Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E95-0028 - TRAMMEL CROW - PAVILION SOUTH LOT DEVELOPMENT: RESTAURANTS AND STREAM RELOCATIONPAVILION SOUTH LOT DEVELOPMENT TWO RESTAURANTS WITH PARKING LOT & RELOCATION OF STREAM S. 180TH E95-028 MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: January 30, 1996 RE: Background Research and Recommendations for South Lot Development - #E95-0028. As a result of our meeting yesterday, I thought I do some research and let you know what I found regarding the on-site watercourse. There were no SEPA mitigation conditions related to replacing the watercourse. Apparently, the staff planner working on the first submittal/SEPA chose not to include conditions because the SEPA identified the impact and proposed conceptual mitigation. The following is my reasoning of what occurred in the decision process and interpretation of SAO. 1) A Pre -Application meeting was first held on 4/21/94. My attached comments indicate two important items. First, I cited TMC 18.45.080 d. as the way the watercourse could be altered 'and replaced. Specifically, watercourses may be dredged, filled, diverted , or rerouted with an approved mitigation plan. Second, the conceptual mitigation for the watercourse had been informally discussed and accepted prior to the Pre -App. Currently, the mitigation pond will replace a nearly equal segment of open watercourse, provide a buffer, and incorporate water quality improvement features. 2) My interpretation of the "piping" issue is that the ordinance allows for watercourse alteration or relocation if appropriately. mitigated. The exact words are dredging, filling, diverting, and rerouting. Piping could be a component of all of these alterations. The (1) General section clearly states that rerouting may be allowed with the permission of the Director and would be subject to standards of this section. I assume this refers to the entire Section (d) Watercourses. The sections that have actions associated with watercourse impacts or loss - (3), (4), (6), and (7) have mitigation criteria except for (6) Piping. The "piping" section seems to only refer to unavoidable impacts and limiting those impacts to access purposes. There is no mitigation criteria accept what could be incorporated into the piping structure. Therefore, I feel the Council viewed the "piping" section as an avoidable impact kept to a minimum that would not have mitigation potential. I seem to recall during the initial code deliberations the Council understood that rerouting or SouthLot Memo January 30, 1996 Page 2 divertingmay be necessary on a site for use but would need to be relocated as an open drainage with enhancement. The second part of this memo includes my observation of what is now being proposed and will need to be mitigated. If the applicant avoids altering or piping any additional watercourse area, there is no need for another mitigation. However, it appears to me that 15 feet of buffer will need to be maintained where new parking is proposed on the south boundary. The reduction to 10 feet of buffer for that watercourse segment requires enhancement. Most of the area where the new parking is being planned has fairly large cedar trees. It does not appear to be appropriate to reduce the buffer width and remove these trees. In addition, maps I reviewed today show most of the watercourse corridor to be on the applicant's site. In summary, this project has been worked on since 1994. Two different development scenarios have been proposed with many meetings involving City staff. The applicant and consultants have had more than adequate exposure to City code requirements, and allowances have been granted. I know parking is an exact requirement but cannot recommend unmitigated impacts unless allowed by Code. I suggest an on-site visit with staff and possibly the applicant's engineer. Based on a recent visit, it appears that are there few trees inside the standard 15 foot buffer in the area where more parking is planned. Please let me know what your interpretation is on this situation. 0 City of Tukwila HAr41=. Gc,1 yrstt.eb To ,S raver cAo aKe3X_ OM IlzslEc ® F- Fttomiac, v6‘_ John W. Rants, Mayor epartment of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM To: SEPA Reviewers From: Steve Lancaster, SEPA Res sib a Official Date: January 25, 1996 RE: ADDENDUM to Mitigation Conditions for E95-0028 (Pavilion South Lot Development) Further clarification and expansion of mitigating conditions for this project are established by this addendum. These changes are. based on further information received during the MDNS comment period. A summary of the information is presented in attached memo. 1. A "no protest" developer's agreement to participate in providing a fair share of all utilities, between the property owner and the City of Tukwila, shall be executed prior to issuance of a building permit. The owner retains the right to protest the amount of assessment, but not the agreement to participate in providing the following utilities: a. A 16 inch water main along Southcenter Parkway, between South 180th and South 190th streets, per the Tukwila "Comprehensive Water System Plan" and b. A 12 inch sewer line to the Minkler Lift Station and increasing the pumping capacity of the station per the Tukwila "Comprehensive Sewer System Plan." 2. Traffic Impact Mitigation (New) A total of $33,102 to mitigate project impacts on road capacity. This represents a per fair share cost of needed improvements, based on the Tukwila "Traffic Deficiencies Study" and the applicant's traffic study. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 ° Tukwila, Washington 98188 ° (206) 431-3670 0 Fax (206) 431-3665 111 SEPA Mitigating Conditions for E95-0028: Pavilion South Lot g g January 25, 1996 Page 3 3. Pedestrian Crossing Improvement (New) The good probability of Mall operation to achieve average customer traffic levels, from its current level of about 60% of customer activity, requires providing for the future demand on pedestrian facilities as follows: a. After South Lot development and full facility operation, a pedestrian volume study will conducted. The timing of this study shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. b. If there is no significant increase from existing pedestrian volumes, but pedestrian improvements are needed (e.g., per MUTCD criteria), then the applicant/Pavilion Mall developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding one-half the cost such improvements. c. If there is a significant increase from existing pedestrian volumes and pedestrian improvements are needed, then the applicant/Pavilion developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding a fair share of all improvements. d. The applicant retains the right to protest the cost of the improvements. There is no comment period as a result of this addendum. ADDENDUM to Mitigation Conditions for E95-0028 (Pavilion South Lot Development) UPDATED: January 25, 1996 Further clarification and expansion of mitigating cond this project are established by this addendum. These based on further information received during the MDNS period. A summary of the information is presented in memo. itions for changes are comment attached 1. A "no protest" developer's agreement to participate in providing a fair share of all utilities, between the property owner and the City of Tukwila, shall be executed prior to issuance of a building permit. The owner retains the right to protest the amount of assessment, but not the agreement to participate in providing the following utilities: a. A 16 inch water main along Southcenter Parkway, between South 180th and South 190th streets, per the Tukwila "Comprehensive Water System Plan" and b. A 12 inch sewer line to the Minkler Lift Station and increasing the pumping capacity of the station per the Tukwila "Comprehensive Sewer System Plan." 2. Traffic Impact Mitigation (New) A total of $33,102 to mitigate project impacts on road capacity. This represents a per fair share cost of needed improvements, based on the Tukwila "Traffic Deficiencies Study" and the applicant's traffic study. 3. Pedestrian Crossing Improvement (New) The good probability of Mall operation to achieve average customer traffic levels, from its current level of about 60% of customer activity, requires providing for the future demand on pedestrian facilities as follows: a. After South Lot development and full facility operation, a pedestrian volume study will conducted. The timing of this study shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. 4 • SEPA Mitigating Conditions for E95-0028: Pavilion South Lot January 25, 1996 Page 2 b. If there is no significant increase from existing pedestrian volumes, but pedestrian improvements are needed (e.g., per MUTCD criteria), then the applicant/Pavilion Mall developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding one-half the cost such improvements. c. If there is a significant increase from existing pedestrian volumes and pedestrian improvements are needed, then the applicant/Pavilion developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding a fair share of all improvements. d. The applicant retains the right to protest the cost of the improvements. • • CLARIFICATION AND EXPANSION OF Mitigation Conditions for E95-0028 (Pavilion South Lot Development) UPDATED: January 25, 1996 The mitigating condition for this project (Item No. 1) has been further clarified and additional conditions added, expanded based on information from the Public Works Department. This information was received during the comment period and included as Attahmb A. 1. A "no protest" developer's agreement to participate in providing a fair share of all utilities, between the. property owner and the City of. Tukwila, shall be executed prior to issuance of a building permit. The owner retains the right to protest the amount of assessment, but not the agreement to participate utility provision. Further Clarification Water. The proposed development adds to the cumulative impacts of future development in the Tukwila Valley South zone. The Tukwila "Comprehensive Water System Plan" identifies the need for a 16 inch water main along Southcenter Parkway, between South 180th and South 190th Streets, to adequately provide for the area's future growth (ibid, Pg. 5-9, Table 5-2). An agreement to reimburse the City for the fair share costs to provide this water line is an appropriate mitigation and herewith made a condition of development. Sewer. The proposed development is in the South Basin analysis area and is part of the area's projected future growth. The area is served by a substandard sewer line which runs northward to the Minkler Blvd. lift station. Upgrading the sewer line to 12 inches and increasing the pumping capacity of the station is identified in the Tukwila "Comprehensive Sewer System Plan" in order to adequately provide for the area's future growth (ibid, pg. 6-6, projects 6 and 5 respectively). An agreement to reimburse the City for the fair share costs to provide this sewer system improvement is an appropriate mitigation and herewith made a condition of development. • • SEPA Mitigating Conditions for E95-0028: Pavilion South Lot January 25, 1996 Page 2 2. Traffic Impact Mitigation (New) The Public Works Department has submitted analyses of project_fair share costs based on the Tukwila "Traffic Deficiencies Study" and the applicant's traffic study. A total of $33,102 is an appropriate fair share cost to mitigate project impacts on road capacity, as detailed in Attachmex t Right-of-way analyses regarding the need for road area on Southcenter Parkway for impact mitigation are not presented since the applicant has incorporated these provisions in the proposed project. 3. Pedestrian Crossing Improvement (New) The City Engineer has evaluated the need for pedestrian improvements (Attachment ;A) and also concurs with a Planning Division analysis of the probable need for future pedestrian improvements (Atter hmert B). Based on this, the following :..............::...........::.::..:....:::.. mitigating conditions are established: a. After South Lot development and full facility operation, a pedestrian volume study will conducted. The timing of this study shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. b. If there is no significant increase from existing pedestrian volumes, but pedestrian improvements are needed (e.g., per MUTCD criteria), then the applicant/Pavilion Mall developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding one-half the cost such improvements. c. If there is a significant increase from existing pedestrian volumes and pedestrian improvements are needed, then the applicant/Pavilion developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding a fair share of all improvements. d. The applicant retains the right to protest the cost of the improvements. 95\slot\mdns.1 Pm A To: Vernon Umetsu ()� From: Ron Cameron Date: January 23, 1996 Subject: TC Southlot two restaurants comments. (Revising Jan 10 memo based on your pedestrian crossing analysis which indicates that there is potentially significantly more pedestrian mid -block crossings). The following is an update of the September 9, 1994 memo identifying Soutlot development issues. The update uses the August 1995 traffic study, other issues are essentially the same. The Chris Brown Traffic Study for two quality restaurants identifies 1,540 daily trips and 182 noon peak hour trips. The Brown Study Figure 1 trip distribution was used to determine traffic mitigations in accord with Table 12 of the Tukwila Transportation Element for 127 noon peak trips. The 182 is reduced for pass by of 30%. The Chris Brown Study update of the crosswalk recommends retaining it as a marked and unsignalized crossing. The mid -block driveway would have continual conflict potential of turning vehicle and pedestrian crossing traffic; therefore, Public Works will not approve the site plan with the mid -block driveway. The Tukwila Traffic Defeciencies Study identifies the traffic LOS impacts resulting, from the cumulative affects of individual developments such as Southlot. The mitigations needed to provide for the impacts were identified. This is for the period between. 1990 and 2010. The growth in traffic for new and redevelopment was forecast, mitigation alternatives evaluated, and a series of mitigations selected for growth alternatives. The mitigation projects are scheduled in the CIP in response to need. This has been published in the Draft Transportation Element, adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, and various portions in SEPA documents for specific developments. Improvement costs divided by the traffic increase determine fairshare/prorated mitgation costs per development trip. It has been used through SEPA for developments including Home Depot, Segale Retail, Segale Simulcast, Best, and others. The following traffic mitigations for Southlot are the same process. While a development such. as Southlot may not result in a LOS impact, it contributes to the cumulative impact and the mitigation system provides for fairshare participation in mitigating the Southlot cumulative affect. South Lot development affects the following intersections and proportionate mitigations are: SouthcenterPkWy/Strander increase to 2010 is 954 trips and improvement cost is $134,000. The prorated share is $140/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $1,820 SouthcenterPkWy/S 168 St increase to 2010 is 899 trips and improvement cost is $250,000. The prorated share is $278/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $3,614. Andover Park E/Baker increase to 2010 is 663 trips and im- provement cost is $250,000.. The prorated share is $377/trip. 6 peak hour trips mitgation is $2,262. (Note: the 20% to north and east is assumed that 5% will use Andover Park E/S'Cntr Blvd/Grady and 15% W Valley/I405) Andover Park E/Strander increase to 2010 is 694 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $94,000. The prorated share is $135/trip. 25 peak hour trips mitgation is $3,375. SouthcenterPkWy/Minkler increase to 2010 is 907 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $122,903. The prorated share is $136/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $1,768. Andover Pk W/Minkler increase to 2010 is 1360 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $121,500. The prorated share is $89/trip. 6 peak hour trips mitgation is $534. S 180 St/SR181. The increase to 2010 is 3,200 trips and improvement cost is $1,520,000. The prorated share is $475. 25 peak hour trips mitgation is $11,875. Interurban Bridge widening. The increase to 2010 is 1,114 trips and improvement cost is $1,250,000.The prorated share is $1,122/trip. 7 peak hour trips mitgation would be $7,854. (Note: this is not included in mitigations as the trip distribution indicates that the traffic bypasses the bridge). Sidewalk, curb, and gutter required by ordinance will mitigate pe- destrian safety issues and are normally treated as a permit re- quirement and required on 57 Ave S. A Design Report has been prepared for 57 Avenue South. It identifies that 80 feet of right-of-way is needed for the minor arterial serving this area. Southlot will need to provide a total of 40 feet from centerline, or an additional ten feet to the 30 feet shown as existing on the assessor maps. The r/w is being researched at this time to ascertain if the original 30 feet was formally dedicated, if not, 40 feet would be needed. If it has, then the additional 10 is needed. This right-of-way provides for the street that will provide the access for this lot along 57 Avenue South. S 180 St is complete. The western driveway is right in/out only as shown on the plan. The midblock crosswalk connecting parking at this site and Pavilion Mall has been complained about in the form of safety, needing a signal to stop traffic, and similar concerns of vehicles not stopping for peds. The new use will increase ped useage, this is identified in the study. No recommendation for improvement is made in the Brown study except to retain the crossing. Improve- ments to provide increased safety for the increased ped volumes could be an actuated flashing beacon(s) signal, midblock pedestrian signal, additional signing and markings, or relocation. The improvement alternative will need to be engineered after the after Southlot is constructed and in operation so that the increased activity can be quantified. The report ackowledges an impact that cannot be quantified until the development is established. As stated in the Brown report, encouraging ped traffic deters vehicle trips in this area and is to the advantage of the developer and city. The mitigation requirement for Southlot to be responsible for funding half of future safety improvements to the crossing if, there's no significant change in the crossing volumes or safety impacts. If there's a significant increase in the crossing volumes requiring additional measures, then. Southlot will be responsible for all of the improvement costs. Similar to the cumulative traffic impacts, the water comp plan identifies the need for a 16 inch main in 57th Ave S. A No Protest/proportionate share agreement is needed to mitigate the developments water impact. A sewer no protest LID agreement (or proportionate fairshare agreement to reimburse the City) for design and construction of a sewer connection to Minkler and the Minkler lift station upgrade is needed. Both of these improvements are identified in the Comp Plan needed to serve cumulative effects of development. Drainage has been reviewed and designed in accord with City plans. wr AN ANALYSIS OF PEDESTRIAN CROSSING VOLUMES ATT E SOUTH 180TH STREET MID -BLOCK CROSSING Tukwila Planning Division January 23, 1996 FINDINGS Existing Conditions Pedestrian volume at the mid -block crossing between the existing south lot and the existing Pavilion (retail) Mall (across So. 180th Street), is due to mall operations to attract customers and the Mall's decision to provide 386 of 844 required parking spaces (46%), on this lot. This mid -block crossing is the only convenient pedestrian route between the Mall and its off-site facility. For the purposes of this analysis, the lot on which the Pavilion Mall is located will be referred to as the Main Lot and this site will be referred to as the South Lot. Existing crossing volume is very low or non-existent due to few customers parking in the South Lot and the ability of the Main Lot to accommodate the existing level of customer volume at all times except annual peak shopping periods, when less than 30 cars are found at the South Lot. This is documented in the applicant's study of existing parking demand and supply (AttaChment B1). Even at this low level of pedestrian usage, the Public Works Department has received complaints about the hazardous nature of pedestrians crossing this busy street, at the mid -block cross- walk. The existing low level of customer crossing is made increasingly dangerous due to increasing traffic volumes along S. 180th Street. The previous approvals for the off-site parking facility obligate the applicant for the cost of pedestrian safety improvements. However, the shared nature of the need for additional pedestrian crossing improvements to accommodate existing crossing volumes in light of increased traffic levels indicates the need for cost sharing. Future Conditions The following findings are adopted regarding the probability of future increased Mall parking at the South Lot and subsequent pedestrian volume at the mid -block crossing: 1. Data from the applicant's parking study shows that the current level of customer activity is being supported by only the parking in the Main Lot, but that this lot is currently full during peak periods. The current peak parking demand is 1.73 spaces per gross square footage (g.s.f.) (= 265,000 g.s.f./458 Main Lot spaces). All SEPA File E95-0028: Pavilion South Lot January 23, 1996 Page 2 further increases in peak period customer activity would be accommodated in the South Lot. 2. Almost all retail operations within the Tukwila Urban Center provide between 2.5 and 3.5 spaces per 1,000 gross square footage. 3. The few projects providing 2.5 spaces per 1,000 g.s.f., often experience parking congestion (e.g., over 90% occupancy of all parking spaces). 4. Projects with 3.5 spaces per 1,000 g.s.f., have over 95% of all parking spaces occupied a few times per year, usually during the Christmas season. 5. An extremely successful mall such as Southcenter Mall, provides about 4.39 spaces per 1,000 gross square footage. That mall has over 95% of all parking spaces occupied a few times each year, during the Christmas season. Staff field surveys indicate that this level of congestion is often greater than experienced at other area retail operations. CONCLUSIONS Based on the above findings, staff concludes the following: A. It is possible that the existing pedestrian crossing volumes generated by the off-site parking facility, may require additional pedestrian improvements (e.g., per MUTCD criteria), most likely due to increased traffic volumes. A. It is probable for future customer activity at the Pavilion Mall to equal or exceed the level of customer activity in an average, area retail development, C. A level of future customer activity equal to an average area retail development will result in frequent parking congestion at the Main Lot and result in significantly increased South Lot usage. D. Probable peak future customer parking activity will generate demand for between 2.5 and 3.5 spaces/1,000 g.s.f. at the Pavilion Mall. Existing and Future Parking Estimates are presented below: Est. Peak Parking Activity Level of Customer Activity At Main Lot At South Lot Existing @ 1.73/1,000 g.s.f. 458 0 Future @ 2.5/1,000 g.s.f. 458 204 Future @ 3.5/1,000 g.s.f. 458 469 • • SEPA File E95-0028: Pavilion South Lot January 23, 1996 Page 3 E. At a very low vehicle occupancy rate of 1 person per car, this would result in 204 to 469 probable mid -block crossings during the peak period. The 204 crossing estimate would probably occur frequently as Mall customer activity reached the area average range. F. Additional use of the South Lot by Pavilion customers which generates a parking demand of 2.5 to 3.5 spaces per 1,000 g.s.f., would probably require additional pedestrian Improvements. Discussions with the City Engineer indicate that pedestrian improvements include, but are not limited to: a mid -block signal which stops cars and phasing intersection traffic signals to create vehicular gaps. G. The Mall would be responsible for a fair share cost of the improvements. For example, the mid -block signal would solely benefit the Mall and accrue all costs. Alternatively, intersection signal improvements may benefit others, with the costs being shared. RECOMMENDATION Mitigation is recommended for probable pedestrian safety impacts as follows: a. After South Lot development and full facility operation, a pedestrian volume study will conducted. b. If there is no significant increase in pedestrian. volumes and additional pedestrian improvements are needed, then the applicant/Pavilion Mall developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding one-half the cost of pedestrian improvements. c. If there is a significant increase in pedestrian volumes, then the applicant/Pavilion developer, who are the same, shall be responsible for funding their fair share costs of needed pedestrian improvements. • • To: Vernon Umetsu From: Ron Cameron Date: January 23, 1996 Subject: TC Southlot two restaurants comments. (Revising Jan 10 memo based on your pedestrian crossing analysis which indicates that there is potentially significantly more pedestrian mid -block crossings). The following is an update of the September 9, 1994 memo identifying Soutlot development issues. The update uses the August 1995 traffic study, other issues are essentially the same. The Chris Brown Traffic Study for two quality restaurants identifies 1,540 daily trips and 182 noon peak hour trips. The Brown Study Figure 1 trip distribution was used to determine traffic mitigations in accord with Table 12 of the Tukwila Transportation Element for 127 noon peak trips. The 182 is reduced for pass by of 30%. The Chris Brown Study update of the crosswalk recommends retaining it as a marked and unsignalized crossing. The mid -block driveway would have continual conflict potential of turning vehicle and pedestrian crossing traffic; therefore, Public Works will not approve the site plan with the mid -block driveway. The Tukwila Traffic Defeciencies Study identifies the traffic LOS impacts resulting from the cumulative affects of individual developments such as Southlot. The mitigations needed to provide for the impacts were identified. This is for the period between 1990 and 2010. The growth in traffic for new and redevelopment was forecast, mitigation alternatives evaluated, and a series of mitigations selected for growth alternatives. The mitigation projects are scheduled in the CIP in response to need. This has been published in the Draft Transportation Element, adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, and various portions in SEPA documents for specific developments. Improvement costs divided by the traffic increase determine fairshare/prorated mitgation costs per development trip. It has been used through SEPA for developments including Home Depot, Segale Retail, Segale Simulcast, Best, and others. The following traffic mitigations for Southlot are the same process. While a development such as Southlot may not result in a LOS impact, it contributes to the cumulative impact and the mitigation system provides for fairshare participation in mitigating the Southlot cumulative affect. South Lot development affects the following intersections and proportionate mitigations are: • • SouthcenterPkWy/Strander increase to 2010 is 954 trips and improvement cost is $134,000. The prorated share is $140/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $1,820 SouthcenterPkWy/S 168 St increase to 2010 is 899 trips and improvement cost is $250,000. The prorated share is $278/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $3,614. Andover Park E/Baker increase to 2010 is 663 trips and im- provement cost is $250,000. The prorated share is $377/trip. 6 peak hour trips mitgation is $2,262. (Note: the 20% to north and east is assumed that 5% will use Andover Park E/S'Cntr Blvd/Grady and 15% W Valley/I405) Andover Park E/Strander increase to 2010 is 694 peak hour trips and improvement cost is$94,000. The prorated share is $135/trip. 25 peak hour trips mitgation is $3,375. SouthcenterPkWy/Minkler increase to 2010 is 907 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $122,903. The prorated share is $136/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $1,768. Andover Pk W/Minkler increase to 2010 is 1360 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $121,500. The prorated share is $89/trip. 6 peak hour trips mitgation is $534. S 180 St/SR181. The increase to 2010 is 3,200 trips and improvement cost is $1,520,000. The prorated share is $475. 25 peak hour trips mitgation is $11,875. Interurban Bridge widening. The increase to 2010 is 1,114 trips and improvement cost is $1,250,000. The prorated share is $1,122/trip. 7 peak hour trips mitgation would be $7,854. (Note: this is not included in mitigations as the trip distribution indicates that the traffic bypasses the bridge). Sidewalk, curb, and gutter required by ordinance will mitigate pe- destrian safety issues and are normally treated as a permit re- quirement and required on 57 Ave S. A Design Report has been prepared for 57 Avenue South. It identifies that 80 feet of right-of-way is needed for the minor arterial serving this area. Southlot will need to provide a total of 40 feet from centerline, or an additional ten feet to the 30 feet shown as existing on the assessor maps. The r/w is being researched at this time to ascertain if the original 30 feet was formally dedicated, if not, 40 feet would be needed. If it has, then the additional 10 is needed. This right-of-way provides for the street that will provide the access for this lot along 57 Avenue South. S 180 St is complete. The western driveway is right in/out only as shown on the plan. The midblock crosswalk connecting parking at this site and • • Pavilion Mall has been complained about in the form of safety, needing a signal to stop traffic, and similar concerns of vehicles not stopping for peds. The new use will increase ped useage, this is identified in the study. No recommendation for improvement is made in the Brown study except to retain the crossing. Improve- ments to provide increased safety for the increased ped volumes could be an actuated flashing beacon(s) signal, midblock pedestrian signal, additional signing and markings, or relocation. The improvement alternative will need to be engineered after the after Southlot is constructed and in operation so that the increased activity can be quantified. The report ackowledges an impact that cannot be quantified until the development is established. As stated in the Brown report, encouraging ped traffic deters vehicle trips in this area and is to the advantage of the developer and city. The mitigation requirement for Southlot to be responsible for funding half of future safety improvements to the crossing if there's no significant change in the crossing volumes or safety impacts. If there's a significant increase in the crossing volumes requiring additional measures, then, Southlot will be responsible for all of the improvement costs. Similar to the cumulative traffic impacts, the water comp plan identifies the need for a 16 inch main in 57th Ave S. A No Protest/proportionate share agreement is needed to mitigate the developments water impact. A sewer no protest LID agreement (or proportionate fairshare agreement to reimburse the City) for design and construction of a sewer connection to Minkler and the Minkler lift station upgrade is needed. Both of these improvements are identified in the Comp Plan needed to serve cumulative effects of development. Drainage has been reviewed and designed in accord with City plans. I, AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION fl Notice of Public Hearing fl Notice of Public Meeting Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet ❑ Board of Appeals Agenda Packet LIPlanning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet ereby declare that: Determination of Non- significance KiMitigated Determination of onsignificance Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice Notice of Action Official Notice Other O Notice of Application for E Other Shoreline Management Permit flShoreline Management Permit was mailed to each of the following addresses on l/1i 540 Name of Project File Number l j 9 S` 024 Signature CITY OF TUKWILA MITIGATEC•TERMINATION OF NONSIGNIF4NCE (MONS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF TWO, ONE STORY RESTAURANTS WITH A TOTAL OF 15,000 S. F . , REVISION OF AN EXISTING 500 SPACE PARKING LOT, AND RELOCATION OF A STREAM. PROPONENT: TRA/4-Max_ C./L.Ow co • LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUCs,I 4IG a:TeEET 'A PIR ;,,a IF ANY : PARCEL N 'I . _, 5 mssi .� a -. ' :' i-.',:- 0,4-_--.,--_,` . o .:PEC./TUNI RN�3: �, -72",,� t, �t :; j '+' ,,'_a,'! �'''rJ A1.771 - v •7 ,7 LEAD AGENT trr. %'� CITY CIF TUKWILA , J` FILE NO:) E95-0028 �-7;9�ari G t� G; 1 v; The C. i t v has -id ,,the -r e,ropo.>:a 1 does not '�i ave=- ; !-ur~obiafi\i e significae,tifadver a impact on\''the1envir.onment. An envir't_1tYrnerlt.]A1:'.-1!?1pact statement -?EI_;.) -J : no,t reauu}ired u • ndee RC:W 4.3.21c.030(2) (c.::I =Thi. �'t decision�w;as. ,litand'e-i atter r~e�-v.�'adot ofYai-Vonplieted er'tvir'linmentasT c,fi,eck�1 ::.t .-] and othefr,- /r nt'ar fiat i(OPll on fl-e-_w.�i:.th'( the _1'e d a9erlc.v. Thi" `i nt"o matt i'`on is ava 1 1/ b l e `t_o the' pub l.;iec� on request . The rc.ond 1 t 1 ons. to this SEPP e • R P V Deter miri� t ion are fatta.ched. ( r t�� �� I!,',' This DNS i i,_s.`sae.d car pier 19i -1r1 0 t •'' I :o`inmerrts must b, _.-��t�rr_iit t�ed b v t . a4s., i... ` 1%, c, 7. , , • 6 it h_e eya ci���afg a f V rwil 1 ' - - - � P_ - - �y� `1'5 days f`r'orUt,i7,�date „b,e 1,nw' . ,-.�._;,` '' t' 1` " r �(�.� fi r yam" .• Steve,-;="----' \ Lanc;a t•er . Re :OeH: i b 1 e Ott i c. i at1 ''•,,Dafi''e,� 1 City of T*Niyi 1a, ( «,6) 431-36L70 . ;,`-. 6300 Pouth,ctenter` Boulevard f � _ ar .�,rt--, Tukwila, WFr y�1t;���,� o �; �e C C' L..'' :J f , .r You may appeal',:th is determination to the _ i tv Clerk at�.L Lt;v' Hal 1 . 6200 '�Pouthcenter- Boule,var�d, Tukwila: WP. :,cJL3I88 no later' tharl*'10 days from the above signature date �>unwritten/[;_,'ppeaijptdting the,-t-a,i'S of the appeal for specific tactual ob''j;er;�t on_..<.You_mti,y-be rreg�i.i_r:ii-- to bear some of the a pence_ tor• an appe'a, -- =_�=%--- Copies of the procedures for- SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Department of Community Development. Mitigation Conditions for E95-0028 (Pavilion South Lot Development) January 10, 1996 A "no protest" agreement to participate in providing a fair share of all utilities, between the property owner and the City of Tukwila, shall be executed prior to issuance of a building permit. The owner retains the right to protest the amount of assessment, but not the agreement to participate in funding utility provision. TRANSMISSION RESULT REPORT TUKW (JAN 11 '96 04:08PM) DCD/PW THE FOLLOWING FILE(S) ERASED FILE FILE TYPE OPTION 058 TRANSMISSION (AUTO) TEL NO. PAGE RESULT 9* -4642582 02 OK ERRORS 1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL 2) BUSY 3) NO ANSWER 4) NO FACSIMILE CONNECTION I AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION O Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet []Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Planning Commission Agenda. Packet fl Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit J Shoreline Management Permit hereby declare that: Il Determination of Non- significance Mitigated Determination of onsignificance Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice Notice of Action Official Notice Other Other was,yaaried to each .of the following addresses on 6)r &k*o&. 0,1/ 1/«plcp ce-e/WkT.v�=r-es ♦ 1 11 Name of Project Signature e11/.4 File Number els--vvzi /qlp • • CITY OF TUKWILA MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF TWO, ONE STORY RESTAURANTS WITH A TOTAL OF 15,000 S.F., REVISION OF AN EXISTING 500 SPACE PARKING LOT, AND RELOCATION OF A STREAM. PROPONENT: TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY: ADDRESS: PARCEL NO: 352304-9034 SEC/TWN/RNG: LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: E95-0028 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. The conditions to this SEPA Determination are attachcth ,'WA I cAa c a' u Pont. g e"c ,u tis Y, This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by ZE-/{-"CC// c.?( 2c) ,9 . The lead agency will not act .on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. 6 fo1/4 OA Y f / F?,C Date Steve Lancaster, 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. Facsimile Cover Sheet CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT To: Linda Querin Company: Seattle Times Department: Legal Notices Phone: 464-2088 Fax: 464-2582 From: Company: Department: Phone: Fax: Sylvia Schnug City of Tukwila Community Development 431-3654 431-3665 Date: 1 /11/1996 Pages including this cover page: 2 Comments: Please publish the following public notice on Tuesday, January 16, 1996. Thank you. AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting Board of Packet Board of Packet Planning Packet Adjustment Agenda Appeals Agenda Commission Agenda ❑ Short Subdivision Agenda Packet ❑ Notice of Shoreline hereby declare that: ❑ Determination of Non- significance Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice Notice of Action Official Notice n Other Application for ❑Other Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit was to each of the following addresses on Name of Project " , / — File Number 1AS --& " Ytt . tte,evfq)-L_ 19-L. iic?-/9L0 . PUBLIC NOTICE City of Tukwila Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission and Board of Architectural Review will be holding a public hearing at 7:00 p.m. on January 25, 1996, in the City Hall Council Chambers, located at 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to discuss the following: PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING I. CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: II. CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: L95-0066: Good Guys Dana Warren Approval to increase wall sign area from 150 s.f. to 180 s.f. per TMC 19.32.140(A). 300 Andover Park West, Tukwila. L95-0067: Pavilion Mall/South Lot Development Cooperative Parking Agreement Trammell Crow Co. Approval of a cooperative parking agreement which would reduce the minimum required parking from 491 spaces to 475 spaces (3.3%). 5901 S. 180th Street, Tukwila. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: OLD BUSINESS IV. CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: L95-0058: Pavilion Mall/South Lot Development Cooperative Parking Agreement Trammel Crow Co. Design approval of a revised parking lot plan to allow construction of two restaurants and relocate a portion of a stream. 5901 S. 180th Street, Tukwila. L95-0051: Les Schwab Tire Paul Casey Approval of a revised design for a 13,222 square foot retail tire store with 40 parking spaces: 6810 S. 180th Street, Tukwila. CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES ( )U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( )FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( )DEPT. OF INTERIOR -FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE WASHINGTON ( )U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( )U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H.U.D. (REGION X) STATE AGENCIES ( )OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( )TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( )DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES ( )OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( )DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ( )DEPT. OF FISHERIES' ( )K.C. PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEV. ( )BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( )FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( )FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( )SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )TUKWILA LIBRARIES ( )RENTON LIBRARY ( )KENT LIBRARY ( )CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( )US WEST ( )SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( )WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ( )WATER DISTRICT.#75 ( )SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( )GROUP W CABLE ( )OLYMPIA PIPELINE ( )KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( )PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE ( )POLICE ( )FINANCE ( )PLANNING ( )BUILDING ( )PARKS AND ORECREATION ( )TUKWILA MAYOR ( )DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES ( )DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANDS DIVISION ( )DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* ( )DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE ( )OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL *SEND CHECKLIST WITH DETERMINATIONS AND *SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( )KING COUNTY DEPT. OF PARKS ( )HEALTH DEPARTMENT ( )PORT OF SEATTLE ( )BUILDING & LAND DEV. DIV.- SEPA INFORMATION CENTER SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( )HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE MUNICIPAL REFERENCE LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ( )RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT UTILITIES ( )PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ( )VAL-VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( )WATER DISTRICT #20 ( )WATER DISTRICT #125 ( )CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( )RAINIER VISTA ( )SKYWAY CITY AGENCIES ( )RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )CITY OF SEA -TAC ( )CITY OF SEATTLE ( )CITY OF BURIEN ( )TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( )TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( )PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( )P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( )SW K.COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( )MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( )DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE MEDIA ( )DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE ( )VALLEY DAILY NEWS ( )METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIV. OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL 5,000 GSF OR MORE RESIDENTIAL 50 UNITS OR MORE RETAIL 30,000 GSF OR MORE ( )HIGHLINE TIMES ( )SEATTLE TIMES PUBLIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PERMITS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section Applicant Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) Include these documents: SEPA Determination (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) _ SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Dlstribution (notice was mailed & sent to newspaper). SHORELINE MAILINGS Notice of Application: Notice of application for a substantial development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 300 feet of subject property, prepare an affidavit of publication, and publish two consecutive weeks with deadline for comments due 30 days after last newspaper publication date. Shoreline Permit: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 30 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section State Attorney General Applicant Indian Tribes Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). Include these documents: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report,if applicable) Shoreline.Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high. water mark & improvements Cross-sections of site w/structures & shoreline _ Grading plan Vicinity map SEPA D- etermination (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed & sent to newspaper) Affidavit of Publication (notice was published in newspaper). • | | ||||| | | | |||| || | | � L |||� || | ;17//0;/;;;//� ///|| // A 11111.1111N1111111111-- \ | | || ��� C7��| |||| | | || /| | |i&�� L�@| |||| || || | 11VIN NOIllAd \\\\\_\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\. S 180th STREET | | | | | U | | | | /| | | � | | || |-��` / / | / �U~ | | | |�L�~ / | |�-�� | | ..� | | | | | | | | | | | |! | | / || � | || | | | | i||||||||||||[/||/||||||~�| . | | '-_ .__ |r | ' 11 | / ' || ���.� | || | | | | | | | | || | | | | | | | || H | | | | | | 1 | | | | 1 | | 1 | || || | | | || | | | | Trammell CrowCempany October 13, 1995 Board of Architectural Review CITY OF TUKWILA 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila WA 98188 5601 Sixth Avenue South P.O. Box 80326 Seattle, Washington 98108 20617624750 2061763.9871 Fax RE: South Lot Development Parking Lot Calculations To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to transmit the following assumptions and calculations as they relate to the attached submittal. Assumptions (verified by actual count): Existing parking on Pavilion Mall site Parking to be provided at South Lot Proposed restaurants 503 spaces 491 spaces 15,000 square feet Code requirement of four (4) parking spaces per 1000 square feet for both Pavilion Mall and South Lot Development: 211,082 square feet GLA at Pavilion 211082 sf/1,000 sf x 4 Less Existing Parking Remaining South Lot Spaces 844 spaces (503) spaces 341 spaces Adding code requirement often (10) stalls per 1000 square feet for the proposed restaurants: 15,000 sf/1000 sf x 10 = 150 spaces Required spaces Required Restaurant Spaces Total Required Spaces Please call me if you have any questions at (206) 762-4750. Sincerely, St- a Crocker onstruction Manager SC:am Attachment COMPANY 341 spaces 150 spaces 491 spaces ECEOVED NOV 2 7 1995 COMA"O!NI.17`t Vi-.. V le.-vd'1- Iif/L.NT s�rECEI ED OCT 1 31995 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 CIVIL ENGINEERING,' LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 28, 1995 RECEIVED 2 51995 CU1viivtuivl IY DEVELOPMENT RE: Revised Environmental Review Submittal for South Lot Development/Trammell Crow Company City of Tukwila File No. L94-0039/Our Job No. 4969 The City of Tukwila previously issued an MDNS for a proposed two-phase development by Trammell Crow Company, located at the southeast corner of South 180th Street and 57th Avenue South adjacent to the Pavillion Mall. Phase II of the project has now been modified to include a 15,000 -square foot building with two restaurant tenants in lieu of a 24,050 -square foot retail building. At this time, we are submitting the following plans and documentation for your review and use in issuing a revised environmental determination for development of the existing parking lot. The project is still anticipated to be developed in two phases. Phase I will include construction of two new driveway entrances along South 180th Street along with storm drainage modifications. Phase II will include the construction of a 15,000 -square foot building with two restaurant tenants. Enclosed are the following items: 1. Twelve blueline prints of the Preliminary Site and Storm Drainage Modification Plan indicating the work proposed for the project. 2. One 81/2- by 11 -inch PMT of the Site and Storm Drainage Modification Plan. 3. Four copies of the Traffic Analysis completed by Chris Brown and Associates for the project. 4. Fifteen copies of the revised Environmental Checklist which includes a reduced copy of the site plan. 5. One check in the amount of $325 for the environmental review fee. Please proceed to process the enclosed plans and documentation at your earliest convenience and contact. me if you have any questions or need additional information. Daniel K. Balmelli, P.E. Principal Engineer DKB/kr [4969C.009] enc: As Noted cc: Steve Crocker, Trammell Crow Company (w/enc) Lynn Takeuchi, FDG (w/enc) 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (206) 251-6222 (206) 251-8782 FAX Control No. Epic File No. 5 > Fee $325.00 Receipt No. CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST OUR JOB NO. 4969 A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: South Lot Development 2. Name of Applicant: Trammell Crow Company 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Steve Crocker 5601 6th Avenue South P.O. Box 80326 Seattle, WA 98108 (206) 762-4750 4. Date checklist prepared: June 9, 1994 Revised August 25, 1995 - 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Phase I construction is scheduled to begin in August 1995 or as soon as construction permits are issued. Phase II construction is scheduled for the Summer or Fall of 1995. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. Page 1 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. An MDNS was issued by the City for the project on October 7, 1994. 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. None are pending to our knowledge. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. A. Storm Drainage Permit B. Sewer and Water Utility Permits C. Street Cut Permit D. Building Permit E. Fisheries HPA Permit (Issued December 21, 1994) 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 project consists of a two -phased development of an existing parking lot located at the southeast corner of South 180th Street and 57th Avenue South. Phase I of the project will include the construction of two new entrances along South 180th Street, modifications to the existing storm drainage system, and the construction of a water quality feature. Phase II will consist of construction of a single 15,000 -square foot building with two restaurant tenants along with the necessary utility services and landscaping. The total site area is approximately 4.8 acres. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to under- stand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located at the southeast corner of South 180th Street and 57th Avenue South within the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. The site is located in the northeast quarter of Section 35, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Page 2 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • of the Willamette Meridian. Please refer to the enclosed site plan and vicinity map enclosed within this submittal. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? The Sensitive Area Map identifies an existing drainage channel running through the site as a Class III stream. Page 3 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): ?1at, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 3 percent in the existing paved areas and approximately 15 to 20 percent in landscaped areas. An existing drainage ditch running through the site has site slopes of approximately 25 to 30 percent. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The site is currently developed as a paved parking lot to serve the Pavilion Mall located across South 180th Street. The SCS soils conservation service maps indicate the underlying soils as Woodinville silt loam. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not to our knowledge. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. An existing open drainage ditch running through the site will be filled and replaced with a tight line storm system as part of the Phase I construction activities. The open ditch will be replaced with a water quality feature which will be excavated along the north side of the project. Grading for Phase II of the project will include preparing a building pad for a future retail building. The approximate quantities of excavation and fill for both Phase I and Phase II is estimated at 800 to 1,000 cubic yards. Depending on weather conditions at the time of construction, the type of fill will Page 4 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT be either Class A or Class B structural fill material from an approved fill source. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. g. The potential for some erosion is possible during the excavation and fill work related to the existing drainage ditch. However, erosion control measures will be implemented prior to construction to minimize the potential for erosion. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? There is no anticipated increase in impervious area resulting from the proposed development. The existing site is approximately 75 to 80 percent impervious and will remain generally the same after construction of the project. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: An erosion control plan will be prepared as required by the City of Tukwila to reduce and control erosion during the construction phase. 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. During construction, normal emissions from construction equipment will occur. After completion of the project, normal emissions from automobiles will occur similar to those currently being created by the existing use. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Not to our knowledge. Page 5 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None our proposed. 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. An existing drainage channel runs through the site via a combination of open ditch and tight line storm drain. This channel is identified as a Class III stream, according to the City of Tukwila Sensitive Area Maps. The name of this channel is not known. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described water? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. As part of the proposed project, a portion of this channel will be filled in and replaced with a tight line storm system as indicated on the enclosed plan. Near the north end of the channel, a water quality feature will be constructed to provide both water quality treatment and some additional storage volume. Approximately 100 to 150 cubic yards of material will be placed in or removed from the drainage channel as part of the proposed work. It is anticipated that material removed from the water quality area will be used to fill the existing drainage ditch further to the south. Although the proposed work will be done during the driest time of the year, some diversion may be required in order to construct the tight line storm line and open water quality feature. At this time, it is not anticipated that surface water withdrawals will be required. Page 6 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 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. Approximately 100 CY to 150 CY will be excavated and/or placed within the drainage channel to fill in the ditch and construct a water" quality feature. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and ap- proximate quantities, if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. In accordance with the FEMA firm maps, the site is not located within the 100 -year floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the types of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. The proposal does not require any groundwater to be withdrawn or water to be discharged to groundwater. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the Page 7 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. There will be no discharge into the ground from septic tanks or other sources. c. Water Runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quan- tities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The source of runoff is from rainfall only. Existing catch basins and tight line storm pipe currently collects and conveys surface water runoff from the existing parking lot to the public storm system within South 180th Street. All storm flows from the project eventually discharge to the east along South 180th Street via an existing storm pump system and eventually enter the Green River. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste materials could only enter groundwater or surface waters if directly dumped into existing catch basins or the drainage channel. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Other than maintaining the existing stormwater system as well as constructing the proposed tight line system and open water quality feature, no additional measures are proposed. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass Page 8 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT _ pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, 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? Some of the existing landscape vegetation will be removed for construction of the tight line storm system and the open water feature. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Existing landscaping which is removed by construction of the new tight line storm system under the Phase I work will be replaced around the water quality feature area. Additional vegetation will be planted along the side slopes and along the bottom of the water quality area. For Phase II, landscaping will be provided to meet City requirements. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds an animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: X 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 to our knowledge. Page 9 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not to our knowledge. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The proposed water quality feature will help preserve and/or enhance wildlife. 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. It is anticipated that power and heating will be provided by electricity and natural gas as part of the building construction under the Phase II development. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not to our knowledge. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation features will be provided as necessary to meet City code requirements. 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. Page 10 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Other than normal police, fire and medical services which are currently available to the site, no other special emergency services will be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None are proposed. b. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Other than normal noises from existing retail uses and vehicular traffic, no other noises exist in the area that will affect the project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated 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. Normal noise from construction equipment will occur during the construction phase from approximately 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. After construction is completed, standard noise levels from retail uses will occur similar to those which currently exist. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None are proposed. Page 11 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT S. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The current use of the site is an existing paved parking lot to serve the Pavilion Mall. The current use of adjacent properties is mostly office and retail space. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. It is not known whether the site was previously used for agricultural purposes prior to development of the existing parking lot. c. Describe any structures on the site. The existing site does not contain any existing structures. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No structures will be demolished as part of the development. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning designation of the site is M2 (Medium Industrial). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation for the site? The current comprehensive plan designation of the site is Medium Industrial Development. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. The City of Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance classifies the existing drainage channel running through the site as a Class III stream. To our knowledge, there are no other environmentally sensitive areas. Page 12 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? J• After construction of the proposed restaurant building under Phase II, approximately 10 to 15 people are estimated to work at the completed project. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None are proposed. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The City of Tukwila Planning, Building and Public Works Department will ensure that the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses through the permit process. 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. Page 13 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest height of the proposed structure under Phase II construction would be approximately 24 feet. The principal exterior building material is not known at this time. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None are proposed. '11.. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposals produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None to our knowledge. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not to our knowledge. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None to our knowledge. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None are proposed. Page 14 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] 1 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 12. Recreation a. What designation and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The South Center Mall is located approximately 1 mile north of the proposed project along South Center Boulevard. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None are proposed. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state or local preservation registers to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Not to our knowledge. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. ' None to our knowledge. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None are proposed. 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: Page 15 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT The existing site is served by South 180th Street and 57th Avenue South. Access to the project will be from 57th Avenue South and South 180th Street. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? After completion of the Phase II building construction, approximately 473 parking stalls will be provided on the site. The proposed project will eliminate approximately 10 to 20 existing stalls. 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). The proposal will not require any new roads, streets or improvements to existing streets. Two new entrances are proposed along South 180th Street as part of the proposal. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Not to our knowledge. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Please refer to the Supplemental Traffic Study completed by Chris Brown and Associates attached to this document which indicates the vehicular trips and peak hour volumes which will be generated by the completed project as well as a comparison of the original study prepared for the retail development to the proposed restaurant project. Page 16 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None are proposed. 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. Completion of the Phase II project will result in an increased need for public services for fire protection and police protection. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: None are proposed. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utilities providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Phase I construction will not require any additional utility services to the project. Phase II construction will require fire and domestic water service to the building as well as sanitary sewer, power, gas, and telephone. Page 17 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: 44... -al Date Submitted: 8 -Z8 -?S PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE Page 18 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 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 of the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal that would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. 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 plans, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Page 19 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? 6. How 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. 8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: Page 20 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NONPROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the foregoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental information provided and the submitted plans, documents, supportive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? The objective of this proposal is to obtain a two -phased permit for development of the existing paved parking area. Phase I includes two new entrances and storm drainage modifications; and Phase II includes the construction of a new 24,050 -square foot retail building. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? We are not aware of an alternative means of accomplishing the proposed objectives other than to complete the project all under one phase. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: The alternative means would not allow adequate time to complete the storm drainage improvements since an HPA permit from the Fisheries Department may be required and the time frame to complete this work is typically from June 15 to September 15. Building permits for Phase II of the project would not be able to be accomplished under this time frame. Therefore, the preferred course of action is the original two -phased design. 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan? To our knowledge, the proposal does not conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: Page 21 of 20 4969.003 [DKB/sdc/kr] ".. • r - ;;w 1 17131 iµ 0Sii. s : INS �, Agin& R' ]0.1 JLLA i .,.• l%i�ii�.. Pp4) R 411 SITE LOCATION PLAN SITE SOUTH 180TH STREET .11111.16 CURB COT IIIIIIIIIIIIII{111[1 fallo.04 1,001 New W SOUTH LOT RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT 7 / — 7 IL IC PE.wnow "wa 1 i i CI•- C LG 11111111111111111 COMM., GA Nohow: C C GL cI L cic Lc L Clc LL ,1 L CCL. CGLLL GIGGL CC L,LILWdLI� 4 CI cicccI is ICICI--�LI(�C L� LLC "1(11ICICCC L IC CIC:L.0 CIC C C C CILIC C C CIC ICICI CIC L ADJACENT PROPERTIES wu .. 30-0. Parking Spaces S 7 5tRLS So -re SE reucv. 11 E9 11111 11 IS a P. y South Lot Development m 0 a smertr Christopher Brown 0 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Fax 772-4321 THE SOUTH LOT Developed with Two Quality Restaurants RECEQVED An 2'9 1995 [DEVELOPMENT Supplementary Traffic Study with a Review of Potential Pedestrian Crossings of S. 180th Street prepared for the Trammell Crow Company August 11, 1995 Traffic Engineers 4 Transportation Planners THE SOUTH LOT Developed with Two Quality Restaurants Supplementary Traffic Study with a Review of Potential Pedestrian Crossings of S. 180th Street Table of Contents Introduction Previous Study Trip Generation Trip Generation Comparison Noon Hour Demand Trip Distribution Shoppers Survey Survey Responses Results & Comments Recommendation Caveat List of Figures Figure 1 List of Tables Table I Table II Table III Table IV Table V Trip Distribution Trip. generation for Two Restaurants Retail versus Restaurants Trip Generation Comparison Noon Hour Trips as a Percent of PM Peak Hour Trips Noon Hour Trips for Restaurants Trip Generation for Two Restaurants 1. 2. 3. 4. 4. 6. 6. 8. 9. 10. 10. 7. 3. 4. 5. 5. 5. Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • THE SOUTH LOT Developed with Two Quality Restaurants Supplementary Traffic Study with a Review of Potential Pedestrian Crossings of S. 180th Street Introduction At the present time a large paved parking lot is located on the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Southcenter Boulevard at S. 180th Street, in the City of Tukwila. This parking lot was especially constructed as an ancillary facility to a major shopping complex - the Pavilion Mall. It was to be used for "overflow" and site employee parking. Vehicular access to the parking lot is from a driveway located about a block south of the Southcenter Boulevard/S. 180th Street intersection. To link this lot with the Pavilion Mall a wide mid -block pedestrian crossing complete with a mid -street pedestrian refuge area was constructed. Signing and overhead nighttime illumination was provided for pedestrian safety. From current parking surveys, this lot is underutilized by shoppers at the Pavilion Mall and is only lightly used by mall staff. Indeed, from a license plate check of government owned vehicles it seems that others are using this lot for personal business not related to the Pavilion Mall. Given the lack of use by mall visitors and staff, and by inference little if any economic viability, this site can well be considered for some other more productive use. A possible use is for two new, high quality, sit down restaurants. Since two new restaurants will generate additional vehicular traffic and may also induce shoppers to cross over from the Pavilion Mall to dine or, conversely, visit the Pavilion Mall after dining, it is appropriate to document a number of vehicular and pedestrian traffic related elements. Of particular note, since a previous (June 8, 1994) traffic study addressed the use of this lot for commercial retail sales -1- Christopher Brown « Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 J the principal elements of this new study are to contrast trip generation for these two restaurants against the trip generation projected under the 25,000 gross square feet (GSF) retail sales type of land use and, in addition, to assess the potential or likelihood of significant pedestrian crossings of S. 180th Street. In essence, how does the new two restaurant proposal contrast against the estimated retail sales use and is there a continued need to maintain the mid -block pedestrian crossing? Accordingly, given these issues the City Engineer has requested that this supplementary traffic study include the following key elements. o Provide a comparison of the trip generation for the proposed two restaurants against the previous retail use proposal. o Provide a new vehicular trip distribution to: Strander Boulevard, West Valley Highway, South city limits, West city limits, using statistics addressing the average daily traffic, noon peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic demands. o Estimate or quantify potential pedestrian traffic crossing to the restaurants from the Pavilion Mall. Previous Study As noted above, a traffic study was completed for this site under the assumption that a 25,000 g.s.f. retail store might be constructed. That study is attached as a part of the Appendix. Accordingly, the project site, its access, current and future traffic forecasts, its estimated trip generation and traffic distribution to the city's arterial network for that commercial use are available for immediate reference. The Appendix to that retail land use study also includes a copy of the proposed -2- Christopher Brown C4 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 1 (206) 772-1188 parking lot design. That provides a detailed description of the parking lot and its amenities as it was considered for the commercial use. It will likely be constructed in a similar vein with respect to access for the two new restaurants. Trip Generation Since two restaurants are considered for this site it is assumed that one will be a "quality sit down" restaurant (where the average duration is an hour or more) while the second will be a "high -turnover" type of restaurant although it will also be built as a quality sit down type. Both restaurants could have cocktail lounges as ancillary uses. The high turnover type is often a part of a chain and sometimes referred to as a "family style" restaurant. Of some importance, the latter restaurant would be open for breakfast while the former would not. The trip generation data for the restaurants is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (I.T.E.) Land Use Code 831 which applies to quality sit-down restaurants and Land Use Code 832 for the family style. The expected trip generation data is shown on Table I, below. -3- TABLE I Trip Generation for Two Restaurants Time Interval High Quality Family Type Restaurant Restaurant A.W.D.T. * 710 1540 vehicles per day A.M. inbound 6 59 vehicles per hour A.M. outbound 1 59 vehicles per hour P.M. inbound 40 66 vehicles per hour P.M. outbound 17 56 vehicles per hour * Average Weekday Daily Traffic Christopher Brown 4 Associate 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • Trip Generation Comparison A comparison of trip generation with the previously contemplated retail use is shown below in Table II. TABLE II Retail versus Restaurants Trip Generation Comparison Time Interval Restaurant Retail Difference A.W.D.T. * 2250 1017 3267 vehicles per day A.M. inbound 65 18 83 vehicles per hour A.M. outbound 60 14 74 vehicles per hour P.M. inbound 106 71 177 vehicles per hour P.M. outbound 73 53 126 vehicles per hour * Average Weekday Daily Traffic Note that ITE has not published any a.m. peak hour data for the retail use described under Land Use Code 814 for the "Specialty Retail" use. Accordingly, this statistic was prorated from the published Table 1 data (see page 1231, Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition) using the p.m. peak hour rate as the independent variable. Noon Hour Demand Next, noon hour data has also been requested for the proposed two restaurants. Since this data has not been published it is assumed that the noon hour demand will follow the same hourly trends as a "shopping center over 300,000" square feet. This assumption is based on the fact that shoppers at significant sized shopping centers are comprised of mainly "primary" trips with pass -by and diverted -linked trips being in the minority. With that assumption,and referencing Table 3, Hourly variation in Shopping center Traffic (see page 1232, Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition) the noon hour demand is taken as follows. -4- Christopher Brown 4 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 \` Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • TABLE III Noon Hour Trips as a Percent of PM Peak Hour Trips Inbound trips 9.5/8.3 X 100 = 114.5 % of the Peak Outbound trips 7.9/9.5 X 100 = 83.2 % of the Peak With the above data, the noon hour vehicular traffic volumes can be estimated. The data are shown below in Table IV. TABLE IV Noon Hour Trips for Restaurants Inbound Outbound 121 vehicles/hour 61 vehicles/hour Table V is constructed to aggregate the morning, noon and p.m. peak hour demands for the restaurants. TABLE V Trip Generation for Two Restaurants Time Interval Combined Restaurants A.W.D.T. * 2250 vehicles per day A.M. inbound - 65 vehicles per hour A.M. outbound 61 vehicles per hour Noon, inbound-. 121 vehicles per hour Noon, outbound 61 vehicles per hour P.M. inbound 106 vehicles per hour P.M. outbound 73 vehicles per hour * Average Weekday Daily Traffic The above data suggests that the noon hour is marginally greater than the p.m. peak hour (182 versus 179 trios per hour) but the difference is only about 1.7 percent. This is to be expected -5- Christopher Brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • since the restaurant business will continue into the evening. Trip Distribution Since these are somewhat remote from the main shopping and commercial areas of Tukwila, these are considered to be primarily destination restaurants. As a consequence, the combined trip distribution is the same as propounded for the retail use of this site. The trip distribution schematic diagram is shown on the Figure 1 of the next page. Shoppers Survey A survey of current Pavilion Mall shoppers mixed trip/travel purpose was conducted on Saturday, July 29th, 1995 between the hours of 6:00 and 8:00 p.m. These times were selected to capture site visitors who may have been or were about to dine at a restaurant and thus comprise.a mixed trip (shopping and dining) sample. The full text of the questionnaire is included in the Appendix. There were 35 respondents of which 27 percent were male. The dominant percentage of females (73 percent) is not considered unusual since the survey was taken outside the front door of the Pavilion Mall. Of interest, 11 percent were accompanied by young children. The survey location outside the mall was selected since it is the candidate site for shoppers who may keep their cars parked in that location while walking to the south side to dine. In essence, they are candidate pedestrians who might cross the street. Some difficulty was found in obtaining responses since many either had no interest in providing information or were in a hurry to complete their business. The weather at the time of the survey was warm and sunny. There were no apparent constraints or anomalies that might skew the data. -6- Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 NOIlf1811:11sla d1al i CP 51ST AVE. S. • • 410 N 0 o 0 III El Nv II m mo m m 0 WEST VALLEY HWY. • Survey Responses The survey 35 responses can be enumerated as follows. 1. If shopping in the Pavilion Mall and dining out, will keep car in the Pavilion Mall lot and will walk to the restaurants? Yes, will walk. 49 percent * No, will not walk. 48 percent Undecided. 3 percent * 3 Answers qualified. "If no purchases are in car." 2. If dining in one of the new restaurants and will then shop in the Pavilion Mall, will keep car in the south lot and will walk to the Pavilion Mall? Yes, will walk. 37 percent No, will not walk. 63 percent Undecided. 0 percent 3 If it is raining, will this change your answers? Yes. No. Undecided. 26 percent 74 percent 0 percent 4 If it is dark, will this change your answers? Yes. No. Undecided. 37percent 63 percent 0 percent 5. How frequently do you dine out after shopping? Once a week or more often. Once or more often in a month. Infrequently. 49 percent 31 percent 0 percent 6. Do you combine shopping trips with dining? Yes. 90 percent * No. 10 percent * 1 answer qualified. "If restaurant is in the mall." -8- Christopher Brown i Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • Results & Comments Fundamentally, about ninety percent of the shoppers will dine out but of these three percent would do so only if the restaurant were in the mall. Further, nine percent would not dine if they had made purchases. In essence, the risk of theft seemed to dictate if a shopper is willing to segregate herself ("her" since most respondents were women) from her car if she had stored parcels in it. At best, 78 percent would possibly combine a dining trip to a remote site not in the mall. However, of the 78 percent, only 49 percent would be willing to walk so that absent rain or day/night consideration at best 38 percent of shoppers are candidate pedestrians. Considering rain and night conditions the 38 percent are reduced to about ten percent. (Rain and night is often combined so that those who won't walk in the rain won't in the dark, either.) Less then half of the shoppers are frequent diners so that at best half of the 78 percent are candidate pedestrians. Also, in daylight with no rain it would seem that about 38 percent of the shoppers might be candidate diners. Considering adverse environmental effects, the range would drop to about 10 percent. For estimating purposes, the median is about 24 percent. This would represent candidate pedestrians or non -drivers. Since the questioned (sampled) shoppers each represent a single vehicle, it would seem that the peak demands for automobile use could change by 24 percent, as follows. Trip Generation Time Interval Noon, inbound Noon, outbound P.M. inbound P.M. outbound -9- TABLE VI - Reductions for Two Restaurants Combined Restaurants Net Automobile Demand 92 vehicles 46 vehicles 81 vehicles 55 vehicles per per per per hour hour hour hour Christopher Brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • The corollary to this is that there will be some pedestrian crossings of S. 180th Street if the two restaurants are built. In the noon hour this could amount to about 29 (round up to 30) walking to the restaurant trips with 15 in the opposite direction having already dined. As many as 45 pedestrian crossings in the noon hour may be found in fair weather. In the evening this could be in the order of 25 pedestrian trips to the restaurants and 18 (round up to 20) from the restaurants. Again, this would total about 45 pedestrian crossing per hour in fair weather. These estimates of pedestrian crossings suggest that the mid - block crosswalk in front of the Pavilion Mall should be continued. However, there is not a sufficient demand to warrant a traffic (control) signal. A volume of 45 pedestrians per hour is not significant but is sufficient to ensure that crosswalks continue to be maintained, that nighttime illumination be in effect and that police surveillance to ensure motorists yield to pedestrians is periodically instituted. Recommendation Maintain the existing mid -block pedestrian crossing. It may serve a. significant pedestrian movement between the mall and the restaurants in fair weather. The demand will not be as great at nighttime nor in wet weather. Caveat The sample size is considered sufficient for estimating purposes; however, the recurring theme, "Whose restaurant is it? does tend to limit the pedestrian crossing estimates. Similarly, if vehicular access to the site is opened on S. 180th Street so that a readily visible entrance is seen and, furthermore, that the availability of parking is also seen, then that can attract motorists and thus limit the amount of pedestrian crossings. Considering the questionnaire, it would be reasonable to say pedestrian crossings to the restaurants would be no more than about 45 per hour. Of course, if there are vacancies or diminished amounts of leasing in the Pavilion Mall, that in turn would act to reduce pedestrian cross -flows. -10- Christopher Brown g Associates 879 12ainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Lenton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • THE SOUTH LOT Developed with Two Quality Restaurants Supplementary Traffic Study with a Review of Potential Pedestrian Crossings of S. 180th Street APPENDIX 1. Survey questionnaire. 2. TIA for a Retail Store of 25,000 g.s.f. (June 8, 1994) Christopher Brown a Associate 879 Painier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Penton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • SOUTH LOT Shopper's Survey of Driving/Walking Habits Questionnaire of Pedestrian Crossings of Arterial Streets This study is being undertaken to determine the mode of travel of patrons of the Pavilion Mall who may wish to dine in one of the two new restaurants planned for the south property. A) Will you keep your car parked in the Pavilion Mall parking lot and walk across S. 180th Street to one of the new restaurants to dine, or will you drive to the new restaurants and park in the South Lot near one of the new restaurants. The corollary is just the reverse: B) If you have dined in one of the new restaurants and you wish to shop in the Pavilion mall, will you walk across S. 180th Street and keep your car parked in the restaurant lot, or after you have dined in one of the new restaurants and you now decide to shop, will you drive to the Pavilion Mall parking lot. C) Is your answer affected by the weather, for example ifit is raining are you more likely to drive? D) Is your answer affected by the time of day (at night in the dark) will not walk? Circle the answer on EITHER line A OR line B, as applicable. Answer: A) Keep car in Mall Lot and walk. Yes No Undecided Circle the answer on EITHER line C OR line D, as applicable. Answer: B) Keep car in South Lot and walk. Yes No Undecided Circle E and D as responded. Answer: C) Will not walk in rain to cross. Yes No Undecided Answer: D) Will not walk on a dark night. Yes No Undecided Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 j (206) 772-1188 SOUTH LOT Shopper's Survey of Driving/Walking Habits Ouestionnaire of Pedestrian Crossings of Arterial Streets This portion of the study is to obtain a sample of dining and shopping habits of Pavilion Mall patrons. It relates to those who may wish to dine in one of the two newrestaurants planned for the south property. 1. How frequently do you dine out if you have been on a shopping trip to the Pavilion mall? Once or more often in a week. Once or more often in a month. Every other month or infrequently. 2. Do you ever combine a shopping trip with dining? Yes No 3. Does it matter to you how close you park to a restaurant? Must be close. A few blocks to walk is okay. I wont cross a 4 -lane arterial street to park. (Put X in brackets to statement that will apply.) 4. Do you prefer to drive your car from one lot to another if the purpose of the trip (shopping or dining) is different? Yes No Depends on proximity. Christopher Brown g Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Penton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Christopher Brown 0 Associales� 879 Rainier Avenue N.. &Suite A-201 Iknlon, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Fax 772-4321 THE PAVILION MALL a Parking Study with a Review of Parking Usage at the Overflow Lot June 13, 1995 Traffic Engineers 0 Transportation Planners THE PAVILION MALL Parking Study with a Review of Parking Usage at the Overflow Lot Table of Contents Introduction 1. Purpose 1. Location 1. Main Parking Lot Zones 3. Parking Supply 6. Parking Study 6. Results & Comments 10. Potential Restaurant Usage 11. Conclusion 12. List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Parking Study Areas Figure 3 Key to Parking Zones 2. 4. 5. List of Tables Table I Main Parking Lot Capacity by Zone 6. Table II Main Parking Lot Demand by Time of Day 8. Table III Overflow Parking Lot Demand by Time of Day 9. Table IV Estimated Restaurant Peak Parking Demand 12. Christopher Brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Penton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 THE PAVILION MALL • A Parking Study with a Review of Parking Usage at the Overflow Lot Introduction An separate parking lot was built on the south side of S. 180th Street east of Southcenter Parkway for the purpose of providing additional parking to the Pavilion Mall. As an ancillary lot, a pedestrian linkage across S. 180th Street close to the main entrance of the Pavilion Mall was also built. Signage within the main Pavilion Mall parking area directs motorists to this "overflow" parking facility. This lot, while used by a few employees and by other users who may or may not be shoppers has never been used to any significant degree. Accordingly, to provide a reasonable economic justification it is proposed to use a portion of this site for two, high quality, sit down restaurants of about 7,500 gross square feet, each. Before converting a portion of the "overflow" parking lot to a new use, however, it is appropriate to consider how the main Pavilion Mall parking area functions in concert with this ancillary parking lot. Purpose The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current vehicular parking demand associated with the existing Pavilion Mall and its "overflow" or ancillary parking lot. Location The location of the Pavilion Mall and the "overflow" parking lot, on each side of S. 180th Street east of Southcenter Parkway, in the south part of the City of Tukwila, is shown on Figure 1, the Vicinity Map. -1- Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., 6uite A-201 Renton, WA 980554380 (206) 772-1188 lir wad MINION ICIPWW111111111 111111RIPIIIIM L CEIRMISE011= MAIL FIGURE 1 Vicinity Map -2- • Christopher Brown ( Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 1:2enton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 In addition, since this study looks at current parking demands, the two principal or respective parking areas associated with the Pavilion Mall are shown in slightly greater detail on Figure 2 of page 4. Of interest, Figure 2 also indicates the general relationship of the Pavilion Mall which is essentially located at the south end of the larger Parkway Plaza shopping facility. Like most malls, the parking area directly in front of the building tends to be used by its customers. In addition, no significant pedestrian linkages exist between the Pavilion Mall and Parkway Plaza. In any case, no pedestrian traffic was observed passing between these two shopping sectors. While the Pavilion Mall tends to focus on apparel and related kinds of sales, the Parkway Plaza facility tends to a different type of retail focus. Also, in the immediate vicinity of the Pavilion Mall there are no quality sit-down or family style restaurants which are found in the Parkway Plaza sector. Figure 2, in addition to describing the location of the main parking area for the Pavilion Mall with its overflow lot to the south of S. 180th Street, also depicts the style of parking which is can be described, in general, as 60 degree angle parking served by 2 -way aisles. Also shown on this figure, to increase parking density, are some 90 degree parking stalls. These are provided along the west side building frontage and in a small paring bay at the north end of the mall. Main Parking Lot Zones In order to assess current parking demands, the main parking area was divided into "parking zones". These are shown on Figure 3. For the most part these "parking zones" tend to be the individual rows of parking stalls, the exception being the aggregated lot on the north side of the mall building. Of note, the "overflow" parking lot located on the south side of S. 180th Street is so lightly or sparely used that it was not considered appropriate or useful to sub -divide its different parking areas. Regardless of day -of -the -week or time -of -day, it has such little parking demand that no value can be derived from any segregation.of its total data. -3- Christopher Brown 0 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 0 180th St Overflow Parking Area S 128th St__ Pavilion Mall Parking Area (Main Study Area) \, f\J • FIGURE 2 Parking Study Areas -4- Christopher Brown g Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • Current "Overflow" Parking Site or Future Site for Development S. 180th Street © vi S. 178th St. \ \\No \\\\‘\\\ t,\\\VINO, "\\\NA\ `►\\\\ \-I\\ \\\\\ z 0 5 \ \\t\ \\\ \\\ \\` \\ \ ' \ n \;. ` I1tt FIGURE 3 Key to Parking Zones -5- L t Christopher Brown Ci Associates 879 18inier Avenue N.. (Suite A-201 E2enton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Parking Supply Referring to Figure 3, the main parking area has the following capacity, as shown in Table I. TABLE I Main Parking Lot Capacity by Zone Parking Capacity Parking Capacity Zone (Stalls) Zone (Stalls) 1. 49 11. 21 2. 16 12. 23 3. 14 13. 23 4. 17 14. 21 5. 17 15. 20 6. 18 16. 23 7. 19 17. 36 8. 20 18. 23 9.. 21 19. 32 10. 21 20. 24 Total parking supply 458 stalls The parking supply noted in Table I includes 8 handicap parking stalls. Directly behind the Bon Marche ancillary furniture store, along its east wall, are 13 parking stalls and a dumpster. These are not used in this parking study since they are not visibly connected or otherwise related to the site. Parking along the south wall (zone 15) is assumed to be related to the site. The south or "overflow" parking lot was counted in the field. It has 503 marked or visible parking stalls. Parking Study The parking study was conducted over two, peak shopping days so that the worst case parking loads could be measured. These -6- Christopher Brown 4 Associates 879 12ainier Avenue N.. (Suite A-201 12enton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • days were Memorial Day (Monday, May 29th) and the following Saturday, June 3rd, 1995. Note: The manager at the Nordstrom Place 2 store in the Pavilion Mall indicated, from his experience, that the following Saturday, June 3rd, would be higher than the Memorial Day in terms of sales and thus for maximum parking demands. The method used for data collection was the "periodic parking check". By this method an observer checks the number of vehicles accumulated on site in each of the parking zones. This was done in fifteen (15) minute intervals from 10:00 A.M. to 5:30 PM. It documents the total parking accumulation for each discrete time interval of the day. The field observations noted in Table II on the next page provide a clear indication of the maximum parking demand in the, main parking area serving the Pavilion Mall. In addition, noting the surplus parking that is available for each of these time intervals in concert with the adjacent "percent occupied" statistic, the degree of congestion can be inferred. For example, as a rule of thumb, a parking lot is considered to be well used if 90 percent of the stalls are occupied at any particular time. Similarly, if over 98 percent of the stalls are used, there is very little surplus parking and the main mall lot can be considered congested since there is little opportunity for parking other than by circulating around the aislesand waiting for someone to pull out of a stall. On May 29th, Memorial Day, the maximum loading in the main parking lot serving the Pavilion Mall was at 2:45 PM when 357 cars were observed. This is 78 percent of the lots capacity. Even at that time, it was not considered congested. This level of demand also was noted at 1:00 o'clock. In general, on this day it was fairly active from 11:45 AM to about 3:30 PM when seventy or more percent of the stalls were occupied. Conversely, on Saturday June 3rd peak shopping started at about 11:15 AM and continued unabated until 5:30 PM or just before closing time. In the interval from 2:00 PM to about 3:15 PM it was totally full, namely 100 percent occupied. While Table III gives demand in the overflow lot, it is not clear from the size of its demand whether or not it serves in this capacity. On Saturday when the main lot was congested it gained less than a dozen vehicles. -7- Christopher brown ci Associates ^ , 879 Rainier Avenue N.. 6uite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 TABLE II Main Parking Lot Demand by Time of Day Time Volume Surplus Percent Volume Surplus Percent Occupied Occupied May 29th June 3rd 10:00 129 329 28 177 281 39 10:15 138 320 30 189 269 41 10:30 173 285 38 235 223 51 10:45 207 251 45 281 177 61 11:00 241 217 53 295 163 64 11:15 251 207 55 323 135 71 11:30 283 175 62 338 120 74 11:45 320 138 70 362 96 79 12:00 345 113 75 379 79 83 12:15 346 112 76 382 76 83 12:30 352 106 77 394 64 86 12:45 352 106 77 400 58 87 1:00 356 102 78 420 38 92 1:15 331 127 72 431 27 94 1:30 351 107 77 438 20 96 1:45 331 127 72 445 13 97 2:00 330 128 72 456 2 100 2:15 344 114 75 455 3 99 2:30 354 104 77 458 0 100 2:45 357 101 78 457 1 100 3:00 338 120 74 456 2 100 3:15 334 124 73 448 10 98 3:30 323 135 71 455 3 99 3:45 289 169 63 447 11 98 -8- 4:00 297 161 65 441 17 96 4:15 270 188 59 418 40 91 4:30 255 203 56 380 78 83 4:45 236 222 52 380 78 83 5:00 219 239 48 368 90 80 5:15 200 258 44 342 116 75 5:30 186 272 41 321 137 70 5:45 172 286 38 294 164 64 Christopher Brown 0 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 J TABLE III Overflow Parking Lot Demand by Time of Day Time Volume Surplus Percent Volume Surplus Percent Occupied Occupied May 29th June 3rd 10:00 16 487 3 16 487 3 10:15 15 488 3 16 487 3 10:30 16 487 3 17 486 3 10:45 15 488 3 20 483 4 11:00 16 487 3 23 480 5 11:15 18 485 4 26 477 5 11:30 16 487 3 25 478 5 11:45 18 485 4 26 477 5 12:00 20 483 4 28 475 6 12:15 20 483 4 27 476 5 12:30 20 483 4 26 477 5 12:45 21 482 4 27 476 5 1:00 21 482 4 26 477 5 1:15 20 483 4 25 478 5 1:30 21 482 4 27 476 5 1:45 21 482 4 27 476 5 2:00 18 485 4 28 475 6 2:15 20 483 4 29 474 6 2:30 19 484 4 30 473 6 2:45 18 485 4 23 480 5 -9- 3:00 18 485 4 25 478 5 3:15 18 485 4 25 478 5 3:30 18 485 4 25 478 5 3:45 16 487 3 23 480 5 4:00 15 488 3 21 482 4 4:15 15 488 3 20 483 4 4:30 15 488 3 19 484 4 4:45 16 487 3 19 484 4 5:00 16 487 3 22 481 4 5:15 16 487 3 19 484 4 5:30 15 488 3 18 485 4 5:45 15 488 3 16 487 3 Christopher Brown Ci Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Results & Comments First, on both days the weather was warm and sunny; there were no adverse weather conditions to inhibit typical shopping patterns. Of course, the Memorial Day sales were underway but these did not seem to be influential judging from the parking demands noted above . Second, there was no major construction or other road activity that might otherwise interfere with average weekend shopping. Thus, there is no reason to assume the data was adversely skewed by those kinds of considerations. Fundamentally, it can be concluded that the data is representative of typical peak, non -Christmas type shopping. Third, in the overflow parking lot on June 3rd it wasnoted that at 11:00 o'clock nine of the cars had bike racks and that these were parking in that lot not to go shopping but, rather, to use the City of Tukwila bike trail system. At noon (12:00 o'clock) this number increased to the maximum observed value of ten (10). In essence, in the south or overflow lot nearly a third of the parked cars are related to recreational (bicycle) activities, not to shopping. Fourth, in this overflow lot when recreational activity was taking place it was noted that eight (8) vehicles had government license plates. Probably, they were not shopping either. Considering the above observatioins, it seems that employee or shopping related parking in the overflow lot is about a dozen vehicles. Continuing, while the parking accumulation study considered a typical non -Christmas holiday shopping day and a normal or average Saturday, being in late spring or early summer the parking demands would be typical for setting average design standards. Considering average conditions, then, several conclusions can be made. These are noted below. -10- 1. The main parking lot serving the Pavilion Mall is very well used and on a typical Saturday is at full capacity for a good part of the day. 2. The Pavilion Mall main parking area is at capacity Christopher brown c4 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., &uite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 on Saturday from about 1:00 to 5:00 o'clock when over 90 percent of the parking stalls are occupied. 3. When the Pavilion Mall main parking area is at the 90 percent parking utilization level, the overflow parking area remains unused. 4. The overflow parking area appears to be used primarily by three different classes of automobile owners. These are: i. recreation (bicycle) groups (10 maximum). ii. government employees (8 maximum). iii. store employees. 5. The overflow parking area is never more than six (6) percent occupied and this is for no more than about an hour on a peak Saturday (Table III). 6. As an overflow parking area with signage in the main Pavilion mall lot directing or advising motorists of this availability, it does not seem to be used for that purpose. Potential Restaurant Usage Recognizing that the overflow parking lot site is little used by Pavilion Mall shoppers and, as a consequence, may serve as the location for two quality sit-down type of restaurants or some equivalent, their peak parking needs can be estimated to determine if that kind of use on this site would induce any significant parking impacts. Assuming that each restaurant has some 7,500 gsf leasable area, then the additional parking needs can be estimated on the basis of some general traffic engineering parameters. This is best reviewed using information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the publication Parking Generation (2nd Edition, (1987). For the ITE Land Use Code 831, Quality Restaurant and Land Use Code 835, Family Restaurant the future peak parking needs are as follows. -11- Christopher Brown (4 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. (Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 TABLE IV Estimated Restaurant Peak Parking Demand Site Usage Weekday Saturday Quality Sit Down Restaurant One 7.25 ksf Facility 92 stalls 129 stalls Two 7.25 ksf Facilities 184 stalls 258 stalls Family Restaurant One 7.25 ksf Facility 70 stalls N.A. Two 7.25 ksf Facilities 140 stalls N.A. Combination Quality Sit Down & Family Restaurants 7.25 ksf Quality Restaurant 92 stalls 129 stalls 7.25 ksf Family Restaurant 70 stalls N.A. Total, Two Restaurants 162 stalls N.A. Based upon the maximum demand for peak parking, as measured by traffic engineering standards for the "quality" restaurant, the worst case will be on a Saturday when 258 stalls are required. (Note that the Saturday data for a family'restaurant is not published and so no assessment can be made at this time for that class. Its peak parking demand may be higher than found with the quality restaurant.) The Pavilion Mall peak Saturday parking demand at this site is not significant although some parking should be set aside for mall employees. Perhaps 20 stalls may be appropriate for this group of users. If the two restaurants can be sited along with parking for at least 258 visitors and, say, 20 mall employees, there should be no significant conflict. Conclusion The peak parking demand at the Pavilion Mall takes place on a Saturday from about 1:00 to 5:00 o'clock when over 90 percent of the parking stalls are occupied. Excess demand for parking -12- Christopher Brown 0 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 by mall patrons does not take place at the overflow parking site. Rather, apart from a few mall employees, this site is used by an entirely different group who are not associated with the owners or developers of the site. Since the overflow parking site is not used for mall patrons to any significant degree, it could be converted to a better or more appropriate use. If two restaurants are to be sited, both scale and restaurant classification may need to be explored in some detail so that competing goals can be accommodated. At the moment, it is clear the overflow parking lot originally designed for Pavilion Mall patrons does not serve a significant or compelling purpose insofar as the Pavilion Mall is concerned. It is scantily used. This is in direct contrast to the mall parking lot that experiences 100 percent occupancy for nearly a full hour on a Saturday. -13- Christopher Browne Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton,. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 UERJV 'J u Me u To: John Jimerson From: Ron Cameron Date: January 10, 1995 TC Southlot two restaurants comments. The following is an update of the September 9, 1994 memo identifying Soutlot development issues. The update uses the August 1995 traffic study, other issues are essentially the same. The Chris Brown Traffic Study for two quality restaurants identifies 1,540 daily trips and 182 noon peak hour trips. The Brown Study Figure 1 trip distribution was used to determine traffic mitigations in accord with Table 12 of the Tukwila Transportation Element for 127 noon peak trips. The 182 is reduced for pass by of 30%. The Chris Brown Study update of the crosswalk recommends retaining it as a marked and unsignalized crossing. The mid -block driveway would have continual conflict potential of turning vehicle and pedestrian crossing traffic; therefore, Public Works will not approve the site plan with the mid -block driveway. The Tukwila Traffic Defeciencies Study identifies the traffic LOS impacts resulting from the cumulative affects of individual developments such as Southlot. The mitigations needed to provide for the impacts were identified. This is for the period between 1990 and 2010. The growth in traffic for new and redevelopment was forecast, mitigation alternatives evaluated, and a series of mitigations selected for growth alternatives. The mitigation projects are scheduled in the CIP in response to need. This has been published in the Draft Transportation Element, adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, and various portions in SEPA documents for specific developments. Improvement costs divided by the traffic increase determine fairshare/prorated mitgation costs per development trip. It has been used through SEPA for developments including Home Depot, Segale Retail, Segale Simulcast, Best, and others. The following traffic mitigations for Southlot are the same process. While a development such as Southlot may not result in a LOS impact, it contributes to the cumulative impact and the mitigation system provides for fairshare participation in mitigating the Southlot cumulative affect. South Lot development affects the following intersections and proportionate mitigations are: SouthcenterPkWy/Strander increase to 2010 is 954 trips and improvement cost is $134,000. The prorated share is $140/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $1,820 SouthcenterPkWy/S 168 St increase to 2010 is 899 trips and improvement cost is $250,000. The prorated share is $278/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $3,614. Andover Park E/Baker increase to 2010 is 663 trips and im- provement cost is $250,000. The prorated share is $377/trip. 6 peak hour trips mitgation is $2,262. (Note: the 20% to north and east is assumed that 5% will use Andover Park E/S'Cntr Blvd/Grady and 15% W Valley/I405) Andover Park E/Strander increase to 2010 is 694 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $94,000. The prorated share is $135/trip. 25 peak hour trips mitgation is $3,375. SouthcenterPkWy/Minkler increase to 2010 is 907 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $122,903. The prorated share is $136/trip. 13 peak hour trips mitgation is $1,768. Andover Pk W/Minkler increase to 2010 is 1360 peak hour trips and improvement cost is $121,500. The prorated share is $89/trip. 6 peak hour trips mitgation is $534. S 180 St/SR181. The increase to 2010 is 3,200 trips and improvement cost is $1,520,000. The prorated share is $475. 25 peak hour trips mitgation is $11,875. Interurban Bridge widening. The increase to 2010 is 1,114 trips and improvement cost is $1,250,000. The prorated share is $1,122/trip. 7 peak hour trips mitgation would be $7,854. (Note: this is not included in mitigations as the trip distribution indicates that the traffic bypasses the bridge). Sidewalk, curb, and gutter required by ordinance will mitigate pe- destrian safety issues and are normally treated as a permit re- quirement and required on 57 Ave S. A Design Report has been prepared for 57 Avenue South. It identifies that 80 feet of right-of-way is needed for the minor arterial serving this area. Southlot will need to provide a total of 40 feet from centerline, or an additional ten feet to the 30 feet shown as existing on the assessor maps. The r/w is being researched at this time to ascertain if the original 30 feet was formally dedicated, if not, 40 feet would be needed. If it has, then the additional 10 is needed. This right-of-way provides for the street that will provide the access for this lot along 57 Avenue South. S 180 St is complete. The western driveway is right in/out only as shown on the plan. The midblock crosswalk connecting parking at this site and Pavilion Mall has been complained about in the form of safety, needing a signal to stop traffic, and similar concerns of vehicles not stopping for peds. The new use will increase ped useage, this is identified in the study. No recommendation for improvement is made in the Brown study except to retain the crossing. Improve- ments to provide increased safety for the increased ped volumes could be an actuated flashing beacon(s) signal, midblock pedestrian signal, additional signing and markings, or relocation. The improvement alternative will need to be engineered after the after Southlot is constructed and in operation so that the increased activity can be quantified. The report ackowledges an impact that cannot be quantified until the development is established. As stated in the Brown report, encouraging ped traffic deters vehicle trips in this area and is to the advantage of the developer and city. The mitigation requirement for Southlot to be responsible for funding half of future safety improvements to the crossing is needed. Similar to the cumulative traffic impacts, the water comp plan identifies the need for a 16 inch main in 57th Ave S. A No Protest/proportionate share agreement is needed to mitigate the developments water impact. A sewer no protest LID agreement (or proportionate fairshare agreement to reimburse the City) for design and construction of a sewer connection to Minkler and the Minkler lift station upgrade is needed. Both of these improvements are identified in the Comp Plan needed to serve cumulative effects of development. Drainage has been reviewed and designed in accord with City plans. To: From: Date: Subject: 1. • Lfc- Rick Beeler Ron Cameron November 15, 1994 TC MDNS questions Fairshare denominator. The denominator is the projected traffic increase from 1990 (3,899 trips) to 2010 (4,853trips). The improvements costing $134,000 will maintain LOS at an average of E or better for the CBD. 2. S 180 St/SR181 is being constructed; no further WSDOT funding is available. / 3 The mitigations are based on trip that's for a furniture store which giseone lof ttheonalowestdtrip- generation uses. If the use is auto or other that is higher than the identified trips of SEPA, then, further study would be made to determine adjustments. 4. A Design Report has been prepared for 57 Avenue South. It identifies that 80 feet of right-of-way is needed for the minor arterial serving this area. Steve Crocker of Trammel Crow asks if the improvements can be accomplished with easement. Yes, a means to serve the travel need including the Southlot traffic can be accomplished this way. The right-of-way research is not complete, the initial stages have not located formal dedication of 30 feet of right-of-way on each side but have found maps dating to the turn of the century showing the road including various developments over the last 80+ years. Therefore, a formal dedication of the existing roadway is requested (30 feet) and a sidewalk and utility easement (10 feet). This is the Trammel Crow suggestion and work for both the City and TC. • City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Public Works Ross A. Eamst, P. E., Director August 12, 1994 Mr. Daniel K. Balmelli, P.E. Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Subject: South Lot Development (Phase 1) 57th Avenue South & South 180th Street Project No. PRE94-012 Review Comments on Permit Submittal Dear Mr. Balmelli: I am following up on our conversation of August 3rd and providing you with comments and red -lined plans for the above submittal while the SEPA review is also currently in progress. Please excuse the delay in this response. The following are our specific comments: 1. A Water No -Protest Agreement needs to be executed by the property owner for participation in a future 14" water main on the south side of South 180th Street and a 16" main in 57th Avenue South. 2. A Sewer No -Protest Agree tent needs to be executed by the property owner for participation in a future 21" sewer main in 57th Avenue South. 3. Under Storm Drainage Note No. 1, include King County standards. All catch basins shall be numbered. Trash racks shall be provided as shown. Private storm drainage pipe shall be either concrete or reinforced ADS. Indicate vertical datum as NGVD on the plans. See red- lined plans for additional items. 4. South 180th Street and 57th Avenue South are classified as minor arterials. Right-of-way requirements vary from a minimum of 60' to a desirable of 80'. The existing 72' along South 180th Street is adequate. However, the existing 60' along 57th Avenue South is not. In accordance with the design report prepared for the City 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: (206) 433-0179 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • for the upgrade of 57th Avenue South, a total right-of- way width of 80' is required through this area. Therefore, an additional 10' dedication will be required from this property owner as a condition of development. This is consistent with what was required from the property owners for the proposed Tukwila Driving Range to the south. In addition and in compliance. with City standards, the lot corner at the intersection of 57th Avenue South and South 180th Street shall have a minimum radius of 50' with the remainder outside of the radius being dedicated as right-of-way. 5. Typical sections for roadway improvements and requirements for any channelization/striping/signing should be coordinated directly with Brian Shelton, PW Transportation Engineer. 6. Sidewalks are required along 57th Avenue South and these shall be six feet wide. All driveways, whether existing or proposed, shall meet commercial City standards. The proposed driveway locations are still being reviewed by the City Engineer. It is still the desire of the City that a common driveway between this property and the property immediately to the east be developed at some point in time in the near future. 7. Other minor items are indicated on the red -lined plans. After the driveway locations have been reviewed by the City Engineer, any comments will be immediately forwarded to you. At the point in time that you submit revised plans, please attach the enclosed red -lined plan as well. If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, John A. Pierog, - E. Development En. eer JAP/jap Enclosure a/s cf: Permits Denni Shefrin, Planning Division Development File • Christopher Brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Fax 772-4321 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANANYSIS For The Trammell Crow Company SOUTH LOT BUILDING (A Proposed Retail Store) In Tukwila, King County June 8, 1994 Traffic Engineers Transportation Planners A PROPOSED RETAIL STORE for THE TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY Table of Contents Introduction 1. Location 1. Purpose Access Project Description Road System Public Transit Traffic Data Background Traffic Trip Distribution Trip Assignment Horizon Year Capacity Analysis/LOS 3. 3. 3. 4. 4. 4. 5. 8. 8. 8. 8. Parking 13. Mid -block Pedestrian Crossing 14. Adverse Consequences 14. Conclusions 15. List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map 2. Figure 2 Current Traffic Volumes 6. Figure 3 Year 1995 Traffic, No Build Case Trip 7. Figure 4 Distribution in Percent 9. Figure 5 Traffic Assignment 10. Figure 6 Year 1995 Traffic with All Projects 11. List of Tables Table I Trip Generation 5. Table II Levels of Service 12. Appendix Site Plan Capacity Calculations • • Traffic Impact Analysis for the Trammell Crow Company South Lot Building Proposed Retail Store Introduction The proposed project consists of a 25,000 gross square foot retail store to be located in the southern sector of the City of Tukwila. The site is located on the southeast quadrant of the intersection of S. 180th Street and 57th Avenue S. The site is presently used for overflow parking needs generated by the Pavilion Mall. However, its current marginal use as a parking lot, generally by mall employees only, suggests that this peripheral or accessory use is not vital. Indeed, with a safe pedestrian linkage maintained between the two sites, the concept of "shared parking" can implemented while a higher or more economically viable use of the site is established. Given the proposed new or higher use of this site, it is appropriate to examine potential impacts the new traffic demands associated with the proposed project may involve. Thus, if the projected traffic volumes are large, then the operating ability of the access driveways and adjacent arterial street system may be adversely impacted. Further, the operating characteristics of the main access driveways with the new higher traffic volumes can also be assessed and mitigated if necessary. In summary, with a new retail use on an existing lightly used parking lot, the review of traffic circulation issues is an important element. Location As noted above, the site is located on the southeast quadrant of the intersection of S. 180th Street and 57th Avenue S. In turn, the retail building will be located on the southwest. corner of this site. The street system is shown on page 2, Figure 1, the Vicinity Map. -1- Christopher Brown g Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 T us WEST VALLEY HWY. • • Purpose The purpose of this study is severalfold, as noted below. o To gather a data base of current traffic operations on the adjacent and access streets serving the proposed retail store: o to estimate the daily, noon and p.m. peak hour trip generation for the developed site: o to assign the generated traffic to the road network: o to derive a traffic forecast for the baseline condition, that is for 1995 without the site: o to derive a traffic forecast for 1995 with the site: o to determine the existing and horizon year levels of service (LOS) both with and without the project at the key intersections and access driveways under present street geometry and traffic control systems. In addition, given that the development may immediately proceed, a secondary function of the study is to identify any possible changes or modifications in access and traffic control systems to ensure the maintenance of safe traffic operations in the future when the project is completed. Access Access to this new retail store will be from three different points of entry. Two driveways will provide access to S. 180th Street and a third to 57th Avenue S. The central driveway on S. 180th Street, due to an existing mid -block crosswalk with a - center pedestrian "safety island" or "refuge", will be limited to right turn in and right turn out (RI/RO) movements. Project Description The project consists of a 25,000 gross square foot retail (furniture) store, complying with Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) land use code (LUC) 814, and its associated ancillary parking is included. -3- Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Road System There are three major streets potentially impacted by the proposed new development on this site. They are: I. Southcenter Parkway north of the project site, a multi- lane principle arterial constructed with curbs, gutters, and other amenities throughout most of its length. Immediately south of S. 180th Street, Southcenter Parkway becomes 57th Avenue S., a two lane minor street widened with a short left turn lane at S. 180th Street. II. S. 180th Street is multi -lane principle arterial with raised curbs, gutters, and a center two-way left turn lane. Sidewalks are only found on the south side between Southcenter Parkway and Andover Park W. In addition, a mid -block pedestrian crosswalk, featuring a central refuge island, links the project site with the Pavilion Mall on -the north side of S. 180th Street. This street has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. III. Andover Park W. is a four lane arterial with raised curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and overhead illumination. Andover Park W. provides access to a series of warehouse and business/light manufacturing buildings which are predominant in this part of the city. Street design data and other capacity information including the number of lanes, grades and traffic control devices are contained in the Appendix as a part of the level of service (LOS) analysis and computer data input. Public Transit Public Transit is provided to the site by METRO via routes #150 and #155 along S. 180th Street. These routes operate seven days a week but may not carry many shoppers. Traffic Data Current noon and p.m. peak hour traffic data for the several intersections along S. 180th Street were obtained from a recent study by David Hamlin and Associates for the Sectale Business Park dated August 1993. Since the data from the Segale report is only one year old at the time of this writing, projected 1994 base conditions traffic volumes provided by that study, were used as the "current" traffic volumes data in this study. -4- Christopher brown g Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • The current 1994 p.m. and noon hour traffic volumes data used in this study are displayed on Figure 2. Data references and sources used in this study include trip generation data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the Document, Trip Generation: 5th edition, and the Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, published by the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. For the latter item, reference is also made to the computer program SIGNAL 85 for signalized intersection capacity and NCAP for driveway capacity. Background Traffic Traffic growth in the general area, as described in the Segale study, is expected to be fairly stable, increasing only slightly in the near future. To be consistent with that study, the increase in background traffic volumes will be taken at two percent annually. This growth rate is used to determine 1995 horizon year traffic volumes without project implementation. It does, however, include the expected generated traffic by the adjacent site which should be fully operational by that time. The horizon year traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. Trip Generation Trip Generation data for the site is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (I.T.E.) Land USE Code (814) which applies to specialty retail centers similar to that being proposed. The expected trip generation data is shown below in Table I. TABLE I Trip Generation A.W.D.T. Noon Inbound Noon Outbound P.M. Inbound P.M. Outbound 1,017 vehicles 78 vehicles 58 vehicles 71 vehicles 53 vehicles -5- per day per day per day per day per day Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME 148 • • 124 85 226 3.6"7 Y 0. CC W 1— z W V H O 121 172 59. 208 28 8 537 527 260 S. 180th STREET Y cc 4 0. ccW 0 0 z 4 104 253 159 286 75 67- 551 iSsr eG�QZ ' 63 44 uQO' NOON HOUR TRAFFIC 334 274 467 S. 180th STREET 187(-474 68 ac 4 0. cc W O C Z 125 74 203 648 72 770_ 605 a 1 --Ixe 55 47 ore P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC r6r-r-7 6 FIGURE 2 G TRAFFIC VOLUMES -6- CURRENT MAY 1994 .I • • 0. CC W 1- z W V 1- O co \ 153 577 151 t 574 y 87 270_ 237 ) 0. CC W 1- z v 1- O CO 123 175 60 117 NOTE:HORIZON YEAR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ASSUME A rNUAL GROWTH RATE FOR BACKGROUND TRAFFIC. ALSO INCLUDED IS PROJECTED TRAFFIC FROM THE SEGALE RETAIL STORE. SIGNAUZED INTERSECTION • S. 180th STREET ANDOVER PARK W. 126 182 87 584 ikasn efAR, size NOON HOUR TRAFFIC 368 315 481 258 '( 292 715 Q 4 a cc W 0 Z C 145 80 227 661 S. 180th STREET 80 813 \*\ 638 ,Er(�Q�C� 56 48 za P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC t54(1.14 FIGURE 3 4 [NI -7- PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES HORIZON YEAR 1995 -WITHOUT PROJECT • • Trip Distribution New traffic generated by the implantation of this project is expected to be distributed in a manner similar to those approved for the adjacent Segale project. Inbound/outbound motorists will access the local arterial street network system from the greater regional transportation system consisting of I-5, I-405, SR -167, and SR -518 and the East and West Valley Roads. In order to be consistent with the previously referenced Segale traffic study, the traffic distribution assignment used in this report is the same. This trip distribution is shown on Figure 4 and is expressed in term of percent of all project generated trips. Traffic Assignment Using both the noon hour and the p.m. peak hour trip generation data with the traffic distribution described on Figure 4, the trip assignment is definedand shown on Figure 5. This data has been included in the horizon year (1995) forecast base condition to arrive at the projected horizon year traffic volume data with project implementation. It is depicted in Figure 6. Horizon Year For the purpose of this study, the time period of project implementation is taken one year hence so the horizon year for full development is the year 1995. This is also consistent with the construction schedule of the project. With full project implementation, including traffic generated by the completion of the adjacent Segale site and including the anticipated growth in background traffic, the noon and p.m. peak hour demands of Figure 6 will apply. This data is used to assess potential traffic impacts and the optimum design. Capacity Analysis/Levels of Service The level of service (LOS) describes the quality of traffic flow. This ranges from the best or highest level, 'A', usually denoted by an ability to select ones' own speed or the ability to change lanes or overtake at will, down to the lowest of worst level, 'F'. This LOS is the lowest possible level and is one where traffic is severely constrained. It is denoted by "jam" conditions and long traffic delays. -8- Christopher Brown g Associates\ 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 NOIlf181111S1a d11:11 ,mme•amp 1 1� 0 0 smi 0 1 001 9 9 WI IN NI • IS MI IN MI III III SOUTH ENTER PKWY. N -i D Z 0 m _Lira ,114 '4t '5' GI, tib F+ TF,p •••# 1 0.• �/ 1 ANDOVER PARK W. a) ANDOVER PARK E. 0 51ST AVE. S. Flimminew— _MIMOMI Ell _ III OILMI 68TH AVE. %%////rrrrr �■■■■■■■4r4Nk\ WEST VALLEY HWY. 62ND AVE S. ♦' 4 0 (-n • SIGNAUZED INTERSECTION •) SOUTHCENTER PKW 1 17 S. 180th STREET SOUTHCENTER PKWY :4611 2 ANDOVER PARK W. 16 18 se usz% rAllz NOON HOUR TRAFFIC S. 180th STREET 14 2 16 seG�erAge s P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC z y 23 21 FIGURE 5 ANNUAL GROWTH RATE■2.0•/. 1 YEAR PERIOD TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT -10- • 153 v, 151 105 238 a cc W 1- Z W V 1` O 123 175 76 591 • S. 180th STREET 137 198 87 ANDOVER PARK W. 602 eG ,,,u � 64 45 p sore NOON HOUR TRAFFIC 379 331 482 S. 180th STREET NOTE: HORIZON YEAR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ASSUME A 2% ANNUAL GROWTH RATE FOR BACKGROUND TRAFFIC. ALSO INCLUDED 15 PROJECTED TRAFFIC FROM THE SEGALE RETAIL STORE. SIGNAUZED INTERSECTION •� 2 ANDOVER PARK W. 258 292 738 74 80 241 661 80 834 155 654 &LG aQ48sire P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 6 154 (1.2.4 INI -11- PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES HORIZON YEAR 1995 -WITH PROJECT • • Capacity computation were performed in accordance with Special Report 209, the Highway Capacity Manual, using the computer program Signal 85 for intersection analysis and NCAP for driveway analysis. As noted earlier, all input data is listed in the appendix along with computer output. The title and other reference or descriptive materials, including the applicable dates, are also shown. Levels of service for the three conditions, current or 1994 traffic, 1996 without the project and 1996 with the project are shown below in Table II. TABLE II Levels of Service In the above table, note that the driveway LOS for S. 180th Street is a worst case representation since, for this analysis, only a single driveway with full turning movements was assumed -12- Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • as a theoretical case. In actual fact, there are two driveways. The most easterly one has access to the 2 -way, left -turn lane while the central driveway is limited to right in/right out only movements due to the proximity of the mid - block pedestrian crossing. The driveways on S. 180th Street will, at worst, operate at LOS 'D'. This is a satisfactory LOS and applies to the outbound left turn movement, only. What this means is that the heaviest queuing will be on site and, as a result, will not interfere with arterial street traffic. Conversely, the inbound left turns will operate at LOS 'A' and, consequently, that means there will be negligible queuing on the street. For short, left turn stacking in the 2 -way, left turn lane will not impede other driveways nor arterial through traffic. Fundamentally, the driveways will function very well. Concerning the existing arterial signal operations, they were considered fully actuated and signal timing was optimized for the best results. The only intersection of concern was at Andover Park W. at S. 180th Street. This is at LOS 'E' to -day and will remain so for the next few years regardless of site development. No mitigation is considered for this intersection at this time. Parking As noted earlier, the existing site is used for supplemental or overflow parking by the Pavilion Mall shoppers and staff. As now planned, there are proposed 422 parking stalls on completion of the new retail store. Using the equations from the ITE publication Parking Generation 2nd Edition, the proposed new store, the South Lot Building, will generate a peak demand for approximately 90 parking spaces based on LUC 815 for the worst case, namely, a Discount Store. With a demand for 90 stalls against a proposed supply of 422 stalls, yielding a surplus of 332 stalls, there is no reason to believe that this site can not continue to serve as an overflow parking area attendant to the Pavilion Mall. Indeed, existing signage at the mall directing motorists to this site can continue in full force when the South Lot Building is fully occupied and operational. -13- Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Mid -Block Pedestrian Crossing Considering the foregoing parking surplus and the auxiliary parking supply for the Pavilion Mall, it is axiomatic that the large mid -block crosswalk be maintained for this ancillary purpose. It will provide an important pedestrian linkage between the two shopping areas and, in fact, inhibit unnecessary cross -street vehicular maneuvering which can be detrimental to traffic operation on S. 180th Street. In other words, there is no necessity to shift cars from the subject lot to the Pavilion lot (and vice versa) whenshopping at both retail sites. The cross walk is key to this consideration. While some concern has been noted in the way of complaints to the City by users, no data has been made available at this writing as to the time, date, nature or the specific causes or concerns leading to_the complaint(s). Absent a more detailed review, an appropriate amelioration program can not be well identified. Adverse Consequences The inclusion of traffic generated by the project will not cause any significant lowering of the levels of service at either of the key intersections examined. Generally speaking, adequate geometrics and signal systems exist to allow the additional traffic to be accommodated without creating capacity problems. Levels of service will remain acceptable except at S. 180th Street and Andover Park W. where LOS 'E', considered marginal, is found to -day and will continue in the future. No adverse consequences are anticipated with the subject proposal at its driveways, particularly along S. 180th Street. While complaints have been registered by the city regarding the mid -block crosswalk at the center of the site on S. 180th Street, the absence of details precludes an engineering assessment or analysis. Regardless, the extension of retail activity to the south of S. 180th Street will make such a crossing quite commonplace and, as a result, motorists will become more aware and/or accustomed. Rigorous police enforcement will do much to assist in pedestrian safety. -14- Christopher Brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • • Conclusions The following conclusions may be drawn: 1. The addition of project generated traffic will not alter the current levels of service at any of the key arterial intersections studied for both the noon and p.m. peak conditions. 2. The project will generate about 1,017 additional vehicular trips per day with 136 in the noon hour and 53 taking place in the evening peak hour. No account was made for "pass -by" traffic so the data of the study is considered to be a worst case assessment. 3. The mid -block pedestrian crosswalk currently linking the Pavilion Mall with the project site was originally intended to provide mall patrons with a supplemental or ancillary parking area. It is lightly used by mall employees: 4. The project will provide 422 parking stalls. Under a worst case parking load scenario, the maximum demand will be for 90 spaces. With a surplus of 332 stalls, the area will continue to adequately provide ancillary parking for mal customers. 5. The continued use of the mid -block crossing is urged so that cross -street auto movements will be minimized from shoppers who visit both facilities and otherwise might use their cars for intersite travel. 6. On the arterial street system, the maintenance of good levels of service, at their present standing, suggests no adverse consequences in this regard. 7. Driveways will operate very well and no queuing is expected on the street system. Thus, there should be no impacts to the adjacent or cross -street driveways. 8. Outbound movements from the site to S. 180th Street may be heavy and queuing will take place when the LOS drops in the peak hours to 'D'. In summary, the implementation of a new 25,000 g.s.f. store on this site should not impact street or parking operations. -15- Christopher brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 TRAFFIC STUDY & INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Trammell Crow Retail Store APPENDIX I- Site Plan II -Capacity Calculations with Signal 85 by Strong Concepts Location/Hour Intersection of S.180th St/Southcenter Pkwy Noon Hour Current (1994) Horizon Year Horizon Year P.M. Peak Hour Current (1994) Horizon Year Horizon Year Filename: Traffic TR-NN001 1995) W/O Project TR-NN011 1995) W/Project TR-NN111 Traffic TR-PM001 1995) W/O Project TR-PM011 1995) W/Project... TR-PM111 Intersection of S.180th St/Andover Park W. Noon Hour Current (1994) Traffic TR-NN002. Horizon Year (1995) W/0 ProjectTR-NN022. Horizon Year (1995) W/Project TR-NN222 P.M. Peak Hour Current (1994) Traffic TR-PM002 Horizon Year (1995) W/O Project TR-PM022 Horizon Year (1995) W/Project TR-PM222 III -Access Capacity Calculations with NCAP by METRO Transportation Group, Inc. Southcenter Pkwy/West Driveway Noon -Horizon Year (1995)W/0 Project TR-NN333 P.M. -Horizon Year (1995)W/ Project TR-PM333 S. 180th Street/North Driveway Noon -Horizon Year (1995) W/0 Project TR-PM444 P.M. -Horizon Year (1995)W/ Project TR-PM444 PRE-APPLICAAN CHECKLIST CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION — PERMIT CENTER 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 PRE-APPL1CATION FILE NO. PRE94-012 : PROJECT: SOUTH • LOT BUILDING MEETING DATE: April 21 1994T1ME: 2:30 SITE ADDRESS: S 180 ST & 57 Av s' e following .coinmentsam based ion a piaeilminaryzev,�ew. Whin nformat oppaybo . ed. t, swequkf nentstf„ uP.Ronsmayneed046e..1i ENVIRONMENTAL 1) Watercourse #35-3 crosses the site. This drainage is conveyed in a pipe and becomes an open channel for approximately 120 feet. According to Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45) the on-site watercourse is rated Type 3 with a standard buffer setback of 15 feet. The existing open channel was likely created as part of the developed parking lot. Several trees were planted around the watercourse as part of the site's previous landscaping. However, there is no natural watercourse buffer area. 2) Permitted uses related to sensitive areas are allowed by TMC 18.45.080 Sections (a), (b), & (h). TMC 18.45.080 (d) specifies that watercourses may be rerouted, diverted, or enhanced using mitigative measures. Alterations are permitted by the DCD Director with an approved mitigation plan. 4 A land altering permit may need to be processed with the Public Works Department. Depending on pond design, ie. retaining walls, the proposed water quality/watercourse mitigation facility may also need a building permit. A Hydraulic Project Approval permit may be required by WA State Department of Wildlife. Manager Kits Photo 1233 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Levitz Furniture 17601 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Petschls Quality Meats 1180 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Home Innovations 1180 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Aero Go 1170 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Rattan Interiors 1191 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Pacific Fabrics & Crafts 1207 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Pacific Linen Warehouse 1232 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager --- Pacific Linen 17855 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Shasta Beverages 1227 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Goodwill 1174 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Walter Pyes Menswear 1185 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Aptex 1205 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Dania 1251 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Crown Cork & Seal 18340 Segale Park Drive "B" Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Cort Furniture Rental 1230 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager United Furniture Warehouse 1201 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager National Envelope 18221 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Keystone Brothers 18303 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Seattle Tractor 18349 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Alpak 18298 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Stanley 18290B Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Food Maker 18161 Segale Park Drive "B" Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager -- Viking 18270 Segale Park Drive "B" Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager CST Office Products 18271 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Leviton 18328 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Fletchers 18338 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Cadillac Plastic 18292 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Lenihan Distribution 18200 Segale Park Drive "B" Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Mohawk 18255 Segale Park Drive "B" Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager General Medical 18325 Segale Park Drive "B" Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager S.P Richards Company 1100 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager WRCA Wire Rope 1112 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Robert Half & Accountemps 18000 Andover Park Drive West, Suite 102 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Analog Devices 18000 Andover Park Drive West, Suite 104 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Deutsche Financial Services 18000 Andover Park Drive West, Suite 201 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Quick Bite 6305 South 180th Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Krusteaz 18125 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager J. T. Shelton Company 1110 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Abrasives Northwest 1114 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager American Express 18000 Andover Park Drive West, Suite 103 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Segale Business Park 18000 Andover Park Drive West, Suite 200 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Key Bank 18000 Andover Park Drive West, Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Off Track 6101 South 180th Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Johnstone 18205 Andover Park West Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Picolo's Espresso 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 1 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Salon Sport by Gary Bocz 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 136 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager The Shoe Pavilion 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 146 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Ethan Allen Home Interiors 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Winners 17401 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Prestige Fragrance & Cosmetics 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 132 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Seafirst National Bank 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 168 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager United States of America 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 284 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Tony Roma's, A Place for Ribs 17305 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Azteca Restaurant Enterprises 17555 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Wild Birds Unlimited 17310 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Burlington Coat Factory 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 250 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Clothestime, Inc. 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 112 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Gifts of Distinction 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 198 Tukwila, WA 98188 • Manager Home Express 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 104 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Jean Nicole Plus 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 128 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager The Luggage Center 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Bean Pod/Pizza Haven 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 181 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Catherine' s 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 102 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Frankfurter 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 166 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Gold Gallery 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 133 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Honey Custom Store for Kids 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 196 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Kitchen Basics 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 108 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Marshalls of Tukwila 17900 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 170 Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Dunhill Furniture 17636 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager America's Best Contacts & Eyeglasses 17334 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Comp USA, Inc. 17400 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Dining Interiors 17362 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Egghead Software 17326 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager J. R. Cinemas, Inc. 17374 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Red Robin Restaurant 17300 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager A House of Clocks 17448 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Applegreen Furniture 17328 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Crown Books 17372 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Drug Emporium 17348 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Evans Music 17312 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Plato's Pocket 17340 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Waterbed Emporium, Inc. 17320 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Sportmart, Inc. 17500 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Apple American LTD Partnership 17790 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Cost Plus, Inc. 17680 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Hobbytown, USA 17774 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Michaels Stores, Inc. 17686 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Ross Stores, Inc. 17660 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager The Bon 17750 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Wallpapers To Go 17540 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Bel -Red Furniture 17642 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Cucina! Cucina! 17770 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Krauses Sofa Factory 17740 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Readicare, Inc. 17780 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Sleep Country U.S.A., Inc. 17710 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Manager Video Only 17610 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 Southcenter By Tukwila WA 98188 PACIFIC NORTHWEST GROUP 3131 S Vaughn Wy Ste 20 Aurora CO 80014 Robert Schoenbachler 3131 S Vaughn Wy Ste 204 Aurora CO 80014 FAIR VENTURES INVEST LTD Lp La Pianta TRI -LAND CORPORATION 12835 Bel -Red Rd Ste 140 PO Box 88050 1325 4th Ave Suite #1940 Bellevue WA 98005 Tukwila WA 98138 Seattle WA 98101 SEA -PORT INVESTMENTS INC 5319 SW Westgate Dr Portland OR 97221 William E Boeing JR 1325 4th Ave Suite 1940 Seattle WA 98101 Paul & Eleanor Sade 585 Point San Pedro Rd San Rafael CA 94901 UNION PACIFIC CORP PO Box 2500 Broomfield CO 80020 Beverages Shasta 26901 Industrial Blvd Hayward CA 94545 VALLEY PROPERTIES 6051 South 194th St Kent WA 98032 WOELFL FAMILY TRUST 6852 Coyote Canyon Rd Souris CA 93066 HILL INVESTMENT CO PO Box 700 Mercer Island WA 98040 LEVITZ FURNITURE CORP PACIFIC NORTHWEST GROUP 212 High St 3131 S Vaughn Wy Ste 204 Pottstown PA 19464 Aurora CO 80014 PACIFIC NORTHWEST GROUP 3131 S Vaughn Wy Ste 20 Aurora CO 80014 ' 30' NOTE: NEW SIDEWALK TO BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG 57TH AVE. SOUTH AT TIME OF BLDG. PERMIT. -> 1IITIONAL 10' SIDEWALK AND U 1 I DEDICATION .TO CITY OF • yvyA OUSTING 60•.ROW ,) . ;I e D e ;1 W I 0' I .e 40 I 59 • LEV.'-OF:CHANNEL .• EST"OF SECTION 36" SD ' 1VARIES • •-P .dISS • 18' MIN.'.DEPTH- EDIMENT TRAP SECTION A -A W 825 TORM.DRAINAGE .AND ENTRANCE MODIFICATION PLAN SOUTH LOT DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 /4 1 INSTALL NEW H.C. RAMP. PER CITY SIDS EXISTING CUPS• 1 EX. CONC AL EX. CONC. CURB % 66PE _ E 21.67 16' CARPI E: ` .EXIST: EXISTING PAVEMENT.• - 250' Aloe- REMOVE l REMOVE EX. CONC - - WALK CONSTRUCT NEW --s 210 30' COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE PER CITY.OF TUKWILA. SOUTH 180th STREET, .STDs J fl '1 REMOVE PORTION OF EX. CONC. WALK REMOVE EX.' CUTE- - AS SHOWN • EX- CONL F100DG,ATE �1. 5 5009 490 -�• `� v• �1•E rASP INF( END RE40VE --' IX AC PVMT: • �3•) NEW 6' EXTRUD-I$T - • SFS So, 11 ED CONC..CURB- / \Oy Y 8 - REMOVE--� -' W/ GR_A -Ti -4 . EX [HOW _ 24, - RW • 09 'E • 22.36 IGREA6E TRAP/ - E OF CM E •'20.16 OZ. P) E NEW NEW CH CHAN- -\---, E • 2026 UT DWI 1. ' NEL , A • INSTAJ L MIRAFI FII TER - FENCE' BAFFLES 'ALONG. OPEN CHANNEL DURING CONSTRUCTION .TO FILTER: STORM FLOWS. MAINTAIN ON REGULAR.INTERHVALS (T,YP -': OF 4 BAFFLES)".151.13_ate .E0 .• . ' .5 E-•19 9 /-k C N TRPUTV 0'•3'*I O S pp 'MIN. DEPTNSUMP TO"" NEW SD MM• *2 TYPE 11-54 - 7 c1 '/ (MARKED DRAWL.. �' TRAP. PROVIDE SEDIMENT ! }y W/SOLID LOCKING LID •,-.-.-• P OF -1` .. EM9.4. 1IADJUST TO. 00) CHANNEL - f f RIO TYPE 1 'le- _:_,......,..„...:-A." „f\\14 i i E •2223 62' CLAM') E E • 22.129 16 LTWI S. EX 10•'50 q' tell' ... • •m SII .... II II ' • II .: JI EX CB w9 TYPES IIE • .,23.2E ae' 2657) Jl' 001WFi.R• 2044.22 E 23Jpaffe a TRAP/ E • taffeta CM E • 21.11 or ORI'1. / PLUG EXIST. '. 36' CMP... "69-N'; / TRASH F(E4 TAVRAP /T -- OUARRY SPALLS16�8'61 //60 LI 36' ADS 442 •FIL DfiAf�AGEZH�ANNF•1`- - �+ se 103.76' • 5 66' 01" 56' STORM DRAINAGE'NOTES ' CONSTR ClIO4.S - [;"STANDARD 1C] _IC YM JS CONST CTI " )Y. ACS PUBLIC ,ORAS ASSOCIATION. .1961 (VAI ANP I TY pe CONTRACTOR' 11•T6LELT RESPONSIBLE' FOP. 5 .49004CE: CONSTRUCTIONML FM THE SAFETY O -YORKERS AND GIVERS 1. ME SITE. T SNAIL LL THL GONTYAC0OR'S RESPONSIBILITYTO PROTECT IN-PLACE ALL .11.171.. AND/OR 'SRT UVM R.. EMER'0)011SIWM OR NOT 0444134 004 -90)5 PIA OANAGE OUE TO CORMAd[M' S OPERATIONS SMALL SE REPAIRED AT -RE CONTRACTOR' 5 PROVIDE 'ANO 00101041 TMFOMEY 7)0.90. 101012 ' 5152' ' TO INSURE 151/1041,1.151/1041,1151/1041,1.1101 Not. D0. NOT LEAVE THE PROJECT -SITE. THE i ILIT1.'7ESt • SE IN OPEMt1ON PRIOR TO CLEARING OR OINU CONSTRUCTION AND 1E M1N1AIN5 105711 CONST.ULTION Aim .NC cutosGIARE CON71Efm-0).2 5ILNTIAL'NNt ON -'.ITL 005501AS LA Hssm}},,,- AS CONSTROCTIM P0CCE1Sf.m U AND *501,5 4012 CONDITIONS DIC9w1L.g50U 51LTATI011 MMROL FACILITIES MY BE 511111110"50 INSURE CMTS. SILTATION CONTROL ON THEPROPOSED 1511JECT., ' 71101300E DU05m THE CORSE ( OT 'CONS5UETION. IT SHALL .5 TU OBLIGATION AND • -'00155245$ILI5Y Or T. DE 011470 TO ADDRESS ,1110 N. O0N0I71011S TMT MT 50 C0GT0 BY 415 .21'1/171. NM TO PROVIDE ADOIT10.1 FACILITIES. OVER AND'." 'ASO. 11INI051 101.1015..S. AS .MY RE NEEDED .ROTLCT AWACLM. 0 0.15% 36• (7A. IS) / 5` F / / • TYPE 1 2 E 22277 Or C1m1 E EX. 40' SO NM -rip-IW[E 1 061.1.I . - 2. EX, E5D MH '7 i'. 19.37) ENO 1 PIM X67 �� 0 2aEM0AW1 •\ OVERFLOW 9 EX: LANDSCAPE 5TR 01. CONCH: WALK.O'_ REMOVE EX. CONC. WALK. CONSTRUCT' NEW COMMERCIAL ENTRANCI CITY OF TUKWILA.STD: •CONSTRUCT ADD TION4\ AL ROCK ARMOR --0-8' ALONG BANK'0 I. SLOPE AS REOUIR - - �- REMOVE PORTON • OPER. TT W AS. 551 •24.37" E • 22.84 MGR SE TRAP( E'• 929 IN CARPI NY - - REMOVE EX. CURB 5 SHOWN REMOVE EX. 36' STOR E=1915, INSTALL _A EXISTING PAVEMENT -- - -TRASH RACY T •. NEW. EXTRUDED. -CONC. CURB PER • - DET. ITYP3 _ CONSTRUCT ROCK ARMOR' :16'0-8'0) ALONG BANK 0 1.5.5 NEW ASPHALT PVMT. • --- 2' CL. 'B' AC PVMT:. - 4''CRUSHED' ROCK ' '12' COMPACTED SUBGRADE E44.0'50 -- p0P TOP OF '` cwEr _ \ \\\ rl „\ �MCB P/5 -TYPE 5-48' 'EX. 'w4 TYPE• •23.14 • - (1 - E • 2217 IOSEASE .TRAP(- E • 22.05 18' 6.1.015 1, 1 E • 20.44 05' 057 TO PO01 II .. 6'.201952'11040. E-• 2029.19' OPI E 11 II 11 all • 11 Wll , EX. 0616 TYPE I 510.1 E - - I1I- • '. E • 21,9618- .wP/'N. - \\.s-\�\L E.21A6.16'CK+I N. EX. E. SD NEW'SDMH #I TYPE 11-54' (MARKED DRAIN) -W/SOLID LOCKING LID RIM•25.Oa-(ADJUST TO GRADE): 1E-19.57 .. • - EX. PAVEMENT, - 60 CURS • lgolwT Ty PB 1' z E • 2184 18•.25371 W. l CU11. '• EXTRUDED 'CURB 87. 50' 50 W 429 89 THE MO/r1LL SHALL' DE MND O'AY 5 00 01X. SIDES Or 5rut.IN LAYERS, IBITD 'A'IOOSL AVERAGEDEPTHOr Su INCH. 16') MISIHMII DJT11 01011 140)65 (•-1. MOR01 117 DAM= GM UYER MRS. CObACTm ANTE. NMI MIND • SOP/ ONE PIPE DIMIETED ON UM SIDE Or THE PIPE M TOSIDC OECME TO.CH• • MTE.Au'TO COMPLETE THE 'FILL OVER FIFE SHALL 1E TEL SANE AS MCAVAM 15ON ME TRmDI,' UCL. MAT WGNIC 1.7.1.. PROI'EN•INPS, OR ROOD M r.01ENT MMES HORS MAN Eli INDIES (6')•iN MIIHM OINMSIONS: DIC on1ER ' MSUSTAeu MT.10u:fMLL-N0I EE USO.- '" 5 ALL 57020 DMI. 717E Se.,, EE 080402E 0060. u501 ASM 0.10-2 OR ASM E-76.11 OR 16 64. GALVANIZED 5141). 0R 16 CA. 4105INM HELICAL 03.UGATED HE1AL PIPE. ' STEEL OR ALO/111M 7171 RIA11. MVE RA0.710R CONNECTING SANDS • CONFORMING TO INE- 1.001.014775 Or AP. SPE. PTGAT.ONS SECTION 60.3020 STEEL PIPE SHALL 5050101'5000000 - I ASPHALT COATING .105100 AND OUTS100, AllSITECATO1 5041x5; SHALL SE PLR. 8700 51200050.PION 0 0T 010) ANA 5170" 60A.OUILLT. TRA AAPOA:SrANO.D PLAN m. 69 0032 . 0.ANO CMR.,' PNS : 6: • ' ALL5010150 STODAM9U.SE2 T1M/DITINTIM FACILITIES X051 51 CON5T0CT0 AND . OPERATION -RICK To SAVING AND WILDING CONSTRUCTION UNLESS 01x.015[ 41710006 01.1111 DEN.... 01 10151.10 00220. • • 9 -""5000I50 FOR. RICID PIPE.(000C0ET7 M IRON) SHALL SE CUSS 7- P.. ANA STANDAP1 ELW N0. 62' (PM LEAVES .SON FUM MDI. . (4') 0EIMO PIPE R 5.1004.101).. 500100 790 2011541* 7x71 (0050401060 0ET00 OR 14140110) SHALL DE CUSS 'I- 711 Ara51* STAND.. PL. W: •62 (TM GRAVEL 1551 FOM 5INDIES (6-) AEW EINE TO S7 flOOl S (6') ABM. PIR). TREi. 0I0TH05MA0 [ 40'0.. MACINNION 1 1/1 TINES PIR DIJ1II. SIMS 15 INCHES. OHIMEV10 1S LMUT.. . RAOTILL SMALL SE PLACID IN SID INCH (6-) UYERS C NIACTE0 TO 951 NAEINM ODDITY.. - • 10 IISTRUDER opts VIAL. ES -R THE ASPHALT. star.. RIM AS. EM. BOND SUIT.. FM TH. M)OS[:'- rucc. le INC., 14 RM. A 9.-0- o.C. • 10 1AIL AttrAs,.'41%s.4415 0055, 7.7.13 0000000200 00991511 TIL 50500*0. Or SOO LTG., MOS[ AIDS SNAIL DE .1.04E1.110 010) RR CRASS FOR THL PR...TIM or ON-SITE 010SION. ALL .PIPE SHALL BE LAID ON A PROPERLY MOUS FOUNDATION ACTCEDIN:-SO 'AMINSTON SINT. SRC. 7-03.3(1)- MIS ..L INC.. NECESSARY LEVELING •.: OF TH1 TRENCH RORM OR M5 M P OF IO 101 5*5IGV MT.14L, AS LII. AS PUCE.N0 AND 2 115*1ION OF 1 150 14.0(15 77EIUI. TO DNI11RN GRADE m TMT TNI * 0IRL LENLT11 Or ME 7175 VILL U =40 5001 ON A UNIFORMS D.SE UNYISISISC USC. IF THE MINE MT.IAL IN ra 71 50 Or THC TIMM NUTS RE .00IRL)RN. FOR 500125 INC... FOR 45 RU BLOOD.- TNI MST TEL " OF 7111 ? (.004 C MY A5 MITT. RO01D0 LO MT.IAL IN 0)5 151115 07 TM TRIP. IS SOMMO, REMADm AND COMPACT. TO 11621 A 100515 UNYILSLING • 1. SRUCIU.x SNAIL 00T BE PERMITSE. 010)50 10.00 FUT OF THE SPRING 1290 OT - ANY STORE ORAD.CE PIPE(s), OR 15-00 FELT 57011 TIO TDR Or TIO MANN. RAW/. " TILE STORK DRAINAGE INC TO ME unarm ' SYS L 5X11 7 CONS 707 0.10 'FLANS 010 A ARO 011 TAN . ra 0VA100 Or N AD LANE. ANY DEVIATION PROM PRM ra APPROVm PLANS 07 t0g211* 575TT111 ? 07 1015 RM x111')0.0?.. M.w1LY THE aT.•oP Mumu O.Aal2mrr M runic Sala. . S. A COPY 07 0).5 A715OVL0 70x5 NDST 91 .011 105 JOS STT. NNETEV6 ON5RUCTI0 I5 10 750DRE55. , 16 ALL DSAI5AC1 STRUCTURES 90T ON MLIC RICIDS.07-SAT Tv.•• 0)55 mDm, SOUD-LOO151. UDE. IME31 000041ISL 0715050 BY THIS D.A1O0 0 M' 50.1J1 • WRI.S.• • .ALL 100r DRAI15:'A D FOOTING MAIM STALL AE '72c1II1.41411 TO 00•rrsst1\• DRAINAGE SYSTEM.: ., 1E. All. EMT E22'OTIME 51I7YNr0! PUN A51 tU t07 M PAVMONR, MUSS 0Em1V152 • NEW 6''. ' DE B 0'. WIDE SPECIAL NOTES INC. PACES Gr CIM AND RLL SLOPES 'SHALL u P1QAR0 AND. 11AI0[AI.0 TO CON150L AOAIPST'.OSION. THIS CONTROL NAT CDWSI57 OF ERECTION FLAWING. • 0)1. PROTECTION FOR 190 SLOPES MALI- u L15TA4Jm AS SOON AS ruuCi1Wu RIOT TO CALLING SUR RN/J. AFEYO5AL 111011 CPI s2O7ES 416 NM EOSSTCT .. TO CROTON v S TO INE MOSION-F12ISTAIR CHARACTER OF'M1-NATIIIDS, SUM PROTECTION MT al MITTED. 21 au. ER STt1R UTILITIES 0 5 P0100 MESE PIONS 5511 OKAI02, 50 OM TIDO AVE} AVw u ULIR.CORD 02RA SvS,. U It.ldi R TOS 5 0 ON N5 ALL STIES VN0 COaNMNS CT urn TRU ER SID. MESE PIANS OR -POT.. 01010E. Do. POE w.A.DIT THAT 0T ALL MUTES' . PAVILION PARKING LOT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ' Those 70710005 Of the soLtT 'St.Olarter 0?' the north4ast quarter and southeast qua -ter -of the wort' est quarter.. all in Section -35, • nship 23'North. Range 2 -East; 1.H in'Ki ng County, Mashington, ore particularly eescribed.as follows" .. - ' • Coerce t Ing.at northwest corner, of the said southwest quarter of the'northeast 2rter, thence 5 88'5446 E along the north line ' l of said subdlvls 449,30 •feet; thence S 01.05'14'-0, 36.0'feet' to" the southerly margin of South 80th Street and the true'point _-of beginning, thence continuing 5 01.05'12" V. 365.78 feet; thence ' Il 88'54'46" N, 024.89 f074; 45020,.5'86'58'00", U10376.f et;. thence - 58.20'50":15 71.`3 feet to the easterly. a g'4 of 57th Avenue South ISouthcentEr Partway); mance 0 08,13.18".E along said easte ly margin 316.06 feet. thence N 12'46'53' E along said :eastedly margin.. :3.77 feet; ton:, on said easterly margin along. curve to - the )n hang a radius of 50 feet through a central - angle of 76R13'21;.,an arc distance *7'66.59 feet, thence S 88'54'46" E 'along the southelAy Dsrgln of sad South 180th •Street,_ 405.16. feet. D the true pain:: ef:beglnnng. _ -•- " LEGEND:' PROPOSED CURB EXISTING CURB 'I'" PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE EXISTING STORM DRAINAGE ASPHALT PAVEMENT!. 'ELSTING OPEN CHANNEL. `EXISTING CONC SOEW7LK WRAF! FILTER FENCE OPEN WATER ESTIMATED EARTHWORK QUANTITY: EXCAVATION a 490 cy FILL - 470 CY± 1' RECF" D. �IUI -2 1 1995 c 0' DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED JUL 1: 0:05 8995 PuE acs t:. %97 2,711-,(F SQ'avAt Es-' rECOMMICE 1i cc 1- M 44 "o y war tai ANGjI sy AC di 1,1 3 1 ' f�6n 1f e SENT RECEIVED CITY OF 1)111641 JUL.1 01995 TPEFO.111 1251101 .112 TAQ� c0 0 0 , 0) ay s GOAL STATEMENT Create a water quality pond that uses native emergent wetlano plants to blofi,ter stormwater flows and. - provides a visual amenity for pedestrian traffic: 3' SPLITRA^ILL �, FENCE . EXISTING EARKING LOT • • common Nang Botanical Name - TREES _ Western Red Cedar TArpe phtste 6'•a' . . Western Hemlock Titres hererophypi . 6••B• " Western While Paw •- Pinus roommate 6' B•' . Quaking Aspen • Papulas emu/mats. s { Paper Birch - Berta. papyrilera Vine Made. . Acer cucinarum B'•10' Willow• '. Saki sop. *•0 . '. � silos 01 pots . • Sires area seasonally doper Gem method of proP*getion and cannot be used during the May through October :,prowinp.season' wallows are to be only many* species' (i.e. Saba scouted... Saar. hooked.. and Sabi SHRUBS . Pacdp Hauberk .Seryiceberry Paufrc Rhododendron Red Rowerinp Currant Tap Oregon Grape 'NO«ka Rose • Snowberry EMERGENTS AND AQUATICS Prrysocarpus cepitarus. Arne/sncMN ,,clpb* .. Rhodpeene/on macrophy//un -. Ribes aanpuineum . MMnpnta aetolobum . . _. Rosa martens SvnwMol%csmos &bus Gaultherin snapon Skwb•� Sedge - .. Cxes calmer. Sous Rusted Bulrush Scirpus microcprpus• ' 'root stock' . Hatr.tem Bulrush - Scirpus *tutus - - yaps/dumps ai' yrhesd S*pirrans SOP,.. . SP.)... sparoot stxk .. Typ/a /arilobi - yr iiow Iris... nrben .. . .. /ns p2eaeatOrus 4 W ( • ( .P z • Az" STORM DRAINAGE AND ENTRANCE MODIFICATION PLAN SOUTH LOT DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 Soo . 'REMOVEEX. CONC WALK. CONSTRUCT -', NEW 30' ENTRANCE 1 - PER CITY OF TUKWLA . `'SOUTH: 180th STREET • STDs. 210' 250' 40' CannElttJAL. REMOVE ' PORTION -OF EX. CONC. WALK. • N 19.02 rWEi .Eur .'. .EIOS1*G AL. CONC WALL ' S AT' 50 !l REMOVE EX. CONC. ` WALK. CONSTRUCT. NEW 30' WIDE ENTRANCE PER. CITY OF TUKWILA STD5. COOMER4A4, EX. SD 1.1442 7. REriOEN!/AL. RDM25.4 L a snKroseAPC oft OR iTis • - EX CON. 0.13 Slumneu - REMOVE E%.ZtJRB v_ AS SHOWN REMOVE -- *4*2MT.' \r NEW 6' EXTRUD- /�• 'ED CONC. CURB: . • ENDS: ,F- /2.'A • Ur TT' c -I '2214537:.7 REMOVE �\ yERlF/ED � C wi r�.-.r . er) - is vl3osm�� - • r:.622.319r..512.TRAM FLOWLWE OF c E • nor) E. NEW EHAH- . . _ E•20.26Ir 00'1■ . 3 Nvn iQ ALL GB S. •CONC�'1�11-LN_�•j _-_- F4.0s1' CONSTRUCT ADDITION N- AL ROCK ARMOR f q!ALONG BANK 0 LSI • . SLOPE AS REQUIRED -�� REMOVE PORTION •OF EX'C W AS -: .� '.. . 61gWN ; INSTALL MWAFI FILTER .. -. FENCE BAFFLES ALONG 34 OPEN CHANNEL DURING CONSTRUCTION TO FILTER STORM FLOWS. MAINTAIN ON REGULAR INTERVALS (TMP. -�i- OF 4 BAFFLIESI ' E 1945 Ex. CURB .TO BE _ 0(OPS ........Z4/.'3, / - NEW EXTRUDED 1+ REMOVED. Pyr/`'P�OI�•1• •rL / /:, .'i -CONC. CURB PERNEW SD WI TYPE • I .W . � Dr 0 `: M ThAi/I DET.. ITYP-1 WISOLID LOCKING _0 -'- iC \" ( P CONSTRUCT ROCK CIIECKC�e"'-*'i'� RW24.511ADJUST. TO GR7 ' ARMOR ALONG BANK 0 1 I a v /•• p+P \%a ®' NEW ASPHALT PVMT - . 1' • -p 24' CRUSHED ACROCK �CRAnc '. Cs. ---N--- . EX Oak Vis\ Ex. to TYPE 1 ✓Ea!/AfO 9 �� V \ TO BC REMOVED 11 RN • 23.7 :'qa]f- E • VD GREASE TR 56 - 12' CJW E1 END II E • V 4 OIO1 • E • 2201 or C1P) W. a. 63.g 1rC. 0.2093 if le . c• eai *DAISY DIP( EOM S. ii QIl X11 yI 7 0 h '11 EX 0 TYPE 1 . • • 1 Y'REMOVE EXIST: '1 CURB MATCH NEW 1 ' EXTRUDED 'CURS 1 I. • 11 -• ' .E • 2124 19' 0171 rreTRAPI . REMOVE EX 0.439 •9f.cS - REMOVE EX. 36' STORM '.•„. . EX:STNG PAVEMENT - . /ro -•2CM 225uT MIE E •2229 nT CMP( 1. --_-pL10'W -' - 2322 (r 009 N PLUG: E ' 36','CMP . i(pEipGE•t1- .5 80' O' 56•. 103.7/ t•P E • 222y I SE TR•Pl, E •'21.11 IA E • 0.3I Cr CVI W 000 / 760 LF 36• CMP 5D v'• r / • E• ?,?,227,227OOZE ( \\ • II E • 021 rOa" L II• E•OAa Ir 011 E • 0.04 1r 000 IL EX r W YiYPE ,. 04 ur 0.1 W. NEW' SDMH' TYPE 9.54'(/.0• r0* AIWN, . r-7 EX' !'• -WISOLID LOCKING LID RN•25.07 (ADJUST TO GRADE) i EX NR8 - 'I ( i. as b STOR DRINAG NO1.:S: Jr, %S Em u COVSRrCTI.l:, ..0 .1 A.:as...ct ul:. Yl*0 snurio1 :0 1) �'Mnnr.r, rue!. ..410 I: Scu..- 'n' uAN1NRMw .11,11 :NI rn. n[A1TAA n 0.3.0C.1 Jt1ATIOC. ISR colt ION I1.NAAO Gaiy of TMOIIA :. Al 00•'11.* 1.•. I' OLL - N Olt T10 ALAN. n17i*ws MD. : II1.10..Es • • .500..:010 10,110. sn n OF. NUNS AND Onus ON 1101 SITE • IT TAALL A. cow...1o,5•533a05]•1utt m MISRPLC['.ALL':- MILITIAS 99/Oa,TILLIMANS. MILANO N00.0.0. SUM W N.' SHIMS PIAN.'. NNMCC OM To CMSP.Ot01' S oroATlns SWALL Sl OrAl. 1 AT Mt CoMACN" 5 ur11s[. . • MSc. . uS.IMSnAIN TO.ra.P. nun *0171 .0. *SNR • 'TO.17037• 00MENT•LDta M. DOLL NoL0V7 m nniR'sln. ra r9wT1u I37T 0 11 Ot11.\n.1 7.11 O MAIM n am CONSS0 170 ASS 10.090-1171 uRiL *1*1 P*T1.1 MS 1.1170700 At Minna .Ino AMC... L 11 0 -nn EFO ION 0 PASO. A Sonsia7min 0102 lS0 AIS OVE(5M304LS ' 0*007* 001 OSRATT •Ent SlLMn.1 COMM. MALITIES MT 53 1141E0* 10 I0*n[ COPUTt 5)NATI0 119001 . 07 MOOS= r0*0 0.. Ta 70 *0* 1114' Lot 0031 Of 0005OCTION IT .6331 A tut OMICA1?0 a0* anI0S1i1Nn or :u[ ca nota O aOM.Sf An KO'emtnOO *IMT ML K MATO NT NIS AR:nnts mia To 7900 of MOTION. fACINnO. 0/0* ao0 mg. NOM 11.01ta0*5. A MY R Nom t0 •wOSect AUAMT • N 07' SO' 50' W 42989'. tot Lanm saki' at 0900 DIMLLT M sole SIDES or T53 117"10 Laos. (ITN 1 Inn 971197 *010 OF SU UM. (a-1. MOM LIMN TIM WM . Nn, 700401.3 I9nn SAC, 1410. MOO COMM ATOS MT MOO ••. - N at nn 0.1.1100 0 1000 Slot Or Olt 7171 On O slot 0 INT 1000 • M201A1 To Gown= Tat TILL Orn nn -MALL .1 TO {ADI A 10110.10 • • 7701 tat MtN.. nun L91T.OAC.NIC 01701.1, FOLD owes. CO 7001 0 ' 7.07900* SMAA.5 MS 107 701MOLLS (VA 10 WoolWool00n 00 110(0715. 0' .. OMIT.. NAMa.. MALL Nn 00 WM. , . . ' ALL TTOOl.0OM 7171 GULL w 0 00In TOM CASA*TKD 900.1.171.1 a AS70 . .. 1.14.11 a 16 c•....IUD 5700. O.16 Da.• 0YM1Nn Wau0L'C0 0041711, . • • NETAL 7377. 001 n COM. PIPE 0ALL On OraT(C07 CONNECTING ONO 1 mta110* O tat a0K11lnO*1 07 ANA 1 C1fMTI05 SECTION 10.10(1 : 54711 7077 SMALL MIME 100110071'9PMLT aAT5)0 10110E ANDIOO11O.: .1 1010 N 0.1100 ,I7t •1 ICEET1 M 000)' roll. A -OAis-'a- 'ma !ANA 57A110*0 IIAN n. 67 (70.000 MIK 70O 0000'(1.) 5040 2071 To 170100LU.). MOM N 7401011 Pin (Coanl"^"' NRA!, n PLASTIC) _'I • 1 55ALL 5t 01155 -r N7.1 0 711 AA STAMM n.-61 (n• Mon Mot 701. 4)13 MON(4•MONnet O 514 INMn (4.1 Yat 71701. 11.1.0 0100 MAIL 910 Toms ..10.111 Oa 1 1/1 TM. TIC L7.I1 71 (i ) (900 9, MAIM. Is a3WIn. OMU. A . . To na MOIDM Doom. - Mt.. conn To t5 *17007.7, AC[ NSTN'A5 17007 0. • •POO NNiY ION TM POLIOSE.. 714Ct I. .-a. arm .7 . 1 0. t- • 'aLL 7071'....,, It LAIDON • 1.107011 eu1An romoTI.1•AOo0D701 TO 07 9000701 soli A.C. 1.02.3(1). 1010 SMALL 71000 Nt 117.. * MILL= . -0 T10 ITJANO .0n. n Tal Torn TO 1003{0.1 ILTOIA. 9 all A 0407700 An 1ODMLTIM CO LOOM UMW Yin•.. TO WIND 0105 So TMT151moa LOOM 0 Ia[ POI WILL O 5910070• MAMMY N011'.- 7951.1010 A9t. 'If Mt NATIVE /Ami•. 10 Tib soT5O1 0r T1R non 0*71 .07 0 077401.1 N •01051MCA1LL F TIO 50. OVIon T50 TAM nn .n Ili 3 0103 MT 1l ONIT100 nucleus= MTh... ATO 10501'0 TO IltN O IS IMM.NED. S.W. AIS SWARM W IOD • DOSE ; aha nits sax. 3' . 71017011310 SNAIL 50T A PWw17710 01M5 10.00 mat Or 100E twin 1110 0 • AMY scan outrun rtes(n. n 19.00 rum Mn Till TOT 01 TO CIAMO SADA. A. M1 mon MICR Smut SME. 50 mOwOC710 Arm11i TWA. •71MPn 'r1.0D1 W101 m ON Will 10 m DUM NT Or .0313C MU. Ar MOTTO 7107 100 011.000* PLA5s WILL Malt 37005 970009 Ia.1 iWt r0*700 .INC., O053NAi1 In non a WS WL o07Alflmrt a COLIC LIcaO. . S. • Con 0 TWOS 111E001.RANT Nun, 10.00 TO JO. inn 1050.0 •00*nuCTI0 O 15 Moms. . l0.' ALL DM00A1 TI0LTLWEI Na 0 7002.10 53105.07- Y MAIL M 10.10.1001(1 NMWM.. W. 01500115 AMINO n m MAMA. 0 Manz 1h. 'ALL (Mor [MOS' AWe'man Man MALL. a'IONTLIIO Tom Rall . ALL TM I Min ...los um 11 711 ANA RANOYO PW .0.' 70.010 ARM rrn {M ovru� 70 4090'.10 fT9°AlD 119 KD.' 19 wL[ Am Gann. 11. '1Y A. Yt9. •... THAN Egos. Syn. COSI OT10 aOOuts TO mom •II-' 9L 770 MATIONS soon/ CO run YS O AO 07.070107. 0155 011®Nsu • ALL EI9 .... 500.470 attrlflM/oROOlM rAlun10 Nun at corrnuctM oV >De t'0*-• loaf AAO 00. 53 NYno-S[0*. VITA In CA.n N i00[' .. No*O. Ano IN 00.71.1 Rica O MVin MS OI(Dln Ccorr Crum Miss OTTEMISE - 'R{r[0*fM 0 ON•Sln Rata. 910000 aT AIL 0...MOO 0 CON. MIS. NEW 6' EXTRUDED CONC CURB - NOW W poed,1✓AY? .. SPECIAL NOTES: I) TO Mm Or '01T aM ISN. 5310 0.11 O ODY0* A0.1017.00* TO. COMM ACCT 0010. SKIS COMM NA coons" OF MOTIVE FLAMM. OO 17771170 N OO 0077. OM1 A 13.1.111ID A fDn 9 P5•(iT1MaLL , • m 1010 W.4S1 51 N PMA. 1PI*WA1: co 0070 AL NO* SOW= to MVO O0 TO TO ODSl.1•Ost1T•O ammo 0 SO W.T011O, 1O01 • .70017170 sac 55O.ftT10*.,_ •. . .: 2) ALL Minn MUMS M01.0 1050 7140* 0705 00,.130 7P0 1 TIM nor A(Asu roue MOM. 77 *17 M ENA. 17 a0I7S10n • Folk AMMO all Ot1Nn0 once NAT con , nos vO0OLTIn. TIMM SNMM 0 AM RAs On an. mum. Don Nor o m.ar TMT Au -mums PAVILION PARKING LOT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 5007,7.. Portions of the southreit 903,00707 the northeast garter • and southeaa 'quarter of the northwest quarter. all 1n Section 35.. lownsni7 23 (10770. Range 4 East. Y.K., in King County. Washington.. . • one Part 'larly described as follows: ... ' .. ' Coemenc, g the northwest -tomer of the said s msouthwest outrte, :01 the not mast quarter; thence 5 88.54'46• E along the north line. ' .. of said- subllrlsi0n. 449.30 feet: them S 01.05'14' 11. 36.0 feet •to' the souturly margin of South 18309 Street and the true point •of beginning; thence continuing S 01.05'14. 9. 365.78 feet; thence x 88'54'46• M. 424.89 feet; thence 5 86.158'00. M 103.76 feet; thence • S•58'20'50' M 74.23 feet to the easterly margin of 57th Avenue south (sou lncenter. Partway), 007910 7 07.43'10•E along said - .. easterly m7coin; 316.06 feet; thence 8 14.46'53'. E along -said - ' ' ' sterly Durgin.. 63.77 feet. 00ence on said easterly margin along" • a'curve to the right Paving a radius of:50 feet through a central angle of -71.18'21•; an arc distance of 66.59'feet; thence 5'8854'46' E . •alcn9 the southerly margin of said South 180th Street. -485.16 feet to the true point -o1 beginning • LE!,Er ?: .PROPOSED 01410 PROPOSED 5" ORM DRAINAGE ' ■ . . EXI51NG STERN DRAINAGE' ASPHALT PA'IEMENT' • _ - 1-� EXISTING OPE`: CHANNEL- E05TNG C07CSIDEWALK IDRAFI FLTEI; FENCE - ROCK ARMOR - OPEN WATER ESTIMATED EARTHWOR OUANITY: EXCAVO.TION - 490ey # FILL '70 CYi z. c2 Q 0 W` Q.�: �a Z 0 z Q.� Q LT. 0Va...00 N J EZ CI) W 'I EXPIRES: 9-7.3�� i a 0 1- U' o co ui 0CC_a _ J N -J Lu co It 4 4 l m '4, 2Ae Y A ,1 :Ir: 10 0- 11 '. j<ENT, o•• K c0MO u .1111 21.1994 .49/..as =D✓ 41AG + 74 /20 '►��iW 7-457W • P Jo 76-11---- _.--_- • • • • • 1 w • •1 s° 351' ., Pop. 'a h 1► ' AC' 'o V� • Jell/s•J r •r ,-217.2941r • .so J \ .-.r.r.�►.soc 1St 77 .•••ts4wV #117- 63 -1•A JJ7. fI IGI.N as- s••v.i 1321.0) f d • ' 8/354 Z. Co „ea 49• kir /.i.8/1.1.f..s S74I 4 17/ 4 • - • 547- /i- o./ 947. 6 7414.92 Al 47- le - MY 14 •.7 S. 180TH ST. A -7411/1...I Oh-) /%1%/914 CovTs� LT /•a. J:re-, ,-I:C td e' 1:04.840 rp/:dG �f ofv ,vets- o s-374., 0 ss7-.1o.v9L s 1 e9 {"B7- so-io .✓ 67_ so -09 A/ Z&0. 53 A h?' 00 060 -72/Ar s e �o-o9i A#32 7 4' A- h, • : ''.• 'r+. f,. - asts4,A, • /JJ .7 N •7 - SI• 270 L[4 93- S �'• o► • -'. ��<i i'1A7 91 RECEIVED OCT 2 7 1995 CODEVELOPMENT SITE LOCATION PLAN SITE OPENVI COSTING CUPP 1. 0 SOUTH 180TH STREET •r � 11 awn COMPACT CAR (WI GAS) I`I I`1`I �`iLLiLls LI`I`II`I`iLGIc-ICIL I�L.I�I�Ic c4c �I�ILI LILILI iC ids 1`1'1'" 19`1`i`4 'ICILCILILI`I'I'ILI' ICICC::'CICICICICICICICC CICICICICICICICIL 20 -IT SEIPPCit FOP PEr Vg SOUTH LOT RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT Parking Spaces ADJACENT PROPERTIES 47 5t,9L15 ADJACENT PROPER 3. SETIPCJI iiII ad: 3s jl e a ti South Lot Development m 0 . i � g =- '`IC1\e z AV • ril j ml - II!Ay AI lal 117+ - 1110 Q I: m�__I i'! sr i W . .,C ', "11 1 i yrI mP. . . SITE LOCATION PLAN SITE OPENVI COSTING CUPP 1. 0 SOUTH 180TH STREET •r � 11 awn COMPACT CAR (WI GAS) I`I I`1`I �`iLLiLls LI`I`II`I`iLGIc-ICIL I�L.I�I�Ic c4c �I�ILI LILILI iC ids 1`1'1'" 19`1`i`4 'ICILCILILI`I'I'ILI' ICICC::'CICICICICICICICC CICICICICICICICIL 20 -IT SEIPPCit FOP PEr Vg SOUTH LOT RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT Parking Spaces ADJACENT PROPERTIES 47 5t,9L15 ADJACENT PROPER 3. SETIPCJI iiII ad: 3s jl e a ti South Lot Development m 0 . bNlW€5101P A , r, 00 6 Z qnv • 11111111 L • 111111kd 1111111111 OYU FO tp-u 11V1N NOflIAc \\\L\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ S 180th STREET 1111 LEL11111111..1111 [IL 111111111111111111111111.1.1 • sours 11.0111$n*IT • ADJACHNT PRQrgR las