Land Use Discipline Report

Duportail Street Bridge Project Benton County, Washington

Prepared by:

Federal Highway Administration 711 South Capitol Way, Suite 501 Olympia, WA 98501

Washington State Department of Transportation P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909

March, 2011

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

Acronyms

B-C Business Commerce BFCG Benton-Franklin Council of Governments CID Columbia Irrigation District C-B Limited Business DPS Distinct Population Segment FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NOS Natural Open Space PPF Parks and Public Facilities R-1-12 Single-family Residential R-3 Multiple family residential RCTP Richland Citywide Transportation Plan ROW Right of Way SAO Sensitive Areas Ordinance SAG Suburban Agriculture SEPA State Environmental Policy Act SR State Route TMP Traffic Management Plan WDFW Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

Executive Summary

This report includes an analysis of how the Proposed Action compared to the No Build Alternative would affect current and planned land uses and an evaluation of consistency with existing city and regional land use plans and development regulations. The Duportail Street Bridge Project is consistent with, and would assist in implementing, goals and objectives found in the applicable land use plans and regulations. Construction and operation of this project would be compatible with planned development in the study area. The Proposed Action is designed to improve mobility within the City of Richland, as well as improve emergency vehicle response times and mobility for non-motorized uses.

The existing Duportail Street is bisected by the Yakima River, resulting in two roads named Duportail Street that dead end on each side of the river. The intersection of Duportail Street and Queensgate Drive (project origin) is surrounded by new commercial and retail development. Moving north along Duportail Street, a mobile home park is located along the east side of the street, and the west side of the street is vacant land and areas for recreational use. Duportail Street picks up again on the north side of the Yakima River, and is lined on both sides by apartment complexes to its intersection with State Route 240. North of State Route 240, single family residences lie on either side of Duportail Street to the project terminus, approximately at the intersection of Duportail Street and Birch Avenue.

The existing southern portion of Duportail Street is a 4-lane road, with a center turn lane, as well as curb, gutter and sidewalks (along the western roadside as well as along the eastern roadside adjacent to the mobile home park). The existing northern portion of Duportail is a 2-lane roadway with left-hand turn lanes (at its intersection with State Route 240), curbs, gutter and sidewalks. City View Drive is an unimproved, 2-lane gravel roadway. Riverstone Drive is a 2- lane roadway with incomplete sidewalks, curb and gutter to the south and shoulders to the north. State Route 240 is a 6-lane roadway with left-hand turn lanes and shoulders. The intersection of State Route 240 and Duportail Street is signalized and a single-track railroad line crosses Duportail Street approximately 75 feet south of the State Route-240 intersection.

The project involves the construction of a four-lane bridge between the existing Duportail Street on the south-west side of the Yakima River, to Duportail Street on the north-east side of the river. In addition, intersection improvements at State Route 240 and Duportail Street will be included, as well as a new roadway (Tanglewood Drive) on the north side of the proposed bridge will be constructed to connect the existing land uses to Duportail Street. A stormwater detention pond, and a new water main, will be constructed. The current Columbia Irrigation Canal drainage will be piped under the proposed bridge. The proposed project is located within the legal geographic area of: Township 09 North, Range 28 East, Sections 15 and 16, Benton County, Washington. Existing land use along the project corridor consists of primarily natural open space, multi-family residential, and a few businesses. See the Vicinity Map; Figure 1 on page 5.

The Duportail Street Bridge Project study area is located between two residential neighborhoods, and would span the Yakima River. The study area includes a mix of residential, recreational and business uses. Over the past few years, there has been significant growth in on the southwest

iii

side of the Yakima River (Queensgate area), currently, only three ways to access the southwest side of Richland exist, two of which require driving considerable distance away from the area to the crossing, and then back to the area after crossing. A major purpose of the Proposed Action is to increase mobility for the residents and businesses in the area, thereby increasing viability for those land uses.

The city of Richland is bounded by the Columbia River to the east, State Route 240 to the west, Hanford Site to the north, and Interstate-182 to the south. These features limit the access to and from the central part of Richland where there are only four connection points to and from the area. The south end of the city contains two choke points in which 75,000 vehicles per day pass through. The first choke point is at Aaron Drive, a feeder street to Interstate-182, and the second choke point is at George Washington Way, a feeder street to Aaron Drive. See Figure 1, Vicinity Map on page 5. The cars getting caught in the choke points are making their way from the city center to the Queensgate neighborhood on the southwest side of the Yakima River. Only two roads intersect State Route 240 between the existing crossings at State Route 224 and Interstate- 182 to allow for an additional crossing of the Yakima River, Swift Boulevard, and Duportail Street. Duportail Street is directly across from the Queensgate neighborhood.

The guidance in Chapter 450 of the Washington State Department of Transportation Environmental Procedures Manual was used to evaluate the potential land use effects in the study area. The project team compared the existing land uses with the Proposed Action to determine if there would be any changes to land use. The Proposed Action was also compared with the plans and regulations to determine if the Proposed Action would be compatible.

The project team collected and reviewed regional and local plans, regulations, and maps from the City of Richland to identify the existing and potential future land uses within the study area, and to evaluate the Proposed Action’s relationship to existing plans and regulations and any impacts on existing and future land uses. Plans and regulations reviewed include:

. City of Richland Comprehensive Land Use Plan, City of Richland, December 7, 2008 . Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan (2006-2025) . Richland Citywide Transportation Plan, December 7, 2004

Two alternatives were analyzed, the No Build and the Build condition. The No Build was essentially used as a baseline to compare the project effects to, as under the No Build no activities would be taking place, and the status quo is assumed to be maintained.

This study shows that temporary disruptions may occur during construction; such as traffic delays and increased noise levels. Construction and operation of the Proposed Action would not result in any adverse effects on land use. The Proposed Action is consistent with, and would assist in implementing, goals and objectives found in the applicable land use plans and regulations. The Proposed Action is designed to improve mobility within the City of Richland by creating an additional crossing of the Yakima River. The long term benefits to the project include improved emergency vehicle response times, and more efficient travel from the city center to outlying residential areas. Approximately 5.24 acres are being converted from Natural Open Space to a transportation land use. This area is on the north side of the bridge, where the

bridge connects to the existing segment of Duportail Street, and where the proposed Tanglewood Drive will be built.

As the majority of the project will be a new bridge connecting two existing dead-end streets, there will be no change to the overall land use in the area. The project will have a beneficial effect by creating more opportunities for non-motorized traffic, providing quicker routes for emergency vehicles, and relieving traffic choke points in the City of Richland.

Recommended mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse effects during construction could include: Preparing and implementing a Transportation Management Plan, requiring the contractor to post signs showing detour routes during any required road and/or lane closures. Where possible, disturbed areas will be re-vegetated and or planted according to an approved planting plan. A noise wall will be constructed for residences on the south side of the proposed bridge that were shown to have future impacts based on the Traffic Noise Report.

As no indirect effects are anticipated to occur due to the Proposed Action no mitigation/minimization measures will be necessary to reduce potential indirect effects.

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

Table of Contents Land Use Discipline Report ...... i Duportail Street Bridge Project ...... i Benton County, Washington ...... i Acronyms ...... i Executive Summary ...... iii 1.0 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Purpose of Report ...... 1 1.2 Methods and Data...... 1 2.0 Project Description ...... 2 2.1 Purpose and Need ...... 2 Purpose ...... 2 Need ...... 2 2.2 Project/Alternatives ...... 3 3.0 Existing Conditions ...... 9 3.1 Study Area Map ...... 9 3.2 Zoning ...... 9 3.3 Current Land Use, Shoreline, Critical Area, and Transportation Plans ...... 15 3.4 Development Trends ...... 18 4.0 Impacts ...... 18 4.1 Direct Effects ...... 18 4.2 Indirect Effects ...... 25 4.3 Cumulative Effects ...... 25 5.0 Consistency with Land Use Plans and Implementing Regulations ...... 26 5.1 Federal ...... 26 5.2 State ...... 26 5.3 Regional ...... 26 5.4 City ...... 26 6.0 Mitigation ...... 27 6.1 Direct Impacts ...... 27 6.2 Indirect Impacts ...... 27 6.3 Consistency with Land Use Plans and Implementing Regulations ...... 27 7.0 References ...... 28

Table of Figures Figure 1: Vicinity Map...... 5 Figure 2: Project Area ...... 7 Figure 3: Land Use Designations ...... 11 Figure 4: City of Richland Zoning Map ...... 13 Figure 5: Property Acquisitions ...... 23

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of Report The purpose of this Land Use Discipline Report is to evaluate the Duportail Street Bridge Project for impacts on land use within the study area. The analysis includes a comparison of how the Proposed Action and No Build Alternative would affect current and planned land uses and an evaluation of consistency with existing city and regional land use plans and development regulations. The report also suggests a range of mitigation measures to relieve negative impacts on land use during project construction. Analysis of land use impacts is required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for actions sponsored, funded, permitted, or approved by federal agencies. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires analysis of a project’s impact on the natural and built environment.

1.2 Methods and Data The guidance in Chapter 450 of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Environmental Procedures Manual (WSDOT 2010) was used to evaluate the potential land use effects in the study area. The project team compared the existing land uses with the Proposed Action to determine if there would be any changes to land use. The Proposed Action was also compared with the plans and regulations to determine if the Proposed Action would be compatible.

The study area is defined as roughly the areas surrounding the proposed project. The study area is roughly bounded by Queensgate Ave. to the east, Interstate-182 (I-182) to the south, Cottonwood Drive to the West, and Swift Blvd. to the north. This area was selected as the study area because direct and indirect effects of the Proposed Action, during construction and operation, could occur there.

Coordination with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has been ongoing.

2.0 Project Description

2.1 Purpose and Need

Purpose The purpose of this project is to alleviate congestion on the I-182 and State Route (SR) 240 corridors in the city of Richland, to improve emergency vehicle response times to currently underserved areas of town, and improve mobility for bicycle and pedestrian users from the south side of the Yakima River to the north. A new fire station is planned at the approximate location of the intersection of Duportail Street and City View Drive. The proposed new connection over the Yakima River for emergency vehicles using Duportail Street would be a faster, more direct route in some cases.

The proposed bridge will contain a 12-foot trail on the upriver side, creating a safe crossing for non-motorized traffic, as the speed limit for the proposed bridge is 35 mph. The proposed new connection over the Yakima River can be used for a more direct route to shopping, employment, or other purposes. An additional north-south crossing in the city of Richland aims to improve mobility, and will substantially reduce the amount of local trips within the SR 240 and I-182 corridor areas.

Water conveyance will be constructed on the proposed bridge, via two 24” pipes converging into one 36” pipe at each end of the bridge. The current deteriorating, 36” waterline will be valved out of service and abandoned in place. A previous commitment has been made by the City to replace the water line and the city has received a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA) to reduce vulnerabilities to the waterline.

Need The City of Richland is planning to serve the growing infrastructure needs of the city particularly emergency vehicle response times and non-motorized transportation by constructing an additional bridge over the Yakima River, connecting Duportail Street south of the Yakima River to Duportail Street north of the Yakima River. In addition, improvements are needed for the city’s water pipeline in this area, which is now exposed in places and susceptible to damage or vandalism.

There are four existing conditions associated with the roadway that require action to address the above needs:

 Reduce Emergency Response times on the South Side of the river  Improve non-motorized access  Improve the city’s arterial street network connectivity to reduce the amount of local trips on SR 240 and I-182  Replace Exposed 36-inch waterline

Reduce Emergency Response times on the South Side of the river Currently, there is only one crossing over the Yakima River in the city of Richland that services the new developments on the south side of the river. There are two other crossings, SR 224 in the north part of Richland, and SR 240 to the south of the city, however to take one of these routes would be lengthy and time consuming. The SR 224 crossing and the I-182 crossing are roughly 3 miles apart, SR 240 crosses just south of I-182. Emergency vehicles needing to get to the other side of the river must choose between crossing to the north, or crossing to the south, which may extend response times to locations located between the existing crossings. See Figure 1; Vicinity Map on page 5.

Improve non-motorized access The three existing crossings over the Yakima River in the city of Richland are able to primitively accommodate bicycle and pedestrian access. However, just as the bridge would provide a more direct route for cars and public transportation, the 12-foot trail on the bridge will provide a more direct route for non-motorized transportation from the city center to the Queensgate area.

Improve the city’s arterial street network connectivity to reduce the amount of local trips on SR 240 and I-182 I-182 is currently the only one of three crossings over the Yakima River that services the new developments on the south side of the river. Residential and retail developments southwest of the city center have created a need for more cars to travel over the I-182 Bridge. The I-182 Bridge is increasingly being used as a route for local trips from the city center to the newer developments. The need for local trips to use I-182 is anticipated only to increase as development and population rise.

Increasing capacity on the existing crossings of the Yakima River will not solve the problem seen at the choke points in the city of Richland, as the choke points occur on local feeder streets to the main crossing (I-182). The Aaron Drive choke point can be alleviated by approximately 8,500 cars in the year 2012 and by approximately 12,000 cars in 2032 with the proposed bridge, as the current queued cars waiting to get on I-182 take an alternate, more distant crossing in order to continue their local travel.

Exposed 36-inch waterline The existing 36-inch waterline that is the sole source of domestic water to all of the residents and businesses in southern Richland crosses the Yakima River near Duportail Street. The waterline is exposed in places as it crosses the river, leaving the waterline susceptible to potential further damage and vandalism.

2.2 Project/Alternatives Proposed Action The City of Richland proposes to construct a four-lane bridge over the Yakima River, connecting the existing Duportail Street from its intersection with Queensgate Drive on the south-west side of the river to Duportail Street on the north-east side of the river to its intersection with SR 240. See Figure 1, Vicinity Map on page 5. Project activities will include the following:

. Construction of a four lane bridge; with two 11-foot travel lanes and a 12-foot pedestrian/bicycle path on the upriver side of the bridge. . Sidewalks will be installed between Cityview Drive to Tanglewood Drive to connect to the existing network, with a 12-foot pedestrian/bicycle path on the bridge. . The north-east segment of Duportail Street will be extended south to connect with the proposed bridge, and will be widened north of SR 240, between Cottonwood Drive and Birch Avenue; sidewalks will be added where needed to connect with the existing network. . Tanglewood Drive will be extended eastward to intersect with Duportail Street north of the proposed bridge and terminate in a dead end approximately 700 feet east of the proposed intersection. . The intersection of Duportail Street and SR 240 will be upgraded to handle higher traffic volumes. . The BNSF railroad tracks running parallel to SR 240 will be raised to the same grade as the intersection of SR 240 and Duportail Street. . SR 240 will be widened on both sides of intersection with Duportail Street due to the addition of right turn exit lanes from SR 240 onto Duportail Street. . A new access road will be built from Tanglewood Drive cul-de-sac behind the Shoreline Village apartment complex east of Duportail Street to the Desert Streams Bible Church. . The existing water main crossing within the Yakima River will be replaced. . The existing Columbia Irrigation District (CID) canal south of the proposed bridge will be enclosed under the proposed bridge. . A drainage/detention pond will be installed southeast of the intersection of Duportail Street and Tanglewood Drive. . The existing parking lot used to access the boat launch and trails on the north side of the bridge will be re-constructed. . A trail will be constructed under the new bridge to connect with the existing riverfront trails on the north side of the bridge.

See Figure 2, Project Area on page 7.

No Build NEPA requires that the No Build alternative be included and evaluated in this discipline report. This approach is used to establish an existing and future baseline for comparing the effects associated with the Build Alternative. The No Build Alternative is assumed to maintain the status quo: only routine activities such as road maintenance, repair, and safety improvements would occur within the corridor between now and 2032. However, the waterline to be replaced and added to the bridge is failing and needs repaired, regardless of whether or not the project is built.

The No Build Alternative does not include improvements that would increase roadway capacity or reduce congestion on feeder streets to I-182 or other surface streets in the City of Richland.

0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 Miles ¯ 1 in = 0.75 miles

«¬224

Columbia River

¨¦§182

Duportail Street Bridge

«¬240

Figure 1: Vicinity Map Duportail Street Bridge Project City of Richland

City of Richland September 27, 2010

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

3.0 Existing Conditions

3.1 Study Area Map The study area is defined as roughly the areas surrounding the proposed project. The study area is roughly bounded by Queensgate Ave. to the east, I-182 to the south, Cottonwood Drive to the West, and Swift Blvd. to the north. This area was selected as the study area because direct and indirect effects of the Proposed Action, during construction and operation, could occur there. Figure 3 shows the current land uses in the project area.

The primary land uses in the immediate area of the project are agriculture/high density residential (10.1+ dwellings/acre)/public facility/ and commercial. Other land uses in the study area include, but are not limited to: medium density residential/low density residential/ and urban reserve.

3.2 Zoning The study area is entirely within the city limits of Richland, and therefore City of Richland zoning regulations apply. Current zoning in the study area consists of the following zones, shown on Figure 4.

Multiple family residential (R-3) – The multiple-family residential use district (R-3) is a residential zone classification allowing for the location of multiple-family dwellings, duplexes and attached and detached one-family dwellings and providing a high degree of protection for such uses and adjacent low density residential development. This classification shall be designed to give protection from hazards, objectionable influences, building congestion, and lack of light, air, and privacy. Certain essential and compatible public service facilities and installations are permitted in this district. This zoning classification is intended to be applied to some portions of the City that are designated High Density Residential (10.1+ Dwellings/Acre) under the City of Richland Comprehensive Plan.

Limited business (C-LB) - The Limited Business Use District (C-LB) is a zone classification designed to provide an area for the location of buildings for professional and business offices, motels, hotels, and their associated accessory uses, and other compatible uses serving as an administrative district for the enhancement of the central business districts, with regulations to afford protection for developments in this and adjacent districts and in certain instances to provide a buffer zone between residential areas and other commercial and industrial districts. This zoning classification is intended to be applied to some portions of the City that are designated either Commercial or High Density Residential under the City of Richland Comprehensive Plan.

Natural open space (NOS) - The natural open space use district (NOS) is a special use classification intended to provide area for the retention of publicly owned, natural open spaces, that due to their proximity to wetlands, shorelines, flood plains or critical habitat areas are too sensitive for intensive use or development. This zoning classification is intended to be applied to those portions of the City that are designated as Natural Open Space under the City of Richland Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 04-09)

Suburban agriculture (SAG) - The Suburban Agricultural Use District (SAG) is a zone classification providing for residential areas, rural in nature, with sufficiently large lots to allow for the maintenance of certain animals and farm crops, while at the same time establishing and maintaining a living environment of high standards for residential uses. This zoning classification is intended to be applied to some portions of the City that are designated Low Density Residential (0 – 5 Dwellings/Acre) under the City of Richland Comprehensive Plan.

Business/commerce (B-C) – The business and commerce use zoning classification (B-C) is intended to provide locations for a range of business and commerce uses, in a business park setting, where such uses are in close proximity to residential lands. It is also a purpose of this zoning classification to place appropriate use limitations and restrictions on business and commerce uses to ensure the protection of nearby residential uses. Areas of restriction include such items as increased building setbacks, stringent landscaping standards, restrictions on outdoor storage, architectural controls, outdoor lighting standards and access controls. The business and commerce zoning classification provides opportunities for employment in modern, attractive buildings on well-landscaped sites which may be close to residential areas, thereby resulting in a reduction of travel time to and from work. Developments that include several businesses with integrated building architecture, landscaping, and infrastructure are encouraged. This zoning classification is intended to be applied to some portions of the City that are designated Industrial under the City of Richland Comprehensive Plan.

Parks and public facilities (PPF) – The Parks and Public Facilities district (PPF) is a special use classification intended to provide areas for the retention of public lands necessary for open spaces, parks playgrounds, trails and structures designed for public recreation and to provide areas for the location of buildings and structures for public education, recreation and other public and semipublic uses. This zoning classification is intended to be applied to those portions of the City that are designated as Developed Open Space and Public Facility under the City of Richland Comprehensive Plan.

Single family residential (R-1-12) - The single family residential is a residential zone classification requiring the lowest density of population within the City, providing protection against hazards, objectionable influences, building congestion and lack of light, air and privacy. Certain essential and compatible public service facilities and institutions are permitted in this district. This zoning classification is intended to be applied to some portions of the City that are designated Low Density Residential (0 – 5 Dwellings/Acre) under the City of Richland Comprehensive Plan.

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

3.3 Current Land Use, Shoreline, Critical Area, and Transportation Plans Land use in the study area is regulated through regional and local land use and transportation plans and development regulations for implementing local plans. The project’s consistency with regional and City of Richland land use and transportation plans was determined by evaluating the Proposed Action and by assessing whether these changes support the type of growth and meet the needs of the community, as outlined in the overall land use and transportation plans.

Shorelines As the proposed project is a bridge spanning the Yakima River, there are shorelines in the project area. Shorelines are regulated in the City of Richland by Title 26 of the Municipal Code. According to the shoreline environment designation map (City of Richland 1973) the shorelines adjacent to the Yakima River are designated as “conservancy” from approximately river mile (RM) 0.52, near its confluence with the Columbia, to RM 7.1. The proposed Duportail Bridge is located at RM 5.3 of the Yakima River.

Title 26 states: “The designation of conservancy environments on Richland's shorelines seeks to satisfy some of the needs of the community relative to the present and future location of recreation areas serving existing and proposed population concentrations and to provide a continuous flow of recreational uses and benefits without substantial adverse modification of the shoreline character. Recognized uses in the conservancy environment are those which are generally non-consumptive of the physical and geological resources of the land and water uses. Conservancy environment designations identify those land and water areas containing valuable natural, cultural, aesthetic, historic and recreational resources which most benefit the public by having their existing character maintained, but which are able to tolerate a limited level of development or resource utilization. Conservancy environments also possess biophysical limitations which preclude designation as a rural or urban environment.”

The shoreline along the northern side of the Yakima River consists of a riparian corridor with approximately 3 percent slopes while the southern shoreline is dominated by shrub-steppe vegetation with slopes ranging from 11-18 percent.

The project will not have substantial adverse modification of the shoreline character, and will be enhancing recreational opportunities with improvements to the existing boat launch. Title 26 contains special use circumstances applicable to this project: (C) Roads and railroads may be permitted only when necessary to cross a shoreline area and no other feasible alternative is present, and; (D) Any utility brought into a conservancy environment shall be located and designed so that it minimizes impact on scenic views or aesthetic qualities and so that it minimizes environmental impact. Additionally while the project proposed to alter natural vegetation along the shoreline all such vegetation removal will be mitigated for within currently degraded portions of the shoreline near the project site

The Duportail corridor was selected after careful consideration, based on the following criteria: Mobility / Feasibility / Development Impact/ Neighborhood impact. Expansion of the I-182 Interstate scored second best to the Duportail corridor; however expansion of I-182 was

estimated at three times the cost of constructing the Duportail Bridge. Duportail was the least costly, and could be pursued more easily by the City of Richland to fund and construct. Therefore, the crossing at Duportail Street is the most feasible alternative. As many of the utilities as possible will be put on the bridge, freeing up easements and removing unsightly overhead power lines. The Duportail Street Bridge project is consistent with Title 26- Shoreline Management of the municipal code.

Transportation Plans The Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCG) Regional Transportation Plan was developed through the transportation planning process. The goals, policies, and strategies herein were subsequently adopted by the BFCG Board. These goals and policies will guide and direct the regional transportation planning process for the next twenty years.

Specific policies related to the Proposed Action included in the BFCG Regional Transportation Plan include: . A transportation system that is integrated with local land use policies; . A transportation system that provides lower cost solutions in the form of transit, vanpool/carpool, bicycling, and walking, in lieu of expanding capacity; . A transportation system that provides access and mobility for all citizens regardless of age, race, or handicap; . A transportation system that gives access while minimizing energy consumption and environmental impacts; . A transportation system that meets the needs of sustained economic growth, and; . A transportation system that is consistent with local, regional, state, and federal policies

Richland Citywide Transportation Plan (RCTP) identifies projects and programs needed to support the City’s Vision and to serve planned growth within the city and the greater Tri-Cities area over the next 20 years. This document presents the recommended investments and priorities for the pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and motor vehicle systems along with new transportation programs to correct existing shortfalls and enhance critical services.

Specific goals and policies related to the Proposed Action included in the RCTP include:

Goal 1: The City will provide an efficient transportation network including road, rail, water and air, to serve existing needs and to accommodate new development. . Policy 2 – The City will coordinate the location of major utility and transportation corridors. . Policy 5 – The City will maintain the existing transportation network, and projects that impact the existing network will support expansion of the network. . Policy 6 – The City will identify and prioritize transportation system needs citywide to meet current and future demand. . Policy 7 – The City will establish a program to consistently upgrade its existing signal system to improve traffic flow and progression. Goal 2: The City will maximize the operating efficiency of its transportation system. . Policy 2 – The City will maximize the operating efficiency of its transportation system through the use of Transportation Demand Management strategies.

. Policy 3 – The City will actively coordinate the planning, construction, and operation of transportation facilities and programs that may affect the City with local, regional and state jurisdictions. Goal 4: The City will encourage public/private partnerships for financing transportation projects that foster economic growth and address the needs of growth and development. . Policy 7 – The City will encourage the development community to site and construct transportation facilities that are compatible with adjacent land uses to minimize potential conflicts. Goal 5: The City will work to secure adequate long-term funding sources for transportation. . Policy 2 – The City will work to establish local improvement districts and transportation improvements districts in designated areas for economic development. Goal 6: The City will encourage the use of transportation modes that maximize energy conservation, circulation efficiency and economy. . Policy 1 – The City will support increased use of multi-modal transportation. This includes, but is not limited to, high occupancy vehicle lanes, bicycle facilities, park-and- ride facilities, carpools, vanpools, buses and mass transit. . Policy 2 – The City will coordinate planning efforts for non-motorized modes of travel with other jurisdictions and develop an integrated area-wide plan for non-motorized travel modes that ensures continuity of routes. . Policy 3 – The City will encourage sidewalks, improved shoulders, or off-street trails within new developments to accommodate internal circulation. . Policy 4 – The City will encourage new development to be pedestrian friendly and compatible with the public transportation system. . Policy 5 – The City will seek to receive formal recognition as a “Bicycle Friendly Community.” . Policy 6 – The City will coordinate site development guidelines to encourage and enable use of alternative modes.

Environmentally Critical Areas The City of Richland adopted a Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) in November, 1993 (Chapter 22.10 to the Richland Municipal Code) which contains standards, guidelines, criteria, and requirements to identify, analyze, and mitigate probable impacts on the City’s sensitive areas and to enhance and restore when possible. The City’s sensitive areas map identifies Geologic Hazards (steep slope) and floodplains in the project area (City of Richland 2010). Additionally the Yakima River, within the project area has been designated as critical habitat for both the Columbia River distinct population segment (DPS) of bull trout and the Middle Columbia River DPS of steelhead trout (USFWS 2010 and NMFS 2005); critical habitat is designated as a sensitive fish and wildlife habitat area in accordance with the SAO. The project’s impacts on these sensitive areas are being addressed in separate discipline reports, the Geology and Soils Discipline Report (Shannon & Wilson 2010), the Floodplain Discipline Report (Widener & Associates 2010b) and the Biological Assessment (Widener and Associates 2010c). No wetlands and/or other areas designated as sensitive fish and wildlife habitat areas are present within the study area. Should there be any impacts from the proposed project on sensitive areas, within the study area, minimization measures and/or compensation will be consistent with the requirements of the City of Richland’s SAO.

3.4 Development Trends The City of Richland’s community economy remains largely dependent on federal government work at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. The massive cleanup of the Department of Energy’s Hanford Reservation has generated a flourishing accumulation of high-tech R&D and industrial firms. The influx of workers has supported growth in new areas, such as the Queensgate area in the southwest section of the City. The proposed project aims to improve traffic efficiency for cars travelling from Hanford to the Queensgate area by providing an additional overcrossing of the Yakima River.

4.0 Impacts Impacts may result from many types of effects both during the construction or operation of a proposed action. When pertaining to land use such impacts would result from physical effects rather than chemical or biological effects. A proposed action may result in substantial impacts on land use if the proposed action could prevent or severely limit the ability of multiple property owners to use their property for an existing or allowed land use, if the proposed action is not consistent with relevant plans and regulations, or if the proposed action could induce land use not compatible with existing plans.

4.1 Direct Effects Direct Effects are impacts resulting from the proposed action, usually during construction. The project will have proximity impacts on a number of properties on both sides of the Yakima River. Property will be acquired for this project, using strip takes along the northeast side of the river in order to widen the existing street. Strip takes will occur in two locations, first along the Shoreline Village Apartments which are buffered by parking carports between the roadway and the apartments, and second along undeveloped land on the northwest corner of the Duportail Street/Riverstone Drive intersection. See Table 1 and Figure 5 on pages 21 and 23 for a details and locations of where strip takes are occurring. Access driveways for the Shoreline Apartments and a private driveway for the church are being relocated to use the future traffic signal to get onto Duportail Street. The public street of Riverstone Drive will be converted to right turns only. A connection to the extension of Tanglewood Drive will be provided for access via the traffic signal as well. Improvements to the boat launch parking lot will not change the use of the area. Impacts to 4(f) resources are expected to be de minimis, and a letter is being prepared to address the boat launch site and access point.

Additional property will be leased from the USACE for use by WDFW and the City of Richland. The USACE owned property- See Table 1 and Figure 5 on pages 21 and 23 for details, falls into a separate land use category that is USACE specific, Intensive Wildlife Management (USACE 1995). According to the USACE’s McNary Master Plan “intensive wildlife management lands are defined as lands that are set aside for wildlife management because of their inherent value as wildlife habitat, or because of their potential for specific management practices of an intensive nature that have been or will be implemented to improve and/or maintain habitat beneficial to desirable forms of wildlife (both game and nongame). These lands, including developments and improvements thereon, will be administered by the Corps of Engineers or will be administered under cooperative agreements or license agreements by Federal or state fish and wildlife agencies. Private or exclusive group use of these wildlife lands will not be permitted. Licenses,

permits, or easements will not be issued on intensive management wildlife lands for such non- compatible manmade intrusions as pumping plants, underground or exposed pipelines or cables, overhead transmission lines, non-project roads, or dredging or filling operations”.

This land use category is consistent with the City of Richland’s Comprehensive plan, and use of the restricted intensive wildlife management land for the proposed project would fall into an exception, as the project is providing “a demonstrated public need in those instances where no reasonable alternative is available” (USACE 1995). The project proposes to alter natural vegetation within the intensive wildlife management area; however, all such vegetation removal will be mitigated for within currently degraded portions of the intensive wildlife management area near the project site

Temporary construction effects on users of adjacent properties and the local street system may be caused by noise, dust, vibration, glare, traffic detours, traffic delays, and visual disturbance. The severity of the effects depends on the duration and intensity of the construction. Traffic disruptions that affect land use may be caused by temporary construction easements and changes in access due to detour routing to allow for construction. During some phases of construction, traffic will experience delays. Much of the project does not lie on existing streets, so construction in these areas will not have an impact to traffic.

This project will have unavoidable short-term effects on surrounding land uses from construction and construction staging. The project may limit business or enjoyment of outdoor activities or events due to increased noise levels from construction equipment, changes in access to individual properties, increased dust from vegetation removal/grading, and work zone traffic control measures. Staging areas would be located within private property and rights-of-way.

The Proposed Action would not have any substantial effects on land uses in the study area. While small pieces of land acquired for this project would be permanently changed from the existing use to a transportation use these conversions would not require relocations or changes in land use designations as existing land uses will continue to occur on parcels to be affected (Table 1) in addition to proposed new uses.

No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative would not produce construction related effects on the study area.

This page intentionally left blank for printing purposes.

Table 1: Details of Proposed Property Acquisitions Ownership Parcel # Owner Total Area Total Value ROW Easement ID (acres) (acres) (acres) 1 116984020002002 City of Richland 29.95 $2,703,180 0.15 0.00 2 116984000003001 City of Richland 16.06 $1,377,340 0.23 0.00 Columbia Irrigation 3 115983000004000 11.93 - 0.00 0.58 District US Army Corps 4 116981000004000 20.00 $60,000 0.00 0.55 of Engineers US Army Corps 5 116981000003000 20.00 $60,000 0.00 3.35 of Engineers Spencer Family 6 116981000001000 23.35 $404,530 0.76 0.00 Living Trust US Army Corps 7 115982000006000 40.00 $120,000 0.00 3.17 of Engineers Riverpointe 8 115982000002002 5.88 $13,174.350 0.06 0.00 Apartments Shoreline Limited 9 115982011748008 6.11 $444,710 0.92 0.00 Liability Co. 10 115982000002005 Yuksel Co. 11.41 $17,199,850 0.918 0.00 Desert Streams 11 115982011748005 5.00 $367,830 0.00 0.38 Bible Church Timberline Capital 12 115982000002003 1.74 $189,490 0.06 0.00 Inc. Bureau of Land 13 103983020342000 15.56 $356,970 0.00 0.07 Management 14 115982020149000 City of Richland 8.80 $412,950 0.01 0.00 15 115982020100001 Michael W. Gallien 0.26 $115,410 0.01 0.00 16 115982020154000 City of Richland 4.41 $216,730 0.023 0.00 17 115982030169001 Justin T. Stoker 0.28 $165,640 0.037 0.00 18 115982030162001 Dajana Doutlik 0.14 $100,080 0.004 0.00

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

0 275 550 1,100 Swift Boulevard Feet ¯ 1 inch = 550 feet

18 15 14 17 16

6 13 State PlaneCoordinate System NAD83 WashingtonSouth FIPS4602 12

8 10 State Hwy 240 Bypass 5

8 10 9 10 7 9 11 9 9 5

4 3

Queensgate Drive

¨¦§182

Project Area Figure 5: Property Acquisitions Parcel Boundaries Duportail Street Bridge Project Proposed ROW City of Richland Proposed Permanent Easement Proposed Temporary Easement October 8, 2010

This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes.

4.2 Indirect Effects Indirect effects are defined as effects caused by the proposed action that are later in time or farther removed in distance but still reasonably certain to occur. The project would be consistent and compatible with existing zoning and land use plans; therefore, land use is not anticipated to be affected..

No building moratoriums are in place; no land use changes are anticipated to result from the project (other than small right-of-way acquisitions necessary to build the project); no known developments are contingent upon the completion of the proposed project; nor are any land use changes tied by permit condition to the proposed project. The proposed project will; however, 1 result in increased traffic within the zone of influence . Therefore, an analysis was conducted to determine if the proposed project will speed up the rate of planned development within the zone of influence. It was determined that of the 349 acres of developable land within the zone of influence approximately 28 percent (95.96 acres are likely to develop within ten years of project completion. Currently the rate of development within the zone of influence is approximately 2.8 percent or 9.59 acres per year; therefore, current level of development is anticipated to be maintained throughout this area.

In the reasonably foreseeable future, some current vacant land might convert to commercial uses, with or without the Proposed Action. These land uses are already present and allowed by zoning. No change in zoning or amendment to an existing land use plan would be required by the Proposed Action.

The Proposed Action would not affect land use indirectly or induce land use change. By improving mobility in the study area, the Proposed Action is anticipated the rate of current development will be maintained as previously anticipated future traffic congestion will not hinder growth.

No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative would not change existing land uses in the study area; however, the rate of development could potentially be hindered by future traffic congestion.

4.3 Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are those effects of future state, local, or private (not federal) activities that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of the proposed project. Per the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidance, a cumulative effects analysis is discipline specific and generally performed for the discipline, in this case land use, directly affected by the action (such as a transportation project) under study.

1 The zone of influence is defined by the area in which changes in traffic patterns due to the proposed action which may potentially result in a change in land use. The zone of influence may; therefore be affected by indirect effects associated with future development as a result increased stormwater from impervious surfaces or vegetation removal associated with future projects.

The future fire station planned at the intersection of Duportail Street and City View Drive is a potential cumulative effect, however it will undergo its own, separate, environmental review including analyzing cumulative effects.

5.0 Consistency with Land Use Plans and Implementing Regulations

5.1 Federal Construction of the additional non-interstate crossing is consistent with the FHWA goals of removing local trips from interstate roads.

5.2 State WSDOT South Central Region staff has participated with the City of Richland in several planning studies which indicate this project will significantly improve the transportation system in Richland. With the cooperation of the WSDOT, the City of Richland completed a thorough evaluation of alternative projects aimed at improving mobility between the sections of Richland north and south of the Yakima River and I-182. WSDOT agrees that the selection of the Duportail corridor is critical in improving mobility, and the most cost-effective solution.

5.3 Regional As mentioned in Section 3.3, the project is consistent with the Benton-Franklin County Government Regional Transportation Plan. Specifically, the project will improve transportation efficiency, provide faster travel routes for emergency vehicles, and provide more opportunities for non-motorized transportation.

5.4 City As mentioned in Section 3.3, the project is consistent with the RCTP. Specifically, the project will construct sidewalks and a 12-foot trail (on the bridge in lieu of a sidewalk) to connect to the existing pedestrian/non-motorized network, provide better access to areas of business and residential growth outside of the city center.

As previously mentioned, shorelines in the City of Richland are regulated by Title 26 of the Municipal Code. The project will not have substantial adverse modification of the shoreline character and is in compliance with the Municipal Code as improvements to the existing boat launch are consistent with special use circumstances outlined in Section 3.3 and any vegetation altered/removed as part of the Project Action will be mitigated for within currently degraded portions of the shoreline near the project site.

6.0 Mitigation

6.1 Direct Impacts Required mitigation/minimization measures to avoid or minimize adverse effects during construction could include: . Prepare and implement a Transportation Management Plan (TMP), requiring the contractor to post signs showing detour routes during any required road and/or lane closures. . Erosion control best management practices (BMPs), such as silt fences, straw bales (certified weed free) and/or catchbasin liners will be installed before any earthmoving activities take place and would be maintained throughout construction. . Where possible, disturbed areas will be re-vegetated and or planted according to an approved planting plan. . Any natural vegetation altered/removed along the shoreline will be mitigated for within currently degraded portions of the shoreline near the project site . Any vegetation altered/removed within the intensive wildlife management area will be mitigated for within currently degraded portions of the intensive wildlife management area near the project site . A noise wall will be proposed to be constructed for residences on the south side of the proposed bridge that were shown to have future impacts based on the Traffic Noise Report (Widener and Associates 2010a); however, ultimately it will be up to the residents of the community to decide if they want the barriers, as they may have negative visual impacts.

6.2 Indirect Impacts As no indirect effects are anticipated to occur due to the Proposed Action no mitigation/minimization measures will be necessary to reduce potential indirect effects.

6.3 Consistency with Land Use Plans and Implementing Regulations The Proposed Action would support and be consistent with adopted plans and regulations, no mitigation would be required during project operation.

7.0 References

Project Reports Shannon and Wilson. 2010. Final Geology and Soils Technical Report Duportail Street Bridge. August.

Widener and Associates. 2010a. Noise Report: Duportail Street Bridge Project. June 7.

Widener and Associates. 2010b. Floodplain Discipline Report: Duportail Street Bridge Project. December 21.

Widener and Associates. 2010c. Duportail Street Bridge Project Biological Assessment. December 21.

Literature Cited Benton County. 2006. Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Transportation Plan.

Benton County, 2010. Site visited on July 1, 2010. http://www.bfcog.us/RTP.html

City of Richland. 1973. City of Richland: Shoreline Environment Designation Map.

City of Richland. 2008. Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Accessed January 26, 2011: http://www.ci.richland.wa.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=748

City of Richland. 2010. City of Richland Sensitive Areas Maps January. Accessed June 22, 2010. http://www.ci.richland.wa.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=894

USACE (United States Army Corps of Engineers). 1995. Master Plan for the McNary Lock and Dam Project, December 1995 supplement. http://www.nww.usace.army.mil/planning/ER/mcnary/default.htm#8_04

USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 2010b. RTWP; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout in the Conterminus United States; Final Rule. October 18. Federal Register 75 (200): 63897-64070. http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/pdf/BTCHFR101810.pdf

WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation). 2010. Environmental Procedures Manual, version M 31-11.08. Chapter 450, Public Services and Utilities. Olympia, Washington. June. Accessed June 18, 2010.