HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-26-87 - HANSEN HANSEN & JOHNSON - RIVERBEND OFFICE BUILDINGRIVERSBEND OFFICE
BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION OF THREE
STORY OFFICE BUILDING
S. 180T" ST & SPERRY DR
EPIC -26 -87
111 m
Hansen Hansen & Johnson
December 7, 1987
Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner
6200 Southcenter Blvd
Tukwila, WA 98188
Dear Vernon:
Please amend our permit application on Riversbend Office
Building .as per our phone conversation on December 4, to
reflect the following:
Proposed action to erase existing street lines on
Sperry Drive as required in order to extend the
left turn lane to 120'.
Sincerely,
HANSEN HANSEN & JOHNSON
1006 fryar ave. • p.o. box "0 "• sumner, wa 98390 • (206) 863 -8126
WAC 197 -11 -970
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Description of Proposal To construct a three story, 13,647 s.f. office building on
1.2 acres.
Proponent Hansen Hansen and Johnson
Location of Proposal, including street address, if any S.W. corner of So. 180th
St. and Sperry Drive in the NE 1/4 of Sec. 35, Twn. 23, Rge. 4.in Tukwila, WA.
Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC 26 -87
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable
significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement
(EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after
review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency. This information is available to the public on request.
[[ There is no comment period for this DNS
This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by
December 19, 1987 . The lead agency will not act on this
proposal for 15 days from the date below.
Responsible Official Rick Beeler
Position /Title Planning Director
Address A 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, //Tuu1��wil -a
Date „1���� !� - 2 7 Signature I�t'aOa
Phone 433 -1846
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 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
Planning Department.
FM.DNS
CC: DEPT. OF ECOLOGY
CITY OF TUKWILA
CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM
k t-
o CN
EPIC EPIC -26 -87
FILE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM:
TO: n BLDG ri PLNG
P.W. n FIRE n POLICE n P & R
PROJECT RIVERSBEND OFFICE BUILDING
LOCATION SOUTHWEST CORNER OF S. 180TH ST. & SPERRY DR.
FILE NO.
DATE TRANSMITTED 11 -3 -87 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 11 -9 -87
STAFF COORDINATOR JACK PACE RESPONSE RECEIVED
THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE
REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD
DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART-
MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH
CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE
MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM.
ITEM COMMENT
TA. 120 CS LA A tmsT - CD t.)F A-a ss oN t�tt \I (�- `'-\VE
A t-t t--70 At or: L- u3/ A e-H-4I I t✓� CF.
o1,1 5.l 4:'S-h
No new o I Ptu411;i ) er D►Kfs A•1t4nae01 ani tS FLuvn
i i &.M rrs 5 oe- s tsAVl w'11 Q . htro∎-
P.3 --tf rzi, L, t A f 6 ► N cu, ODE D : cc,G. g cur/ *cuss/ 's to tiNAtit.i StU/l w%
P(-AI AM'lsI FOS 1 AIN IP- U1ni&SC Rr IRA I WW1 61.-1 �t FiIle LOO P /hfyc
Pf6EP ? £N—,svo lelbehN,C P�-M11v Silt 0\ P�IV sITV , Sft(►luy
cy-rt...,1• 1 rLc-bzu crMLAO(ty -..
? - 17 ; / ' - t- 47 *Gas c.litct.. Lffl k-S /4v i4, t_A rsu . *v. -n} S t1V->
DATE II I-30/s—) COMMENTS PREPARED BY
C.P.S. Form 11
CITY OF TUKWILA
CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM
•
{ ced
• CN
EPIC EPIC -26 -87
FILE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM:
TO: El BLDG ri PLNG (i P.W. n FIRE n POLICE n P & R
PROJECT RIVERSBEND OFFICE BUILDING
LOCATION SOUTHWEST CORNER OF S. 180TH ST. & SPERRY DR.
FILE NO.
DATE TRANSMITTED 11 -3 -87 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 11 -9 -87
STAFF COORDINATOR JACK PACE RESPONSE RECEIVED
THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE
REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD
DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART-
MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH
CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE
MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM.
ITEM COMMENT
'9!Q ..e.)371,1,4)24tA Ceti lid ..t,./fror
DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY
C.P.S. Form 11
Ee)
NOV - 21987
CITY OF TUKWILA
A. BACKGRO PLANNING DEPT.
I)NB
NVJIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Con. No.
Epic File No. 26- 8-7
Fee $100.00 Receipt No.118A
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Riverbend Office Building
2. Name of applicant: Lee Hansen
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Lee Hansen, P.O. Box
Sumner, WA 98390 (206) 863 -8126
11011
4. Date checklist prepared: 16 October 1987
5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 8 month
construction time
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. Do not know.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes,
explain. No
• •
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal.
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Board of Architectural Review
various utility permits.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed use
and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in thi .
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do no-
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.
13,647 S.F. speculative office building on a 1.2 acre lot. Also, provide
left turn channelization on Sperry Dr. for a minimum of 12Q ft. from SQ,_lau__
St. per WSDOT design standards.
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 applica-
tions related to this checklist.
Southwest corner of S. 180th St. & Sperry Drive, Tukwila.. NE Quarter of Sec.
35 of Township 23 N., Range 4 W.M. and NW Quarter of Sec.. 36 of Township 23 N.,
Range 4 W.M. in Tukwila, King County, Washington, adjacent to the Green River.
13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land
Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive?
Yes it is along the Green River.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICO
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat,
rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other
Steep grade at dike and down to River.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate
percent slope)? 52% from dike to river.
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. Loose silty
sand overlaying interlayered sequences of organic
silt and clayinq silt.
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 quanti-
ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate
source of fill. 6" gravel base = 462 c.y. 4" crushed
rock = 404 c.y. Total Fill = 866 c.y. to _arovide
suitable subgrade for parking area. Source of fill
is an approved pit.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing,
construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
No.
g.
About what percent of the site will be covered with
impervious surfaces after project construction (for
example, asphalt or buildings)? About 64.51 of the
lot is covered by impervious surfaces.
•
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or
other impacts to the earth, if any: To control
erosion we will plant grass, trees and shrubs.
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.
General automobile odors will be added to the site
and general wood frame construction noises at the
time of construction.
b. Are.there any off -site sources of emissions or odor
that may affect your proposal? If so, generally
describe. There are no known off -site sources of
emissions or odors that may effect our project.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or
other impacts to air, if any: There are not any
proposed at the present time.
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. Yes the Green
River - a controlled river.
•
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
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. Yes, the building will be within
200' of the river; but no closer than 50' of the
high water mark.
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. No fill or dredge
material will be placed or removed from the site.
4) Will the proposal require surface water
withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quan-
tities, if known. There will be no surface water
withdrawals or diversions.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year
floodplain? If so, note location on the site
plan. No. Since the Green River is a controlled
river, the 100 year floodplain is at 24.5'
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. There will be no discharges
of waste materials to surface water.
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be
discharged to ground water? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quan-
tities, if known. Water will be discharged to ground
water except in parking area where catch basins
will drain to existing storm drain system.
2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged
into the ground from septic tanks or other sour-
ces, 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. Water run off
will either be taken from the site by storm
drains connected to the existing city storm
drain system or the water will be absorbed into
the ground.
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface
waters? If so, generally describe. Ain waste
water materials ran nnt enter grnund nr surfare
waters.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface,
ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The catch
basins provided on the site will have volume controls.
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the
site:
X 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
_ other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed
or altered? The existing weeds will be removed from
the site.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on
or near the site. None are known.
1
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other
measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the
site, if any: Evergreen d i s iduous trees, shrubs..tld__
grass will be provided on the site.
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:
Crows
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 are known.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so,
explain. Do not know.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife,
if any: There are no proposals to erg 1 e_idiLrll ife_
on the site.
• • Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil,
wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether
it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
Electricity or natural gas will be used for heating.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar
energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe. No this project will not affect potential
use of solar energy by adjacent properties.
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: This project employs the use of
double pane windows, insulated R-19 walls'.
and R -30 insulated ceilings as energy conservation
features; along with overhangs for shading.
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. No, there are no environmental health
hazards provided by this project.
1) Describe special emergency services that might
be required.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ-
mental health hazards, if any:
• • Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may
affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)? So. 180th St. is
a major traffic route but I don't think it will
7EfFEEt this project.
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: traf-
fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate
what hours noise would come from the site. During
construction, noise will come from the site from
?i to 5. After the project is finished, noise
will come from-the site at Sam, 12am, 1pm & 5pm.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise
impacts, if any: There are no proposed measures
to reduce or control noise impacts from the site.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent
properties? The site is currents a vacant lot. The
adjacent properties are used for light industrial,
offices and commercial.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so,
describe. No.
c. Describe any structures on the site. There are no
structures on the site.
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
There are no existing structures on the site.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the
site? M -1
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation
of the site? Light industrial.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master
program designation of the site? Urban special
development consideration.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an
"environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify.
Yes, 200' from high water mark is considered the
'Tenvironmentally sensitive" area. (See site plan)
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work
in the completed project? Approximately 55 people
will work at this building.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed
project displace? There will be no people displaced
by the project.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement
impacts, if any: There are no proposed measures
needed.
1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com-
patible with existing and projected land uses and
plans, if any: The surrounding land uses are light
industrial, office buildings and commercial. This
project is an office building; therefore it is com-
patible with existing land uses.
•
0 Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if
any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income
housing? Does not apply.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli-
minated? 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?
351% is the overall proposed height of_ ji s btilddng
The principle exterior material is cement plaster
with a metal roof.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be
altered or obstructed? There are no views which
will be altered or obstructed.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic
impacts, if any: The planting . of trees, sh.rubs.and__
grass will reduce the aesthetic impact of the hilildi.ng.
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal
produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
The parking lot and building will produce some
light from dusk to dawn.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a
safety hazard or interfere with views? The light
or glare from the finished project should not be a
hazard or interfere with views.
c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may
affect your proposal? There is no known off -site
sources of light or glare which may affect this project.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and ..
glare impacts, if any: There is no need for measures
to reduce or control light and glare impacts.
12. Recreation
a. What designed and informal recreational oppor-
tunities are in the immediate vicinity? There is a
pedestrian path along the Green River.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing .
recreational uses? If so, describe. No, there is
no displacement of existing recreational uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on
recreation, including recreation opportunities to be
provided by the project or applicant, if any: This
project will provide a path connecting the sidewalk
and building to the existing pedestrian path.
•
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro-
posed for, national, state, or local preservation
registers known to be on or next to the site? If
so, generally describe. No
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of
historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural
importance known to be on or next to the site.
Does not apply.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if
any: Does not apply.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the
site, and describe proposed accss to the existing
street system. Show on site plans, if any. So. 180th
St. & Sperry Drive abut this project. Access to
this project is from Sperry Drive.
b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If
not, what is the approximate_. distance_ to the nearest
transit stop? Yes. 'Metro buses stop going -
east and west on Sperry Drive.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project
have? How many would the project eliminate? This
project provides 64 parking spaces and eliminates none.
•
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets,
or improvements to existing roads or streets, not
including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private). There is no
need for new or improved roads or streets from the
proposa of this project.
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. 64 vehicular trips per day.
The peak volume should occur at 8am,.12am, 1pm & 5pm.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor-
tation impacts, if any: There are no proposed measures
to reduce or control transportation 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. This project should result in
no increased need for public services.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct
impacts on public services, if any. Does not apply.
•
16. Utilities
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site:
etectricity;) natural gas, ater e use servlc -,
initary sewer? septic sys em, other.
Storm drain.
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.
This project will require water, telephone, sanitary
sewer electricity, refuse service, and storm drain.
Refuse service, water: sanitary sewer and storm drain
are provided by the City of Tukwila. Telephone will be
provided by Pacific Northwest Bell and electricity by Puget
C. Signature Sound Power and Light.
The above answers are true and complete to the best
my knowledge. I understand that he lead agency is
relying on them to ma / its dec
Signature:
of
Date Submitted:
PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE.
'TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLIST • Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
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:
•
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or
natural resources?
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and
natural resourses 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, inclduing whether it would allow or
encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with
existing plans?
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land
use impacts area:
How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline
Master Plan?
6. Now would the proposal be likely to increase demands on
transportation or public services and utilities?
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)
are:
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict
with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for
the protection of the environment.
•
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila
Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli-
cies of the Plan?
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s)
are:
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPL •T
• Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT
PROPOSALS
The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the
objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the
aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This
information provides a general overall perspective of the
proposed._action in the context of the environmental infor-
mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor-
tive information, studies, etc.
1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? The objectives
of this proposal are to provide an office building which
takes advantage of the views, works well with the site
and surrounding buildings and provides plenty of parking
for its tenants.
2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing,these
objectives? Does not apply to this project.
3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the
preferred course of action: Does not apply to this
project.
• •
4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila
Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli-
cies of the Plan? No this proposal follows the Tukwila
Comprehensive Land 'Use Policy Plan:.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s)
are:
-23-
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
FOR THE PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING
AT SOUTH 180TH STREET AND
SPERRY DRIVE IN TUKWILA
Prepared for
Hansen, Hansen, and Johnson
P.O. Box "0"
Sumner, Washington 98390
Prepared by
Entranco Engineers, Inc.
5808 Lake Washington Boulevard N.E.
Kirkland, Washington 98033
(206) 827 -1300
September 1987
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
EXISTING CONDITIONS 1
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Trip Generation and Distribution 5
Level of Service Analysis 6
Queue Length Analysis 9
Impact Summary 10
RECOMMENDED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS 10
APPENDIX
Turning Movement Volumes
Level of Service Calculations
•
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Vicinity Map 2
2 Study Area and Existing Conditions 3
3 Existing Traffic Volumes and Queue Lengths (1987) 4
4 Traffic Volumes and Queue Lengths with Project 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Queue Observations for the Eastbound Approach to the
South 180th Street /West Valley Highway Intersection and
on Sperry Drive 5
2 Trip Generation Summary 6
3 Level of Service Summary (P.M. Peak Hour) 8
ii
INTRODUCTION
This report documents the traffic impact analysis performed for a
proposed 26,200 square foot (sf) office building in southeast Tukwila. The
site for the proposed office building is located in an office park south of
the intersection of Sperry Drive and South 180th Street. Figure 1 shows
the project vicinity.
The office park in which the site is located currently has three
buildings - two are occupied by First Interstate Bank and the third by
Honeywell. Access to the site will be provided by a new driveway to be
located north of the First Interstate building off of Sperry Drive. Figure
2 shows the study area and the approximate locations of the project site
and the existing buildings.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Sperry Drive is currently a two -lane local access road used for access
to the three existing buildings. Sperry Drive connects to South 180th
Street to form a "T" intersection which is stop sign controlled.
South 180th Street is a five -lane east -west arterial with a two -way
left turn lane and a speed limit of 25 miles per hour within the study
area. A major signalized intersection is located on South 180th Street at
West Valley Highway (SR 181), east of Sperry Drive.
P.M. peak hour turn movement counts were conducted by Entranco
Engineers on July 29, 1987 at the intersections of Sperry Drive /South 180th
Street and West Valley Highway /South 180th Street (see Appendix for turn
movement summaries). Existing.average daily traffic volumes provided by
the City of Tukwila for September 1984 were updated to 1987 using a growth
factor of 3 percent per year. Existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure
3.
A queue analysis was also conducted at these two intersections. Queue
lengths were observed and recorded on the Sperry Drive approach to South
180th Street during two- to three - minute intervals. Vehicle queues from
the east approach of the South 180th Street /West Valley Highway
intersection were also observed to determine what percentage of time the
Sperry Drive /South 180th Street intersection was blocked during the peak
hour.
1
BOEING AFRO SPACE CENTER
ST PATRICKS (EN
e
ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC.
N
FIGURE 1
VICINITY MAP
2
South 180th Street
J l J 1 >
Proposed
Office Building
Proposed Driveway
First
Interstate
IVirt
Honeywell
rSt Interstate
F i 113ViIa tior,s
O Ce ter
Green River
�I T
West Valley Highway
SCALE
1" = 100'
ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC.
FIGURE 2
STUDY AREA
AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
1110
4
SCALE: 1" = 100'
J l
10.70
11■ 1■ 1■ 1■ 1■ 1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1■i ■1 ■1■
k South 180th Street
1150 "4'-
1140
40 \ 100
Sperry Drive
Honeywell Driveway
Green River
LEGEND
* P.M. Peak Hour Volume
■i■ Average Peak Hour Queue Length
' ///. Maximum Peak Hour Queue Length
West Valley Highway
*NOTE: Eastbound Queue on South 180th St. at West Valley Highway
extended beyond Sperry Drive approximately 68% of the time
during the P.M. peak hour.
0
1120
1060
4
0
N
ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC.
FIGURE 3
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND QUEUE LENGTHS (1 987)
4
The average queue length on Sperry Drive was then used to determine the
95th percentile queue length (the queue length which occurs at least
95 percent of the time) during the p.m. peak hour. The results of these
observations are shown in Table 1.
Time(p.m.)
3:30 -3:45
3:45 -4:00
4:00 -4:15
4:15 -4:30
4:30 -4:45
4:45 -5:00
5:00 -5:15
5:15 -5:30
Average:
TABLE 1
Queue Observations for the Eastbound Approach
to the South 180th Street/
West Valley Highway Intersection
and on Sperry Drive
Length of Time
Queue Blocks
Sperry Drive
(min.)
11:04
5:14
7:03
5:14
12:04
9:54
10:58
8:08
Percent of
Time Period
74
35
47
35
80
66
73
54
8:42 58
Average Number
of Vehicles
in Queue on
Sperry Drive
0.0
2.0
0.2
1.2
2.0
1.2
0.8
0.2
95th Percentile
Queue Length
on Sperry Drive
0
alE
0
3 2
I
0.95 4 2• (
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Trip Generation and Distribution
Trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineer's
(ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 1982, were used to determine the daily and
peak hour traffic generation from the proposed office building. The
traffic which would be generated from the 26,200 sf office building is
shown in Table 2.
5
TABLE 2
Trip Generation Summary
P.M. Peak Hour
Daily In Out Total
General Office 464 10 63 73
(26,200 square feet)
Trip distribution for the proposed office building was determined from
existing traffic volume patterns at the intersections of Sperry Drive /South
180th Street and South 180th Street /West Valley Highway. Since Sperry
Drive is the only outlet for the proposed office building, all of the
project - generated traffic was distributed onto South 180th Street.
Sixty -two percent of the project - generated traffic was distributed to and
from the west on South 180th Street, and the remaining 38 percent was
distributed to and from the east on South 180th Street. Figure 4 shows the
traffic volumes with the project.
Level of Service Analysis
Table 3 summarizes the level of service (LOS) analysis performed for
the Sperry Drive /proposed office building driveway, Sperry Drive /South
180th Street, and West Valley Highway /South 180th Street intersections in
the vicinity of the proposed office building. LOS was calculated using the
methodology outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation
Research Board, 1985. The three intersections were analyzed for existing
traffic volume conditions and with the added project - generated traffic from
the proposed office building during the p.m. peak hour. (See the Appendix
for LOS calculations.)
The unsignalized intersection of Sperry Drive /South 180th Street is
currently at LOS E for the northbound left turn movement onto South 180th
Street during the p.m. peak hour. This movement becomes LOS F when
project - generated traffic from the proposed office building is added to the
intersection. It is important to note, however, that the eastbound queue
6
SCALE: 1" = 100'
1150
1070
4 J L
11■ 1■ 1■ 1■ 1. 1■ 1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■11
ik South 180th Street / �\
16
1160 (
50 160
-4- 10
Proposed
Driveway
60 }
1
s4
ra
P4
1160
Honeywell Driveway
0
co
LEGEND
P.M. Peak Hour Volume
■1 ■: Average Peak Hour Queue Length
' / //, Maximum Peak Hour Queue Length
West Valley Highway
0
1
1120
-4-
}
1070
0
m
*NOTE: Eastbound Queue on South 180th St. at West'Valley Highway
is projected to extend beyond Sperry Drive approximately
69% of the time during the P.M. peak hour.
e
ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC.
FIGURE 4
TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND
QUEUE LENGTHS WITH PROJECT
7
on South 180th Street at West Valley Highway extends beyond Sperry Drive
during almost every signal cycle at the South 180th Street /West Valley
Highway intersection. The "Do Not Block Intersection" sign on eastbound
South 180th Street prior to Sperry Drive is generally obeyed by motorists
on South 180th Street. This creates an opening for the queued vehicles on
Sperry Drive to make the left turn onto South 180th Street. Therefore, a
queued vehicle attempting to make a left turn onto South 180th Street from
Sperry Drive rarely is delayed more than one signal cycle at the West
Valley Highway /South 180th Street intersection.
TABLE 3
Level of Service Summary
1987 Existing With Project
Reserve Reserve
Unsignalized Intersections Movement LOS Capacity LOS Capacity
Sperry Drive /South 180th Northbound Left E 0 F -42
Street Northbound Right A 530 A 503
Westbound Left C 255 C 249
Sperry Drive /Proposed Eastbound Shared - -- A 715
Office Building Driveway Northbound Left - A 1,000
Signalized Intersection
West Valley Highway/
South 180th Street
1987 Existing With Project
Delay Delay
Approach LOS (sec) LOS (sec)
Eastbound F 94.8 F 97.2
.Westbound F 72.1 F 72.7
Northbound F 138.3 F 142.7
Southbound F 96.2 F 98.5
Overall F 101.9 F 104.3
8
The intersection of the proposed office building driveway with Sperry
Drive will operate at LOS A with project - generated traffic during the p.m.
peak hour.
The signalized intersection of West Valley Highway and South 180th
Street is at LOS F with existing traffic volume conditions. An average
overall intersection delay of 101.9 seconds per vehicle (sec /veh) is
obtained in the p.m. peak hour. The LOS with project - generated traffic at
this intersection remains at LOS F, with an average overall intersection
delay of 104.3 sec /veh. Therefore, the proposed office building increases
average overall delay by 2.4 sec /veh during the p.m. peak hour at this
intersection.
Based on this analysis, the proposed office building does not
significantly worsen the LOS at any of the three analyzed intersections.
In addition, the LOS F condition at the Sperry Drive /South 180th Street
intersection cannot be improved without the installation of a traffic
signal. In general, it is not good traffic engineering practice to install
a traffic signal where it is not warranted. A traffic signal at this
location would not significantly improve traffic operations at the
intersection and would be difficult to coordinate with the existing traffic
signal at the West Valley Highway /South 180th Street intersection. -
Queue Length. Analysis
A queue length analysis was performed at the Sperry Drive /South 180th
Street intersection for the Sperry Drive approach to assess whether the
length of the existing 110 foot left turn pocket is adequate for the
existing traffic volumes plus traffic volumes generated by the proposed
office building.
The average queue under existing traffic volume conditions is 1.6
vehicles during the p.m. peak half -hour on Sperry Drive. The p.m. peak
half -hour was found to be 4:30 -5:00 p.m. The queue increases to 2.6
vehicles with traffic generated by the project. The minimum length of a
left turn pocket is based on the 95th percentile queue length, which is
found using the probability tables for queue length calculations from
Statistics With Applications to Highway Traffic Analyses, Eno Foundation
for Highway Traffic Control, 1952. The 95th percentile queue length for an
average queue length of 2.6 vehicles is 6 vehicles. Assuming an average
vehicle length of 20 feet, the minimum left turn pocket length on Sperry
9
Drive with the proposed office building should be 120 feet. (See
Recommended Roadway Improvements section for further discussion.)
Calculations were also made to determine the percentage of time that
the proposed office building driveway would be blocked by a queue on Sperry
Drive during the peak half -hour. The proposed driveway would be blocked
approximately 8 percent of the p.m. peak half -hour under existing traffic
volume conditions. With the increase in traffic volume from the proposed
office building, the driveway will be blocked for approximately 26 percent
of the p.m. peak half -hour (approximately 8 minutes).
In addition, the percentage of time during which the Sperry Drive
intersection is blocked by the eastbound queue at the South 180th
Street /West Valley Highway intersection will increase with traffic volumes
generated by the proposed office building from 68 to 69 percent. This will
slightly improve the traffic operations of the South 180th Street /Sperry
Drive intersection because vehicles can execute their turns from Sperry
Drive only if the eastbound queue extends beyond the intersection and
motorists observe the "Do Not Block Intersection" sign.
Impact Summary
The following summarizes the transportation impacts related to the proposed
office building located on Sperry Drive in southeast Tukwila:
• The proposed office building developer proposes 26,200 square feet
of general office development.
• The development will generate approximately 464 daily vehicle trips,
with 73 of these trips occurring in the p.m. peak hour.
• Project - generated traffic was distributed to the roadway network in
the following manner: 62 percent to South 180th Street westbound
and 38 percent to South 180th Street eastbound.
• LOS C or better is obtained at all analyzed unsignalized
intersections with the project, except for the left turn movement
from Sperry Drive onto South 180th Street, which is at LOS F. This
turn movement was observed to operate at a much better LOS than the
theoretical LOS F because the eastbound queue at the South 180th
Street /West Valley Highway intersection extends beyond Sperry Drive
and allows vehicles to execute turns to South 180th Street. (The
"Do Not Block Intersection" sign is generally obeyed by eastbound
motorists in queue on South 180th Street.)
10
• Level of Service F is obtained at the signalized intersection of
West Valley Highway and South 180th Street for existing traffic
volume conditions and for traffic volume conditions with traffic
generated by the proposed office building.
• The average queue length for existing traffic conditions during the
p.m. peak half hour on Sperry Drive is 1.6 vehicles. The average
queue length increases to 2.6 vehicles for traffic volume conditions
with project - generated traffic.
• The minimum left turn pocket length is determined by assuming
20 -foot vehicle lengths for the 95th percentile queue length on
Sperry Drive. The minimum left turn pocket length necessary on
Sperry Drive was determined to be 120 feet.
• The proposed office building driveway will be blocked approximately
8 percent of the p.m. peak half -hour by the queued vehicles on
Sperry Drive_for existing traffic conditions. The driveway will be
blocked approximately 26 percent of the p.m. peak half -hour
(approximately 8 minutes) for existing traffic conditions with
project - generated traffic.
RECOMMENDED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
Two general roadway improvements are suggested to mitigate the traffic
impacts of the proposed office building.
The existing left turn pocket on Sperry Drive currently does not meet
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) guidelines for left
turn channelization. It is suggested that the left turn pocket be extended
to 120 feet in length and designed in accordance with the guidelines for
left turn channelization in the WSDOT Design Manual.
The lanes on South 180th Street are marked with raised white buttons,
while the two -way left turn lane (TWLTL) is marked with raised yellow
buttons. It is difficult at times to distinguish the TWLTL from the other
lanes; therefore, it is suggested that the TWLTL be designated by painted
markings conforming to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This
minor improvement would increase the chances of a motorist using the TWLTL
as a refuge lane before merging with westbound traffic on South 180th
Street. The improvement would also help to reduce the accident potential
at the intersection.
11
Appendix
• TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES
LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATIONS
Indicate North
With Arrow
fA
A-;-M-w--PEAK HOUR
Time Period
Date
SWIMS M=M1 .1■1B OMID. •••■••
11...1•111,
38
Co2y.
/ 1 17—
I
La-1i
P.M. PEAK HOUR
Time Period 5'30
Date' 7/09/8 7 7---=-7r/S 7-24/6
I 60414
1111
--01/U#
• 23
1053
••••■■••
'
sI
37 H
8
ElfillANCX) Engineers
LOCATION Pg"-ie-ii)) I2/V4 ff044' St"
PROJECT 14AL-05Al Orr/C LP/AM.-7
INTERSECTION
TURNING
MOVEMENT
COUNTS
Compiled By tt/D Date7/29/87Job No.
Sheet. Of
srfccss —T
Indicate North
With Arrow
M, .
PEAK HOUR
Time Period
Date 87 w
r
Ow ea ems
N
1b
I o 1 73
"mot '3
P.M. •PEAK HOUR
Time Period 4:3° - 5 34)
Date lag- w7Pc-bje±
S. lzh64 `ter.
it01
• IN
i'1
2°1
0
0
1 47 IIICa 2 -•
i•
1'
0
oo
9E05
ENTRANCO Engineers
LOCAT ION • r•/ RYt ,
PROJECT ± ANStci -S
INTERSECTION
TURNING
MOVEMENT
COUNTS •
Compiled Bye Date gj� (a7 Job No.
Sheet. Of
(
��esr�GT PrAve -c-,0 ^
Indicate North
With Arrow
- PEAK HOUR
Time Period 1' o-- 30
Date 87 w
P.M. PEAK HOUR
Time Period 4:3° - 5' 3°
Date 1°Kf 7 w7F rdse±
S. leio' ter.
-1 t •Co
Z4i
os3
1.25
0
0
1'
I47 I I (CoZ •
LrjJ
1
1
!N
t °St
. ENTRANGO Engineers
LOCATION sT t%1P--.
PROJECT ± A,-N.Stl,..S
Compiled By Date
s7 Job No.
INTERSECTION
TURNING
MOVEMENT
COUNTS
Sheet. Of
Indicate North
With Arrow
31
r4,
a--
P.M. PEAK HOUR
Time Period't'•c5ID- C'''
Date Ict `b-7 w / pR-c rEcr"
PEDS
0
3
t
I
t 17k,
P.M. PEAK HOUR
Time Period‘ 0� - • °
Date 1� 1 e7
. 1e6" sr-
F
Z� , Oh_ 1
5s7 99/ , o
ss.e,
0
N
ieiSi1I I
LZ77 Ski
ENTRANCO Engineers
LOCATION Wes-r VP•u- * 4 W ( /s. lip c.y
PROJECT T Or - 14.4.1>G, .
INTERSECTION
INTERSECTION
TURNING
MOVEMENT
• COUNTS
Compiled By .;:,C ,i.Date gi -t(f57- Job No.
Sheet Of. j
LOCATION:SPERRY DRIVE / SOUTH 180TH STR |NAME:180SPREX
HOURLY VOLUMES ^ | VOLUMES IN PCPH
` N |
Major street:180TH STREET
============______===================== ( =====================================
N= 3 <---V5--- 1053 | <---V5---
Grade 1126---V2---> v---V4--- 14 | ---V2---> v---V4--- 15
Critical Gap, Tc | Tc= 7 secs (Tab.10.2)
Potential Capacity, Cp | Cp7- 65 pcph (Fig.10.3)
Actual Capacity, Cm | Cm7=Cp7xP4= 65 x .97 = 63 pcph
============================================================= ... ====== ..... =_====_===
SHARED LANE CAPACITY SH = (V7+V9)/((V7/Cm7)+(V9/Cm9)) if lane is shared
CR CR LOS LOS
MOVEMENT V(PCPH) CM(PCPH) CSH(PCPH) (CM-V) (CSH-V) CM CSH
=======
• .^��==========================_=====================�~~________________
��
' -_ 0 � �� 63 E
-
9 39 569 530 A
4 15 270 255 0
SHARED LANE CAPACITY SH = :V7+V9)/((V7/Cm7)+(V9/Cm9)) if lane is shared
CR CR LOS LOS
|:,VEMENT V(PCPH) CM(PCPH) CSH(PCPH) (CM -V) (CSH-V) CM CSH
���__________ _________________________ ________________________
7
9
104 62 -42 F
64 567 503 A
20 249 0
Critical Gap, Tc
Potential Capacity, Cp
Actual Capacity, Cm
1/2 V3+V2+V5+V4=
5 + 37 + 99 + 0 = 141 vph(Vc7)
Tc= 6.5 secs (Tab.10.2)
| Cp7= 779 pcph (Fig.10.3)
| Cm7=Cp7xP4= 779 : 1 = 779 pcph
0
• •��������������������
SHARED LANE CAPACITY SH = (V7+V9)/((V7/Cm7)+(V9/Cm9)> if lane is shared
CR CR LOS LOS
`��VEMENT V(PCPH) CM(PCPH) CSH(PCPH) (CM -V) (CSH-V) CM CSH
7
64 779
0 1000
0 1000
779 715 715 A A
779 1000 715 � A
1000 A
--- --------'----------'-------- ____ -------- .... - .... -------- ___________ ----- _____ _____ ----
' ____________INPUT WORKSHEET
|Intersec+ion:WEST VALLEY HWY / SOU[H 180TH ST. Date: 8/5,87
| Ali alyst VH180 El- sDG Time Period Anlyzd:4:00-5:00 PMArea Type: CBD XOther:
|Project 'No ,88142_ -60 City/State:T11KWILA , WASHINGTON |
___________________________~.
-`OLUME AND GE�MF��l�5 :W.VALLEY HWY N/S ST.|
| ' [1168] | | 243 ^
ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, Kirkland, Washington, using NCAP by PSI
• ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, Kirkland, Washington, using NCAP by PSI
-_______-_____'__-.-_______-_____-_______-___________--__
-■'�����������
ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, Kirk]and, Washington, using NCAP by PSI
ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, Kirkland, Washington, using NCAP by PSI
)Intersection:WEST VALLEY HWY / SOUTH 180TH ST. Date:8/5/87 .
|Analyst:WVH180P3 TimePeriod Anlyzd:4:00-5:00 PMArea Type: CBD XOther:
oject No.38142-60 City/State:TUKWILA , WASHINGTON
lr =|
___________ ________ LEVEL-OF -SERVICEWORKSHEET__�_____��_________________�
|`___|______First Term Delay |Second Term Delay______|Tot.Delay_&_LOS
"LANE ! 3 | 4 � 5 � 6 | 7 | 8 � 9 : 10 | 11| 12 | 13
��
~~GROUP| v/c | Sreen| Cycle| Delay | Lane| Delay :Prgrsn|Lane Gp| Ln| Apprch|Apr
-----| Ratio| Ratio|Length; di :Group: d2 :Factor: Delay | Gp| Delay :LOS
1 | 2| X | g/C | C |sec/veh|Cap,c:sec/veh| PF |sec/veh|LOS|sec/veh:Tbl
Ap|Mv| . (sec)| :(vph)| |T.9-13|(6+8)*919-1| :9-1
__|__|______|_:_____|______: | -|-------�-----=|------=�---�------�|�--
PROPERTY LINE �o
p .0132'04'
L -9.00'
6.'
A .90'00'00'
-- OR•50.00'
. - 1.78.54' _
t H-Hf Hl
(- ExaTNCi =�•B
ASPHALT PAVEMENT
RIVERSBEND OFFICE BUILDING
TUK WILA, . WASHINGTON
__an:•`3{l"r��1 7�ii.Udjll ik +cu'.+••:C Y�...�.ti '2i:
4
STATE OF
.WASHINGTON
;REGISTERED
. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT • SITE PLANNER
7209 104th STREET EAST') PUYALLUP, WASHINGTON 98373'
TELEPHONE : (206) 848 -3422
DATE'Hat3
No OGIT
DRAWN .
SHEET'.;: -GE:;
LAM ' FLAN r9 f Z
11p GFFIG� .III IN6
TUKNlILA wAS rIHEION . Sa.1TN .I 77V
FOIZ 14.6‘n r:1; FIANSEN • JOHCISN ; ; SU MNER
eres - sizx:,