing of the Sky Max attraction I. Family Fun Center Booklet J. Family Fun Center Materials Board (to be presented at hearing) K. La Quinta Materials Board (to be presented at hearing) Page 2 . *' z • • z_. 2, U; • 0 0: No W= , J f-s . w 0`. g • .co m. _. • z� I--0. Z ut U� ui o w; u.�; — O: uiz • 0 F': Z Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission /BAR VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION FINDINGS Project Description. Family Fun Centers has applied to develop an approximately 14 acre site by demolishing existing structures and regrading the site. To accommodate required flood storage capacity a combination of off channel pond and riverbank cutback with restoration and habitat enhancement will be built adjacent to the Green River. Proposed buildings include a 9,000 square foot pad building, a 153 room 4 story hotel, a 36,300 square foot restaurant and arcade building and 7 acres of outdoor attractions including miniature golf, bumper boats, batting cages and a go cart track. A City trail will be constructed along the perimeter of the site and will connect to a new pedestrian bridge crossing the River. The applicant is requesting Board of Architectural Review approval of the site, Family Fun Center arcade building and La Quinta hotel. The pad site will come back to the BAR for approval when a tenant has been secured. Existing Development. The site is currently vacant. The historic barn on the property burned down last summer and the abandoned houses have been demolished. The barn was documented by photograph and report prior to the arson fire. Surrounding Land Use. The site is at the northeast corner of Interurban Avenue and Grady Way. The Fort Dent office buildings, Homewood Suites hotel and the Kwan Dental Clinic are across the River to the North. The project is separated from Renton on the east by railroad tracks. Grady Way and Interstate 405 are to the south and the Interurban Avenue/I405 interchange is to the west. Topography. The site is generally flat except the slope down to the River. Vegetation The majority of the existing pasture, shrubs and trees will be removed and replaced by buildings, parking lots, attractions and site landscaping. The majority of a significant stand of willows along the eastern portion of the riverbank will be retained for wildlife habitat as requested by the Muckleshoot Tribe Fisheries Department. New landscaping will be installed according to Shoreline regulations, Zoning Code standards and the Board of Architectural Review's approved landscape plan. Non - native plants such as Himalayan blackberry will be removed and replaced with native plants of higher habitat value. The riverbank above the ordinary high water mark will be stabilized by landscaping. Page 3 z t.-w re 00 ( 0 CO L1.1 w r: J F-. LL w 0; v__; Iw Z 1- 0 z� w F- 111 w, IL 6 z` =_ O F- z Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission /BAR Access. Access to the site is from Monster Road, which may be renamed Fun Center Way. Turns are limited to right - in/right -out from Grady Way and Interurban Avenue. REPORT ORGANIZATION The staff report has been divided into four sections. The first section covers the conditional use permit, the second covers the parking requirement determination, the third covers the special permission sign requests, and the fourth section covers the design review decisions for the Family Fun Center site and the La Quinta hotel. Staff's conclusions and recommendations will follow each section. SECTION ONE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DECISION CRITERIA - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The Family Fun Center requires a conditional use permit to establish an amusement park use in the Commercial/Light Industrial zone. For the applicant's response to the criteria see Attachment B. The criteria for the decision and staff's response follows. 18.64.050 Criteria The following criteria shall apply in granting a conditional use permit: 1. The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district in which the subject property is situated; The Family Fun Center site is separated from neighboring properties by the Green River on the north, railroad tracks on the east, Interstate 405 on the south and the Interurban Avenue /405 interchange on the west. The Commercial/Light Industrial zoning district is intended to allow such large scale uses as truck terminals, heavy equipment repair, and salvage and wrecking operations. 2. The proposed use shall meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in the district it will occupy; The amusement park use will not generate significant airborne pollution, noise, water pollution or hazardous materials. The project also meets or is capable of meeting all development standards including setbacks, landscaping and height of the Commercial/Light Industrial Zone and other Zoning Code requirements. Page 4 z w re p • U O, co 0 w= tu cn �w zo LL/ ut wui z" ui O~ Z Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR 3. The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design; Circulation and trip generation issues were examined in the Traffic Impact Study completed by Entranco Engineers and reviewed by the Tukwila Public Works Department. The study concludes that the project will not lower the Level of Service at affected intersections below B. The City is currently planning to widen the Interurban Avenue Bridge to ease traffic congestion for vehicles entering I405. The Washington State Department of Transportation did not have any concerns about the proximity of the amusement attractions to I405. A new pedestrian bridge across the Green River will connect with the new trail segment along the perimeter of the Family Fun Center site by early 1999. 4. The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan; The project will increase public use and access to the shoreline through the new pedestrian bridge and the section of river trail around the site per Goal 5.6 and Policy 5.6.6. The amusement park will add a new recreation opportunity available to residents of Tukwila and the surrounding area per Policy 5.6.4. The riverbank will be enhanced with landscaping, tree snags and an off channel pond per Goal 5.9. The project will redevelop an underused site with multiple uses while enhancing flood control and the habitat value of the riverbank per Goal 5.3. The project includes buildings with distinctive rooflines and pedestrian friendly features per Policies 1.8.7 and 8.1.12. Interior parking lot landscaping has been provided per Policy 8.1.4. Pedestrian paths between sidewalks and buildings have been provided per Policy 8.1.2. Screening of mechanical equipment and screening of trash and recycling collection areas has been provided per Policy 8.1.5. 5. All measures have been taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area in which it is located. A Determination of Non - significance was issued for the project (see Attachment A). The project is providing extensive riverbank landscaping and habitat features such as log snags along the bank and within the off - channel pond (see details in Attachment I). This higher quality habitat will mitigate for disturbance to the site during construction and the more intensive use of the site after completion. Lighting will be shielded to control off - site illumination. CONCLUSIONS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Off -site impacts such as noise and glare have been minimized through site design by locating more intensive uses away from the shoreline. Traffic generated by the amusement park will be spread throughout the day, with higher levels after 10:00 AM and on the weekends, so it will not add significantly to peak hour congestion in the Page 5 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission /BAR vicinity. The amusement park use will be less intense than many of the uses that are allowed outright in the C/LI zone such as truck terminals. The riverbank will be recontoured and revegetated to provide required flood storage and improved fish and wildlife habitat. RECOMMENDATION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit to establish an amusement park on the site. SECTION TWO - PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION DECISION CRITERIA - PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION Per TMC 18.56.100 the parking requirements for any use not specifically mentioned in the Zoning Code are to be determined by the Director. This project requires review by the Planning Commission so the decision has been elevated to that body as required by TMC 18.104.030. The applicant has submitted a parking study performed by Entranco Engineers that documents the expected parking demand for the site based on parking provided at five existing Family Fun Centers and parking use at the Oregon site (see Attachment C). The conclusion of the report is that 303 parking stalls will be adequate to handle the expected parking demand both at opening and after any future additions or remodeling. The current site plan shows approximately 320 parking stalls proposed for the amusement center. CONCLUSIONS- PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION The amount of parking recommended in Entranco's report seems reasonable in light of the parking demand experienced at other Family Fun sites. They are providing a little more parking, approximately 320 spaces, to provide for future growth. RECOMMENDATIONS - PARKING REQUIREMENT DETERMINATION Staff recommends that the parking requirement for the Family Fun Center be set at 303 parking spaces. SECTION THREE - SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS DECISION CRITERIA - SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS Increase in Sign Area Family Fun Center has asked for special permission sign area increases for its two "Family Fun Center" wall signs based on TMC 19.32.140 A 2. which allows wall sign Page 6 / z z w 6D -J C.) U O. t N o; CO w. w z: J �• wo g -J w = N 0 = I- w Z I-- O Z I- ON 0 I-- w W` u. s _ z' UN 0 z Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR areas to be increased up to 50% for each doubling of the required minimum setback distance, not to exceed 6% of the wall area or 500 square feet, whichever is smaller. This is a Type 2 decision generally made by the Director that has been elevated to the Planning Commission as part of the overall project review. z = 1-: The proposed sign on the southeast elevation would be 260 square feet, less than the 387 1 1- w square feet that would be allowed under the 6% limitation. The proposed sign on the D: m west elevation would be 207 square feet, equal to the maximum allowed under the 6% v v o limitation. Both signs are set back at least five times the required yard setbacks. , g o: I w Unique Sign co u w0 Family Fun Center has asked for approval of a unique sign per TMC 19.28.010 5. The definition of unique sign is: ¢; 19.08.260 Unique Sign I- w Z - "Unique Sign" means a building or other structure of unique design and exterior decor, where the 0 entire structure may be considered an advertising device, including but not limited to shapes Z 1-' imitating hats, boots, tires, statues, parts of anatomy, or manufactured items such as airplanes, 2 D; cars, boats, carriages, or symbols which may or may not contain lettering. U This is a Type 4 decision made by the Planning Commission. The criteria are that "the ,0 I= . effect of the proposed sign would not contribute to a cluttered, confusing or unsafe x 0, condition." The unique sign would be a non - illuminated three- dimensional mural of the ! ~O. Rocky and Bullwine cartoon characters on the south building elevation. The sign Iii Z` kl would be on a different wall plane than either of the "Family Fun Center" wall signs and v =. the area of the south wall has not been used in calculating the allowable size of those 0 F- signs. Internal Information Signs Family Fun Center has also asked for approval of a variety of internal information signs under TMC 19.22.010. The additional signs are needed to direct customers throughout the eight acre site and label the various attractions. They have shown some examples of these signs in the booklet, Attachment I, such as "Go Karts" and "Restaurant." As the designs for the attractions have not been finalized they request that the Director be authorized to approve the sign permits at the time of building permit. CONCLUSIONS - SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS Increase in Sign Area The proposed Family Fun Center wall signs, though large, are scaled to the size of the building and do not overwhelm the architecture. The signs meet the criteria for the sign area increase. Page 7 .. Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR Unique Sign The unique sign is not illuminated, would not move, and would not obstruct views in the vicinity, therefore it is unlikely to create a confusing or unsafe condition. The building has been designed to accommodate the sign locations so they are widely spaced and do z not create a cluttered appearance. r4 2 Internal Information Signs QQ JU oo The sign code allowance for four internal information signs not to exceed six square feet for wall signs and four square feet for freestanding signs is not adequate for a site of this w size and complexity. A majority of the Family Fun Center business is conducted outside N u and is therefore subject to the sign code, unlike most businesses that have unlimited w o' interior signage to direct customers within their buildings. —' Q RECOMMENDATIONS - SPECIAL PERMISSION SIGNS - =a Staff recommends that the special permission sign area increases for the two Family Fun ? H O, Center wall signs be approved and that the wall mural be approved as a unique sign. z II E-: Staff recommends that Family Fun Center's internal information signs be approved with ? o the following condition: o :o 1. All internal information signs must be scaled and located to be viewed by the w w pedestrian on site and therefore not have off -site visual impacts. Designs for the signs 1— �' shall be submitted to the Director and administratively approved at the time of v_ Z`: building permit. v N O z SECTION FOUR - DESIGN REVIEW DECISION CRITERIA.- DESIGN REVIEW This project is subject to BAR design approval under TMC 18.60.030 due to its location in the C/LI zone and size. In the following discussion the Board of Architectural Review criteria are shown below in bold, followed by staff's comments. For Family Fun Center's response to the criteria see Attachment I, for La Quinta's response see Attachment D. 18.60.050 General Review Criteria (1) Relationship of Structure to Site. a. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping and pedestrian movement. b. Parking and service areas should be located, designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas; c. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to the site. Page 8 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission /BAR The project will provide landscaping around the perimeter of the site, in the parking lots, throughout the attractions and adjacent to the buildings. Pedestrian pathways from the sidewalks through the parking lots to the buildings have been provided. The parking lots have been wrapped around the buildings to minimize their impact. The noisiest z attractions, go carts and bumper boats, have been located away from the River. The z arcade building and the hotel are both large buildings built to the maximum height tX allowed in the C/LI zone, but the site is quite large and they are set back from the edges 6 of the property. The pad site in the west corner will come back to the BAR once a tenant d c..) i O has been secured. It is likely that the layout of the pad site will change from what is w W currently shown on the drawings. , F W0 (2) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. a. Harmony on texture, lines and masses is encouraged; u_ b. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided; = 0 W. c. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood z = character; 0 Z I- d. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of W j; safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged; ] 0, 0 e. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. 0 — • - The City is building a new pedestrian bridge across the Green River that will connect • 0 with the new trail segment along the perimeter of the Family Fun Center site. This will LL 0 provide a bicycle and pedestrian link for the Interurban Trail. di Z. to Frontal improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, street widening, storm drainage �, and street lighting will be required along both sides of Monster Road. Driveway location z and width for all driveways has been coordinated with Public Works during the review and revision process. Some slight realignment of the driveways may be necessary based on the final grades of the site. Access from Grady Way and Interurban Avenue will be limited to right in/right out. (3) Landscape and Site Treatment. a. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced b. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance; c. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade; d. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken; e. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encouraged; f. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combination; Page 9 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission /BAR g. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls and pavings of wood, brick, stone or gravel may be used; h. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining landscape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. Perimeter, parking lot and building landscaping will be added throughout the site to define the layout and provide screening. An outdoor eating area, plaza and lawn area are provided on the Family Fun Center site. Trash and recycling dumpsters will be screened by fencing and where possible landscaping. A 500 foot long riverbank cut -back above the ordinary high water mark and an off - channel pond will be constructed to provide flood storage compensation for filling on the rest of the site. They will also provide refuge areas for fish and enhance animal habitat through revegetation with native plant species and the placement of large wood snags. The bank work has been designed with input from the City of Tukwila, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Department. Pole fixtures are provided around the building and parking lot for safety lighting. No off - premise glare or light in excess of 2 foot - candles will be permitted. (4) Building Design. a. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its design and relationship to its surroundings; b Buildings should be appropriate scale and in harmony with permanent neighboring developments. c. Building components such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated life of the structure; d. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent; e. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be screened from view; f. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards, and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with building design; Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of detail, form and siting should be used to provide visual interest. g. The architectural concept of the Family Fun Center building is that of a large, fairly simple building form decorated with a variety of colors and materials. The entryways are emphasized with oversized, playful elements. The wall materials are smooth and ribbed gray metal panels and dark purple stucco. Accents are provided by ribbed yellow pylons, decorative metal elements, neon tubing, tinted glass and signage. The design theme of the arcade building is repeated in the maintenance building and throughout the site. The mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened with the same metal siding used on the building. Page 10 Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission /BAR The La Quinta hotel has a southwestern appearance which relates to its name and the theme of the La Quinta chain. There are two sections to the building, the lower lobby area and the four story guest wing (see Attachment F). The roof line of the guest wing will be broken up with three dormers over the balcony areas. The east elevation (narrow end of the guest wing) does not have the entry porch shown on another La Quinta in the first color photograph of Attachment E. The base of the building will be a rosy beige and the upper stories will be tan (see Attachment E). The accent color is a medium teal green. The roof will be dark red - orange metal formed to look like clay tile. Mechanical equipment will be concealed within the building. (5) Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture. a. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architectural concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and proportions should be to scale; b. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and buildings. The Family Fun Center will have attractions such as a Sky Max ride (see Attachment H), two miniature golf courses, batting cages, bumper boats and go carts. The La Quinta hotel will have an outdoor pool and lawn area. Bicycle racks have been provided throughout the site. Light standards will be installed to provide safe lighting levels around the building and throughout the parking lots. CONCLUSIONS - DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES 1. Relationship of Structure to Site Traffic flow, pedestrian access and circulation on the site work well. The site is pedestrian friendly with paths from the sidewalks and the Interurban Trail to the buildings. The site plan takes advantage of the river amenity and buffers the river from the noisiest uses. The pad site will come back to the BAR for consideration after a tenant has been secured. 2. Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area The site will be linked with the Interurban Trail through the new pedestrian bridge the City is building. Monster Road and the perimeter landscaping will be improved creating an attractive "front door" for the development. 3. Landscape and Site Treatment The proposed landscape plan provides an attractive streetscape, breaks up the parking lot into smaller sections and softens the edges of the buildings. The landscape islands between sets of compact parking stalls in the Family Fun Center parking lot will not be Page 11 1 z I— w: rt JU U O N o: W =. J uj• 0' J i d. _ zH I- O'. z D • 0 ,O N O wW H U .. Z w U =. z Staff Report to the Family Fun Center Site Planning Commission/BAR very functional because they are only 6 feet wide and cars tend to pull forward against the curb, leaving only about 2 feet in the center for planting. A better solution would be to replace eight parking spaces with 8'x38' islands that would allow enough room for two trees and some shrubs. This would repeat the pattern set by islands at the ends of the parking aisles. Attractive and functional outdoor spaces have been created on the Family Fun Center and La Quinta sites. The riverbank will be reconstructed above the high water mark to provide flood storage and improved habitat for fish and wildlife. The lighting plan should enhance the safety of the site and design of the building without creating unnecessary brightness off -site. 4. Building Design The Family Fun Center arcade building is colorful and playful which is appropriate to its function. It provides distinctive entryways, a prominent roofline, and glass in the facade. The design theme established with this building shall be carried through the other structures on the site. The La Quinta hotel carries out its southwestern theme through color, detailing and the simulated roof tile. It has a smaller scale lobby building with a covered entranceway and a larger guest wing that is broken into sections by the roof dormers over the balconies. It meets the Multi - Family Design Standards that are also applied to hotels and motels. The small balcony over the entrance on the east elevation of the guest wing should be replaced with a more substantial entry feature similar to that shown on another La Quinta in Attachment E. 5. Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture The design detailing of the Family Fun Center attractions should be consistent with the colors and forms of the arcade building. The design of the attractions has not been finalized, and they will likely be remodeled and replaced over time. Administrative review of the attractions will ensure that they remain integrated with the overall design concept. The proposed light fixtures will enhance the safety of the site. RECOMMENDATIONS - DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES Staff recommends approval of the site, Family Fun Center arcade building and La Quinta hotel with the following conditions: 2. The landscape islands between compact parking stalls at the Family Fun Center shall be replaced with four 8' by 38' islands containing two trees per island. Page 12 : z zz UJ 6 � o. cno: w= J H; (n 0 w gQ i d` i w; s Z I-0. Z I- 0 I- 1 1J = U. 0 uiz; o 0 F. Staff Report to the Planning Commission/BAR Family Fun Center Site 3. The design of the Family Fun Center attractions shall be administratively reviewed by the DCD Director and approved so long as they are harmonious and compatible with the overall site and building design. 4. The east elevation of the guest wing of the La Quinta shall be redesigned to include a prominent entry feature. The new design shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director. 5. The Family Fun Center and La Quinta lighting plans shall be submitted to and approved by the DCD Director to ensure that they do not cause off -site glare or excessive lighting of the river environment. Page 13 : � .+- •. F- o Z 11J a ten. i0 Ni ;W W°, H V •U .H :o 0 • . CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCr:IPTI:111 OF PROPOSAL: NE') 41USEMENT PARK, 153 ROOM HO-EL, AND RESTAi.RANT INa_T)ING APPROXIMATELY 7 ACRES OF OUTDOOR ATTRTIONS, THE SITE wIL4..pE47F;L4pA7A_RAIsE IT ABOV-:.' THE FLOOD PLAIN_AN6..j::,tPM0,ENS.4170RX:STORAAR WLL 3E PROVIDED RV:COTT:MG BAcr THE RIVERBAM AND 3:JILDING ANcIFACHANNEL::,P(:)NW':: • . PROPiAENT: FAMILYFUN CENTERS LOC/3.71011 PROPSAL,,.IVCLUDING STREET ADDRESSIF ADDREI;S': 150341 PARCEL NO: 242304-9012 , .SEC/TWNiRNG,: • LEAD AGENCY.: 'CITY or TUrWILA FILE NO: IE97004 ,1" • A • 4 n . The City hrvs determined thatthej.ptopbsal. does not have a probableil adverse.. impact on,ithe."..enyi.ronMent: (An enwironmemtaj • mpa,..:t sta;eMent (EI) is notre.crujredun'd:epROW....-4?.21C_030(4) ,.("6).fr.::.., • This ;:son was Made after';17.,avteW\o'f a coMpletOd Olvir;onmenlaq A. .ind other informaion 00 t le W i th the 1 idtgeny Thisf4. infoYmai2.1 is available to'thePubliC'dn 1.-equeSt. ••1 • * * le le :k * 'A• *,:k * * * *;* * .; • . • . ... . • . .. _ - . . ...,.,:, ., • • ..Mi.': DNS il: issued under 197-11-340(2) comments ;lust:be Submitted by .: • • ?2:-.ILLK9.6 -c: . lead wirr nOt.,arct on this pr..*lpo..:al • for days.. from the date below. ..,, • Lando:ester, RsesponsIbleOfficlal t. of .Tul.wila, •(206) 43'1=3640 ''• 6300 So.Jthdenter Boulevard 7pkwia, !,/A 98188 Date t:.he procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the E:epa-tms.nt of Community Development. ATTACHMENT A CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTM7T OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMET 6300 South.dnter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 981 b.. Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (P -CUP) APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Planner: File Number: l/97 r(7z Receipt Number: Project File #: f' /d7 (o 03 O Application Complete ` (Date: SEPA File #; O Application Incomplete- (Date: Other File #: 1. PROJECT BACKGROUND A. NAME OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: Proposed Family Fun Center, Hotel and Restaurant. B. LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: . STREET ADDRESS: N.E. corner of Interurban Ave. S. and Grady Way,. Tukwila ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: Tax Lot 2423049013 (Map Grid 655 J4 ) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached. Quarter: w1/ 2 Section: 24 Township: _23E Range: 4 Ea st(ihis information may be found on your tax statement) w.M. C. CONTACT: (Primary contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent) NAME: Mulvanny Partnership Architects Attn: Chandler Stever ADDRESS: 11820 Northup Way, Suite E300, Bellevue, WA 98005 PHONE: (425) 822 -0444 SIGNATURE: DATE: CLIPCKLST.DOC 7/5/96 z �W. wad. JU U O :. ui cnw. J w0 u.2 a I-w Z 1._ F- O Z H. al 'Li U� 'O N W U` • o Z' U N' H =, O ~ z A. PRESENT USE OF PROPS„ CY: Farm /Sand & Gravel Ope. .lion Maintenance & Repair Shop B. PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE REQUESTED FROM LIST IN YOUR ZONING DISTRICT): Fntertaiament Facility C. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE (FOR EXAMPLE, DESCRIBE THE MANUFACTURING PROCESSES USED, WHOLESALE/RETAIL/WAREHOUSE FUNCTIONS, OUTSIDE STORAGE OF GOODS OR EQUIPMENT OR OTHER INFORMATION WHICH WILL FACILITATE UNDERSTANDING OF THE ACTIVITIES YOU PROPOSED TO DEVELOP ON THIS SITE: Restaurant -• Fami ly pi n i ng Video Arcade, Lazer Tag, Climbing Structure, Miniature Golf, Go Karts, Bumper Boats, Batting Cages, etc. • D. WILL THE CONDITIONAL USE BE IN OPERATION AND /OR A BUILDING TO HOUSE THE USE BE STARTED WITHIN A YEAR OF ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT? yes . . E. ON A SEPARATE SHEET, DESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICH YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR REQUEST FOR AN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WILL SATISFY EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED IN TMC 18.64.030. 1. The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district in which the subject property is situated. 2. The proposed use shall meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in the district it will occupy. 3. The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design. 4. The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. 5. All measures shall be taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area ' in which it is located. CUPCKLST.DOC 7/5/96 ' z Z• • OC UO: W =1 J LL• w o}} g J. � W F• . z I- D o: UN. D H' w w; • H U: ..L-1=:0: z: • • U OI z CONDITIONAL USE PEi',vIIT APPLICATION PAGE II E.1. ...not detrimental to the public... • The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public because it is designed for the public. The facilities will provide public activity and entertainment, and the proposed new bike path that will be linked to the Fort Dent Park will further enhance the connection between the public and this project. E.2. ...meet or exceed the performance standards... This project will facilitate the congregation of people, which in turn will increase the level of safety in the area. The present state of the site will be much improved by the removal of industrial remnants (corrosive materials) and placement of extensive exterior landscaping. E.3. ...compatible with surrounding land uses... The proposed development will maintain existing traffic circulation, easily accommodate increased traffic, and enhance the pedestrian circulation with the proposal of a new bike path that is connected to the Fort Dent Park. The building is unobtrusive on the site and the site design provides an extensive amount of usable landscaping (miniature golf). E.4. ...maintain goals of policy... There are no inconsistencies between this proposed development and the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. Rather, it strengthens the Plan's objectives in creating a more habitable site. E.5. ...minimize the 'adverse impacts... All measures will be taken to minimize adverse effects. Landscaping will provide absorption of both off -site sounds as well as on -site. There are no adjacent uses that will be affected by this development. And the congregation of people in this area will provide activity for vendors, as well as safety for each other. Z _� mow• . JV • U0; .t (.Q • 10 W =+ • wO LL ¢; • Ea Zf-, I- a: . ZI-, AL O • • U u)! O ~' • D. PROPERTY OWNER DECLARATION The undersigned makes the following statements based upon personal knowledge: . I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. All statements contained in the application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. I understand that conditions of approval, which the City and applicant have jointly agreed may not be completed prior to final approval of the construction (e.g., final building permit approval) will be incorporated into an agreement to be executed and recorded against the property prior to issuance of any construction permits. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington and the United States of America that the foregoing statement is true and correct. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on , 199 C AL:51\ (Print Name) '2-6\k\ *tom. \ (Address) ( ne Nu • =er) (Signature - C-6 < <s0,\t;.11e Use additional sheets as needed for all property owner signatures. ., .....: z mz w. • UO CO W= •J N LL� w O. • .2 Q • =a. I-- w. • z zo w 10 —1 'O H w w. 1- U. LL �: _o w z; =: • O Z,. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Scott Huish, Family Fun Center Chandler Stever, Mulvanny Partnership CI7 YOF 7UKWILA z FROM: Torsten Lienau, P.E. FEB 0 91998 W; Entranco, Inc. mil. PERMIT CENTER DATE: October 24, 1997 co 0'. tnp, Revised February 6, 1998 w w: !JH; N LL: SUBJECT: Parking Demand for Family Fun Center, and Limited Access w o Easement for Hotel /Restaurant Driveway 2 �. g J' PROJECT: Family Fun Center Traffic Impact Study D, Entranco, Inc. Project No. 97018 -60 I w Z' Z I—; 1— 0' CONTENTS: Page ? o. PARKING "2 o N Introduction 2 'w uj- w w-. Parking Comparison to Existing Sites 2 ,LL Parking Demand Study 4 Z b. Recommendations 5 ' (n Future Parking Demand 9 i- LIMITED ACCESS EASEMENT 10 z TABLES: 1. Parking History at Existing Family Fun Center Facilities 3 2. Parking Demand at Wilsonville Family Fun Center 5 3. Level of Service and Queue Analysis 11 FIGURES: 1. Wilsonville Family Fun Center Daily Variation in Traffic and Parking Accumulation Average of Thursday and Friday, June 12 -13, 1997 6 2. Wilsonville Family Fun Center Daily Variation in Traffic and Parking Accumulation Saturday, June 14, 1997 7 3. Wilsonville Family Fun Center Daily Variation in Traffic and Parking Accumulation Sunday, June 15, 1997 8 97018\Reports / ftcpark (2/6/98) / jc 1 ATTACHMENT C L q'1- Oo(o9 . . '.�+ The Family Fun Center Development, to be located in the northeast corner of the intersection of Grady Way and Interurban Avenue, is comprised of three different land uses: a hotel, restaurant, and the Family Fun Center, itself. A traffic impact analysis for the proposed Family Fun Center Development was submitted to the City of Tukwila in June 1997, and was revised in January 1998. Since that submittal, two requests have been made; one for additional study of the parking demand and supply for the proposed Family Fun Center only, and a deviation request to allow the proposed location of a hotel and restaurant driveway within an existing Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) limited access easement. This technical memorandum addresses both of these topics. PARKING Introduction The Tukwila Family Fun Center is currently proposed to supply 303 parking stalls. Due to the unique attractions offered at the Family Fun Center, parking estimates for this type of facility are not well- documented; however, it is in the developer's and the City's best interest to ensure ample parking supply for the expected parking demand. Therefore, a documentation of parking supply at existing Family Fun Centers and a detailed parking demand study at one existing site in Oregon were made. Parking Comparison to Existing Sites Table 1 lists five existing Family Fun Center locations, and provides a brief description, total acreage, and parking supply for each location. While not all Family Fun Centers provide the same attractions, many of the attractions are common to all. As shown in table 1, all sites have at least two 18 -hole miniature golf courses, go -karts, bumper boats, and an arcade. All but one site have varying numbers of batting cages. Other attractions not common to all sites are listed in table 1, with the total attractions per location ranging between 8 and 23. The proposed Tukwila site will have a total of 18 attractions, which is about the average number of attractions at a typical Family Fun Center and is comparable to other existing sites. The acreage for the existing Family Fun Center locations range between 4.5 and 9 acres, with the proposed Tukwila site falling between those extremes at 7.9 acres. Each existing site has a different number of parking stalls, which was determined primarily based on the availability of remaining property on -site for parking, as opposed to the expected demand. Even so, the demand at each site does not routinely exceed the supply, per the management of the Family Fun Centers. The number of stalls at the various existing locations range between 221 and 349 stalls; Family Fun Center locations with fewer attractions having fewer parking stalls. 970181Reports / ffcpark (2/8/98) / jc 2 d 0 t6 w d 0 a LL E u" 1- C W O N a) i a Proposed Site Existing Family Fun Center Locations ca H Fountain Valley Wilsonville Two 18 -Hole Two 18 -Hole m 0 2 as Two 18 -Hole Two 18 -Hole Two 18 -Hole Miniature Golf Miniature Golf Miniature Golf Miniature Golf Miniature Golf Miniature Golf a) 0 a) r 0 O 0 0 Bumper Boats, ai is 0 m a) 0 a 0 0 E U 0 m Q ai U) a) o i 0 0 0 0 Bumper Boats, Bumper Boats, 8 Batting Cages, 16 Batting Cages, 2 Golf Courses, a) as 0 a as 0 vi m r 12 co Y 0 E a a U 0 0 m 1 Golf Course, 9 Batting Cages, ai 0 0. 0 i a) 0 a) 0. E m 10 Batting Cages, Laser Runner, 9 Batting Cages, Bullwinkles Rest. Lazer Runner, Kids County Fair Kids County Fair Bullwinkles Rest. aS 0 a) c(n Bullwinkles Rest., Kids County Fair, a) as 0 12 v' T Q a) m 0 CO CO O co CO N O m O T - N a) L co N 46 O O i O E c O ) O O O i N Z 0 of .0 C cm (S 5_ N (.5 f— - Q<Za. .Z W3 6 —J U, U O .U) W; W=: J.H. . W Di —a. W Z_ 111 111: I- o' Z 1—: 00. o -. 'W 'Cj Z: W 0 • Z The proposed Tukwila Family Fun Center currently proposes 303 stalls, which is more than four of the five existing sites, while still being comparable in size and number of attractions. Parking Demand Study z A detailed parking demand study was conducted at the Wilsonville, Oregon Family Fun w Center location. This site was chosen because of its proximity to Washington, its 6 D similarity in size to the proposed site, and weather conditions similar to Washington's. -J o (Weather is an important factor because many of the attractions are located outdoors.) (n o Driveway vehicle counts were performed at the Wilsonville location on Thursday through w = Sunday, June 12 through 15, 1997. This data was also used to determine trip n u. generation for the proposed site, as is documented in the January 1998 Traffic Impact w O Study. As was discussed in that report, these days represent above average trip g u generation days, and therefore above average parking generation days for the following a: reasons: = a I- w. • June 11 was the last day of school for children and teenagers in Wilsonville. z 1.-, Family Fun Center personnel have documented a noticeable increase in z O, La patronage following the close of school. 2 n' U p • The Oregon site experienced the company's highest sales in its 40 -year history, O N` of company -wide, during the week of June 13. = W; H U. • The weather was dry and warm in Oregon. = z UN • The summer months are when Family Fun Centers experience their peak . F 0 z business. The vehicle count data was obtained using machine tube counts, which counted vehicles for 24 hours each of the four days. One challenge common to tube counts is that they generally over - estimate the vehicle counts. This is because the machine counts the number of impressions on the tube by the vehicle tires. Tubes are set on the pavement such that vehicles drive over them perpendicularly. In this way, the machine counter will count two impressions for each car (when the front tires impact the tube and when the back tires impact the tube). However, if the car crosses the tube at an angle, it will cause the counter to record four impressions - thus double counting a car. A good indicator that this double counting is occurring is when the total number of trips into the site do not equal the total number out of the site. During the four days of data collection at the Wilsonville site, vehicles entering the site were greater by as much as 100 vehicles than those that were exiting the site. Because the "double counting" phenomenon is nearly inevitable, the counts were used by proportionally distributing the unaccounted trips throughout the day for each day. This resulted in the same number of vehicles entering the site as exiting the site. 97018\Reports / flcpark (2/6/98) / jc 4 , � Calculating vehicle accumulation in this manner is conservative, because it assumes all of the "double counted" vehicles were actually parked on the site. Vehicles entering and exiting the Wilsonville site were summarized in 15- minute intervals, such that at any given 15 minutes during the day, the total number of vehicles on the site was known. Table 2 shows that on an average weekday (Friday included), at the Wilsonville Family Fun Center, the most vehicles on site were 121, with an average of 76 vehicles over the course of the day during operation. Saturday and Sunday prove to generate more patrons than a weekday, with as many as 242 vehicles on site. This number represents 6 more vehicles than parking stalls, and is probably a result of the "double counting" phenomenon described earlier. Table 2 Parking Demand at Wilsonville Family Fun Center Maximum Parking Time of Maximum Average Parking Demand Parking Demand Demand Average Weekday Saturday Sunday 121 219 242 1:45 - 2:30 p.m. 1:45 - 2:15 p.m. 3:00 - 3:15 p.m. 76 128 148 Figures 1, 2, and 3 show the accumulation of entering and exiting vehicles at the Wilsonville Family Fun Center for a Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday, respectively. Please note that the entering and exiting volume data points should be referenced to the vertical axis on the left side of the graph, and the parking accumulation data points should be referenced to the vertical axis on the right side of the graph. Recommendations Based on five other existing Family Fun Center locations, the proposed Tukwila Family Fun Center is comparatively the second largest site at 7.9 acres (ranging from 4.5 to 9 acres), tied with another location as having the third most attractions at 18 attractions (ranging from 8 to 23), and the site with the second most parking stalls at 303 (ranging from 221 to 349). 970181Reports /flcpark(2/6/98) /jc 5 . o o 0 CO N r r ,- T CO (salolgaA) uo9elnwnoab 6ulved 0 O O CO 0 COO 0 0 0 0 co O L — Wd00 :8 4 of C Wd 00 :L CL (� T Wd 00:9 O N • r v d � � — - Wd 005 C C .z. ` Wd 00:17 CD C . -- • a:I -- 7p WdOOE iZ • .( �. > �� -- Wd OO: 'eo N Wd 00:1. �0. H ✓ • O _ WdOOZI d C LL • w -- - Wt100:11. to u. d O co I , I { , , f —• –I , I•- I , F- , 1 -1 0 - Wd OO :LL Wd OO :0l -- Wd 00 :6 • INV 00:01 Wy00 :6 Wb 00:8 W`d 00:L WV 00:9 t-- CO 0 0 0n °v coo as ;ua� and AIluied 6uIllx3/6ulra ;u3 salolyaA ;o JagwnN 0 N 0 m 3 0 -0— Entering Volume —411— Exiting Volume —A-- Parking Accumulation ' •z • • •= I•L • .Z; 6D'. • O' Np •u) w:. • w = • W LL Q • • N = o. W. Z�s. mil • H- 0' 'Dp ;0 •;p H • +W = U' U • :0 H'. Z O. t0 E 0 a lQ 0. •p co t0 C. O O • 3 LT 'C LL L d cp LL 6.E Li MONO N N O N (sapigaA) uoUeinwnoov 6ui$aed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0) CO N. (O Lt) V CO N T 0 0 0 0 co O 0 0 NI. 0 0 0 -1 1 1 1—{ 1 —1 1 1 1 1 --i- I 1 -1-- 0 - Wd00:LL - Aid 0001 - Wd 00:6 — Wd00:8 - Wd 00:L Wd 00:9 Wd 00:9 Wd 00:17 - Wd 00:£ - Wd 00:Z -- Wd 00 L - Wd 00:ZL -- 00:14 Wb' 00:0L Wd 00:6 INV 00:8 Wd 00:L Wd 00:9 0 0 T O 0) O O O N O 0 O O to to V 0) 0 N .ia=ua3 un,1 6ui;ix3/641a1u3 saIo!gejo aagwnN 0 O -4--- Entering Volume —0—Exiting Volume —A— Parking Accumulation . • (soIoIgap) uoneinwnood 6ultaed o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tf) �t C+) N r O C 00 r (D (D at CO N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N i-- 1 -1-- -1 4 1 I 1 1 4-1 i- i } 4---1 1 "-t -} —f- i — Wd 00 :4L — WdOO:OI — Wd 00 :6 - • Wd 009 — Wd 00 :L Wd 00:9 -- Vic! 00 :9 Wd 0047 -- Wd 00 :1 -- Wd 0044 Wd 00 :6 WM 00 :9 Wd 00 :L t 0 °' °0 n `o aa;ue3 and AIiwed 6ui ;ix3/6ulaa ;u3 saioiyap ;o aagwnN Wd 00 :9 .. - ... .. .,�. -� Based on a parking demand study at the Wilsonville Family Fun Center location during their busiest weekend in company history, the most vehicles parked on site was 242, which occurred on the weekend. The 242 parked vehicles at the Wilsonville Family Fun Center equates to about 16 parking stalls per attraction. The Tukwila Family Fun Center will have 3 more attractions than the Wilsonville site (includes future build out as described below), and will also provide 67 more parking stalls. The additional parking stalls represent a slightly higher increase with respect to the additional attractions when compared to the Wilsonville site (22 parking stalls per attraction). At 16 parking stalls per attraction and three more attractions at the Tukwila site than the Wilsonville site, the minimum number of parking stalls that should be supplied at the Tukwila Family Fun Center is 290. The currently proposed 303 parking stalls appears to be more than adequate, and could include parking for future build out, as described below. Future Parking Demand An amusement park facility similar to Family Fun Center must periodically add new attractions, or change older attractions, to maintain a stable customer flow. The Tukwila Family Fun Center plans to build a two -story, 9,200 square foot (footprint) facility in the future to accommodate new attractions. Although the new attractions have not yet been determined, some likely candidates include indoor golf or bumper cars. The future building is not included in the current development submittal, however, the future undetermined attraction that will be housed in the two -story future facility (see table 1) was included in the calculation to determine the minimum number of stalls required (see discussion above in Recommendations referring to 290 stalls). The Family Fun Center is proposing to provide 303 stalls, which accommodates parking needs for this future facility. Although we have based the estimated parking demand for the Tukwila Family Fun Center on stalls per attraction, there is no evidence that each attraction will attract the same number of people, or that a Family Fun Center with more attractions will attract more people. For example, the Wilsonville site has the second lowest number of attractions of the five locations in table 1, yet it experienced the highest sales of all the Family Fun Center locations in the company's 40 -year history the week that trip generation and parking accumulation data were obtained. Therefore, using the Wilsonville site to estimate parking demand based on the number of attractions can be thought of as a conservative approach. The 303 proposed parking stalls are 13 more than the minimum required based on this conservative approach. As mentioned previously, it is the nature of this business that new attractions or changes to older attractions must be made to keep people coming. Between the introduction of new attractions when patronage peaks, patronage typically declines to a stable level until the introduction of another new attraction. Therefore, even with new attractions, it is not expected that parking demand will increase substantially above the required 290 parking stalls. Based on this analysis, Family Fun 970181Reports / Ifcpark (2/8/98) / jc 9 Center proposes to construct 303 parking stalls with the understanding that the 303 stalls will accommodate future development as described earlier. LIMITED ACCESS EASEMENT A portion of the proposed Family Fun Center Development also contains a hotel and restaurant, which propose to share one access off of Monster Road. The hotel /restaurant access will be separate from the Family Fun Center access. The current proposed access for the hotel and restaurant is located approximately 196 feet (measured along the center line of Monster Road) east of the intersection of Monster Road and Interurban Avenue. This proposed access location falls within a WSDOT limited access easement, which prohibits access within its boundaries. This type of WSDOT access easement is common near freeway interchanges to prohibit access near the interchange to help ensure fewer conflicts and smoother flow. The access easement in this case is a product of an older interchange alignment that has since been reconstructed. Previously, there were no other roadways intersecting Interurban Avenue or West Valley Highway between the 1 -405 ramps. However, with the reconstruction of this interchange, South Center Boulevard and Grady Way now intersect West Valley Highway and Interurban Avenue between the northbound and southbound 1 -405 ramps. Monster Road is, in fact, currently the old alignment for Grady Way, which is the road for which the original access easement was intended. Monster Road is not intended for heavy through traffic, as Grady Way currently operates. Monster Road is only intended to serve as a controlled access for development in the northeast corner of the Grady Way /Interurban Avenue intersection. To locate the proposed hotel /restaurant access outside of the WSDOT access easement would require moving the driveway 50 feet east of its current location. Relocation of the driveway would not, in any way, redistribute vehicle trips in and out of the site, and therefore would have no different effect on vehicle operations at the intersection of Monster Road and Interurban Avenue or the intersection of the 1 -405 southbound ramps with Interurban Avenue then was previously presented in the Family Fun Center Traffic Impact Study (January 1998). However, moving the driveway would cause significant changes to the current site plan, which has required substantial negotiation among the City, Family Fun Center, and the hotel developer to come to agreement on the current plan. In the Traffic Impact Study, it was shown that the Monster Road intersection with Interurban Avenue, including project trips, would operate at level of service (LOS) B, with a 95th percentile vehicle queue of 25 feet, or one vehicle. The operational analysis presented in the traffic impact study is reproduced here as table 3. The good LOS conditions are mostly attributable to the fact that only right turns are permitted on and off of Monster Road at Interurban Avenue. The vehicle queue on Monster Road also does not interrupt traffic ingress and egress at the currently proposed hotel /restaurant access on Monster Road. 970181Reports / lfcpark (2/6/98) / jc p�..vt:�.� =';;,;: >iti:S7 :Sid; S; is1�`• d� +':?n.','F:�a%L?i`'.f'::;1Y;.�» :.`' 'eh�iliYl�.ru�yFd'it:lYi;L'�;�S 10 Intersection with Monster Road at: Table 3 Level of Service and Queue Analysis Average Weekday Total Delay Level of Queue Movement Peak Hour (sec) Service (feet) Interurban Avenue WB Right A.M. 6.7 B 25 Noon 6.1 B 25 P.M. 9.9 B 25 Hotel /Restaurant Driveway SB Left A.M. 2.2 A 25 Noon 2.3 A 25 P.M. 2.4 A 25 WB Left A.M. 3.9 A 25 Noon 4.8 A 25 P.M. 5.0 A 25 WB Right A.M. 2.7 A 25 Noon 2.8 A 25 P.M. 2.8 A 25 Family Fun Center Driveway SB Left A.M. 2.1 A 25 Noon 2.3 A 25 - P.M. 2.3 A 25 WB Lt/Rt A.M. 3.3. A 25 Noon 4.3 A 25 P.M. 4.0 A 25 Grady Way SB Right A.M. 5.2 B 25 Noon 6.5 B 25 P.M. 8.0 B 25 Notes: WB = westbound; SB = southbound To summarize, moving the currently proposed hotel /restaurant driveway on Monster Road 50 feet east to locate it outside of the WSDOT access easement will not change operations at the interchange or the intersection of Monster Road and Interurban Avenue any differently than if the access remained in its current proposed location. In addition, it has been shown that the currently proposed location for the hotel /restaurant driveway on Monster Road, with respect to the Monster Road /Interurban Avenue intersection, would have no queuing conflicts and would operate at LOS B. 97018\Reports / ftcpark (2/6/98) / jc 11 • z DWI 6 J U; UO U • U W` W =: J t— WO ga N d. W: _.. z� F- o Z F- V 0' .O U, ICI H' W; Hr. U. U w z; o CO O~ z [10 0-03- !- O - -1997 1 : -Th ■� URN ■■■ ■I MN • 10,440. 61411111 Architecture/ Planning/ Landscape Architecture TODD _ ASSOC IHTES . Irt' :. DESIGN REVIEW NAR.RATIVE LA QUINTA INN TUKWILA, WA 1' &A Project N° 97-3004 . November 3, 1997 From 18.60.053 multi- family review guidelines Proposed Project: Hotel, 4 Stories, 153 rooms Existing Zoning: C/L1 F,o_ 1. Site Planning a. The building is sited to take advantage of the natural grades that exist on this old multi -use farm, recycling, auto- repair and mining, site. The slope is generally drawing to the river. The building pad is above the flood plain as identified by Barghausen Engineers. The high voltage overhead power lines and easement restrict the buildable areas of the site. The Hotel is sited to run parallel to the power line easement. The hotel .is sited on the northern portion of the site between a proposed restaurant pad on the west and the proposed Family Fun Park on the east. The Green River lies to the north. Across the river there is an office building complex and an extended stay hotel. To the south of the project lies Interurban Avenue (SR181) and SR405. The proposed La Quinta Hotel is a compatible use with the surrounding development and is allowed in the C/L 1 zoning district with a use permit. b. The major natural feature impacting the design of this site is the Green River, Vegetation including trees within proximity to the river will be left natural where possible. Very little other significant vegetation exists on the La Quinta site as this portion of the development is mostly pasture land. c. The La Quinta site is setback from Monster Road approximately 33'. The landscaping along the perimeter of the La Quinta project will incorporate similar plant materials as the proposed Family Fun Center. Pedestrian links and pathways to adjacent parcels and to the river will be accentuated with clusters of trees and shrubs. The landscape treatment adjacent to the building will highlight the lobby and portecochere with plenty of color plants including annuals. Additionally trees will be clustered around the lobby and guesrwing to break -up the building mass and help visually reduce the scale of the building. There are nine points of entry and exit to and from the La Quinta Hotel. Guests will have the ability to walk in any direction to and from the hotel to take advantage of the amenities that will be provided once the project is completed. The Green River bike and pedestrian pathway, the Family Fun Park and future restaurant being the most immediate. Each entry will be enhanced with both architectural elements and landscape elements to provide visual focus points at the face of the building. Main entry points will receive more treatment than secondary points of access. 4148 North 48th Street • Phoenix, Arizona 85018 • (602) 840 -2795 • FAX (602) 840 -9469 E aPFJ97:973004`.CORR\drnarsmivc.wpd z a w` 6 00� W o; cn w W= J �! w 0. 2 J u_ _• Lo d I-w z� z t—. w al 0 wW =U H 0 F' . z H& J-07-1997 -0? -1997 13 : '4 TODD _ H _,S0C ! HTES I�I _ '� I . F.0- e. There viii tie only one point of entry from Monster Road in to the La Quinta site. f. The La Quinta project is being developed in conjunction with the Family Fun Center project. Landscape treatment and pedestrian walks will be coordinated and designed to be harmonious. g. Varying degrees of privacy for the hotel project really is not applicable, as this requirement is for residential projects. The parking areas around the La Quinta project will be landscaped at the perimeters and in clustered areas to help screen the parking. Additionally the Family Fun Center and Restaurant projects provide additional screening of La Quinta's parking from surrounding roadways. The La Quinta. Hotel will be the tallest building of the proposed development at 4 stories. This is in character with existing development in the area. At this site it will also become a background for the Family Fun Center and the proposed restaurant. Building Design a. The style used on the La Quinta Hotel is a Mediterranean style. The architecture includes hipped, tiled roofs, pediments projecting out from the face of the guestv.ing, cornice molding, banding at the floor lines and at the base. Color is used to create additional visual interest. The field color is a light sand color, the accent color is a beige, and the trim color is a teal green color. The projections of the molding and banding at the floor lines in conjunction with the pediments and colors help to reduce the overall mass of the building and give it a more human and residential character. The lobby helps to transition from the higher guestwing down to the future restaurant. The guesrwing east end is adjacent to the amusement park and their proposed rides and miniature golf features. b. See "a" c. The windows are scaled to fit the proportions of the rooms in the guestwing. They are dual pane energy efficient units with dividing muttins to add a residential look to the rooms. The windows are framed with a projected stucco detail to add shadow lines to the face of the building. The doors are all residential in style. Entry doors are divided glass french doors. The eaves are a function of the hipped tiled roofs. There is very little use of parapet walls. Mechanical equipment above portions of the lobby are screened by parapet walls. Most of the mechanical equipment is within the pitched areas of the roof. d. The color scheme is light using neutral tones for the most part accept for the teal - green trine which is used at the eave and specific molding treatments. Due to the nature of the multitude of primary colors that will be used for the Family Fun Center, we feel it necessary to stay with La Quinta's proposed color scheme. �-:'+;�t.�. s.. .-....... „ ,..�:MiSS•li_,'.'::Wig+r` Sin?'' �; i; a�ri:' a�' �arYiil�e ` %s':,�.,`ri�S?�iY�'tis7tr a.....�. L ..,PRJ9 i •973(AN':CORR :drn arraiivc. wpd z _- • Z: CL 2; JU 00: CO o. • W= N u. w I- •z • ,o w w' • HU: ui z; U) U= . O. z Ni 173:24 TODD 2, ASSOCIi-IITES, INC. • 0-1 e. The use ot'the pediments, horizontal banding with simple shapes and crown mold shapes, framing of windows and doors and color on the guestwing help to achieve visual interest and shadow lines on the building face. Additionally the three story lobby is set at an angle to the guestwing which helps create spatial interest between the buildings. The lobby steps down from the guestwing helping to transition to a residential or human scale. 3. Landscape & Site Treatment (See Item la through I) • Z. ' . I • 4. MiscellaneouS Structures • , 6D- ' a. Trash enclosures and lawn maintenance building will be designed using the same : • 0 0 detailing and materials on the hotel. • 0). 0: 1 :0) lii - ILI I; • • .. b. . The courtyard and pool area vill be screened by an ornamental iron and stucco block Nv a 1 1 . ..:2 .. • u. < Iri • • •c. Mechanical: equipment will be screened by parapet walls on the roof and screen : ' V) .p, • walls at grade where such equipment exists. . :i--I114 ' • •= . '; •'.?_1.- :. .d. Exterior lighting will he done with a combination of wall mounted decorative 1.- .z i-- 0'. fixtures :at entry points and pole mounted, shielded, parking lot light fixtures. Bollards will be used along pedestrian pathways. Accent lighting will he used to • 1..... ,n; : highlight landscape areas. • '' :0.=v: 0 1.-. .ku a • : 'T :' ND OF DESIGN REVIEW •INARRATI VE . • „z: 0_L ' • — I, •1- i_.! • . :0 i. •• 'iz.: . E:,.Plt I 97,973904, CO kitt dmarra nye. pd try-?1,5::;IL=L; ,',":',.:.f.L-:''.'12.L':''''..''''!•' ' •'::•''',Y,'",'::'1.,:, -" • :,:..._:' < • I— Z CL W 0 CD 0 CO (f) W W F- u_ w 0 < CO C5 F- 1-1-1 z }._ 0 z 1— 111 w 0 H W r- - di co 0 1— z Z W CL 2 ,J 0 U0 u) W J 2 H WO Q - tai< 2d I- Wm I- O ZI- W uj • p U co O- U I- W W 2 I-0 II- O .. Z WU U- F- O~ Z �Yftftf `i,'Y,•�l'y�'i;= �" °'.i•`}Y X'i.� ;'i:�rz,.. a:.ar>��7": ".3, � �'�c;x +::U�'.:,�sTa^ "at•ry,C t.:. _ ;:7':":';,4^r�`c +, .iu.a:. ,.., �.. »... -_ ... .. ..:. ........: �.. ". {•.; ,. .:y. ... ...ate; Z ~ W Ce W U0 W = � WO L_ cn = W z� w1- U • � O (2 0 F- W W 2 H Li- H O ..Z WU U- 1— O ~ Z DD mm Drawing# M k;\ 2 T,3' x 4.. 0- IL PL 2 J • ritillI90:4-1M- / _.TP -�, tir rkl , 411115-11," 3 i � 0 1 I ATTACHMENT H i CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 'jECT ;INFORMATIOI! Family Fun Centers has filed applications for development of an entertainment facility, which includes an arcade, go -carts, bumper boats, batting cages, restaurant, and an adjoining hotel and restaurant to be located at 15031 Grady Way South, Tukwila,Washington. Permits applied for include: L97 -0069 Design Review L97 -0068 Conditional Use Permit - Land Use L97 -0071 Special Permission Parking L97 -0072 Special Permission Sign Other known required permits include: Building Permits, Land Altering Permit, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Sign permits, Flood Zone Control Permit and Misc. Utility Permits These and additional project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the permit counter of the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. Additional Files: E97 -0024 SEPA Environmental Review L97 -0048 Shoreline Permit PORTUNITY FOR: PUBLIC COMME' You are invited to comment on the project at the public hearing before the Board of Architectural Review, scheduled for April 23, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers at City Hall. The hearing is subject to change. You may confirm the time and date by calling Nora Gierloff at the Department of Community Development at 433 -7141. For further information on this proposal, contact Nora Gierloff at (206) 433 -7141 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: October 24, 1997 Notice of Completeness Issued: November 21, 1997 Notice of Application Issued: November 26,1997 SEPA Threshold Determination Issued: April 6, 1998 Notice of Hearing Issued: April 9, 1998 3" m�: ::.Sodu.Si?.;.i �.. +;.s+a�.+:c«�uF�rt�:tut;:wvrat ,,:shed,�33^itEtt•AC •. `12i14-07. . • . MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Lancaster, SEPA Responsible Official • FROM: Nora Gierloff, Associate Planner /..\,in RE: SEPA - Family Fun Center DATE: April 6, 1998 Project File No. E97-0024 Project Description: Develop an approximately 14 acre site by demolishing existing structures and regrading the site. To • accommodate required flood storage capacity a combination of off channel pond and riverbank cutback with restoration and habitat enhancement will be built adjacent to the Green River. Proposed buildings include a 9,000 square foot restaurant, a 153 room 4 story hotel, a 36,300 square foot restaurant and arcade building and 7 acres of outdoor attractions including miniature golf, bumper boats, batting cages and a go cart track. A City trail will be constructed along the • perimeter of the site and will connect to a new pedestrian bridge crossing the River. Agencies With Jurisdiction: Washington State Department of Ecology Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Washington State Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation King County Health Department U. S. Army Corps of Engineers King County Department of Natural Resources - Water and Land Resources Division Documents submitted with SEPA Checklist: 1. A.G.I. Environmental Audit 4/26/89 — 2. Geotech Consultants Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 6/17/94 and 7/7/94 Addendum 3. Geotech Consultants Phase 11 1/24/97 4. Geotech Report by Geo-Engineers 6/30/97 5. Geotech Report on riverbank stabilization by Geo-Engineers dated 9/26/97 and revised 1/98 6. Environmental Report (Phase I E.S.A.) by Geo-Engineers dated 8/12/97 7. Environmental Report (Phase II E.S.A) by Geo-Engineers dated 11/17/97 8. Traffic Study by Entranco Engineers dated 6/30/97 and revised 1/98 9. Revised Riverbank Stabilization and Restoration Habitat Report by Barghausen Engineers, Wetland Resources and Geo- Engineers dated 3/19/98 Comments to SEPA Checklist: A comment letter was received from Chris Clifford with the following concerns: 1. The right in and right out access would be inadequate for the intensity of the use and would pose an unacceptable danger to the public and patrons of the facility. 2. Analysis of the project's impacts on wildlife and protected bird species that use the large trees on site should be conducted. 3. The impact of the construction of the bench along the shoreline on native fish runs is unknown. 4. The proposal is for a commercial use that is not consistent with the Shoreline Master Plan urban designation for the shoreline. 5. The magnitude of the project's impacts on the quality and economic vitality of the area warrant an environmental impact statement. Response: 1. Circulation issues were examined in the Traffic Impact Study completed by Entranco Engineers. Entranco concluded that queuing would be a maximum of one car, resulting in Level of Service ratings of A or B for both driveways and Monster Road intersections. 2. There are no threatened or endangered species on site. The intensive landscaping of the river bank buffer with native species will enhance the habitat value of the site. 3. The flood storage bench has been redesigned to start at elevation 9.0, above the ordinary high water mark, so that it will be inundated only during flood conditions. It was designed with input from the State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to create low flow pockets that will provide refuge and holding areas for juvenile and mature fish in this stretch of the River. Large woody snags have been incorporated into the bench and an off - channel pond to add further habitat value and mitigate for the necessary vegetation removal and interim loss of riparian habitat during construction. 4. Tukwila's Shoreline Plan defines the urban environment as including "areas to be managed in high intensive uses, including residential, commercial and industrial uses, while providing for restoration and preservation to ensure long -term protection of natural and cultural resources within the shoreline." 5. The project will redevelop a largely vacant site for three commercial uses, remediate contamination on the site, provide flood storage and improve fish and wildlife habitat. These actions are not expected to create substantial unmitigated negative impacts on the surrounding area, therefore an EIS is not warranted. A comment letter was received from the John C. Radovich Development Company with the following concerns: z �w re 2 6 J U 00 UO CO I• J I- N LL w o. 2 J = d. t—w r z� I--0 Z— w 2 • o O co o F-: w w' uZ i U co o ~` z 1. The trips generated by the project as a whole will add to an already overburdened traffic system. 2. The right in and right out access would result in customers using Fort Dent Way to make U- turns. Response: 1. Circulation and trip generation issues were examined in the Traffic Impact Study completed by Entranco Engineers and reviewed by the Tukwila Public Works Department. The study concludes that the project will not lower the Level of Service at affected intersections below B. The City is currently planning to widen the Interurban Avenue Bridge to ease traffic congestion for vehicles entering I405. 2. Family Fun Center customers may make U -turns on Fort Dent Way, however that is a public street designed with a turnaround and no safety hazards are expected to result from the use. Summary of Primary Impacts: 1. Earth - The project will involve remediation of contaminants on the site by excavation and capping. The remediation plan is being developed with the Department of Ecology under the Voluntary Cleanup Program. The site will be filled with a combination of 40,000 to 50,000 cubic yards of relocated and 10,000 to 20,000 cubic yards of imported materials. Geotechnical reports stating that the earthwork can be done without a loss of stability on the riverbank have been prepared for the site by GeoEngineers. An erosion control plan has been submitted by GeoEngineers and must be approved by the Tukwila Public Works Department. It is likely that some minor erosion of the bank and the pond outlet may still occur before the plantings have become established. A 500 foot long riverbank cut -back above the ordinary high water mark and an off - channel pond will be constructed to provide flood storage compensation for filling on the rest of the site. They will also provide refuge areas for fish and enhance riparian habitat through revegetation with native plant species and the placement of large wood snags. The bench has been designed with input from the City of Tukwila, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Muckleshoot Tribe Fisheries Department. 2. Air - Demolition of existing buildings requires the approval of the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency. There will be exhaust emissions from construction equipment and trucks carrying the building debris, fill soil and construction materials during the project. If necessary dust control measures will be taken during construction. The project's air emissions when complete will consist of automotive traffic to and from the site, bumper boat and go cart engines. A traffic impact study prepared by Entranco Engineers was submitted as part of the environmental review. 3. Water - To provide 100 year /7 day storm water storage volume approximately 500 feet of the riverbank will be cut back for approximately 20 feet at elevation 9.0 and a 23,000 square foot off- channel pond in the northeast corner of the site will be constructed. The riverbank and the sides of the pond will be stabilized with native plantings and riprap according to a plan prepared by GeoEngineers and Wetland Resources Inc. The only construction planned below the ordinary high water mark is the outlet for the off - channel pond which will be at an approximate elevation of 4.0. Family Fun Center will apply for a Nationwide 27 Wetland and Riparian Restoration and Creation Activities section of the Clean Water Act for construction of the bench and pond. Stormwater run -off will be treated with oil/water separators and a 200 foot biofiltration swale. The swale is designed to meet the requirement for treatment of the 2- year /24 -hour post- development storm event as required by Tukwila's Storm and Surface Water Ordinance prior to discharge into the Green River. A flap gate will be used to prevent infiltration into the on -site drainage system during high river flow events. No hazardous wastes are expected to be released during or after construction. 4. Vegetation - The majority of the existing vegetation will be removed and replaced by buildings, parking lots, attractions and site landscaping. The majority of a significant stand of willows along the eastern portion of the riverbank will be retained for wildlife habitat as requested by the Muckleshoot Tribe Fisheries Department. New landscaping will be installed according to Shoreline regulations, Zoning Code standards and the Board of Architectural Review's approved landscape plan. Non - native plants such as Himalayan blackberry will be removed and replaced with native plants of higher habitat value. The riverbank above the ordinary high water mark will be stabilized by landscaping. 5. Animals - The riverbank and off- channel pond will be revegetated with native plant species to improve riparian wildlife habitat in accordance with the comments received from agencies with jurisdiction including the Muckleshoot Tribe Fisheries Department, State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and King County Water and Land Resources Division. Groups of tree snags will be placed along the riverbank and within the off - channel pond to create evening and winter habitat for salmonids. There are no endangered species on site, though Chinook salmon in the adjacent Green River are proposed to be listed as a threatened species. 6. Energy and Natural Resources - The project will require energy for construction equipment, vehicles coming to the site and building operation after completion. The project will be required to meet current energy codes. 7. Environmental Health - Phase I and II environmental site assessment reports submitted with the checklist list potential soil and groundwater contamination and confirm the presence of petroleum, metals, solvents, PCBs, pesticides and small amounts of asbestos and arsenic. The site has been placed on the Department of Ecology's Confirmed and Suspected Contaminated Sites List. The remediation plan and cleanup will be regulated by Ecology under the Model Toxics Control Act. Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency regulations require that all asbestos containing materials be removed from buildings prior to demolition. Tukwila required PSAPCA approval prior to issuance of demolition permits for the existing houses on the site. Construction equipment operation will need to comply with Tukwila's noise ordinance. 8. Land and Shoreline Use - The proposed uses are permitted or conditional uses under the site's Commercial/Light Industrial zoning and are allowed by the Urban shoreline designation. A a conditional use permit will be required for the amusement park. A Shoreline Substantial 1-- Development Permit will also be required for the project. w ...I C.) 9. Housing - Five dilapidated abandoned houses on the site have been demolished. The proposal t co o contains no new housing. N w g w = J H CO LL 10. Aesthetics - The project, its landscaping and all buildings are subject to the design review 0. process including a hearing before the Tukwila Board of Architectural Review. The building permit drawings must agree with the BAR approved design. COd 11. Light and Glare - Site lighting will be provided by new light standards , but offsite lighting $ ~_: will be controlled by focusing the light downwards and using cut -off shields at the perimeter of the ? H site. w o' w; Do 12. Recreation - The proposed amusement park will expand recreational opportunities for local U O residents and visitors. A new City walking and biking trail will be constructed around the boundary o i of the site to provide a link between Tukwila's Interurban and River Trails. The trail will connect i v; to a new pedestrian bridge across the Green River that will be constructed by the City. o .z 13. Historical and Cultural Preservation - The dairy barn on the site was proposed for the State o _; Historic Register but never listed. It was documented in a report prior to burning down on August O '— 31, 1997. The documentation was sent to the State Office of Archaeology and Historic z. Preservation. According to an environmental assessment prepared for a proposed commuter rail project in 1994 the Neilson Farm site has a high probability for hunter - fisher - gatherer archaeological resources. If construction activities penetrate fill to native soils Family Fun Center has agreed to provide archaeological monitoring of the excavation. 14. Transportation - A trip generation study prepared by Entranco Engineers was submitted along with the checklist. In lieu of frontage improvements along Interurban Avenue Family Fun Center will pay the City's traffic mitigation fee per the concurrency ordinance to offset planned concurrency improvements to the intersection. Frontal improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, street widening, storm drainage and street lighting will be required along both sides of Monster Road. Family Fun Center will provide a public trail easement along the perimeter of the site and construct a portion of the trail per a letter of understanding with the City dated 9/24/97. The grades of the trail will be coordinated to match City plans for a new pedestrian bridge across the Green River. 15. Public Services - The project will cause a modest increase in demand on public services such as fire, police and emergency medical from the current level due to the more intensive use of the site. 16. Utilities - The project will increase the use of utilities on site. The developer will connect to the City's sanitary sewer lift station in Fort Dent by force main. Family Fun Center will either construct its portion of pipe prior to the City's start of bridge and roadway construction or reimburse the City for portions of the force main constructed as part of the bridge and roadway project. Family Fun Center will contribute $46,000 as its prorata share of the City's costs to upgrade the lift station. The estimate is based on a 1998 sewer flow rate analysis by Gray and Osbome. Family Fun Center will construct a 12" waterline for the length of the Interurban property frontage. If construction is not completed prior to July, 1998 when the City bridge and roadway project starts, Family Fun Center will request the City install all or portions of said waterline. They will reimburse the City unit contract prices for waterline, fittings, bedding, blocking, trench excavation and backfill and other associated waterline improvements. Waterline shall be installed or estimated payments made to the City as a condition of the first building permit issued for the site. Recommended Threshold Determination: Determination of Non - Significance. Traffic Impact Study FAMILY FUN CENTERS Tukwila, Washington Prepared for Family Fun Centers ECEIVED JAN 2 7 1993 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Prepared by ENTRANCO 10900 NE 8th Street, Suite 300 Bellevue, Washington 98004 (425) 454 -5600 January 1998 MEMORANDUM Date: January 21, 1998 To: Brian Shelton, P.E. Tukwila Public Works Director From: Torsten Lienau, P.E. Entranco Subject: Revised Traffic Analysis for Family Fun Center Development On December 9, 1997, we met with you to discuss the results of the traffic impact analysis for the Family Fun Center development. There were three traffic analysis concerns that remained unresolved at the conclusion of the meeting, namely: 1. A better explanation of internal capture rates, and a reduction of the daily internal capture rate assumed in the traffic analysis, 2. Comparison documentation between the hotel land use trip generation provided by La Quinta and trip generation rates provided in the ITE Trip Generation Manual. 3. An explanation of why raw data driveway counts at another Family Fun Center provided in Appendix A of the report do not match counts provided in the text of the report. All of these concerns were addressed in the attached revised Traffic Impact Analysis report for the Family Fun Center development. With respect to the internal capture rate, the daily rate was reduced from 15 percent to 10 percent, and an explanation of what that means in terms of number of trips was added to the text. See the text on pages 10 and 11, and table.2 of the report for changes. In discussing the City's concerns regarding the motel trip generation with La Quinta officials, it was decided to use the trip generation rates provided in the 1997 ITE Trip Generation Manual for Business Hotel, rather than use those documented by La Quinta. The rates given in the ITE Trip Generation Manual are higher than those provided by La Quinta. Please refer to page 10 for changes to the text, and table 2 for changes to the trip generation. As a result of the trip generation change for the hotel, the trip distribution changed, level of service calculations were revised, and the mitigation payment for the hotel was changed. Please refer to intersections 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 13, 15, 17, and 18 on figure 5 for changes in trip distribution, table 3 for changes in level of service, and table 4 for changes in mitigation payment. In addition, I mistakenly referred to La Quinta as a "motel" throughout the report. We have revised the text to refer to La Quinta as a "hotel ". Finally, the driveway count data provided in Appendix A was different from that presented in the text of the report because of a machine count malfunction. An explanation of how the data was salvaged is provided in Appendix A of the revised report. 9701 8\reports\rprtmem o(01 /21198); sks 1 of 1 z w cc 2 6 0 0, co o: W I• wO gQ D.a F _;. Z �. I- 0' 11) uj U O— 0 H. w W' LLB;. z; ili =: z 97018 / Reports / 8ctia (01(21/98)/ sks CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 zz _ t-:` EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 w Road Network 4 6 ,R JU. Traffic Volumes 4 co O • moo; TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS 8 w i' O IL, Trip Generation 8 ej o; Trip Distribution 12 2 �+ TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 12 .. n < = Ci MITIGATION 12 I- _ zf-, SUMMARY 14 z �, AU uj APPENDIX D f` D N: A - Family Fun Center Driveway Counts ;o i- B - Trip Distribution by Land Use 'i v C - Level of Service Concept u_ ' f- D - Level of Service Calculations ...; w_ U N =; FIGURES Page `z 1. Project Vicinity 2 2. Proposed Site Plan 3 3. Existing Facilities 5 4. Existing Traffic Volumes 1989 -1997 7 5. New Project Generated Trip Assignment 13 TABLES Page 1. Study Intersection Count Dates 6 2. Family Fun Center Development Trip Generation Summary 9 3. Level of Service and Queue Analysis 14 4. Mitigation Proportionate Fair Share Costs 15 •fJ + ( .d3 .S 3,;x,2 ! s. t i �C'! �F v'i'n iiFnkiM.flJ.b1 *i. afti:,• is*04: i., ,, .. ,,, .,..:5.;..,... .w....w .I�. d.�.s;:.., 'S�s>s. +.c4�i:.f• +x ri'. rrvwali« X,. a. u`. ix\ .ra'i�.Yt, ".i:.a.+Ft;:Lt4:�tz„ ,ti.Y,c1t+� t.:. x�a3i�:.i`ir�'.,.. ._J tat t,:t:;yr �,k:;y ?• _:; c:r: INTRODUCTION This report documents the traffic impact analysis performed for the proposed Family Fun Center development to be located in Tukwila, Washington. This report addresses the existing traffic conditions in the area and provides an analysis and discussion of the traffic z impacts created by and potential mitigations for the proposed development. 1 w The development consists of three different land uses: the Family Fun Center, a hotel, „1 V and a restaurant. The entire development is located in the northeast quadrant at the v o intersection of SW Grady Way, Interurban Avenue, Southcenter Parkway, and West w co w: Valley Highway (figure 1). The site is currently undeveloped, although there are some : -' L-r vacant houses and a barn located on the site. The Green River is located along the north w o: side of the property, while railroad tracks for both the Burlington Northern and Union 2 , Pacific railroads are located along the eastern edge of the property. The railroad tracks g Q also mark the city limits line between Tukwila and Renton. cn a 1- w: A site plan of the development is provided in figure 2. Direct access to the site will be z i provided from Monster Road, which subsequently provides access to the arterial network z oI- via Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way (see figure 2). 2 D', U, The Family Fun Center is similar to an amusement park with both indoor and outdoor ,O Hof-.. attractions. Indoor attractions will consist of a video arcade, a ball room, and laser tag. _, w Outdoor attractions will include a miniature golf course, go -carts, batting cages, and H v bumper boats. There also will be a restaurant located inside the facilities as a LL o' convenience for patrons, and it is not expected to be a traffic generator in and of itself. . z i= _' The Family Fun Center will occupy 7.96 acres. The Center's building will be three stories. 01- z The building footprint will be 35,500 square feet, with a total gross floor area of 60,500 square feet for the entire building (see figure 2). La Quinta will operate the hotel to be located within the development. The hotel will be located on 2.87 acres, and will consist of 153 rooms. The hotel also will have a few small meeting rooms for use by its patrons, but will not be marketed for conferences or other large events. La Quinta will not operate a restaurant in the hotel. A restaurant also is planned for the site, to be located on approximately 2.09 acres and approximately 11,900 square feet. A tenant for the restaurant has not yet been determined. It is expected, however, that the restaurant will be a high- turnover sit -down restaurant, which will only serve lunch and dinner, similar to a Red Robin, Tony Roma's, or Chile's. 97018 / Reports / flctie (01/21/98) / sks • 1 �sa`4:t#.ta�i:+5r`aYth�tads. 8013 97018-60 Family Fun Ctr. (6/25/97) AGT outhcenter Andover Park W Andover Park E West Valley Hwy, Tukwila City Limits Jackson SW Oaksdale Ave. SW Lind Ave. SW East Valley Hwy. 1r 1 ff�l;;4-v','��0,+ a7AW.:nMits.katt isi. `O,A1'4..i4 4eliiii*!lk.`a 4fi,:tt4Zi'ewull.z ti..�'Efrr"akiiO4V'''Y ;.J J uc�:: nrx1;. 1T,' K�.+ ts•. 1±.,;;�T=?iei'air�J�.dwSs{iJ'1w 9.'�°`.:U R�r iov (L6/9Z/9) .J O and LlluJed 09.8l0L6 .'t ;1. 41P0kfitiia , 140i44,02 .l • .Z W -.I U.' • U O! U to W. • .W Z; J N LL . W }} 'g J; • LL Q' • •• Z �. I- a. 'z 1- ,11J W D; ON • wW • I=- V`, ,LL O 111 Z, UN O • z EXISTING CONDITIONS Road Network The major access streets to the proposed Family Fun Center development are SW Grady Way, West Valley Highway (State Route 181), Southcenter Boulevard, Interurban Avenue, and Interstate 405 (1 -405). Southwest Grady Way is a five -lane east -west principal arterial with two through lanes in each direction and a two -way left -turn lane, except in the elevated area approximately between the city limits line and Long Acres Drive. It provides a link to the Renton area east of the project site. There are sidewalks on the north side of the road and the speed limit is 35 miles per hour (mph). West Valley Highway is a four- to five -lane north -south principal arterial with two through lanes in each direction and a two -way left-turn lane. It provides a link to the west Kent area south of the project site, and connections to and from 1 -405 northbound. For most of its length in Tukwila, West Valley Highway provides a sidewalk on one side of the road, although there is a section just south of Strander Boulevard where no sidewalks are provided. The speed limit on West Valley Highway is 40 mph. Southcenter Boulevard is a five -lane east -west arterial with two through lanes in each direction and either a center two -way left-turn lane or left -turn pockets at the critical intersections. It provides connections from the project site to Southcenter via 66th Avenue and 62nd Avenue. It also connects Tukwila to the City of SeaTac in the west. There is a sidewalk on one side of the road in the vicinity of the project site, and the speed limit is 35 mph. Interurban Avenue is a five -lane north -south arterial with two through lanes in each direction with either a two -way left -turn lane or left -turn channelization at major intersections. This roadway provides a connection to north Tukwila and south Seattle. Interurban Avenue also provides access to and from southbound 1 -405. In the vicinity of the project site, Interurban Avenue has sidewalks on one side of the road south of the Interurban bridge and sidewalks on both sides of the bridge. The speed limit on Interurban Avenue is 35 mph. Existing facilities for all of these arterials, as well as other local streets in the Tukwila/Renton area are illustrated in figure 3. Traffic Volumes Existing traffic volume data for the arterial street network and intersections were provided by the City of Tukwila Engineering Department, City of Renton Engineering Department, and supplemented by additional intersection turn movement counts by Entranco. The count information was gathered between 1989 and 1997 for all of the study intersections as shown in table 1. 97018 /Reports / ffctia (01/21/98) / sks 4 �k+'.idz+'t$916i!? \t,M . stl X ^�;aw�i #✓'.cr�v "�'i`t3t C1hTi;3.1�'.r`.' z w mo' 6D. J U- 00 CO w. L1.1= w 0' . u. d N a z w. z� 0: Z I-: U� 0 5_ 0 Ill w I0 — 0. tii z; U(12 H 0 'H %alleA lse3 MS'9AV Pull MS'0AV alepsHeO MS uos)oer SI!Wil AIM sIIMHnl AolleA 7seM 3 vEd JanopuV m(ki iF.'�'Inl :..,.,.� �., ?...i a ��fe �.''Ji: a+.h�:,.i.',if ..9.p�,�LwC:{•.F'a 10v (L6/9Z/9) 117 un3 6IIuWC 109.810L6 4108 i&it s`'t3ki h;,c:;xe,`1,- 41.F,: ,. aki:A.4 t', 1— t's.<aNt�a, Y,S ±,ri a. . fi3s< t.t Existing Facilities 0 Y Z 4 0 M Z W 1r * • Intersection Table 1 Study Intersection Count Dates A.M. Noon P.M. Peak Peak Peak 1. Interurban Avenue /I -405 SB Ramps 12/94 12/94 12/94 2. Southcenter Boulevard/West Valley 12/94 12/94 6/97 Highway 3. West Valley Highway /I -405 NB Ramps 12/94 12/94 12/94 4. Andover Park West/Tukwila Parkway 3/90 5. Andover Park East/Tukwila Parkway 3/90 6. Strander Boulevard /Southcenter Parkway 9/89 3/90 7. Strander Boulevard /Andover Park West 4/91 4/91 8. Strander Boulevard /Andover Park East 3/90 5/92 3/91 9. Strander Boulevard/West Valley Highway 2/89 3/91 10. Andover Park East/Minkler Boulevard 8/91 8/91 11. South 180th Street/Southcenter Parkway 10/92 10/92 12. South 180th Street/Andover Park West 10/92 10/92 13. Andover Park East/Baker Boulevard 3/90 3/90 14. South 180th Street/Andover Park East 6/97 7/96 6/97 15. SW Grady Way /Oakesdale Avenue 8/96 6/96 8/96 16. South 180th Street/West Valley Highway 8/93 8/93 17. SW Grady Way /Lind Avenue 3/97 6/96 8/96 18. SW Grady Way /Rainier Avenue 3/97 5/96 6/96 Note: Numbers correspond to figure 4 showing the intersection traffic count data. Figure 4 shows the existing a.m., noon, and p.m. peak hour traffic turn volumes on primary access routes in the study area based on Entranco's counts and data from the cities. 97018 / Reports / ffctia (01/21/98) / sks 6 z =1= �w O J U;. O O; { No V) LW w O` g J, u. D. a =,w I- al Z 1— O; ZF uj O • 0 O U3! ,0 w w. u' O! co 1-'. Z File: • 7 TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS Trip Generation Traditionally, the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) 1991 Trip Generation Manual, Fifth Edition is used to obtain trip generation rates or equations for various land uses. Because of the unique land uses for this development, trip generation rates were Z obtained from a variety of sources for each proposed land use. Therefore, the trip Q generation for each land use will be discussed separately. E- Z, rt w Family Fun Center 6 c=i: 0 The ITE Trip Generation Manual does not contain trip generation estimates for a land use t CO w similar to a Family Fun Center. For this reason, trip generation rates were determined 1 tu =` based on vehicle counts at another Family Fun Center. There are several existing Family co it.- w O. Fun Centers located in California, and one in Wilsonville, Oregon, each varying in size 3 and offered attractions. Based on discussions with Family Fun Center personnel, it was I decided that the Family Fun Center located in Wilsonville, Oregon, is most like the one u) D planned for the Tukwila site, because of the similarity in size, attractions, and weather. w Weather plays an important role in trip generation because many of the attractions are z �` located outside. z O" 111 ui Driveway vehicle counts were performed at the Wilsonville Family Fun Center on D o Thursday and Friday, June 12 and 13, 1997. Vehicle counts were obtained using p -; machine counters with tubes. For a brief period, the tubes at one driveway malfunctioned �_ such that counts had to be adjusted. Vehicle counts and an explanation of the = v 1- -; adjustment are provided in Appendix A. These days represent above average trip u- 0. generation days for a Family Fun Center for the following reasons: w Z U co • June 11 was the last day of school for children and teenagers in Wilsonville. p' Family Fun Center personnel have documented a noticeable increase in patronage Z following the close of school. • The Oregon site experienced the company's highest sales in its 40 -year history, company -wide during the week of June 13. • The weather was dry and warm in Oregon. • Friday is typically the highest trip generation weekday for a Family Fun Center. • The summer months are when Family Fun Centers experience their peak business. Vehicle count data on both Thursday and Friday were averaged for the a.m., noon, and p.m. peak hour. These averages were used to estimate the trip generation for the proposed Tukwila site. The trip generation for the proposed Tukwila Family Fun Center is shown in table 2. 97018 /Reports/ flctia (01/21/98) / sks 8 x ^tti>>«. 3:EdiY� »' :ia`idti;i 6:b'?d;€'.1ti�'u.7'e i.':imi:r::t�a4lLS r aka ��, "KCI.;lii Feiik7r,PN ffld4.011,10 v4i:':5',0C,iVifl; ' 7:si.99aZW,A&NleElisSO4i i..V gle- 1-Wavi`41,'Y��.S'x3:w`'K�nd9 • _.l j Family Fun Center Development ITE No. of LUC1 Units Table 2 Trip Generation Summary Trip Generation Rate Trips Generated Units In Out Total In Out Total AM Peak Hour Family Fun Center n/a 7.96 acres 1.76 1.01 2.76 14 8 22 • Hotel (La Quinta) 312 153 rooms (2) 0.34 0.24 0.58 52 37 89 Net New AM Peak Hour Trips = 66 45 111 Noon Peak Hour Family Fun Center n/a 7.96 acres 12.81 7.67 20.48 102 61 163 Less 10% Passby Trips 10 6 16 Less 15% Internal Trips 15 9 24 Subtotal= 77 46 123 Hotel (La Quinta) n/a 153 rooms (2) 0.11 0.08 0.19 17 12 29 Less 15% Internal Trips 3 2 5 Subtotal= 14 10 24 Restaurant n/a 11,900 GFA 7.02 8.75 15.77 84 104 188 Less 20% Passby Trips 17 21 38 Less 15% Internal Trips 13 16 29 Subtotal= 54 67 121 Gross Noon Peak Hour Trips = 203 177 380 Net New Noon Peak Hour Trips = 145 123 268 PM Peak Hour Family Fun Center n/a 7.96 acres 6.91 9.30 16.21 55 74 129 Less 10% Passby Trips 6 7 13 Less 15% Internal Trips 8 11 19 Subtotal= 41 56 97 Hotel (La Quinta) 312 153 rooms (2) 0.37 0.25 0.62 53 42 95 Less 15% Internal Trips 8 6 14 Subtotal= 45 36 81 Restaurant 832 11,900 GFA 7.24 5.68 12.92 86 68 154 Less 20% Passby Trips 17 14 31 Less 15% Internal Trips 13 10 23 Subtotal= 56 44 100 Gross PM Peak Hour Trips = 194 184 378 Net New PM Peak Hour Trips = 142 136 278 Daily Total Family Fun Center n/a 7.96 acres 107.42 107.42 214.82 855 855 1,710 Less 10% Passby Trips 85 86 171 Less 10% Internal Trips 86 85 171 Subtotal= 684 684 1,368 Hotel (La Quinta) 312 153 rooms (2) 3.64 3.63 7.27 556 556 1,112 Less 10% Internal Trips 55 56 111 Subtotal= 501 500 1,001 Restaurant 832 11,900 GFA 88.94 88.93 177.87 1,058 1,059 2,117 Less 20% Passby Trips 211 212 423 Less 10% Internal Trips 106 106 212 Subtotal= 741 741 1,482 Gross Daily Peak Hour Trips = 2,469 2,470 4,939 Net New Daily Peak Hour Trips = 1,926 1,925 3,851 1. ITE LUC = Institute of Transportation Engineer's Land Use Code from the Trip Generation Manual. 97018 / Reports / ttctia (01/21/98) / sks 9 ^.� +.,: pax. �. �-,...., tc;,_ �,.,...{ �, s: 9a.. �Z!, s,,, �#¢ n•. a+,: Ykut. rb. kt ft: �.• rx4m. �: i¢' n+:: i- S; iliiic.+': riwABLahaa�? 5. ��'. t" .: "Nt;:'w.'.'•i�= 3+ka�Ja!ai,�' . �' �F>• n5) �i2Yi�aT:, Yti�i::,,.€ �$ i" Y: r.1iUwµal': nm• 14.L' aOWAtOS'•eiiiu4SH,fx:h�C;i;;d iiFhs%a��)il�u�r>f�4'"ar: La Quinta Hotel Trip generation rates from the ITE 1997 Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, were used to estimate the trip generation for the La Quinta proposed for the Family Fun Center development. An average occupancy rate of 100 %, and land use code 312 (Business Hotel) was assumed. Neither La Quinta nor ITE have documented trip rates for the noon peak hour for a hotel. Therefore, trips in and out of the Kirkland La Quinta were observed on Thursday, June 26, 1997 from noon to 1:00 p.m. The Kirkland La Quinta hotel is located on Northup Way, west of 1 -405 and just north of SR 520. During the noon hour, 13 trips into the site and 9 trips out of the site were witnessed at this 118 -room hotel. Converting these trips to a rate results in the noon trip rates shown in table 2. Trip generation for the a.m., noon, and p.m. peak hours and the daily total for the La Quinta hotel are shown in table 2. Restaurant The 1995 ITE Trip Generation Manual, Update to the Fifth Edition was used to estimate the trip generation for the restaurant during the p.m. peak hour and for the daily total. Although a tenant for the restaurant has not yet been determined, it is expected that the restaurant will be a high- turnover sit -down restaurant, which will only serve lunch and dinner, similar to a Red Robin, Tony Roma's, or Chile's. For this reason, Land Use Code 832, high turnover sit -down restaurant, was assumed. Because the restaurant will not be open for breakfast, no vehicle traffic is expected to be generated by the restaurant in the a.m. peak hour. As for the noon peak hour, the ITE Trip Generation Manual does not document any trip rates. Therefore, a Red Robin restaurant on the eastside was observed during the noon hour on Thursday, June 26, 1997. The restaurant selected for observation was selected because of its popularity, and because the majority of its customers would drive to it rather than walk, bicycle, or take a bus. Therefore, it is believed that the trip generation estimate used for the noon peak hour is a realistic and perhaps conservative estimate for the Tukwila restaurant site. Trip generation for the noon and p.m. peak hours and the daily total for the restaurant are shown in table 2. Internal Capture Rate The land uses provided in the Family Fun Center development were specifically selected to promote each other. It is expected that there will be trips between the hotel and restaurant, hotel and Family Fun Center, and Family Fun Center and restaurant. Trips between land uses within one development are referred to as internal trips because they 97018 / Reports / ffctia (01/21/98) / sks 10 z LLJ r4 2 0 CO w U.1 =_ -J • LL wo g Q. =d z �. O. z H; U • 0 O o 1- w w` Z, ui z _J are trips that remain internal to the development and do not use the surrounding network of streets. Because of the proximity of these land uses to one another, most internal trips will probably become pedestrian trips rather than vehicle trips. Internal capture rates have been documented for various mixed use developments in the z ITE Trip Generation Manual . These . rates have been documented to range between 10 and 45 percent, depending on the combination of land uses and the time of day. �- w Unfortunately, none of the documented cases have had a land use mix similar to Family 6 D Fun Center development. Therefore, owners of the Family Fun Center company provided v p their experience with a similar situation in California where a Family Fun Center, hotel and N o restaurant are all located within one block of each other. Based on their experience at _ this location, a 15 percent internal capture rate seemed most representative and realistic co u- of the expected conditions at the Tukwila site during peak hours, with a daily internal w O, capture rate of 10 percent. Therefore, these respective internal capture rates were 4a 5 applied to the trip generation for the uses at the Family Fun Center development, as N m shown in table 2. This results in a reduction of 56 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour I w'. and 494 daily vehicle trips from the development. Z = F. Although the daily reduction may seem high, 4 vehicle trips really only represents one w w vehicle. For example, an internal trip between the hotel and restaurant represents one m o'. trip out of the hotel, one trip into the restaurant, and then after the meal, one trip out of p re- the restaurant, and one trip into the hotel, or 4 vehicle trips being replaced with potentially one pedestrian trip. x v' Pass -By Trip Rate O idz U- }— The total trips generated by a project can sometimes be reduced by a pass -by trip factor. z Pass -by trips are defined as trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination. Initially, the Family Fun Center expects its pass -by percentage to be high, but as residents become more familiar with its use, the pass -by percentage should level off at approximately 10 percent (see table 2). The 1995 ITE Trip Generation Manual, Update to the Fifth Edition provides pass -by trip estimates for six high- turnover sit -down restaurants. The average pass -by trip rate from these six sites was 40 percent. However, taking into account the internal capture rate reduction and the fact that the tenant for the restaurant is currently unknown, a 20 percent pass -by trip reduction was assumed (see table 2). Net New Trips Accounting for internal and pass -by trips, the Family Fun Center development, including the hotel and restaurant, will generate 111 weekday a.m. peak hour net new trips. The noon and p.m. peak hour will generate 268 and 278 net new trips, respectively. On a 97018 / Reports / fictia (01/21/98) / sks 4 +ilk:ziJ.r ytiveid.W1 a7 ait �t k,xzU s�tt� iw:r s r as, 'Vis r. Vbr: 1iY tnw iii a, 11 .072 tra mom. p ...am.•r,f,,nt•V TA∎•RM.:V A.611}1 • • weekday daily basis, the project is expected to generate approximately 3,851 net new trips. Trip Distribution The trip distribution and assignment for the proposed development's trip generation was based on the existing travel patterns (figure 4), access to the major arterials, turn restrictions at Monster Road, and access to 1 -5 and 1 -405. Figure 5 depicts the a.m., noon, and p.m. peak hour trip assignment of the project - generated volumes on the surrounding street network. Trip distribution by land use is provided in Appendix B. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS On Thursday, June 5, 1997, a pre - application meeting for the proposed development was convened. At that meeting, potential traffic impacts were discussed, including the restriction of left turns in and out of Monster Road at both Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way. Additional requests included an analysis of the site's driveways and queuing. These analyses will lead to the determination of channelization at each driveway on Monster Road. A level of service (LOS) analysis for unsignalized intersections was performed at both driveways on Monster Road, and at the Monster Road intersections with Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way for all three weekday peak hours (an explanation of LOS is in Appendix C). The LOS calculations are provided in Appendix D. Results of the LOS analysis are provided in table 3. As shown in table 3, the intersections operate at LOS B or better. Based on the level of service calculations, a queuing analysis was performed. Queues at all four intersections analyzed did not exceed one vehicle for the minor movements during all peak hours (see LOS calculations in Appendix D for queue calculations). Queues are shown in table 3. The assumed channelization for each driveway is also shown in table 3. Based on these analyses, Monster Road has ample capacity as a two -lane road and should remain as such. MITIGATION The mitigation for the proposed project is based on the Mitigation Proportionate Fair Share Costs for various intersections as presented in the Transportation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The amount to be submitted for mitigation is based on the total project -trips entering the intersections during the peak hour from the project at rates proportionate to the cost of projected improvements per trip. The p.m. peak hour was determined to be the "peak hour. " The mitigation associated with the proposed development is summarized in table 4 and totals $155,560. 970113/ Reports / ttctia (01/21/98) ! sks 12 44414 l . r:Y: dK,S S il*.✓F =:dd�:ti7. hY, Aa6,h4:a ik ( id7 f *0 3. File: 00b3 mm Drawing# : w; 7.: N.c..J.':k:YY':1':i+��,':...e�. Intersection with Monster Road at: Table 3 Level of Service and Queue Analysis Average Weekday Total Delay Level of Queue Movement Peak Hour (sec) Service (feet) Interurban Avenue WB Right A.M. 6.7 B 25 Noon 6.1 B 25 P.M. 9.9 B 25 Hotel /Restaurant Driveway SB Left A.M. 2.2 A 25 Noon 2.3 A 25 P.M. 2.4 A 25 WB Left A.M. 3.9 A 25 Noon 4.8 A 25 P.M. 5.0 A 25 WB Right A.M. 2.7 A 25 Noon 2.8 A 25 P.M. 2.8 A 25 Family Fun Center Driveway SB Left A.M. 2.1 A 25 Noon 2.3 A 25 P.M. 2.3 A 25 WB Lt/Rt A.M. 3.3 A 25 Noon 4.3 A 25 P.M. 4.0 A 25 SW Grady Way SB Right A.M. 5.2 B 25 Noon 6.5 B 25 P.M. 8.0 B 25 In addition to the Mitigation Proportionate Fair Share Costs, the City has requested that "right -turn only" signing be provided at the Monster Road intersections with both Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way. The City also required physical deterrents be installed at both Monster Road intersections to physically prohibit left -turns in and out, however, C- curbing currently exists on both Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way in the vicinity of Monster Road, which already physically restrict left -turn movements. Furthermore, improvements to Monster Road including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lighting were required. SUMMARY A traffic impact analysis was performed for the proposed Family Fun Center development to be located in Tukwila, Washington (see figures 1 and 2). The development consists of 97018 / Reports / ffclia (01/21/98) / sks 14 � .: .:...�...v :,. • . . ri. ot21?».�d:1inl.tilY.�+S�s.rS .�.�.ti:'... ��:aAcn� +.+a"�d3fGrl 4 ';`• w. -/i4',4`• �Si�':.% riiU` X;•n'."L'��:t }aM, WrT.4434%A. t0,..0'.: IY: SiF, 7• w�.'. �. k'✓, Foa rKk3.^. uw `6'r4•)24."ili^'Aa'ir.•.:+3.c J Mitigation Payment Number of P.M. Peak Hour Trips Restaurant (a C 0 J Restaurant 4- O u. •E V p Intersection N N CO N N CO lD N CA (� 00 • 05' (A r r (!? ER r Q) (p EA 69 EA � N (Li CLi ER M CD CO LO EA ((0 lac) f O ER 1- N LO O M 0 CO N co 69. Ef? ns m 0) (0 W Y (U d 'p > > 'O • 7 ¢ m° O N (n (n Nt 0 O t N. (3).. ) ((0 O • N 6, (n (R. Eft co co co (mn o Efl M M Eft ER o co Lo co co 0 CV co e- O ra' co r 4 N r r Ef? ER ER M (O Eft to O N co O M 0) N N d Q) a 0) Z-7) N N M CO CO N Eli a) a a L 00 v° a>i T 'UO ((S Q < O L CO m O C .2a1 a > '000 = N Q C N .-. C N_ c T 2 (� 7 (s 7 !o ai 4) in m° in m° w in > Total Mitigation Cost 97018 / Reports / ffctia (01/21/98) / sks Lwi three land uses: Family Fun Center on 7.96 acres, a hotel on 2.87 acres, and a restaurant on 2.09 acres. Family Fun Center is similar to an amusement park, with both indoor and outdoor attractions. La Quinta will operate the hotel, which will consist of 153 rooms. The restaurant will be approximately 11,900 square feet, and no operator has been selected. The ITE Trip Generation Manual does not contain trip generation estimates for a land use similar to a Family Fun Center. For this reason, trip generation rates were determined based on vehicle counts at another Family Fun Center. Driveway vehicle counts were performed at the Wilsonville Family Fun Center on Thursday and Friday, June 12 and 13, 1997. Vehicle count data on both Thursday and Friday were averaged for the a.m., noon, and p.m. peak hour, and were used to estimate the trip generation for the proposed Tukwila site. To determine the a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip generation rates, the 1997 ITE Trip Generation Manual was used. Land use code (LUC) 312, Business Hotel, is the ITE LUC most closely related to a typical La Quinta. Neither La Quinta nor ITE have documented trip rates for the noon peak hour for a hotel. Therefore, trips in and out of the Kirkland La Quinta were observed on Thursday, June 26, 1997 from noon to 1:00 p.m. The 1995 ITE Trip Generation Manual, Update to the Fifth Edition was used to estimate the trip generation for the restaurant during the p.m. peak hour and for the daily total. Land Use Code 832, high turnover sit -down restaurant, was assumed for the restaurant land use. Because the restaurant will not be open for breakfast, no vehicle traffic is expected to be generated by the restaurant in the a.m. peak hour. As for the noon peak hour, the ITE Trip Generation Manual does not document any trip rates. Therefore, a Red Robin restaurant on the eastside was observed during the noon hour on Thursday, June 26, 1997. The land uses provided in the Family Fun Center development were specifically selected to promote internal trips. Internal capture rates have been documented in the ITE Trip Generation Manual to range between 10 and 45 percent, depending on the combination of land uses and the time of day. A 15 percent internal capture rate seemed most representative and realistic of the expected conditions at the Tukwila site during peak hours, while a 10 percent rate was assumed for daily totals. The total trips generated by a project can sometimes be reduced by a pass -by trip factor. Pass -by trips are defined as trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination. A 10 percent pass -by percentage was assumed for the Family Fun Center, while a 20 percent pass -by percentage was assumed for the restaurant. 97018 / Reports / Nctia (01/21/98) / sks 16 z �W 6 J U: U0. u) ' V)w W =. -.Iu_ wo g 11- d Z Z o, W n D o: ON' C) ww CU ..z O~ z -_J —J . J Accounting for internal and pass -by trips, the net new trips generated by the Family Fun Center development, including the hotel and restaurant, in the weekday a.m. peak hour is 111. The noon and p.m. peak hour will generate 268 and 278 net new trips, respectively. On a weekday daily basis the development is expected to generate approximately 3,851 net new trips. The trip distribution and assignment for the proposed development's trip generation was based on the existing travel patterns, access to the major arterials, turn restrictions at Monster Road, and access to 1 -5 and 1 -405. A LOS analysis for unsignalized intersections was performed at both driveways on Monster Road, and at the Monster Road intersections with Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way for all three weekday peak hours. All intersections are operating at LOS B or better. Based on the LOS calculations, a queuing analysis was also performed. Queues at all four intersections analyzed did not exceed one vehicle for the minor movements during all peak hours. Based on these analyses, Monster Road has ample capacity as a two -lane road and should remain as such. The mitigation for the proposed project is based on the Mitigation Proportionate Fair Share Costs for various intersections as presented in the Transportation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The mitigation associated with the proposed development totals $155,560. In addition to the Mitigation Proportionate Fair Share Costs, the City has requested that "right -turn only" signing be provided at both Monster Road intersections with Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way. The City also requires physical deterrents be installed at both Monster Road intersections to physically prohibit left-turns in and out. Also, improvements to Monster Road including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lighting were required. 97018 / Reports / ttctia (01/21/98) / sks 17 a z. re 2L- 6 JU,. .0O' u) o NW • u w :J. wQ; 2 a • ix w _ z I- O, Z l-; • • ;w W: U N:. '` O • �w := w' H,.0 • Z' • O'~ .z onmemin I I lu �f`,,�,,'C inn '4t4{x*M4,%Y*M`Fi -'4 `! c" "�++„VF9.++AATM'Dik Yi��.0 !tantLvVrt tvo nos mi=x 4 t ; Wit. fSMfr r �,v� .u; MS MEMORANDUM Date: January 16, 1998 To: Torsten Lienau Entranco From: Chris Forster Entranco Subject: Adjustments to 24 -hour Traffic Counts at Wilsonville Family Fun Center Family Fun Center - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 97018 -60 This memo documents the adjustments made to the 24 -hour traffic counts performed at the Family Fun Center located in Wilsonville, Oregon. These counts were used to determine the weekday trip generation for the proposed Family Fun Center to be located in Tukwila, Washington. Dual direction 24 -hour traffic counts were performed by Traffic Smithy at the east and west access driveways to the Wilsonville Family Fun Center from Thursday, June 12, 1997 to Sunday, June 15, 1997. Raw count data sheets are included in Attachment A. As noted by Traffic Smithy, the southbound detection tube at the east access was disconnected from the counting equipment from 1:25 p.m. on Thursday through 11:00 a.m. on Friday. However, as Traffic Smithy explains, the northbound tube was still connected to the survey equipment and thus counted the combined northbound and southbound traffic during that time period. In short, the total volume count at the east access remained intact, despite the disconnection of one of the hoses. Therefore, we needed to determine how many of those vehicles were entering and exiting during that time period to obtain suitable counts that could be used to determine weekday trip generation. To determine the directional split between in and out traffic at the east access between 1:25 p.m. Thursday and 11:00 a.m. Friday, we first computed the directional splits for the time periods in which volumes in and out were obtained (i.e. 1:25 p.m. Friday to 12:00 a.m. Saturday and 12:00 a.m. Thursday to 11:00 a.m. Thursday). The directional splits between in and out traffic during these periods were then used to "patch" the time periods in which the tube was disconnected. For example, the volumes from 8:00 p.m. to 8:15 p.m. on Friday were shown to be 11 in and 11 out at the east access, a 50/50 directional split. The total volume at the east access for the same time period on Thursday was shown to be 30 vehicles. Applying the directional split computed on Friday to the total volume counted on Thursday, the volumes on Thursday were assumed to be 15 in and 15 out. This adjustment was performed in the same manner for each fifteen - minute period in .. ...'.Yt,: :'I:::. ..n.r., ti', 1: i; ti+': 7' W? if+.' 4: Y;. E. ii,.'}'( 4' 7AfimowGneh+« w. rn. a.. n«. wwrmfre. aeau< �nafWuHt7t�SOR 'Y::''ii3 °:j'.�F.?ii`i`rob4.'iS kR�MYhRk: wae:rw.0 • w U O' (0 �. w =� CD LL wO 2QQ LL rn D =a y z1._ 1- 0 z O • c' W, H - ll. �; - O. Cu U - z which only total volume was counted at the east driveway. A summary of the adjusted counts at the east and west access for Thursday and Friday, including the two -day average, are included in Attachment B. For the purpose of determining weekday trip generation, the Tukwila Family Fun Center was assumed to generate the same number of trips as the Wilsonville Family Fun Center. Trip generation estimates were based on the two -day average of the counts performed on Thursday and Friday after making the volume adjustments to the east access as described above. For the a.m., noon, and p.m. peak hours, trip generation was computed directly from the two -day average of both accesses as shown in Attachment B. For the daily trip generation, the volumes in and out were adjusted slightly to reflect an even 50/50 directional split between traffic in and out of the site. This was done by making the assumption that, over an average 24 -hour period, the amount of traffic entering and exiting the site should be equal. This adjustment is also shown in Attachment B. v..... �Yi. a„..: isin+ i:'".+...... ta. u...,-„+ ri, i:;.. t•;;¢ eE. Y: J.: dtii:;; E: a2vi�ii�::'.; i::' uSAi ::,..::i,�LLA C:i::Ye;.�,...,x, v...;�.rt .M.,,.... . ,... ..._.,..�v..�....u..,el+eiu:'. ATTACHMENT A TRAFFIC SMITHY Professional Traffic Counting Service 1225 N.W. Murray Blvd., Suite 111 Portland, Oregon 97229 -5552 Fax: (503) 643 -8866 • Voice: (503) 641 -6333 ADDITIONAL SURVEY FIELD NOTES LOCATION: FAMILY FUN CENTER East Access. The south bound detection tube was disconnected from the survey equipment. It was disconnected Thursday at 13:25 through Friday at 11:00. The East Access, North Bound Count is the combined north and south bound traffic during these hours. LOCATION: FAMILY FUN CENTER East Access. Due to a known software problem with the survey equipment one five minute interval of data for the East Access, South/Out Bound traffic has been calculated from the surrounding data and manually inserted. The Sunday 17:35 -17:40 interval contains interpolated data. gtw 6 J U. O ;. CO o; ' .vow, w =; JH: u o 2 J; lL Q' ;u) Hw, I0,. Z !01-!: ,w W Vf z: w D; 0 z i J 'Location: FA/t? / t }/ / W J Cross Street: FAST 4 C C Es S DIRECTION ❑Wort Bound ❑East Bound ❑North Bound ❑south Bound ~❑Combined West and East Bound ❑Combineed North and South Bound OIn Bound IZOut Bound Survey Type SP CL GP Start Da SMTTFS En Day St'TWTFS Survey By Start Date Map# �7/S" 4 7 Grid# POSTED SPEED 25 Q 30 Q 35 Q 4o Q 45 Q 5o Q 55 Q OTHER Q NONE 0 Site Evaluation Speed Greater Than 20 Miles per Hour ? Yes No ? ?? ❑ ❑ 171 All vehicles pass over road tube at a perpendicular? ❑ 1� ❑ ❑ ❑ Do you anticipate peak hour queuing over road tube? ❑ ❑ Road tube crosses no more than two lanes? V Equipment Setup Date 6 1/4i Time Offset /Delay -5-D0 Observed Counter TT2 Lenght of Tube Remarks: O B Level Sketch Layout fowN CENr1R soap f u.7 Counter Type i9/([ No. // Data Dump Date 6/13 Time // :0/ :39 File Name /3FCEA 1/ Th- Z Jr Data Dum • Equipment Pickup Data Dump Remarks: 131 -1 4 4112 13 % Date Time File Name / E P4 F I 5e i�r6E N8 oK 0 1IL) d ; :een /1, Observed Counter TT2 p Date Time File Name Data Dum p i3 Level Date Time File Name Data Dum p Date Time File Name F Cf 7 U 1 eomb:n,e 1 - i3FC e/vv/v, 13Fc E-Aii.Tor < ,` • hvitar.S ii'DS -',IiY ,sSSL'�tr5ii,' it�%u "'.�t?�2i�',tilit ??nt a tVaii ,r" Ai.'A: 4154 .'"a +VYn'0+A11444 fiMir ..• t, .7� 1.t:!.`i6�3 z Z. re III -.iU UO CO Q W =. u. W O u_ =• a F.W zF I-O z t- LU D • p o - W W. LL I— Z U N; 1= H z J J ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY .toadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: East Access (In Bound) Direction: NORTH BOUND Date: 6/12/97 Day of Week: THURSDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 -02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 -03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 0 03 -04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 -05 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 -06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 -07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 07 -08 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 08 -09 3 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 9 09 -10 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 5 3 3 19 10 -11 1 0 0 4 2 1 7 3 1 2 1 2 24 11 -12 4 4 2 2 6 1 4 4 2 6 1 9 45 12 -13 4 7 4 2 4 3 8 9 2 4 6 6 59 13 -14 9 11 11 3 7 10 6 10 1 3 7 6 84 14 -15 2 2 10 14 4 8 8 5 6 12 10 11 92 15 -16 9 8 5 9 7 5 13 10 16 2 6 9 99 16 -17 3 7 10 3 6 6 4 4 3 7 9 7 69 L7 -18 7 12 11 6 6 1 6 9 0 4 4 8 74 18 -19 15 15 6 5 5 4 3 5 2 1 10 8 79 19 -20 8 16 7 7 5 2 4 3 9 9 6 5 81 20 -21 0 11 13 5 2 12 10 9 5 7 12 3 89 21 -22 1 8 5 9 5 10 7 5 9 5 5 7 76 22 -23 2 13 2 3 4 2 4 1 6 4 3 1 45 23 -24 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 8 Daily Total: 960 AM Peak Hour (11:00- 12:00) 45 PM Peak Hour (14:45- 15:45) 115 4th Highest Hour (13:00 -14:00 )84 8th Highest Hour (17:00 -18:00 )74 4.69 % of Daily Total 11.98% of Daily Total 8.75 % of Daily Total 7.71 % of Daily Total ss4Eaai�ilt A4ut iS�` 7 ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY Roadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: East Access (In Bound) Direction: NORTH BOUND Date: 6/13/97 Day of Week: FRIDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 -02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 -03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 03 -04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 -05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 -06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 -07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 07 -08 4 2 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 17 08 -09 4 0 2 1 3 1 0 1 1 3 2 1 19 09 -10 2 1 4 0 0 0 1 1 3 3 0 0 15 10 -11 0 0 6 2 3 5 0 4 1 1 3 3 28 11 -12 6 7 7 4 2 3 0 4 7 4 4 11 59 12 -13 3 2 4 6 0 3 3 5 4 6 4 7 47 13 -14 12 6 6 5 4 10 4 7 2 9 8 8 81 14 -15 8 2 4 6 2 5 11 2 5 3 5 5 58 15 -16 9 2 4 3 5 1 4 4 6 8 5 2 53 16 -17 8 6 6 4 3 3 2 2 4 8 4 2 52 17 -18 1 6 3 3 2 2 2 4 4 7 4 7 45 18 -19 5 1 1 2 7 6 5 3 6 4 2 2 44 19 -20 9 7 4 2 2 2 5 3 4 8 4 3 53 20 -21 9 6 6 4 6 1 6 2 3 2 4 2 51 21 -22 7 8 3 4 3 11 4 10 3 3 7 3 66 22 -23 6 0 7 3 5 3 2 0 3 1 1 2 33 23 -24 4 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 19 Daily Total: 741 AM Peak Hour (11:00- 12:00) 59 PM Peak Hour (13:00- 14:00) 81 4th Highest Hour (14:00 -15:00 )58 8th Highest Hour (20:00 -21:00 )51 7.96 a of Daily Total 10.930 of Daily Total 7.83 % of Daily Total 6.88 % of Daily Total u^ ���!�fL {:..a'i`+4r:Yf�CkY�SAY:' ACTS. etT�tmviYWwawmmnfN +uoXnmuw'r.r.`+�.•....a-.. 7 i 1 • I j ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY Roadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: East Access (Out Bound) Direction: SOUTH BOUND Date: 6/12/97 Day of Week: THURSDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 -02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 -03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 03 -04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 -05 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 -06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 -07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 -08 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08 -09 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 4 09 -10 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 10 -11 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 7 11 -12 3 3 1 0 1 4 2 1 0 2 0 2 19 12 -13 0 4 3 1 0 4 3 3 0 3 0 2 23 13 -14 3 8 11 6 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 14 -15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 -16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 -17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 -18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 -19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 -20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 -21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 -22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 -23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 -24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Daily Total: 96 AM Peak Hour (11:00- 12:00) 19 PM Peak Hour (12:25- 13:25) 52 4th Highest Hour (10:00 -11:00 )7 8th Highest Hour (02:00 -02:00 )0 19.79% of Daily Total 54.17% of Daily Total 7.29 % of Daily Total 0 % of Daily Total ..J 1 ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY Roadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: East Access (Out Bound) Direction: SOUTH BOUND Date: 6/13/97 Day of Week: FRIDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 -02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 -03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 03 -04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 -05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 -06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 -07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 -08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 -09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 -10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 -11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 -12 4 3 4 4 8 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 35 12 -13 5 0 0 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 33 13 -14 3 4 5 0 3 7 3 6 4 0 3 3 41 14 -15 6 10 5 4 5 3 10 6 4 6 4 6 69 15 -16 3 2 9 3 7 5 4 0 5 2 5 5 50 16 -17 4 8 12 4 5 2 4 3 1 12 5 1 61 17 -18 4 4 4 4 2 3 7 12 4 5 2 5 56 18 -19 4 5 2 0 3 3 4 1 2 6 3 0 33 19 -20. 3 2 3 0 3 2 3 3 7 5 4 3 38 20 -21 2 4 7 2 2 3 5 2 4 6 2 1 40 21 -22 4 7 1 3 7 6 8 5 4 4 8 3 60 22 -23 4 5 5 6 1 1 6 8 1 5 7 6 55 23 -24 5 3 6 1 5 1 1 4 7 0 3 2 38 Daily Total: 609 AM Peak Hour (11:00- 12:00) 35 PM Peak Hour (14:00- 15:00) 69 4th Highest Hour (17:00 -18:00 )56 8th Highest Hour (20:00 -21:00 )40 5.75 % of Daily Total 11.33% of Daily Total 9.2 % of Daily Total 6.57 % of Daily Total .: 3V:• la"'. c" r. � :i.:'w�.+:].�.r:.Y:r.• "u.'.'ic' iii': �Y:' t; i�t:: ri�9a4;,:[ L�r'.' vtrl. it: e', sw:: lti $'S�.3cYi`e4:&5d:x�.'1','.`i <, y mi- ��x re ui2 UO N 0 WI CO IL, W0 g. v w. O` Z 2 uj :0 �: p N H V U. ~O Z MI U Or Z ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY toadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: West Access (In Bound) Direction: EAST BOUND Date: 6/12/97 Day of Week: THURSDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 -) 01 -02 02 -03 03 -04 04 -05 05 -06 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 10 -11 11 -12 12 -13 13 -14 14 -15 15 -16 16 -17 i7 -18 -' 18 -19 19 -20 20 -21 21 -22 22 -23 23 -24 1 l j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 O 0 2 1 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 1 9 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 6 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 1 2 4 0 16 4 1 4 3 3 1 3 2 2 0 2 0 25 4 2 4 5 1 1 4 1 0 1 1 .0 24 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 3 2 0 1 12 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 2 3 12 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 9 5 2 0 1 4 1 3 2 1 1 1 0 21 5 2 1 1 1 2 4 2 3 1 2 2 26 O 0 1 0 0 4 3 0 1 0 0 0 9 1 1 2 2 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Daily Total: 194 AM Peak Hour (09:40 - 01:40) 10 PM Peak Hour (12:45- 13:45) 29 4th Highest Hour (18:00 -19:00 )21 8th Highest Hour (16:00 -17:00 )12 5.15 0 of Daily Total 14.950 of Daily Total 10.82% of Daily Total 6.19 % of Daily Total temil ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY doadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: West Access (In Bound) Direction: EAST BOUND Date: 6/13/97 Day of Week: FRIDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 01 -02 02 -03 03 -04 04 -05 05 -06 06 -07 07 -08 08 -09 09 -10 10 -11 11 -12 12 -13 13 -14 14 -15 15 -16 16 -17 17 -18 18 -19 19 -20 20 -21 21 -22 22 -23 23 -24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 4 0 1 3 2 1 5 5 2 4 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 0 0 4 1 1 2 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 O 3 0 0 8 1 3 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 2 0 2 0 3 0 O 1 1 1 O 0 0 0 O 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 O 2 1 3 1 3 2 3 3 3. 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 2 2 4 1 1 1 1 0 2 2 4 3 2 1 0 3 1 1 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 1 4 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 2 2 0 2 3 2 3 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 O 2 1 4 2 13 0 25 1 16 3 20 2 17 1 23 O 11 1 13 1 15 0 20 5 31 O 20 1 11 0 3 Daily Total: 244 AM Peak Hour (10:55- 11:55) 27 PM Peak Hour (20:15 - 21:15) 32 4th Highest Hour (13:00 -14:00 )20 8th Highest Hour (12:00 -13:00 )16 11.07% of Daily Total 13.11% of Daily Total 8.2 % of Daily Total 6.56 % of Daily Total ;; "t':i.i urs.,.�..wi���:a_, ? ?•,.. �:::!:ktcs..s�:rn:% aka' �i�7: �' �:. ti+ imZa` i:' ts.:. kc.' ii+ is': 7+: Yiv' 4�t*'. `l3$i��`+�•t��:ifS�w:izru•�r".c `rSxb igS100 at,,, atiTs".iAl?i'L'39QPmm . w Hw UO- .N p. ui W O; 2 u. J; W Z H HO. Z WW D p' ,O I- Wuj 1--U Yr. Z O H. z 7 �j p ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY 2oadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: West Access (Out Bound) Direction: WEST BOUND Date: 6/12/97 Day of Week: THURSDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 -02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 -03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 0 03 -04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 -05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 -06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 -07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 -08 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08 -09 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 09 -10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 10 -11 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 11 -12 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 8 12 -13 2 0 0 0 3 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 11 13 -14 0 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 17 14 -15 0 1 0 3 2 1 3 1 2 3 3 1 20 15 -16 1 4 1 1 0 5 3 4 3 3 1 1 27 16 -17 1 3 4 0 2 4 1 1 3 3 2 2 26 17 -18 1 3 1 2 0 0 1 1 1 3 1 2 16 18 -19 4 2 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 15 19 -20 4 2 0 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 0 1 16 20 -21 1 1 2 3 1 2 6 1 3 1 2 0 23 21 -22 3 1 2 2 1 3 4 1 2 3 2 1 25 22 -23 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 16 23 -24 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 6 Daily Total: 235 AM Peak Hour (10:55 - 11:55) 10 PM Peak Hour (15:25- 16:25) 30 4th Highest Hour (20:00 -21:00 )23 8th Highest Hour (19:00 -20:00 )16 4.26 % of Daily Total 12.77% of Daily Total 9.79 % of Daily Total 6.81 % of Daily Total ... nuw.wc'rfLi21.1 4"t%3C'.tZLit.+.:'u[:Jx .:t�?b�.iiyttP.P =c4z:M;t+tiiir4d: a: 4.; �v�{, K, `•&= 4a;.31tOilfr.:re.b:kvk`:?a: t :,.;444.4..17 z z 6 -1 C.) UO W I. w. }O}' gJ u_ a; co d 1 w Z� wuj; gip'. u; ;0E- uI 2 O ui z F= I O z • ROADWAY TRAFFIC SURVEY Roadway: FAMILY FUN CENTER Location: West Access (Out Bound) Direction: WEST BOUND Date: 6/13/97 Day of Week: FRIDAY Axles per Vehicles: 2 Traffic Smithy Traffic Survey Service Hour :00- :05- :10- :15- :20- :25- :30- :35- :40- :45- :50- :55- Hour of Day :05 :10 :15 :20 :25 :30 :35 :40 :45 :50 :55 :00 Tot. 00 -01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 -02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 -03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 03 -04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 -05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 -06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 -07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 -08 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08 -09 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 09 -10 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10 -11 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 7 11 -12 0 0 1 3 5 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 14 12 -13 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 1 11 13 -14 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 4 1 3 17 14 -15 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 3 13 15 -16 2 4 1 9 3 3 1 6 2 3 2 2 38 16 -17 5 4 1 0 2 3 0 0 2 4 1 0 22 17 -18 3 5 0 2 4 1 4 3 1 1 1 1 26 18 -19 0 0 0 2 0 3 1 1 3 2 0 1 13 19 -20 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 9 20 -21 2 1 3 1 4 4 1 2 3 1 2 1 25 21 -22 2 0 2 4 4 4 2 4 1 5 0 5 33 22 -23 9 2 3 2 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 3 25 23 -24 1 3 5 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 15 Daily Total: 274 AM Peak Hour (10:55 - 11:55) 16 PM Peak Hour (21:15- 22 :15) 43 4th Highest Hour (20:00 -21:00 )25 8th Highest Hour (23:00 -24:00 )15 5.84 % of Daily Total 15.69% of Daily Total 9.12 % of Daily Total 5.47 % of Daily Total 1 Family Fun Center - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 97018 -60 Wilsonville Family Fun Center Volume Summary Family Fun Center Total Volume (both accesses CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS Thursday, June 12, 1997 Friday, June 13, 1997 Two -Day Average OUT TOTAL Time IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL IN 12:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 :00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 6:45 AM 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 7:00 AM 3 1 4 5 2 7 4 2 6 7:15 AM 2 1 3 5 0 5 4 1 5 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 2 0 2 6 0 6 4 0 4 8:00 AM 3 1 4 6 0 6 5 a 1 6 8:15 AM 4 1 5 4 2 6 8:30 AM 1 2 3 1 3 4 it °` 3 4< 8:45 AM 3 1 4 5 3 8 4 3 2 6 9:00 AM 5 3 8 6 3 9 6 3 9 9:15 AM 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 9:30 AM 6 1 7 6 0 6 6 1 7 9:45 AM 11 2 13 4 0 4 8 1 9 10:00 AM 3 3 6 3 4 7 3 4 7 10:15 AM 8 2 10 12 2 14 10 2 12 10:30 AM 15 3 18 7 2 9 11 3 14 10:45 AM 7 4 11 12 6 18 10 5 15 11:00 AM 11 10 21 31 12 43 21 11 32 11:15 AM 11 7 18 14 21 35 13 14 27 11:30 AM 10 3 13 15 5 20 13 4 17 11:45 AM 19 7 26 24 11 35 22 9 31 CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS ,,1 j J Family Fun Center - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 97018 -60 Wilsonville Family Fun Center Volume Summary Family Fun Center Total Volume (both accesses Time Thursday, June 12, 1997 Friday, June 13, 1997 Two -Day Average OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL IN 12:00 PM 18 9 27 14 9 23 16 9 25 12:15 PM 12 8 20 12 10 22 12 9 21 12:30 PM 23 10 33 17 13 30 20 12 32 12:45 PM 22 7 29 20 12 32 21 10 31 1:00 PM 40 26 66 29 16 45 35 M 21 -:56 1:15 PM 30 17 47 23 12 35 1:30 PM 16 11 27 18 16 34 17 i 14 31 r 1:45 PM 15 8 23 31 14 45 23 11 34> 2:00 PM 16 9 25 19 23 42 18 16 34 2:15 PM 21 18 39 16 15 31 19 17 36 2:30 PM 14 16 30 21 25 46 18 21 39 2:45 PM 17 25 42 19 19 38 18 22 40 3:00 PM 15 17 32 25 21 46 20 19 39 3 :15 PM 9 19 28 12 30 42 11 25 36 3:30 PM 28 25 53 21 18 39 25 22 47 3:45 PM 12 13 25 18 19 37 15 16 31 4:00 PM 11 19 30 26 34 60 4:15 PM 9 14 23 10 16 26 10 15 25 4:30 PM 8 10 18 10 10 20 r9; 10 19 v 4:45 PM 16 20 36 17 23 40 17 22 39 5:00 PM 18 21 39 10 20 30 14 21 35 5:15 PM 8 9 17 10 16 26 9 13 22 5:30 PM 6 13 19 16 31 47 11 22 33 5:45 PM 12 12 24 22 15 37 17 14 31 6:00 PM 21 29 50 7 11 18 14 20 34 6:15 PM 16 8 24 17 11 28 17 10 27 6:30 PM 13 4 17 21 12 33 17 8 25 6:45 PM 11 13 24 14 12 26 13 13 26 7:00 PM 30 15 45 26 11 37 28 13 41 7:15 PM 12 10 22 12 6 18 12 8 20 7:30 PM 17 12 29 16 16 32 17 14 31 7:45 PM 16 11 27 19 14 33 18 13 31 8:00 PM 16 13 29 27 19 46 22 16 38 8:15 PM 16 13 29 19 16 35 18 15 33 8:30 PM 16 22 38 18 17 35 17 20 37 8:45 PM 10 15 25 18 13 31 14 14 28 9:00 PM 12 12 24 25 16 41 19 14 33 9:15 PM 19 17 36 20 28 48 20 23 43 9:30 PM 14 17 31 27 24 51 21 21 42 9:45 PM 9 16 25 14 25 39 12 21 33 10:00 PM 8 18 26 17 28 45 13 23 36 10:15 PM 7 9 16 14 11 25 11 10 21 10:30 PM 4 10 14 8 20 28 6 15 21 10:45 PM 2 6 8 5 21 26 4 14 18 11:00 PM 1 2 3 9 23 32 5 13 18 11:15 PM 0 1 1 5 11 16 3 6 9 11:30 PM 1 2 3 4 13 17 3 8 11 11:45 PM 2 6 8 4 6 10 3 6 9 Totals 796 690 1486 970 898 1868 900 810 1710 Daily Trip Generation Adjustment: 855 855 1710 Notes: Shaded areas denote a:m: noon;, and' p.m peak hours„` CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS :• •...'i 40,..a ...: Nw . :ijkO.Plki',:. ii4; 4141st fitg- ki-tilks 54. . 4rea4.441.4ts7&Li.4ii4 t- ge.kro Misr&'4.- weis4.74:' ° awi?triEsx'' • " v6414" w $}h�1'x , 'i X911 `3ti''•• '.01giroZt.ti W' CL W � U O; N 0 W LL• W O: Q LLQ N _ a: t- Z I..-; Z0 .W us 0 N. • W W� I=- V u_ F-. lij Z O ~. Z Family Fun Center - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 97018 -60 Wilsonville Family Fun Center Volume Summary East Access Time Thursday, June 12, 1997 Friday, June 13, 1997 Two -Day Average IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL 12:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 AM 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 7:00 AM 3 1 4 5 1 6 4 1 5 7:15 AM 2 0 2 5 0 5 4 0 4 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 2 0 2 6 0 6 4 0 4 8:00 AM 3 0 3 6 0 6 5 0 5 8:15 AM 4 1 5 4 1 5 4 1 5 8:30 AM 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 8:45 AM 1 1 2 3 3 6 2 2 4 9:00 AM 5 2 7 5 2 7 5 2 7 9:15 AM 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 2 9:30 AM 2 0 2 5 0 5 4 0 4 9:45 AM 11 2 13 3 0 3 7 1 8 10:00 AM 1 1 2 3 3 6 2 2 4 10:15 AM 7 1 8 9 1 10 8 1 9 10:30 AM 11 3 14 4 1 5 8 2 10 10:45 AM 5 2 7 5 2 7 5 2 7 11:00 AM 10 7 17 20 11 31 15 9 24 11:15 AM 9 5 14 9 13 22 9 9 18 11:30 AM 10 3 13 11 4 15 11 4 15 11:45 AM 16 4 20 19 7 26 18 6 24 CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS .J Family Fun Center - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 97018 -60 Wilsonville Family Fun Center Volume Summary East Access Time Thursday, June 12, 1997 Friday, June 13, 1997 Two -Day Average OUT TOTAL IN _ OUT TOTALS IN OUT TOTAL IN 12:00 PM 15 7 22 9 5 14 12 _ 6 18 12:15 PM 9 5 14 9 9 18 9 7 16 12:30 PM 19 6 25 12 10 22 16 8 24 12:45 PM 16 5 21 17 9 26 17 7 24 1:00 PM 31 22 53 24 12 36 28 17 45 1:15 PM 23 12 35 19 10 29 21 11 32 1:30 PM 9 8 17 13 13 26 11 11 22 1:45 PM 13 3 16 25 6 31 19 5 24 2:00 PM 6 8 14 14 21 35 10 15 25 2:15 PM 14 12 26 13 12 25 14 12 26 2:30 PM 9 10 19 18 20 38 14 15 29 2:45 PM 15 18 33 13 16 29 14 17 31 3:00 PM 11 11 22 15 14 29 13 13 26 3:15 PM 8 13 21 9 15 24 9 14 23 3:30 PM 24 15 39 14 9 23 19 12 31 3:45 PM 9 8 17 15 12 27 12 10 22 4:00 PM 9 11 20 20 24 44 15 18 33 4:15 PM 7 8 15 10 11 21 9 10 19 4:30 PM 6 5 11 8 8 16 7 7 14 4:45 PM 10 13 23 14 18 32 12 16 28 5:00 PM 14 16 30 10 12 22 12 14 26 5:15 PM 6 7 13 7 9 16 7 8 15 5:30 PM 5 10 15 10 23 33 8 17 25 5:45 PM 10 6 16 18 12 30 14 9 23 6:00 PM 14 22 36 7 11 18 11 17 28 6:15 PM 10 4 14 15 6 21 13 5 18 6:30 PM 7 3 10 14 7 21 11 5 16 6:45 PM 9 10 19 8 9 17 9 10 19 7:00 PM 22 9 31 20 8 28 21 9 30 7:15 PM 8 6 14 6 5 11 7 6 13 7:30 PM 8 8 16 12 13 25 10 11 21 7:45 PM 11 9 20 15 12 27 13 11 24 8:00 PM 15 9 24 21 13 34 18 11 29 8:15 PM 12 7 19 11 7 18 12 7 19 8:30 PM 12 12 24 11 11 22 12 12 24 8:45 PM 10 12 22 8 9 17 9 11 20 9:00 PM 8 6 14 18 12 30 13 9 22 9:15 PM 13 11 24 18 16 34 16 14 30 9:30 PM 11 10 21 17 17 34 14 14 28 9:45 PM 8 9 17 13 15 28 11 12 23 10:00 PM 8 9 17 13 14 27 11 12 23 10:15 PM 5 4 9 11 8 19 8 6 14 10:30 PM 3 8 11 5 15 20 4 12 16 10:45 PM 2 6 8 4 18 22 3 12 15 11:00 PM 1 2 3 7 14 21 4 8 12 11:15 PM 0 0 0 4 7 11 2 4 6 11:30 PM 0 0 0 4 12 16 2 6 8 11:45 PM 2 3 5 4 5 9 3 4 7 Totals 602 Notes: XX - Total volume known, directional split assumed 454 1056 726 624 1350 677 ..Gi.•I.F.i��ti'c », �«•:> r' �ti; k';=' f•'::.. ahi• F�a+ '��Z;f„A'(�:.Y?>.`s:'1:'°AU.J': X71.' kG+ riJli�kul .ai:iid4Ei;f�YAislc:'P.S'1;Y ':.'CT,1.' ' z,' k'.J•.�.`v�t'�+Y.�xR7A�h"t4,�`a +,i��.It.�+.�',f�i�'+�:� 552 1229 CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS • 7 Family Fun Center - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 97018 -60 Wilsonville Family Fun Center Volume Summary West Access Time Thursday, June 12, 1997 Friday, June 13, 1997 Two -Day Average IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL 12:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 6:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 7:15 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 1 8:45 AM 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 9:00 AM 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 9:15 AM 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 9:30 AM 4 1 5 1 0 1 3 1 4 9:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 10:00 AM 2 2 4 0 1 1 1 2 3 10:15 AM 1 1 2 3 1 4 2 1 3 10:30 AM 4 0 4 3 1 4 4 1 5 10:45 AM 2 2 4 7 4 11 5 3 8 11:00 AM 1 3 4 11 1 12 6 2 8 11:15 AM 2 2 4 5 8 13 4 5 9 11:30 AM 0 0 0 4 1 5 2 1 3 11:45 AM 3 3 6 5 4 9 4 4 8 CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS _ _j a Family Fun Center - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 97018 -60 Wilsonville Family Fun Center Volume Summary West Access Totals 194 236 430 244 274 518 233 275 508 CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS Z OgqCW Wes; U 0' CO 0 • W x LL W 0. g 4;LL • om N = 0, Z Z 0. 'D . .1O —1 .0 F- WW': H L .Z' W 0 _: 01-. Z Thursday, June 12, 1997 Friday, June 13, 1997 Two -Day Average OUT TOTAL Time IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL IN 12:00 PM 3 2 5 5 4 9 4 CO N d' co d' d' co 1s- N to Co to N. T r0 Co co Co dr Co t- to co uo dr lA co co to co d• N to co co st to co I. Cn r dr dt N in co N N 7 12:15 PM 3 3 6 3 1 4 3 5 12:30 PM 4 4 8 5 3 8 5 9 12:45 PM 6 2 8 3 3 6 5 8 1:00 PM 9 4 13 5 4 9 7 11 1:15 PM 7 5 12 4 2 6 6 10 1:30 PM 7 3 10 5 3 8 6 9 1:45 PM 2 5 7 6 8 14 4 11 2:00 PM 10 1 11 5 2 7 8 10 2:15 PM 7 6 13 3 3 6 5 10 2:30 PM 5 6 11 3 5 8 4 10 2:45 PM 2 7 9 6 3 9 4 9 3:OOPM 4 6 10 10 7 17 7 14 3:15 PM 1 6 7 3 15 18 2 13 3:30 PM 4 10 14 7 9 16 6 16 3:45 PM 3 5 8 3 7 10 3 9 4:00 PM 2 8 10 6 10 16 4 13 4:15 PM 2 6 8 0 5 5 1 7 4:30 PM 2 5 7 2 2 4 2 6 4:45 PM 6 7 13 3 5 8 5 11 5:00 PM 4 5 9 0 8 8 2 9 5:15 PM 2 2 4 3 7 10 3 8 5:30 PM 1 3 4 6 8 14 4 10 5:45 PM 2 6 8 4 3 7 3 8 6:00 PM 7 7 14 0 0 0 4 8 6:15 PM 6 4 10 2 5 7 4 9 6:30 PM 6 1 7 7 5 12 7 10 6:45 PM 2 3 5 6 3 9 4 7 7:00 PM 8 6 14 6 3 9 7 12 7:15 PM 4 4 8 6 1 7 5 8 7:30 PM 9 4 13 4 3 7 7 11 7:45 PM 5 2 7 4 2 6 5 7 8:00 PM 1 4 5 6 6 12 4 9 8:15 PM 4 6 10 8 9 17 6 14 8:30 PM 4 10 14 7 6 13 6 14 8:45 PM 0 3 3 10 4 14 5 9 9:00 PM 4 6 10 7 4 11 6 11 9:15 PM 6 6 12 2 12 14 4 13 9:30 PM 3 7 10 10 7 17 7 14 9:45 PM 1 7 8 1 10 11 1 10 10:00 PM 0 9 9 4 14 18 2 14 10 :15 PM 2 5 7 3 3 6 3 7 10:30 PM 1 2 3 3 5 8 2 6 10 :45 PM 0 0 0 1 3 4 1 3 11:00 PM 0 0 0 2 9 11 1 6 11:15 PM 0 1 1 1 4 5 1 4 11:30 PM 1 2 3 0 1 1 1 3 11:45 PM 0 3 3 0 1 1 0 2 Totals 194 236 430 244 274 518 233 275 508 CPF 1/17/98 WILVOL.XLS Z OgqCW Wes; U 0' CO 0 • W x LL W 0. g 4;LL • om N = 0, Z Z 0. 'D . .1O —1 .0 F- WW': H L .Z' W 0 _: 01-. Z APPENDIX B Trip Distribution by Land Use Trip Distribution AM Peak Hour u:: ���.,vy�,yg;zTrY ^sr...,_... -.,_ ...,r.... r.... Y.,. �w« x�+. rr�t': Ys'",% ...e::.a:..��:,4.:..tE•.ah✓'.2 2 -71 Ca, IINTRANCO PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR MADE BY eF. A IA t,JE--1--- SHEET NO. OF 2- Pt SI—. JOB NO. - o 0 Disr. DATE CHECKED BY DATE JJ 2. 4.1 4— --A 2. tr 31 2. +4 1 r Z3 4- 4- 2- 5 9- L, t_ `MI ji 3 k" 4- t2 ,J L jJ • •••=4,WPtg • A M SHEET NO. _2 OF Z © ■NTRANCO JOB NO. I - 1 o 1 - 60 �1 1 PROJECT F. F' L CALCULATIONS FOR Ain 0 151 MADE BY c P DATE tr /2 4 icl CHECKED BY DATE J• 13 < 3 }3 1+-4 --� 1 4--- 34 3 3 .. ;:i. is:.i•:e:•rs'� ' L: .aL1.�":� sri:�.v.Jt «zAr Cr TI,V4U4';as'I1,:"i '`,N.A . © ■ N T R A N C O PROJECT SHEET NO. OF I JOB NO. 1 '4- o ,_ 6 o CALCULATIONS FOR Pr L A M ou-r 1145 MADE BY &Pr DATE , e /2-7. - I41 1' CHECKED BY DATE Trip Distribution AM Peak Hour Family Fun Center AM M75 Costeo/Tukwila (7R9196) AGT Strander Blvd. Andover Park W S 180th St. Baker Blvd. Minkler Blvd. Existing Costco Project Site Dr. r. Existing Home Depot E N T R ANC() Figure 1 Project Vicinity . , :.»:t':s'' �I. �< �' crrr�Ss,;: tv; %r �Yati aiN« �; dt�tf` s. xtF�: c; Wli: Li+ 4r£ ��iJ ,xa#.Si+�';uFrikul,�:.vF?a* : crsad4�+ s?. �' i., ftaSY: si��§ i�'fotti.�' +3i�^t�i3§rM�1tw�`3' _I • J • FFG P5 A.M. R;AK o or A875 Coster)/ Tukwila (7/2398) AGT © E N T R A N C O Figure 1 Project Vicinity n.t -...,. ='.,1• ,:. �:�. ��. <; is 'r .c,:.:. .... �•(':.r i.�., .:JA {�y. •.•w�"i/.k....'r row: st�cu�an; t,. eunYtiRi�' Si�l' aSYika:' �.i-$y,+v.��.:',^.':eiG:i,Is#a' tills:*.:«+ 4�k ^.?n:;tiiil: ?�;�ii%45'�,i�tu; Sao; a;. a,'` r4iiia". i{ �. w�'.' ih:..: sril dl., k' 4; i' �rit: o���. 4iiv�z `ii: %d..ik#k'akrfAILr.Yri� 1., ?ti C,e7n`9BF::r''u e:a!' iL: i:+ iwsYl! s.' oSab°.. u'? i. u': i " "a¢�u.a.:lwn;.ibMF6',.t�Yt.t :A 0 u z Q cc f z W D .` ck' d` z"• �kii.( F,'�S>:aiuii ± ?o�ei,,lnda,4'i-� 1 Trip Distribution AM Peak Hour Motel (La Quinta) 6 : © E N T R A N CO nS,r�� •l �vr .1�,1Y �. if �'itt'9 Figure 1 Project Vicinity i�+u+ isa�;�L"r:��fi.": i'.:�i';a]s�iVd'e`. vii'. i'.';< iP� '«.�s:w;s:i'•whS.''�.+"•V'•r.: ` iiA `vti''9?;•:uti }tF:i= Vi,�h:YF'e% i "`s7ifi w.'.'+Y,4,4:1";.,,s:0A11/'4;110 i "g4r?y;�+ .z _. mow: 6 JU UO: U w W= u.- J' co D, Za H z� z F-. p. W W: O! Z W 1' O z AaIfeA Ise] MS •3AV Pun MS 'iAV aRPsleO �._- t__,__• _•g a ii U U 0 'O a 4 aix: r�a�: r: 2�s:: ��L�cC_w+ �' s< s�ahr: w? uiiux;... b. il�>5iifi�t�r ;Hn:hk±,:t:i�i��'!�w %t,4ki'� 001- "' ouT _,. tn Minkler Blvd. Existing Costco Project Site Existing Home Depot © ENTRANCO Figure 1 Project Vicinity ,icr n? a.. uoni�.? afis2rs..:i�t,nrr.,li ;t::itrla+FzhttiSF%.xf3 Win'*... ^, r.�:k:k.U;rsavdiii�w•kh.�rd.? f.`` 1 �' �vY J<< ;E ' s Y h: Z • re W JU• U O; i. `� C3; to • W=. • LL. • W Ji LL d !- W. I-.O: • Z I- al La p, U W W; LL — Z; :O H; ..Z 1JV (L6/SU9) 'JID un j Al!wed 09.91016 C109 Trip Distribution Noon Peak Hour i5':t.,[[i:i';•......::iitii'.': 1 © E P4 T R^ N C O PROJECT F1~� CALCULATIONS FOR MADE BY C PF" NO rJ r/ET Si", SHEET NO. 1 OF 2 JOB NO. I o L Y� 0 NOC»' 1�11T. DATE 6,721- Pri" CHECKED BY DATE .., In :.�a -.r �....;5. 'r.i. P• "' '1t}+'k�'e' "•:r73 'ice �i�t&iDtklfl;iiizw+ <:iit�i'ti k �iFds 4p?:3d}iatJwkkkK4fGd (V O v iJ SHEET NO. 2 OF 1 © tP4TRANCO JOB NO. 1- °1 may, - G a PROJECT FF CALCULATIONS FOR , IQ "0 131 • MADE BY (PP DATE 6 7.--7M-4- CHECKED BY DATE T 2 14 L-1 +2 .- Io + 14+I 3 4 Z. 1 Li 24-3 34- 3 - T 5 8 14-G 3,4 z. 4.3 151 2 3 4{ -e 2 3 1iKC'..` .....,, -!ty� :l:SZJi%r' Ada.; sia ?w''ilJi,ti$Vren.32"'2i.02 :1 • _1 1 ■ N T R A N C O PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR 57►1e teArno J — N o °N MADE BY (P DATE b /? ? h CHECKED BY DATE FF� SHEET NO. OF JOB NO. '4- o gy o ,,. ,. 3. ..ud.!+ cif,.. �. SW,..+ :!lan..:u4�::�'1ii:'aJ::.tiS..�i SfF,.r,:ft: r.Yr.,tN.. �il�t: S+ r*. a' �1: is'; ��: yini.'. �lii�: ti.{ �v��r.' S2ks§t W. bP;. 4„ 4�/ �. bn':t. Gxtt. 5E5LtiU�Ar; �, �t.' M� .S,var.rri'xNt:U?'+r'..�.i.Ua56 ;ra.�'f�,t y�AfiA rrS.�'S <�'• • z LAV ,U AD LW X • • N W 0 . 2 g •Ji N = C7i .IHW.. O? Z F-: D •O: • O ': • Hi • ALI V, • LL. ~' _ Qi Z, U O.H1 1 Trip Distribution Noon Peak Hour Family Fun Center ._J l M75 Coslco/Tukwila (7/23/96) AGT FFC /100 qP ';: •2 ,L\ Z° it 16 11 al TI6 Strander Blvd. Southcenter Pkwy. illinkler Blvd. Existing Costco 0 Saxon - I-1_1' S 180th St. Existing ,Home Depot © E N T R A N C O .. _. ::1,rf'�s F: ,`• i �7Y1�'. ?` z% FT��?c% t. i" r. ��iia§ �S9} �.' 1' E ^o4�Y"y:�m:•....,...�e..:...a.. Figure 1 Project Vicinity �:1 i4 }ie ?r e�, i� 'C�`K�:G4�:.i�.�,�ii���,ti»F%f� � �R.�..et n'QS " ".� d• 8uief0..P1.4i?;a r4nW4k4 ''.'w9eYYf JmF..r.,n ..F:dti.� •Z LW w. U: UO. cn w, ' w =� •wO J. N w; H; D. E- O Z F- D p; Ott` ;p 'w W. • H -; u- O. Z • U N; O ~' Z A1oo N OUT E N T R A N C O Figure 1 Project Vicinity 6,414'4:4),;:a a 4AV4:4;:i!git 0,4:Ps; #,yJ .,W24;34:01 41 :: zS..rr+",+,diat?t5 ?fAi 3,14c,#x±SxMX' "'"'.±( :i*"4` 04, L., i'. �# i�' �f {2fX.1�i�X.i:%l.F��:+i4tifi:�Si .. wLr, LL u�IAi�` a3' i:. t'. �ld���i" kL�v! �SN�i, N. Ri> F1 `Ci're�".�dfR:bh�tkCS.`VS3tl1YF i+�••T.F3+i15:ef 0 u Z 4 h Z W 4 0 V�Ka� 'i•.^.F}.`�rk�Y''l+C:��.'.c.4!{ �il�i�Nw +.�•.':�i. z • fig, JU U O' U ! N W W =; W O. • LL Q. a: • • 1-=, 'Z� Z 0; W tit i0 H W W • - 0. 111 Z• z Trip Distribution Noon Peak Hour Restaurant iZtS1 ocN © E N T R A N C O Figure 1 Project Vicinity 4, a '.'!,'1i aiSVipi .41Z . . 4MPION 5t:+" FYi t?'ir(W.St1i't`i'?n:�".'rs+:' ,ait:ai4; i;A ; ^'i. S{ A875 Cosico/Tukwila (7/23'98) AGT feasfi Alva, o (A.1- / 19 der I1 6 1111,-**04 31- 36 36+/ , Baker Blvd. 1 Strander Blvd. W 1 Minkler Blvd. it 9 tt/ Existing Costco Project Site Z S 180th St.E 'cI 3 1 3> 19 Existing Home Depot ii E N T f A P4 C 0 :i _ 141- :t,;yy, .��.•s: xtY F,, i5i3d'tii CZ' %il:s::attn �_.L'•i::rd Figure 1 Project Vicinity • .al•:..v..... 0 u Z 4 cc h Z W 4 •z • ` -z: W• JU. • • U O' i (0 0' Ww J CO IL,' W000 .u.< • a. • z � t— 0; 111 uji: zI- • :U 0: O F_' WW' H U'. • a. Z: • z Trip Distribution Noon Peak Hour Motel (La Quinta) —1 • 1 A875 CiosteaTukwia (7/23/96) AGT (14b/ /VooN !A) Strander Blvd. Minkler Blvd. �•t Existing Costco Saxon Dr. Project Site © E N T 11 A N C O :SaS,a :•ray a� ,:� : .. «,� ..........w..... .,..� . Existing Home Depot Figure 1 Project Vicinity '&14 Aain ise3 MS'aAV Pun MS 'PAY WPM() Ihv d mivaayinos 19V (L6/SU9).J 3 and /!Wed 09•0t016 CIOO 0 eS`C L' c�Is. Snag +�Y�as'- `i�it,L'Ssri�9P�'hi'•� i45ti, "'�+,.wr' :cL��5'�,.. «rua��,�r z a • XZ W QQ �. UO I .N CO LL ; W LL Q cn ai I— W. Z; F- O; z D p' O N' W W` H U.. O' i. z U N, O Minkler Blvd. Existing Costco Project Site Existing Home Depot © E N T R A N C O Figure 1 Project Vicinity 100V (L6/SU9)')10 un j p!wej 09.81016 0109 iriQ 4.. 14T �ss+t:§;%�w7tzFirca . cSrieOti ::tAr"•:i`aa�ti.;«a {'r.'+"+' ,.N:••tiwd':'.r:.S.. 1. ., i.:; 1r..;;:F °2c.t G. 't. ;...r`? , ?; >— . °:.., 4t;t4c. > L, }'i 1 PM NAT, i7{ ST- SHEET NO. I OF 2- fp iNTRAM ��� JOB NO. 1-_jG a ( 3 - b 0 PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR P r, U I s 7 MADE BY c PF DATE 4 %Z 7 A q- CHECKED BY DATE _p 2+-3-4 t 4-- t 14 22 1 o 4 ,ti I 5 T� 2g 2 za 11 � d 14 2 +3+ I +1 �- I +Z Z +21 +Z4' r I +I 1 j'' Ilo 1 ID 13 13 i-3 11 3+ 4Z 1 9 b 14 2 2 1 +2 2.1.2. —4 2. 4 3 2 c © E N T R A N C O PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR Pm DIST, MADE BY ' /F DATE 41/2-1- (i 7 CHECKED BY DATE I'm SHEET NO._ OF 2 JOB NO. 1- 1 7- a I g- b 0 14 J 3 +10 +8 "z 114- 114- . ,4I Z I• t1 3 +9 +b 3 +2 —4 3rz- -� 104- 4.-Z —� 1 +3 2.1- 2 j 4:4- 3 ---j • ^nr • J U: or N W. ' W = . w O: :LL',. = C3; 1- a 1-`; • o Nl p = V, • Z':. U co` F-. mss ' O © ■NTRANCO PROJECT Fee_ CALCULATIONS FOR SHEET NO. ) OF JOB NO. 1 -9 1 L-__60 QM )i3T, MADE BY GPr DATE /? I' 7- CHECKED BY DATE no noIlk, tnl N° WZ. F—: N tl.;. W.0 u- (0 a +— W: Z,. F-0; :. Z.F-; W: p N 10 .=Vi.. - LL 0, — Z. W N; Trip Distribution PM Peak Hour Family Fun Center A875 Coslco/Tukwila (7/2398) AGT Strander Blvd. ler Blvd. 4-1 Existing Costco r Saxon Dr. Project Site I! 111 a 1 Existing Home Depot 1- © EN T RA N Co iG.'L' :: :`i:t "u?�ic ^= +t:..?f�; w.. .Wi.Ut��ii,;.0 :SF3'.^.'�,".`:{L' = - -- "+: s7i_ - ..n4 _+; :•__ Figure 1 Project Vicinity Pr?--- PM �t) Y'i'xv ... 1 -.... f>s ,v.:a`f`.. ":J ��i4.'>,- sd.:''.•}.^ v. lil .��`I`:::.N.'.:.::'Y'it'if'SP: r.. `l�%QA1�1tYG'Aaw`srN�'+ss 10V (L6/SZ/9) 'f 1O un j Ai we j 09.8 t OL6 £ too iJ':7f tik �rti e ';bus�?kfi n ky v« tit Y: M3s,fi7 Ats1 - Z :. Z 0 O' O' co w • W =. LL. W O, LL Q. a = 0, • ,-W. ' 1- 0` w w. • ;O ui i0 W w: = 0, 1- CL Z .O Z • _J • • . ciir Strander Blvd. LU 0 124 Mink ler Blvd. 114 / Existing Costco Project Site Pit Existing Home Depot •,1 CZ, EINTIIANCO 3 Figure 1 Project Vicinity (ft J 10V (L6/SZJ9) J 3 unj 41! wed 09.910[6 0109 0 u z 4 ct 1- Z W 4 t / ;M ,Y ` ��': i, ��' Sa1z�s ;AaisKaS��u'iid,:�•na`t:�t ".'�,n:dRriY" 14wG',Fa:}n;�%i Trip Distribution PM Peak Hour Restaurant ...,,.r.,..:•k::r.'.:.,.,,.: ra,r.. _ .... ,..; ,,:.^e•r.;x.1. r...�m� „c,...-rtiiL; �iicwi. J'.... rw ;a�1:7'iu::s::.�f...�t,..nir.�v ... tr.� ..�,.�. _ ct, rrx_:, v:: s.: �..:. sJ..;, sata3: as: i:. s' yer'.: �Y. etrt. 3' :S:�awa��,t::tw.ui�S,:r..i�:u: JU) Oi UP W =; O In DI 1-i.. I- I.0 = a • jW W ,. =U Z --J M75 Costco/Tukwila (7/2396) AGT I'L ri) f�2 nkler Blvd. / Existing Costco Saxon Dr. • Project Site Existing H . me Depot QE N T R A N C O fih"• o-' �ifi�wr `u'f�.�v'n4++:.T? 544 Figure 1 Project Vicinity .arritAVieaA:44t. Saagi.g14ieur':3c:'1,63 344,4ire' `,' .1.0V (L6/0/9) 110 un Autue3 09.9 OL6 C109 - vi-ziw,744,4-x-io..Q1eigA-1,4;44i4114:14--Vitz Z LLI et 2 6 D .00 ° W 111 x u. uj 0 LL(. (22 a I— 0 Z W n 0 c.) 0 0 I= U1 `c5 0 o3 II CO Figure 1 Project Vicinity Fits :A doggie 44r4n 1,;,44 4 ;11nA 3S1F a5v7Eta Y 4ifr ?SWws.{i1 .4"Gnu fit u ¢ } # rCf tE j{ i` k G• a •. c a) a 0 u z 4 z W D :tis.: !?'+{?;it.. �.,(,�a:a4Y�.T: ti�.r..'� ��a.firsivu • ''wLaS Sa 1Fik%.4W4.4tirecAri4,'�:+ ax�Yµi r a. y ,kixt%r �• s;SYaa`,its.s.# FXa"::r rei»045r-h � ; `. ' N' Lii+:' �+�r;¢L'di.�.ti•4H«%i7 }ra�v�+sSA ,"i:,,.,�,Ae�1• :�k5S'2J�"i:�,. z �w :6s: .. -J o O: cn W W Z; N ur O', W. z�-: W W: . 2D'. !O H' W 0- ui U N; A Trip Distribution PMPeak Hour Motel (La Quinta) M75 Como/Tukwila (7R3/96) AGT Strander Blvd. Minkler Blvd. it/ Existing Costco Sax in Dr. Project Site • Existing Home Depot 4,11.10 ENT RANC0 Figure 1 Project Vicinity s+ i�C: :�1:`:Ii15. %;IM'v'k."f`"i:'i.7% Est' 5i •J'.itricilC,:S''A*.'srf:,s?H:4 rJ�;kSS, fl r.4. 1b.0 Gli+:�ii1 ?�.'k`al %:ilc"S+- nL'lir• lw (cc✓su9)'no unj Howe j 09.810[6 C1011 _.... «.. �, �.� .. xc,.. ? r t'•.. �:�.. :�. �. .... ��a.•� �. � �Yq' 4xtr(, ,Lid3dFi?ia(saitA• 194Sa.. 'i<f�'i :' Sri;^:.C�c•W • °.P;S +.i'a"' d'AliiYi4"`J.4 z U0: yO W W ='. w 0' LL Q• N a W• 1- 0• z E- Ili id U 1 CI W 1 U, —0 iZ' u 0 z A875 Como/Tukwila (7r2398) AGT Strander Blvd. Minkler Blvd. 0 r, Existing Costco Project Site Existing Home Depot © E N T R A N c o Figure 1 Project Vicinity ._., .: + ... �. E�.,� .,.h ... ,:. c1:n. x, "„ ,..ti .,.. , ,ra:b vSlir Asu�y�,aU.:fiaf :14a¢ktR.ALid1.�cO..iLMNA•4Yi« J'.i.'a. i15k4Y•., SW,'" ea u?■.ie4i1,1' •/.Wj+ niGA4' .{] 4 i✓ firli..[ 1++! 4A4M(:' Ct% 1" •WA".¢. eign:4•• iYbfCVgla:!'{i74.4`.Z6T.i;*Cr=A„: ..t.444% alti Z W; aa' 2: WD .0 O. N 0i. .. ••W=: MS IN Pun MS IN NePsNe0 • • . Maw sapannos 'S '"asi tilLS LOY (t6nze3) '113 and A4'we 09•910[6 cm Level of Service Concept LEVEL OF SERVICE CONCEPT Because intersection capacity and traffic flow performance, or "level of service ", are prime factors in the process of developing and evaluating alternatives, a brief description is presented here for the benefit of the lay reader. The ratio of existing traffic volume to available capacity provides a measure of intensity of traffic loading relative to the ability of the street intersection to accommodate the traffic. The number of lanes, presence of turn lanes, type of traffic control, signal phasing, etc., are important factors determining capacity. As the volume /capacity (v /c) ratio approaches a value of 1.0, extreme congestion sets in, with long backups at signalized intersections and the passage of several complete changes of the signal cycles before a motorist can proceed. Motorists at stop -sign controlled intersection approaches face extremely long delays. As traffic queues lengthen, this congestion can also impede access to and from upstream abutting property. The term "level of service" is used to describe traffic flow at intersections. For signalized intersections, the level of service is essentially based on v/c ratios (see table C -1). Table C -1 Level of Service and Volume /Capacity Ratio Relationships for Signalized Intersections Level of Service General Description Stopped Delay Intersection (seconds /vehicle)1 V/C Ratio2 A Free flow B Stable flow (slight delays) C Stable flow (acceptable delays) D Approaching unstable flow (tolerable delay - occasionally wait through more than one signal cycle before proceeding) E Unstable flow (intolerable delay, intersection operating at capacity) F Forced flow (jammed) <_ 5.0 5.1 to 15.0 15.1 to 25.0 25.1 to 40.0 40.1 to 60.0 <_ 0.60 0.61 to 0.70 0.71 to 0.80 0.81 to 0.90 0.91 to 1.00 > 60.0 > 1.00 1. For detailed operational analysis method 2. For planning level analysis method Source: "Highway Capacity Manual ", Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 1994; and "Interim Materials on Highway Capacity ", Circular 212, Transportation Research Board, 1980. 970164eports\appc -los (06/30197)1 kp C.1 d4W�li�'�mN.' z z. L• AI 60 U 0 0 co = w 0, LL a' co is u±.1 1- 0. z F- LU uj ' 0 F— w w. .z U co O~ z u Level of service "A" is a condition of unimpeded flow, while level of service "C" is often used in the design of new urban streets as the lowest acceptable level for peak periods. Congestion begins to occur at level of service "D" (v /c from 0.81 to 0.90). Because of funding and /or environmental constraints for improvements, this level of service is being used by more and more cities as an adequate level, particularly for improvements to congested existing facilities. Increasingly unstable traffic flow with excessive delay and congestion occurs as level of service "E" (capacity) is approached (v /c = 0.91 to 1.00). For v/c > 1.00, level of service "F" (forced flow) is obtained, and the intersection is overloaded or is jammed due to traffic backups from overloaded downstream intersections. Table C -2 shows daily traffic volumes corresponding to peak -hour level of service C, D, and E (capacity) applicable to suburban arterial roadways of various numbers of lanes and configurations. Table C -2 Guidelines for Relating Average Weekday Daily Traffic Volumes to Peak -Hour Level of Service for Suburban Arterials of Various Roadway Lane Configurations Total Number of Lanes Lane Configuration Daily Two -Way Traffic Volume for Various Levels of Services E C D (capacity) Two -Way Streets 2 Two Lanes 3 Two Lanes with Left-Turn Lane 4 Four Lanes 5 Four Lanes with Left-Turn Lane 6 Six Lanes 7 Six Lanes with Left-Turn Lane 8,000 10,000 16,000 21,000 25,000 31,000 11,000 14,000 23,000 29,000 36,000 45,000 13,000 16,000 26,000 32,000 39,000 49,000 One -Way Streets 2 Two Lanes 3 Three Lanes 4 Four Lanes 5 Five Lanes 12,000 19,000 23,000 29,000 1. The volumes represent maximums for the daily volume that will result in levels hours, with an average spacing of 2.5 to 4.5 signalized intersections per mile. spacings, multiply the above service volumes as follows: Signals per Mile 0.50 -2.49 Over 4.5 LOS C LOS D multiply by: 1.55 multiply by: Not Possible 17,000 27,000 33,000 42,000 19,000 29,000 36,000 45,000 of service indicated during peak For approximations at other signal 1.16 0.87 LOS E 1.06 0.99 Prepared by Entranco based on data in the Florida Department of Transportation "Level of Service Standards and Guidelines Manual ", April 1992. 9701 B\reportslappc -los (06130/97) \ kp C.2 rnw. o.,..,, naa„ �wr.. v.•,„„ aen. r .,:o�,ww}�Fw,way��ri!+r/nrKWnaxr . m.•. m. e• n+ n�nn..., r.«...,..... «.e.....W,.,....ai..aaecwwwaOxs i 7 It should be noted that equal v/c ratios at several locations do not necessarily indicate equal overall performance of intersections, since one location may experience a high v/c ratio for a considerable period of the day while at another the peak period is of short duration. In addition, a low level of service is more tolerable at a low- volume intersection than a high - volume location. The general level of service concept also holds for stop -sign controlled intersections, although the capacity of the stop -sign controlled approaches is less than that of the signalized intersection approach. Table C -3 shows the level of service criteria for unsignalized intersections. Capacity analysis for two -way stop -sign controlled intersections is based on the assumption that major street traffic is not affected by the minor street movements, and left-turns from the major streets to the minor streets are influenced only by opposing major street through flow. The level of service calculated for two -way stop intersections is therefore based on delay experienced by only the minor street movements and the major street left-turn movement. Table C -3 Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Average Total Delay (d)1 Level of Service d <_5 5 <d_5.10 10<d<_20 20 <d<_30 30 <d545 d >45 A B C D E F 1. Average total delay is measured in seconds per vehicle. 2. For level of service F, when demand volume exceeds the capacity of the lane, extreme delays will be encountered with queuing which may cause severe congestion affecting other traffic movements in the intersection. This condition usually warrants improvements to the intersection. Source: "Highway Capacity Manual ", Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 1994. 97018\reports\appc -los (06/30/97) \ kp C.3 .,:'4 ::?:',aim,J�:: =t: �ttey%a�;.o�tis%riivarwv:s .. ail cit.. z�i :.v.s,.:ez,4.\ +tka,.ati..4$6.\: 1-40r.B::tK 2;t�irt:�s•: mK.a:''" ;.1.4: A44.44-4'\T:ti ':f4x 'g,.4,- Yd4 ';?- '`�. ;''�'i'r;.x'k+ti z • :, i..w .J C.) •o Oi ( No; • cn w; • w =; -I 1-, w �7J J Q; • — :(/) D: : `• F= o{ z �. ILI al • U N: • SO.. 13 I- w' S U • O: • tit Z O .F- •z APPENDIX D Level of Service Calculations z ~W JU O 0 cO W =. J 1- U) u_ WO LL Q. =• d W z= I- O. zI- w • w O co 0- O I- wW O Z w = 0 Z 1 LOS Calculations AM Peak Hour ) HCS: Unsignalized Intersections fl 1 Release 2.1d GWMRAMWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) Grady Way (E-W) Monster Road Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC AM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Eastbound L T R O 2 0 N 932 .9 0 Westbound L T R O 2 <0 N 1036 10 .9 .9 0 Northbound 0 0 0 Southbound L T R O 0 1 0 9 .9 1.10 Vehicle Maneuver Adjustment Factors Critical Follow-up Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Left Turn Minor Road Road 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 Z HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d GWMRAMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -Free State: 581 703 703 0.98 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) SB R 11 703 5.2 0.0 B Intersection Delay = 0.0 sec /veh 5.2 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d IAMRAMWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) Interurban Ave (E-W) Monster Road Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC AM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF :Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) •PCE's Northbound 0 ---- 2 <0 N 1279 56 .9 .9 0 Southbound L T R O 2 0 1059 .9 0 N Eastbound L T R O 0 0 Westbound L T R O 0 1 0 36 .9 1.10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Maneuver Gap (tg) Left Turn Major Road 5.50 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 Follow-up Time (tf) tgiat,,,or.4.4.,,,,,s, • ,•-■ 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d IAMRAMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 742 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 583 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 583 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.92 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) WB: R 44 583 6.7 0.2 B Intersection Delay = 0.1 sec /veh 6.7 ,,H;;,�:r,,..•. , :.� .,emu • - C.) ; Of W W: - FL' .wO;f.. IL' Qt; :co H w' Z F- :. U c. Ws. H • • Z', Ail Ali O • :Z HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRHDAMWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) Monster Road (E-W) Hotel Dwy Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) -) Analyst CMC AM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 -1 Other Information With Family Fun Center development I Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Northbound L T R O 1 <0 N 3 6 .9 .9 0 Southbound L T R O >1 0 N 46 10 .9 .9 0 1.10 Eastbound 0 0 0 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Maneuver Gap (tg) Lett Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 Westbound L T R COLL 1 0 1 0, w 4 33 .9 •9 w.c 0 = a i w zi..., 1- o 1.10 1.10 zi-t LU ut 2 0 o (0; P1- , — 111 ... 3:16 I- :7 Follow-up Time (tf) Z: iii co 0 _ 2.10 i- 2.60 0 3.30 •z 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRHDAMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 6 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1375 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1375 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.97 Z •1 i'' re Ill Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB 61 • () 0 ' CD Ilk 111 i _II ui 01 2 g Er 0.97 u..‹. (0' - a x . Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB EB i, z1...., 68 E a 967 Au ui. 2 D 0.97 r:a o 0.97 ' , 0 P- 10 I.- 0.97 in id 935 F. _ U. 1- '...:Z Intersection Performance Summary IJJ or, 9rEt', P._ Avg. 95% 01- z : . Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) Conflicting Flows: (vph) 10 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1696 -1 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1696 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.97 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: • Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity Adjustment Factor -- due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) WB L 4 935 3.9 0.0 A WB R 41 1375 2.7 0.0 A 1 SB L 56 1696 2.2 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 2.0 sec/veh j 2.8 1.8 `z1 7-T • • : HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRFDAMWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) Monster Road (E-W) FFC Dwy Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC AM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection I Northbound L T R No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 Stop/Yield Volumes 6 4 PHF .9 .9 Grade 0 MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Southbound L T R O >1 0 N 10 4 .9 .9 0 1.10 Eastbound L T R O 0 0 Westbound L T R , 9 , O >0 <0 u_ < .9 .9 co 3 0 i I.- w , 1 -J 0 oo .(0 CO U.1: 1.10 1.10 Vehicle Maneuver Adjustment Factors Critical Follow-up Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 0 =4 1- uj uj • (...) I- - Z Ij I-: O F- Z n x HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRFDAMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 9 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1370 j9 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1370 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 1.00 7 Step 2: LT from Major Street LJ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 11 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1694 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1694 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.99 ; TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) fl Major LT Shared Lane Prob. 1 Li of Queue -Free State: 0.99 6 ri LJ SB NB Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) 24 1025 0.99 0.99 0.99 1018 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) WB L WB R SB L 7 1018 > 1103 3.3 0.0 A 3 1370 > 2.1 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 1.5 sec /veh 12 1694 3.3 1.5 1 LOS Calculations Noon. Peak Hour rl File Name Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Streets: (N -S) Grady Way Major Street Direction... Length of Time Analyzed.. Analyst Date of Analysis Other Information GWMRMDWP.HCO . EW . 60 (min) CMC NOON Peak 6/27/97 With Family Fun Center development (E -W) Monster Road Two -way Stop - controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop /Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU /RV's ( %) CV's ( %) PCE's Eastbound 0 2 0 N 1227 .9 0 0 1.1 Westbound - - -L T R 0 2< 0 N 1166 45 .9 .9 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 1.1 1.1 Northbound 0 0 0 0 Southbound 0 0 1 0 104 .9 0 0 1.1 Vehicle Maneuver Adjustment Factors Critical Gap (tg) Follow -up Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 z z Wes' J0: • o0` cnw' w = ' w 0 a .F- _' • z I- ,O N' = U O. Z; cri z Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: 606 683 683 0.81 CO LL, w 0}° I. Z F- O. Z 2 Di Oto; . 0 W W v U •••i O ~` Z ri Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay 128 683 LOS 6.5 B Intersection Delay = 0.3 _ ..,. i... a'. 1!'. v{ ti. �Ll%.:. L+ Yww...+ a_ •..'.Sui�e'_u'..s' «:.S:iv�ut..a . Delay By App a.•{•., x,:4:.: <.i. i,:� lv. aG: 3.^. ti:: i2 :rl.5t.:1. 1:30:11lrsc2t•'ce: Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** File Name IAMRMDWP.HCO Streets: (N -S) Interurban Ave (E -W) Monster Road Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC Noon Peak Date of Analysis 6/27/97 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two -way Stop - controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop /Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's ( %) SU /RV's ( %) CV's .( %) PCE's Northbound L T R 0 2< 0 N 1175 127 .9 .9 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 1.1 1.1 Southbound 0 2 0 N 1118 .9 0 0 0 1.1 Eastbound L -- T - - -R O 0 0 0 Vehicle Maneuver Adjustment Factors Critical Gap (tg) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 w: J V! uW Westbound L T R co U. - -- - - -- - - -- w O; O 0 1 2Q� 46 LLj .9 ND 0 i_ Wj 2 O Z H O 1- O O Z 1-, 1.1 2 iii ✓ p.. co 0 1- W W H U. H LL Follow -up w z: Time (tf) to co 2.10 0 2.60 3.30 3.40 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 651 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 648 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 648 Prob. of Queue -free State: 0.91 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3 **************************************************************** Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App WB R 56 648 6.1 Intersection Delay = 0.1 ..„ B 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** File Name MRHDMDWP.HCO Streets: (N -S) Monster Road (E -W) Hotel Dwy Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC NOON Peak Date of Analysis 6/27/97 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two -way Stop - controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop /Yield Volumes PHF Grade. MC's ( %) SU /RV's ( %) CV.'s ( %) PCE's Northbound L T R O 1< 0 N 13 21 .9 .9 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 1.1 1.1 Southbound L T R 0> 1 64 63 .9 .9 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 1.1 1.1 0 N Eastbound L T R O 0 0 0 w :u6 D J U: UO lAW Westbound lux! L T R -11 - - -- - - -- - - -- • Vehicle. Maneuver Adjustment Factors Critical Gap (tg) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road. 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 1 0 1 w 0., 65 33 g -i .9 .9 u)D;. 0 I W, O 0 0 = O 0 Z O 0 I..0; ZF 1.1 1.1 W W D p ;o — _W Follow -up -I:0 Time (tf) ti.i N U -; 2.10 F. /--1 2.60 z 3.30 3.40 • t yl ri Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 24 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1346 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1346 Prob. of Queue -free State: 0.97 Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 34 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1652 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1652 Prob. of Queue -free State: 0.95 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue -free State: 0.95 Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) 150 867 0.95 0.95 0.95 824 rFnrrtC,ms. ter; rwmtvxfs:Y Sr-ur E6i3. a :`:", IYai:∎ ;:v:iwv.=.i" N rii4•: 'CirR,:; " * ":.t4:'4.;.ai�:d:4`'. 5; .,'�:.�i. Lii? 53:v?i Center HCS: Unsignalized Intersection ompReleasen2 Tiansportation ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ge * ** Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS Delay By App WB L 79 824 4.8 A 4.1 WB R 41 1346 2.8 A SB L 78 1652 2.3 A 1.2 Intersection Delay = 2.1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** File Name MRFDMDWP.HCO Streets: (N -S) Monster Road (E -W) FFC Dwy Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC NOON Peak Date of Analysis 6/27/97 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two -way Stop - controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop /Yield Volumes. PHF Grade MC's ( %) SU /RV's ( %) CV's ( %) PCE's Northbound L T R O 1< 0 N 21 24 .9 .9 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 1.1 1.1 Southbound L T R 0> 1 0 N 63 65 .9 .9 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 1.1 1.1 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0> 0< 0 39 13 .9 .9 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 1.1 1.1 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow -up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: 33 1332 1332 0.99 Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 45 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1632 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1632 Prob. of Queue -free State: 0.95 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: ( pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue -free State: 0.95 Step, 4: LT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) -� Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity. Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) 161 854 0.95 0.95 0.95 812 h.+. acs. �a,[. n;.«,.• rti: s•: x.�.:uixr+d+a.�i.i#;U�dKe:�,i;: i'.e Q ` -j U: 1.).O; 0, • w WI W =• • W O; . 4C • = fJ: .1-10'. zF-; .14 Ilk O N W f'' O; • • .O z Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3 ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App WB .. L WB R SB 47 812 > > 897 15 1332 > > 77 1632 2.3 Intersection Delay = 1.6 4.3 A 4.3 A 1.1 LOS Calculations PM Peak Hour HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d IAMRPMWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) Interurban Ave (E-W) Monster Road Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC PM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Northbound L T R ■■ ■ ■■■■ ■■■■ O 2 <0 N 1616 129 .9 .9 0 Southbound L T R O 2 0 1153 .9 0 N Eastbound L T R O 0 0 Westbound L T R O 0 1 0 69 .9 1.10 Vehicle Maneuver Adjustment Factors Critical Follow-up Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 'n■ 11111‘AtiMit,WWw 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d IAMRPMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 970 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 447 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 447 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.81 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length. LOS Delay Movement (pcph) .(pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) 85 447 9.9 0.8 B Intersection Delay = 0.2 sec /veh .. ,...i 4.k r. ro .. z .... >:Lt v %ZP ,.... !.:�:.c, .* Kw... ✓. , 4,.,...vyii.�- yi:ar.4'riRC.+.ekr ;t :;`aKiFli'.ii�t''.ui tlu!. .a< &'iJ6eLl:reiM1.?:.'..ret:... i:�di� Su v1'. +.�: 4'. +t:.+. Zf .J 9.9 z _ H t. Z' mow. 2 u6n:. 00 uW Wz .J W 0' J.. � < co = d.. F- W' 1- t- O Z 10 N Id • 1 Zj U =I 0 ~' z.i ! 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRHDPMWP.HCO Page 1 , i-n Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall I., Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 11 7 I Ph: (904) 392-0378 ..1 Streets: (N-S) Monster Road (E-W) Hotel Dwy 4 Major Street Direction.... NS I Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst CMC PM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Northbound L T R O 1 <0 N 20 26 .9 .9 0 Southbound L T R O >1 0 95 34 .9 .9 0 1.10 N Eastbound 0 0 0 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Maneuver Gap (tg) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 z z Aolw 2 6m` _j 00 co 0' Westbound co mu, L T R 12:11E, ui 0 1 0 1 41 49 .9 .9 0 1. a Z I- 0 Z 1.10 1.10 LJJ w 0 - 01- mr Zu) Follow-up -0 Time (tf) ua •■= 2.10 r: 0E- 2.60 3.30 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRHDPMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ---, 1 Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB ,.) Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1 Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue-Free State: 36 1328 1328 0.96 Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 51 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1621 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1621 1 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.93 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) ---.) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. I of Queue-Free State: 0.93 Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH [ Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity Adjustment Factor -1 due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) 7. I • ';-",71 • .1; 180 833 0.93 0.93 0.93 772 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) <-1 WB L 51 772 WB R 59 1328 SB L 117 1621 5.0 0.1 A 2.8 0.0 A 2.4 0.1 A 2.2 sec/veh Intersection Delay = 3.8 1.8 .1 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRFDPMWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) Monster Road (E-W) FFC Dwy Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC PM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF. Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Vehicle Maneuver Northbound Southbound L T R L T R ■■■■ ■■■■ ■■■■ O 1 <0 0 >1 0 N 26 13 34 41 .9 .9 .9 .9 0 0 1.10 N Adjustment Factors Eastbound L T R O 0 0 Critical Gap (tg) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road *IV 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 ry.tilaaCCIP9111 z. w 1% 2. u.1 D 0 ,0 0 Westbound co w w x L T R 'co O >0 <0 ILE . .• 43 20 : .9 .9 n: 0 142a; m; z I—. 1.10 1.10 • z t- ' 'ID ui '1"" • Follow-up Time (tf) ' • LLI .1) Lit 2.10 z 2.60 0 /7 3.30 3.40 • j• HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d MRFDPMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -Free State: 36 1328 1328 0.98 Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 43 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1635 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1635 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.97 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of. Queue -Free State: 0.97 Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) 120 902 0.97 0.97 0.97 878 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) WB L WB R SB. L 53 878 > 982 4.0 0.2 A 24 1328 > 42 1635 2.3 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 1.8 sec /veh 4.0 1.0 wmaresrAspreceswearge- '7-71 1 f HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d GWMRPMWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) Grady Way (E-W) Monster Road Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst CMC PM Peak Date of Analysis 1/20/98 Other Information With Family Fun Center development Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Eastbound L T R ■■■.16 ■■■■ ■■■■ O 2 0 1210 .9 0 N Westbound L T R ■■■■ ■■■■• ■■■■ O 2 <0 N 1374 39 .9 .9 0 Northbound L T R O 0 0 Southbound L T R O 0 1 0 84 .9 1.10 Vehicle Maneuver Adjustment Factors Critical Follow-up Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road " ;.14tARL•■•11'''', • ' • 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 • z 11- ILI • 1Sp, .-J • CO ILI; al 1'i COLL LLI a.. • ••• X Z I- 0: na :c..) • !O • iC3 • M jZ lu- • 0 • • HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d GWMRPMWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1. Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -Free State: 785 554 554 0.82 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) SB R 102 554 8.0 0.8 B Intersection Delay = 0.2 sec /veh 8.0 REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF L97 -0068, L97 -0069, L97 -0071, L97 -0072 APRIL 23, 1998 Charlotte Corbley Transcriber 1ST TAPE, COUNTER 5232 - APRIL 23, 1998 (FOUR TRACK TAPE) Neiss: Next item on the agenda is case #L97 -0068, L9.7 -0071 and L -97 -0072, approval of a conditional use permit for an amusement park. Okay. We'll hear from staff. (background whispering - unintelligible 5272) Neiss: Okay. We also have one other item on that L97 -0069, design review. Mr. Chair, be sure to talk loud in your mike. Channel #2 is cutting out. Gierloff: For the record my name is Nora Gierloff. I'm an associate planner with the city here. And I have a big project here for you tonight, the Family Fun Center. It's a, about a 14 acre site and we're going to be having four different uh, requests for approval before you tonight. There will both planning commission and board of architectural reviews. So you'll be wearing both your hats tonight. Uh, there are um, the four things that we've, I divided the staff reports. There are four different sections to deal with the four different areas of decision. The first one is a conditional use permit to establish an amusement park use in a commercial /light industrial zone. The second, one is a special permission parking determination. We don't have a set parking requirement for amusement parks and so it's something that is set on a case by case basis, given the nature of the use proposed. The third thing is some special permission sign requests. They've asked for some leeway on some of their signage and we'll walk through that. And the fourth thing is design review for the LaQuinta and the Family Fun Center Buildings. Um, so I'll walk you through the staff report. At the end we've received public comments that came in after the staff report went out. We'll talk about those at the end and then answer any questions. So to start off with the site. This is located at the northeast corner of Interurban Avenue and Grady Way, just south of the river, just north of 405 and adjacent to Renton and the railroad tracks on this side. Uh, this is the whole parcel. It's the old Neilson farm REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 1 z • UO� • CO z'. 1 H N wO g Q 0 D: d; w I- 0'. • Z1— •U : O co" w W; • 'I . 0 uiz U N• H 1' O , z site. There used to be a historic barn that burned down last summer on that site. About half of the site would go to the Family Fun Center use. And then a pad would come out here and become the LaQuinta Hotel. And then there's another pad site over here that haven't secured a tenant for and that will come back to you when that's been designed. It's likely that the layout will change somewhat from the sort of schematic layout that they've given here. Uh, this site is against the river, so there's river issues that we've spent many months coordinating between all the different agencies with jurisdictions and the Muckleshoot tribe. So you can see there's a lot going on along here. Uh, there's a bioswale. There's a riverbank cutback and then they've built this, are planning on building this off - channel pond that will provide additional habitat area and as well as some flood storage. So that, that is controlled by shoreline development permit. That's an administrative permit that the staff is hoping to issue in the next couple weeks. Um, what we're concerned with tonight is really the stuff that's landward of this trial. Uh, Family Fun Center has granted or will grant the City an easement to extend the river trail along the site from here all the way around over to here. And there's, the City is planning on building a new pedestrian bridge across the river here, that'll connect up to the trail. So, so that's sort of the basis layout of the site. The first issue before you is the conditional use permit. And there's a couple different criteria when we're looking at that. Basically a conditional use is to say that we think that this use is possibly suitable for this zone, but it's worthy of having a little more in depth look at how well it really fits in with the specific location it's proposed for. You know the first criteria is that is, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the neighbors. This is a pretty isolated site. You've got, you've got all this sort of riverbank buffer and then you have the river. Over here you've got quite a bit of railroad tracks and then Renton over on this side. On this side you've got quite a large right of way between Grady Way and 405. And then over here you have the interchange and uh, Interurban Avenue. So there's um, there's REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 2 • .....w o . m!aatwam.r.rarefortAtMelerin✓.CS+;IY?Y;ee�7 ...�r .... . z Z, JU' 0 0: N 0. J I , H w. w 0: I a: I- In I- 0 zI w w D'. Um O F-i =w H U' ii:' f ft O z some people that are down the road, but there's nobody that's really butted up next door to this property line. So that, that gives it a little bit of isolation from the neighbors. The second criteria is that the use shall meet or exceed the uh, performance standards in the zone. And the performance standards have to deal with issues like airborne pollution, noise, water pollution or hazardous materials. There are some hazardous materials on the site. There's people, there was some dumping of old pesticides. There is some petroleum contamination and some other things. And those will be addressed in a cleanup plan approved by the Department of Ecology before the Family Fun "Center site gets developed. And as far as airborne pollution, it's not expected that this use will have any impact on airborne pollution beyond what would be expected of any developed site, which is cars coming to and from the site. Water pollution um, has been something they have spent a lot of engineering time on. There'll be oil /water separators as well as a bioswale, before the storm water is released into the river. So staff feels that the project can meet all of those performance criteria. The third one is that proposed development shall be compatible with surrounding land uses in terms of traffic, pedestrian circulation and building and site design. Traffic is going to be an issue on the site. You know it's vacant now. So any development of the site would be an increase in traffic from what it's experiencing now. It, the access on the site will be right in /right out driveways onto Interurban Avenue and Grady Way. And then there'll be two access, driveway accesses off of uh, what is now Fun Center Way, this little bit of access road there. There have been traffic reports submitted as part of um, as part of the paperwork on this um, project. And uh, I'll be having Gary Barnett from the Public Works Department get up and talk to you a little more in depth about that later in response to some of the citizen comments. In terms of pedestrian circulation, um, they will, there will be sidewalks that will be connecting all through here. There's pathways from the sidewalks to the buildings and there's also connections to the buildings, to the trail. So I think they've done a nice job REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 3 of tying this in and making this accessible to people from the trail. And then building and site design. We'll cover that a little more thoroughly when we get to the design review section. Um, and then the fourth one is that the proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies for the comp -plan. There are quite a few comp -plan policies that have to deal with design issues and shoreline access. This site will certainly open up this section of the shoreline to a lot more people through the provision of the public trail. And also through these businesses which are developing a site that people don't really go to at the moment. There's also some comp -plan policies about parking lot landscaping, pedestrian paths, screening of mechanical equipment, um, that this project does address. And then the last criteria, excuse me, is that all measures have been taken to minimize possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area in which it's located. Well, they're, they're doing quite a bit in terms of trying to mitigate any impact along the river. And again there's no real next door neighbors that, that I think would be effected by any noise. They uh, they're also, as you'll see later, staff is also recommending a condition that the lighting plan be examined. We, not everything has nailed down on the site, since it is such a large site and so um, we're asking that when they get to the point of being able to come up with an accurate lighting diagram, that staff review that and make sure that it doesn't have off -site lighting, which is our standard review on that. Okay. The next section is the parking requirement determination. And again because there is no set parking requirement, we asked the applicant to do a study and try and give their best estimate of what their parking needs will be. They uh, that was included in your packet. They did a study of site in Wilsonville, Oregon actually I think the busiest day they've had at a Family Fun Center site, so it seems to me that that's a, probably a reasonably conservative estimate of the number of cars. They came out with um, a requirement of 303 parking stalls. Family, this site is actually um, going to provide REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 4 about 320 parking stalls. There's a little more. So there is even a little more um, allowance for any overflow. And so Family Fun Center is asking that, that you set this determination and that you also understand that um, it's in the nature of their business z to update and to re- arrange their outside Q amusements from time to time, but they don't : f- z: think that that's uh, necessarily going to ce w change the overall draw of the site. So they'd like to set that with the understanding v v 0 that, that things may shift around a bit on cn o the site over time. This happens. { w i' J !- Livermore: Does that quantity of parking, 320 spaces, NLL-. does that include the parking spaces for the w O. hotel also? 2 _ Gierloff : No. � d =w Livermore: That is separate? �"_ z1 Gierloff: Yeah. LaQuinta will meet the code l-- zE-: requirements of one space per room, plus one ILI uj space per 20 for employee parking. Um, and v o then again on the pad site it'll just meet 0 N. code, depending on what use goes in there of- later. Okay. w w` LI O; tii z U N, O 1- z The third item is, are the special permission signs. And the signs that they're proposing are two signs that say "Family Fun Center." One will be right here on the west elevation. And then one will be over the main door on the southeast elevation. And you know our sign code as sort of sliding scale and it maxes out at about 150 square feet for a sign. And these are actually quite a large building, quite large walls. And so there is a provision in our sign code that says, that if you set back more than the required minimum set back distance that you can ask for increases in your sign area. And those are limited to either 500 feet or 60 of the wall area that you're going to put the sign on. So that, the increases that um, are being requested meet the criteria for um, increasing the set backs and they also meet those, the high end limits of um, that 6%. They're not close to that 500 foot limitation. So they meet the code in that regard. Another thing that Family Fun Center is asking for is approval of a unique sign. You don't see, we haven't seen very many of those REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 5 Malina: Gierloff: requests recently and that's going to be a three dimensional mural on this south wall. And it's going to be the Rockie and Bullwinkle cartoon characters, which ties in with the theme of their Bullwinkle's Restaurant which is why it's a sign and not just a decoration. Um, the area of that south wall is not included in the area of the walls that we used to calculate their other signed areas on. The criteria for unique signs is that um, it not contribute to a cluttered, confusing or unsafe condition. This will, it's not going to move. It's not going to blink. And it shouldn't really be a distraction for motorists. So you guys can make, make up your mind on that. The. last item under the signs um, is a, is the internal sign information, internal information sign request. Generally people are limited to either six square foot wall signs or four square foot free standing signs which are meant to mean parking in the back or this way to the entrance kind of signs. This site, because so much of it is outdoors, and there is so much going on outdoors, that Family Fun Center really feels like they, they need to be able to direct people around the site. You know, where are the batting cages? Where do I go? Where are the bathrooms? That sort of thing. So what they've asked is to be able to, to have some leeway on doing those directional signs. Um, with the understanding that they would be, they would be low. They would be scale to be seen by people walking around on site. That they're not, they're not up 20 feet in the air trying to lure people in from 405. That they're really intended to be pedestrian level and for people actually moving around on the site. And since not everything has been finalized on the attractions yet, they've asked that, that be an administrative approval done by DCD. Are they proposing a pole sign or a momument sign or have they made any indication? No. Uh, they're just proposing the two wall signs, that unique sign and then the internal information signs. Um, and actually LaQuinta, LaQuinta will meet the sign code um, as well. They're having some wall signs and just a very small monument sign out front. So there won't be a big pole sign on the site. Um, unless the pad site comes and asks, asks for something. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 6 z z -J C.) 00: t o w= 0 LLQ Nom` D. a. z� H- O z� ILI 2 OE w w' U: F= O uiz z '�i Um, okay. That brings us to design review on the site. Um, I put up the landscaping plan up there on the wall. Sorry, um, put up the landscaping plan up there on the wall and then you also have a colored version in your packets that we handed out. They're done quite a bit of landscaping, you know, in addition to all of the work they're doing along the river bank here. There's perimeter landscaping on all the sites. Landscaping around the buildings and then landscaping throughout the attractions on the Family Fun Center site. There is one issue. The staff is recommending on condition that um, they've shown some internal, some parking lot island landscaping along this.... 2' TAPE. COUNTER 260 - APRIL 23, 1998 (FOUR TRACK TAPE) Gierloff: ...leg right in here. And they're, they're put at the head of the compact parking stalls and we found that we don't have a lot of success with the landscaping in those stalls because cars pull in, um, with their hot radiators and there is just not very much room for the plants to grow. So what the staff has recommended is that those be replaced by length -wise um, uh, parking lot islands. It would be like the length of two cars put together. And that gives you quite a generous amount of area for landscaping. Um, it would help keep the rhythm that's set up by the parking uh, islands at the ends of the rows. Livermore: But how would that effect their overall parking count? Gierloff: It would be eight parking spaces. Livermore: So it would go from 320 to 312? Gierloff: Something like that. They, you know, they're providing more than they need and um, there, there may be a possibility that if you can see that there's, their property line kind of jogs in here and they're looking at trying to, to get an easement or a lease of some land so that they could uh, put in a little more parking, complete that row of parking. Um, it, it shouldn't, they would still have more than their parking study says that they need even with that. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 7 z = 1— �--w cc 0 O' CO CO 0 = J 1-: w 0:. J 20 I—=: z�' F-0 Z 0 O co ;off w uj 0. Z UI U� f- _ 0h The other, the next criteria is structure, relationship of structure and site to adjoining area. We've talked about some of that in the conditional use permit. Um, you know, again they're doing uh, the trail and the pedestrian bridge. They will also be putting in frontal improvements along Monster Road, curb, gutter, sidewalks, street lighting, some, long both sides of Monster Road here. Um, the driveway locations that you see out here in the right -of -way, may shift around a little bit as, the final grades get engineered. Um, but that will be off -site in the right -of -way subject to public works engineering review later. Um, talking actually about the Family Fun Center.building. You have a good rendering of, of it in your packets. It's um, a large building. It's got some colorful and over - scaled elements like the, the entry pylons, the signage. It's, if you look, the color board is up there in front and you can tell they've used some, some bold colors. They hae used purple, grey, kind of a coral color and accented different areas with that. Um, it's, it's a little more playful and unusual building than say the LaQuinta Hotel. LaQuinta's color board is up there as well and you also have a rendering of that. It's um more of a pinkish beige and a tan with some green accents and then the roof is going to be sort of dark orangish -red. It's got a Southwestern theme going. It's um, it's, it's a long building along here and then it's got a lower entry area which is the meeting rooms and the lobby, along that. The staff is recommending one condition. On that narrow east end of the building, they have an entrance here and right now it's a small entrance and it's got a little balcony projecting over it. When we were looking through some of the colored pictures that are in your packet, this, of other LaQuinta's we noticed that one of them had more of porch entry element along here. Right. With some columns and a hipped roof over that. And that seemed to be a little more graceful way of making a transition on the end of that building, providing a little weather protection for people on that side and so we suggested that LaQuinta do something like that on that end. Um, oh, one, one unusual thing that we'll see, REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 8 there's a proposal for a Skymax ride along in here and you have a drawing of what that's like as, it's a, the only thing that really looks like an amusement park kind of ride that's sort of a truss -work element. Um, so that will be the most unusual thing I think I've come under miscellaneous structures and street furniture on a design review. In addition to that they'll have the um, golf courses, batting cages, bumper boats, that sort of thing. The LaQuinta Hotel will have an outdoor pool and lawn area. Um, staff has also proposed a condition that um, that these, the design of these amusement attractions um, be approved by staff administratively once they're finalized. Uh, with the understanding that they need to be harmonious with the rest of the building design and in keeping with the theme that's been set by the Family Fun Center Arcade Building. Um, they're, Family Fun Center has also, has the Arcade Building and then there is an outdoor plaza and a big grass picnic area over here. Um, so it's providing some outdoor space that's oriented towards the river, to address that river site. So just to quickly review the four conditions that staff is recommending are one, internal information signs be approved administratively, so long as they're scaled to be viewed by pedestrians on site. Uh, to change to the landscape islands in the Family Fun Center parking lot. Um, design of the Family Fun Center attractions be administratively approved um, by the DCD Director. Uh, a change to the east elevation of the LaQuinta, putting on that entry porch and fifth that the lighting plans for LaQuinta and Family Fun Center be approved administratively by staff according to the, the no- off - premise uh, glare or lighting in excess of two foot candle standard. That's our standard condition. Okay? Then I'd like to talk a little bit about some of the public comments we've received. We didn't get much for quite a long time that we were working on this project and then the last week we've gotten some comments on it. What I'd like to pass out are, I've gotten a number of phone calls. There was a postcard set out to I'm not sure how many residents in the city and so a fair number of people have been REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 9 Y: ta?. ris ::�K,G'�.:LI3�..h...St..iillAi l}3125.L"ri)r`3+.'IiKSi1�4ti 04A-40,6riti'1'YAi.'r'..•f ^l'Y.�fir�IGe.}r� •i ti'•'�r" •.^aj:A7 J�. iM4iiV3YVih :51;%1:iftW ?:�.V�ut•.i.: z w W U! 00: CO 0 w Nw w 0. LL <' - a. Z H0 Z F-; LU uj; D. D'. 0 w tu. w 0 .z. O; calling me up and wanting to know what's going on with the Fun Center. Um, and some of those people have mentioned that they wouldn't be able to come to the hearing tonight, but would like to, to make some comments. And so um, I have those two here. One person called um, in support of the project. He liked it. He thought it was a good idea. And then one person called to say that he didn't really think that an amusement park was needed in Tukwila and that he was concerned about the parking in the area. Okay. Another issue that's come up um, as always, we always uh, issue our SEPA threshold determination before we come to public hearing so that that um, we can issue it and have the comments and that, have the comment period expire before you come, before planning commission. There was a, the comment period on the SEPA expired on Monday. And on Monday we got some comments from a Joel Haggard, who's a land use attorney. And we just wanted to give you the, for your own information. Staff has written a memo responding to those comments. And again you're not here tonight to decide SEPA, but we wanted to get everything out on the table that people had raised. Um, there were several comments about the traffic study and again I'm going to defer to public works and the traffic engineers on that. Um, there were also some comments on toxic waste and water quality. And, you know, what I had talked about a little bit before, was that there are some, there's some contamination on the site. You know, it's been in use for a variety of uses for a long time. That has been studied. Uh, clean -up of hazardous waste is regulated by the Department of Ecology and they are working with the applicant on developing a clean -up plan that meets all of their regulatory issues. Um, once they, they have reached a clean -up plan that is acceptable to the Department of Ecology, Ecology will also monitor the work and then uh, City of Tukwila's Land Altering permits will only, will be issued to be in conformance with.that approved clean -up plan. And then after the end of the clean -up Ecology will certify that it's been done correctly. Um, so that's that. The other thing that happened is um, today, we also got a copy from um, of some comments from uh, John Radovich. He's the owner of the, REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 10 z a zz rw 2 J0 U O' N 0 W =; , u- al gQ D. �w z� 1- 0. zI- In al, n0 O N, 0 I— w uj Z. Uco O~ z owner /operator of the Fort Dent office buildings that are to the north of this site, like the State Farm Building I think. Um, so it's just across the river up here to the north. And they had submitted some comments on the SEPA, that we addressed in our SEPA memo. Um, and then they submitted another comment. They had a traffic engineer look at the traffic study and again I'd like to differ to public works on that issue. Do you have any other questions for me? Malina: Yeah I got a couple for you. Time of operation. I see that in the traffic study it shows that, it sounds like they're opening up at 10:00 a.m. in the morning. What time do they close the Fun Center during the evening? Gierloff: You know I'd like to, I think it's probably something like 10:00 or 11:00, but the applicants will, could answer that question better than me. Malina: Okay. Two, uh, the uh, the sky ride, uh, where is that going to be located on site and how much noise does this catapult or sling shot, whatever it, whatever that thing is, uh, does it generate? Gierloff: Well it's in an area right in here I believe. Meryhew: Malina: The lung capacity of the riders. Screams of the riders... (background laughter) Gierloff: Malina: Gierloff: Malina: Gierloff: I would guess that the screams are probably louder than the machine, but again I think the applicant could probably answer that. Okay. And a third one, on the hotel, we have a lawn area there. Uh, does it have a guest sitting area in the lawn, in the lawn area? Do you know? Um... I would think that they would probably have lawn chairs, but.you could ask.... I mean some form of, something for the folks that the uh, the hotel versus .... Well the access is controlled. There is a fence, there is access directly from, into it from the building and then there's a fence REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 11 rulur.,> n4L". u. r: .(1ii��li.:H�,'jr.�Y�.Y)ST�nwwr 12`1iv2.(u�pii:. Z W re JUG U0. tO w z: w 0, . ga. u.¢. co =w z I-: E- O. Z U� O- I U. 0. lllZ 0 z Malina: Gierloff: Malina: around the outside to keep people from wandering into the pool I think. Um, so I think it is available, I think they, I think on one of their renderings they, they had some little deck chairs out there. I don't think that there's fixed chairs. But the architect, you can, you can ask that. So you don't know if the lawn area has any uh, guest seating out there versus having to stay in a room consistently if they don't want to use the pool or any other facilities? I imagine they'll have chairs, like lawn chairs available for that. Um, the, go -cart track. Now that's pretty close, going back to the amusement center. The go -cart track is pretty close to Interurban. With the number of go -carts that are probably going to be in there, which is probably 10, 15 or 20 or possibly more, uh, those things will put out a ton of noise, go- carts will unless they're absolutely muffled. And uh, I have a big concern for noise. And I have a big concern as to the length of operation, during the evening, and a big concern for the security of the folks in the hotel. Gierloff: Well as far as operation I would defer that to, to the Huishes. You know siting, I think that they chose to put the go -carts at the corner of the site where they are nearest the road and the intersection, rather than have it over near the river, um, in trying to contain, to be a good neighbor. Um, I think that it probably, that way you're quite a distance and you're across quite a few lanes of traffic before you get to a neighbor on that side. Malina: Have we had any input from the police department as far as uh, security issues that they may have concerns with between the amusement park and the hotel operation or vice - versa? Gierloff: Well they did have a chance to... Malina: I didn't see anything in the staff report and normally we've always gotten something from the police department, making their per se recommendations. Gierloff: They did review the project early on. I REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 12 z • ~ w 6 • UO C) LLJ , =: • Da J H' U-1 zF E- a z �- .2 Di •U w La F- V: • uiz -1 think, I don't think that they had many comments. I think that they were incorporated into the project. The, there will be a fence that separates, that goes around Family Fun Center and would separate it from the hotel. Um, they're talking about I think a decorative iron fence around the Family Fun Center. And at one point they had talked about maybe some kind of masonry fence along the section, along the LaQuinta section through here. So I think that um, there will be some separation between the two, that you would be able to walk across at the sidewalks, but not necessarily the whole length between the two properties. Malina: Is the Fun Center going to have it's own protective service or will they use um, let's say off -duty Tukwila police officers? Gierliff: Uh, again I'd refer that to the applicant. Malina: That's all I got for right now. Neiss: I have a question on the um, uh, ground water and storm water drainage and the proximity to the river. What mitigation measures are being taken to prevent um, you know, toxic water getting into the river? Gierloff: Yeah. All of the parking lots will drain into catch basins under the parking lot. Uh, water will be detained through there. There'll be, it will go through an oil /water separator, which will take out a lot of um, the materials that come off the parking lots. After that it will go through a bioswale that is along the top here before it goes into the river. And there's certain formulas uh, per King County standards for how much treatment it has to have and how many linear feet that it needs to go through and I'm assured by the people who understand that that it meets those criteria. Uh, there's also, you know the Muckleshoots were very concerned about that issue. Um, and so one of the things they did that's sort of over and above normal standards is that um, run -off is most hazardous at the beginning of a dry spell when there's been a lot of time for things to accumulate on the roads. Once things get to flood stage, where it's been raining for days and days there's a lot less concern. So you're not actually required to treat the storm water after it, a certain level of storm because it's considered that it's so diluted and everything has already REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 13 ns%I,'ca.1 .'.i�.k'n�%i'%6:.etlCF•,' w.:aith."ca "t .. ... fi =:a2; "' , . a An ... • z w 6 -1 C..) U O: CO CY wI N LL' wO a.1 LL Q; I- w: z� I- 01 Z I-; uj U� !O wW: I U LL 0; U CO-! washed off at that point. However, um, because there was concern, they agreed to install a flap gate before, at the bioswale so that if the water rose up high enough to go into the bioswale, so that the water wouldn't be treated by the bioswale, the gate would shut and it would be kept in the underground detention areas `til the river went down again and then it could be metered out and treated. So I, I think that they've really worked to address that issue. Meryhew: Just, would you cover that east elevation of the guest wing of the hotel again for me as to what it looks like and what you're proposing it will be changed to? Gierloff: Yeah. Um, it is uh, it's the narrow end of the elevation and it does have, sort of a vertical element along here. And then it's got sort of a line of windows and then above this little, this doorway which is the entry way on this side, they have a small balcony that projects out and it provides a little bit of relief on that side and a little of sense of entry there. Um, but when we saw that other photo, that's the top one and that attachment of, of photos of LaQuinta Hotels, that seemed like a nicer approach. To kind of have a porch with a hipped roof and some columns maybe on the front. Um, that that would, that would really bring the scale down a little bit so you're walking into a one story little entry way instead of a four story wall. Um, and LaQuinta will have a chance to respond to that. I talked with somewhat about that previously. Livermore: But in the building that had that was there parking in the vicinity so that people would be utilizing that entrance. Looks to me on the drawing that we've got a situation here where the number of people that will go in and out of that entrance is exceedingly small because it's going out into a curve of the road. Gierloff: Well one thing that the Parks Department will ask for, although um, they hadn't to date, was that there be a trail connection put in through here. There is a trail connection along here and they thought it would be nicer to have one at each end of the site. So that may increase traffic a bit. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 14 Malina: In other words what you're... Livermore: That's not really practical. .Merhew: And Dave's point is on the folder that's here there's probably 25 spots, parking spots real adjacent to that. Livermore: Yeah. Where you could use it. So you'd logically expect people to come in. But you look up here and, and you have a roadway along here. You're talking about a fence between the hotel and the uh, the fun park, so you're not going to have people from here coming over here. Your main entrances are here. Your parking is along here and down here. So who's going to use that entrance? You know, why put extra money into it, if it's going to be more of an emergency exit or anything? And it... Meryhew: And there, though this is another site. Gierloff: Certainly the Planning Commission can make a different decision. Neiss: Any other questions for staff? Did you not have some other speakers that wanted to speak on other issues? Gierloff: Um, yeah. I would like to invite Public Works Department to address um, some of those traffic issues that have been raised in the comments. Barnett: Hello. It's a pleasure to address the Planning Commission. Let me introduce myself. I'm Gary Barnett, Senior Engineer for development with Public Works here in Tukwila. Wanted to address one particular letter that you haven't received any information on, that was handed to you earlier tonight by Nora and that is the letter from the Radovich Development Company. They had concerns about traffic and I'd like to go over those concerns briefly so I can kind of summarize them and then give you some information about our response and our viewpoints on traffic about the project. Two points raised in Radovich's letter primarily were that the impacts were underestimated. And secondly that the mitigation needs were underestimated. And then more particularly that uh, the intersections along the Interurban corridor REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 15 W te 6D: U O: w = N U.: W 0: d i• a 1-7w • I. z1.- F- 0'. Z :w • U� = W' — O: LL. 2: v:: •O z were jammed up and one of their access points is of course Fort Dent III and they were particular concerned about that intersection. And then the second more particular concern was uh, I would categorize as parking spill- over, where the pedestrian bridge would invite people to park over in Fort Dent III and not all the people coming to Family Fun Center, the hotel or the restaurant would find their way to that site; but they would go on around into Fort Dent III, park there and take the pedestrian bridge back. So that's a summary of the things that I saw in their letter. And how we view those issues is in this way, in looking at the letter that came from their traffic engineer, Chris Brown, he looked at the analysis that had been done by the applicants engineer and characterized the that their trip generation appears appropriate. And Public Works concurs that their generation appears appropriate. And that's important in that a lot of other issues tie to what the trip generation is. And mitigation is tied to the amount of trip generation. Briefly um, Public Works Department has a traffic concurrency ordinance. And based on the amount of trips that a project generates, this project or any other project, there are identified capital projects that dollar contributions are made towards. And this project will pay towards seven of those projects as their traffic is generated and then distributed to those seven intersections. The good news is that the main intersection closest to this project uh, Interurban at the uh, Fort Dent access and freeway on -ramp, is um, scheduled for construction this fall and next summer. We're widening the Interurban bridge to have dual left turn lanes. And that project which this Family Fun Center complex is paying towards, along with six others, but that project in particular will improve the level of service in that vicinity of the project. As the other capital projects that are currently in the CIP for the city are built, other traffic mitigations will in effect become put in place. Um, there was not a specific analysis done of all of these intersections all throughout Tukwila where this traffic that was generated would have gone because we already have a capital improvement program in place to improve those intersections and also more importantly we collect mitigation fees for trips to go REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 16 Ftkl:iG}:iaui:wa . r _ c.a:... a, , ......... ..... z Z H ne aa , JV 0 . N0. w =; J F-; N u_ w 0` g:3 ' z o. U r, — 0 H` w w! I O. 11• J Z z through those so each development, as is this one, is contributing to mitigating their impacts and that's on a comprehensive city- wide basis. And this project is scheduled to pay $155,000.00 to those various capital improvement projects. So we conclude that given the trip generation is appropriate, um, and mitigation fees are tied to trip generation, directly. You know for every trip that goes through an intersection there is a dollar impact associated with it. Um, both the impacts are correctly estimated and also the mitigation are appropriately estimated. So we have reasonable confidence that the project is doing their fair share and also that the capital improvement program in place here in the city that they're paying towards will insure that traffic levels of service are maintained. Malina: How, (cough) excuse me, how does your, how does the City study compare with Mr. Brown and Associates study as far as gross trips? I mean they're, they're talking about almost 5,000 vehicles per day. Barnett: Um, we see the traffic study just as the applicant's engineer does and also Chris Brown. There's no dispute over the amount of the trip generation. Um Mr. Brown, I quote from his letter saying, "The traffic generation appears appropriate." So I don't think that is a question before anybody here. Am I answering your question? Malina: Yeah you've answered mine. Barnett: Okay. Good. Neiss: I need some clarification. In terms of the mitigation that's being done, um, both by the applicant as well as the City, the projects, uh, I'm just thinking about driving through that intersection and, and how backed up it is now. Um, so I'm wondering how those mitigation measures are going to at least keep it as, as good or bad as it is without making it worse with the, you know, the onset of all the traffic that's coming from this? Barnett: Well the Interurban bridge widening for instance will create a dual left turn. And that is the critical most congested movement out of that whole intersection. When you make that one movement better, significantly, by REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 17 it+: e£iiiS'ati^,+;hr,u'�hw:,�tU,.:�: •;,rs::i •oe.•ra+,�• +t:.w �ltWx4 z � VO 0; , Nw w =: IL: w O; 2 g a. w a I- • Ili F: .H. O' z �- U ;O.N; SOH. W. �..• 0 r. • F-' w z: O F- z Neiss: doubling the capacity, all the other movements all around it get more time because this one critical movement wasn't hogging all that. So that one thing could help alleviate the other backups in that intersection? Barnett: Right. When we look to improve an intersection we go find the problem. Not all parts of an intersection are the big problem. But the whole intersection run by the same traffic signal benefits. Meryhew: Okay. And the schedule for completion of that his this year? Barnett: No. Construction starts this year and will be completed the following year, 1999. Arthur: Mr. Chairman I apologize for the timing of this, but uh, I was made a disclaimer since the last matter. Uh, the, on this letter that was handed to us late or outside of the package that we received, I understand that Mr. Chris Brown of Chris Brown and Associates is, is the correspondent that is being referred to. And to alleviate any tainting that this might cause, I want to disclose that in, in previous employment, previous things that I have done, I have had uh, a fairly extensive consultant /client relationship with Mr. Brown and Mr. Brown's firm. So I would like to know if either the proponent or Mr. Brown would object to my continuing in this matter. I do not believe that my prior association would have any effect on my decision in this matter. But... Neiss: Huish: Neiss: Does the applicant have any objections to Mr. Arthur remaining, on the counsel? Representative from the applicant? Should I state my name right now? Scott Huish. Address is 29111 Town Center Loop West, Wilsonville, Oregon 97070. And no, we do not have a problem with it. Do any planning commissioners have any objections? (background whispering - unintelligible 2138) Malina: Does Mr. Brown have any? Neiss: Mr. Brown do you have any objections? Are you REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 18 te z i ~` te .6 ..J U; U O' • { N o, 'CO W, • wI w O; ct- .W • • - I.. z�. .z �. tui U U; 13121 ip W w- U: f-. O- ti.• Z. z Arthur: here tonight? Would you like to step forward and let us know if you approve or disapprove of Mr. Arthur sitting on this commission? I don't know if he's been sworn in yet. I didn't see when he came in. Neiss: Was he not here during the swearing in? Brown: I wasn't sworn in, because I hadn't planned on saying anything. But uh, my name is Christopher Brown and have known Bill Arthur on previous projects both with Segale and with Puget Sound Power and Light as it was used in those days. I have no objection at all on behalf of Mr. Radovich. Neiss: Okay. Thank you. Okay. We can continue. Oh? Arthur: Mr. Chairman I once again apologize for the timing of this matter, but in the other letter that was handed to us by staff outside of the packet, uh, I see the name Joel Haggard, attorney and he like Mr. Brown is an individual who I've had fairly extensive dealings with in a client /attorney relationship in•the past. And as with Mr. Brown, I do not believe that association would bias my decision in this matter. But I want to ask if the proponent has any objections to my involvement in this and I would like to hear from Mr. Haggard whether he objects to me continuing and of course my fellow commissioners. Meryhew: Bill how long has it been since you were employed by any of these people? Arthur: I was never employed by them. It, it was uh, I would say around 10 years. But as I say the dealings were um, fairly extensive and I want to remove any taint that that might have on the proceedings. Meryhew: You haven't had any close association for somewhere around 10 years, is that correct? Arthur: No, in a client relationship. But I think that these are two individuals I still have business cards on in my file. So they're, they're a little bit uh (tape cuts out) closer. Meryhew: I guess I would suggest that maybe you recuse REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 19 WOW Arthur: Haggard: Neiss: Livermore: Malina: Livermore: Stetson: Livermore: Neiss: Meryhew: Neiss: Meryhew: Neiss: Meryhew: Arthur: yourself from this hearing for purposes of uh, just to make sure that there is no misunderstanding going on. I will accept the suggestion of my fellow commissioner. I'm Joel Haggard the attorney he was speaking of. It has been some years since I have represented, not Mr. Arthur personally, but rather the company that he worked for and to suggest that he step down.because I have represented him in the past on totally different matters, I'm not sure is totally appropriate. On the other hand it may be best for me because after he would review some of my comments and letters, I felt pretty worked over and I'm not sure I want to be that worked over again. But I certainly would have no objections to Mr. Arthur. He's always told me exactly what he thinks. Okay. Thanks Mr. Haggard. Uh, the rest of the commissioners uh either way on this? I don't have a problem with it, but I think it only takes one... I don't have either. You know I think if we threw that we've ever known in our There'd be nobody up here, bu ...we'd have many many times would have to step down. Let's put it to a vote then. I don't think it takes a vote Oh, doesn't it? out everybody life, uh... t... where some of us I think it's one person and I think it's a perception of fairness that is a possibility and rather than have that possibility, I•think the easiest thing, there's six of us.... Okay. I think the easiest thing is to... Your right. If I ran into someone that I had less than an intensive relationship with, and REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 20 oie,Wk:2Y i:,, .;�;i�J cf45 anc z =.Z'. h' w IX J U,. U O CO CI w =, Nom,. w LL Q = Ci; �- _ z I- 0: Z �.. no •UN ;oI- w w; H 0. • -O z Ufn, O I1 z Meryhew: that's a common occurrence, I would not have this problem. I trust Bill completely, but I think it's a perception of fairness concern and I don't want to see it muddying the water at a later time. Arthur: No I do not either and I appreciate Mr. Haggard's (unintelligible 2444). Neiss: So be it. Arthur: I do not want to feel... Neiss: You may be excused. Arthur: ...I do not want to feel tainted either, so thank you. Neiss: Okay. I'm not sure where we were now. Barnett: Are you done asking questions of Public Works? Neiss: Any other questions for Public Works, traffic? No other questions. Barnett: So then we're ready for the applicants. Hood: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is Mark Hood. My address is 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 1900 in Tacoma, 98401. I'm the attorney for the applicant here this evening, Family Fun Centers. Because we wish to concentrate on the specific design elements and features of this project. Uh, I will just introduce myself and indicate that if any legal issues come up that need to be addressed in the future, I'm available to do that. I think the staff has very appropriately set forth the manner in which this project meets the legal re, requirements and that being said, I'll introduce Scott Huish from Family Fun Centers and he'll begin our presentations. Huish: Good evening. My name is Scott Huish and I'd like to start by thanking you for your service and your time that you render to the City and uh, (unintelligible 2542) for the City I hope that our project will both improve and be an asset to the city. Neiss: Scott could you give us your address for the record please? REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 21 Huish: Yes. It is 29111 Town Center Loop West, Wilsonville, OR 97070. Neiss: Thank you. Huish: Um, we'd also like to thank the city staff, Steve Lancaster, Jack Pace, Nora and all those others who have helped us with our project. Together with them we have made some great improvements that, that will take place here. And we will take a tired run -down part of town and turn it into a beautiful gateway to the City of Tukwila and we look forward to the opportunity to do that. We've worked with them on uh, finalizing the final link of the pedestrian /bike trial along the back side of our property. We've worked with them to straighten out old Grady Way, make it, the access there easier. We've worked in providing access for the pedestrian bridge that will cross the Green River. We will be extending the water main up Interurban Avenue to the Green River Bridge which will complete the final loop of the fire water link, watering system. We will be upgrading um, the sewer and will be paying our assessment to the city in that area. We also agreed to pay the traffic medication fees in the intersections that have been mentioned. And we also have worked very long and hard to provide new and exciting habitat along the river bank and also a new off - channel habitat pond, which will provide some resting and nice habitat for the fish and the environment. At this time I'd like to just take a quick second to introduce our company. It was, it's been about 26 years since I first started on this project. And that was in our family room with my Dad and my uncle. They showed me the plans of a new Family Fun Center that was about to be built back then. And from that time on we've been growing and improving, making our business as best as we can make it and what we have today is, will be the flagship of our company. We've been in business for 41 years. We are owner /operated. We will have an owner /operator on site as a general manager here to take care of the day in and day out operations. Um, we are heavily involved with the community and with youth. We do a lot with the DARE program and other community activities. And we provide um, a lot of seasonal and year round jobs for the youth in the community as well as their REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 22 •z _i0! U O .cna 'w w: Nw w 0.. 2 J I. a I • Z �. • I— O' Z ~` w • O N' ;O I- :w w: w . Z ;. ui =i • O~` z Stever: Clear: families. Um, at this time I'd like to introduce the rest of our team real quick. They will say their name and their address as they come up. Um, this is my father right here, John Huish, who has started the brother, the business with his brother, 41 years ago. This is Dick Hendry who will be our owner /operator in this area. And we have Chandler who is from Mulvanny who is working on our, in our design team, but represents the architectural firm. Chandler would you like to come up and (unintelligible 2770) My name is Chandler Stever from Mulvanny Partnership. Address 11820 Northrup Way, Bellevue, WA 98005. Um, our design objectives were to incorporate uh, the concerns of the city as well as to meet the uh, objectives of the, of the client. Uh, we believe we've done that, uh, in creating a fun and exciting building with modulations of, of surfaces that will break up the, the surfaces which is I know concerns of the city and uh, in so doing creating a fun appearance. Also in placement of the building on the site, to take advantage of the uh, of the space on the site and place parking in an area uh, that would both buffer the train tracks to the east and the Grady Way Bridge to the south, while leaving the main space in front the Family Fun Center uh, uh, the park like area, opening up to uh, the river. So in short we've worked um, I think very well with the City of Tukwila to achieve a lot of design goals and I'll be available to answer any of your questions as we go. And to discuss the landscaping, um, I'd like to introduce Mike Clear from Weisman Design Group. Thanks Chandler. I'm Mike Clear, 2329 East Madison, Seattle, WA 98112. Um, we have designed the landscape for the entire site including the hotel, the restaurant and the riverbank and coordinated, (unintelligible 2916). We've also been retained by the LaQuinta to prepare, prepare the working drawings for the hotel. Um, by meeting Family Fun's requirements for landscape which are, which are fairly extensive, um, we uh, exceed, far exceed the city's requirements. Um, now I'll just talk briefly about four different areas of landscape, the site buffers, uh, site interior landscaping, parking and the Green REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 23 z 6 C3 0 W x W IL 1,_. w O. LLa S.0_ lii I- O` Z i- w 2 ww O .. z w z River. The buffers are uh, heaviest along the perimeters of the property, along Grady Way and um, Grady Way and Interurban. We also are providing a fairly dense buffer between Family Fun Center and the hotel here. I'm also providing landscape buffers along the frontage along Monster Road and a buffer between the hotel and restaurant, which aren't quite as intense. The interior landscaping, as I mentioned Family Fun has a strong commitment to the landscape of their site and it's a very important part of the outdoor attraction so it tends to be very ornamental, very detailed and Family Fun provides a pretty high level of maintenance for those areas. Uh, the parking lot, we're providing deciduous trees for shade. Um the ground plain is low maintenance, pretty tolerant shrubs and ground coverage and we will be adding the, the islands as um recommended by staff. The, the Green River. Now we have been working with the wetland consultant, wetland resources to propose removing all the blackberries along the slopes of the river. But we will be saving the willows that are located here and here. There are some pretty large existing willow trees. Those will be saved. Uh, we will be regrading the slope and replanting all native veg, vegetation on the slope. Um, you know it's going to give a much greater habitat value for wild life than existing blackberries which have a pretty low value for, for wild life habitat. In addition as has been mentioned, um, we're proposing an off - channel pond for a salmon habitat. That in addition to log snags along the main channel of the river, which provide cover for salmon. We'll also have log snags in the off - channel pond and that entire area will be re- vegetated with native plants. Um, in general um, as I said Family Fun has a commitment to a pretty high level of landscape development. It's going to be a very detailed and very well- maintained landscape project. And, and re- vegetation of the Green River slope is, is a huge benefit to the community. If you've been out there you can see what it is. It is a field of blackberries now and uh, this, this section here kind of shows you what, what we're proposing, the mix native evergreen REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 24 :z z ww. uQl � J U: :U. O' Nw w=;• N LL_ w0 • za, z � .0: • O N. 0 F-• w w: Z:, ui N; O1 z Livermore: conifers, large deciduous trees, and native shrubs along with the log snags at the edge of the river. Now what's the size of this pond you're calling it, right in here? Clear: Yeah, the off - channel pond. This is a 40 scale drawing, so you're looking at about 120 in this direction, about 8 feet this way and it slopes back up to... Livermore: And that's low enough to have a full time channel to the river? Clear: There is no flood in the spring. The um, the depth, the mean water level will fill this area. So it, it, may dry in the summer, but... Livermore: So you're going down from the existing level a ways then? Clear: Oh, right. Right. Livermore: Okay. Clear: (unintelligible 1195). These side slopes here, the blue color is normally where the water level will be and the side slopes are all sloped down. Surrounding it it will be re- vegetated. Livermore: Now is this, are you going to be able to utilize the dirt that's, 000ps, along this area here, the big hill on the rest of the property or is this going to have to be a net export site? Clear: That material will be used to raise the level of the, the majority of the site out of the flood plain. Livermore: So you will be able in essence to use all of it and not have to truck a lot of it off of here or... Clear: Yeah. It will be a balance on site. Malina: Okay. It says that you're keeping so many of the weeping willows that are along the riverbank side to enhance the fish habitat. I don't see, unless my eyes are bad, can you show me where those weeping willows are at? Clear: Yeah. The grouping right in here ... REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 25 nnr mnn� i �� Malina: That's right in there. Clear: Malina: Clear: Livermore: ....yeah, and the #2 here. It looks like there's two, about seven or eight. And they're in good shape? Yes, yes. There is kind of an emergent wetlands along here right now. Malina: Yeah. Clear: The only existing vegetation of any stature, there's, you know, are blackberries. Marvin: What type of deciduous trees are on the perimeter and, and on the interior park of this park? Clear: What type? Marvin: Yeah. What types are you using? Clear: We haven't picked out the specific trees, but it would be like maples, oaks, maybe um, honey locus, that type of a larger shade tree. Any other questions. Stetson: How does the applicant feel about the City's request to change the parking um, planting islands? Clear: They have no problem making that change. We will do that. Thank you. Neiss: Thank you. Livermore: I guess I've got a question for the architectural site of this. I noticed in spending some time and walking around on the site and that, that you have some high tension lines that uh, come up to this point and then go along here. With a four story hotel, how close are those upper floors going to be to those high tension power lines going through there? Stever: Everything is outside of the... Neiss: Excuse me. Could you speak into the mike. That's the only way we can record this. Stever: Everything is outside of the easement. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 26 Q �ZL w 6 • wz • W o'. u.a . • d • • Z •H o. Z • V 0i oN .w wO • 0 Z Pace: Well, excuse me... This is a tape. If you could give your name and address? Stever: Okay. Chandler Stever from Mulvaney Partnership, 11820 Ste 300, Northrup Way, Washington, Bellevue, WA 98005. Uh, yeah. There, there is an easement and all the buildings are placed outside of that easement. The easement itself has tolerance uh, for a sway of wires with, built within that easement. Livermore: Okay. But I'm interested in... Stever: How close? Livermore: ...how many feet from a high tension line are those upper floors going to be? I mean are they 50 feet away, 25 feet away? Stever: It•'s approximately 50. That, that's a good guess. The building itself is probably 20, 25 feet from the easement itself. And then there is approximately a 30 foot tolerance from the furthest sway of that line to the easement according to Puget Sound Energy who I've been working with. Marvin: On some of the photos uh, in the packet here, it shows masonry walls which looks like around the perimeter of the park. Will that be used here? Clear: No we're, well yes and no. We're proposing masonry only adjacent to LaQuinta. The other perimeters will uh, wrap around the rest of the site with a decorative iron fence which will... Marvin: So you will be enclosed? Clear: It will be completely enclosed. Access is controlled through the building itself. Marvin: I see. That's the way in? Clear: That's the only way in and out except for emergency. Marvin: And what will this fence, I, I, what will this fence look like? Clear: Uh, decorative iron fence. I... Marvin: Painted? REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 27 Clear: Yeah, probably black iron. It should be reasonably looking, good looking fence. Meryhew: Six, six feet high? Clear: Yeah. Stetson: I'm not sure who to properly address this question to, but will there be facilities in, in the parking lot for large vehicles, for buses, for school buses or recreational, you know, recreation groups who bring in larger vehicles? Clear: Livermore: Clear: Marvin Clear: Huish: I suppose not, but it would probably be easy to accommodate a couple of larger buses in certain portions of the parking lot. The parking lot is not always going to be full except maybe on opening day. One design feature I have a little problem with in this whole thing is uh, we've been pretty clear that we kind of wanted our compact parking dispersed around the parking lot to minimize hassles of adjacent people and hitting doors and so on and so forth. I notice that the hotel, you've got a solid line of compact stalls on the south side of there, with very little access through it to get to that entryway. Uh, I'm not so concerned with the compact length there as I am the compact width and all that distance with that little bit of relief in there with full sized stalls. Perhaps we should take this opportunity to introduce LaQuinta who should probably describe their portion of the site. Their architects are here. So with that let's introduce LaQuinta. I have, could I have, I have, could I have one more question for you before... Um, your hours of operation? I would allow the applicant to answer that. The hours that we anticipate to be hold will be 10:00 a.m. in the morning 'til, 10:00 a.m. on Sunday through Thursdays, then 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, open `til 12:00 on Friday and Saturday evening. Marvin: Will this be year -round you believe or summer REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 28 Huish: Marvin: Year - round. It will be year -round operation, yes. Stetson: Will you be charging an entrance fee then I assume at the building where you come in, is that...? Huish: Stetson: Huish: Marvin: Huish: There is no entrance fee. It is a pay per attraction park... Pay per... ...so anyone can come in. If they'd like to use the attractions then they would pay for what they liked to use. Do you have your own security system uh, personnel I should say? Yes we do. And we have designated Dick Hendry to talk about that. (background whispering and laughter) Marvin: Line him up. Hendry: Everybody gets their chance. My name is Dick Hendry. I live at 825 Murray Drive in the City of El Cahone in California. We do have our security system. The head of our security system is FBI trained and qualified to train police officers through the FBI Academy. He does the training of all of our security officers and we do have a total security system in all of our facilities. We also have a very strict dress code which we enforce and it has to do with wearing sagging pants and tattoos and uh, the proper manner that we want people dressed in when they come to the facility. We do not allow drugs or alcohol on the property and uh, on many occasions when the traffic begins to get a little bit big or heavy, we still stop the people at the entrance or driving into the parking lot. We will actually do a visual inspection of the cars to make sure that people are not coming onto to the property in an intoxicated or under the influence of drugs ,because we don't want them there. It's too much of a hazzard for everybody else. And so we're very concerned about that and very strict about that enforcement at our facilities. It's a family entertainment center. It's there. People are encouraged to bring their children REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 29 z z UO ID: • WI -J (.1) LL` wO tea, cn3: E_- _ Z :F-a Z F-, :w w. O —; w w' O; z: wN U H p--+ O z Malina: Hendry: Sexton: Livermore: and uh, many of them do it and just drop them off and leave them there and feel very comfortable because there is the security there that will insure their safety while they're off doing other things. Do you have parking lot facility if there that, complex? video camera surveillance for your and from your off -site um, go cart there's something that happens since it's away from the main We do have a very extensive security camera system on premises and uh, we have them strategically collocated to allow us monitor those activities on our property, both in the building and outside also. Any other questions? Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, my name is Doug Sexton. I work with Todd and Associates. Our address is 4019 N. 44th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85019. We are the project architects for this LaQuinta in Tukwila. And I will address the questions that I've heard Commissioner Livermore and Commissioner Malina ask about the security and about, also the compact parking spaces. Typically the compact parking spaces introduced into a project or because of the site constraints and trying to get the parking numbers uh, to satisfy the parking ordinance. The problem with trying to mix your compact parking spaces and disperse them around the site is that they are shorter in length and what we are trying to do is satisfy a, a fire truck access uh, problem with getting the islands wide enough to circulate around the project and not have any interference for the fire trucks so they have clear accessibility to the buildings and all parts of the buildings. If we mix the short spaces in with the long spaces we defeat the purpose of trying to get the wider aisle for the fire truck. Okay. But let me address that for just a minute. I'm not so much concerned about the length as I'm the width. Because you know as well as I do, that these compact spaces are going to have, the majority of them are going to be filled with full -sized cars. So it's a reality that you're not going to have compacts parked against the building and the full -sized out across the aisle. My concern is the width. When you start putting full -sized cars in REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 30 �'t; a.'`"n; Sexton: compact spaces people start banging doors and chipping doors and you have ill tempers, etc. being expressed out there and thankfully I see a move away from cramming a whole bunch of compact spaces together there. Would you be willing to, to give a regular width with the compact length along the face of that building so there's a little more room for people to get in and out? I mean after all we are talking a hotel where people are going to be taking stuff out of their car to, to take it up to their rooms and carrying suitcases etc. And, and when you have the narrow width of a compact stall with full -sized cars in them which we all know there will be, you're going to have problems. Well part of the problem is the configuration of the site. We'd certainly be willing to look at with the planning staff to see what we could do to maybe move some of the compact spaces to the outside perimeter, but as far as changing the width, I don't know if there is a way we can change the width and still meet the parking ordinance for the numbers. LaQuinta typically uh, builds on all sites a one to one ratio with the hotel and that's satisfies all the parking requirements and we would be able to reduce the number of compact spaces if that's all we had park. But Tukwila has an additional ordinance for parking for employees for one for every additional, for every twenty spaces that we provide for the guests. Um, and so in order to satisfy that requirement, we have the number of compact spaces that you see. Um, all I can say to you Mr. Livermore is that we could talk with staff about maybe moving some of those spaces to the outside. But as far as changing the dimensions I don't think we could get the numbers that we require in order to satisfy your parking ordinance. There was another question earlier, if I could go on, about the security for the hotel. There was a question about the walls and I think Family Fun Center has indicated that there is a masonry wall that separates the hotel property from their Family Fun Park. In addition after 10:00 LaQuinta has a security guard that stays 'til 6:00 in the morning. And after 10:00 the only access into the hotel is with a somebody that has a key, a card to get to their room. Or they could ring the buzzer at the front lobby to be let in to register if they come in late. I'd like to go REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 31 z w. ce O 0 CO o: u) w =, J H . .N w � U � = d _` • 1- 0 w ~, !O 0 1-. • w w. oi Z. sw Vj O z on and describe a little bit more about the hotel if I may. As you are aware uh, we have a four story hotel and I've got some 11" by 17" handouts that you can use to look at, to follow along with the board. You've all probably seen these in your packets. (pause while papers are being handed out) Sexton: This hotel has 153 rooms. Um, it's four stories. The lobby is a three story structure and on the second and third floors of the lobby we have a special king suites. In addition in the lobby building itself we have two meeting rooms. Each seat approximately 30 to 35 people and they do have a dividing wall that opens up that make, to make one large meeting room that seats 60 to 70 people. Also off the lobby area there's a small dining area inside the lobby and also on the patio for continental breakfast for, off of a self -serve counter that the guests can partake of a continental breakfast in the morning. There was a question about the seating arrangements outside in the courtyard. Yes there are tables and chairs and lounge chairs in the courtyard. We have a patio just outside the lobby with a hard surface sidewalk amongst a landscaped turf area. There is a gazebo provided for people to sit in. Then there is a separate bench area around the swimming pool that has also has tables and lounge chairs around it, around the pool with a trellis or a pergola over one end of the pool area. And access to that courtyard is also with a room key or through the lobby and also into the pool area. Fenced, it's also fenced off. And we do have, as you saw on Weisman's landscape plans for the tr01 that comes off of the lobby building out to the river trial and hiking and bike path. We believe that's a great amenity for the hotel as well as the amenities that we're providing for our guests. Now we are a limited service hotel which means we don't provide full conference resort type facilities. And it's basically for the business travel, traveler that wants to come to Family Fun Center and not to have to spend a great deal of money on room rates and that kind of thing. Now the architecture of the building is uh, somewhat Southwest, but we prefer to think of it as a more modern Mediterranean style. We have gable group. We have a color palette here that we have selected just for Tukwila, which is darker REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 32 earth tones than we normally. The first, from the first or second floor is, that's a rosy color that we use on the base of the building. And it's broken up with shadow lines or revealed joints in the bottom portion to help break up the horizontal math of the building as well as banding that we have projecting out on each floor line as you go up the building. Um, as you get to the facia of the building and some trim, at the top we have that green color that you saw on that, on the color board •which is a, a teal or a blue -green color. Uh, we think that kind of ties with the primary colors and the colors that the Family Fun Center is using on their building. The windows and doors are residential in scale and this whole building is made to feel like uh, a place that people are welcome to. It's a warm friendly feeling. Gives them kind of a residential character as you come up to the building. Um, the point brought up by Mr. Livermore earlier about the canopy on the east end of the building is a point well taken. We feel that there is very little uh, traffic on that end as far as pedestrians are concerned. Most of the parking is on the side of the building. We do have mid -entry points to the building which we feel most, will be the ones that are mostly used as well as the ones in the front. This provides for exiting purposes required code. It probably will be used occasionally, but not as much as everyone thinks or believes. And we don't know that adding a larger canopy is necessarily something that needs to be done. We'll leave it up to you. It there's any other questions I'll be happy to answer them. Neiss: Any questions? Thank you very much. Sexton: Thank you. Malina: I'd like to get back to somebody from the Fun Center. I still have uh, a couple questions that I have here. One would be the sky -ride, this Maxi sky -ride and the go -cart. Huish: Yes. Regarding the Sky Max. It is a, pretty much a silent ride. .It is a 20 horsepower electric motor. And there are no other sound parts that would make any noise. Malina: Okay. How about the go -cart track? How many go -carts do you have or are you going to have approximately? REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 33 :xttd: rx; z 6 .J U 0 0' vow w =. w 0' fir; d w d, =w z� F- O' Z -: D o: O N,: W O; ui z 2` 0 ~� z Huish: We anticipate having 28 to 30 go- carts. Malina: Okay. .Huish: And it is a very good question, because it is an issue that a lot of cities have. And so therefore the manufacturer has taken great lengths to um provide a nice quiet go- cart.. This particular manufacturer is called J & J Recreation and they're built down in Oregon. They're sold, the go -carts are sold world -wide and they have, an extensive muffler system built onto them. And they pride themselves that they have an engine that is quieter than a.lawnmower. And that was correct, we did strategically plan the go -cart track to be closer to the Interurban and to Grady Way and 405, away from the river. Malina: Well yeah, it shows that there in the rendering. I was just more concerned with the amount of noise with what you're generating off of Interurban and Grady Way with a full - fledged go -cart. My kids had go -carts and they were noisy. Huish: A point that was made, and I'll respond to that. Um, our go -carts are run at different times, so if we do have 28, only half of them will be ran at one time. And that is a safety feature that we have built into our operation. Um, regarding the sound and, and Grady Way, we had a situation like this at one of our other projects, where we had a sound test done and due to the noise, the ambient noise of the freeway, um, the sound test proved inconclusive that there was any additional noise at 100 feet from the go -cart track, due to the go -carts being in operation. And this will be the 405 north and southbound, plus a heavily traveled Grady Way. Malina: Do you feel that you have enough landscaping there to create that buffer um, help reduce whatever you may have there? Huish: As to the sound? Malina: Right. Huish: Yes. I believe there is extensive buffering with the six foot wall that goes between our properties and also, would that be the sound going north or south into the freeway? REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 34 r Malina: Huish: Malina: Huish: It would be going, well you have, the track is right here so that would be what, west? Going this way? Correct. Um, I believe that the um, the noise would be going into the, the, into Grady Way and the freeway interchange, which would be drowned out... Malina: Well the freeway interchange is an overhead, um, it's an overhead section there. Livermore: Commercial light industrial zone too. Malina: Oh, that's right. Okay. Livermore: With railroad tracks next to it, so... Malina: Yeah. Okay. Stetson: Are there any um, passive recreational facilities in your Fun Centers such as a swing set or a monkey bars or something for, for children who are perhaps uh, tired of (laughter), the mechanized recreation or Mom who wants to sit and just be quiet for a little while? Huish: Stetson: Huish: Stetson: Huish: Um, yes we do have, on the interior of the building, we have a specific room set aside where um, Mom or a grandparent can go sit down. It is located at the very front of the building so that they can always monitor the traffic in and out and that room is set aside for quiet um, patrons. Uh, huh. Regarding the inside we also do have a soft play unit that is designed specifically for kids to, to play on. Do you have a, what age groups are you, do you aim for? I would, I would say that our target market is the family. Mother and father or single parent family that like to come with their children. It could be anywhere from age three to eighteen. Stetson: So there are facilities for three year olds, REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 35 1--z D JO. U O ;. N w;. w =: J �r wO u. <' co • =a F— w. _; F- O. Z F- LU w U� u. O'. wZ co:. H H` z for little, for toddlers? Huish: Absolutely, yes. Our attraction mix is really broad. We have everything that a three year old, all the way up to an eighty three year old can enjoy. And that is part of our goal is to provide a place where the family can come together and enjoy an afternoon at the park. Stetson: At the risk of turning this into something else, I was looking on your floor plans for the building and, and uh, how set are, are the designs of the floor plans? Um, in specific (laughter) I always hate to bring this up, but I'm looking at the women's restroom, okay. And um, you know, there's more stalls for men than there are for women. And you know how it is, we take longer, and it, there's never enough. Malina: Way to go Kathy. I mean sure, you would count, right. Stetson: I'm the only one up here that would notice this, so... Meryhew: No you're not. Stetson: Thank you. Thank you Vern for your support. Meryhew: I just didn't have the guts to say anything. (laughter) Stever: I can address that at this point. I was actually uh, do I need to say my name and address again? Neiss: Just say your name. Stetson: No. • Stever: Chandler Stever from Mulvaney. Uh, I was investigating the uh, all of the toilets today and indeed code requires for six more fixtures for women then men. So we will be making those adjustments. Stetson: Thank you. Are there, are there other restroom facilities other than the ones in the building? Are there some out on the grounds? Huish: Yes there are. There are additional restrooms that are located in the children's area which REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 36 could also be used as an additional um, women's facility. Um, specifically we do have two toilets in there, one a normal sized one and then one a child sized toilet. Stetson: Oh good. Huish: Neiss: Huish: We have some experience in that area and we like to provide the services. Are there changing tables in there too? Well I'd like to get to that. Um, upstairs we also are providing a family room bathroom. I have three kids of my own and I appreciate going to a restroom where I can go and I can close the door and I have a nice place where I can set my child down and change diaper or be there with, with my little girls and take the proper time that I need. There will also be a; there will be a toilet, a sink and a changing table in there for a family restroom experience. z • U O w = -Jl- • u. W O: u. Q. N D= =d zf-�: i--(3 z I-: win Stetson: Great. Thank you. D; D p: (laughter) 'O N, Stetson: Those are some important to us. i wi v Huish: There is also additionally which I don't, let --• C) me see if it shows on the... Iii . Z• U F- _ Neiss: It's real stuff. Z ~' Huish: ...first floor. There is also one more additional restroom that will be located behind the counters for our employees. Um, it is not uh, it is not on this plan, but we have it designed behind the counter. And then that's for the interior building employees and then we'll have, also have an additional restroom outside in the maintenance building... Stetson: Okay. Huish: ...for our employees. Stetson: Thanks. It sounds like you're thought this through. Huish: Yes. Marvin: Have the motel owners expressed any concern REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 37 over the go -cart noise? Huish: No. They know what we are. They have visited our sites and they do not have a problem. They, they know what they're getting into and they are comfortable with it. At least that's what they're expressed to me. Neiss: Okay. Any other questions? Thank you very much. Huish: Thank you. Neiss: Okay. We have a number of citizens that have signed up to speak. Um, I'm just going to start at the top of the list and work my way . down. I'd like to ask each of you that if an issue that you have personally, that's been addressed either by a previous speaker or another citizen, uh, I'd like to move to new business as we move along so that we don't repeat the same issue over and over. So uh, if you could help us that way it would help speed the process up. Um, the first person on the list is Sandra Breslich. Breslich: Thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Sandra Breslich. I reside at 6283 So. 153rd Street, Tukwila, zip 98188. I have been a home owner resident there for 18 and one half years. Prior to signing up I had not received the handout and I'm pleased that most of my concerns have been answered by the public safety uh, representative and also the roads representative and the owners. However, I have a couple of quick questions. The preparation done by the assistant planning director stated that the, since most of the people will be coming to the Fun Center after 10:00 a.m., there should be little traffic problem. Having uh, driven from Kent and /or Renton, to Tukwila, to my home for 15 years down Grady Way and /or down the um, Valley Highway, I can assure you that there has always been and it still now and probably will be worse, a traffic tie -up between 3:00 and 5:00 p.m. when people come home from Boeing towards uh, Southcenter and I -405. Um, that leads to my question, one to the project people. When is the Fun Center to be completed? What is the completion date if I may ask? John Huish: Hopefully in November of this year. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 38 z H• z U O; co o. W CO u;. w O gam. LL Q H z U a +O .ti w w; Ua u.~O' w z. U z Breslich: I... Neiss: Let the record reflect that that was November... Breslich: November 1998? Neiss: Thank you. Huish: (unintelligible 1296) We plan to complete construction in November or December of this year. Neiss: Thank you. Breslich: It is my recollection this evening that the mitigation and changing of the roads is going to take place in 1999. If this is correct, how long a time will there be more congestion? Neiss: We'll raise that issue with staff. We'll have.. Breslich: Thank you again for allowing me to speak. Neiss: Thank you. Okay. The next person on the list, Steve Delay. State your address for the record please. Delay: My name is Steve Delay. I live at 14469 57th Avenue South, Tukwila. And uh, most of my concerns about this um, development have been answered so far, but I have two issues and um, one is what is the counsel going to do about um, pressuring Metro to increase bus service to this area, especially beyond the Interurban corridor and the directions from Renton and the um, and the Southcenter area. And then secondly uh, about the go- carts. What is the limit or the time frame that they're going to be running the go- carts. Like I know that the um, they've listed a time of operation, but because of the noise level there after hours I'm kind of worried about hotel patrons and then your local neighborhoods. That noise spilling over into Fort Dent and the (unintelligible 6002) areas. We might be able to hear that noise even up on the level of the hill above it. City Hall may hear it where the park is. And so I'm kind of thinking that there should be some sort of limitations on the hours of operation of the go- carts. Like an example, like 10:00. (unintelligible 6042) I'm just throwing it out for discussion. So those are my two major concerns. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 39 z ▪ w U 0: 0 co al; wI J H. . N IL: w 0. w¢ F. � au I z�! I- O:. Z w. 2 U 0 :0-; ,0 1- al I V; loTi w z. — Y. 0 E'; z Neiss: Haggard: Okay. Thank you very much. Next person on the list is Mr. and Mrs. Graves. No here? Okay. Mr. Joel Haggard. State your name and address for the record. I'm Joel Haggard, 1200 IBM Building, Seattle, WA 98101. I'm appearing here tonight as an attorney. I've got a few comments by way of analysis and suggestion. I guess really though I ought to start by saying I think you're doing a nice job. It looks good. It looks great. The concept.of family, bringing them together for entertainment superb. Having the hotel there, not that we don't have enough hotels in Tukwila. Maybe we need another one, but that's fine too. But I'm somewhat struck by a couple of items. Maybe we're trying to fit a, fit a size 10 foot into a size 8 shoe. What I mean by that. Well, we've got a concern by one member that's here tonight about the width of the compact spaces all along the front of the hotel. Car banging, things like that. Sure the applicant is going to take a look at that with the staff but that isn't responsive and maybe the point is, they don't, they aren't able to make them wider because they don't have any room to put more parking spots in there. Maybe they're just got too many facilities on this site and they ought to quit trying to put that size 10 foot into a size 8 shoe. And that's an essential element with respect to the conditional use criteria and what is appropriate for this site. I was also a little bit concerned about the suggestion that they're going to start construction in November or December of this year. It's quite typical in the development area to recognize that construction activities, particularly that maybe a little more erosive in nature than other type of activities with the proximity of a (unintelligible 6345) body, is extremely sensitive. There's usually restrictions that should be imposed, either under the shoreline development act or under the hydraulic permit. And it would seem to me somewhat symptomatic of maybe not only too much in too small of a shoe, but maybe too early without getting the right job done. Because there are also other issues with respect to the hazardous wastes on this site. We've had, had an opportunity to review volume studies about that high. I'm sure you've reviewed them too. They're referenced in the SEPA documents about the hazardous conditions REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 40 • z Iz :U O w0: w• J f" WLL w0 J' IL •:. �w z O; Z i-- Dp U ID U w U - O. Lfi w z. O z on site. The barium, the cadmium, the selenium, copper. These are all particular concern for water quality standards and also for the aquatic biota particularly the salmonids. So the question of when the work is being done is absolutely critical and it relates to the design elements of what they're going to do and when they're going to do it. Because without the knowledge of when they're going to do it or when they're not going to do it, you can't determine whether or not the conditional use criteria have been established and there isn't that public health hazard, there isn't the impact upon the biota, there isn't that harm. On the other hand, as I look at the toxic waste and water quality issues besides the water quality.standards in the salmonids. We also have the issue of some rather substantial excavation and exposure of soils below the surface, particularly up there in that northeast corner where the flood refuge is and frankly that's a great concept, building in the flood refuge and increasing the capacity. I mean that's great. But there's an exposure of some particularly difficult materials in that area, which again should be controlled. Not just by temporary sedimentation and erosion control, but basically by temporary dams to prevent any erosion of any of that material getting into the river, particularly during the period of August 15th to April 15th of May 15th of each year. If they're going to do construction in November or December, then there are serious concerns as to whether this proposal has significant adverse impacts that have not been adequately analyzed. Along that standpoint we raised a lot of comments based upon material that I'm sure has been given to you and you've reviewed as well, regarding the nature and the materials on the site. I was given tonight at 8:18 p.m. a copy of a memo that Nora did and gave to Steve with respect to my letter that was submitted last Monday. And it was kind of interesting because the whole flavor, tenor of the toxic waste and water quality section of the comments that I made that are contained in my letter really come down to say, well, it's no big deal because DOE is going to take care of the whole thing. That's somewhat bothersome because the point is, without the analysis and the full disclosure in the environmental documents, the informed decision maker is not REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 41 ,z w` U 0.. N -0 CO w: w =. J (Ow g Q. w D. _. ?t- za U� ;O • w w! 0. . -0' U , • f'- z • available and without that information, and without those studies, as a part of the decision making process on this project, you have to consider SEPA and the documentation and so I'm concerned if it hasn't been made available to you. I'm particularly concerned by one of the introductory comments here tonight that was made with respect to SEPA and I want to find my notes so that I don't misstate or mischaracterize. It was the SEPA threshold determination that was issued before this hearing. Comments expired. Monday we got some comments. We have written a response to the comments, ext. Bottom line is, but you don't worry about SEPA. Well, if there is ever a misstatement of either the law or the intent with respect to the state environmental policy act, which requires every decision maker on every permit action involved in a project, to consider the environmental impacts, that comment stands out in a fairly glaring fashion. I've also been concerned with respect to this one response with respect to DOE kind of taking care of everything and we don't really need to worry about it. There's a very fundamental requirement under the MTCA law and that is when you've got the type of industrial waste that are located on this site, it's, it's just not not farm waste like manure. The reports are clear on that area. That without DOE approval there can be no transfer to a non - industrial use on this site. Again a timing issue. So we've got two timing issues besides the one the lady just mentioned and that's the timing of the completion of the construction of the improvements for the dual left turn lane. We put all of that together and start looking at the traffic, then I started to get a little more concerned because in the response to our letter to the City primary concept is well don't worry about the access points, the two, particularly the one that's so close from spacing from Interurban Avenue, `cause the city engineers approved it. That doesn't make any difference. I don't care whether he's approved it or not. If it doesn't meet standards and if there isn't an adequate traffic study to examine the accident history and there was no accident history at all in the traffic reports, so we don't even have any information base for that. And without a REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 42 structure analysis with respect to queuing and the intersection spacing which is a fairly standard requirement we've got some very substantial difficulties there. There was also the comment with respect to the concerns that we had on traffic. We have some fairly substantial concerns that are contained on page 2 of the letter. In review of the traffic study, the site not having the traffic safety and accident history information which is fairly typical and normally.... THIRD TAPE COUNTER 226 - April 23, 1998 Haggard: ..required, we got a little concerned about the use of outdated data because a lot of the counts were done from 1989 through 1997, the bulk of them in the 1989 through about the 1993 period. And I think your own common sense tells you that traffic has changed over a period of time and perhaps there are probably more cars on the road, particularly in this area than there was in 1989. And that hasn't been disclosed or analyzed. There is also the concern regarding whether or not we really got a worse case analysis which is required under the environmental policy act. `Cause what they've done is take the data for Thursday and Friday and averaged it to come up with a number and of course one number is here and one number is here, and while on the average it's okay. But it's almost 12 to 23 percent less than the peak conditions that they've experienced actually and I've discussed that in my memo on page 2, under paragraph 3. They said, well don't really worry about because, you know, 150 of our trips are really going to be internal, i.e., they're going to drive, come into the site to go to the amusement center, Family Fun Center and then they'll get in their car and drive out onto Monster Road and go over to a hotel or whatever. 15% are going to be internal trips and they get deducted. And yet they tell us very very specifically at the top of page 11 of the traffic analysis that most internal trips will probably become pedestrian trips rather than vehicle trips. Well their own traffic engineer tells us that most of them are going to be pedestrian rather than vehicle, then why do we reduce by using average and then by reducing again for 15% the total trips based upon internal trip. So then REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 43 v we did raise the concern regarding the right out, right in /right out. Our primary concern had to do with this. When we looked at the, the trip distribution patterns, now these are the drawings with the little arrows and the percentage on them. I'm sure you've seen the traffic study report and you're reviewed that yourself, `cause that's part of the environmental documentation that's required for you to (unintelligible 356). It's got a lot of trips coming down Grady and coming down Interurban. Particularly Grady (unintelligible 366), yeah it's Grady coming down. And you know, I don't know how they're going to get in there, `cause they'd have to make a left hand turn to get in, and you know, the City says, no it's going to be right in /right out only. Well if that's the case, why didn't the traffic study using current traffic data, under a worst case basis, analyze the actual projected trip distribution. It isn't just a question of trip generation, even though I suggested that that's way under estimated. But it's also trip distribution, a factor not discussed in this responsive memo by Nora, dated April 22nd, that I've got tonight. Would (unintelligible 409) a concern. Well people come out on Monster Road and turn right, and start heading up? If they want to go the freeway where are they going to go? They're going to go Fort Dent Way, turn right, go in there, whip a u -ey and come back out and around. The feeling on that and the traffic interference, not analyzed in the traffic study at all. So there are enough factors, enough averaging going on, enough discounting, enough activities maybe too many on this site, enough not known, enough not specified with respect to timing of construction activities and the DOE cleanup plan, frankly that I would suggest at this point in time that you postpone action on this until you get the answers. Should that take five months, or ten years to get, absolutely not. With this team of people that are here tonight, guided by the developer, their attorney, (unintelligible 467) .and all of that, they can turn the information around fast. I'm sure they can do it. And why should we expect anything less than a full disclosure of adequate information so when we make decisions on conditional use criteria, we know whether there's been full disclosure and in fact the criteria can be met based upon facts not like the Hound of Baskerville, what REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 44 z 65 00 0: wi N w O'. u. Q cod =w z� I-0'. Z ►-. U 0: 0 N. ,0 w - Uw: u. - - O. w z. ., 0 z Neiss: Haggard: Neiss: hasn't happened. Thank you very much. I have, excuse me, I just have a quick question for you. Um, I've listened to you and I've read your memo and it looks like you spent a lot of time in research on this issue. Well I tell you I really appreciated staff. Nora got this stack of documents, I mean literally that (unintelligible 516). We got them Friday afternoon. Well, you know what I did this weekend, buy my wife was out of town, so that was okay. But yeah, we did get through the documents. Yeah. Um, and I just, it occurred to me, 'cause I heard you refer to "we" and "our" several times. I was just curious, what, what's your involvement in this? Why are you here? Haggard: I have a client that has raised interests and concerns and asked me to provide comment. Neiss: One of the neighbors of the project? Haggard: I have a client. Neiss: That's it? Haggard: Yes sir. Pace: Could you explain how your client is adversely impacted by this project or impacted by this project? Haggard: I think we have already identified it. Pace: But where, is your client located in the City of Tukwila? Haggard: (no response) Pace: No. Meryhew: Are you waiting for a commission to ask you that question? Is that why you won't answer? Haggard: I'm not going to answer. I'm authorized. I cannot as an attorney disclose... Meryhew: We, we have a concern as to who you're representing and what the reason for that is... REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 45 ,.t..nu ttnityC:n'A"Y,viirw, • Haggard: Meryhew: Haggard: I understand that and I'm totally sympathetic with you. But there is no indication here at all where that (unintelligible 577) . And I am not... Meryhew: You're not representing yourself? You're representing a client.... Haggard: Oh, no, no, no. I tried to be real clear and say, as, I'm here as an attorney and, one of the difficulties that, that I have as an attorney, is I'm bound by the code of professional responsibility. And we've got the attorney /client confidence. And when a client asks me to do something and specifically instructs me not to disclose, I frankly can't. I can't. I will certainly communicate this information to my client of your interest and concern, but I cannot. Neiss: I, I can respect your, you know, your client's wishes. However, we, we asked a simple question, how is he effected by this. Haggard: He... Neiss: He or she? Haggard: ...is effected with this requirement of standing set forth in the (unintelligible 628) RCW 36.70(c). Neiss: Which is? Haggard: That's the action that would provide a basis for a review of your decision and review of SEPA. Neiss: How are they effected by that directly though. I'm still confused on that. Haggard: As an aggrieved party. And you know the interesting thing is while I can be sympathetic to your concern, which I think frankly is more than just curiousity, and I understand that. And I'm not trying to demean it, that doesn't, because I can't answer it, doesn't change the validity of the comments, the questions or the observations that have been made one iota. They're still valid. They're still part of this record. They still haven't been answered. And you still haven't REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 46 been given the documents. I told my client that I was going to be asked that question and of course Mr. Hood asked me earlier, `cause he's very interested too. I know this won't effect your fair consideration and the due process, because frankly the comments stand and they're available and need to be responded to. Neiss: Okay. Any questions? Thanks. Haggard: Thanks a lot. Neiss: Okay. Um, now I had Paul Sexton here. Did you have, had you already spoken? Sexton: (unintelligible 746). Neiss: Bonnie Lutz, or... ( ?): She (unintelligible 760). Lutz: I'm not going to speak. Neiss: Alright. I have no one else signed up. Is there anyone else, anyone else that would like to speak, please state your name and address for the record please. MISS WHEELER SPEARS EXTREMELY FAST AND IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF WHAT SHE WAS SAYING. Wheeler: Hi. My name is Cheryl Wheeler. I live at 6321 So. 151st Place in Tukwila and I've lived here about 30 years. Neiss: (unintelligible 788). Wheeler: And I've seen a lot of changes in this town, I'll tell you. When the mall first opened up, that's where I was at. I have seen a lot of changes, especially on 154th since they made that modification of the freeway and Southcenter Free, Freeway that we have now at rush hour traffic and where my neighbors and I are having problems getting out of our intersection of 65th, to try to turn left and the traffic is outrageous. So I am not looking forward to even (unintelligible 819). Um, I would say I'm at a loss of knowing about information until this evening, because I didn't get, I heard about the park being, being built. I didn't know what it was. I (unintelligible 829). But the other thing, I didn't get a flyer until I got, since my REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 47 ..%;'ta -k:swe— r.:iLlts,:74s:aLA" J' 1, ,2LE' "u aa-c 3u;s'4,er„r,.,sow. z z� U: UO: ' co W= w 0; J' LL Q' = a' 1 w I-0. w~ n O N Ill w' � • U .z U -. 01- 0 daughter who is away at college, talking about this meeting tonight. Whether any other voting members of our family and I don't know how these particular people got picked up and aware about the meeting, but I guess I need to be more aware myself of how, what goes on in my own community. I have a big concern about the traffic. Traffic doesn't, I work down at Fort Dent Park myself. It is horrible. I live five minutes from work at the most. It's a mile, possibly less. It can take 15, 20 minutes. And the light at Interurban backing up is outrageous even at lunch time and throughout the day. It doesn't matter (unintelligible 867). So the rush hour scenarios probably aren't probably too valid because at noon going down to Interurban and you try to turn left and you can't. My other (unintelligible 878). When you're coming into the park, it's Grady Way and then it's like of a•little loop -de -loop and it's Interurban, is that correct? Woman: (unintelligible 884). Wheeler: Okay. Right now, I can only, you can only get to the park from Grady Way, `cause that's the only way you can turn right to get into the park. `Cause Interurban is, goes straight and you turn left and (unintelligible 891) and you have to go backwards around that loop -de -loop to get back to the park. So I can't figure out how you can get to the park from my house unless you go to Renton, turn around and come back. Okay? So that's kind of the concern I have. (unintelligible 901) That's okay. I can do it. Um, let's see. And there is, because I work at Fort Dent Park and I see how the traffic there is anyway going in and out of the park, and thinking of all the cars and turning around (unintelligible 917) to get out to the freeway and things, it's just going to be a big traffic mess. It's already is a nightmare there. Um, the other part I have of that, is the signs for the walking trails, `cause I'm a walker and I really like the idea of the walking trails being joined and having all the, more population in the park area so when you walk you have more people around. But we have people who will be parking over at Fort Dent because they can't get, or they mess a turn or (unintelligible 938). There's a (unintelligible 939) park here and you have REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 48 Neiss: Wheeler: Meryhew: Wheeler: people walking around back and forth and a lot heavier congestion and things and you might even have people going to try to see baseball playoffs down here, and the soccer tournament that goes on down at Fort Dent being impacted by the people having to park (unintelligible 954). Um, I (unintelligible 962). That's a good idea. Let's see, what's the other thing I had. Right. We've had some concerns in the past, where I've worked before, so people have to be concerned with the (unintelligible 968) there at Fort Dent Park. And I want to be sure that in the studies and things they have done with the flooding situation (unintelligible 970) those possibilities and concerns. I do like the idea too, of (unintelligible 983) those blackberry bushes. That's wonderful `cause it's ugly. Um, and I walk there, I see that. Um, let's see. I haven't hit everything else here. The entrance. Oh, seasonal. Someone is calling it that it's a seasonal park. I'm supposing that means it's a summertime park? Are, these buildings are covered (unintelligible 1006) covered or not covered? Well why don't we, we'll redirect the question... Okay. I don't know, okay. `Cause all these buildings are covered so that things are going to be inside, then it's more year -round than just seasonal. If they're not covered, and the batting cages and things are outside, the bumper cars are outside, and it's miniature golf I think he said was going to be outside... Cheryl it was indicated it's an all season park. Year - round. Okay. So, but they mentioned seasonal. It has more.seasonal traffic is what I was talking about. They were talking about seasonal when they were talking about the trips. The amount of trips going to and from the park. So that is what I was referring to in that comment. Because if it's seasonal, or it's going to be all year- round, so we don't really just consider the seasonal traffic or is it all year- round, so seasonal is not even part of the issue. Okay. Alright. Why don't I stop there. And um, mostly concern of the traffic (unintelligible 1055) getting in and out of the park. And like the gentleman REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 49 mentioned a size 10 into a size 8. Doesn't look like it even from just generally knowing the area myself there. Um, anyway these are my concerns and I just wanted to let you know that I don't (unintelligible 1070) extra traffic and I think (unintelligible 1076) shortly. Thank you. (unintelligible 1078). That's all I had. Meryhew: I guess I'd like to make one comment. You, you indicated that you didn't get notified? Wheeler: No. Meryhew: I think that has to do with where you're located. So you still live in Maple, Maplewild... Wheeler: Yes. We're right above it. Meryhew: I think your distribution was what, 500 feet? Wheeler: My daughter got notified at my house, at my same address. Pace: What kind of notice did she get? Wheeler: (unintelligible 1117). No problem. But I just wanted to be sure whoever sent those (unintelligible 1129). Stetson: Jack was a notice published in a newspaper or, the site was posted? Pace: If you look on the top of the staff report it mentions the type of notifications that was done. What she's referring to is a notice that the City did not do. Stetson: I understand. Why don't you let her know what the other notifications procedures are generally for a project so that .... Wheeler: Yeah, I didn't realize that (unintelligible 1170). Citizens not being aware of all the (unintelligible 1177). Neiss: State your name and address for the record please. Brown: My name is Christopher Brown. Address is 879 Rainier Avenue North, Ste A -201, Renton, 98055 -1380. I was not sworn in. Neiss: Okay. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 50 z t 57 mow: J U; U O: 0: . W =i • JF N (l.. .wo g • u-Q: =a z �- -.2D U �: O H • z w O w Z. N. 0•~' Meryhew: He can do that by signing the sheet. Neiss: Oh, okay. You just need to sign the sheet. Brown: Okay. Neiss: Yeah. Thanks. Brown: Thank you very much. Neiss: Thanks. Brown: First of all I want to let you know that I did the traffic study for the Fort Dent project on behalf of John Radovich. And it was not John Radovich who hired uh, uh, Joel Haggard just in case you were wondering. But nonetheless I'm sure if Mr. Radovich was here, he would certainly concur with all of the comments, especially with respect to traffic that Mr. Haggard has raised. The reason I'm up here right now in addition to the correspondence which has provided to you, is that I thought you may be interested in knowing a few of the facts as we see them in the year 2000, if this project is not built, but if Fort Dent park III is built. Grady Way and Interurban Avenue, the southbound queue will be 130 vehicles long, 1,348 feet. Grady Way on the east leg, will have a queue of 109 vehicles, about 1,011 feet. Of course the west leg, that's coming towards Grady Way at Interurban, will only have a queue of 777 feet. The concern of Mr. Radovich of course is at Fort Dent Way. Fort Dent Way will have a que of about 32 vehicles, that's on the south leg, northbound, at about 276 feet. Now if there is a second left turn lane there, on that location, please understand it does nothing, it does nothing to relieve traffic congestion down Interurban and Grady Way. So the real question is what happens, not just at Fort Dent Way, but in fact indeed along the corridor. And the concern that Mr. Radovich has and of course it's one that Joel has brought out and we hadn't even met until we were in the lobby this evening, is what happens when a person wants to leave this particular site and go southbound towards Auburn or Kent? Especially when you have right turn only restrictions, not whether you like them or not, that will exist in a defacto sense anyway, by virtue of the congestion on the street. They will go up into Fort Dent Way. They will go into that site. They will REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 51 make a u -turn and probably try to get access in that fashion. And that's the thing that Mr. Radovich would like to have thoroughly reviewed. In other words, in concert with Fort Dent III which we hope will be happening fairly soon, and in concert with this project, which Mr. Radovich is absolutely in favor of, the question is how do you handle the traffic. And I think that is the one concern that he is worried about. Another one of minor concern was if there was insufficient parking on this particular site and there is a very nice new pedestrian bridge across the river, which curiously enough goes right up to Fort Dent Way, will there be overflow parking in that vicinity? Will that parking take place on Mr. Radovich's parking lot? To what extent will his existing office space be compromised by any overflow parking that, if, if they're extremely successful, should take place there, but nonetheless will be shifted north to the next door facility? Parking needs to be looked at we think in concert with Fort Dent Way. And I think traffic needs to be looked at in concert with Fort Dent ##3 coming down the pike. And I think that is the purpose that uh, caused them, at least (unintelligible 1469) belatedly and asked me for my comments, would I kindly take a look. When you read the traffic reports by (unintelligible 1475) I think you'll find with a deep reading that there is an awful lot that is not said and it's what is not said that is the concern. Thank you very much. And I do apologize to Nora for having given her very little time to answer that letter. Gierloff: (unintelligible 1499) . Neiss: Are there any citizens that would like to speak on this issue? No? Pace: Do we want to take a break? Neiss: ( ?) . Neiss: (7) Yeah. I think we should. We'll take 5 minute break. We also have another issue. We are approaching on 10:00, normal cutoff. (unintelligible 1517). Proceed ahead? (unintelligible 1522). Neiss: Okay. We'll take a five minute break and then REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 52 z a • X/". mow; ,'U O' NW; :U)w; • .w o: g J: u. • _, •�.: Z I. w U• O • s U. Ii.i Z . • • U N 0 I-• • Z return. BREAD Neiss: Okay. We'll pick up with staff rebuttal. Gierloff: Again for the record I'm Nora Gierloff. Well we had quite a few comments on the project. We had a pretty big turnout for a design review project. Um, again I'm going to defer to public works on the technical traffic issues. But there are some of the other things that uh, were brought up that I can address. Um, one of the things that was mentioned was um, construction during the wet season and concerns about erosion control. Work within the riverbank is definitely restricted to certain times of year so that you avoid, the river is lower and therefore you avoid having impacts in the river. And then also the vegetation they plant on the disturbed slopes has time to take hold and to hold that dirt in um, prior to the rising of the river. Um, that's something that would be addressed um. They'll need something called a hydraulic project approval or HPA permit and that something that specifically deals with riverbank issues. That's the jurisdiction of another agency. Uh, they will also need a land altering permit from the City and we have an erosion control plan um from them, that's been reviewed by um, our storm and surface water engineer in the City. Um, and Public Works can also maybe address that a little more fully. But, you know it's obviously an issue any time you're dealing with a river and something that we have paid attention to. And certainly the Muckleshoots are not going to let anyone get away with doing things they think are harmful to river. And they have been very involved in our riverbank plans. There are also some issues about the hazardous wastes on the site. And I had talked a little bit about that. You know, again there is a lot of environmental regulations out there, not all of which are the City's um, area to enforce and this hazardous waste um, happens to be something that's enforced by the State Department of Ecology. And they have been actively involved uh, with the applicant. There's a procedure um, a voluntary uh, cleanup plan, where if someone is doing work REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 53 z mow: J U- • p CO w! • LL w0. g w •;. wd =. Z 0: U �. w; 1- w z ui ; 0 I--' z Neiss: Gierloff: Pace: and they want to, they know they need to do a cleanup plan, that instead of doing all this work and then going to the Department of Ecology, they work with them all the way through to develop the cleanup plan. They actually pay for some time for an ecology staff person to work with them on developing that. That's a procedure that the Family Fun Center is going through right now. And so I um, they're the experts on this, and they seem to be quite comfortable from the letter that I've gotten from their ecology staff person that these issues are being addressed and that they're meeting all of the requirements, the state requirements. What mitigation measures are being taken with regard to that issue? They are, there are certain areas that the dirt needs to be dug up and just taken out, because it's contaminated. There's certain areas where there is lower levels of pollutants and they can just be capped and kept in place. Um, and they've done whatever ground water work they need to do to be assured that those things are not going to migrate, that those are just, you know, there is some diesel fuel or there's some other types of contaminants that aren't moving through the soil. Erosion control is certainly part of that. There's, the legislation for that is the Model Toxic's Control Act, and that's something that I'm not so familiar with myself, but sure that DOE is. Okay. Something I'd like to add is that we've also sat down with our legal staff and had them review it and they're understanding of the material and reviewing it is that they agree with staff that this will not have any significant adverse impacts. And that with the procedures going through, the applicant is going through are appropriate. Neiss: Who said that? Pace: Our legal staff. Neiss: Okay. Gierloff: And again some questions, some procedural questions were raised with regard to SEPA and, you know, we all can't be experts on REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 54 Malina: everything. Um and so we have a SEPA responsible official and he's Steve Lancaster. And so our SEPA decision is made by him as an administrative decision to have one person go through all of those reports and make that final decision and it's not a public hearing kind of decision, because it's a technical issue and not, and not a public imput. The people are willing, are very able to submit comments on that to be considered by the SEPA official. And we've gone through all of the notification for that process to happen. It's, it's not a decision for you tonight. Uh, we have issued the SEPA threshold determination. We've had the comment period. The next action is the City will decide to either revise its SEPA determination based on the comments we've received or stay with its original determination. After those actions, the SEPA can be appealed if someone is still feeling like there is a legitimate issue. The appeal for that SEPA is to superior court. So it's not a City issue after this. Um, let's see. Our notification for a Type IV decision like design review is that the site is posted, notice of application and notice of hearing are made to, are sent to properties owners and tenants within 500 feet of the property and it's published in the paper. Um, obviously we don't get everybody on that. Um, you know I defer to the applicants on some of the operational questions that people have raised, uh, and again to Public Works on any traffic issues. Do you have any questions of me? Yeah, I think uh, from what I heard from the uh, five people who spoke, of that group there was this avid concern of the right hand turns into the site. And a big concern would be making the u -turn down there at Fort Dent and it does make sense, that that is going to happen. Uh, the Public Works Department traffic engineer uh, basically never really addressed the issue of the LOSs for Interurban and the 405 ramp. I think everybody that probably has been here and has heard what was said, there is a big concern, the traffic issue. It seems as though uh, there needs to be just a little more information provided on the LOSS for Interurban, 405 and primary, primarily the u -turn that's going to inevitably happen at the Fort Dent thing. And REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 55 this right turn entrance. I looked at coming down um, Southcenter Boulevard, down to Interurban, trying to get into this site. I just have a concern of how this is going to happen. I can see how it's going to happen coming off of Grady. I can see it's going to happen coming off of Interurban. I don't, I have a real problem with the Southcenter Boulevard. Gierloff: What I understand is the concern there is that if you um, the right in /right out is a safety feature, because if you were allowed to make a left hand turn, there's concern I think that traffic would back up into the intersection and be more of a hazard or an accident generator then just having the right in /right out. It's, it's a site with some constraints. Um, there are, the access is somewhat limited. I think given, and that those limitations would apply to any use on the site. Um, as far as peoples' concerns about traffic. You know, we, under growth management, you know, there's, there's concurrency and you are allowed to, to control some development in relationship to levels of service at intersections. In general the remedy for adding more traffic at certain intersections is to evaluate the level of service, plan improvements and then charge mitigation fees for the development. Uh, it an extreme case where you would say the level service is F, and no further development can occur. There are no mitigation projects that can be constructed. I'm not sure that, is that where we think this is? Malina: Well part of that, but the other is I don't want to see people who utilize this facility coming out of that facility and wanting to end up going south and they're going to have to go into Fort Dent and unless they want to go all the way down by the Riverside and make some kind of a turn down there which I don't think is going to happen. But I don't want to see a situation where people are going into Fort Dent and having to make sort of an illegal u- turn and have our Tukwila Police Department hand out tickets like popcorn. Gierloff: It is a public road that is built with a turnaround. I don't believe it would be an illegal turn. Malina: Well I just don't want to see something that's REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 56 z �z w, Qom;. -J U O; { .no; CO (11: W =. CO LL: 0 g Q: -a = w. z„ z �— U co: 0 1- w w. • w • z x • going to end up creating a whole heck of a lot of problems. And, and I, I don't know if Public Works, the engineering department has really done a sufficient job in my purview as far as the LOSs on Interurban as well as the 405 on -ramp. z Gierlof f : It... _ ~' E- w Livermore: Usually you have a situation every place you 6 R have a divided road. We had this situation up v at Sally's Market to get into it. v p; N vw w: Stetson: Exactly. , -I I N LL; Meryhew: I'd like to suggest that we hold off, let 1110 Public Works come up and actually draw out n` what's there and what the change is going to g Q: be so we can see... N n Neiss: Yeah. I'd like to see that. I w: zI.- Meryhew: ..what that is and ... 1-.0 zF- : LU Neiss: That's a good suggestion. D 0' D o: Barnett: Hello. I'm Gary Barnett here at the podium —. from Public Works and you probably recognize WF Brian Shelton our city engineer up at the = v', blackboard and he'll go ahead and draw some of r-; the intersections and show the movements that LI O can occur and how people can come from most v (: directions and access the site or leave the 1=5E, site. I do understand your concerns... z ( ?): (unintelligible 2393) concerns. Barnett: ...about traffic. There is no denying that these intersections are crowded. However, with the planned improvements, the level of service will not drop to lower level. It's not to say it's a pretty site. Uh, it's also, I wanted to outline that there is a, another part of the project that I didn't describe. It's not the primary place where dollars are being spent. We're spending a lot of money of course to make dual left turn lanes on the Interurban Bridge. We're building a wider bridge to make left turn lanes. But in doing that, these two left turn lanes shorter the traffic queues. You don't have one long lane stretching out forever. But they're shortened up by half if you will. And by shortening the queues there, the through lanes won't be blocked nearly as often. The other thing... REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 57 Neiss: Which way are those lanes, where are they going to and from? ( ?): (unintelligible 2459). Barnett: Neiss: Barnett: When the drawing is done I'll be sure to point them out to you? Okay. Yeah. Specifically they are northbound across the river and then left on up to the freeway ramp. Neiss: Oh, okay. Barnett: Yeah. And the other part of that intersection is Fort Dent III. So in shortening the queues and doing two left turn lanes, Brian tells me that for little or no money we get a secondary bonus and that is at the intersection of Grady Way, we can re- channelize and have two left turn lanes southbound that then turn east towards Renton, again shortening queues, letting traffic move through the through lanes a lot more smoothly. And again maintaining similar level of service that exists there now. The majority of the traffic uh, entering or leaving the site through the combination of right in or right out, at either Grady Way or Interurban, does have the ability to go to most of the primary destinations. For instance if you wanted to go south, uh, on Interurban, you could exit the site, uh, onto Grady Way and then make a left turn southbound onto Interurban. Neiss: How far back is that entrance from the intersection itself? Barnett: Um, approximately 200 feet. Neiss: That's..? Barnett: That's about 8 to 10 cars. Neiss: They'll never be able to make it across there. Barnett: In peak hours I'll concur that it will be tough. Um, this is not the best intersection and it has the ability to stay about the same, you know, as with our freeways that are congested, making them better is almost an impossible task, but we do feel that the project with its contribution to the City's traffic mitigation program um, will do its REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 58 • z • :•mow uQl D 0 0. f W=_ , 0,' • u.Q Via. H =: z� •?o N: w w, H O. wz • z • Neiss: Shelton: Barnett: Meryhew: share. Brian do you want to make some illustrations? If anybody wnats to move up closer to watch this you're welcome to come on up. Okay. You talked about exiting the site to go southbound. Yes. Well Brian just familiarize us with the whole thing. It's difficult for everybody to see, so, so point it out. And this is the way it exists today? Shelton: Yes. Meryhew: Okay. Neiss: And then show the addition of where those two left turn lanes are going to go. Shelton: Okay. Um, north, north is to the south of the board. Uh, this is Interurban Avenue, turns into West, okay. Turns into West Valley Highway. I -405. Southcenter Boulevard which turns into Grady Way. Here you have the Family Fun Center /LaQuinta restaurant site with what's proposed to be changed to Family Fun Center Way right here. Access to LaQuinta and the restaurant. Access to Family Fun Center site. This is Fort Dent Way, which has a cul -de -sac on the end with an access into Fort Dent Park. And this is the freeway 405 on and off ramp. Right now we have a single northbound left turn lane here and a single southbound left turn here with two through lanes in each direction, uh, including a right turn lane here. Um, the project proposal is to widen this bridge here through the river or across the river, excuse me. And add another lane and a wider sidewalk and create a dual northbound left turn lane right here. In addition to that we have an existing single southbound left turn lane to Grady Way. In conjunction with this project we're adding another left turn lane, dual left turn lane southbound. Which during the peak hour should shorten the traffic queues in both directions so that the through lanes in each direction don't get blocked by the left turn queues that back up. That's, that's not guaranteed every single cycle, but it should relieve it some. Uh, we talked about exiting the site, heading REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 59 <z • u.12 .JV. U0: • Np.. U) • W= Jam; . u- Q'. CO H= I- CY Z • DoE-. w w. .z Z U O .Z • southbound. The question came up if you're on Southcenter Boulevard how do you get to the site. You make a left turn and right turn into the site. Neiss: Okay. Stetson: I guess I didn't realize that that was, that Monster Road is a two way road or, or.. Malina: Two lane. Livermore: Yes. Stetson: ...or Family Fun Center Way.... Shelton: You mean here? Stetson: Yes. Livermore: Yeah. Stetson: (unintelligible 2847). Shelton: First of all, with all due respect don't call this Monster Road. Stetson: Okay. Sorry. Whatever. Shelton: Well John McFarland had a heck of a week last week over that being Monster Road. Stetson: Okay. Shelton: Incorrectly named. Anyway.... Stetson: Incorrectly named. Shelton: Yes this is a two -way road. Stetson: Is it now a two -way road? Shelton: Yes it is. ( ?). Yes. Stetson: See now... Shelton: It's striped a two -way road. Stetson: Okay. Okay. Malina: That's where, that's where I've been going wrong. I thought.... REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 60 ....Vi1Y + S :::.1i`�.:°':ti;:i'L ^+",a�:l/wn. •; - x:id:J3'6it1" • w U: U O Z :(I) C LU LU J F.- NU. w O.. J-. w D, -a ? H: Z ▪ o, w w U 0 H; w w. o a. O; ui z U SI: O i; Stetson: That's where I was too. I thought, I have all this time thought that was, that was one way... . Malina: Yeah. Because even the drawing... Shelton: Just one way? Livermore: Well you can go and drive it right now and it's two lanes. Shelton: Well, this, this portion of roadway in here used to be the old Grady Way... Stetson: Right. Malina: Right. Stetson: Right. Shelton: ...before this interchange project, Southcenter Boulevard /Grady Way realignment project was done. Stetson: Okay. Shelton: Stetson: This was left pretty much in tact. It used to be a four lane facility through here. Um, we took out some lanes because we didn't need 48 or 50 feet of pavement in here. So we took some of the pavement out and left enough room for two lanes, one in each direction, through here. I think it's probably because no one uses it going the other direction right now `cause there's no reason to. Livermore: Right. Stetson: Okay. Alright. Well this is making more.. Malina: Okay. Okay. Exiting the, the hotel or the fun center, going south then you come out of those and take a left onto Grady Way... Shelton: Take a right. Neiss: Take a right onto Grady Way and then a left down ... Meryhew: Oh, okay. You come out of those, you take a left onto Fun, Family Fun Way, and then a right onto Grady Way and then left on East Valley Highway or West Valley Highway? REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 61 •. •• ;SU:�7i:i,:.!iC' :. f....s..�..Sk_.:,. YRCi'1R'tti.�'ih'�.u'ir `- r31iL••. z ce w; 6 • JU UO , N� w =' J 1-: . N LL Ili 0: cna. 1- w: z�' O: U0 w; LL O: w =: • O F.; Z Shelton: Right. Meryhew: So there's no need from that to go west to Fort Dent Way is there? There's no reason at all for anybody to go out of there ( ?): Right. They'll have to.... Meryhew: ... and go up to Fort Dent and turn around? Malina: ...to make the u -turn. Neiss: Oh I don't, I don't agree. Shelton: If, the, the argument, and *no one can say that it won't happen... ( ?): Oh, I see that, but ... Shelton: Is to exit this site uh, to go southbound, one can come up here and do that. Stetson: If Grady Way is particularly... Shelton: However, if someone leaving the site wants to go eastbound on Grady Way, they would presumably come up here and turn around... (?) : Oh.... Shelton: ....or leave the site some other way... Malina: See that.... Shelton: ...to turn around to get to Grady Way eastbound. Malina: ...that's what, that was my concern. Meryhew: So there, there is no way to get onto Grady Way without... Livermore: That's still no different than a lot of areas where you've got divided highways. Stetson: Like Sally's Market where you cannot get there from here. Livermore: I mean that's a buyer beware for the property owner. Meryhew: The alternative actually which most people would use, familiar with it would be to go up and come back on I -405 and go back to, east REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 62 z .. Hw re —J U.O: s U) w z; w O. g J. IL 1-11.1 Z I- O Z F—� U 0: - O ` w. wz N; 1 Shelton: • Meryhew: Shelton: Malina: Livermore: Malina: Shelton: (background ( ?): Shelton: Shelton: Shelton: Meryhew: Shelton: Meryhew: on, parallel on Grady Way. Well and that... But only those that are familiar with it perhaps. Yeah. And that's an alternative if you, if you want to go to Grady Way eastbound, you can come out here and get on the freeway, if you're going Grady Way eastbound. Now that, obviously if you want to go to Grady Way eastbound and your alternative is to use 405, uh, and your intermediate destination point, just the east side of Grady Way Bridge, just barely in Renton, that the chances of getting on I -405 and going all the way around are pretty slim, but it could happen. Is there some way to drop another road in on the backside of this, by the railroad tracks? Wasn't there, isn't there a road down there by the railroad tracks on the back side of that property to get you onto Grady? But that's quite low. Grady Way is on a bridge back there. Yeah, but that's on the back side isn't it? Well Monster Road.... conversations, unintelligible 3152). Across the tracks... ...it was vacated before it was uh, and basically taken out in the City. Yeah. You got to cross the tracks. There, there is a culvert under the railroad track. Right. But it's not a roadway. It's an access to get back and forth uh, for railroad purposes and range. Used to be for cows. Pardon me? I say it used to be for the REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 63 cows. MIMS =a 1._w z 1... F- O. z O D-; w w. O. . z: w U =; O ~' z Shelton: That's... (laughter) Malina: Yeah. Maxine Anderson's and her husband. Shelton: Right. Right. And there were a few other crossings around here. Any other... Meryhew: Okay. That helped me considerably. Stetson: That helped a lot. (laughter) Malina: Well I think what threw me is this drawing here uh, I guess there's no page number on here, but anyway, it just actually shows one road coming in here. It doesn't show it being a divided road. Shelton: Yes. Malina: That's where I've been going wrong. Barnett: Okay. Thank you very much Brian. Gary Barnett once again. I would like to add a few other comments that might provide more information about traffic and then provide a little more information about the rest of the project in context of some of the concerns that you've raised tonight. Regarding traffic, the operation of the center is in the majority a weekend operation. There are some times when, weekdays will be busy days for the center, but not often. Most of the traffic concerns related to office usage and coming and going, commuting are weekday functions. About 200 of their business volume is done Monday through Friday. About 80% done on Saturdays and Sundays. So it spreads out the concern and actually shifts the majority of their traffic away from the concerns that I think have mostly been articulated. On the weekends the traffic for the center use is mostly spread out evenly from around noon time all the way through 'til time of closing. So again a large amount of time will absorb the traffic. So I wanted you to know that so you could balance that with the concerns that you do have. Um, on the SEPA documents uh, Public Works has looked at all the available documents and we feel that they've covered the project quite extensively and feel that we have adequate information to, not only to have indicated REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 64 - Z. re II J U' 0 U 0 co w: w I. w O g:3 • D a. I-w Z I- O Z I- LL! tu 2 U O N o F-_ ww u-0; iii z, U N. f= _ O z that there was no significant adverse impacts, but we have information to go ahead and process subsequent permits. Department of Ecology is the agency with authority for hazardous material remediation and we will be sure that they have full regulatory over -site before we issue the permits that will allow them to proceed. We have a good working relationship with them just as the applicant has voluntarily said that they will clean up the site. Construction sequence has been raised as a issue and the solution is relatively straightforward. If as a result of this hearing a project decision is made in the normal turn of events, they'll start construction approximately in June and be completed by November or December is what I heard the gentleman say. And that's what they've been requesting and shooting for, for the last four or five months. And so the work that would be done next to the river would be done in the ideal low -flow summer months and then vegetation would be allowed to re- establish come high flow periods. It's important to note that uh, most of the earth work associated with the riverbank is above the mean high water level. The off - channel pond that's providing a salmon habitat will have a small opening into the river. But that pond can be constructed um, separate from any time of erosion that would be of concern and open that up perhaps in the next construction year to the river again during a summer month when it's just, everything is perfect to have riverbank construction. The temporary erosion control is something that we look at very closely and the concerns are obvious and the solutions are available to work with the site. The safety of access to the site we feel is quite reasonable. Accident studies probably wouldn't be warranted in that there's rio traffic hardly on Monster Road now. You probably couldn't go find an accident. Um, as this project comes on line, again, the traffic movements in and around Monster are relatively safe because of the right turn only. You don't have the hazardous left turns due to the existing c -curb. And the driveways themselves both for LaQuinta and Family Fun Center operate at a level of service A. You know, it's like your report card in school. A is the best. One car is the maximum average REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 65 z • 00 • N VwJ_. • Jam:.. wo J' Di 'IQ C! = • F-= t- O: ►- 2 o` c)N: w w; O Z. "; N; OH z queue. Regarding some of the queues that Chris Brown mentioned. I was horrified to think that, if Fort Dent III were to be constructed, there'd be over 1,000 foot queues. I find that hard to believe, but if in fact that's the case, uh, I'll be working with Mr. Brown and Fort Dent III to be sure that is correctly analyzed and mitigated just as we feel that this project would be. Stetson: I have one question. Barnett: Yes please. Stetson: If you are southbound on Interurban, how do you get to the site? Barnett: You would have to make.. Stetson: You're coming from my house Brian. Shelton: (unintelligible 3595). Stetson: I'd have to go on Southcenter Boulevard and go across. But you can't, you cannot make, that I can see, a left turn. Let me go over there. Neiss: You can't.. Stetson: You can't get there from there. You can't, you can't go like this? Barnett: That's correct. And you know that. Stetson: That's correct? Barnett: Yes. Because you cannot make the left turn from Grady.... Stetson: You can't make a left turn when you're on Grady... Barnett: ...into Monster Road. Correct. Stetson: Okay. Barnett: However, about 50, most of the traffic is anticipated to come from the north and... Neiss: Wouldn't they come from the freeway exit though? From the freeway exit... Well that's the same, same direction. You're Barnett: Neiss: REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 66 -z _~ • .J U: .00! vow :w =: 0•w: w O: u. Vi a: = w. _. :z 1- O. w w. D O cn. . • f-. • w W, • ui z, • N• H z still coming off of there and you got to go south? Barnett: Uh, huh. (affirmative) Yeah. And about 10% of the traffic may arrive from the site, to the site from that direction. So, once people become familiar with the center and they're no longer a first time visitor, they're going to realize what they did to get there and whatever, you know, they may have made a u- turn one place or another. They'll realize oh, I can approach the site a different way and get there more conveniently. Stetson: Okay. Barnett: Uh, there will be... Neiss: How did you come up with 10% coming off the freeway. Marvin: You're saying only 10% of the people will be coming from the freeway? Barnett: From that particular freeway ramp. Meryhew: From Renton or Bellevue or Kent. Barnett: Which would be westbound 405. Eastbound 405 gets off at a different location. And a lot of traffic will be arriving from the south. Malina: I'm having a problem on all of this. Livermore: Southbound on Interurban you can't get there from here. Stetson: So... Livermore: But from any other direction you can. Stetson: Okay. The two left turn lanes southbound on Interurban will be left turns to Grady Way only? Barnett: Yes. Stetson: Yes? Barnett: Improving that intersection. Stetson: You can't turn in that other little road that I didn't know was a two -road either? Barnett: No. There's a c -curb there. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 67 z 6• g. JU UO; w I CO u-. w 0;. • Q: co = d. 1--0 z W w, U W H U kJ . - Z U co O z Stetson: Okay. Barnett: I will mention that u -turns at an intersection are legal and so, you can, you don't have to go over here or over there or into Fort Dent or into Renton, to get there. You can get in a left turn lane and make a u -turn and then Z you're able to turn right into the site. �t=. re Livermore: In an unmarked intersection? ?: Malina: Yeah you can, believe it or not. 00: N p: Barnett: At a signalized intersection. I'm thinking of W = J I_. CO U. w O. Livermore: That is legal? ga., Malina: Uh, huh. (affirmative) 22D. a Stetson: Don't you be doing that now. _ Livermore: All these years I thought I was illegal. f-0. (laughter) w Up O N: ` w �U ujz F _ O ~' either Interurban or... Malina: Barnett: Hell, I do it all the time here on the street every morning. I'm a fellow that got a traffic ticket for doing it mid -block once and I've learned very clearly where you can... Livermore: If I get a ticket I'll have them call you. Barnett: ..make that left, that u -turn. Malina: How about, someone brought up the issue of bus service? Have we had any opportunity to talk Metro about the potential of this area that uh, for bus stop, bus shelter? Barnett: No. But that would be something that would be worth looking into. In talking with Fort Dent III and on their project, they've indicated and we know that there's pretty good bus service on Interurban. And we could enhance that by trying to find a safe stop in the region. Malina: Well if we do that I would like to see, you know we've done something really nice in Southcenter and I guess, I pushed the buttons on that and that was down in front of Penny's there on that street where we had the little shelters we put up, "Welcome to Tukwila." Uh, REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 68 z i • Barnett: Malina: Barnett: ( ?). Barnett: Malina: Barnett: Malina: I mean we could, you know, put up a little shelters and put up something that says "Welcome to Tukwila and the Fun," you know, whatever. You know, something creative. Well some of that creativity is in plan, in place... If this goes through. ...excuse me for interrupting. `Cause I was really excited when I heard uh, City Administrator, John McFarland, indicate that the center of Monster Road, between Monster Road and the Interurban and Grady Way is slated to be a welcome to Tukwila, with one of the logo signs.. It is? Family Fun Center is going to do some additional landscaping. Are we doing to put a monument sign there similar to what we have around here indicating that that's the gateway to the city? That's what I've heard John say, yes. So I would like to see you pursue, if this thing goes through, that somebody pursue the facts with Metro. See if we can.. Barnett: Sounds like an excellent idea. Malina: ...push some buttons with Metro. Barnett: Be glad to do it. Neiss: I need you to sell me on the idea that we're only getting 100 of the traffic off, off of the freeway. I just don't buy that. Barnett: Neiss: Well I don't want to sell anything to anybody, so that's my (unintelligible 3978). Yeah. Well I know, but we're, you know, we're dealing with traffic volumes and I'm just thinking from a practical standpoint there's going to be a lot of people coming off 405 that are heading west and they're going to get off and they're going to be north and then they're going to have to try to find a way to get into the place. I mean that's not good for them either. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 69 z _�: W: 6 UO U) LIJ w. LL wo g-7 I- w; z 1- 0 z f-. w w: - U. LL O; Cu . z. • U= 5F- z ( ?): It's going to slow traffic down. Neiss: But then, then you're going to have to deal with the issue of how people are going to get in there. Because it's going to be seen from the freeway. So I, where did 106- come from? Barnett: Uh, it was the traffic analysis that Entranco (sp ?) did and we've looked at that. It seems reasonable. Again that's the westbound on uh, 405 only. There's a lot of other ways of arriving to the site. Livermore: They'll do it once and then they'll take the off -ramp at Renton Avenue and come up Grady Way to it. Stetson: Or they'll go to Southcenter and go to the • Southcenter exit, take a left turn at Southcenter and come back up. Malina: They have a lot of, you're asking... Meryhew: Or they'll say to hell with it, I can't find it, I'm going home. Neiss: Yeah. Marvin: Let's go bowling. Meryhew: I'm a little concerned about the traffic I tell you because, that's all of Renton, all of uh, Bellevue, Kirkland, Kenmore, Auburn, Bothell and that's the whole side that comes down that way. Stetson: Well Renton can get there. Renton will just have to learn how to take Grady Way. But.. Malina: And go home on 405. Livermore: But here again it's not our responsibility to get traffic from all directions to all sites. It's the owner of the property that pays his money and takes his chances on access. Stetson: That's true. Livermore: You know we don't cut holes in divided roads so people can make left turns into them. And I think there's reasonable access into this from all directions but one and that's, three out of four ain't bad. Neiss: Yeah. The big concern that I had was the REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 70 z a new �U U O: u)o vow: J = H W O: gQ z a, 1--i zo Lu U O N; ww O Ui .iz w z... people going up into Fort Dent to make a u -ey and I don't, I don't think that's, that's a concern now. . Livermore: Yeah. Neiss: Yeah. Stetson: Right. Neiss: (unintelligible 4195). That's all I had. I just had that one concern. Barnett: I can certainly understand everybody's concern about traffic. You don't have to be a traffic engineer. Anybody using those intersections realizes they're. crowded. We in Public Works believe that there are capital programs in place that will maintain the traffic and not let it get worse and that through developer mitigation, by this project, Fort Dent III and others, that we do have the funding. Capital program is funded. And so I don't see an adverse impact from this particular project. Meryhew: One of the questions on the bridge now when you said you were going to put the left turn lanes in and, and widen the bridge itself across the river and put a sidewalk in. Is the sidewalk a part of the bridge or is there a separate pedestrian crossing across that bridge? I wasn't sure of that. Barnett: Meryhew: Barnett: ( ?) Barnett: Meryhew: Stetson: Meryhew: There's a separate pedestrian bridge that serves the trail and the recreational user. And a new wide sidewalk as well? Yes. If you're out on Interurban you also get a sidewalk. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. It's been a pleasure to address the commission tonight. Look forward to seeing you again. Oh, before, I guess I did have one other question. Sorry, too late. Yeah, it's too late. ( ?): They're planning on finishing their fun center REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 71 z _ . WD• . J0 O Of t moo: .w =` JH• . U)w w O; ua;• =• C1• • • mow, zI w • • :0 1-H w C.)! LL O wz • F= • z • construction in late 1998? You're going to start construction on the left turn lanes and the bridge in 19, late 1998, perhaps, finished in 1999. Barnett: Correct. z Meryhew: Is there any kind of a target date in 1999 or just a 1999? t F w Barnett: I will be probably somewhere in fall that it's '6 D.. completed. We'll be starting approximately v 0 July of this year for the bridge and it's , co 0; about a year long project. , w w. Meryhew: So they are going to be operating with the N 0 existing problem and go through all that w O` construction for first probably nine g months that they're re there. Q o n Barnett: Or the six months and you know, Interurban x w. Bridge will come online about the time summer z��[; time and their first peak occurs. Um, the project itself is quite expensive and we're z i- happy to have the funding in place to do it. III u; Uh, Brian what is the cost on that project D p; on.. ;0D .0 H Shelton: About 1.2 million. w w; ma Barnett: 1.2 million dollars and those funds are ~O'. ui z. U _; Marvin: Will the bridge remain open during � �� z Barnett: Absolutely. available. construction? Malina: Barnett: Neiss: Huish: Is this part of the old t -line? Is this some part of the old t -line project? The t -line project off Southcenter Boulevard? No? (no audible response) Okay. Thank you again for your thoughtful questions. Any other rebuttal from staff? Rebuttal from the applicant? We believe that all of our concerns have been addressed by the staff and we thank them for their support and the information that they have given to you and if we have any other questions from you we'd like to take them. Neiss: Go -cart operation. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 72 Stetson: Huish: Neiss: Huish: Meryhew: Huish: Malina: Huish: ( ?) . Huish: Malina: Huish: Stetson: John Huish: Huish: John Huish: Yeah, that's my question. We have a sound study that indicates that the go -carts and we take great lengths to make sure they are quiet and uh, we plan to keep those operating from 10:00 `til 10:00 Monday through Thursday and from 10:00 `til midnight on the weekend. So they're going the whole time you're open? Yes sir. And (unintelligible 4494). Yeah? If, if you had complaints I'd suspect they'd probably come from the hotel first of all if there's, if it's noisy and keeping their residents awake. And I suspect you would consider closing down at 10:00, if that became a problem? We absolutely want to be a good neighbor and if we have complaints we can work with any of our neighbors as we do in our other parks. That's our intention to get along with our neighbors. At.._..any of your other parks do you have a hotel (rig1ht' next to your fun center. I don't see that. I see where you've listed, I see where you've listed the names of them. Uh, but I didn't... (unintelligible 4561). Okay. Okay. Okay. To answer your question, yes, we do have a location that has a um hotel, actually closer than the LaQuinta Hotel because they're back wall actually abuts up to our property line. The go -cart. The go -cart track, where the go -cart track is. Which one is that? It's in (unintelligible 4587) Fountain Valley, California. How long has that one been in operation? It would be 20, 1971. 1971. Never had a complaint. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 73 i. �+ et... i�.. 1:: iv: ��'} �i: �:: ti33i?4:;CntiY ?.z� "��LCaurcti4�• Huish: Any other questions. Thank you for your time. Neiss: Uh, rebuttal from citizens? . Haggard: Three sentences. Joel Haggard and that's not one of them. Nora told us that they haven't finished the SEPA determination `cause the responsible official hasn't considered the comments and issued a final decision. Second sentence, as a matter of law you can't take action tonight. It would be contrary to the State Environmental Policy Act. Number three, you should provide adequate time to get some of this information, for example to look at the Entranco (sp ?) study and the figures that maybe show 216 coming down Interurban. Thank you. Neiss: Alright. New speaker. Sexton: My name is Paul Sexton. I'm with LaQuinta Inns. I just want to address the issue of the noise. We had the opportunity on several occasions to build adjacent to airports. Indeed we have facility at Sea -Tac Airport here. And just through our typical construction methods, double paned windows and we add maybe a layer of gypsum on the outside of the building. It's not an operational concern to use to be next to the Family Fun Centers and we look forward to being in this development. I think it will be a good co- existence between us. So it's not a concern of ours. We're owner /operators. We're not franchise. We're going to be the guys that are in there. It's going to be our guests. It's going to be our name our reputation and it's just not a concern to us. Thank you. Neiss: Thank you. Pace: Can I? Neiss: Yes. Pace: I'm also the acting SEPA official. Clarificatoin, have, comment periods have expired. We've given you our comments in the file. The SEPA official is not amending its decision. SEPA official has made a decision. It's an DNS. Neiss: Okay. Okay. With that, unless there's REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 74 a:= iu a4 66-44 .tiwi toloiztr _ ?,t.• 7l$`U. S`c'(tir`7:r. tamer ".. z • Z U. U0- co c3. WX J H w O: J'. .12 a I- _, z I- z 0; uj np o N,. 0 H; w w. H U. IL 0: .. z. w =; O~ z Pace: Neiss: Meryhew: Neiss: Meryhew: Stetson: Neiss: ( ?) . anything else I'll close the public hearing. And open up for discussion. First, in your bylaws you have, you want to go longer. It's 10:28. So in the past you've asked to make a motion to go to 11:00. That's what your direction is? How do the commissioners feel? I, I'd make a motion we continue 'til 11:00. Uh... 11:00. It's an awful lot of inconvenience to come back and continue this thing. Yep. Okay. Motion to second. Any discussion? All in favor say aye? Aye. Stetson: Aye. (can't hear the rest of the ayes) Neiss: All opposed? (no response) Pace: And one other suggestion. As you noted in the opening there are several requests here. You might go through each request, stands on its own. So you may make your decision on, as well as your decision any conditions you want on each request. Neiss: Okay. Stetson: Shall we just start with conditional use then? Neiss: Yeah let's just start with the conditional use and work our way down. Livermore: Well I think it's a reasonable use for the location. In fact I can't think of any place in the City that would probably have less impact on, on a residential area. Stetson: This is completely well buffered from... Livermore: Yeah. You've got train tracks on one side and REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 75 w, 6 -I U. U O. CO 0 W W. w O gas J; u-Q' 1• 0 F- _, Z F- O: Z F-: w w, Do. O N: 0E-. ww -O uiZ. U N z • Stetson:. Livermore: Stetson: Neiss: Stetson: Neiss: Livermore: Meryhew: Neiss: Livermore: river on the other. A couple of freeways. A couple freeways. I suspect the ambient noise levels from the freeways is going to be higher than what's coming off of here. Shall we do the approvals? Yeah we'll do them individually. Individual? Right. Yeah. I'll make a motion under L97 -0068, conditional use permit, that uh, we approve. I'll second that. Based on the staff's findings and conclusions. (unintelligible 5013) their conclusions (unintelligible 5017). (unintelligible 5020). (background whispering - unintelligible 5040) ( ?) Livermore: Neiss: ( ?): Neiss: Pace: Malina: Neiss: Livermore: Page five, bottom of page five. Yeah, but we don't have any extra recommendations, so the motion stands. (unintelligible 5045). Findings and conclusions. Okay. Can I make one suggestion, if you're going (unintelligible 5058) that you also note the additional material that staff provided and the public testimony and the written response to the letter as part of the findings. You have to make that motion your motion. Yeah. Just add that to your including, including all the tonight. Okay. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 76 or add that to motion, data presented Neiss: Livermore: .Stetson: Neiss: So be it. Modified so be it. Yes. Second it again. Motion is seconded. Any other discussion? All in favor say aye. Chorus of ayes. Neiss: All opposed. No reponse. Neiss: Motion for the conditional use is approved. Malina: I'll make a motion on L97 -0071, special permission for parking determination as to staff findings and conclusions. Livermore: Question. Malina: Question? Livermore: Point of order of where to put things. I have an ob, a strong objection to the solid rows of compact parking against the back of his hospital. Would this be the place to object or have the design reviewed? Meryhew: Right here. This is part of parking. This is the place.. Neiss: No? Pace: No. This is where we determine the amount of parking of.. Malina: Design review is where you want... Pace:. Design review would be the... Livermore: That's what I thought. I wasn't sure. Pace: That's where the nexus would be. Livermore: Alright. Stetson: What we're approving here is because we don't have parking requirements for amusement centers. Livermore: Right. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 77 nislzz� "ri ?.t!✓#1%rsv,.�.,,....._.. __r.«v�..,.��.,vwrvw Stetson: Okay. Pace: Exactly. Stetson: Okay. So, who did that? Malina: I did that. Stetson: I'll second that. Neiss: Have a motion and second. And discussion? All in favor say aye. Chorus of ayes. Neiss: All opposed. No response heard. Neiss: Special permission, parking determination has been approved. Okay. Then the third item, special permission for the signs. Marvin: I'll move to approve L97 -0072, special permission signs. Stetson: I'll second that. Neiss: That motion is seconded. Any other discussions? Malina: Yeah I got a question about actually what kind of internal signs are we talking about. I mean they give a, an example of go -cart restaurant. Are they going to be ... Meryhew: Because they're not.. Malina: ...a, a standing sign or the monument sign? Livermore: They're going to be direction signs. Stetson: It's going to be directional, but it's for pedestrians. They're going to be scaled to pedestrians, pedestrians. Malina: And that will be done by staff on administrative... Neiss: Right. Malina: ..on administrative decision. Okay? Marvin: And not to have outside visual impacts. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 78 Ar<",.i3.s`YAttagi.VAT -Yh y` 4,;, i�''3! ° ' !N; s. /: �� -aY;r aEi f 1.'i, >:ii'��,aYr;'ei$ik:�;,.s ri'�'�.5i�.� iti:::."-:.'�'t re Lk QUO: w w; WQ g J.• w ¢ U �. • C!; z� 1- O. Z F- U ON ,: w'. . w Z HH O z Stetson: I says here "all informational signs must be scaled ... Neiss: Right. Stetson: ..to be viewed by pedestrians on site and therefore not have off site visual impacts." If we base the motion, the approval on this, the staff's finding and conclusions and recommendations, I'm comfortable with that. I feel like we're covered. Malina: Question called for. Neiss: Okay. Any other discussion? All in favor say aye. Chorus of ayes. Neiss: All opposed? No response. Neiss: Motion carried. Special permission for the signs has been approved. Design review. Pace: For the record, just so I know, the motion then includes the conditions? Stetson: Yes. Meryhew: That was part of the motion. Pace: Okay. As Mary is doing these minutes, I want to make sure. Malina: She just got a good report from Bill Arthur on (unintelligible 5409). Neiss: Kudos earlier. (background conversation with people talking over each other so I can't get enough to sort out) Livermore: Buy the girl a latte or something then. Neiss: Okay. Design review. • Now we can deal with the parking. Livermore: Okay. Overall I really like the plan. I think they've done an excellent job. I like the way the parking is broken up for the uh, Family Fun Center with a few compacts here and then regulars. I don't see a real problem with the divider between it. I mean that's in REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 79 z F-w: QQ U O' , .N p; W 11 w z: W 0 D: = CJ w Hz z1.■ I- O' z H: pi O co, W W: z us O; t.l .z Neiss: parking lots all over the place. It's a fact of life. I do object to the solid row of compact cars against the back of the hotel. This is against all intents that we have had in our parking ordinances and I... The cars are getting bigger whether we like it or not and uh, these are going to be filled with full -sized cars and we're going to have problems. I think they ought to find a way to fix that. I don't disagree with you. Being a minivan and family person and I'm sure there's going to be a lot of that, um, that kind of people going to the hotel, I don't disagree with you at all. Livermore: I think maybe we can approve this under the condition that they fix that. That we do not have solid compacts in the.. Stetson: If they work with staff to figure out a way to do it. Livermore: If they work with staff and there's no more than three compacts adjacent. Now I'd be willing to live ... Malina: No you're sitting a criteria. That's not working with staff. Livermore: I guess I'd be willing to live with full sized width and compact length. But this compact width all the way across the building is asking for trouble. Meryhew: You are the owner of a ... Malina: Full sized truck. Meryhew: ..large Ford pickup, uh, supercab, uh, and quite often being forced to park in the compact spaces and we had a party to our revised parking restriction or code, uh, I, as I recall we had a lot of discussion on this. And what we wound up with is that the compacts would be evenly distributed throughout the parking lot. Uh, in looking at this one, uh, I could interpret that as fairly evenly being distributed. Concerning this particular site and the problems that they do in lane width and I looked at this thing and I, I think I am completely in agreement with the outfit. I don't see how you could change that and keep that number of parking stalls and, and widen REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 80 • 1 those compact stalls at all. It just, it looks to me like it's too compact. The only way I think you could make it fit would be to reduce the size of the hotel and, and thereby reduce the size of the parking requirements. I'll lay you odds... Meryhew: So I would be opposed to uh, at this time interpreting the compact as not being distributed good enough. Livermore: I disagree. I think if they have to do it they can find a way to make it work. This is the easiest solution that they have and uh, you know, I really don't like to throw away the baby with the bath water. We've all agreed we want parking dispersed. We've all agreed that we have larger vehicles going into places. And this just flies in the face of our intent of the parking ordinances. Malina: I think if you leave this in an administrative review and I think staff has heard what your concerns, if they can make it work they'll uh, we can direct that. Stetson: The question becomes, is the "if" you know. Malina: Yeah. Stetson: If they can't... Malina: Then... Stetson: ...then what? Is it still approved? That's... ( ?) : Oh, sure. Livermore: Necessity is the mother of invention. If they have to they will. (?) : Well... Stetson: Livermore: Well I, you know, you can only fit so many stalls in, in a given space. I mean, I'm tending to go, to lean towards um, towards Vern's viewpoint which is to say that there may not be another option in this particular case. Well if you need a little more space you can rearrange the miniature golf a little bit, extend the parking on the opposite side of the REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 81 ..z i •; • ~ w' J Li; 0O � 0 w w; w s; J I- . w0; Q; Z f.-. I- a z �.. V O: O t/3 . • l O • .= U. O Z: •O Neiss: ,Stetson: Neiss: Pace: aisle down a ways. Different project. Different project. That's the Family Fun Center. Jack? Two points. One, you need to, if you make, depending on which decision you make, you need to tie it to the design review criteria. Second point, if you decide you want these full sized, one option, not a requirement, is that they can request (unintelligible 5931). Let's say you want them all full sized and you have the, develop findings to justify that, one option the applicant does have is requesting an administrative variance. Already noted in the record is they have documented for this size of a hotel, this usage they're over - parked for even their own standard. I'm just pointing out that those are the practical options and issues you need to consider. Malina: What's it going to cost them for, for the variance? Pace: There's an administrative fee `cause of the notification map, but the point here is I want to leave you as one, whatever decision you make, there needs to be some nexus to the criteria in design review and at the same time I want to mention to you that there is some options. So I don't want you to feel like you're boxed in. But there needs to be some linkage rationale for whatever decision you make. Livermore: It doesn't meet our parking criteria. Marvin: Dave is it the width? Livermore: Uh? Marvin: Is it the width of the space that you'.re concerned with? Livermore: Personally it's the width more than the length `cause you run into so many cases where they put the big trucks and the vans in compact spaces and you get doors slamming into each other. You get your cars dinged up. You get tempers flaring and people arguing. Uh, REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 82 ` <.J�.:� ,:'•.i ;:'� '.: ;�S'.M1�5:� •4ui +i.. ,`•�ei ""'7 SS k• <�.r,�._.te:: : x.. �y .: �., J�'-`' kri $.c�i{R'1yr'Jkks'•.nJ�`t'��``„„���,,,, 1Dl�J1k.WJY3YiYi fl.:# ' a�G�MV�IT�.`.' �1�MUew. �C�: RVYjSi,; y�11x. �Tb% i {��e3�?k'i'I�`�va%r�l�uiiv�+F� i Ci U0: No WI: w 2. Z :I- O w W`. • S r-: U �. .0 z • Marvin: 1 Marvin: Pace: Marvin: Pace: Livermore: Neiss: Livermore: Stetson: Livermore: something that was brought to light when I was in a design review in another municipality is they're seeing more and more people that are coming into these lots straddling a line and taking up two places because of things are and I think the, the stage we went through allowing lots of compact spaces I think failed and it's been backfiring and, and I think we recognize that in our parking regulations to say yeah, we can have a certain percentage of compacts, but they shall be dispersed throughout the lot. And I don't think 20 or so in a-row is considered dispersed. Okay. It's the length, the compact stall, the row of them down here, it's the length that's the problem because of the uh, that fire access, fire truck access, in other words the width of the lane going through. That's why they made them compact to widen, actually widen the lane. There's a couple issues. First off just the shear number of spaces they can get on compact versus standard. That's one. So the number of spaces. The second point was brought in the testimony is the length and width for the aisles. Yeah. So the points you're looking at here on the compact is, is it dispersed or not, or not. But if there's not compact there then the lane is not wide enough, is that correct? So there had to be some adjustments. We're not talking moving the building 20 feet, 30 feet. There just would need to be some adjustments. Yeah we're fooling ourselves anyway when you put a full sized car in a compact spot. The rear end is sticking out further into the driveway... Right. You know that's... Well what, I propose condition what do you propose David? What that we approve it, but we put a on there that they disperse those REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 83 compact parking stalls. Neiss: What, what cr±teria would you... ( ?) : Yeah. Livermore: The parking requirements that the... Neiss: With regard to the design view, review. That's what I'm looking for right now. I'm not going to find it am I? (background whispering - unintelligible 6366). Meryhew: Livermore: Marvin: Stetson: If this was a retail building with customers coming and going, uh, any of that type of thing, I'd be much more concerned. But this is a, a hotel. You don't get this kind of movement that you get with the retail and I, I just... But you're taking luggage in and out of your car and all of that when you're going up to your room. But.. But you know the same thing happens in the big stalls. You're just, it's all relative, you know. I agree. I don't like compact either, but, it really is relative. You get all the big cars in the bit spots and you really have the same problem. I think Vern is right, they don't have the amount of movement. It's not what I want to see either, but uh... I think where we do have a lot of movement in this development over in the Family Fun Center, we do have the compact stalls dispersed throughout the parking. And that, that's the area where there's going to be a lot more in and out traffic, a lot more cars, you know, a lot more people getting in and out . of cars a lot more frequently. And, and, and in that case it, it seems to work. In the hotel um, they're likely going to park, and um, you know, they're not going to be getting in and out as much. It's not ideal. But I think it's, I think it's adequate. ( ?): Just... Livermore: Well I think it's fixable. But... Meryhew: ...they're trying to satisfy code requirement and I think that's the only way you can do it. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 84 • z 1. H z'. w, 2, -J 0! 0 0 wI w O' J ¢ • w • z I. • 1-O' .Z - Win; U O` 0 H w w': • - - w I w z: 0- O ~' Z Stetson: Are there any other design, design... Meryhew: There are a few, yes. Stetson: (laughter) Neiss: Not with this, no. Meryhew: But with the parking I don't have any problems. Stetson: We have 20 minutes. (laughter) Neiss: Other issues? Meryhew: I have a problem on the east elevation of the guest wing, being redesigned. Uh... Malina: I thought we discussed that a little earlier didn't we? Livermore: We just ignore their request for that. Meryhew: Well it's... Neiss: It's part of design review. Meryhew: It's part of our design review and I have a problem with it. I, the, the recommendation that they like they have done in this particular one, uh, I agree that's nice looking, but that's also applies to our building and has a bigger impact on that one then it does on the building we're looking at which is a four story building. And uh, I'd be quite satisfied in leaving that .piece, just the side opening exactly as it is, because it's not going to get much use. Neiss: I would support striking #4. Stetson: I do too. Meryhew: And I have no other comments really on it, other than I think it's a terrific design and it's a perfect spot for it. It will be welcome addition to the City. And we talk about gateways, that will be the, probably the most attractive gateway the City has ever seen. And I... Stetson: I do wish you could get here southbound on Interurban, but I'll figure out a way. Meryhew: They will too after awhile. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 85 141MIS 7 jrAir':3giY'a tU46,'a`ni ti ?2ibi>, 4i1.4<AK w u6= a U. 0 cn w; w =, J H: N W wO ga =a �w z�. z 2 D' :O o 1-. = ~— wH — O� Z; w • U at 0 (laughter) Meryhew: Neiss: I have a motion. Any other discussion. Marvin: Yeah. I'd also like to say that I think it's a real nice project and uh, and hearing the applicant speak of their security and, and the type of uh, people they want in their fun center, you know, I think they really convinced me .that they, they do want it to be a community, a family affair. Uh, they're not looking, I don't believe they're looking for people to come in there and loiter and hang out and, and I think that was a big concern of some people possibly and, and I think you laid that to rest and I do hope it stays that way • because we are, we are a, we're almost like a big city, but we still are a small community here and when things come in like this, this is what we want. We want our community to be able to use them too, and not just people from other cities. So uh, so I personally welcome that attitude. I think the landscaping is great, the habitat pond, I'm looking forward to that. And uh, and I hope we don't get too much silt running into the river, `cause every time it rains during the project, I really hope they control that `cause I know fishing down there at, a couple hours of rain and you can't fish anymore. And that's no fun for me and I'm sure it's not for the fish. The trail /pedestrian bridge I think is nice and really adds to the really good system we have here now. So I like the project. I'm pleased with it. Stetson: I also wanted to commend the applicant for their very well organized and well presented presentation to us. I, I, you must have done this once or twice before, because you've, you've uh, you did it well. You anticipated a lot of questions that people had, not just us here on the, on the board, but audience members. And I think you did a fine job of allaying a lot of um, fears or concerns at any rate. So thank you very much. Neiss: Motion? Meryhew: I make a motion that we approve um... Stetson: L97.... REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 86 z 1 0; 0 0; { o u�w w= .J H. Nw w :g -J = zw' 1- _. • HO: z 1-7 . w w> ;O N :0 1- w W: �U LL u.iz. :O ~' z Meryhew: ..the design review of the uh, the Family Fun Centers, item L97 -0069 with staff's findings and conclusions. Uh, and uh, recommendations as staff noted except for item 4, uh, the, the east elevation of the guest wing be deleted. Everything else as staff recommended. Livermore: I'll second that. Neiss: I have a motion and second. Any other discussion? Livermore: Uh, just one comment. I like the whole project. I think the did an excellent job, but in good conscious I can't vote yes on this because of the parking situations. Just so that's on the record. Neiss: Okay. Any other discussion? All in favor say aye? Chorus of ayes. Neiss: All opposed? Livermore: Aye. Neiss: And one opposed. Motion carried. Design review has been approved. Pace: There's no director's report? Livermore: We still have two more items. Malina: What timing Jack. Neiss: No that's the last (unintelligible 7161). Stetson: That was it. Livermore: The environment and the shoreline. Meryhew: We did the shoreline once before. And it is, those are old things. Livermore: Uh, okay. Stetson: (unintelligible 7195). Neiss: Nothing else? (background conversation - unintelligible 7205) Neiss: Okay. Meeting is adjourned. REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 87 ...v.:,c1107F:. F:;:bC' -'.t .::LY.:t ti3�...... z. Z. tam •C ✓ O wX. w 0 • Q = C'1; w F= 0 z�-.. D p: iO w = V. 0. z. U W' O I: I certify, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my ability. Dated this j_ day of June, 1998. Charlotte Corbi Transcriber REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS - PAGE 88 NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED NOVEMBER 21;1997: ' The following application has been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: The Mulvanny Partnership for Family Fun Center LOCATION: 15031 Grady Way South, Tukwila,Washington FILE NUMBERS: L97 -0069 (Design Review) L97 -0068 (Conditional Use Permit - Land Use) L96 -0075 (Conditional Use Permit - Swing) L97 -0070 (Variance) L97 -0071 (Special Permission Parking) L97 -0072 (Special Permission Sign) PROPOSAL: To construct an entertainment facility, which includes an arcade, go- carts, bumper boats, batting cages, large swing, restaurant, and an adjoining hotel and restaurant. OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Shoreline Substantial Use Permit Land Altering Permit Building Permits Utility Permits These files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431 -3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on December 10, 1997. This matter is not yet scheduled for a public hearing. If you are interested in being notified of the future hearing date, please contact the Department at (206) 431 -3670. If you cannot submit comments in writing by the cutoff date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and give your comments on the proposal before the Planning Commission. If you have questions about this proposal contact Diana Painter, the Planner in charge of this file. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision by the Planning Commission on a project or obtain information on your appeal rights by contacting the Department of Community Development at 431 -3670. A decision from the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council. DATE OF APPLICATION: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: NOTICE OF APPLICATION POSTED: + A' ��.': c• i ^:u.`�t�%ii:i�r::i:'il:(%r+"'+ i:-r:'1+'Jf szYYius:.�:�e",�•i e` � '��.;bGT,i�a`;E:ti'v`iUP'.'fii5 October 24, 1997 November 21, 1997 November 26,1997 z _1- „QQL JU UO ' .rn w. W =: LL w O. g =1 _ z�. I- O. Z �. ILI WE o. O N` :w W: 1=-- LLB' — O: w — =: 0 z. CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTME 4" OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENX 6300 Southc; _ : iter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 9818c Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (P -CUP) APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Planner :,!Nana. ner File Number: L '4--- 0(768 Receipt Number: Project File`# PI2eR &L _o ? 0 Application Complete ` (Date: SEPA File #: E97.,- 7 Application Incomplete Date Other File #: L97 -0oyg 497 . 97 -0070 ten -007/ C_97- Oo7LA 5T7- 0 C06.9 9y 1. PROJECT BACKGROUND A. NAME OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: Proposed Family Fun Center, Hotel and Restaurant. B. LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: STREETADDRESS: N.E. corner of Interurban Ave. S. and Grady Way, Tukwila ASSESSORPARCELNUMBER: Tax Lot 2423049013 (Map Grid 655 J4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached. Quarter: W1 /2 Section: 24 Township: _21317 Range: 4 Ea st(This information may be found on your tax statement) C. CONTACT: (Primary contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent) NAME: Mulvanny Partnership Architects Attn: Chandler Stever ADDRESS: 11820 Northup Way, Suite E300, Bellevue, WA 98005 PHONE: (425 :22 -0444 SIGNATURE: rtfi ` DATE: CUPCKLST.DOC 7/5/96 d5 z =Z w 6 00 4 .co o cnW. WI- LL: W O: g J` lL Q' = C3►, t- w Z H. H O: Z w 10 E 0 1--' = Wi 1- 2 U o Z II. J A. PRESENT USE OF PROPS,.. f: Farm /Sand & Gravel Opel ..ion Maintenance & Repair Shop B. PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE'REQUESTED (FROM LIST IN YOUR ZONING DISTRICT): Entertainment Facility C. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE (FOR EXAMPLE, DESCRIBE THE MANUFACTURING PROCESSES USED, WHOLESALE/RETAIL/WAREHOUSE FUNCTIONS, OUTSIDE STORAGE OF GOODS OR EQUIPMENT OR OTHER INFORMATION WHICH WILL FACILITATE UNDERSTANDING OF THE ACTIVITIES YOU PROPOSED TO DEVELOP ON THIS SITE): _Restaurant -• Fami 1 y t)9 ni n fir, Video Arcade, Lazer Tag, Climbing Structure, Miniature Golf, Go Karts, Bumper Boats, Batting Cages, etc. • • D. WILL THE CONDITIONAL USE BE IN OPERATION AND /OR A BUILDING TO HOUSE THE USE BE STARTED WITHIN A YEAR OF ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT? Ys. E. ON A SEPARATE SHEET, DESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICH YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR REQUEST FOR AN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WILL SATISFY EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED IN TMC 18.64.030. 1. The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district in which the subject property is situated. 2. The proposed use shall meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in the district it will occupy. 3. The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design. 4. The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. 5. All measures shall be taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area in which it is located. CLIPCKLST.DOC 7/5/96 • ..++�rcRQHVO!FdltF�f wi'v,s}i v,i ve.4x4we.v.7414.t.. iro:A.i,Atri z D JU; U • 0. w. w =: � LL' 'w0 < cn a: w z 1._ F- O:. z Ii-; iu U U '0 re.' 0 I-1 =w • O: z: 1.) O ~` 4 CONDITIONAL USE PEkAT APPLICATION PAGE II E.1. ...not detrimental to the public... The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public because it is designed for the public. The facilities will provide public activity and entertainment, and the proposed new bike path that will be linked to the Fort Dent Park will further enhance the connection between the public and this project. E.2. ...meet or exceed the performance standards... This project will facilitate the congregation of people, which in turn will increase the level of safety in the area. The present state of the site will be much improved by the removal of industrial remnants (corrosive materials) and placement of extensive exterior landscaping. E.3. ...compatible with surrounding land uses... The proposed development will maintain existing traffic circulation, easily accommodate increased traffic, and enhance the pedestrian circulation with the proposal of a new bike path that is connected to the Fort Dent Park. The building is unobtrusive on the site and the site design provides an extensive amount of usable landscaping (miniature golf). E.4. ...maintain goals of policy... There are no inconsistencies between this proposed development and the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. Rather, it strengthens the Plan's objectives in creating a more habitable site. E.5. ...minimize the adverse impacts... All measures will be taken to minimize adverse effects. Landscaping will provide absorption of both off -site sounds as well as on -site. There are no adjacent uses that will be affected by this development. And the congregation of people in this area will provide activity for vendors, as well as safety for each other. D. PROPERTY OWNER DECLARATION The undersigned makes the following statements based upon personal knowledge: I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. All statements contained in the application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. I understand that conditions of approval, which the City and applicant have jointly agreed may not be completed prior to final approval of the construction (e.g., final building permit approval) will be incorporated into an agreement to be executed and recorded against the property prior to issuance of any construction permits. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington and the United States of America that the foregoing statement is true and correct. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on , 199 . (Print Name) 2\\\■ (Address) (5;) (ec -C74 ( ne Nu ber) Udf\, (Signature Wi s4.•\u.)\e 0 Use additional sheets as needed for all property owner signatures. CITY OF?UKWILA DEPARTMEI1i :)F COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Department. Please contact the Department if you feel certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206-431:3670. ETURN THIS CHECKLIST WITH YOUR APPLICATI APPLICATION FORMS: oa Application Checklist a Other permits applied for: `I Application Form (12 copies) 7,OiJll.161 Cot2E, VM2- �1C2 La Conditional' Use Fee - $850 ❑ Complete Environmental Checklist and fee ($325) La Design Review application and fee ($900) (if applicable) PLANS (12 coples): Er Site plan at 1 "= 30' or 1" = 20', with north arrow, graphic scale, and date; and the license stamp of the architect. The following information must be contained on the plan (details may be included on additional drawing sheets): CO Property lines and dimensions, lot size(s), and names of adjacent roads Location and setbacks of existing and proposed structure(s) with gross floor area Location of.driveways, parking, loading, and service areas, with parking calculations Location and design of dumpster /recycling area screening and other exterior improvements Location and type of exterior lighting Location and classification of any watercourses or wetlands, and 200' limit of Shoreline Overlay District 60 Existing and proposed grades at 2' contours, with the slope of areas in excess of 20% clearly identified • Location of closest existing fire hydrant; location and size of utility lines; location and size of utilities or street/sidewalk easements or dedications Description of water and sewer availability from provider of utility (note which utility district or City) ® Other relevant structures or features, such as rockeries and fences. • Location of outdoor storage areas and method of screening CUPCKLST.DOC 7/5/96 z a • ~w J0. 00 tots' w= J � w O, Q. z� • 1- ILI Z • E-0 Z 1-: w w o 0 H, w w. H U' UO ..z w U =`. O~ z Landscape /planting plan at the same scale as site plan, with north arrow, graphic scale, and date; and the license stamp o landscape architect. The following ir. ,nation must be contained on the plan: Property lines and names of adjacent roads Location of the following: proposed structure(s), vehicle and pedestrian circulation areas, dumpster /recycling area, site fumiture, any proposed public outdoor art Existing trees over 4" in diameter by size and species, and any trees to be saved Proposed landscaping, including size, species, location and spacing. • Ly Building elevations of all building facades at a scale of 1/8" = 1' or 1/4" = 1', with graphic scale and date. Include on the elevations: • Dimensions of all building facades and major architectural elements • Materials to be used Location and type of exterior building lighting Location of mechanical units and proposed screening where necessary. • One:(1):. "P MT" .- (photomaterial transfer, or photostat). each of the plan set, reduced to 8:5 x-11. inches. ❑ OTHER MATERIALS: Other documentation and graphics in support of the proposal may be included as appropriate, such as color renderings, perspective drawings, photographs or models. If other materials are to be considered, twelve (12) copies of each must be submitted (except models). Color drawings or photos may be submitted as 8.5 x 11 -inch color photocopies. El Certificate of Water Availability if the site is served by a water purveyor other than the City. ❑ Site percolation data approved by the Seattle -King County Department of Environmental Health if the site is proposed for development using a septic system, or a Certificate of Sewer Availability from the sewer utility purveyor (if other than the City). ❑ Proof that the lots are recognized as separate Tots pursuant to the provisions of TMC Title 17 and RCW Ch. 58.17. ❑ Any Sensitive Area studies required by TMC 18.45. El A list of existing environmental documents known to the applicant or the City that evaluate any aspect of the proposed project. ❑ A list of any permits or decisions applicable to the development proposal that have been obtained prior to filing this application, or that are pending before the City or any other governmental entity. ©' A storm water design which meets the requirements set forth in the Surface Water Design Manual adopted pursuant to TMC 16.54.060(D). r- A soils engineering report for the site. El Traffic study or studies, if required pursuant to TMC 9.48.070. PUBLIC NOTICE: King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 feet of the subject property. Two;(2):';sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. (Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings - -e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks- - must be included.) See Attachment A. ❑ A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received. See Attachment B. CUPCKLST.DOC 7/5/96 .. %:. �:; NN�;7 " -: cis: �.',• iji..Y�r��a�.niKe`3���.<.itrw.. 1 ie.,kikr4.4aveit;;V",:-.4:40rx:„1,44-e4 .a4.2t.414,44-tpr.4.* #40,awsz—t" " 1 'CND' 44'.71; g1:411'i ; unifiumum wind. 86/6I/E El 1L6 :S C it ‘!..''.!';:.:-..,:•:.--• _. ':::c...;1:-!;..', /...---.‘,..:::;-,:::::::::.,. • • ' V0. ".iht..111414"r I / Aoritegittert, ° n n 0 # 1 f, P i L i, u L , i' 'i " i u 111 u u i u. '01 01 9, 01 01 t o 5 � r Ttl St 11 1 U 1 u Pt, , 5y4 L: uu ,z9 u6 7% ua Ypt SIZE & CONDITION RIVERBANK NOTES UO19UI1ISQ/t\ 'r.Ilm0lnl 86/6 I/E El I-L6 11 4q 4.Da .C.: 1i %!. Uq yyb ` Yo Opp °e u Db0 ua Ua p," Y, 01° o.. .1w 4 +"P q1� el,or ii it w, 1 ..I' p1 0LL'U _iu UI i "j$ au . LL.ia u 3 S iia., 5 4 eu i i -S 1..5 tl G Oo.o U., u O . 99`.5)i):, u:t p 4 V J V V LILLY •. ` m Y 4 Y9 o, m 9 U Ym , ' a 1' '2, Ym . " Y, Y, P 9 9 9 ° a,n o . u u 9 P e u nc a Di a o ' , 69 3E nb11� oeuD a B$ ‘,13b1,) u<u0 I R. 4. i yp u u e ur o it' it1 1 a r, 1 u �Z �ll DG ngt ui x'117 a�U'u "b•"0��'� :0 Fr i 7� i«`b w, aujp _itr G i,�• ° oa... _ ,6 0rP' iiu "� 2^ J fi e " • t, . 4•! a%� /ti t d 4 �� •'i t i u O1f-Channel Pond 9 w 9 SITE LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE _t e 0 w:.t.,�?�,..,, �.,.., ., < . 1ss5,"• r.-.$ t;:. r...+' 3r. �. s3G+... tau�ri3•iuifitl:�lk:S�kd6�'Lx'� iiecdYX'$a�HS,'v'(S T4,4vW%.44' 7iYSr- k'a', tie4a-4,0 ' � i. �' :+ ib�.�ar.?ang4vii^n'Nt't4' � ' kYiti` Gu? 5'%.,.: �P+1 *KSCii!3inriXic3�i'>ow/h"�" .«.e,h{e�"b'atvJiX. File: 35m.th Drawing # EMI k ti:y, SW oalr�da�egvP SW 7th St ti' 18 0 . I w° - Names !'E v.. ai ai 'i .'y .....• 17 1" ^ \ i 5.151stSt i' �f `. j`� \ " . ., ._ -,_: ,'.• a�. 15 +L' i SW 16th St 111KIIIr f. cfa ------"R■Np ., /� s9`B 1 -. Legend ouyk S. 153rd stmr�I;;:: -'' 1 : ' anre�B7di ��'' j ,fit p Weekday P.M. Peak Hour TrafficVolumes 2�� ` i Project (p) -Weekday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes �/1 �'i► �t� j l Site 3 4 1- 0 0 - Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • V I -� Na -Not Available Q =���' S.Lon9 pf 1 Way I it i /, TT i, d Baker Blvd 13 %,y I �� v Ts ® gIi 7 iD 33''>/ l 1 - �.+ I BSI 1._6 • trander Blvd. g ": l A 7 .8 7 Y;; SW 27th St. 1.i i F I a4t 1 i x 1i W m �. f ,1 z. 1:1 SW34thSt. inkler Blvd. k�, Iii h �,T ,11 a k lil iiT ill 1111 SW 41st St. 11 s 1' aoth St 1 z 1 a l; i;i SW 43ro St ± % 16 `t not to sale / , l ' 1 f 1 IUnH AaIIEA lSe3 MS •aAV Pull MS'aAValePSVO . •--t -- .__,__t_._ t . • • 3 >pedJanoPuy Jatuaayin MWad laAOPW 19V (UAW J ,and Wed O9- 8tOL69LOG 0 Y Z 4 I• 0 t ID CO re <1r Z 'a ^5 tN^ N a� tD • a co f Z- ( "'�N eto N\ 15 . 92 121 45 ` L 42 (35) 68 (166) (65) (57) 333 158 63 1047 (612) 579 r,46 i (21 (54) 38 i 201 (186) 170 it ^ ` t 402 (583) 898 216 121 31 347 (174)102 (128 (69) (11) ( iiii'1!1'1i.TII11`111'I, p INCH 1 5 6 CHINA 9L tit et Zl ;�'�OL- ; c.6: 9 ;w fL--t� `9ra ti 5 ti £ Z •l ro0 1111111111111111111111111 .11.1.11111111111111i1111I1iI 11111111 IL111 11I11111[11I1.i111I111.111111li iili1 •il'il.li 111ili1,1.1.l1 Ii1111 .1illl111111111i111111IiIIil ! • ;•• • ,t •1 File: e: . . . RECEIVED. • CITY. OF TUKWILA APR 1 0 1998 PERMIT CENTER „ • 1' • „.. , 1.11111 1 1 111110.11 .11111.1.111 1 i1111111 1'011 11 um an VIIIMS NB ggal 1.,;:.;nlith • • • , 11100,_ rourviii • a • •-•:$14 ' +1434 -.7v•v•-..' maw • t, r -61 JanwAsh q11- " -.44127, ; • rt."1.,, WP.1,0,P,e44: Meg • ,4 7 51:090,154111;ezz,:7"; - • a t , ATTACHMENT .G 5 •L : • 6 L., • 'L.- 'L.. I! ,f• ,,"L' • • • • • VI „ t i . % C 1..':11- 0 • • KILN. J 5 -6 WALL NOUNTE° SIGN o.F. /C.I. ILrvAT10Y MONUMENT SIGN WALL V SIGNS REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMIT •`1 4/6/199516.24.57 C- 1201.6.9 I.ihl.I�1T-1-) `IYi1I ['I �ilil'L I! 1111117 ., (, 1111_ IJ . I!I 0INCH' : - 1 r CHINA ) I. bl £I' • Zl R OI (. .:.6 8:' 1111. � . z 9 : I �� �'� `. E I111III11II1(III11II111111111IIIIII11III111111111111111I1111II1111! NII11111111 11II11111111I1111111IlII11111 1,1 i. I1111I11I1IIII)11111111111111111111I �h!(,1I11.1:17:71.171.11,1;71:1..111 I1�� %)lil:�I,[i'i1�1 I1�1_� `a r °( 5 6 MONTH XPLANATORY TITLE; LA 10NTA PLR!. INC. wTENDS TO PROMO£ AN EXCEPnCNAL NOSNTAUTT ENMRONNENT. OWNER FAULT FUN CENTERS .APPLICANT LA OUwTA NN9, NC. 112 EAST PECAN STREET SAN ANTONIO . RIU$ 76299 (210)3O2 -6416 CONTACT: AL RATMON. M CIVIL ENGINEER NPrr 111 S.N. STN AVE 04 SRp500 (001)22 1720E (503) 2T7 7 OR CONTACT: TAW SNAIK2NOER ARCHITECT /APPLICANT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT %IMAM OERCN GROUP. INC. 2329 EAST MASSON SEATTLE. WASWNGTON 91112 (206)322 -1733 CONTACTt 1st 1LLER SITE DATA PROPOSED UY: ZONING: BUILDING CODS To k ASSOOARS 4101 NONNI 44Th 579E11 11201705. ARIZONA 12016 (102)952 -5260 CONTACT: WALT LASSRA OCWPANCY GROUP: CONSTRUCTION TYPE: MAIIWNM ALLOWAILE SUILONC ND61T MnD1N0 NOWT PROVIDED: LOT AMA PROMOS DENSITY: UNITS PROMOS ROOM COUNT AI STANDARD OIL \DLL OUEST1OOY 59 8 STANDARD MINI SUITS 47 DI) STANDARD MN0 SUM 0/ 20►A 25 02) SPOON. VINO Mil W/ MIL NWT 11 11 , MARRIES FRGS DIL \OM. CU0111001 2 1) 11/PALL-IN DILL \DIL CULSTSOOY 2 (E) DAM= PRIX KING OUCTTIR00M 2 f RAMS POLE ICING OUCTTRO011 T /ROW -DI 31019111 2 (6.1.1) DUOS MID EDITS • 12 TOTAL 153 GUESTROOY5 BUILDING AREA CALC, 10113. L01W 1060610• 16.992 S.f. NOM. GUESTING • 01.414 Sr. TOTAL 65.106 sr. 4071. G/u 1994 U.S.C. NM WASHINGTON STAR 011ENOMENTS 1 -1 TYPE V 1 4R. • uses, TNT( • 1 M. • CUE5TNN0 • STORIES GROSS • 7.32 ACRES NET • 2.12 ACRES N UNITS /GROSS At 153 GUEST900N5 PARKING CALC, 1 REWIRED: WEEVER EKFOY 201100415/ TORNE115PL0YEE5• 156 P'S 10701 161 P S. FRONDED STANDARD P.S. (• R 19' W/Y 0.4.)• 109 P.5. COMPACT NS. (0' X 161 • 47 P.S. ACCES09LL PARKING SPACES Of X 20' W/S ISLE k 2' O.N.- DAR) .5 P.S. Or 5 20. 0/5' ISLE k • 0.11.- 5(141 7 P.S. TOTAL. 162 P.S. • EXISTING ACCESS DIRK REOUIRED SETBACKS 5151.01163.3056035 FRONT TARO SEC YARD 110II TARO P2P1NG TETMACS5 FRONT YARD SIDE YARD REM TARO 25 fT 5 fT 5 fT 6 fT MIRAGE. 2 FT NN. 5 FT AVERAGE 2 FT MN. 4017 MEOWED 5200 ) SYMBOL SCHEDULE ® ACCESSIBLE POSING SPACE - REFER 9/0901 l 410MAN7, REFER 70 OK DRA1405 �. ACCESSMLL WADING ENTRANCE k LOCATION OF I.A. S 51ON NNOE SOX 4 LOCATION OF ACCESSIKE k 104 AWAY SIGN- REFER 1/01101 • • • • INDICATES ACCE55011L 1701.110 111— 11010(155 ACCESSSELL RAMP SLOPE NOT TO EICEED 1:12 - ��_�--(�(1P11 SIYET C -001 ♦-c3 STANDARD UDR POLE 174 51RELDEO U047 FUTURE - 30' NT. ITE PLAN 905 PROGRESS SET Architecture/ Planning/ Landscape Architecture 4148 North 48th Street Phoenix, Arizona 85018 (602) 840 -2795 FAX (602) 840 -9469 Job# 97- 3004.01 Date: 3-9-98 Sheet Description: SITE PLAN Revision: ATTACHMENT F • Sheet 01201 of Shts.. File: • • -2 • -_ 1 - - __R_MPVL- (ON.::. TC ' )(T j • NEARS ST j=ANEL JVT.IFOR I� NEW FOOTU AND S.PEWALIT.. I I MOVE IRRIGATIONIHEA ^•S • 1 %= WITHICARE TO LEAVE LINZ INTACT FOR S'viCL REMAINING LANDSCAPE. Nor. (-T_, CONFIRM WARRANTY REO• ( ••••.: ; •- OF SPRINKLER SYSTEM WI \ 1 ' OLNER PRIOR TO ISEGINT:IN WORK IN THIS AR=A. I .! KEY. 4,.24 CY GONG DEMOLITICK NEW H.C. RAMP SEE 19 /A -4.I NEW- STRIPES-- H,C. SYM50L. ( NOTE. DEMOLITI INTERIOR FROM THI OF EXIST'G ALLS 15 EXCLUDED CONTRACT. 1 —; - 8" MTL 2Cr A STUD m 24" I OZ. DEMISING WALL / BATT INSUL W/ 5/8" T PE'X' GU:3 ONE SIDE: EXTc D TO ROOF DECK OR UNDERSIDE OF GLB. 144' -Gn G" MTL 20GA STUD 0 24" O.C. DEMISING WALL / R -II BATT INSUL W/ 5 /S" TTPE'X' G4'3 ONE SIDE, EXTEND TO KOOF DECK OR UNDERSIDE OF GLB. (J) O Il9id \ HTL 24)GA STUD o 21" O.C. 1 DEMISING WALL W/ R -II ?ATT IINSUL WM..0 /8'! TYPE 'X' EA SIDE 1 RESILIENT - ANNEL TI-115 SIDE. EXTEND TO „Op!. DECK OR UNDERSIDE eF GLB. I ' LIMITS OP CONS — (RUCTION • 0? I .D•Dl I ' I —of 1 I I I l l l 1 l l 1 1 I :I1E1 1 Fri T 1 1 1 FT 17 IIIP -j r]TJ rjrl17111110111•lj� IjIjiji rjTjrlr lT�ITI�jIj?jlj ?rj'I'� Iih Il'f9r(IIIII 1 I I 1 I .1 INCH • o ±;:s.) / . i �L0 -T • t■i. BLVD. 11111110111•1 1:.. ?. • I ..I..4.' y • 0 • CXINA yy •�' ,. 01 et EL Ll .L4�.,1 OL: •!. A.... _L::.,.9 ..._9 . Y C L l'•p0 11111111111111111111111111111111111I1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111ng111H111IIIuulpnh1111unlpuln111111llulllllul <r': SHEETS • ' I LPF`..NT • 't---1.4f. 4:••••:', , . ,./•■• •••I . •';' • .:.-Lj . Fi . <c> •: • I.. < t- . \ • . 1. • s;••• -•• 4- ! • <YD.; •30-, r-k2•22_, • - , tt,c,,z63 h'ESH , • TP• r 1 • „.. • DR.YVT "SCORN-: 2 s: , • ...„ 7 20 . L. / _ • ro-i ) • ; ) 1-7,7E-7-,„).7 „7-. • . ; 1.1 71:1:1-11 • J I- I • H.. (--i•-•.,\AIEST • ELEVATION • . A4.1, A4.2, A4.3 ' • — / REF:•1,1—A1 • STAII (SEE A2.4) - - - z • 1_, I St, - ,' SCALE:.1 4.4 limill=011010liessisommoursamis araiMaiiiSEVEMIN al 111111111R1 NINO HIM Ira enasula Dm BEIM mg.. MUM MEM • t• tt: • •• • '• g, • 0:sz.Xcl; page A4 11,?.01t.rx 91 Pt El 61 '1,101,,,„ • 6, e . 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.111111111111111111111111111111111111111111116111111111111110111iiihilthiPliphilfithillitil siT'.••• "1- R R A C./. A . CK TECTS •rru: (2c,.;) •••••. - 74. ;•••••,: K-j.;Y:'t .3.35-7524 ELEVAT10?..; . . ;EAFup, \/;!!,..A ,• tt, • :1,:r.1 1;9 ON E3' Cl tt-CKED DATE: 1.;c1‘,,E; 1/ • - REVISIONS Z1131_94 1. (-•; SHEET • 1:1t\ • T.- •4 • Fe;,'..”