Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit L93-0084 - TURNER & ASSOCIATES - SEARS HOMELIFE SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
l93-0084 402 strander boulevard l93-0083 turner & associates CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Remodel an existing 30,816 s.f. industrial /office building into a 44,000 s.f. retail building with 101 parking stalls. PROPONENT: FIDELITY ASSOCIATES LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY: ADDRESS:. PARCEL NO: SEC /TWN /RNG: LEAD AGENCY: 402 STRANDER BL 022320 -0010 NE 26/23/4 CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: L93 -0084 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable . significant adverse impact on the environment. An , SEPA environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.O30(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. **** *************** *********** ***** Fc******** ********** fr* *fie **h* **** ** k****•k* This determination is final and signed this .Zi 1 day o 199 /r. . Rick Beeler, Responsible Official City of Tukwila, (206) 431 -3680 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, 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. .,... w ......,.....a«.�..N,.ne,,. -s,r. i..w,u -.0 raicx.,.•.vn:uee..u'r .x v,..�ku,»...n........... --- ,., .�.ror . cxY' r�C• v4: gtrfRQii;kSJ:'.�iiT,'XiSSZw;,"i MEMORANDUM To: Tukwila SEPA Responsible Official From: Howard Turner Date: January 26, 1994 RE: L93 -0084: Turner and Assoc. (Homelife). Based on input from the Public Works Department, I herewith clarify and amend my SEPA checklist as follows: 1. A payment of $2,078.00 for a fair share of road improvements to the Andover Park West /Strander Blvd. intersection and the Andover Park East /Strander Blvd. intersection. 2. The applicant agrees to sign a "no protest agreement" for upgrading the current substandard water main. This agreement obligates the land owner to participate in a local improvement district for upgrading the water system, but does not waive any rights to protesting the fair share cost assignment to the property. These provisions shall be completed prior to final approval of the construction. file:93 \fidl \sepa ......,......_......_._..._..,....«..... a.«. »......»....,........ -<i... ...,... on.. mnwKx ...+,e,,.,t�,.•N, a.,+...,>....... ..a.� ...................w,.KM.. x wwcnrsaxc eePk' lr.. C+. S. Yd' c4'.` t' 7�"• •.mFa'C�.�v.':= 1r513zA"'VY 1/5/94 Ron, RE: Homelife SEPA. I need your and John's SEPA mitigation for traffic by next Monday (1 /10) in case I need to issue an MDNS (i.e. if the applicant refuses to incorporate the conditions into his proposal). Comments were due on 12/29 so I could review issues with the applicant. This will give me one day to put every thing together and issue the determination. Please give John your analysis in time for submitting Public Works comments by Monday. I'd appreciate if you could also talk with their traffic person about your requirements since I won't have any time to answer their questions in the one day available. If we miss this date, BAR project review may be postponed from January 27th to February 24th. • Thanks, Vernon cc onenc P, U KW ILA P1..IU.IC WORKS TO NAiVCE JlX�I X51994 RECE I E$n JAN - 5 1994 TUKWiLA PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instruction for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. The City uses this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply ". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the City staff can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional inforniation that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The City may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Nonproject proposals refer to actions which are different or broader than a single site specific development project, such as plans, policies and programs. Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the supplemental sheet for nonproject actions (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. Control No. Epic File No. LA — j } O Fee $325.00 Receipt No. RECEIVED NOV !61993 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ..n .... n.. w�-.,.. o-._ e...-¢.. r ,••,.c.c;.e.:,��r.,.a- ,u,ro,:.:. ., ..,.,.,.:v.., - :r: s�::,.cC•.m^, ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Fidelity Associates Homelife Remodel of existing warehouse 2. Name of applicant: Fidelity Associates 4211 Holly Lane Mercer Island, WA 98040 phone (206) 232 -6465 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: November 15, 1993 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Grading and demolition is anticipated to start in the early part of 1994, and the remodeling and ongoing site improvements could be complete by fall of 1994. Timing would depend on the City's review process. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. —OD-1 Pr cc; 1,72-00 81- 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 west portion of the building as retail will be filed as soon as a tenant is identified. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. - Grading and Utilities Report, dated 11 /15 /93,Bush Rocd and Hitchings, Inc. - Traffic Impact Study, dated 11/15/93, Transportation,Planning, and Engineering, Inc. - Design Review Application, Board of Architectural Review. Turner & Associates, dated 11/15/93. 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. Zoning Code change allowing a zero -lot line at the east property line, and a subsequent BLA. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Board of Architectural Review Approval Building Permit Zoning Code Change BLA 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 Homelife furniture store and another 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 402 Stander Boulevard, 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) hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. rolling, b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The project site is level with generally 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 Medium dense to dense,silty sand and clean sand are reported in a 11/6/93 soils report performed for the adjacent Computer City project. 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 fill is not expected to prepare the site for development. The area in front will be cleared of building and regraded to accomodate the parking lot,and the loading area in the rear will, be graded to accommodate the proposed building remodel. Reuse of the existing cut from the loading area is proposed as fill in the front. 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 91% of the proposed site is in impervious surfaces. Approximately 7000 sf of landscaping (9 % 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 arc 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. ....,�.c� ,.. �e:.,- eau: a..,,, ........�.r�.�.,....v»........: ��....,........�.,..,......,.. 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. No. Storm water runoff from the site will be discharged at the naturally occurring locations. 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. The site would be served with municipal sewer lines and no waste material would be discharged into ground water. ( See attached report from Bush, Roed and Hitchings) ,:.,.,e.t.;�r:•'- a;re•..�t:y......e;is,�;?ytit�it oral N.,..c���":?.�ts. { foi(:: X:' sre.' iuTi: a:'. iss. ��y, t' v. 4: �h7;,+..".:,•:. r�: ti;:. r: ��V:.; �i. mr.•;v..:•n.«......r..,.•....•. ,..�.,.... .,. .. n.. vs.:— x.•... w,..,. a.:..<.,..•.,. rh+... rr ..nu.- aa.•.xw..om +x....w;.r...+ • r.•., 4:[�. luw1�;. =1 t VTY.�7 �t .. h'+tlY..S[•.:YWt�:r,.Ya+*aua Wtlrrc+ rR: o-aSl W" �• ti'tu•h \`.Gk!Cil.a.i}R..�u�!�w�w 1•%Y...:IXf. f';•.�:�.�.t..'� 1. 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. No. Storm water runoff from the site will be discharged at the naturally occurring locations. 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. The site would be served with municipal sewer lines and no waste material would be discharged into ground water. ( See attached report from Bush, Roed and Hitchings) 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.( See attached report from Bush, Roed and Hitchings) 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. ( See attached report from Bush, Roed and Hitchings) 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 a minimal increase to the existing 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 Strander Boulevard. ( See attached report from Bush, Roed and Hitchings) 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/water separator prior to discharge to minimize surface water contamination. No storage of hazardous materials on the site is proposed. ( See attached report from Bush, Roed and Hitchings) d.Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: As described above, a minimal increase in the ratio of impervious to pervious surfaces, and oil/water separator are being proposed. v...i.l,..., e...1... a.l J.:.r4n_w.... nau..u.a....n. 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? Small areas of landscaping located at the existing building entry 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 Srander Boulevard 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: 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. 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. ,.k..,,..�. �...... ��...., r. nua. n_ �^.; r�.• t?� 'a.?:,x..+:°.`K"'C?.',"�,i�;r a.;!"�,., ., .. .,.r "i u:�• ._. "'.1'.':5...,:'l�s,eCr s�zayi �'H;i�'�:f1!'I��s�: �� "i; d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 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 the retail 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 tenants known at this time use no solvents and chemicals which are considered hazardous. 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 44,000 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 the 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 30,816 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 30,816 square foot industrial building was built using the tilted concrete panel method of construction prevalent in the area. It is fully sprinklered. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The southerly 85' 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? Ten. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. 1. 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, east, and west of the site. The proposed structure would be setback from Strander Boulevard approximately 150 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, west, and south. The type of use proposed is also consistent with land uses adjacent to the east of 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 structurc(s) not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The two storey portion of building would be +1- 32 feet in height. The remaining building elevations of the proposed structure would be approximately 20 to 23 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 facade. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or ob- structed? The profile of existing building is being compacted, improving views along Strander Boulevard Other views are not being altered. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: An 18 ' landscaping/sidewalk strip along the public right of way, interior parking lot landscaping, and perimeter landscaping consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover are proposed. The appearance of the building is being improved. 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. ..r � . `.+iii+'t: w, ra .� �.J•s._.c.. aa :: .�.•uxr...e..n._...,y..,..n.... b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No safety hazards from lighting would occur. The proposed landscaping along Strander Boulevard will be designed to minimize glare from headlights onto adjacent property. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: 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 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: None. 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. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, arch - eaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Mitigation measures are not required. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. See attached traffic report. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Meto bus routes 240, 340, and 912 stop on the north side of Strander Boulevard. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? There are currently 20 parking spaces, all of them standard size. The proposal includes 105 stalls, 30% of them compact. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improve- ments to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). See attached traffic report. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The proposal would not require the use of water, rail, or air transportation to provide goods and services to the site. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the com- pleted project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. See attached traffic report. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: See attached traffic report. -r w -MAP Pic SrvA•- A s Mf: S A j=oR.N(7U ,Sro 65 H iC K C -COLE tATErS S(IFIC /KTGY SS 7V.APP,c NAB AK AvetA GC- R E , A GuArJGe- (n( ()ST' SKALD, t r A V AS(S Fat l- OE VAL (.)A-rt n!" G T7AFF(c rM PA- C,rS. V& 1/2-7 51- A k ACo,IG •76 Wes 7 &7 'n/ Pen. I M reot c.�► o L?) F4c(c.trA7 egb 7-6,C.A vet 4 W ert -P A 6rD UC cooz b/t y 1>E"A K Ef a, A u• o PS, 7 rcc ktmR.eS'Seb ►nl 'Dec (GA! K_crkeenAi C P(c.(r # 1.??— 00$3), V 0- I /27I 15. Public S a. Would th (for exam schools, o The s' indi b. Proposed services, No mi 16. Utilities a. Circle uti electricity sanitary b. Describe ity provi on the sit Sewer Water Telep Powe C. Signature The above I understan • that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. ces project result in an increased need for public services le: fire protection, police protection, health care, her)? If so, generally describe. ilarity in the proposed uses in the area te that there will be little increase. easures to reduce or control direct impacts on public any. igation is required. 'ties currently available at the site: natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, wer, septic system, other. e utilities that are proposed for the project, the util- ng the service, and the general construction activities or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. City of Tukwila City of Tukwila one: GTNW : Puget Sound Power and Light era are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. Signature: Date Submi Nov. ed: 5. 161q3 . A!-_ k. �i.•' ��.., �... �u�ala' �1r' i. Yiiil' is�:.+ E%.: f.,`• i': iv: �R, x: e:: nx�: vn;. vnw,+: wn. .a.uK :r• >r.�..:...,.«.,.nctr,.v aw.•;;:M1:r.'l,u>.rir. -. . „�,,,,, h. - s. Y. mmrv! cxrnr:. w,:. iL .te4�txvmem,vw.srr >iv:uau,..,. .e ri: rttsrv:. LfkT.! fi'rtaT^r�Y."JS.rr;:;�}- Cyi1:;�, ��'+a? Turner & Associates JAN 26 '94 04:17PM TUKL DCD /PW XENDEANDUX 2063657504 • P.2 RECEIVED JAN 271994 COMIAUNiT'" DEVELOPMENT P.02 To: Tukwila SEPA Responsible Offioial Exams Howard Turner ! s 111:1(614 Dates January 26, 1994 MC: L93- 0084: Turner and Assoc. (8omelife). Based on input from the Public Works Department, I herewith clarify and amend my SEPA checklist as follows: 1. A payment of $2,078.00 for a fair share of road improvements to the Andover Park West/Strander Blvd. intersection and the Andover Park East /Strander Blvd. intersection. The applicant agrees to sign a "no protest agreement" for upgrading the current substandard water main. This agreement obligates the land owner to participate in a local improvement district for upgrading the water system, but does not waive any rights tO protesting the fair share cost assignment to the property. These provisions shall be completed prior to final approval of the construction. file:98 \fid1.ieps FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY Prepared for FIDELlirY ASSOCIATES % Mr. Howard Turner, AIN TURNER AND ASSOCIATES 18420 24th Place N.E. Seattle, Washington 98155 Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc. 2101 - 112th Avenue N.E., Suite 110 Bellevue, Washington 98004 (206) 455-5320 e.77.rs-ri COMMUN EVELOP tvl f N 1 FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY Prepared for FIDELITY ASSOCIATES % Mr. Howard Turner, ALA TURNER AND ASSOCIATES 18420 24th Place N.E. Seattle, Washington 98155 Prepared by TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2101 - 112th Ave. N.E., Suite 110 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Telephone - (206) 455 -5320 FAX - (206) 453 -7180 November 15, 1993 APE VICTOR H. BISHOP P E., President DAVID H. ENGER, P.E., Vice President TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. FIDELITY ASSOCIATES c/o Mr. Howard Turner, AIA TURNER AND ASSOCIATES 18420 -24th Pl. N.E. Seattle, WA 98155 Re: Fidelity Associates Homelife Remodel Pre - Application File No. PRE 93 -021 Traffic Impact Study Dear Howard: 2101 - 1121h AVENUE N.E., SUITE 110 — BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004 TELEPHONE (206) 455 -5320 November 15, 1993 FACSIMILE (206) 453 -7180 We are pleased to present this traffic impact study for the proposed retail redevelopment project located at 402 Strander Blvd. in the City of Tukwila. The project proposes to replace an existing 29,000 sq. ft. light industrial building with a 44,000 sq. ft. retail building. Of the 44,000 sq. ft., 35,000 sq. ft. will be used for furniture retail, and the remaining 9,000 sq. ft. will be specialty retail. 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 site access intersections onto Strander Boulevard. The conclusions and recommendations begin on page 5 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and the surrounding street network. Figure 2 shows a preliminary site plan. The plan consists of 44,000 sq. ft. of total building space, 105 parking stalls, and two vehicle accesses onto Strander Boulevard. The west access will be only for use by this project, and will line up directly with a low volume driveway currently under construction on the south side of Strander Boulevard. The east access will be a shared access with the adjacent Computer City Supercenter to the east. Access to Andover Park E. is also available via the Computer City parking lot. November 15, 1993 T081993.RPT TpE FIDELITY ASSOCIATES November 15, 1993 Page -2- Full development of the retail project is expected to occur by 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. and Southcenter Parkway. Figure 4 shows existing noon peak hour and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the Andover Park E. /Strander Blvd. intersection. Manual traffic volume counts were conducted at this intersection on Wednesday, May 6, 1992 during the mid- day peak hour (12:00 -1:00 PM) and the PM peak (4:00 -6:00) by David Evans & Associates, Incorporated. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 5 shows projected 1994 noon and PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing 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 retail project is expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the AM and PM street 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 11 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 Furniture Store (ITE Land Use Code 890), Specialty Retail Center (ITE Land Use Code 814), and Light Industrial (ITE Land Use Code 110). 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 November 15, 1993 T081493.RPT �pE FIDELITY ASSOCIATES November 15, 1993 Page -3- trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including employee, customer, 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 and previous traffic studies, we estimate that approximately 35% of the site - generated trips can be classified as pass -by /diverted linked trips. The net new project trips were calculated by subtracting the pass - by /diverted linked trips from the total driveway volumes for the proposed project and the trip generation from the existing light industrial. 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. PARKING GENERATION The parking generation is estimated using the average parking rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, Second Edition, 1987, for Furniture /Carpet Store (ITE Land Use Code 890) and Shopping Center (ITE Land Use Code 820). The Shopping Center parking rate is used due to lack of parking data for Special Retail Center land uses, but will be conservative in this application. The calculated peak parking demand which would occur during the midday hours is 43 stalls (Furniture Retail) plus 29 stalls (Specialty Retail) equaling 72 parking stalls for the 44,000 sq. ft. facility. This demand results in a surplus of 33 parking stalls (105 minus 72). 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 November 15, 1993 To81493.RPT TpE FIDELITY ASSOCIATES November 15, 1993 Page -4- Figure 6 were added to the projected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 5 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes. 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 1994 with project 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. 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. To calculate the LOS at the site access intersections with Strander Blvd. we have used a multi -lane reduction factor against the through traffic volumes on Strander Boulevard. The multi -lane factor is used to account for some vehicles on the main road arriving at the intersection side by side (50% volume) versus totally random arrival (100% volume). Therefore, to account for the differing arrival patterns [i.e. (50% + 100 %) _ 2 = 75 %] the through traffic volume is reduced by 25 %. November 16, 1993 T081493.RPT TpE FIDELITY ASSOCIATES November 15, 1993 Page -5- TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City will require the developer to install a sidewalk and landscape buffer along the project frontage to match the recently installed frontage improvements by the adjacent property to the east (Computer City Supercenter). 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. According to our trip generation analysis the net new noon peak hour trips generated by the project is only 11. Since no intersection is expected to be impacted by ten or more noon peak hour trips, no traffic impact mitigation should be necessary. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the Fidelity Associates Homelife Remodel be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following comments: The developer will be required to install sidewalk and a landscape buffer along the project frontage. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions please contact Mr. Bob Herman or me at (206)455 -5320. EXPIRES 41314,e( Very truly yours, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. //lisf9? Mark J. Jacobs, P.E. Project Engineer RMH/tta 1 November 15, 1993 T081493.RPT TABLE 1 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL INTERSECTION 1994 PM PEAK HOUR WIPROJECT Strander Blvd./West Site Access C [214] Strander Blvd./East Site Access D [181] NOTES: ° Number in brackets [ ] is the reserve approach traffic movement which stop -sign intersection per the capacity for the worst case minor determines the LOS for a minor -leg 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. November 15, 1993 T081493.TB1 TABLE 2 VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRIP RATE ENTER EXIT TOTAL Proposed Furniture Retail, 35,000 sq. ft. ITE Land Use Code 890 Average Weekday 4.34 76 (50 %) 76 (50 %) 152 AM Peak Hour 0.17 4 (69 %) 2 (31 %) 6 PM Peak Hour 0.39 5 (36 %) 9 (64 %) 14 Proposed Specialty Retail, 9,000 sq. ft., ITE Land Use Code 814 Average Weekday 40.67 183 (50 %) 183 (50 %) 366 AM Peak Hour 6.41 28 (48 %) 30 (52 %) 58 PM Peak Hour 4.93 25 (57 %) 19 (43 %) 44 Total Projected Driveway Volumes Average Weekday 259 (50 %) 259 (50 %) 518 AM Peak Hour 32 (50 %) 32 (50 %) 64 PM Peak Hour 30 (52 %) 28 (48 %) 58 Existing Light Industrial, 29,000 sq. ft., ITE Land Use Code 110 Average Weekday 6.97 101 (50 %) 101 (50 %) 202 AM Peak Hour 0.92 22 (83 %) 5 (17 %) 27 PM Peak Hour 0.98 3 (12 %) 25 (88 %) 28 Net New Street Network Trips (Total Projected Driveway Volumes Minus 35% Pass -by and Diverted Linked Trips For Retail Portion Minus Existing Warehouse Trips) Average Weekday 67 (50 %) 67 (50 %) 134 AM Peak Hour [ -2] 16 14 PM Peak Hour 17 [ -7] 10 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 employee, customer, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips. November 15, 1993 T081493.TD2 PARK • 'Y a IN IMIR SI M 09. 130TH Z6� y S ST • `. t� 'i•' 128TH N4 z, 68°0 Q1S .129TH �IPL "�Y S 129TH 12 EIi? 1.3 i!i g ; N TLi UL S `OI • LAHOSTOH RD aI S PISi n .73..i •J I lc .1 SI �~\ I, SIAL S 133RD T ` S S _]JSTH ST HS sr? 1ST HD 142_ ST � ST _ - LIB ------ J FOSTER •'n , JR NS /J RS ]44TH a ST > FS i 4600 95! 146TH ST '� 1J ST 148TH S 151ST ST E H4IE. PK L I LIB GTON • FORT', S 150111 ST t• HQR DYK DENT', PK' S IMA LOGG4CRES RACE TRACE SOOUTHCEENNTERR BAKE BLVD 54TH YIC STRANDER ISTE IX ••. ST i 168111 TRECK OR NTON NCTION S 1681 5 S'^ 172ND PL 911 S1 • MIDLAND 0 38TH ST l VICINITY MAP FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY \-_11 QV Woes \ Ex /s r'' G wa,a.EHOuSE = N • \, ' \- I H CObtpuTER Crry Suoc X2 cE ''Tt R _ ti,\--- - PIPE-L.1 TY 455ociare5 •; 1. f Y 4t , o o� 41 . — G \ FE M.EM oo EL. }tom a. `; FIDELUTY ASS�Di6ATU:S a...on....00..o ,> a,_ I i t 1 11 II I. T �. I I I •_ I 11 4 :�,.�.e,. AND AZIOCIATIS JII!1HH1H1II; a......- • X14- 1-- 1- I411-1 -�- I- 11; -,1-1 Q I i 111 i l! 11 i 1 I) - ,� Temvec nutty MINT \`�� n111111(; n, �� warfit �R ar nun f. - a 4 y R - -� ST 12.4ovE72 130.1•0. 1 DrzivEwityy curtitemILY fry 'INDEA. CoNST�kcT,6 N B A R PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY : O a 0 ' c Tukwila Blvd. Andover Park E. Barker Blvd. Strander Blvd. 4L J 5L #41\` N not to scale 35 mph L E M LEGEND, O Traffic Control Signal XX mph Posted Speed Limit Approach Lane & Direction XL Number of Roadway Lanes EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY Andover Pork W. Tukwila Blvd. Barker Blvd. Project Site Strander Blvd. Wednesday May, 6th , 1992 12:00 -13:00 16: 30 -17: 30 430(435) A-149(221) LEGEND not to scale (86)47_, (530 )522 (258)145—• Mfr 00� In N CO C Nto(NJ XX(YY) —► PM(NOON) Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction EXISTING NOON & PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY IFIGURE� E 4 w Y Y L. a a. o a_ L ' L. > > V -o c c Tukwila Blvd. Barker Blvd. Strander Blvd. Project Site Fr)(71 N u)CDh- Q) N N 11� 123 155) 452 457) A'- 157 232 N not to scale (90)49.1 (557)548 f I' (271)152 ■ r-Nco r7 d N d- -.V) r0 N LEGEND XX(YY) -► PM(NOON) Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction 1994 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT PROJECT FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY E 20% Tukwila Blvd. [105] iii Y Y a- o O 0 CL a. 1.. ill a) of o v v , cl c a a 15% [80] 20% [100] Barker Blvd. To Southcenter 5% [25] Strander Blvd. u, N 25% [130] (4)8 N not to scale b" ti7 N u 7 1 5 1 .4— 8 1 N 35% [180] co Project Site 10 5 65% 3 [335] O to u 12 5—i 7—I" 8(3) 20% [105] LEGEND xx% Trip Distribution Percentage [XXX] Total Average Weekday Traffic Volume 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 PM PEAK HOUR SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY CFIGURE\ 6 Tukwila Blvd. Andover Park E. Barker Blvd. Strander Blvd. 7 885 r 5 6� 739-0- \ 5 roject Site N LE) N. NIN N not to scale 49 548 152 .� 17 883 12--1 734 --► '_123 455 x157 1fr 00LO( PO d N LEGEND X-'- PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume & Direction 1994 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT FIDELITY ASSOCIATES HOMELIFE REMODEL TRAFFIC STUDY E 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALI2ED INTERSECTIONS Paqe-1 ******************************+*********+******+*1,******1,****.!i**«+«** IDENTIFYING INFORMATION _______________________________________ AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... 1 AREA POPULATION...................... 250000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... 3TRANDER NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET..".... WEST SHE ACCESS NAME OF THE ANALYST—. .. . . ... , .' PMH DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 11-15-1V9 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED,....... PM PEAK HOUR OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT - 25% VOLUHE MULTI-LANE REDUCT ION USED INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES ED WD ND SD LEFT 6 THRU 554 664 0 0 RIGHT 5 7 5 6 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE ED \_ /` LANES WD NB SD `- ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS ({t) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND 0.00 90 20 WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 H NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHlCLES � MDTORCYCLES ___________ EASTBOUND 0 0 0 WESTBOUND 0 � 0 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 0 � CRITICAL GAPS MINOR RIGHTS NB SE MAJOR LEFTS EB WB MINOR THROUGHS NB SE MINOR LEFTS NB SE TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP ______________ ________ 5.70 52J 5.70 o.20 5.60 5.60 6.80 6.80 5.10 5.10 6.30 6.30 6.80 6.80. 0.00 0.0(1 0.00 0.0n 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.20 5.20 5.10 5.10 6.30 6.30 •6.e0 6.80 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION. NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET....." STRANDER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... WEST SITE ACCESS DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS...,. 11-15-199 ; PM PEAK HOUR OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT _ 25% VOLUME MULTI-LANE REDUCT ION USED CAPACITY AND LEVEL—OF—SERVICE F0TE:l.l._ F= I _,(:J Ind— ' I- I Pu i..- F'lF1-rE CAPACITY MOVEMENT `r (pc+pI) G.. (pc._pI1) MINOR STREET N13 LEFT THROUGH RIGHT (:3HT MINOR STREET SD; LEFT r THROUGH RIGHT IlPh.TCJR E''TRIE :IE :'1" EF3 LEFT WEi LEFT 6 3 () 175 870 144 :1.75 3 .1 7 ACTUAL MOVEMENT ICIT CAPACITY c: (pcph) 1.4:1 73 SHARED CAPACITY c.: (pcI_,I..T) 1 4 1 SH 243 173 870 141 141 1/3 2 173 _. 1317 817 . 56? 569 6 618 618 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION d8 Papf RESERVE (.:c-•,Lfl( l..iV c = - -• , LOS F 1 232 173 >C D 064 > 1-1 2 :I 'd 171 ; J:) 173 ct 3 643 NAl'113 OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... 3T'RANDER BL-VD., HPuML: (:JF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... I T'.... WE.' EY'1 SITE ACCESS DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS.-- 11-15-199 R Phi PEAK HOUR OTHER INFORMATION—. 1994 ,.J/ PROJECT -- 25% VOI...UME. MULTI—LANE REDI..JC"r :I :UNI USED Al 1985 HCM: UNSI8NALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 *****************»***************+14.****Y.**+***+++++**4 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR..............,...... 1 AREA POPULATION...................... 250000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... STRANDER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... EAST SITE ACCESS NAME OF THE ANALYST.................. RMH DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 11-15-199 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED................. PM PEAK HOUR OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT - 25% YCLUUE MULTI LANE REDUCT ION USED INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES _________________________ EB WO N8 SO ____ LEFT 12 0 15 THRU 551 662 0 RIGHT 0 17 5 NUMBER OF LANES LANES ED NB NB BB 2 1 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE. ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS _________________ EASTBOUND 0.00 90 20 WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES _____________ EASTBOUND O 0 0 WESTBOUND 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 0 CRITICAL GAPS ------------- MINOR RIGHTS MAJOR LEFTS MINOR LEFTS TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP ______________ SB 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20 EB 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10 SB 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.80 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION --------------------------------------- NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... STRANDER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... EAST SITE ACCESS DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 11-15-199 ; PM PEAK HOUR OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT - 25% VOLUME MULTI-LANE REDUCT ION USED CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-3 MOVEMENT MINOR STREET SD LEFT RIGHT MAJOR STREET EB LEFT POTEN- FLOW- TIAL RATE CAPACITY v(pcph) c (pcph) p 17 10 13 145 813 564 ACTUAL MOVEMENT CAPACITY c (pcph) 143 813 564 SHARED CAPACITY c !Pcph) SH 143 813 • 564 RESERVE CAPACITY c - c - v LOS H S1 ____ 127 > D > 181 >D 803 > A 550 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION _____________________________________________________________________ NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... STRANDER BLVD. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... EAST SITE ACCESS DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 11-15-199 ; PM PEAK HOUR OTHER INFORMATION.... 1994 W/ PROJECT - 25% VOLUME MULTI-LANE REDUCT ION USED �: n.;. vnnn«: .......:.....„, �...«, �.......».... �..-... n:.. Y... ue..,....,+ �.. wrn, w-. sxr: racx: v�a�m, snar .:vew�:�, +nm�xsr't�!myrssc:•e�ct �.en,n,mnw.uroawsc:,n �.3". "�5J.4:'rri;5j4�1�'%�t +. rAt„" �, c�;';*};f'y:,t';n�`�.i�F1'tx}:i >,, PRELIMINARY REPORT FOR FIDELITY ASSOCIATION - HOMELIFE REMODEL 402 STRANDER BOULEVARD TUKWILA, WA BY BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS, INC. 2009 MINOR AVENUE EAST SEATTLE, WA 98102 (206) 323 -4144 CONTACT: JOHN E. ANDERSON, P.E. NOVEMBER 15, 1993 BRH JOB NO. 93249/ENG 41 -B i EXPIRES 12/1/ 93' RECEIVED NOV , 6 19 COMMUN1 DEVELOPME INTRODUCTION Fidelity Associates is proposing to re- develop an existing ware- house building located at 402 Strander Boulevard within the City of Tukwila. The proposed project is adjacent to a Computer City site which is also owned by Fidelity Associates. The Computer City site was re- developed within the last year. Changes to the structure are similar to those made on the Computer City site. The building face along Strander Boulevard will be moved north- ward to increase the parking area, the eastern building face will be moved east and the existing loading dock area in the northwest corner will be converted into building area. Since the existing finish floor elevation is approximately 4 to 5 feet higher than the Strander Boulevard grade, much of the existing asphalt park- ing area will be filled to provide better access to the stores. A new storm drainage system will be installed to collect the run off. It is expected that the existing sanitary side sewer, domestic water service and fire service lines will have adequate capacity for the proposed building. EXISTING CONDITIONS Currently the developed 1.7 acre site contains approximately 0.71 acres of roof, 0.82 acres of impervious surface area and 0.17 acres pervious surface area. South of the building the grades are approximately at the same elevation as Strander Boulevard. Stairs on the south side of the building make up the 4 foot elevation difference between the building finish floor and park- ing lot elevation. On the west side of the building the grades gradually increase from south to north. In the northwest corner there is a storage area and on grade truck doors into the build- ing. Around the north and east side of the building the grades are approximately 2 to 3 feet lower than the finish floor eleva- tion. The storm water run off is collected in catch basins located within the asphalt parking area. A 6 inch concrete pipe is used to convey the storm water to the southeast corner of the site. At this location the storm water is discharged into a 12 inch concrete pipe located on the north side of Standard Boulevard. The existing storm drainage system does not provide any water quality improvement or peak rate control prior to discharging into the street system. Sanitary sewer, domestic water and fire service are all provided from Strander Boulevard. The post indicator valve for the sprin- kler system is located on the south side of the parking lot. It has been protected by placement of broken section of curbing around the post indicator. According to the Chadwick survey the domestic water enters the building approximately mid -point on the south wall. The side sewer is shown entering the building just north of the southwest building corner. The site will be graded so that existing finished floor elevation can be accessed from the parking lot without using stairs. This will result in grades sloping downward from the building at ap- proximately 3 percent. Along the western boundary there will be a 2:1 (H:V) slope from the parking lot to the existing grade. In some section a deeper curb maybe require to achieve the 2:1 slope. Storm water run off will sheet flow to concrete curbs and then be directed toward catch basins. The storm water will then be conveyed by 12'inch pipe to an oil /water separator vault. The vault will discharge into the Strander Boulevard storm system. Proportions of pervious and impervious surface areas will not change significantly from the existing conditions. Preliminary calculations for the change in peak rate discharge from the site indicate an increase of approximately 0.1 cubic feet per second. This small increase will not adversely impact the downstream system. The proposed site plan will increase the asphalt concrete paving area subject to vehicular parking. (Note: the increase in asphalt surface area is related to a decrease in building roof area. Therefore no change in peak rate storm water run -off.) The storm water run -off from the entire site will be conveyed to the oil /water separator vault. Since no water quality improve- ment measures currently exist on site, the oil /water separator ' vault will represent a significant improvement. Also, the larger storm drainage pipe will convey the storm water at lower veloci- ties. This will result in better sediment retention within the catch basins and storm pipe. SURFACE AREA CALCULATIONS: EXISTING SITE 74,052 sf ROOF AREA 30,811 sf CONCRETE WALKS 8,394 sf ASPHALT CONCRETE 24,388 sf GRAVEL DRIVE 3,100 sf LANDSCAPE 7,359 sf A weighted run -off factor will be calculated for comparison with the new site plan. The following run -off factors are used in the calculations: 1. Impervious surface cover C = 0.90 2. Gravel drive C = 0.80 3. Landscape surface cover C.= 0.20 WEIGHTED RUN -OFF FACTOR, C = 0.826 DEVELOPED SITE 76,812 sf ROOF AREA 28,500 sf CONCRETE WALKS 3,469 sf ASPHALT CONCRETE 38,105 sf LANDSCAPE 6,740 sf WEIGHTED RUN -OFF FACTOR, C = .839 Compare the 100 year peak rate of discharge into the street storm drain system assuming the new and existing sites have equal area: I = 3.2 in /hr A = 1.7 acres Q existing = 4.49 cfs Q new = 4.56 cfs The small increase in peak flow rate for a 100 year storm will not adversely impact the downstream pipe capacity. Therefore storm water detention is not required. The area subject to vehicular traffic increases by approximately 10,617 square feet from the existing condition. This includes the gravel drive in the northwest corner of the site which is subject to vehicular traffic. The shallow depth of the street storm drain pipe limits the alternatives for providing water quality improvements. An oil /water separation vault and the larger storm drainage pipe are proposed to mitigate the water quality issue for this site. This will result in significantly higher water quality being discharged from the site. TID1U1[E.- �I GLUHNITURI/ SHEET INDEX ARCHITECTURAL B M I COVER REST (1/O/9l) BAR 2 STE PLAN l((1 /16/94 B AR 3 1 /611(11 1/611( (1(001015 1/0/94 OM 6 1 /0111 C00E0 11EVATCTC 1/0/94 CIVIL DAR 4 1710LL%OIIILRYA CR ANT N (11/0/93) UTLITY LANDSCAPE D AR 5 LNDSCArt RAN (1/6/94) SURVEY LAID 'TITLE RANVEY (4/28/92) SEPA 0(01161 1817 IlC STU)Y BAR (0971 REVEW CRITERIA 1/6/93) (11/0/53 (11/0/93) CONSULTANTS ARCHITECT DOER N0 ASSOCIATES 0420 24111 RACE NE. SEATTLE, WA9ICTOI 98155 (206)365 -7431 (A% 365 -7504 I ACT: IOWA10 R TARTER ALA CIVIL IDAA ROE°. ND 111080 2003 1707 AVCUIf. EAST SEATTLE, WA9ICIO1994)2 (200313-4144 1491 323 -7115 tI001I11IAC7t0I7 E 17(.(37)03'( LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 1NE1LAr1 P.S 603 VAN SMELT, SLIE D ' 10.71)5, WAS 10201 98020 (206)776-4932 !A% 774 -7803 ACT: SWAN PARS07S, RLA /307 SURVEY • 011°9,131 0319(0C ArD EIC3EERIC 409 SILSEWAY 1A17111 • SEAI TLC WA91C109 9603 (200632-33E8 l AC 2 -� 1 T. 111E OIADw01 TRAFFIC ENGINEER 11340 C RANK ND EICl(ER1C)G 201112111 AVL1E ICNIIEAST RI LEVIE,WA91CIO1 98034 (206)455-5320 EA% 453 -700 I ACT: PARK ,LACCOSJ'E CODE INDEX GENERAL / i/ 7 JU /J /r�(,l..IllJ /J, � RAMC DSC 091 WC 0C0PANC7 CLASS 02 111 H- 911141L(RED, 9RIM(R OESOED BY CCMRACTOR AREA • IOTA. (7051610 REAOIC AREA 3OR6 SF DEIA%RC1N (11CILOLG CJ SIIC LC7741811 13905 7 19601IAI DJACIC 1(CHT: 2 STAVES 401 ET 070'°98 TOTAL (7.9360 AREA 2- 51C411) 417196 9' P9.PARAIUV TOTAL TWO 150 (ARC ,1 -20) TT .01 WI -V1o)� 24767 9 • 0280) 1=0 TT 7 1.1700.0.1 ALLOWABLE E 50 4 A 4-ACM IEW01 HEARS WALL C R(0. BETWEEN IIIS A1OECI AC COSUIER OTY AT 4553.1.0 ZERO SET(IA0( PROPERTY LIE EGRESS TO (LI E 11X11 BOOR OCQPMI LOA. 20.099 9'. / 30 - 670 °SAVANTS CXII 691111ELA0EWVI: 670 IT 02 - 133 1E3 ES EMI W0111 °WOW 133 IAES IC(L1E LIVER 11011 °SCUTAJ1 LOAD 6.809 9. / 30 - 527 CCOPARIS EIOI W0111 IEO TEL(11I: 527 % 03 - 68 1701.3 EXIT WUTI 1 711001(12 68 ITO ES RLTALER 'A' OOOP•1 LOAD. 6.686 9. / 30 - 290 CCCIPNIIS (XII METH REORELENI: 290 0 02 - 58 IDES EAT WDDI 111000:0 133 IDES IAA A AA TRAVEL DSTNCE ALLOWEO 107 99910.11(8 RACK - 200 (LEI A6U7CE1EM C( (4315 RR 3301(1) ZONING 201,1 OILMC. 5610001 LIE 19411.091(1311 04I11STIVE, PARK 50,1 6041, 25 REM, 5' SCES by VICINITY MAP F.111 10 8111118 BAKER BOULEVARD 401 KER ROLLEVART ACLl2A DEALER 223 AIDOVER PARK EAST TLI(WLA, WASINGTON (AS PROPOSED) SEA -FLR 400 SIRATUR OOL.IEVNU 1 FLELITY ASSOC. 402 STRIDER Ocu.EVARD CCHPUTER 404 STRAIIT R BOI.t.EVARD l ((R)T1(1111I1II( � TTi➢iTT' CIIIIII 11111IIIIB UURmBUHP 119 T01UTl.(4lT11 SI:cALE REAL CENTER 401 S1RA1DE11 BOULEVARD BLOCK MAP P.100' PARKING ANALYSIS MEATY Jl 1 (( ((� �1 A S L� O C 0 A T E S TURNER AND ASSOCIATES COVER SHEET REVISIONS �L4mW...04„ IS SHEET 1EIAE LT; 36.543 9. 0 1.3/ COO - 96 STALLS WARD OUSE Ili 0 0600 9' - 10 % 6.053 Sr - pj,Lt recur,' ASSOCIATES, HOAELfE / \�\ G =,\ �l U G, 1 - a PNMIC STALLS RCOAED - 5 3215�AL15 IC STALLS MOWED - 5 STALLS STNDCT STALLS (0109 - 61 S� 5 10°A. A 19900 190913(8 D - ( 122) 6470 NIA ILALE rlC. ARCHITECTS SMILE wA4 ECIf11865 (206) 365 -1411 JOl 1 [EUIY FlC I'AOMI 0(1119 0: 1 O CC%L D DY: DATE: 11/0/93 3 RECOROCAL PMYIC 391(141 PROMO #1111 MANOR 0171, DDTH 91E51ROVCE (03 T63) -OS STALLS SCALE:VARI.S 802 Pterk.ov6D 'co I,EW WRE IESH FENCE AN) GATE TRIO< MANIVERNG AREA. NEW WAVY DUTY ASFNALT. LOACIIG RECESSE 150' ItAXM.M NOSE LaG111 TO ANY PART OF 131JLDtC -RENIE1°.62°A. Imilew CF ENS STR ANDEg BO LEVAN! B2 44,5 6 SF. HO ELIFE R TAIL 20,0. 9 SF. ROUN 15 8 • SF. EZZA --35,1110011.1 9 . . I .1. at, .& PER FM COX AIL A 8 SF. In IFC 2 C=22't 9 STANDARDS CD 8.5.76.5' OF EASING OULDNG TO BE REMOVED 0' SDEWALH "CI EXISTING CONCRETE EULDtn COAPUTER CITY SLFERCENTER 24,668 SF. 63 PAWING STALLS 'co EXISTNG WFE. IESH FENCE CN ADJOMG PROPERTY 3 IC-38' 111111111L. 12.2' L 8 STANDARDS C 8.5=68' 1, 8.5' 8 STANDARDS 0 8.5=68' • 50-7 -FR—CiIi7rkiETourosciiiicr 0.8. 6 DX' 8.=48 8' 8 CO/PACTS 0 8-64' PROPOSED SHARED PARKNO AGREENENT BETWEEN LOT I MD LOT 2. ce) <I w i <I EL. ff > ! Z 2q I • STRANDER BOULEVARD FREE STNECC 93N— /EN 25' DRIVEWAY EASING SHARED ACCESS EASENENT. PRCPOSED BOUNDARY LOT ADJUSDENT PLANTER - SEE DAR 5 15' FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE BUS STOP (TO EE VERF(D WITH 1.8.180) [ZING DW FODELIITY ASSOCOATES TURNER AND ASSOCIATES ISL20 2.1. PIMA K. ARCHITECT!. SEATTLE... 9[165 (2C6) 365-74JI ARE PRELIM. GRADING AN IT FIDELITY ASSOCIATES, ' LCL1 Flt: DRAWN By: 0(1.0 DALE: SCALE: SHEET 3A2 8 argil I 11 B B A FURNITURE STONE by SEW O ❑ ❑ 1 ()SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: r.B• REFS /EAR) co !oI OEAST ELEVATION 2 SCALE: r•6• ONORTH ELEVATION 3 SCALE r -E' OWEST ELEVATION (-4 --)WEST r.6• a 0 OSOUTH ELEVATION 1 SCALE r.LS• FEi:I /BAR! f 3".6-1-04 5"-i• 1 1 1 KEY NOTES ()COLUMN DETAIL t4 T 7 OCORNICE DETAIL SCALE: r.f ©1 EIESTPG CRAZES @D M:NOSD MACES ©11APSTER DELCeEE CATES (I) /EWE 1491 FOCE OI D TPG CON7ETE PNELS 101E 1ELOCATED OR TR73ED NO FECYCLID AS M. CN STE © COSMG COMTE PNEL 10 MAW CLEAN NO PANT. P-t ® WICCATED DISTAL m1O1 TE PAM. CLEAN NO PANT, P -2. Q 1EW PARAPET AOGED CAI TOP Cr EASING CONCRETE PNEL- MADE RCN ❑36TtG OMUETE PAM. QI IEW Y LETAL CORE' PANTED P -1 ®1EW r SR 1wORALS PANTED P -1 Q.1 FEW DRYNT 04 STm STIRS © ORYNT °MORCMAJGATED NO WTM Y REVEALS ® 1 -1EVE3. OMIT CORPAX G7 1EW EMT NAXC D AL STMURCNT DOORS NO ® NEW RM GOOK NO MAW. ® PEW STM. OYMEM DOCK CD PANT ACCENT ETIBE CD TOWN 924 BY SEPARATE APPROVAL CD SCRu&D aNAC IMS Q WALL LOAM EXTERN U'-LENT FRDE UT¥ ASSOCOATIES TURNER AND ASSOCIATES 15420 2a11111.Ai RE. ARCHITECTS 5E071L WA 9e65 (TN) 365 -7411 BUILDING ELEVATIONS FIDELITY HOl1ELFE RE .GO ru DAWN BY OECXEDD BT: DAZE: SCALE: FLELITY FABART SDI INT n/ /93 1/SRM1f -0' SHEET BA3 its 41 MgGv1.1' WOCO Midi 7O 4l.t M9 AMA I.t1M4 COT70..00 l 7MU TO ROAW 1.4.42 PRO III THE roe TNU41RAM19 I.4T.O MOS 1011 TRAMfAMT4 11111 11101111111 1111111111 1161.4 PM TO..CW. 111IAR.CH ANT WTZV GMNrUH.00coven tANDPIAN P.S. Landscape Architecture MO him STe., 54.1.0 Edmond; WA 91070 T.k •hone (206), 776,4932 FAX (2061. 774,710) TURNER AND ASSOCIATES *420 2.44 RAU HE SE AIILL NA 90155 (206)305.7231 ARCHITECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN FDELITY ASSOCIATES. ) 1 LEE . PLANT SCHEDULE ■ ...v.& L MMAAA E FMK] IVIRIAIM rued WITH MW TM11 Al OIMOM■,O SAM OM INOTANICA LK:IMMUN NAME. SIT 411(1MM FLATS A. 401.4 an plan 1+ .J 7 ►� I Ap r.«1( all fw.....1.. •Awa1 W M.M•/ M/4* W 14m T1.4. umW.0 1.#Al'/ Cmn W ram a...4* TT.O. j&. o •7..IirM.'/ 1k4M ca. E.i.IN1M10118.6. E1Iraq UN la 4wplanl.d 244• cal ,040, mrdml rt 2' cal MIT, fi ., .I10 I..W 184,111 I 1,,I 111111 { \ —�� \`-'sic.-- •i% c® +•.«J��.cm. —..m_ •9.ka. name/ I ani =M Ethan OM t r1(. mar M n41i fplean1,.6M Ir fd a4*. 1(.M II• • I sal .4.a, Nia M 21,14 811J4 ILII• M,w1,1ut away 21.22• .W, MI 1311111! CD EQUT' FIC: FASIOAR'' 09AW6 81 SD oCC.EO D7: IR DATE. 11/15/9 SCALE 1/70'.f -0 REVISIONS. D601RI121-11YE6 112111.. *4.VN WJ ITTO.. alWTm.,WA Mee *an Mi1+IW baa4 W'W0a •304 11Y anal El 2.•., p4..W I1•..,ri.11r P. Irl ..r 144.@21 a. N► Nww .M...wr1 W 11.. M. v1( NTT N.,.. aw. ..Mr. _w r4H l•.. SHEET 3A Cllr /P4