Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit PL15-0018 - TED CALOGER - NORTHWEST ARENA SEPA / EIS (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT)SEPA EIS Parent Project: PL15-0018 WITHDRWN_CANCEL This File: E15-0005 r City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director January 18, 2017 Ted Caloger MG2 1101 2nd Avenue Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98101 Subject: Northwest Arena Parking Determination L15-0026 Environmental Review E15-0005 Dear Mr. Caloger: I wanted to update you on the status of your applications for a parking determination for the Northwest Arena multi -purpose sports and entertainment project and its associated EIS. We have not had a meeting or submittal on this project since September 2015 so per TMC 18.104.130 A 1 (b) the files have been closed due to inactivity. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at (206) 433-7141. Sincerly, Nora Gierloff Deputy DCD Director Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov Nora Gierloff From: Minnie Dhaliwal Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 10:37 AM To: Lynn Miranda; Jaimie Reavis; Bob Giberson; Robert Eaton; Rachel Bianchi Cc: Nora Gierloff; Jack Pace; Chris Flores; Mike Villa; Robin Tischmak Subject: Comments on the Preliminary Draft EIS -Northwest Arean Thank you all for reviewing the Preliminary EIS documents and providing comments. The consolidated comments are saved at Z:\Arena\EIS\Comments on Preliminary DEIS 7-17-15\Final comments 7-17-15 The list of documents that were provided to CH2Mhill on Friday are: 1. Comment matrix -Preliminary Draft EIS document. 2. Comment matrix -Transportation Technical Report 3. Preliminary Draft EIS with consolidated comments. 4. Transportation Technical Report with consolidated comments 5. Transportation Section 2.5 6. Level of Service Comparison with 2010 levels ( this goes with Transportation Technical Report comments) 7. Sewer memo that is referenced in the comments in the Preliminary Draft EIS. Minnie 1 / City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director FROM: Robin Tischmak BY: Mike Cusick, Program Manager 1 Senior Engineer DATE: July 15, 2015 SUBJECT: Draft EIS for Northwest Arena City of Tukwila Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities ISSUE Review of Draft EIS for Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems BACKGROUND RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC is proposing the construction, near the intersection of West Valley Highway and Longacres Way, of a Sports Arena with a capacity of 19,500 people. The City of Tukwila has an existing 12" sanitary sewer with a capacity of 1.78 CFS (798.86 GPM) that discharges sewage to the 36" King County Metro Tukwila Interceptor and a 12" water line with a flow of 8,000 GPM. Discussion The proposed Sports Arena requires 1,000 GPM for domestic water and 1,250 GPM for fire service. The City of Tukwila, can meet the fire and domestic water needs for the project with no modifications to the Tukwila water system. The peak sanitary sewage flows from the Sports Arena are estimated to be 1.80 CFS. The existing Tukwila, 12" sanitary sewer does not have the capacity to meet the demands of both the flows from the existing sanitary sewer basin and the proposed discharge from the Sports Arena, without the construction of a new sanitary sewer line. The existing 12" sanitary sewer that services this area of Tukwila discharges into the 36" Tukwila Interceptor owned by King County, just north of Strander Blvd. King County has concerns about the capacity of their 36" pipe to handle the proposed Sports Arena event generated peak flows of 1.80 CSF. To determine if the Tukwila Interceptor has the capacity for the proposed Sports Arena, further analysis of the sanitary sewer basin that is tributary to the Tukwila Interceptor is required. RECOMMENDATION Information only Attachment: Sewer map i EMBI tti"4 r SUITES (11 d`' 0' cf { 1 Q� 117 1' f } ! - , 1 'f .' Gk1'u'( L. f d 1 cE}Go~'`L. Lot 8 3,160 Ac'cs I I t NO,STri.A_ riAT & 111 1 Y I I JOHN tAYt.Oa & r c irya 1' to �d*'��GO4. T OC rt. • (J) ILi ;I, +T L_,--„ I y- t (1820-1821) \; v L r.rr Gr8 Q I'5RTH (417) 91-h8 `4 s ( N. s � : AT Iva 46, ,irak' NESTLRN l:4C 4' Ar Gov't lot 2 815 Acre eetPT HU1^.Sl ' 'CA t3SAc r c\I 7 (,199441', E N 1.0 EvAN NELSON aC..7. r 4 NE. 50N a OE 69Ac ti 4 ua A i o P0FtR7'1e- tAC,ER =ARK CO. "JAC */n r edit/ McROtR ;u4 -err s aE-' (089) rio I 1 ti f � JOE GOTTjSTEIN 1 � r I � I i 1 T4.3 1 P rl PH la GOTTST ttr try: 1 ii pI1 t1 P 1 ,1 1 JJ II i n Iq 11 " , 111` \1 \\ !i{ 'It 11 it '• 14 \�\ .;, it I It 11 \ \\\ 2 1 11 WASHINGTONl t\ \\\.1 i ff lot II.IOI(EY iCLU B I 'i\\! ```\\\ II t3; IJ0Ei IGOTiSEI 0 1I \\. ?' • l l I I i I� Fl O.0 I`, \ 1 1, nc^r�-.'e0--te i l r t 1 1 I t I----- -- 1' 11 II I 1, I 1 I 1 4111� I 11 I II I 11' I WAISHUNGTON I JI II I OKEY CLUB 1 11 1 li 1 1 1, 1 JOE G,OITT SEIN 1811 it I I 11 1' '� 1 1' 11 I I 1, II T.L. A �r:TY-38wk—'ua 1 =i LAW 3-88) • 18. YWASN,NGTON JOCKEY ClU8 JOE 6OTTSEIN Comment Response Matrix , Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Preparer I Rob Rodland { Date 22-Dec-16 Document Date f July2015 Organization CH2M Hill Commenter j City of Tukwila — LS relaying PSE comments 7/17/15 Item Page Section FS-2 Comm Sent. Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New OC Page check List of City Permits: add Conditional Use LS for Permit for relocation of electrical ! PSE transmission lines FS-6 Table FS-1 Environmental health: delete last sentence mentioning EMF. PSE recommends not mentioning EMF at all, as no additional transmission system is proposed as part of the proposal. If the City believes EMF should be mentioned, replace last sentence with: "Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) from power lines is not discussed in the EIS because all transmission line work needed to accomplish the Arena Project consists of moving or rebuilding existing lines; there will be no additional transmission lines or EMF exposure as a result of the proposed action." LS for PSE FS-7 Table Public Services and Utilities: change last LS for FS-1 sentence to read: "Coordination with Puget PSE Sound Energy will occur regarding modifications , to existing gas and electrical facilities to accommodate the Arena and maintain utility service to existing customers. 1-1 11.2 Proposed Action Site description: see PSE email LS for of july 16. Add PSE utility description here or in i PSE 1.3.2.1. 1-3 Figure 1- !2 Figure labels PSE's ROW as park/trail LS for PSE Lines PSE suggested language: LS for 5-10 The PSE right-of-way at the proposed plaza area PSE currently contains underground power cables. overhead 115-kilovolt (kV) and 230-kV power lines and a section of the Interurban Trail. The Updated 22-Dec-16 9:37 AM 1 of 4 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Preparer Rob Rodland ! Date 22-Dec-16 Document Date ! July2015 i Organization t CH2M Hill I Commenter 1 City of Tukwila — LS relaying PSE comments 7/17/15 I Comm New QC Item Page Section Sent. Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response Page check right-of-way is also used for parking by some of the adjacent businesses. The power cables would he realigned as needed. and the 115-kV lines • would be relocated to the east edge of the site as part of the Proposed Action. The , and the 230 kV lines would remain in place with the lattice tower being replaced with a monopole. The Interurban Trail would be relocated either within or outside of the PSE right-of-way, and no parking would be allowed in the area between Longacres Way and S 156th Street. 1-12 j Lines 7-10 ...relocation of the PSE steel lattice tower... The relocated tower would be replaced... and shifted to firth be outside of the relocated roadway. LS for 1 PSE 1-13 1.4 Alternatives Considered but Not Advanced: LS for PSE suggests here might be a place to mention PSE relocation the 230 kV lines to east of the BNSF tracks, and why not pursued at this time 2-5 2.2.1.1 ! Line 30 , Suggest adding "...underground electrical LS for I distribution lines... i PSE 2-6 2.2.1.1 Line 7 Suggest following gg g "purchased by the Boeing ! LS for Company for development as an office park." PSE Add new sentence: 1 Boeing's property immediately adjacent to the BNSF railroad corridor has not een redeveloped 1 as office park, and still has remnants of the race track structure's foundations. 2-8 Table , PSE suggests adding PSE parcel 242304-9023 LS for 1 2.2-1 1 along with the 00580-0008 parcel already noted, PSE and adding "PSE" in front of the "Right of Updated 22-Dec-16 9:37 AM 2 of 4 ( Formatted: Body Text, Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt ) Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Preparer Rob Rodland Document Date I July2015 Organization CH2M Hill Commenter ' City of Tukwila — LS relaying PSE comments 7/17/15 Date PP-Dec-16 Comm Item Page Section Sent. Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New GC Page check Way/Utility,Road" current use cell. , 2-13 2.3.2.1 Line 7 Operation: "The interurban Trail would remain LS for I within the PSE right-of-way." PSE comment: PSE J true? 2-14 2.4.1.1 ' West PSE: should "relocated PSE 115 kV LS for of the transmission line" be added here? PSE UPRR 2-14 Same section — "Add somewhere the LS for replacement of PSE's steel lattice tower with a PSE ' monopole will result in improved aesthetics" 2-17 Figure 2.4-3 Figure caption: reword to current plans LS for PSE 2-17 I Figure Figure caption: ...PSE 230 kV transmission line LS for 2.4-4 and support structures... PSE 2-22 Figure Figure caption: "Note that the steel metal lattice LS for 2.4-10 j mare tower... PSE 2-24 2.4.2.1 Line 33 The 115 kV line would be rerouted to east of the LS for general parking garage, immediately west of the j PSE BNSF RR, on wood or steel poles. The current steel metal -tattles tower ctu•o... ...with a monopole(a single steel tower concrete structure) to the north (North? Or south?) 2-25 2.4.2.1 ' Line 7 Add after last sentence: The 115 kV line would LS for be in the extreme east side of this area, next to PSE the BNSF RR. Updated 22-Dec-I6 9:37 AM 3 of 4 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland Organization CH2M Hill Date ! 22-Dec-16 Item Page Section Sent Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check General Nice effort, under extreme schedule pressure — i LS congratulations, we all recognize your commitment and hard work. 2. General General comments: LS I think there are some overarching issues that need to be addressed with more clarity in the EIS: • Clear and more detailed discussion of the Sound Transit access and parking issue, and some indication that it can be resolved prior to project approval. Discussion of an interim proposal if not resolved by EIS issuance. • Interurban Trail — needs much better discussion of proposed action and options. Detailed graphic, specific route(s) indicated, commitments (if any) for improvements on those routes. • Pedestrian Access bridges from garage — need more discussion of details, incl. design and pedestrian movements from garage to plaza. Discussion of approval from UPRR, interim proposal if approval not obtained prior to project approval. Specific graphic needed. • Parking: I think we need more certainty that at least some of the large blocks of potential off -site parking will be available for project use. As it is discussed in the PDEIS, the project is Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 1 of 23 Comment Response Matrix 1 Document Title Document Date f Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS JuIy2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer ! Rob Rodland i Date 22-Dec-16 Organization ; CH2M Hill Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check relying on use agreements with private owners for a large majority of the 3080 off-street spaces located within one- half mile of the project site, but none are secured at this point. • In general, more discussion of interim steps/phasing plans if certain features are delayed (eg: Strander construction, PSE power line relocation, Green River bridge to SR 181, shared parking with Boeing, etc) 3. i General There are references cited, but I see the list of LS "References" (Chapter 3) is still to come. 4. FS-7 Pub Svcs & Utilities This text raises questions about the safety and security responsibilities of the City during operation of the arena, as well as the details of the Traffic and Parking Management Plan/Program. Suggest adding that these issues would be addressed in the Development Agreement and through the permit process. LS 5. V Acronyms list: • Add UPRR, BNSF • Global thru doc: kV or kv? LS 6. S-1 Table S- 1 Fix pagination LS 7. 1-1 1.1 Line Spell out UPRR and BNSF if first use I LS 15 8. 1-2 Figures I think we need a site plan LS thu 1- 1-1 thru 14 1-9 9. 1-11 Top I Description of the arena and plaza needs a I LS I, figure to illustrate i 10. 1-11 Main Line Reword as shown in text — "Requiring payment LS Parking 13- prior to exiting the garage would allow the Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 2 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland Organization F CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Item Page Section Sent Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check Garage 14 garage to empty more quickly." descry I 11. 1-11 Garage Need illustration to show ped bridges and driveway locations in relation to Longacres Way and plaza, here or in Transportation section j LS r J 12. 1-11 Garage Last sentence says skybridges connect the arena to the upper floors of the main parking garage. Is this right, or do they drop peds to the plaza? I LS ! j 13. 1-11 Plaza Will you need an event ticket to get through security prescreening, or can the general public enter thru prescreening to the plaza if not attending an event? Text left me wondering. LS 14. j 1-12 115 kv and 230 kV line relocations — need to be illustrated as updated, here or in aesthetics LS 15. 1-12 Employm Source for employment figure of 200-400? ent Suggest "Based on the applicant's estimates and experience at similar facilities..." (if true) LS 16. 1-12 to 1- 13 Vehicle access Needs figure for discussion of vehicle and ped access, here or in Section 2-5 j LS I ! J ( 17. 1-13 Line s7- 10 i Update to latest for power lines and poles I LS I i ! 18. 1-13 I 1.3.2.2 ; Last paragraph on page — see sentence that begins "The plaza would be closed to trail users..." and reword. Maybe you meant the plaza would "not" be closed to trail users? In general, this needs more work on the Interurban Trail issue I LS ( i I 19. 1-15 1.5 Line s 5-6 Change "If RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC decided not to move forward with the construction and operation of the Northwest Arena, potential benefits could LS Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 3 of 23 Comment Response Matrix ' Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS 1 Preparer ' Rob Rodland ' Date ! 22-Dec-16 1 Document Date July2015 f Organization CH2M Hill Commenter : City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check include:" to If construction and operation of the Northwest Arena did not occur, potential benefits could include: 20. 2-4 2.1.2.1 Tabl Make tables consistent in format — cell borders LS es 2- outlined or not 1 and 2-2 21. 2-5 2.1.2.2 Mitig Formatting problem. I think 2.1.2.2 should start ation the Alternative 2 discussion; Mitigation sentence is still with Alternative 1. LS 22. 2-5 12.2 23. 2-4 24. ! 2-6 2.2.1.1 Start of Land Use section — Can we have a more LS prominent way to display new sections/elements of the environment? Maybe a page break? Or page headers/footers? As formatted now, I found it difficult to flip back and forth and find sections I was looking to refer back to — sections ( get lost. Adopted land use Plans and Policies — suggest LS using approach found in 2.4, Aesthetics, Light, and Glare. See p. 2-11, Consistency with Planning Principles Related to Aesthetic Resources Identified in the Southcenter Subarea Plan. I.e., direct quote from Plan, followed by { bullet addressing consistency Line , Need consistent format for headings Zoning and LS s 17 Adopted Plans and Policies. I think it's a font and problem? 26 25. 2-7 + 2.2.2 Con See text for revised wording addressing noise LS struc impacts and noise control ordinance 1 tion 26. 2-9 ; Operatio Line , See revised language re Development LS Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 4of23 Comment Response Matrix _ ) 33. 34. Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila - Lloyd Skinner (LS) Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution i Preparer I Rob Rodland 1 Date I 22-Dec-16 I 1- 4-- Organization i CH2M Hill 1- -i-- - 1 ; ; I Comm enter Response New QC Page check n 18 _4_ Agreement 27. 2-9 Mitigation See revised mitigation language , of Alt 1 28. 2-12 2.3.1.1 1 Some wording revisions shown in text 29. 2-12 2.3.1.1 Line Text says the number of Interurban Trail users 26 based on recent user counts can be found in the Transportation Section. I think that number should be in both sections, but I didn't see it in either - were counts done? What is the volume , of current trail users? f- 30. 2-12 I 2.3.1.2 Line Please note the location of the new non- s 34- motorized bridge across the Green River 35 ; 31. 2-13 h2.-3.2.1 Line Needs line space between paragraphs s 18- 19 32. 2-13 2.3.2.1 Line I "The trail would be open and function as it 25 currently does for much of the year." Would cyclists pass through the plaza's security gates when no events were occurring? Would they be able to ride through, or would they have to dismount and walk through? Text should explain. 2-13 2-13 35. 2-13 2.3.2.1 LS LS LS LS LS LS Line Reference to a "temporary event bypass route" - I LS s 26- would this frequent temporary event route be a 27 better solution that a permanent relocation of the trail? 2.3.2.1 Line Bicycle bypass using sidewalk on east side of LS s 30- West Valley Highway between 156th and 32 Longacres Way as pedestrians arrive to attend an event. This introduces bicycle-ped conflicts at a time when ped activity is high. If this solution remains the proposal, EIS will need to disclose these impacts more explicitly. 2.3.2.1 Line Re Possible use of Green River Trail - this LS 1 s 32- I seems to me like a reasonable alternative for Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 5 of 23 Comment Response Matrix , Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Document Date July2015 Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodtand Organization CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check 36. 2-13 37. i 2-15 33 those bicyclists destined to points north or south of the project site and Tukwila Station. I think it should be discussed in more detail — how signage at north and south access points from Interurban to GRT could be placed for events, which crossings of the Green River between the two trails could be used south of the site (the Strander bridge before new bridge near Longacres Way is built, either crossing afterwards, both thus requiring a crossing of West Valley Highway). Compare the two distances — Interurban vs. GRT — between two connection points (for example, Fort Dent Way and the return to Interurban via Strander). Also discussion of how this alternative might be less desirable for those bicyclists destined for Tukwila Station or the project site because it's a little longer. Of course, if they were traveling to the project site, presumably they wouldn't detour but would arrive, dismount, park their bikes at the racks provided, and go through security screening O. Again, any info on user counts would be useful here, if available. Also, a graphic specific to the detour/bypass/relocated trail routes should be prepared. 2.3.2.1 Line Mitigation - No trail improvement mitigation LS s 42- proposed? 46 2.3.2.2 1 + t 38. 2-15 2.3.2.2 Line For the Interurban Trail relocation, bicyclists LS s 1-7 would travel on the street at Longacres Way to/from the north -south link west of the UPRR line? Is there a vehicle -bicyclist conflict and - Line Alt 2 Relocation of the Interurban Trail — is it a LS s 1-7 reasonable alternative to relocate all the way east of the main parking garage so it wouldn't go through the plaza? Could they get back west to the trail again north of the main parking garage? Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 6 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Document Date July2015 Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland • Organization CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check 39. 2-18 /;_\ 40. 2-20 J 41. 2-22 42. 2-23 43. 44. 2-25 2.4.1.1 2.4.2.1 2-25 2.4.2.1 -+ 45. 2-27 2.4.2.1 safety risk during events? Figur Figure description of how lattice tower would be e "moved farther north" should be updated 2.4-3 Figur Figure caption: "view to the southwest" — should e be "view to the southeast," right? 2.4-5 1- Line "West of the Green River along SR 181" — 19 should it be "East" of the river? Figur e 2.4- 10 Delete "that" from caption sentence Line "A future two-story building would be sited at the 19 eastern edge of the pedestrian plaza..." First mention of this building. Line Discussion of PSE power lines. Update to s 32- current plan. 40 A figure should be added showing the relocated 230kV lines. I agree with the selection of language in the text that the power lines "would contrast with the refined design of the plaza." It is disappointing from an urban design perspective that the project is not able to propose relocating the power lines to the east of the site or to place them underground. One option is to add text discussing as a "reasonable alternative" that the lines could be moved east of the BNSF line, or underground, and acknowledge that doing either is difficult, and not under the direct control of the applicant. This might facilitate future relocation. LS LS LS LS LS LS Figur Figure caption: "view to the west..." should be LS e Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 7 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS ' Preparer Rob Rodland Document Date July2015 ; Organization i CH2M Hill Commenter City of Tukwila - Lloyd Skinner (LS) Date i 22-Dec-16 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check 2.4- view to the "east," yes? 12A 46. fi 2-31 ! 2.4.2.1 Line Arena shadow wording revised as shown in text LS -35 2.4.2.2 Line See revised text suggestion for intro to Alt 2 LS s 32- discussion. Softens the conclusion that 35 differences are "minor." 47. 2-32 48. 2-33 49. 2-1 52. 2-6 + 53. 1 2-8 - + f _- 2.4.2.2 Line Needs to be reworded - doesn't make sense as LS s 3-5 written. 2.5 2.5 2.5.1.2 2.5.2.6 Line s 42- 45 2.5.2.7 Line s 36- 41 General: I think more info from the LS Transportation Technical Report could be moved up to the EIS text to make the section stand alone better. I'll try to note specific suggestions { throughout. _i. Transportation section pagination needs to be LS integrated. Methods: I think this text should be expanded to LS briefly describe some of the other aspects of the transportation methodology, before the details are disclosed later in the analysis sections. Examples are: how parking and traffic assumptions were developed (e.g., average car occupancy, trip generation, mode split, and parking demand for typical events at a multi -use arena - were comparables from similar arenas used? Which ones - Portland Rose Garden (now Moda Center)? Were the assumptions conservative? How do we know? Etc.) Re "local streets have generally continuous LS sidewalks on at least one side of the street." Are there gaps, particularly in east -west travel to the project site within the one-half mile distance, that should be noted? Re parking utilization - is it relevant to discuss 1 LS holiday season utilization here? Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 8 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date i Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) 1 Preparer ! Rob Rodland Date ! 22-Dec-16 i Organization CH2M Hill I I Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check 54. \ 55. J 7} , 56. 2-8 2-15 2.5.2.7 Line 36 2.5.3.2 ! line 6 Re: 3080 off street parking spaces within the 1/2 LS mile walk shed. Parking Study (App C, p. 2) says 9175 spaces. Is that the difference between the '/ mile radius and the 1/2 mile walkshed? Or something else? Re all the assumptions: there's mention that trip LS generation is based on research of comparable arena complexes. Can you provide some examples in the text? I see one: the Sacramento Entertainment and Sports Center. But the text says what the studies for that complex assumed, not what actual data show. There's a specific reference to City of Seattle 2013 (is this the SODO arena EIS?) which noted arrival times based on research. If good data are not available, we should note that. 2-16 2..5.3.2 Line Traffic Operations discussion. In addition to all LS s 5- the figures, I think we need a simplified summary 41 i table of LOS results — existing, 2017, and 2037, 57. 2-16 2.5.3.2 58. 2-17 59. 2-23 4 with project and without. ' In addition to the level of service discussion, I LS think we need an explicit discussion of operations at the garage driveways. With a figure. Tabl Some column heading wording suggestions in LS e attached markup 2.5-3 2.5.3.2 Tran I Transit discussion — first two paragraphs on sit Sounder arrivals are confusing. 1700 attendees would use, 200 per train — unclear. LS 60. 2.24 2.5.3.2 Line 1 Parking discussion is too short. "Table 2.5-6 LS s 15- shows where planned parking would occur and 31 that there is more than sufficient capacity to _ i accommodate the parking demand for hockey Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 9 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland Organization CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check 61. Appe ndice s 62. Trans po rtati on Techn ical Repor 63. FS-2 and basketball league events." This is not a valid conclusion, as it's not supported by analysis and discussion. I note that the map showing the locations of the 3830 off - site private parking spaces was not included in the text — can we include it? I don't think we need the WASIST Intersection Screening Tool User Inputs and user Comments included in the EIS or appendices. It's about 65 pages of output — should be available for review at DCD and DPW if any reviewer wants to review. Judicious excerpts should be brought forward to bolster the discussion of transportation in Section 2.5 of the EIS text. Street vacation is referenced for both Nelson Place and S 156th Street, however later discussion in the document is for vacation of Nelson Place only. Is S 156th planned to be vacated? LS LS MD 64. FS-5 thru FS-7 Should other elements such as Earth, Public Services and Utilities be analyzed under Section 2 -Environmental Analysis or additional detail added to table FS-1? It was discussed in meetings about attaching geotechnical reports as appendices. Also, see sewer related comments from Public Works. MD 65. FS-7 Table FS-1 Discussion about impacts to public services and utilities. The existing City of Tukwila 12" sanitary sewer in Nelson Place and the Interurban Trail does not have the capacity for the existing flows and the future sanitary sewer flows that will be generated from the proposed Northwest Arena. MPC Public Works Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 10 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Organization Rob Rodland CH2M Hill Date ! 22-Dec-16 Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Comm Response New QC Page check Solution: Install new parallel 12" sanitary sewer from Arena to the King County 36" Tukwila Interceptor near Strander Blvd. 66. FS-7 Table FS-1 Discussion about impacts to public services and MPC utilities. The existing King County Tukwila 36" Public intercept doesn't have the capacity for the future Works Arena. Solution: Work with King County and the City of Tukwila to determine how the sanitary sewer flows from the future Sports Arena and now capacity can oe met. 67. FS-7 Police impacts No police impacts? No additional security or traffic control needed? LM 68. ; S-3 S.4 Confirm with the design team that Alt 1 with two j MD skybridges and Alt 2 with three skybridges is still the current design. 69. ' S-1 Table S- 1 ! I Construction and operational mitigation under MD Recreation should be more detailed than just "coordination with King County and trail users regarding trail realignment". Also, rather than just state "standard PSCAA emission control measures" list specific measures. Fix page numbering (it should be page S-4 not S-1 again) 70. S-2 and 1-2 Figure S- ! 1 and 1-1 Both maps are identical. Replace one with a different scale showing more detailed area. MD 71. I 1-3 Fig 1-2 i Confirm proposed action boundary is consistent with the write up and only shows project boundary. I MD 72. 1-4 Fig 1-3 I , Update to show ped skybridges. MD 73. 1-5 Fig 1-4 Map Show 2 ped skybridges common to both alts LM Park/trail layer is hard to read on the map. 74. 1-6 Table ! 1St What will this parcel be used for after 9 9-1 1 narr rnnstriirtinn ie rmmnIatarl9 LM el liste Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 11 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Document Date July2015 Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland - i Organization CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Item Sent Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check d 75. 1-11 Main Parking garage Line "...with the number of spaces provided 14/1 consistent with TMC Title 18." Is this referring to 5 + bicycle or auto parking? LM 76. ' 1-11 Main Parking garage Line ADA access. Is an elevator going to be LM s constructed in parking garages for ADA access? 17/1 8 77. 1-12 Conceptu ! Line Where will the 115-kv line be relocated? What al Plaza 7 are the associated impacts? LM 78. 1-11 Plaza Line Fig 1-4 shows plaza includes another parcel 22- besides the PSE right-of-way, but the text says 23 72,000 sf within the existing PSE right-of-way. 79. Employm Line ent s 12- 16 Where are 400 employees going to park? In the parking garage? How does this affect available parking for public? Note: Parking study states 400 pking spaces will be available for general or employee use at the public parking garage next to Renton City Hall. How will employees get to/from there to arena? LM 80. Non- motori zed acces Pedestrian access from/to Sounder Station is not addressed, nor are impacts. Where will this occur and how will people cross the street as cars are entering/exiting parking garage? LM 81. 1-13 22- "TMP shall be prepared in coordination 26 with any other agency who has responsibility in implementing the measures identified in the TMP" What agency is being referred to? It may be helpful to have TMP farther along so those measures can be appropriately discussed in the DEIS. MD 82.1-13 36- Alt 1 option as it relates to having trail 42 users go through prescreening security is not realistic. Another option for trail that has been Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 12 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title , Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS ; Preparer , Rob Rodland — — — + Document Date ; July2015 i Organization , CH2M Hill --I- Commenter City of Tukwila —Lloyd Skinner (LS) Date 22-Dec- 1 6 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check discussed in meetings but not included in the ' document is to relocate the trail east (underneath relocated 113kv lines) and then go underneath 1-405 to continue at Family Fun Center site should be considered as another alternative. J 83. 1-13 1.3.2.2 Line Longacres Way will be closed 2-3 hours before I LM 134 events. Clarify if it will be open for vehicles entering the parking garage, but closed for other traffic? I 84. 1-15 i 1.6 Confirm work schedule and this section with Mortenson so it accurately reflects the hours and other construction sequencing including temporary relocation of PSE lines. MD 85. 2-8 Table 2.2-1 Alt 1 j Figure 1-9 shows ped skybridge connecting parking garage to Industrial Crating & Packing parcel, yet table 2.2-2 does not include this parcel in the summary of land use changes. (2423049090), and the one to the south (2423049088). Note: Transportation techn study/parking study shows these 2 parcels (as well as hotel to the north of arena) will be used for surface parking. If so, this needs to be made clear in EIS land use section, and impacts analysed. P LM 1, 86. 2-10 I i I 2.2.5 Potential secondary land use impact that should be addressed: relying on off -site use of off-street parking lots on under-utilized parcels may result in a delay in the redevelopment of those parcels to a more intensive use, consistent with the Southcenter Plan, due to increased income generated by parking fees during events. ' LM 87. 2-11 Fig 2.3-1 Label Bicentennial Park LM 88. 12-24 I 2.4.2 Impacts are discussed based on existing uses. LM Should discuss impacts based on future planned Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 13 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland 1 Organization , CH2M Hill Date 122-Dec-16 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check uses, as well. Views from WA Place? 89. i 2-24 ( 2.4.2.1 Line Size of rocks — could be safety issue? Also a ' LM 46 design issue. Too many rocks of similar size and shape, and close together, can look like a rustic jersy barrier (after looking at google earth images of other arenas where these were used). LM 90. i 2-26 Line How will pedestrians using the northern s 3-7 skybridge access the site? A description of the sidewalk is provided along LA Way, but not for the northern skybridge. It would also be helpful if the skybridges were included in some of the views (figures), as appropriate. 91. 2-29 Line What about the view from the parcel directly to I LM s the north of the arena? This will be the 22+ "backside" of the arena. 92. 2-32 Mitigation Should this not also state that the project will be subject to the Southcenter Design Manual? Should discuss mitigation in terms of mass, height and scale of the project. LM 93. Fs-2 ! Should include agreements with Sound Transit, Boeing and King County Metro RB 94. FS-3 Related Documen is Hyperlink related documents to make it easy for RB readers to access 95. 2-6 96. i 2-7 3 Nelson family name misspelled Alternativ 1 30 e1 RB Indicates five months of pile driving; inconsistent with page 1-15, line 36 which indicates four months of pile driving. RB 97. 2-19 6 Nelson family name misspelled RB 98. 2-12 Fort Dent i 44- ' Fort Dent is NOT located within the Starfire Park 45 Campus but the Starfire Campus is located ' within the 54-acre Fort Dent Park. RE (Parks) Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 14 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland j { _ Organization CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check l � J 99. 2-13 thru 2-15 100.1 Operatio 23+ n Impacts Alternativ e 1 (for Interurba n Trail) Attach ment A (Inters ection data) and B( WASIS T This is not recommended for long-term trail use. RE Routinely posting trail detours for every event, (Parks) congestion impacts from event attendees and prescreening and likelihood of bicyclists having to dismount are not acceptable. Alternative 2 is much better in that 1) it does not require bicyclists to dismount, 2) potential congestion is minimal from event patrons and prescreening, and 3) would not necessitate temporary trail detours for events. Alternative 2 is the better option. Should these be included with the Transportation Technical Report? MD 101. 102. FS-2 FS-6 Table FS-1 List of City Permits: add Conditional Use LS for Permit for relocation of electrical PSE transmission lines Environmental health: delete last sentence mentioning EMF. PSE recommends not mentioning EMF at all, as no additional transmission system is proposed as part of the proposal. If the City believes EMF should be mentioned, replace last sentence with: "Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) from power lines is not discussed in the EIS because all transmission line work needed to accomplish the Arena Project consists of moving or rebuilding existing lines; there will be no additional transmission lines or EMF exposure as a result LS for PSE Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 15 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Preparer Rob Rodland ' Document Date July2015 Organization + CH2M Hill Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check of the proposed action." 103. FS-7 Table FS-1 Public Services and Utilities: change last LS for sentence to read: "Coordination with Puget PSE Sound Energy will occur regarding modifications to existing gas and electrical facilities to accommodate the Arena and maintain utility service to existing customers. 104., 1-1 1.2 Proposed Action Site description: see PSE email I LS for of july 16. Add PSE utility description here or in j PSE 1.3.2.1. 105. 1-3 Figure 1-2 Figure labels PSE's ROW as park/trail LS for PSE 106. Lines PSE suggested language: 5-10 The PSE right-of-way at the proposed plaza area currently contains underground power cables, overhead 115-kilovolt (kV) and 230-kV power lines and a section of the Interurban Trail. The right-of-way is also used for parking by some of the adjacent businesses. The power cables would be realigned as needed, and the 115-kV lines would be relocated to the east edge of the site as part of the Proposed Action. The 230 kV lines would remain in place, with the lattice tower being replaced with a monopole_ The Interurban Trail would be relocated either within or outside of the PSE right-of-way, and no parking would be allowed in the area between Longacres Way and S 156th Street. LS for PSE 107. 1-12 Lines I ...relocation of the PSE steel lattice tower... 7-10 The relocated tower would be replaced... and shifted to r►-orth be outside of the relocated roadway. LS for PSE Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 16 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title i Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Document Date July2015 Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer ; Rob Rodland +-- Organization CH2M Hill Date 1 22-Dec-16 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check 108. 1-13 1.4 Alternatives Considered but Not Advanced: PSE suggests here might be a place to mention relocation the 230 kV lines to east of the BNSF tracks, and why not pursued at this time LS for PSE 109. 2-5 J 110.l 2-6 2.2.1.1 Line 30 Suggest adding "...underground electrical distribution lines... LS for PSE 2.2.1.1 ! Line 7 Suggest following "purchased by the Boeing LS for Company for development as an office park." PSE Add new sentence: ! 1 I esoemg s property immeuiatery aujacent to me BNSF railroad corridor has not een redeveloped as office park, and still has remnants of the race track structure's foundations. , ! I 1 111.1 2-8 Table 2.2-1 PSE suggests adding PSE parcel 242304-9023 LS for along with the 00580-0008 parcel already noted, PSE and adding "PSE" in front of the "Right of Way/Utility,Road" current use cell. 1 112.1 2-13 ( 2.3.2.1 Line 7 Operation: "The interurban Trail would remain LS for within the PSE right-of-way." PSE comment: PSE true? J 113. 2-14 ; 2.4.1.1 West of the UPRR PSE: should "relocated PSE 115 kV LS for transmission line" be added here? 1 PSE 114.1 2-14 Same section — "Add somewhere the replacement of PSE's steel lattice tower with a i monopole will result in improved aesthetics" LS for PSE 1 , 115. 2-17 Figure 2.4-3 I ( ' Figure caption: reword to current plans LS for PSE 1 1 116.! 2-17 Figure 2.4-4 Figure caption: ...PSE 230 kV transmission line and support structures... LS for PSE 117.1 2-22 Figure 2.4-10 Figure caption: "Note that the steel metal lattice LS for PSE suppecture tower... 118.E 2-24 1 2.4.2.1 Line 33 The 115 kV line would be rerouted to east of the LS for Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 17 of 23 • Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Document Date July2015 + - Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland Date 22-Dec-16 -j t + L Organization CH2M Hill Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check general parking garage, immediately west of the j PSE BNSF RR, on wood or steel poles. The current steel metal Iattico tower structuro... � I ...with a monopole(a single steel tower concrete structure) to the north (North? Or south?) 119. 2-25 1 2.4.2.1 I Line 7 ! Add after last sentence: The 115 kV line would LS for be in the extreme east side of this area, next to PSE the BNSF RR. The following comments are related to Section 2.5 Transportation 120., 2-6 Line Upgraded bus service — delete this line. I believe LM 20/2 the SC Plan was referring to the new BRT lines, 2 , which have already been implemented. 121. 2-6 Line I Revise. Sidewalks, except for those recently 45 expanded along Baker Blvd, are generally 6 feet wide — not 8-12 feet wide. Future sidewalks in the TOD area should be 8-15 feet. LM 122. 2-8 Line Revise — the SC Plan relies on public and 1 private investments as catalysts for the redevelopment of the TOD Neighborhood. LM 123. 2-8 2.5.2.7 Refers to transit addressed in 1.1.2.4 — cannot find this section. LM 124.1 2-10 2.5.2.8 Line ' "None of the intersections in the study area have s 11- been identified as intersection analysis locations 13 and thus are not in need of safety improvements" Tukwila has received complaints about pedestrian safety at the Grady/Interurban/Southcenter Blvd/WVH intersection. Sight distance and vehicles not yielding to pedestrians were brought up with WSDOT. 125.1 2-14 Transit Add in light rail service. This is a good option to LM Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 18 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title ( Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS { Preparer ; Rob Rodland Date 22-Dec-16 t - - Document Date July2015 Organization ; CH2M Hill Commenter City of Tukwila - Lloyd Skinner (LS) -+ Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check network consider especially when paired with a shuttle run or F Line BRT. 126. 2-14 Line s 20- 23 We have examined crossing options to connect to the new ped/bike bridge, which were presented to council during the grant application process and bridge project scoping. The long- term plan is to have either an at -grade crossing of WVH or another bridge. The utility ROW on the east side of WVH has been looked at as a future nonmotorized connection to the Tukwila Station. Sidewalks on Interurban Ave S from S 143rd to Fort Dent will be constructed by 2017. JR 127. 2-14 Non - motorize d Plans call for a tunnel under UP line for continuation of pedestrian/bike trail running from new bridge over Green River, across WVH, to Sounder station. LM 128. 129. 2-17 Table 2.5-3 2.5.3 Impacts- LOS 130. 131. Impacts - LOS Impacts - LOS 132. 2-23 I Transit Was Quest field in Seattle used in determining mode split - Sounders & Seahawks games? Has light rail, Sounder, and transit service. Update maps to show Strander extension on all the Figures showing 2037 Intersection LOS conditions. ▪ Given that until Strander Blvd extension opens, significant amounts of traffic will be using LA Way to access parking garage, it seems like the back up (N&S) on 181 would seem worse at 405 & SC Blvd. - Longacres Dr (the continuation of LA Way eastward from the parking garage on the Boeing property?) will be used by traffic to access the parking garage - What is the intersection LOS where it intersects with SW 16th St and Grady Way? Any impacts to Amtrak passenger service? LM LM LM LM Lim Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 19 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena July2015 City of Tukwila — Preliminary Draft EIS Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland I Organization CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check 133. 134.1 135. 2-24 Non motorize d, TOD Neighbor • hood Access to parking garage & Sounder station by transit Parking General comment. EIS says "Pedestrian traffic in this area will continue to be low except before and after events. In the future, the SC Plan envisions this to be a lively area with people working, shopping, and accessing the Sounder station. Initial discussions with Arena folks indicated the long term vision for the area was an arena with hotels, shopping, office, etc (spin-off development). However, the EIS is characterizing the area only as "an arena". Need to better include the overall vision of the TOD District in the evaluation of impacts. Arena users will not be the only ones in the area. How will this development impact the envisioned TOD neighborhood? How can it further the vision? General comment. Very car -centric approach towards accessing the arena. LA Way gets closed or used solely for autos accessing garage. This precludes transit and transit riders accessing Station. Then transit riders have to walk all the way back to transit center by mall to access transit. Want to have reduced parking, so need to bump up accessibility by transit. One solution - complete Strander extension and add a bus -only lane so can continue seamless & timely transit access to Sounder station and arena when LA Way is closed. Access to the project/impacts to roadways in the JR vicinity of the project site largely depend on use of private roadways. Does the developer have permission from Boeing, Sound Transit, and any other property owners for use of these roads? If these private roads cannot be used, then impacts will traffic will be different. LM I LM Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 20 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS { Preparer Rob Rodland Document Date July2015 1 Organization ; CH2M Hill Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Comm Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution enter Response New QC Page check 1 J 136. 2-24 j Parking 137. 2-25 1 Non- + motorize d 138. 2-25 139. 2-25 140. 2-27 Last para Are extra improvements needed to make pedestrian connections within parking lots, or area -wide connections as part of a plan to get peopie safely to the arena? The Interurban Trail is not just a recreational trail, it is a commuter route connecting to the Tukwila Station, and for many commuters is a much more direct route to get where they are going. The Green River Trail is more of a recreational trail because it winds around, adding extra time and mileage for those using bicycles for transportation. If diverting to Strander and connecting to the Green River Trail will be a detour, Strander Blvd (not currently a designated bike route) will need to be modified to be a bike route/bicycle friendly. Line Instead of requiring bicyclists to dismount and s 22- walk their bikes on a heavy commuter route, an 25 alternate, direct route should be set up for bicyclists when arena events will cause impacts to the trail. Bike trail JR JR General comment. Rather than having bypass j LM trail, riders having to go through prescreening, riders having to detour to the Green River trail, and riders having to cross parking traffic at numerous locations, why not locate trail in a different location? For example, have a separated bike trail running alongside sidewalk on WVH? Once its passed the arena to the south, have it rejoin the existing trail. Road ' For safety purposes, street lights and wider safety ! sidewalks should also be in place on S 156th if performa j ; the parcel to the north is to be used for surface nce parking (in alternatives 1&2) LM Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 21 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS July2015 City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) a_ Preparer Organization 1 Rob Rodland CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check 141. 2-27 142. 2-27 143. 2-28 144. 2-28 145. 2-28 146. 2-28 147. 2-31 Traffic operation analysis Traffic operation analysis Non - motorize �.d. Non - motorize d Non - motorize d Non - motorize d Non - motorize d 148. 2- ( Construct 33/34 ion impacts to roadway/ transit 149. Construct ion impacts to General comment. Technical report shows surface parking on 2 parcels north of arena, but access to these parcels for parking is not discussed here. Only the VIP parking access is discussed. General comment. The technical report shows parking garage access via Tukwila Sounder Access road, but this is not discussed here. In Alt 2, the trail would be relocated west of the UP lines. However, is this where the VIP garage would be located? A special crossing of Longacres will be needed, if the trail will be located near the railroad bridge Bicycle improvements/trail will also be needed on the south side of Longacres to get bicyclists to the crossing and relocated trail Where will bicycles and pedestrians be travelling in relation to turning movements into and out of the garages? A bicycle cage should be located either inside the arena (to encourage events attendees to ride a bike to the event), or inside VIP parking garage adjacent to the plaza. Transit routes will not be affected according to EIS. Discuss construction traffic impacts to Metro bus schedule, and ability to make timely connections with Sounder/Amtrak service. LM JR JR JR LM There is not sufficient roadway width capacity LM the entire length of LA Way to close one lane and have one lane in each direction. On -street parking stops before the UP overpass and the Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 22 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title 1 Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Document Date July2015 Commenter City of Tukwila — Lloyd Skinner (LS) Preparer Rob Rodland Organization CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Sent Item Page Section Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check \ • J ✓ . J 150. 2-34 151. 2-34 Impacts to Amtrak riders should be discussed. 152.1 2-34 Construct There are many pedestrians that walk to the ion station from nearby locations via the public impacts sidewalks, not just the trail. Please discuss to non- impacts to this type of pedestrians. motorize d 153. 154. roadway I width narrows down at that point. — , -- Construct Line Access to the Tukwila Station for transit riders ion 4 WILL be affected by roadway or sidewalk impacts 1 closures... to transit LM + LM LM Construct General comment. Many people access the LM ion Sounder station via kiss & ride. How will this type impacts of traffic be affected? ; Are people parking on the Boeing site accessing • LM the parking via SR 181 and LA Way? If so, what is the impact to their ability to access parking? Updated 22-Dec-16 9:38 AM 23 of 23 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Transportation Technical Report Preparer Rob Rodland Document Date July2015 Commenter City of Tukwila Organization 1 CH2M Hill 1-- - Date 22-Dec-16 Pag Item a Section Sent. Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check 1. 2 Study applied parking requirements of LM spaces/1,000 sf for Entertainment & Recreational use. However, a sports/event arena of this magnitude was not anticipated. Santa Ana uses 1 space/4 fixed seats and 1 space/28 sf of assembly area. 2.2 Why count Nelson's existing parking spaces in utilization study if this street's parking will no longer be available when redeveloped? LM 3. 1 4 3.3.1 Need backup data to prove Tukwila Station parking lot is less than 1 full on a weekday or weekend. Li,. I 4. 8 3.4 Is the 150 employee parking spaces in the north lot subtracted from the parking available to meet event parking demand? LM 5. 8 3.6 Tukwila Station Access Road. Boeing Access LM Road name is also used — main EIS document calls it Longacres Drive — need to be consistent. 6. J General comment — does the traffic analysis take into account people arriving by Tight rail Tukwila Station and taking BRT or shuttle to station? Also, with one-way only movements on LA Way prior to event, how would buses move in and out of Longacres Way/Station area to drop people off? LM 7. 24 Lines 19-22 Delete the sentence about upgraded bus service between the Transit Center and Tuk Station — this was referring to the BRT line which has already been implemented. LM 8. 25 5.6 Lines 16-19 Additional nonmotorized projects by the City of Tukwila include sidewalks on Interurban Ave S (between 1-405 and 1-5) currently under construction, and bike lanes on Baker Blvd. Line 18 could be changed to add "....another way for JR y 1 4 Updated 22-Dec-16 9:39 AM 1 of 4 Comment Response Matrix Document Title ( Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Transportation Technical Report Preparer Rob Rodland Document Date July2015 Commenter City of Tukwila Organization CH2M Hill Date 122-Dec-16 Pag Item a Section Sent. Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check pedestrians and bicyclists from areas near the Proposed Action to access the central part of the Southcenter Mall/TUC." 9. 30 6.1 6.1 Interurban Ave S project (@ 143rd to Fort Dent) Planne should be included. Described in CIP as "Design d and and construct sidewalks, pavement restoration, Approv drainage, and lighting." — to be completed in ed 2015 Roadw ay Improv ement Project s JR 10., 38 6.7 Add sidewalks along Interurban (from S. 143rd to JR Fort Dent) to the list of nonmotorized projects that will be completed before 2017. 11. 51, 7.1.5 The design of parking garage entrances should 54 carefully consider where pedestrians and bicycles will be moving to avoid vehicle and nonmotorized conflict areas and increase ped/bike safety. , JR 12.1 52 7.1.6 The location of the arena near the Interurban and Green River Trails and near the new ped/bike bridge presents an opportunity to increase the portion of mode split coming from nonmotorized modes. A bikeshare program could help expand the parking areas that could be used, would help attendees avoid areas of high traffic congestion, and would reduce the time it takes to access the arena from Fort Dent and destinations in Southcenter. JR 13. 52 Lines . 19-31 Any detour provided should be as direct, and take the same amount of time as the existing trail connection for bicycle commuters heading north and south. Strander does not seem like a viable option due to time it takes to cross WVH JR Updated 22-Dec-16 9:39 AM 2 of 4 Comment Response Matrix Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Transportation Technical Report Preparer Rob Rodiand July2015 , Organization CH2M Hill City of Tukwila Date 22-Dec-16 Pag Item a Section Sent. Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New QC Page check and lack of bicycle facilities on Strander. An option should be available that doesn't require bicyclists to dismount. 14. 56 i Figure 16 4 Fig 16 is interesting — shows ped trip distribution, but is not referred to anywhere in text except incorrectly on pg 54 as study area intersection LOS results. Would like to see a discussion on Fig 16 in text. Not clear where peds are coming from, particularly north of the arena. LM 15. 58 Lines The option of a relocated Interurban Trail as a 8-19 straight segment from the north side of Longacres Way underneath the 1-405 bridge connecting to the Green River Trail on the east side of the Family Fun Center Should be explored. JR 16. 58 Lines The option of using the widened sidewalk on the 8-19 east side of WVH/SR 181 all the way from Longacres Way to 1-405 should be explored as a bicycle detour route. The sidewalk would effectively be a multi -use trail. Traffic control and/or special signals would be needed at the intersection with S 156th Street to reduce conflicts between vehicles and nonmotorized users. JR 17.; 60- 62 p. 61 "preferr ed parking areas" p.62 bicycle racks lines 32-33 Bicycle parking should be secured in a bike cage JR and located close to the arena entrance, either within the arena or in the VIP parking garage, to help incentivize bicycle transportation to the arena. A bikeshare program implemented as part of the TMP could have a bicycle parking station in/near the plaza and/or on the east side of the ped/bike bridge. Clas Updated 22-Dec-16 9:39 AM 3 of 4 Comment Response Matrix La 7 Document Title Document Date Commenter Northwest Arena Preliminary Draft EIS Transportation Technical Report July2015 City of Tukwila Preparer ' Rob Rodland Organization ; CH2M Hill Date 22-Dec-16 Pag Item e Section Sent. Comment / Recommended Solution Comm enter Response New OC Page check 18.. 63 Incentives, including partnerships with local ' JR businesses like restaurants, could be offered to encourage event attendees to use alternate transportation modes. 19., Appendix C Parking Memo Alt 1 and Alt 2 discussed in this appendix should consistent with and covered under the alternatives discussion in the DEIS document. Fig 3, 4, 5, for different demand scenarios and Fig 6 for ingress/egress of the garage should be pulled in the DEIS document. MD Updated 22-Dec-16 9:39 AM 4 of 4 RLB HOLDINGS June 4, 2015 Honorable Jim Haggerton Mayor, City of Tukwila Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188-2544 Re: City TIGER Grant Application Dear Mayor Haggerton: On behalf of RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, thank you for the opportunity to support the City's TIGER grant application seeking funding to complete the City's Strander Boulevard Extension Project. We recognize the importance of this transportation connection to fulfilling the City's planning goals for the Tukwila Urban Center. In addition, completion of the Strander Extension could benefit RLB's proposed Northwest Arena in the TUC by mitigating project impacts and helping to create a new access route to the proposed arena's parking garage. The City has asked RLB to commit $5 million in funding toward the Strander Extension project. RLB can provide that commitment subject to certain contingencies and conditions that RLB has discussed with City representatives. In concept, the conditions and contingencies that we have identified as necessary to support this commitment include the following: • RLB's funding for the Strander Extension would count toward impact mitigation for the Northwest Arena; • The Strander Extension project would be fully funded and permitted with all necessary agreements in place before the RLB contribution is provided; • The Northwest Arena project achieves all necessary agreements, approvals and permits required for facility opening and operation before the RLB contribution is provided; • The Northwest Arena receives an easement or long-term use agreement for access over and across Sound Transit's Tukwila Station site for access to the arena's parking garage at Longacres Way; • The City would expedite design and construction of the Strander Extension; and • The City and RLB would enter into a funding agreement or development agreement that further develops and commemorates these conditions to the satisfaction of both parties before the City accepts a grant award. If these terms and conditions meet with your expectations, please acknowledge on the signature line provided below. We are happy to support the City to complete the Strander Extension, which provides such an important infrastructure connection. Very truly yours, RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment By: Acknowledged: Encl: Jerry Lee Authorized Agent r \ f 1 i COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Y view 06/01/15 NG ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 5 STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 6/1/15 AGENDA ITEM TITLE City process update on the Northwest Arena 06/01/15 ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date CATEGORY 0 Discussion Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor 111 HR 0 DCD 1 Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S This is an opportunity to brief Council on the next steps in the City's process to address the SUMMARY proposed Northwest Arena project, specifically around the environmental review process currently under way. REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ CA&P Cmte ❑ F&S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte ❑ Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DA 1E: COMMITTEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. COMMITTEE Department of Community Development COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 06/01/15 Informational Memorandum dated 5/27/15 31 r'\ TO: City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Haggerton City Council FROM: David Cline BY: Nora Gierloff, Community Development Deputy Director DATE: May 27, 2015 SUBJECT: City process update on the Northwest Arena ISSUE On May 1, 2015, the City of Tukwila received a SEPA application from RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC, a developer interested in building a multipurpose arena in the City of Tukwila. The City has initiated the environmental review process, which has multiple steps. Due to the nature of this project, staff will regularly update Council on the City's process around this potential development. This is the first such briefing. BACKGROUND Staff have determined that an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is warranted for this project due to the scale, location, and potential impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. However, because the City undertook an extensive EIS during the development of the Southcenter Subarea Plan, it has been determined that the EIS for the proposed arena can build on that earlier work. As such, the City is moving forward with a limited scope EIS focused on: • Land use • Height, bulk, scale , and aesthetics • Air quality • Transportation, including parking, vehicle traffic, transit, and bicycle/pedestrian movement/circulation On Tuesday, June 2"d the City will host a scoping meeting at the Tukwila Community Center from 4:30 to 6:30 PM where members of the public will have the opportunity to comment on the scope of the EIS. Comments will be accepted on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. The scoping process will last for 21 days and the public can also provide written comments via both email and traditional mail. After the scoping is complete the EIS will be written and a draft released for public comment in late summer. These public comments will be incorporated into a final EIS. It is expected that this process will take between six and twelve months to complete. Once the EIS is finalized, decisions on other permits and approvals will follow.. Because the zoning code does not include a parking standard for multipurpose arenas, the applicant has applied to the Director of Community Development for a determination as to how many parking stalls must be associated with this project. Design review, sign, demolition and development permits will be required. The developer is also expected to apply for a development agreement and street vacation. 33 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Should this project move forward, there are many other review and regulatory steps ahead, some of which will require Council approval. Staff will provide regular updates to ensure Council has a timely understanding of the City's process. In addition, recognizing the public interest in this potential project, a webpage has been created on the City's website to heighten transparency and post updates to the project. This page can be accessed at: http://www.tukwilawa.qov/ArenaDevelopmentUpdate.html RECOMMENDATION Information Only. 34 W:12015 Info Memos\arenaupdate.doc EIS Scoping Process Corr scents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 11:31 PM To: NWArenaReview f�. Page 1 of 1 Name: Adam Dodge Email: purplepumpkins@hotmail.com comment: Whatever happens with the arena, please ensure that the Interurban South trail remains intact. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/09/2015 EIS Scoping Process Corn tents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 9:07 PM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: bill Email: bill@abc.com comment: I support this project because it will be amazing addition to the city of Tukwila. Why because it will boast the economy with the hundreds of trade shows, conventions and other events and help promote TOD.It will give the city of tukwilla a iconic landmark , a NI -IL and NBA team that will be the pride and joy of this city. This project will also be privately funded which will reduce the debt that tax payers will pay .I hope the city of tukwila approves this project thanks and good luck. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/10/2015 NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: kif f3frifice, Address: —I6 1 5. ) 50 ' t-c W' / u gFOFff Email: br i`a4110)Asio t,cir k'e y/ndcooi What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. o-F inY (,o n'ceirr s had 12 dr uviA k o W f- 5 project ,v01,dd effect pcous plans G1 e veil ©p 0,aod hail dfce4--""` pa,r`H,4,1a r j l y 4-reef /&(/) f 1 IN Ihkl Or i/nev . 4. 1 01 `� l/+ pa.7d 6Ar e I ioo s /1 �(J � JJ f iperdIy 1L) k 'Ploprr f (a nS We:// .I 2J e one, MOO 3{O2 faitinq c...J v'& f tAIh 1110 arena Lv; II heAo 7"u, k (Aida 1"9te V1.off a Woo / G1a55 ��ii� re,pre,c. of t f s con, o po, - -/ w& of d � y pis, . The, catt 11 +KG pJar 1a, YY u, C, r i tY4_-fr% Cbt,ani i 5 the, d e,r y OK, - o of EIS Scoping Process Cori `►ents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 6:02 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Charles Tyson Email: uwcharliet@yahoo.com comment: Paying the full cost to complete Strander into the Renton side has to be part of the mitigation costs paid by the developer. If Federal or other monies are obtained for completion of Strander, then an equal amount of funds should be paid by the developer to be applied to engineering studies for additional east -west road corridors within Tukwila. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/02/2015 NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. /1 Jf�� 1 f Name: C 176-/(es .`/ Email: to �r1Giiar + (�a'�'ploy . Goj,-t Address: JrVi/7 -pp�0 / th s-/ I 'wn'„} (,c/A - 7`�C1/4 6 What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. f a..te.,4A 4.0 ` J J r op -,14_1,41/17) -. / 7 Lmf ,,±4A,Lam^ .1,L` "'h L1,0 ,virl--d_Ld/ .,1,.t.A./LI iLV-,--.1 )'›ktf,,4 4 r 7:4,,,,,,,vi, de,4,,,,,,..e,_li-of „,:t3rAt-,,_:_ z,,,,.,, f-i\ --ZZILL ' cAx� ,-.4.„4-4,5 741,-c__ EIS Scoping Process Cora 'ents Page 1 of 1 EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 3:52 PM To: NWArenaReview Name: Daniel Phillips Email: yaker247@hotmail.com comment: Love the bike trail, please don't cause a negative disturbance to the bike trail. Thank you! Daniel Phillips Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/08/2015 NW Arena Development(' '`interurban Trail Impact Page 1 of 1 NW Arena Development - Interurban Trail Impact Dereck Martin [dereckmartin@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 9:53 AM To: NWArenaReview To whom it may concern - I was recently informed by a coworker about the proposed hockey/basketball arena to be located at the intersection of West Valley Highway and S 158th St. I'm not familiar with the site plan or proposed change to the interurban trail, but I wanted to voice my opinion that I and my 5 person family who use the trail for recreational bicycling opportunities would be frustrated and disappointed if there was not a provision to integrate some sort of path alongside such a development to continue the through use of the interurban trail system. In other words, if the trail halted at this development site, and forced bikers to walk around structures / gates / fences instead of allowing them to cycle though just as before, this would be very disappointing. Thank you - Dereck Martin Renton City Resident, Tukwila site worker There was a public meeting Tuesday at the Tukwila Community Center in regards to the proposed hockey/basketball arena to be located at the intersection of West Valley Highway (aka Interurban Ave and SR 181) and S 158th St (aka Longacres Way). The property is immediately adjacent to the Interurban Trail. This section of the trail is not on public land (it is owned by Puget Sound Energy), and, unlike most parts of the trail located on private land, there is no easement in place for the trail. Unfortunately there was very little advance notice about the meeting, and it wasn't possible to get the word out to all cyclists. Only three attended. The Tukwila staff people were asked explicitly about the future of the Interurban Trail there, but all they would say was that there was no decision about anything at that point - in other words, there is no guarantee. This project was kept secret during its development (it was only revealed a few weeks ago, and the public meeting was only known to us the night before), and the period for public comment extends only through June 12. There is a website with some information on the project (at www.tukwilawa.gov/ArenaDevelopmentUpdate.html), but there are some problems accessing through the typical means; you may have better luck by searching your browser for 'wwii'.tukwilawa.gov/arena'. You can send comments regarding the importance of the trail to nwarenareview.(dtukwilawa.gov. The more people they hear from, the better for trail users. Dereck Martin dereckmartinagmail.com https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/05/2015 Tukwila Community Cer' '° Tukwila Community Center elvin Irew [etlerew©hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2015 6:46 PM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 I am concerned about the possibility that the new Tukwila community center might impact the Interurban bike trail. I use this trail daily as my route to work. Without it easy convenience I would be forced to ride on the streets and in the winter time this would be very difficult. I would encourage you to do whatever possible to preserve this important Bike path. Thanks, Elvin Lerew https://webmail.tukwil awa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/08/2015 EIS Scoping Process Co( 'tents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 8:55 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Evan F. Pierce Email: hz204c@gmail.com comment: What is the plan to deal with the interruption to the interurban trail? I bike commute to work about 75% of the year and I pass through here everyday. There are a large number of other people that also use this trail to commute, exercise, and enjoy the wild life that flourishes in this wet area. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/05/2015 EIS Scoping Process Coi/ '\ents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 8:33 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Glen Cushman Email: cushman253@comcast.net comment: I hope that if a hockey/basketball arena is built on the proposed Longacres site, that it will not shut down the Interurban Trail. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/05/2015 EIS Scoping Process Cor dents f EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 8:37 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Glen Doggett Email: glen.p.doggett@comcast.net comment: Please make accommodations to maintain the Interurban bike/multi-use trail in the area of this development. Keep the new development and traffic flow of vehicles and pedestrians during evemts separated from the existing trail. Many people use the trail for recreation and commuting, please plan for maintaining the flow of the trail without obstruction as you develop your traffic, parking, and pedestrian flow patterns for entering and departing this proposed area. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/05/2015 • NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: QaU LG r164-.' Email: Address: f -/VG ( P Sr -Ave t 'ii) 5: f o What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. T Ge)Q e�to , r L /� -J. /'ire oe, uS t / /..' o Ce in' 4: e_>iD4 0 F lilt LJest 11 Ap/74.- Cc. 4d 5 ,,,,d 71-',74,7"1f141" f2e.; ( 6e- �ii Ltcklo )1.005 e? 7CI .�7�ILi..l ( C.. ifi-i �A4.t Pfskf iL E se tile /e lr .4G) 4 cJt— ,1 l QG-‘42 4347 are c ‘k 1. -13 '"(}C' G c f e r< 74. .2 A *v Ce 4- -2t1' y L/5-. 41P4;( A4,5 tLk;o3 4iy / o,�., / . A, n y e/?7 (> f e tP ik e 443 -, +es+ 14e 6'e' G1�0e • (0rr''1747, 160;f-el 410,74bs /'71 (/L(L/ 2'(. `r51-1iae S.) ck-hoc P/, e % C Gbd S it ts. 4 + t? / -a, rk fd0) (;4/ 1 /34s C/4.:( s, ri u2 en Coe.) (G-Jt -� 1 a?or Cc.1( 7r-/ftil' Y I support your project �_\ Page 1 of 1 I support your project Jason Feldman [jasonfeldman.esq@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 11:34 AM To: NWArenaReview To whom it may concern: I support the building of a multi -purpose arena in Tukwila. Bring the SEATTLE SUPERSONICS back and I will spend thousands of dollars a year in your jurisdiction. Warm Regards, Jason M. Feldman https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/02/2015 EIS Scoping Process Cod `lents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2015 9:38 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 comment: Enjoyed examining this, very good stuff, thankyou. Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. by Euripides. bddfaekcfbkd Submit: Submit Name: Johne560 Email: johne312@gmail.com https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/08/2015 Interurban Trail & propor ' hockey/basketball arena /__\ Page 1 of 1 Interurban Trail & proposed hockey/basketball arena Clement, Jay W [jay.w.clement@boeing.com] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 11:10 AM To: NWArenaReview Bike Commuting is an important aspect of the Puget sound community. Pease continue to provide access to the Interurban Trail through the development of this facility. Regards, Jay W. Clement Boeing Research and Technology SSED Voice: 253-657-8731 E-mail: jay.w.clement@boeing.com https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/08/2015 r '\ Nora Gierloff From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: FYI Jack Pace Thursday, April 30, 2015 9:03 AM Nora Gierloff 'Iloydspes@gmail.com' FW: Tukwila Arena and the Interurban Trail From: NELLER, JOHN [mailto:bikenstein@q.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 10:25 PM To: Jack Pace Cc: Melvin Roberts Subject: Tukwila Arena and the Interurban Trail Mr Pace, I am concerned about the impacts of the proposed arena on the Interurban Trail and its users. The trail is located immediately east of the boundary of the arena location as described in the Seattle Times article. Even if the arena does not take the land where the trail is situated, disruptions during construction would be undesirable, affecting many users, both for recreation and transportation. I also noted the proposed location of the parking facility for the arena, which would likely result in the trail being used by spectators and swamping the trail during events so that its normal uses could be nigh impossible. Please keep me informed of further developments. Thank you John Neller i EIS Scoping Process Coy' 'tents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 4:47 AM To: NWArenaReview 7-N Page 1 of 1 Name: John Stahnke Email: jackstahnke@gmail.com comment: I would hope that the proposed Arena will not cut-off the interurban trail or cause so much traffic that it will make it dangerous to use. I like the idea of the Arena as a way to promote more activity, but putting it in should also not kill the commute or recreational use of our trails by walkers, joggers and bicyclists. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/09/2015 Proposed Arena and the TP `'Turban Trail Proposed Arena and the Interurban Trail NELLER, JOHN [bikenstein@q.com] Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 9:55 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 I attended the meeting at the community Center regarding the proposed arena. I am very concerned with potential impacts to the Interurban Trail by the arena and its construction. The trail is used by very many cyclists and pedestrians for both commuting and recreation, and its loss, either permanently or during construction, would be a major blow to its users. This is one of the longest trails in King County and its continued existence should not be taken lightly. Unfortunately the staff at the meeting were unwilling to commit to the future of the trail. https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/04/2015 EIS Scoping Process Con' 'rents Page 1 of 1 EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Friday, May 29, 201.5 11:02 AM To: NWArenaReview Name: Justin Baghai Email: justinbaghai2016@u.northwestern.edu comment: I strongly support this potential project. I think it will stimulate the Tukwila economy and provide thousands of people with jobs. The return of the Sonics and potential NHL franchise is something that this city has been missing for 7 years and is a strong focal point of this community. I appreciate all the hard work of the Tukwila government and all parties involved with the Northwest Arena. I look forward to this progressing and eventually seeing it built! Go Sonics! Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/02/2015 EIS Scoping Process Coy -cents Page 1 of 1 EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2015 9:39 AM To: NWArenaReview Name: Smithk637 Email: smithk89@gmail.com comment: I simply couldn't depart your site prior to suggesting that I actually loved the standard info an individual supply for your guests? Is going to be back regularly in order to inspect new posts. abgeaccaafbbfecg Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/08/2015 EIS Scoping Process Coy 'gents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 11:50 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Joshua Putnam Email: jmputnam@gmail.com comment: I am greatly concerned that the sketches released to date by arena proponents do not show the Interurban Trail. The Interurban is identified as a regionally -significant bicycle transportation facility in planning documents by the Puget Sound Regional Council, the State of Washington, and King County. The Interurban provides a vital multi- modal/nonmotorized connection to the Tukwila Sounder and Amtrak station -- as a year-round Sounder commuter, I see the Interurban deliver riders to and from this station even in the dead of winter. Tukwila's own Comprehensive Plan identifies the Interurban as a core nonmotorized transportation route, calls for added connections to the Interurban, and calls for the promotion of nonmotorized transportation as part of transportation demand management. If the proposed project would in any way reduce the utility of the existing Interurban Trail as a nonmotorized transportation route, I believe your review should include: * Compliance with the outdoor recreation overlay currently in place for the Interurban * Compliance with Comprehensive Plan policies on transportation demand management, nonmotorized transportation, and recreation * Environmental impact of reduced bicycle transportation, and associated reductions in transit use for multimodal commuters currently using the Interurban to access transit * Transportation impact of any diverted bicycle traffic currently using the Interurban, e.g., increased congestion on West Valley Highway if bicyclists divert from the Interurban to continue north/south through the area. (West Valley has lanes too narrow for a motor vehicle to safely pass within the lane, and lacks separate bicycle facilities; thus even minimal bicycle traffic diversion onto West Valley will require bicyclists to use the right lane of West Valley, and will require drivers to slow and change lanes to pass.) I sincerely hope the arena proponents have simply failed to show the Interurban Trail but do not intend to disrupt this vital nonmotorized route. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/08/2015 Interurban Trail and mull' lurpose arena '. Interurban Trail and multi -purpose arena Ulrey, Michael L [michael.l.ulrey@boeing.com] Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 8:37 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 would like to express my hope that plans for the construction of an entertainment facility near the Interurban Bike Trail in Tukwila take into account the effect on trail bike riders and pedestrians. I and many others use this trail for exercise, walking the dog, pleasure, and commuting to/from work every day, which of course keeps some cars off the already over -subscribed roads. It would be a shame to lose these significant benefits to the community simply due to an oversight. Please keep the users of this trail and others in mind when planning significant construction. Regards, Michael L. Ulrey Airspace and Operational Efficiency The Boeing Co. (253)-657-9887 michael.I.ulrey@boeing.com https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/05/2015 EIS Scoping Process Cor' gents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby • Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 9:58 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Laura Chang Email: laurachang@protonmail.com comment: My name is Laura Chang and I am a regular user of the Interurban Trail through Tukwila. I ride every other day from Auburn to Boeing Plant 2. This land use proposal directly affects me, my family, and my fellow commuting coworkers and it concerns me that there has been no plans for continuing the availability of the trail through this planning process. Bike to work month this year has found record numbers of cyclists riding to month (http://www.luum.com/challenges/88/bike-month-challenge? utm_source=Commute+Challenge+participants&utm campaign=798e4eb204- Crosstown _Traffic_64_2015&utm medium=email&utm_term=0 28775edf5a- 798e4eb204-84855141) and commuting community will only grow. The Kent Showare center was built adjacent to the interurban trail, and also manages to preserve the trail in its original form. Please add in plans to keep the Interurban trail. Many of the Tukwila community depend on it to get to work and school and facilitate carpooling from the Renton Park and Ride. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/05/2015 EIS Scoping Process Con` gents Page 1 of 1 EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 2:12 AM To: NWArenaReview Name: MelRoberts Email: mel@cyclekent.com comment: Comments from the Chairman of Kent's Bicycle advisory Board (425- 41708931 cell/text). The Interurban trail that is used by many people walking and riding bicycle is a vital link for exercise, recreation, and transportation. Its function needs to be retained at or near its current location. The proposed building to the west side of the trail will require many of the attendees to cross the trail four times to reach the parking structure or two times to reach the transit station. They cross once driving to the garage, once walking to the arena, once walking back to the garage, and once driving away from the parking structure. Without a controlled way for trail uses to cross the path of arena users we will have conflicts and possible collisions. Does the trail need to fly over the sidewalk(s) and street(s) that the arena attendees will use? Second Point: How many attendees will arrive and need to park their vehicle? The walkers to the arena from their motels/offices/housing (very few) might be 1000. Those that arrive by a two custom scheduled Sounder Trains might be 2(1500) = 3000. Those that arrive by bicycle might be 500 (I'm being generous). Subtracting (1000+3000+100) from an attendance number of 17,000, gives 12,900 people arriving by car. If attendees arrive 1.5/car you need 8,600 parking stalls (this was the number that Kent Showare Arena used). If we squeeze 2.5 people into each car then you need 5160 parking stalls. The arena needs to provide these parking spaces, to prevent a conflict with the surrounding businesses and their parking needs. Thanks in advance for considering these two issues in your planning. Mel Roberts Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/15/2015 EIS Scoping Process Col' 'lents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 8:05 AM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Otto Rogers Email: ottosinbin@gmail.com comment: Hello, Thank you for taking the time to review my comments in regards to the scoping process of the EIS. Thoughts 1. What is the potential negative impact on local waterways, specifically, the Green River/Duwamish River. What will be the steps taken to mitigate possible damage to the River and/or wildlife. 2. What are the Transit options avaiable to help mitigate Traffic concerns in the area? Would it be possible to add additional commuter rail (Sounder) service? What is the potential of adding a third rail line in that area? Thank you! Otto Rogers Co host of SeattleSinBin.com Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/02/2015 EIS Scoping Process Cot' 'rents EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 7:15 PM To: NWArenaReview Page 1 of 1 Name: Paul Larson Email: yplarson@yahoo.com comment: This is right smack in the middle of the interurban trail! Please to do not block or close this trail for I commute to work through this area almost every day. This is a very poor choice for this site. This is safe commuting option for me. Traveling on streets is sometimes very unsafe. I have been hit several times by cars that do not even care about cyclist safety. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/08/2015 EIS Scoping Process CorY ',ents �: EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 5:00 PM To: NWArenaReview / Page 1 of 1 Name: Randy Lord Email: rdlord77@gmail.com comment: As an avid bike rider, I use and enjoy the many bike routes established throughout the Puget Sound. As a member of the Mukilteo City Council, I advocate for continued expansion of our bicycle corridors, many times pointing to the excellent examples all around us; including your Interurban trail. In fact, I have ridden this portion of the trail in my many rides around the Puget Sound region. I support a multi -use facility and appreciate the opportunity to comment about potential impacts to the existing bike trail system. Please recognize the unique needs of the biking community and try to avoid mixing the expected large pedestrian crowds onto the same biking lanes; it is a recipe for disaster. A pedestrian 'sidewalk' is nothing like a bike lane (which is a transportation corridor of the non -motorized vehicles). Many accidents occur around pedestrian -congested areas of bike lanes because walkers are not expecting bikers behind them. (Gas Works and UW; both on the Burke -Gilman, for example, are notorious). If necessary, perhaps you can reroute the bike lane to a less crowded area of the facility (the slight increase in distance would be negligible). That is preferable to having to wade across hundreds of people crossing the path as the came into or out of the facility. Thank you, Randy Lord Boeing Engineer and Mukilteo City Council member Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/04/2015 NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: Address: fb7'03T,4..'✓ Email: y = =a0-rt ,+d. iti,,ete- What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potentia measures to mitigate impacts. --7-;,, I, JjK2r- r ;eve rie017 ..4 r]// -;,s czi; .7- ile -ru 4j 4-T; iot m IZYs /ram 'A. J LJ. Interurban Bike Trail Page 1 of 1 Interurban Bike Trail Steve and Janet Sisson [stevenjanet©gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 7:47 AM To: NWArenaReview As recreational bicycle riders we wanted to share some thoughts if there any conflicts between the NW Arena and the Interurban Bike Trail. It is very important that the bike trail remains intact because it keeps bicycles off of roads that are too busy for cyclists with the current traffic. The Interurban Bike Trail is an important part of a regional bike trail system that runs through all of King County. A functioning bike trail near a stadium could help people attend Stadium events on their bikes without participating in the gridlock that happens at the Seattle stadiums. In the larger picture we need to keep people on bicycles to keep from getting fatter. Thank you, Steve and Janet Sisson https://webmail.tukwi lawa. gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/09/2015 RE: Scoping Meeting Cot" 'rents RE: Scoping Meeting Comments NWArenaReview Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 8:26 AM To: Steve Smolinske [SSmolinske©rainierrubber.com] Page 1 of 1 Thank you for submitting comments. After the scope of the EIS is determined the impacts of the project will be analyzed and mitigation measures proposed in the draft EIS. The applicant has not applied for a development agreement yet, please see the project page at http://www.tukwilawa.gov/ArenaDevelopmentUodate.html for available documents. From: Steve Smolinske [SSmolinske©rainierrubber.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 1:48 PM To: NWArenaReview Subject: Scoping Meeting Comments I am concerned about mitigation for the built environment and what plans are being discussed for just compensation for ALL impacts to the existing built environment. Are copies of the development agreement and critical path available? Please confirm receipt of my comments. Steve Smolinske President 4M Company, Inc. 15660 Nelson Place South Seattle, WA 98188 425-227-4500 The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or proprietary in nature and is intended for the recipient of the email only. Please treat all information contained in this and any communication with the 4M Company as such. Thank you. En Before printing, think about ENVIRONMENTAL responsibility https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/02/2015 FW: Scoping Meeting Cr- "ments FW: Scoping Meeting Comments Steve Smolinske [SSmolinske@rainierrubber.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 1:23 PM To: NWArenaReview "N Arena review committee please see additional comments/concerns to those listed below. Page 1 of 1 1. How financial impacts will be adequately mitigated to local businesses who would have to relocate. 2. Ensuring not only just compensation if any portion of the property is condemned, but relocation assistance to building owners, including costs of relocation and business interference. 3. A full assessment of impacts to the built environment resulting from a proposed development agreement before any commitment is made by the city to a master plan and/or agreement with the project proponents. Steve From: Steve Smolinske Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 1:53 PM To: 'NWArenareview@tukwilawa.gov' Subject: Scoping Meeting Comments I am concerned about mitigation for the built environment and what plans are being discussed for just compensation for ALL impacts to the existing built environment. Are copies of the development agreement and critical path available? Please confirm receipt of my comments. Steve Smolinske President 4M Company, Inc. 15660 Nelson Place South Seattle, WA 98188 425-227-4500 The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or proprietary in nature and is intended for the recipient of the email only. Please treat all information contained in this and any communication with the 4M Company as such. Thank you. A Before printing, think about ENVIRONMENTAL responsibility https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/04/2015 NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: t ��� C )VVY.� �V15� Email: cVVVb` t (15VQ_ e .c(1 3!'\; Q r'� UGjb2'C'. Address: l 2[ O N.),QAc-:Ion\ Q - (mg. What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. ULD \ 00 c- (6\0rIn be Ti-cncc-7 CO(Ne .Tor -TD 6\4QMS 2- 1 j\c krtoc& -- - �- a Oc-- —(5 Cow — t N) l k ) w� �SS E ► SS ccv --- rov v\ ec—t t 1-c-) Vm Oo\&J PCCPSS 76 ,Oa nworik(c) C C \r\nOR C((e (.JJ( UU•Q. \ Y\CtU resrAP _S \((.G c so h �0Q— \ r\ess/ ec\ires5 0\to r Cev\ \ m6 virt S RR, st `Q "`"' v1 yes es- w \Paz June 3, 2015 City of Tukwila NW Arena Scoping Meeting Please find below a summary and clarification of the points I previously submitted for review in the EIS along with the written comments I left at last night's meeting. 1) Identification of mitigation and just compensation for all impacts to the built environment. 2) How will financial impacts be adequately mitigated to local business that would be forced to relocate? 3) Not only just compensation for any portion of private property that is condemned, but also relocation assistance to building owners including costs of relocations and business interference. 4) Full assessment and public review of impacts to the built environment resulting from the proposed development agreement before any commitment is made by the city to approve a master plan and/or development agreement with the project proponents. 5) With the proposed relocation of 156th and the use of Central Welding's property for the stadium what is the affect to Rainier Rubber Company located at 15660 Nelson Place South via our ingress/egress easement along all properties located along the private Road Nelson Place South. 6) With the proposed relocation of 156th how will Rainier Rubber Company and Porter Seal Company be compensated for the loss of advertising due to the relocation of the road and freeway access which currently as a straight line of sight to company signage. 7) What mitigation will be provided should the PSE leased property for parking be abandoned or cancelled 8) How will my property be protected from the public coming to and leaving the arena for the proposed 230 events each year? Thank you, Steve Smolinske EIS Scoping Process Col.' -tents Page 1 of 1 EIS Scoping Process Comments Scott Kirby Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 8:37 AM To: NWArenaReview Name: Brent Carson Email: brc@vnf.com comment: On behalf of WEA Southcenter LLC (Westfield), owner of the Southcenter Mall, I request that the EIS include a thorough discussion of traffic and parking impacts. Submit: Submit https://webmail.tukwilawa.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 06/04/2015 Denis Law Mayor City of Tukwila Department of Community Development ATTN: Northwest Arena Project 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 JUN 152015 Community Development RE: Comments on Scope of Northwest Arena Project Environmental Impact Statement Dear Ms. Gierloff: The City of Renton has reviewed your request for comments on the scope of an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC proposal to construct a multi -purpose sports and entertainment arena. The arena is expected to host 230 events per year with a capacity of up to 19,500 attendees. The arena building footprint would be approximately 195,000 square feet and total square footage of the building would be 700,000 square feet. The interior would include public -oriented spaces and plazas, concessions, exhibition spaces, meeting rooms, and administrative offices. Maximum height would be about 140 feet. Parking would be provided in a structured garage east of the arena building, and additional parking is anticipated to be secured through use agreements with nearby property owners. The EIS should provide a detailed traffic study that evaluates impacts to transportation corridors and streets during construction and operation of the facility. This study should consider roadway capacity and operation impacts. Impacts to parking and circulation at the Tukwila Sounder Station should also be considered. Mitigation should be identified to diminish or eliminate impacts to traffic movement and circulation duriing the approximately 230 events per year. If identified as an impact, any significant adverse impacts from the use of helicopters to access the venue for an event should also be considered. In addition the city has reviewed the attached study intersections for the EIS and request that the following intersection also be included: • SW 43`d Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW • SW 43rd Street and Lind Avenue South • SW 41st Street and Lind Avenue South • SW 16th Street and Lind Avenue South • SW 16th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov City of Tukwila DCD Page 2 of 2 June 12, 2015 Careful consideration should also be given to the evening peak -hour volumes on 1-405 and 1-5. These facilities do not have the capacity to add additional trips generated by evening events without having negative impact on local streets. Aesthetic impacts that occur as a result of the height and bulk of the proposed parking structure and arena should be studied, with photo -simulations provided that evaluate any view impacts from surrounding areas to distinctive natural features such as Mt. Rainier. Construction impacts such as hauling routes, vibration from construction techniques (e.g., pile drivi.ng), noise, dust, and impacts on existing roads should be evaluated. A geotechnical analysis should evaluate the liquefaction potential of the soils, and the appropriate construction methods and approach for the parking structure and arena. A cultural resources/archaeology section should be included in the EIS to evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources or deposits. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the scope of the EIS for the Northwest Arena Project. We will look forward to the release of the draft EIS. Denis Law Mayor Attachment: Map of Study Intersections cc: Renton City Councilmembers Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Chip Vincent, Community and Economic Development Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Doug Jacobson, Deputy Public Works Administrator, Transportation Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning/Natural Resources Director. Jim Seitz, Transportation Planning Supervisor 15-071 • a g. t N bass • 0' 146th St Y. ry 9 16Oth 51 S 164th St S 166th 5t S 168th St 5 17oth $t S 1 r2nd St g a 5182nd St r. 5131n St S 132ieSr S 133rd St , Renton Concrete Rstick.s 14, 14141s1Tukwlla t g' 2 S 147th S1 6� 0r uperCenter'n i/ Starke Sppets It N (later Bid A Westfield Soufhcentet Svu w r t.t Mmkin [evil s I lath sr S 132ndSt S 1 Et S 135th St Black RIVet Apemen Forest and Wetland 0 StySt 0 � � 0 Study Intersections 1 Interurban Avenue & 1-5 Southbound Off Ramp 2 Interurban Avenue & 1-5 Northbound On Ramp 3 Interurban Avenue & 1-405 Southbound Off/On Ramps 4 Interurban Avenue & SW Grady Way 5 West Valley Hwy & 1-405 Northbound Off/On Ramps 6 West Valley Hwy & Longacres Way 7 West Valley Hwy & Strander Blvd 8 SR-167 & SW Grady Way 9 61st Ave S & Southcenter Blvd 10 61st Ave S & Tukwila Parkway 11 1-405 Northbound On Ramp & Tukwila Parkway 12 66th Ave 5 & Southcenter Blvd 13 Andover Parkway W & Strander Blvd Famty 1Sk Center & B!3twinhle's Restaurant 0 Study Intersections 1J Study Corridor Proposed Project Site S'3rdy, 5w 7th St T i I. N V solo , St 42) Way 5W 12W St SW 16th St S`4f 19th St wV 14th St SW 41st St IKEA n S 184th St Renton Shopping CPI 0 ® V iptcydtcal cent 14 Andover Parkway E & Strander Blvd 15 Southcenter Parkway & Strander Blvd 16 Southcenter Parkway & Klickitat Drive 17 Southcenter Parkway & I-5 Northbound Off Ramp 18 Southcenter Parkway & 5 180th Street 19 West Valley Hwy & 5 180th Street 20 East Valley Road & SW 41st St 21 East Valley Road & SW 43rd St 22 SR-167 Northbound Off/On Ramps & SW 43rd St 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW & SW Grady Way 24 Lind Avenue SW & SW Grady Way 2S Oakesdale Avenue SW & SW 27th Street 26 Lind Avenue SW & SW 27th Street T SOUNDTRANSIT June 12, 2015 City of Tukwila DCD Attn: Northwest Arena Project 6300 Southcenter Blvd suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Mr. Pace, JUN 152015 Community Development Thank you for inviting Sound Transit's participation in agency scoping for the Northwest Arena Project. We appreciate the opportunity to meet with staff and project representatives on June 10t. As we discussed in our meeting, there are a few issues we would like to have addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. The Northwest Arena project must not negatively impact Sounder Service or our customers' access to our station during construction or once in operation. The project will need a transportation mitigation plan for events that occur during our morning and afternoon peaks or special service on weekends. The project proposes to use Sound Transit's access road from Strander Boulevard to Longacres Way. However, we do not believe the access road has the capacity to handle the number of vehicles expected (approximately 3,500 — 6,500 users). Use of the access road requires Sound Transit approval, and if improvements are needed to accommodate the vehicle capacity, the cost and implementation of those improvements would be the responsibility of the Northwest Arena project. The project must restore any damage to Sound Transit property caused during construction, including environmental mitigation efforts. Also as we discussed, the Sound Transit parking facility at the station was developed with federal funds. Federal Transit Administration and Federal Railroad Administration approval would be required for use of the parking for the arena, and Sound Transit must collect market rate for use of the spaces. Given proposed use of Sound Transit property, Sound Transit requests the opportunity to review early versions of the relevant sections of the Draft EIS. The EIS must provide appropriate analysis to support a Sound Transit decision regarding the use of our facilities. We look forward to continued coordination with the City and project proponent, RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC, during the project's environmental review. Michael Miller, Customer Facilities and Accessible Services Manager, will be Sound Transit's contact for the project. He can be reached at 206/689-4927 or Michael.miller@soundtransit.org. Sincerely, l/16 auren Swift, Senior Environmental Planner Environmental Affairs and Sustainability Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority • Union Station 401 S. Jackson St., Seattle, WA 98104-2826 • Reception: (206) 398-5000 • FAX: (206) 398-5499 www.soundtransit.org CHAIR Dow Constantine King County Executive VICE CHAIRS Paul Roberts Everett Councilmember Marilyn Strickland Tacoma Mayor BOARD MEMBERS Claudia Balducci Bellevue Mayor Fred Butler Issaquah Mayor Dave Earling Edmonds Mayor Dave Enslow Sumner Mayor John Lovick Snohomish County Executive John Marchione Redmond Mayor Pat McCarthy Pierce County Executive Joe McDermott King County Council Vice Chair Mary Moss Lakewood Councilmember Ed Murray Seattle Mayor Mike O'Brien Seattle Councilmember Lynn Peterson Washington State Secretary' of Transportation Larry Phillips King County Council Chair Dave Upthegrove King County Councilmember Peter von Reichbauer King County Councilmember CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Joni Earl Patrick R. McGill Senior Counsel - Real Estate June 12, 2015 VIA EMAIL ONLY: NWArenaReview@TukwilaWA.gov City of Tukwila DCD Attn: Northwest Arena Project 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Comments to Notice of Northwest Arena Application, Determination of Significance and Request for Comments on Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement, 15616 West Valley Highway File Numbers: E15-0005 SEPA, L15-0026 Parking Determination (collectively, the "Project") To Whom It May Concern: Thank you for allowing Union Pacific Railroad Company ("UP") the opportunity to submit the following comments in response to the notice on the above -referenced Project. UP is a Delaware corporation that owns and operates a common carrier railroad network in the western half of the United States, including the State of Washington. UP's rail network is vital to the economic health of Washington and the nation as a whole and its rail service to customers in Tukwila and the surrounding area is crucial to the future success and growth of those customers. The proposed Project location is near UP's Seattle Subdivision. Any land planning decisions should consider that train volumes near the Project area may increase in the future. UP also asks that the City and the Project developers keep in mind that this is a vital and growing rail corridor and nearby land uses should be compatible with this continuing rail use. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD 1400 Douglas Street STOP 1580 Omaha, Nli 68179 (402) 544-5761 fx (402) 997-3603 pnncgill@up.com City of Tukwila June 12, 2015 Rail Crossing Safety The safety of UP's employees, customers, adjoining land owners, and the communities we operate through is our top priority. At -grade rail crossings are areas where railroad operations and the public come into close contact. UP cannot support the Project with a proposal for any new at -grade crossings. Should the Project be approved, UP suggests the City consider holding railroad and crossing safety presentations, such as Operation Lifesaver, for the public on appropriate basis. Increased Traffic Impact and Access Any increase of pedestrian and vehicular traffic as a result of the Project may conflict with train operations causing trains to proceed more slowly through the City, and/or make more frequent emergency stops, which would make rail service less effective and efficient. Traffic models should be developed to simulate traffic flows to and from the Project location utilizing the projected capacity of the arena. Should this Project be approved, UP requests that the developer and the City examine any increase in vehicular and pedestrian traffic, access and parking to support the projected capacity of the arena, and the traffic impacts on any nearby road crossings to see if any additional mitigation measures should be included in the Project. Trespassing Any increase in pedestrian traffic will increase the likelihood of trespassing onto the railroad right-of-way. UP requests that the developer and the City examine the Project impacts associated with the increased likelihood of trespassing and set forth appropriate mitigation measures. In particular, the developer should install barrier walls or block fences, pavement markings, and/or "no trespassing" signs designed to prevent individuals from trespassing onto the railroad tracks. Additionally, buffers and setbacks should be required adjacent to the right- of-way. The developer should also ensure that all fencing and wall proposals will prevent arena guests from accessing the right-of-way. Noise and Vibration Impact UP's 24-hour rail operations generate the noise and vibration one would expect from an active railway. Any increase in pedestrian and vehicular traffic over and around crossings may result in additional horn use by UP employees. UP requests that, as a mitigation measure, the developer should disclose to the general public the daytime and nighttime noise levels naturally occurring with UP's long-standing freight rail service, as well as the pre-existing and predictably -occurring vibration. These disclosures should note UP's anticipation that train volume may increase in the future. The Project's development plans should also include appropriate mitigation measures, such as construction of sound barrier walls or landscape buffers, and/or use of sound -proofing materials and techniques. City of Tukwila June 12, 2015 Drainage UP requests the City ensure that the drainage plan relating to the Project does not shift storm water drainage toward UP property and infrastructure. Any runoff onto UP's property may cause damage to its facilities resulting in a potential public safety issue. If the Project is approved, we ask that the City require the applicant to mitigate all safety risks and the impacts of the railroad's 24-hour operations during the construction of the Project. UP appreciates the City giving due consideration to the above concerns, as this proposed Project may result in impacts to land use and public safety. Please give notice to UP of all future hearings and other matters with respect to the Project as follows: Peter Kenney — Assistant Manager - Real Estate Union Pacific Railroad Company 1400 Douglas Street - STOP 1690 Omaha, NE 68179 (402) 544-8581 pkenney@up.com Please do not hesitate to contact Peter Kenney if you have any questions or concerns. r i Patrick R. McGill Senior Counsel — Real Estate Union Pacific Railroad Company cc: Peter Kenney Clint Schelbitzki Terre] Anderson Sincerely, -r www.pse.com r1 ti PUGET SOUND ENERGY Puget Sound Energy, Inc. 6905 South 228th Street Kent, WA 98032 June 11, 2015 City of Tukwila Attn: Nora Gierloff 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Northwest Arena Project (Arena) Comments to the Environmental Impact Statement Dear Ms. Gierloff: Puget Sound Energy (PSE) is looking forward to working with the city of Tukwila and the Arena developer on the above referenced project. It should be noted that PSE owns in fee a critical 100 foot wide utility corridor (Corridor) that runs generally north and south between the properties that are under consideration for the new Arena, see Attachment "A." Below please find PSE's comments for the above referenced project. A. Impacts to be considered in the EIS 1. PSE requests that the EIS evaluate options the Arena has to use the Corridor as part of its final design. Options for using the Corridor seem to include: a. Leave existing utilities and Trail in the Corridor as -is. b. Provide for utilities and the Trail elsewhere within the Arena project site c. Relocate utilities and the Trail outside of the Arena project site 2. New distribution gas and electric facilities will be needed to serve the new Arena and must be accommodated/planned for in the development's plans. B. Description of PSE's fee owned Corridor 1. The Corridor within the proposed development area has both 115 kV and 230 kV transmission lines. The two 230 kV transmission lines are critical to the Northwest area power grid. Requested outages to the line must be submitted and approved 60 days in advance by all neighboring utilities including BPA through the "Coordinated Outage System" process so that system integrity is maintained. This line is also integral to the regional reliability of Puget Sound Energy's transmission grid and therefore requested outages need to be closely coordinated with PSE and may not always be available. Outages to this line need to be kept to an absolute minimum. 2. PSE has multiple circuits of a 12.5 kV underground distribution system running north and south within Corridor. Northwest Arena EIS Comment Letter 3. By agreement with PSE, a regional recreational trail (Trail) occupies the Corridor. The Arena developer will need to coordinate with PSE and King County for any required relocation of the Trail. This will require modification of the existing permit under which the Trail operates. C. Use of PSE's Corridor for the Arena 1. PSE has been in discussions with the developer about the Arena. At this time, it is not clear whether development of the Arena will involve use of the Corridor. Any proposed use of the Corridor must be approved by and coordinated with PSE. 2. PSE is the underlying owner of the Trail that is located within the Corridor. The sale or the granting of rights to use the Trail will be considered after the completion of the EIS review. 3. The cost of any relocation, modification or removal of PSE facilities within the Corridor or facilities outside the Corridor but on separate operating rights will be at the expense of the party requesting such relocation, modification or removal. Allocation of costs for such work as this is controlled by tariffs that are approved by the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission. 4. Real Estate rights related to any relocation of PSE facilities located or relocated outside the Corridor will require operating rights that benefit PSE. The costs of such rights will be the responsibility of the Arena developer. 5. PSE must retain the ability to reasonably access, operate, maintain, upgrade and install additional elements of its utility systems located within the Corridor. 6. The Arena developer will need to negotiate with any third party users of the Corridor for relocation of their facilities which may include modification of existing agreements. Please feel free to contact me at 253-395-6867 if you have any questions. Sincerely, U Douglas L. Corbin Municipal Liaison Manager Attachments: King County Parcel Map AT...wl........� A---- T ,.u..- Attachment to PSE letter to the City of Tukwila June 11, 2015 Northwest Arena Project — EIS Scoping Comment PSE Parcels adjacent to the Arena Site King County 24232 C j." / 181 2423fi4C63 ,-" 2 ; 3 t: 1 tl'OL' c \ 200.579C 011 \ rx: i \\ y2,7.6'0223 ii .., i..., ----^ FZ \ i ".4'. ...... ,,, ._ 6 , ,v0"0026 1 t-, % % - \ — IFcayn \ 5,, : . ,..70,509CCA I I C,.:C1502 2,C .24 2,0.KM Toltialakbeast an*. of* a•fonIlla disessoarelooka Iftermpralrorre ilymnamanservommilaik opora,grboviial, Ile &maw omplaIma,10•01.4•4 welts 11.111.a• al ametrialmmles alatunrab folidardri tram ••••••••,..._10.peamly Ail minable dr gmprowl,..pooil, 1.11.1,11VNWIN, 4mirwmilidanognAndbil.g, wIleeml mammon* poem suldbi Ilimmandimo fir Women% sokalmel ••••••••.../a.M.I.Nampartilionnemi ...fp • plaiNS•imaaplW 041.00111•11.0116 Dertm 6/1012015 ••,),:y•vie illwartook ietoriMw 000%.. +30020 ,...:$U7+Y�7 k 767 02 2 10 I2,5867On:30 O857OC2 2 KIT Courtly, tang county Mae apes Cake Nino Courtly 013 Getter L41 King County GIS CE.NTER A T7TC, • 4800 South 188th Street SeaTac, WA 98188-8605 City Hall: 206,973.4800 Fax: 206.973.4809 TDD: 206.973.4808 Mayor Mia Gregerson Deputy Mayor Tony Anderson Councilmembers Barry Ladenburg Kathryn Campbell Terry Anderson Dave Bush Pam Fernald City Manager Todd Cutts Assistant City Manager Gwen Voelpel City Attorney Mary Mirante Bartolo City Clerk Kristin Gregg June 9, 2015 Ms. Nora Gierloff Deputy DCD Director City of Tukwila DCD 6300 SOuthcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Northwest Arena Project Dear Ms. Gierloff: The City of SeaTac staff appreciates the opportunity to comment on the City of Tukwila's scoping process for the proposed Northwest Arena project EIS. • Analysis of Traffic Impacts to SeaTac Neighborhood Streets: We recognize that the City of Tukwila has already identified "Transportation, including parking, vehicle traffic, transit, and bicycle/pedestrian movement/circulation," as an element for discussion in the EIS. However, because of SeaTac's close proximity to the proposed arena site, and in recognition of SeaTac's numerous hotels, the potential traffic impacts to SeaTac streets during arena events should be analyzed. We therefore request that the EIS includes traffic analysis of an area large enough to include assessments of potential traffic impacts to SeaTac's streets, extending from (and including) SR99/International Boulevard to the east, S 154th Street to the north and S 188th Street to the south. Again, SeaTac staff appreciates the opportunity to comment on this significant project. Sincerely, Kate Kaehny Senior Planner I it Iit . it 0 Address: NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: C. JjGi•/!es o"N/ Email: zcWC/AarlIe 6-(//7 - sU iy9 s"/ � .j�, (,t/A - 6 9K6„,,tjaz (1 —7 C IDOS-j‘ What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. izp_t/411;71,,,t ru,e4i) 174 z to T� p ,tlititt*va ,) a, 4-0 .{,f rz_ebv I ./%//-te-et4 dzui NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: ` 1� �kiv-6l 5\<()__. Email: SSYY\CA nSVc_ e Address: 5( 0 M(260n ? \ kCQ S C6 Lt_AV co 4'\'1 What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. -V4os Cc '` 1D e\(Q ntS \((xiso Nvloc( --w-Q 006 C3 5 Coc(3 )1I QLl(\P l 1) < \ s/E__:_gvarzsS C�v - moo (or ' QC 1( (")-7- 00\A-) (mac� CC`P S 7", �o� `Q CCIC-OrrPc� GC \MDR COQ - Y\CO3 nnPS_5( 7Ck MSc) \( (61 w•Q_ (4\50 \n �k-YP— \ f\ess((c\ ss ©\fo c CQ 1 \ -)0•Q6 vice S R Co ` of C1 aNQS v� �— i\ \ mat NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: iG-�%f,r2'/„/SO 61 7 c Email: Address: /t/y,? (ti J < s'/Qvv (%cc>'� �L�(6 g What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. (c_f'`'rovP , ( /l.! t-c). 4frnc, r G.- tc 4,,54 12,; 1 e p f / 6(r - A 4.)est +0 Cz G k[ e e9 ( G/c���2I J S 7 `! elGJ /_fiStif , ( Set/le Git�/i��v �PG 06,a. "73 �tix Ce.:. y ec 7 .' A i--ev y 6rt-,4 S�c��tn� 41() k.4-7 . / gun% e4Y-7y Gc(.6-sPa1e7+5 6 nJ t :0_j(.(2 t"•7Cc�c� iG /t/2`(ct tfiaPS,)s`(�� �s ,Cut/Ii T!'w4 j 1i- 1,:54+ p2 s f -rllx./0/ ye,c ✓� G2v--7' i \ NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Name: -c4ifOi/LY ke— Email: b I' 1 04Xj vti k�✓ Qj/1?GZ//' Address: V 24 S. ) 50-'1' ,$t, W� �� /50ii8' What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potential measures to mitigate impacts. of my con cer yus heed olv w ift proiotts Jan5 tv d e ;e, o p P. arr 0A,0/ holy deJeIo 1� 5reef 1 &Ili, , y or wok,[ ey+ pd -62r^. 11- )oo4;.5 l/ , f `s go t Olt d o ►r n+ 1a i jud— /(\a-,Je,Pwei one, More, $iouf fdLykay 5/ci& ►� ��I WO�re ac e na _ ' 11 he r �u. ul� ICE' 1 vme. 61o(6 Q Gi. 'Arid GA S lif re, e ✓'F' e/i'I. f S Cam, o p eA+4,04y W3hottid Mix.CA1, priutro f ,& NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Sheet The City of Tukwila has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for the proposed Northwest Arena project. As part of the EIS process, a scoping period is underway. Its purpose is to solicit public comments to narrow the "scope" of review for the EIS, so that the analysis can focus on reasonable alternatives and probable significant impacts. Following the close of the scoping period, the City will establish the final scope of review for the EIS. Your comments will become part of the public record. Email: s ;&L c77-teu' eelinn€24Z- 'eat ✓ ; t 59.2°3 What issues or concerns should be studied in the Arena EIS? You may comment on reasonable alternatives, impacts that you think may be significant, impacts that you think are not as important, and potentia measures to mitigate impacts. �� /��Y��o� mars (A-..1J // ,i r<< —J Vie-7-L) 1147 Zti ���/ M.ems : a:2jL / y City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT You are invited to attend an agency scoping meeting on the Northwest Arena project. Wednesday June 10, 2015 1:30 PM — 3:00 PM Tukwila Community Center 12424 42nd Avenue S. Tukwila, WA 98168 Project Name: Northwest Arena Project Proponent: RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC Location of Proposal: 15616 West Valley Highway, Tukwila WA 98188 File Numbers: E15-0005 SEPA, L15-0026 Parking Determination Other Known Required Permits and Approvals Include: Design Review; Sign, Demolition, and Development Permits; Street Vacation; Development Agreement Comments will be accepted on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. Project Documents are available at http://www.tukwilawa.gov/ArenaDevelopmentUpdate.html and at the Tukwila Department of Community Development Office between 8:30 and 5:00. Written comments may be submitted at the scoping meeting or to the following addresses: By email to: NWArenaReview@TukwilaWA.gov By mail to: City of Tukwila DCD Attn.: Northwest Arena Project 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Public Scoping Meeting: Tuesday June 2, 2015 4:30 PM — 6:30 PM Tukwila Community Center 12424 42nd Avenue S. Tukwila, WA 98168 The deadline for submitting your comments is 5:00 PM Friday June 12, 2015. For any questions about commenting or the scoping process contact Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director, at Nora.Gierloff@TukwilaWA.gov or (206)433-7141. Description of Proposal: RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC (the Applicant) proposes to construct a privately owned and financed multi -purpose sports and entertainment arena to host a variety of events (Northwest Arena). The proposal includes an arena building, publicly -oriented spaces and plazas, and a structured parking garage. The Arena is expected to host about 230 events per year. In general, seating for concerts and similar events could be configured to accommodate a capacity at 19,500 at the highest. Sporting events, which could include professional and special sport events would accommodate between 17,500 and 18,500. Attendance for many of the events at the multi -purpose venue would likely range from 10,000 to 15,000. The arena building footprint would be approximately 195,000 square feet and total square footage of the building would be approximately 700,000 square feet. The interior would include public -oriented spaces and plazas, concessions, exhibition spaces, meeting rooms, and administrative offices. Maximum height would be about 140 feet. Parking would be provided in a structured garage east of the arena building, and additional parking is anticipated to be secured through use agreements with nearby property owners. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will analyze impacts related to the number and location of parking stalls provided for the project. The Community Development Director's determination on the number and location of parking stalls required for the project will be informed by the EIS analysis, and will not be made until after the issuance of the Final EIS. Planning Background: The Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Southcenter Subarea Plan anticipated and addressed many of the potential impacts of growth and development for the area. Nevertheless, the project -specific impacts of this proposal for a sports and entertainment arena warrant a focused assessment of potential impacts, alternatives, and mitigation options. Alternatives: The City anticipates that alternatives to the proposed Northwest Arena project will be finalized following the scoping process. Comments on alternatives are welcome during the scoping process. The project alternatives are expected to include the proposed action; a no action alternative; and the City may consider alternatives for parking, access and design. Elements of the Environment: On a preliminary basis, the lead agency has identified the following elements of the environment for discussion in the EIS: • Land use • Height, bulk, scale, and aesthetics • Air quality • Transportation, including parking, vehicle traffic, transit, and bicycle/pedestrian movement/circulation 2 PARTICIPANT SIGN -IN SHEET NORTHWEST ARENA PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING JUNE 2, 2015 PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY AS THIS IS HOW STAFF WILL CREATE A CONTACT LIST TO NOTIFY YOU OF FUTURE INFORMATION ABOUT THE NW ARENA PROPOSAL. PRINT NAME STREET ADDRESS OR EMAIL Add me to your mailing list CITY, STATE, ZIP st- d ,nnn\\ns14� Y/N \S �1 Sow `�- L. u.n\e.\.s. Ct , V N e r J�� I el �er / ?� Y/N l 3 o Q . (� Ai c D r. S, � r e.Ajo/� q % J"C f T' ` V" C� e� loss` (' Y/N 400 Z� �Je S�> Se0,44(2 q$ilia _. �c 1(. 't 1,,.5 Y/N 1-5� s S c� Q (Sc � n T / _ / g( �A�R D� �S Y/N �AIR�i -t3cfl��;c4rscy.r� jt-‘c.,�1 I� et e . Z- D f iP .50 fi141% Y/N / 1/Z/,Z C/ S7 s',9oE S. /,.7 k<v t L. �g/ G A Cis " 4.-1 1s 33 +es,- a�..t.,1 Y/N gre.„(H-A_'-'46- 'JP, 77` ?/? / Y/N Ii7 s' iVVzs - wA ?/ 8�' �L, r 1 e N 9-6 j 5, 1 so r1 - Y --^ VIA C' 6c 61.L�1 l�� VIA jg141�:i Y/N Y/N Y/N Y/N /-i \--)e AGENCY LABELS F �. (,.City Clerk Office - Christy O' Flaherty PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS NEED TO GO TO CHRISTY (S Corps of Engineers federal HWY Admin federal Transit Admin, Region 10 Dept of Fish & Wildlife ( Section 1 FEDERA,AGENCIES (0) US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) ( ) US Dept of HUD (4) National Marine Fisheries Service Section 2 (office of Archaeology (transportation Department (WSDOT NW) (. )'Dept of Natural Resources ('.)'Office of the Governor ( ) WA State Community Development (. ) IIA Fisheries & Wildlife, MillCreek Office ( WA Fisheries & Wildlife, Larry Fisher, 1775 12th Ave NW Ste 201, Issaquah WA 98027 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) Dept of SociaL&HealthSer_vices__ ( ) Dept of FrnIngy Niional Office, Shoreland Div. SHORELINE NOD REQUIRES RETURN RECEIPT (4tept of Ecology, SEPA **Send Electronically Office of Attorney General ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner ( ) KG-Beufidary-Review-Board ( )Fire District-# 1# ( ),Fire-District-#-2- (;))C Wastewater Treatment Div Cr)KC Dept of Parks & Recreation ( v))CC Assessor's Office Section 3 KING COUNTY AGENCIES (✓')Health Department (,)Port of Seattle (v)-KC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPPA Info Center (islIC Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning (.4:KC Dept of Natural Resources ( •)KC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque (45' KC Public Library System (v oster Library ( ,)'Renton Library ( )''Kent Library (.)'Seattle Library Section 4 SCHOOLS LIBRARIES -Ao (.-Westfield Mall Library (v)'Tukwila School District ( t) Highline School District ("),,Seattle School District (s) Renton School District (QWEST Lommunications ( )-Seattle City -Light ( 1 get Sound Energy ( ) Hightine-'Water-District ( ) Seattle-Plarming-&sev/Water-Bept (.) Comcast Section 5 UTILITIES (14)13P Olympic Pipeline ( ) Val -fie -Sewer --District ( ) Water-Dis- # 20_, ( ) Water-District-#-1.2 . (v)`City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn Mawr=Lakeridge Sewer/Water_Dist ),Seattle Public Utilities ') Waste Management ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor (.)'City Clerk (PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS) Section 6 CITY AGENCIES .A (4 Kent Planning Dept (.)'Renton Planning Dept (.+),City of SeaTac ( ) City of Burien ( )City of Seattle ( ) Strategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects (v uget Sound Regional Council (4 SW KC Chamber of Commerce ( Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * ('j Cultural Resources ( ) Fisheries Program ( ) Wildlife Program (.')Duwamish Indian Tribe * Section 7 OTHER LOC9L AGENCIES (4-Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (Sound Transit/SEPA ( ) Dawa ►isla-River-C-leara-Up_Coi litipn. * ( ) Washington •Environmentat-Council ( ) People forPuget Sowed * ( ) Futurewise * send notice of all applications on Green/Duwamish River (,1 Seattle Times ( ) South County Journal Section 8 MEDIA- A (/) Highline Times (✓)'City of Tukwila Website P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist i 1 AGENCY LABELS - A\A A/ + A ( ) City Clerk Office — Christy O'Flaherty PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS NEED TO GO TO CHRISTY () Corps of Engineers ( Federal HWY Admin ( ) Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 ( ) Dept of Fish & Wildlife Section 1 FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) ( )US Dept of HUD ( ) National Marine Fisheries Service Section 2 ( ) Office of Archaeology (i.. Transportation Department (WSDOT NW) ( ) Dept of Natural Resources ( ) Office of the Governor ( ) WA State Community Development ( ) WA Fisheries & Wildlife, MillCreek Office ( ) WA Fisheries & Wildlife, Larry Fisher, 1775 12th Ave NW Ste 201, Issaquah WA 98027 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) Dept of Social & Health Services ( ) Dept of Ecology NW Regional Office, Shoreland Div. SHORELINE NOD REQUIRES RETURN RECEIPT ( ) Dept of Ecology, SEPA **Send Electronically ( ) Office of Attorney General ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner ( ) KC Boundary Review Board ( ) Fire District # 11 ( ) Fire District # 2 ( ) KC Wastewater Treatment Div ( ) KC Dept of Parks & Recreation ( ) KC Assessor's Office Section 3 KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) Health Department ( ) Port of Seattle ( ) KC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPA Info Center (C Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque ( ) KC Public Library System ( ) Foster Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library ( ) Seattle Library Section 4 SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ) Westfield Mall Library ( ) Tukwila School District ( ) Highline School District ( ) Seattle School District (venton School District ( ) QWEST Communications ( ) Seattle City Light (4uget Sound Energy ( ) Highline Water District ( ) Seattle Planning &Dev/Water Dept ( ) Comcast Section 5 UTILITIES ( ) BP Olympic Pipeline ( ) Val-Vue Sewer District ( ) Water District # 20 ( ) Water District # 125 ( ) City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn Mawr-Lakeridge Sewer/Water Dist (l4eattie Public Utilities ( ) Waste Management ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor ( ) City Clerk (PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS) Section 6 CITY A • ( ENCIES Kent Planning Dept nton Planning Dept City of SeaTac ( ) City of Burien ( ) City of Seattle ( ) Strategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects ( ) Puget Sound Regional Council ( ) SW KC Chamber of Commerce ( ) Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Fisheries Program ( ) Wildlife Program ( ) Duwamish Indian Tribe * Section 7 OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (.)'Sound Transit/SEPA ( ) Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition * ( ) Washington Environmental Council ( ) People for Puget Sound * ( ) Futurewise * send notice of all applications on Green/Duwanish River ( ) Seattle Times ( ) South County Journal Section 8 MEDIA ( ) Highline Times ( ) City of Tukwila Website P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist \. vn 17c.r-; �;z. Public Notice Mailings For Permits �A 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) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect: transit demand Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice Of Application Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Notice of Application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21-day appeal period begins date of filing with DOE) — Notice to DOE must be by return receipt requested mail (this requirement included 9n SSB 5192, effective 7-22-11). Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (printed out from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit 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 with structures & shoreline Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3-part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist ,-. f �yz Cityof Tukwila �. � J W lla JimHaggerto�z, Mayor O y 2 Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director a NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION May 21, 2015 Ted Caloger MG2 1101 2nd Avenue Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98101 Subject: Northwest Arena Parking Determination L15-0026 Environmental Review E15-0005 Dear Mr. Caloger: Your applications for a parking determination for the Northwest Arena multi -purpose sports and entertainment project and its associated EIS are considered complete on May 21, 2015 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at (206) 433-7141. Sincere Nora Gierloff Deputy DCD Director et* of J akai& Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl , HEREBY DECLARE THAT: X Notice of Application Notice of Decision Notice of Public Scoping Hearing Notice of Public Meeting Determination of Non- Significance Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance X Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit Shoreline Mgmt Permit Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Official Notice Notice of Action X Request for Comments, EIS Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this _21 st day of _May 2015 Project Name: NW Arena Project Number: PL15-0018 Associated File Number (s): E15-0005, L15-0026 Mailing requested by: Nora G' rloff Mailer's signature: /` l , , 4 i W:\USERS\TERI\TEMPLATES-FORMS\AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director NOTICE OF APPLICATION, DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Project Name: Northwest Arena Project Proponent: RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC Contact: Ted Caloger, MG2 Entities that Own/Control Site: B&B Sports and Entertainment, Leugar BB, LLC Location of Proposal: File Numbers: 15616 West Valley Highway, Tukwila WA 98188 E15-0005 SEPA, L15-0026 Parking Determination Other Known Required Permits and Approvals Include: Design Review; Sign, Demolition, and Development Permits; Street Vacation; Development Agreement Description of Proposal: RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC (the Applicant) proposes to construct a privately owned and financed multi -purpose sports and entertainment arena to host a variety of events (Northwest Arena). The proposal includes an arena building, publicly -oriented spaces and plazas, and a structured parking garage. The Arena is expected to host about 230 events per year. In general, seating for concerts and similar events could be configured to accommodate a capacity at 19,500 at the highest. Sporting events, which could include professional and special sport events would accommodate between 17,500 and 18,500. Attendance for many of the events at the multi -purpose venue would likely range from 10,000 to 15,000. The arena building footprint would be approximately 195,000 square feet and total square footage of the building would be approximately 700,000 square feet. The interior would include public -oriented spaces and plazas, concessions, exhibition spaces, meeting rooms, and administrative offices. Maximum height would be about 140 feet. City code requires that the project obtain a minimum LEED Certification of Silver from the U.S. Green Building Council. The LEED program (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a rating system for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of "green" buildings, homes, and neighborhoods. Parking would be provided in a structured garage east of the arena building, and additional parking is anticipated to be secured through use agreements with nearby property owners. The applicant has applied for a Parking Determination pursuant to TMC as there is not a fixed number of parking stalls required for a mixed use arena. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will analyze impacts related to the number and location of parking stalls provided for the project. The Community Development Director's determination on the number and location of parking stalls required for the project will be informed by the EIS analysis, and will not be made until after the issuance of the Final EIS. The proposed project is located east of the Green River and south of Interstate 405, see the star on the map below. The Tukwila Station, serving both Amtrak and Sound Transit's Sounder commuter rail line, is to the southeast. Streets surrounding the project site are West Valley Highway (SR 181) on the west, the Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, South 156th Street on the north, and Longacres Way on the south. Jrt- S1ShudP r l31a::t A4 Park M y.. IsrPkw "r"-; n 7Urw,.41'w17 , �:outhtnitr M�q J xwwlS�.-pry.--r:wr s yxy Mwr.p.A 1 i ?a 1r.r@ R. IN.3(th SI swtotpst Planning Background: The project site is located within the City of Tukwila's Southcenter area, which has been designated as an "urban center." The City's planning for the area anticipates the development of a high -intensity mixed -use urban center, with a pedestrian -oriented street grid and transit -oriented development. In 2014, the City adopted the Southcenter Subarea Plan (Plan), which further defines desirable growth for the area. This Plan includes as one of the subarea's goals to "bolster the Southcenter area's market position as the primary regional shopping and entertainment center for South King County." Within the Southcenter area, the proposed project is located within the Transit Oriented Development District of the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC-TOD), an area for which the City's Comprehensive Plan anticipates vibrant growth and development. On April 29, 2015, the City issued a code interpretation confirming that a multi -purpose arena facility including spectator sports events is a permitted use within the TUC-TOD Zoning District. 2 The Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Plan anticipated and addressed many of the potential impacts of growth and development for the area. Nevertheless, the project -specific impacts of this proposal for a sports and entertainment arena warrant a focused assessment of potential impacts, alternatives, and mitigation options. Lead Agency: The City of Tukwila is the lead agency for SEPA compliance under section 197-11-932 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). EIS Required: The Applicant has agreed to the preparation of an EIS to address potentially significant impacts from construction and use of the Northwest Arena. The lead agency has determined that this proposal is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment, therefore an EIS is required under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 43.21C.030 (2)(c) and will be prepared. Application materials describing project details and the Applicant's agreement to the preparation of an EIS can be reviewed at the City of Tukwila's Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter BI. Suite 100, or online at the City's website http://www.tukwilawa.gov/ArenaDevelopmentUpdate.html . The Northwest Arena Project EIS is not a permit --it is one of many pieces of information the City will consider as it decides whether to approve the project and issue the necessary permits. Alternatives: The City anticipates that alternatives to the proposed Northwest Arena project will be finalized following the scoping process. Comments on alternatives are welcome during the scoping process. The project alternatives are expected to include the proposed action; a no action alternative; and the City may consider alternatives for parking, access and design. Elements of the Environment: On a preliminary basis, the lead agency has identified the following elements of the environment for discussion in the EIS: • Land use • Height, bulk, scale, and aesthetics • Air quality • Transportation, including parking, vehicle traffic, transit, and bicycle/pedestrian movement/circulation Scoping: Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. Comments will be accepted on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. The scoping process will last for 21 days, and will include a public scoping meeting at the time and location listed below. Project Documents are available at http://www.tukwilawa.gov/ArenaDevelopmentUpdate.html and at the Tukwila Department of Community Development Office between 8:30 and 5:00. Written comments may be submitted at the scoping meeting or to the following addresses: 3 By email to: NWArenaReview@TukwilaWA.gov By mail to: City of Tukwila DCD Attn.: Northwest Arena Project 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Public Scoping Meeting: Tuesday June 2, 2015 Tukwila Community Center 12424 42"d Avenue S. Tukwila, WA 98168 4:30 PM — 6:30 PM The comment period opens May 22, 2015. The deadline for submitting your comments is 5:00 PM Friday June 12, 2015. For any questions about commenting or the scoping process contact Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director, at Nora.Gierloff@TukwilaWA.gov or (206)433-7141. Responsible Official: Jack Pace, Department of Community Development Director Signature: Date: 41-(94,,3e15 Appeals: There is no agency appeal for this Determination of Significance. The lead agency has determined, and the Applicant has agreed, that an EIS will be prepared. The parking determination decision will be made after issuance of the final EIS and at that time may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner at an open record hearing. Subsequent permit applications will have different appeal procedures. Copies of any decision, information on hearings, and information on permit appeal rights is available by calling DCD at (206)431-3670. 4 First name * TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA * Transit * TUKWILA Lp * * * Peter H Crating & Packin * * * * * * TUKWILA TUKWILA * * last name 2014 MEYERS COMMERCIAL PROP UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO HANSEN GROUP LLC COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER MPL INVESTMENTS LLC COMMUNITY MEMBER DOREMUS FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER PUGET WESTERN INC KOAR-SEATAC PARTNERS LP Sound TUKWILA HOTEL L L C LEUQAR BB LLC COMMUNITY MEMBER Wilton 15616 WEST VALLEY LLC BOEING COMPANY THE T1 UNISON SITE MANAGEMENT Kauput Industrial BNSF PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY FAMILY FUN CENTERS TUKWILA VECTRA LLC NELSEN FAMILY TRUST COMMUNITY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER STANFORD TUKWILA HOTEL CORP EXTENDED STAY HOTELS address 13911 SE 45TH PL 1400 DOUGLAS STOP 1640 14405 25TH AVE SW 15450 NELSON PL S 15470 NELSON PL S 15616 W VALLEY HWY 15643 W VALLEY HWY 15658 W VALLEY HWY 15660 NELSON PL S 15665 NELSON PL 15665 NELSON PL S 15666 W VALLEY HWY 15668 W VALLEY HWY 15700 NELSON PL S 15701 NELSON PL S 15920 W VALLEY HWY 19515 N CREEK PKWY # 310 370 AMAPOLA AVE # 210 401 S JACKSON ST 600 E RIVER PARK LN STE 205 6523 CALIFORNIA AVE SW # 123 7200 S 156TH ST PO BOX 116 PO BOX 24687 PO BOX 3707 M/C 20-00 PO BOX 811510 PO BOX 88108 PO BOX 88299 PO BOX 961089 PO BOX 97034 2500 LOU MENK DR # AOB-3 7300 FUN CENTER WAY 7404 S 262ND ST 10510 NORTHUP WAY # 300 15635 W VALLEY HWY 15901 W VALLEY HWY 1610 BOUNDARY BLVD PO BOX 49550 city state BELLEVUE WA OMAHA NE BURIEN WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA BOTHELL WA TORRANCE CA SEATTLE WA BOISE ID SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA N LAKEWOOD WA SEATTLE WA SEATTLE WA BOCA RATON FL SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA FORT WORTH TX BELLEVUE WA FORT WORTH TX TUKWILA WA KENT WA KIRKLAND WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA AUBURN WA CHARLOTTE NC zip 98006 68179 98166 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98011 90501 98104 83706 98136 98188 98259 98124 98124 33481 98188 98188 76161 98009 76131 98188 98032 98033 98188 98188 98001 28277 ("Th AGENCY LABELS Q) (,tom f v-PK7C, (City Clerk Office - Christy 0' Flaherty PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS NEED TO GO TO CHRISTY (4'S Corps of Engineers (4ederal HWY Admin ( Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 ((Dept of Fish & Wildlife Section 1 FEDERALAGENCIES (K US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) ( )US Dept of HUD (*') ational Marine Fisheries Service \(ffice of Archaeology -. Section 2 ( Transportation Depart ment ment (WSDOT NW) �(v)tept of Natural Resources .)Office of the Governor �( ) WA State Community Development (�) A Fisheries & WildlifeMillCreek Office V ) WA Fisheries & Wildlife,, Larry Fisher, 1775 12th Ave NW Ste 201, Issaquah WA 98027 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) Dept of SocialA Health_Services, ( ) Rept of Frningy NW Rpgicnal Office, Shoreland Div. SHORELINE NOD REQUIRES RETURN RECEIPT ept of Ecology, SEPA **Send Electronically Office of Attorney General ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner () oard re District # 2- 1(,)-„,,KC Wastewater Treatment Div O"(�) Dept of Parks & Recreation �( V'KC Assessor's Office Section 3 KING\COUNTY AGENCIES N(4-Health Department N.s(✓)'Port of Seattle (vYKC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPA Info Center (v)1C Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning (4'KC Dept of Natural Resources NI (-rKC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque �(i4#KC Public Library System (v�oster Library v)"Renton Library �t (u)"�Kent Library "N(+,)°Seattle Library ( 4.. .. L WEST Communications ( ),Seattle -City -Light ( uget Sound Energy ( ) Highline'Water-District ( ) Seattle_glaaa+t►g-&Dev/Water-Dept (u)'Comcast Section 4 SCHQOLS/LIBRARIES -4-ki �( Westfield Mall Library (v)ukwilSchool District \\(Highiine School District ( ')cattle School District (.) Renton School District Sectio'UTILITIES (tj'BP Olympic Pipeline ( ) Val -I€ Sewer Dist - ( ) Water District #- 21 ( ) Water-Distriet-#425, \ (0/City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn-Mawr-Lakeridge,Sewer/watr_Dist (v),,Seattle Public Utilities (+') Waste Management ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor (t'City Clerk (PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS Sectio 6 CTY AG (/f KentENCIES Plannin-4g Dept (*.Menton Planning Dept (✓))'City of SeaTac �(✓) City of Burien p( ,),City of Seattle ( •) Strategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects \\(4uget Sound Regional Council (1) SW KC Chamber of Commerce ('Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * --) Cultural Resources ( ) Fisheries Program ( ) Wildlife Program (✓)`Duwamish Indian Tribe * (v�Seattle Times (\.) South County Journal P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist Section 7 OTH �R .LOC L AGENCIES (✓Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (Sound Transit/SEPA O� ( ) Washington-€evironmental-Eouneil ( ) People'for-Puget-Sothad * ( ) Fut-urewise * send notice of all applications on Green/Duwamish River S cti h 8 M DIA-4,1 Ni( ) Highline Times (,City of Tukwila Website \ / I c.c...,7^A4- KL-,-,L-rr- , 1.--„,,L... t/Q1-) StLeq,‹ V , �a 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) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice Of Application Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Nolice of Application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21-day appeal period begins date of filing with DOE) — Notice to DOE must be by return receipt requested mail (this requirement included in SSB 5192, effective 7-22-11). Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (printed out from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit 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 with structures & shoreline — Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3-part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist Teri Svedahl From: Teri Svedahl Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 9:50 AM To: Teri Svedahl Subject: NW Arena, Tukwila Project Attachments: NW_Arena_notice.pdf Attached is the Notice for a Public Scoping Meeting for the NW Arena proposal. Teri Svedahl lAdministrative Support Technician City of Tukwila I Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard - Ste 100 I Tukwila WA 98188 Teri. SvedahlTukwila WA.gov The City of opportunity, the community of choice. Please be advised: This email is subject to public disclosure NW Arena, Tukwila Project - Message (HTML) ? Cfi- — c'' X MESSAGE 4. 'jrignore---mot.Meetit•:g Riverside/Jesse .:'ToManager '�' � --4 +/ Done t_ Reply & Delete vets, junk- Delete Reply Reply Forward :_.-� More f Create New Delete Respond Qtcck Stc.ps C5'j1/2J i53`O 4b, ci Rules - r,....,.), I>iti Find Q a OneNote �' ; ( Related Move Mark Categorize Follow Translate Zoom Actions- Unread - Up' - a? Select- s More 'Tags Ed3:ng Zoom Tet-i Svediahi NW Arena, Tukwila Project Tcr. Sverlati _ccGretch. ,.zae -ar J ... .v.a.go.', ,arrq.P har dF..,we.a, : ,. p', n,t yocy v. a c.>G', C ..:a hlo te, nn o;.nti c,or . r,tcver _ e+da �psc o . re .m iiehy ..ar. cr.e_hnot rsn.c; ..MessaQe ° Nvv.arena_notice.pdf (328 KB) Attached is the Notice for a Public Scoping Meeting for the NW Arena proposal. Teri Sv d.:61(Ad m istrative Support Technickire City of Tukwila ) Planning Department 0300 Sontleenter Bo» levard - Ste 100 - Tukwila WA 98188 TrtSw bierTni41TA,gsr The City of opportunity, the community of choice. Please be advised. This email is subject to public disclosure OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY WA FISHERIES & WILDLIFE WA DEPT OF ECOLOGY KC ASSESSOR'S OFFICE PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL MUCKLESHOOT Cultural Resources Program SEPA REVIEW ACCOUNTING DIVISION Laura Murphy Gretchen.Kaehler@DAHP.wa.gov Larry.Fisher@dfw.wa.gov sepaunit@ecv.wa.gov Christie. Most(c�kingcounty.gov ystevens-wajdana psrc.org laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us Gretchen Kaehler Larry Fisher 10mb max Christie Most Yorik Stevens-Wajda Laura Murphy T \ r 1 NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday September 30, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Minnie D, Robin T, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, Ben B, Greg R, Kendall N. 6/24 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Business Relocation Outreach — contacts and timing Ted/Derek When appropriate 9/16 Meeting Action Items Schedule meeting to discuss site & building design revisions w/city Ben When appropriate Explore Renton's permit requirements for 230 line relocation Jack 9/30 New Items 1. Comments on Updated Schedule 2. Discuss Revisions to DEIS Alternatives 3. Status of Agency/Property Owner LOI Metro Sound Transit Cascade Bike Club WSDOT UP PSE Boeing Westfield 4. Parking Phasing Proposal 5. Items for Next Week 9/30 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 10/7 Meeting l NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday September 23, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Minnie D, Nora G, Robin T, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan ID, Ben B. 6/24 Meeting Action Items Business Relocation Outreach — contacts and timing 9/16 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Ted/Derek When appropriate Schedule meeting to discuss site & building design revisions w/city Ben When appropriate Explore Renton's permit requirements for 230 line relocation Jack 9/23 New Items 1. Updated Schedule 2. Status of Agency/Property Owner meetings Metro Sound Transit Cascade Bike Club WSDOT PSE Boeing Renton Westfield 3. Discuss DEIS resubmittal and questions 4. Parking Phasing Proposal 5. Items for Next Week 9/23 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 9/30 Meeting NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday September 16, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Minnie D, Nora G, Robin T, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, John N., Chuck H. 6/24 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Business Relocation Outreach — contacts and timing Ted When appropriate 7/1 Meeting Action Items Working group on Development Agreement Framework Ann & Kim Ongoing 7/8 Meeting Action Items Schedule meeting with WSDOT — traffic, easements, Nelson vacation Bob/Robin 7/13 New Items 1. Discuss DEIS resubmittal and questions A) Access through Boeing Property B) Parking Phasing Proposal C) Interurban Trail Temporary and Permanent Alignment D) Utilities 2. Possibility of Pre -EIS site work 3. Contacts with Area Property Owners 4. Status of Agency meetings 5. Items for Next Week 9/16 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 9/23 Meeting NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday August 5, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Minnie D, Nora G, Robin T, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D 6/24 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Business Relocation Outreach — contacts and timing Ted When appropriate 7/1 Meeting Action Items Working group on Development Agreement Framework Ann & Kim Ongoing 7/8 Meeting Action Items Schedule meeting with WSDOT—traffic, easements, Nelson vacation Bob/Robin 7/13 New Items 1. Discuss DEIS submittal and questions A) Access B) Parking C) Interurban Trail D) Utilities 2. Revised schedule/work plan — Nora & Minnie out 8/24-9/1 3. Status of Agreements 4. Site Plan 5. Report out on development agreement 6. Items for Next Week 8/5 Meeting Action Items Responsiblle Due Additional Attendees for 8/12 Meeting Rachel Bianchi — discuss DEIS publication r 1 NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday July 22, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Minnie D, Robin T, Kim AP, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, Tung L. 6/24 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Business Relocation Outreach — contacts and timing Ted When appropriate 7/1 Meeting Action Items Working group on Development Agreement Framework Ann & Kim Ongoing 7/8 Meeting Action Items Schedule meeting with WSDOT — traffic, easements, Nelson vacation Bob 7/13 New Items 1. Update on status of project 2. Revised schedule/work plan 3. Status of Agreements 4. Site Plan 5. Discuss DEIS submittal and questions A) Access —Street cross -sections; garage ingress/egress; ped access bridges; agency coordination — Sound Transit, PSE, KC Metro, Boeing, WSDOT, UP, BNSF B) Parking C) Interurban Trail D) Missing —Earth/Utilities 6. Report out on development agreement 7. Items for Next Week 7/8 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 7/15 Meeting Potential Development Agreement Topics Design Exceed 115' Height: Limit in TUC-TOD for a total height of 155' Sign Regulations may not allow adequate signage Possibility of Administrative Design review w/BAR Consultation Street and Frontage Standards Operations Security Plan Traffic Management Plan Personnel contracted with City or outside agency? Legal Street Vacation Easements - termination, replacement Vesting/Phasing Financial Strander contribution r L NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday July 8, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Nora G, Minnie D, Robin T, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, Tung L. 6/24 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Business Relocation Outreach — contacts and timing 7/1 Meeting Action Items Send Development Agreement examples to Ann & Kim Working group on Development Agreement Framework New Items Ted When appropriate Nora 7/6 Ann & Kim Ongoing 1. Report out on Agency Coordination — Emphasis on Sound Transit Coordination 2. Review issues for development agreement 3. Discuss DEIS submittal and questions 4. Items for Next Week 7/8 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 7/15 Meeting r", NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday July 1, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Nora G, Minnie D, Robin T, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, Tung L. 6/17 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Subgroup for 156th Street and Trail relocation, Nelson Vacation Robin, Kim, Ann Ongoing First draft of DEIS Applicant Week of 6/29 Add new parcels to SEPA application — Industrial Crating Ted Before DEIS Issued Title reports for east section of Longacres Way Ted 7/8 6/24 Meeting Action Items Date for design meeting with Populous and Mark Hinshaw Ted 7/1 Business Relocation Outreach — contacts and timing Ted When appropriate New Items 1. Discuss Site Plans with Traffic Patterns 2. Report out on DEIS status 3. Report out on Agency Coordination — Emphasis on Sound Transit Coordination 4. Items for Next Week 7/1 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 7/8 Meeting / f \ NW Arena Weekly Coordination Meeting Agenda Wednesday June 24, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Nora G, Minnie D, Robin T, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, Tung L. 6/10 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Research Interurban Trail easement Robin 6/17 Complete 6/17 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Prepare memo on the results of the scoping process Lloyd 6/24 Complete Fehr & Peers to meet with CH2M re parking study assumptions Ongoing Subgroup for 156th Street and Trail relocation, Nelson Vacation Robin, Kim, Ann Ongoing First draft of DEIS Applicant Week of 6/29 Add new parcels to SEPA application Ted Before DEIS Issued Title reports for east section of Longacres Way Ted 7/8 New Items 1. Discuss Draft Scoping Memo 2. Report out from Subgroup for 156th Street and Trail Relocation, Nelson Vacation 3. Report out on DEIS status 4. Report out on Agency Coordination 5. Items for Next Week 6/24 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 7/1 Meeting f \ f'\ NW Arena Weekly EIS Meeting Agenda Wednesday June 17, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Nora G, Minnie D, Robin T, Kim P, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D Chris Breiland — Fehr & Peers parking peer reviewer 6/3 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Add a discussion of employee parking to alternatives Roger 6/10 Provide draft site plan for discussion Populous 6/10 6/10 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Provide packet of scoping comments to group Nora 6/15 Complete Scope/Outline for Parking Study Roger 6/15 Research Interurban Trail easement Robin 6/17 New Items 1. Discuss Scoping Comments 2. Continue Draft Alternatives Discussion with Preliminary Traffic Analysis 3. Discuss Draft Site Plan 4. Nelson Place Street Vacation, reversion to abutting property owners 5. Items for Next Week 6/17 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 6/24 Meeting / \ 8904270532 _rr r' co--,1 CITY OF TU ILA' WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. %� 89/04/2? #0532 D RECD F 1O.O0 CRSHSL ***lO.00 55 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, VACATING A CERTAIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NELSON PLACE EAST OF THE WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY, INCLUDING THE CUL-DE-SAC. WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council passed Resolution No. 1058 commencing proceedings for the vacation of a portion of Nelson Place East of the West Valley Highway, including the cul-de-sac, and WHEREAS,' a public hearing was held on said resolution before the City Council on December 21, 1987, and WHEREAS, the reversionary rights to the portion of Nelson Place being vacated are currently held by the State of Washington, and WHEREAS, a developer's agreement requires the development and dedication of a new roadway to be known as 156th South, and WHEREAS, the State of Washington has preliminarily agreed upon certain conditions that its revisionary rights in Nelson Place may be transferred to the new roadway, and WHEREAS, Notice of the Pendency of the Street Vacation and hearing were given as prescribed by law, now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section. 1. That certain public right-of-way located within the City of Tukwila, County of King, State of Washington, and more particularly described on Exhibit A and shown on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein, is vacated upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. Section Z. That the street so vacated shall belong to Robert Poon, the abutting property owner in accordance with Washington state law. Section 3. That in lieu of the owner, Robert Poon, compensating the City for said property in an amount equal to one-half the appraised value of the area so vacated, as provided in RCW 35.79.030 and TMC 11.60.050, the owner, Robert Poon, shall deed by warranty deed to the City of Tukwila the property described in Exhibit B and shown on Exhibit C attached hereto, subject to the rights of the State of Washington as described in Exhibit B. which said property is valued at an amount equal to or exceeding one-half of the appraised value of the vacated property. Section 4. That the deed required in Section 3 of this Ordinance shall recite that the property deeded shall include those improvements to be placed there on by the property owner pursuant to the developer's agreement, and said deed shall be filed with the City Clerk of the City of Tukwila prior to this Ordinance becoming effective, and in no event later than thirty (30) days from the date of passage of this Ordinance. 3360C Page 1 8904270532 Section 5. The State of Washington currently holds rights in and to the portion of Nelson Place being vacated and this Ordinance shall not be effective until the State has exchanged such rights for the rights being acquired pursuant to the deed described in Section 3. This Ordinance shall not be published until the deed referred to in Section 3 is filed with the City Clerk and the agreement of the State has been received by the City Clerk. Section 6. The public works director is hereby instructed to amend the City's official street map to be consistent with this Ordinance. Section 7. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other secton, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance. Section 8. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force five (5) days after publication of the attached summary which is hereby approved. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA. WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this /6 gi day of , 1988. , G "Y VAN DUSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: VIT?L4XE6;44..1‹, NE ANDERSON APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE _►i THE CITY A ORNEY By FI � WITH THE CITY CLERK: A.V. F/- S'7 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: .- /6- kg' PUBLISHED: S-.20-b'8 EFFECTIVE DATE: A"- 2-5-EN ORDINANCE NO: / '746.3 3360C Page 2 f CENTRAC EXHIBIT A 16604 NORM CRUX PARKWAY, 80111l1t, WA 96011 (706) 4U-66W ENGINEERS • SCIENTISIS RECEIVED JUN 14 1988 TUKWILA VEST VALLEY HOTEL: PUBLIC WORKS AMENDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF NELSON PLACE VACATION: That portion of Nelson Place in Government Lots 8 and 10 in the Southwest quarter of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W. M., in King County, Washington, described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the northerly margin of South 04 158th Street, according to the Y-Line right of way of PSN 01, C, Green River Interchange, as conveyed to the City of Tukwila by 0 Quit Claim Deed filed under King County recording number 0 8005280642, with the easterly margin of said PSH#1, the West C, Valley Highway, as established 72 feet easterly, as•measured t1' at right angles, of the 2M line thereof; 01) Thence North 07° 41' 33" West along said easterly margin 563.24 Cp feet to an intersection with a line "A" drawn parallel with and 55.28 feet southerly, as measured at right angles, of the northerly line of Donation Land Claim No. 46 of the Heirs at Law of Henry Meador, deceased; Thence continuing North 07° 41' 33" West along said easterly margin 60.85-feet to an intersection with a line "B" drawn parallel with and 60.00 feet northerly of said line "A", as measured at right angles thereto; Thence South 88° 04' 43" East along said line "B" 322.07 feet to the westerly margin of Nelson Place, according to said Y-Line right of way, and the True Point of Beginning; Thence continuing South 88° 04' 43" East along said line "B" 46.74 feet to an intersection with the westerly margin of the Seattle and Tacoma Puget Sound Electric Railroad right of way; Thence along the Nelson Place margin the following courses: Thence northwesterly along said Railroad right of way in a curve to the left, whose center bears South 71° 29' 10" West 1098.50 feet from said intersection, through a central angle of 13° 46' 38", an arc distance of 264.14 feet; Thence leaving said Railroad right of way, South 81° 25' 06" West 66.43 feet to a point; Thence southwesterly, southerly, southeasterly and easterly along a curve to the left, whose center bears South 38° 48' 22" East 50.00 feet from said point, through a.central angle of 184° 17' 11", an arc distance of 160.82 feet to a point; Thence southerly along a curve to the right, whose center bears South 62° 01' 56" West 1126.13 feet from said point, through a central angle of 08° 24' 22", an arc length of 165.22 feet to an intersection with said line "B" and the True Point of Beginning. 23 MriY 0203 CENTRAC IEBI)4 MV"RI11 DUI K PAHKWAY, I1OIIll Il, WA 460f I (70h) 4Ah•RAIX) ENGINEERS • SCIENIISIS WEST VALLEY HOTEL AMENDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR 60 FT. R/W DEDICATION: That portion of Government Lots 8 and 10 in the Southwest quarter of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W. M., in King County, Washington, and of the Donation Land Claim No. 46 of the Heirs at Law of Henry Meador, deceased, described as follows: 0/ 00 Commencing at the intersection of the northerly margin of South ti 158th Street, according to the Y-Line right of way of PSH 01, C Green River Interchange, as conveyed to the City of Tukwila by Quit Claim Deed filed under King County recording number 01 8005280642, with the easterly margin of said PSH01, the West 0 valley Highway, as established 72 feet easterly, as measured pl at right angles, of the 2M line thereof; CD Thence North 07° 41' 33" West along said easterly margin 563.24 feet to an intersection with a line "A" drawn parallel with and 55.28 feet southerly, as measured at right angles, of the northerly line of said donation claim, and the True Point of Beginning; Thence continuing North 07° 41' 33" West along said easterly margin 60.85 feet; Thence South 88° 04' 43" East and parallel with said donation claim boundary 322.07 feet to an intersection with the westerly margin of Nelson Place, according to said Y-Line right of way; Thence southerly alone said margin in a curve to the right, whose center bears South 70 26' 18" West 1126.13 feet from said point of intersection, through.a centralangle of 03° 14' 46", an arc distance of.63.80 feet to said line "A"; Thence North 88° 04' 43" West along said line "A" 333.58 feet to the True Point of Beginning. 23 MAY i988 f \ MAY 10 '66 1ii`43`KING ON (618)570-9021 f Ex«►B)r, P.2 8904270532 FILED FOR RECORD AT THE REQUEST OF: STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED EXHIBIT B THE GRANTOR, Robert Poon, a married an, as hie separate estate, for and in consideration of the provisions of a certain Developers Agreement between himself and the City of Tukwila dated April 23, 1987, and other good and valuable consideration, in hand paid does hereby convey and warrants to the city of Tukwila, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, the following described parcel of real property generally described as being approximately sixty (60) feet in width and approximately three hundred seventy (370) feat in length and connecting West Valley Highway at Exit 1 to a point on Nelson Place located approximately six hundred (600) feet north of Longacres Way more specifically described as follows: ON EXHIBIT #1 ATTACHED Subject to the General Exceptions set forth in stewart Title Guaranty company ALTA Commitment, Order No. 59332, and further subject to the condition that should any portion of the aforesaid real property no longer be used for publio road purposes or such related purposes, title to such portion shall pass unto and vest with the State of Washington. Acceptance by the City of Tukwila of this dedicated parcel of real property is done so with the understanding that the grantor herein or his assigns shall complete the improvements of said parcel in accordance with the Developers Agreement dated April 23, 1987. 7 41, DATED this / D day 1988. RoTert Poon STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) LOS ANGELES )gg. County of ) On this day personally appeared before me Robert Poon to ma known to be the individual described in and who executed' the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that ha signed the same ae his free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and - purposes therein mentioned. Given under my hand and official se this this "11 ay of May, 1988. OFFICIAL SEAL J Gt.Ct �t4/y�! L iCY 8. KOWN Notar P is n and 'for h9 State L8 NOSANLEE OUTY of Calif ia, residing at HONTEREY PARK My Comm. Eicp. Nov. 30, 19S0 My commission expires: L 30-1V9O •aa and Approved: CITY OF Tt7KWILA By ORIGtNA. 160 ,�. poi .'\ ^, ".-rA, VI (31 .... fl' •44.++.4 �z Z � ,.., it: „A `: (v9 TA 0 m\N .. 72' 'a�i `44 .. ,I S ;- . - iVo erg L' 1 E aF_ Dav q Tiaw 61:tatt4t,altilatit 4k ZAM7 C /4/11 46, -•i✓.ee°o¢'.x3"iv 33.a5 • vzo • Area to be vacated Area to be dedi cated to City rtt» WW2 FAYAM ,5: /.58 � -,4/ 5 8 7/ M87 oe 8 earl `.. SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. J1J 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, VACATING A CERTAIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA GENERALLY DESCRIEED AS A PORTION OF THE NELSON PLACE EAST OF THE WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY, INCLUDING THE CUL-DE-SAC. On laic /‘ 1988 the City Council of the City of Tukwila passed Ordinance No. /� ,3 which provides for vacation of a public right-of-way within the City of Tukwila, establishes an effective date and provides for severability. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed without charge to anyone who submits a written request to the City Clerk of the City of Tukwila for a copy of the text. /. APPROVED by the City Council at their meeting of //", 1988. C u'rf e- NE ANDERSON, CITY CLERK Publish : Ve.11ey i��j1 iJet,s, J�a y �O, 19g?' / NW Arena Weekly EIS Meeting Agenda Wednesday June 10, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Nora G, Minnie D, Robin T, Kim P, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, Rachel B 6/3 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Create and route draft agenda for agency scoping meeting Nora 6/5 Complete Add a discussion of employee parking to alternatives Roger 6/10 Provide preliminary traffic analysis for discussion Roger 6/10 Add critical path for entitlements to schedule Roger 6/10 Provide draft site plan for discussion Populous 6/10 New Items 1. Review Agency Scoping Meeting Agenda — 6/10 1:30-3 PM TCC 2. Continue Draft Alternatives Discussion with Preliminary Traffic Analysis 3. Discuss Draft Project Schedule Incorporating a Critical Path for Entitlements 4. Items for Next Week 6/10 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 6/17 Meeting NW Arena Weekly EIS Meeting Agenda Wednesday June 3, 2015 11-12:30 City of Tukwila — Rainier Room Attendees: Jack P, Nora G, Minnie D, Robin T, Kim P, Lloyd S, Ken J, Ted C, Ann G, Roger M, Ryan D, Rachel B 5/20 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Status Scoping Mtg Graphics — Site plan, elevations, aerial Roger/Ted 5/28 Complete - Perspective from 405, add powerlines - Roger to bring boards to scoping mtg, email PDF Scoping Mtg Graphics —Tukwila Vicinity Map, Zoning Nora 5/28 Complete - Include ped bridge, Strander extension, trail Draft Scoping Comment Card, Sign In sheet Nora/Lloyd 6/2 Complete Talking points for EIS process to Rachel Lloyd 5/28 Complete Talking points for Arena project description to Rachel Ted 5/28 Complete 5/27 Meeting Action Items Send agency contact info to NWArenaReview@Tukwilawa.gov All 5/29 Secure venue/Send agency meeting invitation Nora 5/29 Project Schedule with EIS Milestones Roger 6/3 Develop Draft Alternatives Roger 6/3 New Items 1. Plan Agency Meeting Agenda — 6/10 1:30-3 PM TCC 2. Overall Project Schedule Incorporating EIS Milestone Dates 3. Draft Alternatives Discussion 4. Items for Next Week 6/3 Meeting Action Items Responsible Due Additional Attendees for 6/10 Meeting Complete Complete NW Arena Weekly EIS Meeting Agenda Wednesday May 27, 2015 11-12 AM City of Tukwila — Rainier Room 5/20 Meeting Action Items Scoping Mtg Graphics — Site plan, elevations Scoping Mtg Graphics — Aerials, Zoning Draft Scoping Comment Card, Sign In sheet Talking points for EIS process Talking points for Arena protect description New Items Responsible Status Roger/Ted Nora Nora/Lloyd Lloyd Ted 1. Final Scoping Meeting Logistics 2. Overall Project Schedule Incorporating EIS Milestone Dates 3. Plan for Agency Meetings - Target Dates 4. Items for Next Week 5/27 Meeting Action Items Additional Attendees for 6/3 Meeting Responsible Status NW Arena Weekly EIS Meeting Agenda Wednesday May 20, 2015 11-12 AM City of Tukwila — Rainier Room 1. Finalize Notice of Application/Scoping Content - Mailing/Posting Date - Agencies with Jurisdiction - Scoping Meeting Date/Time 2. 6/2 Scoping Meeting Program - Visuals - Attendance 3. 6/1 Staff Briefing to Council - Focus on process and timeline 4. Overall Project Schedule 5/27 Action Items Responsible Additional Attendees for 5/27 Meeting Applicant: Contact: Project Description: Project Location: Comprehensive Plan Designation: Zoning District: Northwest Arena SEPA Application to City of Tukwila RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC 343 Greenwich Avenue, Suite 200 Greenwich, CT 06830 (203) 869-0600 Ted Caloger MG2 1110 112th Avenue NE, Suite 500 Bellevue, WA 98004 (425) 463-2000 Multi -Purpose Sports and Entertainment Arena City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. King County Parcel Nos.: 2423049014, 0005800011, 0005800032, 0005800014, 0005800025, 0005800026, 0005800034, 0005800035, 0005800028, 0005800029, 2423049034, 2423049137 Tukwila Urban Center Tukwila Urban Center, Transit Oriented Development Page 1 of 5 May 1, 2015 r \, i , Northwest Arena SEPA Application RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC (the "Applicant") submits this application for SEPA review related to permits and approvals necessary to construct a privately financed and owned multi -purpose sports and entertainment arena, including a Development Agreement under Chapter 18.86 of Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC); street vacation(s); parking determination; design review, and other necessary approvals. The Proposal consists of a proposed arena and an ancillary parking structure, which will be located on multiple parcels located east of West Valley Highway (SR 181) and west of the Burlington Northern Railroad lying between Longacres Way on the south and Interstate 405 on the north (Exhibit 1, Vicinity Map). The Applicant or associated entities own or control parcels needed for the Proposal, as shown on the Vicinity Map. See attached Affidavit (Attachment A). The Proposal is located within the Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood of the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC). In June 2014, the City adopted the Southcenter Subarea Plan for the TUC and TOD Neighborhood. The Subarea Plan sets out policies, goals and objectives for transforming the TUC into a high -intensity mixed -use urban center, and encourages redevelopment of underutilized properties. The City published a Draft and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) in connection with adoption of the Subarea Plan that covered a broad range of land use and associated environmental impacts that are likely to result from its implementation. The City's programmatic SEIS for the Southcenter Subarea Plan covers many of the probable environmental impacts associated with the Proposal. The project EIS will focus on those site specific conditions and impacts that: were not available for study at the time of the TUC and TOD Neighborhood. The City will determine the scope of the EIS for the Northwest Arena Proposal following the scoping process. Because an EIS will be prepared, a checklist is not submitted with this application, as provided under WAC 197-11-315. As provided in TMC Chapter 18.86, this SEPA application describes how the proposed arena addresses or complies with, or will address or comply with: 1. Tukwila Plans and Policies 2. Tukwila Development Regulations, and 3. the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (Chapter 43.21C RCW; Chapter 21.04 TMC) The process for review of the proposed Northwest Arena is expected to follow these steps: 1. City review and acceptance of this application as complete for the purposes of commencing SEPA review for the proposed Northwest Arena and associated permits and approvals; 2. Preparation, circulation and completion of an Environmental Impact Statement under the provisions of SEPA and TMC Title 21; 3. Review and city action on the various approvals and permits required by the applicable sections of the TMC; and 4. Simultaneous review and action by other agencies with jurisdiction (if any) for the project Project Overview The proposed Northwest Arena includes construction of a privately financed and owned multi -purpose arena to host a variety of types and sizes of events. The Proposal would include an arena building, public -oriented spaces and plazas and a structured parking garage. The Northwest Arena's maximum attendance capacity would be up to about 19,500 people depending on the event and configuration and is expected to host about 230 events each year. A majority of the events are anticipated to be scheduled for evenings and weekends. In general, concerts and similar events could be configured to Page 2 of 5 May 1, 2015 r \_ r Northwest Arena SEPA Application accommodate the highest capacity at 19,500, with sporting events which include professional and special sport events having a lower capacity between 17,500 and 18,500. Corporate events would also be held at the arena and capacity would depend on the type of function. As a multi -purpose venue with a variety of uses, attendance for many events would range from 10,000 to 15,000 guests. The City has determined that a multipurpose arena facility including spectator sports events is considered to be an outright permitted use in the TUC-TOD zoning District east of the Green River. See Tukwila Code Interpretation, April 29, 2015. The arena building footprint will be approximately 195,000 square feet and be situated to front West Valley Highway (SR 181), Longacres Way, South 156th Street, and extend to the eastern limits of Nelson Place which would require a street vacation to accommodate the arena building footprint. The Concept Plan proposes to obtain an access easement or agreement across PSE right of way as needed for the Proposal and adjacent properties, and may propose to relocate 156th Street slightly to the north. The design concept is for an arena with an estimated 140 foot height (Exhibits 2 and 3, Conceptual Site Plan and Conceptual Elevations). The arena design is proposed to achieve U.S. Green Building Council LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Silver Certification. The arena facade at street level will incorporate architectural features such as lighting, special entrance treatments, facade articulation, windows, building material variation and other elements to create a memorable built environment. Building design would be subject to design review under Chapter 18.60 TMC. The interior of the arena would include public -oriented spaces and plazas to support concessions and other ancillary activities required for both entertainment and sporting events. The facility will be designed to incorporate exhibition space, meeting rooms, administrative offices, as well as accessory parking. Ancillary and potential street -level retail and restaurant uses are also being contemplated. Public -oriented plazas and walkways will be constructed adjoining and approaching the new arena primarily in the area east of the arena. These public spaces will enhance the approach and entry experience and promote strong pedestrian access and circulation. Parking would be provided as part of the arena and would include a structured parking garage west of the Burlington Northern Railroad. Additional surface parking is anticipated to be secured through use agreements with property owners in the surrounding area. Total parking will be sufficient to conform to Tukwila requirements and adequately serve those attending events at the arena. The Northwest Arena would be located north of the Tukwila Station served by rail including both Sound Transit Sounder and Amtrak trains. The station is also served by King County Metro's RapidRide which provides connections to the Tukwila Transit Center and to Sound Transit's Tukwila International Boulevard Link Light Rail Station. The proposal would leverage existing transit service and work with transit agencies to enhance service to reduce traffic impacts and parking needs. Conformance with Tukwila Plans and Policies The Northwest Arena Proposal is located within the area confirmed by the Code Interpretation, where it is a use permitted outright. The Northwest Arena would conform to the City of Tukwila's plans and policies for the TUC and TOD, provided that certain development standards may be requested to be modified through a Development Agreement, as allowed under TMC 18.86.030. The Northwest Arena Page 3 of 5 May 1, 2015 \ Northwest Arena SEPA Application proposal will advance the Goals, Objectives, and Polices that have been identified by the City of Tukwila, specifically in the Southcenter Subarea Plan. The Southcenter Subarea Plan contains numerous relevant Planning Principles, Goals, and Objectives for transforming the TUC into a high -intensity mixed -use urban center, and encourages redevelopment of underutilized properties. Southcenter Subarea Community Intent The Northwest Arena supports Subarea Plan Community Intentions: 1. Bolster the Southcenter area's market position as the primary regional shopping and entertainment center for South King County. Comment: The arena project will add a new set of entertainment offerings to the Southcenter area that will complement the already strong regional shopping activity. This will further strengthen the Southcenter area's position as a regional destination. Southcenter Subarea Planning Principles The Northwest Arena supports many Subarea Planning Principles including: Make Great Streets The Northwest Arena lies along the West Valley Highway which is designated as a Commercial Corridor by the SSP. Development of the arena will support and help implement conversion of the West Valley Highway into a Great Street consistent with the Southcenter Subarea Plan. Create a Memorable Built Environment Arenas can be iconic features of the urban environment and help to define great places and the Northwest Arena will be a dramatic and memorable addition to Tukwila's urban environment. Make Great Public Spaces The Northwest Arena will be a great public -oriented space. The arena will enhance community identity and foster civic pride. It will create a unique character distinguishing Tukwila from other regional centers. Southcenter Subarea Objectives The Northwest Arena supports many Subarea Planning Objectives including: Objective 1: Promote investment into the full range of retail and entertainment uses in Southcenter. Comment: This project will incorporate and catalyze a full range of entertainment and ancillary uses within the SSP area. Objective 4: Improve walkability and begin developing a framework for the longer term transition to more urban forms of development... Comment: The arena project will improve walkability in the eastern portion of the SSP by increasing urban development within the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District. Objective 5: Transit Oriented Development. Leverage the new bus transit center and refurbished Sounder commuter rail station to stimulate investor interest in developing a transit -oriented, mixed -us housing, retail and office neighborhood in Southcenter. Page 4 of 5 May 1, 2015 f \ Northwest Arena SEPA Application Comment: This project will help leverage and stimulate investor interest in the TOD District surrounding the proposed arena. Anticipated Permits and Approvals The Northwest Arena is a unique and special project opportunity for the City of Tukwila. The SEPA review required for the project is related to the permits and approvals necessary to construct the multi- purpose arena. The Applicant anticipates the following permits and approvals to be needed for the Proposal: 1. Parking Determination and Modification consistent with TMC 18.56.100, 18 56.065, 18.56.010, and 18.56.120 2. Development Agreement to address building use, size and intensity; design and development standards including maximum height, setbacks, roads standards, utilities, project landscaping and streetscaping, and other development features; project mitigation measures consistent with chapter 43.21C RCW and TMC Title 21; agreement regarding any applicable impact fees; project vesting and process and procedures for subsequent permitting; build -out timing and phasing; street vacations and dedications as needed; and other provisions as allowed under RCW 36.70B.170 et seq. 3. Design Review 4. Street Vacation 5. Sensitive Areas review 6. Utilities connections 7. Demolition, grading, foundation and building permits 8. Other permits or approvals identified as necessary Compliance with SEPA The City's programmatic SEIS for the Southcenter Subarea Plan covers many of the probable environmental impacts associated with the proposal. In addition, consistent with the provisions of WAC 197-11-315(1)(b) and TMC 21.04.080, the Applicant agrees to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Northwest Arena to supplement the environmental review completed for the Southcenter Subarea Plan. The City of Tukwila will determine the scope and schedule for the EIS. As of the date of this application, based on existing environmental documents the scope of the EIS is expected to address the following elements — applicable site specific conditions identified in the City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist; air; land use and aesthetics; and transportation including parking, vehicle traffic, transit, and the movement and circulation of people. Other elements will be identified through the scoping phase of the EIS. Completion of the EIS will precede execution of the Development Agreement and other required permits. The EIS will also frame and more thoroughly define the size, location and configuration of parking facilities and other transportation related improvements. Page 5 of 5 May 1, 2015 0 250 Legend 500 Proposed Project Parcels 1,000 Feet Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Northwest Arena Tukwila, WA t BNSF CORRIDOR WEST VALLEY HVYY (SR 181) EXHIBIT NO.2 MULVANNY/G2 ARCHITECTURE 1 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN SEPA APPLICATION PROJECT NORM 0 05.01.15 NORTHWEST ARENA 100 200 POPULOUS' WEST ELEVATION E �1 1 r as SOUTH ELEVATION EXHIBIT 3 M U LVA N N Y1 G 2 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS SEPA APPLICATION 05.0'1.15 NORTHWEST ARENA I POPULOUS* ARCHITECTURE • i CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: en• p rat' 4 ce Veyr C.Def 1V 1 ' 1. I am the current ownewof tile property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other represen atyves�the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at sae J T rA �T �4Ib I A for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non -responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at j 1 I We"' (city), Vt/ A (state), on Ape' G 3 0 FI2E Ste.o W N � 01111111 O xx���s� J ACI�S�/ii�� � �SSINF.• '.'''. ;:; .cn (P'. // OF tW A SH `*G `��` , 20 155 (Print Name) 1 t 0 -- l a -1-h Pout iJ OE kl EAR, t3ELLEUU6Wi (Address) 7S,4(3, i(39 (Phone lib (Signattre �G07�Jrz o/cttfi-iernAk)J 8ifislaws AND Kwiimax On this day personally appeared before me FZEb • u)N to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that ( she signed the same as purposes mentioned therein. her voluntary act and deed for the uses and SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS (36-+-h DAY OF Pc -Pei , 20 15 9acke-dn-- -t2e-n.o NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at LCEV E, met My Commission expires on ,J11N2- 7j z_ois \\Deptstore\City Common\Teri\KIRBY - DECEMBER\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20l I.Docx EXHIBIT 'A' FOR AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP King County Parcel Numbers: 2423049014 0005800011 0005800032 0005800014 0005800025 0005800028 0005800026 0005800034 0005800035 0005800029 SEE ATTACHED KING COUNTY GIS MAP King County 1111.111.00.1 lgn!'�rcMA'll� The information included on this rrep has been compied by Kitg County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kng County makes no representations orwananties, express orimpied, as to accuracy, completeness, tinelness, or rights to the use of such infomraticn. This cbcumentis not intended 1 in : 294 feet br use as a survey product. Kng County shdl not be liable for any general, special, ildired, incidental, or consequential damages indud'ng, but nd linited to, bst revenues or bst profits resulting from the use or misuse cf the information curtained on this map. My sale of this map or information on this map is prohitited except by 0 0.035 0.07 ft writen permission of King County. I r I Date: 4/30/2015 LA1King County A GIS CENTER CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, a ents, engineers, contractors or other reprFseniatives the right to enter upon Owner's real for the purpose of application property, located at 5 Ea A M 4iM i d T EX 1 s& l-1' V review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non -responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at ,/ vl I.ei/L.(es (city), 1,11A (state), on Alti / 57 , 20 !�-' (Print Nalaume) (051)3 Qt'4.r71,{a A-v( So #/d 9E/24 (Address) o2GYo — 11- 7 HS' (Phone Number) attlA (Signature) 0 Z2t_ w� / 6�4%e'0y-- On this day personally appeared before me \ j. Na_ VV A , to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/ h0 signed the same as his/ er;voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 15 I DAY OF I"` iY , 20 1 5 Etaitio NOTARY elIBLIC in ands or the State of Washington residing at IBC ✓v4/ Oh+ My Commission expires on J (- fly. 7, 00 / \\Deptstore\City Common\Teri\KIRBY - DECEMBER\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.Docx EXHIBIT 'B' FOR AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP King County Parcel Numbers: 2423049034 2423049137 SEE ATTACHED KING COUNTY GIS MAP 61y, 'iOtb'y6�t f The hfonnation included on this nap has been compied by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or waratties, express or impied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of suchinformatim. This cbcumentis not intended 1 in : 587 feet br use as a survey product. tang County shdl rot be liable fQ any general, special, lndirer, incidental, or onsequential damages indudng, but not limited to, bst revenues or bst profit resulting from the use or misuse c the information curtained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by 0 0.05 0.1 ft writen permission of King County. 1 r Date: 4/30/2015 L41 King County A GIS CENTER King County 24234901 3 t �r • • 2423049063 7200 rJ 2423049(114 •� 242304au O 5 155m ,b�s84isoo1 r r 14 �, \\ `lrJ \5 f... S yy 4 \ \ 1 c-� 0005800014 i 0' 24230 014k1 JrJs -.-" v i( 41 ti -r J -- xr1 r -r /{J r1 \ 'do1 1 1 1 1 \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ 1 1 i 242: 149137 Lj ?fj 088670003C 0886 70005 f 000:% 0002Zing County, Kingjcounty Assessor's Office, King Court y GIS Center The i,fomlation Included on this trap has been compied ty King County staff from a varielyof sources and is subject to change without notice. Khg County makes no representations orwarrani es, oapross or impied, as to accuracy, completeness, tine)hess, or rights to the use of such infomnatim. This d7CumMt is rot intended for use as a survey product, Idng County shill rot be liable fa any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages indud'ng, but nit lirrited to. lest revenues or lest profib resulting from the use or misuse d the Information curtained on this map. Any sale of the map or information on this map is prohlbted except by suntan permission of King County. Date: 6/23/2015 A La King County GIS CENTER CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly:;) apd u op_n oae p tV ads tty 14 1. I am the current owner^of the property which is the subjectlol of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees agents, engineers contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real S E property, located at �1t1tA€MitAeIJ-Tm on. A i poem for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non -responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at r tlV k (city), WA (state), on (UNF.. 13 ,201 s FtE:D bKoW si (Print Name ttto 112. Ma. N svi7 ..'ui� bp.�t,% V1ie (Addres) ibeie - +2s) 4 3,- t43 (Phon (Signature) G jjtr nM-A/Ua b4,E aP0P T5 1 GOTATAI141460 j / On this day personally appeared before me 'iC&t LOy1 to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he signed the same . er voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWOMMINFORE ME ON THIS ir:: \\Deptstore\City Common\Teri\K1RBY - DECEMRLRSSEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.Docx DAY OF N t AR PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington res ing a' cog. k.. ;t„y My Commission expires on II idt , 20 �� EXHIBIT 'A' FOR AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP King County Parcel Number: 2423049090 SEE ATTACHED KING COUNTY GIS MAP r r ; ',fir rt /. / • /. 0) O O Z DRAFT - For internal purposes and discussion only SPECIAL PERMISSION PARKING STANDARD Parent Project: PL15-0018 WITHDRWN CANCEL This File: L15-0026 Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director January 18, 2017 Ted Caloger MG2 1101 2nd Avenue Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98101 Subject: Northwest Arena Parking Determination L15-0026 Environmental Review E15-0005 Dear Mr. Caloger: I wanted to update you on the status of your applications for a parking determination for the Northwest Arena multi -purpose sports and entertainment project and its associated EIS. We have not had a meeting or submittal on this project since September 2015 so per TMC 18.104.130 A 1 (b) the files have been closed due to inactivity. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at (206) 433-7141. Sincer ly, Nora Gierloff Deputy DCD Director Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov �1 l ", City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION May 21, 2015 Ted Caloger MG2 1101 2nd Avenue Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98101 Subject: Northwest Arena Parking Determination L15-0026 Environmental Review E15-0005 Dear Mr. Caloger: Your applications for a parking determination for the Northwest Arena multi -purpose sports and entertainment project and its associated EIS are considered complete on May 21, 2015 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at (206) 433-7141. Sincere Nora Gierloff Deputy DCD Director r"\ NORTHWEST ARENA SPECIAL PERMISSION — DIRECTOR PARKING DETERMINATION APPLICATION 1. Northwest Arena Proposal Description The Northwest Arena proposal (Project) is located within the Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood of the Tukwila Urban Center. The proposed arena would host a variety of types and sizes of events throughout the year. The proposal would include an arena building (approximately 700,000 square feet), public oriented spaces and plazas and a structured parking garage. The maximum attendance capacity would be up to about 19,500 people' depending on the event and configuration and is expected over time to host up to 230 events each year. A majority of the events are anticipated to be scheduled for evenings and weekends. In general concerts and similar events could be configured to accommodate the highest capacity at 19,500, with sporting events which include professional and special sport events having a lower capacity between 17,500 and 18,500. Corporate events would also be held at the arena and capacity would depend on the type of function. As a multi -purpose venue with a variety of uses, attendance for many events would range from 10,000 to 15,000 guests. The arena building footprint will be approximately 195,000 square feet and be situated to front West Valley Highway (SR 181), Longacres Way, South 156th Street and extend to the eastern limits of Nelson Place. The proposed arena is within 600 feet and walking distance from the Tukwila Station that serves both Sounder and Amtrak — See Exhibit A. 2. Parking Requirements for Tukwila Urban Center Supplemental regulations for the TUC provide general parking requirements. See TMC 18.28.260, 18.28.270. The parking regulations are intended to ensure that the provision of parking, and the design and configuration of parking areas, contribute to the character of and support the type of development desired within each District in the urban center. TMC 18.28.260.A. Table 18-5 specifies the minimum parking provision for vehicles required by all new development and changes in use. TMC 18.28.260.B.1. If a use is not specifically mentioned in the table, the requirements for the number of off-street parking spaces shall be determined by the Director as a Type 2 Special Permission Decision, based on the requirements for the most comparable use specified in this section or a parking study. Id. In addition, the TUC parking code allows for a reduction in parking requirements for commercial development within 600 feet of the Tukwila Station (Sounder Transit Station). TMC 18.28.260.B.5.b. 3. Parking Determination Request The Project is a multi -purpose facility located in the TUC. Because the TUC parking table does not specify the required amount of parking for all uses allowed by code, the applicant submits this request for a Parking Determination for a Use Not Specified. TMC 18.28.260.B.1. The applicant includes in this request for Parking Determination a request that required parking be reduced as appropriate under TMC The attendance capacity figure used for the Northwest Arena includes event attendees, but not teams or performers and their support crews, media, or arena employees and concessionaires. Page 1 of 3 May 14, 2015 Northwest Arena 1 Speciermission — Director 18.28.260.B.5.b, because the Project is located within 600 feet in walking distance of the Tukwila Station (Sounder Transit Station). 4. Analysis a. Table 18-5 Parking Provisions As stated above, applicable parking requirements for the Project are found at Table 18-5 of Chapter 18.28 TMC. Table 18-5 includes an "Entertainment and Recreation" use in its prescribed parking provisions. In the TOD Neighborhood, the Entertainment and Recreation use requires a minimum of 6 parking spaces per 1,000 SF of usable floor area (UFA), or as determined by DCD Director. The table does not specify spectator sports arenas, so the Entertainment & Recreation Use would be the most comparable use in Table 18-5. Requirements for civic and institutional uses under Table 18-5, which include convention and exhibition facilities, are to be determined by the Director. Smaller scale retail (less than 100,000 SF UFA) requires 3.3 spaces per 1,000 SF of UFA; eating & drinking establishments require 6 spaces per 1,000 SF UFA. These latter categories would apply if the Project includes street - level venues open to the general public. Concessions and retail (e.g. pro shop) within the facility, however, would operate as complementary uses to the principal events, and as such would be included in usable floor area for the principal use rather than being subject to a separate parking standard calculation. b. Project Parking Table The Project Parking Table below provides preliminary data applying the comparable entertainment and recreation parking standards to usable floor area (UFA) based on schematic building design. This preliminary data is subject to change based upon building design refinement and the parking study described below. Northwest Arena Parking Determination - Comparable Standard Table 18-5 Entertainment and Recreation (TOD District) Options Attendance Capacity Useable Floor Area (UFA) Min Pkg Spaces (6/1000 sf) Comments UFA without concourse areas 10,000 19,500 287,790 1,727 Does not include common corridors for circulation of people including concourses, elevator shafts, stairwells, restrooms, exterior loading docks UFA with concourse areas 10,000- 19,500 480,790 2,885 Same as above but includes concourse areas Parking Study under SEPA 10,000- 19,500 N/A TBD Parking study may consider alternative standards such as seat -based standard used in Tacoma or Seattle. Notes: 1. No parking reductions are included above. Reduction due to the proximity to the Sounder Transit Station will be determined as part of the Parking Study. 2. The Usable Floor Area (UFA) is based on preliminary design information and the applicant's best judgment about how to apply the definition of UFA in the City's Code to the Northwest Arena. The areas shown are subject to further design and the Director's evaluation of how to apply UFA to the Project. Page 2 of 3 May 14, 2015 / \ Northwest Arena Special Permission — Director c. Anticipated Parking Determination Process Based on the Tukwila Code comparable parking standard for entertainment uses, the Project may be required to provide a minimum number of parking spaces based on a usable floor area square footage analysis as addressed above, or as determined by the Director based on a parking study. In addition, the parking requirement for convention and exhibition uses calls for the Director to make a determination based on a parking study. See TMC 18.28.260.B.1, and Table 18-5. Accordingly, it is anticipated that this Parking Determination request will be the subject of a parking study (see below). The Director would then determine the number of required parking spaces to be constructed or provided by agreement for use by the Northwest Arena. In addition to the Director determining the code -required amount of parking, it is anticipated that the Project would develop a parking management plan that could include measures to enhance or supplement transit availability and use for events, address peak parking demand events, and provide for other special circumstances. 5. Parking Study for Northwest Arena In making a parking determination for the Northwest Arena proposal, the Director may consider that the facility will host a variety of different types of events. Event types will vary regarding frequency, maximum attendance capacity, and average attendance per type. Different event types will be held on weekdays or weekends, and at different times of day. For example, sporting events will be mostly weekday evenings and weekends, whereas corporate meetings will occur mostly on weekdays. Attendance projections by event type will be developed as part of a parking study to be prepared in connection with SEPA compliance. The parking study would include further detail about parking projections associated with various event type, scale, and frequency, seasonal sensitivity study for area parking demand, and could include additional information under SEPA or as required by the Director. Page 3 of 3 May 14, 2015 s BNSF CORRIDOR UPRR CORRIDOR Y (SR lSli WEST VALLEY HW Tukwila Station 250 FT WALKING DIS- TANCE TO ARENA FROM TUKWILA STATION EXHIBIT A PARKING DETERMINATION APPLICATION 0 100 200 Preliminary Review Draft RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment LLC Northwest Arena Draft SEPA Environment Impact Statement Set A — EIS Set A — TR CDs are in Permit Tech Area "Land Use Files File CDs" 1 Preliminary Review Draft 2 3 4 RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC 5 Northwest Arena 6 Draft SEPA Environmental Impact Statement 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Prepared for 17 City of Tukwila 18 19 20 21 Prepared by chum.22M 23 24 25 26 July 2015 27 r1 i / „, 1 Fact Sheet 2 Proposed Action 3 RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC proposes to construct and operate a privately financed and 4 owned multi -purpose sports and entertainment arena in Tukwila, King County, Washington. The 5 Proposed Action would be located on multiple parcels east of SR 181 (West Valley Highway) and west of 6 the BNSF Railway line lying between Longacres Way on the south and S 156th Street and Interstate 405 7 to the north. The new multi -purpose arena would accommodate about 19,500 guests depending on the 8 event and arrangement. The arena is expected to host up to 230 events each year. Most of the events 9 are expected to be scheduled on evenings and weekends. In general, concerts and similar events would • 10 be configured to accommodate the highest capacity, while sporting events (professional and special 11 sports events) would have a lower capacity of between 17,500 and 18,500. Corporate events and other 12 family -oriented events would also be held at the arena, and capacity would depend on the type of 13 function. The arena design is expected to achieve the U.S. Green Building Council Leadership in Energy 14 and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver Certification at a minimum. In addition to the arena, the ▪ 15 Proposed Action includes a 3,500-space structured parking garage to be constructed east of the arena in • 16 the area between the Union Pacific Railroad and BNSF Railway railroad corridors with additional parking 17 to be secured through use agreements with property owners in the surrounding area. One build • 18 alternative would also include an additional 1,000-space VIP parking garage just east of the arena. • ` 19 Proponent 20 RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC 21 Lead Agency 22 City of Tukwila ;; 23 Responsible Official 24 Jack Pace, Director \ 25 City of Tukwila 26 Department of Community Development \� 27 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 28 Tukwila, WA 98188 • 29 (206) 431-3670 30 Planning@tukwilawa.gov 31 Project Proponent Contact Person 32 Ted Caloger • 33 MG2 34 1101 Second Avenue, Suite 100, Seattle, WA • 35 (206) 962-6472 36 Ted.Caloger@MG2.com / \ / / / / • 1 JULY 2015 FS-1 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS FACT SHEET 1 Required Permits, Approvals, and Certification 2 State and Regional Permits 3 Washington Labor & Industries 4 • Elevator Permits 5 Washington Department of Ecology 6 • NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit 7 Puget Sound Clean Air Agency 8 • Asbestos Survey 9 • Demolition Permit 10 Local Permits/Approvals 11 King County 12 • Modifications to Interurban Trail Easement 13 Puget Sound Energy 14 • Modifications to Interurban Trail Easement 15 City of Tukwila 16 • Development Agreement 17 • Street Vacation (Nelson Place and S 156th Street) 18 • Parking Determination 19 • Design Review 20 • Noise variance, if required 21 • Demolition Permit 22 • Public Works Type C Permit 23 • Water Meter Permits 24 • Construction Permits 25 • Plumbing/Gas Permits 26 • Sign Permit 27 • Mechanical Permit 28 • Fire Code Inspections 29 • Electrical Permit 30 • Certificate of Occupancy 31 Union Pacific Railroad and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway 32 • Construction and Maintenance Agreement JULY 2015 FS-2 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS FACT SHEET 1 Author and Principal Contributors 2 This environmental impact statement (EIS) has been prepared by CH2M as the primary author. 3 Date of Issue 4 August XX, 2015 5 End of Comment Period 6 September XX, 2015 7 Public Meeting 8 August XX, 2015 9 Next Actions 10 Following publication of the Draft EIS, a public meeting will be held and comments will be received on 11 the Proposed Action. A Final EIS will then be published, including responses to comments received. 12 Following publication of the Final EIS, permits for construction and operation of the project may be 13 issued. Construction of the project is scheduled to begin in late 2015. 14 Cost of Draft EIS Copy to the Public 15 The Draft EIS may be reviewed online at INSERT HYPERLINK. Review copies of the Draft EIS and 16 background materials are available at the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development, Suite 17 100, 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188-2544. Documents may be reviewed between the 18 hours of 8:30 AM and 5:00 PM. CD copies of the Draft EIS are available for purchase at the above 19 address at a cost of $10.00. 20 Related Documents 21 City of Tukwila Southcenter Design Manual (June 2014) 22 City of Tukwila Southcenter Subarea Plan (June 2014) 23 Sound Transit Tukwila Commuter Rail Station Environmental Assessment (January 2009) 24 Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (November 1999) 25 Documents Adopted 26 Consistent with the provisions of Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-635 and Tukwila 27 Municipal Code (TMC) 21.04.230, the Draft and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for 28 the Southcenter Subarea Plan is hereby adopted. Please see Statement of Adoption in Appendix D. 29 Location of Background Information / l /\ /S' / \, ., / /\ / 30 All materials incorporated by reference and supporting technical reports are available for review at: City 31 of Tukwila Department of Community Development, Suite 100, 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, 32 WA 98188-254. 33 Elements of the Environment 34 This State Environmental Policy Act EIS addresses elements of the environment identified in WAC 197- 35 11-444, which has been adopted by the City of Tukwila (TMC Chapter 21.04). Based on comments JULY 2015 FS-3 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS FACT SHEET 1 received during the scoping process and the potential for significant impacts, and consistent with WAC 2 197-11-330, the Responsible Official has determined that the Proposed Action may have probable 3 significant adverse impacts on the following elements of the environment: Air Quality, Land Use, 4 Recreation, Aesthetics/Light and Glare, and Transportation. Probable significant impacts are discussed in 5 Chapter 2 of this EIS. Also consistent with WAC 197-11-330, the Responsible Official has determined that 6 the Proposed Action will not have probable significant adverse impacts on the elements of the 7 environment that are identified in Table FS-1. A brief explanation of why probable significant adverse 8 impacts to these elements are not expected is also included in the table. 9 • • JULY 2015 FS-4 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS . / ' /' / ' / '\ ( \ (\ / \ / 1 (1 (\ / \ / \ (\ (\ ( \ ( \( \ ▪ \ / \ \! \ J \J \ i \ J \ J \ J \! \ ! \ ! \ ! \ ! \ \ / \! \! \ J \! \/ \ \ \ \! \_/ \/ \i \! \ \ \ \.J \/ \./\./ \/ FACT SHEET TABLE FS-1 Elements of the Environment Natural Environment Earth Geology A discussion of impacts on the various aspects of the Earth element of the environment is not included because there are no probable significant adverse impacts to the Earth element anticipated. Design and construction of the Proposed Action would incorporate appropriate design elements to address seismic issues including the use of steel piles. The Proposed Action requires limited onsite excavation to accommodate supporting utilities and other underground infrastructure. In addition, the project site is flat, and prior to construction all applicable permits would be in place including the Washington State Department of Ecology Construction Stormwater General Permit and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Soils Topography Unique Physical Features Erosion/Enlargement of Land Area Air Odor Discussion of impacts related to odor and climate is not included because there are no probable significant adverse impacts anticipated. No odors would be created during construction or operation. The Proposed Action would not impact climate. Climate Water Surface Water Movement/Quantity/Quality Discussion of impacts on the various aspects of the Water element of the environment is not included because there are no probable significant adverse impacts on water element anticipated. There is no surface water, including wetlands, onsite. Runoff will be managed consistent with City requirements The Proposed Action is not located within a floodplain or in a shoreline environment. Construction and operation would not impact groundwater. Public water supply demands are within the capacity of the City of Tukwila's system. Runoff Absorption Floods Groundwater Movement/Quantity/Quality Public Water Supplies Plants and Animals Habitat Discussion of impacts on the various aspects of the Plants and Animals element of the environment is not included because there are no probable significant adverse impacts to plants and animals anticipated. There is no habitat at the project site. There are no unique species on the project site. No fish or wildlife migration routes would be affected. Unique Species Fish or Wildlife Migration Routes JULY 2015 FS-5 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS FACT SHEET TABLE FS-1 Elements of the Environment Energy and Natural Resources Amount Required/Rate of Use/Efficiency Discussion of impacts on the various aspects of the Energy and Natural Resources element of the environment is not included because there are no probable significant adverse impacts on energy and natural resources anticipated. Energy needs, sources, and conservation would conform to LEED requirements. Scenic resources would not be impacted. Source/Availability Nonrenewable Resources Conservation and Renewable Resources Scenic Resources Built Environment Environmental Health Noise Discussion of impacts on the various aspects of the Environmental Health element of the environment is not included because there are no probable significant adverse impacts on environmental health anticipated. Construction and operational noise will conform with City noise standards (TMC 8.22). The Proposed Action would not create any risk of explosion. Excavation of any contaminated soils or pumping of any contaminated groundwater would conform to applicable state and local regulations governing handling, treatment, and disposal. According to the National Institute of Health, studies of exposure to electro-magnetic fields (EMF) from power lines show "no evidence" of a link to adult cancers. Risk of Explosion Releases or Potential Releases to the Environment Affecting Public Health Land and Shoreline Use Housing Discussion of impacts to Housing, is not included because there are no probable significant adverse impacts No housing would be affected. There are no agricultural or forest lands on the Proposed Action site. Agricultural and Forest Lands of Long -anticipated. Term Commercial Significance Historic and Cultural Preservation Historic and Cultural Preservation Discussion of impacts on Historic and Cultural Preservation is not included because no probable significant adverse impacts on cultural resources are anticipated. The Proposed Action site is highly disturbed and covered with up to 10 to 15 feet of fill. Transportation Waterborne, Rail, and Air Traffic Discussion of impacts to waterborne, rail and air traffic is not included because no probable significant adverse impacts are anticipated. JULY 2015 FS-6 i \ r . i % , \ i N / \ / / \ i • / NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS N / • , . / • F • / 1 ` ` ` ` `i`/`/ /-`/`/`/ /`7'/\/\/'i`/`/ f\/\f\/\/'/\(\i.\/.\/ ,-`/♦/ /\/"/\7\/ /♦ ♦i f1 1 FACT SHEET TABLE FS-1 Elements of the Environment Public Services and Utilities Fire Police Schools Maintenance Communications Water/Stormwater Sewer/Solid Waste Other Governmental Services or Utilities No discussion of impacts on other public services and utilities is included because no probable significant adverse impacts are anticipated. Municipal fire, police, and other governmental services are planned to meet the demands of the Southcenter subarea. Water, stormwater, sewer, communication, and solid waste systems are also sufficiently planned. No schools or school bus routes would be affected. Coordination with Puget Sound Energy regarding electrical and natural gas services would occur. JULY 2015 FS-7 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS Table of Contents 2 Fact Sheet FS-1 3 Proposed Action FS-1 4 Proponent FS-1 5 Lead Agency FS-1 6 Responsible Official FS-1 7 Project Proponent Contact Person FS-1 8 Required Permits, Approvals, and Certification FS-2 9 State and Regional Permits FS-2 10 Local Permits/Approvals FS-2 11 Author and Principal Contributors FS-3 12 Date of Issue FS-3 13 End of Comment Period FS-3 14 Public Meeting FS-3 15 Next Actions FS-3 16 Cost of Draft EIS Copy to the Public FS-3 17 Related Documents FS-3 18 Documents Adopted FS-3 19 Location of Background Information FS-3 20 Elements of the Environment FS-3 21 Acronyms and Abbreviations v 22 Summary S-1 23 S.1 Introduction S-1 24 S.2 Project Background S-1 25 S.3 Project Proponent Objectives S-1 26 S.4 Project Alternatives, Significant Impacts, and Mitigation Measures S-3 27 1 Project Alternatives 1-1 28 1.1 Project Location 1-1 29 1.2 Proposed Action Site 1-1 30 1.3 Proposed Action Description 1-1 31 1.3.1 No Action Alternative 1-5 32 1.3.2 Build Alternatives 1-5 33 1.4 Alternatives Considered But Not Advanced 1-14 34 1.5 Benefits and Disadvantages of Delaying Project Implementation 1-15 35 1.6 Construction 1-15 36 2 Environmental Analysis 2-1 37 2.1 Air 2-1 38 2.1.1 Affected Environment 2-1 39 2.1.2 Impacts and Mitigation 2-1 40 2.2 Land Use 2-5 41 2.2.1 Affected Environment 2-5 42 Alternative 1 2-7 43 Alternative 2 2-9 44 No Action Alternative 2-10 45 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 2-10 46 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 2-10 JULY 2015 i NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CONTENTS 1 2.3 Recreation 2-10 2 2.3.1 Affected Environment 2-10 3 2.3.2 Impacts and Mitigation 2-13 4 2.4 Aesthetics and Light and Glare 2-15 5 2.4.1 Affected Environment 2-15 6 2.4.2 Impacts and Mitigation 24 7 2.5 Transportation 33 8 3 References 3-1 9 4 Distribution List 4-1 10 11 Appendixes 12 A Scoping Comments 13 B Air Quality Background Information 14 C Transportation Discipline Report 15 D SEPA Adoption Notice 16 Tables 17 FS-1 Elements of the Environment 18 S-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation 19 2.1-1 Modeled 1-Hour Carbon Monoxide Design Values 20 2.1-2 Modeled 8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Design Values 21 2.2-1 Summary of Land Use Changes Under Alternative 1 22 2.2-2 Summary of Land Use Changes Under Alternative 2 (in Addition to Alternative 1) 23 4-1 EIS Distribution List 24 Figures 25 S-1 Vicinity Map 26 1-1 Project Vicinity 27 1-2 Proposed Action Location 28 1-3 Proposed Action Site Concept Overview 29 1-4 Build Alternative Common Components 30 1-5 Northwest Arena from 1-405 Off -Ramp 31 1-6 Elevations 32 1-7 Building Section 33 1-8 Conceptual Plaza Entrance from the South 34 1-9 Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 Components 35 2.3-1 Recreation Facilities 36 2.3-2 Interurban Trail Detour Routes and Relocated Trail • • • JULY 2015 ii NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CONTENTS 1 2.4-1 Looking north along Nelson Place at examples of buildings and parking found within the interior 2 of the west part of the Proposed Action site. /� � 1 t , 3 2.4-2 Looking south from S 156th Street and SR 181 at west edge of Proposed Action site. 4 2.4-3 Looking north along Nelson Place and the Interurban Trail 5 2.4-4 View to the northwest from Longacres Way at the east area of the Proposed Action site. 6 2.4-5 View to the southwest from the sidewalk in front of Nelson Family Residence Historical Trust 7 property of the southwestern part of Proposed Action site. 8 2.4-6 View to the south from Longacres Way of the Embassy Suites hotel. 9 2.4-7 View to the north from the Interurban Trail of the western area of the Proposed Action site. 10 2.4-8 View to the north from the entrance to the Tukwila Station of the east area of Proposed Action 11 site. 12 2.4-9 View to the west from a paved parking area within Boeing Longacres Park in the direction of the 13 Proposed Action site. 14 2.4-10 View to the east from a section of the Green River Trail with a break in riverside vegetation in 15 the direction of the Proposed Action site. 16 2.4-11 View to the northeast in the direction of the Proposed Action site from an area along the Green 17 River Trail. 18 2.4-12A Existing view to the west of the southwestern corner of the Proposed Action site from a portion 19 of Longacres Way west of SR 181. 20 2.4-12B Depiction of the mass and form of the arena from this location. 21 2.4-13A Existing view to the northeast in the direction of the Proposed Action site from a location near 22 the site of the City of Tukwila's proposed pedestrian bridge over the Green River. 23 2.4-13B Depiction of the mass and form of the arena from this location. 24 2.4-14A Existing view to the southwest in the direction of the Proposed Action site from an unpaved 25 parking area within the Boeing Longacres Park at a location about 400 feet east of the BNSF rail line. 26 2.4-14B Depiction of the mass and form of the arena from this location. 27 JULY 2015 iii NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 1 Acronyms and Abbreviations 2 µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter 3 ADA Americans with Disabilities Act 4 CO carbon monoxide 5 Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology 6 EIS environmental impact statement 7 1-405 Interstate 405 8 1-5 Interstate 5 9 kV kilovolt 10 LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 11 LOS level of service 12 NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 13 PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter 14 PMio particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter 15 ppm parts per million 16 PSCAA Puget Sound Clean Air Agency 17 PSE Puget Sound Energy 18 SEPA State Environmental Policy Act 19 SR State Route 20 TMC Tukwila Municipal Code 21 TMP Transportation Management Plan 22 TOD Transit -Oriented Development 23 TUC Tukwila Urban Center 24 UPRR Union Pacific Railroad 25 USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 26 WAC Washington Administrative Code 27 WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation 28 JULY 2015 v NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 1 Summary 2 S.1 Introduction ' ` 3 This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) addresses the probable significant adverse 4 environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the multi -use Northwest 5 Arena Project proposed by RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC. The Proposed Action includes • 6 the construction of a privately financed and owned multi -purpose arena and associated development. .\ • 7 The EIS is being prepared under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (Revised Code of Washington 8 Chapter 43.21C), the SEPA Rules (Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 197-11), and the City 9 of Tukwila Environmental Policy (Tukwila Municipal Code [TMC] Chapter 21.04). 10 Public and agency comments on the scope of the EIS were solicited and received during the EIS scoping 11 period that concluded on June 12, 2015 (see Scoping Comment Summary, attached as Appendix A). The 12 lead agency (the City of Tukwila) established the scope of the Draft EIS and considered comments 13 received during scoping that identified elements of the environment fo be addressed in the required EIS. ` 14 `The lead agency also considered the mandate of WAC 197-11-408(1) that the EIS should be narrowed to 15 focus on the probable significant adverse impacts\In addition, by adopting the City of Tukwila EIS for the 16 Southcenter Subarea Plan, this scope of this EIS may focus on and be limited to the impacts and 17 alternatives including mitigation measures specific to this project and not analyzed in the prior ' 18 nonproject EIS for the Southcenter Subarea Plan, adopted hereby. WAC 197-11-443(2). Accordingly, this 19 EIS addresses the impacts on the following elements: Air Quality, Land Use, Recreation, Aesthetics/Light ▪ 20 and Glare, and Transportation. Other elements of the environment are not addressed in this EIS (see 21 Table FS-1). ./ • • i 22 S.2 Project Background 23 RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC has applied to the City of Tukwila for a Parking 24 Determination for construction and operation of a 19,500-seat-capacity multi -use arena located in the 25 city of Tukwila. In addition to the arena, the Proposed Action also includes the construction of a 3,500- 26 space structured parking garage (Figure S-1). 27 The Proposed Action is located within the Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) District of the Tukwila 28 Urban Center (TUC). In June 2014, the City of Tukwila adopted the Southcenter Subarea Plan for the TUC 29 and TOD District, which aims to transform the TUC into a high -intensity mixed -use urban center by 30 encouraging use and development of underutilized properties. 31 S.3 Project Proponent Objectives 32 Construct a multi -use arena with a maximum capacity of 19,500 by the end of 2017 with sufficient 33 amenities, access, and parking to attract professional sport teams, other major sporting events, 34 concerts, family events, corporate and other events. JULY 2015 S-1 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS SUMMARY 307, KITSAP COUNTY ISLAND COUNTY Puget round % it JTacoma' 1 _,Tti Lake Washrngten Bellevue Rents n PROJECT LO t TION SNOHOMISH COUNTY KING COUNTY Northwest Arena Tukwila, WA Rail line Major Roadway J City County Boundary Locator Map Miles 0 4 8 I Data Sources: King County, WSDOT 2 FIGURE S-1 3 Vicinity Map JULY 2015 S-2 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS SUMMARY 1 S.4 Project Alternatives, Significant Impacts, and 2 Mitigation Measures 3 The Draft EIS evaluates three alternatives: two build alternatives and the No Action Alternative. 4 Alternative 1 includes an arena, a pedestrian plaza, and a main parking garage connected to the arena 5 by two skybridges. Alternative 2 includes an arena, a pedestrian plaza, a main parking garage, and a VIP 6 garage. In addition to the two skybridges included in Alternative 1, one additional pedestrian skybridge� 7 would be added. In this alternative, all three pedestrian bridges would connect the main garage to the 8 VIP parking garage to provide access to the pedestrian plaza and arena. 9 The Proposed Action would not result in any adverse impacts on the majority of the elements of the 10 environment required to be evaluated under SEPA. Therefore, those elements are not discussed in this 11 Draft EIS. Based on scoping comments received and potential adverse environmental impacts, the 12 elements of the environment addressed in the draft EIS include Air, Land Use, Recreation, 13 Aesthetics/Light and Glare, and Transportation. 14 Table S-1 provides a summary of the potential impacts for the No Action Alternative and the two build 15 alternatives and the mitigation measures that have been identified. JULY 2015 S-3 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 1 TABLE S-1 2 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Environmental Element Construction and Operation Phases Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Action Air Construction No measurable impacts Same as Alternative 1 No impacts Construction Mitigation Standard PSCAA emission control measures Same as Alternative 1 N/A Operations No measurable impact Same as Alternative 1 No impacts Operation Mitigation No mitigation measures identified Same as Alternative 1 N/A Land Use Construction Temporary disruption of nearby business activities Same as Alternative 1 No impacts Construction Mitigation No mitigation measures identified Same as Alternative 1 N/A Operations Conversion of existing land uses to arena related uses. Secondary and cumulative catalyst for land use changes Same as Alternative 1 No impacts Operation Mitigation Conformance with Southcenter Subarea Plan requirements Same as Alternative 1 N/A Recreation t Construction Temporary closure of Interurban Trail Same as Alternative 1 No Impacts Construction Mitigation Coordination with King County and trail users regarding trail detours Same as Alternative 1 N/A Operations Realignment of Interurban Trail Interurban Trail bypass during events Relocation of Interurban Trail No Impacts Operation Mitigation Coordination with King County and trail users regarding trail realignment Coordination with King County and trail users regarding trail relocation N/A Aesthetics/Light and Glare Construction Night construction would be visible Same as Alternative 1 No Impacts Construction Mitigation No mitigation measures identified -, Same as Alternative 1 N/A JULY 2015 i i / • / ' i i S-1 i NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS / ' . . / / \ ' \ / \ I \ ; / \ / \ / \ \ / \ / \ / \ I \ / \ / \ / \ ( \ / \/ \ / \ / 1 / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ \ / \ / 1 2 SUMMARY Operations Iconic structural mass would be created visible from wide areas of Tukwila and Renton Same as Alternative 1 No Impacts Operation Mitigation Conform to the Design Review requirements imposed under the terms of the proposed Developer Agreement. Same as Alternative 1 N/A Transportation (FORTHCOMING) Construction No Impacts Operations No Impacts JULY 2015 S-2 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 1 CHAPTER 1 2 Project Alternatives 3 This chapter provides information on the alternatives evaluated in the Draft EIS. The Draft EIS considers 4 a No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action, which includes two build alternatives. Information in 5 this chapter describes the surrounding project vicinity and Proposed Action site, provides a description 6 of the No Action Alternative and the two build alternatives (including the various components common 7 and unique to each build alternative), and provides an overview of the construction of the Proposed 8 Action. 9 1.1 Project Location 10 The Proposed Action is located in Tukwila, King County, Washington. Tukwila is located about 11 miles 11 south of Seattle, 15 miles southwest of Bellevue, and 25 miles north of Tacoma. Figure 2-1 illustrate the 12 location of the Proposed Action in the greater Puget Sound region. The location is accessible by 13 Interstate 5 (1-5), Interstate 405 (1-405), State Route (SR 167), and (SR 181) with 1-5, 1-405, and SR 167 14 are being important transportation corridors in the region. In addition, the Sea-Tac International Airport 15 is located about 4 miles to the west. The UPRR and the BNSF corridors travel through the area with daily 16 Amtrak service and Sound Transit Sounder service provided along the BNSF corridor from the Tukwila 17 Station located south of the Proposed Action. 18 1.2 Proposed Action Site 19 The Proposed Action site is generally bounded by SR 181/West Valley Highway to the west, Longacres 20 Way to the south, the BNSF rail corridor to the east, and 1-405 to the north. Figure 1-2 shows the 21 location of the proposed action in the localized area of the cities of Tukwila and Renton, and Figure 1-3 22 is a conceptual aerial view of the Proposed Action looking from the southeast. 23 The Proposed Action site is located in the northeastern corner of Tukwila in the Southcenter Subarea, 24 which has been designated as an urban center by the Puget Sound Regional Council. In 2014, the City of 25 Tukwila adopted the Southcenter Subarea Plan, which further defines desirable growth for the area. 26 One of the subarea's goals is to bolster the Southcenter's market position as the primary regional 27 shopping and entertainment center for South King County. Within the Southcenter Subarea, the 28 Proposed Action is located within the Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) District, which is an area 29 where the City's Comprehensive Plan anticipates vibrant growth and development. 30 The existing land uses associated with the Proposed Action site are primarily commercial and light 31 industrial uses on the western portion of the site and vacant land on the eastern portion. Adjacent uses 32 generally comprise commercial uses which consist of hotels located north, west, and south of the site 33 and large transportation related uses including 1-405 and the UPRR and BNSF railroad corridors. Primary 34 access points to the site include SR 181, S 156th Street, Nelson Place, and Longacres Way. 35 1.3 Proposed Action Description 36 The following subsections describe the Proposed Action including the No Action Alternative and the two 37 build alternatives evaluated for this Draft EIS. JULY 2015 1-1 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 104. 3071 r KITSAP COUNTY r 1 ISLAND , COUNTY Puge yi Souisd a coma 2 FIGURE 1-1 3 Project Vicinity • A-:. Everett 5261'�--A {525) )- 12U41 prrens yp t �/ lokP Soru.,,Vlsh 12: PROJECT LO TION PIERCE ;UNTY SNOHOMISH COUNTY KING COUNTY Northwest Arena Tukwila, WA Rail Line Major Roadway City County Boundary Locator Map JULY 2015 1-2 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS MtNKLER(BLVD' 1 S 180TH ST, 2 FIGURE 1-2 3 Proposed Action Location , :, - 5T �Q II ,. us ai -2i, ,� Ip c,-.IS,; ..� ;j fSWf19TH 7i7 H _ST '.4,7r29T1475T t. Northwest Arena Tukwila, WA QProposed Action Area — -' ..1 City Boundary Park / Trail t3hrien �;5e�yttle i1JWP SuaTur :.9, Des -Moir s Krnt I1 Locator Map (i) n ton Feet r L J I 0 1,000 2,000 Source: Esn, DigrtalGlobe, Geo Eye, Earthstar Gtoeraphics, CNESJAirbus US, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmappinr, Aerodrld, IGN, IGP, swnstopo, and the G15 User Community, Kin( County, %SOdr Nearmap JULY 2015 1-3 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS • r r r r - • • r . . r • \ i \ I \ r � / I \ I ` \ / \ / \ / \ i \ / \ / \ \ / ^,/ \ / \ I \ / \ I \ / i / \ / \ i \ / / \ / \ i \ \ / \ / \ / \ i \ i \ i \ / \ / • / \ i \ / \ / \ i ` f l �. i \ / \ i \ / • / • i \ / \ / \ i / \ i \. J \ J \ i \ / \ / \ / \. / .. / \ / \ i \ i . / \ / \ i \ / \ / \. / \ / \ / • / \ J l / • i \ \. / CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 2 FIGURE 1-3 3 Proposed Action Site Concept Overview AT!0N JULY 2015 1-4 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 1.3.1 No Action Alternative 2 Under the No Action Alternative the Proposed Action would not be constructed. The existing land uses 3 would continue until development occurred consistent with the Southcenter Subarea Plan. 4 1.3.2 Build Alternatives 5 This section provides details on the two build alternatives, including the components that are common 6 to both build alternatives. 7 1.3.2.1 Build Alternative Common Components 8 The two build alternatives have some major components in common, including the arena and the main 9 parking garage, with no differences in the design and construction of these elements. Figure 1-4 10 illustrates these common build alternative components. They are described below. - - -- 'T u kw ii lla Northwest Arena Tukwila, WA City Boundary Park/ Trail Proposed Action Features Both Alteratives 0* Realigned S 1 SelTH 5T Arena; Garage Footprint Plaza Feet 0 75 150 300 `Sc Jr 0. .an. EXertalti o:e. (ie0tYe. AAA ',star Gattiuphlo, CNE$IAENA DS. USDA D56, AEX, C_tna_Ping. Aerogrid.IGY, IGP. awes, o. and the GS Low,. SAMmjnity. <I1{Ceuoty. VrSCOT, Nei rmap 11 12 FIGURE 1-4 13 Build Alternative Common Components 14 Arena 15 The maximum capacity for the arena would be 19,500 people for concerts and similar events. Sporting 16 events such as professional team and special sports events would have a capacity between 17,500 and 17 18,500. Corporate events could also be held at the arena, and capacity would depend on the type of 18 function. It is anticipated that attendance for many of the events would range from 10,000 to 15,000 19 guests. 20 The Northwest Arena is anticipated to be used for up to 230 events per yearwithin 2-3 years, f 21 completion with the majority of these events anticipated to be scheduled for evenings and weekends. JULY 2015 1-5 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 Events would include concerts, professional sports matches, special sporting events, family 2 entertainment, conventions and trade shows, and corporate events. About 110 events per year are 3 expected to be medium size with 10,000 to 15,000 attendees. About 100 large events would occur, such 4 as center stage concerts and professional sports, with between 15,000 and 19,500 attendees. About 20 5 small events would take place with attendance up to 10,000. 6 The arena would be located on a site of about 4.75 acres. The arena footprint is about 195,000 square 7 feet, with an overall gross floor area of about 680,000 square feet. The site is bounded by SR 181 to the c 8 west, S 156th Street to the north, Puget Sound Energy right-of-way to the east, and Longacres Way to ' 9 the south. The northwest corner of the arena would be the visual gateway to the site as illustrated on 'J 10 Figure 1-5. 11 The design concept for the arena is for a roof height of 155 feet. The arena would be a multi -level facility 12 including an event level, club level, main concourse, suite level, upper concourse and skybridge, press 13 level, catwalk, and roof level. The lower levels would include administration, circulation, team facilities, 14 spectator facilities, event facilities, food and retail facilities, and operations support. Figure 1-6 15 illustrates the elevations proposed for the arena. The arena would be constructed to meet U.S. Green 16 Building Council LEED Siflver Certification at a minimum. LEED is a green building certification program, 17 and the characteristics that would apply to the Proposed Action include the design and construction of 18 the arena as well as operations and maintenance. JULY 2015 1-6 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES _11 r —sue E*r --.d,-- ,r_ If 1 2 FIGURE 1-5 3 Northwest Arena from 1-405 Off -Ramp I %IA JULY 2015 i 1-7 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS / • / ♦ / ♦ ' ♦ / ♦ / ♦ / ' / ♦ / / \ / \ , ♦ / • / ♦ ♦ / ♦ ! \ / \ / \ / \ / \. / \ / ♦ � ♦ / \ / ♦ / \ 7 \ / \ ! \ 7 N. / \ / \. / \ ( ♦ ! \ ' ♦ \ / ♦ / POPULOUS Figure 1-7 Building Elevation ,DL VE3 ayE4T__4E5 DEB; 4E7i--.-- EB 'VEBU 47, Li1 42 22.5 '41, '41 22.5 '42 '21 20.5 20 DL, 20 20.5 ' 21, 'E111 EiOI E9j Ry , 4— E4�t�.__E32 E2 IEs EFLE -11 •r. 'E10V •`E11'. (DL; 1111. F 1i I, • Cr+::�:d:iii�•iititn�� ■elftli 1111111,41,AI ■■/i111011N1111U1' e■lleie1111VI1S11ir ■el iihiutli'dtl ttl', e111rel11itiP11;111 ■et•111Ill■N 1 1 111K ■ellel ISM f t Rifi ■eeteltil! 1 1111t11! NOUN III 1 t1111Thr. eels�EN f lllldi, ®i Uppel I- frt Ezra"h• " SOUTHCENTER NORTHWEST AREN TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 50%DESIGN DEVELOPMENT JOLT 31, 2015 REVISIONS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 The arena facade at street level will incorporate architectural features such as lighting, special entrance 2 treatments, facade articulation, windows, building material variation, and other elements to create a 3 memorable built environment. Figure 1-7 provides a conceptual rendering of the arena building 4 sections. JULY 2015 1-9 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS POPULOUS Figure 1-7 Building Section • i-,L ro LKVA SECTION--STAGEero C.21 C : B ' A � 'DL; ! A ; B ; C C.2: ' -1J i Yr1 r,t rr-P 1 I . 1_ '41; 415 ;42; L. amain .Bdszim oilla .. � ra, 11-1 • BOWL SECTION 'DI. CIC.2' �is.�r=oNm,�aNA. Bows _ ION av STAGE sa '1nS rBB- . BRrnIDGE' ry .4S SOO- UPPER <a: �i iBB_gveNr�pS Z 0 1- 0 CC O 0 cc O O z } J ' Z I O0 W Z W CC LL W O LL SOUTHCENTER NORTHWEST ARENA TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 50%DESIGN DEVELOPMENT JULY31.2015 REVISIONS BUILDING SECTION: A7-1-1� CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 The southeast corner would be the physical public entry into the arena and a VIP entrance would be 2 located further to the north. There would be another entrance at the southwest corner for VIP and 3 administrative staff. Loading and unloading of deliveries and equipment would be from S 156th Street, 4 and mechanical equipment including cooling towers would be located in a remote central plant adjacent 5 to the arena property. The arena would include wide sidewalks, up to 16 feet wide, on the southern side 6 adjacent to Longacres Way, and extra -wide sidewalks on the western side of the arena, between 16 and 7 24 feet wide. 8 Main Parking Garage 9 The 3,500-space main parking garage would be bounded by the UPRR corridor to the west, Longacres 10 Way to the south, the BNSF railroad corridor to the east, and 1-405 to the north. The garage would be 7 11 levels and about 80 feet high. The garage entrance would includehree entrance Iane`s and three exit, 12 lanes. To shorten departure times from the garage, users would pay prior to entering the garage or at 13 payment machines located in the garage, plaza, or arena. With all payment made prior to exiting the 14 garage, guest vehicles can leave the arena area quickly. The garage would include bicycle parking, with 15 the number of spaces provided consistent with TMC Title 18. The Proposed Action includes the 16 construction of two pedestrian skybridges to connect the main parking garage to areas east of the 17 arena. The connections would be located on the northern and southern ends of the main parking garage 18 and would be designed to ensure Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access on both sides. The 19 skybridges would be designed to ensure proper clearance over the UPRR railroad crossing, which would 20 result in the skybridges connecting the arena to the upper floors of the main parking garage. 21 Plaza 22 The Proposed Action would include a plaza of about 72,000 square feet east of the arena and within the 23 existing Puget Sound Energy (PSE) right-of-way. The plaza would include open space with gathering 24 locations and elements like water features, food and beverage providers, and, depending on the event, 25 could include live music or other viewing opportunities. In order to minimize delays getting into the 26 arena, prior to entering the plaza the event attendees and those who just want to access the plaza 27 would pass through security prescreening. Figure 1-8 illustrates a conceptual view of the plaza at the 28 southern end, including the security prescreening area. 29 / • JULY 2015 1-11 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 5rr • ; /ter --w� 0111 s��"l;ts,'ri�Nta� n1r►� r. 2 3 FIGURE 1-8 4 Conceptual Plaza Entrance from the South. 5 The PSE right-of-way at the proposed plaza area currently contains overhead 115-kilovolt (kV) and 230- 6 kV power lines and a section of the Interurban Traiil. The right-of-way is also used for parking by some of 7 the adjacent businesses. The 115-kV lines would be relocated as part of the Proposed Action, and the 8 230 kV would remain in place. The Interurban Trail would be relocated either within or outside of the 9 PSE right-of-way, and no parking would be allowed in the area between Longacres Way and S 156th 10 Street. 11 Employment 12 The Proposed Action would require 200 to 400 permanent and part-time/temporary employees. The 13 employees would include administrative staff, maintenance staff, ushers, ticket takers, security, 14 cleaning, food service, parking, medical, and retail staff. The number of event staff would vary 15 depending on the size and type of event. For larger events like concerts or professional sports, higher 16 numbers of event employees would be required, but still a maximum of up to 400. 17 Off -Street Parking 18 In addition to the main parking garage, other parking would be acquired through agreements with 19 surrounding properties. Other businesses in the surrounding area are also likely to provide additional 20 parking such as paid lots at market rates, or to offer parking as an incentive to eat at their restaurant or 21 stay at their hotel. Sufficient parking agreements would be secured to ensure parking can be provided 22 during events when the arena is at or near capacily. Additional information on parking is provided in 23 Section 2.5, Transportation, and Appendix C, Transportation Technical Report. 24 Vehicle Access and Non -Motorized Access 25 The primary vehicle access (entrance and egress) to the main parking garage would be from Longacres 26 Way, Tukwila Station Access Road, and Longacres Drive) Longacres Way is a two-lane roadway between 27 SR i181 and the BNSF undercrossing. Longacres Way intersects SR 181,which connects to 1-405 to the -JULY 2015 1-12 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 north. Tukwila Station Access Road is a two-lane private roadway owned by Sound Transit located east 2 of the UPRR railroad corridor and between Longacres Way and SW 27th Street. The Proposed Action 3 would obtain the necessary agreements with Sound Transit to use the roadway prior to opening. 4 Longacres Drive is located east of the BNSF corridor and connects to Longacres Way at the BNSF railroad 5 undercrossing. Longacres Drive provides access to SW 16th Street and SW Grady Way, which would 6 allow event goers to access the main parking garage from SR 167. 7 Construction of the arena would require the vacation of Nelson Place and would require S 156th Street 8 to be modified and angled to the northeast. The modifications to S 156th Street would require the 9 relocation of the PSE tower that supports the 230kV powerlines. The tower would be replaced with a 10 monopole and shifted to north outside of the relocated roadway. 11 The Proposed Action would include sidewalk improvements to the north side of Longacres Way to 12 connect the main garage to the arena. The sidewalk would be constructed under the existing UPRR 13 railroad corridor, but would not interfere with UPRR operations. The sidewalk would also continue 14 eastward and under the BNSF railroad corridor to provide pedestrian access from off-street parking to 15 the east. The City of Tukwila plans to open a new pedestrian bridge over the Green River just south of 16 the intersection of SR 181 and Longacres Way, which would provide a more direct connection to areas 17 west of the arena , ncluding additional transit opportunitr0 Transit access to the Proposed Action 18 includes Sound Transit Sounder and King County Metro F line to the Tukwila Station located south of the 19 main parking garage (Figure 1-2). In addition, the recently improved Tukwila Urban Transit Center is 20 located to the west of the arena across the Green River and provides additional bus transit by King 21 County Metro. 22 The Proposed Action would include a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to ensure safe and 23 efficient operation of the facility. The TMP-would be developed by the proponent and the City of 24 Tukwila in coordinationwith any other agencies who have responsibilities in implementing the 25 measures identified in the TMP. The TMP would be in place prior to operation. Section 2.5, 26 Transportation and Appendix C, Transportation Technical Report, provides information on the TMP. 27 1.3.2.2 Alternative 1 28 The project elements that are unique to Alternative 1 include vehicle access. Figure 1-9 illustrates the 29 components unique to Alternative 1. 30 During events Longacres Way would be open at all times for ingress and egress in the interim until 31 Strander Boulevard construction is complete (if funded). Alternative 1 assumes that the Strander 32 Boulevard connection under the UPRR railroad and connecting to SW 27th Street to the east would be 33 completed by 2037, which is the horizon year used in the transportation analysis. Once the Strander 34 Boulevard extension is completed, Longacres Way may be closed about 2 to 3 hours before events and 35 would be open after events en5g/for exiting vehicles. 36 The Interurban Trail would remain within PSE right-of-way and would likely need to be shifted away 37 from the eastern facade of the arena. Trail users would generally continue to travel on the trail as they 38 currently do, but during events users would have to bypass around the plaza area. The plaza would to be 39 closed to trail users, but would need to go through the prescreening security prior to continuing on the 40 trail. During construction, trail detours would be developed with appropriate signage. Section 2.3, 41 Recreation, provides information on detour routes during construction and alternative routing during 42 event operation. JULY 2015 1-13 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ;A + re Northwest Arena Tukwila, WA as a oty Boundary Park / Trail Proposed Action Features Alternative 1 C Sky Bridge Alternative 2 MINI Sky Bridge t7 G O Relocated Interurban Trail nGarage Knetpnnt Both Alternatives • • •• Realigned 5156TH ST riArena /Garage Footprint Eal Plaza SeaTa I ocatnr p O 1. Renton Fee 0 75 150 300 `✓ urfc: tsrl, orgaaKi o:c. Cieetyc. tart %star Geugi+phiss, CraSJAnbus 15, USDA, USGS, AE%, Getma=ping, Aercgrid, IGY, IGP, swertapc, and the G'S User Comm Jhity. tIng Ccc%ty. %%SCOT, Yeernap 1 2 FIGURE 1-9 3 Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 Components `.e tukwiip, Station' 4 1.3.2.3 Alternative 2 5 Figure 1-9 illustrates the components unique to Alternative 2, which include the construction of a 1,000- 6 space VIP garage. The VIP garage would be located between the plaza and the UPRR railroad corridor, 7 and access to the garage would be via S 156th Street. Alternative 2 assumes that the Strander Boulevard 8 extension would not be completed by opening day, but would be completed about 2 to 4 years after the 9 -Proposed Action is open. 10 Alternative 2 would construct an additional pedestrian skybridge from the main garage to the VIP 11 parking garage. Similar to the skybridges constructed from the main parking garage to areas north of 12 south, the skybridge to the VIP parking garage would be constructed high enough to ensure proper 13 clearance over the UPRR railroad and would provide ADA access. Alternative 2 would relocate a segment 14 of the Interurban Trail outside of the PSE right-of-way. The trail between Longacres Way and 1-405 15 would be relocated to the east and would travel north from Longacres Way towards 1-405 where it 16 -would turn west to connect with the existing trail. Figure 1-9 illustrates the proposed location of the 17 trail. The relocated trail would be reconstructed to be consistent with applicable standards. Section 2.3, 18 Recreation, provides information on detour routes during construction and alternative routing during 19 event operation. 20 1.4 Alternatives Considered But Not Advanced 21 Because the Proposed Action is a private project consistent with WAC 197-11-780, no offsite 22 alternatives were considered or evaluated. Off -site alternatives, or alternatives on property not owned JULY 2015 1-14 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 or controlled by the Proponent would not meet the requirements for a reasonable alternative as 2 required by WAC 197-11-440 and 786. 3 1.5 Benefits and Disadvantages of Delaying Project 4 Implementation 5 If RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC decided not to move forward with the construction and 6 operation of the Northwest Arena, potential benefits could include: 7 • No disruptions to the Interurban Trail during construction and no relocation of a section of the trail 8 during operation. 9 • No transportation impacts associated with event traffic and parking. 10 The primary disadvantage would be the lost opportunities related to employment and the economic 11 benefits of a large multi -use arena that would attract professional sports and other entertainment 12 events that require an appropriately sized venue that currently does not exist in the Puget Sound region. 13 The Proposed Action would provide a catalyst for future development that the City of Tukwila envisions 14 in the Southcenter Subarea Plan. This new development could provide additional employment 15 opportunities, housing and tax revenue for the City of Tukwila. 16 1.6 Construction 17 The following discussion provides an overview of the construction approach for the Proposed Action. 18 Construction is expected to last up to 22 months. Construction of the arena would occur over the entire 19 22-month construction window and the main parking garage would require about 15 months. 20 Most of the construction activities would occur Monday to Friday between 7 a.m. and midnight. To 21 ensure the construction schedule can be met, work may be required on weekends as well. For any 22 construction activities outside of the noise construction windows (TMC Chapter 8.22), a noise variance 23 would be obtained from the City of Tukwila. For the day shift, 7 a.m. to 4 p.m., about 285 workers would 24 be onsite. About 40 would work the evening shift. Parking for the construction workers would be onsite 25 at one of the parcels controlled by RLB Holdings. Construction staging areas would also be needed for 26 equipment and materials, and properties north of the arena would be used temporarily for this purpose. 27 The first steps in the construction sequencing would include establishing any traffic revisions associated 28 with the project, setting up site fencing and temporary erosion control measures, rerouting and 29 decommissioning utilities, and demolishing existing structures. About 59,000 square feet of existing 30 buildings would be demolished. Prior to demolition, a Phase 1 (and, if required, Phase 2) site assessment 31 would be conducted to uncover any hazardous materials that might be present in the buildings, soils, or 32 groundwater. Demolition activities would require excavators, loaders, and dump trucks, and demolition 33 waste materials would be disposed of in a permitted facility. 34 Once demolition is complete, the arena site would be prepared for the installation of the deep 35 foundations. Deep foundations would include driving up to 1,500 steel piles for the arena site. Pile 36 driving would be the loudest construction activity and is anticipated to last about,4, months. Pile driving 37 would be done during daytime hours to minimize impacts on the surrounding hotels and motels. Once 38 piles are placed, the foundation of the arena would be constructed, then the arena structure would be 39 built, followed by the exterior and the interior of the arena. 40 Construction of the main parking garage would not include any demolition since the site is a vacant lot. 41 Similar to the arena, steel piles would need to be driven (up to 750), then the foundation built, followed 42 by the construction of the parking garage structure. 43 Construction of the Proposed Action would require large amounts of concrete, which would be brought 44 to the site via truck. During construction a number of truck trips to the site would be required to haul JULY 2015 1-15 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1 the materials needed to construct the Proposed Action, Construction activities at the arena site would 2 require lane closures on SR 181 and Longacres Way. Section 2.5, Transportation, provides information 3 on the haul routes and construction traffic impacts. • JULY 2015 1-16 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 CHAPTER 2 2 Environmental Analysis 3 This chapter provides information on the affected environment; potential impacts during construction 4 and operation, both negative and positive; and mitigation measures to minimize the impacts of the 5 elements of the environment evaluated in this Draft EIS. This section also includes information on the 6 No Action Alternative. As noted in the Fact Sheet, these elements of the environment are the only 7 elements evaluated in the draft EIS because of their potential for significant impacts. The study area for 8 the Proposed Action is primarily the property boundaries, but it takes into consideration the areas 9 outside of the property boundaries that could be affected by the build alternatives. 10 2.1 Air 11 The following section provides information on air quality in the Proposed Action area, and evaluates the 12 degree to which the Proposed Action would affect the local and regional air quality. 13 2.1.1 Affected Environment 14 Air quality, which is a general term used to describe pollutant levels in the atmosphere, could be 15 affected by emissions generated by construction and operational sources related to the Proposed 16 Action. 17 Ambient air quality is a function of many factors, including climate, topography, meteorological 18 conditions, and the production of airborne pollutants by natural or artificial sources. Both the federal 19 Clean Air Act of 1970 (42 United States Code §§ 7401 et seq.) and its amendments, and the Washington 20 State Clean Air Act (Revised Code of Washington 70.94) currently regulate air quality. The U.S. 21 Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), and 22 the local Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) enforce regulations developed to protect air quality 23 within the Puget Sound region. USEPA delegates authority to manage air quality issues to the states. In 24 Washington, USEPA and Ecology further delegate authority to local air quality agencies. The authority to 25 regulate air quality has been delegated to PSCAA in four counties, including King County where the 26 project is located. 27 USEPA has established nationwide air quality standards to protect public health and welfare with an 28 adequate margin of safety. These federal standards, known as the National Ambient Air Quality 29 Standards (NAAQS), represent the maximum allowable atmospheric concentrations of pollutants and 30 were developed for six criteria pollutants: ozone, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide (CO), particulate 31 matter (both particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter [PM10] and particulate matter less than 32 2.5 microns in diameter [PM2.5]), sulfur dioxide, and lead. The NAAQS represent safe levels of each 33 pollutant to avoid specific adverse effects to human health and the environment. In addition to these 34 standards, Ecology and PSCAA have adopted state and local ambient air quality standards. 35 Ecology and PSCAA monitor air quality in the Puget Sound region by measuring the levels of criteria 36 pollutants found in the atmosphere and comparing them with the NAAQS. The Proposed Action is 37 located in the Puget Sound region, which is designated as a maintenance area for federal standards of 38 CO. The study area is designated as an attainment area for PM10 and PM2.5. The Puget Sound region is 39 currently in attainment or unclassified for all other criteria pollutants. The Proposed Action must meet 40 the state and local air quality standards unless USEPA standards are more stringent. 41 2.1.2 Impacts and Mitigation 42 The following subsections provide information on the construction and operation impacts of the build 43 alternatives and the No Action alternative, and identify any required mitigation. JULY 2015 2-1 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 2.1.2.1 Alternative 1 2 Construction 3 During construction of the Proposed Action there would be air emissions generated from construction 4 workers commuting to and from the site, from equipment and materials being delivered to the site, and 5 from the construction equipment. Most of the emissions would be fugitive dust from moving soil during 6 site preparation and from vehicles coming and going or moving around the site. 7 Proposed Action Alternative 1 would include the construction of the arena and main parking garage, and 8 Alternative 2 would be the same as Alternative 1 but would also construct a VIP garage. The 9 approximate construction duration for either alternative would be about 22 months starting in 2015. 10 The staging and construction worker parking would likely be onsite. 11 The construction of the Proposed Action would include the following activities: 12 • Demolition and site preparation 13 • Pile driving 14 • Placement of pile caps and foundation work 15 • Construction of structures 16 • Interior, enclosure, and other site improvement work 17 Typical construction emission sources that would impact air quality include the following: 18 • Fugitive dust generated during demolition and pavement 19 • Fugitive dust generated by vehicle movement on paved and unpaved roads, excavation, grading, 20 loading and unloading activities 21 • Engine exhaust emission from diesel -fuel fired construction equipment, construction vehicles, and 22 worker vehicles 23 • Volatile organic and odorous compounds emitted during asphalt paving 24 During construction, the sources noted above may temporarily affect air quality. The total emissions and 25 the timing of emissions from these sources would vary depending on phasing of the project and options 26 chosen for the project. Project construction activities could result in short-term increases in dust and 27 equipment -related emissions in and around the project area. Exhaust emissions during construction 28 would be generated by fuel combustion in motor vehicles and construction equipment, and particulate 29 emissions would result from soil disturbance, earthwork, and other construction activities. Construction 30 vehicle activity and disruption of normal traffic flow could result in increased motor vehicle emissions 31 within certain areas. However, the air quality impacts from the construction emissions are expected to 32 be temporary and would not cause significant long-term air quality impacts. 33 The project would comply with state and regional air quality regulations, and the construction 34 contractor would implement appropriate best management practices and emission reduction measures. 35 For temporary impacts during construction, state law and PSCAA regulations (PSCAA Section 9.15) 36 require that construction site owners and/or operators take reasonable precautions to prevent fugitive 37 dust from becoming airborne. In addition to control measures listed in PSCAA regulations, the project 38 may implement the following emission control measures to reduce emissions of fugitive dust and other 39 air pollutants during construction: 40 • Spray exposed soil with water or other dust suppressant to reduce emissions of PM10 and deposition 41 of particulate matter during dry periods. 42 • Use phased development to keep disturbed areas to a minimum. • JULY 2015 2-2 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 • Minimize dust emissions during transport of fill material or soil by wetting down Toads or by 2 ensuring adequate freeboard (space from the top of the material to the top of the truck bed) on 3 trucks. 4 • Promptly clean up spills of transported material on public roads. 5 • Schedule work tasks to minimize disruption of the existing vehicle traffic on streets. 6 • Restrict traffic onsite to reduce soil upheaval and the transport of material to roadways. 7 • Locate construction equipment and truck staging areas away from sensitive receptors as practical 8 and in consideration of potential impacts on other resources. 9 • Provide wheel washers to remove particulate matter that would otherwise be carried offsite by 10 vehicles to decrease deposition of particulate matter on area roadways. 11 • Cover dirt, gravel, and debris piles as needed to reduce dust and wind-blown debris. w1�� 12 • Minimize odors onsite by covering loads. 13 • Emissions of PM2.5i PM10, volatile organic compounds, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and CO would 14 be minimized whenever reasonable and possible. Since these emissions primarily result from 15 construction equipment, machinery engines would be kept in good mechanical condition to 16 minimize exhaust emissions. Additionally, contractors would be encouraged to reduce idling time of 17 equipment and vehicles and to use newer construction equipment or equipment with add -on 18 emission controls. 19 Operation 20 The air quality analysis used traffic impact data (levels of service or LOS) from the Transportation 21 Technical Report to determine potential air quality impacts during operation. These data included both 22 baseline conditions and potential changes associated with the Proposed Action at intersections and 23 corridors selected by the City of Tukwila and the City of Renton. Analyses were conducted for the year of 24 opening (2017) and a future horizon year (2037). 25 The equipment to be used to operate and maintain the Northwest Arena was not yet determined at the 26 time of this report. General operational emission sources could include emergency generators, boilers, 27 and cooling towers. Emission impacts from the operation and maintenance of the arena itself are 28 expected be minimal. The primary air quality impacts resulting from the arena would be the vehicle 29 emissions from vehicle traffic in the study area due to events occurring at the Northwest Arena (visitor 30 and employee vehicle trips). Because the project is located in a CO maintenance area, CO impacts due to 31 vehicle emissions were considered. 32 To evaluate the CO "hot spot" impacts, a quantitative CO hot -spot analysis was conducted using 33 Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) Washington State Intersection Screening 34 Tool (WASIST) version 3.0. WASIST uses emission factors from USEPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions 35 Simulator (MOVES2014) and was approved by USEPA Region 10 for use on project -level CO hot spot 36 analysis within Washington state CO maintenance areas that meet the WASIST intersection criteria. 37 Three intersections that might be adversely affected by the Proposed Action were identified based on 38 changes in intersection volume, delay, and LOS between the existing conditions and Proposed Action. 39 Intersections were first ranked by LOS, then the intersections with the worst -case LOS were ranked by 40 severity of delay (from highest to lowest). The top three LOS F intersections with the highest delay were 41 chosen for the analysis. The existing year, opening year, and horizon year are 2015, 2017, and 2037, 42 respectively. Attachment A, LOS Information, in Appendix B, Air Quality, summarizes the intersection 43 LOS and delay for the study area. The selected intersections are listed below: 44 1. SR 181 and Strander Boulevard JULY 2015 2-3 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 2. 66th Avenue South and Southcenter Boulevard 2 3. SR 181 and South 180th Street 3 The WASIST-predicted impacts are presented in Table 2.1-1 for 1-hour CO and in Table 2.1-2 for 8-hour 4 CO. The background CO concentration was selected based on the WSDOT recommendation. A value of 5 3.0 parts per million (ppm) is suggested for intersections located in Western Washington (WSDOT, 6 2009). In addition, each intersection and build or non -build scenario used project -specific inputs that 7 included intersection surroundings, intersection types, intersection approach speeds, and intersection 8 signal timing. WASIST receptor defaults were used as receptor location inputs. Attachment B, WASIT, in 9 Appendix B provides detailed WASIST inputs and outputs for all analyses conducted. 10 TABLE 2.1-1 Modeled 1-Hour Carbon Monoxide Design Values Intersection Maximum 1-Hour Carbon Monoxide Design Values (ppm) Existing 2017 No Action 2017 Alternative 1 2017 Alternative 2 2037 No Action 2037 Alternative 1 2037 Alternative 2 West Valley Hwy/ Strander Blvd 3.8 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.3 3.3 3.3 66th Ave S/ Southcenter Blvd 3.8 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.2 3.2 3.2 West Valley Hwy/ S 180th St 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.4 3.4 3.4 NAAQS 35 NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards ppm = parts per million TABLE 2.1-2 Modeled 8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Design Values Maximum 8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Design Values (ppm) 2017 No- 2017 2017 2037 No 2037 2037 Alternative Intersection Existing Action Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Action Alternative 1 2 West Valley Hwy/ Strander Blvd 3.6 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 66th Ave S/ Southcenter Blvd West Valley Hwy/ S 180th St 3.6 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.3 NAAQS 9 NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards ppm = parts per million 11 12 The predicted impacts from the WASIST analysis for each selected intersection are below the 1-hour and 13 8-hour CO NAAQS of 35 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) and 9 µg/m3, respectively. Therefore, the 14 project is not expected to cause new violations to the CO NAAQS. The Proposed Action would not be 15 expected to result in any significant air quality impacts due to its effect on the traffic in the area. JULY 2015 2-4 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 2.1.2.2 Mitigation 2 No mitigation measures are required during construction or operation. Alternative 2\ 3 Construction 4 Impacts for Alternative 2 would be the same as described above under Alternative 1 except Alternative 5 2 includes the construction of a VIP parking garage. The construction of the VIP garage would result in 6 additional temporary impacts, but would not result in any significant impacts on air quality. 7 Operation 8 Impacts would be the same as those under Alternative 1. 9 Mitigation 10 Because project construction and operation are not expected to cause substantial air quality impacts, 11 mitigation measures would be the same as those under Alternative 1. 12 2.1.2.3 No Action 13 Under the No Action Alternative there would be no construction activities and during operation no 14 increase in traffic that would result in any changes to air quality. 15 2.1.2.4 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 16 No secondary or cumulative impacts are expected to occur under Alternative 1 or 2. 17 2.1.2.5 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 18 No significant unavoidable adverse impacts on air quality are expected under Alternative 1 or 2. 19 2.2 Land Use 20 2.2.1 Affected Environment 21 The following section provides information on existing land uses and zoning at the Proposed Action site 22 and immediate vicinity, and information on the relevant land use goals and policies. 23 2.2.1.1 Existing Land Uses 24 Existing Site Land Use 25 The Proposed Action site is composed of parcels east of the SR 181. The project site is bounded on the 26 north by 1-405, on the east by the BNSF Railroad, and on the south by Longacres Way. The site is crossed 27 by several streets. S 156th Street crosses the project site from east to west from SR 181 to Nelson Place 28 and Nelson Place is a north -south public right-of-way that connects S 156th Street to Longacres Way. 29 Adjacent and parallel to Nelson Place on the east is the PSE right-of-way, which is about 100 feet wide. 30 Within the right-of-way are overhead transmission lines (115 kv and 230 kv) as well as underground 31 distribution lines, and the Interurban Trail. The PSE right-of-way also provides access and parking to 32 certain properties abutting the right-of-way to the east. The Interurban Trail and potential impacts on it 33 are described in Section 2.3, Recreation. Existing land uses in the Proposed Action area include 34 commercial including a hotel (Hampton Inn) and light industrial, including small manufacturing and 35 warehouse facilities. To the east between the UPRR and the BNSF railroad corridors the land uses in the 36 Proposed Action area include vacant parcels. Both of the railroad corridors are located on raised 37 embankments about 15 feet above the adjacent land uses. 38 Land uses adjacent and in close proximity, about 500 feet, of the Proposed Action consists primarily of 39 commercial uses dominated by hotels and motels. In addition to the Hampton Inn on the Proposed 40 Action site, an Embassy Suites Hotel is directly south across Longacres Way and abutting the Embassy 41 Suites to the south is a Courtyard by Marriott. West of the Proposed Action on the other side of SR 181 42 there is an Extended Stay America and a Ramada Inn. To the south of the Proposed Action and between 43 the UPRR and BNSF railroad corridors, is a transportation related use. The Tukwila Station includes a / \ • JULY 2015 2-5 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 platform station for Sound Transit Sounder and Amtrak passenger rail service, bus service by King 2 County Metro, and a park -and -ride lot. There are no residential land uses in the vicinity of the Proposed 3 Action. The Nelsen Family Residence Historical Trust property, a King County Historic Site, is on the west 4 side of SR 181 across from the southwest corner of the Proposed Action site. 5 Further from the Proposed Action and east of the BNSF railroad corridor is the site of the former 6 Longacres horse racing track within the city of Renton that was purchased by the Boeing Company for 7 development as an office park. North of the Proposed Action and north of 1-405 is a commercial complex 8 that includes a strip mall, a hotel (Comfort Inn), and a recreational facility (Family Fun Center). West of 9 the project site and west of the Green River, land uses are dominated by retail with some office uses. 10 The Westfield Southcenter, the largest regional shopping center in the region is located about 0.5 mile 11 west of the Proposed Action. 12 Land use in the vicinity is shaped and controlled by substantial physical barriers. These include the 13 elevated 1-405 freeway to the north as well as SR 181. Two railroad corridors elevated on significant fill 14 prisms present barriers both across the project site itself and to the east of the project site. To the west, 15 the meandering Green River is also a major physical barrier. The Green River Trail lies adjacent to the 16 left bank (generally west) of the Green River on the top of the river's levee. 17 Zoning 18 The Proposed Action is located within the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District of the Tukwila 19 Urban Center (TUC). The TOD District is located in the in the northeast corner of the larger Southcenter 20 Subarea which includes four other districts in addition to the TOD District (Regional Center, Pond 21 District, Workplace, and Commercial Corridor) which were created as part of the subarea to guide 22 development and change in these distinct areas. Within the TOD District, higher densities of mixed uses 23 including residential, commercial, and office are anticipated to create a transit accessible and walkable 24 urban center in close proximity to the Regional Center and to the Tukwila Transit Center and Tukwila 25 Station. 26 Adopted Land Use Plans and Policies 27 The Southcenter Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan) adopted in June 2014 is an element of the City's 28 Comprehensive Plan, consistent with the state Growth Management Act. The Subarea Plan establishes a 29 planning and design framework to further the vitality, functionality, and sustainability of the 30 Southcenter area in accordance with market forces and the community's vision for its primary 31 commercial district (City of Tukwila, 2014). The Subarea Plan identified five districts in the Southcenter 32 area with the Proposed Action located in the TOD District. The Subarea Plan articulates a vision for the 33 TOD District to foster a compact and vibrant mix of housing, office, lodging, and supportive retail and 34 service uses and the Proposed Action is consistent with the stated purpose of the TOD District and the 35 polices of the Subarea Plan that includes, for example: 36 • "Bolster the Southcenter area's market position as the primary regional shopping and entertainment 37 center for South King County." 38 • "In the area surrounding the Sounder commuter rail/Amtrak Station, consider a special opportunity 39 area that could develop at even greater intensities with a wider variety of uses, such as regional 40 serving entertainment and retail." 41 • "The community will leverage the rail station and bus transit center to bring new investment to the 42 previously underutilized properties within walking distance of these facilities." 43 • "Compact and coordinated mixed use development will provide opportunities for shared parking 44 facilities. Such facilities can be shared between public and private uses — and between different 45 private uses." JULY 2015 2-6 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 • "The overall structure of the TOD Neighborhood will be characterized by higher development 2 intensities and building heights close to the Tukwila Station, lower -rise buildings along the river, 3 increasing again to higher development intensities and heights where the district overlaps with the 4 edges of the Regional Center." 5 • "Promote investment in full range of retail and entertainment in Southcenter" 6 • "There could be a possibility of assembling properties in the area and creating a special opportunity 7 district with a mixed use development (such as housing, office, and regional serving retail and 8 entertainment) at greater intensities than currently proposed." 9 TMC Chapter 18.28 implements the goals and policies of the Southcenter Subarea Plan. On April 29, 10 2015, the City of Tukwila issued a Code Interpretation pursuant to the provisions of TMC 18.96.020 11 regarding the proposed arena (see Code Interpretation Notice of Decision for information). This Code 12 Interpretation concluded that the proposed "...arena use is similar, compatible and consistent with the 13 public assembly and entertainment uses already permitted in the TOD District and will enhance the 14 Southcenter area's market position, foster intensified development and help meet the community's 15 goals for the urban center. An arena adjacent to the Sounder Station that accommodates spectator 16 sports events along with other permitted public assembly uses is consistent with the Southcenter Plan's 17 Vision." 18 2.2.2 Alternative 1 19 This section provides information on construction and operational impacts on land use associated with 20 Alternative 1, and potential mitigation measures. 21 Construction ,� 22 During construction, impacts on adjoining land uses would occur and would be most noticeable to land 23 uses directly adjacent to the project site. Construction staging, traffic, and noise could disrupt normal 24 business activities at times, and the Interurban Trail would be detoured during construction for safety 25 reasons. Lane closures and construction traffic management measures could also impact access to land 26 uses near the site on both sides of SR 181. See Transportation (Section 2.5) and Recreation (Section 2.3) 27 for more information regarding construction -related impacts. Construction noise would include the • ;•` 28 operation of heavy equipment and pile driving. Pile driving would be the most noticeable impact to ( 29 adjoining land uses. Pile driving of steel piles is required for the project and the activity is expected to \: 30 last approximately five months. The noise and ground vibration/shaking would be noticeable and felt at 31 land uses in the project area including the hotels and motels that are adjacent. These impacts would be 32 temporary and end once the activity is complete and are not anticipated to result in any significant 33 impacts on the adjacent land uses. The majority of the construction work on the Proposed Action would 34 occur during the daytime, and impacts on those sleeping at the hotels and motels would be minimized. 35 Construction of the Proposed Action will conform to the requirements in TMC 8.22, except as provided 36 through a noise variance, if required. 37 Operation 38 The Proposed Action would convert the existing mix of land uses to uses associated with the multi -use 39 arena project which is a change from the existing uses, but as noted above under Adopted Land Use 40 Plans and Polices is consistent with the Southcenter Subarea Plan. Table 2.2-1 summarizes the land use 41 changes that would occur under Alternative 1. 42 JULY 2015 2-7 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS TABLE 2.2-1 Summary of Land Use Changes Under Alternative 1 Parcel Number and Site Address Current Use, No Action Alternative Proposed Use, Alternative 1 242304-9014 7200 S 158TH ST Hotel/Motel Potential Construction Staging 000580-0011 15616 WEST VALLEY HWY Warehouse Arena 000580-0032 15650 WEST VALLEY HWY Vacant (Commercial) Arena 000580-0014 15666 WEST VALLEY HWY Vacant (Commercial) Arena 000580-0025 15666 WEST VALLEY HWY Industrial (Light) Arena 000580-0028 15668 WEST VALLEY HWY Medical/Dental Office Arena 000580-0034 15665 NELSON PL Warehouse Arena 000580-0026 15701 NELSON PL Warehouse Arena 000580-0035 15701 NELSON PL Vacant (Commercial) Arena Nelson Place Public Street Arena 000580-0008 7437 S 158TH ST Right of Way/Utility, Roada Plazab 000580-0029 15700 NELSON PL Industrial (Light) Plaza 000580-0027 No Address Utility, Private (Radio/TV) Plazab 242304-9137 No address Vacant (Commercial) Parking Garage 242304-9034 825 INDUSTRY DR Vacant (Utilities)) Parking Garage Note: Address, Parcel Number, and Current Use information is as provided by King County Assessor online database on June 20, 2015. a This parcel also contains the Interurban Trail. See section 2.5 Recreation for discussion of impacts to the trail. b This parcel is not owned or controlled by the proponent. • JULY 2015 2-8 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS r CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS �• .� 1 Nelson Place would need to be permanently vacated between S 156th Street and Longacres Way for the 2 Proposed Action, but the land use impacts of the street vacation would be minimal because the existing 3 land uses served by this segment of Nelson Place would be demolished as part of the Proposed Action. 4 S 156th Street would be realigned to the north as part of the Proposed Action, but would remain a ' 5 public right-of-way as relocated. Although S 156th Street would be realigned to the north, access to the 6 properties east of the PSE right-of-way and west of the UPRR corridor would be maintained through the 7 existing access agreements. 8 As described above under 2.1.2, the Proposed Action would be consistent with City of Tukwila goals and 9 policies. Land uses on the project site would be converted from the current low-rise warehouse and 10 office uses to a multi -purpose arena facility. Displacement of existing commercial/industrial land uses in • 11 response to the area converting from suburban to urban center was considered in the Southcenter � \ • 16 TOD District. In addition, the height of the Proposed Action would not result in any significant impacts 17 related to Aesthetics (refer to Section 2.4). Because the Proposed Action exceeds the current heights ,, 18 allowed in the TOD District, the City of Tukwila and RLB Holdings will prepare a Development Agreement 19 consistent with TMC 18.86. The Development Agreement would include design and development 12 Subarea Plan EIS. 13 The Northwest Arena would be up to 155 feet in height which is greater than that allowed in the TOD 14 District (115 feet). The increase in height would not result in any significant land use impacts since the 15 Proposed Action is not a residential land use that would result in increases in the planned density in the 20 standards including maximum height along with other development features associated with the 21 Proposed Action. The Proposed Action would also include execution of agreements with property / 22 owners in the vicinity to utilize existing parking spaces for arena events. Shared parking is consistent 23 with Tukwila policies (see TMC 18.06.175): 24 Mitigation 25 No land use mitigation measures would be necessary during construction or operation. 26 2.2.3 Alternative 2 27 This section provides information on construction and operational impacts associated with Alternative 2 28 and mitigation measures to address potential impacts. 29 Construction 30 Construction impacts would be the same as those described above under Alternative 1. 31 Operation 32 Alternative 2 would have the same land use impacts described above under Alternative 1 including the 33 vacation of Nelson Place and S. 156th Street. The difference between the two build alternatives with 34 regards to land use is Alternative 2 includes the construction of a VIP parking garage and affects an. 35 additional parcel. In addition to the information in Table 2.2-1 which applies to Alternative 2 as well, 36 Table 2.2-2 summarizes the land use changes that would occur under Alternative 2. Under Alternative 2, 37 the Proposed Action would acquire all properties that need access; therefore no property access 38 agreement to the existing land use would be required. 39 JULY 2015 2-9 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS TABLE 2.2-2 Summary of Land Use Changes Under Alternative 2 (in Addition to Alternative 1) Parcel Number and Site Address Current Use, No Action Alternative Proposed Use, Alternative 2 000580-0023 15660 NELSON PL Warehouse VIP Parking Garagea Note: Address, Parcel Number, and Current Use information is as provided by King County Assessor online database on June 20, 2015. a This parcel Is not owned or controlled by the proponent. 1 2 Mitigation 3 No land use mitigation measures would be necessary during construction or operation. 4 2.2.4 No Action Alternative 5 Under the No Action Alternative, development and redevelopment of the area could occur consistent 6 with the new Southcenter Subarea Plan and implementing regulations. There would be no immediate 7 demolition of existing buildings or conversion of existing land uses on the Proposed Action site. The 8 existing warehouses, small businesses, and other uses on the site would remain until redevelopment 9 unrelated to the arena is proposed. The City may invest in public projects in the area to serve as a 10 catalyst for development and redevelopment in the TOD District consistent with the Southcenter 11 Subarea Plan. 12 2.2.5 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 13 The Proposed Action results in a change in the existing Land use but does not result in changes to the 14 land uses adjacent to or within the surrounding area in the TOD District and the overall Southcenter 15 Subarea. The City of Tukwila can make changes to land use regulations which can change the allowed 16 uses in areas of the city as it has done with the adoption of the Southcenter Subarea Plan. The Proposed 17 Action would create an anchor presence within the TOD District and could act as a catalyst for 18 redevelopment in the TOD District and the larger Southcenter Subarea consistent with the applicable 19 policies and codes of the City of Tukwila. The timing and extent of these changes would vary and the 20 consistency of any proposed development with land use regulations would be subject to site -specific 21 evaluation under the applicable policies and codes of the City of Tukwila. 22 2.2.6 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 23 No significant unavoidable adverse land use impacts are expected under Alternative 1 or 2. 24 2.3 Recreation 25 The following section describes the recreation facilities, identified in the Parks, Recreation, and Open 26 Space element of City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan that are adjacent to and near the Proposed Action 27 that could be affected during construction and operation. 28 2.3.1 Affected Environment 29 The Interurban Trail is the main recreation facility in the immediate vicinity of the Proposed Action. 30 Other recreation facilities in close proximity include the Green River Trail, Bicentennial Park, and Fort 31 Dent Park (Figure 2.3-1). JULY 2015 2-10 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 153RD ST ANDOVER PARK E CHR'STENSEN RO Tukwila STRANDFR BI_VD • OZ • �TF ��fl!1r!'1i, siL S 1Sfan'. 'roose+ Arena ootprin LONG rn r- r rn tr a z s t° STRANDER 9VD • • osd Main- oporogil Fpotprint l Tukwila;' Station 1 0 TH ST Renton Feet 0 200 400 800 Source. Esri, DigitaIG lobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographies, CNES/Airbus OS U.SDA,VSGS, AEX, Getmappirxg, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King Cotinty, WSDOT, Nearmap 2 FIGURE 2.3-1. 3 Recreation Facilities JULY 2015 2-11 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 2.3.1.1 Interurban Trail 2 The Interurban Trail is a 15- 3 mile -long paved multi -use 4 trail that connects the cities 5 of Tukwila, Kent, Auburn, 6 Algona, and Pacific. The 7 northern terminus of the trail 8 is north of the Proposed 9 Action where the trail 10 connects with the Green 11 River Trail which extends 12 north to Seattle. From the 13 trail confluence, the 14 Interurban Trail travels south 15 under 1-405 and generally in a 16 straight line to its current 17 southern terminus in Pacific. 18 Within the Proposed Action 19 area, the paved trail is 10 feet Looking north towards Nelson Place and the Interurban Trail at Longacres Way. 20 wide with little elevation 21 change and is located within existing Puget Sound Energy right-of-way, including where it is located in 22 the westerly section of the PSE right-of-way in the area between S 156th Street and Longacres Way. 23 Figure 2.3-1 shows the location of the trail in relation to the Proposed Action. The trail is used by bicycle 24 commuters who travel to and from Seattle and also provides access to Tukwila Station to allow 25 connections to the Sound Transit Sounder commuter rail service, Amtrak, and King County Metro F Line. 26 Section 2.5, Non -Motorized, provides additional information on the number of users on the trail based 27 on recent user counts. At Longacres Way, users must stop and cross the roadway in an unmarked 28 crosswalk. 29 2.3.1.2 Green River Trail 30 The Green River Trail is about 24 miles long and travels from Seattle to Kent, passing through Tukwila. In 31 the Proposed Action area, the trail is located west of SR 181 and west of the Green River (Figure 2.3-1). 32 The Green River Trail has little elevation through Tukwila, and unlike the Interurban Trail, which travels 33 north to south in a straight line, the trail follows the river through the valley. The City of Tukwila is 34 planning to construct a new non -motorized crossing of the Green River that would provide a new access 35 point from the trail to the SR 181 and Tukwila Station via Longacres Way. 36 2.3.1.3 Bicentennial Park 37 Bicentennial Park is a 1.3-acre City of Tukwila park located just north of Strander Boulevard and adjacent 38 to the Green River Trail (Figure 2.3-1). Park amenities including open space, trails, playground 39 equipment, restrooms, and a cabin for public use. The park trails provide users direct connections to the 40 Green River Trail. 41 2.3.1.4 Fort Dent Park 42 Fort Dent Park is a 54-acre City of Tukwila park located north of 1-405 and is the City's largest park 43 (Figure 2.3-1). The park includes soccer fields, playground equipment, picnic areas, restrooms, open 44 areas, and trails, including a connection to the Green River Trail. Fort Dent park is located within the 45 Starfire Campus, which includes a number of grass and all-weather outdoor soccer fields as well as two 46 indoor fields, locker rooms, and restaurants. JULY 2015 2-12 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 2.3.2 Impacts and Mitigation 2 2.3.2.1 Alternative 1 3 Construction 4 Construction of the Proposed Action would require temporary closures of the portion of the Interurban 5 Trail generally between S 156th Street and Longacres Way as a result of construction activities. 6 Construction of the arena would take place over about 22 months, but not all construction activities 7 would require closure of the trail. When the trail through the construction area needs to be closed to 8 ensure safety of trail users, trail detour routes would be provided to maintain access through the 9 Proposed Action area and maintain connections for non -motorized users to the Tukwila Station. Trail 10 users traveling northbound would still be able to access Longacres Way to reach the Tukwila Station. 11 Trail users traveling southbound would be provided a detour route to avoid construction, which could 12 include a temporary trail relocation east of the current location or detoured to the new crossing of the 13 Green River, if construction is completed prior to or during construction of the Proposed Action. Figure 14 2.3-2 illustrates potential detour routes that could be used by trail users to avoid construction including 15 the new crossing of the Green River. The route that would detour users to the Green River Trail at the 16 intersection with the Interurban Trail to the north and would require users to cross over SR 181 at 17 Strander Boulevard to the south. The total distance and elevation change of this detour route is similar 18 to the Interurban Trail. 19 Most of the construction activities would occur Monday to Friday between 7 a.m. and midnight, and it is 20 anticipated that weekend construction would also be required. The majority of the weekday 21 construction activities are anticipated to occur between 7, a.m. and 4 p.m. 22 Operation 23 The Interurban Trail would remain within the PSE right-of-way, but the trail would be shifted to the east 24 and away from the arena facade and minimize conflicts with any underground utilities in the right-of- 25 way (Figure 2.3-2). The trail would be open and function as it currently does for much of the year. On 26 those days when there are events at the arena, trail users would need to follow a temporary event 27 bypass route. The pedestrian congestion near the trail would depend on the size of the event and may 28 require bicyclists to dismount. The majority of events are anticipated to occur in the evenings and on 29 weekends would require attendee prescreening to enter the plaza area which would begin about 2 to 3 30 hours before an event. The trail event bypass routes would include S 156th Street, Longacres Way, and 31 the sidewalk along SR 181, which would likely require bicyclists to dismount and would increase travel 32 time and distance (the route around adds about 800 feet of out of direction travel). Interurban Trail 33 users could also use the Green River Trail to avoid the area if traveling to points further north or south. 34 Interurban Trail users could still access the trail between S 156th Street and Longacres Way since the 35 plaza would be open to the public, but they would need to be prescreened for security and bicyclists 36 would need to dismount. There is also the potential for event -goers to park at Fort Dent Park and walk 37 to the Proposed Action given the close proximity to the Green River Trail and the connection to the 38 Interurban Trail. Via the trails, the park is located about 1 mile north of the Proposed Action. In addition, 39 Starfire has pay parking that is in effect most weekends and weekdays throughout the year. Given the 40 distance and the pay parking, the number of event goers expected to park there is low, and no 41 significant impacts to Fort Dent Park are anticipated. 42 Mitigation 43 During construction, detour routes would be well marked. Signage would be provided to let trail users 44 know when detours would be required. Operation mitigation would include signage/information to let 45 users know that events are occurring and congestion is ahead, and illustrate event bypass routes for trail 46 users. JULY 2015 2-13 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 \ 4 rl of}. S 153iri ST ILA P1(YIN Tukwila EYAkiS :.CI( DR SAID R STRAND£1 X 1 t 'Main GarageIf proposed '✓ n tpflat) Arena o?} tprltt �1 ESWAY STRANr.',ER FfLVG Tukwila' 1 Stotlon Renton Northwest Arena Tukwila, WA Detour Route/ Event Bypass Route Relocated Trail (Alternative 2) act Ji to Icn CeaTac JJJ '(99t' �..'\. 367. Dps ]<tYl Locator Map Renton use Feet �7 0 350 700 Source: Esri, Digila G'Mae, GeoEye, Lary -Ater Geograpnics. CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX. GetmaoW1g, Ae•ogr-d, IGA, IG P. sw seopo. and the GI5 Use• Cemmu-ity, King County, WSDOT. Ncarmap 2 FIGURE 2.3-2 3 Interurban Trail Detour Routes and Relocated Trail 4 2.3.2.2 Alternative 2 5 Construction 6 Construction impacts would be the same as those described above under Alternative 1. • ♦ i • JULY 2015 2-14 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Operation 2 Alternative 2 would relocate the Interurban Trail to the east and outside of the PSE right-of-way (Figure 3 2-3.2. The trail would be located adjacent to the UPRR right-of-way and the VIP garage plaza to the west 4 between Longacres Way to the south and 1-405 to the north. During events, trail users could encounter 5 some congestion with event patrons arriving and leaving from the main garage and Tukwila Station, 6 especially along Longacres Way; however it is not anticipated that bicyclist, would need to dismount for 7 the relocated trail. 8 Mitigation 9 Mitigation measures are the same as those described for Alternative 1. 10 2.3.2.3 No Action Alternative 11 Under the No Action Alternative, the Interurban Trail would not be affected by construction and 12 operation of the Proposed Action and it would continue to function as it currently does. 13 2.3.2.4 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 14 No secondary or cumulative impacts are expected under either Alternative 1 or 2. 15 2.3.2.5 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 16 No significant unavoidable adverse recreation impacts are expected under either Alternative 1 or 2. 17 2.4 Aesthetics and Light and Glare 18 The following factors were examined to determine whether the alternatives evaluated in this section 19 would impact aesthetic resources and create impacts related to light, glare, and shadow: 20 • Changes to the existing aesthetic characteristics of the Proposed Action and potential changes to 21 views towards the site. 22 • Impacts associated with light, glare, and shadows cast by the arena and other structures. 23 • Consistency with planning principles related to aesthetic resources identified in the Southcenter 24 Subarea Plan. 25 Blockage of or intrusion on views was not evaluated because City of Tukwila policies and ordinances do • 26 not establish protected views or viewsheds. 27 2.4.1 Affected Environment • 28 This section first describes the aesthetic characteristics of the of the -Proposed Action site. It then 29 describes the areas near the Proposed Action site from whichjrom whichh'the Proposed Action would be 30 visible. These nearby locations are primarily areas assessable to the public, such as the Interurban Trail, 31 SR 181, 1-405, the Tukwila Station, the Green River Trail, and the site of the City's proposed pedestrian • 32 bridge across the Green River. Viewpoints farther from the Proposed Action are also described. 33 2.4.1.1 Aesthetic Characteristics f ` 34 Proposed Action Site 35 For this characterization, the Proposed Action site has been divided into two areas, one area west of the 36 UPRR rail line and the area other east of it. Each area of the Proposed Action site has different aesthetic • 37 characteristics and to some degree is seen by different viewers. These two areas are screened from each / 38 other by a substantial fill -berm (up to about 15 feet high) that supports and elevates the UPRR rail line / ` 39 above the valley floor as well as by vegetation that grows along parts of the rail line right-of-way. JULY 2015 2-15 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Proposed Action Site Area West of the UPRR Line 2 The aesthetic character of the majority of the west side of the Proposed Action site is industrial 3 park/manufacturing. Most of the west area contains a mixture of commercial uses that include 4 manufacturing, equipment rental/storage, and office. Buildings in this area are primarily single -story 5 commercial buildings, flat -roofed, and many are tilt -up concrete structures (Figures 2.4-1 and 2.4-2). 6 Buildings are surrounded by extensive paved areas used for equipment and material storage, parking, 7 and circulation. 8 Nelson Place is an internal street that provides access and street -side parking. Street lights are not 9 present along Nelson Place or at parking areas within most of the arena site. Businesses along the west 10 side of Nelson Place are accessed directly from the street and are part of the Proposed Action site. 11 Nelson Place abuts the PSE 100-foot right-of-way to the east (see discussion below). Businesses on the 12 east side of the PSE right-of-way utilize a private road for access and circulation. Some buildings do have 13 attached lights for entrances and areas adjacent to the buildings. 14 The west area of the Proposed Action site is crossed from north to south by the PSE right-of-way that 15 contains two electrical lines (a 230-kV transmission line and a 115-kV distribution line). The 230-kV 16 transmission line and its three different types of large support structures (which are about 100 to 110 17 feet high) are the most prominent structures in the west area of the Proposed Action site. 18 The Interurban Trail passes through the west side of the Proposed Action site from north to south. It lies 19 within the westerly portion of the PSE right-of-way. Existing views from the Interurban Trail through this 20 section include the electric transmission lines and support structures, parking areas, Nelson Place, and 21 paved storage areas, and the adjacent industrial/commercial buildings (Figure 2.4-3). 22 The northwest corner of the west area of the Proposed Action site (north of S 156th Street) is different 23 in aesthetic character from the rest of the site. It contains a four-story hotel (Hampton Inn) that is 24 surrounded by landscaped parking areas (with lighting). The scale, materials, and overall character of 25 this fairly new development is typical of modern hotel facilities found in various parts of Tukwila and 26 nearby communities. The Hampton Inn would be removed as part of the Proposed Action. 27 Proposed Action Site Area East of the UPRR Line 28 The east area of the Proposed Action site is quite different in aesthetic character than the west area. It is 29 bounded by the elevated UPRR rail line on the west and the elevated BNSF rail line on the east. The site 30 is rectangular in shape (about 1,300 feet by an average of about 250 feet) with the long portion of the 31 7.5-acre site oriented north and south. Both rail lines are elevated on fill -berms overgrown with 32 vegetation, which tends to limit views out of and into this side of the site. 33 Although a materials storage facility is located at the north end of the east area of the Proposed Action 34 site, most of the site is undeveloped and has the aesthetic character of a large vacant lot (Figure 2.4-4). 35 The most dominant aesthetic elements are large trees (primarily cottonwoods) growing along the edges 36 of the UPRR and BNSF rail line rights -of -way. JULY 2015 2-16 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-1 Looking north along Nelson Place at examples of buildings and parking found within the interior of the west part of the Proposed Action site. FIGURE 2.4-2 Looking south from S 156th Street and SR 181 at west edge of Proposed Action site. JULY 2015 2-17 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-3 Looking north along Nelson Place and the Interurban Trail (between Nelson Place and the PSE 230 kV electric transmission line support structures) from Longacres Way. Note the metal lattice structure that would be moved farther north when S 156th Street would be rerouted. FIGURE 2.4-4 View to the northwest from Longacres Way at the east area of the Proposed Action site. Note fill -berm for the UPRR rail line, vegetation within the UPRR right-of-way and PSE 230 kV transmission line support structures that pass through west area of Proposed Action site in the background. JULY 2015 2-18 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Areas Adjacent to the Proposed Action 2 Properties directly west of the Proposed Action site across SR 181 include a three-story hotel (Extended 3 Stay America) and a historic trust property south of the hotel. The hotel is set back from SR 181 behind a 4 landscaped parking lot. Guests in some southeast -facing rooms would be able see the Proposed Action 5 site beyond the hotel's parking lot and trees. 6 The Nelsen Family Residence Historical Trust property, a King County Historic Site, is immediately south 7 of the hotel and adjacent to SR 181. The trust property contains a former residence, outbuildings, and 8 landscaped grounds. Viewers in the house and on its grounds would have generally unobstructed views 9 of the proppsed arena (Figure 2.4-5). 10 Another hotel (Embassy Suites) is located adjacent to the Proposed Action site south of Longacres Way. 11 The eight -story hotel is set back from Longacres Way behind a landscaped parking area and at about 85 12 feet high, it is the tallest structure in the vicinity of the Proposed Action site (Figure 2.4-6). Hotel guests 13 in upper north and east facing rooms would be able see the proposed arena. 14 Immediately east of the Embassy Suites and its main parking lot is the PSE utility corridor described 15 previously and the Interurban Trail that is located within it. The tree -lined trail separates the main hotel 16 parking lot and a hotel parking lot located between the trail and the UPRR rail line. People using this 17 section of the trail would have direct views of the proposed arena site as they approach from the south 18 (Figure 2.4-7). 19 Southeast of the proposed arena and directly south of the proposed main parking garage is Tukwila 20 Station. The arena and main parking garage would be visible to people accessing and using the station. 21 (Figure 2.4-8). 22 As discussed previously, the east boundary of the east area of the Proposed Action site is bordered by 23 the BNSF rail line, which is the boundary between Tukwila and Renton. East of the rail line in Renton is 24 the former Longacres Racetrack property. This property is now owned by Boeing as the 222-acre Boeing 25 Longacres Park. The portion of the Boeing land adjacent to the BNSF rail line is unpaved and used for 26 parking (signs at the parking area label the area as "event" parking). East of the event parking area are 27 formalized and paved parking areas, landscaped open spaces for Boeing staff, and a series of three- to 28 four-story buildings. Some Boeing employees on west -facing upper floors of the buildings would have 29 views (over trees) of the Proposed Action. Most views of the Proposed Action from the lower floors of 30 buildings, grounds, and parking areas of the Boeing facility are blocked by trees (Figure 2.4-9). 31 1-405 forms the northern edge of both parts of the Proposed Action site. The elevated freeway 32 (supported by earth fill and overpasses) serves as a barrier to most areas north of the Proposed Action 33 site. It also creates a long and highly utilized viewing platform that offers views into the Proposed Action 34 site to people travelling on 1-405. 35 JULY 2015 2-19 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-5 View to the southwest from the sidewalk in front of Nelson Family Residence Historical Trust property of the southwestern part of Proposed Action site. FIGURE 2.4-6 View to the south from Longacres Way of the Embassy Suites hotel. JULY 2015 2-20 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-7 View to the north from the Interurban Trail of the western area of the Proposed Action site. FIGURE 2.4-8 View to the north from the entrance to the Tukwila Station of the east area of Proposed Action site. Note presence of large trees growing in the BWISF rail line right-of-way that screen views between the west and east areas of the Proposed Action site. JULY 2015 2-21 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-9 View to the west from a paved parking area within Boeing Longacres Park in the direction of the Proposed Action site. Note the power line tower that is about 50 feet shorter than the proposed arena to be constructed next to it. 1 Other Areas from Which the Proposed Action Would be Visible 2 The Proposed Action would be visible from areas beyond properties near to it. It would also be seen 3 from additional areas in both Tukwila and Renton. 4 The portions of Tukwila from which the Proposed Action would be potentially seen are contained within 5 the Southcenter Subarea. The street system in this flat area is generally built around super -blocks 6 through which several arterials pass (City of Tukwila, 2014a). The characterof much of this part of the 7 subarea is automobile -oriented business. Although the scale of some of the developments differ, most 8 consist of buildings of various sizes that are set back from streets by large landscaped parking areas. 9 The Westfield Southcenter Mall is the largest complex in the subarea and is about 0.5 mile west of the 10 Proposed Action site. Most views from the mall of the Proposed Action site are blocked by buildings and 11 vegetation. 1-5 is located just west of the mall and provides elevated eastern views of the Proposed 12 Action site. 13 Between the mall and the Green River are areas containing big box retail, small strip malls, 14 manufacturing, offices (particularly along the Green River), and a host of other businesses. Views of the 15 lower portion of the Proposed Action site from these areas are generally blocked by buildings and trees. 16 However, because the tops of the 230-kV electrical transmission towers and the eight -story Embassy 17 Suite building are visible, the upper part of the proposed arena, which is about 50 feet taller than the 18 transmission towers, would be visible (Figure 2.4-10). 19 West of the Green River along SR 181 is a mix of hotels and small retail strip developments that also 20 tend to be surrounded by large landscaped parking areas. Although the top of the eight -story Embassy 21 Suites building and 230-kV transmission line support structures can be seen from many parts of this 22 area, buildings and trees in parking lots (or along the Green River) tend to block or intrude upon may 23 views towards the Proposed Action site (Figure 2.4-11). JULY 2015 2-22 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-10 View to the east from a section of the Green, River Trail with a break in riverside vegetation in the direction of the Proposed Action site. Note that the metal lattice support structure for the PSIE 230 kV transmission line that is located in the west part of the Proposed Action site. FIGURE 2.4-11 View to the northeast in the direction of the Proposed Action site from an area along the Green River Trail. Note the presence of the Emerald Suites hotel that is adjacent to (and south of) the Proposed Action site. JULY 20IS 2-23 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 East of the Proposed Action site, the BNSF rail line (used by Amtrak and Sounder trains) serves as an 2 elevated viewing platform for people riding on Amtrak/Sounder trains, although views of the Proposed 3 Action site from much of the rail line is blocked by vegetation. 4 The closest part of Renton to the Proposed Action site is the Boeing facility immediately east of the BNSF 5 rail line, which was described above. Areas south of the Boeing facility from which the Proposed Action 6 would potentially be visible are somewhat limited because the areas contain a mixture of scattered 7 retail, manufacturing, service, and offices uses that are generally separated from each other by large 8 landscaped parking areas and undeveloped areas that have abundant tree cover that block or intrude 9 upon views. 10 SR 167 offers somewhat elevated western views, although most views of the Proposed Action site 11 (about 1 mile away) are blocked by vegetation. A residential area on the slopes of an area east of and 12 above SR 167 has some views of the Proposed Action site (which is about 1.3 miles distant). In addition, 13 some elevated areas in Renton north of 1-405 that contain office buildings, manufacturing concerns, and 14 residences (about one mile north), have views into Renton and Tukwila that include the Proposed Action 15 site. 16 2.4.2 Impacts and Mitigation 17 The impact assessment considers impacts on the aesthetic environment that would occur during 18 construction and after construction when the Proposed Action would be operational. This section 19 examines the impacts associated with Alternatives 1, 2, and the No Action Alternative. Because the City 20 of Tukwila has not designated any protected views in the part of the city near the Proposed Action, no 21 protected views would be impacted by the alternatives and protected view impacts were not evaluated. 22 The impact assessment begins by describing the most visible elements of each alternative, assesses how 23 elements would change the existing aesthetic characteristics of the Proposed Action site, and describes 24 how the alternative would change views in the direction of the Proposed Action site seen by various 25 viewers. It also describes impacts from light, glare, and shadow that would be associated with the 26 alternatives. 27 2.4.2.1 Alternative 1 28 The evaluation of impacts associated with Alternative 1 begins with a description of the elements 29 associated with the alternative that would influence the aesthetic environment of the Proposed Action. 30 It then describes construction impacts and operational impacts that would be associated with 31 Alternative 1. 32 Description of Alternative 1 Elements That Would Influence the Aesthetic Setting 33 Part of the Proposed Action Site West of the UPRR Line 34 The 680,000 square -foot arena building would be sited on the part of the Proposed Action site west of 35 the UPRR line. The longest sides (west and east) of the building would be about 540 feet and the 36 shortest sides (east and west) would be about 365 feet. The high point of the arena roof would be about 37 155 feet above grade. Incorporating architectural treatments such as facade articulation; variations in 38 building materials, color, and texture; the extensive use of windows, metal louvers, and rain screens; 39 and an overhanging and slightly curving signature roof would lend aesthetic interest and create a 40 signature structure. 41 The west side of the arena would slightly curve and be set back about 25 to 40 feet away from SR 181. 42 This would be the side of the arena seen in close proximity by the greatest number of people (driving by 43 on SR 181). Streetscape improvements would include a new 15-foot-wide sidewalk, pedestrian 44 gathering spaces adjacent to the building in various locations, and a landscaped area separating the 45 sidewalk and SR 181 that would run the length of the block between S 156th Street and Longacres Way. 46 The landscaped area would help meet arena security requirements (by using oversized stone blocks to JULY 2015 2-24 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 1 / / / / \ CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 block vehicular access from SR 181), separate pedestrians from the road, and add aesthetic interest 2 through the use of trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. Similar landscaped areas would be adjacent to all 3 streets surrounding the arena. 4 The closest distance from the south side of the building to Longacres Way would be about 30 feet. A 5 landscaped area would separate Longacres Way from the sidewalk and pedestrian areas. An overhang of 6 the roof would extend beyond the south facade to provide a sense of enclosure and shelter near the 7 entrance (on the southeast corner of the building) and pedestrian plaza and for people congregating in 8 these outdoor spaces below the roof. 9 The facade of the eastern side of the arena would abut the pedestrian plaza, which would connect the 10 rerouted S 156th Street at the plaza's north end with Longacres Way at its southern end. The plaza 11 would include a number of design features that would provide aesthetic interest, such as: 12 • Granite pavers with varying colors and dimensions that would be used in conjunction with varying 13 shades and colors of concrete to create interesting patterns on the ground plane of pedestrian areas 14 • Landscaped areas containing trees, shrubs, and oversized stone blocks (near streets and integrated 15 into the plaza), all of which would be arranged in varying patterns and combinations to create 16 aesthetic interest and aesthetically tie the project together 17 • Fountains and water features 18 • Street furniture such as benches, light standards and lighting inserted into pavement, and bollards 19 A future two-story building would be sited at the eastern edge of the pedestrian plaza (the plaza 20 building) and would serve as a restaurant or provide similar services to event attendees. It would also 21 serve as the landing platform for a skybridge connecting the plaza with main parking garage (see 22 discussion below). Attractive site fencing and security stations would be constructed between the 23 southeast corner of the arena and the eastern edge of the pedestrian plaza area adjacent to the UPRR 24 rail line right-of-way. Security fencing and access would also be present at the north end of the 25 pedestrian plaza. The fencing and security stations/gates would provide security while directing 26 pedestrian flow and serving as a design element to assist in providing design continuity throughout the 27 Proposed Action area. 28 The north side of the building would be approximately 20 feet south of the relocated S 156th Street. A 29 landscaped area would be adjacent to the street. The structure's roof would overhang some paved 30 areas under it and provide shelter for those areas, including the northwest corner of the arena, which 31 would be perceived as the "front door" of the arena and its gateway from 1-405. 32 The existing PSE 230-kV electrical transmission line would remain in its current right-of-way alignment 33 and pass through the plaza. The 115-kV line would be rerouted. The current metal lattice structure 34 would be removed (due to relocating S 156th Street) and replaced with a monopole (a single concrete 35 structure) to the north of its current location. The other two existing monopole support structures 36 would remain in place in the plaza in their current locations within the PSE right-of-way. The presence of 37 these industrial features as they currently appear would contrast with the refined design of the 38 pedestrian plaza and arena. If the Interurban Trail remains somewhere within the PSE right-of-way, the 39 demarcation of its two lanes would have to be replicated in the pedestrian plaza. Accommodating the 40 trail would influence the design of the pedestrian plaza. 41 Part of the Proposed Action Site East of the UPRR Line 42 A new seven -story main parking garage about 80 feet high would be located between the UPRR and 43 BNSF rail lines and take up most of this area. The structure would be designed to meet City development 44 standards and design guidelines for parking structures. The roof of the garage would constitute the top 45 level of parking and would include exterior lighting for parking. Skybridges at the northwest and JULY 2015 2-25 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 southwest ends of the parking structure would cross over the UPRR line to provide pedestrian 2 connections to the arena and pedestrian plaza. The covered pedestrian bridges would be about 10 feet 3 wide and about 35 feet above grade. Sidewalk improvements, including widening the existing sidewalk 4 to 15 feet wide, would be made along the north side of Longacres Way between the main parking 5 garage and the pedestrian plaza. The wider sidewalk would help aesthetically tie the parking garage and 6 arena area together through the use of similar materials and could also provide pedestrian and aesthetic 7 connection between the Tukwila Station and the arena. 8 Construction 9 Construction would create temporary impacts on the aesthetic environment. Construction is expected 10 to last about 22 months. The removal and demolition of existing buildings and facilities in the portion of 11 the Proposed Action site west of the UPRR line would be the most visible aspect of the demolition phase 12 of construction. The construction of the arena and main parking garage would also have temporary 13 aesthetic impacts that would include moving equipment and materials; placing tall (estimated to be up 14 to 200 feet tall) tower construction cranes within the construction area; construction activities; glare 15 and lights associated with nighttime construction; storing construction materials; and making visible 16 changes to the viewed landscape as the project progresses. Construction staging areas would be 17 required for the arena and parking garage and are anticipated to be located on properties under control 18 of the project proponent. The staging areas would contain construction equipment, materials, and 19 vehicles, and various activities would occur within the staging area. Staging areas would be screened 20 from ground -level view with fencing where appropriate. 21 Operation 22 This section describes how Alternative 1 structures, at -grade improvements, and operations would 23 change the aesthetic character of the Proposed Action site when viewed from nearby areas, and would 24 impact views in the direction of the Proposed Action site from areas surrounding the site. It describes 25 how Tight and glare would impact viewers, and identifies areas where shadows cast by the arena would 26 be located. 27 Proposed Action Site Area West of the UPRR Rail Line 28 The existing utilitarian appearance and industrial park/manufacturing aesthetic character of the 29 Proposed Action site area west of the UPRR would change under Alternative 1. The new character of the 30 area would be that of a major modern sports arena complex consisting of a large-scale, architecturally 31 distinctive arena surrounded by pedestrian areas and a plaza containing sophisticated urban design 32 elements. These changes would be seen from nearby areas that currently have views of the Proposed 33 Action site. The arena would also be seen from areas where the site currently is not visible and would 34 introduce a new 155-foot-tall structure into these views. 35 Views of the Proposed Action site from SR 181 and properties immediately west of it would be altered 36 by the presence of the arena (Figure 2.4-12). At 155 feet in height, the arena would be taller than the 37 tallest elements currently seen east of SR 181, which are the 100- to 110-foot-tall PSE 230-kV electric 38 transmission line support structures and the eight -story Embassy Suites hotel. Viewers from SR 181, the 39 Extended Stay America hotel, and the Nelson Family Residence Trust Property would have direct views 40 of the arena, which would dominate eastern views from these locations. 41 Ground plane components of the Proposed Action (landscaping, paving, etc.) would add aesthetic 42 interest to the site that would be an improvement compared to the existing ground plane character of 43 the site that is viewed from these locations. Views towards the site from areas farther to the west of 44 properties adjacent to SR 181 would also be changed, although buildings and trees in parking areas and 45 along the Green River tend to intrude upon, or block, views to the east. In areas where there are fewer 46 buildings, or Tess tree cover to block eastern views, the upper portions of the arena would be clearly 47 seen (Figure 2.4-13). JULY 2015 2-26 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-12A Existing view to the west of the southwestern corner of the Proposed Action site from a portion of Longacres Way west of SR 181. FIGURE 2.4-12B Depiction of the mass and form of the arena from this location. JULY 2015 2-27 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-13A Existing view to the northeast in the direction of the Proposed Action site from a location near the site of the City of Tukwila's proposed pedestrian bridge over the Green River. FIGURE 2.4-13B Depiction of the mass and form of the arena from this location. JULY 2015 2-28 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 The arena would be visible from some areas in the vicinity of the Westfield Southcenter Mall and from 2 parts of 1-5. Where seen, the arena would add a large-scale element to the views. It would not block or 3 impair views from the mall area or from 1-5. 4 Alternative 1 would change the nature of views towards the Proposed Action site from areas to the 5 south of the site. The arena would dominate views from Longacres Way and the Tukwila Station, and be 6 a very large object seen by guests in the Emerald Suites hotel and areas near it. Many views of the arena 7 from areas south of Emerald Suites would be blocked by the eight -story hotel and other elements such 8 as other buildings and trees. The arena would be visible from Tukwila Station. The existing PSE 230-kV 9 electrical transmission line and support structures would largely remain in place and their industrial 10 character would contrast with the sophisticated design of the arena and pedestrian plaza when viewed 11 from areas south of the arena. 12 Views of the Proposed Action site from areas east of it are generally blocked by vegetation (primarily 13 large trees and understory vegetation) growing along the rights -of -way of the UPRR and BNSF rail lines. 14 However, given its height, the arena (and main parking garage — see below) would be clearly visible from 15 the Boeing Longacres Park (Figure 2.4-14). The arena would add a large-scale element to the view to the 16 west from some areas within the Boeing property, particularly the buildings (which would be from about 17 0.25 to 0.3 mile east of the arena) and would block views of parts of the Southcenter area. The arena 18 would also be seen from some areas (between trees and buildings) south of the Boeing Longacres Park 19 and possibly from some sections of SR 167. Residences in Renton on the top of the slope east of SR 167 20 would also have views of the arena. It would be seen as a large-scale element located within the 21 Southcenter area, but would not block or impair views from this area. 22 The arena would also be visible from areas to the north. It would command attention from people 23 driving past it on 1-405 due to its size compared to nearby structures, design, and vividness. 1-405 would 24 block views of the base of the arena and ground plane improvements from many areas north of 1-405. 25 Most of the land uses north of, and close to, 1-405 do not contain viewers that would be sensitive to 26 changes in the viewed area to the south (which is dominated by 1-405 and the PSE 230-kV electrical 27 transmission lines). Some residents in a series of multi -story residential complexes sited on the edge of 28 an upland area above a gravel operation about one mile north of the Proposed Action would see the 29 arena. There are a host of visual elements found in the mile between the residences and the arena such 30 as the adjacent gravel quarry, a wastewater treatment facility, manufacturing businesses, transmission 31 lines, and 1-405. These tend to attract more attention, and the arena would not command as much 32 visibility as it would from areas with fewer aesthetic distractions. The arena would not impair or block 33 views from these residences. 34 JULY 2015 2-29 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 2.4-14A Existing view to the southwest in the direction of the Proposed Action site from an unpaved parking area within the Boeing Longacres Park at a location about 400 feet east of the BNSF rail line. FIGURE 2.4-14B Depiction of the mass and form of the arena from this location. JULY 2015 2-30 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS / 1 CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Proposed Action Site Area East of the UPRR Rail Line 2 The relatively undeveloped vacant lot and material storage lot character of the area of the Proposed 3 Action site east of the UPRR rail line would be transformed to that of a large-scale 3,500-space parking 4 garage. The approximately 70-foot-high seven -story structure would be seen from nearby areas, 5 although views of it from the areas west of the arena would be generally blocked by the arena. The 6 parking structure would be seen from areas south of it. Views from the Embassy Suites would generally 7 be partially blocked by vegetation in the UPRR right-of-way, but the upper part of the structure would 8 be seen. Viewers in the Tukwila Station would have unobstructed views of the parking garage, as would 9 Amtrak and Sound Transit train passengers. People at the Boeing Longacres Park would see the garage 10 to varying degrees in gaps in the vegetation lining the BNSF right-of-way. In some locations the parking 11 garage would block views of the arena beyond it. The parking garage would be briefly seen from the 12 north by people driving past it on 1-405 and would be somewhat seen by residents to the north. 13 Light and Glare Impacts 14 When not in use, the arena would have its name sign turned on during the evening as well as some 15 exterior lights associated with the arena and grounds needed for safety and security. These lights would 16 be seen to varying degrees from different areas. The arena name sign would likely be the most visible 17 evening object associated with the arena from a distance because of its elevation on the structure. The 18 design of the arena name sign has not been finalized and many aspects related to the sign would be 19 developed in consultation with the City of Tukwila. During nighttime events, architectural lighting 20 showcasing the arena, interior lighting, exterior lighting on sidewalks and within the pedestrian plaza, 21 lights associated with the parking structure, and the arena name sign would be turned on. Lights for 22 events would be highly visible from some areas and would increase the amount of lighted area currently 23 used in this part of Tukwila. 24 Potential glare impacts would be associated with two primary components of Alternative 1: reflection 25 from building materials and reflection from the windows of cars parking on the top level (roof) of the 26 seven -story parking garage. To reduce impacts from building materials, reflective materials will be 27 treated with products to reduce the likelihood of potential glare. Windshield sun reflection from 28 vehicles parked in the evening would be a low-level source of glare, but could produce more noticeable 29 glare at certain times of the day from some locations. Lighting on the top parking level would be 30 provided with appropriate cut-off shielding to minimize any potential spill of light to adjacent property. 31 Shadow Impacts 32 The arena would cast shadows that would vary by date and time on areas near it. In the morning it 33 would cast shadows of varying lengths and for varying periods of time on SR 181 and the properties 34 along the highway west of the Proposed Action site. Areas east of the arena site would be in shadow 35 during the afternoon and the amount of arena in shadow might be greater than shadows currently cast 36 by vegetation alongside the UPRR and BNSF lines. Shadows cast to the north of the arena would fall on 37 S 156th Street and the parcel of land where the current Hampton Inn hotel is located. The arena would 38 also cast afternoon shadows on the pedestrian plaza and on the Interurban Trail if it remains in the PSE 39 utility corridor right-of-way. 40 Consistency with Planning Principals Related to Aesthetic Resources Identified in the Southcenter 41 Subarea Plan 42 The Proposed Action site is located at the eastern edge of the City of Tukwila's Southcenter area. 43 Tukwila adopted the Southcenter Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan) in 2014 to guide and direct future 44 development within the Southcenter subarea, which is considered to be Tukwila's urban center 45 (Tukwila, 2014a). The Subarea Plan established a planning and design framework to further the vitality, 46 functionality, and sustainability of the Southcenter area and was developed to provide guidance for JULY 2015 2-31 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 actions not specifically covered by the development regulations contained in TMC Chapter 18.28 2 Tukwila Urban Center District. 3 The Subarea Plan begins with reviewing planning principals upon which the plan was based. The 4 principles are termed Planning Principles for Great Cities. A series of principles was used to help 5 formulate objectives and short-term strategies to help successfully transition Southcenter from a 6 suburban to a more urban center. Two of the planning principles that directly apply to aesthetics and 7 that are applicable to the Proposed Action are listed below, along with annotated comments related to 8 how the Proposed Action would, or would not, comply with those principles included as a bullet below 9 the summary of the principle. 10 Create a memorable built environment. The buildings, blocks and streets of an area are interdependent 11 and contribute to an overall pattern of unique and related places. Each one contains in part the 12 ingredients of all the others. Buildings of a particular quality can define the block that contains them and 13 the street that surrounds them. Design is the matrix that helps either to create or destroy the quality and 14 character of a place. Buildings are the smallest increment of growth. A variety of architectural types, and 15 their relationship to each other, largely determines the character of a place as they define the streets and 16 open spaces they face. 17 • The Proposed Action would reinforce and support this principle by developing a distinctive and 18 memorable arena along with the pedestrian plazas, and sidewalk improvements. 19 Make great public spaces. Urban areas can be much more than a place to eat, work and spend. Part of 20 what makes a place more valuable and beloved are the public spaces. Well -designed public spaces 21 enhance community identity and foster civic pride. Public spaces are the visual punctuations along the 22 greater public realm of streets that give identity to the various districts in the area. This will contribute to 23 a unique character, and distinguish it from other regional centers and commercial areas. 24 • The improvements associated with the Proposed Action (pedestrian plaza, sidewalk improvements, 25 integration of the Interurban Trail) would provide public spaces at the east end of the Southcenter 26 Subarea that would mesh well with the Sound Transit Tukwila Station and provide an example to 27 emulate for developments to the west of the site. 28 Mitigation 29 The Proposed Action would conform to the Design Review requirements imposed under the terms of 30 the proposed Developer Agreement. 31 2.4.2.2 Alternative 2 32 The arena design under Alternative 2 would be the same as that of Alternative 1. Differences between 33 the two alternatives that could result in variations of the appearance of the alternatives would occur 34 beyond the arena and would be minor for an aesthetic perspective. These differences are described 35 below. 36 Construction 37 Construction impacts would essentially be the same as Alternative 1, with the exception that the 38 construction of the VIP parking garage would entail the construction of another structure in the part of 39 the Proposed Action site west of the UPRR rail line. 40 Operation 41 The 1,000-space VIP parking garage in the Proposed Action site area west of the UPRR rail line would 42 border the eastern edge of the pedestrian plaza north of the plaza building. The parking garage would 43 block views to the east of the UPRR rail line and would provide a sense of enclosure to the plaza, both of 44 which would be beneficial from an aesthetic perspective. The VIP garage would be clearly seen from JULY 2015 2-32 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 1-405, but would generally be screened from view from other directions by the arena, plaza building, 2 vegetation adjacent to the UPRR line, and the main parking garage. 3 With Alternative 2, the interurban Trail would be relocated to the east out of the PSE right-of-way. 4 Relocating the trail would allow the design of the pedestrian plaza to accommodate the trail, which 5 could be beneficial from an aesthetic perspective. 6 Mitigation 7 The Proposed Action would conform to the Design Review requirements imposed under the terms of 8 the proposed Developer Agreement. 9 2.4.2.3 No Action Alternative 10 Under the No Action Alternative, the site of the Proposed Action would likely remain as is until 11 redevelopment activities occurred. If redevelopment occurs over time as envisioned in the Southcenter 12 Subarea Plan, properties within and near the Proposed Action site would be redeveloped consistent 13 with the subarea plan. Redevelopment would be a maximum of 115 feet in height. Redevelopment 14 would not be as large in mass, height, and scale as the arena. 15 2.4.2.4 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 16 Both action alternatives could contribute to a change in the appearance of the portion of the 17 Southcenter Subarea where they would be located. As properties in the TOD District continue to be 18 developed at scales larger than, and heights taller than, existing developments, the character of the 19 subarea will change from industrial/manufacturing/miscellaneous to more urban and vertical. 20 2.4.2.5 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 21 Alternatives 1 and 2 would not produce significant unavoidable adverse impacts. 22 2.5 Transportation 23 FORTHCOMING 24 JULY 2015 2-33 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 1 CHAPTER 3 2 References 3 FORTHCOMING. JULY 2015 3-1 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS • 1 CHAPTER 4 2 Distribution List 3 This SEPA EIS was distributed to the people and organizations listed in Table 4-1. 4 City of Tukwila to provide information 5 6 TABLE 4-1 EIS Distribution List • JULY 2015 4-1 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS r � / 1 Appendix A. Scoping Comments City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 Jim Haggerton, Mayor NW Arena EIS Scoping Comment Summary To: Northwest Arena Project File E15-0005 From: Nora Gierloff, Tukwila Deputy DCD Director Lloyd Skinner, SEPA Consultant for Tukwila Re: Close of EIS Scoping Period Date: June 24, 2015 Summary The City of Tukwila issued a Determination of Significance (DS) for the proposed Northwest Arena Project on May 22, 2015, indicating that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be prepared to address potential impacts from project construction and operation. The 21-day scoping comment period closed on June 12, 2015. Comments were received from 34 individuals, two cities, one transit agency, a railroad, and a utility provider. After review of the comments, Tukwila has determined that the scope of the EIS will include analysis of air quality; land use; height, bulk, scale, and aesthetics; recreation; and transportation. Preparation of the EIS is now underway. Scoping Period During the 21-day scoping period, the City invited comments by letter, by email, on the project website, or in person at the Department of Community Development. A public meeting was held at the Tukwila Community Center on June 2, 2015, from 4:30 to 6:30 in the afternoon, and a meeting for agencies and utility providers was held on the afternoon of June 10. Scoping Comments Received Thirty-four comment forms were received from individuals, although several were duplicates or elaborations from the same commenter. Potential impacts to the Interurban Trail were identified in about half of the comments, the most frequent issue identified. Other comments or concerns included: expressions of general support for the project; potential traffic and parking impacts; support for transit as a way to minimize impacts; concern about paying for infrastructure needed for the project (Strander Boulevard and other road improvements being mentioned); potential impacts to the historic Nelson House located across West Valley Highway from the project; and support for general mitigation of potential impacts from the project. Address: 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 • Phone: 206-433-1800 • Website: www. TukwilaWA.gov Agencies submitting comments included the cities of Renton and SeaTac, Sound Transit, Puget Sound Energy, and Union Pacific Railroad. The cities urged analysis of potential traffic and parking impacts, and Renton suggested that other issues be considered, including aesthetics, construction impacts, geotechnical, and cultural/archaeological impacts. Sound Transit cited potential use of its access road to the Longacres Station and noted procedural issues introduced by federal funding of its facilities. Union Pacific noted its ongoing operations and facilities, as well as the importance of maintaining public safety near the tracks. PSE noted the presence of its power lines through the project site and procedures for use of its corridor. Contents of the EIS In its DS, the City had identified air quality, land use, aesthetics, and transportation as elements of the environment to be studied in the EIS. After review of the comments received during the scoping period, the City finds that most of the issues raised will be addressed in the analysis of these elements. In order to provide a more specific focus on use of and potential impacts to the Interurban Trail, the City has determined that the EIIS will include a separate section addressing recreation impacts. This section will address both pedestrian and bicycle use of the trail, for commuting as well as recreation, and will help separate that discussion from the other traffic and parking issues that will be addressed in the transportation section. The transportation analysis in the EIS will include an assessment of existing conditions and potential impacts of the project on pedestrian and vehicle traffic, circulation, and access to parking supply based on the level of demand generated by different types of events. The section will include analysis of pedestrian travel to and from parking locations, including safety crossing the railroad tracks and potential measures to maintain pedestrian safety in that environment. Air quality was not mentioned in public scoping comments. Because the Southcenter Subarea Plan EIS (2014) identified potential air quality concerns at subarea intersections, the City has determined that air quality will remain as an element to be addressed in the EIS. Similarly, land use impacts were not specifically identified in scoping comments. While the project is consistent with the City's plans and policies for the Southcenter Subarea, because it is a significant new use a land use discussion will be included in the EIS analysis. The final scope of analysis for the EIS will include an assessment of potential impacts and mitigation measures for the following elements of the environment: air quality; land use; height, bulk, scale, and aesthetics; recreation; and transportation. Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX A Scoping Comments Table A-1 provides information on the comments received as part of the scoping process and where the draft EIS, if applicable, addresses the comments. Commenter and Comment(s) Received EIS Location PSE Use of the PSE corridor Table FS-1— Fact Sheet Section 1- Project Alternatives Utilities — relocation within or outside of the PSE corridor and new utilities in the PSE corridor Table FS-1— Fact Sheet Interurban Trail — modification of the existing agreement for the trail within the PSE corridor Section 2.3 — Recreation Section 2.5 — Transportation (Non -Motorized) City of Renton Transportation — Local and Regional Access, i Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C—Transportation Technical Report Aesthetics — Height and bulk and views 1 Section 2.4 - Aesthetics Transportation — Construction impacts I Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C—Transportation Technical Report Noise — Construction impacts Table FS-1— Fact Sheet Soils — Geotechnical information t Table FS-1— Fact Sheet Historic and Cultural Resources — impact to cultural Table FS-1— Fact Sheet resources or deposits City of SeaTac Transportation — Local Arterials Section 2.5 — Transportation ( Appendix C—Transportation Technical Report Sound Transit Transportation — Local Arterials/Capacity Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report Transportation - Parking Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report Union Pacific New Rail Crossing T Section 1- Project Alternatives Proposed Action does not include any new at - grade crossings Transportation — Local Arterials/Access Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report Transportation — Pedestrian Access Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report Noise — Train operations Table FS-1— Fact Sheet Project does not include any residential uses that would be affected by noise Water Quality — storm water drainage Table FS-1— Fact Sheet Charles Tyson Aesthetics — scale of the building Section 2.4 - Aesthetics Transportation — Local Arterials/Access/Mitigation Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report Otto Rogers Water/Plants and Animals — impacts on Green River and wildlife Table FS-1— Fact Sheet Transportation - Transit Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report A-1 APPENDIX A SCOPING COMMENTS LScott E. Hopson Transportation — Local Arterials/Access Brent Carson Transportation —Traffic and Parking Impacts Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report Interurban Trail Recreation -16 comment letters received from public related to impacts on the Interurban Trail as a result of any closures or conflicts between the Proposed Action and the Interurban Trail. _ Project Support 6 letters were received that expressed support for the project. Steve Smolinske Section 2.5 — Transportation 1 Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report Section 2.3, Recreation Section 2.5, Transportation (Non -Motorized) Support of the Proposed Action is noted. Project Impacts and Mitigation- Built Environment Financial Impacts - Relocation Financial Impacts — Relocation and Business Interference Public Review Transportation — Access and Parking Draft EIS is a limited scope EIS Table FS-1— Fact Sheet provides information on elements not studied in the EIS and Chapter 2 provides information on Air Quality, Land Use, Recreation, Aesthetics, and Transportation. Not addressed in the EIS. Project proponent would work with all property owners. Not addressed in the EIS. Project proponent would work with all property owners. Fact Sheet. Identifies the permits and approvals that will be required and the Section 2.5 — Transportation Appendix C — Transportation Technical Report A-2 APPENDIX B Air Quality Background Information B-1 Attachment A Intersection Data . / • \ \ i \ Proposed Southcenter Arena Comparison of Intersection LOS Draft 6/9/15 N. i \ i ' - \ / \ / \ ( / \ < \ / \ \ ( \ / \ / \ / \ • \ \. / \ % \ ( \ l \ i \ - \ l \ .J \ . \ . \ l \ -• \ l \ l / \ l \ J \ / '\ l \ i \ l \ J / \, . \ i ` . , \ \ / \ (\ / \ % \ ' \ / \ '. \ / \ / \ ( \ J \ J \ l \ ,/ \ _ \ _ \ / \ Scenario: Access: 2016 PM Existing, 2017 PM No Build _.. 2017 PM Willi Arena Access at Longacres 2017 PM With Arena _® Access at Strander 4037 PIVI No Build 2037 PM With Arena Access at Longacres 7037 PM With Arena Access at Strander LOS B Delay 18 LOS B Delay 19 Alt 1 LOS Delay C 30 Alt 2 LOS Delay C 30 LOS B Delay 19 Alt 1 LOS Delay B 20 Alt 2 LOS Delay B 20 1 Interurban Avenue 1-5 Southbound Off Ramp 2 Interurban Avenue' 1-5 Northbound On Ramp A 9 A 10 A 10 A 10 B 10 B 10 B 10 3 Interurban Avenue 1-405 Southbound Off/On Rar D 38 D 38 D 39 ID 39 D 52 F 84 F 84 4 Interurban Avenue SW Grady Way D 36. 0 37 D 39 D 39 F 101 F 121 F 120 5 West Valley Hwy 1-405 Northbound Off/On Rar C 30 C 31 0 38 D 38 D 44 E 70 E 76 6 West Valley Hwy Longacres Way A 8 A 8 E 77 D 39 A 10 D 44 C 31 7 West Valley Hwy Strander Blvd C 23 C 23 C 27 C 27 F 99 F 197 F 152 8 SR-167 SW Grady Way E 63 E 66 6 71 E 71 F 94 F 98 F 98 9 61st Ave S Southcenter Blvd C 32 D 38 6 56 E 56 E 57 F 100 F 100 10 61st Ave Si Tukwila Parkway C 33. C 28 D 46 0 46 E 56 F 82 F 82 11 1-405 Northbound On Ramp Tukwila Parkway B 12 B 13 8 13 B 13 8 17 B 19 B 19 12 66th Ave S Southcenter Blvd D 54 E 60 E 67 E 67 F 148 F 217 F 217 13 Andover Parkway W Strander Blvd D 42 D 43 ID 43 ID 43 D 53 D 55 D 55 14 Andover Parkway E Strander Blvd C 34 D 35 D 36 ID 36 D 48 0 46 D 46 15 Southcenter Parkway Strander Blvd C 26 C 26 C 27 C 27 C 26 C 27 C 27 16 Southcenter Parkway Klickitat Drive C 28 C 28 C 31 C 31 C 28 C 30 C 30 17 Southcenter Parkway 1-5 Northbound Off Ramp D 37 D 38 D 45 D 45 E 65 67 E 67 18 Southcenter Parkway S 180th Street C 35 D 35 D 35 D 35 D 41 0 41 D 41 19 West Valley Hwy S 180th Street E 56 58 E 58 E 58 F 190 F 197 F 197 20 East Valley Road SW 41st St D 50 D 51 D 52 D 52 D 54 D 55 D 55 21 East Valley Road SW 43rd St D 42 D 44 D 43 D 43 D 51 D 52 D 52 22 SR-167 Northbound Off/On Ra SW 43rd St B 14 B 14 8 16 B 16 B 16 B 18 B 18 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW SW Grady Way D 54 E 57 E 65 E 65 F 91 F 124 F 124 24 Lind Avenue SW SW Grady Way D 40 D 40 D 39 0 39 D 45 D 44 D 44 25 Oakesdale Avenue SW SW 27th St B 11 B 11 B 13 B 13 C 35 D 44 D 44 26 Lind Avenue SW SW 27th St B 18 B 18 B 18 B 18 C 28 C 30 C 30 27 Oakesdale Avenue SW SW 16th St B 15 B 16 C 23 C 23 8 19 C 29 C 29 28 Lind Avenue SW SW 16th St B 17 B 18 B 18 B 18 C 31 C 31 C 31 29 Lind Avenue SW SW 41st St C 21 C 22 C 22 C 22 C 26 C 26 C 26 30 Oakesdale Avenue SW SW 43rd St C 23 C 24 C 23 C 23 C 29 C 29 C 29 31 Lind Avenue SW SW 43rd St C 27 C 28 C 27 C 27 D 43 D 42 D 42 DRAFT 6/9/15 Attachment B WASIST Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 09:09 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: 66th Ave South/Driveway and Southcenter Blvd Existing Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/2 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: Southcenter BLVD C-D: 66th Ave S/Driveway 0 Rec RESULTS: 0 Rec 4 3 Rec.1 0 ORec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Single Family Residential Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 705 2 A-D Left Turn 705 3 A-C Right Turn 3 4 B-A Thru 605 5 B-C Left Turn 5 6 B-D Right Tum 155 7 C-D Thru 5 8 C-A Left Tum 3 9 C-B Right Turn 5 10 D-C Thru 3 11 D-B Left Tum 175 12 D-A Right Turn 635 - 7, 8, 9. 1 3. 1 Iz. 5. 1' < 10,11,12. E- Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2015 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 12.27 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.65 Leg B 25 3.65 Leg C 25 3.65 Leg D 25 3.65 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 100 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 35 Leg A Left Turn 63 LegBThru&Rt 75 Leg B Left Turn 75 Leg C Thru & Rt 93 Leg C Left Turn LegDThru&Rt 82 Leg D Left Turn Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 09:15 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: 66th Ave South/Driveway and Southcenter Blvd 2017 Build A1t1 Performed by: \ • \ \ • r \i ✓ Z ✓ \ ✓ \ ✓ \ ✓ \ Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/2 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: Southcenter BLVD C-D: 66th Ave S/Driveway 0Rec.4 RESULTS: 0 Rec.3 Rec.1 0 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Single Family Residential Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 720 2 A-D Left Tum 720 3 A-C Right Turn 3 4 B-A Thru 920 5 B-C Left Turn 5 6 B-D Right Tum 160 7 C-D Thru 5 8 C-A Left Tum 3 9 C-B Right Turn 5 10 D-C Thru 3 11 D-B Left Turn 180 12 D-A Right Tum 650 1. 4 C� 10,11,12. E- 7, 8, 9. -->—> 1 nT 4. 6. T Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 150 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 44 Leg A Left Turn 99 Leg B Thru & Rt 98 Leg B Left Turn 98 LegCThru&Rt 143 Leg C Left Turn Leg D Thru & Rt 123 Leg D Left Turn Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 09:14 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: 66th Ave South/Driveway and Southcenter Blvd 2017 Build Alt2 Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/2 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: Southcenter BLVD C-D: 66th Ave S/Driveway 0 Rec RESULTS: .4 0 Rec.3 0Rec.1 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Single Family Residential Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement 1 A-B Thru 2 A-D Left Turn 3 A-C Right Turn 4 B-A Thru 5 B-C Left Turn 6 B-D Right Turn 7 C-D Thru. 8 C-A Left Turn 9 C-B Right Turn 10 D-C Thru 11 D-B Left Turn 12 D-A Right Turn - > 7,8,9. 3. z 51 1' 4. 6. T Volume (vph) 720 720 3 920 5 160 5 3 5 3 180 650 C� 10,11,12. Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 150 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 44 Leg A Left Tum 99 LegBThru&Rt 98 Leg B Left Tum 98 LegCThru&Rt 143 Leg C Left Tum LegDThru&Rt 123 Leg D Left Tum Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 09:13 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: 66th Ave South/Driveway and Southcenter Blvd 2017 No Build Performed by: MO Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/2 Lt Tums Street Names: A-B: Southcenter BLVD C-D: 66th Ave S/Driveway 0 Rec 4 0 Rec.3 RESULTS: 0Rec.l 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Single Family Residential Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 720 2 A-D Left Turn 720 3 A-C Right Turn 3 4 B-A Thru 620 5 B-C Left Turn 5 6 B-D Right Turn 160 7 C-D Thru 5 8 C-A Left Tum 3 9 C-B Right Turn 5 10 D-C Thru 3 11 D-B Left Tum 180 12 D-A Right Turn 650 -� 7, 8, 9. 1 4 1I CD 10,11,12. Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 100 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) Leg A Thru & Rt 35 Leg A Left Turn 64 Leg B Thru & Rt 75 Leg B Left Tum 75 Leg C Thru & Rt 93 Leg C Left Turn LegDThru&Rt 82 Leg D Left Turn Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:02 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: 66th Ave South/Driveway and Southcenter Blvd 2037 Build Altl Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/2 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: Southcenter BLVD C-D: 66th Ave S/Driveway 0 Rec.4 0 Rec.3 RESULTS: 0 Rec.1 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Single Family Residential Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 770 2 A-D Left Turn 930 3 A-C Right Turn 3 4 B-A Thru 1070 5 B-C Left Turn 5 6 B-D Right Turn 200 7 C-D Thru 5 8 C-A Left Turn 3 9 C-B Right Turn 5 10 D-C Thru 3 11 D-B Left Turn 240 12 D-A Right Turn 695 - 7, 8, 9. 3. T T 'T 6. 1' C� 10,11,12. E- Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 100 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 39 Leg A Left Turn 65 Leg B Thru & Rt 77 Leg B Left Turn 77 LegCThru&Rt 93 Leg C Left Turn LegDThru&Rt 78 Leg D Left Turn Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:00 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: 66th Ave South/Driveway and Southcenter Blvd 2037 Build Alt2 Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/2 Lt Turns Street Names; A-B: Southcenter BLVD C-D: 66th Ave S/Driveway 0 Rec.4 0 Re ..3 RESULTS: 0 Rec.1 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.2 3.1 . Pass 3 3 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Single Family Residential Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 770 2 A-D Left Turn 930 3 A-C Right Turn 3 4 B-A Thru 1070 5 B-C Left Turn 5 6 B-D Right Tum 200 7 C-D Thru 5 8 C-A Left Tum 3 9 C-B Right Turn 5 10 D-C Thru 3 11 D-B Left Tum 240 12 D-A Right Tum 695 3. vv 1 1' F- C� 10,11,12. -3 7, 8, 9. 5. 1' 1' 6. T Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 100 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 39 Leg A Left Turn 65 LegBThru&Rt 77 Leg B Left Turn 77 LegCThru&Rt 93 Leg C Left Turn LegDThru&Rt 78 Leg D Left Turn Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 03:57 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: 66th Ave South/Driveway and Southcenter Blvd 2037 No Build Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/2 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: Southcenter BLVD C-D: 66th Ave S/Driveway oRe 0 Rec RESULTS: 4 .3 oRec.1 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.1 3.1 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Single Family Residential Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 770 2 A-D Left Turn 930 3 A-C Right Turn 3 4 B-A Thru 770 5 B-C Left Turn 5 6 B-D Right Turn 200 7 C-D Thru 5 8 C-A Left Tum 3 9 C-B Right Turn 5 10 D-C Thru 3 11 D-B Left Turn 240 12 D-A Right Turn 695 -� 7, 8, 9. > 1. 3. z 1' /7 6. T 10,11,12. Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - K1NG County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 100 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 41 Leg A Left Turn 69 LegBThru&Rt 75 Leg B Left Turn 75 LegCThru&Rt 93 Leg C Left Turn LegDThru&Rt 76 Leg D Left Turn Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: Page 4 of 4 � 1 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 08:21 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and South 180th St Existing Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (2 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: S 180th ST oRec4 0Rec33 RESULTS: oRec. 1 oRec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.9 3.6 Pass 3 3 10 10 4.0 3.7 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.9 3.6 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 765 2 A-D Left Turn 500 3 A-C Right Turn 105 4 B-A Thru 775 5 B-C Left Turn 360 6 B-D Right Turn 130 7 C-D Thru 960 8 C-A Left Turn 65 9 C-B Right Turn 570 10 D-C Thru 870 11 D-B Left Turn 170 12 D-A Right Turn 275 1 3. 9.� 1 1. T 6. 12. E- 10. • Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2015 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 12.27 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.65 Leg B 25 3.65 Leg C 25 3.65 Leg D 25 3.65 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 135 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 91 Leg A Left Turn 111 LegBThru&Rt 95 Leg B Left Turn 115 Leg C Thru & Rt 93 Leg C Left Turn 124 Leg D Thru & Rt 85 Leg D Left Turn 118 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 08:31 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and South 180th St 2017 Build Altl Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (2 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: S 180th ST 0 Rec.4 0 Rec.1 oRec 3 oRec.2 RESULTS: 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.9 3.6 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 785 2 A-D Left Tum 510 3 A-C Right Turn 110 4 B-A Thru 855 5 B-C Left Turn 370 6 B-D Right Turn 210 7 C-D Thru 980 8 C-A Left Turn 70 9 C-B Right Turn 585 10 D-C Thru 890 11 D-B Left Tum 175 12 D-A Right Turn 305 3. z 7 9. \J> 1. L L 1' T 4. T 1' r‘s. 12. to. 6. 1 11/ Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound / • \' I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 ,\ , MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: ` Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 •� Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. / , Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. / 1 Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 135 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 91 Leg A Left Turn 110 Leg B Thru & Rt 96 Leg B Left Turn 115 • ` Leg C Thru & Rt 91 Leg C Left Turn 124 Leg D Thru & Rt 85 Leg D Left Turn 120 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 08:30 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and South 180th St 2017 Build Alt2 Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (2 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: S 180th ST oRec.4 oRec.1 o Rec.3 RESULTS: aRec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.9 3.6 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 . r Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 785 2 A-D Left Turn 510 3 A-C Right Turn 110 4 B-A Thru 855 5 B-C Left Turn 370 6 B-D Right Turn 210 7 C-D Thru 980 8 C-A Left Turn 70 9 C-B Right Turn 585 10 D-C Thru 890 11 D-B Left Turn 175 12 D-A Right Turn 305 �$•- 7. 9. 3. z t. tI A 4. T 5. 1' 12. y ii/ Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 135 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 91 Leg A Left Turn 110 LegBThru&Rt 96 Leg B Left Turn 115 LegCThru&Rt 91 Leg C Left Turn 124 LegDThru&Rt 85 Leg D Left Turn 120 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 08:28 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and South 180th St 2017 No -Build Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (2 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: S 180th ST oRecl.4 oRecl 3 RESULTS: oRec. 1 oRec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.9 3.6 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 785 2 A-D Left Turn 510 3 A-C Right Turn 110 4 B-A Thru 795 5 B-C Left Turn 370 6 B-D Right Turn 135 7 C-D Thru 980 8 C-A Left Turn 70 9 C-B Right Turn 585 10 D-C Thru 890 11 D-B Left Turn 175 12 D-A Right Tum 285 3. E- E- /o. L 1 1' 1' 6. 12. E- 10. E- 11� Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 135 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) Leg A Thru & Rt 91 Leg A Left Turn 111. Leg B Thru & Rt 95 Leg B Left Turn 115 LegCThru&Rt 93 Leg C Left Turn 124 LegDThru&Rt 85 Leg D Left Turn 118 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:11 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and South 180th St 2037 Build Altl Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (2 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: S 180th ST 0 Rec 4 0 Rec.1 oRecl.3 oRec.2 RESULTS: 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. = 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 7. 9.—t Movement Volume (vph) A-B Thru 1185 A-D Left Turn 525 A-C Right Turn 105 B-A Thru 1520 B-C Left Turn 410 B-D Right Turn 235 C-D Thru 1365 C-A Left Turn 225 C-B Right Turn 160 D-C Thru 1325 D-B Left Turn 320 D-A Right Turn 365 3. kK L y E 4. T 6. Z's. 12. lfl. 11/ Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 135 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) Leg A Thru & Rt 80 Leg A Left Turn 120 LegBThru&Rt 83 Leg B Left Turn 123 LegCThru&Rt 96 Leg C Left Turn 122 LegDThru&Rt 92 Leg D Left Tum 118 Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:08 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and South 180th St 2037 Build Alt2 Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (2 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: S 180th ST 0 Rec.4 0 Rec.3 RESULTS: 0 Rec.1 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 1185 2 A-D Left Turn 545 3 A-C Right Turn 105 4 B-A Thru 1520 5 B-C Left Tum 410 6 B-D Right Tum 235 7 C-D Thru 1365 8 C-A Left Tum 215 9 C-B Right Tum 160 10 D-C Thm 1325 11 D-B Left Turn 320 12 D-A Right Tum 365 3. z 1' 12. <- O. - -> -> -> 7. - -> 9. ---> 6. Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 135 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 80 Leg A Left Turn 120 Leg B Thru & Rt 83 Leg B Left Tum 123 LegCThru&Rt 96 Leg C Left Turn 122 LegDThru&Rt 92 Leg D Left Turn 118 Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:06 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and South 180th St 2037 No -Build Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (2 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: S 180th ST 0 Rec.4 I 0 Rec. 1 0 Rec.3 RESULTS: 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 1185 2 A-D Left Turn 525 3 A-C Right Turn 105 4 B-A Thru 1460 5 B-C Left Turn 410 6 B-D Right Tum 160 7 C-D Thru 1365 8 C-A Left Tum 215 9 C-B Right Turn 160 10 D-C Thru 1325 11 D-B Left Turn 320 12 D-A Right Turn 345 12. }9. -> --> 7. 9.� 4. 6. 1' Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... :J Northwest Arena Study \ / F CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 , � \ MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: 1. Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 / 1 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: : J Total Cycle Length (sec): 135 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 81 LegALeftTurn 119 Leg B Thru & Rt 85 Leg B Left Turn 123 Leg C Thru & Rt 95 / Leg C Left Turn 121 LegDThru&Rt 92 Leg D Left Turn 118 / \ / 1 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 08:59 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and Strander Blvd Existing Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/4 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: Strander BLVD 0 Rec 4 0 Rec 3 RESULTS: 0 Rec.1 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.7 3.5 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.8 3.6 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 805 2 A-D Left 'Turn 30 3 A-C Right Turn 375 4 B-A Thru 945 5 B-C Left Turn 285 6 B-D Right Turn 10 7 C-D Thru 30 8 C-A Left Turn 435 9 C-B Right Turn 425 10 D-C Thru 20 11 D-B Left Turn 20 12 D-A Right Turn 30 o. T 7. 9. 2. t 5. 4. 6. T ,\ 10, 12. 11. Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2015 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 12.27 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.65 Leg B 25 3.65 Leg C 25 3.65 Leg D 25 3.65 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 125 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 60 Leg A Left Turn 115 Leg B Thru & Rt 48 Leg B Left Turn 107 LegCThru&Rt 99 Leg C Left Turn 99 LegDThru&Rt 115 Leg D Left Turn 115 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 09:08 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and Strander BLVD 2017 Build Alt! Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/4 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: Strander BLVD 0 Rec 0 Rec RESULTS: 4 3 0 Rec.1 0Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 / Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 825 2 A-D Left Turn 35 3 A-C Right Turn 515 4 B-A Thru 1045 5 B-C Left Turn 295 6 B-D Right Turn 15 7 C-D Thru. 35 8 C-A Left Tum 485 9 C-B Right Turn 430 10 D-C Thru 25 11 D-B Left Turn 20 12 D-A Right Tum 40 --3 7. 9. •yam 1 3. z 2. 1t t t T T 10, 12. 11. Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 125 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 63 Leg A Left Turn 115 LegBThru&Rt 51 Leg B Left Turn 106 LegCThru&Rt 96 Leg C Left Tum 96 LegDThru&Rt 115 Leg D Left Turn 115 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 09:07 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and Strander Blvd 2017 Build Alt2 Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/4 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: Strander BLVD 0 Rec 4 0 Rec.3 RESULTS: Rec.1 0 0 Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.6 3.4 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 825 2 A-D Left Turn 35 3 A-C Right Turn 515 4 B-A Thru 1045 5 B-C Left Turn 295 6 B-D Right Turn 15 7 C-D Thru 35 8 C-A Left Turn 485 9 C-B Right Turn 430 10 D-C Thru 25 11 D-B Left Turn 20 12 D-A Right Turn 30 -* 7, 9. 1. 3. z 1 5. T t 1' nT 6. 4. T r� 10, 12..E- �r 11. — — Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 125 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 63 Leg A Left Tum 115 LegBThru&Rt 51 Leg B Left Turn 106 LegCThru&Rt 96 Leg C Left Turn 96 LegDThru&Rt 115 Leg D Left Tum 115 Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 09:06 AM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and Strander Blvd 2017 No -Build Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 2 w/4 Lt Turns Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: Strander BLVD 0 Rec 4 oRec.3 RESULTS: 0 Rec.1 oRec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.4 3.3 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.5 3.4 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 2. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 825 2 A-D Left Turn 35 3 A-C Right Turn 285 4 B-A Thru 965 5 B-C Left Turn 295 6 B-D Right Tum 15 7 C-D Thru 35 8 C-A Left Turn 435 9 C-B Right Turn 430 10 D-C Thru 25 11 D-B Left Tum 20 12 D-A Right Turn 30 0. T - 7, 9. 1. 3. z 1 N 5. 4\ . 6. 4 T 10, 12. / Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 , USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2017 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 9.11 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 3.10 Leg B 25 3.10 Leg C 25 3.10 Leg D 25 3.10 ✓ r *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 125 ✓ \ Red Times: I \ Type of Movement Red Times (sec) Leg A Thru & Rt 61 Leg A Left Tum 115 LegBThru&Rt 49 Leg B Left Turn 106 Leg CThru&Rt 99 Leg C Left Turn 99 • \ Leg D Thru & Rt 115 } Leg D Left Turn 115 / \ / \ Page 3 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study User Comments: 1. < blank > Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:19 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and Strander Blvd 2037 Build Altl Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Tums (4 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: Strander BLVD oRec.4 oRec. 1 oRec.3 oRec.2 RESULTS: 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 1310 2 A-D Left Turn 1030 3 A-C Right Turn 505 4 B-A Thru 1155 5 B-C Left 'rum 405 6 B-D Right Turn 310 7 C-D Thru 460 8 C-A Left Turn 410 9 C-B Right Turn 245 10 D-C Thru 620 11 D-B Left Turn 35 12 D-A Right Turn 580 3. 8 7. 9.-t Page 2 of 4 r Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 J USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County ., CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. r Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 125 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) Leg A Thru & Rt 69 Leg A Left Tum 87 Leg B Thru & Rt 89 Leg B Left Turn 107 Leg C Thru & Rt 88 ' Leg C Left Turn 104 LegDThru&Rt 103 Leg D Left Turn 115 � l r Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:16 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and Strander Blvd 2037 Build Alt2 Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Turns (4 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: Strander BLVD oRec.4 oRec.1 0 Rec RESULTS: 3 0Rec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 1. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement 1 A-B Thru 2 A-D Left Turn 3 A-C Right Turn 4 B-A Thm 5 B-C Left Tum 6 B-D Right Tum 7 C-D Thru 8 C-A Left Tum 9 C-B Right Turn 10 D-C Thru 11 D-B Left Tum 12 D-A Right Turn 3. z 11 6. Volume (vph) 1310 800 505 1155 405 310 460 410 245 620 35 580 --> Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 125 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) LegAThru&Rt 69 Leg A Left Turn 90 LegBThru&Rt 87 Leg B Left Turn 108 LegCThru&Rt 87 Leg C Left Turn 103 LegDThru&Rt 103 Leg D Left Turn 115 Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 06-26-15 04:14 PM Northwest Arena Study Description: West Valley Hwy and Strander Blvd 2037 No -Build Performed by: Intersection Type: Four -Way Intersection, 4 x 4 w/4 Lt Tums (4 Double Lt) Street Names: A-B: West Valley HWY C-D: Strander BLVD oRec.4 oRec1 oReci.3 RESULTS: oRec.2 10 ft. Distance Distance from A-B from C-D CO CO roadway roadway 1-hour avg. 8-hour avg. Receptor# Quadrant (feet) (feet) Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Pass/Fail* 1 1 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 2 2 10 10 3.2 3.1 Pass 3 3 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass 4 4 10 10 3.3 3.2 Pass *Project PASSES 1-hr and 8-hr NAAQS of 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Largest modeled CO concentrations are at receptor 3. - All CO concentrations include a background concentration of 3.0 ppm. - 8-hr average CO concentrations are calculated by multiplying the 1-hr average concentrations (without background) by a persistence factor of 0.7 and then adding the background concentration. Page 1 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS Northwest Arena Study Intersection Data: Predominant Surroundings: Offices Traffic Volumes: Vol. Index Movement Volume (vph) 1 A-B Thru 1310 2 A-D Left Tum 370 3 A-C Right Tum 375 4 B-A Thru 1140 5 B-C Left Turn 405 6 B-D Right Turn 255 7 C-D Thru 410 8 C-A LeftTurn 410 9 C-B Right Turn 245 10 D-C Thru 620 11 D-B Left Tum 35 12 D-A Right Tum 580 1. 3. 4 12. 13. --> 7. 9. -t 5. r B. • ••• Page 2 of 4 Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER INPUTS continued... Northwest Arena Study CO Emission Factors Based On: Location: Western Washington - KING County CO Maint. Area: Puget Sound I/M Program: No Model Year: 2037 MOVES2014 CO Emission Factors: Idle Emission Factor (g/hr): 3.84 Approach Speed (mph) EF (g/mile) Leg A 25 1.26 Leg B 25 1.26 Leg C 25 1.26 Leg D 25 1.26 *Note: Local roadways should be modeled using an approach speed of 15 mph or less. Highway ramps should be modeled using an approach speed of 5 mph. Traffic Signal Timing: Total Cycle Length (sec): 125 Red Times: Type of Movement Red Times (sec) Leg A Thru & Rt 67 Leg A Left Turn 99 Leg B Thru & Rt 76 Leg B Left Tum 108 LegCThru&Rt 89 Leg C Left Turn 104 LegDThru&Rt 104 LegDLeftTurn 115 Page 3 of 4 User Comments: Washington State Intersection Screening Tool 3.0 USER COMMENTS Northwest Arena Study Page 4 of 4 f1 / 1 rr 1 Appendix C. Transportation Discipline Report • 2 FORTHCOMING 3 r1 r 1 Appendix D. SEPA Adoption Notice 2 FORTHCOMING 1 2 3 4 5 Preliminary Review Draft Transportation Technical Report RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC 6 Northwest Arena 7 Draft SEPA Environmental Impact Statement 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Prepared for 18 City of Tukwila 19 20 21 22 Prepared by 23 CH2M HILL 24 25 26 27 July 2015 28 / \ \ \./ , Contents 2 . \ `- 14 5.6 Non -Motorized Network 25 ......• / 15 5.7 Parking 27 / 16 5.8 Roadway Safety Performance 27 / ` 17 6. Impacts of No Action Alternative 30 / \ 18 6.1 Planned and Approved Roadway Improvement Projects 30 ./ 19 6.2 Background Traffic Projections 32 ../ 20 6.3 Traffic Operations Analysis 32 ' 21 6.4 Freeway Operations 37 / 22 6.5 Transit Network 38 . / 23 6.6 Freight Rail 38 / l ._. 24 6.7 Non -Motorized Network 38 / ' 25 6.8 Parking 38 / \ 26 6.9 Roadway Safety Performance 38 ' ) 27 7. Impacts of Proposed Alternatives 38 / 28 7.1 Alternative 1 38 ` ' 29 7.1.1 Proposed Action Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment 38 / 1 ., 30 7.1.2 Traffic Operation Analysis 44 ' " 31 7.1.3 Freight and Non -Transit Rail 49 • 32 7.1.4 Transit 49 • 33 7.1.5 Parking 51 .., 34 7.1.6 Non -Motorized 52 ' " 35 7.1.7 Road Safety Performance 52 / \ 36 7.2 Alternative 2 52 • 37 7.2.1 Proposed Action Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment 52 / 1 . / 38 7.2.2 Traffic Operation Analysis 54 " \ 39 7.2.3 Freight and Non -Transit Rail 57 a / \ 40 7.2.4 Transit 57 '' 41 7.2.5 Parking 57 .. JULY 2015 111 f l DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. / , 3 Acronyms and Abbreviations vii J 4 1. Introduction 9 5 2. Project Description 9 6 3. Study Area 10 7 4. Methods and Assumptions 10 8 5. Affected Environment 15 9 5.1 Roadway Network 15 10 5.2 Intersection and Corridor Operations 17 Freeway O 11 5.3 y Operations p 20 12 5.4 Transit Network 21 13 5.5 Freight and Non -Transit Rail Network 24 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 7.2.6 Non -Motorized 58 2 7.2.7 Roadway Safety Performance 58 3 7.3 Mitigation 58 4 7.3.1 Physical Improvements 58 5 7.3.2 Transportation Management Plan Measures 60 6 8. Construction Impacts and Potential Mitigation Measures 64 7 8.1 Construction Trips 64 8 8.2 Construction Impacts to Roadways 65 9 8.3 Potential Mitigation Measures for Roadways 65 10 8.4 Construction Impacts to Transit 66 11 8.5 Potential Mitigation Measures for Transit 66 12 8.6 Construction Impacts to Freight 66 13 8.7 Construction Impacts to Non -motorized Facilities 66 14 8.8 Potential Mitigation Measures for Non -motorized Facilities 66 15 8.9 Construction Impacts to Parking 66 16 8.10 Construction Impacts to Safety 66 17 8.11 Potential Mitigation Measures for Safety 66 18 9. References 67 19 20 Appendixes 21 A Peak Hour Volumes 22 B 95th Percentile Queue Lengths 23 C Parking Memorandum 24 Tables 25 1 Study Intersection and Corridor Level of Service Standards 26 2 Study Area Roadway Characteristics 27 3 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary 28 4 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary 29 5 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary 30 6 Existing Transit Service Summary 31 7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity 32 8 Existing Intersection Crash Analysis Results (2009-2013) 33 9 No Action Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary 34 10 No Action Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary 35 11 No Action Alternative Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary 36 12 Project Trip Generation Assumptions 37 13 Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary 38 14 Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary JULY 2015 N DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 15 Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary 2 16 Proposed Weekend Transit Service Changes 3 17 Summary of Parking Availability per Scenario for Alternative 1 4 18 Alternative 2 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary19 5 Alternative 2 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary 6 20 Summary of Parking Availability per Scenario for Alternative 2 7 21 Mitigated Conditions (2017) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary 8 22 Mitigated Conditions (2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary 9 Figures 10 1 Transportation Study Area 11 2 Study Area Intersections and Corridors 12 3 Intersection Level of Service Existing 13 4 Transit Facilities 14 5 Existing Non -Motorized Facilities 15 6 Parking Study Area 16 7 No Action Projects 17 8 Intersection Level of Service No Action 2017 18 9 Intersection Level of Service No Action 2037 19 10 Saturday Event Start Times 20 11 Future Vehicle Trip Distribution 21 12 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 1 2017 22 13 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 1 2037 23 14 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 2 2017 24 15 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 2 2037 25 16 Pedestrian Trip Distribution 26 27 JULY 2015 V DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Acronyms and Abbreviations 2 AVO average vehicle occupancy 3 DART Dial -a -Ride Transit 4 HOV high -occupancy vehicle 5 HSS highways of statewide significance 6 1-405 Interstate 405 7 1-5 Interstate 5 8 LOS level of service 9 MEV million entering vehicles 10 NHS National Highway System 11 PSRC Puget Sound Regional Council 12 SR State Route 13 TOD transit -oriented development 14 TUC Tukwila Urban Center 15 UPRR Union Pacific Railroad 16 WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation 17 JULY 2015 VII DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 1. Introduction 2 This report describes the affected environment of the transportation system that will be used to access 3 the proposed Northwest Arena (Proposed Action) in Tukwila, Washington, and evaluates the degree to 4 which the Proposed Action would affect the transportation system, including roads, freeways, non- 5 motorized facilities, and transit facilities. This report also identifies potential mitigation measures to 6 reduce anticipated impacts to the transportation network. The transportation analysis included an 7 assessment of potential effects of vehicle circulation, and potential impacts on parking supply and 8 parking demand generated by different types of events. The analysis also considered non -motorized 9 travel, including safety for pedestrians and bicyclists and potential measures to maintain safety. 10 The analysis assessed transit service to the Proposed Action site, including King County Metro's transit 11 service including Rapid Ride, Sound Transit's Sounder train, Amtrak, and Sound Transit Link light rail. It 12 also evaluated the potential for special event transit service such as shuttles. 13 2. Project Description 14 The Proposed Action is located in Tukwila, King County, Washington. Tukwila is about XX miles south of 15 Seattle and XX miles north of Tacoma. Tukwila is accessible by Interstate 5 (1-5), Interstate 405 (1-405), 16 State Route (SR) 167, and SR 181/West Valley Highway. I-5, 1-405, and SR 167 are important 17 transportation corridors in the region. In addition, Seattle -Tacoma International Airport is located about 18 XX miles to the east. The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) corridor travels through the Proposed Action 19 site, and the BNSF railroad corridor runs just east of the site in Renton. Daily Amtrak passenger rail 20 service and Sound Transit Sounder commuter rail service are provided along the BNSF corridor from the 21 Tukwila Station located southeast of the Proposed Action. The Interurban Trail runs within the Puget 22 Sound Energy right-of-way across the Proposed Action site; possible alternative trail routes to be 23 provided during construction and trail bypasses during events are addressed in this analysis. 24 The maximum capacity for the arena would be 19,500 people for concerts and similar events. Sporting 25 events such as professional team and special sports events would have a capacity between 17,500 and 26 18,500. Corporate events could also be held at the arena, and capacity would depend on the type of 27 function. It is anticipated that attendance for many of the events would range from 10,000 to 15,000 28 guests. The Northwest Arena would be used for up to 230 events per year with the majority of these 29 events scheduled for evenings and weekends. 30 Construction of the arena would require the vacation of Nelson Place and would require S 156th Street 31 to be modified and re -aligned to the northeast. 32 The Proposed Action would include sidewalk improvements to the north side of Longacres Way to 33 connect the main garage to the arena. The sidewalk would be constructed under the existing UPRR 34 railroad corridor, but would not interfere with UPRR operations. The sidewalk would also continue 35 eastward and under the BNSF railroad corridor to provide pedestrian access from off-street parking to 36 the east. Skybridges from the project garage to the plaza would provide additional pedestrian passage 37 over the UPRR tracks. The City of Tukwila plans to open a new pedestrian bridge over the Green River 38 just south of the intersection of West Valley Highway and Longacres Way, which would provide a more 39 direct connection to areas west of the arena including additional transit opportunities. Transit access to 40 the Proposed Action includes Sound Transit Sounder and King County Metro Rapid Ride F line to the 41 Tukwila Station located south of the main parking garage. In addition, the recently improved Tukwila 42 Urban Transit Center is located to the west of the arena across the Green River and provides additional 43 bus transit by King County Metro. 44 The Proposed Action would include a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to ensure safe and 45 efficient operation of the facility. The TMP would be developed by the proponent and the City of JULY 2015 9 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Tukwila in coordination with any other agencies who have responsibilities in implementing the 2 measures identified in the TMP. The TMP would be in place prior to operation. 3 3. Study Area 4 The Proposed Action site is generally situated between State Route (SR) 181 (West Valley Highway) to 5 the west and the BNSF Railway railroad tracks to the east. The site is south of Interstate 405 (1-405) and 6 north of Longacres Way. Primary access to the Proposed Action site will be provided via SR 181 at 7 multiple intersections including S 156th Street, Longacres Way, and Strander Boulevard (with future 8 extension to the east). Additional access from the south is proposed to be provided via the Sounder 9 Station Access Road from SW 27th Street, which connects with Oakesdale Avenue SW to the east and 10 with the future extension of Strander Boulevard to the west. Access from the east will be provided via 11 Longacres Drive connecting to the east terminus of Longacres Way at the BNSF underpass. 12 Key factors in developing the study area included the Proposed Actions expected travel characteristics 13 (including number of vehicle trips and direction of those trips), primary travel routes to/from the project 14 site, anticipated parking locations in the surrounding vicinity of the Proposed Action, and non -motorized 15 travel movements. The study area for evaluating vehicular and non -motorized potential transportation 16 impacts is bounded by 1-5 to the west, SR 167 to the east, 1-405 to the north, and South 180th Street to 17 the south. North of 1-405, the transportation study area also includes Interurban Avenue South to the 1-5 18 interchange. Figure 1 shows the site and transportation study area. This area was selected as the 19 transportation study area because of the potential for probable significant impacts on the 20 transportation system within the area. In addition, an inventory of existing public and private parking 21 spaces is included in this report. For this parking survey, all parking spaces within 0.5 mile radius around 22 the Proposed Action site were counted. 23 4. Methods and Assumptions 24 To establish baseline conditions against which potential changes associated with the Proposed Action 25 could be compared, intersections and corridors likely to be significantly impacted were selected and 26 included within the study area. Analyses were conducted for the year of opening (2017) and the 20-year 27 future horizon (2037). Study intersections and corridors are shown on Figure 2 and described in Table 1. 28 These locations were selected to examine how the Proposed Action would potentially change traffic 29 conditions related to intersection and corridor operations. This study presents a comprehensive, multi- 30 modal analysis of project impacts under existing and cumulative conditions for the following time 31 periods: 32 • Weekday p.m. peak hour (4:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.) 33 • Weekend peak hour (1:45 p.m. to 2:45 p.m.) 34 • Holiday weekend peak hour (1:45 p.m. to 2:45 p.m.) 35 The weekday p.m. peak analysis time period was selected because it captures the end -of -day commute, 36 which is generally representative of the worst traffic condition of the day and anticipates capturing 37 those attendees arriving for the most frequently occurring 7 p.m. start time weekday events 38 (professional sports) and assumes the arena would be at capacity.. Based on average weekday volumes 39 on 1-405 in the vicinity of SR 181, traffic during the p.m. peak period (generally 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.) is higher 40 than any other time of day. Average traffic volumes are approximately 5 to 15 percent higher in the p.m. 41 peak than in the a.m. peak period. Traffic volumes at the I-405/SR 181 interchange are nearly 20 percent 42 higher in the p.m. peak compared to the a.m. peak traffic volumes (WSDOT, 2015a). Because the p.m. 43 peak condition is higher than the a.m. peak traffic conditions, the p.m. peak was used for this analysis to 44 represent the "worst case" traffic condition. JULY 2015 10 .. DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. Map Inset A Figure 1 Transportation Study Area Northwest Arena ED Project Location Major Roadway t l l I Rail Line City Boundary Park and Trail Waterbody I Feet 1 f� 0 850 1,700 3,400 Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT pi 5194TH ST /*rail 'ifre -ifehr 182ND 188TH ST p 5 190TH 5T 5 19350 ST Renton 5 188TH 5T m 5190TH ST Kent }. 5 192ND 5T 51947H 5T 9TH ST 5190TH ST S192N0 ST 517TH 5 515 5 18TH 5T 519TH$1 '7 I15O' it�r }e. o r`Mr POP 23g4$i '1YrL'!� ,� .k� 5 25TH 5T 526TH57 S.5 S11' G1 1gt 5 3157 ST 5 32ND PL 32ND sr tot 5377H5T ¢ 537TH PL 5 38TH CT 5 177TH 5T • 5 45TH PL 5 47TH 5T 67 S 48TH ST 549TH5T Map Inset B 5 50TH 5T 551ST ST r-i192N0 ST 5196TH P1 550TH5T N 39TH ST Gr?en ki r; 'r Tr'jtl Stt<- Jfe n , 5 19GTI i 6T Renton 5 177TH ST 3121 r 22 • • 5 45TH Pl S 47TH ST 5 48TH ST 5 49TH ST S 50TH $T S 50TH ST $ S1-ST fT 196TII 6T u • Luke t lrlk Figure 2 Study Area Intersections and Corridors Northwest Arena Q Project Location Major Roadway 1 I I I I Rail Line p City Boundary Park and Trail Waterbody 0 Study Intersection _Study Corridor Feet 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT /\ / \ TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 The typical weekend p.m. peak analysis time period includes the peak arrival of retail/commercial traffic 2 in the Southcenter Mall/Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) area, as well as the arrival of weekend event traffic 3 at the Proposed Action site. Based on weekend daily volumes accessing the Southcenter Mall/TUC area 4 and at the I-405/SR 181 interchange (WSDOT 2014a), the peak period of traffic occurs between 5 approximately 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. This peak period occurs before typical professional sports and large 6 concert start times of 7 p.m. Smaller events such as family entertainment could occur in the early 7 afternoon on weekends. 8 Historic p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections were provided by the City of Tukwila 9 and the City of Renton. Data from the City of Tukwila were collected in 2009 and adjusted to existing 10 year (2015) conditions using a conservative average annual growth rate of 1 percent. Based on annual 11 traffic data reported in Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT's) Ramp and 12 Roadway (WSDOT, 2013), average p.m. peak traffic volumes on 1-405 within the study area have 13 increased at approximately 1 percent per year since 2010. 14 Historic weekday traffic counts provided by the City of Renton were collected between 2008 through 15 2014, and were grown to existing year conditions using an average growth rate of 2 percent per year, as 16 directed by the City of Renton. Additional traffic data were collected midweek on Tuesday, February 24, 17 2015, at study intersections on SR 167 (including ramp terminals at the SW 43rd Street interchange) 18 between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to supplement peak -hour intersection turning movement counts 19 provided by the cities. Based on systemwide intersection traffic data, the weekday p.m. peak hour of 20 traffic is 4:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 21 At selected study intersections along SR 181 and surrounding the Southcenter Mall, turning movement 22 data were collected on Saturday, February 21, 2015, between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to encompass 23 peak activity at Southcenter Mall and within the TUC. The weekend turning movement volumes were 24 used to develop the typical weekend analysis volumes for the p.m. peak hour (1:45 p.m. to 2:45 p.m.) at 25 each study intersection. 26 Historic weekend volumes (collected in February 2014) were provided by WSDOT at freeway ramp 27 locations entering and exiting the Southcenter Mall/TUC area along 1-5 and 1-405. Traffic volumes from 28 the month of February were used in order to be consistent with the month that intersection turning 29 movement counts were taken. The February count data were compared with "peak season" volumes 30 (collected in December 2014) occurring on a Saturday during the holiday shopping/retail season 31 between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Holiday season traffic volumes were generally higher for longer 32 time periods of time in December, reflecting the trend that holiday shoppers begin to arrive earlier in 33 the day and leave later in the afternoon during the peak season. Although daily traffic volumes are 34 higher in December, traffic volumes occurring during the typical peak hour of street traffic (1:45 p.m. to 35 2:45 p.m.) were relatively comparable. Holiday weekend traffic occurring systemwide during the 36 analysis p.m. peak hour was generally found to be approximately 5 percent greater than the February 37 weekend afternoon peak -hour traffic volumes. Because holiday weekend traffic is not substantially 38 greater than typical weekend traffic during the analysis peak period, the weekend p.m. peak hour traffic 39 analysis is assumed to reasonably represent impacts of the Proposed Action during the holiday 40 shopping/retail season. 41 Appendix A includes analysis methods and assumptions, as well as information on peak -hour analysis 42 volume development. 43 Traffic turning movement volumes for each condition were analyzed using SYNCHRO software version 8. 44 This software tool, based on the methodology adopted in the latest Highway Capacity Manual 45 (Transportation Research Board, 2010), analyzes stop -controlled intersections as well as intersections 46 controlled by signals. JULY 2015 13 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Traffic operations can generally be described by six level of service (LOS) 2 grades, which categorize operating conditions at an intersection based 3 on the average vehicle delay time in seconds. LOS classifications are 4 given a letter designation from LOS A to LOS F. LOS A generally 5 represents ideal operating conditions with little to no delay and where 6 movements are not influenced by other vehicles on the roadway. LOS F 7 typically represents the poorest operating conditions, including high 8 delays and extreme congestion. The text box at right shows the LOS 9 categories in reference to average delay time criteria for signalized 10 intersections. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Traffic operations LOS standards are designated according to jurisdiction. LOS standards for study intersections on roadways designated as highways of statewide significance (HSS) are set by WSDOT. I-5, 1-405, and SR 167 in the study area are designated as HSS in an urban area; therefore, the standard is LOS D for intersections on these state Level of Service The 2010 Highway Capacity Manual defines intersection level of service as a function of the average vehicle delay. For signalized intersections, LOS grades are: LOS Delay (seconds) A <10 B >10and520 C > 20 and S 35 D > 35 and <_ 55 E >55and<_80 F > 80 highways (WSDOT, 2010). SR 181 is categorized as a regionally significant state highway. Based on the LOS standards adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) for this roadway, intersections should operate no worse than LOS E with mitigation (PSIRC, 2015). 19 For study intersections on local roadways within the City of Tukwila, the level of service standard is 20 LOS E, while the standard for City of Renton intersections is LOS D. 21 Within the Southcenter Mall/TUC area, the City of Tukwila identifies "corridor LOS" operating thresholds 22 for select roadways that support the retail core. Recognizing that individual intersections may be 23 congested during peak periods, the corridor LOS is intended to assess traffic operations along an 24 identified corridor as a whole, rather than focusing on LOS at a specific intersection. The corridor LOS is 25 based on the averaged control delay at multiple intersections along that corridor, and evaluated against 26 the delay thresholds shown above. 27 Corridors analyzed in this report include SR 181/West Valley Highway between the 1-405 southbound 28 ramp terminal and Strander Boulevard (corridor threshold of LOS E), and Strander Boulevard between 29 Southcenter Parkway and SR 181/West Valley Highway (corridor threshold of LOS F with a weighted 30 average intersection delay of no more than 120 seconds) (City of Tukwila, 2014a). The study 31 intersections, study corridors, jurisdictions, and adopted LOS mobility standards for this study are shown 32 in Table 1. TABLE 1 Study Intersection and Corridor Level of Service Standards No. Intersection Jurisdiction LOS Standarda Designation 1 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Southbound Off -ramp 2 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Northbound On -ramp 3 Interurban Avenue/I-405 Southbound Off -/On -ramps 4 Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way 5 SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps 6 SR 181/Longacres Way 7 SE 181/Strander Boulevard 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT City of Tukwila WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT LOS D LOS D LOS D LOS E LOS D LOS E/mitigated LOS E/mitigated LOS D HSS - Urban HSS - Urban HSS- Urban Local HSS - Urban Non-HSS - Urban Non-HSS - Urban HSS - Urban JULY 2015 14 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 1 Study Intersection and Corridor Level of Service Standards No. Intersection Jurisdiction LOS Standarda Designation 9 61st Ave. S/Southcenter Boulevard City of Tukwila LOS E Local 10 61st Ave. S/Tukwila Parkway City of Tukwila LOS E Local 11 1-405 Northbound On-ramp/Tukwila Parkway WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 12 •66th Ave. S/Southcenter Boulevard City of Tukwila LOS E Local 13 Andover Parkway W/Strander Boulevard City of Tukwila LOS E Local 14 Andover Parkway E/Strander Boulevard City of Tukwila LOS E Local 15 Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard City of Tukwila LOS E Local 16 Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat Drive City of Tukwila LOS E Local 17 Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off -ramp WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 18 Southcenter Parkway/S 180th Street City of Tukwila LOS E Local 19 SR 181/S 180th Street WSDOT LOS E/mitigated Non-HSS - Urban 20 East Valley Road/SW 41st Street WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 21 East Valley Road/SW 43rd Street City of Renton LOS D Local 22 SR 167 Northbound Off-/On-ramps/SW 43rd Street WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way City of Renton LOS D Local 24 Lind Avenue SW/SW Grady Way City of Renton LOS D Local 25 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 27th Street City of Renton LOS D Local 26 Lind Avenue SW/SW 27th Street City of Renton LOS D Local 27 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 16th Street City of Renton LOS D Local 28 Lind Avenue SW/SW 16th Street City of Renton LOS D Local 29 Lind Avenue SW/SW 41st Street City of Renton LOS D Local 30 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 43rd Street City of Renton LOS D Local 31 Lind Avenue SW/SW 43rd Street City of Renton LOS D Local No. Corridor Jurisdiction L05 Standarda SR 181 (from 1-405 southbound ramps to Strander 1 Blvd) City of Tukwila LOS E 2 Strander Blvd. (from Southcenter Pkwy. to SR 181) City of Tukwila LOS F (delay < 120 seconds) a Source: City of Tukwila, 2014a. PSRC, 2015. WSDOT, 2010. 1 2 5. Affected Environment 3 5.1 Roadway Network 4 The Proposed Action would be accessed by most vehicles via 1-5, 1-405, SR 167, and SR 181. 1-5 is the 5 major north -south interstate freeway in that provides a connection between Tukwila with Seattle to the JULY 2015 15 / \ DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. / \ / TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 north and Federal Way/Tacoma to the south. 1-405 is a major north -south interstate freeway that 2 bypasses Seattle on the east side of Lake Washington and provides a connection between Tukwila and 3 Eastside communities such as Bellevue, Kirkland, and Bothell. SR 167 is a north -south freeway that 4 connects Tukwila with communities to the south such as Kent, Auburn, and Tacoma. All three of these 5 freeways are designated as HSS and are part of the National Highway System (NHS). 6 SR 181 is a north -south principal arterial, also known as West Valley Highway, that parallels the Green 7 River between Tukwila and Kent as it travels through the study area. It is a regionally significant state 8 highway and also part of the NHS. S 180th Street is an east -west roadway that forms the southern 9 boundary of the study area and provides access between Tukwila and Renton. West of SR 181, S 180th 10 Street is designated as a minor arterial by the City while east of SR 181, this roadway is a principal 11 arterial. Interurban Avenue S, between 1-5 and 1-405, is also designated as a principal arterial. 12 Southcenter Boulevard and SW Grady Way are two arterials within the study area that are not part of 13 the NHS. Southcenter Boulevard is an east -west principal arterial that parallels I-405 north of the 14 freeway and provides access from 1-5 to Tukwila Parkway and the Southcenter area. SW Grady Way is a 15 principal arterial located north of 1-405. It is east of Southcenter Boulevard and provides an additional 16 east -west option to 1-405 for access between SR 167 and SR 181. 17 Tukwila Parkway is a minor arterial just south of 1-405 that provides east -west access between 66th 18 Avenue S (which passes over 1-405) and Southcenter Parkway. Southcenter Parkway parallels I-5 and 19 provides access to the Southcenter Mall from Tukwila Parkway and 1-5 to the north and Strander 20 Boulevard and S 180th Street to the south. It is an important north -south minor arterial for the western 21 part of the Southcenter Mall/TUC area. Strander Boulevard is also a minor east -west arterial. It crosses 22 the Green River and connects Southcenter Parkway with SR 181 and is planned to extend east beneath 23 the UPRR corridor and connect to the western terminus of the recently completed SW 27th St. Andover 24 Park W and Andover Park E are minor arterials that parallel Southcenter Parkway and provide additional 25 north -south access through the Southcenter area between Tukwila Parkway to the north and S 180th 26 Street to the south. 27 Longacres Way is a short (approximately 0.25-mile-long) local road that provides an east -west 28 connection between SR 181 and the private north -south road along the eastern side of the BNSF 29 railroad right-of-way that connects to Longacres Drive SW to the north. Longacres Way passes beneath 30 both the UPRR and the BNSF railroads and intersects with the Tukwila Station Access Road, a private 31 road that provides access to the Tukwila Station parking lot and extends south to SW 27th Street. Table 32 2 summarizes the jurisdictions and operating characteristics of public transportation facilities within the 33 study area. TABLE 2 Study Area Roadway Characteristics Roadway Jurisdiction Functional Classification Number of Lanes Posted Speed Limit (miles per hour) 1-5 State, NHS, HSS Interstate freeway 10a 60 1-405 State, NHS, HSS Interstate freeway 8a 60 SR 167 State, NHS, HSS Other freeway 7a 60 SR 181 State, NHS Principal arterial 6 40 Interurban Avenue S City of Tukwila, NHS Principal arterial 4 35 Southcenter Boulevard City of Tukwila Principal arterial 5 35 JULY 2015 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 16 / / / • / / / • TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 2 Study Area Roadway Characteristics Roadway Jurisdiction Functional Classification Number of Lanes Posted Speed Limit (miles per hour) SW Grady Way City of Tukwila Principal arterial 5 35 Tukwila Parkway City of Tukwila Minor arterial 4 35 Southcenter Parkway City of Tukwila Minor arterial 4 35 S 180th Street City of Tukwila, NHS Minor arterial 5 35 Strander Boulevard City of Tukwila Minor arterial 5 35 Andover Park W City of Tukwila Minor arterial 5 35 Andover Park E City of Tukwila Minor arterial 4 35 Longacres Way City of Tukwila Local Road 2 25 SW Grady Way City of Renton Principal arterial 5 35 Oakesdale Avenue SW City of Renton Principal arterial 5 35 Lind Avenue SW City of Renton Minor arterial 4 35 SW 27th Street City of Renton Minor arterial 3 35 a Number of lanes includes high -occupancy -vehicle (HOV) lanes. 1 5.2 Intersection and Corridor Operations 2 All but two study intersections operate at LOS D or better during the weekday and weekend p.m. 3 analysis peaks in the existing condition. The intersections of SR 167 at SW Grady Way and SR 181 at S 4 180th Street currently operate at LOS E during the weekday p.m. peak hour. SR 167 at SW Grady Way is 5 located approximately 1.25 miles northeast of the Proposed Action site, while SR 181 at S 180th Street is 6 approximately 1.3 miles south of the site. 7 Table 3 and Figure 3 show intersection LOS results for the weekday and weekend p.m. peak hour 8 conditions. Intersections that currently exceed their LOS mobility standard are highlighted in Table 3. TABLE 3 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No. Intersection LOS Standard Weekday p.m.a Weekend p.m.a LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) 1 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Southbound Off -ramp 2 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Northbound On -ramp 3 Interurban Avenue/1-405 Southbound Off -/On -ramps 4 Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way 5 SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps 6 SR 181/Longacres Way 7 SR 181/Strander Boulevard 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way LOS D LOS D LOS D LOS E LOS D LOS E/mitigated LOS E/mitigated LOS D B 18 B 16 A 9 A 9 0 38 D 50 D 36 D 38 C 30 C 22 A 8 A 5 C 23 C 22 E 63 D 46 JULY 2015 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 17 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 3 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary Weekday p.m.a Weekend p.m.a No. Intersection LOS Standard LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) 9 61st Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard LOS E C 32 C 35 10 61st Avenue S/Tukwila Parkway LOS E C 33 C 32 , 11 1-405 Northbound On-ramp/Tukwila Parkway LOS D B 12 B 13 12 66th Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard LOS E D 54 C 30 13 Andover Parkway W/Strander Boulevard LOS E D 42 D 44 14 Andover Parkway E/Strander Boulevard LOS E C 34 D 36 15 Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard LOS E C 26 B 17 16 Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat Drive LOS E C 28 C 24 17 Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off -ramp LOS D D 37 D 39 18 Southcenter Parkway/S 180th Street LOS E C 35 C 32 19 SR 181/5 180th Street LOS E/mitigated E 56 D 47 20 East Valley Road/SW 41st Street LOS 0 D 50 D 44 ` 21 East Valley Road/SW 43rd Street LOS D D 42 C 33 22 SR 167 Northbound Off-/On-ramps/SW 43rd Street LOS D B 14 C 23 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way LOS D D 54 C 34 24 Lind Avenue SW/SW Grady Way LOS D 0 40 D 37 25 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 27th Street LOS D B 11 B 10 26 Lind Avenue SW/SW 27th Street LOS D B 18 B 18 27 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 16th Street LOS D B 15 B 14 28 Lind Avenue SW/SW 16th Street LOS D B 17 B 13 29 Lind Avenue SW/SW 41st Street LOS D C 21 B 19 30 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 43rd Street LOS D C 23 B 18 31 Lind Avenue SW/SW 43rd Street LOS D C 27 C 23 a LOS and delay are reported for overall intersection operations based on HCM 2010 methodology (Transportation Research Board, 2010). sec = seconds LOS E/mitigated = Congestion should be mitigated if the intersection operates worse than LOS E in the p.m. peak hour. JULY 2015 18 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. S 139TH ST BAKER BLV TRECK D TRILAND D Cam in W W pip < < N 5reza S 194TH ST s' co Piker Trail Sire - Kew. up 6 10CT11 ST S 177TH ST OSTCO DR SW 39TH ST S 45TH PL 5 187TH ST S SOTH ST '5 50TH ST 4 S51 cr cT L' 6 19CTH ST m IA SW 9TH ST SW 41ST S JP 5 187 OTH 5 192ND S 29TH ST S 5TH ST S 15TH ST :.. m.creet Park vL S17TH5 S 18TH ST Lower J5,33,1 Hill Park 5 19TH. $1 Talbot up fierervoir No 1- S 23FD 5T H ('Il nlxbF' padt 5 25TH ST S 31ST ST Figure 3 Intersection Level of Service Existing Northwest Arena QProject Location Intersection LOS LOS A-D LOS E • LOS F Existing Weekday O 0 62L1,250 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL Existing Weekend TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Corridor operations are reported in order to present a comprehensive assessment of traffic conditions, 2 especially around the Southcenter Mall/TUC area, where individual intersections may sometimes 3 operate with high delay times and congestion during peak periods. The corridor evaluation supplements 4 the intersection analyses and provides an assessment of overall conditions as vehicles move through the 5 entire corridor, rather than focusing on spot locations of individual congestion. 6 Two corridors of interest are located near the Proposed Action. SR 181, between the 1-405 interchange 7 and Strander Boulevard, would carry traffic to and from the Proposed Action in both directions. Strander 8 Boulevard, from Southcenter Parkway to SR 181, provides a primary connection between the 9 Southcenter Mall/TUC area and the Proposed Action site. The intersection of SR 181 and Strander 10 Boulevard is included in both of the corridors analyzed. 11 Based on methodologies reported in the Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan Environmental Impact 12 Statement (City of Tukwila, 2014a), the average control delays of all of the signalized intersections along 13 a defined corridor are averaged to calculate the corridor delay time. This corridor delay time is then 14 measured against the LOS criteria described for signalized intersections to estimate the resulting 15 corridor LOS category as shown in Table 4. Under current conditions, both corridors operate at LOS C 16 during the analysis peak hours. TABLE 4 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary No. Corridor Weekday p.m. Weekend p.m. LOS Standard LOS Delay (sec)a LOS Delay (sec)a 1 SR 181 (from 1-405 southbound ramps LOS E C to Strander Boulevard) 2 Strander Boulevard (from Southcenter LOS F (delay < 120 seconds) C Parkway to SR 181) 27 C 27 31 C 30 a Corridor delay is calculated as an average of the signalized intersection delay values along the corridor. sec = seconds 17 18 In the existing condition, queues on SR 181 in the northbound and southbound direction do not affect 19 upstream intersection operations. Queues at the 1-405 freeway 20 terminal intersections do affect mainline freeway operations in either 21 direction during the weekday or the weekend peak hour. See 22 Appendix B for 95th percentile queue lengths at all study 23 intersections. 24 5.3 Freeway Operations 25 Peak -hour freeway operations on 1-405 were assessed at two 26 screenline locations to understand the existing conditions during the 27 weekday p.m. peak hour and the weekend p.m. peak hour near the 28 Proposed Action. Table 5 shows the existing p.m. weekday and 29 weekend peak -hour volumes at these two screenlines and presents 30 the volume -to -capacity (v/c) ratio for each screenline. Vic ratio is the 31 ratio of the vehicle demand compared to the roadway capacity, used 32 as the performance measure to assess travel conditions on the 33 regional facilities in the study area. The existing v/c ratio is consistent 34 with the current PSRC travel demand model. A screenline is an imaginary line across a section of freeways or arterials. These screenlines are used to provide a snapshot of how much volume is entering or exiting a particular area. JULY 2015 20 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 5 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary No. Corridor Weekday p.m. Weekend p.m. Screenline Volume Screenline Volume (vehicles) V/c Ratio (vehicles) V/c Ratio 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 10,375 0.72 10,380 0.72 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 10,720 0.74 11,135 0.77 1 2 5.4 Transit Network 3 The closest transit facility to the Proposed Action is Tukwila Station, which is located south of Longacres 4 Way along the BNSF Railway tracks, within XXX feet of the Arena site. Tukwila Station is an intermodal 5 facility served by the Sound Transit Sounder train, King County Metro bus transit, and Amtrak Cascades 6 rail. The facility includes parking for 390 vehicles and provides bicycle parking. Tukwila Transit Center is 7 located at Andover Park West/Baker Boulevard and is served by King County Metro bus transit. Table 6 8 and Figure 4 provide information on transit services and major transit centers in the study area as of 9 May 2015. TABLE 6 Existing Transit Service Summa Route Name/Number Service Hours Average Service Frequency Weekday Weekend Weekday Peak Weekday Off -Peak Weekend Tukwila Station (7301 Longacres Way) Sounder Train, Lakewood to Seattle 4:30 a.m. - 8:00 a.m. 4:30 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. - 20-30min - Sounder Train, Seattle to Lakewood 6:15 a.m. - 7:00 a.m. 3:15 p.m. - 6:15 p.m. - 20 - 30 min - - King County Metro, Route 154 Northbound 5:30 a.m. 7:30 a.m. 30 min King County Metro, Route 154 Southbound 2:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. - 30 min - - King County Metro, RapidRide Fline 4:45 a.m. - 12:00 a.m. 6:00 a.m. - 12:00 a.m. 10 min 20 - 30 min 15 min Amtrak Cascades, Northbound 11:22 a.m., 3:31 p.m., 5:42 p.m., 9:52 p.m. Amtrak Cascades, Southbound 7:44 a.m., 11:29 a.m., 2:14 p.m., 5:44 p.m. Tukwila Transit Center (near Southcenter Mall at Andover Park West/Baker Boulevard) King County Metro, Route 128 4:45 a.m. — 12:30 a.m. 6:00 a.m. — 12:30 a.m. 30 min 30 min 30 min JULY 2015 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 21 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 6 Existing Transit Service Summary Route Name/Number Service Hours Average Service Frequency Weekday Weekend Weekday Peak Weekday Off -Peak Weekend King County Metro, Route 150 5:00 a.m. — 12:00 a.m. 6:00 a.m. — 2:00 a.m. 15 min 30 min 30 — 60 min King County Metro, Route 156 6:00 a.m. —11:00 p.m. 5:30 a.m. — 11:00 p.m. 30 min 30 — 60 min 60 min King County Metro, Route 906 (DART) 6:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. (Saturday only) 60 min 60 min 60 min Sources: Amtrak Cascades, 2015; King County Metro, 2015; Sound Transit 2015. min = minutes DART = Dial -a -Ride Transit 1 2 The Sounder train operates between Lakewood and Seattle. Morning peak service is primarily provided 3 in the northbound direction with eight scheduled trains departing Lakewood or Tacoma before 8:00 4 a.m. Two southbound trains leave Seattle for Tacoma in- the morning between 6:15 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. In 5 the afternoon, eight southbound departures leave Seattle and stop at the Tukwila Station between 6 approximately 3:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. Two northbound trains leave Tacoma before 5:00 p.m. and arrive 7 in Seattle by 6:00 p.m. 8 Two King County Metro routes serve the Tukwila Station: 9 • Route 154 is a north -south route that provides weekday service along Interurban Avenue and 10 E Marginal Way between Tukwila Station and the industrial district south of downtown Seattle. This 11 route operates with four buses on approximately half-hour intervals in the commute peak direction 12 only. Morning service is provided between 5:30 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. with buses departing Tukwila 13 Station and heading north. Afternoon service to the Tukwila Station is between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 14 p.m. Route 154 does not operate on the weekends. 15 • King County Metro operates the RapidRide F Line between the Burien Transit Center and The 16 Landing, a shopping/retail district at the south end of Lake Washington in Renton. Major stops 17 include the Tukwila International Boulevard Link light rail station, Southcenter Mall, Tukwila Station, 18 South Renton Park -and -Ride, and Renton Transit Center. This route operates daily in both directions 19 between 4:45 a.m. and midnight. During the morning and afternoon weekday commute peak 20 periods, roughly 10-minute headways provide frequent service in both directions. Midday and 21 outside the commute peaks, service headways increase to 20 to 30 minutes. RapidRide F operates 22 on Saturday and Sunday with headways of 15 minutes in both directions all day until 8:00 p.m., 23 when headways increase to 30 minutes. 24 25 JULY 2015 22 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. R'entbrieTran`s_rt Center? South'Renfon Park'&; Rlde Figure 4 Transit Facilities Northwest Arena - King County Metro 154 41=111mRapidRide F Other Metro Routes and Sound Transit Express Routes cowl/Railway Project: Location Route Number Transit Location Feet 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographic, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Amtrak Cascades operates daily train service through the study area between Seattle and Portland, 2 Oregon. Trains stop at the Tukwila Station four times each day in the northbound direction and in the 3 southbound direction. 4 The Tukwila Transit Center was recently renovated. It is (located within the TUC on Andover Park West at 5 Baker Boulevard, immediately adjacent to the Southcenter Mall. King County Metro bus routes that 6 serve this transit center include the RapidRide F Line and Routes 128, 150, 156, and 906. 7 Route 128 provides daily service between Tukwila and West Seattle, through White Center, on roughly 8 30-minute headways. Route 150 runs between downtown Seattle and Kent Station, with select 9 extended service to Auburn. Weekday service occurs between approximately 5:00 a.m. and midnight, 10 while weekend service occurs between 6:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. 11 Route 156 runs between Tukwila and Highline College in Des Moines on roughly 30-minute headways 12 between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. on weekdays. Weekend service occurs hourly from 5:30 a.m. to 11:00 13 p.m. 14 Route 906 provides service between the Fairwood neighborhood in Renton and Tukwila and serves the 15 Valley Medical Center and Southcenter Mall. Regularly scheduled routes run between 6:00 a.m. and 16 7:00 p.m. on weekdays, and between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays. This route also provides 17 Dial -a -Ride Transit (DART). Customized pick-up and drop-off services are available on weekdays between 18 6:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. and can be scheduled through pre -arranged reservations. 19 The Southcenter Subarea Plan (City of Tukwila, 2014b) identifies the portion of Southcenter near the 20 Proposed Action as a Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood. To encourage transit service, 21 the subarea plan states that upgraded bus service is planned to be extended from the Tukwila Transit 22 Center on Andover Park West eastward towards Tukwila Station. 23 5.5 Freight and Non -Transit Rail Network 24 Heavy haul rail lines within the study area include two pass 1 rail lines 25 operated by BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). These rail 26 lines are part of the Seattle Subdivision (for both lines) and run parallel 27 in the north -south direction throughout the study area corridor. The 28 UPRR line has one track that is located to the west of the BNSF, which 29 has two tracks within the vicinity of the Proposed Action. 30 According to the Washington State Rail Plan (WSDOT, 2014b), there are 31 approximately 46 trains per day operating on the BNSF line and 32 approximately 10 trains per day on the UPRR line through the Proposed 33 Action study area. Passenger trains (Amtrak and Sound Transit) operate 34 on the BNSF rail line. Both BNSF and UPRR lines have grade -separated 35 crossings for all active roadways near the Proposed Action. The nearest at -grade crossing for either line 36 is located approximately 3.5 miles to the south at S 212th Street. Class 1 Rail Lines Class 1 rail lines are defined by the Surface Transportation Board as having annual carrier operating revenues of $433 million or more. The Seattle Subdivision is the portion of the rail network that connects Seattle with Portland, Oregon. 37 State roadway truck freight corridors within the study area include 1-5, 1-405, SR 181, and SR 167. These 38 corridors are designated as T-1 corridors, meaning they carry more than 10 million tons of freight per 39 year. Freight truck traffic on SR 181 accounts for 8 percent of all traffic on this road. Grady Way between 40 Tukwila and Renton is also designated as a T-1 truck corridor. Oakesdale Avenue SW and S 180th Street 41 (between SR 181 and the railroad) are designated as T-2 truck corridors, which carry between 4 and 10 42 million tons of freight annually. JULY 2015 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 24 l / \ TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT I. 5.6 Non -Motorized Network 2 Principal arterials, minor arterials, and local streets within the study area generally have continuous 3 sidewalks on at least one side of the street that are generally 6 to 8 feet wide with some as wide as 12 4 feet. Some principal arterials currently have limited or no sidewalks available, such as Interurban Avenue 5 South, which has discontinuous sidewalks between 1-5 and 1-405. 6 Streets closer to the Proposed Action site that have sidewalks include both sides of SR 181 south of 7 Longacres Way to Strander Boulevard and the west side of SR 181 north of Longacres Way to S 156th 8 Street. Longacres Way has a sidewalk only on the south side. The sidewalk provides a pedestrian 9 connection from SR 181 east along the Embassy Suites Hotel property, beneath the UPRR corridor, to 10 the Tukwila Transit Station. North of S 156th Street the sidewalk is on the east side of SR 181 that 11 provides connection under 1-405. Strander Boulevard has a sidewalk on its north side that provides 12 pedestrian access from SR 181 west over the Green River and east to the Interurban Trail. Figure 5 13 illustrates the full and partial sidewalks in the study area. 14 The Southcenter Subarea Plan (City of Tukwila, 2014b) indicates that public investments will serve as 15 catalysts for the redevelopment of the TOD Neighborhood where the Proposed Action is located. 16 Improvements planned by the City of Tukwila in the study area include a new pedestrian bridge over the 17 Green River and frontage improvements along Baker Boulevard that would provide another way for 18 pedestrians from areas near the Proposed Action to access the central part of the Southcenter 19 Mall/TUC. 20 Opportunities to cross SR 181 are available at each of the signalized intersections between 1-405 and 21 Strander Boulevard. A marked crosswalk and signalized pedestrian crossing are provided in the east- 22 west direction on the south side of the intersection at SR 181 and Longacres Way. Marked crosswalks • 23 are also provided at cross streets in the northbound and southbound directions along SR 181. There are 24 no dedicated bicycle facilities (i.e., bicycle lanes or bicycle sharrows) on roads within 1,000 feet of the 25 Proposed Action, however, two multimodal, shared -use trails that are part of the King County regional 26 trails system are located within and near the Proposed Action area. The Interurban Trail is a 14-mile 27 north -south trail that connects King and Pierce Counties and travels through the Proposed Action area. 28 Within the Proposed Action area the Interurban Trail is located within the Puget Sound Energy right -of- \/ 29 way. The trail crosses under 1-405 to the north until it crosses the Green River and terminates at the 30 Green River Trail. The Green River Trail is a nearly 20-mile north -south trail that follows the Duwamish 31 and Green Rivers between Seattle and Kent. In Tukwila, the Green River Trail is located on the west bank 32 of the Green River from S 180th Street to just north of 1-405, where it intersects with the Interurban / 40 / • 33 Trail. In addition to the two King County regional trails there is another grade separated multimodal 34 shared -use trail that connects Tukwila Station to north side of SW 27th Street in Renton. Figure 5 shows 35 the non -motorized facilities within the transportation study area. 36 Table 7 shows the number of pedestrians and bicyclists at two intersections within the city of Tukwila. 37 These data were gathered by the City of Tukwila on a typical weekday in September 2014. Morning 38 peak -period activity was recorded between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and afternoon peak -period activity 39 was recorded between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. • ti • JULY 2015 25 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. � J 1 Figure 5 Existing Non -Motorized Facilities Northwest Arena Full Sidewalk Partial Sidewalk -•'- Footpath - - - Trails Project Location 0 625 1,250 Data Sources: Souece: Esri, DigitalGiobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT / TABLE 7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity Intersection Number of Pedestrians Number of Bicyclists a.m. Peak p.m. Peak a.m. Peak p.m. Peak Andover Parkway W/Strander Blvd. 90 484 11 17 Tukwila Station Access Road/Longacres Way 35 48 30 52 Source: City of Tukwila, 2014c. 1 • 2 5.7 Parking • 3 The supply and availability of parking, and transit options, are important factors to be considered in 4 evaluating the effects of proposed actions on circulation and transportation systems. The location, 5 availability, price, type, and ease of access to parking, and transit options, can influence attendance 6 choices, the mode of transportation used by customers, circulation by vehicles and pedestrians, and 7 impacts on nearby businesses. A parking study technical memorandum has been prepared for the 8 Proposed Action that provides additional details (refer to Appendix C, Parking Memorandum). Transit is 9 addressed in section 5.4. 10 Figure 6 shows the survey area used to assess parking near the Proposed Action. From the Proposed 11 Action site, all public and private parking opportunities within a %2-mile radius of the proposed arena 12 were considered for data collection. Due to physical barriers in the study area, such as the Green River 13 and 1-405, direct non -motorized connections between the Proposed Action and some nearby parking • 14 locations are limited, and overcoming these barriers can result in the actual walking distance between 15 locations increasing to more than Y2-mile. To account for actual walking distances, a smaller "walk shed" 16 was identified based on sidewalk or trail availability. Parking locations within al/2-mile walking distance 17 of the arena, which includes the planned pedestrian bridge over the Green River, are included in the 18 walk shed that was evaluated for the Proposed Action. • 19 Within the walk shed, existing on- and off-street parking was inventoried, and utilization information 20 was collected in February of 2015 during the weekday afternoon peak and weekend midday peak • 21 period. General-purpose public parking in the area is limited; there are approximately 3,080 off-street 22 and 29 on -street parking spaces within the %2-mile walk shed. Of these, only 30 off-street parking spaces • 23 and the on -street parking spaces are unrestricted for public use. These public parking stalls are located 24 alongLon acres Wa Nelson Place, and near the intersection of 65th Avenue S and S 153rd Street. The g Y, ▪ 25 remaining stalls within the %2-mile walk shed are restricted for private use. 26 During the weekday afternoon peak, approximately 58 percent of public parking stalls were being used, • 27 while 42 percent of privately owned parking stalls were used. During the weekend midday peak, public • 28 parking utilization is higher with 78 percent of public stalls in use, while privately owned parking space • 29 utilization is lower with just 35 percent of private stalls in use. • 30 Because most parking opportunities in the area are privately owned, these parking spaces are not 31 expected to be generally available for arena use without agreements with property owners to utilize 32 them for events. 33 5.8 Roadway Safety Performance 34 Crash data records for vehicle incidents were collected for a 5-year period from 2009 to 2013 from • 35 WSDOT for most of the study intersections in the project area, including ramp terminals. The safety • 36 analysis focused on intersection -related crashes, which are those that occurred at an intersection or 37 those that occur outside an intersection but are caused by intersection operations. JULY 2015 27 f � DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. • Figure 6 Parking Study Area Northwest Arena 1/4-Mile Radius 17J 1/2-Mile Radius 1/4-Mile Walk Shed 1/2-Mile Walk Shed Surveyed Parking Lot QProject Location Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmappv'ng, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Crash rates were calculated for the study area intersections as the number of crashes per million 2 entering vehicles (MEV). The intersection of Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way had the highest 3 frequency of total crashes (134) and the highest intersection crash rate of 1.52 crashes per MEV within 4 the study period. WSDOT maintains a list of "intersection analysis locations" that have been identified 5 and prioritized for need of safety improvements based on the number and severity of crashes during a 6 5-year period and speed limits of roads approaching an intersection. None of the intersections in the 7 study area have been identified as intersection analysis locations and thus are not in need of safety 8 improvements. Table 8 shows the intersection traffic entering volumes, crash numbers by severity, and 9 crash rates for the study intersections. TABLE 8 Existing Intersection Crash Analysis Results (2009-2013 No. Intersection ADT (Entering Volumes) 2009-2013 Crash Frequency (Number of Crashes) Crash Rate (crashes/MEV) Fatal and Injury Property Damage Only Total 1 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Southbound Off -ramp 19,750 3 8 11 0.31 2 Interurban Avenue/1-5 Northbound On -ramp 23,350 2 1 3 0.07 3 Interurban Avenue/I-405 Southbound Off -/On ramps 30,250 7 31 38 0.69 4 Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way 48 450 r 39_ , 95 134 1.52 5 SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps 33,100 8 24 32 0.53 6 SR 181/Longacres Way 27,250 2 9 11 0.22 7 SR 181/Strander Boulevard 34,100 4 24 28 0.45 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way 62,550 0 0 0 0.00 9 61st Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard 41,550 0 0 0 0.00 10 61st Avenue S/Tukwila Parkway 38,100 18 37 55 p.79; 11 1-405 Northbound On-ramp/Tukwila Parkway 26,500 0 0 0 0.00 12 66th Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard 29,950 2 10 12 0.22 13 Andover Parkway W/Strander Boulevard 29,650 9 23 32 0.59 14 Andover Parkway E/Strander Boulevard 28,550 7 10 17 0.33 15 Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard 41,150 20 57 77 1.03 16 Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat Drive 38,200 1 2 3 0.04 17 Southcenter u hcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off ramP 24,900 1 0 1 0.02 18 Southcenter Parkway/S 180th Street 28,600 2 22 24 0.46 19 SR 181/S 180th Street 55,450 12 51 63 0.62 20 East Valley Road/SW 41st Street 22,000 8 29 37 0.92 21 East Valley Road/SW 43rd Street 42,150 18 41 59 0.77 JULY 2015 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 29 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 8 Existing Intersection Crash Analysis Results (2009-2013 No. Intersection ADT (Entering Volumes) 2009-2013•Crash Frequency (Number of Crashes) Crash Rate (crashes/MEV) Fatal and Injury Property Damage Only Total 22 SR 167 Northbound Off-/On-ramps/SW 43rd Street 39,100 23 33 56 0.78 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way 24 Lind Avenue SW/SW Grady Way 25 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 27th Street 26 Lind Avenue SW/SW 27th Street 27 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 16th Street 28 Lind Avenue SW/SW 16th Street 29 Lind Avenue SW/SW 41st Street 30 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 43rd Street 31 Lind Avenue SW/SW 43rd Street Source: WSDOT, 2015b. ADT = average daily traffic 1 2 6. Impacts of No Action Alternative 3 This section presents transportation impacts as a result of the No Action Alternative in both the year of 4 opening and the future horizon year (2037). Impacts on the transportation network, and primarily 5 intersection operations, would be expected with the planned addition of housing units and commercial 6 square footage within or outside of the study area by 2037. Figure 7 shows the locations of the known 7 projects planned during this timeframe. 8 6.1 Planned and Approved Roadway Improvement Projects 9 All funded (and reasonably assumed funded) projects in the study area that are expected to be 10 complete by the future year of opening (2017) or the horizon year (2037) were included in the No Action 11 transportation analysis. The City of Tukwila's Capital Improvement Program 2015-2020 (City of Tukwila, 12 2014d) identifies the following projects that will be complete by 2017: 13 • West Valley Highway/S 156th Street — add northbound left -turn lane for HOVs and transit, construct 14 safety and capacity improvements. 15 • Andover Park West — construct center median and northbound/southbound turn pockets between 16 Tukwila Parkway and Strander Boulevard. 17 • Tukwila Urban Center pedestrian/bicycle bridge — construct new pedestrian/bicycle bridge over the 18 Green River approximately 600 feet south of Longacres Way. 19 • Tukwila Urban Center transit center — improve existing transit stops on Andover Park West north of 20 Strander Boulevard to accommodate increased transit operations. JULY 2015 30 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. $t39T H ST 44TR St 5214fl:sr' $ 1S2140 Rt.; s 243RD N. S ;44rt COSTCO No Action Projects 1. West Valley Highway/S 156th Street 2. Andover Park West 3. Tukwila Urban Center pedestrian/bicycle bridge 4. Tukwila Urban Center transit center 5. Strander Boulevard extension 6. Lind Avenue SW S 3RD R5 S 4Th Si .0 -' S THSY 5 3R0 ST, 5 tit ST ..� 43RD Figure 7 No Action Projects Northwest Arena J Project Location • Project Intersection Project Corridor Feet O0 6251,250 2,500 Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus D5, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrld, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT T14 ST TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Within the city of Renton, no roadway improvement projects are planned in the study area by 2017. In 2 addition to the projects above, the 2037 transportation network will include the following projects in 3 the No Action traffic condition: 4 • Strander Boulevard Extension Phase III — construct new 4-lane roadway extending Strander 5 Boulevard from West Valley Highway under the UPRR railroad to Naches Avenue/SW 27th Street 6 (City of Tukwila, 2014d). 7 • Lind Avenue SW — widen arterial to 5 lanes where required between SW 16th Street and SW 43rd 8 Street (City of Renton, 2014). 9 6.2 Background Traffic Projections 10 A conservative positive growth rate of 1 percent per year was applied to the existing intersection turning 11 movement volumes to estimate future year of opening (2017) background traffic volumes. This 12 conservative rate was applied to both the weekday p.m. peak hour volumes and the weekend peak hour 13 volumes. 14 Background traffic volumes for the horizon year (2037) weekday p.m. peak hour are based on traffic 15 projections for the year 2031 documented in Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan EIS (City of Tukwila, 16 2014a). In the Subarea Plan EIS, the City of Tukwila travel demand model was used to develop the future 17 year forecasts for two different alternatives (a No Action and a Proposed Action/High Intensity). Based 18 on the analysis volumes for the years assumed in the Subarea Plan EIS, traffic would be expected to 19 grow at a rate of approximately 1 percent per year on West Valley Highway and on Strander Boulevard. 20 Therefore, an average growth rate of 1 percent per year was applied to the weekday p.m. peak turning 21 movement volumes for the 2031 Proposed Action/High intensity alternative to estimate horizon year 22 (2037) background analysis volumes. 23 Future year peak hour weekend volumes were estimated by applying a "weekday -to -weekend" factor 24 (based on existing proportions) to the future weekday intersection turning movement volumes. Where 25 weekday -to -weekend proportions were unavailable, an average growth rate of 1 percent per year was 26 applied to the 2017 weekend peak turning movement volumes to estimate horizon year background 27 analysis volumes. 28 The City's travel demand model is based on the PSRC's EMME travel demand model that has been used 29 for recent WSDOT freeway projects (such as the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Program). This 30 model, which was also used to inform the Transportation Element of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive 31 Plan, includes current population, household, and employment forecasts for the study area, as well as 32 planned future roadway network elements described above. 33 6.3 Traffic Operations Analysis 34 By 2017, including the background planned and approved projects shown in Table 6, two study 35 intersections are expected to operate worse than their LOS standard during the weekday p.m. peak hour 36 with the No Action Alternative. By 2037, background traffic volume increases would result in seven 37 intersections (shaded in Table 9) in the weekday p.m. peak and one intersection in the weekend p.m. 38 peak operating worse than their LOS standard. Most of these seven intersections would operate at LOS 39 F with average delays of greater than 80 seconds per vehicle. See Table 9 and Figures 8 and 9 for study 40 area intersection LOS results. JULY 2015 32 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 9 No Action Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No. Intersection LOS Standard 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday p.m. peak p.m. 2037 Weekend peak Delay LOS (sec) Delay LOS (sec) Delay LOS (sec) Delay LOS (sec) 1 2 3 4 5 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Southbound Off -ramp Interurban Avenue/I-5 Northbound On -ramp Interurban Avenue/I-405 Southbound Off -/On -ramps Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off - /On -ramps 6 SR 181/Longacres Way 7 SR 181/Strander Boulevard 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 61st Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard 61st Avenue S/Tukwila Parkway 1-405 Northbound On- ramp/Tukwila Parkway 66th Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard Andover Parkway W/Strander Boulevard Andover Parkway E/Strander Blvd. Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat Drive Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off -ramp Southcenter Parkway/S 180th Street 19 SR 181/S 180th Street LOS D LOS D LOS D LOS E LOS D LOS E/mitigated LOS E/mitigated LOS D LOS E LOS E LOS D LOS E LOS E LOS E LOS E LOS E LOS D LOS E LOS E/mitigated B 19 B 16 B 19 B 17 A 10 A 9 B 10 A 10 D 38 D 50 D 52 D 54 D 37 D 39 F 101 D 45 C 31 C 22 D 44 C 22 A 8 A 5 A 10 A 3 C 23 C 22 F 99 D 43 E 66 D 48 F 94 E 63 D 38 D 38 E 57 E 72 C 28 C 34 E 56 E 56 B 13 B 13 B 17 B 16 E 60 C 31 F 148 D 52 D 43 D 45 D 53 D 53 D 35 D 40 D 48 D 52 C 26 B 18 C 26 C 21 C 28 C 24 C 28 C 29 D 38 D 40 E 65 D 48 D 35 C 32 D 41 C 35 E 58 D 48 F 190 E 56 JULY 2015 33 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 9 No Action Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No. Intersection 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend p.m. peak p.m. peak LOS Delay Delay Delay Delay Standard LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) 20 East Valley Road/SW 41st LOS D D 51 D 44 D 54 D 50 Street 21 East Valley Road/SW 43rd LOS D D 44 C 34 D 51 D 40 Street 22 SR 167 Northbound Off -/On LOS D B 14 C 23 B 16 C 27 ramps/SW 43rd Street 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW LOS D E 57 D 36 F 91 D 53 Grady Way 24 Lind N vAvenue SW/SW Grady LOS D D 40 D 37 D 45 D 39 25 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW LOS D B 11 B 11 C 35 C 21 27th Street 26 Lind Avenue SW/SW 27th LOS D B 18 B 19 C 28 C 22 Street 27 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW LOS D B 16 B 14 B 19 B 18 16th Street 28 Lind Avenue SW/SW 16th LOS D B 18 B 14 C 31 B 17 Street 29 Lind Avenue SWSW 41st Street LOS D C 22 B 20 C 26 C 23 30 Oakesdale Avenue SWSW 43rd LOS D C 24 B 18 C 29 C 30 Street 31 Lind Avenue SW/SW 43rd LOS D C 28 C 24 D 43 B 16 Street Note: LOS and delay are reported for overall intersection operations based on HCM 2010 methodology. • • JULY 2015 34 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. !(.Q tfr,• ii TRILAND D W Green S 194TH ST Pi ver Troll life -;fen' S 17CTI V ST S 139TH ST BAKER SLV TRECK D r/ OSTCO DR SW-(V ° G iT � N 3744 ST ¢ 3 S 37TH PL S 38TH CT S 177TH ST S 49TH ST S 187TH ST S SOTH ST 5 50TH ST W S51ST ST 196T11 ST 19 w a Z O SW "9TH ST SW 41ST S N 29TH ST 5T Art S 5TH ST S 6TH ST '^ Born,. rr,? µ 6T Iti=•gar Hirt 5T '^ 1 3� az S15THST I— I rl JS_Pgr2 .tr=_:t k T Lo;'mr ilifl Park S 17TH S S 18TH ST S 19TH, ST Tulbi,t Fiesera+Jir Poe?. N U t- Q 5 23FW.$T •i'eu.x1th, 141,4 S 25TH ST V, V, S 26TH 5T S•( ST�� se. �$� S S 31ST ST Figure 8 Intersection Level of Service No Action 2017 Northwest Arena EDProject Location Intersection LOS LOS A-D O LOS E • LOS F JP <P S 187 30TH 5 192ND No Action Weekday 0 625 1,250 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL No Action Weekend Feet 2,500 PL H PL H CT T ial �y' � j �;•� OSTCO DR Rl y 39TH ST N y, J W .> > . a a N 0 z to us vsa x Green S 194TH ST e ;?i ir:•r Trull :ilte - tfenr. 6 19CT$ I S SW 9TH ST SW 39TH ST S 177TH ST S 45TH PL S 47TH ST S 48TH ST S 49TH ST S 50TH ST S SOTH ST S it ST ST 6 19CT1I ST SW 41ST 5' 1/4,P S 187' iOTH S' 192ND 29TH ST S 5TH ST S 6TH ST F: u, n", S 15TH ST vc'.ueet Park S17THS S1STHST u r',r. S 19THSTT To. + w. it Ut ['fir;; 7utjrr�t t16Rt''. fle:; ruc, r 1:lydL S 23g©ST Q Tii�rrrry 7erc: rPr,Dtr,r S 25TH ST S 26TH ST � 5C 511�CC 51 S 31ST ST Figure 9 Intersection Level of Service No Action 2037 Northwest Arena Project Location Intersection LOS LOS A-D LOS E LOS F No Action Weekend No Action Weekday Feet 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL PL H PL H CT T / \ TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT l \ 1 In 2017, the two study corridors would operate at LOS C during the weekday and weekend analysis peak 2 hours. The Strander Boulevard extension is not assumed to be in place by 2017 under the No Action 3 Alternative, but is assumed to be constructed by 2037. In the 2037 No Action Alternative, corridor 4 operations on SR 181 and on Strander Boulevard during the weekday p.m. peak would worsen to LOS E 5 under the No Action Alternative. During the weekend peak hour, corridor operations on Strander 6 Boulevard would be expected to worsen to LOS D by the year 2037. No Action Alternative corridor delay 7 times and LOS are shown in Table 10. TABLE 10 No Action Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend p.m. peak p.m. peak Delay Delay Delay Delay No. Corridor L05 Standards LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) SR 181 (from 1-405 southbound 1 LOSE C 27 C 28 E 61 C 33 ramps to Strander Boulevard) Strander Boulevard LOS F (delay < 120 ✓ 1 2 (from Southcenter seconds) C 32 C 31 E 57 D 42 \�, Parkway to SR 181) 1 Note: Corridor delay is calculated as an average of the signalized intersection delay values along the corridor. /. 8 9 In the No Action Alternative, queues in the year 2017 in the northbound and southbound direction on " 10 SR 181 are generally expected to remain similar to existing conditions. Queues at the 1-405 freeway • 11 terminal intersections are not expected to affect mainline freeway operations in either direction during 12 the weekday or the weekend peak hour. See Appendix B for 95th percentile queue lengths at all study • 13 intersections. 14 6.4 Freeway Operations i 15 Freeway operations in 2017 during the weekday p.m. peak hour and the weekend peak hour are 16 expected to be similar to existing conditions (Table 11). By the year 2037, assuming a conservative 17 average annual growth rate of 1 percent and no improvements to freeway infrastructure, traffic 18 volumes on 1-405 would increase and congestion would occur during the weekday h g p.m. peak hour and • 19 weekend peak hour. TABLE 11 No Action Alternative Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary Weekday p.m. Weekend peak ' Screenline Volume Screenline Volume No. Corridor Year vehicles Vic Ratio (vehicles) / (vehicles) Vic Ratio 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 2017 10,585 0.74 10,590 0.74 -,, 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2017 10,940 0.76 11,360 0.79 ...- / \ 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 2037 12,915 0.90 12,925 0.90 i \ 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2037 13,345 0.93 13,860 0.96 i ;20 / / \ JULY 2015 37 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. � i TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 6.5 Transit Network 2 It was assumed that the existing transit network would not change with the No Action Alternative. King 3 County Metro may revise routes or frequency of service in the study area, but no changes to bus routes 4 in the study area are known at this time. Sound Transit is expected to add two additional Sounder trains 5 by 2017 under their current agreement with BNSF, although the timeline for and specific schedule of 6 new trains is unknown at this time. 7 6.6 Freight Rail 8 Through an agreement with Sound Transit, BNSF is beginning construction this summer on a third track 9 that will provide increased capacity for the Tukwila Station. A northbound track will be installed to the 10 east of the existing track. 11 6.7 Non -Motorized Network 12 Under the No Action Alternative, a pedestrian bridge will be constructed over the Green River south of 13 Longacres Way, providing a new non -motorized connection between the Tukwila Station and Tukwila 14 Transit Center. The project includes sidewalk improvements from the east pedestrian bridge landing at 15 SR 181 north along the west side to the intersection with Longacres Way. No other changes to the trail 16 system or other pedestrian facilities are proposed in this area, and no impacts to the non -motorized 17 network would occur as a result of the No Action Alternative. 18 6.8 Parking 19 No changes to parking are proposed under the No Action Alternative. Impacts would depend upon the 20 type and rate of development and new development under the Subarea Plan. 21 6.9 Roadway Safety Performance 22 With the No Action Alternative, safety conditions and crash rates at the study intersections would likely 23 remain similar to existing conditions as no changes to study intersection lane geometry or control would 24 occur. Changes to the roadway network, such as the completion of installed medians and turn lanes on 25 Andover Parkway W, could improve corridor safety by physically separating traffic in opposing 26 directions. 27 7. Impacts of Proposed Alternatives 28 7.1 Alternative 1 29 7.1.1 Proposed Action Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment 30 The Proposed Action will generate a range in the number of vehicular trips based on the day, size, and 31 type of event or activity being hosted. Traditional trip generation methodologies (such as using specific 32 land use codes and trip generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE] Trip 33 Generation Manual [ITE, 2012]) would not reasonably represent actual trips generated by this unique 34 facility. Therefore, Proposed Action trip generation is based on research of comparable arena complexes 35 and on the maximum attendance of a particular event on a weekday and on a weekend to provide a 36 worst -case scenario. Vehicle trip generation estimates are adjusted to reflect attendee arrival mode 37 split, carpooling or ridesharing strategies, and peak -hour attendee arrival trends. Potential events that 38 would occur at the proposed multi -purpose arena are shown in Table 12 along with appropriate trip- 39 generation adjustment factors. 40 JULY 2015 38 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. • TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT / • • • �i • •/ • / • • / / • • / / \ � J / . ./ TABLE 12 Project Trip Generation Assumptions Type of Event Maximum Attendance (persons) Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Weekend P.M. Peak Hour % Vehicles AVO Total Parking Demand (spaces) Peak -Hour Arrival Demandf Trips to Project Trips from Project Total Peak- Hour Trips % Vehicles AVO Total Parking Demand (spaces) Peak -Hour Arrival Demands Trips to Project Trips from Project Total Peak - Hour Trips Concert - Center Stage 19,500a 90 3.0 5,850 30% 1,650 105 1,755 94 3.0 6,110 20% 1,150 75 1,225 Basketball League Games 18,700a 87 2.3 7,075 30% 2,000 130 2,130 89 2.6 6,405 35% 2,110 135 2,245 National Hockey League 17,400a 87 2.3 6,585 30% 1,855 120 1,975 89 2.6 5,960 35% 1,960 125 2,085 Special Sports Event (tournaments, etc.) 18,700b 87 2.3 7,075 30% 2,000 130 2,130 89 2.6 6,405 35% 2,105 135 2,240 Corporate Event (presentations, etc.) 14,000c 90 3.0 4,200 35% 90 1,380 1,470 Event expected to occur on weekdays only Concert- End Stage 14,000a 90 3.0 4,200 30% 1,185 75 1,260 94 3.0 4,390 20% 825 55 880 Family Entertainment (ice shows, etc.) 15,000d 90 3.2 4,220 30% 1,190 75 1,265 94 3.2 4,410 35% 1,450 95 1,545 Convention (trade shows, expos, etc.) 10,300e 90 2.2 4,215 35% 90 1,385 1,475 94 2.4 4,035 25% 950 60 1,010 a Maximum expected attendance based on Proposed Action site design. b Special sports events may include tournaments, play-offs, and exhibitions with event seating similar to that of a basketball game. Corporate events may include speaker presentations and panel discussions with event seating similar to that of an end -stage concert. d Source: Key Arena, 2015. E Source: Washington State Convention Center, 2015. f Attendees expected to arrive at the Proposed Action site or Southcenter Mall/TUC area during the weekday p.m. peak hour of traffic. g Attendees expected to arrive at the Proposed Action site or Southcenter Mall/TUC area during the weekend p.m. peak hour of traffic. AVO = average vehicle occupancy JULY 2015 39 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Mode Split 2 For weekday sports or civic events at the Proposed Action, between 87 and 90 percent of attendees are 3 expected to travel via automobile depending on type of event scheduled. The remaining attendees 4 would arrive by a different mode, such as transit, on foot, or by bicycle. The arrival mode percentages 5 shown in Table 12 are based on mode split information for similarly -sized multiuse arena venues around 6 the country (Environmental Sciences Associates, 2014; City of Seattle, 2013). 7 For example, the proposed Sacramento Entertainment and Sports Center is a similarly sized sports and 8 multi -use arena located adjacent to a major interstate freeway. For weekday sports events there, an 9 automobile mode split of 90 percent was assumed for event attendees. Due to similarities in size, use, 10 and access, it is reasonable to assume that the arrival mode split at the Proposed Action would be 11 similar for weekday sports or civic events. 12 For weekend events, between 89 and 94 percent of attendees is assumed to arrive at the arena via 13 automobile. These percentages are slightly higher due to reduced weekend transit service, increased 14 likelihood of home -based trips, and greater opportunities to combine automobile trips with other 15 purposes. 16 Vehicle Occupancy 17 Average vehicle occupancy (AVO) is estimated to vary between two and three people per vehicle for the 18 different events expected at the arena. For sporting events, an average vehicle occupancy of 2.3 people 19 per vehicle is assumed for weekday events (based on vehicle occupancy for similarly sized multiuse 20 arenas), while a slightly higher AVO of 2.6 people per vehicle is assumed for weekend sports events. For 21 concerts and family -oriented entertainment events, the average vehicle occupancy is likely to be higher 22 because these types of events are typically attended by families with children or by multiple individuals 23 attending an event as a group. 24 Peak Hour Arrivals 25 Based on data for other major basketball arenas, the majority of attendees (roughly 65 percent) arrive 26 at the venue within one hour of the event start time. Between 10 and 15 percent of basketball event 27 attendees arrive between one and two hours prior to the scheduled event start time. The remaining 28 attendees arrive after the event start time (Environmental Sciences Associates, 2014). 29 For the purposes of this analysis, a conservative assumption that approximately 30 percent of weekday 30 sports event traffic arrives at the venue between one and two hours before the scheduled event start 31 time. Assuming a typical sports event start time of 7:00 p.m., roughly 30 percent of event traffic would, 32 arrive between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., which generally coincides with the analysis p.m. peak hour of 33 street traffic (4:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.). 34 On a weekend day, the peak of street traffic in the study area occurs from 1:45 p.m. to 2:45 p.m. Based 35 on published schedules for various types of events that could occur at the Proposed Action on a 36 Saturday, weekend events (such as basketball games, hockey games, and concerts) most commonly 37 begin in the evening between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. (see Figure 10). While the majority of event- 38 related trips would likely arrive at the Proposed Action site within the 2 or 3 hours prior to these events, 39 a conservative analysis assumes that up to 35 percent of event traffic will arrive to the area during the 40 weekend p.m. peak hour of street traffic. /\ �.J JULY 2015 41 / DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 90% 80% 70% 60% 5 50% go) ;55, 40% a) 1-2 3 0 % a a 20% 10% 0% Scheduled Event Start Times (Saturday) — Basketball League Game — National Hockey League (NHL) - Concerts Family Entertainment — Conventions/Trade Shows Weekend Peak Hour 6:00 AM 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:00 PM 6:00 PM Local Event Start Time 1 2 SOURCE: CH2M HILL, 2015. 3 FIGURE 10 4 Weekend Event Start Times 5 9:00 PM 12:00 AM 6 Project Trip Distribution 7 Based on the population distribution within the Puget Sound area as reported by the United States 8 Census 2010, season ticket holder information for the Seattle Mariners, and events at Century Link Field 9 and Key Arena (City of Seattle, 2015), vehicle trips generated by the Proposed Action are assumed to 10 arrive at the site via the following percentages: 11 • 45 percent to/from the north (Seattle, Lynnwood, Everett) 12 • 25 percent to/from the east (Renton, Bellevue, Kirkland, Issaquah) 13 • 5 percent from the west (SeaTac, Burien) 14 • 25 percent from the south (Tacoma, Federal Way, Kent, Auburn) 15 16 Approximately 45 percent of the population resides north of the study area along the 1-5 corridor 17 through Lynnwood and Everett. Approximately 25 percent of Puget Sound residents are located east of 18 the study area along the 1-405 corridor and along the I-90 corridor to the east of and including Mercer 19 Island. Roughly 5 percent of the population resides west of the study area, and the remaining 25 percent 20 is located to the south along the 1-5 and SR 167 corridors and to the southeast along the SR 18 corridor. 21 Figure 11 depicts the project trip distribution. 22 Project Trip Assignment 23 Trips generated by the Proposed Action would travel on regional and local roadways to arrive at their 24 destination. Based on attendance capacity, mode split assumptions, average vehicle occupancy, and 25 arrival patterns, a basketball league game is expected to generate the greatest number of vehicle trips 26 on a weekday and on the weekend. During the weekday p.m. peak hour, approximately 2,000 vehicle 27 trips would be expected to arrive in the study area. 28 , • • JULY 2015 42 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. s S 3RIIPl p S'4TH Figure 11 -1 Future Vehicle Trip Distribution Northwest Arena Q Project Location *+-+4-4 Rail Line c- ` Interstate --- State Route -- US Route Feet 0 62S 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: Source: Esti, Dkita Globe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographies, MS/Airbus DS. USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, tGN, !GP, sw isstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT S 196T$ St TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Roughly one third of these trips would be destined to local restaurants or other retail in the Southcenter 2 Mall/TUC area prior to the event, while the remaining trips would go to the Proposed Action site. Over 3 2,100 vehicle trips would be heading to the arena and the Southcenter Mall/TUC area during the 4 weekend peak hour. 5 To evaluate traffic impacts of Alternative 1, vehicle trips generated by the most conservative event were 6 distributed through the study network and added to the background No Action Alternative traffic 7 volumes at each study intersection. The results are provided in the following section. 8 7.1.2 Traffic Operation Analysis 9 In the year of opening (2017) with Alternative 1, two study intersections are expected to operate worse 10 than their LOS standard in the weekday p.m. peak. Both intersections are on SW Grady Way (at SR 167 11 and at Oakesdale Avenue SW) and would exceed their weekday p.m. peak LOS standard under both the 12 No Action Alternative and Alternatives 1 and 2. The weekday p.m. peak delay at SR 167 would increase 13 by 5 seconds compared to the No Action Alternative, while the delay for the same time period at 14 Oakesdale Avenue SW would increase by 8 seconds. The weekend peak LOS standard would still be met 15 at both locations. 16 With Alternative 1 project trips, the intersection of SR 181 at Longacres Way would operate with an 17 average vehicle delay of 77 seconds per vehicle, compared to Tess than 10 seconds per vehicle with the 18 No Action Alternative. While this intersection would experience increases in vehicle delay, it is still 19 expected to meet the LOS standard of LOS E. 20 By 2037, 11 study intersections in the weekday p.m. peak and six intersections in the weekend peak 21 would operate worse than their LOS standard. These intersection are shaded in Table 13. 22 Of these intersections, seven also fail to meet the LOS with the No Action Alternative, but the delay 23 would increase with the Proposed Action. The intersections that meet the weekday p.m. peak LOS under 24 the No Action Alternative but would fail to meet the LOS with the Proposed Action are shown in bold 25 type on Table 13. The greatest increase in delay would occur at SR 181 and Strander Boulevard, where 26 the average vehicle delay would increase from 99 seconds to 197 seconds in the weekday p.m. peak 27 hour and from 43 seconds to 129 second in the weekend p.m. peak hour. See Table 13 and Figures 12 28 and 13 for study area intersection LOS results. TABLE 13 Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No. Intersection° 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend p.m. Peak p.m. Peak LOS Delay Delay Delay Delay Standard LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) 1 2 3 4 5 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Southbound Off -ramp Interurban Avenue/I-5 Northbound On -ramp Interurban Avenue/I-405 Southbound Off -/On -ramps Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off - /On -ramps LOS D C 30 C 24 B 20 B 19 LOS D A 10 A 9 B 10 A 10 LOS D D 39 D 53 F 84 E 65 LOSE D 39 D 42 F 121 D 50 LOS 0 D 38 C 29 E 70 C 26 JULY 2015 44 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 13 7\ Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary \ 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend p.m. Peak p.m. Peak LOS Delay Delay Delay Delay No. Intersectiona Standard LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) / 6 SR 181/Longacres Way E/m tOS gated E 77 D 42 D 44 B 12 \. 7 \ L S 7 SR 181/Strander Blvd. E/m togated C 27 C 23 F 197 F 129 / \ 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way LOS D E 71 D 55 F 98 E 69 \i / \ 9 61st Ave. S/Southcenter Blvd. LOS E E 56 E 78 F 100 F 125 \• i 10 61st Ave. S/Tukwila Parkway LOS E D 46 D 50 F 82 F 93 / \ 1-405 Northbound On- ',... 11 LOS D B 13 B 16 B 19 B 16 / \ ramp/Tukwila Parkway \i / \ 12 66th Ave. S/Southcenter Blvd. LOS E E 67 D 54 F 217 E 72 �i / \ 13 Andover Parkway W/Strander LOSE D 43 D 45 D 55 D 55 "--'7 Blvd. / \ Andover Parkway E/Strander \ 14 Blvd. LOSE D 36 D 40 D 46 D 52 \i / \ \ 15 Southcenter Parkway/Strander LOSE C 27 B 19 C 27 C 23 7- \ Blvd. \. / \ Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat \ .7 16 Drive LOSE C 31 C 27 C 30 C 30 / \ \' Southcenter Parkway/I-5 / \ 17 Northbound Off -ramp LOS D D 45 D 49 E 67 D 53 \i / \ \ 18 Southcenter Parkway/S 180th LOSE D 35 C 32 D 41 C 35 / \ Street / \ 19 SR 181/S 180th Street E/m togated E 58 D 48 F 197 E 59 / \ \' 20 East Valley Road/SW 41st St LOS D D 52 D 48 D 55 D 53 / \ 21 East Valley Road/SW 43rd St LOS D D 43 C 33 D 52 D 41 22 SR 167 Northbound Off -/On LOS D B 16 C 26 B 18 C 32 \.... ramps/SW 43rd Street \ / Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW / ss, 23 Grady Way LOS D E 65 D 42 F 124 E 70 \., .7 Lind Avenue SW/SW Grady \ 24 LOS D D 39 D 36 D 44 D 39 / \ Way \. 25 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW LOS D B 13 B 13 D 44 C 26 \ . 27th Street , \ \-' Lind Avenue SW/SW 27th • \ 26 Street LOS D B 18 B 18 C 30 C 22 • i / \ \ JULY 2015 45 / \ DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. i TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT • TABLE 13 Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No. Intersectiona 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend p.m. Peak p.m. Peak LOS Delay Delay Delay Delay Standard LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 27 16th Street LOS D C 23 B 19 C 29 C 22 28 Lind Avenue SW/SW 16th LOS D B 18 B 14 C 31 B 17 Street 29 Lind Avenue SWSW 41st Street LOS D C 22 B 20 C 26 C 23 30 Oakesdale Avenue SWSW 43rd LOS D C 23 B 17 C 29 C 32 Street 31 Lind Avenue SW/SW 43rd LOS D C 27 C 23 D 42 B 15 Street a Intersections that meet the weekday p.m. peak LOS under the No Action Alternative but would fail to meet the LOS with the Proposed Action are shown in bold type. Notes: LOS and delay are reported for overall intersection operations based on HCM 2010 methodology. Grey shading indicates LOS is below the standard. • • • • • • • • • • • JULY 2015 46 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 1 f Rol 5 139TH ST BAKER BLV TRECK D OSTCO DR TRILAND D Ycc a a c .. «ly S 37TH sr f 0 n H 0 S 37TH PL a ii Q S38THCT u JP � ! S 177TH ST Pyt` O k' � 5yr`187 SW 39TH ST 39TH ST atop jr 5 ) ,n .2'.*. S 45TH PL n, a a ,n cv m a a �P- 547THST _ h S 48TH ST Green S 194TH ST a SP River Trail ;lie - Kent 1D / 5 49TH ST S 187TH ST S SOTH ST 6496TN 6T W $S SOTH ST St ST cr rn 19CTI1 6T in S 5TH ST S 6TH ST Burner,' rk _ S 15TH ST ; Lake 7vtreet Park S 17TH 5 Lower t. Hill Park S 29TH ST 5 18TH ST S 19T Talbot up Reservoir Perk .- STST 5 I- 5 23 - Tea.: et, Pa r S 25TH ST S 31ST ST Figure 12 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 12017 Northwest Arena QProject Location Intersection LOS • LOS A-D 0 LOS E • LOS F Alternative 1 Weekday Alternative 1 Weekend Feet 192ND 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL a latrvu )t S 152ND PL TRILAND Dlil - o z rol Green 5 194TH ST (fiver Trail ;ire - Kent TRECK D OSTCO DR S 187TH ST iJklr; Itfver Purr,' SW 39TH ST SW41ST S' 5 177TH ST S 45TH PL S 47TH ST 167 5 48TH ST 5 49TH ST S SOTH ST S 50TH ST S51SrcT 30TH S 192ND 9TH ST 5 N 29TH ST Pa S 5TH ST S6THST - B rnetr irl 5 15TH ST 4Lake �'treet Park S 17TH S S 18TH 5T Loaner „"lfiril, it Hill Park S 19TH-5; Talliotrl!(fll` Ite;ervoir P:riJk W QI S23Ir51 7apfrrr••; x Teu d(fr Pur4 5 25TH ST S 315T ST Figure 13 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 12037 Northwest Arena ® Project Location Intersection LOS LOS A-D LOS E LOS F Alternative 1 Weekend Alternative 1 Weekday O 0 6r�J50 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT 5 196TH PL H PL H CT TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT / l 1 With Alternative 1, the study corridors would operate within their designated mobility standards in 2 2017. In 2037, the SR 181 corridor would operate at LOS F with Alternative 1 during the weekday p.m. 3 peak, which is worse than the LOS standard of LOS E. The Strander Boulevard corridor, while expected to 4 operate at LOS F, is compliant with the City of Tukwila standards with an average corridor delay time of .5 81 seconds. Alternative 1 corridor delay times and LOS are shown in Table 14. TABLE 14 Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend 1 p.m. peak p.m. peak Delay Delay Delay Delay No. Corridor LOS Standards LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) SR 181 1 (from 1-405 southbound LOS E D 44 D 38 F 103 E 56 / \ ramps to Strander Blvd.) Strander Blvd. LOS F (delay < 120 / \2 (from Southcenter Pkwy. seconds) C 33 C 32 F 81 E 65 : to SR 181) / Notes: Corridor delay is calculated as an average of the signalized intersection delay values along the corridor. Grey shading indicates LOS is below the standard. Ei 7 Peak -hour freeway operations on 1-405 with Alternative 1 are shown in Table 15. Traffic volumes in the 8 p.m. peak hour are expected to increase by approximately 600 vehicles at Andover Park W, and by 300 9 vehicles at Longacres Drive SW. TABLE 15 Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary Weekday p.m. Weekend peak Screenline Volume Screenline Volume No. Corridor Year (vehicles) V/c Ratio (vehicles) V/c Ratio 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 2017 11,135 0.77 11,170 0.78 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2017 11,240 0.78 11,670 0.81 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 2037 13,465 0.94 13,505 0.94 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2037 13,645 0.95 14,170 0.98 10 7.1.3 Freight and Non -Transit Rail 11 Alternative 1 would have no impacts on freight and non -transit rail. No new at -grade rail crossings are 12 proposed and operation of the arena would not affect operation of either the BNSF or UPRR rail for i \ 13 freight. • 14 7.1.4 Transit • 15 Approximately 2,400 attendees would use transit to access events using current and planned transit. 16 This is the total transit ridership for a maximum capacity event. Of these 2,400 transit riders, it is 17 expected that 78 percent would come from the north (primarily from Seattle), 10 percent would come 18 from the west, 6 percent would come from the east, and 6 percent would come from the south based • 19 upon the available transit access to the Proposed Action site. JULY 2015 49 \ DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. / TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 From the north, it is assumed that approximately 1,700 attendees would use the Sounder south line to 2 access weekday evening events. Between May 2014 and May 2015, average boardings at King Street 3 Station for p.m. southbound trains ranged from 502 to 732, with the highest number of boardings 4 occurring at 4:12 and 5:12 p.m. Sounder trains have a maximum seated capacity of 1,050, and are 5 estimated to have a crush load capacity (seated capacity and standing room capacity) of 1,600 6 passengers, based on ridership for weekend Seahawks games when trains currently experience crush 7 loads. Based on this usage, the trains could accommodate at least 800 additional passengers, although 8 with 8 runs over 3 hours, the number of additional passengers would be spread out over this time and 9 would average an additional 200 passengers per train. In addition, Sound Transit is expected to add up 10 to two additional Sounder train runs by 2017, which would provide additional southbound service to the 11 arena on weekdays and provide additional capacity. 12 Shuttles buses could be provided by King County Metro or private providers following the events to 13 return these passengers to King Street Station in Seattle. Based on a crush -load capacity of 80 14 passengers per bus, it is estimated that 22 buses would be necessary to transport these attendees. 15 Theses buses could be staged along the east side of SR 181, south of Longacres Way. 16 Other attendees from the north could use Sound Transit Link Tight rail and Metro RapidRide F line or 17 Metro Route 150 from Seattle and points between Seattle and Tukwila to access the arena. These routes 18 are expected to account for about 200 attendees. Based on the frequency of these routes (every 10 to 19 15 minutes) during the p.m. peak period, there would be sufficient capacity to accommodate these 20 riders. Although frequency on these routes is reduced later at night, sufficient capacity would exist due 21 to lower ridership at this time (9 to 10 p.m.). 22 For weekend events, the percentage of attendees arriving by car is assumed to increase to 89 percent, 23 reducing the number of total number of attendees using transit would drop from about 2,400 to about 24 2,000. Bus routes assumed to provide service during the week would also provide service on the 25 weekends, with the exception of the southbound Sounder train, which does not operate on weekends. 26 Without Sounder service on weekends, a larger number of transit riders would be using King County 27 Metro routes and there would not be sufficient capacity on these routes for all bus riders. With an 28 existing maximum capacity of approximately 1,200 bus riders during the day and evening for arriving at 29 events and approximately 700 at night for leaving events. Table 16 shows the service changes proposed 30 to accommodate these riders. TABLE 16 Proposed Weekend Transit Service Changes Route Weekend Day Service (Pre -event) Weekend Night Service (Post -event) Proposed Proposed Current Frequency Frequency Current Frequency Frequency (minutes) (minutes) (minutes) (minutes) RRF RapidRide F West bound 15 6 30 6 RRF RapidRide F East- bound 15 10 30 10 150 To Kent/Auburn and Seattle 15 15 301 15 156 To Des Moines/Highline College 60 30 60 30 31 By increasing the frequency of routes serving this area, capacity on these routes during the day and 32 night could increase to approximately 2,100 and would be sufficient to handle the projected number of 33 riders. Of these riders, it is assumed approximately 40 percent would come from the north using Link 34 light rail to Tukwila and then transferring to RapidRide F or Route 150, and the remaining riders would JULY 2015 50 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. . \ \/ r \ TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 come from south, west, and east with about 20 percent each. These riders would use the RapidRide F 2 and Routes 128, 150, and 156. No changes are proposed to Route 128. /; 3 7.1.5 Parking 4 Parking Access 5 In 2017, access to the main parking garage would be via Longacres Way, Longacres Drive, and Tukwila 6 Station Access Road. 7 By 2037, Proposed Action site improvements and the extension of Strander Boulevard would be 8 complete. Access to the main parking garage would be via SR 181 at Strander Boulevard and via 9 Longacres Drive. Longacres Way would be closed for about 3 hours prior to events, but open after each 10 event starts to allow egress out of the main parking garage. 11 Event Attendee Parking ' 12 Section 5.7 describes the availability of public and private parking in the 1/2 mile walkshed. For 13 basketball league games, the scenario for which the traffic analysis was completed, there would be a 14 maximum of 18,700 attendees, with a maximum parking demand of 7,075 spaces. This is based on an 15 average vehicle occupancy of 2.3 persons and 87 percent of attendees arriving by car. Table 17 shows 16 where planned parking would occur and that there is more than sufficient capacity to accommodate the 17 parking demand. r• \ • \ \� 18 19 Approximately half of the parking demand will be met with a main parking garage connected to the TABLE 17 Summary of Parking Availability per Scenario for Alternative 1 Parking Type Projected Parking. Demand Scenario 2 Demand Scenario 3 Onsite Parking Spaces 3,500 3,500 3,500 Offsite Parking Spaces 3,830 2,230 850 Packages (Hotels and Restaurants) 1,000 500 0 Potential Total Parking Available 8,330 6,230 4,350 Estimate Maximum Parking Demand 7,075 7,075 4,215 Note: Detailed parking availability for each parking type and lot can be found in Table B located in Appendix C. \ 20 arena with two pedestrian bridges. Offsite parking would be through agreements with property owners. 21. Refer to Appendix B, Parking Memorandum, for information on locations of offsite parking spaces. 22 In addition to offsite parking lot locations mentioned above, it is reasonable to assume that offsite 23 spaces would also be provided through packages at nearby hotels and/or travel tour companies. Cities 24 with major professional teams and concert events typically offer these packages. In addition, other ' 25 restaurants and food and beverage establishments could also provide packages that could include • 26 parking and/or transportation. The number of spaces for these packages would vary and would be 27 dependent on market conditions and demand. Additional parking opportunities, such as discount • 28 parking at Seattle -Tacoma International Airport, may also be explored if needed. Additional information 29 is provided in the Northwest Arena Parking Study Memorandum in Appendix C. ` 30 Employee Parking • 31 A typical weekday or weekend evening sports event would employ up to 400 individuals (Populous, • 32 2015). This estimate includes administrative staff, maintenance staff, security personnel, and all event- ` 33 related staff (ticket sales and receiving, ushers, concessions/retail, and parking garage management). 34 There would be onsite employee parking near the Proposed Action, and some employees would be / 35 expected to park offsite at prearranged parking lots and be shuttled to the site prior to the start of an 36 event. Employees would be encouraged to use transit or non -motorized methods of travel. JULY 2015 51 i \ DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 7.1.6 Non -Motorized 2 Pedestrian Circulation 3 Pedestrian traffic in this area would continue to be low except before and after events. Figure 14 shows 4 the pedestrian flows going to and from the area and how facilities would accommodate them. The 5 addition of a 16-foot-wide sidewalk on the north side of Longacres Way between SR 181 and the parking 6 garage and a 16- to 24-foot-wide sidewalk on the west side of the arena, along SR 181, and skybridges 7 from the parking garage to the plaza, would accommodate projected numbers of pedestrians before and 8 after events. All proposed parking west of SR 181 can be reached via existing sidewalks, and transit 9 riders would need to cross the proposed pedestrian bridge over the Green River and walk along Baker 10 Boulevard to access the Tukwila Transit Center. 11 The parking garage, which could be used by up to 9,100 attendees at an event (weekend events with a 12 full garage and 2.6 people per car), would be accessed via the two pedestrian bridges and the sidewalks 13 on Longacres Way, which would accommodate all of the attendees needing to access the garage within 14 an hour after an event. The sidewalk on Longacres Way would also be used to access other parking 15 located east of the arena as well as the Tukwila Station. Bicycles may also use these routes to get to 16 various locations, but it is assumed that most bicycle traffic will use the Interurban Trail, as discussed 17 below. 18 Trails 19 Attendees and employees may use the Interurban Trail to access some events, although it is not 20 expected to be a primary mode of access for attendees. The trail would be used for access from some 21 parking locations. The public plaza would require prescreening of users prior to events, but users of the 22 trail could still access this area because the public plaza would be open to both attendees and the 23 general public. When prescreening is required, trail event bypass routes would be provided and would 24 include the use of Longacres Way and S 156th Street between SR 181 and the trail. Depending on 25 conditions and the number of pedestrians in the area bicyclists may need to dismount and walk their 26 bicycles through the bypass route. For those traveling through the area to destinations further north 27 and south, there is the option to also use the Green River Trail to bypass events. There are connections 28 to the Green River Trail to the south by crossing SR 181 at Strander Boulevard, and to the north the 29 Interurban Trail intersects with the Green River Trail. The Interurban Trail between S 156h Street and 30 Longacres Way would reopen shortly after events begin and would remain open during and after events, 31 although users may still choose to avoid the arena during these times if crowds are present. 32 7.1.7 Road Safety Performance 33 Under Alternative 1, traffic volumes and non -motorized activity within the study area, especially 34 adjacent to the Proposed Action, would increase during the peak hour on weekdays and weekends. This 35 would increase the potential for conflicts between vehicles and between motorized and non -motorized 36 modes, but would not be expected to affect safety conditions within the study area because measures 37 including a Transportation Management Plan would be developed to safely move vehicular and non- 38 motorized traffic. 39 Alternative 1 would include the addition of sidewalks and street lighting along the north side of 40 Longacres Way to accommodate the increase in pedestrians and separate them from vehicles entering 41 or exiting the proposed site. A wider and continuous sidewalk would also be provided on the east side of 42 SR 181 between Longacres Way and S 156th Street. 43 7.2 Alternative 2 44 7.2.1 Proposed Action Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment 45 The Proposed Action trip generation and distribution (including mode split, AVO, and attendee arrival 46 patterns) for Alternative 2 is identical to that of Alternative 1. • • • • • • JULY 2015 52 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 7 17L1VU 71 TRILAND DR 180Ta I ST Y a a 0 0 z ' 'N N W 4, ij a ,_Q N f.i're,!fri 5 194TH ST Riv=,,r Trull Lite. S 11CT11 6 BAKER 8LV0 TRECK D OSTCO DR 39TH ST S 177TH ST S 45TH PL 5 47TH ST S 48TH ST S 49TH ST $ 50TH ST S SOTH ST S Si ST CT 192ND 9TH ST S N 29TH ST S 5TH ST S 15TH ST • htr>gr Prn't Lower' lF4.)r Hill P•,rk S17TH$ $ 18TH ST S 19T11.S$ T1ibtr Hp tie5,?rvoir N U 5 23R1>ST ThPosor T'va:af,q?;. j+:;, li S 25TH ST S 26TH ST S-‘ S1'1�� L� S1 S 31ST ST Figure 14 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 2 2017 Northwest Arena QProject Location Intersection LOS LOS A-D LOS E • LOS F Alternative 2 Weekday Alternative 2 Weekend Feet 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL PL H PL H CT ST TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Access to the main parking garage would be the same as Alternative 1 expect the Strander Boulevard 2 access from the south would be completed prior to 2037. Alternative 2 also includes a 1,000-space VIP 3 parking garage. Access to the VIP garage would be via S 156th Street. The number of vehicles heading 4 eastbound on S 156th Street from SR 181 or from 1-405 would be greater with Alternative 2, compared 5 to the No Action Alternative or Alternative 1. 6 7.2.2 Traffic Operation Analysis 7 With Alternative 2, traffic operations in the year of opening and the future horizon year would be very 8 similar to operations with Alternative 1 at most study intersections. In 2017, differences in traffic 9 operations would occur primarily at the intersections of SR 181 at Longacres Way and SR 181 at S 156th 10 Street. Vehicles would access the VIP garage at the intersection at S 156th Street. Vehicles access the 11 general purpose garage would use the intersection at Longacres Way to access onsite event parking. 12 By increasing the number of access options, vehicles would be distributed to both Longacres Way and to 13 5 156th Street. Compared to Alternative 1, fewer vehicles would use the signalized intersection at 14 Longacres Way, while more vehicles would use the signalized intersection at S 156th Street. Increased 15 vehicle demand at S 156th Street would result in slightly higher average vehicle delay times, compared 16 to the No Action Alternative and Alternative 1 in 2017 and in 2037. In the horizon year (2037), a similar 17 effect on the primary access intersection of SR 181 and Strander Boulevard would occur, but the 18 Strander Boulevard extension would be completed prior to 2037. A portion of the vehicle trips destined 19 for the VIP parking garage would be distributed to S 156th Street, which could relieve some of the 20 vehicle demand on offsite parking locations. 21 Each of the intersections that exceed their LOS standard in Alternative 1 are also expected to exceed the 22 standards with Alternative 2 (shaded below in Table 18). Intersection results that differ from Alternative 23 1 are shown in Table 18 below; all other locations would operate the same as they would with 24 Alternative 1. TABLE 18 Alternative 2 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No. Intersection 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend p.m. peak p.m. peak LOS Delay Delay Delay Delay Standard LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) 5 SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off LOS D D 38 C 33 E 76 C 28 /On -ramps 6 SR 181/Longacres Way LOS D 39 B 12 C 31 B 13 E/mitigated L7 SR 181/Strander Boulevard E/m togated C 27 C 23 F 152 F 99 Note: LOS and delay are reported for overall intersection operations based on HCM 2010 methodology. 25 26 Under Alternative 2 in 2037, the intersection of SR 181 and the 1-405 northbound on- and off -ramps 27 would operate at LOS E and have an additional 6 seconds of delay relative to Alternative 1, or an 28 additional 32 seconds of delay relative to the No Action Alternative. However, the intersection of SR 181 29 and Strander Boulevard would operate better than under Alternative 1, although it would still be worse 30 than the No Action Alternative. This intersection fails under all three alternatives. The intersection of 31 SR 181 and Longacres Way would also operate better under Alternative 2 than under Alternative 1, but 32 would still change from LOS A to C relative to the No Action Alternative. See Figures 15 and 16 for study 33 area intersection LOS results. JULY 2015 54 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. ` • -- S139THST BAKER BLV TRECK D L 0 Z OSTCO DR N 39TH ST Green S 194TH ST River Trull mite - Kent S 11CTI1 6T ,tt SW 39TH ST 5 177TH ST S 45TH PL S 47TH ST S 48TH ST 5 49TH ST S 50TH ST 5 50TH ST $ S1ST fT SW 41ST Si 30TH 5 192ND 9TH ST $ 29TH ST Ptaz Pa S 5TH ST 5 6TH ST Burnet rl; 9 CZ S iSTH 5T yy LakeN iG,•treet Park • S17TH5 vS 18TH ST Lower 7i7rt Hill 5 19TH.ST, Park Talbot tIrl Reservoir Perrk. 5 23SI - 7 rr rem, ▪ Tea.:rl�tite Psrr4{ 5 25TH ST 5 26TH ST Sq 511( � 5 S 31ST ST Figure 15 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 2 2037 Northwest Arena QProject Location Intersection LOS • LOS A-D Alternative 2 Weekend Alternative 2 Weekday O 0 62�250 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL PL H PL HCT T Figure 16 Pedestrian Trip Distribution Northwest Arena Estimated Pedestrian Volume and Trip Distribution for a sold out 17,500 capacity event Feet O0 70 140 280 Data Sources: Source: Est, oiCitalGbbe. GeoEye, Earthsar Geographic's, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS AEX, Getmepping, Aerovid, IGN, IGV, swisstopo. and the GIS User Community, King County, WSOOT TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Corridor operating conditions with Alternative 2 are generally better than Alternative 1 because vehicle 2 demand for onsite parking is distributed to multiple intersections, rather than being concentrated at 3 Longacres Way (in 2017) or Strander Boulevard (in 2037) with Alternative 1. All corridors would meet 4 the designated LOS standard in the year of opening. By the horizon year 2037, SR 181 would operate at 5 LOS F in the weekday p.m. peak hour. Alternative 2 corridor delay times and LOS are shown in Table 19. TABLE 19 Alternative 2 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Corridor Analysis Summary No. Corridor 2017 Weekday 2017 Weekend 2037 Weekday 2037 Weekend p.m. peak p.m. peak Delay LOS Standard LOS (sec) LOS Delay Delay Delay (sec) L05 (sec) LOS (sec) SR 181 1 (from 1-405 southbound ramps to Strander Blvd.) Strander Blvd. 2 (from Southcenter Pkwy. to SR 181) LOS E LOS F (delay < 120 seconds) D 36 C 32 F 92 D 51 C 33 C 32 E 70 E 57 Note: Corridor delay is calculated as an average of the signalized intersection delay values along the corridor. 6 7 Peak -hour freeway operations on 1-405 would be the same under Alternative 2 as Alternative 1. The 8 differences between the action alternatives do not affect the regional vehicle trip distribution on the 9 interstate or state freeway network because vehicle routing to onsite and offsite parking destinations is 10 accommodated on the local street system only. 11 7.2.3 Freight and Non -Transit Rail 12 Alternative 2 would have no impacts on freight and non -transit rail. No new rail crossings are proposed 13 and operation of the arena would not affect operation of either the BNSF or UPRR rail for freight. 14 7.2.4 Transit 15 The transit impacts under Alternative 2 would be the same as under Alternative 1 as described in 16 Section 7.1.4. 17 7.2.5 Parking 18 Parking Access 19 Access to the main onsite parking garage under Alternative 2 is identical to access with Alternative 1. 20 Refer to Appendix C, Parking Memorandum, for information on parking. 21 Access to the VIP parking garage would be via the intersection of SR 181 at S 156th Street. Vehicles 22 destined to the VIP parking garage would be able to turn right or left from either direction of SR 181, or 23 would continue straight through the intersection from the 1-405 northbound freeway offramp. 24 Event Attendee Parking 25 Table 20 provided a summary of how parking would be provided with Alternative 2. The addition of the 26 VIP garage would reduce the amount of offsite parking needed and it is assumed that the two parking 27 areas that are more than Yz mile from the arena would not be needed. Refer to Appendix C, Parking 28 Memorandum, for information on parking. JULY 2015 57 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT TABLE 20 Summary of Parking Availability per Scenario for Alternative 2 Parking Type Projected Parking Demand Scenario 2 Demand Scenario 3 Onsite Parking Spaces 4,500 4,500 4,500 Offsite Parking Spaces 2,830 1,480 850 Packages (Hotels and Restaurants) 1,000 500 0 Potential Total Parking Available 8,330 6,480 5,350 Estimate Maximum Parking Demand 7,075 6,405 4,215 Note: Detailed parking availability for each parking type and lot can be found in Table B located in Appendix C. 1 Employee Parking 2 The number of event employees associated with Alternative 2 is identical to the employees required for 3 Alternative 1 and parking would be the same. 4 7.2.6 Non -Motorized 5 Pedestrian Circulation 6 Pedestrian circulation would be similar to Alternative 1. 7 Trails 8 Under Alternative 2, the portion of the Interurban Trail located between 1-405 and Longacres Way would 9 be relocated to the east. The relocated trail would be located west of the UPRR railroad with east -west 10 connections to the existing trail south of 1-405 and at Longacres Way. 11 7.2.7 Roadway Safety Performance 12 Alternative 2 would result in an increase in traffic volumes and non -motorized activity within the study 13 area, especially adjacent to the Proposed Action, on both weekday and weekend peak hours. This 14 increase in activity would result in more potential conflicts between vehicles and between motorized 15 and non -motorized modes, but would not be expected to affect safety conditions within the study area. 16 Similar to Alternative 1, Alternative 2 would include the addition of sidewalks and street lighting along 17 the north side of Longacres Way to accommodate the increase in pedestrians and separate them from 18 vehicles entering or exiting the arena site. A wider and continuous sidewalk would also be provided on 19 the east side of SR 181 between Longacres Way and S 156th Street. 20 7.3 Mitigation 21 This section addresses a number of potential mitigation measures that could be considered by the arena 22 operator to help reduce and mitigate transportation -related impacts. Two primary types of 23 transportation mitigation measures are considered in this section: permanent physical improvements 24 and operational or programmatic measures that can be documented in the TMP. In combination, the 25 programmatic measures and physical improvements would provide certainty and the flexibility 26 necessary to mitigate event -generated transportation impacts. Mitigation measures would be the same 27 for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. 28 7.3.1 Physical Improvements 29 The proposed physical improvements for project mitigation would consist of roadway, sidewalk, traffic, 30 and parking improvements and are summarized below. 31 Two intersections are expected to exceed their LOS threshold in 2017 under Alternative 1 and 32 Alternative 2 in the weekday p.m. or weekend p.m. peak hour. Potential mitigation measures are 33 described for each location and potential operations results are shown in Table 21. JULY 2015 58 DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. f 1 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT / • 1 TABLE 21 Mitigated Conditions (2017) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No Action Action Alternatives Action Alternatives ' \ Alternative 1 and 2 with Mitigation LOS Delay Delay Delay No. Intersection Standard LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) f � 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way LOS D E 66 E 71 E 61 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW LOS D E 57 E 65 D 51 ' Grady Way i Note: LOS and delay are reported for overall intersection operations based on HCM 2010 methodology. 1 2 The shaded results show that mitigation could improve operations to within the designated LOS 3 standard or to conditions that are better than the No Action Alternative. The two intersections are: 4 • SR 167/SW Grady Way: Potential mitigation includes modifying the signal phases on the 5 northbound, southbound, and eastbound approaches. These approaches are currently operating 6 with protected -only left -turns, but allowing permissive -protected phasing could improve average 7 vehicle delay by approximately 10 seconds. This improvement would result in the intersection 8 operating at LOS E with an average delay of 61 seconds, which is better than the No Action 9 Alternative. r 10 • Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way: Modifying the eastbound and westbound approaches to 11 allow permissive -protected left -turn phasing would improve operations to LOS D with an average 12 vehicle delay of 51 seconds, which is better than the No Action Alternative (LOS E, average delay of r . 13 57 seconds). ✓ 14 By the year 2037, eleven intersections would be expected to exceed their LOS threshold with Alternative 15 1 in either the weekday or weekend p.m. peak hour. In addition to the potential mitigation described, 16 manual intersection control (with off -duty law enforcement personnel) would likely be required at 17 intersections along SR 181 to move vehicles in and out of the onsite parking garages. These intersections • 18 are: 19 • Interurban Avenue/I-405 Southbound Off -/On -ramps: This intersection is expected to operate at t / 7 . 20 LOS F with an average vehicle delay of 84 seconds during the weekday p.m. peak hour with the 21 Action Alternatives. Potential mitigation includes removing the eastbound and westbound split .• / 22 phasing, and allowing permissive left -turns on these approaches instead. Permissive left -turns would / . 23 improve the intersection to LOS D, which meets the WSDOT LOS threshold. ✓ / 24 • Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way: Modifying the eastbound and westbound approaches to allow / \ 25 permissive -protected left -turn phasing would improve average vehicle delay to 100 seconds, which 26 is slightly better than the No Action Alternative condition. / . 27 • SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps: Implementing permissive -protected southbound left- .' 28 turn phasing would improve intersection delay from 76 seconds per vehicle to 69 seconds, but r. . 7 29 would not mitigate conditions to No Action Alternative levels (LOS D, delay of 44 seconds per 30 vehicle). Additional potential mitigation measures at this intersection could include manual traffic / • . 31 control during events to prevent excessive queueing and improve safety. ✓ \ 32 • SR 181/Strander Boulevard: Permissive -protected left -turn phasing on the westbound and 33 southbound approaches, with an overlap phase for westbound right -turns, would improve average .• ' 34 vehicle delay from nearly 200 seconds to approximately 130 seconds. This intersection is the r• •. .7 JULY 2015 59 / s, DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. i TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 primary access to the on -site parking garage and would require additional manual control before 2 and after an event. 3 • SR 167/SW Grady Way: Modifying the northbound approach to allow permissive -protected left -turn 4 phasing would improve average vehicle delay to 93 seconds, which is comparable to the No Action 5 Alternative condition. 6 • 61st Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard: Potential reasonable mitigation at this intersection includes 7 allowing permissive -protected left -turns on the westbound approach. While this improves delay to 8 97 seconds per vehicle, it does not mitigate operations to No Action Alternative conditions; travel 9 demand measures, signal cycle length increases, or manual intersection control during peak hours 10 could be necessary. 11 • 61st Avenue S/Tukwila Parkway: Increasing the cycle length at this intersection would provide 12 more capacity, but would not improve operations to No Action Alternative conditions; travel 13 demand measures, additional turn lanes, or manual intersection control during peak hours could be 14 necessary. 15 • 66th Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard: Potential mitigation at this intersection includes allowing 16 permissive -protected left -turn phasing on the westbound approach and removing the split phasing 17 from the northbound and southbound approaches (allow them to run concurrently). Operations 18 would improve to better than the No Action Alternative. 19 • Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off -ramp: Removing the split -phasing on the eastbound and 20 westbound approaches would improve operations. Further investigation of intersection geometry is 21 required due to the skewed approach legs. 22 • SR 181/S 180th Street: Modifying the eastbound and westbound approaches to allow permissive- 23 protected left -turn phasing would improve average vehicle delay to 183 seconds, which is better 24 than the No Action Alternative condition. 25 • Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way: To mitigate this location, consider removing the shared left- 26 through movement on the northbound approach, and changing control to allow permissive- 27 protected left -turn phases on all approaches. 28 Intersection operations with potential mitigation results are shown in Table 22. Shaded results indicate 29 mitigation could improve operations to within the designated LOS standard or to conditions that are 30 better than the No Action Alternative. 31 7.3.2 Transportation Management Plan Measures 32 The Tukwila Arena is a special events facility that would host a variety of events, each with varying 33 attendance levels, starting and ending times, days of the week, and audience characteristics. Therefore, 34 some of the transportation mitigation developed for the arena could include a variety of operational and 35 programmatic measures to enable flexibility to respond to a wide variety of conditions and could be 36 used to mitigate traffic, transit and non -motorized impacts. These measures would be included in a 37 comprehensive Transportation Management Plan (TMP) that would be formalized during the permitting 38 stage as a condition of approval of the Northwest Arena. Potential strategies and actions for the TMP 39 are described below. 40 JULY 2015 60 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. \ J • ` TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT / 1 • i / / 3 Interurban Avenue/I 405 LOS D D 54 F 84 D 46 �J Southbound Off -/On -ramps / \N % ; 4 Interuraban Avenue/SW Grady LOS E F 101 F 121 F 100 / ' SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off- \� 5 /On ramps LOS D D 44 E 76 E 69 / 1 TABLE 22 Mitigated Conditions (2037) Peak -Hour Intersection Analysis Summary No Action Action Alternatives Action Alternatives Alternative 1 and 2 with Mitigation a / LOS Delay Delay Delay No. Intersection Standard LOS (sec) LOS (sec) LOS (sec) / / ' 7 SR 181/Strander Blvd. LOS F 99 F 197 F 131 \� E/mitigated / s, • J 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way LOS D F 94 F 98 F 93 / ) \ 9 61st Ave. S/Southcenter Blvd. LOS E E 72 F 125 F 97 / \ 10 61st Ave. 5/Tukwila Parkway LOS E E 56 F 93 E 75 / ,..../ 12 66th Ave. S/Southcenter Blvd. LOS E F 148 F 217 E 72 / 1 v Southcenter Parkway/I-5 \ ./ 17 Northbound Off -ramp LOS D E 65 E 67 D 37 / 1 19 SR 181/S 180th Street E/mitigated F 190 F 197 F 183 \/ / \ Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 23 Grady Way LOS D F 91 F 124 F 89 Note: LOS and delay are reported for overall intersection operations based on HCM 2010 methodology. 1 2 Event Management and Public Education 3 Event management and public education strategies focus on event and facility management measures 4 needed to eliminate and/or reduce event conflicts by ensuring coordination with other facilities in the • 5 area, ensuring consistent and responsive implementation of the Transportation Program, and providing 6 the public and attendees with information on choices to avoid conflicts and take advantage of 7 transportation and parking opportunities to reduce delay and frustration. Some methods of / 8 management and public education include: 9 • Event transportation coordinator: An event transportation coordinator could be appointed by the 10 arena owner to coordinate programs to ensure that multiple -event days with expected attendance J 11 in excess of an identified threshold are minimized or eliminated. \ l 12 • Event access guide: An event access guide could be developed to promote alternatives to driving • 13 and to identify resources for ticket purchasers such as preferred parking areas, carpool incentives, 14 and transportation choices. / 15 • Public information coordinator: A public relations coordinator for the arena could be established to / \ 16 integrate and disseminate information regarding events and community activities, including the / -, 17 coordination with media to inform non -attendees of upcoming major events and potential impacts .-' 18 on traffic patterns. .J . l JULY 2015 61 / DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. tiJ TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 • Static electronic media: Static electronic media could be developed to provide a single source of 2 consistent and updated information about the arena, including a transportation access guide and 3 promotional meal/parking packages encouraging the use of nearby businesses and services. 4 • Dynamic electronic media: Dynamic electronic media could be developed that provide real-time 5 pre- and post -game information via Twitter, Facebook, and mass email broadcasts to alert guests of 6 event day traffic conditions, incidents, and regional travel constraints that may impact attendees' 7 ability to travel to and from the events. 8 • Arena call center: An arena call center could be established with a central phone number for 9 transportation and parking information and referral, which may be directed to the main reception 10 desk during business hours or provide prerecorded messages on non-event days and after business 11 hours. 12 • Broadcast advisory: A broadcast advisory could be established to promote alternate modes of travel 13 and traffic advisories through TV and radio franchises to help guests minimize access delay. The 14 service may be combined with advertising and promotion through broadcasting contracts. 15 Vehicular Traffic and Parking Demand Reduction 16 These types of strategies could be employed to help reduce vehicular access and parking demands by 17 encouraging non -automobile modes of travel including Sound Transit and King County Metro Transit, 18 charter bus, rail (Sounder commuter rail and Link light rail), and non -motorized modes or where possible 19 increase average vehicle occupancy. Examples of these strategies include: 20 • Additional public transit service: This strategy provides coordination with King County Metro and 21 Sound Transit to use existing transit services and possibly add additional public transit services or 22 frequencies. 23 • Additional private shuttle buses: Additional private shuttle buses could be provided which run on 24 fixed schedule during events linking the arena to major offsite parking venues, transit users, and 25 guests parking in other remote offsite parking spaces. 26 • Subsidize transit fares: The arena could coordinate efforts with King County Metro Transit and 27 Sound Transit to provide discounted fares to regular event attendees as a way to encourage greater 28 transit use. 29 • Charter bus/meal/ticket packages: This strategy could consist of arranged packages with local 30 restaurants that involve meals, event admissions, and transportation for events at the arena, 31 including charter bus parking and preferred exit routes following events. 32 • Bicycle racks: Bicycle racks could be incorporated as part of the site design, providing safe, 33 convenient racks in well -lit areas near major entrances to the arena. 34 Operational Methods for Creating Increased Vehicular Access Capacity 35 These strategies focus on increasing efficiency and predictability of traffic and parking control systems 36 so attendees of the Tukwila Arena, other nearby event facilities, and general purpose traffic can access 37 desired destinations with greater efficiency by avoiding excess circulation patterns that create 38 unnecessary congestion. Examples of these strategies include: 39 • Manual traffic and pedestrian control: Off -duty police officers could be employed to provide 40 manual traffic and pedestrian controls a major intersections. The manual controls could be used 41 depending upon the anticipated attendance levels. Major intersections could require up to two off- 42 duty officers per intersection, one to control vehicular traffic and one to control pedestrian traffic. JULY 2015 62 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Manual control using off -duty police officers would enable higher -capacity traffic and pedestrian 2 flows during the heaviest activity events and times. 3 • Event access cell phone application: The arena could develop a cellular phone application that 4 provides event attendees with a menu of features ranging from information and links to alternate 5 transportation modes to real-time information regarding congested routes and alternative access. In 6 addition, it would be desirable to Zink this application with a parking guidance system so those who 7 drive can make more strategic decisions about the route they take before arriving in the immediate 8 vicinity of the arena. 9 • Directional event signage: Directional signage between the freeway and other limited access 10 facilities could be revised to incorporate the arena. This signage could be either static or dynamic, or 11 both. 12 • Parking guidance signage: The arena could implement a parking guidance system that provides 13 direction and information regarding parking availability to those drivers who do not prepurchase 14 parking. This system could notify drivers as to the location and number of spaces available in public 15 and event garages in the arena, reducing excess circulation. 16 • WSDOT traffic control center coordination: The arena could consider coordination with the WSDOT 17 Traffic Control Center to enable distribution information from WSDOT traffic cameras and allow for 18 posting of current conditions relating to congestion, parking, and traffic incidents, which would help 19 drivers' decision -making as they travel to an event at the arena. 20 • Way -finding system: In coordination with other arena area stakeholders, a way -finding system 21 could be developed to guide pedestrians and cyclists to the various venues in the arena area. 22 Management of Vehicle and Pedestrian Demand 23 These types of strategies focus on parking, traffic, and pedestrian management options to direct and 24 control the traffic flows for those who drive to the arena. These measures are intended to manage local 25 vehicle and non -motorized traffic congestion to minimize delay on event days by efficiently directing 26 drivers to available transportation and parking facilities. Examples of these strategies include: 27 • Establish covenant parking agreements: Shared -use agreements for available parking could be 28 established. The covenant parking could be distributed around the arena as widely as possible in 29 order to dilute traffic flows and minimize the concentration of traffic entering and leaving before 30 and after events. 31 • Parking for event staff: Parking for event staff could be identified in areas that do not compete with 32 event attendee parking. These are often located in parking structures that do not have attendants 33 on duty during the evenings and weekends when most arena events are scheduled. 34 • Promote and pre -sell offsite private parking: Offsite parking that is further away from the arena 35 could be designated as preferred arena parking and pre -sold. Traffic near the arena would be 36 dispersed and diluted and exit times after events would be faster. 37 • Event ingress and egress plan: Preferred ingress and egress plans could guide drivers to specific 38 parking destinations and divert extraneous traffic to or around areas. These plans would be the basis 39 for developing a manual traffic control plan, preferred bus staging and routing, taxi and passenger 40 drop-off, and preferred pedestrian routes. JULY 2015 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. 63 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT • 1 TMP Operations and Performance Monitoring 2 Operations and performance monitoring strategies strive to achieve continual improvement of the 3 TMP, to developing performance measures for reporting effectiveness of the TMP, and to enable 4 exchange of information with other stakeholders. Examples of these strategies include: 5 • Traffic operations group: A traffic operations group consisting of representatives from the Tukwila 6 Police Department, Tukwila Public Works Department, area parking managers, and King County 7 Metro Transit could meet periodically to debrief on the effectiveness and problems associated with 8 event -related traffic management. This group could then suggest adjustments to signage, 9 signalization and timing, electronic media, and manual traffic control in a coordinated manner. 10 • Periodic program review and survey: To evaluate the performance of the TMP, a set of 11 performance measures could be established to evaluate the performance of major single and 12 multiple event traffic conditions. Surveys during these periods measuring the effectiveness of the 13 traffic control plans could be recorded and reported annually. 14 8. Construction Impacts and Potential Mitigation Measures 15 This section provides an overview of potential traffic impacts resulting from the construction of the 16 Proposed Action including the transport of materials, workers, and supplies to and from the Proposed 17 Action site. Construction is anticipated to last nearly 2 years, commencing with site work preparation in 18 late 2015. Based on the construction schedule of the tasks required for the Proposed Action, the peak of 19 construction for the arena structure and the main parking garage would include the majority of heavy 20 duty trucks (for steel, concrete, and large equipment delivery) and would continue for approximately 12 21 months. 22 Truck volumes and personnel trips for construction were developed using assumed quantities of 23 materials and equipment necessary to construct the facility, as well as construction workforce estimates 24 provided by potential contractors. 25 This section also includes potential transportation mitigation measures for the study area roadway 26 network and operations, transit, freight mobility, non -motorized facilities, parking, and safety. 27 8.1 Construction Trips 28 Major construction components required for the build alternatives associated with the Proposed Action 29 include concrete for the main parking garage and for the arena structure, structural steel for pilings and 30 the arena framework, large equipment deliveries, and daily workforce personnel. Alternative 2 would 31 require more concrete, steel, and various materials for the construction of the VIP garage. 32 The majority of construction activities are assumed to take place on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 33 4:00 p.m. Workforce personnel would be onsite, and heavy haul truck deliveries would made primarily 34 during this window. During certain periods of construction, an additional swing shift could occur 35 between 4:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. and as required construction would also occur on weekends. 36 Approximately 350 workforce personnel are required during the peak of construction for Alternative 1, 37 while an additional 50 personnel could be necessary for Alternative 2. 38 [NEED MORE INFORMATION ON QUANTITIES, ETC. TO JUSTIFY TRIP GENERATION] 39 Assuming up to 10,000 individual vehicle trips are necessary for arena structure and the main parking 40 garage construction, approximately 835 vehicle trips would be accessing the Proposed Action site each 41 month during the 12-month peak of construction. Assuming roughly 22 working days per month, and a 42 typical 9-hour work day, up to 5 construction vehicle trips could be entering or exiting the site each 43 hour. JULY 2015 64 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. / TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT / 1 The geographical distribution of generated trips will based on expected sources of construction 2 materials and personnel. Although specific origins for concrete, steel, or personnel are unknown at this 3 time, vehicles would likely arrive and depart via SR 181 in either direction or via I-405 at South 156th 4 Street. 5 8.2 Construction Impacts to Roadways 6 During construction, the northbound curb lane on SR 181 between Longacres Way and South 156th 7 Street (adjacent to the Proposed Project arena) is anticipated to be closed for the entire 22-month 8 construction duration. This lane would be used for staging of construction vehicles and materials, and ✓ 9 would provide a buffer between traffic and construction activities while the west face of the arena is 10 built. 11 Northbound traffic on SR 181 approaching Longacres Way would be directed to merge from the far right 12 lane into the center lane to avoid this proposed road closure. As a result, northbound capacity on SR 181 • 13 would be reduced during construction, and some traffic may be diverted to parallel roadways (such as ✓ 14 Oakesdale Avenue) or to alternate routes to reach regional freeways. 15 Partial closures of one westbound travel lane on Longacres Way would occur during construction. 16 Although the start of this closure or its duration are currently undetermined, significant traffic 17 operations impacts are not expected. The current right-of-way width of Longacres Way allows one travel 18 lane in each direction, a separate turn pocket to northbound SR 181 on the north side, and parallel 19 parking on the south side. During construction, eastbound and westbound traffic could be shifted away • 20 from the lane closure, and one travel lane in each direction could be maintained at all times. 21 During peak periods, intersections along SR 181 at Longacres Way, South 156th Street, Grady Way SW, 22 and the 1-405 ramp terminal would likely see an increase in congestion and vehicles could experience an 23 increase in travel time during construction. 24 8.3 Potential Mitigation Measures for Roadways ▪ 25 Construction mitigation measures would include working with City of Tukwila and potentially WSDOT to 26 develop a construction management plan. This plan would coordinate construction activities, including 27 incident management, construction staging, and traffic control where vehicles are expected to enter or 28 exit roadways. The development team would also coordinate with the City of Tukwila to disseminate 29 construction closure information to the public as needed. • 30 The construction plan could also include the following temporary mitigation measures: 31 • Establish temporary increases in lane capacity (by widening existing shoulders for bypass traffic). L , 32 • Institute time -of -day restrictions for large, oversized construction vehicles. • 33 • Use flaggers, as necessary, to direct traffic when large equipment is exiting or entering public roads 34 to minimize risk of accidents. • 35 • Provide advance warning and proper roadway signage along SR 181 to warn motorists of potential 36 vehicles entering and exiting the roadway. Signage would include "Equipment on Road," "Truck 1 37 Access," or "Road Crossings." ✓ � 40 • Maintain one travel lane on all roadways at all times, if possible. If lane closures must occur, post • 41 adequate signage for potential detours or possible delays. 38 • Use pilot vehicles when slow or oversized wide loads are being hauled. 39 • Place appropriate detour plans and warning signage in advance of any planned traffic disturbances. • / JULY 2015 65 ' \ DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 8.4 Construction Impacts to Transit 2 Construction of the Proposed Action would not involve bus stop relocations or temporary closures of 3 park -and -ride facilities. Access to the Tukwila Station via Longacres Way would be maintained during 4 construction, and existing transit routes would be unaffected. 5 Access to the Tukwila Station for transit riders may be affected by roadway or sidewalk closures on SR 6 181 and Longacres Way. 7 8.5 Potential Mitigation Measures for Transit 8 Access between surrounding land uses and the Tukwila Station will be maintained to the extent feasible. 9 Detour signage and temporary/alternate access paths for transit riders to and from Tukwila Station will 10 be provided. 11 8.6 Construction Impacts to Freight 12 During construction, no impacts on freight and non -transit rail would be expected. No new at -grade rail 13 crossings are proposed and construction of the arena and parking garages would not affect operation of 14 either the BNSF or UPRR rail for freight. 15 8.7 Construction Impacts to Non -motorized Facilities 16 The Interurban Trail runs within the PSE right of way across the Proposed Project site. During 17 construction of the arena and parking garages, construction vehicles and equipment would be required 18 within the PSE right-of-way and trail users would be affected. 19 8.8 Potential Mitigation Measures for Non -motorized Facilities 20 To mitigate impacts to trail users, alternative/detour trail routes will be provided and temporary detour 21 signage will be installed to minimize effects. Please see Section 2.3 of the EIS for more detailed 22 information on potential mitigation measures for recreational facilities. 23 8.9 Construction Impacts to Parking 24 No impacts to public parking would be expected during construction of the Proposed Project. Parking 25 stalls on existing properties may be eliminated to allow for arena or parking garage construction 26 activities, but no impact to the public is expected because all stalls are located on properties currently 27 owned by the project proponent. 28 8.10 Construction Impacts to Safety 29 Traffic diversions or detours caused by construction could lead to additional traffic volumes on adjacent 30 or nearby roadway facilities. The temporary increase in traffic volumes could cause an increase in 31 collision frequency; however, intersection crash rates should remain similar to existing conditions. In 32 locations where there is no physical change to the roadway, the types of crashes would likely remain 33 similar to existing conditions. 34 Potential lane closures along SR 181 and along Longacres Way could lead to driver confusion or 35 temporary impacts to the shoulder/clear zone; increasing the potential for crashes. 36 8.11 Potential Mitigation Measures for Safety 37 Potential mitigation measures to maintain safety will include placing construction barriers along SR 181 38 and along Longacres Way where construction activities are expected to occur. This temporary barrier 39 would physically separate vehicular traffic from construction personnel and equipment and eliminate 40 potential conflicts. Additional safety mitigation measures could include the following: 41 • Conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (WSDOT, 2005) and jurisdictional 42 agency requirements for all traffic maintenance during construction activities. JULY 2015 66 DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. / 1 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT 1 • Use lighted or reflective signage to direct drivers to designated truck haul routes to ensure / 2 visibility during nighttime work hours. /� 3 • Schedule ingress or egress of large, heavy haul vehicles to avoid peak hours of street traffic and 4 minimize delays during times where higher traffic volumes are traveling on surrounding 5 roadways. ; 6 9. References 7 Amtrak Cascades. 2015 Table 6 8 CH2M Hill. 2015. Weekend Event Start Times. 9 City of Renton. 2014. 10 City of Seattle. 2015. Seattle Arena Final Environmental Impact Statement. 11 City of Seattle. 2013. Seattle Arena Draft Environmental Impact Statement. / � 12 City of Tukwila. 2014a. Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan Environmental Impact Statement. 13 City of Tukwila. 2014b. Southcenter Subarea Plan. f � 14 City of Tukwila. 2014c. 2014 Tukwila Pedestrian Bicycle Count Totals. / 15 City of Tukwila. 2014d. City of Tukwila, Washington, 2015-2020 Financial Planning Model and Capital 16 Improvement Program. http://www.tukwilawa.gov/pubwks/2015-2020%20CIP.pdf. Adopted November 17 17. 18 Environmental Sciences Associates. 2014. Sacramento Entertainment and Sports Center & Related 19 Development Final Environmental Impact Report. 20 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). 2012. Trip Generation Manual. 21 Key Arena. 2015. Key Arena: A to Z Guide. http://www.kevarena.com/arena-information/a-to-z-guide. 22 Accessed on May 18, 2015. Table 12 23 King County Metro. Bus route schedules. http://metro.kingcountv.gov/schedules. Accessed May 5, / 24 2015. Table 6 tJ / 25 Populous. 2015 26 Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). 2015. Adopted Level of Service Standards for Regionally Significant 27 State Highways. http://www.psrc.org/transportation/t2040/los/. Accessed May 5, 2015. 28 Sound Transit. 2015. Sounder Lakewood -Seattle Schedule. 29 http://www.soundtransit.org/Schedules/Sounder-Lakewood-Seattle. Accessed May 5, 2015. Table 6 30 Transportation Research Board. 2010. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010). Fifth edition. / 31 Washington State Convention Center. 2015. http://www.wscc.com/. Accessed May 18, 2015. Table 12 32 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2015a. Ramp and Roadway. 33 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2015b. Standard Accident History Detail 34 Report (2009-2013). 35 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2014a. Ramp and Roadway. / 36 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2014b. Washington State Rail Plan. 37 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2013. Ramp and Roadway. / `.J JULY 2015 67 / \ DRAFT — FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY. NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED ON BEHALF OF ANY PARTY. Appendix A Peak Hour Volumes r • Average weekday traffic volumes, February 2015 \ r Time 1-405 (a Andover Park W / \ 12:00 AM 1780 t i 1:00 AM 1095 12000 / 2:OO AM 1050 L / 3:00 AM 1465 4:00 AM 3795 "' 10000 r \ CV 5:00 AM 7540 \ '/ 6:00 AM 9280 E / \ 7:00 AM 9900 0- 8000 \ / 8:00 AM 9350 > / \ 9:00 AM 8475 \ „ 10:00 AM 8395 - 6000 CO 11:00 AM 8675 / \ IL- 12:00 PM 8910 >` 4000 '/ 1:00 PM 9255 7 \ 2:00 PM 10315 0 \ / 3:00 PM 10375 a)b.2000 7 \ 4:00 PM 10375 CO t / 5:00 PM 9890 L / 6:00 PM 9345 Q 0 • 7:00 PM 7500 ••__./ 8:00 PM 6405 7 \ 9:00 PM 5885 / 10:00 PM 4925 / , 11:00 PM 3220 / \ 3:00 AM 1460 j \"/ 4:00 AM 3710 10000 / \ 5:00 AM 7435 a) `/ 6:00 AM 9070 = / \ 7:00 AM 9445 0 8000 8:00 AM 8990 7 9:00 AM 8300 U / 10:00 AM 8415 w 6000 t / N 11:00 AM 8840 I— / \ 12:00 PM 9170 >' 4000 \ / - 1:00 PM 9615 ' 7 , 2:00 PM 10615 CI ../ 3:00 PM 10705 C 2000 / 4:00 PM 10720 co 5:00 PM 10310 0) �� 6:00 PM 9885 > 0 / \ 7:00 PM 8115 \ / 8:00 PM 6965 / \ 9:00 PM 6290 `/ 10:00 PM 5050 AM peak volume 9900 7:00 AM PM peak volume 10375 3:00 PM \ / / ' 1-405 Longacres Drive i Time SW / \ 12:00 AM 1805 ` 1:00 AM 1105 12000 2:00 AM 1065 / \ 11:00 PM 3270 \ - ' AM peak volume 9445 7:00 AM / \ PM peak volume 10720 4:00 PM / , I-405/SR 181 Interchange .• / Time Ramos \ 12:00 AM 205 1:00 AM 145 _ 3000 1'' 2:00 AM 165 / \ 3:00 AM 195 j \ / 4:00 AM 410 2500 r \ 5:00 AM 1030 O! • / 6:00 AM 1595 Z / , 7:00 AM 2225 0 2000 8:00 AM 2210 > 9:00 AM 1870 U / ▪ 1% 10:00 AM 1835 w 1500 rD \ / 11:00 AM 1960 H / \ 12:00 PM 2050 >' 1000 \ / 1:00 PM 2140 -CO / ` 2:00 PM 2310 CI 3:00 PM 2470 O) 500 4:00 PM 2630 rEE / \ 5:00 PM 2540 y '- / 6:00 PM 2090 Q 0 / \ 7:00 PM 1365 1./ 8:OO PM 1210 / \ 9:00 PM 885 10:00 PM 600 / / 11:00 PM 390 / \ '--/ AM peak volume 2225 7:00 AM / \ PM peak volume 2630 4:00 PM 1-405 @ Andover Park W 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Time of Day 1-405 @ Longacres Drive SW 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Time of Day I-405/SR 181 Interchange Ramp Volumes 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Time of Day t / / i ▪ \ Source: WSDOT, 2015 Average weekend traffic volumes, February 2015 • i Time 1-405 CO Andover Park W 12:00 AM 2740 1:00 AM 1765 2:00 AM 1490 3:00 AM 1325 4:00 AM 1925 5:00 AM 2950 6:00 AM 3940 7:00 AM 5405 8:00 AM 7065 9:00 AM 8310 10:00 AM 9520 11:00 AM 10010 12:00 PM 10265 1:00 PM 10380 2:00 PM 10305 3:00 PM 10075 4:00 PM 10005 5:00 PM 9990 6:00 PM 9355 7:00 PM 7650 8:00 PM 6445 9:00 PM 6230 10:00 PM 5795 11:00 PM 4030 AM peak volume PM peak volume 10010 10380 1-005 @ lonaacres Drive me SW 12:00 AM 2790 1:00 AM 1855 2:00 AM 1535 3:00 AM 1330 4:00 AM 1865 5:00 AM 2885 6:00 AM 3950 7:00 AM 5440 8:00 AM 7150 9:00 AM 8600 10:00 AM 10045 11:00 AM 10785 12:00 PM 11110 1:00 PM 11135 2:00 PM 11065 3:00 PM 10570 4:00 PM 10930 5:00 PM 11030 6:00 PM 10140 7:00 PM 8640 8:00 PM 7315 9:00 PM 6980 10:00 PM 6160 11:00 PM 4210 AM peak volume PM peak volume 10785 11135 Q 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 12000 t O) • 10000 0) E • 8000 U • 6000 ns 4000 tti DO 2000 CO 02 Q 0 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 12000 L 0) 10000 0) 8000 6000 r0 4000 co 0 2000 co 110 N > 0 1-405/SR 181 Interchange Time Ramos 12:00 AM 335 1:00 AM 260 3000 2:00 AM 215 2 3:00 AM 165 > 4:00 AM 230 2500 5:00 AM 295 6:00 AM 385 = 7:00 AM 700 Q 2000 8:00 AM 1030 9:00 AM 1345 U 10:00 AM 1730 ▪ 1500 CO 11:00 AM 1975 H 12:00 PM 2225 ?' 1000 1:00 PM 2370 '@ 2:00 PM 2475 0 3:00 PM 2615 a) 500 4:00 PM 2390 r0 5:00 PM 2170 v 6:00 PM 2060 Q 0 I-405 @ Andover Park W 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Time of Day 1-405 @ Longacres Drive SW • • • 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM • Time of Day I-405/SR 181 Interchange Ramp Volumes 7:00 PM 1545 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 8:00 PM 1080 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM 9:00 PM 890 10:00 PM 695 11:00 PM 465 AM peak volume PM peak volume 1975 2615 11:00 AM 3:00 PM Time of Day • • • • • Source: WSDOT, 2015 • Average weekend traffic volumes, February 2014 1-5 Southbound Off -ramp Time to Southcenter Blvd 12:00 AM 120 1:00 AM 85 2:00 AM 80 3:00 AM 50 4:00 AM 60 5:00 AM 60 6:00 AM 90 7:00 AM 165 8:00 AM 300 9:00 AM 515 10:00 AM 710 11:00 AM 830 12:00 PM 1095 1:00 PM 1095 2:00 PM 1105 3:00 PM 1055 4:00 PM 1015 5:00 PM 930 6:00 PM 825 7:00 PM 595 8:00 PM 385 9:00 PM 255 10:00 PM 195 11:00 PM 135 AM peak volume PM peak volume 830 1105 1-405 Southbound Off - Time ramp to Southcenter Blvd 12:00 AM 60 1:00 AM 40 2:00 AM 35 3:00 AM 30 4:00 AM 25 5:00 AM 25 6:00 AM 40 7:00 AM 75 8:00 AM 145 9:00 AM 285 10:00 AM 425 11:00 AM 520 12:00 PM 580 1:00 PM 595 2:00 PM 600 3:00 PM 555 4:00 PM 570 5:00 PM 555 6:00 PM 485 7:00 PM 350 8:00 PM 230 9:00 PM 170 10:00 PM 125 11:00 PM 80 AM peak volume PM peak volume 520 600 1-405/SR 181 lnterchanee Time Ramos 12:00 AM 315 1:00 AM 240 2:00 AM 205 3:00 AM 150 4:00 AM 175 5:00 AM 250 6:00 AM 385 7:00 AM 635 8:00 AM 930 9:00 AM 1240 10:00 AM 1555 11:00 AM 1830 12:00 PM 2080 1:00 PM 2150 2:00 PM 2125 3:00 PM 2115 4:00 PM 1995 5:00 PM 1925 6:00 PM 1640 7:00 PM 1175 8:00 PM 905 9:00 PM 760 10:00 PM 520 11:00 PM 350 AM peak volume PM peak volume 1830 2150 1200 -c a) 1000 0) E • 800 tLV ai 600 • 400 0 ba 200 r0 0) > • 0 11:00 AM 2:00 PM 700 -c a) > 600 0 z500 O • 400 H 300 r0 200 0 CI) D0 100 r0 N Q 0 11:00 AM 2:00 PM 2500 0) 2000 E O • 1500 U_ r0 I— 1000 O 500 00 r0 > > • 0 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 1-5 Southbound Off -ramp to Southcenter Blvd 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Time of Day 1-405 Southbound Off -ramp to Southcenter Blvd 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Time of Day I-405/SR 181 interchange Ramp Volumes 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Time of Day Source: WSDOT, 2014 \ I \ i \ (\ / \ i \ / \ / \ / (\ / \ / \ ( \ , ' r \ (\ (\ (\ ( / \ (\ \ (\(\ (\ (` (\ / \ ( ` r \ (\ r \ ( \ r \ \ ? \ (\ r ♦ i \ 7 \ / \ (\ i \ / /\J\\:LJ�J\J /\/\/ J\J\J\\ ��\/\\\\/\\/\\\J\J /\J\� Short -Term Background Growth (2010 -> 2013) 1-405, adjacent to SR 181 Interchange, p.m. peak hour volumes MP Location 2010 0.44 Andover Park W 10250 1.39 Longacres Drive SW 10780 Growth Rate between 2010 and 2013 2012 2013 3-yr annual 10640 10640 3.80% 1.27% 11020 10990 1.95% 0.65% 0.96% SOURCE: Washington Department of Transportation, Ramp and Roadway, 2010-2013 P.M. Peak Hour Growth 518 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 24550 300* 560 6070 1-5 ANDOVER PARK W (TU KWI LA) NA NA NA 2010* 1280* 24320 24880 74110 20280 340* 600 6400 4600 320* 4600 840 70380 6900 INTERURBAN AVE S 65440 METERED 330* 630 5710 10960 EXIT 1 SR 181 LONGACRES Dr SW WEST VALLEY HWY METERED 340* 790 6730 64180 69100 71040 e7Washington State Department of Transportation 1 OF 16 Ramp and Roadway, 2010 • / \ / \ i \ / \ \ / \ \ \ \ \ r \ I \ / \( \ ( \ / \( \ \ / \ \ / a i \ / \ I \ J \ / \ i / \ / a I \ / ♦ ' .' a / \ \ I \ \ J \ J \ f \ i I. \ / / \ / \ \ \ / \ / \ / \ i \ / \ ( \ / \ J \ / \ \ J \ J \. / \ SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1610 1860 26330 320* 570 6470 1-5 ANDOVER PARK W (TUKWILA) 47650 27330 78900 12650 1660* 1240 21160 4720 4790 75960 410 630 6860 INTERURBAN AVE S 4190 570 3980* 630 69240 6350 METERED 240* 400 4190 1130 800 11930 EXIT 1 SR 181 LONGACRES Dr SW WEST VALLEY HWY 170* 320 2690 METERED 390* 730 6970 380 4470 970 68700 8440 3730* 4390* 75660 4140* 75840 640 670 7930 411111� Washington State -'/ Department of Transportation 1 OF 16 Ramp and Roadway, 2012 518 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1600 1870 26700 330 590 6640 1-5 ANDOVER PARK W (TUKWILA) 2530 47330 3120 27720 78410 14080 23940 4650 4850 77400 620 6900 360* 830 7800 INTERURBAN AVE S 3890* 68680 METERED 240* 390 4120 1130 790 12090 EXIT 1 SR 181 LONGACRES Dr SW WEST VALLEY HWY METERED 400* 720 7020 3820* 69840 650 510* 4300* 75120 4230* 77060 WWashington State Department of Transportation 1 OF 16 Ramp and Roadway, 2013 Holiday weekend traffic - freeway ramp volumes, February 2014 vs. December 2014 Location Average Volume Start Hour 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4-hour peak total Location Average Volume Start Hour 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4-hour peak total Location Average Volume Start Hour 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4-hour peak total Location Average Volume Start Hour 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4-hour peak total Location Average Volume Start Hour 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4-hour peak total 1. Klickitat Dr 2.1-5 SB Off -ramp to Southcenter Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff 522 555 1.06 1056 1122 1.06 641 631 0.98 1109 1144 1.03 736 723 0.98 1101 1129 1.03 778 761 0.98 1022 1123 1.10 2678 2670 1.00 4287 4518 1.05 3. 1-405 SB Off -ramp to Southcenter 4. 1-405 NB On -ramp from Tukwila Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff 598 632 1.06 569 687 1.21 612 643 1.05 699 797 1.14 618 580 0.94 774 800 1.03 565 558 0.99 836 870 1.04 2394 2412 1.01 2877 3153 1.10 5.1-405 SB Off -ramp to SR 181 6. 1-405 SB On -ramp from SR 181 Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff 725 704 0.97 320 340 1.06 723 732 1.01 347 349 1.01 712 709 1.00 364 364 1.00 651 709 1.09 388 392 1.01 2811 2854 1.02 1419 1445 1.02 7. 1-405 NB Off -ramp to SR 181 8.1-405 NB On -ramp from SR 181 Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff 586 610 1.04 449 509 1.14 600 604 1.01 487 547 1.12 548 635 1.16 515 606 1.18 535 619 1.16 551 599 1.09 2269 2468 1.09 2001 2261 1.13 ALL CORDON LOCATIONS Feb 2014 Dec 2014 % Diff 4825 5159 1.07 5218 5446 1.04 5367 5546 1.03 5325 5630 1.06 20735 21780 1.05 1' Source: WSDOT, 2014 Holiday Weekend Traffic - freeway ramp volumes, February vs. December (2014) • / Typical Weekend liplclAy. Lim (Feb 2014) Weekend (Dec 12:00 AM 125 177 1:00 AM 69 76 2:00AM 43 48 300 AM 25 34 4:00 AM 22 24 5:00 AM 34 31 6:00AM 43 59 700 AM 78 95 8:00 AM 131 136 9:00 AM 188 221 10:0OAM 281 344 11:00 AM 398 435 12:00 PM 522 555 1.00 PM 641 631 2:00 PM 736 723 300 PM 778 761 4:00 PM 815 818 5.00 PM 846 810 6:00 PM 798 827 7:00 PM 716 718 8:00 PM 634 716 9:00 PM 642 717 10:00 PM 353 595 1100 PM 202 264 Typical Weekend Holiday Time (Feb 2014) Weekend (Dec 12:00 AM 122 132 1:00 AM 82 95 2:00 AM 79 91 3:W AM 47 63 4:00 AM 56 56 5:00 AM 64 85 6:00 AM 87 116 7:00 AM 174 211 8:00 AM 265 385 9:00 AM 510 648 10:00 AM 672 941 11:00AM 770 999 12:00 PM 1056 1122 1:00 PM 1109 1144 2:00 PM 1101 1129 3.00 PM 1022 1123 4:00 PM 1015 1027 5:00 PM 934 1010 6:00 PM 837 811 7:00 PM 638 649 8:00 PM 414 501 9:00 PM 285 326 10:00 PM 213 144 1100 PM 157 181 Typical Weekend Holiday Time (Feb 2014) Weekend (Dec 12:00 AM 53 73 1:00 AM 35 38 2:00 AM 35 27 3:00 AM 23 34 4:00 AM 21 19 5:00 AM 21 36 6:00 AM 41 47 7:00 AM 70 112 8:00 AM 142 183 9.00 AM 275 368 1000 AM 421 508 1300AM 540 565 12:00 PM 598 632 1:00 PM 612 643 2:00 PM 618 580 3:00 PM 565 558 4:00 PM 576 520 5:00 PM 557 460 6:00 PM 483 514 7:00 PM 338 415 8:00 PM 216 305 9:00 PM 159 200 1000 PM 115 164 11:00 PM 65 111 11.00 AM 458 550 U 1200 PM 569 687 ) 400 1:00 PM 699 797 rti R 200 PM 774 800 )1: 300 PM 836 870 >' 400 PM 860 884 O 200 5:00 PM 850 858 6:00 PM 812 790 100 700 PM 711 718 8:00 PM 645 704 9:00 PM 611 667 10:00 PM 306 501 11:00 PM 163 241 900 800 t 02 700 01 600 500 g400 Im 300 T 200 100 1400 1200 r 1000 0/ E • 800 O • 600 16 F` 400 T 01 200 700 600 L al `-' 500 01 E 2 400 O g— 300 (0 j , 200 Typical Weekend (Feb 2014) • 100 sHoliday Weekend (Dec 2014) 800 AM 9:00 AM 10.00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 100 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 400 PM 5.00 PM 600 PM 700 PM 800 PM 900 PM 1. Klickitat Drive overpass .Typical Weekend (Feb 2014) Holiday Weekend (Dec 2014) 800 AM 9:00 AM I0:00 AM 1100 AM 12:00 PM 100 PM 200 PM 300 PM 4:00 PM 5.00 PM 600 PM 700 PM SZO PM 900 PM Tlme of Day 2. 1-5 Southbound Oft -ramp to Southcenter Blvd .Typical Weekend (Feb 2014) Holiday Weekend (Dec 2014) 800 AM 900 AM 1040AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 100 PM 2:00 PM: 3:0 PM 4U0 PM 540 PM 600 PM 7:0D PM 800 PM 9:00 PM Time of Day 3. 1-405 Southbound Off -ramp to Southcenter Blvd Typical Weekend Holiday (Feb 20141 Weekend ('Dec 12:00 AM 117 133 1:00AM 71 75 1000 2:00 AM 17 36 3:00 AM 22 26 900 4:00 AM 23 15 5:00 AM 23 35 N 800 6:00 AM 40 53 > 7:00 AM 74 83 0) 700 8:00 AM 110 151 E 9:00 AM 174 254 O - 600 10:00 AM 314 412 500 Time of Day 4. 1-405 Northbound On -ramp from Tukwila Parkway .Typical Weekend (Feb 2014) ,Holiday Weekend (Dec 2014) 800 AM 900 AM 1000AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 100 PM 2:00 PM 300 PM 400 PM 500 PM 6:00 PM 700 PM 8:00 PM 9110PM Tlme of Day • • Source: WSDOT, 2015 Holiday Weekend Traffic - freeway ramp volumes, February vs. December (2014) Typical Weekend )4olidav Time Feb214 Weekend lDec 12:OO AM 52 63 1:00 AM 34 41 2:00 AM 27 40 3:00 AM 24 27 4:00 AM 30 31 590 AM 59 62 6:00 AM 105 98 7:00 AM 222 276 8:00 AM 302 374 9:00 AM 468 548 10:OO AM 556 680 11:00 AM 626 744 1200 PM 725 704 1:00 PM 723 732 2:00 PM 712 709 3:00 PM 651 709 4:00 PM 640 666 5:00 PM 615 636 6:00 PM 485 504 7:00 PM 316 427 8:00 PM 207 275 9:00 PM 146 187 10:00 PM 83 153 11:00 PM 48 90 Typical Weekend Holiday Time Feb2014 Weekend Dec 12:00 AM 91 91 1:OO AM 59 62 2:00 AM 57 73 300 AM 35 46 4:00 AM 35 50 5:00 AM 39 49 690 AM 74 74 7:OO AM 67 95 8:00 AM 128 136 9:00 AM 198 169 10:OO AM 282 288 11:00 AM 330 289 12:00 PM 320 340 1:00 PM 347 349 2A0 PM 364 364 3:00 PM 388 392 4:00 PM 362 371 500 PM 323 326 6:00 PM 268 275 7:00 PM 227 226 800 PM 190 204 900 PM 187 197 10:00 PM 128 165 11:00 PM 84 133 800 700 t CU > 600 1) E soo 3 > ▪ 400 m 300 F- >. 200 100 450 400 t d) 350 300 O 250 V 200 r0 I� 150 100 50 0 Typical Weekend )y4idav Time (Feb 20141 Weekend IDPr 12:00 AM 79 85 1:00 AM 61 66 700 2:00 AM 63 63 3:00 AM 48 53 4:00 AM 73 109 600 5:00 AM 115 133 '01 Ol 6:00 AM 147 180 >500 7:00 AM 238 310 a) 8:00 AM 350 404 E 9:00 AM 400 480 O 400 10:00 AM 445 553 0 11:00 AM 493 592 12:00 PM 586 610 — 300 1:00 PM 600 600 2 2:00 PM 548 635 T 200 3:00 PM 535 619 4:00 PM 480 650 10 5:00 PM 493 530 0 100 6:00 PM 371 378 7:00 PM 273 306 8:00 PM 210 243 9:00 PM 166 187 1000 PM 146 171 11:00 PM 109 135 5. 1-405 Southbound Off -ramp to SR 181 ,.Typical Weekend (Feb 2014) • Holiday Weekend (Dec 2014) 8A0 AM 9:00 AM 10.00 AM 11:00 AM 12:OO PM 100 PM 2:00 PM 3:OO PM 4:00 PM SAO PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 800 PM 9A0 PM Tlme of Day 6. 1-405 Southbound On -ramp from SR 181 ▪ Typical Weekend (Feb 2014) Holiday Weekend (Dec 2014) SAO AM 9:00 AM 10.00 AM 11:OO AM 12:00 PM 100 PM 2O0 PM 390 PM 4:00PM 5O0PM 690 PM 700 PM 8A0 PM 900 PM Time of Day 7. 1-405 Northbound Off -ramp to SR 181 Typical Weekend (Feb 2014) Holiday Weekend (Dec 2014) 0 800 AM 9:00 AM 50:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1A0 PM 2.90 PM 3A0 PM 400 PM SA0 PM 6:00 PM 790 PM 8330 PM 9O0 PM Typical Weekend )loliday Time (Feb 20141 Weekend (Der 1200 AM 86 98 I:00 AM 70 75 700 2:00 AM 55 64 300 AM 38 34 4:00 AM 31 42 600 5:00 AM 40 41 ai Ol 6:00 AM 56 53 > 500 7:00 AM 106 95 N 8:00 AM 149 154 E 9::00 AM 182 192 2 400 10:00 AM 308 331 j 11:00 AM 357 430 12:00 PM 449 509 g 300 1:00 PM 487 547 rA 2A0 PM 515 606 T 200 3:00 PM 551 599 4:00 PM 502 591 ID 5:00 PM 486 537 0 100 6:00 PM 404 440 7:00 PM 340 367 8:00 PM 274 337 0 Time of Day 8. 1-405 Northbound On -ramp from SR 181 9:OO PM 253 324 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 1000 AM 11:00 AM 12,00 PM 100P 10:00 PM 152 255 11:00 PM 98 146 .m....0ypical Weekend (Feb 2014) Holiday Weekend (Dec 2014) 2A0 PM 300 PM 4:OD PM SOO PM 690 PM 700 PM 8O0 PM 900 PM Time of Day Source: WSDOT, 2015 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM cliZsii: Northwest Arena Project - DRAFT Transportation Analysis Methods and Assumptions PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: COPIES: DATE: Bob Giberson/City of Tukwila Robin Tischmak/City of Tukwila Tung Le/CH2M HILL Brittney Horn/CH2M HILL Terry Yuen/CH2M HILL Roger Mason/CH2M HILL Rob Rodland/CH2M HILL Project Files May 22, 2015 This memorandum describes the overall project framework for the transportation analysis of the Northwest Arena proposal (Project) which is located within the Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood of the Tukwila Urban Center in the city of Tukwila, Washington. The proposed arena would host a variety of types and sizes of events throughout the year. The proposal would include an arena building, public oriented spaces and plazas, and a structured parking garage. The maximum attendance capacity would be up to about 19,500 people depending on the event and configuration of the arena, which is expected over time to host up to 230 events each year. The majority of events are anticipated to be scheduled for evenings and weekends. In general, concerts and similar events could be configured to accommodate the highest capacity at 19,500 people, with sporting events (including professional and special events) having a lower capacity of between 17,500 and 18,500 people. Corporate events would also be held at the arena with their projected capacity depending on the type of function. As a multi -purpose venue with a variety of uses, attendance for many events would range from 10,000 to 15,000 guests. This document outlines the analysis methods and assumptions, and includes the analysis years, study limit boundaries, safety analysis methods, travel demand forecasting and operational assumptions, assumed land uses, and background infrastructure improvements. This memo also describes the site development, parking demand, trip generation and distribution, and access/circulation for the proposed Project. Study Area The proposed Project is generally situated between State Route (SR) 181 and the BNSF Railway railroad tracks, north of Longacres Way and south of 1-405. Primary access to the potential Project will be provided on SR 181, known as West Valley Highway in the vicinity of the Project. The traffic analysis study area is generally bound by the 1-5 interchange with Interurban Avenue to the north, S 180th Street to the south, 1-5 to the west, and SR 167 to the east. The study area includes the majority of the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) as described in the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan (City of Tukwila, 2013). A total of 31 signalized intersections, 2 arterial corridors, and 2 sections of the 1-405 mainlines at SR181 will be included in the study; these locations are listed in Table 1 and shown in Figure 1. MAY 2015 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Traffic volumes for the 1-405 freeway mainline within the study area will be provided in the traffic analysis report. An evaluation of peak hour conditions will be included and the anticipated effects on traffic due to the proposed development will be discussed. TABLE 1 Study Intersections and Corridors No. Intersection Jurisdiction 1 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Southbound Off -ramp WSDOT 2 Interurban Avenue/I-5 Northbound On -ramp WSDOT 3 Interurban Avenue/I-405Southbound Off -/On -ramps WSDOT 4 Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way City of Tukwila 5 West Valley Hwy./I-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps WSDOT 6 West Valley Hwy./Longacres Way WSDOT 7 West Valley Hwy./Strander Blvd. WSDOT 8 SR 167/ SW Grady Way WSDOT 9 61st Ave S/Southcenter Blvd. City of Tukwila 10 61st Ave S/Tukwila Parkway City of Tukwila 11 I-405 Northbound on-ramp/Tukwila Parkway WSDOT 12 66th Ave S/Southcenter Blvd. City of Tukwila 13 Andover Parkway W/Strander Blvd. City of Tukwila 14 Andover Parkway E/Strander Blvd. City of Tukwila 15 Southcenter Parkway/Strander Blvd. City of Tukwila 16 Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat Drive City of Tukwila 17 Southcenter Parkway/1-5 Northbound Off -ramp WSDOT 18 Southcenter Parkway/S 180th Street City of Tukwila 19 West Valley Hwy./S 180th Street WSDOT 20 East ValleyRoad/SR167 Southbound Off -ramp WSDOT 21 East Valley Road/SW 43rd Street City of Renton 22 SR 167 NorthboundOff-/On-ramps/SW43rd Street WSDOT 23 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way City of Renton 24 Lind Avenue SW/SW Grady Way City of Renton 25 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 27th Street City of Renton 26 Lind Avenue SW/SW 27th Street City of Renton 27 Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW 16th Street City of Renton 28 Lind Avenue SW/SW 16th Street City of Renton 29 Lind Avenue SW/SW 41" Street City of Renton MAY2015 2 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT — DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS TABLE 1 Study Intersections and Corridors No. Intersection Jurisdiction 30 Oakesdale Avenue SW /SW 43rd Street City of Renton 31 Lind Avenue SW/ SW 43rd Street City of Renton No. Corridor From To 1 West Valley Highway 1-405 Southbound Ramps Strander Blvd. 2 Strander Boulevard SouthcenterPkwy. West Valley Highway 1 1-405 Mainline westof SR181 2 1-405 Mainline eastofSR181 WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation Analysis Years and Time Periods The traffic analysis will be conducted for the following years: • Existing conditions (2015) • Year of opening (2017) • Horizon year (2037) For each of the analysis years, traffic conditions will be evaluated for the: • Typical weekday p.m. peak • Typical weekend (Saturday) midday peak • Holiday weekend (Saturday) midday peak The weekday p.m. peak analysis time period is assumed to capture the end -of -day commuter traffic coinciding with the arrival of a portion of event traffic at the proposed Project site. The typical weekend midday peak is assumed to include the arrival of event traffic, as well as the peak of retail/commercial activity in the Southcenter MaII/TUC area. A holiday season peak period analysis will also be conducted to assess weekend traffic conditions with the Project during the busiest retail event of the year, which is assumed to occur on a Saturday between Thanksgiving and Christmas Day. For the year of opening and the horizon year analyses, two traffic scenarios will be examined. The Baseline condition assumes the Project is not constructed, while the Build condition assumes the proposed Project is in place. Up to two unique alternatives, described later in this memo, will be analyzed for the Build condition. The a.m. peak period will not be analyzed as part of this study. While the proposed Project may host events that begin in the morning, the majority of events will occur in the late afternoon or evening. Therefore, only the p.m. peak and the weekend peak will be analyzed because they are assumed to represent the worst operating conditions. MAY 2015 3 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS -.- % a ti7 'A < $ 144th°,t TukY�it.� 51:6tn"1 1470t St S'1511 h at S ',Wet St 5'7gth ,t Renton Concrete Recyclers S 131-r .r S 133rtl St S 132nd St • 134th. 5) ! 35th sr Black River Riperan "'Rd 5W Forest and Wetland Stature Spats BNHE;r4 estfield Southcenter •"Ztos1 MInker e''rd . "a 1' Peril wajl Super Center e t 44184 st 41) Study Intersections I- -J Study Corridor Proposed Project Site SYr rth St WaY ,4021"st ;44..G1a41 ily-Kri Center & 'winkte's Resteurant MS any Olepsar° 15In St SY: 19th Sr 5'Y1 141 : St SW 41st St KEA a S ?80th Si Renton Stopping Cer a 4 0 ay 5 gta4`1W to ® Va11te.dical Cent FIGURE 1 Study Area Intersections and Corridors Data Collection Traffic Volumes Traffic data were collected midweek on Tuesday, February 24, 2015, at select study intersections during the p.m. peak (between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.) to supplement peak -hour intersection turning movement counts provided by the City of Tukwila. At select study intersections along West Valley Highway and surrounding Southcenter Mall, turning movement data were also collected on Saturday, February 21, 2015, during the midday peak (between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m.). This weekend time period coincides with peak activity at Southcenter Mall and within the TUC. MAY 2015 4 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Traffic turning movement data includes vehicle counts summarized by 15-minute intervals, as well as heavy vehicle percentages, pedestrian counts, and bicycle counts summarized by approach. Historical intersection turning movement data (collected prior to 2015) will be adjusted to existing year conditions using a conservative average annual growth rate of 1 percent. Based on annual traffic data reported in Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT's) Ramp and Roadway (WSDOT, 2013b), average p.m. peak traffic volumes on 1-405 within the study area have increased at approximately 1 percent per year since 2010. Historical daily arterial traffic volumes on West Valley Highway are not available from WSDOT's Ramp and Roadway or from WSDOT's Annual Traffic Reports (WSDOT, 2013a). Based on peak -hour arterial and intersection traffic data on West Valley Highway between 1-405 and Strander Boulevard, p.m. peak volumes have actually decreased slightly since 2009 by an average of approximately 1 percent annually. Although peak -hour volumes adjacent to the proposed Project have shown a general trend of contraction since 2009, count data taken prior to 2015 will be multiplied by a conservatively positive rate of 1 percent per year. This rate is consistent with p.m. peak freeway traffic growth and is assumed to account for modest growth. Additional average annual daily traffic volumes on 1-5 and 1-405 will be collected from WSDOT data sources. Daily and weekly freeway traffic data will be collected from permanent traffic recorder stations on 1-5 (station S205, south of the 1-405/SR 518 interchange and station S201, north of the I-405/SR 518 interchange). Daily and weekly traffic data will be collected from WSDOT for applicable freeway on- and off -ramps to determine seasonal trends into and out of the Southcenter Mall/TUC area. Intersection Signal Timing/Phasing Timing and phasing plans for all signalized study intersections will be provided by the City of Tukwila, the City of Renton, or WSDOT. Field reconnaissance may be conducted to verify or supplement traffic signal timing or phasing information provided by the city. Parking An inventory of parking supply and demand was conducted in the area surrounding the proposed Project on Wednesday, February 18, 2015, during the p.m. peak (between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.) and on Saturday, February 21, 2015 during the midday peak (between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m.). All marked parking spaces (including public on -street parking spaces and those in private parking lots) within one half -mile of the proposed arena were surveyed. Nearly 120 on -street parking spaces are available to the public, while over 9,100 spaces on privately -owned parking lots are located within one- half mile of the arena. Nonmotorized The existing pedestrian and bicycle network within the study area, including the Green River Trail and the Interurban Trail, will be described and documented. Transit Existing transit routes and facilities that serve the study area will also be documented. Tukwila Station is located just south of the proposed Project site. This transit facility currently has 390 parking spaces and is served by Sound Transit Sounder train, King County Metro transit, and Amtrak Cascades rail. Table 2 provides information on transit service in the study area. MAY 2015 5 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS TABLE 2 Existing Transit Service Summary Route Name/Number Service Hours Average Service Frequency Weekday Weekend Weekday Peak Weekday Off -Peak Weekend Tukwila Station Sounder Train, Lakewood to Seattle 4:30 a.m.-8:00 a.m. 4:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m. - 20 —30 min Sounder Train, Seattle to Lakewood 6:15 a.m.-7:00 a.m. 3:15 p.m. — 6:15 p.m. - 20-30 min - King Co. Metro, Route 154 Northbound 5:30 a.m.-7:30 a.m. - 30 min - - King Co. Metro, Route 154 Southbound 2:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m. - 30 min - - King Co. Metro, RapidRide F Line 4:45 a.m.— 12:00 a.m. 6:00 a.m. — 12:00 a.m. 10 min 20-30min 15 min Amtrak Cascades, Northbound 11:22 a.m., 3:31 p.m., 5:42 p.m., 9:52 p.m. Amtrak Cascades, Southbound 7:44 a.m., 11:29 a.m., 2:14 p.m., 5:44 p.m. Southcenter Mall (Andover Park West& Baker Boulevard) King Co. Metro, Route 128 4:45 a.m. — 12:30 a.m. 6:00 a.m.— 12:30 a.m. 30 min 30 min 30 min King Co. Metro, Route 150 5:00 a.m.-12:00 a.m. 6:00 a.m.-2:00 a.m. 15 min 30 min 30-60 min King Co. Metro, Route 156 6:00 a.m. —11:00 p.m. 5:30 a.m.— 11:00 p.m. 30 min 30 —60 min 60 min King Co. Metro, Route 906 (DART) 6:00 a.m.— 7:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. (Saturday only) 60 min 60 min 60 min Sources: Amtrak Cascades, 2015; King County Metro, 2015; Sound Transit, 2015. The Sounder train operates between Lakewood and Seattle. Morning peak service is primarily provided in the northbound direction with eight scheduled trains departing Lakewood or Tacoma before 8:00 a.m. Two southbound trains leave Seattle for Tacoma in the morning between 6:15 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. in the afternoon, eight southbound departures leave Seattle and stop at the Tukwila Station between approximately 3:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. Two northbound trains leave Tacoma before 5:00 p.m. and arrive in Seattle by 6:00 p.m. Two King County Metro routes serve the Tukwila Station: • Route 154 is a north -south route that provides weekday service along Interurban Avenue and E Marginal Way between Tukwila Station and the industrial district south of downtown Seattle. This MAY 2015 6 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS route operates with four buses on approximately half-hour intervals in the commute peak direction only. Service is provided between 5:30 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. with buses departing Tukwila Station and / heading north while in the afternoon service to the Tukwila Station is between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. Route 154 does not operate on the weekends. • King County Metro operates the RapidRide F Line between the Burien Transit Center and the shopping/retail district at the south end of Lake Washington known as The Landing in Renton. Major stops include the Tukwila International Boulevard Link light rail station, Southcenter Mall, Tukwila / . Station, South Renton Park and Ride, and Renton Transit Center. This route operates daily in both directions between 4:45 a.m. and midnight. During the morning and afternoon weekday commute peak periods, roughly 10-minute headways provide frequent service in both directions. Midday and outside the commute peaks, service headways increase to 20 to 30 minutes. RapidRide F operates on Saturday and Sunday with headways of 15 minutes in both directions all day until 8:00 p.m., when headways increase to 30 minutes. Amtrak Cascades operates daily train service through the study area between Seattle and Portland, Oregon. Trains stop at the Tukwila Station four times each day in the northbound direction and in the southbound direction. ✓ In addition to Tukwila Station, the City has recently renovated their Tukwila Transit Center within the TUC on Andover Park West at Baker Boulevard immediately adjacent to the Southcenter Mall. Routes r 1 that serve this transit center include the RapidRide F Line and King County Metro Routes 128, 150, 156, `—/ and 906. Route 128 provides daily service between Tukwila and West Seattle, through White Center, on roughly `—• 30-minute headways. Route 150 runs between downtown Seattle and Kent Station, with select extended service to Auburn. Weekdayservice occurs between approximately pproximately 5:00 a.m. and midnight, while weekend service occurs between 6:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. Route 156 runs between Tukwila and Highline Community College in Des Moines on roughly 30-minute i1 headways between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. on weekdays. Weekend service occurs hourly from 5:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. / Route 906 provides service between Fairwood and Tukwila and serves the Valley Medical Center and Southcenter Mall. Regularly scheduled routes run between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays, and / between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays. This route also provides Dial -a -Ride Transit (DART). Customized pick-up and drop-off services are available on weekdays between 6:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. and can be scheduled through pre -arranged reservations. r � Freight • .� State roadway truck freight corridors within the study area include 1-5, 1-405, SR 181, and SR 167. These corridors are designated as T-1 corridors, meaning they carry more than 10 million tons of freight per year. Grady Way between Tukwila and Renton is also designated as a T-1 truck corridor. Oakesdale Avenue SW and S 180th Street (between SR 181 and the railroad) are designated as T-2 truck corridors, which carry between 4 and 10 million tons of freight annually. Freight corridors will be identified in the Project's transportation analysis, but existing freight activities will not be evaluated because the proposed Project is not anticipated to significantly affect freight ` operations. It is assumed that freight deliveries generally occur outside of the peak weekday commute period or the peak weekend period being analyzed as part of this effort, so no estimates of freight truck / activity or tonnage carried will be included, and the Project's potential effect on freight activities will not be analyzed. I ( ti MAY 2015 7 r •. / NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Safety Conditions Historic crash data statistics for the most recent 5 years available will be collected from the City of Tukwila and WSDOT. These data will be summarized for the study area intersections within the City of Tukwila identified in Table 1. Collision types and crash severities will be reviewed at ramp terminal intersections, in conjunction with volumes and queues, to evaluate freeway ramp conditions. Collision analysis corridors (CACs) and collision analysis locations (CALs) along state facilities in the study area will be identified and documented. For future year conditions, a qualitative assessment of safety will be performed and documented. Future Transportation Network All funded (and reasonably assumed funded) projects in the study area that are expected to be complete by the future year of opening (2017) or the horizon year (2037) will be included in the Baseline and Build transportation analyses. The City's Capital Improvement Program 2015-2020 (City of Tukwila, 2014a) identifies the following projects that will be complete by the opening year Baseline condition and Build condition: • West Valley Highway/S 156th Street — add northbound left -turn lane for high -occupancy vehicle (HOV) and transit, construct safety and capacity improvements. • Andover Park West— construct center median and northbound/southbound turn pockets between Tukwila Parkway and Strander Boulevard. • Tukwila Urban Center pedestrian/bicycle bridge —construct new pedestrian/bicycle bridge over the Green River approximately 600 feet south of Longacres Way. • Tukwila Urban Center transit center — improve existing transit stops on Andover Park West north of Strander Boulevard to accommodate increased transit operations. In addition to the projects above, the horizon year transportation network will include the following project in both the Baseline and Build traffic conditions: • Strander Boulevard extension — construct new 4-lane roadway extending Strander Boulevard from West Valley Highway under railroad to Naches Avenue/SW 27th Street. Future Traffic Volumes Without the Project, background traffic growth within the study area is assumed to occur from existing conditions to the year of opening (2017), and to the horizon year (2038). Background Traffic Although traffic within the study area has shown a general decreasing trend recently, a conservatively positive growth rate of 1 percent per year will be applied to the existing (2015) intersection turning movement volumes to estimate year of opening (2017) background traffic volumes. This conservative rate will be applied to p.m. peak hour volumes as well as weekend peak hour volumes. Background traffic volumes for the horizon year (2037) will be based on p.m. peak -hour volumes analyzed in the Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan EIS (City of Tukwila, 2014b). The City of Tukwila travel demand model was used to develop the future year forecasts for two different alternatives (No Action and Proposed Action/High Intensity) presented in the Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan. Based on year 2016 and year 2030 versions of the City's forecast model, traffic would be expected to grow at a rate of approximately 1 percent per year between 2016 and 2030 on West Valley Highway and on Strander Boulevard. Therefore, an average growth rate of 1 percent per year will be applied to the MAY 2015 8 r NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS f � \ , weekday p.m. peak turning movement volumes for the 2031 Proposed Action/High Intensity alternative f ` to estimate horizon year (2037) background analysis volumes. r� Future year p.m. peak -hour weekday volumes will be proportionally adjusted to estimate weekend peak -hour volumes. Proportions will be based on existing year weekday and weekend peak -hour volumes by intersection. Where weekday -to -weekend proportions are unavailable, an average growth rate of 1 percent per year will be applied to the 2017 weekend peak turning movement volumes to estimate horizon year background analysis volumes. ;J The City's travel demand model is based on the Puget Sound Regional Council's EMME travel demand model that has been used for recent WSDOT freeway projects (such as the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Program). This model, which was also used to inform the Transportation Element of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, is assumed to include the most recent population, household, and lJ employment forecasts for the study area. All future roadway network elements described above are assumed to be incorporated into the models as well. Project Trip Generation The proposed Project is expected to generate a range of vehicular trips based on the day, size, and type ✓ \ of event or activity being hosted. While the number of vehicle trips will be aligned with a particular event, traditional trip -generation methodologies (such as using specific land use codes and trip- ,-, generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE] Trip Generation Manual [ITE, 2012]) would not reasonably represent actual trips generated by this unique facility. Instead, f Project trip generation will be estimated based on research of comparable arena complexes around the country and on the maximum attendance of a particular event on a weekday andon a weekend. These trip estimates will be adjusted to account for mode split, carpooling or ridesharing strategies, and peak- • \ hour arrival trends. Potential events that would be likely to occur at the proposed multi -purpose arena ✓ are shown in Table 3 along with appropriate trip -generation adjustment factors. ti Mode Split ✓ For weekday sports or civic events at the proposed Project, between 85 and 90 percent of attendees would be expected to arrive at the venue via automobile. The remaining attendees would arrive by either transit or non -motorized mode. The assumed arrival mode percentage is based on mode split information documented in the Sacramento Entertainment and Sports Center & Related Development Final Environmental Impact Report (Environmental Sciences Associates, 2014) and the Seattle Arena Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) (City of Seattle, 2013). The Sacramento Entertainment and Sports Center (SESC) is a similarly -sized sports and multiuse arena \ located adjacent to a major interstate freeway. For weekday sports events, an automobile mode split of 90 percent was assumed for event attendees. Due to similarities in size, use, and access, it is reasonable to assume that the arrival mode split at the proposed Project could be similar for weekday sports or civic events. The spectator sports arena analyzed in the Seattle Arena DEIS is also sized similarly to the proposed Project in Tukwila. While the prospective Seattle Arena would not be immediately adjacent to an vinterstate freeway, the traffic analysis assumed that just 80 percent of event attendees would arrive at events via automobile due to the transit options available in downtown Seattle. Although the proposed Project site in Tukwila is served by transit options, there are fewer transit choices than in Seattle, so it is reasonable that more than 80 percent of attendees would arrive via automobile. For weekend events, a slightly higher percentage of attendees is assumed to arrive via automobile due to reduced weekend transit service, increased likelihood of home -based trips, and greater opportunities to combine automobile trips with other purposes. • � P P P MAY 2015 9 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Vehicle Occupancy Average vehicle occupancy (AVO) is assumed to vary between two and three people per vehicle for the different events expected to occur at the Project arena. For sporting events at the proposed Project arena, an average vehicle occupancy of 2.4 people per vehicle is assumed for weekday events, while a slightly higher AVO of 2.6 people per vehicle is assumed for weekend events. • MAY 2015 10 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT- DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS ♦, TABLE 3 Project Trip Generation Assumptions Type of Event Maximum Attendance (persons) Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekend Holiday/Midday Peak Hour %Vehicles AVO Total Parking Demand Peak -Hour Arrival Demandf Trips to Project Trips from Project Total Peak- Hour Trips %Vehicles AVO Total Parking Demand Peak -Hour Arrival Demandf Trips to Project Trips from Project Total Peak - Hour Trips Concert -Center Stage 19,500a 90 3.0 5,525 30% 1,650 105 1,755 94 3.0 6,110 20% 1,149 73 1,222 Basketball League Games 18,700a 87 2.3 7,073 30% 1,995 127 2,122 89 2.6 6,402 35% 2,107 134 2,241 National Hockey League (NHL) 17,400a 87 2.3 6,582 30% 1,856 118 1,975 89 2.6 5,957 35% 1,960 125 2,085 Special Sports Event (tournaments, etc.) 18,700b Event expected to occur on weekends only 89 2.6 6,402 35% 2,107 134 2,241 Corporate Event (presentations, etc.) 14,000c 90 3.0 4,200 35% 88 1,382 1,470 Event expected to occur on weekdays only Concert - End Stage 14,000a 90 3.0 4,200 30% 76 1,184 1,260 94 3.0 4,387 20% 825 53 877 Family Entertainment (ice shows, etc.) 15,000d Event expected to occur on weekends only 94 3.2 4,407 35% 1,450 93 1,543 Convention (trade shows, expos, etc.) 10,300e 90 2.2 4,214 35% 88 1,386 1,475 94 2.4 4,034 20% 948 61 1,009 a Maximum expected attendance based on site design provided by Project developer. b Special sports events may include tournaments, play-offs, and exhibitions with event seatingsimilarto that of a basketball game. Corporate events may include speaker presentations and panel discussions with even seating similarto that of an end -stage concert. d Source: Key Arena, 2015. e Source: Washington State Convention Center, 2015. f Attendees expected to arrive at the proposed arena (or the Southcenter Mall/TUC area) during the weekday p.m. peak hour of traffic. MAY 2015 11 \. • \ NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS \• These assumptions are based on documented AVO values in the SESC Report, the Seattle Arena DEIS, \ and the Barclays Center/Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project Environmental Impact Statement (Empire State Development, November 2006). For other events, an AVO of 3.0 people per vehicle is assumed. This higher estimate reflects the \`J likelihood that these types of events are typically attended by families with children (family -oriented entertainment) or by multiple individuals attending the event as a group (concerts, corporate events). U Peak Hour Arrivals Based on research of comparable arenas around the country, approximately one-third of event vehicle trips would be expected to arrive at the proposed arena (or the Southcenter Mall/TUC area) during the f weekday p.m. peak hour of street traffic. The remaining trips headed to the proposed arena would `—' arrive before or after the peak hour of street traffic. Employees A typical weekday evening sports event is expected to employ up to 500 individuals. Up to 20 percent of site employees would likely take transit, get dropped off, or use an alternative method to travel to the arena. The remaining80percent of employees employees)will be encouraged to share rides and . (400 g / arrive at work via carpools. Assuming an average of at least 2.5 people per vehicle, up to 160 vehicle trips would be generated by employees on a typical weekday evening sports event. Up to 160 parking stalls for employees would be required onsite. Project Trip Distribution Project -generated vehicle trips would arrive at the proposed arena via the assumed distributions: /• • 45 percent to/from the north (Seattle, Lynnwood, Everett) • 25 percent to/from the east via (Bellevue, Renton, Redmond, Kirkland, Issaquah) • 5 percent to/from the west (Burien, SeaTac) f • 25 percent to/from the south (Tacoma, Federal Way, Kent, Auburn) Build Alternatives Two different Build alternatives will be analyzed for the proposed Project. Vehicle access, site layout, / 1 and parking/garage configuration will differ between the two alternatives as described below. Build Alternative 1 Alternative 1 includes 4 500 on -site parkingspaces (3,500-stallgeneral purpose garage and 1,000-stall P (, P P g g / premium parking garage) and up to 2,000 off -site parking spaces. Off -site parking capacity includes 1,000 spaces on adjacent properties through lease agreements or easements, 500 paid -parking spaces at surrounding businesses, and 500 spaces at various establishments within and outside of the City of Tukwila. / In 2017, access to the proposed general purpose garage would be via Longacres Way (from the west) and Sounder Station Access Road (from the east). By 2037, vehicle access to the general purpose parking ti. garage will be via an improved Strander Boulevard. Access from Longacres Way under the BNSF alignment would be restricted to cars/small vehicles only (and shuttle buses depending on height). Prior to events, access would be restricted to one-way inbound movements only. Vehicle access to the premium garage and all loading docks would be via South 156th Street. / i \ 1 MAY 2015 12 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS i Build Alternative 2 Alternative 2 includes 3,500 on -site parking spaces in a general purpose and up to 2,850 off -site parking spaces. Off -site parking capacity includes 500 spaces in a potential parking garage located north of the I- 405 on Grady Way at the existing Family Fun Center, up to 1,350 spaces on adjacent properties through lease agreements or easements, 500 paid -parking spaces at surrounding businesses, and 500 spaces at various establishments within and outside of the City of Tukwila. Access to the on -site parking garage would be the same as described for Alternative 1. Traffic Analysis Tools and Operations Parameters Synchro Model Intersection traffic operations analysis will be conducted using Synchro (version 8). Synchro parameters for local intersection operations are listed in Table 4. TABLE 4 Synchro Intersection Operations Parameters/Assumptions Arterial Intersection Parameters Analysis Year 2015 Existing 2017 Year of Opening 2037 Horizon Year Peak Hour Factor (PHF) From count and by intersection Same as existing Use 0.95 for all intersections exceptwhere existing PHF is greater than 0.95. If PHF is greater than 0.95, use existing. Conflicting Bikes and Pedestrian per Hour From traffic count, otherwise assume 5 pedestrians/cyclists Same as existing Same as existing Area Type "Other" for all areas Same as existing Same as existing Ideal Saturation Flow (for all movements) 1,900 vehicles perhour Same as existing Same as existing Lane Utilization Default software assumptions Same as existing Same as existing Percent Heavy Vehicles From count, otherwise 2% From forecasts, otherwise same as existing From forecasts, otherwise same as existing Percent Grade Assume 0% Assume 0% Assume 0% Parking Maneuvers per Hour Assume zero Assume zero Assume zero Bus Blockages per Hour Assume zero Assume zero Assume zero Intersection Signal Phasing and Coordination From City of Tukwila signal phasing sheets Baseline: same as existing Build: If proposed design necessitates phasing change, use engineering judgment Baseline:same as existing Build: If proposed design necessitates phasing change, use engineeringjudgment Intersection Signal Timing Optimization Limits From City of Tukwila information 60 to max of 150 seconds, existing cycle length 60 to max of 150 seconds, existing cycle length Minimum Green Time From agency information, otherwise based on MUTCD minimum pedestrian times (minimum of 7 seconds walk time and 3.5 feet per second Same as existing Same as existing MAY 2015 13 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS for flashing don't walk clearance); if no crosswalk: 10 seconds Yellow and All -Red Time From agency information, otherwise Yellow = 4 seconds and Red = 1 second Same as existing Same as existing Right Turn on Red Allow unless prohibited Same as existing Same as existing Queue Lengths Based on 25 feet per vehicle Same as existing Same as existing MUTCD = Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices The evaluation of intersection performance will be based on Synchro output. Turning movement volume, average delay, level of service (LOS), and queuing information will be generated and presented for a one -hour peak period. All results will be based on methodologies documented in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (TRB, 2010) but may be supplemented with results based on the methodologies of the 2000 HCM. Level of Service Standards LOS standards for study intersections on roadways designated as Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) are set by WSDOT. 1-405, 1-5, and SR 167 in the study area are designated as HSS in an urban area; therefore, the standard is LOS D for intersections on these state highways. SR 181 is categorized as a regionally significant state highway. Based on the LOS standards adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) for this roadway, intersections should operate no worse than LOS E with mitigation. For City of Tukwila study intersections, the level of service standard is LOS E. Corridor LOS threshold for the SR 181/West Valley Highway corridor is LOS E, while the threshold forStrander Boulevard is LOS F with a weighted average intersection delay of no more than 120 seconds. The adopted intersection LOS mobility standards for this study are shown in Table 5. TABLE 5 Study Intersection and Corridor Level of Service Standards No. Intersection Jurisdiction LOS Standards Designation 1 Interurban Avenue/I-5Southbound Off -ramp WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 2 Interurban Avenue/I-5Northbound On -ramp WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 3 Interurban Avenue/I-405Southbound Off -/On -ramps WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 4 Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way City of Tukwila LOSE Local 5 West Valley Hwy./I-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 6 West Valley Hwy./Longacres Way WSDOT LOS E/mitigated Non-HSS - Urban 7 West Valley Hwy./Strander Blvd. WSDOT LOS E/mitigated Non-HSS - Urban 8 SR 167/SW Grady Way WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 9 61st Ave. S/SouthcenterBlvd. City of Tukwila LOS E Local 10 61st Ave. S/Tukwila Parkway City of Tukwila LOS E Local 11 1-405 Northbound On-ramp/Tukwila Parkway WSDOT LOS D HSS -Urban MAY 2015 14 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODS PND ASSUMPTIONS TABLE 5 Study Intersection and Corridor Level of Service Standards 12 66th Ave. S/Southcenter Blvd. City of Tukwila LOS E Local 13 Andover Parkway W/Strander Blvd. City of Tukwila LOS E Local 14 Andover Parkway E/Strander Blvd. City of Tukwila LOS E Local 15 Southcenter Parkway/Strander Blvd. City of Tukwila LOS E Local 16 Southcenter Parkway/KI ickitat Drive City of Tukwila LOS E Local 17 Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off -ramp WSDOT LOS 0 HSS - Urban 18 Southcenter Parkway/S 180th Street City of Tukwila LOS E Local 19 West Valley Hwy./S 180th Street WSDOT LOS E/mitigated Non-HSS - Urban 20 East Valley Road/SW 41st St WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban 21 East Valley Road/SW 43rd St City of Renton LOS D Local 22 SR 167 Northbound Off-/On-ramps/SW43rd Street WSDOT LOS D HSS - Urban No. Corridor LOS Standards 1 West Valley Highway (from 1-405 southbound ramps to Strander Blvd.) LOS E 2 Strander Blvd. (from Southcenter Pkwy. to West Valley Highway) LOS F a Source: Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan EIS, City of Tukwila, 2014. Documentation Results the traffic analysis described in this memorandum will be documented in a Transportation Technical Report, which will be included as an appendix to the SEPA EIS. The Transportation Technical Report will provide information on the existing transportation conditions, the future transportation conditions with and without the proposed Project, and any mitigation measures necessary to address potential transportation impacts. References AKRF, Inc. 2004. Downtown Brooklyn Development Final Environmental Impact Statement. April. Amtrak Cascades. 2015. Schedules. http://www.amtrakcascades.com/Schedules.htm. Accessed May 5, 2015. City of Seattle. 2013. Seattle Arena Draft Environmental Impact Statement. City of Tukwila. 2013. Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. City of Tukwila. 2014a. Capital Improvement Program 2015-2020. City of Tukwila. 2014b. Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan EIS. Empire State Development. 2006. Barclays Center/Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project Environmental Impact Statement. November. Environmental Science Associates. 2014. Sacramento Entertainment and Sports Center & Related Development Final Environmental Impact Report. May. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). 2012. Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. MAY 2015 15 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT — DRAFT TRANSPORTATION ANPLYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Key Arena. 2015. Key Arena: A to Z Guide. http://www.keyarena.com/arena-information/a-to-z-guide. Accessed on May 18, 2015. King County Metro. 2015. Bus route schedules. http://metro.kingcountv.gov/schedules. Accessed May 5, 2015. Sound Transit. 2015. Sounder Lakewood -Seattle Schedule. http://www.soundtransit.org/Schedules/Sounder-Lakewood-Seattle. Accessed May 5, 2015. Transportation Research Board (TRB). 2005. Highway Capacity Manual 2000. Transportation Research Board (TRB). 2010. Highway Capacity Manual 2010. Washington State Convention Center. 2015. http://www.wscc.com/. Accessed May 18, 2015. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2013a. Annual Traffic Reports. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2013b. Ramp and Roadway. MAY2015 16 Appendix B 95th Percentile Queue Lengths N O tG W V m U P W N N O ID OD t'l P U A W N r O tG W V m U A W v ID Intersection Approach Storage Length' Lind Avenue SW & SW 43rd St Oakesdale Avenue SW & SW 43rd St Lind Avenue SW & SW 41st St Lind Avenue SW & SW 16th St Oakesdale Avenue SW & SW 16th St Lind Avenue SW & SW 27th St Oakesdale Avenue SW & SW 27th St Lind Avenue SW & SW Grady Way Oakesdale Avenue SW & SW Grady Way SR-167 Northbound Off/On Ramps & SW 43rd St East Valley Road & SW 43rd St East Valley Road & SW 41st St West Valley Hwy & S 180th Street Southcenter Parkway & 5 180th Street Southcenter Parkway & 1-5 Northbound Off Ramp Southcenter Parkway & Klickitat Drive Southcenter Parkway & Strander Blvd Andover Parkway E & Strander Blvd Andover Parkway W & Strander Blvd 66th Ave S & Southcenter Blvd 1-405 Northbound On Ramp & Tukwila Parkway 61st Ave S & Tukwila Parkway 61st Ave S & Southcenter Blvd SR-167 & SW Grady Way West Valley Hwy & Strander Blvd West Valley Hwy & Longacres Way West Valley Hwy & I-405 Northbound Off/On Ramps Interurban Avenue & SW Grady Way interurban Avenue & 1-405 Southbound Off/On Ramps Interurban Avenue & 1-5 'Northbound On Ramp Interurban Avenue & 1-5 Southbound Off Ramp Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Northbound Southbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Westbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound' Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound' Northbound Southbound Westbound g-g c c$$ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g s$$ o 0 0 0 0 0 o g o o E o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o g o 0 0 o DD o 0 H 0 o m o 0 o 0 o 0 0 o m o o 0 o F, o 0 b' o 0 0 0 0'go i sgo 0 `o° i P m 0 0 0 W o A" 0 0 twin c8o 'A" 0 o . o o 0 g mmn $ o g 1O °m' $ 0 0 o 0 0 8 o N pp U U O U S lull g O S S U S D L'I U U N O O S S O O O U N S tilt U O O S U S H S U O S U S O O U U U V� D U tin S H U U O S U N D. U V N U U U O O O U S N m A U 0 0 H O Vvi O S qp�pl O D U 0 tin O U V 0 0 'In' tun tun S U W N O O O S U O O U AP U O 'Si O O O S O D P tVn S till U O O P r H O S O S tin O O N U U ro O O b St N D U O H U U v U O O 0 U U U N N U O D U U O U 0 1p1ppp O D U U 0 S U O N U O D U O D ',Si U U U U U 0 m U O till I U 0 g U O lNn U 0 UI O O g N W O UI U M O D U N t+ U UI U H O O O O O A O U O U U O U pppp O N U S S til O H A H H H S SUS O 0 0 25 25 r 8 S M O O S O 2015 Existing Conditions Weekday p.m. Weekend p.m. peak peak U m A U {mn pppp U O O 8 5 m A N O S U S S S U O S S U t+ O S S U O Y U$$ O U U S O D U S S$ O ✓ S S H O r S S S O S g r S Y+ u N U O O O v g N N N O O O O to U U N H O U O N N O U O D O bO S U U U U U U U tun U p r N Ap N N O S O O A g N S S O O u V N N pppp D O O N N N +plp� D U O O U W N W D U O N W D U O A U U S S U N m U S S U W W N S W W v O H W N O O S Ag {/� A V O. &1 S A V O Vil U H S N S N S U S$ W N S U S S V S U U O S bii U S O S tin P> N U> pp� S a O qqpp H d O U N N N V� S tin W N S U O N D U A O S tin U P N O S IA U$$ N D U U O S U U A U N U U U " A S O U in i N $ U U tin S N D S U U N S N N U H p U H till P U H N H H A U" NAl O H N U l" i O O Yi U U ppmp� U U U O O U U N m O S U S U W W A A V D U O U A N U O N U N O U U i+ N G H U U U G H H U N Atu V y� U H U pp1 A U O S S A$ U SS U V i D U U V U U S S U N U v H tilt U O S U U O 0 0 0 25 25 25 U riO �+ U M O r U YI O 2017 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Action Action No Action Alternative 1 Alternative 2 w N N O U O O ppmp� ti N O U O O m ti N S U O O w U O S U w U O S U W U O S G H U U O D U to O D U U O S U S 0 S U S S U S `+ U O U O S S U to O D U to to U S U U S S U U S S U U U U .• U U G H t+ U U O O N 0 U iii S w O D U S O D U S N a g U 0 0 S r U O S V U U U S pppp�l v O S 0 pp� O D U pppp�� O D N U O D U w U O O U U W U O O D N v O O S U N Vt U S U U U S U to N A O D U S w 0 U U S W O D U S w g U O O w .- U 0 0 w F+ U O O N U w U S O U m w U S O U W m H N S O tin w m qpap O\ O m S n tNn A m S d N S U U S to H S U S w N O D U O � N to H In O V A N U S tin O N w U O U O a w O S U O P to O S U O Si'+ 1O U O � r- U S U O V r D U U O N g S O O .• S U O t+ S U O P Vii S O A U S O ppf S S O N N S S " U H S N S N till m N w U O O m ti U O U H m ti U O U H N N tilt S N U U U U W U O$ H r O O O O i m U O O O O O H O D U U Si i m N U tin $ O U D U O till A N U H O tun A m O 5 O U A m W O U O O U U S U to to O U D U O 0 0 0 25 25 25 U H O S O t+ U O 2017 Weekend P.M. Peak Hour Action Action No Action Alternative 1 Alternative 2 A V m A S U S O pppp�� A O U O S U A 'g m N O O S S m A '+ S O S O D UN U U r S U U O t+ S U O U S U U U S U U U H U U 5 iS W W U U O O W W U U O O O A S N N $ U O S N O S U U liA tii A U U O A U U U O UN S U S V S O U V S O U S S VU U H1 N $ U U yyvvll yptpn� O 1 U O U NU N S to U pqpqpp N O D U m JU U D v0 0 tin U U p O O tin U U A D U N V w U U N S N A N U S 6, i U O w U S U DO tp tp �' N bit S N U V U U A U O M O U v U O U 0 N U N A O til� U N m mp v tpn 0 0 U O. S m- U V m S U > i b S S U p A O O H yp p U O NA UV U WO U W W S O O O U W O tii� O O NU S pW W W A S U M O N A W O S S O jU U U t' S O D U O H U U U U N w v t+ O O O W N '+ O O O p U N ppl H O tin M ppl I" O U ti V i v N w U w O b S N tin m U S m N V U U S O N U S O S O S m0 pp� O S U U A t0 U In i O 0N Y 0 l+ �"� O S i� S A O S S O r O A w `+ m O U O U t pp� N W O O U O N U N m w t0 O U S$ ID Epp O U O U U N till m b U S H O m t0 N U S O M 0 0 0 25 25 25 U S U U H U v W il, H U 2037 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Action Action No Action Alternative 1 Alternative 2 N N Uo m U W U Si U U U U O N S U A vS N A N S U O U S N U N U V. U N U S VU O O S N StO+ S U O N NN g D y r U v N N U S o 8 8 FO U S W H v g vO D ✓ Ov Ov 1w r O N U A g N § wJ N ON O tiAn O NO HV v J NU V o No NU D N N vU U m8 A O A U O U S W m N S U m U O S U O U U U U U N U ND V A U N WV to & in i U A S W P 8 tin S S a�U U H A m g W N § U U 8 m 8 m U 0 U 85 `A U A U U U Wli W a � tlitiA c6 g W D Ui 8 o In 8 S W U S U N N to �N :N4r U N D U S W o 8 Uit NN S U p O: `,,,,,A"� U SS t" H� E. S O m S U UN U U UU UI W U U N U U U U 61 U to to ON N U OO U r to o in N 0 0 tiS U$ N U tt, O OA W U FA A U U U tVo V o U iA V V U S § vUU U U o A W UO U S O l^ ' U O N NU 8 U Nl U 2037 Weekend P.M. Peak Hour Action Action No Action Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Northwest Arena Queue Lengths Appendix C Parking Memorandum TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM chz*i: Northwest Arena Project - DRAFT Parking Study PREPARED FOR: City of Tukwila PREPARED BY: Brittney Horn/CH2M HILL Terry Yuen/CH2M HILL Tung Le/CH2M HILL COPIES: Roger Mason/CH2M HILL Rob Rodland/CH2M HILL DATE: July 6, 2015 1. Introduction The Northwest Arena is proposed to be a multi -purpose venue located in the City ofTukwila's Transit - Oriented Development (TOD) District. The proposed arena development (Figure 1) could host up to 230 events per year of various sizes and types. The arena could hold concert events with a maximum of 19,500 attendees or professional sport events with 17,500 to 18,500 attendees depending on the seating arrangements. Smaller events would also be held at the arena, including conventions or trade shows and corporate annual meetings. Most of these events would be held on weekday evenings and weekends. The Proposed Action would also include one or more parking structures located to the east of the arena. Arena employees would number from 200 to 400, including both permanent administrative employees and other event employees who may be temporary and/or part-time. FIGURE 1 Arena Site Plan JULY 2015 1 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - PARKING STUDY The purpose of this study is to determine the existing parking supply and demand in the project vicinity and provide future conditions analysis for the development of Northwest Arena parking options. Options include onsite parking garage(s) and surrounding offsite parking lots. Three event scenarios were evaluated as a part of this study. In the TOD District in the Tukwila Urban Center, it is required that *parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of usable floor area are provided for an Entertainment and Recreational use facility or as determined by the City Director per Tukwila Municipal Code 18.28.260. Under this requirement, up to 2,885 spaces would need to be provided based on current building design plans. Since general public parking or pay Tots are not available within the vicinity of the proposed arena site, a parking plan along with access criteria and findings of this study suggest that it would be necessary to provide adequate parking capacity for Northwest Arena event attendees. This study also addresses employee parking (Section 3.4). 2. Parking Supply 2.1 Data collection Existing on- and off-street parking supply and demand were surveyed within a 1/2-mile radius of the proposed arena site. Typically, half a mile is considered a reasonable and acceptable walking distance to reach an event destination. Parking supply data were collected using Google Earth and confirmed with a field survey. Parking supply and utilization data collection was conducted on February 18, 2015, during the weekday PM peak -hour of street traffic (5:00 — 7:00 p.m.) and on February 21, 2015, during the weekend midday peak of street traffic (1:00 — 3:00 p.m.). All marked parking spaces were surveyed along with any parking restrictions. The data were then analyzed to delineate parking within a 1/2-mile and 1/4-mile radius of the proposed arena location, and a 1/2-mile, and 1/4-mile walking distance based on existing available pedestrian facilities (the "walk shed"). The parking study area is shown on Figure 2. 2.2 Parking Utilization Parking supply and usage was analyzed within a 1/2-mile radius of the arena and 1/2-mile walk shed. Within 1/2 mile of the arena there are 9,175 off-street and 117 on -street parking spaces. Of these, 86 on -street spaces and 30 off-street parking spaces are unrestricted for public use. These unrestricted spaces are located alonklelson Place, longacres Way, 68th Ave S, and 65th Ave S. Within a 1/2-mile walk shed of the arena, however, there are approximately 3,080 off-street and 29 on -street parking spaces. Of these, only 30 off-street parking spaces and the on -street parking spaces are unrestricted for public use. The remaining spaces are restricted for private use. Parking survey data are provided in Appendix A. During the weekday afternoon peak, approximately 58 percent of public parking stalls located within the 1/2—mile radius were utilized, while 36 percent of privately owned parking stalls were used. During the weekend midday peak, public parking utilization was higher with 71 percent of public stalls in use, while privately owned parking space utilization decreased to 30 percent of private stalls. Within the 1/2-mile walk shed, 58 percent of public parking stalls were being used, while 42 percent of privately owned parking stalls were used during the weekday afternoon peak. During the weekend midday peak, 78 percent of public stalls were in use, while just 35 percent of private stalls were in use. 2.3 Parking Restrictions Most parking lots surveyed are privately owned Tots for business use only. These lots include the Starfire Soccer Complex, Boeing office locations, hotels, office parks, industrial warehouses, and a variety of commercial retail locations. Two on -street parking locations near the Green River Trail are restricted to park and recreational use. Both of these parking areas are located on 68th Ave 5, and the more northerly location has a 6-hour time restriction. JULY 2015 2 Figure 2 Parking Study Area Northwest Arena iimr 1/2-Mile Radius 1/4-Mile Walk Shed 1/2-Mile Walk Shed ( : Surveyed Parking Lot Q Project Location Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographic, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GI5 User Community, King County, WSDOT NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - PARKING STUDY 3. Parking Demand 3.1 Event Scenarios The multi -purpose arena would host a variety of events of different types and sizes and at various times. Three event scenarios were selected for this analysis representing the maximum amount of parking in sold -out conditions that are anticipated to occur for three different time -of -day peaks. Maximum parking demand was determined based on the average vehicle occupancy (AVO) and the maximum capacity of the event representing a sold -out event condition. For the purpose of this parking demand study, maximum parking capacity was analyzed to represent the "worst -case" parking conditions. Table 1 shows the various types of events and maximum expected parking demand for each time -of -day peak. Appendix B includes charts that show the proportion of assumed events by event type and by size, per year. Approximately 100 large events, 110 medium events, and 20 small events are assumed to take place each year. 3.2 Onsite Parking Availability Two onsite parking alternatives were analyzed based on current arena site plans: • Alternative 1 provides a 3,500-stall parking structure located to the east of the arena. The structure would have up to seven floors of parking and three lanes for entering and exiting. Access to this main garage would be provided from Longacres Way, Boeing's Longacres Drive, and Tukwila Station Access Road. • Alternative 2 includes the main garage plus an additional 1,000-stall VIP parking garage for use by VIP ticket holders. This garage would be located between the main parking garage and the arena, with primary access on S 156th Street. For each of the alternatives, additional surface lot parking is provided north of the VIP garage and maui gal -age. A 200-stall surface parking lot would be located north of the main garage with access throt gh the structure. North of S 156th Street, just east of the Hampton Inn, another lot with 400 stalls would%be aJaltable with access from S 156th Street. Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 were both included in the parking assessments for all three time -of -day scenarios, and offsite proposed parking was adjusted for each of the onsite parking alternatives. 3.3 Offsite Parking Availability Three offsite demand scenarios were evaluated to accommodate the range of events expected to occur at the proposed Northwest Arena. Each scenario proposes potential additional offsite parking locations to address the maximum parking spaces needed as described by Table 1. Parking arrangements and agreements with owners of the potential offsite parking locations are being negotiated. Total offsite spaces identified exceed the total demand of each demand scenario described below to assure the sold - out event parking conditions could be met. The offsite parking agreements would provide flexibility to scale parking up or down to adequately support event parking demand during a typical weekday, weekend, or holiday weekend. Parcels that could provide potential offsite parking are listed in Table F of Appendix A. 3.3.1 Demand Scenario 1 — Weekend/Weekday Evening Peak Hour Event Demand Scenario 1 is offsite parking locations for a weekday or weekend evening peak hour event. In the evening peak hours, retail and office parking lots are less utilized because businesses in the area are closing and employees have left for the day. Tukwila Station parking is also less than half full; It is anticipated that the maximum evening parking demand on a typical weekday or weekend would be approximately 7,075 stalls for a basketball league game. JULY 2015 4 ( / j f\ \ \ \ \ \�\ \ \/\f\ \f \ice/� �/\� /\\ �(\ \(\/\ \(\ \ 1/•\ \ \(1(\/\ \,\/`/C/CJCJCJC/CJ,�C/CJ�/./C�`,C J�/CJ�/C/ C,C/C/"C,C,�/�,�C\ ../,CJC/,JCJC�,,\/. NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT — PARKING STUDY TABLE 1 Proposed Action Total Vehicle Parking Demand Event Type Expected Attendance (persons) Weekday (Midday Event) Weekend (Midday Event) Weekday and Weekend (Evening Event) % Vehicle Trips AVo' Total Parking Demand % Vehicle Trips AVO' Total Parking Demand % Vehicle Trips AVpf Total Parking Demand Concert— Center Stage 19,500a N/A —weekend or evening event only 94% 3.0 6,110 90% 3.0 5,850 Concert— End Stage 14,000a N/A —weekend or evening event only 94% 3.0 4,390 90% 3.0 4,200 Basketball League Games 18,700a N/A —weekend or evening event only 89% 2.6 6,405 87% 2.3 7,075 Hockey League Games 17,400b N/A —weekend or evening event only 89% 2.6 5,960 87% 2.3 6,585 Special Sporting Event 18,700c N/A —weekend event only 89% 2.6 6,405 89% 2.6 6,405 Corporate Event 14,0000 90% 3.0 4,200 N/A —weekday event only 90% 3.0 4,200 Family Entertainment 15,000d N/A —weekend event only 94% 3.2 4,410 94% 3.2 4,410 Convention,Trade Show 10,300e 90% 2.2 4,215 94% 2.4 4,035 94% 2.4 4,035 Note: Shaded parking numbers represent the highest parking demand duringthe weekday and weekend events. a Maximum expected attendance based on site design provided by Project developer. b Special sports events may include tournaments, play-offs, and exhibitions with event seatingsimilarto that of a basketball game. c Corporate events may include speaker presentations and panel discussions with event seatingsimilarto that of an end -stage concert. d Source: Key Arena, 2015. Key Arena: A to Z Guide. http://www.keyarena.com/arena-information/a-to-z-guide. Accessed on May 18, 2015. e Source: Washington State Convention Center, 2015. http://www.wscc.com/. Accessed May 18, 2015. f AVO based on research of comparable arenas in the region. N/A = not applicable: event is not expected to occur during the time period. JULY 2015 5 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT - PARKING STUDY • Up to 3,830 spaces are expected to be available at offsite privately owned parking lots. This parking stall count includes 3,080 stalls within the 1/2-mile walk shed (of which 830 are within 1/4 mile of the arena), plus 900 spaces on two lots that are located outside of the 1/2-mile walk shed of the arena. IJ_these-lots are utilized, the Transportation Management Plan (TMP) would identify transportation arrangements between the parking lot and the arena. Although 250 of the offsite parking stalls are located on parcels acquired' by the RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC, other parking stall availability would require agreements to be created with the property owners to allow event parking. Under Alternative 2, the two Tots located outside the 1/2-mile walk shed may not be necessary due to the addition of the onsite VIP garage. In addition to the offsite parking lot locations mentioned above, it is assumed that up to 1,000 spaces would be provided through promotional packages at nearby hotels and/or travel tour companies as these packages are currently offered at many cities with major professional sports teams and concert events. The Port of Seattle ‘-ould;offer discount weekend event parking at the Sea-Tac Airport Terminal Direct garage. It is assumed that up to 500 parking stalls could also be available with discount vouchers. Demand Scenario 1 proposed parking locations and supply are shown in Table 2 and Figure 3. TABLE 2 Summary of Parking Availability and Demand per Scenario Parking Type Demand Scenario 1 Demand Scenario 2 Demand Scenario 3 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt 1 Alt. 2 Onsite Parking Spaces 3,500 4,500 3,500 4,500 3,500 4,500 Offsite Parking Spaces 4,150 3,150 2,830 2,080 850 850 Promotional Package ParkingSpacesa 1,000 1,000 500 500 0 0 Potential Total Parking Available 8,650 8,650 7,330 7,580 4,350 5,350 Estimated Maximum Parking Demand 7,075 7,075 6,405 6,405 4,215 4,215 Net Parking Capacity 1,575 1,575 425 675 135 1,135 Note: Detailed parking availability for each parking type and lot can be found in Table E located in Appendix A. a Based on research of promotions available at comparable arenas located regionally. Large events (with attendance in the range of 15,000 to 19,500 people) and medium events (approximately 10,000 to 15,000 attendees) would occur in the evening on both weekdays and weekends, typically starting at roughly 7:00 p.m. Of all events anticipated at the arena, approximately 46 percent (105 events) could require up to 7,075 parking stalls. 3.3.2 Demand Scenario 2 - Weekend Midday Event Demand Scenario 2 is offsite parking locations for a weekend midday event. For this scenario it is assumed that most retail parking lots are mostly full while the Tukwila Station and business parking lots are considered to be mostly empty. As presented in Table 1, the maximum parking demand for midday weekend event would be about 6,405 stalls fora typical center or end stage concert or special sporting event. About 250 offsite parking spaces would be available on properties already acquired by RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC. An additional 1,380 parking spaces would be available at privately owned offsite parking locations located within 1/2-mile walking distance from the arena. These parking locations would require agreements to be established with the current property owners. With the Alternative 2 VIP garage, offsite parking demand could be dropped by 750 to 1,000 parking spaces, reducing total offsite parking required to 1,480 stalls. i • • . • • ! • • JULY 2015 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Legend Parcel Status Acquired Negotiation Needed Parking Alternative 1 and 2 Parking Alternative 1 only VIP Garage Proposed Arena Site ru' 000000n ❑ 1/4-Mile Walkshed `42a000c0 �plu••� ■ 1/2-mile Walkshed ilimma —No- Pedestrian Routing Alternative 1 Summary Garage: Surrounding Promotions: Off -Site Lots: Total: 3,500 Spaces 1,000 Spaces 4,150 Spaces 8,650 Spaces Alternative 2 Summary Garage: 3,500 Spaces VIP Garage: 1,000 Spaces Surrounding Promotions: 1,000 Spaces Off -Site Lots: 3,150 Spaces Total: 8,650 Spaces Notes: Assumed up to 1000 additional parking spaces will be available at surrounding businesses as promotional packages with hotels and restaurants. Up to 400 parking spaces will be available for general otg toyee7 parking at the public parking garage located next to Renton CRT Hill. Port of Seattle offers discount weekend event parking at the SeaTac Airport Terminal Direct Parking Garage. Up to 500 parking stalls would be available with discount voucher. Parking lot boundaries are approximate, boundaries would be determined prior to project opening. N' Figure 3 Estimated Parking Plan for Demand Scenario 1. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT:- PARKING STUDY In addition to offsite parking lot locations mentioned, it is assumed that up to 500 spaces would be provided through promotional packages from surrounding hotels, tour packages, and nearby businesses. The Port of Seattle could offer discount weekend event parking at the Sea-Tac Airport Terminal Direct garage. It is assumed up to 500 parking stalls would also be available with discount vouchers. Proposed parking locations and supply for Demand Scenario 2 are shown in Table 2 and Figure 4. Events of all sizes would occur on a weekend day, beginning at various times throughout the day. Approximately 30 percent of all events (or about 70 events) would require up to 6,405 parking stalls. 3.3.3 Demand Scenario 3 - Weekday Midday Event Demand Scenario 3 is offsite parking locations for a weekday midday scheduled event. For this scenario it is assumed that most retail and business parking lots and are mostly full along with the Tukwila Station. Based on the event capacity and AVO, the maximum parking demand would be 4,215 stalls for a convention or trade show type event. As in the previous two scenarios, 250 offsite parking spaces would be available on property acquired by RLB Holdings Sports and Entertainment, LLC. No other offsite parking would be necessary to accommodate event parking demand. Demand Scenario 3 proposed parking locations and supply are shown in Table 2 and Figure 5. Weekday daytime events could include conventions, trade shows, corporate events, or family entertainment. Of all events anticipated at the arena, approximately 24 percent of events (55 events) could require up to 4,215 parking stalls. 3.4 Employee Parking The Northwest Arena is expected to have a maximum of 400 employees per event. Employees include administrative staff, maintenance staff, facility operators, ushers, ticket takers, security, cleaning, food services, police, parking, medical, ticket sellers, and retail services (Populous, email dated June 24, 2015). Employee parking would be available onsite north of 5.156th Street for up to 150 employees, or offsite at the public parking garage next to Renton City Hall with shuttle service to the arena. Parking for employees would be addressed in the TMP. 3.5 Parking Management Plan In addition to the parking structure(s) provided onsite at the arena, additional parking demand will need to be accommodated through mitigation. Event staff parking offsite and event day parking management would improve parking conditions at the arena for attendees. Agreements would be negotiated with nearby parking lots to provide additional offsite event parking. The TMP for the arena would include a Parking Management Plan, to be prepared prior to the opening of the Northwest Arena to address adequate parking supply and reduce demand for event parking. 3.6 Parking Ingress and Egress Under Alternative 2, two parking garages are planned on the arena site. The main garage is anticipated to have 3,500 available parking stalls while the VIP garage is proposed to have 1,000 parking spaces. The main parking garage entry and exit driveways are assumed to have three lanes each off of Longacres Way. The VIP garage is planned to have entry and exit points off of S 156th Street. Access to the main garage is expected from Longacres Way, Tukwila Access Road, and Boeing Access Road. Expected garage entry ingress routing is shown on Figure 6. At least one garage or exit Jane could serve Eeach direction of travel. Rates for vehicle ingress and egress at each of these lanes would vary based on the entry or exit strategy selected. JULY 2015 8 000000000000000000000000.0000000000000000000 Lmend Parcel Status Acquired Negotiation Needed Parking Alternative 1 and 2 111.1 Parking Alternative 1 only VIP Garage Proposed Arena Site FrzoizoB ❑ ❑ 1/4-Mile Walkshed Q❑❑❑❑dJ TEENER • ■ ■ 1/2-mile Walkshed Pedestrian Routing Alternative 1 Summary Garage: 3,500 Spaces Surrounding Promotions: 500 Spaces Off -Site Lots: 2,830 Spaces Total: 6,830 Spaces Alternative 2 Summary Garage: 3,500 Spaces VIP Garage: 1,000 Spaces Surrounding Promotions: 500 Spaces Off -Site Lots: 2,080 Spaces Total: 7,080 Spaces Notes: Assumed up to 500 additional parking spaces will be available at surrounding businesses as promotional packages with hotels and restaurants. Up to 400 parking spaces will be available for general or employee parking at the public parking garage located next to Renton City Hall. Port of Seattle offers discount weekend event parking at the SeaTac Airport Terminal Direct Parking Garage. Up to 500 parking stalls would be available with discount voucher. Parking lot boundaries are approximate,, boundaries would be determined prior to project opening. N Figure 4 Estimated Parking Plan for Demand Scenario 2 eeeeeeeeeeoee•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Legend Parcel, Status Acquired Negotiation Needed Parking Alternative 1 and 2 Parking Alternative 1 only VIP Garage Proposed Arena Site run 11/4-Mile Walkshed rm.. • ■ 1/2-mile Walkshed ---►� Pedestrian Routing Alternative 1 Summary Garage: 3,500 Spaces Surrounding Promotions: 0 Spaces Off -Site Lots: 850 Spaces Total: 4,350 Spaces Alternative 2 Summary Garage: 3,500 Spaces VIP Garage: 1,000 Spaces Surrounding Promotions: 0 Spaces Off -Site Lots: 850 Spaces Total: 5,350 Spaces Notes: Up to 400 parking spaces will be available for general or employee parking at the public parking garage located next to Renton City Hall. Port of Seattle offers discount weekend event parking at the • SeaTac Airport Terminal Direct Parking Garage. Up to 500 parking stalls would be available with discount voucher. 'Parking lot boundaries are approximate, boundaries would be determined prior to project opening. Figure,5 Estimated Parking Plan for Demand Scenario 3 Figure 6 Parking Garage Ingress Access Northwest Arena E.:!) �LJ I 0 135 270 540 Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT NORTHWEST ARENA PROJECT — PARKING STUDY Table 3 and Table 4 show the assumed rates of ingress and egress to the parking garage per lane. Up to 1,200 vehicles per lane are expected to be able to be serviced in one hour depending on the parking payment strategy employed. If two lanes are reversed inbound before the event or outbound after the event, then capacity will double. Traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network are addressed in the Transportation Technical Report. TABLE 3 Estimated Garage Entrance Rate Garage Entrance Strategy Entrance Rate (sec/veh)a Number of Vehicles Entering per Lane Per hour Per45 minutes Per40 minutes Per30 minutes Pay upon entry, with gate arm 10 360 270 240 180 Prepaid ticket with gate arm 6 600 450 400 300 Prepaid ticket, hand to attendant 4 900 675 600 450 Pay upon exit, no gate or attendant at exit 3 1,200 900 800 600 a Assumed rate per entrance strategy in vehicles per hour. Delays due to pedestrian crossings or roadway operations outside gates are not included. TMP will include traffic management personnel at garage access and critical intersections to improve roadway operations and minimize traffic backups. TABLE 4 Estimated Garage Exit Rate Garage Exit Strategy Exit Rate (sec/veh)a Number of Vehicles Exiting per Lane Per hour Per45 minutes Per40 minutes Per30 minutes Pay upon exit, with gate arm 10 360 270 240 180 Prepaid ticket with gate arm 6 600 450 400 300 Prepaid ticket, hand to attendant 4 900 675 600 450 Pay upon entry, no gate or attendant at exit 3 1,200 900 800 600 a Assumed rate per exitstrategy in vehicles per hour. Delays due to pedestrian crossings or roadway operations outside gates are not included. TMP will include traffic management personnel at garage access and critical intersections to improve roadway operations and minimize traffic backups. EA— new_overpass•is-Under_consi eration over the Union Pacific Railroad between S 156th Street and the main garage. This overpass would provide direct access to the fifth floor of the garage. To provide a worst -case analysis for this study, the overpass access was not considered. 4. Conclusion The Northwest Arena would hold events of different sizes with varying parking demands. Agreements would be established with nearby businesses to provide offsite parking in addition to the proposed onsite parking to adequately support the maximum anticipated parking demand for all event scenarios. Parking has been identified in excess of average demands for each scenario to accommodate extreme event cases such as increased holiday traffic and unique tournament games. JULY 2015 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Appendix A. Existing and Proposed Parking Supply Appendix A. Existing and Proposed Parking Supply TABLE A Off -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Radial Buffer Parking Area Analysis Period Parking Capacity (stalls) Parking Demand Percent Utilization Within %-Mile Radius of Proposed Arena Site 14 Weekday 85 10 12% Weekend 20 24% 15 Weekday 150 50 33% Weekend 70 47% 16 Weekday 305 90 30% Weekend 300 98% 24 Weekday 260 10 4% Weekend 0 0% 25 Weekday 70 0 0% Weekend 0 0% 26 Weekday 640 340 53% Weekend 110 17% 27 Weekday 25 10 40% Weekend 0 0% 28 Weekday 50 20 40% Weekend 10 20% 29 Weekday 10 10 100% Weekend 0 0% 30 Weekday 60 40 67% Weekend 50 83% 31 Weekday 155 100 65% Weekend 30 19% 32 Weekday 15 10 67% Weekend 0 0% 33 Weekday 10 10 100% Weekend 10 100% 34 Weekday 20 0 0% Weekend 0 0°% 35 Weekday 265 130 49% Weekend 170 64% 36 Weekday 205 100 49% Weekend 70 34% 41 Weekday 95 40 42% Weekend 40 42% JULY 2015 A-1 APPENDIX A TABLE A Off -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Radial Buffer 42 Weekday 310 60 19% Weekend 40 13% Total Weekday 2730 1030 38% Weekend 920 34% Within 1/2-Mile Radius of Proposed Arena Site 1 Weekday 160 160 100% Weekend 160 100% 2 Weekday 320 120 38% Weekend 130 41% 3 Weekday 120 50 42% Weekend 60 50% 4 Weekday 115 70 61% Weekend 10 9% 5 Weekday 150 40 27% Weekend 70 47% 6 Weekday 15 10 67% Weekend 10 67% 7 Weekday 240 120 50% Weekend 120 50% 8 Weekday 20 0 0% Weekend 10 50% 9 Weekday 10 0 0% Weekend 0 0% 10 Weekday 125 20 16% Weekend 10 8% 11 Weekday 25 20 80% Weekend 10 40°% 12 Weekday 60 10 17% Weekend 10 17% 13 Weekday 45 20 44% Weekend 20 44% 17 Weekday ffi 20 24% Weekend 10 12% 18 Weekday 70 10 14% Weekend 0 0% 20 Weekday 35 20 57% Weekend 10 29% 21 Weekday 800 110 14% Weekend 30 4% Weekday 30 10 33% JULY 2015 A-2 APPENDIX A TABLE A Off -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Radial Buffer 22 Weekend 10 33% 23 Weekday 700 130 19% Weekend 20 3% 37 Weekday 40 10 25% Weekend 10 25% 38 Weekday 35 10 29% Weekend 20 57% 39 Weekday 60 10 17% Weekend 10 17% 40 Weekday 40 10 25% Weekend 10 25% 43 Weekday 155 80 52% Weekend 60 39% 44 Weekday 105 50 48% Weekend 40 38% 45 Weekday 100 0 0°% Weekend 0 0% 46 Weekday 295 100 34% Weekend 10 3% 47 Weekday 25 0 0% Weekend 10 40% 48 Weekday 50 30 60% Weekend 10 20% 49 Weekday 425 200 47% Weekend 30 7% 50 Weekday 10 10 100% Weekend 10 100% 51 Weekday 20 10 50% Weekend 10 50% 52 Weekday 15 10 67% Weekend 10 67% 53 Weekday 15 10 67% Weekend 0 0% 54 Weekday 60 20 33% Weekend 20 33% 55 Weekday 30 20 67% Weekend 30 100% 56 Weekday 135 40 30% Weekend 30 22% 57 Weekday 165 60 36% Weekend 80 48% JULY 2015 A-3 APPENDIX A TABLE A Off -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Radial Buffer 58 Weekday 75 10 13% Weekend 10 13% 59 Weekday 35 0 0% Weekend 0 0% 60 Weekday 145 0 0% Weekend 0 0% 61 Weekday 85 10 12% Weekend 10 12% 62 Weekday 20 10 50% Weekend 10 50% 63 Weekday 40 10 25% Weekend 10 25% 64 Weekday 35 20 57% Weekend 20 57% 64 Weekday 35 20 57% Weekend 20 57% 66 Weekday 15 10 67% Weekend 10 67% 67 Weekday 35 10 29% Weekend 10 29% 68 Weekday 25 10 40% Weekend 10 40% 69 Weekday 25 10 40% Weekend 10 40% 70 Weekday 455 320 70% Weekend 280 62% 71 Weekday 355 70 20% Weekend 120 34% 73 Weekday 160 60 38% Weekend 70 44% Total Weekday 6445 2190 34% Weekend 1690 26% Notes: Weekday parking demand survey was conducted February 18, 2015, between5:00 PM and 7:00 PM. Weekend parking demand survey was conducted February 21, 2015, between 1:00 PM and 3:00 PM. Parking lot ID numbers provided in Figure Al of this appendix. JULY 2015 A-4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 APPENDIX A TABLE B On -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Radial Buffer On -Street Parking Area Analysis Period Parking Capacity (stalls) Parking Demand Percent Utilization Within 1/4-Mile Radius of Proposed Arena Site K Weekday 8 8 100% Weekend 4 50% L Weekday 15 4 27% Weekend 15 100% Total Weekday 23 12 52% Weekend 19 83% - Within 1/2-Mile Walking Distance of Proposed Arena Site A Weekday 13 8 62% Weekend 8 •62% B Weekday 7 7 , . ', 100% Weekend (7 100% C Weekday 5 3 60% Weekend 4• 80% D Weekday 17 / 15 88% Weekend 15 88% E Weekday 5 • 1 20% Weekend 1 20% F Weekday 3 0 0% Weekend 0 0% G Weekday 3. 0 0% Weekend: 0 0% H Weekday 7 1 14% 'Weekend, 1 14% 1 • Weekday 18 1 6% Weekend 3 17% 1 Weekday 16 0 0% Weekend 0 0% Total'Weekday `. 94 36 38% Weekend 39 41% Notes:. > Weekday parking demand survey was conducted February 18, 2015, between 5:00 PM and 7:00 PM. Weekend parking demand survey was conducted February 21, 2015, between 1:00 PM and 3:00 PM. Parking lot ID numbers provided in Figure Al of this appendix. JULY 2015 A-5 APPENDIX A TABLE C Off -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Walk Shed Parking Area Analysis Period Parking Capacity (stalls) Parking Demand Percent Utilization Within 1/4-Mile Walking Distance of Proposed Arena Site 29 Weekday 10 10 100% Weekend 0 0% 30 Weekday 60 40 67% Weekend 50 83% 31 Weekday 155 100 65% Weekend 30 19% 32 Weekday 15 10 67% Weekend 0 0% 33 Weekday 10 10 100% Weekend 10 100% 34 Weekday 20 0 0% Weekend 0 0% 35 Weekday 265 130 49% Weekend 170 64% Total Weekday 535 300 56% Weekend 260 49% Within 1/2-Mile Walking Distance of Proposed Arena Site 4 Weekday 115 70 61% Weekend 10 9% 6 Weekday 15 10 67% Weekend 10 67% 13 Weekday 45 20 44% Weekend 20 44% 14 Weekday 85 10 12% Weekend 20 24% 15 Weekday 150 50 33% Weekend 70 47% 16 Weekday 305 90 30% Weekend 300 98% 18 Weekday 70 10 14% Weekend 0 0% 26 Weekday 640 340 53% Weekend 110 17% 27 Weekday 25 10 40% Weekend 0 0% 28 Weekday 50 20 40% Weekend 10 20% JULY 2015 A-6 APPENDIX A TABLE C Off -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Walk Shed 36 Weekday 205 100 49% Weekend 70 34% 37 Weekday 40 10 25% Weekend 10 25% 38 Weekday 35 10 293/0 Weekend 20 57% 39 Weekday 60 10 17% Weekend 10 17% 40 Weekday 40 10 25% Weekend 10 25% 41 Weekday 95 40 42% Weekend 40 42% 42 Weekday 310 60 19% Weekend 40 13% 43 Weekday 155 80 52% Weekend 60 39% 44 Weekday 105 50 48% Weekend 40 38% Total Weekday 2545 1000 39% Weekend 850 33% Notes: Weekday parking demand survey was conducted February 18, 2015, between 5:00 PM and 7:00 PM. Weekend parking demand survey was conducted February 21, 2015, between 1:00 PM and 3:00 PM. Parking lot ID numbers provided in Figure Al of this appendix. JULY 2015 A-7 APPENDIX A TABLE D On -Street Existing Parking Supply and Demand Summary by Walk Shed On -Street Parking Area Analysis Period Parking Capacity (stalls) Parking Demand Percent Utilization Within 1/4-Mile Walking Distance of Proposed Arena Site K Weekday 8 8 100% Weekend 4 50% L Weekday 15 4 27% Weekend 15 100% Total Weekday 23 12 52% Weekend 19 83% Within 1/2-Mile Walking Distance of Proposed Arena Site F Weekday 3 0 0% Weekend 0 0% G Weekday 3 0 0% Weekend 0 0% Total Weekday 6 0 0% Weekend 0 0% Notes: Weekday parking demand survey was conducted February 18, 2015, between 5:00 PM and 7:00 PM. Weekend parking demand survey was conducted February 21, 2015, between 1:00 PM and 3:00 PM. Parking lot ID numbers provided on Figure Al of this appendix. JULY 2015 A-8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 APPENDIX A TABLE E Proposed Parking Spaces by Location Lot ID Demand Scenario 1 Demand Scenario 2 Demand Scenario 3 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Onsite Parking (stalls) 1 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 2 - 1,000 - 1,000 - 1,000 4 400 400 400 400 400 400 5 200 200 200 200 200 200 Offsite Parking (stalls) 3 250 250 250 250 250 6 250 250 - - - - 7 400 - - - - - 8 600 - - - - _ 9 750 750 750 - - - 10 250 250 - - - '�- 11 130 130 130 130 ,, > 12 100 100 100 100 , - - 15 200 200 200 200 16 50 50 S0 50 s - - 17 150 150 150 150. - - 18 400 400 400 400 \ - - 19 200 200 200 200 *" Promotional Package Parking (stalls) 1,000 1,000`\ 500 500 - - Total (stalls) 8,650 r` 8,650 7,130 7,580 4,350 5,350 - = parking lot ID not included in demand scenario JULY 2015 A-9 APPENDIX A TABLE F Offsite Parcels Requiring Negotiation for Use Lot Number Panel number Taxpayer name Parcel address Jurisdiction Zip code 2 0005800023 2014 MEYERS COMMERCIAL PROP 15660 NELSON PL TUKWILA 98055 2 0005800027 T1 UNISON SITE MANAGEMENT No address available. TUKWILA 2 '2423049088 BOEING COMPANY THE 15470 NELSON PL TUKWILA 98055 6 0886700010 BOEING COMPANY THE No address available. RENTON 6 0886700020 BOEING COMPANY THE No address available. RENTON 6 0886700030 BOEING COMPANY THE No address available. RENTON 6 2423049086 PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC 1901 SW 16TH ST RENTON 98055 9 0886700050 BOEING COMPANY THE 2101 LONGACRES D RENTON R SW 10 0005800020 CPSRTA (SOUND TRANSIT) No address available. TUKWILA 11 0005800024 KOAR-SEATAC PARTNERS LP 15920 WEST VALLEY HWY TUKWILA 98188 12 0005800005 CSM CORP 16038 WEST VALLEY HWY TUKWILA 98188 15 0005800030 STANFORDTUKWILA HOTEL CORP 15901 WEST VALLEY HWY TUKWILA 98188 16 0005800015 EXTENDED STAY HOTELS 15635 WEST VALLEY HWY TUKWILA 98188 17 2423049063 FAMILY FUN CENTERS TUKWILA 7300 FUN CENTER WAY TUKWILA 98168 18 0005800008 PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC 7437 S 158TH ST TUKWILA 98055 18 0005800012 PUGET WESTERN INC 15643 WEST VALLEY HWY TUKWILA 98055 JULY 2015 A-10 OOO000OCOO00000000O000OOO00000000OOOO000000 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••• NOTES Figure Al Parking Lot Identification Numbers North west Arena • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • • M • • • osici'd\ Appendix B Proportion of Events, by Type and by Size, Per Year • ✓ / J a Basketball League Game o Special Sporting Event ® Center Stage Concert • Conventions/Trade Shows o Large Event c Medium Event c Small Event o NHL End Stage Concert Family Entertainment • Corporate Events Figure B1 Proportion of Events, By Type, Per Year Northwest Arena Figure B2 Proportion of Events, By Size, Per Year Northwest Arena E Er "g'' CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS U O 16 The study area for evaluating vehicular and non -motorized potential transportation impacts is bounded 17 by Interstate 5 (1-5) to the west, SR 167 to the east, 1-405 to the north, and South 180th Street to the 18 south. North of 1-405, the transportation study area also includes Interurban Avenue South to the 1-5 C) 19 interchange. Figure 2.5-1 shows the site and transportation study area. This area was selected as the O 20 transportation study area because of the potential for probable significant impacts on the 21 transportation system within the area. 0 1 2.5 Transportation `; 2 The purpose of the transportation analysis is to determine the impacts of the Proposed Action on ✓ 3 nearby transportation facilities, including roads, non -motorized facilities, transit, and freight. Additional 4 information on the methods used for the analysis, the existing conditions and the impact analysis results 5 are provided in the Transportation Technical Report in Appendix C prepared for the Proposed Action. Ci 6 2.5.1 Study Area and Methods 7 2.5.1.1 Study Area (l 8 The Proposed Action site is generally situated between State Route (SR) 181 (West Valley Highway) to • 9 the west and the BNSF Railway railroad tracks to the east. The site is south of Interstate 405 (1-405) and 10 north of Longacres Way. Primary access to the Proposed Action site will be provided via SR 181 at • 11 multiple intersections including S 156th Street, Longacres Way, and Strander Boulevard (with future 12 extension to the east). Additional access from the south is proposed to be provided via the Sounder 13 Station Access Road from SW 27th Street, which connects with Oakesdale Avenue SW to the east and 14 with the future extension of Strander Boulevard to the west. Access from the east will be provided via 15 Longacres Drive connecting to the east terminus of Longacres Way at the BNSF underpass. 0 22 In addition, an inventory of existing public and private parking spaces is included in this report. For this 23 parking survey, all parking spaces within 0.5 mile radius around the Proposed Action site were counted. 0 24 2.5.1.2 Methods C) 25 To establish baseline conditions against which potential changes associated with the Proposed Action 26 could be compared, intersections and corridors likely to be significantly impacted were selected and 27 included within the study area. Analyses were conducted for the year of opening (2017) and the 20-year 28 future horizon (2037).Study intersections and corridors are shown on Figure 2.5-2. 29 The weekday p.m. peak analysis time period was selected because it captures the end -of -day commute, 30 which is generally representative of the worst traffic condition of the day and anticipates capturing 31 those attendees arriving for the most frequently occurring 7 p.m. start time weekday events 32 (professional sports). The weekday peak hour is 4:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m and the weekend peak hour is J 33 1:45 p.m. to 2:45. Historic p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections were provided by 34 the City of Tukwila for 2009 and the City of Renton for 2008 to 2014. These data were adjusted to the 0 35 existing year using a conservative average annual growth rate of 1 to 2 percent. Additional traffic data 36 were collected midweek in February 2015 at study intersections on SR 167 (including ramp terminals at r ▪ 37 the SW 43rd Street interchange) between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to supplement peak -hour intersection • 38 turning movement counts provided by the cities. 0 39 Holiday season traffic volumes were generally higher for longer time periods of time in December, 40 reflecting the trend that holiday shoppers begin to arrive earlier in the day and leave later in the 41 afternoon during the peak season. Although daily traffic volumes are higher in December, traffic 42 volumes occurring during the typical peak hour of street traffic (1:45 p.m. to 2:45 p.m.) were relatively 43 comparable. Holiday weekend traffic occurring systemwide during the analysis p.m. peak hour was 44 generally found to be about 5 percent greater than the February weekend afternoon peak -hour traffic 45 volumes. Because holiday weekend traffic is not substantially greater than typical weekend traffic during ri JULY 2015 2-1 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 5'?149TN> Figure 2.5-1 Transportation Study Area Northwest Arena Q Project Location Major Roadway ti l l l Rail Line ! City Boundary Park and Trail Waterbody Feet O0 850 00 3,400 Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, ONES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT • ..re,.n 5:194TH•ST-• - ;Renton •S-188TH•ST--1 -5 190TH-ST-. Kent •5192NDST-- _ 5•194TH5T -S190TH ST- S192ND ST S-12TH-5 515 Sf18iH-ST 5{{§9THa51r • 5.25TH ST S 5 6'THi,ST iSS" .\,t' Sti S�6. 1 e\--s.AST ST - 5,32ND,PL •, 3b1.H ST? S-37TH.„ g• - 0 537THrPL S'38TH GT MY- 5 5TH•PL 1 5 47THST 5 48TH•5T 549" ST Mai Inset B tTS-50322.17) S 50TH-ST—:, c 3 5s5T ST I J =yy92ND•ST 11 5 196T1-41 ti,. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V 0 0 0 0 ("0 0 0 �0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39.T IST tr T'rlril3ite . i.'errt IS 1%411 ST ..., to ✓�,..,..�, S 37.t•H-sr . oe ;— --.,_ Sl37THiPL S 138TH CT S 177•TH, ST 5 4JTH-ST SA8TH •ST " S49A44ST B 0TH S 5ST � j S SOTH-ST J S''S'1GT.ST Lutes, r- r Figure 2.5-2 Study Area Intersections and Corridors Northwest Arena LJ Project Location Major Roadway Hill Rail Line L 2 City Boundary Park and Trail Waterbody 0 Study Intersection _Study Corridor Or� I 0 625 1,250 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 the analysis peak period, the weekend p.m. peak hour traffic analysis is assumed to reasonably 2 represent impacts of the Proposed Action during the holiday shopping/retail season. 3 Appendix A of the Transportation Technical Report includes raw traffic count data and information on 4 peak -hour analysis volume development. 5 Traffic operations can generally be described by six level of service (LOS) grades, which categorize 6 operating conditions at an intersection based on the average vehicle delay time in seconds. LOS 7 classifications are given a letter designation from LOS A to LOS F. LOS A 8 generally represents ideal operating conditions with little to no delay and 9 where movements are not influenced by other vehicles on the roadway. 10 LOS F typically represents the poorest operating conditions, including high 11 delays and extreme congestion. The text box at right shows the LOS 12 categories in reference to average delay time criteria for signalized 13 intersections. 14 Traffic operations LOS standards are designated according to jurisdiction. 15 WSDOT has set the standard for intersections the 1-5, 1-405, and SR 167 16 ramps at LOS D (WSDOT, 2010) and SR 181 has a standard of LOS E with 17 mitigation (PSRC, 2015).For study intersections on local roadways within 18 the City of Tukwila, the level of service standard is LOS E, while the 19 standard for City of Renton intersections is LOS D. 20 Within the Southcenter Mall/TUC area, the City of Tukwila identifies 21 "corridor LOS" operating thresholds for select roadways that support the 22 23 24 25 26 27 Level The Manual level the signalized grades of Service 2010 Highway Capacity defines intersection of service as a function of average vehicle delay. For intersections, LOS are: LOS Delay (seconds) A _510 B >10and 520 C >20and 535 D > 35 and 5 55 E >55and _580 F > 80 retail core. The corridor LOS is based on the averaged control delay at multiple intersections along that corridor, and evaluated against the delay thresholds shown above. Corridors analyzed in this report include SR 181/West Valley Highway between the 1-405 southbound ramp terminal and Strander Boulevard (corridor threshold of LOS E), and Strander Boulevard between Southcenter Parkway and SR 181/West Valley Highway (corridor threshold of LOS F with a weighted average intersection delay of no more than 120 seconds) (City of Tukwila, 2014a). 28 Additional detail on these methods, including a table of the study intersections and corridors, 29 jurisdictions, and adopted LOS mobility standards for this study are shown in Transportation Technical 30 Report. 31 2.5.2 Affected Environment 32 This section describes the existing roadway network, intersection and corridor operations, freeway 33 operations, transit network, freight and non -transit rail network, non -motorized network, parking and 34 safety. 35 2.5.2.1 Roadway Network 36 The study area is accessed by most out-of-town vehicles via 1-5, 1-405, SR 167, and SR 181. 1-5 is a major 37 north -south interstate freeway in Washington that connects the study area with Seattle to the north 38 and Federal Way/Tacoma to the south. 1-405 is a major north -south interstate freeway that bypasses 39 Seattle on the east side of Lake Washington and provides a connection between Tukwila and Eastside 40 communities such as Bellevue, Kirkland, and Bothell. SR 167 is a north -south freeway that connects 41 Tukwila with communities to the south such as Kent, Auburn, and Tacoma. All three of these freeways 42 are designated as HSS and are part of the National Highway System (NHS). 43 SR 181 is a north -south principal arterial, also known as West Valley Highway, that parallels the Green 44 River between Tukwila and Kent as it travels through the study area. It is a regionally significant state 45 highway and also part of the NHS. S 180th Street is an east -west roadway that forms the southern 46 boundary of the study area and provides access between Tukwila and Renton. West of SR 181, S 180th JULY 2015 2-4 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Street is designated as a minor arterial by the City while east of SR 181, this roadway is a principal 2 arterial. Interurban Avenue S, between 1-5 and 1-405, is also designated as a principal arterial. 3 Other arterials in the study area, both major and minor, are shown on Figure 2.5-2 and include: 4 • Southcenter Boulevard 5 • SW Grady Way 6 • Tukwila Parkway 7 • Southcenter Parkway 8 • Strander Boulevard 9 Longacres Way is a short (about 0.25-mile-long) local road that provides an east -west connection 10 between SR 181 and the private north -south road along the east BNSF railroad right-of-way that 11 connects to Longacres Drive SW to the north. Longacres Way passes beneath both the UPRR and the 12 BNSF railroads and intersects with the Tukwila Station Access Road, a private road that provides access 13 to the Tukwila Station parking lot and extends south and then east to SW 27th Street. Additional 14 information on these facilities in provided in the Transportation Technical Report. 15 2.5.2.2 Intersection and Corridor Operations 16 All but two study intersections operate at LOS D or better during the weekday and weekend p.m. 17 analysis peaks. The intersections of SR 167 at SW Grady Way and SR 181 at S 180th Street currently 18 operate at LOS E during the weekday p.m. peak hour. SR 167 at SW Grady Way is located about 1.25 19 miles northeast of the Proposed Action site, while SR 181 at S 180th Street is about 1.3 miles south of 20 the site. The Transportation Technical Report includes intersection LOS 21 results for the weekday and weekend p.m. peak hour conditions. 22 Under current conditions, both corridors operate at LOS C during the 23 analysis peak hours. 24 2.5.2.3 Freeway Operations 25 Peak hour freeway operations on 1-405 were assessed at two 26 screenline locations to understand the existing conditions during the 27 weekday p.m. peak hour and the weekend p.m. peak hour near the 28 Proposed Arena. Table 2.5-1 shows the existing p.m. weekday and 29 weekend peak hour volumes at these two screenlines and present the 30 volume to capacity (v/c) ratio for each screenline. Vic ratio is the ratio 31 of the vehicle demand compared to the roadway capacity, used as the 32 performance measure to assess travel conditions on the regional 33 facilities in the study area. The existing v/c ratio is consistent with the 34 current PSRC travel demand model. TABLE 2.5-1 Existing Conditions (2015) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary A screenline is an imaginary line 'across a section of freeways or arterials. These screenlines are used to provide a snapshot of how much volume is entering or No. Corridor Weekday p.m. Vehicles Weekend p.m. Vehicles Screenline Volume V/C Ratio Screenline Volume V/C Ratio 1 I-405 at Andover Park W 10,375 0.82 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 10,720 0.85 10,380 0.82 11,135 0.88 V/C = volume to capacity ratio. 35 2.5.2.4 Transit Network 36 Public transportation is available to the Proposed Action site via bus and commuter rail. The closest 37 transit facility to the Proposed Action is Tukwila Station, which is located south of Longacres Way along JULY 2015 1� 2-5 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 the BNSF Railway tracks about 500 feet from the southeast corner of the arena plaza. The station is 2 served by the Sound Transit Sounder train, King County Metro bus transit, and Amtrak Cascades rail. The 3 station has a number of shelters for the various modes of transportation, entry drives for passenger 4 vehicles and buses and provides surface parking for 390 transit riders. The Tukwila Transit Center is 5 located at Andover Park West/Baker Boulevard, about half a mile from the arena plaza, and is served by 6 King County Metro bus transit. 7 The Sounder train operates between Lakewood and Seattle. Afternoon peak service includes eight 8 southbound departures that stop at the Tukwila Station between about 3:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. Two 9 afternoon northbound trains leave Tacoma before 5:00 p.m. and arrive in Seattle by 6:00 p.m. 10 King County Metro routes that serve the Tukwila Station include: 11 • RapidRide F: provides service between Renton and Burien 12 • Route 154: provides service between Tukwila and the south Seattle industrial district 13 King County Metro routes that serve the Tukwila Transit Center include: 14 • RapdRide F 15 • Route 128: provides service between Tukwila and West Seattle 16 • Route 150: provides service between Auburn/Kent and Seattle 17 • Route 156: provides service between Tukwila and Highline College 18 • Route 906: provides service between Tukwila and Fairwood (Renton) 19 The Southcenter Subarea Plan (City of Tukwila, 2014b) identifies the portion of Southcenter near the 20 Proposed Action as a Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood. To encourage transit service, 21 the subarea plan states that upgraded_ bus. service_ is planned to be extended from the Tukwila Transit 22 Center on Andover Park West eastward towards Tukwila Station. 23 2.5.2.5 Freight Rail Network 24 Heavy haul rail lines within the study area include two Class 1 rail lines 25 operated by BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). These rail 26 lines are part of the Seattle Subdivision (for both lines) and run parallel 27 in the north -south direction throughout the study area corridor. The 28 UPRR line has one track that is located to the west of the BNSF, which 29 has two tracks within the vicinity of the Proposed Action. 30 According to the Washington State Rail Plan (WSDOT, 2014), there are 31 about 46 trains per day operating on the BNSF line and about 10 trains 32 per day on the UPRR line through the Proposed Action study 33 area. Passenger trains (Amtrak and Sound Transit) operate on the BNSF 34 rail line. Both BNSF and UPRR lines have grade -separated crossings for all active 35 Proposed Action. 36 State roadway truck freight corridors within the study area include 1-5, 1-405, SR 181, and SR 167. These 37 corridors are designated as T-1 corridors, meaning they carry more than 10 million tons of freight per 38 year. Freight truck traffic on SR 181 accounts for 8 percent of all traffic on this road. Grady Way between 39 Tukwila and Renton is also designated as a T-1 truck corridor. Oakesdale Avenue SW and S 180th Street 40 (between SR 181 and the railroad) are designated as T-2 truck corridors, which carry between 4 and 10 41 million tons of freight annually. 42 2.5.2.6 Non -Motorized Network 43 Principal arterials, minor arterials, and local streets within the study area generally have continuous 44 sidewalks on at least one side of te-streigure 2.5-3 shows the locations of sidewalks in the study 45 area. These sidewalks are genera jl y 8 to 12 feet wide. Class 1 Rail Lines Class 1 rail lines are defined by the Surface Transportation Board as having annual carrier operating revenues of $433 million or more. The Seattle Subdivision is the portion of the rail network that connects Seattle with Portland, Oregon. JULY 2015 roadways near the 2-6 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 tliAtikAt �Nnenrc« :. Figure 2.5-3 Existing Non -Motorized Facilities Northwest Arena Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT CHAPTER 2, ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 The Southcenter Subarea Plan (City of Tukwila, 2014b) indicates that publiclnvestmenfs will serve as 2 catalysts for the redevelopment of the TOD Neighborhood where the Proposed Action is located. / 3 Improvements planned by the City of Tukwila in the study area include a new pedestrian bridge over the 4 Green River and frontage improvements along Baker Boulevard that would provide another way for 5 pedestrians from areas near the Proposed Action to access the central part of the Southcenter 6 Mall/TUC. 7 There are no dedicated bicycle facilities (i.e, bicycle lanes or bicycle sharrows) on roads within 1,000 feet 8 of the Proposed Action, however, two multimodal, shared -use trails that are part of the King County 9 regional trails system are located within and near the Proposed Action area. The Interurban Trail is a 14- 10 mile north -south trail that connects King and Pierce Counties and travels through the Proposed Action 11 area. Within the Proposed Action area the Interurban Trail is located within the Puget Sound Energy 12 right-of-way. The trail crosses under 1-405 to the north until it crosses the Green River and terminates at 13 the Green River Trail. The Green River Trail is a nearly 20-mile north -south trail that follows the 14 Duwamish and Green Rivers between Seattle and Kent. In Tukwila, the Green River Trail is located on 15 the west bank of the Green River from S 180th Street to just north of 1-405, where it intersects with the 16 Interurban Trail. In addition to the two King County regional trails there is another grade separated �� 17 multimodal shared -use trail that connects Tukwila Station to north side of SW 27th Street in Renton. Vv 18 Figure 5 shows the non -motorized facilities within the transportation study area. rP\C:.� 't 19 2.5.2.7 Parking 20 The supply and availability of parking and transit options are important factors to be considered in' 21 evaluating the effects of proposed actions on circulation and transportation systems. The location, 22 availability, price, type, and ease of access to parking and transit options can influence attendance 23 choices, the mode of transportation used by customers, circulation by vehicles and pedestrians, and 24 impacts on nearby businesses. K-parking study technicarrnenlbranduTn has been prepared for the 25 Proposed Action that provides additional details (refer to Appendix C; Parking Memo of the 26 Transportation Technical Report). Transit is addressed in section 1.1.2.4. 27 Figure 2.5-4 shows the study area used to assess parking near the Proposed Action. From the Proposed 28 Action site, all public and private parking opportunities within al/2-mile radius of the proposed arena 29 were considered for data collection. Due to physical barriers in the study area, such as the Green River 30 and 1-405, direct non -motorized connections between the Proposed Action and nearby parking locations 31 are limited, and overcoming these barriers often results in the actual walking distance between 32 locations increasing to more than 1/2-mile. To account for actual walking distances, a smaller walkshed 33 was identified based on sidewalk or trail availability. Parking locations within al/2-mile walking distance 34 of the arena, which includes the planned pedestrian bridge over the Green River, are included in the 35 walk shed that was evaluated for the Proposed Action. 36 General-purpose public parking in the area is limited; there are about 3,080 off-street and 29 on -street 37 parking spaces within the %2-mile walk shed. Of these, only 30 off-street parking spaces and the on -street 38 parking spaces are unrestricted for public use. During the weekday afternoon peak, about 58 percent of 39 public parking stalls were being used, while 42 percent of privately owned parking stalls were used. 40 During the weekend midday peak, public parking utilization is higher with 78 percent of public stalls in 41 use, while privately owned parking space utilization is lower with just 35 percent of private stalls in use. 42 Because most parking opportunities in the area are privately owned, these parking spaces are not 43 expected to be generally available for arena use without agreements with property owners to utilize 44 them for events. 45 JULY 2015 2-8 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [/0 0 0 0 SW Figure 2.5-4 Parking Study Area Northwest Arena 1/4-Mile Radius J 1/2-Mile Radius 1/4-Mile Walk Shed 1/2-Mile Walk Shed Surveyed Parking Lot Project Location Feet 0 m 0 325 650 1,300 Data Sources: Source: Esri, 0igitaIG lobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus D5, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 2.5.2.8 Roadway Safety Performance 2 Crash data records for vehicle incidents were collected for a 5-year period from 2009 to 2013 from 3 WSDOT for most of the study intersections in the project area, including ramp terminals. The safety 4 analysis focused on intersection -related crashes, which are those that occurred at an intersection or 5 those that occur outside an intersection but are caused by intersection operations. 6 Crash rates were calculated for the study area intersections as the number of crashes per million 7 entering vehicles (MEV). The intersection of Interurban Avenue and SW Grady Way had the highest 8 frequency of total crashes (134) and the highest intersection crash rate of 1.52 crashes per MEV within 9 the study period. WSDOT maintains a list of "intersection analysis locations" that have been identified 10 and prioritized for need of safety improvements based on the number and severity of crashes during a 11 5-year period and speed limits of roads approaching an intersection. None of the intersections in the 12 study area have been identified as intersection analysis locations and thus are not in need of safety 13 improvements. 14 2.5.3 Impacts and Mitigation 15 2.5.3.1 No Action Alternative 16 All funded (and reasonably assumed funded) projects in the study area that are expected to be 17 complete by the future year of opening (2017) or the horizon year (2037) were included in the No Action 18 transportation analysis. These projects are shown on Figure 2.5-5. 19 Projected traffic volumes for 2017 used a conservative positive growth rate of 1 percent per year. This 20 conservative rate was applied to both the weekday p.m. peak hour volumes and the weekend peak hour 21 volumes. For 2037, p.m. peak hour are based on traffic projections for the year 2031 Proposed 22 Action/High Intensity alternative documented in Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan EIS (City of Tukwila, 23 2014a), which also assumed a one percent per year growth rate. 24 Future year p.m. peak hour weekend volumes were estimated by applying a "weekday -to -weekend" 25 factor (based on existing proportions) to the future weekday intersection turning movement volumes. 26 Where weekday -to -weekend proportions were unavailable, an average growth rate of 1 percent per 27 year was applied to the 2017 weekend peak turning movement volumes to estimate 2037 background 28 analysis volumes. 29 Traffic Operations Analysis 30 By 2017, two study intersections are expected to operate worse than their LOS standard during the 31 weekday p.m. peak hour with the No Action Alternative. BV$20 , background traffic volume increases 32 would result in seven intersections in the weekday p.m. peak and one intersection in the weekend p.m. 33 peak operating worse than their LOS standard. Mostrfit. ese sere interseGtionstwouldloperatetateOS 34 iritliMierage delays of greater than 80 seconds per vehicle. See Figures 2.5-6 and 2.5-7 for study area 35 intersection LOS results. Additional details on intersection operations is provided in the Transportation 36 Technical Report. 37 In 2017, the two study corridors would operate at LOS C during the weekday and weekend analysis peak 38 hours. By 2037, corridor operations on SR 181 and on Strander Boulevard during the weekday p.m. peak 39 would worsen to LOS E under the No Action Alternative. During the weekend p.m. peak hour, corridor 40 operations on Strander Boulevard would be expected to worsen to LOS D by the year 2037. 41 42 In the No Action Alternative, queues in the year 2017 in the northbound and southbound direction on 43 SR 181 are generally expected to remain similar to existing conditions. Queues at the 1-405 freeway 44 terminal intersections are not expected to affect mainline freeway operations in either direction during 45 the weekday or the weekend peak hour. JULY 2015 2-10 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS ) 0000000t 0 )000000 00000000000000000 00000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 4 TH 15OtH ST Q C7-71 No Action Projects 1. West Valley Highway/S 156th Street 2. Andover Park West 3. Tukwila Urban Center pedestrian/bicycle bridge 4. Tukwila Urban Center transit center 5. Strander Boulevard extension 6. Lind Avenue SW SP 7TFi. 5 `1$TH ST S 2l' S 26TH ST 177TH ST 5 43R0 Figure 2.5-5 No Action Projects Northwest Arena J Project Location • Project Intersection Project Corridor Feet ri ( 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographies, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, King County, WSDOT vt S -5 ISZND 7 t 5152ND PL O 0 iJ9ER-BtVfl TRILAND DR Gre.en S 194TH ST ;fiver •frail mite - ifent S 139TH ST •en ten Pal TRECK D 5 1•87TH ST h SW 39TH ST SW 39TH ST -•-3W 41ST-Si JI S 37TH ST S 37TH PL S 38TH CT 5 177TH ST S 45TH PL S471HST 67 S 48TH ST 5 49TH 51 5 SOTH 5T 5 50TH ST 5 51-ST el SiN 29TH 5T 4 Pa 3•dT�l+-S•T-.�-• tT S 5TH ST S6THST Bur'n_,r,rQ`g ' 5 15TH ST any Lulte r trees Park S17THSr'^ • 5 18TH 5T Lower flat Hill S 19T Park Talbot t i f1e:;ervvir 5, Ll • 523 Tit S (eci7l S 25TH ST S 26TH ST S� 5 S 31ST ST PL Figure 2.5-6 Intersection Level of Service No Action 2017 Northwest Arena Q Project Location Intersection LOS • LOS A-D LOS E LOS F No Action Weekend No Action Weekday Feet 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: , King County, WSOOT S 196TH PL H PL HCT ST 1.518 OSTCO DR V 39TH ST 181) SW 19TH ST 3w-4T-51 AN-EYER-Biro S 139TH ST i 1 BAKER BLVt 44: TRILAND D 0 O TRECK Dfi. N N w LL, > > a a N 0 Z N >to to Green S 194TH ST River Trail it - Rent 5 45TH PL S 47TH ST SW 39TH ST S 50TH ST 29T+1 ST t Pa 4TH-ST__..t 44 SSTNST cc 5 15TH ST L!Iire T;trttet Park N 0 z 7, S 17TH SI{915J N 5.18TH ST LoW r dill S 19T Park Talbot- rl Reservoir r PT t167) S 25TH ST S 26TH 5T T. Sti S 31ST ST Figure 2.5-7 PL Intersection Level of Service No Action 2037 Northwest Arena 0 Project Location Intersection LOS 411) LOS A-D LOS E LOS F No Action Weekday O0 625 1,250 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL No Action Weekend Feet 2,500 H.Pt H•CT 51- CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Freeway Operations 2 Freeway operations in 2017 during the weekday p.m. peak hour and the weekend p.m. peak hour are 3 expected to be similar to existing conditions (Table 2.5-2). By the year 2037, assuming a conservative 4 average annual growth rate of 1 percent and no improvements to freeway infrastructure, traffic 5 volumes on 1-405 would increase and congestion would occur during the weekday p.m. peak hour and 6 weekend peak hour. TABLE 2.5-2 No Action Alternative Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary No. Corridor Weekday p.m. Weekend p.m. Screenline Volume Screenline Volume Year (vehicles) V/c Ratio (vehicles) V/c Ratio 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 2017 10,585 0.74 10,590 0.74 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2017 10,940 0.76 11,360 0.79 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 2037 12,915 0.90 12,925 0.90 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2037 13,345 0.93 13,860 0.96 7 Transit Network 8 It was assumed that the existing transit network would not change with the No Action Alternative. King 9 County Metro may revise routes or frequency of service in the study area, but no changes to bus routes 10 in the study area are known at this time. Sound Transit is expected to add two additional Sounder trains 11 in the future under their current agreement with BNSF, although the specific timeframe is unknown at 12 this time. 13 Freight Rail 14 Through an agreement with Sound Transit, BNSF is beginning construction this summer on a third track 15 that will provide increased capacity for the Tukwila Station. A northbound track will be installed to the 16 east of the existing track. 17 Non -Motorized 18 Under the No Action Alternative, a pedestrian bridge will be constructed over the Green River south of 19 Longacres Way, providing a new non -motorized connection between the Tukwila Station and Tukwila 20 Transit Center. The project includes sidewalk improvements from the east pedestrian bridge landing at 21 SR 181 north along the west side to the intersection with Longacres Way. No other changes to the trail 22 system or other pedestrian facilities are proposed in this area, and no impacts to the non -motorized 23 network would occur as a result of the No Action Alternative. 24 Parking 25 No changes to parking are proposed under the No Action Alternative. Impacts would depend upon the 26 type and rate of development and new development under the Subarea Plan. 27 Roadway Safety Performance 28 With the No Action Alternative, safety conditions and crash rates at the study intersections would likely 29 remain similar to existing conditions as no changes to study intersection lane geometry or control would 30 occur. Changes to the roadway network, such as the completion of installed medians and turn lanes on 31 Andover Parkway W, could improve corridor safety by physically separating traffic in opposing 32 directions. JULY 2015 2-14 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 0t10( (10000004! 000( 0 000I.i00001_. (.. 0000000000000000 /1 1 CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS i� 1 2.5.3.2 Alternative 1 2 The Proposed Action will generate a range in the number of vehicular trips based on the day, size, and 3 type of event or activity being hosted. Traditional trip generation methodologies (such as using specific 4 land use codes and trip generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE] Trip 5 Generation Manual [ITE, 2012]) would not reasonably represent actual trips generated by this unique 6 facility. Therefore, Proposed Action trip generation is based on research of comparable arena complexes 7 and on the maximum attendance of a particular event on a weekday and on a weekend to provide a i 8 worst -case scenario. Vehicle trip generation estimates are adjusted to reflect attendee arrival mode 9 split, carpooling or ridesharing strategies, and peak -hour attendee arrival trends. Potential events that 10 would occur at the proposed multi -purpose arena are shown in Table 2.5-3 along with appropriate trip- 11 generation adjustment factors. 12 For weekday sports or civic events at the Proposed Action, between 87 and 90 percent ofattendees-are Q 13 etOcted-to arrive at the venue via automobile; The remaining attendees would arrive by a different 14 mode, such as transit, on foot, or by bicycle. The arrival mode percentages shown in Table 2.5-3 are 15 based on mode split information for similarly -sized multiuse arena venues around the country 16 (Environmental Sciences Associates, 2014; City of Seattle, 2013). 17 For example, the Sacramento Entertainment and Sports Center (SESC) is a similarly -sized sports and J 18 multiuse arena located adjacent to a major interstate freeway. For weekday sports events, an 0 19 automobile mode split of 90 percent was assumed for event attendees. Due to similarities in size, use, (, 20 and access, it is reasonable to assume that the arrival mode split at the proposed Project could be 21 similar for weekday sports or civic events. 22 For weekend events, between 8.9.and.9 ercent of attendees is assumed to arrive via automobile. J 23 These percentages are slightly higher due to reduced weekend transit service, increased likelihood of 24 home -based trips, and greater opportunities to combine automobile trips with other purposes. 25 Average vehicle occupancy (AVO) is estimated to vary between two and three people per vehicle for the 26 different events expected at the Project arena. For sporting events at the proposed Project arena, an 27 average vehicle occupancy of 2.3 people per vehicle is assumed for weekday events (based on vehicle 28 occupancy for similarly -sized multiuse arenas), while a slightly higher AVO of 2.6 people per vehicle is 1 29 assumed for weekend sports events. 0 30 For concerts and family -oriented entertainment events, the average vehicle occupancy could be higher 31 due to the likelihood that these types of events are typically attended by families with children or by 32 multiple individuals attending an event as a group. 33 Based on research of major sports events in the Seattle area (City of Seattle, 2013), about 30 percent of 34 weekday sports event traffic arrives at the venue between one and two hours before the scheduled r; 35 event start time. Assuming a typical sports event start time of 7:00 p.m., roughly 30 percent of event r1 36 traffic would arrive between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., which generally coincides with the analysis p.m. 37 peak hour of street traffic (4:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.). r1 38 On a weekend day, the peak of street traffic in the study area occurs from 1:45 p.m. to 2:45 p.m. Based 39 on published schedules for various types of events that could occur at the Proposed Action on a 40 Saturday, weekend events (such as basketball games, hockey games, and concerts) most commonly 41 begin in the evening between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. While the majority of event -related trips would 42 likely arrive at the Proposed Action site within the two or three hour prior to these events, a 43 conservative analysis assumes that up to 35 percent of event traffic will arrive to the area during the 44 weekend p.m. peak hour of street traffic. 45 Based on the population distribution within the Puget Sound area as reported by the United States 46 Census 2010, vehicle trips generated by the Proposed Action are assumed to arrive at the site via the 1 47 following percentages: JULY 2015 2-15 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS f 1 CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 • 45 percent to/from the north (Seattle, Lynnwood, Everett) 2 • 25 percent to/from the east (Bellevue, Renton, Kirkland, Issaquah) 3 • 5 percent from the west (Seatac, Burien) 4 • 25 percent from the south (Tacoma, Federal Way, Kent, Auburn) 5 Traffic Operation Analysis 6 During the weekday p.m. peak hour, about 2,000 vehicle trips would be expected to arrive in the study 7 area, while over 2,100 vehicle trips would be heading to the Proposed arena during the weekend p.m. 8 peak hour. To evaluate traffic impacts of Alternative 1, vehicle trips generated by the most conservative 9 event were distributed through the study network and added to the background No Action Alternative 10 traffic volumes at each study intersection. 11 In 2017, two study intersections are expected to operate worse than their LOS standard in the weekday 12 p.m. peak with Alternative 1. Both intersections are on SW Grady Way (at SR 167 and at Oakesdale 13 Avenue SW) and would exceed their weekday p.m. peak LOS standard under the No Action Alternative 14 and Alternatives 1 and 2. The weekday p.m. peak delay at SR 167 would increase by 5 seconds compared 15 to the No Action Alternative, while the delay for the same time period at Oakesdale Avenue SW would 16 increase by 8 seconds. The weekend p.m. peak LOS standard would still be met at both locations. 17 With Alternative 1 project trips, the intersection of SR 181 at Longacres Way would operate with an 18 average vehicle delay of 77 seconds per vehicle, compared to less than 10 seconds per vehicle with the 19 No Action Alternative. While this intersection would experience increases in vehicle delay, it is still 20 expected to meet the LOS standard of LOS E. 21 By 2037, 11 study intersections in the weekday p.m. peak and six intersections in the weekend p.m. 22 peak would operate worse than their LOS standard. These 11 intersections are: 23 • Interurban Avenue/1-405 Southbound Off -/On -ramps 24 • Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way 25 • SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps 26 • SR 181/ Strander Boulevard 27 • SR 167/SW Grady Way 28 • 61st Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard 29 • 61st Avenue S/Tukwila Parkway 30 • 66th Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard 31 • Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off -ramp 32 • SR 181/S 180th Street 33 • Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way 34 Of these intersections, 7 of these also fail to meet the LOS with the No Action, but the delay would 35 increase with the Proposed Action. The intersections that meet the weekday p.m. peak LOS under the 36 No Action but would fail to meet the LOS with the Prosed Project are in bold on the list above. 37 The greatest increase in delay would occur at SR 181 and Strander Boulevard, where the average vehicle 38 delay would increase from 99 seconds to 197 seconds in the weekday p.m. peak hour and from 43 39 seconds to 129 second in the weekend p.m. peak hour. 40 See Figures 2.5-8 through 2.5-11 for study area intersection LOS results. Additional detail on intersection 41 operations is available in the Transportation Technical Report. JULY 2015 2-16 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS TABLE 2.5-3 Project Trip Generation Assumptions Type of Event Maximum Attendance (persons) Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Weekend P.M. Peak Hour % Vehicles AVO Total Parking Demand Peak -Hour Arrival Demandf Trips to Project Trips from Project Total Peak- Hour Trips % Vehicles AVO Total Parking Demand Peak -Hour Arrival Demands Trips to Project Trips from Project Total Peak - Hour Trips Concert -Center Stage 19,500a 90 3.0 5,850 30% 1,650 105 1,755 94 3.0 6,110 20% 1,150 75 1,225 Basketball League Games 18,700a 87 2.3 7,075 30% 2,000 130 2,130 89 2.6 6,405 35% 2,110 135 2,245 National Hockey League (NHL) 17,400a 87 2.3 6,585 30% 1,855 120 1,975 89 2.6 5,960 35% 1,960 125 2,085 Special Sports Event (tournaments, etc.) 18,700b 87 2.3 7,075 30% 2,000 130 2,130 89 2.6 6,405 35% 2,105 135 2,240 Corporate Event (presentations, etc.) 14,000c 90 3.0 4,200 35% 90 1,380 1,470 Event expected to occur on weekdays only Concert - End Stage 14,000a 90 3.0 4,200 30% 1,185 75 1,260 94 3.0 4,390 20% 825 55 880 Family Entertainment (ice shows, etc.) 15,000d 90 3.2 4,220 30% 1,190 75 1,265 94 3.2 4,410 35% 1,450 95 1,545 Convention (trade shows, expos, etc.) 10,300e 90 2.2 4,215 35% 90 1,385 1,475 94 2.4 4,035 25% 950 60 1,010 a Maximum expected attendance based on Proposed Action site design. b Special sports events may include tournaments, play-offs, and exhibitions with event seating similar to that of a basketball game. Corporate events may include speaker presentations and panel discussions with even seating similar to that of an end -stage concert. d Source: Key Arena, 2015. e Source: Washington State Convention Center, 2015. f Attendees expected to arrive at the Proposed Action site or Southcenter Mall/TUC area during the weekday p.m. peak hour of traffic. 8 Attendees expected to arrive at the Proposed Action site or Southcenter Mall/TUC area during the weekend p.m. peak hour of traffic. JULY 2015 2-17 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS 00000000000000000G0000000000000000000000000 r 00 • W`I',V* Abitioolit 7• 7-1 < •4'0 fir •,"`!! `.. . -N2's t Z • 1- 111 OSTCO DR 00 cr - 4 cca. 0 00 iv 39TH ST a •,r 0. 0 • cn r .' > E.L.1 > .).....i < < cn x 00 , .., 00 1-- ... . . . „. •4. Grerqt S 1.94TH ST Piver Tr,ii I ltr- Kent S 19CTI I ST 10 5 187TH ST SW 13°0 T 00 S 37TH sr fi S 37TH PL S 38TH CT S 177TH ST S 45TH PL 47TH ST S 48TH ST S 49TH ST S 50TH ST S 50TH STB S S1 ST tr •••••••••=•••••amemmmaser,416+4+ameaaera N 4,Zr 1 S 187 130TH 5 192ND S 6TH ST Buot,ti S 15TH ST iv 00 .r•Z;t.reet Pork 00 00 00 2 • S 17TH S S 18TH ST Luw,r; Hill hiol; S 19T H45T Talbot' nire Pe3.?,-Toir PoiC 00 c•-) • S 23RD,ST • ilictliA10. • . f S 25TN ST • S 26TH ST S.0 -V<'s 1.1 c, ,c‘k 51 S 31ST ST Figure 2.5-8 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 1 2017 Northwest Arena I=1 Project Location Intersection LOS Om 0 625 1,250 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL H PL H CT r �.wfro n TRILAND D kive:r Trrril..';(rer. Kent S 1 CTlt ST 5 139TH ST BAKER BLV TRECK D OSTCO OR W 39TH ST S 187TH ST w "-m r.irx>ar t: irk S 177TH ST 5 45TH PL 5 47TH ST W 41ST 30TH S. 192ND S 1STH ST 9' r:.Yt Park T S17THS S18THST a SW 39TH ST SW 39TH ST 5 50TH ST B Pm S fV 29TH ST 1'ulbutr. Pc2;ervroir i+rrrl; S 23I{.DST 7'ect..11, Psrrtt S 25TH ST 5 19TH. ST S 26TH ST SS S1,1�� (S S� 5 31ST ST Figure 2.5-9 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 1 2037 Northwest Arena Q Project Location Intersection L05 LOS A-D LOS E LOS F Alternative 1 Weekend Alternative 1 Weekday Feet 0 625 1,250 2,500 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT 5 196TH PL PL H Ply H CT T 00000000G00000000GOCG0000000G00000000000GCC ISLIVU I S 152ND PL w 1 !fro fl, Grmrt S 194TH ST i±ivr;r 7'raii in Kvnt S 139TH ST w e OSTCO DR S 187TH ST w S 177TH ST S 45TH PL 5 47TH ST 5 48TH ST 5 49TH ST S 50TH ST S 51ST CT "'7W`2'77H. SW 39TH ST 5 50TH ST B SW 41ST 90TH S' 192ND 9TH ST N 29TH ST S STH ST S 6TH ST G rrsb,t fin"p B 9 5 15TH ST ;Lr € t r'erti 5 17TH 5 S 18TH ST S 19TH ST h w > 5 23RD-ST- a y N Tea..c!< .`aer14 5 2T151. 5TH ST S 26TH ST SS S,ASS C� S lYf S 31ST ST Figure 2.5-10 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 2 2017 Northwest Arena Q Project Location Intersection LOS LOS A-D LOS E LOS F Alternative 2 Weekend Alternative 2 Weekday O 0 625 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL Feet 2,500 PL H PL H CT 5T TRILAND D 5 139TH ST BAKER 8LV TRECK D OSTCO DR N 39TH ST 4.C.' w w �� g ¢ a to -�i r 5 Gr.,!,,' fl S 194TH ST to 5P j/i>.:r : 'rrlti •=1.1. 5 187TH ST z z O »a SW SW 39TH ST SW^43AD6 S 38TH CT 5 177TH ST S 45TH PL 5 47TH ST 5 48TH ST 5 49TH ST S 50TH ST S 50TH ST S 51ST CT .r, 1:6TI I GT 90TH S 192ND 9TH ST SN 29TH ST 3RD C 5 7TH =T S 5TH ST 5 6TH ST LiQr'rte! 7 9 ' ft ¢ t^ z O 5 15TH ST I- i 5 17TH 5 S 18TH ST 5 1971 5T 1':tti,c,! ?lift', i'. c'�Brvo/r Pft=0f. S23R 02STT 57 i4rt.rc• = f rf=, F=trt4 to 5 25TH ST S 26TH ST 5;( 511j‘kLt 5 1a%s 5 315T ST Figure 2.5-11 Intersection Level of Service Alternative 2 2037 Northwest Arena Q Project Location Intersection LOS LOS A-D LOS E LOS F Alternative 2 Weekday Alternative 2 Weekend 0 625 1,250 Data Sources: , King County, WSDOT S 196TH PL Feet 2,500 PL H P HC ST O0000ecoococooeo coueoceecooe0o000o 000000o CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 With Alternative 1, the study corridors would operate within their designated mobility standards in 2 2017. In 2037, the SR 181 corridor would operate at LOS F with Alternative 1 during the weekday p.m. 3 peak, which is worse than the LOS standard of LOS E. The Strander Boulevard corridor, while expected to 4 operate at LOS F, is compliant with the City of Tukwila standards with an average corridor delay time of 5 81 seconds. 6 Peak hour freeway operations on 1-405 with Alternative 1 are shown in Table 2.5-4. Traffic volumes in 7 the p.m. peak hour are expected to increase by about 600 vehicles at Andover Park W, and by 300 8 vehicles at Longacres Drive SW. TABLE 2.5-4 Action Alternative 1 Conditions (2017 and 2037) Peak -Hour Freeway Analysis Summary Weekday p.m. Vehicles Weekend p.m. Vehicles No. Corridor Year Screenline Volume V/C Ratio Screenline Volume V/C Ratio 1 1-405 at Andover Park W 2017 11,135 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2017 11,240 1 I-405 at Andover Park W 2037 13,465 2 1-405 at Longacres Drive SW 2037 13,645 0.77 0.78 0.94 0.95 11,170 11,670 13,505 14,170 0.78 0.81 0.94 0.98 V/C = volume to capacity ratio 9 10 Freight and Non -Transit Rail 11 There would be no impacts to freight and non -transit rail. No new rail crossings are proposed and 12 operation of the arena would not affect operation of either the BNSF or UPRR rail for freight. 13 Transit 14 Approximately 2,400 attendees would use transit to access events using current and planned transit. 15 This is the total transit ridership for a maximum capacity event. Of these 2,400 transit riders, it is 16 expected that 78 percent would come from the north (primarily from Seattle), 10 percent would come 17 from the west, 6 percent would come from the east, and 6 percent would come from the south based 18 upon the available transit access to the Proposed Action site. 19 From the north, it is assumed that about 1,700 attendees would use the Sounder south line to access 20 weekday evening events. The existing service could accommodate these passengers with an average of 21 200 additional passengers per train. In addition, Sound Transit is expected to add up to two additional 22 Sounder train runs by 2017, which would provide additional southbound service to the arena on 23 weekdays and provide additional capacity in both 2017 and 2037. 24 Shuttles_buses could be provided by King County Metro or private providers following the events to 25 return these passengers to King Street Station in Seattle. Based on a crush -load capacity (seated capacity 26 and standing room capacity) of 80 passengers per bus, it is estimated that 22 buses would be necessary 27 to transport these attendees. Theses buses could be staged along the east side of SR 181, south of 28 Longacres Way. 29 Other attendees from the north could use Sound Transit Link light rail and Metro Rapid Ride F line or 30 Route 150 from Seattle and points between Seattle and Tukwila to access the arena. Although frequency 31 on these routes is reduced later at night, sufficient capacity would exist due to lower ridership at this 32 time (9 to 10 pm). JULY 2015 2-23 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS r r 1 1 For weekend events, the percentage of attendees arriving by car is assumed to increase to 89 percent, 2 reducing the total number of attendees using transit from about 2,400 to about 2,000. Bus routes r, 3 assumed to provide service during the week would also provide service on the weekends, with the 4 exception of the southbound Sounder train, which does not operate on weekends. Without Sounder 5 service on weekends, a larger number of transit riders would be using King County Metro routes and 6 there would not be sufficient capacity on these routes for all bus riders. With an existing maximum 7 capacity of about 1,200 bus riders during the day and evening for arriving at events and about 700 at r 8 night for leaving events. Table 2.5-5 shows the service changes proposed to accommodate these riders. ` J r� TABLE 2.5-5 r " Proposed Weekend Transit Service Changes Weekend Day Service (Pre -event) Weekend Night Service (Post -event) r1 Proposed Proposed % 1 Route Current Frequency Frequency Current Frequency Frequency r� RRF RapidRide F West bound 15 6 30 6 / RRF RapidRide F East- bound 15 10 30 10 f1 150 To Kent/Auburn and Seattle 15 15 30 15 / 156 To Des Moines/Highline College 60 30 60 30 9 By increasing the frequency of routes serving this area, capacity on these routes during the day and 10 night could increase to about 2,100 and would be sufficient to handle the projected number of riders. Of c; 11 these riders, it is assumed about 40 percent would come from the north using Link light rail to Tukwila 7 12 and then transferring to RapidRide F or Route 150, and the remaining riders would come from south, f� 13 west and east with about 20 percent each. These riders would use the RapidRide F and Routes 128, 150 14 and 156. No changes are proposed to Route 128. L, 15 Parking `J 16 In 2017, access to the main parking garage would be via Longacres Way, Longacres Drivee, and Tukwila 17 Station Access Road. By 2037 the extension of Strander Boulevard would be complete and access to the 18 parking garage from SR 181 would be at Strander Boulevard. From eastbound Strander Boulevard, /� 19 vehicles access the parking garage would continue north on the Tukwila Station Access Road or 20 Longacres Drive to the garage entrance. Longacres Way would be closed for about 3 hours prior to .i 21 events, but open after each event starts to allow egress out of the main parking garage. r ~ 22 Section 1.1.2.7 describes the availability of public and private parking in the 1/2 mile walkshed. Table u 23 2.5-6 shows where planned parking would occur and that there is more than sufficient capacity to �J 24 accommodate the parking demand for hockey or basketball league events. Additional information is /1 25 provided in the Transportation Technical Report and the Northwest Arena Parking Memo (see Appendix 26 B). 27 Use of about 3,000 of these parking spaces require an agreement with property owners of these parking 28 lots. These negotiations are currently underway. r u 29 A typical weekday or weekend evening sports event would employ up to 400 individuals (Populous, F 30 2015). There would be onsite employee parking near the Proposed Action, and some employees would 31 be expected to park offsite at prearranged parking lots and be shuttled to the site prior to the start of an r1 32 event. Employees would be encouraged to use transit or non -motorized methods of travel. r JULY 2015 2-24 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS f1 CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Table 2.5-6 Summary of Parking Availability per Scenario Parking Type Projected Parking Alternative 1 Alternative 2 On -Site Parking Spaces 3,500 4,500 Off -Site Parking Spaces 3,830 2,830 Promotional Package Parking Spaces at Hotels 1,000 1,000 Potential Total Parking Available 8,330 8,330 Estimate Maximum Parking Demand 7,075 7,075 Detailed parking availability for each parking type and lot can be found in Table B located in Appendix A of the Transportation Technical Report. 1 2 Non -Motorized 3 Pedestrian traffic in this area would continue to be low except before and after events. Figure 2.5-12 4 shows the pedestrian flows going to and from the area and how facilities would accommodate them. 5 The addition of a 16-foot wide sidewalk on the north side of Longacres Way between_SR,181 and the 6 parkinkgarage, a 16 tO 24-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the arena, along SR 181, and 7 sky ridges from the parking,garage to the plaza would,accommodate projected-rnumbers-of pedestraans 8 before and after events„All proposed parking west of SR 181 can be reached via existing sidewalks, and 9 transit riders would need to cross the proposed pedestrian bridge over the Green River and walk along 10 ,akerBoulevard to access the Tukwila Transit 11 The parking garage, which could be used by up to 9,100 attendees at an event (weekend events with a 12 full garage and 2.6 people per car), would be accessed via the two pedestrian bridges and the sidewalks 13 on Longacres Way, which would accommodate all of the attendees needing to access the garage within 14 an hour after an event. The sidewalk on Longacres Way would also be used to access other parking 15 located east of the arena as well as the Tukwila Station. Bicycles may also use these routes to get to 16 various locations, but it is assumed that most bicycle traffic will use the Interurban Trail, as discussed 17 below. 18 Attendees and employees may use the Interurban Trail to access some events, although it is not 19 expected to be a primary mode of access for attendees. The trail would be used for access from some 20 parking locations. The public plaza would require prescreening of users prior to events, but users of the 21 trail could still access this area because the public plaza would be open to both attendees and the 22 general public. When prescreening is required, trail event bypass routes would be provided and would 23 include the use of Longacres Way and S 156th Street between SR 181 and the trail. Depending on 24 conditions and the number of pedestrians in the area bicyclists may need to dismount and walk their 25 bicycles through the bypass route. For those traveling through the area to destinations further north 26 and south, there is the option to also use the Green River Trail to bypass events. There are connections 27 to the Green River Trail to the south by crossing SR 181 at Strander Boulevard, and to the north the 28 Interurban Trail intersects with the Green River Trail. The Interurban Trail between S 156h Street and 29 Longacres Way would reopen shortly after events begin and would remain open during and after events, 30 although users may still choose to avoid the arena during these times if crowds are present. 31 JULY 2015 2-25 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS • 1.4., m cy „a r �• F�j 4 _. �S'' ,41 Figure 2.5-12 Pedestrian Trip Distribution Northwest Arena Estimated Pedestrian Volume and Trip Distribution for a sold out 17,500 capacity event t Feet O i 1 0 70 140 280 Data Sander Source: Esd, DigitaiGbbe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographies, CNESIAirbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogriid, [GN, tGP swisstopo, and the GIS'User Community, King County, WSOOT • ay CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Road Safety Performance 2 Under Alternative 1, traffic volumes and nonmotorized activity within the study area, especially adjacent 3 to the Proposed Action, would increase during the peak hour on weekdays and weekends. This would 4 increase the potential for conflicts between vehicles and between motorized and nonmotorized modes, 5 but would not be expected to affect safety conditions within the study area because measures including 6 a Transportation Management Plan would be developed to safely move vehicular and non -motorized 7 traffic. 8 Alternative 1 would include the addition of sidewalks and street lighting along the north side of 9 Longacres Way to accommodate the increase in pedestrians, and separate them from vehicles entering 10 or exiting the proposed site. A wider and continuous sidewalk would also be provided on the east side of 11 SR 181 between Longacres Way and S 156th Street. 12 2.5.3.3 Alternative 2 13 The Proposed Action trip generation and distribution (including mode split, AVO, and attendee arrival 14 patterns) for Alternative 2 is identical to that of Alternative 1. 15 Access to the main parking garage would be the same as Alternative 1 expect the Strander Boulevard 16 access from the south would be completed prior to 2037. Alternative 2 also includes a 1,000-space VIP 17 parking garage. Access to the VIP garage would be via S 156th Street. The number of vehicles heading 18 eastbound on S 156th Street from SR 181 or from 1-405 would be greater with Alternative 2, compared 19 to the No Action Alternative or Alternative 1. 20 Traffic Operation Analysis 21 With Alternative 2, traffic operations in the year of opening and the future horizon year would be very 22 similar to operations with Alternative 1 at most study intersections. In 2017, differences in traffic 23 operations would occur primarily at the intersections of SR 181 at Longacres Way and SR 181 at S 156th 24 Street. Vehicles would access the VIP garage at the intersection at S 156th Street. Vehicles access the 25 general purpose garage would use the intersection at Longacres Way to access onsite event parking. 26 By increasing the number of access options, vehicles would be distributed to both Longacres Way and to 27 S 156" Street. Compared to Alternative 1, fewer vehicles would use the signalized intersection at 28 Longacres Way, while more vehicles would use the signalized intersection at S 156' Street. Increased 29 vehicle demand at S 156" Street would result in slightly higher average vehicle delay times, compared to 30 the No Action Alternative and Alternative 1 in 2017 and in 2037. 31 In 2037, a similar effect on the primary access intersection of SR 181 and Strander Boulevard would 32 occur, but the Strander Boulevard extension would be completed prior to 2037. A portion of the vehicle 33 trips destined for the VIP parking garage would be distributed to S 156th Street, which could relieve 34 some of the vehicle demand on offsite parking locations. 35 Each of the intersections that exceed their LOS standard in Alternative 1 are also expected to exceed the 36 standards with Alternative 2. Three intersections would operate differently than Alternative 1, however: 37 • SR 181 and the 1-405 northbound on and off -ramps would operate at LOS E and have additional 6 38 seconds of delay relative to Alternative 1 or an additional 32 seconds of delay relative to the No 39 Action Alternative. 40 • 181 and Strander Boulevard would operate better than under Alternative 1, although it would still 41 be worse than the No Action Alternative. This intersection fails under all three alternatives. JULY 2015 2-27 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 • SR 181 and Longacres Way would also operate better under Alternative 2 than under Alternative 1, 2 but would still change from LOS A to C relative to the No Action Alternative. 3 Corridor operating conditions with Alternative 2 are generally better than Alternative 1 because vehicle 4 demand for on -site parking is distributed to multiple intersections, rather than being concentrated at 5 Longacres Way (in 2017) or Strander Boulevard (in 2037) as it is with Alternative 1. All corridors would 6 meet the designated LOS standard in the year of opening. By the horizon year 2037, SR 181 would 7 operate at LOS F in the weekday p.m. peak hour, similar to Alternative 1. 8 Peak hour freeway operations on 1-405 would be the same under Alternative 2 as Alternative 1. The 9 differences between the Action alternatives does not affect the regional vehicle trip distribution on the 10 interstate or state freeway network because vehicle routing to on -site and off -site parking destinations 11 is accommodated on the local street system only. 12 Freight Rail 13 There would be no impacts to freight and non -transit rail. No new rail crossings are proposed and 14 operation of the arena would not affect operation of either the BNSF or UPRR rail for freight. 15 Transit 16 The transit impacts under Alternative 2 would be the same as under Alternative 1. 17 Parking 18 Access to the general purpose on -site parking garage under Alternative 2 is identical to access with 19 Alternative 1. Access to the VIP parking garage would be via the intersection of SR 181 at South 156th 20 Street. Vehicles destined to the VIP parking garage would be able to turn right or left from either 21 direction of SR 181, or would continue straight through the intersection from the 1-405 northbound 22 freeway off -ramp. 23 The addition of the VIP garage would reduce the amount of off -site parking needed and it is assumed 24 that the two parking areas greater than a 1/2 mile from the arena would not be needed. The number of 25 event employees associated with Alternative 2 is identical to the employees required for Alternative 1 26 and parking would be the same. 27 Non -Motorized 28 Pedestrian circulation would be similar to Alternative 1, including use of the Interurban Trail. Under 29 Alternative 2, the portion of the Interurban Trail located between 1-405 and Longacres Way would be 30 relocated to the east. The relocated trail would be located west of the UPRR railroad with east -west 31 connections to the existing trail south of 1-405 and at Longacres Way. 32 Roadway Safety Performance 33 Alternative 2 would result in an increase in traffic volumes and nonmotorized activity within the study 34 area, especially adjacent to the Proposed Action, on both weekday and weekend peak hours. This 35 increase in activity would result in more potential conflicts between vehicles and between motorized 36 and nonmotorized modes, but would not be expected to affect safety conditions within the study area. 37 Similar to Alternative 1, Alternative 2 would include the addition of sidewalks and street lighting along 38 the north side of Longacres Way to accommodate the increase in pedestrians and separate them from 39 vehicles entering or exiting the arena site. A wider and continuous sidewalk would also be provided on 40 the east side of SR 181 between Longacres Way and S 156th Street. JULY 2015 2-28 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS \ CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 2.5.3.4 Operational Mitigation f. / • / 2 This section addresses a number of potential mitigation measures that could be considered by the arena 3 operator to help reduce and mitigate transportation -related impacts. Two primary types of 4 transportation mitigation measures are considered in this section: permanent physical improvements 5 and operational or programmatic measures that can be documented in the IMP. In combination, the 6 programmatic measures and physical improvements would provide certainty and the flexibility 7 necessary to mitigate event -generated transportation impacts. Mitigation measures would be the same 8 for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. 9 Physical Improvements 10 The proposed physical improvements for project mitigation could consist of roadway, sidewalk, traffic, 11 and parking improvements. The initial list of proposed physical mitigations improvements are 12 summarized below. 13 Two intersections are expected to exceed their LOS threshold in 2017 under Alternative 1 and 14 Alternative 2 in the weekday p.m. or weekend p.m. peak hour. For each intersection, mitigation is 15 proposed as described below. 16 • SR 167/SW Grady Way: Potential mitigation includes modifying the signal phases on the 17 northbound, southbound, and eastbound approaches. These approaches are currently operating 18 with protected -only left -turns, but allowing permissive -protected phasing could improve average 19 vehicle delay by approximately 10 seconds. This improvement would result in the intersection 20 operating at LOS E with an average delay of 61 seconds, which is better than the No Action 21 Alternative. 22 • Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way: Modifying the eastbound and westbound approaches to 23 allow permissive -protected left -turn phasing would improve operations to LOS D with an average 24 vehicle delay of 51 seconds, which is better than the No Action Alternative (LOS E, average delay of 25 57 seconds). 26 By the year 2037 eleven intersections would be expected to exceed their LOS threshold with Alternative 27 1 in either the weekday or weekend p.m. peak hour. In addition to the potential mitigation described, 28 manual intersection control (with off -duty law enforcement personnel) would likely be required at 29 intersections along SR 181 to move vehicles in and out of the on -site parking garages. These 30 intersections are: 31 • Interurban Avenue/I-405 Southbound Off -/On -ramps: This intersection is expected to operate at 32 LOS F with an average vehicle delay of 84 seconds during the weekday p.m. peak hour with the 33 Action Alternatives. Potential mitigation includes removing the eastbound and westbound split 34 phasing, and allowing permissive left -turns on these approaches instead. Permissive left -turns would 35 improve the intersection to LOS D, which meets the WSDOT LOS threshold. 36 • Interurban Avenue/SW Grady Way: Modifying the eastbound and westbound approaches to allow 37 permissive -protected left -turn phasing would improve average vehicle delay to 100 seconds, which 38 is slightly better than the No Action Alternative condition. 39 • SR 181/1-405 Northbound Off -/On -ramps: Implementing permissive -protected southbound left- 40 turn phasing would improve intersection delay from 76 seconds per vehicle to 69 seconds, but 41 would not mitigate conditions to No Action Alternative levels (LOS D, delay of 44 seconds per 42 vehicle). Additional potential mitigation measures at this intersection could include manual traffic 43 control during events to prevent excessive queueing and improve safety. JULY 2015 2-29 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 • SR 181/Strander Boulevard: Permissive -protected left -turn phasing on the westbound and 2 southbound approaches, with an overlap phase for westbound right -turns, would improve average 3 vehicle delay from nearly 200 seconds to approximately 130 seconds. This intersection is the 4 primary access to the on -site parking garage and would require additional manual control before 5 and after an event. 6 • SR 167/SW Grady Way: Modifying the northbound approach to allow permissive -protected left -turn 7 phasing would improve average vehicle delay to 93 seconds, which is comparable to the No Action 8 Alternative condition. 9 • 61st Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard: Potential reasonable mitigation at this intersection includes 10 allowing permissive -protected left -turns on the westbound approach. While this improves delay to 11 97 seconds per vehicle, it does not mitigate operations to No Action Alternative conditions; travel 12 demand measures, signal cycle length increases, or manual intersection control during peak hours 13 could be necessary. 14 • 61st Avenue S/Tukwila Parkway: Increasing the cyde length at this intersection would provide 15 more capacity, but would not improve operations to No Action Alternative conditions; travel 16 demand measures, additional turn lanes, or manual intersection control during peak hours could be 17 necessary. 18 • 66th Avenue S/Southcenter Boulevard: Potential mitigation at this intersection includes allowing 19 permissive -protected left -turn phasing on the westbound approach and removing the split phasing 20 from the northbound and southbound approaches (allow them to run concurrently). Operations 21 would improve to better than the No Action Alternative. 22 • Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Northbound Off -ramp: Removing the split -phasing on the eastbound and 23 westbound approaches would improve operations. Further investigation of intersection geometry is 24 required due to the skewed approach legs. 25 • SR 181/S 180th Street: Modifying the eastbound and westbound approaches to allow permissive- 26 protected left -turn phasing would improve average vehicle delay to 183 seconds, which is better 27 than the No Action Alternative condition. 28 • Oakesdale Avenue SW/SW Grady Way: To mitigate this location, consider removing the shared left- 29 through movement on the northbound approach, and changing control to allow permissive- 30 protected left -turn phases on all approaches. 31 Transportation Management Plan Measures 32 The Tukwila Arena is a special events facility that would host a variety of events, each with varying 33 attendance levels, starting and ending times, days of the week, and audience characteristics. Therefore, 34 some of the transportation mitigation developed for the arena could include a variety of operational and 35 programmatic measures to enable flexibility to respond to a wide variety of conditions and could be 36 used to mitigate traffic, transit and non -motorized impacts. These measures would be included in a 37 comprehensive Transportation Management Plan (TMP) that would be formalized during the permitting 38 stage as a condition of approval of the Northwest Arena. Potential strategies and actions for the TMP 39 are described below. 40 Event Management and Public Education 41 Event management and public education strategies focus on event and facility management measures 42 needed to eliminate and/or reduce event conflicts by ensuring coordination with other facilities in the 43 area; ensuring consistent and responsive implementation of the Transportation Program, and providing JULY 2015 2-30 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 the public and attendees with information on choices to avoid conflicts and take advantage of 2 transportation and parking opportunities to reduce delay and frustration. Some methods of 3 management and public education include: 4 • Event Transportation Coordinator 5 • Event Access Guide 6 • Public Information Coordinator 7 • Static Electronic Media 8 • Dynamic Electronic Media 9 • Arena Call Center 10 • Broadcast Advisory 11 Vehicular Traffic and Parking Demand Reduction 12 These types of strategies could be employed to help reduce vehicular access and parking demands by 13 encouraging non -automobile modes of travel including Sound Transit and King County Metro Transit, 14 charter bus, rail (Sounder Commuter Rail and Link Light Rail), and non -motorized modes or where 15 possible increase average vehicle occupancy. Examples of these strategies include: 16 • Additional Public Transit Service 17 • Additional Private Shuttle Buses 18 • Subsidize Transit Fares 19 • Charter Bus/Meal/Ticket Packages 20 • Bicycle Racks 21 Operational Methods for Creating Increased Vehicular Access Capacity 22 These strategies focus on increasing efficiency and predictability of traffic and parking control systems 23 so attendees of the Tukwila Arena, other nearby event facilities, and general purpose traffic can access 24 desired destinations with greater efficiency by avoiding excess circulation patterns that create 25 unnecessary congestion. Examples of these strategies include: 26 • Manual Traffic and Pedestrian Control 27 • Event Access CeII Phone Application 28 • Directional Event Signage 29 • Parking Guidance Signage 30 • WSDOT Traffic Control Center Coordination 31 • Way -Finding System 32 Management of Vehicle and Pedestrian Demand 33 These types of strategies focus on parking, traffic and pedestrian management options to direct and 34 control the traffic flows for those who drive to the Arena. These measures are intended to manage local 35 vehicle and non -motorized traffic congestion to minimize delay on event days by efficiently directing 36 drivers to available transportation and parking facilities. Examples of these strategies include: 37 • Establish Covenant Parking Agreements 38 • Parking for Event Staff 39 • Promote and Pre -Sell Off -Site Private Parking 40 • Event Ingress and Egress Plan 41 JULY 2015 2-31 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS , CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 TMP Operations and Performance Monitoring 2 These types of strategies strive to achieve continual improvement of the TMP, to developing 3 performance measures for reporting effectiveness of the TMP, and to enable exchange of information 4 with other stakeholders. Examples of these strategies include: 5 • Traffic Operations Group 6 • Periodic Program Review and Survey 7 2.5.3.5 Construction Impacts and Potential Mitigation Measures 8 This section provides an overview of potential traffic impacts resulting from the construction of the 9 Proposed Action including the transport of materials, workers, and supplies to and from the Proposed 10 Action site. Construction is anticipated to last nearly 2 years, commencing with site work preparation in 11 late 2015. Based on the construction schedule of the tasks required for the Proposed Action, the peak of 12 construction for the arena structure and the main parking garage would include the majority of heavy 13 duty trucks (for steel, concrete, and large equipment dellivery) and would continue for approximately 12 14 months. 15 Truck volumes and personnel trips for construction were developed using assumed quantities of 16 materials and equipment necessary to construct the faciility, as well as construction workforce estimates 17 provided by potential contractors. 18 This section also includes potential transportation mitigation measures for the study area roadway 19 network and operations, transit, freight mobility, non -motorized facilities, parking, and safety. 20 Construction Trips 21 Major construction components required for the build alternatives associated with the Proposed Action 22 include concrete for the main parking garage and for the arena structure, structural steel for pilings and 23 the arena framework, large equipment deliveries, and daily workforce personnel. Alternative 2 would 24 require more concrete, steel, and various materials for the construction of the VIP garage. 25 The majority of construction activities are assumed to take place on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 26 4:00 p.m. Workforce personnel would be onsite, and heavy haul truck deliveries would made primarily 27 during this window. During certain periods of construction, an additional swing shift could occur 28 between 4:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. and as required construction would also occur on weekends. 29 Approximately 350 workforce personnel are required during the peak of construction for Alternative 1, 30 while an additional 50 personnel could be necessary for Alternative 2. 31 [NEED MORE INFORMATION ON QUANTITIES, ETC. TO JUSTIFY TRIP GENERATION] 32 Assuming up to 10,000 individual vehicle trips are necessary for arena structure and the main parking 33 garage construction, approximately 835 vehicle trips would be accessing the Proposed Action site each 34 month during the 12-month peak of construction. Assuming roughly 22 working days per month, and a 35 typical 9-hour work day, up to 5 construction vehicle trips could be entering or exiting the site each 36 hour. 37 The geographical distribution of generated trips will based on expected sources of construction 38 materials and personnel. Although specific origins for concrete, steel, or personnel are unknown at this 39 time, vehicles would likely arrive and depart via SR 181 in either direction or via 1-405 at South 156th 40 Street. JULY 2015 2-32 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Construction Impacts to Roadways 2 During construction, the northbound curb lane on SR 181 between Longacres Way and South 156th 3 Street (adjacent to the Proposed Project arena) is anticipated to be closed for the entire 22-month 4 construction duration. This lane would be used for staging of construction vehicles and materials, and 5 would provide a buffer between traffic and construction activities while the west face of the arena is 6 built. 7 Northbound traffic on SR 181 approaching Longacres Way would be directed to merge from the far right 8 lane into the center lane to avoid this proposed road closure. As a result, northbound capacity on SR 181 9 would be reduced during construction, and some traffic may be diverted to parallel roadways (such as 10 Oakesdale Avenue) or to alternate routes to reach regional freeways. 11 Partial closures of one westbound travel lane on Longacres Way would occur during construction. 12 Although the start of this closure or its duration are currently undetermined, significant traffic 13 operations impacts are not expected. The current right-of-way width of Longacres Way allows one travel 14 lane in each direction, a separate turn pocket to northbound SR 181 on the north side, and parallel 15 parking on the south side. During construction, eastbound and westbound traffic could be shifted away 16 from the lane closure, and one travel lane in each direction could be maintained at all times. 17 During peak periods, intersections along SR 181 at Longacres Way, South 156th Street, Grady Way SW, 18 and the 1-405 ramp terminal would likely see an increase in congestion and vehicles could experience an 19 increase in travel time during construction. 20 Potential Mitigation Measures for Roadways 21 Construction mitigation measures would include working with City of Tukwila and potentially WSDOT to 22 develop a construction management plan. This plan would coordinate construction activities, including 23 incident management, construction staging, and traffic control where vehicles are expected to enter or 24 exit roadways. The development team would also coordinate with the City of Tukwila to disseminate 25 construction closure information to the public as needed. 26 The construction plan could also include the following temporary mitigation measures: 27 • Establish temporary increases in lane capacity (by widening existing shoulders for bypass traffic). 28 • Institute time -of -day restrictions for large, oversized construction vehicles. 29 • Use flaggers, as necessary, to direct traffic when large equipment is exiting or entering public roads 30 to minimize risk of accidents. 31 • Provide advance warning and proper roadway signage along SR 181 to warn motorists of potential 32 vehicles entering and exiting the roadway. Signage would include "Equipment on Road," "Truck 33 Access," or "Road Crossings." 34 • Use pilot vehicles when slow or oversized wide loads are being hauled. 35 • Place appropriate detour plans and warning signage in advance of any planned traffic disturbances. 36 • Maintain one travel lane on all roadways at all times, if possible. If lane closures must occur, post 37 adequate signage for potential detours or possible delays. JULY 2015 2-33 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 Construction Impacts to Transit 2 Construction of the Proposed Action would not involve bus stop relocations or temporary closures of 3 park -and -ride facilities. Access to the Tukwila Station via Longacres Way would be maintained during 4 construction, and existing transit routes would be unaffected. 5 Access to the Tukwila Station for transit riders may be affected by roadway or sidewalk closures on SR 6 181 and Longacres Way. 7 Potential Mitigation Measures for Transit 8 Access between surrounding land uses and the Tukwila Station will be maintained to the extent feasible. 9 Detour signage and temporary/alternate access paths for transit riders to and from Tukwila Station will 10 be provided. 11 Construction Impacts to Freight 12 During construction, no impacts on freight and non -transit rail would be expected. No new at -grade rail 13 crossings are proposed and construction of the arena and parking garages would not affect operation of 14 either the BNSF or UPRR rail for freight. 15 Construction Impacts to Non -motorized Facilities 16 The Interurban Trail runs within the PSE right of way across the Proposed Project site. During 17 construction of the arena and parking garages, construction vehicles and equipment would be required 18 within the PSE right-of-way and trail users would be affected. 19 Potential Mitigation Measures for Non -motorized Facilities 20 To mitigate impacts to trail users, alternative/detour trail routes will be provided and temporary detour 21 signage will be installed to minimize effects. Please see Section 2.3 of the EIS for more detailed 22 information on potential mitigation measures for recreational facilities. 23 Construction Impacts to Parking 24 No impacts to public parking would be expected during construction of the Proposed Project. Parking 25 stalls on existing properties may be eliminated to allow for arena or parking garage construction 26 activities, but no impact to the public is expected because all stalls are located on properties currently 27 owned by the project proponent. 28 Construction Impacts to Safety 29 Traffic diversions or detours caused by construction could lead to additional traffic volumes on adjacent 30 or nearby roadway facilities. The temporary increase in traffic volumes could cause an increase in 31 collision frequency; however, intersection crash rates should remain similar to existing conditions. In 32 locations where there is no physical change to the roadway, the types of crashes would likely remain 33 similar to existing conditions. 34 Potential lane closures along SR 181 and along Longacres Way could lead to driver confusion or 35 temporary impacts to the shoulder/clear zone; increasing the potential for crashes. 36 Potential Mitigation Measures for Safety 37 Potential mitigation measures to maintain safety will include placing construction barriers along SR 181 38 and along Longacres Way where construction activities are expected to occur. This temporary barrier 39 would physically separate vehicular traffic from construction personnel and equipment and eliminate 40 potential conflicts. Additional safety mitigation measures could include the following: JULY 2015 2-34 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS /\ CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS / \ • 1 • Conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (WSDOT, 2005) and jurisdictional 2 agency requirements for all traffic maintenance during construction activities. 3 • Use lighted or reflective signage to direct drivers to designated truck haul routes to ensure 4 visibility during nighttime work hours. 5 • Schedule ingress or egress of large, heavy haul vehicles to avoid peak hours of street traffic and \ 6 minimize delays during times where higher traffic volumes are traveling on surrounding 7 roadways. >/ 8 \ / ti / / / / \i / / \ / \ / \ / JULY 2015 2-35 NORTHWEST ARENA DRAFT SEPA EIS - f1 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and on oath states as follows: jr vrc1ia8Ear u . •conttM ' I. I am the current owner/4of t e property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its ent to ees, a ents, engineers, contractors or other represen[�tivesithe right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at c A T1A mer4 (#'(t I- A for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non -responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at 6 ie vue (city), _(state), on Afe l G 3 0 FI�E� E>go W N , 20 15 (Print Name) 11 u o i [ a -III NE- of N L Soo, i3E VO4 WA (Address) It & ..l;,3, If0,3 1 (Phone b (S gna41, e) &D/C. �l�m�t� 8q/3 5P0f7T5 AND q INN;t On this day personally appeared before me FaEb b k,oN to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that she signed the same as purposes mentioned therein. her voluntary act and deed for the uses and SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS c36-1-h DAY OF PO el L. , 20 15 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at GLF JQE,, Wyk My Commission expires on JUA) _ 7) ZO1,5 \\Deptstore\City Common\Teri\KIRBY - DECEMBER\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20I I.Docx EXHIBIT 'A' FOR AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP King County Parcel Numbers: 2423049014 0005800011 0005800032 0005800014 0005800025 0005800028 0005800026 0005800034 0005800035 0005800029 SEE ATTACHED KING COUNTY GIS MAP ON The nfonnation bclyded on the nap has been compied by Krug County staff from a variety of soaves and t subject to lunge wlhoul notice Kbg County makes no representations orwalranlles, express or impied, as to accuracy,compbleness, linelbess, or rights to Ile use of such informatim. Ttis cbcumentis not intended br use as a survey product. IGng County shill not be liable fa any general, special, retired, Inddental, or consequential damages indudng, but nd United to, bat rewnues or bsl profit resulting from the use ormisuse d the informatbn curtained on this map My sale of Ills map orinfoimatim on this map Is prohihled except by wolen pennissim of Kirg County. Date: 4/30/2015 1 in : 294 feet La King County 0 0035 o o7 n A GIS CENTER i r 1 • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: I. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, a ents, engineers, contractors/ or other reprFsen%atives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at h Ae-MM et T EX{-(j & I"r b for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's cntry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non -responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at co e`gt ' tiOTAfty AV l3 iNt '•'�(2F WASK ‘`�. (city), kiA s/ (state), on / , 20 JS &&rite' Q!zi LC {Print Nat W "� �/3� (pS)1 93 1-g•�rr`t,t,at /t ) (Address) ra2C.(-F`ii-7Hs (Phone Number) (Signature) On this day personally appeared before me Al..R(,L A) to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 15 I DAY OF Al AY , 20 15 signed the same as his/oluntary act and deed for the uses and NOTARY f?UBLIC in anchor the State of Washington residing at -'1-1- t%llF / My Commission expires on JVP< ZD 15 \\Dcptstore\City Common \Teri\KIRBY - DECEMBER\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.Docx EXHIBIT `B' FOR AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP King County Parcel Numbers: 2423049034 2423049137 SEE ATTACHED KING COUNTY GIS MAP 0 King County The hformation hcluded on this map has been compels(' ty Khg County slag from a variety of sources and Is subject to change without notice. Khg County makes no represenlatbns orwartanlies, express or impied, as to accuracy, completeness, (business, or rphts to the use of such inforrnatim. Tlis document is not intended br use as a survey product. ling County shall rot be liable for any general, special, brined, inddental or consequential damages indudhg, but not limited lo, lost revenues orhet profits resulting from Iheuse or misuse d the infonnaton curtained on this map. My sale of this map or information on this map is prohubted except by , 0 0.05 0.1 5 written pennisim of Kirg County, i r t 1 in : 587 feet " La King County A GIS CENTER Date: 4/30/2015 r \ CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 SPECIAL PERMISSION - DIRECTOR PARKING DETERMINATION APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P-SP Planner: File Number: ) 15 _ v (.7,9. ( , Application Complete Date: Project File Number: `PL ) 6 _ Qt.), g Application Incomplete Date: Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Northwest Arena BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Multi -Purpose Sports and Entertainment Arena LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Situated approximately between SR 181 and BNSF Railway; and Longacres Way and S. 156th Street. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 2423049014,0005800011,0005800032,0005800014,0005800025,0005800026,0005800034,0005800035,0005800028,0005800029,2423049034,2423049137 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner/applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Ted Caloger, MG2 Address:1101 Second Avenue, Suite 100, Seattle, WA Phone: (206) 962-6472 E-mail: T. t.Calo_er@VIG2.com FAX: Signature: Date: 05/14/2015 \\deptstore\City Common\Teri\Revisions In Progress\Special Permission Director -March 2011.docx