DOCSLIB.ORG

WSDOT Report Template

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
WSDOT Report Template Duportail Street Bridge Project Richland, Washington Transportation Discipline Report Benton County, Washington Prepared by: Federal Highway Administration 711 South Capitol Way, Suite 501 Olympia, WA 98501 Submitted by: City of Richland Prepared for: Washington State Department of Transportation P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909 AprilNovember 2011 2011 Review copy for WSDOT This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms............................................................................................................................................................... 4 Glossary of Technical Terms .................................................................................................................................. 6 Applicable Statutes and Regulations ................................................................................................................... 10 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 13 What is the purpose of this report? ................................................................................................................ 13 Why construct the Duportail Street Bridge? ................................................................................................... 13 Where is the project located? ......................................................................................................................... 13 How was traffic data evaluated for the Duportail Street Bridge Project? ........................................................................................................................................................... 14 What are the current road and traffic conditions within the Duportail Bridge vicinity? ............................................................................................................................................... 14 How does the project improve traffic in the future? ...................................................................................... 16 How will construction activities affect the project area? ................................................................................ 16 What measures are proposed to avoid or minimize effects on traffic during construction? ...................................................................................................................................... 17 What are the key points of this report? .......................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 18 Design Year and Opening Year ....................................................................................................................... 18 Chapter 2 Project Description ............................................................................................................................ 19 What is the purpose of the Project? ................................................................................................................ 19 How was the Project designed to provide these elements? ........................................................................... 19 Chapter 3 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................................... 21 What alternatives were considered before development of the Project alternative? ...................................................................................................................................................... 21 What alternatives are considered in this discipline report?............................................................................ 22 What is the Without Project Alternative? ........................................................................................................ 22 What is the With-Project Alternative? .............................................................................................................. 22 How will the stormwater system handle the runoff from impervious surfaces? .......................................................................................................................................................... 23 How would Project construction be sequenced and staged? ......................................................................... 24 Duportail Street Bridge Project 1 Transportation Discipline Report – Review Copy to WSDOT April 2011 What would happen if the bridge is not constructed? ................................................................................... 25 Chapter 4 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................................... 26 What are the general transportation features in the project area? ................................................................. 26 What is the study area for transportation and how was it defined? ............................................................... 26 How was information collected? .................................................................................................................... 29 What are the existing traffic volumes within the study area? ......................................................................... 29 What is the historical collision data in the study area? ................................................................................... 31 How did we evaluate traffic operations? ........................................................................................................ 31 How do we determine what level of congestion is acceptable? ..................................................................... 33 How does Duportail Street operate under existing (2008) conditions? ..................................................................................................................................................... 33 What transit service is currently available in the study area and how will it be affected? ........................................................................................................................................... 35 What pedestrian and bicycle facilities currently exist in the study area and how will they be affected? ....................................................................................................................... 35 How will this project affect parking in the area? ............................................................................................ 35 How will this project meet ADA requirements? ............................................................................................. 36 How will this project affect waterborne traffic? .............................................................................................. 36 How will this project affect rail traffic? ........................................................................................................... 36 How will this project affect air traffic? ............................................................................................................ 36 Chapter 5 Potential Effects .................................................................................................................................. 37 How was future traffic projected near the proposed Duportail Street Bridge? ............................................................................................................................................................ 37 How did we evaluate traffic operations? ........................................................................................................ 42 How do we expect the project area to operate under future without Project conditions? ......................................................................................................................................... 42 How do we expect the project area to operate under future With-Project Conditions? ................................................................................................................................ 45 What are the potential effects for pedestrians and bicyclists? ........................................................................ 50 What is the potential effect on safety in the project area? .............................................................................. 50 What are the potential effects on vehicular and non-motorized traffic due to construction? ....................................................................................................................................... 51 Duportail Street Bridge Project 2 Transportation Discipline Report – Review Copy to WSDOT April 2011 Chapter 6 Measures Taken to Avoid or Minimize Project Effects ........................................................................ 52 What mitigation measures are proposed to avoid and/or minimize operational impacts on vehicle traffic? ........................................................................................................... 52 What mitigation measures are proposed to avoid and/or minimize construction impacts on vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic? .................................................................. 53 Chapter
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Davita OM Brian Mayer.Indd
    REPRESENTATIVE PICTURE Actual Site Photo DAVITA EXCLUSIVLY LISTED BY: Brian Mayer RICHLAND, WASHINGTON National Retail Group 206.826.5716 1315 Aaron Drive, Richland, WA 99352 [email protected] DaVita | 1 PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTS INVESTMENT GRADE TENANT: 10+ YEAR HISTORICAL OCCUPANCY: Nation’s leading provider of kidney dialysis Build to Suit for DaVita in 2008, the Tenant services and a Fortune 500 company, has occupied the property for over 10 DaVita generated $10.88 Billion in net years. revenue in 2017. S&P Investment Grade Rating of BB. EARLY LEASE EXTENSION: MINIMAL LANDLORD RESPONSIBILITIES: In December 2018, DaVita exercised its Tenant is responsible for taxes, insurance first 5-year option, as well as exercising its and CAM’s. Landlord is responsible for roof, second 5-year option early, for a combined structure and limited capital expenditures. 10-year renewal period. SIGNIFICANT TENANT CAPITAL EXPENDITURES: MANAGEMENT FEE REIMBURSEMENT: Tenant contributed approximately $1.5 Lease allows Landlord to collect a million towards its build-out in 2008, and is management fee as additional rent. A slated to contribute an additional $250,000 management fee equal to 6% of base rent in 2019. is currently being collected. HIGHWAY VISIBILITY & ACCESS: PROXIMITY TO MAJOR MEDICAL CAMPUS: Features easy access and excellent visibility In close proximity to the Tri-Cities major from Interstate 182 (69,000 VPD), Highway medical campus, including Kadlec Regional 240 (46,000 VPD) and George Washington Medical Center, Lourdes Health and Seattle Way (41,000 VPD). Children’s’ Hospital. ANNUAL RENTAL INCREASES: DENSELY POPULATED AFFLUENT AREA: Lease benefits from 2% annual increases Features an average household income of in the initial Lease Term and 2.5% annual $93,558 within 5 miles, and a population increases in the Option Period.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Choices 3
    Transportation Choices 3 MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE | MOVEMENT OF FREIGHT AND GOODS Introduction Facilities Snapshot This chapter organizes the transportation system into two categories: movement of people, and movement of freight and goods. Movement of people encompasses active transportation, transit, rail, air, and automobiles. Movement of freight and goods encompasses rail, marine cargo, air, vehicles, and pipelines. 3 Three Airports: one commercial, two Community Consistent with federal legislation (23 CFR 450.306) and Washington State Legislation (RCW 47.80.030), the regional transportation system includes: 23 Twenty-three Fixed Transit Routes ▶All state-owned transportation facilities and services (highways, park-and-ride lots, etc); 54 Fifty-Four Miles of Multi-Use Trails ▶All local principal arterials and selected minor arterials the RTPO considers necessary to the plan; 2.1 Multi- ▶Any other transportation facilities and services, existing and Two Vehicles per Household* proposed, including airports, transit facilities and services, roadways, Modal rail facilities, marine transportation facilities, pedestrian/bicycle Transport facilities, etc., that the RTPO considers necessary to complete the 5 regional plan; and Five Rail Lines System ▶Any transportation facility or service that fulfills a regional need or impacts places in the plan, as determined by the RTPO. 4 Four Ports *Source: US Census Bureau, 2014 ACS 5-year estimates. Chapter 3 | Transportation Choices 39 Figure 3-1: JourneyMode to ChoiceWork -ModeJourney Choice to Work in the RTPO, 2014 Movement of People Walk/ Bike, Public Transit, 2.2% Other, 4.3% People commute for a variety of reasons, and likewise, a variety of 1.2% ways. This section includes active transportation, transit, passenger Carpooled, 12.6% rail, passenger air, and passenger vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • Everything You Always Wanted to Know About the Highway Department
    -mM WA STATE DOT LIBRARY 66 0009 9062 2 Everything you always wanted to know about the Highway Department Explained by The Washington State Highway Department * BUT DIDN'T KNOW WHO TO ASK DOT LIBRARY PO BOX 47425 OLYiViPlAVVA 98504-7425 360-705-7750 FOREWORD Although the title of our book is somewhat whimsical, the reader wil l find that the text is entirely serious in nature. We have l imited our report to "facts and figures" concerning the Highway Department and Washington State*s highway system, and have made no attempts to advance opinion or philosophy. We intend this book to be a reference guide for anyone - students, legislators, news media people and Highway Department employees - who need information on Washington's primary transportation system. Compi l ing the information for this book has been - and wi l l continue to be - a formidable task, requiring many hours and much di l igent research. The book you are now holding does not contain "everything" about the highway system; rather, ^it contains the information we have compiled so far and have included in it. More - much more - wi l l be forthcoming in the future. We wi l l send additional information to those who receive the book as it becomes avai lable, and we ask that those who want to stay up to date to supply the Publ ic Information Office with their names and addresses. We hope our book serves your needs and we wi l l welcome any suggestions, comments and criticisms you may care to give us regarding its contents.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding of No Significant Impact Duportail Street
    Federal Highway Administration FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT for DUPORTAIL STREET BRIDGE BENTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON Issued Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332 (2)(c) and 23 U.S.C. 128 (a) This action complies with Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, and Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice. The Duportail Street project will construct a new four-lane bridge and a pedestrian/ bicycle path on the upriver side of the bridge. The project will also extend Tanglewood Drive eastward approximately 700 feet east and 1, 700 feet west of Duportail Street. Sidewalks will be installed where necessary to create a seamless pedestrian network in the project area. It will upgrade the intersection of Duportail Street and SR 240, install a signal at the intersection of Duportail Street and Tanglewood Drive, and build new access to Tanglewood Drive from properties south of Duportail Street. The existing water main, which crosses the Yakima River at this location, will be replaced with a water main onto the new bridge. The parking lot for the existing boat launch will be reconfigured and one nature trail will be designated. The Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) has determined that this proposal to construct a· bridge will have no significant impact on the human or natural environment. This Finding of no Significant Impact (FONSI) is based on the February 2013 Environmental Assessment. The environmental assessment was independently evaluated by the FHWA and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the need, environmental issues, impacts of the proposed project, and appropriate mitigation measures.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 General Sewer Plan Update
    2015 GENERAL SEWER PLAN UPDATE April 2016 Prepared by J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 2810 W. Clearwater Ave. Ste. 201 Kennewick, WA 99336 2015 GENERAL SEWER PLAN UPDATE April 2016 Certification This 2015 General Sewer Plan Update (with exception of Chapter’s 5 and 8) for the City of Richland has been prepared under the direction of the following Registered Professional Engineers. In compliance with the Washington Department of Ecology Requirements for General Sewer Plans, WAC 173-240-050. Preliminary Alex J. Fazzari, P.E. J-U-B ENGINEERS, INC. 2810 W. Clearwater Ave., Ste 201 Kennewick, WA 99336 (509) 783-2144 2015 GENERAL SEWER PLAN UPDATE April 2016 Certification Chapter 5 of this 2015 General Sewer Plan Update for the City of Richland has been prepared under the direction of the following Registered Professional Engineer. In compliance with the Washington Department of Ecology Requirements for General Sewer Plans, WAC 173-240-050. Alan J. Straub, P.E. Carollo Engineers, Inc. 1218 Third Ave., Ste 100 Seattle, WA 98901 (206) 684-6532 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 1 ES-1 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 1 ES-2 Planning Boundaries ............................................................................................................................... 2 ES-3 Collection System
    [Show full text]
  • Land Use Discipline Report
    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 i This page left blank intentionally for printing purposes. ii 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Plan 2018 to 2038 City of Pasco, Washington
    Volume II Supporting Analysis Comprehensive Plan 2018 to 2038 City of Pasco, Washington City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan Volume II, Supporting Analysis Re-adopted by Ordinance No. ___ ________ City Council Mayor Saul Martinez (District 3) Mayor Pro Tem, Blanche Barajas (District 1) Councilmember Ruben Alvarado (District 2) Councilmember Pete Serrano (District 4) Councilmember Daved Mline (District 5) Councilmember Craig Maloney (District 6) Councilmember Zahra Roach (At-Large) Planning Commission Position 1: Chair Tanya Bowers Position 2: Vice-Chair Joe Campos Position 3: Commissioner Paul Mendez Position 4: Commissioner Anne Jordan Position 5: Commissioner Abel Campos Position 6: Commissioner Isaac Myhrum Position 7: Vacant Position 8: Commissioner Pam Ransier Position 9: Commissioner Jerry Cochran City Staff Dave Zabell, City Manager Rick White, Community and Economic Development Director Jacob Gonzalez, Senior Planner Jeff Adams, Associate Planner Darcy Bourcier, Planner I TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Pasco’s Setting ................................................................................................................................... 1 What's in a Name ............................................................................................................................. 2 Pasco Then and Now .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pasco Pump Lateral Wasteway 5.8 Pipeline Project
    Pasco Pump Lateral 5.8 Wasteway Pipeline Project – South Columbia Basin Irrigation District FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Columbia Basin Project, Washington Pacific Northwest Region PN FONSI 19-1 Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Columbia Cascades Area Office Yakima, Washington March 2019 Mission Statements U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PROTECTING AMERICA’S GREAT OUTDOORS AND POWERING OUR FUTURE The U.S. Department of the Interior protects America’s natural resources and heritage, honors our cultures and tribal communities, and supplies the energy to power our future. MISSION OF THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Finding of No Significant Impact Pasco Pump Lateral 5.8 Wasteway Pipeline Project – South Columbia Basin Irrigation District Columbia Basin Project, Washington U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Columbia-Cascades Area Office Yakima, Washington PN-FONSI 19-1 PN-EA 19-1 Introduction The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation has prepared the Pasco Pump Lateral (PPL) 5.8 Wasteway Pipeline Project (Project) Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. This EA evaluated a proposal by Reclamation to construct the Project while the South Columbia Basin Irrigation District (SCBID) provides operation and maintenance of the Project as part of their transferred works. Purpose and Need for Action Reclamation proposes to construct a new wasteway from the PPL to the Columbia River to correct shortcomings of the existing 6.0 Wasteway and avoid adverse impacts on the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Field-Trip Guide to the Vents, Dikes, Stratigraphy, and Structure of the Columbia River Basalt Group, Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington
    Field-Trip Guide to the Vents, Dikes, Stratigraphy, and Structure of the Columbia River Basalt Group, Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5022–N U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Palouse Falls, Washington. The Palouse River originates in Idaho and flows westward before it enters the Snake River near Lyons Ferry, Washington. About 10 kilometers north of this confluence, the river has eroded through the Wanapum Basalt and upper portion of the Grande Ronde Basalt to produce Palouse Falls, where the river drops 60 meters (198 feet) into the plunge pool below. The river’s course was created during the cataclysmic Missoula floods of the Pleistocene as ice dams along the Clark Fork River in Idaho periodically broke and reformed. These events released water from Glacial Lake Missoula, with the resulting floods into Washington creating the Channeled Scablands and Glacial Lake Lewis. Palouse Falls was created by headward erosion of these floodwaters as they spilled over the basalt into the Snake River. After the last of the floodwaters receded, the Palouse River began to follow the scabland channel it resides in today. Photograph by Stephen P. Reidel. Field-Trip Guide to the Vents, Dikes, Stratigraphy, and Structure of the Columbia River Basalt Group, Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington By Victor E. Camp, Stephen P. Reidel, Martin E. Ross, Richard J. Brown, and Stephen Self Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5022–N U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Applicant's Environmental Report
    Appendix E Applicant’s Environmental Report Operating License Renewal Stage Columbia Generating Station Energy Northwest Docket No. 50-397 License No. NPF-21 January 2010 Columbia Generating Station License Renewal Application Environmental Report [This page intentionally blank] Table of Contents Page ii January 2010 Columbia Generating Station License Renewal Application Environmental Report Table of Contents Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................... LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................... ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................... 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of and Need for Action.............................................................. 1-1 1.2 Environmental Report Scope and Methodology...................................... 1-3 1.3 Columbia Generating Station Licensee and Ownership ......................... 1-7 1.4 References ............................................................................................. 1-9 2.0 SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES................................................... 2-1 2.1 Location and Features ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SR 397: Kennewick ECL to I-182 Jct Corridor Sketch Summary
    Corridor Sketch Summary Printed at: 4:50 PM 3/29/2018 WSDOT's Corridor Sketch Initiative is a collaborative planning process with agency partners to identify performance gaps and select high-level strategies to address them on the 304 corridors statewide. This Corridor Sketch Summary acts as an executive summary for one corridor. Please review the User Guide for Corridor Sketch Summaries prior to using information on this corridor: SR 397: Kennewick ECL to I-182 Jct This six-mile long north-south corridor is located in south central Washington, in Benton and Franklin counties. The corridor runs between the city of Kennewick and the Interstate 182 junction in Pasco, crossing the Ed Hendler Bridge over the Columbia River midway. The corridor is urban in character, primarily with industrial land uses throughout its length. Other land uses present on the corridor include commercial and residential housing. This corridor is one of three major Columbia River crossings in the Tri‐City area. The corridor encounters multiple BNSF rail lines as well as a one Union Pacific rail line in Kennewick. Major BNSF rail yards are located in eastern Pasco. The Tri-Cities Airport is located near the north end of the corridor in Pasco and provides commercial passenger service for the greater Tri-Cities area. The terrain is level throughout the route, and vegetation consists of a mix of shrubbery and dry grasses on the southern end of the corridor to minimal landscaped yards on the northern half of the corridor. Current Function State Route 397 extends 22-miles from the community of Finley and the I-182, US Route 12, and US 395 junction in Pasco.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact
    21 Cover Sheet 3 4 Lead Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 5 6 Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Department of the Interior (Bureau of Land Management, Bureau 7 of Reclamation, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service); Benton, Franklin, and Grant counties; and 8 the City of Richland, Washington | 9 10 Consulting Tribal Governments: Nez Perce Tribe Department of Environmental Restoration 11 and Waste Management and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation 12 13 Title: Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement | 14 (HCP EIS), Hanford Site, Richland, Washington | 15 16 Contacts: For further information on this EIS call or contact: 17 18 Thomas W. Ferns, HCP EIS Document Manager | 19 U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office 20 P.O. Box 550, MSIN HO-12 21 Richland, Washington 99352 22 (509) 372-0649 or [email protected] 23 Fax: (509) 376-4360 24 25 For general information on DOE’s National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) process, 26 call 1-800-472-2756 to leave a message, or contact: Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 27 Policy and Assistance (EH-42), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, 28 Washington, D.C. 20585, (202) 586-4600. 29 30 Abstract: The DOE prepared this Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental | 31 Impact Statement (HCP EIS) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with | 32 implementing a comprehensive land-use plan for the Hanford Site for at least the next 50 years. 33 With the exception of the required No-Action Alternative, each of the six alternatives presented 34 represents a Tribal, Federal, state, or local agency’s Preferred Alternative.
    [Show full text]