Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2022-02-14 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET2 AGENCY, UNLESS Tukwila City Council Agenda ❖ COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ❖ ILA w4s ���- 0 4 "',n I90a Allan Ekberg, Mayor Councilmembers: ❖ Kathy Hougardy ❖ De'Sean Quinn David Cline, City Administrator ❖ Kate Kruller ❖ Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson Thomas McLeod, Council President ❖Mohamed Abdi ❖ Tosh Sharp THE MEETING 20-28 ADOPTED ANY PUBLIC RCW 42.30 FOR THE PUBLIC Monday, February WILL NOT BE CONDUCTED AT TUKWILA CITY HALL, BASED ON THE GOVERNOR'S PROCLAMATION 2020 WHICH SAYS IN PART: TO RCW 42.30, IS PROHIBITED FROM CONDUCTING ANY MEETING, SUBJECT TO MARCH 24, SUBJECT (A) THE MEETING IS NOT CONDUCTED IN-PERSON AND INSTEAD PROVIDES AN OPTIONS) TO ATTEND THE THE PHONE For Technical 14, 2022; PROCEEDINGS THROUGH, AT MINIMUM, TELEPHONIC ACCESS, ..." NUMBER FOR THE PUBLIC TO LISTEN TO THE MEETING IS: 1-253-292-9750, ACCESS CODE: 670077847#. Click here to: Join Microsoft Teams Meeting Support during the meeting call; 1-206-433-7155 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The City of Tukwila is located on the ancestral lands of the Coast Salish people. We acknowledge their continuing connections to land, waters and culture. We pay our respects to their elders past, present and emerging. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS— including comment on items both on and not on the meeting agenda * 2021-2022 Update * Those wishing to provide public comments now the opportunity to verbally address the City Council via phone or Microsoft for up to 5 minutes for items both on and not on the meeting agenda. take advantage of this option, please email citycouncil@tukwilawa.gov with have Teams To your meeting. to name and the topic you wish to speak on by 5:00 PM on the date of the meeting. Please clearly indicate that your message is for public comment during the You will receive further instructions and be called upon during the meeting address the City Council. 4. SPECIAL ISSUES a. Weekly COVID-19 report. b. Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) grant applications: (1) A resolution authorizing submission of an application for grant funding assistance for the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project. (2) A resolution authorizing submission of an application for grant funding assistance for the Nelsen Side Channel Project. c. An update on the Teen & Senior Center siting. d. A briefing on "Missing Middle Housing." e. 42nd Avenue South Bridge Type, Size and Location (TS&L) Report. Khashayar Nikzad, Tran Tech Engineering Pg.1 Pg.9 Pg.21 Pg.33 Pg.143 Pg.173 (continued..) COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING February 14, 2022 Page 2 5. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff 6. MISCELLANEOUS 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION 8. ADJOURN TO SPECIAL MEETING ❖ SPECIAL MEETING ❖ • Ord #2670 • Res #2042 1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT AGENDA a. Approval of Vouchers b. A resolution authorizing submission of an application(s) for grant funding assistance for the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project (#99830105) to the Salmon Recovery Funding Board and to the Brian Abbott Fish Barrier Removal Board as provided in RCW 77.85, RCW 77.95.180, WAC 420 and other applicable authorities. [Reviewed and forwarded to Consent by the Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee on 2/7/22.] c. A resolution authorizing submission of an application(s) for grant funding assistance for the Nelsen Side Channel Project (#91641203) to the Salmon Recovery Funding Board as provided in RCW 77.85, RCW 77.95.180, WAC 420 and other applicable authorities. [Reviewed and forwarded to Consent by the Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee on 2/7/22.] Pg.9 Pg.21 3. NEW BUSINESS For discussion of Consent Agenda items only, if necessary. 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION Potential Litigation — Pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). (30 minutes) NO action will follow in the open meeting. 5. ADJOURNMENT This agenda is available at www.tukwilawa.gov, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Remote Tukwila Council meetings are audio taped (and video taped as of 9/14/20). Available at www.tukwilawa.gov) WELCOME TO THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Tukwila City Council encourages community participation in the local government process and welcomes attendance and public comment at its meetings. MEETING SCHEDULE Regular Meetings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month. The City Council takes formal action in the form of motions, resolutions and ordinances at Regular Meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month. The City Council considers current issues, discusses policy matters in detail, and coordinates the work of the Council at Committee of the Whole meetings. PUBLIC COMMENTS Members of the public are given the opportunity to address the Council for up to 5 minutes on items both on and not on the meeting agenda during Public Comments. The City Council will also accept comments on an agenda item when the item is presented in the agenda, but speakers are limited to commenting once per item each meeting. When recognized by the Presiding Officer, please go to the podium if on-site or turn on your microphone if attending virtually and state your name clearly for the record. The City Council appreciates hearing from you but may not respond or answer questions during the meeting. Members of the City Council or City staff may follow up with you following the meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. The City Council Rules of Procedure provide the following guidelines for Public Hearings: 1. City staff will provide a report summarizing and providing context to the issue at hand. 2. The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 3. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 4. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 5. After the proponents and opponents have used their speaking time, the Council may ask further clarifying questions of the speakers. 6. Members of the public who wish to address the Council on the hearing topic may speak for 5 minutes each. 7. Speakers are asked to sign in on forms provided by the City Clerk. 8. The Council may ask clarifying questions of speakers and the speakers may respond. 9. Speakers should address their comments to the City Council. 10. If a large number of people wish to speak to the issue, the Council may limit the total amount of comment time dedicated to the Public Hearing. 11. Once the Presiding Officer closes the public hearing, no further comments will be accepted, and the issue is open for Councilmember discussion. 12. Any hearing being held or ordered to be held by the City Council may be continued in the manner as set forth by RCW 42.30.100. For more information about the City Council, including its complete Rules of Procedure, please visit: https://www.tukwilawa.gov/departments/city-council/ COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS kJ* �. , �4 Initials ITEM NO. OtP Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review i 2/14/22 RB ��r 0 4.A. \\......., 1908 ITEM INFORMATION STAFF SPONSOR: RACHEL BIANCHI ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 2/14/ 22 AGENDA ITEM TITLE A weekly update on the City's planning and response to COVID-19 (Coronovirus) CATEGORY 11 Mtg Discussion Date 2/14/22 ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Altg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mfg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ►1 Mayor ❑ Admin Svcs ❑ DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S The City is actively engaged in regional efforts to address the coronovirus (COVID-19). SUMMARY Staff are providing the Council with updated information regarding the City's response to COVID-19. REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: N/A COMMITTEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. N/A COMMITTEE N/A COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 2/14/22 Coronavirus Report 1 2 CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE UPDATE February 14, 2022 * Denotes All New Content in the Section ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND CITY OPERATIONS Essential Services & City Operations Due to the fast -spreading omnicron variant of COVID-19 throughout the region, most City facilities are closed to the public through February 28, 2022. Muncipal Court will resume limited in-person operations on Mondays and Wednesdays, from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. The Tukwila Community Center remains open and proof of vaccination is required. All services remain available remotely. Masks are required at all times in City facilities; N95s have been made available for staff and are highly encouraged. * Human Services Since the beginning of February, HS staff has assisted 17 households (36 individuals) for a combined total of $21,023.18 in direct financial assistance ($20,021 in rental assistance, $752.18 in utility assistance). The least amount of rent owing was $300 the highest amount owing was $6,000. Staff is working with several new households who are at various stages of the intake process. As of February 11, 2022, the KC EPRAP portal is closed to new applicants (both tenants and landlords). Residents and landlords who have already applied for the EPRAP program can check their status by going to: https://kingcounty.gov/depts/community-human-services/COVID/eviction-prevention-rent-assistance Source General Fund Contracted Partners - Covid Rental & Utility Assistance Sewer/Water HB 1406 Rental Assistance Information from the community on total past due rent amount *Business Recovery Business Health Households Assisted/Ind 1/4 14/29 1/2 1/1 Funding Breakdown Rent: $1,200 Utility: $ Rent: $18,821 Utility: $539.69 $212.49 $250.00 $500-$1,200 = 6 $1,250-$3,500 = 10 $3,600-$4,000 = 2 Over $4,000 = 1 Washington's economy continues to be open. All businesses and public spaces including restaurants, stores, offices, theaters, outdoor events, and other places can operate at full capacity. Statewide every person (including customers and employees) is required to wear masks when indoors with someone from outside their household, however, there are exceptions. On February 9, Governor Inslee announced that the State will discontinue the State's outdoor mask mandate on February 18th. He also said that soon he expects to announce when the State will lift the indoor mask mandate. 3 COVID, especially the Omicron variant, has continued to spread but appears to be slowing. In King County, the seven-day average daily number of cases is still very high but appears to have reached a peak on January 10. By early February the levels were similar to late December although still much higher than this past summer. Hospitalizations and deaths lag new cases and have started to decline but are still high. Business Assistance The State's Small Business Flex Fund continues of offer low interest loans to small businesses. Staff is participating in the Port of Seattle's creation of a Trusted Community Partners Network that will help navigate small businesses to resources like technical assistance and funding. King County is distributing $145 million of federal funds for residential rental assistance and eviction prevention to tenants and landlords through their Eviction Prevention and Rental Assistance Program (EPRAP). King County will significantly increase the EPRAP funding with additional ARPA funds in 2022. MEETING THE COMMUNITY'S BASIC NEEDS * Food Resources and Distribution Senior Meals, number of meals distributed. Week of 2/7 During the week of 2/7; 40 meals were picked up at the Duwamish Curb Cafe and 198 meals were delivered to 17 residents. Meals are distributed weekly, unless there is a holiday that may affect delivery. In those instances, meals are "doubled" up for Meals on Wheels and delivered the prior week. Tukwila Pantry The Pantry is in need of volunteers on Monday, Wednesday or Friday to build emergancy food boxes for the community. For more information call: 206.431.8293 4 Duwamish Curb Cafe 40 Meals on Wheels 198 Data is unavaible until next week COVID-19 UPDATES * Covid-19 Tukwila Overview About the Da << Go to other tabs: Demographics Geography Go to other dashboards: COVID-19 Vaccinations COVID-19 Outcomes by Vaccination Status Level of Community Transmission High Select a location Change the type of locations Cases 1 4,720 Hospitalizations 154 Tukwila City • Health Reporting Area ▪ Region View HRA Map Sdele..Ba01on Mep Deaths 25 People Completed Vaccine Series Not yet available Hover over graphs and text for more details Cases 13 daily average cases +18 new cases since 02/09/22 -43% decrease in the last 7 -days (89) from the prior 7 -days (156) 80 60 40 20 0 11/01/21 12/01/21 01/01/22 Specimen Date (last 120 days) 02/01/22 Hospitalizations Show data as a table <1 daily average hospitalizations +0 new hospitalizations since 02/09/22 50°Io increase in the last 7 -days (3) from the prior 7 -days (2) 4 z 0 11/01/21 12/01/21 01/01/22 02/01/22 Admission Date (last 120 days) Deaths Show data as a table 20 1.5 +0 new deaths since 02/09/22 1.0 <1 daily average deaths Increase of 3 in the last 14 -days (3) from the prior 14 -days (0) * Mobile Vaccination Team 0.5 0.0 11/01/21 12/01/21 01/01/22 Death Date (last 120 days) 02/01/22 The Tukwila Fire Department' Mobile Vaccine Team (MVT) has been stood up to provide various vaccine opportunities, including most recently at the Tukwila Pantry. 5 * Vaccine Update & Locations There are many ways for community members to access the vaccine at no cost. Multiple appointments are available at sites in the area, as well as private opportunities. Visit vaccinelocator.doh.wa.gov for location and appointment opportunities. Booster shot information and vaccines for children ages 5 through 11 are also available at vaccinelocator.doh.wa.gov. Upcoming Vaccine Opportunities in Tukwila: • March 1 & 21 8:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. - Tukwila Library. Vaccines available to ages 5+, first and second shots, boosters, walk-ins welcome. Vaccines free regardless of insurance, citizenship or immigration status. Vaccinations for the population 12+ in King County as of February 10, 2022: • 1 dose: 1,9356,352 or 95.0% • 2 doses: 1,789,973 or 87.3% • Booster doses: 1,000,784 Below is a zip code map of vaccinations as of February 10, 2022 (percentage of population 12+ who have completed the series) in King County, with Tukwila's two zip codes highlighted: • 98168: 86.4% • 98188: 91.7% Map of KC residents who have completed series among ages 12+ years old 1111111," 11) 0% .'— 711 © 2022 Mapbox CO OpenStreetMap Table of all KC residents who have completed series by age group and regions Below is a chart of vaccinations by region in King County. Note that South King County has a lower vaccination rate than many other areas in the county. 6 Table of all KC residents who have completed series by age group and regions Total 5+ years 12+ years 5-11 years 12-17 years 18-34 years 35-49 years 50-64 years 65+ years population old old old old old old old old Overall King County 79.2% 83.7% 87.2% 465% 75.7% 765% 88.7% 94.1% >95% East 845% 90% 93.7% 573% 91.9% 84,7% 92.4% >95% >95% 4 North 83.2% 87.7% 905% 56.8% 73.7% 82.7% >95% 87.0% >95% Regions Seattle 79.7% 83.2% 843% 64.7% 90.7% 73.7% 90.4% 87.4% >95% South 71.8% 76.7% 825% 25.5% 57.2% 713% 80.7% >95% >95% Kirkland, Redmond, Bothell, and 82.7% 88.2% 90.6% 64.7% 88.7% 76.7% >95% 92.8% >95% 1.7.1..,..0:,,,.:1 L N Seattle and Shoreline li: 80A% 841% 85.0% 721% 93.1% 705% 92.7% 865% >95% Central Seattle 77.7% 80.1% 80,8 % 62.6% 85.7% 76.2% 85.7% 79.7% 87.2% W Seattle,S Seattle, Del ridge and lrighline 82.7% 88.2% 91.5% 52% 78.2% 81.2% >95% >95% >95% 10 Buri en, Renton, Tukwila and Seatac 75.0% 803% 853% 29.8% 651% 72.0% 88.2% >95% >95% Regions Auburn, Kent, and Federal Way 69.1% 7415E 80.6% 203% 54.1% 693% 78,49E >95% >95% South East King County 69.8% 74.2% 80% 26.9% 53.1% 72.7% 73.7% 89% >95% Bellevue. Issaquah and piercer Island 86% 90.7% 94.2% 56.6% 89.9% 92% 91.7% >95% >95% East King County 83.7% 89.7% >95% 52.6% 93.1% 86.9% 85.7% >95% >95% Vachon !bland 894% 92.4% >95% 59.5% 755% >95% 84.0% 75.0% >95% * COVID-19 Testing The following are the number of individuals tested over the past week at the Church by the Side of the Road. This is a regional testing facility drawing individuals from across south King County. King County has contracted with off-duty officers to provide traffic management along Tukwila International Boulevard and Military Road to mitigate traffic impacts in the neighborhood. 2/9 - 318 individuals tested 2/8 - 351 individuals tested 2/7 - 397 individuals tested 2/6 - closed (Sunday) 2/5 - 305 individuals tested 2/4 - 365 individuals tested 2/3 - 324 individuals tested * WA Notify WA Notify (also known as Washington Exposure Notifications) is a free tool that works on smartphones to alert users if they may have been exposed to COVID-19 without sharing any personal information. It is completely private and doesn't know who you are or track where you go. To download the app: On an iPhone, enable Exposure Ali On an Android phone: Notifications in Settings: • Go to the Google Play Store • Go to Settings • Download the WA Notify app • Scroll down to Exposure Notifications • Click 'Turn On Exposure Notifications" • Select United States • Select Washington For Android or iPhone, scan the QR code: Note: As we move into the third year of the pandemic, staff is seeking ways to streamline the information in this report and may reduce some of the detail in future reports. 7 8 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 02/14/22 JR ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 4.B. (1)& Spec 2.B. 9 STAFF SPONSOR: BRITTANY ROBINSON ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 02/14/22 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Surface Water — Resolution for RCO Gilliam Creek Grant Applications Fish Barrier Removal Project CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Altg Date ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date 11 Resolution Mtg Date 02/14/22 SPONSOR ❑Council Mayor HR ❑DCD Finance Fire TS P&R ❑Police 11 PLV ❑Court SPONSOR'S This Resolution is to authorize the submittal of two grant applications for the Gilliam Creek SUMMARY Fish Barrier Removal Project. The State of Washington Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) requires that project applicants submit a legislative authorizing resolution when applying for grant funds. This resolution will be incorportated into the Fish Barrier Removal Board & Salmon Recovery Funding Board applications. Council is being asked to approve the Resolution authorizing the submission of grant funding applications to the RCO. REVIEWED BY /1 Trans&Infrastructure ❑ CommunitySvs/Safety ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Planning/Economic Dev. ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. COMMITTEE CHAIR: KATE KRULLER ❑ LTAC DATE: 02/07/22 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. COMMITTEE Public Works Department Forward to Committee of the Whole and Special Consent Agenda COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $632,500 $ $0.00 Fund Source: BAFBRB GRANT, SRFB GRANT, 15% CITY MATCH Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 02/14/22 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 02/14/22 Informational Memorandum dated 02/04/2022 Draft Resolution Minutes from Transportation and Infrastructure Committee meeting of 02/07/2022 9 10 City of Tukwilla Allan Ekberg, Mayor Public Works pepartmerrt - Harr Ponnekar?ti, Director/City Engineer INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Public Works Director/ City Engineer BY: Brittany Robinson, Grant Analyst Mike Perfetti, Senior Surface Water Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: February 4, 2022 SUBJECT: Surface Water — Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project Project No. 99830105 Resolution for RCO Grant Applications ISSUE Approve a Resolution to the State of Washington Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) for two grant applications for the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project. BACKGROUND The primary goals of this project are to restore fish passage between Gilliam Creek and the Green River, restore salmon habitat, and maintain or improve flood protection. The 108" flapgate would be removed and replaced with flood protection more conducive to fish passage. DISCUSSION This committee approved the submittal of future grant applications to the RCO and King County on April 6, 2020, for the Gilliam Creek Project. The RCO requires that project applicants submit a legislative authorizing resolution when applying for grant funds. RCO has specific language required in the resolution, which has been incorporated into the City resolution template. Staff applied for design funding to the RCO's Brian Abbott Fish Barrier Removal Board (BAFBRB) and plans to apply for the RCO's Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB). The resolution will be incorporated into the BAFBRB application retroactively and the SRFB as part of the application. FISCAL IMPACT These RCO grants require a 15% match. The 15% match will be funded by King County Flood Control District and Cooperative Watershed Management grants awarded to the City and City CIP funds as needed. Fund Source Amount Grant Match Budget BAFBRB Grant $300,000 $700,000 SRFB Grant 250,000 15% Grant Match 82,500 Total $632,500 RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve the Resolution authorizing the submission of grant funding applications to the RCO and consider this item at the Committee of the Whole and the Consent Agenda of the February 14, 2022 Special Meeting. ATTACHMENTS • Draft Resolution • Page 85, 2021 CIP 11 12 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION(S) FOR GRANT FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR THE GILLIAM CREEK FISH BARRIER REMOVAL PROJECT (#99830105) TO THE SALMON RECOVERY FUNDING BOARD AND TO THE BRIAN ABBOTT FISH BARRIER REMOVAL BOARD AS PROVIDED IN RCW 77.85, RCW 77.95.180, WAC 420 AND OTHER APPLICABLE AUTHORITIES. Organization Name (sponsor) City of Tukwila, Washington Resolution No. Project Number(s), Name(s), and RCO Project Number(s): Project #99830105...Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project RCO #s 21-1502 Gilliam Creek Fish Passage Prelim Dsgn, and 22-1049 Gilliam Creek Fish Passage Prelim Des This resolution/authorization authorizes the person identified below (in Section 2) to act as the authorized representative/agent on behalf of our organization and to legally bind our organization with respect to the above Project(s) for which we seek grant funding assistance managed through the Recreation and Conservation Office ("the Office"). WHEREAS, under provisions of WAC 420-12, state grant assistance is requested to aid in financing the cost of the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila considers it in the best public interest to complete the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal capital improvement project; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Our organization has applied for or intends to apply for funding assistance managed by the Office for the above "Project(s)." W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 4 13 Section 2. Our organization authorizes the following persons or persons holding specified titles/positions (and subsequent holders of those titles/positions) to execute the following documents binding our organization on the above projects: Grant Document Name of Signatory or Title of Person Authorized to Sign Grant application (submission thereof) Allan Ekberg, Mayor Project contact (day-to-day administering of the grant and communicating with the RCO) Mike Perfetti, Senior Surface Water program Manager RCO Grant Agreement (Agreement) Allan Ekberg, Mayor Agreement amendments Allan Ekberg, Mayor Authorizing property and real estate documents (Notice of Grant, Deed of Right of Assignment of Rights if applicable). These are items that are typically recorded on the property with the county. Hari Ponnekanti, Public Works Director The above persons are considered an "authorized representative(s)/agent(s)" for purposes of the documents indicated. Our organization shall comply with a request from the RCO to provide documentation of persons who may be authorized to execute documents related to the grant. Section 3. Our organization has reviewed the sample RCO Grant Agreement on the Recreation and Conservation Office's WEBSITE at: https://rco.wa.gov/wp- content/uploads/2019/06/SampleProjAgreement.pdf. We understand and acknowledge that if offered an agreement to sign in the future, it will contain an indemnification and legal venue stipulation and other terms and conditions substantially in the form contained in the sample Agreement and that such terms and conditions of any signed Agreement shall be legally binding on the sponsor if our representative/agent enters into an Agreement on our behalf. The Office reserves the right to revise the Agreement prior to execution. Section 4. Our organization acknowledges and warrants, after conferring with its legal counsel, that its authorized representative(s)/agent(s) have full legal authority to act and sign on behalf of the organization for their assigned role/document. Section 5. Grant assistance is contingent on a signed project agreement. Entering into any project agreement with the Office is purely voluntary on our part. W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 14 Page 2 of 4 Section 6. Our organization understands that grant policies and requirements vary depending on the grant program applied to, the grant program and source of funding in the project agreement, the characteristics of the project, and the characteristics of our organization. Section 7. Our organization further understands that prior to our authorized representative(s)/agent(s) executing any of the documents listed above, the RCO may make revisions to its sample Agreement and that such revisions could include the indemnification and the legal venue stipulation. Our organization accepts the legal obligation that we shall, prior to execution of the Agreement(s), confer with our authorized representative(s)/agent(s) as to any revisions to the project Agreement from that of the sample Agreement. We also acknowledge and accept that if our authorized representative(s)/agent(s) executes the Agreement(s) with any such revisions, all terms and conditions of the executed Agreement shall be conclusively deemed to be executed with our authorization. Section 8. Any grant assistance received will be used for only direct eligible and allowable costs that are reasonable and necessary to implement the project(s) referenced above. Section 9. If match is required for the grant, we understand our organization must certify the availability of match at least one month before funding approval. In addition, our organization understands it is responsible for supporting all non-cash matching share commitments to this project should they not materialize. Section 10. Our organization acknowledges that if it receives grant funds managed by the Office, the Office will pay us on only a reimbursement basis. We understand reimbursement basis means that we will only request payment from the Office after we incur grant eligible and allowable costs and pay them. The Office may also determine an amount of retainage and hold that amount until all project deliverables, grant reports, or other responsibilities are complete. Section 11. Our organization acknowledges that any property acquired with grant assistance must be dedicated for the purposes of the grant in perpetuity unless otherwise agreed to in writing by our organization and the Office. We agree to dedicate the property in a signed "Deed of Right" for fee acquisitions, or an "Assignment of Rights" for other than fee acquisitions (which documents will be based upon the Office's standard versions of those documents), to be recorded on the title of the property with the county auditor. Our organization acknowledges that any property acquired in fee title must be immediately made available to the public unless otherwise provided for in policy, the Agreement, or authorized in writing by the Office Director. Section 12. Our organization acknowledges that any property owned by our organization that is developed, renovated, enhanced, or restored with grant assistance must be dedicated for the purpose of the grant in perpetuity unless otherwise allowed by grant program policy or Office, in writing, and per the Agreement or an amendment thereto. W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 4 15 Section 13. Our organization acknowledges that any property not owned by our organization that is developed, renovated, enhanced, or restored with grant assistance must be dedicated for the purpose of the grant as required by grant program policies unless otherwise provided for per the Agreement or an amendment thereto. Section 14. Our organization certifies the following: the Project does not conflict with the Puget Sound Action Agenda developed by the Puget Sound Partnership under RCW 90.71.310. Section 15. This resolution/authorization is deemed to be part of the formal grant application to the Office. Section 16. Our organization warrants and certifies that this resolution/ authorization was properly and lawfully adopted following the requirements of our organization and applicable laws and policies and that our organization has full legal authority to commit our organization to the warranties, certifications, promises and obligations set forth herein. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of , 2022. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Thomas McLeod, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Office of the City Attorney W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 16 Page 4 of 4 PROJECT: DESCRIPTION: JUSTIFICATION: STATUS: MAI NT. IMPACT: COMMENT: CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2021 to 2026 Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project No. 99830105 Construct fish passage improvements at existing flap gate and restore salmonid habitat; replace flap gate which may include a self-regulating tide gate or flood wall. Enable fish access to lower Gilliam Creek under wider range of flow conditions; fish barrier per WDFW and City; WRIA 9 salmon habitat project. Analysis of lower Gilliam Creek is being conducted in 2018 to determine the best solution for fish passage and to address potential flooding. Likely a shift in maintenance commitments with potential elimination of flapgate maintenance. In 2020, SRFB listed as Project of Concern, WRIA pulling funding from this cycle; BA Fish Barrier Board - scored 63 of 94; outcomes yet to be determined; $100K allocated in CWM via WRIA 9. FINANCIAL Through Estimated (in $000's) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES 4 Project Location , iri 5 ,2•ti, tr Design 60 NV 936 536 405 1,937 Land (R/W) ill \ till A. %. ilv.. 0 Monitoring .� / ,A, StLAM 0 Const. Mgmt. 752 400 1152 Construction lan7♦♦ _7:mem__ \xa . -4,,r 5,200 2,000 _ ��� 7,200 TOTAL EXPENSES 60 0 936 536 405 5,952 2,400 0 0 10,289 FUND SOURCES 1`Ir90'�'G5 5,605[ 4 ` Awarded Grant 0 Proposed Grant 708 350 258 4,760 1,000 7,076 Mitigation Actual 0 Mitigation Expected 0 City Oper. Revenue 60 0 228 186 147 1,192 1,400 0 0 3,213 TOTAL SOURCES 60 0 936 536 405 5,952 2400 0 0 10,289 2021 - 2026 Capital Improvement Program 85 17 4 Project Location , iri 5 ,2•ti, tr NV ip Id ill \ till A. %. ilv.. 91744 .� / ,A, StLAM ®" S 143 St ti lan7♦♦ _7:mem__ \xa . -4,,r _ ��� , s,ss���-4nc�a G. �-Q ri,-� ' sm c �• Tukwlt8 Pkwy 1`Ir90'�'G5 5,605[ 4 ` 2021 - 2026 Capital Improvement Program 85 17 18 City of Tukwila City Council Transportation & Infrastructure Services Committee Meeting Minutes February 7, 2022 5:30 p.m. - Electronic Meeting due to COVID-19 Emergency Councilmembers Present: Kate Kruller, Chair; Mohamed Abdi, Tosh Sharp Staff Present: David Cline, Hari Ponnekanti, Seong Kim, Adib Altallal, Griffin Lerner, Cyndy Knighton, Adam Cox, Mike Perfetti, Jay Wittwer, Laurel Humphrey Chair Kruller called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans Staff provided an update on progress on the Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans, of which drafts have been submitted for state review and plans for SEPA environmental review are underway. Committee Recommendation Discussion only. B. Resolution: Grant Applications for Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution authorizing the submission of two grant funding applications to the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office for the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. February 14, 2022 Committee of the Whole. C. Resolution: Grant Application for Nelsen Side Channel Project Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution authorizing the submission of a grant funding applications to the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office for the Nelsen Side Channel Project. Chair Kruller urged cross -departmental collaboration to address encampment activity. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. February 14, 2022 Committee of the Whole. D. Grant Application: 42"d Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project Staff is seeking Committee approval to submit a grant application to the National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) in the amount of $2,000,000 for construction of the 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. 19 20 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 02/14/22 JR ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 4.B. (2) & Spec 2.C. 21 STAFF SPONSOR: BRITTANY ROBINSON ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 02/14/22 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Surface Water — Resolution for RCO Nelsen Side Channel Grant Application Project CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Altg Date ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date 11 Resolution Mtg Date 02/14/22 SPONSOR ❑Council Mayor HR ❑DCD Finance Fire ❑TS P&R ❑Police 11 PLV ❑Court SPONSOR'S This Resolution is to authorize the submittal of a grant application for the Nelsen Side SUMMARY Channel Project. The State of Washington Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) requires that project applicants submit a legislative authorizing resolution when applying for grant funds. This resolution will be incorportated into the Salmon Recovery Funding Board application (SRFB). Council is being asked to approve the Resolution authorizing the submission of grant funding application to the RCO. REVIEVG'ED BY /1 Trans&Infrastructure ❑ CommunitySvs/Safety ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Planning/Economic Dev. ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. COMMITTEE CHAIR: KATE KRULLER ❑ LTAC DATE: 02/07/22 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. COMMITTEE Public Works Department Forward to Committee of the Whole and Special Consent Agenda COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $230,000 $ $0.00 Fund Source: SRFB GRANT, 15% CITY MATCH Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 02/14/22 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 02/14/22 Informational Memorandum dated 02/04/2022 Draft Resolution Minutes from Transportation and Infrastructure Committee meeting of 02/07/2022 21 22 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Public Works pepartmerrt - Harr Ponnekanti, Director/City Engineer INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Public Works Director/ City Engineer BY: Brittany Robinson, Grant Analyst Mike Perfetti, Senior Surface Water Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: February 4, 2022 SUBJECT: Surface Water — Nelsen Side Channel Project Project No. 91641203 Resolution for RCO Grant Application ISSUE Approve a Resolution to the State of Washington Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) for a grant application for the Nelsen Side Channel Project. BACKGROUND The Nelsen side channel is a remnant section of the Green River as it existed prior to the construction of 1-405 in the 1960s. The remnant channel is separated from the mainstem of the river by a constructed levee but offers potential as off -channel rearing habitat for threatened Puget Sound Chinook salmon and other aquatic species. This project will set the levee back to create a ±1.2 -acre side channel, restore an acre of riparian forest, provide additional flood storage and provide public access to the river. Currently, there is a concept design in place for this project and property transfer arrangements are underway between the City, WDNR and WSDOT. DISCUSSION This committee approved the submittal of future grant applications to the RCO and King County on December 13, 2021, for Nelsen Side Channel Projects. The RCO requires that project applicants submit a legislative authorizing resolution when applying for grant funds. RCO has specific language required in the resolution, which has been incorporated into the City resolution template. Staff plans to apply for design funding to the RCO's Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) on March 4. The resolution will be incorporated into the SRFB application. FISCAL IMPACT This resolution will authorize the application for this and for future SRFB grant rounds, as well. Staff is working with WRIA 9 to identify other funding sources for this project. The required 15% match will be funded by Surface Water utility funds. Fund Source Amount 2022-2023 Utility Budget SRFB Grant 200,000 $615,000 15% City Match 30 000 Total $230,000 RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve the Resolution authorizing the submission of a grant funding application to the RCO and consider this item at the Committee of the Whole and the Consent Agenda of the February 14, 2022 Special Meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution Page 87, 2021 CIP 23 24 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION(S) FOR GRANT FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR THE NELSEN SIDE CHANNEL PROJECT (#91641203) TO THE SALMON RECOVERY FUNDING BOARD AS PROVIDED IN RCW 77.85, RCW 77.95.180, WAC 420 AND OTHER APPLICABLE AUTHORITIES. Organization Name (sponsor) City of Tukwila, Washington Resolution No. Project Number(s), Name(s), and RCO Project Number(s): Project #91641203...Nelsen Side Channel Project RCO # 22-1047 This resolution/authorization authorizes the person identified below (in Section 2) to act as the authorized representative/agent on behalf of our organization and to legally bind our organization with respect to the above Project(s) for which we seek grant funding assistance managed through the Recreation and Conservation Office ("the Office"). WHEREAS, under provisions of WAC 420-12, state grant assistance is requested to aid in financing the cost of the Nelsen Side Channel Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila considers it in the best public interest to complete the Nelsen Side Channel capital improvement project; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Our organization has applied for or intends to apply for funding assistance managed by the Office for the above "Project(s)." W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Nelsen Side Channel Project 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 4 25 Section 2. Our organization authorizes the following persons or persons holding specified titles/positions (and subsequent holders of those titles/positions) to execute the following documents binding our organization on the above projects: Grant Document Name of Signatory or Title of Person Authorized to Sign Grant application (submission thereof) Allan Ekberg, Mayor Project contact (day-to-day administering of the grant and communicating with the RCO) Mike Perfetti, Senior Surface Water program Manager RCO Grant Agreement (Agreement) Allan Ekberg, Mayor Agreement amendments Allan Ekberg, Mayor Authorizing property and real estate documents (Notice of Grant, Deed of Right of Assignment of Rights if applicable). These are items that are typically recorded on the property with the county. Hari Ponnekanti, Public Works Director The above persons are considered an "authorized representative(s)/agent(s)" for purposes of the documents indicated. Our organization shall comply with a request from the RCO to provide documentation of persons who may be authorized to execute documents related to the grant. Section 3. Our organization has reviewed the sample RCO Grant Agreement on the Recreation and Conservation Office's WEBSITE at: https://rco.wa.gov/wp- content/uploads/2019/06/SampleProjAgreement.pdf. We understand and acknowledge that if offered an agreement to sign in the future, it will contain an indemnification and legal venue stipulation and other terms and conditions substantially in the form contained in the sample Agreement and that such terms and conditions of any signed Agreement shall be legally binding on the sponsor if our representative/agent enters into an Agreement on our behalf. The Office reserves the right to revise the Agreement prior to execution. Section 4. Our organization acknowledges and warrants, after conferring with its legal counsel, that its authorized representative(s)/agent(s) have full legal authority to act and sign on behalf of the organization for their assigned role/document. Section 5. Grant assistance is contingent on a signed project agreement. Entering into any project agreement with the Office is purely voluntary on our part. W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Nelsen Side Channel Project 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 26 Page 2 of 4 Section 6. Our organization understands that grant policies and requirements vary depending on the grant program applied to, the grant program and source of funding in the project agreement, the characteristics of the project, and the characteristics of our organization. Section 7. Our organization further understands that prior to our authorized representative(s)/agent(s) executing any of the documents listed above, the RCO may make revisions to its sample Agreement and that such revisions could include the indemnification and the legal venue stipulation. Our organization accepts the legal obligation that we shall, prior to execution of the Agreement(s), confer with our authorized representative(s)/agent(s) as to any revisions to the project Agreement from that of the sample Agreement. We also acknowledge and accept that if our authorized representative(s)/agent(s) executes the Agreement(s) with any such revisions, all terms and conditions of the executed Agreement shall be conclusively deemed to be executed with our authorization. Section 8. Any grant assistance received will be used for only direct eligible and allowable costs that are reasonable and necessary to implement the project(s) referenced above. Section 9. If match is required for the grant, we understand our organization must certify the availability of match at least one month before funding approval. In addition, our organization understands it is responsible for supporting all non-cash matching share commitments to this project should they not materialize. Section 10. Our organization acknowledges that if it receives grant funds managed by the Office, the Office will pay us on only a reimbursement basis. We understand reimbursement basis means that we will only request payment from the Office after we incur grant eligible and allowable costs and pay them. The Office may also determine an amount of retainage and hold that amount until all project deliverables, grant reports, or other responsibilities are complete. Section 11. Our organization acknowledges that any property acquired with grant assistance must be dedicated for the purposes of the grant in perpetuity unless otherwise agreed to in writing by our organization and the Office. We agree to dedicate the property in a signed "Deed of Right" for fee acquisitions, or an "Assignment of Rights" for other than fee acquisitions (which documents will be based upon the Office's standard versions of those documents), to be recorded on the title of the property with the county auditor. Our organization acknowledges that any property acquired in fee title must be immediately made available to the public unless otherwise provided for in policy, the Agreement, or authorized in writing by the Office Director. Section 12. Our organization acknowledges that any property owned by our organization that is developed, renovated, enhanced, or restored with grant assistance must be dedicated for the purpose of the grant in perpetuity unless otherwise allowed by grant program policy or Office, in writing, and per the Agreement or an amendment thereto. W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Nelsen Side Channel Project 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 4 27 Section 13. Our organization acknowledges that any property not owned by our organization that is developed, renovated, enhanced, or restored with grant assistance must be dedicated for the purpose of the grant as required by grant program policies unless otherwise provided for per the Agreement or an amendment thereto. Section 14. Our organization certifies the following: the Project does not conflict with the Puget Sound Action Agenda developed by the Puget Sound Partnership under RCW 90.71.310. Section 15. This resolution/authorization is deemed to be part of the formal grant application to the Office. Section 16. Our organization warrants and certifies that this resolution/ authorization was properly and lawfully adopted following the requirements of our organization and applicable laws and policies and that our organization has full legal authority to commit our organization to the warranties, certifications, promises and obligations set forth herein. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at the Special Meeting thereof this day of , 2022. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Thomas McLeod, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Office of the City Attorney W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Grant funding applic-Nelsen Side Channel Project 1-31-22 BR: Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 28 Page 4 of 4 CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2021 to 2026 PROJECT: Nelsen Salmon Habitat Side Channel Project No. 91641203 DESCRIPTION: Create an off -channel salmon rearing habitat side channel by connecting a segment of historic river channel with the Green River. JUSTIFICATION: WRIA 9 has identified this project a proposed action in the Salmon Habitat Plan. The project area is primarily within State lands, but the intent is to transfer to City. The project may take place STATUS: under an aquatic lease (DNR), depending on timing. Grant application for design funding submitted to Floodplains in 2020 with a low probability of success. MAINT. IMPACT: Expected to increase maintenance COMMENT: Property acquisition to the north could create the opportunity for a side channel and additional flood storage, or potentially combine this with Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier project depending on funding source feedback. FINANCIAL Through Estimated (in $000's) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES H;II-- ..r Project Location ;' )� Design 50 220 240 41,,,- `,711011 ..,\w At. 510 Land (R/W) 5 5 10 Monitoring simill �.� 8,449[ NN a 0 Const. Mgmt. 1.. WAR g, 385 385 Construction LAM//reAmt.(A. 5 t 4 1,440 7 i INN 1,440 TOTAL EXPENSES 0 55 225 240 1,825 0 0 0 0 2,345 FUND SOURCES _ � all Tula RNwy _' .. 8 150 ... 0 II Awarded Grant 0 Proposed Grant 100 218 1,232 1,550 Mitigation Actual 0 Mitigation Expected 0 City Oper. Revenue 0 55 125 22 593 0 0 0 0 795 TOTAL SOURCES 0 55 225 240 1,825 0 0 0 0 2,345 2021 - 2026 Capital Improvement Program 87 29 H;II-- ..r Project Location ;' )� ; r ri `w 41,,,- `,711011 ..,\w At. illii _ �A simill �.� 8,449[ NN a i� 1.. WAR g, LAM//reAmt.(A. 5 t 4 '�� 7 i INN Ili! ylll• o- rte-"- 3� �, ii, `1'1 Riltr"et yr4r __s 1 f C _ � all Tula RNwy _' .. 8 150 ... 0 II 2021 - 2026 Capital Improvement Program 87 29 30 City of Tukwila City Council Transportation & Infrastructure Services Committee Meeting Minutes February 7, 2022 5:30 p.m. - Electronic Meeting due to COVID-19 Emergency Councilmembers Present: Kate Kruller, Chair; Mohamed Abdi, Tosh Sharp Staff Present: David Cline, Hari Ponnekanti, Seong Kim, Adib Altallal, Griffin Lerner, Cyndy Knighton, Adam Cox, Mike Perfetti, Jay Wittwer, Laurel Humphrey Chair Kruller called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans Staff provided an update on progress on the Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans, of which drafts have been submitted for state review and plans for SEPA environmental review are underway. Committee Recommendation Discussion only. B. Resolution: Grant Applications for Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution authorizing the submission of two grant funding applications to the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office for the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. February 14, 2022 Committee of the Whole. C. Resolution: Grant Application for Nelsen Side Channel Project Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution authorizing the submission of a grant *funding applications to the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office for the Nelsen Side Channel Project. Chair Kruller urged cross -departmental collaboration to address encampment activity. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. February 14, 2022 Committee of the Whole. D. Grant Application: 42"d Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project Staff is seeking Committee approval to submit a grant application to the National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) in the amount of $2,000,000 for construction of the 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. 31 32 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 2/14/22 RB 2/28/22 RB ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 4.C. STAFF SPONSOR: NATE ROBINSON & RACHEL B. ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 2/14/ 22 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Teen & Senior Center Project Siting CATEGORY ® Discussion Mtg Date 2/14/22 ® Motion Mtg Date 2/28/22 ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mfg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ® Admin Svcs ❑ DCD Finance ❑ Fire ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PIE SPONSOR'S SUMMARY The Council is being asked to determine the preferred site for the proposed Tukwila Teen and Senior Center. REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Administrative Services COMMITTEE COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 2/14/22 2/28/22 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 2/14/22 Informational Memo dated February 4, 2022 Tukwila Teen & Senior Center Project Predesign Report 2 - Siting Contingent Contribution Letter 2/28/22 33 34 TO: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM City Council FROM: Nate Robinson, Teen Program Specialist Rachel Bianchi, Deputy City Administrator CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: February 4, 2022 SUBJECT: Teen and Senior Center Siting ISSUE The Council is being asked to determine the preferred site for the proposed Tukwila Teen and Senior Center. BACKGROUND As a part of the 2021/2022 biennial budget process, the City Council directed staff to initiate engagement with the community regarding a proposed teen and senior center. For the past 14 months, the project team has been engaging with the community on feasibility, programming and potential sites for the proposed facility. To date, the project team has held more than 70 meetings with community members — ranging from small, one-on-one meetings to broad public ones — to gather feedback and ideas for the center. Updates on the community engagement process and the proposed programming were provided to the Council in June, September and December of 2021. In order to move forward to the next phase of the project, which would be Schematic Design (30% design of the building), staff is looking to the City Council to determine a preferred site. Staff expects to return to the Council in March of 2022 with a proposed funding plan for the Schematic Design phase. DISCUSSION The Project Team began exploring potential sites in the Spring of 2021, heeding the direction from the Council that the proposed facility should be in the Tukwila International Boulevard neighborhood. Originally, the co -project managers and a representative from the City's Economic Development division walked the neighborhood with an eye on City -owned property and properties known to either be on the market or that had a likely willing seller. Later, a larger group consisting of the full Project Team — SOJ, McGranahan Architects, Bookie Gates and Tali Hairston — did the same walk looking at various properties. The Project Team committed early on to ensuring that the preferred site did not displace anyone and was either a City -owned property or one with a willing seller. The Project Team narrowed the potential sites to four: • Newporter site — located at S. 150th and Tukwila International Boulevard; City -owned • Motels site — located on Tukwila International Boulevard just south of the SHAG development, this site would contemplate a co -location with HealthPoint • Bartell's site — located off of 37th Avenue South across from Cascade View Park and just north of Walgreen's, this site has a willing seller • Star Nursery site — located on S. 42nd Avenue between 139th Avenue S. and 140th Avenue S., this property is City -owned and originally purchased to relocate Fire Station 54, which was removed from the Public Safety Plan 35 36 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 As the Council is aware, the community engagement effort around the Teen and Senior Center included convening a group of 23 "Community Champions" to help distill the vast amount of programming and other information gathered from the broader community. The project team held three different sets of topical meetings (nine meetings in total to adjust for community members' schedules) with the Champions, one of the topics (three meetings) was focused on siting. The group met at the Tukwila Justice Center, reviewed the four candidate sites and key information, and visited the sites to discuss the pros and cons of each. Champions were also asked to vote for their first, second and third choice of sites. Staff also held meetings with HealthPoint to better understand the feasibility of a co -located facility. In September of 2021, staff presented the preliminary site findings to the Council: • Discussions with HealthPoint revealed that two separate developments would likely be in the best interest of the community. This would allow for more new services to enhance the Tukwila community. As an example, during the listening phase, the Project Team heard a lot about the need for more good quality, affordable childcare in Tukwila. However, a facility focused on teens and seniors may not be the best place for such a service given that the focus is on two age groups that largely do not have childcare needs. However, HealthPoint is contemplating such a service in their building. It is also the case that the proposed Teen and Senior Center could meet the needs of some of HealthPoint's customers. For instance, a senior patient may need exercise opportunities and HealthPoint could refer them to the Teen and Senior Center programming. For this reason, this option was eliminated. • The Newporter site ranked very low among the Champions, with only one of the 23 Champions listing it as their number one site and the majority listing it as their third site. Specific concerns from the Champions regarding the Newporter site was the distance to the high school and middle school, direct location on Tukwila International Boulevard, which caused concern about security for patrons of the proposed center and others. For these reasons this option was eliminated. • The Bartell site rated second among the Champions, which developed a list of pros and cons to be discussed further in the memo. This site moved forward. • The Star Nursery site rated the highest among the Champions, which developed a list of pros and cons to be discussed further in the memo. This site moved forward. The Project Team began engagement with the broader community in October of 2021. Staff sent first-class mailings to all residents and property owners within 1,000 feet of both the Bartell and Star Nursery sites. A virtual meeting was held specifically for the neighborhood around each site with the idea that each affected neighborhood could have the opportunity to convene separately. An in-person open house was held at the Sullivan Center on Saturday, December 4, 2021 and a citywide virtual meeting was held December 14, 2021. In addition, an online survey was available on the project webpage and was included in the mailings and on social media. Due to requests from community members, the survey was extended through the end of January, 2022 in order to achieve maximum participation. The project webpage included videos on the siting process in English, Spanish and Vietnamese, and the online survey was available in English, Spanish, Vietnamese and Somali. All the content — from the neighborhood -specific meetings to the in-person open house to the online videos — was the same, regardless of venue. Also, as a response to community members who were concerned that siting preferences couldn't be identified until there was a better understanding of the programming, staff held a citywide programming meeting on January 18 and shared the programming information previously discussed with the Council on December 13, 2021. Concurrently, the Project Team engaged landscaping and civil partners to review the two remaining sites and provide their expertise to the challenges and opportunities associated with INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 each. The attached report provides an overview of the engagement process, community feedback and landscape and civil analysis. In late 2021, two community members proposed a contingent contribution of $1 million toward the project for the development and operations of a technology/media facility within the proposed center, provided the City choose the Bartell site. The letter outlining the proposed contribution is attached to this memo as part of the community feedback received. ANALYSIS Both sites have pros and cons, and there is no perfect place to site this proposed center. Both two final sites could support the programming identified by the community for a Tukwila Teen and Senior Center. The attached report provides a look in detail at each site. Page 7 of the attached report provides a high-level side by side table of considerations to choose a preferred site. The report also includes the community's feedback on the preferred site, including from the Champions, the in-person open house and the online survey. Ultimately, more individuals in the community preferred the Star Nursery site as the location of the proposed Teen and Senior Center. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to provide direction on the preferred site for the proposed Tukwila Teen and Senior Center project to move forward with the next phase of Schematic Design. The Project Team has specifically remained neutral regarding siting in this process with the goal of presenting the community's unfiltered feedback to the Council and Mayor. For your awareness, in the Mayor's review of these sites, his recommendation is the Star Nursery site due to the following reasons: • Larger site located close to schools with ample space for onsite outdoor space and parking • More opportunity for an economical phased construction approach • Preferred location for when evening programs ends; safety • Avoids after school teens from being on and crossing TIB • Already in City ownership; overall project funding consideration The Council is being asked to provide the Project Team direction on a preferred site via at the February 28, 2022 Committee of the Whole and at the Special Meeting to follow. ATTACHMENTS Tukwila Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center Predesign Report Part 2 — Siting Analysis Proposed contingent contribution letter 37 38 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR INTERGENERATIONAL CENTER Predesign Report Part 2 - Site Analysis City of Tukwila February 2022 tflir s 0 J McGRANAHAN architects TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgements The City of Tukwila is located on the ancestral lands of the Coast Salish people. We acknowledge their continuing connections to land, waters and culture. We pay our respects to their elders past, present and emerging. The City of Tukwila and the Project Team deeply appreciates all who participated in the programming & site selection process. The Tukwila community is and will always be paramount to the success of this project. Without the diversity of voices and community relationships, the Tukwila Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center will not be a reflection of this incredible city. Thank you for adding your unique voice to the conversation. Tukwila City Council Thomas McLeod, Council President Kathy Hougardy De'Sean Quinn Kate Kruller Cynthia Dellostrinos Johnson Mohamed Abdi Tosh Sharp Tukwila Mayor Allan Ekberg Project Team CITY OF TUKWILA Rachel Bianchi, Co -Project Manager Nate Robinson, Co -Project Manager PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM I SOJ Justine Kim, Team Manager Ben Franz -Knight, Strategic Advisor Paige McGee, Program Coordinator COMMUNITY OUTREACH CONSULTANTS Bookie Gates, Gates Ventures Group W. Tali Hairston, Equitable Development LLC 40e Analysis Report 12 ARCHITECT I McGRANAHAN ARCHITECTS Michael McGavock, Principal Ben Fields, Project Designer Shona Bose, Project Architect Dennis Adjetey, Architectural Associate CIVIL ENGINEER I JACOBSON ENGINEERS Alan Jacobson, Civil Engineer Kevin Smith, Civil Engineer LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT I SITE WORKSHOP Vinita Sidhu, Landscape Architect Jordan West Monez, Landscape Architect 8 Questions Small Groups African Born Seniors Group, Community Advisory Board- Human Services, Foster High School Students, Parks & Rec Senior Program participants, Refugee Women's Alliance (ReWA,) SHAG Housing Seniors, Showalter Middle School Students, Teens for Tukwila, Town Hall Community Meeting, Tukwila Children's Foundation- Board of Directors, Tukwila City Council, Tukwila City Staff, Youth Voices for Justice, and individual community member meetings. Tukwila Champions Bilan Aden, Tina Ali, Travis Boyd, Caden Crawford, Jadon Crawford, Katrice Cyphers, Dr. Eileen English, Andrea Gamboa, Chris Hong, Jalissa Horton, Allan Howard, Rachel Jackson, Jonathan Joseph, Hien Kieu, Miguel Maestes, AJ McCloure, Diana Melgoza, Marie Parrish, Pastor Terrance Proctor, Courtney Promvongsa, Alejandra Silva, Annie Stempa, Lina A. Stinson -Ali Share Back & Verify Meetings African Born Seniors Group, Foster High School, Showalter Middle School, Teens for Tukwila, Tukwila Champions & Community Members Table of Contents REPORT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECAP FROM REPORT 1 TRANSFORMATIONAL ENGAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT GOALS MATRIX DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL GOALS FLEXIBLE PROGRAM SPACES GLOSSARY OF TERMS SITE OVERVIEW OVERVIEW OF THE TWO SITES SITE ATTRIBUTES COMPARISON MATRIX COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAMPION WORKSHOP 2 BROADER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ONLINE SITE SURVEY ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING OPEN HOUSE COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT MAIN FINDINGS DESIGN ASSESSMENTS ARCHITECTURAL ASSESSMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ASSESSMENT CIVIL ENGINEER ASSESSMENT TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX* F. COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT REPORT G. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES SITE OPEN HOUSE NOTES PROGRAMING OPEN HOUSE NOTES H. COMMUNITY SITE SURVEY *Appendices A-E can be found in Tukwila Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center: Report Part 1 - Appendix 41 Executive Summary Following the Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center: Predesign Report 1— Process & Programming, this report (Predesign Report 2 — Site Analysis) completes the Predesign Phase for the proposed Tukwila Teen & Senior Center. Report 1 presented the community engagement and design & operational goals, the transformational community engagement process, and the flexible program spaces that emerged from the engagement process. Report 2 focuses on characteristics of the top two sites chosen through the non-traditional and extensive engagement, and observations of the project team. This report is intended to support the decision on the preferred site for the new Center. The project began exploring potential sites in the Spring of 2021, heeding the direction from the City Council that the proposed facility should be in the Tukwila International Boulevard neighborhood and committed to ensuring the preferred site did not displace anyone by being either a City -owned property or one with a willing seller. With a list of four candidate sites identified by co -project managers Rachel Bianchi and Nate Robinson and a representative from the City's Economic Development division, the Project Team set to engage the Tukwila community to understand the opportunities and challenges of each site to inform the decision-making process. As introduced in Report 1 and expanded upon in Report 2, the 23 Tukwila Champions toured, analyzed, discussed, and prioritized the list of sites narrowing it down to two finalists — the Bartell site named for its proximity to Bartell Drugs and the Star Nursery site named for the plant nursery that formerly occupied this site. Champions also identified a need for broader community engagement especially from the direct neighbors (both residential and commercial) of each site. This recommendation aligned with the community engagement goals for the project. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Project Team began engagement with the broader community in October of 2021. Staff sent first-class mailings to all residents and property owners within 1000 feet of both the Bartell and Star Nursery sites. A virtual meeting was held specifically for the neighborhood around each site with the idea that each affected neighborhood could have the opportunity to convene separately. In December, an in-person open house was held at the Sullivan Center and a citywide virtual meeting was held over Microsoft Teams. In addition, an online survey was available on the project webpage and was included in the mailings and on social media. Due to requests from community members, the survey was extended through the end of January 2022 to achieve maximum participation. The project webpage included videos on the siting process in English, Spanish and Vietnamese, and the online survey was available in English, Spanish, Vietnamese and Somali. All content—from the neighborhood - specific meetings to the in-person open house to the online videos — was the same, regardless of venue. Through these meetings and as a response to community members who were concerned that siting preferences couldn't be identified until there was a better understanding of the programming, staff held a citywide programming open house in January and shared the programming information previously reviewed with small groups described in Report 1 and discussed with the Council in December. Concurrently, Community Outreach Consultant Tali Hairston and the Design Team comprised of Architecture, Landscape Architecture and Civil Engineering partners separately reviewed community data and the two remaining sites to provide their expertise to the attributes, challenges, and opportunities associated with each site. These assessments can be found in the Site Analysis Report 43 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Community Assessment, Design Assessment and Appendix portions of this Report. Finally, an ongoing appendix associated with this report continues documenting the complete data from the extensive and ongoing community outreach for this project. This Appendix builds upon the appendix associated with Report 1 providing appendices F, G, and H with the full Community Assessment Report, the remainder of notes from community engagement through January, and the complete results of the Site Survey respectively. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Team members present progress to City Council. Recap from Report 1 As a reminder, the next few pages include the goals and programmatic elements first presented in Predesign Report 1— Process & Programming. The Engagement Goals are the foundation for transformational community engagement throughout this project. The Design & Operation Goals and flexible program hubs represent the voices of participants in the planning process and should be referred to when considering which site will be the location of the new Tukwila Teen & Senior Center. Transformational Community Engagement One of the main drivers of this project is to center and elevate the relationship between the Tukwila 44e Analysis Report 16 community and the City through transformational community engagement. This will build a strong foundation set in empathy, transparency, listening, and healing for not only this project, but also for any future endeavor. Co -designing during a workshop with Tukwila Community Champions. Transformational community engagement centers the community as experts and tasks the City with the responsibility to uplift and celebrate the input received from all community members. This inclusive co -designing process requires a community -focused Project Team to serve a supportive role by applying their respective skills and areas of knowledge to amplify the concepts, ideas and aspirations of community. These Predesign Reports are based in and sourced from the relationships and understandings that were built in the co -design process. Through 73 meetings (both virtual and in-person, and held at different times to accommodate different schedules,) City-wide surveys, and online translated presentations a wealth of information was gathered. This Report presents the broad, unfiltered strokes of the conversations and engagement, and the Appendices provide all data, materials, and notes gathered from community engagement in full. Transformational community engagement will continue throughout the design, construction and operation of the new Center. Engagement Goal TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Tracking & Progress 1. Serve as a model for new approaches to community outreach that centers in and for community, building trust, embracing community ideas and embedding community in the process of project ideation and development. On Track 73 community meetings to date including in-person and virtual options; identified 23 Community Champions; held 24 check-in meetings on preliminary programming; provided translated presentations online; conducted a City wide survey to ensure we heard the whole community. Planned ongoing outreach and engagement throughout design, construction and operations. 2. Strengthen existing ties to community, build new relationships and establish lasting partnerships that will inform this project and can translate/inform future City of Tukwila community outreach efforts. On Track The project team recognizes that the number of meetings is less important than authentic connections with the Tukwila community. Each meeting was a new opportunity for transformational engagement that teaches, listens, and builds advocacy around design and urban planning. 3. Address the unique challenges of engaging in community outreach during a pandemic including: Strategies for addressing digital divides, varying levels of digital literacy, multiple languages and varying hours of availability. More Work to Be Done We recognize there are still community members that we need to reach. The Project Team created a hybrid approach offering the same engagement event through virtual or safe, in-person events at different times during the day/week. Presentation materials around siting effort translated into Spanish, Vietnamese and Somali. 4. Assist in identification of community representatives to engage alongside design and planning team members. On Track Engagement efforts have led to new relationships and partnerships with community representatives; many community members invested in the outcome of this project. 5. Ensure connections with Tukwila residents, local schools, non -profits and senior community. On Track The project team has engaged with teen and pre- teen students at Foster High School and Showalter Middle School, multiple non -profits serving the Tukwila community and individual community members. We recognize the importance of centering teens and seniors in ongoing outreach & engagement during design. 6. Provide an achievable plan for the financing, construction and long-term maintenance and operations of this new City facility. Planned for 2022 Site Analysis Report 45 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Design and Operational Goals Developed through early community outreach and further refined at Champion Workshops, community members, representing diverse communities in Tukwila, identified the following design and operational goals for the new Center: • Be a place that prioritizes the teens and seniors of Tukwila. • Be good stewards of the diversity of Tukwila by creating a diverse, equitable and inclusive space that is representative of and for all in Tukwila. • Create a place where youth and seniors have access to various resources and services that reflect the experiences, needs, and wants of Tukwila community members. • Create a vibrant, welcoming, and safe place where all can feel a sense of belonging, ownership, and pride. • Create a place that provides opportunities for authentic connections. / Build a community engagement process that relies on trust and fosters authentic community connections for the city. • Create a place for teens and seniors to have fun. Flexible Program Spaces The Tukwila community recognizes that prioritizing teen and seniors in this proposed facility requires the utmost flexibility in the spaces that make up the building. Most, if not all, rooms and spaces must be able to meet multiple programmatic needs to achieve the Design & Operational Goals. Through various community engagement efforts, six key hubs were identified to categorize the various programmatic needs. For more on these hubs and the community co -design process that created them, see Predesign Report 1 - Process & Programming. 48e Analysis Report 18 These hubs include: ■ Teen Only & Senior Only Spaces — While most of the new center will be shared spaces, sometimes both teens and seniors need a space to retreat and be with their peers. ■ Teen & Senior Community Gathering Spaces— a shared space where teens and seniors can gather around activities such as sharing food, presentations, dancing or hosting any size meeting. ■ Teen & Senior Active Recreation Space — an indoor gymnasium or recreation space was one of the highest priorities. ■ Teen & Senior Learning Spaces — learning and resources spaces where financial literacy or education training classes could occur were an important theme throughout the community engagement. • Teen & Senior Holistic Health Spaces — provides resources and services for teens and seniors in need. • Teen & Senior Outdoor Spaces — outdoor spaces will be dependent on which site is chosen. Possibilities include gardens, walking paths, sport fields, outdoor gathering spaces, or areas for food trucks or events. Glossary of Terms Champion (also Tukwila Champion)- a person with great interest in the success of Tukwila. Champions are a diverse group who REPRESENT, ENGAGE, and ADVOCATE for the wants and needs for all of the unique communities in Tukwila. These individuals participated in three 2-3 hour workshops around program development and site selection for this project. Co -design- developing the architectural project with community so that every step of the design process is community led from discovery to verification. Google Jamboard - an interactive digital whiteboard where multiple people can post their thoughts and others can see it in real time. Used here to gather anonymous community input during online engagement meetings. Intergenerational - shared experiences between two or more distinct age groups. Miro - an online collaborative whiteboard platform where groups can brainstorm together. Used here as a note taking and digital activity platform during engagement workshops. Predesign Phase- the beginning of a construction or urban planning project that sets the foundation. In this case by developing goals, exploring space requirements, and choosing a site. Psychological Safety- The feeling of mental and emotional security gained from the knowledge that there is no fear of embarrassment, judgement, or rejection when voicing opinions. Every community engagement meeting sought to establish a psychologically safe environment. Schematic Design- the first phase of an architectural design process. This phase is based on and continues the work of the Predesign Phase through further developing the program into 3D space and building forms, exploring the constraints of the chosen site, choosing preliminary structural, TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY mechanical and electrical systems, and developing a budget. Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center (also the Center) is a placeholder name for this facility. As the project develops, this name may change. Transactional Design Process - a process of engagement where the Project Team interacts with the community solely to get information. Transformational Design Process- a process of engagement where there is teaching, listening and building advocacy around design & urban planning. This conversational process of engagement not only develops richer project information, but also seeks to develop relationships and prioritize human -centered design. Site Analysis Report 47 Site Overview The design of a building is closely connected to and intimately influenced by the chosen site. The boundaries, characteristics and context all contribute to the nature of the place being created and the experiences of those who use it. The Bartell site and the Star Nursery site would create different buildings, though the functions housed within are based on the same goals and programmatic elements. The site evaluation process began with four primary sites in consideration and after a voting exercise by the Tukwila Community Champions, options were narrowed down to the top two: the Bartell site (offered for purchase) and the City - owned Star Nursery site. A summary of the input received by community participants is included in the section of this report called Community Engagement. Overview of the Two Sites Bartell Site This site is named for its proximity to Bartell Drugs. It is comprised of two parcels currently used as overflow parking west of Bartell drugs and North of Walgreens. It is located between Cascade View Park, multifamily residential, and commercial developments. It is being offered to the City for purchase. The property is bounded very closely on the North by an apartment building. Depending on how much of the site the building covers, it is likely that existing traffic ingress and egress on the west side of the site will change. At 0.9 acres, it is very likely the building will be at least two stories, perhaps three or more with structured parking underneath, which will have an impact on surrounding properties, the arrangement of spaces in the building, the cost to build and perhaps to operate. Adjacency to a higher density and diversity of people and public transportation TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SITE OVERVIEW provides accessibility for a greater number of people. Star Nursery Site This site is situated within a primarily single-family residential area with some multifamily buildings to the west. It is currently owned by the City. At 1.74 acres there is more area to explore options with respect to the building footprint, number of stories, parking and area dedicated to outdoor activities at ground level. Public transportation comes from the south along TIB moving north, and is 'A -mile walk from the site along South 140th Street. There may be a need to improve the curbs, sidewalks, right-of-way landscaping and lighting along the streets leading to the site from both Tukwila International Boulevard and from the High School and Middle School which are located two blocks south. Seniors and others may benefit from shuttles to use the new Center. The site's history as a plant nursery has left several ornamental trees that could be incorporated into the design. Site Attributes Comparison Matrix The Project Team compiled a table of each of the sites' attributes, to summarize topics and issues that were raised by participants in the planning process, along with observations of the design professionals on the Project Team. These observations are offered, side by side on the following pages, for the purpose of giving some context and a sense of the characteristics that each site offers in supporting a new Teen and Senior Intergenerational Center for Tukwila. This information is further described in the Design Team Assessments included later in this report. Site Analysis Report 149 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SITE OVERVIEW 50e Analysis Report 112 BARTELL SITE STAR NURSERY SITE Site Area 0.9 acres 1.74 acres Ownership/ Purchase City staff analysis of the previous seller's 2020 memorandum provides an estimated value of the two parcels at $2.3 million. A final price will be negotiated. The City purchased the Star Nursery site for $885,000 in 2017 for the purpose of building a new fire station on the site. The project was removed from the public safety plan. Neighbors The %-mile radius around the site encompasses multifamily housing, a park, and commercial developments. Multifamily residential property directly adjacent to the north property line. Multi -generational, multifamily residences are situated to the west and north of the site. Cascade View Park located across the street to the west across 37th Avenue South. There are commercial neighbors adjacent to south and east of the property. The 'A -mile radius around the site encompasses primarily single family residents. There are 3 homes with adjacent property lines, others are located across streets. There is a mobile home park across from the Southwest corner. Potential Impacts to Neighbors Bartell Drugs site may or may not include access to parking in the adjacent parking lot used by surrounding businesses. The new Teen and Senior Center will increase traffic and parking loads in the commercial area. Walgreens (immediately to the south of the Bartell Drug site) has a loading dock on the west side of their building who's delivery trucks may currently utilize the site to maneuver into the loading dock. Potential impact to northern zero -lot -line neighbors with views and daylight. A new Teen and Senior Center on the site would draw new foot traffic through the neighborhood from Foster High School and Showalter Middle School. It would also draw new car and shuttle traffic through the neighborhood, primarily from South 140th Street to the west (connecting to TIB) and 42nd Avenue South from the south. Extended day and outdoor activities are anticipated in the new Center. Potential Impact on Design/ Operations There is a vehicle access point from 37th Avenue South on the west side of the site. That vehicular access point may or may not be retained in the design of the new Teen and Senior Center; as it could have a significant impact on the configuration of the building, its function and cost of construction. There is also a potential easement on the property for sale that needs clarification; it could impact the configuration of the new Teen and Senior Center, its function and cost of construction, as well as the neighboring properties. The zero -lot -line multifamily housing to the north would need accommodations for views and daylight in the design of the new Teen and Senior Center which would impact the potential size and configuration of the new Teen and Senior Center, its function and cost of construction. Potential off-site sidewalk and street improvements may be needed to accommodate new pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The city may offer shuttle service to seniors and others who need help accessing the site. Room for Growth/Site Improvements Future site improvements or vertical building expansion could be more expensive relative to larger sites. Designing to accommodate future expansion, may make the initial building more expensive (for example, building a three-story building initially instead of two story to provide area for a future phase.) The site affords area for future growth or site improvements that can be accommodated in the design of the new Teen and Senior Center. Access to Services/ Amenities The site is adjacent to restaurants, shopping, library, grocery store, and other amenities. There would be potential for combining errands at the local businesses and visits to the Center. Direct walking path from schools, the community pool, and library. 50e Analysis Report 112 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SITE OVERVIEW Site Analysis Report 151 BARTELL SITE STAR NURSERY SITE Transportation/ Accessibility This site is close to a number of bus stops, and is walkable for a higher concentration of people. Access from Foster High School and Showalter Middle School requires crossing TIB. Approximately a % mile walk to the closest public transportation stop on TIB and South 140th Street. This site is located across TIB from many neighborhoods with seniors & underserved families who live to the West of TIB. Shuttle service may be required for seniors and others. The site provides direct access to and from the nearby schools. Teens coming after school can reach the site without having to cross TIB. Outdoor Play Fitness activities would likely need to be located on the roof of the building. Cascade View Park across the street could potentially be used with improvements. The site affords room at ground level for outdoor activities. The site and building configuration, parking approach and number of stories will influence the amount of site that can be dedicated to outdoor play. Parking The small site would likely require structured parking under the building to accommodate regulations, which would increase the cost of the building. Use of the adjacent commercial parking lot could potentially be negotiated with the purchase of the property. Surface parking is more feasible on this site. The project may benefit from structured parking under the building to provide more area for outdoor activities and/or future growth, which would increase the cost of the building. Potential Offsite Developments Needed The buildable area on this parcel would be impacted by overhead power lines along 37th Avenue South on the west side of the site. The required setback is a 15 -foot radius from the power line. Overhead power lines may be able to be placed underground to mitigate setback requirement, at additional expense. New curb, sidewalks, and right-of-way landscaping in South 139th Street and South 140th Street, and possibly additional offsite accessible measures, may be required to allow pedestrian access to the site. Landscape Design Considerations Character of the site could be described as Urban Neighborhood Core. A few large evergreen street trees exist on site that may need to be removed due to their proximity to overhead power lines. There is active traffic along Tukwila International Boulevard. Busy retail, surrounding hardscape, and minimal vegetation contribute to a high level of noise at this site. There is view potential if the new Center is built vertically, but there is also potential for future surrounding building growth to block views. Character of the site could be described as Park -like. Many large, healthy -looking trees and shrubs exist on site, due to it's former land use as a nursery. The plants include a very large weeping larch, several large conifers with trunk sizes up to 60", and other small trees and shrubs that may have potential to be used in the future landscape design. Distance from Tukwila International Boulevard, residential neighborhood uses, and large trees and other vegetation contribute to medium noise levels at this site. There is a prospect view from ground level to the northeast. Civil Engineering Considerations Stormwater flow control/detention requirements for this site will be needed. Due to the smaller parcel size and coordination of drainage through adjacent parcels, coordination of storm system on site could be challenging. Located in the "Neighborhood Commercial Center" zoning, the associated roadways adjacent to the site are well established. Some minor frontage improvements on the west side of the parcel is anticipated. The utilities serving this site appear to be adequate. Larger site will require a large stormwater detention system and the relative depth of the storm drain connection in South 139th Street is shallow, likely causing a shallower system that takes up more footprint area. New curb, sidewalks, and right-of-way landscaping in South 139th Street and South 140th Street likely and possibly additional offsite accessible measures required to allow pedestrian access to the site. There is likely the need for utility main upgrades, street lighting upgrades,and possible roadway improvements adjacent to the site. Current and previous zoning not supportive of large infrastructure previously. Site Analysis Report 151 PAN, lFl �I Community Engagement The Project Team began exploring potential sites in the Spring of 2021, heeding the direction from the Council that the proposed facility should be in the Tukwila International Boulevard neighborhood. Originally, the co -project managers and a representative from the City's Economic Development division walked the neighborhood with an eye on City -owned property and properties known to either be on the market or that had a likely willing seller. Later, a larger group consisting of the full Project Team did the same walk looking at various properties. The Project Team committed early on to ensuring that the preferred site did not displace anyone and was either a City -owned property or one with a willing seller. The Project Team narrowed the potential sites to the following four: • Newporter site — located at S. 150th and Tukwila International Boulevard; City -owned • Motels site — located on Tukwila International Boulevard just south of the SHAG development, this site would contemplate a co -location with Health Point • Bartell site — located off of 37th Avenue South across from Cascade View Park and just north of Walgreens, this site has a willing seller • Star Nursery site — located on S. 42nd Avenue between 139th Avenue S. and 140th Avenue S., this property is City -owned and originally purchased to relocate Fire Station 54, which was removed from the Public Safety Plan Community voice has been guiding the predesign process and will continue to be a transformational part of the design, construction, and operation of the new Center. Regarding site selection, this community centered approach relied on the Tukwila community for discussion around these four sites. Initially, the group of 23 Tukwila Champions (introduced in Predesign Report 1 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT — Process and Programming) visited the sites in Champion Workshop 2 and narrowed down the list to the Bartell and Star Nursery sites. However, the Champions advocated for further outreach to the direct neighbors and businesses, and the wider Tukwila community before a final decision was made. They also asked for an initial assessment of community resources to better understand how the new Center would fit into the existing community. The broader community engagement is covered directly after the Champion Workshop section, and the Community Assessment can be found in Appendix F. Champion Workshop 2 Champion Workshop 2 was the second of three Champion Workshops. At this Workshop, the 23 Tukwila Champions reviewed the four candidate sites and key information, and visited the sites to discuss the pros and cons of each. Champions were also asked to vote for their first, second and third choice of sites. As there were multiple sections of each workshop to provide Champions with options, Champion Workshop 2 was held in two in-person meetings where transportation was arranged to each site and one virtual meeting using Zoom and Google Maps. For more on Tukwila Champions and the full scope of Champion Workshops, see Predesign Report 1— Process and Programming. Before visiting the sites, City -lead Rachel Bianchi oriented the Champions to each option noting that each of the four site options are City -owned or have a willing seller. For the Motels site, Champions heard about discussions with HealthPoint that revealed that two separate developments would likely be in the best interest of the community. This separation would create more opportunities for new resources and services in the Tukwila community. As an example, Site Analysis Report 153 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT during the listening phase the Project Team heard a lot about the need for more good quality, affordable childcare in Tukwila which HealthPoint is contemplating for their building. It is also the case that the proposed Teen and Senior Center could meet the needs of some of HealthPoint's customers. For instance, a senior patient may need exercise opportunities and HealthPoint could refer them to the Teen and Senior Center programming. For this reason, the Motels/co-location site was eliminated from the potential sites. Champions toured the remaining three sites generating pro/con lists at each followed by a discussion and vote for their preferred site. Champions overwhelmingly chose the Star Nursery and the Bartell Drugs sites as their preferred choices, though many noted that there seemed to be no 100% perfect site. A breakdown of the vote using 3 points for 1st choice, 2 points for second choice, and 1 point for 3rd choice nets the following point totals: SITE 1ST 2ND 3RD TOTAL POINTS Star Nursery 16 4 1 57 Bartell Drugs 4 15 2 44 Newporter 1 2 18 25 Newporter Site The Newporter site is City -owned and 0.81 acres in size with a possible option to buy (willing sellers) all three parcels on this block. This site ranked very low among the Champions, with only one of the 23 Champions listing it as their number one site and the majority listing it as their third site. Specific concerns from the Champions regarding the Newporter site was the smaller size, the further distance to the high school and middle school, and the direct location on Tukwila International Boulevard which caused concern about safety and security for patrons of the proposed center and others. For these reasons this option was eliminated. Justice Center Parking `-1LllilIIU Image shows Champions' combined votes using colored dots - green for 1st place, yellow for 2nd place, and orange for 3rd place. 54e Analysis Report 116 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT a O V IA a z ^ Y F r 3 J -Q 2t`L Lij NCn J d 0 a o 3 Z o0 2 .pm O a if T vo.. >v- v u • is 2 m .° c � v ° m y m p $ 0 3 v E - ' 2, r u wer ° E v E' s 10I IIIA a 7 27 o 0 Image shows Champions' thoughts regarding the pros & cons for the Newporter site, collected during both in-person and virtual tours of the site. Site Analysis Report 155 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Bartell Site The Bartell site is two parcels located just west of Bartell Drugs totaling 0.9 acres in size. The parcels are located across 37th Street from Cascade View Park, and the owner is willing to sell the area shown in the image to the City. With three green (first choice) stickers, 15 yellow (second choice) stickers, and 2 orange (third choice) stickers, this site rated a high second choice among the Champions. This site moved forward in the predesign engagement process. The Bartell site was discussed as a highly accessible location with proximity to many amenities. Champions noted that the current Community Center is difficult to get to for those relying on public transit, but the Bartell site is near many bus routes. One Champion noted that it is nearby and easily accessible to many multigenerational, immigrant residences to the west. Many Champions pointed out valuable proximities to shopping, pharmacies, schools, restaurants, TIB and the park noting that the visibility would be good for establishing the new Center or allowing for multiple errands to be run in tandem with visiting the Center. However, Champions were concerned about the potential impacts to the northern residents and the adjacent businesses wondering if new developments would increase rents and displace tenants, or block the sunlight and views. Others were concerned about safety noting that there has been frequent criminal activity associated with this area. Still others were concerned that the smaller size and the cost of purchasing the site would limit potential programming. Image shows Champions' combined votes using colored dots - green for 1st place, yellow for 2nd place, and orange for 3rd place. 5$e Analysis Report 118 TUKWIL TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENG EMENT 0 U Li ; 0 a 0 V tO {\ $ &\ & a\% §! � .. F _ McG RANAHANarchitecte iq15 \\ / _\ /IC.S! ( e �§� '3 o 4>::2Z,44, )All \\) \\\{ \3g•§ ®.---- ____z i ill -6 } \ §! \ % — / f / (% 81 15 f Image shows Champions' thoughts regarding the pros & cons for the Bartell site, collected during both in-person and virtual tours of the site. Site Analysis Report I 57 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Star Nursery Site The Star Nursery site is 1.74 acres in size and the home of the former Star Nursery. The City originally bought this site for Fire Station 54 which ended up being removed from the Public Safety Plan. The City is currently reviewing long term operations of fire services and may not need this site for Fire Station 54 in the future. The Star Nursery site rated the highest among the Champions with 16 green (first choice) stickers, three yellow (second choice) stickers, and one orange (third choice) sticker. This site moved forward in the predesign engagement process. Many Champions loved this site. Some noted that with the lack of urban noise and the abundance of nature left from the nursery this site felt safe, calming and protected. Others noted that it was very close to the high school and middle school and the teens would not have to cross the busy Tukwila International Boulevard to attend after school programming. Many loved the size of the lot noting there would be enough room for outdoor activities and an opportunity to provide access to nature for all teens and seniors. However, there were Champions who had very deep concerns about the accessibility of the site. This site is further away from public transit that would affect access for many visitors to the Center. Champions noted that many teens and seniors have no personal vehicles making access to the current Tukwila Community Center challenging. They would like to see that fundamental issue remedied at this new Center in ways that empower teens and seniors. Champions also noted the potential impact on the single-family residential neighborhood with new car and foot traffic through the neighborhood, construction noise and ongoing Center programming. Image shows Champions' combined votes using colored dots - green for 1st place, yellow for 2nd place, and orange for 3rd place. 58e Analysis Report 120 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT g) a O V O a E a o a Z� VI 0 m ro o) 0- 0 c/) a r T cn z L v� o L � I �L m W y p — a L Image shows Champions' thoughts regarding the pros & cons for the Star Nursery site, collected during both in-person and virtual tours of the site. Site Analysis Report 159 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Broader Community Engagement The Champions helped narrow down the potential sites to their top two preferences- Star Nursery and the Partial Bartell Pad- with the Newporter site coming in a distant third choice. But the Champions and the City wanted to hear from the broader Tukwila community and the immediate neighbors of the top two sites in order to make an informed decision. The City sent first class mailers to both residential and commercial neighbors who lived within 1000 - feet of both the Star Nursery and the Bartell sites with translations located on the City website. They also sent information to the project mailing list and through City social media. Three virtual and one in-person open houses were held; two virtual meetings were for immediate neighbors while the third virtual and the in-person open houses were for any interested community member to attend. At these informational open houses City -leads Nate and Rachel presented information on both sites, listened to community members' concerns and conducted a survey asking which site was preferred and why. Recordings of the presentation are available on the City website in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese, and the survey was available in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Somali. These meetings and survey were held from November 2021 through January 2022. Virtual and In-person Open Houses These were the first community -wide open meetings this project has held, previously relying on directed, small group engagement. As word of the project spread throughout the Tukwila community, more people joined the various open houses. Attendees of the virtual sessions included concerned neighbors of each site, community members, and a teen who had heard of the event from the flyer that was sent to her house. These residents all had a chance to share important thoughts with the City. 60e Analysis Report 122 The discussion centered around what site would you choose and why, and was there anything else anyone would like to share. Dependent on how many people attended the virtual meetings, more conversational questions were added (smaller groups) or a Google Jamboard was used (for larger groups.) Full notes and any Jamboards can be found in Appendix G- Community Engagement. Two community break-out groups gather around printed presentation boards to discuss hopes and concerns with Nate and Rachel at the Sullivan Center. In the virtual open houses, the concerns generally aligned with similar thoughts from the Champions. Walking access, streetlights, sidewalks, and public transportation were discussed as positives for the Bartell Pad with some noting that additional off-site improvements would need to happen in the Star Nursery neighborhood. Some noted that parents could drop off their teens and easily do their errands or shopping or seniors could pick up prescriptions next door. One concerned neighbor noted that she was enthusiastic about the new Center as a needed resource for Tukwila teens and seniors, and she would want to be very involved in the engagement process going forward if the site near her house was chosen. She wondered about noise into the evening or more people coming through the neighborhood. Some attendees noted they would like more information like the program, or would like to speak directly to the City one-on-one. City co -managers Nate Robinson and Rachel Bianchi accommodated these neighbors with additional meetings at another date. The in-person open house was held at the Sullivan Center near the Tukwila Library. For three hours, project team members conversed with Tukwila residents walking them through the same presentation printed on large format boards. After the discussions, community members were invited to answer the same questions using sticky notes. The Sullivan Center open house attracted many seniors from the SHAG housing complex across the street as well as some community members from various areas of Tukwila. Seniors wondered about the feel of the future space with one noting that she'd like it to feel cozy and like home, not like a cold hotel. Another senior noted that the finishings and the furniture must accommodate varying disabilities, for example chairs must have arms otherwise they are difficult to get out of. Some of the seniors from SHAG said they walked to Star Nursery all the time and they have the SHAGmobile to shuttle them places, thought they did worry about those on the other side of Tukwila International Boulevard (TIB.) While others noted they also were concerned about teens crossing TIB to get to the Bartell Pad after school, and about the safety and security of teens and seniors at the Bartell location. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT What do you think? Star Nursery or Bartell Pad? • Which of the two sites is your favorite? What do you think? Star Nursery or Bartell Pad? • Why did you choose one site over the other? What do you think? Star Nursery or Bartell Pad? ii • What other information would you like to share on where to site the Teen & Senior Center? Siting survey answers gathered at the in-person Open House at the Sullivan Center. Larger images can be found in Appendix G. Site Analysis Report 181 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Online Site Survey WHICH OF THE TWO SITES IS YOUR FAVORITE? BARTELL SITE STAR NURSERY SITE NONE 43% 55% Results from the online siting survey. A total of 191 Tukwila community members voted for their preferred site and provided feedback. Along with the conversations and information gathered at the virtual and in-person Open Houses, a siting survey was conducted online through the City of Tukwila website. The survey was open from November through January and promoted through the mailer, social media, public meetings and the project e-mail list. The full set of results is included in Appendix H. The survey questions and the direct contact questions were the same, so whether you attended a virtual or in-person Open House or you watched the presentation through the City website, everyone had the opportunity to find the same information and provide feedback to the same questions. • Which of the two sites is your favorite? (Choice: Former Star Nursery site or Partial Bartell Pad) 62e Analysis Report 124 • Why did you choose one site over the other? • What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? In total, 190 community members took the online Site Survey with 82 votes (or 43%) for the Bartell Site, 105 votes (or 55%) for Star Nursery, and three people (or 2%) abstaining. Common Themes — Bartell Site Common themes for people choosing the Bartell site were that it was closer to their home or easier to get to, it was more accessible for more people, and the convenience and visibility of being centrally located. Some noted a "proximity to critical population group that needs this establishment the most" such as newly arrived immigrants, refugees and non-native speakers. Others hoped that the new Center and the existing park would feel like an extension of each other promoting positive activities and providing safety to the surrounding areas. Some chose the Bartell site because they thought the Star Nursery site should be something else — single family homes that fit with the character of that neighborhood or a neighborhood park so that green spaces stayed unpaved. Others didn't want to add foot traffic, cars, or noise to the quiet residential neighborhood around Star Nursery. Common Themes — Star Nursery Common themes for those choosing the Star Nursery site were that it is a larger site and is City -owned. Many liked the immediate access to nature, and that it has proximity to the schools. Others noted that Star would have room for adequate parking and noted that there should be a lot of accessible/ADA parking stalls. Some chose the Star Nursery site because they thought the Bartell site had too much crime and they did not feel safe in that area while Star Nursery is quieter and safer being one block off of Tukwila International Boulevard. Others noted the "too close" proximity of the north apartment complex at the Bartell site as a reason to build at Star Nursery. Additional Programming Open House As the engagement on siting started prior to the finalization of Report 1 on Programming, some of those who attended a Site Open House were wondering about what sorts of activities would happen at the Teen and Senior Intergenerational Center. Some community members requested an additional Open House on programming before they finalized their vote on the site. See Report 1 for more community feedback on program. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Many who attended were excited to see this new Center come to Tukwila. Staff from the Tukwila Library and the Tukwila Metropolitan Park District were interested in partnering with the Teen & Senior Center as another resource in serving the community. Others commented on the community engagement process and how it feels like it's more than just "ticking off a few boxes" — community members feel heard and this place will be so special if Tukwila can see itself in the final Center. Others abstained from giving their opinion saying they needed more information or were there to listen. See Appendix G for the full Google Jamboard and meeting notes. Open House on programming to discuss and understand community concerns and site choices. Virtual meeting over Microsoft Teams using Google Jamboard. Site Analysis Report 163 64 • TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER MAIN FINDINGS OF THE COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Main Findings of the Community Assessment Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a community -centered approach that involves the ideas, challenges, opportunities, and the lived experiences of community members and stakeholders. This community assessment reveals and highlights important findings in the development of the Teen and Senior Center Project Team report. The scope of this analysis details descriptively the services that typically fall within the core capacity of the city of Tukwila and provides an assessment of the ways the core capacity may be impacted. In this analysis the contractors describe the critical questions and data used to form the analysis and the specific assessment findings. Additionally, this report was designed as an addendum to the Teen and Senior Center Project Team report. It is the contractor's hope it will serve the city of Tukwila, its citizens and representatives for a successful teen and senior center. A Summary of the Key Findings Community-based participatory data demonstrated the community believes there is a growing need to increase services to teens and seniors. There is also awareness that the current facilities, mainly the Tukwila Community Center, is a beautiful facility that is difficult to access for teens and seniors of Tukwila. 1. Teens and seniors who are marginally engaged in the educational or retirement systems may experience a lack of services and programs that address their lived experiences. 2. Tukwila residence frequently mentioned the relationship with the Tukwila School District as one that could be expanded with the building of the teen and senior center. 3. It is likely the city will be able to efficiently operate the teen and senior center in ways that reflect its diversity. 4. Through the community-based participatory process, the city's ability to partner and network with the non-profit community is viewed as a strength and something the community values as well. 5. (Recommendation) The findings indicate that a more centrally located site for the center allows the city to more feasibly support programs and services for teens and seniors. This is largely because a centrally located facility allows the gaps raised in the analysis to less negatively impact teens and seniors. In this way the teen and senior center may also serve as a community hub and connector to other community services, extending beyond the services and programs operating out of the center. The full Community Assessment Report can be found in Appendix F. Site Analysis Report 165 r Design Team Assessments The following assessments were prepared by McGranahan Architects, Landscape Architect firm Site Workshop, and Civil Engineering firm Jacobson Engineering. Each firm has provided initial observations of the challenges and opportunities of the two final sites- Bartell and Star Nursery. Architectural Assessment The design of a building is closely connected to and intimately influenced by the chosen site. The boundaries, characteristics and context all contribute to the nature of the place being created and the experiences of those who use it. The Bartell site and the Star Nursery site would create different buildings, though the functions housed within are based on the same goals and programmatic elements. Bartell Site The Bartell site is 0.9 acres in size and slopes from a high side on the west to a low end on the east. It is currently used as a paved parking lot with little vegetation. The City would need to purchase this site and City staff analysis of the previous seller's 2020 memorandum provides an estimated value of the two parcels at $2.3 million. A final price will need to be negotiated. Due to its size, future site improvements or vertical building expansion could be more expensive relative to larger sites. Designing to accommodate for future expansion, may make the initial building more expensive- for example, building a three- story structure initially instead of two-story to provide site area for a future phase. Neighbors The site is adjacent to restaurants, shopping, the library, a grocery store, a park, and other amenities. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER DESIGN TEAM ASSESSMENTS A new Teen & Senior Center would be a centrally located resource for many of these surrounding communities and there would be potential for combining errands at the local businesses and visits to the Center. The immediate 1/4 -mile radius around the site encompasses multifamily housing, Cascade View Park, and commercial developments. A 1/4 mile represents a 5 -minute walk at 3 miles an hour. Surrounding developments include multi- generational, multifamily residences that are situated to the west and north, a main grocery store to the south, the community pool and Tukwila Village including SHAG senior housing, the Sullivan Center and the library to the east, and commercial businesses directly to the east and south. Just outside this radius are the high school and middle schools. The schools, the community pool, the library and SHAG senior housing are all located across Tukwila International Boulevard and access would require crossing TIB. Directly to the north of the site is a multifamily residential property immediately adjacent to the property line. A new, multi -story Teen & Senior Center may impact the northern zero -lot -line neighbors with respect to views & daylight. Any building would need to be carefully planned to provide appropriate accommodations for views and daylight to the apartments that face this property. This would impact the potential size and configuration of the new Teen and Senior Center, and potentially its function and cost of construction. Parking and Transportation A new Teen and Senior Center will increase foot traffic, vehicle traffic and parking loads in the surrounding commercial area. There are four bus stops in the 'A -mile radius, two on Tukwila Site Analysis Report I 07 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER ARCHITECTURE ASSESSMENT International Boulevard that runs north and south, and two on South 144th street running east and west. This proximity to mass transit would allow both the teen and senior populations autonomy and choices for traveling to the Center. The Bartell site is currently used as overflow parking for the surrounding commercial businesses connected by shared parking area. Dependent on final negotiations for purchasing the Bartell site, the new Center may or may not include access to parking in the adjacent parking lot. Use of the adjacent commercial parking lot could potentially be negotiated with the purchase of the property. The site would likely also require structured parking under the building to accommodate regulations, which would increase the cost of the building. There is a vehicle access point from 37th Avenue South on the west side of the site. This vehicle access point possibly has a potential easement on the property for sale that needs clarification. Walgreens, which is immediately to the south of the Bartell site has a loading dock on the west side of their building that may currently utilize this vehicle access point for delivery trucks maneuvering into the loading dock. Dependent on potential easement, purchase negotiations, and traffic flow, this access point may or may not be retained in the design of the new Teen and Senior Center and would have a significant impact on the configuration of the building, its function and cost of construction. Outdoor Recreation Depending on specific program, larger outdoor recreation and outdoor fitness activities could be located on the roof of the new building with adequate barriers. Smaller activates could be accommodated at ground level enhancing the landscaping around the building and potentially adding views to the northern, zero -lot -line neighbors. Additionally, Cascade View Park across the street could potentially be used with improvements that would benefit both the park and the new Center. 68e Analysis Report 130 Other Concerns The buildable area on this parcel would be impacted by overhead power lines along 37th Avenue South on the west side of the site. The required setback is a 15 -foot radius from the power line. Overhead power lines may be able to be placed underground to mitigate offset requirement. Star Nursery The Star Nursery site is 1.74 acres in size and slopes from a high side on the southwest to a low side on the northeast. This site was formerly used as a plant nursery and is currently owned by the City of Tukwila. It was purchased for $885,000 in 2017 for the purpose of building a new fire station on the site. That project has since been removed from the public safety plan. Due to its larger size, this site affords area for future growth or site improvements that can be accommodated in the design of the new Teen and Senior Center. Neighbors The %-mile radius around the site primarily encompasses single family residents. There are three homes with adjacent property lines with other homes located across the surrounding streets. There is also a mobile home park across from the Southwest corner. Just at the edge and directly outside this radius are the high school and middle schools, the community pool, SHAG senior housing, and the Sullivan Center located to the south. Access from these spaces would not require crossing TIB. The neighborhood surrounding this site is less noisy and less populated located one block east of Tukwila International Boulevard. Extended day and outdoor activities are anticipated in the new Center. This could potentially affect the surrounding neighbors and will require outreach to the neighborhood during the design process. Additionally, this site is located across TIB from many neighborhoods with seniors & under -served families who live to the west of TIB, and may be harder for them to access the new Center. Parking and Transportation A new Teen and Senior Center on the site would draw new foot traffic through the residential neighborhood from Foster High School, Showalter Middle School and potentially other surrounding multifamily residential buildings. It would also draw new car and shuttle traffic through the neighborhood, primarily from South 140th Street to the west (connecting to TIB) and 42nd Avenue South from the south. The Star Nursery site is approximately 1/4 -mile walk to the public transportation stops running north and south on TIB between South 140th and South 131st Streets. Shuttle service may be required for seniors and others. The site provides direct access through neighborhood streets to and from the nearby schools. Teens coming after school can reach the site without having to cross TIB. Potential off-site sidewalk and street improvements may be needed to accommodate new pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Due to the size of this property, surface parking is more feasible on this site. However, the project may benefit from structured parking under the building to provide more area for outdoor activities and/or future growth, which would increase the cost of the building. Outdoor Recreation The site affords room at ground level for outdoor activities. The site and building configuration, parking approach and number of stories will influence the amount of site that can be dedicated to outdoor play, fitness activities, or other outdoor spaces. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER ARCHITECTURE ASSESSMENT Other Concerns New curb, sidewalks, and right-of-way landscaping in South 139th Street and South 140th Street, and possibly additional offsite accessible measures, may be required to allow pedestrian access to the site. Architectural Diagrams The following diagrams depict aspects of the context around the two sites described in the narrative above. Each of the diagrams include circles with a 1/4 -mile radius, which represents a 5 -minute walk at 3 miles an hour. The first diagram studies Amenities and Services in the vicinity of the two sites. It appears that more community amenities and services located are in the vicinity of the Bartell site. The second diagram studies Vehicular & Pedestrian Pathway Conditions, looking at major and secondary arterials, speed limits, crosswalks, locations of sidewalks, as well as public transportation stops. This gives context to the pathways available to teens and seniors accessing either site. The third diagram studies Zoning: Commercial and Residential. It gives an overview of the density of people and activities surrounding each site. The diagram includes the following zones: Low, Medium, and High Density Residential; Neighborhood Commercial Center and Regional Commercial Mixed Use. Site Analysis Report 169 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER ARCHITECTURE ASSESSMENT Transport Stop Community Services Parks & Recreation Restaurants Religious Centers 70e Analysis Report 132 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER ARCHITECTURE ASSESSMENT xx Speed Limits (mph) ® Transport Stops , Pedestrian Crosswalks — Sidewalks Arterial Route (T.I.B.) Secondary Road (42nd Ave S & S 144th St) • • School Zone (25/20 mph when flashing) Site Analysis Report 1731 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER ARCHITECTURE ASSESSMENT onin: • • ii u - . F1T : -C1'Ti EI Star Nursery Address: 13916 42nd Ave S Parcel Number: 152304-9263 Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial Center Residential Commercial Center 72e Analysis Report 134 Bartell Site Address: 37th Ave S 98168 152304-9152 Landscape Assessment The future Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center will be a facility in the Tukwila International Boulevard Neighborhood, near Foster High School, Showalter Middle School, and the senior community including senior -oriented housing and multi -generational housing. The City's goal is to create an "innovative facility that will be inclusive and serve seniors during the day and teens in the afternoon/evening. The Facility will serve our Tukwila community and incorporate diverse cultural, economic, educational, and athletic opportunities and activities" At this time, two sites have been identified as potential locations for this future community center, after several were analyzed by the city, project team, and community input was given. The two sites are referred to as the Star Nursery Site (due to its former land use) and the Bartell Site (due to its location adjacent to a Bartell pharmacy). The two sites are located approximately 0.5 miles walk from each other yet have very different characters. The Bartell site is 50% smaller than the Star Nursery site (0.9 acres and 1.7 acres respectively). The entire property is an existing parking lot surrounded by retail, apartments and a public park and has the associated street noise, traffic and activity of a more urban site. The Star Nursery site is located in a single-family residential area and has established vegetation and distant views. With the adjacent single family residences and schools, the site is quieter, with less traffic. However, both sites are in close proximity to residences, commercial hubs, and public amenities. From a landscape perspective, the Star Nursery site has more potential for outdoor recreational opportunities that require greater open space. Additionally, there are opportunities to preserve large trees and shrubs that appear to be thriving, and to take advantage of distant views, including a view of Seattle's skyline. The Bartell site, on the other hand, has the opportunity to activate the TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT existing Cascade View Community Park, provide a hub within the retail core of TIB and has a closer connection to bus transit. Bartell Site: 14224 37th Ave South The 0.9 acre "Bartell Site" is located west of Tukwila International Boulevard, fronting 37th Ave South and can be accessed via Tukwila Boulevard through adjacent parking lots. Currently the site is a paved parking lot, adjacent to a two-story multi- family apartment building to the north, retail to the south and east, and a surface parking lot to the south and east serving additional retail. Adjacent businesses include two large pharmacies, a fast- food drive through, a laundromat, a liquor store, a clothing store, and an East African restaurant. On the other side of 37th Avenue South is the Cascade View Community Park, a two -acre public park featuring picnic tables, barbecue area, a walking path, and a playground. The existing 37th Ave S frontage lacks a sidewalk adjacent to the site, and access will need to be planned to create safe and intuitive routes to the site to discourage pedestrians from traveling through the parking lot from Tukwila International Boulevard. The site is located 0.2 — 0.3 miles from a bus stop for routes 124 and 128. One advantage of this A view east toward Tukwila International Boulevard and the Bartell Drugs and other retail. Site Analysis Report 173 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT site is the proximity to several community hubs (and the location of the site on the same side of Tukwila International Boulevard as) Cascade View Community Park, popular small businesses and chain stores, the Abubakr Islamic Center of WA, and many intergenerational multifamily and single family residential areas. The site is currently used as a parking lot for the adjacent retail stores. There is some existing vegetation, including a few evergreen street trees. The site currently lacks a distant view, but there is a potential for a rooftop view depending on the height of the building. A view west toward Cascade View Community Park and street trees from the Bartell site. Cascade View Community Park is an asset for the Intergenerational Center at this location and could be upgraded to offer more amenities that would benefit the programs and everyday use by visitors to the Center including accessible features, sport courts, site furnishings, planting beds, edible and sensory gardens, play and exercise equipment, an outdoor stage, and public art. Landscape design opportunities at this site include: • Rooftop garden/Green roof • Small scale at grade garden areas ■ Site Furnishings • Connection to the existing park visually and physically, using features like wayfinding, a cross walk, public art and sightlines 74e Analysis Report 136 • Urban Plaza for outdoor gathering, food trucks and/or a cafe • Streetscape improvements, including sidewalks and street trees • Green stormwater infrastructure, including bioretention planters and cisterns for water re -use • Public art • Upgrades and additions to the Cascade View Community Park to support programming such as gardening, fitness, art classes, dance and live music events, food and beverage, and everyday use of the park by Intergenerational Center visitors and staff. Star Nursery Site: 13916 42nd Ave South The 1.7 -acre "Star Nursery" site is located one block east of Tukwila International Boulevard and has frontage on 42nd Ave South, South 139th Street, and South 140th Street. The site is adjacent to a single-family residential home on the NW corner of the block. Existing frontage lacks a sidewalk, and careful planning of routes will be needed to create safe routes to the property in a neighborhood currently lacking sidewalks. The site is located 0.3 — 0.4 miles from a bus stop for route 124. One advantage of this site is the proximity Large trees and shrubs on the Star Nursery site, remnants from its former land use. of several community hubs (and the location of the site on the same side of Tukwila International Boulevard as) the middle school, high school, Tukwila Pool, Tukwila Library, the Tukwila Village Senior Living Apartments, and residential areas. The site includes several large trees and shrubs left over from the prior use as a nursery that have potential to be preserved and included in the future landscape design. They include large coniferous (up to 60" trunk diameter) and deciduous (up to 24" trunk diameter) trees, a large weeping larch (over 50' long) extending along the southern edge of the adjacent residential property, and various small trees and shrubs that need to be further inventoried and assessed for health and potential use in the Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center landscape design. The existing plants are located throughout the property, especially concentrated along the edges, buffering the site from noise and views to the adjacent property. There is a distant view from ground level of the Seattle skyline to the north. There is potential to incorporate established plants, like this large conifer, in the future landscape design at the Star Nursery site. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT A view north toward the Seattle skyline from the Star Nursery site. The site is located in a residential zone and its distance from the busy Tukwila International Boulevard significantly reduces road noise. Landscape design opportunities at this site include • Rooftop garden/Green roof • Larger at -grade gardens (edible, sensory or other types) • Site furnishings • Outdoor gathering areas for sports and events (such as food truck festivals, soccer games, and concerts) • Sidewalks • A loop pathway • Streetscape improvements, including sidewalks and street trees • Green stormwater infrastructure, including bioretention cells, swales and cisterns for water re -use • Public art The future Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center will be an asset to the community it serves, and both locations have many advantages. Creating a site-specific design will yield very different outcomes depending on which site is chosen, however both sites offer similar benefits through their proximity to residences, retail, and civic spaces and both have potential for delightful public outdoor spaces and green stormwater infrastructure. Site Analysis Report 17,5 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT Civil Assessment For approximately the last nine months, starting in April 2021, a variety of small meetings and community involvement discussions have been held to review the feasibility and site selection of the Teen and Senior Intergenerational Center. This assessment discusses some of the observations and notes associated with the feasibility for the final two project locations. Although the project locations are relatively close to each other (approximately 1/3 -mile separation) there are significant differences in the project lot size and surrounding infrastructure that will heavily influence the characteristics of the proposed facility. The two project locations are the "Bartell Site" and "Star Nursery Site" as identified in maps in the architectural narrative. It should be noted that this feasibility narrative did not include any detailed schematic design or massing of the proposed facility on either of the two project sites being considered as this is anticipated to occur in the next phase of the project design once a singular site has been chosen. Bartell Site: 14227 Pacific Highway South Existing Conditions Located to the west of Tukwila International Boulevard, there are two parcels that currently combine for approximately 0.9 -acres that are referred to throughout this report as the "Bartell Site" due to the existing large retail store located to the east of the property. This site is located immediately east of Cascade View Community Park and has frontage (the piece of land that lies immediately adjacent to the roadway along the project's property line) along 37th Ave South. On the north side of the parcel is an existing two-story multifamily residential building, east of the project is an existing Bartell Drugs store, and to the south of the project is an existing surface parking lot 7$e Analysis Report 138 containing a Walgreens drug store. Topography of the potential project site includes approximately 10 -feet of grade change with the high end of the site on the west side sloping down to low side on the east. The parcel is served by Water District 125 and Valley View Sewer District. Proposed Site Demolition Currently the project site location is paved as a parking lot, therefore no building demolition would be required. There is unidentified utility equipment in a chain link enclosure that appears to be serving the Bartell Drugs building that is located on the potential project's parcel. Any utility easements for the location and operation of these utilities would need to be reviewed and coordinated with the adjacent property owner prior to removal. Image looking at the parcel from the southeast corner of the property. Currently developed as a surface parking lot. Site Preparation It would be beneficial to install any utilities and perform site improvements before or after the rainy season (October to April) to minimize sediment transport and to protect the building subgrade during wet weather. Installation of interceptor ditches, silt fence, straw wattles, and sediment traps etc. will be required to control construction stormwater and must be maintained through the duration of construction until the site is ready to be stabilized (paved and landscaped) to its final condition. Construction sites can be messy in nature, however as long as the dirt/debris/dust impacts off the construction site are minimized then there is little concern for surrounding and downstream stake holders. Sediment in stormwater runoff from construction sites are measured in comparison with a baseline measurement and the resulting comparison is called turbidity monitoring which measures the scattered and absorbed light transmitted through the runoff. In other words, the turbidity measures the cloudiness of the runoff where the units of measurements are called Nephelometric Turbidity Units or NTU's for short. The higher the NTU then higher the degree of cloudiness in the water sample. In addition to the sediment traps, supplementary filtration systems may be necessary in order for the contractor to treat the storm runoff to no more than 25 NTU's over the baseline flows in the area. Although the site area is 0.9 -acres, construction laydown and potential offsite improvements could ultimately disturb more than 1 -acre, therefore an NPDES permit through the Washington State Department of Ecology will be required. The project will also construct more than 2,000 square feet of new plus replaced impervious surface and will require a full project Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which will be prepared and executed by the future general contractor for the project. The SWPPP will be required to be maintained and updated as construction conditions change throughout the duration of construction, until the site is stabilized. Stormwater The project will create over 5,000 square feet of new replaced impervious surface. By exceeding this threshold, the project will be required to provide stormwater flow control for all new and TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT replaced hard surfaces and converted vegetated areas. Stormwater flow control systems (also called detention systems) are a constructed facility designed to store potentially damaging peak stormwater flows from the impervious surfaces temporarily until the downstream pipes, creeks, and stream flows subside and can safely carry the water away. The flow control, or detention, system will be designed to mimic forested conditions as required by the permitting jurisdiction (City of Tukwila) and sized accordingly. Although the 0.9 -acre "Bartell Site" may seem like a small area when considering the entire drainage basin that the parcel is tributary to, controlling flows from small projects is important to the municipal and state agencies because the cumulative effect of uncontrolled stormwater flows from many small projects can be as damaging as those from larger projects. Peak stormwater flow rates from developed conditions can have damaging impacts to downstream storm systems and streams that historically received runoff from a less developed tributary area. A graph representing the need for stormwater flow control system is described in the adjacent graphic. The City of Tukwila stormwater code (and associated adoption of the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual) requires low impact development strategies to infiltrate, disperse, and retain stormwater runoff onsite to the maximum extent feasible. All projects must treat stormwater on site from pollution generating surfaces (such as roads, parking lots, and any potential synthetic turf fields). There is no geotechnical information currently available to describe the potential for infiltration on the project site, but characteristics of the soil conditions of development to the site immediately east of the project site were unconducive to infiltration. If infiltration is infeasible, then infiltration systems that could help reduce some of the stormwater infrastructure costs for the proposed development would not be able to be used. This also precludes the use of permeable pavements. Likewise, the anticipated layout of Site Analysis Report 177 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT Stormwater Flowrate From Project Area Storm or Rainfall Event /Past construction peak stormwater flowrate from project area Historic / Pre -Developed Stormwater Flowrate from Project Area Post Development Stormwater Flowrate From Project Area (Highly Impervious) Post Development Stomwater Flowrate with Detention System Mitigation Peak flowrate from detention storage system (matches pre -developed peak flow condition) Peak historic/natural (pre -developed) stormwater flowrate from the project area Time Figure 2 - Storm water Impact from Development the project on this site would not contain any suitable areas of native vegetation for stormwater dispersion systems. Therefore, conventional stormwater flow control systems such as vaults or pipes will likely be used. As described previously in the narrative, site topography slopes from west to east. The stormwater drainage on the parcel follows the same flow direction as the topography. The project is located in the Southgate Creek Drainage Basin which is in a Conservation Flow Control Area according to the City of Tukwila's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards (Chapter 5) and therefore a stormwater detention system would be required. Utilities For domestic water and fire water services, the parcel is served by Water District 125. A survey of the existing utilities has not been completed which would identify and locate underground utilities. Although it is anticipated that the domestic and fire 78e Analysis Report 140 services for the parcel will come from the existing water main in 37th Avenue S, the existing size of the water main and infrastructure is not known at this time. Sanitary sewer service to the parcel is served by Valley View Sewer District. Due to the topography of the site is likely that the sewer service will need to connect via side sewer to the sewer main in Tukwila International Boulevard. There is an established existing sewer pipe stubbed to the east edge of the parcel that would likely be the best way to serve any future development on this parcel. Alternatively, a sewer connection to the existing sewer main in 37th Avenue South could be made directly from the project site, however as 37th Avenue South is at the topographic high point of the site, the connection would have to be deep, or a pump be used to serve the sewer needs from the ground floor or any possible basement levels to the higher elevation sewer main in 37th Avenue South. There are overhead power and communication lines along the project frontage on 37th Avenue South including large wood poles supporting the aerial lines. These existing overhead power lines likely have a minimum clearance to any constructed building elements (further coordination with Puget Sound Energy is required but it is estimated that the clearance would be 15 -feet). Alternatively aerial electrical lines could be undergrounded in which, for a significant cost, the aerial power lines on the poles are converted to underground duct banks. Constructing underground ductbanks could be costly, and in addition to construction of underground ductbanks would require large vaults, especially at this site due to an electrical switch on one of the poles that will require a large underground vault within the project frontage. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT Paving and Access As of this writing there is no title report to review easements and other encumbrances on the property (such as shared parking lot agreements with adjacent properties). A potential concern that needs to be investigated prior to the project moving forward with this site is the ability to construct over the entire 0.9 -acre site. The southern parcel that makes up approximately half of the site area lies between an established east/west vehicle corridor that allows access to the businesses located on the east and south of the project location with access to 37th Avenue South. It would seem likely that reciprocal access Current established traffic patterns shown in (2) Parcels that make up the "Bartell's Site" S. 144th Street Figure 3 - Existing Traffic Patterns Through Site Site Analysis Report I 79 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT easements through this parcel with the parcel on the east and possibly to the parcel to the south would be through an easement. If an established easement for access runs through this parcel then a significant amount of the project property will be burdened with an undevelopable amount of property. Offsite Improvements With surrounding roadways and infrastructure generally established already, it is unlikely that a significant amount of offsite improvements to provide needed infrastructure to this project location would be required. The sidewalk immediately adjacent to the project on the 37th Avenue South frontage is currently not constructed, and building the sidewalk to match the City standards would likely be required. Photo looking north along projects 37th Ave S. frontage. No sidewalk exists along the street and presence of overhead power lines may impact the ability to develop a multistory building immediately adjacent to the street. 80e Analysis Report 142 Star Nursery Site - 13916 42nd Ave South Existing Conditions This potential project site location is approximately 2 -blocks east of Tukwila International Boulevard and 1 -block north of Foster High School. The parcel is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of South 140th Street and 42nd Avenue South. The parcel has frontage on 42nd Avenue South, South 139th Street, and South 140th Street. Site area is approximately 1.70 -acres in size. The parcel is backwards "L" shape with a single-family residential home on an adjacent parcel to the northwest. This parcel is in a low- density residential zone (maximum 6.7 DU per acre). This is a City owned parcel originally purchased for potential reconstruction of Fire House 54. The site is served by Water District 125 and Valley View Sewer District. Topography of the potential project site generally flows from south to north. City GIS maps identify the potential for Class 2 (moderate) landslide hazard areas on the parcel, however during site visits to the site location these areas appeared to be only moderately graded and likely will not interfere with the development of the parcel. Existing frontage on the north and south sides of the project site do not have any sidewalk or curb separating the project from the adjacent roadway. The frontage along 42nd Avenue South does have an existing sidewalk and curb adjacent to the roadway. Proposed Site Demolition The existing buildings on the site have been previously removed. Existing vegetation will be removed, and appropriate stripping of soils where new construction will occur will be required. The potential building location has a number of existing large trees that, depending on the ultimate scope of the project, may need to have the root zone protected using measures to keep construction laydown and construction traffic away from the tree in addition to offsetting constructed buildings and site infrastructure. Site Preparation A gravel working pad will be placed within and around the proposed building footprint and is recommended to be utilized during construction to provide a stabilized construction area. It would be beneficial to install any utilities and perform site improvements before or after the rainy season (October to April) to minimize sediment transport and to protect the subgrade during wet weather. Installation of interceptor ditches, silt fence, straw wattles, and sediment traps etc. will be required to control construction stormwater and must be maintained through the duration of construction until the site is ready to be stabilized (paved and landscaped) to its final condition. Construction sites can be messy in nature, however as long as the dirt/debris/dust impacts off the construction site are minimized then there is little concern for surrounding and downstream stake holders. Sediment in stormwater runoff from construction sites are measured in comparison with a baseline measurement and the resulting comparison is called turbidity monitoring which measures the scattered and absorbed light transmitted through the runoff. In other words, the turbidity measures the cloudiness of the runoff where the units of measurements are called Nephelometric Turbidity Units or NTU's for short. The higher the NTU then higher the degree of cloudiness in the water sample. In addition to the sediment traps, supplementary filtration systems may be necessary in order for the contractor to treat the storm runoff to no more than 25 NTU's over the baseline flows in the area. The disturbed project area will be greater than 1 Acre, therefore an NPDES permit through the Washington State Department of Ecology will be required and will be applied for by the General TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT Contractor. The project will also construct more than 2,000 square feet of new plus replaced impervious surface and will require a full project Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which will be prepared and executed by the General Contractor. The SWPPP will be required to be maintained and updated as construction conditions change throughout the duration of construction, until the site is stabilized. Stormwater The project will create over 5,000 square feet of new or replaced impervious surface. By exceeding this threshold, the project will be required to provide stormwater flow control for all new and replaced hard surfaces and converted vegetated areas. Stormwater flow control systems (also called detention systems) are a constructed facility designed to store potentially damaging peak stormwater flows from the impervious surfaces temporarily until the downstream pipes, creeks, and stream flows subside and can safely carry the water away. The flow control, or detention, system will be designed to mimic forested conditions as required by the permitting jurisdiction (City of Tukwila) and sized accordingly. Although the Star Nursery site may seem like a small area when considering the entire drainage basin that the parcel is tributary to, controlling flows from small projects is important to the municipal and state agencies because the cumulative effect of uncontrolled stormwater flows from many small projects can be as damaging as those from larger projects. Peak stormwater flow rates from developed conditions can have damaging impacts to downstream storm systems and streams that historically received runoff from a less developed tributary area. A graph representing the need for stormwater flow control system is described previously in Figure 2 of this narrative. The City of Tukwila stormwater code (and associated adoption of the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual) requires low impact development strategies to infiltrate, disperse, and retain stormwater runoff onsite to the maximum Site Analysis Report 181 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT extent feasible. All projects must treat stormwater on site from pollution generating surfaces (such as roads, parking lots, and any potential synthetic turf fields). There is no geotechnical information currently available to describe the potential for infiltration on the project site, but known soil characteristics of nearby recent projects would suggest that infiltration on the property is unlikely. Therefore, implementation of infiltration systems on site is not anticipated at this time. This also precludes the use of permeable pavements. Likewise, the likely site plan for a project such as this one would not contain suitable areas of native vegetation for stormwater dispersion systems. Therefore, conventional stormwater flow control systems will likely be used. As described previously in the narrative, site topography slopes from south to the north with the stormwater flow direction on the parcel following the same flow direction as the topography. The project is located in the Southgate Creek Drainage Basin which is designated as a Conservation Flow Control Area according to the City of Tukwila's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards (Chapter 5) and therefore a stormwater detention, or flow control system, would be required to mitigate the development on the parcel. There are low impact design elements that should be considered that could help reduce stormwater infrastructure costs and provide an opportunity for the community to learn about stormwater. The ability for the soil on the site to infiltrate is assumed to be very limited based on soil maps and review of other recent developments in the area. If large scale infiltration is not possible on this project, then other low impact stormwater designs that could be implemented include the following: non -infiltrating bioretention areas, vegetated roofs, and roof rainwater collection systems. If after further study on the project site it is found that stormwater infiltration is a possibility, then permeable paving systems could be utilized to provide infiltration, treatment, and storage of 82e Analysis Report 144 stormwater. Although development in the urban corridor such as the Bartell site, which is already nearly fully impervious, could be considered a lower impact design strategy, the Star Nursery site may be able to accommodate more low impact development strategies into a future design due to more available area compared to the smaller Bartell Site. Figure 4 - Project frontage along South 140th Street: overhead power lines along the project with terminal pole near the midpoint of the Star Nursery parcel. Utilities There is an existing 6" diameter water main in South 140th Street on the south side of the project, and an 8" water main in 42nd Avenue South along the west side of the project frontage, there is no known watermain in South 139th Street to the north of the project site. There are no existing fire hydrants identified on or immediately adjacent to the project site. Water conditions surrounding the site consist of water mains typical for single family residential neighborhoods but are generally undersized for commercial/civic type building construction. Water availability to the project location including fire flow tests and hydrant coverage analysis will be needed and may require further design and coordination with the permitting authority and Fire Marshall. Sanitary sewer service to the parcel is served by Valley View Sewer District. There is an 8" sanitary sewer main on the north side of the project that is approximately 8 -feet deep at the topographic low point of the project that will be the likely connection point for this project. There are overhead power lines along a portion of the southern property line, and overhead communication lines along the entire south frontage on South 140th Street. Near the mid- point of the site frontage along South 140th Street, there is a utility pole that is a terminal pole which is where the overhead power is routed underground (into ductbanks) at a pole that has a guy -wire support to counter any stress caused by tension on the overhead power lines. Then near Figure 5 - Project frontage along South 139th Street. No curb or sidewalk exist. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT the corner of South 140th Street and 42nd Avenue South the overhead communication wire is routed underground at a pole that also has a guy wire support to counter the tension in the overhead communication wire. These guy wires will need to be protected during construction and could influence the location of driveways and where project site access can occur. Offsite Improvements There is no curb or sidewalk along the South 140th Street and South 139th Street frontages. It is likely that the project will be required to install this infrastructure with development of the parcel. In addition to development of pedestrian access (sidewalks) immediately adjacent to the project site, safe pathways of pedestrian traffic to the facility may need to be considered. Direct access from Tukwila International Boulevard along South 140th Street, as well as pedestrian access ways from Showalter Middle School consists of routes along roadways with no current curb and sidewalk. Site access should be considered during project site selection. Site Issues Comparison Table A brief description of the two sites has been provided, however in order help compare the two different sites the table below has been created to compare the sites across a narrow selection of civil/site related topics. Site Analysis Report 183 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER CIVIL ASSESSMENT Site Specific Notes and Comments Degree of Impact to Future Development on This Parcel Civil Engineering Topic Degree of Impact to Future Development on This Parcel Site Specific Notes and Comments The Bartell Site The Star Nursery Site Stormwater flow control/ detention requirements for this parcel will be needed. Due to smaller parcel size and coordination of drainage through adjacent parcels, coordination of storm system on site could be challenging. (medium) Stormwater Infrastructure CostsICI Larger site will require a large stormwater detention system and the relative depth of the storm drain connection in South 139th Street is shallow, likely causing a shallower system that requires a larger footprint area. 00o 666 666 Located in the "Neighborhood Commercial Center" zoning, the associated roadways adjacent to the site are well established. Some minor frontage improvements on the west side of parcel are anticipated. a aFrontage • V flow) Offsite Improvements Requirements (Pedestrian Improvements and Beyond) a V is V : V (high) New curb, sidewalks, and right-of-way landscaping in South 139th Street and South 140th Street likely and possibly additional offsite accessible measures required to allow pedestrian access to the site. Located in the "Neighborhood Commercial Center" zoning, the utilities serving this parcel appear to be adequate. (®) ilow) Capacity Issues or Inability to Connect to Adjacent Utilities (8) ' (G) 1-1 I There is likely the need for utility main upgrades, street lighting upgrades and possible roadway improvements adjacent to the site. Current and previous zoning not supportive of large infrastructure previously. (medium) A future proposed building on this parcel could be impacted by the required setback to overhead power lines more so on this compact site than on a larger site. (medium) ..•11A Impact to Project Site from Overhead= Utilities �• Large site likely not impacted by required setback to overhead power lines. The terminal pole guy wire support may influence the perimeter improvements. =1... ��� I• ...�� � UP P.-4 UP j04 (low) Potential shared parking lot and potential reciprocal access easements may limit amountproperties. of constructable land on the project to less than the 0.9 -acre site area. Further investigation of a title report should be pursued. Coordination of Access to Adjacent Parcels (negligible) No known or assumed access issues to neighboring o—o o—o (high) The Bartell Site The Star Nursery Site 84e Analysis Report 146 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 85 86 S 0 J McGRANAHAN architects TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR INTERGENERATIONAL CENTER Predesign Report Part 2 - Appendix City of Tukwila February 2022 S 0 J McGRANAHAN architects 87 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 88 Table of Contents REPORT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECAP FROM REPORT 1 TRANSFORMATIONAL ENGAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT GOALS MATRIX DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL GOALS FLEXIBLE PROGRAM SPACES GLOSSARY OF TERMS SITE OVERVIEW OVERVIEW OF THE TWO SITES SITE ATTRIBUTES COMPARISON MATRIX COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAMPION WORKSHOP 2 BROADER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ONLINE SITE SURVEY ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING OPEN HOUSE COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT MAIN FINDINGS DESIGN ASSESSMENTS ARCHITECTURAL ASSESSMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ASSESSMENT CIVIL ENGINEER ASSESSMENT TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX* F. COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT REPORT G. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES SITE OPEN HOUSE NOTES PROGRAMING OPEN HOUSE NOTES H. COMMUNITY SITE SURVEY *Appendices A-E can be found in Tukwila Teen & Senior Intergenerational Center: Report Part 1 - Appendix 89 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 90 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER APPENDIX F- COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT REPORT APPENDIX F - Community Assessment Report Report 2- Appendix 91 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 92 CITY OF TUKWILA COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT REPORT Submitted by: Equitable Development LLC W. Tali Hairston, PhD Principal Owner Assistance provided by Stephanie Noren Submitted to: City of Tukwila — Teen and Senior Center Project Leads Rachel Bianchi and Nate Robertson Equitable Development LLC 1 2021-2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC Summary Findings .3 Introduction 4 Assessment Scope and Purpose 5 Community Assessment Findings .6 Recommendations .9 Conclusion 9 Community Assessment Report 2 SUMMARY FINDINGS EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC THIS REVIEW SUMMARIZES THE MOST SUBSTANTIVE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSMENT. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a community -centered approach that involves the ideas, challenges, opportunities, and the lived experiences of community members and stakeholders. This community assessment reveals and highlights important findings in the development of the Teen and Senior Center Project Team report. The scope of this analysis details descriptively the services that typically fall within the core capacity of the city of Tukwila and provides an assessment of the ways the core capacity may be impacted. In this analysis the contractors describe the critical questions and data used to form the analysis and the specific assessment findings. Additionally, this report was designed as an addendum to the Teen and Senior Center Project Team report. It is the contractor's hope it will serve the city of Tukwila, its citizens and representatives for a successful teen and senior center. A Summary of the Key Findings Community-based participatory data demonstrated the community believes there is a growing need to increase services to teens and seniors. There is also awareness that the current facilities, mainly the Tukwila Community Center, is a beautiful facility that is difficult to access for teens and seniors of Tukwila. 1. Teens and seniors who are marginally engaged in the educational or retirement systems may experience a lack of services and programs that address their lived experiences. 2. Tukwila residence frequently mentioned the relationship with the Tukwila School District as one that could be expanded with the building of the teen and senior center. 3. It is likely the city will be able to efficiently operate the teen and senior center in ways that reflect its diversity. 4. Through the community-based participatory process, the city's ability to partner and network with the non-profit community is viewed as a strength and something the community values as well. 5. (Recommendation) The findings indicate that a more centrally located site for the center allows the city to more feasibly support programs and services for teens and seniors. This is largely because a centrally located facility allows the gaps raised in the analysis to less negatively impact teens and seniors. In this way the teen and senior center may also serve as a community hub and connector to other community services, extending beyond the services and programs operating out of the center. Community Assessment Report 3 5 INTRODUCTION EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PURPOSE AND METHODS. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a community -centered approach that involves the ideas, challenges, opportunities, and the lived experiences of community members and stakeholders. Using methods of community-based participatory research, the contractors were able to use the data provided in the teen and senior center community engagement process to inform the analysis. In this way the community assessment emphasizes the important role community plays in identifying key opportunities for the teen and senior center facility. Therefore, the rich data collected in the community engagement process also informed an effective analysis of the city of Tukwila teen and senior services. The analysis dovetails with the historic data provided by the city of Tukwila staff. Historic data acts as an overlay in this analysis. Meaning, we sought to analyze the historic data in order to 1) identify the overlaps with the community engagement data, and 2) interpret a set of findings relevant to the primary assessment questions. Such an approach supports community empowerment, advances the ability to make policy decisions responsive to community data, and promotes new ways of addressing systemic inequities for Tukwila's most vulnerable citizens. This community assessment reveals and emphasizes important findings in the development of the Teen and Senior Center Project Team report. The community-based participatory engagement data included key stakeholder data, focus groups, and multiple opportunities for the community to evaluate participatory data. Further analysis for the assessment process only required review of public documents and a visual mapping process. Tukwila is one of the most diverse cities in King County. In language, ethnicity, and race Tukwila's diversity is an important factor in scanning the gaps in services and programs to teens and seniors. According to census data (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/tukwilacitywashington), Tukwila is also slightly younger with 23% of its population below the age of 17. The percentage of owner to renter occupied residences reveals Tukwila is significantly different than the King County average with 62% renter occupied. Combined with a young adult population having less education than the county average, Tukwila's social services will continue to address these realities. In this analysis the contractors describe the critical questions and data used to form the analysis and the specific assessment findings. Additionally, this report was designed as an addendum to the Teen and Senior Center Project Team report. It is the contractor's hope it will serve the city of Tukwila, its citizens, and representatives for a successful teen and senior Center. Community Assessment Report 4 ASSESSMENT SCOPE AND PURPOSE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC A SUMMARY OF THE OUTCOMES The scope of this analysis details descriptively the services that typically fall within the core capacity of the city of Tukwila and provides an assessment of the ways the core capacity may be impacted. To achieve this, the analysis required an understanding of the relationship between 1) the current services provided by the city of Tukwila to its emerging teens and seniors, and 2) the desired services shared during the community engagement process. Additionally, a quick view of the overall services and programs being delivered to teens and seniors was examined. Though beyond the scope of this assessment, a review of the overall services and programs assisted the development of key assessment outcomes. In meeting with project team representatives and city staff, we were able to design a set of outcomes to define the scope of the assessment with those parameters and expectations. KEY OUTCOMES 1. Conduct an analysis of the services and programs directly or indirectly supported by the city of Tukwila for teens and seniors. What is the city of Tukwila's core capacity for teens and seniors? More specifically, scan the city's central or primary service and program areas. Tukwila funds the delivery of many services and programs. Analyze these services and programs as an indicator of the city's future core capacity needs. 2. Describe how the supported services and programs compare to the community- based participatory research data. This outcome is designed to connect the shared struggles, challenges, and opportunities raised in the community-based participatory engagement process, to the core services and programs of the city of Tukwila. What are the overlapping activities in what the city directs towards teens and seniors and the community-based participatory findings? 3. Identify any significant community-based gaps for the Teen and Senior Center. By scanning community -data, a broader view of the data emerged. Emerging issues and trends reveal possible partnerships, collaborations, and strategic interventions. Communities often provide feedback that speaks to places where folks are falling in- between the services and programs. The goal of this outcome is to see if the community- based participatory data identified any gaps in services to teens and seniors. 4. Provide advice and guidance on the feasibility of addressing possible gaps in services. Include additional information to assist in decision-making regarding center programming, facility design, and location. Community Assessment Report 5 COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FINDINGS EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC CONDUCT AN ANALYSIS OF THE SERVICES AND PROGRAMS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY SUPPORTED BY THE CITY OF TUKWILA FOR TEENS AND SENIORS. Community-based participatory data demonstrated the community believes there is a growing need to increase services to teens and seniors. There is also awareness that the current facilities, mainly the Tukwila Community Center, is a beautiful facility that is difficult to access for teens and seniors of Tukwila. The Tukwila School District was often represented as a good partner for meeting the needs of teens. For seniors, two distinct populations were identified: those capable of affording the available housing and with access to transportation, and those without. Teens and seniors who are marginally engaged in the educational or retirement systems may experience a lack of services and programs that address their lived experiences. These services may include ambulatory care and other transportation services, affordable childcare and accessible early learning centers for teen mothers, teen transition programming in financial literacy and career -development, and drop-in health clinics. Additionally, data suggests Tukwila experiences multiple social service needs of those primarily between the ages of 21 and 55 years old. For example, community-based participatory data shows the city continues to address housing instability, food insecurity, employment services, and affordable health insurance options. There is evidence to suggest this is where the city's core capacity is most robust. Noting the history of Tukwila, as a working-class city with recent rapid diversity over last twenty years, it is expected to locate gaps in services. A scan of Tukwila's primary, central, or core services and programs for teens and seniors indicates there may be a need to strategically address the role and core capacity of the city depending on the site location. In the analysis it was found that a site location and the city's core capacity for addressing the opportunities and challenges for its teens and seniors is highly correlated. Another way of saying this is, the site chosen must enable the city to adequately serve teens and seniors by building on the city's core capacity. Without this alignment it is likely that teens and seniors who marginally engage the current educational and retirement systems will continue to lack connection to the services and programs they need. Community Assessment Report 6 COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FINDINGS EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC DESCRIBE HOW THE SUPPORTED SERVICES AND PROGRAMS COMPARE TO THE COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH DATA. A comparison of the participatory data with the city's supported services and programs for teens and seniors revealed important overlaps to consider. Each overlap makes up the city's core competencies. In other words, the core competencies describe the city's most likely and efficient focus areas for teen and senior services and programs. Most likely and efficient focus areas can also be understood as a measure of feasibility. Feasibility measures include schedule reliability, cultural compatibility, and operational feasibility. Each of the narratives below are instances where all three measures were found to be more than likely and efficient. • Tukwila residence frequently mentioned the relationship with the Tukwila School District as one that could be expanded with the building of the teen and senior center. The high participation of teens in the community listening and feedback sessions shows there is shared value and willingness to further this relationship. Familiarity with the needs of teens after school hours was affirmed by the teens. It is obvious teens have a level of trust in the current school district relationship through Teens for Tukwila, for example. There appears to be an openness and willingness to advance teen programming and services with the partnership of the school district. • Participatory data frequently mentioned ways to build upon the city's diversity. Listening sessions and focus groups also represented the city's diversity. It is likely the city will be able to efficiently operate the teen and senior center in ways that reflect its diversity. The perspective of diversity was positive and affirming. Consistent references to the growing school district data suggests Tukwila's diversity is economic, intergenerational, ethnic, and religious. Meaning, Tukwila's diversity is somewhat embedded in its social and cultural identity. As such, Tukwila residence will likely find the teen and senior center reflects its social and cultural identity. • Through the community-based participatory process, the city's ability to partner and network with the non-profit community is viewed as a strength and something the community values as well. The city demonstrated a history and capacity to maintain relationships with a variety of service delivery providers. Additionally, there appeared to be a willingness to rely on and work with the city on community issues and concerns. This is an asset to be leveraged by all parties for the success of the teen and senior center. A cooperative and collective approach bodes well for program planning, scheduling, and operating the center. Community Assessment Report 7 COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FINDINGS EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC IDENTIFY ANY SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY-BASED GAPS FOR THE TEEN AND SENIOR CENTER. The intended purpose of a community assessment includes locating significant gaps in a community or community-based project. It should be said that every community has gaps for various reasons. Some of those reasons are intermittent. Meaning, the gaps exists for a shorter period of time and resolves rather simply, mostly through rerouting services or a change in process. Significant gaps require more effort and often exist at a systems level. Significant gaps often require re-training staff, hiring new staff, acquiring consultant services, and other possible time sensitive processes. The narrative that follows describe significant activities to address the gap in services at the systems level. Intermittent gaps are not the central focus of this assessment. • Respondents and stakeholders consistently mentioned accessibility for teens and seniors in discussing a site selection. Many issues can make accessibility a problem for teens and seniors. This scan was unable to determine the source of accessibility issues. But what is evident is a centrally located facility can support resolving accessibility and related challenges. • The data revealed some inconsistencies regarding the challenges and opportunities to serve teens after graduation. For teens who do not go into further schooling, it is unclear how the center might provide for that transitional period between high school and adulthood. Additionally, the analysis evaluated King County funding sources for post- high school teens transitioning into adulthood. Several non -profits report to serve teens in Tukwila with leadership, employment, and financial literacy mentorship and training. • There appears a trend in the community feedback and stakeholder data that is also consistent with other south county cities. A growing population of refugee and immigrant communities continue to organize and advocate for increase in support services. The community assessment engaged this trend hoping to evaluate Tukwila's capacity for intergenerational families and communities. How the teen and senior center programs for intergenerational cultures is an open question. • Evaluating health related data for teens and seniors revealed a growing gap in low-cost health services for pregnant teens and young adults, and seniors unable to afford retirement services and housing. This also includes teens experiencing mental health crisis. For teens who drop-out of school or graduate lacking employment opportunities, in particular those for whom English is not their first language; easily accessible and affordable health services may feasibly operate out of the teen and senior center. Community Assessment Report 8 L7 EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT LLC RECOMMENDATION PROVIDE ADVICE AND GUIDANCE ON THE FEASIBILITY OF ADDRESSING POSSIBLE GAPS IN SERVICES. The findings indicate that a more centrally located site for the center allows the city to more feasibly support programs and services for teens and seniors. This is largely because a centrally located facility allows the gaps raised in the analysis to less negatively impact teens and seniors. In this way the teen and senior center may also serve as a community hub and connector to other community services, extending beyond the services and programs operating out of the center. Such efforts may require the city to provide a navigation team responsible for directing teens and seniors to the city's organizational partners and facility programs and services. A non-profit contracted to provide navigational services is an option instead of hiring city employees. A teen and senior center conceptualized as a hub of community activity may also allow the city to schedule, operate, and create a culture as diverse as Tukwila. To harness the beauty of Tukwila's diversity is more likely in a hub and spoke model. Meaning, the teen and senior center not only brings people together, but the assessment found that it can connect participants to other programs and services. Again, this recommended model assumes the city continues to value local partnerships and collaborations, a clear strength of Tukwila. The many different social sectors that are most likely a need for teens and seniors into the future (affordable access to healthcare, mental wellness, early childcare, employment services, post -secondary education), spans many institutional systems and delivery networks. This does inform the kind of staffing model the city may pursue as well. Further analysis is needed once a location is selected and the final building plans permitted. CONCLUSION In conclusion, by employing community-based participatory feedback, the contractors were able to identify opportunities and gaps in selecting a site for the teen and senior center. The community engagement process directly and uniquely informed this analysis. In this way the community assessment emphasized the important role community has played in identifying key opportunities and also informed the recommendations for the teen and senior center facility. The purpose and central focus of the community assessment does not go so far as to recommend a particular site. Instead, it provides a supportive analysis and descriptive framework for decision makers by further leveraging the work of community stakeholders who invested their time, insight, and support to the community engagement process. Community Assessment Report 9 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 102 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES APPENDIX G - Community Engagement Notes The following pages have meeting notes from the online and in-person community engagement on siting followed by the additional community wide, virtual open house on programming including the Google Jamboard. Report 2- Appendix' 03 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES Site Open House Comments December 2021 I. ATTENDANCE A. Co -project Managers Nate Robinson & Rachel Bianchi led three virtual meetings over Microsoft Teams. B. Project Team members held in-person open house at the Sullivan Center using printed slides. C. Virtual meetings: 6 community members including 1 teen. In-person Open House: 29 community members many from SHAG across the street. II. COMMENTS A. Community Member 1: Bartells already has sidewalks and streetlights, seems safer. Has concerns about the outreach that has been done so far. Likes that size of Star Nursery though, and buying the Bartell site would probably be more expensive than adding sidewalks and streetlights around the Star Nursery site. However, parents could multitask with dropping of teens and going shopping or running errands, and Bartells is already commercially zoned. Tough choice. B. Community Member 2: Transportation is the biggest issue for the Star Nursery site — without regularly scheduled busses it will be no different that the Community Center. Bartells is appealing because many seniors live in nearby apartments — not just SHAG. And it feels safer because it's well lit with sidewalks. C. Community Member 3: Asked for private meeting with City leads. D. Community Member 4: Still processing, feels like more information is needed to understand implications of site selection on possible program. E. Community Member 5: Star Nursery seems really well positioned for this center — close to the high school and middle school. Star Nursery is preferred for its size and calmness, but it's really close because Bartells is a landmark that is easier to navigate to and easy to find. There is a lot around Bartells to do and access. F. Community Member 6: Star Nursery is preferred because its larger so there would be more options. Bartells seems small. Both are good options though. Star Nursery might be easier access for students, but harder for mass transit/others. Bartells is less than 100ft from her house, but close/accessible isn't everything — can have more programming at Star. G. Community Member 7: South Seattle Senior Center is the place to be. It's cozy, like home. Not every space is for utilization, and it doesn't feel like a hotel. Feels like a warm, comfortable hangout. Also all chairs MUST have arms for seniors to get out of them. H. Community Member 8: SHAG seniors "walk to Star Nursery all the time," and we have the SHAGmobile. But it might be more difficult for those on the other side of TIB. Also, Bartells might be hard to get to from SHAG because it's a big street crossing and it's too close for the SHAGmobile. I. Community Member 9: Has concerns about teens crossing TIB after school to get to Bartells — the traffic is fast and women/girls are harassed in that area. It'd be so safe for them to just go a couple blocks north through the neighborhood. J. Community Member 10: Wondered about the new plan for the TIB neighborhood and how the Boulevard will layout with the new zoning. K. Community Member 11: Somali immigrant who works as a liaison between City and Somali population. Would love to be involved in helping translate workshops for Tukwila residents. Likes Star Nursery because it keeps kids more safe by keeping them away from the commercial center. L. Sullivan Center in-person Open House Boards: '� O4rt 2- Appendix 118 CJ® 1,xipuaddy -z �aoda� • Which of the two sites is your favorite? 1 APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES 1B1ND UOIN3S'S N331 VIIMHll OZ I xipuaddy -Z1-190 I, What do you think? Star Nursery or Bartell Pad? WIN! • Why did you choose one site over the other? APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES 2131N3) 21OIN]S'8 N331 VlIMNfll LQ 1,xipu.ddv -z Jodj Inv w-f...„qf What do you think? Star Nursery or Bartell Pad? Y • What other information would you like to share on where to site the Teen & Senior Center? MOP de APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES 1B1ND UOIN3S N331 viimmni TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES Program Open House Comments 18 January 2022 I. ATTENDANCE A. Co -project Managers Nate Robinson & Rachel Bianchi led virtual meeting over Microsoft Teams and using Google Jamboard for comments. B. 26 people total, including Project Team. II. COMMENTS A. 16 people in the Google Jamboard — see attached for comments. B. Additional comments/discussion: 1. Tukwila Pool wants to be involved throughout process. Looking forward to it. 2. Appreciate flexible spaces great for community partners. Pool — CPR or lifeguarding classes, coordinating with teens/seniors. III. COMMUNITY REFLECTIONS A. Community Member 1: Lots of opportunities to serve our community — key thing is to ensure everyone is served. B. Community Member 2: Contractor tracking on this project and the project engagement; impressed with the project website and videos. Love the community engagement — is very intentional and the real deal. C. Community Member 3: Too much to carefully consider and comment on brief presentation on a small screen. D. Community Member 4: Excited that the teens/seniors are a focal point here. Librarian at Tukwila library — love the intergenerational opportunities. E. Community Member 5: All the community outreach has been such a great depth with great feedback from the community. Will be nice to see that incorporated into the project from users to flexible spaces. Excited to see where it's going from here. F. Community Member 6: Second that we're not just checking off boxes about engagement. See the student voices and community come through. Will be a space people want to use because their voices are being heard. G. Community Member 7: Teen Librarian — teens have lots of energy. Tried to give the 60-100 teens coming through Tukwila Library. Some get mad at them at the library. Glad that the community needs are included and that there is a new place to partner with for teens. H. Community Member 8: Worked with community on fire station project. Really great to see the interaction with the community on this project that will be great for the community. I. Community Member 9: Think it's going to be really good. Teens and seniors will benefit from each other. Lives across the street from one of the potential sites so she'd want to be very involved with design and operation times. Some concerns, but it overall it'll be very beneficial for everyone. J. Mayor Ekberg: Appreciates the group of folks on this call and the honesty/fulfillment coming through with regards to a teen and senior center. IV. SESSION JAM BOARDS 1 O8rt 2- Appendix 122 activities resonate, though what is already in the community and accessible needs to be q investigated before finalizing (eg - laundry next to a laundromat biz, Sullivan Center has a kitchen and large space - is that available tet the Ii 60 1,xipuaddy -z �aoda� Yes. I love all the different ideas and the diversity it offers. I appreciate all the thought that went into the designs. ie Tukwila Pool is arrently the only en and senior rvice provider in the ea and are very cited in sharing of eas and spaces to •ovide our residents ie best and most ficient delivery of rvices. Do these spaces resonate with you? Why or why not? Yes, I appreciate the depth of community engagement. Very impressive! What you have learned resonates with my own perceptions and experiences. lb. Spaces that facilitate this is very important to our District. The spaces make sense. I'm wondering about which of the needs are being met in other spaces and which of these spaces would be unique to the TTSC. As a Tukwila Pool Commissioner, I am very interested in maintaining a collaborative relationship with the City during this process. The Tukwila Pool is currently the only teen and senior service provider in I didn't see office space lb. the area and are very excited in sharing of ideas and spaces to provide our residents the best and most efficient delivery of services, Spaces that facilitate this is very important to our District. Ftnink the services are very comprehensive but worry that there is too much for the space available. I think some of these services are more available at the school. if there are too many services in small areas can they be (Irina nrnnarly I APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES 1B1ND UOIN3S'S N331 VIIMHll bZ I xipuaddy -Z 1-100 I, Options how spaces will be used and offered. I also like the open space concepts for example: Gardening and rec activities. Flexible space, outdoor space, coming together around food, space for service providers, Lots of great ideas1 What do you like about what have seen? low Flexible spaces to best utilize spaces will be important for future development and adaptivity. Community space. Community meeting space so organizations have places to meet. Intentionality around the outdoor space around the TTSC and how to best use it for recreation, learning, relaxation, and gardening What I am excited most about is simply a multi -use space for both teens and adults. Nothing fancy Separate spaces for teens to be with teens, and collaborative spaces for intergenerational learning and playing Eating + Cooking The potential for more after school programs APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES 2131N33 2IOIN3S'8 N331 d1IMNl1 1,xipuaddy -Z 1Jodaa Ensuring there are gender specific programming: Women only. This was offered for women swimming at the Tukwila Pool a while ago. Question - will it be multiple stories? Is there anything (glaring) that is missing? Senior lunches has been a common bringing together - providing that regular service is missing. Arts & crafts, specifically, though I think they may fit in the Makerspace and some of the multi-purpose areas. Access and parking. Not all seniors will be in walking distance. What about security? I fear that outsiders come and hang around and there could be shop lifting and we could lose Bartell's and Walgreens Easy access and parking. Concern about bringing all this traffic to a residential neighborhood if the nursery site is chosen. Just want to note proximity to transi is crucial. We currently have a n amazing community 4 center that is not easily accessible to 4 a large number of Tukwila residents. i APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES H31N3J HOIN3S II N331 d1IMNfll 9Z I xipuaddd -Z IJEtd If you had to take away two spaces, which two spaces would you take away and why? I like everything. thank youl Take a{ way spaces that are already being met somewhere else. Funding will dictate how many wants are possible, but priority should be given to dedicated spaces and community flexible spaces first- others fit in as funding/space would allow Study area and tech help --don't we have that at the old library and at the school Some of the outdoor space, depending on final site for the building (ie, if it's near the park, factor in activities that can be held at the park, to maximize space/resources) In the new nearby HealthPoint facility there will likely be space for social service agencies. We hope to coordinate services to be sure we are complementary and aligned. APPENDIX G- COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES 2131N3) 21OIN]S'8 N331 VlIMNfll PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 113 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 114 Finish J TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER APPENDIX H- SITE SURVEY APPENDIX H - Site Survey Tukwila Teen & Senior Center Site Selection Survey The City is exploring the development of this project, and we're looking for the community's input on where to locate this facility. Tell us about your site choice and any other thoughts you might have. 1. Which of the two sites is your favorite? Former Star Nursery site Partial Bartell pad 2. Why did you choose one site over the other? 3. What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? Back Powered by SurveyHero.com I Report abuse Report 2- Appendix' *5 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE Survey Results - Bartell Site Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 1 It's closer to the recent redevelopment of the S 144th St area including closer to the Shag complex. Also, its closer to the two main bus routes serving the area. Plus it puts in a business activity area, businesses that teens and seniors use. The other location is. a longer walk for seniors traveling by bus and in would increase automobile traffic in a partially single family housing area 2 I don't think it would be especially responsible of the planners to CHOOSE to place a teen/senior center di- rectly across the street from a DOC prison -release loca- tion, which houses a variable number of level II and III sex offenders (70% of sex offenders are level I, and are NOT shown). PLEASE look up the King County Sheriff's website. The DOC house at 4220 S. 139th Street, 98168 currently houses 4 sex offenders. I thought there was a law that specified that sex offenders are NOT supposed to reside within 1,000 feet of centers for children (e.g. schools, etc.). It seems that teens are often targets for sex offenders. 3 Located in a more public area. Safer cross roads to get to the location. 4 Bartells is more convienient to high school "teen"kids. More access. 5 I believe easier access via public transportation 46rt 2- Appendix 130 The S 144th St area is a major activity center. Keep growing the activity center for transit and managing traffic.lt is easier for citizens to focus on one area in- stead of isolating new facilities over on 42nd Ave S I'm glad you're building a second community center with a a more central geographical location. The cur- rent Tukwila Community Center is nice, but it's all the way down in Allentown. Why can't the center be placed on the park across the street from Bartells ? There is plenty of room.. it could be smaller if only for the sr's. And could actually have some parking available there or near Bartells if smaller. And why can't the teen center be placed at the little round so called Tukwila Village community center.... Or the sr's be here? Or the daycare be here? Teen and senior center combo is a fantastic idea for this community. I'm very excited about it. Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? Many reasons. 1. Transit availability both north/south as well as east/west stop at the Bartell site. None is available adjacent to the star site. 2. Closer walking dis- tance to shag and other senior housing. 3. Trips to the Pharmacy or grocery's and library (due to no parking at library) can be combined with a visit to the senior center. 4. Gets kids away from school buildings into a changed environment. (Although not far.) 5. Cascade view park is right there for outdoor space that can be reimangined to fit teen needs as well as seniors. 6. Easy drop/pickup point for Hyde Shuttle or School/Tour buses. 7. Teens have tended to hang out there more since cascade view part was created. especially during summer months. 8. Eliminates a law enforcement trou- ble spot especially in summer months at night. (Drugs, Alcohol,Gangs) 9. Close by for all the teens living near by in apartments and there are a lot living within a couple blocks. Compared to the star property it's a no brainer. The bartell site is extremely user friendly. Better access for folks of all ages: there is a steep slope on the former nursery land, making it less accommo- dating for many people. Public transit is important, too, for users/clients and staff members. The proximity of the Bartel's area to TIB is therefore the best of two sites. Currently an eye sore The Bartell site is better located to serve both seniors and teens. It is a level site across from the many se- niors living in Tukwila Village and just a couple of blocks from FHS. It is a very visible location and served by two bus routes. The nursery site is in a residential neigh- borhood. A senior -teen center is better located where it doesn't impact homes. The nursery site is downhill from Tukwila Village. i think is more easy for people because the other one chops down trees and we need trees I'm a Tukwila senior and I don't use the senior center much because I don't feel valued by the city parks and rec folks. So like other Tukwila seniors we go to SeaTac for lunches and events. Does this mean that a more robust effort is going to be undertaken to provide help for senior taxpayers? And provide more meaningful services for us as well as teens? Beautify the space with native plants & shades - de - pave. idk nothing Report 2- Appendix' *7 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 12 Cus this site is a lot closer to things and would be more easy to walk to and get to cus its right in the middle on everything 13 it just seem easy to access and some people know where it is. 14 I choose this site over the other site because I live re- ally close by it. 15 Because it's a big palace for blud something. 16 cuz is more to the school 17 More accessible since its near the schools. 18 i dont know thise sites so i chose one 19 Because it is near a store where supplies can be easily acsessed 20 I picked Partial Bartell pad because it's closer to where I live. 21 because its a place where me and my parents have been many times so if i wanted to go it would make it really easiar for me and my parents going into a place where i can go easily and come back the same, also i fee like many people know the partial bartell pad more then they know the former star nursery site. 22 It is more conveniently located 23 I prefer this site over the former Star Nursery site since this appears to be the epicenter of the major Tukwila Development is occurring in this area and it is adjacent to the community park. The former Star Nursery site is in the middle of residential area where Neighbors are unlikely to change in the near future. Locating the center adjacent to this area could create more effective changes in the city. 24 Partial Bartell pad is far superior because of proxim- ity to new senior assisted living & housing, it's an easy walk from Foster High School, has park across the street and no trees would be removed. 1 48rt 2- Appendix 132 none nothing. There is nothing that I would like to tell you more about the teen and senior center. NO nothing thank you but how is this community Cen- ter gonna help us are the student. Idk Nothing else its a good spot thers a lot of space for of lot of us to play N/A Nothing else really. having counselor is a great idea but maybe you guys can try to also encourage teens to talk to teens be- cause sometimes adults just don't get what kids are going through and may make them feel like there is no problem and that nobody understands them. Tukwila is generally a fairly dark city. I would like to see these public areas lit up well at night to deter criminal activity. I have noted that this area has been the site to several shootings in the past year. I appreciate all the new development for continuous improvement of the city, and providing new services. My family will use it much more if it's located at partial Bartell pad. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? The location has multiple advantages as it is: located near SHAG housing and the high school, sits along multiple bus station routes, and is across from a public park. This location would also increase foot traffic to local business and reclaim unused parking for community needs. While the other site is much lager and in a 'quieter' section of the city, it does not hold the same advan- tages as the Bartell pad does. It's close to me Senior Center and Library are already in that area, would help complete the renewal of that area. Also it would help support the local businesses. The Star Nursery site is right next to residential houses, could affect their property values. I don't know what will become of that site, but hoping there will be some way to save some of the trees on the land. The Star Nursery site is in a neighborhood; the partial Bartell pad is a much more ideal spot for a Teen and Senior Center. It would help clean up the area near Highway 99, like the library and Senior Living Facility have done. It's clearly the superior location. Bartell pad is adjacent to a park, has easy access to shopping so seniors taking public transit can get more done, it is closer to the library, closer to transit lines, and is currently pavement whereas the nursery is green space. I'd rather see a building go up on an area that's already covered in concrete rather than cover a new area in concrete. I also think locating the center in that shop- ping complex makes it more centrally located and has the potential to draw a more positive focus directly to that area. ...aaaaand I think the former Star nursery would make a really great small neighborhood park someday....just planting the seed ;) The location is centralized with easy access to transpor- tation, library and commercial businesses. Easy access to site from existing public transit, close to outdoor park already Report 2- Appendix' *9 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 33 It's close the to the action, close to TIB. And it could use some improvement. 34 1- Tear up asphalt, not plants 2 - Convenience to library, shopping ( esp. pharmacy) & schools 3 - Access to transit 4 - Parking 35 The site is situated in a better location (i.e., in the ac- tive TIB neighborhood vs in a low density residential area) where activity and density will be more easily accommodated. The TIB area is an active accessible area in need of various land use "draws" and this kind of facility would be great to enhance area activity. 36 Bartell is more in the center of population and has good transportation connections. Why not Tukwila Vil- lage? 37 The Bartell site is more convenient. It would be nice to have a senior center as close as possible to the new SHAG senior apartments. For the kids, since they're in school every day anyhow, having a location that's closer to Foster High School is easiest for them. 38 More convenient for both seniors and teens! 39 It is closer to the SAARs marketplace and all the other stores, where children/teens/seniors can go to if any- thing. Parents can run errands while their kids are at the Teen center. The center is also really close to the playground, library. Yet, with the former star nursery site, that place is more closer to the homes and trailers of many people. To not disturb their peace, I think the partial Bartell pad would be much better. 40 More centralized to both seniors and teens! 41 There's better parking 42 1 2Ort 2- Appendix 134 As mentioned it would be wonderful for it to serve multiple purposes- proximity to TIB, where many folks live, and to also revitalize an unattractive, underdevel- oped area. Thanks! That is it... Thanks for asking. Neighbors were notified late in the process. Vague plans for what will actually go in a teen/senior center. Difficult to comment on such a murky plan. It seems unusual that you have combined a Teen/Se- nior Center. Normally, it seems like you see one or the other, as the interests of these two groups tend to be divergent. I also think the Partial Bartell pad should be facing the playground. Or be located facing away from the park- ing lot. I think it should have a warm nice welcoming entrance. and I also personally think the city has yet to work together to build a homeless center or care cen- ter for our houseless neighbors living on the streets. The Bartell's pad is directly on multiple bus lines and embedded at a location that adjacent grocery store, pharmacies, and laundry mat. The immediately adja- cent services would make that location more beneficial for the intended uses. The Bartell's pad is also an existing commercial loca- tion, meaning the neighborhood is structured in a way that allows for a common influx of foot and vehicle traffic, that does not pose a raised level of noise for the surrounding residents. 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? More visible, near bus line, criminal activity happens in that area and it would be nice to have that space filled with a building promoting positive activities, next to a park so they may feel like an extension of each other (park & rec center). There's already infrastructure there plus a parking lot and it feels like a more central location for the corn- munity Easier access for both teens and seniors; close to other activities and the Cascade Park which can act as a natu- ral extension of the center. Start nursery is in a residual neighborhood and could have negative effects; whereas the commercial neigh- bors will be better prepared to handle. Closer to SHAG and most apartments. I think that it will be a more visible site and more as- sessable. the Star Nursery would be more aesthetically pleasing, but I think the Bartell lot would be accessible to more people. Closer to my the park and neighborhood my neighborhood does not need more traffic! visibility and ease of access This might promote more safety in that area. The for- mer Star Nursery is in a residential area and may not be conducive to the potential traffic. I'm so happy to hear that there will finally be a space for activities for teens and seniors in a place that is walkable to the schools and senior living and is actually near transit! Glad you are doing it! Each location will have a base cost and project comple- tion time associated. The Bartell pad site already has cleared and level land, existing city lighting, onsite and adjacent parking, and other existing infrastructure, that could help keep the project cost down. Since it is located in a commercial area, some construction could continue beyond residential hours, if needed for the timeline. people can walk there or bus there Incorporate new landscaping with outdoor seating and a walking path around the building - fully utilize the space both inside and out. The Bartells site is better situated for traffic. Hopefully TPD presence is part of the plan. Report 2- Appendix' 21 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? 54 Wasn't Star Nursery purchased with Bond Money to replace the 3rd fire station? 55 There are well established crosswalks and lights on TIB to get to the site safely 56 The Bartell pad site is less residential, and very easy to get to by public transit. It also has better parking op- tions. 57 Proximity to neighboring housing with lots of young people. 58 Other commercial sites nearby. Parking, lighting, along the IB pathway. 59 Mas accessible 60 61 This one seems easier to get to 62 no se 63 Because its close to my home 64 Slightly further away from residential areas. 22rt 2- Appendix 136 What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? Why is the city proposing property purchased with bond money to build a fire station to now build a teen senior center. How is that legal? Obviously, there is no longer a plan to build a fire station. How can they use the star nursery property for something else when we voted to build a fire station? That is the real question! And where is the bond money to build that fire sta- tion??? how can they build these two buildings when the can't build the fire station we voted for and our currently paying for?? This city administration is the Worst in Tukwila History! I think the Bartell pad is also nice since there is a city park across the street! St Thomas church is situated between the high school and the nursery. Concerned about foot traffic Por favor contraten personal de la comunidad. Gra- cias! It would take long but it helps the coummity nada No thank Combining those two venues is a terrible idea. Please tell me who proposed that idea so I can vote against them in the next election. What were you thinking??? Leave the seniors at the Community center and give the Teens their own SU- PERVISED center. I am a senior and I am Quiet, go home early, and don't cause any trouble for anyone. Teens always has some in their groups that are loud, stay our late so they can do things they know their parents would not approve once they are out of sight. 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? Because this site is already paved over, and it's impor- tant to preserve what little open space is left in this wonderful city. It is close to public transportation, library senior center and immigrant and refugees lives in the area. proximity to populations with must need - newly ar- rived immigrants and non-native english speakers will find more support in this well -situated location than the other It's close to Tukwila Village which is a Shag community that houses a lot of seniors and it makes sense to have it close to all of those seniors so they have easy access to the facility Proximity to critical population group that needs this establishment the most, such as newly arrived im- migrants and refugees. It's also a well acquainted site with abundance of public access. It's also adjacent to the Cascade View Park, which has seen many unsafe transient activities and by having this establishment there, it will change the environment to become a safer place for vulnerable populations who utilizes that park and that area. Having the Teen & Senior center there will also attract more customers to the local businesses in the area. I choose the bartell parking pad because it would not involve destroying green space that is becoming harder to keep. It's rarely used and it's a non permeable surface. It would be much less of an environmental impact. It would use a very useless space where the nursery would be a better park ;-) for kids birds and other wildlife:-) Nursery site is a relatively quiet neighborhood, Bartell site is closer to major bus lines and has multiple high traffic routes for access. Close to the middle/high school would be great for a teen center, so many teens in this area already. Close to bus lines for teens and seniors. Plus with the new senior living so close by it seems like a great space for all needs Great for the neighborhood! This will be a great opportunity and program for the community. Thank you in advance! I would like to see this new center transform a place to create a safer and welcoming environment for the Tukwila community. The center must prioritize the needs of those who'll have the most barrier to access- ing this facility (Limited English speakers, newly arrived immigrants and refugees, among other marginalized groups). The new center should also be a transfor- mative place for those it serves and be a resource to change people's lives. It would closer to a high density housing making it easier to access Having it located near the library, food options and apartments seems like a more logical choice. I'm so excited to hear this is happening. Thank you! Close to senior housing and would be a wonderful ad- dition! Report 2- Appendix' 23 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 74 Close proximity to good grocery store, convenience store, Library, good dining and fast food, farmer's mar- ket, drug stores... just about anything the family might need to pick up. And there is an abundance of seniors at the Tukwila Village SHAG. 75 It is right by a large senior complex, SHAG Tukwila Vil- lage and the High School. Many bus routes run right by there for transportation. Also, many stores that Seniors shop at all around the Bartell Pad, including Grocery, Drug Stores and places to eat right there, not even a block away. 'Seniors can pick up prescriptions, grocery shop and grab a bite to eat right there, cut- ting down on their trips out. It just makes good sense. Over 200 Seniors live less than a block away and the High School is only a block away. I believe the Star Nursery site would not get as many Seniors or Teens coming to it in that area. Seniors can't walk to it and transportation is non-existent for Seniors or Teens. 76 I see it as an enhancement of the park next door which is lovely but seems under utilized and could use an of- ficial city presence to keep it a safe and clean area for families. This site is a better fit for access as there are bus stops nearby and good sidewalks in the area. It is also close to the high school and library for the teens, and drugstores and shag housing as well as other apartments for the seniors. Additionally I live right by the star nursery site and I am not sure that the mysteri- ous teen and senior center is a good fit in our residen- tial area. 77 It's in a more industrial area yet close to the school, the ShAG apartments , the Library etc. the Old Nursery site should be used as open space or something that will fit better in that part of our neigh- borhood 78 Easier access than residential, spots for parking, well lit, safer at the Bartell location. 24rt 2- Appendix 138 It is close enough to the High School to be great for after school activities. Seniors use the Bartell area everyday. Also, the Teens from High School walk up there at lunch time and after school for snacks and to meet their friends. It just makes the most sense to build it at the Bartell area because there are more people would benefit from it. This is more of a series of questions not answered by the presentation but.... What new services would a teen and senior center provide that are not already available in our Tukwila community center and library? Is it possible to provide these from an existing build- ing such as the nearby Sullivan center building by the library or at the Tukwila community center? What happened to the fire station and playground plan for the nursery lot? How secure is the funding for this proj- ect? Will it get started then abruptly cancelled like the proposed fire station or birth to kindergarten center in the past? The Bartells site just makes more sense. It is right off of International Blvd. and ties in with the Library Former Star Nursery has some blind spots while driv- ing. Bartell is wide open and safer. It's kind of close to the nearest apartment/ motel next to bartells Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- BARTELL SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? The other is in neighborhood reach for residents but can be a disturbance because of the pattern of incom- ing and out going people. Barbell pad has stores to get goods, grocery store and a few restaurants so people visiting won't have to go far when visiting. It's also closer to the tukwila village for seniors. I wasn't aware the City had control of the former nursery. Perhaps the City should have allowed the sale of the former nursery. Single family homes are in high demand and would fit with the character of the exist- ing neighborhood. Because it is bear to the park and also near to our house It close to stores, park, senior homes, schools, and people. It a convenient place. This is such a half baked idea one has to wonder what sort of kickbacks Tukwila City Councilors are getting for proposing it? What is the purpose of a Senior -Teen Center? Is this just a fancy term for a homeless cen- ter? If teenagers in the area need space or services we already have the newly renovated gigantic Foster High School Campus. If single elderly people need services we already have the brand new Shag Tukwila Center. Seems Tukwila City Councilors are hellbent on forcing teens and seniors into unnatural friendships via cohabi- tation. For every budding Senior -Teen friendship I'm sure the brand new library will suffice. This is a weird idea. Report 2- Appendix' 25 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE Survey Results - Star Nursery Site Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 1 Much nicer location and closer to my Dad. Bartell's seems to attract panhandler's. 2 not as close to pac hwy 3 It is a much better location when it comes to build- ing grading, permits, etc. I guarantee you will run into many more conflicts and competing interests with the Bartell pad like parking will be a huge problem. We already have that problem around SHAG. 4 Access to nature on site and ability to design a build- ing that integrates with surroundings.More land to work with. Better collaborative space. Opportunity to improve access in the area. No need to cross a busy street. No abutment to apart- ments. There are safety issues with the Bartell pad businesses. 5 More outdoor space for recreation, gardening, and it is closer to FHS. More area to work with Larger lot. More parking. 6 7 8 Better spatiality, better appearance, and better safety. 9 bartells area too busy not safe 10 It has trees. More flexibility on design layout. 11 There is something about locating on a site that held living plants that appeals for the roots and branches (metaphor for elders and youth) tha sounds right to me. I also like the quieter location. 12 City -owned so more flexibility for decision-making, large site and closest to schools. However, Bartell's site is also good be a center could bring more positive, active elements to that part of town. 26rt 2- Appendix 140 This is much needed and oh so long overdue, thanks for all your efforts around this project. Looking forward to using the space! the bigger the better Star Nursery location will more a part of the residential community. I hope to be able to become part of it and support intergenerational projects. Thank you for considering this joint center. The city owns the property and it has a larger footprint The Star site seems to be larger, and is located where its parking will be only for the center and not shared with retail customers. The Bartell site is also more crowded and will be part of a retail center, which seems to invite parking conflicts. Having the center in a residential area also seems more appealing, with easier access and with a non-commercial atmosphere, like the TCC. It only happens to be closer to Allentown where we live, which is only a personal reason deserv- ing no more influence than nearness for others living closer to the Bartell site. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? This location seems to make sense, close to Shag s as and the Tukwila Pool! Do like the possible location of building fire station on the original site at Star Nurs- ery and the Teen senior center on the fire station site across from Foster Larger lot size which would allow a bigger single story building, good for seniors. City already owns this property. bec it is big and the oter one is small I choose the Former Star Nursery site because the space is bigger. its closer to the schools Quick access for teen (easy access from the High School/Middle School). Plenty of room for senior parking. Crossing TIB to the Bartell's will be dangerous for teens and seniors. I'm kind of "late on the take", so my apologies for re- peating no doubt well-worn questions: How is the Teen and Senior Center serving different needs than the TCC? Why isn't the new building just considered an an- nex of the TCC? -- like "TCC West Annex". And if it does differ appreciably, what does this mean functionally? If it's for teens, does this imply it is a kind of library ex- tension with computers and study or meeting rooms? For seniors, will it have a different exercise studio with therapeutic equipment, or a suite of craft or gathering rooms? And how was it deemed congruous to have it serve cohorts of folks at far ends of the life spectrum in the same complex? Will it have a gym or an exercise yard? Kids need a place to play. Is there a large enough area for outside activities? How about a performance venue where kids and oldies can put on plays and hear presentations? It is an exciting project, in any case, and I look forward to its completion and value to our corn- munity. it is cloos near me and the oterh one is not Nothing ready to see what it is going to look like after it is built. no. Report 2- Appendix' �17 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 20 I chose this because in my opinion I feel like there is not that many community place area going on around there and so its also easier for people living close by there to check it out. I think its kinda easier for alot of people because they live like few blocks and we want to help build up the community by not only locating at somewhere there is a lot of community buildings so close to one another like the Tukwila library, but also looking at the area so lots of people have a good chance. 21 this is big 22 idk Nothing else no idk 23 Very close to the students and is not in a parking lot. It will be a great place for teen to spend their time there. 24 because its a bigger space so that way many rooms can nothing be in. 25 because it is closer to a lot of people nothing 26 Because its not a busy place and it looks like it is nothing enough land to built on Z7 no i do not no 28 The space looks bigger. Nothing. 29 It's much larger, so there'd more space and it's also closer to the middle and high school aswell. 30 its more space its not in a crowded area and its not in a parking lot 31 i feel like this site has more room to use. choose former star nursery site its good0 32 Well it looks more quiet then to put it near a road Nothing else. that's busy in my way of seeing it. 33 because it looks big but although it would be kinda far well there is nothing else to say. for students here in showalter middle school 34 i think if you put it in the parking lot it might make the n/a parking lot overcrowded. 35 I choose the Former Star Nusery Site because i think it will be a more open space and bigger. 36 More room and at an accurate location 37 It looks like it has more room Nothing else :) 38 because it looks bigger it should have a turf field 1 28rt 2- Appendix 142 there is more space dont really now I just think it might be a bigger area than the other location A kitchen garden, and chicken coop would be a great multi generational opportunity. An dedicated art room, with an open drop in policy would be great concept. various artists in residence could have open house format , for all ages. Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? because former star nursery site is bigger than partial bartell pad because it closer to my home City owned land more expansion on property close to high school -walkable Nicer area. Size. The Star nursery site has much greater opportu- nities. A skatepark ? A garden ? A covered basketball court ? And room for possible growth, if the space wasn't completely utilized initially. Lower crime area It should be placed away from the international blvd as teens are going to attend. International has a large transient population that could do the opposite and bring kids into that lifestyle. The site should be at the Nursery. That is obvious because there is more room. We need space for park- ing also, including a lot of handicap parking. It is in a quieter area, not as much traffic. And maybe room for an outdoor barbeque area for both seniors and teens. A couple of rooms, one for seniors and one for teens too. If a second floor is in the plans please make sure there are bathrooms on both floors! nothing else i would like to say i already said why i liked it better than the other nothing nothing at all I am a person who has a hard time mak- ing decisions so I believe you'll listen to people who have more ideas and much more convincing opinions nothing either location is fine Sidewalks needed also crosswalk on 42nd easy flat entrance security/police patrolled extra outdoor lightening keep impact on neighbor to a minimum -noise -traffic control Thank you! Great idea Because of the new senior housing on the east side of the International Blvd., it would be easier and safer access for a lot of seniors, to go to the Nursery site. The teens would also have easier access to the nursery site too because of the high school being so close. The corner where the Bartell pad is, is way too small. There is much more gang and drug problems in that area. I am a senior and live close by and will not be in that area at night. I feel very uncomfortable there even during the day. Report 2- Appendix' 29 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 49 This area is large enough to include more natural and native elements which provides the opportunity for teens and seniors to enjoy our natural environment, yet still be close to international Blvd. 50 Neighborhood setting, larger area 51 I like that it is off the main street. I don't feel safe having it on International Blvd. where there is a lot of crime. You don't want people afraid to go to the center. 52 A more private, dedicated space with less outside traf- fic and interfearance and possibly better parking. 53 I can see pros and cons to Both but might be good to develop other areas beyond the "urban core" and plus there is more green space potential. could the huge bartell's parking lot still be turned into something else down the road? It's way too big and needs to be developed in my opinion with either apartments or otherwise. 54 Vi no On tru'ang trung hoc pho thong hon 55 I think the teen center should be near the schools to maximize utilization. The site is also larger. Develop- ment near Bartells is better suited for commercial de- velopment. There have also been a number of violent crimes in that area recently. 56 Looks safer 8Ort 2- Appendix 144 Mental health plays a big part in our everyday lives and the center being surrounded by a natural and native scenery would definitely contribute to a healthier and more relaxed life. I don't believe the Bartell location can provide this due to it's limited space and it being surrounded by vehicle passages. I think having it in more of a residential area is key to everyone feeling comfortable to go there. Less traffic in that area is also a plus. Seniors are often fearful of driv- ing and in the other location there are multiple busi- nesses that would be competing for parking. Stressful! Depending on plans for usage, are the different age groups compatible enough to get maximum use and value for the investment? Transit and being walkable to get there seems key, star nursery still seems accessible enough with great sig- nage, bike and car parking and welcome areas. Vi tri nen trong khuon vien gan tru'ang hoc va khu nha cao nien. Cac hoat dong cua trung tam nen yeu eau thanh vien lien quan den hoc sinh va cao nien de moi ngu'ai trao doi kinh nghiem song va ton trong Ian nhau Excellent idea. Can't wait. Why change it? I like where it is. But get the cameras working. Because the former Star Nursery site would allow for outdoor space and activities and the Bartells pad would not. I feel that well thought out outdoor space for both the teens and the seniors is very important. The Bartells site feels so cold and uninviting and I don't see of any way to make it feel any different. Both the teens and the seniors need a space that was though - fully planned not just dumped into an available space in a parking lot. If I was using the space I would not feel that whoever planned it really cared. 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? Open space access and the City owns the property. It's larger, has more room to build, and it's in a quieter area, which is probably not an advantage as far as the neighbors are concerned. It's away from the congestion of the corners at 144th and International Blvd. On the other hand, it's farther to walk from a bus stop for seniors or teens who don't drive to be able to ac- cess easily and quickly. And the Bartell's site has a park across the street where family's could spend time while waiting for seniors or teens. Hmmm. Advantages and disadvantages to both. Only that I hope a lot of planning includes input from teens and seniors to find out what their vision would be if they were the ones building it. Artwork and staff should reflect the community. I'm glad to hear that it was important that no one be displaced in order to site this center. Not knowing where the other locations options are, I really don't have anything further to say about the location issue. I do, however, have something to say about the func- tion of the Center. Somehow I missed every one of the 65 meetings, and I apologize for that - it simply wasn't on my radar. If it hasn't already been requested or no- ticed, I would like to suggest 3 zones for the building - 1 where teens can be as active and as noisy as they want, 1 where the seniors can be as active and as quiet as they want, and one where both teens and seniors can interact and mix things up. I believe each age group has something valuable to contribute to the other. Parking,parking, parking. It can not be said enough. Why have a center in a spot with restricted access? Just like your library situation. Great building VERY poor parking availability. The bigger question is where is the money coming from? Are we not already far enough in debt with all our new buildings? More space. Set apart. Still center of community. Proximity to Foster HS and Cascade Middle School, larger property with more options and fixability. Away from busy International Blvd, and still close to senior lousing. t looks like it's bigger space This is such an important investment for our youth and seniors, thank you. I'd like to see that this facility have small indoor soccer and basketball hoops. Report 2- Appendixl31 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE 64 65 66 67 68 69 Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? I like the vibe of it being in a neighborhood rather than in a business center. I also like the fact that the city already owns the property and from a budget prospec- tive, that's a good idea. I like the fact that we have choices!!! I chose this site because of the location. I feel that it is in a safe walk -able area. And it is one of the largest sites. I also feel like the surrounding residents would embrace the teen/senior center. It is located away from International Blvd- a safer op- tion- and is closer to the schools and the pool while still, maintaining proximity to the senior housing- creat- ing more of a community and more cohesiveness. Ultimately it is up to the teens they will be frequenting the center. I want to make sure that they feel safe and enjoy where the teen center is located. It is important to have continuing dialogue with and include as planning partners other entities and stake- holders such as the school district, the pool district, the senior housing, and other service providers. Ensuring that all visions are thoughtfully taken into consideration and possibilities of collaboration explored will provide a more advantageous end result for our community members. For example, discussions are underway sur- rounding future plans for the 50 -year-old Tukwila Pool; would proximity to that site location and/or collabora- tion not be important considering the demographic being served: teens and seniors? Before watching the video my first choice was the Bartell's pad. I liked the idea of walking proximity to shopping and food. After watching the video my choice is the Star Nursery. 1. City owned property no need for additional funding for this component of the project, 2. Large property with mature vegetation and potential outdoor space, 3. A short distance from the highway rather than right next to the highway. 4. The hope that there would be adequate parking. 5. The closer the center is to the schools I think the higher likelihood of teens using the building. less congested, bigger site, closer to schools I think the biggest factors are the size of the property and that we already own the Star Nursery land. Bartell pad site in an area that's already too congested, less parking, smaller area Has more options and room for development. It is safer than the Bartell site. It is walking distance from the school and shag for most people. Consideration should be done during develop- ment to have seniors picked up and dropped off via the ACCESS system like they do at the Tukwila Community Center. 82rt 2- Appendix 146 There's too much activity/crime by Bartells. Because it is off of International Blvd. and a bit away from the crime that goes on in that area 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? Vo matter how hard the city has tried and is still try - ng to clean up TIB, I do not think it is a place I would vant my child or my grandparent to be near for safety easons. rhe partial Bartell pad is a weird and sus area. One of the highlights of the Nursery site is that it is more walking distance friendly to the high school and middle school. That could be a great incentive for students to actually go to the center. rhe Bartell pad area is also not appealing in general. I feel like things would get VERY busy if it was placed there. The lot is already chaotic by itself right now. There is room and even GREEN space. There is parking space available. Close to high school. Seniors will either need to be shuttled or drive park. Star nursery is best. Closer for teens to walk. roo much crime by Bartells! Very very close to schools in quiet area with biggest and I'm more familiar with the Bartell site, and am a public transit used, but after seeing the rationale for the space and location of the nursery site, I think it's more appropriate for the use proposed based on potential need for expansion. I feel the Center is going to be used more for teens than seniors so I feel being close to the schools in a safer neighborhood would be great. I see this center as more of a neighborhood center. There needs to be expansive room. Be not like the king county library. Each new library site was barely bigger than the previous. The last time library parking got worse. Need green space to sooth people nerves Putting it closer to the high school would be way better What will sensors and teens find at this center? Will their be programs daily free of charge or at very very low cost? At this point, the Bartell site would be more convenient for me when I get to be old enough to use the senior center, but hoping that by then maybe Transit links will be better by then. I think seniors will feel more comfortable/safer than at the current TCC senior site than at both of the other locations. There is too much crime in those areas of Tukwila. As a senior myself, if the senior activities move from the current TCC to either of those locations, I will likely not go. Please seriously consider the Star Nursery site because it is accessible to all of the folks living in the areas around the grocery store, yet it is a little less visible to folks who might be migrating up and down the boule- vard. It is easily accessible to both the junior high and high school students without having to put them right up in the middle of everything that tends to go on in the Bartell's area. At the Star site, people would have to go there on purpose rather than having it so visible to all in the Bartell's parking lot. Report 2- Appendix' 33 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 78 Bigger site, less chance for teens to disrupt local busi- nesses. 124 bus is close 79 It close to the main drag , but isn't a congested area ... Bartell's parking lot has a bunch of stuff always going on , semis & shady people .. we don't go there after dark unless we have to .. 80 The footprint for the Star Nursery site looks a little big- ger. More space = More opportunities! Also, it's right across from Foster High School, prime location for a teen and senior center. It looks like the senior apart- ments would be about equidistant from both. 81 Less traffic, and area will get more highlighted, is to lonely and dark the corner Because it is closeby 82 83 84 85 be it closer buz i like it I chose this one because i live near the "Bartell Pad" although this may seem irrelevant to the building site, Whenever i go to look out the window ill see this building. And i personally don't like being around seniors, And in my opinion the foster one is closer to the schools (Showalter,Foster) on the other hand the Bartells one is closer to cascade view Elementary. The star nursery one is more "Isolated" in my opinion. 86 because the bartell pad is way to close to my house and that feels like an invasion 34rt 2- Appendix 148 What is the plan for the present community center? I think close to the highschool and senior living from shag without crossing a busy street is a plus !! I'm very excited about it, as a Tukwila teacher and com- munity member. Great idea to have teenagers safe with friends doing activities together nothing no its nice That would be all. looks cool ig but i wish it would be done sooner instead of my senior year.... Why did you choose one site over the other? TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? I live near 137th and 42nd. The Star Nursery should be the site. Although 42nd has its speed issues, it is currently a calmer narrower street than TIB. The project could also bring more attention to completing sidewalk infrastruc- ture along 42nd—further improving the safety and traffic calming of the road for pedestrians. The Star Nursery heading north along 42nd towards Riverton Park would greatly benefit from sidewalks. If the CNU recommendations for TIB had been imple- mented in the zoning and traffic calming for TIB, I would have been okay with the Bartell site. But while TIB has progressed, it is still a long way from the vision of a recommended road -diet and walkable district. Parking lots still mostly line TIB. I would not ask the teens and seniors to cross both TIB and then through a car oriented parking lot to reach their services. That is a hazardous user experience. Both Foster and the SHAG are east of TIB and should have a center that is accessible without crossing multiple death traps. Bigger site, close to schools, city owns it. It has more options for open / green space. In addition it already has mature landscape and a driveway off of 139th. There is also fencing already around much of the property Roomier ;-) i.e. I don't see potential parking issues such as I SUSPECT will occur at the Partial Bartell pad. Because it's more deeply embedded in the neighbor- hood and accessible to a portion of the neighborhood low on services. I like it's proximity to the two high schools, and the fact that we can finally use this long neglected space for something positive. The space is large with potential for awesome outdoor activities. If the Bartell location is chosen. Please pursue the CNU recommendations in full force. Let's prioritize the area for the residents that live here and not for people just passing through. Think about getting some transportation options to the site, for example, rerouting of route 128. It would allow teens to walk from the school without having to cross TIB as well as better parking for senior vans At the risk of repeating myself I do like very much the idea of a Teen and Senior Center as the Teens certainly have the energy and enthusiasm and us older folks have (allegedly;-) those life experiences we can share! I like it along TIB like this. Report 2- Appendix' 35 TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- STAR NURSERY SITE Why did you choose one site over the other? What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? 93 more centered in community and more of a neighbor- hood feel that will foster greater community connec- tion. 94 I don't like that the other site is right on Pachwy such a busy road. 95 Less traffic and peaceful. 96 There is increasingly shady happenings that go down in the barrels/Walgreens parking lot. I am not sure if it would be the safest location. 97 This site is essentially right next to Foster HS and very close by to Showalter MS. I strongly believe this site would be best for access in terms of transportation. I believe that the Partial Bartell Pad is not a good choice because it'll Intervene with the apartment complex right next to the site and the apartments nearby. 98 Close to home 99 Nice area 100 Doesn't sit on a busy street (Tukwila Int'I Blvd) plus appears to be a larger facility with potential for more activities. SHAG residents have access to transporta- tion with the use of the SHAG van 101 Larger space, can have more parking 102 It's closer to Foster high school, it's a safer area with more green around it. 103 1041 live in the mobile home park one block west of the former star nursery site. I would prefer to keep young- er and older folks on this side of Tukwila International Boulevard, especially in the evenings when it gets dark. Despite new crosswalks, drivers are still less than cautious. Plus having more young people and older people will make the neighborhood feel more neigh- borly. 105 Lot of space and convenient spot 1 86rt 2- Appendix 150 Next to Bartell. Access is important. Having the ability to pick up and drop off seniors and teens from all over the city is criti- cal. Otherwise the people who need it most might not be able to get there Must have lots of parking I feel this facility would be a great addition to this com- munity and give children and seniors a safe place to interact with each other The area around the partial Bartell pad can be a little sketchy at night. Some drinking and smoking weed in the park across the street after dark. Convenient spot and lot bigger space and location instead of partial bartell pad location. TUKWILA TEEN & SENIOR CENTER SURVEY RESULTS- NEITHER SITE CHOSEN SURVEY RESULTS - NEITHER SITE CHOSEN 1 Why did you choose one site over the other? 2 I don't really think either would be a good place to have the teen and senior center. The one by the Walgreens would be a lot of stress on shootings or break ins and the other one is in a neighborhood r 3 I think neither because they both will cause more traffic and accidents because of all the blind spots each corner has, and why would you put a center in the middle of a neighborhood and a school where kids might just go and leave school to just hang around. What else would you like to tell us about locating the Teen & Senior Center? -he city cannot afford another building that.we have o maintain and hire staff to run it. Terry Lund I think somewhere close to the schools and the com- munity center or somewhere the bus can drop off Bad idea just like with all the senior centers. Report 2- Appendix' 37 138 S 0 J McGRANAHAN architects Van Ness Feldman «P January 24, 2022 Ms. Rachel Bianchi Deputy City Administrator City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Email: Rachel.Bianchi@TukwilaWA.gov RE: Tukwila Teen and Senior Center Project Dear Ms. Bianchi: 1191 Second Avenue, Suite 1800 Seattle, WA 98101-2996 206-623-9372 vnf.com Thank you and Nate for our telephone conversation on January 14 regarding Ron and Nancy Lamb's proposed donation for a technology/media lab in the proposed Tukwila Teen and Senior Center ("Center"). As we discussed on our call, this letter provides some additional details regarding the donation. Ron and I will plan to attend (either in person or virtually) the Council meetings when site selection will be on the Council agenda to answer any additional questions. Please keep us posted on when those agenda dates are finalized. We understand that the tentative dates are February 14, February 28 and potentially March 7. Purpose and Vision for the Donation: As described in our first letter, the Lambs are interested in establishing a tech/media lab at the Center. The Lambs are long-time residents of the City. Ron in particular has had a long connection with technology and education. After graduating from Foster High in 1966, he attended Highline College, where he had a student job in the computer center working with the IBM 360 mainframe computer. He went on to earn a master's degree from the University of Washington and eventually had a career as an editor at Microsoft Press, the trade book publishing division of Microsoft, from 1984 to 1998. While still at Microsoft, he was chair of the school board when the new Foster High building was constructed. After leaving Microsoft, he led the successful campaign for the first technology levy ballot measure for the Tukwila School District. The Lambs believe their $1 million donation can be used to attract other sources of money (corporate donations, local match for grant applications, etc.) for both capital and operational needs for the tech/media lab and its ongoing operations. The Lambs see technology as not only vital for life skills and career training for Tukwila's youth, but also an exciting, transformative bridge for connecting the generations. The Lambs envision teens and seniors working side by side in a wide range of computer, technology and media programs. Because the completion of the Center is several years away, during which time technology may advance, it is not possible to spell out a 775511 139 Ms. Rachel Bianchi - 2 - January 24, 2022 "shopping list" of equipment and programs at this time. However, examples of uses and services in the Center might include a recording studio, audio and video editing suites and computers. Ron has already begun some initial exploratory outreach with David Bley, CEO of the Seattle Foundation, who has specific personal experience with young adult technology programs in south King County. Ron has also been in contact with Jen Lee, senior advisor of the giving campaign at the Seattle Foundation, as well as the English Language Learners teacher at Foster High School. Further exploration of collaboration could include the Technology Access Foundation and others with the experience, skills and vision to accomplish the lab's purpose. The overall objective is to use this donation offer to stimulate broad interest and investment; finding program sponsors or partners who will invest in the program for the long term. These partners might come from the private sector or the non-profit sector. Should the City select the Bartell site and thereby accept this offer, the Lambs expect others to lead a collaborative effort to better define program capital and operations needs and to develop a plan to best leverage this donation to maximize other contribution sources. The Bartell Site: As noted in our prior letter, the Lambs' donation is dependent on the City Council selecting the Bartell site for the new Center. The Lambs believe the Bartell site is a superior location for several reasons. The Bartell site is immediately across the street from Cascade View Park. That existing park site can provide some of the outdoor recreational amenities that otherwise might not fit on the Star Nursery site to meet articulated Center program objectives. Developing those outdoor recreational amenities at the Star Nursery site would likely be at added cost and, potentially, diversion of limited funds from other Center program objectives. The Bartell site is closer to the Tukwila International Boulevard, and is already more centrally located within the TIB District planning area (the Star Nursery site is not). The Bartell site has better access to existing transit routes (King County Metro bus routes 124 and 128). To the east, 42nd Avenue forms a natural boundary between the higher intensity TIB District and the low-density residential uses on the east side (Star Nursery side) of 42nd Avenue. Furthermore, the Bartell site is closer to Tukwila Village and the proposed HealthPoint facility, where social services are expected to be offered. The Bartell site is more visible, is already developed (not raw, former agricultural land) and has already addressed surface water and other development issues. These features make the Bartell site a better choice for a successful Center, including the proposed tech/media lab. It makes most sense to locate this Center where the City has already committed to future investment to support future City growth—helping the City achieve its TIB District objective to make this area "a complete neighborhood and destination," rather than an arterial highway leading to "somewhere else." (Tukwila Comprehensive Plan at 8-2). Investment in a new Center at this location further supports the existing diverse, multicultural community that already exists in this part of the City. The Star Nursery site, located on the eastern edge, outside of the TIB planning area would not help the City achieve the TIB planning and development objectives the same way the Bartell site would. 775511 140 Ms. Rachel Bianchi - 3 - January 24, 2022 Timing & Milestones: We understand that it is likely to take several years before the City has completed all work necessary to design and obtain funding sufficient to proceed with the Center project. Since the Lambs' donation is not targeted at front-end design costs, but rather the lab construction, equipment and operations costs that will only occur once the City has obtained other project funding/financing, we discussed the concept of a Memorandum of Agreement or Donation Agreement ("Agreement") to be drafted and executed if and when the City Council selects the Bartell site. This Agreement would set various interim action steps or milestones that, if achieved by the City, would extend the duration of the Lambs' donation offer. We recognize that at least some of these milestones are dependent on circumstances outside of the City's control, including possible conflicting priorities for City funds, and thus there would be no adverse consequence from failure to achieve an interim milestone, other than expiration of the Lambs' donation offer. To illustrate, some of the interim milestones might include: • City Council selection of the Bartell site. • City either acquires Bartell site or obtains binding commitment right to acquire Bartell site. • City approves 30% design funding and commences design to refine project costs and feasibility. • City approves funding to complete 100% design. • Construction Permits issued and Construction commences. This list of milestones is meant as an example of the concept, rather than a complete or exhaustive list. The intent is that the Lambs' donation offer would be extended each time a milestone is reached for some agreed, reasonable duration to achieve the next milestone and so forth, with some overall outside date. We can discuss this concept in more detail if the City Council chooses to proceed. The Lambs appreciate the City's interest in further exploring the purpose, intent and scope of their donation offer. We look forward to the Council's consideration, and certainly hope the Council chooses to accept the donation and select the Bartell site. The Lambs are eager to continue working with the City to develop a tech/media lab at the new Center that will be the envy of the region. Sincerely, P ay P. Derr Attorney for Ron and Nancy Lamb JPD:dh Enclosure cc: Allan Ekberg, Mayor David Cline, City Administrator Nate Robinson, Teen Recreation Program Specialist Tukwila City Councilmembers Ron and Nancy Lamb 775511 141 142 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS 4.Initials ITEM No. 44, Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review Ql o 2/14/22 RB 2906 ITEM INFORMATION STAFF SPONSOR: R. BIANCHI & N. GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 2/14/22 AGENDA ITEM TITLE House Bill 1782 "Missing Middle Housing" CATEGORY 11 Mfg Discussion Date 2/14/22 ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor 1 Admin Svcs 11 DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ Pe R ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S The State Legislature is considering legislation that would require new additions to local SUMMARY jurisdictions' comprehensive plans, provides additional technical assistance to jurisdictions and require accessory dwelling units (ADUs), detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs), duplexes, and triplexes within a half mile walking distance of transit. This legislation has many sponsors and is a governor's request bill. Staff is bringing this to the Council for its awareness, highlighting parts of the legislation that will most impact the City of Tukwila. REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&lnfrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPoNsoR/ADMIN. Administrative Services/Department of Community Development COMMITTEE N/A COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 2/14/22 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 2/14/22 Informational Memorandum dated 2/7/22 Subsitute House Bill 1782 Half -mile transit walkshed map 143 144 TO: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM City Council FROM: Rachel Bianchi, Deputy City Administrator Nora Gierloff, Department of Community Development Director CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: February 7, 2022 SUBJECT: House Bill 1782 "Missing Middle Housing" ISSUE The Washington State Legislature is considering legislation that would require significant new additions to local jurisdictions' comprehensive plans, provides additional technical assistance to jurisdictions developing comprehensive plans, and permits middle housing types including accessory dwelling units (ADUs), detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs), duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, cottage housing, stacked flats, townhouses and courtyard apartments within a half mile walking distance of major transit stops. This legislation has many sponsors and is a governor's request bill. Staff is bringing this to the Council for its awareness, highlighting parts of the legislation that will most impact the City of Tukwila. BACKGROUND House Bill 1782 adds a variety of topics to jurisdictions' comprehensive plans, specifically in the mandatory Housing, Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements. In the capital facilities plan, cities must identify capital facilities, deficiencies, forecasted facilities needs and a six-year plan to finance such capital facilities with sources of public money for such purposes and a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs. Parks and recreation facilities must be included in the capital facilities plan element. Any city between 20,000 and 100,000 in population may only require one off street parking spot for every three bedrooms on the lot, unless the street on which the lot is on has no on -street parking. ANALYSIS If passed, these mandatory zoning code and comprehensive plan changes will require additional analysis, outreach, and staff time to meet the new requirements. The bill requires that the State provide funding by June 2022 for jurisdictions to make these changes or the bill will become void. The required zoning changes will affect all single-family neighborhoods in Tukwila. The current version of the legislation stipulates that cities over 20,000 must allow ADUs, DADUs, and duplexes on lots 4,500 square feet or more, and triplexes on corner lots of 5,000 square feet or more on single family zoned land further than a half -mile walk from a major transit stop. Properties within a half -mile walking distance of transit must allow all missing middle housing types. A map of how these proposed density requirements will affect Tukwila is attached to this memo. Alternatively, cities with more than 20,000 residents may choose to alter local zoning codes to provide an average minimum net density equivalent to 33 units per acre within a half -mile walk of transit. 145 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Information only. ATTACHMENTS Substitute House Bill 1782 Map of Tukwila's half mile transit walkshed 146 H-2500.1 SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1782 State of Washington 67th Legislature 2022 Regular Session By House Local Government (originally sponsored by Representatives Bateman, Macri, Berry, Fitzgibbon, Ryu, Dolan, Wicks, J. Johnson, Barkis, Davis, Goodman, Gregerson, Morgan, Peterson, Ramel, Simmons, Slatter, Bergquist, Valdez, Thai, Duerr, Stonier, Riccelli, Ormsby, Taylor, Harris -Talley, Hackney, Kloba, and Frame; by request of Office of the Governor) READ FIRST TIME 02/03/22. 1 AN ACT Relating to creating additional middle housing near 2 transit and in areas traditionally dedicated to single-family 3 detached housing; amending RCW 36.70A.030, 36.70A.190, and 4 36.70A.070; adding new sections to chapter 36.70A RCW; adding a new 5 section to chapter 64.38 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 64.90 6 RCW; and creating new sections. 7 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: 8 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. The legislature finds that every 9 Washington resident should have access to safe, healthy, secure, and 10 affordable housing; and, that it is the responsibility of the state 11 and all cities and counties to plan for all current and future 12 residents within their jurisdictions of all income levels, races, and 13 ethnicities to have such housing. As our state population grows, the 14 legislature recognizes the need for the state's housing supply to 15 grow and adapt to meet the needs of all households, regardless of 16 age, race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, 17 country of origin, or income, including families with children, 18 seniors, and people who have a disability. 19 The legislature finds that adding a built environment subelement 20 to comprehensive plans is desirable as the legislature mandates 21 increasing density for middle housing, particularly in larger cities, p. 1 SHB 1782 47 1 pursuant to this act, in order to protect and improve the physical 2 and mental health of communities with less access to open space and 3 tree canopy, reduce health risks of extreme heat events related to 4 climate change, or reduce disproportionately higher risks of exposure 5 to air pollution or other environmental contaminants. 6 The legislature finds that it has duties under existing statutes, 7 including chapter 36.70A RCW, to provide funding for all cities and 8 counties to plan for new required elements of comprehensive plans 9 including, but not limited to, planning for affordable housing and 10 meeting the goals of the state in reducing our contribution to 11 climate change. The legislature recognizes that it has been difficult 12 to project what the costs may be of planning for new elements 13 pursuant to this act. It is the intent of the legislature that the 14 evaluation provided for in RCW 36.70A.190, and updates to it 15 periodically thereafter, shall determine what constitutes adequate 16 funding for planning for new elements of comprehensive plans and for 17 the adoption of implementing ordinances and development regulations 18 pursuant to chapter 36.70A RCW for future comprehensive plan updates. 19 Sec. 2. RCW 36.70A.030 and 2021 c 254 s 6 are each amended to 20 read as follows: 21 Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in 22 this section apply throughout this chapter. 23 (1) "Adopt a comprehensive land use plan" means to enact a new 24 comprehensive land use plan or to update an existing comprehensive 25 land use plan. 26 (2) "Affordable housing" means, unless the context clearly 27 indicates otherwise, residential housing whose monthly costs, 28 including utilities other than telephone, do not exceed thirty 29 percent of the monthly income of a household whose income is: 30 (a) For rental housing, sixty percent of the median household 31 income adjusted for household size, for the county where the 32 household is located, as reported by the United States department of 33 housing and urban development; or 34 (b) For owner -occupied housing, eighty percent of the median 35 household income adjusted for household size, for the county where 36 the household is located, as reported by the United States department 37 of housing and urban development. 38 (3) "Agricultural land" means land primarily devoted to the 39 commercial production of horticultural, viticultural, floricultural, p. 2 SHB 1782 148 dairy, apiary, vegetable, or animal products or of berries, grain, hay, straw, turf, seed, Christmas trees not subject to the excise tax imposed by RCW 84.33.100 through 84.33.140, finfish in upland hatcheries, or livestock, and that has long-term commercial significance for agricultural production. (4) "City" means any city or town, including a code city. (5) "Comprehensive land use plan," "comprehensive plan," or "plan" means a generalized coordinated land use policy statement of the governing body of a county or city that is adopted pursuant to this chapter. (6) "Cottage housing" means four or more residential units on a lot with a common open space that is either: (a) Owned in common; or (b) Has units owned as condominium units with property owned in common and a minimum of 20 percent of the lot size as open space. (7) "Courtyard apartments" means up to four attached dwelling units arranged on two or three sides of a central courtyard or lawn area. (8) "Critical areas" include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) Wetlands; (b) areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; areas. (d) frequently flooded areas; "Fish and wildlife habitat and (e) geologically hazardous conservation areas" does not include such artificial features or constructs as irrigation delivery systems, irrigation infrastructure, irrigation ditches that lie within the boundaries of and canals, or drainage are maintained by a port district or an irrigation district or company. (((7))) (9) "Department" means the department of commerce. ((--8-)-)) (10) "Development regulations" or "regulation" means the controls placed on development or land use activities by a county or city, including, but not limited to, zoning ordinances, critical areas ordinances, shoreline master programs, official controls, planned unit development ordinances, subdivision ordinances, and binding site plan ordinances together with any amendments thereto. A development regulation does not include a decision to approve a project permit application, as defined in RCW 36.70B.020, even though the decision may be expressed in a resolution legislative body of the county or city. (((9))) (11) "Emergency housing" or ordinance of the means temporary indoor accommodations for individuals or families who are homeless or at p. 3 SHB 1782 149 1 imminent risk of becoming homeless that is intended to address the 2 basic health, food, clothing, and personal hygiene needs of 3 individuals or families. Emergency housing may or may not require 4 occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. 5 (((10))) (12) "Emergency shelter" means a facility that provides 6 a temporary shelter for individuals or families who are currently 7 homeless. Emergency shelter may not require occupants to enter into a 8 lease or an occupancy agreement. Emergency shelter facilities may 9 include day and warming centers that do not provide overnight 10 accommodations. 11 (((11))) (13) "Extremely low-income household" means a single 12 person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted 13 income is at or below thirty percent of the median household income 14 adjusted for household size, for the county where the household is 15 located, as reported by the United States department of housing and 16 urban development. 17 (((12))) (14) "Forestland" means land primarily devoted to 18 growing trees for long-term commercial timber production on land that 19 can be economically and practically managed for such production, 20 including Christmas trees subject to the excise tax imposed under RCW 21 84.33.100 through 84.33.140, and that has long-term commercial 22 significance. In determining whether forestland is primarily devoted 23 to growing trees for long-term commercial timber production on land 24 that can be economically and practically managed for such production, 25 the following factors shall be considered: (a) The proximity of the 26 land to urban, suburban, and rural settlements; (b) surrounding 27 parcel size and the compatibility and intensity of adjacent and 28 nearby land uses; (c) long-term local economic conditions that affect 29 the ability to manage for timber production; and (d) the availability 30 of public facilities and services conducive to conversion of 31 forestland to other uses. 32 (((13))) (15) "Freight rail dependent uses" means buildings and 33 other infrastructure that are used in the fabrication, processing, 34 storage, and transport of goods where the use is dependent on and 35 makes use of an adjacent short line railroad. Such facilities are 36 both urban and rural development for purposes of this chapter. 37 "Freight rail dependent uses" does not include buildings and other 38 infrastructure that are used in the fabrication, processing, storage, 39 and transport of coal, liquefied natural gas, or "crude oil" as 40 defined in RCW 90.56.010. 150 p. 4 SHB 1782 (((14))) (16) "Geologically hazardous areas" means areas that because of their susceptibility to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events, are not suited to the siting of commercial, residential, or industrial development consistent with public health or safety concerns. (((15))) (17) "Long-term commercial significance" includes the growing capacity, productivity, and soil composition of the land for long-term commercial production, in consideration with the land's proximity to population areas, and the possibility of more intense uses of the land. (((16))) (18) "Low-income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below eighty percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for the county where the reported by development. (((17))) (19) the United States department "Major transit stop" means: household is located, as of housing and urban (a) A stop on a high capacity transportation system funded or expanded under the provisions of chapter 81.104 RCW; (b) Commuter rail stops; (c) Stops on rail or fixed guideway systems, including transitways; (d) Stops on bus rapid transit routes or routes that run on high occupancy vehicle lanes; (e) Stops for a bus or other transit mode providing actual fixed route service at intervals of at least 15 minutes for at least five hours during the peak hours of operation on weekdays; or (f) Washington state ferry terminals. (20) "Middle housing" means duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, attached and detached accessory dwelling units, cottage housing, stacked flats, townhouses, and courtyard apartments. (21) "Minerals" include gravel, sand, and valuable metallic substances. (((18))) (22) "Moderate -income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below 120 percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban development. p. 5 SHB 1782 51 152 (((19))) (23) "Permanent supportive housing" is subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy and utilizes admissions practices designed to use lower barriers to entry than would be typical for other subsidized or unsubsidized rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history, and personal behaviors. Permanent supportive housing is paired with on- site or off-site voluntary services designed to support a person living with a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing with community-based health care, treatment, or employment services. Permanent supportive housing is subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW. (((20))) (24) "Public facilities" include highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting streets, systems, signals, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer parks and recreational facilities, and schools. (((21))) (25) "Public services" include fire protection and suppression, law enforcement, public health, education, recreation, environmental protection, and other governmental services (((22))) (26) "Recreational land" means land so designated under RCW 36.70A.1701 and that, immediately prior to this designation, was designated as agricultural land of long-term commercial significance under RCW 36.70A.170. Recreational land must have playing fields and supporting facilities existing before July 1, 2004, for sports played on grass playing fields. (((23))) (27) "Rural character" refers to the patterns of land use and development established by a county in the rural element of its comprehensive plan: (a) In which open space, the natural landscape, and vegetation predominate over the built environment; (b) That foster traditional rural lifestyles, rural -based economies, and opportunities to both live and work in rural areas; (c) That provide visual landscapes that are traditionally found in rural areas and communities; (d) That are compatible with the use of the land by wildlife and for fish and wildlife habitat; roads, traffic systems, p. 6 SHB 1782 1 (e) That reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land 2 into sprawling, low-density development; 3 (f) That generally do not require the extension of urban 4 governmental services; and 5 (g) That are consistent with the protection of natural surface 6 water flows and groundwater and surface water recharge and discharge 7 areas. 8 (((24))) (28) "Rural development" refers to development outside 9 the urban growth area and outside agricultural, forest, and mineral 10 resource lands designated pursuant to RCW 36.70A.170. Rural 11 development can consist of a variety of uses and residential 12 densities, including clustered residential development, at levels 13 that are consistent with the preservation of rural character and the 14 requirements of the rural element. Rural development does not refer 15 to agriculture or forestry activities that may be conducted in rural 16 areas. 17 (((25))) (29) "Rural governmental services" or "rural services" 18 include those public services and public facilities historically and 19 typically delivered at an intensity usually found in rural areas, and 20 may include domestic water systems, fire and police protection 21 services, transportation and public transit services, and other 22 public utilities associated with rural development and normally not 23 associated with urban areas. Rural services do not include storm or 24 sanitary sewers, except as otherwise authorized by RCW 36.70A.110(4). 25 (((26))) (30) "Short line railroad" means those railroad lines 26 designated class II or class III by the United States surface 27 transportation board. 28 (((27))) (31) "Stacked flat" means dwelling units in a two or 29 three story residential building on a residential zoned lot in which 30 each floor may be separately rented or owned and is a discrete 31 dwelling unit. 32 (32) "Townhouses" means dwelling units constructed in a row of 33 two or more attached units, where each dwelling unit is located on an 34 individual lot or parcel and shares at least one common wall with an 35 adjacent unit. 36 (33) "Urban governmental services" or "urban services" include 37 those public services and public facilities at an intensity 38 historically and typically provided in cities, specifically including 39 storm and sanitary sewer systems, domestic water systems, street 40 cleaning services, fire and police protection services, public p. 7 SHB 1782 153 154 transit services, and other public utilities associated with urban areas and normally not associated with rural areas. (((28))) (34) "Urban growth" refers to growth that makes intensive use of land for the location of buildings, structures, and impermeable surfaces to such a degree as to be incompatible with the primary use of land for the production of food, other agricultural products, or fiber, or the extraction of mineral resources, rural uses, rural development, and natural resource lands designated pursuant to RCW 36.70A.170. A pattern of more intensive rural development, as provided in RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d), is not urban growth. When allowed to spread over wide areas, urban growth typically requires urban governmental services. "Characterized by urban growth" refers to land having urban growth located on it, or to land located in relationship to an area with urban growth on it as to be appropriate for urban growth. (((29))) (35) "Urban growth areas" means those areas designated by a county pursuant to RCW 36.70A.110. (((30))) (36) "Very low-income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below fifty percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban development. (((31))) (37) "Wetland" or "wetlands" means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface and duration sufficient to circumstances do support, a adapted for life in saturated include swamps, marshes, bogs, water or groundwater at a frequency support, and that under normal prevalence of vegetation typically soil conditions. Wetlands generally and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands. p. 8 SHB 1782 1 Sec. 3. RCW 36.70A.190 and 1991 sp.s. c 32 s 3 are each amended 2 to read as follows: 3 (1) The department shall establish a program of technical and 4 financial assistance and incentives to counties and cities to 5 encourage and facilitate the adoption and implementation of 6 comprehensive plans and development regulations throughout the state. 7 (2)(a) The department shall evaluate the costs for counties and 8 cities to review and revise their comprehensive plans to assure 9 compliance with this chapter. This evaluation must be completed by 10 December 1, 2022, and updated every five years thereafter. The 11 department shall provide a report of the evaluation to the 12 legislature upon completion of the evaluation. The evaluation must 13 include, at a minimum, the costs for each general jurisdiction size 14 and type, and the costs to complete various types of planning 15 requirements, including: 16 (i) Meeting the requirements of a new goal in RCW 36.70A.020; 17 (ii) Meeting the requirements of a new comprehensive plan element 18 in RCW 36.70A.070; 19 (iii) Updating a critical areas ordinance; 20 (iv) Updating a shoreline master program; 21 (v) Making a minor update to a comprehensive plan element; 22 (vi) Making a complex update to a comprehensive plan element; 23 (vii) Updating a development regulation; and 24 (viii) Implementing a new development regulation. 25 (b) The department shall consult with the Washington state 26 association of counties and the association of Washington cities as 27 part of the process for performing and completing the evaluation. 28 (c) In order to ensure that jurisdictions receive adequate 29 funding for their comprehensive plan updates, the department shall 30 distribute funds in the form of grants. 31 (d) The department shall promote equitable and meaningful 32 participation in development of comprehensive plans and development 33 regulations and shall distribute grants to community-based 34 organizations representing historically marginalized communities and 35 populations, communities with a high proportion of limited English 36 proficient speakers, and communities at elevated risk of displacement 37 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070(2) or experiencing disparately higher 38 health risks due to environmental factors related to the built 39 environment, subject to the availability of amounts appropriated by 40 the legislature for this specific purpose. p. 9 SHB 1782 55 156 (3)(a) The department shall develop a priority list and establish funding levels for planning and technical assistance grants both for counties and cities that plan under RCW 36.70A.040. Priority for assistance shall be based on a county's or city's population growth rates, commercial and industrial development rates, the existence and quality of a comprehensive plan and development regulations, and other relevant factors. (((3))) (b) The department may also contract with a public or nonprofit agency with appropriate experience in providing technical assistance and training to assist local governments related to comprehensive planning and other obligations under this chapter. (4) The department shall develop and administer a grant program to provide direct financial assistance to counties and cities for the preparation of comprehensive plans under this chapter. The department may establish provisions for county and city matching funds to conduct activities under this subsection. Grants any purpose directly related to the preparation comprehensive plan as the county or city and may be expended for of a county or city the department may agree, including, without limitation, the conducting of surveys, inventories and other data gathering and management activities, the retention of planning consultants, contracts with regional councils for planning and related services, and other related purposes. (((4))) (5) The department shall establish a program of technical assistance: (a) Utilizing department staff, the staff of other state agencies, and the technical resources of counties and cities to help in the development of comprehensive plans required under this chapter. The department shall make available planners and department regulations development regulations; (b) Additional specialists to cities and counties to assist in the of comprehensive plans and related technical assistance may include, development but is not ((bc)) limited to, ((modcl land use ordinanccs,)) regional education and training programs((,—)) and information for local and regional inventories; ((and (b))) (c) Providing model ordinances to cities and counties to implement updates that are required under this chapter; and (d) Adopting by rule procedural criteria to assist counties and cities in adopting comprehensive plans and development regulations that meet the goals and requirements of this chapter. These criteria p. 10 SHB 1782 1 shall reflect regional and local variations and the diversity that 2 exists among different counties and cities that plan under this 3 chapter. 4 (((5))) _La The department shall provide mediation services to 5 resolve disputes between counties and cities regarding, among other 6 things, coordination of regional issues and designation of urban 7 growth areas. 8 ((-6-)-)) ill The department shall provide planning grants to 9 enhance citizen participation under RCW 36.70A.140. 10 Sec. 4. RCW 36.70A.070 and 2021 c 254 s 2 are each amended to 11 read as follows: 12 The comprehensive plan of a county or city that is required or 13 chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall consist of a map or maps, 14 and descriptive text covering objectives, principles, and standards 15 used to develop the comprehensive plan. The plan shall be an 16 internally consistent document and all elements shall be consistent 17 with the future land use map. A comprehensive plan shall be adopted 18 and amended with public participation as provided in RCW 36.70A.140. 19 Each comprehensive plan shall include a plan, scheme, or design for 20 each of the following: 21 (1)j A land use element designating the proposed general 22 distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land, 23 where appropriate, for agriculture, timber production, housing, 24 commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, general aviation 25 airports, public utilities, public facilities, and other land uses. 26 The land use element shall include population densities, building 27 intensities, and estimates of future population growth. The land use 28 element shall provide for protection of the quality and quantity of 29 groundwater used for public water supplies. Wherever possible, the 30 land use element should consider utilizing urban planning approaches 31 that promote physical activity. Where applicable, the land use 32 element shall review drainage, flooding, and stormwater runoff in the 33 area and nearby jurisdictions and provide guidance for corrective 34 actions to mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute waters 35 of the state, including Puget Sound or waters entering Puget Sound. 36 (b) The land use element shall include a subelement on the "built 37 environment" to protect and improve the physical and mental health of 38 residents within the portions of urban growth areas with higher 39 densities. The subelement should include provisions improving p. 11 SHB 1782 57 1 determinants of health which are equitable with residents in other 2 communities including, but not limited to, tree canopy or green open space to prevent extreme heat islands, reduction in air pollution and exposures to contaminants in homes as well as in the environment, solar energy and sunlight access. The department shall, in consultation with the department of health and the department of ecology, adopt guidance to promote these goals. The department's guidance shall also include provisions that provide for access to sunlight in residential and school spaces based on the health and learning benefits from natural lighting, and for meeting state and local goals for use of solar energy to meet climate change goals. (2) A housing element ensuring the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods that: (a) Includes an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs that identifies the number of housing units necessary to manage projected growth, as provided by the department of commerce, including: (i) Units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households; and (ii) Emergency housing, emergency shelters, and permanent supportive housing; (b) Includes a statement of goals, policies, objectives, and mandatory provisions for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing, including single-family residences, and 158 within an urban growth options including(([,])), and townhomes; (c) Identifies sufficient capacity of land for housing area boundary, moderate density housing but not limited to, duplexes, triplexes, including, but not limited to, government -assisted housing, housing for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, group homes, foster care facilities, emergency housing, emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing, and within an urban growth area boundary, consideration of duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes; (d) Makes adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community and increasing economic integration among all economic segments of the population in all areas of the jurisdiction, including: (i) Incorporating consideration for low, very low, extremely low, and moderate -income households; p. 12 SHB 1782 1 (ii) Documenting programs and actions needed to achieve housing 2 availability including gaps in local funding, barriers such as 3 development regulations, and other limitations; 4 (iii) Consideration of housing locations in relation to 5 employment location and shopping for household essentials, including 6 food and health products; and 7 (iv) Consideration of the role of accessory dwelling units in 8 meeting housing needs; 9 (e) Makes adequate provisions for middle housing options as 10 required in section 5 of this act; 11 (f) Identifies local policies and regulations that result in 12 racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing, 13 including: 14 (i) Zoning that may have a discriminatory effect; 15 (ii) Disinvestment; and 16 (iii) Infrastructure availability; 17 (((f))) (g) Identifies and implements policies and regulations to 18 address and begin to undo racially disparate impacts, displacement, 19 and exclusion in housing caused by local policies, plans, and 20 actions; 21 (({g-})) ihl Identifies areas that may be at higher risk of 22 displacement from market forces that occur with changes to zoning 23 development regulations and capital investments; ((and 24 (h))) (i) Establishes a goal and plan to adopt development 25 regulations, investments, incentives, or other programs which will 26 achieve substantial measurable progress over a 20 -year planning 27 horizon toward increased economic and racial integration in all areas 28 of the jurisdiction through programs encouraging, authorizing, 29 directly investing in, or incentivizing new affordable housing 30 options for all economic segments of the population including duplex, 31 triplex, townhomes, accessory dwelling units, multifamily housing, 32 subdivision of properties above minimum lot size, or with condominium 33 common ownership; 34 (j)(i) Establishes antidisplacement policies, with consideration 35 given to the preservation of historical and cultural communities as 36 well as investments in low, very low, extremely low, and moderate - 37 income housing; equitable development initiatives; inclusionary 38 zoning; community planning requirements; tenant protections; land 39 disposition policies; and consideration of land that may be used for 40 affordable housing. The county or city shall make a finding that p. 13 SHB 1782 59 1 comprehensive plans and development regulations affirmatively prevent 2 displacement of lower and moderate -income community members, 3 including families, in communities of interest. Such communities 4 shall be determined based on community input solicited through 5 appropriate outreach, including public meetings, in order to ensure 6 that there is no net displacement of lower and moderate -income 7 residents or people from racial, ethnic, and religious communities 8 which have been subject to discriminatory housing policies in the 9 past. 10 (ii) Any city planning under RCW 36.70A.040 that has a population 11 of 20,000 or more as of the effective date of this section, or any 12 city that is determined by the office of financial management 13 pursuant to RCW 43.62.030 to have a population of 20,000 or more at 14 least one year prior to its next comprehensive plan update, shall 15 adopt a subelement of their plan's housing element which shall ensure 16 that the jurisdiction will adopt development regulations, fees, 17 incentives, subsidies, or funded investment programs, including 18 programs funded pursuant to interlocal agreements, that are found to 19 reasonably meet the projected needs for new housing for all economic 20 segments of the region and to prevent displacement of lower income 21 residents and communities; and 22 (k) Allows subdivision of lots to increase the supply of housing 23 affordable to lower and moderate -income residents Options for 24 subdivision include allowing lot sizes as follows: 25 (i) For cities with a population over 40,000, subdivision of lots 26 to 3,200 square feet or 80 percent of the average lot on a block 27 within an urban growth area is allowed; 28 (ii) For new development on lots under 3,200 square feet in an 29 area, a special exception is required which includes public notice 30 and an opportunity to appeal pursuant to this chapter and the land 31 use petition act in chapter 36.70C RCW; and 32 (iii) For short subdivision of lots developed with more than one 33 house, ownership of the houses may be divided using the unit lot 34 subdivision process. A property containing a detached accessory 35 dwelling unit may be segregated in ownership from the principal 36 dwelling unit. 37 In counties and cities subject to the review and evaluation 38 requirements of RCW 36.70A.215, any revision to the housing element 39 shall include consideration of prior review and evaluation reports 40 and any reasonable measures identified. The housing element should p. 14 SHB 1782 160 1 link jurisdictional goals with overall county goals to ensure that 2 the housing element goals are met. 3 (3) A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An 4 inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, 5 showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a 6 forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities; (c) the 7 proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital 8 facilities; (d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such 9 capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly 10 identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a 11 requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding 12 falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use 13 element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within 14 the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. 15 Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital 16 facilities plan element. Any city that has identified a specific 17 infrastructure deficiency and utilized the process under section 6 of 18 this act shall include, as part of its capital facilities plan 19 update, actions necessary to remedy that deficiency. 20 (4) A utilities element consisting of the general location, 21 proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed 22 utilities, including, but not limited to, electrical lines, 23 telecommunication lines, and natural gas lines. 24 (5) Rural element. Counties shall include a rural element 25 including lands that are not designated for urban growth, 26 agriculture, forest, or mineral resources. The following provisions 27 shall apply to the rural element: 28 (a) Growth management act goals and local circumstances. Because 29 circumstances vary from county to county, in establishing patterns of 30 rural densities and uses, a county may consider local circumstances, 31 but shall develop a written record explaining how the rural element 32 harmonizes the planning goals in RCW 36.70A.020 and meets the 33 requirements of this chapter. 34 (b) Rural development. The rural element shall permit rural 35 development, forestry, and agriculture in rural areas. The rural 36 element shall provide for a variety of rural densities, uses, 37 essential public facilities, and rural governmental services needed 38 to serve the permitted densities and uses. To achieve a variety of 39 rural densities and uses, counties may provide for clustering, 40 density transfer, design guidelines, conservation easements, and p. 15 SHB 1782 61 162 other innovative techniques that will accommodate appropriate rural economic advancement, densities, and uses that are not characterized by urban growth and that are consistent with rural character. (c) Measures governing rural development. The rural element shall include measures that apply to rural development and protect the rural character of the area, as established by the county, by: (i) Containing or otherwise controlling rural development; (ii) Assuring visual compatibility of rural development with the surrounding rural area; (iii) Reducing the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development in the rural area; (iv) Protecting critical areas, as provided in RCW 36.70A.060, and surface water and groundwater resources; and (v) Protecting against conflicts with the use of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands designated under RCW 36.70A.170. (d) Limited areas of more intensive rural development. Subject to the requirements of this subsection and except as otherwise specifically provided in this subsection (5)(d), the rural element may allow for limited areas of more including necessary public facilities the limited area as follows: (i) Rural development consisting of the intensive rural development, and public services to serve infill, development, or redevelopment of existing commercial, industrial, residential, or mixed-use areas, whether characterized villages, hamlets, rural activity developments. (A) A commercial, as shoreline development, centers, or crossroads industrial, residential, shoreline, or mixed- use area are subject to the requirements of (d)(iv) of this subsection, but are not subject to the requirements of (c)(ii) and (iii) of this subsection. (B) Any development or redevelopment other than an industrial area or an industrial use within a mixed-use area or an industrial area under this subsection (5)(d)(i) must be principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population. (C) Any development or redevelopment in terms of building size, scale, use, or intensity shall be consistent with the character of the existing areas. Development and redevelopment may include changes in use from vacant land or a previously existing use so long as the new use conforms to the requirements of this subsection (5); p. 16 SHB 1782 1 (ii) The intensification of development on lots containing, or 2 new development of, small-scale recreational or tourist uses, 3 including commercial facilities to serve those recreational or 4 tourist uses, that rely on a rural location and setting, but that do 5 not include new residential development. A small-scale recreation or 6 tourist use is not required to be principally designed to serve the 7 existing and projected rural population. Public services and public 8 facilities shall be limited to those necessary to serve the 9 recreation or tourist use and shall be provided in a manner that does 10 not permit low-density sprawl; 11 (iii) The intensification of development on lots containing 12 isolated nonresidential uses or new development of isolated cottage 13 industries and isolated small-scale businesses that are not 14 principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural 15 population and nonresidential uses, but do provide job opportunities 16 for rural residents. Rural counties may allow the expansion of small - 17 scale businesses as long as those small-scale businesses conform with 18 the rural character of the area as defined by the local government 19 according to RCW 36.70A.030(((23))) (27). Rural counties may also 20 allow new small-scale businesses to utilize a site previously 21 occupied by an existing business as long as the new small-scale 22 business conforms to the rural character of the area as defined by 23 the local government according to RCW 36.70A.030(((23))) (27). Public 24 services and public facilities shall be limited to those necessary to 25 serve the isolated nonresidential use and shall be provided in a 26 manner that does not permit low-density sprawl; 27 (iv) A county shall adopt measures to minimize and contain the 28 existing areas or uses of more intensive rural development, as 29 appropriate, authorized under this subsection. Lands included in such 30 existing areas or uses shall not extend beyond the logical outer 31 boundary of the existing area or use, thereby allowing a new pattern 32 of low-density sprawl. Existing areas are those that are clearly 33 identifiable and contained and where there is a logical boundary 34 delineated predominately by the built environment, but that may also 35 include undeveloped lands if limited as provided in this subsection. 36 The county shall establish the logical outer boundary of an area of 37 more intensive rural development. In establishing the logical outer 38 boundary, the county shall address (A) the need to preserve the 39 character of existing natural neighborhoods and communities, (B) 40 physical boundaries, such as bodies of water, streets and highways, p. 17 SHB 1782 63 1 and land forms and contours, (C) the prevention of abnormally 2 irregular boundaries, and (D) the ability to provide public 3 facilities and public services in a manner that does not permit low - 4 density sprawl; 5 (v) For purposes of (d) of this subsection, an existing area or 6 existing use is one that was in existence: 7 (A) On July 1, 1990, in a county that was initially required to 8 plan under all of the provisions of this chapter; 9 (B) On the date the county adopted a resolution under RCW 10 36.70A.040(2), in a county that is planning under all of the 11 provisions of this chapter under RCW 36.70A.040(2); or 12 (C) On the date the office of financial management certifies the 13 county's population as provided in RCW 36.70A.040(5), in a county 14 that is planning under all of the provisions of this chapter pursuant 15 to RCW 36.70A.040(5). 16 (e) Exception. This subsection shall not be interpreted to permit 17 in the rural area a major industrial development or a master planned 18 resort unless otherwise specifically permitted under RCW 36.70A.360 19 and 36.70A.365. 20 (6) A transportation element that implements, and is consistent 21 with, the land use element. 22 (a) The transportation element shall include the following 23 subelements: 24 (i) Land use assumptions used in estimating travel; 25 (ii) Estimated traffic impacts to state-owned transportation 26 facilities resulting from land use assumptions to assist the 27 department of transportation in monitoring the performance of state 28 facilities, to plan improvements for the facilities, and to assess 29 the impact of land -use decisions on state-owned transportation 30 facilities; 31 (iii) Facilities and services needs, including: 32 (A) An inventory of air, water, and ground transportation 33 facilities and services, including transit alignments and general 34 aviation airport facilities, to define existing capital facilities 35 and travel levels as a basis for future planning. This inventory must 36 include state-owned transportation facilities within the city or 37 county's jurisdictional boundaries; 38 (B) Level of service standards for all locally owned arterials 39 and transit routes to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the 40 system. These standards should be regionally coordinated; p. 18 SHB 1782 164 1 (C) For state-owned transportation facilities, level of service 2 standards for highways, as prescribed in chapters 47.06 and 47.80 3 RCW, to gauge the performance of the system. The purposes of 4 reflecting level of service standards for state highways in the local 5 comprehensive plan are to monitor the performance of the system, to 6 evaluate improvement strategies, and to facilitate coordination 7 between the county's or city's six-year street, road, or transit 8 program and the office of financial management's ten-year investment 9 program. The concurrency requirements of (b) of this subsection do 10 not apply to transportation facilities and services of statewide 11 significance except for counties consisting of islands whose only 12 connection to the mainland are state highways or ferry routes. In 13 these island counties, state highways and ferry route capacity must 14 be a factor in meeting the concurrency requirements in (b) of this 15 subsection; 16 (D) Specific actions and requirements for bringing into 17 compliance locally owned transportation facilities or services that 18 are below an established level of service standard; 19 (E) Forecasts of traffic for at least ten years based on the 20 adopted land use plan to provide information on the location, timing, 21 and capacity needs of future growth; 22 (F) Identification of state and local system needs to meet 23 current and future demands. Identified needs on state-owned 24 transportation facilities must be consistent with the statewide 25 multimodal transportation plan required under chapter 47.06 RCW; 26 (iv) Finance, including: 27 (A) An analysis of funding capability to judge needs against 28 probable funding resources; 29 (B) A multiyear financing plan based on the needs identified in 30 the comprehensive plan, the appropriate parts of which shall serve as 31 the basis for the six-year street, road, or transit program required 32 by RCW 35.77.010 for cities, RCW 36.81.121 for counties, and RCW 33 35.58.2795 for public transportation systems. The multiyear financing 34 plan should be coordinated with the ten-year investment program 35 developed by the office of financial management as required by RCW 36 47.05.030; 37 (C) If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, 38 a discussion of how additional funding will be raised, or how land 39 use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that level of service 40 standards will be met; p. 19 SHB 1782 65 1 (v) Intergovernmental coordination efforts, including an 2 assessment of the impacts of the transportation plan and land use 3 assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions_ 4 The comprehensive plan shall describe how the city or county will 5 ensure that the transit frequency that is relied on in the plan, 6 development regulations, and permitting decisions is going to be 7 continued undiminished, including any interlocal agreements with 8 transit providers that will be utilized. For any area where such 9 transit frequency is not reasonably assured, the level of required 10 density or mix of housing required by this section is not required to 11 be increased beyond what would be required if the transit was not 12 present; 13 (vi) Demand -management strategies; 14 (vii) Pedestrian and bicycle component to include collaborative 15 efforts to identify and designate planned improvements for pedestrian 16 and bicycle facilities and corridors that address and encourage 17 enhanced community access and promote healthy lifestyles. 18 (b) After adoption of the comprehensive plan by jurisdictions 19 required to plan or who choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, local 20 jurisdictions must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit 21 development approval if the development causes the level of service 22 on a locally owned transportation facility to decline below the 23 standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive 24 plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate 25 the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development. 26 These strategies may include increased public transportation service, 27 ride -sharing programs, demand management, and other transportation 28 systems management strategies. For the purposes of this subsection 29 (6), "concurrent with the development" means that improvements or 30 strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a 31 financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or 32 strategies within six years. If the collection of impact fees is 33 delayed under RCW 82.02.050(3), the six-year period required by this 34 subsection (6)(b) must begin after full payment of all impact fees is 35 due to the county or city. 36 (c) The transportation element described in this subsection (6), 37 the six-year plans required by RCW 35.77.010 for cities, RCW 38 36.81.121 for counties, and RCW 35.58.2795 for public transportation 39 systems, and the ten-year investment program required by RCW 40 47.05.030 for the state, must be consistent. 166 p. 20 SHB 1782 1 (7) An economic development element establishing local goals, 2 policies, objectives, and provisions for economic growth and vitality 3 and a high quality of life. A city that has chosen to be a 4 residential community is exempt from the economic development element 5 requirement of this subsection. 6 (8) A park and recreation element that implements, and is 7 consistent with, the capital facilities plan element as it relates to 8 park and recreation facilities. The element shall include: (a) 9 Estimates of park and recreation demand for at least a ten-year 10 period; (b) an evaluation of facilities and service needs; and (c) an 11 evaluation of intergovernmental coordination opportunities to provide 12 regional approaches for meeting park and recreational demand. 13 (9) It is the intent that new or amended elements required after 14 January 1, 2002, be adopted concurrent with the scheduled update 15 provided in RCW 36.70A.130. Requirements to incorporate any such new 16 or amended elements shall be null and void until funds sufficient to 17 cover applicable local government costs are appropriated and 18 distributed by the state at least two years before local government 19 must update comprehensive plans as required in RCW 36.70A.130. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. RCW to read as follows: (1)(a) Any city planning population of 20,000 or more A new section is added to chapter 36.70A under as of RCW 36.70A.040 that has a the effective date of this section, or any city that is determined by the office of financial management pursuant to RCW 43.62.030 to have a population of 20,000 or more at least one year prior to its next comprehensive plan update, must authorize the development of all middle housing types on all lots exceeding 4,500 square feet zoned for detached single-family residential use and within one-half mile, based on walking distance, of a major transit stop. If a city adopts a maximum of four residential units per lot within one-half mile of a major transit stop, it may consider a detached accessory dwelling unit as one of the units. (b) Cities subject to the requirements of (a) of this subsection must also allow development of duplexes and attached and detached accessory dwelling units on all other lots exceeding 4,500 square feet zoned for single-family residential use, and for the development of triplexes on corner lots exceeding 5,000 square feet. Cities may limit development on such lots to a total of two detached residential p. 21 SHB 1782T67 168 units per lot inclusive of either duplexes or detached accessory dwelling units on noncorner lots, and to a total of three detached residential units or a triplex per lot on corner lots. (2)(a) As an alternative to the requirements in subsection (1) of this section, cities may alter local zoning to allow an average minimum net density equivalent to 33 dwelling units per acre within one-half mile of a major transit stop, based on walking distance. (b) In determining net density for housing within one-half mile of a major transit stop a city may exclude sensitive or critical areas, dedicated open space, schools, bodies of water, or lands which are not buildable to the level of density otherwise required. (c) Any city choosing to adopt an average minimum density pursuant to (a) of this subsection shall also adopt findings of fact demonstrating that the actions taken to implement the average minimum density will not result in or further exclusion in findings to the department. (3) When providing for the racially disparate impacts, displacement, housing. The city shall transmit such required middle housing types as required in subsection (1) of this section or for the minimum net density as required in subsection (2) of this section, the city shall ensure that multifamily housing within such areas includes sufficient units to meet the projections of housing needed within the planning horizon for families and households of various sizes and income levels. (4) Any city with a population of between 10,000 and 20,000 as of the effective date of this section, or any city determined by the office of financial management pursuant to RCW 43.62.030 to have a population between 10,000 and 20,000 at least one year prior to its next comprehensive plan update, must authorize the development of duplexes on all lots exceeding 4,500 square feet which are zoned for detached single-family residential use that do not have an accessory dwelling unit on the lot. (5)(a) Any city with a population over 100,000 may not require the inclusion of off-street parking as a condition for the construction of middle housing within one-half mile of a major transit stop, unless the street on which the construction will occur has no on -street parking. (b) Any city with a population between 20,000 and 100,000 may not require more than one off-street parking spot on a lot within one- half mile of a major transit stop for every three bedrooms on the p. 22 SHB 1782 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 lot, unless the street on which the lot is located has no on -street parking. (6)(a) Outside of the limitations in this section, a city may apply all otherwise applicable regulations for the development of middle housing, including regulations for health, safety, or environment. (b) Cities may adopt development and design standards related to the siting and design of middle housing. Such development and design standards may not discourage the development of middle housing through unreasonable costs, fees, delays, or other requirements or actions which individually or cumulatively make impracticable the permitting, siting, or construction of middle housing, provided that this subsection does not limit the amount of affordable housing that a city may require to be provided, either on-site or through an in - lieu payment, pursuant to a program enacted under RCW 36.70A.540. A city may standards required not require zoning, development, siting, or design review for middle housing that are for detached single-family more restrictive than those residences and the same development permit and environmental review processes that apply to detached single-family residences shall be applied to middle housing. (7) Nothing in this section prohibits a city from permitting detached single-family residences. 23 NEW SECTION. Sec. 6. A new section is added to chapter 36.70A 24 RCW to read as follows: 25 (1) Any city subject to the requirements under section 5 of this 26 act may apply to the department for, and the department may certify, 27 an extension of the implementation timelines. 28 (2) An extension certified under this section may be applied only 29 to specific areas where a city has identified water, sewer, 30 stormwater, or transportation services that are currently deficient, 31 or are expected to be deficient within the next five years, and for 32 which the local government has established a plan of actions that 33 will remedy the deficiency in those services on a specific timeline. 34 The department may certify additional extensions of a city's 35 remediation timeline. 36 (3) For any subarea or community of interest within the 37 jurisdiction for which the city or county finds that the increases in 38 housing density required under section 5 of this act may create a 39 significant risk of displacement of lower or moderate -income p. 23 SHB 1782 69 1 residents, reducing racial and economic integration, or of not 2 meeting goals to increase affordable housing near transit, the city 3 or county may apply to the department for flexibility in 4 implementation for a limited period of time not to exceed one year. 5 (4) The department may establish by rule any procedures necessary 6 to implement this section. 7 NEW SECTION. Sec. 7. A new section is added to chapter 64.38 8 RCW to read as follows: 9 Governing documents of associations within cities subject to the 10 middle housing and density requirements of this act that are created 11 after the effective date of this section may not prohibit the 12 construction or development of the types of housing or density 13 requirements that must be permitted by this act within such cities. 14 NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. A new section is added to chapter 64.90 15 RCW to read as follows: 16 Declarations and governing documents of a common interest 17 community within cities subject to the middle housing and density 18 requirements of this act that are created after the effective date of 19 this section may not prohibit the construction or development of the 20 types of housing or density requirements that must be permitted by 21 this act within such cities. 22 NEW SECTION. Sec. 9. If specific funding for the purposes of 23 this act, referencing this act by bill or chapter number, is not 24 provided by June 30, 2022, in the omnibus appropriations act, this 25 act is null and void. 170 --- END --- p. 24 SHB 1782 80 ft U1 07, C co A 1 f [509 12th Ave S Boeing Id/King Co I Airport ;Rainier - Golf4 ountryv Club S 128th St- - North . Sea Tac S 136th St Fark 3 s .airport Park Cl) '. moral iir Ryan Field Seat tie - Tac onv, Int'I Air port 24th Ave S :J 0 0 0 34th Ave S R HDR I rf) Q co S 121 p IN. 11114$1,' i l IhiL.A MO : ON etC3� I DR ti w D S 511 ft .S 166th St I I S 170th St 0 188th St Des S 200th St Moines C reek Park Valley Ridge Park SeaTac Angle Lake /, lA SII DR S 128th St tS' S Langston Rd M Of Mil C 1 v SUITsc! f �,/�: Black River 4 Forest nsiC, a s.. MI CCounf yoC ifyA,,R Oakesdale A kS' St - - - 84th Ave S Lake Washington SI Lind Ave SW (I) !1' Re n Mum' Airp'r er CC w alley ted ica I Center Talbot Rd S e ton, Bureau of Land Manageme t, Esri Canada, Esri, HERE, rmin, GeoTechnologics, Inc., US ei; , METI/NASA, EPA, USDA Major Transit Stops .5 Mile Walkshed Bus Stops .5 Mile Walkshed li Tukwila City Limits EI KC Metro 124, 150, F ;; ; ; Potential Annexation Areas Zoning LDR MDR HDR MUO - 0 RCC NCC Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mixed Use Office Office Residential Commercial Center Neighborhood Commercial Center RC RCM CLI LI HI MIC/L ▪ MIC/H ▪ TVS Regional Commercial Regional Commercial Mixed Use Commercial Light Industrial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy Industrial Tukwila Valley South TUC -P Tukwila Urban Center - Pond TUC -RC Tukwila Urban Center - Regional Center TUC -CC Tukwila Urban Center - Commercial Corridor TUC -WP Tukwila Urban Center - Workplace ▪ TUC-TOD Tukwila Urban Center - Transit Oriented Development Half Mile Walksheds - Tukwila Transit Stops 0 0.5 1 2 Miles I I I I I I I I N 172 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS A.41,----- Initials ITEM No. 44, Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review Q l o 02/14/2022 BR 4.E. 29Q$ ITEM INFORMATION STAFF SPONSOR: ADAM COX ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 02/14/22 AGENDA ITEM TITLE 42"d Ave S Bridge Replacement - TS&L Report CATEGORY �I Mtg Discussion Date 02/14/22 ❑ Motion Meg Date ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ Admin Svcs ❑ DCL) ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ Pr SPONSOR'S As part of the 30% design, TranTech Engineering, the design consultant, developed a Type, SUMMARY Size, & Location (TS&L) report to provide options for replacement of the 42nd Ave S Bridge. The TS&L report is an industry design standard that allows the agency to receive multiple options and weigh all outcomes when a selecting a structure for replacement. The four bridge replacement options identified in the TS&L are being brought forward to Council for discussion. REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&lnfrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Department of Public Works COMMITTEE COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ Fund Source: 104 Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 02/14/22 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 02/14/22 Informational Memorandum dated 02/11/22 Draft TS&L Report 173 174 City of Tukwila► Allan Ekberg, Mayor Public Works Department - Hari Ponnekanti, Director/City Engineer INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, P.E., Public Works Director/ City Engineer BY: Adam Cox, P.E., Transportation Project Manager DATE: February 11, 2022 SUBJECT: 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project -Type, Size, and Location Report ISSUE Discuss the options presented in the Type, Size, and Location (TS&L) report for the 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement project. BACKGROUND At the October 26, 2020 Committee of the Whole meeting, Councilmembers were presented options to move the 42ntl Ave S Bridge Replacement project forward with the selection of 30% Plans and Estimate (P&E) or the 100% ad -ready Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E). Included in the 30% P&E was a description of the TS&L and the two conceptual alternatives for the replacement of the 42nd Ave S Bridge: 1. Replacement of the bridge in its current location; or 2. Replace the structure at S 124th St. Both options are eligible for funding as the new structure remained in the same corridor. On November 02, 2020, Council directed staff to move forward with the 30% P&E as part of TranTech's original contract and re-examine options for 100% PS&E once additional funding was secured. The intent of starting the 30% P&E was to make the replacement project more competitive for the federally funded Local Bridge Program's (formerly known as BRAC) call for projects that was announced in late 2020, with the due date for the application in February 2021. The City Council adopted funding for the 42nd Ave S Bridge as its top state and federal legislative priority. In June 2021, the City was awarded $1.5M in federal contingency funding from the PSRC to be applied toward the design phase, and in July 2021, the Local Bridge Program awarded $12M for the design and construction phases of the 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project. These funds will cover all design expenses and move the project well into construction. Staff conducted the initial consultant selection process for the project in accordance with the WSDOT Local Agency Guideline (LAG) manual to ensure the selected consultant would be approved by WSDOT and expenses would be eligible for federal grant reimbursement throughout the project. Given that federal protocol was adhered to during the selection process, WSDOT Local Programs Department determined that TranTech is an approved consultant to perform the design work without the need to readvertise or reinterview design consultants, a process that would take a minimum of three months. The ability to move forward with 100% design through the existing contract with TranTech provided the City with costs savings and prevented project delays. The supplemental agreement was issued to TranTech in October 2021 to get to 100% ad ready PS&E enabling future construction bidding. The bid ready PS&E is still on schedule to be completed by the third quarter of 2023. HISTORICAL TIMELINE 2017 City applied for and did not receive state funding for local bridge replacement 2019 City applied for and did not receive state funding for local bridge replacement 2020 City adopts 42nd St. Bridge Replacement as top state and federal legislative priority February 2020 Council approves $1 M for 30% design May 2020 Advertisement for design is published August 2020 TranTech Engineering, LLC selected November 2020 Council Awarded 30% Design (Type, Size, Location) to TranTech 175 June 2021 PSRC Funds Awarded June 2021 Local Bridge Program Funds Awarded October 2021 Council Awarded 100% Design to TranTech December 2021 Draft TS&L submitted for Public Works Engineers for Review December 15, 2021 Bridge Strike February 2022 Project included in the State Transportation Package for $17M in funding and is currently being considered by the legislature February 14, 2022 COW Discussion ANALYSIS As part of the 30% P&E, TranTech was tasked with creating a TS&L report to give the City options for replacement of the 42nd Ave S Bridge. The TS&L report is an industry design standard that allows the agency to receive multiple options and weighs all outcomes when a selecting a structure for replacement. During the TS&L process, TranTech and its subcontractors have used their best engineering judgement to create an accurate report that lines up with the City's best interests when replacing the structure. All four options presented are using the same cross section configuration with 12 ft wide travel lanes, a concrete pedestrian barrier, and a 10 ft wide ADA -approved pedestrian walkway. The differences between the structures are: 1) the structure location; and 2) material used for girders. All four options are eligible for federal funding and grants as they are in the same corridor as the current structure. All options provided below have inherent pros and cons and the comparison matrix found in the draft TS&L report illustrates all the weighted variables and provides a professional rating of each element. Due to the complexity of each replacement option and the limited scope of work in preparation of the TS&L, each option has had a construability review at a cursory level. This allows the design team to explore multiple avenues without wasting time focusing on one option that would not be the preferred structure for this project. There are still multiple unknowns that will be investigated during the design process. Once a replacement is selected, TranTech can then focus their efforts to creating a safe, dependable structure that has a design life of 100+ years. The following options to be considered for the 42nd Ave S Bridge replacement are: • Option 1: New 42nd Ave S Bridge with Steel Girders Replace the structure in its current location with the main span consisting of steel girders. • Option 2: New 42nd Ave S Bridge with Concrete Girders Replace the structure in its current location with the main span consisting of concrete girders. • Option 3: New S 124th Ave Bridge with Steel Girders New structure at S 124th St with the main span consisting of steel girders. • Option 4: New S 124th Ave Bridge with Concrete Girders New structure at S 124th St with the main span consisting of concrete girders. PROPOSED NEXT STEPS Public Works staff will share the 42nd Ave S Replacement options and gather feedback at the monthly Allentown Community Meeting on February 22, 2022 and other community outreach meetings, and return to Council at the March 28, 2022 Committee of the Whole for Council direction and selection of the replacement option. FINANCIAL IMPACT No financial impact at this time. RECOMMENDATION Discussion Only ATTACHMENT: 42nd Ave S Bridge Draft TS&L Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 176 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Type, Size, & Location Report Prepared for: City of Tukwila Public Works - Engineering December 2021 TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 — 118th Ave SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 543-5545 TRANTECH klEngineering LLC Executive Summary This project will replace the existing bridge over the Duwamish River that was constructed in 1949. The physical condition of this bridge has been deteriorating in recent years and requires constant maintenance. Recommendation for a replacement bridge and its alignment is based on considerations of the environmental process determinations, budget and stakeholder input. The completed bridge will have a roadway section that will consist of two 12 -foot lanes, two 2 -foot shoulders and a separated 10 -foot pedestrian path for a total width of 42 feet out -to -out. The project is scheduled to go to construction in 2024. The design team developed a list of critical project criteria and improvements/impacts for the project. Criteria was developed for environmental, social and cost considerations associated with the project. The criteria used for comparison purposes included: Environmental: • Natural River Flow Conditions • Natural Bank Habitat Conditions Social: • Temporary MOT Impacts • Aesthetics Costs: • Construction Costs (Bridge and Approaches) • Right of Way Costs In close collaboration with the City, the design team made careful examination of a final list of two alignments, 42nd Ave S and S 124th Street, and two viable structural bridge alternatives for each alignment, from all facets of engineering disciplines, seeking an optimized bridge solution with respect to the above mentioned criteria. The viable alternatives for each alignment are: 42nd Ave S Alignment Alternative 1 A - Three -span precast concrete girder Alternative 1 B - Three -span steel plate girder S 124th Street Alignment Alternative 2 A - Three -span precast concrete girder Alternative 2 B - Three -span steel plate girder The study presented in this report leads to the conclusion that the steel plate girder on the S 124th Street alignment, Alternative 2B (i.e., Three -span steel plate girder bridge), best meets the criteria set forth for the project. The cost of this alternative is the lowest of all alternatives at approximately $21.5M. The team's recommendation is to advance design of the Alternative 2B on S 124th Street alignment through final PS&E phase. 178 2 Table of Contents 42"d Ave S Bridge Replacement Type, Size, & Location Report 1 Executive Summary 2 1. Introduction 4 2. Type, Size & Location (TS&L) Study 6 2.1 Surveying 7 2.2 Geotechnical 8 2.3 Permitting 11 2.4 Hydrology 15 2.5 Traffic 16 2.6 Public Outreach 17 2.7 Aesthetics 18 2.8 Roadway/Utilities 19 2.9 Structural 24 2.10 Constructability 25 2.11 TS&L Alternatives Comparison 26 Concluding remarks and recommendations 28 Appendix Appendix A — Existing Plans 29 Appendix B — Current Inspection Report 44 Appendix C — Survey Map 79 Appendix D — Geotechnical Investigations Technical Memo 81 Appendix E — Permitting Matrices 124 Appendix F — Mobility of Traffic Mechanical Memo 128 Appendix G — Public Outreach 198 Appendix H — Aesthetics Exhibits 223 Appendix I — Roadway/Utilities Exhibits 235 Appendix J — Bridge Viable Structure Concept Alternatives Drawings 239 Appendix K — Constructability Memo 254 Appendix L — Bridge Alternatives Opinion of Cost 267 1. Introduction This project will replace the existing City of Tukwila's (City) South (S) 42nd Ave Bridge with a new multi -span bridge. The existing 42nd Ave S Bridge was built in 1949. It is a 3 -span bridge that is 280 -foot - long (30':220':30') and 28 -feet wide (24' curb -to -curb) with the main span consisting of a through -truss that spans over Duwamish River. The existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 7.56 SD and is considered Structurally Deficient and Functionally Obsolete. The 2018 Average Daily Traffic volume (ADT) was 10,300 vehicles per day with 30% of those vehicles being heavy trucks. The 42nd Ave S Bridge is a primary crossing of the Duwamish River for the Allentown neighborhood, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Intermodal Facility, and the Baker Commodities which are considered as major stakeholders of this project. The City has been struggling with the deterioration of this bridge for many years. Starting in the 1990's with an expensive painting project, and followed a few years later by the emergency shoring of the northern approach roadway with a sheet pile wall system when the river threatened to wash away its northern approach fill. Even after those repairs, the north approach has continued to settle requiring constant maintenance to provide a smooth transition onto the bridge. The existing steel truss is a Fracture Critical structure and requires costly special access inspections every 24 months which must be proceeded by a cleaning of the structure to allow complete access to critical connections. Cleaning the bridge is also expensive and a logistical headache that yields only short-term benefits. The bridge currently needs further maintenance, and the cost of the necessary repairs to provide improved level of service per today's standards exceeds the cost of replacing the bridge. Improving the level of service is extremely important for this route that serves in excess of 10,000 vehicle per day with 30% of those vehicles being trucks. The bridge is the only viable route for container trucks entering and leaving the Tukwila BNSF Intermodal Facility and is currently load posted restricting the free movement of that freight. The bridge's many structural deficiencies are compounded by the crossing of the frequent heavy loads as well as by deterioration suffered during its 70 -year service life. Deterioration that occurred despite the preventative maintenance performed on the bridge. 180 4 The bridge bearings are locked causing continuing damage from temperature related expansion and contraction of the bridge. These deficiencies coupled with the bridge geometry have resulted in a bridge at risk of collapse during a strong seismic event. The current truss is also narrow with only 24 feet curb -to -curb which further restricts the flow of traffic. Another issue is the width of the single sidewalk at just over 3 feet with the additional intrusion of the bridge truss structure into the pedestrian walkway. The functional deficiencies compound the structural ones, and both are further amplified by the proximity of the bridge to the Tukwila Community Center. The bridge serves pedestrians and cyclists as the southern connection of the Green River trail with the Community Center and Allentown. Appendix A presents the existing plans and Appendix B provides the current inspection report for the bridge. The City has applied and has been successful in securing federal funds for the replacement of this deteriorated bridge. This report entails the engineering design activities that have been performed by TranTech's team to prepare the herein Type, Size, & Location (TS&L) Report as part of the Phase 1 of designing a new bridge replacement for this route over the Duwamish River. The consultant team is composed of the following members: TranTech — Project Management, Structural Engineering; Civil Engineering 1 Alliance - Surveying Landau — Geotechnical Engineering and Environmental Permitting Natural Waters — Hydrology Engineering Transpo — Traffic Engineering Ott Sakai — Constructability & Estimation Envirolssues and Coaxis - Public Involvement DCI — Right-of-way Makers - Aesthetics 2. Type, Size & Location (TS&L) Study In order for this TS&L study report to be prepared, many design team members from various engineering disciplines had to provide contributions in support of this investigation effort. In the following report, a summary of these engineering activities is provided while detailed reports are provided in the appendices. Alternative Comparison Process: The design team developed a list of critical project criteria and improvements/impacts for the project. Criteria was developed for environmental, social and cost considerations associated with the project. The criteria used for comparison purposes included: Environmental: • Natural River Flow Conditions • Natural Bank Habitat Conditions Social: • Temporary MOT Impacts • Aesthetics Costs: • Construction Costs (Bridge and Approaches) • Right of Way Costs Each of the criteria was assigned a weight for comparison purposes. Further discussion on the comparison criteria and how it was used for this study is included in Section 2.11 TS&L Alternative Comparison of this report. In the following sections a summary of each engineering discipline with contributions to this study report is described in further detail. 182 6 2.1 Surveying This activity is performed by the TranTech's team member 1 Alliance. Exhibit C provides a plan displaying the topography base map survey of the bridge site. 2.2 Geotechnical This work element is performed by TranTech's geotechnical engineering team member Landau Associates, Inc. (LAI). In the following, a summary of the geotechnical engineering considerations associated with each studied alternative is provided. A detailed technical memo on this topic is provided in Appendix D. LAI conducted a subsurface exploration program along the two alternative bridge alignments that included four exploratory borings (B-1 through B-4). Two of the borings (B-1 and B-2) were advanced approximately 90.3 and 74.5 feet (ft) below ground surface (bgs) adjacent to the existing bridge alignment, and two borings (B-2 and B-4) were advanced approximately 90.5 and 60.5 ft bgs along the alternative South 124th Street Bridge alignment. Provided below is a summary of the subsurface soil conditions observed along the two, alternative bridge alignments. Existing Bridge Corridor Based on LAI's field observations, the soils/rock observed in the exploratory borings that were advanced along the existing bridge corridor (borings B-1 and B-2) were classified into the following geologic units: • Alluvium: This unit was generally observed to consist of black and mottled orange, brown to brownish tan, and gray, very loose to medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt and clay and with trace organics and gravel, and very soft to medium stiff silt with varying amounts of sand and trace organics. This unit was observed to extend from approximately 0 to 50 ft below ground surface (bgs) and 0 to 25 ft bgs in borings B-1 and B-2, respectively. • Glacial Till: This unit was encountered beneath the alluvium in borings B-1 and B-2 and was generally observed to consist of gray to greenish gray, dense to very dense sand with varying amounts of gravel, silt, cobbles, and boulders; and gray, hard silt with varying amounts of sand, gravel, cobbles, and boulders. This unit was observed to extend to the maximum depth of boring B-1 (90.3 ft bgs) and to a depth of about 74 ft bgs at the location of boring B-2. • Bedrock: At the location of boring B-2, this unit was encountered beneath the glacial till at approximately 74 ft bgs and was observed to consist of grayish black siltstone. LAI did not observe this unit in boring B-1. LAI was able to sample only the upper 6 inches of this unit. South 124th Street Corridor Based on LAI's field observations, the soils observed in the exploratory borings that were advanced along the South 124th Street corridor (borings B-3 and B-4) were classified into the following geologic units: 184 8 • Alluvium: This unit was generally observed to consist of tan to blackish gray and blackish brown, very loose to medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt and peat lenses; and gray, very soft to hard silt. This unit was observed to extend from approximately 0 to 73 ft bgs and 0 to 20 ft bgs in borings B-3 and B-4, respectively. • Glacial Till: This unit was encountered beneath the alluvium in borings B-3 and B-4 and was generally observed to consist of gray very dense sand with varying amounts of silt and trace gravel. At the location of boring B-3 between the depths of about 73 to 80 ft bgs, the till was observed to consist of tannish iron -stained, gravelly, silty, dense, fine to medium sand. The lower portion of the till unit was generally observed to consist of gray, bluish gray, tan, greenish gray, very dense sand with varying amounts of gravel and trace silt; and dark gray, hard silt with varying amounts of sand and gravel. This unit was observed to extend to the maximum depths of borings B-3 (90.5 ft bgs) and B-4 (60.5 ft bgs). Geotechnical Considerations Provided below is a summary of the geotechnical considerations that LAI identified for this project: • Earthquake shaking should be anticipated during the design life of the replacement bridge, and the proposed bridge should be designed to resist earthquake loading using appropriate design methodology. • Some of the upper soils along the two, alternative bridge alignments are susceptible to liquefaction during a strong motion earthquake. At the locations of the two, alternative bridge alignments, the estimated depth to the non -liquefiable soils was deeper on the Allentown side of the Duwamish River (50 to 70 ft vs 20 to 25 ft on the other side of the river). • It is LAI's opinion that the slopes/riverbanks along the two, alternative bridge alignments could experience lateral spreading during a design seismic event. • The upper 20 to 70 ft of soils along the two, alternative bridge alignments are soft/loose and have marginal foundation support characteristics. Furthermore, as noted above, portions of the upper soils may be subject to soil liquefaction and lateral spreading during a design -level earthquake. As a result, shallow foundations (e.g., spread footings), which are typically cost effective if they can be founded in hard or dense soils that have adequate bearing resistance and exhibit tolerable settlement under load, are not considered to be an appropriate foundation type for the proposed replacement bridge. Another reason that shallow foundations are not considered appropriate for the replacement bridge is because shallow foundations are not effective where soil liquefaction can occur at or below the footing level unless the liquefiable soil is removed, improved using ground improvement techniques, or is well below the footing level. Therefore, it is anticipated that the proposed replacement bridge will need to be supported by deep foundations. • Driven pile foundations and drilled shaft foundations are two deep foundation types that can be used when shallow foundations are not appropriate. For this project, shaft foundations with a diameter of 8 to 10 ft or greater appear to be most advantageous because a very dense bearing stratum can be penetrated in order to obtain the anticipated required bearing, uplift, and lateral resistances. In addition, shafts can be cost effective if a single shaft per column can be used as opposed to a pile group with a pile cap, especially if temporary shoring is required to construct the pile cap. Finally, unlike driven piles, shafts have the advantage of a reduced potential to cause damage to existing adjacent facilities from pile driving vibrations. • Soil liquefaction and lateral spreading could subject the replacement bridge foundations to down -drag and lateral loads, respectively. Downdrag loads could lead to bridge foundation damage (due to exceeding the structural capacity of the foundation) if not accounted for in the design, as well as increased foundation settlement. To mitigate the lateral spreading risk, the foundations for the replacement bridge will need to be situated outside of the zone of lateral spreading or the foundations will need to be designed to withstand the lateral forces imposed on the foundation by the moving soil. Potential methods to mitigate the liquefaction risk at the site include improving the soils such that liquefaction does not occur or to design the replacement bridge to tolerate the consequences of liquefaction (i.e., design the structure to tolerate downdrag loads and foundation settlement). • Nominal axial resistances of single, 8- and 10 -ft diameter drilled shafts can be preliminarily assumed to be equal to those presented in Table 4 in LAI's attached preliminary geotechnical report. • If it is necessary to place drilled shafts in groups with a center -to -center spacing of less than 3D (where D is the shaft diameter), then an axial group reduction factor will need to be incorporated into the design of the shaft. 186 10 2.3 Permitting This work element is performed by TranTech's geotechnical engineering team member Landau Associates, Inc. (LAI). In the following a summary of the geotechnical engineering considerations associated with each studied alternative is provided. A detailed technical memo on this topic is provided in Appendix E. Preliminary data was gathered to identify wetlands, waterways, wildlife habitats, cultural resources issues and the probable associated permitting requirements. The project area includes the extent of the 42nd Avenue South Alternative and South 124th Street Alternative. The study area extends 200 feet from the project area for evaluation of wetland/waterway critical areas. Existing Conditions Public documents reviewed included City Critical Areas Mapping, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain data, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) priority habitats and species (PHS) data, and Washington Natural Heritage Program Geographic Information System (GIS) data sets regarding habitats and plants. LAI also conducted a wetland/waterway delineation in December 2020 to be utilized for survey pick-up which is presented in Appendix C. Results of a literature search of readily available documentation and observations made during the site review indicate the following resources in the project area that should be considered as part of project permitting: • Duwamish River, which is: - A navigable waterway under jurisdiction of Section 9 and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. - State-owned aquatic land managed by Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), specifically in the area of the South 124th Street Alignment (the 42nd Avenue Bridge is within existing easement). - A waters of the state subject to regulation under the Washington State Hydraulic Code (WAC 220-660). 11 187 — A shoreline of the state subject to regulation under the City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City designates the shoreline environment as Urban Conservancy (south of 42nd Avenue South) and Shoreline Residential (north of 42nd Avenue South). - Suitable habitat for Endangered Species Act (ESA) -listed species, and designated critical habitat for ESA -listed species, including: • Puget Sound ESU Chinook (Oncohrychus tshawytscha) • Puget Sound DPS steelhead (0. mykiss) • Puget Sound DPS bull trout (Salvinus confluentus) • FEMA 100 -year floodplain associated with Duwamish River with base flood elevation of 16 ft (NAVD88). • Adjacent sensitive land uses, including single family residences, Tukwila and Community Center. • Potential archaeological/cultural resources in that the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD) identifies the project area in an area of "Survey Highly Advised" based on Predictive Model of Environmental Factors with Archaeological Resources Results (DAHP 2021). The Washington Natural Heritage Program does not indicate any records of rare plants or unique habitats in the study area (NHP 2021). Environmental Permits and Documentation Documentation evaluating effects of the proposed project on environmental and cultural resources referenced above will be required in support of local, state, and federal permitting, and associated with federal funding to be provided through Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Local Programs. Summary of permits and supporting documents are provided in Appendix C. Environmental documentation required as part of the selected alignment is anticipated to include: • Wetland/Waterway Critical Areas Report, which would supplement the wetland delineation report referenced above, and would include a discussion of mitigation sequencing. Options for mitigation may include riparian enhancements and/or removal of the existing bridge associated with selection of the South 124th Street Alternative. • Area of Potential Effects and Cultural Resources Investigation Report, involving a field effort and impact evaluation. • Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) • Endangered Species Act/Essential Fish Habitat effect determinations, documented in a Biological Assessment. Evaluation of potential project impacts is likely to 188 12 focus on water quality/quantity effects related to stormwater runoff associated with new impervious surfaces, riparian impacts, and change in over water coverage. • WSDOT National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Categorical Exclusion Form and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist, requiring design details of the proposed project. • Section 4(f) De Minimis Impact Determination or Temporary Occupancy, requiring concurrence for use of recreation properties (i.e. Tukwila Community Center) for transportation projects. • Environmental Justice letter to file describing potential impacts to protected populations. • Traffic noise study for new roadway or significant change in existing roadway. • Hazardous Material Corridors Study in support of right of way acquisition. • Navigation Impact Report for the Duwamish River; completed and presented in Appendix C. The environmental documentation supports applications for the following environmental permits, which will likely be necessary for the proposed project: • NEPA determination from WSDOT Local Programs, and if necessary, the Federal Highway Administration. • SEPA determination from the City. • Shoreline Substantial Development permit or Exemption from the City • US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 10/Section 404 permit for unavoidable impacts associated with bridge removal (i.e. in water impacts) and bridge crossing. • Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). • City wetland/waterway critical areas compliance to address any project activities within regulated waterways and associated buffers. • Aquatic Lands Lease from DNR for new bridge alignment, or alignment outside of existing lease area. • Advanced Approval Bridge permit from US Coast Guard; completed, and has been issued; Appendix C provides the Technical Information Memo sent to the Coast Guard. Typically, the USACE Section 404 permit for wetland impacts takes the most time to acquire. LAI assumes that the project would be permitted under the USACE Nationwide 13 189 Permit (NWP) No. 14, Linear Transportation Projects, and would not require individual review by Ecology for CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification. A conservative estimate to obtain a NWP is nine (9) months from submittal of the application. USACE review timeline should be reduced by the cultural resources and endangered species consultations that will be completed by WSDOT that are also required for CWA permitting. All other environmental permits can normally be obtained within 3 months of application. Initial feedback from WDFW has been obtained regarding the project alternatives, with the Area Habitat Biologist indicating preference for maintaining the bridge location at the existing 42nd Avenue South location, and suggestion for coordination with representative from the Muckleshoot Tribe. We understand that WDFW concern with the South 124th Street alignment includes impacts to habitat on the island located in the river channel. Coordination is ongoing with WDFW and Muckleshoot Tribe regarding the project alignments. References: DAHP. 2021. Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD). https://wisaard.dahp.wa.gov/Map. Accessed November 18, 2021. FEMA. Map Service Center. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Accessed June 30, 2021. https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload/searchResult.action. NHP. 2021. Sections that Contain Natural Heritage Features. Washington Natural Heritage Program. Available at: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/amp_nh_trs.pdf. November 18. 190 14 2.4 Hydrology This work element is performed by TranTech's team member Natural Waters. In the following, a summary of the hydrological engineering considerations associated with the project is provided. The S 124th St crossing is located in a straight reach of the Duwamish River which typically reduces the risk of lateral migration, erosion and scour as compared to being located on a sharp bend (e.g., proposed 42nd Ave South Bridge). The S 124th St crossing has more clearance (freeboard) above the 1% annual chance (100 -year) water surface elevation (WSE). On both alignments the bridge could be constructed to not affect the effective elevations (BFE) and thus meet a no/zero-rise. base flood The goal of design for both 42nd Ave S and S 124th Street alignments is a no/zero-rise but if a no/zero-rise cannot be met, a conditional letter of map revision (CLOMR) would likely be required. On both alignments the design goal will be ensuring all constructed elements are outside of the effective FEMA BFE (1% annual chance (100 -year) flow). This translates to the following design criteria • Designing all foundations to account for total scour • Designing walls to account for total scour such that roadway and approach spans cannot be compromised from potential scour. 15 191 2.5 Traffic This work element is performed by TranTech's traffic engineering team member Transpo Group, Inc. (Transpo). A detailed technical memo on this topic is provided in Appendix F. Transpo conducted a transportation analysis to evaluate a possible bri dge replacement for the 42nd Avenue S bridge over the Duwamish River located near the Tukwila Community Center. The analysis focused on future 2040 weekday PM peak hour conditions for three different scenarios, as this represents peak demands in the area. The first scenario was "No Action" and represents no changes to the bridge and nearby intersections. The second and third scenarios remove the existing 42nd Avenue S bridge and construct a new bridge by extending S 124th Street to the west to create a new intersection with Interurban Avenue S. For the second scenario, the new S 124th Street/Interurban Avenue S intersection would be constructed as a traffic signal intersection. For the third scenario, this new intersection is assumed to be a single -lane roundabout instead of a traffic signal. For the second and third scenarios, the 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S intersection would remain signalized but reconfigured to remove the north leg. Traffic volume forecasts for 2040 were developed based on two primary sources: the volumes used in the existing conditions analysis (adjusted for COVID-19 impacts); and forecast traffic growth from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) regional travel demand model. Manual edits and shifts were applied to account for the alternatives with a bridge closure where necessary. There are no known current development plans in the vicinity of the study intersection that are anticipated to add significant traffic to the study intersection beyond what is anticipated in the annual growth rates from the PSRC model volumes. The Tukwila level of service (LOS) standard is LOS E. Under 2040 No Action conditions, the signalized intersection of 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S is anticipated to operate at LOS D. For the second scenario, the reconfigured intersection of 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S and the new signalized intersection of S 124th Street/Interurban Avenue S would operate at LOS A and LOS B, respectively. For the third scenario, the roundabout at S 124th Street/Interurban Avenue S would operate at LOS A with other intersections operating similar to the second scenario. For all scenarios, no significant queuing is expected at major intersections and traffic signal warrants are met for the new intersection. 192 16 2.6 Public Outreach This work element is performed by TranTech's team member Envirolssues and later by Coaxis. The public outreach (PI) which started from early 2021 came in different forms and formats. In February 2021, the City began outreach efforts by interviewing different project stakeholders from Allen Town Community members to businesses affected by this project. Later in March 2021, the City's project website was updated with a presentation that provided more information about the project and informed the Community and other stakeholders of an upcoming virtual Townhall meeting on April 27, 2021. Post cards for this purpose were also sent out to the Community and other stakeholders. The City of Tukwila provided community members and other stakeholders additional opportunities for engagement in the decision-making process for the 42nd Avenue S Bridge Replacement Project by taking comments and votes on various project design elements through project website. Participant responses were gathered both during an online survey, open to the public for votes from August 31, 2021 to September 30, 2021, as well as during a Gallery Day in- person meeting held on September 15, 2021 in Tukwila Community Center. The online survey and the gallery day event presented stakeholders with 5 questions pertaining to various design elements of the bridge replacement project including bridge railing and landscaping concepts, color preference, a gateway element, and lighting concepts. There were 109 online survey participants, and many gallery attendees; the maximum responses received on any given element was 112 votes. Participant responses are included with the outreach exhibit presented in Appendix G. 17 193 2.7 Aesthetics This work element is performed by TranTech team member Makers. The team working on the architectural elements investigated concepts for the bridge railing, gateway and landscape and prepared three alternate designs for each category intended for the September open house Gallery Day. During this process, the team coordinated remotely with the full design team. Appendix H presents the Gallery Day Townhall Boards displayed at the Tukwila Community Center on September 12. Participants at that open house were asked to select the preferred alternatives and the votes were tallied and added to the ones received through the online voting. Responses to the railing alternatives were mixed, with 42% preferring a complex plate and bar construction; 36% preferring a vertical orientation and 22% preferring a simple horizontal orientation. However, comments from the public indicated a strong interest in relating the bridge's character to the local tribes. Sixty two percent (a clear majority) preferred the "Natural" landscaping concept which featured a new trail south of the bridge and plantings of native trees and vegetation. A clear majority (46%) preferred dark green over black, blue or grey as their favorite color. The question "What should the gateway element relate to" was included. • 24% indicated the Allentown Community • 21% indicated the current bridge • 20% indicated the Green River • 19% favored the Tukwila Community Center • 7% indicated the Green River Trail • 9% indicated other As noted above, there was strong interest for local input, which was not an option that was presented. This matter will be investigated and options will be presented for this purpose. In terms of luminaires, the most preferred the El Mirage RNTA model with 41% of the votes. 194 18 2.8 Roadway/Utilities 2.8.1 Roadway Design Criteria The proposed project will include a new two-lane bridge. The structure section discusses the types and sizes of bridge options considered. Two locations were considered the existing bridge location on 42nd Ave S, or build a new bridge at 124th St. Roadway design criteria for each of these locations was based on the 2019 Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards, the 2018 American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) publication A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets and the latest editions and amendments of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Design Manual (M22-01.18). An exhibit of the proposed project footprint and profile for each option can be found in Appendix I. Geometric Design Parameters Design criteria for both 42nd Ave S and 124th St are consistent with the proposed roadway classification, existing and projected traffic volumes and movements, non -motorized needs, land use, and desired safety improvements. Table 2.8.1 below lists a summary of the design criteria for the project, and this is followed by additional detail regarding the basis of the selection. TABLE 2.8.1 *The maximum profile grade allowed is 12% the max in this table is the slope proposed in appendix I. Federal Functional Class 42nd Ave S: Major Collector 124th St: Major Collector 19 195 42"d AVE S DESIGN CRITERIA 124th ST DESIGN CRITERIA Posted Speed 25 MPH 25 MPH Design Speed 25 MPH 25 MPH Stopping Sight Distance 162 feet 168 feet Profile Grade* 5% max, 0.5% min 7.5% max, 0.5% min Travel Lane Width 12 feet 12 feet Sidewalk Width 10 feet 10 feet Roadway Cross Slope 2% typical 2% typical *The maximum profile grade allowed is 12% the max in this table is the slope proposed in appendix I. Federal Functional Class 42nd Ave S: Major Collector 124th St: Major Collector 19 195 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) The average Daily Traffic on 42nd Ave S is 10,300 vehicles per day with over 15% heavy vehicles per table 1 of the Mobility of Traffic Mechanical Memo Appendix F. Past traffic data from bridge inspection reports and other information have included a higher percentage of heavy vehicles, but the most recent data is included in Appendix F Design Speed The 42nd S Ave Option will be posted with a speed limit of 25 MPH, matching the existing conditions, and a design speed of 25 mph was used in the model. The 124th St Option will be posted with a speed limit of 25 MPH, matching the existing conditions, and a design speed of 25 mph was used in the model. Typical Roadway Sections Appendix J includes the assumed section for the 42nd Ave S option and the 124th St option on the new bridge. The road will transition back to the existing road section width once off the bridge. The proposed pavement section will be finalized, by the geotechnical engineer, as design continues. The 10' sidewalk on the bridge would tie in nicely with the Tukwila Community Center frontage sidewalk and planter strip on the east side of 42nd Ave S for that option. The 124th St option would construction a missing link of sidewalk between the new bridge and the existing sidewalk at the Tukwila Community Center. This new sidewalk would be constructed at the existing Superette on the southeast corner of the 42nd/124th intersection. Profile Grades Maximum: 15% per Tukwila Design and Construction Standards Section 4.0.7. Grades over 15% require approval of the Director and the Fire Depai lment. Streets with slopes greater than 15% shall be concrete. Minimum: 0.5% (AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, Page 3-130), flatter is allowed when there is no curbing and a crown that will drain the roadway of stormwater. We will have curbing on at least one side of the road the length of the project so 0.5% minimum grade should be met. Vertical Curves Crest Vertical Curve. The length of vertical curve for crest conditions will be determined by Equations 3-44 and 3-45 on page 3-167 of the AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. These equations for vertical curves provide sufficient distance for a driver to come to a stop if an obstacle is within the roadway. Passing sight distance 196 20 will not be met on the bridge, therefore the road will need to be striped as a "no passing" zone. Sag Vertical Curve. The length of vertical curve for sag conditions will be determined by Equations 3-48 to 3-51 on page 3-173 of the AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. This will not require that the sags be illuminated, as there will be sufficient sight distance provided by vehicles headlights' alone for stopping sight distance purposes. Cross -Slope All traffic lanes will have a design cross slope of 2% on the roadway and bridge structure, except at intersections and where tying into existing where cross slope will be matched. Side Slopes/Walls Including walls in the final design will be beneficial from a permitting standpoint as they will minimize the amount of fill/grading work in the shoreline buffer. Walls would help avoid floodplain impacts that may be associated with fill that would otherwise be needed. Walls at the back of walk in some locations will minimize right-of-way impacts, particularly to parking at the Superette on the southeast corner of the 42nd and 124th intersection for the 124th St bridge crossing option. For these walls at the back of walk or other short walls modular block walls are an option. For medium height walls MSE walls may work, but during final design the temporary excavation for this type of wall needs to be considered and the temporary excavation necessary could impact existing improvements and/or utilities. For the 42nd Ave S option at the furthest north abutment, on the west side, it is a sheet pile wall is likely the best option. A sheet pile wall eliminates the need for a temporary excavation to construct the wall. Another advantage to a sheet pile wall is that the global stability of the wall can be achieved by simply increasing the embedment depth of the sheets, whereas deepening the embedment depth of an MSE wall creates the need for an enormous temporary excavation — possibly leading to additional conflicts with existing improvements. A sheet pile wall may be the best option for the 124th St option on the east side of the bridge as well, although there are additional options in this location that should be further explored in conjunction with the geotechnical engineer, environmental permitting specialist, and structural team. Right -of -Way The 42nd Ave S option would require permanent acquisition from the Tukwila Community Center, Parks property, to tie the wider bridge into the existing roadway. This would trigger additional environmental permitting for 4f requirements. This option would also require collaboration with King County to utilize their existing DNR Aquatic Lands Lease for the temporary bridge location. Since the 42nd Ave S option proposes to utilize the existing bridge shifted to the east and utilized as a detour bridge there would be overlap 21 197 between the temporary detour bridge location and the sewer easement. Temporary construction easements (TCE) would also be needed from both Tukwila Parks and Rec and King County. A TCE with Tukwila parks would be needed at the Tukwila Community Center for the temporary bridge to connect to the existing roadway, it is likely the splash park would need to be closed for the duration of construction and trails and maintenance roads within the Tukwila Community Center property would be impacted. The parking lot may need to be utilized while portions of the existing roadway are needed for stockpiling and construction efforts. A TCE with King County would be needed for both their sewer easement as well as the trail connection and reconstruction under the new bridge. For both options a portion of the trail would need to be regraded to assure there is a 10' separation between the trail grade and the bottom elevation of the new bridge. This would require a TCE from King County who owns the trail. There is already an existing maintenance agreement between King County and the City of Tukwila. See next section for more information regarding the trail. The 124th St option also has right-of-way concerns. Two driveways and the Superette driveway would require right of way acquisition or TCEs. The right-of-way acquisition required at the intersection of 124th and 42nd would eliminate some parking at the Superette even with a block wall and pedestrian handrail at the back of walk, and the parking lot would need to be converted to a one way. The positive is a TCE for a temporary bridge would not be necessary as the existing bridge would be utilized until the new bridge is open eliminating the need to tie into the roadway utilizing the Tukwila Community Center property. This option may eliminate the need for 4f during permitting, however a TCE may still be needed for the 124th St option. Trail Connection The trail allows, pedestrians, bicycles, and horses so there is a 10' clearance requirement to meet the active transportation need. More than 10' clearance may be required by emergency services or maintenance and this will be evaluated and coordination with emergency services and maintenance teams will occur during final design. Trail areas to be reconstructed shall consider chapter 1515 of the WSDOT design manual. To meet these requirements the trail would need to be realigned to lower the elevation as the bridge passes under the new bridge. Walls would need to be constructed with both options along the trail. The maximum trail grade is 5% or 8.33% with a 5' min. length ramp every 2.5' of elevation change to meet the requirements of the Public Rights -of -Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). The trail connection for the 124th St option will require walls on either side of the connection to meet grade requirements connecting the proposed bridge to the existing trail. During a community engagement occurring online between August 31 and 198 22 September 30, 2021 with an in-person meeting Gallery Day meeting held September 15, 2021 three connection alternatives were voted on by the community. Natural concept 2 for landscaping was selected (see appendix G) During final design this natural landscape selected will be tied into the trail connection as much as possible while meeting the above noted PROWAG requirements for connection. This includes a 10' minimum width with 2' shoulders on either side and illumination is highly recommended with this vegetation style. Utilities Existing utilities crossing the 42nd Ave S bridge include a 6 -inch high-pressure PSE gas main and a 10 -inch City of Tukwila water main. Both utilities would need to be extended along Interurban Ave to the 124th St bridge if that option is selected and pursued. The existing utilities do not currently extend north past the 42nd Ave S and Interurban Ave intersection. The sewer main crossing under the Duwamish is proposed to remain for either alternative. The bridge replacement in it's current location along 42nd Ave would require major coordination for placing the temporary bridge design during construction as noted above. Stormwater Stormwater runoff from either of the alternatives will discharge to the Duwamish River. There are existing conveyance systems located in both 42nd Avenue and 124th Street. These systems may require modifications due to the project but will be utilized to the maximum extent possible. The 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project will be designed to meet the requirements outlined in the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as adopted by the City of Tukwila. The project will likely be subject to a full drainage review because it will likely result in more than 2,000 square feet of new plus replaced impervious area. Typically, Core Requirements 1 through 9 and Special Requirements 1 through 5 apply to a project that is subject to a full drainage review; however, in some cases the project may be exempt from some of the core and special requirements. The Duwamish River is considered a major receiving water downstream of the S. Boeing Access Road which means that projects are not subject to flow control requirements. This project is located approximately 9,000 feet upstream of the S. Boeing Access Road and thus will likely be required to meet the flow requirements. Treatment of the stormwater runoff prior to it being discharged to the Duwamish River will likely be required. The type and level of stormwater treatment will be determined as part of the final design phase but will likely be a treatment system such as a StormFilter®. 23 199 2.9 Structural To investigate viable structural bridge concepts that provides all of the City's desired goals for this roadway facility, TranTech's structural team focused on bridge structural concepts that meet important design criteria like minimizing/ eliminating the number of piers within the Duwamish River's 100 -year flood zone, being cost effective with minimal future maintenance costs and quicker construction. The team focused its attention to four viable structural concepts, namely: 1. Standard steel or concrete girder 2. Precast segmental concrete 3. Cable -stayed 4. Truss Through careful examination of each viable alternative, our structural team concluded that clear -span alternatives (i.e., concepts 2 through 4 above) are beyond City's allocated budget for this project. Hence the investigations focused on exploring standard types of steel and concrete bridge alternatives on the two identified viable alignments of 42nd Ave S (i.e., existing alignment) and S 124th Street. After careful consideration of the River's 100 -year flood levels and the connectivity constraints explained in Section 2.10, the following span arrangements were chosen for further investigation with respect to both of the aforementioned alignments: 1. Three span precast prestressed girder 2. Three -span steel plate girder Moreover, for the steel alternative, the design team is envisioning utilization of weathering steel which is not only a low maintenance material but also does not require a paint coating. Appendix J presents the preliminary concept drawings of these alternatives. In the following sections, further details regarding the final viable alternatives are presented: Conventional L shape abutments/ piers are assumed for all considered alternatives. Per geotechnical engineer's preliminary recommendation, deep foundations like oscillated drilled shafts, are envisioned for the substructure of all alternatives. 200 24 2.10 Constructability This work element is performed by TranTech team member Ott Sakai (OS). OS performed constructability review, construction schedule and cost estimate at the TS&L level for the 42nd Ave S Bridge replacement. Appendix K presents the results of their investigations for the following: • Project Constructability Review • Project Construction Cost Summary • Bridge Construction Schedule As seen OS has prepared a "contractor - style" estimate for the bridge structure based on the Concept drawings we received from the design team. OS cost estimate has been prepared using crew -based costing, local wage rates, current market material prices and budget quotes obtained from precast concrete producers. The estimates were compiled using the HCSS Heavy Bid construction estimating software. 25 201 2.11 TS&L Alternatives Comparison To compare the studied viable alternatives identified in the previous section with respect to desired City goals for the project an Alternative Comparison Matrix is developed. This matrix has the selected criteria as its rows and the studied alternatives as its columns. One of the important criteria in this matrix is the project cost. Appendix L presents the Engineer's Opinion of cost for this project for all investigated alternatives. The alternatives are ranked in an ordinal ranking fashion and then weighed per their respective importance. The criteria weighs are determined with close coordination with the City team. The following are the ordinal ranking definitions: State 1 — Substantial Benefit State 2 — Moderate Benefit State 3 — Minor Benefit State 4 — No Benefit The alternative with the combined lowest score is the most optimized alternative with respect to the chosen desired criteria in this ordinal ranking method. The table below presents this Matrix where it is seen that the Alternative 2B (i.e., 3 -span steel plate girder superstructure on the S 124th Street alignment) provides the lowest score and consequently brings the most benefit to the City as the owner of this bridge. 202 26 Environmental: Natural River Prow Conditions Permit -ability rr,po rim Fac: Iris (outo10C) Align ant B S 124th Sweet _ 15 1 2 1 1 Social: Temporary MOT Impacts AesthetiC5 5 1'i 2 2 L Costs: Construction Costs (Bridge and Approaches) Right of Way Requirements 15 :2 3 2 i. 11 Total Score: Sum (Importance Factor State) 100 235 210 185 1EiO Concluding remarks and recommendations In close collaboration with the City, the design team made careful examination of a final list of two alignments, 42nd Ave S and S 124th Street, and two viable structural bridge alternatives for each alignment from all facets of engineering disciplines, seeking an optimized bridge solution with respect to the above mentioned criterions. The viable alternatives for each alignment are: 42nd Ave S Alignment Alternative 1 A - Three -span precast concrete girder Alternative 1 B - Three -span steel plate girder S 124th Street Alignment Alternative 2 A - Three -span precast concrete girder Alternative 2 B - Three -span steel plate girder The study presented in this report leads to the conclusion that the steel plate girder on the S 124th Street Alternative 2B (i.e., Three -span steel plate girder bridge) best meets the criteria set forth for the project. The construction cost of this alternative is estimated at a value of approximately $21.5M for the 2024 construction season. The team's recommendation is to advance design of the Alternative 2B on S 124th Street alignment through final PS&E phase. 204 28 Appendix A — Existing Plans 29 205 206 rt) ) 05 7 CO • , SEC. 10 - TWP. 23N - R.4 E.W.M. \ Ifi x‘ • "-r s -1, .. END piv3JEDT IF\J _ ,,,,,6don 0i , R • 1 30 A • 0 -..4 • 11. . s A.641° 5.9.0. No Tn.\ o 0•42. „ 1 — 1W1.7.17-1.--11Wilai • • , . 2 0 • 5 . It Z. 5. 'IR:L:1.1 /.4' SO. m. V.- • 4 • 0. PR°jECT — g .4:975:47: i 86894; 15,\I : „*____.----- 9-i). .. ri 42 ND tk_v_g • 2 4 • •VD V •,li . _ ft ,,,---'---119... ,..„,e::;,.., •41. BEGIN 7 s.' .t. 0 +49 ... riii 1,0 , 10 ,..0 ___----- , r ‘„,_t_g_i-1-7- 1\ !:;) \ Iiii,„ -- or 4 i., ...-c; t•-, ..... 1... l• PROJE A El 1 01Tti „ckl Z,,.., ....;.......110 ..-1 o; t iw -------' a, `4. tis -- - ..-.. • .. t . .... .. . . . . . . . .......iii.1,?:, C _,. ---------"------- A . — . . .o• „ ,, , ,,- - - -,i, „ 1 s r NM • RIVERTON AVE- 90' 0 orAir • 09 5 E ..” • . . WAll )1) D ; AV,.)17-''• 42 t4 ..,..,• , 6 • , 1:1 . ).-- • .,,,,,,t..• .s.-.4, -.• , - , ..r ,..., • e'''•i'l.C- ,---• t*.1.!:!" ' .1 t '•:. IA '• o 1111W-111 . A ditiet,Igiiii-- '. P, ..,•.-* • . • ot ,, in"I„?. , . -'7 iti 0 ., / 41 ig . 2 ...4'r / ADOPTED IIT THE MHO Of MHO COMM oolonssiotios SEATTLE. WASHINGTON I.A., 111...,,Z 7 / 1H° '' 01/ 7 '- t)* 10-0 - 11-0. 7'-0" ...4-1..../ "i) q * *mu- - arM : \i .t% 1r. ",! iol '..,,, Crushed Stone Type I-1 Asphaltic Concrete Crushed Stone 41,. ,,....q. a.-1 Tract 47 * M. .1 .GI Surfacing Top course 2- 1/2"compclopth Wearing Course - Leveling •• close C- I" . CamPidsath " F - PI/2 Surfacing Top course 2-V2"comp. KING COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT D. L EVANS, cou NTT ROAD EllaINEEE c..?..2 id • ,epP* ..9. (...1 , v D-0"at NW. cm of bridge crown 1/4:1 PROFILE GRADE BRIDGE OVER NO.3175 REPLACEMENT OUWAIMISti RIVER AT RIVERTON,WASH. .....r SURVEY Mo. I02341/44C-” 8 teMrSCiH R..O..._JEOTtla.A.._1.1•.4N0.4.",:l .4 . .., . SHE .. . :" s.) Widen pavtto24ot brde beg. 30bkrmbridgen g ' Superetevation asmatedonsheetno.2 COMMISSIONER'SDISTRICT 4ilt-friE1ii. I,oTEO-.—EO050T 3.1t" N.PT.g. 301:. •P '9.. .'-.°,„4 ,• , 4„,,„ ‘ / q'. Feather ecton to meet existingroadways •••110,10 II .I...S " ,,,.... 36 FT. ROADWAY SECTION --11/...----..'....."0 COUK, *O. .114.11MII Ibotf*tft 4. MG.. Oh 4:744' l'IVSTE..314 . . R1 4,,61.5 , 1 I Wiin . I _ .171:13E12 q 1 [ Mr, - Sr 40' leering - Lorna sum K.C,A.S. )1:4 /-1 Actittattt:. c • - MI Roman eltistIng StruiSturs 4ype I -I Asphaltic canc. III - _ .._ _ SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES - - cl. C. 20 • -C1.1'26 CrUshed stens surfacin Oft . _ - ' (S.C. 20 tons-cl.F24tons Crushed Stone surfacing -wwwil-- 111ww..4_ -Clearing - Sta. 0.49 to 6.10 - 561 lin.ft. 0.106 miles Iump Sum Com. Exccnt. 100 c.y. - . - 2 Top aoune tS - c.y. ____.__ Top course 5 c.y. - Borrow incl. overhaul 295 c.y. Crushed Stone Sur f odor top as., 35 c.y. - - - _ _ _ Type 1- I Asphaltic cont. cl. G. 40 tons io ci. F. 50 tons -type 30 1 ;11 sd el '°- Boom guard roil I des. 5 87 knit Remove 8 Replace exist. guard roil 39 limit. - --_-. ---- - P'. s,. a.. *a .„. Remove exist. Structure lump sum • io, . Riprop - Class 9 200 c..y. _ _ Al _ 1 * 0 0 _ _:. satect Rdwy Borrow 260 c.y. ._ . . _. . ea 0 -.... ":2-__..5%-.""1111111114111111111 m , tc, BRIDGE 1,1 00 - exist grade;-„, G. furn. untrt timber piling 4,200 }Mit •hil _ _ ,,.........., . ._,-,..-_, Furn. pm -cost conc. piling 500 limit 20 - ,, oi ,n Driving timber piles 1 04 only Driving conc. piles I 2 only lump275 t tym ScCt'oncoZcrirn:ettsea...-Cecriloai 1111E111 - Isis AF -,_ ,s 15 __ - - - • _ - 220 te. , DOA 7 ' , i 0 ----, 3 45 c.y. Concrete- class H 340 c.y. ' .,. —la Steel feint bore 64,000 lbs. Structural steel 444, 000 lbs. 0 0 VOX. 4 • r 0 Cast steel 2,500 lbs. 10 ._ _ 1,..... P.. 4r Emmet 4'on ' C.vs: — - - — CC 0... - 1 ' I Forgins 700 lbs. g Bridge droins 7 only III LSI _______ _fr.: _I 01.31 • .15 suril-5 • IIII Z ts./ Metal Railing 350 Unit. Rum. Ru. 8 drive timber test piles 2 only Furnish &drive pre -cast conc.tost piles 2 only as -.. C41030 Rc.17. 5 1111 - cc _ _-_-_ • . 'IP ilf ? Ini 1111 ------ I ... • 0- c tom - ,- i 0,._ si i . . -el.R• • , I. Rainy Barrow -1:. it II, -' - B (30 Ole C. ....NH ' 1 20 c.y. Sorrow 120 c.y. . ' MEI II ...ill so• v 100 cp. Emb. 20illi0 c ' L 1 0 5 - r It • fianuw. S. 17uway/il 67-20 T / / / A� // // / 0 / /// ti SPC /O -Y 23 N = R. 4G WM \� \O Q „t, Apo Y /.\. / ,�iway Cron / /SV ...,VA,111„1111,W VA AtiAlltr, ),-- /„, , 111111PA AllidairAll% 4 :','-'-'7,- uw•��s,��.11111 �ssssrsuei�esus� r i.ommenvalsr �m F eltwtion r 5PtPer f rr'f fa End r Q. 1 4t k ' diejw 1 /7/ Dumped .ep Pap 2-3 lfirXy average $JZ /Ca, Tbs., Slope 1 ver to /1 %, approx. From El 0.0 to E1 /5.0 ,'L A N 9 o 9 3t 8 ti 0 8 9 110 GENE.AL NDTGS ALL rtuA.nat and wnrKmonship shall be in ococedanae with the rr- , quire( ends of the .State of li&shirr, D can'( ent of Higghrwys, .5ko.thrri Sserificatinns good qnr/ Bridge Candruetion thud April /945.. rbcting eeevatirns air suiier.2 -to cfiar,,eJ r,4nq on icon&Lan nn/errL encounterd and teinh c,' slew( s/n1( rscd be ca' until the £/x '`- frg ee vtions have been aelerminrd in the F.rld Alt e'irr/rte in seas shad be Cars 'N' m//. Coxre•te %n P.irr shafts pinfhs and cywnres s/nll he' chss 7' in' c. AfIof/xr ca :re+ doll be Gas :A"m c. Co-crelrPi/es (/ cionlispamnrmi.m Lcn'nq w(.,e .se 25 77Mber A'ks sin!( develop es mnimw7, bearohg valve 4,f24 marcs AC( yr Juin( sleet' and dire drill 2r jiainleYl wrlir ore sip mat of Rd lord pain/, Formulo /oto 4-4_470d knd via* a , 1 Firth coat o f prawn paint, ,obrniIa 0-/, arrd a slrcivai {crid carat of green faint Frsrme;1a C-5. Angk does of Cond./or .Part shall be paint wh to 220'0" c. to c. of G3hs ELEVATION E.rrstn9 9trtxeurr Rot .,hown) r•20. 7/7//49 GGA. Aye: S APPROXIMATE OUAI.IT'JTIES 17./rnav y �vsti 7 5trutvre - Lanp_,tem !trzct re- E<ca io tion / 100..Cr• Yd Furni. h,Fr (intre,/d Tinier FvcJaTcn ir.o 4ZQ4.Ln t9. Famish69 - fir,../ Gra.leie 5:u-datitrr f3iJ, . _.2GR.T Lf 0,-;vin TinierTa„rtbtioe, Pik: , i-1 Fbc► - _ . _ _ . /04 F rh 22/owing este rcwnci t,on Aks,in _Aoor._.____ 1.Z_.Zach Shorrny and Gifu Ltar p SCrn , Cmncrer Gass 'A' ,in 'rice). _27, ,...C+4i Cep c re Er, Class •F , in _ /% cr _..1.34.%-:a Jbt Concrete, Gass 'N', in_ fixer .-. --340.--6,-NY S/ / /n{cNci,-- Bors, in Place 6 OQC3/ 3 Sfrtcturv' Sim: , in / 1C1. 444000 -tb..as Cast Sferf , 7, PbcaJ, $00. {2u Fragmgg o in FXace- - 700 Y�lnds Bridge .1"217 175 , rn Finer - 7 Eel Meta( ,falling , in Floor 350 Lw.. Ft Fur,;sn,n, arta .,nnnf T+mbet 7est P'/..s Z Ccch Fvrnishiny and .2-,-nr•5 ffroul Ca.47ist Fib .. __Z. !aril DESIGN SPECS AASHO_J944 DE SIGN LC14D/NG H 20 -44 KING COUNTY WASHINGTON D.L.EVANS COUNTY ROAD ENGINEER .DUWAM15H RIVER-ALLENTOWN BRIDGE laflND ISSUE 15-5 GEN -ER AL FLAN: LA'Y'OUT PRtPp 1:25D 15Y CECIL C, ARNOLD 4 RAYMOND C. 5MITH. CONSULTING ENG INELR9 St=`ATTL9.WAS HINATON .. JUNE lot$+. �ESIGNEL7 C.C.A. ""�ltE�T. �z CNEC.ICED 2C5 til` 14 SWCt:Ts. F7-2OA 9d 0 /2f// 2 3, arc" 9 Sg 7116• 31'-0" Curb Ears -� 1040. 9`- E1 2532 --- -- d/rdar A, /0=9' 616 37212e 04 -Po `135 curb users -r I 23'" f(9 e is. fop. 23 -4/ .9 o /5 bl. 1 23 - e, '9, N/ 15" oifernafr w,/ , LJG,Or'hy/CSS .PQOd, i.r Arca_— I ,1 1 .FLAN r/O =r ,� 4-j' M.B,posfarx}aoroge .'c¢/e tr"1 ( } ,- g- i,v ql/ 4'C SW b-acLe>ts L,.. i �i _r. ('e- poxeYY - Girder A E/.23.55 - Qrrdcr .A" ?Q{ E/ 23.44 E1.23.34 m m I 4=4' SECTION CNS Crass beam reinforcement cnly 24=0' sit -" hangers 4 3�'machine bolls Rm l.. Mat I 44 3- LT 14-lru 55CTION Cross beam reinfarcement-m/y' 12'-0. 4'25' 7r Sidewolk ;zt3eri�.f tn.3-S.nac7`� i 20- RI ®>=r40,11c1 a' G' 7-"s J�j stirrups tat ' otliolcari5 rise. Et. 23.29 Curb tine) 04 } CZ. Truss) t •.zpaccr 05' 3hoyvn Slope %fi each way thorn 4' /%2"Jtruvahr-ira «n 1-9,4. 15 7 "tto 4-1'lairbi +V /angers tn 1=5' g'"'slirrUps 10-1'= 7 10'-10' tL airder of L ,,fend wo// F 1-i"tra43' * sfncer 10"-10`- 10'10' 10`- F✓L 4N SOUTH APPRCACH Abutment 1; fn Pier -.2 P , "Ox.3o`•G' sfrrup/ n9ers- a'.x 32u3' beam , Cars (Perri in field) 9`-54' Qof6i- rot 4 of end wall pi Const. Yi3' re1114�-.r0 -r 3-f" 02, k1 5,00C= IP / G' • 2/40' 2$ - i. 0 Girder- sflrrups _ S CTIQN AA Rein ' errkant Girder % C truss dcorrn 2Q� cdzitrneat 1.a or endr*-- l-0-arin9 i 1 /C6' /'-6', S-ECTION 8-B End 1,310 .SECT/ON C -C End beorrz -. gym i. !-5" Dimensions 4' rein Sumac "Ear oil9,rders toe 7'- TYP/CAL SECTION Note: g Scale d" -/`-O' _ . _ — _... -. wide / j " deer- coker -on a/! rcinibrrementl escept Alt reinforcing dimensions refer 10 cr.rr/er *answer of Cars Eteroriona refer fn ryo eFraadway slava Section E. -f 4 9,9 shown on sneet4. Far cndwail reinforcement see sheer 5 f r cndt corn rciegt rcaman/ sae anaaf 6 Concrete Class 'A: KING COUNTY WASHINGTON D=L. EVANS COUNTY _ROAD'tNCsINER2._.._ CUWAi11SH R1VER-ALLENTOWT>i $RI pat.`. PSOND ISSUC NO. 155 SQU1T ti_ APPROAC ti SPAN=- _ Pft'PAFLntD BY �ECiL C.. ARNOLD 4 RAYMOND c._SMiTH / 5AYTL -.WASH! IGTON ' 7uurr 1949 DasiGNco 7/z(/49 4.:".;.4.. CHEGKED b Jets ... (Z /rusts. - 1=6d f=6 9'5a 0 tl Lit 6 41 10'-0" /O=.9,4' I 7'44 I Gurbbars-4 x3/=0'® -j 6 6 "d-Truss J Curb nser3 I i 30 J i Girder 'B' 11=3' birder 8' 6irdcr B' Z9' -7f' i to -o^ I 9=5g 616" :Curb tiler r3-g4E50l3' • I 23-J a Ccis'iap T T 23 3 Co /S'bof. I ?3-k 3 8/5'allwithiO4 -1/-0 Girder f( f(10 --,Q Curb tars 4 jrox3/=O' pEt 2110 76- P 6' —a-141 0 C t8' stirrup s4 It Crai 4 44rc td -3'in :51Y bean. Rend in Held. 4- i''@-14 incl. spacers 8'-l0 6-J3tirrvps P/6' -7 3-i'"3O1p✓xLe6" - it 64 Ql_stirrups PI8' f� 8` -LOP 8-/Oiit Girder at ;Lac end wall =PI AN -NORTH APPROACH Pier 3 to Abutment 4 P- 4 "05 30'-6' stirrup hangers- 2=3' Pspce 1(0 3"1=6 2.3' ACC 14 aooces l=6 'tl-O' ?3 -}'." be 7m s//rrups SECTION A -A Reinforcement- birder B' V i t/t A / 4',/ Curb line r c6e C Girder a/ 4 of end wall 2= 3" 11 crt6,Zi 3,9'14 7 / �Gorzst. jo of . 72-f 10 ih all 4 sidewalk brackets -44'"x 2=0 stirrups hanger i 1 l 7, 4-r�T stirtole T S�CTtON'Ff' Class beam rcinforcemen/ only _ . Sec tion H -H some except Side -Au ; braced&. r 4-j'� s/ir. E' h 7" end weal/ 6d^ Q bearing SECTION 8-5 End de -ow -r, 7" 4- iaE,krIT, 4end/ wall4 abufinenl - Z"y 71 4-i! cir — s/frels'T r1_.. CT/ON Crit Cross [earn. reinforcement qty -. - SECTION C -C' Noce Ery'bevrnreihfa acmerrtsee Pier 3 detail sheet? Pbr YVing Wad/ details see she 5 Sections I? -O t 5-5 shown on sheet 3 Erdsa//rcihforcerren,' see obutmciri 4 sheets. S'evo tions refer fo /oa of roadway slob. All reinforcing dimensions refer to o:rn'ci- /0 Gel, / _ -- .1121-s Provide 4 "clear cover unless a%herwisemeted- Concrete- foss >4 • 5colc 4'/a'1 _.._ ..... l -0,r -TYPICAL SECTION -CR 3BE4M5 K 1 NCS COUNTY SH - M TONI D.L. EVANS COUNTY ROAD ENOINEE R DUVJAM SH RIVER-ALLENTOWN BR CxE=; BC2ND t55UJE Nc 155 NORTH APPROACH SPAN` PRGPARtEII LSY' .. __ CECIL C. ARNOLD 4 RAYMOND. C .SMITH ON5Ut1�i?O LWMuersts.. SEATrtL WASH TQid _ we- 5t4N Y � ,YtlNttzl9+t'3 ----- 9M'1'.r� CH�CSC or _ . _,....Y' ' L4-,SRifAIS t7E S It S i4 CD a td hOcoisa.4'. �i 'r-.-.1 T k .1-' ---9- %'2 t. 0 I --4---,-- 4— �53 /M 4„ig ZX) -� --- .gaprox. roonc, v/ Le 0/...4.45,7' Gnf rifWo//y 6/. /.5.00 1- K N -74 .. /a'4-47.7. se-CT/ON 4 c,v /0=3-%0 /pa' (�,/ 1. /6"Conm /%i Yca -. ANS F✓..U.ao= a/i Ei v r/o.. Fr 7 /'w of .Pose/'r..7 .T/440 a/ 9 ih c o{ /ha o /1,<,0` q 0! Cyr64'm ��� 4i Ia( Aod-2-%y d6orr whoa i s.�/c wa/K occc.is otOr- P / F / /2`6iofmr� 1:l2 4)? ...$2.9a,/dQ-c.f 244/2"ac.G. er ' @ Boz {Ww/ �E/C✓. /-Ta2 t 0 r b —, 4'/rtvoµr-49 r. G cmcr%4 !o leis c p.% srcc/ 20"/i�ha J coo r %-%f /C,4/ .SEC 77 ^! . .ene r/ -rcK7- /t/o, PLAN , 907 t"1 NT No. I ENO BEAM FLOOR r--6" f. 20.00 ! 4 11//N‘ !4/A .L PG44/ Ifff tI — l ! I L ,' 4c idci Acid Z -%'awry - - o y/Ae/c Siam ...alL' - - 000ufS.. nc nib 15B / -/ 1°Ha 0,495.4- -.sic,/ /e9'd.4.7ic/ /�- /' /'icCor Coo—pc a. yyy p% c .rake >' "V+.s 7ne.Ix/enc/ .4'r0'r.n/O �% xtcr TYePtc41. .Sec 7-/c ?/v Pt/A/L L 1='/LA.T re -Ye NOS-.^ /re.' .0e57.7sn+4.r /Toet'+sc s N. F /year- .• �F .e Csoc'h .. M1 e`oe {y— cax.c4 74> -/hia d5r' /fsy. Conc. 13%c.S //V.s-ze, " ,e2.4.1.44 77 W NoTE� /Va. _TyP.ca/ c - A- L3/c Rr>oi/_r BOJT ,744/..// 75-.9rc.44 SccTraN .-484/7-/-r.EN Z' Nco. ... PLAnt AQci-re- Va Atz-or- E,w2 S Ari ,r-Loci/t• SYSTCcH sifyea w^/ �.TGIcerr=17 LrN6S 75- '/c a / Wil/G b{/RLt -_ .--'c R.,,".•/ -p✓ K f NCi COUNTY WASHINGTON RL.EVANS, COUNTY ROAD 1=NGIN1E R DUWAMISH 1:21VE2'ALLENTOWNBR1Xt 6ONP 199uE 15•S BENTS t 4 4, 1>l2EPAKED >6Y Cry 1 L. C.AANOLD RAYMOINO. C.3ioUTf1 CON SULT11.IG Ef141NM'S SEATTLE WASHIN6TQN JUNE 194e 34 SN e3ET S'4 51 ft. CHECKEIO LY Cc; • ql 7 - - _zr^•¢ �idcr '� o �G.dGrEj" 6c1.eer.:4 '__. r— -,tet / A /6. J. o /t Tvu /9P�Or>o Ch .22:3vr1 ��Hao/ts-h' o.c _.mss. K/.sy /7 N W -Ev1Y 37 /7. .53-92 . t •� zAcci7 6u-dcr-s- , ,, •SA<wvri--7'• -We're/. irk 11� /s ' / $'1: N'tis..; NN"� "./ 7s�.-' ,A/hll / qk / / ti L bdt;! / Q C-oPin/6- A Al o." Nor,; ---4`,....-/Ac/ 43r3 &'-',7,40 Wo// ri o7' -3'/ioivp in 'this vlcw ("4- Ti:nhor P!/cr 29 Yonr co ch ) HALF /4:2.A /V P/E,Q o" 7}'P/C4-TEC 770.A./ QF PZ /N7/•/ Showm9 ,E'c/ryi c c.ot Gori.//J .Sa^q /er criMC / / *v //O/E'f16E PLAN 77-",4='/CA L /70,e A L L //V 7-1-7`5 -f 1 sd s2 _,7•t ria - 1 r" ar, rr mar 419 S /jz 9r 52 �ct'6.c ,cl. /757 _- L- _ --}- e¢ S /B I- — ,.44,,,-5"7"6-;'S) cch J it Ti -1 * y.. 2" /POcrE.t L /ll.K / 6 .pogo ;'SP, -/3 -^P/irztf7 3-%z40 327) YsS Osnoch sEcr/o/v A4 4" / O7". A — ?J-r/'r 38• /Gf a.e' Exch z< /x/4 ,_f EL O vA 7-zo/5f .. 'cf," =.s- j/ -Vs Tqo. tZkvY. 7/z//4y CCA _1t/CIRTtf L`,4,7 ELEv,c}T/O/y/ (310e vett. --i�'l/rr/ihT # /fp/Jraoc", .S,00n Fi,4 t4^' i/� Sco/c 4./.9""-/- a -7- �'L A V C' /ROE.fl ji'4c,C�R -7oP Pa 8 ems./�,:<,_/ KOGK�,e BOTTOM PLATE 8 .Prq.N;r<4 z 1� t a or /r prl� -�,, 1 k Dr,// /70"//c3.4,..1 -u • =, !/ d ssce/ 1' F}Cr}TfQ,rV a E/E-V/,),v 8-8" �r ..roi . // c," o''/=* i9 N 2-G 6744-1z L -C" FLS K1h1G.COUNT'? WA4HtN5TON- - DL.EVANS COUT,iTV RCsACL-fisittfttEfi�=. UWAM151t-RIVER-ALLENTOWNISRtUC2E BOND 15SUE 15-5 PIER 2 PREPARD CtC L_GARNOLD < 2471NbONDC5Mt714 CONSULTING EwatimEE!?S. _DEA.TTUE -WASHINGTON - _ JUNE MIS- PR£P4 et) dY 12C5 5H41G'. - CHECKED pY CL.4. M. $titttL !��!fn r i a- t F ,7-tz.sstr o eibeeva,— or" " ° / / / r.p‘,45h 4Pc1.5. A/o. 6 CC;10,WV6 AiV ./21:7"' /14/ 71r, C.se-bc/ .7 ,;, (4.0,9 72:4o6o.- F -',//os 4;1, 29 ) ,/ALF-^ PLAN - sfO-core• kVatrIle"- /4F'Pk'o,-ICH A/ ,OKrA/Z- Re-9ee-,c) Fore P.r.E //O, ...e...4-4xibeeD /case /t/a..3 rf-rr" 11 - 77,d. , t `Mr o sac,', are,/ /3.47..""<IC App,f,c-,AcH .5PAA/ G.e"A! RocA--Ew e<247.- -1-.E•eo)(./.,eff.0 fib.e. Ma, Z. A'c'. o /41-jea.c. --t J F 4 77=., "=,/,';145 f-- 'f,Sctir) Zro.o.2 Frio r1,2 /3-74 111111 ks/.4-5r P2.t/Arle2Ae C.X1.0.44.0,37 4,21.477eNzr q hos4tolf ) calk$ 4tiv,-.." 40-e 2',O" • e•• /...9 /i/V (V, cSindo,- /Co c,ea ,-, shop: -i-o -.5-Thoo r` Aro p-6, 7, -op ," - 14-7a, -5462", -,"re,". T 2.4: 33'1 -44e! 2-ir o-zaettr.4- 49.4;2 _ /ec,c...C.ff/e Lrc)7—ro,,f' .45c,L7 44). 7;4/L. - rE'14-12' No.(--agzass_cad shoixo.--> EN? ..,Czegae.ig Roc KF- efs..TifAim. -Cc oalo 1_40 K I NG COUNITY-WASH I NGTON L. VANS, COUNTY ROAD ENG! NE'El2 DUWA M15 H RIVE R-ALLNTOWN BDE 150t,4n ISSUE 15 PI ER 3 ..harrailt09111011 pat pkat-cy _CECiL C. AllNOLD 12/4,YI`4011Cfr---5MiTH COUSULT I ND EI,IDINIeRs '5EATTLe* WASH11,4TC114 194.5 "CE5141,1ED !SI' RCS .1 -CHECKED fl`f C(4, NOTE Tension thus -4 Compress/on thus - P/473 RE4C7/01,1 EACH 7-12(,( 5 D. LOAD 2260' L. LO8D /SI N./.LOAD 67x- DL - 264 L -IZ35 _ 45B U D[S' `rte r' rr a - ' XX Nom^ �� Q ^\ 0 Q.; 4 of Wes Truss AhA Z ' 7L -262 LL -122.2 IL U 01 -368 IL -/71.7 I L - 21.8 DES -5415 of East Truss TOP LATERALS U4 D4 - 368 LL -/71.5 IL - 21.8 DES -544.6 DL -374 LL -i73.8 CL - V! DE5 568.9 U6 EX,PAN. Dl. +/60.0 LL + 74:5' IL / 9.0 _D55 f 2435 L DL LL DES 152.2327 L 18R 497.6 nji DL / 383 LL .17$8 /L + 21.8 DES/554.9 /0 Panels 6' Z2' -O" 270'-O" DL -374 LL -174.6 DES, 1,7 54/ \ Q'L• DL 1343 LG t /588 IL I 19.3 DES + 521.1 2-15e°338 !-Corn zz„r �1-ci71R 22. .7 F0 0- 7-2 3� 339 ?-C 15•@'39 /Cavil n" .30/H 22" EVATION OF EAR (WEST)TRUSS Sca(e 2-c/Se40 77 /58'40 2-215840 2C15G 40 P -L /5,63,gD 1-C0r.P722xi ®!-(pr.V ZZx� /-Cor9 CZ.�`/ fovlr'P?x 2' /�nvPlzx• 50i Z2x i-.3org zz. U7 oL -293 - L /33.6 L - /63 OPS -462.8 DL -284 L L -1377 IL - /6.0 -4327 r� Om\g dcr h I • ' y / h<4'<7 4 �r sr� h DL, /600 I L 746 9.0 8E542436 2-0158.33-9 i-Cor�zzx -3olq?2xe by � N v « 'k 4 T 1' O P C /5 do 2-C /5 7-R /2* /0 Pane/s 7 22'-O" = 53010" 2-3 /55 2 .9 1.7., 2- C /58' 33.9 EXPAN FLOOR ,SEAMS -� 33 1 /30 ELEVAT/ON OF NEAR (EAST) TRUSS j-/NTE,RIOR STRINGERS 15 AP (8'60 S EXTERIOR STRINGERS /5 AF%'55 FIXED 18Yv‘-6355 -t o rf / g -i \ Alk a› p z _ z z /_ r r : ., 'EWALK ..57R1 RS leC@z5 BOTTOM LATERALS ci FLOOR SYSTEM ,Scale 1'=/5' Cf Bridge TOP ST GEOMETRIC LENGTHS ANO f ) C00RECT/OHS THERETO TO OBTA/N NO LOAD CAA'143CR UT �Ib .IWAY P`RAME,5 EAST 7KUSS WEST TRUSS Us' U1 UT Uz 06' 03 Os' 2.14 U4.' U5 Ue �' U7 U8 N /0, 22'= 32O• NO LOAD CAMBER LZ'AGRAAl NOTE 411 StrISSes and rrcct/oss arr 9i.en m ,c/Rs 2Xre15 3S"., open holes i"16 except ,ss sfnwn otiermor DESIGN SPC-CIF/CATIONS: AASHO 1944- LOADING 944LOAD/NG H 20-4-4 K1 NO COL,NTY. WA St-iYNC1Oi4- D:L-EVANS • COUNTY ROAD ENG1 NEER DUWAM 1 5 H RIVER-:ALLENTOWN BR1DCIE BOND 155U5- 15-S STEEL.SPAN-STRESS SHEET PR5PARED 5Y CECIL C. ARNOLD a RAYMOND C. SMITtt CONSULT! NO ENOINEER5 SEATTLE WAShttNTON JUNE 1949 D£"51ONET) C.G. CH eclat) (or EEyT ttp 667-20 G ,xro TOP (,ATEEAL -/-CP I -/P /6- TDP .ST=2i31 Q 4-G3�1s& (ExceF1 Ur L/ty „i U,= TOP STRUT U -Ug' 7-45 6"3a<,g 1-g l6. 3/i6 of a 5pr?4. Cr td ataz3)5 o c tr5p -ber,a -Laf g 8`na SP berd Z- Lof ,I r 2-6zs A Z - 26us E' L§/3 '9 -L� EPfectivr) /-5133.9 BotZP22+6 (i2 EC) ttnt 4%6 ENO POST ANP Oel H 6M 4 -ZX 4.3± P //<46 u rrt W CROSS "'RAMC CONNECTION /aT TOP CHORD - TYP/C.i L ,ft0-1DWAY STRUTS 4 s 6-3f- A tag�i - /- Ji". -5121 Apr dna oy Trus+ On/y C.2055 FRAME CONN fC 77 TO VERTIG4L - TYPICAL, L7l Tivst COLLISION{ RA /4, /-L 6"a Et 2-L43"�6 I-L3-�/z_ 3 !'3 ' Hcck bud tis NcalJ> Gussats mn S/d -. Jt Truas to "--, rtYltYe len.,on fes» watt Loef INT R i(L fi35Z /17 0 Qf P4ti5G W C - 24- z- F,eij bolts QL,Liie nut 3" 5 /3'¢5C' I- Ai 5' " ?-Tie /L' A8 5 W A -L BEAM 33 vv-'e.l h Erd G/ p (L9 01 O 0 ' 0 ill dJ 0 p, 0 0 Gass CJ An /O Panels@22=0-."220.O' ,A Lo -L z D/A, PH RAG MS 36 /-It /2. m �ai- f /-L2 /Pel 9-< $i6 'ie n al 3=0"' ci s 72>p 4 ,150Ilam• Typico LQWPR LA TGRAL5 2 -2, -,4x -lx (i2WC2 LATG¢.ALS S -3 -qty Ck Pare( Flet' DP.4141 J � Li -L4 2E l3aSO z-3 /z- 1,04/1'.0 CATCZ.4L_5 2 ss 4-,_50115 NOTE Sm Shw# f3 ie rider rryardinq Szvf 3pons /1„ i ,$TZIN6ER CONNECT/ON TO SCSNED TLOO1Z BL4I-Z ScoZrB„and-//O” KING COUNTY WASHING -ON D.LEVANS COUNTY ROAD ENGIN EER DUWAMISH RIVER—ALLENTOWN BR1DQE e01,10 IbsUE 1&-5 DETAILS—STEEL SPAN. - PRZPA ED SY CECIL G. AIZNOLD S RAYMOND G SMITH CONSULTINCp ENOItsJEERS SEATTLE, WASHING TON JUNE 19>9 pEsiCiNeD 25Y CCA. CHECKED E('TOP I- •--411-41--9- c,gf; 5. gend MILl 1.5-& 40 8 22.4 g 2Z- 7t ¼L4 41- 1t7., 5/16 (37'4" o -c ads.) Bend ferzi /0". 145- Aver:264.3j (.4 Us 1-5&440 1- Coy I- Ed12Z-4.1 EIAT-) .Y1 MILL 7 I .4 0 0 ',, erAcer'atuxesi M/1..L imisillienj IL, fpEp.4,Gi. 44S .ii illed /-sfit L'e it -16 4' - ernat 9 /6 44- ° III US -4 5 1- ea..3),,, (37,4Lc-c cit,nis) LOWEZ LAT2eAL INTrieSECTION As shown 7 7O panels End panesin"; la n II 1.5 e .50 7 -it i2-7 N U3- 06 2-8 13 40 /-Ccv 22., /-&/4' E,CIW7 LOVV2ZC1-1CP-D 0/APH246,A1S 4 -Ls 3 4- /- Web 8 /2-/�j 44- 2-1 2 -ft 12 -ii 70F' 1,47E2A I.. 2N7--m2StCTioN 2-2 L5 -JO / (8 27- / ace Z 776 (/Z ) i''5P129 aorkI g dend Ma. ........ • oesanain Notch Gussets on _Side ts to ,eceht- Terson plaer r neca.t bnar-eet -Guzr A/07 See Sheet es rgenera( O7- 2T 5 3. -%6 (3.4q -c -c chords) Fon OV.1 2-h I5 50 1-8 12,-.5 /39 /7, 27.• 22- anti IA' =/0" KINC.3 COUNTY WASHINGTON D.L EVANS , COUNTY ROAD ENQINIEER. DUWAM 1 SH ZVER-ALLNTOINN BR1DoE 5o»40 155Ut No is -S DETAIL5-5TEEL SPAN PARED BY CCLC..ARNOLD 4- RAytAON C MrrM CONSULTINO EtsAINMER 5 5EATTLE, WASNINCTON _ - JUKI notes te,yordin,.cy„,ons -Dt-siatmo CCA CsitCKM tY TOP ecT qtA, StitL`TS. 67-201 /-S /1 &xi /O-- /G' Ap+rotrrr. -.Sp 4- >b 29 ,4 /-4./0 f• e.d 1-at� - -turd /-Spy 4-A d' 4 • a U -U Z 15GD 33.9 /-Grp 1z -f &(k 12• %/b Ct2` £) 26cg 6 she.e addiGora�( fblol 2.&Zi U9 'L9 3 4 -3,. '6 !Z- ji6 3Z=/ G chords) re, FL -r ,i_.&farlt Ja+r.Shse.f /2 1 -Lot _ R g fEh _L�rbr. Lot__ G}4 G cry .3f+�S 9onJ /CS For Dotait at L) a k� /o snre't 9 PLAN Ft Loam 'Sfd 6v/' Z4 -/ F►) f3.Q( Da.` Ir IS GAS S758L Scaly !f "=1'D orf Of Truss SECTION A -A ..}• O/ Rana/ 5'/OEWALK Of TA/LS Nor: $ e Sheri- 6 far tenercl motes re a rchnf sten. 'cn. Scza(. A and = 4o a arpll:aa >fiav/1 • KING COUNTY WASHINGTON D,L.EVANS, COUNTY ROAD i=NINE'=R DLTWAMISH R1VE-R-ALLtNTOWN BRIDGE BOND ISSUE.' NO IS S. DETAILS -STEEL SPAN 1 2EF'R1?ED 6Y -CECIL C. ARNOLD 4 RAYMOND C. 5M1 11 coNSLILTIN> _ENatNEeRs.. . EAT Tt_ ,WASHINCIO 1 JVNE.1949 _DESIGNED BY CGA CHECKED BY TOG 67-20. I". 6Z4 -4s Ci .5- ad cl`r• c1Lfsior4IL. Wel..01146 4' 0 ,11 El) 41 74mo.:1 rxcan VG" RcADAAY STLJY i -L' /- /Z. 5;c4eA/cdt c truss / • (nemkeri 72, .t.,-f?tor,r191. Es) Q'd WL BeACZEr_coriNec-rIcrq s.4 4-L7 '1/6 4 6•<•/i COLL/510N g.,4/1. 2L' ,..t• 4")4, clZ)6"4 •:2 „ .77c.AuGHT J.JNf CIZOKI4 4 -- PLCLO.,,Z IOW& 60 /-5ent 1t• '545( a •-• -3 0- EA 57-- SIDEWAL4 7-ZUSS DETAIL DE LATZA1- HANOI` 5LCH EACH PAI -IPL ,,-)-ernoukferI Exponvor, ..To;nt filler- 4" tif; ,4 0 TYPICAL. CROSS SEC TCN -)5trErz-z`arx-auLc, Breis /10,./y 7 mop co,i of 6/-70 perm,Sofion { hot' asphoti to top and' ed•eu of floo- r e..•207 (b,, and cover wd4 roorcnri ( lei! be lion,' pi, -;,-,..7 reiniorcirxj cteri 1 wed La -Lt. Others (4 -Lo faCADWAY 5L.A8 oyez F.:00,z AN45 NH tr.- 71 54..evveti ZOADWAY INCHCC 3C1-7 DfTAIL 5CE2uliZED FOC PIEZZ e zEouhzeo Fo.e. 1,712 o as shown 4,r ..5.,47 end/ fatenrisrcIng .5feet -5,2/774e • ,/, Noe_ -22ptc ..5ci,dereeevategt )21:140111,4Y 31-413 AT SF'AN ENDS SCale ii"=/`0 Din-7E113;0ns ;17 .a;s, th•ts indicate attiPte,t 3t2";* a "strif,qers art- to Or raised or Lowe,rd in north trian7u6/2/- ixinee tc, 7Q'7 super elevation, Ma," tain 6"atoor .th-irlersq 17oor twons. 4-- of fevricy f Y,4 TIONS FIV5D BfAl2.thiG,..S P 15/e 3 CAST 575L 2 zuigrQ PLAN rxFAN.sicN EE4L /47S-' ft E Z z e_ze;4.it.e5D _ C457- sc./. 4- e•zept shown a/h,tw,.. NOTE See 5heve 8iGr genetz71 note ' myarding .sfere span. PLaN of 49,43Z .5L -A5 BEARING DETAILS cr--de /"="1L0 K1 1\1 G COUNTY WASHINGTON D.L. EVANS, COUNTY ROAD ENGINEER.. DUWAM I SH RIVR— ALLI-NTOWN lssu e- D'ETA1L S —STEEL SPAN ' FiZt-PARet _ =IL C. ARNOLD 4 RAYMOND r Li1111 117N SU LT MI E.1J0 fsle-ER5 lEATTI-E• WASH hitttON JuNte 1,Nia • ZVSICIN 1SY C.C.4 E -CK T, __SIDEWALK PIN? WELDING R� N v h V 'Or;Il oed tap sear *• cap sows of 4'0 fcfrs for ternsseerary f sten;ny. (2- ? , 6'e d c244Solfs ROADWAY 5XP,WS1cf-I DAMS •sEG7/ON 5-3 �r atT/OKE-f S/M/LAK Z-25 /7/ Z' T SLCT/O+v c -c East Curb Of 71 -vis Of .asvr,np / f 10. 4b r 3S' J. I -L ./-3. 4'%s3'5- -f6 I -C fO�C7/53 .3/S (CS./) r3* /'0 /- 2 . . 3'5 a . /`/ ArrhxsG 3o<in SEc7/ail A -A /-&/ /Y fr /6',-,..nrs S.ti,on 5-e West curb -*ski c. 7 ,Kgries CV..`o: 7c , rG77 , i%r,:•-/: r1,-oods✓oy to Of P x' Qc 2/// 0/ kbool .ro ,bin; s East nirt,.1%N/esf Curb Pier 2 7a" �'. 7. per 3 Ili" 9" Si Ser Diagram 9t / 2 WP(d mesh to angles. Eiravolen t 20 >`b 4 i" fr/let axh wire. Top and tottom• /-e //* 4215 7 -Ls 6.6- 3b /-L a - -*25 if -123 - 7k Archon co 3=0.cies Eta' 1r aP4:0 cies r 41- -+f' lo, 545 _.J ?, o E �,:8 L 'e ; r r-sGv3o'c7s -It ../;If.,e, 4=0'"4bam 3732 h18*j/D /-L 4*3�3'i,6r57 I I,' CY C75 5'7 (CV/) SECTION 0-0 5/d Gp "sed Pipe Vt/erd 2 Ends 0 S4CY/O1-4 F -F Drill ,n field anis oss?rnb/y r,vet's. Pio„ shuts 3 .t 4 L END NIa VIEW ,(-X ( Ori/I iq field o{f/r assembly onc/ drive cold rivets top and bottom ELf' VAT ION OF 24IL. PANEL- 7YP/CAL Viewed Pearn sidewo(k ale Z'IOj4 )FrZ 2-7./end pipes !hrooph ?ool. weld 13o// around 3/5 teorrng plate to post web @ Fier Z __ !`57/16 /142rrnaLl. _Oen 3 WfST 04/L AT pick Z 3 pie 7 l'71 -AC -1 3'7 5vm6e3.5 56..1 /f 4 Aer Z es‘ko,;-sy Fit . Fier 3 7tp eal .N T ZMorD44 re APPL'O4C 1 SPANS ?LAN carzeviJNG ANO ZAII.J1,1 FC5YS fly "ho - ,s rU' �•is/ 5 -Jr. West site appro.ch Swett 3l, 150 except tor" angle poet. Sco(e I =I`O' /\10Tc$ _ I. to or crown>xIvd�5 _stew, end supe6-let/arc/art. arr. Gavriolly tsbimtexi 9 ..5 eailiit� Pepe and Fit`/irx,IS to hr SecmLtSS D.brrtcrrd Mesh is to be Csnlvonized 3, 2ivels 7/ " C fen holes • except as noted. cA rQ .6 t X Plx'R rfF/ S PAu- 2/i ZM£D/A7Z KING COUNTY WA5H1NTON D.L. EVANS COUNTY ROAD N61 NE;r R. DUWAMISH RIVeR-ALLE-NTOwN BROCIE BOND ISSUE IS 5. EXPAN 5'1ON DAMS 4 RAW NG P PARLzD a' CeCIL C. e.t2NOLD 4 RAYMOND C. 5VtT1j CONSULi1NC C•NQINEE .5 SEATTLE W-5k11N6TON JUNE 1949 Of 51614f D C. C.A• CHECKED Rc5 {0C -47/0/V (No. I Jiro (Gc«rnrt ABUTMENT NO. f. 202 - 23 eta° 203 26 %z$ 9'-o" tog 205 E 4 Vt/ci//- Vs -,-- S /z4 21 '120 12' O^ '206 207 Cop - Top z Bo'f: Mcop.5 344 3723" - 25 leo' a^ .z08 Bons -78 co :220 End of,o/o2 20! Curt.rn w0// Noi.0 20 B 760 5=2 37=3'' N7 No.4 2P/ 9t-NY4/Nta .4 04164,414 7,.56 _,7 7- a' x(2/81 C./ 41..-7 Wc,//-//o/, z. -s... a '/24 37-3S . r . 204 ,/ ,/ 9z96 2 1La Off 11 `G'}" ✓ 2/ 0 1 r, „ Valet it! f. 5 Yas,' .5' O" .i 21/ ,. .. . 5 %z'0 5,2"' ,• 2/2 t_ „ o _ _4 .. S la 4. .3-'-4 „ ,. 2/5 ., 3,{y511:.6'=2" .. " - 5 %4 .5' `f' , 2/9 . ,. ., . .-S Yz 6 a, 0.. ., F.F S 1/20' 3=6" 2/7 s 7z 4 3'- 9,- 218' /15' 9=0"- 2/q S '/ 8 204 .2 -ace -5- //24 mcg. 205 2/ �E m 2,70y 20a Coo 7-0,o d '�"Sl4y 3723' 207 Cao 77 s 23' /n 0s` 220 ,7='//c E.4 v/3 1n cop 20 - 4 coo ends • 22/ kf/ifs Wo// -Nor -/z /O "irk I 4"'0". Str, 222 4-4......-- 0,...5 n/...//. vi -r/. - 2' 9z96 '7=3`" .• 773 t..:,y ,-✓o//-terra /2 %2 Is 910 23 229 .. .. ,. /2 //z6 5=3` ,. - 22 „ ., pibs7'tr-r 4 7/iab 0-,o. ,• 326 „ o _ _4 740 1,-5.'. „ X27 Tic: /4 -?/ivy 422"" 228 ,. /for., 2: /z44 Of'cr”- 224 f + -c 9.0 2Z= 9' J23.1JTH APRES�RC/Y_`✓�'fa.4N /00 6.idcr4 B r /2 /0/ 2-0=4' /02 . 20 /e /03 92 4,44 a /04 Nanparcr d.740) 6%d . /B0 -3-'a' .5,1, j I /05 C%r0ST .0 672f �r4 9/6.. /06 Hongc lest 707 .7Y`irrups 92 1/z roB .340 29=7' /0.3 74.40 4er-5 4 0,4, 2247" //O .Sia/c 4/0/.0 c 77, 4 7,24 2 /1 7/2 - ms 7 5/ 4f 32'T' r 2/ %9' -7 5- /74 .. „ .47v0 4 96 !d0.406.'f=5' -,4-. //S .--- .. - -- -, ;. 2 '3/3/9 4=7" - 1/6 s/a4 34=/0' 3 3/40 . -7=/0" 23 //7 .. /38 2 77'.445 3- =7-2" ^ //B .. ., Em/ -5 rtr .6:re's- Noe: End .3 '4 0'S=2" 3,6" !/P ,. a '154 3.41d'.r'=.o'" /48 /20 „ ,. /z$ 3 3,{y511:.6'=2" ,. /2/ .. - /3/ _ 2 ,/afy6 =S'r 28/0" /23 ,. �/( V2 7 / 34¢ - -L-3'4' /24 7 '3Qd ` 21 9" „ /2x n ., / Al, d " 243" - /26 !, K / °.4650:1-744 /27 - „ „ . ' / % SA ' 33'24 .. /28 ,r " / - %zf' 3/236 /29 , . / .1/2i6 32=0" ., /30---- ! .! :'/zi6. /if.," /3/ Eo.r/ C:-..,-0 Bris 4 .-s/s0 3Few /3'2 „ /,33 lies'/_ c .Pir�rs E. -J 24 Ty6 3=7 2q ' Io'S p'/o" - __ 22 _. - 1/45,. N 726' /y4, 1 Loc v runs 1!✓a. 1.S2E4,ZEN6Td1 .Br:tla/N6-- 547UT,`f ,4, a,c 'OAC/-/ SP'Q N CON 721, 474 /-V,' Curd .ars 4 s/e9i 3/.0" /-2S S/ce 7'/7 23 5,6 33://6 /36 Bot - 23 s/a4 34=/0' /37 „ 7r3.r,- .94,--5- 23 5/30 3- 9' /38 3,4 �ccrs Z6 -5/34 3d-6" /43 Em/ -5 rtr .6:re's- Noe: End 2 .5/315 3,6" /47 50 vVS 82/0' 437-1,6// 72sa a '154 S'-3' /48 " .r 7 /z$ 37;3'/ /SO /t/os/45 „ 4c.+."7811 [ 3 340 39'6' /3/ _ . ,. .,.....76,9,o --..5i 2 3,34 28/0" /S2 „ , , .J7i//ps /5- �/( V2 7 7.,. C'r-y ,NO, Tf/ CH -'PAN 5f -too /2 24=4. 10/ 8 34'4' /0 /03 .✓ r, - .S1"irr"rpi 20 92 .7"0 *406 32=70" 6/6" /04 Nonycrs B x/44 30,0"' /01 6 140 9'6„ /0G 4 �4 5 9.0" 5/'. /0 7 ups 32 /08 .Bot 6 .7ZO 7%5' 23/4. 070' /09 /ingars .4- 3,40 220 //O /// 6 u 2 7 " 7/a 56' /22 „ - 004.,40 -t 31',rr✓pr /d S6". 5/y 4` 128' 5" 5/f. 4 -?.1n 1.2 3" . e 3 32/-3'• ss 11131111M111=112=5111911ISOMismiumMINEINIMMINNIIIEv MIN 2. 3 4 -4=/0 //7 °/- 6 n ©�� 1/9 .j//o" �. kalis .. 3 3445 6 .r /901 / J/0 .3'0' . EminisrimErlimmui EMIRIIIMMIIIIII = / %z 46 /0 6" /39 Ti ns✓c/Jc / /3/ Ecu/01rbBai,S 9 4013/-0" ., 22 0/" -_ - /-SU\� •+6" T-' 6 7 -.7"-- 3 /22 30 %0 -9=7 /33 . t✓Grf 734 _.1/ -94is 23 4 s� A 2'/0" j$0/ /35 3/06 Top 23 52,4 133 -/ /36 -/, . Bol': --..- 23 /341 3'v=/0' /37 7,38 Tiuss B i �,oc crs 23 26 549. ...3-f ?,. 540 .5'0'6" -(47_ /Ya/ -,!h .E?i/ L✓v//`Tow) 2 %zq) 513" /4/3 7 1/z 5 799 �fer frw,%,5f .4 5os',97 Fn0 B ey,77 B= 3 %z4,1 3.3. jyPl 29=0' 51r 'S/ To/ Z 9/-r 49:0,t /53 J"r'r ps /5 /2¢ " No, 2 Sob /L`7`9. 70/'. 7rq>S ✓a'rJC Z 9' ,G67'5" .3o/ „ Bo7; - -94 ,, ,S//oc_.rs 77,avE.5,71 /4 7/39 S 302 3 4s0 4020" 303 Jo .304 905 306 /0 .94¢ 6�S" S7"cm 5/c//`-2-5c/oS .JO 340 5-/r / r Ye -7o' .Nosc 307_ .?',,/ ' 1 - 243 3� 3aq 3/0 3/1 3/2 e 2 23'7" 4/34 3a-6 s'6 Np4 327., 2 2. 2 -/44 3=/r SA"' 7' 2 L 3" lei m II; - Ai i4" 7-7 /37 0! 6" j,(9oq q'6" F C /✓arc.../// /77CJ2JJ "23 fr7A.c t1 - - L0GA7-/ON cat -0 our` /o cc/ f:- 1 No ISzetZrACThq - P/S,e - No. --2 '- CoAfTO, _ 3/3 . 5,143' f, /vOJC-,ya.-iZ 3/4 3/S' 3/6 3/7 5/e 3/9 320 2. 2 2 2 2 2 2 4=3" S/ 4 '-,f4-149-%/`- - 4//P /O;9a.=.. • 22/ 322 Tics - 2 540 /0;9""-_. 2 0/30 /070".._ 37 W:046 /6'43" ..._ -'1 /o ,4l-3'' 2-f /2 /1 325 324 32S 74c, A/05o Har/i. -7-44/0.7" 326; 327 P/i�fh //ocyo_r 345' 7z9dy �1T 459" „,0* 2' f'/ER No. .3 -900 40/ /bol i,q 774./0, 7U.c 29 -!.-AA -'3 fet, -402 .5 -/t /6 -r 401' fA .31z' 403 /0 923 909 "405 J,,o -r »J •- Top a!' Bal! "f - 5,45,9' 42=3" 5h: 48 546 17[7"3/'. 5/cis! , ,000 - t/c/^/`" t. ... _-_,`fisri2. 20 - -0 36=6",S/r- 406 :-.- ,o5'c. v -,-1._ -. 20 /7 i 4/5" 63'.34' - - 2 .5460 s a' 3 9/5 =-7/ 7 r4=-/404'..-- . 2. ad fes. 418 2 40- 4!? 920 2 -5693 42/ 9=l0" 92Z 2 /2 4/2 /2 5T.C. EL SPAN 11 - Trunsvele Top ' 7/ Slob Tronvver5e- .13c, 171 -bls 4-Vrb 700 Walk Jlab 21 22 24 at, 5I4 Z1-9 r5te 74 70 Lee-A40/N6 -5 3/1 1411 PO - 7 . COUNTY ROAD ENt'INI-fri tsuithteeies 67-20 Appendix B — Current Inspection Report 44 221 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 1 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Inspector's Signature MAG Cert # G1103 Cert Exp Date 4/15/2026 Co -Inspector's Signature HJ BMS Elements Element Element Description Total Units State 1 State 2 State 3 State 4 12 Inspections Performed: 6840 SF 6835 2 5 Structural Eval (1657) 23 Concrete Deck Soffit Operating Tons (1552) 2 0 No Utilities (2675) 0 110 Concrete Girder 256 LF 256 0 Freq Hrs Date Rep Type — 113 Steel Stringer 1100 2 1050 Deck Geometry (1658) 0.65 0 126 Op RF (1553) 1 LF Bridge Rails (1684) 0 154 0 133 Truss Gusset Plates 40 EA 24 7.0 4/20/2021 Routine — 20 0 152 9 351 Underclearance (1659) 14 0 Inventory Tons (1555) 0 Concrete Pile/Column Transition (1685) EA 10 0 8 0 212 Concrete Submerged Pier Wall 24 7.0 4/20/2021 Fract Crit — 77 3 0 8 215 (1661) 0.39 LF 70 Ilnv RF (1556) 0 0 Guardrails (1686) Concrete Pier Cap/Crossbeam 84 LF 84 0 0 0 UW —Alignment 1482 SF 1482 5 0 Deck Overall (1663) 1 Moveable Bearing (roller, sliding, etc) Operating Level (1660) 0 0 Terminals (1687) 8 7913 Fixed Bearing 2 EA 2 0 $5 Special — 5 Superstructure (1671) P Open/Closed (1293) 0.00 Asphalt Depth (2610) — 24 3.0 3/2/2020 Interim 4 Substructure (1676) 8 Waterway (1662) 6.00 Design Curb Ht (2611) UWI 9 Culvert (1678) U E Scour (1680) 32.0 Bridge Rail Ht (2612) — Damage 5 Chan/Protection (1677) Y Soundings Flag (2693) 1949 Year Built (1332) PRM Safety — N Pier/Abut/Prot (1679) N Revise Rating (2688) 0 Year Rebuilt (1336) SEC Safety — 4 Drain Cond (7664) Photos Flag (2691) Y Subj to NBIS (2614) Condition — 1 Drain Status (7665) C Measure Clrnc (2694) Alpha Span Type: STrus Short Span — M Deck Scaling (7666) 6 Sdwk Cond (7673) Sufficiency Rating: 7.56 In Depth — 10 Scaling Pct (7667) 5 Paint Cond (7674) Status: SD Geometric — 7 Deck Rutting (7669) 6 3 Approach Cond (7681) Routine Risk Category: High Risk — 7 Exposed Rebar (7670) 7 Retaining Wall (7682) Underwater Risk Category: No Risk — 6 Curb Cond (7672) 9 Pier Prot (7683) Category BMS Elements Element Element Description Total Units State 1 State 2 State 3 State 4 12 Concrete Deck 6840 SF 6835 0 5 0 35 Concrete Deck Soffit 6840 SF 6836 0 4 0 110 Concrete Girder 256 LF 256 0 0 0 113 Steel Stringer 1100 LF 1050 0 50 0 126 Steel Thru Truss 440 LF 286 0 154 0 133 Truss Gusset Plates 40 EA 20 0 20 0 152 Steel Floor Beam 351 LF 331 0 20 0 205 Concrete Pile/Column 18 EA 10 0 8 0 212 Concrete Submerged Pier Wall 80 LF 77 3 0 0 215 Concrete Abutment 80 LF 70 0 10 0 234 Concrete Pier Cap/Crossbeam 84 LF 84 0 0 0 266 Concrete Sidewalk & Supports 1482 SF 1482 0 0 0 311 Moveable Bearing (roller, sliding, etc) 10 EA 2 0 0 8 7913 Fixed Bearing 2 EA 2 0 $5 0 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 2 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post BMS Elements (Continued) Element Element Description Total Units State 1 State 2 State 3 State 4 330 Metal Bridge Railing 570 LF 458 100 12 0 340 Metal Pedestrian Railing 285 LF 285 0 0 0 357 Pack Rust 50 EA 46 4 0 0 361 Scour 4 EA 2 2 0 0 402 Open Concrete Joint 216 LF 0 0 216 0 408 Steel Sliding Plate 72 LF 0 72 0 0 901 Red Lead Alkyd Paint System 23760 SF 9110 0 13770 880 GGJ Notes 0 ORIENTATION Beginning of bridge: South Abutment 1 (nearest traffic signal at Interurban Ave). Green River Pedestrian Trail located under span 1. Duwamish River flows east to west - note river tidal influence. Old King County Bridge ID No. 3175 1 FRACTURE CRITICAL INSPECTION Includes visual inspection of truss tension members: bottom chords, floor beams, diagonal and vertical members. See Fracture Critical Report in Files Tab. See bridge nomenclature for feature ID on skewed truss. 3 UBIT 62 INSPECTION UBIT can deploy through both sides of truss. Truss openings are narrow, bridge deck is narrow with low portals and sways. Bridge closed to all traffic for 2021 UBIT Inspections. Full bridge closures recommended for UBIT inspections due to the bouncing motion of the UBIT boom caused by the high volume of truck traffic on the bridge during the inspection. Police presence is required during inspection at the intersection of Interurban Ave S and 42nd Ave S 100' south of the bridge. 11 LOAD RATING Gusset Plate at L2U1-East controls. Load rating performed (August 2017) and the bridge requires load posting for AASHTO 2 and 3, SHV 5,6,&7, and EV 2 and 3. An additional analysis was performed for a low speed posting option, see the Low Speed Posting Memo under the Records/Load Rating tab and posting sign photos under the Photos tab. 12 CONCRETE DECK Open joints over floorbeam locations. Exposed aggregate in wheel lines and light to moderate rutting. Moderate to heavy scaling, pop -outs and mudball voids scattered throughout surface. Longitudinal cracks concentrated near ends of bridge, some porosity. 35 CONCRETE DECK SOFFIT All spans: Many minor areas of exposed transverse rebar along overhangs due to lack of cover and poor concrete consolidation. Span 2: Diagonal hairline leaching cracks near steel stringers. Deck fillets are spelled in several locations along top flanges of floorbeams. Scattered hairline transverse rusty leaching cracks in soffit. Moderate sized pockets of poor consolidation - truss spans 2-4 thru 2-7. Span 3: Soot stained throughout. Diagonal leaching cracks between girders 3A/B near Pier 3. 110 CONCRETE GIRDER Four lines of CIP concrete T -beams in Spans 1 and 3. Webs have hairline vertical and diagonal cracks. Span 1: 1A - Vertical crack near Pier 2. 1D - Delamination on East Upper Flange at drainage pipe interface. Span 3: 8 exposed stirrups on each girder, 4 evenly spaced sets of 2 with minor corrosion. All girders are covered with soot. 3A - 4" x 4" x 1" spall at Pier 3, west face. End diaphragm at Pier 3 has hairline vertical leaching cracks. 46 GGJ Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 3 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Notes (Continued) 113 STEEL STRINGER Five lines of stringers. Square cope at connection to floorbeams, rust blisters on some copes - no cracks observed. Areas of corrosion top flanges. 126 STEEL THRU TRUSS GENERAL: See attached Fracture Critical Report for detail on fracture critical members. Lower and upper panel points and those connecting members are covered in bird guano, active nests in upper chords and in lower panel points on gusset plates. Also see note133 Gusset Plates for details. PACK RUST: Diagonals (compression): pack rust in seams, warping between rivet heads up to 1/8". Verticals (tension): visible seem rust - no deformation at rivets. Lower Chords: both consist of two channel beams from L2 to L8; addition plates riveted to interior webs, pack rust forming between channel webs and plates, plates are distorting up to 1/8" between rivets. Gusset Plates: Pack rust between bottom lateral gusset plates and bottom chord, plates are bulging up to 3/8" at all chord joints. Pack rust between interior cover plates and bottom chord channel has caused warping of cover plate up to 1/4". Bottom laterals have seam rust and pack rust up to 3/8" along tops of members. Upper Chords: minor seam rust along channel/plate seams throughout. IMPACT DAMAGE: Traffic impact damage to truss south portal and sway members. PORTALS: South Portal: U1 W -U1 E: High load traffic damage to south portal and sway frame. North flange of south portal is bent north 3" over length of 2 ft. Bottom flange of sway is bent upward 2" over 8" in length. Top flange of sway has a sine -wave shaped crimp, 1" over 7" in length. Center of sway is bent 1'-0" to north. SWAYS: Seam rust between angle plates and webs along the upper chord. M1W-M2E: Impact damage to sway, bent 5" to north; bottom flanges buckled center. M2W-M3E: Minor impact damage bottom flange. Slightly out of plane. Most sways have scrape marks across bottom flanges - typically northbound lane. LOWER CHORD: Lower chord floor system sways have pack rust up to 5/8" thick between paired angles (sway flanges). Vertical flange of angles are bulging and the horizontal bottom flange exhibits downward deflection. L7W: 2 rusty rivet heads on bottom plate. L7-L8W: Pack rust on lower chord. L8W: Pack rust 1/8" on bottom plate. L9W-U9W: Pitting up to 1/8" near top of bottom gusset plate. L9W: Gusset plate 7/16" thick. Pack rust 1/8" on bottom plate and 1/4" vertical plate. UPPER CHORD: Rust along riveted seams most sections. Interior upper flange has widespread peeling paint. Interior lower flange has excessive amounts of bird guano. 47 224 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 4 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Notes (Continued) 133 STEEL GUSSET PLATES 20 gusset node points per truss line. Low Chord Plates: Lateral gusset plates have pack rust, plates bulging up to 3/8" at most chord joints. Interior cover plates at chord channel have pack rust; warping of cover plate up to 1/4". Interior rivet heads have blistered or failed paint, many are heavily rusted. All bottom low chord plates have excessive guano and active pigeon nests. 5LE bottom plate has two deformed rivet heads. Upper Chord Plates: Lateral interior cover plates have pack rust at connections, no warping noted. Exterior upper plates have peeling paint; pack rust at connections. Upper interior plates have excessive bird guano. 152 STEEL FLOOR BEAM Two skewed end floor beams and ten transverse floor beams. Diagonal beams are ELO-WLO and EL10-WL10. Dirt and mud at connections to truss. Laminar rust along top flange with minor section loss (<2%). 48 225 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 5 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Notes (Continued) 205 CONCRETE PILE Ten octagonal concrete piles, five at each abutment. All columns have rough finish concrete and a few hairline cracks at cap interface. 1C: 10" spall with exposed rebar. 4A, 4B, 4C: Hairline horizontal cracks at about 1 ft. spacing. CONCRETE BEARING PEDESTALS Eight concrete columns support sliding plate bearing, four each at Piers 2 & 3. See Files Tab for Monitoring Diagram. 2A: South Face - Horizontal crack along cap interface, 6" diameter x 1/2" deep spall with exposed corroded rebar, with up to 25% section loss) and associated corner delamination, 3" wide x 18" high. East Face - 10" long x 2" high x 1/2" deep spall at top, 20" long x 14" high x up to 1" deep delaminated spall. Northwest Corner - Full -height (31") spall, 7" wide on north x 9" high on west x up to 4" deep; the NW corner of bearing is unsupported and the bearing anchor and two rebars are exposed with corrosion and section loss. 2B: South Face - Horizontal crack and associated spalling, 6" long x 4" high x 1" deep with 2 exposed rebars, along cap interface with associated delamination/spalling on southeast corner with 2' high x 5" wide on the south and up to 12" long x 1" deep with exposed rebar on the east. Northwest Corner - Full -height spall (31" high) x 6" long on west face x 6" on north face, rebar is exposed with 25% section loss; NW corner of bearing is unsupported. 2C: South Face - Horizontal crack along cap interface with associated spall, 4" wide x 1" high x 1" deep and delamination, 9" long x 16" high, at the southeast corner. Th southeast corner is spalled along the top, 4" long x 4" wide x 4" deep, exposing the bearing anchor. North Face - 14" long x 5" high x 1" deep spall with exposed horizontal rebar. West Face - 2" x 2" x 1" deep spall with exposed rebar. 2D: South Face - Hairline cracking at cap interface with associated 6" diameter x 1" deep spall with exposed rebar. SE corner is spalled off, 18" high x 8" wide x 4" deep at the base exposing bearing anchor and rebar with corrosion and 10% section loss. West Face - 5" long x 2" high x 1" deep spall with exposed rebar. North Face - 2" diameter x 1" deep spall with exposed rebar. 3A: North Face - Horizontal cracking and delaminated spalls along cap interface, full -width x 6" high x 3" deep, with exposed anchor and previously noted water leakage. Column is tilted south at 2.2°. Southeast Corner - Grout pad is chipped off exposing base plate anchorage. South Face - Edge spalling about 4" long x 1" high x 1" deep near west end. Water leakage previously noted at southwest corner. 3B: North Face - Horizontal cracks at cap interface. Multiple edge spalls along northwest corner, up to 8" high x 6" wide x 2" deep. Column is tilted to the south at 0.5°. NW corner of bearing grout pad is spalled. South Face - 3 spalls, typically 8-12" diameter x up to 1" deep, with exposed rebar, up to 50% section loss, and associated surrounding delaminations. 3C: South Face - Spall , 24' long x 6" high x 1.5" deep with 12" of horizontal rebar exposed. Southeast corner is spalled, 1" long x 3" high x 1" deep. NW corner of bearing grout pad is spalled. 3D: Water leakage previously noted along base of south face. 212 CONCRETE SUBMERGED PIER WALL Hairline vertical cracks in pier walls. Many 1-1/2" shallow form tie holes in both walls. Pier 2: water abrasion along north face. Several spalls with exposed rebar north face. Pier 3: Three 12" x 12" x 1" deep areas of abrasion in south face. 49 226 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 6 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 50 227 Notes (Continued) 215 CONCRETE ABUTMENT Both abutments have a few hairline vertical cracks in concrete backwalls. Abutment 1 - Void at backwall between Column 1C and 1D, 6' long x 2" high x 14" deep. Pedestrian trail under span 1 near abutment. Metal pedestrian rail and concrete retaining wall between trail and abutment. Abutment 4 - Significant glass debris under Span 3. Void under backwall from pile 4A through 4D, minor erosion/sloughing. Heavy vegetation overgrowth between 4A - 4C. Northwest abutment-wingwall interface; open diagonal crack above top of cap to ground line (2.0" gap at top) with 2 ft x 8" x 6" deep spall with 5" of exposed rebar. Northeast wingwall: 8" x 6" x 3" deep spall. Two steel plates attached on the east side of north abutment wall at the NE corner bridge rail. 234 CONCRETE PIER CAP Piers 2 and 3 only. Both have hairline vertical cracks in perimeter, tops are covered with mud, moss and transient debris. Caps have open form tie holes. Pier 2 - Several small spalls north and south face. 266 CONCRETE SIDEWALK & SUPPORTS Surface: Transverse cracks at panel points, cracks are open up to 1/8", with minor edges spalling. Southeast corner delaminated between Joint and rail post anchor, 12" long x 6" wide. Soffit: Many hairline transverse cracks leaching on underside. Form anchors still in place on soffit along channel web. Small shallow cover spalls with exposed rebar common throughout. Supports: Steel knee braces support sidewalk in Span 2, top clips at truss are separating due to pack rust. 311 MOVEABLE BEARING Rocker Bearings: Pier 2 - Bearing display signs of recent movement and are not considered frozen. Truss bearings 2-1A & 2-1B are tipped towards expansion, with a 0.3° differential at the time of the 2021 inspection. Year Bearing 2-1A (°) Bearing 2-1B (°) Temperature (F°) 2021 6.2 5.9 51 2019 5.6 5.6 43 Rocker Bearings - support approach spans: Eight skewed steel bearings, each bearing has two hinge bars. Bearings are mounted on concrete bearing pedestals at Piers 2 and 3. Pack rust between sole plates and hinge bars on all bearings. Hinge bars at bearings 2A, 2D, 3-1A and 3-1D, are bulging up to 1/8" from pack rust, all eight bearings are frozen. Bearing 3-1C has an isolated area of paint failure with exposed steel and minor laminar corrosion on the east face. See Note 205 CONCRETE COLUMNS - for details on the concrete bearing pedestals. 313 FIXED BEARING Pier 3 - Two pinned shoe bearings 3A and 3B support truss - minor rust on edges. 330 METAL BRIDGE RAILING Retrofit thrie beam rail has minor traffic scrapes throughout. Loose rail connection at U5L5 east truss, rattles under traffic loads. Tack welds broken on west rail, widespread. 340 METAL PEDESTRIAN RAILING Rail panel section loose at bottom tube connection to post, east sidewalk north of center line of the river, between EL4 and EL5. 357 PACK RUST Seam rust and pack rust - most 1/4" or less on built-up members throughout truss. 50 227 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 7 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Notes (Continued) 361 SCOUR, FIELD Pier 2 is located on the outside of a sharp meander bend in the Duwamish River. Pier 2: Riprap along left bank has a scour scallop, approximately 8 to 10 feet in diameter at the center of pier, two relic piles are exposed in the scalloped area. During inspection flow increased velocity with the changing tide; back eddies were noted along the center and downstream face of pier, the thalweg flow is near the left bank at Pier 2. Pier 3: Riprap is scattered and missing along the downstream half of pier. Aggradation is visible upstream right bank to mid channel. SOUNDINGS: are taken from upstream rail at truss panel points: YEAR LO L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 L7 L8 L9 L10 2021 18.6 33.5 43.4 37.0 43.5 32.1 29.3 27.8 26.2 23.1 15.8 2019 17.5 29.5 40.0 42.0 42.8 31.5 28.0 27.5 25.9 23.5 15.3 2015 18.5 30.5 36 23.5 42 28 30.2 35 23.8 43.5 28.5 2014 19 41.5 29.7 16 39.5 26.5 41 30 16 43 27 2013 18.8 44.5 28.5 34 34 23.5 42 27.5 30.5 37.5 25.5 2007 18.5 40.5 26.5 39 28.5 15 42 26 40 31 15 WL (2021) = 25.3' Update soundings every two years or more often if lateral migration is suspected. Monitor riprap at low tide and low flow periods. 402 OPEN CONCRETE JOINT Open joints over 8 floorbeams of main span have felt seals, most of the seal is worn away. Visible water and mud intrusion onto floorbeam top flanges noted many locations. See Repair No. 12306. 408 STEEL SLIDING PLATE Located at Piers 2 and 3. Both joints are full of sandy debris. Chips and D -spalls along edges of both joints typical along wheel lines. Water leaks through the 'oint onto truss main piers. MEASUREMENTS: taken at center -line perpendicular to each joint. YEAR TEMP PIER 2 (WEST) PIER 3 (EAST) 2021 61° 1-0" 1-1/2" 2019 55° 1-0" 1-1/2" 2018 60° 1-0" 1-1/2" 2016 62° 1-0" 1-1/2" 2015 48° 7/8" 1-1/2" 2013 48° 15/16" 1-3/8" 2011 50° 15/16" 1-3/8" 2009 65° 1-0" 1-5/8" 2007 50° 1-1/2" 1-5/8" 2005 65° 1-0" 1-3/8" 51 228 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 8 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 52 229 Notes (Continued) 901 RED LEAD ALKYD PAINT SYSTEM Upper Chords - Top sways, upper gusset plates, and gusset connections: Paint is thin and typically dull and chalky. Widespread peeling, exposed primer (orange), and bare steel with areas of surface corrosion in some locations, common on interior surfaces. Vertical/Diagonal members: Paint is dull and chalky throughout with isolated areas of peeling paint, concentrated near upper gusset connections. Stringers: Rust blooms, blistered paint, and peeling common on stringer notches at floor beam connections. Low chord: Exterior and upper flanges are dull and chalky with algae growth throughout. Interior flanges are peeling near the gusset plate connections. Moss and algae on lateral low chord members and floor system. 1660 OPERATING LEVEL NOTE: Bridge is posted. Truck speed is limited to 15 MPH. 1663 DECK OVERALL The code was downgraded based on deck and floor system deterioration. The deck panels are non -composite and are loose / slapping on the floor system under traffic. In addition, the floor system is creaking and groaning under load. These problems are not revealing themselves in recordable damage but the loose deck panels and lack of continuity was taken into account in a new load rating update. 1671 SUPERSTRUCTURE CONDITION Coded 5 due to impact damage at south portal and pack rust throughout steel truss members. 1676 SUBSTRUCTURE CONDITION Code reduced to 4 due to condition of concrete bearing pedestals under rocker bearings at piers 2 and 3. 1680 SCOUR , OFFICE Scour analysis completed in 2014. Intermediate piers are founded on timber piles, tip elevations are not available, the scour code = "U". The channel is centered under L3 -East, channel aggradation upstream of bridge from right bank to center of channel. Calculated contraction scour is 0.6 feet, local pier scour ranges between 6 feet and 13 feet depending on angle of attack. Plans indicate bottom of footing at -17.0 (Pier 2) Top of rail is estimated per plans at 28.0. Thalweg (2021) = -15.5 1685 TRANSITION Bridge rail transition at Abutment 1, west side, is missing approach guard rail. SE Transition rail has 6' of impact damage with 1 damaged/twisted post. 1686 GUARDRAILS SE approach rail has an area of impact damage, approximately 30' long. NW approach rail is 18" high along settlement area. 1687 TERMINAL Breakaway Cable Terminals at southeast and northwest corners. Impact attenuator at northeast corner. Sloped concrete Jersey terminal at southwest corner. 2675 NO. OF UTILITIES Two utilities are suspended from east edge under sidewalk: One 12" diameter steel waterline with mechanically restrained joints. One 6" diameter gas pipe. Gas line couplers are cracked and broken in many locations. 52 229 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 9 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Repairs Notes (Continued) 2694 CLEARANCES Vertical clearance at portals and Mid level sway braces, measured 3" from curb: Minimum along East fog line: 14.95' at North Portal E -M9 - W -M10. Minimum along West fog line: 14.97' at E -M2 - W -M2. Minimum Clearance: E -M1 - W -M2 = 15'-0 3/8" (West) E -M2 - W -M2 = 14'-11 5/8" (west) E -M3 - W -M3 = 15'-0" (East) E -M4 - W -M4 = 15'-0" (East) E -M5 - W -M5 = 15'-0 7/16"(East) E -M6 - W -M6 = 15'-0 3/8" (East) E -M7 - W -M7 = 15'-1 3/8" (East) E -M8 - W -M8 = 15'-0 1/8" (East) E -M9 - W -M9 = 15'-0 1/8" (East) E -M9 - W -M10 = 14'-11 3/8" (West) Span 1: Vertical Clearance along shared use path undercrossing, measured 6" from Pier 2 Wall along Girder 1A: Minimum Measurement: 9'-3". 7664 DRAIN CONDITION Deck drains are plugged throughout. 7672 CURB CONDITION Cracks open 1/8" over truss floorbeams. 7681 APPROACH ROADWAY South approach - Cracking along center line ACP seam. Open pattern cracking and settlement up to 1.5" in southbound lane and along center line. Heavy wheel track rutting in southbound lane. Northbound lane asphalt is ramped up to 1/2" higher than deck. North approach - Smooth approach, no settlement noted. 7682 RETAINING WALL Sheet pile wall to retain NW approach fill, no defects noted. Repairs Repair No Pr R Repair Descriptions Noted Maint Verified 12306 1 B JOINTS SPAN 2: (MAH Revised 4/10/2015) Open Joints: Clean out open joints over floor beams thoroughly and fill with a flexible sealant, priority 1 due to corrosion at top flanges of floorbeams from leaking joints. 3/25/1998 13469 1 B RAIL: SW transition is missing approach guard rail and terminal. SE guardrail is bent and deformed. NW guardrail has settled below acceptable standards. REPAIR - replace missing guard rail and terminal at SW corner, replace damaged rail at SE corner, reset NW rail and posts to bring rail up to standard height. 4/8/2013 13471 1 B PAINT: (Updated - 2021 HJ) Paint has failed in many locations along the top face of the upper truss chords. Pack rust is forming in seams of all built-up members. Moist soil and pigeon guano accumulated within truss panel points are accelerating paint failure. Algae and moss growing on many members. 1. Thoroughly pressure wash clean truss of all dirt/algae/guano. 2. Prepare surface and repaint bridge to encapsulate pack rust and protect truss members. 3. Add bird deterrent at all panel points, upper and lower chords. 4/8/2013 53 230 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 10 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Repairs (Continued) Repair No Pr R Repair Descriptions Noted Maint Verified 13473 1 B EXPANSION JOINT: Steel sliding plate expansion joints allows water and debris onto top of caps and bearings at Piers 2 and 3. The concrete edges at joints are chipped and spalled. REPAIR - Replace steel sliding plate expansion joints with either a strip seal with steel header or modular joint to eliminate water intrusion onto steel bearings. 4/8/2013 13474 S S SCOUR: (Updated in 2019) Current scour code is coded "U" unknown due to the lack of pile tip elevation records. Check City bridge files for pile tipe elevations at intermediate piers. 4/16/2013 13475 2 B STRUCTURAL SUBSTRUCTURE: (Updated - HJ 04/20/21): Concrete columns supporting sliding bearings at Piers 2 and 3 have open cracking, exposed rebar and bearing anchors with section loss, spalls, and delaminations throughout columns and along cap interface. Pier 2 - Cap has spall, with rusted rebar and open cracks up to .05mm. Pier 3 - heavily abraded at waterline. Pier 4 - columns 4A -C have horizontal cracks. Abutment backwall is undermining along west half. West wing wall has large open crack and spalls. REPAIRS: P2 and P3 bearing columns - recommend design seismic retrofit steel collar and construct around bearing columns, anchored to cap, then fill tight with epoxy. Pier 2 - cap clean exposed rebar and patch spalls, epoxy inject cracks. Pier 3 - clean and patch abraded areas of pier wall. Pier 4 - FRP wrap columns 4 A -C. Reinforce west wingwall. Fill voids under abutment backwalls and add quarry spalls along abutment wall and under Span 3. 4/16/2013 13476 2 B SCOUR: (RPH Revised 7/22/2014): Small scour scallops in left bank armor in front of Pier 2. Riprap is sparse and scattered through mudbar in front of Pier 3. Monitor the downstream inside face of Pier 3 at low water. REPAIR - Replace missing riprap along banks and in front of piers. 4/17/2013 13478 1 B SWAY BRACES: Heat straighten south portal and sway E-M2/W-M2. Sway bracing measures 14' - 11" clearance at fogline. Vertical clearance signs are required for measured clearances less than or equal to 15'-3" Install warning signs at both portals with posted height 3" less than lowest measured clearance. Recommend raising portals and sways due to the high volume of truck traffic and existing damage to sway members. 4/10/2015 13479 2 B BEARINGS: Approach span bearings - slide movable bearing at pier 2 and 3 are corroded - and appear frozen. Replace sliding plates with elastomeric dynamic isolation bearings. 4/10/2015 13480 2 B DECK: SOFFIT - widespread consolidation pockets, spalls with exposed rebar east side of soffit. SURFACE - worn to aggregate, spalling along joints. Patches of light scaling. REPAIR: Chip any delamintaed concrete from exposed rebar, clean and seal exposed bar and patch spalls. Sack honeycombed areas throughout soffit. Shotblast deck surface, patch spalled areas and apply epoxy overlay. 4/10/2015 54 231 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Release Date: 5/18/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 11 of 11 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Repairs (Continued) Repair No Pr R Repair Descriptions Noted Maint Verified 13481 1 U UTILITY - GAS: Gas 6" dia. gas utility pipe couplers are cracked and broken in many locations. 1. Contact gas company to inform condition of couplers. 4/20/2021 13482 2 J DECK DRAINS: Deck drains are plugged with debris throughout. 1. Clean out drains and ensure proper functionality. 4/20/2021 Inspections Performed and Resources Required Report Type Routine Fracture Critical Resources UBIT Flagging Date 4/20/2021 4/20/2021 Hours Min 6.00 6.00 Freq 24 24 Pref Hrs Insp CertNo 7.0 MAG G1103 7.0 MAG G1103 Max Freq Date Coinsp HJ HJ Need Date Override Interim 3/2/2020 24 3.0 HP G1913 HJ Inspect concrete bearings at piers pedestal details. Resources Hours Min Pref Max Freq Date Need Date Override Special Equipment Equipment 4/1/2019 24 7.0 MAG G1103 HP Resources Hours Min UBIT 4.00 Flagging 4.00 2 Man UBIT 4/20/2021 24 7.0 MAG G1103 HJ Resources Hours Min Pref Max Freq Date UBIT Pref Max Freq Date Need Date Override Need Date Override Note Notes WSDOT UBIT 62 USED LOCAL AGENCY Flagging or road closure provided by City of Tukwila bearing pedestals supporting approach span 2 and 3. See Note 205 and Files tab for Notes Ladder required to reach columns and bearings. Notes WSDOT UBIT-60 USED Traffic contol provided by City of Tukwila Notes WSDOT UB -62 used for 2021 inspection 55 232 Bridge ID WB71 Facilities WB72 Layout WB73 Crossing Route On WB74 Crossing Route Under WB74 Design WB75 Inspection Report Types Approved Revised RFC AAN Not Reviewed 1001 2009 2132 WSBIS Field Inventory Report 41116' Washington State Mr Department of Transportation 1019 1021 2023 1156 1188 1196 Structure ID Bridge Number Bridge Name Owner County City Location Latitude Longitude 08109700 TUKxNx14 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR 04 17 1320 0.04 MI E OF SR -599 47° 29' 23.10" 122° 16' 49.00" Skew Angle Flared Median 1949 0 284 1.04 220 2 1232 1256 1274 1286 1288 1289 Feature Intersected Facilities Carried Region Custodian Parallel Temporary DUWAMISH RIVER 42ND AVE SO NW 04 N Min Vert Under Vert Code Min Lat Under Right Lat Code Min Lat Under Left Navigation Control Code Approach Roadway 1332 1336 1340 2346 1348 1352 1356 1360 1364 1367 1370 1374 1378 1379 1382 1383 1386 1397 Shaded fields are to be reviewed each inspection. Fields in italics are for information only & are not editable. 1310 1312 1291 Year Built Year Rebuilt Bridge Length Screening Length Maximum Span Length Lanes On Curb to Curb Deck Width Out to Out Deck Width Sidewalk Left Sidewalk Right Min Vert Over Deck Min Vert Under Vert Code Min Lat Under Right Lat Code Min Lat Under Left Navigation Control Code Approach Roadway Skew Angle Flared Median 1949 0 284 1.04 220 2 24.0 30.0 0.0 3.5 15' 00" 00' 00" N 0.0 N 0.0 0 36 38 N 0 2000 1432 1433 1434 1435 2440 1445 1451 2402 1487 1490 1354 1491 1495 1499 2500 2501 2502 1413 0 o v. m On Under 0 = N * N Service Level Route Number Milepost ADT Truck ° /o Crossing Description Funct. Class Lane Use Direction Total Lanes Under Horizontal Clearance Route Dir Horizontal Clearance Reverse Dir Max Vert Clearance Route Min Vert Clearance Route Max Vert Clearance Reverse Min Vert Clearance Reverse Detour Length M 1 5 1 01037 1.04 10300 30 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR 17 2 0 24' 00" 0.65 15' 00" 14 0.39 2 2000 1432 1433 1434 1435 2440 1445 1451 2402 1487 1490 1354 1491 1495 1499 2500 2501 2502 1413 n K o v. CD On Under nLane = in* y Service Level Route Number Milepost ADT Truck ° /° Crossing Description Funct. Class Use Direction Crossing Lanes Under Horizontal Clearance Route Dir Horizontal Clearance Reverse Dir Max Vert Clearance Route Min Vert Clearance Route Max Veil Clearance Reverse Min Vert Clearance Reverse Detour Length 10 1 04 1 2 5 5 1 1 0 0 6 23 0.65 6 14 0.39 1532 1533 1535 1536 1538 1541 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 Main Span Material Main Span Design Appr Span Material Appr Span Design Number Main Spans Number Appr Spans Service On Service Under Deck Type Wearing Surface Membrane I Deck Protect Oper Rating Method Oper Rating Tons Oper Rating Factor Inv Rating Method Inv Rating Tons Inv Rating Factor 3 10 1 04 1 2 5 5 1 1 0 0 6 23 0.65 6 14 0.39 2920 Inspection 1990 Date 2646 Inspector 2649 Cert No 2654 Co -Inspector Routine 4/20/2021 MAG G1103 HJ Fracture Critical 4/20/2021 MAG G1103 HJ Special Feature Underwater UW Interim Inspection Date Inspector Cert No Co -Inspector Interim In Depth Damage PRM Safety SEC Safety NBIS Risk Category Routine: High Risk Underwater: Inspection Date Inspector Route On Route Under Printed Date 9/12/2021 Cert No Co -Inspector Condition Short Span Geometric Info Inventory 56 234 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 1 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (52) - E ELEVATION {root} Photo Type: E - Elevation Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: East Elevation (Downstream) MAG (228) S APPROACH {root} Photo Type: D - Deck Orientation: N Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13469, 13478 Remarks: South Approach SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 57 235 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 2 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 SID 08109700 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (229) N APPROACH {root} Photo Type: D - Deck Orientation: S Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13469, 13478 Remarks: North Approach HJ (18) - TYP DECK {root} Photo Type: D - Deck Orientation: N Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13480 Remarks: Typical Deck 236 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post iI� f 1 58 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 3 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (95) - TYP SUPERSTRUCTU RE {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: E Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13471 Remarks: Typical Superstructure HJ (48) - ABUTMENT I {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: S Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: South Abutment SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 59 237 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 4 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (90) - PIER 2 {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: S Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13474, 13475, 13476 Remarks: Pier 2 (North Face) MAG (91) - PIER 3 {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: N Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13474, 13475, 13476 Remarks: Pier 3 (South Face) 238 SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 60 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 5 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (100) ABUTMENT NORTH {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: N Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13475 Remarks: North Abutment 2021_MAG (5) DECK AGGREGATE {root} Photo Type: D - Deck Orientation: DN Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13480 Remarks: Heavy Deck Scaling large SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 61 239 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 6 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 SID 08109700 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER 2021_MAG (19) DECK SOFFIT SPALLS {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: UP Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13480 Remarks: Deck Soffit Spalls with Exposed Rebar HJ (62) - GIRDER 1D DELAM {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Girder 1D - Delamination at Drainage Pipe Interface 240 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 62 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 7 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (101) - SPAN 3 - SOOT & REBAR {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: UP Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Span 3 Girders - Soot Stained and Typical Exposed Rebar MAG (192) PACK RUST BT RIVETS {root} Photo Type: I - In Depth Orientation: E Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13471 Remarks: Warping due to Pack Rust between Diagonal Connections SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 63 241 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Release Date: 5/18/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 8 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (66) WL3 PLATE PACK RUST {root} Photo Type: Orientation: Date: Repairs: I - In Depth UP 4/20/2021 13471 Remarks: Pack Rust and Associated Warping at W3L Gusset Plate MAG (141) UPPER LATERAL PACK RUST {root} Photo Type: Orientation: Date: Repairs: I - In Depth W 4/20/2021 13471 Remarks: Pack Rust between seams throughtout Upper Chords 242 SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 400 411110 ABA w # a .ate AV f 64 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 9 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (43) WML1- EML2 SINE WAVE {root} Photo Type: I - In Depth Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13478 Remarks: M1W-M2E Impact Damage to Mid Level Sway MAG (37) ML1- ML2 OUT OF PLANE {root} Photo Type: U - Utility Orientation: DN Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13478 Remarks: M1W-M2E Out of Plane Impact Deflection SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 65 243 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 10 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (67) - 2A COLUMN EXP ANCHOR {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: E Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13475 Remarks: Column 2A West Face - Full Height Spelling with Exposed Bearing Anchors HJ (85) - SE SIDEWALK DELAM {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: DN Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Southeast Sidewalk Delamination 244 SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 66 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 11 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 SID 08109700 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (16) BARINGG 2-1B TIP 5.9° {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Typical Rocker Bearing (2-1 B Shown) HJ (20) - JOINT 3 {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 12306 Remarks: Typical open joint Span 2 (Joint 3 shown) Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 67 245 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 12 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (44) - JOINT 2 (SOUTH) {root} Photo Type: D - Deck Orientation: E Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13473 Remarks: Steel Sliding Plate Joint (South) at south end of truss HJ (37) JOINT 11 N {root} Photo Type: D - Deck Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13473 Remarks: Steel Sliding Plate Joint (North) at north end of truss 246 SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 68 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 13 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (7) LOAD POST & SPEED {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: S Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Load & Speed Posting HJ (42) RAIL HEIGHT {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13469 Remarks: North East Rail Height SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 69 247 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 14 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (103) UTILITY BROKEN COUPLER {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13481 Remarks: Broken Utility Connector HJ (125) MINIMUM VERT CLEARANCE {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: DN Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13478 Remarks: Minimum Clearance Measurement (North Portal - East Fogline) 248 SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post ALR130 Distance Measurer 70 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Release Date: 5/18/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 15 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (50) PED UNDERCROSSIN G {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Span 1 Mixed Use Trail Undercrossing HJ (29) PLUGGED DECK DRAIN {root} Photo Type: Orientation: Date: Repairs: D - Deck DN 4/20/2021 13482 Remarks: Plugged Deck Drain SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 71 249 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 16 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER HJ (9) S APPROACH SETTLEMENT {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: DN Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: South Approach Settlement HJ (105) BEARING 3C {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: 13479 Remarks: Approach Bearing (Bearing 3C Depicted) 250 SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 72 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 17 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 SID 08109700 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (39) PAINT LOSS {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: DN Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Upper chord and gusset plate paint loss. MAG (59) STRINGER NOTCH RUST {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: W Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Stringer notch rust in failed paint common on stringer notches Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 73 251 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 18 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (68) SWAY BRACE PK RUST {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: NE Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Pack rust between angles deforming bracing. MAG (129) PANEL POINT {root} Photo Type: R - Repair Orientation: DN Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Garbage and debris accumulated in low panel point 252 SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 77. ,ta,Li ti LJ, 74 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 19 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 SID 08109700 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (57) EL2 PLATE PACK RUST {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: UP Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Gusset plate EL3 bending due to pack rust MAG (97) EL6 BOT PLATE RIVETS {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: UP Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: 2 deformed rivets in bottom gusset at EL6 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 75 253 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 20 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 SID 08109700 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER MAG (178) BOT CHORD ALGAE {root} Photo Type: G - General Orientation: S Date: 4/20/2021 Repairs: Remarks: Bottom chords and other floor system members are coverd with algae and moss 254 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post 76 {root} G 13471 3 4 {root} G 13475 5 {root} G 13480 6 13471 8 13478 9 G 13475 10 G 13 G 13481 14 G 15 G 16 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 21 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER Entry Name Folder Name HJ (52) - E ELEVATION {root} MAG (228) S APPROACH {root} MAG (229) N APPROACH {root} HJ (18) - TYP DECK {root} SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Type Repairs Page E 1 D 13469,13478 1 D 13469,13478 2 D 13480 2 HJ (95) - TYP SUPERSTRUCTURE HJ (48) - ABUTMENT 1 {root} G 3 MAG (90) - PIER 2 {root} G 13474, 13475, 13476 MAG (91) - PIER 3 {root} G 13474, 13475, 13476 4 HJ (100) ABUTMENT NORTH 2021_MAG (5) DECK AGGREGATE {root} D 13480 5 2021_MAG (19) DECK SOFFIT SPALLS HJ (62) - GIRDER 1D DELAM {root} G 6 HJ (101) - SPAN 3 - SOOT & {root} G 7 REBAR MAG (192) PACK RUST BT {root} RIVETS 13471 7 MAG (66) WL3 PLATE PACK {root} RUST MAG (141) UPPER LATERAL {root} PACK RUST 13471 8 MAG (43) WML1-EML2 SINE {root} WAVE MAG (37) ML1-ML2 OUT OF {root} PLANE U 13478 9 HJ (67) - 2A COLUMN EXP {root} ANCHOR HJ (85) - SE SIDEWALK DELAM {root} G 10 MAG (16) BARINGG 2-1B TIP G 11 5.9° HJ (20) - JOINT 3 {root} G 12306 11 HJ (44) - JOINT 2 (SOUTH) {root} D 13473 12 HJ (37) JOINT 11 N {root} D 13473 12 HJ (7) LOAD POST & SPEED {root} HJ (42) RAIL HEIGHT {root} G 13469 13 MAG (103) UTILITY BROKEN{root} COUPLER HJ (125) MINIMUM VERT {root} CLEARANCE G 13478 14 HJ (50) PED UNDERCROSSING {root} HJ (29) PLUGGED DECK {root} DRAIN D 13482 15 HJ (9) S APPROACH SETTLEMENT {root} HJ (105) BEARING 3C {root} G 13479 16 MAG (39) PAINT LOSS {root} G 17 MAG (59) STRINGER {root} G 17 NOTCH RUST 77 255 G 20 Status: Released CD Guid: 4244c0f0-f994-4820-b57f-0df8e475c0b2 BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Printed On: 9/12/2021 Agency: TUKWILA Release Date: 5/18/2021 Program Mgr: Sonia L. Lowry Page 22 of 22 Br. No. TUKxNx14 Carrying 42ND AVE SO Intersecting DUWAMISH RIVER Entry Name Folder Name SID 08109700 Br. Name 42ND AVENUE SOUTH BR Route On 01037 Mile Post 1.04 Route Under Mile Post Type Repairs Page MAG (68) SWAY BRACE PK {root} G 18 RUST MAG (129) PANEL POINT {root} R 18 MAG (57) EL2 PLATE PACK {root} G 19 RUST MAG (97) EL6 BOT PLATE {root} G 19 RIVETS MAG (178) BOT CHORD ALGAE {root} 78 256 Appendix C — Survey Map 79 257 -21,111.2 258 e 0 s B 116) CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS. EXISTING UTILITIES MUST BE LOCATED AND PROTECTED BEFORE AND DURING CONSTRUCTION. ATTENTION IF ASSISTANCE IS NEEDED WITH NAVIGATING OR UTILIZING THIS BASE MAP IN CIVIL 3D PLEASE CONTACT 1 -ALLIANCE AT (425) 598-2200. 80 Appendix D — Geotechnical Investigations Technical Memo 81 259 DRAFT Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington November 22, 2021 Prepared for TranTech Engineering, LLC 365 118th Avenue SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 14 LANDAU ASSOCIATES 82 260 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington This document was prepared by, or under the direct supervision of the undersigned, whose seal is affixed below. Name: Steven R. Wright, PE Washington/No. 32250 Date: November 22, 2021 Document prepared by: Sean Gertz, PE Senior Engineer Document reviewed by: Steven R. Wright, PE Quality Reviewer Date: November 22, 2021 Project No.: 1790003.010.011 File path: \\edmdata0l\projects\1790\003.010\R\Signature Page.docx Project Coordinator: TAC 83 261 DRAFT Landau Associates TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Project Background and Description 1-1 1.2 Scope of Services 1-2 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2-3 2.1 Geologic Setting 2-3 2.2 Surface Conditions 2-3 2.2.1 Existing Bridge Corridor 2-3 2.2.2 South 124th Street Corridor 2-4 2.3 Subsurface Soil Conditions 2-4 2.3.1 Existing Bridge Corridor 2-4 2.3.2 South 124th Street Corridor 2-5 2.4 Groundwater Conditions 2-5 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3-1 3.1 Seismic Design Considerations 3-1 3.1.1 Liquefaction 3-1 3.1.2 Lateral Spreading 3-2 3.2 Preliminary Bridge Foundation Design 3-2 3.2.1 Drilled Shaft Lateral Foundation Capacity 3-2 3.2.1.1 Lateral Spreading 3-3 3.2.2 Drilled Shafts Axial Capacity 3-4 3.2.2.1 Downdrag Loads 3-5 3.2.2.2 Group Interaction Effect 3-6 4.0 DESIGN PHASE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 4-7 5.0 USE OF THIS REPORT 5-1 6.0 REFERENCES 6-1 Figure 1 2 Title Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan FIGURES Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement iii November 22, 2021 84 262 DRAFT Landau Associates Table Title TABLES 1 Recommended Seismic Design Parameters 2 Estimated Depth to Non -Liquefiable Soils 3 Preliminary Recommended Soil Parameters for LPILE Input, Non -Liquefied Condition 4 Preliminary Drilled Shaft Axial Capacities 5 Recommended Resistance Factors for Drilled Shaft Design 6 Preliminary Recommended Seismic Downdrag Loads for Extreme 1 Limit State 7 Recommended Axial Group Reduction Factors APPENDICES Appendix Title A Field Explorations B Laboratory Soil Testing Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement iv November 22, 2021 85 263 DRAFT Landau Associates LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ADT Average Daily Traffic bgs below ground surface BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe City City of Tukwila ft foot/feet TranTech TranTech Engineering, LLC LAI Landau Associates, Inc. LRFD Load Resistance Factor Design pci pounds per cubic inch psi pounds per square inch NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 PGA peak ground acceleration WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement v November 22, 2021 86 264 DRAFT Landau Associates This page intentionally left blank. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement vi November 22, 2021 87 265 DRAFT Landau Associates 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of preliminary geotechnical engineering services provided by Landau Associates, Inc. (LAI) to TranTech Engineering, LLC (TranTech; Project Civil and Structural Engineer) in support of preliminary design of the City of Tukwila (City; project owner) 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement project in Tukwila, Washington (site; Figure 1). This report has been prepared with information provided by representatives of the City and TranTech, and with data collected during LAI's field exploration program. 1.1 Project Background and Description The existing 42nd Avenue South Bridge was built in 1949. It is a 3 -span bridge that is 280 -feet -long and 28 -feet wide [24 feet (ft) curb -to -curb], with the main span consisting of a through -truss that spans over the Duwamish River. The existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 7.56 and is considered Structurally Deficient and Functionally Obsolete. The 2018 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume was 10,300 vehicles per day, with 30 percent of those vehicles being heavy trucks. The 42nd Avenue South Bridge is a primary crossing of the Duwamish River for the Allentown neighborhood, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Intermodal Facility, and Baker Commodities, all of which are considered major stakeholders of this project. The City has been struggling with the deterioration of this bridge for many years, starting in the 1990s with an expensive paint project followed a few years later by the emergency shoring of the northern approach roadway with a sheet pile wall system when the Duwamish River threatened to wash away its northern approach fill. Even after these repairs, the northern approach has continued to settle, and constant maintenance is required to provide a smooth transition onto the bridge. In addition, the existing steel truss is fracture critical, and the bridge requires costly special access inspections every 24 months. These inspections must be preceded by a cleaning of the structure to allow visual access to critical connections. Cleaning the bridge is expensive and a logistical challenge that yields only short-term benefits. The bridge currently needs further maintenance, but the cost of the necessary repairs far exceeds the cost of replacing the bridge. The bridge is the only viable route for container trucks entering and leaving the Tukwila BNSF Intermodal Facility and is currently load posted, which restricts the free movement of that freight. The bridge's many structural deficiencies are compounded by the crossing of the frequent heavy loads as well as by deterioration suffered during its 70 -year service life. In addition, the bridge bearings are locked, which causes continuing damage from temperature -related expansion and contraction. These deficiencies coupled with the bridge geometry have resulted in a bridge at risk of collapse during a seismic event. This project will replace the existing 42nd Avenue South Bridge with a new multi -span bridge and improve the serviceability of 42nd Avenue South. The City is considering two alignments for the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 1-1 November 22, 2021 88 266 DRAFT Landau Associates replacement bridge, one within the existing bridge corridor and one within the South 124th Street corridor. LAI understands that the replacement bridge will likely be supported on drilled shaft foundations with diameters on the order of 8 to 10 ft. 1.2 Scope of Services TranTech retained LAI to provide preliminary geotechnical design services in support of preliminary design of the project. LAI provided the following services in accordance with the scope outlined in a Subconsultant Agreement for Services between LAI and TranTech, dated November 23, 2020: • Reviewed readily available geologic and geotechnical data for the site and the surrounding area, including information gathered by others as part of the nearby King County Allentown Trunk and Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail projects. • Evaluated the above-described information collected by others from the project area and developed preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to preparation of the project's Type, Size, and Location Report. • Obtained public and private utility clearances prior to performing field explorations. • Characterized subsurface soil and groundwater conditions along the existing bridge corridor and the South 124th Street corridor by advancing four exploratory borings at or near proposed bridge foundation locations. • Collected representative soil samples from the exploratory borings. • Completed a geotechnical laboratory testing program consisting of natural moisture content, grain size, and Atterberg Limits determinations on selected soil samples to aid in classifying site soils. • Evaluated the information collected as part of the data review and field investigation program to develop preliminary geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations related to the preliminary design (i.e., 30 percent design) of the proposed replacement bridge. • Prepared a written report, summarizing the findings of the field investigation and providing preliminary geotechnical design recommendations for the project. The report includes: — A site plan showing the locations of the exploratory borings completed for the project. — Summary logs of the subsurface conditions observed in the exploratory borings. - A discussion of the near -surface soil and groundwater conditions observed along the two bridge corridors. - A preliminary qualitative evaluation of the liquefaction and lateral spreading hazards at the two bridge sites. - Seismic design criteria in accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. - Preliminary geotechnical design recommendations for the preliminary design of deep foundations for the proposed replacement bridge. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 1-2 November 22, 2021 89 267 DRAFT Landau Associates 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS This section discusses the general geologic setting of the project area and describes the surface and subsurface conditions observed along the existing bridge and the South 124th Street bridge corridors at the time of LAI's field investigation. Interpretations of site conditions are based on the results of LAI's geologic review, site reconnaissance, and subsurface explorations. 2.1 Geologic Setting General geologic information for the project area was obtained from the Geologic Map of the Des Moines 7.5' Quadrangle, King County, Washington (Booth and Waldron 2004). The project area is mapped as being underlain by alluvium. Booth and Waldron describe alluvium as moderately well sorted deposits of cobble gravel, pebbly sand, and sandy silt that is found along the floodplains of the Duwamish River. Glacial till, ice contact, and advance outwash deposits are also mapped in the vicinity of the project area. Glacial till typically consists of a heterogeneous, non -sorted mixture of sub -rounded boulders, cobbles, gravel, and sand in a matrix of silt and clay. The heterogeneous nature of the glacial till is a result of it being mixed and transported before being deposited, overridden, and compacted by the weight of an advancing glacier. 2.2 Surface Conditions The following sections describe the surface conditions in the vicinity of the existing bridge corridor and the South 124th Street corridor during LAI's field investigation. 2.2.1 Existing Bridge Corridor On the south side of the Duwamish River, the project area is currently developed with hardscape (impervious, asphalt concrete pavement) associated with King County's Green River Trail, which passes beneath the existing bridge; overhead utilities; and landscaped areas (deciduous trees and grass) between Interurban Avenue South and the Green River Trail. Blackberry bushes and deciduous trees line the riverbank near the existing bridge landing. The site slopes towards the Duwamish River at variable grades, and a retaining wall of variable height passes beneath the existing bridge along the south edge of the Green River Trail. On the north side of the Duwamish River, the project site is developed with hardscape (impervious, asphalt concrete pavement) and landscaping (deciduous trees and grass) associated with the Tukwila Community Center and the King County Duwamish River Siphon. The site slopes toward the Duwamish River at variable grades, and blackberry bushes and deciduous trees line the riverbank. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 2-3 November 22, 2021 90 268 DRAFT Landau Associates 2.2.2 South 124th Street Corridor On the east side of the Duwamish River, the project site is developed with hardscape (impervious, asphalt concrete pavement), overhead utilities, and signage associated with the 42"d Avenue South and the South 124th Street intersection. The site is generally flat except near the west edge of the intersection where the ground surface slopes down sharply toward the Duwamish River. On the west side of the Duwamish River, the project site is generally developed with hardscape (impervious asphalt concrete pavement) associated with the Green River Trail, overhead utility lines along the east side of the trail, and landscaping that runs along the west side of the trail. Deciduous trees and blackberry bushes exist along the east side of the trail where the site slopes down toward the Duwamish River. 2.3 Subsurface Soil Conditions The following sections present the subsurface conditions observed along the proposed existing bridge corridor and along the alternative South 124th Street corridor bridge alignment. The approximate locations of the borings described herein are shown on Figure 2. Additional information about LAI's field exploration program, including summary exploration logs, is provided in Appendix A. A discussion of LAI's geotechnical laboratory testing program and laboratory data are presented in Appendix B. 2.3.1 Existing Bridge Corridor Based on LAI's field observations, the soils/rock observed in the exploratory borings that were advanced along the existing bridge corridor (borings B-1 and B-2) were classified into the following geologic units: • Alluvium: This unit was generally observed to consist of black and mottled orange, brown to brownish tan, and gray, very loose to medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt and clay and with trace organics and gravel, and very soft to medium stiff silt with varying amounts of sand and trace organics. This unit was observed to extend from approximately 0 to 50 ft below ground surface (bgs) and 0 to 25 ft bgs in borings B-1 and B-2, respectively. • Glacial Till: This unit was generally observed to consist of gray to greenish gray, dense to very dense sand with varying amounts of gravel, silt, cobbles, and boulders; and gray, hard silt with varying amounts of sand, gravel, cobbles, and boulders. This unit was observed to extend to the maximum depth of boring B-1 (90.3 ft bgs) and to a depth of about 74 ft bgs at the location of boring B-2. • Bedrock: This unit was observed to consist of grayish black siltstone and was observed at approximately 74 ft bgs in boring B-2. LAI did not observe this unit in boring B-1. LAI was able to sample only the upper 6 inches of this unit. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42"d Avenue South Bridge Replacement 2-4 November 22, 2021 91 269 DRAFT Landau Associates 2.3.2 South 124th Street Corridor Based on LAI's field observations, the soils observed in the exploratory borings that were advanced along the South 124th Street corridor (borings B-3 and B-4) were classified into the following geologic units: • Alluvium: This unit was generally observed to consist of tan to blackish gray and blackish brown, very loose to medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt and peat lenses; and gray, very soft to hard silt. This unit was observed to extend from approximately 0 to 73 ft bgs and 0 to 20 ft bgs in borings B-3 and 13-4, respectively. • Glacial Till: This unit was generally observed to consist of gray very dense sand with varying amounts of silt and trace gravel. At the location of boring B-3 between the depths of about 73 to 80 ft bgs, the till was observed to consist of tannish iron -stained, gravelly, silty, dense, fine to medium sand. The lower portion of the till unit was generally observed to consist of gray, bluish gray, tan, greenish gray, very dense sand with varying amounts of gravel and trace silt; and dark gray, hard silt with varying amounts of sand and gravel. This unit was observed to extend to the maximum depths of borings B-3 (90.5 ft bgs) and B-4 (60.5 ft bgs). 2.4 Groundwater Conditions Use of the mud rotary drilling method precluded measurement of site groundwater levels. However, the water level observed within the adjacent Duwamish River suggests that groundwater elevations could be approximately 6 to 15 ft bgs at the existing bridge corridor explorations and approximately 20 ft bgs at the South 124th Street corridor explorations at the time of drilling. Groundwater conditions will vary depending on local subsurface conditions, weather conditions, the level of the Duwamish River, tidal fluctuations, and other factors. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 2-5 November 22, 2021 92 270 DRAFT Landau Associates 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of the field exploration, preliminary engineering analyses performed, and review of existing data, it is LAI's opinion that subsurface conditions along the proposed existing bridge corridor are suitable for the proposed construction, provided the recommendations contained herein, and in subsequent design -level geotechnical documents, are incorporated into the project design. The following sections present preliminary geotechnical conclusions and recommendations related to seismic design considerations and foundation support for the proposed replacement bridge. 3.1 Seismic Design Considerations The Pacific Northwest is seismically active, and the project area could be subject to ground shaking from a moderate to major earthquake. Consequently, earthquake shaking should be anticipated during the design life of the proposed improvements, and the proposed improvements should be designed to resist earthquake loading using appropriate design methodology. To estimate lateral forces on project components, LAI recommends the seismic design parameters presented in Table 1. These parameters were obtained from the United States Geological Survey (USGS; accessed January 2021) seismic design maps for a seismic event with a 7 -percent probability of exceedance in a 75 -year period, consistent with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2020). Table 1. Recommended Seismic Design Parameters Location Site Class Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) (g) s, 51 (g) (g) Fa F„ FPGA (--) (--) (--) B-1 through B-4 E 0.456 1.01 0.338 0.9 2.648 0.9 Fa, F" = site coefficients for short -period (0.2 -second period) and long -period (1.0 -second period) ranges of acceleration spectrum, respectively. FPGA = peak ground acceleration coefficient g = acceleration due to gravity PGA = peak ground acceleration Ss, S1= 0.2 -second and 1.0 -second period spectral accelerations, respectively 3.1.1 Liquefaction Liquefaction is a phenomenon where strong ground motions temporarily cause soils to lose strength and behave like a liquid. Liquefaction is generally limited to granular soils or non -plastic silts located below the water table that are in a relatively loose, unconsolidated condition at the time of a large, nearby earthquake. Near -surface soils at the project site were generally observed to be in a relatively loose condition; however, no groundwater was directly observed in the exploration due to the method that was used to advance the borehole. For preliminary design purposes, LAI assumed a groundwater elevation of 12 -ft NAVD88 (North American Vertical Datum of 1988). In general, Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 3-1 November 22, 2021 93 271 DRAFT Landau Associates subsurface conditions on the east side of the Duwamish River were observed to be relatively poorer. Preliminary estimates of depths to non -liquefiable soils are presented in Table 2. Table 2. Estimated Depth to Non -Liquefiable Soils Location Boring Depth to Non -Liquefiable Soils (ft bgs) Existing Bridge Corridor B-1 50 Existing Bridge Corridor B-2 25 South 124th Street Bridge Corridor B-3 70 South 124th Street Bridge Corridor B-4 20 ft = feet bgs = below ground surface 3.1.2 Lateral Spreading Lateral spreading typically occurs during soil liquefaction in the presence of sloping ground or a free face. It is LAI's opinion that slopes along the proposed bridge alignments could experience lateral spreading during a design seismic event. Preliminary recommendations regarding lateral spreading loads on drilled shaft foundations are presented in Section 3.2.1.1. 3.2 Preliminary Bridge Foundation Design The following sections provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations related to preliminary design of the foundation for the proposed replacement bridge. The seismic parameters presented in Section 3.1 of this report are applicable to the preliminary design of the bridge. LAI recommends that the preliminary recommendations presented herein be updated as necessary during development of the project design. 3.2.1 Drilled Shaft Lateral Foundation Capacity A computer program, such as Ensoft's LPILE program, can be used to calculate the lateral capacity of the foundations that will be used to support the proposed replacement bridge. LPILE uses lateral soil reaction (p) and lateral deflection (y) curves generalized from field load tests and soil input properties to approximate lateral pile deflections and moments. Preliminary recommended LPILE input parameters for the onsite soils in non -liquefied conditions at the locations of borings B-1 through B-4 are presented in Table 3. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 3-2 November 22, 2021 94 272 DRAFT Landau Associates Table 3. Preliminary Recommended Soil Parameters for LPILE Input, Non -Liquefied Condition Location Depth Below Existing Grade (ft) Effective Unit Weight (pci) Friction Angle (degrees) Undrained Shear Strength (psi) Soil Modulus K (pci) Soil Strain E5 Soil Model B-1 0 to 6 6 to 50 >50 0.061 0.025 0.042 30 30 38 - 25 - 20 - 125 - Sand (Reese) - Sand (Reese) - Sand (Reese) 0 to 25 0.025 27 - 20 - Sand (Reese) B-2 >25 0.042 38 - 125 - Sand (Reese) 0 to 12 0.057 28 - 25 - Sand (Reese) 12 to 70 0.022 28 - 20 - Sand (Reese) B-3 70 to 80 0.033 36 - 60 - Sand (Reese) >80 0.042 38 - 125 - Sand (Reese) 0 to 18 0.061 28 - 25 - Sand (Reese) B-4 18 to 20 0.025 28 - 20 - Sand (Reese) >20 0.042 38 - 125 - Sand (Reese) €50 = strain at 50 percent stress level ft = foot/feet pci = pounds per cubic inch psi = pounds per square inch The recommended parameters assume a single shaft without group effects. Groups of shafts will have less lateral resistance than the sum of the single pile resistances due to soil structure interaction among closely spaced shafts. Consequently, the lateral load response of shafts in groups should be modified to account for this group effect. When the P -y method of analysis is used, this can be accomplished by multiplying the values of P by the P multipliers presented in Article 10.7.2.4 of the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (AASHTO 2020). The minimum center -to -center pile spacing presented in the AASHTO 2020 LRFD Bridge Design Specifications is 3D (where D is the shaft diameter); however, Section 8.12.2.3 of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Geotechnical Design Manual (2021) provides guidance on how to account for the shading effect when the center -to -center pile spacing is between 2D and 3D. To account for the effect of liquefied soils due to a design -level seismic event, LAI preliminarily recommends assuming no lateral resistance for soils at depths less than those presented in Table 2. 3.2.1.1 Lateral Spreading Based on the results of LAI's field investigation, drilled shafts located along either of the proposed alignments may be subject to lateral loading as a result of liquefaction -induced lateral spreading Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 3-3 November 22, 2021 95 273 DRAFT Landau Associates during a design -level seismic event. The magnitude of lateral spreading loads at each location will largely be a function of the thickness of the non -liquefied "crust" above the groundwater table. As noted previously, LAI has preliminarily assumed a groundwater elevation of 12 -ft NAVD88 in liquefaction analyses. A higher groundwater table would result in a lower magnitude of lateral spreading loads, whereas a lower groundwater -table elevation would result in a higher magnitude. Lateral spreading loads are anticipated to be greatest in areas where the ground surface elevation adjacent to the drilled shaft foundation is the highest. Because of this, it may be possible to limit the magnitude of lateral spreading loads by locating the drilled shaft foundations at locations where the ground surface elevation is the lowest. Detailed lateral spreading analyses will be performed in subsequent phases of the project. 3.2.2 Drilled Shafts Axial Capacity Preliminary recommendations for drilled shafts were developed in accordance with the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (AASHTO 2020). LAI recommends minimum shaft embedment depths equal to one shaft diameter greater than the depths presented in Table 2. For preliminary planning purposes, drilled shafts should be assumed to have no axial capacity between the ground surface and the depths presented in Table 2. Below those depths, the preliminary nominal axial resistance of a single, 8- and 10 -ft diameter drilled shaft can be preliminarily assumed to be equal to those presented in Table 4. Table 4. Preliminary Drilled Shaft Axial Capacities Service Limit State Resistance Strength/Extreme Limit State Resistance Shaft Diameter End Bearing (kips) 8 ft 700 10 ft 865 Skin Friction (kips/ft) 65 80 End Bearing 2.400 3,770 Skin Friction (kips/ft) 68 85 kips = kilopounds kips/ft = kilopounds per foot Note: 1) Preliminary resistances presented herein are valid only for depths greater than those presented in Table 2. Drilled shafts should be preliminarily assumed to have no axial resistance at depths less than those presented in Table 2. The preliminary axial resistances presented in Table 4 assume no permanent casing is used. If the shafts are constructed using permanent casing, the axial resistances should be multiplied by a factor of 0.7. Service limit state nominal capacities were developed assuming 1 inch of allowable settlement. Resistance factors applicable to the Service, Strength 1, and Extreme 1 limit states are presented in Table 5. Where the resistance factors are applied to a single shaft supporting a bridge pier (i.e., a non -redundant shaft), the recommended resistance factors should be reduced by 20 percent. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 3-4 November 22, 2021 96 274 DRAFT Landau Associates Table 5. Recommended Resistance Factors for Drilled Shaft Design Loading Service Limit Strength Limit Extreme Limit Compression 1.0 Uplift 0.55 (side friction) 0.50 (end -bearing) 1.0 0.45 (side friction) 1.0 0.8 For preliminary planning purposes, drilled shaft nominal uplift resistances could be taken as equal to the nominal shaft friction capacities presented in Table 4. 3.2.2.1 Downdrag Loads As previously noted, some soils in the vicinity of the drilled shafts that are being considered for foundation support for the replacement bridge are potentially liquefiable. It is estimated that the magnitude of liquefaction -induced settlement as a result of the design earthquake could be great enough [i.e., greater than 0.4 inch per the WSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual (2021)] that downdrag loads on the shafts could fully develop. Consequently, downdrag loads resulting from potential liquefaction induced settlement should be applied at the Extreme 1 limit state as described below. Downdrag loads at the Extreme 1 limit state for each drilled shaft can be preliminarily taken as equal to those presented in Table 6. Section 2.3 of this report describes the soil profile that is anticipated at each bridge pier location. The downdrag loads assume no permanent casing will be used to construct the shafts. If the shafts are constructed using permanent casing, the downdrag loads presented in Table 6 should be multiplied by a factor of 0.7. Table 6. Preliminary Recommended Seismic Downdrag Loads for Extreme 1 Limit State Location Boring Shaft Diameter (ft) Downdrag Load on Drilled Shaft (kips) B-1 Existing Bridge Corridor B-2 B-3 South 124th Street Corridor B-4 ft = feet 8 225 10 280 8 50 10 65 8 340 10 420 8 235 10 290 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 3-5 November 22, 2021 97 275 DRAFT Landau Associates 3.2.2.2 Group Interaction Effect If it is necessary to place drilled shafts in groups with a center -to -center spacing of less than 3D (where D is the shaft diameter), then an axial group reduction factor will need to be incorporated into the design of the shaft. Table 7 presents recommended axial group reduction factors. Table 7. Recommended Axial Group Reduction Factors No. of Rows in Group Shaft Spacing (Center to Center) Group Reduction Factor Single Multiple D = shaft diameter 2D 0.9 3D or greater 1 2.5D 0.67 3D 0.8 4D or greater 1 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 3-6 November 22, 2021 98 276 DRAFT Landau Associates 4.0 DESIGN PHASE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Per Section 8.2.1 of the WSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual (WSDOT 2021), it is especially critical that groundwater conditions be well defined at the location of each drilled shaft. Following final determination of drilled shaft locations, LAI recommends that additional borings be conducted at each of the shaft locations. Piezometers should be installed in each boring to adequately define the limits and piezometric head in all unconfined, confined, and locally perched groundwater zones. Information from the supplemental field exploration program should then be analyzed by a geotechnical engineer, and geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations should be developed to support final design of the project. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 4-7 November 22, 2021 99 277 DRAFT Landau Associates 5.0 USE OF THIS REPORT Landau Associates has prepared this report for the exclusive use of TranTech Engineering, LLC and the City of Tukwila for specific application to the preliminary design of the 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project in Tukwila, Washington. No other party is entitled to rely on the information, conclusions, and recommendations included in this document without the express written consent of Landau Associates. Reuse of the information, conclusions, and recommendations provided herein for extensions of the project or for any other project, without review and authorization by Landau Associates, shall be at the user's sole risk. Landau Associates warrants that, within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, its services have been provided in a manner consistent with that level of skill and care ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions as this project. Landau Associates makes no other warranty, either express or implied. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 5-1 November 22, 2021 100 278 DRAFT Landau Associates 6.0 REFERENCES AASHTO. 2020. LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 9th Edition. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Booth, D.B., Waldron, H.H., 2004. Geologic Map of the Des Moines 7.5' Quadrangle, King County, Washington. United States Department of the Interior. US Geological Survey. November 30. USGS. 2020. 2008 Interactive Deaggregations. US Geological Survey. Accessed January 2021. Available online at: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/ WSDOT. 2021. M 46-03: Geotechnical Design Manual. Washington State Department of Transportation. July 1. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 1790003.010.011 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement 6-1 November 22, 2021 101 279 S F 47d S X 6G,% c46 S t . O ,.d, ,,01" °'i •5 N, S Rainier Golf and Country Club / 112Th S t a 00 0- d m Park Southern Heights S 124Th w Riverton -Boulevard S 128Th St S 136Th St a) L F eu N 44aJ S 1 S4Th S t y6 S1 IALANDAU ASSOCIATES 280 0 C9 gi 3 L Y N ai ar > / in J N Boeing Rd c s�yar m go Rainier Beach Lake Washington 167 de P^441 f eP Allentown so„, f Riverton Heights ail 0.5 1 Miles Data Source: Esri 2012 Project Location 181 Everett Seattle Spokane. 11 Tukwila P Tacoma Olympia Washington 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Vicinity Map Figure 1 102 Landau Associates I G:\Projects\1790\003\010\011\F02SiteExplorationPlan.dwg I 1/21/2021 10:34 AM I ezick Legend B-1 S Boring Location and Designation 14 LANDAU ASSOCIATES 0 100 200 Scale in Feet Note 1. Black and white reproduction of this color original may reduce its effectiveness and lead to incorrect interpretation. 2. 1 -foot contour elevations (NAVD88, feet). Source: Bing Imagery, 2021; 1 -Alliance, 2021 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Site and Exploration Plan Figure 2 103 281 282 APPENDIX A Field Explorations 104 283 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS Subsurface conditions along the two, alternative bridge alignments were explored by Landau Associates, Inc. (LAI) by advancing and sampling four exploratory borings (B-1 through B-4) between December 21, 2020 and December 24, 2020. The approximate locations of LAI's explorations are shown on Figure 2. Two of the borings (B-1 and B-2) were advanced approximately 90.3 and 74.5 feet (ft) below ground surface (bgs) adjacent to the existing bridge alignment, and two borings (B-2 and B-4) were advanced approximately 90.5 and 60.5 ft bgs along the alternative South 124th Street Bridge alignment. Under subcontract to LAI, the exploratory borings were advanced by Holocene Drilling, Inc. of Puyallup, Washington using the mud rotary drilling technique. The field exploration program was coordinated and monitored by LAI personnel who also obtained representative soil samples, maintained a detailed record of the observed subsurface soil and groundwater conditions, and described the soil encountered by visual and textural examination. Each representative soil type observed in the explorations was described using the soil classification system shown on Figure A-1, in general accordance with ASTM International standard test method D2488, Standard Recommended Practice for Description of Soils (Visual -Manual Procedure). The exploration logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-5. These logs represent LAI's interpretation of subsurface conditions identified during the field exploration program. The stratigraphic contacts shown on the summary logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be more gradual. The soil and groundwater conditions depicted are only for the specific dates and locations reported and, therefore, are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. A further discussion of soil and groundwater conditions is provided in the main text of this report. Disturbed samples of soil encountered in the exploratory borings were obtained at select intervals using a 1.5 -inch inside -diameter split -spoon sampler. The sampler was driven up to 18 inches into the undisturbed soil ahead of the drill bit with a 140 -lb hammer falling a distance of approximately 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler for the final 12 inches of soil penetration, or a portion thereof, is noted on the boring log, adjacent to the appropriate sample notation. Samples collected in this manner were taken to LAI's laboratory for further examination and testing. A discussion of laboratory test procedures and the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. Upon completion of drilling and sampling, the boreholes were decommissioned in general accordance with the requirements of Washington Administrative Code 173-160. 105 284 Soil Classification System USCS MAJOR GRAPHIC LETTER TYPICAL DIVISIONS SYMBOL SYMBOL11> DESCRIPTIONS 12>(3) COARSE-GRAINED SOIL (More than 50% of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size) GRAVEL AND CLEAN GRAVEL o ° o °! o GW Well-graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines GRAVELLY SOIL or no fines) 3 0 o u o u o o tr GP Poorly graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines (More than 50% of fraction GRAVEL WITH FINES ' i ` ) GM Silty gravel; gravel/sand/silt mixture(s) coarse retained on No. 4 sieve) (Appreciable amount of fines) , s GC Clayey gravel; gravel/sand/clay mixture(s) SAND AND CLEAN SAND SW Well-graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines SANDY SOIL (Little or no fines) SP Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines (More than 50% of coarse fraction passed SAND WITH FINES ` I SM Silty sand; sand/silt mixtures) through No. 4 sieve) (Appreciable amount of fines) /1 / SC Clayey sand; sand/clay mixture(s) FINE-GRAINED SOIL (More than 50% of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size) SILT AND CLAY I I( M Inorganic silt and very.fine sand; rock flour; silty or clayey fine sand or clayey silt wh slightlasticity /l CLL Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silty clay; lean clay (Liquid limit less than 50) OL Organic silt; organic, silty clay of low plasticity SILT AND CLAY M H Inorganic silt; micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand CH Inorganic clay of high plasticity; fat clay (Liquid limit greater than 50) 4 OHii) Organic clay of medium to high plasticity; organic silt HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILPT Peat; humus; swamp soil with high organic content OTHER MATERIALS GRAPHIC LETTER SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS PAVEMENT :1::' ,AC or PC Asphalt concrete pavement or Portland cement pavement ROCK \a RK Rock (See Rock Classification) WOOD �d./.✓w/�F AA WD Wood, lumber, wood chips DEBRIS 0/0/0/ DB Construction debris, garbage Notes: 1. USCS letter symbols correspond to symbols used by the Unified Soil Classification System and ASTM classification methods. Dual letter symbols (e.g., SP-SM for sand or gravel) indicate soil with an estimated 5-15% fines. Multiple letter symbols (e.g., MUCL) indicate borderline or multiple soil classifications. 2. Soil descriptions are based on the general approach presented in the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), outlined in ASTM D 2488. Where laboratory index testing has been conducted, soil classifications are based on the Standard Test Method for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes, as outlined in ASTM D 2487. 3. Soil description terminology is based on visual estimates (in the absence of laboratory test data) of the percentages of each soil type and is defined as follows: Primary Constituent: > 50% - "GRAVEL," "SAND," "SILT," "CLAY," etc. Secondary Constituents: > 30% and < 50% - "very gravelly," "very sandy," "very silty," etc. > 15% and < 30% - "gravelly," "sandy," "silty," etc. Additional Constituents: > 5% and < 15% - "with gravel," "with sand," "with silt," etc. < 5% - "with trace gravel," "with trace sand," "with trace silt," etc., or not noted. 4. Soil density or consistency descriptions are based on judgement using a combination of sampler penetration blow counts, drilling or excavating conditions, field tests, and laboratory tests, as appropriate. Drilling and Sampling Key SAMPLER TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER & INTERVAL Field and Lab Test Data Code Description a 3.25-inch O.D., 2.42-inch I.D. Split Spoon b 2.00-inch O.D., 1.50-inch I.D. Split Spoon Code Description PP = 1.0 Pocket Penetrometer, tsf TV = 0.5 Torvane, tsf c Shelby Tube d Grab Sample e Single-Tube Core Barrel f Double-Tube Core Barrel g 2.50-inch O.D., 2.00-inch I.D. WSDOT h 3.00-inch O.D., 2.375-inch I.D. Mod. California i Other - See text if applicable 1 300-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop Sample ,- Identification Number Recovery Depth Interval Sample Depth Interval Portion of Sample Retained for Archive or Analysis PID = 100 Photoionization Detector VOC screening, ppm W = 10 Moisture Content, % D = 120 Dry Density, pcf 200 = 60 Material smaller than No. 200 sieve, GS Grain Size - See separate figure for data AL Atterberg Limits - See separate figure for data GT Other Geotechnical Testing CA Chemical Analysis 2 140-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop Groundwater 3 Pushed 4 Vibrocore (Rotosonic/Geoprobe) 5 Other - See text if applicable a Approximate water level at time of drilling (ATD) 1 Approximate water level at time after drilling/excavation/well IALAIVDAU ASSOCIATES 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Soil Classification System and Key Figure /� _1 /`� I 106 285 1790003.01 11/19/21 N:\PROJECTS\ 1790003.010.011.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG WITH GRAPH B-1 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) O — 0 — 5 — 10 — 15 — 20 — 25 — 30 286 a`) .Q 0 C zT, o a) •a)aa) > E c w (nets a) a I- a`) a E as O LL 3 0 m Graphic Symbol S -211 S-3 -I S-5 S-6 I S -711 S-8 11 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 5 2 4 3 0 10 4 9 W = 20 W = 24 GS W = 21 W = 26 GS W = 26 W = 25 GS W = 22 USCS Symbol Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/24/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit 1—*—1 Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 SM I SP Brown, very silty, fine to medium SAND with trace organics (loose, moist) (ALLUVIUM) -Becomes very loose Tannish -brown, very silty, fine SAND (very loose, moist) -No recovery Black and mottled orange, fine to medium SAND with trace silt (loose, moist) -Becomes moist to wet -Grades to fine to medium -Grades to with trace gravel Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. LANDAU ASSOCIATES 0 a) 0 a) m o 0 0 � Cl) o m z a 0 0 A • A 1 A A • X • X • • A 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-1 Figure A-2 (1 of 3) 107 a- 1.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn r` 21 N:\PROJEC 0 M B-1 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) 0 — 35 — 40 — 45 — 50 — 55 — 60 If) .0 0 C zTo O a) •a)aa) > E c w ea ett a. 0. I- a`) a E as 0 17) LL 0 m as is 0 a) I— raphic Symbol n E co 0 Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/24/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-9 S-10 S-11 S-12 S-13 S-14 1 S-15 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 12 0 42 50/ 6" 74 W = 24 GS W = 20 W = 13 W = 12 GS SP Black and mottled orange, fine to medium SAND with trace silt (loose, moist) -Grades to without gravel -Becomes medium dense -No recovery SM Gray, gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND with cobbles and boulders (dense to very dense, moist) (GLACIAL TILL) -Grades to with gravel Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fie d interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. LANDAU ASSOCIATES o a) 0 - -o a> 0 0 O� m— z - - -o — 0 O • A• • X A 501 6"A 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-1 Figure A-2 (2 of 3) 108 287 a 1.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W 0 0 M 21 N:\PROJECTS\17 0 M B-1 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE c O . a� 0 — 65 — 70 — 75 — 80 — 85 — 90 288 a`5 .Q a a z0 0a) .a) a0 > E c w (n ats a) 0. IT a`) 0. E as 0 LL 17) 0 m 0 .0 E U 0 E 0 Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date' 12/24/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-161 S-171 S-181. S-191 S-201 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 52 50/ 5" 50/ 5" 82 50/ 4" S-21 1 b2 4„ J W= 7 Boring Completed 12/24/20 Total Depth of Boring = 90.3 ft. SM ML Gray, gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND with cobbles and boulders (dense to very dense, moist) (GLACIAL TILL) -Grades to gravelly -Grades to very silty Gray, very sandy SILT with trace gravel (hard, moist) Greenish gray, gravelly, silty SAND (very \dense, moist) Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. LANDAU ASSOCIATES a O2 o m– z –ts 3 — 0 CO A 50/ 5"- 50/ 5A A –It • 501- 4"A 50/ 4".a 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-1 Figure A-2 (3 of 3) 109 1790003.01 11/19/21 N:\PROJECTS\ 1790003.010.011.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG WITH GRAPH B-2 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) O — 0 — 5 — 10 — - 15 — 20 — - 25 — 30 a`) .Q 0 C zT, o a) •a) aa) > E c w (not a) a I- a`) a E as O LL 3 0 m Graphic Symbol S-1 b2 S-2111 b2 S-3 b2 S-4 b2 S-51 S -611 S-7 =] S-8 b2 b2 b2 b2 2 20 5 6 7 0 65 50/ 6" W = 42 AL W =2 W = 22 W = 13 GS FI USCS Symbol Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/21/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit 1—*—1 Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 ML GM ML Brown, SILT with sand, boulders, and trace organics (very soft, moist) (ALLUVIUM) -Boulder -No recovery -Becomes soft Gray, SILT with sand and trace organics (medium stiff, moist) Gray, clayey, silty SAND with organics (shells) (very loose, moist to wet) Gray, silty, very sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL (very dense, moist) (GLACIAL TILL) Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Lik LANDAU ASSOCIATES 0 a) 0 -0 Z 0 0 � Cl) m z m2i 3 0 C 0 0 A H i OX .50/. 6"A 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-2 Figure A-3 (1 of 3) 110 289 a- 1.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W 0 0 0 O 0 0 rn r` 21 N:\PROJEC 0 M B-2 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) 0 — 35 — 40 — 45 — 50 — - 55 — 60 5 .0 0 C zTo O a) •a)aa) > E c w (not a. 0. I- a) a E as 0 17) LL 0 m as is 0 a) I— raphic Symbol n E 0 Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/21/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-9 S-10 S-11 S-12=] S-13 Z] S-14 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 88 50/ 6" 50/ 6" 50/ 6" 50/ 4" 50/ 5" W =8 W = 12 GS W = 11 W = 15 ML SM Gray, sandy SILT with trace gravel (hard, moist) Gray, very silty, fine to medoium SAND with gravel (very dense, moist) -Grades to silty, fine to coars SP -Grades to with trace gravel -Grades to gravelly Gray, medium SAND with gravel and trace silt (very dense, moist) Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fie d interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Lik LANDAU ASSOCIATES 290 o a) 0 - -0 a> _ N L —• 0 o om z — m� - -o — 0 O A X 501 6"A 50/. 6"A 50/ . 6..A 50/ 4"A ..50/. 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-2 Figure A-3 (2 of 3) 111 a 1.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W 0 0 M 21 N:\PROJECTS\17 0 M B-2 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE O . a) 0 — 65 — 70 If) .0 0 O Z m O a) a)0.a) > E 0' w ea ett a. O. I- a`5 a E as 0 LL 0 0 m 0 .0 E T U 0 .0 E co 0 Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/21/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-15 =E S-16=] S-17 -' b2 b2 b2 50/ 3" 50/ 6" 50/ 6" W =5 W =3 SP j c GP- Dcc GM DCC DCC SCC oCC SCC DCC SCC oCC SCC DCC SCC oCC SCC DCC SCC oCC DCC — 75 Boring Completed 12/2 /20 Total Depth of Boring = 74.5 ft. — 80 — 85 — 90 SLS Gray, medium SAND with gravel and trace silt (very dense, moist) Gray, GRAVEL with sand and silt (very dense, moist) SILTSTONE (very dense, moist) (BEDROCK) Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. LANDAU ASSOCIATES 0 -- a .0 U) _ O2 o m— z.� — w — 3 5 0 O 50/ 50/ VA 50/ 6"A 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-2 Figure A-3 (3 of 3) 112 291 1790003.01 11/19/21 N:\PROJECTS\ 1790003.010.011.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG WITH GRAPH B-3 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) O — 0 — 5 — - 10 — - 15 — 20 — - 25 — - 30 292 a`) .Q 0 a z0 O a) •a)aa) > E c w ea ett a. 0. I- a`) a E as 0 LL 0 0 m S-211 S-3 S-5 1 S-611 S-7 1 S-8 I b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 3 3 5 3 4 5 10 18 W = 22 W = 25 W = 29 W = 26 GS W = 26 W = 35 0 .0 E n U U! n a5 0 n Milt AC SM SP Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/23/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I I L 20 40 60 80 imit ♦ SPT N -Value ♦ o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 Asphalt Pavement (6 -inch Thickness) (ASPHALT) Brown, very silty, fine SAND (very loose, moist) (ALLUVIUM) -Becomes loose -Becomes very loose, -Becomes loose and moist to wet -Grades to fine to medium sand Blackish -brown, fine to coarse SAND with trace silt (medium dense, moist to wet) Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. LANDAU ASSOCIATES 0 a) 0 a) m Z o 0 -0Cl)0 o z .� a 0 0 I • • • •X • • 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-3 Figure A-4 (1 of 3) 113 a- 1.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn r` 21 N:\PROJEC 0 M B-3 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) 0 — 35 — 40 — 45 — 50 — 55 — 60 5 .0 0 a z m O a) •a) aa) > E c w ea ett a. 0. IT a`) a E as 0 17) LL 0 m 0 .0 E T 0_ as USCS Symbol Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/23/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-9 S-10 S-11 S -12A S -12B S-13 S-14 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 21 14 0 W = 35 AL SP Blackish -brown, fine to coarse SAND with trace silt (medium dense, moist to wet) ML Gray, very sandy SILT (very soft, wet) I -Grades to sandy and blackish -gray W = 38 [SP- Black, fine SAND with silt (medium dense, I SM moist to wet) SM Black, very silty SAND (medium dense, moist to wet) Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fie d interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Lik LANDAU ASSOCIATES o a> 0 - -a – a - o rn w — O� om z – E - -o – C 0 O H • A • 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-3 114 Figure A-4 (2 of 3) 293 a 1.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W 0 0 M 21 N:\PROJECTS\17 0 M B-3 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) 0 — 65 — 70 — 75 — 80 — 85 — 90 If) .0 0 a z m 0 0 L a) a0 > E c w (nets 0 0. I- a`5 a E as 0 LL 0 m 0 .0 E T 0_ .0 E co 0 Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/23/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-15 I S-16 I S-19 =] b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 0 30 39 74 50/ 6" W = 42 W = 25 AL W = 12 W = 12 SM ML ML SM Black, very silty SAND (medium dense, moist to wet) Gray, sandy SILT (soft, moist to wet) -Becomes very soft Gray, sandy SILT (soft, moist to wet) 4 Blackish -gray, very silty SAND with gravel and organics (shells) (medium dense to dense, moist to wet) SM SP Tannish -orange, gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND (dense, moist) (GLACIAL TILL) Bluish -gray, fine to coarse SAND with gravel and trace silt (very dense, moist) -Grades to gray with trace gravel S-20 • b26" GS Grades to very gravelly with silt Boring Completed 12/23/20 Total Depth of Boring = 90.5 ft. Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Lik LANDAU ASSOCIATES 294 0 0 - m o rn w - .0 0 - O� z - = ti -D - C o - 0 - • A 50/ 6'.A 50/ 6 A 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-3 Figure A-4 (3 of 3) 115 a - 3.010.011.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W r, 21 N:\PROJEC 0 M B-4 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) 0 — 0 — 10 — 15 — 20 — - 25 — 30 If) .0 0 a Z m O a) a)aa) > E c w ea ett a. 0. IT a`) a E as 0 17) LL 0 m 0 .0 E T 0_ as USCS Symbol Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date. 12/22/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-2 S-3 S -4I S-5 S-6 S-7 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 0 2 33 50/ 6" W = 12 GS W =9 W = 18 W = 15 GS W = 18 S-8 1 b2 20 W = 13 GS SP- Tan, very gravelly, fine to coarse SAND SM with silt (very loose, moist) (ALLUVIUM) SP- Tan, very gravelly, fine to medium SAND SM with silt and trace organics (very loose, moist) PT Black, fibrous PEAT SP- Tan, fine SAND with silt and trace organics SM (loose, moist) SM Tan, silty, fine SAND with gravel and trace organics (loose, moist) ML Gray mottled, sandy SILT with gravel and trace peat (very stiff, moist) ML Tannish -gray, very sandy SILT with trace gravel (hard, moist) (GLACIAL TILL) SM Gray, very silty, fine SAND with trace gravel (very dense, moist) -Becomes gravelly Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fie d interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. LANDAU ASSOCIATES 0 0 • -A • X • A 50/. 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-4 Figure A-5 (1 of 2) 116 295 x a- 1.GPJ SOIL BORING LOG W 0 0 0 O 0 0 rn r` 21 N:\PROJEC 0 M B-4 LAI Project No: 1790003.010 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE 0. a) 0 — 35 — 40 — 45 — 50 — - 55 — 60 If) .Q c C zT, O a) .a) a a) >E c w (n ats a) a IT a`) 0. E as 0 LL 17) 0 m as is 0 a) I— raphic Symbol USCS Symbol Drilling Method. Mud Rotary Ground Elevation (ft). Not Determined Logged By: BCS Date' 12/22/20 Groundwater Moisture Content (%) Plastic Liquid Limit I� I Limit 20 40 60 80 A SPT N -Value A o Non -Standard N -Value 20 40 60 80 X Fines Content (%) X 20 40 60 80 S-9 S-10 S-11 S -12A S -12B S-13 S-14 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 b2 50/ 6" 50/ 6" 61 80 80 50/ 6" W = 22 W = 13 W = 15 AL Boring Completed 12/22/20 Total Depth of Boring = 60.5 ft. SM Gray, very silty, fine SAND with trace gravel (very dense, moist) SW Greenish -gray, fine to medium SAND wit SP gravel (very dense, moist) Tan, fine to medium SAND (very dense, moist) ML SP Greenish -gray, sandy SILT with gravel (hard, moist) Tan, fine to medium SAND (very dense, moist) ML Dark gray, sandy SILT with gravel (hard, moist) 0 CO • 501_ 6"A 50/_ 6"A A • A 50/ Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate. 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. Lik LANDAU ASSOCIATES 296 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Log of Boring B-4 Figure A-5 (2 of 2) 117 APPENDIX B Laboratory Soil Testing 118 297 APPENDIX B LABORATORY SOIL TESTING Soil samples obtained from the exploratory borings were taken to LAI's laboratory for further examination and testing. Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to characterize certain engineering and index properties of the soils along the two, alternative bridge alignments. Testing was performed in accordance with the ASTM International (ASTM) standard test procedures noted below. Natural Moisture Content The natural moisture contents of select soil samples were determined in general accordance with ASTM D2216 test procedures. The results of the moisture content determinations are indicated adjacent to the corresponding samples on the summary boring logs in Appendix A. Atterberg Limits Determination The liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL), and plasticity index (PI) of select soil samples were determined in general accordance with ASTM D4318 test procedures. The tests were conducted on fine-grained soil samples to facilitate soil classification and estimation of certain engineering properties. Test results are summarized on Figure B-1. Grain Size Analysis Grain size analyses were conducted on select soil samples in general accordance with ASTM D422 test procedures. Samples selected for grain size analysis are designated with a "GS" in the "Test Data" column on the summary boring logs in Appendix A. The test results are presented on Figures B-2 through B-4. 119 298 w O H 0 U) w co uJ Lu H a O 0 U) F O Lu O 0_ a z O 0 0 0 m IA Plasticity Index (PI) N 0) A Ul 6) O O O O O O O CL CH ML • or OL MH or OH CL -ML v *i 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Liquid Limit (LL) WI ATTERBERG LIMIT TEST RESULTS ir Symbol Exploration Number Sample Number Depth (ft) Liquid Limit (%) Plastic Limit (%) Plasticity Index (%) Natural Moisture (%) Soil Description Unified Soil Classification • B-2 S-1 2.5 34 32 2 42 SILT ML X B-3 S-11 45.0 23 26 NP 35 Very sandy SILT ML A B-3 S-16 65.0 26 21 5 25 Clayey SILT CL -ML * B-4 S-14 60.0 21 19 2 15 SILT ML ASTM D 4318 Test LANDAU ASSOCIATES Method 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Plasticity Chart Figure B-1 120 299 1790003.01 11/19/21 N:\PROJECTS\1790003.010.011.GPJ GRAIN SIZE FIGURE Percent Finer by Weight 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. Sieve Opening in Inches U.S. Sieve Numbers 6 4 3 2 1 5 1 3/4 1/2 3 8 3 6 8 10 14 16 20 30 40 5060 100 140 200 Hydrometer 100 10 1 Grain Size in Millimeters 01 0.01 0.001 Cobbles Gravel Sample Number Depth (ft) Sand Soil Description Silt or Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Symbol Exploration Number Sample Number Depth (ft) Natural0 Moisture (/o) Soil Description Unified Soil Classification • B-1 S-2 5.0 24 Very silty, fine to medium SAND SM I B-1 S-4 10.0 26 Very silty, fine SAND SM A B-1 S-7 25.0 25 Fine to medium SAND SP * B-1 S-9 35.0 24 Fine to medium SAND SP O B-1 S-13 55.0 12Gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND SM IA LANDAU ASSOCIATES 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Grain Size Distribution Figure B-2 171 1790003.01 11/19/21 N:\PROJECTS\1790003.010.011.GPJ GRAIN SIZE FIGURE Percent Finer by Weight 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. Sieve Opening in Inches U.S. Sieve Numbers 6 4 3 2 1 5 1 1/2 3/8 3 4 6 8 10 14 16 20 30 40 5060 100 140 200 Hydrometer 100 10 1 Grain Size in Millimeters 01 0.01 0.001 Cobbles Gravel Sample Number Depth (ft) Sand Soil Description Silt or Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Symbol Exploration Number Sample Number Depth (ft) Natural0 Moisture (/o) Soil Description Unified Soil Classification • B-2 S-7 25.0 13 Silty, very sandy, fine to coarse GRAVEL GM X B-2 S-11 45.0 12 Very silty, fine to medium SAND with gravel SM A B-3 S-4 10.0 26 Very silty, fine SAND SM * B-3 S-20 90.0 11 Very gravelly, fine to coarse SAND with silt SP -SM O B-4 S-1 2.5 12 Very gravelly, fine to medium SAND with silt SP -SM IA LANDAU ASSOCIATES 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Grain Size Distribution Figure B-3 177 1790003.01 11/19/21 N:\PROJECTS\1790003.010.011.GPJ GRAIN SIZE FIGURE Percent Finer by Weight 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. Sieve Opening in Inches U.S. Sieve Numbers 6 4 3 2 1 314 1/2 3/8 3 4 6 8 10 14 16 20 30 40 5060 100 140 200 Hydrometer • I I I I I I I 100 10 1 Grain Size in Millimeters 01 0.01 0.001 Cobbles Gravel Sample Number Depth (ft) Sand Soil Description Silt or Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Symbol Exploration Number Sample Number Depth (ft) Naturalo Moisture (/o) Soil Description Unified Soil Classification • B-4 S-4 10.0 15 Silty, fine SAND with gravel SM I B-4 S-8 30.0 13 Gravelly, very silty, fine SAND SM IA LANDAU ASSOCIATES 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Tukwila, Washington Grain Size Distribution Figure B-4 12t Appendix E — Permitting Matrices 124 303 304 Permit or Act Compliance Environmental Resource(s) Reviewing Agency Permit/ Reporting Trigger Permit/Reporting Submittal Requirement(s)2 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING SUMMARY MATRIX1, 42nd AVENUE SOUTH BRIDGE REPLACEMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Agency Review Timeframe ALTERNATIVES 42nd Avenue S 124"' Street Notes and Status State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Earth, air, water, plants, animals, energy, environmental health, land use, transportation, public services, and utilities City of Tukwila Any proposal which involves a non-exempt government "action." Project actions involve an agency decision on a specific project, including nonproject actions that involve decisions on policies, plans, or programs. National Natural resources, Environmental Policy social, Act (NEPA) cultural, and economic resources Section 404/401 Clean Water Act; Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbor Act Hydraulic Project Approval Shoreline Management Act/Shoreline Master Program Waters of the U.S./ Navigable Waters (3) Waters of the State (3) Shorelines and areas landward 200 ft (3) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/ Washington State Department of Transportation Local Programs, Northwest Region (WSDOT) US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Seattle Regulatory Branch Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Federal nexus (includes project funding or permit) Dredge/fill in waters of the U.S., or crossing of navigable waterway. Any work that will use, divert, obstruct, or change the bed or flow of state waters, including streams and rivers. City of Tukwila "Substantial development" within shoreline jurisdiction. Endangered Species Threatened and Act and Magnuson - Stevens Act; City Critical Areas Regulations Endangered Species and Critical Habitat; Essential Fish Habitat "Substantial development" means any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds five thousand dollars, or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. NOAA Federal nexus (includes Fisheries/ project funding or permit) and Essential Fish US Fish and Habitat Evaluation Wildlife (BA/EFH) Service (USFWS) / SEPA checklist WSDOT NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA),Critical Areas Report; refer to Notes. SEPA determination Contents of JARPA, refer to Notes JARPA; City application form, SEPA checklist, Critical Areas Report, Biological Assessment, Geotechnical Report, site plans. Up to 120 days. Variable depending on length of supporting consultations (i.e. refer to Endangered Species Act below). 3 to 9 months for Nationwide Permit. Up to 45 days Up to 120 days. Biological Assessment Concurrent with NEPA NOAA Fisheries determination may range from 6 to 12 months, or more. X, Exemption X, DNS or MDNS anticipated SEPA checklist initiated based on 30 percent design. WAC 197-11-800(27), allows exemption for the repair, reconstruction, restoration, retrofitting or replacement of structurally deficient bridges provided certain conditions are satisfied. X X NEPA compliance requires approval of the studies listed in this matrix (excluding SEPA), as necessary. WSDOT NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form to be submitted following completion of consultations associated with Biological Assessment and Cultural Resources investigation. X X Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from USACE may require individual project review and issuance of Section 401 Water Quality Certification by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). Project may comply with condition of Nationwide Permit 14 (Linear Transportation Projects). X X WDFW requires SEPA Determination in order to issue HPA. Project applications are made through the online APPS online program. X X The City designates the shoreline environment as Urban Conservancy (south of 42nd Avenue South) and Shoreline Residential (north of 42nd Avenue South). X X 12/1/2111/19/21 P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \600 Deliverables\620 Reports \TS&L\Pemmitting\Permit Matrix42nd Draft.docxP:\121\027\WIP\Permit Matrix GAPB Draft.docx BA/EFH documentation requires summary of project impacts/mitigation, including information regarding construction and stormwater design. Anticipated the project will result in a Biological Assessment documenting "May Affect, Not Likely to Page 1 of 3 125 Permit or Act Compliance Environmental Resource(s) Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Reviewing Agency WSDOT; City Permit/ Reporting Trigger Permit/Reporting Submittal Requirement(s)2 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING SUMMARY MATRIX', 42nd AVENUE SOUTH BRIDGE REPLACEMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Agency Review Timeframe ALTERNATIVES 42nd Avenue S 24th Street Historic and cultural WSDOT/ resources Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) and affected Tribes (WSDOT completes consultations with DAHP and affected tribes.) Federal nexus (includes project funding or permit) Area of Potential Effect (APE) Letter Cultural Resources Report Title IV of the Civil Environmental Justice FHWA/ Rights Act of 1964, WSDOT Executive Order 13166, Executive Order 12898 Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (DOT Act) of 1966 Publicly owned parks, FHWA/ recreational areas, WSDOT wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or public and private historical sites CERCLA, MTCA, TSCA, RCRA, OSHA" Hazardous and Problem Waste FHWA/ WSDOT Federal nexus (includes project funding or permit) Disproportionate and adverse impacts to protected populations. Federally funded transportation projects proposing use of Section 4(f) protected properties Land acquisition and/or excavation below ground surface WSDOT NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form and associated documentation, if necessary (see Notes). De minimis form and letter of concurrence from Parks Department WSDOT NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form and Hazardous Materials Discipline Report/Technical Memorandum. Federal Noise Control Act Sensitive Land Uses WSDOT (e.g. residences, parks, churches) Aquatic Lands Lease State aquatic lands Federally funded transportation project providing new highway or significant change to existing highway Washington Use or crossing of aquatic Department of lands Natural Resources (DNR) Advance Approval of Navigable Waters US Coast Bridges (33 CFR Guard Crossing of navigable waterway Traffic Noise Study JARPA, plans, survey Navigation Impact Report (NIR) Concurrent with NEPA. Up to 30 days for APE Up to 30 days for Cultural Resources Report Concurrent with NEPA Concurrent with NEPA Concurrent with NEPA Concurrent with NEPA 6 to 12 months Completed 12/1/2111/19/21 P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \600 Deliverables\620 Reports \TS&L\Pemmitting\Permit Matrix42nd Draft.docxP:\121\027\WIP\Permit Matrix GAPB Draft.docx X X, Exemption X X Notes and Status Adversely Affect" (NLAA) or "May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect (LAA), resulting in informal or formal consultation. WSDOT conducts consultations with NOAA Fisheries and USFWS. X Project APE is first developed and submitted for concurrence prior to conducting field investigation in support of Cultural Resources. WSDOT completes consultations with affected Tribe(s) and DAHP. X May be exempt for work limited to existing right of way. For non-exempt projects, review of data for census blocks adjacent to the project to identify protected populations along the project corridor and project impacts. Associated documentation is anticipated to include social and community impacts decision matrix and letter to file. X Required for temporary or permanent use of recreational property (i.e. parks). X An evaluation to determine the likelihood of whether environmental conditions on or adjacent to the project corridor is present. X X "Significant change" to the highway consists of: • Moving the existing highway horizontally which halves the distance between the nearest edge of the travelled lane and the closest receptor's outdoor use area, or; • Altering the vertical alignment of an existing highway that exposes a new line -of -sight between the receptor and the traffic noise source. X Application process can be initiated when JARPA and plans are available. DNR will issue permit following receipt of other agency permits. X X Advance Approval issued August 27, 2021, and includes conditions for approval. Page 2 of 3 126 Page 3 of 3 Permit or Act Compliance 115.70); Section 9 of the River and Harbors Act Environmental Resource(s) Reviewing Agency Permit/ Reporting Trigger ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING SUMMARY MATRIX1, 42nd AVENUE SOUTH BRIDGE REPLACEMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON ALTERNATIVES Permit/Reporting Submittal 42nd Avenue S 124th Street Requirement(s)2 Agency Review Timeframe Notes and Status NOTES: 1. Summary of permits does not include construction related permits, including, but not limited to, right-of-way, utility, or local development/clearing/grading permits. 2. Permit/Reporting Submittal Requirements vary by project. 3. Waters of the U.S., Waters of the State, and shorelines include the Duwamish River in the project area. Wetlands and certain waterways are regulated by federal, state, and local governmental agencies, and compliance with one agency typically does not fulfill permitting requirements of any other agencies. *The listed Acts apply to contaminated sites. Additional regulations may apply to disposal of hazardous and problem wastes. Key to hazardous and problem waste regulations: CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 USC 103) MTCA: Model Toxics Control Act (WAC 173-340) TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act (15 USC 2601 and 2629) RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (UST Program) (WAC 173-360) OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 CFR 1910) OI12/1/2111/19/21 P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \600 Deliverables\620 Reports\TS&L\Permitting\Permit Matrix42nd Draft.docxP:\121\027\WIP\Pennit Matrix _GAPB_Draft.docx 127 308 Appendix F — Mobility of Traffic Mechanical Memo 128 309 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: February 18, 2021 TG: 1.20133.00 To: Adam Cox — City of Tukwila From: Brent Turley, PE — Transpo Group Francesca Liburdy — Transpo Group cc: Kash Nikzad, PE — Trantech Engineering Diane Sheesley, PE — Tratech Engineering Subject: Tukwila 42nd Avenue S Bridge Replacement Transportation Analysis This memorandum summarizes the results of the existing and future transportation analysis for the 42nd Avenue S bridge replacement in Tukwila, Washington. Existing conditions were evaluated as well as future horizon year 2040 conditions. Future 2040 alternatives were evaluated for three possible scenarios as further described below. The following memorandum summarizes the analysis of alternatives and findings. Background and Study Area Description The existing 42nd Avenue S bridge crosses the Duwamish River south of S 124th Street near the Tukwila Community Center. The existing and future conditions analysis includes the following study intersections: 1. 42nd Avenue S/S 124th Street 2. 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S 3. Access Roadway/Interurban Avenue S 4. Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street (future conditions only) The Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection will be evaluated under future alternatives analysis assuming the existing 42nd Avenue S bridge is replaced with a new bridge along the S 124th Street alignment. Existing Conditions Physical Features 42nd Avenue S is a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 25 miles per hour (mph). Within the immediate vicinity of the 42nd Avenue bridge the speed limit is posted at 15 mph. 42nd Avenue S is considered a Major Collector by WSDOT. Interurban Avenue S is a two- to five -lane north -south roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Interurban Avenue S is a major route through most of the City of Tukwila and provides access to SR 599, 1-5, and 1-405. No on -street parking is permitted. Interurban Avenue S is considered a Principal Arterial by WSDOT. S 124th Street is a two-lane east -west roadway with a posted speed limit of 25 mph. A sidewalk with on -street parking runs along the south edge of the roadway, while a paved shoulder separated by c -curb from the vehicle travel lanes runs along the north edge of the roadway. S 124th Street is considered a Major Collector by WSDOT. 310 129 Non -Motorized Facilities 42nd Avenue S is designated as a bicycle friendly route based on the City of Tukwila's 2015 Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Element. Sidewalks are available on the east side of 42nd Avenue S north of S 124th Street, on the northeast side of Interurban Avenue S south of 42nd Avenue S and on the south side of S 124th Street. In addition, the Green River Trail extends along the south side of the Duwamish River in the study area, passing beneath the existing 42nd Avenue S bridge, while providing cycle and walk access. Vehicle Classifications Vehicle counts and classifications were collected along 42nd Avenue S in July 2020. The Average Daily Traffic volumes on 42nd Avenue S ranged from 3,600 in the northbound direction to 3,700 in the southbound direction. Table 1 summarizes the key vehicle classifications along 42nd Avenue S. The two main categories of vehicles are passenger vehicles and heavy vehicles. Passenger vehicles include Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) classes 1-3, and heavy vehicles include FHWA classes 4 and above. Attachment A contains the complete vehicle classification data sheets summarized by FHWA vehicle type. Table 1. Vehicle Classification Vehicle Type 42nd Avenue S NB SB Passenger Vehicles Passenger Cars Motorcycles Subtotal Heavy Vehicles Medium Trucks (2 axles) Heavy Truck (>2 axles) Buses Subtotal 82% 1% 83% 7% 7% 3% 17% 84% 1% 85% Source: Transpo Group Heavy vehicles represent approximately 15 to 17 percent of vehicles utilizing 42nd Avenue S. It is important to note that most heavy vehicles counted at the intersection were medium and heavy trucks, representing approximately 14 percent of the total vehicle volumes. Existing Operations Analysis Peak hour turning movement counts were collected for two hours during the weekday evening (4 p.m.to 6 p.m.) peak period in December 2020. Traffic volumes were analyzed for peak hour traffic operations. In addition, a 20 -percent factor was applied to increase counts to account for the impacts of COVID-19 on vehicle travel patterns. This factor was based on WSDOT permanent traffic recorder (PTR) data on SR 599 in the vicinity of the study area. Attachment B contains the weekday peak hour turning movement count worksheets. Existing weekday peak hour traffic operations were evaluated at the study intersections based on Level of Service (LOS) methodology. The LOS analysis method is identified in the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition as described in Attachment C and evaluated using Synchro 10 software program. For signalized and all -way stop control (AWSC) intersections, LOS is measured in average control delay per vehicle and is reported for the intersection as a whole. For two-way stop -control (TWSC) intersections, LOS is measured in control delay per vehicle at the worst 130 311 movement of the intersection. Traffic operations for an intersection can be described alphabetically with a range of levels of service (LOS A through F), with LOS A indicating free-flowing traffic and LOS F indicating extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. The City of Tukwila has adopted a LOS E standard for the study intersections based on the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element. Table 2 summarizes the existing weekday peak hour operations. The detailed LOS worksheets are included in Attachment D. Table 2. Existing (2020) Weekday PM Peak Hour Level of Service Traffic Control LOS' Delay2 WM3 1. 42nd Avenue S/S 124th Street AWSC B 11 2. 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S Signal C 30 3. Access Roadway/Interurban Avenue S TWSC B 13 SBL 4. Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street (future conditions only) N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: Transpo Group 1. Level of Service (A — F) as defined by the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (TRB), 6th Edition. 2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized two-way stop -controlled intersections. As shown in Table 2, the study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the PM peak hour, meeting City of Tukwila standards. The Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection will be evaluated under future conditions only when considering the possible S 124th Street bridge alternatives. Future Conditions The following section summarizes the future (2040) No Action and S 124th Street bridge alternatives. The No Action alternative evaluates 2040 forecast volumes at the study intersections with no change in traffic control or channelization from existing conditions. The S 124th Street bridge alternatives evaluate the closure of the existing 42nd Avenue S bridge and the construction of a new bridge that extends S 124th Street across the Duwamish River to intersect Interurban Avenue S. The alternatives consider either a traffic signal or a roundabout at the future Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection. Future Demand Traffic volume demand for 2040 was developed based on two primary sources: the volumes used in the existing conditions analysis (adjusted for COVID-19 impacts); and forecast traffic growth from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) regional travel demand model. Annual growth rates were developed from comparing 2025 and 2040 PSRC travel demand model volumes in the study area. These growth rates were then used to grow existing volumes to 2040 conditions. Manual edits and shifts were applied to account for the alternatives with a bridge closure where necessary. There are no known current development plans in the vicinity of the study intersection that are anticipated to add significant traffic to the study intersection beyond what is anticipated in the annual growth rates from the PSRC model volumes. Future Operations Analysis Estimated future operations were evaluated for the study intersections under 2040 future traffic conditions. Intersection operations were evaluated using Synchro 10 software for traffic signals and stop -controlled intersections, and Sidra 8 for roundabout intersections. The following alternatives were evaluated: • No Action Alternative — this alternative maintains all existing channelization and traffic control from existing conditions. 312 131 • S 124th Street Bridge with Signal — this alternative removes the existing 42nd Avenue S bridge and constructs a new bridge extending S 124th Street to a new intersection with Interurban Avenue S as a signalized intersection. Single -lane approaches with no dedicated turn lanes are assumed at the Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection. The assumed signal timing includes actuated -uncoordinated timing with a 60 -second cycle length. In addition, two-way stop control was assumed at the 42nd Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection, with stop -control at the north and south approaches. The 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S intersection remains signalized but is reconfigured with only three legs (north leg removed). A conceptual figure for this alternative is included in Attachment E. • S 124th Street Bridge with Roundabout - this alternative is similar to the previous alternative, but the Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection is analyzed as a single -lane roundabout. A conceptual figure for this alternative is included in Attachment E. Table 3 summarizes the 2040 future weekday PM peak hour LOS at the study intersections. Detailed LOS and queue worksheets are included in Attachment F. Table 3. Future (2040) Weekday PM Peak Hour Level of Service No Action Alternative S 124th Street Bridge Alternatives Traffic Traffic Intersection Control LOS1 Dela? WM3 Control LOS1 Delay2 WM3 1. 42nd Avenue S/S 124th Street AWSC B 14 TWSC C 19 SB 2. 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S Signal D 41 Signal A 10 3. Access Roadway/Interurban Avenue S TWSC B 15 SBL TWSC B 14 SBL 4. Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street N/A N/A N/A N/A Signal B 16 RAB A 7 NB (V/C 0.54) Source: Transpo Group Note: TWSC = two-way stop -controlled, AWSC = all -way stop -controlled 1. Level of Service (A — F) as defined by the 2016 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (TRB), 6th Edition. 2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized two-way stop -controlled intersections. Volume to capacity ratio (V/C) reported for roundabout intersections. As shown in Table 3, all study intersections are anticipated to meet City of Tukwila standards under future No Action and either of the S 124th Street bridge alternatives. No significant queueing or vehicle delay are anticipated at the study intersections. Signal Warrant Analysis A signal warrant analysis' was conducted for the study intersections under existing and future (2040) baseline conditions. Hourly traffic volume percentages were developed using NCHRP Report 365, Travel Estimation Techniques for Urban Planning. These percentages were applied to the existing PM peak hour turning movement volumes to develop an hourly volume distribution. Hourly volumes are included in Attachment G. Hourly volumes were analyzed with Highway Capacity Software 7 (HCS7) to evaluate signal warrants. Table 4 summarizes the results of the signal warrant analysis at the study intersections. 1 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Federal Highways Administration (2009). 132 313 Table 4. Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Intersection No Action Alternative S 124th Street Bridge Alternative Traffic Control Warrants Met Traffic Control Warrants Met 1. 42nd Avenue S/S 124th Street AWSC NO TWSC NO 2. 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S Signal N/A Signal N/A 3. Access Roadway/Interurban Avenue S TWSC NO TWSC NO 4. Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street Intersection does not exist Signal YES Source: Transpo Group Note: N/A = Not applicable, warrants not evaluated As shown in Table 4, signal warrants are only met for the Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection for the S 124th Street Bridge Alternatives. The signal warrants met included the 8 - hour volume warrant and the 4 -hour volume warrant. Detailed signal warrant worksheets at the intersection are included in Attachment G. Summary of Findings • Three potential future (2040) alternatives were evaluated: o No Action o S 124th Street Bridge with Signal o S 124th Street Bridge with Roundabout • No Action Alternative: o Maintains existing channelization and traffic control o 42nd Avenue S/Interurban Avenue S intersection operates at LOS D o 42nd Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection operates at LOS B o Access Roadway/Interurban Avenue S intersection operates at LOS B • S 124th Street Bridge Alternatives: o Removes the existing 42nd Avenue S bridge and constructs a new bridge extending S 124th Street to a new intersection with Interurban Avenue S o Signal Alternative — Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection operates at LOS B (2040 signal warrants are met) o Roundabout Alternative — Interurban Avenue S/S 124th Street intersection operates at LOS A o All other study intersections operate at LOS C or better • Each alternative exceeds the City of Tukwila's adopted intersection standard of LOS E 314 133 Attachment A: Vehicle Classification Summary Sheets 134 315 Allentown Classification Counts July 2020 Average Daily Volumes Location Date Direction Motor Bikes Cars & Trailers 2 Axle Long Buses 2 Axle 6 Tire 3 Axle Single 4 Axle Single <5 Axl Double 5 Axle Double >6 Axl Double <6 Axl Multi 6 Axle Multi >6 Axl Multi Total Vehicles 42nd Ave S Pre- Inspection ADT NB 29 2,703 569 63 222 152 2 45 157 4 1 1 0 3,948 SB 34 2,549 399 28 162 192 1 27 99 2 1 1 1 3,495 Total 63 5,252 968 91 384 344 3 72 256 5 2 2 1 7,443 During Inspection NB 21 1,827 388 94 164 87 0 42 98 2 0 1 1 2,726 SB 23 1,640 297 22 123 135 2 21 70 0 1 0 0 2,335 Total 44 3,468 685 116 287 222 2 63 168 2 1 1 1 5,061 Post- Inspection ADT NB 37 2,452 527 115 249 131 1 39 87 2 1 1 0 3,642 SB 38 2,653 475 48 219 166 0 32 99 0 1 0 0 3,732 Total 75 5,105 1,003 162 468 298 1 71 186 2 2 1 1 7,374 S 115th St Pre- Inspection ADT NB 16 630 161 1 30 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 846 SB 18 627 154 1 31 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 835 Total 34 1,257 315 2 61 6 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 1,681 During Inspection NB 17 1,148 275 2 72 27 1 7 19 1 0 0 0 1,570 SB 25 1,291 311 2 79 23 0 7 7 1 0 0 0 1,745 Total 42 2,439 586 4 151 49 2 14 26 2 0 0 0 3,315 Post- Inspection ADT NB 15 649 150 1 30 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 850 SB 18 640 156 1 27 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 847 Total 33 1,289 306 2 58 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1,697 S 129th St Pre- Inspection ADT NB 28 1,704 458 5 133 26 1 10 9 0 0 0 0 2,373 SB 24 1,539 485 7 128 29 1 6 12 1 0 0 0 2,232 Total 52 3,243 943 12 261 55 2 16 21 1 0 0 0 4,605 During Inspection NB 24 1,989 513 8 163 96 1 13 136 2 0 1 1 2,947 SB 97 1,807 606 6 176 153 3 13 87 1 1 0 0 2,950 Total 122 3,796 1,119 15 338 248 4 26 223 3 1 1 2 5,897 Post- Inspection ADT NB 31 2,204 505 5 124 26 1 9 11 0 0 0 0 2,916 SB 29 2,071 472 5 95 29 1 8 16 0 0 0 1 2,726 Total 60 4,275 977 9 219 55 1 16 27 0 0 0 1 5,642 Allentown Classification Counts July 2020 Average Hourly Volumes Allentown Classification Counts July 2020 Quick Summary of Types Location Date Time Period Motor Bikes Cars & Trailers 2 Axle Long Buses 2 Axle 6 Tire 3 Axle Single 4 Axle Single <5 Axl Double 5 Axle Double >6 Axl Double <6 Axl Multi 6 Axle Multi >6 Axl Multi Total Vehicles Date Time Period Motor Bikes Passenger Vehicles Trucks Pre - Inspection Hourly 12:00 AM 01:00 AM 02:00 AM 03:00 AM 04:00 AM 05:00 AM 06:00 AM 07:00 AM 08:00 AM 09:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 01:00 PM 02:00 PM 03:00 PM 04:00 PM 05:00 PM 06:00 PM 07:00 PM 08:00 PM 09:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 5 4 3 4 4 2 2 4 1 1 103 69 60 51 59 87 109 139 177 222 249 283 327 340 342 351 344 367 341 321 280 269 205 160 15 13 11 10 10 21 26 34 44 46 55 55 66 68 57 63 58 61 57 49 51 43 32 23 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 4 3 5 6 6 5 6 6 7 5 6 8 6 5 9 8 4 5 6 9 9 12 19 21 24 26 22 26 26 26 24 24 22 14 15 13 11 11 10 8 12 12 14 20 24 23 17 19 14 18 20 16 18 13 16 12 12 12 11 8 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 4 4 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 2 4 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 7 9 9 12 5 8 11 13 14 18 14 16 18 14 12 11 9 10 8 7 9 7 8 7 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 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 154 113 100 94 97 149 183 231 280 337 368 Pre - 410 Inspection 467 Hourly 480 468 474 463 487 454 412 376 354 273 220 12:00 AM 1 118 33 01:00 AM 0 82 30 02:00 AM 1 71 29 03:00 AM 1 60 32 04:00 AM 0 69 27 05:00 AM 1 108 39 06:00 AM 1 135 46 07:00 AM 3 174 52 08:00 AM 4 221 54 09:00 AM 4 267 62 10:00 AM 4 304 57 11:00 AM 5 338 64 12:00 PM 4 393 65 01:00 PM 6 408 61 02:00 PM 5 398 60 03:00 PM 4 414 52 04:00 PM 3 401 52 05:00 PM 4 428 48 06:00 PM 4 399 45 07:00 PM 2 370 36 08:00 PM 2 332 37 09:00 PM 4 312 31 10:00 PM 1 237 29 11:00 PM 1 183 31 135 O V0)n C O N :Tr 0 t` N N N N 0 N.- N CO 0 23 r 2123 0 M M 0 M N 0 0 0 N- 0 0 N 00 N 0) 0 0 7 0 0) 0 2 N- N- N) N O - O O 0 - O 0 O . 0N-000NW N m NAN r ONO M d'0000 . N N M Z5tC CC)00Nr0N 0000 N N r- 0 W nt2022'44300) .- e- e- n .- N ON M M 00 g M M 00) 22 M M 2R .',."2 M 0 Z; ON M M 0 M 0 M 0 N r ON. No" 0 .-0N)f 2NO6 W r0NO.- W r r r O O O O N O O O CO e- c- c- O N M 0 0 M LL) 0 0 CO e- O N 4 0 0 'O O e- c- CO CO CO 0 CO Cr m 0 CO 0 0 CO 0 M M N. n 0 0 0 0 0 r N r r r r N N N. Cr 0 " 0 O c'. I-- e- 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 i0 (O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O << 0 0 0 0 0 0 O e- 0 0 0 0 0 e- N e- e- a a 0 0 0 0 N CO O a a 0 0 0 0 M 0 O O a a 0 0 0 0 CO) 0 O O a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 O e- a 0 0 ;9 e- O r- f << 0 0 0 0 OV e- CO a a<¢ 0 0 0 0 N 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 N O O a a¢ 0 0 0 0 C) 0 O O a 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O a¢ 0 0 0 0 0 .- e- e- a a 0 0 0 0 ' O a a 0 0 0 0 N M O O a a 0 0 0 0 0 0) O O a a 0 0 0 0 OO 0 O O a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O a a<<a<a 0 0 0 0 0 .- e- e- 0 0 O H 0 0 0 0 N O O 0 0 0 0 M 0 O O a a 0 0 0 0 0 C) O O a a<a<as 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r -O 0 0 0 0 e- rC as as as 0 0 0 0 0 0 N M O O C ONO T C O N0 ❑ x C C O T I; IS'g O 0 N O' x Cel O 0 O a Et X C 4 g h 0 .- r " .- r Ic c' Of N )`1 M V' . N M M 0 0 0 M M N N O CO .. O O g 72 M N FO M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 aQ p 0 0 M M N N M N" A O c N N INO A r A OMD 000 O O 72 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 e- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O M e- M 0 e- M 0 e- N,- CC M 0 0 0 0 M 00000 N-000)‘- 0) n 01000 r N-0000 N 00 N e- e- 00 e- •- N 00000 e- e- N- r 00O0000000000000000000 N r NOO LO CO 0 N M .- 0 0 0 O O 0 O 0 M CO CO CO N M 0 0I,. CO N 0 N M e- N co CO 0 0) CO M 0 0 Cr 0 CO M M M CO CO N CO A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e- O O e- O e- e- M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 N 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 0 0 V- RR M 0.0 r N co 0 M .- O O .- 4 N. CO 0 N a- e- 0 0) CO O N N OD N- CO CO N CO N N- 0 0 CO LO LO N- OO 07 N O a- 0 O) 0 N- OO O O N O O O O O O O O O .- e- O O .- .- 0 0 COe- CO O 0 CO 0 CO CO N 0 e- e- N N O CO e- e- 1- 1- N N CO 0 N N 0 O0 N e- N e- e- e- 0 Is CO O N• e- 0) 0 0 0 e- N N e- N CO r N N O0 r N N 0 0 N N LL") . M M r 0 N N CO CO N .- 0 N N N .- e- r CO .- CO Yt 0 0 0 e- O N 0 0] 0 W 'V' 0 0 0 0 . e-0 e-� 0.-0.-00000 CO O c n N.-0) CAN. 0) N CO CD O N N N N M Cr U0 00 M N o 0000) 0O000) CO C4.- 0000000000000 a-0 0 0 0 OO ." CO0 - N 0 0 0 N M 0 r N e- 0 0) m"- 10 O N O N 00 0 OD r N N 0 r M M M M N N CO 0 0 N r N 0 M M 0 M M N N O) 0) 0) O N 0 CO N N t0 tO N 0) O O C) 0 01 0 )O 0 1,..3 r N M Cr 00 N N N N r N 0) 0) COP-- N N N 0 O N N N N o N N N N 0 M 0) N o 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 r N N r 0 N CO 0 0 N O r N r 0 0 0 N N O N 10 0 CO C7 0 O N- CO N 0 N- N N N e- 0 0O 0O 0i e- 0 M 0 M O N- e- N 7 f0 O0 n O 0 0. M 0) N e- e- o N f0 N e- N 0 n N 0 N N r N O N CO CO N N M M CO CO N N M OO CO CO 0O M O CO CO 0 0 N N N N 0 M 0 0) e - N N- O. CO) N 0) 0 N- 0 4 . 0 N` N 0 00 N 0 O0 O0 N OO N- 0 O 0) N- 0 0 O O O O N O O O CO r e - e - O N CO V Cr CO 000 CO e- C, N 4o 0 o 0e -e -M M M 0 CD Tr r r 0(000 M 0 M M N. tO OOOO 0.N.. N N N. 0 <<<<<<<<<<<<aaaaaaaaaaaa o ,No o O` N- O O o O N 000000000 O o O o CO 7 0 0 0 o LL) CO 0 0 O o 0 0 o O O o 0 0 e -a-.-000 O o 0 0 e- N 0 0 0 o N 0 0 O o CO 0 0 O O 0 OO 000OO 0 0 O o x 0 0 0 o O 0 0 e-e-H.-O000OOOOOO 0 o o e- O <<<<<<<<<<< 0 0 O o N 0 0 O o N CO 0 0 o O OI) 0 0 o 0 OO 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 O o 0 e- e- as 0 0 N o N r 000000000.-.-H.-0000000000.-.-.-0000 0_ 0_ 0 0 O O N CO 0_ 0_ 0 0 o O a O!) 00000 0 0 o 0 OO x 0 0 o O 0 0 0- 0 0 o o 0 e- ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢aaaa 0 o p O N 0 0 o 0 N 0 0 0 0 CO V 0 0 o p iO f0 0 0 O p x 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 o p e- N 0 0 0 o 0 0 N CO C O) C T y J 22, a , g- E 0 T y y J o a av, x c 0 0 T i y J a a o mx c S env pun, Co r• 317 0 CO a N N N T- T- A% 0 0 0 0 M CO CO N N N N N z -.;N a, O N O co co N O N V N O O O O O N0 700 U) CO 0 0 t 00 CO M CO N N T- O co N N CO a C.4 CV CO N cc M 7 r N M O m N V N .- V Or- M M m O O 'N M A N O N CON O In N O N IO F.2 m N N MM H O M O N O N A AN 0 0 LLOJ O 'CO M O- r, m -cc- N 7 0 O O N Ia O N AO a O N AM O O M M N N .- N N N N 2 0 0 0 0 0 O N M N R V C0 M M N ' N Na. O O O O O O M N- T- N T- T- N CO M M M N N N N N T- T- 2v- O O v- O - N v- v- 2 aaaaaOas<<<<<<<<<<<asaaaaaaa000<<<<<<<<<<<<aaaaaaaaaaOO<<<<<<<< 0 0 0 0 0000060- O O 0 0 0 Cr O O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 T- T- 0 ;? O O (V f T- 0 0 o 0 N O O 0 0 0 0 M000000O.- O O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O 0 0 0 0 00000006- O O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O T- 0 0 2 O T- f 0 0 o o 0 0 0 O O N M 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 00 0 0 O o (O1� 0 0 0 0 O O W 0O.-.- 0 0 0 0 O o T- 0 0 O o O 0 0 O O N M O O 0 0 0 O O O 4060 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O O W 0 O O 0 0 O o Ci.- T- T- 0 ;? O O c f 0 0 o 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 M 4060 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 01 0 a C 3 N O 1=1Ya) S C C O O T C N 0' O 2 C O) CO e- CO CO O CO CO A A CO CO N N M x- CO O a-.- CO CO CO CO CO .- N CO CO CO CO U) x- xl. O N 0 Of O In N N CO CO CO N N M N N A M N 00 a- CO N N N 0 In N CO A Of D N CD O O V ha- CO M M N a- O N a- a- A CO a- N V CO w CO a- V A CO 0 M m CO s- CO O O O1 CO .- N r 0 Of CO NN A O 0 CO V CO CO O. O a- 'R CO A a- CO A co O 0 a V 0) a- M Cf a O N CO 0 O O O O 0 O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 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 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 Cu 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 Cr 0 0 0 Cr 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O 0 O O O O O 0 0 O O O, 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 0 N O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 O O O N- N N V 10 N CO NC O O o 0 0 0 0 0 N 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 N. N- N. 0 0 0- O O O CO O O O O 0 O N r' r' N, N,- N N. r' r' O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 N- T- T- O T- T- 0 0 0 0- O O CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N- C) O O 0 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O O O 0 O N 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 00 CO O O O O O O M a lO CO M U) 00 U) MI. 000000001000000000-0 T- 000000000000 M O0- -0 Cl N aMVNT- N T -T- T- OOOOM O'C)Om M OA VMM 0 u- 00000T- 7 V V 10 ' V Y) Ni. V 0 V M CO NN T- T- O CO CO T- T- T- CO OOM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N. 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 O. O O O N O 0 0 O. 0 - 0 0 T- N M N N.-.- 21 OM O -m - V N M N V'- M MO M N MIO Md' 4N IOaNOd'MMN A IO A 4 10 O O Tr N OUOA O O O1 M' CI (OO 100 0 m N. O M .-N O N N N N N N A M M O A O O.-.- O M I's - 0) O m 10 f0 N M 0 m O O A O O a N O I O IO a N A(- N(- 0 A' 0 NNOm CO O M CO NAON m IO N 7 IO NNN m CO N -O,- CO O 0) M 0 A A M CO lOCO CO 01 N MN,- N A 0 (- m m CO N (- N 01 O M V. O m IO IO 'et CO OO IO O AA N A 0 m 0 CO 000 .- et CO A CO N 00 m a M N 01 CO N IO Z. N CO M M CO N N M O A l000 M N N x- N N N N M O o 0 0 0 T- T- N n- CO N 7 V O CO CO N T- T- N N4 0 0 0 0 O 0 CO T- .- N N- T- N CO CO CO CO N N N N N T- T- M c O O O N. .- asaaaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 OOOOO 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O m 0 0 0 0� 0_ � <<<<<<<<<<<<aaaaaaaaa000 0 o O.- f 0 0 0 0 0 OOO�OOOOO� 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 IO O 0 0 0 0 1� O 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 (V �'-000000000� 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 IO (0 0 0 0 0 1� O 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 ;g O � ♦- <<< 0 0 o 0 000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 N M << 0 0 0 0 0 IO <<<<<<aaaaaaaaa000 0 0 0 0 f0 I� 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 O T- 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O m 0 0 0 0� 0 ¢aaaaaa¢ 0 o O N H.-0000000 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1i C m C T 0 y 0 J O. O ❑ N 2 C C is 0 y 0 O O O d y C 4SLOS 4I.S 318 N CO CO e- CO .- CO CO N e' CO CO M CO CO CON O CO e' e' O CO e' n O CO CO CO7 mr CO CO O , CO 1` CO N CO N a O O CO 10 O CO 0 0 1• N- N` I N CO N- O O CO CO CO CO N` a- e- a a- M CO CO M N N N O T CV ,- n O CO CO CO CO CO O O CO CO CO CO CO CO O O) CO CV O r O CCO CO O N O CO e0- CO CO CO0 CO O O CO N CO LLS O CO M M CO CO CO CO M M CO CO CO CO N N CO N N O N N 1. N e- e- COOn v 7 CO CO a COO a- e- a N e• '- W CO e- N CD N N CO a CO CO CD r CO CO CO a CO CO CO COO CO N CO COO N a- cr a- r T v COO cr C0 CO CO 7 r CO CO CO .a- CO CO CO N N a- COO M M COO O, M CO N CO M M COO , M M O C00 M N O a CO a- N N N e- e- M M N• a M O N a M'a N CO N ei N O a- O O a- N N a O CO r I.- N CO CV O T O CO N a- CO CO N N N a- o a- o o N M N N N N a CO O Cr O M a M a co co a- O ¢¢¢¢aaaaaaaaaaaa 0 0 O O OO 606 0 0 o 0 e-6 a - e - 0 0 0 0 e - o 0 0 0 0 N M 0000000 0 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 00000 o O 0 0 o O o0 0 0 e- e -e-1- <<<<<<<<<<<<aaaaaaaaaaaa �O„ O O6 0 0 O o N Ooo0000o0 0 0 0 o Ma 0 0 o o 6000 0 0 o o 0 0 o o T O.- .---e- 0 0 0 o cV 0 0 0 o N Oo00000o 0 0 o o 60600 0 0 o o 0 0 o o GD0 0 0 o o O 0 e - 0 0 CD e- O e - H <<<<<<<<<<<<aaaaaaaaaaaa 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 o o N M 00000000 0 0 o o a 660000.- 0 0 o o 0 0 o o 0 0 o o e- �C 0 0 o 0 000000000 0 0 o o N M 0 o o o a 0006 0 0 o 0 0 0 o o T O 0 o 0 ;a O e- O T- C 0 T ` 0 0 a S. 0 S C 01 0 T C O O S. 2 0 T y O O O 0 a m t C 0 00 0 N CO CO O N C4 N COO CO M COON 0a- M CO COD M N a- N N CCOO N a- a- O 1,41 CO aT N 0 COC t h r t ONO N N CND N N 00)) O N N N CO a a COO fl a CO CO a CO N CO CO N COO 0) N e• N. COO 00) a- CO CC> NE N O CO a COO N COD N U) CO CaO) N- O C+Of 00 0 00) N N r N- to COO O V V OAcoco N 00000000000000000000000000000a- a- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a- 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 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 0 0 a- 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 0000000000000000 C- 000000000,-a-0e-00000000000Cf 0000000000000000000000000 N N a- N N CO N N a- a- a- a- 0 0 a- 0,- 0 0 e- 0 a- COO N N N CO N T N T CO CO e- a s a- 0 0 0 0 CO ;3 ON 0 0 0, O O a- N N CO N M a- CO N a- N r- r- 0 a- 0 0 0 N CO e- e- e- e- e- CO e- e- e- O C e- e- 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 e' O O N N e' e' N N a a N N e' e' O e' O O 0 O O O O O O O e- e- N N e- N N e- a- e- e- e- 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a- 0 0 0 a- 0 0 0 0 0 0 a- 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a CO N M a M O O a 7 a N.- e- .- .-.- N .-.- 0 N M T 0 e- C) 0 e- e- et N N N N CO0 0 e- CO CO e- 7 N CO 0 e- CO, N 0 0 0 a- CO a CO CO a CO CO CO a a a a CO CO e- a- e- a- a- N O e- e - e -CO c vr< N a CO CO CO CO r CO e- c O e- T r` O a e- CO N M N M O e- M e-e-Ne-e'e' O O OD CD M e'NNN OD CO N O MNN O CO CO CO e-T..CO n a N Co CO N N e- a- CO a r• N e- er CI m er er N• T N• 0 0 0 0 e - CO r` CO N CO N CO e- e- e - e - e- a - e - e - O e -e -000O N 0000000 e -N00 e- CO e - e - CO e - OC' 00000(0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OO O e- e- e- e- e - e - e• e-0 e' 0000001 COM a CO CO CO a r CO a CO NO n T O n CO M CO CO O CO M U) a T CO CO M a a e- co e- r e- N 0 01 O CO CO CD r a a O 0 a e1 r er CO CO CO h h F O O h N a CO r CO O CO O CO a a O 01 N CO a- e- r• . O e- (0 O e- O O CO CO N- a M a 0 O O )D T N- O CO O CO r r O T r CO a T CD 0 N- CO a a T n M e- t - O1 O O e- e- N 7 e- e- co CO e- N V U)O CO CO CO CO CO CO CO o CO CO N- LO e- .- N 0)0 .- CO COO N CO CO CO N CO Cl COD O CO N. N. CCOO 0 N. N. 0 0 N. e- VO) N- CO CO ODD 0 N N O r CO CO U W CO CO 0 v e- e- N Of e- n CO r 7 CO N U) Cl O O e- N r e- e- 0)0 N .- CO CM O CO CO 0 00) CO CO C- CD CO CO CO er 0 CM CO CO CM CO CO CO COCOCO A e- e- N V N e- e- M M r a CO O N a co a N co N CN 0 e- O O e- N N a0 O h N- N^ N O T O O N e- O CO N N e- o e- O O N CO N N N N N aa O a O co a M a M M.- 0 2222222222222222 0 0 0 0 0 0 O T OOe- 0 0 0 0 0 0 O m- e- 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 e-o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N M 000000OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 mi 0000 11 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 o T 0 4 0 0 0 0 O e- e - e - 2 0 0 ,C,—D, O O` F 2 2 0 0 0 0 o 0 N 000000000 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 M0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cn 66 2 2 0 0 0 0 o 0 64 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 T O e-e-e-000000CD0CD 2 2 0 a.0 0 0 o O e - OV 2 2 0 0. 0 0 o O OV 2 2 a s 0 0 0 o M V 2 2 0. a 0 0 O O Cn 66 2 2 a a.0 0 0 o O 64 O 0 2 0 0. 0 0 o 0 T Oe- e - d 0 0 0 a O e - H 222222222222222222222222 0 0 0 0 o o N e- 000000000 0 0 0 0 O O N M 0 0 0 0 o 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 O O T 0 0 0 0 O o O e -N e -e -e-000000000 a 0 00 O o a a 0 0 0 0 N M 0 a 0 0 o O 0IO a a 0 0 o o O0 a 0 0 0 O o OD O a a 0 0 0 0 a O e- O e - e - F C 0 T d., 3 O1 a 0 y 2 E C CO T y J , 3 Pr", ❑ y 2 c C 0 T 0 '2., 3 d 0 O v) 2 >_ iS 436Z6 S 319 Attachment B: Peak Hour Traffic Counts 320 www.idaxdata.com 42ND AVE S S124THST Date: 12-08-2020 N Peak Hour Count Period: 3:30 PM �' WQ7,. to 6:30 PM C/) w 0 Z NN nWT3 rn co N d' O 1 I Ili Peak Hour: S 124TH ST 4:00 PM r AV Vn�'. O O 1 1 to 5:00 PM N 19 fl000Ua > 186 206 /\ 0 ' L 0 TEV: 550 PHF: 0.99 1 c A N r r 0 = 280 V 0 u ot n I M M N 0, > Q a HV %: PHF 1r O O r Three -Hour Count Summaries :ILv N ��N EB /�� WB 16.5% 0.87 V NB 13.0% 0.92 SB 4.0% 0.82 TOTAL 13.1% 0.99 Interval Start 0 S 124TH ST 42ND AVE S 42ND AVE S 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 4 1 53 0 5 0 38 0 4 0 46 0 6 0 0 7 58 1 0 8 54 0 0 12 61 0 0 8 60 0 14 7 0 0 9 5 0 0 12 11 0 0 11 6 0 139 136 138 137 0 0 0 550 Peak Hour All HV HV% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - - 1 186 0 19 0 33 0 1 0% 18% - 5% 1 0 35 233 0 0 1 34 0% - 3% 15% 0 46 29 0 0 0 3 0 - 0% 10% - 550 72 13% 0 0 0 Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page. Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 10 6 1 17 0 8 11 1 20 0 6 11 1 18 0 10 7 0 17 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 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 34 35 3 72 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 project.manager.wa@idaxd i .com 321 322 www.idaxdata.com Three -Hour Count Summaries Interval Start 0 S 124TH ST 42ND AVE S 42ND AVE S 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 6 0 0 12 49 0 6 11 0 135 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 54 0 3 0 0 10 47 0 11 5 0 130 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 4 0 0 7 58 0 14 7 0 139 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 1 53 0 5 1 0 8 54 0 9 5 0 136 540 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 4 0 0 12 61 0 12 11 0 138 543 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 46 0 6 0 0 8 60 0 11 6 0 137 550 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 3 0 0 8 54 0 4 6 0 128 539 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 6 0 0 9 55 0 11 6 0 140 543 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 54 0 3 0 0 9 63 0 11 2 0 142 547 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 3 0 0 8 50 0 4 9 0 116 526 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 3 0 0 9 55 0 6 7 0 118 516 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 5 0 0 7 59 0 8 4 0 130 506 Count Total 0 0 0 0 1 578 0 51 1 0 107 665 0 107 79 0 1,589 0 All 0 0 0 0 1 186 0 19 1 0 35 233 0 46 29 0 550 0 Peak HV 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 1 0 0 1 34 0 0 3 0 72 0 Hour HV% - - - - 0% 18% - 5% 0% - 3% 15% - 0% 10% - 13% 0 Note: Three-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Interval Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Start EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 3:30 PM 0 10 9 0 19 o 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 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 3:45 PM 0 9 6 0 15 1 0 0 0 1 4:00 PM 0 10 6 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 8 11 1 20 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 6 11 1 18 2 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 0 10 7 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 6 7 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 6 6 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 5 8 0 13 2 0 0 0 2 5:45 PM 0 10 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 5 5 1 11 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 10 9 0 19 1 0 0 0 1 Count Total 0 95 95 4 194 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 Peak Hr 0 34 35 3 72 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 project.managerwa@idaxdbil.com www.idaxdata.com Three -Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Interval Start 0 S 124TH ST 42ND AVE S 42ND AVE S 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT UT Northbound LT TH RT UT Southbound LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 9 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 6 15 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 1 5 17 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 0 11 20 71 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 11 18 70 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 7 17 72 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 7 13 68 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 5 12 60 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 8 13 55 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 20 58 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 11 56 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 9 19 63 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 94 0 1 0 0 2 93 0 0 4 0 194 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 1 0 0 1 34 0 0 3 0 72 0 Three -Hour Count Summaries - Bikes 0 S 124TH ST 42ND AVE S 42ND AVE S Interval 15 -min Rolling Start Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Total One Hour LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: U -Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left -Turn, if any. project.manager.wa@idaxd i .com 323 324 www.idaxdata.com MACADAM RD S 42ND AVE S Wo A 0.1 Date: 12-08-2020 N Peak Hour Count Period: 3:30 PM to 6:30 PM Cr) W Q o Z N o 1.0 co N N Peak Hour: o ,[INTERURBAN AVE S '`/* 4:00 PM to Of° o C. 0 «i1 4 5:00 PM * / \ ` 170 flEULL1D 0 _ ° 4 297 ~ 97 0 J •__ >` ' 0 12 TEV: 910 0 o o _,0 y ~ PHF: 0.94 30 269 219.1 4 0 3 U 1 0 \i/ i 38 �0 <.fl00L10� INTERURBAN AYES f 1 r rn N \ o cn 2 HV %: PHF Q 1 t r o 0 0 / Three -Hour Count Summaries 4Q N Q EB 7.4% 0.80j, WB 13.8% 0.87 'f� NB 2.4% 0.88 SB 15.8% 0.94 TOTAL 10.9% 0.94 Interval Start INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S MACADAM RD S 42ND AVE S 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 4 58 7 0 1 34 9 0 3 71 10 0 4 56 12 0 6 18 37 0 8 25 39 0 10 23 46 0 6 31 48 0 2 25 6 0 0 27 8 0 2 24 4 0 3 17 5 0 28 25 5 0 38 18 2 0 25 20 1 0 35 22 2 221 209 239 241 0 0 0 910 Peak Hour All HV HV% 0 12 219 38 0 4 16 0 - 33% 7% 0% 0 30 97 170 0 0 11 30 - 0% 11% 18% 0 7 93 23 0 0 2 1 - 0% 2% 4% 0 126 85 10 0 27 2 6 - 21% 2% 60% 910 99 11% 0 0 0 Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page. Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 7 5 0 10 22 2 14 2 8 26 8 11 1 7 27 3 11 0 10 24 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 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 20 41 3 35 99 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 project. manager.wa@idaxdla`.com www.idaxdata.com Three -Hour Count Summaries Interval Start INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S MACADAM RD S 42ND AVE S 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 2 57 10 0 7 21 42 0 4 21 5 0 40 17 5 231 0 3:45 PM 0 2 54 5 0 8 20 31 0 3 21 4 0 35 29 3 215 0 4:00 PM 0 4 58 7 0 6 18 37 0 2 25 6 0 28 25 5 221 0 4:15 PM 0 1 34 9 0 8 25 39 0 0 27 8 0 38 18 2 209 876 4:30 PM 0 3 71 10 0 10 23 46 0 2 24 4 0 25 20 1 239 884 4:45 PM 0 4 56 12 0 6 31 48 0 3 17 5 0 35 22 2 241 910 5:00 PM 0 2 51 8 0 6 14 42 0 5 18 4 0 30 22 2 204 893 5:15 PM 0 1 41 4 0 8 19 44 0 4 23 3 0 40 26 1 214 898 5:30 PM 0 5 37 7 0 2 25 40 0 2 29 2 0 34 19 1 203 862 5:45 PM 0 4 34 6 0 6 19 44 0 2 13 6 0 25 23 4 186 807 6:00 PM 0 4 33 3 0 3 24 37 0 3 18 4 0 30 13 3 175 778 6:15 PM 0 3 26 2 0 2 21 42 0 1 23 1 0 37 15 0 173 737 Count Total 0 35 552 83 0 72 260 492 0 31 259 52 0 397 249 29 2,511 0 All 0 12 219 38 0 30 97 170 0 7 93 23 0 126 85 10 910 0 Peak HV 0 4 16 0 0 0 11 30 0 0 2 1 0 27 2 6 99 0 Hour HV% - 33% 7% 0% - 0% 11% 18% - 0% 2% 4% - 21% 2% 60% 11% 0 Note: Three-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Interval Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Start EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 3:30 PM 4 11 0 10 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 6 9 0 11 26 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4:00 PM 7 5 0 10 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 2 14 2 8 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 8 11 1 7 27 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 3 11 0 10 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 8 9 1 4 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 2 14 0 8 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 5 14 0 5 24 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5:45 PM 4 17 0 10 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 6 13 0 6 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 2 14 1 10 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 57 142 5 99 303 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 Peak Hour 20 41 3 35 99 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 project.managerwa@idaxdbii.com 325 326 www.idaxdata.com Three -Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Interval Start INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S MACADAM RD S 42ND AVE S 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT UT Southbound LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 1 2 1 co un v 5.3rn n oo co v oo a— a w v v co CO co CD CO 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 7 0 3 25 0 3:45 PM 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 1 26 0 4:00 PM 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 2 22 0 4:15 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 7 0 1 26 99 4:30 PM 0 2 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 1 1 27 101 4:45 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 2 24 99 5:00 PM 0 1 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 22 99 5:15 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 24 97 5:30 PM 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 24 94 5:45 PM 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 1 31 101 6:00 PM 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 25 104 6:15 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 10 0 0 27 107 Count Total 0 7 47 3 0 0 57 85 0 1 3 1 0 83 4 12 303 0 Peak Hour 0 4 16 0 0 0 11 30 0 0 2 1 0 27 2 6 99 0 Three -Hour Count Summaries - Bikes INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S MACADAM RD S 42ND AVE S Interval 15 -min Rolling Start Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Total One Hour LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: U -Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left -Turn, if any. project.managerwa@idaxdbia.com www.idaxdata.com ACCESS ROADWAY INTERURBAN AVES Date: 12-08-2020 N Peak Hour Count Period: 3:30 PM to 6:30 PM >- W o Q Ict M ` O) W / 1' - Peak Hour: 4:15 PM / O NTERURBAN o 0 AVES jHr to 5:15 PM L9 > 1 gg 9299 + L 0 I. 290 0= TEV: 698 / c PHF: 0.93 c �' — 0� = 0 3s o U 3612 359 W V 0 INTERURBAN AVE S HV %: PHF EB 12.2% 0.91 WB 16.7% 0.87 NB - - SB 7.9% 0.73 TOTAL 13.9% 0.93 Three -Hour Count Summaries Interval Start INTERURBAN AVES INTERURBAN AVES 0 ACCESS ROADWAY 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 0 1 80 0 0 1 98 0 0 0 95 0 0 0 86 0 0 0 68 3 0 0 74 3 0 0 84 2 0 0 64 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 5 0 6 0 2 0 5 0 1 0 10 0 1 165 184 187 162 0 0 0 698 Peak Hour All HV HV% 0 2 359 0 0 1 43 0 - 50% 12% - 0 0 290 9 0 0 47 3 - - 16% 33% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - - 0 29 0 9 0 3 0 0 - 10% - 0% 698 97 14% 0 0 0 Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page. Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 10 16 0 3 29 11 11 0 0 22 12 12 0 0 24 11 11 0 0 22 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 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 44 50 0 3 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 project.manager.wa@idaxdlaig.com 327 328 www.idaxdata.com Three -Hour Count Summaries Interval Start INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S 0 ACCESS ROADWAY 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT Northbound UT LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 0 100 0 0 0 66 2 O O O O Cr 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O M Ln N N N e- a- 00000 000000000000 7 CO CO 0 10 0 7 CO 0.- a- a- 000000000000 - O O O O O O O O O O O O 175 0 3:45 PM 0 0 94 0 0 0 59 3 174 0 4:00 PM 0 0 90 0 0 0 58 1 154 0 4:15 PM 0 1 80 0 0 0 68 3 165 668 4:30 PM 0 1 98 0 0 0 74 3 184 677 4:45 PM 0 0 95 0 0 0 84 2 187 690 5:00 PM 0 0 86 0 1 0 0 64 1 162 698 5:15 PM 0 0 81 0 0 0 68 1 154 687 5:30 PM 0 0 73 0 0 0 67 0 143 646 5:45 PM 0 0 64 0 0 0 70 2 136 595 6:00 PM 0 0 67 0 0 0 65 0 133 566 6:15 PM 0 0 61 0 0 0 66 0 128 540 Count Total 0 2 989 0 0 0 809 18 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 19 1,895 0 All 0 2 359 0 0 0 290 9 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 9 698 0 Peak HV 0 1 43 0 0 0 47 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 97 0 Hour HV% - 50% 12% - - - 16% 33% - - - - - 10% - 0% 14% 0 Note: Three-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Interval Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) Start EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South Total 3:30 PM 10 11 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 14 9 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 4:00 PM 12 5 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4:15 PM 10 16 0 3 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 11 11 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 12 12 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 5:00 PM 11 11 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 10 13 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 5:30 PM 8 14 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 12 18 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 12 13 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 12 14 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 134 147 0 3 284 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 Peak Hr 44 50 0 3 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 project.manager.wa@idaxd' ilcom www.idaxdata.com Three -Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Interval Start INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S 0 ACCESS ROADWAY 15 -min Total Rolling One Hour Eastbound UT LT TH RT Westbound UT LT TH RT UT Northbound LT TH RT Southbound UT LT TH RT 3:30 PM 0 0 10 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 3:45 PM 0 0 14 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 4:00 PM 0 0 12 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 4:15 PM 0 1 9 0 0 0 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 29 90 4:30 PM 0 0 11 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 91 4:45 PM 0 0 12 0 0 0 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 92 5:00 PM 0 0 11 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 97 5:15 PM 0 0 10 0 0 0 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 91 5:30 PM 0 0 8 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 91 5:45 PM 0 0 12 0 0 0 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 97 6:00 PM 0 0 12 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 100 6:15 PM 0 0 12 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 103 Count Total 0 1 133 0 0 0 142 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 284 0 Peak Hour 0 1 43 0 0 0 47 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 97 0 Three -Hour Count Summaries - Bikes INTERURBAN AVE S INTERURBAN AVE S 0 ACCESS ROADWAY Interval 15 -min Rolling Start Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Total One Hour LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT 3:30 PM 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: U -Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left -Turn, if any. project.manager.wa@idaxdtig.com 329 Attachment C: LOS Definitions 330 Highway Capacity Manual 2010/6th Edition Signalized intersection level of service (LOS) is defined in terms of a weighted average control delay for the entire intersection. Control delay quantifies the increase in travel time that a vehicle experiences due to the traffic signal control as well as provides a surrogate measure for driver discomfort and fuel consumption. Signalized intersection LOS is stated in terms of average control delay per vehicle (in seconds) during a specified time period (e.g., weekday PM peak hour). Control delay is a complex measure based on many variables, including signal phasing and coordination (i.e., progression of movements through the intersection and along the corridor), signal cycle length, and traffic volumes with respect to intersection capacity and resulting queues. Table 1 summarizes the LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as described in the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 and 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2010 and 2016, respectively). Table 1. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Average Control Delay Level of Service (seconds/vehicle) General Description A (410 Free Flow B >10 — 20 Stable Flow (slight delays) C >20 — 35 Stable flow (acceptable delays) D >35 — 55 Approaching unstable flow (tolerable delay, occasionally wait through more than one signal cycle before proceeding) E >55 — 80 Unstable flow (intolerable delay) F1 >80 Forced flow (congested and queues fail to clear) Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2010 and 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2010 and 2016, respectively. 1. If the volume -to -capacity (v/c) ratio for a lane group exceeds 1.0 LOS F is assigned to the individual lane group. LOS for overall approach or intersection is determined solely by the control delay. Unsignalized intersection LOS criteria can be further reduced into two intersection types: all -way stop and two-way stop control. All -way stop control intersection LOS is expressed in terms of the weighted average control delay of the overall intersection or by approach. Two-way stop -controlled intersection LOS is defined in terms of the average control delay for each minor -street movement (or shared movement) as well as major -street left -turns. This approach is because major -street through vehicles are assumed to experience zero delay, a weighted average of all movements results in very low overall average delay, and this calculated low delay could mask deficiencies of minor movements. Table 2 shows LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections. Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) A 0-10 B _10-15 C 15-25 D 25 — 35 E 135 — 50 F' _50 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2010 and 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2010 and 2016, respectively. 1. If the volume -to -capacity (v/c) ratio exceeds 1.0, LOS F is assigned an individual lane group for all unsignalized intersections, or minor street approach at two-way stop -controlled intersections. Overall intersection LOS is determined solely by control delay. 150 331 Attachment D: Existing LOS and Queue Worksheets 332 HCM 6th AWSC Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 1: 42nd Ave S & S 124th St Existing (2020) PM Peak Hour Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.6 Intersection LOS B Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 225 25 50 280 55 35 Future Vol, veh/h 225 25 50 280 55 35 Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Heavy Vehicles, % 17 17 13 13 4 4 Mvmt Flow 227 25 51 283 56 35 Number of Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 1 Approach WB NB SB Opposing Approach SB NB Opposing Lanes 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left NB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 1 Conflicting Approach Right SB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 M 0 HCM Control Delay 11.4 10.5 9 HCM LOS ' B B A Lane NBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % _ 0% 90% 61% Vol Thru, % 15% 0% 39% Vol Right, % 85% 10% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 330 250 90 LT Vol 0 225 55 Through Vol 50 0 35 RT Vol 280 25 0 Lane Flow Rate 333 253 91 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.41 0.369 0.13 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.425 5.263 5.164 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 810 679 690 Service Time 2.466 3.331 3.226 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.411 0.373 0.132 HCM Control Delay 10.5 11.4 9 HCM Lane LOS ' B B A HCM 95th -tile Q 2 1.7 0.4 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 152 333 Timings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Existing (2020) PM Peak Hour Lane Group Lane Configurations EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBT SBR r* r* Traffic Volume (vph) 15 265 35 115 205 10 110 30 100 10 Future Volume (vph) 15 265 35 115 205 10 110 30 100 10 Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA pt+ov Split NA Free NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 8 6 2 2 6 Permitted Phases Free 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 8 6 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 23.0 15.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Total Split (s) Total Split (%) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) 15.0 27.0 15.0 27.0 16.7% 30.0% 16.7% 30.0% 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 23.0 25.6% 25.6% 4.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 27.8% 4.0 1.0 0.0 25.0 27.8% 4.0 1.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio None None None None Max Max Max Max 6.5 18.6 7.5 23.7 48.3 18.3 18.3 80.0 20.4 20.4 0.08 0.23 0.09 0.30 0.60 0.23 0.23 1.00 0.26 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.12 0.80 0.25 0.25 0.23 0.03 0.27 0.02 0.66 0.02 Control Delay 40.0 45.4 40.9 23.0 1.6 28.9 30.7 0.0 38.8 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 40.0 45.4 40.9 23.0 1.6 28.9 30.7 0.0 38.8 0.1 LOS D D D C A CC A D A Approach Delay 45.1 12.3 24.5 37.3 Approach LOS D B C D Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Natural Cycle: 85 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.80 Intersection Signal Delay: 29.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Intersection LOS: C ICU Level of Service A 02 ►06 o 3 0708 X04 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 153 334 Phasings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Existing (2020) PM Peak Hour 74( Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBT SBR Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 8 6 2 2 6 Permitted Phases Free 6 Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 23.0 15.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Total Split (s) Total Split (%) Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) 15.0 27.0 15.0 27.0 16.7% 30.0% 16.7% 30.0% 10.0 22.0 10.0 22.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 23.0 23.0 25.6% 25.6% 18.0 18.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 25.0 25.0 27.8% 27.8% 20.0 20.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Time Before Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Recall Mode None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 90th %ile Green (s) 7.9 22.0 10.0 24.1 18.0 18.0 20.0 20.0 90th %ile Term Code Gap Max Max Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 22.0 8.5 35.5 18.0 18.0 20.0 20.0 70th %ile Term Code Skip Max Gap Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 21.7 7.4 34.1 18.0 18.0 20.0 20.0 50th %ile Term Code Skip Gap Gap Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 16.0 0.0 16.0 18.0 18.0 20.0 20.0 30th %ile Term Code Skip Gap Skip Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 12.3 0.0 12.3 18.0 18.0 20.0 20.0 10th %ile Term Code Skip Gap Skip Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated 90th %ile Actuated Cycle: 90 70th %ile Actuated Cycle: 88.5 50th %ile Actuated Cycle: 87.1 30th %ile Actuated Cycle: 69 10th %ile Actuated Cycle: 65.3 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 154 335 Queues Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Existing (2020) PM Peak Hour t Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 16 330 37 122 218 11 117 32 266 11 v/c Ratio 0.12 0.80 0.25 0.25 0.23 0.03 0.27 0.02 0.66 0.02 Control Delay 40.0 45.4 40.9 23.0 1.6 28.9 30.7 0.0 38.8 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 40.0 45.4 40.9 23.0 1.6 28.9 30.7 0.0 38.8 0.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 8 163 19 43 0 5 55 0 136 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 #297 49 102 20 19 107 0 #257 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 394 179 500 964 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 125 80 50 90 Base Capacity (vph) 214 493 201 572 997 405 427 1564 405 462 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.07 0.67 0.18 0.21 0.22 0.03 0.27 0.02 0.66 0.02 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 155 336 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Existing (2020) PM Peak Hour Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 'I ) I. r* 'I 4 r 4 r* Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 265 45 35 115 205 10 110 30 150 100 10 Future Volume (veh/h) 15 265 45 35 115 205 10 110 30 150 100 10 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1796 1796 1796 1693 1693 1693 1870 1870 1870 1663 1663 1663 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 16 282 48 37 122 218 11 117 0 160 106 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 7 7 7 14 14 14 2 2 2 16 16 16 Cap, veh/h 32 328 56 57 399 707 412 433 250 165 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.22 0.22 0.04 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 SatFlow,veh/h 1711 1496 255 1612 1693 1434 1781 1870 1585 971 643 1409 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 16 0 330 37 122 218 11 117 0 266 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1711 0 1750 1612 1693 1434 1781 1870 1585 1614 0 1409 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 14.1 1.8 4.6 7.1 0.4 4.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 14.1 1.8 4.6 7.1 0.4 4.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 32 0 384 57 399 707 412 433 415 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.86 0.65 0.31 0.31 0.03 0.27 0.64 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 220 0 495 207 478 774 412 433 415 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 37.8 0.0 29.2 37.1 24.5 11.8 23.1 24.5 0.0 25.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.4 0.0 11.6 11.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 1.5 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.4 0.0 6.9 0.9 1.8 3.6 0.2 1.9 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 49.2 0.0 40.8 48.8 24.9 12.0 23.3 26.1 0.0 33.1 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D D C B C C C A Approach Vol, veh/h 346 377 128 A 266 A Approach Delay, s/veh 41.2 19.8 25.8 33.1 Approach LOS D B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.0 7.8 22.1 25.0 6.5 23.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 18.0 10.0 22.0 6.0 3.8 16.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 20.0 10.0 22.0 13.4 2.7 9.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 0.0 1.0 0.8 0.0 1.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.3 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 156 337 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Interurban Ave S & Access Roadway Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement Existing (2020) PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement 0.7 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SB Lane Configurations 44 I jr Traffic Vol, veh/h _ 5 440 345 10 35 10 Future Vol, veh/h 5 440 345 10 35 10 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 0 1 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 50 - - 55 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 12 12 17 17 8 8 Mvmt Flow 5 473 371 11 38 11 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 383 0 - 0 626 193 Stage 1 378 Stage 2 248 - Critical Hdwy 4.34 6.96 7.06 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.96 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.96 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.32 - 3.58 3.38 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1104 - 403 798 Stage 1 - 645 Stage 2 - 753 Platoon blocked, Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1103 - 400 796 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - - 496 Stage 1 - 641 Stage 2 - 752 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0 12.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1103 - - - 496 796 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - 0.076 0.014 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - 12.9 9.6 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 0 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 157 338 Attachment E: Intersection Concepts 158 339 340 12.5 50 0 Notes: 25 75 1. Improvements shown are preliminary and subject to change during the course of design. 2. Not all improvements necessary to complete the work are shown. Match existing channelization _ I 12.3FT 12.3FT Match existing channelization 42nd Ave S Match existing channelization Stop sign Match existing channelization S 124th St bridge Proposed Type PS pole with countdown pedestrian signal head and APS pedestrian pushbutton (typ.) Proposed mountable concrete aprons to accommodate WB -67 truck movements (typ.) Proposed combined traffic signal controller and service cabinets. Proposed connection to Green River Trail Green River Trail Proposed pedestrian hand railing (typ.) y _I 12.3FT Proposed Type III signal pole, mast arm, and associated signal equipment. Conceptual Traffic Signal Layout - Interurban Ave S & S 124th St Bridge - Option 1 1.20133 -Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Nov 01, 2021 - 3039pm chrlsc M1\20\120133,00 - Tukwila S 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\Engineering\CAD\Conceptual\20133-TG-CDNCEPT-INTERURBAN & 124TH.dwg Layout: Traffic Signal Interurban Ave S 12.JFT Proposed pavement widening to accommodate WB -67 truck movements SR 599 November 1, 2021 transpogroup �4 WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE. FIGURE 159 1 W fV Options 1 & 2 involve the removal of the existing 42nd Ave S bridge, with its replacement located at S 124th St Maintain and protect existing Type III signal pole, mast arm, and associated equipment. Replace existing vehicle signal heads and street name sign to accommodate proposed channelization and signal phasing. Install hybrid radar/video detection camera. Remove existing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons. Remove existing R3 -5R regulatory sign. Proposed extension of existing sidewalk across north leg of intersection Maintain and protect existing Type III signal pole, mast arm, and associated equipment. Install hybrid radar/video detection camera. Remove existing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons. Maintain and protect existing traffic signal controller cabinet, service cabinet, and junction boxes (typ.) Proposed connection to Green River Trail 0 25 50 100 Scale In Feet O O a Notes: Proposed Type PS pole with countdown pedestrian signal head and APS pedestrian pushbutton (typ.) Remove existing Type II signal pole, mast arm, foundation, and associated equipment 1. Improvements shown are preliminary and subject to change during the course of design. 1 O O o- -23 Yield/Do Not Enter sign 2. Not all improvements necessary to complete the work are shown. '- Proposed modifications to existing island to accommodate proposed channelization Maintain and protect existing Type III signal pole, mast arm, and associated equipment. Replace existing vehicle signal heads and street name sign to accommodate proposed channelization and signal phasing. Install hybrid radar/video detection camera. Remove and replace existing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons with countdown pedestrian signal head and APS pedestrian pushbutton. Conceptual Traffic Signal and Channelization Layout - Interurban Ave S & 42nd Ave S - Option 1 3. Roadway/intersection illumination improvements have not been evaluated at this point. 4. Existing traffic signal system, including existing traffic signal controller cabinet, service cabinet, conduits, junction boxes, and traffic signal poles/foundations have not been evaluated at this point. Match existing channelization 1.20133.00 - Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Feb 15, 2021 - 11,41an Justin \\srv-dfs-wa\Protects\20\1.20133.00 - Tukwila S 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\Engineering\CAD\Conceptual\20133-TG-CONCEPT-INTERURBAN&42ND-OPT1&2,dwg Layout. Option 1 lnterUrb,, eke S Match existing channelization February 15, 2021 transpo WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE. r J FIGURE 160 2 12.5 0 Notes: 25 50 75 1. Improvements shown are preliminary and subject to change during the course of design. 2. Not all improvements necessary to complete the work are shown. Match existing channelization 12.JFT 12.3FT Match existing channelization 42nd Ave S Match existing channelization Stop sign Match existing channelization Proposed S 124th St bridge Proposed pedestrian hand railing (typ.) Green River Trail connection to Green River Trail Conceptual Roundabout Layout - Interurban Ave S & S 124th St Bridge - Option 2 1.20133 - Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement CO Feb 17, 2021 - 12,44am Dalnanln M,\20\1.20133.00 - Tukwila S 42nd Ave Bridge Replacerient\Engineering\CAD\Conceptual\20133-TG-CONCEPT-INTERURBAN & 124TH.dwg Layout, Roundabout SR 599 123FT Interurban Ave S 12.3FT February 17, 2021 FIGURE transpogroup cir WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE. 161 1 Options 1 & 2 involve the removal of the existing 42nd Ave S bridge, with its replacement located at S 124th St Maintain and protect existing Type III signal pole, mast arm, and associated equipment. Replace existing vehicle signal heads and street name sign to accommodate proposed channelization and signal phasing. Install hybrid radar/video detection camera. Remove existing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons. Remove existing R3 -5R regulatory sign. Proposed extension of existing sidewalk across north leg of intersection Maintain and protect existing Type III signal pole, mast arm, and associated equipment. Install hybrid radar/video detection camera. Remove existing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons. Maintain and protect existing traffic signal controller cabinet, service cabinet, and junction boxes (typ.) Proposed connection to Green River Trail 0 25 50 100 Scale In Feet ;OAT Notes: Proposed Type PS pole with countdown pedestrian signal head and APS pedestrian pushbutton (typ.) Remove existing Type II signal pole, mast arm, foundation, and associated equipment 1. Improvements shown are preliminary and subject to change during the course of design. 1 O O o- -23 Yield/Do Not Enter sign 2. Not all improvements necessary to complete the work are shown. '- Proposed modifications to existing island to accommodate proposed channelization Maintain and protect existing Type III signal pole, mast arm, and associated equipment. Replace existing vehicle signal heads and street name sign to accommodate proposed channelization and signal phasing. Install hybrid radar/video detection camera. Remove and replace existing pedestrian signal heads and pushbuttons with countdown pedestrian signal head and APS pedestrian pushbutton. Conceptual Traffic Signal and Channelization Layout - Interurban Ave S & 42nd Ave S - Option 2 1.20133.00 - Tukwila 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement 3. Roadway/intersection illumination improvements have not been evaluated at this point. 4. Existing traffic signal system, including existing traffic signal controller cabinet, service cabinet, conduits, junction boxes, and traffic signal poles/foundations have not been evaluated at this point. Match existing channelization Feb 15. 2021 - 11.39am Justfrc \\srv-dfs-wa\Protects\20\1.20133.00 - Tukwila S 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\Engineering\CAD\Conceptual\20133-TG-CONCEPT-INTERURBAN&42ND-OPT1&2.dwg Layout. Option 2 I2.0P7. 0P7 �2• lnteturb,, eke S February 15, 2021 Match existing channelization FIGURE 162 2 transpo WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE. r J Attachment F: Future (2040) LOS and Queue Worksheets 163 345 HCM 6th AWSC Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 1: 42nd Ave S & S 124th St Future (2040) No Action PM Peak Hour Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 13.5 Intersection LOS B Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 285 30 65 355 70 45 Future Vol, veh/h 285 30 65 355 70 45 Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Heavy Vehicles, % 17 17 13 13 4 4 Mvmt Flow 288 30 66 359 71 45 Number of Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 1 Approach WB NB SB Opposing Approach SB NB Opposing Lanes 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left NB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 — 1 Conflicting Approach Right SB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 M 1 M 0 HCM Control Delay 14.3 13.8 9.9 HCM LOS ' B B A Lane INNT- NBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % _ 0% 90% 61% Vol Thru, % 15% 0% 39% Vol Right, % 85% 10% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 420 315 115 LT Vol 0 285 70 Through Vol 65 0 45 RT Vol 355 30 0 Lane Flow Rate 424 318 116 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.565 0.502 0.182 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.791 5.678 5.637 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 759 636 637 Service Time 2.791 3.706 3.674 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.559 0.5 0.182 HCM Control Delay 13.8 14.3 9.9 HCM Lane LOS ' B B A HCM 95th -tile Q 3.6 2.8 0.7 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 164 346 Timings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) No Action PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi r* 4 r* Traffic Volume (vph) 20 335 45 145 260 15 140 40 125 15 Future Volume (vph) 20 335 45 145 260 15 140 40 125 15 Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA pt+ov Split NA Free NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 8 6 2 2 6 Permitted Phases Free 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 8 6 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 23.0 15.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 24.0 24.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%) 16.7% 28.9% 16.7% 28.9% 26.7% 26.7% 27.8% 27.8% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Max Max Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 6.7 21.2 7.8 24.3 47.6 19.1 19.1 83.5 20.2 20.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.25 0.09 0.29 0.57 0.23 0.23 1.00 0.24 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.93 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.04 0.35 0.03 0.87 0.04 Control Delay 40.6 61.4 43.0 26.8 1.8 28.4 31.5 0.0 57.1 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 40.6 61.4 43.0 26.8 1.8 28.4 31.5 0.0 57.1 0.1 LOS D E D C A C C A E A Approach Delay 60.4 14.0 24.7 54.5 Approach LOS E B C D Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 83.5 Natural Cycle: 85 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93 Intersection Signal Delay: 38.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.9% Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Intersection LOS: D ICU Level of Service D Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 165 347 Phasings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) No Action PM Peak Hour -IP 1r Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBT SBR Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 8 6 2 2 6 Permitted Phases Free 6 Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 23.0 15.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 24.0 24.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%) 16.7% 28.9% 16.7% 28.9% 26.7% 26.7% 27.8% 27.8% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 21.0 10.0 21.0 19.0 19.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Time Before Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 Recall Mode None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 90th %ile Green (s) 8.4 21.0 10.0 22.6 19.0 19.0 20.0 20.0 90th %ile Term Code Gap Max Max Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 70th %ile Green (s) 7.3 21.0 9.3 23.0 ' 19.0 19.0 20.0 20.0 70th %ile Term Code Gap Max Gap Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 21.0 8.0 34.0 19.0 19.0 20.0 20.0 50th %ile Term Code Skip Max Gap Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 21.0 0.0 21.0 - 19.0 19.0 20.0 20.0 30th %ile Term Code Skip Max Skip Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR 10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 21.0 0.0 21.0 19.0 19.0 20.0 20.0 10th %ile Term Code Skip Max Skip Hold MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 83.5 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated 90th %ile Actuated Cycle: 90 70th %ile Actuated Cycle: 89.3 50th %ile Actuated Cycle: 88 30th %ile Actuated Cycle: 75 10th %ile Actuated Cycle: 75 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 166 348 Queues Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) No Action PM Peak Hour t Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 21 415 48 154 277 16 149 43 335 16 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.93 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.04 0.35 0.03 0.87 0.04 Control Delay 40.6 61.4 43.0 26.8 1.8 28.4 31.5 0.0 57.1 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 40.6 61.4 43.0 26.8 1.8 28.4 31.5 0.0 57.1 0.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 225 25 57 0 7 71 0 183 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 34 #428 60 128 23 24 129 0 #354 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 394 179 500 964 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 125 80 50 90 Base Capacity (vph) 203 447 191 485 927 405 427 1564 384 446 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.93 0.25 0.32 0.30 0.04 0.35 0.03 0.87 0.04 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 167 349 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) No Action PM Peak Hour Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r* 4 r* Traffic Volume (veh/h) 20 335 55 45 145 260 15 140 40 190 125 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 20 335 55 45 145 260 15 140 40 190 125 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1796 1796 1796 1693 1693 1693 1870 1870 1870 1663 1663 1663 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 356 59 48 154 277 16 149 0 202 133 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 7 7 7 14 14 14 2 2 2 16 16 16 Cap, veh/h 40 379 63 65 455 730 406 426 234 154 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.04 0.27 0.27 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.00 SatFlow,veh/h 1711 1502 249 1612 1693 1434 1781 1870 1585 973 641 1409 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 21 0 415 48 154 277 16 149 0 335 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1711 0 1751 1612 1693 1434 1781 1870 1585 1614 0 1409 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 0.0 19.4 2.5 6.1 9.8 0.6 5.6 0.0 16.6 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 0.0 19.4 2.5 6.1 9.8 0.6 5.6 0.0 16.6 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 40 0 441 65 455 730 406 426 387 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.53 0.00 0.94 0.74 0.34 0.38 0.04 0.35 0.86 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 205 0 441 193 455 730 406 426 387 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.3 0.0 30.6 39.6 24.5 12.5 25.1 27.0 0.0 30.4 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.6 0.0 28.4 15.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 2.3 0.0 21.9 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.5 0.0 11.3 1.2 2.4 4.9 0.3 2.7 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 50.9 0.0 58.9 54.7 24.9 12.8 25.2 29.2 0.0 52.3 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A E D C B C C D A Approach Vol, veh/h 436 479 165 A 335 A Approach Delay, s/veh 58.6 20.9 28.9 52.3 Approach LOS E C C D Timer - Assigned Phs 350 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.0 8.4 26.0 25.0 6.9 27.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 10.0 21.0 20.0 10.0 21.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 4.5 21.4 18.6 3.0 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 40.9 HCM 6th LOS D Notes Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 168 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Interurban Ave S & Access Roadway Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement Future (2040) No Action PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement 0.8 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SB Lane Configurations 44 I jr Traffic Vol, veh/h _ 5 560 435 15 45 15 Future Vol, veh/h 5 560 435 15 45 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 0 1 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 50 - - 55 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 12 12 17 17 8 8 Mvmt Flow 5 602 468 16 48 16 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 485 0 - 0 789 244 Stage 1 477 Stage 2 312 - Critical Hdwy 4.34 6.96 7.06 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.96 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.96 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.32 - 3.58 3.38 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1007 - 316 739 Stage 1 - 573 Stage 2 - 698 Platoon blocked, Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1006 - 314 738 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - - 427 Stage 1 - 570 Stage 2 - 697 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0 13.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1006 - - - 427 738 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - 0.113 0.022 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - 14.5 10 HCM Lane LOS A - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.4 0.1 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 169 351 HCM 6th TWSC Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 1: S 124th St & 42nd Ave S Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT giME Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 65 370 5 0 290 15 5 5 5 45 5 45 Future Vol, veh/h 65 370 5 0 290 15 5 5 5 45 5 45 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 0 - Grade, % 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 99 92 92 92 99 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 17 17 17 17 17 17 13 13 13 4 4 4 Mvmt Flow 71 402 5 0 315 15 5 5 5 45 5 49 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 332 0 0 407 0 0 897 879 407 879 874 325 Stage 1 547 547 325 325 Stage 2 350 332 554 549 - Critical Hdwy 4.27 - 4.27 7.23 6.63 6.33 7.14 6.54 6.24 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.23 5.63 - 6.14 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.23 5.63 - 6.14 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.353 - 2.353 - 3.617 4.117 3.417 3.536 4.036 3.336 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1148 - 1075 - 249 275 621 266 286 712 Stage 1 - 502 500 - 683 645 Stage 2 - 644 625 513 513 Platoon blocked, Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1146 - 1075 - 214 252 620 243 263 711 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - - 214 252 - 243 263 Stage 1 - 462 460 - 627 644 Stage 2 - 595 624 - 461 472 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.2 18 18.7 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 293 1146 - - 1075 - - 361 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.056 0.062 - 0.276 HCM Control Delay (s) 18 8.3 0 0 - 18.7 HCM Lane LOS C A A A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0.2 0 - 1.1 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 170 352 Timings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1 Traffic Volume (vph) 525 45 405 155 40 Future Volume (vph) 525 45 405 155 40 Turn Type NA Prot NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 8 Detector Phase 2 1 6 3 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 23.0 15.0 23.0 15.0 23.0 Total Split (s) 32.0 15.0 47.0 23.0 23.0 Total Split (%) 45.7% 21.4% 67.1% 32.9% 32.9% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Recall Mode None None Max None Max Act Effct Green (s) 33.8 7.6 42.0 18.0 18.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.11 0.60 0.26 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.28 0.43 0.36 0.10 Control Delay 13.4 32.2 9.2 24.1 7.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.4 32.2 9.2 24.1 7.8 LOS BC A C A Approach Delay 13.4 11.5 20.7 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 70 Actuated Cycle Length: 70 Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.5% Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service A Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 171 353 Phasings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 8 Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) Maximum Green (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 23.0 15.0 23.0 15.0 23.0 32.0 15.0 47.0 23.0 23.0 45.7% 21.4% 67.1% 32.9% 32.9% 27.0 10.0 42.0 18.0 18.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Time Before Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Recall Mode None None Max None Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 90th %ile Green (s) 27.0 10.0 42.0 18.0 18.0 90th %ile Term Code Max Max MaxR Hold MaxR 70th %ile Green (s) 28.4 8.6 42.0 18.0 18.0 70th %ile Term Code Hold Gap MaxR Hold MaxR 50th %ile Green (s) 29.5 7.5 42.0 18.0 18.0 50th %ile Term Code Hold Gap MaxR Hold MaxR 30th %ile Green (s) 42.0 0.0 42.0 18.0 18.0 30th %ile Term Code Hold Skip MaxR Hold MaxR 10th %ile Green (s) 42.0 0.0 42.0 18.0 18.0 10th %ile Term Code Hold Skip MaxR Hold MaxR Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 70 Actuated Cycle Length: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated 90th %ile Actuated Cycle: 70 70th %ile Actuated Cycle: 70 50th %ile Actuated Cycle: 70 30th %ile Actuated Cycle: 70 10th %ile Actuated Cycle: 70 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 172 354 Queues Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 750 48 431 165 43 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.28 0.43 0.36 0.10 Control Delay 13.4 32.2 9.2 24.1 7.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.4 32.2 9.2 24.1 7.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 107 19 89 58 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 168 47 146 109 22 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1009 179 500 Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 80 50 Base Capacity (vph) 1606 226 1000 455 433 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.21 0.43 0.36 0.10 Intersection Summary Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 173 355 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 2: 42nd Ave S & Interurban Ave S Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations + 'I 4 'I r* Traffic Volume (veh/h) 525 180 45 405 155 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 525 180 45 405 155 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1796 1796 1693 1693 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 559 191 48 431 165 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 7 7 14 14 2 2 Cap, veh/h 1449 493 74 1203 214 Arrive On Green 0.58 0.58 0.05 0.71 0.12 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 2588 851 1612 1693 1781 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 381 369 48 431 165 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1706 1643 1612 1693 1781 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.1 7.2 1.7 5.8 5.3 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.1 7.2 1.7 5.8 5.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 989 953 74 1203 214 V/C Ratio(X) 0.39 0.39 0.65 0.36 0.77 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 989 953 273 1203 542 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.7 6.7 27.7 3.3 25.2 0.0 lncr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.3 9.0 0.8 5.8 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.0 2.0 0.8 1.4 2.4 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 7.0 7.0 36.7 4.2 31.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A D A C Approach Vol, veh/h 750 479 165 A Approach Delay, s/veh 7.0 7.4 31.0 Approach LOS A A C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.7 39.3 47.0 12.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 27.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.7 9.2 5.0 42.0 7.8 5.0 18.0 7.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.6 3.0 0.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.0 HCM 6th LOS A Notes Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 174 356 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Interurban Ave S & Access Roadway Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement 0.8 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SB Lane Configurations ft jr Traffic Vol, veh/h _ 5 560 435 15 45 15 Future Vol, veh/h 5 560 435 15 45 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 0 1 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 50 - - 55 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 12 12 17 17 8 8 Mvmt Flow 5 602 468 16 48 16 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 485 0 0 789 478 Stage 1 - 477 Stage 2 312 - Critical Hdwy 4.28 6.72 6.32 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.52 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.92 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.314 - 3.576 3.376 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1017 - 333 572 Stage 1 - 608 Stage 2 - 701 Platoon blocked, Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1016 - 331 571 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - - 445 Stage 1 - 604 Stage 2 - 700 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0 13.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1016 - - - 445 571 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - 0.109 0.028 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - 14.1 11.5 HCM Lane LOS A - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.4 0.1 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 175 357 Timings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 4: Interurban Ave S & S 124th St II Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour te- Lane Group WBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 315 160 40 390 Future Volume (vph) 315 160 40 390 Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 6 Detector Phase 8 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s) 25.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 Total Split (%) 41.7% 58.3% 58.3% 58.3% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None Max Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 17.0 31.1 31.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.54 0.54 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.62 0.54 Control Delay 31.1 8.0 12.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 31.1 8.0 12.4 LOS C A B Approach Delay 31.1 8.0 12.4 Approach LOS C A B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 60 Actuated Cycle Length: 57.1 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79 Intersection Signal Delay: 15.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.3% Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 4: Interurban Ave S & S 124th St Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service D Transpo Group 358 Synchro 10 Report 176 Phasings Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 4: Interurban Ave S & S 124th St Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Lane Group WBL NBT SBL SBT Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 6 Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s) 25.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 Total Split (%) 41.7% 58.3% 58.3% 58.3% Maximum Green (s) 20.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Time Before Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Recall Mode None Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 90th %ile Green (s) 20.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 90th %ile Term Code Max MaxR MaxR MaxR 70th %ile Green (s) 20.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 70th %ile Term Code Max MaxR MaxR MaxR 50th %ile Green (s) 18.4 30.5 30.5 30.5 50th %ile Term Code Gap MaxR MaxR MaxR 30th %ile Green (s) 15.0 30.5 30.5 30.5 30th %ile Term Code Gap MaxR MaxR MaxR 10th %ile Green (s) 11.1 32.8 32.8 32.8 10th %ile Term Code Gap Dwell Dwell Dwell Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 60 Actuated Cycle Length: 57.1 Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated 90th %ile Actuated Cycle: 60 70th %ile Actuated Cycle: 60 50th %ile Actuated Cycle: 57.9 30th %ile Actuated Cycle: 54.5 10th %ile Actuated Cycle: 52.9 Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 177 359 Queues Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 4: Interurban Ave S & S 124th St Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Lane Group WBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 362 596 458 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.62 0.54 Control Delay 31.1 8.0 12.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 31.1 8.0 12.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 108 53 97 Queue Length 95th (ft) #202 154 187 Internal Link Dist (ft) 274 1009 238 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 557 960 842 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.65 0.62 0.54 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 178 360 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Tukwila 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement 4: Interurban Ave S & S 124th St Future (2040) Option 1 PM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations * 4 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 315 25 160 400 40 390 Future Volume (veh/h) 315 25 160 400 40 390 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1648 1648 1693 1693 1707 1707 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 335 27 170 426 43 415 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 17 17 14 14 13 13 Cap, veh/h 388 31 241 604 112 818 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 1435 116 428 1072 70 1451 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 363 0 0 596 458 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1555 0 0 1500 1521 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 12.0 0.0 0.0 15.6 0.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.0 0.0 0.0 15.6 16.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.92 0.07 0.71 0.09 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 420 0 0 845 930 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.49 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 589 0 0 845 930 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.8 0.0 0.0 8.6 7.1 0.0 lncr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.3 0.0 0.0 4.9 1.9 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.9 0.0 0.0 4.8 2.8 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 28.1 0.0 0.0 13.5 9.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h 363 596 458 Approach Delay, s/veh 28.1 13.5 9.0 Approach LOS C B A Timer - Assigned Phs 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 35.0 35.0 19.1 4.5 4.5 4.5 30.5 30.5 20.5 17.6 18.3 14.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.6 2.4 0.7 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.8 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Transpo Group Synchro 10 Report 179 361 180 362 MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 101 [Interurban Ave S/S 124th St] 2040 Option 2 Weekday PM Peak Hour Site Category: (None) Roundabout Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HV Satn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph South: Interurban Ave S 8 T1 18 R2 Approach 170 14.0 0.534 426 14.0 0.534 596 14.0 0.534 4.4 LOS A 4.5 LOS A 4.5 LOS A 4.7 4.7 4.7 129.8 129.8 129.8 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.32 0.32 0.32 36.9 35.7 36.0 East: S 124th St 1 L2 335 17.0 0.378 11.4 LOS B 2.2 62.8 0.46 0.67 0.46 33.6 16 R2 27 17.0 0.378 5.5 LOS A 2.2 62.8 0.46 0.67 0.46 32.7 Approach 362 17.0 0.378 11.0 LOS B 2.2 62.8 0.46 0.67 0.46 33.5 North: Interurban Ave S 7 L2 43 13.0 0.543 13.8 LOS B 4.1 114.2 0.71 0.78 0.78 35.0 4 T1 415 13.0 0.543 7.8 LOS A 4.1 114.2 0.71 0.78 0.78 35.1 Approach 457 13.0 0.543 8.4 LOS A 4.1 114.2 0.71 0.78 0.78 35.1 All Vehicles 1415 14.4 0.543 7.4 LOS A 4.7 129.8 0.48 0.61 0.50 35.0 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akgelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 I Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I sidrasolutions.com Organisation: THE TRANSPO GROUP I Processed: Friday, January 8, 2021 11:37:26 AM Project: M:\20\1.20133.00 - Tukwila S 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\TrafficAnalysis\Traffic Operations\2040 Option 2.sip8 181 363 Attachment G: Signal Warrant Volumes and Worksheets 364 182 Warrants Summary Page 1 of 2 Warrants Summary Information Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed Project ID East/West Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 1.20133.00 S 124th St 42nd Ave S & S 124th St - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street 42nd Ave S/S 124th St City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Option 3 Forecast 2040 42nd Ave S North-South Project Description 1.20133.00 General Roadway Network Major Street Speed (mph) 25 ❑ Population < 10,000 Two Major Routes ❑ Coordinated Signal System 1 Weekend Count ❑ Nearest Signal (ft) 1050 ❑ Adequate Trials of Alternatives Crashes (per year) 0 ❑ 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 Geometry and Traffic EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane usage LR TR LT Vehicle Volume Averages (vph) 0 0 0 210 0 22 0 48 262 51 33 0 Peds (ped/h) / Gaps (gaps/h) 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 Delay (s/veh) / (veh-hr) 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 Warrant 1: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ 1 A. Minimum Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 B. Interruption of Continuous Traffic (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- El 1 (80%) Vehicular --and-- Interruption Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) G Warrant 2: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume 2 A. Four -Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 3: Peak Hour 3 A. Peak -Hour Conditions (Minor delay --and-- minor volume --and-- total volume ) --or-- L 3 B. Peak- Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) r Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume 4 A. Four Hour Volumes --or-- L 4 B. One -Hour Volumes Warrant 5: School Crossing 5. Student Volumes --and-- 5. Gaps Same Period Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System 6. Degree of Platooning (Predominant direction or both directions) ❑ Warrant 7: Crash Experience C 7 A. Adequate trials of alternatives, observance and enforcement failed --and-- 7 B. Reported crashes susceptible to correction by signal (12 -month period) --and-- file:///C: /Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k9328.tmp 183 365 1/6/2021 Warrants Summary Page 2 of 2 17 C. (80%) Volumes for Warrants 1A, 1B --or-- 4 are satisfied I ❑ Warrant 8: Roadway Network ❑ 8 A. Weekday Volume (Peak hour total --and-- projected warrants 1, 2 or 3) --or-- ❑ 8 B. Weekend Volume (Five hours total) ❑ Warrant 9: Grade Crossing ❑ 9 A. Grade Crossing within 140 ft --and-- ❑ 9 B. Peak -Hour Vehicular Volumes ❑ Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 Generated: 1/6/2021 4:53 PM 184 file:///C:/Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k9328.tmp 1/6/2021 Warrants Volume Page 1 of 1 Warrant 1 C01111001A—MlnIrn4mVehIcular Volume I lumh*l44iwi lir moirl is Ft OR ooh *swat Warrants Volume riiiV44 per hour oo Io5horwiame rrixesir ei .o *action onN Information 000 B0% 74fi 559% Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed ProjectEas/WestID File Name Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 S1124th St S 124th St 42nd Ave S & S 124th St - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street 42nd Ave S/S 124th St City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Option 3 Forecast 2040 42nd Ave S North-South Project Description 1.20133.00 CO 350 2rnil. Warrant 1 C01111001A—MlnIrn4mVehIcular Volume I lumh*l44iwi lir moirl is Ft OR ooh *swat 1 ohi;los pe1114ur sn 011117' 111491 i,`hGl al tolh Enosa`.1;t8) riiiV44 per hour oo Io5horwiame rrixesir ei .o *action onN liojcf &met : MiwrSdnel 000 B0% 74fi 559% 100.5. 41m 70% 36% 1 5190 `2i:rre,rc CO 350 2rnil. 150 WJ 105 BA 1 ECC 101} 020 994 190 120 1115 24 2oraate 2ormare EU ;EO 420 934 Zai: 104 140 112 I1 1 2ormans L SU ttli 39} l 040 200 180 140 112 Condlllon B—tttunftion or Coollnuousholtlo thnberoilamsttrrmwTr2' Ilailiom ouch approach Melti:le.JtpMlwonrreR.rs0td 00GI0I both oxoosches) 4perlourcnhch$r-s ums Vtlr e ninah41roa1opji4011C110d tnn only) lldjcr Enlet l Mira Sheer 11441% 50% 70% 155% 100% 20% 76% w4 1 1 7141 974 575 I 471 75 ED E3 42 2 unit I 1 101} 720 a 504 75 40 59 4,2 2ertrate 2ormore I 9C4 724 050 504 100 20 70 54 1 j 7orn1oa 7541 53 50f 427 104 54 74 54 Warrant 2 Warrant 3 500 400 300 ern 2 200 Z a 0 100 ca Z 400 a 7 LLA LL 300 200 Z z 100 2 2 OR MORE LANES 8 2 OR MORE LANES I 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE 81 LANE '11. •e= 301 40O 000 600 700 800 003 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 2011 MORE LANES 8 2 OR I LANES 2 OR MORE LANCS. b 1 LANE I LAS & 1 LA 300 300 400 500 800 700 000 000 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 001, Q dao w43 200 5 100 c� x 2 0R MORE LANES 8 2ORMORE LANES LES8! IE 1 LANE 81 WJE 2 OR LORE 400 500 FAO TOO 800 000 1000 1100 1200 0300 140o 1510 1600 1700 1000 = 400 Uqq ¢ O 300 fl Z E 200 a = 10D CO MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 1 2 O R MORE LANES E 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES 8 1 LANE 61 LANE 8 1 LANE '100 `75 300 400 500 604 700 000 900 1001 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH Volume Summary Major Street Lanes 1 Minor Street Lanes 1 Speed 25 Population 10000+ Hours Major Volume 07-08 421 08-09 313 09-10 228 10-11 281 11-12 326 12-13 427 13-14 366 14-15 401 15-16 520 16-17 535 17-18 528 18-19 392 Minor Total 1A 1A 1B 1B 2 3A 3B Volume Volume (100%) (80%) (100%) (80%) (100%) (100%) (100%) 249 670 No Yes No No No No 185 498 No No No No No No 134 362 No No No No No No 165 446 No No No No No No 191 517 No No No No No No 251 678 No Yes No No No No 216 582 No No No No No No 236 637 No Yes No No No No 306 826 Yes Yes No No Yes No 315 850 Yes Yes No No Yes No 312 840 Yes Yes No No Yes No 231 623 No No No No No No Totals 4738 2791 7529 3 6 0 0 3 0 Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 file:///C: /Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k9317.tmp Generated: 1/6/2021 4:54 PM 185 367 1/6/2021 Warrants Summary Page 1 of 2 Warrants Summary Information Analyst Transpo Group Agency/Co Transpo Group Date Performed 1/6/2021 Project ID 1.20133.00 East/West Street Interurban Ave S Access Roadway & File Name Interurban Ave S - Option 3 - Forecast 2040.xhy Access Intersection Roadway/Interurban Ave Jurisdiction City of Tukwila Units U.S. Customary Time Period Analyzed Option 3 Forecast 2040 North/South Street Access Roadway Major Street East-West Project Description 1.20133.00 General f oadway Network Major Street Speed 35 Population < 10,000 Two Major Routes ❑ (mph) Nearest Signal (ft) 280 Coordinated Signal System Weekend Count ❑ Crashes (per year) 0 L Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 EB WB NB SB Geometry and Traffic LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lane usage L T TR L R Vehicle Volume Averages (vph) 3 413 0 0 320 11 0 0 0 33 0 11 Peds (ped/h) / Gaps (gaps/h) -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- Delay (s/veh) / (veh-hr) -- 0 / 0 -- -- 0 / 0 -- -- 0 / 0 -- -- 0 / 0 -- Warrant 1: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume 1 A. Minimum Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 B. Interruption of Continuous Traffic (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 (80%) Vehicular --and-- Interruption Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 2: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume 2 A. Four -Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 3: Peak Hour LI 3 A. Peak -Hour Conditions (Minor delay --and-- minor volume --and-- total volume ) --or-- L] 3 B. Peak- Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) ❑ Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume 4 A. Four Hour Volumes --or-- ❑ 4 B. One -Hour Volumes ❑ Warrant 5: School Crossing ❑ 5. Student Volumes --and-- ❑ 5. Gaps Same Period ❑ Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ 6. Degree of Platooning (Predominant direction or both directions) ❑ Warrant 7: Crash Experience ❑ 7 A. Adequate trials of alternatives, observance and enforcement failed --and-- ❑ 7 B. Reported crashes susceptible to correction by signal (12 -month period) --and-- file:///C: /Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k7C6D.tmp 186 1/6/2021 Warrants Summary Page 2 of 2 17 C. (80%) Volumes for Warrants 1A, 1B --or-- 4 are satisfied I ❑ Warrant 8: Roadway Network ❑ 8 A. Weekday Volume (Peak hour total --and-- projected warrants 1, 2 or 3) --or-- ❑ 8 B. Weekend Volume (Five hours total) ❑ Warrant 9: Grade Crossing ❑ 9 A. Grade Crossing within 140 ft --and-- ❑ 9 B. Peak -Hour Vehicular Volumes ❑ Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 file:///C: /Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k7C6D.tmp Generated: 1/6/2021 4:56 PM 187 369 1/6/2021 652 Warrants Volume Page 1 of 1 Warrant 1 CnndlllORA—MlnlmumVehicular Volume I lrumlMlr4 Irmo br mgMT, tap am smooth eporoetl Warrants Volume •4'raldo reer hourvn h5her.'c4n trim 91ratI a i x,030 c11ei1aa Crir'j Information 000 0C:4 70% %I; Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed Project ID EasFile est Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 1.20133.00 Interurban Ave S Access Roadway & Interurban Ave S - Option 3 - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street Access Roadway/Interurban Ave City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Option 3 Forecast 2040 Access Roadway East-West Project Description 1.20133.00 CO 350 2rnil Warrant 1 CnndlllORA—MlnlmumVehicular Volume I lrumlMlr4 Irmo br mgMT, tap am smooth eporoetl '.chide 0e60444nn-9i?'11r0e1 (iatii011:01hEtrotEbe01 •4'raldo reer hourvn h5her.'c4n trim 91ratI a i x,030 c11ei1aa Crir'j Myer 5lrcet : liiwr Scnel 000 0C:4 70% %I; 10091 0% 70% f&% 1 ' 1 506 `2i:rre.rc CO 350 2rnil 150 121 105 1041 I 0CC i€a, 020 a90 100 t20 105 64 2oraate 2ormore 0f41 #81. 920 930 tat 100 140 112 I1 1 20r mans L SCC ++G!,, 350 l 030 200 120 140 112 Condlllon B,—tttearufiran or CanllnuoushorrIo /11406040i km fomwr�rrp' bolo mooch approach Veht,C.lo.oJma9kro rreixs0eei 5^+� oi beth oxssschesj Vtarcbepahour ccfigher-vduma rTrrlahrlmai appoxich OM dream only) Miplieet l Miw Wheel ' 1441% 54:4 70% 155% 10494 0% 76% w4 1 1 75C 974 575 I 471 75 El E3 42 2 w mom I 1 1001 720 4112 504 75 00 59 42 2orrrore 20f more I 9C4 726 930 504 140 20 70 54 1 ! SurnNat i 751 53 52:, 427 103 511 76 51 Warrant 2 Warrant 3 500 400 300 ern 2 200 Z a 0 100 ca Z 400 rz 7 LLA LL 300 LLI 200 Z z 100 2 2 OR MORE LANES 8 2 OR MORE LANES I 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE& 1 LANE '11. •e= 3130 150 000 600 (CO 800 003 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 2011 MORE LANES b 2 OR I LANES 2 OR MORE LANCS. &I LANE 1 LAS & 1 LA 200 360 100 500 600 704 000 000 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH j 500 w43 dao EkE C 34 200 100 c� x 20R MORE LANES & 2ORMORE LANES I IaSE! IE 1LANE 81 WJE 2 OR LORE 100 5000 CSO T00 5000 OW 14)00 1100 1200 0300 1100 154)0 1604 1700 13300 = 400 Uqq ¢ O 300 fl Z E 200 a = 10D MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH f 2 O R MORE LANES E 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES b 1 LANE 61 LANE 8 1 LANE '400 `75 300 400 500 606 700 1300 500 1640 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH Volume Summary Major Street Lanes 2+ Hours 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 Totals Minor Street Lanes 2+ Major Volume Minor Volume Total Volume 801 47 848 595 35 630 431 25 456 531 32 563 616 36 809 48 693 41 761 45 987 59 1015 60 1004 59 857 734 806 1046 1075 1063 743 8986 44 531 787 9517 Speed 1A (100%) 1A (80%) No No 1B (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No 0 No 0 No 0 35 Population 10000+ 1B (80%) 2 (100%) No No 3A (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No 0 No 0 No 0 3B (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No 0 Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 file:///C: /Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k7C6C.tmp Generated: 1/6/2021 4:56 PM 188 1/6/2021 Warrants Summary Page 1 of 2 Warrants Summary Information Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed Project ID East/West Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 1.20133.00 S 124th St 42nd Ave S & S 124th St - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street 42nd Ave S/S 124th St City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Forecast 2040 42nd Ave S East-West Project Description 1.20133.00 General Roadway Network Major Street Speed (mph) 25 ❑ Population < 10,000 Two Major Routes ❑ Nearest Signal (ft) 1050 ❑ Coordinated Signal System Weekend Count ❑ Crashes (per year) 0 ❑ Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 Geometry and Traffic EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane usage LT TR LR Vehicle Volume Averages (vph) 48 276 0 0 217 14 0 0 0 36 0 33 Peds (ped/h) / Gaps (gaps/h) 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 Delay (s/veh) / (veh-hr) 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 Warrant 1: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume 1 A. Minimum Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 B. Interruption of Continuous Traffic (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 (80%) Vehicular --and-- Interruption Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 2: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume 2 A. Four -Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 3: Peak Hour 3 A. Peak -Hour Conditions (Minor delay --and-- minor volume --and-- total volume ) --or-- L 3 B. Peak- Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) r Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume 4 A. Four Hour Volumes --or-- L 4 B. One -Hour Volumes Warrant 5: School Crossing 5. Student Volumes --and-- 5. Gaps Same Period Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ 6. Degree of Platooning (Predominant direction or both directions) Warrant 7: Crash Experience 7 A. Adequate trials of alternatives, observance and enforcement failed --and-- 7 B. Reported crashes susceptible to correction by signal (12 -month period) --and-- file:///C:/Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k60A6.tmp 189 371 1/6/2021 Warrants Summary Page 2 of 2 17 C. (80%) Volumes for Warrants 1A, 1B --or-- 4 are satisfied I ❑ Warrant 8: Roadway Network ❑ 8 A. Weekday Volume (Peak hour total --and-- projected warrants 1, 2 or 3) --or-- ❑ 8 B. Weekend Volume (Five hours total) ❑ Warrant 9: Grade Crossing ❑ 9 A. Grade Crossing within 140 ft --and-- ❑ 9 B. Peak -Hour Vehicular Volumes ❑ Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 Generated: 1/6/2021 5:12 PM 190 file:///C:/Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k60A6.tmp 1/6/2021 516 Warrants Volume Page 1 of 1 Warrant 1 CnndI o A--MlnIrn4mVehIcular Volume I l{uir1151gd Wow For min; traffic smooth opo mat Warrants Volume *WO per hour oR Io5hoh1di'ne rrmorlroei .o *action c,4 Information 000% B0% 70"0 559% Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed ProjectEas/WestID File Name Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 S1124th St S 124th St 42nd Ave S & S 124th St - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street 42nd Ave S/S 124th St City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Forecast 2040 42nd Ave S East-West Project Description 1.20133.00 #00 350 2rnil Warrant 1 CnndI o A--MlnIrn4mVehIcular Volume I l{uir1151gd Wow For min; traffic smooth opo mat 1ohi;los per 9r11r]]t7' Ir041 i,`hGl4l tolh opyor..ben1 *WO per hour oR Io5hoh1di'ne rrmorlroei .o *action c,4 liojef &met : Libor S0erl 000% B0% 70"0 559% 101% 41m 70% 36% 1 5141 ` #00 350 2rnil 150 1121 105 04 2 i:r r. orc i ECC 4€a1 420 994 190 120 115 04 2oraate 2orroom EC8 420 420 934 Zai: 100 140 112 I1 1 2ormans L SCC ith 350 l 046 200 100 146 112 Condlllon B—tttunftran or Canllnuoushernc Ntatiberai ltflmmbuIX�STo3' bolo mooch approach W10:le.JspMlrwonrreas0eel 00G1o1 God! 09pwoo:has) Vrdr+ pa lour enhQher-s ums rtnaorree14pproedl 00 clrcdnn only) lalip Ereet l Mira Sheet 1141% E0% 700 55% 100% 00% 76% w4 1 1 7541 974 535 I 471 75 BO E2 42 241 mart I 1 1006 730 831 504 75 41 59 42 20r iron 2ormore I 914 724 020 514 100 06 70 54 1 j 7 ornlor 7141 010 5E. 427 101 54 74 54 Warrant 2 Warrant 3 500 400 300 ern O 2 200 0 100 ca Z 400 a 7 LLA LL 300 LLI 200 Z z 100 2 2 OR MORE LANES 8 2 OR MORE LANES I 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE& 1 LANE '11. •e= 300 403 000 600 700 800 003 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 2011 MORE LANES b 2 OR I LANES 2 OR MORE LANES &I LANE 1 LAS & 1 LA 300 300 400 600 800 700 000 000 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 500 Qw 43 400 200 100 c� x 20R MORE LANES & 2ORMORE LANES I IaSE! IE 1 LANES 1 WJE 2 OR ORE 400 Sao FAO TOO 800 000 1000 1100 1200 0300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1000 = 400 Uqq ¢ O 300 fl Z E 200 a = 10D MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 1 2 O R MORE LANES E 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES 8 1 LANE 61 LANE 8 1 LANE '100 `TS 300 400 500 604 700 000 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH Volume Summary Major Street Lanes 1 Hours 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 Totals Minor Street Lanes 1 Major Volume Minor Volume Total Volume 596 74 670 443 55 498 320 40 360 394 50 444 459 57 602 76 516 65 566 71 734 93 755 95 747 93 678 581 637 827 850 840 553 6685 70 839 623 7524 Speed 1A (100%) 1A (80%) No No 1B (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No No 0 No 0 No 1 25 Population 10000+ 1B (80%) 2 (100%) No No 3A (100%) No No No No No No No No No Yes No No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No No 4 No 0 No 0 3B (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No 0 Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 file:///C: /Users/siqih/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k60A5.tmp Generated: 1/6/2021 5:12 PM 191 373 1/6/2021 Warrants Summary Page 1 of 2 Warrants Summary Information Analyst Transpo Group Agency/Co Transpo Group Date Performed 1/6/2021 Project ID 1.20133.00 East/West Street Interurban Ave S Access Roadway & File Name Interurban Ave S - Forecast 2040.xhy Access Intersection Roadway/Interurban Ave Jurisdiction City of Tukwila Units U.S. Customary Time Period Analyzed Forecast 2040 North/South Street Access Roadway Major Street East-West Project Description 1.20133.00 General f oadway Network Major Street Speed 35 Population < 10,000 Two Major Routes ❑ (mph) Nearest Signal (ft) 280 Coordinated Signal System Weekend Count ❑ Crashes (per year) 0 L Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 EB WB NB SB Geometry and Traffic LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lane usage L T TR L R Vehicle Volume Averages (vph) 3 413 0 0 320 11 0 0 0 33 0 11 Peds (ped/h) / Gaps (gaps/h) -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- Delay (s/veh) / (veh-hr) -- 0 / 0 -- -- 0 / 0 -- -- 0 / 0 -- -- 0 / 0 -- Warrant 1: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume 1 A. Minimum Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 B. Interruption of Continuous Traffic (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 (80%) Vehicular --and-- Interruption Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 2: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume 2 A. Four -Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 3: Peak Hour LI 3 A. Peak -Hour Conditions (Minor delay --and-- minor volume --and-- total volume ) --or-- L] 3 B. Peak- Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) ❑ Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume 4 A. Four Hour Volumes --or-- ❑ 4 B. One -Hour Volumes ❑ Warrant 5: School Crossing ❑ 5. Student Volumes --and-- ❑ 5. Gaps Same Period ❑ Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ 6. Degree of Platooning (Predominant direction or both directions) ❑ Warrant 7: Crash Experience ❑ 7 A. Adequate trials of alternatives, observance and enforcement failed --and-- ❑ 7 B. Reported crashes susceptible to correction by signal (12 -month period) --and-- ❑ file:///C: /Users/Francescal/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k9D7D.tmp 192 1/8/2021 Warrants Summary Page 2 of 2 17 C. (80%) Volumes for Warrants 1A, 1B --or-- 4 are satisfied I ❑ Warrant 8: Roadway Network ❑ 8 A. Weekday Volume (Peak hour total --and-- projected warrants 1, 2 or 3) --or-- ❑ 8 B. Weekend Volume (Five hours total) ❑ Warrant 9: Grade Crossing ❑ 9 A. Grade Crossing within 140 ft --and-- ❑ 9 B. Peak -Hour Vehicular Volumes ❑ Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 file:///C: /Users/Francescal/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k9D7D. tmp Generated: 1/8/2021 12:12 PM 193 375 1/8/2021 652 Warrants Volume Page 1 of 1 Warrant 1 CnndIto A—MlnImurnVehlcuarVolume I %mktgd1a1 r iarrm in tap on 00th epprosth Warrants Volume 4'ra1ok: Far houroR hCher.'9 ..me min:csimel$1 i.,bh9 a11ei106 Ct'fr',l Information 400 B0:4 70% 5594 Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed ProjectEas/WestID File Name Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 1 Interurban Interurban Ave S Access Roadway & Interurban Ave S - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street Access Roadway/Interurban Ave City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Forecast 2040 Access Roadway East-West Project Description 1.20133.00 CO 350 2rnil. Warrant 1 CnndIto A—MlnImurnVehlcuarVolume I %mktgd1a1 r iarrm in tap on 00th epprosth "...iraalpl peril;r,r to rr>s1?'dre91 i,`hGi gib& kmagbe01 4'ra1ok: Far houroR hCher.'9 ..me min:csimel$1 i.,bh9 a11ei106 Ct'fr',l ltejcr&rcet : MawrScrel 400 B0:4 70% 5594 10091 en 70% 36% 1 ' 1 500 L CO 350 2rnil. 150 120 105 04 2 i:r r. auc 1 544 i€a, 423 a90 100 120 105 94 2ornnate 20443053 058 SI. 420 939 Zai: 190 140 112 I1 1 2ormans L SCC ith 350 l 090 200 120 140 112 Condlllon B—tttoinftran or Coollnuousholtlo rlur ai hiss i rrmvmp Iaeiioonaclreppmach ' Mehi:100 0140tr on mal4r0deel (total al bath sppoosahesj 14drrlee pet hour cc ticher-vdumt rnrrorrarea1e01:0a0110dant on riipitmet 1 Mir Sheei 11241% 04% 70% 155% 10494 41 74% w4 1 1 781 974 535 I 471 75 Ea 81 12 2 or mare I 1 1000 720 11901 504 75 00 52 12 2 or rrare 24f more I 961E 726 520 504 140 20 70 50 1 j S or n10 e i 754 600 52:. 427 100 54 76 54 Warrant 2 Warrant 3 5010 400 300 ern 2 200 a a 0 100 ca Z 400 a 7 300 LLI 200 Z z 100 2 2 OR MORE LANES 8 2 OR MORE LANES I 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANES. 1 LANE '11. 300 150 000 600 (CO 800 003 1000 1100 4200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 2011 MORE LANES b 2 OR I LANES 2 OR MORE LANCS. b 1 LANE 1 LAW & 1 LA 300 300 400 500 800 700 000 800 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH j 500 w43 400 EkE C 34 200 9 100 c� x 20R MORE LANES & 2OR010RE LANES I IaSE! IE 1LANE 81 WJE 2 OR LORE 400 500 KO TOO 800 500 14)00 1100 1200 0300 1400 154)0 1604 1700 1000 = 400 Uqq ¢ O 300 fl Z E 200 a = 10D MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH f 2 O R MORE LANES E 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES b 1 LANE 61 LANE 8 1 LANE 300 400 500 606 700 000 504 1600 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH Volume Summary Major Street Lanes 2+ Hours 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 Totals Minor Street Lanes 2+ Major Volume Minor Volume Total Volume 801 47 848 595 35 630 431 25 456 531 32 563 616 36 809 48 693 41 761 45 987 59 1015 60 1004 59 857 734 806 1046 1075 1063 743 8986 44 531 787 9517 Speed 1A (100%) 1A (80%) No No 1B (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No 0 No 0 No 0 35 Population 10000+ 1B (80%) 2 (100%) No No 3A (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No 0 No 0 No 0 3B (100%) No No No No No No No No No No No No 0 Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 file:///C: /Users/Francescal/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k9C34.tmp Generated: 1/8/2021 12:14 PM 194 1/8/2021 Warrants Summary Page 1 of 2 Warrants Summary Information Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed Project ID East/West Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 1.20133.00 S 124th St Interurban & S 124th St - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street Interurban Ave S/S 124th St City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Forecast 2040 42nd Ave S North-South Project Description 1.20133.00 General Roadway Network Major Street Speed35 (mph) ❑ Population < 10,000 Two Major Routes ❑ Nearest Signal (ft) 1050 ❑ Coordinated Signal System Weekend Count ❑ Crashes (per year) 0 ❑ Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 Geometry and Traffic EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane usage LR TR LT Vehicle Volume Averages (vph) 0 0 0 232 0 18 0 118 295 29 287 0 Peds (ped/h) / Gaps (gaps/h) 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 Delay (s/veh) / (veh-hr) 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 Warrant 1: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume 1 A. Minimum Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 B. Interruption of Continuous Traffic (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- 1 (80%) Vehicular --and-- Interruption Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 2: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume 2 A. Four -Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 3: Peak Hour 3 A. Peak -Hour Conditions (Minor delay --and-- minor volume --and-- total volume ) --or-- L 3 B. Peak- Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume 4 A. Four Hour Volumes --or-- L 4 B. One -Hour Volumes Warrant 5: School Crossing 5. Student Volumes --and-- 5. Gaps Same Period Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System 6. Degree of Platooning (Predominant direction or both directions) ❑ Warrant 7: Crash Experience C 7 A. Adequate trials of alternatives, observance and enforcement failed --and-- 7 B. Reported crashes susceptible to correction by signal (12 -month period) --and-- file:///C:/Users/Francescal/AppData/Local/Temp/w2kB21 D.tmp 195 377 1/8/2021 Warrants Summary Page 2 of 2 17 C. (80%) Volumes for Warrants 1A, 1B --or-- 4 are satisfied I .r Warrant 8: Roadway Network ❑ 8 A. Weekday Volume (Peak hour total --and-- projected warrants 1, 2 or 3) --or-- ❑ 8 B. Weekend Volume (Five hours total) ❑ Warrant 9: Grade Crossing ❑ 9 A. Grade Crossing within 140 ft --and-- ❑ 9 B. Peak -Hour Vehicular Volumes ❑ Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 Generated: 1/8/2021 2:52 PM 196 file:///C:/Users/Francescal/AppData/Local/Temp/w2kB21 D.tmp 1/8/2021 807 601 Warrants Volume Page 1 of 1 Warrant 1 CnndI 'ilA--MlnlmMMVehicularVolume j l4uml*ST4d Wow kir r it IYirtE 0n 4464 pis mat Warrants Volume Vsdo:Ferhour in h4herdwge Rf10F aretIii,,wPs 41 let on Orijrf Information 400% 041% 70% Wli Analyst Agency/Co Date Performed ProjectEas/WestID File Name Street File Name Transpo Group Transpo Group 1/6/2021 S1124th St S 124th St Interurban & S 124th St - Forecast 2040.xhy Intersection Jurisdiction Units Time Period Analyzed North/South Street Major Street Interurban Ave S/S 124th St City of Tukwila U.S. Customary Forecast 2040 42nd Ave S North-South Project Description 1.20133.00 lit0 350 2rnil Warrant 1 CnndI 'ilA--MlnlmMMVehicularVolume j l4uml*ST4d Wow kir r it IYirtE 0n 4464 pis mat 'Jelriclos peryrou vnrr>si?' 1141 i,`hGl ofbdh Kota':hal Vsdo:Ferhour in h4herdwge Rf10F aretIii,,wPs 41 let on Orijrf liijef &met : Miwt S0erl 400% 041% 70% Wli 100% 41m 70% 36% 1 500 `2i:rre,r4 lit0 350 2rnil 150 101 105 01 i 4CC 4€a1 423 998 190 420 115 64 2oraate 2ormore ECC 490 420 938 2010 ted 140 112 I1 1 2armans L 5114 tCli 390 l 000 200 120 140 112 Condlllon Br- I<tteatl Titan or Canllnuouo1IorrIo Itimber allkmfoueeee Infoonesrlripproudr ' Vehsleemaw oarrelas0ed (totalalboth olvoiaheoj Volirleepahour00figher-vduma rnrrororeeleppraadllMdream only) risjarEtreetlMinx $heel'1441% 54% 70% 155% 100% 410 76% 540 1 1 7541 974 535 I 421 75 50 13 12 2 01mart I 1 10M 720 431 504 75 81 59 12 2orrrure 20f more I 4c4 720 050 504 100 20 70 54 1 j 24ralare 750 976 EE 621 1070 54 71) St Warrant 2 Warrant 3 0 400 ern a�a O 2 z 100 0 ca 500 300 200 Z 400 a tYLLI Z_ z 2r 100 2 300 200 2 OR MORE LANES 8 2 OR MORE LANES I 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE& 1 LANE '11. •0: 3130 400 500 600 TOO 800 003 1000 1100 4200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 2011 MORE LANES b 2 OR I LANES 2 OR MORE LANES b 1 LANE 1 LAS & 1 LA 206 300 400 500 800 700 000 000 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 506 400 300 200 I fl Z 200 a = 10D CB 2 0R MORE LANES 8 2OR100RE LANES I IaSE! IE 1 LANES 1 WJE 2 OR LORE 400 SOO FAO TOO 800 NO 1000 1100 1200 0300 1400 15110 1604 1700 1800 400 300 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH f 2 O R MORE LANES E 2 OR MORE LR E'S 2 OR MORE LANES b 1 LANE 61 LANE 8 1 LANE 300 400 500 '100 `75 COO 700 1360 003 1540 1100 1200 1306 MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH Volume Summary Major Street Lanes 1 Hours 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 Totals Minor Street Lanes 1 Major Volume Minor Volume Total Volume 782 268 1050 581 200 781 421 145 566 518 178 696 206 789 271 677 232 742 255 963 330 990 340 980 336 1060 909 997 1293 1330 1316 724 8768 249 3010 973 11778 Speed 1A (100%) 1A (80%) Yes Yes 1B (100%) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes 11 Yes 12 No 5 35 Population 10000+ 1B (80%) 2 (100%) Yes Yes 3A (100%) No No No No No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Yes 9 Yes 8 No 0 3B (100%) No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No 3 Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS7TM Warrants Version 7.2.1 file:///C:/Users/Francescal/AppData/Local/Temp/w2kB21 C .tmp Generated: 1/8/2021 2:53 PM 197 379 1/8/2021 Appendix G — Public Outreach 380 Allentown Advocates Community Engagement Meeting March 30, 2021 Zoom tips • Please stay muted until you are ready to speak • Raise your hand to be called on to make a comment • Type your questions or comment into the chat • If you need technical support, text or call 206-940-6013 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Introductions & Agenda • Introductions • Answer your questions — 3/29 from Sally Blake • Community presentation • Project history and need • Where are we now? • What's next? 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Answers to Your Questions Why was the BNSF Access Study report from 2015/2016 never moved from draft to final form? This report had the 48th street bridge as the number one preferred option to reroute the truck traffic out of Allentown permanently. • You are correct that the access study has been delayed. This happened because in August of 2017, the critical need to replace the 42nd Avenue Bridge became apparent, and the City has a civic and legal responsibility to ensure that the bridge does not fail and preserve public safety. Because the bridge currently has a sufficiency rating of 7.56 out of 100, the City must make the 42nd Avenue Bridge our number one infrastructure replacement project. 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Answers to Your Questions Why did the consultants contact only the businesses and not the residents in February regarding the possible rebuild of the 42nd Ave. Bridge and/or extending 124th street across the river? • The intention has always been to include feedback from residents in the replacement bridge project and we had planned to start that outreach in the Spring. While we did initiate the outreach with some businesses, we recognize that feedback from residents is an essential part of the type, size, and location (TS&L) report. Your feedback will be included in the final bridge design. 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Answers to Your Questions Maria Cantwell was made aware of our situation with the truck traffic in Allentown approximately six years ago. She requested a formal "ASK "with a plan for the alternate bridge on 48th. Why wasn't Maria Cantwell's request followed through on? • Senator Cantwell has a long history of supporting the Allentown neighborhood. Because of the emergent reality of the need to replace the 42nd Avenue Bridge, the City has had to focus its infrastructure funding requests toward this project. Senator Cantwell's support was for mitigating the impacts of the rail yard in the Allentown neighborhood however, it was never project specific. 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Answers to Your Questions Have the Federal standards for bridge maintenance and inspections been followed for the existing 42nd Ave bridge by the City of Tukwila? • Yes. The City has an ongoing contract with King County Inspection Services and meets federal standards for bridge maintenance and inspections. The 42nd Ave S Bridge receives the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) 24 -month Routine inspection, the 24 -month mandated fracture critical inspections, as well as 6 -month interim inspections for the north pier. Due to the critical nature of the bridge now we are on a 12 -month inspection schedule 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Answers to Your Questions Regarding the approximate $11 million dollar pedestrian bridge constructed on West Valley Highway several years ago... where did the funding come from and what was the time -line for requesting it? • The funding for the West Valley Highway pedestrian bridge came from four multi- year grant sources between 2006 and 2016. $6.8 million of this project was funded by the Washington State Regional Mobility grant, which supports projects improve multimodal connections and services between counties or regional transit centers. 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Community Presentation 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Looking forward • Partner with you, Allentown residents • Seek guidance from you to make the upcoming community meeting, and future community engagement, a success 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Bridge History • Design plans are dated in 1927 • Bridge was built 1949 • Weight and speed restricted in 2017 for several legal trucks • Bridge was ordinally designed for 75 years 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement GJ N) Reasons for Replacement • Current Sufficiency Rating is 7.56 out of 100 • Substandard (Functionally Obsolete) for non -motorized access (i.e., pedestrian, bike, and ADA) • Primary access to the Tukwila Community Center via pedestrian, bike, and vehicle • Bridge is not ADA compliant • Making the new structure multi use with pedestrian, bike, and vehicle access • Wide -spread damages on the bridge including corrosion, pack -rust, frozen bearings and spalling concrete supports. • Fracture -critical bridge susceptible to fatigue failure 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Where are we now? November Dec 2020 — February 2020 Jan 2021 2021 Consultant Initial team investigations contracted begin April 2021 Summer 2021 Fall 2021 Begin Community Community Type/Size/ stakeholder Townhall check in Location interviews Report complete & Online Open House 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement W COCA) 211 Next steps —preparation for April 27 Townhall March 31 April 2 April 2 April 7 April 7 April 14 Weeks of April 12 & 19 April 27 Project website updated with this presentation and link to recorded meeting Mail postcard notifications for April 27 Community Townhall Survey to incorporate Allentown community feedback in the Type/Size/Location Report goes live on project website (TukwilaWA.gov/42nd) Hard copy surveys available at the Tukwila Community Center Posters delivered to Tukwila Community Center and Allentown Superette Door-to-door notifications for April 27 Community Townhall Email and social media notification for April 27 Community Townhall Online Community Townhall, via Zoom, begins at 5:30 PM 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement 212 Community Townhall Format: Presentation, Q/A, breakout groups Community feedback: Below are questions the technical team needs to finish the Type / Size / Location report (TS&L report). Feedback will be used and shared in the TS&L report (due this summer). A TS&L report will consider all reasonable replacement options and help narrow the choices. The report will determine the functional and physical characteristics of the bridge, how it will be constructed, and its location. This is the step before a project goes into 30% design. Experience using the bridge • What methods of travel do you use that take you over the bridge? • What has been your experience crossing the bridge? • What kind of issues, if any, do you and your family experience when using the bridge? Future use of the bridge • What ideas do you have for making the bridge a welcoming gateway into the Tukwila or Allentown community? • Keeping in mind federal funding limitations, what do you hope the City of Tukwila prioritizes and considers when developing design and construction concepts for the bridge? 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement W 01 213 Engagement • Due to COVID-19, we are unable to meet with folks in person and hold an in-person open house. As an alternative we plan to host an online open house for residents and bridge users. Are there ways you would suggest the City gather feedback from the community? • What is the best way for us to keep you informed and engaged throughout the project? • Are there other specific community groups or residents that you suggest we talk with? Conclusion and next steps Do you have any remaining questions about the project that we did not cover? Do you have any additional thoughts that you want to make sure we capture? Before we conclude, are there any questions you have about the project that you would like to make sure we cover? 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement 214 Stay Engaged Visit the project website to: • Sign up for the project Iistsery • Get project updates • Learn about upcoming engagement opportunities .. TukwilaWA.gov/42nd Adam Cox, Project Manager (206) 431-2446 Adam.Cox@TukwilaWa.gov 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project - Community Engagement Dimensions: half sheet (5.5x 8.5), double sided FRONT Header: 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement Project Upcoming Online Community Townhall, April 27 BACK We need your feedback! The 42nd Ave S Bridge is an important crossing on the Duwamish River that connects the City of Tukwila to surrounding communities and resources. The bridge, built in 1949, needs to be replaced and the City is exploring options for a new bridge design. The City needs your feedback to progress early planning on how a new bridge can better serve all users. This project is not related to the BNSF Access Study at 48th PI S, east of Codiga Park. Join us for an online community townhall Learn more and RSVP at TukwilaWa.gov/42nd Tuesday, April 27 5:30 — 7:30 pm What to expect at the town hall • A presentation by City of Tukwila staff • Small group discussions • Opportunities to share your thoughts and ask questions If you can't make it, no worries! A community survey is available on the project website and at the Tukwila Community Center. Please let us know if you're facing barriers to participating and need accommodations. Please email Adam.Cox@TukwilaWa.gov by April 16 398 216 City of Tukwila 42nd Avenue Bridge Replacement Project Community Outreach Stakeholder Engagement Results The City of Tukwila provided community members and other stakeholders with an opportunity to engage in the decision-making process for the 42nd Avenue Bridge Replacement Project by taking comments and votes on various project design elements. Participant responses were gathered both during an online survey, open to the public for votes from August 31, 2021 to September 30, 2021, as well as during a Gallery Day Meeting held on September 15, 2021. The online survey and the gallery event presented stakeholders with 5 questions pertaining to various design elements of the bridge replacement project including bridge railing and landscaping concepts, color preference, a gateway element, and lighting concepts. There were 109 online survey participants, and their responses are included in the following data along with responses from the Gallery attendees. Maximum responses received was 112 votes. 217 399 CITY CF T U KW I LA Railing Concepts Total responses: 109 Total responses: 109 TRANTECH hi Engineering LLC Question 1- Railing Concepts Survey Preference- Concept 3: Diagonal Emphasis ■ Concept 1 Vertical Emphasis ■ Concept 2 Horizontal Emphasis iii Concept 3 Diagonal Emphasis Number of Responses 0 10 20 30 40 50 Pictured - Concept 3 218 CITY OF TUKWILA Question 2 - Landscape Concepts Survey Preference - Concept 2: Natural Landscape Concepts Number of Responses Total responses: 112 • Concept 1 Decorative Concept 2 Natural • Concept 3 Community Center Campus Extension 62 0 TRANTECH Engineering LLC 20 40 60 80 Pictured - Concept 2 219 CITY CF TUIWILA Color Preference Question 3 - Color Preference Survey Preference - Dark Green Total responses: 106 • Black • Dark Green • Blue • Galvanized Silver TRANTECH Engineering LLC Number of Responses 19 49 13 17 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 220 CITY OF TUKWILA Gateway Element Question 4 - What should gateway element relate to? Survey Preference - Allentown Community ■ Tukwila Community Center ■ Allentown Community ■ Current bridge; historic steel Green River ■ Green River Trail ■ Other* *Other: Duwamish Tribe & Allentown Community; the diversity of Tukwila; Duwamish Tribe/Native American; Duwamish waterway; Tukwila's connection to the Duwamish; collage of elements: Indian-Duwamish, community, history, river; include Duwamish tribe out of respect; combination of Green River + Trail TRANTECH id Engineering LLC Number of Responses 23 Mi. AIL 22 w 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Total responses: 108 221 CITY OF TUKWILA Lighting Concept Question 5 - Lighting Concepts Survey Preference - Concept 4 Total responses: 104 ■ Concept 1 ■ Concept 2 ■ Concept 3 Concept 4 Number of Responses 0 10 20 30 40 50 TRANTECH Engineering LLC Attached El Mirage Spec; RNTA-8-14 Spec Pictured - Concept 4 222 N NJ W C) 01 s}igigx3 s3! eq;say — H x!puaddV Railing Concept 1. Vertical Emphasis • - Traditional - Reflects existing fence south of Community Center - Could be finished in green or black - Light pole options shown separately Final design detail may vary Your dots Your comments Final design detail may vary Dots from online survey I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i CITY CF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT Building connections224 Railing Concept 2. Horizontal Emphasis • - Horizontal configuration enhances the gentle arch of the bridge - Clean and easy to construct - Finish could be blue, aluminum, galvanized, or stainless steel. - Light pole options shown separately Your dots Your comments Final design detail may vary iguiL 46, Dots from online survey - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - % ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i CITY CF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT Building connections225 Ra.ling Concept 3. Diagonal Emphasis i • - Diagonal elements included in railing. - Steel plates ensures safety. - Barrier rail between pedestrian and vehicle lanes could reflect diagonal geometry. Your dots Your comments Final design detail may vary Dots from online survey - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - % ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i CITY CF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT Building connections226 Lan • scape Concept 1. Decorative _.�.W_ _ _ as • .. 3 Final design detail may vary Your dots Your comments - Emphasis on enhancing a gateway for the Community Center. - Ornamental trees along 42nd Ave S and Interurban Ave S. - Small scale floral plantings an option. Dots from online survey - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - m ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i CITY CF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT — Building connections227 Lan • scape Concept 2. Natura - incl design detail may vary Your dots Your comments - Emphasis on enhancing the ecology through plantings of native vegetation. - Opportunities for pathways. - Best for stormwater and habitat - Reinforces Green River Trail character. - Pedestrian -friendly lighting recommended Dots from online survey - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i CITY CF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT — Building connections228 Lan • scape Concept 3. Community Center Landscaping Extension Final design detail may vary 40 w Your dots Your comments - Emphasis on unifying both sides of the bridge and ex- tending Community Center character. - Extend street tree plantings in front of Community Cen- ter. - Add gentler path from - Green River Trail to Bridge. Plantings like Community Center. Dots from online survey - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - m ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i CITY CF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT — Building connections229 Lighting Concept 1. Lighting Concept 2. (integrate with railing concept 2/3) (integrate with railing concept 2/3) - GCJ i -Series Fixture - Mounted on 20' tall round tapered pole with square base and showing rail of choice Final design detail may vary mp 41111110. E ■ ■ NI VI. 111 ■ • Ella Your dots Tenon Top Pole Cap Cross Section Handhole Nut Covers ri ard) Dart Square - 2T (Optional) eiriltille - Evolve Series Fixture - Mounted on 20' tall square tapered pole with square base and showing rail of choice Final design detail may vary Your comments : Online survey dots: Your dots _ ==== _______ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ CITY OF TUKWILA ======== _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U P _ _ _ _ Tenon Top Pole Clip Cross Section Square Har dhole l Full 9ase Cover (Standard) J Dart Square - 2T (Optional) Kagicrliele Your comments : Online survey dots: _ ============= U P _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ ====== _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U P _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ =========== _ _ i i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U I 1 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT Building connections230 Lighting Concept 3. (integrate with railing concept 1) - Evolve -Contemporary Series Fixture - Mounted on 16' tall round non-tapered pole with square base and showing rail of choice Final design detail may vary Your dots 5 E C Tenon Top Polo Cap Cross Section II Handhole 1 Nut Covers (Standard) Dart Square - 2T (Optional) r" l Lighting Concept 4. (integrate with railing concept 1) - Pendant -Arm EI Mirage Fixture - Mounted on 16' tall round non-tapered pole with square base and showing rail of choice Final design detail may vary A Norninal Mourtilino Horjh I Tenon Top 14 Polo Cap Cross Section II I andhoI Nut Covers (Standard) Dart Square - 21 - (Opti ona I ) T(OptionaI) titrdhe Your comments : Online survey dots: Your dots : Your comments : Online survey dots: _ ==== _______ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ CITY OF TUKWILA P I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ ===== _ _ ====== U ! _ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _ ============= U P _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ ====== _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U P _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ =========== _ _ i i ======== _____ 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT Building connections231 Color Preference What is your color preference? We are just beginning to consider different colors and finishes for the rail, light poles and other metallic elements. Some colors are more appropriate with different styles of railing and light poles and these are noted below. Please indicate your color preference by checking a box from options below: Your dots Black (goes best with railing concept 1/3) Dots from online survey _______________________________ INN _____________________________________._________________________________ Dark Green (goes best with railing concept 1/2/3) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Blue (goes best with railing concept 2/3) _________________________________________________________._________________________________ Galvanized (goes best with railing concept 2 easy maintenance) Silver (Brushed Aluminum) (goes best with railing concept 2 easy maintenance) CITY OF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT — Building connections232 Gateway Preference What should a gateway element relate to? The project may include a Gateway element such as a sign, monument, or artwork. Many options are available, but it is desired to have a gateway element that relates to some aspect of its location and the bridge's function, as an important connecting structure. Please indicate which, if any, of the following attributes the gateway should reflect and/or celebrate. You may select more than one. Your dots The Community Center The Allentown Community The The current bridge with its historic steel character Dots from online survey ________________________________________________________ The Green River _________________________________________________________r_________________________________ The Green River Trail Others, Please describe ITY OF TIJ KW I LA I 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT — Building connections233 General Comments CITY CF TUKWILA 42ND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT Building connections234 Appendix I — Roadway/Utilities Exhibits 235 417 418 30' 15' 0 30' SCALE IN FEET 60' N_ ti� S4 %.�Ti • f Imo! Ji 11I 1 1 II I 80 72 64 D 56'>nn oh mCn 48A+ rD CnN, II O ' N 40- rn 32- 3,00°/0 24 VPI STA=13+02-'.--- VPI EL=27.98' VCL=75.00' K=9.68 CO LP STA -12+93.53, - m LP EL=28.67' n _ _ m 16 •0) 4.7 VPISTA=15+10 VPI EL -37.86' VCL=340.00' K=35.79 HP STA=15+10 HP EL=33.82' —1 08+96=V1S 0/0 co n m 0 4.75% VPI STA=17+64.81 VPI EL=25.76' VCL=100.00' K=37.63 8'4 L+L l=V1S OAS 80 72 64 56 <m n n -- 48 m b D II '� + 40 CD▪ - --32 -2.09% 24 -u I— m m ''NCO CONW ,OND W 0INO J - A A (OT V c0 N do A r- 12+50 13+00 0 A N) CD 14 00 CO CO On On W 15 00 CO W co 16+00 to W O N h▪ 1 0 CO03 CO W 17+00 01 O No W co) No cn ✓ N No O N N 01 1,3 03 0 0 18+00 A O4.4 CO A CD CO 18 PUBLIC WORKS DEPT_ *ENGINEERING *STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # 42nd AVE S Profile jTRNT-CN Engineering LL� 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 16 8 J J 40 42ND AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 42ND ALTERNATIVE - PLAN & PROFILE Know what's below. Call before you dig. No. Date Revisions EX01 1 of #### H File No. 2020016_BASE-OS.dwg ggIty AS SHOWN Date OCT 2021 HOUSE ALLENTOWN SUPERETTE 56+00 –+- 125 – 100 50 – 25 – 0 -25 – 00+05=V1S de -2.00% PIER 1 w n m 0) W co -.1111 n ti D 01 ..VPI STA=52+13.02 VPI EL=40.86' VCL=220.00' K=40.74 m n m Co noN PIER 2 9.5' GIRDER DEPTH 3' FREE BOARD –15.00' (100 -YR WSEL) PIER 3 '£Z+£5=VIS OA 0 rn o LU coo Qc 0 . CO < z 0 0 wQ) r-1 D Jii t N W N -,I Cn 07 7.40% o o N e------2'.8-------6---QM-------Tc' 0 PIER 4 E8Z6+E9=VIS 3d VPI STA=55+00 VPI EL=19.62' VCL=225.00' K=27.03 LP STA=55+87.55 LP EL=20.55' A 0) 0 0.92% -1.00% – 125 – 100 75 – 50 – 25 57+00 A 30' 15' 0 30' SCALE IN FEET 0 m r m — 1 r (T N Vt N 49+75 50+00 0) N W co 0) W N N 0) 51+00 52+00 53+00 co O N N v N 0] 01 N O N V 01 Na O 54+00 Na W A N CT Na W m N N CD N W 01 55 00 56 + 00 -25 56 50 S 124TH ST - PROFILE Know what's below. Call before you dig. PUBLIC WORKS DEPT_ * ENGINEERING* STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS* BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TRA NTECH Engineering LL 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 42ND AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 124TH ALTERNATIVE - PLAN & PROFILE 1 Revisions EX02 2 of #54# File No. 2020016_BASE-DS.dwg Scale AS SHOWN • Date OCT 2021 I+f4 1 °45'50"W DUWAMISH RIVER 24+00 80 0 0 m I I I 25 80 72 — — 72 64 56 — VPI STA=21+72.92 VPI EL=25.16' VCL=125.00' K=28.09 VPI STA=22+55.42 VPI EL=29.28' VCL=40.00' K=13.33 co co n -1 Ni O 24 N 16- 8— r rn 0 In N Co OD W �� N m rn_ ✓ —1 NiII D mm'cr) co co mm n n COb +_ n n n co mco o mN << VPI STA=23+25.42 VPI EL=29.28' VCL=40.00' K=13.33 VPI STA=24+07.92 VPI EL=25.15' VCL=125.00' K=29.41 1— A r 0 0 cco + pao + Ni D n) _._ 2.00%2.00%P+ N cow tN���mA cn Ni _-----�-- Zb'0L+4Z=V1S OA 0.75% — 64 — 56 V -u m r X A A A -1 O 01 W RIr- 21+00 21+00 W N N A O) N O N N W (Oli W 22 + A v 00 N N A O CAD W ACD ✓ J A CO O CCD AKJ CO Co 23 + 00 Ary 9)) cn 24+00 O KJ O Ca — 32 •24 — 16 — 8 25 —00 42ND AVE S - PROFILE rzTh 30' 15' 0 30' 60' SCALE IN FEET If 3 F u O o- F Know what's below. Call before you dig. / PUBLIC WORKS DEPT_ * ENGINEERING* STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS* BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TRANTECH Engineering LL� 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 42ND AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 124TH ALTERNATIVE - PLAN & PROFILE 2 Revisions EX03 3 of #W## File No. 2020016_BASE-DS.dwg Scale AS SHOWN • Date OCT 2021 422 Appendix J — Bridge Viable Structure Concept Alternatives Drawings 239 423 424 t\Bridge Plan & Elev - Concept 1.dwg djensen 02/08/21 6:04pm - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \000 CAD 2018\010 Drawing \C -Structural ,No PIER3 PIER4 APPROACH SLAB EXIST PIER 3 Q. EXIST & NEW ROADWAY EXIST PIER 2 NEW BRIDGE 255-0" 315'-0" APPROACH SLAB PIER 1 30'-0" Q PIER 2 BRIDGE PLAN 255'-0" Q PIER 3 30'-0" BEARING NEW TRAIL BEARING BRIDGE BARRIER PIER 4 EXISTING TRAIL PRESTRESSED —/ SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT --/daL CASING SHORING 7'0 COLUMN APPROX HIGH WATER EL 16.10 STEEL PLATE GIRDER MIN. 3' CLR 0., � I J EXIST PIER 2 ITT171J II II II II it ii it li 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT —r LJ� T _ 7'0 COLUMN Jr /1 �rMit EXIST PIER 3 APPROX GROUND BRIDGE ELEVATION 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT APPROACH SLAB PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION - CONCEPT 1 Know what's below. Call before you dig.) S1 X of - L File No. Bridge Plan & Elev Conc No. Date Revisions ND 1E 20' Date JUNE 2020 11.dwt \Framing Plan & T djensen 02/08/21 6:06pm - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD 2018\010 Drawing \C -Structural ROADWAY 12'-0" 12'-0" 2'-0" 1'-6' 10'-0" TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 CONCEPT 1 Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0 TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT TYPICAL BRIDGE SECTION - CONCEPT 1 No. Date Revisions S2 X of - K l File No. Framing Plan Si Typ Sec.d Date JUNE 2020 J 0 SHY LANE PROFILE GRADE & PIVOT POINT LANE Ei SHY BARRIER _ SDWK L C C C ,• 0 .7. ,nr,.. 7 0 . 0 0 ° o i ,/ Q °ikv� °0. 0 N. (� o�l ° ° ° 0 0 0 °°Loo° _ �m==° o — _Jo o Joo q GIRDER A GIRDER B 3 SPA @ 11'-9" = 35'-3" I GIRDER C CL I GIRDER D STEEL PLATE GIRDER SPACING MEASURED NORMAL TO ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 CONCEPT 1 Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0 TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT TYPICAL BRIDGE SECTION - CONCEPT 1 No. Date Revisions S2 X of - K l File No. Framing Plan Si Typ Sec.d Date JUNE 2020 a 0 u ROADWAY C C C GIRDER A GIRDER B GIRDER C GIRDER D z 7'0 COLUMN (TYP) 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT (TYP) 32'-0" 49'-0" PIER ELEVATION - PIER 2 & 3 8'-6 Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJ.SLIC WORKS DEPT_ * ENGINEERING * STREETS *WATER* SEWER * PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn TMW MJS Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PIER ELEVATION - PIER 2 & 3 Revisions File No. Framing Plan & Typ Sec.d N.12 Date JUNE 202 Date 2020 \Framing Plan & T djensen 02/08/21 6:07pm - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD 2018\010 Drawing \C -Structural GIRDER A w GIRDER B GIRDER C GIRDER D ..-.. - E 1 Y4x24x47'-6" R 2 Y2x24x57'-0" IC 2 Y2x24x102'-6" R 1 Y4x24x47'-6" L C BRGS 46-0" zoo ._U.. 102'-6" C 46-0" BRGS 1'-6" 1'-6" BRGS r Gt BRGS 103'-6" i FIELD SPLICE I 148'-6" C I 1 I 1 I 7 LWEB /1x123V) _ E 1 Yzx26x47'-6" IE 2 34x26x50'-0" I—I R 3 Y4x26x60'-0" It 2 3/4x26x50'-0" I 46-0" } 7'-6" 52'-6" I I I I 1 + L -L. 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 i Y L 22'_6" t 9 SPA @ 23'_0" = 207_0" 22'_6" FRAMING PLAN 1'-6" E 1 Y4x24x47'-6" R 2 Y2x24x57'-0" IC 2 Y2x24x102'-6" R 1 Y4x24x47'-6" L C BRGS 46-0" 57'-6" 102'-6" C 46-0" BRGS 1'-6" 1'-6" I- —' I— - U 1 I 1 I 7 LWEB /1x123V) _ E 1 Yzx26x47'-6" IE 2 34x26x50'-0" I—I R 3 Y4x26x60'-0" It 2 3/4x26x50'-0" 11 Yzx26x47'-6" 46-0" 50'-0" 7'-6" 52'-6" 50'-0" 46-0" J _ 1'-6" GIRDER ELEVATION - SPAN 2 P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0 TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT FRAMING PLAN AND ELEVATION Know what's below. Call before you dig.) No. Date Revisions S4 X of - L File I�No. Framing Plan & Typ Sec.d IS 3/32" =1'-0" Date JUNE 2020 t\Bridge Plan & Elev - Concept 2.dwg djensen 02/08/21 6:05pm - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \000 CAD 2018\010 Drawing \C -Structural PIER 1 d sof a o allo C PIER 2 00 411,/_ I air AV -7 PIER 3 C PIER 4 APPROACH SLAB EXIST PIER 3 7 C EXIST & NEW ROADWAY EXIST PIER 2 NEW BRIDGE APPROACH SLAB PIER 1 42'-6" PIER 2 230'-0" 315'-0" BRIDGE PLAN 230'-0" L BEARING NEW TRAIL EXISTING TRAIL PIER 3 42'-6' L BEARING PIER 4 APPROACH SLAB PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT EXIST PIER 2 7 TIT APPROX HIGH WATER EL 16.10 WF100G PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER 7'0 COLUMN 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT APPROX GROUND BRIDGE ELEVATION - MIN. 3' CLR 7'0 COLUMN EXIST PIER 3 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT 4nn I II II I II II I PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0 TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION - CONCEPT 2 Know what's below. Call before you dig.) No. Date Revisions FI le N0. Bridge Plan 8 Elev - Conce t 2.dwt Date Date JUNE 2020 \Framing Plan & T djensen 02/08/21 6:08pm - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD 2018\010 Drawing \C -Structural 1'-6 2,-0' 12'-0" ROADWAY 12'-0" 2'-0" 10,-0" SHY LANE PROFILE GRADE & PIVOT POINT 2.0% 2.0% LANE SHY BARRIER SDWK GIRDER A GIRDER B C GIRDER C dGIRDER D 6 SPA @ 6-0" = 36-0" 4 GIRDER E GIRDER F GIRDER G 1'-9" WF100G LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE GIRDER SPACING MEASURED NORMAL TO ROADWAY 42'-6" TYPICAL SECTION P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0 TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT TYPICAL BRIDGE SECTION - CONCEPT 2 Know what's below. Call before you dig.J No. Date Revisions S6 X of - L File No. Framing Plan & Typ Sec.d - I5 1/2"=1'-0" Date JUNE 2020 2/02/21 11:35am - P:/2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD 2019\010 Drawing \C-Structural Sheet\124th St Concept 1 & 2 Plan & Elev.dwg PIER1 STA 50 3.0 60'-lli' PIER 2 STA 51+03.0 S 124TH ST 52+00 NEW ROADWAY 220'-0" APPROACH SLAB APPROACH SLAB PIER 1 LSTA. 50+33.0 60'-0" PIER 2 STA. 51+03.0 BRIDGE PLAN 220'-0" PIER 3 STA 50+23.0 PER4 S A 53+ 3.0 20'-0" 11 APPROACH SLAB PIER 3 g PIER 4 STA. 53+43.0 STA. 53+23.0 20'-0" I BRIDGE BARRIER APPROACH SLAB ALLENTOWN SUPERETTE PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT 3' FREEBOARD (APPROX. 18.00) APPROX W.S. 100 YEAR FLOOD (15.00) 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT STEEL PLATE GIRDER BRIDGE ELEVATION CIP CONCRETE SLAB 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT —/ 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT Q F.!3 F u 0 o- F v Know what's below. Call before you dig PUBLIC' WORKS Di-:E°T_ *ENGINEERING* STREETS* WATER*SEWER* PARKS* BUILDING* By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS TT TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 1 BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION No. Date Revisions S1 1 of 8 DFile No. 124th St Concept 1 & 2 Pla & Elev 20' Daatete DEC. zozo ctural Sheet\124th ST Concept 1 & 2 Deta djensen 12/02/21 11:04am - P:/2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD 2019\010 1"-6" 12'-0" ROADWAY 12'-0" 10'-0" TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 1 TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 No. Date Revisions S2 2 of 8 File No. 124th ST concept 1 & 2 Os: Date DEC. 2020 ils.dw SHY LANE PROFILE GRADE & PIVOT POINT LANE SHY BARRIER SDWK C C C 2.0% 2.0% a0 a oh °Iao L°° lir, °.°° IL o 012°a Wil°o ° o °r °° ° a 0� °° off° ° 7. ° ° >°°lo\ ,alo0 ° o �� o o 0 0 e° 0 o L .1-'4.2°0 J L ° J o rL 2'-1 %2" GIRDER A I GIRDER B GIRDER C cL 3 SPA @ 11'-9" = 35'-3" I GIRDER D 2'-1 Y2" STEEL PLATE GIRDER SPACING MEASURED NORMAL TO ROADWAY 42'-6" TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 1 TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 No. Date Revisions S2 2 of 8 File No. 124th ST concept 1 & 2 Os: Date DEC. 2020 ils.dw sen 12102121 11:45am - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \000 CAD 2019\010 Drawing \C-Structural Sheet \124th ST Concept 1 & 2 Details.dwg 1'-6" 2,-0" SHY 12'-0" LANE PROFILE GRADE & PIVOT POINT / ROADWAY 12'-0" LANE 2'-0" SHY 1'-6' BARRIER 10'-0" SDWK GIRDER A GIRDER D 7'0 COLUMN (TYP) 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT (TYP) 25'-6" PIER ELEVATION - PIER 2 & 3 P ZJ.SLIC WORKS DEPT_ * ENGINEERING * STREETS *WATER* SEWER * PARKS * BUILDING By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 1 PIER ELEVATION - PIER 2 & 3 Know what's below. Call before you dig. .01 No. Date Revisions S3 3 or 8 File No. 124th ST concept 1 & 2 Dr Date DEC. 2020 djensen 12/02/21 9:03am - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \000 CAD 2019\010 Drawing \C -Structural Sheet \124th ST Concept 1 & 2 D PIER 2 60'-0" PIER 4 PIER 2 220'-0" PIER 3 20'-0" q INTERMEDIATE q BEARING CC FIELD SPLICE Cl BEARING I DIAPHRAGM I 68'-6" 148'-6" 51+00 CROSS FRAME (TYP) EDGE OF BRIDGE DECK 52+00 53+00 H 30'-0" WF36G PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER (TYP) (6 TOTAL) 30'-0" 24'-6" STEEL PLATE GIRDER (TYP) 7 SPA @ 24'-0" = 168'-0" EDGE OF BRIDGE DECK CIP CONCRETE SLAB 24'-6" 1'-6" FRAMING PLAN Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 1 FRAMING PLAN No. Date Revisions S4 4 of 8 File No. 124th ST Concept 1 & 2 0� 3/32" =1'-0" Date DEC. 2020 2/02/21 11:35am - P:/2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD 2019\010 Drawing \C-Structural Sheet\124th St Concept 1 & 2 Plan & Elev.dwg 50+00 PIER 1 STA 504 3.0 60'-0i PER 2 STA 51+03.0 NEW BRIDGE S 124TH ST NEW ROADWAY APPROACH SLAB H PIER 1 STA. 50+43.0 60'-0" g PIER 2 STA. 51+03.0 52+00 220'-0" DUWAMISH RIVER BRIDGE PLAN 220'-0" PIER 3 STA 50+23.0 PER4 20,-0„ S 1� I' A 53+43.0 53+00 APPROACH SLAB c. PIER 4 PIER 3 I STA. 53+43.0 STA. 53+23.0 20'-0" BRIDGE BARRIER APPROACH SLAB ALLENTOWN SUPERETTE PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT—/ 3' FREEBOARD (APPROX. 18.00) 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT APPROX W.S. 100 YEAR FLOOD (15.00) PRESTRESSED CIP CONCRETE SLAB CONCRETE GIRDER BRIDGE ELEVATION 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT Know what's below. Call before you dig PUBLIC' WORKS *ENGINEERING* STREETS* WATER*SEWER* PARKS* BUILDING* By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS TT TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 2 BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION No. Date Revisions S5 5 of 8 File No. 124th St Concept 1 & 2 Pla & Elev S2§5 1".20' Date DEC. 2020 djensen 12/02/21 9:04am - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \000 CAD 2019\010 Drawing \C -Structural Sheet \124th ST Concept 1 & 2 D 1'-6 2,-0' 12'-0" ROADWAY 12'-0" 2'-0" 10,-0" SHY LANE PROFILE GRADE & PIVOT POINT 2.0% 2.0% LANE SHY BARRIER SDWK GIRDER A 1.-9" GIRDER B GIRDER C GIRDER D 6 SPA @ 6-0" = 36-0" GIRDER E GIRDER F C C C GIRDER G 1'-9" WF100G LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE GIRDER SPACING MEASURED NORMAL TO ROADWAY 42'-6" TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJBL.IC WORKS 1131 -;PPT. * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 2 TYPICAL SECTION - SPAN 2 No. Date Revisions S6 6 of 8 File No. 124th ST Concept 1 & 2 Os: 19 1/2"=1'-0" Date DEC. 2020 ils.dw sen 12102121 11:42am - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \000 CAD 2019\010 Drawing \C-Structural Sheet \124th ST Concept 1 & 2 Details.dwg ROADWAY GIRDER A GIRDER B GIRDER C CL GIRDER D C GIRDER E C GIRDER F C GIRDER G z 2 0 i0 7'0 COLUMN (TYP) 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT (TYP) 25'-6" 42'-6" PIER ELEVATION - PIER 2 & 3 P E3 LTC' WORKS DEP Y. * ENGINEERING * STREETS *WATER* SEWER * PARKS * BUILDING By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 2 PIER ELEVATION - PIER 2 & 3 Know what's below. Call before you dig. .01 No. Date Revisions S7 7 of 8 File No. 124th ST concept 1 a 2 De' $ 12 1/2"=1'-0" Date DEC. 2020 djensen 12/02/21 9:04am - P:\2020\2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement \000 CAD 2019\010 Drawing \C -Structural Sheet \124th ST Concept 1 & 2 D PIER 2 CC PIER 2 60'-0" 220'-0" PIER 3 20'-0" CC INTERMEDIATE CC BEARING I DIAPHRAGM I II CC INTERMEDIATE DIAPHRAGM INTERMEDIATE I DIAPHRAGM CC INTERMEDIATE CC INTERMEDIATE rC BEARING DIAPHRAGM DIAPHRAGM I I I II I II PIER 4 51+00 52+00 I 53+00 0 30'-0" WF36G PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER (TYP) (6 TOTAL) 30'-0" 2'-6" I WF100G LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE GIRDER (TYP) 5 EQUAL SPACES CIP CONCRETE SLAB 2,-6" FRAMING PLAN N Know what's below. Call before you dig. P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - 42ND AVE. S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CONCEPT 2 FRAMING PLAN No. Date Revisions S8 8 of 8 L / File No. 124th ST Concept 1 & 2 Os: 13 3/32" =1'-0" Date DEC. 2020 Appendix K — Constructability Memo 254 439 ID Task Name (Duration Start '.Finish Qtr 1, 2024 Jan Feb Mar Qtr 2, 2024 I Qtr 3, 2024 Qtr 4, 2024 Apr May Jun ,2 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Qtr 1, 2025 Jan Feb Mar Qtr 2, 2025 Apr I May Jun 42nd Avenue 5 Bridge 275 days Fri 3/22/24 Mon 4/21/25 42nd Avenue 5 Bridge Replacement 75 days Replacement . 2 In-Water Work Window 2024 Jul 1- Sept 64 days Mon 7/1/24 Mon 9/30/24 In-Water Work Window 2024 Jul 1-Sept30 3 30 Field Construction 12 Months 258 days Tue 4/16/24 Mon 4/21/25 Field Construction 12 Months 4 Advertise Project & Receive Bids 15 days Tue 1/2/24 Mon 1/22/24 Advertise Project & Receive Bids 5 Award & Execute Contract 40 days Tue 1/23/24 Mon 3/18/24 Award &Execute Contract 6 Notice to Proceed 1 day Tue 3/19/24 Tue 3/19/24 Notice to Proceed 7 Mobilization & Initial Submittals 22 days Wed 3/20/24 Thu 4/18/24 Mobilization & Initial Submittals 8 9 Early Submittals & Procurements Procure Materials for Temporary Detour 10 days Tue 3/19/24 Mon 4/1/24 44 days Tue 3/19/24 Fri 5/17/24 1Early Submittals & Procurements Procure Materials for Temporary Detour Bridge 10 11 Bridge Prepare & Submit Truss Span Relocation Plan Steel Girder Delivery 8 months (incl shop 30 days Tue 3/19/24 Mon 4/29/24 176 days Tue 3/19/24 Tue 11/26/24 -•- - - -- Steel Girder Delivery -- cation Plan 8 months (incl shop drawings) 12 drawings) Manufacture Light Poles (6 months) 132 days Tue 3/19/24 Mon 9/23/24 ,� vanra.sn.e I iglu poles (c mnntl,c) 13 Early Submittals (TESC, MOT, etc.) 20 days Tue 3/19/24 Mon 4/15/24 .� Early Submittals (TESC, MOT, etc. I 14 15 Pfeparatory Work. Install TESC 6 days Tue 4/16/24 Tue 4/23/24 6 days Tue 4/16/24 Tue 4/23/24 11 Install TESC 16 17 Install Project Signing & Traffic Control frfBtruct Detour 5 days Wed 4/17/24 Tue 4/23/24 56 days Wed 4/24/24 Sun 7/14/24 Install Pro Construct not Signing &Traffic Detour Control '- 156 days 1g Clearing & Rough Grade Temp Bridge 6 days Wed 4/24/24 Wed 5/1/24 Approaches i rbaang & Rough Grade Temp Bridge Approaches 19 20 Mobilize & Drive Pile for Bents D2 & 015 days Mon 5/20/24 Fri 5/24/24 (14 ea.) Install Bracing & Pile Caps Concrete D1 15 days Tue 5/28/24 Mon 6/17/24 TM-Mobilize & Drive L, Inst Pile all Bracing for Bents D2 & DI (14 ea.) & Pile Caps Concrete 01 & D2 21 22 23 & D2 Deck Beams & Barrier Span D1 5 days Tue 6/18/24 Mon 6/24/24. Relocate/ Drive Pile for Bents D3 & D4 5 days Tue 5/28/24 Mon 6/3/24 (14 ea.) Install Bracing & Pile Cap Concrete D3 15 days Tue 6/4/24 Mon 6/24/24 Relocate/ r., Dti In k Beams e Pile II & Barrier Span D1 for Bents D3 & D4 (14 ea.) Bracing & Pile Cap Concrete D3 & 04 & D4 24 25 26 27 Deck Beams & Barrier Span D3 Grade, Surfacing, Pave Detour Approaches Weekend Closure to Relocate Bridge Truss Construct Substructure 5 days Tue 6/25/24 Mon 7/1/24 8 days Tue 7/2/24 Fri 7/12/24 2 days Sat 7/13/24 Sun 7/14/24 99 days Mon 7/15/24 Tue 12/3/24 eck Beams & Barrier Span D3 Grade, Surfacing, Pave Detour Approaches TWeekend Closure to Relocate Bridge Construct Substructure Truss 99 days 28 29 30 31 32 Demolish Spans 1 & 3 5 days Mon 7/15/24 Fri 7/19/24 Drive Coffercells around Pier 2 & 3 6 days Mon 7/22/24 Mon 7/29/24 Remove Existing Piers, Foundations & 10 days Tue 7/30/24 Mon 8/12/24 Pile Remove Coffercells 4 days Tue 8/13/24 Fri 8/16/24 Drive, Cap & Brace Steel Erection Pile 5 days Mon 8/19/24 Fri 8/23/24 --,Drive T. Demolish Spans 1 & 3 Coffercells around Pie Remove Existing Pier; Fr Remove Coffercells Tm, D%Ns- tap z V..e 2 & 3 Foundations & Pile cs..ei E.eyaoe FII. 33 Construct Drilling Platform Pier 2 5 days Mon 8/26/24 Fri 8/30/24 Construct Dr ling Platform Pier 2 42nd Ave South Construction Schedule 1-23-21 with Revised Start 2-17-21 42nd Ave 5 Bridge Replacement - Preliminary Construction Schedule Sheet 1 of 2 Wed 2/17/21 Based on Concept 1 Steel Girder Plans 255 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Qtr 1, 2024 Jan 1 Feb I Mar Qtr 2, 2024 Qtr 3, 2024 Apr I May I Jun Jul Aug Sep Qtr 4, 2024 Oct I Nov I Dec Qtr 1, 2025 Jan I Feb I Mar Qtr 2, 2025 Apr Mav I Jun 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 10' Diameter Drilled Shfts Pier 2 10 days Tue 9/3/24 Mon 9/16/24 4' Drilled Shafts Pier 1 6 days Tue 9/17/24 Tue 9/24/24 Construct Drilling Platform Pier 3 7 days Tue 9/3/24 Wed 9/11/24 10' Diameter Shafts Pier 3 10 days Tue 9/17/24 Mon 9/30/24 4' Drilled Shafts Pier 4 6 days Tue 10/1/24 Tue 10/8/24 Form & Pour Columns Pier 2 8 days Wed 10/9/24 Fri 10/18/24 Construct Pier Caps Abutment 1 & Pier 15 days Mon Fri 11/8/24 _1 7, 10' Demeter i 4 Drilled t Drilling 10' i,4' Drilled Shfts Pier 2 Shafts Pier 1 Platform Pier 3 Diameter Shafts Pier 3 Drilled Shafts Pier 4 Form & Pour Columns Pier 2 Construct Pier Caps Abutment 1 & Pier 2 41 42 2 10/21/24 Form & Pour Columns Pier 3 8 days Mon Wed 10/21/24 10/30/24 Construct Pier Caps Abutment 4 & 15 days Mon Tue 12/3/24 & Pour Columns Pier 3 Construct Pier Caps Abutment 4 & Pier3 43 Pier3 11/11/24 Construct Superstructure 67 days Wed 12/4/24 Mon 3/10/25 Construct Superstructure 44 45 46 1 Set Steel Bridge Girders Span 2 10 days Wed 12/4/24 Tue 12/17/24 Set Precast Slabs Spans 1 & 3 2 days Wed Thu 12/19/24 12/18/24 Form, Rebar, Pour & Cure Span2 40 days Fri 12/20/24 Mon 2/17/25 Set Steel Bridge Girders Span 2 Set Precast Slabs Spans 1 & 3 Form, —1 67 days Rebar, Pour & Cure Span2 47 Form, Poure, Cure Spans 1 & 3 Toping 15 days Tue 1/28/25 Mon 2/17/25 Form, Poure, Cure Spans 1 & 3 Toping Course 48 Course Cast Barrier, Sidewalk & Install BP Rail 15 days Tue 2/18/25 Mon 3/10/25 0, ast Barrier, Sidewalk & Install BP Rail 49 Remove Detour 15 days Sat 3/15/25 Fri 4/4/25 I 50 51 52 Weekend Closure to Remove Truss 2 days Sat 3/15/25 Sun 3/16/25 Span & Open New Bridge Jack,Slide, Remove Truss Span 2 days Sat 3/15/25 Sun 3/16/25 Complete Striping, Errect Luminiares 1 day Sat 3/15/25 Sun 3/16/25 - 0,/ack,5lide, -11 Weekend Closure to Remove Truss Span & Open Remove Truss Span Complete Striping, Errect Luminiares 53 54 Dismantle & Dispose Truss Span 10 days Mon 3/17/25 Fri 3/28/25 Remove Spans D1 & D3, Foundations 15 days Mon 3/17/25 Fri 4/4/25 Approach Roadway i Dismantle & Dispose Truss Span ii Remove Spans DI & 53, Foundations & 55 ttr ���;;;���& construct Bridge Approaches 18 days Tue 2/18/25 Thu 3/13/25 56 57 58 Approach Slabs 10 days Tue 2/18/25 Mon 3/3/25 Grading, Surfacing, Pave N & 5 8 days Tue 2/25/25 Thu 3/6/25 Approaches Temp Pavement Markings & 5 days Fri 3/7/25 Thu 3/13/25 Luminaires r .I •-1,-,Grading, r Approach Temp Slabs Surfacing, Pave Pavement N &S Approaches Markings & Luminaires 59 Project Completion 131 days Tue 10/15/24 Mon 4/21/25 60 Wearing Course "No Paving Window" 106 days Tue 10/15/24 Mon 3/17/25 Wearing Course "No Paving Window" 61 62 63 64 65 66 HMA Wearing Course Entire Project 3 days Tue 3/18/25 Thu 3/20/25 Pavement Cure Before Final Striping 10 days Fri 3/21/25 Thu 4/3/25 Final Striping & Channelization 2 days Fri 4/4/25 Mon 4/7/25 Planting & Landscape Restoration 10 days Fri 3/21/25 Thu 4/3/25anting Punchlist, Cleanup & Project 10 days Tue 4/8/25 Mon 4/21/25 Restoration Project Complete 4/21/25 0 days Mon 4/21/25 Mon 4/21/25 HMA ,pavement Wearing Course Entire Project Cure Before Final Striping =,Final Striping & Channelization & Landscape Restoration Punchlist, Cleanup &ProeC t Res P l CProject Complete 4/21/25 TT 42nd Ave South Construction Schedule 1-23-21 with Revised Start 2-17-21 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement - Preliminary Construction Schedule Sheet 2 oft Wed 2/17/21 Based on Concept 1 Steel Girder Plans 256 442 750 T Mobile Crane wl Mega Wing Attachment Girder Wt 125K + 20K rigging Temporary Falsework Bent for Steel Erection m 0 W 25'-0" APPROACH SLAB PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT --/daL CASING SHORING PIER 1 30'-0" PIER 2 - - 42ND AVE `4.‘' q. PIER 3 4 PIER 4 EXIST PIER 3 EXIS'[.triyO'_;DWAY NEW BRIDGE BRIDGE PLAN 255'-0" Girder Wt 85K + 15K rigging i / / APPROACH SLAB / / ANNAMI tiMENMINIM A 111 / /Off I ; y A . . ' 1 "11rwItilki_ IL iv, 30'-0" PIER 3 30'-0" G- CL BEARING NEW TRAIL EXISTING TRAIL - 7'0 COLUMN BRIDGE BARRIER APPROX HIGH WATER EL 12.55 STEEL PLATE GIRDER MIN. 6' CLR BEARING -J� EXIST PIER 2 iII II It innrI IIl II II II II 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT P ZJ.SLIC WORKS DEPT_ * ENGINEERING * STREETS *WATER* SEWER * PARKS * BUILDING 101-0` / APPR±ROUW1 BRIDGE ELEVATION Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # By TMW MJS Date 0Engineering LLC TRANTECH 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 LJ� 7'0 COLUMN r1 1rlrnrlr1 II II II II II II II II EXIST PIER 3 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT Temporary Falsework Bent for Steel Erection 550 T Mobile Crane w/ Mega Wing Attachment PIER 4 25'-0" APPROACH SLAB PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT w -4' „ in 1,111- DUWAMISH RIVER - S 42ND AVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION - CONCEPT 1 N Know what's below. Call before you dig. No Date Revisions File No. Bridge Plan & Elev - Conc 1"_20' Date JUNE 2020 t 1.dwc 3 djensen 02/02/21 9:34pm - P:\2020/2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD \010 Drawing\C-Structural Sheet\Bridge Plan & Elev ,No PIER3 PIER4 APPROACH SLAB EXIST PIER 3 Q. EXIST & NEW ROADWAY EXIST PIER 2 NEW BRIDGE 255-0" 315'-0" 25'-0" APPROACH SLAB PIER 1 30'-0" Q PIER 2 BRIDGE PLAN 255'-0" Q PIER 3 30'-0" Q PIER 4 BEARING NEW TRAIL BEARING BRIDGE BARRIER EXISTING TRAIL 25-0" APPROACH SLAB APPROX HIGH WATER EL 12.55 MIN. 6' CLR PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT --/daL CASING SHORING 0., 7'0 COLUMN STEEL PLATE GIRDER EXIST PIER 2 innrI J II II II 11 i1 n i1 Ii 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT APPROX GROUND BRIDGE ELEVATION 7'0 COLUMN — 1717M7171 EXIST PIER 3 H H H I I H II 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - S 42ND AVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION - CONCEPT 1 Know what's below. Call before you dig.) No. Date Revisions S1 X of - L File No. Bridge Plan & Elev Conce :1.dwt �Ig 1E 20' Date JUNE 2020 3 djensen 02/02/21 9:34pm - P:\2020/2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD \010 Drawing\C-Structural Sheet\Bridge Plan & Elev ,No PIER3 PIER4 APPROACH SLAB EXIST PIER 3 Q. EXIST & NEW ROADWAY EXIST PIER 2 NEW BRIDGE 255-0" 315'-0" 25'-0" APPROACH SLAB PIER 1 30'-0" Q PIER 2 BRIDGE PLAN 255'-0" Q PIER 3 30'-0" Q PIER 4 BEARING NEW TRAIL BEARING BRIDGE BARRIER EXISTING TRAIL 25-0" APPROACH SLAB APPROX HIGH WATER EL 12.55 MIN. 6' CLR PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT --/daL CASING SHORING 0., 7'0 COLUMN STEEL PLATE GIRDER EXIST PIER 2 innrI J II II II 11 i1 n i1 Ii 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT APPROX GROUND BRIDGE ELEVATION 7'0 COLUMN — rlrnn71 EXIST PIER 3 H H H I I H II 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - S 42ND AVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION - CONCEPT 1 Know what's below. Call before you dig.) No. Date Revisions S1 X of - L File No. Bridge Plan & Elev Conce :1.dwt �Ig 1E 20' Date JUNE 2020 djensen 02/02/21 9:33pm - P:\2020/2020016 - 42nd Ave Bridge Replacement\000 CAD \010 Drawing\C-Structural Sheet\Bridge Plan & Elev - Concept 2.dwg PIER 1 d sof a o allo C PIER 2 00 A 411,/frtrair AV -7 PIER 3 C PIER 4 APPROACH SLAB EXIST PIER 3 7 C EXIST & NEW ROADWAY EXIST PIER 2 NEW BRIDGE 25-0" APPROACH SLAB PIER 1 42'-6" PIER 2 255-0" 315'-0" BRIDGE PLAN 230'-0" L BEARING NEW TRAIL EXISTING TRAIL PIER 3 42'-6" L BEARING PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT LC=== EXIST PIER 2 APPROX HIGH WATER EL 12.55 WF100G PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER 7'0 COLUMN __--- -- ,L I I >%r j ------,,,ii ,J,� — 7'0 COLUMN r`-- \ EXIST PIER 3 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT APPROX GROUND - MIN. 6' CLR BRIDGE ELEVATION 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT 4171-1 II II I II II I PIER 4 25'-0" APPROACH SLAB PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS Engineering LL 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 DUWAMISH RIVER - S 42ND AVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION - CONCEPT 2 Know what's below. Call before you dig.) No. Date Revisions File No. Bridge Plan & Elev - Conce t 2.dwt 1E 20' Date Date JUNE 2020 ALternate Crane Location on Work Platform �e APPROACH SLAB 660T Crawler Crane w/ Maxer Attachment PIER 1 tife �flw411111111111111111 660T Crawler Crane PIER 3 PIER 4 APPROACH SLAB EXIST PIER 3 liil�ll�=i/ril ngitiNINEM IIII��i r, IIII11i V;91N11ii!kluiiBgIRfll,i ri:�s1Y EXIST PIER 2 NEW BRIDGE w m U a- rn 25'-0" APPROACH SLAB PIER 1 42'-6" PIER 2 230'-0" 315'-0" Single Point Pick WF100G Girder 250k + 25K Rigging 230'-0" L BEARING NEW TRAIL EXISTING TRAIL PIER 3 L BEARING PIER 4 25'-0" APPROACH SLAB LC=== PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT EXIST PIER 2 APPROX HIGH WATER EL 12.55 WF100G PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER 7'0 COLUMN ----- TO COLUMN '' _ '^0DRILLED SHAFT 7 riEXIST PIER II II II APPROX GROUND - MIN. 6' CLR P ZJBL.IC WORKS D * ENGINEERING * STREETS* WATER* SEWER* PARKS * BUILDING * Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # By TMW MJS Date BRIDGE ELEVATION Engineering LL 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT 41 -IA 407 II III u II iii II PRESTRESSED SLAB GIRDER 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT DUWAMISH RIVER - S 42ND AVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION - CONCEPT 2 1,966 sf Know what's below. Call before you dig.) No Date Revisions File No. Bridge Plan & Elev Conce �191"=20' Date JUNE 2020 t 2.dwt 3 e Bridge Replacement\000 CAD \010 Drawing\C-Structural Sheet\Bridge Plan & sen 02/02/21 9:34pm - P:\2020\2020016 - /// ,0 Workzone Q PIER3 i PIER4 APPROACH SLAB EXIST PIER 3 AttiW f 42ND AVE S // gaimink rsisa /vs. Q. EXIST & NEW ROADWAY .3pif141\111\ AMU 417 Existing Bridge (relocated) �WV — •,t'rye Rrlt1,-d�ir7A��lllli urt nrri����®lyll,t .dat rummy W Workzone 5-0" X11 25' Jump Span at each end of truss Know what's below. Call before you dig. P LJ.SLIC WORKS DEPT_ * ENGINEERING * STREETS *WATER* SEWER * PARKS * BUILDING * By Date Designed Drawn Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TMW MJS 0Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 TRANTECH DUWAMISH RIVER - S 42ND AVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT Relocated Bridge & Detour Plan No. Date Revisions File No. Bridge Plan & Elev Conc SIS 1"=20' Date JUNE 2020 1.dwc 10 11 12 Task Name Duration Start Finish 42nd Avenue S Bridge Replacement - Revised 253 days Tue 4/23/24 Mon 4/21/25 In -Water Work Window 2024 Jul 1 - Sept 64 days 30 Field Construction 11 Months 231 days Advertise Project & Receive Bids 15 days Award & Execute Contract 40 days Notice to Proceed 1 day 22 days Mobilization & Initial Submittals Early Submittals & Procurements 10 days Prepare, Submit, Review Dilled Shaft Plan 22 days Concrete Girder Delivery 4 months (incl 88 days shop drawings) Manufacture Light Poles (6 months) 132 days Early Submittals (TESC, MOT, etc.) 20 days 13 16 days 14 Install TESC 6 days Preparatory Work 15 Install Project Signing & Traffic Control 5 days 10 days 17 64 days 5 days 10 days 6 days 7 days 10 days 8 days 16 Project Clearing / Site Prep Construct Substructure 18 Construct Drilling Platform Pier 2 19 10' Diameter Drilled Shfts Pier 2 20 4' Drilled Shafts Pier 1 21 Construct Drilling Platform Pier 3 22 10' Diameter Shafts Pier 3 23 Form & Pour Columns Pier 2 Mon 7/1/24 Thu 5/23/24 Mon 2/5/24 Mon 2/26/24 Mon 4/22/24 Tue 4/23/24 Mon 4/22/24 Mon 4/22/24 Mon 4/22/24 Mon 4/22/24 Mon 4/22/24 Thu 5/23/24 Thu 5/23/24 Fri 5/24/24 Mon 6/3/24 Mon 7/1/24 Mon 7/1/24 Tue 7/9/24 Tue 7/23/24 Tue 7/9/24 Tue 7/23/24 Wed 7/31/24 Mon 9/30/24 Mon 4/21/25 Fri 2/23/24 Fri 4/19/24 Mon 4/22/24 Wed 5/22/24 Fri 5/3/24 Tue 5/21/24 Fri 8/23/24 Fri 10/25/24 Fri 5/17/24 Fri 6/14/24 Fri 5/31/24 Fri 5/31/24 Fri 6/14/24 Mon 9/30/24 Mon 7/8/24 Mon 7/22/24 Tue 7/30/24 Wed 7/17/24 Mon 8/5/24 Fri 8/9/24 Total Slack .4 Feb Mar Qtr 2, 2024 Apr May Jun 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 13 days 32 days 51 days 92 days 3 days 0 days 0 days 225 days 10 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 14 days 11 days 0 days ID 1 2 Advertise Project : Rece ve Bids ward : Execute Contract Notic to Proceed Mobilization & Initial Submittals ly Submittals & Procurements Prepare, Submit, Review Dilled Shaft Pla Qtr 3, 2024 Qtr 4, 2024 Qtr 1, 2025 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 42nd Avenue S Bridge Replacement - Revised Alignment In -Water Work Window 2024 Jul 1- Sept 30 r Field Construction 11 Months rly Submittal Mar Qtr 2, 2025 Apr May Concrete Girder Delivery 4 months (incl shop drawings) Manufacture Light Poles (6 months) (TESC, MOT, etc.) Install TESL Install Project Signing & Traffic Control Project Clearing / Site Prep Construct Substructure 1 64 days Construct Drilling Platform Pier 2 '-.10' Diameter Drilled Shfts Pier 2 i_,4' Drilled Shafts Pier 1 i Construct Drilling Platform Pier 3 L, lim10' Diameter Shafts Pier 3 Form & Pour Columns Pier 2 53 days Jun 42nd Ave South - Alternate Alighment Construction Schedule 7-31-21 Sat 7/31/21 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement - S 124th ST Alignment Preliminary Construction Schedule Sheet 1 of 2 Figure 3 263 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Construct Pier Caps Abutment 1 & Pier 15 days 2 Remove & Relocate Pier 2 Work 10 days Platform Form & Pour Columns Pier 3 8 days Construct Pier Caps Pier3 Remove Work Platform Pier 3 Construct Superstructure Set WF100G Girders Span 2 Set 80' Precast Slabs Span 1 Form, Rebar, Pour & Cure Span2 15 days 5 days 77 days 10 days 2 days 50 days Form, Pour, Cure Span 1 Toping Course 15 days Cast Barrier, Curbs & Install Bridge Rails 15 days Construct Bridge Approaches Approach Slabs Grading, Surfacing, Pave N & S Approaches Temp Pavement Markings & Luminaires Project Completion Mon 8/12/24 Fri 8/30/24 Tue 9/3/24 Mon 9/16/24 Mon 8/12/24 Wed 8/21/24 Tue 9/3/24 Mon 9/23/24 Tue 9/24/24 Mon 9/30/24 Tue 9/24/24 Tue 1/14/25 Tue 9/24/24 Mon 10/7/24 Tue 10/8/24 Wed 10/9/24 Thu 10/10/24 Fri 12/20/24 Thu 11/14/24 Fri 12/6/24 Mon Tue 1/14/25 12/23/24 28 days Mon Fri 1/31/25 12/23/24 10 days Mon Tue 1/7/25 12/23/24 8 days Wed 1/15/25 Fri 1/24/25 5 days Mon 1/27/25 Fri 1/31/25 Total Slack 0 days 36 days 7 days 0 days 0 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 41 days 69 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 131 days Tue 10/15/24 Mon 4/21/25 0 days Wearing Course "No Paving Window" 106 days HMA Wearing Course Entire Project Tue 10/15/24 3 days Tue 3/18/25 Fri 3/21/25 2 days Fri 4/4/25 10 days 10 days 0 days Pavement Cure Before Final Striping 10 days Final Striping & Channelization Planting & Landscape Restoration Punchlist, Cleanup & Project Restoration Project Complete 4/21/25 Mon 3/17/25 Thu 3/20/25 Thu 4/3/25 Mon 4/7/25 Fri 3/21/25 Thu 4/3/25 Tue 4/8/25 Mon 4/21/25 Mon 4/21/25 Mon 4/21/25 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 2 days 0 days 0 days Feb Mar Qtr 2, 2024 Apr May Jun Qtr 3, 2024 Jul Aug Sep Qtr 4, 2024 Oct Nov Dec Qtr 1, 2025 Jan Feb Mar Qtr 2, 2025 Apr May Jun �. Construct Pier Caps Abutment 1 & Pier 2 emove & Relocate Pier 2 Work Platform NrmFarm & Pour Columns Pier 3 Construct Pier Caps Pier3 Remove Work Platform Pier 3 Construct Superstructure Set WF100G Girders Span 2 j Set 80' Precast Slabs Span 1 77 days Form, Rebar, Pour & Cure Span2 , Pour, Cure Span 1 Toping Course Cast Barrier, Curbs & Install Bridge Rails I Approach Slabs L, Grading, Surfacing, Pave N & S Approaches Temp Pavement Markings & Luminaires Wearing Course "No Paving Window" HMA Wearing Course Entire Proj Pavement Cure Before Final Final Striping & Channeliza lanting & Landscape Restoi Punchlist, Cleanup & F Project Complete 4/2 42nd Ave South - Alternate Alighment Construction Schedule 7-31-21 Sat 7/31/21 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement - S 124th ST Alignment Preliminary Construction Schedule Sheet 2 of 2 264 APPROACH SLAB C 0 0.5 50 -u 0'-3" PIER 2 PIER 1 80'-0" C D 332'-0" S 124TH ST % NEW ROADWAY CV NEW BRIDGE V % PIER 2 STA. 51+23.0 190'-0" 52+00 J w w 1 Work Platform Relocated to Support Erection Crane 0 BRIDGE PLAN 190,-0" % PIER 3 OHP t APPROACH SLAB APPROACH SLAB—\ PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDE 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT BRIDGE BARRIER % PIER 3 iSTA. 53+33.0 3' FREEBOARD OHWM 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT PUBLIC' WORKS *ENGINEERING* STREETS* WATER*SEWER* PARKS* BUILDING* By PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER BRIDGE ELEVATION Date Designed TMW Drawn MJS Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # TT TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT Associates, LLL 1 4 -o F APPROACH SLAB Shoring Casing DUWAMISH RIVER - S. 124TH ST. BRIDGE Work Platform Configurations If 3 F u 0 o- F v Know what's below. Call before you dig. File No. 124th St Concept l.dwg SAS 1„_20' No. Date Revisions Date77JUNE 2021 Figure Al L N Single Point Pick WF100G Girder 206K + 25K Rigging (51 0 0 U E dd APPROACH SLAB APPROACH PIER 1 7,2 I— C C 4) C PIER 2 190'-0" P 95'-0" PIER 3 NM 1 41111311 111:%1 to 1111111 Ilq ail ' IIIIIIIIIIIlllllllliJU0 a'r"Ir rr+i • y Iot i'i I, .I .fill —Ili II I ino1111154 , 111111111■ IIIIIIIl11lillllll IIIIIIII II N y/11111111 11 Ilial li III IIII 11111111"4 Qe A321_4' NEW BRIDGE Relocated Work Platfom PIER 1 8Q,":00" q PIER 2 pod...STA. 51+23.0 DUWAMISH RIVER 660T Crawler Crane w/ Maxer Attachment 190,-0" APPROACH SLAB 1 i OHP OHP It OH W OH PI: 22+21.03 N q PIER 3 STA. 53+33.0 4'0 DRILLED SHAFT PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER 1' - BRIDGE BARRIER 11 3' FREEBOARD 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT PUBLIC WORKS DEPT_ *ENGINEERING*STREETS*WATER*SEWER*PARKS* BUILDING* OHWM PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER BRIDGE ELEVATION By Designed TMW Drawn MJS Checked Proj Eng Proj Dir Field Bk # Date TT TRANTECH Engineering LLC 365 118th Ave. SE, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425.453.5545 10'0 DRILLED SHAFT ott - Sakai 1 N N :r 23.57 APPROACH SLAB 3 F u 18000 MAX -ER Boom No. 55 or No. 55A , with 42,7m (140') No. 56 Mast with 18m (59') position I 223 170 kg (492,000 Ib) Counterweight 145 150 kg (320,000 Ib) Carbody Counterweight 390 090 kg (860,000 Ib) Wheeled Counterweight or Hanging Counterweight 360° Rating Boom m (ft) 42,7 (140) kg (Ib) x 1 000 54,9 67,1 79,2 (180) (220) (260) 91,4 103,6 115,8 134,0 (300) (340) (380) (440) Radius 8,5 750,0 (28) (1653.5) 10,0 750,0 684,8 (34) (1653.5) 1509.8) 12,0 715,7 684,8 570,9 (40) (1543.3) 1509.8) (1258.0) 14,0 649,9 647,9 565,8 405,6 — (50) (1310.1) 1303.8) (1240.2) (894.4) (655,0) 18,0 502,1 499,3 497,8 405,6 297,1 223,1 — (60) (1089.4) 1083.3) (1075.8) ( 894.4) ( 655,0) (491.9) (374.2) 20,0 450,8 448,0 444,6 405,6 297,1 223,1 169,7 117,2 (70) (929.9) (923.9) (916.3) ( 894.4) ( 655,0) ( 491.9) ( 374.2) (258.5) 24,0 373,1 370,4 367,0 364,8 297,1 223,1 169,7 117,2 (80) (809.2) (803.3) (795.7) (789.4) ( 655,0) ( 491.9) ( 374.2) ( 258.5) 30,0 294,5 291,9 288,5 285,6 284,2 223,1 169,7 117,2 (100) (638.4) (632.8) (625.2) (618.9) (612.1) ( 491.9) ( 374.2) ( 258.5) 36,0 233,1 239,1 235,6 232,8 229,7 223,1 169,5 (120) (502.2) (518.0) (510.4) (504.2) (497.4) ( 491.9) (373.7) 42,0 181,4 201,0 197,6 194,8 191,8 189,9 167,2 (140) (387.5) (435.4) (427.7) (421.6) (414.9) (410.9) (368.2) 48,0 167,5 168,9 166,1 163,1 161,3 159,4 (160) (359.6) '365.4) (359.3) (352.6) (348.7) (343.7) DUWAMISH RIVER - S. 124TH ST. BRIDGE Main Span Girder Setting 116,4 (256.5) 115,1 (253.4) 113,6 (250.1) } F V Figure A2 No. Date Revisions File No. 124th St Concept 1.dwg 1...20' Dateate JUNE 2021 .001 Appendix L — Bridge Alternatives Opinion of Cost 267 453 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement - 42nd Ave S Alignment Steel Plate Girder Superstructure TRANTECH Engineering LLC ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY MEAS. UNIT UNIT PRICE COST MOBILIZATION 1 LS $ 1,262,913 $ 1,262,913 TESC 1 LS 50,000 $ 50,000 TEMP DETOUR ALIGNMENT (RELOCATE EXISTING BRIDGE) 1 LS 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 TEMPORARY WORK BRIDGE 1 LS 360,000 360,000 EXIST BRIDGE REMOVAL & DISPOSAL 8,520 SF 50 $ 426,000 NEW BRIDGE 14,405 SF 475 $ 6,842,375 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS 250,000 $ 250,000 APPROACH SLAB 275 SY 400 $ 110,000 SURVEYING 1 LS 200,000 $ 200,000 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 200,000 $ 200,000 SOLDIER PILE WALL ALONG 42ND AVE 5 8,000 SF 150 $ 1,200,000 CIVIL ROADWAY APPROACH ITEMS (15% OF ABOVE) 1 LS 1,490,756 $ 1,490,756 CORE CONSTRUCTION COST (CCC) $ 13,892,044 RIGHT-OF-WAY $ 200,000 CONTINGENCY (25% CCC) $ 3,473,011 ENGINEERING (25% CCC) $ 3,473,011 CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (18% CCC) $ 2,500,568 INFLATION @ 3% FOR 2 YEARS $ 833,523 TOTAL $ 24,372,157 268 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement - 42nd Ave S Alignment Pre -stressed Concrete Girder Superstructure TRANTECH Engineering LLC ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY MEAS. UNIT UNIT PRICE COST MOBILIZATION 1 LS $ 1,345,742 $ 1,345,742 TESC 1 LS 50,000 $ 50,000 TEMP DETOUR ALIGNMENT (RELOCATE EXISTING BRIDGE) 1 LS 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 TEMPORARY WORK BRIDGE 1 LS 360,000 360,000 EXIST BRIDGE REMOVAL & DISPOSAL 8,520 SF 50 $ 426,000 NEW BRIDGE 14,405 SF 525 $ 7,562,625 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS 250,000 $ 250,000 APPROACH SLAB 275 SY 400 $ 110,000 SURVEYING 1 LS 200,000 $ 200,000 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 200,000 $ 200,000 SOLDIER PILE WALL ALONG 42ND AVE 5 8,000 SF 150 $ 1,200,000 CIVIL ROADWAY APPROACH ITEMS (15% OF ABOVE) 1 LS 1,598,794 $ 1,598,794 CORE CONSTRUCTION COST (CCC) $ 14,803,161 RIGHT-OF-WAY $ 200,000 CONTINGENCY (25% CCC) $ 3,700,790 ENGINEERING (25% CCC) $ 3,700,790 CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (18% CCC) $ 2,664,569 INFLATION @ 3% FOR 2 YEARS $ 888,190 TOTAL $ 25,957,499 269 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement - S 124th Street Alignment Steel Plate Girder Superstructure TRANTECH Engineering LLC ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY MEAS. UNIT UNIT PRICE COST MOBILIZATION 1 LS $ 1,102,593 $ 1,102,593 TESC 1 LS 50,000 $ 50,000 TEMP DETOUR ALIGNMENT (RELOCATE EXISTING BRIDGE) 1 LS 500,000 $ 500,000 TEMPORARY WORK BRIDGE 1 LS 360,000 360,000 EXIST BRIDGE REMOVAL & DISPOSAL 8,520 SF 50 $ 426,000 NEW BRIDGE 13,860 SF 475 $ 6,583,500 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS 250,000 $ 250,000 APPROACH SLAB 350 SY 400 $ 140,000 SURVEYING 1 LS 200,000 $ 200,000 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 WALL ALONG 42ND AVE S 1,200 SF 75 $ 90,000 CIVIL ROADWAY APPROACH ITEMS (15% OF ABOVE) 1 LS 1,426,425 $ 1,426,425 CORE CONSTRUCTION COST (CCC) $ 12,128,518 RIGHT-OF-WAY $ 400,000 CONTINGENCY (25% CCC) $ 3,032,129 ENGINEERING (25% CCC) $ 3,032,129 CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (18% CCC) $ 2,183,133 INFLATION @ 3% FOR 2 YEARS $ 727,711 TOTAL $ 21,503,620 270 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement - S 124th Street Alignment Pre -stressed Concrete Girder Superstructure TRANTECH Engineering LLC ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY MEAS. UNIT UNIT PRICE COST MOBILIZATION 1 LS $ 1,178,838 $ 1,178,838 TESC 1 LS 50,000 $ 50,000 TEMP DETOUR ALIGNMENT (RELOCATE EXISTING BRIDGE) 1 LS 500,000 $ 500,000 TEMPORARY WORK BRIDGE 1 LS 360,000 360,000 EXIST BRIDGE REMOVAL & DISPOSAL 8,520 SF 50 $ 426,000 NEW BRIDGE 13,860 SF 525 $ 7,276,500 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS 250,000 $ 250,000 APPROACH SLAB 275 SY 400 $ 110,000 SURVEYING 1 LS 200,000 $ 200,000 UTILITY RELOCATION 1 LS 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 SOLDIER PILE WALL ALONG 42ND AVE 5 1,200 SF 75 $ 90,000 CIVIL ROADWAY APPROACH ITEMS (15% OF ABOVE) 1 LS 1,525,875 $ 1,525,875 CORE CONSTRUCTION COST (CCC) $ 12,967,213 RIGHT-OF-WAY $ 400,000 CONTINGENCY (25% CCC) $ 3,241,803 ENGINEERING (25% CCC) $ 3,241,803 CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (18% CCC) $ 2,334,098 INFLATION @ 3% FOR 2 YEARS $ 778,033 TOTAL $ 22,962,950 271 458 UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS FEBRUARY 2022 Due to COVID-19, meetings will be held virtually with telephone access available (see agenda page). FEB 14 MON FEB 15 TUE FEB 16 WED FEB 17 THU FEB 18 FRI FEB 19 SAT ➢ Community Services and Safety Committee 5:30 PM Virtual Meeting ➢ Finance and Governance Committee 5:30 PM Virtual Meeting ➢ City Council Committee of the Whole Meeting 7:00 PM Virtual Meeting Special Meeting to immediately follow C.O.W. Meeting. D. Future of Fire / EMS Community Advisory Committee 4:00 PM Virtual Meeting ➢ Civil Service Commission 5:00 PM Virtual Meeting IA!� I ! r r V V ACADEMY GENERAL 1-._.'_ , • •, - FREE DENTAL EXTRACTION Asa part of the advanced course, the academy provides services such as dental extractions and bone grafting to their patients free of charge. Feb 18 - Feb 19 SeaTac Location Click here for information. To schedule screening, email Dr. Nick Parque at surgery@washingtonagd.org. 7--; G R L0O 17 DONATE BLOOD Your donation is critical! To schedule an appointment, call 1-800-398-7888. Click here for more information and to schedule an appointment online. FEB 21 MON FEB 22 TUE FEB 23 WED FEB 24 THU FEB 25b FRI FEB 26 SAT .QE510ENT5o`--JI,W k PRESIDENTS DAY L wqtiY e ALLENTOWN TRUCK REROUTE PROJECT UPDATE Join City staff monthly for updates on the Truck Reroute project and other projects happening in your neighborhood. 5:30 PM Virtual Meeting Or call 1-253-292-9750 651610490# Click here for more information. ➢Arts -Commission Cancelled 3 -Planning Commission 6:30 PM Virtual Meeting TUKWILA INTERNATMNAI RIn m. Action Committee . i] TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD ACTION COMMITTEE TRASH PICK-UP DAY For more information, call Sharon Mann at 206-200-3616. •'•.,*e.l S1N3130 City Offices closed w IL "q,` 2022 TUKWILA CITY OF OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP APPLICATION DUE ON MARCH 31, 2022 The City of Tukwila Scholarship Program was established in 2014. The mission of the scholarship is to provide financial assistance to individuals enrolled 1 _ I for undergraduate study in community colleges, colleges, trade schools and universities. Selection criteria include but are not limited to academic I. accomplishments, community service, references, financial need, and personal essay. Click here for more information and download the application. ' For more information, contact Cheryl Thompson at 206-433-1850 or email Cheryl.thompson@tukwilawa.gov, DRIVE THRU PICK-UP 3118 S 140TH ST TUESDAYS, THURSDAYS AND SATURDAYS 10:00 AM - 2:00 PM ti VOLUNTEERS - In need of volunteers between 8 AM - 1 PM for food packaging Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and food distributions ,,y Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. Click here to sign-up to volunteer. DONORS - Please donate at TukwilaPantry.org. STILL WATER SNACKPACK NEEDS YOUR DONATIONS AND VOLUNTEER HELP! SnackPack serves food bags on Fridays to Tukwila students in need. For more information, call 206-717-4709 or email TukSnackPack@gmail.com. I Volunteers needed on Wednesdays, 1 PM -3 PM, Thursdays 9 AM -10 AM and Fridays 9:30 AM -11:00 AM. Please donate to feed our Tukwila kids. Checks can be mailed to Still Waters, PO Box 88576, Tukwila WA 98138. COVID-19 TESTING Public Healtha Rapid, over the counter COVID tests are now widely available around King County. These tests are also known as home-based self -collected COVID tests or antigen tests results in 15 minutes. Click here for more information. provide Soffit 8 King County Click here to find COVID testing sites by location in King County. COVID-19 VACCINATION All Washingtonians ages 5 and up are eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. For more information, visit Getting vaccinated in King County or call 206-477-3977. You can also search at vaccinelocator.doh.wa.gov Interpreters available for assistance. Telephone -to -text relay service: Dial 711 or 1-800-833-6384. Tactile interpretation: seattledbsc.org. ASSISTANCE FOR COVID-19 RELATED FUNERAL, BURIAL OR CREMATION EXPENSES KING COUNTY Funds may be available through Federal Emergency Management Agency Funeral Assistance program. It will take 20 minutes to apply, and you can ask questions and receive the help you need with the application process. Gather all the information and documents, and then call LIBRARY SYSTEM FEMA at 1-844-684-6333. You can use library scanners, computers, fax machines, and Internet access to upload your files. Library staff can assist you with the process. You can get help from library staff in person, online, or by phone at 206-242-1640. Click here for more information. Find Funeral Assistance information in your language: 14,15C I Espanol I KreyolAyisyen I �Fq-0-1 I TiengViet I Francais I'.0 -P I 1W4r I Portugues I PyccKIi i I Tagalog I Bengali GET CERTIFIED AT YOUR LIBRARY FOR FREE! FREETake free online classes, practice tests and Certiport certification exams. Get certified in MS Office, Adobe, QuickBooks, coding and more! You will need your KCLS library card number and PIN to access some resources. Click here for more information and registration. ONLINE COURSES ANO FREE TECH COURSES & EARN BELLEVUE COLLEGE CREDIT! CERTIFICATIONS Take free tech courses from Cisco, and apply for college credit from Bellevue College. The courses are online, self -paced and free. Click here for more information and register to enroll in the tech courses. 6• Do you have a disability that makes it difficult to visit the library? Find out about assistive technology, program accommodations, home delivery and more! Learn what's available at your library and how to make an accommodation request. Click here for more information, or call Tukwila Library at 206-242-1640. FREE TAX FREE TAX SUPPORT THRU APRIL 21! TUESDAYS, WEDNESDAYS, THURSDAYS & SATURDAYS 11:30 AM - 8:30 PM PREPARATION SOUTHCENTER MALL (lst FLOOR AT WEST ENTRANCE) File with trained and IRS -certified tax experts virtually and in-person! United Way will be available to provide safe, secure, and 100% online United Way .. assistance in filing your taxes to maximize your return and keep more of your money. Assistance is also available for international students and those who have an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). For more information, visit https:l/www.uwkc.org/need-helpltax-help/ Click here to file online free without assistance. 459 Tentative Agenda Schedule MEETING 1 — REGULAR MEETING 2 — C.O.W. MEETING 3 — REGULAR MEETING 4 — C.O.W. FEBRUARY 7 See below link for the agenda packet to view the agenda items: February 7, 2022 Regular Meeting FEBRUARY 14 SPECIAL ISSUES - COVID-19 Weekly Report. - Teen and Senior Center siting. - Washington Recreation and Conservation Office Grant Applications: - A resolution authorizing submission of an application for grant funding assistance for the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project. - A resolution authorizing submission of an application for grant funding assistance for the Nelsen Side Channel Project. Special Meeting to immediately follow the Committee of the Whole Meeting. CONSENT AGENDA - Washington Recreation and Conservation Office Grant Applications: - A resolution authorizing submission of an application for grant funding assistance for the Gilliam Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project. - A resolution authorizing submission of an application for grant funding assistance for the Nelsen Side Channel Project. - Collective Bargaining Agreements: - Authorize the Mayor to sign Memorandum of Understanding with the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local #2088 to extend the current Labor Contract #19-191 through 12/31/2023. - Authorize the Mayor to sign a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Police Commanders Teamsters Local #117 for 2022-2024. - Authorize the Mayor to sign a Collective Bargaining Agreement for non-commissioned Police Staff United Steelworkers Local #941 for 2022-2024. FEBRUARY 21 ,c � 5 eEs •4' PRESID-DAY FEBRUARY 28 SPECIAL ISSUES - COVID-19 Weekly Report. - Consensus on Teen and Senior Center Siting. - A resolution adopting the Tukwila Pond Master Plan. - Fire Investigation Interlocal Agreement. "".,r�a.* 6 QS1N34‘`'� Regular Meeting Cancelled MEETING 1 — REGULAR MEETING 2 — C.O.W. MEETING 3 — REGULAR MEETING 4 — C.O.W. MARCH 7 UNFINISHED BUSINESS - COVID-19 Weekly Report. - A resolution adopting the Tukwila Pond Master Plan. - Authorize the Mayor to sign an Interlocal Agreement for Fire Investigation Services. MARCH 14 MARCH 21 MARCH 28 460