Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L94-0044 - CIRCUIT CITY - SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI T Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), cha governmental agencies to consider the environme before making decisions. An Environmental lmpact statment prepared for all proposals with probable significa ter 43.21C RCW, requires all tal impacts of a proposal ct Statement (EIS) must be t adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this c iecklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal to help the agency decide whether an EIS is requi Instruction for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe about your proposal. The City uses this checklist environmental impacts of your proposal are sig preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions brie information known, or give the best description y pacts from your proposal if it can be done) and ed. some basic information o determine whether the scant, requiring y, with the most precise u can. You must answer each question accurately and ca efully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to nswer the questions from your own observations or project plans without th need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a ques ion does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not a..ly ". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary dela_ s later. Some questions ask about governmental regulati .ns, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer t ese questions if you can. If you have problems, the City staff can assist you The checklist questions apply to all parts of your . roposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on differ nt parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help ' scribe your proposal or its environmental effects. The City may ask you o explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably relat • to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Nonproject proposals refer to actions which are single site specific development project, such as programs. Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, be answered "does not apply." In addition, compl for nonproject actions (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the chec "project," "applicant" and "property or site" sho "proposer," and "affected geographic area," re Control No. Epic File No. Fee 52.25:00 Receipt 3a5. Do fferent or broader than a Tans, policies and even though questions may to the supplemental sheet st to the words d read as "proposal," tively. o. • p,z 3U 0(0 -I RECEIVED SEP 2 1993 uumMUNI-i Y DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: McConkey Development Company Remodel of existing warehouse 2. Name of applicant: McConkey Enterprises 3006 Northup Way, Suite 101 Bellevue, WA 98004 phone (206) 889 -1180 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Turner & Associates 18420 28th Pl. N.E. Seattle , WA 98155 phone (206) 365 -7431 4. Date checklist prepared: August, 1993 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Grading and construction is anticipated to start in the latter part of 1993, and the remodeling and ongoing site improvements could be complete by summer of 1994. Timing would depend on the City's review process. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. The project would not be extended beyond the project site and is submitted as a "stand alone" retail use intended to meet the City of Tukwila development standards. However, it is expected that a proposal for tenant improvements for the rear portion of the building to remain as warehouse will be filed as soon as a tenant is identified RECEIVED SEP 2 1993 c ;i:,.MUN(TY DEVELOPMENT •, . 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. - Traffic Impact Study, dated 8/31/93, Transportation,Planning, and Engineering, Inc. - Design Review Application, Board of Architectural Review. Turner & Associates. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for government approval of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Board of Architectural Review Approval Building Permit 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. The proposed retail outlet would house an Auto Parts Club store where general retail merchandise is sold. The proposed structure would be a remodel of the existing industrial warehouse into an attractive retail store. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 223 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan map as environmentally sensitive? No. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The project site is level with less than a 1% slope. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. The existing building is constructed on conventional spread footings and shows no sign of differential settlement after more than twenty years. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Significant excavation or of fill is not expected to prepare the site for development. An area approximately 200' by 55' will be cleared of building and regraded to accommodate the proposed building remodel. Reuse of the existing fill from the demolished floor slab area is proposed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, soil erosion could occur in connection with the proposed development since a small portion of the site will be stripped of building and asphalt during the construction phase. Even though the site is flat, erosion could occur during rain and/or wind storms that occur during the construction phase of the project. To minimize this potential for soil erosion, site preparation techniques would include temporary detention ponds and filter fences to reduce the impact of water runoff on the surface soil. When construction has been completed landscaping will have been placed on all surfaces not covered with impervious materials. No significant erosion is expected. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 90% of the proposed site is in impervious surfaces. Approximately14000 sf of landscaping (10 % of the site) is proposed. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Earthwork activities should be done during periods of dry weather. Erosion and sedimentation controls such as interceptor swales, straw bale barriers, silt fences and straw mulch for temporary erosion protection of exposed soils should be applied during construction. Stabilized construction entrances and washpads should be installed at the beginning of construction and maintained for the duration of the project. All erosion and sedimentation control measures shall be installed and maintained in accordance with City of Tukwila requirements. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Development of the site, as proposed, would not result in any significant impacts to existing air quality. The primary impact from development of the purposed project are related to construction activities and future vehicle traffic. Dust generated from grading and construction vehicle activity would be a temporary nuisance in the general area. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: - Transport of materials on local streets should be controlled to minimize congestion during peak travel times. This would minimize secondary air quality impacts caused by reduced travel times. -Dust produced by construction can be reduced by using a number of techniques. Areas of exposed soils such as storage yards could be sprayed with water, oils, or chemical dust suppressants. Areas that might be exposed for prolonged periods of time should be covered with suitable groundcover to prevent wind erosion. Soil carried out of the construction area by trucks could be minimized by: use of a sawdust mat as a transition zone from the construction site; wheel washing; washing or brushing truck undercarriages; and covering dusty truck loads. For soils that do escape the constructions site on trucks, a daily cleaning program for truck routes would help minimize dust. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, salt- water, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indi- cate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diver- sions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. The proposed project will not require the withdrawal of surface water from existing pervious areas. However, surface water drainage will continue to be diverted to the storm drain system in Andover Park East east of the project site. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Not Applicable 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and antici- pated volume of discharge. No. Based on the preliminary grading and utility plans for the McConkey Development project, all surface water runoff would be collected by the existing on site storm drains and would then enter the City's storm drain or sanitary sewer system. Minor alterations to the on site system are being considered. • b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. The existing impervious surface will not be increased significantly so infiltration will be maintained at its current level. No ground water will be withdrawn as a result of this project. 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemi- cals:; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The site would be served with municipal sewer lines and no waste material would be discharged into ground water. c. Water runoff (including storm water) : 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and the method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe Existing buildings and asphalt paving are proposed to be demolished and replaced by new paving and building, resulting in no increase to the existing 88.7% impervious surface on site. Alterations to the existing storm drainage system will be minimal and it will continue to discharge to the City's storm drains in Andover Park East. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Surface water could be contaminated by runoff containing oil and gas from parked cars on the parking lot and streets servicing the proposal. However, surface water runoff will be directed into a system of catch basins and an oil and gas separator prior to discharge to minimize surface water contamination. No storage of hazardous materials on the site is proposed. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: : .:•. � •.:�..�•, 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass _ pasture _ crop or grain _ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, _ skunk cabbage, other _ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Two small areas of landscaping located at the proposed new driveway locations will be replaced by similar materials in equal quantities in adjacent new landscape planters. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The existing mature landscaping located in the 10' wide planters along Andover Park East is proposed to be preserved and enhanced with additional plantings. No irrigation is required for this established plant community. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: (haw i heron, eagle, ngbird$) other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No birds are known to use the site as part of a migratory pattern. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc Electrical energy would be used for lighting and power for HVAC, refrigeration, and miscellaneous power equipment. Some heating will be reclaimed heat form refrigeration compressors. Supplemental energy for heat will be natural gas. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: For thietail portion of the building , energy conservation would consist of an insulated building envelope, HVAC with heat recovery features, automatic energy management system, airlock entrances, energy efficient light fixtures, and minimal use of glass. The State of Washington has adopted model conservation standards for new commercial buildings. Provided the City of Tukwila has adopted these standards, or has no standards conflicting there within, the future development would be consistent with these model standards. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, des- cribe. No special environmental hazards are known to exist on the site. The retail sale of auto supplies includes some solvents and chemicals which are considered hazardous. None of this product is sold in bulk form. All such sales are made in the original manufacturers containers. All employees are trained to handle spillage according to an Emergency Action Plan on file in the manager's office. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Fire, police, and ambulance services would be required on a basis consistent with any commercial retail store of 29,000 square feet and a commercial warehouse of 42,000 square feet. No special services would be required. . 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Mitigation measures are not required. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic from adjacent streets may be heard from the interior of the site but will not affect he commercial operations proposed. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or assoc- ciated with the project on a short -term or long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Sources of noise identified for the development and operation of the remodeled mixed use project are as follows: construction related noise for approximately three months from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm, six days per week; normal traffic generated noise associated with a commercial retail store's and warehouse operations seven days per week; including several large truck deliveries per day. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Mitigation measures for noise are not necessary since surrounding land uses are generally not noise sensitive. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site of the proposed mixed use project is currently occupied by a 82,000 square foot warehouse building . The surrounding area is generally developed with a mixture of light industrial and retail uses. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. Not in the recent past. c. Describe any structures on the site. The 82,000 square foot industrial building was built using the tilted concrete panel method of construction prevalent in the area. It is fully sprinldered. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The northerly 55' of the building will be demolished, and the concrete wall panels will be relocated. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning classification of the site is C M Industrial Park. The proposed uses are allowed outright. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Light Industrial g. If applicable- what is the current shoreline master program desig- nation of the site? Not applicable as the site is located more than 200' from the Green River. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 30 workers. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with exist- ing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed is a concrete tilt -up structure that is similar in size, design, and scale of the other industrial, warehouse, and commercial buildings north, south, and west of the site. The proposed structure would be setback from Andover Park East approximately 100 feet. This setback, the mature 10 foot wide landscaping strip along the public right -of -way, and perimeter landscaping would provide an adequate buffer to retail and service commercial uses to the north, east west, and south. The type of use proposed is also consistent with land uses adjacent to the site and in the surrounding area. . }: ^: .. .. _.... .. .< 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing? Not applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s) not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The north and east elevations would be +1- 30 feet in height. The two remaining building elevations of the proposed structure would be approximately 26 to 28 feet in height. The principle exterior building material would be pre-cast concrete tilt -up panels with a series of offsets, accented with stucco and paint, at the building street facades. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or ob- structed? The area of existing building is being reduce, improving views into the center of the block from Andover Park East. Other views are not being altered. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: A ten foot landscaping strip along the public right of way, interior parking lot landscaping, and perimeter landscaping consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover are proposed. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Exterior lighting for the improvements resulting from the proposed bulk retail development would consist of wall lighting, parking lot lighting with non -glare fixtures, and signage. Any glare that may occur would happen at night. � All outdoor lighting would be shielded and directed downward to minimize potential intrusion on neighboring properties. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? No recreational facilities, with the exception of the racetrack, are in the vicinity of the project site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, in- cluding recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. A pedestrian easement along the west propertyline is proposed. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None. b. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, arch - eaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. -: P 2. /Z FT y..oAT (PeNra6 is Prweoset ': Turner & Associates 2063657504 DEC 10 '93 02:05PM TUKW1 .DCD /PW 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased needier public services (for et amp$e: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, outer)? If so, generally describe. The reduction in the site of the buliding and the similarity in the proposed uses indicate that there will be no increase. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. No mitigation is required, 16, Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site; electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the util- ity providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Sewer. City of Tukwila Water City of Tukwila Telephone: OTNW Power: Puget Sound Power and Light C. Signature The above answers are true and Oomplete to the best of my knowledge, I understand that the lead agency is zelying on them to make its decision. Si azure: Date Submitted: (n ( t q /- P.02 P. 2/4 •: . .. ...... D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not imple- mented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water, emissions to air, production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants ani- mals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: . =' , CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ; •"" rii n EPIC: olice 1 PROJECT -= Ft eLi 7 Nr ADDRESS S7:62A 672._ DATE TRANSMITTED ( 2, 71 0/?..? RESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR X.../\(09/\.7 ci DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED The atlached .:environmental ' ' bb ''''''''''''''' '''''' ''''''''''''''''"'''''''' coodiator, Om. rg CO. oard of A t and . City Council should be subrnittedin'',.:11-16'Oortin.ient.::'seetiorii.belor.::::—. ITEM COMMENT .0" I/ ■• •■ ,to Of" .../ ribrOPSINS Date: /01-//e//9 3 Comments prepared by: RUBBER TIRES ,:ORAGE REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS The Fire Prevention Bureaus of the Cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton and Tukwila have adopted and hereby prescribe the following requirements for the indoor storage of rubber tires: 1. That portion of any building used for the storage of rubber tires as defined in NFPA 231 D; shall be classified as "H -1 ", per the Uniform Building Code. This will generally require a two hour fire - resistive separation from the neighboring occupancies. 2. A mechanical smoke removal system designed and installed per Section 81.107(c) of the Uniform Fire Code shall be required. 3. Piles of tires are not to exceed 50 feet in length and shall be no closer than 24 inches to outside walls. 4. A minimum of 18 inches clearance shall be maintained between the top of the piles and the sprinkler heads. 5. The entire area shall be a NO SMOKING area and shall be conspicuously posted as such. 6. Portable fire extinguishers shall be provided and maintained per NFPA #10. For high hazard areas. 7. Main aisles throughout shall be maintained not less than 8 feet wide. 8. Full coverage of 1 1/2" hose lines shall be provided. 9. Automatic sprinkler protection shall be provided and maintained for ALL tire storage as follows: (Except small scale storage) as per NFPA 231d, Section 1 -2 (a) Piles up to 6 feet in height shall be protected by an automatic sprinkler system designed to discharge .39 gpm /5600 square feet. (b) Piles over 6 feet in height shall be protected by one of the following: (i) .60 gpm /5000 sq. ft. with ordinary temperature heads.or a .60/3000 with high temperature heads. (ii) .39 gpm /5600 sq. ft. plus rack sprinklers at each 6 foot level. (iii) .30 gpm /5000 sq. ft. plus an automatic Hi- Expansion Foam System. 10. The sprinkler system shall be' monitored by a U.L. approved central station alarm monitoring agency. Fire Marshal, Cityi Au WP :VFM.001 urn LQW1-0 Marshal, City o Kent Fire Marshal, City of Renton Fire Mar , City of Tukwila CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: REMODEL EXISTING WAREHOUSE INTO MIXED USE RETAIL/ COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITH 87,255 S.F. AND 165 PARKING SPACES. THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE 32 TO 36 FT. HIGH AND COVER ABOUT 40% OF THE SITE AREA. THE SITE ENCOMPASSES 3.2 ACRES. PROPONENT: TURNER AND ASSOCIATES LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY: ADDRESS: PARCEL NO: SEC /TWN /RNG: LEAD AGENCY: 223 ANDOVER PK E 022310 -0090 NE 26 -23 -04 CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: L93 -0069 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. ******************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** This determination is final and signed this __AjjEi day of _1 %rt __ 1993 . #---- Ri k eler, •Responsible Official ty of Tukwila, (206) 431 -3680 00 Southcenter Boulevard kwila, WA 98188 You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above signature date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Department of Community Development. • 223 ANDOVER PARK EAST TRAFFIC STUDY Prepared for MC CONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 3006 Northup Way, Suite 101 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Prepared by TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2101 - 112th Ave. N.E., Suite 110 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Telephone - (206) 455 -5320 FAX - (206) 453 -7180 August 31, 1993 RECEIVED SEP 2 1993 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APE OTOR H BISHOP P E . President /ID H ENGER, P E Vice President TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY c/o Mr. Howard R. Turner, AIA TURNER & ASSOCIATES 18420 24th Pl. N.E. Seattle, WA 98155 2101 - 112th AVENUE N.E., SUITE 110 - BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004 TELEPHONE (206) 455 -5320 FACSIMILE (206) 453-7180 August 31, 1993 Re: 223 Andover Park E. Redevelopment Project Pre - Application File No. 93 -011 Traffic Impact Study Dear Howard: We are pleased to present this traffic impact study for the proposed warehouse and retail redevelopment project located at 223 Andover Park E. (on the west side of Andover Park E. north of Strander Blvd.) in the City of Tukwila. The project proposes to remodel an existing 87,255 sq. ft. warehouse including the following: ° demolition of 15,655 sq. ft. of the existing warehouse; retaining 42,400 sq. ft. of warehouse and supporting office space; and remodelling the remaining 29,200 sq. ft. into a discount auto parts store including 3,300 sq. ft. dedicated to tire sales and mounting. Six tire mounting bays are proposed. We have visited the project site and surrounding street network, and have discussed the scope of this study with Mr. Ron Cameron, P.E., City Engineer of Tukwila. This study analyzes the intersections of Andover Park E./Baker Blvd. and the two site accesses onto Andover Park East. Traffic control signal warrants will also be checked for the intersection of Andover Park E./Baker Boulevard. The conclusions and recommendations begin on page 7 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and the surrounding street network. T082293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -2- TpE Figure 2 shows a preliminary site plan. The plan consists of 71,600 sq. ft. of total building space, 139 parking stalls, and two vehicle accesses onto Andover Park East. An additional emergency vehicle access connects Strander Blvd. with the west side of the project site via an abandoned railroad right of way. Six truck loading bays are proposed, including four 65 ft. recessed bays to the west and two flush bays to the east. The recessed bays can accommodate a WB -65 tractor /trailer combination. The two flush bays will be able to serve nothing larger than a single unit truck. Truck access to the loading bays will be from the north site access on Andover Park East. Most trucks will access the three easternmost recessed bays by entering the north site access from Andover Park E., traveling straight down the parking circulation isle, stopping when the trailer has cleared the bays, then backing into the desired bay. For the westernmost recessed bay, a longer backing maneuver may be required. A tractor /trailer combination destined to this bay will approach the project site, preferably from the north, on Andover Park East. It will then turn right into the site using the north access, make a left turn maneuver toward the east side of the building until the trailer has cleared the throat of the north access, back up and turn westbound on the north parking circulation isle and back into the bay. Signing should be provided for truck drivers at the accesses on Andover Park E. prohibiting truck access via the south access and giving direction on the preferred access to the six loading bays. Full development of the warehouse and retail project is expected to occur by mid -1994, therefore 1994 is used as the horizon year for the purposes of this study. EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure 3 shows existing traffic control, number of roadway lanes, number of approach lanes at intersections, and other pertinent information near the project site. The primary roads near the project site are Andover Park E., Andover Park W., Strander Blvd., Southcenter Pkwy. and Baker Boulevard. No sidewalks exist along the project site frontage on Andover Park East. A sidewalk has recently been constructed by an adjacent redevelopment project immediately to the south, but no sidewalks exist north of the project site on the west side of Andover Park East. T081293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -3- APE Figure 4 shows existing noon peak hour and PM peak hour and average weekday traffic volumes at the Andover Park E.Baker Blvd. intersection. A manual traffic volume count was conducted at this intersection on Tuesday, August 17, 1993 during the PM peak hour (4:30 -5:30 PM) by TP &E, Inc. staff. Data was collected from the City to perform a check of the minimum traffic volume traffic signal warrants for the Andover Park E./Baker Blvd. intersection. The majority of the data used for the warrant analysis was gathered by the City in May 1992. Due to some traffic volume discrepancies in the 1992 data, some data dated September 1991 was used and either adjusted to 1992 or averaged with the 1992 data. The attached warrant analysis notes how the data was used. Warrant no. 1 is only met for two consecutive hours of an average weekday and warrant no. 2 is met for six consecutive hours of an average weekday. Eight consecutive hours are needed to meet the requirements of either warrant no. 1 or 2. Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate, and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows the calculated LOS for 1993 conditions at the pertinent street intersections and driveways. The LOS -were calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual - Special Report 209, 1985. The LOS shown indicate overall intersection operation at signalized intersections and worst case traffic movement operation at stop sign controlled intersections. At signalized intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average delay per vehicle. At two -way stop sign controlled intersections, LOS is determined by reserve capacity. Reserve capacity is the number of new vehicles that can be added to a traffic movement before the operational conditions deteriorate and motorists begin to experience serious backups and delays (LOS F). The unsignalized intersection analysis procedure is conservative, and tends to indicate a worse operation than most motorists perceive at the intersection. T08I293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -4- IR Typically the LOS shown for an unsignalized intersection is the LOS for the side street left turn, which is usually the worst case traffic movement. At intersections where the left turn volume is low, the operation indicated should be tempered by engineering judgement based on roadway and traffic conditions. The intersection of Andover Park E./Baker Blvd. is currently operating at LOS E during both the noon peak hour (12:00 -1:00 PM) and the PM peak hour (4:30 -5:30 PM). Traffic volumes in the noon peak hour are estimated to be 4.4% higher than in the PM peak hour at this intersection based on actual data collected at the Andover Park E. /Strander Blvd. intersection to the south in May 1992. During our field review it was apparent that sight distance obstructions exist in the northwest quadrant of the Andover Park E./Baker Blvd. intersection. The obstructions are a row of large street trees is located immediately in back of the street curb. One to two feet west of the street trees is a dense shrub which is approximately three feet high. The stop bar for eastbound traffic can not be moved any further east. Eventually sidewalks will be built along this section of Andover Park E. which will greatly improve the situation, but the street trees would need to be removed to completely void the sight distance triangle of obstructions. Accident data obtained from the City for the three year period from January 1990 to December 1992 showed only three accidents that may have been related to the sight distance issue. Since the sight distance obstruction currently is not causing a significant safety problem, no immediate remedial improvements should be needed. However, we do recommend the City monitor the intersection in the future for traffic safety. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 5 shows projected 1994 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing (1993) traffic volume counts plus background growth. The growth factor used in this report is 2.5% per year, determined from historical traffic volume counts. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The warehouse and auto parts retail project is expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the AM and PM street T081293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -5- TpE traffic peak hours as shown on Table 1. The noon peak hour trip generation (not shown on Table 1) is expected to be approximately 5% higher than in the PM peak hour based on existing traffic volume patterns. There is expected to be 29 net new noon peak hour trips, only one trip more than in the PM peak hour. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Fifth Edition, 1991 for Warehouse (ITE Land Use Code 150), Automobile Care Center (ITE Land Use Code 840), and Tire Store (ITE Land Use Code 848). To be conservative no reduction in trips was taken for captured trips that will occur between the auto parts sales and the tire sales and mounting portions of the store. A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips. A pass -by trip is an existing trip that comes directly from the traffic flow on a road adjacent to the project site, and does not require a diversion from another roadway. A diverted linked trip does require a diversion from another roadway. Both of these types trips can be deducted from the total primary trips because they are not new to the street network. Based on pass -by and diverted linked trip percentages found in Section VII of Trip Generation, we estimate that approximately 35% of the site - generated trips (retail portion only) can be classified as pass -by /diverted linked trips. The net new project trips were calculated by subtracting the trip generation from the existing warehouse operation and the pass -by /diverted linked trips from the total driveway volumes for the proposed project. Figure 6 shows the estimated trip distribution and the calculated site - generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on the characteristics of the street network, existing traffic volume patterns, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (residential, employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times, and previous traffic studies. T081293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -6- FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT TpE Figure 7 shows the projected 1994 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site - generated PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 6 were added to the projected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 5 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes. Table 1 shows calculated LOS for future with and without project conditions at the pertinent street intersections. The intersection of Andover Park E./Baker Blvd. is expected to operate at LOS E with or without the project. If a traffic control signal became warranted and installed at this intersection, it is expected that it would operate at a high LOS B. This assumes that the existing lane configuration remains unchanged and a simple two phase fully actuated signal is installed. Both site accesses on Andover Park E. are expected to operate at LOS C. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City will require the developer to widen Andover Park E. 2.5 ft. along the project frontage and install a sidewalk and landscape buffer to match the recently installed frontage improvements by the adjacent property to the south (Computer City Supercenter). It is recommended that Andover Park E. remain channelized as it currently exists until the remaining properties on both sides of Andover Park E. between Strander Blvd. and Baker Blvd construct their 2.5 ft. of widening. The desired cross section for Andover Park E. is 56 ft. with five lanes, two each direction and a center two way left lane and/or left turn pockets at intersections. In the interim, the site accesses are expected to operate at acceptable levels of service. The City has indicated that they are collecting contributions for several intersection improvement projects throughout the City. The developer should offer to pay contributions for those intersections which are expected to be impacted by ten or more net new noon peak hour project trips. The intersection of Andover Park E. /Strander Blvd. is impacted by 16 net new noon peak hour project trips (29 net new noon peak hour trips x .55) at a contribution rate of $317 /trip for a contribution of $5,072. T081293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -7- The intersection of Andover Park E./Baker Blvd. is impacted by 13 net new noon peak hour project trips (29 net new noon peak hour trips x .45). The probable improvement to this location is a traffic control signal. However, the City has not developed a detailed cost estimate for this improvement. The City's planning level cost estimate is $250,000 which assumes some geometric improvements as well as the signal. Geometric improvements at this intersection may not be necessary. The $250,000 cost translates to a contribution rate of $377 /trip. The City should define the level of improvements for the intersection and prepare a detailed cost estimate to refine this trip rate. The developer should offer to pay a contribution for this intersection improvement based on the refined trip rate. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the warehouse and auto parts retail project be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following comments and traffic impact mitigation measures: 1. The developer will be required to widen Andover Park E. 2.5 ft. along the project frontage with sidewalk and a landscape buffer. 2. Rechannelization of Andover Park E. is not recommended until all other properties on both sides of Andover Park E. between Strander Blvd. and Baker Blvd. have constructed their 2.5 ft. of widening. 3. The developer should offer to contribute toward improvements at the Andover Park E. /Strander Blvd. intersection. The pro rata contribution is $5,072. 4. The developer should offer to contribute toward improvements at the Andover Park E./Baker Blvd. intersection based on a pro rata contribution rate to be developed by the City. 5. Appropriate signing should be provided at the site accesses on Andover Park E. prohibiting delivery truck access via the south site access and providing clear instruction on the preferred access to the loading bays in the middle of the site via the north site access. 4 T081293.RPT 1PE MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -8- No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions please contact Mr. Bob Herman or me at (206)455 -5320. RMH/ab (per 41$1€7 Very truly yours, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Mark J. ac s, P.E. Project Manager/Engineer �pE TABLE 1 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY INTERSECTION 1993 NOON PEAK HOUR 1993 PM PEAK HOUR 1994 PM PEAK HOUR W/O PROJECT 1994 PM PEAK HOUR WI PROJECT Andover Park E./ Baker Blvd. E [34] E [52] E [40] E1 [37] Andover Park E./ North Site Access NC NC NC C [222] Andover Park E./ South Site Access NC NC NC C [232] NOTES: ° Number in parenthesis () is the average the LOS for a signalized intersection ° Number in brackets [ ] is the reserve traffic movement which determines the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. delay in seconds /vehicle which determines per the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. capacity for the the LOS for a minor worst case minor approach -leg stop -sign intersection per two phase signalized intersection 1 This intersection would operate at LOS B (6.0) as a .in its current lane configuration. NC = Not Calculated. 7081293.1121 TABLE 2 VEHICLULAR TRIP GENERATION 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFFIC STUDY TRIP RATE ENTER EXIT TOTAL Proposed Warehouse, 42,400 sq. ft. ITE Land Use Code 150 Average Weekday 4.88 103 (50 %) 104 (50 %) 207 AM Peak Hour 0.57 17 (72 %) 7 (28 %) 24 PM Peak Hour 0.74 11 (35 %) 20 (65 %) 31 ( Proposed Auto Parts Sales, 25,900 sq. ft., ITE Land Use Code 840 Average Weekday 28.70* 372 (50 %) 371 (50 %) 743 AM Peak Hour 2.40 40 (65 %) 22 (35 %) 62 PM Peak Hour 2.87 34 (46 %) 40 (54 %) 74 I Proposed Tire Sales & Mounting, 6 Bays, ITE Land Use Code 848 Average Weekday 34.70* 104 (50 %) 104 (50 %) 208 I AM Peak Hour 2.24 8 (65 %) 5 (35 %) 13 PM Peak Hour 3.47 9 (42 %) 12 (58 %) 21 Total Projected Driveway Volumes II Average Weekday 579 (50 %) 579 (50 %) 1158 AM Peak Hour 65 (66 %) 34 (34 %) 99 II PM Peak Hour 54 (43 %) 72 (57 %) 126 r Existing Warehouse, 87,255 sq. ft., ITE Land Use Code 150 II Average Weekday 4.88 213 (50 %) 213 (50 %) 426 AM Peak Hour 0.57 36 (72 %) 14 (28 %) 50 11 PM Peak Hour 0.74 23 (35 %) 42 (65 %) 65 Net New Trips (Proposed Driveway Volumes Minus 35% Pass -by and Diverted Linked Trips For Retail IIPortion Minus Existing Warehouse Trips) Average Weekday 199 (50 %) 200 (50 %) 399 II AM Peak Hour 15 (66 %) 8 (34 %) 23 PM Peak Hour 12 (43 %) 16 (57 %) 28 NOTES: A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips. This rate is not available in Trip Generation. It was estimated based on the PM peak hour rate assumed to be 10% of the average weekday rate. FOSTER ,. • F''stF�i a. S 149TH S I y�vGiC?= LONG16RES EVM S : unc BAKE BLVD STRANDER 176TH 17NTN CT LIB �., .' DR VICINITY MAP 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY NV1d 3l1S ) VNIWI-lald c N o C 77 fTl� EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY LEGEND [xx] 1992 Average Weekday Traffic Volumes xx(yy) AM(NOON) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes & Direction Strander Blvd. N not to scale West Valley Highway EXISTING NOON & PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE 4 LEGEND X PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction 1994 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT PROJECT 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY E LEGEND xx% Trip Distribution Percentage X-- Total PM Peak Hour Driveway Volumes & Direction (Does not include reduction for Pass —By /Diverted Linked trips or existing Trip Generation) (x)—• Net New PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction C ter B /t/d a pkwy A OP 20% St rander Blvd. N not to scale S. 178th St. 11% 0 0 L 0 0_ L Q) c Q) U -z D 0 15% Baker Blvd. 10% .. ,,, 25% cn Q) 0 x `o 0 0 Q_ L a) > 0 c Q 11% 6% S. 180th St. s off° ti i in Project Site (1) N Nl, 0 / 0 W 16 --1 x L 24 a 0_ L a) N N 0 )l c 6-1 Q 8 4% 1t N CO r0 ) t N 0 6% b\ (0 405 cO r West Valley Highway PM PEAK HOUR SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY (FIGURE. 6 LEGEND X— - PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction 1994 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY E SIGNAL WARRANT CHECK ANDOVER PARK E./BAKER BLVD. R.M. HERMAN 8/20/93 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2101 - 112TH AVE. N.E., SUITE 110 BELLEVUE, WA 98004 TEL. (206) 455 -5320 FAX (206) 453 -7180 TWO LANE APPROACHES TWO LANE 35 MPH SPEED LIMIT APPROACHES ENDING HOUR NB(1) SB(2) TOT EB(3) WB(4) WARR. # /WARR. #2 1 23 15 38 3 2 2 8 4 12 1 6 3 8 5 13 0 0 4 8 5 13 1 5 5 4 19 23 2 1 6 19 65 84 2 5 7 86 180 266 10 11 8 226 391 617 19 18 9 286 312 598 44 38 10 339 276 615 51 38 11 402 423 825 90 70 12 559 499 1058 96 126 13 622 546 1168 158 181 14 565 482 1047 157 108 15 490 425 915 111 77 16 568 410 978 111 110 17 591 427 1018 124 219 18 495 330 825 81 228 19 276 260 536 47 87 20 243 188 431 31 98 21 175 139 314 27 22 22 52 42 94 15 22 23 30 18 48 4 8 24 18 12 30 3 7 XX XX TOTALS 6093 5473 11566 1188 1487 2 NOT MET XX XX XX XX XX XX 6 NOT MET (1) 5/14/92 ACTUAL 24 -HR. COUNT. (2) 9/5/91 ACTUAL 24 -HR. COUNT ADJUSTED TO 1992 USING 2.5% GROWTH RATE. (3) 5/14/92 ACTUAL 24 -HR. COUNT. (4) 9/5/91 & 5/14/92 ACTUAL 24 -HR. COUNTS AVERAGED (1991 AWDT = 1715 & 1992 AWDT = 1258). K FACTORS FROM 1992 COUNT USED. 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Pa8e-1 ****************************************************.x*************** IDENTIFYING INFORMA}ION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... 1 AREA POPULATION...................... 250000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... BAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... ANDOVER PARK E. NAME OF THE ANHLYST.................. RMH DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 08-20-93 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED.....,........... 12:00 - 1:00 PM OTHER I*F[RMATlON.... EXISTING (VOL'S ASSUMED TO OE 4.4% HIGHER THAN PM PEAK HR.) INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL ____________ INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES EB WB NB SB LEFT 42 65 69 10 THRU 16 33 566 413 RIGHT 82 102 17 48 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE EB LANES WB LANE USAGE LT -1- TR LT + R NB SB 2 2 ADJUSTMENT FALTORS Page-2 -------'--------------------- PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS _______ __________ EASTBOUND 0.00 90 30 N WESTBOUND 0.00 90 30 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION ----------------'------'----------------------------- SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICL=S MOTORCY[LE5 ----------- ------------- EASTBOUND 0 0 0 _____________ WESTBOUND 0 0 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 CRITICAL [!APS TABULAR VALUES AJ:USTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2> VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP ___ ________ ____________ MINUR rIGHT5 E8 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20 WE 5.70 5.20 D.00 5.20 MAJOR LEFTS SE 5.60 0.00 5.10 N8 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10 MINOR THROUGHS ED 6.80 6.30 0.()0 6.30 WE 6.80 6.30 0.00 6.30 MINOR LEFTC E8 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.20 WB 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.80 IDENTIFYING INF2RMATICN __________________________________________________ UF TfiE EAST/WEST STREET...... BAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NURTh/SULTH STPEE|.... ANDOVER PARK E. DATE. AND TIKE OF THE ANALYSIS..... 0O-20-93 1200 - 1:00 PM O|/{ER lNFORhATlON.... EXISTING (VOL'S ASSUMED TO BE 4.4% HiJHER THAN PM PEAK HR.) CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF- SERVICE MOVEMENT MINOR STREET ES LEFT THROUSH RIGHT MINOR STREET W3 LEFT THROUGk RIGHT MAJOR STREET BE LEFT N@ LEFT POTEN- FLOW- TIAL RATE CAPACITY v(pcph) c (pcph) P 46 18 90 36 112 145. 215 917 150 211 858 ACTUAL MOVEMENT CAPACITY c (pcph) M 109 200 917 124 175 858 SHARED CAPACITY c (pcph) SH 109 109 200 578 917 141 124 195 858 11 . 629 629 629 76 727 727 727 IDENTIEVINC INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST /WEST STREET.-- BAKER .AEER BLVD, NAME OF lHE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK E. DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 00 -20.93 ; 12 ;00 OTHER INFORMATION..,. EXISTING (VOL'S ASSUMED TO BE PM PEAK HR.) RESERVE CAPACITY c = _ - v LOS R SH 63 63 >E E 182 > D S27 >A A 37A 34 53 159 746 313 631 - 1 00 PM >E E > D 4.43 HIGHER THAN 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 ********************q(************.x********4.********************. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... 1 AREA POPULATION . 250000 NAME OF THE. EAST/WEST STREETBAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREETANDOVER PARK E. NAME OF THE ANALYSTHMH DATE OF T.AE ANALYSIS, (mm/dd/yy)08-1S-199 TIME PERIOD ANALYZE[4:30 - 5:3C PM OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING lN.ERSECT:ON TYPE AND CONTROL INTER3ECTT'O% TYPE: 4-LEE MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NMTH/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VuLUMES ---------------------------------------------------------- LEFT lHRU RIGHT ED WD NB 40 62 66 15 79 32 ) 8 --- 10 542 396 16 46 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE ''-'---------------------- WE! NB LANE� 2 2 2 LANE USAOE LT + LT + R 3D _______ ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2 PERC[NT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIU6 (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS _______ EASTBOUND 0.00 90 30 N WESTBOUND 0.00 90 30 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N 3OUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'3 VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES EASTBOUND 0 WESTBOUND 0 NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 0 CRITICAL GAPS '--------------'-------------- MINOR RIGHTS E6 WB MAJOR LEFTS SD NB MINOR THROUGHS FD WB MINOR LEFTS ED WD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TABJLAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP _______ ____ ___ ___________ ____________ 5.70 5.70 6.G0 6.80 7.30 7.30 5.20 5.20 5.10 5.10 6.30 6.30 6.80 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.20 5.20 5.10 5.10 b.30 6.30 6.80 6.80 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ____________________________________________________ NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BAKER BLVD. NAM= OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK �. DATE AND TIME OF THE !..)NALY5IS..... 0C-18-199 ; 4:30 5t30 P-1 OTHER INFURhATION.... EXI'ETING • CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-3 POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS F M SH R SH MINOR STREET E8 LEFT 44 157 120 > 120 120 > 76 76 >E E THROUGH 17 230 214 > 214 > 197 > D RIGf|T 07 927 927 > 605 927 > 502 840 >A A MINOR STREET WB LEFT 68 162 137 ) 155 137 > 5� 68 >E E THROUGH 35 225 210 > 210 > 174 > D RlC4HT 108 970 870 870 763 A MAJOR STREET SD LEFT 11 649 649 649 638 A NB LEFT 73 742 742 742 670 A IDENTIFYIN6 INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BAKER BLVD. NAM[ OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK E. DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 08-18-1�9 ; 4:30 OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING 5:30 7M �985 HON: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Fage-1 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... 1 AREA POPULATION...................... 250000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... NORTH SITE ACCESS NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET ANDOVER PARK E NAME OF THE ANALYST........ RMH DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (nm/dd/yy)08-17-1993 TIME PERIOl! ANALYZED4:30 — 5:30 PM OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 WITH PROJECT INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL INlERSECTION TYPE: T—INTEPEE2THN MAJUk STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/GOUTH CON/ROL :Y['E EASTBOUND: STOP SI3N TRAFFIC VOLUME6 LEFT TH8U RIGHT E8 WB NB GB 16 32 0 0 e. 46 594 24 0 22 NUMBER ]F LANEL LANES EB 1 ND S8 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ___________ Page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANMtE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS _______ __________ ________ _____ EASTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 M SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION ________________ % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES _____________ =ASTDOUND 0 0 0 WESTBOUND NURTHBOUND 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 CRITICAL GAF'S _____________________ MINOR RIGHTS MAJOR LEFTS hINOR LEFTS ED NB EB TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT MET. FINPL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP ______ _____ ________ 5.70 5.60 7.30 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 -------------- ---- --------------------------------' 5.20 5.10 6.80 NAME OF TI-E EAST/WEST STREET....." NORTH SITE ACCESS NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK E DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALySIS..... 08-17-1993 ; 4:30 - 5:30 PM OTHER INFORMATION.... • 1594 WITH PROJECT CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF- SERVICE ROTEN- FLOW- TIAL RATE CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) MINOR STREET EB LEFT RIIH2 MAJOR STREET NB LEFT 18 26 IDENTIFYIN3 INFORMATION • 136 B43 ACTUAL MOVEMENT CAPACITY c (pcph) M 131 843 SHARED CAPACITY c (pcph) EH Page -3 RESERVE CAPACITY c = c - v LOB R SH 266 131 843 605 605 605 113 > D 816 > A 569 A NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET.,,... NORTH SITE ACCESS NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER FAR& E DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS...,. 98- 17 -i923 ; 4 :30 - 5 ;30 PM OTHER INFORMATION.... l974 WITH PROJECT 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 ********************************+********+*************************** IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAjOR STREET.. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... 1 AREA POPULATIO%...................... 250000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... SOUTH SITE ACCESS NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... ANDOVER PARK E • NAME OF THE RMH DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 08-17-1993 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED................. 4:30 - o:n PM OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 WITH PROJECT INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOU/H CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: ST6P SI5N TRAFFIC VOLUMES EB WB N8 L T 11 O THRU 0 692 611 RIGHT 8 0 7 NUMDER OF LANES FE WE NB LANES 1 SB ,"1 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Rage -2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS <E ) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N GOUT -MOUND 0.90 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION % GO TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'5 ')EHICLEE % MOTORCYCLES EASTBOUND 0 . 0 WESTBOUND ©- NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND O 0 CRITICAL CAPS MINOR RIGHTS Ea MAJOR LEFTS MINOR LEFTS ND E5 TABULAR VALUES :Ta=le 10 -2) 5.70 5.60 7.30 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ADJESTED SIERT DIST, FINAL VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL DAP 5.20 0.00 5.20 5.10 0.00 5.10 6.80 0.00 6.80 NAME OF THE EAST /WEST STREET,..,.. SOUTH SITE ACCESS NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET..., ANDOVER PARK E DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS... -. 0g -i7 -1973 ; 4 :30 - 5 :30 PM OTHER INFORZATION.... 1994 WITH PROJECT CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF- SERVICE POTEN- FLOW- TIAL RATE CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcpr) P MINOR STREET EB,LEFT RIORT MAJOR STREET N9 LEFT 9 129 842 12 603 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ACTUAL MOVEMENT CAPACITY c ,:pcph) M 12B 542 SHARED CAPACITY c (pcph) SH 248 128 > 842 603 603 Page -3 RESERVE CAPACITY c = c - v LOS R SH 121 > D >C 833 > A 391 NAKE GF THE EAST /WEST STREET....., SOUTH SITE ACCESS •NAME CF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS.,... O8 -17 -1923 ; \:30 - 5 :30 OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 WITH PROJECT PM 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 ********************************************************************* IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... 1 AREA POPULATION 250000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREETBAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET......~ ANDOVER PARK E. NAME OF THE AWALYSTRMH DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy>08-18-199 TIME PERlUD ANALYZED4:30 - 5:30 PM OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/O PROJECT INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL ---------- _________________________ INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NOR/H/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES ED WD NB BB LEFT 41 64 68 10 THRU 15 33 556 406 RIGHT 81 100 16 47 NUMBER OF LAN= AND LANE USAGE LANE.3 ED 2 WD LANE USAGE Ll TR LT -1- R ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS _______ EASTBOUND 0.00 90 30 N WESTBOUND 0.00 70 30 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES _____________ EASTBOUND 0 0 0 WESTBOUND 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 CRITICAL GAPS MINOR RI6HT:2 EB WB MAJUR LEFTS TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DI5T. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL OAP ______________ ________ 5.20 5.70 0.00 0.00 38 5.60 5.10 0.00 NB 5.60 5.10 0.00 MINOR THKOUGHS E9 6.80 6.30 0.00 WB 6.80 6,30 0,00 MINOR LEFTS EO 7.30 6.80 0.00 WB 7.30 6.80 0.00 5.20 5'20 5.10 5.10 6.30 6.30 6.80 6.80 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION _______ NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK E. DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 08-18-199 ; 4:30 - 5:30 PM . OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/O PkOJECT CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE POTEN- FLOW- TIAL RATE CAPACITY MDVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) p MINOR STREET EB LEFT THROUGH RIGHT MINOR STF:EET WB LEFT THROUGH RIGHT MAJOR STREET SB LEFT NB LEFT ACTUAL MOVEMENT CAPACITY c (pcph) M • SHARED CAPACITY c (pcph) SH RESERVE CAPACITY c = c - v LOS R SH 45 150 113 > 113 113 > 68 17 221 206 > 206 > 89 921 921 > 597 921 > 491 70 36 110 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION 154 217 129 147 129 > 201 ) 201 > O64 864 638 638 777 733 638 68 >E E 189 > D >A A 40 59 >E E 165 > D 754 A 659 A NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER FARK E. DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSI5..... 08-18-199 ; 4:30 - 5:30 PM OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/O PROJECT 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... 1 AREA POPULATION............... 250000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREETBAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREETANDOVER PARK E. NAME OF THE ANALYSTRMH DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)08-23-93 TIME PEH'OD ANALYZED4:30 - 5:30 PM OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL INTERSECTION /YPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIF�ECTION: NORTH/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL lYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES ED WB NB S� ____ LEFT 41 64 70 10 THRU 15 33 562 410 RIGHT 82 100 16 47 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE ED WD LANES LANE USAGE LT + TR LT + R NB SB 2 2 | ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND 0.00 WESTBOUND 0.0c, NORTH8O0VD 6.00 SOUTHBOUND 0.00 VEHICLE COMPOSITION 90 90 90 90 % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES _____________ EASTBOUND 0 0 WESTBOUND 0 NORTHBOUND 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 CRITICAL CAPS TABULAR VALUES (Table 10-2) MINOR RIGHTS ED WB 30 30 20 20 N N N N % MOTORCYCLES 0 ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL VALUE AD:USTMENT CRITICAL GAP ________ ___________ 5.20 5.20 0.00 0.00 5.20 MAJOR LEFTS SB 5.60 5.10 C.00 5.10 ND 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10 MINOR THROUGHS EB 6.80 6.30 0.00 6.30 WB 6.80 6.30 0.00 6.30 MINOR LEFTS EB 7.30 6.80 0.00 WB 7.30 6.80 0.00 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ________________________________ NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK E. DAT;:: AND TIME OF THE ANALYSI5..... 03-23-93 ; 4:30 - 5:30 PM OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT 6.80 6.80 CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF- SERVICE MOVEMENT POTEN- FLOW- TIAL RATE CAPACITY v(pcph) E (pcph) MINOR STREET ES LEFT 45 THROUGH 17 RIGHT 90 MINOR STREET WE LEFT 70 THROUGH 36 RIGHT 110 MAJOR STREET SE LEFT NE LEFT 147 218 919 151 213 861 II 633 27 730 ACTUAL MOVEMENT CAPACITY (pcph) 111 202 915 126 197 861 633 730 SHARED CAPACITY E (pcph) SH Page -3 RESERVE CAPACITY c = c - v LOS R SH > 111 111 > 202 > > 593 919 > 143 126 197 861 633 730 65 65 >E E 185 >. D 486 829 >A A ]: tENT :i. F' i INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BAKER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... ANDOVER PARK E. DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 08 -23 -93 ; 4.30 - 5;30 OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT 37 55 >E 161 > 751 PM E D A 622 A 653 A Al: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY 08-20-1993 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation reets: (E-W) BAKER BLVD. .alyst: RMH ea Type: Other .mment: 1993 W/ PROJECT W/ SIGNAL (N-S) ANDOVER PARK E. File Name: PMEXM.HC9 8-23-93 PM PEAK Eastbound I Westbound | Northbound / Southbound /L T R 1L T R IL T R |L T R . Lanes | > 2 [_' , > 1 1 I > 2 < , > 2 < 1umes : 41 15 821 64 33 1001 70 562 16| 10 410 47 ne Width | 12.0 � 12.0 12.01 12.0 . 12.0 OR Vols I 0I 0| 01 0 Signal Operations ase Combination 1 2 3 4 | 5 6 7 G -. Left * 1NB Left * Thru * | Thru * Right * Right * Peds * � Peds * - Left * :SE Left * Thru * | Thru * Right * Right * — Peds * | Peds * Right IEB Right Right |W8 Right ! =en 20A |Green 30A ilow/A-R 5 |Yellow/A-R 5 st Time 3.0 Lost Time 3.0 cle Length: 60 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 ________________________________________________ Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS _____ ____ _______ _____ ___ _____ LTR 1023 2789 0.16 0.37 8.3 B 8.3 74 | LT 579 1579 0.19 0.37 E.4 G 8.4 8 R 554 1511 0.20 0.37 8.4 B LTR 1722 3228 0.44 0.53 5.6 B 5.6 8 _ LTR 1828 3427 0.30 0.53 5.0 A 5.0 A Intersection Delay = 6.0 s=c/veh`Intersection LOS = 8 .;t Time/Cycle, L = 6.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.342 CITY OF TUKWILA PRE- APPLICAT PROCESS MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development - Building Division Phone: (206) 431 -3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard — #100 Tukwila Washington 98188 PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO. PRE 9 3- 01 1 PROJECT: Mc C o n k ey Development MEETING DATE: 3 -25 -93 TIME: 2:30 SITE ADDRESS: 223 Andover Park East DATE CHECKLIST MAILED: 3-26-93 BY: DLM STAFF PRESENT ® Building ® Fire CO Planning NAMES / TITLES (431 -3670) Duane Griffin /Building Official (575 -4404) Mike Alderson /Assistant Fire Chief (431 -3680) Denni Shefrin /Associate Planner ® Public Works (433 -0179) Ron Cameron /City Engineer ❑ Parks & Rec (433 -1843) ® Police (433 -1804) Tom Ki1berg/Crime Prevention Officer ® Permit Center (431 -3670) Denise Mil 1 and /Permit Coordinator ® Other: ( - ) Rick Beeler /Chairman APPLICANT / REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT Contact Person Others Present Name Howard Turner Company/Title Architect Phone206 523 -7.489 Street Address 2115 NE Park RD City /State/Zip S e a t t l e, wA Name Fred McConkey Phone 206 889 -1180 Company/Title McConkey Development Co. Street Address 3009 Fairweather PL City /State/Zip Bellevue, WA 98004 Name Phone Company/Title Street Address City /State /Zip Name Phone Company/Title Street Address City /State /Zip Name Phone Company/Title Street Address City /State/Zip Name Phone Company/Title Street Address City /State/Zip PRE-APPLICATION CHECKLIST CITY OF TUKWILA — DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION — PERMIT CENTER PRE-APPLICATION FILE NO PaEg5 I: f MEETING DATE:''= >5 "1 Ecl 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 TIME:2 BUILDING DIVISION 1. Comply with the Uniform Building Code, 1991 Edition. 2. Comply with the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1991 Edition. 3. Comply with the Washington State Energy Code, 1991 Second Edition. Provide energy calculations stamped by a Washington State licensed architect or engineer (see attached format). 4. Comply with Washington State Barrier Free Code, 1991 Edition. 5. Apply for and obtain the following Building Division permits and approvals through the Permit Center: • Building Permit • Rack Storage • Mechanical Permit • Demolition (building) • Other: 6. All applications and plan submittals must be complete in order to be accepted by the Permit Center for plan review. Use the Plan Submittal Checklist provided on the reverse of the application forms to verify that all the necessary materials and information has been supplied. 7. Construction drawings must be stamped by a Washington State licensed architect. 8. Structural drawings and calculations must be stamped by a Washington Stated licensed structural engineer. 9. A boundary survey prepared by a Washington State Registered Land Surveyor must be submitted as part of the Building Permit application. 10. Temporary erosion control measures shall be included on plans. Normally, no site work will be allowed until erosion control measures are in place. 11. Rockeries are not permitted over 4' in height. Retaining structures over 4' in height must be engineered retaining walls, and require a permit. 12. All rack storage requires a permit and rack storage over 8' high must be designed for Seismic Zone 3. A Washington State structural engineers stamp will be required on plans and structural calculations submitted for rack storage over 8' high. 13. Construction documents shall include special inspection requirements as specified in Sections 302(c) and 306 of the Uniform Building Code. Notify the Building Official of testing lab hired by architect or owner prior to permit issuance date. The contractor may not hire the testing lab. 14. Construction documents shall contain soils classification information specified in Table 29 -B of the Uniform Building Code, stamped and signed by Washington State licensed architect or engineer in responsible charge of the structural design work. 15. Demolition permits are required for removal of any existing buildings or structures. 16. Comply with UBC Appendix Chapter 35, Sound Transmission Control (R -1 occupancy group). 17. Obtain approvals and permits from outside agencies: j� ELECTRICAL PERMIT /INSPECTIONS are obtained through the Department of Labor and Industries VV vv (248- 6630). PLUMBING PERMIT /INSPECTIONS are obtained through King County Health Department (Inspec- t/ tions: 296 -4767; Permits: 296- 4727). KING COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT must approve and stamp plans for public pools /spas and food service facilities prior to submittal to the Tukwila Building Division (296- 4787). FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS plans are reviewed through the Tukwila Fire Department (575 - 4404). 18. 19. 20. Checklist prepared by (staff): OLUVL vf\-(i-vk Date: 3� -9 PRE - APPLICATION CHECKLIST CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION - PERMIT CENTER 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98186 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO. kLc 3 - o I f PROJECT: I11 Corm AEU -e.(o pt r-)-f- MEETING DATE: 3'aS-�i3 TIME:a"3 SITE ADDRESS: a33 And ot Pk I FIRE DEPARTMENT - Construction Information 1. The City of Tukwila has adopted the 1991 Uniform Fire Code. This and other nationally recognized standards will be used during construction and operation of this project. (TMC 16.16.120) Fire hydrants will he required. (City Ord. #729) Required fire hydrants shall be approved for location by the Fire Department, approved for purity by the Water Department, and fully in service prior to start of construction. A fire hydrant must be no further than 150 feet from a structure; and no portion of a structure to be over 300 feet from fire hydrant. (UFC 10.30•i and City Ord. #729) K4. Automatic fire sprinklers are required for this project. Sprinkler systems to comply with N.F.P.A. #13. Sprinkler plans shall be submitted to Washington State Surveying and Rating Bureau, Factory Mutual or Industrial Risk Insurers for approval prior to being submitted to Tukwila Fire Marshal for approval. Submit three (3) sets of sprinkler drawings. This includes one for our file, one for company file, and one for the job site. (City Ord. #1-528) I�zC� 5. Maximum grade is 15% for all projects. /6.2c, Hose stations are required. (City Ord. #1-528) U 8. A fire alarm system is required for this project. (City Ord. #1-5-28) Plans shall be submitted to the Tukwila Fire Marshal for approval, prior tc' commencing any alarm system work. Submit three (3) sets of complete drawings. This includes one for our file, one for company file, and one for the job site. Special installations of fixed extinguisher systems, fire alarm systems, dust collectors, fuel storage, etc. require separate plans and permits. Plans to be submitted to the Fire Marshal prior to start of installation. (UFC 10.301) Portable fire extinguishers will be required in finished buildings per N.F.P.A. #10. (Minimum rating 2A, 10 BC) 10. Buildings utilizing storage of high piled combustible stock will require mechanical smoke removal per Section 81 of the 1991 UFC. 11. During construction, an all- weather access will be required to within 150 feet of the building. (UFC 10.207) No building will be occupied, by people or merchandise, prior to approval and inspection by Fire and Building Departments. 412. g_13. K14. Adequate addressing is required. Number size will be determined by setback of building from roadway. Four inch numbers are minimum. Numbers will be in color which contrasts to background. (UFC 10.208) Designated fire lanes may be required for fire and emergency access. This requirement may be established at the time of occupancy and /or after the facility is in operation. (UFC 10.207 as amended) 15. Special Fire Department permits are required for such things as: storage of compressed gas, cryogens, dry cleaning plans, repair garages, places of assembly, storage of hazardous materials, flammable or combustible liquids or solids, LPG, welding and cutting operations, spray painting, etc. (UFC 4.101) K16. Fire Department vehicle access is required to within 150' of any portion of an exterior wall of the first story. Fire Department access roads in excess of 150' require a turn around. Fire Department access roads shall be not less than 20' wide with an unobstructed vertical clearance of 13'6 ". x 17. Adequate fire flow availability will need to be demonstrated for this project. 18. Checklist prepared by (staff): l Date: PRE - APPLICATION CHECKLIST CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION — PERMIT CENTER 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FIRE DEPARTMENT - Inspections 1. Underground fire line from vault to riser a. Thrust block and rodding e. Hydrostatic test b. Type of pipe f. Fire Dept. approved plans c. Depth of cover g. Materials and test certificate d. Fl sh Overh H Tr Al Fi S 3. Under a. L b. Di c. Di d. D 5. Fire a a. A b. Fi ad sprinkler piping drostatic test p test rm system monitoring test e Dept. approved plans rinkler head location and spacing round tank cation .tance between tanks .tance to property line pth of cover arm ceptance test e Dept. approved plans 6. Hood . nd duct inspections a. I n,stallation b. Trip test 7. Spra Booth a. L cation b. F re protection c. V ntilation d. P-rmit 8. Flam able liquid room a. L•cation b. F re protection c. ermit Rack storage a. ermit b. echanical smoke removal c. • ack sprinklers d. • isle width 10. Fire oors and fire dampers a. I stallation b. a rop testing 12. e. Vent piping, swing joints, fill piping, discharge piping f. Anchoring g. Hydrostatic test h. Separate Fire Dept. approved plans Fire final e. Fire protection systems: a. ire Dept. access (1) Halon systems uilding egress and occupancy load (2) Standpipes ydrants Stations uilding address Fire Doors AFire Dampers Fire Extinguishers Oth a. b. c. d. r: Checklist prepared by (staff): �s 1'& I4JIj 5.25v.! e f g Date' 3/�s'/r13 PRE- APPLICAI ION CHECKLIST CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION — PERMIT CENTER 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 9818, Telephone: (206) 431 -367: ETI DRE PLANNING DIVISION - Land Use Information Comply with Tukwila Municipal Code (zoning, land use, sign regulations, etc.) 2. Obtain the following land use permits /approvals: ( ) Boundary Line Adjustment n Building Site Improvement Plan ( ) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cl Conditional Use Permit Design Review . ( ) Design Review - Interurban -( Environmental (SEPA) ( Planned Mixed Use Development () Planned Residential Development ( Rezone Shoreline Management Permit ( ) Shoreline Management Permit Rev. ( ) Short Subdivision Sign(s) ( ) Subdivision ( ) Unclassified Use () Variance ( Other: No ` Rear: Yes No 3. Zoning designation: Site located in sensitive area? Yes CM 4. Minimum setback requirements: Front: 50 Side: Side: 5. ''Maximum Building Height' 4-6 Height exception area? 6. Minimum parking stalls required: ) 3'8 7. 8. S' Handicap stalls required: No more than 30% of required parking stalls may be compact. No landscape overhangs into compact stalls are permitted, although no wheel stops prior to hitting the curb will be required. Minimum landscaping required: Front: )5' � Side: � Side: CI Rear i 9. Landscape plans must be stamped by a Washington State licensed landscape architect. All landscape areas require a landscape irrigation system (Utility Permit Required). 10. Roof -top mechanical units, satellite dishes and similar structures must be properly screened. Provide elevations details as part ot.bui4,21:144g t application submittal. D�llCr1� t vV Trash enclosures and storage areas must be screened to a minimum of 8' in height. Provide elevations and construction details as part of building permit application submittal. 12. Building permit plans which deviate from that already approved by the Board of Architectural Review may require re- application for design review approval. 13. Ke) 14. 15. 16'. 17. 18. 19. 20. Checklist prepared by (staff): Q 11\Mt Date. 3,Z-4) PREAPPLICATION CHECKLIST c,il1 o5\) PLANNING DIVISION - Land use Information 1 i Comments continued: 13. Building Entry Orient main entry towards Andover Pk. East. Recommend corner entry - suggest rounded entry with wrap- around sign above. This orientation would significantly enhance building design; amplify entry - creates more design opportunity; facilitate ped. movement from parking on east and north sides. 14. Building Design Architectural improvements should be of high quality. Pre - application proposal would not be acceptable. Reduce horizontality by use of vertical elements, canopies /covered walkways, color and materials, wall undulation /off - setting planes, coping, glazing. 15. Sionage Separate sign permit required, however, sign info. including color, dimensions and locations should be included on DR drawings to demonstrate how sign design /building design are integrated and that proposed signs comply with City's sign code; Recommend single wall sign for corner entry 16. Sidewalks Install separated sidewalk along Andover; width should be same as Computer City improvements (confirm with PW); 17. Streetscape Retain existing vegetation adjacent to Andover and /or replace with other shrub species; add trees along full length of existing landscape island; City in process of developing street tree theme for CBD. Please contact City at time landscape plan is being prepared to obtain recommended species list for street trees. 18. Parking lot landscaping Landscape plan must reflect landscaping within parking areas. Recommend large stature trees - shade within parking area; groundcovers should be drought- tolerant /low maintenance; 19. Vehicle movement - visibility Ensure adequate visibility at egress points onto Andover - reduce shrub height/ replace with high- canopy trees (see comment #15); recommend internal traffic control signs to indicate enter /exit; 20. Site Plan Site plan(s) submitted for discretionary actions should reflect land uses on property to west including driveways /parking areas, gated areas and building edges. 21. Provide lighting plan. 22. Mechanical Units Rooftop units must be architecturally LL scr��eenned. /�{tA ,; rw 1)) ' J4 i L ) ( E 'f7cnt.LF. ;r' eRZI,1-c: rt-P i'244 ) Z.-- M,c l � / CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION- PERMIT CENTER PRE- APPLICATION CHECKLIST • :> :.......................,.. ............................... .... ............................ • 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE- APPLICATION FILE NO. Pre 93011 MEETING DATE: 3/25/93 TIME: 2:30 PROJECT: McConkey Developm. SITE ADDRESS: 223 APE CRIME PREVENTION SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Security Camera System: Recommend that a good quality surveillance video camera system be installed during construction. The cameras should have sufficient quality to be able to identify a subject from the video recorded tape. One security person can monitor several areas of concern with a surveillance video system. It is a deterrent to potential thieves and great for prosecution to have the actual crime on tape. 2. Security Alarm: Recommend installing a security alarm system during construction that would report a robbery in progress as well as a burglary in progress when the store is closed. 3. Restrooms: If the restrooms are open to the general public I recommend they not have false ceilings. There have been problems with subjects hiding in the ceiling area and then dropping down later to do robberies. 4. Doors: Doors should have quality locking mechanisms with minimum one inch deadbolt locks. All exit doors shall be operable from the interior without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. The Crime Prevention Unit should be contacted for information regarding correct hardware usage (433- 1823). 5. Windows: Consideration should be given to providing hardened coverings for ground level windows where glass breakage would allow for access to building interiors by burglars. 6. Orientation of Windows: Windows should be located so that the parking lot area can be easily surveyed by employees inside the business. Also the windows should be located so that a patrol car passing by can easily survey inside the business, this helps reduce the opportunity for armed robberies. 7. Lighting: Energy efficient security lighting is a relatively low -cost, yet extremely effective way to protect your business. A well- designed system will: Illuminate a security target. Burglars and vandals simply don't like light, preferring the cover of darkness for their dirty work. Create a psychological barrier. Alarms can frighten would -be intruders away once they've reached your building. Security lighting discourages them from even coming near in the first place. Provide people with a legitimate sense of security. Lighting protects not only you, but employees and customers. Help security people and police identify and capture criminals. Well- designed security lighting will help you meet these basic security objectives along with those that may be unique to your business. 8. Landscaping: Plant materials should be placed and maintained so to provide visibility and prohibit hiding places for unauthorized people around ground level door and window areas Sticker shrubs may discourage crime activities. Low shrubs and umbrella trees (where the canopy is maintained above five (5) feet from the ground) will allow surveillance opportunities, hence reducing the potential for criminal behavior. Checklist prepared by T. Kilburg 433 -1823 3/23/93 PR[ �.PPLICATION CHEC..i:.1ST CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION - PERMIT CENTER 6300 Soulhcenier Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431.3670 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1l 1. Apply for and obtain the following permits /approvals through the City's Permit Center: 0 C CO Channelization /Striping /Signing(- E 0 Sewer Main Extension (private) © Curb Cut/Access /Sidewalk C ) Sewer Main Extension (public) 0 .(public) 0 Storm Drainage(sES- M7 /9) (7) Fire loop /Hydrant (main to vault ) 0 Water Main Extension (private) 0 Flood Zone Control n Water Main Extension (public) © Hauling (2.000 Bond. Cert. Ins.) y 0 Water Meter (exempt) 0 Landscape Irrigation(s.EE/✓a. /8) 0 Water Meter (permanent) ADD /7'aM14.V U Moving an Oversized Load O Water Meter (temporary) Sanitary Side Sewer(Aaorr/oA/44-•) 0 Other:400 -4. -R..Nq (SEND 24) 2. Hauling Permit required prior to start of any hauling of material on public right -of -way ($2,000 bond, $1,000,000 certificate of insurance, route map and $25.00 permit fee required). 3. All applications and plan submittals must be complete in order to be accepted by the Permit Center for plan review. Use the Plan Submittal Checklist provided on the reverse of the appli- cation forms to verify that all the necessary materials and information has been supplied. 4. Water and sewer assessments may apply and will be determined during the utility plan review process. (/./aNL-- ,si coRD /f 7D ,'0'97" 5' D //; c /FY P/47Ef r.Fv✓=/2�.✓,�,R, 5. Provide sidewalks per Ordinance #1158, #1217 and #1233, or obtain waiver. (/>A7Z'/e GOlito/- TFR ern' p. s /C;N 717 77/c ove,774 6. Provide Hydrological - Geotechnical ana ysis. 'AND 7 W ',% 7. Provide erosion control plan as part of parilitt application. n 8. Identify building elevation above 100 year flood elevation per FIRM maps (use NGVD datum and recognized benchmarks). .7/444dGFB.90e.Ef'scvo_/,9t94 //v_ 7c. trECT/oN 10S >< S/ /.494 4,4R4 AN,Ct yS /Sj 9. Provide traffic analysis /trip generation study for Aec/eriv .r/s..s:YS /s 0.4-APA'.A.� /- r�/rsECTio,✓. {0 10. Provide developers agreement for /y /r/ 47/v//5 Nor p PSS,� .-s P,ver 4/-/2 2zot#LN7 .c ANY Ex/srAyy a q APD- 11. Provide the following asements and maintenance agreements Parma ur /..�: /.��.oce -- S/AF1voL.rS ALLW . 4P- 2 ' Ri9A.5 7 T/'4/45 FASENE/S? -1. Wei .r N /,V//7/i/f ,‘"AF<J_!i/,L= A•/✓Y / _°- QR L1=YF.:.OrNa✓T TXAT pvelia4 PPFYENT 7,9 /S HICO/✓YERS /O/✓. 12. Provide water /sewer availability letters or certificates from districts serving your development. 2 t-wlLq �/7Y�/T /�s. P/.: .a +rt'E„aw, ex'/ r4 -e/ .. �k �v Q. sAY� !/T /G/T /Fr ARE n 13. Obtain Metro Waste Discharge permit or approval (684 - 2300). / AGEOI/47�. B �S/l N Aerc.4.7R.P:70 // : TAc/Y``}>.) 14. Complete Industrial and return to Metro (self addressed and stamp provided). 7 7 n 15. Review` the following City Studies when designing your project and preparing your plan submittal: Qroucke ts2Saeua'C1or eQ V.S. Ate RR 0.se.vme..` ,,j�^�^r -t- •1 LA. ra i; depicAking ,,� 0S wry ease,c,.,'k 'hr- �.�1....0 r-a� v 5 C. v.JO�O 1O C. i beck\ cra,r.O,N,, rF 7-7 ,7477.,4' ca#.°vrr,Q c..7--y 74'C ,.'V /.•►r.EO/A7E�?'77�7f....?1 r ,,{r{ �.',p�} F-71 ` I 1 6. -F-r 7rMrNL4NFS' S / /ai,LO e€ EXTENDED A.riPlN 711 RA.r e 6'DLL'�l11rAil t 1 - V� ea vs/At-r w/F/RE.e,P7. FOR ,ceZeerf 7 N OF ,c-'4 NYo.eANT /NALLEy. C/irECX 72 v4-0./A7 17. 779,77" E'X4s77/11 F /P,.- zzoe. FChr74 / / /.S L2?NB_E- OE7: -C. R GHEI.AI�IL IS "EPA6Z,', PtO„'1.,�L ,icloK't" Oa i.-t$I lanA $, are CeGp b'1 Ma.l L 18. No-,- R /RE/) /F 11e2/./ 7Pl E,eANT PUJ/Yr/ A.PF urELT K W ii A R1f�-,��� R.Egaui. -E'D "271'2' ANY /10A /F /c47 -IONS- TO EXI$74 sYS7E-rl .p�t(Zyy4T 19. .a-XIS-,-/N C.l reN AWS /h!S //hvE" n/t,/rvAra.e tE,DA -e,Q77 4/ ,.Alva' Td COrvYFY4/,/CE e;cF_ ci,-7 .Zr E /77/Ale 77GF TJ r. .. ac -G/iT v- zPregk ,'-,t / ae ,'7'I.1-74. 5.1ci zL sc-xe.EEOS ..iv e>7 co oO oi- 1 VI 20. .4`Xli4YR7,a /) s- //NLLr•/7.Y • ,," /L/ .> '14/ O- °7/l. r zv. "70IJ /o ' Fc.NJW,4I L .r.Yo,o/.cily uri:✓, 7 c o,$% //0. et? AB.S,404V1 ' r hecklist prepared by (staff _i /49 Date. ,/2r!.� CITY OF TUKWILA PRE- APPLICA" L 4 PROCESS MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development - Building Division Phone: (206) 431 -3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard — #10C Tukwila Washington 98188 PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO. Pr_E � -o PROJECT: LD>1 K ec L� U�l o i1,1ev1 i' MEETING DATE: � s-/ q3 3 TIME: a ' �d SITE ADDRESS: aa3 AnaOl> -'PK- E DATE CHECKLIST MAILED: BY: STAFF PRESENT Building (431 -3670) Fire (575 -4404) lanning (431 -3680) ❑ Public Works (433 -0179) ❑ Parks & Rec (433 -1843) Police (433 -180) ❑ Permit Center (431 -3670) ❑ Other: (431 - 3t27) c ,1 L /(C Ai r% 2 NAMES / TITLES 7,3/(4, air C R / .Yy E j'k ✓Fi✓ Ti 1:11),1 L, c4-t7>iIR, APPLICANT / REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT Contact Person Others Present Name w1c\ .' Tu R K) 3'/ kA Company/Title Street Address 'Z, 115 NE ?• ti R Phone S2 i4 City /State /Zip SEA ,; Name 3DD f Company/Title Street Address Name Company/Title ;r z- ��n� -�-s r moo. -11---4/ pi, City /State /Zip 3e / /��� c �- w 4- *-3(/ Phone Phone 2 - 0 6 — 3 - jigs Street Address Name Companyltle Street Address Name Company/Title Street Address Name Company/ Title Street Address City /State /Zip Phone City /State /Zip Phone City /State /Zip Phone City /State /Zip CITY OF TUKWILA Permit Center Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard — #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: (206) 431 -3670 Pre - .App!; ration PROJECT SUMMARY FOR STAFF USE ONLY Total Building Square Footage: e,A 11-0 6. Type of Construction: 11 N..) . (1991 UBC) Project /Name: Mttz.,s1(.el 0E W:1,4),m"Ns l 4,0 Site Address: 2.23 ist w 7 R1.. G Pre -App File No.: pAlLq 3 -Oil Date Received: - \-1 @'`j Meeting Date: Si% IR 3 Time: 2Ybp i'v` Routing: Q Building Q Fire Q Pub Wks 0 Planning 0 Police Q Pks & Rec TOTAL 11,9 to PROJECT INFORMATION Total Building Square Footage: e,A 11-0 6. Type of Construction: 11 N..) . (1991 UBC) Project /Name: Mttz.,s1(.el 0E W:1,4),m"Ns l 4,0 Site Address: 2.23 ist w 7 R1.. G Description of Proposal: WcO )r,,,,, .lej'=f$ (, e14, k, I Assessor Account No.:0227j ICS •CX.Ci --G) NOD A 5 m i e t ' " i AiL, N „ . 0 A 7 - 1 • P G ) Q Acreage of Site (gross): v/4 ps(, c,, (7 ° \ Anticipated Period of Construction: From 4X56 ci's . To Q G7 q$ WWI-, 1 ! C.D" -9 Will the project be developed in phases? ( No Q Yes If "Yes ", describe: TOTAL 11,9 to 2nd Floor Identify existing easements on site: 10 L)TI _ e v ( 01 '1.10x`4 +1. k. e , BUILDING INFORMATION Project Value: j Current Assessed Value of Building: it Ci 7,-7 &ea Total Building Square Footage: e,A 11-0 6. Type of Construction: 11 N..) . (1991 UBC) Please indicate the square footage of each floor, broken down by building use(s); use another sheet for additional floors. BUILDING USE OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATIONISQUARE FOOTAGE 1st Floor WWI-, 1 ! C.D" -9 TOTAL 11,9 to 2nd Floor TOTAL 3rd Floor TOTAL Number of parking stalls proposed: Regular: 141 Compact: 10 ow Handicapped: Storage or use of flammable, combustible or hazardous materials on premise or area of construction? CNo QYes If "Yes ", explain: PROJECT INFORMATION Contact Person: {-i'f `,tt,10,(7-0 ^ t URFJEZ PIA Address: t4t., (� f. MAR �7 Prepared by: t, %.4 Company: ltiX . ; I A z si7c. Z3 74 L,cl 3I/)71 ci3 Phone: Date: 01/12/93 PRE- APPLieATION PLAN SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION — PERMIT CENTER Pre - application plans should contain the following: g 1. Vicinity map 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 2. Site plan (drawn to scale), including dimensioned property lines and identifying the following: (7) Building setbacks from property line V) Width of any adjacent public right -of- way(s) V) Designated landscape areas V) Easements (including railroad, Puget Power, etc.) V) Parking layout V) Truck loading area designations V) Access points and traffic circulation pattern Vj Footprint of existing and /or proposed structures c7) Significant natural features (water, slopes, vegetation, etc.) 7) Identify sites proximity to river environment if less than 1700' from river ) Topography map (for slopes over 15 %) 3. Building layout, identifying the following: (,) General layout V Exits and exiting pattern MAR 7 1n3 Uses and dimensions of all spaces (Please check the appropriate boxes identifying what was included on your plans, and attach checklist to your pre - application submittal.) .�.....>......,....._.�_. -...� MEMORANDUM To: Tukwila SEPA Responsible Official From: Howard Turner Date: December 10, 1993 RE: L93 -0069: McConkey Development Based on input from the Public Works Department, I herewith clarify and amend my SEPA checklist as follows: 1. The recommendations of the traffic consultant (Transportation Planning and Engineering, Inc., 8/31/93) shall be incorporated and implemented as part of this project proposal. 2. TPE recommendations 3 and 4 (Pg. 7) on traffic mitigation payments to the City, are further clarified to provide a total payment of $9,976.00, to be provided prior to final building permit approval. file :93 \mccnky \sepa To: Vernon Umetsu, Planning Division From: John A. Pierog, PW Development Engineer Date: November 24, 1993 Subject: McConkey Development 223 Andover Park East Project No. PRE93 -011 SEPA Review RECEIVED NOV 4 1993 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT This morning I gave you the City Engineer's comments on the subject project. Traffic mitigation costs total $9,976.00 (the $10,933.00 figure is incorrect). In addition, I also have the following comments: 1. The street shall be widened 2.5' at the present time but rechannelization can be delayed as recommended in the traf- fic study. Appropriate markings for road taper shall be required. 2. The water main is adequately sized on Andover Park East and no improvements are necessary. 3. Under item no. B.3.a.6) in the environmental checklist, please note that it is illegal to dicharge surface water runoff into the sanitary sewer system. If you have any questions concerning the above, please let me know. JAP /jap cf: Development File It/ 273 q_3 C/1 6 M C k 41 DI, 'try t-1(_ smi 7); A-3 - 51) 4L $71F C)00t-ts(A'20 Pk) 7 3 , ;i- ps ()/ s a . 12D D) e-rF- 1\kc;c-41) 2-A) st`2,) 2_0 •••■••••• )on y -14 q 1 c? 33 A ; 7cxccd tokAA no ( ° V? to kl u e-k\ Aie=cif■S ge card Lc) (ruv,° Co 4t) bco-,vc(r7 ys3ve.. )ts _t,t,;// rc4 r L\V ; 5 -;,\,.2, •_ 6 To: From- Da Ron Cameron, City Engineer John A. Pierog, PW Development Engineer November 18, 1993 Subject: McConkey Development 223 Andover Park East Project No. PRE93 -011 SEPA Review j -e,va r. • may.. Review comments on the subject proposal were due on November 12th. Our Pre - Application review comments required the submittal of a traffic study and the widening of Andover Park East by 2.5 feet. The traffic study was submitted along with a preliminary environ- mental checklist and distributed for review at our November 2nd development plan review meeting. You requested additional time to review the study. To be able to respond to Planning on SEPA issues, I need answers to the following two questions: 1. What are the total traffic impact mitigation requirements? 2. Do you agree with the traffic study's conclusions and re- commendations? One of the recommendations calls for the delay of rechannelization of Andover Park East until all property owners on both sides of the street have completed their respective widenings. If you have any questions concerning the above, please let me know. JAP /jap cf: Development File 4cCCO ]]EY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY SHEET INDEX ARCHITECTURAL HAR 0 CO0TR 9EET (11/24/93) OAR 1 561E RAN BAR 2 1/16111 EL EVAT05 OAR 3 1/85. ELEVA1C15 BAR 6 F5R9'EC(T*E BAP 7 FIRD'EC1h£ 0%30 8 0008 WARD CIVIL -AR 4 WU..0* 3 CRA04 CRNLI(E MD IITLII15 PLAN (8/25/93 LANDSCAPE BAH 5 Lk/75CW( k 131CATOr1 RM (8/25/93) SURVEY 10PpQUF17C 5.1t£Y (7/29/92) 8/30/93 9/77/93 7/24/93 CONSULTANTS ARCHITECT 117d(R ND ASSOCIATES 6420 24tH RACE NE SEAI TLE WA9141O1 9865 (206) 365-7431 FAX 365-7504 C011AC1: 10*APO R TIBER, AIA CIVIL/LANDSCAPE/SURVEY DARO+A 03:24 0903/1/4 D10ETR5 TG 620 72 10 AVE SOUTH XEN1. WA914TO4 98032 (206) 251-6222 (01020(1: 0010 CODERS. PE (OR (01020(0. )91JX ucCORY EA: ' C01TAC1: 0:1215 SALTSS SURVEY) CODE INDEX GENERAL 61L04 COLE: 931 LOC 000PN1Y CLA55 82 1 N-94T*Q£RLO, 949!(.06 ((90(0 OY CONRACTOR AREA TOTAL (X6104 DIEM AREA (1+(11.04 EASING LCZZATIE) 87.255 SF 0EACL1104 (NQL0(5 EXMT14 LCZZAizE) 63055 SF WXIUI 611x4 1(040: 2 5TORE5, 40 FEET PRCPO5FD TOTAL 6104 ATEA (1 -STORY) 09515 X 12.000 SF X 3 - MAX9800 AILOWAFSE 61914 AREA A 4-4020 SEPARAION WALL 6 RE0160 0(10(124 AUTO PARTS QLD 21.010 56" 102004 BAY /4 WAFE'H .1i 1 LOA04 OATS / 1.2 & 3 EGRESS AUTO PMTS CLUB OCOPANT LOAD. 29.203 5F / 30 - 973 000PN1IS 0111 WOTH REOUELCNT:973. 02 195 TOES Exit WIDTH PROVCCET 204 TOES wARD7716E OCCLPNIT LOAD 42400SF. / 500 - 85 OCOJ'ANTS EXIT WOTH FEOUSLLNT: 85 X 02 - 1710 LS EAT WOTH PROVCLD 72 TOES MAXIMA TRAVEL D6TNAZ A1103,E0 FOR 9'214ERED 030010 - 203 FEET AMAMI-W 1 OF EXITS PER 3303(c) SEPARA101 01 TWO SCES. (35 - 20) X D05 - .9515 7(600 5< 43,047 SF 30,325 SF 41215 SF ZONING 2014 620014 SERVO( 1.7E 0662061).1 1(015 014 TOL5INAL PARK 503 RCNT.25' r&AR.5 50E5 45. VICINITY MAP ACLRA DEALER BAKER BOULEVARD 401 BEVAR(AKER i30LL PR0.ECT SITE 223 Ata0OVER PARK EAST TL.KWLA. 59511 0TON STA -FUR 400 STR BOULEVARD \ FIDELITY ASSOC. 402 STRANGER \ BOULEVARD N COLPUTER CITY 404 STRAt BOU.EVARO STRA1ER BOULEVARD -ild eBLOCK MAP =100' (—l -f - NOTES TURNER AND ASSOCIATES SITE PLAN REVISIONS SHEET ;AR `£" ro`IEN15 P/5i 992 3ARO • AUTO Pmale. TLMYLA, WA Pam i 0+ fns 0420 2424 RALE NL ARCHITECTS SEATTLE WA*T41U1 9865 IXI6) 365-74}+ pEVEiO'I.EIN RELOCEL 11(5 LCSTBAR Flc LICSTB564 OtAwN f77': SH 9*eCONKIY DIVILOPMINY COMPANY 0C0IED BY: IRT. 7006 R•H161 WIT. 3Hu 111 • S•11•rnn. WA 11101 DATE: 8/30/93 (164) 111.2411 116 1116) 113.1111 5081E: 1 a3-eni.44 EXISTING LNE OF E{STNG aDG. TO EE RENgVED +/- 11000 SF. 8 COLPACTS W 8'=64' COPACTS 0 8'=80' 7'j t0 STA/DAR/5W 85=85 88 25'27'E 0&.90' ir -RANTER MING S88 25 14 10 STANDARDS 0 8.5=85' CONCRETE E 140.09' RMAP100WN� 175'( A I �/1 NEW ASPHALT PAVNC LRM STANDARD (TYP.)1 STD 0 8.5=85' ,8.5', 4 0 85'=34' 2 HC=25' 4 4 ( ■ 10 STANDARDS 0 9•=90' 10 STANDARDS 0 9'=90' S88 25' 14'E 505.43' I 1 NEW ASPHALT PAVING 41 0 85•=34' 8 STANDARDS 0 8.5'=68' ,85', 18 STANDARDS 0 8.5'=68' 195 25' 10'+15'+8N CLU CONCRETE ENOL TRUCK MANUEVER INC NEW ASPHALT PAVING 200' 14 WALL MOUNTED • SHELOED UG HTS NEW iEXIT 1 (3 DOWILEHTS PER OVERHANG • ED 17'+65 I TRUOK BAYS o -yo• GL 1 � i \ i�.\ • EXIST NG 24' 18 a'ROCAL AC SS EASELENT-PROVLIE tEW ASPHALT Pi ( 1 FRE TRI O< ACCESS CtLY PROVOED Stn CITY Z • — - REQ8 ED FRE�QA NT� ACROSS AAIAlxtlT PROPERTY TO 0 SOUTH. ABANDONED 2T� RR EASELENT PLANTER RETAIL SPACE 'B' 1 (42,250 SF. RETAIL' INCLUDING LOADING SAYS) NEW NC. FRE EXIT RAM? 1 0, NEW EXIT DOCK REMOVE EXISTNG DOOR, 7 WALL MOUNTED LANONG AND STARS LK:HTS EX I T 208' I DOCK EXISTING 4 I I 1 DOCKS O W CC NEW EXIT III 25.1' NEW 354CRETE DRIVEWAY( R.ANTER REMOVE EXLSTNG DOOR =' 1 _REMgIITRTS STA L......Il..._......._JII..._......... ,��.I� 1 tL �° r i I I 1 I I!� I � � m NEWE 1 EIIT II I N W U mi Z< SALES 1 SALES II I N I R ' x u LIF CF EXIEITNG L EZZ. —11 1 — O a 1 I ENTRY — N 1 RETAIL SPAC�E''A' Iuu __ _ 30,400 SF. RETAIL I. i- —' I n T- . (INCLUDING LOADII{G SAYS) II I G—re f CO I I I IL—_I—_ m Zcn lI.K--_E A ST1---------7-----V-- -0. . I < & — 1 SALES . SALE_ 1 _....1.. m — :. I _ I I I NO- i _ i i_ I. - t �'I Jm - T i182' i 1 EL C. — - 1 tr) .!.•\ I 1 w - 1 MOWED REAL LAN — 1 BUFFER MOED N 2.` s"' — PARTS 10IPELANTER vim- _ - I SOEWALKTI SAND 6', 1"1 1 t.X - I i. i �M Eld -.T.1 I Ie I. I i=--EX15T1I1C ROADWAY 1_10_1_1 J} I YI 1' 1 1 1 1 1 1 M WIDE HC. ACCESS 32.9' \ F. 114.6' USE OF ECO -BLOCK FOR FRE LME OFFICES FOR 5 OSITE PLAN SCALE: f.70' EXISTING CONCRETE BLDG.; 5' BUILDING SETBACK AND LANDSCAPE' N88 25' 27'W -I- 505.43 -f' 150' EXISTING CONCRETE BLDG. 25' 195' 6 Z 1, COORDNAT 6' SEEWALK) WITH COLRJTER CITY 1 NOTES TURNER AND ASSOCIATES SITE PLAN REVISIONS SHEET PARKING REQUIRED: PARKING PROVIDED: RETAIL 29,300 SF. W 2.5/1000 = SHOWROOM RETAIL 31,300 S. 0 2.5/1000 = TOTALWAREHOUSE 12,650 S. 0 1/1000 = 72.650 SF. = STANDARD = HC. = COMPACT (30% x ROD 163 STALLS) PLUS 2 = TOTAL = 73 78 12 163 108 5 51 164 McCOtXEY DEVELOPLENT RELIODEL a 1i vEw0:LNENT n!T.,`/1333 2/01/1993 3ARTOTAL NIA um 65.A31 SEETHE -7431 (laa)3r;s-r��1 O19EE5 .lar 223 PAW TLE LCSTBARI S4XI GRAxr+er:sx ISiCONI(IY OIVILO?HENT COMPANY OEO<EO 8Y. {RT. '0' """•' •"• "" N7 • 4.M•••. ''A "NN DATE: 8/30/93 nM) M .IIID ".. DMI MST)) SCALE) f=20' 1 at.m4.11 O U W U`/ TURNER AND ASSOCIATES - REVISIONS SHEET AkCON(EY C£LVELGI'I.ENT REMODEL LIAR 10.4W C6.r.FNT� 7�tjYj9} BAR G�51 L/(-�//-/ �1 -' 13 13 52 5 54 56 57 lu P-5 SP -5 EE ROTO P-iFLE P-2 P-3 4 PP --2 P-3 Pi p- i212ti 3] Il . xe n3 MCOVER PARK EAST MCSIDM2CCD DRANK BY: Sit ?M.CONKRY D1VICOPMt NT COMPANY CIEDtED (VIM 32 1111:31111111111111111:311111111111111111111111����������������� Mw Mw.4r 809. Salt. NM • 411..... �A MON DAIS: B/30/93 32 1z SCALE: I/16-.1' ,, jFg[� 1t: 1_11111:111111=11 19.--- 11 I t I o , i . 1111 �J � @NORTH ELEVATION 1 SCALE i/1E.T-0" REF: 2-BAR3 0 0 0 0 0 1 [r 1 1 i m ii ,3e. g o600 [ 11 ()EAST ELEVATION 1 SCAtr: 1/ b .T-0" REF: 1-BAR3.1-BARS 0 O '1 OWEST ELEVATION (.7WEST 1/6'.T-0" REF: 1 -Al 0 0 a a @SOUTH ELEVATION 1 Sru F 1/16'44-0" REF: 1-M NOTES cam � �i +. TURNER AND ASSOCIATES 1/16• ELEVATIONS REVISIONS SHEET AkCON(EY C£LVELGI'I.ENT REMODEL LIAR 10.4W C6.r.FNT� 7�tjYj9} BAR G�51 L/(-�//-/ �1 -' 13 13 52 5 54 56 57 RELOCATED GOMMPS RX= A PANTED WgSTE PNf15 MON 1LM QO-0if POOR AID MRUOM QfN✓<'S PANTED AOOCGTE COT WM TO ST01 CREEN RL PANELS PANOD T TTL GA OU n NOM [ N= 10 GA FA WALL PAINED 1ETAL GTE MON RiPANim 2A G FAOA PANELS PAINED 65089 O 2a G CMG PANTED 21 G CAME 1080 PANTED SIL 000 Pi841(0 51 201 FAALZ1A PANDS PROWEITD 30 PATER 20 G C 3316 P-5 SP -5 EE ROTO P-iFLE P-2 P-3 4 PP --2 P-3 Pi p- i212ti 3] 13420 24N PLACE NE ARCHITECTS ".[A1TLE W�t7IG10H 9073 (2a) .765-7 31 xe n3 MCOVER PARK EAST MCSIDM2CCD DRANK BY: Sit ?M.CONKRY D1VICOPMt NT COMPANY CIEDtED (VIM Mw Mw.4r 809. Salt. NM • 411..... �A MON DAIS: B/30/93 OM rwaw t.. Owl r11.rnL SCALE: I/16-.1' � 43.OtiIA 1 0 2 11 El 2 1 1 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" REF: 1 -BAR 1 J]1 v v u EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 33 53 bo 11 33 51 33 —17 r1. 0 53- 54 3, „1'11 REF: 2 -BAR 2 NOTES CELa _ (♦ j1■ i■ TURNER AND ASSOCIATES 1/8' ELEVATIONS REVISIONS REv£w a>tilt,r+Ig Rt1/as3 SHEET 3AR ' 71 72 73 7.4 73 7a AI E3 63 64 53 OtYYIT 5757111O1511EL M1HG FRAI G WI O 555101 ON STeSTEEL- OMR SYSTEM ON MEL fRN1G O YYTI 5757D/ OI STEM IRM SOTTT 015511 555108015110. TRUED 6140 SCftE71 / PARAPET MINT 5Y51B1 W STEEL TRUED HYAC SCiE41 / PARAPET PEW MSD At1AfU15TO£IR71T O PEW � 0006 � OOH IX E76511G HU Da DOORS 1(M HM Oa COOS P-4 i� 1-1 P -s D st P_5 P-5 P S £r OEVOR.fNT RE1.l00EL IAcCOnxEL SAH 11 pl /B4] U.70 65- PLACE431NE SEATTLE 6691581O1 9665 (X16) J65-7.�7 ARCHITECTS JOB 773MaOVER PARK EAST EL E: LCSiBAR1 CRAW m: Sit 14,COHK6Y OIYELOIYIHT COMPANY O£Cl(E0 BT. IRT. 1001 MMI.1 W.I. l.lu 111 • MII..... to NN. O111E: 8/30/93 /IN) 851)115 1.. (IN) 1).555 SCALE: t/B•.I' ,ter.,-\,.‘,_ ■wJrc•,.w,o ^11.V6 m as;,a.N .✓JJJ.V.J.Wd..y ------ .vim.- .•0•-•1.1=-S1:3,;. t .3 l , . ` 1243,4 'uq, r / ( f 1 I 1 k i 1 - !I__1_I ...■■.. n.■■e■■u NOTES: • I I • RN■■■■n �•N.b b«.O•.•orrlsC.M�:Ilt -..r� '• .70 ,JG LENT.GD •J� i •I f XfA A 3-7%4Y:':- yj •V 204, mu. mwuuuuuunm■m■■■wn■uw■nw •rv.'Ttr� _ WI 60••...4.- ..f.44,,,,,,,,,,,%; itA ■.T,■■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■■■■an Y• PLANT LIST .3.1..1E G+•T.n It ,L�rt.:Y�oax+ CE•K�'-�J ATCALAA •••••••..>t". *.C... LCAL^ o^Qu�Y t. r� 1'Y "�fY .K Y.R.i..ht-. -..-car-cT rJw.. 7,14 eGt. 113 -MIA tS7 ■as um■■uuyu lracG{H•rY .-. GY.:�. Ot.•.C.. - nJ.: c 2v1iG.WN •,1.O D'a4'O Go.6 e.• v�.yt5e GD.cOr I1 -...Te, eu.+f •-r-.c-raw^... t. tw£iT,1.'G..n..1.eG.oiraGLT 'ue •4 wS•�.DV N...4Z wIT:rw .¢rY..niaL i!...-- .4M,. Vis. . GaCV.'/ G rpt I • I' 7•* • *'` P. _..apt.o • • �1 tisr cn.n Q v 0 VI U1 Z CZ K ARCHITECTS AUTO PARTS CLIA. TIEWI.A. WA 111 GIADNG N PARR■1G LOT PLANTERS GROURDCOVER PLANTING PETAL ter•. DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING PETAL •r0.• MUM rc411.1 s..r...o �. I ca PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN SCALE 1" r 20' ::._....._.. ,., .Aflzw .ouLRYARO %E% 414h 4,.t U3v.trfDEOm— EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDING F.F. r 26.30 • 0 E u E 0 • 0 r •U u 1 MAL DESCRIPTION: y fr....`�i •:t.y• hatslw•r. y . rrl.rn .I•:tf.r rr RN Ir. r.r . M [r.Tag T • RI rrty nr ..lr iiCtr rly r TRI y.r ti .. rr.rrw to ••rrw.... nw Y:N2.r•i...r.. �� r... wtrNI. lara RI. OS Rua .r...w.•ae NargrIN rrw• a. r« yr w•..—..4�-0.. r.rlr.. >r.Ia ✓ fi"i...`••a �.,� •r• w' ....... w it In'.y..• ....r ......r .yr r .• IW. ".. Los Srl`er.f.• .,..,,.. y1 T• bN •L fIOY 2t• Wr, atE.tl .rr .. W r.rwt .r.r r r L.m rW b�a..� .N .r.rr M . . I� •. rriu6Yw. D• t :a.; • Tr •M W L rr 1.1 am*. 1. ' I t• Ng. RN. rr . Nom. sr. rr T. EaMr..r 1�r*re.r.Ar...I. lag.. org....r 16/111.81,•tialrs OEbIwWb•iWtSUM l.t TT r w. Last Irrrr LE.Gtl Iw1.r11' • Ir .r. VLSI M r.. ••rc Wt r llr ass. Tres : `••i.•Tarr. ..: wwt wrIo leg. :I.y r• Yr 11. r rl T.r.•r..rr r..rl T<.n , _,.tr .war.r1wr ru 3.4'[ryW NOM I. g. Ur,.. 1.. Dray r aloe, s..rr r..l.a... a.Ab ••• Not el ...la tWr l.r• ear .nrr.. ......r..'f..t'r ...w.r r... yr SUIIYEY DATA: E.AEO KANO• PI. a .oma fabTl.:.L f.M tlo. z If [wOIXn.nuEn WAS:Z iwrcu wi6S032o i .ATMA OILY • VC. .p. YAP FOR FLOW .Af.KE .1000 .T L FLOOD •0.0.1.T .w E.. m ELEV. • Ya.' �mlw u Ar .rb LD artt 0.40.4.1 TOTAL LTE .M. • 1...'1 If. 0.40.C" SLED. .INA .1,•4144,. TI.600 Lf: 14E710 381.104 .Af. •.1.3068. ETC" 21.21 v. 13/41 S/. EOZOil .081.115 .OG. EIU'vU3. ..AE S.F. ..330 Sr. 1..3%1 1!00001 PROM. •SINNST PROPOSED MIMIC 7AV03E0 STMT LK M0ODRED .•TCII.E 410. AMOR WC". f.Of0.0 SPOT GEN. A3r.G aE.wcc UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: r•• ,LIEN 1 h3•eiel.q CONC BLDG x Jxvvx::J •>rTrvw u IIIC• TOPOGRAPHIC. SURVEY CITY OF TUKWILA, KING CO., WASHINGTON PORTION OF S. 1/2 NE 1/4 SEG 26, T.23N., R. 4 E., W.M. TRACTltr\ �I 1 __BAKER BLVD, _ I % e _ e25'z7'w; `'— so SO S88.25'27'E 20890 S88.25'I4E n.. t« I... 14009' 224 95 to' wry:* SCM,O('S DISTRIBUTION CENTER CONC. BLDG »UnLi•1 •.... DOOM... tre •••• Cw. Pu Al — 11 � r. •nf.r ... e. 1.9 DoeS.Pie.. N88.25'27'W [r.rr.. .. d,...... Pr. r.e1 r Lr.r JYx,.BLDG .K DS : L94 -0044 CIRCUIT CITY SUPERSTORE ........»... CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: DEMOLISH AN EXISTING 87,000 S.F. WAREHOUSE AND BUILD TWO (2) REPLACEMENT, RETAIL BUILDINGS: 41,220 AND 8,635 S.F. W/ 183 PARKING SPACES:_ PROPONENT: CIRCUIT CITY STORES LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRES ADDRESS: PARCEL NO: SEC /TWN /RNG: LEAD AGENCY: 223 ANDOVER PK E 022310 -0090 NE 26 -23 -4 CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO;: L94 -0044 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probabl'e<': significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required Under RCW, 43.21c.030(2) (c) This decision was made after review cif; a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. ` `Th i-: information is available to the public on request. ******************************** ** *•k* * * * *•k * *•k * * * *•k * * **•k ** k * * * * * * *•k * * * * * ** This determination is final and signed th s: _L�_ day of 199 . Ric eler.,.Responsible Official City of Tukwila, (206) 431 -3680 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188:_ You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk: City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA. , 98.188. no "l;ater' than 10 days from the above signature date by written appeal 'stat,ing the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Department of Community Development. A F F I D A V I T i, Robin R. Stanley Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting LI Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet fl Board of Appeals Agenda Packet fl Planning Commission Agenda Packet O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: fl Short Subdivision Agenda Packet D Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit M Determination of Non - significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance O Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action 0 Official Notice Other 0 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on 8/22/94 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY -SEPA Name of Project CIRCUIT CITY File Number L94 -0044 Signatur A F F I D A V I T 'Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting J Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of Appeals Agenda Packet fl Planning Commission Agenda. Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet ... .. �,.... .. .. �:.:' O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: L Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit D Shoreline Management Permit KDetermination. of Non - significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance fl Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action Official Notice ri Other Li Otherr ' was mailed to each of the following . addresses on 0 '1S- —q c1 Name of Project( V U4 (4"-- File Number Loi* -o04-'5 Signatur HMI PO Box 870 Bremerton WA 98310 Seattle Fur Exchange 240 Andover Park W Seattle, WA 98111 Fidelity Associates 4211 Holly Lane Mercer Island WA 98040 Peterson RW & AD 290 Andover Park E Tukwila WA 98168 Rossellini Albert D 5930 6th Ave S Seattle WA 98108 Tri -Land Corp. 1325 4th Ave STE 1940 Seattle WA 98101 Baker Square Retail Bldg 8009 S. 180th St Kent WA 98032 Accura Auto 400 Baker BI Seattle, WA 98188 SAME Convert Pac 402 Strander Blvd Seattle WA 98168 Computer City 1800 Two Tandy Center Fort Worth TX 76102 Office Depot 290 Andover Park E Tukwila WA 98168 Tenant 340 Andover Park E Seattle WA 98168 Tenant 230 Andover Park E Seattle WA 98168 Floor Covering Spec. 220 Andover Park E Seattle WA 98188 Boeing Support Services 505 Baker Blvd Seattle WA 98188 State Farms 415 Baker Blvd Seattle WA 98188 Alvin + Carol Pearl 4304 Hunts Point Rd Bellevue WA 98004 Alvin + Carol Pearl 405 Baker Blvd Seattle WA 98188 CED Inc. 402 Baker Blvd Tukwila WA 98188 Hugh S. Ferguson 601 Union St, St. 45121 Seattle WA 98101 US Bank of Washington PO Box 720 Seattle WA 981111 The Park East Building 31919 First Ave S. Federal Way, WA 98003 Gibson Co 100 Andover Park W Tukwila WA 98188 Pearl NW 405 Baker BI Seattle WA 98188 Material Flow 401 Baker Blvd Seattle WA 98188 Same Same Cullen Bindery 410 Baker Blvd Tukwila WA 98188 Same Andover Bldg 415 Baker Blvd, #200 Tukwila, WA 98188 Same CHECKLIST: EN ,.AONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE�r2RMIT MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES ( )U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( )FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( )DEPT. OF INTERIOR -FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE WASHINGTON ( )U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( )U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H.U.D. (REGION X) STATE AGENCIES ( )OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( )TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( )DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES ( )OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( )DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ( )DEPT. OF FISHERIES ( )K.C. PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEV. ( )BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( )FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( )FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( )SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )TUKWILA LIBRARIES ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( )KENT LIBRARY ( )CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( )US WEST ( )SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( )WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ( )WATER DISTRICT #75 ( }SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( )GROUP W CABLE ( )OLYMPIA PIPELINE ( )KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( )PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE ( )POLICE ( )FINANCE ( )PLANNING ( )BUILDING ( )PARKS AND ORECREATION ( )TUKWILA MAYOR ( )DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES ( )DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANDS DIVISION ( )DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* ( )DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE ( )OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL *SEND CHECKLIST WITH DETERMINATIONS AND *SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( )KING COUNTY DEPT. OF PARKS ( )HEALTH DEPARTMENT ( )PORT OF SEATTLE ( )BUILDING & LAND DEV. DIV.- SEPA INFORMATION CENTER SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES ( )HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE MUNICIPAL REFERENCE LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT UTILITIES ( )PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ( )VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( )WATER DISTRICT #20 ( )WATER DISTRICT #125 ( )CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( )RAINIER VISTA ( )SKYWAY CITY AGENCIES )RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT )CITY OF SEA -TAC )CITY OF SEATTLE )CITY OF BURIEN )TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS )TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( )PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( )P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( )SW K.COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( )MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( )DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE MEDIA ( )DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE ( )VALLEY DAILY NEWS ( )METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIV. OFFICE /INDUSTRIAL 5,000 GSF OR MORE RESIDENTIAL 50 UNITS OR MORE RETAIL 30,000 GSF OR MORE ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( )SEATTLE TIMES PUBLIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PERMITS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section Applicant Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) Include these documents: SEPA Determination (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings /Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed & sent to newspaper). SHORELINE MAILINGS Notice of Application: Notice of application for a substantial development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 300 feet of subject property, prepare an affidavit of publication, and publish two consecutive weeks with deadline for comments due 30 days after last newspaper publication date. Shoreline Permit: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 30 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section State Attorney General Applicant Indian Tribes Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). Include these documents: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, if applicable) Shoreline Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings /Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements Cross- sections of site w /structures & shoreline _ Grading plan _ Vicinity map SEPA Determination (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed & sent to newspaper) Affidavit of Publication (notice was published in newspaper). TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PROJECT: VERN UMETSU CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. SCOTT SHERROW Entranco 8-12-94 CIRCUIT CITY STORES REVISIONS TO SEPA DOCUMENTATION CIRCUIT CITY STORE Entranco Project No. 94021.60 On behalf of Circuit City we are amending the SEPA documentation, SEPA # L940044, to include a revised Traffic Study and related impact fee analysis. The revised Traffic Study is a result of the City of Tukwila's comments. Please include the revised Traffic Study into our application for the Circuit City Tukwila Store. Thank you for your help on this project, we look forward to our Hearing on August 25, 1994 at 8:00 PM. RECEIVED. AU8 121g94 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal", "proposer", and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Circuit City Superstore 2. Name of applicant: Local Contact: Mr. Sean Fitzsimmons Circuit City Stores, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Circuit City Stores, Inc. Local: 2661 Bel-Red Road #104 Bellevue, Washington 98008 (206) 861-1700 Headquarters: 9950 Mayland Drive Richmond, Virginia 23233 4. Date checklist prepared: June 17, 1994 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Begin construction September 1994, with an expected opening date of spring 1995. 94021 / MiscTexl / Envchklt (6/20/94) / lbw 2 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal: Level 1 and Level 2 investigations have been prepared. Asbestos will be mediated for the project. y 7? A;r2C f 0 e-Y■i Lc( am- N c?'t! %4LG SoNC5 (77 Ve- f}r' F,JIt� eA c_ i8 . `I-S) A -re-7 G( st 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? if yes, explain. Do not know. TR. cv :GntS ((_` ?- 0(5 01) f55 u i24G(94, 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Demolition permit, plumbing permit, mechanical permit, building permit, electric permit, - design-review; Board of Architectural Review approval, sign permit, fire protection systems approval, storage rack permit, curb cut permit, hauling permit, channelization /striping/ signing approval, storm drain approval. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. The project will demolish an existing 87,000- square -foot warehouse and will build an approximately 41,220- square -foot electronics retail store. An additional, separate approximately 8,635- square -foot retail store also will be built on the site. The second store will be a complementary business. The site will be landscaped and improved to City standards. 94021 / MisoText / Envchklt (6/20/94) ! lbw 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located at 223 Andover Park East in the Cty of Tukwila, South 1/2, Northeast 1/4, Section 26, Township 23N, Range 4 East, W.M. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? No. 94021 1 MiscText / Envchklt (6/20/94) / lbw B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (underline one): steep slopes, mountainous, other oiling, hilly, b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope) ? The steepest slope is approximately two percent. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The soil in the nonpaved areas appears to be a gravelly loam. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 1,000 cubic yards of grading will be required as part of the demolition and site preparation for the project. Fill will be obtained from an approved borrow pit. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, erosion could occur when soil is moved around the site. 94021 / MiscText / Envchklt (6/20194) / lbw g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings) ? Of the total 3.4 acres, 3.25 acres will be covered with impervious surfaces after construction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Site fences, hay bales, and other standard erosion control practices will be used. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. There will be temporary chances of dust during construction. Emissions during operation of the store would be from vehicles coming to the store. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None are proposed. 940211 MiscText I Envchhlt (6/20/94) / lbw 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 94021 1 MiscToxt / Envohklt (6120194)1 lbw 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Does not apply. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stormwater runoff will be collected on -site and released into the existing storm drainage system, following the standards set by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Project will follow all required release standards set by the Public Works Department. 4. Plants a. Check or underline types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree; alder, fnaole, aspen, other London Plane evergreen tree; fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants; cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other X other types of vegetation 94021 / MisoText / Envchklt (6/20194) / lbw 8 b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? All vegetation will be removed, including the ornamental junipers, photinia, and scrub brush. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None are known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The site will be landscaped following the City's guidelines for landscaping in the Zoning Code. 5. Animals a. Underline any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. — 9o-not"krt W. KO fLi e KKUc,e.) t. ' c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is located along the Pacific flyway. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The landscaping will provide some habitat for urban tolerant species of wildlife. 94021 1 MiscText / Envchklt (6/20/94) / lbw 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The project will use electricity for lighting and the appliances, and natural gas for heating. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy- efficient heating equipment will be used. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None are anticipated. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None are anticipated. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None are proposed. b. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? There is traffic noise along Andover Park East. 94021 / MiscText / Envchktt (6/20/94) / lbw 10 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short -term noise during construction could reach up to 90 dBA. Operational noise would be generated by vehicles accessing the site. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None are proposed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site currently is not being used. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. An existing 87,000 +1- square foot warehouse is on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, the warehouse will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? C -M, Industrial Park. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Light industrial. 940211 MiscText / Envchklt (6/20/94) / lbw g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 70 + / -, distributed in shifts throughout the week. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. However, the existing warehouse has been used for specialty sales throughout the year. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will follow all City zoning code requirements. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low income housing. • Does not apply. No & Kts rrN(G .({ou 114G OM S t 7 RntqE c)2oFosa 94021 / MiscText / Envchklt (6/20/94) / lbw 12 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Does not apply. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Does not apply. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed ? Q7-0 The street sign pylon will meet the silty( height requirements in the Zoning Code. The building entry sig is 45 feet tall. The building will be CMU block material, with an alucobond entry. ir 5D. E' .3c -.t) r .Z3 b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. The proposed buildings will be set to the rear of the site and along the south property line. Much of the site will be opened up for parking. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The site will be planted with aesthetically pleasing ornamental vegetation. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light would come from the store neon signs, from parking lot lights, and from the buildings, during the evening. 94021 / MiscTexl / Envchkft (6120/94) / lbw 13 b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None would be likely to affect the project. Buildings have been sited, to minimize visual impacts of the parking lot. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Cut -off light would be used on parking lot lighting, if necessary. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None are known. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Does not apply. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. 94021 / MiscText / Envchklt (6/20194) / lbw 14 _.,. 08/15/94 11:00 FAX 206 454 0220 ENTRANCO ENG. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Of the 1,427 daily trips that would be generated by the site, 817 would be new trips. The afternoon peak would be from 4 :00 to 6:00 p.m. .6/J5- � (G .5: rtJ 1.) f 11 r �. 1) g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Proponent will make proposal to minimize potential traffic impacts. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No increase will occur. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None are proposed. 16. Utilities a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: elegtriciiy, natural ,, water, refuse service, telephone, 'anima, sewer, septic system, other. Stormdrain, Cable 940211 IAI1eTen / EnwhWt 14400.41 1 lbw 16 . Q002/002 RECEIVED 416 :-.1•.0.1994 • COlvltvi o m I Y 'DEVELOPMENT _� b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity - Puget Sound Power and Light Company Telephone - U.S. West and AT &T Water, Sewer, and Storm - Municipal Water & Sewer District Natural Gas - Washington Natural Gas C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: 94021 ! MisoText 1 Envchklt (6!20!94) ! lbw -71 /24 79y E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NONPROJECT PROPOSALS 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? To remove an existing warehouse and to construct both a new electronic retail store and a separate building housing one or two specialty shops. 2. What are alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? Alternative means would be to build in an alternate location within the city of Tukwila. Site was selected since it offers the appropriate land size and location for such a store, and currently is available for use. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: Looking for additional sites delays the opening of a store. The preferred course of action is to continue with this proposal through the review process. 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan? No. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict are: Not applicable. 94021 1 MisoText I Envchklt (6120194) / lbw N not to scale CIRCUIT CITY SUPERSTORE Project Vicinity ('FIGURE 1 74 - I ONES;• .TNM 440107 1116014711111 Kt •^SOT OCTAL'? A_21T4�__ K 47044 N .• 741 K flat[ Q 14111 A.7RA7M a 2.,2? K IL77li-iolE 6 11.32 ALTA NOTES: 4400 10 0 pepPC 4444' 11444441441 / 6103206003 roma . Ilea Coons 2 0..•11.4 OAF.. - a7 s %m1A /lash Ham 1Tap el 004644.600 M .R 41.•1.. N *W... M Ea7. s •11.•1 .11.17 00 R.sts 2101 4 rano M ova ..■w .4.11 M 6124400 0.10 A.. (5.0.6.1 A } 1 rano 40.EM /awls 11..'.••Ss 017 1. 31 0 M ( Soo PAO r} A 0.7.670 Menne rat .. 710 ameeeted M 94041.14 461+1144 wl.w /m..1• M saps ON 7. £.0..7•1• and 4.4110.. Cal000M 0...000 110_12504_._ 0 AOatw 4r.Now 74.4 E•ewale Iw K l7 0 COC. E .M a+ala .e.. M 110.11 444mM 44464.6 533204 5100104 1130154 1.••••• 613617111.30E 1131114 1110331 110123E .M *70.33041214 T A7.wal• Wanes WI 111. iM ' pr. sly 1Mnoa sae 61.4 MI M n. 7.d 71_21.61 las 1. M4 a Aro snows M. Ana ( 1131 - C.0 T .4�• 6. • awn 1sYkl0. 61•.1 Oman SURVEYORS DECLARATION: T. 040441 OTT STORES. .N_ sM 577011 ORE mama co, 1 A.•I .•0.• 100 TAI. •.a .a M• arm on and, 1 1 1•..a •.e les a •C4.A.ar ..1. M. 164.41 Sandell ONO 61.0.041• 4 ATA/ALoa .III. Sow"' Takla 00 00l .a ~A 07 01.70 M 11 *191 1 1 IMI Ina I .•m1. 0.. meows ..4aa+lle M . CLASS A L.ry •. 441.00 1..1..4 1.110. 1.a* .. 4 7741. 0..61 11 M T.Os 3 went 911[0 00. FGIA K 11.11 1 AK K nasi 6 vac ■ K 11611 OI ¢ .4/61 A7E1AlaR 1101461 C 1701041. 7.4.74 4OSIRAO01 0.. 16131 f--I04Q 11(41r 10011 a 0404. ICK 0111•.04 RK 00 001 CCK NPI 1 (DIOL IJ.E 0 x NORM 07 RID.. 107 APpered Sr ENCROACNNENT DETAIL A SLATE 1•7.20• Dwain D7• DPI. Chuland try GM0110 •7. 044370 .0 •7• COMA SAC K. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 101 AIM M ins 1 4 Ilam YSAO M lAw..lama" Is AM Pal Nemo 1.4767041 be Warm 71 ei 1. MIL Ara 11 0411141. s nas C4N7 41•08.0 •4011 OS 111.. , manTrerl 117•K• ▪ y~ a4••lnut • 74.. Y wsleLtAda • n•. 00 071N Mel 61.00. s 41.04 M.• 0.11 r 17. 3Y 1eelw as Alse s 1107 MI t• ea salami ..•0 M • Anal a 114 44.47.0 le Alp 1I.1.10101444 .1/ Sala C•sa% rr Ino to • /717•11A warbmA7 4404146 17 .a PC 116 MIT or MICIRRI laer 0...61 Sr 25 2r Est ..• 1r AAA M MSW A..4 04104 AM M M ••••••46 mar e • /acrd M We m..•7.1 s Amino 1140• 44000. Cerwella 07 OA amain seder 4..00111•.1. 0404714 IAae. Sara N. 15 N' (00. AA F .M M et c.10 A.t4 IAA 11.1. s•.• . M•. 0 M ASM* m•. se • Arai 0 lab Amapa s 31.1. 7.•. .NI•. 4.64.044111 1nt.er C.w.ap 04.4 07 .ad 4..110 •mar 1114+004 16•44644 151.011 awns .411.41 6.11 r 13' 15 CAI 220 MI Is M valiant anar . ••M - sd • 4.46 40 M one M.sail 1'sl R nano /a. N /Ana. •7 - Tad 111 10••. S••1. 1•c r N' 4 27100 6.06 M... 1.M r 22 04 4 501.3 art awes Awa s• 31. 30• •.R1 161.117 bet awe. 0.44 • cons 1. A.• debt Haas • Alla 0 17210 salt A .e Man. . 17.71 M S Me HILL PORT 131"11.0110010. LEGEND: O CA101 WIN 0 CAS 4100 e DEMI 041 E!] Po n MILT MCAD © 0477101E MILT • AMC POST • 011* 401 p RK N10M1T M ATM 2000 o SAMMAR, MANIOC • 1Pd1011•R' ALL • 04001[17 IN CAA 0 POEM 111MfY0LKR 1-- ►010 -7- 00707 Atlp -a- STM•. OLA. CAS 111 AIDN01E MT(R HA • IIA PAHA PRA OTT O 1.001 r 10. O• .ORM 1 a CJIA. OD.D1K 07 A10071176000 CAA At 0004 PRpaT7 Ili .0 30 20 60 0 .0 N SCALE Yx1O' rola a1K 014' MORN Q 7110•. UK ENTRANCO 001176 • 56741615 • RNKRS • 50/01005 RLS17NCTON PAW CM10RNA RNA 114E 010• SOON O4 7110►. IRK ENCROACHMENT AAA 0 SG14 1•-20 CITY OF TUKWILLA Y NO CIRCUIT CITY STORE ALTA SURVEY 1 1 NE 1/4 OF NE 1/4 S-26 T-23 R -4 444)•41•••1 4 016..2• Pa CmU01 CRT SIOtI MIA • 11770 50. 11. Nino 2 r • 1 • L-: 4414..2-•• r-+ JZ) FIE 4. AIM(4 901.016 11.75.5 VIA • 9435 S0. 71. LIMA.aI-.IA'.�..... ..__...__.._"'.r./41I ..noA! LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 101 44.70. M 54.0 9, 4440•., 4.61124 Por. MV10144 7. 0000 10 lee Ml 11•0•1 .4)044•4 • 71 e 0415 poen 40 04 0. 4. e4.• C40117 0400••10. 4004.4 .4 1040 0990904 •t IM 01001 Cerner e/ 1914 Awl 9. Venn 0410014/0 0999 • 004 4* 11,. 1441. 1.000 a 474410 .1 57309 101 IM cent. M 04,4, More Mote Sr sr Jr(0t on ors 0103o 4 1507 140 tower n • 11 0 el 1..• (*97.1 M4r to J00Pr I4[i*Yy 00 Sued/ 1 0 Tt."0"c. l c. •T 4044 M 404.4 440000 14•04.5500797 9.11 w 194( Part Or 040149/0 1..410 04013 0T 7s' 4.Y (.1 9904 14. .0114 14.0 N 1.4.4 Por.[. 70990 MI le 100 401001 come at MM N IN 00070 to Ant.4k91 EMM Pro104. Carpel.. 07 4..4 .0.464 9449 0.0)41049 MwnM 5790744. 00.40. S0100 NE 25 M• (eat. owl IM 000 14• of 01 cK 1001 1401. .lore or 404. to 00.0417.441 M • MM of 10.1 40.4)•0 l0 54.11 (tent WIN 4.10"004. 4.9.940 (01.00041 M. •7400.24)040 ..0 04)94•04 14«.9.4 6514044. 940. 00414.44.9 59410 M' 70' 2r (0.4 724 93 1019 1. 000 04009001 carer N .o4 4001 924 • Pyet40,. 1east 00 4 AGO 9. 0 9044 .4 t4. •4.44.4. M 09 .4 •110 00 9 00 47.05' 5060 041 05' 01 149 72300 014 14.00 Mop 4.Y' 25' 7r WTI 50543 Mr. 4.0 O4 1040. 1, 39' 30• .0.1 111447 4.0c 1004•.• 40, • 1. 9..• 1• t 4040 l. 44 451.9 • .50 or 57309 741E Pc 090090 40 97 91 4.01 15 t 0 4011[ 0044 Cr 0[000040 PROJECT OATA0 CIRCUIT Otr 5t0E: 41770 50(T. 91.29 0400. 0635 5012. 704.440 C -M 0570442 100510041. PMN S(111401: 41.0•? 50. 5E( 5' 9.140 5' PM010: RIl\IP[0 00000X4' 5641010 125 125 5140100 COMPACT (30() K COMPACT 04401.4• 4.04001. 3 • 10tµ: 171 174 TOTAL PROPERTY MCA 0tµ 102.16005 SWAGE TOTAL 4509005 4R0ACE PI OXC1 COl7ACt 10 34 ACAS (005100 700PO500 313Y 32550 077541 0154 vR]RT( ted 001(45 441 9019 9011 04 M 40000041CC NM M 0000 0 444942 0.1(101141141 57A•OY0S KNµ 40"0.10 10.4,0. MAT s0K 0450 to (4 1/- 0 ACC01000L ACCESS LA52140.1 AO[(K0l N AIl(0. A I 0400. OTT 041 0R• .4 �I�IEfJ�7 04. 10 0 MOMJKMt w 050. CO.RRV{ 0 411.0VE9 7411 1454. At 50045 190(601 441.. 11► 044. Clt APP 60,19446 Approved 99• Drawn Br Dat. D•e pYS M CMOYed R7. Approved Rri ENTRANCID (4.5((05 • 5.104545 • 0041.147t5 • 54/4.7595 MASIWG4Iw 4w1ZORA CAL40RI4A b 1/' '25° SCALE 11.70' CRE5DESCT0M / 5105E 0(5100 DEPT o•9.. On 99410 CIRMT CIT( STORES. INC. 9950 YA0LA10 DRIVE RIOM0 40. WON* • 1 3 JON. 94071-60 CIRCUIT CITY STORE PREUMINARY SITE LAYOUT art a 2 1 NE 114 OF NE 114 11142 T-23 24 2005 Pii:3111/0VT 12" f 70113 MIMS I I Am 2402 £ 7033 A01 Tc/OUt 77- c OUT If •T/Ogra .•=1=r4=4 III 111/PRICAIIMPJ r 21SS CVT .2! "• , • 22.0. so ROL. .• • • . . • -- go 20 (2020 C 20 TV 1 12' \-71C) •••[1: U P Ogee •• CPI Apr Armtek:a Approved Pr Minim ep DM. Deeknul Cloodred dy. Approved dr ENTRANCO IRCARIES • SC0040571 • PLANERS • 5010015 VOGratiCIOR mem CAUTORNIA gag 9-7 rwr 2.111 C 1020 gT/007 12. C 0300. 0 MOW 01-9 'WI 1 • I- C •• 711 COT 72. C 20200. gOl SEPARATOR NOTES: ALL RORX STMT. SC ge ACC0100070 on• cc 0777 01 Rom). 70,C1.011.01T 31•00.•05 ACTUAL 0.$01070 Loping". ••• VOW MOT 70 rT 0/- TO ACCO6ARDA7E ACCESS ErksParrr AMMO,. Ault 01.1ILMb Ilk le LOAM: O C•To• 1290 co (05 70770 • CUM OJT III POW01 VAULT • 001100 Ell MP.= gaut.• • Arra POST • 00770 770710 A roc 7470110T P. •••It• viu.st O 014(7011T 0000012 0 woolloo•C WO • 0000400 al CM la POWill 11100/01101. --...— P0700 —.— SANIT•ar ILIKR Moo —.— CAS UNE TTI.OwJNE o•OR 1.1•C • MO KIM ▪ On, Or CORA Ps Me Or 740R000E770CAU. �4000C cf ANDONEN POW usr. AT SOLON /0170071. c...._...,),....,.......... 1 .30 750 60 SOPA CONSTAPCTICer STORE 00770 GOTT CROAT ATT STORES. PC 9950 WAYLAND orovE FoOPIONA viRANIA lob 14o. 9.021-60 CIRCUIT CITY STORE PRELIMINARY UTILTIES LAYOUT O .0 2 pr 2 RANK 744.01OLT •PL •PL •PL •n. •PL - • PL •PL P L •PL •PL EPL •R •PL •P. .PL •Pl •P. Ec•f••ginl 6666 ...Ij;�..EY so ow N • 4.0 - H.CN 001 Brumbaugh & Associates Isar. . Architecture s /r11r. Ill 111411 PA IOW PLANT SCHEDULE (Ttr1OL OTT BOTANICAL NYE / CO?17N NYE 6CE NOTES R...) AI P• N. • • • •O TIRES ..mcolw.w...n...= u.,..WIWJW `P c.1 NNE., .•.441 .••••6. t.. M* SY•Or `NI .aN.IooRR,• ORnooOO.N •SN.TN•pa1 NAL Kurt ••eL ,11..M•011.I0•OC LI. MIL1.I.e OC W. OC. VOINSIAWP,IOR�., ..e.....e�•a /•••JES .•.P6•C.IN...•a0 RO PIALN me•••/OM I*PMON WY. 16O1•r I'PONTWIL.A.a 101.100. C..O TY•IR.•.•RV'0 . TyF OCNw,Iw•A:••..AIIWW,O LANDSCAPE NOTESI L ALL UMTK. VEGETAT1011 TO BE CLEARED 110 DRAW POD M NTI PRO* TO Coeecr.x, 0 LANDSCAPE ROA *00RADE• 700 4L 014RADe LMO•CAPIL AMY NOICJTIO CN TI! 1Y01C1.! PLM* TO ISE MT At •• roll !UNDO. JCIPT A• NOTED ]. GIC{IO COVER TO DODO DOER ILL TTlE 4701600 CODER. AT 061 1PEC•ED WOOD TO PROVIDE LOOM COMAE* N ALL PLANING, O 01 DENCOOTE0 TO PRONE *0410 COVER 1 LMOSCAPE ORM. -011! 04410001 T•E EINE PLO 04P400 Or VORA.= G,!0[* TO WE PLAN POI PADCDO LOT LATOrr AIO 000101[. •. ODER TO CNV[. 1NG,IEERK DAW.I'J FOR GRADED MO ORANADE N OINTATIDN IKOIIT0T MOTOT LMO•CJPE AAO.IECT O Ylf ADVIR 1 DRIONDI COOITICNI Wad ,YT ARICT TA NOLO 0 PLATO MATERIAL •. CONTRALTO* WALL AWN MO PAW* TO TIE OEIER4 CONTRACTOR 4L OILIV[OT ROMP/. YO 11104411 MINCES POI MILORD ISM TO. MOLDERS AND ALL SOIL ANI L0ENT. (PEC9ED POR of.p1C RECEIPT. /.ALL AOICITE 044701*!► ••RTE0 TO TO JCe 601 A10 W ALL BE AVA.ADLE TOM COM O REPREICRAT7Ve PCR ROOS • NO 70 -EMERGENT .EROICDES TO OE IMO 01 TIE PROJECT WE LUDO 144 POOT TEAR O.RRANTII *IOW. 30 45 0 I •LAI[ 1-.30 are• 91 CIA MM Approved Sr Drew y 011•• 0•Y/re y aIeIY.d y Approved y E N T R A N O O VAMPS •SOMA • RAEVS • SRRTOe 009/610 4 AMA CN70ENN kir IIIIE. r—w' 0111. N/A Am m JO No 11021-60 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN a 1 11. 1111111 :2: 1111, EAST ELEVATION • .. CDR C 1 1 •-• =.111:11.1.. Alr! _.._ • lij 11 7j} 11 • fmum •••• 61/ /IT 11. ammo a bm • = lem/P •••• 114111/1/1 •••• Ime. • OMNI 1311111111RiliP 1 1111111111111111Mthil ••• MO/ et . woe 4••• tam mamba Inver a II • MO 4.••••••• SOUTH ELEVATION - •••11. MN • 441 = = VS,%SITE - EAST ELEVATION :ilrwt.M.•=101,441 •/01- /I 0/11 r =1111:4 LEASE SITE - NORTH ELEVATION r. Immo«. 1 smt, *Arm I man moue ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS TUKVALA, WASHINGTON ....twawnt -- dango.?"124L(1...c.: •4111.1.• Ira masa se WA DD -2' • .. ._......, _._... ._. - _. : �.��. Traffic Analysis Report CIRCUIT CITY STORE Tukwila, Washington Prepared for Circuit City Stores, Inc: 9950 Mayland Drive Richmond, Virginia 23233 -1464 Prepared by ENTRANCO 10900 NE 8th Street, Suite 300 Bellevue; Washington 98004 (206) 454 -5600 August 12, 1994 CONTENTS Page Introduction Existing Conditions Road Network Traffic Volume. Forecast Trip Generation Trip Distribution Site Access Issues Mitigation Summary Appendices A - Trip Generation Studies of Existing Circuit City Stores B Andover Park East Redevelopment Project Traffic Study by TP &E C - 'Internal" Trips Within Multi - Development Areas D - Circuit City Market Study Analysis: E City of Tukwila Transportation Element - Table 12. 94021/Raporb/Trafanal (8111 /94)1 Pow FIGURES 1. Project Vicinity 2. Proposed Site Plan 3. Net New Project-Generated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes With Retail Pad 4. Net New Project - Generated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Without Retail Pad Page 2 TABLES Page 1. Circuit City - Tukwila: Trip Generation. Summary With Full Buildout of the Site 2. Circuit City - Tukwila: Trip Generation for Circuit City. Only Without the Retail Pad 3. Driveway Volumes and Level of Service With Full Bulldout of the Site 10 4. Circuit City Mitigation Proportionate. Fair Share Costs CIRCUIT CITY STORE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORT INTRODUCTION This traffic impact analysis has been prepared for the proposed Circuit City store in Tukwila, Washington. The report addresses the existing traffic conditions and provides an analysis and discussion of traffic - related issues regarding the proposed store. The proposed Circuit City store site is located on the west side of Andover Park East north of Strander Boulevard (see figure 1). The existing site is currently occupied by an 87,255- square -foot warehouse. The Circuit City site will consist of a 41,220- square -foot Circuit City store and a 8,635 - square -foot retail pad. Access to and from the site is proposed by one access driveway along Andover Park East. This driveway is planned to operate with one inbound and two outbound lanes and be controlled by a stop sign. A site plan has been developed for the proposed Circuit City and is shown in figure 2. Sources of information and data used for this study are as follows: • Trip Generation manual, fifth edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), January 1991 • Trip generation study of four Circuit City stores during the p.m. peak hour. Arthur L. Kassan, P.E. • Trip generation study of Santa Ana, California Circuit City store during the noon peak hour. Arthur L. Kassan, P.E. • Market Study Information conducted by Circuit City • Traffic impact study for the proposed warehouse and retail redevelopment at 223 Andover Park East, by TP &E, August 31,1993 EXISTING CONDITIONS Road Network The streets which provide major access to the site are Andover Park East, the West Valley Highway, Tukwila Parkway, and Strander Boulevard. Andover Park East is a four -lane north -south collector arterial with two through lanes in each direction and left tum pockets at major intersections. It serves as an alternative route to northbound West Valley Highway to areas northeast of the project site. 94021 /Reportn/Trafanal (8/11/94) / lbw 1 A398 94021 -60 Traffic Study 7/11/94 AGH CO E N T R A NCO 2 Figure 1 Project Vicinity 0 z 4 t W 3 HEY V6 /31./L APnIS OI11eJ1 09-1ZOPB 96CV The West Valley Highway (SR 181) is a heavily used five -lane north -south principal arterial with two through lanes in each direction and a two -way left -turn lane. It provides a link to the west Kent area south of the project site and northeast Tukwila. It also provides a connection to the City of Renton via its interchange with 1 -405. Tukwila Parkway is a four -lane secondary arterial with a raised median in places and left - turn pockets at major driveways and intersections. It provides a direct access to both 1 -5 and 1 -405 along the frontage of the Southcenter mall. Strander Boulevard is a four -lane east -west secondary arterial with two through lanes in each direction and left-turn pockets at the critical intersections. It provides east -west circulation between SR 181 and Southcenter Parkway. TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECAST Trip Generation The p.m. peak hour trip generation for the proposed Circuit City's main building (41,220 square feet) was based on a trip rate developed from a 1993 study of four existing Circuit City stores located in southern California. The study was conducted during the p.m. peak period, which was between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. The average trip rate for the four stores was 3.72 trips per 1,000 square feet (see Appendix A). The noon peak hour generation for the proposed Circuit City's main building was based on counts conducted at an existing Circuit City store in Santa Ana, California. The count provided was conducted during the noon peak period, which was between 12:00 and 2:00 p.m. A noon trip rate of 4.68 vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet was determined. The trip generation for the retail pad was determined using trip rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, fifth edition, January 1991. The trip rates assumed the trip rates published for a Shopping Center (Land Use Code 820). The noon peak hour trip generation value was determined by the hourly variation in shopping center traffic (noon peak hour versus p.m. peak hour), as outlined in the ITE Trip Generation manual. The noon peak hour and p.m. peak hour trips generated by the existing warehouse were obtained from a traffic report conducted by TP &E (223 Andover Park East Redevelopment project, August 31, 1993). This report assumed the noon peak hour trips generated were five percent higher than the p.m. peak hour based on existing traffic volume patterns. (See Appendix B.) A pass -by /diverted linked trip factor of 35 percent was applied to the gross trip generation to account for vehicles already using the street network. This factor was used in the previous study conducted by TP &E. An internal capture rate of ten percent was applied to the gross trip generation to account for the proximity of the Circuit City store to other related uses. This factor was 94021 /Reports/Trafanal (8/11/94) / lbw 4 based on the information documentation in the memorandum "Internal" Trips Within Multi- Destination Development Areas, by Entranco, August 11, 1994, and approved by Mr. Ron Cameron, Tukwila City Engineer (Appendix C). The proposed Circuit City store and retail pad are projected to generate a total of 2,969 weekday trips with 329 trips occurring during the noon peak hour and 291 trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. The total new trips on the network, less pass -by /diverted linked trips, internal trips, and existing warehouse trips, is 1,207 weekday trips, of which 113 occur during the noon peak hour and 95 trips occur during the p.m. peak hour. Table 1 summarizes the trip generation analysis for full buildout of the site. The proposed Circuit City store with the exclusion of the retail pad is projected to generate a total of 1,440 weekday trips with 193 trips occurring during the noon peak hour and 153 trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. The total new trips associated with the Circuit City store less passby /diverted linked trips, internal trips, and existing warehouse trips is 366 weekday trips, of which 38 occur during the noon peak hour and 20 trips occur during the p.m. peak hour. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation analysis for the site without the retail pad. Trip Distribution The trip distribution and assignment for the proposed development's trip generation was based on a market study analysis conducted by Circuit City (Appendix D). Results of the study showed that 61 percent of the market base would be to and from Seattle, 17 percent Renton, 11 percent Kent, and 11 percent Des Moines. Figure 3 depicts the trip distribution percentages and trip assignment of the net project generated volumes to the surrounding street network for the noon and p.m. peak hours with full buildout of the site. Figure 4 shows the net project trips for Circuit City only without the retail pad. Site Access Issues Access to and from the site is proposed to be by one access driveway along Andover Park East. This driveway is planned to operate with one inbound and two outbound lanes and be controlled by a stop sign. A noon peak hour and p.m. peak hour level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted to determine the driveway operations. Background volumes for this analysis were obtained from the TP &E report. The driveway is expected to operate at LOS E during both the noon peak and p.m. peak hours. The LOS E conditions at the driveway will occur with or without the retail pad. It should be noted that the LOS reported for unsignalized intersections is the worst case among all of the calculated movements at the intersection (typically the worst case is one of the stop -sign controlled side street approaches). The movement experiencing LOS E conditions at the driveway is the left turn exiting the driveway, while all other movements at the driveway experience LOS A conditions. However, actual operations for the traffic turning left from the driveway will be improved by gaps in the northbound traffic flow on Andover Park East, created by the signal at the Strander Boulevard /Andover Park East intersection. A summary of driveway volumes and LOS is provided in table 3. 94021 /Reports/Trafanal (8/11/94) / lbw 5 0 5 co 0 • 13 4- L (Q va 0 as Z' cls tu 5 E V cn O L ct E.5 ° 3 es d d a •L O d 15 O. 2 Cf cc O. H rts O c 0 C 3 au- C 3 ti 00 01 CD UD T CO LC) CM (OD CD C7 CM r O N CO N 1) N CO ID 4 cV 4 C\1 N N L4 C C N N O N OD CD N n N N N • bit to la (.1 2 2 N A411 94021 -60 Traffic Study 8/11/94 AGH h co Legend: t xxx — Net New Noon Peak Hour Trips with Retail Pad (xxx) —Net New P.M. Peak Hour Trips with Retail Pad Trip Distribution Percentages (4) 5 (4) N5 Not to Scale 4 8 (6) (41) 5 Tukwila Parkway and 3 (3) 5 (4) Strander (41) 50 ""Ni (41) 50 4 Baker Boulevard (6) 8 --► Proposed Driveway Note: Driveway volumes do not include reduction for pass -by /diverted linked trips, internal trips, or existing trip generation. Blvd 4-- 5 (4 `1 28 � (26) `••• ) Rive, Project Site / • v.•o. :O;;C 28 ' (5) : (26) 6 (4) (. _) •, 4J 6 j - 10 (8) y (3) 4 '� 4 6) 8 -I t (2) 2 71 (3) 4 (3) j " ti I W t a o •\ < \ (103) 122 (101)109 .1 (43)48 "t 52 (44) S 178th Street (4) 5 18 (6) Andover Park W t,61��• (2) �► 4 (3) S 180th Street 1 • ey Highway 4 (2) 2 t 4 4 (3) (3) CIRCUIT CITY ENTRANCO Figure 3 Net New Project- Generated Peak Hour. Traffic Volumes with Retail Pad 8 A412 94021 -60 Legend: t xxx —Net New Noon Peak Hour Trips without Retail Pad (xxx)— Net New P.M. Peak Hour Trips without Retail Pad Trip Distribution Percentages N Not to Scale () r r 3 1(0 3 (2) 4 U 7 0 0) co a Proposed Driveway Note: Driveway volumes do not include reduction for pass -by /diverted linked trips, internal trips, or existing trip generation. Strander Boulevard (14) 19 (14) 19 Baker 4 7 Q„.� (0) `.•ten Rive Project f Site ; • (0) 1 (2) 1 (0 ..a R. 5 (g) 2) 3 –# t (0) t .'1 (1) (1) 1 v � � 3 Blvd (53) 69 11 (22) 29 -11 28 (23) S 178th Street (0) 1 l 3 (2) Andover Park W i � 3 r (01) 1 k-,0) 1 S 180th Street t 1.2 (1) (1) CIRCUIT CITY ENTRANCO Figure 4 Net New Project- Generated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 9 without Retail Pad Table 3 Driveway Volumes and Level of Service With Full Buildout of the Site Noon Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Level of Reserve Level of Reserve Site Driveway Movement Volume Service Capacity Volume Service Capacity Left turn exiting to northbound 109 E 12 101 E 30 Andover Park East Right turn exiting to 46 A 799 43 A 814 southbound Andover Park East Left turn entering from 52 A 520 44 A 547 northbound Andover Park East The vehicle queue extending back northward toward the site driveway from the southbound approach at the Strander Boulevard /Andover Park East intersection is projected to be 225 feet during the noon peak hour and 150 feet during the p.m. peak hour. Since the available distance between this intersection and the proposed project driveway is approximately 410 feet, queuing should not be a problem along the project frontage. There are currently four driveways on the east side Andover Park East across the street from the proposed project site. Two of the driveways are within 100 feet of the proposed access. These driveways serve low volumes of traffic during the peak hours. Therefore, the safety of vehicles turning simultaneously from the opposing driveways should not be a problem. No sidewalks exist along the project's site frontage on Andover Park East. A sidewalk is provided immediately to the south, but none exist north of the project site on the west side of Andover Park East. Improvements will be made to include a sidewalk along the project frontage. Pedestrians access to the site will be provided by sidewalks on the west side of Andover Park East. Pedestrians wishing to cross Andover Park East will use the crosswalks provided at the intersection of Strander Boulevard /Andover Park East. 94021 /Raports/Tratanal (7/21/94) / lbw 10 Mitigation The mitigation procedure for the proposed project, as identified by Mr. Ron Cameron, is an agreement to pay a fair share to the improvements identified in the City of Tukwila Transportation Element, Table 12 - Mitigation Proportionate Fair Share Costs (Appendix E). The fair share mitigation is only assessed when more than five peak hour project trips impact a project listed in the City of Tukwila Transportation Element. The amount to be submitted for mitigation is based on the cost per peak hour trip for each improvement, as defined in the mitigation table. The noon peak hour represents the worst peak hour and thus was used to determine the fair share costs for the project. At this time, the improvement costs for city improvement projects five through nine are based on the City's planning level cost estimates. The City should define the level of improvement to occur at these locations and prepare detailed cost estimates to refine the cost per trip for these improvements. The costs for improvements 5 -9, as shown in table 4, represent a maximum project cost to determine the fairshare mitigation for Circuit City. Per Mr. Ron Cameron, the total improvement cost of the signal at Andover Park East/Baker Boulevard will be up to 25 percent Tess than the cost shown in table 4. Circuit City's final fair share cost of improvements 5 -9 will be determined when the detailed cost estimates are provided. Mitigation was developed for the site with and without the retail pad. Based on the mitigation procedure outlined by the City, current projected improvement costs associated with each project, and planning level cost estimates for projects 5 -9, the Circuit City fair share cost of these improvements is estimated to be a maximum of $13,403, and the retail pad fair share cost is estimated to be a maximum of $33,169, as summarized in table 4. The retail pad will be applied for under a separate Board of Architectural Review (BAR). Therefore, mitigation fees for the retail pad shall be applied upon issuance of a building permit. Mitigation credits will be given for frontage improvements (widening only) by the developer. The cost of these improvements shall be subtracted from the costs shown in table 4. The mitigation costs reflected in this report is preliminary and shall be finalized after reivew and agreement between the developer and the City of Tukwila. Summary Based on the trip generation developed from driveway counts at existing Circuit City stores, at full buildout, the proposed Circuit City site is projected to generate a total of 2,969 weekday trips with 329 trips occurring during the noon peak hour and 291 trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. The total new trips on the network, less 35 percent pass -by /diverted linked trips, 10 percent internal trips, and the site's existing warehouse trips, is 1,207 weekday trips, of which 113 occur during the noon peak hour and 95 trips occur during the p.m. peak hour. Without the exclusion of the retail pad, the total net new trips on the network is 366 weekday trips of which 38 occur during the noon peak and 20 trips occur during the p.m. peak hour. 94021 /Rapals/Trafanal (7/21/94) / lbw 11 Project Intersection or Link a= O N T to C13 O o to o T CO CO 0 o r` N O 0 0 0 O N NO O O coo O C (D (0 a0 0) e! r r r C) 60, 40, (A N 11 Ts 0 O to f` tf) •' n N 00 Ch N r M e0 0) N co T T Grand Total 0 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c v ' (D O 0 0 O O Ci m T. 0 N N N N N N c m CI EA T T E lL CD C ri w ° cia 0 0 o Q) N 0) CO cm O O C) 0) 4.7. f p c C a. ED.. c C r" a0� N (0 . m to . 1- CO lff N 7 m d ,Y' co O O r` 0) w n~ _c •• m E a m s E N 0 > SO .. ca o gr. m x o == a c m ° c c c a) as a) -O c m .. Ix c :2 o .n c c ° CD ca Ts 8 ai $ 3 1. c in 2 -0 c o -mc3.c a) a) a) �L L m of c0 C °G CD 'O c �° m ' Z co a 3 N m C N ' C a) a) O f' y(9 y 0. (v b r 'p (/i N N O m Y C 0 U 7 -0 y � E� E T u7 a (a c c ° y a m 0= a`)m aim v/) d `a) aa) to c a 'd a � �' o u' o �' o o m S is s", a) �° ›.. a, om c? c? c C �c v) o' > E U m u co � a.° a ° co a a'�n a•(n cn 3 5 u ; &h O E U LL T N co •t to co n co 0) ° Z e- N (h el: Access to and from the site is proposed to be by one access driveway with two exit lanes along Andover Park East. The left- turning traffic from the driveway is calculated to operate at LOS E during both the noon peak and p.m. peak hours. However, actual operations for the left- turning traffic from the driveway will be somewhat better, due to gaps in the northbound traffic flow created by the signal at the Strander Boulevard /Andover Park East intersection. The mitigation for the proposed project is an agreement to pay a fair share of the improvements identified in the City of Tukwila Transportation Element, Table 12 - Mitigation Proportionate Fair Share Costs (Appendix E). The total fair share for the Circuit City site will be redefined when all detailed cost estimates are completed. Based on current the mitigation procedure as outlined by the City, projected improvement costs associated with each project, and planning level cost estimates for projects 5 -9, the Circuit City fair share cost of these improvements is estimated to be a maximum of $13,403, and the retail pad fair share cost is estimated to be a maximum of $33,169. Mitigation credits will be given for frontage improvements (widening only) by the developer and will be subtracted from the costs shown in table 4. The mitigation costs reflected in this report is preliminary and shall be finalized after reivew and agreement between the developer and the City of Tukwila. 94021/Rsporti/Trafanal (7/12/04) / lbw APPENDIX A Trip Generation Studies of Existing Circuit City Stores MAY -04 -1994 16:17 FROM THE HENDERSON GROUP February 11, 1994 TO 4540220 P.02 ARTHUR L. KASSAN, P.E. Consulting Traffic Engineer Mr. George Pasini Director of Design & Development Circuit City Stores, Inc. 9950 Mayland Drive Richmond, Virginia 23233 Dear Mr. Pasini: As the consulting traffic engineer for the City of Culver City, California, and the Culver City Redevelopment Agency, I have prepared numerous Traffic Impact Studies of developments ranging from residential complexes to regional shopping centers. Currently, I am engaged in a study of a retail center that will contain a Circuit City consumer electronics and appliance specialty store among the retail and financial facilities. Early in the study, it was recognized that the electronics specialty store would probably have trip generation patterns that are • not represented by the types of retail establishments for which the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has published data in the book, Trip Generation, Fifth Edition, 1991. Therefore, it would be necessary to collect data that are specific to that type of store. In August and September 1993, a traffic counting firm retained by me counted the numbers of vehicles entering and leaving two existing Circuit City stores in Orange County, California (an area of suburban development and, therefore, generally high trip generation at retail facilities). Subsequently, we decided to supplement the original data with data from two suburban stores in Los Angeles County, and those counts were made earlier this month. The counts were at the following locations and on the following dates: Santa Ana, Wednesday, August 25, 1993 Newport Beach, Wednesday, September 1, 1993 Norwalk, Tuesday, February 8, 1994 South Torrance, Wednesday, February 9, 1994 Telephone 5105 Cimarron Lne PI I n FAX , awes MAY-04 -1994 16:18 FROM THE HENDERSON GROUP Mr. George Pasini February 11, 1994 Page 2 TO 4540220 P.03 The counts were conducted during the afternoon commuter peak period, 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. and recorded in 15- minute intervals. All stores were open until 9:00 p.m. on the count days. The results of the two-hour and peak -hour vehicle counts are summarized in Table 1. Also shown are the peak -hour trip rates (vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet) for each store and for the average. For total trips in the afternoon peak hour, the average trip rate counted was 3.72 trips per 1.000 square feet. Although the trip rate for Circuit City stores is different from typical retail trip rates, it can be assumed that the hourly variation in traffic follows similar percentage patterns. According to data in the ITE book, Trip Generation, Fifth Edition, the percentages of the total traffic that will appear in the afternoon peak hour will he 10.3% of entering traffic and 11.0% of leaving traffic (Table 2, pg. 1232). The average of those percentages is 10.65%. Applying that average percentage to the peak -hour trip rates in Table 1 results in the estimates of 24 -hour trip rates shown in Table 2. The average 24 -hour trip rate is estimated at 34.93 trips per 1.000 square feet, total in both directions. I hope that this information will be useful to you in planning your future projects. If you have any questions about this information, please contact me. Very truly yours, Arthur L. Kassan, P.E. • MAY -04 -1994 16:18 FROM THE HENDERSON GROUP TO 4540220 P.04 TABLE 2 • ESTIMATED TRIP RATES CIRCUIT CITY STORES 24 HOURS OF WEEKDAY STORE TOTAL PEAK -HOUR ESTIMATED TOTAL 24 -HOUR LOCATION TRIP RATE' TRIP RATE* (FROM TABLE 1I_ (PEAK -HOUR RATE /10.65 %) LSanta Ana 4.02 Total Trip Rate -. Number of vehicle trips, total entering lus leaving, er 1,000 .square feet of building floor area. 37.75 29.48 39.91 30.89 34.93 MAY-04-1994 16:19 FROM THE HENDERSON GROUP TO 4540220 P.05 Vg• Z .1 • ea 0 cgs n• • t.) • .09 .14 "eq4 -4 0O1113d ) VII NO M Y 1- 9 4 F R I 1 5: 3 9 A R T H U R L. K A S S A N P. E. P. 0 2 bA n ¢, / e t Fes-, dey) /-1: 4 o TIME: !tEC't)1ZMO 13Y .�: eo P 13/Paid. Td L..- -0543Urak 7Ckt. 4, . lor�Tl _ ar: /A: o / 3 1 q :11° • / 7 .. Jo /3 1 •' !8 . /: DO 17 - • o., 1 ? . .•gyp . ._.... ..r _._ r • Cal ri r O 1�� ...•. lit' 4Cor.47 ' Y .... /. •� ., O .Y �_ .... Ja °"T • I C;20 �,S' • 1 d' • o 01.4 a.3 I Al i i 460 • '3b �D • • 13/Paid. Td L..- -0543Urak 7Ckt. 4, . lor�Tl _ ar: / 3 1 .- .____.__ -...-r ._.... ..r _._ r • 9 •••••••■•• •� ., • •••• / V .... _, r._____.___ • I C;20 01.4 I Al i i 460 • APPENDIX Andover Park East <., Redevelopment Project Traffic Study by TP &E I H BISHOP P E. Prescenl. CCr 'NGE P E. vice Prescient TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY c/o Mr. Howard R. Turner, AIA TURNER & ASSOCIATES 18420 24th Pl. N.E. Seattle, WA 98155 2101 • 1121h AVENUE N E.. SUITE 110 — BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 98004 TELEPHONE (206) 455.5320 FACSIMILE 12061453.7180 August 31, 1993 Re: 223 Andover Park E. Redevelopment Project Pre - Application File No. 93 -011 Traffic Impact Study Dear Howard: We are pleased to present this traffic impact study for the proposed warehouse and retail redevelopment project located at 223 Andover Park E. (on the west side of Andover Park E. north of Strander Blvd.) in the City of Tukwila. The project proposes to remodel an existing 87,255 sq. ft. warehouse including the following: o demolition of 15,655 sq. ft. of the existing warehouse; retaining 42,400 sq. ft. of warehouse and supporting office space; o and remodelling the remaining 29,200 sq. ft. into a discount auto parts store including 3,300 sq. ft. dedicated to tire sales and mounting. Six tire mounting bays are proposed. We have visited the project site and surrounding street network, and have discussed the scope of this study with Mr. Ron Cameron, P.E., City Engineer of Tukwila. This study analyzes the intersections of Andover Park EJBaker Blvd. and the two site accesses onto Andover Park East. Traffic control signal warrants will also be checked for the intersection of Andover Park EJBaker Boulevard. The conclusions and recommendations begin on page 7 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and the surrounding street network. Ta82293.RPT Tp� MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY . August 31, 1993 Page -2- Figure 2 shows a preliminary site plan. The plan consists of 71,600 sq. ft. of total building space, 139 parking stalls, and two vehicle accesses onto Andover Park East. An additional emergency vehicle access connects Strander Blvd. with the west side of the project site via an abandoned railroad right of way. Six truck loading bays are proposed, including four 65 ft. recessed bays to the west and two flush bays to the east. The recessed bays can accommodate a WB -65 tractor /trailer combination. The two flush bays will be able to serve nothing larger than a single unit truck. Truck access to the loading bays will be from the north site access on Andover Park East. Most trucks will access the three easternmost recessed bays by entering the north site access from Andover Park E., traveling straight down the parking circulation isle, stopping when the trailer has cleared the bays, then backing into the desired bay. For the westernmost recessed bay, a longer backing maneuver may be required. A tractor /trailer combination destined to this bay will approach the project site, preferably from the north, on Andover Park East. It will then turn right into the site using the north access, make a left turn maneuver toward the east side of the building until the trailer has cleared the throat of the north access, back up and turn westbound on the north parking circulation isle and back into the bay. Signing should be provided for truck drivers at the accesses on Andover Park E. prohibiting truck access via the south access and giving direction on the preferred access to the six loading bays. Full development of the warehouse and retail project is expected to occur by mid -1994, therefore 1994 is used as the horizon year for the purposes of this study. EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure 3 shows existing traffic control, number of roadway lanes, number of approach lanes at intersections, and other pertinent information near the project site. The primary roads near the project site are Andover Park E., Andover Park W., Strander Blvd., Southcenter Pkwy. and Baker Boulevard. No sidewalks exist along the project site frontage on Andover Park East. A sidewalk has recently been constructed by an adjacent redevelopment project immediately to the south, but no sidewalks exist north of the project site on the west side of Andover Park East. T081293.RPT TpE MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 manual traffic volume count was conducted at this intersection on Tuesday, , August 17, 1993 during the PM peak hour (4:30 -5:30 PM) by TP &E, Inc. staff. Data was collected from the City to perform a check of the minimum traffic volume traffic signal warrants for the Andover Park EJBaker Blvd. intersection. The majority of the data used for the warrant analysis was gathered by the City in May 1992. Due to some traffic volume discrepancies in the 1992 data, some data dated September 1991 was used and either adjusted to 1992 or averaged with the 1992 data. The attached warrant analysis notes how the data was used. Warrant no. 1 is only met for two consecutive hours of an average weekday and warrant no. 2 is met for six consecutive hours of an average weekday. Eight consecutive hours are needed to meet the requirements of either warrant no. 1 or 2. Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate, and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows the calculated LOS for 1993 conditions at the pertinent street intersections and driveways. The LOS were calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Hiehwav Capacity Manual - Special Report 209, 1985. The LOS shown indicate overall intersection operation at signalized intersections and worst case traffic movement operation at stop sign controlled intersections. At signalized intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average delay per vehicle. At two -way stop sign controlled intersections, LOS is determined by reserve capacity. Reserve capacity is the number of new vehicles that can be added to a traffic movement before the operational conditions deteriorate and motorists begin to experience serious backups and delays (LOS. F). The unsignalized intersection analysis procedure is conservative, and tends to indicate a worse operation than most motorists perceive at the intersection. T081293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -4- Typically the LOS shown for an unsignalized intersection is the LOS for the side street left turn, which is usually the worst case traffic movement. At intersections where the left turn volume is low, the operation indicated should be tempered by engineering judgement based on roadway and traffic conditions. The intersection of Andover Park EJBaker Blvd. is currently operating at LOS E during both the noon peak hour (12:00 -1:00 PM) and the PM peak hour (4:30 -5:30 PM). Traffic volumes in the noon peak hour are estimated to be 4.4% higher than in the PM peak hour at this intersection based on actual data collected at the Andover Park EJStrander Blvd. intersection to the south in May 1992. During our field review it was apparent that sight distance obstructions exist in the northwest quadrant of the Andover Park EJBaker Blvd. intersection. The obstructions are a row of large street trees is located immediately in back of the street curb. One to two feet west of the street trees is a dense shrub which is approximately three feet high. The stop bar for eastbound traffic can not be moved any further east. Eventually sidewalks will be built along this section of Andover Park E. which will greatly improve the situation, but the street trees would need to be removed to completely void the sight distance triangle of obstructions.. Accident data obtained from the City for the three year period from January 1990 to December 1992 showed only three accidents that may have been related to the sight distance issue. Since the sight distance obstruction currently is not causing a significant safety problem, no immediate remedial improvements should be needed. However, we do recommend the City monitor the intersection in the future for traffic safety. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 5 shows projected 1994 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing (1993) traffic volume counts plus background growth. The growth factor used in this report is 2.5% per year, determined from historical traffic volume counts. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The warehouse and auto parts retail project is expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the AM and PM street T081293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -5- 1pC traffic peak hours as shown on Table 1. The noon peak hour trip generation (not shown on Table 1) is expected to be approximately 5% higher than in the PM peak hour based on existing traffic volume patterns. There is expected to be 29 net new noon peak hour trips, only one trip more than in the PM peak hour. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Fifth Edition, 1991 for Warehouse (rrx; Land Use Code 150), Automobile Care Center (ITE Land Use Code 840), and Tire Store (ITE Land Use Code 848). To be conservative no reduction in trips was taken for captured trips that will occur between the auto parts sales and the tire sales and mounting portions of the store. A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips. A pass -by trip is an existing trip that comes directly from the traffic flow on a road adjacent to the project site, and does not require a diversion from another roadway. A diverted linked trip does require a diversion from another roadway. Both of these types trips can be deducted from the total primary trips because they are not new to the street network. Based on pass -by and diverted linked trip percentages found in Section VII of Trip Generation, we estimate that approximately 35% of the site - generated trips (retail portion only) can be classified as pass -by /diverted linked trips. The net new project trips were calculated by subtracting the trip generation from the existing warehouse operation and the pass -by /diverted linked trips from the total driveway volumes for the proposed project. Figure 6 shows the estimated trip distribution and the calculated site - generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on the characteristics of the street network, existing traffic volume patterns, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (residential, employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times, and previous traffic studies. T081293.RPT MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page • -6- FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Figure 7 shows the projected 1994 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site - generated PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 6 were added to the projected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 5 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes. Table 1 shows calculated LOS for future with and without project conditions at the pertinent street intersections. The intersection of Andover Park E.Baker Blvd. is expected to operate at LOS E with or without the project. If a traffic control signal became warranted and installed at this intersection, it is expected that it would operate at a high LOS B. This assumes that the existing lane configuration remains unchanged and a simple two phase fully actuated signal is installed. Both site accesses on Andover Park E. are expected to operate at LOS C. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City will require the developer to widen Andover Park E. 2.5 ft. along the project frontage and install a sidewalk and landscape buffer to match the recently installed frontage improvements by the adjacent property to the south (Computer City Supercenter). It is recommended that Andover Park E. remain channelized as it currently exists until the remaining properties on both sides of Andover Park E. between Strander Blvd. and Baker Blvd construct their 2.5 ft. of widening. The desired cross section for Andover Park E. is 56 ft. with five lanes, two each direction and a center two way left lane and/or left turn pockets at intersections. In the interim, the site accesses are expected to operate at acceptable levels of service. The City has indicated that they are collecting contributions for several intersection improvement projects throughout the City. The developer should offer to pay contributions for those intersections which are expected to be impacted by ten or more net new noon peak hour project trips. The intersection of Andover Park EiStrander Blvd. is impacted by 16 net new noon peak hour project trips (29 net new noon peak hour trips x .55) at a contribution rate of $317 /trip for a contribution of $5,072. T081293.RPT MCCONEEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -7- 1PE The intersection of Andover Park EJBaker Blvd. is impacted by 13 net new noon peak hour project trips (29 net new noon peak hour trips x .45). The probable improvement to this location is a traffic control signal However, the City has not developed a detailed cost estimate for this improvement. The City's planning level cost estimate is $250,000 which assumes some geometric improvements as well as the signal Geometric improvements at this intersection may not be necessary. The $250,000 cost translates to a contribution rate of $377 /trip. The City should define the level of improvements for the intersection and prepare a detailed cost estimate to refine this trip rate. The developer should offer to pay a contribution for this intersection improvement based on the refined trip rate. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the warehouse and auto parts retail project be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following comments and traffic impact mitigation measures: 1. The developer will be required to widen Andover Park E. 2.5 ft. along the project frontage with sidewalk and a landscape buffer. 2. Rechannelization of Andover Park E. is not recommended until all other properties on both sides of Andover Park E. between Strander Blvd. and Baker Blvd. have constructed their 2.5 ft. of widening 3. The developer should offer to contribute toward improvements at the Andover Park EJStrander Blvd. intersection. The pro rata contribution is $5,072. 4. The developer should offer to contribute toward improvements at the Andover Park EJBaker Blvd. intersection based on a pro rata contribution rate to be developed by the City. 5. Appropriate signing should be provided at the site accesses on Andover Park E. prohibiting delivery truck access via the south site access and providing clear instruction on the preferred access to the loading bays in the middle of the site via the north site access. TD81293.RPT . MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 31, 1993 Page -8- No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions please contact Mr. Bob Herman or me at (206)455 -5320. RMH/ab Very truly yours, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. WIPES 41519d/ Mark J. J'acaJds, P.E. Project Manager/Engineer TP� TABLE 1 • INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE 223 ANDOVER PARK E. TRAFFIC STUDY INTERSECTION 1993 NOON PEAK HOUR 1993 PM PEAK HOUR 1994 PM PEAK HOUR WIO PROJECT 1994 PM PEAK HOUR WI PROJECT Andover Park EJ Baker Blvd. E [34] E [52] E [40] E1 [37] Andover Park EJ North Site Access NC T NC NC C [222] Andover Park EJ South Site Access NC NC NC C [232] NOTES: ° Number in parenthesis ( ) is the average the LOS for a signalized intersection ° Number in brackets [ ] is the reserve traffic movement which determines the 1985 Hiehwav Capacity Manual. delay in seconds/vehicle which determines per the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. capacity for the the LOS for a minor worst case minor approach -leg stop -sign intersection per two phase signalized intersection 1 This intersection would operate at LOS B (6.0) as a ,in its current lane configuration. NC = Not Calculated. SIGNAL WARRANT CHECK TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. ANDOVER PARK E./BAKER BLVD. 2101 - 112TH AVE. N.E.. SUITE 110 R.M. HERMAN BELLEVUE, WA 98004 820 /93 TEL. (206) 455 -5320 FAX (206) 453 -7180 TWO LANE APPROACHES TWO LANE 35 MPH SPEED LIMIT APPROACHES ENDING HOUR NB(1) SB(2) TOT EB(3) WB(4) WARR. # /WARR. #2 1 23 15 38 3 2 2 8 4 12 1 6 3 8 5 13 0 0 4 8 5 13 1 5 5 4 19 23 2 1 6 19 65 84 2 5 7 86 180 266 10 11 8 226 391 617 19 18 9 286 312 598 44 38 10 339 276 615 51 38 11 402 423 825 90 70 12 559 499 1058 96 126 XX 13 622 546 1168 158 181 XX 14 565 482 1047 157 108 XX 15 490 425 915 111 77 XX 16 568 410 978 111 110 XX 17 591 427 1018 124 219 XX . XX 18 495 330 825 81 228 19 276 260 536 47 87 20 243 188 431 31 98 21 175 139 314 27 2 22 52 42 94 15 22 23 30 18 48 4 8 24 18 12 30 3 7 TOTALS 6093 5473 11566 1188 1487 2 6 NOT NOT MET MET (1) 5/14/92 ACTUAL 24-HR. COUNT. (2) 9/5/91 ACTUAL 24-HR. COUNT ADJUSTED TO 1992 USING 2.5% GROWTH RATE. (3) 5/14/92 ACTUAL 24-HR. COUNT. (4) 9/5/91 & 5/14/92 ACTUAL 24-HR. COUNT'S AVERAGED (1991 AWDT = 1715 & 1992 AWDT = 1258). K FACTORS FROM 1992 COUNT USED. APPENDIX C " Internal" Trips Within Multi-Development f Areas (August 11, 1994 Memo to City of Tukwila) ; ;: MEMORANDUM Date: August 11, 1994 To: Ron Cameron, City Engineer, Tu; From: Dennis Neuzil, Entranco Subject: "Internal" Trips within Multi- Destination Development Areas Circuit City - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 94021 -60 Research published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, Fifth Edition, January 1991 and elsewhere (e.g., Urban Land Institute monographs) has shown that aggregating the application of ITE vehicle trip rates to the individual uses in a small developing area will overestimate gross trip generation volumes on the area's external arterial network. The decline in shopping center trip generation rate with increasing size (floor area) is a well -known related example of this relationship. Because of the proximity of the proposed Tukwila Circuit City store to other related commercial /retail uses —such as Computer City, Office Depot, Smith's Home Fumishing, and others —a percent- reduction in the external trip generation rate appears warranted. This reduction, often referred to as "capture" rate, would conservatively apply to those traffic impact locations (selected arterial intersections in Tukwila's case), which are located beyond the immediate superblock or local area of Circuit City site. A capture rate —Le., the percent reduction in gross trip rate — ranging from 15 percent to 50 percent or more for both the p.m. peak hour and daily basis has been observed. (See ITE Trip Generation.) As another example, consider ITE's shopping center (Land Use Code 820). The p.m. peak hour trip generation rates for a 40,000- square -foot, 100,000 - square -foot, and 200,000- square -foot shopping center are: P.M. Peak Hour Trip Rate Square Foot — Floor Area Rate Index 40,000 9.15 = 1.00 100,000 6.56 = 0.72 200,000 5.10 = 0.56 Thus the 200,000 - square -foot shopping center generates 44 percent fewer trips per square foot than the 40,000 - square -foot shopping center, in part due to the captive rate phenomenon. For the 40,000- square -foot Circuit City and given its proximity to 150,000 to 200,000 square feet of related land uses, a capture rate of a ten percent reduction in the ITE "stand- alone" store trip rate is warranted and would be a conservative downward adjustment in trip rates in this specific case. Thanks for your consideration of this matter. Please call if you have any questions or comments on this. DRN:Ibw : ..•.....`.�...�.. APPENDIX .D Circuit City Market Study Analysis ' JUL -20 -1991 13 :4141 FROM THE HENDERSOM GROUP PK*1 SCENTDEM.XLS TO 4IS40220 P.02 SE- c.2•►�rl... Demographic Breakdown of Southcenter Market opuiation Area Dir Rte./ Int # Pop % of Pop Net trps Notes KENT S NW 44,063 11% 19 SEATTLE (sum) 238,328 61% 103 RENTON NE 65,789 17% 28 DES MOINES W 44,620 11% • 19 392,800 100% 169 .., ,._._... From Market Analysis Conduesmd Oa 911193 NAm Rv.ifs s r er 19a6 GIN v1A11 onus sto es In Doth 8eae�vue WA and l�edsrdl Warr WA SE- c.2•►�rl... APPENDIX E City of Tukwila Transportation Element - Table 12 0-0= 1■44-el s F.+ 1,,,4preveKiet,45 raThbIe 1 2- " M t:11:3 R-oportizinait. Fed i MI/Are CCStS" Tseam esChAnIft.. PILIA" 2 NOV . JUN 13 '94 08:43AM TUKWILA DCD /PW P.2 TRANSPORTATIQN ELEMENT Table 12 - Mitigation Proportionate Fairshare Costs (1 h+ersec +ra�l5 p- 1990 2010 Pk Vol Improvement • Cost/ Pk Vol Pk Vol Diff Cost Trio 3,899 4,853 954 3134,000 5140 h Z , Andover Pk ElStrander 3,211 3,905 694 394,000 5135 widen for n/s left turns 3,082 4,016 934 S296,000 S317 5,236 7,760 2,524 S1,200,000 5475 790 1.453 663 S250,000' 2.441 3.078 637 5250.000' 2,425 3.324 899 3250,000* 3,433 4,316 883 5250.000* 2,831 3,945 1,114 S1,250,000* Intersection or Link I, Southcenter /Strander widen for WB left turns Andover Pk W/Strander widen for n/s left turns �! S 180 St/SR181 widen n/s aad e/w Andover Pk B/Baker n/s lefts, signal 6• Andover Pk W/Minkler n/s lefts, signal 7, Southcenter PkWy /168 signal W Valley /Strander NB dual left turn lanes Interurban Bridge • widen for dual lefts 3. • * This is a "planing level"-estimate. Future (Beyond 6 years (2000)): Minkler (APW - Southcenter Pkwy) 0 1,015 1,015 construct 3lane street S 178 St (Southcenter PkWy -WC..) 789 1,424 635 f realign (cap /safety /transit) Andover PkWy (T PkWy -180) 1,112 1,833 721 widen to 5 Ianes Andover Pk E (T Pkwy -180) 970 1,420 450 widen to 5 lanes @ ins. Southcenter PkWy (180 -200) 408 1.600 1,192 construct 3 and 5 lane street . • S377 3392 S278 le S283 S1,122 • • November 1993 71 • CIRCUIT CITY. Circuit City Stores, Inc. 9950 Mayland Drive Richmond, VA 23233 -1464 August 15, 1994 • Vernon Umetsu City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 431 -3684 RECEIVED AUG 19199, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RE: Circuit City - Tukwila, WA (Andover Blvd.) Dear Mr. Umetsu: This is notice to the City that Circuit City will pay, at time of building permit receipt, traffic mitigation fees for the Circuit City building as stated within the traffic report prepared by Entranco dated 12 Aug 94. The mitigation fees associated with the outparcel will be paid when that building is issued a building permit. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office immediately. Sincerely, CIRCUIZCITY STOKES, INC. Greg Kin h, A.I. Corporate Design Administrator GK/sst cc: Scott Sherrow - Entranco Scott Godino CRIME PREVENTION SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Cashier Platform: The cashier's area or store information area should be on a raised platform in order for the employees to have a better view of the entire business. This would help provide an atmosphere that the employee has control of the area thus reducing the opportunity for crimes to occur. 2. Restrooms: Recommend that the restrooms that are open to the general public not have false ceilings. There have been problems with subjects hiding in the ceiling area and then dropping down later to do robberies. Also ceiling areas have been used to hide merchandise wrappings. 3. Security Alarm: Recommend installing a security alarm system during construction that would report a robbery in progress as well as a burglary in progress when the business is closed. 4. Security Camera System: Recommend that a good quality surveillance video camera system be installed during construction. The cameras should have sufficient quality to be able to identify a subject from the video recorded tape. It is a deterrent to potential thieves and great for prosecution to have the actual crime on tape. 5. Windows: Consideration should be given to providing hardened coverings (such as security film, etc.) for ground level windows where glass breakage would allow for access to building interiors by burglars. 6. Orientation of Windows: Windows should be located so that the parking lot area can be easily surveyed by employees inside the business. Also the windows should be located so that a patrol car passing by can easily survey inside the business. 7. Doors: Doors should have quality locking mechanisms with minimum one inch deadbolt locks. All exit doors shall be operable from the interior without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. The Crime Prevention Unit should be contacted for information regarding correct hardware usage at 433 -1823. 8. Doors and Windows Protection: Smash and grab burglaries are popular in the retail areas. Many burglars simply drive a vehicle through the door or through a window to gain entry. They then load previously scouted merchandise into the vehicle in less than 90 seconds and drive off. Recommend placing concrete planters in front of doors and windows to detere this type of entry. 9. Graffiti Prevention Program: It is important to win the war against the graffiti "artist" and keep your building attractive for customers. New non -stick anti - graffiti water- based or wax like coatings are now available to make an effective barrier against graffiti or other potentially staining substances. Contact the crime prevention unit 433- 1823. 10. Landscaping: Plant materials should be placed and maintained so to provide visibility and prohibit hiding places for unauthorized people around ground level door and window areas. Sticker shrubs may discourage crime activities. Low shrubs and umbrella trees (where the canopy is maintained above five(5) feet from the ground) will allow surveillance opportunities, hence reducing the potential for criminal behavior. 11. Lighting: Energy efficient security lighting is a relatively low -cost, yet extremely effective way to protect your business. By providing sufficient lighting in the parking lot and around your building you will discourage burglars and vandals who don't like light, preferring the cover of darkness for their dirty work. Also the lighting will provide a legitimate sense of security for not only you, but your employees and customers. Checklist prepared by T. Kilburg (433 -1823) 7/25/94