HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-09-07 Special Minutes - Sound Transit Public Hearing TranscriptIN RE SOUND TRANSIT'S APPLICATION
FOR:
L03 -057 Unclassified Use Permit
L03 -058 Shoreline Variance
L03 -060 Design Review
2208 North 30th Street
Suite 202
Tacoma, WA 98403 -3360
(253) 627 -6401
Fax: (253) 383 -4884
PUBLIC HEARING
Tuesday, September 7, 2004 7:00 p.m.
City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington
J. Gayle Hays, RPR, CSR, Reporter
BYERS ANDERSON, INC. COURT REPORTERS VIDEO
1 (800) 649 -2034
scheduling @byersanderson.com
One Union Square
600 University Street
Suite 2300
Seattle, WA 98101 -4128
(206) 340 -1316
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Jim Haggerton, Council President
Pam Carter, Councilmember
Joe Duffie, Councilmember
Dave Fenton, Councilmember
Joan Hernandez, Councilmember
Pamela Lindner, Councilmember
Dennis Robertson, Councilmember
Jane Cantu, City Clerk
2
1 TESTIMONY INDEX
2 PAGE NO.
3 KENYON 7
4 LANCASTER 20
5 GIERLOFF 23
6 LADENBURG 34
7 PATTERSON 38
8 EARL 42
9 FAZEL 47
10 HEWITT 54
11 BREMER 61
12 ZAPUTIL 65
13 G. ZAPUTIL 70
14 MATO 75
15 CAROSINO 75
16 COOPER 81
17 NEAL 83
18 COATES 85
19 GRIFFIN 88
20 WARD 89
21 LORENZEN 91
22 BERNHARDT 95
23 SHEEHY 97
24 KEMPKES 99
25 ZAPUTIL 101
3
1 EARL 104
2 STAUDINGER 105
3 LANCASTER 106
4 IRISH 106
5 KEMPKES 107
6 MORROW 108
7 EARL 109
8 IRISH 110
9 KEMPKES 113
10 IRISH 115
11 OLIVAS 119
12 COOPER 120
13 FAZEL 120
14 COOPER 122
15 EARL 124
16 ZAPUTIL 125
17 MORROW 127
18 SHEEHY 136
19 ZAPUTIL 136
20 GRIFFIN 138
21 LORENZEN 139
22 LINTON 141
23 OLIVAS 144
24 QAASIN 145
25 KENYON 147
4
1 OLIVAS
2 EARL
3 KENYON
4 LAPPENANN
5 BALL
6 EARL
7 BALL
8 KEMPKES
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
148
150
151
153
161
164
165
167
5
1 BE IT REMEMBERED that on Tuesday,
2 September 8, 2004, at 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila,
3 Washington, at 7:00 p.m., before J. Gayle Hays, CSR, RPR,
4 Notary Public in an4 for the State of Washington;
5
6 WHEREUPON, the following proceedings
7 were had, to wit:
8
9
10
11 MAYOR MULLET: Item 5, Public Hearing,
12 we will have on two public hearings tonight. And although
13 they're very similar, they are two separate issues. So we
14 will allow if you testify in one, we will put that
15 testimony into the other public hearing automatically, so
16 you don't have to testify for both if you don't want to. If
17 you have something different to say for the other one, then
18 that's fine, you can get back up again.
19 But we have the first hearing which is a quasi judicial
20 public hearing for the Sound Transit request for an
21 Unclassified Use Permit, a Shoreline Variance and Design
22 Review. I'm assuming that the people who wanted to speak to
23 this issue have signed up. If you haven't signed up, please
24 do so now. And Bob, would you collect those signatures for
25 us, please?
6
1 Representing the City of Tukwila in this matter will be
2 Mick Kenyon, our city attorney. Mike will review the legal
3 issues as well as the decisional criteria with relevance to
4 these issues. Mike, it's all yours.
5 MR. KENYON: Counsel and many members of
6 the public, I will try to keep this as brief as I can. I
7 know that there are a number of speakers who actually have
8 substantive comment to add. And I don't have any notes, but
9 let me just draw your attention to some background.
10 First of all, it goes literally without saying, but
11 I'll say it anyway. This is our first light rail project,
12 so we started really with a blank slate. And you should be
13 exceptionally proud of the planning and the public works
14 staff and the staff of Sound Transit, the people with all
15 the dark bags under their eyes putting all this time in on
16 this project over the last year and a half or so.
17 Sound Transit, in this project at the Tukwila Freeway
18 Route, "The Project as we referred to it in shorthand, is
19 what's called an essential public facility. Under state
20 law, essential public facilities are those types of
21 facilities that are difficult to site. Jails are one,
22 regional wastewater facilities. And essential public
23 facilities include regional transportation facilities like
24 Sound Transit.
25 That matters for a couple of particular reasons
7
1 important reasons. Under the Growth Management Act, local
2 government cannot use its comprehensive plan or its
3 development regulations to preclude the siting of an
4 essential public facility. So the council would have the
5 authority to deny certain uses from coming to town; the
6 council does not have the authority to preclude the siting
7 of an essential public facility. That's the black and white
8 law in the Growth Management Act.
9 A couple of other important legal principles flow from
10 that. The first one is the Growth Management Hearings Board
11 cases. And some appellate court cases that logically go on
12 to say that, when the Growth Management Act says that a city
13 cannot use its complement of development regulations to
14 preclude the siting of essential public facilities, that's
15 really what it means. In a recent exposition of the law
16 from last October, a Growth Management Hearings Board case,
17 it says, "Local regulations, including permit processes, may
18 not make essential public facilities impossible or
19 impracticable to site or operate."
20 And then it concludes that, "Local government lacks of
21 the authority to deny the development permits for essential
22 public facilities sponsored by state or regional entities."
23 So that's a pretty heavy- handed statement of the law that
24 the state legislature and the appellate courts have passed
25 down.
8
1 And maybe the question will be, Mike, what are we doing
2 here? If that's the case, why are we bothering with all
3 this paper and all these people? That's because there's a
4 second important legal principle that the appellate courts
5 have drawn out from the Growth Management Act and this local
6 government's inability to preclude essential public
7 facilities. And that goes like this.
8 Outside of the siting requirements, we cannot ban
9 essential public facilities from this town. But the city
10 can impose reasonable permit and mitigation requirements,
11 even though imposition of those requirements might make the
12 construction of the essential public facility more costly.
13 And it is that process of trying to determine reasonable
14 permitting mitigation requirements that the City of Tukwila
15 and Sound Transit staff has spent so much of the last year
16 and a half or even more on.
17 The product of those negotiations and the discussions
18 are before you in your notebook, and you'll have a chance to
19 flesh that out in the public participation and the staff
20 participation as it goes on tonight.
21 Let me just turn briefly then to the legal focus as
22 opposed to the factual focus. Nora Gierloff, Steve
23 Lancaster and Jim Moore will be providing more of that
24 factual focus later.
25 You've got essentially two buckets of information in
9
1 front of you. The first bucket, as Mayor Mullet indicated,
2 is the quasi judicial process dealing with these land use
3 applications: The Unclassified Use Permit, the Shoreline
4 Variance and the Design Review.
5 The Unclassified Use Permit criteria and I hope you
6 have in front of you a five -page cut and paste handout that
7 is just the review criteria. The Unclassified Use Permit
8 criteria are the first page there. You'll be having to make
9 one decision, your first decision, an up or down vote, on
10 the Unclassified Use Permit. And in making your decision,
11 you are bound by the law, by the provision in the initial
12 code, to rely on these ten review criteria in 18.66.060.
13 There are a couple of curve balls in these criteria as
14 applies to essential public facilities. Let me just call
15 those out briefly. Again, Nora will go through them. They
16 are addressed in great detail in Pages 11 to 24 on the staff
17 report.
18 Unclassified Use Permit, Criteria 1 talks about, where
19 appropriate and feasible, all facilities shall be
20 underground. The city took the position back in late '90s
21 that this reference to "facilities" referred to "utilities"
22 that would serve the Sound Transit Light Rail System. It
23 did not refer to the Sound Transit facilities itself; that
24 putting the entire light rail system in a tunnel didn't make
25 sense. So it only refers to the utilities that serve it.
10
1 Criteria 2 through 7 pretty clearly are applicable and
2 are pretty comprehensively analyzed in the staff report.
3 Criteria 8 and 9 are only applicable in part, if at
4 all.
5 That gets back to the first general legal principle I
6 talked about. Local government cannot use its development
7 regulations to preclude the siting or to ban essential
8 public facilities. Criteria 8 and 9 talk about these uses
9 in residential areas, and applicant would otherwise have to
10 demonstrate there's no reasonable nonessential alternative
11 site, but when a state or regional essential public facility
12 is approved, we don't have a veto vote or a regulatory say
13 on the site. We certain have had much the city has had
14 much input over the years, and much of the city's input has
15 been addressed by Sound Transit, but we don't have the final
16 say on that.
17 And then Criteria 10 is applicable dealing with secure
18 transition facilities, the halfway houses for sex offenders,
19 which doesn't apply here.
20 The Shoreline Variance criterion will be your second
21 vote on Shoreline Variance. Shoreline Variance is required
22 because the maximum height for the structure is normally
23 35 feet. The Sound Transit is proposing a variance of not
24 quite 50 feet for the bridge that spans the Duwamish River.
25 That's the only variance they're requesting. The criteria
11
1 are again laid out and analyzed in some detail on
2 Pages 28 through 30 of your staff report, and also on this
3 handout on Pages 2 and 3.
4 The third vote that we will be asking to you take is
5 the last component of this quasi judicial land use decision.
6 That's the Design Review. It's the Design Review for the
7 station, the light rail station and associated parking. The
8 summary is at the top of Page 3 here on your handout. It's
9 analyzed in detail in Pages 32 to 41 of your staff report.
10 And the Design Review criteria are laid out there in four
11 components: Site design, second building design, the third
12 is landscape design, and the fourth is signage.
13 That's your first bucket of material. That's
14 quasi judicial, and we're going to walk through some
15 standard sets of questions that I have to ask the
16 quasi judicial decision makers here shortly.
17 The second bucket of information you have to deal with
18 is the legislative decision. It's not quasi judicial. It's
19 what's entitled in your packet the Transit Way and
20 Development Agreement. You should think of it analytically
21 in much the same way that you have taken a look at other
22 street use permits, driveway permits. And Jim Morrow will
23 be up to explain that in greater detail.
24 So that's my presentation, other than asking council
25 members a series of three hopefully brief questions designed
12
1 to analyzing interference issues. I'm prepared to start on
2 that, unless the council has any questions for me.
3 MAYOR MULLET: Any questions?
4 MR. DUFFIE: No.
5 MR. KENYON: Councilmember Fenton, maybe
6 I can just start with you. I'll start here and work down
7 the table. This procedure applies to quasi judicial
8 matters. The first bucket of material is the Unclassified
9 Use Permit, the Shoreline Variance and Design Review is a
10 quasi judicial matter.
11 Let me ask you, number one, do you or your family
12 immediate family have any interest in the property that
13 comprises the Sound Transit project, the station, the
14 trackway route?
15 MR. FENTON: No.
16 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to gain or
17 lose financially by virtue of your vote on this matter?
18 MR. FENTON: No.
19 MR. KENYON: I'll remind you that the
20 application was filed with the city on October 3, 2003.
21 Since that date, have you had what are called exparte
22 contacts; that is, contacts outside of open council meetings
23 with those known to you to be opponents or proponents of the
24 Sound Transit project?
25 MR. FENTON: I have not.
13
1 MR. KENYON: Based on what Councilmember
2 Fenton has disclosed, is there any member of the audience
3 who wishes to challenge his continued participation?
4 Seeing none, Councilmember Robertson, do you or your
5 immediate family have any interest the property that's the
6 subject of the Sound Transit application?
7 MR. ROBERTSON: No.
8 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to lose or
9 gain financially by virtue of your vote on this property?
10 MR. ROBERTSON: No.
11 MR. KENYON: Since October 3rd of
12 2003 Councilmember Robertson, since the date you were
13 sworn in earlier this year, have you had any contact or
14 discussion about the Sound Transit application with known
15 opponents or proponents of the project?
16 MR. ROBERTSON: No.
17 MR. KENYON: Based on Councilmember
18 Robertson's disclosure, would anybody here like to challenge
19 his continued participation?
20 Seeing none, Councilmember Lindner, do you or your
21 immediate family have any interest in the property that's
22 the subject of this application?
23 MS. LINDNER: No.
24 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to gain or
25 lose financially by virtue of your vote on this project?
14
1 MS. LINDNER: No.
2 MR. KENYON: Since October 3rd of 2003,
3 have you had contact outside of an open council meeting with
4 known proponents or opponents of the project of the
5 application?
6 MS. LINDNER: I have not.
7 MR. KENYON: Based on Councilmember
8 Lindner's disclosure, would anybody in audience like to
9 challenge her continued participation?
10 Seeing none, Councilmember Carter, do you or your
11 immediate family have any interest in the property that's
12 the subject of application?
13 MS. CARTER: No.
14 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to gain or
15 lose financially by virtue of your vote on the property?
16 MS. CARTER: No.
17 MR. KENYON: Based or since
18 October 3rd of 2003, have you had contact outside of an open
19 council meeting with known proponents or opponents of the
20 application?
21 MS. CARTER: Yes, I have, because I've
22 attended other regional transportation meetings where Sound
23 Transit staff members make presentations. I have not
24 listened to any presentations relative to these permits, but
25 it has been on the Sound Transit System.
15
1 MR. KENYON: That was my question. So
2 was any of that discussion did any of that discussion
3 involving these applications relate to the Tukwila
4 freeway
5 MS. CARTER: No. They threw me out of
6 those meetings.
7 MR. KENYON: Based on Councilmember
8 Carter's disclosure, does any member of the audience
9 challenge her continued participation?
10 Seeing none, Councilmember Haggerton, do you or your
11 immediate family have any interest in the property that's
12 the subject of the application?
13 MR. HAGGERTON: No.
14 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to gain or
15 lose financially by virtue of your vote?
16 MR. HAGGERTON: No.
17 MR. KENYON: And how about contact
18 outside of open public meetings with known proponents or
19 opponents?
20 MR. HAGGERTON: I've been contacted by
21 individuals. And in each case, I have told them I can't
22 discuss the project at all, so I have not.
23 MR. KENYON: Based on Councilmember
24 Haggerton's disclosure, would any member of the audience
25 like to challenge his continue participation?
16
1 Seeing none, Councilmember Hernandez, do you or your
2 immediate family have any interest in the property that's
3 the subject of application?
4 MS. HERNANDEZ: No.
5 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to gain or
6 lose financially by virtue of your vote on the application?
7 MS. HERNANDEZ: No.
8 MR. KENYON: Since October 3rd of 2003,
9 have you had any contact with any known proponents or
10 opponents of the application?
11 MS. HERNANDEZ: I will say that Sound
12 Transit has certainly been a topic of conversation at many
13 social events I've attended, but I've always been very
14 careful to say it's not a topic that I can engage in
15 conversation about until after the publication hearing.
16 MR. KENYON: I take it you've declined
17 to express an opinion.
18 MS. HERNANDEZ: Yes, I have.
19 MR. KENYON: Based on Councilmember
20 Hernandez's disclose, would anybody like to challenge her
21 continued participation?
22 Seeing none, Councilmember Duffie, do you or your
23 immediate family have any interest in the property that
24 comprises the Sound Transit application?
25 MR. DUFFIE: No.
17
1 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to gain or
2 lose financially by your vote?
3 MR. DUFFIE: No.
4 MR. KENYON: Have you since October 3rd
5 of 2003 had any contact outside of the open council meetings
6 with known proponents or opponents of the application?
7 MR. DUFFIE: No.
8 MR. KENYON: Based on Councilmember
9 Duffie's disclosure, would any member of the audience like
10 to challenge his participation?
11 I think as well, Mayor Mullet, I should ask you these
12 questions on this application, that it does not have to be
13 approved by ordinance. In fact, it's a voice vote record of
14 decision. So it's possible for you to break a tie on this
15 application, not on the transit agreement at that point.
16 So Mayor Mullet, do you or your immediate family have
17 any interest in the property that is the subject of this
18 application?
19 MAYOR MULLET: No.
20 MR. KENYON: Do you stand to gain or
21 lose financially by virtue of the project?
22 MAYOR MULLET: No.
23 MR. KENYON: And since October 3, 2003,
24 have you had discussion outside of council meeting with
25 known proponents or opponents?
18
1 MAYOR MULLET: Not with proponents or
2 opponents, but I am involved in staff issues, and I am
3 up -to -date on what staff has been doing.
4 MR. KENYON: That's Steve Lancaster and
5 his department.
6 Based on what the Mayor has disclosed, would any
7 member of the audience like to challenge his continued
8 participation?
9 Seeing none then, Mayor, I have finished.
10 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Mike.
11 The next item up is to swear everybody in that's going
12 to testify. So at this point in time, if you're planning on
13 testifying at the public hearing, please raise your right
14 hand. We left out a few people. Are you sure? All right.
15 Repeat after me. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
16 regarding matters to which you will testify?
17 (All say aye)
18 MAYOR MULLET: All right, thank you very
19 much.
20 If per chance anybody decides later to testify and they
21 didn't do this, I will gladly swear you in at that point in
22 time. But please remind me if you did not raise your hand
23 and decide later that you want to testify, and we'll take
24 care of that at that time.
25 First, part of this hearing will be a presentation of
19
1 the staff report. And Mr. Lancaster will lead that off.
2 MR. LANCASTER: Thank you, Mr. Mayor,
3 members of the council.
4 For the record, my name is Steve Lancaster. I'm
5 director of community development for the City of Tukwila.
6 As has been indicated by Mayor Mullet at this public
7 hearing, the purpose of this evening's testimony is
8 concerning the approval requested by Sound Transit relating
9 to the proposed construction of that portion of the Link
10 Light Rail System proposed in July in the City of Tukwila.
11 In a few moments, the city's planning supervisor,
12 Nora Gierloff, will provide some of the details with regard
13 to the proposed light rail facilities focusing on the three
14 land use permit applications before the city council. Those
15 have been described to you tonight. Nora will summarize the
16 staff report and other information prepared for this hearing
17 presented to the staff recommendations on these threes
18 matters.
19 At the first public hearing, public works director, Jim
20 Morrow, will present the staff recommendations concerning
21 the proposed Development and Transit Way Agreement that
22 would give Sound Transit use of the right -of -ways and
23 establish development standards or protocols for
24 construction.
25 It's important to note that the decisions made by the
20
1 city council on the Unclassified Use Permit, the Shoreline
2 Variance, the Design Review, and the Development and Transit
3 Way Agreement will establish the framework that will guide
4 the city staff relating to the various permits and approvals
5 for construction of the light rail facility over the next
6 several years. Building permits, utility permits and many
7 other construction decisions made by staff over that period
8 will be based upon and must be consistent with the council's
9 decision and with all of our existing city codes and
10 regulations that will apply to this project.
11 In presenting the staff report on the Unclassified Use
12 Permit and related approvals, Nora will describe several
13 conditions that we believe the city council should attach to
14 this decision. I want to make sure that everyone is aware
15 that these are only a small part of the impact mitigating
16 conditions or requirements that apply to this project under
17 the staff's recommendation.
18 The notebook that has been compiled by staff that all
19 council members have before them presents or summarizes
20 numerous additional requirements that have been imposed by
21 many agencies, for example, federal government, the Federal
22 Transit Authority's record of decision that's Attachment
23 G3 in your notebook the state government, the Department
24 of Ecology, the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
25 System Permit, the city police and fire departments through
21
1 concurrent letters regarding public safety issues, community
2 development department, the parking determination that was
3 issued in July of this year, Sound Transit's own commitment
4 including various plans and reports, for example, the final
5 noise the noise analysis and various studies that are
6 concluded in the notebook. All these documents and
7 requirements represent commitments upon which the city is
8 entitled to rely and which are enforceable for this project.
9 As the final note, I want to note that the staff report
10 and all of the supporting work that you have before you
11 represents an interdepartmental effort. Representatives of
12 the department of community development, public works, the
13 police department, the fire department are all here this
14 evening to hear the testimony that you will be hearing and
15 will be available to answer questions that the council may
16 impose at the conclusion of the public hearing.
17 With that, I'd like to introduce Nora Gierloff to make
18 the main body of our staff presentation, unless there are
19 specific questions I can answer on my comments.
20 MAYOR MULLET: Jim?
21 MR. HAGGERTON: I have one question,
22 Mr. Lancaster.
23 The conditions that you put on this, or that our staff
24 has put on this, can you say whether Sound Transit has
25 approved of those conditions, or will they express that when
22
1 they testify?
2 MR. LANCASTER: I'd rather have them
3 express that.
4 Jill. HAGGERTON: Thank you.
5 MAYOR MULLET: Okay. Thank you. Before
6 Nora begins, in the interest of getting through the
7 testimony, council members, I would ask you to take good
8 notes, and then we'll save the questions for the end.
9 MS. GIERLOFF: Good evening. As Steve
10 mentioned, I'd like to go through and give you a brief
11 overview of the project and the staff report and the
12 information contained in your binders.
13 As Mike had mentioned, last October, Sound Transit
14 applied for three land use permits from the City of Tukwila.
15 This is for the southern half of the light rail line that
16 will go from the downtown Seattle bus tunnel to a station at
17 Southcenter Boulevard and International Boulevard.
18 As Steve mentioned, Tukwila has already made a
19 determination on the amount of parking required at the
20 station, and Sound Transit has performed its own SEPA
21 environmental review on the project.
22 The binding in front of you contains a lot of
23 information, including the staff report evaluating the
24 project and each of the review criteria, public comments
25 that have been received between the application date and the
23
4
1 date you got the binder, which was August 20. I'd like to
2 distribute some additional comments and responses. Some are
3 in the council packet that you received, and there are some
4 that have come subsequently to the council packet. The ones
5 that we received in time to list as attachments to the staff
6 report are listed on the updated attachment page, Pages 5
7 and 6 of the binder, which will be a part of the record.
8 Finally, the binder also contains supporting drawings,
9 studies and documents that further explain the proposal in
10 more detail than I can go into tonight.
11 To start off with, I'd like to give a general overview
12 of the construction associated with the 4.9 -mile link of
13 trackway in the City of Tukwila. You're welcome to follow
14 along with the detailed drawings that are contained in your
15 binder at Attachment D. That's the 11 by 17 center drawing.
16 And this should take about five minutes to walk through all
17 of the improvements that are part of that.
18 The north end of the trackway enters Tukwila along the
19 median of Martin Luther King Way South, changing from street
20 level in Seattle to elevated location. As part of this
21 project, the improvements that will be built include curb,
22 gutter, sidewalk, storm drainage, street trees and street
23 lighting as a continuation of the City of Seattle
24 improvements.
25 The trackway will then curve to the west supported by a
24
1 straddle bent. A straddle bent is two columns supported by
2 beam across the top. And this is used where it's not
3 possible to have a column directly underneath the trackway.
4 As the trackway curves around the intersection of the
5 northwest corner of Martin Luther King and the Boeing Access
6 Road, there's a building that will have to be demolished at
7 the corner.
8 The trackway will then cross to the south side of the
9 Boeing Access Road and continue across I -5 parallel to where
10 the deferred Boeing Access Road station would be located at
11 the time that it is finally built.
12 The trackway will then curve south crossing several
13 parcels requiring the demolition of some small buildings.
14 As the trackway crosses East Marginal Way South, a
15 straddle bent was eliminated and replaced with a column in
16 the center of the roadway including utility undergrounding
17 on both sides of the street. The before and after picture
18 is Attachment G8.
19 The trackway continues south on the west side of the
20 East Marginal Way with curb, gutter, sidewalk and street
21 lighting on the west side down to 112th Street. There is a
22 trackway substation planned west of the trackway north of
23 112th Street. There is a building in the path of the
24 trackway on the Overnight Trucking site which will have to
25 be demolished.
25
1 The trackway will then cross the Ray Carosino
2 farmstead. No buildings are planned to be moved or
3 demolished on that site, but some site changes will be
4 required.
5 The trackway will then cross the river directly west of
6 the East Marginal Way bridge, then curve to the east before
7 crossing 599 with two straddle bents. It will continue
8 along the west side of 599 with a small straddle bent over
9 the onramp at the Metro South Base. A detention pond is
10 planned between the back of the Group Health building and
11 the trackway just before it changes back to being ground
12 level.
13 The trackway will follow 599 and become elevated again
14 just north of 42nd Avenue crossing. One more straddle bent
15 is planned where the trackway crosses the 599 offramp at
16 South 133rd Street.
17 A second trackway substation is planned adjacent to the
18 trackway just south of Gateway Drive at the street end of
19 old 133rd Street. And then just after crossing 47th Street
20 South, the trackway will change to at -grade and go across
21 several residential properties requiring the demolition of
22 twelve houses and garages. These properties will be
23 purchased by Sound Transit, and a detention pond is planned
24 at the end of 48th Avenue South.
25 The trackway becomes elevated again and passes under
26
1 South 144th Street on the west side of I -5. An additional
2 detention pond is planned at the end of South 146th Street;
3 and just south, the trackway becomes elevated again. A
4 final detention pond is planned just north of the
5 intersection of South 151st Street and 52nd Street South as
6 the trackway curves away from I -5. Two houses and
7 outbuildings will be demolished on the pond site.
8 The trackway continuous along 52nd Avenue crossing
9 gradually from east to west. A straddle bent was eliminated
10 here and replaced with a median column.
11 The trackway will curve to the west crossing vacant
12 property and going over the 51st Avenue South bridge to the
13 south side of Southcenter Boulevard. This is the highest
14 location along the route. It needs to get over that bridge.
15 Two straddle bents are eliminated here to be replaced with
16 median columns. Southcenter Boulevard is planned to have
17 continuos frontal improvements along both sides including
18 medians, utility undergrounding, sidewalks, street lighting,
19 storm drainage and bike lanes to International Boulevard.
20 The trackway will continue between 518 and Southcenter
21 Boulevard curving to the south to follow 518 along the south
22 side of apartment complexes.
23 The station, main parking lot and trackway substation
24 are planned for the Ajax Park Fly lot at the southeast
25 corner of International Boulevard and Southcenter Boulevard.
27
1 Additional parking will be provided on the Public Storage
2 side across the street, and a new intersection is proposed
3 between two driveway.
4 The station is planned to accommodate an extension
5 across International Boulevard on the way to the airport.
6 So that's the length of the proposal within Tukwila.
7 I'd like to next give you an overview of the land use
8 permits that are the subject of the hearing tonight.
9 I'd like to mention that Unclassified Use Permits are
10 unusual, large -scale or unique projects that may not fit
11 into our standard code regulations and so require a special
12 level of review.
13 The code allows the council to approve modifications to
14 height, setback and landscaping standards, and staff has
15 recommended modifications along the trackway and at the
16 station where it would be unreasonable to apply the standard
17 regulations. For example, the Zoning Code setbacks or
18 height limitations were not intended to apply to
19 transportation improvements such as light rail or freeways.
20 Generally you think of building setbacks and property line.
21 The trackway by its very nature needs to cross many property
22 lines. It isn't meant for that kind of setback.
23 The second one is that parcels adjacent to the trackway
24 that cannot meet landscape standards because of vegetation,
25 clear zone requirements should be considered nonconforming
28
1 to landscape standards. The public interest is served by
2 ensuring the safe operation of the light rail, and
3 neighboring properties should not be penalized for meeting
4 these restrictions.
5 Also, some flexibility in meeting perimeter landscape
6 requirements at the station and north parking lot sites
7 would maximize their efficiency. South Transit's plans show
8 that the total number of replacement trees and square
9 footage of landscaping required by the Zoning Code will be
10 exceeded.
11 Staff is also recommending, as Steve had mentioned,
12 four mitigation conditions. The first one is that early
13 construction of the permanent noise wall on the station site
14 to protect the adjacent apartment complex from construction
15 noise, a temporary noise wall on the north parking lot if it
16 is to be used as a staging area, increased lighting of the
17 park- and -ride lots for safety. This is a condition we've
18 discussed with Sound Transit before, and it is possible to
19 do from an engineering standpoint.
20 And then also, Sound Transit is proposing to use some
21 existing landscaping for screening and buffering. That
22 landscaping will be preserved or replaced. We'd like to
23 ensure that, if something happens during construction and if
24 those trees are lost, that they will be replaced according
25 to our tree installation.
29
1 The second item is the shoreline area. As Mike has
2 pointed out, the height of the bridge over the river is
3 going to be close to 50 feet where the shoreline regulations
4 limit building to 35 feet. The reason why they need this
5 height is because lowering the crossing over the river would
6 limit access to the parcels on the west side of the street.
7 They'd like to have that traffic high enough so that people
8 can continue to use that river trail underneath it and not
9 interfere with the use of the river. They will have
10 clearance for that.
11 There's also a maximum grade for the trackway and a
12 minimum height required to cross 599. The proposed trackway
13 height has been determined by engineering and safety
14 considerations.
15 The last item is the Design Review. Design Review is
16 intended to ensure that sites and buildings ar designed to
17 fit into their surroundings and contribute to the vitality
18 of the city and function safely. Design Review has only
19 been applied to the station building and not the trackway.
20 Sound Transit has worked with Tukwila on the design of
21 the station and site during this year -long review process.
22 We also had the station design peer- reviewed by an urban
23 design consultant who has commended approval of the current
24 design.
25 There are also some site plans and elevations at end of
30
1 your packet as Attachment E, we produced which are up on the
2 wall behind me.
3 The pedestrian paths will be provided from the site
4 entrances through the parking lot the station, which is
5 set at the south end of the site. Underneath the station
6 will be transit plaza for Metro bus connections. The first
7 level of the station will be for ticket information. The
8 second level will be the train platforms. The height of the
9 station has been determined by the grade required for future
10 extension across International Boulevard to reach the
11 airport.
12 The architect is here tonight. He'll talk to you in
13 more detail about the actual design of the building itself.
14 Staff recommends approval of the station building,
15 landscaping design, site layout and furnishings as proposed
16 by Sound Transit. The signage is not cover by this permit
17 and will require separate administrative approvals. Minor
18 modifications are anticipated to the station site during the
19 building permit process. These should be subject to
20 administrative approval by the appropriate Tukwila
21 department director through the building permit process.
22 I'd be happy to elaborate on any elements of the
23 project or answer any questions that the council has. I'd
24 like to point out that we have the city's noise and lighting
25 peer reviewers in the audience this evening if you have any
31
1 technical questions that you'd like to go over tonight.
2 MAYOR MULLET: Any clarification
3 questions on the staff?
4 MS. HERNANDEZ: Not on anything that you
5 had said, but I have read, I believe, in the report
6 somewhere that it was possible that in the future that air
7 lines over the parking lot could be used for compatible
8 development.
9 Can you clarify for me how that can be incorporated in
10 this project?
11 MS. GIERLOFF: Well, one thing that the
12 city has talked about is trying to come up with a regional
13 detention approach for the stormwater which would not have
14 the required tanks, so then you could build on top of the
15 parking lot. That's something that I'd like to defer to
16 Jim Morrow at the public works to deal with. But we're
17 trying to kind of think ahead and make sure that the design
18 would work for either structured parking or maybe future
19 development.
20 MS. HERNANDEZ: Thank you.
21 MAYOR MULLET: Anything else? Pam?
22 MS. CARTER: Yes. Thank you for I
23 mean it was interesting to look at, but it was all there.
24 And I had very few questions.
25 The one I'll ask right now is, you talked about Sound
32
1 Transit's intention to retain some existing landscaping in
2 certain areas. And you were suggesting that one of the
3 conditions you might add to this was that they would have to
4 replace those during construction? And would the
5 replacement have to have the same sort of warranty that any
6 new landscaping does under a permit?
7 MS. GIERLOFF: Right. I think we asked
8 for the same kind of guarantee that we typically get with
9 landscaping which is a several -year period.
10 MS. CARTER: Okay. Thank you.
11 MAYOR MULLET: Anything else from Nora?
12 Thank you. Does that conclude the staff report?
13 MR. LANCASTER: Yes, it does.
14 MAYOR MULLET: While we're in between,
15 I'll give you a little bit more on how we're going to
16 proceed tonight.
17 We will next have a report from Sound Transit which we
18 think will last about 20 minutes. After that report we'll
19 have the city and other interested parties speak. You'll
20 have about five minutes apiece. As you get close to the end
21 of your time, we'll wave at you somehow. You have to come
22 up and use the podium. Give your name and address clearly
23 so that Gayle can catch it all. And if she doesn't, we've
24 heard her already control the pace of this testimony, and
25 she will not hesitate to do that again. She's a big cog in
33
1 the wheel of this operation tonight.
2 So at this point in time, I'd like to call John, are
3 you going to start it off? And who's going to follow you,
4 John?
5 MR. LADENBURG: I will. Mr. Mayor,
6 thank you very much.
7 It's been 18 years since I was on the Tacoma City
8 Council. I had forgotten how fun these things can be. But
9 I appreciate your city attorney's brief and very accurate
10 explanation of how this will proceed.
11 My name is John Ladenburg. I'm the Pierce County
12 executive and chair of Sound Transit this year and next
13 year. And I want to thank you for the opportunity to have
14 Sound Transit staff make a brief presentation on this
15 project.
16 I think the goals of Sound Transit and the City of
17 Tukwila are very similar. We both understand that there are
18 a few issues more important to our economy and the
19 environment and the quality of life here than updating and
20 upgrading our transportation system.
21 Our job at South Transit is building and operating a
22 regional transportation system that includes the express bus
23 system, our commuter rail Sounder System and the light rail
24 system, along with other transit facilities and
25 improvements.
34
1 It's a big job, and there's a lot at stake in the
2 region. So far, Sound Transit has invested $1.4 billion in
3 bus, commuter rail and light rail programs, and we have a
4 lot more yet to do. And that work is already starting to
5 pay off around the region. In five years of service,
6 Sounder System buses and trains together already carried
7 more than 30 million people.
8 Light rail is a very important part of that regional
9 transportation investment. It offers a new congestion -free
10 way for people to get around. And I'm here to tell you that
11 people use it.
12 In just one year, Tacoma's light rail line has already
13 carried more passengers than we had expected in the year
14 2010. At the end of this year, we will have carried more
15 than a million people on the Tacoma segment. That segment
16 is only 1.6 miles long. This segment will be over 14 miles
17 long. So you can see the impact that it's had in Tacoma if
18 you've been down to our regional system, seen the transit
19 center, the Freighthouse Square where Sounder trains,
20 express buses, private bus companies and light rail all come
21 together. The redevelopment along Pacific Avenue and other
22 places in Tacoma and a lot of other things has really been
23 phenomenal. And the citizens are really enjoying the light
24 rail system, and it gets an awful lot of use.
25 We had a rather large rally for presidential candidate
35
1 Kerry recently on a Saturday. On that day, over 4,000
2 citizens used the light rail system so they could park in
3 other areas downtown. They used the light rail to the
4 Tacoma Dome to' avoid all the traffic rush. I was one of
5 them, and a lot of people were very happy that light rail
6 was in place at the time.
7 The Tukwila Freeway Route before you tonight is a very
8 important link in our southern system. Your city staff has
9 concluded that the project in Tukwila should have a positive
10 effect on the redevelopment along the Pacific Highway South
11 because of the major economic investment associated with the
12 South 154th Street station. And frankly, that's not
13 unusual. Other cities such as Portland, Denver, Dallas and
14 St. Louis credit light rail for spurring new development
15 along those routes. And I can tell you firsthand that the
16 Tacoma link has been a big help to Tacoma for this
17 Freighthouse Square area that was very underdeveloped for
18 many years around the Tacoma Dome. That's really seen a
19 resurgence there.
20 Sound Transit and Tukwila have worked long and hard
21 very professionally, by the way, through the route design
22 process and review of the permit application. I want it
23 known that your staff has our compliments for being very
24 hard working, very tenacious with their point of view to get
25 across what they feel is best for Tukwila, and that's their
36
1 job. As a former city councilmember, I can appreciate that,
2 because when you have to work with state agencies or an
3 agency, as the attorney expressed, that has certain rights
4 over and above what the counsel and others have, it was
5 often frustrating for me as a councilmember. Your staff was
6 there day and night to make sure that the changes were made.
7 The project you see before you is very different from
8 the project first envisioned in Tukwila. A lot of that is
9 due to the hard work of the staff and Sound Transit staff in
10 working with them. But as a result, I think we made this
11 project better and minimized impacts during construction and
12 operations.
13 And that's why I'm here tonight, to say that we
14 enthusiastically concur with your staff report in every
15 single one of its recommendations and conditions. And I
16 respectfully request that the city council approve the
17 Unclassified Use Permit, the Shoreline Variance, and the
18 Design Review Permit, and the Development and Transit Way
19 Agreement as recommended by your staff.
20 Sound Transit Board Member Julia Patterson, who
21 represents this area on Sound Transit Board, is here to add
22 a few words. And then after her remarks, Sound Transit CEO
23 Joni Earl to your right, and link light rail director, Ahmad
24 Fazel, and David Hewitt, architect of the South 154th Street
25 station, will provide more brief statements.
37
1 Thank you very much.
2 MS. PATTERSON: Thank you, John. Thank
3 you, Mr. Mayor and council members. And it's a great
4 pleasure to be here before my good friends in Tukwila again.
5 I'm here tonight because I represent this area a
6 portion of this area in my role as the King County Council
7 person. I also represent the South King County subarea on
8 the Sound Transit Board of Directors, so I'm here in two
9 capacities this evening.
10 Most of you know that I'm very passionate about the
11 need for transportation improvements in South King County.
12 Some of you have worked with me on the process we went
13 through on the RTID, Regional Transportation Investment
14 District. And you also know that I'm currently chairing the
15 Transportation Policy Board for Sound Transit legal counsel.
16 South King County is a very vibrant community, and we
17 deserve the benefit of an excellent regional transportation
18 system. We desperately need alternatives to driving single
19 occupancy vehicles out here in South King County. I don't
20 know if you folks are aware of this, but we have more people
21 who leave in a mass exodus every day who commute from South
22 King County than any other portion of the county. In other
23 words, our people are commuting the farthest, so we do need
24 alternatives to concrete and the single- occupancy car.
25 I'd like to share with you folks a few facts about the
38
1 size and the importance of South King County, especially
2 about Sound Transit's Southcenter subarea. I don't know if
3 you're aware of the fact that it stretches 176 square miles
4 from Tukwila to the Pierce County line, and that there are
5 approximately 615,000 people and there are eleven cities
6 that are represented in this area. It is a huge area. If
7 it were a county within itself, it would be the fourth
8 largest county in King County.
9 We also are the fastest growing portion of King County.
10 The last census showed that we are growing much more quickly
11 than the City of Seattle.
12 South King County needs a public transit system that
13 connects us to the other cities and to the employment
14 centers around this region. It's no secret to the entire
15 region that Sound Transit and the City of Tukwila have
16 traveled sometimes a very bumpy head together to reach this
17 point. But I believe that successful long -term
18 relationships and sometimes those struggles result in the
19 better result in the end. And I believe that's where we are
20 right now at the City of Tukwila. I believe we have a much
21 better project because of those struggles that we went
22 through.
23 For example, at the request of the City of Tukwila, the
24 Sound Transit Board in the year 2001 changed the light rail
25 alignment and adopted the Tukwila Freeway Route which is
39
J
1 before us this evening. Before joining the Sound Transit
2 Board and also before joining the county council, I was
3 invited by you folks to travel to Washington, D.C. I was
4 currently or I was at that °time I was a state senator,
5 and I helped to advocate for that alignment in Washington,
6 D.C.
7 Over the past several months, your staff and Sound
8 Transit staff have worked very hard to improve the design of
9 the Tukwila Freeway Route project. And it's even a better
10 product because of all that hard work.
11 This station that you folks are going to have at South
12 154th Street is absolutely beautiful. I think it is the
13 most beautiful station that we are going to have in the
14 entire system. And I don't think that Sound Transit staff
15 will come forward and say that, but I can tell you that I've
16 seen the other stations, and this station is absolutely
17 beautiful. The station will be beautiful. There will be
18 fantastic improvements around the station. You're going to
19 have bike trails and sidewalks, landscaping. There's going
20 to be art. There's going to be tremendous mitigation as a
21 result of this project in the City of Tukwila.
22 The other last thought that I want to leave with you is
23 that it is my firm belief that light rail must it
24 absolutely must connect up to the airport. And I'm not
25 making that a request. I'm saying that I believe it is an
40
1 absolute necessity. During our process of trying to figure
2 out whether or not we could get the Regional Transportation
3 Investment District proposal on the ballot last year, we put
4 oit °a poll and we asked people which projects were the most
5 important projects in our Central Puget Sound region. We
6 asked them to rank them. The number one project, the
7 project that ranked above the Alaskan Way viaduct and
8 expanding Route 405 and 509, fixing the Evergreen floating
9 bridge, the number one project that people felt need to be
10 accomplished was getting light rail to the airport.
11 So currently we have an agreement in principle with the
12 Port of Seattle to extend light rail to the airport, and
13 we're working on a feasibility suit right now to determine
14 the schedule for reaching the airport. I can't tell you
15 that we have an exact date for when that will happen, but I
16 certainly can assure you that it is of the utmost importance
17 to South King County, to the people of the entire region
18 actually, and to the Sound Transit Board of Directors.
19 So I think that I'll close now. In closing, to my
20 colleagues on the Tukwila City Council, I simply want to
21 implore you and I'm going to echo board chair, John
22 Ladenburg in requesting you to approve the Unclassified
23 Use Permit, the Shoreline Variance, the Design Review
24 Permit, and the Development and Transit Way Agreement that
25 are being recommended by your staff this evening.
41
1 Thank you for this opportunity. This is Joni Earl, our
2 executive director of Sound Transit.
3 MS. EARL: Thank you, Mayor Mullet and
4 members of the City Council. It's a pleasure to be here
5 tonight to talk about the project and ask for your consensus
6 to move forward with the Tukwila section.
7 I want to start by mouthing the critical role your
8 staff has played in review of the project. Our staff has
9 work together on some very, very complex issues to get here
10 tonight. There have been many disagreements. I've been
11 there. I've been part of them. I've seen them. And I just
12 want to echo that they have stayed professional, and they
13 have stayed strong advocates to make sure that project fits
14 well into your community for the long term. And I think
15 that hard work and respect between our two agencies
16 demonstrates the quality of this project.
17 I want to echo, without taking time to do that, but
18 ask, consistent with Board Chair Ladenburg and Board Member
19 Patterson, that you approve the permits and the Development
20 and Transit Way agreement so construction can get underway.
21 As CEO and on behalf of the Sound Transit staff, we
22 concur completely with the city staff report. And in
23 response to one of the questions earlier from the council,
24 we do accept the conditions, and we will deliver this
25 project consistent with those conditions there in the staff
42
1 report.
2 Let me take a moment just to describe the current
3 status of the project. When it starts running in 2009, the
4 light rail initial segment will stretch 14 miles from the
5 South 154th Street station here in Tukwila to the downtown
6 station in the transit tunnel. By 2020, the initial segment
7 will carry more than 42,000 riders every day. This is a
8 really significant step for Sound Transit in being able to
9 connect the region. And to put that in perspective, 42,000
10 passengers is roughly equivalent to everyone in Tukwila and
11 SeaTac getting on the train every day. That is a
12 significant number of people.
13 Now, it's one thing to talk about a big project. We
14 definitely have been doing a lot over the years and
15 certainly in the last couple of years here in Tukwila, but
16 it's quite another to actually be building it. I'm happy to
17 report this evening that after many years of debate, design
18 and engineering, we are building light rail. Over
19 $720 million in construction contracts have been awarded.
20 In fact, everything in the City of Seattle portion of the
21 14 miles to the border of Tukwila is under contract and most
22 of it is under construction today.
23 You should have in front of you the we gave you this
24 booklet here. This is a photograph book that shows you some
25 of the examples of the construction that's underway, and
43
1 then also it shows you some of our other projects that are
2 completed to demonstrate the quality of our work. As you
3 can see, we now have real construction experience in
4 building light rail in Tacoma; and bythe time we start
5 construction in Tukwila, we will have an additional year of
6 building the system in the City of Seattle.
7 Actual light rail station and trackway construction is
8 scheduled to start here in the city next year and continue
9 for about two and a half years. Some utility relocation
10 work will actually start this fall. Once construction does
11 start, there will undoubtedly be unforeseen issues that
12 neither of our two jurisdictions have realized was going to
13 happen.
14 We take very seriously our commitment to work together
15 with the city, the community, the adjacent property owners,
16 and the businesses during light rail construction. We have
17 a 24 -hour construction hotline for the public to obtain
18 construction updates and file complaints. That's the card
19 in front of you. That's an active number that we're using
20 now. I can tell you, the public does call that number.
21 Our outreach staff is very professional, very
22 experienced, and they are already working closely with your
23 businesses and the community to explain what's going on and
24 what's coming up next. We will work with business owners to
25 develop the business marketing programs during construction.
44
1 We will realize, as I'm sure you know from your own
2 projects that you do in the city, that all construction
3 projects create issues and concerns. I can't promise that
4 we'll be.able to solve all construction issues to everyone's
5 satisfaction, but I can commit to proactive communication.
6 As issues arise, we're here to listen, to respond very
7 promptly and to work on solutions. We do return our phone
8 calls.
9 We all agree it's important to the City of Tukwila and
10 the Puget Sound region that light rail reach the airport, as
11 Board Member Julia Patterson stated, and we are working very
12 closely with the Port of Seattle and the City of SeaTac to
13 that end. I can assure you as CEO that this is top priority
14 for the board members.
15 And until the airport extension is completed, there
16 will be shuttle buses that run from the station to the
17 Sea -Tac main terminal. What's important there is that those
18 shuttles will only carry light rail and bus transfer
19 passengers. I think that's a very important point to
20 underscore.
21 The station, as you see here, is beautiful, and it will
22 be a great community asset. It will be an effective
23 multimodal transit hub in that people that park at the 154th
24 station will be able to catch a Sound Transit regional bus,
25 a Metro bus or light rail, so it's truly a multimodal
45
1 facility.
2 It will also be a very active place. We expect about
3 5,000 daily boardings at this station by 2020.
4 As the city staff report states, we have agreed to a
5 series of improvements along the full Tukwila Freeway Route
6 including sidewalks, street lighting, roads, walls,
7 landscaping, art, bike paths and emergency service vehicles
8 to mitigate the impact. The staff report along with the
9 other documents in your very comprehensive packet in front
10 of you is loaded with examples of Sound Transit working with
11 the city staff to improve the project and lessen the impact
12 in your community.
13 Our link light rail director, Ahmad Fazel, is here
14 tonight to go over the project in a little bit more detail.
15 And David Hewitt of Hewitt Architects is here to go over the
16 station design. They will show you how the project has
17 involved over the last two years.
18 This light rail system will provide your city and
19 others in the region with a brand new transportation
20 right -of -way, a new mode of travel. We're anxious to prove
21 to you and to your community our ability to build this
22 important project and to be solid partners in this very
23 long -term relationship. I respectfully ask for your
24 approval of the permits and Transit Way Agreement. With
25 your concurrence, we'll keep the momentum on this project
46
1 going strong.
2 We stand here ready tonight to assist the staff in
3 answering any questions or concerns you may have. Thank
4 you.
5 MR. FAZEL: Ahmad Fazel. Good evening.
6 My name is Ahmad Fazel, and I'm director of light rail
7 for Sound Transit. Your staff tonight did a great job
8 walking you through the alignment for this Tukwila freeway
9 alignment. I'm going to just take a few minutes and talk
10 about some of the improvements that we have done as part of
11 the final design and since the Supplemental Environmental
12 Impact Statement we call it the SEIS was completed and
13 the preliminary engineering was completed. I'm also going
14 to talk about some of the improvements that we have made to
15 the final design as part of the discussions in the review
16 process that we have.
17 Some of the features of this alignment I'm just going
18 to briefly mention. It's 4.9 miles long and runs from MLK
19 Way just north of the Boeing Access Road to our station in
20 the City of Tukwila at South 154th Street. It is entirely
21 grade separated which means that we are not going to have
22 any at -grade crossing with traffic. There are elevated
23 structures for 87 percent of the length, and the rest of it
24 is on its own exclusive right -of -way and is separated, as I
25 mentioned earlier. It runs in Washington State Department
47
1 of Transportation right -of -way for approximately 70 percent
2 of the land, and those are State Route 599, 1-5 and State
3 Route 518.
4 The elevated guideway is a single -beam precast concrete
5 structure supported on columns with the typical spacing of
6 120 feet between the columns. There are longer spans on the
7 route such as the one over the Duwamish River, which is
8 about 250 feet long.
9 Now, I'm going to talk about some of the improvements
10 that we did as part of our final design. In the fall of
11 2002, when we completed the preliminary engineering and the
12 Supplemental EIS was completed, we entered into final
13 design. And one of the early tasks that we have for our
14 final designer to achieve was to do a value engineering
15 program, which was just simply looking at the alignment and
16 the work that we have done on the design previously and come
17 up with recommendations for improvements to the alignment
18 that would minimize the impact of the environment and also
19 save some of the cost.
20 And I'm pleased tonight to tell you that our value
21 engineering program was very successful. I'm going to
22 review some of the examples and some of the major
23 improvements that we did as part of our value engineering
24 program.
25 As part of the VE Program, or the value engineering
48
1 program, there was a reduction of six months to the
2 construction schedule. The construction schedule was
3 reduced from 37 months of construction to 31 months of
4 construction. And °we are very confident about this schedule
5 that I'm talking to you about, because we have done peer
6 review. We have invited our peers from other transit
7 agencies and also the Washington State Department of
8 Transportation to come and review our schedule and make sure
9 that our construction phasing and the period of time that we
10 have allotted for the contractors to construct the project
11 is sufficient, and we have received a vote of confidence
12 from all the peers that came to review our schedule. So
13 this is a great accomplishment as part of the review program
14 to reduce the construction by six months.
15 I'm going to show you some of this, and Rod Kempkes
16 from our staff is going to help show you some of the
17 renderings that we have and tell you why we were able to
18 reduce the timing of the construction of the schedule by six
19 months. We were able to achieve this reduction in schedule
20 by using a precast segment rather than the cast -in -place to
21 construct the elevated guideway. I want to draw your
22 attention to one of the pictures in your booklet that you
23 have in front of you.
24 As part of our preliminary engineering, most of the
25 elevated guideway was going to use a cast -in -place method to
49
1 construct it, and this is the type of preparation work that
2 you can see it will take to construct the cast -in- place.
3 The contractor will come and build the bridge there.
4 But as part of our value engineering, we came up with
5 the method to use precast segments of the bridge, as you can
6 see in the picture, that this segment would be cast in a
7 fabricator shop and transported in place. And then at the
8 location of the construction site, it would be assembled
9 together using a truck. And you can see that there would be
10 minimal impact to the street below, as evidenced in the
11 picture when we build this. And using that method of
12 construction and using precast, we were able to again reduce
13 the time that it takes to construct the 4.9 miles by six
14 months.
15 We also did some improvements to the alignment by
16 increasing the speed of the train traveling from MLK on the
17 elevated highway to the station. The degree of the
18 curvatures on some of the curves that you can see on the
19 alignment increased the speed. That eliminated two minutes
20 of travel time that it would take the train to travel from
21 MLK to this station in Tukwila. The two minutes amounts to
22 more than 3,000 hours of saving operating hours per year.
23 And also the passengers would save that time traveling.
24 We were also able to eliminate impacts to approximately
25 10,000 square feet of wetland by designing an elevated
50
1 guideway to the impacted segments. As I mentioned, there
2 are segments of this alignment that are not elevated,
3 although grade separated, so we were able to elevate those
4 segments that impacted the wetlands and again eliminate
5 approximately 10,000 square feet of impacts to the wetland.
6 So those are some of the value engineering that we did.
7 And also, we reviewed our final design as we were developing
8 the final design and the final construction phase with your
9 staff, and we have received some great comments that we have
10 incorporated into the final design. And these comments were
11 with regard to passenger safety and security, environmental
12 mitigation, construction impact mitigation and station area
13 enhancement. And I'm going to use some examples.
14 We listened to the concern from the Tukwila Fire
15 Department for reaching and accessing the guideway when
16 there's an emergency, and we have agreed to purchase a fire
17 truck with the special 100 -foot platform that your fire
18 department will use to access the guideway in case of an
19 emergency. This is for emergency personnel to be able to
20 reach the guideway and be able to help the passengers; and
21 not for getting the passengers off the platform because we
22 have an emergency walkway on our bridges that the
23 passengers the train will come to stop. And Rod can
24 point to the rendering that we have.
25 You can see the typical cross section of the bridge,
51
1 and we have an emergency walkway between the track. The
2 train in the case of emergency can stop, and the passengers
3 can simply walk away from the train once they get off the
4 train on that area under construction. But it is important
5 for the emergency crews to also be able to access the
6 guideway. So it is in response to your fire department that
7 Sound Transit has agreed to purchase a fire truck with a
8 100 -foot platform for the fire department to be able to
9 reach the guideway.
10 We also responded to the concerns from your police
11 department with regard to the security, and we are
12 installing as a result high- resolution color cameras on our
13 elevated guideway and also on the station platforms and the
14 parking lots. And your police department in case of any
15 incident will be able to monitor the situation and be able
16 to respond to it. That was a great comment that came from
17 the police department, and we have responded to it.
18 We also worked very closely with your staff, and we got
19 great improvements to the drainage that we need to handle
20 from the guideway. And as the result of the innovative
21 design that we have come up with your staff, we have
22 eliminated two thirds of the detention ponds. And you heard
23 your staff talking about those. That would normally be
24 required to handle the drainage. And the State Department
25 of Ecology is in support of this design and agreed that this
52
1 is going improve the impact to the environment.
2 You heard a lot of comments from your staff with regard
3 to the straddle bent. We have a rendering over here that
4 shows what a straddle bent is. It's a bridge -type support
5 for the elevated guideway. You can see the picture. So in
6 many cases, we have eliminated the situation with two
7 columns and a beam to support that elevated guideway. And
8 we have gone to a single column that is going to support the
9 guideway. And it's going to be in the middle of the street,
10 but it's going to be protected by a median curved median
11 barriers so that there is no situation that there would be
12 any conflict with the traffic. This eliminated some need
13 for private property. By working closely with your staff,
14 we reduced some of the impacts to some of the private
15 property.
16 We have also worked very closely with your staff and
17 Washington State Department of Transportation to work out
18 acceptable conditions whereby most of the construction
19 access will be from the freeway and not from the local
20 street. This is going to greatly reduce the impact of
21 construction traffic on the local streets.
22 And finally, as you heard tonight, we have worked very
23 closely with your staff to make great improvements to the
24 station and the park- and -ride, and we have agreed to provide
25 initially 600 spaces for the parking in Tukwila; and also
53
1 have done a lot of street improvements. We have a
2 cross section of International Boulevard. I'm going to talk
3 quickly about the improvements we are going to make on that
4. street.
5 We are going to provide sidewalks, two bikes lane, one
6 in each direction, two general traffic lanes and a
7 landscaped median on Southcenter Boulevard. And most of
8 those comments came from the staff, and we were convinced
9 that's going to be for the best interest of the project,
10 because there are a lot of residents nearby that can safely
11 walk and use our stations to go downtown.
12 With that, I like to now turn it over to David Hewitt.
13 I guess he's going to be talking about some of the features
14 that we have designed into our station. Thank you very much
15 for the opportunity.
16 MR. HEWITT: Good evening. Is it all
17 right if I don't speak with a mic? It's a lot more flexible
18 that way, because I want to refer to the board.
19 First, I want to talk about the concept of the station,
20 how we felt about it, what its commitments were to the
21 location.
22 MS. CARTER: Can we have you identify
23 yourself for the record, please?
24 MR. HEWITT: Okay. I'm David Hewitt,
25 Hewitt Architects. Do you want my address?
54
1 MAYOR MULLET: Yes, sir.
2 MR. HEWITT: The office one is 119 Pine
3 Street, Seattle, No. 400, 98101. All right.
4 Obviously, with the location of the station at this
5 intersection and its prominence in the neighborhood, it's
6 simply a scale. This is bound to be a landmark building,
7 and it's got application to the City of Tukwila. It's got
8 application to the system. It's got application to the
9 people that use it.
10 And Joni mentioned this is truly a multimodal facility.
11 It deals with light rail and bus and car. And one thing
12 that wasn't mentioned is bicycles. And it's really going to
13 be a transportation center. And as a detail, it's in total
14 compliance with the Tukwila codes.
15 But our challenge was to look at the station in a way
16 where we could provide the most site available to help with
17 the parking. This was always an issue. So the idea of the
18 station is basically elevated so that very little aspect of
19 the station itself touches the platform. The platform is
20 pardon me the plaza, the plaza is the property underneath
21 the guideway that really serves as the landing point for the
22 vertical circulation.
23 So let me go over here to the site diagram.
24 Southcenter Boulevard, International Boulevard. As you
25 know, we have parking on each side. There's a traffic
55
1 signal here with the intersection that connects the two
2 parking areas. There is one primary vehicular access to the
3 site. The buses come in and go around to the east and come
4 back along here. And this is the plaza I'm referring to.
5 It's very narrow, because we were able to lift that. The
6 buses actually come under the station. That's the whole
7 point of elevating the station. Cars come on this side, and
8 they came in at the Paris parking area dropoff. That's how
9 that basically works. And so we're separating all those
10 modes of transportation. You need to separate the people
11 and the vehicles.
12 I'd like to look at this diagram over here. This
13 describes the offsite development which is really that
14 portion of the landscaping and the pedestrian access to the
15 site that is very important. I want to show you this first,
16 and then I'll get back to that.
17 If you look at the intersection, we have a corner of
18 Paris at this point. This goes up quite commonly along
19 International Boulevard, slightly down as you go down 164th,
20 so people usually walk downhill rather than uphill. So when
21 people come up to this intersection, they'll come up to the
22 point this is represented in this diagram this way. There
23 is very clear and designated pedestrian access through the
24 site, and there's a minimum of these vehicles crossing. So
25 we're doing that for safety, handicap access and the like.
56
1 Along these edges that are landscaped, we have
2 landscaped sections that incorporate barriers so people
3 can't stop and drop off people illegal in the street and
4 cause a traffic hazard. People that need to drop off come
5 in the site, and we have a dropoff at this point and this
6 point as well.
7 So the scheme is really on three levels the plaza;
8 the mezzanine, which is really the place where people mix
9 together to go up. There's a very, very clear I'll take
10 this down. You see a very, very clear designation of what
11 we call the tube, which was the area that really you see
12 from the parking area that really shows you how the building
13 works. You go up to the mezzanine level. That's where you
14 get ticketed; or if you've got your ticket, that's where you
15 decide if you're going north or south. That is above the
16 bus zone. That's this whole point. Buses can come under
17 the station. You go up then to the building. The building
18 is designed so you can read it, you can understand how it
19 works by form. So you can come up the escalator to the
20 platform area, and you can see the day and night shop, how
21 it would be.
22 We really saw this building as very, very transparent
23 so that it was transparent because it's safer. It's
24 transparent because it's also represents to the community a
25 landmark. During some 30 percent design, Sound Transit
57
1 decided that they wanted to really provide more weather
2 protection for the platform areas before we had two grooves
3 that were on other side of the platform. Because of the
4 w ,ind and the other factors, it was decided that the whole
5 station would be covered. That gave us a chance to develop
6 a very powerful, we think, and evocative form of movement.
7 And I think I hope you agree in the sense of the form of
8 the building and how that works.
9 This is especially true from the west side. This is
10 the view from International Boulevard as it goes up the hill
11 in this direction, so we have continuous rain protection at
12 all station levels.
13 There is another factor here that I'd like to point
14 out. I hope it's back here somewhere. Here it is, that
15 inside the station, there is a spatial quality that not only
16 is an exciting thing to use because you can look from the
17 platform areas down to the mezzanine, and as you can see
18 here these are the platform areas in the mezzanine level.
19 And that makes your experience more enjoyable, but it also
20 provides a great deal of safety because you can see who's
21 around you.
22 The mezzanine, I should mention, has glass on the south
23 side to protect it from the wind, but it's open with the
24 railing to the north side, so you can look out over the
25 parking area, so that you have a great sense of spatial
58
1 quality and transparency from all around.
2 And finally well, a couple more points. I hope I'm
3 not talking too fast. It was suggested to us by staff in
4 our own disposition to add some color to the station so it
5 wasn't a monochromatic experience. We've done that. I
6 think you can see that in the renderings with some powerful
7 accents on certain structural elements. It's certainly here
8 in the model. I think you can even see it from your seat.
9 It's true ambient lighting on the lower level, so that
10 brings a bit of spirit. The lighting is in the parking
11 area, as I mentioned, it's a 40 -foot standard outside the
12 tree line, so that as the trees foliate and grow larger,
13 your lighting will not be diminished.
14 There's also pedestrian lighting which is 12 feet, and
15 that pedestrian lighting outlines the corridors for
16 pedestrians. It's a scale giving element.
17 The lighting in the station itself is ambient. In
18 other words, it bounces off the surfaces as opposed to
19 fixtures that are directly in your eyes. That gives you a
20 little better sense of the space, a little better sense of
21 where you are.
22 And finally, there are three major specific pieces of
23 art incorporated in the design of the building. One as
24 you just as you we didn't put them in the model at
25 this point. There's a piece just outside of tube that is a
59
1 metaphor of a hazelnut, which we believe has some history in
2 the early agricultural development of the Tukwila area on
3 the north side, and then these big these spaces that you
4 move up in the are tremendously exciting. They're about
5 45 feet high. And on one side is a metaphor of a molecule
6 made up of icons of the region which you will recognize when
7 it's in place. On the other side there's a symbolic water
8 element that is the nutrient for all cities in the
9 Northwest.
10 Thank you.
11 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you very much. We
12 ran a little over 20 minutes, but that's okay.
13 At this point in time, we're going to open it up to the
14 public. And now I'll ask again, is there anybody out there
15 that did not sign up to speak that wants to speak at this
16 point in time.
17 (Anna Bernhardt sworn in)
18
19 MAYOR MULLET: We'll try in the
20 interest of getting through this tonight, I'd appreciate it
21 if everybody would stay to about five minutes. Try not to
22 be too repetitive. If somebody else has already said what
23 you wanted to say, it's on the record and sufficient to just
24 say I agree or disagree with that item. I'll start going
25 down through the list then. LeAnne Bremer?
60
1 MS. BREMER: My name is LeAnne Bremer,
2 500 Broadway, Suite 400, Vancouver, Washington 98684.
3 I'm here tonight representing SPEEA. That's the
4 Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace.
5 They have an office building that is extremely close to the
6 proposed alignment.
7 I don't know if you can all see this. It's right
8 there. This is 52nd Avenue South.
9 SPEEA is a 20,000 member union. Fifteen thousand of
10 its members are residing in Washington, and this is their
11 headquarters in Tukwila. They have some concerns about the
12 impact the project will have on their business and working
13 environment.
14 I want to say that I appreciate the time especially
15 that Sound Transit has taken recently with members of SPEEA
16 in voicing their concern. And no matter what happens
17 tonight, we hope that dialogue continues beyond this
18 evening.
19 Before getting into this specific concerns, I just want
20 to reiterate a few of the specific approval criteria that
21 are before you tonight for the Unclassified Use Permit.
22 That is what I'm talking about tonight is the Unclassified
23 Use Permit, and the city's obligation under the code and the
24 state environmental policy before approving the permit. And
25 I want to mention three criteria that puts my comment into
61
1 context.
2 One criteria of the Unclassified Use Permit is that the
3 proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the
4 public welfare or injurious to the improvements in the
5 community. Second, the proposed development shall be
6 compatible generally with the surrounding area. And third,
7 the proposed unclassified use shall to the maximum extent
8 feasible mitigate all significant adverse impacts on public
9 and private profit.
10 Under SEPA, the State Environmental Policy Act, the
11 city can and, in fact, must impose condition mitigation
12 measures related to specific environmental impacts that you
13 find in the record.
14 And I did want to also say that SPEEA does not oppose
15 this project at all. In fact, they're very supportive of
16 transit. But they think things could be done just a little
17 bit better with additional mitigation. I want to get in
18 those three concerns that they have.
19 I realize my time is short. I'll try to get through
20 this quickly.
21 The first issue is the alignment. SPEEA supports the
22 route that was proposed at the 30 percent preliminary
23 engineering stage back in March of 2002 or earlier. We're
24 not talking about a major change. Primarily around 52nd
25 Avenue, SPEEA is supportive of moving this segment closer to
62
1 I -5. As I understand, there are reasons the alignment was
2 changed significantly. The most significant reason, as I
3 understand it, is so that segment would be north of
4 Southcenter Boulevard. What SPEEA is proposing is that the
5 alignment be moved closer to I -5. It still has that
6 intersection with 51st Avenue and Southcenter where it is
7 proposed now.
8 There will be other folks talking about this issue, so
9 I'm not going to belabor it, but what I want to leave you
10 with on this is, as you hear the testimony tonight, whether
11 the original alignment is has less impact than the
12 proposed alignment. I think that's the balancing that you
13 have to do, which alignment will have less impact. And
14 you'll hear a lot more testimony on that.
15 The second issue is, you heard about the straddle
16 bents. Originally it was proposed to be two straddle bents
17 in front of the SPEEA property along 52nd Avenue. That
18 changed to the columns that you heard about earlier now that
19 are in the center of the road. And in fact, one of the
20 columns proposed is right in front of SPEEA's driveway, and
21 they definitely oppose that. In fact, they're supportive of
22 the original proposal that had the straddle bent, even
23 though those straddle bents would be partially located on
24 their property.
25 The concern about these columns on 52nd Avenue,
63
1 especially right where their driveway is, creates some
2 safety issues. They have trucks that visit their building
3 from time to time, and they're not sure that they can make
4 that turn.
5 And I'm told that the columns act like a roundabout or
6 circle like you see in Europe and some cities here in the
7 U.S. This is not an intersection by any means. It's a
8 driveway accessing 52nd Avenue. It's not a (inaudible)
9 situation.
10 I just have one last point is the noise and
11 vibration impact. There is a detailed technical report in
12 the record from our noise consultant basically saying that
13 the noise impacts were not studied on the SPEEA property,
14 because FTA guidelines only require Sound Transit to study
15 impacts on residential properties, so that's not the
16 obligation under SEPA. You need to study and understand
17 what the impacts are on all properties, not just residential
18 properties. And that's a huge flaw in the environmental
19 analysis. We would like to see a condition imposed that
20 requires Sound Transit to work with us in identifying
21 post- construction after operation what the impacts are truly
22 going to be as a result of noise and vibration impacts, and
23 to monitor those impacts and take corrective measures. So
24 we would request some sort of condition to that effect.
25 It's a serious when you look at the city's peer
64
1 review of our noise consultant's study, you'll find that
2 they agree that there is no study of the nonresidential
3 property. That's all I have to say.
4 MAYOR MULLET: I think, well, also for
5 the record, there will be an opportunity for rebuttal after
6 everybody's spoken once and a chance for some answers to
7 these questions.
8 Vanessa? For the record, would you spell your last
9 name?
10 MS. ZAPUTIL: My name is Vanessa
11 Zaputil, Z- A- P- U- T -I -L, 15171 52nd Avenue South, No. 5,
12 Tukwila 98188.
13 My husband and I are resident owners of five townhomes
14 located on 52nd Avenue South. My husband has lived at this
15 location since he and his father built these homes 25 years
16 ago. I have called Tukwila my home for the past twelve
17 years after emigrating from Canada. Tukwila is an
18 extraordinary place to live. The services available to the
19 residents are unparalleled. We have enjoyed being part of
20 our unique community on 52nd Avenue South and hope Sound
21 Transit's actions do not force us out.
22 We realize the city council has been provided many
23 pages of our correspondence with Sound Transit, and I would
24 like to summarize these for you. First, though, it is
25 important I thank the city staff for their continued
65
1 assistance in our endeavor, in particular, Jack Pace,
2 Steve Lancaster, Nora Gierloff and Brian Shelton. They were
3 all unfailingly prompt to provide information to us when
4 Sound Transit w4s °reluctant and untimely.
5 Our timeline begins when, in March of 2000, we saw a
6 proposed Tukwila Freeway Route in the Seattle PI. It was
7 planned to parallel I -5, then cross through vacant
8 commercial lots to the south of us. We had communication
9 with Sound Transit and were assured we would not even notice
10 it. We requested to be parties of record for everything
11 regarding 52nd Avenue South. Three years later, we attended
12 the next community meeting and discovered the alignment had
13 shifted approximately 100 feet to the west from along 1-5 to
14 the front yard of the Johnson Braund Design Group building
15 across the street from our residential property. As you can
16 imagine, we were not only shocked; we felt very deceived
17 that Sound Transit would make this kind of change without
18 correspondence with us, especially as we had specifically
19 asked to be informed of progress on our street. It is my
20 understanding that the Johnson Braund Design Group had a
21 similar experience.
22 Since then we have continually and consistently
23 attempted to educate Sound Transit on our area. In fact, we
24 even had to advise this agency that they had overlooked our
25 residential houses in their plans. After much convincing,
66
1 they conceded our houses did, in fact, exist and added sound
2 walls, as we pointed out was required by federal law. We
3 have tried to understand why Sound Transit would be so
4 insistent on impacting residential properties on a pretty
5 little avenue in Tukwila when the original concept and
6 proposal was much more consistent with the philosophy of the
7 I -5 corridor route.
8 Sound Transit did provide a variety of reasons behind
9 the decision to change the alignment. After careful
10 examination, we showed that, with a slight adjustment, it
11 could realize most of the same benefits and maintain a
12 residential -free route on 52nd Avenue South. For example,
13 the bulk of the cost savings were concerning traversing the
14 51st Avenue bridge on the north side versus the south side.
15 This could be easily be accomplished with our variations.
16 Impacts to Gilliam Creek along I -5 were previously mitigated
17 by utilizing columns instead of cut and fill. They have
18 been unreceptive to seriously consider a change. They are
19 more concerned with minimizing delays, even if it means the
20 route is just plain wrong.
21 We understand the city's attorney feels the city's
22 authority is limited regarding the route. Revised Code of
23 Washington states: "No local comprehensive plan or
24 developmental regulation may preclude the siting of
25 essential public facilities."
67
1 While we understand this to be appropriate with regard
2 to precluding the routing if, for example, it did not serve
3 the Tukwila Urban Center, we disagree in our unique
4 situation. The city does have jurisdiction when it is in an
5 adjustment within the same avenue. We are not asking the
6 city to preclude the siting in this area.
7 The Unclassified Use Permit for which Sound Transit is
8 applying states: "No. 6, the proposed unclassified use
9 shall to the maximum extent feasible mitigate all
10 significant environmental impacts on public and private
11 properties. Full consideration shall be given to, A,
12 alternative locations and /or routes that will reduce or
13 eliminate adverse impacts; and No. 8, for uses in
14 residential areas, applicant shall demonstrate that there is
15 no reasonable nonresidential alternative site for the use."
16 Sound Transit has done just the opposite. They have
17 moved to change the alignment to impact the residential
18 property to the fullest. Their latest addendum to the FSEIS
19 finally, reluctantly acknowledges some impact to us. All of
20 Sound Transit's Environmental Impact Statements either
21 completely ignore the residential properties on 52nd Avenue
22 South or greatly minimize them. There are still impacts,
23 however, that are not listed I'm almost done such as
24 additional noise generated by the vehicles traveling under
25 and along the viaduct type tunnel with bouncing, reflecting
68
1 noise.
2 We ask the city not to accept the Environmental Impact
3 Statements as they stand. They are not extensive. The
4 city's interpretation of the RCW is one Sound Transit
5 obviously is in favor of, but it is not correct. The city
6 can and should have influence on the alignment in our
7 distinct location. The criteria of the Unclassified Use
8 Permit must be enforced.
9 Furthermore, we have requested a federal investigation
10 from the Federal Transit Administration, based on our
11 findings of Sound Transit's violations of the FTA guide and
12 US Code.
13 Sound Transit has not shown the majority of the
14 property owners on 52nd South that they are forthcoming, nor
15 are all their representations factually correct. It would
16 sometimes require two or three requests and several months
17 for disclosure of information. In fact, the latest FSEIS
18 addendum was supposed to be available this spring and was
19 only furnished to us less than a month ago. We feel they do
20 not have our community's best interest at heart.
21 This structure will be here to a very long time, and we
22 want it to be done once correctly. This is not a project
23 that can be hurried through for the sole purpose of meeting
24 deadlines. The Right -of -Way Agreement, we feel, needs more
25 clarification. We want to ensure that enough language is
69
1 contained herein to guarantee Sound Transit meets their
2 commitments fully. We believe everything needs to be in
3 writing. We have reason to feel betrayed, and the city
4 needs to be cautious.
5 We have met with Sound Transit regarding the public
6 works on 52nd Avenue South. There are many unanswered
7 questions on our little street alone. We strongly urge the
8 city to take a second and third look at this agreement. We
9 need to put Tukwila's best interests first.
10 It is with that thought, I would suggest that the city
11 form a citizen advisory panel to ensure the residents' and
12 city's input as Sound Transit applies for permits. As
13 always, we would be he willing to help. But let's not rush
14 this critical project. We need to slow down and wait until
15 Sound Transit is truly and properly ready. This section
16 cannot be approved as is.
17 Thank you.
18 MAYOR MULLET: Greg?
19 MR. ZAPUTIL: I'm Greg Zaputil, 15171
20 52nd Avenue South, Tukwila, Washington 98188.
21 As my wife previously stated, I chose to make Tukwila
22 my home 25 years ago. I have always strived to maintain
23 quality tenants at my four rental townhomes. Being a
24 resident landlord, I have been able to accomplish this.
25 With Sound Transit's new alignment proposal less than
70
1 60 feet from our bedroom windows, this luxury will be gone.
2 I will have great difficulty renting my units, and I will be
3 damaged. My income property will be greatly devalued and my
4 ability to rent my units at all, let alone for what is
5 necessary, will destroy my income.
6 Last Tuesday and Friday, we met with city staff and
7 Sound Transit regarding public works on 52nd Avenue South.
8 There was great discussion on a variety of items, including
9 Sound Transit's property line and right -of -way surveys. We
10 have been provided road improvement plans and spent the
11 Labor Day weekend researching property lines, because Sound
12 Transit had the city right -of -way and their construction
13 zone four feet into my property. I knew this was wrong.
14 As you see from a recent survey on a proposed
15 development behind us and the original tract property lines,
16 52nd Avenue South was never centered in the right -of -way.
17 The center is documented as five feet from the east curb.
18 All of the property documentation clearly show this. This
19 was something I was aware of when I built.
20 How can Sound Transit be so wrong? It makes me
21 question the other right -of -way surveys and acquisition
22 surveys they have been doing in Tukwila. The city cannot
23 enter the right -of -way agreements if Sound Transit has
24 inaccurately documented them.
25 This has created more problems. As the alignment
71
1 stands now, posts D -06, D -07 and D -08 would be clearly in
2 the right -hand lane of the road when the road is eventually
3 centered. Knowing this, the city and Sound Transit cannot
4 allow the route to encumber the right -of -way so drastically
5 and needs to be moved. With this information, this
6 alignment will not fit where it is currently proposed.
7 Furthermore, this alignment would never allow the city
8 to widen the road in the future, as they have often
9 commented on for future development to the north. 52nd
10 Avenue South is a major arterial access from Southcenter to
11 Highway 518. Emergency vehicles also utilize 52nd Avenue on
12 a daily basis, another example of why this route does not
13 work.
14 For these reasons, columns cannot be located in the
15 right -of -way on 52nd. A route that crosses 52nd Avenue
16 South on more of an angle similar to what was originally
17 proposed would not have this problem. We have shown this is
18 still possible. We do not want a situation where the city
19 needs right -of -way in the future and because of the
20 structure the property has to be taken out of my land
21 unnecessarily. We need to look ahead.
22 Furthermore, in 2003, the City of Tukwila initially was
23 reluctant to allow Sound Transit's columns on the city
24 right -of -way. Their drawings show Sound Transit engineers
25 moved the right -of -way. See Drawing No. L57 -RP38, 7/1/03;
72
1 and Drawing No. L57 -RP38, 7/10/03. This is another example
2 of how Sound Transit deals with problems and has
3 intentionally misrepresented property lines. This is
4 totally unacceptable. I'm sure they were hopeful that no
5 one would notice. But we have, and they must be held
6 accountable.
7 Another problem is the single column roundabout traffic
8 circle Sound Transit has proposed in front of the SPEEA and
9 Parkridge's driveway. This has huge consequences. A
10 roundabout that you can see through is one thing; one with
11 an eight -foot column blocking drivers' views is something
12 entirely differently. The driveway access has the potential
13 for accidents. We already have a bad intersection at
14 Southcenter Boulevard and 52nd Avenue South. We don't need
15 another. Also, the roundabout does not correspond to the
16 correct right -of -way boundaries and will not work.
17 Finally, we are extremely unhappy with the preferential
18 treatment the Bricklayer Beneficial Association has been
19 given by Sound Transit. They bought their lot after the
20 original route has been planned to intersect it, south of
21 the residential. They complained they wanted to develop
22 their newly purchased encumbered lot, and Sound Transit did
23 everything they could to make that happen.
24 We provided Sound Transit interoffice e -mails showing
25 this. In fact, part of the decision to change the alignment
73
1 to in front of our homes and 10 feet from Johnson Braund
2 Design Group's front building included language to "not
3 impact the Bricklayers." This is not right. The
4 Bricklayers have realized financial gain as a result of this
5 decision. The city cannot let these kinds of deals go on to
6 hurt their residents.
7 Ron Sims was the chairman of Sound Transit when this
8 change was approved, and he was actually wooing the labor
9 unions for the gubernatorial race. He was quoted as saying
10 in the Seattle PI article dated 8/24/03 regarding labor
11 union votes, "You remember your friends. That's the rule."
12 "You always remember who was willing to take the gamble with
13 you." Is this coincidence? This will be investigated.
14 This section on 52nd Avenue South is shrouded in
15 questions and uncertainty. It needs a redesign. It is not
16 ready to go to council. Sound Transit have had a year and a
17 half to address these issues, and they have chosen not to.
18 The route concept as they have proposed it is not feasible
19 and will need changes. We need a minimum six -month
20 continuance on the section from C -24 to D -24 until Sound
21 Transit can sort all this out. There is too much at stake
22 not to.
23 Thank you.
24 MAYOR MULLET: Marc? Can we get your
25 name and address?
74
1 MR. MATO: Marc Mato, and I live at 5119
2 South 151st Street. I lived in one of Greg's units and
3 liked the area so much I bought a house around the corner.
4 And when my first heard of the project in the original
5 proposal along I -5, it made a lot sense. I was just awful
6 surprised that they changed the route.
7 And knowing that road, if you just look at the road, it
8 just doesn't make any sense. If you come down 1-5, it makes
9 total sense instead of moving and tearing up the whole
10 system there with the road and the residential. You should
11 look at it. It just is obvious.
12 I know emergency vehicles come down that road a lot of
13 times, fire trucks, police and stuff like that. It's going
14 to encumber pretty much everything.
15 That's pretty much it.
16 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Marc. Tony?
17 MR. CAROSINO: Tony Carosino,
18 11245 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, Washington, Carosino
19 Farms.
20 I have lived in Tukwila area on that farm for 51 years.
21 And it's previously unincorporated King County. It's part
22 of Tukwila, so I know the valley quite well. I'm not a
23 newcomer to this neighborhood, and I know a lot of changes
24 have come along. We knew industry was going to be coming
25 into us over three ago when they decided to change it from
75
1 farming to industrial property. It brought along with it
2 the noise, the traffic, the change in the tax base. Like I
3 stated previously, we lost the farming. It became
4 industrial, which at the rate of doing the farm, you don't
5 make a lot of money with the taxes.
6 I am a little bit nervous. Being around this many
7 Sound Transit people makes me nervous, and you should be
8 too.
9 The dealing with Sound Transit has been less than
10 outstanding, to tell you the truth. Our first dealings with
11 South Transit came from a phone call I received after one of
12 the meetings prior to when this thing came up a long time
13 ago. The lady said that, how come you sold out, Tony? I
14 heard Sound Transit stated that they have reached an
15 agreement with you. I said, on what? Well, in general, on
16 your property. They never called us.
17 The next thing I hear, there's a group that comes down
18 from this organization that says they're going to take the
19 land and turn it into a historical place. And we didn't
20 even hear from Sound Transit yet, and we still don't know
21 what the heck was going on.
22 So we kind of go along. And finally we did get in
23 contact with Sound Transit. Well, with everything that has
24 gone on in the last two years since we've been allowed to
25 deal with them I call them Sound Transit. I'd rather
76
1 call them light rail, because there's no nothing sound that
2 I can tell about them in any way.
3 They've come along and made us many deals in the last
4 two or three years. They had one agent who would work with
5 us that they brought in just to deal with our farm. They
6 brought another gentleman in. The people were nice, but the
7 information was very misguided, totally untrue. Nothing was
8 ever said straight up to us. They promised they were going
9 to buy us out, relocate the renter next door in the old
10 circle house. I run my home and my business out of my
11 place. They did relocate the neighbors. Then they said at
12 any time during that deal, we'll be happy to relocate you.
13 If you lose your renter or if you lose your commercial
14 renters in the back, don't worry about it during the
15 process. Until this deal gets made, we will pay your rent
16 for you. The renter moved out. They didn't pay.
17 Our renter in the back, now that they've decided to
18 change everything to us as far as roads and stuff, he's most
19 likely going to leave. If there's any problems like we had
20 prior to when the county did the bridge, I think he will
21 leave. Will they pay rent? As I already stated, no.
22 They put me through a situation of where I had to put
23 myself in many days off of work to allow them to come to my
24 home, drill holes in the house, drill holes in the ceiling,
25 drill holes in the dirt. They put me through moving
77
1 companies coming in more than once, more than twice. And
2 after all this paperwork, provided them the documentation of
3 my worth, everything to them, they were going to move me.
4 They put me all the way through the stages of actually
5 from one of the gentlemen from Sound Transit came with
6 me, photographed the house to see if it would be workable
7 with the city that I could run my business to see if they
8 had a heck of a lot of a different idea because I was no
9 longer being industrial property, but it would be a limited
10 business that we would present to you folks to have
11 approval.
12 I get in. I make a bid to this gentleman. We discuss
13 prices. The next thing I know, he no longer works with me
14 no more. They said at this one meeting we had with them at
15 our lawyer's office, they would continue to work with us and
16 said they would iron things out, just a few small things.
17 So they give us a new challenge to work with. I'm not
18 mentioning names because the people I worked were really
19 nice people, not the people that make the rules or
20 regulations. They must be a little different.
21 They come along, and so I called the gentleman up, is
22 there a mistake, to find out what we could about getting
23 relocated out of the house. And he said, I can't talk to
24 you, Tony. I said, okay, you can't talk to me. I'll call
25 the attorney. So I called the attorney for Sound Transit.
78
1 He says, I can't talk to you. You go talk to your lawyer.
2 So much for open discussion with Sound Transit. They had
3 again lied to me, totally shut us off. So we go home, and
4 now we're in the stage to where they have, I guess, taken
5 our property. We didn't give our property. They take your
6 property. They don't buy it. They assume easements on your
7 property. Right now they have not even talked one dime
8 about a take section, even though we have a column that's
9 going through our driveway, which is our main this is
10 three separate pieces of property. Even though it is
11 located on one major deal, it's still three separate pieces.
12 So the main industrial property that we have, the
13 entrance to that property is located on the northern side of
14 the Duwamish River within our 100 -foot water boundary or the
15 easement boundary that you have to have. And now they have
16 to move that because of the fact of just the construction of
17 the column.
18 I would say, if you don't have things in writing, don't
19 trust them. Even if you do have it in writing, still don't
20 trust them. They've got 80 lawyers to our one. Who is
21 going to win the fight?
22 As far as landscaping goes, I hope you do. As far as
23 landscaping goes, right now the City has trees. I have
24 beautify landscaping, although I've let it go to heck
25 because I was told that I was going to move so many times.
79
1 And they're not putting anything back. Their idea down by
2 our house is hydro seed. Level things out the best we can,
3 spray some grass on there, do what you want with it. That's
4 not acceptable to me. They come to these meetings at the
5 community center, show you a beautiful picture of all those
6 trees and everything. There's millions of trees you can
7 plant that are not 50, 60 feet tall. They can do lots of
8 landscaping. But where we're at, don't worry about it.
9 In conclusion, all I can say is that my dealings with
10 Sound Transit, which are ongoing, we have yet to learn
11 anything definite. They've got our land. We don't have a
12 price. They say they pay a fair market value. I have only
13 a 3,100 square foot home. It could be made into an
14 eight -room office. There's two upstairs, bathroom, bedroom
15 downstairs, kitchen, everything, $175,000, a fair bid. I
16 don't understand that.
17 So before you guys get everything on paper, I would say
18 take your time, think about it. There's a lot things
19 they're doing. They changed the alignment and just now tell
20 us here at our last meeting, you no longer have that
21 driveway going to your commercial property. We're going to
22 change it. Now it's infringing more on the lot. So there
23 are too many changes. Just like people are worried about
24 the 52nd area, we have way more concerns. We're kind of a
25 kingpin for them, and they have stepped on us, I think, once
80
1 too many times.
2 Thank you.
3 MAYOR MULLET: Hal Cooper.
4 MR. COOPER: My name is Hal Cooper. I
5 live at 11715 Northeast 125th Street, Kirkland, Washington
6 98064.
7 I just want to compliment you on your station. It
8 looks not only nice, but looks very similar to the one on
9 Hampton Road. I was somewhat part of the origination of
10 this alignment in the City of Tukwila. I have some
11 suggestions, and some of them some of the issues were
12 raised by some of the landowners.
13 I think you need to make a provision in the future for
14 a station at Interurban Avenue and Interstate 5. And you
15 need to make a provision for a Y connector at the where
16 the freeway connects at the northwest corner. And
17 unfortunately, this alignment changed which was different
18 than my earlier one. Moving over to 52nd from the freeway,
19 while it saved some transit time and reduced the length of
20 the alignment slightly, unfortunately it's going to close
21 off the way to get easily to Southcenter, which I think is
22 probably the greatest shortcoming of this whole situation.
23 It's a very large Southcenter complex. And it needs to be
24 moved back, as I said, because, while there is a short -term
25 benefit here to Sound Transit in transit time, there's a
81
1 long -term detriment, and that has to do with the fact that
2 it's making it much more difficult in the future to set the
3 direct alignment to Southcenter and go to the east side in
4 the future. So there's a logistical reason 4t•would benefit
5 Sound Transit by listing things like that.
6 While it won't affect the City of Tukwila, there should
7 be a station in the main Sea -Tac terminal. That would
8 certainly be beneficial. And I also think that we need to
9 make a provision for a shuttle between not only Southcenter
10 and the Tukwila rail station to Sea -Tac Airport, but also in
11 the future not only the light rail sections, but perhaps the
12 innercity rail passenger, freight and commuter rail. And we
13 may see, because of the raise in the price of oil recently,
14 a long -term decline in air traffic, which needs to be
15 somehow matched with light rail traffic with local
16 transportation.
17 And one of the things related to what Julia Patterson
18 mentioned earlier tonight and it is something that the
19 City of Tukwila is interested in is the fact that it's
20 only one of the constituent cities in the Puget Sound area.
21 I think that we need to be thinking about separate rail
22 construction authorities for South King County and East King
23 County to get them built, very similar to what has been very
24 successfully completed for Los Angeles this past year, the
25 blue line construction authority for rail system, because
82
1 this might speed things up considerably because we'll have a
2 need for transit earlier than we might think. And I think
3 the rise in the price of oil again is helping force this
4 issue. And I wpuld suggest that you that all of you
5 collectively look at, first of all, increased legislation
6 next year and also contact the people in California. And I
7 thank you.
8 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you.
9 MR. ROBERTSON: Are we going to have a
10 chance to question individuals later?
11 MAYOR MULLET: Keith Neal.
12 MR. NEAL: Keith Neal, 6635 Beach Drive
13 Southwest, Seattle.
14 I'm a SPEEA member. SPEEA is the aerospace workers at
15 Boeing. We're a union of 20,000 people. Our headquarters
16 are on 52nd Avenue. This is an our national headquarters.
17 I will make my remarks relatively brief.
18 The alignment down I -5, as the voters agreed, that
19 alignment would mitigate the business and residents alike.
20 SPEEA as an institution likes and supports rapid transit and
21 light rail. The alignment down I -5 mitigates negative
22 impacts to some of the residents, and the 30 percent design
23 point that was maintained in the 52nd Avenue area has since
24 been changed to go down 52nd, thus creating a large public
25 system that's over everybody's head. So there's noise
83
1 during construction. There's mess with the relocation of
2 utilities. This is certainly a concern.
3 Also with secondly, large supporting structures in
4 the middle of the public streets seems like a really poor
5 design with many negative attributes in terms of traffic
6 flow, traffic safety, large vehicles down the street, let
7 alone having one sited essentially at the head of our
8 driveway.
9 We do a lot of printing. We have a very large 18 -wheel
10 vehicle coming in making deliveries. At times a few
11 times a month, times when we do lots of printing during when
12 we have contracts specific to our members, we're getting
13 them three to five times a week. So it's no small impact in
14 that regard.
15 And then, as I mentioned briefly, we like the I -5
16 alignment simply just because it's further away. And the
17 noise, the vibration, the visual impact, the shadowing, it's
18 over 100 feet away. And let's face it. This is the
19 members' house. And in terms of real value of that
20 property, it will be diminished if you have something
21 essentially overhead.
22 Also lastly functionally, we're very concerned about
23 the sound and vibration simply because we have a business
24 where we need to converse and having an office that is
25 essentially filled with a transit train going back and forth
84
1 which basically interrupts the conversation. And in the
2 evenings when Sound Transit projects six minute transits by
3 the building, we're often holding evening meetings. Our
4 members work at Boeing, and we have to meet in the evening.
5 So this is a great concern that we have. And I thank
6 you for your time.
7 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you. Peter Coates.
8 MR. COATES: Good evening, Mayor,
9 council members. Thank you for this opportunity to speak to
10 you.
11 My name is Peter Coates. My business address is
12 6770 East Marginal Way South. Our office are located at the
13 Duwamish Training Center for the South Seattle Community
14 College. I'm the executive secretary of the Seattle King
15 County Building and Construction Trades Union and represent
16 the 27 affiliated construction unions in King County.
17 Many of the members live in the City of Tukwila and the
18 surrounding community. It's a pleasure to be here tonight
19 and to enter into the Sound Transit love fest that we've
20 experienced up to this point, and I realize that my comments
21 are probably contrary to what you've heard already this
22 evening.
23 I'd like to talk about the labor components. Yes, I am
24 here to speak in favor of the requested permits and the
25 Transit Way Agreement. But up and above that, and what will
85
1 come to your community, is a relationship with a very large
2 entity named Sound Transit.
3 I know something about Sound Transit inasmuch as we
4 supported the RTA many years ago, entered into a
5 relationship with Sound Transit back in the latter part of
6 the '90s. And we negotiated a project labor agreement for
7 the labor component of what Sound Transit was about to
8 embark on.
9 What that labor component meant to us was the
10 commitment of an agency to, not only this generation of
11 construction workers, but the next generation and what those
12 construction jobs would bring in the way of opportunities to
13 future generations.
14 We've had a five -year history with Sound Transit. And
15 in spite of what you've heard tonight, our relationship with
16 Sound Transit and all people within the agency has been
17 nothing less than stellar.
18 First and foremost, that has been their commitment to
19 the community, to the people that are going to be providing
20 or performing the jobs on these projects. That's a
21 significant part of the effect this project is going to have
22 on your city. Yes, it's going to create employment
23 opportunities, it's going to create some disruption
24 obviously.
25 But more than that, this is going to be the beginning
86
1 stages of what will be the regional transit system that will
2 go on for years to come. Sound Transit will be a model of
3 how the Puget Sound region will address its transportation
4 needs. We cannot pavethe Kent Valley. We cannot pave 405.
5 We have to come up with an alternative. Again, part of that
6 alternative is what Sound Transit brings. It not only has
7 had a relationship with us, it's had a relationship with the
8 other cities within its jurisdiction.
9 We have constructed Link in Tacoma successfully. We've
10 successfully constructed many of the heavy rail stations.
11 And now we've embarked on hundreds of millions of dollars
12 worth of light rail construction in the City of Seattle.
13 And I'm here to tell you, of all of the agencies that I deal
14 with, of all of the public and profit sectors that I deal
15 with, in the literally billions of dollars worth of
16 construction that is going on in King County, whether it be
17 a third runway or South Lake Union, I'm here to tell you
18 that our relationship with Sound Transit is the best.
19 First place in the nation, they incorporated into the
20 project labor agreement the community, talking about how
21 they're going to bring people from the community into this
22 construction activity and provide futures for those people.
23 There's been a direct entry component where they're
24 guaranteeing people from the community jobs, so that when we
25 talk about our relationship with the Seattle School
87
1 District, with the High Line School District, and with the
2 communities around, what's going to happen here, we'll be
3 able to have those same job opportunities guaranteed for the
4 citizens in this area.
5 Again, I'd like to thank you for the time you've given
6 me, and again, my support for the requests that are being
7 made tonight. Thank you.
8 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Peter. Diane
9 Brewster.
10 MS. BREWSTER: Pass.
11 MAYOR MULLET: Mike Griffin.
12 MR. GRIFFIN: My name is Mike Griffin.
13 I live at 5131 South 151st Street, this house right here,
14 right on the turn. And I've lived there for 27 years.
15 I don't believe you're bringing it down 52nd Street.
16 When I first heard about Sound Transit coming down 1 -5, I
17 said, well, we need transit, we need some type of light rail
18 to take the pressure off the region, but I was very
19 disappointed when they said they were coming down 52nd. I
20 found this out from Vanessa.
21 So even at the meeting at Foster High School, I asked
22 them. All of a sudden, we found out they're going to do
23 underground wiring. So I asked them, who is going to pay
24 for the underground wiring when it gets to my property line?
25 Am I going to have to pay for it up to my house, or are you
88
1 guys going to pay for it? He said, we'll pay for it. I'd
2 like that in writing, for one thing, because I don't think
3 that I'm too clear on that right now.
4 And I disagree with the circular turnaround down in
5 front of SPEEA, because that interferes with their entry
6 their right of entry for the trucks, and it's also going to
7 be an accident -prone area.
8 As far as underground wiring goes, I think I already
9 have a telephone pole that's on the site of 151st Street
10 that could be hooked up without it going underground.
11 Actually I think just about everything else has been
12 covered. But I'd sure like to see it go back towards the
13 freeway. That's the first proposal that was brought about.
14 Thank you. That's all I have to say.
15 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Mike. Craig
16 Ward.
17 MR. WARD: Mayor Mullet, council, thank
18 you. My name is Craig Ward. I'm the assistant city manager
19 for the City of SeaTac. The address is 4800 South 108th
20 Street, Seattle, Washington.
21 My comments will be brief tonight. I just wanted to
22 make you aware that, in anticipation of light rail
23 development, SeaTac adopted High Capacity Transit Design
24 Standards several years ago and also adopted elements of a
25 Transportation Improvement Program for the South 154th
89
1 Street light rail station and the area within a quarter mile
2 of the proposed station, which is generally called the
3 station area.
4 The City of Tukwila and Sound Transit have actively
5 solicited SeaTac's input into the station design and has
6 incorporated many of SeaTac's suggestions into the station
7 design and the proposed conditional use permit condition.
8 Specifically, Sound Transit has proposed improvements to the
9 International Boulevard right -of -way. Immediately adjacent
10 to the station of International Boulevard is SeaTac's
11 property. And there a variety of improvements that have
12 been included in that component of the project proposal,
13 which we endorse.
14 In addition, there are improvements proposed to South
15 154th Street, which we also support. And in accordance with
16 all of this support that we have received from both your
17 staff and Sound Transit, we have to applaud your efforts and
18 acknowledge the collegial responses and professional manner
19 in which Tukwila staff has led this effort. It's truly been
20 quite unprecedented in my experience, the degree of
21 cooperation we've received from your staff.
22 And I want to acknowledge the work of Steve Lancaster,
23 Nora Gierloff, Jack Pace in the planning department and
24 Brian Shelton from public works. You really deserve a big
25 pat on the back for your efforts in working with us, in
90
1 addition to the staff at Sound Transit.
2 In addition to our joint efforts involving Tukwila, the
3 City of SeaTac and Sound Transit have actively pursued an
4 agreement to improve the station area in the interest of
5 future light rail passengers in a manner that satisfies our
6 SeaTac's High Capacity Design Standards and our
7 Transportation Improvement. We had hoped that an agreement
8 would have been completed in time for us to announce its
9 successful completion tonight, but that time proved to be a
10 little bit too ambitious. We look forward to continuing to
11 work with Sound Transit to accomplish that goal so that our
12 station area improvements can be satisfied. We trust that
13 all of that will be accomplished.
14 That concludes my statements. Thank you,
15 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Craig. It
16 must be the city experience that you know how to get things
17 said within five minutes. Roger Lorenzen.
18 MR. LORENZEN: My name is Roger
19 Lorenzen. I live at 14038 Macadam Road South here in
20 Tukwila. You can have my notes, but they're not very good.
21 I want to challenge slightly the Unclassified Use
22 Permit due to the noise levels that will be established on
23 or created on Macadam Road due to the removal of the plan to
24 build the sound wall. I think that it's really atrocious
25 that the sound wall has been completely dropped for that
91
1 section of the light rail because, of course, you save
2 money. Well, with the elevated rail, one of the quotes in
3 the pamphlet we have is that it would save approximately
4 $20,000 to $30,000 for each of the receptors. I guess we're
5 a receptor. That's what we hear because we live there. The
6 $20,000 to $30,000 to me is really a drop in the bucket
7 considering the property values in the Greater King County
8 area as a whole.
9 We purchased our house for about $140,000 six years
10 ago. It's almost double that in value now. The house just
11 down the street from us sold for almost $300,000 recently.
12 I think that the $20,000 to $30,000 investment in the noise
13 buffering that they have previously considered a sound wall
14 on the side of elevated trackway is a really cheap
15 investment for enhancing our neighborhoods for the
16 decades centuries? Will it be centuries, folks?
17 Probably centuries this light rail will be there. So this
18 $20,000 to $30,000 is not acceptable per receptor or
19 household or whatever, what have you.
20 Removing of the trees just on my property alone has
21 already been appraised at a very much higher value than
22 that, and that's just the trees on my property, not the
23 trees that are on the WS -DOT property, or the trees that I
24 get to appreciate on the property to the north and south of
25 me. To the north of us, there's probably 200 small alder
92
1 trees that completely block off the highway from our view.
2 And we've never really appreciated them until this whole
3 process had started. And now we realize what a huge buffer
4 that has and how much we will miss those sorely in the past.
5 There's a big property with a ten -foot buffer that
6 Sound Transit will request or insist upon for an open zone,
7 vegetation zone, clear vegetation zone along the trackway
8 for safety measures. That's really a large portion of
9 people's property if they go along the highway or along the
10 trackway. To not be able to plant a tree, if trees were all
11 one foot wide, that would be pretty easy, but most trees are
12 fairly wide. So having to plant a tree another eight to ten
13 feet back to grow up a buffer zone along the trackway which
14 is already in some places quite high will be very, very
15 difficult and very lengthy in time.
16 I'm wondering if the City of Tukwila can please help us
17 and the neighbors and citizens of Tukwila to promote and
18 help us to get our sound wall back in some way, shape or
19 form. Deleting it completely for minor financial problems
20 to me is not what the taxpayers paid for. When we drive up
21 and down I -5, all the time, we see sound walls on
22 communities up and down, up and down the highway in every
23 state, every community, everywhere you go. How is it
24 possible that the City of Tukwila, Sound Transit, the State
25 of Washington, King County and WS -DOT has not sat down and
93
1 decided how these pieces of pie can all merge together to
2 make the sound wall be built. It seems incomprehensible
3 that it could just be pulled off of this design just like
4 that. Where is the Design Review for the trackway?
5 We've had wonderful design reviews for our beautiful
6 new station. Where is the Design Review for the trackway
7 that will be going right through the middle of our
8 neighborhood? Where is the Design Review for that?
9 The noise study we've read and read and read over and
10 over and over again. We tried to get the new noise study,
11 but we failed to get that. Apparently the City of Tukwila
12 did a noise study as well. We haven't seen that just yet.
13 But there's a certain amount of information in the study
14 done by Michael Minor Associates in December of 2003.
15 Light rail vehicles with wheels, 40 miles an hour at
16 100 feet, 78 decibels between 70 to 80 decibels at
17 100 feet. We're going to be 50 feet away.
18 So to me, to me, they have specific numbers for our
19 property. And to me, I'm very dubious. For the amount of
20 volume of noises there presently, to add trains every six
21 minutes is going to be atrocious. And to remove all of our
22 trees, all of our best blocking trees, our big beautiful
23 trees that presently exist that have years to go before they
24 grow back is going to be very difficult, to say the least.
25 I hope the City of Tukwila can help us. Thank you very
94
1 much.
2 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Roger. John
3 Takami.
4 MR. HEWITT: Pasq.
5 MAYOR MULLET: Anna, you're up.
6 MS. BERNHARDT: Anna Bernhardt, 14241
7 89th South.
8 I just looked at the police chief I mean our fire
9 chief and some of our police officers. And I was wondering
10 what the impact is going to be with that transit station and
11 the parking lot to our already overburdened police
12 department and fire department, especially our police
13 department. We desperately need more police officers, which
14 we cannot afford. And so is Sound Transit going to help us
15 patrol these stations the station? Because, you know,
16 they are hot beds for garbage and junk and gatherings of
17 unwanted people. I've seen it in Europe. I've seen it here
18 in the country. I like it to stay as beautiful as it is
19 designed. And so who is going to patrol it, and how much is
20 it going to cost the City of Tukwila?
21 And I've been here for about 45 years, and the police
22 department and fire department are very special to me,
23 having been a civil service commissioner for about 26 years,
24 I think. I lost count.
25 So please consider that, because I think that's one of
95
1 the main things we have to worry about. We've got a lot of
2 problems on our highway, and it's a lot better than it used
3 to be. And this is just an extension of our highways. And
4 I'm sure there will be problems, so I would like to have
5 some extra money to take care of this and not burden our
6 city with it. Thank you.
7 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Anna.
8 That completes the signup list that I have. Is there
9 anybody else who didn't sign up who wants to take a shot at
10 this? Okay. How are we doing on time?
11 We have an opportunity for some rebuttal, some answers
12 to comments on surrebuttal, but maybe some clarification of
13 some of the questions that were asked by Sound Transit. I
14 would ask that rebuttal not bring up new information but
15 actually answer some of the questions that have been raised.
16 Joni, are you prepared to do any of that at this time?
17
18 (Recess taken 9:44 p.m. 10:00 p.m.)
19
20 MAYOR MULLET: Okay. Thank you all.
21 We're going to continue with the public hearing now. We're
22 going to have an opportunity for some rebuttal. And I would
23 caution everybody, if you did talk to people about issues
24 during the break, that is not a part of the record. So if
25 you have something you want to say, you better get it into
96
1 the record at this point in time. But I think most of the
2 council understood that. So I hope you're all out there
3 just visiting.
4 I'll ask the staff first, do you have any rebuttal?
5 MR. LANCASTER: The staff has no
6 rebuttal.
7 MAYOR MULLET: Sound Transit?
8 MR. SHEEHY: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and
9 members of the council. For the record, my name is Steve
10 Sheehy, and I'm legal counsel at Sound Transit.
11 Mr. Mayor, with your permission, we want to really not
12 rebut or respond in great detail at this time. It might be
13 a better and more appropriate use of everyone's time if we
14 start diving into your questions. Along with the public
15 here, I'm sure you have questions. You have question of
16 your staff, and I'm sure you have questions of us. We want
17 to answer every one of those questions. I don't want to
18 take up a lot of time in rebuttal or response, but I do have
19 a couple very quick things I want to bring to your
20 attention. There's a couple housekeeping matters that I
21 want to just make sure the clerk and I are on the same page.
22 By my count, there were 37 exhibits added this evening.
23 CLERK: That's correct.
24 MAYOR MULLET: Most of those, Sound
25 Transit gave. Exhibit No. 36 is correspondence from the
97
1 Mr. and Mrs. Zaputil which we have not seen. And then I
2 believe Exhibit No. 37 is another document from Mr. Zaputil,
3 which we have not seen. I just want to make sure I know
4 that for the record.
5 LeAnne Bremer, the attorney for SPEEA, we've had a
6 number of conversations in the last few weeks, and I have
7 known her for many years. I have to just respectfully for
8 the record disagree with her interpretation of SEPA. I
9 concur with the city staff's interpretation. Their SEPA
10 analysis is correct. There are no mitigation measures
11 warranted for the SPEEA property under the noise and
12 vibration analysis. I just want to leave it at that.
13 If you have more questions on that, I'm happy to dive
14 into it in Q and A. Please don't take my word for it. Ask
15 your own city attorney and your own city staff.
16 We asked Rod Kempkes, who is one of our engineers he
17 is the segment line manager responsible for the Tukwila
18 segment to come and just take a minute to address a
19 couple of things about the 52nd Street questions. I'm sure
20 you'll have lots of questions on that. I'll answer every
21 one of them. But I wanted to just generally speak to the
22 52nd question and why the shift in the alignment occurred.
23 Mr. Zaputil also raised a question about the
24 correctness of the right -of -way survey. I asked him to
25 address that as well.
98
1 For the record, Mr. Kempkes is probably going to refer
2 to two documents which are in your record. The first is
3 Attachment E27, and that is a letter dated March 15 from
4 Mr. Wendle to Mr. and Mrs. Zaputil.
5 The second document is Attachment E23, which is a
6 letter from Mr. Kempkes to Zaputils dated February 12, 2004.
7 But again, we're going to be very, very brief. Rod is
8 committed to being brief. And we would dive into all your
9 questions. Thank you.
10 MR. KEMPKES: For the record, I'm Rod
11 Kempkes. I'm the line segment manager for the Tukwila
12 segment of the link light rail project.
13 Briefly, I'm going to describe to you why we changed
14 the alignment that has been the topic here this evening.
15 As Admad mentioned in his remarks, typically, on all of
16 our contracts for the whole project, at the 30 percent level
17 of design, we undertake an exercise called value
18 engineering. That is an exercise where we either bring in
19 an outside consultant or have our final design consultant
20 that we hired to carry the design to 100 percent take a
21 another look at the work that's been done up to that point,
22 ask questions, take a hard look at the design, look for ways
23 to improve the project, make it less costly, improve on the
24 schedule, reduce impacts and make recommendations.
25 Then Sound Transit staff reviews those recommendations,
99
1 analyzes them. And in order to adopt those recommendations,
2 we have a change control board that's composed of all our
3 lead managers, and they then vote on whether that change
4 should be carried °forward.
5 For the 52nd Avenue area, our final design consultants,
6 when they came on board, they looked at this area as part of
7 an overall effort to look at reducing costs and improving
8 this project. In the Tukwila segment, as we mentioned, one
9 of their recommendations was to go to the precast segmental
10 design, and we also looked at several areas along the line
11 to improve the overall operation of the system, reduce
12 travel time, reduce impacts, the reasons that we cited in
13 our review of the recommendations and why we went forward
14 with the change of 52nd Avenue.
15 We changed construction right -of -way activation costs,
16 costs that were estimated at that time at $1.8 million. We
17 increased train speed through that area from 35 miles an
18 hour to 40 miles per hour. We reduced the overall length of
19 the guideway in that area by 152 feet. We reduced the
20 overall height of some of the columns by adding 15 feet over
21 ten columns in that area. We eliminated the need for a
22 costly long -span structure over the Southcenter Boulevard
23 and First Avenue bridge. We avoided the acquisition of a
24 developable property which had been submitted for
25 development. We reduced impacts to wetlands to Gilliam
100
1 Creek, and lowered the height of the guideway by taking
2 advantage of the sloping screen up towards the hill on 51st,
3 and we changed the location of a large storm drain.
4 That was a summary of the changes.
5 The other issue that was brought up was the
6 right -of -way line on 52nd Avenue. This was recently pointed
7 out to us by Mr. Zaputil, and I can assure you that we will
8 look into that and do a survey and verify whether or not
9 those lines are accurate. Thank you.
10 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you. Is there any
11 rebuttal from any of the audience who spoke earlier? And
12 please keep it to rebuttal information.
13 MS. ZAPUTIL: My name is Vanessa
14 Zaputil.
15 Mr. Kempkes listed the savings in his value engineering
16 study. We provided a lot of our rebuttal statements many,
17 many times to Sound Transit. And what we did is, we
18 suggested an alternative route that is a slight modification
19 that realizes both aspects.
20 He said they reduced some construction and right -of -way
21 acquisition costs with savings of approximately
22 $1.7 million. Our proposed slight modification route
23 would realize actually we showed more savings. So that
24 was the largest savings would be going over the
25 52nd Avenue bridge. It was not to do with going down
1 01
1 52nd Avenue. 52nd Avenue at the time they did the value
2 engineering study, it actually added to the cost because
3 they were adding bent columns. So when the study was done
4 and that was quoted, 52nd Avenue cost more money as opposed
5 to going over the bridge.
6 The increased train speed from 35 to 40 miles per hour,
7 as Mr. Lorenzen pointed out already this evening, that had
8 to do with the new improved track system that has a bank,
9 et cetera, that's more. That's why they increased the train
10 speed. In fact, if you look at the original alignment
11 versus what they proposed, what they proposed is actually a
12 sharper curve. So you know, the engineer at the meeting
13 noted that too.
14 Our proposed overall length would have been reduced
15 also. We reduced our height of some columns, over 50 feet
16 over ten columns. Bringing it closer to the contour of the
17 hill on 52nd would have done the same thing which we were
18 proposing.
19 Eliminated the need for a costly long -span structure
20 near Southcenter Boulevard, we proposed something that would
21 have done the same thing. Avoided acquisition of
22 developable property permitted for development, we addressed
23 those issues. And we actual still feel it could possibly be
24 done.
25 Avoid the grove of trees that's near Southcenter
102
1 Boulevard and reduced impacts to wetland and Gilliam Creek,
2 we already addressed that fact by using columns instead of
3 cut and fill. Those impacts would have already been
4 mitigated by the way that they're mitigating it the whole
5 way along.
6 Lower the height level of track to the ground, ours
7 would do have done the same thing. Avoided relocation to
8 the storm drain, the same thing.
9 So in rebuttal, we let Sound Transit know this over and
10 over. And of course, they keep siting the original
11 30 percent alignment. And if you take just that, yes, what
12 they say is true. But we have shown that there is an
13 alternative, and that is very feasible. And we've shown
14 that to Sound Transit many times. Thank you.
15 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Vanessa.
16 Anybody else? Okay.
17 I have been told that we can close the public hearing
18 and ask questions, so I'm going to do that. At this point
19 in time, I'm going to close the Unclassified Use Permit,
20 Shoreline Variance and Design Review public hearing, and I'm
21 going to open it to council questions of anybody that you
22 want to ask questions of, staff, Sound Transit or anybody
23 else who gave testimony. Joe?
24 MR. DUFFIE: First of all, I really
25 appreciate all the information we received tonight. It's
103
1 been great, very appreciative and proud at the opportunity.
2 And what I hear is that Sound Transit and the city have
3 worked so good together. I'm very appreciative, because I
4 didn't think they was working together as close, but I was
5 surprised tonight.
6 One thing I want to ask Joan, I think she answered
7 now, I know the other council wants to ask questions too.
8 When people are ready to go from 154th to the airport, is it
9 a free ride?
10 MS. EARL: Yes.
11 MR. DUFFIE: For anybody? Do you have
12 to be if you have to have a ticket, how are you going
13 have to verify that?
14 MS. EARL: When passengers get on the
15 shuttle from the 154th Street station, they either have to
16 show that they have a light rail ticket or have a bus
17 transfer ticket to the operator on the train.
18 MR. DUFFIE: All right. That's all I
19 need to ask.
20 MAYOR MULLET: Joan?
21 MS. HERNANDEZ: Well, just I do have
22 a lot questions since I was taking notes, but I'm trying to
23 focus on what I was going to start with.
24 I know that in Exhibit D, we have an exhibit that's the
25 agreement with the Carosino Farmstead. And I wonder if,
104
1 based on some of the testimony we heard, if somebody could
2 tell me exactly what the status is of that piece of
3 property, and if it's going to be acquired, which I don't
4 believe it is now, because I believe someone said that it's
5 not necessary to acquire it. But if somebody could address
6 some of the concerns that that property owner expressed.
7 MS. CARTER: Which property?
8 MS. HERNANDEZ: Carosino. And will we
9 be needing to read and enter into the draft memorandum
10 agreement that we have in Exhibit D that's in our packet?
11 MR. STAUDINGER: My name is James
12 Staudinger. I'm with Sound Transit. I'm the real estate
13 manager.
14 We are currently negotiating with the Carosinos with
15 regard to a part of their property, and what we're trying to
16 do is deal with some of the issues that they have. Some of
17 the issues are temporarily blocking some access. There will
18 be an excess road at what we permanently probably will
19 close, and we're trying to deal with all of the Carosino
20 members with regard to all of their concerns with the part
21 take on the property. And it's no longer a full take. We
22 have made a offer to the Carosinos for a part take.
23 MS. HERNANDEZ: Will this require the
24 draft memorandum agreement to be signed that's Exhibit D in
25 our packet?
105
1 MR. STAUDINGER: I'm not sure what that
2 is.
3 MR. LANCASTER: This is Steve Lancaster.
4 Perhaps I can try to answer this. The draft I believe
5 it's called a Draft Programmatic Agreement that's in the
6 document. It was attached to the record of the decision
7 issued the Federal Transit Administration. And that was at
8 a time when the impacts of the light rail project were
9 expected to be severe with regard to historical nature of
10 the Carosino project.
11 I believe through project changes, that that's no
12 longer the case. The FTA is no longer requiring the
13 agreement. James Irish from Sound Transit can probably
14 provide more detail.
15 MR. IRISH: My name is James Irish. I'm
16 the environmental manager for the light rail program at
17 Sound Transit.
18 And basically what Steve said is correct, that we have
19 made some modifications to the project and done some
20 additional analysis. And the agency to our to make the
21 determination in terms of impacts to the historic farm which
22 is the state and the federal government, through that,
23 additional changes to the project and reanalysis have
24 determined that there is no longer a significant impact to
25 this historic farm. And the mitigation requirements that
106
1 are outlined are no longer required, so the agreement did
2 not go forward.
3 MS. HERNANDEZ: Thank you. I do have
4 other questions, but I'll be glad to let other people take,
5 their turn.
6 MAYOR MULLET: Okay. Jim?
7 MR. HAGGERTON: I have a question of
8 Rod. You said one thing you would pursue would be the
9 survey, and whether that one concern about encroachment on
10 the right -of -way, whether the survey was accurate.
11 How long would it take to get that information back?
12 Do you know?
13 MR. KEMPKES: My name is Rod Kempkes
14 again. I don't know exactly how long that will take. My
15 estimate would be a couple months at the outside. I think
16 it should be resolved before we need the building permit
17 from the city.
18 MR. HAGGERTON: Thank you.
19 MAYOR MULLET: Is that it, Jim?
20 MR. HAGGERTON: That's all I have.
21 MAYOR MULLET: Pam?
22 MS. CARTER: Okay. This is to our
23 staff.
24 We had several people that had concerns about the
25 placement of columns. And I really don't want to pretend
107
1 I'm an engineer. I understand the columns need to be a
2 certain distance apart. There's probably a little bit of
3 play there. Some of those, just to my untutored eye, look
4 like they aren't the most optimum placement there. It looks
5 like it could be a real problem as far as access.
6 Is that something that staff has looked at, the
7 geometric of getting a large truck, whether it's an
8 18- wheeler or not, in and out of the driveway there? Is
9 that something that you've examined to see?
10 MR. LANCASTER: I know that our public
11 works staff has looked pretty closely at the column
12 placements, and they have made some suggestions with regard
13 to those. I'm going to ask either Brian Shelton or
14 Jim Morrow can respond.
15 MS. CARTER: Is it possible that, if we
16 were to choose to approve this, that adjustment could be
17 made so that it worked better for property owners or
18 residents.
19 MR. MORROW: For the record, I'm
20 Jim Morrow, director of public works.
21 We are at the 90 percent stage for the design of the
22 transit way itself. With regard to the column in question,
23 it is being reviewed now with Sound Transit as to its exact
24 location, can it or can it not be moved?
25 But in addition to that, we do include as part of the
108
1 design the turning radiuses of the vehicles that would need
2 to enter and exit out of the particular property, so that is
3 taken into consideration by Sound Transit when they locate
4 the columns and provide the design.
5 MS. CARTER: Okay. That answers the
6 question whether that's taken in. And you also, I think,
7 answered whether small amounts of change can happen, if
8 necessary, because you had several people mention concerns
9 about columns.
10 I had another question that maybe Sound Transit
11 answered better. The undergrounding of the utilities, we
12 understand that Sound Transit undergrounds the utilities in
13 the right -of -way. But what about the concern one person had
14 as far as from the edge of their property to their building?
15 MS. EARL: Yes. That is Joni Earl, for the
16 record. That is at Sound Transit expense, so that is
17 something that we have responsibility for.
18 MS. CARTER: Very good. Never mind. I
19 won't ask that. I'm not going to get into that.
20 The sound wall in some places and not in others, can we
21 tell by looking on any of those maps there? The council
22 didn't really have a chance to look at those things, because
23 we stayed out of the room during the open house before the
24 meeting, and so we haven't had a formal time to look closely
25 at some of these exhibits.
109
1 MR. IRISH: James Irish for the record.
2 Yes, the sound walls are indicated on this map. I can
3 point them out to you if you'd like.
4 MS. CARTER: Yes. That would be
5 helpful.
6 MR. IRISH: Sure. The first sound wall
7 is actually adjacent to the park- and -ride along here.
8 That's mitigated from the park- and -ride bus traffic to the
9 apartments adjacent.
10 There's also a sound wall on the elevated guideway.
11 It's about three and a half feet high, which is the same
12 height as the railing on the guideway. I'll just point to
13 the there's about four locations around the corridor
14 where those are located.
15 The first one is right here just to the south end of
16 the east side park- and -ride, which extends great, thank
17 you. The first one starts again east of the park- and -ride.
18 It extends along the elevated guideway just east of
19 42nd Avenue to mitigate impact to these apartments along
20 here.
21 The second noise wall is right here down by the Park
22 Place Apartments, again parallels or follows the guideway
23 along Southcenter Boulevard to just down here in this area.
24 There is a sound wall that is from just about in front of
25 the SPEEA building in front of the Zaputil property because
110
1 of the noise impacts to the residents here. And there's one
2 other one that's kind of hard for you to see, but it's down
3 by the Macadam Road. It's on the ground actually on top of
4 the retaining wall about eight feet high. It's protecting a
5 number of homes that are down in that area.
6 MS. CARTER: This is for staff. Is that
7 the far west area down there?
8 MR. IRISH: I'm not sure what you mean.
9 MS. CARTER: I'm trying to orient it
10 this way.
11 MR. IRISH: It's along 599. It's 128th.
12 MS. CARTER: Which doesn't mean much to
13 me which is why I was asking staff that knows the names.
14 MR. IRISH: Across the river from the
15 community center.
16 MS. CARTER: Okay.
17 MS. LINDNER: It's north of far west.
18 MR. LANCASTER: If it helps the council,
19 there is a report in the materials behind Attachment G15,
20 and it has drawings that show in a heavily dashed line the
21 location of all the sound walls.
22 MS. CARTER: And I tried looking at
23 that, and I wasn't sure the color helped me a whole lot
24 better than the dashed lines.
25 MR. LANCASTER: That's why I colored
111
1 mine in.
2 MS. CARTER: Do you want to color mine
3 too? Okay.
4 And I'm assuming that the sound walls are not simply
5 being made where it's near residential properties. You make
6 the decision as a result of noise studies.
7 MR. IRISH: That's correct. We use the
8 Federal Transit Administration criteria, because that
9 criteria is focused specifically on transit and rail
10 projects. And we use their methodology for analysis and
11 their criteria threshold that's based on what the existing
12 noise levels are and then adding in the train noise to come
13 up with a new noise level to determine whether it exceeds
14 that threshold or not. If it does, then you need
15 mitigation.
16 MS. CARTER: We've had people concerned
17 I'm going to address that later.
18 Also about noise, are you planning to do any nighttime
19 construction?
20 MR. IRISH: I believe not, but I'm
21 probably not the best person to answer that. I think the
22 construction hours are until 10:00 at night, according to
23 the noise ordinance of the city.
24 MS. CARTER: Because I seem to have read
25 that in Seattle you're going to be doing construction at
112
1 night, I thought.
2 MR. IRISH: In Seattle, we are primarily
3 because we have tunnels and other types of construction that
4 require you to continuously keep going at nighttime. It's
5 primarily for the tunnel on Beacon Hill.
6 MS. CARTER: Okay. And can you point
7 out where the at -grade fencing is, where it's going to be at
8 grade? And if there's fencing there.
9 MR. IRISH: I'll let Rod handle that.
10 MR. KEMPKES: Rod Kempkes, line segment
11 manager for the record.
12 All the sections of the Tukwila alignment that are at
13 grade are adjacent to WS -DOT freeway, and there will be both
14 a fence on the freeway side and on the adjacent property
15 side. So basically, from when you transition from the
16 elevated guideways to the at -grade sections, there will be
17 no access that can be gained to the guideway from the
18 adjacent property.
19 MS. CARTER: Is that where the dark blue
20 is there?
21 MR. KEMPKES: The dark blue is the
22 at -grade segment.
23 MS. LINDNER: Can you give the street
24 numbers so we can have a reference?
25 MR. KEMPKES: The section along I -5
113
1 going from south to north starts just south of 146th Street.
2 And then it's underneath the 144th overpass and a couple
3 hundred feet north of 144th Street along Macadam Road.
4 MS. LINDNER: 124th?
5 MR. KEMPKES: 144th. The next section
6 runs from 136th street to just south of 47th Avenue South.
7 And the last section runs from Macadam Road to 599 to the
8 south boundary of the Group Health property.
9 MS. CARTER: I'll ask one more. Then
10 I'll let other people ask, although I still have others.
11 What conditions are in the design for extension to the
12 airport? Is it simply that the station design allows for
13 the track to continue on through, and that's all you have to
14 do for that? Is that basically it?
15 MR. KEMPKES: I can answer that
16 question.
17 What we've done is, this section of the alignment here
18 on 518, we've made sure that the geometry is such that, if
19 we ever want to go to put in a spur there, that it won't
20 preclude a
21 MS. CARTER: He was probably answering.
22 That was going to be my next question. You were asked the
23 second question that I hadn't asked first, so that's fine.
24 Continue with that. Then answer the first question.
25 MR. KEMPKES: For the airport, we can
114
1 just extend off the end of the station.
2 MS. CARTER: That's what I figured.
3 MR. KEMPKES: We've got the elevation
4 high enough, and we've actually done a preliminary design to
5 locate columns to span International Boulevard.
6 MS. CARTER: So then you're answering on
7 the other, which is that up in that area of the region where
8 you can run a spur, the geometrics allow for that. Okay.
9 Thank you.
10 MS. LINDNER: I still want to get a
11 better clarification on why the sound wall was removed
12 between Macadam and a hundred and I mean I -5, because I
13 know that area fairly well, and I know the homes are right
14 on top of the freeway as it is. I can't imagine how you
15 wouldn't have a sound wall when you add more noise.
16 MR. IRISH: The final design noise
17 analysis that has been filed with the city indicates that
18 there are 25 buildings that would be impacted by noise where
19 they exceed the criteria. After looking at identifying
20 those impacts, we looked at what's the most appropriate way
21 to mitigate those impacts.
22 And when we looked at this issue back in 2001 when we
23 did the EIS, we believed that we could mitigate all the
24 impacts with walls along this side of the project. When we
25 did the final design noise report, based on the final design
115
1 of the project, we found that nine of the buildings would
2 require a noise wall that would be unreasonable.
3 And the reason it would be unreasonable is two -fold.
4 First, the noise wall would have to be over seven feet high
5 instead of three and a half feet high, a noise wall that you
6 typically do on the guideway. The guideway itself is only
7 at seven and a half feet deep when you're looking at it from
8 the side. And if you add another seven -foot sound wall,
9 it's an additional element.
10 The second reason is we looked at the cost
11 effectiveness of those noise walls. And essentially the
12 cost to mitigate these nine buildings would have been five
13 times more than typically you would spend on mitigating
14 noise impacts for each residential unit. A typical number
15 that's used by the state DOT, Sound Transit uses their
16 general guideline of about $30,000 to $40,000 per
17 residential unit for noise mitigation.
18 The seven -foot noise walls would be mitigated impacts
19 to homes and building that were fairly isolated. They're
20 not connected to a lot of other residences, so the cost of
21 those noise walls again, they would be over seven feet
22 high, and they would be in the order of $150,000 per unit.
23 According to Sound Transit policy, that's not a reasonable
24 level of expenditure for mitigating a single impact.
25 So we are providing mitigation to these buildings. The
116
1 mitigation will be in the form of residential sound
2 insulation. The way that program works is to monitor the
3 sound levels currently at each building interior level, and
4 then we will cgme up with ways to modify the structure
5 typically adding double -pane windows, replacing doors,
6 providing an air exchange so that in the summer or air
7 conditioners so that in the summer you may not have to open
8 the windows. And we would develop a program for each
9 individual building that would reduce the sound levels to a
10 lower threshold for the interior of each building.
11 So that's the reason why both Mr. Lorenzen and eight
12 other buildings would not receive the sound walls, but they
13 would receive the insulation.
14 MS. LINDER: I do understand that. I've
15 seen maps for SeaTac Airport, and I have heard the same
16 logic. And it is true. But I also know when you go
17 outside, you actually can't go outside because it's just
18 unbearable. So it seems like there would be a compensation.
19 I don't know how you would address that. But obviously
20 their property is worth less money. And I don't want to get
21 into it too much, but it is I mean if you can't have a
22 sound wall, even if you insulate their property.
23 MR. IRISH: You're correct. The
24 mitigation for sound insulation is for the building itself.
25 One thing I could add in terms of just general
117
1 understanding of light rail noise to provide some
2 perspective here, first off, the noise levels along almost
3 the entire route is relatively high simply because we're
4 next to the freeway. So you have the traffic from the
5 freeway already increasing the noise level beyond a typical
6 residential neighborhood.
7 The way the FTA criteria works is, when you have an
8 existing condition with high noise levels, the train is not
9 allowed to add almost any more noise. As soon as you add
10 anything, you're basically into a mitigation.
11 The noise level, for instance, at Mr. Lorenzen's
12 property would increase by one decibel over the existent
13 condition. That's a very moderate impact. Many transit
14 agencies would not do anything about that. We feel like
15 we're going the extra step to go ahead and provide some
16 mitigation.
17 The other thing I wanted to mention, just for people to
18 understand the noise from light rail, a typical light rail
19 train has the same noise level as a large UPS delivery
20 truck. It's a lower noise level than a diesel bus. And so
21 it's very similar to the types of noise from the level of
22 noise that comes from traffic on the street. It's not a
23 freight train. Sometimes people get the wrong impression.
24 If you ever go down to Portland and Tacoma, take a
25 listen to how loud the trains are. It's actually quieter
118
1 than people imagine. That's just some context. I cannot
2 speak to the property issues.
3 MS. LINDNER: Two other things that I
4 can, at least, throw out and see if somebody could answer
5 them.
6 One was, I'm pleased about the fire truck. I can't
7 quite imagine what the fire truck looks like with a 100 -foot
8 platform. I don't know what that is. So my question is,
9 where do we put it?
10 MAYOR MULLET: You had to ask.
11 MS. LINDNER: I can't imagine what it
12 is. So without that, I'm thinking, hum, where should I
13 stick this thing.
14 MR. OLIVAS: For the record, Nick
15 Olivas, fire chief.
16 Essentially, the vehicle that you spoke of is a
17 replacement for our current aerial platform, so it's just
18 the same as that we have now. It is a 100 -foot aerial with
19 a platform on the end,
20 MS. LINDNER: Thank you very much. One
21 more quick one.
22 In response to what Hal Cooper had said earlier, at the
23 30 percent, it looked like we did have an easy way to go to
24 Southcenter, which is an urban center, or to head east. And
25 now at 90 percent, is that really closed off making it more
119
1 difficult? How will that be addressed when we eventually go
2 to Southcenter? I don't see everybody nodding. Is
3 everybody nodding? Is it going to go to Southcenter? Or
4 maybe you can explain why it won't work now, and then we'll
5 take
6 MR. COOPER: It isn't that it won't
7 work. What I propose will work better, because it's closer
8 to Southcenter. You'll have a direct alignment where you'll
9 be further away, and you will probably have to take more
10 property than at the southern end of 51st Avenue if you
11 don't use my approach.
12 Now, the one thing, as I have said earlier, in Sound
13 Transit's decision from the value engineering, again, if
14 they were only to look at getting from Seattle to Sea -Tac,
15 they're right. I would agree with that. But if we're
16 looking at the longer term picture in the future, we really
17 need to keep it on the freeway all the way. It will have a
18 sharper curve, but we've got to build a wide structure over
19 the freeway anyway. Mine will be shorter when you look at
20 the cost for the long -term. When you look at the cost for
21 the entire project, it will be more.
22 MS. LINDNER: Can we get somebody from
23 Sound Transit to respond to that?
24 MR. FAZEL: For the record, my name is a
25 Admad Fazel with Sound Transit.
120
1 As Rod had previously mentioned, we have not precluded
2 the opportunity to have a junction that would go to
3 Southcenter. We specifically looked at the design and made
4 sure that that opportunity is not precluded. It's not
5 exactly the way that the previous speaker talked about it,
6 but that opportunity is there.
7 MS. LINDNER: Okay.
8 MAYOR MULLET: Dennis?
9 MR. ROBERTSON: As we continue on with
10 the same question, I'm having a hard time envisioning, when
11 you talk about a Y, if we're coming from the 154th station
12 going east, would there be a Y then just before you get to
13 I -5 that would go to the Southcenter?
14 MR. FAZEL: Yes. There is going to be a
15 Y that's going to go. And the design has not been
16 precluded, but that extension needs to be added in the
17 future time.
18 MR. ROBERTSON: Okay. I'm sorry.
19 Continue.
20 MR. FAZEL: The design that we have to
21 accommodate the extension is going to Southcenter.
22 MR. ROBERTSON: So we're not discussing
23 the extension coming from the north coming down 1 -5. That
24 would still just continue on the curb to the west. Is that
25 correct? All right.
121
1 MS. LINDNER: Mr. Cooper?
2 MR. ROBERTSON: Let's ask Mr. Cooper why
3 he disagreed.
.4 MR. COOPER: Because the distance for
5 the entire track is like you've got this, theirs is going to
6 require, when you build it, much longer. Mine is much
7 shorter. It's all concentrated right there together. In
8 other words, it's going to be the more cost for the
9 long -term, because there's going to be less track required.
10 MR. ROBERTSON: If we were going to go
11 to Southcenter, it would still be the same street, the same
12 basic track coming from 154th?
13 MR. COOPER: Again, if I -5 is here, the
14 thing is, it's longer. And I think that's why they're
15 and it's going to take more time, and you're going to have a
16 sharper curve. Great. That's if you only go to Sea -Tac.
17 But if you're going to Southcenter, you're going this
18 way, because it's more direct. Otherwise you have to go
19 down this way, and you'll probably take more of these
20 properties here. And my thought is, you don't need to do
21 that under my plan.
22 MR. ROBERTSON: Would Sound Transit
23 eventually actually get to Southcenter from the north also,
24 not just from the west? Both ways?
25 MR. COOPER: This is probably a question
122
1 that hasn't really been looked into in any great detail, as
2 far as I know. I only did it because I was asked to. And I
3 wrote a rather extensive report about that section of the
4 alignment and the access to Southcenter including the cost
5 analysis. You need to come to the north in my opinion.
6 Sound Transit can speak for itself. I'll just speak for
7 myself. You need to. In fact, it is a travesty of this
8 project that it doesn't serve Southcenter now.
9 And there's another point I think you need to address.
10 And that is what's going to be our long -term access to the
11 east side, including to the airport. Because once we have
12 factored that into the equation, you need to do what I
13 suggested.
14 MR. ROBERTSON: Thank you, Mr. Cooper.
15 MR. COOPER: There's one other point.
16 Sometime in the future, we may need to look at rail access
17 other than light rail to the airport, commuter or innercity
18 passengers. That's a whole different story. I wrote a
19 report to the City of Tukwila on that issue also.
20 MR. ROBERTSON: Are those reports
21 available?
22 MR. LANCASTER: They are available.
23 They're in the record. I don't have them with me tonight in
24 the packet.
25 MR. ROBERTSON: Okay. Thank you.
123
1 MS. EARL: Could I add something to that
2 question?
3 Sound Transit Joni Earl for the record.
4 Sound Transit, the City of Tukwila, City of Sea -Tac
5 we're working on a study right now that's looking at the
6 connection between Southcenter. This came out of all this
7 discussion two years ago. There was just a technical
8 advisory committee last week. Larry McGhee is our project
9 leader on that if you want more detail.
10 But I want to make sure you're aware that we're in the
11 process of looking at that broader area between the airport
12 and the Tukwila station and Southcenter to see what's the
13 best way to establish a route, so we've been very clear
14 about making sure that the design does not preclude the
15 opportunity to service Southcenter. And in this other
16 study, we're looking at the best way to do that, so you're
17 aware that that study was going on.
18 MR. ROBERTSON: Thank you.
19 MAYOR MULLET: You had one more.
20 MR. ROBERTSON: I have a whole bunch
21 more. Thank you.
22 MS. EARL: Thank you.
23 MR. ROBERTSON: Vanessa, can I ask you a
24 question? You mentioned that you had provided Sound Transit
25 with an alternative route.
124
1 MS. ZAPUTIL: Yes. I have actually
2 provided in May of 2003 when they first told us that this
3 route had changed at a community meeting, it was our first
4 opportunity as the public to fee the new route. We met
5 with I think it was Ken Newholtz, I think, was the man's
6 name, the engineer of Sound Transit we met up at the
7 community meeting. We showed him on the map at that point
8 how this could be accomplished and maintained in a
9 residential -free route. And after talking to them for a
10 month, we officially submitted that in November. And in
11 fact, we talked to them again in August.
12 MR. ROBERTSON: Do we have a copy of
13 that?
14 MS. ZAPUTIL: Yes. It's in your packet
15 at some point. I'm sorry. It's probably two or three times
16 in the packet.
17 MR. ROBERTSON: Thank you very much.
18 MS. CARTER: At least twice.
19 MR. ROBERTSON: I have another one
20 before I give up my turn.
21 MR. KENYON: Mayor Mullet, I would just
22 like to interrupt for just a minute. I would ask for
23 Mr. Robertson's indulgence.
24 Just a suggestion I have is that it might make some
25 sense to temporarily suspend the council's questioning on
125
1 the application at this point and take up the public hearing
2 on the Transit Way Agreement, because we've got some people
3 who, I suspect, want to testify and probably want to go home
4 .at. some point. And then we can certainly pick back up. If
5 we can get that public hearing open and closed this evening,
6 then the citizens that have been here all night won't have
7 to come back.
8 MR. ROBERTSON: It's really nice to have
9 all these people here.
10 MAYOR MULLET: Is that agreeable to the
11 council?
12 MR. DUFFIE: That's agreeable.
13 MS. HERNANDEZ: That's agreeable to me.
14 I wanted to point out something that I have wanted I may
15 have maybe I should have pointed out before we closed the
16 first public hearing, was that I think we were all given a
17 packet of information this evening that I'm not sure whether
18 it was entered as an exhibit or not. So you've taken care
19 of that for us? Good.
20 MAYOR MULLET: Has this letter from the
21 League of Women Voters also been included?
22 CLERK: Yes.
23 MR. HAGGERTON: Several things came in
24 at the last minute.
25 MAYOR MULLET: So the staff will make
126
1 sure that all parties get copies of all that. If we can put
2 aside our questions for a minute, let's go onto Item B,
3 which is the proposed ordinance authorizing the mayor to
4 execute a excuse me. This is legislative, so it's not
5 quasi judicial. We don't have to swear anybody in for this.
6 Mr. Morrow will start us off.
7 MR. MORROW: For the record, I'm
8 Jim Morrow, the director of public works. I would ask that
9 the council direct your attention please to the packet
10 starting on Page 30.
11 You've heard this evening about the project itself.
12 What you have before you is a proposed Development and
13 Transit Way Agreement that lays out the specifics as to how
14 we're actually going to accomplish the budget itself.
15 The city owns and operates city streets and other
16 infrastructural improvements within the city boundaries
17 where Sound Transit proposes certain transit improvements.
18 The city holds these streets and rights -of -way in trust for
19 the convenience of public travel and has the responsibility
20 of ensuring public safety and their welfare when these
21 streets and rights -of -way are used.
22 Approximately 30 percent of what has been addressed
23 this evening falls within that category. And so what has
24 been of primary importance to city staff and Sound Transit
25 staff have been three things: One, the public safety itself
127
1 when using the roadways, improving pedestrian access that we
2 have to the facilities, and the third aspect is minimizing
3 the impacts of the project itself.
4 The proposed construction of this project has given
5 rise to many engineering challenges. Sound Transit and city
6 staff have attempted to address those challenges. This
7 proposed agreement deals with several specifics, and it also
8 deals with overall concepts and principals that will be
9 followed throughout the construction period. Some of these,
10 I would hope, that the council recognizes, because you have
11 implemented them before with regards to telecommunication
12 companies that wanted to occupy our rights -of -way. We have
13 continued with those policy decisions that the council has
14 put forth in the past with regards to that.
15 I would ask that and I just want to address, first
16 of all, several of the issues that are contained within the
17 proposed agreement. One has to do with straddle bents, and
18 that is addressed in Section 3 of the agreement.
19 Mr. Kempkes showed you a picture this evening with
20 regards to just what a straddle bent was. We have tried to
21 eliminate those wherever possible such that we would lower
22 the risk with regards to the clear zone associated with a
23 street and also reduce the impact along the project way
24 itself by getting rid of the two columns in the associated
25 beam.
128
1 There is another aspect dealt with in the agreement,
2 and it has to do with vesting, and that is dealt with in
3 Section 6.1. The project will be governed by our TMC
4 provisions that exist on September 7, 2004. So in other
5 words, from this day on, they will be held by whatever
6 provisions, rules, codes, laws that we have in existence
7 today.
8 The guideway columns specifically along Southcenter
9 Boulevard and I would ask in Section 8.1A of the
10 agreement this has been one of the most difficult
11 sections of the guideway to address with regards to
12 engineering challenges. We have had a limited amount of
13 right -of -way. We are impinged by State Route 518 such that
14 Sound Transit and the city have struggled as to where to put
15 the columns, because we want to minimize any sort of risk
16 associated with travel along Southcenter Boulevard.
17 Also, once the columns are constructed, the City of
18 Tukwila is forever bound by their location. In other words,
19 the city will be limited in what roadway improvements can be
20 made or anticipated to Southcenter Boulevard.
21 The third aspect of it is, as was mentioned earlier by
22 Sound Transit, we wanted to provide the greatest pedestrian
23 access we could along that major route leading to the
24 station itself, so we have laid out in that section just
25 exactly what will happen with the improvements to
129
1 Southcenter Boulevard, because when we're in regards of
2 doing the construction themselves along that boulevard,
3 we're going to tear up the roadway. We're going to
4 underground utilities. We're going to be placing columns.
5 So it was decided between Sound Transit staff and city
6 staff that we would make the improvements as the city had
7 anticipated for the future along Southcenter Boulevard at
8 this time.
9 While we're speaking of construction impacts, we
10 addressed those in Section 8.1B of the agreement. Yes, we
11 know that some routes will be used for construction access
12 within the city, but there are several locations where
13 construction activity, trucks, vehicles of all sorts may be
14 used. We do not know specifically what the impacts will be
15 along those routes. So we have put in here a provision that
16 we will at a minimum videotape the roadways associated with
17 those potential construction routes to benchmark today the
18 condition of the roadway.
19 Upon completion of the project, we've come back, we
20 will inspect all of those roadways, we will compare with the
21 benchmarks and see what, if any, damages have occurred. If
22 they are over and above what we could normally expect
23 through daily usage, then Sound Transit will make
24 restoration for those roadways.
25 We have talked about the fire and police mitigations
130
1 that are included specifically in the agreement, and that is
2 addressed under Section 8.1C of the agreement. There are
3 city -owned properties currently today that will be required
4 to be vacated in order to assist with the construction of
5 the project. Those street vacations will be initiated by
6 the city itself. Sound Transit will cooperate associated
7 with it. We will follow our normal procedures for street
8 vacations that are covered in our TMC 11.60.
9 The construction of the 154th Street station is dealt
10 with, how we will do that, under Section 11.1. Sound
11 Transit will apply for and obtain approval from the building
12 official for a building permit to construction the station,
13 including the two park- and -ride facilities associated with
14 it.
15 Construction of all remaining light rail transit
16 facilities is dealt with in Section 11.2. This will be
17 handled under what we know here as a right -of -way
18 construction permit that will be issued by the department of
19 public works.
20 We have addressed on occasion this evening relocation
21 of the utilities during the construction. Any utilities
22 that need to be relocated as a result of the construction of
23 the guideway shall be relocated at Sound Transit's expense.
24 Restoration of the public right -of -way, under
25 Section 11.12, if the public right -of -way is disturbed or
131
1 damaged during construction of the guideway, Sound Transit
2 has agreed to promptly repair the damage.
3 An important section, entry into the public
4 right -of -way, after construction, once the construction
5 project, this is exactly the same approach that we take all
6 of the telecommunications or any other facility that has
7 permission from the city to use its public right -of -way.
8 Sound Transit will apply for a separate permit and how it
9 will work is through public works. If they have to come
10 into the public right -of -way for normal maintenance or
11 repair operations, they will notify us as to where they are
12 working. That will be covered under this separate permit
13 that they have.
14 MR. DUFFIE: Mr. Mayor, excuse me for
15 interrupting. It's now approaching the hour of 11:00. We
16 have to have a motion to exceed the hour of the meeting.
17 MAYOR MULLET: You're absolutely right.
18 We have four more minutes. I don't think we're going to
19 finish in four minutes. Would you like to make that motion?
20 MR. DUFFIE: I make a motion that we
21 continue the meeting for the next two hours.
22 MAYOR MULLET: You're out of order,
23 Mr. Duffie.
24 MR. DUFFIE: I'll make a motion for the
25 next hour. May we continue for an hour?
132
1 MR. ROBERTSON: I'll second the motion.
2 MAYOR MULLET: Moved and seconded to
3 continue the meeting, if needed, until midnight.
4 MR. DUFFIE: Okay.
5 MAYOR MULLET: All in favor say aye.
6 (All say aye.)
7 MAYOR MULLET: Opposed? Unfortunately
8 that carried.
9 MR. MORROW: With that subtle guidance,
10 I will speed up.
11 One last item, one unique feature in the agreement, and
12 that is the dispute resolution, and that's covered under
13 Section 26 of this agreement.
14 There are three levels that have established. Level 1
15 would be Sound Transit's project manager or resident
16 engineer shall work with the city planning supervisor, the
17 building officials, the fire marshal, or the city engineer
18 to resolve. If we had unable to resolve the issue at
19 Level 1, we would go to level 2, which would then involve
20 Sound Transit's director of link light rail working with
21 either the director of community development or the director
22 of public works. If we are unable to resolve it at that
23 level, it would go to the third level which would then
24 involve Sound Transit's executive director and the city
25 administrator.
133
1 So with that, that is what we have before you is the
2 proposed agreement and the associated ordinance that would
3 authorize the mayor to sign that agreement. And I would
4 invite any questions that you might have.
5 MAYOR MULLET: Okay. I need to open the
6 public hearing officially at this point in time on this
7 issue. Thank you for the staff report, Jim. And we'll do
8 at that time. Did you have questions you wanted to ask of
9 Jim before we
10 MR. FENTON: One question I have for
11 you, Jim, is are you going to use the same type of logic
12 that you had in the past when Sound Transit starts opening
13 up the street, that you're going to contact Qwest or whoever
14 else that might have pipes in that street? Or what were you
15 thinking about long -term whatever, that they better get in
16 the street now and put in whatever they want to put in
17 during
18 MR. MORROW: Yes, sir. One of the first
19 things we're working with now is that undergrounding
20 contract and permit associated permit where Sound Transit
21 and Seattle City Light will be taking a considerable amount
22 of overhead lines and putting them underground. But yes,
23 every other utility that could be impacted will be contacted
24 during that.
25 MAYOR MULLET: Dennis?
134
1 MR. ROBERTSON: Jim, there's a section
2 on fire and police mitigation, but there's nothing on public
3 works. Will there increased ongoing costs due to the
4 guideway and the station to public works?
5 MR. MORROW: There will be some
6 additional surface water maintenance for the public system.
7 There would be some additional landscaping maintenance
8 required. But Sound Transit and the city have tried to work
9 out exactly what Sound Transit will be responsible for in
10 those landscaping meetings and what the city would be
11 responsible for.
12 But yes, because there is additional public
13 infrastructure like additional sidewalks, that there will be
14 some impact to the city.
15 MR. ROBERTSON: What about surface
16 water, the pond, things like that? Who is going to be
17 responsible for those?
18 MR. MORROW: Sound Transit will be
19 responsible for maintaining those ponds.
20 MR. ROBERTSON: In perpetuity?
21 MR. MORROW: Yes, sir.
22 MR. ROBERTSON: Thank you.
23 MAYOR MULLET: Any other questions of
24 staff? Jim, thanks.
25 Sound Transit, did you have any comments on this?
135
1 MR. SHEEHY: Thank you, Mr. Mayor,
2 members of the council. Steve Sheehy again, just two points
3 real brief.
4 I just want to clarify for the record that everything
5 that Sound Transit provided in the testimony on the three
6 Land Use Permits will be transferred over to this bucket as
7 well, so that's the basis for our support.
8 The second thing is, just to make it very crystal
9 clear, we're 100 percent in support of Mr. Morrow's staff
10 report and the recommendations of this agreement together
11 with the Land Use Permit be approved.
12 Thank you very much.
13 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Steve. I
14 would remind you, the audience, as I told you earlier, if
15 you testified in the first hearing, your first testimony, if
16 it's pertinent to this issue, will be transferred over. And
17 with that in mind, is there anybody in the audience who had
18 something additional specific to this issue that would like
19 to testify now? Vanessa?
20 MS. ZAPUTIL: Vanessa Zaputil. I would
21 also like all of our information transferred over.
22 As Mr. Morrow just mentioned, that once the columns are
23 constructed in the City of Tukwila, they are bound by the
24 limits. The right -of -way is bound by the limits. Once
25 they're there, it's not going to be moved. So we have to
136
1 make sure that the columns are located where we really need
2 the columns.
3 And for example, on 52nd Avenue South, we show an old
4 diagram of the area that shows that the first two lots which
5 were originally zoned commercial when we built, it shows
6 initially an 80 -foot right -of -way which is an 80 -foot road.
7 When it got to the Parkridge building, it narrowed down to a
8 60 -foot right -of -way, because at that point it was known to
9 be low density residential. So there was support for the
10 site initially that, as in many commercial areas, the road
11 would need to grow or at least utilize the fullest of its
12 60 feet.
13 Where we are now, it's quite a small road. And it's
14 not a stretch of the imagination to see in the future that
15 the road will need to be improved. It will need to, at
16 least, be brought up to a regular road size, and we really
17 to need to iron out where that right -of -way is, where the
18 centerline of that road is. We've already contended that
19 centerline of the road is five feet from the east curb right
20 now, which is ten foot further to the east than what Sound
21 Transit has right now proposed.
22 Sound Transit staff a year ago, or a little more than a
23 year ago, did show it where we're saying it is, so we do
24 have documentation that shows that also. Like I said, we
25 really need to iron this out. It's really important to the
137
1 52nd Avenue right -of -way, and so it's now estimated that it
2 would take two months to find the centerline of 52nd Avenue
3 South. If it's going to take two months to find the center
4 of the road, I guess we °just have to wait. It sounds like
5 they're not really ready for the freeway agreement if they
6 can't really find out where it is right now. And I think we
7 have to wait and see where they find it and where the city
8 surveys finds it. All of our properties show where it is,
9 and it just looks like they're not quite ready yet.
10 We have to make sure that the language in the agreement
11 definitely enforces all of the city's best interest, and we
12 just really have to slow down. Let's not just make keep
13 going just for minimizing delays. We have to make sure this
14 is right. Council is only going to make this decision once,
15 and we have to make sure it's right for everyone.
16 Thank you.
17 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Vanessa.
18 Anybody else?
19 MR. GRIFFIN: I'd like to my name is
20 Mike Griffin. I'd like to address the problems semi -truck
21 drivers have coming up our road.
22 And it seems like four or five truck drivers,
23 18- wheelers, come right up 52nd right around my house, stop
24 right here and come down.
25 Now, Sound Transit addressed the problem? You have a
138
1 column in front of SPEEA. Is the truck driver going to be
2 able to get around that? They're not even supposed to be up
3 that road. What if they hit the column? Is there enough
A° room for an 18- wheeler to come up and go around that column?
5 And what I want to know is, are we going to stop 18- wheelers
6 from coming up 52nd when they hit the columns?
7 MAYOR MULLET: It may solve the problem.
8 We'll find out.
9 MR. GRIFFIN: We're going to have to put
10 some more signs up, because if they hit one of those
11 columns
12 MAYOR MULLET: We'll find that out.
13 Thank you.
14 MR. GRIFFIN: Okay.
15 MAYOR MULLET: Anybody else? Okay. I'm
16 going to close this public hearing then. Roger? You almost
17 missed out.
18 MR. LORENZEN: I was just not familiar
19 with the process.
20 My name is Roger Lorenzen, and I would like to give
21 this paper to the council. This is from Sound Transit, and
22 it is talking about the RSIP program. This was a letter
23 that we received that really did not impress us very much at
24 all. I'm read a slight portion of it to the crowd.
25 "Although you are slated to receive our RSIP, we cannot
139
1 specify the exact improvements you will receive at this
2 time. We will be able to give you a better idea of the
3 improvements anticipated after conducting some additional
4 analysis of your home. We'll look the age of your home, the
5 general condition, the proximity to the light rail track and
6 other factors to determine the measures needed to ensure
7 that noise impacts are reduced. We have completed noise
8 testing in the Rainier Valley and Tukwila and will not be
9 doing further testing until we or the contact for the
10 program."
11 Another quick portion is, a question, "What kind of
12 improvements to my home can I expect? The type and
13 magnitude of improvement vary from house to house, mostly
14 insulation, simply consists of upgrades to the windows and
15 doors and walls insulation. The level of these improvements
16 will be the minimum required to ensure that noise levels for
17 the proposed project are within the HUD noise level
18 requirements."
19 I'm still trying to measure how we're going to have a
20 monochromatic color experience at the station, yet we still
21 are going to not have any sound protection in our entire
22 neighborhood.
23 MAYOR MULLET: Thank you, Roger.
24 Anybody else? All right. I'm going to officially close
25 this public hearing, and we'll go back to council questions.
140
1 Dennis, I think we were at you.
2 MR. ROBERTSON: I have a significant
3 concern on public security.
4 We have a fire and police mitigation basically that
5 deals with fire equipment and security cameras. I think
6 recent events in the world last week concerns all of us on
7 public security. Tukwila right now is at the Southcenter
8 and the industrial property we have, but those are
9 tax paying properties, so we have the ability to actually
10 raise different kinds of fees and taxes if necessary for
11 public security.
12 I'm kind of concerned, because this agreement seems
13 very, very weak on ongoing costs. What are I would just
14 like to I see nothing that talks about a security plan
15 either for the guideway itself and the cars running on it or
16 the station. And the fire truck is nice, but the fire
17 trucks don't do anything other than cost a heck of a lot of
18 money to maintain and replace.
19 So from both the police and fire, I've got any number
20 of questions, because there's nothing here other than a
21 simple paragraph. And I looked at the actual agreement
22 itself, and it merely says that the mayor can excuse future
23 agreements in some kind of a letter. So other than
24 concerns, I don't know anything.
25 MR. LINTON: For the record, my name is
141
1 Sergeant Bruce Linton with the Tukwila Police Department.
2 The Tukwila Police Department is represented as part of
3 a regional security task force which could comprised of the
4 following agencies impacted Jy light rail Seattle Police
5 Department, King County Metro, King County Police Department
6 and SeaTac Police Department.
7 Part of our charter is to develop procedures for
8 responding to incidents associated with the light rail.
9 Specifically within Tukwila, with the guideway, the elevated
10 guideway and the 154th station, we have ongoing meetings
11 that deal and to come with these procedures. And as those
12 meetings are ongoing, we will deal with any issues that come
13 about.
14 Hamid Qaasin from Sound Transit is a part of that
15 committee, and he can also advise you on any issues that we
16 will be undertaking.
17 MR. ROBERTSON: The question is, is the
18 process and procedures you guys develop to deal with both
19 the station and the guideway, especially the guideway, which
20 it's a very different situation, if the process needs
21 additional money this is for a regional facility how
22 do we pay for it? Who do we get is there anything in the
23 plan? I see nothing.
24 MR. LINTON: Are you asking about the
25 additional officers or fire fighters?
142
1 MR. ROBERTSON: Yes, training, equipment
2 other than security cameras. You guys are currently
3 together 65 percent of the city's budget roughly.
4 MR. LINTON: The training has been
5 addressed as part of the letter of concurrence. Sound
6 Transit has provided funding for officers from the Tukwila
7 Police Department to undergo training over the next three
8 years. And they have addressed that issue as far as
9 training to deal with emergencies on light rail. That is
10 part of the concurrent letters. I'm not sure if it's in the
11 packet or not.
12 MS. LINDNER: They pay for the training?
13 MR. LINTON: Pay for training of
14 emergency responders, i.e., SWAT officers that are part of
15 the Tukwila Police Department, various outside agencies that
16 require specific training dealing with light rail issues.
17 MR. LANCASTER: For the record, the
18 police concurrent letter is Attachment G5 in your packet,
19 and the fire concurrent letter is Attachment G6.
20 MR. LINTON: The discussion of funding
21 to the police department for the police officers and police
22 staff has not been addressed during our meetings as of yet.
23 Again, the meeting are early in the stages.
24 MR. ROBERTSON: This mostly deals
25 well, with fire this mostly deals G5 mostly deals with
143
1 equipment. And I don't see anything in there on staffing
2 costs. Did I miss something?
3 MR. OLIVAS: For the record, Nick
4 Olivas, fire chief.
5 No, the agreement simply covers the replacement of the
6 aerial ladder and replacement of existing equipment to the
7 tune of $1.5 million.
8 MR. ROBERTSON: Hydrant locations and
9 stuff like that?
10 MR. OLIVAS: The issue of staffing was
11 not raised, because the impact is going to be what we
12 foresee at the station because of Sound Transit policies and
13 procedures with regard to incidents on the train. For
14 example, if they have somebody experience a heart attack or
15 something along those lines, the train proceeds to the
16 nearest station rather than stop on the guideway, so most of
17 the impacts we will see or can foresee will occur at the
18 station. And because of fire protection that's built into
19 the station, the impacts will be minor.
20 We don't have a history right now of how many
21 additional aid calls there will be or false alarms, so at
22 this point we don't know the severity of the impacts.
23 MR. ROBERTSON: Let's all assume that
24 the system is terribly successful. And Tacoma's experience
25 is magnified by what we're talking about. That's all that
144
1 we hope for. So we see instead of 5,000 riders, we see
2 10,000 at our station and the incidents double. Are we
3 going to see an increase in the emergency calls or aid or
4 anything else at the guideway or the station that are going
5 to require us to change our staffing?
6 MR. OLIVAS: I'm sure that we'll see an
7 increase in the volume of calls. But at this time I'm not
8 prepared to say whether that will require a need for
9 staffing or not.
10 MR. ROBERTSON: If we do, three years
11 from now, five years from now, what recourse do we have? Do
12 we have any ability to recoup the cost?
13 MR. LANCASTER: Under the agreement that
14 we have attempted to negotiate, there's nothing in these for
15 adding staffing in any of the departments, police, fire,
16 public works, community development. I think at the staff
17 level, we considered this project similar to an awful lot of
18 other public projects that go on from highway and street
19 improvement projects to other public projects that do
20 increase the amount of people who come in and out of Tukwila
21 and do increase the workload on staff. There's no question
22 about it.
23 MAYOR MULLET: I think we have somebody
24 from Sound Transit that wants to speak.
25 MR. QAASIN: I am Hamid Qaasin. I'm
145
1 with Sound Transit, and I'm on the committee that works with
2 the safety committee, police and fire, and I'd like to
3 address your question.
4 First of all, I've seen the exhibits that Bruce Linton
5 referred you to. We have a comprehensive security task
6 force that meets twice a month. KC Sheriff and the KC Metro
7 will provide security for the rapid system, and this will be
8 addressed by them, although there may be some minor impact
9 within the system. We're meeting now to develop a plan for
10 that. We don't foresee in drastic increase. We have our
11 own security forces we have that provide security at Sound
12 Transit. They will be on our trains at our stations. We
13 have them now on the commuter train for the Sounder. We
14 also have a KC Metro Sheriff on the trains if we have a
15 security issue through King County Metro.
16 In regards to the fire issue, if you were to review
17 light rail instances across the country, the light rail
18 properties typically don't have fires, and they don't have
19 very much response to the fire department. And our primary
20 objective here was to make sure that we had the ability to
21 respond at any point on the guideway if there was a
22 significant issue requiring rescue. That's why we need the
23 equipment.
24 That's what Chief Olivas mentioned, $1.5 million for
25 the fire truck and equipment. Some equipment contains 200
146
1 backboards and rescue equipment in case there's a major
2 catastrophe that may or not affect our light rail system, so
3 we require quite a bit of equipment to sustain those
4 incidents.. An incident on the guideway is very rare on
5 light rail properties in the U.S. We're all elevated in
6 Tukwila, so most incidents you have on the light rail
7 property usually involve a grade that you don't have here.
8 Does that address the question? Thank you.
9 MR. ROBERTSON: It stimulates the
10 question, if something changes, what I think I understand
11 is, we have no legal recourse to go back and say it's
12 costing us a lot more money to provide fire service. Is
13 that correct?
14 MR. KENYON: I think that's a fair
15 statement. But also similar to what Steve Lancaster said,
16 it's common and typical of other large projects. The
17 recourse that the council does have, however and I guess
18 I'll just lay it out on the table is first we would work
19 with Mr. Qaasin and under Sound Transit give him the data,
20 indicate it would be in their best interest as well as ours
21 to increase the level of security they provide. If they
22 don't, then it's within the police chief's discretion and
23 the council in their discretion to reallocate our own police
24 and fire resources. We've got plenty of leverage if the
25 data bears out the fact that additional resources are
147
1 required.
2 MR. ROBERTSON: Thank you. One last
3 round on that, on that truck. That's a million and a half
4 dollars worth of equipment, I think. It's a one -time
5 capital purchase. I'm beginning to realize that Christmas
6 presents like that cost a lot of ongoing costs. The
7 assumption is that that's a city cost from now on to
8 maintain and to replace that, because what's the life on a
9 truck, ten years, twelve?
10 MR. OLIVAS: Twelve, if we're lucky.
11 Ten is more realistic for that type of apparatus, the weight
12 and its use, and then five years as reserve. That's really
13 reasonable. We're getting some extended life out of the one
14 we have now, but that's about it.
15 MR. ROBERTSON: Does the fact that
16 there's no ongoing maintenance cost included in this, is
17 that part of the reason we're getting the entire truck paid
18 for? Or are we just
19 MR. OLIVAS: No, I wouldn't say that.
20 The genesis of the truck is actually quite a long story,
21 which I'd be happy to do a Reader Digest version if you'd
22 like.
23 However, maintenance costs for the apparatus were
24 discussed in negotiations, as well as replacements, ten
25 years and other aspects. And I will defer response to our
148
1 city attorney with regard to those issues, because they were
2 not included by Sound Transit as being part of
3 maintenance was not included. Replacement down the road was
4 not included. Contributions towards replacement in the
5 future, that was an aspect of the equipment. I'll let Mike
6 talk about that.
7 MR. KENYON: Well, this is not as much
8 as we would have liked, but it's a heck of a lot more than
9 what was initially offered.
10 MAYOR MULLET: Is that it, Dennis?
11 MR. ROBERTSON: For the moment.
12 MAYOR MULLET: David?
13 MR. FENTON: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
14 Before with Mr. Kenyon cut off all the questioning,
15 sometimes when you're last on the sheet here at the end of
16 the table, a lot of my colleagues have asked a lot of
17 questions. But I do have a few questions. This is kind of
18 a long -range question.
19 I was intrigued by two things. First, I was intrigued
20 by Julia Patterson's comments regarding the Port of Seattle
21 and how the airport was you guys were working diligently
22 with the airport to try to get a station at the airport, and
23 so on and so forth.
24 Then I was intrigued with the City of SeaTac assistant
25 city manager who also said that he was they were excited
149
1 about the ongoing opportunities that Sound Transit presented
2 and also about getting the station to the airport. My
3 long -range question is this.
4 Ten years or fifteen years down the road; when there is
5 a station at the airport, of what use is the station at
6 154th?
7 MS. EARL: The station at 154th, we're
8 showing under our traffic modeling, is going to have about
9 5,000 boardings. So whether you're at I don't know I
10 don't think the staff can tell if there's much of a
11 reduction once we go to the airport. But every stop that
12 you have, you have access to get more people on the system.
13 A lot of people think about the airport as being just
14 the traveling public. The airport is a huge employment
15 center. So you really have people in the area around here,
16 this is where that the bus hub is at the South 154th Street
17 station. So King County Metro reallocated some routes.
18 They're going to truncate some routes, so there's your
19 multimodal station.
20 And the airport station is another station, but you're
21 not going to be bringing in buses. You're not likely to
22 have bicycles and other access there. So we think they
23 actually complement each other, because of the way the
24 public is going to be traveling back and forth between who
25 comes in at 154th and who comes in at the airport station.
150
1 You're going to see a lot of employees that come and go
2 right through the 154th Street station and will obviously go
3 on to the airport where they will have a shuttle bus now.
4 But the ridersJip is pretty strong at the board stations
5 under our modeling.
6 MR. FENTON: Thank you.
7 MAYOR MULLET: Joan, you had a couple
8 questions. Did you have a few more question?
9 MS HERNANDEZ: Most of these got
10 answered. I'm getting too tired to think about what
11 questions I had.
12 I guess maybe the city attorney could clarify for me,
13 what is the extent of the council's authority when it comes
14 to determining whether we feel like some of the adverse
15 impacts are inadequately mitigated?
16 MR. KENYON: I want to make sure we're
17 talking just in a generic sense.
18 MS. HERNANDEZ: We have heard different
19 things about sound walls and
20 MR. KENYON: I don't intend my answer to
21 be a detailed analysis of SEPA versus other forms of
22 mitigation. But just in a general sense, the city council
23 retains the ability to impose conditions that are reasonably
24 related to a public problem when that problem is
25 exacerbated, at least in part, by the Sound Transit
151
1 proposal.
2 There are, of course, some exceptions that we talked
3 about at the beginning at 7:30 or so, and that is we have
4 very, very little say, if any, on the actual siting of this
5 facility. With respect to the rest of the impacts that it
6 generates, to the extent that the council feels maybe have
7 not been addressed by the EDP conditions or the other
8 mitigations imposed by the federal government and by the
9 transit agreement, that's certainly fair for the discussion,
10 and we'll give you our best analysis whether those are
11 issues that would fly.
12 MS. HERNANDEZ: Thank you.
13 MAYOR MULLET: Dennis.
14 MR. ROBERTSON: Then if I understand, I
15 think I heard that, while we cannot change the siting, we
16 can deal with the impacts caused by the siting by the
17 current siting. Is that correct?
18 MR. KENYON: I think that's fair to say.
19 And again, I want to make it clear, we think we've done that
20 in all these documents. But if there's a question the
21 council wants to address that has been raised by public
22 comment, that's fair for consideration.
23 MAYOR MULLET: Ms. Carter.
24 MS. CARTER: Okay. Ms. Earl mentioned
25 the Metro bus service, and I'd like an explanation of what
152
1 bus service we know will be going to the station, because
2 the other I feel it's somewhat speculative as far as the
3 route, because I know there isn't the money.
4 And Jack is going to explain this maybe. And I know
5 he's somewhat constrained because Sound Transit is dependent
6 upon sales tax and receipts which have not been as robust
7 for the last couple of years.
8 MR. LAPPENANN: For the record, I'm
9 Jack Lappenann. I'm the lead service planner for King
10 County Metro.
11 And I've been involved the last, I guess, about four
12 yeas in planning for this station. We've worked very
13 closely with Sound Transit and city staff to plan a station,
14 especially the bus facility aspects, that could accommodate
15 a variety of service configurations.
16 And if we're planning transit access to the station, we
17 want to improve access from the general area and enable
18 people to get to this light rail system by bus, not just by
19 driving or walking. We want to just generally improve the
20 service levels that we're providing in the area. Sometimes
21 that takes more resources. Sometimes you can get part of
22 that through redeployment of resources by, say, not taking
23 all bus routes to downtown Seattle.
24 We want to improve passenger travel times where that
25 makes sense. We don't want to incur transfers that increase
153
1 people's travel time. We want the transfer to make sense,
2 but we want to do it in a way that overall improves people's
3 travel time.
4 Now, we did design a bus network for the station. It
5 was what we call a sample network. At the time you know,
6 we did this in 1999 to 2002, so that was prior to the
7 recession impact on our sales tax revenues. And those have
8 been slow to recover, as Councilmember Carter has pointed
9 out.
10 However, we still five years away. We're very much
11 committed to providing access to the station from the areas
12 that are logical to provide. For example, Burien from the
13 west, the Southcenter and Tukwila commuter rail stations and
14 Renton to the east, the entire International Boulevard
15 corridor as far north as Federal Way we think that is a
16 natural station and there are areas to the north.
17 There's a neighborhood of SeaTac that needs to be connected
18 as well as Boulevard Park, Sodo, and then, of course, in
19 downtown Seattle there would be some local bus service. So
20 we see all these connections as making sense.
21 Now, how much in the way of resources are we going to
22 have? Our current revenue projections only go out three
23 years. We're still five years away. And at least part of
24 this can come from redeployment. What we're going to be
25 able to provide will be according to our resources as they
154
1 will exist in 2009. And we'll do more detailed planning
2 over the next two years. We'll set up a sounding board for
3 about three years away. From setting up the community
4 sounding board, we'll look at alternatives for connecting up
5 the station. And in that time, we do the detailed planning
6 work, we have better budget projections, et cetera. So we
7 have a better idea three years from now about the range of
8 possibilities we can provide.
9 There will definitely be some changes to the bus
10 centers. We may not have the complete network on day one,
11 but we will have, at least, part of it. It may take more
12 resources, but we have not done enough technical work to
13 establish how much more that would be. But we're committed
14 to making the connection to the station work.
15 MS. CARTER: And in the priorities,
16 where does redeployment serve? In the nature of a station
17 like this, where does that go? The priorities, where does
18 that fit in?
19 MR. LAPPENANN: We are guided by a
20 motion of the King County Council passed at the time they
21 adopted a current six -year plan a couple years ago, and that
22 policy calls for redeployable resources to be available to
23 the entire subareas, so it wouldn't necessarily all go, say,
24 to feeding the 154th Street. We have to look at other
25 priorities.
155
1 Now, serving the regional corridor, the Sound Transit
2 regional light rail corridor is one of the priorities that
3 was listed in that policy. But it does not direct us to put
4° all the resources that may be freed up through restructuring
5 into that corridor. It calls on us to look at other
6 priorities in this case within the South King County
7 subarea. So that's a policy the King County Council has
8 adopted, and that's our redeployable policy, and that was
9 adopted with Sound Transit in mind.
10 MS. CARTER: So I would characterize it
11 as saying it's a goal, but it's anyone's guess as to how
12 achievable that goal is in the future.
13 MR. LAPPENANN: Certainly the opening of
14 this light rail line is going to be an important transit
15 event. It's going to dominant our planning for a two- to
16 three -year period, so it will be one of several important
17 priorities that King County Metro will face. I don't think
18 we're completely in the dark about how we'd like to
19 connection this station. We have a sample network.
20 As I pointed out, it's not the only way we can design
21 the transit network, and that's where we have the community
22 sounding boards set up to make sure that we sift through the
23 alternatives so we give them public review. And some
24 alternatives cost more than others, so we have a number of
25 variables here.
156
1 We're confident that we can provide some services to
2 the station when it opens. It may not be the complete
3 network or a complete service level. But that's part of
4 what we've laid out, and we think we can do that.
5 MS. CARTER: It's a problem when it's so
6 distance from the redeployment center, but that was the only
7 question I had. I'll let someone else ask a question.
8 MR. ROBERTSON: I'd like to ask, the
9 154th Street station, you talked in terms of 5,000
10 boardings. What are the theoretical boardings as of right
11 now?
12 MS. EARL: Are you asking the capacity?
13 MR. ROBERTSON: Yes.
14 MS. EARL: We don't know off the top of
15 our head.
16 MR. ROBERTSON: Let me explain what I'm
17 want.
18 If it turns out to be if it moves forward with other
19 transportation improvements, and that may be the case, then
20 suddenly over the three or four or five years after the
21 system is up and running you may see 10,000 people wanting
22 to board the system there because that may be the only way
23 they get to work, so then I see that has two impacts on it.
24 One, as far as people trying to find a place to park if
25 their only access or only major access is a vehicle, their
157
1 own automobile. And I didn't see it as one of the
2 mitigations or one of the solutions of increased bus service
3 proposed. I saw all kinds of ways to stop people from
4 parking where they shouldn't park, but I didn't see anything
5 that talked about giving them an alternative, and that's
6 really what you provide. But I didn't hear the words I
7 wanted to hear, that you guys would meet the needs. You
8 didn't say that.
9 MR. LAPPENANN: And I don't think I can,
10 because we have an interesting budget situation. Our sales
11 tax revenues are below what was projected three or four
12 years when we put together this plan. Now, that is a
13 concern, I know, of our management and the county executive
14 and members of the council as part of the whole discussion
15 about what additional packages are needed to complement the
16 Sound Transit investment that we're making.
17 And in terms of a facility, with the facility's size,
18 it certainly can accommodate more than the initial numbers
19 of people. We can accommodate at least six bus routes.
20 We've worked very closely with the staff of both the city
21 and Sound Transit to make sure that we had a facility that
22 was flexible enough to not just cover this scenario that we
23 laid out as one possibility, but that we could accommodate
24 more than that.
25 So we think we have a facility that can accommodate
158
1 that. What we don't have certainty on is initially how much
2 service we can provide, and I think they're exactly right.
3 There is some relationship between in this location
4 park- and -ride demands and the availability of commuter bus
5 service. So you think you hit one of the nails on the head
6 in terms of it's important to provide a convenient enough
7 level of service that people who can take the bus and will
8 take the bus. Some people that are beyond the range of the
9 bus service for various reasons that it doesn't meet their
10 needs, they'll be the park- and riders. But I think the
11 point is, we shouldn't shove people into the park- and -ride
12 mode when there's a possibility of getting them on the bus.
13 So I would personally visit that.
14 MR. ROBERTSON: I have a question for
15 Steve Lancaster.
16 What can we at the city do if that situation arises? I
17 counted three I did some rough math, and I can see 300
18 buses a day coming in there if we hit 10,000 people. And
19 transportation is not getting better in the region. There's
20 nothing positive on the board that shows we're going to
21 solve the problem.
22 MR. LANCASTER: I guess the best way I
23 can respond to that is by telling you first that I spent a
24 lot of time in the last year reviewing the forecast of
25 ridership and of people's needs to access this station in
159
1 preparation for making the parking determination that was
2 made by July lst. And the models that were used by Sound
3 Transit and were peer reviewed by our consultants do take
4 into consideration the likelihood of increased congestion on
5 the highways in terms of how it predicts people will try to
6 divert from that highway system to the light rail system and
7 the bus system, and also due to that congestion how many
8 people will attempt to use buses to get access to the light
9 rail system.
10 So you asked a hypothetical question, what happens
11 if and I guess the way I would phrase that, what happens
12 if those projects with wildly wrong, and if those forecasts
13 are wildly wrong. Then yes, we're going to have a problem.
14 But I don't see the reason to believe those forecasts are
15 wildly wrong. I think they're the best that Sound Transit
16 could come up with and confirm for the most part by our peer
17 review.
18 Specifically, to answer your question, the only real
19 relief valve in that is the parking determination which
20 requires simply the expansion of parking under certain
21 circumstances, but does not require anything with regard to
22 funding additional bus service.
23 MR. ROBERTSON: If the viaduct is torn
24 down after this system is complete, I could see that as
25 because of a failure of some type because of construction
160
1 there. I could see that bridge is one obvious reason why
2 the estimate might be wildly wrong. Did you guys consider
3 that?
4 MR. LANCASTER: Frankly, no, at least
5 not to my knowledge. I certainly didn't consider it and
6 wasn't aware it was being considered in the forecast.
7 MR. ROBERTSON: I don't know how else
8 you could get to the north side of the city.
9 MR. LANCASTER: And I think if the
10 viaduct is closed down, the effects of that are going to be
11 felt a lot more wildly than just in Tukwila obviously.
12 MAYOR MULLET: Okay. Anybody getting
13 tired yet?
14 MS. CARTER: A couple of things on the
15 design of the station.
16 The pedestrian crossings in the parking lot are
17 supposed to be raised, I believe, so that they're more
18 obvious to driver. Was it going to be just raised asphalt,
19 or were you looking at a different surface material?
20 MR. BALL: For the record, I'm Greg
21 Ball. I'm the architectural project manager for the 154th
22 Street station.
23 The raised walkway is aligned with the north -south
24 pedestrian route from 154th Street. When David presented
25 the plans that he referred to, the stairway and the ramp on
161
1 South 154th, that connection has a flush walkway. It's
2 basically at the level of the sidewalk and continues right
3 through and connects to the opposite sidewalk.
4 So Rod, if you could point it out
5 MS. CARTER: I thought there was
6 something in here about a raised sidewalk.
7 MR. BALL: It's raised at the point
8 where it crosses the vehicular route.
9 MS. CARTER: That's what I was talking,
10 yes.
11 MR. BALL: And that material is scored
12 concrete, so it different from the asphalt adjacent to it.
13 MS. CARTER: Because just scored asphalt
14 isn't real obvious.
15 MR. BALL: Scored concrete.
16 MS. CARTER: Just raised asphalt doesn't
17 do much so that the concrete will
18 MR. BALL: It provides a visual contrast
19 to the asphalt.
20 MS. CARTER: Thank you. That helps.
21 And the design of the station, there was talk about the
22 north side is glass on the mezzanine level. The south
23 side the south side is glass on the mezzanine level, and
24 on the north side it's open. Did I have that correct?
25 And then up on the station, the light rail station
162
1 level, is that open on both sides and it's simply a roof
2 over it?
3 MR. BALL: Do I have to reintroduce
4 myself for the record, or can I just
5 The first question has to do with the mezzanine level.
6 And on this side, which faces north, it's not considered to
7 be the weather side of the building. The prevailing winds
8 are coming from this side. So wind driven rain is going to
9 enter the station above the platform and the mezzanine level
10 from this side. So we thought it was prudent to provide a
11 full wind screen at the mezzanine and also at the platform
12 level through the full length of the platform.
13 On the north side, the concern is, particularly for the
14 mezzanine, it's tucked well underneath the station, so we
15 think it's already got a good level of weather protection.
16 So the wind screens are not real high. They terminate at
17 guideway height. At the platform, which is this level here,
18 it's continued on that side as well. So at the platform,
19 you've got a continuous wind screen as well as the roof for
20 the full length of the platform.
21 MS. CARTER: So on the north side, it's
22 rail height?
23 MR. BALL: On the mezzanine.
24 MS. CARTER: On the platform?
25 MR. BALL: No, the full height on the
163
1 platform.
2 MS. CARTER: Oh, the full height on the
3 platform?
4 MR. BALL: Both sides.
5 MS. CARTER: So it doesn't go up to the
6 roof level, but what is full height for me it's five
7 foot, but it may be different for someone else.
8 MR. BALL: The wind screens are nine
9 feet high
10 MAYOR MULLET: We don't have many people
11 taller than that in Tukwila.
12 MR. BALL: to the roof, so there's no
13 opportunity for the rain to come in on this side.
14 MS. CARTER: Okay. I'm glad I asked
15 you, because I had some wrong assumptions.
16 It was also mentioned that the artwork had a regional
17 flavor. Is the artwork in the Seattle station, is it
18 pertinent to Seattle? Or is the flavor of the station
19 regional?
20 MS. LINDNER: Let's pick somebody.
21 MS. EARL: I think it's a little bit of
22 both. I think the same way here I think the discussion
23 was hazelnut. That was for this our other stations have
24 a combination of that. And I think this one has been
25 through the Tukwila Art Commission.
164
1 MS. CARTER: What I've read of the
2 stations in Seattle there, the specific community or
3 location is the theme of their artwork, so I'm wondering why
4 both were Seattle specific, and Tukwila is regional.
5 MS. EARL: We can come back and give you
6 a better answer on that.
7 MS. CARTER: I have asked this before
8 and have never gotten an answer, other than what was just
9 thought to be regional for Tukwila, and I think that's
10 extremely disrespectful of Tukwila.
11 MR. BALL: Just to add to what Joni
12 said, there are three major pieces of art at this station.
13 I would say that, out of the three, that there are two that
14 are distinctly local in flavor.
15 When David presented the station, he explained the
16 hazelnut was a local reference, and the drop of water or
17 drop of moisture was also a local reference tied in, I
18 think, to the rivers and just the general climate of
19 Tukwila.
20 The regional reference is the molecule that David
21 referred to earlier. You can see it in the central image,
22 the second one down. That image isn't fully developed yet.
23 It is a molecule in its flavor. As we mentioned, it brings
24 in icons that are Tukwila -based and also regionally- based.
25 It's kind of placing Tukwila within the larger region. It's
165
1 indicating that you're arriving at a place that has local
2 favor but is also connected to a much larger region.
3 MS. CARTER: I'd also like an answer to
4 the question, if the art at the Seattle station was all
5 connected to the region, if we've been cut out of this
6 because of the legality of this as quasi judicial but before
7 this ever started, I asked and I was told, "We never thought
8 about that."
9 MS. EARL: We'll get back to you.
10 MAYOR MULLET: Ms. Lindner?
11 MS. LINDNER: I'm pretty sure what you
12 were trying to say that the molecule will show that Tukwila
13 is the center of the universe. Is that what you were trying
14 to say?
15 MR. BALL: Not exactly.
16 MAYOR MULLET: I think you should take
17 the hint.
18 MS. LINDNER: Take that back with you.
19 MR. ROBERTSON: Why, on the guideway,
20 why can't the trees that don't grow, all of them, 50 feet or
21 30 feet or whatever is appropriate for that section, be
22 planted? Why is there a clear surface under it? Ten -foot
23 cliff? Is there a security reason? Is it a obviously
24 you don't want trees interfering with your train cars, but
25 what about at ground level?
166
1 MR. KEMPKES: Rod Kempkes, for the
2 record.
3 We have established a standard for our guideway that
4 will allow our crews to do maintenance and prevent hazardous
5 trees from falling on the guideway. The standard is that,
6 in the clear zone that will extend from the bottom of the
7 guideway down five feet and outward from the centerline of
8 each track from the guideway 14 feet, so within that
9 envelope, we will not allow any trees to be planted, but we
10 would reserve the right to trim them or remove them within
11 that envelope.
12 MR. ROBERTSON: So at ground level, if
13 it's a 50 -foot high guideway, trees wouldn't be planted.
14 MR. BALL: They couldn't be planted on
15 the guideway, that's right.
16 MR. ROBERTSON: Especially if the
17 guideway isn't located in the street.
18 MR. BALL: Correct. We tried not to do
19 that.
20 MR. ROBERTSON: Thank you. Thank you.
21 MAYOR MULLET: Any other questions from
22 council? Are we going to finish this up by midnight?
23 (Discussion off the record.)
24
25 MS. CARTER: I would suggest that we
167
1 postpone our discussion to another meeting, which I would
2 prefer Monday rather than tomorrow night since we don't have
3 to take testimony if we have asked all the questions we can
4 think of. But we need time to think about and look at some
5 of the exhibits for next time. I would have said, after
6 this meeting, I don't feel like hanging around after the
7 meeting.
8 MS. KENYON: Council, you understand you're
9 free to ask questions of your staff when you reconvene on
10 Monday as well. I suspect there will be a Sound Transit
11 contingent to provide additional information as well. You
12 can't go outside the record, but you can certainly say,
13 look, I've reviewed Exhibit G, and here's what I want to
14 know about it.
15 MR. FENTON: So we're not strapped by
16 the quasi judicial aspect of it?
17 MR. KENYON: You are. You still
18 couldn't go and share your view or talk about this outside
19 of your reconvened meeting.
20 MR. FENTON: But we can discuss it with
21 staff?
22 MR. KENYON: Well, do it here at the
23 reconvened meeting.
24 MS. CARTER: So I can't call up Steve
25 Lancaster tomorrow and say, what about this, I don't
168
1 understand? I have to wait until we reconvene, correct?
2 MR. KENYON: If it's what about this, I
3 didn't understand, you can call Steve Lancaster. You're
4 entitled to rely on your staff. If you want to talk about
5 alternatives or to debate some of the issues, then I would
6 encourage you strongly to wait until Monday. But in order
7 to provide some clarification, answer some questions
8 MS. CARTER: I can talk to him then, but
9 I couldn't argue with him. He doesn't like it anyway.
10 MR. KENYON: If there are some
11 questions, get it to Steve or Jack in advance by voice mail
12 or e -mail.
13 MS. CARTER: But I shouldn't contact
14 Sound Transit with questions. I should go through our
15 staff?
16 MR. KENYON: They are not your staff.
17 They are the project proponent.
18 MAYOR MULLET: The consensus is we'll
19 take this up again on Monday. And we'll have some further
20 discussion. And then we'll either have a special meeting or
21 continue it on at our regular monthly meeting. All right.
22 Are we dispensing with reports tonight?
23 MR. DUFFIE: I move that we adjourn.
24 MS. HERNANDEZ: Second.
25 MAYOR MULLET: Moved and seconded to
169
1 adjourn. All in favor say aye.
2 (All say aye)
3 MAYOR MULLET: Any opposed? Thank you.
4
5 (Meeting adjourned at
6 11:55 p.m.)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
170
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
171
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
STATE OF WASHINGTON I, J. Gayle Hays, CCR, RPR,
ss CCR 1964, a duly authorized
COUNTY OF KING Notary Public in and for the State
Of Washington, residing at
Renton, do hereby
certify:
That the foregoing hearing was taken before me and
completed on September 7, 2004, and thereafter was
transcribed under my direction; that the transcript is a
full, true and complete transcription of the testimony of
said witness, including all questions, answers, objections,
motions and exceptions;
That the witnesses, before examination, were duly
sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth;
That I am not a relative, employee, attorney or
council of any party to this action or relative or employee
of any such attorney or council and that I am not
financially interested in the said action or the outcome
thereof;
That I am herewith securely sealing the said
transcript and promptly delivering the same to the City of
Tukwila.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
and affixed my official seal September 9, 2004.
J. Gayle Hays, CCR, Notary
Public in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
Renton.