Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E95-0035 - OXBOW CORPORATE PARK USPS DISTOXBOW CORPORATE PARK UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE MAIL PROCESSING & DISTRIBUTION CENTER 10730 W. MARGINAL WAY SO. E95-0035 MEMORANDUM TO: USPS SEPA File E95-0035 FROM: John son DATE: April 18, 1996 RE: .USPS Oxbow Project This is one of two SEPA checklists submitted for the above referenced project (The other is E95-0029). It was submitted for the change of use of an existing building, additions to the building and new parking. Subsequent to submitting the checklist, the Postal Service purchased the building and commenced work without a local permit. Without a permit, local jurisdiction on SEPA was eliminated as well. Thus, this SEPA review has been voided. The other SEPA review has been completed. It was necessary as the City has jurisdiction via a Shoreline Permit. © ALL COPYRIGHTS RESERVED BY: AEROLIST PHOTOGRAPHERS, INC. SEATTLE, WA (206) 246.5900 RYI-IIRIT A ALL CC r' C' n .iC3.(STP +r •GR.AP'1ERS, INC`.. 12E30 INTERURBAN AVE„ 50, SEATTLE, WA. 98168 (206) 246-5900 (800) 85213686 FAX#(206) 246-9077 NEGATWV€# DATE FLOWN 76457 ® 16 • JUL 1 5 1.992 • RECEIVED OCT 0 2 1995 COMtvI„„ DEVELOPMENT SABEY • CORPORATION December 11, 1995 John Emerson, Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Oxbow Corporate Park - USPS Dear John: Enclosed are the documents required for the SEPA Submittal for the United States Postal Service Processing & Distribution Center at Oxbow Corporate Park. Enclosed are: 12 copies of plans (Exhibits A, B, C) 1 copy of 8 1/2 x 11 of plans 4 copies of Traffic Analysis (Exhibit D) 15 copies of Environmental Assessment 1 check for SEPA filing fee - $325 Please notify Sabey Corporation immediately if these documents are not sufficient for your review. Sincerely, EY C P ' ' ARCHITECTURE GROUP John W. L Lead Architec cc: Phil Birk Doug Gardner Haynes Lund File g:\const\projects\seattle\ 1995\s95_2014\corresp\a&e\sepa.Itr A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE COMPANY 101 Elliott Avenue W. • Suite 330 • Seattle, WA • 98119 • 206/281-8700 • Fax: 206/282-9951 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 1 1 1995 PERMIT CENTER r T LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS PARCEL A THAT PORTON OF TIE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECITON 4. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 FAST. W.Y., DESCRIBED A5 FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 IN SAID SECTION 4; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11. 9 8722'00 E, 988.27 FEET; THENCE N 14'45'00 W. 477.09 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH ME NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 460 FEI SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11 OF SECTION 4 AND THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY 1 A5 ESTABUSHED BY KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE N0. 529021: THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN, N 1[45'00 W, 689.81 FEET TO THE SOITTMWESTERLYli MARGIN OF TINT 200 FOOT SEATTLE TRANSMISSION UNE A5 ESTABUSHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 82986 OFT CITY OF SEATTLE A5 CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE N0. 469557 AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEONNINC; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN. N 1445'00 W. 22.70 FEET TO A POINT OF SPIRAL CURVAIURE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORMEASIERLY MARGIN ALONG A SPRAL CURVE TO THE LEFT, 1IE CHO WHICH BEARS N 150751- W, 152.94 FEET TO A POINT OF 9MPLE CURVATURE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SMD NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN. NORTHWESTERLY 340.67 FEET ALONG THE NRC NON -TANGENT CURVE TO THE LE/T. HAVING A RADIUS OF 3970.00 FEET. THE RA01.5 POINT OF WHICH BE THROUGH 5 740722 W. THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04'55'00. THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SVD NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN. N 1024'57 E 327.11 FEET; THENCE N 4811'40 E. 218.98 FEET; THENCE S 41'52'5f E, 027.47 FEET; THENCE N 4005'28 E. 406.88 FEET TO A UNE 225 FEET OF PARALLEL A'—EC Si oa 8 8 RECEIVED* '• 1'"V. 0 DEC 1 1 1995 •1 •y PERMIT CENTER • • t - o iii Fa1 8 N O J NORTHEASTERLY AND MAIM RE SOUTHEASTERLY 0(IElSION OF THE CENTERUNE OF A PROP® WATERWAY CH4NNF1 CHANGE (1910 -1911); THENCE 5 .1.4407 E ALONG SAID PARALLEL UtE, 845.54 FEET TO THE TOP OF BANK AS SURVEYED BY ESM, INC. IN9 JULY OF 1995; THENCE ALONG SAID TOP OF BANK THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES S 2420'47 W, 5328 FEET. 5 4222'47 W, 35 67 FEET. 5 5015'00 W. 6729 FEET. 5 4714'18' W, 4834 FEET. S 4703'51' W. 51 45 FEET. S 5758'26 W. 51 61 FEET. 5 4755'09' W. 4251 FEET. 5 604317 W. 6963 FEET, 5 7148'09- W. 57 65 FEE,. 5 5730'37 W. 5302 FEET, S 532719 W. 22 34 FEET. 5 521004' W. 28.28 FEET. 5 5416'40 W. 4518 FEET: 5 2251.10 W, 49 CO FEET. 5 4405107 W, 5463 FEET: 5 4544'57 W, 8374 FEET; 5 551707 W, 55 45 FEET; 5 7504'06 W. 48.21 FEET; N 7436.00 W, 37.10 FEET TO SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID SEATTLE TR 1SNSSION UNE; THENCE KONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN. N 561310 W, 759.40 FEET TO TE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF TUKWILA, C01MlY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL 15 THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 IN SECTION 4, TOWN9HP 23 NORM, RANGE 4 EAST. W.Y., LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY N0. 1. AS ESTABLISHED BY KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 529021 AND LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF THE 5EAT11.E TRUNSNISSION UNE AS ESTAB SHED BY ORDINANCE N0. 82986 OF 1140 CITY OF SEATTLE A5 CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE N0. 489557 AND LYING NORTHWESTERLY OF THE DUWAMISH RIVER EXCEPT THE 501.1111 460 FEET OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11. SITUATE IN THE CTIA OF TU(WIA, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 70 PER V(T ewnTTTAL SAFE THE SCMEMMER AYOCIATOU INC. MAIL PROCESSING & DISTRIBUTION CENTER U.B. POSTAL SERVICE BEATTLE, WABNINOTON AW&1' F� a{a' i/ggH�C( 11!! d 6 - - 01 -... ".o. Y06163 WT Al -I •"'" SITE PLAN E co oc x z -o 1,, ... 1.2 7' - . cif — 7 7' W W — $ e ea V 97 17 17 t., — A 4 IN • kn ' ••••111 W..._, G - , 2 up 0 IIIII IIII 1,*•• .40111ffl ol soi iii!!•Arol [ • Sio 1 _ ,____ILt--r 11111110111. — i!=iifti i• • = lit I I •!1-1J, ifill I I I-1 i ., 1 I I , . ...1 -. .-- * . .....5,51,155 - no ' Iii.1 - • ,-,..- —..., ,,. , 43..6661,65 - 1 — ..0.°°: • . '51,515.55:130 05 laill '---11Ini lair :_ 9 . " 14 4 .1 qiij 02411 i.l NM i rid1 1 is la ' • NUMMI ,Il r .1". 5 nirll i o EC 7 _ [ J111 III 11 111 1 il .0 D> .. .---.----1,--1-a . i r: .0ifythim i1,51 12,%•!•1 . No i I I ....... 0-, .... o. ts, A _ r..) — t., o- — — .2 ; - f, RECEIVED CITY OF TUKVVILA DEC 1 1 1995 . PERMIT CENTER — co _ ..... — co I I I I I • t I . 0 ,{ HAIL PROCESSING le DISTRIBUTION CENTEP U.E. POSTAL BERYICE SEATTLE, WANINOT011 70 P2M011" BUOIOTIAL sli my OCRPL11,010,7 • ao MEI loomosts nol I 119 J TPOI OCMENOWEA 06.0ONOCIATHO INC. ......... 1.• 45 g = Ei ExHISIT 8,-- FLOOR PLANS PUN 0.13 . DEC 55 --.. —. T 1/Yu* `Ir a__Q-_ •44_4.4 k i I I I I M.1.llll iU I l l l l l 1:1•hhlkLLi PIM I /' , — }«tt, lIIIlllfl, .u.1111i11.1I.W.tH 4+i' J ii II[f+III111{ i"TTTTi' ��fTi ;15: .111UJ) 1.0 IUJ J.0 UJ I l.k,4,, IILI ll U11.1 I A g i n 3�'hi•h'i�3�3C3{3y�Kiri �< rrr.r?, 6 0 O (.1 MAIL PROCESSING & DISTRIBUTION CENTER U.8. POSTAL BERWCE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 1154/481118* EXHIBIT A -- 6ITE PLAN 4 VICINITY PLAN 70 PERCENT BuaMITTAL tMUM TME UCMEMMER ASSOCIATES INC. 0 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 1.1 1995 PERMIT CENTER Dtl6 FLEA tOt OWL II/21/95 Conte No. Epic File No. Fee $ 325 Receipt No. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Mall Processing & Distribution Center, United States Postal Service 2. Name of applicant: Sabey Corporation 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: John W. Lang, AIA 101 Elliott Avenue West, Suite 330, Seattle, WA 98119, (206) 281-8700 4. Date checklist prepared: December 11, 1995 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction: February 1996 - October 1996 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Installation of fixed mechanization equipment under separate permit. Construction: May 1996.- November 1996 . 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. SEPA for Shoreline Permit (#L95-0045) for paving improvements submitted 8/31/95. 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. See Item #8. -2- RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 1 1 1995 PERMIT CENTER 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Building Permit Mechanical Permit Electrical Permit. Change of Use - Manufacturing to Truck 'Terminal 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. Provide tenant improvements in existing buildings 250 and 252 (apEroximately 465,000 square feet). Add three separate structures (approximately 97,000 square feet) to existing buildings to create one large building to house the mail processing and distribution facility for the Seattle area. Site modifications to accomodate loading docks and site circulation/security. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency,.you are not required to duplicate maps'or'detailed plans submitted with any permit -applica- tions related to this checklist. Oxbow Corporate Park, 10730 W. Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA Quarter: S.E. Section: 4 Township: 23 Range: 4 See attached plans - Exhibit's A and B, legal description Exhibit C 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? No -3- TO'BE COMPLETED BY APPLICA• B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth 411 Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, (other) Flat with exception of riverbank slope. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 45 degree riverbank. 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. Mixture of sand and clay. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading for building pads and truck docks will require both cut and fill, most balanced on-site. 8,000 yards of material will have to be exported offsite to an approved landfill. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 8.4% approximately -4- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Temporary erosion control plan will be developed (re: silt fence and straw bales). 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. Construction will generate moderate amounts of dust and exhaust for exterior work. .Exhaust from vehicles once project is completed. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None Proposed: measures to reduce or control emissions or. other impacts to air, if any: Normal dust control measures during construction. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. _ Yes - Duwamish River flows into Puget Sound (Elliott Bay) -5- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, this work within 8/31/95 SEPA for Shoreline Permit. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would. be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie Within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, on-site storm water retention to utilize oil/water separators. -6- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of 'runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Water.will flow from impervious surfaces into existing retention system to new biofiltration swale prior. to release into the Duwamish River and ultimately into Puget Sound. -7- iEvaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Only at biofiltration swale. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Existing retention system and biofiltration swale to be modified for project. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous ."tree: alder,, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs X grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other x other types -of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grass, weeds and blackberries c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None -8- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Landscaped (see attached plans). 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: None mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: None fish: bass,,salmon;, trout, herring, shellfish, other: • In Duwamish River b. List any threatened or endangered species .known to be on or near the site. None according to Washington.. State Dept. of Fisheries & Wildlife c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None -9- • . Evaluation for Agency Use Only 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas,, oil, wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Gas - building heating • Electric - building/site lighting, manufacturing b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? if so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: New HVAC and lighting per 1994 Washington State Energy Code. 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 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: Safety training programs by United States Postal Service. -10- • b. Noise • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long-term basis (for example . traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Normal noise associated with construction - typically 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. Long term normal noise from vehicles. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None 8. .Land and. Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Generally industrial and business development, parking, street right-of-way with some vacant industrial land. Proposed King County Park to the 'south. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No, based upon research to date. c. Describe any structures on the site. Two existing industrial/manufacturing buildings (approximately 465,000 square feet). -11- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. Minor selective tenant improvement demolition only. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? M2 - Heavy Industrial f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? M2 Heavy Industrial - Manufacturing/Industrial Center - Heavy g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Unknown h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No i . Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Reside - none Work - 1,500 on three shifts. j.. Approximately. how many people would the completed project displace? None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Work with City of Tukwila and existing Land Use ordinance. -12- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - inane housing. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None 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? Existing building 252 is 47'. New construction to be pre-engineered metal buildings.To be minimum height of approximately 27' feet. 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 -13- • 11. Light and Glare • Evaluation for Agency Use Only a.. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Shielded site lighting = night. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- _ tunities are in the immediate vicinity? Fishing in Duwamish River, King County trail system, Boeing recreational facility and jogging path. 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 -14- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a.. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None 14. Transportation a. identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. S. 102nd Street, 27th Avenue South, West Marginal Way South, East Marginal Way South. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Closest site approximately ± 1,000 feet at East Marginal Way. South. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Revised parking area would include 803 automobiles and 214 trucks/trailers. -15- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Two new curb cuts off 27th Avenue South. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Approximately 1.400 a„rmmnbile trips and 370 truck trias per day. Peak volnmaS wnitld be 4:00 am - 7:00 am and 10:00 pm - 11:00 pm. Sep attached traffic impact letter and USPS Environmental Assessment • g• Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: Traffic to site significantly reduced at typical peak hours due to majority of USPS workers on night shift. See attached traffic impact letter and USPS Environmental Assessment. Exhibit D. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None -16- • 16. Utilities • Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. C. - tilities -n'ly available at the site: electricity natural gas (water defuse servic e to ephone sanitar sewer septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity - Puget Power Natural Gas - Washington Natural Gas Telephone - U.S. West Communications Water - City of Tukwila (1996), City of Seattle (195) Sewer - ValVue Sewer District C. Signature The above answers are true ancomplete to the best of my knowledge. I understand th.t the ,ad agency is relying on them to rake its de Signature: Date Submitted: op 4// Iz� s PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. -17- TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLIT • Evaluation for Agency Use Only E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT .AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? To remodel manufacturing buildings 250 and 252, originally built in 1988 for lease to the Boeing Military Airplane Company, and construct three new additions so the building can function as the Mail Processing & Distribution Center for the United States Postal Service. The building would process all mail for the 981XX zip codes. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? None - The Oxbow facility,proposed by Sabey Corporation, was the only response to the USPS request for proposal seeking a new facility that met all USPS criteria. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: No acceptable alternative means -for tenant. -22- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does. the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? No Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: None -23- • • 431) ENTRt1NC0 EXHIBIT D 10900 NE 8TH ST SUITE 300 5ELLS_06E WASHINGTON 96004 TELEPHONE 206 454 5600 901.1. FREE aoo 454 5601 FAX 206 454 0220 ARIZONA 10AH0 WASHINGTON December 11, 1995 John Lang, AIA Lead Architect - Sabey Corporation 101 Elliott Avenue W Suite 330 Seattle, Washington 98119 Re: Oxbow USPS Site - Tukwila Entranco Project No. 95040-60 Dear John: Per your request, this technical memorandum documents our review of the trip generation for the proposed United States Postal Service (USPS) site located in Tukwila; Washington. As we understand, the site is located on the Oxbow just east of West Marginal Way at South 102nd Street. The proposed site wiil become the Processing and Distribution Center (P&DC) for Seattle, Washington. Our review is based entirely on the information as presented in pages 39-45 in the USPS Environmental Assessment (EA) dated. March, 1995 (see attached) and supplemented by information provided by your office. The EA documents the trip generation estimates at the existing P&DC located at Lander Street and 4th Avenue South. The EA also documents trip generation from the Boeing Buildings 250 and 252 which were occupied on the proposed P&DC site until June 1995. We have reviewed the trip generation estimates during the following peak periods. • Boeing p.m. peak hour: 2-3:30 p.m. • Arterial System p.m. peak hour: 4:30-5:30 p.m. Proposed P&DC Site The trip generation for the proposed P&DC was estimated based on three basic employee shifts. The arrival and departure times will be staggered and will generally correspond to the major shifts. The P&DC employees generate approximately 322 trips during the Boeing p.m. peak hour and 145 trips during the p.m. system peak hour. It should be noted that these employee trips do not account for significant use of transit or carpool and thus represent a worst-case scenario. The P&DC will generate operational traffic during both p.m. peak hours consisting of truck traffic for highway routes and collection routes (7 trips inbound, 7 trips outbound). In addition, the local Seattle collection routes generate trips during both p.m. peak hours (19 inbound, 19 outbound). Therefore, the total estimated p.m. peak hour trip generation of the P&DC site is 374 trips during the Boeing p.m. peak hour and 197 trips during the p.m. system pemeEIVED hour. CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 1 1 1995 PERMIT CENTER John Lang, AIA December 11, 1995 Page 2 Boeing Buildings 250 and 252 The Boeing Buildings 250 and 252 on the site were vacated in June 1995 and housed 1,750 employees when used by Boeing manufacturing. Of these employees, 1,400 worked the first shift which relates to 1,218 p.m. peak hour trips. This peak hour traffic occurred between 2:30 and 3:30 p.m. (Boeing peak hour). In addition, truck traffic is estimated at 10 percent of employee trips, or 140 trips during the Boeing peak hour, for a total of 1,358 trips. It is our understanding that the remaining 350 employees leave. the Boeing facilities during the p.m. arterial system peak hour, and that 87 percent of the employees used single occupant vehicles to commute. This would translate to employees from Boeing Buildings 250 and 252 generating 305 total p.m. arterial system peak hour trips. in addition, truck traffic is estimated at 10 percent of employee trips, or 31 trips during the Boeing peak hour, for a total of 336 trips. Table 1 summarizes the trip generation comparison between the Boeing and USPS uses. P.M. Peak Period Table 1 Trip Generation Comparison (1) (2) (3) Boeing Buildings Proposed USPS Reduction In Trips 250 and 252 P&DC = (1) - (2) Boeing Peak 1,358 374 984 trips 2:30-3:30 p.m. (73 percent) Arterial System Peak 336 197 139 trips 4:30-5:30 p.m. (41 percent) Therefore, based on the information presented in the EA and supplemented by your office, as compared to Boeing Buildings 250 and 252, the proposed P&DC facility will generate significantly fewer trips during the p.m. Boeing peak period (984 trips, 73 percent less) and 139 fewer trips (41 percent) during the p.m. arterial system.peak hour. This should translate to the USPS site having Tess traffic volume impact on the arterial streets than previously existed with the Boeing facility. Sincerely, ENTRANCO A 1 7 ,a)44A> Jeff J. Haynie Project Manager Traffic JJH:mjw INTERIM (3/11/94) PLEASE SUBMIT'1tl} FOLLOWING INFORMATION: 1. TWELVE SETS OF THE PLANS NEEDED TO CLEARLY DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED ACTIONS. 2. ONE PMT SET OF PLANS REDUCED TO 8 1/2 X 11. 3. FOUR COPIES OF ANY STUDIES NEEDED IN SUPPORT OF THE CHECKLIST. 4. FIFTEEN COPIES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WHICH INCLUDES 8 1/2 X 11 COPIES OF THE REDUCED PLANS. ADDITIONAL COPIES OR FURTHER INFORMATION MAY BE REQUIRED.