Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
WS 2024-10-21 Document - Draft Transportation Background Report
DRAFT Transpo Background R� City of Tukwila September 200 ■1111uIu.8 sportation EIe ent Executive Summary Tukwila is a vibrant community with diverse residents, businesses, and regional attractions, connected by various transportation options to local and regional destinations. Since incorporating in 1908, Tukwila has grown to a community with a population of 20,265 residents (2020)1. In addition to serving its residents, Tukwila is home to jobs from a wide range of sectors, such as manufacturing, industry, local businesses, and retail. Tukwilaor shopping area draws in shoppers from across the Puget Sound region. In recent years, Tukwila has sought to address traffic cong- on and im multimodal connectivity, especially near Tukwila International Boul= : and in Southce Tukwila also maintains two major regional trails: the Green River and t terurban Trail. These trails allow people to walk, roll, scooter, and bike througho - and to neighboring communities. There have been several major transportatio . th- City of Tukwila, including the Tukwila International Boulevard Li tation. on bo. is high usage and provides much needed transit connections to i . ernati. :I Boulevard, which has undergone several pedestrian access improv- is in rep t years. nd Transit is also planning to add an additional light rail infill sta o .f the City, near Boeing Access Road. In addition to light rai - e, Ki .unty Metro and Sound Transit both provide bus routes serving the Tu This Transpo r . Backgrou 'eport seeks to proactively build on these investments to support Tukwila's inued elution over the next 20 years. Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan (The Plan) integrates • planning efforts and emphasizes multimodal connections, safety, and equity. This Transpo ation Background Report, including the transportation project list, was developed in coordination with the community, who helped identify long-term vision for transportation in Tukwila. The following five goals were developed with input from the Tukwila community and guide the investment decisions outlined in this Transportation Background Report: 1 American Community Survey, Table S0101. Age and Sex. 2020 5-year Estimates. 2 Eliminate systemic barriers to ensure fair access to healthy, affordable, reliable transportation options, livable places, and jobs. Provide a safe transportation system and placemaking to emphasize Tukwila as a welcoming pl- -, particularly for historically marginalized and vulne e populations. Maintain, expand, and enh Tukwil. ultimodal network, particularly wa ike, roll, and it, to increase mobility opti where needs are • test. Anticipate a• • an for the munity's evolving needs, new technol, - oppor " ies for mobility. truct transportation projects that s emissions, improve community e natural environment. Plan Overview The Tukwila Transportation Background Report sets a framework for understanding, prioritizing, measuring, and constructing a multimodal transportation network that furthers Tukwila's goals. This document includes seven chapters: Chapter 1: Introduction Describes the purpose of the Transportation Background ' ' .rt and the planning requirements it needs to address. This chapter provide • on about Tukwila's history, position in the region, current demographi nd existind uses. Chapter 2: Transportation Inventory and Needs Describes conditions for all travel modes in t chapter also gives an overview of needs identifie challenges. Chapter 3: Public Outreach Describes the extensive groups, pop -ups at public outreach w diverse perspectives ransportation system. This the community, opportunities, and hat included online engagement, focus meetings. The overarching principle of the on background report that reflects the ation needs of the community. Chapter 4: Tr • ortatio Is, ies, & Actions Desc the Transpo ion Element's policies and actions, categorized under each of the five • . Policies scribe the City's preferred direction to achieve these goals. Actions imp : policies through defined steps to improve systems, develop capital projects, • ign tasks, and set priorities. Chapter 5: Transportation Vision Describes Tukwila's layered network approach, which focuses on how the city's transportation network can function, to meet the needs of all users. This chapter introduces the priority networks for each mode, describes the City's vision for how those modes are served, and describes the types of infrastructure that would be needed to achieve that vision. This chapter includes level of service performance standards for 4 � streets and intersections, and planning guidance to accommodate transit, biking, and Chapter 6: Transportation Project List Describes the Transportation Background Report's prioritized project list, which would provide a safer and more connected multimodal system over the coming decades. This chapter also describes further transportation investments that ' Id be pursued if additional funding opportunities arise. Chapter 7: Funding and Implementation Describes the City's path to implementation, incl transportation over the life of the plan, strat use ofits transportation network, and how T Transportation Background Report overtime the development of this Backgrou ghow the [it Istofund that t - City will em 9 oy to optimize onitorprogress ofthe the overarching goals that guided 5 Contents Executive Summary 2 Plan Overview 4 Contents 6 Chapter 1: Introduction 9 Tukwila Profile 9 Demographics 11 Existing Land Use 12 Local Planning Context 16 City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Transportation ent (20 16 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study (2018) 16 Southcenter Subarea Plan (2014) 17 Tukwila International Boulevard Neighbo .. 017) 17 Tukwila Growth and Transportation Efficien _ 2007) 18 Tukwila Transit Plan Update ( 18 Americans with Disabiliti- t (ADA'' ansitio :n (2016) 19 City of Tukwila's Non- ized ' . (2009) 20 Regional Planning Context 20 VISION 2050 • 20 King Co Countywide P ing P. cies (2021) 21 Washingto e Growth agement Act 22 Chapter 2: Transpor'. Inv- .ry and Needs Assessment 23 Street Network 23 Citywide Traffic Volume Trends 28 Existing Traffic Conditions 30 Existing Facilities and Future Needs for Walking and Rolling 43 Pedestrian Network Connectivity 46 Existing Facilities and Future Needs for Biking 46 Bike Network Connectivity 49 Existing and Future Transit Needs 50 6 System Overview 50 59 62 67 70 71 74 76 79 82 82 83 89 91 91 92 Goal 1: Equity 92 Goal 2: Safety 94 Goal 3: Connec ' ' 96 Goal 4: Ad. .ility 99 Goal 5: . nment 101 Chapter 5: Transp. ion Visio 103 Introduction to Lay , •rk 103 Auto LOS Guidelines 104 2044 Traffic Conditions 104 Pedestrian LOS Standards and Guidelines 113 Bike Guidelines 119 Transit Guidelines 123 Freight Guidelines 125 Chapter 6: Transportation Project List 129 Project Development 129 Via to Transit Service Market Analysis Freight and Truck Mobility Safety Vehicle -Vehicle Involved Collisions Vehicle -Bike Involved Collisions Vehicle -Pedestrian Involved Collisions Opportunities and Challenges Chapter 3: Public Outreach Vision and Goals for Transportation Process to Develop the Vision and Goals Recurring Themes Chapter 4: Transportation Goals and Policies .... Goals Policies 7 Priority Projects 133 Chapter 7: Funding and Implementation 134 Funding 134 Actions 137 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) 139 TDM Strategies 140 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program 142 Appendix A: Tukwila Population Characteristics 144 Appendix B: Vehicle LOS Results for the Urban Center Corridor •a -sis, and Day & PM Peak Hour 148 Appendix C: Vehicle LOS Results for the Study Intersecti. alysis P Peak Hour 158 Appendix D: Existing Transit Service in Tukwila .... 164 Appendix E: Public Outreach Materials (Fact Sheet, Flyer, Pos ngagement Boards) 177 Appendix F: Bike Facility Types and Treatmen 184 Appendix G: Freight Considerations ....... 191 8 Chapter 1: Introduction The City of Tukwila's Transportation Background Report (Background Report) provides a framework for transportation investments over the next 20 years and beyond, guided by the community's transportation and mobility priorities. The Background Report was developed through close collaboration between City staff, elected officials, comm •ty representatives, and the public at -large to help improve mobility and quality of life in T a. It combines the insights gained from this collaboration with detailed technical . . identify transportation investments that will help the City improve mobility for eve o e who -s transportation systems in Tukwila. Tukwila Profile Centered at the crossroads of rivers, trails, King County with 12 unique neighborhoods land area and is bordered on the north, sout SeaTac, respectively. The city b in 1908 and has evolved in distribution of goods and highlights the chron preserving its s , Tukwila is a suburban city in ximately 10 square miles of d w- .y Seattle, Kent, Renton, and Figure 1. Tukwila was incorporated as a city nd commercial sales, warehousing, and nt Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2015, s willingness to grow and change while diligently 9 Figure 1. City of Tukwila Boundary 200th Sk, LIT:i City Boundary Parks Stonder BWri 0.5 M (les C) City of Tukwila Boundary 10 Demographics In 2020, Tukwila had an estimated population of 20,265 residents. Tukwila residents are concentrated in the City's northwest quadrant, consisting of multiple neighborhoods, including Thorndyke, Cascade View, Riverton, and Foster. Age ranges for residents are relatively balanced, with a median age estimated to be 36 years, 12 percent 65 years or older and 21 percent under 18 years old.2 Tukwila's population is diverse in multiple aspects, na ethnicity, spoken languages, and educational attainment.' This s demographic statistics that make Tukwila unique. The three most common racial identities represented constituting 31 percent, 26 percent, and 21 percen respectively.2 The diversity of Tukwila is notable in co national level. Of the nationwide populatio hose iden percent, those identifying as "Asian Alone Alone" comprise 13 percent. Additionally, 18 or Latino," which is comparable foreign -born residents; app United States. Of these r population in Tukwila speak languages being English less t The Tukwila co 28 percent of Tuk school diploma (inclu in terms of race, highlights various wila are White, and Black e City' erall popula ion, o the same statistics on a s "White Alone" comprise 70 nd those identifying as "Black residents identify as "Hispanic wide. 2 Tukwila has a high percentage of f Tukwila residents were born outside of the ed States citizens.2 Slightly over half of the ge of - .n English at home, with the other dominant ese. About 55 percent of this population subset speak people with diverse educational backgrounds. Approximately over the age of 25 have an educational attainment of a high quivalency). Additionally, 24 percent of Tukwila residents have an educational attainment of a bachelor's degree or higher.' About nine percent of Tukwila residents identify as living with a disability.2 This statistic is important to consider when planning for the transportation needs of all residents. Fourteen percent of Tukwila residents reported an income level in the past 12 months that is below the national poverty Ieve1.2 Detailed population characteristics of the City of Tukwila are tabulated in Appendix A. z 2016-2020 American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey Office. https://www.census.gov/ 11 � ���°*��° Land �� U� �����=����� �`���"� ~ws�� �� The City ofTukwila iscomprised ofZ1 distinct land uses within its land area ofapproximately 10 square miles. Figure 2 displays the designated land uses within the city boundary. Tukwila is comprised of 12 distinct neighborhoods, as shown in Figure 3. Tukwila's residential neighborhoods are a mix of smaller -lot, built -out residential areas pre, World War 11, large multi -family apartment complexes built in the newer neighborhoods characterized by more larger houses. inate|ybuilt before ,70s and 80s,and Tukwila has ewide range ofpopular destinations, inc|ud* he regional shopping area and several perk spaces with multiple trails, sho n Figur 4. Notab|y' �N�Tukvvi|a Community Center along the [}uvvarnish River hosts al ' '|ties and resources for seniors, adults, teens, and young children, including fitness, recr^' ,and wellness programs, aswell as a preschool. Although not located within "*eries, th;. ~tt|e-Tacoma International Airport is located just west of Tukwila in the o ` ive the close proximity of the major airport, the City of Tukwila rnnrdinates ~Toc e i the Port of Seattle to address any planned projects near the airp, 12 Figure 2. City of Tukwila Land Use Map City- Boundary Parks CummerMal Corridor Manufacturing Industrial Canter/Heavy Commercial Light Industrie Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Heavy industrial Light IndustroaW High Llerssity Resv`dentiel Medium Density Residential Low Density Residential U. aye N6ghbanceed Commercial Center Pond Ion Len Regional Commercial Regional Commercial Mixed Use Residential C'ommernal Center Workplace Transit Oriented Development Tukwila Volley south Zoning/ Land Use 13 Figure 3. City of Tukwila Neighborhoods .,.I-1 City Boundary #i 4l Allentown Parks \ Cascade View osier Faster Point Tho rndyke MCMicken Tukwila Hill Riverton Tukwila South Ryan Hill figill T'ukw@la Urban Center City of Tukwila Neighborhoods 14 Figure 4. City of Tukwila Key Destinations Stor,dEr Parks SI?Sth St S i2.4111`St '46„ S Public Services & Agencies School Parks Trail Sites S 450th St:, S 200Th \ cL5 Tukwila Community Cenler TrI Facilities mm Libraries 0 Tukwila Post Office Mde5 sikk, Shopping Centers 4; roster Goff Links Attractions City of Tukwila Key Destinations 15 �0 K W � t, A [RAN S P 0 U'A ['X0 N EL M E NT U Planning �� �~������u m u����������� ������te��t �� The City of Tukwila has several plans and policies that guide future development in Tukwila. Some of these plans, such as the Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study, 5outhcenterSubarea Plan, and Tukwila International Boulevard Neighborhood Plan, focus nndevelopment incertain areas n, corridors within the City. The 2O15 Comprehensive Plan isthe guiding document for City staff and elected officials in making decisions regarding transportation ca" project funding, development regulations, and guiding principles for growth in ` through 2035. City of To�m�n Comprehensive Plan `~.`' . .~......~ .~ r~ .. . . ..~'. Trnyls�CJrh��nyl ����/20yc1 Transportation �� ` ~ The City of Tukwi|a's Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2015lays out theCity's rvision, deriv~*from the Cit«'s core values: respect for the past ~ '� present, compassion and support for individ^ families, pride ofplace, and qua[ °ortunit plan touches on many as development, from the char. eighww .^ds and urban design ' I to � `eve|nprnentnf vibrant center eoonorn| ^ an* revitalization Ofresidentia ^3.1The plan »videSgoals and policies for achi~ the City' |siOnthrough the allocation of jobs a ` ` * ', housing, parks and o8C*8ati0na| OppOrtunit|^ ,tnan3pOrtetiOn network investments, and sustainable funding. 'an Hill Neighborhood Study ^ . In 2018L development interest within the Ryan Hill neighborhood, resulting from the area's limited infrastructure and sensitive features, prompted a comprehensive look at the needed land , City ofTukwila. City ofTukwila Comprehensive Plan. 2O15 https//vww.tukwi|awa.gov/wp'content/up|ood$DCD'[omprehensive'P|an.pdf 16 use changes and the types of infrastructure improvements required to support potential redevelopment.4 The study's primary objectives were to ensure that any development decisions work collectively to achieve neighborhood -driven goals and that development -driven infrastructure improvements, such as sewer, water, and roadways, are coordinated and maximized. Southcenter Subarea Plan (2014) The City of Tukwila developed the Southcenter Subarea Plan as regulatory policy to guide and govern future development Southcenter Subarea Plan outlines the community's asp Southcenter as well as the physical outcomes inten for change and rban center. The ons and suppo . .tegies for o be imented as ew investments create change. Some of Tukwila's industrial uses have -a• ifted to retail uses, as evidenced by Costco, Lowe's Home Improvement, and Home Depo buildings. In addition, this plan also identi investments that the City can take to acceler ocated in former warehouse .I set o • mmended actions and t trategies. Tukwila International ' .rd cghborhood Plan (2017) In 2015, Tukwila City Cou (TIB) Element of the Tukwila neighborhood i In 2017, the City's adopte Congress for Ne number of through - icier in the Tukwila International Boulevard hensive Plan, calling for a transformation of the afer, and attractive destination with TIB as a "main street". developed to explore strategies for implementing the for the TIB neighborhood. The City partnered with the U) to develop recommendations which included: reducing the IB and replacing them with on -street parking and bike lanes to provide parking for adja ent businesses and improve safety for all users and revising the zoning regulations for new development to allow new land uses and development patterns that are consistent with the walkable vision for TIB5. 4 City of Tukwila. Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study. 2018 https://www.tukwilawa.gov/wp-content/uploads/Ryan-Hill-Neighborhood-Study-03.06.18.pdf 5 City of Tukwila. Tukwila International Boulevard CNU Legacy Project. 2017 https://indd.adobe.com/view/30a631e0-ee3c-45f4-8f76-a9c83850446a 17 Between 2017 and 2020, there have been various efforts to support the Tl8 Neighborhood Plan, ° Interim zoning code revisions to restrict certain auto -oriented and lodging uses ° Development of rechanne|ization design alternatives for T|B, including potential impacts, mitigation, cost, and the extent to which they achieve the goals for the TIB District To�m�m�rnm����r�Trn���[)�m�n� /7�� ��rnnraO7 ._''''_ _._''—. _ Transportation .-_—_ Efficiency ����.-- .._�� / nO�� /� \~�~~/ TukwilaUnder the Washington State Commute Trip Red uction'WIEfficiency Act ' City of was given the option of developing a Growth and Tri v NCe Cei r (G T E Q PI Crta program to expand CTR efforts to additional em 0 n d ntial groups within a defined In 2007, the City developed a GTEC for the growth center, through extensive involveme throughout the City who helpe the TUC GTEC program was TUC), a designated regional rganizations, and individuals from to achieve the program's goals. The vision of bjec±ivesx: * Bolster the TUC's nne ° ion as ^ ^|one| shopping center by creating an attractive centre|de * °ffon ouaing,shopping, entertainment, and recreation. Connect disper etoi|act|~ en* ~vide econvenient, walkable, enjoyable, and varied shop * Use the * *edCOrn ' 8rrail station, Tukwila Transit Center, and other transportation investments ^ [' 'St to shift development patterns, provide amenities, and create a true center and . 8|point for the community. Transit Plan Un��tp /nD/c1 '~—''''~ ''^-'' ''' '~ —r'~~^~ `--~'~/ 6 City of Tukwila. Tukwila International Boulevard Neighborhood Planning. 2020 hups//www.tuhwi|avvaAov/departments/tnnnmunity'deve|opmenVcommunitvp|anning/tukwi|a'internationv| bou|evand'neighborhood'p|anninn/ 7 City of Tukwila. Tukwila Urban Center Growth and Transportation Efficiency Center Program. 2007 httpc//www.tukwi|avva.gov/vvp'content/up|oads/D[D'[ompP|an'Tuhwi|a GTE[ P|an.pdf 18 Last updated in 2016, Tukwila's Transit Plan was targeted to provide clear guidance for transit planning over ten years by outlining recommendations for short-term actions. The developed recommendations were based on public outreach, thorough analyses of demographic data, planning documents, travel demand, and transit service inTukwila. This plan recommended the � The addition ofthe Tukwila Transit Center and Tukwila |-405Bus Rapid Transit route, which would provide Tukwila a relatively t nection between Tukwila and the Eastside. * A new express route between Tukwila and Bellevue `f5rethe |targeting both Tukwila residents as well as Sou riders. * Frequency improvements to bus routes serv* ukwiL * uding Rt-124, Rt-150, Rt-128, 0 Maintenance of the Hyde Shuttle w h serves se 55 and over) and people with disabilities. 0 The provision of options to connect Documented options inc companies (TNQ pro 0 Long-term transit management and o American The City of Tu providing equal a RJisimplemented, ila Community Center. subsidized taxi/ transportation network itVvan program. iority corridors, transportation demand munities, and a few capital recommendations. Act (An«) Transition Plan (2076) ongoing commitment as an all-inclusive community, oughthe AOASelf-Evaluation and Transition Plan. Asdocumented inthe Z« 6 draft Plan, the City ofTukwila anticipates the removal ofthe highest priority barriers within the first two years of the p|an's adoption. This is based on the se|f- assessnnent planning -level cost estimates, and available financial resources. The Capital Improvement Program (C|P)' allocates $200,000 per year, over the next 5 years, towards AOA improvements and ensuring /\[}Aconnpliance of all capital improvements projects, private 19 development, and other right-of-way construction; the City's objective is to address all known deficiencies within 20 years.8 City of Tukwila's Non -Motorized Walk and Roll Plan (2009) In 2009, the City developed Tukwila's first pedestrian and bike planning document, "The Walk and Roll Plan" to implement goals of the Comprehensive Plan and ado . complete streets approach. The Walk and Roll PIan9 was targeted to ensure that all ila residents know the joy of wandering through the community using trails and sidewalk o able to experience the sense of accomplishment and freedom associated with e ability t• k or bike to school, to work, to the store, and the library. The following recoendations were ined in the Plan: • Adoption of bike and pedestrian infrastruct • Designation and adoption of "Bike Friendly Rou • Continue construction of neighbo • More than the minimum for pedest • Railbanking for the future • Promotion of and part • Identify and fund Regional Plannin • • tex VISION 2 d walking programs he Capital Improvement Program (CIP) City of Tukwila. ADA Transition Plan. 2016 https://www.tukwilawa.gov/wp-content/uploads/PW-ADA-Draft-ADA-Transition-Plan.pdf 9 City of Tukwila. City of Tukwila's Non -Motorized Plan. 2009 https://www.tukwilawa.gov/wp-content/uploads/DCD-Walk-and-Roll-Program.pdf 20 8v2O5[\the region's population is anticipated to reach 5.8 million. VISION 2050 sets the stage for updates to countywide planning policies and local comprehensive plans, developed by the region's cities and counties, as illustrated in Figure m The key themes highlighted in VISION 2050inc|ude: ° Provide opportunities for all * Increase housing choices and affordability • Sustain a strong economy * Significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions * Keep the region moving • Restore the health of the Puget Sound * Protect a network ofopen space • Grow in centers and near transit 0 Act collaboratively and support local efforts .—.g ___.'/ .~~~n The Countywide Pla juhsdictkznsvvo the compre that the [PPs ge we plans for |ish. Figure 5. Washington State Planning Framework GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT so n��� //'./��s �/.c~._/� PPs) implement VISION 2050 by guiding how King County r growth. The comprehensive plan for King County and s an,, owns in King County are developed from the framework The 2021 [PPs were ^ ;, ^ to provide guidance in advance of the 2024 statutory update of comprehensive plans to corporate changes to the regional policy framework and to reflect new priorities addressing equity and social justice within communities". TheZO21 [PPsupdate was based on the following: 0 2012 Countywide Planning Policies 10 Puget Sound Regional Council. VISION 2050. 2020 h |vfi|es/20Z2-02/viion -2U50-o|ao%zo%z81%zyud " King County. 202lKing County Countywide Planning Policies. 2021 hneo:,,�Zk'»ycvuotuu»«/-/rri��bel.depts/m�e(�ub:elp«db'mmnu��oateuv�V bv�s�,cyimzal � �annins/cppVZQl�3�u��0optcd-and- Zl � ° Centering social equity and health ° Integrating regional policy and legislative changes ° Providing clear, concise, and actionable direction for comprehensive plans ° Implementing the Regional Growth Strategy with 2044 growth targets that form the land use basis for periodic comprehensive plan updates N/nsh'[7Qtny7State (�romth8�nnaOe�7ent/\��t ^/ `' The 3tote'sGrowth Management transportation plan that ties directly to the Cit/s land use i ons an ncial planning. The updated Transportation Element and Background Repo pports this G nclate for the next 2O'yearplanning cycle. 22 Chapter 2: Transportation Inventory and Needs Assessment The subsequent sections document the existing transportation networks within the City and discuss identified opportunities for improvement. The Tukwila transpor tion network accommodates various modes of getting around, including walkin ng, scootering, biking, riding public transit, driving, and freight and goods movement Street Network Tukwila's street network is comprised of roadways varyi icle capacities intended to accommodate various modes of transportation and co sers to local and regional facilities. Streets in Tukwila serve as the foundation • - transport system, as roadways shape how residents and visitors experience the city. T. ure scribe and map the functional classification of roadways in Tukwila, respecti re sents posted speed limits on the City's roadway facilities. The City is dedicated to through various rehabilitati conducted in 202 network is ge Condition In percent of the o national average o conditions along its street network ents.:. _. on a pavement condition assessment miles of City -owned asphalt roadways, Tukwila's roadway he City's roadway network has an average Pavement backlog (roads rated below a PCI of 40) slightly over one otably, the average PCI for Tukwila streets is slightly above the Because Tukwila's street network is also comprised of state-owned facilities, the City collaborates with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) . State-owned roadways in Tukwila include Interstate 5, Interstate 405, and state routes 99, 181, 518, 599, and 900 depicted in Figure 6. 12 City of Tukwila. Pavement Management Program — Analysis Report. 2020 htttvlirecords.tukwilawa ov1WebLink/1/edocL332433/TIC%202020-10-05%201tem%202E%20-%20Reort%20 %202020%20Pavement%20Manaaement%20Proaram%20Analvsis%20Renort.ndf 23 WIF �0 K W � �tt, A [RAN S P 0 RTA ['X0 N EL M E N7 Table 1. City of Tukwila Street Functional Classifications Principal Arterial Minor Arterial The primary function cfprincipal arterials istoexpedite through -traffic between communities and traffic generated by major shopping centers and serve travel between freeways and lesser classified arterials. Principal arterials carry the highest volume within the City, ranging between 10,000and 50,000vehides per | weekday. These roadways generally have sidewalks onboth sides, and some have bike facilities. Minor arterials serve inter-comm traffic traveling between neighborh(3 and principal and od|ecto ' '~|cTh roadways serve small than principal arter served bymino hospitals, and co centers. Minor arteria range from 1'5UOto15,0 Tukwib|nternation Boulevard, Interurb Avenue S, East Margin Way S thcemerBou|evant center Parkway, Strander Boulevard 24 Tukwila International Boulevard SmthanterBoulevard Wr �0 K W � t, A [RAN S P 0 RTA f,X0 N EL M E NT Collector Arterial Local Access Collector arterials are designed toserve traffic traveling between access streets and higher classification arterials and primarily serve local traffic ofa neighborhood orcommercial/industrial area. Collector arterial traffic volumes are generally less than 10,O0Uvehicles per day. Some collector arterials provide transit service, sidewalks, and bike facilities, but there are gaps inTuh*i|a's net*ork. Local access roadways connect tra arterials, accommodate short neighborhood clestinat |nco| access Many transit service, si ' - Source: Tukwila Municipal Code, City vfTukwila, Fehr & Peers. Images are courtesy vfGvogleMaps unless otherwise noted. 25 Figure 6. Existing Street Functional Classification Map City Bounclary Parks Interstate/ Other Freeway/ Expressway Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Arterial Local Access 0 C1.5 1 Mlles Functional Classification 26 Figure 7. Existing Speed Limits Map Parks 35 MPH • a. 40 MPH 'City streets are 25 mph u0ess otherwise posted; streets in school zones ar 0 tnph MPH MPH Speed Li 27 Citywide Traffic Volume Trends Due to the challenges and unprecedented travel patterns related to COVID-19, pre -pandemic traffic volume data was utilized for the purposes of the Transportation Element. Traffic data the City collected in 2018 was used as a starting place, and supplemented by turning movement count data from location -based services (LBS) and navigation global positioning system (GPS) data from anonymized smartphone and vehicle navigation devices. B representative locations in Tukwila, these data sets closely match with some discrepancies at locations near freeways. As a resu developed based on the City's traffic database counts to c rate turnin from these sources to accurately represent baseline co' ions. The City of Tukwila collects and monitors traffic coun monthly to track annual average daily traffic (AADT). As busiest locations are Southcenter Bouleva West Valley Highway. Data collected prior t these locations exceeded 25,000 and 2021. In 2020, the COVID demand and traffic patter telecommuting. This is refle from 2021 show a than in pre -pa represent a Figure 10 illustra locations. Travel on on a review of with historical counts, t factors were vement count data le locations across the ity s in Figure 8 and Figure 9, the Southcenter Parkway, and n.emic from 2017 to 2019 at es. Fig d Figure 9 display AADT data from 2020 in abrupt and dramatic changes in travel stemming from safety protocols and mass T illustrated in Figure 8 and Figure 9. Data at study locations; however, travel demand was still less ms that turning movement count data from 2018 for travel demand. vel patterns in Tukwila based on total AADT at the count ridors peaks during the summer and winter holidays, and volumes are notedly lower in September and October. 28 Figure 8. Traffic Volume Trends in or near Tukwila Urban Center (2017 - 2021) Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Klickitat Drive 1700 Southcenter Andov- nth 180th S 200th Street West Valley w/o 53rd Southcenter Boulevard w/o West s . Street w/o e/o Orillia Road Highway s/o Avenue Parkway 61st Ave• - Strander een River Longacres Way Brid. '.ulevard Source: City of Tukwila, Fehr & Peers. 2022. Figure 9. Traffic Volume Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 2017 M 201: 2019 .tr 02 s Across Tukwila (2017 - 2021) Interurban Interurban East Marginal East Marginal Tukwila Boeing Access Avenue n/o Avenue n/o Fort Way s/o S 126th Way s/o 94th International Road e/o E Gateway Drive Dent Way Street Avenue Boulevard n/o 5 Marginal Way 139th Street Source: City of Tukwila, Fehr & Peers. 2022. MI 2017 312018 •2019 1,, 2020 2021 29 Figure 10. Monthly Travel Patterns in Tukwila Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr Source: City of Tukwila, Fehr & Peers. 2022. Existing Traffic Co The performanc standard sta degree of co intersection, such scale, A through F, representing highly con illustrated in Figure 11. Sep Oct Nov Dec n at intersections within Tukwila is measured using a ogy known as level of service (LOS). LOS represents the ection based on the average delay per vehicle at a controlled al or stop sign. Individual LOS grades are assigned on a letter representing free -flow conditions with no delay and LOS F sted conditions with long delays, as described in Table 2 and Table 2 shows the definition of each LOS grade detailed in the 6th edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology, which is based on average control delay per vehicle. The methodology captures the average delay for all vehicles entering the intersection and prescribes how the average delay is measured at different types of intersections: signalized and all -way stop intersections. Signalized intersections have higher delay thresholds compared with two-way 30 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ FAR FIR FA FF.,. FAI Ai, "1" FR FFFF FRI FRF CD FFR 1F A. 1„.„ E. NA and all -way stop -controlled intersections. When calculating LOS at two-way stop -controlled intersections, the delay from the most congested movement is reported and used. Table 2. Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Criteria Signalized Intersection Level of Service Delay (seconds) Unsignalized Intersection Delay (seconds) A 1 10 0-10 1 ! B >10-20 >10-15 c D >35-55 E >55-80 F >20-35 1 >15-25 >25-35 >35-50 >80 >50 Source: Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition Figure 11. Intersection Level of Service 7, A FRFFRFF. „ARA:, FilfkiFFFVFPF oFFRAFIFFolooRtFoRtonFoRFFEvONFR, Source: Fehr & Peers. APS OFR t tFRFF FRteRFA t.„„, F FFS OF 41,1101,t `3,000",ig 140eM644,,,,,,wonwo ittaglettel t Intersection Operator: 1455 Stable flow „ it Degree of Detatj:' F.' Lope deiays '44A'ANZ's A LOS F Intersection Operation: Unpredictable flow/wait through multiple cycles Degree of Detay: Excessive delays 31 The City's adopted LOS standard requires that roadways and intersections within city limits adhere to the following3: Southcenter Area • The Southcenter area corridor average is not to exceed LOS E, except for the Strander Boulevard corridor and a portion of the Andover Park East corridors. • The Strander Boulevard corridor average is not to exceed LO ith an average delay not to exceed 120 seconds. The Andover Park East corrid. 'tween Tukwila Parkway and Strander Boulevard, is not to exceed LOS F, with a era• -lay not to exceed 120 seconds. • SR 181 (West Valley Highway) is not to exceeated per sT standards. Outside of Southcenter • All other non-residential arterial in - tions are n exceed LOS E. • The LOS of minor and collector artresidential areas is not to exceed LOS D for each specific arteri • As State highways of re ; nifica SR 181 (West Valley Highway) and SR 599 are subject to a Region -vel of ' ice St. and established by the Puget Sound Regional Council and WSD. he a - - .f service is not to exceed LOS E/Mitigated. • As State highwa s of al significance, 1-5, 1-405, SR 518, and SR 99 are subject to a LOS sta . - he• SDOT. The automobile level of service is not to exceed Vehicle LOS in Tu unsignalized) and 1 ated at 54 study intersections (38 signalized and 16 s (comprised of 24 representative intersection locations) presented in Figure 12 and Figure 3. The selection of the study intersections was based on previously identified locations with congestion and geographic spread. This approach has been used in various City efforts including the 2015 Comprehensive Plan and the 2018 Concurrency Study. 32 Figure 12. Study Intersections ri"'`'4rititetstrBir.444igii ik Ell city Boundary Parks 0 Study Intersections S'43Uck SBoOng 1Vh 5 .£1501 St 0 00 SW O. 0,5 I Miles Study Intersections 3 3 Figure 13. Study Corridors City Boundary • Study Intersections C D Study Corridors is Corridor ID Study Corridors 34 Citywide Traffic Conditions Figure 14 shows vehicle LOS, which reflects how the study intersections operate today based on an existing traffic operations analysis conducted using the Synchro version 11 software package. Detailed vehicle LOS and delay results for each intersection are provided in Appendix C. 35 Figure 14: Existing PM Peak Hour LOS in Tukwila City Boundary .Parks Level of Service MSA -c LOS LOS E • LOSF Study ntersections - PM Peak Hour LOS The City's intersection LOS policy only applies to intersections outside the Southcenter area. These study intersections currently operate acceptably under existing conditions during the PM peak hour except at the following location: • Southcenter Boulevard / 1-405 SB Off -ramp (LOS F with an average delay of 92 seconds) Other notable intersections outside the Southcenter area include: • South 116th Street / East Marginal Way (LOS E with an av- delay of 39 seconds) For specifically WSDOT facilities, only the following intersec 'o does n standard established by the Puget Sound Regional Cou .nd WSDOT: eet the regional LOS • Southcenter Boulevard / West Valley Highw. OS F an average delay of 80 seconds) exceeds the LOS E/Mitigated standar Operational evaluation for intersections in nter a : presented in the next section. These are evaluated on a corridor basis. Urban Center Traffic Co The roadway network wit peak periods due to mall tr. • - ns. - tudy corridors depicted in Figure 13 were evaluated to und- .ffic •itions in the Urban Center (Southcenter Mall area) during several peak p 15 through Figure 18. The analysis periods include weekdays a -ekends duri idday and PM peak hours. The weekend analysis periods are of particular int- to captur -gional ingress and egress traffic to the mall area. There are markedly higher tra of s in the Southcenter mall area during weekends compared to weekdays, with increas- .nging from 10 percent to 20 percent. ea is understood to have non-traditional Detailed Synchro/ SimTraffic microsimulation informed the corridor analysis assessment of the Southcenter Mall area. As illustrated in Figure 15 through Figure 18, the study corridors operate acceptably during all the evaluated analysis periods and meet the City's corridor LOS standards. The corridors operate at LOS E or better. Noteworthy intersections along these corridors include: • Southcenter Boulevard / 61 st Avenue South (LOS F with an average delay of 98 seconds under weekend mid -day conditions) 37 � ° 5outhcenter Boulevard / West Valley Highway (-[)S F with an average delay of83 seconds under weekend PK4conditions) ° South 180th Street / West Valley Highway (LOS E with an average delay of 70 seconds under weekend mid -day conditions) � South 180th Street / Andover Park East (L[}S E with an average delay of 70 seconds under weekend mid -day conditions) Tables with detailed vehicle LOS and delay results for each interse, exhibited in Appendix B and Appendix C. and corridor are 38 Figure 15. Existing (2018) - Weekday Mid -day Peak Hour LOS 1 attl, St 4 tte' 5 lte4th St els r-----' City Boundary Study Intersections Corridor iD MINIXat=„ 1,== 492,11W oraullm,„..414%, Corridor Level of Service D E Oar S'Iget)th 0 0 1 0 a 1 Mies Existing 2018 Weekday Midday LOS 39 Figure 16. Existing (2018) - Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS City Boundary • Study Intersections # Corridor ID 44;f1,11,1111211•113ar Corridor Level of Service D Baker Blvd 5116 0.15 0,3 Hies Existing 2018 Weekday PM LOS 40 Figure 17. Existing (2018) - Weekend Mid -day Peak Hour LOS S 16411, St City Boundary * Study Intersections Ai Corridor ID Corridor Level of Service ker 131u4 5. 0.3 Miles Existing 2018 Weekend Midday LOS 41 Figure 18. Existing (2018) - Weekend PM Peak Hour LOS Uf4ggg sg City Boundary Study Intersections Corridor ID SALRIBBLUCCIVELM Corridor Level of ServicD CitraAC aker Figng 1;5:211M 0 0,15 0 MRen Existing 2018 Weekend PM LOS 42 Existing Facilities and Future Needs for Walking and Rolling Walking and rolling are essential ways people get around Tukwila. Walking and rolling often precede and concludes trips by other modes. Planning safe and effective pedestrian infrastructure can make these trips easier, cheaper, and more convenient. Pedestrian infrastructure includes a range of treatments spanning from sidewalks, curb cuts, and crosswalks to and shared -use paths. An example of supportive p infrastructure in Tukwila are pedestrian -actuated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB), which are located along several corridors, including International Boulevard, as shown in Figure Most principal and minor arterial have sidewalk facilities on on sidewalk facilities tend to designations and many resi sidewalks and co Figure 20 dis city limits. Following the ado Plan, the following constructed13: the exis p imited e City es. H • ver, as in . a lack rriers such as 1-5. network within la's 2009 Walk and Roll facilities have been that does " rolling" include? "Rolling " refers to methods of using pedestrian facilities other than walking. This includes the use of whee' airs, strollers, and mobility de; ys. Sidewalks, trails, and other .:de_ in facilities accommodate those wa ialk as well as those who rely on moc, ' devices. 19. Crosswalk and RRFBs along a International Boulevard Source: Fehr & Peers. 2022 • Cascade View Elementary Safe Routes to School Trail • Sidewalk in front of Aviation High School • Sidewalk on South 150th Street (Thorndyke Elementary Safe Routes to School) • Sidewalks on Interurban Avenue South • Sidewalks on Tukwila International Boulevard 13 City of Tukwila. Walk & Roll Program. https://www.tukwilawa.gov/departments/community-development/walk-roll-program 43 � ° Sidewalks on Southcenter Parkway (south of South 180th Street) Sidewalks on Southcenter Boulevard (east of 1-5) These projects demonstrate Tukwila's long-standing commitment to multimodal connectivity. 44 Figure 20. Existing Walking and Rolling Network Csty Doirdary Parks ?75t,h ,F1P404, 4.3 P4M, Existing Sidewalks Multi-Llse trail Pedestrian Bridge Stairs/Walking Path -tt—tt- Walking Path dddaddr Blvd Side a ks and Trails 45 Pedestrian Network Connectivity The walking and rolling facilities in the City of Tukwila have room to improve overall network connectivity. As noted, residential areas in Tukwila have limited access to sidewalks. This poses a challenge for those relying on pedestrian facilities to reach key destinations such as grocery stores or transit stops. Filling gaps in the network can make the current facilities more functional throughout the city. In addition, many transit stops in the City are no I connected to the sidewalk network. This poses an issue as most transit riders acces •s using the pedestrian network. People may resort to walking in travel lanes or on a ► .w Icier, which poses a safety concern. Improving Tukwila's pedestrian network c. ctivity will, rn, improve the ability of users of the current infrastructure to reach mdestinations. Existing Facilities and Future Ne - r Biking Biking often facilitates longer trips than wa environment, individuals, and the communi There are a variety of different levels of experience and co bikes, other wheeled user skateboards, and inline skat infrastructure gear- ds ., .edestrians and cyclists, such a .red us hs. •e range of bicycle facili is important •nsur- at people who bike at a -Is can mak: .e of the network. This includes bot anced clists who are comfortable interact oving vehicles as well as bicyclists who prefer .arated facilities. ing wi ilar benefits to the types that can appeal to cyclists with varying Figure 21. Bike lane along Southcenter Boulevard Bike facilities currently found in Tukwila include bike lanes (example in Figure 21), sharrows, shared -use paths/trails, and designated bike routes. Tukwila currently maintains over six miles of dedicated bike lanes along seven segments. Tukwila's existing bike network is shown in Figure 22. While there are bike lanes on some key roadways, such as sections of Southcenter Boulevard, East Marginal Way South, 42nd Avenue South, Baker Boulevard, Orillia Road South, among other roads, there Source: Fehr & Peers. 2022 46 � are many gaps in the bike network. These lanes are not connected to each other nor to local shared -use paths. Following the adoption ofTukvv|a's 2009 Walk and Roll Plan, the following bike facilities have been constructed by private developers or the 14 0 Cascade View Elementary Safe Routes to School Trail • Bike lane VnSouth 112th Street • Bike lanes and shernovvsnn East Marginal Way * Bike lanes onramps to/from Airport Way South * Bike lanes on SouthcenterBou|evanj (east of|-5 mCity ofTukwila. Walk & Roll Program. hupz//ww"v.tukwi|pwa.xov/department$iommunity'deve|opment/wa|k,noU'program 47 Figure 22. Existing Bike Network } City Boundary Parks ----- Bike Friendly Routes --- -- Sharrows --hi—. Existing Bike Lanes — Multi -Use Trails Existing Bike Facilities & Bike Friendly Routes Bike Network Connectivity The bike facilities in the City of Tukwila have room to improve overall network connectivity. There are several roadway segments with bike facilities, however they are currently disjointed. The connection between bike lanes in Tukwila to local shared -use paths and trails is limited. This limits the ability of cyclists to reach desired destinations utilizing designated bike spaces. Improving Tukwila's bike network connectivity will provide more opti or people who bike to reach their desired destinations using their preferred type of bicy cility. 49 Existing and Future Transit Needs This section provides an overview of the transit services currently providing service to and from Tukwila, how these services are utilized, and where there may be additional demand for service in the area. System Overview King County Metro (Metro) offers five traditional fixed -route s o RapidRide routes, one Demand Area Response (DART) route, and Via to Transit o . and s within the City of Tukwila. Sound Transit provides light rail service on the e to Tukwila In tional Boulevard Station and Sounder commuter rail service to Tukwi ation. The highest ridership activity occurs at two locations th. served by multiple lines and modes: • Tukwila International Boulevard Stati. . , bus, RapidRide, and the 1 Line. Average daily boardings .er 20• Link light rail were 1,960 and bus boardings were 5,337 for a tota ,338 . he stat • Andover Park West -r ied by local bus and RapidRide F Line. Passengers - ect e Tukwila Sounder station to the east using the RapidRide F Line. A .e daily . din. this location during October 2021 were 3,325. The characters of these se es are summarized in Figure 23. 50 Figure 23. Existing Transit Serving Tukwila (2023) City Boundary Parks Sounder Stations Link Stations TukwilaParkandRide KCM Local Routes RapidRide �0 Sounder S Line Commuter Rail cw,rw 1 Line light Rail Existing Transit Options 51 Service Frequency and Availability Transit service in Tukwila operates with a range of service frequencies and availability depending on corridor. There are four frequent service bus routes in Tukwila that have service every 15- minute service from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays, including Rapid Ride A, Rapid Ride F, Route 124, and Route 150. Route 193 is a commuter express route that only operates during commute times in the peak direction to/from First Hill. Route 150 serves Kent anouthcenter before becoming an express route to Downtown Seattle. Routes 156 and 1 .erve Tukwila locally including the urban center, Tukwila International Boulevard, So -r Mall, and Interurban Ave South. These routes tend to serve the area with lower fr-. -noes . •.ared to rapid transit options. 1 Line light rail additionally serves Tukwila Intern .nal Station e :-10 minutes on weekdays. All transit modes serving Tukwila are outli' in Tab 3, alongside rrent service frequencies and spans of service. Table 3. Service Characteristics by Route AM/PM Peak ing (6A-9A, 3P- i er 7P) 4. Route 124 15 Route 128 20 Route 150 Route 156 30 Route 193x 20 RapidRide A 10 RapidRide F 15 DART 906* 20-30 day Sunday Weekday Saturday Sunday 30 30 15-30 60 4:54 AM- 4:21 AM 1:12AM 4:45 AM- 3:03AM 5:03 AM- 11:26 PM 5:21 AM- 8:50 AM 3:09 PM — 8:32 PM 24 Hr 4:44 AM- 12:44 AM 4:45 AM- 11:51 PM 5:49 AM- 5:53 AM- 4:24AM 4:22 AM 6:02 AM- 1:03 AM 6:03 AM- 1:13 AM 5:07 AM- 3:01 AM 5:25 AM- 11:00 PM 24 Hr 5:59 AM- 12:44 AM 5:52 AM- 3:06 AM 5:28 AM- 10:47 PM 6:00 AM- 12:48 AM 8:20AM- 8:20 AM- 6:59 PM 6:57 PM 52 S Line AM/PM Peak Midday Evening 6A-9A, 3P- (9A-3P) (After Saturday Sunday Weekday Saturday Sunday 7P) 7P) 20-30 1 Line 8 10 Via to Transit On -Demand On Demand 20-30 8 On - Demand * Some late -night trips may exceed maximum frequency listed High Frequency Transit During peak travel times on weekdays, ther frequency: • Metro Route 150 o Service betwe • Metro • Metro Rapid o Service between Burien and Renton • Sound Transit 1 Line o Service between Angle Lake and Northgate via Downtown Seattle Local Route Frequency 10 On- Deman nd Dow • n Seattle 4:36 AM- 11:22 M Special Events Only 4:11 AM- 2:14 AM Special Events Only 5:06 AM- 1:05 AM 6 AM-12 AM t provide 15-minute or better deral Way Transit Center and Tukwila Intl Blvd Station 53 During peak travel times onweekdays, noutes1Z4 1Z8,and 156provide service at3O-nninute frequencies or better. These routes serve local stops in Tukwila in addition toserving surrounding communities and Downtown Seattle. ° Metro Route 1Z4 o Service between Tukwila /ntYBlvd Station and Dom/ntow/n,,&eottle � Metro Route 12O o Service between North Admiral (West Seattle, * Metro Route 156 ` o Service between /finh0ne [o0nue (Des On Demand Services During off-peak times when service is not as to use two different on-clemans I to tra higher frequencies. Dial-A-fUcleTransb | mmmunitiestha distances, an better and c other transit op Southc md SouthcenterMo8 outes, Tukwila residents are able them to stops with more service and ope . - ey King County Metro that operates within ore flexible service due to lower population density, greater e options. DART route 906 serves Tukwila every hour or ute by request to allow for residents to make connections to Via to Transit is a pi|o^ ernand service that is also available within a defined boundary of Tukwila. Via toTransit allows anyone within the defined service area to hail a ride using a mobile epp or phone ce|| for transportation to a transit stop with frequent service. In Tukwila, Vie to Transit can be used within the defined area to provide transportation to Tukwila International Boulevard Station and the Tukwila Community Center. Ridership and Productivity Boarding activity inTukwila is highest atTukwila |nt'| Blvd Station, with average daily boardinQs of7,3]8 in [>ctober2O21 (bus and light rail combined). The next highest boarding activity is 54 � located at Southoenter Mall, a large employment hub served by three local routes and the RapidRide F line. The Sound Transit Sounder Station east of Southcenter Mall has lower ridership than both Tukwila |nt'|Blvd Station and SouthcenterMall. Figure 24shows average daily boanjings for these heavily utilized stations and other stops in Tukwila. Outside of larger transit hubs, the Tukwila International Blvd corridor has notable ridership and residential neighborhoods. activity especially near the intersection of S 144 th Street which is locat2&ear Foster High School 55 Figure 24. Average Daily Boardings by Stop Tukwila international Boulevard Station 5,337 bus hoardings 1,960 light rep headings City Boundary Parks [Wordings 10 100 1,000 „1"St R5rfo 512.4th :ST MR, Link Stations „Or Sounder Stations Southcenter Man 3,325 hoardings isier sr 1v1,1e. mar" ir 1 Line Light Rail twit... Sounder S Line Commuter Rail King County Metro Routes Serving Tukwila 00",""1.' Rao.dRide Average Daily Weekday Boardings (October 2021) 56 Figure 25 shows the average weekday boardings for each route serving the City of Tukwila, as well as the percentage of ridership that occurs within Tukwila and outside the city limits. The RapidRide Fline, which provides rapid bus service between Burien and Renton, generates almost half of its ridership from Tukwila boanjings. This activity indicates strong demand foreast-west travel, with Tukwila being a major origin/destination. Figure 25. Average Weekday Ridership by Route Operating in Tuk - (2021) nnp|dR|dc AUne navuxidePLim, nompl5o x^mpIo Route 124 Route156 Route 906* Route 193X � � Source: King County Metr ^ Route 906 ridership could n. 1W ated bystop and represents all boarding activity inside and outside ufTukwila 3% A A 11,1111111 i � 3,000 4�000 5�Oo0 \veaCeWeekday Boardings kwi|aaoa,diopo sRoandioq,pinTv:wi|a 6"V00 7�OOO Route level productivity, calculated as boardings per revenue hour, is displayed in Figmre20i Route productivity provides a measure of service efficiency and shows which routes are most effective at attracting ridership per unit of service. The RapidRideA Line has nearly double the productivity nfany other route serving Tukwila. The Line operates between Tukwila |nt'| Blvd station and Federal Way Transit Center and serves as an important transit connection for residents to access 1 Line light nail for regional travel and connections to other services. Route 193 carries 16 passengers per trip, which is a better measure of utilization for peak commute 57 type routes as it shows seat utilization and is not being compared with the metrics of all -day routes. Figure 26. Peak Period Productivity by Route Operating in Tukwila (2021) 5.0 30.0 9.5 5.0 0.0 7.1 15.0 koLli..e 130 RoL,Itrr On -Time P 15,7 4.4 29.4 Route 150 kc utc"t 124 Rapid Ride F Rapid Ride A On -time perf. -nce largely i ►acts the reliability of a transit service and can drive passenger decision making . t usin. nsit. Figure 27 displays the percentage of bus trips arriving late to stops during the f .f 2021, early departure data was not available. King County Metro considers buses on -time f they arrive to a stop up to 1.5 minutes before the scheduled time and up to 5.5 minutes after the scheduled departure. Route 128, Rapid Ride A, and Route 124 have the highest amount of late trips of any bus service that operates within Tukwila. Routes 193, 156, and 150 operate with the lowest number of trips arriving late. 58 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Figure 27. Percent of Late Arrivals by Route Operating in Tukwila (Fall 2020) 25,0% 20.0% 5.0% 0.0% 5.6% 5.0% R0we 193 Routo.15' Via to Transit Ser Origins and D 5,9% VIIH11',51e7i0P, 20.1% 14.4% 12.9% lc F Raut'e.1.24 Rapid Ride 0 Route 128 Via to Trans' lot ice from King County Metro that connects riders to transit and co nity hubs t may not be well served by fixed -route or rail service. This analysis shows th ridership patterns of the service. October 2021 ridership erns are illustrated in Figure 28. The predominant travel patterns are to and from Tukwila International Station. 59 Figure 28. Via to Transit Trip Direction and Popularity City Boundary Parks tt% Trips 5 or Fewer 6 25 26 - 50 SSAMS,,,ss,s. 51 - 75 - 76 _ 100 NNW (My 100 S 20,111th \ '77Towd„"IP!,,T'Y'''127 Stranths kat s,sRSAls „ss 0 0 5 Via to Transit Operating Bo ffi,riary Mlles Via to Transit Trip Patterns (October 2021) 60 In October 2021, there were 836 Via to Transit trips in Tukwila, of which there were 24 unique origin and destination pairs. The most common pairing provided service between Tukwila Intl Blvd Station and a block group approximately 1.5 miles north containing a mix of housing densities and commercial activity including King County Metro's South Base. This pairing accounted for 20% of all 836 trips. The block group is defined at the south near Foster High School and to the north by the Duwamish River. It includes residential neighborhoods north of the school and isolated areas near the Duwamish. Popularity of this ay be influenced by the King County Metro base and employees potentially using th- 'ce. The block group also contains isolated residential areas with limited pedestrian infr ctu raking it difficult to walk to a fixed route bus stop. This aligns with Via to Tra . goal of img transit access in harder to reach areas. The second most popular trip pair made up 17% of to . ip, providing service between Tukwila Int'I Blvd Station and a block group o miles no -st of the station bounded by Tukwila Intl Blvd to the west, S 139th St to _ Margi ' ay to the east, and the Duwamish River to the north. The southern oft -sidential while the northern half is warehouse commercial near H'- 599. The Tukwila Community C Transit trips. There are also Via to Transit polic paratransit sery lar bus service, generated only 33 Via to the Tukwila boundary, which is allowed under passenger is eligible for Access, King County Metro's Over a sample of - s o . to Transit data, the largest number of requests for rides comes during the afternoon . eriod, from approximately 3 pm to 6 pm. From the location -based analysis of Via to Transit trips, trips at the most popular times of day indicate the service being used to connect employees to regional transportation options and Tukwila residents from high frequency transit hubs to home locations. Figure 29 displays the number of Via to Transit trips during the afternoon rush hour. Via to Transit in Tukwila appears to function primarily as a first/last mile connection during common commute times. The service is also used as an early morning and late night connection to transit when frequencies are lower, but with fewer riders than during the peak period. 61 Figure 29. Via to Transit Rides Provided by Time of Day 20 00 00 00 40 20 L,f} LO ham ` GI Market Analysis Travel Patterns The employment rel Longitudinal E that is agg Figure 30 and Fi ten commute destin erns to and from Tukwila were evaluated using 2019 amics (LEHD) data, a product from the U.S. Census. Data tract vel. work or home locations by point density. Each point represents ome locations. Tukwila Residents Work Destination Tukwila residents primarily commute within King and Pierce counties, with only a handful of employment locations further away. Large employment clusters can be seen in downtown Seattle, Renton, SeaTac Airport, and commercial areas adjacent to the 1-5 corridor. Transit service from Tukwila to downtown Seattle is fast and frequent by utilizing Link light rail or Route 150 from areas surrounding Tukwila Int'I Blvd station or Southcenter Mall. Tukwila residents additionally have access to frequent east/west travel with RapidRide F line which serves 62 employment centers at Southcenter Mall and Renton. Residents may face slower commutes by car or local bus to reach stops with frequent and regional service. 63 Figure 30. Employment Locations of Tukwila Residents City Boundary Parks r Mono a23 Pont , Mt2Cfic1C1 ss33,"3s732332usniss, Pc2nt".32, 03vircsUon OTIS 1 3 NE.11111= Mi 4,5 1 Dot = 10 Jobs = Employment Locations of Tukwila Residents 132322:423311,, Employment Locations of Tukwila Residents (2019) 64 � Tukwila Employee Home Origins [ornnouteo into Tukwila live throughout King, Pierce and Khsap County. The largest concentration of Tukwila commuters live in South Seattle, West Seattle, Federal \Ney, and unincorporated King County southeast of Renton. Except for unincorporated areas of King County, employees that work in Tukwila have access from surrounding communities to two large transit stations, Tukwila |nt'| Blvd Station and Southcenter Mail. Thesestations can be accessed by utilizing Link Light Rail, RapidRideAor F |ine, and voute�j, 128. and 156. 65 Figure 31. Home Locations of Workers Employed in Tukwila te, _ City Boundary Parks 4 4C411011el. rctt.tr 7,4 7 teeteelt. itomitio "4T2 kkentrikocirsici ei 4"tkeite Scireirksani ete,0.44,;:tee s' ;Vero et e King Cs:24424 , . teem, i'keliktei . reit si e‘, eee tee et. 4 1 Atetene% " 7: 'Cie tek' ; OT eki: sidekick:lin:4A 4 „ 4 ,Algyvt, ,tt 0:t itptto Mi=.11.1E40teskiiri.,„ 1 Dot = 10 Residencies Horne Locations of People Employed in Tukwila Home Locations of Workers Employed in Tukwila (October 2019) 66 Refer to Appendix D for an overview of the transit services to and from Tukwila, how these services are utilized, and where there may be additional demand for service in the area. Freight ����*� �������&r ����&�°U°��� " "~~"��""� ~= Truck Mobility Freight plays a critical role in the economic vitality of Tukwila as businesses and residents rely on freight shipped via trucks. Truck sizes range from light -duty commerd ans, "single -unit trucks" for package delivery or moving, and garbage trucks that Ante through neighborhoods to large semi -truck trailers connecting to local n and Tukwila's Manufacturing/ Industrial Center (MIC). Tukwila's MIC is o 0 fourreg MICs in King County targeted to preserve and enhance manufacturi d industrial acti facilitating freight transportation and substantial employment , ortunit* Trucks delivering wholesale and retail goods, business �es,and building materials throughout Tukwila contribute toand are � ` -*bvtraff i gestion.The City partners with regional agencies and the State to build an* eint^ 4ta 4 Goods Transportation System streets and promote the use Department of Transporta classifications described in Freight Corri, Descriptioi � / q e ffic on lower -volume d roadways. The Washington State dways using five freight tonnage illion tons of freight per year iUionand 1Umillion tons offreight per year T-3 1 Between 3O00O0and 4million tons offreight per year Between 100,000 and 300,000 tons of freight per year At least 20,000 tons of freight in 60 days and less than 100,000 tons per year Source: wsooTWashington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FaTs) 20e1 update,an2l / 67 � As shown in Figure 33, Interstate 5and Interstate 405, which are part of the national Interstate Highway system, areT-1 corridors that run through Tukwila and facilitate the transportation ofmore than 10million tons offreight per year. Other T-1 corridors include State Route 599, West Valley Highvvay,[}ri||ia Road South, East Marginal Way South from Interurban Avenue South toSouth Boeing Access Road, and South Boeing Access Road from East Marginal Way to Martin Luther King Junior Way South. Multiple roadways in various parts of the City are designated as T-2 and T-3 corridors. Figure 32Error! Reference source not found. presents an example of T-] coni In addition to truck routes, railro Union Pacific (UP)run northnorth and the Port of Taco - carry including th included in the documen goin tic car rou ' out ym, . ',mPeers. zoz Burlington Northern Santa Fe(BNSHand as shown in Figumm33. These rail networks market and serve the Port ofSeattle tothe eCity to balance freight mobility and community needs, ject If available, information from these efforts will be on of the Transportation Element. 68 Figure 33. Freight Routes 5133ed St Truck Corridors r' 1 T-2 North Tukwila Manufacturing/ indunkr+at Congo eti Feeight Iota/modal FscillYiav Orglia Vehicle thallolOy Freight Routes 69 Safety The ultimate goal of traveling is to arrive safely at a destination, regardless of the mode of transportation used. The City of Tukwila has several programs dedicated to ensuring the safety of its transportation system users, including Safe Routes to School (SRTS) and a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program (NTCP). Tukwila's SRTS program is part of a make it easier and safer for students to walk or bike to school Speeding and unnecessary through -traffic in neighborhoods create safety hazards on residential streets; therefore, the NTCP program was developed to improve the livability of the local streets and residential collectors using traffic calming. An example of a traffic calming measure is shown in Figure 34. The City's collision data obtained from the WSDOT was analyzed to identify safety hot and overall collision trends in Tukwila. Three categories of collisions involvin vehicle, vehicle -bike, and v vehicle collisions with bic time period, collision counts increase in collis' number of c the COVID-1 could travel at hi national movement to Figure 34. Spee Source: Fehr & Peers. 2022 ps in Tukwila nalyzed to understand overarching patterns: d with other vehicles. Over the 2017 to 2021 ila have generally decreased. Data from 2020 showed an erious injuries and fatalities despite a notable drop in the es that year. This is potentially related to the onset of times drivers experienced less congestion on roadways and It is critical to consider vehicle -pedestrian collisions have substantially higher proportions of serious injuries and fatalities as compared to other modes, hovering around 40 percent since 2019. This is substantially higher than the rate among vehicle -vehicle collisions, where KSI (killed or seriously injured) collisions typically make up approximately two percent of collisions. However, in 2020, serious injuries and fatalities resulted from slightly over four percent of vehicle -vehicle collisions. Overall, vulnerable road users in Tukwila, including cyclists and pedestrians, face higher rates of negative outcomes of collisions as compared to rates among vehicle -only collisions. 70 Vehicle -Vehicle Involved Collisions While collisions have generally decreased over the period of 2017 to 2021, Tukwila experienced a significant decline in collisions in 2020. As shown in Figure 35, the number of collisions involving only vehicles in 2021 increased from 2020 but remained at a level lower than 2019. The top three causes recorded, for vehicle -vehicle collisions that reported a cause, were driver distraction/inattention (24%), failure to yield/did not grant right of w. %), and improper turning (9%). A heat map of vehicle -vehicle collisions from 2017-2021 is vehicle -vehicle collisions are concentrated in the South International Boulevard. These areas have speed li contribute to elevated rates of collisions. Collisions re the City, with several fatalities resulting from collisions al the speed limit is 40 miles per hour. Highe n resu o»ided in Mall area, as e 36. The reported as along Tukwila mi per hour wh ch may atality are spread throughout outh Boeing Access Road, where orse outcomes from collisions. 71 Figure 35. Vehicle -Vehicle Involved Collisions in Tukwila Collision Count Notes 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2017 2018 2019 " d2 * Vehicle -vehicle collisions include objects. Source: WSDOT, Fehr & Fatal Suspected Serious Injury F Suspected Minor Injury i Possible Injury No Apparent Injury Unknown edestrians or cyclists. This does include crashes with standing 72 Figure 36. Vehicle -Vehicle Involved Collisions Heat Map Cloy Boundary Parks Injury Type e Fatal Collision 0 Suspected Serious Injury Collision Density Low Vehicle -Vehicle Involved Collisions Heat Map 73 Vehicle -Bike Involved Collisions There were no fatalities as a result of a vehicle -bike collision in Tukwila between 2017 and 2021. However, more than 80 percent of vehicle -bike collisions resulted in some form of injury (serious injury, minor injury, or possible injury). Notably, two thirds of vehicle -bike collisions in 2021 resulted in a suspected serious injury. Figure 37 displays the vehicle -bike involved collisions by year and of the vehicle -bike collisions with a listed cause, driver distr failure to yield/did not grant right of way (35%), and asleep or ill common reasons. Figure 38 displays a heatmap of vehicle -bike collisions. collisions were reported in the area north of Southc other areas within the city. Since there are minimal d bicycles must interact with vehicles on these busy streets` number of collisions. Figure 37. Vehicle -Bike Involved Collisions +ila Collision Count 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2017 2018 Source: WSDOT, Fehr & Peers. 2022 2019 2020 n/inattention (39%), ake up the most er concentrate. .f bicycle Mall,ig Tukwila P.rkway, than cycle facilities in the area, Lch may be related to the elevated ti 2021 Fatality Suspected Serious Injury • Suspected Minor Injury Possible Injury No Apparent Injury Unknown 74 Figure 38. Vehicle -Bike Involved Collisions Heat Map City Boundary Parks Injury Type + Fatal Collision * Suspected Serious Injury Collision Density h Vehicle -Bicycle Involved Collisions Heat Map 75 Vehicle -Pedestrian Involved Collisions Between 2017 and 2021, at least one pedestrian fatality occurred in Tukwila each year. The rate of serious injuries and fatalities resulting from vehicle -pedestrian collisions ranges from eight percent of collisions in 2018 to 42 percent of collisions in 2020. The rate of serious injuries and fatalities resulting from vehicle -pedestrian collisions followed a generally increasing trend from 2017 and 2021. Figure 39 displays the vehicle -pedestrian involved c pedestrian collisions where a cause was reported, driver distractio yield/did not grand right of way (15%), and under the influen causes. ns by year. Of vehicle- tention (26%), failure to e up the most common Figure 40 displays a heatmap of vehicle -pedestrian sions. er concentr.tions of vehicle - pedestrian collisions were reported around Southcen well as Tukwila Hill. Surrounding Southcenter Mall, there was one suspected serious injury sion, while there were several suspected serious injury collisions along T - nationlevard and Military Road. This may be related to the difference between tr. spe- h ocation. Although there are increased conflict areas between . - - - trians . icles near Southcenter Mall, vehicle speeds are slower and resulting coll. ' are seve ` he higher speeds along Tukwila International Boulevard may contribute orse o .mes of isions. Collisions resulting in a fatality were spread throughout the city . - s , speeds or limited pedestrian amenities. 76 Figure 39. Vehicle -Pedestrian Involved Collisions in Tukwila Collision Count 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1 2017 Source: WSDOT, Fehr & Peers. 202 2018 Fatality Suspected Serious Injury uspected Minor Injury le Injury No parent Injury VI Unknown 77 Figure 40. Vehicle -Pedestrian Involved Collisions Heat Map [1:11 Oty Boundary Parks sea`i s nosh 'st Injury Type 0 Fatal Collision 0 Suspected Serious Injury Collision Density Low High MOPS Vehicle -Pedestrian Involved Collisions Heat Map 78 Opportunities and Challenges The City views this Transportation Element update as an opportunity to step back and develop a holistic vision for transportation in Tukwila. As pointed out in the subsequent sections, a set of draft goals for Tukwila's transportation system were developed based on input from the community, stakeholders, councilmembers, and City staff. Given the system that Tukwila has today, these goals require ongoing efforts and input from stakehold nd the community. Some of the key challenges and opportunities for achieving eac are listed below. Tukwila is one of the most diverse commu residents who were born in various parts o to serve the needs of all people and that dec strive to eliminate systemic barri- 017, t Policy (Resolution No. 1921) commissioners with the Currently, the Equity Policy systemic and ins equitable ou Specific to tran issues to provide s tation n Washin. • State, with over 40 percent here • t is of paramount importance 'der diverse perspectives and wila City Council passed their first Equity ted officials, City staff, board members and ake decisions with an equity lens. mittee (EPIC) seeks to dismantle historic nd to reinforce practices that result in inclusion with y frequently engages with the community about transportation pulations who have the greatest need:children, older adults, people with disabilitie , er income communities, and under -served communities. In addition, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan establishes the City of Tukwila's ongoing commitment as an all-inclusive community to providing equal access for all, including those with disabilities. 79 Safety is important to Tukwila residents and visitors. The City of Tukwila has several programs dedicated to ensuring the safety of its transportation system users, including Safe Routes to School (SRTS) and the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program (NTCP). The collision analysis described in this report highlights locations where documented crashes resulted in injuries and fatalities, or involved the most vulnerable users (pedestrians and cyclists), between 2017 and 2021. In Tukwila, pedestrians and cyclists face higher rates of negative o .mes of collisions as compared to rates among vehicle -only collisions. Serious injur .n. .lities for vulnerable users were noted along arterials including Southcenter Bo ard, Tukw 'ternational Boulevard and South 144th Street. Addressing these lo' .ns through imp . . multimodal designs and other strategies such traffic calming hore safe anwelcoming system. Most importantly, it is critical to ensure that ► 'dents and visitors feel safe walking, biking, and connecting to transit, o .erwise they , of choose to do so. This resonates with the sentiments shared by the rega ; transit safety concerns. Using the 2009 Non Motorized Pla Update presents an opportun pedestrian and bike netw addition, identifying and a shelters helps imp s a start 24 Transportation Element (TE) d improved facilities, to address gaps in the omfortable access to transit facilities. In amenities such as lighting, benches, and Having a variety of pract al and reliable transportation modes offers Tukwila residents and visitors travel choices, which helps to optimize the capacity of the City's transportation system and reduces reliance on driving. Following the adoption of Tukwila's 2009 Walk and Roll Plan, new bike and pedestrian facilities have been implemented over the past few years to improve connectivity. Currently, most principal and minor arterials in the City have sidewalk facilities on one or both sides. However, sidewalk facilities tend to be limited to these street designations. Similarly, bike facilities are limited to a few roadways. While people have expressed desire to use transit, there are also gaps in transit service and inadequate stop amenities that make transit an 80 inconvenient option for many. Developing a network of Complete Streets to accommodate all modes and abilities is vital to increasing walking, rolling, biking, and riding transit. As indicated by how the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the abrupt travel demand and traffic patterns, there is need for a poised and system capable of adjusting to disruptive trends in transportati has an opportunity to invest in new technologies, such as a intersections more efficient, bike share and/or scooter s options, and automated enforcement cameras. Cogn. need to be strategic in capitalizing upon new techn opportunities for mobility. Transportation is one of th change. Historically, there transportation air poll facilities are typ waterways. sustainability, marginalized po p ve sig programs to of funning limitatio ramatic changes in onsive transportation he TE Update, the City 'es a ing to make 'de more modal he City will olicy choices to create it pollution and consequently, climate ong the people that adverse impacts of affect. Additionally, streets and other transportation enerate runoff and carry contaminants into streams and on rastructure in Tukwila should be designed to promote nd support clean air and water for all, particularly historically Encouraging multimodal, ected transportation options plays a significant role in advancing the goal of protecting the environment. This TE Update should look for opportunities to promote in order to reduce the impact of the City's transportation system on the environment such as: expanded transit use; pedestrian and bike transportation options;intelligent transportation systems (ITS) for traffic management and more efficient transportation operations; and street design elements such as trees, landscaping, planted medians and permeable paving. 81 Chapter 3: Public Outreach Community engagement is a key component of the overall Transportation Element process, ensuring that community stakeholders have ample opportunity to identify issues, influence outcomes, and participate in final recommendations. The engagement efforts are targeted to enable collaboration in identifying and resolving issues, facilitate two- communication, ensure transparency, and build trust. This Background Report sum es key takeaways from outreach efforts conducted in Spring of 2022. These standards ted to reinforce the transportation goals developed as part of the City's TE Upd Vision and Goals for Transport Cities establish a transportation -specific vision and se. .. o guide decisions. The transportation vision and goals identified in the Transpo 'n Element of a Comprehensive Plan guide decisions over a 20-year planni 'q. - The Cit ukwila established its current transportation vision and goals through prio forts te 2015 Comprehensive Plan update, but the new goals docu the future and will be include goals will be presented to • Goal 1: Equity Eliminate systemic barriers to ensure fair access to healthy, affordable, reliable transportation options, livable places, and jobs. in thi best reflect the City's current vision for preh- •ve Plan update. The following draft vision and Counc •r endorsement: • Goal 2: Safety Provide a safe transportation system and placemaking to emphasize Tukwila as a welcoming place, particularly for historically marginalized and vulnerable populations. • Goal 3: Connectivity 82 Maintain, expand, and enhance Tukwila's multimodal network, particularly, walk, bike, roll, and transit, to increase mobility options where needs are greatest. • Goal 5: Adaptability Anticipate and plan for the community's evolving needs, new technologies, and opportunities for mobility. • Goal 6: Environment Plan, design, and construct transportation projects that r' •reenhouse gas emissions, improve community health, and protect tjatural - onment. Process to Develop the Vision and G The transportation vision and goals are a product of e and engagement efforts conducted in collation with Community Input The TE team, in partnership wit community outreach and en outreach efforts to Tukwi were targeted to ensure tha needs of the co communities As a first step sheets, flyers, and flyers, and posters de stakeholder and public outreach taff. artm Community Development (DCD), conducted spring 2023. This was the first of three planned community organizations. These efforts s deve o. d during the City staff workshop align with the as primarily placed on engaging hard -to -reach focus groups. t, the project team posted and distributed handouts (fact ughout the City and contacted community partners. Fact sheets, insight into the TE Update and provided a link to a survey and webmap requesting community input. English versions of the fact sheet, flyer, and poster are available in Appendix E. The shared project material was available in Spanish, Vietnamese, Somali, and English. The locations where the project team shared fact sheets, flyers, and posters included: Tukwila Community Center, Healthpoint Tukwila, Riverton Church, Abubakr Islamic Center of Washington, Saint Thomas Parish, Global to Local / Spice Bridge, Tukwila Library, Tukwila Village (senior housing), Saar's Super Saver Foods, Vietnamese Martyr Church, Somali Health Organization and Starfire Complex. 83 In -person events The in -person events hosted in April 2023 and May 2023 are listed below. Tabling events: • Tukwila Community Center • Tukwila Library • Tukwila Elementary School • Saar's Super Saver Foods Focus groups: • Riverton Park United Methodist Church • Foster High School During the in -person events (tabling and fo groups), the project team captured a total of public comments and ideas rel transportation system. Nea comments captured focus transit comments, man relat- afety concerns while using pub he ents that highlighted -s with drivi :bou percent specified a co regarding .t or access. Lastly, approxima 5 per of comments pointed out walking . g needs. From the in -person outreach effor s, there was overall support for the draft goals with an emphasis on safety and active transportation. Online Input . Focus Group at Riverton iced Methodist Church Source: Fehr & Peers. 2023 84 High lir4 Ii&iiirilku..•• LP rsisl kkon ' s4ht. • •• • ss„ Source: Fehr & Peers. 2023 The City of Tukwila website15 hosted project information related to the TE, including an incentivized16 online survey and an interactive webmap (Figure 42) to solicit feedback from the Tukwila residents and visitors. The online survey had questions about the draft goals and transportation experiences, while the webmap sought input on potential needs and improvements in specific locations, such as missing bicycle/pedestrian connections, high -stress crossings, challenging intersections, or near -miss locations. Based on the understanding that Tukwila is a diverse community, all project items were available in Sp , Vietnamese, Somali, and English. In addition, the Google Translate option was availab all the other languages. Figure 42. Online Webmap :t.tv t(1f1 ccuFI!Hi R ris(sr , ch E,0,0,01 ai N'ark 'levy 'Park (C 71 —1 t •"Frc.V,Fit.;17A,. WirCo'rit +.,11 Coal, Newta Le sCrO,k „ , Last Renton ,, HI rld , n '• • •soif C,911 l'"`,,.A, ,, t;isog c,k,.k. : E Ri. osis •, 'Pt ric iin a' , Legend Coup pr ReTi, ,14105,00o vis, 11 N.atu 1,7,MIllgt COP n r rove an issue wdi walking, roll) g„ or crossirc here have an issue with biking, here have an issue with, dirtying/pat-kilns here • I' have an issue with riding transit here le) [eel carniforcable here (please describe:1 ';67 t 'NO LI I d ke waikini7 route here i( would iiike a biking route here 15 City of Tukwila. Transportation Element Update. https://www*tukwilawa.gov/departments/public-works/transportation/transportation-element-update/ 16 Survey participation was incentivized with the chance to win a $150 Visa gift card. 85 About 80 unique respondents completed the survey and provided feedback on the draftgoals in addition to the 67 comments that were added to the intenactivevvebnnap. The location -based comments pointed out the lack of bicycle and sidewalk connectivity. Several comments identified abrupt ends of bike lanes on busy streets, including Southcenter Boulevard, and other streets inthe vicinity ofSouthcenter Mail. Similarly, respondents also noted challenges in the 5outhcenterK4a|| area for pedestrian connections. Additionally, respondents identified the Tukwila Community Center as an area ofinterest for sidewalk conn and transit access. reachSpecifically for transit, several respondents revealed that the a nsit routes do not W, all city neighborhoods, particularly the Via system. On the ide scale, community 7 generally needs east -west connections via all modes of sportation. Drivi eed is also a citywide concern. A number of comments pointed reas w, traffic moves faster than the speed limit due tothe underut|izatonofstreets. The projectteanodocunoentede|istofaU transportation inTukwila and these which for the Transportation Element. The respondents' informati Figure 43. To draw in par messages on the City's Faceb events describe to the clevel ideas fro e community on improving ing project recommendations primary mode of travel is provided in rnunications team posted social media ge. Furthermore, the project team hosted several in -person n to engage with the Tukwila community and direct them 86 Race a White Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native • Asian • Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Prefer not to answer e Other Primary language spoken at home te English Spanish a .. � .�:,�;: �.:�:;:��.�..• ;.:, E :;�^„ ;. , .lic Transit • Somali • Swahili Vietnamese a . y',".. ooter Othera � � �. p;. �:..��::� Other Source: Fehr & Pee Primary mode of travel As shown in Figure 44, -re was overall support for the draft goals with an emphasis on safety and equity. Anecdotal comments from respondents related to transit safety included: "The stigma surrounding public transit affects my personal experiences with transit. Often the stigma seems to be reinforced as truth when you use transit." Figure 44. Online Input on Draft Transportation Goals 87 Number of Respondents 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Equity Source: Fehr & Peers. 2023 Safety Adaptability IN Strongly Agree Agree tral .gree AI ate Justice Multiple comments on transit east -west con tivity - s o the Tukwila Community Center and Allentown neighborh. - gener. noted. he respondents highlighted the associated limitations for cycl and sit rid: They pointed out the need for the City to focus investments on encns besides driving. One suggested protected bike infrastructur- 'n' w ational Boulevard, Southcenter Boulevard, Andover, Interurb. - oun. - Community Center as a way to improve connectivity and address relate 88 Recurring Themes Outreach and engagement efforts in the spring of 2023 holistically catalogued the community's needs regarding the various modes of transportation available in Tukwila. During the in -person events (tabling and focus groups), the project team captured a total of 128 public comments and ideas related to the City's transportation system. Thirty-six comments from the community involved issues with transit, and over a third of these were specificall using public transit. Of the 17 comments that highlighted issues specified a concern regarding cost or access. Lastly, 19 comm biking needs. The key themes noted from community inpcluded: • Transit safety, reliability, and amenities • Expanding the bicycle network • Filling sidewalk gaps • Costs associated with driving arding safety while driving, about 40 percent out walking and As discussed in previous sections, S.ring 202 also included online engagement tools (online sury . -racti iebmap). The interactive webmap presented a platform for respondents t• are fee. :ck, con. s, or ideas regarding precise locations or transportation facilities wi ity 1' , respondents could upvote each other's comments that they . • -ed w total, 67 comments were compiled on the map; the breakdown of c► en we . -d by upvotes is as follows: • Bikin2%) • Walking, . •, or cr• ng issues and needs (34%) • Transit issue •s (12%) • Driving or parkinissues and needs (8%) Commendation on Tukwila's transportation facilities (4%) The location -based comments pointed out the lack of bicycle and sidewalk connectivity. Several comments identified abrupt ends of bike lanes on busy streets, including Southcenter Boulevard and other streets in the vicinity of Southcenter Mall. Similarly, respondents also noted challenges in the Southcenter Mall area for pedestrian connections. Additionally, respondents identified the Tukwila Community Center as an area of interest for sidewalk connections and transit access. 89 � Specifically for transit, several respondents revealed that the available transit routes do not reach all city neighborhoods, particularly the Via system. On the citywide scale, the community generally needs east -west connections via all modes of transportation. Driving speed is also a citywide concern. A number of comments pointed out areas where traffic moves faster than the speed limit due to the underuti|ization of streets. The project team documented a list of all proposed ideas from the co transportation in Tukwila and which will be used in developing pr Transportation Element. unity on improving recommendations for the 90 Chapter 4: Transportation Goals and Policies Policies, which fit under the five established goals of the plan, provide steps that the City can take to further each of the goals. Each goal is outlined below followed the policies and actions categorized by goal. Goals Eliminate systemic healthy, affordable, re livable places, and jobs. ure fair access to sportation options, ystem and placemaking to a welc • ming place, particularly for zed and vulnerable populations. and enhance Tukwila's multimodal ork, particularly walk, bike, roll, and transit, to obility options where needs are greatest. icipate and plan for the community's evolving needs, technologies, and opportunities for mobility. Plan, design, and construct transportation projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve community health, and protect the natural environment. 91 Policies This section documents all policies included in the City of Tukwila Transportation Element. These policies were derived through reviewing historical planning policies, conducting transportation analysis, and interacting with the community. Goal 1: Equity Eliminate systemic barriers to ensure fair access to healthy, affo' • -liable transportation options, livable places, and jobs. Provide a balanced transportation sys throughout the city, including peopl wheelchair or other ambulation devices, and residents of all ages an vers circula for all users cling, persons who use a s, youth, people with low incomes, 1.2. Plan and implement the trans tati' .tilizing urban street design principles in reco' of the .etween urban design, safety, economic developmen mun health, • transportation system design in the planning a ple - - • tr. sportation projects. 1.3. Co -- ec• is development and community benefit implications in the ansportation projects. 1.4. k with BNS' • mitigate impacts associated with rail and intermodal yard Tukwila's residential neighborhoods. 1.5. Encouragansit providers, paratransit operators, and private purveyors to provide mobility for people of all ages, abilities, and income levels in the City of Tukwila and the surrounding community. 1.6. Regularly update the City of Tukwila's ADA Transition Plan and invest in the identified infrastructure to ensure that transportation systems serve people of all ages and abilities. 92 � 1.7. 5upportefficienttnansitcapacitvtoreduoysing|e-occupancyvehidethpshl from, within, and through Tukwila. 1.8. Prioritize investments that address systemic barriers to accessing livable places and jobs. 93 Goal 2: Safety Provide a safe transportation system and placemaking to emphasize Tukwila as a welcoming place, particularly for historically marginalized and vulnerable populations. 2.1. Balance travel efficiency, safety, and quality -of -life by exploring context -sensitive roadway design strategies (including appropriate vehicl ne widths, traffic calming measures, landscaping, and buffers separatehicle traffic from other modes of travel). 2.2. Invest in transportation projects and pro. that addres ty issues systematically impacting historically alized .nd vulnera opulations. 2.3. Design streets to safely accommodate travel modes such that it is comfortable an vehicle. f motorized and non -motorized o access destinations without a 2.4. Design intersectio sidew promote pedestrian safety and foster walking (or us i ' wh: hair o bility device, scooter, or stroller) as a viable mode of tr 2.5. Meet . -xcee. dards for pedestrian facilities, such as sidewalks and e residents and visitors to walk or roll for transportation, pro .. health. 2.6. P ze press g and maintaining existing transportation facilities to avoid cos ents and to meet public safety objectives in a cost-effective manner. 2.7. Work with school officials and school community members to promote Safe Routes to School projects and programs and require safe routes to school improvements — such as sidewalks and crosswalks — as new development occurs along designated school walk routes. 2.8. Partner with transit agencies to improve safety and cleanliness in and around transit stops and stations to encourage ridership. 94 � 2.9. Set posted speed limits to prioritize the safety ofall roadway users with specific consideration given tothe severity ofpotential conflicts (i.e., amount ofpotential kinetic energy transfer) between vulnerable road users (e.g, people walking, biking) and motor vehicles. 2.10. Seek to minimize conflicts between non -motorized modes and freight vehicles. 2.11. Provide well -maintained facilities. Coordinate with Department of Transportation to keep state fadU 2.12. Prioritize emergency vehicle routes and a 2.13. Integrate the Safe System Approach in ukwila free of debris. bshington State t to hospitalWd trauma care �ignguidance, standards and related policies, and project , -velopment �Ilftsses and be consistent with industry best practice. serious injury c systemic c 215. Securofundin sed on the occurrence of fatal and Injury Network, and/or the presence of fatal or serious injury crash. ementing safety strategies and long-term maintenance of 2.16. ive to elimin , traffic fatalities and serious injuries through a Safe System 95 Goal 3: Connectivity Maintain, expand, and enhance Tukwila's multimodal network, particularly walk, bike, roll, and transit, to increase mobility options where needs are greatest. 3.1. Focus on transportation efficiency by maximizing the movement of people with streets that are designed to be safe for all transportatio existing land uses while designing for the future. 3.2. Include trucking design parameters in principa as well as in commercial areas. odes, accommodating erial improvements 3.3. Allow truck traffic on all principal an nor a s, as well as on commercial area local access streets. Consider usin it restrictions and geofencing on residential collector arterials -. residentia I access streets. 3.4. Support goods mobility by al that Tukwila is part of a regional freight di ton hu, - . major international trade gateway. 3.5. Encourage in the vicin lopment patterns and pedestrian amenities t stations. 3.6. C. .or. e with surrounding jurisdictions and with regional and State evelop a multi -modal transportation system that mobility and reinforces the countywide vision for managing 3.7. Recom . and pursue a regional multi -modal center in conjunction with the Tukwila Commuter Rail/Amtrak Station and secondary pedestrian/bicycle/transit hubs elsewhere in the City. 3.8. Require all new streets, street improvements, property developments, and property improvements to provide sidewalks and other non -motorized infrastructure consistent with adopted standards and subarea plans. Property developments and improvements in commercial areas shall provide direct 96 pedestrian access from sidewalks to buildings, as well as to, from, and between parking areas. 3.9. Evaluate street improvement projects for the inclusion of features that support the Complete Streets policy in order to encourage walking, bicycling and transit use. 3.10. Support goods mobility by all modes, recognizing t regional freight distribution hub and a major int 3.11. Encourage and support public transportatiervices. 3.12. The development and extension of meet the following objectives: kwila is part of a I trade gateway. ght ral ommuter rai system shall • Any commuter or li• tem se Tukwila, Seattle, South King County and/or Sea-T. irpo • be •cated in a manner which promotes t - oordinand long-term use of alternative transpor •n ems, s as carpools, transit, biking and walking. • Suc terns s be loca so as to allow for future extensions to corn -r . - service to East King County and Southeast and shall be coordinated with other transit service. be located in a manner that provides multi -modal to ukwila's urban center, Manufacturing and Industrial ransit centers, so as to encourage development in the ontemplated by this Plan and the Countywide Planning Policies. 3.13. Collabor. with transit providers to expand transit connectivity to Tukwila South and other developing areas within Tukwila. 3.14. Support, encourage and implement programs and improvements that promote transit, foot, and bicycle access to community amenities, stores, and jobs. 3.15. Incorporate proportionately greater neighborhood -enhancing elements in collector, minor arterial, and principle arterial design. These elements include collector lanes, wider sidewalks, separated sidewalks, and curbline trees. 97 3.16. Continue to provide assistance to King County, King County Metro, Sound Transit, Washington State Department of Transportation, and other agencies in increasing people -carrying capacity of vehicles and reducing vehicular trips. 3.17. Coordinate with adjacent agencies on the development of a network of regional non -motorized transportation improvements in, through, and to Tukwila such as connected network of bicycle facilities and trails. 3.18. Work with King County Metro and Sound Transi ide bus layover space, amenities for transit riders, encourage transit u , and e ice multi -modal connections to transit. 3.19. Construct neighborhood links by pr. g ad' .nal sidewalks and trails as opportunities and development occur. 3.20. Pursue converting railroads 3.21. Require secure bic - storage locations near desti .ns. 3.22. Provide wa travelers to tra . destinations. aseme . pedestrian and bicycle trails. cages, etc.) in appropriate ewalks and trails to direct non -motorized 3.23. and bu. for motorized transportation projects within the Tukwila nt Program. 3.24. Mai i exi . unimproved rights -of -way if there is a potential future opport o create a non -motorized connection through stairs or other trail improvements. 3.25. Improve transit, walking, and biking connections to the Tukwila Community Center. 3.26. Update the concurrency program to incorporate identified level -of -service standards for multimodal transportation. 98 Goal 4: Adaptability Anticipate and plan for the community's evolving needs, new technologies, and opportunities for mobility. 4.1. Protect the transportation system (e.g. roadway, rail, transit, air and marine) against major disruptions by developing maintenance, • vention, and recovery strategies and by coordinating disaster response pl 4.2. Maintain a partnership with King County Metr. oper. . and maintenance of the Tukwila Transit Center. 4.3. Continue to encourage the use of ridare, try bicycle, and evolving technological transportation improvem 4.4. Balance modal priorities on that supports needs for emer slow traffic. 4.5. Adopt and developme ugh design and maintenance II implementing strategies to S standards to guide City improvement and sustainable transportation options to increase system arpooling/rideshare, pedestrian and bicycle facilities). hese priority improvements, consider other street capacity ., signal improvements, street widening) as a last resort. 4.7. Use the sportation Background Report — in conjunction with this Plan's land use goals — to prioritize construction of new sidewalks, bike lanes and trails. 4.8. Advocate for Tukwila representation on the boards of King County Metro and Sound Transit in order to influence service and policies that are effective for Tukwila. 4.9. Advocate through verbal and written testimony to King County Metro and Sound Transit to achieve and maintain a minimum LOS C (defined by headway, vehicles 99 � per hour and hours of service), and work within Tukwila's Transit Priority Corridor Classification System. 4]0. Promote emerging technology and innovative approaches to local deliveries, including cargo bikes, delivery drones, sidewalk autonomous delivery robots 4.11. Address spillover parking (onto private property, p streets) near transit facilities and other commun competing land use needs and opportunities, roperty, or public ations, balancing 100 Goal 5: Environment Plan, design, and construct transportation projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve community health, and protect the natural environment. 5.1. Collaborate with King County, the Port of Seattle, and BNSF to ensure that King County International Airport, SeaTac International Airpo nd BNSF railway operations and development: • Enhance Tukwila goals and policies; • Incorporate Tukwila land use plan regulations; • Minimize adverse impacts to T a rest nts; and • Are not encroached upon by pa land uses. 5.2. Provide Commute Trip Reduction Progra ) services to Tukwila employers to reduce drive -alone trips, ver travele ffic congestion, and greenhouse gas emissions. 5.3. The City of Tuk an example vehicle mi esting in transit benefits and education to set ommitment to reducing drive -alone trips, se gas emissions. 5.4. D- •era .nsportation facilities in a manner that is compatible with ural and built environments in which they are located. es such as natural drainage, native plantings and local design h. that f. ate integration and compatibility. 5.5. Support share, bike -share, and other alternatives to individual automobile ownership, to enhance sustainability. 5.6. Support, encourage and implement transportation programs and improvements that promote water quality and regional air quality. 5.7. Support the urban tree canopy to provide shade, improve air quality, and enhance placemaking by including vegetation wherever feasible. 101 � 5.8. Support electric vehicle changing stations and other alternative fuel sources as 5.9. Establish mode -split goals for all significant employment centers which will vary according todevelopment densities, access to transportation service' and levels of congestion. 5.10. Support transportation system improvements and p nnsthat encourage transit use, high-occupancyvehicletrips, and nos, ' izod transportation to reduce single -occupancy vehicle trips, vehiclf, es tra i. traffic congestion, and greenhouse gas emissions. 102 Chapter 5: Transportation Vision Introduction to Layered Network The City's Transportation Element takes a layered network approach to focus on how Tukwila's transportation network can function, as a system, to meet the needs o aims to develop "complete streets" to address the needs of all use that serve all modes well on every street can be an unattainabl constraints such as limited right-of-way and funding for ca users. While Tukwila oviding accommodations actice, given To practically address this challenge, the City plans it et net ork to serveacent land uses. The proposed layered network builds on this c t pr e to create a high -quality experience for intended users by considering the functi multiple streets and transportation facilities together rather than individually. ' -.roach al or certain streets to emphasize specific modes or user types while discouras. For example, a commercial street may be planned to provide a .leasant : e fo oppers on foot, recreational bicyclists, and car parking on t hile d .uraging use by "cut -through" traffic. The project team has identified priorit .nsport. ' n network for each mode: pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, freight, a 'ene - cles. Tukwila's key destinations and land use information are the .. ' of th. . posed layered network (see Figure 2 and Figure 4). The subsequ network. Sta City of Tukwila a for the vehicle mode corridor LOS can be ach ed. posed MMLOS standards and guidelines for each modal " that are subject to concurrency. Current LOS policies in the sed on automobiles. Citywide LOS standards are currently set development must prove that the adopted intersection or 103 Auto LOS Guidelines The current auto LOS policy in the City of Tukwila includes isolated intersection LOS for areas outside of Southcenter and the corridor average approach for the Southcenter area. The LOS standards for intersections outside the Southcenter are provided in Table 5. These standards ensure busier intersections have room for more delay than intersections in residential areas. Table 5. Intersection LOS Standards Outside of Southcenter Non-residential arterial Residential minor and collector arterials SR 181 and SR 599 1-5, 1-405, SR 518, and SR 99 For the Southcenter area, the Boulevard corridor and a p Boulevard and Andover P corridor average is n Given the po similar forma giving it flexibili feedback evaluating effecti n of th st ( erage ndover LOS E LOS D LOS E/ Mitigated LOS D of to exceed LOS E, except for the Strander k East corridor. Specific to Strander Parkway and Strander Boulevard), the F, with an average delay not to exceed 120 seconds. e current approach to auto LOS, the City will maintain a y. The approach uses standards tailored to specific locations, ess in addressing issues that impact specific areas. Appendix B and Appe C present auto LOS at the displayed intersections and corridors under mid -day and PM peak hour conditions. 2044 Traffic Conditions Traffic forecasts based on anticipated land use growth and planned regional transportation investments were developed using the customized Tukwila travel demand model to help inform future transportation needs. The model assumes a growth of 6,044 additional households and 11,875 additional jobs between the 2018 base year and the 2044 horizon year. An average growth in traffic volume of about 40 percent is anticipated between 2018 and 2044. 104 The anticipated performance of roadway intersections and corridors within Tukwila under 2044 conditions was evaluated using the same methodology as existing conditions. The analysis assumed that all signal timings for intersections in Tukwila would be optimized between 2018 and 2044; however, there would be no adjustments to cycle lengths unless otherwise planned. The following background projects were assumed based on input from City staff: • Southcenter Boulevard / 66th Avenue South o Restripe the east leg from a single left turn pocket,Cwo through lanes to dual left turns and a single through lane • Southcenter Boulevard / 65th Avenue South o Install a traffic signal • Andover Park East / Minkler Boulevard o Design and construct dedicated left 1 lanes • ndover Park East o Reconstruct traffic signal; remove split • Ryan Way Road Diet o Restripe Ryan Way betwee uther Ki nior Way South and 51st Avenue South to provide tw• •ot' :erections (eastbound and westbound) o In advance of th uther • Junior Way South intersection, taper the traffic lane to . ch tho fisting - configuration • West Valley High o Add a northballey Highway between Strander Boulevard and the - p/ 156th Street intersection • The Tu :South . -lop t would include intersection improvements to address pot- impacts to h 201 Street / Orillia Road South, South 200th Street / South -r Parkway, • ►ther nearby intersections. Figure 45Error! Re - e rce not found. through Figure 49Error! Reference source not found. presents vehicle . results for the study intersections and Southcenter corridors under 2044 conditions. The detailed vehicle LOS and delay results for each intersection and Southcenter corridor are documented in Appendix B and Appendix C. The following intersections are anticipated to operate at a level of service that does not meet the City's LOS policy during the PM peak hour: • South 116th Street / East Marginal Way (LOS F with an average delay of 125 seconds for the eastbound left -turn of the two-way stop -controlled intersection) 105 o The increase in northbound and southbound traffic volumes on East Marginal Way is expected to limit gaps in traffic flow to permit eastbound left -turn movements. • South 133rd Street / SR 599 Ramps (LOS F with an average delay of over 150 seconds for the southbound left -turn of the two-way stop -controlled intersection) o The overall increase in traffic volumes for all movements is anticipated to degrade southbound operations. • South 144th Street / 53rd Avenue South (LOS F with an avera • . elay of over 150 seconds for the southbound left -turn movement of the tway stop -controlled intersection) o South 144th Street is an important connecti• ' ever 1-5, -cting the west and east parts of Tukwila; expected delays o minor approa •uld be due to high through movements. • Southcenter Boulevard / 1-405 SB Off -ramp w' average delay of over 150 seconds for the northbound left -turn movemen e two-way stop -controlled intersection) o The intersection operates at ' - existi •nditions and is expected to result in higher vehicle delays 04A . _ reased traffic volumes along Southcenter Boul • SR 518 EB Off -ram • tat ve (LO with an average delay of 59 seconds for the northbound left-t oveme •f the t ay stop control) o The current sec ' Id not accommodate increased traffic volum from : under future conditions as the approach is currently stop - As previous traditional pea understand traffic weekdays and weeken way network within Southcenter is understood to have non - all travel patterns. Eleven study corridors were evaluated to uring several peak periods. The analysis periods included ing midday and PM peak hours. The evaluated corridors currently operate acceptably and meet the City's LOS standards. Under 2044 future conditions, the corridors also operate acceptably except for the following corridors that would operate at LOS F: • 61 st Avenue South Bridge/Tukwila Parkway from Southcenter Boulevard to Andover Park West • South 180th Street from Southcenter Parkway to West Valley Highway • West Valley Highway from Southcenter Boulevard to Strander Boulevard 106 .~.~~'K~~ `-^~~~-�~~~N~~~-0.~~N~~~L~M^~~~ The following strategies are proposed as options that may address degraded traffic operations in the 5outhcenterarea: Table 6: Potential Strategies to Address Southcenter Congestion Strategy Potential Limitations/Bareiers Update the City's LOS policy Improve vehicle access into the Southcenter area Advocate for enhanced transit service Allow LOSFoperations, with anaverage delay not toexceed 12Oseconds onthe impacted corridors. Partner with WSDOT to provide an east -west connection over the Green River from Southcenter,e.g,anextension ofStrand, Boulevard. This would better accom increased volumes on West Valley other key access locations. Given that Southcenter is a regional advocate for enhanced transit service improved frequency, es, or infrastructuminvestnu transit signal priority. Th use and discourage singl trips in contn»|sthe LOS standard est Valley Highway. Acap � require | undon|labo ojmtof this size would kmVVSDOTsupport | Advocacy does not always translate toimplementation. / 107 Figure 45: Future 2044 - PM Peak Hour LOS in Tukwila City Boundary Parks SPanarp ADA Level of Service • LOS A -C LOS D • LOS E • LOS E SD• SOOthC*Ot'' Zi Study Intersections Future 2044 - PM Peak Hour LOS 108 Figure 46. Future 2044 - Weekday Mid -day Peak Hour LOS „S 160th iSt S 164th St j City Boundary * Study Intersections # Corridor ID 112111111221MBIS Corridor Level of Service D BA.. Blvd %Mr S igOth St 0,15 0..3 Miles Future 2044 Weekday Midday LOS 109 Figure 47. Future 2044 - Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS leOth St S 164th St BS City Boundary • Study Intersections # Corridor ID ;rmareintalif Corridor Level of Service A-C Baker Bled 1•5iniiith„ vziavier S leOtk 0 0.15 0.3 Wes Future 2044 Weekday PM LOS 110 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ "-" Figure 48. Future 2044 - Weekend Mid -day Peak Hour LOS S 1600 St S 164th St St ::„1„ City Boundary Study Intersections Corridor ID tsteltatItatt Corridor Level of Service A-C D E s S 10th SI 0 0 15 G 3 MOPS Future 2044 Weekend Midday LOS 111 Figure 49. Future 2044 - Weekend PM Peak Hour LOS 5.15c514 5 164th $t Z5 City Boundary 8 Study Intersections tr Corridor ID Corridor Level of Service D E 015 0,3 Miles Future 2044 Weekend PM LOS 112 Pedestrian U��N� Standards �m� �� Guidelines U° ������������m����m�����*m�u0nes Pedestrian LOS standards and guidelines describe the comfort of someone walking. The fundamental expectations for physical space, modal separation, and street crossing amenities are informed by the neighborhood and land use context of given street. Therefore, pedestrian facility standards and guidelines are tailored to different neighborhood/streetcontexts. Accordingly, pedestrian LDS standards typically involve design standj&app|ied to each of the various pedestrian environments represented within the City. The City of Tukwila currently utilizes acons isten/y- basedLo' - |i��Xins ��modes This standard focuses on consistency among planned w opnnents� Thusing existing plans to prioritize construction of new sidewalks, bi -.nes, a , ails. Table 7 presents the updated pedestrian LOS policy, wh in Tukwila. Figure 50 maps out the street standards would apply and Figure 51 maps simplified approach to pedestrian concerns while avoiding desi pedestrian connectivity, m ould apply standards to all streets in the I Tukwila where the LOS t eSouthcenterarea. Utilizing o Ability in addressing critical he goal is to provide safe and convenient ekey focus. 113 Table 7. Pedestrian LOS Standards by Street Type Functional Class Southcenter Category Principal Arterials Minor Arterial and Major Collectors Residential Streets Commercial Corrid Urban Corridors Workplace Cor Neighborhood Corridors and Walkable Corridors Freeway Frontage Corridors Side of Street Both Sides Both Sides ides 8 ft oth Sides One Side Minimum Amenity Zone Width2 4 ft 5 ft 15ft(10ft 6ft on Minkler) 114 Pedestrian vehicular-sca decorative street lighting Vehicular -scale lighting Vehicular -scale lighting Pedestrian and vehicular -scale decorative street lighting Pedestrian and vehicular -scale decorative street lighting Pedestrian and vehicular -scale Optimal Crossing Frequency Within 300 feet of a transit stop or community asset3 Elsewhere: <_ 1,320 feet Within 300 feet of a transit stop or community asset Elsewhere: <_ 1,320 feet ------------- ------ --- --- Within 300 feet of a transit stop or community asset Elsewhere: <_ 1,320 feet <_ 800 feet <_ 800 feet Within 300 feet of a transit stop or community asset Other Trails Key Connections' Tukwila International Boulevard Tukwila International Boulevard Adjacent Streets Notes: The minimum sidewalk width refers to the pedes z The amenity zone provides additional space include street furniture, landscaping, or tree A community asset is defined as a park, The City aspires to provide sidewalks on b Key Connections policies supersede function critical transit corridors. estria N/A Both Sides Both Sides zone, or se 1, community cent •.es and amenity policies. The loft 1 N/A 8ft 4 ft decorative street lightin : Elsewhere: _5_1,320 feet P Irian -scale ative street Pedestria vehicular-sc. .ecorative street lighting Pedestrian and vehicular -scale decorative street lighting Pedestrian and vehicular -scale decorative street lighting serves as an accessible pathway, clear of obstacles. a buffer from vehicle traffic, separate from the minimum sidewalk width. This space may library. s on residential streets as right of way permits. cations include east -west access corridors, connections to pedestrian generators/destinations, and N/A Within 300 feet of a transit stop or community asset Elsewhere: _<1,320 feet Within 300 feet of a transit stop or community asset Elsewhere: _5.1,320 feet Within 300 feet of a transit stop or community asset Elsewhere: <_1,320 feet 115 Figure 50. Citywide Sidewalk Policies City Boundary Parks �( Southcenter Policy Area Functional Class Sidewalk Policies Other Sidewalk Policies --- Principal Arterial - Minor Arterial Major Collector Source: City of Tukwila, Fehr & Peers, 2023 - Key Connections TIB TIB Adjacent -- Trail Citywide Sidewalk Policies Figure 51. Southcenter Sidewalk Policies FL:: City Boundary Parks Southrenter Policy Area Southcenter Sidewalk Policy Other Sidewalk Policies Commercial COVidor Freeway Frontage CoFridor Neighborhood Corridor iirbou Corridor Walkable. Corridor --Po Workplace Corridor Source: City of Tukwila, Fehr & Peers, 2023 WC rt't 0 0.15 0.3 Mlles Southcenter Area Sidewalk Policies 117 Based on the existing network bee Figure 20\ as well as the pedestrian standards, key focus areas where there are high levels ofpedestrian activity include the SouthcenterN4aU area, east - west connections along Tukwila International Boulevard, and the Tukwila Community Center area. Important connections around Southcenter Mall include connections to the Tukwila Sounder station as well as Pond Park. Tukwila International Boulevard, particularly between South 144th Street to South 1 54th Street, hosts many affordable housine units, which are commonly associated with lower rates of vehicle ownership, relying walking. The Tukwila Community Center has been identified as a many students travel there on their own for after -school pro In addition to existing pedestrian needs, it is important future development that would rely on these faciliti South is the location of a proposed roundabout with commercial cluster. SR 99 and South 160th eet is the mixed -use project with access to the light Access Road isthe location ofeplanned |igh pedestrian connectivity. 1:: blic transit and ea for pedestrians, as an pedestrian . 'es prior to d South and 42nd Avenue agrocery store eswell osa nofopotential large-scale ionbridge. South Boeing ould require increased 118 Bike Guidelines Level of traffic stress (LTS) is the current state of the practice in planning bike facilities. This approach provides a framework for designing bike facilities that meet the needs of the intended users of the system. Figure 52 describes the four typical categories of cyclists, each requiring different levels of accommodation to feel comfortable using the system. Figure 52. Bike Level of Traffic Stress and Rider Categories Table 8 and T. 9 disp . ,e va treatments required for each LTS designation along corridors as as at interne ns. h this approach, treatments required to meet each LTS designation alo corridor v based on speed limit and traffic volume. The contextual nature of the LTS approac no .ges that the same bike treatment under different street conditions can evoke . -nt levels of stress. For example, a striped bike lane without a buffer may be comfortable for all ages and abilities on slow streets with low traffic volumes. However, as traffic volumes or speeds increase, the riding conditions no longer meet the needs of those in the LTS 1 category. Utilizing the LTS approach for bike conditions provides the City with the opportunity to plan bike networks that address the varying comfort levels of people who bike. Additional information on bike facility types and treatments is provided in Appendix F. 119 Table 8. Bike Level of Traffic Stress and Rider Categories < 3k <_ 25 3-7k >_ 7k < 15k 30 15-25k >_ 25k < 25k 35 >_ 25k >35 Any Table 9. Recommended z '1' sat an Intersection Bike Signal Green solid or skip -stripe Skip -stripe Green bike box Bike box Curb ramp to wide sidewalk, Dutch Intersection Green bike lane to left of turn lane Green Cycle Sharrow lane Automatic signal Bike lane to left of Length markings actuation turn lane No Specific design guideline for LTS 4 Trail or id -Block Full signal, Green solid or Crossing HAWK, or RRFB skip -stripe N/A N/A 120 � The LTS approach to bike LD3 offers a way to develop a network of bike facilities that meet the needs of each rider category. Figure 53 shows the Citv's aspirationa| bicycle LT5 network. It considers the current facilities and their LTS designations to identify areas for potential connections. Awareness of the types of people who bike provides insight into the inclusivity of each bike route. Establishing various options for all people who bike allows that people to efficiently reach desired destinations. 121 Figure 53. Proposed Bike LTS Network City Boundary Parks LTS Score 2 ,==== 3 Source: City of Tukwila, Fehr & Peers, 2023 Bike LTS Proposed 122 Transit Guidelines Given that transit service in Tukwila is provided by King County Metro and Sound Transit, the Cih/s efforts to set transit standards are limited. The transit providers maintain routes, headvvays, and stop amenities. Under these circumstances, the City is generally restricted to providing access tothe externally established transit stops. However, the City is empowered to advocate for higher-qualitytransitstop amenities along city streets. Table 10 / s proposed transit treatments based on the corridor type. TabUe10. Recommended Transit Treatments Stop Component , Weather Protection Seating Paved Bus Don Passenger Zone Wayfindimg Other Amen (trash Ughdn Local Transit Corridor �u, . and Ex'press Transit Network'Corridor Yes priority with 2S+d boardings Ye Yes, pri boardin ide stops, priority with 25+ daily her Frequent/Express stops Yes, for Rapid Ride stops, priority with 25+ daily boardings on other Frequent/Express stops Yes, zone length 60 feet h 25+ daily ! Yes, for Rapid Ride stops, priority with 25+ daily boardingsonother Frequent/Express stops with +daily Yes, for Rapid Ride stops, priority with 25+ daily boardings on other Frequent/Express stops Figure54includestheChvofTukvvla'scunenttransitnetvvo6cstoplocations,andavailmble amenities. There are still gaps in the transit network, including access tothe Tukwila Community Center, and the City is empowered to continue advocating for access to key destinations within the City. As shown in Figure 54, there are several transit stops without any amenities and this presents an opportunity to address these gaps using the recommended transit stop treatments tabulated inTable 10. The City is recommended to utilize an equity lens in filling up these gaps sothat all neighborhoods in Tukwila have access to safe and comfortable transit stops. 123 Figure 54. Existing Transit Network and Stops City Boundary Stop Amenities Parks 0 Shelter and Bench 0 Bench 0 None Source: City of Tukwila, Fehr & Peers, 2023 — KCM Local Routes Neighborhoods Foster Point Tukwila Hill RapidRide Allentown McMicken Tukwila South Cascade View Riverton Tukwila Urban Center Duwamish Ryan Hill Foster Thorndyke Transit Network & Stop Amenities 124 Freight Guidelines As a result of the growth in urban populations, the prevalence of online shopping, and related freight activities, there is an upward trend in goods and parcel delivery in cities. This prompts the need to closely review and develop guidelines to adequately accommodate freight movement and related activities. Current street designs or policies often present challenges for truck/ freight operators. Better balance can be achieved by clearly d g freight corridors and developing guidelines to address the following challenges often by truck or commercial delivery drivers in cities: • Large truck operators frequently have difficu and curved or circular travel paths. • Street furniture, bike parking, trees, signage, obstructions can inhibit delivery activity. • An inadequate supply of truck par two-way left -turn lanes, which pres • There is a high risk for dangerous co likely to be operating in • Many commercial veh. efficient deliveries. As a community that hosts a activity, develop' limited impa present reco Freight Corr ating restrictes, narrow lanes, other curbside or sidewalk double parking or parking on sues for other road users. re pedestrians and bicyclists are orly designed to accommodate safe and eliveries is typically constrained. anufacturi g/Industrial Center (MIC) and citywide delivery ines is critical to ensure efficient delivery of goods and odes. The subsequent sections and Appendix G ng freight corridors, curb access, and truck parking. The City currently partners with regional agencies and the state to build and maintain freight corridors within the City that are classified as Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) routes (Figure 33). Designated FGTS routes aim to prevent heavy truck traffic on lower -volume streets and promote the use of adequately designed roadways. Building on this effort, the City is recommended to prioritize these corridors in developing freight -related policies or guidelines in relation to curb access and truck parking. 125 Curb Access Several agencies are beginning to recognize curb space as valuable real estate that ought to be better understood and designed toimprove the quality oflife for residents and transportation systems. Prioritizing curb functions based on adjacent land use is an approach that various jurisdictions/agencies are taking to manage curb access. Examples include Seattle and San Francisco. Figure 55presents curb access prioritization referencing ses in San Francisco. The City of Tukwila isrecommended to follow asimilar approa ' ^ ~Frandsco. Curb access guidelines for freight drafted by the project team are prese te^ in Tab The priority ranking tabulated below isincomparison toother competing u ' dudingacce people, public space and services, vehicle parking, and vehicular nnp ent.A ~otedinTab 11,there are no land use categories where freight is ranked first base. ~ th" mne|ethat vehicular movement always takes precedence. Ranking 2to 5 describes priori ` curb access based on freight activity in each land use category. Table 1Y'Recommended Curb AccesoGui 3 4 5 |ndu Delivery Access ight Industrial, Manufacturing Industrial Center/ Heavy, Manufacturing Corridor, Commercial Light Industrial, Mixed Use Office, Office, Regional egiona| Commercial, Regional Commercial Mixed Use, Workplace High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial Center, Residential Commercial Center Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Transit Oriented Development, Tukwila Valley South |naddition tOland use considerations, itiSrecommended that curb access along designated FGTS routes, displayed in Figure 33, be prioritized for freight activity. 126 Figure 55. Curb Functions Prioritized by Land Use Low -Density Residential Source: San Francisco Municipal Transport gency (SFMTA) C anagement Strategy, 2020. 127 Industrial/Pr, req, Distribution a .4epalr Curb Functions t �t Access tov Goods Spa“, 'for s `3xhv;°te a, (.ri kir13ercro,, tows and sa.;n, kr,ed fsat,thext p,. Qds%r°lore and Services eA for we. by people and .4.,r +k od a sed f',a 5 hs :..sue aks r;Id`,crictacrriae�' :ar,td fr orktsart'keiavrtr* rat :ot 'yspag tiekli rix; ch thitttztr usyb ?1461e foi' ttP ^fun pr+1 Truck Parking Truck parking is a critical national transportation issue that cities including Tukwila currently face. Truck drivers need safe and secure parking as well as rest as required by law. But, with more trucks and drivers on the road to serve the significant increase in demand for goods, the scarcity of parking for drivers has exacerbated. Most truck parking in cities is directly related to industrial warehouse development and the production of goods, and e land uses, and the associated zoning are locally controlled. Over the past few years, it has been a nationwide effort to a• • -ss on• . • truck parking issues. The proposed guideline on this topic is to engage and cnate with the -rse set of truck parking stakeholders (truck drivers, neighborhoods, taff, fr:'• ht facility o. rators, and other regional, state, and federal agencies) to address/ dis h- owing: • The disconnect between economic - •.ment g•. o build major freight generators (e.g., industries, malls, dense mixed- - • - . ••ents, pitals, etc.) without provisions for truck staging or parking spaces to •p' ru iveries and driver needs. • The common response g truc . king when dealing with truck parking concerns (typically I: ed abo throug' 'sident complaints). These truck parking bans often result in mo athe e problem. • Key truck parkin. co is including safety, zoning, environment and sustainability, residents- •. 'd q of life, intermodal connections and emerging technology, fund' :nd incentiv= om ication, and public outreach. • Educa ocal planne development staff, and elected officials to get an understan. of ho -fight operates, and the truck parking demand generated by local industrsa •pment. In addressing and discussing the bulleted items, the City is recommended to utilize Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)'s truck parking handbook. It presents resources for the development of truck parking, including factors that influence parking need, quantitative approaches for estimating truck parking demand, design of truck parking facilities, truck parking safety and security, and facility siting to protect community quality of life." 17 FHWA, Truck Parking Development Handbook, 2022. 128 Chapter 6: Transportation Project List This section describes the projects and programs that will support the City's goals, policies, and vision. The project list would provide a safer and more connected multimodal system while fitting within the City's anticipated budget over the next 20 years. Project Development The Transportation Element development process involved project ideas and transportation needs citywide. Projects analysis, community input, and past plans. After a ful eject metrics were applied to fit the projects within the e ed Technical Analysis Several types of analysis were used to pinp under current conditions and what challenge These technical analyses iden under existing and future c each mode. Vehicle network average dela projects we - Existing con - Future alternate the jects s- al me. •s of identifying e identified t . h technical lis as develop: , prioritization f ng constraints. on challenges are present ted to face in the next 20 years. set level of service standards are not met .dentified to mitigate substandard LOS for asured based on the seconds of delay at intersections and peak hour, midday, and weekend periods. Vehicle d to meet LOS standard ow LOS degrading below the standard. Pedestrian level of service standards were set by determining the required walking and rolling treatments on each type of corridor. Sidewalk presence is the most critical element of the set standard. Specifically, the project team identified if the corridor type requires sidewalks on one or both sides and used spatial analysis to identify gaps in the sidewalk network. Projects were identified for areas where the walking and rolling facilities do not meet the standard. Bike projects were identified using a similar methodology to pedestrian network improvements. LTS methodology was used to identify the existing bicycle LTS network. The project team then 129 identified a proposed skeleton LTS network based on current LTS and feasibility. Projects were identified in areas where an LTS improvement is proposed. Community Input The community was heavily involved throughout the process of developing the TE. Community input was synthesized to identify patterns and ultimately create projects out of the ideas shared by the community. See Chapter 3: Public Outreach for more details process. Previous Planning Efforts The 2023-2028 Capital Improvement Program include as well as Bridges & Arterial Streets. Transportation incorporated into the TE project list. Prioritization Metrics Upon consolidating a full list of potential pro which projects would further th the five transportation goal guiding principles, and w used to identify a fiscally con . pro e engagement ctions dedicated tidential Streets ects frhese sections were metrics were applied to identify oals. • a and metrics were developed for each of ed accordingly. Table 12 describes the goals, the project prioritization metrics that were 130 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ _ -_ -'-- L77117- Ensuefairaccessto healthy, affordable, reliable transportation options, livable places, and jobs, particularly for historically marginalized and vulnerable populations. Provide safe transportation infrastructure and improve personal comfort to emphasize Tukwila asa welcoming place. Maintain, expand, and enhanceTukwi|a's mu|timoda|network particularly walk, bike, r and transit, »oincrease mobility options where needs are 131 �Adar Anticip | co ,nity's and opmortunities for 10% Ian for the g Plan, design, and construct transportation projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve community health, and protect the natural environment. 15% Table 13. Scoring Criteria by Goal Equity Safety Connectivity Adaptability Environment Community outreach and engagement Delivery of transportation services Safe and comfortable options Crossing Safety Collision history Access Quality of travel choices Person trip capacity Emerging travel modes and technology Intelligent Transportatio Systems (ITS) Preparedness for disruptive events Sustainable transportation Protection of ecological resources Project is supported by community members. The communi how the project supaorts communit needs and! oafs. Project provides access to healthy, affordable, reliabl marginalized or vulnerable populations. meaningfully engaged in identifying ation options in areas with historically Project improves levels of comfort and des! 'y of walking, biki Project provides new or improved cros curb extension, reduced pedestrian e narrowed curb return, etc.). Project is identified as a priority project in T Project increases route op ' terconnect walk/bike/roll/transit netw Project increases the numbe a) Pedestrians — facilities are c b) Bikes - faci c) Transit d) Auto Proje Projec Project This inclu adaptive si Project sup otal f ce is rsection vides a high - or TS1or- uent an corridor Iling or using transit. eatmen -.g. restriping, ' B, curb ramps, crossing island, e, ne al, reduced motor vehicle turning speed, s Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP). s and/or closes an existing gap in the c oices, which are defined by mode as follows: sible fable or the provision of stop amenities is A, B or C -- ---- ------------ ----------------------------- r person trips compared to existing conditions. advances em-rging travel modes or technology including e-scooters, e-bikes, us and connected vehicles unities to maximize the efficiency of the transportation system using technology. piem. Ling smart signal or technology upgrades e.g. fiber optic, signal cabinets, echnology or leading pedestrian interval s redundancy to the transportation network and traffic operations improvements. This is cuation planning in preparation of future emergencies/ challenges such as land slides, arthquakes, unplanned road closures etc. Pro encourages travel to be less impactful on the environment by promoting shared/mass transportation or shortening SOV vehicle trips or shifting to other low- or zero -emission, energy - efficient, affordable modes. This criterion is primarily centered on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction which is linked to GHG emissions, air and noise pollution. Project protects or minimizes impact to ecological resources (plant/animals species and their habitat). 132 � Priority °�m��� ° u ������= Projects � � Apriority project |istisacrihca|pieceoftransportationp|anning.TheCitYofTukvv|acanusethe priority project list to determine what capital improvements to include in budgeting. This list outlines the XX most important projects in Tukwila over the next 20 years. Each project derived from previous planning efforts, technical analysis was scored using the criteria and weights outlined above. The pro score to determine the top performing projects that would m Table 14 includes the priority projects categorized by sour or Community Input). Table 14. Prioritized Project List / community input were then sorted by hohtizedproject |ist. Technical Analysis, Source Cost, 133 Chapter 7: Funding and Implementation Funding Transportation infrastructure and maintenance reflects one of Tukwila's largest budget items. Transportation is funded through a mix of dedicated transportation fu allocated to the expansion and maintenance of the City's transpor funds. This distinction is important since general funds have th allocated by City Council to any need within Tukwila. Thus, competitive and subject to the most pressing needs in range from impact fees paid by developers, to the t parking (largely parking for Sea-Tac Airport) to local, the dedicated transportation funding by source for 2023. utility tax, parking tax, and traffic impact fe than 80% of Tukwila's dedicated transportat ewhat tax, and traffic impact fees can be 0 depen ral fun (i.e., funding must be system) and general flexibility and can be ars are often highly ity. Dedicated .ortation funds lected the city on ommercial ederal grants. Figure 56 shows hown, grants, the solid waste y developers) constitute more ose sources, grants, the parking ng on economic cycles. 134 Figure 56. 2023 Dedicated Transportation Revenues ivellstr ffeesu Muft Figure 57 shows an analy revenues over the p. ne enhancements improving s and safety pro exceeded revenue aggregate, the averag nses versus dedicated transportation he expenses cover all aspects of maintenance and stem and include items such as repaving streets, faciles, safety improvements, bridge inspections and repairs, he figure, in all but one year, Tukwila's transportation expenses erence generally being made up by the general fund. In al revenues for Tukwila over the past 9 years are $7.05 million and the average expenditures are $10.68 million. 135 Figure 57. Historic Transportation Revenues and Expenses $,25,000,000 20,000,000 S10,o00,0oo 2015 2016 -� ?€):R 0i - 020 2021 2022 Looking forward, it revenues and range of $1 headwinds tha Transportation Ele 2023 Tukwila could sustain the current level of transportation ears could fund capital and maintenance program in the on. owever, there are some transportation funding I of it relates to the magnitude of total projects in the c headwinds include: • The grant fundin• over the past several yeas has been very robust with a historic infusion of federal funding; future federal budgets may have fewer grant funding dollars available. • While Washington State has regularly raised the gas tax over the past 20 years, the share allocated to cities has not changed since 1990; every year inflation erodes the purchasing power of the gas tax and as vehicles become more fuel efficient (further exacerbated by electric vehicles) the gas tax will continue to be less meaningful as a funding source. 136 • General funds may have more competition in the future and be less available for transportation projects. Despite these headwinds, there are both untapped dedicated transportation revenue sources that Tukwila could consider pursuing along with potential replacements for the gas tax that could restore funding and ensure that electric vehicles help fund the system as well. • Both the state and federal government are exploring a "roa• .er charge" which would either supplement or entirely replace the gas tax. Any n ng source is likely to raise additional revenues compared to the existing a ax to a nt for the lack of indexing to inflation in the prior decades. • There are several dedicated transportation 'ng pr ms that could be leveraged by Tukwila to increase transportation revenues or reliance on general fund transfers: o Transportation benefit distr o Transportation benefit distric o Other utility taxe •dition 'r sewer tax) o Dedicated tra- •rtati. proper ax levy o Local imp Actions The followi Transportation s tha he City can take to implement the goals of the Study and pu ding sources such as Local Improvement Districts (LIDS) to pay for improvements no fully funded by grants, impact fees, and general funds. - Update the Impact Fee Schedule annually, adding new projects, deleting projects as necessary, and keeping project costs at current dollar value. - Prioritize safety in an ongoing monitoring program. - Design collector arterials with a two -travel -lane, local access road design to encourage slow but steady speeds. 137 - Work with school officials to promote Safe Routes to School projects and programs and require safe routes to school improvements — such as sidewalks and crosswalks — as new development occurs along designated school walk routes. - Develop a street network plan that augments the existing system of streets, breaks up super -blocks in non-residential areas, designs connecting through -streets in all areas, and provides functional separation of traffic through new stre - Prioritize residential local access through -streets, minim . -de-sacs. - Create or require the creation of non -motorized c' -ctions in li- streets where local access through -streets are not feasible, s as on steep hillside where property owners resist streets. - Support and encourage the location •f a light rail at Boeing Access Road. Coordinate with the Washington Sta, Repa . •f T . sportation to preserve and support the Amtrak Cascad- stop in Require that parkin adequately sized property, or public s addition onjunction with transit facilities be (lover parking onto private property, public onsider a p asing plan to require structured parking if Purs ternal fundin ources to construct pedestrian and non -motorized improve Use an impact stem that identifies: o Capacity improvements based upon the long-term 2030 LOS needs, but which also accommodate a realistic financing plan; o Costs of improvements needed to mitigate growth that are reflected in the annual CIP/ FPM update and annual update to the Impact Fee Schedule; o Impact fee assessments, determined by the number of new development trips in the p.m. peak hour; and 138 o Additional mitigation measures, in accordance with the ConcunencyOndinance when development cannot meet Concurrencystandards. Evaluate parking usage to maintain sufficient space surrounding key destinations. Require street improvement projects and development improvements tobein accordance with the general Functional Street System Standard wrsubarea plans and require anengineering study. Evaluate impacts to LD5vvhen reviewing private clevel' ent °osals, and require mitigation and/or reduce or delay project impactsA#ecessary to . tain adopted LOS Maintain oprogram tomonitor congestion ofthe LDS standards in providing a competitiv- ousiness Xenvent and adequate public safety - Include roadside plantings ^menever onslopes to help mnid - Evaluate improve o or str- - and road improvement projects oadway and sidewalk improvements. uding but not limited to: and Expansion Opportunities (Metro Connects, etc.) Are. xpension ovements PrOvd8addhd0 ` ranSitstop amenities tOenhance rider experience. Fill sidewalk gaps that provide pedestrian access tOtransit. Transportation �� w��� ��~������ �������� .�n���������� & n�.�.� �� � ° This 88[kon}und Report has thus far focused On O]rnp|edng Tukvv|8'S rnu|tirnOd8| transportation network via the layered network approach. The network proposed for each mode represents the supply side of the transportation network. On the opposite side of the coin is the demand for the nnu|tinn0da|transportation network. The demand side isaddressed with TDN4. 139 The concept ofT[)K4 has evolved from a focus on commuters and strategies for reducing single occupancy vehicle demand at peak times to a focus on maximizing the modal choices of all travelers and trip types. This new focus includes a broader set of diverse strategies. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) defines TDM as: "providing of whether they drive alone, with trove/ choices, such as work location, route, time oftravel and mode. In the broadest s. , demand management is defined as providing travelers with effective choices to im,, - travel reliability." The emphasis [orTDK4 is on personal mobility rather than v~h ler nn* TDK4 strives to treat roadvvay, transit, bicycle facilities and sidewalk cap~ . as valuable, || 'w assets to be carefully managed. TDK4 strategies that strive to ma the cle"`~nd on the |ted nnu!tinnoda| transportation network include, encouraging hdesh~ ` (c^ ^ndvenpooling); providing active transportation subsidies (e.g,transit passes);providing ^ *nnnnuting,flex schedules, and compressed work weeks; and enforcing p - ._ - - /restric Other TDM strategies ��' wp` °mstommp|exland use ~ �� decisions. City land use policies cedes ^enceonprivate automobile travel b« focusing growth in specific ~ ionsa changi and use development patterns. Land use densities, mixed -use activ rben ' ` � ^ ation areas, and other concentrated points ofactivity support free uentt ervice and pedestrian facilities. The citY's TOK4 program is focused onnnax'' * . ow. *tionsfor all trip types and travelers. There are various purposes that reduce muters can travel to work and individuals can travel for other mber of single occupancy vehicle trips: * Transit Service— Public transit options are provided by Sound Transit, King County Metro, and Community Transit. As part of the ST3 regional transit package and King County Metro's long-range plan (Metro Connects), transit options will expand to include new commuter express bus services and more geographic coverage within the city. w Vanpooll and Rideshare Programs—Tukwi|apartneowithKing[ounty Metro for vanpools and rideshare solutions primarily for commute trips, though other trip 140 purposes, such as to school, are being explored. The vanpool program requires a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 15 individuals per vehicle with similar commutes. King County Metro also offers rideshare solutions to local businesses to fulfill first and last mile connectivity to and from transit services. • Walking/Biking — Every trip begins and ends with walking. The existing pedestrian network supports walking for some trip types, particularly ' eas with higher density and a mix of land uses. Sound Transit and King ' . my Metro buses are equipped to accommodate passengers with bicycl- c . can be a viable mode for commuters who live further than walking di ce from t . services and whose schedules are too inflexible to use v. ' .ol programs. As •edestrian and bicycling networks are constructed and lopmecurs in dense, mixed -use areas, these modal options are anticipate Many of the prioritized projects, ••licies, and and next steps to both construc ` - - trian/b attractiveness and viability of wal easingly viable and popular. s in this plan provide guidance ng networks and increase the I options. • Alternative Work - — Alte tive work schedule options are beneficial to both employee Businesses can for addi their sit a van. ridesharin vailability. Alterna che• s include flextime, co ssed work weeks, and staggered shifts. These options are a significant component of the CTR program in Tukwila. • Telecommuting and Remote Working — In the Puget Sound region, full-time and part-time telecommuting has increased over the last decade. The COVID pandemic forced 141 many businesses, non -profits, and government agencies to quickly implement telework for employees that can work remotely. To facilitate this shift, unique solutions were implemented to address technology and resource barriers. Many businesses, non -profits, and government agencies are likely to have significantly higher levels of telework than before the pandemic due to the widespread development of these programs. Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program CTR Program Overview— In 1991, the Washington State I:•is ature pa Reduction (CTR) Law to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and decrease fuel consumption. In 2006, the Washington State Legislature passed the Commute Trip Reduction Efficiency Act (RCW 70A.15.400t The goal of the CTR Efficiency Act is to impr. the efficiency of the overall trans. - ion system by focusing on the m• areas of the state and incr' ng the . ning coordination between loca organizations. The Washin. State CTR L. s unli - many of the require. • reduction .grams established in oth- .tes t► gh federal air pollution regulations. gton's CTR program relies on a partnership between the public and private sectors to make progress towards meeting goals. The CTR Law is incorporated into the Washington State Clean Air Act. • the Commute Trip Tukwila's CTR Program — The City of Tukwila adopted its CTR ordinance (Ordinance No. 2201) in 2008. Over the last 16 years, job growth has exploded in King County, while most of the 142 � residential population growth has occurred outside ofKing County. As a result, employees are commuting greater distances, extending the hours of peak congestion. Tukwi|a's CTR program provides information and connects employees to e variety of alternative commute options including flex schedules, compressed work weeks, teleworking, transit, and ridesharing. The city also actively coordinates with transit organizations such as King County Metro that administer marketing campaigns. TDIVII and Transportation — Tracking pro ' implementing TDK4 strategies will be incorporated into the systemwide perform nneas� developed for the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to r 0 ,A ize the effici- of the current and future transportation system. 143 Appendix A: Tukwila Population Characteristics Table Al. Total Population (B01003) Estimate Total 20,265 Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey Office. Table A2. Median Age By Sex (B01002) Total: Male Female Source: 2016-2020 American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau's Am Estimate 36 36 37 munity Survey Office. 145 Table A3. Age (1301001) Estimate Percefit Total: . 20,265. � 10To14Years lSTo17Years 18And 19Years 20Yeam 21 Years 22 To 24 Years 25 To 29 Years ]UTo34Years 35To39Years 4OTo44Years 45To49Years 50ToS4Years SSToS9Years GOAnd 61 . 62To64Years 65 And 660ao 67 To 69 Years } | / 534 /2.696 70 To 74 Years 637 3196 � 2.5% 85 Years And Over soumsomsananAmerican Community Survey, o.S.Census munmu's American Community Survey Office. 146 Table A4. Race (B02001) White Alone 6,234 1 Black or African American Indian and Alaska Native Alone 67 0.3% Asian Alone AL320 26.3% ......... .................. __— Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone �Ijff 444 1 Some Other Race Alone Am 133% Two or More Races: j0V 1 11111046 f Two Races Including Some Other Race Two Races Excluding Some Other Race, and Three or M, aces 1,1M 5.8% Source: amsananAmerican Community Survey, U.S. Census eumav's Table A5. Place of Birth By Nativity and Citizenship Native: Born Outside The United States: Puerto Rico U.S. Island Foreign Bo Born Abroad Of Ame Naturalized U.S. C* Parent y Survey Office. ( ' 'Estimate Percent 406 O 0.0% 117 0.696 8,437 Latin America 3228 1.6% Northern America � Not AU.SiCitizen 3,890 19.2% � Northern America 3 0.0% Source: 20U6-2O20American Community Survey, UICensus Bunau'sAmerican Community Survey Office. 147 Appendix B: Vehicle LOS Results for the Urban Center Corridor Analysis, and Mid - Day & PM Peak Hour .~.~~'K~~ `-^~~~-�~~~N~~~-O`~.~~N~~~L~M^~~~~,~,~,~,~,~,~,~, Table 131. Existing 2018 Corridor LOS - Weekday Mid -day Peak Hour Southcenter Corridor ID Intersection Intersection Average, Corridor ID, Delay (s) Delay 1 2 4 G 6 7 8 g 10 11 ' 61stAvenue S8hdge/Tukwi| | / Parkway from Southcenter Boulevard mAndover Park W SouthcemerParkway/Stnander Boulevard from Nordstrom Entrance to61stPlace S ^ Andover Park W from Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Andover Park Efrom Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard StranderBoulevard from SouthcemarParkway to WYaUey Highway Andover Park W from S Boulevard to S 180t Andover Park Boulevard to S 180 trand th Sout Park 3180thStreet om5omhcenter Parkway to WValley Highway ` 38 22 44 52 17 29 2 9] 19 34 13 � ]6 37 38 52 39 B 34 3S 32 17 13 13 41 1l -- 21 42 30 35 12 7 26 24 30 26 43 23 44 17 45 27 --� 46 23 29 47 40 | VVValley Highway from 25 29 SouthcenterBoulevard tnStmnder 32 27 Boulevard � - ~_ _- � Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay uvolume weighted. Source: Fehr & Peers, IDAX Data Solutions, StreetLight Data, 2018. 28 C A [ [ [ / 149 .~.~~'K~~ `-^~~~-�~~~N~~~-O"~.~~N~~~L~M^~~ Table 132. Existing 2018 Corridor LOS - Weekday PM Peak Hour Corridor Southcenier Corridor ID 1 2 4 61stAvenue S8hdge/Tukwi| Parkway from Southcenter Boulevard toAndover Park VY SouthcenterParkway/3trander Boulevard from Nordstrom Entrance to61stPlace S Andover Park W from Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Andover Park Efrom Tukwila Parkway to5trande/Boulevard StranderBom|evard from 5 SouthcenterParkway toVVValley � Highway 6 7 8 y 10 11 Intersection Intersection Average 38 � _ 33 19 -------------' l 34 16 ' Andover Park W from S Boulevard to S 180t Andover Park E Boulevard to S 180t trand 28 _ 30 _ 20 _ 32 _ 30 20 th �� 22 Sou , 'rParkwa Andover 20 44 22 s1mnhs�ep omsomhcemer | 45 32 | � ��_ ���� � 4U VVVaUeyHighway from B 14 8 24 24 30 �Corridor� uO v^"Sx��� 27 13 r Andover ���y�WYaUeyHig�� B���� / 18 40 | 28 | | Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay uvolume weighted. Source: Fehr & Peers, IDAX Data Solutions, StreetLight Data, 2018. C B B D D | / 150 .~.~~'K~~ `-^~~~-�~~~N~~~-O"~.~~N~~~L~M^~~~~,~,~,~,~,~,~,~,~ Table 133. Existing 2018 Corridor LOS - Weekend Mid -day Peak Hour � Corridor Intersection' Intersection 4verage Corridor outhcenter Corridor / 1 2 6lsLAvenue SBridge/Tukwila | ������=��m, | ......~' .~.�...~~..~Boulevard to Andover Park W 52 22 36 3 Andover Park W from Tukwila 37 52 Andover Park E from Tukwila 39 Parkway to Strander Boulevard 53 34 | | Stran6erBoulevard from / 35 56 3omhcemerParhway/3tmnder 29 6� | / Entrance to61stPlace 3 34 | 21 � | � 5 3nuthcenterParkway to WVaUey Highway 21 20 26 38 6 �--�— �—'-'���'—�- ' 26 � 51 39 7 �--�—�--�.— -- . ' 2341 23 � 8 — �-���� - —� — | 44 | 19 | 9 Sou ' 'rPadnwaAndover | Park 43 | 23 | 44 19 56 46 /0 25 �4 WVaUeyH���fmm 11 6oukhce�erBoulevard toStmnder Boulevard ------T---'------� | 31 ZZ | 35 98 / 10 22 30 28 41 Boulevard to Andover Boulevard to S t�nd 3180thStreet om5omhcenter Parkway to WValley Highway Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay uvolume weighted. Source: Fehr & Peers, IDAX Data Solutions, StreetLight Data, 2018. 49 15 24 30 D B E C 151 Table B4. Existing 2018 Corridor LOS - Weekend PM Peak Hour Corridor Southcenter Corridor ID 61st Avenue S Bridge/Tukvila 1 Parkway from Southcenter Boulevard to Andover Park W 2 4 Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard from Nordstrom Entrance to 61st Place S Andover Park W from Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Andover Park E from Tukwila Strander Boulevard from 5 Southcenter Parkway to W Valley Highway 6 7 8 9 10 trand ter Pa to S 180th S 54 4 Boulevard fro 41 21 Sout r Parkwa Andover 42 30 Park E 43 23 44 21 S 180th Street om Southcenter 45 23 46 41 47 83 W Valley Highway from 25 53 11 Southcenter Boulevard to Strander 32 34 Boulevard 40 28 Intersection Intersection Average Corridor ID Delay (s) Delay* (s) LOS 31 46 22 98 52 44 29 13 33 54 34 1 22 -1------ 1 36 37 38 37 52 39 Parkway to Strander Boulevard 53 34 35 22 22 28 37 Andover Park W from S 30 Boulevard to S 180t 23 40 Andover Park E 23 Boulevard to S 180 46 41 41 21 th 44 21 19 Parkway to W Valley Highway Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay is volume weighted. Source: Fehr & Peers, IDAX Data Solutions, StreetLight Data, 2018. 65 30 27 31 29 30 E c c c c c 36 16 24 48 41 B c 1 52 .~.~~'K~~ `-^~~~-�~~~N~~~-O"~.~~N~~~L~M^~~ Table 135. 2044 No Action Corridor LOS - Weekday Mid -day Peak Hour Corridor ID 1 61stAvenue SBridge/Tukwila Parkway from Southoenter Boulevard toAndover Park VV Sout cemerParkway/Stnander 2 Boulevard from Nordstrom Entrance to61stPlace S 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 Andover Park Wfrom Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Intersection ID Intersection Average Corridor Delay (s) Delay* LOS 60 | 22 | 105 29 15 B 22 34 15 36 37 38 52 Andover Park E from Tukwila 39 Parkway to Strander Boulevard 53 34 19 Strander Boulevard from 35 5nmhemerParkway to WVaUey Highway 38 8 Andover Park W from S Boulevard to S 180t Andover Park E Boulevard to S 180 ter Pa Boulevard fro rParkwa Uand 3180thStreet om5omhcenter Parkway to WValley Highway W Valley Highway from � 15 38 51 49 34 18 46 | J] � � � 41 15 th 43 1 18 Boulevard 40 Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay uvolume weighted. Source: Fehr & Peers, 02« 36 | 1 80 17 7 37 29 45 30 15 28 47 E _ B � D _ D [ D [ B C D E / 153 Table B6. 2044 No Action Corridor LOS - Weekday PM Peak Hour Corridor ID 1 4 Southcenter Corridor 61st Avenue S Bridge/Tukwil Parkway from Southcenter Boulevard to Andover Park W Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard from Nordstrom Entrance to 61 st Place S Andover Park W from Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Andover Park E from Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Strander Boulevard from 5 Southcenter Parkway to W Valley Highway 6 7 8 Andover Park W from S Boulevard to S 180t Andover Park E Boulevard to S 180 9 I Sout Park E 10 11 ter Pa to S 180th S Boulevard fro r Parkwa trand ndover S 180th Stree rom Southcenter Parkway to W Valley Highway W Valley Highway from Southcenter Boulevard to Strander Boulevard Intersection Intersection ID 22 52 29 33 34 40 36 37 38 1 67 52 48 83 93 39 53 34 35 40 40 118 67 37 72 47 1. 46 1 58 25 44 34 44 25 37 15 34 45 72 46 58 47 140 25 135 78 ............. 40 118 Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay is volume weighted. Bold text highlight corridors with LOS exceeding the City's current policy. Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024. Average Delay* (s) 80 43 26 26 Corrido LOS E E E D C C 154 \\\\\\\\\\\\\ !!!!!!!!! Table B7. 2044 No Action Corridor LOS - Weekend Mid -day Peak Hour Corridor Intersection Intersection Average Corridor ID ID Delay (s) Delay* (s) LOS Southcenter Corridor 61st Avenue S Brid eiTukw`l 67 1 2 4 Parkway from Southcenter Boulevard to Andover Park W Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard from Nordstrom Entrance to 61st Place S 22 135 29 19 33 73 41 34 29 36 52 96 Andover Park W from Tukwila 37 Parkway to Strander Boulevard 38 52 Andover Park E from Tukwila 39 Parkway to Strander Boulevard 53 Strander Boulevard from 5 Southcenter Parkway to W Valley Highway 6 7 8 9 10 11 Andover Park W from S Boulevard to S 180t Andover Park E Boulevard to S 180t Sout Park E ter Pa to S 180th S Boulevard fro r Parkwa trand th ndover S 180th Stree rom Southcenter Parkway to W Valley Highway W Valley Highway from Southcenter Boulevard to Strander Boulevard 34 35 44 96 29 47 100 49 50 38 27 44 39 52 67 F 44 1 , 24 67 E l , 46 108 i I 41 90 I , 44 47 52 D 54 20 . : 41 90 42 39 43 24 „.. _„. 44 47 45 67 46 108 89 47 116 57 E F 25 134 I 32 28 I 82 F 40 27 Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay is volume weighted. Bold text highlight corridors with LOS exceeding the City's current policy. Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024. 155 Table B8. 2044 No Action Corridor LOS - Weekend PM Peak Hour Co 1 2 4 5 6 7 Southcenter Corrido 61 st Avenue S Bridge/Tukwil Parkway from Southcenter Boulevard to Andover Park W Southcenter Parkway/Strander Boulevard from Nordstrom Entrance to 61 st Place S Andover Park W from Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Andover Park E from Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard Strander Boulevard from Southcenter Parkway to W Valley Highway Andover Park W Boulevard to S Andov Boul Minkler . Southcen Park E center Parkway S 180th Stre yard trander Street o Andover S 180th Street from Southcenter Parkway to W Valley Highway W Valley Highway from 11 i Southcenter Boulevard to Strander Boulevard Intersection ID 22 29 33 34 36 52 39 53 Intersec Delay 56 118 3 17 75 35 75 43 35 53 43 15 46 72 41 49 44 27 54 16 41 49 42 1... 43.._„._. __ t 43 15 44 27 45 35 46 72 47 ! 89 Notes: *The tabulated corridor average delay is volume weighted. Bold text highlight corridors with LOS exceeding the City's current policy. Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024. Average Corridoi Delay* (s) L05 92 42 51 F D E D 156 PLACEHOLDER PAGE: REMOVE THIS PAGE AND INSERT ALL SIMTRAFFIC PDFS Appendix C: Vehicle LOS Results for the Study Intersection Analysis PM Peak Hour Table C1. Existing 2018 PM Peak Hour LOS in Tukwila ersection Average Control Delay (s) 1 ^ Boeing Access Road / E Marginal Wa ignal Signal 37 2A 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 Boeing Access Road / Martin Luther King Way S 112th Street / Tukwila International Boulevard S 112th Street / E Marginal Way 5 116th Way / Tukwila International Boulevard S 116th Street/ E Marginal Way 5 130th Street / Tukwila International Blvd S 130th Street / East Marginal Way 42nd Avenue S / Interurban Avenue 5 S 124th Street / 42nd AvenueS��� S 124th Street / 50th PI 5 S 133rd Street / SR 599 Ramps 52nd Avenue S / Interurban Avenue S S 144th Street / Tukwila International Boul 15 S 144th Street / 42nd Avenue 5 16 S 144th Street / 53rd Avenue 23A ? South 24 1-405 SB 25* Southcenter Boule er Boulevard / Boulevard/ 6 /WVall v dS Avenue kwila Avenue S ............................ ghway Valley Highway 26 S 160th Street / 4 venue S 27 SR 518 EB Off -ramp / Klickitat Drive 28A Klickitat Drive / 53rd Avenue S 29* Southcenter Parkway / Northwest Mall Driveway 30* Tukwila Parkway / Northwest Mall Driveway 31* Tukwila Parkway / 61st Avenue S 32* 1-405 NB Ramps / W Valley Highway 33* 1-5 Exit 153 Off -ramp / Southcenter Parkway 34* [ Strander Boulevard / Southcenter Parkway 35* Strander Boulevard / 61st Place S 36* ; Andover Park W / Tire Center Driveway 43 Signal ! 8 TWSC 17 Signal 20 TWS 39 Signal AW ai TWSC TWSC Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal AWSC 12 TWSC 28 Signal TWSC TWSC Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal TWSC 38 35 17 5 144th Street / Macada 18 58th Avenue S / Inter 19 Southcenter Boulevar. Boulevard 20 Southcenter .d Av- 21 Southc = I-40 22* Sou Aven 159 Intersection Location 37* Andover Park W / Southeast Mall Dri y TWSC Average Delay (s) 4 A 38* 39* Strander Boulevard / Andover Park W Strander Boulevard / Andover Park E 40* Strander Boulevard / W Valley Highway 41* 42* 43* 45* 46* 47* 48 49A 50^ 51 52* 53* 54* Notes: ^Intersections analyzed using HCM phasing. *Study intersections within the South these intersections are from SimTraffic average. For two-way s Bold text highlight s Source: Fehr & Pe erse AX Data Solu Minkler Boulevard / Southcenter Parkway Minkler Boulevard / Andover Parrkk W W Minkler Boulevard / Andover Park E S 180th Street / Southcenter Parkway S 180th Street / Andover Park W S 180th Street / Andover Park E S 180th Street / W Valley Highway Southcenter Parkway / S 184th PI S 200th Street / Orillia Road 5 S 200th Street / Southcenter Parkway Southcenter Boulevard / 65th Avenue S Tukwila Parkway / Andover Park W Tukwila Parkway / Andover Park E Southcenter Parkway / S 168 ethodolo a nter ith L• treet nstead of Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Sign. Si. . nai Signal Sig . nai Sign. al Signal 20 41 22 21 22 15 5 B A 6th edition due to unusual geometry or unusual signal idor LOS policy applies. The tabulated vehicle delay values for ese were used to determine corridor LOS based on a vehicle -volume -weighted s in this subset, the average intersection delay for all approaches is reported. eeding the City's current policy or WSDOT standards. ata, 2018. 160 Table C2. 2044 No Action - PM Peak Hour L05 in Tukwila section Control Boeing Access Road / E Marginal Wa Signal Signal Signal TWSC Average Delay s) OS '. 54 D 2^ Boeing Access Road / Martin Luther King Way 3 I S 112th Street / Tukwila International Boulevard 4 S 112th Street / E Marginal Way 6 5 S 116th Way / Tukwila International Boulevard 5 116th Street / E Marginal Way 7 S 130th Street / Tukwila International Blvd 8 S 130th Street / East Marginal Way Signal T al AWSC 9 42nd Avenue S / Interurban Avenue S Signal 10 S 124th Street / 42nd Avenue S A C 11 ' S 124th Street / 50th PI 5 SC 12 S 133rd Street / SR 599 Ramps TWSC 13 52nd Avenue S / Interurban Avenue S ignal 14 S 144th Street / Tukwila International Boul- . .al 15 S 144th Street / 42nd Avenue S Si.nal 144th Street / 53rd Avenue 5 TWSC 17 j S 144th Street / Macadam R• r TWSC 18 58th Avenue S / Interurb Signal 19 Southcenter Boulevar. :oul: .rd Signal 20 Southcenter Blvd / 42nd Signal 21 Southcenter 22* Southcen 23^ Sout 24 1-405 S 25* i Southcen ulevar r Boulevard / ps / W Valley ulevard / 26 S 160th Stree enue S kwila I 1- B Off -ramp TWSC _ t Av Signal Avenu:. Signal way Signal Signal e S AWSC alley Highway 27 SR 518 EB Off ra hckitat Drive 28^ Klickitat Drive / 53rd Avenue S TWSC Signal 29* Southcenter Parkway / Northwest Mall Driveway TWSC 30* Tukwila Parkway/ Northwest Mall Driveway TWSC 31* i Tukwila Parkway / 61st Avenue 5 Signal 32* j 1-405 NB Ramps / W Valley Highway Signal Exit 153 Off -ramp / Southcenter Parkway Signal 34* Strander Boulevard / Southcenter Parkway Signal 35* Strander Boulevard / 61st Place S Signal 36* Andover Park W / Tire Center Driveway TWSC 37* j Andover Park W / Southeast Mall Driveway j TWSC 56 21 29 >150 F 9 37 17 >150 F 41 j B 61 i E 71 >150 93 F E E 135 2168 C 59 66 83 78 E 5 40 41 9 12 161 ersection Coca ntersection Control oS 38* Strander Boulevard / Andover Park W z 39* x Strander Boulevard / Andover Park E 40* Strander Boulevard / W Valley Highway 41* Minkler Boulevard / Southcenter Parkway 42* Minkler Boulevard / Andover Park W 43* Minkler Boulevard / Andover Park E 44* S 180th Street / Southcenter Parkway Sign 45* S 180th Street / Andover Park W 46* S 180th Street / Andover Park E 47* ', S 180th Street / W Valley Highway 48 Southcenter Parkway / S 184th PI 49^ S 200th Street / Orillia Road S 50^ S 200th Street / Southcenter Parkway 51 Southcenter Boulevard / 65th Avenue S 52* j Tukwila Parkway / Andover Park W 53* Tukwila Parkway/Andover Park E 54* Southcenter Parkway / S 168th Street Notes: ^Intersections analyzed using HCM 2000 phasing. *Study intersections within the So these intersections are from SimTra average. For two-way stop -controlled Bold text highlight study it ti ns Source: Fehr & Peers, Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal S. Signal Signal 67 47 118 25 37 15 34 C 72 E 58 140 25 68 ignal 64 Signal 77 Ic nal al ignal 48 26 19 M 6th edition due to unusual geometry or unusual signal E E B r LOS policy applies. The tabulated vehicle delay values for ermine corridor LOS based on a vehicle -volume -weighted in this su. - , e average intersection delay for all approaches is reported. exceeding the City's current policy or WSDOT standards. 162 PLACEHOLDER PAGE: REMOVE THIS PAGE AND INSERT ALL SYNCHRO PDFS Appendix D: Existing Transit Service in Tukwila O A D To: Emily Alice Allhart, Fehr & Peers Tino Jonga, Fehr & Peers From: Peter Soderberg, Nelson\Nygaard Lela Cooper, Nelson\Nygaard Date: July 30, 2024 Subject: Tukwila Transit Element Strategies Memorandum BACKGROUND This memorandum provides an overview of Tukwila's exis and specific recommendations and strategies the City of Tuk network and foster a more accessible transportation system. By providing service to and from Tukwila, and how -rvices are based on expected growth scenarios and commu el programmatic needs, and large capital investment Existing Condition King County Metro (Metro) Area Response (DART) route, a provides light rail sery - - - he service to Tukwila The highest r Tukwila daily boards total of 7,338 a Andover Park Wes k, opportunities and challenges, o further improve the transit ng on the transit services currently d, recommendations are discussed mendations related to efforts. e services, two RapidRide routes, one Demand x o -. : service within the City of Tukwila. Sound Transit o Tukwila International Boulevard Station and Sounder commuter rail cations that are served by multiple lines and modes: and Station, served by local bus, RapidRide, and the 1 Line. Average 021 for Link light rail were 1,960 and bus boardings were 5,337 for a outhcenter Mall, served by local bus and RapidRide F Line. Passengers can connect to the Tukwila Sounder station to the east using the RapidRide F Line. Average daily boardings in this location during October 2021 were 3,325. 165 Figure Di. Tukwila Existing Transit Service ©undary Route Type Tukwila Parks KCN Express Route KCIvt Frequent Route Link Light Pail ---'RCM Local Route Sounder Line Future Transit Options 166 During peak travel times on weekdays, there are four services that provide 15-minute or better frequency: ■ Metro Route 150 ■ Metro RapidRide A Line ■ Metro RapidRide F Line ■ Sound Transit 1 Line Local Route Frequency During peak travel times on weekdays, Routes 124, 128, and 156 provide better. These routes serve local stops in Tukwila in addition to serving s Downtown Seattle. Metro Route 124 Metro Route 128 Metro Route 156 On -Demand Services Two different on -demand services are available destinations within the city or to transit stops with Dial -A -Ride Transit (DART) is a sery have a need for more flexible ser fixed route options. DART Ro request to allow for residents s- ' - at 30-minute frequencies or communities and o transport riders directly to some her frequencies. unty Metro that operates within communities that on density, greater distances, and fewer available our or better and can deviate from its route by er transit options or their home. Metro Flex is an on-d ervic- is also available within a defined boundary of Tukwila. Metro Flex allows anyone wi e • - sere . ea to hail a ride using a mobile app or phone call for transportation transit stop freq service. In Tukwila, Metro Flex can be used within the defined area to provid wila International Boulevard Station and the Tukwila Community Center. 167 OPPORT UNT81LS AND CHALLENGES Community and Stakeholder Priorities Based on the existing transit network serving the City of Tukwila, there are opportunities to improve transit reliability and viability in coordination with identified community priorities. Through surveying and outreach efforts conducted in Spring 2024, community members had the opportunity to provide feedback on their goals for the City of Tukwila's transit system, including: • Access to new destinations - Community members highlighted a d- for the transit system to expand service to new destinations more effectively within the -rticular, the Tukwila Library (located on Tukwila International Boulevard and S 144th St), a ell as t kwila Community Center and surrounding Allentown neighborhood. • Safety — Residents emphasized a goal for improved y Condit' ns for riders. included improved bus stop lighting conditions, and furthe oard ity measures, and safety measures at bus stops and Sounder/Link Light Rail stations, esp ing times with lower ridership. • Improved Amenities — Community me underscore eed for improved amenities at bus stops and rail stations, with particular e •us stop ities. Increased availability of benches at stops and stations, as well as i ove• - •us shelters were identified as community amenity priorities. In addition to stop ameni ' p ents, roved parking access and availability at stations and park -and -rides were a •entified an oppo ity to ensure that transit users can find adequate parking availability a lities or to ..ys. Community members also indica -ral service priorities to improve the existing transit network. • Improve • • uen .mm. members highlighted the desire for improved frequencies allowi .r more consi t use . ansit. During peak travel times on weekdays, there are curre •ur services th. rovide 15-minute or better frequency, and three routes providing 30- minute o • Southcenter .t• rvice — Residents emphasized a desire to implement a potential circulator service connectin: thcenter with other areas in the city. • Improved Regional Bus Service — Riders indicated a desire for improved regional bus connectivity to supplement existing transit service. This includes frustration that other regional express bus lines pass by Tukwila without making a stop for riders and presents an opportunity for increased connectivity. Residents indicated a desire for improved Eastside connectivity with the only existing connection existing via the F RapidRide Line. • First- Last -Mile Connectivity — Community and stakeholder engagement also emphasized the importance of first- last -mile connections in ensuring a reliable and effective transit network in Tukwila. This includes connecting existing sidewalk and bicycle network gaps and ensuring higher rider familiarity with Metro Flex on -demand service from King County Metro. 168 Challenges and Considerations In addition to the opportunities and identified community priorities, there are also several challenges and considerations for transit service and accessibility in Tukwila. These challenges include: • Land Use, Density, and Barriers — In Tukwila the highest density areas and employment centers are generally served by the existing transit network, but areas outside these major destinations face gaps in service that limit connectivity for many residents. Additionally, the city has physical challenges that create barriers to access, with freeways, rail lines, and t uwamish River impeding some options for fixed -route service. While a challenge, this also len• . the potential for more flexible transit service to be implemented in key areas of the city • Infrastructure Availability — In order to support transit, some astru investments are needed. Particularly, in North Tukwila, there are limited 't facilities a eral gaps in the sidewalk network compared to the Tukwila core area. • 42nd Ave S Bridge Replacement —The 42nd Ave S : •e is an i- rtant arterial and nearing its lifespan. The city is currently evaluating plans for the th construction expected to begin after 2026. • Boeing Access Road Station Project — A deration ansit investment in Tukwila is the building of a proposed Sound Transit infil tion . cc- s Road (BAR) in Tukwila. This project would add a new station to the ex i - ne and was approved in the ST3 system plan. The location of the st. et to b. : ized, but is open for public opinion based on two options: adjacent to the ' der t son Bo Access Road, or further south along E Marginal Way S. • Pedestrian Access to T in u sidewalk network gaps were identified throughout the area, incl - con on points for the existing transit network. These gaps in pedestrian infrastru ma e . it us., d connectivity more difficult and less safe for riders. Northwest Tukwi .s the ereates -d fo .roved sidewalk conditions. R E CO NS AND STRATEGIES Based on the existing tra ork, community priorities, and identified challenges and opportunities, recommendations and strat gies to improve transit service and access to transit were determined in coordination with stakeholders. Recommendations for Tukwila can be broken down into the following main categories: • Transit Service Improvements ■ Transit Amenities and Facilities ■ Access to Transit 169 Transit Service Improvements Service Enhancements and Expansion Opportunities The Metro Connects Long Range Plan identifies prioritized service improvements through the year 2050 based on projected growth patterns and demand for service. Within this plan, Route 150 (frequent service between Kent and Downtown Seattle), was identified as a potential future RapidRide corridor. The City of Tukwila should continue to work with Metro to develop this service and continu- o incentivize and encourage growth and new development around planned high -capacity trans .rovements. The finalization of Sound Transit's Boeing Access Road infill Line 1 station ' portance for the City of Tukwila and Metro to consider in planning future service and connect , wh- .rdinating local service. The City of Tukwila should continue working with Sound Transit a her regiona ners to advocate for the development of this station as well as supporting bus -rail tr er infrastructure ure seamless connectivity between transit modes in the northern area of ity. Community members also expressed interest in improved t could be addressed through a potential Southcenter circulator Flex. Such a service would provide circulation se connections to existing neighborhood amenities amenities. The City should explore opportunities potential service options to improve mo.'lity with or new programmatic options. 'thin the So cting in the Southcenter area, which or on -demand service, similar to Metro nter neighborhood and provide shopping, employment, and her regional partners to identify ea, either through expanded services In addition to exploration of a - ator or demand ulator service at Southcenter, residents indicated a need for improved transit c ctions - .. a whole, including Eastside connections. The City of Tukwila should further work d Transit . pport Southcenter's growth as the regional center of Tukwila and ensure i •eede. sit network and last -mile connections. Metro Flex Community fee and improved ease improvement. King Co conveniently address thes fixed -route service. r engagement also identified enhanced first and last mile connections I trips from the city's transit network as an opportunity for s on -demand transit service Metro Flex provides an opportunity to eds by providing service in areas with lower densities or barriers that inhibit 170 To improve the Metro Flex service, Tukwila should consider advocating with King County Metro for an expanded Metro Flex zone, specifically to provide enhanced connections to the south to serve Southcenter, as well as further east to Tukwila Station (Figure D2). These recommendations for expanded service are based on both anticipated future growth, as well as rider needs and the opportunity to connect to Sounder and additional transit service. Paramount to the success of Metro Flex service and the suggested service enhancements is effective marketing and rider familiarity. Tukwila should prioritize working further with Metro to market the service throughout the city to enhance rider familiarity and usage. These efforts should be concentrated in areas with high need, such as low vehicle ownership or limited existing transit connections. Marketing efforts should also provide further cl the service and how it can be use Rider Safety To address rider safety by partnering with amenities/safe and Link Ligh entrance conditi Figure D2. Existing Tukwila Metro Flex Service Area ers to rider usage. oncerns, Tukwila can encourage improved on board safety amenities t to ensure on -board safety measures in addition to stop fforts can be made to explore safety concerns at transit center ng with Metro and Sound Transit for improved platform and Transit Ameniti• acilities Community feedback indicated that improved bus amenities were an identified priority, particularly, additional shelters at bus stops. While many stops in the city have shelters either provided by Metro or the City of Tukwila, there remain stops with high ridership activity without shelters, resulting in a less satisfying user experience. This section highlights the highest priority bus stops for investment in improved amenities based on average daily boardings. Boeing Access Road Station Members of the community commonly identified a lack of transit facilities in the northern portion of the City of Tukwila. The proposed Boeing Access Road Station would ameliorate this concern and create a key regional link for the City of Tukwila. The City should continue to work with Sound Transit to advance the 171 planning for this rail station and incentivize the necessary surrounding development activity to support station area activity and encourage seamless bus -rail transfer integrations in the immediate station area. Transit Stop Amenities and Rider Experience King County Metro classifies stops outside of the City of Seattle with 25 or more average boardings per day as eligible for bus shelters. RapidRide stops with less than 50 average riders are eligible for standard RapidRide stops, and those with over 50 riders are eligible for enhanced stop amenities which include larger shelters, real-time arrival information, and other amenities. Tukwila currently has 16 bus stops with no bus shelters and over 25 averag Table D1. Of these stops, 5 stops have over 50 boardings per day, show amenities at these stops will help to improve the rider experience an guidelines for stop amenities. The highest priority stops are along Tukwila International Bo .rd a have the highest ridership and no shelters available. Addit priori & Park Place, Strander Boulevard & Andover Park E, and And represent an opportunity to pursue the addition of bus shelter defined ridership guidelines and improve rider - These s utilized transit lines, including Routes 150, 128, a in 0 rdings per day as shown in ext. Prioritizing improved County Metro's t 14:th and 152nd -t. These stops t .s include Southcenter Boulevard & S 180th Street. These stops es while meeting King County Metro's I along some of the area's most 172 Table Di. Tukwila bus stops with no bus shelters and more than 25 average daily boardings Stop ID Stop Location Average Daily Boardings 40813 S 144th St & 42nd Ave S 37.3 41119 42nd Ave S & S 144th St 47 41128 S 144th St & Pacific Hwy S 39.2 54202 Southcenter Blvd & 52nd Ave S 37.5 54203 Southcenter Blvd & Park Place* 32.2 54204 Southcenter Blvd & Park Place* 52.3 54205 Southcenter Blvd & 53rd Ave S* 26.5 54206 Southcenter Blvd & 42nd Ave S* 47.4 58111 Strander Blvd & Andover Park 37 58113 Strander Blvd & W Valley 59833 Strander Blvd & Andove E* 59.3 60380 Andover Park W & S 180 54.2 60920 Tukwila Intl Blvd & S 152nd 188.5 60930 Tukwila Intl S 148th St 76.2 61000 Tukwila Intl St 26.4 61040 Tukwila Intl BI S 14 41.9 *RapidRide service stops with only bench ame ie Data Source: King County Metro Boardin Within the identified stops w service to the F Line, as show amenities were limited and prov should continue to b from Metro. Additionally, Many of these s International Boule some bus stop ere identifi This re additional amenity imp lighting, trash receptacles, ential exp o etro Bus Shelter Data (2024). ings and no bus shelters, five provide RapidRide e these stops had benches available, other ion for improved amenities. Ridership at these stops may be eligible for increased amenities or enhanced stop features d have shelters available, they lacked benches or seating for riders. s City of Tukwila managed bus shelter facilities along Tukwila nts another opportunity for the city to explore when evaluating such as bike racks (of which no bus stops in Tukwila have), improved well -kept signage. 173 Figure D3. Tukwila Bus Stops without Shelters .L.,akerree .*TqatyP10 Stops Without Bus Shelters Bus stops with more than 25 average daily hoardings and no shelters Legend \ 25-50 Average Daily Boardings 50-100 Average Daily Boardings 100+ Average Daily Boardings Data Source King County Metro (2024) Lake, WriSh"ngt011 1 Line Station Sounder S Station Tukwila Boundary 11111111 0 0.25 0.5 1 Mile 174 Access to Transit Tukwila also has opportunities to improve accessibility and ensure folks are able to physically access the existing and planned future transit network. Pedestrian Accessibility to Transit A key strategy to improve accessibility to transit is through addressing ease of access and safety of riders to physically reach transit service. Specifically, this includes addressing pedestrian editions and safety, through systematic improvements to existing sidewalk network gaps. These - s should be first prioritized based on improving pedestrian facilities nearest to frequent transit servic 'le considering broader pedestrian connectivity as shown in Figure D4. Sidewalk network gaps o -valent in Northwest Tukwila, including areas currently serving the transit network. Mai re. s of pote sidewalk network improvements valuable to pedestrian access to transit include: • Tukwila International Boulevard -Tukwila Interna particularly at the northern end of the boulevard b serves the local 124 Route. has gaps in t' - sidewalk network ginal Way, near SR 599. This area • 40th Avenue, 42nd Avenue S, and Maca r . d — Contin -ast of Tukwila International Boulevard, 40th Avenue, 42nd Avenue S, . .. :oad a :ve gaps in the sidewalk network. These streets serve and are near local rou 28, . • - Link Light Rail 1 Line which runs along Macadam Road S, as well as - - 1-5. • 53rd Avenue SW - 53rd A • needing improved sidewalk facilities, as the area helps to support bot .I Route as well a ute 128. Allentown — Additiona support bett- - t of priorit • - • - rove the Allentown area of Tukwila would also help to rian - sibility to transit. 50th Place S and S 124th Street are additional areas ure improvements. 175 Figure D4. Tukwila Sidewalk Network Gaps I „ City Boundary Parks =r sidewalk 'Pliny? Gap 'minder Stations Link St hors Line Light Rail Sounder 5 Line Comsat mail Rap Ri e KCM Local Routes 176 Appendix E: Public Outreach Materials (Fact Sheet, Flyer, Poster, Engagement Boards) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ti Ivot\I "1" FR ,A S 0 ffi; A. (7) E. NA City of Tukwila Comprehensiue Plan Transportation Element What is a THOOSPORTOTMO ELEMEOT? The Transportation Element ofthe Comprehensive Plan is a plan that will serve the community's current and future needs and establish Tukwila's transportation goals and policies for the next 20 years. Pl"se dr ”refully, lot our children' sake Specifically, the TPIIIISPORMI1011ELEMEIIT will: • Establish new goals and policies to guide City decision -making • Improve safety, equity, accessibili reliability, and connectivity and goods movement • Develop a prioritized li projects and a Loca o Make recommendations improvements. Projec Share ideas Help us identify challenges, provide input on needs, and refine draft goals and priorities Take me to the suruey! You s PFIRTICIP 'CRUSE: IMI111111111 itansportation Gement City n s help making decisions transportation We ne d your input on current challenges e s and ideas about how to improve the transportation network Fall 7023 Review draft programs and project lists Help us refine and prioritize policies, programs, and projects Spring 2024 Present to Council N. 4 Present draft Transportation Element update for Council adoption FOR m�flt IflFORflTIOfl OR TO CORTRCT US: visit le„N FEHR i*PEERS 1 78 SharehoL 'hts on tr? sportati. in Tuk. 'la in ow an'line survey nd .eractive map. 179 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ti Ivot\I "1" FR A PI S 0 ffi; A. (7) E. NA City of Tukwila Comprehensive Pm Transportation Element Tell Us! The City of Tukwila is launching a plan to improve transportation ouer the next 20 years. We need your help to identify issues and opportunities to help people move around the city. The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan will serve the community's current a ture nee and establish Tukwi •rtation goals and policie then- '0year What you thi It's important to r voice hear to h- sportation d ,1111r. I V r ideas in our survey and interactive map! We want hear from you! El Find us in person at one of our tabling events El El listed on our website, or use our online form to S+:1 share your thoughts. 1 80 11 PROJECT Otl[RIIIEW The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan is a plan that will serve the community's current and future needs and establish Tukwila's transportation goals and policies for the next 20 years. Specifically, the TRSDISP RTR IDf EE T will: Establish new 'goals 'and policies to guide City decision -making °' Improve safety, equity, accessibility, reliability, and connectivity for all road users and goods movement Develop a prioritized list of transportation projects and a Local Road Safety Plan' Make recommendations on how to fund improvements. Project Timeline: This is Flelp us identify challenges, prevido input en needs, and refine draft goals I and priorities You should PiiIPTE 8 DIS: " The City needs help making decisions related to transportation We need your input ,urrem. challenges and idr ,bout' how to improve' transportatior .work, YOUR Plan. *WE ARE HERE! Winter 2e24 Confirm what we heard im the spring and identify any miss, na ideas Present draft Transportation Elemem update far Council adoption Transportation Eleme In the first round to understand. 181 re the up hat some of the words we used were hard oats that will shape the plan, ure fair access to healthy, affordable, reliable transportation options, vable places, and jobs, particularly for historically marginalized and vulnerable populations. Provide safe transportation infrastructure and improve personal comfort to to emphasize Tukwila as a welcoming place. Maintain, expand and enhance Tukwila's multimodal network, particularly walk, bike, roll, and transit, to increase mobility options where needs are greatest. Anticipate and plan for the community's evolving needs, new technologies, and opportunities for mobility. Plan, design, and construct transportation projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve community health, and protect the natural environment. PUBLIC EDGR6EEDT "The stigma surrounding public transit affects my personal experiences with transit.. Otters the eigma searns,m be reinfurced as Criitlt IGkan Ha0 nse trallsil" The City of Tukwila website hosted project information related to the Transportation Element, including an online survey and an interactive webmap to solicit feedback from Tukwila residents and visitors. The project team hosted several in -person events to engage with the Tukwila community and direct them to the developed online tools.The online survey asked about the draft goals and general transportation experiences, while the webmap asked for input on potential needs and improvements in specific locations. Vehicle Here arare How do people Walk Public Transit During the in -person events (tablin total of 128 public comments and id rly one-third of comments captur= focused on tran- transit c©mme related to safe using publ piker es much au c2nrmerned-about n ridinu Car utaitin a pprcaxlm. omments alking and d out a needs. n- It's uta&l r ing-tn e1lk rarcutrkt th"e' h(e 'Srat1th6.6ncerMeII aPea. r+aBylikethe transportation-0annfictaitylar TTkuraaand-am -happy math ear current cetidna itd uksie d01se cupeouiv PI lit ' Tiaa epra I b se the r aavalk netetrt alking places. Bike ia lties-erad abruptly, including SauthcoritevBoulevard sadotharstreetsm the vanity ar Soetecerrter mat➢, h,ed to get train Driven aee s tie€gno Ikc 'Please make it Basler to walk around lukwila by providing sidewalks endlor physical separation tram uehiWos. 1 walkable area Is more universally acceasibie t ^gdlriug a pall ele 11 al1l cuts dol t'sun and has healthier Other aptured a nsportation system. The key themes noted from community input included: Transit safety, reliability, and amenities Expanding the bicycle network Filling sidewalk gaps „ Costs associated with driving IirisMg shoIdbe achset e nak anu`0a01-00p1i5re P. Tho roads isumay end nssd to rreva pavemeit. but =,d 0-Allentown. 6ne88d value Psrktu-options bynei "perking garag` and nioisteising above otherelexa1 nitsin theread lanes). 182 4MMMMMMMMMMMMM ti Ivot\I "1" FR ,A S 0 ffi; A. (7) E. NA WHAT DO YOU THAN ABOUT THESE Here are key themes we heard through public outreach. Did we hear you correctly? THROSPORTATIOD COMMEDTS? Vote your top 5 ideas! 1,41:1.4,1 444 tiv 44.4 SEATTLE-TA , INTERNATIG: AIRPOPT; • TRROSIT 22 23 ItilmOl on' rilv.„ ADA sinuniv,Sitiu r.,,,eneeti Tinos, T,,NiiNV it A Better security and enforcement at Tle Station. Want better transit connections between light rail and Southcenter. COMMEOTS pap Want to bike Marginal It's h • to ke to Boeing wn, and SODO. ncomfortable to bike on uthcenter Boulevard. Want better to McMi -ctiont to bike 51st Ave S. Mall is difficult to y bike. 'Ice to Rentcni. rears on 42nd Ave S. More p- rking nearTukwila International Boulevard Station. 9 Wont slower cars on 51st Ave Si VOTES 6 Want slower cars on Southcenter Parkway * WRIVROLL The intersection of E Marginal 11 Way and S 112th St feels uncomfortable for pedestrians. 12 Want more sidewalks in Allentown. 13 14 Sidewalks missing along Macadam Rd S. Sidewalks missing along 40th Ave S. Hard to walk on Tukwila 15 International Blvd with cars parked on sidewalks. It's uncomfortable to walk or 16 bike across 1-5 on the S 144th St bridge. Ti Sidewalks missing on 5160th St. It's hard to walk between 18 Southcenter Mall, Tukwila Sounder Station, and the Interurban Trail. la It's hard to walk to and around " Tukwila Pond Park. OTHER zo More lighting in Ryan Hill. 24 Want to gat) more places from the Tukwila gi Clean up Green River Trail / Sounder Station and have more frequent trips Interurban Trail. 183 Appendix F: Bike Facility Types and Treatments Table F1. Bike Facility Types Facility Type Description Image Off -Corridor Bike Network Striped Bike Lane Bike boulevards are low -volume and low -speed streets that prioritize bike travel. They incorporate signage, pavement markings, and traffic calming tools to improve the comfort and connectivity of the bike roadway network. Bike boulevards offer an alternative to bicycling on busy streets with high traffic volumes. Many bike boulevards couple speed management strategies with bike route signage to create safer streets. A conventional bike lane is a stri lane on a roadway that is desig exclusive use by people riding bi Conventional bike lanes include pavement markings bike use. These along roadwa or anticipa would be un the travel lane. Buffered Bike ered bike la .re conventional Lane b es pair ith a designated (Horizontal) bu c_ .rating the bike lane from the .cent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. These facilities are established along roadways with high travel speeds, volumes, and/or truck traffic. 185 Facility Type Description Image Separated Bike Lane (Vertical) Physically Separated Bikeway/ Shared Use Paths Separated bike lanes (vertical) are buffered bike lanes with vertical elements that provide further separation from motor vehicle traffic. Common vertical elements are vertical curbs, a painted buffer with planter boxes, parked cars, or a fixed barrier. These facilities keep motorists from crossing into the bike lane and minimize maintenance costs due to decreased motor vehicle wear. They may be especially appropriate for curvy streets, areas with high drop off/pick up activity, and higher speed streets with few driveways and cross streets. Physically separated bikeways are distinct from the sidewalks. These include shared use paved trails fo pedestrians active tran wide enough are rier, curb, corridor. They cilities separat sidewalk. clusi ts, skater tion us 0 Iso be ich are se of nd other a motorized space, dependent e-way bike — but adjacent to Note: All images are courtesy of Fehr & Peers unless otherwise noted. Sourc-. TO, 2019. o.org/2019./ bellevues =downtown- demonstratio: •w yJ 186 Nor �0 K W � �tt, A [RAN S P 0 U'A f,X0 N EL M E N'T' Table F2. Bike Intersection Improvement Treatments Treatment Type ! Description Image Bike Signal Green solid or | Bike signals are dedicated signals, which can bedetection or actuation systems, to separate bicyclists and motor vehicle movements atintersections. They give bicyclists priority. These facilities are utilized athigh volume intersections with conflicts among motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. | Skip -striping directs cyclists to bike lane and increases the visib of cyclists to motorists. These | facilities are often `visua|ly | a|e�v,eo�ou' lanes. ' ~~~~~~ cated space at the signalized interse I for bicyclists to wait safely and visibly. Bicyclists have priority crossing major streets as they wait infront ofvehicle traffic, These facilities are mostly adopted at signalized intersection with high volumes ofbicyclists making left - turns and/ormntoristsmaking � � 'A� w � m11211 | i | 187 Wr �0 K W � t, A [RAN S P 0 RTA f,X0 N EL M E N'T Treatment Type I Description Protected or AProtected orDutch Intersection is Dutch anintersection which Intersection accommodates one-way cycle tracks. Modeled after Dutch intersection design' Dutch Intersections feature corner refuge islands which place stop bars for bicyclists ahead ofvehicles and set back bike crossing approximately one car length from the adjacent travel lane. This allows for two - stage Length 1, minimum green signal cycle 1 the intersection. In locations wh Green Cycle Green cycle length refers to a � long enough for bicyclists to c | i This isimplemented, the green | / cycle length is Automatic Signal Actuation uuadonare s. 'whi ' -rtmotorists of bike I ^ and separate motoh , d bicyclists traffic signaling. |nthe case ofautomatic signals, bike signals are initiated through inductive loop vehicle detection which is calibrated to the size ormetallic mass ofabike. Bicyclists are instructed towait in detection areas through marked pavement and signage. btVu����o�����in� pvidc/uiec*iqna|s/sinna|dctecuoo-"nd'auvativ* 188 Treatment Type Description Image Bike Lane to Left HAWK Signal Left -side bike lanes are conventional bike lanes placed on the left side of one-way or two-way median divided streets. They improve visibility as motorists have bike lanes on the driver's side and potentially avoid right -side bike lane conflicts. They also reduce bus and truck conflicts as most bus stops, loading zones, and rush hour parking restrictions are usually on the right side of the street. Consequently, these facilities are often utilized on streets with frequent bus stops or truck loading zones on the right side, high numbers of left -turning bicyclists, high volumes of right turning motor vehicles, and high park turnover accompanied by rush hour parking restrictions. n as a Ac are signal-h yellow lenses i nd cyclist cros e facilitie •nali a •d beacon, Crosswalks d over ating •edestrian to motorists. mostly installed ersections or mid •ssing locations. They can be . ful along bike boulevards, where intersections are more likely to be unsignalized due to low vehicular traffic volumes, and/or where bike trails intersect streets. Sou : TO, 2019. https://na -design •uide/bike-lanes publication/urban- ide-bike-lanes/ 189 eatment Type ,. Description Rectangular Rectangular Rapid Flashing Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) allow pedestrians Beacon to actuate a flashing warning light to indicate pedestrian crossing. When combined with other pedestrian treatments, such as median refuge islands or advance yield marking, they have an even stronger impact on pedestrian and bicyclist visibility. Note: All images are courtesy of Fehr & Peers unless otherwise note 190 Appendix G: Freight Considerations Figure G1. Examples of Freight Considerations along Corridors CHALLENGE Navigating restricted turns Curb space access Source: Accommoda RECOMMENDATIONS Recessed stop line H orizonta for loa • ance delivery Asymmetrical median nose Offset bus and bicycle lanes 192 Figure G2. Common Features for Safe Truck Parking Desired Safety Features of Truck Parking INGRESS AND EGRESS RAMPS OF SUFFICIENT LENGTH SITE DESIGN ALLOWING EFFICIENT FLOW OF TRAFFIC Source: FHWA, Truck Parking Development Handbook, 202 SUFFICIENT LIGHTING FENCIN TH SU THE SECURITY CAMERAS OR LOT ATTENDANTS ECURE BATHROOMS 193