HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix S - Section 4f DR
I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, I-5 to SR 169
SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION
October 2005
%&e(
!"b$
AÉ
!"`$
!"`$
Aæ
%&e(
Bothell
Kirkland
Bellevue
Renton
AÊ
AÐ
Aí
Aô
AÌ
Aí
Aç
AÅ
Lake
Washington
Arterial Road
Freeway
Municipality
Lake
Park
M0 2
Miles
I-405 Project Area
Renton Nickel
Improvement
Project
SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Prepared for
Washington State Department of Transportation
Urban Corridors Office
And
Federal Highway Administration
Prepared by
Linda Osborn, Osborn Pacific Group Inc.
October 28, 2005
Title VI
WSDOT ensures full compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by
prohibiting discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, national
origin or sex in the provision of benefits and services resulting from its federally
assisted programs and activities. For questions regarding WSDOT's Title VI
Program, you may contact the Department's Title VI Coordinator at 360. 705.7098.
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information
If you would like copies of this document in an alternate format—large print, Braille,
cassette tape, or on computer disk, please call 360.705.7097. Persons who are deaf
or hard of hearing, please call the Washington State Telecommunications Relay
Service, or Tele-Braille at 7-1-1, Voice 1.800.833.6384, and ask to be connected to
360.705.7097.
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation i
T ABLE OF C ONTENTS
Glossary.............................................................................................................................................................................iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Evaluation.................................................................................................vii
Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................1
What is the Renton Nickel Improvement Project? ...........................................................................................................1
What is the No Build Alternative?................................................................................................................................2
What is the Build Alternative?.....................................................................................................................................2
How will stormwater from the project be managed? .................................................................................................12
What environmental and utilities issues influenced the project design and what was done to avoid
and minimize project effects?....................................................................................................................................13
What is planned for wetland and stream mitigation?.....................................................................................................16
What benefits will the project provide?......................................................................................................................17
How will the project incorporate community design preferences?.............................................................................17
How will the project be constructed?.........................................................................................................................18
What is Section 4(f)? .....................................................................................................................................................19
What are Section 4(f) resources?..................................................................................................................................20
What constitutes a “use” of Section 4(f) resources?......................................................................................................21
When would a constructive use occur?.........................................................................................................................22
How do we decide if 4(f) resources are affected by the project?...................................................................................23
What Section 4(f) resources might be affected?............................................................................................................24
Existing Conditions.........................................................................................................................................................26
What are the Section 4(f) resources that may be subject to use by any alternative under consideration?....................26
Ikawa Park ................................................................................................................................................................26
Tukwila Park..............................................................................................................................................................26
Duwamish/Green River Trail.....................................................................................................................................26
Interurban Trail..........................................................................................................................................................27
Springbrook Trail.......................................................................................................................................................27
Cedar River Trail.......................................................................................................................................................28
Cedar River Park.......................................................................................................................................................29
Liberty Park...............................................................................................................................................................32
Potential Effects...............................................................................................................................................................34
How would the project use 4(f) resources?....................................................................................................................34
Ikawa Park ................................................................................................................................................................34
Tukwila Park..............................................................................................................................................................35
Duwamish/Green River Trail.....................................................................................................................................36
Interurban Trail..........................................................................................................................................................37
Springbrook Trail.......................................................................................................................................................38
Cedar River Regional Trail........................................................................................................................................39
Cedar River Park and Liberty Park............................................................................................................................40
Are there feasible and prudent alternatives that would avoid use of the Section 4(f) properties? .................................42
What measures have been included in the project to minimize harm to the Section 4(f) resources?............................42
What measures are proposed to mitigate for unavoidable use of Section 4(f) resources?............................................42
Studies and Coordination ...............................................................................................................................................43
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
ii Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
With which agencies and persons did we coordinate concerning avoidance alternatives, effects, and measures to
minimize harm?............................................................................................................................................................. 43
Summary.......................................................................................................................................................................... 44
What conclusions have been reached?......................................................................................................................... 44
References....................................................................................................................................................................... 45
Appendix
A – Consultation with City of Renton
E XHIBITS
Exhibit 1. Project Vicinity Map..........................................................................................................................................1
Exhibit 2. Project Overview Section 1..............................................................................................................................3
Exhibit 3. Project Overview Section 2..............................................................................................................................4
Exhibit 4. Project Overview Section 3..............................................................................................................................5
Exhibit 5. Project Overview Section 4..............................................................................................................................6
Exhibit 6. Project Overview Section 5..............................................................................................................................7
Exhibit 7. Project Overview Section 6..............................................................................................................................8
Exhibit 8. Project Overview Section 7..............................................................................................................................9
Exhibit 9. Project Overview Section 8............................................................................................................................10
Exhibit 10. Park and Recreation Areas and Historic Properties and Section 4(f) Criteria...............................................24
Exhibit 11. Resources Identified in the Study Area.........................................................................................................25
Exhibit 12. Duwamish/Green River, Interurban, and Springbrook Trails.........................................................................27
Exhibit 13. Cedar River Trail...........................................................................................................................................28
Exhibit 14. Cedar River Park ..........................................................................................................................................30
Exhibit 15. Existing Conditions, Liberty Park ..................................................................................................................33
Exhibit 16. Noise Modeling at Ikawa Park.......................................................................................................................35
Exhibit 17. Noise Modeling at Tukwila Park....................................................................................................................36
Exhibit 18. Noise Modeling at the Duwamish/Green River Trail .....................................................................................37
Exhibit 19. Noise Modeling at the Interurban Trail.........................................................................................................38
Exhibit 20. Noise Modeling at Springbrook Trail.............................................................................................................39
Exhibit 21. Noise Modeling at Cedar River Regional Trail..............................................................................................40
Exhibit 22. Noise Modeling at Cedar River and Liberty Parks........................................................................................41
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation iii
GLOSSARY
A-weight A standard frequency weighting that simulates how humans perceive sound (dBA).
Adverse Effect A term that may apply to a property which is on or eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places, adverse effect refers to diminishing a property's integrity with respect
to its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Federal
agency officials apply this term during consultation with the State (or Tribal) Historic
Preservation Officer, as part of the Section 106 process.
Constructive Use A type of indirect use in which a transportation project's proximity impacts (as opposed
to direct impacts) are so severe that the protected activities, features, or attributes that
qualify a resource for protection under Section 4(f) are substantially impaired.
Examples include excessive noise level increases, diminished aesthetic features,
ecological intrusions, and other indirect impacts to the resource's environment or
utility.
Cultural Resources Any historic (or prehistoric) district, site, building, structure, or object that is either listed
or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Examples include such
items as artifacts, records, structures, and remains.
Decibel The decibel (dB) is used to measure sound level and is a logarithmic unit.
Department of the Interior
(DOI)
The nation's principal conservation agency, the DOI plays an important role in
conserving the nation's natural and cultural heritage. It comprises many agencies,
including the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Department of
Transportation (DOT)
As the federal steward of the nation's transportation system, the DOT comprises
agencies that provide transportation services to the American public, including the
Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, the Federal
Aviation Administration, and the U.S. Coast Guard.
Easement An easement is a limited right to make use of a property owned by another.
Eligible Refers to properties that meet the National Park Service criteria for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places.
Extraordinary Magnitude A reference to exceedingly high costs or other objectionable factors associated with a
project alternative, extraordinary magnitude characterizes the impacts to Section 4(f)
or non-Section 4(f) resources as beyond the boundaries of feasible and prudent.
GLOSSARY
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
iv Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Feasible and Prudent A term that is integral to the Section 4(f) process, feasible and prudent refers to the
viability of an alternative that avoids the use of a Section 4(f) resource. The term
"feasible" refers to the constructability of a project—whether or not it can be built using
current construction methods, technologies, and practices. The term "prudent" refers
to how reasonable the alternative is—in essence, whether or not it makes sense.
Given a range of options, a transportation agency must select an avoidance alternative
rather than adversely impact Section 4(f) resources if it is feasible and prudent. By
contrast, an alternative may be rejected if it is not feasible and prudent. An alternative
may be considered not feasible and prudent for any of the following reasons:
• does not meet project purpose and need
• excessive cost of construction
• severe operational or safety problems
• unacceptable effects (social, economic or environmental)
• serious community disruption
• a combination of any of the above
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
One of several agencies in the U.S. Department of Transportation, the FHWA provides
federal financial assistance to the states through the Federal Aid Highway Program,
the purpose of which is to construct and improve the National Highway System, urban
and rural roads, and bridges.
Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act
(LWCFA)
Passed by Congress in 1965, the Act established the Land and Water Conservation
Fund, a matching-fund assistance program that provides grants which pay half the
acquisition and development cost of outdoor recreation sites and facilities. Section 6(f)
of the act prohibits the conversion of property acquired or developed with these grants
to a non-recreational purpose without the approval of the Department of the Interior's
(DOI's) National Park Service. The DOI must ensure that replacement lands of equal
value, location, and usefulness are provided as a condition of such conversions.
Consequently, where conversions of Section 6(f) lands are proposed for highway
projects, replacement lands are required.
Legal Sufficiency Review A review that is required by the Federal Highway Administration for final environmental
impact statements (FEISs) and final Section 4(f) evaluations. The purpose of the
review is to ensure that Section 4(f) and NEPA requirements have been met and are
legally defensible. A legal sufficiency review is not a technical review; rather, it is a
review of Section 4(f) and NEPA documentation and compliance efforts, and an
attempt to make sure that these efforts comply with the law.
Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA)
Official documentation specifying the terms of agreement between government
agencies regarding work to be completed.
Minimization Minimization involves measures developed during the planning phase of a project to
reduce potential effects to a resource. Minimization measures could include alignment
shifts, a commitment to off-season construction, replacement of land or facilities,
restoration or landscaping, or payment of fair market value for affected lands.
Mitigation An effort to replace land or facilities either with resources that are comparable in value
and function, or with monetary compensation that can be used to enhance the
remaining land. The cost of mitigation should be a reasonable public expenditure in
light of the severity of the effect on the Section 4(f) resource.
GLOSSARY
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation v
National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA)
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) is considered to be the basic
"National Charter" for protection of the environment. NEPA requires that, to the extent
possible, the policies, regulations, and laws of the federal government be interpreted
and administered in accordance with the protection goals of the law. It also requires
federal agencies to use an interdisciplinary approach in planning and decision-making
for actions that affect the environment. Finally, NEPA requires the preparation of an
environmental impact statement (EIS) on all major federal actions significantly
affecting the human environment.
National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA)
A federal law established in 1966, the NHPA requires federal agencies to consider the
effects of their undertakings on historic properties and provide the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation with an opportunity to comment on such undertakings. Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act mandates consideration of a project's
effect on historic resources in much the same way as Section 4(f). Because of their
similarities, the relationship between Sections 4(f) and 106 is a common source of
confusion. The most important connection between the two statutes is that the Section
106 process is generally the method by which a cultural resource's significance is
determined for a federal undertaking under Section 4(f).
National Park Service (NPS) An agency within the U.S. Department of the Interior, the NPS preserves the natural
and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment,
education, and inspiration of current and future generations. The NPS is keeper of the
National Register of Historic Places. Under Section 6(f) of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act, the NPS reviews land conversions for transportation projects
that require replacement lands.
National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP)
The Nation's official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation. Authorized under
the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Register is part of a
national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify,
evaluate, and protect our historic and archaeological resources. Properties listed in the
register include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in
American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. The National
Park Service administers the National Register, which is part of the U.S. Department of
the Interior.
Official with Jurisdiction The legal representative at the agency owning or administering the resource, unless
the agency has delegated or relinquished this authority via formal agreement.
Programmatic Evaluation Programmatic Section 4(f) evaluations can be used in place of individual evaluations
for highway projects where uses of the Section 4(f) resource are considered minor.
The primary advantage of a programmatic evaluation is that it saves time. Unlike an
individual evaluation, a programmatic evaluation does not require a draft, a comment
period, or circulation, because its framework and basic approach has already been
circulated and agreed upon by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). Project
specific details are then applied to the programmatic evaluation to determine whether
or not it can be used. Programmatic evaluations are usually approved much faster
than individual evaluations.
Proximity Impacts See “Constructive Use.”
Prudent See “Feasible and Prudent.”
GLOSSARY
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
vi Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Publicly Owned Property that is owned and/or operated by a public entity. If a governmental body has
a proprietary interest in the land (such as fee ownership, drainage easements or
wetland easements), it can be considered publicly owned. Land subject to a public
easement in perpetuity can also be considered to be publicly owned land for the
purpose for which the easement exists.
Right-of-Way (ROW) Land legally established for public use by pedestrians, vehicles, or utilities.
Section 6(f) of The Land
Water Conservation Fund
Act (LWCFA)
Section 6(f) directs the Department of the Interior (National Park Service) to assure
that replacement lands of equal value, location, and usefulness are provided as
conditions to approval of land conversions. Therefore, where a Section 6(f) land
conversion is proposed for a highway project, replacement land will be necessary.
Section 106 Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended,
federal agencies must identify and evaluate cultural resources and consider how
undertakings they fund, license, permit, or assist affect historic properties eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The federal agencies must afford
the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation the opportunity to comment on these undertakings.
Significance Significance means that in comparing the availability and function of a Section 4(f)
resource with the recreational, park, and refuge objectives of that community, the
resource in question plays an important role in meeting those objectives. Barring a
determination from the official with jurisdiction to the contrary, the Section 4(f) land will
be presumed to be significant. All determinations (whether stated or presumed) are
subject to review by FHWA for reasonableness.
State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO)
A governor-appointed position and, typically, a member of a state historic preservation
agency, the SHPO reviews projects for compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act.
Substantially Impaired Substantial impairment occurs only when the protected activities, features, or attributes
of the resource are largely diminished.
Temporary Occupancy
A temporary occupancy of land is so minimal that it does not constitute a use within
the meaning of Section 4(f) when the duration is temporary, the scope of work is
minor, there are no anticipated permanent adverse physical effects, and when the land
will be fully restored. There must be documented agreement of the appropriate
Federal, State, or local officials having jurisdiction over the resource regarding the
above conditions.
Use Generally, "use" occurs with a DOT approved project or program (1) when land from a
Section 4(f) site is acquired for a transportation project, (2) when there is an
occupancy of land that is adverse in terms of the statute's preservationist purposes, or
(3) when the proximity impact of the transportation project on the Section 4(f) site,
without acquisition of land, are so great that the purposes for which the Section 4(f)
site exists are substantially impaired.
Unique Problems Unique problems are present when there are unusual factors, or when the costs or
community disruption reach extraordinary magnitude.
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation vii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
USED IN THIS EVALUATION
APE Area of Potential Effect
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
dB Decibel
dBA A-weighted decibels
DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement
DOI U.S. Department of the Interior
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
EA Environmental Assessment
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HOV High Occupancy Vehicle
IAC Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation
I-90 Interstate 90
LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund
MOA Memorandum of Understanding
MSE Mechanically Stabilized Earth
NAC Noise Abatement Criteria
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NPS National Park Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
ROD Record of Decision
ROW Right-of-way
SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer
WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation
WSHR Washington State Heritage Register
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
viii Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
This page intentionally blank.
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 1
INTRODUCTION
What is the Renton Nickel Improvement Project?
The Renton Nickel Improvement Project is a highway expansion project that will
improve mobility and safety through Tukwila and Renton. On I-405, this project
begins just east of the I-5/I-405 interchange in Tukwila and extends north past the
Cedar River to the SR 169 (Maple Valley Highway) interchange. The project will build
an additional lane both northbound and southbound between I-5 and SR 169. On
SR 167, the project will extend the southbound high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane
north to I-405 and add a southbound auxiliary lane from I-405 to the SW 41st Street
off-ramp. These limits comprise the study area for the project.
Prior to planning this specific project, WSDOT created the I-405 Corridor Program.
This program provides a comprehensive strategy to reduce congestion and improve
mobility throughout the I-405 corridor. The corridor begins at the I-5 interchange in
the city of Tukwila and extends northward 30 miles to the I-5 interchange in the city of
Lynnwood. The program’s purpose is to provide an efficient, integrated, and
multimodal system of
transportation solutions.
Using the I-405 Corridor
Program’s Selected
Alternative as the Master
Plan to improve I-405,
WSDOT developed
relatively low cost,
congestion relief roadway
improvements as an interim
step in achieving the Master
Plan. As part of this effort,
WSDOT began to define
the Renton Nickel
Improvement Project. The
Renton Nickel Improvement
Project was developed as
part of a first step in
providing a focused strategy
to improve I-405 between
I-5 in Tukwila and SR 169 in
Renton and SR 167
southbound from I-405 to
SW 41st Street, see Exhibit
1. This discipline report
analyzes two project
alternatives: the No Build
Alternative and the Build
Alternative.
Exhibit 1. Project Vicinity Map
G r e en R
i
v
e
r
C
e
d
ar
Riv
er
Interurban TrailCedar River Interpretive Trail
Panther
Creek
Wetlands
Green River TrailBlack River
Riparian Forest
Fort
Dent
Park
Cedar
River
Park
Liberty
Park
SW 41st St
S W 3 4 t h S t
S W 2 7 t h S t
SW 16th St
Southcenter ParkwayW Valley HwyI
n
t
e
r
u
r
ban Ave SMa
ple
V
alley H
w
yRainier Ave SS
W Sun s e t B lvdS W 7 t h S t
S W G r a d y W a y
Lind Ave SWTUKWILA
RENTON
S
pri
n
g
br
ook CreekBenson Rd SSW 23rd St Talbot Rd SBenson Dr
SI-405
Northern
Project Limit
at SR 169
I-405
Southern
Project Limit
at I-5
!"`$
%&e(
Aæ
Aç
Aí
SR 167
Southern
Project Limit
at SW 41st St 0 0.25 0.5
Miles
M
AÅ
Arterial Road
Freeway
Trail
Stream
Lake
Park
Municipality
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
2 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
What is the No Build Alternative?
The No Build Alternative assumes that only routine
activities such as road maintenance, repair, and safety
improvements would take place over the next 20 years.
This alternative does not include improvements to increase
roadway capacity or reduce congestion. For these
reasons, it does not satisfy the project’s purpose—improve
I-405 between I-5 in Tukwila and SR 169 in Renton and
SR 167 southbound from I-405 to SW 41st Street.
The No Build Alternative has been evaluated in this
discipline report to establish a baseline for comparing
the effects associated with the Build Alternative.
What is the Build Alternative?
The new lanes that will be built under this project are:
An I-405 northbound general-purpose (GP)
lane from I-5 to the SR 167 off-ramp.
An I-405 northbound auxiliary lane from the
SR 167 to I-405 on-ramp to the SR 169 off-ramp.
An I-405 southbound auxiliary lane from the
SR 169 to I-405 on-ramp to the SR 167 off-ramp.
An I-405 southbound GP lane from the SR 167
to I-405 on-ramp to the I-5 off-ramp.
A SR 167 southbound auxiliary lane from I-405 to the
SW 41st Street off-ramp. Also, the existing inside
HOV lane will be extended north to I-405 from its
present starting point in the vicinity of SW 21st Street.
See Exhibits 2 through 9 show the project features. In
addition to adding lanes to I-405 and SR 167, this project
will provide the following improvements.
Improve Interchanges
Minor modifications will be made to the ramps at the
SR 167 interchange:
The one-lane ramp from northbound I-405 to
SR 167 will be widened to a 2-lane off
connection, which provides a dedicated lane to
southbound SR 167 and a dedicated lane to
northbound Rainer Avenue. See Exhibit 5.
Traffic from two consecutive single-lane on-
ramps from southbound I-405 to SR 167 will be
separated by a concrete barrier. This will
provide a smoother transition to the mainline
and reduce congestion on the on-ramps.
What is an auxiliary lane?
An auxiliary lane is a lane added between
interchanges—from one on-ramp to the
next off-ramp. It is dedicated to traffic
entering and leaving the freeway and
provides motorists with more time and
extra room to accelerate or decelerate
and merge when getting on and off the
freeway.
89:P 89:T
Existing On-ramp On-ramp with
proposed auxiliary
lane
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 3
T u k w i l a P a r k w a y
I-405
Southern
Project Limit
at I-5
Gilliam Creek
Cottage Creek
Westfield
Shoppingtown MallSouthcenter ParkwaySouthcenter Blvd 65th Ave STUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec.
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
I-405 Northboundbound Improvements:
A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at
some locations.
I-405 Southbound Improvements:
A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at
some locations. M0250500
Feet
I-405 NORTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
I-405 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
Renton
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
Ecology EmbankmentÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ
Retaining Wall
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
New Pavement
Easement Acquisition
Parcel Acquisition
Existing ROW
Areas of Construction
New ROW
Exhibit 2. Project Overview Section 1
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
4 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃInterurban TrailFort
Dent
Park
W Valley HwyInterurban Ave S RENT
ONT
UKWI
L
AG r e en RiverSouthcenter B lv d65th Ave SAí
%&e(
%&e(UP RRBNSF RRBridge Restripe Only
Bridge Rail Replacement
Bridge Rail Replacement
M
o
n
s
t
e
r
R
d
S
WTUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec.
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
I-405 Northbound Improvements:
A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at
some locations.
I-405 Southbound Improvements:
A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at
some locations. M0250500
Feet
I-405 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
Renton
I-405 NORTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
%&e(
Retaining Wall
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
New Pavement
Areas of Construction
Easement Acquisition
Parcel Acquisition
Existing ROW
New ROW
Exhibit 3. Project Overview Section 2
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 5
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ
SW 16th St
S W G r a d y W a y
SW G ra d y W a y
Oakesdale Ave SWSW 16th St
%&e(
Potential Staging Area
Bridge Replacement
S
prin g br
o
o
k
Cr
eekBridge Replacement
TUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec.
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
I-405 Northbound Improvements:
A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at
some locations. The existing Springbrook Creek and Oakesdale
Avenue bridges will be replaced and the existing culvert will be
removed.
I-405 Southbound Improvements:
A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 70 feet to the outside at
some locations. The existing Springbrook Creek and Oakesdale
Avenue bridges will be replaced and the existing culvert will be
removed.M0250500
Feet
I-405 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
Renton
I-405 NORTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment
Retaining Wall
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
New Pavement
Areas of Construction
Easement Acquisition
Parcel Acquisition
Existing ROW
New ROW
Exhibit 4. Project Overview Section 3
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
6 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ
SW 19th StLind Ave SWS G r a d y W a y
Aæ
%&e(
Potential
Staging
Area
Noise Wall
Renton
CinemaRolling Hills Creek
Panther
Creek
Wetlands
SW 16th St Lake AveSouthRainier Ave STUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec.
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
I-405 Northbound Improvements:
A general-purpose lane will be added up to the SR 167 interchange and an auxiliary lane
will be added from the SR 167 to I-405 on-ramp north. These lanes will be added by
restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at
some locations.
I-405 Southbound Improvements:
An auxiliary lane will be added up to the I-405 to SR 167 on-ramp and a general-purpose
lane will be added south of the interchange. These lanes will be added by restriping the
existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations.
SR 167 Southbound Improvements:
An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping existing pavement and adding up to 19 feet
of pavement at the outside at some locations. The existing HOV lane will be extended
north from SW 21st Street to the interchange with I-405.M0250500
Feet
I-405 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
Renton
I-405 NORTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
SR 167 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
Proposed Noise Wall
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment
Retaining Wall
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
New Pavement
Areas of Construction
Easement Acquisition
Parcel Acquisition
Existing ROW
New ROW
Exhibit 5. Project Overview Section 4
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 7 ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃPanther
Creek
Wetlands
S W 2 7 t h S t Talbot Rd SEast Valley RdTalbot Rd SPotential
Staging
Area
SW 23rd St
TUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec.
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
SR 167 Improvements:
In addition to extending the HOV lane north from SW 21st
Street, an auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 19 feet to the outside at
some locations.
M0250500
Feet
SR 167 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
RentonÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment
Retaining Wall
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
New Pavement
Areas of Construction
Easement Acquisition
Parcel Acquisition
Existing ROW
New ROW
Exhibit 6. Project Overview Section 5
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
8 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃSW 41st St
S W 3 3 r d S t
Panther CreekEast Valley RdTalbot Rd SLind Ave SWAæ
SR 167
Southern
Project Limit
at SW 41st St
TUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec.
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
SR 167 Improvements:
An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 19 feet to the outside at
some locations. The new lane will tie into the existing ramp
connection to SW 41st Street.
M0250500
Feet
SR 167 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
Renton
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment
Retaining Wall
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
New Pavement
Areas of Construction
Easement Acquisition
Parcel Acquisition
Existing ROW
New ROW
Exhibit 7. Project Overview Section 6
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 9 ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃS G rady W ayB
e
a
c
o
n
S 7 t h S tWilliams
%&e(
Potential Staging Area
Replace Bridge
Bridge Widening
Existing Bridge to be Demolished
Thunder Hills Creek
Rolling Hills Creek
Noise Wall Benson Rd STalbot Rd STUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec,
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
I-405 Northbound Improvements:
An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement
and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations.
I-405 Southbound Improvements:
An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement
and adding pavement up to 24 feet to the outside at some locations.
Benson Rd S Improvements:
The Benson Rd S overpass will be replaced and realigned to the
west of its current location. The new overpass will have 2 lanes with
5-foot bike lanes on both sides and a 6-foot sidewalk on the west
side.M0250500
Feet
I-405 NORTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
I-405 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
Renton
Parcel Acquisition
New ROW
Existing ROW
Easement Acquisition
Areas of Construction
New Pavement
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
Retaining Wall
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment
Proposed Noise Wall
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
Exhibit 8. Project Overview Section 7
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
10 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
C
edar River
Cedar River Interpretive Trail
Cedar
River
Park
Liberty
Park Ma
p
l
e
V
a
ll
e
y
H
w
y
H o u s e r W a y S
N 3 r d S t
Bronson Wa y N%&e(
I-405
Northern
Project Limit
at SR 169
Aç
Restripe Only
Main AvenueCedar Ave SRenton Ave STUKWILA
RENTON!"`$
%&e(
Sec.
1
Sec.
2
Sec.
3
Sec.
4
Sec.
5
Sec.
6
Sec.
7
Aæ
Aç
Sec.
8
Aí
I-405 Northbound Improvements:
An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside
at some locations.
I-405 Southbound Improvements:
An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing
pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside
at some locations. M0250500
Feet
I-405 NORTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
I-405 SOUTHBOUND
Existing
Proposed
Renton
Renton
Piped River/Creek Channel
Open River/Creek Channel
ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment
Retaining Wall
Stormwater Flow Control
Facility
New Pavement
Areas of Construction
Easement Acquisition
Parcel Acquisition
Existing ROW
New ROW
Exhibit 9. Project Overview Section 8
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 11
Improve Benson Road
The Benson Road overpass will be replaced and
realigned to accommodate the southbound auxiliary
lane on I-405 as well as future improvements to I-405
as shown on Exhibit 8. Improvements on Benson
Road include a 6-foot sidewalk on the west side and
5-foot bike lanes on both sides.
Widen and replace bridges
Several bridges within the study area will be widened
or replaced based on present location, cost, and
existing soil conditions. To construct the new lanes,
the project will:
Widen Talbot Road Bridge on both the
northbound and the southbound sides. See
Exhibit 8.
Replace Springbrook Creek Side Channel
Bridge and Oakesdale Avenue Bridge with new
southbound and northbound structures and
remove the Springbrook Creek box culvert.
See Exhibit 4.
Replace the rail on the I-405 bridges over
SR 181 and the Union Pacific and Burlington
Northern Santa Fe railroads.
The project will not affect the I-405 bridges over the
Green River, Lind Avenue, or the Cedar River. The
project will also not affect the Cedar Avenue or Renton
Avenue overpasses. The roadway will be restriped in
these areas to accommodate the new lanes.
Use retaining walls
Widening I-405 and SR 167 will require retaining walls
to minimize the construction footprint and right-of-way
acquisition. Retaining walls will also help avoid and
minimize effects to wetlands and other sensitive areas.
Improve culverts
WSDOT anticipates that construction will affect some
existing stormwater cross culverts and one stream
culvert. Associated culvert improvements include
extending the existing structures due to widening the
roadway and stabilizing culvert ends with rock or
retaining walls. The I-405 Team will conduct a hydraulic
analysis of the culverts to ensure that the modifications
will have no effect on the base flood elevations. See the
Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Discipline Report for
detailed discussion on fish passage.
Why rebuild Benson Road on a new
alignment over I-405?
By building the new overpass to the west
on a new alignment, the new structure
can be constructed while the existing
structure remains open to traffic. Traffic
can then be shifted onto the new
structure, while the old overpass is
demolished.
What does a “rail” replacement involve?
Typically, a bridge rail replacement
project consists of making minor
adjustments to the width of the bridge
deck and replacing the guard rail or
barrier. This type of project does not
include adding new bridge columns or
footings.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
12 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Build a noise wall
One noise wall will be built on the northbound side of
the freeway as shown on Exhibits 5 and 8. The wall
will begin at the intersection of South 14th Street and
South 15th Street and follow South 14th Street east to
Talbot Road. This wall will be approximately 2,150
feet long and 18 feet tall.
How will stormwater from the project be
managed?
Stormwater from the project will be managed for both
quality and peak flows using currently accepted best
management practices (BMPs). The I-405 Team has
designed the stormwater management facilities to
comply with the following guidelines and procedures:
WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual M 31-16
WSDOT Hydraulics Manual M 23-03
Stormwater treatment facilities
The project will add new impervious surface within the
study area, most of which will be within the Springbrook
Creek basin. This project will treat runoff for an area
equal to 100 percent of these new surfaces.
The project will use BMPs that the HRM lists as
enhanced treatment facilities. The I-405 Team has
proposed that stormwater be treated using a
combination of these facilities. In most of the study
area, ecology embankments will be used to capture
runoff from the edge of the
pavement and provide water
quality treatment. Ecology
embankments also serve to
convey treated runoff to
receiving waters or to flow
control facilities as required.
The project also includes a
combined stormwater quality
wetland and detention facility
that addresses water quality
and flow control in one facility.
Exhibits 2 through 9 show the
location of stormwater facilities
that will be built for this project. Ecology Embankment Cross-Section
What are the guidelines for stormwater
management facilities?
Water quality treatment will be provided
for an area equal to the new impervious
surfaces created on the project.
Impervious surfaces, such as pavement,
are those that do not allow water to
penetrate into the ground. Stormwater
from new impervious surfaces or an equal
area will be controlled in detention
facilities. This process allows water to
be held (detained) and thus released at
rates that are equal to existing
conditions.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 13
Drainage Collection and Conveyance
Some changes to existing drainage will be necessary
to provide flow control and water quality treatment to
address the new impervious area added by the
project. However, existing storm drainage systems
will be kept to the greatest extent possible and existing
flow patterns will be maintained. Where roadway
widening affects drainage ditches that convey water
from adjacent private properties, the project design will
assure that existing conveyance capacities are
maintained.
What environmental and utilities issues
influenced the project design and what
was done to avoid and minimize project
effects?
Throughout the development of the Renton Nickel
Improvement Project design, environmental elements
were reviewed and design features were modified to
avoid or minimize negative effects to the environment.
Influence on the project design came from:
Soil Conditions: the soils in the project area are
highly prone to accentuate earthquake
shaking, which influences how bridges can be
widened or replaced.
Noise: highway noise in the project area
already exceeds acceptable levels, which
means that including noise walls as part of the
project had to be considered.
Wetland Locations: many wetlands are located
along the edges of the highway, which
influence whether the widened sections will
use retaining walls or fill slopes.
Historical Sites: some historic sites exist within
the study area, so the project design was
coordinated to avoid these properties.
Because the I-405 Team planned for these
environmental considerations, several design features
have the benefit of avoiding or minimizing potential
effects due to the project. These design features are
described from south to north below.
I-405, I-5 to SR 167
WSDOT will construct a retaining wall from west of the
68th Avenue structure over I-405 at Tukwila Parkway
What are detention facilities?
These facilities control stormwater runoff
so that it can be released at a controlled
rate. Two types are commonly used:
Ponds.
Vaults. Similar to a pond, but with a
hard-sided construction. These
concrete structures function like a
pond but also provide detention
storage.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
14 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
The proposed design modifications allow
the additional lanes to be added over the
Green River by restriping instead of
bridge widening. This avoids effects on
the river, stream habitat, floodplain, and
Interurban Trail.
to the Green River. This wall avoids the need to
construct a fill slope that would extend into Gilliam
Creek. See Exhibit 2.
WSDOT will provide a narrower outside shoulder on
northbound I-405 at the Green River Bridge. The
shoulder will vary from 10 to just over 3 feet at the west
abutment of the existing bridge. Narrowing the
shoulder avoids modifications to the existing bridge. As
a result, the design also avoids effects to the river, the
100-year floodplain, the ordinary high water level, and
adjacent riparian zones.
At the SR 181 interchange, the bridge and ramp will
be restriped to provide the new general-purpose lane
and ramp improvements. This approach minimizes
the need to widen the existing SR 181 Bridge,
reconstruct the SR 181 interchange, or modify the
Southcenter Boulevard crossing of the Green River.
This in turn avoids relocating or diverting the
Interurban Trail, which goes under the bridge. See
Exhibit 3.
Near the Westfield Shoppingtown Mall, a large Seattle
Public Utilities water transmission line parallels I-405.
WSDOT will line this pipe so that is can support the
loads from the new roadway embankment. This
approach allows the line to stay in its present location.
WSDOT will remove the existing I-405 bridges over
the Springbrook Creek side channel and Oakesdale
Avenue and replace them with a single northbound
and a single southbound bridge. This approach will
allow for the removal of the Springbrook Creek box
culvert. Construction of the new bridges will be
phased with the southbound bridge built slightly to the
north of the existing roadway. This phasing minimizes
the need to construct temporary roadway to maintain
traffic operations. WSDOT also evaluated the location
of the new bridge piers and selected locations that will
minimize the effect on the existing stream, stream
buffer, and trail that crosses under the bridge.
WSDOT will construct a narrower exit gore from I-405
to the northbound ramp at the SR 167 interchange as
shown in Exhibit 5. By building a narrower exit gore,
the project can be constructed within the existing right-
of-way. This has the benefit of avoiding right-of-way
acquisition, avoiding effects to the wetland outside the
right-of-way, and avoiding effects to the existing Lind
Avenue Bridge.
What is an exit gore?
An exit gore is a roadway feature that
separates an exiting lane from the main
lanes. An exit gore can be defined either
by paint stripes, raised buttons, physical
barriers, or a combination of these.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 15
Retaining walls will help to avoid and
minimize effects on the Panther Creek
wetlands along SR 167
SR 167, southbound from I-405 to SW 41st Street
WSDOT will build a retaining wall along a large portion
of the west edge of SR 167 southbound instead of an
earth fill slope. See Exhibits 6 and 7. The retaining
wall minimizes effects on three wetlands. The
retaining wall has the added benefit of minimizing
right-of-way needs and reduces the effect on existing
utility crossings, in particular, the City of Seattle’s 60-
inch water line and Olympic Petroleum’s two high
pressure pipelines, which all cross under SR 167.
I-405, SR 167 to SR 169
WSDOT will add a lane by restriping I-405 northbound
next to the Talbot Hill retaining wall immediately east
of the SR 167 interchange. Restriping instead of
widening avoids the need to reconstruct the existing
Talbot Hill retaining wall and avoids effects on
properties south of I-405 in this area. Between Talbot
Road and the “S-Curves”, northbound I-405 will be
widened to achieve standard lane and shoulder
widths. Most of this length will be supported by
retaining walls to minimize effects to Thunder Hills
Creek, adjacent properties, and the existing cut slope
south of I-405.
To support the fill required to widen the roadway on
the north side of I-405 next to the outfall for the
original Rolling Hills Creek culvert, the design uses a
retaining wall. By using the retaining wall, the project
improvements at this location can be constructed
without affecting the existing culvert.
WSDOT will use a non-standard design for the I-405
to SR 167 exit ramp. The changes from the design
standards include not providing a recovery lane,
narrowing the distance between the through lane and
ramp, and providing narrower shoulders. While these
changes deviate from WSDOT design standards they
are an improvement over existing conditions. These
features will avoid effects to the existing Rolling Hills
Creek/Thunder Hills Creek channel located between
I-405 and the Renton Cinema complex as shown in
Exhibit 5. Using retaining walls along the west side of
Benson Road avoids effects to Rolling Hills Creek and
the wetlands east of Talbot Road.
WSDOT will use retaining walls to support widening
southbound I-405 south of the Cedar Avenue
overpass. Using retaining walls versus a fill slope,
avoids encroaching on Cedar Avenue and Main
Avenue in Renton.
What is a recovery lane?
A recovery lane is a paved area adjacent
to an off-ramp. This area gives drivers,
who find themselves exiting the freeway
unintentionally, room to maneuver back
onto the freeway.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
16 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
WSDOT also plans to replace the existing Benson
Road overpass on a new alignment. The new bridge
will be located slightly to the west of the existing
bridge. This will allow traffic to continue to use the
existing overpass until the new one is completed. This
will minimize disruption for local traffic and to
emergency response vehicles.
Where northbound and southbound I-405 passes
under the Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue
overpasses, WSDOT will add lanes by restriping. This
design avoids replacing the two overpasses; however,
the available area does not allow the standard
shoulder and lane widths.
WSDOT shifted a proposed stormwater facility to
avoid effects to the existing Renton Coal Mine Hoist
Foundation site south of Benson Road. This site is on
the Washington Historic Register.
What is planned for wetland and stream mitigation?
WSDOT will compensate for unavoidable effects to
wetlands with credits from the Springbrook Creek
Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. Mitigation is
needed for 1.66 acres of wetlands.
The Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation
Bank is being developed as a joint effort between
WSDOT and the City of Renton. This ‘bank’ will
construct a new high quality wetland complex that will
serve to replace other wetlands that are filled in by
projects such as the Renton Nickel Improvement
Project. The location of the bank is shown to the left.
In addition to wetland mitigation, the site will also
provide flood storage mitigation. The Springbrook
Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank will be one
of the first urban mitigation banks to be certified in
Washington.
To mitigate project effects on streams, WSDOT will
remove the existing Springbrook Creek box culvert.
With the new I-405 southbound and northbound
bridges that will span both Springbrook Creek and
Oakesdale Avenue, the box culvert is no longer
needed. After the new bridges are in place, the box
culvert will be removed and the streambed in that area
will be restored. This will improve fish habitat within
Springbrook Creek. Any additional stream mitigation
required to offset project effects will be accommodated
within the project vicinity.
Renton Coal Mine Hoist Foundation site
looking west
r
Interurban TrailPanther
Creek
Wetlands
Green River TrailFort
Dent
Park
SW 41st St
S W 3 4 t h S t
S W 2 7 t h S t
SW 16th St
W Valley HwyS W 7 t h S t
S W G r a d y W a y
Lind Ave SWS
pri
n
g
br
ook CreekSW 23rd St
Aæ
Aí
M
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
100 Year Floodplain
500 Year Floodplain
Park
Renton
Tukwila
Springbrook Creek Wetland
& Habitat Mitigation Bank
Wetlands
Local Road
Legend
Trail
Arterial Road
Freeway
River/Creek Channel
Study Area Limits
Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat
Mitigation Bank
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 17
What benefits will the project provide?
The Build Alternative will benefit the area by reducing
congestion at chokepoints, reducing the duration of
congestion during peak commuter travel hours, and
improving freight movement.
This section of I-405, from the I-5 interchange to
SR 169, is congested due to large traffic volumes and
merging and diverging traffic. The new lanes will help
relieve congestion by adding roadway capacity. This
in turn will improve safety by providing drivers with
more time and extra room to accelerate or decelerate
and move into and out of the stream of traffic when
getting on and off the freeway. This provides a
smoother transition for motorists as they get on and off
I-405 in Tukwila and Renton and helps decrease rear-
end and sideswipe collisions.
The project reduces congestion approaching the
SR 167 interchange, and it complements the
completed southbound I-405 to southbound SR 167
flyover ramp.
This project will construct one noise wall along
northbound I-405 from the intersection of South 14th
Street and South 15th Street east to Talbot Road. This
wall will benefit residents in that area by lowering the
overall noise levels.
Another benefit of this project is that it continues the
application of the Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS)
design choices made by the communities within the
I-405 corridor. The Benson Road realignment will
reflect the most comprehensive application of these
design choices as explained further in the next section.
How will the project incorporate
community design preferences?
The Renton Nickel Improvement Project is being
planned, developed, and designed according to CSS
guidelines. These guidelines establish the community
design preferences used to design the project features.
Working within the framework for the overall I-405
corridor, the Urban Design Guidelines will be adapted to
incorporate the communities’ design preferences. These
preferences will be included in the contract documents
prepared for the Renton Nickel Improvement Project.
The selected I-405 theme of “Culture, Nature, and
Progress,” with nature being the dominant theme, will be
carried into corridor-wide and local I-405 designs.
This rendering shows the new Benson
Road overpass with the CSS Guidelines
applied
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
18 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
The new Benson Road overpass is the main project
feature that will receive CSS treatment. The new
southbound and northbound bridges over Springbrook
Creek and Oakesdale Avenue will also receive CSS
treatments. The rest of the project elements will be
designed to match in color and vegetation type only, as
many of these elements will be affected by construction
of future Master Plan projects. During future Master
Plan phases for the overall I-405 corridor, the approved
CSS guidelines will be applied throughout.
How will the project be constructed?
Construction of the entire Renton Nickel Improvement
Project is expected to take two years, beginning in early
2008 and being completed in late 2010. However,
construction activity will not be constant for the entire
study area throughout this time, and in some locations,
the work will take substantially less time than two years.
Construction will pose some minor inconveniences
because of localized travel delays due to temporary
lane closures and narrowed lanes and shoulders.
At-grade construction
At-grade construction, which occurs on the same
elevation as the existing lanes, will be staged to minimize
traffic delays and detours. Typically, lanes are shifted
toward the median. WSDOT then places a concrete
barrier to close off the shoulder. Staging allows
construction to occur safely without closing lanes for the
duration of construction. Access to construction areas will
occur from the roadway side to minimize property effects.
Bridge construction
Construction of the I-405 bridges will occur in multiple
stages to minimize traffic delays and detours. The
following describes typical staging for bridge
construction. As the first stage, traffic is shifted toward
the I-405 median and the existing lanes and shoulders
are narrowed slightly to allow widening of the existing
structure or construction of the new bridge depending
on the design. In the next stage, traffic is shifted onto
the new bridge area. If the bridge is being replaced
rather than simply widened, the old structure is
demolished after traffic is shifted to the new bridge.
The new Benson Road overpass will also be staged.
The new structure will be built to the west, while the
existing overpass remains in service. After traffic has
At-grade construction for this project will
likely be staged similar what is shown
above. Here, the southbound lanes of I-5
were shifted toward the median and a
concrete barrier closed off the shoulder to
provide crews a safe work area.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 19
been shifted onto the new overpass, the existing
structure will be demolished.
Staging areas
Construction staging areas along I-405 and SR 167
will be within the WSDOT right-of-way. Potential
staging areas have been identified as shown on
Exhibits 2 through 9.
Traffic control
Detour agreements with the local agencies will be
obtained after WSDOT awards the contract. A traffic
control plan will be approved by WSDOT prior to
starting construction. The plan’s primary objectives will
be to provide a safe facility, to streamline the
construction schedule, and to minimize reductions to
existing traffic capacity. To lessen effects on traffic, the
duration of activities will be minimized and reductions in
capacity will be limited and will be targeted to a period
when they will have the least effect.
What is Section 4(f)?
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act
(DOT) of 1966 (49 USC 303) prohibits the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) from approving a
transportation project that uses land from a significant
public park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl
refuge, or land of an historic site of national, state, or
local significance, unless:
1. There is no feasible and prudent alternative
2. The project includes all possible planning to
minimize harm to the property
A feasible and prudent alternative must be selected if
it avoids using this land. Measures that minimize the
harm to the resource must be identified and
incorporated if use of the Section 4(f) resource is
unavoidable.
A Section 4(f) evaluation must be prepared if any
resources protected by Section 4(f) are used by a
project. The Section 4(f) Evaluation
describes the affected properties;
discusses the specific use(s) of the resources;
identifies and evaluates alternatives that avoid
use of 4(f)-protected lands;
What is feasible and prudent?
A term that is integral to the Section 4(f)
process, feasible and prudent refers to
the viability of an alternative that avoids
the use of a Section 4(f) resource. The
term "feasible" refers to the
constructability of a project—whether or
not it can be built using current
construction methods, technologies, and
practices. The term "prudent" refers to
how reasonable the alternative is—in
essence, whether or not it makes sense.
An alternative may be rejected if it is not
feasible and prudent. An alternative may
be considered not feasible and prudent
for any of the following reasons:
does not meet project purpose and
need
excessive cost of construction
severe operational or safety
problems
unacceptable impacts (social,
economic or environmental)
serious community disruption
a combination of any of the above
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
20 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
identifies measures to minimize harm resulting
from unavoidable effects to Section 4(f)
resources;
includes coordination with officials having
jurisdiction over or administering the lands that
will be affected; and
identifies the applicability or non-applicability of
Section 4(f) to a property.
What are Section 4(f) resources?
The Code of Federal Regulations – specifically 23
CFR 771.135 – defines Section 4(f) resources using
three categories:
Public parks and recreation areas, if they meet the
following criteria:
They must be publicly owned;
They must be open and available for use by all
members of the public;
Their major purpose is for public recreation
activities; and
They must be considered significant by the
federal, state, or local official having jurisdiction
over the facility.
Historic sites if they are identified as properties of
local, state, or national significance as determined by
the federal, state, or local officials having jurisdiction
over the site. Historic sites include properties listed on
or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP). DOT, however, does not recognize historic
sites of state and local significance or on the
Washington State Heritage Register (WSHR) as
automatically falling under the protection of
Section 4(f), unless such sites are also on or eligible
for the National Register. The responsible DOT
official may, at his or her discretion, apply Section 4(f)
to such historic sites, but this is not mandatory.
Wildlife or waterfowl refuges if they are publicly-owned
lands that have been set aside and designated for the
protection of wildlife species and/or migratory birds.
How do we minimize harm
(minimization)?
During the project’s planning phases, we
identify measures to reduce the potential
effects to a resource. Minimization
measures can include alignment shifts, a
commitment to off-season construction,
replacement of land or facilities,
restoration or landscaping, or payment of
fair market value for affected lands.
What is the concept of “use?”
The concept of “use” is fundamental to
the Section 4(f) process. Generally, “use”
occurs when (1) land from a Section 4(f)
site is acquired for a transportation
project, (2) there is occupancy of the
Section 4(f) site, or (3) there are
proximity impacts that substantially
degrade the purposes of the Section 4(f)
site.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 21
What constitutes a “use” of Section 4(f) resources?
“Use” of Section 4(f) resources as defined by the Act1
occurs when:
1. Land is permanently incorporated into a
transportation facility.
2. The land is subject to temporary occupancy
and temporary or permanent adverse changes,
such as contour alterations or removal of
mature trees and other vegetation occur during
project construction. Temporary occupancy
during construction will not always constitute a
use of Section 4(f) land. Short-term, temporary
occupancy or impact (e.g., for a construction
easement) does not constitute a use under
Section 4(f) as long as all of the following
conditions are met:
Occupancy is temporary (i.e., shorter
than the construction period for the
entire project) and ownership does not
change;
Changes are minimal;
No permanent adverse physical impacts
result and there is no interference with
the activities or purposes of the
resource on either a temporary or
permanent basis;
The land being used will be restored to
a condition which is at least as good as
that prior to the project; and
Documented agreement(s) exist
between relevant jurisdictions regarding
temporary use of the resource.
3. There is a constructive use of the facility.
1 23 CFR 771.135(p) (1) and (2) is where DOT specifically describes 4(f) “use”.
What is permanently incorporated?
The physical and permanent procurement
of a protected resource for use by a
transportation project is known as an
actual or direct use.
What is constructive use?
A type of indirect use in which a
transportation project's proximity
impacts (as opposed to direct impacts)
are so severe that the protected
activities, features, or attributes that
qualify a resource for protection under
Section 4(f) are substantially impaired.
Examples include excessive noise level
increases, diminished aesthetic features,
ecological intrusions, and other indirect
impacts to the resource's environment or
utility.
What is temporary occupancy?
A temporary occupancy of land is a “use”
as determined by the length of
occupancy, scope of work, anticipated
permanent adverse physical impact of
the land, and whether the resource can
be restored to its original condition prior
to occupancy. There must be
documented agreement of the
appropriate Federal, State, or local
officials having jurisdiction over the
resource regarding the above conditions.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
22 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
When would a constructive use occur?
A constructive use occurs when:
Noise from the project substantially interferes
with the use and enjoyment of the resource,
such as enjoyment of a historic site where a
quiet setting is a generally recognized feature or
attribute of the site’s significance, or enjoyment
of any park where serenity and quiet are
significant attributes. The noise increase must
not only be detectable to the human ear (i.e., an
increase greater than 2 to 3 decibels) and
exceed the FHWA noise abatement criterion as
contained in Table 1 of 23 CFR Part 772, but it
must be severe enough to truly impair
enjoyment of the Section 4(f) resource; or
The proximity of the proposed project
substantially impairs aesthetic features or
attributes of the resource, where these
features or attributes are considered important
contributing elements to the value of the
resource. An example might be the location of
a roadway that obstructs or eliminates a view
or substantially detracts from the setting of a
park or historic site that derives its value in
substantial part due to its setting; or
The project restricts access and would result in
a substantial decrease in the usability of the
resource; or
Vibration emanating from the project
substantially impairs the use of the resource.
In all instances, a “substantial impairment” of the
resource is necessary for a constructive use to occur.
What is a decibel?
Sound intensity is measured in units
called decibels. The decibel scale is
logarithmic and climbs steeply. An
increase of about three decibels is
perceived as a doubling of sound volume.
In the wilderness, a typical sound level
would be 35 decibels. Speech runs 65 to
70 decibels; freeway traffic generates 50
to 90 decibels (90 decibels is associated
with heavy trucks). By 140 decibels,
sound becomes painful to the human ear,
but ill effects, including hearing loss, set
in at much lower levels.
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 23
How do we decide if 4(f) resources are affected by the
project?
The I-405 Corridor Program Final Preliminary 4(f)
Evaluation2 identifies potentially affected public parks,
recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and
historic resources (collectively referred to as 4(f)
resources). For the Renton Nickel Improvement
Project, we confined the assessment to 4(f) lands
located within a quarter-mile of the proposed
improvements. We conducted additional research
beyond the Preliminary Evaluation findings, including
site investigations and coordination with the Cities of
Renton and Tukwila, and the Interagency Committee
for Outdoor Recreation (IAC).
The team evaluating cultural resources surveyed all
historic resources in the project area that predate
1955. WSDOT selected the year 1955 to cover all
cultural resources that would be 50 or more years old
by the time some parts of the project are built. Please
refer to the Cultural Resources Discipline Report for
more detailed information.
After identifying the Section 4(f) properties along the
Renton Nickel Improvement Project, we then
evaluated those properties subject to a use as defined
by the DOT ACT of 1966. We prepared the
Section 4(f) Evaluation based on guidance contained
within the FHWA Section 4(f) Policy Paper issued
March 1, 2005; Title 2 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 771.135 (Section 4(f)); and the
WSDOT Environmental Procedures Manual published
in September 2004. These documents explain how
Section 4(f) applies generally and to specific
situations. They are based on court decisions,
experience, and on policies developed by FHWA and
USDOT over the years. The Policy Paper serves as a
guide for how Section 4(f) applies to common project
situations often encountered by state departments of
transportation. The manual clarifies the required
coordination and documentation procedures.
2 Prepared by the Washington State Department of Transportation, June 2002.
What is the IAC?
The Office of the Interagency Committee
is a state agency that serves two boards,
the Interagency Committee for Outdoor
Recreation (IAC) and the Salmon
Recovery Funding Board. The agency is
charged with implementing policies and
programs established by the boards, the
legislature, and the Governor. The IAC
administers state and federal grant
programs for recreation and habitat
conservation.
Why do we use 50 years when
considering cultural resources?
The federal government uses specific
criteria to determine the significance of a
cultural resource. The criteria includes
that the resource must be a building, site,
structures, object or district and it must
be at least 50 years of age to be eligible
for the National Register (36 CFR 60).
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
24 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
What Section 4(f) resources might be affected?
There are ten publicly-owned parks, four
architecturally historic properties, and no waterfowl or
wildlife refuges near the proposed Renton Nickel
Improvement Project right-of-way. Exhibit 10
compares each of the properties with Section 4(f)
criteria and identifies those resources that will be
protected Section 4(f) properties.
Exhibit 10. Park and Recreation Areas and Historic Properties and Section 4(f) Criteria
Property
Publicly
Owned
Open to
the Public
Major Purpose
is Recreation
Significant
as a Park
Section 4(f)
Protected
Property
Park and Recreation Areas
Ikawa Park, Tukwila Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Tukwila Park, Tukwila Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Duwamish/Green River Trail,
Tukwila Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Interurban Trail, Tukwila Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Springbrook Trail, Renton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Renton Hill Park (also known as
Freeway Park), Renton Yes Yes Yes No No
NARCO Community Park, Renton Yes Yes Undeveloped No No
Cedar River Trail, Renton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cedar River Park, Renton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Liberty Park, Renton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Historic Properties
Property Listed on or Eligible for NRHP
Section 4(f) Protected
Property
Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad Segment1 No No
Renton Substation, Snoqualmie Falls Power
Company1 No No
Renton Fire Station1 Yes No
Renton Coal Mine Hoist Foundation No No
1. Listed on the Washington State Heritage Register. WSDOT has determined that this property is not eligible for protection under Section 4(f).
INTRODUCTION
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 25
These properties and the evaluation area are shown in
Exhibit 11.
!"`$%&e(
Aæ
AÅ
AÇ
Aí
Aç
G r e en R
i
v
e
r
C
e
d
ar
R
iv
er
Panther
Creek
Wetlands
Black River
Riparian Forest
Fort
Dent
Park
SW 41st St
S W 3 4 t h S t
S W 2 7 t h S t
SW 16th St
Southcenter ParkwayW Valley HwyI
n
t
e
r
u
r
ban Ave SMa
p
l
e
V
alle
y H
w
yRainier Ave SS
W
Sun s e t B lvdS W 7 t h S t
S W G r a d y W a y
Lind Ave SWTUKWILA
RENTON
I-405
Northern
Project Limit
at SR 169
I-405
Southern
Project Limit
at I-5
SR 167
Southern
Project Limit
at SW 41st St
S
pri
n
g
brook CreekBenson Rd SSW 23rd St Talbot Rd SBenson Dr SIkawa
Park
Tukwila
Park
Duwamish/
Green
River Trail
Interurban
Trail
Springbrook
Trail
NARCO
PropertyCedar River
Trail
Freeway
Park
Cedar River
Park
Liberty
Park
Columbia/
Puget Sound
Railroad
Renton Coal
Mine Hoist
Foundation
Renton
Substation
Renton Fire
Station
Legend
""A 4(f) Resource
")A Non 4(f) Resource
1/4mile Study Area
Stream
Trail
Local Road
Arterial Road
Freeway
Waterbody
Park
Municipality
M
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Exhibit 11. Resources Identified in the Study Area
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
26 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
EXISTING CONDITIONS
What are the Section 4(f) resources that may be subject to
use by any alternative under consideration?
This section describes the Section 4(f)-protected
properties along the Renton Nickel Improvement
Project, beginning at the southern project limit and
continuing north. See Exhibit 11.
Ikawa Park
Ikawa Park was dedicated in November 1987 in
recognition of the friendship bond between the cities of
Tukwila and Ikawa, Japan. Recreation use is passive.
The park comprises a Japanese garden, koi pond and
waterfall, and trail with benches. It is situated on 0.2
acres approximately 200 feet north of the I-405 right-of-
way. There are about 3,000 visits to this park annually.
Tukwila Park
Tukwila Park is a 6.5-acre City of Tukwila
neighborhood park established in 1938.
Tukwila Park has tennis courts, children’s
play areas, picnicking, horseshoes,
basketball, overlooks, and a gazebo/
picnic shelter.
Duwamish/Green River Trail
The Washington Wildlife and Recreation
Program (WWRP) administered through
the Interagency Committee for Outdoor
Recreation (IAC) awarded a grant to the
City of Tukwila to acquire land and
develop a trail through Tukwila. The
Duwamish/ Green River Trail connects
with a King County trail to the north and
existing Tukwila and Kent trails to the
south. The City developed 8.4 miles of
twelve-foot wide paved trail with soft
shoulders for jogging. Landscaping,
wildlife habitat enhancement, picnic
tables, and benches enhance the
recreation experience along the trail. See
Exhibit 12.
Tukwila Park
Duwamish/Green River Trail
Ikawa Park
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 27
G r e en R
i
v
e
r
SW 41st St
S W 3 4 t h S t
S W 2 7 t h S t
SW 16th St
Benson Dr SSouthcenter ParkwayW Valley HwyI
n
te
r
u
r
ban Ave SSW
Sun s e t B l v dS W 7 t h S t
S W G r a d y W a y
Lind Ave SWTUKWILA
RENTON
S
pri
n
g
brook CreekTal
bot Rd SBeSW 23rd St
!"`$%&e(
Aæ
Aí
Springbrook
Trail
Interurban
Trail
Green River
Trail AÅ
Legend
Stream
Municipality
Section 4(f)
Protected Trails
M
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Exhibit 12. Duwamish/Green River, Interurban, and Springbrook Trails
Source: City of Renton Draft Trails Plan, 2005
Interurban Trail
The Interurban Trail extends 14 miles, from I-405 in Tukwila
to 3rd Avenue SW, just south of Pacific. It is a paved
regional walk/bike trail with picnic tables and a view of the
Green River near I-405. See Exhibit 12. The trail is used
extensively by bicyclists, both for recreation and commuting.
Springbrook Trail
The Springbrook Trail is a well-developed, paved, mixed-
use trail traversing north-south through Renton’s Green
River Valley. It follows the course of Springbrook Creek,
passes through a wetland rich in bird life and distinctive
Interurban Trail
Springbrook Trail
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
28 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
vegetation, and connects/will connect to other existing or
future trails such as the Oakesdale Trail, Fort Dent
Connector, and the Black River Forest and Black River
trails. The developed portion of the trail is approximately 3
miles. The trail edge is landscaped and lined with mowed
grass. See Exhibit 12.
Cedar River Trail
The Cedar River Trail System, one of Renton’s major
recreation facilities, extends five miles from Lake
Washington east to the city’s boundary, and then continues
south and east as part of King County’s regional trail
system. The paved trail follows an old railroad right-of-way
from downtown Renton to King County’s Landsburg Park.
This system serves as a physical link to a series of parks
along the Cedar River corridor, beginning at Cedar River
Trail Park on Lake Washington and including Jones Park,
Liberty Park, Cedar River Park, Maplewood Park, Cedar
Grove Natural Area, and Landsburg Park. Cedar River
Trail is depicted on Exhibit 13.
Exhibit 13. Cedar River Trail
Cedar River Trail
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 29
The trail corridor, located south of the river and east of
the freeway, utilizes a narrow strip of property
between the railroad right-of-way and the river. This
51.6-acre parcel was purchased with federal funds
administered through the IAC, King County Block
Grant funds, and City of Renton general revenue.
Development of the trail that begins at the pedestrian
bridge beneath the I-405 overpass over the Cedar
River and parallels SR 169 for 2.8 miles also was
funded by federal funds administered through the IAC
and City of Renton general revenue.
Cedar River Park
Cedar River Park is a 23-acre Renton community park
situated between I-405 to the west; SR 169 (Maple
Valley Highway) to the north; the former Stoneway
Cement Plant to the east; and the Cedar River, Cedar
River Regional Trail, and the proposed Narco
Community Park property to the south. The land for
Cedar River Park was acquired in 1966 by the City of
Renton. The IAC awarded a Land and Water
Conservation Fund (LWCF) grant to the City in 1975
for acquisition of additional park land.
As shown on Exhibit 14, these facilities are located
within the park:
The Carco Theater is a municipally-owned and
operated center for the performing arts.
Annual visitation at the theater is
approximately 32,000.
The Renton Community Center is a 51,600
square foot recreation facility that includes a
fitness room, a gymnasium, and classrooms.
There are about 400,000 visits to this facility
annually.
Renton Community Center
What is the Land and Water Conservation
Fund Act?
Passed by Congress in 1965, the Land
and Water Conservation Funds Act
(LWCFA) provides grants which pay half
the acquisition and development cost of
outdoor recreation sites and facilities.
Section 6(f) of the LWCFA addresses
transportation projects and prohibits the
conversion of property acquired or
developed with these grants to a non-
recreational purpose without the
approval of the Department of Interior’s
National Park Service.
Carco Theater
Cedar River Trail Trailhead
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
30 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Exhibit 14. Cedar River Park
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 31
The Henry Moses Aquatic Center opened in
June 2004. This family outdoor aquatic center
is situated on approximately 0.75 acre in the
northeast corner of the park, near the
Community Center. It features a lap pool and
a separate, large leisure pool; a water slide;
sun and shade patios; a bathhouse and a
concession area. During its inaugural 2004
season, there were 76,000 visits to this facility.
The multi-use fields include heavily-used soccer
and football fields and a baseball/ softball
complex with backstop and seating for 200.
Shoreline – Approximately 750 feet of shoreline
along the Cedar River is used for fishing, canoeing,
kayaking, and swimming. A sandy beach and
grassy sunbathing area are very popular.
Vehicular access to the site includes the main
access from SR 169 and a secondary access
from Houser Way that crosses underneath
I-405 and the BNSF railroad track.
Other recreation elements include access to
the Cedar River Regional Trail, picnic shelter,
restrooms, three paved parking lots, and park
landscaping.
Relationship to other similarly used lands in the
vicinity: Cedar River Park is separated from
Liberty Park by I-405 and Houser Way. Access
between the parks is provided via a
road/pedestrian underpass beneath I-405. The
Cedar River Regional Trail lies south and
roughly parallels the Cedar River. It is physically
connected to Cedar River Park via a pedestrian
bridge over the river. The NARCO property,
recently acquired by the City, lies adjacent and
south of the Cedar River Trail. Freeway Park
(also known as Renton Hill Park), located two
blocks south and west of Cedar River Park,
provides passive recreation opportunities.
The City of Renton has completed construction
documents and funding is in place to construct HOV
improvements to SR 169 that will require changes at
Cedar River Park. The first phase of construction for
this City of Renton project began in August 2005 and
includes the closure of the current park entrance from
SR 169, construction of a new entrance on the former
Stoneway site approximately 800 feet east, demolition
and reconstruction of the existing parking lot at the
current entrance, and expansion of the existing
Henry Moses Aquatic Center
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
32 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
parking lot south of the Henry Moses Aquatic Center.
A portion of a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE)
retaining wall with a decorative finish and artwork of
sculpted fish is also being constructed during the first
phase. The wall will frame the new entrance and
extend west about 150 feet. Disturbed areas in the
park will be landscaped. Construction is expected to
be complete by December 2005.
Liberty Park
Liberty Park is Renton's oldest park facility. The 12-acre
park site was purchased from the Sartori family in July
1914, and was first known as "City Park." The name was
later changed to "Liberty Park" to commemorate World
War I veterans. Liberty Park continues to be the City's
major park and playfield area. It also serves as the
venue for the annual Fourth of July celebration and the
Renton River Days. The park is adjacent to the City’s
central core, between the Cedar River to the south,
Houser Way to the east, and Bronson Way to the north
and west. The City of Renton Library is along the south
property line and is seamless with the park. Specific park
elements shown on Exhibit 15 include:
Giannini Stadium is a baseball and softball
complex that includes a 930-seat grandstand,
restrooms, a concession area, and locker rooms.
The field is located adjacent to Houser Way.
Wilcoxen Field and bleachers provides another
venue for baseball and softball. Both Giannini
Stadium and Wilcoxen Field support league
games and tournaments.
The 8,400 square feet Skate Park includes
obstacles for in-line skaters and skateboarders.
The Skate Park is unique for its “skateable”
artwork funded by Renton Municipal Arts
Commission “One Percent for Art” monies. The
artwork, called “Rolling Waters,” is comprised of
a series of hump-like ramps of colored concrete
with boulders that mimic the motion of water.
The Skate Park is located in the southeast
corner of the park adjacent to Houser Way and
the Cedar River Regional Trail.
Other recreation elements include a lighted,
multi-purpose court, lighted tennis courts,
children’s play equipment, restroom facilities,
parking, and Cedar River Trail access.
Skate Park
Giannini Stadium
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 33
Shoreline – Liberty Park features six hundred
feet of river frontage and a picturesque garden
trail along the river that features many varieties
of rhododendrons.
Vehicular access to the site is excellent with major
arterials surrounding the site on three sides.
Landscaping is a significant element in Liberty
Park. In addition to the rhododendron garden,
mature oak trees line the park adjacent to
Bronson Way. Along Houser Way, a large elm
tree is located at the entrance to Giannini
Stadium. Other landscaping includes
ornamental shrubs and trees, hedges, and
manicured lawns.
Relationship to other similarly used lands: See
previous discussion under Cedar River Park.
Exhibit 15. Existing Conditions, Liberty Park
Mature Elm Tree
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
34 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
How would the project use 4(f) resources?
Direct effects, proximity effects, and construction
effects were examined for each 4(f) resource. During
the planning phase WSDOT considered and
incorporated avoidance alternatives to eliminate
potential effects to 4(f) resources. As a result, the
Renton Nickel Improvement Project will not require
acquisition of any Section 4(f) resource lands, will not
impose any adverse temporary occupancy on
resource lands, and will create no constructive use
effects at any of the identified Section 4(f) resources.
Ikawa Park
In the vicinity of Ikawa Park, the construction of a
northbound and a southbound I-405 general-purpose
lane will be completed by widening within the existing
WSDOT right-of-way.
Direct effects
No Section 4(f) lands will be acquired, either
permanently or temporarily, from this park.
Proximity effects
The modeled noise level at Ikawa Park exceeds the
FHWA noise abatement criteria (NAC) of 67 dBA for
existing conditions3. Exhibit 16 presents the modeled
noise levels for the park.
3 I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise and Vibration Discipline Report. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade &
Douglas, 2005.
What is the test for feasibility and
reasonableness to mitigate noise?
WSDOT evaluates noise sensitive areas
that approach or exceed the NAC to
determine the feasibility and
reasonableness to mitigate noise with
noise barriers. To be feasible, a barrier
must be constructible in a location that
achieves a noise reduction of at least 7
dBA. Determination of reasonableness
depends on the number of sensitive
receptors benefiting by a reduction in
noise of at least 3 dBA, the cost-
effectiveness of the barriers, and
concerns such as aesthetics, safety, and
desires of nearby residents.
What do modeled noise levels mean?
Project noise specialists model noise
levels of existing conditions in the
project area ranging between 53 and 70
dBA. These levels range from typical
suburban outdoor sound levels, between
50 and 60 dBA, to very noisy levels
(above 70 dBA) that are typical of
locations within 100 feet of a busy
freeway.
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 35
While Ikawa Park is a noise sensitive area, it
represents a small number of users and mitigation
would not be feasible. It was determined that
constructing a noise barrier at this location would not
meet WSDOT’s criteria for reasonableness.
Construction effects
There will be no construction effects at Ikawa Park.
The projected noise levels and vibration during
operations attributable to the project will not
substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of
this park. The proximity of the proposed project will
not substantially impair aesthetic features or attributes
protected by Section 4(f). The Build Alternative will
not restrict access to or use of the park.
Tukwila Park
In the vicinity of Tukwila Park, the construction of a
northbound and a southbound general-purpose lane will
be completed by a combination of widening and restriping
lanes on I-405 within the existing WSDOT right-of-way.
Direct effects
Work in the vicinity of Tukwila Park will be constructed
in the existing WSDOT right-of-way. There will be no
direct use of Tukwila Park.
Exhibit 16. Noise Modeling at
Ikawa Park
Future Modeled Noise
Levels
(dBA) without
additional abatement
Modeled
Existing
Noise Level
(dBA) 1 2030 No Build 2030 Build
69 69 70
Values in BOLD approach or exceed the NAC.
1 Modeling of noise levels occurred during Spring 2005.
(I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise
Discipline Report)
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
36 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Proximity effects
Project noise specialists modeled noise levels of existing
conditions at Tukwila Park as shown in Exhibit 17.
Noise levels are below the NAC.4 Proximity effects are
not expected at this park. Analyses in the Noise, Air
Quality and Visual Quality Discipline Reports indicate
that there will be no constructive use.
Construction effects
There will be no construction effects at Tukwila Park.
The projected noise levels and vibration during
operations attributable to the project will not
substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of
this park. The proximity of the proposed project will
not substantially impair aesthetic features or attributes
protected by Section 4(f). The Build Alternative will not
restrict access to or use of the park.
Duwamish/Green River Trail
An existing bridge on I-405 spans the Green River and
the Duwamish/Green River Trail. All project work on
I-405 which bridges over the trail is confined to the
current WSDOT right-of-way. The addition of the
general purpose northbound and southbound lanes
will be completed by restriping within the footprint of
the freeway and shoulders. New retaining walls on
the south and north sides of I-405 will stop short of the
Green River Trail.
Direct effects
No Section 4(f) lands will be acquired, either
permanently or temporarily, from this trail.
Proximity effects
Project noise specialists modeled noise levels of
existing conditions at the Duwamish/Green River Trail
as shown in Exhibit 18.
4 I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise Discipline Report. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, 2005
Exhibit 17. Noise Modeling at
Tukwila Park
Future Modeled Noise Levels
(dBA) without
additional abatement
Modeled
Existing
Noise Level
(dBA)1
2030 No Build 2030 Build
64 64 65
Values in BOLD approach or exceed the NAC.
1 Modeling of noise levels occurred during Spring 2005.
( I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise
Discipline Report )
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 37
While the Duwamish/Green River Trail is a noise
sensitive area, it represents a small number of users
and mitigation would not be feasible. It was
determined that constructing a noise barrier was not
reasonable.5
Other proximity effects to this trail are not expected.
Analyses in the Air Quality and Visual Quality
Discipline Reports indicate that there will be no
constructive use.
Construction effects
There will be no construction effects where the
Duwamish/Green River Trail crosses beneath I-405.
The projected noise levels and vibration during
operations attributable to the project will not
substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of
this trail. The proximity of the proposed project will not
substantially impair aesthetic features or attributes
protected by Section 4(f).
The Build Alternative will not restrict access to or use
of the park. WSDOT will not use the trail to access
the retaining wall construction area. WSDOT will
ensure that the trail remains in operation during
construction activities and will provide signing and
safety barriers to inform and protect trail users. No
effects will occur to trail use.
Interurban Trail
An existing bridge on I-405 spans the Interurban Trail.
All project work on I-405 which bridges over the trail is
confined to the current WSDOT right-of-way. The
addition of the general purpose northbound and
southbound lanes will be completed by restriping
within the footprint of the freeway and shoulders.
Direct effects
No Section 4(f) lands will be acquired, either
permanently or temporarily, from this trail.
5 I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise Discipline Report. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, 2005
Exhibit 18. Noise Modeling at the
Duwamish/Green River Trail
Future Modeled Noise Levels
(dBA) without
additional abatement
Modeled
Existing
Noise Level
(dBA) 1
2030 No Build 2030 Build
71 71 71
Values in BOLD approach or exceed the NAC.
1 Modeling of noise levels occurred during Spring 2005.
( I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise
Discipline Report )
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
38 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Proximity effects
Project noise specialists modeled noise levels of
existing conditions at the Interurban Trail as shown in
Exhibit 19.
While the Interurban Trail is a noise sensitive area, it
represents a small number of users and mitigation
would not be feasible. It was determined that
constructing a noise barrier was not reasonable.
Other proximity effects to this trail are not expected.
Analyses in the Air Quality and Visual Quality
Discipline Reports indicate that there will be no
constructive use.
Construction effects
There will be no construction effects where the
Interurban Trail crosses beneath and is adjacent to
I-405. The projected noise levels and vibration during
operations attributable to the project will not
substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of
this trail. The proximity of the proposed project will not
substantially impair aesthetic features or attributes
protected by Section 4(f). The Build Alternative will
not restrict access to or use of this trail.
Springbrook Trail
I-405 traffic crosses a bridge spanning Springbrook
Creek and Springbrook Trail. During construction of
the Renton Nickel Improvement Project, this bridge
will be removed and replaced with a new bridge that
will span Oakesdale Avenue, Springbrook Creek, and
Springbrook Trail. During construction, the trail under
the highway will be closed for public safety reasons. A
signed detour will be provided during the closure and
notices will be provided to the Cascade Bicycle Club
and posted to keep the public informed about the
construction. The detour will extend from SW Grady
Way to a point just south of SW 16th Street on the
sidewalk and road edge of Oakesdale Avenue SW.
The trail will be fully restored following construction.
Direct effects
No Section 4(f) lands will be acquired, either
permanently or temporarily, from this trail.
Exhibit 19. Noise Modeling at the
Interurban Trail
Future Modeled Noise Levels
(dBA) without
additional abatement
Modeled
Existing
Noise Level
(dBA) 1
2030 No Build 2030 Build
72 72 73
Values in BOLD approach or exceed the NAC.
1 Modeling of noise levels occurred during Spring 2005.
(I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise
Discipline Report )
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 39
Proximity effects
Project noise specialists modeled noise levels of
existing conditions at the Springbrook Trail as shown
in Exhibit 20.
While the Springbrook Trail is a noise sensitive area, it
represents a small number of users and mitigation
would not be feasible. It was determined that
constructing a noise barrier was not reasonable.6
Other proximity effects to this trail are not expected.
Analyses in the Air Quality and Visual Quality
Discipline Reports indicate that there will be no
constructive use.
Construction effects
The envisioned temporary occupancy does not
constitute a “use” because the closure will be
temporary and over a shorter duration than the
construction of the full project. The trail will be fully
restored following construction. The alignment of the
restored trail may be shifted slightly west to avoid the
placement of the northernmost bridge pier. This shift
will only be in the proximity of the pier and does not
affect the rest of the trail alignment. The City of
Renton Parks Department has agreed to these trail
changes as documented in Appendix A.
Cedar River Regional Trail
Direct effects
The trail in the vicinity of I-405 will be unaffected by
the construction occurring within the I-405 WSDOT
right-of-way.
6 I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise Discipline Report. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, 2005
Exhibit 20. Noise Modeling at
Springbrook Trail
Future Modeled Noise Levels
(dBA) without
additional abatement
Modeled
Existing
Noise Level
(dBA) 1
2030 No Build 2030 Build
73 73 74
Values in BOLD approach or exceed the NAC.
1 Modeling of noise levels occurred during Spring 2005.
(I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise
Discipline Report)
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
40 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Proximity effects
Project noise specialists modeled noise levels of
existing conditions at the Cedar River Regional Trail,
near where it crosses beneath I-405 as shown in
Exhibit 21.
While the Cedar River Regional Trail is a noise
sensitive area immediately adjacent to I-405, it
represents a small number of users and mitigation
would not be feasible. It was determined that
constructing a noise barrier was not reasonable.7
Other proximity effects to this trail are not expected.
Analyses in the Air Quality and Visual Quality
Discipline Reports indicate that there will be no
constructive use.
Construction effects
There will be no construction effects where the Cedar
River Regional Trail crosses beneath I-405. The
projected noise levels and vibration during operations
attributable to the project will not substantially interfere
with the use and enjoyment of this trail. The proximity
of the proposed project will not substantially impair
aesthetic features or attributes protected by
Section 4(f). The Build Alternative will not restrict
access to or use of the trail.
Cedar River Park and Liberty Park
Direct effects
All work in the vicinity of Cedar River Park and Liberty
Park will be constructed in the existing WSDOT right-
of-way. There will be no direct use of either park.
Proximity effects
Proximity effects to the parks are not expected. While
there will be two additional lanes on the mainline, any
increase in noise and visual effects resulting from the
project will not be a constructive use because views
from the parks will not change appreciably; I-405 has
existed within the viewshed of both Cedar River Park
7 I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise Discipline Report. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, 2005
Exhibit 21. Noise Modeling at Cedar
River Regional Trail
Future Modeled Noise Levels
(dBA) without
additional abatement
Modeled
Existing
Noise Level
(dBA) 1
2030 No Build 2030 Build
69 69 67
Values in BOLD approach or exceed the NAC.
1 Modeling of noise levels occurred during Spring 2005.
(I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise
Discipline Report)
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 41
and Liberty Park for more than 30 years, and National
Ambient Air Quality Standards will not be exceeded.
Project noise specialists modeled noise levels of
existing conditions at multiple locations within the
parks as shown in Exhibit 22.
Exhibit 22. Noise Modeling at Cedar River and Liberty Parks
Future Modeled Noise Levels (dBA)
without additional abatement
Approximate Location in Park
Modeled Existing
Noise Level (dBA) 1 2030 No Build 2030 Build
Cedar River Park
West edge of baseball field 68 68 71
Aquatic Center 67 67 63
Beach 62 62 63
Liberty Park
Giannini Stadium 69 70 69
Near tennis courts 65 65 64
Values in BOLD approach or exceed the NAC.
1 Modeling of noise levels occurred during Spring 2005. (I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise
Discipline Report)
Cedar River Park and Liberty Park are both in noise
sensitive areas. WSDOT determined that users of
these parks represent a small number and that
mitigation would not be feasible. It was determined
that constructing a noise barrier in this area was not
reasonable.
Construction effects
There will be no construction effects at Cedar River
Park or Liberty Park. The projected noise levels and
vibration during operations attributable to the project will
not substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of
these parks. The proximity of the proposed project will
not substantially impair aesthetic features or attributes
protected by Section 4(f). The Build Alternative will not
restrict access to or use of the parks.
POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
42 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
Are there feasible and prudent alternatives that would
avoid use of the Section 4(f) properties?
WSDOT considered and incorporated avoidance
alternatives into the Build Alternative. As a result, the
expansion of I-405 between I-5 and SR 169 will not:
Require acquisition of any Section 4(f)
resource lands
Impose any adverse temporary occupancy on
resource lands
Create constructive use effects at any of the
identified Section 4(f) resources.
Although WSDOT identified the No Build Alternative
as the Section 4(f) avoidance option, it was not
selected because it did not meet the project purpose
and need. While WSDOT does not consider this
alternative to be feasible and prudent with respect to
Section 4(f), we must still retain it in the EA process as
a requirement of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA).
What measures have been included in the project to
minimize harm to the Section 4(f) resources?
WSDOT did not have to identify minimization efforts
for the Build Alternative because the project avoids all
Section 4(f) resources.
What measures are proposed to mitigate for unavoidable
use of Section 4(f) resources?
Because measures to avoid use of Section 4(f)
resources were incorporated into the planning
process, the Renton Nickel Improvement Project will
not require acquisition of any Section 4(f) resource
lands, will not impose any adverse temporary
occupancy on resource lands, and will create no
constructive use effects at any of the identified
Section 4(f) resources. Therefore, mitigation for
effects on 4(f) resources is not required.
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 43
STUDIES AND COORDINATION
With which agencies and persons did we coordinate
concerning avoidance alternatives, effects, and measures
to minimize harm?
The following summarizes coordination efforts
between the I-405 project team and local and federal
agencies and jurisdictions related to this Section 4(f)
Evaluation:
March 11, 2005 – Coordination with Darrell
Jennings (IAC) concerning LWCF grants and
recreation properties in the project area.
March 15, 2005 – Coordination with Darrell
Jennings (IAC) concerning LWCF grants and
recreation properties in the project area.
April 25, 2005 – Coordination with Darrell
Jennings (IAC) concerning LWCF grants and
recreation properties in the project area.
May 4, 2005 – Coordination with Darrell
Jennings (IAC) concerning LWCF grants and
recreation properties in the project area.
May 10, 2005 – Coordination with Rick Still,
Assistant Director, City of Tukwila Parks
concerning Tukwila Parks and Trails
May 10, 2005 – Coordination with Leslie
Betlach, Director, City of Renton Parks
concerning Renton Trails
May 11, 2005 – Coordination with Terrence
Flatley, City of Renton Parks, concerning
Renton Trails
May 13, 2005 – Coordination with Darrell
Jennings (IAC) concerning LWCF grants and
recreation properties in the project area.
May 27, 2005 – Coordination with Darrell
Jennings (IAC) concerning LWCF grants and
recreation properties in the project area.
August 15, 2005 – Coordination with Leslie
Betlach, Director, City of Renton Parks
concerning temporary closure and detour route
for Springbrook Trail during construction.
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
44 Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
SUMMARY
What conclusions have been reached?
The Renton Nickel Improvement Project is one of
three congestion relief projects along I-405. The Build
Alternative will add one new general-purpose lane
northbound and southbound on I-405 from I-5 to
SR 169. This project will also extend the southbound
high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane on SR 167 to
I-405 and add a new southbound auxiliary lane from
I-405 to the SW 41st Street off-ramp. T he Build
Alternative includes new stormwater management
facilities, a substantial upgrade of existing drainage
structures and systems, noise walls, and improved
interchanges.
There are ten publicly-owned parks, four
architecturally historic properties, and no waterfowl or
wildlife refuges located within a quarter-mile of the
proposed Renton Nickel Improvement Project right-of-
way. Eight of these properties qualify for protection
under Section 4(f). These resources include:
Ikawa Park, Tukwila
Tukwila Park, Tukwila
Duwamish/Green River Trail, Tukwila
Interurban Trail, Tukwila
Springbrook Trail, Renton
Cedar River Trail, Renton
Cedar River Park, Renton
Liberty Park, Renton
WSDOT considered and incorporated avoidance
alternatives into the Build Alternative. As a result, the
expansion of I-405 between I-5 and SR 169 will not
require acquisition of any Section 4(f) resource lands,
will not impose any adverse temporary occupancy on
resource lands, and will create no constructive use
effects at any of the identified Section 4(f) resources.
WSDOT and FHWA determined that the No Build
Alternative was not feasible and prudent because it
did not meet the project purpose and need—that is, it
would not improve traffic capacity and relieve
congestion on the I-405 corridor.
Renton Nickel Improvement Project
Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation 45
REFERENCES
Federal Highway Administration
Website. Available:http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/4fpol2.htm.
Interagency for Outdoor Recreation
Website. Available: http://www.iac.wa.gov/maps/default.asp.
Historical Research Associates
2005 I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Cultural Resource Discipline
Report. Prepared for WSDOT, Urban Corridors Office, Seattle,
Washington. On file at the WSDOT UCO office, Seattle.
National Park Service
Website. Available: http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/lwcf/protect.html.
Website. Available: http://www.nps.gov/lwcf.
Parsons Brinkerhoff Quade & Douglas
2005 I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, Noise Discipline Report.
Prepared for WSDOT, Urban Corridors Office, Seattle, Washington. On
file at the WSDOT UCO office, Seattle.
Renton, City of
Website. Available: http://www.ci.renton.wa.us.
2003 Park, Recreation, and Open Space Implementation Plan.
2005 Preliminary Draft, Trails Plan.
Tukwila, City of
2001-06 Parks, Golf, and Open Space Plan.
Website. Available: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us/recreation/recmain.htm.
United States Code
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 USC 303).
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
2005 FHWA Section 4(f) Policy Paper.
Washington State Department of Transportation
Website. Available:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/fasc/EngineeringPublications/Manuals/EPM/455.pdf.
2002 I-405 Corridor Program NEPA/SEPA Final Environmental Impact
Statement.
2002 I-405 Corridor Program Final Preliminary 4(f) Evaluation. Prepared by
Michael Booth. June 2002.
APPENDIX A
Consultation with City of Renton